Are plug-in electric cars the new ethanol? – A Right-winger questions the Government’s investment strategy

July 2, 2009 at 3:47 pm

(Source: Examiner & Autobloggreen)

In the name of “clean energy,” Washington is subsidizing a switch from gasoline-powered cars to cars powered mostly by coal. In pursuit of “energy independence,” the feds may foster addiction to a fuel concentrated in a socialist-run South American country.

Image Courtesy: Apture - Hybrid electric vehicles at Argonne

Lobbying by automakers, chemical companies and coal-dependent power producers has yielded a slew of subsidies and mandates for electric cars. However promising a gasoline-free automobile may sound, anyone who followed the government’s mad rush to ethanol fuel in recent years has to worry about the clean promise of the electric car yielding dirty results.

Ethanol — an alcohol fuel made from corn or other plants — has been pushed relentlessly on the American people by a Congress under the influence of a powerful ethanol lobby. Touted as a clean fuel, the government-created ethanol boom has contributed to water pollution, soil erosion, deforestation and even air pollution.

Lithium could be the new ethanol, thanks to the government push for electric cars. Lithium is an element found in nature, and lithium-ion batteries are at the heart of the next generation of electric cars. Compared with lead acid (the standard car battery) and nickel metal hydride (the batteries in today’s hybrids), lithium-ion batteries are less toxic, more powerful and longer lasting.

But what would happen if electric cars and these batteries gain wide use?

Before we even get to the batteries, recall that although all-electric, plug-in cars emit nothing, somebody needs to burn something for the car to move. Here, the burning happens at the power plant instead of under your hood.

The Department Energy estimates that coal provides half our electricity. A recent Government Accountability Office study reported that a plug-in compact car, if it is recharged at an outlet drawing its juice from coal, provides a carbon dioxide savings of only 4 to 5 percent. A plug-in sport utility vehicle provides a CO2 savings of 19 to 23 percent.

The Department Energy estimates that coal provides half our electricity. A recent Government Accountability Office study reported that a plug-in compact car, if it is recharged at an outlet drawing its juice from coal, provides a carbon dioxide savings of only 4 to 5 percent. A plug-in sport utility vehicle provides a CO2 savings of 19 to 23 percent.

If the cleaner and cheaper fuel of a plug-in causes someone to drive even a bit more, it’s a break-even on CO2. GAO co-author Mark Gaffigan raised the question to CNSNews.com; “If you are using coal-fired power plants and half the country’s electricity comes from coal-powered plants, are you just trading one greenhouse gas emitter for another?”

And of course, there’s the lithium lobby. FMC Corp. is the largest lithium producer in the United States. The company employs a dozen lobbying firms and operates its own political action committee. FMC has leaned on Congress and the Energy Department for electric car subsidies.

If the electric car lobby succeeds, brace for another harsh lesson in unintended consequences.

Click here to read the entire Examiner article. Our friends at Autobloggreen were kind enough to point Tim Carney, the author of this Examiner article, the following: While Carney is right that the GAO did warn against all of the coal that could be used to power the EVs of the future, he forgot to mention the GAO’s finding that “Research we reviewed indicated that plug-ins could shift air pollutant emissions away from population centers even if there was no change in the fuel used to generate electricity.”

TransportGooru Musings: Though I agree with some aspects of the author’s argument, I disagree with the notion that  Electric Vehicle investment boom is akin to that of the Ethanol-boom of the years past.   There are many differences between what’s happening now and what happened in the past.  Apart from ridiculing the Government’s strategy, the author, Tim Carney, is not offering any credible solutions and simply terrorizes the readers with an insane argument — Your tax dollars are getting wasted and the lithium lobbies are winning.

Let us see, Mr. Carney! We have two clear choices  — either we continue to tread the same path, guzzling billions of gallons of oil a day (and polluting the environment with gay abandon), all the while facilitating the transfer of your dollars to some petro-dictatorship in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia) or South America (Venezuela).  Or try and invest in something like Electric Vehicles which can help us and our children breathe easy in the years to come.   The latter option may not be very appealing to many folks like you who are grounded in a myopic view of the world.

