This unsung form of public transportation is finally getting its due

In the United States, gondolas (also known as aerial cable cars) have mainly been proposed and developed as a small transportation line serving a private development, like the one proposed for the new Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles. Because these gondola systems are only serving a single location, a narrow population, and are part of a private, for-profit developer’s project, they have rightly been criticized for lacking a public purpose and even diverting public resources toward private profiteering.

But in Colombia, Germany, Turkey, Algeria, and other countries, gondola systems are being celebrated for enhancing urban public transportation systems. In Bolivia, for example, research found that the installation of a mass transit cable car system “expanded school accessibility for low-wealth students and reduced socioeconomic school segregation.” Few examples exist in the U.S. where gondolas have been planned or developed as public transportation. But some of the current needs and constraints on urban transportation in the U.S. provide reason to consider gondolas more seriously as urban transportation and climate solutions.

I came to an interest in gondolas through a focus on two pressing questions related to public transportation and the climate crisis:

• How can public transportation become a better option than driving for a majority of residents?
• What types of transportation technologies make use of renewable energy without creating substantial demand for lithium and mining resources?

Gondolas may seem like an odd idea for urban transit, but they are uniquely strong in meeting these criteria. They provide transportation that is extremely frequent (a cabin leaves as often as every 12 seconds), fast (they don’t have to stop for any traffic signals or traffic), and reliable—three of the primary factors that researchers have found determine people’s choices to use transit over driving. Because gondolas run on electricity and do not use batteries, they can use 100% renewable energy.

Many people in the U.S. only know gondolas as a way to get up a ski slope, and the word gondola can also mean a boat used for transportation (picture the canals of Venice, Italy). This confusion is compounded when various names are used for the same thing: “Aerial Rope Transit,” “Aerial Cable Cars,” “Gondolas,” and “Aerial Trams.” But the unique promise of gondolas as part of improved urban transit systems and climate solutions should not remain so obscure.

Gondolas offer unmatched frequency of rides

To avoid the most catastrophic climate conditions, the transportation sector must dramatically reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, and yet less than 5% of trips people take in the U.S. involve public transportation. This is in part because of how much longer a trip on transit takes compared to the same trip in a car. In a study of Los Angeles commuters, researcher Sandip Chakrabarti found that commutes on transit take an average of four times as long as the same trip in a car for 70% of people who own cars, and as much as six times as long for the remaining 30% of people who own cars.

Increasing the frequency of public transit departures, the speed of transit, and the reliability of transit schedules are known to substantially increase the use of transit. Chakrabarti’s analysis found that “reduction in transit-to-auto travel time ratio by unity can increase odds of transit mode choice by about 25%; reduction in headway by 10 min can increase the odds by about 30%, and lowering the standard deviation of schedule deviation from over to under three minutes can result in 2.6 times increase in the odds.” In other words, when public transit becomes faster, comes more frequently, and is more reliably on schedule, many more people choose transit over driving.

Gondolas stand out in comparison to other modes of transportation in terms of their reliability, frequency of trips, and speed. Gondolas can arrive as often as every 12 seconds and, as a system, carry the equivalent of one bus full of people every minute, according to planners Dave Schumacher and Chris Wahl. Wait times for gondolas are typically less than one minute (but of course depend on the number of passengers waiting and cabin capacity). Gondola cabins can hold anywhere from 4 to 200+ people. Because they operate in the air, they do not have delays due to traffic lights or congestion, so their speed is consistent and unimpeded, allowing users to rely on their schedule and optimum speed.

Gondolas are such an enjoyable experience for some users that they have become an attraction in and of themselves. The Roosevelt Island tram in New York City and the Pittsburgh funiculars in Pennsylvania are part of the local transit systems but also attract visitors who are simply interested in riding the gondola. If the gondola experience is fun enough to draw people to ride for the sake of taking a ride, it holds promise as a way to get people out of their cars and increase the use of public transit.

