(Source: NY Times)

Ethanol producers reacted with dismay to California’s approval of the nation’s first low-carbon fuel standard, which will require the state’s mix of fuels to be 10 percent lower in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

In a 9-1 vote late Thursday, the state’s Air Resources Board approved the measure (seebackground here).“The drive to force the market toward greater use of alternative fuels will be a boon to the state’s economy and public health — it reduces air pollution, creates new jobs and continues California’s leadership in the fight against global warming,” said the California board’s chairman, Mary D. Nichols, in a statement.

But the ethanol industry is concerned that the regulations give a poor emissions score to their corn-based product, in some cases ranking it as a bigger emitter than petroleum.

“This was a poor decision, based on shaky science, not only for California, but for the nation,” said General Wesley Clark, who co-chairs the pro-ethanol group Growth Energy, in a statement.

The decision, he added, “puts another road block in moving away from dependence on fossil fuels and stifles development of the emerging cellulosic industry.”

Note: Late last night, TransportGooru made detailed post (shown below), immediately following the Calif. Air Resources Board announcement on the adoption of this standard. 

California adopts first-in-the-world regulation to minimize the amount of carbon in fuel

The public is getting its first uncensored look at the government’s records of where and when airplanes have struck birds over the last 19 years, thanks largely to pressure resulting from the dramatic ditching of a US Airways jet in the Hudson River after bird strikes knocked out both its engines.

Finally, travelers will be able to learn which airports have the worst problems with birds.

Since 1990, the Federal Aviation Administration has been collecting reports voluntarily submitted by commercial and private pilots, the military, airline mechanics, and airport workers who clear dead birds and other animals from runways. The agency has released aggregate data over the years so it’s known that there are records of more than 100,000 strikes and that reported strikes more than quadrupled from 1,759 in 1990 to 7,666 in 2007.

But the FAA has always feared the public can’t handle the full truth about bird strikes, so it has withheld the names of specific airports and airlines involved.

Aware that some airports do a better job reporting strikes than others and that some face tougher bird problems, the agency said the public might use the data to “cast unfounded aspersions” on those who reported strikes and the airports and airlines in turn might turn in fewer voluntary reports.

But this week Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood overruled the FAA’s attempt to throw a formal cloak of secrecy over the data before it had to reveal the records in response Freedom of Information Act requests from The Associated Press and other news organizations.

The database was to be posted on the Internet at midmorning Friday.

With President Barack Obama promising a more open government and releasing secret Bush administration legal memos about harsh interrogations of terrorism suspects, LaHood said he found it hard to justify the FAA’s plan to withhold records about birds flying around airports.

LaHood also noted the public bridled at being kept in the dark. In addition to newspaper editorials coast to coast opposing the FAA’s secrecy, members of the public commenting directly to the FAA opposed it by a 5-to-1 margin.

(Source: CBS, LA Times, SF Chronicle)

California took aim today at the oil industry and its effect on global warming, adopting the world’s first regulation to limit greenhouse gas emissions from the fuel that runs cars and trucks.

Photo: AP/Rich Pedroncelli via CBS

The regulation requires producers, refiners and importers of gasoline and diesel to reduce the carbon intensity of their fuel by 10% over the next decade. And it launches the state on an ambitious path toward ratcheting down its overall heat-trapping emissions by 80% by mid-century — a level that scientists deem necessary to avoid drastic disruption to the global climate.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger praised the regulation immediately after the vote.

“California’s first-in-the-world low carbon fuel standard will not only reduce global warming pollution – it will reward innovation, expand consumer choice and encourage the private investment we need to transform our energy infrastructure,” Schwarzenegger said in a statement.

At the all-day public hearing prior to the vote, backers of corn-based ethanol criticized the regulation because it counts – as part of the carbon intensity – the indirect effects of manufacturing the fuel. With corn-based ethanol, that means counting the impact of creating new crop land when existing land is converted to growing corn for fuel instead of food.

Backers of the regulation applauded in the auditorium after the vote.

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program Strategic Planning Workshop

 May 6, 2009

The workshop is designed to present the results-to-date of the strategic planning effort and to invite discussion from the public.  Participants will be engaged in question/answer sessions with break-out session discussions.  All feedback will be captured and incorporated into FTA’s ITS strategic planning effort.  Using this input, the FTA’s Office of Mobility Innovation expects to program a robust agenda for research and deployment assistance that reflects the current and future needs of the transit industry. 

