LA Visions

Ecoliner battery-electric bus

2011-04-25T13:26:00.000-07:00

Foothill Transit has three prototype battery-electric buses made by Proterra. One was on display at the SCAQMD for its Zero-Emission Transportation Technology Forum last Wednesday (4/20/11). Also see George Karbowski's presentation (3 MB PDF) for technical details. (click to enlarge photos)

1. Oil Supply

2011-04-09T17:36:00.000-07:00

The the first critical reason for Freedom from Oil is declining oil world supply....

The supply of oil in the ground is not infinite. Someday, annual world crude oil production has to reach a peak and start to decline. It is my opinion that the peak will occur in late 2005 or in the first few months of 2006. – Princeton University Professor Emeritus Kenneth Deffeyes, Beyond Oil

Based on oil geology, the peak of oil production occurs when around half of total recoverable oil has been produced. Not that we're "out of oil", but that supply will inexorably fall after the peak. The United States peaked in 1970 (blue area).

The above chart, data from ASPO (the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas) founder Colin Campbell (Newsletter #100 and OilPoster.org), summarizes our likely situation. Now even the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2010 sees a 2006 peak of 70 mb/d world crude oil production.

Won't oil companies keep finding more oil fields, especially with new technology?

No, as shown above, the biggest fields were discovered decades ago and are running down faster than new discoveries can replace them. Matthew Simmons' Twilight in the Desert summarizes numerous technical reports to conclude even Saudi Arabia's production may have peaked.

The United States' 1970 oil peak was never exceeded despite all of Alaska's new production (U.S. EIA). The big rise in demand has been supplied with imported oil (top five import sources' data beginning 1993/1995).

Nearly two-thirds of United States oil is imported, some from "countries that don't like us very much" (John McCain, 2008), and causing half of the U.S. balance of payments deficit, over $20 billion per month.

"Drill Baby Drill" simply cannot change the U.S.'s production decline. We need real solutions that reduce oil use, or else ...

We've already experienced for the consequences of oil supply less than demand: price spikes (2008) and gas lines (1979).

Synthetic fuel from Canadian tar sands consumes vast quantities of natural gas and water, creates huge waste ponds, and is worse than conventional oil for global warming (Suncor photo).

Synthetic fuel from coal, aka "liquid coal", has twice the global warming emissions as petroleum.

The Gulf oil disaster (USCG , AP photos; also see LA Times) is the latest example of environmental and economic devastation from oil production. Not to mention decades of air pollution. How much stronger a message do we need??

The vast majority of oil is used for transportation, with over half for personal vehicles' motor gasoline.

For more on Peak Oil see Energy Bulletin's Peak Oil Primer, The Oil Drum's Peak Oil Overview, and authors Richard Heinberg and James Howard Kunstler.

NEXT: 2. Global Warming

2. Global Warming

2011-04-09T16:30:00.000-07:00

A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems. – U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010

This January 2011 NASA chart shows 2010 tied (with 2005) for the hottest year on record, and is part of the hottest decade on record. It "is compiled from weather data from more than 1000 meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperature and Antarctic research station measurements."

Multiple reconstructions of historic temperatures show it is now the hottest in 2,000 years (PDF). More perspective on temperature reconstructions from Climate Progress and Skeptical Science.

Glaciers and ice sheets are melting around the world. For example, Muir Glacier in Alaska's Glacier Bay National Park, 1892 (left), has vanished in 2005 (right; both USGS).

Arctic sea ice is at record lows, and melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets is increasing. The “Albedo Effect” of shiny ice replaced by dark ocean further accelerates warming.

Not only is sea level rising, but most of the excess heat and has been absorbed in the ocean, resulting in stronger hurricanes. CO2 is also making the ocean more acidic, endangering shellfish and coral reefs.

A new NASA-Jet Propulsion Laboratory study projects a one-foot rise by 2050. If the 100,000-year-old, mile-thick Greenland Ice Sheet melted it would raise sea level over 23 feet.

Effects of global warming include extreme weather – severe heat, storms, floods, drought and dust bowls. Great wildfires (photo – Station Fire behind downtown Los Angeles, August 2009) are a result of heat, drought, and pine borer beetles that were formerly killed by cold winters.

Greater heat and less water reduce food crops.

Climate doesn't change all by itself for no good reason. Something has to force it. – Mark Serreze, National Snow and Ice Data Center director

The Greenhouse Effect is well-documented. That something is CO2 levels, primarily from burning fossil fuels over the last century – and other greenhouse gases – that have risen with temperature (NASA chart). This atmospheric CO2 acts like a thermostat to control the temperature of the Earth.

Warming is not caused by the sun: temperature is rising despite falling solar irradiance.

In fact, 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming via greenhouse gas emissions.

See more in NASA's Climate change: How do we know?, Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming, and Climate Progress, especially:

Transportation is the second-largest emissions sector nationally (above, US EPA, Tables 2-12 & 2-15) and the greatest in California (due to less coal-fired electricity, below, CARB; more on AB 32 Scoping Plan)

NEXT: 3. Alternatives to Driving BACK: 1. Oil Supply

3. Alternatives to Driving

2011-04-09T15:38:00.000-07:00

Livable communities with better transportation choices including transit and opportunities for bicycling and walking reduce the need to drive.

Los Angeles' Measure R and "30/10" – now "America Fast Forward" – will expand our transit network, including the Wilshire subway to Westwood (above).

Grid-connected electric transit – streetcars, light and heavy rail, and electric trolleybuses are quiet, energy-efficient, and proven. As Gilbert and Perl note, "Electricity is the ideal transport fuel for an uncertain future. Unlike other alternative energy transition paths for transport, only electric mobility can move people and goods using a wide range of energy sources."

New battery electric buses being tested on Foothill Transit may provide a good alternative to diesel and natural gas powered transit buses (Proterra photo; also MetroRiderLA). See George Karbowski's SCAQMD presentation (3 MB PDF) for technical details.

"Complete Streets" make communities more livable with inviting places to walk and bike, instead of driving (Charles Gandy, City of Long Beach image).

Urban parks importantly balance higher-density residential.

Ridesharing (via smart-phone apps) may be the fastest adjustment for an oil shock.

Intercity high speed rail will replace oil used by long-distance driving and intrastate plane flights (CHSRA image).

Moving freight to rail is much more efficient than trucks, and railroads can be electrified to become entirely oil-free.

NEXT: 4. Electric Vehicles BACK: 2. Global Warming

4. Electric Vehicles

2011-04-08T23:01:00.000-07:00

Plug-in electric vehicles, now beginning to be available (such as the battery-electric Nissan Leaf, above, and plug-in hybrid Chevy Volt), are the most feasible alternative to oil-powered cars.

Vehicle fuel efficiency helps, but cannot get us off oil. EPA-NHTSA rulemaking – in conjunction with California ARB – is beginning for 2017-2025. A range of 3-6% annual improvement would result in 47-62 mpg in 2025, compared with 34.1 mpg in 2016 and 27.5 mpg of the old (1990-2010) CAFE.

In comparison, a 2004-9 Toyota Prius midsize car was rated at 46 mpg. A fleet averaging that would cut U.S. gasoline use in half and U.S. oil use by 1/4.

Cartoon (c) by Steve Nease, used with permission

Most U.S. personal trips are by car (U.S. Census, SF-3, QT-P23), although less so in dense cities with good public transit like San Francisco, where only 41% drove alone, 31% rode transit, and 9% walked – a strong reason to oppose new sprawl development.

Fifty percent of drivers travel less than 25 miles per day (EPRI PDF). There is ample off-peak grid capacity today for overnight charging, and vehicle batteries can become distributed storage for demand peaks and renewable supply.

From renewable solar, wind, and geothermal power, the core of our clean energy, green jobs economic future.

But even on U.S. average-mix electricity Argonne National Lab's June 2010 "Well-to-Wheels Analysis ..." documented that plug-ins have lower GHG emissions than equivalent ICE gasoline cars, about the same on a coal-intensive mix, and of course much better with renewables (Figure ES-1, page 3).

See also Michael Brune's Sierra Club blogs 10/6/10 and 3/10/11; California ARB on zero Emission Vehicles, advocate Plug In America, Top 11 Electric Car Myths, and lithium availability.

We will need to plan for charging stations in apartment garages, public street parkways, and retail and commercial locations.

Biofuels, conversely, fail the key criteria of scalability, net energy, and external impacts.

Ethanol from corn uses about as much fossil-fuel energy to grow and make as it yields. It consumes water and fertilizer and competes with food production. Ethanol from sugar cane in Brazil is more sustainable, but not scalable to replace any large portion of oil.

Cellulosic ethanol is not in large-scale production, and has poor net energy due to transporting biomass and distilling the alcohol.

Biodiesel from used french fry oil sounds great, but there's not very much used french fry oil! The most productive oil crops are palm oil and soybeans. Their expanded production threatens rainforest land, hardly a benefit to global warming emissions.

See also Robert Rapier on The Palm Oil Conundrum and Five Challenges of Next-Generation Biofuels.

Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not source. It is mostly created from natural gas today, just another fossil fuel.

Even if electrolyzed from renewable electricity, it is less efficient to make, compress, and run a fuel cell on hydrogen than to just charge a battery (page 5, Table 2 in Boschert).

We need a solution now, but fuel cell vehicles are extremely expensive, plus there is no hydrogen fueling infrastructure.

BACK: 3. Alternatives to Driving

Move LA, part 1

2010-05-03T23:40:00.000-07:00

This is a web version of my presentation at Move LA's Transportation Conversation II, an environmental perspective on Los Angeles transportation.

The starting point always is our awful traffic.

Second are the impacts of our oil dependence. The U.S. imports 2/3 of what we use. U.S. production peaked in 1970 - despite all the new production in Alaska - and world production's high point was 2005 (US EIA data).

If one imagined what a divine message might be on the eve of Senate debate about national energy policy, it's hard to imagine a bigger one than the gulf oil catastrophe right now (US Coast Guard photo).

Third is Global Warming, documented here by continuing rise in world temperatures (NASA chart).

(Click any image to enlarge)

Transportation and electricity generation are over half the total greenhouse gas emissions (CARB AB 32 Scoping Plan data).

California's AB 32 goal is to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (more on AB 32 Scoping Plan).

The first solution is simple efficiency: if every car got the mileage of today's Prius, the U.S. would use half as much gasoline, one fourth less oil, as vividly illustrated in this cartoon by Steve Nease (used with permission).

The most cost-effective and scalable sources of renewable energy are wind ...

... and solar.

So sustainable transportation must transition to electricity. Measure R funding includes extending the electric Wilshire subway ...

(continue to part 2)

Move LA, part 2

2010-05-03T23:30:00.000-07:00

(continued from part 1)

... and expanding L.A.'s light rail network.

We seek cities' use of local return funds for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, as the City of Los Angeles just approved 10% for.

