Rijeka, a bustling port city in Croatia, experiences diverse commuting patterns with a significant reliance on cars and walking. In 2024, Rijeka's transportation landscape is dominated by car usage, accounting for nearly 43% of all commutes, followed by walking at 32%.
Summer months see increased traffic due to tourism, affecting commute times. Winter weather can lead to slower travel, particularly for walking and cycling.
Traffic congestion during peak hours is a common issue for car commuters. Limited public transport options can lead to longer waiting times for buses.
Early mornings and late evenings are ideal for avoiding peak traffic congestion. Midday travel is generally smoother for those using public transport.
Public events and festivals in Rijeka can lead to temporary road closures and increased traffic. Planning commutes around major events can help avoid delays.
Rijeka is investing in expanding its cycling lanes to promote eco-friendly commuting. The city is exploring electric bus options to reduce public transport emissions.
Ride-sharing services are gaining popularity, offering flexible commuting options. These services help reduce the number of cars on the road, easing congestion.
Rijeka ranks 2nd on the Traffic rankings in Croatia. The Traffic Index for Croatia combines user-contributed data on commute times, traffic dissatisfaction, CO2 emissions, and traffic system inefficiencies in Croatia, to provide insights into overall traffic conditions.
Car usage is the primary mode of transport, contributing significantly to CO2 emissions.
Improving public transport and promoting cycling could reduce traffic inefficiencies and emissions.
Rijeka's CO2 emissions index stands at 2089.83, indicating a moderate level of emissions.
Efforts to reduce car dependency could help lower emissions further.
TimeThe average commute time index is 18.33, reflecting relatively short travel times within the city.
Efficient public transport could help maintain or reduce these times.
InefficiencyThe inefficiency index is 36.22, suggesting room for improvement in traffic flow and public transport efficiency.
Enhancing bus and bicycle infrastructure could address inefficiencies.