(Source: Court TV via Ridelust.com)

You probably heard many stories about crazy people behind the wheel and tough looking  police officers who handle these people effectively (in many cases with guns drawn, or on hot pursuits with sirens blazing, which makes for good TV) ensuring the safety of the traveling public on our roads..  But here comes a completely different, stereotype shattering officer who epitomizes patience while dealing with his irate customer who gets pulled over for speeding..

Shot from his police vehicle’s dash cam, in this video State Trooper. Stephen Murray looks like the most patient man on earth, and probably the best in the history of law enforcement (as ridelust puts it).  Trooper Murray kept his cool and poise while that nut case driver went nuclear and unleashes a verbal tirade, loaded with a barrage of F bombs..And the funny thing is that he stands there politely without showing any reaction, and that gets the driver at fault even more mad..Boy, this is some fun to watch!

I wonder how the situation would have turned if the officer put his hand on the weapon holster?  Amazing, the driver didn’t get into much trouble and went away with a speeding ticket after unloading so many F-bombs and behaving badly with the officer!  Easily Qualifies for MUST SEE title. Great job, Trooper Murray.

(Sources: USDOT Sec. Ray LaHood’s Fast Lane Blog; USDOT; NY Times; Wired, Tree Hugger; The Transport Politic)

A day after delivering the State of the Union address, President Obama took his economic message on the road in the first of a series of trips outside Washington. He began his full-scale pivot to the economy by focusing on high-speed rail projects, a tangible thing that many voters can see in their own neighborhoods or states. Joined by Vice President Biden in Tampa, Florida, he announced the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act High-Speed and Inter-city Passenger Rail grants. Mr. Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. both traveled to Florida to announce the projects. The president and vice president rarely travel together, but did so in this case because Mr. Biden has overseen the economic stimulus plan. He introduced Mr. Obama to the crowd at an event that resembled a campaign rally.

The investments, scattered across the country, include startup money for high-speed rail projects in California and Florida. For months, states have been engaged in a bidding war over the money, which comes from the economicstimulus plan approved a year ago.

Image Courtesy:Sec. Ray Lahood's Fastlane blog

Our favorite, Yonah Freemark @ The Transport Politic summarized this seed funding for HSR as follow: After months of speculation about which states will get funding from the Federal Railroad Administration to begin construction on new high-speed corridors, the news is in. As has been expected, California, Florida, and Illinois are the big winners, with more than one billion in spending proposed for each. But other states with less visible projects, including Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Washington will also get huge grants and begin offering relatively fast trains on their respective corridors within five years. The distribution of dollars is well thought-out and reasonable: it provides money to regions across the nation and prioritizes states that have made a commitment of their own to a fast train program.

The bulk of today’s awards go to new, large-scale high-speed rail programs–projects such as Florida, with $1.25 billion to develop a high-speed rail corridor between Tampa and Orlando with trains running up to 168 miles per hour–and California, with $2.25 billion to connect Los Angeles to San Francisco and points in between with trains running up to 220 miles per hour.

In total, 31 states and the District of Columbia will receive awards. In addition to 13 corridor investments, we are also awarding several grants for improvement projects and planning. These efforts on existing routes and emerging corridors will lay the groundwork for future high-speed and intercity rail development.

And here are the stats of the projections for each line via Tree Hugger (via Wired):

California
First Phase – San Francisco to Los Angeless
Ultimate Goal – Sacramento to San Dieago
Estimated Completion Date – 2025
Top Speed – 220 mph
Final Tab – $45B

Florida
First Phase – Tampa to Orlando
Ultimate Goal – Orlando to Miami
Estimated Completion Date – 2017
Top Speed- 180 mph
Final Tab – $11.5+B

Midwest
First Phase – Chicago to Madison, Detroit, and St. Louis.
Ultimate Goal – Hub-and-spoke network: 20 major cities using 3,000 miles of existing railway.
Estimated Completion Date – 2025
Top Speed – 110 mph
Final Tab – N/A

Texas
Ultimate Goal – “T-Bone” connecting Dallas/ Ft. Worth, San Antonio, and Houston
Estimated Completion Date – 2020
Top Speed – 220 mph
Final Tab – $12-22B

Northeast
Ultimate Goal – Speed-boosting upgrades to existing lines to get Washington-to-Boston travel time down to five hours, 45 minutes.
Estimated Completion Date – 2023
Top Speed – 150 mph
Final Tab – $12B

Other lines will grace Washington, Oregon, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.