This map from The Transit Coalition suggests a number of rail corridors beyond the Measure R map. I'd highlight (1) extending the Crenshaw line from the Expo line up to Hollywood and (2) north south corridors from Westwood to LAX along Lincoln and/or the 405.

California High Speed Rail is important to Los Angeles, that will replace many intra-state plane flights and long car drives with electric trains (earlier post on Prop. 1A; California High Speed Rail Blog).

A few cities like San Francisco still have electric trolley buses.

The new company Proterra will be testing battery-electric buses that fast-charge at the end of their routes on Foothill Transit this year.

Plug-in hybrid and battery-electric vehicles are very important for all the trips that do not fit biking, walking, or transit. The first two major auto company models are the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf, due late this year (EVs and Energy Blog; Plug In America).

Finally, a major benefit of rail transit is enabling effective Transit Oriented Development within walking distance of stations, like here at Del Mar in Pasadena on the Gold Line. But will it live up to Smart Growth or just be auto-oriented "dumb density"?

Livable streets that encourage walking to neighborhood shops are very important. These two examples from Portland's Pearl District show the kind of amenities that make you feel at home.

Parks and open space for kids and older people are very important to balance increased density.

Canon EF-S 15-85 lens sample photos

2010-04-03T20:05:00.000-07:00

Following my Canon EF 70-300 lens sample photos, here are similar ones highlighting the usefulness and quality of my regular zoom lens Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM. Left is a photo of the male leaders of the 3/21/10 Los Angeles Marathon on San Vicente Blvd. approaching 14th St. in Santa Monica.

Here is a 100% crop of this 85mm (136mm in 35mm equivalent) zoom shot (F/8, 1/320 second, ISO-200). Winner Wesley Korir is in orange.

(Click all photos for full 800 px wide or all big photos.)

A quick turn to the left, pulled all the way back to 15mm (24mm in 35mm equivalent) looked like this, showing runners and the camera truck you don't see on TV.

It looks like my center spot focus locked on the truck (F/8, 1/800 second, ISO-200). Again, these are all original camera JPGs with no sharpening or other adjustments.

Here's another zoom, of a Pasadena Gold Line train crossing Mission St. in South Pasadena on 3/26/10. First is zoomed in on the approaching train at 85mm (136mm).

It looks like the auto focus locked on the pole on the right, in front of the train; the yellow sign is also within the depth of field (F/11, 1/320 second, ISO-200).

I've widened to 31mm (50mm 35mm equivalent) to include the historic buildings on the left and right.

The brick wall on the far left is nice and sharp at 100% (F/11, 1/400 second, ISO-200).

I find the zoom range useful, image quality on my 18 MP Canon Rebel T2i very good, and I just like the feel in hand of this camera and lens.

Canon EF 70-300 lens sample photos

2010-03-14T23:31:00.000-07:00

I've intended this blog to be more about images of Los Angeles; why not start with the results of shopping for a new DSLR and telephoto zoom lens? After reading many reviews I bought a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens yesterday for my new Rebel T2i (also with EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM regular zoom).

Above is the Westwood Village Theater tower from a block away at 300mm, full-frame 18 MP (5184 x 3456 pixels) reduced to 800 px wide. Left is a 100% crop (click all photos for full 800 px wide or all big photos). AF locked quickly on the seagull (1/1000 second, F/8, ISO-200).

Here's the Santa Monica Pier from 3/4 mile north on Palisades Park at 300mm, and a 100% crop of the ferris wheel. Behind the wheel is the Manhattan Beach Pier and Redondo Beach, around six miles away, which explains the fuzziness (1/800 second, F/8, ISO-200).
I found sample images most useful to me, so I'd like to share some of mine so far. These are all original camera JPGs with no sharpening or other adjustments. Also, I used only the center spot for focusing in all cases.

Here's a group of plants at 300mm from about a hundred feet away, and a 100% crop of the succulent at lower-left (1/200 second, F/8, ISO-200).

My biggest question was whether this lens would be sharp enough - and others' concerns about non-ring USM and the extending, rotating lens barrel - compared with the more expensive, larger, but shorter-reach EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. My answer is yes.

And this is a sample shot of the far side of the camera store at 300mm, with a 100% crop from below center showing readible text (1/25 second, F/8, ISO-1600). Image Stabilization worked well for this hand-held shot.

I think the biggest variable in the sharpness of my test photos is what part of the scene I lock focus on (as in the landscapes with a lot of depth). I'm still learning the camera and lens, but having a lot of fun with what 300mm can do.

The Solution to ...

2009-01-19T16:00:00.000-08:00

The right energy plan addresses all of Global Warming, Peak Oil, Energy Independence (2/3 of U.S. oil is imported), and Economic Stimulus spending (investing in green jobs and future economic sustainability).

Here's my summary in four images (click to enlarge).

Nearly half of U.S. oil is used for gasoline, and over half of California's global warming emissions come from passenger vehicles and electricity generation.

The greatest leverage is Efficiency in transportation and buildings' energy use.

The most practical renewable energy in large quantities is electricity from solar, wind, and geothermal.

The most sustainable transportation is electric - EVs and plug-in hybrids, transit, passenger and freight rail.

There is a growing consensus around these main policies, as recently noted by Adam Stein in Gristmill and the Post Carbon Institute's The Real New Deal.

Sources:
World Oil Production - ASPO Newsletter and OilPoster.org
Crude Oil and Products' sources - U.S. EIA Petroleum Supply Monthly, Tables 4, 38
Oil Uses - U.S. EIA Petroleum Supply Monthly, Table 4
Greenhouse Gas Emissions - California Air Resources Board

New Metro Long Range Transportation Plan

2009-01-06T19:00:00.000-08:00

The new post-Measure R staff-proposed Long Range Transportation Plan was noted by the LA Times' Steve Hymon and is available for download from the Planning & Programming Committee agenda here (PDF).

Here is the Recommended list of Transit Corridor projects (first page of Attachment B):

Transit Corridors -- $ Millions (YoE) -- Open Year (FY)

Metro Gold Line Eastside Light Rail Transit (LRT) -- 899 -- 2010
Exposition LRT Phase I: 7th Street Metro Center to Culver City -- 862 -- 2011
San Fernando Valley North-South Metro Orange Line Canoga Extension (R) -- 223 -- 2013
San Fernando Valley East North-South Rapidways (R) -- 100 -- 2013
Exposition LRT Phase II: Culver City to Santa Monica (R) -- 1,646 -- 2015
Wilshire Boulevard Bus Rapid Transitway -- 124 -- 2015
Metro Gold Line Foothill LRT Extension (6)(R) -- 905 -- 2017
Metro Green Line LRT Extension to LAX/Crenshaw Corridor: Segment 1 - 1 mile -- 443 -- 2018
Metro Green Line LRT Extension to LAX (R): Segment 2 -- 300 -- 2018-2022 (depending on LAX contribution)
Regional Connector (R) -- 1,158 -- 2018
Westside Subway Extension to Westwood (R):
Segment 1 to La Cienega -- 2,350 -- 2019
Segment 2 to Century City -- 2,597 -- 2026
Segment 3 to Westwood -- 1,497 -- 2032
Crenshaw Corridor (3)(R): Segment 2 (mode is TBD) -- 2,004 -- 2029
Metro Green Line LRT Extension: Redondo Beach to South Bay Corridor (R) -- 570 -- 2035
Metro Gold Line Eastside LRT Extension (R) -- 2,845 -- 2037
San Fernando Valley 1-405 Corridor Connection (R) (mode is TBD) -- 2,420(8) -- 2038
West Santa Ana Branch ROW Corridor (R) -- 405(8) -- As additional funds become available

(R) Projects included in Measure R
(3) Technology to be determinted; cost assumes LRT
(6) Measure R funds estimated to fund segment to approximately Glendora, including yard and vehicles
(8) Measure R contribution only

Tier 1: Currently Under Planning Study/Environmentally Cleared/Route Refinement Study/Previously Studied

Burbank/Glendale LRT from LA Union Station to Burbank Metrolink Station
Harbor Subdivision Alternate Rail Technology (ART)
Metro Gold Line Eastside LRT Extension Branch not funded in Recommended Plan
Metro Gold Line Foothill LRT Extension (beyond segment funded by Measure R)
Metro Green Line LRT Extension between Norwalk Station and Norwalk Metrolink Station (Elevated or Underground Light Rail)
Westside Subway Extension (beyond segment funded by Measure R)

Tier 2: Candidates for Further Project Definition

Metro Green Line LRT Extension between South Bay Galleria and Pacific Coast Highway Harbor Transitway Station
Metro Green Line LRT Extension from LAX to Expo Santa Monica Station
Metro Red Line Extension from North Hollywood Station to Burbank Airport Metrolink Station
"Silver" Line LRT between Metro Red Line Vermont/Santa Monica Station and City of La Puente
SR-134 Transit Corridor BRT between Metro Red Line North Hollywood Station and Metro Gold Line Del Mar Station
Vermont Corridor Subway
"Yellow" Line LRT between Metro Red Line North Hollywood Station and Regional Connector

AB 32 Scoping Plan

2008-12-13T21:44:00.000-08:00

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) passed the AB 32 Scoping Plan Thursday (press release; LA Times).

AB 32 is California's landmark 2006 law to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, about 30% from business-as-usual projected for 2020, 15% from today’s levels.
The long-range goal is 80% from 1990 levels by 2050.

The largest two sectors of greenhouse gas emissions (left) are transportation — 38% — and electricity generation — 23%.

(click to enlarge)

This timeline shows CARB's first milestones in 2007; developing the high-level Scoping Plan over the last year; and the upcoming detailed rulemaking through 2011 to implement it.

Following is the overview of how the Scoping Plan expects to reduce emissions.

Recommended Reduction Measures — Counted Towards 2020 Target (MMTCO₂E*)

ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS FROM CAP AND TRADE PROGRAM AND COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES — 146.7

California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards — 31.7
Energy Efficiency — 26.3
Renewables Portfolio Standard (33% by 2020) — 21.3
Low Carbon Fuel Standard — 15
Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets — 5
Vehicle Efficiency Measures — 4.5
Goods Movement — 3.7
Million Solar Roofs — 2.1
Medium/Heavy Duty Vehicles — 1.4
High Speed Rail — 1.0
Industrial Measures (cap-and-trade sources) — 0.3
Additional Reductions Necessary to Achieve the Cap — 34.4

ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS FROM UNCAPPED SOURCES — 27.3

High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures — 20.2
Sustainable Forests — 5.0
Industrial Measures (non-cap and trade sources) — 1.1
Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture) — 1.0

TOTAL REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS 2020 TARGET — 174

*Million Metric Tons of CO₂ Equivalent emissions. Source (PDF), page 2, update to Proposed Scoping Plan (PDF), Table 2, page 17 (PDF page 37). Charts source (PDF).

