The Future of Flying and Driving are Really Shakey

Now that high speed fever has finally hit Vancouver, people somehow seem really surprised that there are not already plans and funding in place for it. Some are taking the old plans developed by Washington State during the peak of cheap oil and indifference from Canada as set in stone and not subject to revision even in face of the new found commitment of the US Federal Government to fund and champion high speed rail.

News reports quote staff from Washington that not surprisingly state the current policy, as staff is supposed to do until they receive new direction from the politicians. The reports then make the huge leap and come to the conclusion that high speed rail will never happen, that at best, it is on "really shaky ground". Well, it was on really shaky ground in the states before the last election. Since when does having currently policies mean policies won't change?

High speed rail is proven technology used by millions of people in countries around the world. It is the only form of long-distance transportation that does not face a shakey, uncertain future. The airline industry is not profitable, has no proven alternative to oil, and is becoming an increasingly miserable experience. Gas prices are certain to rise and the world's oil supply will run out sooner or later, leading to the end of gas powered automobiles. in a world where wages where stagnent even before the recession, it is uncertain that electric cars will ever be an affordable alternative even if technical and practive hurdles can be overcome.

Even if by some miricle the problems facing flying and driving can be overcome, high speed rail is still a faster, more affordable, greener and more comfortable form of transportation for trips between 100 and 500 km. Compared to the tens of billions of dollars we collectively spend per year on flying and driving, the cost of high speed rail is a relative bargin. By not building high speed rail, we risk our economic future.

change.gov:The Main Train Drains the Planes in Spain

Seems like the Spanish are jumping off planes and onto trains in record numbers, leading to the unfortunate rhyming of headlines all around the Net. The planes in Spain carried 20 percent  fewer fed up victims last year. 

According to Wired Autopia, "Airlines carried 72 percent of the 4.8 million long-distance travelers who opted to go by rail or air in 2007. That fell to 60 percent last year". Joseph Valls, a professor at the ESADE business school in Barcelona told The Guardian "The numbers will be equal in two years." This is really "Change We Can Believe In" as it is actually happening.

Again from Wired, "Alberto Garcia of the Spanish Railways Foundation estimates AVE trains use 19 percent less energy than conventional trains and generate one-sixth the carbon emissions of a plane."

By 2020, Spain plans on building 10,000 more km of high-speed rail. Over here, at least California is planning on building some, if it doesn't go totally bankrupt and is repossessed by Mexico first. Or would that be Spain. Not sure. Anyway, it is time the US and Canada get cracking and stop wasting money on roads and make massive investments in high speed rail and rapid transit.

The so called "Green Stimulus" plan of Obama is really disappointing. It calls for $30 billion for roads and only $10 billion for transit and rail. In fact, the amount for high speed rail is only $1.5 billion while there is $2 billion for batteries. That doesn't really seem like much of a change at all. 

Fortunately, the people are a step or two ahead. They have forgotten all about electric cars which now seem oh so mid 2008. Back when oil prices were high and people still could afford expensive cars by taking out second or third zero percent mortgages on their McMansions. Now $40,000 cars that you have to plug-in don't seem like such a great idea.

Electric cars are the "solution" for everyone else. The people that people believe will never get out of their cars. Yet, when asked what they want, people ask for better transportation, not a electric band aid that will not make getting around any more convenient, faster or more enjoyable. It is problem solving instead of looking for better solutions and new opportunities. If that thinking had prevailed one hundred years ago, we would be riding around on horses with diapers.

It is not electric cars or more roads that people really want, it is high speed rail and rapid transit. Fortunately the people sending this message out clear and strong at Obama's site, change.gov. The top 20 or so ideas contain five or six that are related to rail and transit. Electric cars, not so much.

Let the soon to be Prez know that you want high speed rail and rapid transit at change.gov

It is the forth most popular idea. Your vote can help make it the top idea.

While you are at it, support my Billions for Bicycles idea which doesn't seem to be as popular. At least it faired better than Put Warning Labels on Cars and Ban Irresponsible Auto Advertising, which seem to be dropping in popularity faster than the stocks of the small three automakers.

Last of all, the reason why the world should be happy I didn't become a poet or more likely, the reason why I could not become one. Enjoy?

After the day began on the plain main train through plains of grain, to my bane, the insane rain in Spain sustained, drained my brain again, dry hopes in vain, restrained, waned, feigned. What a inane pain to gain raising cain, last obtained on stained lanes of Danes.