If attending, please RSVP to: Suzanne.Sloan@dot.gov.  A similar workshop will take place at the APTA Rail Conference in Chicago, Illinois (June 14-17, 2009).  Location:  Chicago Hilton / TBD

Elvira, Mistress of the Dark, when questioned one night on a television talk show about what makes her so popular, responded: “I’m like a bad car wreck on the freeway. You know you shouldn’t stare but you just can’t help it.” 

We can’t help it, can we? While hardly unique, an accident that brought the State Route 60 in Rowland Heights, California to a crawl one afternoon provides a perfect example. Just past the State Route 57 interchange, three crumpled compact cars limped to the right shoulder and died. The respective occupants and a highway patrol officer surveyed the situation, rounding out the classic picture of an accident scene. For a few miles in either direction cars passed by at the speed of a funeral procession so their drivers could ogle the unfolding scenario. 

Admit it. Most of us do stop and stare — with costly consequences, too. The statisticians at the some urban traffic-safety centers calculate that rubbernecking causes more unnecessary traffic congestion than any other behavior.  

So why do we do it? Are we really that morbid? Do we really revel in the misfortunes of other people? 

“Not at all,” answered Mark Rafter, former assistant professor of psychology at Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, California. “We stare because that’s the way we are built. It is perfectly normal for us to respond to unusual stimuli with an increased level of attention. In fact, having a sense of curiosity is healthy.” 

Rafter also said that this “novelty interest” increases our chances of survival. Instinct

dictates that we examine any unnecessary phenomenon — such as the brightly flashing blue and red lights of an emergency vehicle — lest it be a threat to our own safety. 

“There are other factors as well,” Rafter added. “Freeway wrecks provide us with the rare opportunity to double check our best guess as to the cause of the delay.” 

Goodness knows that we are granted plenty of time to wonder what happened when stuck in a long backup. When we finally arrive upon the accident scene, we are usually presented with conclusive evidence of just what the problem was. Then there is the frustrating fact that the very slowing of traffic that a collision creates lends us the perfect chance to really get a good look at it. Evidently our voyeuristic tendencies tend to complicate matters.

However, being the individuals that we are, not all of us stare with the same intensity, according to Rafter. 

“Each person strives to maintain their own optimal level of arousal,” Rafter pointed out. “Extroverts need to seek out exciting events to get to normal, so they really stop and gawk, whereas introverts require much less stimulation and tend to look away from tragic occurrences.”

In the final analysis, there’s really no need for us to feel too guilty about where we cast our eyes, at least according to one expert. On the other hand, traffic would certainly move a lot smoother if we elevated ourselves above our basic instincts and just kept our eyes on the road.

©2009, Dr. Roadmap® 

_________________________________________________________________________________________ 

David Rizzo, better known as Dr. Roadmap,  a Commute Management expert who writes about issues such as improving gas mileage (mpg), alternate routes, traffic congestion, ridesharing, commuting behavior and intelligent transportation systems on California’s Orange Country Register.  He is well known for his comprehensive guide ever written on off-freeway commuting in Southern California, published in 1990.  Two years later he became the first traffic reporter to offer daily alternate routes in real time over the air on one of the most popular morning radio shows in Los Angeles.  His bi-weekly columns appear exclusively for TransportGooru.  This is copyright-protected content.  Please contact Transportgooru if you like to use this article or portions of this article. 

(Source: AutoBlog, New York Times, Jalopnik)

 REPORT: Bill Ford, Jr. “shocked” at Wagoner’s ousting…Some say GM taking government loans (as opposed to private sector loans) changed the rules, and the government needed to protect its investment; others say it was government interference. Regardless, the way things are going, we would be surprised if that were the last “shocking” development in the car industry saga.[Source: The Detroit Free Pre…

(Source: Washington Post; USA Today & Airsafe.com)

 The people should have access to this kind of information

Department of Transportation is preparing to reject a proposal by the Federal Aviation Administration that would keep secret data about where and when birds strike airplanes.   Among the high-profile boosters of releasing the information is Transportation Secretary  Ray LaHood, whose agency oversees the FAA.  He said the comments ran “99.9 percent” in favor of making such information accessible.  

