(Source: Times Online, UK & Wired)

Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich has a rather curious new addition built in to his latest oversized yacht. The 557-foot boat Eclipse, the price tag of which has almost doubled since original plans were drawn to almost $1.2 billion, set sail this week with a slew of show-off features, from two helipads, two swimming pools and six-foot movie screens in all guest cabins, to a mini-submarine and missile-proof windows to combat piracy.

It might not seem like somebody with such ostentatious tastes would crave privacy, but along with these expensive toys, Ambramovich has installed an anti-paparazzi “shield”. Lasers sweep the surroundings and when they detect a CCD, they fire a bolt of light right at the camera to obliterate any photograph. According to the Times, these don’t run all the time, so friends and guests should still be able to grab snaps. Instead, they will be activated when guards spot the scourge of professional photography, paparazzi, loitering nearby.

The high-tech system on Eclipse, a mega-yacht measuring up to 557ft, relies on lasers to block any digital camera lenses nearby.  Infrared lasers detect the electronic light sensors in nearby cameras, known as charge-coupled devices. When the system detects such a device, it fires a focused beam of light at the camera, disrupting its ability to record a digital image.   The beams can also be activated manually by security guards if they spot a photographer loitering.

The ThyssenKrupp-built boat, which has reportedly more than doubled in cost to £724m since it was commissioned three years ago, glided out of port in Hamburg last week on its maiden voyage. On board were 150 engineers and maritime experts who will put it through its paces over 10 days. One witness described the boat as “a great white castle on water”.

The yacht — the fourth in Abramovich’s private fleet — drips luxury. It boasts two helipads, two swimming pools — the larger of which doubles up as a dance floor when drained — and 6ft-wide home cinema screens in all 24 guest cabins.

Mindful of a rise in piracy on the high seas, the yacht has a hull and windows capable of withstanding a missile attack and a mini-submarine for emergencies. Once it leaves the Blohm + Voss German shipyard, it will be fitted with a missile defence system in France.

The Sunday Times Rich List reported that last week Abramovich has splashed out £55m on a 70-acre estate on the Caribbean island of St Barthélemy. The exclusive retreat looks out onto Gouverneur Bay, where the oligarch will be able to moor his new yacht.

More details on Times (via Wired).

(Source: AASHTO)

On September 8, ten states shared the national spotlight, as AAA, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced the top ten finalists in the2009 America’s Transportation Awards competition.

(Source: NPR’s Talk of the Nation)

This evening I was listening to an interesting piece (click here to listen to the audio) on NPR’s Talk of the Nation hosted by Neal Conan.  The program’s guest was Chris Steiner, author of this book: $20 Per Gallon: How the Inevitable Rise in the Price of Gasoline Will Change Our Lives for the Better, who says our lives would be a lot happier and healthier if gas prices rose into the double digits.

Image Courtesy: NPR

Last year, gas prices soared over four dollars a gallon and Americans responded by driving a hundred billion fewer miles than the year before. Right now, at $2.50 a gallon or so, things seem back to normal. But writer Christopher Steiner argues that’s a delusion. He thinks we need to prepare for life at six, 10, even 20 dollars a gallon, prices which will change a lot more than our driving habits. They will transform what we eat, where we live, and how we view the world. And while there will be losers, he believes the airline industry will largely disappear, for example, for the most part, he asserts our lives will be better.

The following excerpt from his book paints a scary (and also good) picture:  Many people, quite understandably, don’t consider the implications of expensive gasoline so grand. The fact remains that the price of oil will inevitably rise, however. Two simple factors are responsible: first, we’re running out of oil (albeit slowly) and second, world demand will continue to rise for decades. We use six barrels of oil for every one we find. Half of the world’s petroleum comes from 3% of its oil fields — and those fields are old. The average age of the world’s 14 largest oil fields: 50 years, the exact age when most fields’ productions start an irreversible ebb. On the demand side, consider this: There are 1 billion people on the globe living what would be considered an American-style life, including ourselves. By 2040, that number will triple. The world’s burgeoning middle class will demand oil and it will get oil. Steady price increases are academic. Economics 101: Supply down, Demand up = higher prices.