For further details on the major corridor projects, click here (via USDOT Press Release):

• Florida
• California
• Chicago-St. Louis-Kansas City
• Madison – Milwaukee – Chicago
• Charlotte – Raleigh – Richmond – Washington, D.C.
• Eugene-Portland-Seattle
• Detroit-Chicago
• Ohio
• Northeast

Please visit here for a complete in-depth analysis of this distribution and for an awesome table that captures salient features (distance, funding amounts, etc). Thanks to Yonah Freemark for his efforts to keep us informed.

New Report: U.S. Falling Off Pace of World Leadership In Intelligent Transportation Systems

Why the U.S. is Missing the Intelligent Transportation Systems Revolution

WASHINGTON, D.C.— A new report by a leading Washington, D.C. think tank will be released on Wednesday, January 27^th, highlighting the increasing disparity between foreign industrialized nations and the United States regarding the current use of new technologies to address major transportation congestion, safety, and environmental problems.

At Wednesday’s forum, researchers from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will issue the report and discuss its findings with domestic and international transportation experts.  The report, Explaining International IT Application Leadership: Intelligent Transportation Systems, discusses why the United States has fallen behind in developing intelligent transportation technology while nations such as Japan, South Korea, Singapore and others have made significant progress and advances.

Date:   Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Time:  9 AM – 10:30 AM

Place:  Information Technology and Innovations Foundation,  1101 K Street, NW, Suite 610A , Washington, DC 20005

(News media inquiries, please call ITIF at 202-449-1351)

Participants

• Robert Atkinson (moderator),  President, The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
• Stephen Ezell (presenter), Senior Analyst, The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation

Respondents:

• Scott Belcher, President and CEO, ITS America
• Riz Khaliq, Global Business Executive, Intelligent Transportation Systems and Growth Markets, IBM Global Government
• Masahiro Nishikawa, Japan Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transportation and Tourism (MLIT)

Report Should Be “A Serious Wake Up Call” For the U.S.

“The report should be a serious wake-up call to our nation’s transportation leaders and policy makers as to why the U.S. is not staying competitive in the international market,” said Scott Belcher, President and CEO of ITS America. “Other industrialized nations have learned that a major key to transportation efficiency and economic growth is by deploying intelligent transportation systems (ITS) to allow for the safe and easy movement of goods and people.

“We have the opportunity to reverse this disparity if we don’t continue to ignore 21^st Century technology in addressing our transportation problems,” Belcher said.

According to the report: “Many think improving a country’s transportation system solely means building new roads or repairing aging infrastructure.  But the future of transportation lies not in concrete and steel, but in a network of sensors, microchips, and communication devices that collect and disseminate information about the functioning of the transportation system.”

The report also introduces specific recommendations on how the U.S. government can accelerate the deployment of ITS to remain economically competitive with other industrialized nations.

“Information Technology Is Revolutionizing Transportation”

ITS technology includes real-time, in-vehicle traffic and transit information; new types of automated road pricing; adaptive traffic signal timing; safety warning systems; and many other applications which leverage IT to enhance the safety, efficiency and convenience of transportation, including for cars, trucks and mass transit.

“What ITS do is empower actors in the transportation system—from commuters, to highway and transit authorities, even down to the actual traffic lights themselves—with actionable information, that is, intelligence, to make better-informed decisions, whether it’s choosing which route to take, when to travel, or whether to mode-shift; how to optimize traffic signals; where to build new roadways; or how to hold providers of transportation services accountable for results,” said Stephen Ezell, ITIF lead report author.

“As we have seen technology revolutionize how we work and live, information technology is revolutionizing transportation. Other nations are already using intelligent transportation technology to reduce traffic collisions, congestion and carbon emissions,” Belcher said.

“Imagine being able to receive real-time information about traffic congestion or incidents on freeways, updates of when the next bus or train will arrive when using mass transit, or collision avoidance warnings from autonomous vehicle sensors when crashes appear imminent,” Belcher said. “In many other industrialized parts of the world, this is already happening.”