Though majority of the electric power produced in the US comes from coal,  we can to a large degree control the emissions from these coal plants with current technology.  It may require some more arm twisting on the Government’s part to make these coal-fired electric plants to adhere to the stringent emissions standards but this is a lot more easy to manage.  Also, with more government investment in other forms of generating electricity and a great deal of consumer interest in purchasing clear power, we have  golden an opportunity for investing in other forms of electricity production (Nuclear,  Wind, solar. etc – FYI, Government data indicate there have been 17 licence applications to build 26 new nuclear reactors since mid 2007, following several regulatory initiatives preparing the way for new orders and the Government envisions producing significant share of the power from Nuclear by 2020).

In this option, the Fed & State Governments can regulate and control these domestic sources of power generation and to a large degree keep the investments within the American borders.  If you are advocating to continue the same path as we have done in the past decades, Petro-dictators on the other parts of the globe  (Saudi, Venezuela, Russia, etc) are going to grow richer and they do not listen to what you or your government wants.  They do what they want and run a cartel (OPEC) that is very unrestrained and at times acts like a bunch of thugs.  In this option, your price at the pump is not dictated by your Government but some hukka-smoking, arms-dealing perto-aggresor, who is trying to make the best of the situation and extract as much as he can from your wallet.

The Ethanol buzz dissipated quickly because the Detroit lobby was too damn powerful and them automakers were not listening well to what the customers wanted.   When the economy tanked (and the markets wreacked havock on their stock values) and the customers started showing love for foreign manufactured cars like Prius & Insight,  Detroit had a sudden realization that they need to change their strategy and started moving away from making those huge SUVs and Trucks. Now they are talking about newer cars that are small, functional, economic and environmentally viable products.

It is hard to disagree that there was a flood of investment in the Ethanol technology, but the underlying concept remained the same (burning fuel using the conventional combustion engine) and there was nothing ground-shaking about the way it was promoted.  It is just that we were simply trying to change the amount of emissions coming out of our tailpipes.  But now with Electric-vehicles, we are changing the game completely.

Though it may take a few more years to develop the “Perfect” technology, full electrification of vehicles will eliminate the very concept of a tailpipe in a vehicle.  Tesla and numerous other manufacturers are trying to do this and I consider this to be a step in the right direction.  One thing we have to bear in mind is that during the Ethanol era, the U.S. was the major proponent (because we have way to much areable land and corn growing farmers around) and the rest of the world was just playing along with mild interest because of various reason.  But this time around the  scenario looks very different.  Worldwide there is a coordinated push for heavy investments in alternative energy technologies, and almost every industrialized nation jumped into this EV bandwagon pushing research funds towards development of green cars when the oil prices sky rocketed.  No one is interested in paying $140+ dollars/barrel for oil.

Above all, we are at a time when the Government needs to invest its tax-payer dollars back in the communities in a fruitful way. The addiction to oil has gotten way bad and the sky-high oil prices of 2008 were a good indicator that we can’t afford to continue treading in the same path as we did in the decade past. If the Government has to hold back from investing in clean energy technologies, it might invest in other areas that may look very appealing in the short run but potentially leaving a huge developmental hole in the transportation sector.  This is the RIGHT TIME for investing in Electric Vehicles.  Now the Government has a stake in two of the three Detroit Automakers, which offers the flexibility to steer the development of new technologies and  newer vehicle platforms running on clean fuels such as electric and hydrogen power.

Going by your argument that by switching enmass to Electric-vehicles, we are going to create a demand for Lithium, simply shifting our oil dependence to socialist-Bolivia’s Lithium reserves, so be it.  You want to know why? Any day, I’ll take the Democratically-elected Bolivian Government (headed by a Evo Morales)  over the petro-crazy OPEC members.  If it helps resuscitate a nation that is living in depths of poverty, why not do that.  We in the Western world helped the Saudi’s & other mid-east monarchs become rich and modern from their goat-sheperding Bedouin past with the invention of modern Automobiles.  If we can do the same to Bolivia with the introduction of a new technology (Lithium-ion batteries for running cars), why do you get so jittery about that.

The growing threat of environmental degradation and the fallout from the rising green house gas emissions fore-casted by our eminent scientists are too damn threatening to our world and hard to ignore. Be happy thinking that your Government is doing something to improve the status-quo (which is guzzling billions of gallons of oil) instead of  sitting around waiting for a miracle.   For all that matters Electric Vehicles may be just an evolution in the quest for a better form of transportation.  Who knows!  But by investing in these technologies, we may at least have a chance to live a better life in the future. If our Government is not doing any of the above, we may never have a future after all.  So, let’s stop being an obstacle along the way for everything the Government does just because it is run by people who have a diabolically different views and principles.