“I think all of this information ought to be made public, and I think that you’ll soon be reading about the fact that we’re going to, you know, make this information as public as anybody wants it,” LaHood said in an interview for The Washington Post’s “New Voices of Power” series. “The people should have access to this kind of information.

“The whole thing about the bird strike issue is it doesn’t really comport with the president’s idea of transparency,” the secretary said. “I mean, here they just released all of these CIA files regarding interrogation, and . . . the optic of us trying to tell people they can’t have information about birds flying around airports, I don’t think that really quite comports with the policies of the administration. . . . It’s something that somebody wanted to put out there to get a reaction. We got the reaction, and now we’re going to bring it to conclusion.”

Here is the Secretary’s interview to Washington Post’s Lois Romano on this issue:

 The FAA last month quietly posted a proposal in the federal register, requesting public comment, that would bar the release of its records on bird collisions. The proposal followed a prominent incident in January when a flock of geese brought down a commercial flight, forcing the pilot to make an emergency landing on the Hudson River. The agency immediately came under fire because the recommendation runs counter President’s Obama vows of government transparency.

For those interested in reading the FAA’ proposal on Federal register, here it is:

 Note: TransportGooru appreciates the Sec. of Transportation’s stand against this move by FAA.  Public have the right to know and it is not nice that FAA can withhold  sharing this data, even after the overhwleming public response.

Transportation for America’s webinar on Transportation and Housing took place last week.  This is the third one in a series of webinars that explore the deep impacts of our transportation system on our housing and job markets, public health, energy needs, climate, economic competitiveness, and nearly every other pressing issue facing our country today.   This particular webinar on Transportation and Housing/Development had almost 300 people in attendance, who heard from development experts on the connections between transportation policy, real estate development, and affordable housing.  The following links will take you to the products (policy briefs and A/V recordings) from the session.

• Policy Brief: Transportation and Housing (pdf)
• Policy Brief: Transportation and Development (pdf)
• Audio and video recording of the entire webinar
• Podcast audio file (.mp3)
  
• Podcast video file (.mp4)

With economic crisis putting jobs in jeopardy, homes in foreclosure and entire communities in peril, Americans are facing extraordinary challenges in finding affordable and accessible housing options. Now more than ever, we need federal leadership to help make the critical link between our housing and transportation policies and creating revitalized communities where people can find good places to live and convenient ways to get around.

Shelley Poticha, President and CEO of Reconnecting America and the Center for Transit Oriented Development moderated the discussion and provided an overview of the Transportation for America Campaign.

Christopher Leinberger, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Partner of Arcadia Land Company; discussed the benefits of walkable urbanism and the linkages between land value and transportation systems. Ann Norton, Senior Staff Attorney at the Housing Preservation Project, provided a snapshot of Blueprint planning from the Minneapolis / St. Paul Metropolitan Area that links up transportation and land-use planning. Finally, John McIlwain, Senior Resident Fellow at the Urban Land Institute discussed policy options for locating housing around transportation nodes and creating compact, mixed use, mixed income neighborhoods.

There are still more webinars on tap.  Sign up for more sessions on the webinars page. The next session is April 30  (2-3:30PM) on Transportation, Public Health and Safety.  Here is a brief description of the upcoming session:  Transportation influences the health and safety of communities by affecting physical activity levels, traffic speeds, and air pollution. This session will investigate the needs of paratransit and transit-dependent populations, the success of Complete Streets and non-motorized transportation programs, and the connections between transportation and active living.

(Source: Transportation for America)

(Source: Los Angeles Times)

As the state moves to reduce the carbon footprint of fuel, an engineer hopes to build a plant in Lancaster that will convert garbage into an alcohol-based mixture.

California’s proposal “is the first time anyone has attempted, for environmental purposes, to change the content of what goes into cars and trucks,” says Mary D. Nichols, state Air Resources Board chairwoman. “It would revolutionize transportation fuel.”
 
President Obama has also called for a low-carbon standard for the nation’s $400-billion transportation fuel market. A version similar to California’s is incorporated in climate legislation pending before Congress.