Provide Solutions and Avoid Gas Tax Pains and Carbon Tax Attacks

It all sounds so nice and green and fair. A revenue neutral carbon tax for British Columbia, the Best Place on Earth. The greens loved it. The first government in North America to give carbon taxing a shot. If it worked here, it would spread like wildfire across North America.

Well, the organic manure hit the windmill. It is fair to say that it was not a popular move. In a move that still seems rather surreal, the left leaning New Democratic Party borrowed a page from the neo-cons and starting an “Axe the Tax” campaign. The bad timing of the summer’s high gas prices certainly didn’t help. People were mad and looking for fight.

Now, with falling oil prices, there is concern that people will quickly return to their SUV lovin’ ways. Both for environmental, security and economic reasons, there is talk about gas or carbon taxes to discourage overuse of the precious black gold.

In going forward with such politically tricky ideas, it is important to learn from the BC experience. It would be easy enough to draw the conclusion that people just are not willing to except such taxes. This would be a mistake. The problem is not with the concept of a carbon tax, it is how it was implemented that caused the pain.

First of all, while it may have seemed like a good idea at the time, making the tax revenue neutral proved to be a bad idea. The anti-tax crowd, likely the ones the government was trying to bring onboard with revenue neutrality just simply does not like taxes, especially new ones, especially ones that they perceive as social engineering. On top of that, many just don’t trust government. They fully expect the money to be used for something and thus were not convinced.

People want solutions. If they feel they have no options to avoid paying the tax, they will feel like they are being unfairly targeted for actions they have little control over. They will fell like they are being punished for driving and they feel they have no alternatives, they will get mad.

Instead of returning the money from the carbon tax, a better idea would be to use it to fund transit improvements and other public measures that can help people reduce their carbon emissions. Five billion in transit improvements will get peoples attention. Construction companies, consultants and unions will be onboard. Drivers will feel that they have an option or at least will think that other drivers with leaving them with more space on the road. People waiting in the cold while packed trains and buses pass them by will certainly be excited about increased transit funding.

Using funding from a tax to improve public transit creates a lot of big winners who will provide the public support needed for the tax to be successful. A revenue neutral tax will create a lot of small winners who, given the small amount they receive, will not really care much one way or the other.

People don’t mind pay more taxes if they know the money will be used for something they want. If the last election was any indication, people clearly want money to be spent on rail and rapid transit. Voters in Seattle, Los Angles and Honolulu approved tens of billions of dollars in tax increases for rapid transit. California approved ten billion dollars for high-speed rail.

No one really gets that excited about receiving a hundred dollars in the mail. It is no big deal these days. Pretty much everyone will pay some of that in carbon tax so really no one really benefits that much.

Congestion charging has been a success in London because transit improvements where on the ground when the charges came into effect. Pricing without improvements is rather cruel. Without alternatives, it is just another tax that is unlikely to change people’s behavior.

Pooling our resources to create a better transportation system is a far more compelling idea than giving everybody a hundred bucks and hoping against all hope they can use this small amount of money to somehow provide themselves with a greener transportation solution.

Ironically, the province did announce a transit plan before the carbon tax was implemented. Which is all fine and good. Only problem is that they didn’t have a plan to fund it. Without such a plan, it is hard for people to take the plan that seriously especially when they are staring a carbon tax in the face. Only now is the province looking at revenue sources to fund the transit improvements. Up on the list are bright ideas like a cell phone tax (I don’t get it either) and of course gas taxes, congestion charges and road pricing.

So when governments are considering carbon taxes, road pricing and other similar measures, here are a few suggestions:

• Create many big winners
  
• Provide people with solutions so they have an option to avoid paying
  
• Clearly tie the tax or charge to the solutions
  
• Announce the solutions and the tax or charge at the same time
  
• Have solutions on the ground when the tax or charge starts
  
• As the solutions improve, increase the tax or charge
  

Good Luck!

Billions for Bikes Beats Band-aid Bailouts

Shockingly enough, this is my first post dedicated to bicycles. I was rather fixated on high-speed rail for a while. Now that the people in my home state have voted to spend $10 billion on high-speed rail and there is talk of systems all over North America, it is time to focus on pedal power.

In a world shaken to the core by climate change, volatile fuel prices, rising obesity rates and a collapsing economy,  there has never been a better time for cycling. What is possible will only be limited by our vision and execution. 