Gondolas can use renewable energy but don’t require batteries

Powered by electricity, gondola systems use whatever source of energy the grid uses, including renewable sources like wind and solar. They are highly efficient in several ways: they do not use energy for the stop-and-go caused by traffic congestion, they do not lose energy in the transfer to and storage in batteries, and they do not have ‘deadhead time’, which is the trip a bus takes after its route is finished and it is driven back to a garage or the starting place of a new route. The source of power for gondolas can be quite basic—there is even a funicular in Fribourg, Switzerland, that is powered by inserting wastewater into the tank of the cabin going down the mountain, increasing its weight and providing the force to pull the other cabin up the mountain.

The fact that gondolas do not use batteries means they do not require lithium and other minerals that are sourced from mines. An over-reliance on electric vehicles threatens to massively expand mining of lithium, cobalt, and other minerals. From the cobalt mines in Congo to over 100 lithium projects planned in the United States, the demand for minerals is wide-reaching. Reducing the demand for mining is necessary to safeguard vulnerable ecosystems from degradation, sustainably manage precious water supplies, reduce geopolitical conflicts and human rights abuses, and prevent major threats to biodiversity, indigenous territory, and the planet’s most crucial carbon sinks—tropical forests. Expanding public transportation is an essential strategy for meeting climate goals while reducing the harm of mining.

The climate benefits of gondolas are beginning to be recognized: MetroCable in Medellin, Colombia, received grant funding from the UN Clean Development Mechanism for its ability to reduce carbon pollution. After five years of operation, the three gondola lines in Medellin had produced 22,250 tonnes of carbon dioxide, only 30% of the emissions that would have been produced by using the other modes of transportation in the city.

Gondolas are not the only type of transit that can operate on renewable energy without requiring battery minerals—trolleybuses, catenary rail, and cable cars also have this strength.

Gondolas don’t take away space from other transportation modes

Another strength of gondolas for urban transportation is that they require minimal land to operate. Space is precious on urban streets because of the need for bike lanes, pedestrian use, buses, cars, parking, and increasingly outdoor dining and parklets. Adding bike lanes or a dedicated lane for buses expands transit options, but takes away from other uses of the street. Gondolas operate above the streets, so there is no loss of land that’s being otherwise used, except in the places where a gondola tower or station is located. This minimal use of space lowers the cost and time needed for construction and avoids taking space away from other modes of transportation.

Appropriate contexts for gondolas

There is no ‘silver bullet’ for transportation systems, and a fixation on a particular technology can cause planners and advocates to push a solution that doesn’t fit the local context. Understanding the conditions that are most appropriate for gondolas is essential.

Every gondola stop requires a station, and stations take up significant space, entail construction costs, and require ongoing staffing. Station dimensions measure, on average, 90 feet by 30-40 feet, according to The Gondola Project’s Creative Urban Projects. Gondola stations can be designed to provide interesting co-benefits: gondola systems in Venezuela and Brazil incorporated stations with space for small libraries and community centers.

Gondola systems typically have just a few stations, located at the points where a high number of passengers will need access. In this way, gondolas are more like light rails than buses because of the low number of stops and high volume of use. Gondolas make sense as transit between a few places that have high numbers of frequent travelers, such as a high-density residential area, a university or hospital, an area with large numbers of jobs, an end of a light rail system, or a major public attraction.

Gondolas have the obvious strength of being able to traverse difficult terrain like rivers and steep inclines, but this is not what they should be limited to. In their compendium of gondola research, Cable Car Confidential, Steven Dale and Nicholas Chu report that “The most common of all misconceptions is that the technology is only useful in topographically constrained areas and tourist environments.”

Chu and Dale find that gondolas are “particularly adept at addressing local circulation and last-mile problems.” Last-mile (the mile between a stop on a light rail system and the final destination) and local circulation are common problems in urban transportation in the U.S.

Gondolas and equitable mobility

Gondola systems have expanded equitable mobility for low-income communities that had limited access to transportation in Colombia and elsewhere. In general, transportation that provides affordable, reliable, safe access from marginalized neighborhoods to areas with employment and other opportunities can result in substantial improvements to the lives and economic security of local residents. Or as Raj Chetty and co-authors conclude in their study of intergenerational social mobility, “commute times remain a significant predictor of upward mobility.” Of course, the equitable impact of enhanced transit depends on where it is located, how fares are set, schedule, and other factors.

