« March 2008 | Main | May 2008 »

April 30, 2008

Gas Prices and Housing Bust: Causality or Spurious Correlation?

You decide (via the Oregonian).

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (38) | Permalink

April 29, 2008

The Latest on Transit-Oriented Development

Portland State University
Center for Transportation Studies
Spring 2008 Transportation Seminar Series

Speaker: GB Arrington, Principal Practice Leader, PB PlaceMaking and Jennifer Dill, Portland State University

Topic: Transit-Oriented Development: Findings from Recent Research

When: Friday, May 2, 2008, 12:00-1:30pm

Where: PSU Urban Center Building, SW 6th and Mill, Room 204

Posted by Chris Smith at 7:52 AM | Comments (2) | Permalink

April 28, 2008

Pedestrian Legal Clinic

Willamette Pedestrian Coalition would like to invite you to a Pedestrian Legal Clinic

REI-Portland
May 20, 2008, 6:30 - 8:00 pm,
1405 NW Johnson, Portland

Tired of Dodging Cars? Do you feel unsafe walking in your neighborhood? People on foot have rights. Have you almost been hit crossing the street when walking, running, getting to school or out for a stroll? On sidewalks and in crosswalks pedestrians have the right of way: Unite with others. Learn more about your legal rights as a pedestrian. Ray Thomas will present from his new guide "Oregon Pedestrian Rights: A Legal Guide for Persons on Foot".

REI - Portland is located two blocks south of the street car and on bus lines 17 and 77

Register in advance (walk-ins ok): 503-223-1597
Pedestrian Legal Clinics are a joint project of lawyer activist Ray Thomas and the Willamette Pedestrian Coalition.
This session is hosted by REI-Portland

The next Pedestrian Legal Clinic will be: June 10, 2008, 6:00 – 7:30,
Portland Building, Broadway Room on the 9th Floor
1120 SW 5th Ave. Portland

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (5) | Permalink

April 25, 2008

Basic Equation of Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Editor’s Note: The following was originally posted to the Oregon Transportation Reform Activists Network (OTRAN) email list (you can subscribe here).

Executive Summary

In order to actually meet targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Oregon must do the math to determine that proposed steps will be sufficient. I offer the “Basic Equation of Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions” as a tool for examining the interplay of the five major factors: overall reduction target, share attributable to the transportation sector, population growth, changes in technology, and changes in travel behavior. Under reasonable assumptions, I find that in order to meet the targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, statewide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per person will need to be reduced 18% by the year 2020, 33% by the year 2035 and 62% by the year 2050. Note that the first two benchmarks are within the planning horizons of regional transportation plans (RTPs) for Oregon’s six metropolitan areas, none of which are planning for anywhere near these kinds of reductions. A future post will discuss what making such needed reductions in VMT would actually mean for Oregon’s transportation system.

Warning: Math at the sixth grade level ahead!

Dear OTRAN friends,

Last December in “Framework Part 1: The New Direction for Oregon” (12/5/07), I proposed:

The New Direction for Oregon: All proposed, laws, rules, plans, policies and other actions must be judged in terms of how effectively they keep Oregon on track reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Proposed efforts taking us in the wrong direction must be rejected. Efforts that don’t go far enough must be strengthened to keep us on track. Every year and at every level, Oregon must assess how well it is doing compared to the House Bill 3543 targets, and make adjustments as necessary.

More recently in “Gov. Kulongoski re transportation and climate change: Part 2—glass half empty or half full?” (4/17/08), I challenged Governor Kulongoski and other state leaders to “show us the numbers that explain in detail how Oregon can move from business-as-usual to where we need to go.”

But it is easy to challenge others, and even easier to set ambitious goals. Instead, we need to roll up our sleeves, take out our slide rules,¹ and begin the critical work of re-engineering the Oregon’s future to meet Oregon’s ambitious, but essential, targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, in particular, from the transportation sector.²

Basic Equation of Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The starting point for re-engineering Oregon’s future is what I term the “Basic Equation of Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions”:

(Total Emissions) × (Transportation Sector) = (Population) × (Technology) × (Behavior)

Before I explain in detail each factor in this equation, which involves only simple multiplication, I’ll point out that there are many solutions to this equation—and even more non-solutions. This equation does not dictate a single future, but merely reflects the fact that numbers don’t lie. For example, we can’t propose taking baby steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and expect these will add up to meeting the ambitious House Bill 3543 (2007) reduction targets.

I’ll also note that the equation involves five factors, each measured relative to today’s values. The factors will assume different values at different points in time, for example, today, the year 2020, the year 2035 or the year 2050.