Global Automotive Survey Finds Nearly Six in Ten People Prefer Green Cars, Even If Money No Object

July 1, 2009 at 4:29 pm

(Source:  Green Car Congress & Synovate)

Market research firm Synovate released new study findings showing that nearly six in ten people would choose to buy a green car over a dream car, even if money was no object. In March 2009, Synovate surveyed more than 13,500 people across 18 markets (Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the United Kingdom and the United States of America) about “green” versus “dream” cars, vehicle ownership, intent to buy in the next year and attitudes towards cars, traffic, public transport and their need-for-speed.

The top answer across all 18 markets, if money was no object, was to buy a green car, with 37% of respondents saying this would be their preference. Thirty percent said they would buy their dream car and a further 22% claimed that &ldqou;my dream car is a green car”, meaning that 59%—or very nearly six in ten—showed the desire to go green.

This In:fact survey on cars was conducted in March 2009 across 18 markets - Australia (AU), Brazil (BR), Canada (CA), China (CN), Egypt (EGY), France (FR), Germany (DE), Greece (GR), India (IN), Japan (JP), Korea (KR), Malaysia (MY), South Africa (ZA), Thailand (TH), Turkey (TR), the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (US). It covered over 13,200 urban respondents

Some of the other findings of the survey include:

  • The nation most likely to simply elect green car was Germany, with 58% choosing the environment over their dream cars.
  • The 30% of people globally who would still choose their dream car, green-be-damned, comprised of 35% men and 27% women.
  • The single biggest result for dream car came from South Africa where over half of all respondents (53%) would go for their fantasy vehicle over a green one.
  • In the United States (US), 35% would buy a dream car, 23% chose green and 19% say their dream car is a green car. More American women than men say that their dream car is a green car (20% women versus 17% men).
  • Overall, 15% of respondents across all 18 markets surveyed, including 9% in the US, say they will buy a new car in the next 12 months. The new car purchase intenders were topped by India at 38% and Egypt at 24%.
  • 6% of survey respondents across the 18 markets say they will buy a used car in the next year, including 7% of Americans. 53% would be happy to pay more for a used car if it came with a manufacturer certification and warranty.
  • South Africa (18%) as well as the US, Malaysia and Thailand (all 15%) were tops among the households globally in which more than two cars can be found.
  • 14% of respondents across the 18 markets say they will use public transport more often in the coming year. The highest level of agreement was in China at 39%. The lowest level of agreement was in the US at 2%.
  • 9% of people globally, including 5% of Americans, said they would be riding bikes or walking more often.

Click here to read the entire study.

Jalopnik’s Words of Wisdom – Five Ways To Get Screwed By “Cash For Clunkers” a.k.a. Car Allowance Rebate System (C.A.R.S.) Act

July 1, 2009 at 3:47 pm

(Source: Jalopnik)

Image Courtesy: Jalopnik

Now that the President has signed the “Cash For Clunkers” into a bill, a lot of you may be thinking hard about trading your old meta for a shiny new one.  Through various articles Transportgooru has already discussed in great lengths about the details associated with the Cash for Clunkers, including the eligibility criteria for trading your old vehicle.

To add to that, our good friends at Jalopnik have put together this awesome list (see below), which I think is a must read for anyone who is contemplating a trade under Cash for Clunkers program.  Here is the list in reverse order.

5.) Buy A Clunker Now!

Some unscrupulous sellers may try and convince you to buy a clunker for a few hundred dollars with the promise of being able to trade it in for a $4,500 voucher. In reality, if you haven’t owned your car and kept it running and insured for a year you’re not eligible. Don’t buy a beater unless you want to keep it for a while.

4.) Trade In Your Car Early! –

We’ve read reports on forums of people already taking advantage of the Cash for Clunkers bill. In reality, they’re being taken advantage of. The law has been signed, but the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration hasn’t finalized the rules. It probably won’t go into affect until after July 24th. If you are being offered a “voucher” on your clunker you’re really just getting money for your trade-in, which the dealer can then resell. The most you lose is your car, but the dealer could face a fine of up to $15,000.

3.) Scrap A Car Worth More Than The Voucher

The used car market isn’t great right now, but this doesn’t mean your vehicle doesn’t have some value. Make sure to check the value of your car using a resource like KBB before trading in an older car that, it turns out, is worth more than $4,500 or $3,500 on the open market. Dealers have a greater incentive to sell you a new car and scrap your old one than to get the value of your trade-in “clunker.”

