Globesity: How climate change and obesity draw from the same roots

June 22, 2009 at 10:45 am

(Source: Grist.org via T4America)

Image Courtesy: Photo illustration by Tom Twigg/Grist

You’ve heard all the reasons before: We drive too much. We eat too much meat and processed food. We spend too much time with plugged-in devices—computers, TVs, air conditioners.

But what problem are we talking about—climate change, or the worldwide rise in obesity?

Both, according to Globesity: A Planet Out of Control?, a book by four public-health researchers who show how climate change and obesity draw from a shared web of roots. Both problems worsen as car culture spreads, desk jobs replace manual jobs, and carbon-intensive foods (including meat) become available to more and more eaters, according to the book, published first in French and this spring in English.

The two issues spread across the planet in similar ways. Those paying attention to climate change know the planet can’t afford for the developing world to emit carbon dioxide at the same levels as the industrialized world. Public-health workers, too, foresee enormous trouble if developing countries adopt the worst dietary and lifestyle habits of rich countries. That shift is well underway, according to Michelle Holdsworth, Globesity’s lead author and a nutritionist with the World Health Organization (WHO) in Montpellier, France.

Rates of obesity—defined by the WHO as a body mass index of 30 or higher—are now higher in Germany, Finland, and the Czech Republic than in the U.S., according to data from the International Obesity Task Force (IOTF). The same is true in some Mediterranean countries famed for their healthy diets: Greece, Egypt, and Cyprus. Traditional olive oil-centric diets have become too high in fat for populations that are less active than they used to be, said Holdsworth. And traditional diets are losing ground.

Even more disturbing is the rise in childhood obesity. Again, America was a trailblazer, and again, much of the world is catching up quickly. Childhood obesity rates doubled in the U.S. from 1975 (15 percent) to 1995 (30 percent), according to the IOTF. England’s childhood obesity rate caught up in half the time, from 15 percent in 1995 to 30 percent in 2005. More from the book: “Mediterranean countries are among the worse hit, so that in Spain, Italy, Albania or Greece, we find the numbers of overweight children already climbing to between 30 and 40 percent.”

Globesity‘s message is somewhat at odds with research published in April that concludes overweight people, by requiring more food and energy to transport, produce more greenhouse gases. “Moving about in a heavy body is like driving in a gas guzzler,” one of the two London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine authors told the U.K. Sun, which ran the thoroughly lame headline “Fatties Cause Global Warming.”

So here’s some good news: The problems of obesity and climate change may be connected, but so are many solutions. Rethinking neighborhoods to encourage bicycling and walking (and walking school buses), for example, would help on both fronts. Junk food requires more energy to produce than healthy food, so “junk food taxes,” limits on advertising to children, and clear labeling standards would also help both problems. Simply cutting subsidies that give a cost advantage to junk-food staples like corn syrup could do a great deal. But that requires political courage.

Click here to read the entire article.

REGISTER NOW! TISP Summer Forum: Enhancing Infrastructure Resiliency through a Planned Investment Strategy

June 19, 2009 at 9:12 pm

TISP Summer Forum: Enhancing Infrastructure Resiliency through a Planned Investment Strategy

July 29, 2009

8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.

Embassy Suites DC Convetion Center

900 10th Street NW

Washington, DC 20011

Register HERE for this Forum

On July 29, 2009, at the Embassy Suites DC Convention Center, Washington, DC, The Infrastructure Security Partnership (TISP) hosts its Summer Forum on Enhancing Infrastructure Resilience through Planned Investment Strategies with a focus on the Transportation and Energy CI/KR Sectors. Resilience is more than a buzzword used to describe the strength of community. When considering the subject of infrastructure protection, we ignore many other crucial aspects of securing the nation and its critical infrastructure. Infrastructure resilience addresses the development and implementation of exercised measures and policies to reduce the disaster and devastation impacts of all types of hazards to manageable effects that can be quickly overcome. Investment strategies that take into consideration the reduction of risk, stabilization of the work force, improved efficiencies (such as improvements to the road and rail transportation system that result in faster cargo supply chains), redundancy, business continuity and quick recovery from a catastrophic event will realize significant returns to stakeholders and investors. Infrastructure operations, safety, maintenance, protection and resiliency are so closely intertwined in today’s world that they must all be part of any investment strategy if it is to be cost-effective and long-lasting.