In particular, one trivial solution to the equation is where we are today with all the factors equal to 1:

1 × 1 = 1 × 1 × 1    (year 2008)

As we look to re-engineer the future, we can adjust each of these five factors—think of turning each of five knobs up or down—subject to the constraint that the equation remain true.

Let’s look at each factor in detail…

Total Emissions

The Total Emissions factor in the Basic Equation represents the total annual emissions from all sectors relative to today’s emissions.

Today in 2008, Oregon’s total greenhouse gas emissions are roughly 70 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO₂E) per year. In 1990, the figure was 55.5 MMTCO₂E per year.³

For purposes of illustration, I am going use the year 2035 as a medium-term point in the future, far enough away to begin seeing real changes but not so far away that there is too much uncertainty. In particular, the Metro Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) currently under development goes out to the year 2035.⁴ The RTPs for other metro areas will also need to plan out to roughly that year. Thus the year 2035 is within the timeframe of current transportation planning processes.

Oregon’s greenhouse gas reduction targets set in House Bill 3543 (2007) call for reducing emissions by the year 2020 to roughly 50 MMTCO₂E per year (= 10% below the 1990 level) and by the year 2050 to roughly 13.9 MMTCO₂E per year (= 75% below the 1990 level).⁵

As the year 2035 is halfway between 2020 and 2050, if we are to stay on target, Oregon’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2035 should be halfway between the 2020 and 2050 targets, i.e., roughly 32 MMTCO₂E per year.

Recalling that today’s emissions are roughly 70 MMTCO₂E per year, the Total Emissions factor for the year 2035 is (rounded to two decimal places):

(Total Emissions) = (32 MMTCO₂E) / (70 MMTCO₂E) = 0.46    (year 2035)

In plain English, Oregon needs to cut total greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2035 to just 46% of today’s level in order to stay on track.

Transportation Sector

The Transportation Sector factor in the Basic Equation represents the fraction of the total annual emissions attributable to the transportation sector relative to the fraction today.

According to the Governor’s Climate Change Integration Group (CCIG), the transportation sector accounted for 36% of Oregon’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 1990 and 34% in 2004.⁶

In theory, one could imagine a future in which the transportation sector accounted for anywhere between 0% and 100% of total emissions.

In practice, as Oregon looks to meet its targets, there will be some political negotiation around how much each sector must do to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If one sector does less, other sectors will have to do more.

A reasonable policy decision is to plan for each sector to continue to account for the same fraction of emissions as it does today, in particular, that the transportation sector continue to account for 34% of all emissions. Under this policy decision, the Transportation Sector factor for the year 2035 is:

(Transportation Sector) = (34%) / (34%) = 1.00    (year 2035)

But an argument can be made that other sectors, in particular, residential, commercial and industrial uses, should be required to reduce emissions relatively more than the transportation sector: It is more practical to have low- or zero-carbon sources of energy for uses at fixed locations connected by a network of electrical power lines than for millions of personal motor vehicles traveling all over the place. In this case, the Transportation Sector factor would actually be larger than 1, reflecting that the sector’s share of emissions is increasing. We will return to this policy option below.

Population

The Population factor in the Basic Equation represents the population relative to today’s population.

Today in 2008, the population of Oregon is roughly 3.75 million people.⁷ By the year 2035, the population is projected to grow to roughly 5.15 million people.⁸

At least for the purposes of this discussion, we don’t have much control over population and it is just a fact of life. Thus the Population factor for the year 2035 is (rounded to two decimal places):

(Population) = (5.15 million) / (3.75 million) = 1.37    (year 2035)

In plain English, by the year 2035 the population is projected to grow to 137% of its current level.

Technology

The Technology factor in the Basic Equation represents the effect of technological changes on greenhouse gas emissions relative to technology today.

This factor subsumes all factors affecting the greenhouse gas emissions per vehicle mile traveled: vehicle fuel efficiency, fuel cleanliness and/or carbon content, transportation system changes to increase the experienced fuel efficiency of travel, etc.

Indeed, this factor subsumes three of the four specific ideas Governor Kulongoski highlighted in his recent speech to the Oregon Environmental Council Forum for Business and the Environment:

* low carbon fuels;

* vehicle technology improvement, including the shift to plug-in and electric cars; and

* improving transportation system efficiency.

Now it is notoriously difficult to predict where technology will be, say, 25+ years in the future. One can optimistically assume that technology will save us, even if that technology isn’t widely available and affordable today. Or one can pessimistically assume that there will be no improvement in technology, at least until it is actually commonplace.

