Al Gore, An Electric Hero

I'm going to copy John here, forgive me but this is basically question and answer via youtube:

Money Pundits are shocked when told that oil isn't in a bubble.



Al Gore has the answer... Alternative energy in 10 years.



I've been hoping someone would make this challenge. Less carbon, fresh air, better transit options and WE CAN KEEP OUR MONEY!

Where You Live, and What It Costs

CEO for Cities made a nifty little movie showing the difference between two neighborhoods in Chicago and why people spend so much on transportation. How much money do you transfer to oil companies?

EPA, Regressive Progressives, A Green Link

The EPA is saying that the EIS for the Columbia River Crossing doesn't consider growth from Sprawl or water and air pollution caused by increased driving. Don't get me wrong, I think its important to look at these things but the EPA has been super schizophrenic as of late. Perhaps this is the wing of the EPA not controlled by Bush lackeys? You know, the ones that reduced the value of life...really. From the Oregonian:

The critique is drawn from EPA's review of the Columbia River Crossing's 5,000-page environmental impact statement, and it extends to other areas as well. Among those are whether doubling the congested I-5 bridge from six to 12 lanes will promote suburban sprawl; whether the combination of air toxics, noise and other pollution will punish North Portland communities living close to the I-5; and whether massive pile-driving efforts will stir up toxic sediments, compromising federally protected migrating salmon.

In other environmental news from the bay area, BRT booster Charles Siegel writes a fairly scathing critique of Berkeley residents which has become a city of regressive progressives r.

These hard-core anti-environmentalists seem to believe that they are fighting to protect Berkeley’s character against growth. They don’t realize that Berkeley’s early character as a walkable streetcar suburb was disrupted by auto-oriented development. Transit corridors were filled with drive-in uses, and they ended up being more like strip malls than like walkable Main Streets. Even in downtown, there were surface parking lots, tire stores, a strip mall, a car wash, and other drive-in uses that made it less pleasant to walk.

Obviously I'm not a fan of BRT in these corridors that used to be Key System lines, especially when its not electrified but the grounds on which this proposal is being opposed is a bit silly. It makes Berkeley residents look bad. Eric covers the worst of it.

Meanwhile, one quite confused speaker claimed that giving buses a dedicated lane would cause them to “get stuck,” and that what we really needed was “flexibility.” She suggested that with “flexibility,” AC Transit could run buses every three minutes, while implying that three-minute headways would be impossible with a dedicated bus lane. Just incredible.

It's at this point when you kind of just have to throw up your hands and say uncle. These people are never going to get it. And its sad, because even though BRT is a small step up in service, it represents a giant shift in priorities (people over cars) and better service than what exists now.

And Green News from BART, all of their peripheral systems are going solar. Pretty cool.

With Days Like These...

I don't quite understand why we still think burning carbon based fuel is a good idea. Forget about Global Warming, this is what is dumb to me about the pushback against alternative energy. This is San Francisco the last few days. Orange is nice, but it means dangerous air.

McCain and Amtrak Not BFF

We've covered this before, but John McCain is no friend of passenger rail. This Boston Globe article goes into detail.

In the section of McCain's website called "reforming our transportation sector," there is no mention of rail. There is only his clean-car challenge to automakers, his $300 million prize to design battery cars, and enforcing only existing gas mileage standards.

When The Washington Post reported on how President Bush's fiscal 2006 budget did not include a subsidy for Amtrak, would kill both $20 million for the next generation of high-speed rail, and $250 million for railroad rehabilitation, it quoted McCain as saying on television, "I'm glad the president is coming over with a very austere budget."

The luster of austerity is gone. Public transportation is becoming a real issue for the campaign trail. If so, McCain has all but handed Obama a golden spike to beat him over the head with.

Question About Plug in Hybrid Cars

I have a question about plug in hybrids. Are they predicated on having a snout house or a garage? I park my car all over the place near my house in San Francisco and there is no where I would be able to plug in on the street. I wonder what the urban design implications are for these cars. Are there going to be outlets sticking up all over the place? Cables?

Yosemite's Relation to Transit

This weekend I was in Yosemite camping with my siblings. There always seems to be a transit twist with my trips and this one was no different, even in the wilderness where there was no cell phone reception or access to technology but there were buses.

On the first day we went to Yosemite Valley. If you haven't been I certainly recommend it. It's stunningly beautiful and made me wish that I could still run twenty miles at a time, specifically during this picture...



