NC Media Watch

Oh no, not another car regulation - green windows

Russ Steele

California is the first state in the nation to require car manufacturers to install windshields that block the sun as a way to cut greenhouse gases.

The state Air Resources Control Board voted unanimously Thursday to require all new cars sold in California by 2012 to prevent 45 percent of the sun's total heat-producing energy from entering the car with the windshield rejecting at least half of the sun's energy.

In 2016, car manufacturers will be required to install windows in new cars that prevent at least 60 percent of the sun's heat-producing rays from entering the car. Instead the companies may propose technologies to achieve the equivalent result, the board voted.

"My view is that this is not another car regulation," said board Chairwoman Mary Nichols. "We're supposed to be in the business of moving California toward a new energy-efficient world, and that includes reflective glass."

Mary Mary, Mary, perhaps you might want to check a dictionary: 

Regulation

1)  a rule or directive made and maintained by an authority : planning regulations.

For this CARB action to not be "another car regulation" we have to accept two propositions. One, you did not make any rules or publish a directive. Two, you have no authority. Since both are faults, I have to conclude this is another car regulation.

Now, what happens if the world turns colder, we have another Grand Minimum?  A little sunshine in the car on those cold mornings would be most appreciated.

H/T to DaveC for bring this SFGate story to my attention.

Life-cycle costs apply in the real world

Russ Steele

I have written for years that public transit was not the solution to saving the climate, and I was trash as an advocate of big oil some our local bloggers. I was kept off the Transit Commission when I joined the Transportation Commission, which are normally the same, because of my strong views on the cost of transit and transit inefficiency.

From the Investors  Business  Daily :

Herding large numbers of commuters into buses and trains has been a goal of environmentalist groups for some time. They tend not to like cars because cars represent freedom and independence from central planners. They especially loathe SUVs because they see them as symbols of crass wealth and excessive consumption.

Initially, these groups wanted cars off the roads and replaced with mass transit under the pretense that they emitted too much pollution. Now the environmentalists and their allied policymakers are saying that automobile use should be limited because their engines discharge carbon dioxide. This, according to the eco-faith, is causing global warming, even though there's no scientific evidence, just an assumption, to back up the claim.

The environmental left is also campaigning against airplane travel — unless the travel is being done by one of their alarmist heroes and the carbon he or she discharges while jetting about is for the purpose of cutting future carbon emissions.

The researchers indeed found that energy-intensive infrastructure operations and maintenance increase the carbon footprint of rail commuting more than they do cars and light trucks, which include SUVs. Their work showed "that total life-cycle energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions contribute an additional 63% for onroad, 155% for rail, and 31% for air systems over vehicle tailpipe operation."

Let's have more of this!

Russ Steele

As a senior manager of an engineering laboratory in the 1990 I was always aware of the life cycle cost of military systems. Our engineering teams often worked on projects to reduce these costs. In many cases the life cycle cost often exceeded the original purchase price of the weapon system. When I helped start an advanced transportation systems line of business at TRW, I was amazed how little was understood about life cycle impact of transportation systems. Now almost twenty years later, it looks like life cycle cost are coming to the forefront, especially when emissions are considered.    

Here is an article from the New Scientist that reports on a study that looked at the full life cycle impact of emissions from different modes of transportation.

Consider buying a diesel

Russ Steele

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) will soon increase the ethanol blend from 5.7 percent to 10 percent in the vehicle fuel you buy.  On June 14th, CARB announced changes to its reformulated gasoline regulations and announced a predictive model that allows for greater uses of ethanol. This new predictive model is based on a complicated mathematical equation which is used by refiners to forecast emissions from California's passenger vehicles. It also allows refiners to adjust their formula to accommodate higher blends of ethanol. This reformulation is the direct result of California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) decreed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger by executive order in January 2009.

Caltrans I-80 Detour Update.

Russ Steele

The Nevada County Transportation Commission agenda for the May Meeting just dropped in my e-mail box. I noted that Doug Lange, Caltrans Project Manager, will be giving an I-80 Detour Update.

Brave man Doug Lange coming to Nevada City after the treatment that Caltrans got at the last meeting in City Hall. Since this meeting will be right in the heart of the complainers territory I expect a large audience.

The meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 20, 2009 at 9:30 a.m., in the Nevada City Council Chambers, 317 Broad Street, Nevada City, California.

First item on the agenda: Certificate of Appreciation for former Commissioner Russ Steele

See you there.

Leaving the scene, time to move on

Russ Steele

It been rumored a for a while, and now it is on the Board of Supervisors agenda for next week.  I resigned from the Nevada County Transportation Commission in January, to become effective once the Board of Supervisors found a qualified replacement.  The new Commissioner will be announced at the next Board of Supervisors meeting.

I have enjoyed working with the NCTC staff during both of my tours on the Commission and will continue to work with them on transportation issues, especially those that have an economic impact. One real regret is I will not longer be an Economic Resource Council Board member. I will be moving to the back bench, but will continue to work with Gil Mathew, ERC President and CEO on broadband issues in Nevada County. The Presidents stimulus package has some great opportunities for expanding broadband in Nevada County.