2.) Get Denied For Other Discounts

The voucher program is not designed to be a stand-alone discount program, meaning you’re still eligible for whatever other discounts automakers are offering (and there are a lot of those). With 0% financing and thousands cash back you’re getting cheated if you just get the value of your trade-in off a new car. The average incentive, according to Edmunds, was $2,930 for June. So you could possibly get $4,500 + $3,000 off of a new car.

1.) Avoid Moving Up To A More Profitable Class

If you own a truck or SUV you can use your voucher to trade it in for a car and, likely, get a larger voucher. Many dealerships will want to put you into a new truck because they’re more expensive than most cars, but if you don’t need a truck you can trade your old one in and find an inexpensive car with 10 MPG better fuel economy, which qualifies you for $4,500. For example, if you’ve got a 1991 V6 Ford F-150 you can trade it in for a $15,000 2009 Ford Focus for your kid and get the full $4,500 off, instead of paying upwards of $20,000 for a new truck and only getting a $3,500 voucher.

If you still have any questions, please visit the official “Cash For Clunkers” CARS Act website. For those interested, please click here to checkout the nice picture-filled essay on Jalopnik’s website and don’t forget to drop a note thanking them in the comment section for keeping us informed.

Future for Transit Automation? – Washington, DC Metrorail Crash May Exemplify Automation Paradox

July 1, 2009 at 3:12 pm

(Source:  Washington Post)

Image Courtesy: Gothamist via Apture - DC Metro Crash

Sometime soon, investigators will piece together why one train on Metro’s Red Line hurtled into another last Monday, killing nine people and injuring dozens. Early indications suggest a computer system may have malfunctioned, and various accounts have raised questions about whether the driver of the speeding train applied the brakes in time.

The problem, said several experts who have studied such accidents, is that these investigations invariably focus our attention on discrete aspects of machine or human error, whereas the real problem often lies in the relationship between humans and their automated systems.

Metro officials have already begun a review of the automated control systems on the stretch of track where the crash occurred and have found “anomalies.” While such measures are essential, Lee said, making automated systems safer leads to a paradox at the heart of all human-machine interactions: “The better you make the automation, the more difficult it is to guard against these catastrophic failures in the future, because the automation becomes more and more powerful, and you rely on it more and more.”

Automated systems are often designed to relieve humans of tasks that are repetitive. When such algorithms become sophisticated, however, humans start to relate to them as if they were fellow human beings. The autopilot on a plane, the cruise control on a car and automated speed-control systems in mass transit are conveniences. But without exception, they can become crutches. The more reliable the system, the more likely it is that humans in charge will “switch off” and lose their concentration, and the greater the likelihood that a confluence of unexpected factors that stymie the algorithm will produce catastrophe.

Several studies have found that regular training exercises that require operators to turn off their automated systems and run everything manually are useful in retaining skills and alertness. Understanding how automated systems are designed to work allows operators to detect not only when a system has failed but also when it is on the brink. In last week’s Metro accident, it remains unclear how much time the driver of the train had to react when she recognized the problem.

New cruise-control and autopilot systems in cars and planes are being designed to give better feedback in a variety of ways. When sensors detect another car too close ahead on the road, for example, they make the gas pedal harder to depress. Pilots given auditory warnings as well as visual warnings about impending problems seem to respond better.

One researcher has even found that the manner in which machines provide feedback is important. When they are “polite” — waiting until a human operator has responded to one issue before interrupting with another, for example — improved human-machine relationships produce measurable safety improvements that rival technological leaps.

Click here to read the entire article. (Hat Tip: TheTransitWire.com)

Evolutionary Leap – Intelligent Bus Stop Billboard Delivers Brilliant Message for Amnesty International

July 1, 2009 at 1:45 pm

(Source:  Copyranter via Dvice via Gizmodo)

Image Courtesy: Gizmodo

This bus stop ad for Amnesty International’s anti-domestic-abuse campaign is installed in Hamburg, Germany. It is equal parts clever and shocking: when you look at the photo, it’s a smiling couple; when you look away, it’s a dude punchin’ a lady.

The billboard works by scanning its proximity with an eye-tracking camera, which triggers an image switch on the display panel when it senses someone looking at it. The change only occurs after a brief delay, so that observers understand what’s going on, and get the message.  Brilliant!