NOTE: This event will be live webcast here on the day of the event. News media inquiries, please call ITIF at 202-449-1351.

Social Media – What is it? How can my agency use it? What experience have others had?

The I-95 Corridor Coalition is hosting a webcast titled “The Use of Social Media for Travel Information” on Thursday, January 28, 2010 from 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM (EST).

Many areas of interest regarding Social Media will be discussed during this webcast including: how it works, what information can be shared using it, how to implement it, how to get management buy-in for it, how do you know if it is working, and where is it all headed. In addition, two case studies from New York State DOT and North Carolina DOT will be highlighted.

For more information and to sign up for this no-cost webcast, please see the notice on the I-95 Corridor Coalition website athttp://www.i95coalition.org/

(Source: The Pew Center on Global Climate Change)

Click the image to access a summery of the report

I came across this excellent report, Aviation and Marine Transportation: GHG Mitigation Potential and Challenges, via an article on Washington Post and felt compelled to share with you all.   This report published by The Pew Center on Global Climate Change examines growth projections for emissions from both aviation and marine transportation and options to reduce those emissions.  Aviation and marine transportation combined are responsible for approximately 5 percent of total GHG emissions in the United States and 3 percent globally and are among the fastest growing modes in the transportation sector. Under business-as-usual forecasts, CO2 emissions from global aviation are estimated to grow 3.1 percent per year over the next 40 years, resulting in a 300 percent increase in emissions by 2050.International marine transportation emissions are estimated to grow by 1 to 2 percent per year, increasing by at least 50 percent over 2007 levels by 2050. Controlling the growth in aviation and marine transportation GHG emissions will be an important part of reducing emissions from the transportation sector.

According to the press release, the report explores a  range of near-, medium- and long-term mitigation options that are available to slow the growth of energy consumption and GHG emissions from aviation and marine shipping. These options include improvements in operational efficiency, improvements in the energy efficiency of engines and the design of air and marine vessels, and transitioning to less carbon-intensive fuels and transportation modes. Implementation of these options could result in reductions of more than 50 percent below BAU levels by 2050 from global aviation and more than 60 percent for global marine shipping. For these reductions to be realized, however, international and domestic policy intervention is required. Developing an effective path forward that facilitates the adoption of meaningful policies remains both a challenge and an opportunity.

“Aviation and marine shipping are two of the fastest growing modes of transportation,” said Eileen Claussen, President of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.  “Their greenhouse gas emissions are growing rapidly as well. To protect the climate, we need to reduce emissions across the entire economy. Aviation and marine shipping are part of the climate problem, and this report shows that they can be part of the solution.”

Aviation and Marine Transportation: GHG Mitigation Potential and Challenges also examines policy options for achieving reductions in GHG emissions from these transportation modes. The paper, authored by David McCollum and Gregory Gould of the University of California at Davis and David Greene from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, explains the challenges, examines policy efforts to date, and explores both domestic and international policy options for addressing emissions from aviation and marine transportation.

Key sections of the paper include:

• An introduction to aviation and marine transportation and a discussion of the determinants of their GHG emissions;
• An overview of current emissions trends and growth projections;
• An explanation of the technological mitigation options and potential GHG emission reductions; and
• Policy options at both the domestic and international level to achieve deep and durable reductions in emissions.

Click here to access the Pew Center’s website or click here to download the entire PDF report.

(Sources: AFP via Yahoo; Xinhua, Times of India)

China on Saturday (Dec 26) unveiled what it billed as the fastest rail link in the world — a train connecting the modern cities ofGuangzhou and Wuhan at an average speed of 350 kilometres (217 miles) an hour.

The super-high-speed train reduces the 1,069 kilometre journey to a three hour ride and cuts the previous journey time by more than seven and a half hours, the official Xinhua news agency said. Work on the project began in 2005 as part of plans to expand a high-speed network aimed at eventually linking Guangzhou, a business hub in southern China near Hong Kong, with the capital Beijing, Xinhua added.