Today, the fleet average fuel efficiency for cars and light trucks sold in the United States is just 25 miles per gallon (mpg). The Bush administration recently proposed rules that would mandate this figure rise to 35 mpg by the year 2020, a 40% increase.⁹ (Of course, just because the federal government proposes something doesn’t necessarily make it so.)

In comparison, a Toyota Prius, the best-selling hybrid in America, gets an estimated 51 mpg, even in the city.¹⁰ But currently all hybrids make up only 2.2% of the U.S. auto market, barely a drop in the bucket.¹¹ Even once improved technology is available, it can take years or even decades for it to be widely adopted.

In trying to gaze into and re-engineer the future, I suggest a middle approach. In particular, I suggest taking the proposed new federal fuel efficiency rules for 2020 at face value. But I also suggest that this 40% increase in fuel efficiency be assigned to the year 2035, as it does take years for people to replace older cars with new.

Now increasing fuel efficiency by 40% translates to reducing fuel consumption, hence emissions, all other factors being equal, by 29%.¹²

In addition, I generously suggest that all other technological improvements, including further improvements in fuel efficiencies beyond the proposed 2020 targets, the increased use of hybrids and fully electric vehicles, non-carbon fuels and cleaner carbon fuels, and transportation system changes that result in greater operational efficiencies, account for an additional 21% decrease in emissions.

In plain English, I suggest that as a result of all technological changes, vehicle emissions in 2035 can be cut to just half of what they are today, mile for mile:

(Technology) = 0.50    (year 2035)

Behavior

Last but not least, the Behavior factor in the Basic Equation represents the effect of behavior changes on greenhouse gas emissions relative to behavior today.

The Behavior factor subsumes factors related to how much people choose travel, as measured in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per person. Thus it incorporates the effects of trip lengths, frequency, carpooling, mode splits, and so on.

Indeed, this factor subsumes the fourth specific idea Governor Kulongoski highlighted in his recent speech to the Oregon Environmental Council Forum for Business and the Environment:

* reducing the vehicle miles traveled.

We could argue about what sorts of changes in behavior are likely or desirable. But the magic of numbers not lying, i.e., of the Basic Equation of Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions, is that any four factors determine the fifth.

In particular, given our settings for the other four factors, it is necessary that:

(Behavior) = 0.67    (year 2035)

If this is the case, then the Basic Equation holds true:

(0.46) × (1) = (1.37) × (0.5) × (0.67)    (year 2035)

In plain English, by the year 2035 each person needs to travel, on average, just two-thirds as much as they do today.

Put another way, VMT per person needs to decrease on average by 33% by the year 2035.

I recall that years ago the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule called for metropolitan areas to reduce VMT per person by 5%, 10% or even 20% over a period of decades. But such targets were amended by the Land Conservation and Development Commission, under pressure from the metropolitan areas, to require only more achievable steps towards reducing VMT.¹³

For example, the recently adopted regional transportation plan (RTP) for the Eugene-Springfield-Coburg metropolitan area plans for a slight increase in VMT per person between now and the year 2031.¹⁴

Thus the idea of reducing VMT per person by 33% by the year 2035, given recent history, is farfetched to say the least.

But the numbers don’t lie and a 33% reduction by the year 2035 is exactly what will be required, assuming the other four factors are as specified.

Other Scenarios

As I noted above, the Basic Equation does not predict the future nor does it have a single solution. The Basic Equation is merely a useful tool for exploring different possible futures, for asking “what if?” questions.

If we continue to focus attention on the year 2035, and if we take the Total Emissions and Population factors as fixed, then we can adjust the Behavior factor if we also adjust the Transportation Sector and/or the Technology factor.

For example, if we allow the transportation sector to grow from 34% of all emissions today to, say, 50% by the year 2035, then this growth would allow us to keep VMT per person constant, and thereby to avoid having to make significant changes in behavior. But doing so would be at the expense of all other sectors, requiring them to reduce their emissions not to 46% of today’s level but even further to 35% of today’s level.¹⁵ It would have to be a policy decision, heavily affected by politics and what is technologically feasible, to impose less ambitious targets on the transportation sector while imposing more ambitious targets on other sectors.

Another possibility would be to rely more heavily on technology, planning for emissions mile for mile to be cut not merely in half but actually to one-third of today’s levels. For example, this could be accomplished by increasing average fuel efficiencies from 25 mpg today to 75 mpg in 2035, or by a combination of technological measures. But it would be foolhardy today to plan for technology to improve so dramatically and thus to forgo opportunities to change behavior, i.e., to reduce reliance on motor vehicles.

The Years 2020 and 2050

Rather than focusing on the year 2035, we can also look to the year 2020 or 2050.

