(Source:  WUSA9.com & Moving Momentarily)

Washington’s aging Metro system will be getting a 21st century security makeover that will include video cameras capable of integrating with other “facial recognition” systems in use in the National Capital region.

Some $78 million in grants for enhanced security were recently approved by the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security.  Grants also include money for 20 additional transit police officers, 3 bomb-sniffing dog teams and security training for 9,000 “front line” employees. The lion’s share of of the grant money will be spent on enhanced video surveillance of Metro’s sprawling rail and bus system.

And $27.8 million in grants from the Department of Homeland Security will pay for cameras on buses, in ventilation shafts, at station entrances and near the end of platforms over the next few years. $7.1 million is designated to monitor passengers inside rail cars. Metro Transit Police officers will be able to view in-railcar cameras in real-time on portable computers.

Moving momentarily editor poses an interesting question to the readers and riders: How do you feel about Metro getting federal monies for facial recognition technology at stations? Does it make the system safer?  Register your thoughts below in the comments section.

(Source: Examiner, DC-ist)

City officials gathered Friday morning to open the new Union Station Bike Transit Center, the first secure bicycle parking facility of its kind on the East Coast.  The inside of the helmet-shaped facility includes secure parking for over 100 bikes, about 50 rentable lockers, a relatively spacious changing room, and a bike repair shop that is available to the general public, as well as members.

The Post offers more basic details: it’s 1,700 square feet, costs $100 per year for membership, and will contain changing rooms, personal lockers, and a bike repair shop.  All good things, though it’s a shame they couldn’t find a way to include some showers.

DC Department of Transportation Director Gabe Klein noted that 60 people had already signed up for memberships to the facility before it even opened today, as evidence of the potential demand for this kind of service in Washington.  Memberships currently cost $96 for a full year, or $12 per month. All members are additionally charged a $20 annual administrative fee. You can also purchase $1 daily passes in increments of $10 (in other words, 10 days worth of access for $10, 30 days worth of access for $30, and so on). You should normally receive your membership card in the mail about five business days after applying, though this early registration process could take a little longer. Membership cards allow users 24/7 access to the parking area.

The beautiful new facility elicited the following comments (courtesy of Examiner):

• The Washington Post’s Dr. Gridlock compares the Bike Station to a space ship that “took a wrong turn at the Mall and parked next to the train station.”
• The Washington Business Journal points out that the DC Bikestation is part of a nationwide network that includes 12 other stations and 200 expected within the next five years. That, perhaps more than this particular bike station, is a significant story that reporters ought to be following.
• DCist spoke with Andrea White-Kjoss, the CEO of Mobis/Bikestation who says the station “represents D.C’s big statement about what they want to do for bicyclists in the city.”

(Sources: Green Car Congress, Red Orbit, & Reuters)

Jean-Louis Borloo, France’s Minister for Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development and the Sea, presented a national 14-point plan designed to accelerate the development and subsequent commercialization of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids in France.

France will invest 2.5 billion euros ($3.6 billion) over 10 years in research, subsidies and infrastructure development for electric cars as automakers race to get the vehicles on the road, its energy minister said.  Speaking at a presentation of the government’s plans for electric vehicles on Thursday, minister Borloo said the investment would be split between pilot projects, battery production and bonuses for carmakers building green cars.

The investment would also cover the biggest cost, namely adapting the electricity grid to allow for the creation of a million charging points by 2015 and over 4 million by 2020.  Borloo said around half the charging points would be in private homes, with almost as many in offices, as well as 75,000 “back-up” charging points in streets and car parks.