The changes to our society will begin at $6 per gallon and continue on from there, affecting things far beyond the kinds of cars we drive and how often we drive them. America’s obesity rate will fall. Mass transit will spread across the country. Plane graveyards will overflow. We’ll lose the option to cheaply travel by plane, but high-speed train networks will slowly snake state to state. Disneyworld will lock its gates, Las Vegas’ strip will shrink to half its size. Our air will be cleaner. Cities like Detroit, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee will revive at $12 per gallon, their streets rife with commerce, people and stores. The exurbs of America, where we’ve poured so much of our wealth during the last several decades, will atrophy, destroying the equity of those who held fast. Wal-Mart will go bankrupt at $14 per gallon and manufacturing jobs will return to the U.S. en masse. When gas reaches $16 per gallon, Michael Pollan will get the food world he lobbies for in The Omnivore’s Dilemma.

Recently, NY Times has also reviewed Mr. Steiner’s work.  Writing about this NY Times review on his blog, Mr. Steiner says ” The Times neither praised the book nor panned it. The review proceeded as cautious and as neutral as would seem possible, with a bit of skepticism tossed in. It was reviewed in the Business Section, however, not in Styles or Books, so that may explain the stern pragmatism of the reviewer.”

Here is an excerpt from NY Times review:  “The book’s arguments are sometimes overstated in hyperbolic prose. In the chapter about the end of the airline industry as we know it, it says that some companies will be “permanently torpedoed” by high gas prices. It warns that a “giant herd of people” will lose their jobs. And it says that our grandchildren will “undoubtedly gawp in awe” when we recount our childhood trips to Disneyland. Well, that’s something to look forward to in our old age.”

If you are one of  those people who have already read his book, let us know what do you think.  Worth a buy??

Click here to read the entire transcript from this interview.

(Source: New York Times)

The Senate voted on Wednesday to allow Amtrak passengers to carry unloaded and locked handguns in checked baggage, even though Amtrak officials had raised concerns that the proposal could present “numerous challenges.”

Amtrak used to allow passengers to check licensed guns, but ended the practice after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001.

The provision, which was introduced by Senator Roger Wicker, Republican, as an amendment to a housing and transportation spending bill, is the latest in a string of Senate votes aimed at expanding gun rights. It passed 68-30, with a group of 27 Democrats and one independent, mostly from states where gun rights are widely supported, joining all 40 Republicans in voting for the measure.

The Senate has already approved separate provisions this year that would allow properly permitted gun owners to carry in national parks and would loosen gun laws in Washington. Additionally, a July proposal that would have allowed permitted gun owners in one state to carry concealed weapons in another fell just two votes short in the Senate.

Under the Wicker amendment, Amtrak would lose the funds earmarked for it in the must-pass spending bill if it did not comply with the new regulations. In a statement released after the amendment passed, Mr. Wicker stressed that the guidelines laid out in the provision — which would also insist that a passenger notify Amtrak that he or she is transporting a handgun and that only that passenger could unlock the secure container holding the gun — are roughly the same ones used by airline passengers.

“Americans should not have their Second Amendment rights restricted for any reason, particularly if they choose to travel on America’s federally subsidized rail line,” Mr. Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, said in the statement.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Washington Post)

Today the Washington Post had an interesting article about the burgeoning bike scene in Los Angeles, California.   It was a surprise to learn that there is such a good environment for biking in a city that has been known for its congested traffic and notorious drivers.   Here are some extracts from Amanda Abrams’ special report to the Washington Post:

I should’ve been warned by the reaction of my sister, a 12-year L.A. resident and non-cyclist, when I told her I was planning to spend a few days riding around the city while visiting her. “No way,” she had said incredulously. “The cars here are insane. You have no idea.”

Ah, but I did have some ideas. In spite of its reputation as the country’s car mecca, I’d heard that L.A. was home to a burgeoning bike scene. And as a dedicated bicycle commuter in Washington, I figured “if they can do it, I can do it.”

Despite all the talk of L.A. being a sprawl of neighborhoods connected by freeways, and Angelenos’ perverse pride in living in a place where “no one walks,” it is, in fact, a genuine city. Close inspection of my road map showed an endless grid of quiet residential streets leading to bigger arterial roads, some of which, according to a Los Angeles Department of Transportation bike map, had bike lanes. Bingo. From there, it was no sweat to outline a variety of routes that could get me around the city without harm to life or limb.