As a shortcut, one can set the other four factors using reasonable values and then solve the Basic Equation for the needed Behavior factor:

(Behavior) = (Total Emissions) × (Transportation Sector) / (Population) / (Technology)

For the year 2020, we get:¹⁶

(Behavior) = (0.71) × (1) / (1.16) / (0.75) = 0.82    (year 2020)

In plain English, under reasonable assumptions, by the year 2020 we need to see people driving just 82% of what they do today, in other words a reduction of 18%.

For the year 2050, we get:¹⁷

(Behavior) = (0.2) × (1) / (1.6) / (0.33) = 0.38    (year 2050)

In plain English, under reasonable assumptions, by the year 2050 we need to see people driving just 38% of what they do today, in other words a reduction of 62%.

Conclusion

I don’t intend the discussion above as a prediction of the future nor as detailed policy recommendations.

Rather my main point is that numbers don’t lie and if Oregon is going to actually meet our targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we need to think like engineers and determine how to make the numbers work out.

I’ll also note that the RTPs for Oregon’s six metropolitan areas are not planning for anywhere near the kinds of reductions in VMT per person that are needed: 18% by the year 2020 and 33% by the year 2035. In a future post, I’ll discuss what these kinds of reductions in VMT per person might mean for Oregon’s transportation system.

Oregon has many great engineers, trained at Oregon State University and elsewhere. Today, if you want to, say, build a highway from Point A to Point B handling × average daily traffic (ADT), the engineers can pull out their “Highway Capacity Manual” and tell you exactly what kind of highway is needed to get from here to there.

Moving forward, a bigger challenge than moving traffic from here to there will be moving from where we are today to a future with far less greenhouse gas emissions. The state’s engineers, including many good people with the Oregon Department of Transportation, need to begin retooling and rethinking to figure out in detail how to solve the challenges of this century, not the last.

But what do you think? The Basic Equation offers a framework for exploring the future. Using it, what kind of future do you see? How do transportation proposals we are hearing fit into this framework, and do the numbers add up?

Coming up…

Framework Part 3: Leadership, Commitment and Accountability

Thanks,
Rob

P.S. To learn how some other engineers, in this case from Princeton, propose to re-engineer the future, not only for the transportation sector of Oregon but for the entire world, listen to a National Public Radio story about the “Wedge Game.” In brief, to reduce greenhouse gases worldwide to acceptable levels by the year 2050, it will be necessary to adopt seven specific policy actions—”wedges”—from a menu of 15 possible actions. The first two possible “wedges” relate to transportation: doubling transportation efficiency and halving VMT, i.e., the Technology and Behavior factors we have been discussing.

Footnotes

¹ In this age of cheap computers and even cheaper calculators, many might not know what a slide rule is. That’s too bad because the old analog technology offered a simple, concrete, tactile way to learn number sense in a way that the new digital tools don’t. Slide rules made it easy to do multiplication and division—and to see tangibly how the magnitudes of different numbers compare. One could even argue that a lack of number sense underlies the difficulty current society has in facing many important problems.

² The term “re-engineering” is meant loosely. According to Wikipedia, “re-engineering is the radical redesign of an organization’s processes, especially its business processes. Rather than organizing a firm into functional specialties (like production, accounting, marketing, etc.) and looking at the tasks that each function performs, we should, according to the reengineering theory, be looking at complete processes from materials acquisition, to production, to marketing and distribution. The firm should be re-engineered into a series of processes.”

³ See Figure 11 in Appendix A of the Final Report to the Governor: A Framework for Addressing Rapid Climate Change, Governor’s Climate Change Integration Group, January 2008

⁴ Metro RTP update

⁵ Oregon’s greenhouse gas reduction targets

⁶ See Figures 18 and 19 in Appendix A of the Final Report to the Governor: A Framework for Addressing Rapid Climate Change, Governor’s Climate Change Integration Group, January 2008

⁷ See 2007 Oregon Population Report, Portland State University Population Research Center, March 2008

⁸ See Forecasts of Oregon’s County Populations and Components of Change, 2000-2040, Oregon Office of Economic Analysis, April 2004

⁹ “Update 1: US DOT wants autos to average nearly 32 mpg by 2015,” Reuters, April 22, 2008

¹⁰ “Guide to Choosing a Vehicle,” Oregon Environmental Council

¹¹ “US hybrid sales up 38 percent in 2007; Prius leads the pack,” Associated Press, April 21, 2008

¹² For example, a vehicle traveling 175 miles uses 7 gallons of gas at 25 mpg but only 5 gallons of gas at 35 mpg, a reduction of 2/7 or 29% (not 40%, as one might naively suppose). Mathematically, fuel efficiency and fuel use are inversely related, so raising the fuel efficiency by a factor of 1.4 lowers the fuel use by a factor of 1/1.4 = 0.71, i.e., by 29%.

