Tag Archives: transportation

metropolitan planning organizations

If you live in a decent sized metropolitan area, your metropolitan planning organization forces local officials and other stakeholders to get together across political jurisdictions and make decisions about how to prioritize transportation projects in the context of a long term plan. The results then get sent up to the state, which uses it to allocate funding.

The article has a number of criticisms. MPOs have tended to favor highways over other forms of transportation, and these have often disrupted disadvantaged communities. They have tended to favor suburban areas. They have tended to favor new construction over maintenance of what is already constructed.

I have always thought MPOs are good even if they are imperfect because (1) they force stakeholders to work together at the right geographic and economic scale for infrastructure planning, (2) they force some kind of long term plan to be put down on paper, (3) they force the prioritization of site-level projects to be justified in the context of that long term plan, and (4) they bring in state and federal money to get projects in the ground based on the priorities of local actors that have “skin in the game”. In the absence of this process, either political jurisdictions would plan in isolation, or more efficient but less democratic structures would be created that largely cut out elected officials, voters and taxpayers. Engineers and officials not trained in planning would tend to jump right to analysis of site-level projects without a real plan. State and federal funding either would not happen at all or would be based on political lobbying. Corruption would likely be more common. And systems that are less in public view would tend to be neglected until major, obvious failures occur that affect peoples’ lives.

What I just described covers the state of water infrastructure in the U.S. pretty well. I think we should expand MPOs to cover other kinds of infrastructure rather than just transportation. MPOs are one of the reasons that politicians and the public think infrastructure=transportation and transportation=infrastructure. They do some rational planning and economic analysis at roughly the rate geographic scale and time period, then feed that into a messy political process to rank site-specific, short-term projects, then direct taxpayer money to projects that are likely to benefit the citizenry, while sharing the wealth at least a little bit. Unless you want to go authoritarian, it’s a reasonable approach to get infrastructure done in a democracy. I think it’s better and more equitable than the ratepayer-funded utility model followed in the water, energy, and communication industries.

10% drop in vehicle miles traveled predicted long-term

KPMG says some of the sharp reduction in vehicle miles traveled during the coronavirus crisis is likely to be permanent, with people getting used to working from home and shopping online. The numbers they came up with are a 9-10% reduction in vehicle miles traveled (this factors in both a decrease in personal vehicles and an increase in delivery vehicles, if I understand the article) and a drop in car ownership from 1.97 to 1.87 per household.

solving the delivery problem

Wired has an article on solutions to the “last mile” delivery problem. A couple interesting stats are that 5% of deliveries don’t reach their destination on the first try (that sounds pretty good to me) and that this costs retailers about $18 each time. Most of the proposed solutions just have to do with better data on locations and delivery preferences.

This article repeats the claim that deliveries increase traffic congestion, although it admits this is “difficult to measure”. I am still a bit skeptical of this. I am willing to follow the evidence wherever it leaves, but logically I feel like these claims leave out all the trips individuals are not taking to the store. If a delivery truck brings 100 packages to 100 homes, that could mean 100 car trips that were not taken. And that was just one truck, although it is kind of a big obvious smelly one and it might be blocking the street, a crosswalk, or a fire hydrant for a few minutes. Those trucks might also be competing for city and suburban streets at times when people are coming and going from work trips, which could increase peak traffic congestion.

September 2019 in Review

Most frightening and/or depressing story: Most hopeful story:
  • I think Elizabeth Warren has a shot at becoming the U.S. President, and of the candidates she and Bernie Sanders understand the climate change problem best. This could be a plus for the world. I suggested an emergency plan for the U.S. to deal with climate change: Focus on disaster preparedness and disaster response capabilities, the long term reliability and stability of the food system, and tackle our systemic corruption problems. I forgot to mention coming up with a plan to save our coastal cities, or possibly save most of them while abandoning portions of some of them in a gradual, orderly fashion. By the way, we should reduce carbon emissions and move to clean energy, but these are more doing our part to try to make sure the planet is habitable a century from now, while the other measures I am suggesting are true emergency measures that have to start now if we are going to get through the next few decades.
Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both:
  • I mentioned an article by a Marine special operator (I didn’t even know those existed) on how to fix a broken organizational culture: acknowledge the problem, employ trusted agents, rein in cultural power brokers, win the population.