Researchers Julio Davila and Peter Brand found that the socio-economic benefits of Medellin’s Metro Cable depend on the city’s approach to integrated urban development: “The philosophy behind these projects is that better mobility is only a part of area regeneration in the deprived sectors of the city, and that transport infrastructure needs to be complemented by improvements in housing, schools, the environment and public space if wider and sustained improvements are to be achieved . . . Another important aspect is that of high quality architecture which inspires community pride, self-esteem and a sense of belonging.”

If planned well, gondolas could increase transportation for people who are dependent on transit as well as people who have cars. Often these two populations are planned for separately, such as with the LA Dodger stadium gondola proposal that is solely focused on providing an option for baseball fans who would otherwise drive to the game. In contrast, some equitable planning focuses solely on the needs of transit-dependent riders, which risks pitting these residents against investments in improving the transportation system for other commuters and meeting climate goals. The Othering and Belonging Institute promotes the framework of Targeted Universalism, which take a both/and approach of setting universal goals, analyzing the particular needs and barriers facing different populations’ pursuit of those goals, and developing targeted strategies that address those particular needs and together add up to plan for achieving the overall goals. Applied to transportation, this can mean an overall goal of high quality, accessible, appropriate, climate-friendly transportation for all people, and targeted plans and projects that fit the needs and capacities of particular communities.

Other planning considerations

Implementation of gondola systems is growing more widespread, and research on these systems is benefiting from more data and interest. Some key findings on planning considerations include:

• Jobs: “A gondola station typically employs two to six workers whose responsibilities range from station attendants, mechanics to supervisors. Each system generally has crews split into two to three shifts per day while the total number of staff per shift ranges from five to 16. However, total staffing numbers vary with each system,” according to Cable Car Confidential.
• Safety: Gliding through the air raises unique safety risks, but because gondolas have most often been used in mountainous areas, they are built to withstand high winds and extreme weather. Staff presence to de-escalate conflict is limited because most gondola cabins do not have a staff person, so there is a call system in case of emergency.
• Privacy: Because gondolas operate high above neighborhoods, the nearby residents of some planned systems have raised concerns about the loss of privacy when passengers can see into their homes. One solution that newer systems have implemented is glass windows, which have an effect that limits how transparent the windows are.
• Costs: In general, gondolas have lower construction costs than rail systems, both in terms of construction labor and land costs. They have higher construction costs but lower ongoing maintenance costs than bus systems.
• Accessibility: Gondola stations have level platforms that allow passengers in wheelchairs to embark easily. Cabins also slow down in the station by detaching from the propulsion cable, so that people who need more time to get in have access.

Looking forward

Persistent urban transportation problems and the climate crisis demand that public transit systems expand to provide high-quality transportation that uses renewable energy and substantially increases the percentage of people using the system. Doing so when funds are limited, and decades of car-centered infrastructure and planning have given cars an advantage, requires creativity and persistence. Gondolas may seem a radical idea, but their unique strengths match some of the most vexing needs in urban transportation: major improvements to frequency, speed, and reliability.

Solutions to the climate crisis have focused on electric vehicles for good reason, but without moderation and complementary improvement to public transportation, a massive expansion of electric vehicles threatens to exacerbate problems with lithium mining and fail to solve problems with traffic, pedestrian safety, and social equity. As a group of leading scholars ask in their report More Mobility, Less Mining: “How can the transition to renewable energy avoid creating new sacrifice zones, where ecosystems are disrupted, rights violated, and social conflict triggered under the banner of fighting the climate crisis? What is the most globally just pathway to decarbonizing the U.S. transportation sector, the number one source of US emissions?” One technology that should not be ignored in constructing climate-safe transportation of the future is the gondola.

This story was originally published by Next City, a nonprofit news outlet covering solutions for equitable cities. Sign up for Next City’s newsletter for their latest articles and events.