¹³ The text of the Transportation Planning Rule is available online. For a history of the TPR, see “The Politics of Implementation: Oregon’s Statewide Transportation Planning Rule—What’s Been Accomplished and How,” by Martha J. Bianco and Sy Adler, November 1998

¹⁴ See Table 8, “Summary of Key Performance Measures” in Chapter 4, Central Lane Regional Transportation Plan, Lane Council of Governments

¹⁵ If the transportation sector continues to account for 34% of all emissions, then it will need to reduce emissions from 23.8 MMTCO₂E/year (= 34% × 70 MMTCO₂E/year) to 10.9 MMTCO₂E/year (= 34% × 32 MMTCO₂E/year), i.e., to 46% of today’s levels: the same percentage as for reducing overall emissions. On the other hand, if the transportation sector grows to account for 50% of all emissions, then it will need to reduce emissions only to 16 MMTCO₂E/year (= 50% × 32 MMTCO₂E/year), i.e., to 67% of today’s levels. But the flip side of giving the transportation sector a break is that other sectors, which currently account for 66% of all emissions, will need to reduce emissions from 46.2 MMTCO₂E/year (= 66% × 70 MMTCO₂E/year) to 16 MMTCO₂E/year (= 50% × 32 MMTCO₂E/year), i.e., to 35% of today’s levels.

¹⁶ The Total Emissions factor is (50 MMTCO₂E/year) / (70 MMTCO₂E/year) = 0.71. We set the Transportation Sector factor to 1, assuming that transportation will continue to account for 34% of emissions. Oregon’s population in 2020 is projected to be roughly 4.35 million people, resulting in a Population factor of (4.35 million) / (3.75 million) = 1.16. Finally, we assume that technological improvements by the year 2020 will result in a 25% reduction in emissions, mile for mile, i.e., a Technology factor of 0.75.

¹⁷ The Total Emissions factor is (13.9 MMTCO₂E/year) / (70 MMTCO₂E/year) = 0.20. We set the Transportation Sector factor to 1, assuming that transportation will continue to account for 34% of emissions. Extrapolating trends, Oregon’s population in 2050 will approach 6 million people, resulting in a Population factor of (6 million) / (3.75 million) = 1.6. Finally, we assume that technological improvements by the year 2050 will result emissions being cut in third, mile for mile, i.e., a Technology factor of 0.33.

Posted by Rob Zako at 12:00 AM | Comments (78) | Permalink

April 24, 2008

TriMet Gets Tough

Via the Daily Journal of Commerce, TriMet has toughened their exclusion policies:

TriMet is adding intimidation as behavior restricted on the system, which includes violent, threatening or disruptive behavior or conduct intended and likely to provoke a violent response.

TriMet also is adding boisterous and unreasonably loud conduct as a restriction on the system.

"These changes give us more options to deal with problem riders and make riding transit more comfortable for everyone," said TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen in a statement. "It allows more TriMet personnel to immediately remove a rider who's being excessively loud and boisterous. These, along with more police officers, security cameras and other safety enhancements, make TriMet a safer and more comfortable transit system."

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (9) | Permalink

April 22, 2008

Changing Railroads in the U.S.: Is now the time for a national electrification program?

Garlynn Woodsong is an occasional guest contributor.

According to this Washington Post article, A Switch On the Tracks: Railroads Roar Ahead, the U.S. railroad industry is currently booming. They're hiring workers and expanding their facilities, as opposed to just six years ago, when they were laying off workers. They expect that high fuel prices will lead to a continued boom for railroads even as the economy continues to soften.

Also, apparently a diesel railroad engine can haul a ton of load four times more efficiently than a diesel truck. This allows the railroads to position them as the green shipping alternative.

This is all fine and good, but what about communities adjacent to the tracks? A couple of tons of diesel exhaust is a couple of tons of diesel exhaust, no matter how efficiently it is being used to haul its load.

Can our nation easily begin to retrofit the national railroad system to become electrified? The railroads are currently coming to Uncle Sam looking for a handout. Maybe the form of this handout should be tax breaks for electrification projects?

A modern diesel railroad engine is, apparently, something like a hybrid: A diesel generator provides electricity to turn the electric motors. Unlike a hybrid, it does not significantly use batteries in its operation, however. I wonder if a program to add pantographs (catenary arms) to diesel engines could work, to allow them to get the electricity for their electric motors from overhead wires, where available (say, in urban areas, to begin with) and to use their diesel engines where no overhead wires had yet been installed?

