|
|||
|
» Visit the Official NARP Website Connecting the Dots for Sustainable TransportationFriday, May 22, 2009Tuesday’s much-anticipated presidential announcement of higher nationwide fuel economy standards for automobiles was nearly universally praised by auto manufacturers, organized labor, environmentalists and consumer groups, and is indeed a step in the right direction. However, the new rules may have unintended negative consequences, particularly for those interested in a future where Americans are less reliant on the car, and these should not be overlooked. Safe Climate Campaign director Daniel Becker pointed out on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show Wednesday morning that the new standards apply to cars that are actually bought, not just to those that are in showrooms. Therefore, in order to comply with the law, the auto industry must sell more new cars, potentially with help from a provision in the climate bill that would give consumers incentives to trade in their current vehicles. Becker also noted (as does USA Today’s Open Road blog) that the laws of economics generally dictate that when the cost of an activity goes down, people tend to do marginally more of it. Therefore, by making it cheaper to drive on a per-mile basis, a gas-sipping auto fleet may lead to an increase in driving, which, while it may not have the same impact on carbon emissions, would certainly worsen the many other consequences of auto dependence: congestion, sprawl, and parking problems, to name a few. Plus, the new line of fuel-efficient cars may actually be less safe, and when people buy less gas, the key source of revenue for highway maintenance (and some rail and transit services) is further depleted. Higher gas prices (which will inevitably return) and greater awareness about global warming have led not only to increased demand for fuel-efficient vehicles, but also for more travel alternatives. If public policy were to promote one without simultaneously addressing the other, it would be a step in the opposite direction from one that would lead to an energy-secure and livable future. Luckily, federal leaders have taken steps towards improving the automobile alternatives for which Americans are clamoring, but a guaranteed long-term source of funding for these projects is still missing. Congress will eventually have to either increase the gas tax (a move that is sure to be resisted mightily) or find other sources of funding for our transportation infrastructure. Continued after the jump. —Malcolm Kenton Posted by NARPTags: auto industry, climate, congress, highways, obama, transit,V.P. Biden: Amtrak is “powerful and indespensible” vehicle for the futureWednesday, January 06, 2010Vice President Joe Biden penned the following column for publication in the January/February 2010 issue of Arrive, Amtrak’s on-board magazine geared towards Northeast Corridor travelers. It is reprinted in the Huffington Post.
Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: acela, amtrak, biden, future, green, obama, passenger, senate, train, vice president,CNBC Looks at New Intercity and High Speed Rail GrantsThursday, January 28, 2010In a report broadcast today, CNBC’s Brian Shactman gave a brief overview of President Obama’s intercity and high speed rail program. While briefly acknowledging the national scope of the effort, Shactman was quick to focus on the three states that will receive the lion’s share of the money—California, Florida, and Illinois. This focus is perhaps inevitable, and I think it shows the wisdom in the Administration’s choice to spread the $8 billion around the country instead of throwing it all into one or two corridors. $8 billion is not nearly enough money to build even a single high speed rail line—and the spokesman for the California High Speed Rail Authority admits that their line won’t see significant construction until 2012. An incremental ramp-up to high and higher speed passenger trains will allow people (and media sources) around the country to see new jobs, steady decreases in trip times, and steady improvements in on time performance. And this will give transportation officials something to point to when preparing requests for the second round of funding. The fact that the CNBC anchor introduces the piece by asking “is [high speed rail] a magic economic bullet?” tells a lot about the kind of yardstick the media are using to judge this program. But it is important for rail and transit advocates to keep this in mind, because these are the people who will be telling the general public whether these projects are successes or failures—and CNBC anchor Erin Burnett’s alluded-to labeling of the program as “rail to nowhere” gives a sense how eager some commentators are to write American passenger trains off. See the video below. -Sean Jeans-Gail Posted by NARPTags: cahsra, high speed rail, media, obama,Near-Term Rail Upgrades are Excellent Job CreatorsMonday, February 01, 2010The Associated Press’s Joan Lowy wrongly downplays the importance of the good American jobs that will be created through the Obama Administration’s investments in higher-speed intercity passenger trains in a Jan. 29 article. “There will be U.S. manufacturing and engineering jobs for slower trains often described as ‘higher speed’ or ‘midspeed,’” she writes, in a tone that suggests that these