But by measuring the “cradle-to-grave” effect of various fuels, the new rule would favor ethanol such as Klann’s, made from non-food sources. Even “low-carbon” corn ethanol — such as the kind produced in California using gas-fired electricity and efficient machinery — has a far higher carbon footprint than so-called cellulosic fuel from landfill waste, trees, switchgrass or sugar cane.

“This is fantastic for us,” said Klann, who uses recycled sulfuric acid to transform paper, construction debris and grass clippings into ethanol. “The paradigm is changing from oil to sustainable fuels. The ones with the lowest carbon footprint will be the winners.”

By 2020, the air board estimates, new-technology fuels along with electricity to power hybrid and electric cars would replace a quarter of the gasoline supply. And that is a critical element of the state’s sweeping plan to reduce its global warming emissions. 

Battered corn ethanol investors have mounted an intense lobbying effort against California’s proposal. Several, including Pacific Ethanol, California’s biggest, had planned to diversify from corn into cellulosic ethanol. They argue that by diminishing the value of their existing plants, the new rule also would cripple their advanced biofuel efforts. 

At issue is the Air Resources Board’s complex modeling, which would calculate each fuel’s carbon footprint not only by its “direct” emissions from drilling or planting to refining to burning, but also “indirect” emissions caused by clearing forests or fields to compensate for food crops such as corn or soy that are diverted to fuel. Opponents say the science behind the indirect modeling is inaccurate. 

Among entrepreneurs like Klann, the mood has never been more hopeful. In an Anaheim lab, the 57-year-old electrical engineer guides a visitor through a maze of pipes, filters, heat exchangers, fermentation tanks and vats of acid like a small boy showing off a chemistry set. “We’re in the forefront of this industry,” he said of his patented “concentrated acid hydrolysis” process. “We expect to have the first plant to produce cellulosic ethanol on a commercial scale.”  

Financing for his Lancaster plant, which recently obtained its final permits, has been delayed by the credit crunch. But if it comes through, the facility will process 170 tons of garbage a day to produce 3.7 million gallons of ethanol a year. Estimated cost per gallon: about $2, Klann says.  

He already has plans for 20 more facilities across the country. Next on the block: a plant outside Palm Springs, partly funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, that would produce 19 million gallons annually. 

Click here to read th entire article.  For interested readers, here is a TransportGooru article on California’s ambitious new fuel regulation standards. 

Tightening the “Green” Screw! California regulators consider instituting first-in-the nation low-carbon fuel standards

(Source: San Jose Mercury news & Calif. ARB)

SACRAMENTO—California air regulators are taking another step to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, considering first-in-the nation standards to require the use of so-called low-carbon fuels.

The California Air Resources Board, which will debate the standards Thursday, considers the regulation a framework for a potential national policy advocated by President Barack Obama on the campaign trail last year. Democrats have included a goal for low-carbon fuels in the latest climate bill they have introduced in Congress.

“We see this as a model for the rest of the country and the world to follow,” said Air Resources Board member Dan Sperling, a transportation expert and professor at the University of California, Davis.

 The proposed regulation calls for reducing the carbon content in California’s transportation fuels 10 percent by 2020, but representatives of the petroleum and ethanol industries are objecting to how the state proposes to achieve that.

California oil producers and refiners are skeptical that cleaner fuels and vehicles powered by hydrogen and natural gas will be available in time to meet the new standards. They are asking the Air Resources Board to delay a decision until next year.

“This is the most transforming fuel regulation we’ve ever done,” said Kathy Rehis-Boyd, executive vice president of the Western States Petroleum Association. “We think there’s still more homework to do on this. There’s a lot of uncertainty.”

“We have a long history of what I call ‘fuel du jour’ approaches,” Sperling said. “What we need is a broad policy framework that doesn’t pick winners.”

The Air Resources Board is not just targeting the emissions of the fuel once it is burned in a vehicle. It also wants to account for all carbon emissions related to the production of the fuel.

For example, refineries could choose to stop buying a heavy crude oil extracted from Canadian oil sands, which takes more energy to convert into gasoline. But accounting for emissions during the entire production cycle of a fuel also would discourage certain fuels from being used in California.

Corn-based ethanol, for example, burns cleanly in a car engine. But making it can take a heavy toll on the environment: Massive tracts of land must be cleared, which requires fuel-powered tractors, then coal- or natural gas-fired plants convert the corn into fuel and petroleum is used to transport the end product to distant markets.