An issue with electrification, some might say, would be the extra-tall railroad cars now commonly used by freight railroads.

Catenary height in Europe is a standard 20 feet, and can be as high as 23 feet in Amtrak's NE Corridor. The maximum height of shipping containers is 9 feet; two of these stacked on top of one another, in a well car with 25" of clearance above the tracks, would be about 20 feet tall, still leaving nearly three feet of clearance between the top of the car and the highest catenary lines. If most of the U.S. is currently non-electrified, then it would be a simple matter of standardizing at the 23-foot catenary height to allow the U.S. to continue using double-stack trains as it began to electrify its national railway system.

What does this mean for Portland? Why not start the electrification program here? We could electrify all of the railroad tracks in the tri-county area (maybe using a mix of clean air funds, surcharges on shipping and maybe even a diesel tax), retrofit the engines that live here, and have electric switchers meet inbound long-haul trains at the borders of the region.

What's the favorite tenet of planners everywhere? "Make no small plans." This, IMHO, is no small plan -- but why let that stop us?

Guest Column at 11:58 PM | Comments (21) | Permalink

Rush Hour Redefined

Via Planetizen:

How will telework change commuting patterns?

Today the virtual work place trend is apparent in college towns across the U.S. like Amherst, Mass., and lifestyle locales like Asheville, N.C., and Bellingham, Wash., which are quickly becoming quality of life destinations for boomers developing their own virtual companies. Rather than experiencing clog ups during rush hour, quality-of-life locales like Amherst are experiencing far more traffic congestion at meal times--particularly lunch--as the self-employed virtual company owner heads to commercial districts for business meetings and to conduct errands. In these sorts of places, it's a return to the 19th century where people live and work close to a town or village center.

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (1) | Permalink

April 21, 2008

Yamhill County Rail study focuses on 3 options

Plans for linking Portland to Yamhill County by rail will likely fall short of Spirit Mountain and even perhaps McMinnville. The study currently underway by Portland-based IBI Group suggests that the line may go no further than Newberg due to low ridership estimates.

Randy Knapick of IBI Group said three options are getting a serious look. They include:

• Train service between Newberg and Beaverton, operating as a branch of Washington County's system, with stations in Springbrook, Sherwood and Tualatin and connections at existing stations in Tigard, Beaverton and Hall/Nimbus. Rough cost estimate: $72 million.
• Diesel light-rail service from Newberg through Sherwood and Tualatin to Lake Oswego, and then along the Willamette Trolley right-of-way to the North Macadam area of Portland. Rough cost estimate: $98 million.
• Rail service from Newberg to Tigard, where passengers could transfer to a Tri-Met bus or a MAX train. Rough cost estimate: $59 million.

All of the alternatives would enable passengers to connect, one way or another, with the Westside Express Service system now under construction.

The three project estimates under study all come in below $100 million since the right of way is still available. However, according to one Yamhill County commissioner, current ridership estimates aren't much higher than they were ten years ago, which may limit the project's ability to qualify for federal funding.

Several months ago many participants of this blog expressed optimism that a Yamhill rail line would be built, perhaps even to the coast, broadening the appeal beyond a commuter and winery tour train. With a route extending no further than Newberg, does this project still stand a chance as more than just a commuter line? Will McMinnville-to-Portland Metro commuters really bus it or drive to Newberg to take a train to work?

Continue reading Yamhill County Rail study focuses on 3 options

Posted by Joseph Edge at 12:00 AM | Comments (43) | Permalink

April 18, 2008

Metro managing all the bridges?

The City of Fairview has passed a resolution requesting that Metro coordinate the repairs on all the Willamette River bridges including the Sellwood bridge:

Metro is a natural fit, he said, because of its three-county reach and because it already handles transportation planning and selects projects to receive some federal transportation funds.

"No matter who puts a bridge up, Metro would be involved," Weatherby said. "To create a separate and independent bridge authority would create a new layer of bureaucracy. If you already have an agency whose apparatus is there, you get a running start."

Multnomah County floated the idea to create an independent regional bridge authority as part of its plan to raise the car registration fee to help pay for a new Sellwood Bridge. The plan was shelved in February, after votes against the fee increase by city leaders in Gresham, Troutdale and Maywood Park.

Continue reading Metro managing all the bridges?

Posted by Matthew Denton at 12:00 AM | Comments (18) | Permalink

April 17, 2008

Telling CRC Headline

From the Daily Journal of Commerce this morning: Columbia River Crossing builds contention instead of connections

Posted by Chris Smith at 9:37 AM | Comments (22) | Permalink

April 16, 2008

More VMT Tax Trials

I just finished listening to last week's presentation on the ODOT trial of a mileage tax and I came away impressed by just how complicated both the study and the means of collecting the info for the tax were. I wonder if the Puget Sound trial was less complicated?