CARB Chairman Mary Nichols (far left) and board members Barbara Riordan and Dr. Daniel Sperling at the December 2007 meeting in El Monte that set the 2020 emissions limit at 427 MMTCO₂E.

CARB's senior staff, led by Chuck Shulock (far left), at a July public workshop during development of the Scoping Plan.

Dr. Steven Chu

2008-12-13T17:45:00.000-08:00

Another to bookmark: Dr. Steven Chu's presentation on climate change impacts, energy efficiency, and advanced renewable energy technologies — photovoltaics and biofuel grasses — at the National Energy Summit in Nevada last summer demonstrates what an excellent choice he is to be Obama's Energy Secretary (via Gristmill).

Presidents, morphed

2008-12-03T20:05:00.000-08:00

Too good not to bookmark here (via Huffington Post), by someone a lot more skilled than I was at morphing Bush to Palin.

It drew me into their faces, these men whose names we've heard of but really know so little about.

First two Measure R rail projects

2008-12-02T22:50:00.000-08:00

Measure R has officially passed with a final count of 67.93% YES!

Let's look at the next steps for the first two rail projects it will fund, Expo Line Phase 2 to Santa Monica and the Gold Line Foothill Extension to Azusa, construction potentially beginning on both in 2010 (click maps to enlarge; Expo, Foothill PDF sources).

Updated with the latest Expo Authority Board reports their schedule ahead is:

January/February 2009 - Public Hearings on Draft EIR
March/April 2009 - Board Adopts LPA
October 2009 - Final EIR
2010 - Begin construction
2014-15 - Revenue Service

And an email from the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority listed these target dates for the Gold Line Phase 2A (Pasadena to Azusa):

November 2009 - Commencement of the design / build procurement process for both the Santa Anita Aerial Structure and the Foothill Extension Phase 2A Alignment.
August 2010 - Groundbreaking for Santa Anita Aerial Structure
February 2011 - Groundbreaking for Foothill Extension Phase 2A
December 2013 - Phase 2A Revenue Service

After Measure R passes

2008-11-23T22:15:00.000-08:00

Now that we can celebrate Measure R passing (67.65% YES on 11/21/08 provisional vote update), what projects will be built first and how can advocates help?

As specified in Measure R (Metro Map, click to enlarge), the new 1/2-cent sales tax begins collection on July 1, 2009. Its funding breakdown is:

35% new Metro Rail and Bus Rapid Transit capital
3% Metrolink commuter rail capital
2% Metro Rail capital improvements to existing lines
5% Rail Operations
20% Bus Operations
20% Highway Capital
15% Local Return for streets, bikeways, pedestrian improvements

The transit projects funded for completion in its first ten years are:

1-A Expo Line phase 2, Culver City to Santa Monica, $925M, starting construction 2010, opening FY 2013-15
1-F Gold Line Foothill Extension, $735M, starting construction 2010, opening FY 2015-17
1-H Green Line LAX Extension, $200M, FY 2015-28
1-B Crenshaw Corridor, $1,207M, FY 2016-18
1-I S.F. Valley Canoga Corridor BRT, $182M, FY 2016-18
1-J S.F. Valley N-S Corridors BRT, $68.5M, FY 2016-18

Even better, Roger Snoble said on KPCC 11/6/08 that construction of the Foothill Gold Line "is able to move ahead very quickly, right along with Expo" Line phase 2 to Santa Monica in 2010 (21:00), as well as the Green Line to LAX (19:30). He also emphasized, "the ordinance ... has a very clear expenditure plan ... when the project would be expected to be delivered ... the people voted on that schedule ...."

On accelerating the Purple Line Wilshire Subway (1-D Westside Subway Extension, $4,074M, FY 2034-36), the LA Times Bottleneck Blog reported: "During the news conference about Measure R's passage, Metropolitan Transportation Authority chief Roger Snoble said it may now be possible to extend the line to Fairfax Avenue within six or seven years and the line could get to Westwood in 20 years."

The important Regional Connector (1-C) between the Expo/Blue and Gold lines is expected to be competitive for federal funding (estimated $708M match to $160M local), which we hope can advance it from its current FY 2023-25 scheduled completion.

How can advocates help? With funding in place, we can now focus on helping Metro's planning process complete their designs well and move forward to construction. And advocate for cities to fund bicycle and pedestrian projects with their Local Return share.

Also see Ken Alpern's CityWatch column this week and my earlier posts Metro's sales tax would fund... and Sales tax comments for more.

Election success!

2008-11-05T20:30:00.000-08:00

Congratulations President-elect Obama! His presidency, combined with Democratic majorities in Congress, will make possible the energy, climate, and transportation policies we need.

For some very moving photos of last night's acceptance speech, see these Grant Park photos from the Chicago Tribune.

Amazingly, Los Angeles County Measure R transportation sales tax sqeaked past its needed 2/3 majority at 67.41% YES (100% reported)!

The LA Times Bottleneck Blog gave a good description of the joyful press conference this morning at Wilshire & Western. Left are two UCLA student campaigners, and lower left are Steve Hymon with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Metro CEO Roger Snoble (click to enlarge).

Proposition 1A for High Speed Rail finished at 52.2% YES. Now we'll have a lot of work ahead going from funding to completed plans to finished projects.

And the faux-clean-energy Propositions 7 and 10 were strongly defeated, 64.9% and 59.8% NO, respectively (100% reported). Four for four!

Proposition recommendations

2008-10-29T19:10:00.000-07:00

NEW: I'm on KNBC TV supporting 1A and opposing 10.

On the four ballot measures next week about transportation and energy:

YES on 1A

Proposition 1A for California high-speed rail from San Francisco to Anaheim, with extensions to Sacramento and San Diego, would fund the state's $10B share to match private and federal money. Travel time from Los Angeles to San Francisco would be less than three hours.

Trains powered by domestic renewable electricity could reduce our oil dependence by 12.7 million barrels a year and eliminate 12 billion pounds of greenhouse gasses from many intra-state plane flights and long-distance car drives, using proven technology enjoyed in Europe and Asia.

This is the time to take high speed rail to its next step, investing in our infrastructure for California's economic future, like Governor Pat Brown's 1960s legacy. Is a $10 billion bond expensive? Not compared with highways and airport expansion, $6B to widen 99 to 6 lanes in the San Joaquin Valley, $20B to 8 lanes. And not compared with China's investment high speed rail for its place in the world economy.

Also see my earlier post on California High Speed Rail.

Links: Yes on 1A; Sierra Club on 1A; California High Speed Rail Blog; LA Times editorial

NO on 7

Proposition 7 has a laudable goal, but its critically flawed execution would set us back, the reason it's opposed by Sierra Club and other leading environmental groups – NRDC, Union of Concerned Scientists, California League of Conservation Voters; many in the renewable energy industry; the LA Times; and both political parties.

California already has a 20% Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) for 2010, and 33% for 2020, plus the statewide AB-32 plan to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Prop. 7 does not address the real barriers to renewable energy – the need for reliable, predictable funding, such as a feed-in tariff – instead of creating rules for renewable contracts based on the unstable cost of baseload gas.

Its exclusion of less-than-30 MW providers (“solar and clean energy plant” is defined as a renewable energy generating “facility” with “a generating capacity of 30 Megawatts or more” in section 14) would cripple much of the renewables industry.

Its six-month “fast-track” provision would undermine environmental protections and existing collaboration on appropriate siting of renewable facilities and transmission corridors.

And it would be nearly impossible to correct these errors with its 2/3-majority legislative vote requirement.

Links: No on 7; Sierra Club on 7; LA Times editorial

NO on 10

Proposition 10 would spend $5B ($10B with bond interest) of state taxpayers’ money to subsidize natural gas vehicles and fueling infrastructure.

Mostly funded by T. Boone Pickens’ natural gas fueling station company Clean Energy Fuels Corp – $3.7M as of Sept. 30 – it is a wrong direction to a dead-end.

The right solutions to Global Warming and to reduce our oil dependence especially include efficiency, and electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) that can use renewable electricity from wind, solar, and geothermal. One-third (36%) of California's greenhouse gas emissions are from from cars and trucks, and half of U.S. oil is used for motor gasoline.

Natural gas is merely another depleting fossil fuel. It provides little benefit toward the goal of 80% reduction in Global Warming emissions by 2050. In fact, it is 40% more efficient to make electricity for electric cars from gas than burn it in cars.

Proposition 10 is opposed by major environmental groups – Sierra Club, NRDC, Union of Concerned Scientists, California League of Conservation Voters – and over 30 newspapers. The LA Times called it a “reprehensible scam.”

Links: No on 10; Sierra Club on 10; LA Times editorial

YES on R

Measure R is a proposed half-cent 30-year Los Angeles County transportation sales tax.

Los Angeles County’s transportation needs far exceed existing local, state, and federal funding, and the political climate both in the state and in Washington DC is not likely to increase those levels any time soon. That is why this comprehensive countywide plan was developed, in consultation with a coalition of transit, environmental, labor, and business groups.

Two-thirds (65%) of Measure R will fund critical expansion of our rail transit network and transit operations. Bus riders will receive the benefits of a 70% annual increase over current bus operations funding, to reduce fare increases and improve service. And Local Return funds can support new bicycle and pedestrian projects.

See my earlier posts Metro's sales tax would fund... and Sales tax comments for more.

Links: Yes on Measure R; Metro on R; LA Times editorial

Oil-state governors

2008-09-20T23:15:00.001-07:00

Sales tax and its planned projects

2008-08-13T17:30:00.000-07:00

Great news! The LA Times Bottleneck Blog just reported that amended sales tax authorization bill was just approved by the State Senate Appropriations Committee.

New "intent language" specified that some of the sales tax revenues must be spent on the Green Line to LAX, 605 freeway traffic hotspots, the Foothill Gold Line extension and 710 Freeway to satisfy concerns of some legislators that projects, despite being named, won't be funded — without making changes that would invalidate the Metro ballot language. Whew, we finally got this far!

On objections that not enough planning went into this measure, it's not like the projects in the Draft LRTP and the proposed sales tax are all that new. They haven't changed much from the L.A. County Transportation Commission's 10/91 Draft 30-Year Plan map (detail, right, click to enlarge).

The Proposed Rail Component of the March 1992 "LACTC Proposed 30-Year Integrated Transportation Plan" included three tiers:

Fundable Plan

Red Line segments 1, 2, and 3 (North Hollywood)
Orange Line (now Purple), east to Atlantic and west to Westwood
San Fernando Valley East-West, North Hollywood to Sepulveda (Canoga Park "included in LACTC's commitment to the overall East-West Transit Project, pending outcome of the EIR and Public-Private Partnership initiatives.")
Pasadena Line
Green Line
Commuter Rail
Blue Line Downtown Connector
Right-of-Way Protection Program

Candidate Corridors

Sierra Madre Villa to Azusa in the San Gabriel Valley
Downtown Los Angeles to USC
USC to Santa Monica
Downtown Los Angeles to the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport area
Green Line to Orange County Rail Connection
Green Line Multi-Modal Transportation Center to Westchester Parkway
Route 60 Corridor in the San Gabriel Valley
El Segundo to Torrance

Expanded Plan (the colored circles of Possible Future Extensions on the map)

The Tri-Cities Corridor linking the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena
An extension of the Sierra Madre Villa to Azusa Corridor in the San Gabriel Valley to the Pomona Valley
Crenshaw Corridor providing a mid-city connection between the Green Line and the Exposition Corridor
A corridor extending from Westchester Parkway to Marina Del Rey

Then there's the LAX-Palmdale Public-Private Partnership Project.