Facilitating public and private sector discourse regarding investment strategies for infrastructure resilience is essential to the TISP mission to lead collaborative effort that advances the practice and policies of infrastructure security and resiliency. We will bring together decision makers, policy analysts, and experts in transportation and energy infrastructure resilience and planning. This forum is designed to encourage audience participation, with a morning discussion of cross-sector topics and with two afternoon breakout sessions (one for transportation and the other for energy sectors).

The issues and recommendations identified by the Forum will be documented and distributed via a summary report to of all participating organizations and an article published in the TISP e-Newsletter and shared with infrastructure resilience stakeholders.

Registration Rates

TISP Dues-paying Members: $75.00

Public Agency Rate: $75.00

TISP Partners (non-paying members): $100.00

Hotel Location and Directions

Embassy Suites DC Convention Center

900 10th Street NW

Washington, DC 20011

202-719-1423

Map and Directions

Register HERE for this Event.

For more information about TISP and this Forum, contact Mr. Bill Anderson, 703-549-3800 Ext 170. For assistance in registering for this Forum contact Carie Losinski, SAME Online Registration Specialist, at 703-549-3800, Ext. 154.

Google Transit delivers “Dump the Pump” day gift for urbanites – Now you can use voice search on Trip Planner

June 18, 2009 at 10:46 pm

Image Courtesy: joannapenabickley.typepad.com

Personally, I am a big fan of Google Transit and Google’s approach to making transit a bit more easy for the general public. Today (June 18) being the “Dump the Pump Day” sponsored by the American Public Transit Association, the good folks at Google Transit published a post on their LatLong blog outlining how Google can help you find the transit options in the cities you live.

Here is an excerpt from the blog post by Jessica Wei, Strategic Partner Development Manager, Google Transit: Now, you may wonder how you can plan a transit trip easily if you’re not familiar with your local agency. The answer is – go to Google Maps. So far more than 100 agencies in the United States have made their data available in Google Maps through Google Transit Partner Program. In addition, Los Angeles Metro, City of Edmonton, Houston Metro, and Calgary Transit have released their GTFS data feed to the public so that developers can create innovative transit applications to further promote the awareness of public transportation.Now go to Google Maps on your computer or your cell phone, plan a transit trip, and go catch a train or bus. I bet your won’t miss the congested highway or increasing gas price!”

The last statement in the blog post caught my curiosity leaping and promoted a search on the web (of course using Google)to find out the mobile applications.  Surprise, Surprise!  I found out that this past weekend Google introduced a new version of its glossyMaps application for Android phones.

Version 3.1.0 brings with it several new features, including voice search to go with its text search field and transit and walking directions to go with step-by-step driving directions. “Whether you’re searching for an address, a business, or nearby windsurfing sports, just speak your query and Google Maps will find it,” Google wrote on its mobile blog. “After your search, you’ll see a map of places. To help you decide where to go, we’ve improved our business listings to include content such as store hours, prices, ratings, and reviews.”  Urbanites must be thrilled with this new addition!

Image Courtesy: Google Mobile Blog

The new features were tested by the folks at CNET and they were clearly impressed – an outcome that we have come to expect out of most Google products these days.

Here is what they had to say about the Trip Planner tool:  The trip planner in particular worked extremely well for San Francisco. As with the online version, Google’s Transit works in 250 cities. Indeed, Google Maps quickly and accurately planned and timed my commute, providing options for other routes in the near past and future. To get directions with public transit, tap “Directions'” from the menu, select the middle icon, of a bus, and enter the end point, which can be an address or a business name.

You’re also able to set a specific departure time or arrival time and day. For city-dwellers, accurate walking and transportation directions are a necessity.   Rolled into the release is an experimental feature. Updates, which is connected to Google Latitude, lets you actively change your Latitude status for friends to see–so long as they’re also using the latest version of Maps.

The erasure of Street View as its own map mode is another change you’ll see. Instead, it has been integrated into any search result where the view is applicable. Pressing a point on the map will also bring up a Street View thumbnail if there’s an available image.”