Portland State University
Center for Transportation Studies
Spring 2008 Transportation Seminar Series

Speaker: Matthew Kitchen, Puget Sound Regional Council

Topic: Traffic Study Choices: Findings from a Road Pricing Experiment

When: Friday, April 18, 2008, 12:00-1:30pm

Where: PSU Urban Center Building, SW 6th and Mill, Room 204

Posted by Chris Smith at 1:55 PM | Comments (3) | Permalink

April 15, 2008

Enhancing Public Transit With Wi-Fi

A recent column found by way of Planetizen identifies many of the advantages of providing Wi-Fi Internet access to public transit passengers and provides several brief case studies of transit districts that have implemented wireless networks on their systems. One of the most commonly cited benefits was the ability to enhance the safety of passengers and operators by enabling streaming video from on-board surveillance cameras that can be accessed by dispatch. Many of the agencies mentioned in the column received Homeland Security grants to install their networks.

"Rail and bus companies are using Wi-Fi to entice more passengers to use their service," said Esme Vos, an intellectual property lawyer based in Amsterdam and founder of MuniWireless.com.

...

In addition to enhancing the commuter experience, Vos says that Wi-Fi is helping transit operators improve safety and efficiency, by using widespread video surveillance and sophisticated maintenance and diagnostic tracking.

"Streaming surveillance video from wireless cameras on buses to public safety authorities has been very successful for bus operators," she said.

Jim Baker agrees.

"While offering free Wi-Fi connectivity to passengers is a value-added service that is going to distinguish a public transit operator from its competition, that's not the main selling point for the operators," said Baker, CEO of UK-based Moovera Networks, whose company makes gateway devices that deliver broadband connectivity to public transport companies worldwide. "The primary driver is not Wi-Fi for passengers, but Internet connectivity for the vehicle."

At present, Trimet is planning to offer Wi-Fi on WES. When does Wi-Fi become a priority for MAX and buses? No numbers were offered, but many of those interviewed for the column said they believed ridership increased as a result of offering Wi-Fi, but most of those were for commuter trains or BRT routes. I would suspect that Wi-Fi becomes more appealing to a passenger as the trip length increases. If that were the case - or even if I'm wrong about that - what routes should be at the top of the list to be fitted with wireless Internet access for passengers? Are there routes that you think should be targeted for Wi-Fi in an attempt to boost ridership? Or routes that could use the enhanced security?

Continue reading Enhancing Public Transit With Wi-Fi

Posted by Joseph Edge at 12:00 AM | Comments (23) | Permalink

April 14, 2008

Kulongoski Calls for Congestion Pricing as Advocacy Group Launches CRC Alternatives Web Site

Speaking to the Oregon Environmental Council, Governor Kulongoski spoke strongly in support of congestion pricing (in the form of variable tolling at bottleneck points in the system). See Oregonian coverage and commentary by Jeff Mapes.

Interestingly he has slightly altered his rhetoric about the Columbia River Crossing. He spoke of "offsetting" the greenhouse gas emissions of the new bridge.

At the same time, a new web site has appeared: SmarterBridge.org, offering a phased approach of alternatives to the $4.2B proposal.

The organizers of this site are not explicity listed:

As individuals, we have all put our names on letters to the editor, opinion articles, and public testimony, but as a group we have chosen to emphasize not who we are, but what we have to say. We have chosen to let the facts speak for themselves on this site. We hope to see you at the hearings, where we can introduce ourselves in person!

(Yes, I have a pretty good idea who they are - and you've read some of their comments here.) One clue is that they have posted local economist Joe Cortright's testimony to the Portland Planning Commission (PDF, 327K) regarding the bridge.

Joe's presentation is the best, most concise, argument I've seen for the need for a different approach (and includes a preview of the web site).

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (142) | Permalink

April 11, 2008

TriMet buses now feature internal Automated Stop Announcements

From a TriMet press release today:

Buses with internal Automated Stop Announcements (ASA) are now notifying riders where they are along bus routes on seven TriMet bus lines. ASA ensures people who are hearing or sight impaired and those new to transit are informed of upcoming stops, by providing both internal readerboard and voice announcements of major stops along a bus route.

The internal announcements also include information about other transit connections available at stops along the route. External announcements, which were introduced and tested last year, announce which bus line is serving the stop when there are multiple bus lines involved.

(More after the break...)

"Automated Stop Announcements provide greater independence for riders with disabilities as well as be a valuable tool for all riders," said Fred Hansen, TriMet general manager." ASA reduces uncertainty over what stop is next and decreases anxiety over missing a stop."