So sixteen years later the project list hasn't changed much at all, beyond rise (especially Crenshaw) and fall in priority, and a couple of mode changes.

Would yet another round of studies change anything — especially after the extensive studies c. 2000 and the current round of corridor studies — or just delay the benefits of completed projects again?

Sales tax comments

2008-07-31T12:15:00.000-07:00

To get its required 2/3 vote the proposed 1/2-cent L.A. County transportation sales tax will have to meet critical needs for voters across the county. That it was designed as a compromise package to fund a number of long-sought projects, both transit and roads, hasn't stopped some critics from complaining.

The flagship new Westside project is the "Subway to the Sea", to receive $4,074 million, enough to open to Westwood in phases by the mid-2030s. The Expo Line phase 2 from Culver City to Santa Monica, although already budgeted in the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), would receive funding to assure its timely completion in 2013-15.

Other Westside projects include advancing the Crenshaw line from the 2020s to 2016-18, including service to LAX, and extending the Green Line to the South Bay Galleria.

New for both the San Fernando Valley and Westside is $1 billion for the I-405 Connector from the Valley to Westwood, a critical alternative to this freeway pass. SFV north-south Bus Rapid Transit lines along the Canoga right-of-way and north-south boulevards would be accelerated.

Similarly, the flagship project for the San Gabriel Valley is the Foothill Extension of the Pasadena Gold Line to Claremont. Here are Congressmembers David Dreier and Hilda Solis at a press conference on the right-of-way by Citrus College in Azusa on March 26. Foothill is not funded in the LRTP, and would receive $735M from the sales tax.

The Regional Connector across downtown L.A. between the Blue/Expo and Gold Lines would receive $160 million, with expectation of easy qualification for federal match.

Other SGV projects include extending the Eastside Gold Line and initial funding for the 710 freeway "gap closure" tunnel under South Pasadena.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich called for "Equity" in the form of allocating dollars based in population by subregion. But that supposes people only travel where they live. A resident of Palmdale who drives across the San Fernando Valley to a job in Santa Monica demonstrates how funding should go where it is most needed.

Bus advocates call for lower fares and more service in the face of limited operations funds and rising costs. The solution is a bigger pot, which is where 20% of the sales tax would generate $7,880 million for bus operations over 30 years, a 70% annual increase from existing (Draft LRTP) levels.

And how regressive is a sales tax that doesn't apply to groceries, rent, transit, utilities, or services?

Bicycle and pedestrian advocates sought a dedicated 1-2%, but will have to lobby local cities to be sure such projects are submitted under the 15% Local Return category. Making neighborhoods more inviting for walking and cycling is a fast, cost-effective way to reduce both traffic and fuel use.

Metro's sales tax would fund...

2008-07-30T16:00:00.000-07:00

Here's some detail of what would be funded by the proposed 1/2-cent 30-year Los Angeles County sales tax that Metro approved July 24 (StreetsBlog, Bottleneck Blog 1 and 2) putting on the ballot this November, from Metro's Board Report (PDF).

(Note that Assemblyman Mike Feuer's AB 2321, necessary for the measure to go on the ballot, is still pending in the State Senate.)

Here's the overall breakdown of the estimated $40 billion over 30 years:

35% — Transit Capital — New Rail and/or Bus Rapid Transit — $13,790M
3% — Transit Capital — Metrolink within Los Angeles County — $1,112M
2% — Transit Capital — Metro Rail System Improvements, Rail Yards, and Rail Cars — $788M
20% — Highway Capital — Carpool Lanes, Highways, Goods Movement, Grade Separations, and Soundwalls — $7,880M
5% — Operations — Rail (New Transit Projects) — $1,970M
20% — Operations — Bus (Countywide Bus Service Operations, Maintenance, and Expansion. Suspend a scheduled July 1, 2009 Metro fare increase for one year and freeze all Metro Student, Senior, Disabled, and Medicare fares through June 30, 2013) — $7,880M
15% — Local Return — to cities and unincorporated county for major street resurfacing, rehabilitation and reconstruction; pothole repair; left turn signals; bikeways; pedestrian improvements; streetscapes; signal synchronization; and transit — $5,910M

Here's an outline of the "Metro's Five-Point Plan" official description, combined with Attachment A's Total funding from the new sales tax and Expected Completion dates for specific capital projects. I've indicated these projects in dashed orange on the Draft LRTP base maps. Click to enlarge.

1. Rail Expansion

Goals: To significantly expand the size of the Metro Rail and busway systems; to accelerate and enhance existing rail and bus projects; to serve more communities.

1-A. Expo Light Rail: Culver City to Santa Monica — $925M — FY 2013-5
1-B. Crenshaw Corridor (project acceleration) — $1,207M — FY 2016-18
1-C. Regional Connector — $160M (+ $708M federal) — FY 2023-25
1-D. Westside Subway Extension — $4,074M — $2034-36
1-E. Gold Line Eastside Extension — $1,271M — FY 2033-35
1-F. Gold Line Foothill Light Rail Extension — $735M — FY 2015-17
1-G. Green Line Extension to South Bay — $272M — FY 2033-35
1-H. Green Line Extension to LAX — $200M — FY 2015-28
1-I. S.F. Valley N-S: Canoga Corridor (proj. acc.) — $182M — FY 2014-16
1-J. S.F. Valley N-S: East Corridors (proj. acc.) — $68.5M — FY 2016-18
1-K. West Santa Ana Branch Corridor — $240M — FY 2025-27
1-L. S.F. Valley I-405 Corridor Connection — $1,000M — FY 2038-39
1-M. Metrolink Capital Improvements
1-N. Metro Rail Capital
1-O. Eastside Light Rail Access (Gold Line) — $30M — 2013

2. Local Street Improvements

Goals: To synchronize traffic signals to ease traffic flow; to accelerate pothole repair and other maintenance on local streets; to make neighborhood streets and intersections safer for drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians in each community.

2-A. Signal Synchronization
2-B. Major Street Resurfacing & Pothole Repair
2-C. Traffic Monitoring Programs
2-D. Bicycle Programs
2-E. Pedestrian Improvement Program
2-F. Safer Bus Stops
2-G. Traffic Demand Management

3. Traffic Reduction

Goals: To relieve highway traffic congestion throughout Los Angeles County; to enhance highway safety and improve traffic flow.

3-A. I-5: SR-134 to SR-170 — $271.5M (+$264M state) — FY 2013
3-B. I-5: I-605 to OC Line — $264.8M (+$834M state) — FY 2016-17
3-C. I-5/Carmenita Rd. — $138M (+$154M state) — FY 2015
3-D. I-5/SR-14 — $90.8M (+$41M state) — FY 2013-15
3-E. I-405, I-110, I-105 and SR-91: South Bay — $906M — TBD
3-F. I-5 North: SR-14 to Kern County Line (Truck Lanes) — $410M — TBD
3-G. I-710 South and/or Early Action Projects — $590M — TBD
3-H. SR-138 Capacity Enhancement — $200M — TBD
3-I. High Desert Corridor (environmental) — $33M — TBD
3-J. I-605 Corridor “Hot Spot” Interchanges — $590M — TBD
3-K. Highway ... Arroyo Verdugo Subregion — $170M — TBD
3-L. Highway ... Las Virgenes and Malibu Subregion — $175M — TBD
3-M. I-710 North Gap Closure (Tunnel) — $780M — TBD

4. Better Public Transportation

Goals: To keep public transportation affordable, especially for seniors and the disabled; to expand proven bus transit methods; to extend the convenience of public transportation.

4-A. Rapid Bus Improvements
4-B. Express Bus Improvements
4-C. Local Bus Improvements
4-D. Improved Service for Seniors
4-E. Improved Service for the Disabled
4-F. Fare Equity
4-G. Increased Bus Service to Rail Stations
4-H. Expanding Community-based Shuttle Services
4-I. Increased Local Transit Funding

5. Quality of Life

Goals: To ensure that people and freight can move freely in Los Angeles County; to enable the local economy to prosper; to enable residents to enjoy safety, clean air and a high quality of life.

5-A. Alternative to High Gas Prices
5-B. Significant Economic Impacts
5-C. Job Stimulus
5-D. Reduced Traffic Congestion
5-E. Local Air Quality Improvements
5-F. Live/Work Opportunities
5-G. BNSF Grade Separations in Gateway Cities
5-H. Alameda Corridor East Grade Separations Phase II
5-I. Countywide Soundwall Construction
5-J. Metro and Municipal Clean Fuel Bus Facilities and Rolling Stock

Oil prices

2008-06-18T23:25:00.000-07:00

Crude oil prices have risen from under $25 to over $130 a barrel (click images to enlarge). Gasoline prices are headed for $5 a gallon. Is it Peak Oil, speculators, the weak dollar, OPEC, or what?

The lower chart (source, PDF, page 6), by Roger H. Bezdek, co-author of the 2005 "Hirsch Report", shows the impact of demand exceeding supply. Are we there now?

I'll update this post with analyses on different sides.

Peak Oil introduction

2008-06-01T12:20:00.000-07:00

The critical topic of Peak Oil deserves its extensive coverage in multiple books (right; click to enlarge) and websites. A good start is oil geologist and Princeton University Professor Emeritus Kenneth Deffeyes' beginning to Beyond Oil:

The supply of oil in the ground is not infinite. Someday, annual world crude oil production has to reach a peak and start to decline. It is my opinion that the peak will occur in late 2005 or in the first few months of 2006.

Based on oil geology, the peak occurs when around half of total recoverable oil has been produced. Not that we're "out of oil", but that production will inexorably fall after the peak.

This chart, data from ASPO (the Association for the Study of Peak Oil&Gas) founder Colin Campbell, summarizes where we likely are.

But won't oil companies keep finding more oil fields, especially with new technology?

No, the biggest fields were discoverd decades ago and are running down faster than new discoveries can replace them. Matthew Simmons' Twilight in the Desert summarizes numerous technical reports to conclude even Saudi Arabia's production may have peaked.

As an example, this chart from The Oil Drum's Gail Tverberg documents the United States' 1970 oil peak was never exceeded despite all of Alaska's new production. Proposed drilling in ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) would do far less.