With the growing popularity of transit,  spread of Google Transit in more cities around the globe, such cool new features would make transit a compelling option.  It is a good time to recall that quote by New York Governor David Patterson “Google Maps for Transit is a truly innovative marriage of information and infrastructure. It is a perfect example of how the public and private sectors can partner together to benefit us all — and it didn’t cost New York taxpayers a penny. I applaud my colleagues at the MTA and Port Authority for making this a priority, and our friends at Google for continuing to make the world an easier place to navigate.”

We gotta admit that it definitely got a lot more easier to navigate as of this past weekend!

(Source: Google, CNET)

Transportation Reauthorization Updates for June 18, 2009: Bill Outline released; LaHood Blogs, Oberstar stays upset & moves press briefing to 2PM; etc., etc…

June 18, 2009 at 10:59 am

(Source: NY Times, USDOT Secretary’s FastLane Blog, AP via Google, Transportation for America)

Late-breaking: The full outline of Rep. Oberstar’s proposed bill is now available on Transportation for America’s website.  For those readers brave enough to wade into 90 pages of policy detail, please click here to download a copy of the PDF file.  Personally,  (after a super-quick glance) I was left scracting my head about the directions of cutting edge programs like Intelligent Transportation Systems. Absolutely no mention of it except under some transit discussion.  Also, I did not see any references to how this program will help spur the infrastructure development aspects of electric vehicles (like charging stations, etc)? Possibly dealt through CMAQ or other climate-friendly avenues in ths bill?  Would love to know what y’all found out after a careful reading of the outline.  Please leave your thoughts in the comments sections below.

With plans for a six-year, $450 billion transportation bill hung up over the question of how to pay for it, the Obama administration said Wednesday that it wanted to put off the thorniest questions for now. Instead, officials proposed essentially extending the existing law for 18 months and finding a short-term way to pay for highway and transit projects.

Rather than face a series of three-month extensions of the law, which has happened in the past, Mr. LaHood said it would be less disruptive for everyone to plan for an year-and-a-half extension now. “We think this is the most realistic approach,” he said.  In an interview with Bloomberg, LaHood describes his decision as one to “face reality” instead of “stringing Congress along with three-month or six-month extensions.”

The media reports indicate there is a serious fight happening in the Hill between the Secretary and the folks who spent months working on this bill.  The AP report states that at LaHood’s request, Oberstar and key members of the committee met with the transportation secretary Wednesday morning, a half hour before the congressman was scheduled to brief reporters on his bill. LaHood laid out for the surprised lawmakers a plan that seeks to approve money for transportation for another 18 months, eliminating the likelihood that highway and other transportation projects would come to a halt for lack of dollars. The plan would require Congress to approve an estimated $13 billion to $18 billion in stopgap cash.

Rep. John Mica, the senior Republican on the transportation committee, likened LaHood’s presentation of the finance plan to a bomb being dropped on committee members.

“That’s a real slap in the face to a lot of hard work … earth-shattering,” Mica said. “I would have been mortified if this had been done to me under Bush.”

LaHood asked to meet with Oberstar as soon as the administration worked out the details of its plan and went straight to Capitol Hill, said Jill Zuckman, a Transportation Department spokeswoman.

For his part, the Secrtary used his blog to convince the public that he did what he and the Obama administration think is the best approach rather than  rushing for a reuathorization bill.

Here are his words: ” Yesterday and today, I briefed members of Congress on the Highway Trust Fund situation and proposed an immediate 18-month highway reauthorization that will replenish the Fund. This is an unusual step, I know. But, with the Fund likely to run out of money by late August, it’s a little too late to worry about business as usual.

Beyond keeping the Highway Trust Fund solvent, an immediate 18-month reauthorization provides Congress the time it needs to fully deliberate the direction of America’s transportation priorities. That’s the kind of thoughtful decision-making America deserves.”

Making a case for his proposal, Sec. LaHood first brought up why we are in this mess and how the Highway Trust Fund went south over the years and months past.