“The train can go 394.2 kilometres per hour, it’s the fastest train in operation in the world,” Zhang Shuguang, head of the transport bureau at the railways ministry, told Xinhua. By comparison, the average for high-speed trains in Japan was 243 kilometres per hour while in France it was 277 kilometres per hour, said Xu Fangliang, general engineer in charge of designing the link, according to Xinhua.

Test runs for the service began earlier in December and the link officially went into service when the first scheduled train left the eastern metropolis of Wuhan on Saturday.

To sweeten the news further, a report published on the Xinhua quoted the China CREC Railway Electrification Bureau Group (CCREBG) stating that China’s electrified railway mileage has surpassed 30,000 kilometers, ranking the second in the world, said.

It achieved the goal with the completion of a 1,422.2-kilometer electrified railway line which connects Beijing and Lehua in south China’s Jiangxi Province on Saturday, according to the CCREBG. The project, involving an investment of more than 7.6 billion yuan (or1.112 billion U.S. dollars), will increase the trains’ speed from 120 kilometers to 160 kilometers per hour and raise the transportation volume from 3,500 tonnes to 6,000 tonnes by each train. Congratulations, China.

The era of high speed railway began in China in 2004 when Guangzhou was linked to Shenzhen, both in Guangdong Province, with a train traveling at 160 km per hour. This was followed by the launch of a high-speed line linking the capital with the port city of Tianjin at the time of the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

The government recently announced it plans to build 42 high-speed lines by 2012 in order to spur economic growth amid the global downturn. China has unveiled a massive rail development program, considered to be the world’s biggest plan outside the United States. The goal is to take the rail network from the current 86,000 kilometers to 120,000 kilometers.

(Source: Huffington Post; The Independent)

The only passenger rail link between Britain and the rest of Europe has been shut down indefinitely, Eurostar said Sunday, promising more travel misery for thousands of stranded passengers just before Christmas.

Services have been suspended since late Friday, when a series of glitches stranded five trains inside the Channel Tunnel and trapped more than 2,000 passengers for hours in stuffy and claustrophobic conditions. More than 55,000 passengers overall have been affected.

A Bloomberg news report says Eurostar Group Ltd., operator of high-speed trains through the Channel Tunnel will resume a limited service tomorrow after its trains stopped working in snowy weather, causing three days of cancellations.

The disruption will prove “very expensive,” Eurostar said today at a briefing in Paris, while declining to give an estimate of the likely cost.

Some panicked passengers stayed underground for more than 15 hours without food or water, or any clear idea of what was going on – prompting outrage from travelers and a promise from Eurostar that no passenger train would enter the tunnel until the issue had been identified and fixed.

Eurostar runs services between England, France and Belgium. The company said Sunday it had traced the problem to “acute weather conditions in northern France,” which has seen its worst winter weather in years.  The company noted that its problem with the trains this weekend has been to do with the changes between the sub-zero temperatures outside the tunnel and the 25C (77F) heat within the tunnel.

The breakdown was probably caused after cold air sucked through intakes on the locomotives was quickly warmed on entry to the tunnel, resulting in condensation that shorted out electrical circuits, Eurostar has said.

The problem represents a “new mode of failure” not encountered before in Eurostar’s 15-year history, Brown said. After 15 years of comparatively trouble-free operations, high-speed train company Eurostar is now facing huge challenges.  There have been numerous cold snaps in that time, with the trains running from London through Kent – one of the UK’s snowiest counties.

The company’s bosses must get to the bottom of a cold weather malfunction of trains that appears baffling – even to rail experts.

And they must then win back the trust of the travelling public -a trust which will have been eroded by all the tales of travel misery that emerged this weekend after the train failures within the Channel Tunnel.

Eurostar has suffered two serious in-tunnel fires during its 15-years of operation. But despite those setbacks it has become the way to travel between London and Paris and Brussels.

Already popular, the service was given a further boost when the 68-mile London to Folkestone Channel Tunnel high-speed rail link – now known as HS1 – was completed in 2007.

This enabled passengers to travel to Paris from London in two hours 15 minutes, while London-Brussels journey times came down to one hour 51 minutes.

