Transportation

The Limits of Bus Rapid Transit: A Cape Town Case Study

Why BRT isn't right for every city.
Eric Goldwyn

Bus Rapid Transit, or BRT, has been touted by its proponents as something close to a miracle for cash-strapped cities, capable of easing congestion and improving public transportation without breaking the bank. By separating buses from the irregularities of traffic and dramatically decreasing passenger load times, BRT can approach the same capacities and speed as costlier rail service. By filtering out the main components of delay—traffic and on-board payment—buses can travel faster, maintain reliable schedules, and potentially turn a profit.

In the 1970s, the city of Curitiba in Brazil demonstrated how dedicated lanes—the iconic pre-payment tubes came later—tapped the latent potential of buses to transport millions of people a day more affordably than rail. Instead of building subway-related infrastructure for $90 million per km (or $144 million per mile), local officials prioritized the new buses on existing streets for $200,000 per km (or $320,000 per mile). The costs savings are startling and worth restating: it was 99.8 percent cheaper to roll out BRT in Curitiba than build a subway.