After the meadow, we drove to a parking lot and left our car. We hopped on the bus and it took us to a trail head for mirror lake. It was amazing and we got a good view of the lake's reflection of the mountains.







The next day we went to Hetch Hetchy, where San Francisco gets its water. Down stream that water gets turned into hydroelectric power for Muni Metro and trolleybuses. You'll have to turn your screen sideways for the video of Wampama falls.








All in all it was a fun trip.

Lieberman-Warner Bill DOA

Aww shucks, we'll have to wait until the next President is in office to pass a climate change bill. If you couldn't tell, I'm not very upset about it. There needs to be a lot more in there for alternative transportation, especially modes that will reduce VMT like bikes and transit (and walking). It still stuck people in their silos as well not blending the benefits of land use and transportation decisions.

Although it is kind of par for the course that it dies the same day as Oil skyrockets.

Muni LRT to be Powered by the Sun

Calgary powers its light rail with wind, Seattle with hydro and Muni which was partial hydro, will now be solar. So much for those coal fired power plant arguments against light rail and future energy.

The photovoltaic systems at the two facilities and the solar energy they generate will be developed and operated under a "Power Purchase Agreement" between the SFPUC and Recurrent Energy. Under the agreement, which the SFPUC members authorized SFPUC staff to negotiate today, Recurrent will finance, design, build and operate the solar energy projects and provide all the energy generated to the SFPUC for a period of 25 years. The five megawatts generated between the two facilities will be used to help power other San Francisco public services and buildings, including streetlights, San Francisco General Hospital, Muni light rail and city schools.

Obama Video: Learn From Portland

Yup. H/T Carfree USA

Chicks Dig Low Carbon Footprints

So Wired has a story on how females are more willing to start conversation if you own a hybrid. I wonder if it goes one step further and you get even more attention if you promote transit. I'm not holding my breath.

Bill Language Translation

As promised, an update on the Boxer amendment to the Lieberman Warner climate bill. The bill language in full can be found here. Here are the funding breakdowns for each program to be funded. Here is my translation of the language below for the transit section of the amendment:

Grants for Additional Public Transportation Service

65% of the funds will be put into the formula funding program for transit already set up under section 5307. 60% of these funds can go to capital and operations funds and will be appropriated according to the urbanized area population. 40% of these funds can be allocated based on growth in the state based on the census. Also, any capital project that receives federal funding will be eligible for the funding if it provides 20% of its own funding (See section e). Operating costs will only allow 50%

I worry that some of these funds might be eligible for transfer to freeways and roads. I can't tell for sure though if this is possible, but the rules set out below from the code make it possible.

1. In a Transportation Management Area (TMA), the MPO may elect to transfer portions of its FTA Section 5307 funds that cannot be used for operating assistance to FHWA for highway projects subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. §5307(b)(2).

Requirements:

(3) In a transportation management area designated under section 5305 (a) of this title,^[1] amounts that cannot be used to pay operating expenses under this section also are available for a highway project if—

(A) that use is approved, in writing, by the metropolitan planning organization under section 5303 of this title after appropriate notice and an opportunity for comment and appeal is provided to affected public transportation providers;

(B) the Secretary decides the amounts are not needed for investment required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.); and

(C) the metropolitan planning organization in approving the use under subparagraph (A) determines that the local transit needs are being addressed.

Grants for New Public Transit Projects

This is a really cool part. 30% of the $171 Billion expected would go to fixed guideway construction (Heavy Rail, Light Rail, Streetcar, Commuter Rail, and True BRT). It's subject to the same criteria as the new starts program. Now we have a little bit to worry about here if John McCain and Mary Peters stick around because they are going to water down fixed guideway as much as they can. Earlier this year they tried to make hot lanes eligible for new starts funding as "fixed guideway". This is also pennies. $1.026 Billion per year for fixed guideway projects is the basic idea.

Grants for Efficiency at Public Transit Agencies

5% of the funds will be allocated for reducing VMT, Bike and Ped infrastructure, carpool and telecommuting programs that don't include new road capacity. Funding will be distributed based on the total GHG reductions of the project applying for funding. This could include any of the following:

(A) improvements to lighting, heating, cooling, or ventilation systems in stations and other facilities that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(B) adjustments to signal timing or other vehicle controlling systems that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(C) purchasing or retrofitting rolling stock to improve efficiency or reduce greenhouse‐gas emissions; or
(D) improvements to energy distribution systems.

Like Ryan says, we can do better. But its a small start that could and should be expanded.