(Source: Office of Planning, Environment and Realty – Federal Highway Administration)

Recent Events

U.S. DOE and U.S. EPA announce the 2010 Fuel Economy Guide for model year 2010 vehicles. Each vehicle listing gives an estimated annual fuel cost, based on the vehicle’s MPG rating and national estimates for annual mileage and fuel prices. The online version of the guide allows consumers to input their local gasoline prices and typical driving habits to receive a personalized fuel cost estimate. Fuel efficiency is important for reducing CO2 and other GHGs. The top ten fuel economy leaders for 2010 include nine hybrid vehicles, from compact cars to SUVs.

World Resources Institute issues provisional GHG emissions reporting standard for public sector. The standard was developed in consultation with agencies from all levels of government and is supported by the Federal Energy Management Program within U.S. DOE and U.S. EPA. The standard includes guidance on how to apply GHG accounting principles to government operations at the federal, state and local level. The standard is compatible with the Local Government Operations Protocol recently adopted by The Climate Registry, ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and California Climate Action Registry (CCAR). For questions or to submit comments on the standard, please email Stephen Russell or Mary Sotos at pspcomments@wri.org.

EESI publishes State Actions on Climate Change: A Focus on How Our Communities Grow, to encourage State, regional, and local governments to focus on land use reform as a key strategy for reducing GHG emissions. The publication is the result of collaboration with the American Planning Association to develop tools to assist planners. The study examined State and regional climate action plans for their inclusion of transportation, green building, and land use or “smart growth” practices and found that the plans cover a broad range of strategies, because each area has unique geographic and socioeconomic conditions. Of the three, transportation practices were the dominant feature, along with, to a lesser degree, green building policies. Some common transportation policies include adopting California’s vehicle emissions standard (the country’s most aggressive standard), creating more mass transit options, and providing incentives to lower VMT. Specific smart growth practices appeared to be the least likely component of the plans. A table at the end of the document shows some aspects of urban planning that are incorporated. Any GHG reduction targets adopted or regional climate action plans to which a state belongs are provided.

Simple Measures Can Yield Big GHG Cuts, Scientists Say in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Thomas Dietz, Michigan State University assistant vice president for environmental research, and his colleagues find that simple, voluntary activities such as routine vehicle maintenance, carpooling and trip chaining, eco-driving, and use of low-rolling-resistance tires can result in significant reductions in GHG emissions and, therefore, “deserve increased policy attention.” They examined 17 household action types in five behavioral categories. Adoption of these actions typically is the result of several policy tools and strong social marketing, the authors state. They estimate that if the behaviors became the norm across the nation it could save 123 million metric tons of carbon per year, equal to 7.4% of U.S. national emissions, within ten years with little or no reduction in household well-being. Their estimates are based on “how many families could reasonably be expected to take such measures if they were provided information, offered financial assistance and could interact with others doing so.”

Managing Our Coastal Zone in a Changing Climate: The Time to Act is Now Issued by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia Provides Insights Relevant to U.S. The fact that many Australian coastal communities have single-access roads is an issue of grave concern to the Commonwealth. The report noted that evacuation routes were a significant factor in the extent of a July 2009 bushfire tragedy (“Black Saturday”). Dr. John Church, from [the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australia’s national science agency] pointed out that “sea-level-rise planning benchmarks need to be part of a risk management framework,” stating “We really have to move into a risk assessment framework…where we talk more about probabilities and the risks that we are prepared to take….One problem that we have is that planners tend to come to us and say, “How much do we need to allow for sea level rise?’ The retort I always give is, ‘What kind of risks do you want to take?’ I think this is a very important change in process that we need: to put the onus of the risk back onto the planners and the policymakers, not leave it to the scientists.’

State and Local News

Draft Pennsylvania Climate Action Plan released for comment. The plan contains 52 climate policy actions, which are estimated to reduce the Commonwealth’s GHG emissions by 95.6 million metric tons (a 36 percent reduction below year 2000 business-as-usual levels, 42% if recent state and federal actions are included) and to provide a net gain of $5.13 billion and 54,000 new jobs by 2020. The Plan does not address climate change adaptation. The GHG emissions inventory and projections, which cover 1990 to 2020, use “standardized methodology prescribed by the [EPA] and in accordance with international standards.” Transportation is the third largest source of GHG emissions in Pennsylvania (24% in 2000, of which gasoline-powered on-road vehicles accounted for about 64% and on-road diesel vehicles for 15%). Of all the sectors analyzed, GHG mitigation actions from transit and ground passenger transportation are projected to produce the second largest financial gain for the Commonwealth. The Land Use and Transportation work plan recommendations are listed in the following table.