#unblockbikelanes

Just following up on yesterday’s “paint and pray” post about ignorant, unsafe street designs killing people in New York City and Philadelphia. There is a Twitter hashtag called #unblockbikelanes. Maybe the Philadelphia Police and Philadelphia Parking Authority look at it on occasion. Maybe they don’t. Maybe the engineers at the Philadelphia Streets Department will be inspired to learn about safe street design. Maybe they won’t. Either way, it’s indisputable photographic evidence that may eventually have a variety of uses.

https://twitter.com/printtemps/status/702941757009326080

Resources for safe street design:

August 2019 in Review

My work-life balance situation continues to not favor a lot of blog posts. Or is it work-life-family balance? Or is family part of life? Yes, I guess so. Anyway, what there is not a lot of time for is personal leisure activities like reading, writing, and thinking. Not that I don’t enjoy reading Green Eggs and Ham for the 50th time. I do. Anyway, here are a few highlights of the slim pickings that constituted this blog in August 2019. Most frightening and/or depressing story:
  • Drought is a significant factor causing migration from Central America to the United States. Drought in the Mekong basin may put the food supply for a billion people in tropical Asia at risk. One thing that can cause drought is deliberately lying to the public for 50 years while materially changing the atmosphere in a way that enriches a wealthy few at everyone else’s expense. Burning what is left of the Amazon can’t help. 
Most hopeful story:
  • I explored an idea for automatic fiscal stabilizers as part of a bold infrastructure investment plan. I’m not all that hopeful but a person can dream.
Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both:

hydrogen as a jet fuel

I was curious if aircraft could be fueled feasibly by hydrogen in the future. Okay, I know this has been tried in the past – “Oh, the humanity!” – but, there must be advances in technology since then. 10 minutes of research reveals that battery-powered aircraft are now a going concern, although they tend to be unmanned or at least small. Current fuel cell technology sounds like it has pretty similar limits to batteries. On a larger scale, there is serious research on the potential of liquid hydrogen as a commercial aviation fuel. It sounds feasible but would require major changes in long-lived infrastructure systems around the world. But let’s say you happened to have lots of electricity and water in abundance. Maybe you are in a coastal location and have invested in nuclear power, or you just happen to have lots of geothermal, hydroelectric, or whatever kind of power. You have also invested in desalination and you have created a major transportation hub. You might then be in a position to create liquid hydrogen and/or fuel cells at a cost-effective price. This could be climate friendly as burning hydrogen, in theory at least, creates only water vapor as a product, and fusing hydrogen with atmospheric oxygen creates the same – liquid water or water vapor. Hydrogen is dangerous, but so is jet fuel and so are the materials in modern batteries, so hopefully technology will eventually come to our aid and get the risk and environmental impact down to a similar or lower level than these other options.

hydrogen fuel cell buses

The transportation agency serving the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is using fuel cell-powered buses and planning to produce and store its own hydrogen supply.

The cost of acquiring the two new buses, a fueling station and fuel storage equipment will be about $3.5 million, of which $1.5 million will be covered by federal grants…

MTD plans to produce the hydrogen for its fuel-cell buses itself. It could use solar power, wind turbines or, if need be, gas from the local landfill to separate the hydrogen from oxygen in water molecules for the buses.
The transit agency will soon be accepting bids for the equipment it will use for that conversion. It plans to add a total of 12 hydrogen fuel-cell buses by 2023, or about one-tenth of its fleet. By that time, the rest of its buses will be diesel-electric hybrids.

I’ve always thought that nuclear power, fuel cells, and membranes for water treatment would go together pretty well for a coastal city. You could size the nuclear reactor for peak demand, then use the excess energy to desalinate and electrolyze sea water whenever you are not at peak demand, storing the hydrogen to use in transportation vehicles and any other applications where you need decentralized or off-the-grid energy. You can use the membrane technology to produce drinking water and water for industry, either from seawater or treated sewage. I think you could substitute LNG for the hydrogen in this system if you need to for some reason, for example if the nuclear reactor were down for maintenance. You would have that occasional pesky problem of nuclear waste to deal with, but I am gradually coming around to the idea that managing the risks of nuclear reactors and nuclear waste may be preferable to the certainty of destroying the planet’s ecosystems and oceans. Inventing fusion power would be nice.

heavy water

This article in TreeHugger suggests that one simple solution is not to ship so much water around as part of consumer products. It makes sense. Even if the water were added locally, say at the Amazon neighborhood distribution center, it could save a lot of weight and expense. Maybe local water utilities could get in on the game somehow, and at a minimum you would be using local water rather than transferring large amounts of water from one place to another without realizing it.