That's the very short version of Peak Oil. Energy Bulletin's Peak Oil Primer and the books above are good next steps. Richard Heinberg and James Howard Kunstler provide extensive background on Peak Oil, oil alternatives, and potential futures. I regularly check Energy Bulletin, Gristmill, and Robert Rapier's blog for Peak Oil and energy news. ASPO-USA will hold its 4th annual national conference in Sacramento this year, September 21-23. I'll be there.

So begins a thread that will focus on what does Los Angeles do post-Peak Oil.

Streetcar Workshop

2008-05-23T20:30:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's Streetcar Workshop received extensive coverage in BlogDowntown, as well as StreetsBlog LA.

This image sets the mood of a streetcar revival on Broadway (click to enlarge).

Here more photos of recent streetcar lines.
The Portland Streetcar blazed the trail of modern streetcars as the catalyst to new pedestrian-oriented downtowns.

Two replica Pacific Electric Red Cars run in San Pedro. Extensions south to the beach, west into downtown, and north are planned.

Replica cars circle downtown Little Rock, Arkansas, go to the Clinton Library, and cross the river to North Little Rock.

Regional Conector: 1st & Alameda

2008-05-23T11:21:00.000-07:00

A new post on BlogDowntown (via MetroRiderLA) shows three Metro images of the Regional Connector subway Alternative 5 at 1st and Alameda with tracks rising from a portal at 2nd and Central and Alameda passing under 1st.

Be sure to read the whole item; here's the first image (click to enlarge; looking south, Little Tokyo Gold Line station on the lower right next to Alameda).

Regional Connector update

2008-05-11T23:00:00.000-07:00

Last week blogdowntown reported the final two options for the 1.5-mile Regional Connector that will provide a one-seat ride into and across downtown between the Blue / Expo Lines and the Pasadena / Eastside Gold Line.

These images (click to enlarge) are updated from Metro's February presentation. (Turns out my suggestions last November didn't work structurally to connect with the existing Gold Line bridge at Aliso.)

In Alternative 3B the existing Flower Street tunnel would be extended up to street level at 4th for a station, cross 3rd at-grade, cut through the 2nd Street tunnel wall, then run on the south side of the tunnel and middle of 2nd (image below). A one-way couplet on Main and Los Angeles completes the route up to Temple and the Gold Line.

Alternative 5 is a subway extension up Flower and beneath 2nd Street. It would ramp up from a portal at 2nd and Central across the Office Depot lot to cross Alameda at-grade. Alameda would be depressed below 1st Street.

This rendering shows the proposed at-grade alignment on 2nd Street. It does all fit in the 60' street right-of-way (5' sidewalk, 10' station platform, 24' trackway, 11' traffic lane, and 10' sidewalk).

But detailed study and the relatively-small price difference — $650 million vs. $800 million — is likely to conclude that the subway is the best choice, for a faster ride with less traffic and train disruption.

Wilshire subway planning

2008-05-07T13:15:00.000-07:00

Here are the latest refined Westside Extension (aka Wilshire subway) maps (click images to enlarge) from Metro's public meetings this week. (Also see my 11/15/07 comments and the Subway to the Sea Coalition.)

The remaining alternatives — with the best performance — are two subway options along the Wilshire corridor, and those two with Hollywood branches added. The obligatory No Project, TSM (Transportation System Management), and BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) study options also remain. These are only general route and station locations; details will come in a later study phase.

Alt. 1. This is the basic Wilshire route, with different details from Century City to Westwood. Orange rectangles highlight changes from previous versions.

Alt. 14. This jogs north to serve Farmers Market and Cedars-Sinai. I like adding these destinations, but am concerned about slowing around three sides of a box, unlike the earlier version that diagonaled to Wilshire & Beverly.

Alt. 11. Here trains would also run between Santa Monica and Hollywood, transferring to the Red Line at Highland. I suggested considering a longer north-south route from Hollywood past Wilshire to perhaps the Crenshaw line to LAX.

Alt. 16. Hollywood branch added to the Farmers Market alternative.

Other notes:

The Santa Monica Blvd.-only options were dropped for lower ridership and cost-effectiveness.
Wilshire only — 71K new boardings (2030), 53K daily travel hours saved, $5.5B capital cost, $32/hour saved (FTA target is $25-35/hour saved)
Santa Monica only — 55K new boardings, 41K daily travel hours saved
Wilshire + Hollywood — 82K new boardings, 62K daily travel hours saved, $8B capital cost, $37/hour saved

The remaining two meetings are (6-8 p.m.):

Thursday, May 8, Santa Monica Public Library – Multipurpose Room, 2nd Floor, 601 Santa Monica Bl, SM
Monday, May 12, Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Bl, West Hollywood

Wilshire Monorail—2

2008-05-07T13:10:00.000-07:00

There were also these two great simulations of a monorail above Wilshire at Fairfax, using a Las Vegas station to show how much space it would take. The landmark former May Co. department store, now part of the LA County Museum of Art, is on the left.

Metro doesn't recommend further study of any aerial alternatives in this corridor, either HRT, LRT, or monorail. (click images to enlarge)

Stations are large, especially with pedestrian bridges for access. Straddle bents (the beams spanning the street) are used when there's not space for columns.

See my previous 6/23/07 post Wilshire Monorail? on this subject, also Flood channel monorails?

Olympic-Pico one-way

2008-05-07T12:10:00.000-07:00

The LA Times reported yesterday, "Judge puts hold on L.A.'s Olympic-Pico traffic plan".

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's chief plan to speed traffic in Los Angeles was delayed Monday when a judge ruled that more study, which could take months, was needed before two Westside thoroughfares could be altered to work more like one-way streets. ...

In his five-page ruling, Torribio took particular umbrage to a claim by the city that the project didn't need to be studied because it wasn't a major change to how the streets were managed.

"In other words, the very purpose of the project is to expand the use of the existing streets," Torribio wrote. "To claim that the project will not expand the current use and is therefore exempt" from further study "seems inconsistent with the stated purpose." ...

Rather than creating major disruption for the questionable effectiveness of the city's plan, two simple improvements would help ease the bottleneck of getting east past the 405 freeway while we await major relief from completion of the Expo Line to Santa Monica:

Restripe a fourth eastbound lane to Olympic Boulevard from Barrington to Sepulveda.
Two lanes of Pico converge with two lanes of Gateway (Ocean Park) Blvd., narrowing to two lanes (photo above, click to enlarge) before widening to three lanes (past the big tree on the right). An obvious fix is to extend the third lane the short additional distance to the intersection. Street parking on Pico proposed to be removed farther west is much less the problem.

Flood channel monorails?

2008-01-26T17:50:00.000-08:00

For more on monorails (see also Wilshire monorail?), David Lazarus' 12/9/07 column "Southland transit is in need of big ideas" suggested:

Brian C. Brooks, an L.A. County Department of Public Works employee, believes he has the answer, which he shared with me after laying out a map of the county's system of flood channels.

"If you had a monorail system all over Los Angeles, along all the flood channels, it would be like having a magic carpet, carrying you above all the traffic," he said. "Absolutely this would work." ...

Brooks believes a monorail network can be built along L.A.'s flood channels for less than $35 million per mile, or a tenth the estimated cost of expanding the existing subway system. A 10-mile monorail line could be up and running in less than three years, he said.

"Californians are an above-ground people," Brooks said. "We don't want to be underground in a dark tunnel. We want to be above it all, in the light."

This image shows how a flood channel monorail could look, north from the Charnock Ave. bridge in Mar Vista, between McLaughlin and Sawtelle (enlarge).

I was a regular San Francisco Bay Area BART rider in the 1970s, and every time the train came out of the subway onto elevated track I enjoyed seeing daylight (or even night). So I'm another who prefers to ride above ground.

Monorails have operated in transit service in a number of cities around the world, and certainly have a cool factor from Disneyland, Disney World, etc. -- even if the Disneyland monorail only bumped across the parking lot at 25 mph.

But I'm concerned monorails are oversold, especially when a company claims costs and performance that it has never built. Here are three issues about monorails along flood channels: 1. Would they fit? 2. How much would they cost? 3. Would they go where people travel?

1. Fit. Running along storm channels raises issues of space for 5-6-foot wide columns and noise and visual impacts for neighbors, commonly single-family residential neighborhoods. I rather doubt that the owners of the houses on the right would welcome this past their back yards; some of the most heated opponents of the late Orange County CenterLine were Irvine homeowners along the flood channel where it would have been built.

The Las Vegas monorail (train used in image) is a close comparable to the unbuilt Metrail proposal Brooks cites. Las Vegas' Bombardier trains are about the same size but not as tall, also made of lightweight composite materials. The standard Las Vegas columns are 4'-8" x 2'-8" and 18+ feet tall. In Los Angeles they would likely be thicker to for our seismic standards; the L.A. Green Line's columns are about 6 feet in diameter.

Las Vegas trains are relatively quiet, but could not be called silent, with tire noise and a metallic whoosh as they pass. Metrail proposes to add an on-board engine instead of electric power, which would add to its noise, likely making it sound like a Long Beach diesel hybrid bus.

2. Cost. It's very unlikely a Metrail monorail could be built for one-tenth the cost of subway. The Las Vegas monorail was built between 2001 and 2004 for $100M per mile (source) by an experienced engineering company (see construction photos by The Monorail Society).

With Brooks's Metrail trains about the same size and weight as Las Vegas' its guideway and stations would be quite similar, while costs have inflated seriously since then. Best case is probably $100-150M per mile, at least 1/3 the cost of subway.

3. Usefulness. Finally, would monorails along flood channels put stations in places useful for travellers? In many cases, no.

Regional Connector

2007-11-26T23:00:00.000-08:00

The Regional Connector is a potential connection between the Blue and Expo lines and the Gold Line to Pasadena and East Los Angeles. This is an important enhancement to the existing lines, that would allow a one-seat ride into and across downtown Los Angeles, rather than current transfers at 7th and Flower or Union Station to the Red Line or downtown buses.

Metro is beginning an Alternatives Analysis on potential routes. There are many possible routes; the map above (click to enlarge) is my submission, seeking the shortest and quickest route across downtown that serves important destinations.

It would continue in subway from the existing Blue / Expo Line station at 7th Street up Flower Street to 3rd Street, then make a diagonal across Bunker Hill. It would continue east under 1st Street, then curve north under Main Street beneath the City Hall south lawn.

North of Temple Street it would transition from shallow subway to aerial by Los Angeles Street at Aliso Street. The final section would be aerial along Aliso Street to an aerial half grand union with the Gold Line at Aliso and Alameda, to allow trains to go in all directions.

Potential subway station locations are:

Flower Street at or north of 5th Street, which also serves southern Bunker Hill via existing escalators;
Around Grand Avenue and 2nd Street, serving northern Bunker Hill (hopefully part of the redevelopment project there);
By City Hall either on 1st Street around Spring Street or on Main Street near Temple Street.