TransportGooru Musings:  It reminds me of  a scene from one of the sci-fi movies  (I think it is Minority Report) where a hero is walking through the Mall and the wall mounted display consoles will recognize the his identity and start showing voice and video advertisements that are tailored to his consumer profile (the ads sell a particular product based on the person’s previous buying habits, or something like that).   This Amnesty Ad campaign brings us one step closer to that stage where information will be tailored and delivered on the spot  based on the individual viewer’s personal preferences/consumer profile sitting in a database somewhere (this is not even remotely possible now because the behavioral & purchase patterns of the consumer should be captured and mapped in a single database first, which means privacy issues and other such crap needs to be addressed; we are talking big ticket issues data ownership, privacy, and other such public policy issues).  But it is big money in the making for whoever wanting to do this!

A Pilot’s Nightmare? – Gibraltar Airport Shares Runway Space with City’s Pedestrains and Vehicles

July 1, 2009 at 11:36 am

(Source: Wikipedia, AOPA Blog, Hoax-Slayer.com)

For many of us, there exists on the world map a small state called Gibraltar, which is a self-governing British overseas territory located on the southern end of the Iberian Peninsula andEurope at the entrance of the Mediterranean overlooking the Strait of Gibraltar. The territory covers 6.843 square kilometres (2.642 sq mi) and shares a land border with Spain to the north. The Gibraltar Airport is 1,600 feet from the city, the shortest commute of any major airport in the world. One would naturally ask the question how difficult it is to operate and land aircrafts when the airport is so close to the city.  British Gibraltar has very little area, and the important airport runway takes up a major portion of land. To drive from Gibraltar to Spain, vehicles must cross the runway.The picture below (taken by a Cessna Pilot as he approached for landing) shows you what happens in Gibraltar where pedestrians and vehicles share the space with aircraft on the tarmac.

Image Courtesy: AOPA

From the picture, one can clearly see an arterial road, Winston Churchill Avenue, dissecting the long concrete runway.  One can also see that the arterial road is dotted with vehicles and pedestrains (those tiny figures which are hard to see; click to the image to magnify), which should be ringing the alarm bells for any pilot approaching for a landing.  In the past it could take 10 minutes to clear people and traffic off the runway so an aircraft could land. Now the Government is spending some big bucs building a tunnel to divert the vehicle and pedestrian traffic away from the air traffic.  In 2007, the Government of Gibraltar unveiled plans for a new airport terminal and tunnel. In a May 2007 press release, it notes:

Even with current airport use Gibraltar can no longer sustain a situation of severe traffic tailbacks, disruptions and delay every time an aircraft takes off or lands. This is even less acceptable in the context of increased use of the airport following the Cordoba Airport Agreement, which has enabled the normal operation of our airport.

Accordingly, the Government will also divert the main road leading to the north of the runway. This main road will no longer cross the runway at the centre, as at present. Instead, the new main road will take the route of Devils Tower Road, up to the junction with Eastern Beach Road. At that point there will be a large roundabout. The main road will then U-turn to the North through the site known as the Aerial Farm, passing parallel to Eastern Beach Road but behind the ex-Mediterranean Hotel building, and then passing under a tunnel at the Eastern end of the runway. Once it emerges from the tunnel on the north side of the runway the new road will run parallel to the frontier, passing under the air terminal fly-over section.

Even when the new tunnel under the Gibraltar runway is completed, pedestrians and emergency vehicles will continue to stop air traffic and use Winston Churchill Avenue above ground to cross it.   A wikipedia entry for this airport had the following:  The existing terminal at Gibraltar Airport has been, for many years, too small and the road across the runway is even more constraining to operations at the airport, especially with the increase in operations since the Córdoba Accord. Prior to this agreement, only three flights operated daily to Gatwick and Luton. On busy days at present some 7 flights now arrive and depart.  If the average time the road is closed for an aircraft to land or depart is 10 minutes, then on certain days the road can be closed for over two hours.


