U of M Route Choice Crashes and Burns

Instead of going straight through campus, the University of Minnesota wanted the Central Corridor to go around. They even had Governor Pawlenty hold up State Funding for the project so they could study the route that would kill ridership. Well the study is back and like everyone said it would, it tanked:

The University of Minnesota's preferred route for the Central Corridor would fail to pass — big time — a key scoring index needed for federal approval, according to records obtained by the Pioneer Press today.

...

The Washington Avenue route, which would cost $909 million, is 23.80. The U's Dinkytown route, which would cost between $889 million and $894 million, would have a CEI of between 28.25 and 28.44, according to the U's study, which notes that 23.99 "is recommended by the FTA to be considered for federal funding.

The University is still going to try and lobby to change the CEI measures but good luck with that. How many other cities have tried to change it and failed. This is just another example of even smart people building for cars. And from now on, they will get much more pushback.

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.

Krugman on Living in a High Cost Oil World

I hope Mr. Krugman gets more folks to start talking about the changes we need to make in order to live a low oil lifestyle. And as he states, its not about prying cars away from Americans, but instead facilitating walking, biking, and transit. You know, what the transit blogosphere is talking about anyways.

To see what I’m talking about, consider where I am at the moment: in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood consisting mainly of four- or five-story apartment buildings, with easy access to public transit and plenty of local shopping.

It’s the kind of neighborhood in which people don’t have to drive a lot, but it’s also a kind of neighborhood that barely exists in America, even in big metropolitan areas. Greater Atlanta has roughly the same population as Greater Berlin — but Berlin is a city of trains, buses and bikes, while Atlanta is a city of cars, cars and cars.

Central Corridor Alive

Governor, legislators make a deal.

Updated with better link. Thx Tedder.

Vulgar Libertarianism in Pittsburgh

I often wonder if libertarianism has a built in preference for getting around. Why do I wonder? Because it shouldn't. But that is how conversations about transport and libertarianism start out in this country. Basically most libertarians (I say most because there are some that understand history) use their libertarianism to declare that transit does not work. "Let the free market work" they say, without discussing the massive amount of subsidies that turned the United States into its car loving, wealth transferring, big business loving self.

In fact during the time at which most transit was built, it was during the most free market period in the history of this country and it was about the development of land. That development opportunity disappeared with the invention of the automobile and the road funding by the government. By that time zoning was implemented and separate districts mostly single family were created like they were on an assembly line.

So I'm not surprised when the assistant editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune started his column out like this without historical context:

It was no place for a lone libertarian. And it was certainly no friendly place for anyone who thinks wasteful government transportation monopolies like the Port Authority of Allegheny County are proof that America's 40-year-old experiment in socialized urban mass transit is a failure.

Just jump right into it Bill, leave no history forgetting opinion out. Then the preference issue:

In fact, anyone who openly prefers cars to buses would have found himself feeling very alone during a salon dinner discussion on "The Future of Urban Growth and Transportation" Tuesday night at the upscale restaurant Eleven in the Strip District.

Why is it that you prefer cars? Is it because we've made cars and oil pretty much the only game in town? This brings me to Vulgar Libertarianism. The Mutualist Blog lays it out:

The defining feature of vulgar political economy, as Marx described it, was that it had ceased to be an attempt at the scientific explication of the laws of economics, and had become a hired prize-fighter on behalf of plutocratic interests.

Interests like the automobile, at the cost of every other mode. But Japan can have free market transit! Why not be like them?

When the lone libertarian finally found the nerve, he did his uncomfortable best to politely shame his fellow salon-goers for their blind acceptance of our obviously third-rate mass-transit industrial complex. He pointed out that Tokyo's gargantuan transit system -- arguably the world's best -- was about 90 percent private and mostly profitable.

He tried to point out that in progressive Europe, governments are decentralizing control and funding of mass transit or privatizing its bus and rail lines, as Stockholm and London have done.

Remember earlier when we talked about land and our zoning. Well Japan's railroad owns land and that's where it makes most of its money. We don't let transit agencies become real estate companies either in this country. If we do, we often get into the whole eminent domain mess, which libertarians hate. In addition, London's privatization has been seen as a money sucking failure and the government in Denmark provides the best bike infrastructure in the world by which 24% of total trips are made.