The system is now being tested on seven lines:

• 6-Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
• 14-Hawthorne
• 54-Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy/56-Scholls Ferry Rd
• 57-TV Hwy/Forest Grove
• 72-Killingsworth/82nd Ave
• 75-39th Ave/Lombard
• 79-Clackamas Town Center

Next steps

By the end of May, these bus lines will be added:

• 12-Barbur Blvd
• 12-Sandy Blvd
• 15-Belmont
• 15-NW 23rd Ave
• 20-Burnside/Stark

By the end of 2008, all of the bus routes served by TriMet’s approximately 360 low-floor buses will have the announcements activated.

The system is similar to MAX, which has always had internal and external automated stop announcements. Bringing ASA to buses, however, required considerably more technology than the train announcements. On buses, ASA had to be coordinated with the Bus Dispatch System, using Global Positioning System (GPS). The GPS system and bus odometer let the bus dispatch system know where a bus is on the route and trigger automated announcements as the bus progresses.

Posted by Bob Richardson at 11:51 AM | Comments (31) | Permalink

April 10, 2008

Hybrids Too Quiet?

Jeff Mapes muses on his Oregonian blog about whether hybrids need to be noisier to be safe.

Posted by Chris Smith at 10:30 AM | Comments (27) | Permalink

April 9, 2008

Experience with VMT Tax Pilot

Portland State University
Center for Transportation Studies
Spring 2008 Transportation Seminar Series

Speaker: Anthony Rufolo, Professor, Urban Studies and Planning, Portland State University

Topic: Behavioral Responses to Oregon's Mileage Fee Experiment

When: Friday, April 11, 2008, 12:00-1:30pm

Where: PSU Urban Center Building, SW 6th and Mill, Room 204

Posted by Chris Smith at 9:33 AM | Comments (10) | Permalink

Take the survey on Metro-area bicycing conditions

Whether you bike a little or a lot, in the summer or all year long, BTA wants to hear about your experience.

Please take this survey on Portland-area bicycling conditions.

Every respondent is automatically entered in a prize drawing for a one-hour massage by Andrine de la Rocha of Beaumont Health Clinic.

Your input will help inform our advocacy and education work! It will only take 3-8 minutes, depending on how much you have to say.

This is a project of the BTA and the Lloyd TMA Bike Committee.

Posted by Joseph Edge at 12:00 AM | Comments (2) | Permalink

April 8, 2008

Vehicle Costs Up

As reported in the Business Journal, AAA's estimate of driving costs is up to 54.1 cents/mile, or $8,121 per year.

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (3) | Permalink

April 7, 2008

Pay-by-cell Meters Slow to Start in San Francisco

From the San Francisco Examiner.

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (16) | Permalink

April 2, 2008

KBOO Bike Show: Bike Patrol, Filmed by Bike

Listen to the show (mp3, 12.7 MB)

Officer Robert Pickett shares perspective from his experience with the Portland Police SE Precinct bike patrol. Carl and Sara talk with two filmmakers represented at the Filmed by Bike festival.

Posted by Chris Smith at 2:51 PM | Comments (0) | Permalink

Two Editorials

Regular Portland Transport commenter Erik Halstead had a guest editorial published in the Portland Tribune a couple of weeks ago, regarding the state of TriMet's bus fleet:

http://www.portlandtribune.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=120578246708008500

Today, TriMet's Fred Hansen responded:

http://www.portlandtribune.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=120699417903725300

Check out the original editorials, and share your comments (there or here).

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (32) | Permalink

April 1, 2008

Toyota Prius to go Non-Hybrid

The always-reliable About.com has this hot automotive scoop today: Toyota announces non-hybrid Prius V6

From the article:

"Our research shows that many people buy a Prius because they want to project the image of being environmentally friendly," says a Toyota spokesperson. "The Prius V6 bestows the same 'green chic' while delivering the performance and acceleration of a conventional mid-size sedan."

This could have significant ramifications.

Discuss.

Posted by Bob Richardson at 12:07 AM | Comments (22) | Permalink

Travel Time Estimation

First seminar of the Spring 2008 Transportation Seminar Series, and the 200th seminar in the series!

Portland State University
Center for Transportation Studies
Spring 2008 Transportation Seminar Series

Speaker: Robert L. Bertini, Portland State University

Topic: Travel Time Estimation for Traffic Management and Traveler Information

When: Friday, April 4, 2008, 12:00-1:30pm
Where: PSU Urban Center Building, SW 6th and Mill, Room 204

Posted by Chris Smith at 12:00 AM | Comments (1) | Permalink