Archive for December 2006
I don’t normally read Der Spiegel. This article was brough to my attention by the Semiahmoo Planning Group on the Liveable Region Coalition listserve. There some nice (though small) pictures to go with the article too. I hope this story gets picked up around here as trams on Broadway (and other major streets) are becoming something of leitmotif of mine.
Here is the official website and if you look in the comments section, Ron has provided some useful links for English speakers.
“Introduce closed circuit television cameras to deter public disorder and support our police in the capturing of individuals breaking the law.”
It will not do anything for the first as experience in the UK has shown, but if they manage to actually store the video and get someone to look at all of it, it can help with catching people after offences have been committed. But, to give one early and eerie example, cctv was not enough to save James Bulger.
This is one of those ideas that has to get going sometime. I can still recall reading the research, conducted many years ago in suburban London, by someone who noticed that most of the cars parked on his street never moved. Car ownership vastly exceeds car use, and most cars spend most of their time parked. But then car ownership has a lot more to it than just acquiring the convenience of mobility. Cars are like our houses. They denote status. They are possessions that we use to identify ourselves and our values. And I am not just talking about the sort of people who customise their cars – or those who spend far more than the car is worth is keeping it not only running but in far better condition than when they bought it.
And the interior of the car says a lot about us too. As so many thieves have learned, possessions spend a lot of time in cars too.
Car sharing is a great idea from a transportation perspective. And so was the idea that people should be able to stop and pick up people waiting at bus stops so they can utilise some of the empty seats that drive past the long queues. But then reality kicks in. You want to use my car? You want me to get into your car? Once you can come up with the safety and security assurances, then both ideas can take off. But they are no small hurdles to overcome
How mirrors can light up the world
Scientists say the global energy crisis can be solved by using the desert sun
Monday November 27, 2006
CSP technology is not new. There has been a plant in the Mojave desert in California for the past 15 years. Others are being built in Nevada, southern Spain and Australia. There are different forms of CSP but all share in common the use of mirrors to concentrate the sun’s rays on a pipe or vessel containing some sort of gas or liquid that heats up to around 400C (752F) and is used to power conventional steam turbines.
The mirrors are very large and create shaded areas underneath which can be used for horticulture irrigated by desalinated water generated by the plants. The cold water that can also be produced for air conditioning means there are three benefits. “It is this triple use of the energy which really boost the overall energy efficiency of these kinds of plants up to 80% to 90%,” says Dr Knies.
This form of solar power is also attractive because the hot liquid can be stored in large vessels which can keep the turbines running for hours after the sun has gone down, avoiding the problems association with other forms of solar power.
The cost of the elctricity is estimated to be around $50 per barrel oil equivalent – and this price would fall as mass production introduces economies of scale. But if you can also use the other benefits the cost gets competitive with natural gas generation.
It seems to me that the claim about meeting all electricty needs does not even need to be made. There must be plenty of places around the world where this sort of power generation would be welcome now. Las Vegas and Phoenix – maybe even Oliver – spring to mind immediately.
According to TransLink officials, the number of buses running on Broadway is already at full capacity, and adding any more would only increase congestion and delays. While Anton says TransLink needs to expand the Millennium Line further West and bring in a streetcar service downtown, the city’s top priority now is to build a rapid-transit line along the East-West Broadway corridor.
But when and how TransLink will ever be able to afford that remains a mystery. After approving the $1.9 billion Canada Line in 2004, TransLink’s next priority is the $970 million Evergreen rapid-transit line to Coquitlam. However, TransLink is still $400 million short of being able to start building that project, with no funding sources in sight. With only 12 per cent of Vancouver commuters using public transportation, compared to over 20 per cent in Toronto and Montreal, public-transit advocates say it’s time for the provincial and federal governments to step in and start filling the funding gaps.
“The demand is there, it’s just we don’t have the supply; and the reason for that is the historical lack of funding from senior governments,” says Deming Smith, manager of policy and communications with Better Environment Sound Transportation (BEST), a Vancouver-based non-profit organization.
Yes, but it’s not just that, is it? Others like to blame the emphasis on expensive rapid transit. SkyTrain and now the Canada Line are very expensive but do tend to attract senior government funding. Buses just don’t seem to get their attention. (Of course the same amount of money spent on surface LRT would have gone a lot further and helped to reduce traffic but that tram has gone.)
But I still think that UPass is to the cause of the sudden bloom in demand and I think that was entirely predictable. And the planners must take a lot of responsibility for the “revenue neutral” policy that ignored the impact on costs and capacity. The UPass deal should have included funding for additional buses and the new pass should not have been introduced until the essential additional bus capacity was provided. Boosting ridership on system already creaking under its peak load was simply irresponsible.
“Lies, damn lies and statistics”
Or, in the case of Translink a vivid imagination. At one time it was thought that the new electronic farebox would at long last bring some reality to the business of estimating ridership. But then the operations people got worried about the delay to service while everyone swiped their tickets and passes, so passes remained “flash media”. Automatic counters are now being deployed on new buses. There are counts and survey of course, but the problem with a count is that you have no idea how that relates to individual journeys – many people are probably counted several times. So you get this issue of “boardings” and “trips”. Then there are fare audits, which attempt to establish the extent of fare cheating, but then if someone is dishonest enough to ride without a ticket they are unlikely to be truthful when asked about their origin and destination.
Sample surveys and trip diaries try to make up the data gap, by tracking individuals who report all their journeys in some detail. 5,000 such diaries are collected every five years as part of the regional travel survey. That is enough to be statistically significant at the regional level, and allows for some “calibration” of the model together with cordon or screen line counts. But it is a very small sample – 0.04% of trips – compared to the 4% of trips that get counted in the Toronto Travel Survey.
Back in the bad old days of Glen Clark, a head count reduction was demanded of what was then BC Transit. It was realised that cutting operators or maintenance staff would be catastrophic, but the loss of “checkers” (the people who conducted passenger counts) would not have an immediate effect on service. And then there was always the use of market research firms who could do focus groups and questionnaires and the like.
But the good thing about this sort of data is that you don’t have to be bound by it. There’s plenty of room for interpretation and “professional judgement”. For example, the first two years of data from the farebox were simply ignored by the planners, because they were so different from what the estimates had been telling them for so long. And then there was the auditor, who did not understand that the estimates of fraud were based on calculations made from the total fare revenue divided by the “average fare”, which in itself was based on an estimate of ridership which included a set percentage for fraudulent travel.
The people who think that everyone rides Skytrain for free are mistaken. Most people get to the station by bus, and have a transfer or a pass. That’s why they don’t buy a ticket from the machines. But bus operators do not enforce the fare system – it’s too dangerous and not worth risking a faceful of knuckles (or worse) for an expired transfer. Most people are basically honest, and passes allow so many trips that they are a real bargain, so the decline of the cash fare is actually part of the plan. Counting coins is expensive, but Translink is much cheaper than the banks if you need to buy lots of rolls of coins.
UPDATE Based on information provided by the comment below this post has been revised