¹NA in this column means “not applicable.” Work plan numbers 1,2, and 4 are recent state actions that are being implemented by the state; and the federal government will be implementing national vehicle GHG emissions and corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards starting in 2012.
²Because T-9 uses federal dollars exclusively, it should be noted that the cost figures for T-9 are calculations of how many federal dollars – not state dollars – would be required to implement the work plan.
³This cost per ton value excludes the emission reductions associated with the “Federal Vehicle GHG Emissions and CAFE Standards” since costs (savings) were not quantified for this recent federal action.
GHG = greenhouse gas; MMtCO₂e = million metrice tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; $/tCO₂e = dollars per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; NPV = net present value; NQ = not quantified; PA = Pennsylvania; PAYD = Pay-As-You-Drive; CAFE = Corporate Average Fuel Economy.

Climate Change and Transportation in Maine published by MaineDOT. This white paper prepares MaineDOT to respond to the Governor’s call to evaluate climate change adaptation options and positions the agency to work with transportation stakeholders to evaluate short-term and long-term approaches to preparing for and adapting to climate change. Judy Gates, Director of MaineDOT’s Environmental Office said “…uncertainty [about long-range impacts due to climate change] can create paralysis in an agency charged with making and justifying long-term, fiscally-responsible decisions around the safety and efficiency of public travel. But the long life-cycles of most transportation infrastructure demand early preparation to protect significant tax payer investments…” The white paper includes a table showing how Maine’s current and proposed adaptation strategies compare to seven other States whose Climate Action Plans address adaptation (see below). The paper references the part of TRB’s Special Report 290: Potential Impacts of Climate Change on U.S. Transportation that discusses the Caltrans process of evaluating bridges for seismic retrofitting, in which TRB suggests that a similar approach could be used to screen and identify critical infrastructure that is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. MaineDOT has already included climate change as a factor to be considered in future planning with an eye towards conducting technical, risk-based assessments such as California’s.

Announcements

Behavior, Energy and Climate Change Conference in DC, November 16-18, has webcast option. The webcast costs $150 for one day or $300 for all three days, versus $320 and $600, respectively, for on-site attendance. The webcast option is limited to 200 people who register by November 12.The conference is sponsored by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Stanford University’s Precourt Energy Efficiency Center, and the California Institute for Energy and Environment.

TRB announces webinar: A Transportation Research Program for Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change and Conserving Energy. This web briefing on December 2, from 2:00-3:00 p.m. EST will explore the findings of TRB’s Special Report 299: A Transportation Research Program for Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change and Conserving Energy.Participants must register at least 24 hours in advance, space is limited, and there is a fee for non-TRB-Sponsor employees. To learn more about current and planned FHWA research on climate change mitigation and adaptation, visithttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/climate/index.htm.

FYI

What is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention? The Convention is an international treaty adopted in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro and ratified by almost all of the countries of the world, in which they agreed to undertake policies and measures to return their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. In 1997, all but two of the Convention signatories (the U.S. and Turkey) adopted an addition to the Convention, the Kyoto Protocol, which has specific binding GHG emission targets to be achieved in the 2008 – 2012 time period (which would have been 7% for the U.S.) The U.S. has not ratified the Protocol primarily because China and India are exempt from a numerical cap on their emissions. Below are data from the UNFCCC on trends in GHG emissions in industrialized countries (called Annex I Parties) that committed to voluntary GHG reductions under the Convention

Related news. Indian Environment and Forest Minister Jairam Ramesh and Chinese Minister for National Development and Reforms Xie Zhenhua signed a 5-year commitment for their countries to collaborate on GHG emission reduction programs, projects, technology development, and demonstration. The Ministers agreed to work together to protect and promote the interests of developing countries like China and India.

Next month:What is “cap and trade” GHG emissions trading, which is in the media so much lately?