Possibly Billions for US Transit in Climate Bill

The word on the street is that an amendment will be introduced by Barbara Boxer to the Lieberman Warner Climate bill that would raise $171 billion dollars for transit (see title VI subtitle B). While this sounds good, it is only pennies. Over 50 years, thats only $3.42 billion per year which compared with the last transportation bill was $244 billion over 6 years, most of it for roads.

Now there is another pot of money that could possibly be used for transit. There will $544 billion available as energy block grants. The money is available for states that reduce GHG emissions. Some of that money could go to transit as well. Now this is just an amendment and while its got some support, it still needs votes.

We'll let you know more as it comes online.

Transfer of Wealth

Via the Bellows, Mr. Setser notes the Transfer of Wealth.

If oil -- using the price for sweet light crude -- stays to $125 a barrel for the rest of the year, the average price of oil over the course of 2008 will be around $115 a barrel. The average 2007 price was around $70 a barrel. The $45 a barrel y/y increase in the average price of oil is equivalent to going from $25 a barrel oil to $70 a barrel oil in a single year. It is a large jump. It would lead to something like a $650-700 billion transfer of wealth from the oil-importing economies to the major oil-exporting economies.

It's very very disgusting. Actually, you know I saw an article on Wired's blog about Dubai's awesome Metro today. The sad thing is that it was basically funded by us.

The system will carry 200 million passengers a year, about 547,000 passengers each day. Officials hope to have almost 200 miles of subway lines built by 2020, at which point it would be one of the largest automated subway systems in the world.

That could have been LA.

Debunking O'Toole #3,520

Mr. Setty at PublicTransit.us is debunking Randal's latest try to put down light rail yet again. This time the claim is that a Prius is more energy efficient:

With most renewable sources such as wind, solar and hydroelectric, "gross energy" is essentially meaningless in this "Prius vs. Electric Transit" argument, except that efficient extraction of available energy keeps the price of the power obtained down. Taking O'Toole's reasoning to its logical extreme, if wind and solar only captures 10% of the available energy, or a hydroelectric project only captures 25% of the energy available, he'd still report absurdly high BTU's expended. Never mind that in these cases, nature still radiates this energy into Earth's environment--whether humans choose to tap into it or not.

Holiday from Real

Why can't we have a real discussion about energy and alternatives in this country? As we continue to talk about worthless alternatives like gas tax holidays and price caps, real solutions to our energy problems get tossed aside. Today Thomas Friedman writes in the New York Times that the United States passed on giving tax breaks to alternative energy. Soon we will have tax credits for oil companies that are making record profits on the market while alternative energy credits run out. While this would not really help in the transportation sector that uses the most oil, it most certainly would have the effect of getting the ball rolling on ways to get us off the sippy cup. Even carbon taxes as Ezra Klein points out would help give us a push.

But there is another problem that plagues us now and long term. The Gizmo Green. This is the hope that technology alone and not also behavioral modifications will save us from ourselves. Barack Obama even has an ad out discussing what we can do including:

Raising fuel efficiency standards
Alternative fuel research
Middle class tax cut

Whew. Once we do that the problems will be solved! Not. That is all about cars. What about modes of electric transit? What about development patterns? Walkable, bike friendly communities? Anyone? Bueller?

Matt at track twenty-nine says it best:

Still, Mr. Obama's message leaves a little to be desired. He recently reiterated his support for Amtrak and for building a better high-speed rail network in this country, but he has not yet asked Americans to change modes, nor has he promised to significantly change the way we build transit in America.

In all of President Bush's States of the Union, he called for us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Not once did he ask Americans to try the bus. Not once did he promise a spending package that would start a wave of new transit construction across the nation. Instead, he called for new fuels (to be delivered sometime in the future) and a switch to biofuels (also to be delivered sometime in the future).

Asking Americans to switch to transit would produce an immediate reduction in oil usage, especially if it was coupled with subsidies to reduce fares and the construction of new lines.

Seems to me we did this with the Interstate Highway Act. Not to mention that more transit means more jobs in an ailing economy. Perhaps a new program is in order to change our possible transport and neighborhood choices, not just what powers our cars. Now when buying your first house, you can choose between suburbs. It's annoying to hear folks say that the market prefers suburbs when downtowns are so expensive because of the market for living in them. I wish those people that hated living here in dense ole San Francisco would move out because its dang expensive due that pesky market demand for a transit-oriented lifestyle people sure don't like.

Transport Electrification

There is a lot of talk here of passenger rail but little discussion of freight. I can't say that I know about the business that much but I wanted to share a few ideas that I had seen that look promising.