The 14 elements of the plan are:

1. ADEME (the French Environment and Energy Management Agency) will launch in early 2010 a new call for projects on infrastructure costs, to support plug-in demonstrators and trials combining infrastructure, applications and target territories, and to validate the functioning of the ecosystem of rechargeable vehicles. Budget: €70 million (US$102 million).
2. ADEME will establish early in 2010 a roadmap for specific new mobility solutions, dealing with developments in transportation of people or goods, based both on technology (new vehicles, dissemination of renewable energy, electric traction, etc.) and service (Vélib, Carsharing, Carpool, etc.) ADEME will then launch a new call for projects, with a budget of €25 million (US$36 million).
3. Renault will establish a Li-ion battery factory in Flins, in partnership with CEA (France’s Atomic Energy Commission), at an investment of €625 million. This site may produce more than 100,000 batteries per year. Bolloré, Dassault and Saft are also conducting parallel projects.
4. A group of large companies and associations of local and state officials are committing to purchase electric vehicles with a range of at least 150 km. The public tenders and private joint purchasing will target a market fleet of 100,000 vehicles by 2015. The first 50,000 are already identified. Led by La Poste, the group includes EPA, Air France, Areva, Bouygues, Darty, EDF, Eiffage, France Telecom, GDF SUEZ, SNCF, SPIE, UGAP, Veolia, Vinci, associations and communities represented by Association of Urban Communities of France and the Association of Regions of France.
5. A €5,000 grant for the purchase of vehicles with CO₂ emissions less than or equal to 60 g/km until 2012. Hybrids with CO₂ emissions are less than or equal to 135 g may receive a bonus of €2,000, as will LPG or natural gas vehicles.
6. Availability of a standard outlet to charge the cars outside of the home. Specifically, no charge should be needed at home.
7. By 2012 the construction of buildings (offices and homes) with compulsory integration of charging systems.
8. Supporting the installation of charging systems in condominiums.
9. Compulsory charge points in parking for office buildings by 2015.
10. Agreement on common European charging standards.
11. Municipalities to receive support to deploy the public recharging infrastructure.
12. Organize the operational deployment of the network. €1.5 billion for public infrastructure.
13. Maximize the use of low-carbon or renewable electricity for recharging vehicles.
14. Giving batteries and battery materials a second life after their vehicular applications, either through reuse (in grid storage, for example), or recycling.

The unveiling of the so-called “battle of the electric cars” plan follows hard on the heels of another scheme announced just two weeks ago that the French government would invest some seven billion euros ($10 billion USD) in the development of a modern freight-transporting railway system in an effort to reduce congestion on the nation’s roads and highways.

French President Sarkozy also announced his plans for a new carbon tax on businesses and private households that is set to go into effect next year. All three interventions are critical elements of Sarkozy’s “green plan” with which he hopes to drive down France’s dependence on carbon-based fuel and lower its emission of greenhouse gases.

Borloo says that nearly two thirds of the 1.5 billion euros ($2.2 billion USD) needed to fund the program will be procured through state loans set be started next year.

Included in the electric car plan is the construction of roughly a million battery-charging facilities by 2015, some 90 percent of which will be in private homes, while the other ten percent will be installed in car parks and at roadside stations.

Additionally, beginning in 2012, all new apartment buildings with parking lots will come equipped with battery-charging stations. By 2020, the plan’s architects say they hope to have some four million charging points throughout the country—or nearly two per electric car.

The ecology ministry stated in the meeting that the emissions-free sector of the French automobile industry should be worth a whopping 15 billion euros ($21 billion USD) by the year 2030 and constitute an estimated 27 percent of the total market for vehicles.

Click here to read the entire article.

Note: A big heartfelt thanks to our friends at Green Car Congress who made a concerted effort to provide the readers with an English Translation of this 14 point plan.  For those who wonder, this plan and every other material on the Ministry’s website is only available in French.  What’s up with a Government website only published in French? What were these egalitarian and patriotic Frenchies thinking about non-French speakers when they made the decision that things will get published only in French?  Damn, these folks are very biased in that aspect compared to the Americans.  BTW, I wonder what would Glenn Beck say about the French plan if he found out that Sarkozy is spending more money than Obama on improving/modernizing his  country’s transportation infrastructure?

The following report about the Distracted Driving Summit is prepared Adam Hopps, a transportation whiz, who participated virtually over the past 2 days (September 30 & Oct 1, 2009), tirelessly taking notes while observing the Summit proceedings online.  Shortly after the event finish, Adam e-mailed his observations for sharing it with the rest of the community.  Please note that these are Adam’s thoughts and by no means should be considered as a summary of the event.  Thanks, Adam for helping us stay informed.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

Thanks to the US D.O.T.’s efforts at opening up participation in their Distracted Driving Summit, I spent the last two days as one of 5,000 online viewers who watched industry reps, academics, legislators, and policy experts discuss what Secretary LaHood describes as, “the epidemic of distracted driving.”