Green stimulus is all the rage. People realize that this is an opportunity to transform our cities and our economy. We need to create a world where people can live great lives while using much less energy and resources. This, really is our only option.

Politicians are looking for shovel ready projects where construction can start as soon as possible. Bicycle paths and bridges are idea. Compared to other types of projects, they are simpler and have less impact on the environment and the community. Transit and rail projects are complicated and can take years to plan. Not to argue against transit and rail, we need both. It is just that cycling projects can be done now while the economy is still in the tank. This will provide people with both jobs and affordable transportation speeding the recovery. 

Be sure to push for high-quality cycling facilities that people want and will use. This tends to be paths and cycle tracks, like in Amsterdam and Copenhagen that are separated from cars. There is little evidence that even bike lanes are effective at encouraging more people to cycle. By pushing for want people actually want, you will find that politicians are likely to be more receptive in spite or even because of the additional cost. 

Don't be afraid to dream big. Politicians just aren't interested in small projects that no one will even notice. Don't forget, the goal is economic stimulus. That means big bucks. These people are used to dealing with large numbers. Don't waste their time or yours with small projects.

Unlike the automobile industry, the bicycle industry is doing just fine thank you. Sales are at record levels. Unfortunately, unlike the automobile industry, the bicycle industry has not done a very good job of fighting for funding for facilities. If auto industry had done such a poor job, we would still be riding horses and well, bicycles. Fortunately, the bike industry is starting to support advocacy groups, but much more needs to be done.

So start phoning, writing, and meeting with your elected representatives. Join and volunteer for cycling advocacy groups. Form your own. Bring your friends, family and co-workers on board. Be relentless. Don't take no for an answer. Remember, the squeaky gets the green stimulus.

More info:

Third Wave Cycling Group - My consulting firm

British Columbia Cycling Coalition - British Columbia's Cycling Advocates

Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition

Bikes Belong - Sponsored by the U.S. bicycle industry with the goal of putting more people on bicycles more often

Thunderhead Alliance - The national coalition of state and local bicycle and pedestrian advocacy organizations

Sustrans - The UK's leading sustainable transport charity

Active Transportation for America - A Case for Increased Federal Investment in Bicycling and Walking

Certainty in an Uncertain World - The Case for Accelerated Investment in Cycling

Unfair Debate and Just Plain Invalid Arguments

So now Bush has doomed the economy with the band aid bailout, I can stop madly posting on every comment section on the web. Not quite sure why I never got around to posting on that. I guess it was such a bad idea, I was not quite sure where to start.

Well, now on to the annoyance du jour. It is bad enough when environmentally sites do PR for automakers and advertise so called green cars. I guess it pays the bills. Might as well get some money from them while they still have any money to give. 

What got to me today was an ad on grist that was not only plain wrong but also used just plain old faulty logic to draw people in. That did it. If there is one thing I can't stand is stuff that couldn't pass a first year philosophy course, which includes the majority of stuff posted on the web these days. Half the world's problems could be solved if people would just take Philosophy 112 or whatever number it was.

Anyway, the offending ad displays a nice beach with a sunset mentions something about drilling for oil and proceeds to proclaim "overpopulation is an environmental problem". Fair enough, their are six billion or so of us. That is a lot, I'll admit. The button said "join the debate". The site was fairdebate.org. Suspecting that the only reason someone would call their site fairdebate would be to try and hide the fact that the debate was anything but fair, I couldn't resist clicking the button. 

Fair, turns out to not describe the quality of the debate but the rather cute acronym for the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Fair enough. What is not fair is the quick bait and switch they pull. Turns out they don't seem to care about global population, just US population. And not just any old US population, merely those who happen to be a little newer newcomers than the rest of us newcomers. The religious conservatives having 17 and counting children don't seem to be on their radar yet in spite of their hit show on TLC.

True, more people in the US will have an impact on the American environment but in a world of global warming, the key word is global. It doesn't really matter if someone is in the good old US of A or in Timbuktu, the impact is the same, isn't it. Well, actually not. The people of the US are just about the hoggest of resource and energy hogs. Sure, when someone comes to the country to live what is rapidly becoming the American nightmare, they are likely to "When in Rome, do as the Romans do". 