Add Olympic lane

2007-11-26T22:00:00.000-08:00

The LA Times announced today, "Villaraigosa unveils traffic plan for Pico and Olympic." Here's what it would do:

The first step in the mayor's plan would be to immediately begin to eliminate parking on both streets during rush hour. Then, beginning next year, traffic lights would be re-timed so that those traveling west on Olympic and east on Pico would be rewarded with longer green lights. Those driving in the other direction might see their rides take longer.

This makes a lot of sense, to synchronize the signals in the favored direction, without the expense and disruption of Allyn Rifkin's Olympic-Pico one-way proposal last spring. I'd look at it differently, though, rather than take their next step in the one-way direction:

If those two steps speed up traffic, mayoral aides say the city might take an additional step and restripe both streets, so most lanes on Pico would be for eastbound motorists, while westbound lanes would predominate on Olympic.

Think of I-405 as a north-south wall across the Westside, with limited openings that have become major bottlenecks (map, right). Once east of the 405 in the afternoon you find traffic frees up.

This leads to a simple short-term bottleneck-reliever, while we wait for completion of the Expo Line and Wilshire subway. Olympic Boulevard has four lanes westbound but three lanes eastbound between Century City and two blocks west of the 405, presumably from when Century City was a bigger commuter destination than Santa Monica.

The simple bottleneck-reliever is to add a fourth eastbound lane to Olympic from west of Barrington to Sepulveda, as shown below (original map). This section has the same 110-foot right-of-way and 86-foot pavement, but only three lanes in each direction plus curb parking. (To fit nine lanes under the 405 could require a slight narrowing of the sidewalks, but Santa Monica Boulevard fits nine lanes in a 100-foot right-of-way and 88-foot pavement under its I-405 bridge).

Purple Line subway route options

2007-11-15T17:00:00.000-08:00

Here's a short version of my Scoping comments submitted for Metro's Westside Extension.

Route options north of Wilshire Boulevard: There are multiple major destinations north of Wilshire Blvd. that may be more important to serve than Wilshire itself, if end-to-end running time isn’t seriously slowed. These include Farmers Market / The Grove / CBS; Cedars-Sinai Medical Center / Beverly Center; and West Hollywood / Pacific Design Center. I sketched three potential route options to serve them onto their map (above). Based on the existing Red Line schedule I estimate their additional travel time at only 1-3 minutes, so they appear well worth considering.

Beverly Hills – Hollywood Connection: I consider the Wilshire corridor primary, but also find a connection from Beverly Hills via West Hollywood to Hollywood very important. That area has no easy freeway access, and could strongly benefit from a rail transit link, for travel between the Westside and Hollywood or the San Fernando Valley. Perhaps it should be a separate light rail line, on the surface where the old Pacific Electric right-of-way still exists, then tunneled the rest of the way from West Hollywood to Hollywood & Highland?

North-South Corridor: The concurrent Crenshaw-Prairie corridor study’s northern boundary is Wilshire Blvd. Is there a way within the scope of the Westside Extension study to consider a single north-south line from LAX to Hollywood? Such a line could use some combination of Crenshaw, La Brea, Fairfax, and/or San Vicente to connect Exposition & Crenshaw to Hollywood & Highland.

I-405 Corridor: Transit along the I-405 corridor from the San Fernando Valley to Westwood, LAX, and the South Bay is critical and missing. The current Metro LRTP suggests only BRT along the I-405 HOV lanes, and no rail line. An effective interface between the Wilshire corridor and the I-405 corridor (interim BRT, future rail) is very important to consider. Good access to the UCLA campus is also obviously important.

West of I-405: A Wilshire subway may not extend west of Westwood, given its high capital cost and the lesser development density in Santa Monica. Western terminus locations to consider beyond Westwood include one more station on Wilshire between Federal and Bundy in West Los Angeles, to allow Westside access to the subway without needing to cross the 405, and in Santa Monica, the Expo Line's Bergamot Station, Wilshire & Ocean, or the Expo Line’s terminus around Colorado & 4th.

October transit meetings

2007-10-04T10:15:00.000-07:00

There are a number of important public meetings on transit planning this month on the Westside:

1. Metro Westside Extension (aka Wilshire "Subway to the Sea"), map above) Alternatives Analysis public meetings. "Please join Metro at one of five upcoming community meetings where you can comment on what you want Metro to study." All meetings are 6:00-8:00 p.m. (same content at each). More info.

Westwood/Century City - Tues., Oct. 9 - Emerson Middle School, 1650 Selby Ave., LA
Hollywood/West Hollywood - Thurs., Oct. 11 - Pan Pacific Recreation Center, 7600 Beverly Blvd., LA
Mid-Wilshire/Koreatown - Tues., Oct. 16 - LA Wilshire United Methodist Church, 4350 Wilshire Blvd., LA
Beverly Hills - Wed., Oct. 17 - Beverly Hills Public Library Auditorium, 444 North Rexford Dr., BH
Santa Monica - Thurs., Oct. 18 - Santa Monica Public Library, 601 Santa Monica Blvd., SM

2. Expo Line Phase 2 Initial Screening Results. All meetings are 6:30-8:30 p.m. Announcement flier (1.5 M PDF); Expo Construction Authority; Friends 4 Expo Transit.

Mon., Oct. 22 - Santa Monica Civic Auditorium East Wing Meeting Room, 1855 Main St., SM
Wed., Oct. 24 - Venice High School Auditorium, 13000 Venice Blvd., LA 90066
Thurs., Oct. 25 - (Cheviot Hills) Vista Del Mar Child and Family Services Gymnasium, 3200 Motor Ave., LA 90034

3. Santa Monica citywide Transportation Workshop, part of the Land Use and Circulation Element update. More info and rsvp.

Sat., Oct. 6, 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m., John Adams Middle School cafeteria, 2425 16th St., SM

4. Metro Crenshaw-Prairie Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis public meetings. "Metro will consider several transit modes such as Metro Rapid Bus, Metro Rapid Transit (MRT) (a dedicated lane) and Light Rail Transit (LRT)." More info.

Mon., Oct. 15, 6-8 p.m., Darby Park, 3400 W. Arbor Vitae St., Inglewood
Wed., Oct. 17, 6-8 p.m., Nate Holden Performing Arts Center, 4718 W. Washington Blvd., Los Angeles
Sat., Oct. 20, 9-11 a.m., Audubon Middle School, 4120 11th Ave., Los Angeles

[Added] 5. Santa Monica Industrial Land workshop, including the Bergamont Station and Mid-City Expo Station locations, part of the Land Use and Circulation Element update. More info and rsvp.

Thu., Oct. 25, 6:00 or 7:00 p.m. [verify], Lincoln Middle School cafeteria, 1501 California Ave., SM

LA CityBeat

2007-10-02T22:40:00.000-07:00

I'm featured in Alan Mittelstaedt's article "Dozing in the Slow Lane" in this week's CityBeat.

For more about the Expo Line light rail from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica and our advocacy for it, please see Friends 4 Expo Transit.

Lincoln bus lanes

2007-07-31T23:30:00.000-07:00

Santa Monica Daily Press commentator Bill Bauer (page 5 in PDF) argues that:

Local politicians, planners and misguided "enviros" must stop backing schemes that reduce street capacity. It'll be a long time before mass transit (light rail, monorail, busses and subways) serves a sizable percentage of the public. In the meantime, streets should be configured ot move traffic efficiently, safely and expediently - not impede it.

... In Santa Monica, ... instead of using parking lanes on Lincoln Boulevard to ease congestion, City Council declared them exclusive "bus and bike only" lanes for the eight hourly busses and handful of bicyclists using the street. ...

Isn't a simpler solution to Santa Monica's traffic and parking congestion to have more people come into the city without bringing their cars with them? Bus-only lanes can provide a speed incentive to ride instead of drive plus greater people-carrying capacity.

That was the recommendation of the 2002-3 Lincoln Corridor Task Force. The illustration above shows its near-term recommendations: to use the opportunity of existing parking lanes in Venice and Ocean Park for peak-period bus- and bike-only lanes, plus to underground the power lines and add landscaped medians.

Santa Monica Big Blue Bus already operates four #3 buses and another four Rapid 3 buses per direction on Lincoln during peak periods. The ones I've seen are crowded beyond their 40 seats, carrying around 400 people/hour (50/bus x 8 buses/hour), despite being stuck in slow traffic. That's some 20% of the people traveling on Lincoln.

A boulevard lane maxes out at around 750 vehicles/hour, or 900 people/lane/hour at 1.2 people per vehicle. But a new mixed-flow curb lane would carry fewer, with cars stuck behind frequently stopping buses, whereas a dedicated bus lane can easily expand capacity with more buses and/or longer ones.

Wilshire Monorail?

2007-06-23T23:50:00.000-07:00

A monorail along Wilshire Boulevard has been suggested as a faster and cheaper alternative to extending the Purple Line "Subway to the Sea". Here are some considerations to evaluate whether a monorail could fit.

This image of the Las Vegas Monorail superimposed onto Wilshire in West Los Angeles shows the visual bulk of its concrete beams and columns, and how it blocks the left turn lane.

Las Vegas has the only transit monorail in the United States, begun construction in 2001 and opened in 2004. Its 2000 construction cost was $100 million/mile ($385 million for 3.8 miles; source). This was similar to elevated light rail, and about one-third the cost of subway construction. It would be more now, with construction cost inflation.

Las Vegas uses a proprietary Bombardier (Canada) design based on Walt Disney World. Hitachi (Japan), the world's other main monorail vendor, uses a different, incompatible, design. It's risky to be dependent on a single vendor.

Spans for the Las Vegas beams average 100 feet, with the longest about 120 feet. They are 26 inches wide and vary from 5 to 7 feet deep. The typical column is 56 inches by 32 inches (source). They likely would be larger in Los Angeles to meet our seismic requirements.

Aerial stations are quite large, cantilevered over the street with pedestrian bridges to the sidewalk, needing space for stairs, handicapped-accessible elevators, and possibly escalators (which tend to break in the weather). Is this acceptable on Wilshire?

Passengers would experience a 10-15 minute delay at Western Avenue, to transfer between aerial and subway stations and wait for another train.

What are alternatives to losing the left turn lane to columns? Las Vegas' 120-foot maximum span is far short of this typical boulevard intersection at Wilshire and Bundy, where it would take a 550 foot span across the left-turn lanes and cross street.

Even this massive bridge of the Green Line over Aviation and Rosecrans in the South Bay is only just over 300 feet.

The other possibility is "straddle bents" spanning the entire boulevard, like these three supporting a curve in Las Vegas. These would also be used if the beam curved to the edge of the boulevard if stations were built in buildings' upper floors.

For more perspectives see The Monorail Society and Light Rail Now.

(I plan a future post about monorails along freeways.)