Image Courtesy:USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood's Blog - Fast Lane

As the chart below shows, even in years of relative economic security and gas-price stability, the Highway Trust Fund ended the fiscal year with less money than it started. He pointed to the change in the consumption patterns of the US consumer who was losing sleep over the economic concerns that rocked the country (as well as the entire planet).   The prolonged economic insecurity and gas-price volatility, like the one we experienced in 2008, when people bought less gas and Fund’s revenue source dropped off  (evident from the chart above). Congress had to kick in an extra $8 billion to the Fund. He warned that the Fund is likely to run out of money once again, and soon. Expenditures will stop; states will be in danger of losing the vital transportation funding they need and expect; projects will shut down; jobs will be lost.  That’s the road we’re on right now. Once again, the Highway Trust Fund will need a massive cash infusion.

Can we really go through this every year? Is that really the best this Nation can do?.  With that question, he brought the hammer down on Oberstar’s plans. saying “I don’t think so. That’s why I went to the Hill yesterday and why I’ll be there today.”  He strengthened his argument for his delayed reuathorization proposal, saying “Time is running out, and the Highway Trust Fund must be made solvent. Then, and only then, can this country get the kind of thorough transportation discussion needed to address our infrastructure investments in a smarter, more focused way, a way that best meets the real demands of the country.”

Representative James L. Oberstar, who is chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, still plans to introduce a new bill’s outline today at 2PM (The House T & I Committee Twitter note annoucned that the 11AM briefing is now moved to 2PM), but Democrats said they had not determined how to pay for it.  Oberstar had been counting on a looming Oct. 1 deadline — that’s when the current law authorizing federal highway and transit programs expires — to force lawmakers to make tough decisions on how to pay for transportation programs over the next six years.But Oberstar’s spokesman Jim Berard conveyed the Chairman’s displeasure:  “The chairman is not too pleased with the administration’s proposal.”

All is not bad for the Secretary.  He enjoyed the support of some of his powerful allies in the Senate.  Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee and a key player in the federal transportation re-write, expressed her support for the delayed reauthorization proposal put forward by the Secretary.  “I am very pleased that the White House is being proactive in working with the Congress to address the shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund.  As we work our way out of this recession, the last thing we want to do is to drastically cut back on necessary transportation priorities.  The White House proposal to replenish the Trust Fund until 2011 will keep the recovery and job creation moving forward and give us the necessary time to pass a more comprehensive multi-year transportation authorization bill with stable and reliable funding sources.”

Two congressionally mandated transportation commissions — one in 2008 and one earlier this year — have recommended raising gas taxes as the most practical solution for making up projected declines in revenue over the next several years. The most recent commission also recommended moving to a system that would use GPS technology to tax motorists based on the number of miles they drive as the best long-term revenue solution.

Either step is expected to be politically difficult.

DeFazio said the administration’s plan risks tens of thousand of jobs because contractors need cash commitments beyond 18 months for major, multiyear construction projects.

LaHood acknowledged his plan will be unpopular with some lawmakers and transportation interest groups.

“With the reality of our fiscal environment and the critical demand to address our infrastructure investments in a smarter, more focused approach, we should not rush legislation,” LaHood said in a statement. “We should work together on a full reauthorization (bill) that best meets the demands of the country. The first step is making sure that the Highway Trust Fund is solvent. The next step is addressing our transportation priorities over the long term.”

Late Breaking Update: Transportation for America(T4America), the ever popular website that has been a great source for reauthorization updates just made available a summary of  Rep. Obsertar’s proposed bill (shown below, courtesy of T4America)and a 10 page breakdown of the consolidated/terminated programs. A quick analysis by T4America reveals Oberstar proposal terminates or consolidates 75 federal programs from the program and recommends a consolidation into a “performance based framework”.  Read the 17p summary and the 10p breakdown of consolidated/terminated programs now on the T4America blog.

Event Alert: Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) ITS Program Strategic Planning Web Conference – June 24, 2009 @ 2:00PM

June 17, 2009 at 4:42 pm

The Federal Transit Administration’s Office of Mobility Innovation is holding a web conference on June 24, 2009 from 2:00-4:00pm to elicit discussion on the vision and direction for transit ITS research for the next five years and beyond.