For those of us not in the building the department also provided an online “chat and tweet room” so that every expert, novice, and personal advocate could give their two cents in response to what was being said live. It’s a perfect symbol of democracy in the Web 2.0 ear, where on one computer screen you can see live a public servant of 20 years desperately trying to convince people to adopt legislation to allow police to enforce drivers who text, while reading “Mark K” write: “We have too many cops. They like things orderly. Freedom is chaotic, so too many cops affects society.”

It’s also a reminder of how transportation is truly a democratic issue – perhaps one of the few issues that affect every individual daily. We all go places every day. We have loved ones who go places. We are doing this constantly, and as the summit pointed out of course, we move dangerously and with reckless behaviors.

The summit drew on a wide variety of people to make this point:

1. Victims of distracted driving reminding us of the end results
2. Transportation researchers informing us our risk of accident increases 2300% when we text
3. Law enforcement officials telling us the type of distraction doesn’t matter – all distractions are deadly
4. Legislators preaching to us that we need laws to prevent these behaviors
5. AAA reporting that people do it even though they know it’s dangerous
6. Wireless companies ensuring us they want to help as much as anyone
7. Teens sharing with us the life changing effects of their distracted driving.

. . . . And many more people from all areas of the transportation field reminding us that distracted driving kills.

The value of the summit was in the substance of the presenters and the nature of the experience. Even though Secretary LaHood ended the summit by announcing policy changes and an executive order from the President banning all federal officials from texting while driving, these two days were more about the U.S. DOT engaging academia, industry and public officials on an extremely important topic. Sure, there were plenty of Mark K’s commenting wildly in the chat room, but there were also thousands of people discussing the best way to enforce a texting law, or how to really educated teens on driving or even debating the nature of federal transportation laws.

So the people are engaged, we know we need to end distracted driving, but how do we do it? Two major solutions were presented: Do we create a society where law enforcement is responsible for punishing us when we fall to the temptation to text while driving? Or do we make our technology safer and more intuitive and design systems to prevent distractions?

In his closing, Secretary LaHood laid out the end goal: “Driving while distracted should just feel wrong – just as driving without a seat belt or driving while intoxicated.”

Click here to read the Secretary’s blog about the summit and to replay the proceedings.

Note: Please register your comments/kudos below for Adam in the comments box below.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

Click here for more details

Researchers from the US Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) are cooperating to develop and test a method for predicting the real-world fuel and electricity consumption of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) by adjusting dynamometer test results. After examining data on the only PHEV currently available in large numbers, the new adjustment method shows promise for reasonably predicting PHEV average fuel and electricity use, despite differences in design.

Current rules for conventional vehicles do not work for plug-in hybrids because the vehicles run on both electricity and gasoline; industry debate centers on the rules for estimating miles per gallon. This was highlighted by the reaction to GM’s announcement that the Chevy Volt would attain 230 mpg in the city cycle, given a single charge per day, along with combined cycle electricity consumption of 25 kWh/100 miles, based on a draft EPA methodology. (Earlier post.)

PHEV testing is further complicated by the fact that these vehicles operate in two different modes based on the distance they are driven (initially depleting energy from the large vehicle battery, and eventually sustaining the battery charge for longer distance driving). Consensus is building on techniques to handle these first two complications, but one question that remains is how to adjust raw certification cycle test results to best predict a PHEV’s average real-world energy use.

Click here to read the entire article.

Funding of transportation-related infrastructure is at a crossroads. Traditional funding mechanisms, such as general and specific tax revenues, are proving to be insufficient to maintain existing facilities and fund expanded capacity. Infrastructure providers and operators are looking to users to make up for the shortfall. Transport-related infrastructure offers an exceptional opportunity for raising funds to establish and/or sustain such infrastructure while providing an attractive return on investment to both public and private investors. Key to achieving such returns are the prices charged to users. But how should user charges be set?