So all of this points to hypocrisy and a misunderstanding of the past(or even the present) by the libertarian faction, one in which we subsidized cars and trucks so much, it killed the private railroads, passenger and freight. Now when are we going to talk about how much money we're sending overseas to fuel those cars? Is that the free market at work?

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.

Where Are the Whiners on This One?

Man that Houston can sure build roads! Good thing they're starting to get a little balance. An email on the LightRail_Now yahoo group came in with an article about the Hampton Roads cost increase for a specific piece of the route. Now they have contingency money set aside so its not busting the budget but the ridiculousness of transit opponents comes out when overruns occur. It's a "boondoggle"! they say.

Well what about boondoggles like this: the Katy Freeway in Houston. Charles Kuffner covered this back in February but the email reminded me about this fantastic project that's $1.7 Billion over the original $1 Billion or $1.2 Billion estimate. How many more billions in GHG cleanup will this one cost?

As for Hampton Roads and other FTA projects, what do you expect when you start a project and over10 years it gets changed a little and built. This type of time overrun has got to stop. We can't wait that long anymore. Don't get me wrong, we need to build it right...but ten years?! Give me a break.

Space Race Update: UTA Vehicle Purchase

UTA, the transit agency on Utah's front range which includes Salt Lake City has started up the PR campaign and purchases for its Front Lines 2015 program. The plan is to build 70 miles in 7 years. So to keep on track with that, they are buying up 77 Siemens SD70 Avantos for $277 million or $3.6 M per vehicle. The same type used in Charlotte and Houston.

To make the order cheaper, buy in bulk. And that bulk includes an option for 120 more. My best guess is that either Houston or San Diego is going to be exercising those options with San Diego's cars reaching the end of their 25 year life and Houston embarking on the metro solutions plan. It might also be split up into smaller orders if cities that are running low based on this most recent ridership surge.

Siemens' news release about the contract lists an option for 180 more rail cars, though UTA General Manager John Inglish said the agency most likely won't use that many. It's common practice to secure more than needed at a good bulk price, he said, then offer the excess to another transit system that needs the cars.

Looks like the Siemens plant in Sacramento is going to be working overtime. Glad that these vehicles are all being built here. Imagine the economic impact if every city was building new LRVs and transit networks. Jobs Jobs Jobs.

Update: a Railway Gazette Article states that the Siemens vehicles will be a bit shorter than the Charlotte and San Diego Cars in order to accommodate 4 car trains.

Anyone Need Some Modern Trams? Never Been Used!

Prague apparently bought four streetcars but never used them. They didn't work. Now they are building Skoda models built at home in the Czech Republic and selling off the surplus four Tatras. Anyone think they can be fixed up and used in the US? I dunno, but it might be worth looking into.

Update: On second thought, probably not a good idea. Translation here.

Dragging Them Kicking and Screaming

A few items of good news out tonight:

Rep. John Mica is from Florida and the ranking Republican on the house transportation and infrastructure committee. He has been fighting for local commuter rail recently but took a time out to gave a speech at the Dow Jones Infrastructure Conference. He discussed Semi HSR on the Northeast Corridor and improvements to Amtrak. When asked about the airline lobby, he had this to say:

"We'll drag them kicking and screaming into the 21st century."

There was also news from the Ranking Democrat from the same committee, James Oberstar. He stated in a discussion with Minnesota Public Radio that new starts rules would be changing. This would perhaps allow a tunnel under the university and cut down the importance of our favorite cost effectiveness measure.

Oberstar, who chairs the influential House Transportation Committee, supports the Central Corridor project linking St. Paul and Minneapolis. The DFLer said a recently passed bill changes how the Federal Transit Administration evaluates transportation projects that are seeking federal money.

Under the old system, Oberstar said the FTA focused on what's known as the cost-effectiveness index. The CEI is a complicated formula that looks at travel times, ridership and construction costs.

But Oberstar said the index means the agency essentially ignores other factors, such as environmental benefits and the potential for economic development. He pushed for the recent changes, which will require the FTA to also give comparable weight to five other criteria.

Hopefully this means that cities start planning lines based on ridership, rather than saying, what can we build for this small amount of money.