And the prize for bucking personal responsibility goes to FAIR. They won it fair and square. A small suggestion. How about cutting down on your own consumption before building the fence. This would have the added benefit of not sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas for oil to people who don't like you very much. Save the economy and the environment at the same time. Sounds like a good deal. You might what to some some for the kids as well. They might really appreciate that when they grow up.

I suspect though, that it may not be the environment they are really concerned about. It is more about being scared of losing their so call high standard of living which they seem to be doing a fine job of losing on their own. Who would have thought that it would be their own captains of capitalism that would steer the ship into the rocks. They were too busy worrying about more people climbing on board to notice.

Back to population. The key is ensuring women have access to education, economic opportunity and are free to make choices regarding their lives. These are basic rights that have the added benefit of solving the "population crisis". Europe is proof of this. So is my dating life. I tend to be attracted to bright women. Of the dozens I have dated, I only know of two who have had children.

So if you are worried about the impact of population on the environment, you know what to fight for. Women's rights and lower consumption of resources and energy. If you are worried about immigration, stop that. If you are still having trouble, stop listening to Lou Dobbs. If you can't, then at least stop using the environment as an excuse. It is elitist at best to think that you have more rights to resources and to pollute than other people.

Yikes, a google later and it is much worse than I thought, my spidy sense was right:

http://www.adl.org/civil_rights/is_fair_unfair.pdf

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846

The Future Has not Happened Yet

After several hours of pouring over the news of Obama’s historic victory with tears of joy in my eyes, it is time to reflect on what happened and the hard work ahead. The change has just begun.

I witnessed the election of the first African American President from a smoke-free bar in Vancouver. A mere forty years ago, I’m not sure which would have seemed more improbable.

When Vancouver first tried to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, the industry was up in arms, predicting economic disaster and the end of civilization as we know it. They showed up on mass at public meetings and lobbied intensely. Fortunately civic leaders stuck to their guns. Their fears failed to materialize. They were forced to improve their food because people can now taste it. If anything, smoke-free bars are now attracting people that used avoid smoky pits.

Early this year, when the city proposed banning smoking from even out door patios, nobody said a peep. I guess they realized, that with only 13% of the population smoking, it is no big deal.

As big a battle as it has been to reduce the scourge of tobacco, it pales in comparison to the oppression and huge challenges African Americans have overcome. A struggle that threatened to tear the nation apart. Many brave people have risked their lives to make yesterday possible. Many have died.

In both cases, it would have been easier for many to simply accept that the future would be the same as the past. But people of courage and vision knew the future will be different if they took a stand for what is right. They knew that change is not only possible, it is inevitable if we believe and fight for it. That change is all we have. That change is the hope of a better world, in the face of seems impossible. They knew from the bottom of their heart, without knowing how or when, that the future had not happened yet.

Our ability to anticipate events is perhaps one of our greatest strengths. It saves us from floods, earthquakes and famine. It is also our greatest obstacles to a better world. The future is a wild horse that can’t be tamed. At best, we do our best to hang on and hope for the best. While anticipation is a gift, our ability to chance is what gives us the wings to soar above what many were sure that was all that was possible.

We may never create a perfect world but it is only through the striving for that which we are sure is not possible that we approach our potential.

While taken time to celebrate our victories, we must chart our course forward to overcome the many challenges facing the world today.

Eclipsed, and rightly so, by Obama’s accomplishment, yesterday also witnessed the start of another chapter in the history of change. This time, it is change for the sake of the planet. \The people of California, in spite or perhaps because of the financial crisis, approved $10 billion dollars to start building high-speed rail from San Diego to Sacramento. The state that road to greatness of endless freeways, now is starting to turn its back on the automobile. This is a bold step that, in the next forty years will transform California and indeed the whole country.

For those that think the only path forward is greener fuels and vehicles, Californian’s rejected propositions for alternative fuel vehicles and renewable energy bonds; and renewable energy generation.

For those too busy predicting the future to invent it.

For those too absorbed in small drama to notice people’s passion for chance, open your eyes.

For those ruled by the truisms “People love their cars” and “You’ll never get people out of their cars.”, I stood as a witness of the election of an African American president in a smoke free bar.

Yes We Did, Yes We Can and Yes We Will

The future has not happened yet.

The Ability to Lead

In spite of my near addition to election coverage, this is the first time I’ve chimed up on the race. With all that has been written and rewritten in the last two years, I am not sure what I can really add that hasn’t been said by people who can say it far better than I can but here goes.