• Should every user pay the same fee?
• Is it practical, commercially worthwhile, and socially acceptable to charge differential prices?
• How should the price be set relative to the cost of alternatives modes or routings?
• How are these pricing principles changed when the facility is congested?
• Can pricing be used to reduce the problems of congestion?
• How does private operation of a facility change the pricing objectives?
• How might the public sector regulate prices?

These questions and more will be addressed in this two-and-half day course offered by the Transportation Center at Northwestern University.

Click Here for a Full-Brochure of the Program.

View Faculty

Facilities & Location

Registration & Fee*Registration

Program Fee (after 10.5.09) $2,700
Early Registration Fee (before 10.5.09) $2,160
Government & academic rate $2,160
Registration

Who Should Attend

The course is aimed at professionals who currently, or might in the future, set user charges; financial personnel; and engineers and project managers who oversee facility maintenance and new construction. It is also applicable to consultants to infrastructure providers, and those who finance infrastructure projects.

Course Format

Program content will be thoroughly integrated by the course faculty, so that participants will emerge with a comprehensive understanding and perspective of transportation infrastructure pricing strategies.  The focus of the course is on the economics of pricing. Some prior knowledge of economics, such as might be obtained from an introductory college level microeconomics course, will be useful.

Topics to be covered include:Full Program Schedule

For additional information please visit the Northwestern University Transportation Center website or contact: Ms. Diana Marek, Program Registrar – 847-491-2280; dmarek@northwestern.edu

Will a city need all the latest technology and they will solve the traffic problems? If not, then what are the correct choices.

Technology has been playing an important role in promoting vehicular safety, reducing driving stress, comfortable travel and increased  efficiency of the whole transport system. These technologies applied in a package are called “Intelligent Transport System (ITS)”. When carefully applied the ITS will create an efficient, safe and comfortable transport system.

Often, policy-makers are in a situation where they are not properly informed on the right technological choices. The GTZ Sourcebook module  on “Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)” focuses on the choices for a city and also informs the reader of the various viable ITS options, their function and advantage. (German Technical Cooperation Agency (GTZ) is a member of the Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP – ASIA).  The project is carried out in cooperation between German Technical Cooperation Agency (GTZ), the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), CITYNET, UNHABITAT and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA). The office is based in Bangkok (Thailand).

The focus of this module on ITS is on ITS applications that support the concept of sustainable transport by encouraging the following desirable outcomes which can be expected to find general acceptance:

• Equitable access and improved mobility and including reduced demand for motorised private transport; and improve the modal split in favor of walking, transit, and cycling;
• Improved transport efficiency and productivity;
• Improved safety and security; and
• Reduced environmental impact and improved ‘liveability’, especially in congested city centres.

The module was written by Mr. Phil Sayeg and Prof. Phil Charles and updated by the authors. The authors also wrote ITS Australia’s Intelligent Transport Systems Hand- book that was published in 2003 and edit their quarterly Members’ Information Pack. They are currently contributing to the development of the first ITS Strategy for Bangkok, Thailand.

More information on the updated module (3.15 Mb) and download links are available from the Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP) website.

(Source: USA Today; Carkeys, UK)

Image Courtesy: USA Today

Automobile technology has exploded over the past two decades and todays cars are far more “intelligent” than the cars of the 70 and 80s.  These days there are more computers and sensors (collectively captured under the term Intelligent Vehicle, a terminology that is more familiar to those involved in Intelligent Transportation Systems) operating side by side with the driver to ensure that the vehicle operates at optimal efficiency while managing the safety of the vehicle by avoiding or alerting/warning about impending collisions.   The state of the art technology deployed in some cars can even slow down the vehicle by applying brakes without driver’s assistance, just to minimize the impact of the crash.  Now, that will soon become yesterday’s technology, thanks to vehicle safety pioneers at Volvo who are hard at work to deploy “full auto brake” and “pedestrian safety” functions.   USA Today reports on this latest vehicle technology development at the Volvo shop.

By now, collision avoidance systems that automatically apply the brakes to a speeding car have become pretty common. But while cars will suddenly slow if they detect an accident is about to happen, automakers have been hesitant to bring them to a sudden and full emergency stop.