Finally, my book on Cobalt mining in Idaho in the 1950s will be published this month, and this year will I be doing book tours in Idaho. This is unique book in that it comes in two parts, a paper part and a companion Internet Blog, Cobalt Memories. In the coming year, I will be focusing on the blog part of the book. And, at the same time I working on my second hybrid book, The Unintended Incubator: Fifty years of applied technology development in Nevada County.  It is going to be a busy year.  It was time for someone else to focus on local transportation issues.   

Idaho Maryland Mine EIR Traffic Study needs more work

Russ Steele

The Nevada County Transportation Commission staff has reviewed the draft EIR Appendix I – Idaho-Maryland Mine Project Traffic Study, and found this it still needs some work. In addition to Caltran's comments, "that the traffic impacts of the project will be reduced as long as employee shift changes do not fall within existing peak traffic times," the NCTC Staff reported to Thomas Last, Grass Valley Planning Director, the following areas need to be reviewed and/or expanded in the EIR:

    • Daily trip generation numbers in some table were understated.

    • Project peak hour need to analyzed, in addition to AM and PM peak hours.

    • Truck traffic on SR 49 south of Grass Valley, SR 174 east of Grass Valley, or on SR 20 west    of Grass Valley or east of Nevada City are not considered.

    • Assumed traffic model land use increases, and the associated traffic generation for the long range scenario, should be added to the report.

    • Impact of long range traffic improvements, such Dorsey Drive Overpass should be included in the report.

In my opinion, with proper planning most or all of these issues can be mitigated.

California Transportation Commission funds SR-49/La Barr Meadows Improvements

Russ Steele

The Nevada County Transportation Commission did not take no for an answer when their project was rejected by Caltrans. When Prop 1B passed, the Nevada County Transportation Commission submitted the SR-49/La Barr Meadows intersection as a Mobility Corridor Improvement Project to Caltrans District 3, for inclusion in their package to Caltrans HQ in Sacramento. Based on District 3’s advice, this was a scaled down version of the total project. Caltrans HQ remove the SR-49/La Barr Meadows project before their list of projects went to the California Transportation Commission.  But, NCTC’s Dan Landon and the Commission did not accept Caltans action as the final solution.

Dan Landon looked a the CMIP criterial and decide the project met all the criteria and submitted a package directly to CTC.  Not the scaled down package, but for the whole $18.5 million   The CTC announced today that they will fund this whole project. From the NCTC Press Release:

This morning the California Transportation Commission (CTC) looked at statewide projects recommended for funding from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), a program created as a result of the approval of Proposition 1B which provides $4.5 billion for projects that relieve congestion and improve connectivity. The CTC adopted seven staff recommended projects for the Sacramento Valley Region: two for Sacramento County, three for Placer County, one for El Dorado County, and one for Nevada County, which is the signalization and widening project on SR 49 near the La Barr Meadows Road intersection. The CTC also gave an additional project for Sacramento County. The amount of funding approved for the SR 49/La Barr Meadows Road project is for $18.5 million.

The CTC Executive Director told Dan Landon this morning in Irvine that Nevada County's project “was the best one submitted from the whole state, because it met all the criteria.”  NCTC’s Mike Woodman also played a role in securing funding for this project. Mike is currently Chairman of the Rural County’s Task Force, and testified this morning on the behalf of rural counties being considered for CMIA funding.  Chairman Beason, also made sure Senator Sam Aanestad and Assemblyman Rick Keene were aware of the Commission's effort to secure this critical funding for the safety of all SR-49 users.

NCTC’s success proves once again, accepting the first no may not be the right answer. Two other lessons from this success. Make sure of your criteria, and show your commitment. Some Counties lost out when they failed to show up at the hearings in Sacramento to defend their projects, other because there submission packages were not complete.  Today was decision day at the CTC and NCTC was there with a complete package.  As a philosopher once said, success is life is all about being prepared and showing up!

Transportation newsletter article on Nevada County (edited)

Russ Steele

The Urban Transportation Monitor, 2 February, has a nice write up on how Nevada County is using teleworking as an effective tool for improving air quality and reducing traffic congestion in the region.

UTM is a widely read industry newsletter on transportation issues.

Update: Many people could not read the photo, here is a pdf: Download UTM_pdf.pdf

Occasionally we just need some reality

Russ Steele

Consider this from Nevada County Breathers

Ridesharing Decreases Ozone

Nevada County folks occasionally need to get to Sacramento or the Bay Area, and some commute significant distances to work. The following note on carpooling is brought to you by our wonderful local YubaNet.com. If ride sharing interests you, you can sign up for a Nevada County maillist at http://lists.apple-nc.org/mailman/listinfo/rideshare...

And this from Yubanet:

In most cases, carpoolers shared driving (77%), and most (81%) found it easy to divvy up gas and commute costs. Only 18% said it was difficult to coordinate schedules. The small number that stopped carpooling (10%) blamed a schedule, route, or job change.

Well all this looks good, but how may car pooler are there really out there?  Here is the reality.  HOV = high occupancy vehicles, or car poolers. This is a national survey, but it mirrors the bay and valley areas.  Click for a larger image.