File:Gibralter Airport Checkpoint.jpg
It must be interesting to hear the conversations between the control tower folks and the pilots as they prepare the vehicle for landing.  Such a conversation would definitely involve a warning that goes to say “Caution: Watch for rogue pedestrains in the middle of runway”.  With the news media blaring about all sorts of air disasters from around the world everyday, it must makes me wonder about the safety record of this airport .
Some interesting facts: Gibraltar Airport has the distinction of being the closest airport to the city that it serves, being only 500 metres from Gibraltar’s city centre. In 2004 the airport handled 314,375 passengers and 380 tonnes of cargo. Gibraltar Airport is one of the few Class A airports in the world. of the country’s airport (IATAGIBICAOLXGB), which is a joint defense/civilian airport, owned by the Ministry of Defence for use by the Royal Air Force as RAF Gibraltar; currently the only scheduled flights operate to the United Kingdom and Spain.  Click here for an interesting article featuring a few more interesting pictures and a video.
(Hat Tip: Alton Marsh, AOPA Pilot’s Senior Editor)

Hyundai’s Innovative Marketers Pop a New Sales Pitch – Hyundai Assurance Gas Lock promises gas at $1.49/gal for one year

June 30, 2009 at 3:01 pm

(Sources: Autobloggreen, Autotropolis)

Hyundai is doing very well in both the automotive quality and marketing arenas. Hyundai recently scored high in the latest 2009 J.D. Power Initial Quality Study. Many analysts were surprised that Hyundai finished fourth behind a stellar cast consisting of Lexus, Porsche and Cadillac.

On the marketing side, Hyundai Assurance struck a cord with the American consumers when it offered payment protection in the event of job loss. Now Hyundai is looking to give consumers increased peace of mind over of the volatility of gas prices, which have swung from under $2 a gallon a few months ago to nearly $3 at the beginning of summer.

Many consumers are sitting on the fence waiting to see which direction the price of gasoline will take. After a period of relatively cheap fuel, over the last several months the price of a gallon has started to climb significantly once again.

The newest promotion, Gas Lock, fixes the price of regular unleaded at $1.49 per gallon for the next year. The program runs July 1 through August 31, and eligible vehicles include the Accent, Sonata, Tiburon, Elantra, Elantra Touring, Entourage, Azera, Santa Fe, Tucson and Veracruz. Customers choosing to utilize Gas Lock will forgo $1,000 in available rebates, making the incentive a gamble that gas prices will remain high.

Hyundai is able to finance its Assurance Gas Lock through a partnership with a commodities company named Pricelock. Without having to dust off your MBA to figure this one out it appears that Pricelock purchases call options in the commodity markets to lock in future gasoline prices. Hyundai will make up the difference.

Shown below is the Press Release from Hyundai:

Smart Growth America reviews the state of stimulus spending on transportation 120 days since rollout

June 30, 2009 at 12:27 am

(Source: Streetsblog, WATodau.au.com, Smart Growth America)

Image Courtesy: Smart Growth America

Within the $787 billion stimulus bill that became law in February, Congress provided states and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) with $26.6 billion in flexible funds for transportation projects. Today marks 120 days from the apportionment of the funds to the states.

Smart Growth America released a report today examining how well states have been spending these billions. As they say on the Smart Growth America blog today, not only did the money arrive in a time of economic recession, but “at a time of embarrassingly large backlogs of road and bridge repairs, inadequate and underfunded public transportation systems, and too-few convenient, affordable transportation options.”

So after 120 days, how have states done in addressing these pressing needs and investing in progress for their communities?

After analyzing project descriptions provided by states and MPOs, Smart Growth America found forward looking states and communities that used the stimulus money as flexibly as possible, repairing roads and bridges and making the kinds of smart, 21st century transportation investments that their communities need to support strong economic growth.

While some states proved excellent at investing wisely and making progress, most states failed to fulfill pressing transportation needs. Nearly one-third of the money, $6.6 billion, went towards building new road capacity. Only 2.8% was spent on public transportation, and 0.9% percent on non-motorized projects.

The Secretary of Transportation, Ray Lahood, in his daily blog noted that ARRA is working successfully across America. Some folks in the transportation community are not totally happy about how the money had been spent. Streetsblog points out that $6.6B in Stimulus Cash is spent on New Roads, Not Repair. It says:

Distressingly — but unsurprisingly — quite a lot is going to new roads rather than repair of existing ones. Of the $26.6 billion sent to states under a flexible transportation mandate, SGA found that $6.6 billion has gone towards building new highway capacity.

Only $185 million of the flexible stimulus aid has been used on transit and non-motorized transportation, which was given about $8 billionin separate funding as well.

One culprit behind this questionable use of taxpayer money, as SGA reports, is a theme at risk of repeating itself during the upcoming debate over broad transportation reform: the lack of accountability.