Volvo is about to change all that. With the launch of the S60 next year, Volvo will introduce a “full auto brake” and “pedestrian safety” function. Cars will come a full stop at speeds less than about 15 miles an hour if their radar systems detect they are about to strike a car or a person. If the car is going faster, the car will try to come as close to a full stop as possible.

“If the car is traveling faster, the aim is to reduce the impact speed as much as possible. In most cases, we can reduce the collision force by about 75%,” says Thomas Broberg, Volvo’s safety expert. “Considering the large number of pedestrian fatalities that occur, if we manage to reduce the fatality risk 20 percent, this new function will make a big difference.”

Carkeys.com, a British website reports that this effort is part of Volvo’s 2020 vision, which has two goals – firstly, that nobody will be killed or injured in a new Volvo and, secondly, that the average CO2 emissions of the entire range will be below 100g/km. As part of addressing this first goal, the first step forward from the current situation regarding safety is the introduction of Collision Warning With Full Auto Brake and Pedestrian Safety, both of which will be introduced in the new S60, due to be launched next year, and Volvo is also upgrading its Adaptive Cruise Control so that it now maintains a gap to the vehicle in front at speeds right down to zero, rather than the present 18mph minimum.

Further development depends on vehicles being able to communicate with each other – the idea being that they recognise it and take steps to avoid a collision regardless of what the drivers are doing – and this in turn will require a suitable infrastructure. “We believe that the key is to use systems that are already available for other purposes,” says Jan Ivarsson, Volvo’s Head of Safety Strategy. “The air around us is already charged with communication, most of it used for pleasure or convenience.

“Adding traffic safety communication to this existing architecture is a far more sensible route than trying to invent and agree on a completely new ‘language’ for communicating in the traffic environment.”

Fifty years ago, Volvo introduced seat belts, which are now a “standard” in all vehicles entering the market(s) and has been credited for saving millions of lives world over since its introduction.  Hope this new introduction can repeat the magic for the 2nd time and further cut the vehicle-related fatalities and crashes.  Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Tree Hugger)

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

Tree Hugger reports that the estimated $4 billion US (or 2.7 billion euros) is only part of China’s grand $300B dream. Another recent article on  TreeHugger outlined the grand plan to invest over $300 billion in high-speed rail through 2020, in a bid to speed ahead of the rest of the world’s train systems. Here are some excerpts from today’s interesting TreeHugger article.

The Chinese Ministry of Railways has announced that it will buy 80 “very high speed trains” from Bombardier’s Chinese joint ventre Bombardier Sifang to add to China’s fast-growing network of high-speed rail. The ZEFIRO 380 trains are both very efficient (more on that below) and very fast, and should help make transportation in China greener, especially if train trips displace plane trips.

The order is for 20 eight-car trainsets and 60 sixteen-car trainsets, for a total of 1,120 cars.

The ZEFIRO 380 has a maximum operating speed of 380 kilometers per hour (236 miles per hour) and is designed for efficiency:

The Bombardier press release notes ” The new trainsets will be an integral part of an evolving high speed rail capability in China, which is developing more than 6,000 km of new high speed lines to create one of the most advanced high speed rail networks in the world. The trains, with maximum operating speeds of 380 kph, are based on Bombardier’s next-generation ZEFIRO high speed rail technology, and powered by a highly energy efficientBOMBARDIER MITRAC propulsion and control system.

Image Courtesy: Bombardier

The ZEFIRO 380 trainsets will also incorporate Bombardier’s advanced ECO4 energy saving technologies to create best-in-class energy and operating efficiencies. Bombardier launched its ECO4 technology package in 2008 as part of an ongoing focus to extend rail’s position as the most sustainable form of transportation in the world. Bombardier is first in the industry to create a new formula for total train performance with a portfolio that can create substantial overall energy savings of up to 50%.”

The ZEFIRO 380 trains will be manufactured at Bombardier Sifang (Qingdao) Transportation production facilities in Qingdao, China. Engineering will take place in Qingdao and at Bombardier centers in Europe with project management and components provided from sites in Europe and China.

What the heck is USA doing?