The first is a plan thought up by Bruce McFadden over at Docudharma. His idea is to create a backbone energy corridor along freight lines to transport stranded wind.

It should, I hope, be clear that much of the best resource is in areas that do not have the highest electricity consumption. And at the same time, that is a lot of the terrain that the transcontinental freight rail must traverse to get where its going. And, at the same time, we desperately need to get the main freight rail trunk lines electrified, by hook or by crook. Ergo, I got a grossly oversimplified policy proposal to present.

• The Federal Government invests in publicly owned infrastructure to electrify the main railroad
• In return, the owners of the right of way cede use of the right of way above the part that they need to public use, together with access to the ground level right of way for support structures
• That right of way is used to establish long distance High Voltage DC trunk lines to bring sustainable energy from the places that have it to places the need it
• In areas where there is a commercial wind resource, the usage rights above those trunk lines are available to be leased out for wind farm operators, with the lease payments rolled back into the funding for the program

Some answers to some challenges to the proposal, after the fold.

Another of interest is a plan to reduce energy consumption in 10 years through transport electrification, mostly by electrifying the freight lines by granting property tax waivers for railroads that electrify. It also includes more rail transit and trolleybuses. Alan Drake discusses that plan over at Light Rail Now! I'm not sure how feasible it is, but its an interesting idea to ponder.

True Patriotism

Streetsblog posted this video earlier today. I never saw it on TV, but it mentions sticking it to OPEC. Be patriotic, drink some beers and ride some bikes (or transit).

Greening Car Myth + Capacity Issues

In Forbes, Michael Repogle writes an article on the problems with auto travel increases even in the face of new technologies.

A key arena for innovation will be finding ways to grow the world's communities and economies while at the same time reducing how much driving the population is doing. The forecast growth in motor vehicle traffic--60% over the next two decades in the U.S. and many times that in China and India--threatens to overwhelm gains won through increasing vehicle fuel efficiency.

Which is the main rub, that VMT will increase so much that it will overwhelm any solutions we come up with such as everyone having a Prius type gas sipper. The only way to solve this issue is with more compact development and better transit.

The key to success is to keep car traffic from growing to unsustainable levels to begin with. A 2007 Urban Land Institute study found that shifting two-thirds of new U.S. growth to compact neighborhoods where cars are not the only transportation option would save 85 million tons of CO2 annually by 2030. That figure is more than the combined annual emissions of over 16 million regular passenger cars.

While Michael claims the transit solution is BRT, I think he's been drinking too much of the Bill Vincent cool-aid. In keeping with most BRT peddlers out there, he spreads the rumor in a major print medium that BRT is cheaper than LRT. With most new BRT lines in the United States built as hybrid buses instead of trolleybuses, and just operating as express buses they are not helping the problem either. In suburban areas and less congested routes BRT will be a major part of the solution, but in urban areas, it is a necessity that we build rail lines that can have multiple car consists and have major capacity. The Orange Line in Los Angeles which is already at capacity and takes 15 minutes longer to finish the same distance as the Gold Line LRT, even with its speed limits. The LACMTA is looking to expand it but there is hardly room for more people.

The thing that bothers me most is what if a lot of people need to use transit in cities? On some lines, particularly in San Francisco, there is a capacity problem. A recent study to open up Muni for free rides showed how overwhelmed the system would be if a substantial number of new people hopped on due to free rides. This scares me a bit. New York City has been handling massive increases quite well but even they need to expand and are in the process of building new subway tunnels. If we ever have a big shock and a ton of people hop on transit, there are going to be problems. And not having the capacity of a subway system spine here, it will show the limits of buses as the only solution as peddled by many rubber tire advocates. Buses will always be the bones of a transit system, but our spine should have capacity to move more people than a 60 foot bus.

Obama on Transit

In today's Charlotte Observer, staff asked Barack Obama how he felt about federal support for mass transit:

His response:

I'm a strong supporter, as part of our broader energy strategy. You know, if we are designing cities, and urban communities and suburban communities around two-hour commutes, then we are destined to continue down the course of climate change. And mass transit not only is far more environmentally sound, but with oil prices sky high, and not likely to go down significantly, because of increased demand by China and India, it gives individuals much more of an incentive to look at trains and mass transit as an alternative.

Eh. I want to hear a more substantive discussion, but anything beats McCain, who has said he wants to kill Amtrak through privatization. I imagine Mary Peters will get to stick around too, and we already know her record.