(Source: Greenwire @ New York Times)

According to a Center for Public Integrity report released yesterday, there are nearly 1,800 special interest groups lobbying Congress on the transportation bill, ranging from local officials and planning agencies to real estate companies, construction firms and universities. In the first half of this year, the groups employed more than 2,000 lobbyists and spent an estimated total of $45 million on their transportation lobbying.

The road to reforming the nation’s transportation systems looks to be a long and winding one.

Once lawmakers decide when to move forward with the sweeping overhauls they promise, they will need to find a way to pay for it. And once that difficult task is accomplished, the debate will only grow more complicated.

Many in the transportation community agree the next multi-year surface transportation bill needs to significantly boost federal funding for the nation’s roads, rails and bridges. But the consensus soon begins to crumble when the issue turns to how to pay for the overhaul — with lawmakers loath to tell Americans they will need to foot the bill and the rest of the transportation community agreeing that is the only option to pay for it (E&E Daily, Sept. 15).

But even off the Hill, where key players agree massive reform is needed to make the system more performance-based and effective, there is no consensus on exactly what that new system would look like and what those performance goals should be.

Many of the goals discussed at the invitation-only event are conflicting by nature. The usual suspects include the funding ratio for highways and transit systems, and the rate of return that individual states see from taxes they pay to finance the nation’s road and rail work.

Robert Atkinson, who chaired one of two congressionally created blue ribbon panels to examine transportation investment needs, said his panel, the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, did not even broach the subject of where the increased investment should be spent in its report.

According to government estimates, the transportation sector accounts for roughly a third of U.S. carbon emissions, and Democrats have vowed to recast the nation’s roads and rails in a “greener” light.

But many state highway departments that had previously voiced support for the new environmental focus are now worrying that the emissions goals may grow overly ambitious and threaten to deliver another blow to both the economy and their efforts to repair and replace crumbling roads and bridges (Greenwire, Aug. 27)

Congress must also decide whether or not to welcome the private sector into the transportation field by giving firms long-term leases on public roads and bridges, effectively turning public infrastructure into a private product.

Click here to read the entire article.  For those wondering what is in the minds of our lawmakers drafting the reauthorization bill, here is congressman Oberstar’s handwritten scrap-paper version (pulled right from the House T&I Committee website, which has a lot of interesting materials to read on this subject).  Though it is not very detailed, it offers a general sensing of the direction he is taking (e.g., consolidating the existing behemoth (108 programs) into 4 categories to simplify the mgmt. structure, adding Office of Livability & Office of Expedited Project Delivery to the FHWA, etc.)

(Source: Yonah Freemark @ The Transport Politic)

Projects in Georgia, Pennsylvania get millions; Las Vegas, Los Angeles, and Baltimore still waiting to hear.

Image Courtesy: Yonah Freemark @ The Transport Politic

One clear demonstration of the United States’ lack of coherent national transportation policy objectives is its approach to funding magnetic levitation train projects. Rather than making a decision about what to fund, the Congress occasionally appropriates a relatively small pot of money, then the DOT distributes cash for planning studies. Nothing ever gets off the ground.  That, at least, is how it has worked since 1999, when the DOT first awarded $12 million in planning funds to seven proposed projects in California, Nevada, Louisiana, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. By 2001, the agency announced it would pick either a line between Baltimore and Washington or one connecting Pittsburgh and its suburbs for almost $1 billion in construction dollars, eventually deciding on the latter. By 2005, however, all funds had been cut off by an uncommitted congress, despite the fact that $62 million had already been distributed; meanwhile, states and municipalities had contributed virtually nothing to the projects. Maglev seemed dead.

The news this month that Atlanta and Pittsburgh have received more planning funds — $14 million for the former and $28 million for the latter — and that other projects funded back in 1999 may once again get appropriations in the coming days seems like a continuation of this destructive cycle. If so, these dollars are nothing more than a waste of money, because there is little chance that funds for actual construction will ever appear. Yet the Congress devoted $90 million maglev two years ago, knowing that actually getting big-budget funds for the projects’ completion from Washington would be almost impossible. Nor has there ever been a concerted effort by either Congress or the Department of Transportation to show why maglev projects should be funded at all.