Specifically, FTA seeks input and insights into a proposed set of goals and research areas. FTA is also interested in exploring new opportunities for research and development, technology transfer, and evaluation of next generation transit ITS technologies. The web conference is designed to present the results-to-date of the strategic planning effort and to invite discussion from the public. All feedback will be captured and incorporated into FTA’s ITS strategic planning effort. Using this input, the FTA’s Office of Mobility Innovation expects to be able to program a robust agenda for research and deployment assistance that reflects the current and future needs of the transit industry.

If interested in attending, please RSVP to:  Charlene.Wilder@dot.gov or   Robert.Marville@dot.gov.

Please note the connection instructions below on your calendar.  There will be no confirmation or reminder Emails sent in response to your RSVP.

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

Instructions for Connecting to the Webinar:

Webinar Date:  June 24, 2009; 2:00 – 4:00 PM ET

First:  Connect to the web meeting at: https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/

Conference number: PW4373046

Audience passcode: STRATEGIC

SecondDial into the web meeting teleconference:

Toll Free Number: 888-677-1341

Participant passcode (verbal): STRATEGIC

Please connect to the webinar 15 – 20 minutes before the start time to facilitate the processing of attendees by the webinar operator.

Cut and paste links into your browser’s address bar if they do not open automatically.

IMPORTANT:  As of September 2008,  Live Meeting 2007 net conferencing software. You must download Live Meeting 2007 to join this Webinars. There is no upgrade from Live Meeting 2005 to the 2007 version.  Instructions are here:  http://www.pcb.its.dot.gov/t3/info_requirements.asp.  If link does not open automatically, cut and paste it into your browser’s address bar.

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

Transportation Bill Update: Sec. LaHood proposes 18 month extension of SAFETEA-LU; House Dems Busy Crafting Bill; Transportation Community Eagerly Awaits; Scorecard for Grading the Bill Now Available

June 17, 2009 at 3:04 pm

(Source: Wall Street Journal, T4America@twitter)

Sec. LaHood proposes 18-month extension for SAFEAT-LU  and shortly thereafter Rep. Oberstar says delay is unacceptable (via T4America@Twitter & WSJ)

Image Courtesy: Apture - Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood

USDOT published a news release this afternoon offering Sec. Ray LaHood’s proposed extension:

“This morning, I went to Capitol Hill to brief members of Congress on the situation with the Highway Trust Fund. I am proposing an immediate 18-month highway reauthorization that will replenish the Highway Trust Fund. If this step is not taken the trust fund will run out of money as soon as late August and states will be in danger of losing the vital transportation funding they need and expect.

“As part of this, I am proposing that we enact critical reforms to help us make better investment decisions with cost-benefit analysis, focus on more investments in metropolitan areas and promote the concept of livability to more closely link home and work. The Administration opposes a gas tax increase during this challenging, recessionary period, which has hit consumers and businesses hard across our country.

“I recognize that there will be concerns raised about this approach. However, with the reality of our fiscal environment and the critical demand to address our infrastructure investments in a smarter, more focused approach, we should not rush legislation. We should work together on a full reauthorization that best meets the demands of the country. The first step is making sure that the Highway Trust Fund is solvent. The next step is addressing our transportation priorities over the long term.”

Shortwhile ago, WSJ published an article covering today’s development, which featured Secrtary’s proposal to delay the reauthorization.  This aricle also captured an interesting response from Rep. Oberstar, delivered his press conference Wednesday.  It notes that Rep. Oberstar was adamant that Congress must pass a new law before the current one expires.

“Extension of current law is unacceptable,” Mr. Oberstar said. “Now is the time to move.”

Bill in the Works at Congress (via WSJ)

House Democrats are busy crafting a transportation spending bill that would cost roughly $450 billion over six years, but no consensus has emerged on how to fund it, reports WSJ citing familiar sources.

The bill for the first time would establish standards — like reducing oil consumption and spurring economic growth — that would influence which highway and transit projects get federal funding. It would also consolidate to six or fewer the number of Transportation Department programs used to channel money to states, giving local officials more flexibility to combat their transportation challenges.