If you are wondering what is the status of the US high-speed rail development program, here is your answer.  We are waaaaaaaay behind many of our counterparts that are already engaged in the HSR programs .  The Europeans (French with their TGVs  & Germans with their ICE trains) and the Japanese have been at the forefront of HSR for decades and have built excellent systems that are capable of traveling at ~250MPH speeds.  New comers such as Spain and China have blazed new paths and surged ahead of the US and have embarked on ambitious plans, backed by huge  government funding commitments.  Heck, even the oil-rich Saudi Arabia is forging ahead with its development of brand new HSR lines cutting across the sandy deserts connecting major cities.  Recently, the Russians also got on this track and have quickly sought Spain’s help in building their HSR lines.  While the rest of the world is surging ahead, the US Government is still wrangling over its plans of where to invest the $8Billion funding. The US HSR Association states “Our vision is for a 21^st century, 17,000 mile national high speed rail system built in 4 phases, for completion by 2030″.  Realistically speaking, this goal seems far fetched at this point, especially with the glacial pace of activity at the Federal level.

Click here to read the entire article. Also, click here to see more pictures of these new toys China is buying from Bombardier.

(Source: New York Times)

Image Courtesy: American Van via Google Images

Crisscrossing the country, hundreds of thousands of long-haultruckers use computers in their cabs to get directions and stay in close contact with dispatchers, saving precious minutes that might otherwise be spent at the side of the road.

The trucking industry says these devices can be used safely, posing less of a distraction than BlackBerrys, iPhones and similar gadgets, and therefore should be exempted from legislation that would ban texting while driving.

“We think that’s overkill,” Clayton Boyce, spokesman for the American Trucking Associations, said of a federal bill that would force states to ban texting while driving if they want to keep receiving federal highway money.

The legislation will be discussed at a conference on distracted driving in Washington, starting Wednesday, organized by the Transportation Department.

The issues raised by truckers show the challenges facing advocates for tougher distracted-driving laws, given that so many Americans have grown accustomed to talking and texting behind the wheel.

The trucking industry has invested heavily in technology to wire vehicles. Satellite systems mounted on trucks let companies track drivers, send new orders, distribute companywide messages and transmit training exercises. Drivers can also use them to send and receive e-mail and browse the Internet.

After videotaping truckers behind the wheel, the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that those who used on-board computers faced a 10 times greater risk of crashing, nearly crashing or wandering from their lane than truckers who did not use those devices.

That figure is lower than the 23 times greater risk when truckers texted, compared with drivers simply focused on the road, according to the same study. However, the Virginia researchers said that truckers tend to use on-board computers more often than they text.

The study found that truckers using on-board computers take their eyes off the road for an average of four seconds, enough time at highway speeds to cover roughly the length of a football field.

Richard J. Hanowski, director of the Center for Truck and Bus Safety at the Virginia institute, said videotape monitoring of 200 truckers driving about three million miles showed many of them using the devices, even bypassing messages on the screen warning them not to use the devices while driving.

In recent years, fatalities caused by large trucks have risen slowly, despite many safety advances like air bags and antilock brakes, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In 2007, large trucks caused 4,808 deaths — or 12 percent of all driving-related fatalities — up from 4,777, or 11 percent, in 1997.

Beyond the dispatch computers, truckers said they relied heavily on an array of technologies to stay productive, entertained and connected on the road. Their cabs become like home offices, wired with CB radios, AM/FM and satellite radios, weather band radios, GPS devices, electrical outlets, laptops and even computer desks. And, of course, cellphones.

Click here to read the entire article.  Also, while you are on the NY Times page, don’t forget to try the awesome interactive graphic (which can be found embedded on the left hand panel of this NY Times article) to gauge  your distraction.  It does that by measuring how your reaction time is affected by external distractions in a nice little game.

Note:  Another New York Times article on this issue of driver distraction notes that the general public overwhelmingly supports the prohibition of text messagingwhile driving, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll finds. Ninety percent of adults say sending a text message while driving should be illegal, and only 8 percent disagree.   More than 80 percent of every demographic group say sending text messages while driving should be illegal, but some are more adamant about such a prohibition than others. Parents, whether or not their children are adults, are more inclined to support a ban than people without children. Women are more in favor of outlawing the practice than men.  Click here to read more details on this interesting poll.