Click here to read the entire article.

Image Courtesy: USDOT

(Source: USDOT Press Release)

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced the agenda  for the Distracted Driving Summit on Tuesday (shown below), September 30 and Wednesday, October 1. Over 200 safety experts, researchers, elected officials and members of the public will gather in Washington, D.C. to share their experiences, provide feedback and develop recommendations for reducing the growing safety risk that distracted driving is imposing on our nation’s roads.

The Distracted Driving Summit will bring together respected leaders from around the country for interactive sessions on the extent and impact of the problem, current research, regulations, best practices and other key topics. The two day Summit will feature five panels – on data, research, technology, policy, and outreach – with a range of experts discussing each topic.

• The Summit will begin with a context setting panel where participants will examine the scope of the issue and the various distractions that exist, followed by a panel that will review currently available research.
• Day one wraps up with an examination of distractions caused by technology and efforts made to assess and reduce negative effects caused by current and planned devices. Panelists will also consider technology that can prevent the consequences of driver distraction.
• Day two features a review of legislative and regulatory approaches for dealing with distracted driving; evaluations of the impact of such measures; and enforcement issues. Members of Congress and their staff will also have the opportunity to contribute to the discussion.
• Day two concludes with a discussion with teens about their experiences with distracted driving followed by an examination of various public awareness initiatives and research regarding the effectiveness of these efforts.

To accommodate the strong response, the Summit will be available live by webcast and members of the public will be given the opportunity to submit questions online for each individual panel discussion. The complete agenda and additional information about the Summit can be found at http://www.rita.dot.gov/distracted_driving_Summit/ .  Also, you can follow the latest developments via twitter @ distractdriving

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

Distracted Driving Summit
September 30 – October 1, 2009
Renaissance Hotel, 999 9th Street NW, Washington, DC

Agenda Is Subject to Change

Wednesday, September 30

DOT Welcome and Summit Opening
Peter Appel, Administrator
Research and Innovative Technology Administration

Opening Address
Ray LaHood, U.S. Secretary of Transportation

Panel: Driver Distractions and Inattention – Definitions and Data
A context-setting panel on the definition of distracted driving (what it is and what it is not), data on the extent of the issue, the types of distractions across surface modes of transportation.

Moderator:       Victor Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration

Speaker:           Dr. John D. Lee, Professor, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Speaker:           Kristin Backstrom, Senior Manager, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety
Speaker:           John Inglish, General Manager, Utah Transit Authority
Speaker:           Bruce Magladry, Director, Office of Highway Safety, National Transportation Safety Board

Panel: Research Results – How Risky is Distracted Driving?

This panel session will review what various research – experimental research, industry self reporting, collision studies, and observational studies– tell us about the nature of the problem of distracted driving.

Moderator:       Rose McMurray, Acting Deputy Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Speaker:           Dr. Ann Dellinger, Lead, Motor Vehicle Injury Prevention Team,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center of  Injury Prevention and Control
Speaker:           Dr. Tom Dingus, Director, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
Speaker:           Dr. William Horrey, Chair, Surface Transportation Technical Group,
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society and Research Scientist,
Center for Behavioral Sciences, Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety
Speaker:           Dr. Key Dismukes, Chief Scientist, Human Systems Integration
Division, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center

Panel: Technology and Distracted Driving
This panel will focus on distractions caused by technology and on efforts that have been made (or are needed) to assess and reduce the negative impact of distractions caused by current and planned devices.  It will also consider technology that can prevent the consequences of distraction.

Moderator:       Peter Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration

Speaker:           Dr. David Eby, Research Associate Professor and Head, Social
and Behavioral Analysis, University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute
Speaker:           Rob Strassburger, Vice President, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Speaker:           Steve Largent, President and Chief Executive Officer, International Association
for Wireless Telecommunications Industry
Speaker:           Michael Petricone, Senior Vice President, Government Affairs, Consumer Electronics Association
Speaker:           Rod MacKenzie, Chief Technology Officer and Vice President of
Programs, Intelligent Transportation Society of America

Thursday, October 1

Congressional Presentation

Panel: Legislation, Regulation and Enforcement of Distracted Driving
This panel session will review legislative and regulatory approaches for addressing distracted driving; evaluations of the impact of such measures; enforcement issues; and public attitudes towards the issue.