It has certainly been a race that has evoked passionate debate. However, I do believe there is a critical difference between the candidates that pretty much everyone can agree on. The difference certainly isn’t policy. People will likely never agree on what is the best policy. Nor should we. Healthy debate is good. The future has not happened yet, so there is really there is no way of being sure what works and doesn’t work.

It is perhaps execution that is more important that the policy anyway. Whether you agree with the policies of President Bush or not, it is much easier to agree that current administration’s execution has been truly awful. From the war to the economy, the lack of competence has been truly staggering. And don’t forget, George Bush by most accounts was a fine governor of Texas, one of the largest states in the nation, so clearly “executive experience” doesn’t count for much.

Speaking of experience, understand that any talk about experience in the campaign was never about determining if someone has the experience to be President. Experience was just another talking point in a tactic in the strategy to gain an advantage over the opponent to win the keys to the big White House.

The challenge is to determine if someone will do a great job of something they have never done before. This is especially a challenge in a presidential campaign as there are really no other jobs that compare. One has to look at other endeavors that people have taken on and look at the way they have taken them on to determine, if indeed a candidate has the ability to be a good over even great president.

Fortunately, for the last two years, we have been witnessing such an endeavor, this historic election campaign. A successful campaign both involves choosing exceptional people for the job at hand and leading these people in an effective manner. As luck would have it, these two abilities are perhaps the most important for a president as well. You might be able to get away with appointing your buddies to run a state, but clearly, this does not work well when running a large countrys.

While disagreeing on just about everything else, pundits on both sides have agreed that Senator Obama has run one of the best campaigns ever. A well managed, disciplined and excellently lead campaign. Many say even a brilliant campaign. He has raised more money than another other candidate in history from a record number of donors taking full advantage of the Internet. A campaign that started from nothing a mere two years ago and outflanked the Clinton’s, the most powerful political machine in the country. No small feat. For the first time in years, a Democrat has a better ground game, mobilizing hundreds of thousands of people. Looks like being a community organizer really paid off.

Now to Senator McCain. With an unpopular Republican president and a crumbling economy, it is not apparent that even a flawless campaign would have done the trick. What is apparent that his train wreck of a campaign will most likely not. Remember way back to the primaries, where he planned a $150 million effort complete with a $10,000 a day bus. Well, the fundraising came up way short and he was forced to ditch the bus, his campaign staff and fly coach to New Hampshire. This does not bode well for someone hoping to be President in economically challenging times. He was meet by an aid at the airport. Traveling around the state to countless town hall meetings, he rebuilt his campaign and the rest is history. Certainly an inspiring comeback story, but, since he seems to be more adept at working by him self rather than leading a huge team. This is fine for a maverick Senator but will not work at all well for a president.

In spite of a military background, where discipline is not just a nice to have, it can be a matter of life and death; the McCain campaign has been sloppy. They have had trouble sticking to message. Staff spent $150,000 on clothes for Gov. Palin, not even thinking how off the hockey mom Joe Six Pack message that was. Even worse, they let the candidate take the fall. Yikes. Campaign staff has been complaining about Gov. Palin to the media. Again, this is not useful and speaks to a lack of discipline and leadership in the campaign. Such leaks are bad for a campaign. Just think how bad they could be for the country in a time of crisis.

The drama of the McCain campaign often draws more media attention than the message. We have enough problems in this world. While McCain’s drama makes good television, we really don’t need a president that seems to need to manufacture such distractions.

It almost is a shame that Senator Obama is a great inspiring speaker. This is what people first notice. Some don’t look beyond, dismissing him as an “empty suit”. Once you get beyond the soaring rhetoric, you will discover a lot more than empty. He has the ability to be a great president. He is focused, disciplined and is a very effective leader who surrounds himself with bright and capable people.

Even if you believe he is a socialist (I don’t), I argue that it is better to have someone who can successfully execute such an agenda as president rather than someone who will continue to bungle along with the free market. So what if he “pals around” with the “wrong people”. If you do your homework, he also “pals around” with the “right people” as well. McCain has some shady characters in his past as well. Anyway, courting such a diversity of opinions is a sign of a great leader.

Sen. Obama has lead a masterful campaign that has overwhelmed the Clinton machine and McCain, who has been running for president for the last decade.

His execution has been close to flawless. He is determined and relentless.

This is a guy you want on your side. This is the guy we need to lead the country.