endeavors are not worthwhile compared to the kind of super high-speed trains that Europe and Asia have. In reality, the Administration’s current strategy is absolutely necessary to reboot domestic railroad manufacturing and engineering industries. Fifty years ago, while the U.S. let railroads wither while pouring billions into new highways and airports, other industrialized countries did exactly what we are now beginning to do: make important outlays towards expanding and improving their rail networks. This laid the building blocks for their high-speed lines by providing connecting systems that feed passengers to the bullet trains and fostering a culture in which the train is a vital mode of travel. Admittedly, it will be necessary for the U.S. to gain from other countries’ expertise in the short term, but by awarding contracts to foreign companies now, we will enhance our own knowledge base and quickly become more independent in the rail field. We cannot simply build brand new high-speed railroads overnight. By gradually strengthening the existing rail network to allow for faster, more frequent passenger (and freight) service, we not only create jobs, but we also enhance the quality of many Americans’ travel experiences. —Malcolm Kenton Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: ap, domestic, high-speed rail, jean lowy, job creation, jobs, manufacturing, obama, passenger trains, transportation, travel, upgrades,Rail Grants Are Answering People’s DemandsTuesday, February 02, 2010The following letter to the editor was published in the Washington Examiner: Since passenger train improvements have enjoyed bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, we reject your suggestion that White House unveiling of passenger-train Recovery Act grants constitutes turning a deaf ear to the recent Massachusetts election. Indeed, polls—and Amtrak’s rising ridership—show that Americans want more trains. Put “travelers” atop your list of “those who are quite pleased by the projects.” The majority of dollars will go to upgrade existing trains, producing tangible service improvements within one or a few years. At the other end of the spectrum, our children may look back and thank those who pushed the California and Florida very-high-speed projects. Very high energy prices threaten the future of short-distance air service. —Ross Capon Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: amtrak, congress, high-speed rail, obama, public, ridership, trains, upgrades, washington examiner, white house,Deepwater Horizon, Energy, U.S. DOT and TrainsThursday, June 17, 2010Quoting again from the June 11 Philip Stephens column in Financial Times, “The reason the Deepwater Horizon rig is there is because the US consumes a quarter of world oil production even though it has only one-twentieth of the population.” A major reason that the US has such high per capita energy consumption is our high reliance on automobiles and aviation. The world has an average of 107 motorcars per 1,000 inhabitants, but the U.S. has 765 cars per 1,000 people. That compares with 516 in Europe (15 nations), 188 in the Russian Federation, 14 in China and 11 in India. Simply raising CAFÉ (miles per gallon) standards does not address the “external” energy costs of the automobile—including pedestrian-unfriendly development and widely-spaced buildings which themselves consume energy inefficiently. In 2007 (the most recent figures available), automobiles averaged 28% more energy consumed per passenger-mile than Amtrak. Domestic airlines averaged 19% more than Amtrak. If the nation had invested adequately in passenger trains, Amtrak’s showing would have been even better. Secretary LaHood deserves credit for the fact that the draft U.S. DOT Strategic Plan FY 2010-FY2015 [PDF] says most of the right things. Here are some quotes from the Executive Summary, starting with its first sentence: “President Barack Obama supports a transformative U.S. transportation policy that improves public health and safety, fosters livable communities, ensures that transportation assets are maintained in a state of good repair, supports the Nation’s long-term economic competitiveness, and works to achieve environmental sustainability…In addition to the sustainable development patterns associated with livable communities, DOT will also promote the substitution of carbon intensive travel on congested highways and airways for use of more energy efficient transportation systems, including rail, water, and pipelines where feasible.” We need the White House to connect those dots more frequently! —Ross Capon Posted by NARPTags: consumption, deepwater horizon, energy policy, obama, oil dependence, oil disaster, oil spill, ray lahood, strategic plan, transportation, us dot,©2010 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website |
» Recent Entries» Blogroll» Terms of Service for CommentsYou may register to post comments in response to NARP-generated postings on the Blog. By registering you agree 1) that all comments will be relevant to the respective posting and 2) not to post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or that violate any laws. We reserve the right to permanently block postings from any user who does not abide by the above terms. NARP reserves the right to remove, edit, or move any messages for any reason. » Monthly Archives |
||