Image Courtesy: Apture

The legislation is being drafted by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D., Minn.), who plans to release a blueprint of his bill tomorrow at a press conference starting at 11:00AM.  Since this is the internet age, there will be a live webcast of the news conference (an invitation-only press conference). Transportation for America informs that Chairman Oberstar is releasing a 12-page paper and a 100-page outline of the bill and it’s likely that at least one of those — probably the shorter white paper — will be released the first press conference.

The current system relies heavily on taxes from gasoline and vehicle purchases. Revenue from these sources is dropping as Americans drive less and opt for more fuel-efficient cars and trucks. Meanwhile, states are encountering similar funding problems due to declines in tax revenue. The result is a growing gap between the nation’s infrastructure needs and what is being spent to maintain and upgrade it.

The Obama administration has opposed any gas-tax increase. The White House also opposes any quick transition to a new system, which has been tested in Oregon, where drivers are taxed based on the miles they drive rather than the number of gallons they pump into their gas tanks.

People familiar with the matter say Mr. Oberstar hasn’t come up with a funding solution, and the task of writing the bill’s funding component will fall to the Ways and Means Committee. Things may proceed even slower in the Senate. That makes it unlikely Congress will pass a new bill by the time the old one expires at the end of September.

Meanwhile, states may be forced to further curb their transportation spending if Congress doesn’t come up with more money soon. Last year, Congress opted to transfer $8 billion from the Treasury’s general fund into the Highway Trust Fund to prevent last-minute cutbacks.   Click here to read the entire article.

Grading the Transportation Bill (via T4America)

To help us all judge whether the bill delivers the promised transformation, Transportation for America has developed this scorecard (see below) laying out the changes that must be included to clear the bar. When the bill is released, we can begin using this as our measuring stick. Click here to download the PDF version of this awesome scorecard.

Awesome Threesome: EPA Joins USDOT and HUD Strengthening Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities

June 16, 2009 at 4:08 pm

(Source: USDOT)

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson today announced a new partnership to help American families in all communities –- rural, suburban and urban – gain better access to affordable housing, more transportation options, and lower transportation costs.

Earlier this year, HUD and DOT announced an unprecedented agreement to implement joint housing and transportation initiatives.   With EPA joining the partnership, the three agencies will work together to ensure that these housing and transportation goals are  met while simultaneously protecting the environment, promoting equitable development, and helping to address the challenges of climate change.

Testifying together at a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee hearing chaired by U.S. Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Secretary LaHood, Secretary Donovan and Administrator Jackson outlined the six guiding ‘livability principles’ they will use to coordinate federal transportation, environmental protection, and housing investments at their respective agencies.

DOT Secretary LaHood said, “Creating livable communities will result in improved quality of life for all Americans and create a more efficient and more accessible transportation network that serves the needs of individual communities.  Fostering the concept of livability in transportation projects and programs will help America’s neighborhoods become safer, healthier and more vibrant.”

“As a result of our agencies’ work, I am pleased to join with my DOT and EPA colleagues to announce this statement of livability principles” said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. “These principles mean that we will all be working off the same playbook to formulate and implement policies and programs. For the first time, the Federal government will speak with one voice on housing, environmental and transportation policy.”

“It’s important that the separate agencies working to improve livability in our neighborhoods are all pointed in the same direction.  We’re leading the way towards communities that are cleaner, healthier, more affordable, and great destinations for businesses and jobs,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “This partnership provides a framework to guide decisions that affect all communities.  This way, investments of financial and human resources by any one of our agencies will meet shared goals and confront significant challenges we all face together.”

The Partnership for Sustainable Communities established six livability principles that will act as a foundation for interagency coordination:

1. Provide more transportation choices.
Develop safe, reliable and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote public health.

2. Promote equitable, affordable housing.
Expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices for people of all ages, incomes, races and ethnicities to increase mobility and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation.

3. Enhance economic competitiveness.
Improve economic competitiveness through reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services and other basic needs by workers as well as expanded business access to markets.

4. Support existing communities.
Target federal funding toward existing communities – through such strategies as transit-oriented, mixed-use development and land recycling – to increase community revitalization, improve the efficiency of public works investments, and safeguard rural landscapes.

5. Coordinate policies and leverage investment.
Align federal policies and funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding and increase the accountability and effectiveness of all levels of government to plan for future growth, including making smart energy choices such as locally generated renewable energy.