Metro fares

2007-05-24T18:00:00.000-07:00

I was quoted in today's LA Times article on Metro's (MTA's) proposed fare increase:

"Rail gives greater speed, it's more comfortable and it has higher capacity than buses," said Darrell Clarke, co-chairman of Friends 4 Expo Transit, which has been pushing for the line from downtown to Culver City. "Buses are stuck in traffic."

I'm disappointed the article was cast as bus vs. rail, though, framing the issue as:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority today will consider approving a series of large fare increases that would hit bus riders particularly hard at a time when officials are spending $1.5 billion for a network of new rail lines.

Construction costs for rail come from different sources than operations, and operating costs for rail are less than for buses. In Metro's FY07 Budget (Appendix 15, pp. VII-46-47), buses cost $0.61 per passenger-mile, compared to light rail's $0.49 and the subway's $0.47.

This is consistent with national statistics, and makes sense: the largest cost of running transit is vehicle operators, and one 3-car Blue Line train carries more passengers than six regular buses (or four of the new articulated buses). (Click for more.)

It's not either-or; we need both rail for main high-speed corridors and buses to fill in the gaps and provide local service. Rail is also more attractive to get people out of their cars and to attract the transit-oriented development Los Angeles needs to handle population growth without completely choking on traffic.

On the fare increase, many transit advocates recognize Metro's costs have been increasing for labor, fuel, and expanded service, while fares have been held flat for a decade. Like the LA Times editorial today, we seek a middle ground between no increase and Metro's original proposal:

Big transit systems in the U.S. get 38% of their operating revenues from fares, on average, while the MTA went from 32% before the decree to 24% today. If transit riders don't start paying their fair share, the agency will have no choice but to cut bus and rail service, which won't benefit anybody.

An ideal solution would find new sources of transit operations funding from sources like gas taxes, parking fees, carbon taxes, or congestion pricing, to mitigate for the externalized costs of automobiles.

Updates: I just spoke about this with Patt Morrison on KPCC.

Here's the LA Times on the final compromise by county Supervisors Gloria Molina and Zev Yaroslavsky that was adopted:

... the original increase, which would have raised the cash fare for both rail and bus to $2 per ride from $1.25. The monthly pass would have increased to $120 from $52 over the next 19 months.

Instead, ... fares will increase to $1.50 by July 1, 2010, then $1.80 by 2012. The $3 daily pass will jump to $5 by 2008, $6 in 2010 and $7.25 two years later. The $52 monthly pass will go up to $62 in 2008, $75 in 2010 and $90 in 2012.

A special [off-peak] 25-cent fare will be established for the disabled and seniors 65 and older. The fare would be in effect 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. and after 7 p.m. on weekdays, and all day Saturday, Sunday and federal holidays.

Be sure to read Steve Lopez' column, especially Martin Wachs' comments:

"There's no question that in a metro area like L.A., a transit system cannot be sustained" by current formulas, said Martin Wachs of the Rand Corp. "You need some form of tolls or parking or gas increases, with a transfer of funds from auto users to transit users."

He and Brian Taylor of UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies support a variable fare system, saying it's illogical to charge a flat $1.25 for a bus ticket regardless of whether the rider goes 30 miles or three blocks.

Southern California Transit Advocates (So.CA.TA) has an extensive discussion of their fare recommendations and the final Metro plan.

Olympic-Pico update

2007-05-16T17:45:00.000-07:00

Allyn Rifkin presented his Olympic and Pico Boulevards one-way study at the CD-11 Transportation Committee Monday evening. (See my earlier post for an introduction.)

He set the stage well, saying, "Think of this as someone's first idea ... now let's go out to the community about it." His main points were:

Olympic and Pico are major Metro and Big Blue Bus corridors. Because they're mostly more than 1/4 mile apart, he rejected pure one-way roadways in favor of contra-flow bus lanes.
Left turn arrows eat up a lot of intersection capacity. The one-way direction would be clockwise — east on Olympic, west on Pico — so changes in direction would use right turns.
His "5/2" (5 lanes one-way, 2 contra-flow) diagrams are here — off-peak with parking and left turns above, peak without parking or left turns below.

Without peak-period left turns capacity would increase by 20%; with peak left turns capacity would only increase by 6%. A questioner was concerned about banning left turns, which would require many to drive around a the block through neighborhoods.
The roadways would not become "freeways" because speeds would be regulated by synchronized signal timing.

Zev Yaroslavksy's transportation deputy Vivian Rescalvo emphasized this is about improving transit in the corridor, not only for automobiles, and that it's "absolutely not" an alternative to the Expo Line, but that is eight years away.

Rifkin agreed with my question that Santa Monica's section of Olympic is difficult, long blocks west of Centinela with many west-bound cars headed to the freeway at Cloverfield, and with the median's coral trees and Expo Line west of Cloverfield. Pico is also narrower in Santa Monica. But switching from one-way to two-way would require a large connector street. Could Barrington do that? Bundy is already jammed.

The next step is more study and public process. Will we end up deciding to just synchronize signal timings in the dominant direction?

LNG terminals

2007-05-13T23:15:00.000-07:00

A number of proposals for Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) terminals along the southern California coast are being promoted, citing increasing demand for gas. Because natural gas is the cleanest-burning fossil fuel — in both CO2 and other air pollutants — it has been favored to displace coal and oil for generating electricity and diesel in large vehicles like transit buses.

To ship natural gas across the ocean it is liquified by chilling to minus 259 degrees Fahrenheit, stored in special tanker ships (photo), shipped, and re-gasified at a receiving terminal. See the California Energy Commission for an LNG overview.

There are serious questions, however, about the safety and emissions of LNG terminals:

A proposed terminal in the Port of Long Beach was voted down by the Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners in January. "Specifically, opponents raised safety concerns, citing the potential for a catastrophic natural gas explosion that could kill hundreds of people and devastate much of the Long Beach waterfront."
The proposed Cabrillo Port LNG terminal off the Ventura County coast was rejected by the state Lands Commission and the California Coastal Commission in April. It would have emitted "23 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, or about 40 percent as much as New York City" as well as "failed to meet local air pollution standards."
Woodside's OceanWay proposal, "over 20 miles offshore" in Santa Monica Bay, raises similar issues of air pollution and safety near LAX. The LAX area and the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are already the largest air polluters in Los Angeles County.
The energy used to liquify the gas, transport the gas, and regasify it — 15% in one example* — reduces its advantages over other fossil fuels.

There are better alternatives. I find this a critical decision point, whether we invest in more fossil fuel infrastructure that does not reduce global warming, or instead in efficiency and sustainable alternatives that reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions.

Around 50% of California's gas is used to generate electricity. Natural gas demand can thus be directly reduced by:

Replacing old power plants (right) with the most-efficient combined-cycle plants;
Increasing building energy efficiency in lighting, cooling, and heating;
Increasing wind and solar electricity generation (especially when combined with smart grid storage with EVs and PHEVs).

Solar thermal hot water systems can also reduce the 10% used to heat residential hot water and swimming pools.

*Julian Darley, High Noon for Natural Gas, p.60.

High Speed Rail budget alert!

2007-05-08T21:10:00.000-07:00

The California High Speed Rail Authority's budget request of $103 million for 2007-2008 will be discussed at a Budget Subcommittee meeting scheduled for this Thursday, May 10th in Sacramento. This funding is critical for the authority to continue its environmental planning and begin acquiring right-of-way while it is still available.

Besides high speed rail's strong mobility and economic benefits, it will be an important component in California's commitment to sustainable energy and reducing global warming. Electric-powered high speed rail is an excellent alternative to CO2 emissions from jet plane flights and long car trips within California. See my earlier post for more.

Click here to write Governor Schwarzenegger and here to send an email to key state legislators by tomorrow!

The (Fossil) Invaders

2007-05-07T15:10:00.000-07:00

Too good to not pass on! (Via Energy Bulletin. It and Gristmill, links to the left, are my two best daily sources of energy and climate news.)

Carbon Footprint

2007-05-04T09:10:00.000-07:00

Dr. James Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, emphasized last year that,

We have at most ten years — not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.

A major purpose of my starting this blog is to examine what we can do in Los Angeles, what can work to change course on energy, within the urgent timeframe we have.

I'll begin with the idea of "carbon footprint," because the increase in carbon dioxide emissions caused by burning of fossil fuels is the largest contributor to global warming.

It helps to break it into four main areas we can change as individuals, regionally, and nationally:

What and how much we drive
Electricity and gas used in our homes and other buildings
How much we fly
Energy used to make and transport what we buy

Different "carbon calculators" are available online. The website for "An Inconvenient Truth" notes,

The average American generates about 15,000 pounds of carbon dioxide every year from personal transportation, home energy use and from the energy used to produce all of the products and services we consume. Calculate your personal impact to see how much CO2 you produce each year.

Another is The Climate Trust's CarbonCounter.org. Here is my estimate there:

So what do I do after I calculate it? Stay tuned, there's a lot to explore....

South Bay Energy Fair

2007-05-03T11:36:00.000-07:00

I'll be speaking on "How public transit can serve you in the South Bay, and other ways to make your transportation greener", and hosting a table for Friends 4 Expo Transit and the Sierra Club, at the South Bay Energy Fair this Saturday, May 5th.

Plug-In Hybrids

2007-04-30T22:57:00.000-07:00

Increase the battery capacity of a hybrid like a Toyota Prius so it charges while parked, then operates on batteries for 20-50 miles without needing its gasoline engine, and you have a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV).

Half of Americans travel 25 miles or less per day. PHEVs use electricity instead of gasoline for many of their miles, yet retain the range of a conventional car when needed. Their electricity can be sustainably generated from wind and solar, and there is ample off-peak capacity in today's electricity grid for charging.

Although the only PHEVs available today are aftermarket conversions of Priuses (as in the photo; also note the plug-in cord), major auto manufacturers including Toyota and others have announced plans. See the LA-based Plug In America and Austin-based Plug In Partners for two national campaigns to push the car companies to build them.

Sherry Boschert, author of the excellent Plug-in Hybrids will speak on Thursday, May 10, 7:00 p.m., at the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter office, 3435 Wilshire Boulevard, suite 320 (the tall Equitable building across from the former Ambassador Hotel; park free after 6 p.m. under the building off Mariposa, or on 6th Street, or ride the Wilshire Purple Line subway or Metro Rapid bus #720 to Wilshire / Normandie). Office phone is 213-387-4287.

The batteries of electric vehicles and PHEVs could also be used for distributed storage in a smart electric grid, to balance peak demands and intermittant generation from wind and solar. Saturday's LA Times noted:

California power companies are salivating at the idea of plug-in hybrid vehicles that would provide extended all-electric travel using bigger batteries that are recharged from the conventional power grid. ...

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. demonstrated bidirectional, or vehicle-to-grid, technology in San Francisco this month, using a Toyota Motor Corp. Prius modified by Energy CS, a Monrovia firm that develops plug-in hybrid conversions.