(Source: USDOT Press Release)

Dallas and San Diego selected as Integrated Corridor Management Pioneer Demonstration Sites

In an historic step towards ending gridlock in urban areas across the country, the U.S. Department of Transportation today announced that the Dallas and San Diego areas will receive $14 million as the nation’s first demonstration sites for new Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies that help fight congestion and enhance travel.  The Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) initiative will help the Dallas and San Diego metro areas become “living laboratories” in the fight against congestion.

“These communities are leading the way by using state-of-the-art technologies to create a commute that is safer, less congested and more convenient.” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.  “America can’t simply build our way to a more modern and efficient transportation infrastructure.  These projects will show the rest of the nation that bumper-to-bumper traffic doesn’t have to be the status quo.”

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) will contribute $3 million for an $8.3 million project. DART will use a transportation management model to predict travel conditions 30 minutes into the future, allowing diversion of traffic to other routes during freeway incidents and special events along US-75.  Travelers will have access to real-time information about traffic, public transit and expected travel times, through wireless and web-based alerts.

The San Diego Association of Governments and its partnering agencies will contribute $2.2 million for a $10.9 million project.  San Diego will use ITS investments along I-15 to enable a “smart” traffic management system that combines road sensors, video and traveler information to take steps to reduce congestion.  It will deliver information to commuters via the internet and message signs and will enable managers to adjust traffic signals and ramp meters to direct travelers to HOV lanes, HOT lanes, bus rapid transit and other options.

Since 2005, ICM has laid the groundwork for transportation agencies to use existing roads, intersections and other elements of urban transportation networks more efficiently

The demonstrations will build on past findings about ICM to provide a first-hand evaluation of the real-world impact.  The new technology will avoid the dangers of text-messaging and other distractions behind the wheel that result in distracted driving.

The initiative is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA).

Below is a summary of the ICM Pioneer sites (courtesy of the ITS JPO):

ICM Pioneer Sites–Dallas, Texas

The Dallas-Fort Worth area is currently populated by 6 million people, and is growing by 1 million every 7 years. Travel demand and congestion in this area continue to grow. Dallas’ US-75 ICM Corridor is the highest volume and most critical transportation corridor in the region. It has major employment centers and while there is no room for expansion of the corridor, it will be impacted by major construction planned in the surrounding area.

Dallas is creating an operational entity responsible for all ICM activities. In this region, transit availability and capacity is being increased, park-and-ride facilities will be improved, and intelligent transportation system elements are being deployed in the field. In addition, HOV and HOT lanes will be added, and value-pricing strategies are being explored.

The Dallas US-75 ICM corridor was chosen as a site for Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) of ICM strategies. Click here to learn more about this site’s Experimental Plans and early results.

More on Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas’ ICM Corridor:

The Dallas, Texas application proposed U.S. route 75 from downtown Dallas to SH 121 with the North Dallas Toll Way to the west and DART and various arterials to the east as their corridor. The Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority was the lead agency, accompanied by the City of Dallas, the City of Richardson, the City of Plano, the City of University Park, the Town of Highland Park, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the North Texas Tollway Authority, and the TxDOT Dallas District. In addition to the expected freeway and arterial capabilities, the corridor includes HOV, tolling, express bus, and light rail.

ICM Pioneer Sites–San Diego, California

San Diego experiences significant traffic congestion during peak travel periods, has limited HOV and HOT lanes, and has limited transit capacity. The strong consortium of partnering agencies in San Diego is increasing multi-jurisdictional and multi-agency collaboration on corridor management. Together, they are introducing dynamic ramp metering to reduce arterial spillover and they are looking to collect arterial data to support efficient signal timing strategies. This ICM team is implementing dynamic variable pricing along 21 miles of managed lanes and pioneering congestion avoidance awards.

The San Diego I-15 ICM corridor was chosen as a site for Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) of ICM strategies. Check back in late 2009 for updates on this site’s Experimental Plans and early results.

More on San Diego, California’s ICM Corridor:

The San Diego, California application proposed I-15 from SR 52 in San Diego to SR 78 in Escondido as their corridor. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) was the lead agency, accompanied by Caltrans, the City of San Diego, the City of Escondido, the City of Poway, the Metropolitan Transit System, and the North County Transit District. In addition to the expected freeway and arterial capabilities, the corridor includes HOV, tolling, value pricing, express bus, and BRT.

Click here to read more.