Most states and localities reported the projects they selected for stimulus aid only after the fact, allowing a privately run website to monitor the process much faster than the Obama administration.

But inconsistent reporting is just the beginning of the problem, as SGA points out in its report:

Most states failed to educate, engage, and seek input from the public before making decisions. … There is not a clear articulation of what project portfolios should accomplish, no methods identified for evaluating projects against these goals or against one another, and few repercussions for achieving or failing to achieve these goals.

SGA mined the stimulus itself, as well as comments by administration officials, to produce a list of nine goals that can be used to evaluate its transportation spending. But the lack of tangible consequences for not meeting those goals has left states free to spend at will, often focusing more on the report’s No. 1 objective (“create and save jobs”) than Nos. 5 (“improve public transportation”), 7 (“cut greenhouse gas emissions”), and 8 (“not contribute to additional sprawl”).

Interestingly enough, Senior White House adviser David Axelrod says the economic stimulus package has not yet “broken the back of the recession” but set aside calls for a second massive spending bill. Republicans, meanwhile, have called the spending under way a failure.

Some economists and business leaders have called for a second spending bill designed to help guide the economy through a downturn that has left millions without jobs. Axelrod said it’s too early to know if more spending would be needed or if the administration would seek more money from Congress.

“Most of the stimulus money – the economic recovery money – is yet to be spent. Let’s see what impact that has,” Axelrod said. “I’m not going to make any judgment as to whether we need more. We have confidence that the things we’re doing are going to help, but we’ve said repeatedly, it’s going to take time, and it will take time. It took years to get into the mess we’re in. It’s not going to take months to get out of it.”

Click here to download Smart Growth for America’s report:  The States and the Stimulus – Are they using it to create jobs and 21st century transportation?

Car-crazy Jakarta fast descends towards total gridlock; Now disabled pedestrians should wear traffic signs

June 29, 2009 at 11:51 pm

(Source: AFP via Google, ITDP & Jakarta Post)

New laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people.

The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said.

Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with barely moving, pollution-spewing cars.

That’s too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and won’t be operational until 2016 at the earliest.

“Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city’s mobility will die,” University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh Prasidha said.

Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won’t run them down as they cross the street.

Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning.

“It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra burdens and obligations,” Institute of Transportation Studies (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said.

A 2004 study by the Japan International Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel consumption, lost productivity and health impact.

Paralyzing traffic jams and severe air pollution are the most frequent answers when people are asked what they know about Jakarta. Motorized vehicle ownerships increase in line with a rise in income per capita.

An Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) study notes that motorized vehicle ownership is growing at 9 percent every year, with more than 1,500 new registrations being filed a day for motorcycles and 500 a day for cars.  The study discusses various options including BRT, incentives for biking, etc to manage the growing congestion problem that is now threatening to cripple the growth of the country’s economy and adversely affect the quality of life of its citizens.

Now, growth of the vehicle population is not the only problem.  The drivers behind the wheel are adding to the chaos on the roads.  An article that recently appeared in the online edition of Jakarta Post, says the following: Driving in Jakarta is nothing short of chaotic, thanks to the huge quantity of people using the roads, the often terrible condition of the roads and the vast variety of vehicles there are. All of this chaos is only made worse by drivers who are reckless and dismissive of other road users.

There are drivers that seem utterly oblivious to there being anybody else on the roads except themselves. Perhaps they are too comfortable in the enclosed air-conditioned capsule that is their vehicle, as they listen to pumped-up stereophonic music or even watch small video screens, to pay any attention or care about anyone else on the roads.

Click here to read the entire article.

Navigation Device Gone Wild! American tourist in Germany follows outdated GPS into oncoming traffic

June 29, 2009 at 10:39 am

(Source: The Local, Germany)

Image Courtesy: Apture

An American tourist caused an accident near Karlsfeld over the weekend, banging up some €45,000 in damages when he followed an outdated navigation system prompt in the wrong direction, daily TZ reported on Monday.

According to the paper, the man’s Mercedes Vito rental car system had not been updated with the new exit from the B471 motorway near Karlsfeld, 20 minutes north of Munich.

The oversight caused him to drive himself and seven passengers into oncoming traffic, where they came face to face with a Peugeot. Both cars wound up veering off the road and into a ditch, the paper said.

The Vito landed on the roof, but all eight passengers in the Mercedes escaped injuries. The Peugeot driver suffered a whiplash injury.

Click here to read the entire article.