After the car's extra lithium-ion battery was charged, a PG&E technician flipped a switch and the power in the battery started flowing back onto the grid, causing the electric meter monitoring the activity to start running backward.

... plug-in hybrid owners could recharge their batteries at night, when most electric rates are lower, said PG&E environmental spokesman Keely Wachs.

Then on hot days, when demand for power soars, owners not using their cars could plug them in and transfer electricity from the batteries to the commercial grid. Utility companies would pay hybrid owners for that power, and at the higher daytime rate. ...

See New Energy News for more on vehicle-to-grid.

Wilshire bus lanes

2007-04-23T17:17:00.000-07:00

Also on the LA City Council Transportation Committee agenda Wednesday is a staff recommendation (1.9MB pdf) to implement dedicated peak hour curb bus lanes on Wilshire Boulevard, per the map above (click to enlarge). Here are key excerpts.

Option A: Peak Period End-to-End Bus Lanes. Convert the curb lanes of Wilshire Boulevard within the City limits from mixed flow to bus and right turn only operation between Downtown LA and the Santa Monica City limit during weekday peak periods (7-9 AM and 4-7 PM). ...

BENEFITS

Option A would result in significant improvement for bus travel times and speeds. End-to-end Metro Rapid bus travel time within the City would be reduced by an average of 11.7 minutes from 48.0 to 36.3 minutes, or 24%. ...

IMPACTS

Conversion of the curb lanes from mixed flow to bus and right-turn only operation would mean that Wilshire Boulevard could carry fewer mixed flow vehicles during peak periods, resulting in significant adverse impacts on mixed flow traffic. The traffic impact analysis indicates that mixed flow travel time on Wilshire Boulevard in the peak periods would increase by an average of 26% (11 minutes). ...

These impacts would diminish over time if drivers find new routes or switch to transit. ...

As part of its Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit project, Metro is proposing to widen Wilshire Boulevard between Barrington Avenue and Bonsall Avenue (on the Veterans Administration property) in West LA to create new capacity for an eastbound peak period bus lane. ...

Street Pavement

It is anticipated that operation of the bus lanes in Option A would have a significant impact on the curb lane pavement due to the concentration of bus activity in the curbside lanes, The new 60-foot articulated buses, with a gross vehicle weight of 68,000 Ibs. and rear axle load of 30,000 Ibs., are much more damaging to pavement than 40-foot buses, with a gross vehicle weight of 42,000 Ibs. and rear axle load of 28,000Ibs. This would be especially problematic between Western Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, where the pavement and concrete gutters are in generally poor condition. The curb lane pavement condition is also a problem for buses: Metro's bus operators are instructed to stay out of the Wilshire Boulevard curb lanes where possible.

As part of the Bus Speed Improvement Project, Metro is proposing to install 120' long concrete bus pads at all bus stops and intersection stops along Wilshire Boulevard (200 total), at a total cost of $6,8 million. This would substantially mitigate impacts to the pavement at locations where buses are most likely to stop.

MITIGATION MEASURES

In order to mitigate some of Option A's traffic impacts, certain segments of Wilshire Boulevard could be widened to create additional capacity for the new bus lanes: ...

San Vicente Boulevard to Fairfax Avenue - The north side of Wilshire Boulevard could be widened by reducing the sidewalk width, which is currently 20-23 feet, to create capacity for a new westbound bus lane. This would leave a 10-13 foot width sidewalk along the north side. ...

Like the Lincoln proposal below, this would prioritize people-carrying capacity of the boulevard while we wait for higher-capacity rail transit. It is also consistent with the fall 2006 "A Green Los Angeles" recommendations by the Green LA Working Group, which included more peak-hour bus-only lanes as one of its top-three transportation recommendations.

The LA Times Bottleneck Blog has an item about this plan potentially narrowing sidewalks

Olympic-Pico one-way?

2007-04-23T16:25:00.000-07:00

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky's April 15, 2007 "Olympic/Pico One-Way Pair Initial Feasibility Report" (4.7 MB pdf) by Allyn D. Rifkin P.E. describes a range of options. The Los Angeles City Council Transportation Committee will consider a motion by Weiss, Greuel, and Rosendahl this Wednesday (4/25 at 2:00 p.m.):

In January 2007, Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky hired a traffc consultant to analyze the feasibility of turning Olympic and Pico Boulevards into oneway streets from downtown Los Angeles to the City of Santa Monica. The traffc consultant has completed a preliminary analysis.

The potential impact to residential neighborhoods of any proposal to convert major thoroughfares into one-way streets necessitates a thorough analysis and consideration of all potential community impacts.

Such analysis must include a thorough assessment of the potential impacts to residential neighborhoods as well as a quantitative analysis of potential benefis in terms of reduced travel times and congestion relief. Analysis of this proposal must also include broad community input.

I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council direct the Department of Transportation to report back in 60 days with a review and analysis of Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavosky's consultant study on the feasibility of turning Olympic and Pico Boulevards into one-way streets from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica. The report should address potential impacts to surrounding streets and neighborhoods. In addition, LADOT shall engage in comprehensive community outreach during the preparation of their report.

I'll also highlight Kent Strumpell's letter to the LA Times (4/21):

One-way streets prioritize moving cars rather than moving people, perpetuating the traffic problems we face. Instead, we need solutions that help people meet their needs without having to drive.

Unfortunately, one-way streets make our urban boulevards more like freeways, with hazardous speeds, noise and lack of landscaped medians. This works against the strategy of improving our boulevards as inviting public places conducive to walking, transit use, cycling and successful businesses. Creating vibrant, multimodal shopping streets near residential communities is a critical strategy for reducing automobile trips.

It is time that we stop sacrificing the important public space of our roads to the degrading domination of cars.

In a similar situation I served on the Lincoln Corridor Task Force Citizens' Advisory Committee in 2002-4. We faced the question of whether to attempt to move more cars on Lincoln Boulevard -- knowing it wouldn't solve traffic congestion and would further impact its neighbors -- or to focus on moving people. We recommended the latter, taking advantage of the curb parking lanes in Venice and Ocean Park to propose dedicated peak-hour bus lanes first, and potentially light rail later. See SCAG's LCTF webpage for detailed LCTF reports.

Hybrid sales up

2007-04-15T19:48:00.000-07:00

The LA Times reported yesterday that hybrid car sales are up 91% year-to-year:

Hybrid sales are on a roll, and it's no secret what's driving them.

"It's called $3 gasoline," said Fritz Hitchcock, who owns Toyota dealerships in Santa Barbara, Northridge and the City of Industry. "We are absolutely, positively liking hybrids, and it's only going to get better." ...

In the first three months of the year, sales jumped 91% compared with the same period of 2006, to 59,613, according to research firm AutoData Inc. In March, year-over-year sales of the segment-leading Toyota Prius climbed 142% to 19,156.

Prius sales were juiced by a rush to buy before the federal tax credit on the vehicle was cut by 50% on April 1 to $788 per vehicle. But other popular models also showed strong growth last month, including hybrid versions of the Honda Civic (up 26%) and the Ford Escape sport utility vehicle (up 51%). ...

Although gas savings are attracting buyers, having more cars on dealer lots has also helped. Toyota is boosting production of U.S.-bound Priuses by almost 50% to an annual rate of 110,000. That's giving buyers more bargaining room — the cars are selling for almost $3,000 less than last summer, according to Edmunds.com. The average sale price of a base model is now about $21,200, according to Edmunds. Toyota is offering discounts of $600 to $2,000 a vehicle on common options packages. ...

Almost 700,000 hybrids have been sold in the U.S. since 1999. They accounted for 1.8% of vehicle sales last month, double the year-earlier market share. ...

If you're buying a car, it seems obvious to buy the highest-mpg car you can, both from expecting rising gasoline prices and to reduce our individual global warming emissions. If all cars averaged what today's Prius does, it would save half of U.S. gasoline, one fourth of all U.S. oil used.

Speaking as a delighted Prius owner, it's just a great car! I love its comfortable upright driving position, good interior space, and very useful hatchback. It's nimble for parking, yet a good cruiser. And it's averaged over 40 mpg for two years.

California High-Speed Rail

2007-04-11T21:15:00.000-07:00

High-speed trains offer the prospect of travel between Los Angeles and the Bay Area in 2-3 hours. Electrically powered, they can be a sustainable alternative to fossil-fueled airplanes and automobiles.

France just set a new speed record of 356 mph. The California High-Speed Rail Authority has plans for our state to join Europe and Asia's accomplishments.

After completing system-wide environmental study, two project-level EIR/EISs are now beginning, for Los Angeles-Palmdale and LA-Orange County. The last Scoping meeting for LA-Palmdale will be at the Los Angeles River Center & Gardens (Atrium), 570 W. Avenue 26, Los Angeles, CA 90065 on April 17, 2007, 3:00-5:00 and 6:00-8:00 p.m. Comments for both may be submitted until April 27, 2007.

While we wait for the real thing, here are two of a number of simulations (the photo above is from the first): San Diego Mission Bay and Tehachapi windmills.

See the local Friends of High Speed Rail to help.

Step It Up!

2007-04-09T20:05:00.000-07:00

This Saturday, April 14 is the "Step It Up National Day of Climate Action":

"Citizens around the nation concerned about the catastrophic effects of global warming will rally together on April 14, 2007 to urge Congress to cut carbon emissions 80% by 2050. The events are part of the Step it Up campaign, the largest day of citizen action focusing on global warming in our nation’s history."

This is consistent with the reduction in global warming emissions many climate scientists say is necessary to avoid runaway warming, and the goal of Rep. Henry Waxman's Safe Climate Act (graph, right).

Look for me at the Sierra Club booth at Earth Day on the Santa Monica Third Street Promenade, 10 a.m.-7 p.m., featuring personal carbon footprint calculations and the Carbon Family.

Expo Line

2007-04-09T18:02:00.000-07:00

The Expo Line is a planned light rail transit line from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica, a sustainable alternative to horrible Westside traffic. Construction on Phase 1 from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City is starting, with opening scheduled for 2010. Environmental study for Phase 2 to Santa Monica is now beginning.

For more information see Friends 4 Expo Transit (the volunteers who brought the popular support leading to its approval in 2001) and the Expositon Metro Line Construction Authority. The Authority will host a Project Status Open House on Tuesday, April 17, 6:30-8:30 p.m., at the Culver City Senior Center, 4095 Culver Boulevard.

A great proposal for a "green corridor" park with restored stream west of Overland Ave. (below) was developed by Light Rail for Cheviot.

Welcome!

2007-04-07T21:41:00.000-07:00

Our challenges for the Los Angeles region are acute, especially in transportation, housing, Global Warming, and the coming decline of fossil fuels. But transitions bring opportunities.

I'm beginning this to explore possiblities of what can work to make L.A. more livable and sustainable, and celebrate special places, past and present, that we can expand on. Welcome to what I'm seeking to be an important and entertaining discussion!