6. Value communities and neighborhoods.
Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities by investing in healthy, safe and walkable neighborhoods – rural, urban or suburban.

Click here to access the USDOT Press Release on this new partnership.  Also check out the Secrtary of Transportation’s blog post on this significant interacgency partnership in his FastLane blog.

Opting to take the train instead of driving for environmental reasons? Think twice about ‘green’ transport, say scientists

June 11, 2009 at 12:32 pm

(Source: AFP via Yahoo & Science Daily)

Image Courtesy: IOP - Energy consumption and GHG emissions per PKT (The vehicle operation components are shown with gray patterns. Other vehicle components are shown in shades of blue. Infrastructure components are shown in shades of red and orange. The fuel production component is shown in green. All components appear in the order they are shown in the legend.)

Do you worry a lot about the environment and do everything you can to reduce your carbon footprint? Are you the one who frets about  tailpipe emissions, greenhouse gases and climate change?

If yes,  you must be the one who prefers to take the train or the bus rather than a plane, and avoid using a car whenever you can, faithful to the belief that this inflicts less harm to the planet.

Well, there could be a nasty surprise in store for you, for taking public transport may not be as green as you automatically think, says a new US study published in Environmental Research Letters, a publication of Britain’s Institute of Physics.  Often unknown to the public, there are an array of hidden or displaced emissions that ramp up the simple “tailpipe” tally, which is based on how much carbon is spewed out by the fossil fuels used to make a trip. Environmental engineers Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath at theUniversity of California at Davis say that when these costs are included, a more complex and challenging picture emerges.

In some circumstances, for instance, it could be more eco-friendly to drive into a city — even in an SUV, the bete noire of green groups — rather than take a suburban train. It depends on seat occupancy and the underlying carbon cost of the mode of transport.

The pair give an example of how the use of oil, gas or coal to generate electricity to power trains can skew the picture.

Boston has a metro system with high energy efficiency. The trouble is, 82 percent of the energy to drive it comes from dirty fossil fuels.  By comparison, San Francisco‘s local railway is less energy-efficient than Boston’s. But it turns out to be rather greener, as only 49 percent of the electricity is derived from fossils.

The paper points out that the “tailpipe” quotient does not include emissions that come from building transport infrastructure — railways, airport terminals, roads and so on — nor the emissions that come from maintaining this infrastructure over its operational lifetime.

The researchers also touch on the effect of low passenger occupancy and show that we are naïve to automatically assume one form of transport is more environmentally friendly than another. They conclude from their calculations that a half-full Boston light railway is only as environmentally friendly, per kilometre traveled, as a midsize aircraft at 38 per cent occupancy.  From cataloguing the varied environmental costs the researchers come to some surprising conclusions. A comparison between light railways in both Boston and San Franciso show that despite Boston boasting a light railway with low operational energy use, their LRT is a far larger greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter because 82 per cent of the energy generated in Boston is fossil-fuel based, compared to only 49 per cent in San Francisco.

Total life-cycle energy inputs and GHG emissions contribute an additional 155 per cent for rail, 63 per cent for cars and buses, and 32 per cent for air systems over vehicle exhaust pipe operation.

So getting a complete view of the ultimate environmental cost of the type of transport, over its entire lifespan, should help decision-makers to make smarter investments.

For travelling distances up to, say, 1,000 kilometres (600 miles), “we can ask questions as to whether it’s better to invest in a long-distance railway, improving the air corridor or boosting car occupancy,” said Chester.  The calculations are based on US technology and lifestyles.

Click here to read the entire article.    Also, you can access the PDF version of the research paper here.

Journal reference:

  • Mikhail V Chester and Arpad Horvath. Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chainsEnvironmental Research Letters, 2009; 4 (024008) DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/4/2/024008

Work begins on nation’s largest mass transit project; Offers new link between New Jersey & New York, doubles commuter rail capacity

June 10, 2009 at 4:25 pm

(Source: CNN)

  • Tunnel will link New Jersey with New York, doubles commuter rail capacity
  • Part of project financed by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
  • ARC, Access to the Region’s Core, expected to create 6,000 jobs

Image Courtesy: Arctunnel.com

The new tunnel, said to be the largest commitment to any transportation project anywhere in the United States in the history of the Department of Transportation, according to administrator Peter Rogoff of the Federal Transportation Administration, will link New Jersey with New York and eventually will double capacity on the nation’s busiest rail corridor, running from Washington to Boston, Massachusetts, officials said.