Moderator:       Peter Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration

Speaker:           John D’Amico, Representative, Illinois General Assembly
Speaker:           Bruce Starr, Senator, Oregon Senate and Executive Committee Member of the National Conference
of State Legislatures
Speaker:           Steve Farley, Representative, Arizona House of Representatives
Speaker:           Major David Salmon, Director, Traffic Services Division, New York State Police
Speaker:           Vernon Betkey, Chairman, Governors Highway Safety Association
and Director of the Maryland Highway Safety Office

Youth Program

Panel: Public Awareness and Education
This panel will review initiatives to increase public awareness of safety issues such as distracted driving, and will review research regarding the effectiveness of such efforts.

Moderator: Ron Medford, Acting Deputy Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Speaker:           Sandy Spavone, Executive Director, National Organization for Youth Safety
Speaker:           Chuck Hurley, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer,  Mothers Against Drunk Driving
Speaker:           Ann Shoket, Editor-in-Chief, Seventeen Magazine
Speaker:           Janet Froetscher, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Safety Council
Speaker:           Dr. Adrian Lund, President, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Secretary LaHood
Closing Remarks and Action Plan

(Source: New York Times)

The Obama administration issued proposed rules on Tuesday that impose the first nationwide limits on greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles and that require American cars and light truck fleet to meet a fuel efficiency standard of 35.5 miles a gallon by 2016.

The government projects that the regulations will raise car and truck prices by an average of $1,100, but that drivers will save $3,000 over the life of the vehicle in lower fuel bills. Officials also said the new program, which is to take effect in 2012, would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly a billion tons and cut oil consumption by 1.8 billion barrels from 2012 to 2016.

The 1,227-page regulation will go through a 60-day public comment period before it is completed early next year.

(Source: Wall Street Journal)

Today’s WSJ had a nice article about the Korean Automaker, explaining what makes it a successful car in the US.   Worth a read..

….The leading Korean car company’s name rhymes with the first day of the week, as in “Hyundai, Bloody Hyundai.” Which is pretty much what the company’s competitors are saying to themselves these days about Hyundai’s remarkable success over the past few years.

Last year Hyundai’s global sales bucked the industry’s decline and rose 5% to 4.2 million cars and trucks. Even in the U.S., the world’s most competitive car market, Hyundai’s sales rose 0.8% in the first eight months of this year, while Ford’s sales dropped 25% in the same period and GM’s plunged 35%. The major Japanese auto makers suffered declines between 25% and 30%.

Hyundai’s success stems from a sustained corporate effort at reinvention—the very same word General Motors is using to describe its mission these days. The Hyundai story should provide GM with a road map.

For years, Hyundai enjoyed a protected home market in Korea. This ensured its prosperity there, but the lack of competition meant the company didn’t develop the product quality or consistency to compete effectively in international markets. The result: Hyundai’s initial U.S. success in 1986 was undercut quickly by quality problems.

A decade ago, Hyundai acquired Kia, a victim of a mid-1990s shakeout in the Korean auto industry. It also established a new quality-control division charged with boosting reliability by emulating Toyota’s vaunted manufacturing methods. To allay lingering concerns over quality, Hyundai put warranties of 10 years or 100,000 miles on vehicles sold in America.

Their campaign began to show results, and the big breakthrough came in 2004, when Hyundai tied Honda for second place in the prestigious J.D. Power & Co. Initial Quality Survey. Also that year, Hyundai completed its first U.S. assembly plant, near Montgomery, Ala.

On the marketing front, last January the Hyundai division launched an innovative “Assurance Program” in the U.S.: Buyers return their cars if they lose their job within a year after their purchase. The offer generated buzz and resonated with the public, as Hyundai’s recent U.S. sales results demonstrate, even though buyers have turned in fewer than 50 cars under the program, which continues through year-end.

…..Both U.S. companies will have to make their marketing more relevant. Hyundai’s 10-year warranties and the “Assurance Program” succeeded because they addressed specific customer concerns—the former about the brand’s reliability, the latter about the economic environment…….

Click here to read the entire article.