(Source: NPR)

The government is imposing fines for the first time against airlines for stranding passengers on an airport tarmac, the Department of Transportation said Tuesday.

The department said it has levied a precedent-setting $175,000 in fines against three airlines for their role in the stranding of passengers overnight in a plane at Rochester, Minn., on Aug. 8.

For those unaware of the issue, here is a wonderful write-up , courtesy of Wall Street Journal Blog, that gives you a good understanding of the incident that prompted this Fed action and a breakdown of the DOT penalties for each of the involved parties.

Flight 2816 from Houston to Minneapolis was diverted to Rochester at 12:30 a.m. and passengers were held onboard until 6:15 a.m., when they were finally allowed into a terminal, DOT said. ExpressJet, which operated the flight on behalf of Continental, had contacted Mesaba, the only airline with ground handling at Rochester, before the plane landed. Mesaba agreed to provide ground services. But shortly after the flight arrived, a Mesaba employee told the flight’s captain passengers couldn’t deplane because there were no Transportation Security Administration screeners on duty. That didn’t matter—TSA rules don’t prohibit people from deplaning without screeners on duty.

DOT fined Continental and ExpressJet $100,000 for engaging in unfair and deceptive trade practices because they violated Continental’s customer service commitment, which promises that passengers will be allowed off a plane after it has been sitting for three hours. Mesaba was fined $75,000 for an unfair and deceptive practice when it provided inaccurate information to ExpressJet about deplaning passengers from Flight 2816, the DOT said.

Continental and ExpressJet, which each were fined $50,000, both said in statements that they agreed to the DOT’s consent order to avoid costly litigation. They both noted that ExpressJet had worked throughout the night to deplane passengers but was blocked by Mesaba. Mesaba said in a statement it believes it “operated in good faith by providing voluntary ground handling assistance to ExpressJet,’’ but is re-evaluating policies and procedures because of the event.

Secretary LaHood followed-up on this issue with a blog post, expressing his support for the passengers: “Look, this is just no way to treat passengers, customers, or anyone. You can’t strand people overnight without access to the basics. It’s not right; it’s against the rules.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Transportgooru Musings: Thank you, Secratary LaHood.  Your actions reaffirm that our Government is  indeed “for the people, by the people, of the people.” Interesting enough, the NPR story also notes that the department’s action comes at a time when the Congress is weighing legislation that places a three-hour cap on how long airlines can keep passengers waiting on tarmacs before they have to offer them the opportunity to deplane or return to a gate. The measure would give a flight’s captain the authority to extend the wait an additional half hour if it appears that clearance to takeoff is near. As one would expect, the Air Transport Association (ATA), which represents major airlines, is opposing this measure.  According to the ATA,  a three-hour limit could create more problems than it alleviates by increasing the number of flights that are canceled and leaving passengers stuck at airports trying to make new travel arrangements.

How is that the European airlines are able to successfully operate without encountering such problems?  I’ve not seen anyone from an European airline complaining about the EU regulations (at least after it had become a law).  The European Union, which caps the acceptable delay at 2 hrs,  has successfully enacted the Passenger Bill of Rights that has some reasonable points that tells you how much they care about a passenger stuck in a metal tube with no access to basic necessities such as food. The following summary of the EU law, courtesy of Airsafe.com, gives you a good idea of what the European value system looks like:

Delays and Cancellations for European Union Related Flights

In most, but not all, cases involving a delay or cancellation of a flight, a passenger is entitled to compensation under European Parliament Regulation (EC) 261/2004 for delayed and cancelled flights. There are three levels of compensation:

• in the event of long delays (two hours or more, depending on the distance of the flight), passengers must in every case be offered free meals and refreshments plus two free telephone calls, telex or fax messages, or emails;
• if the time of departure is deferred until the next day, passengers must also be offered hotel accommodation and transport between the airport and the place of accommodation;
• when the delay is five hours or longer, passengers may opt for reimbursement of the full cost of the ticket together with, when relevant, a return flight to the first point of departure.

This regulation applies to all airline flights departing from an EU airport or to any airline licensed in the EU if that flight is departing from an airport outside the EU to a destination at an airport in an EU member state.

Delays and Cancellations for Other International Flights