Officials participated in the groundbreaking for the $8.7 billion project as commuter trains passed behind them in North Bergen, New Jersey, before entering the existing train tunnel, which went into operation in 1908.

“As we start digging this tunnel, I think that what really it means, we are digging our way out of an economic crisis,” said Sen. Bob Menendez, D-New Jersey. “As we’re getting under way, we’re seeing the dividends of the Recovery Act being paid right now.”

The project — known as ARC, for Access to the Region’s Core — is expected to create 6,000 design and construction jobs.New Jersey Transit says 170,000 passengers now travel through the existing train tunnel beneath the Hudson River to New York each day. When completed, the second tunnel will enable that figure to increase to 255,000 passenger trips. The additional passengers will disembark at a new concourse to be built at Penn Station in New York, 150 feet below street level.

GAO explores Federal Transit Administration’s New Starts Program; Testimony outlines challenges and preliminary observations on expediting project development

June 4, 2009 at 5:46 pm

(Source: Government Accontability Office)

Ribbon Cutting Ceremony

The New Starts program is an important source of new capital investment in mass transportation. As required by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must prioritize transit projects for funding by evaluating, rating, and recommending projects on the basis of specific financial commitment and project justification criteria, such as cost-effectiveness, economic development effects, land use, and environmental benefits. To be eligible for federal funding, a project must advance through the different project development phases of the New Starts program, including alternatives analysis, preliminary engineering, and final design. Using the statutorily identified criteria, FTA evaluates projects as a condition for advancement into each project development phase of the program.

This testimony discusses the:

(1) key challenges associated with the New Starts program and

(2) options that could help expedite project development in the New Starts program.

This testimony is based on GAO’s extensive body of work on the New Starts program and ongoing work–as directed by Congress. For this work, GAO reviewed FTA documents and interviewed FTA officials, sponsors of New Starts projects, and representatives from industry associations. The FTA reviewed the information in this testimony and provided technical comments.

Previous GAO work has identified three key challenges associated with the New Starts program. First, frequent changes to the New Starts program have sometimes led to confusion and delays. Numerous changes have been made to the New Starts Program over the last decade, such as revising and adding new evaluation criteria and requiring project sponsors to collect new data and complete new analyses. Although FTA officials told GAO that changes were generally intended to make the process more rigorous, systematic, and transparent, project sponsors said the frequent changes sometimes caused confusion and rework, resulting in delays in advancing projects.

Second, the current New Starts evaluation process measures do not capture all project benefits. For example, FTA’s cost-effectiveness measure does not account for highway travel time savings and may not capture all economic development benefits. FTA officials have acknowledged these limitations, but noted that improvements in local travel models are needed to resolve some of these issues. FTA is also conducting research on ways to improve certain evaluation measures.

Third, striking the appropriate balance between maintaining a robust evaluation and minimizing a complex process is challenging. Experts and some project sponsors GAO spoke with generally support FTA’s quantitatively rigorous process for evaluating proposed transit projects but are concerned that the process has become too burdensome and complex.

In response to such concerns, FTA has tried to simplify the evaluation process in several ways, including hiring a consulting firm to identify opportunities to streamline or simplify the process. As part of ongoing work, GAO has preliminarily identified options to help expedite project development within the New Starts program. These options include tailoring the New Starts evaluation process to risks posed by the projects, using letters of intent more frequently, and applying regulatory and administrative changes only to future projects.

While each option could help expedite project development in the New Starts process, each option has advantages and disadvantages to consider. For example, by signaling early federal support of projects, letters of intent and early systems work agreements could help project sponsors use potentially less costly and time-consuming alternative project delivery methods, such as design-build. However, such early support poses some risk, as projects may stumble in later project development phases. Furthermore, some options, like combining one or more statutorily required project development phases, would require legislative action.

Click here to download the entire report.