Blue Line

John, thanks for the responses. They cleared up several questions I had. I do have question regarding the quoted text above. If the airports are too concerned with parking revenues to allow rail, most times, why do they allow public bus shuttles on airport property? Is it usually a government intervention to ensure that public buses reach the terminal pickups? Couldn't the same be argued for rail and access to each respective city? And with that, as I said before, I'd be satisfied with BRT to the airport if need be. However, Indianapolis currently has their Green Line bus shuttle from the CBD to Airport. Fare is $7 per direction and picks up very frequently.

^Seems like that's the only crack in the process that needs patching up. Otherwise, I'd be okay if they implemented it today. I'm sure there's a way around giving the manufacturer commission, unless it's bound by contract.

Thanks, great advice. :)

That's sad and ridiculous. I'm tired of these games. "Oh, how can I evade the laws of the land?"

To me, cameras that catch minor or major offenses translate to less money spent on police staffing. Plus, if you're breaking the law, who is someone to say that they shouldn't be penalized for it, even it if *is* a speeding violation. I'd rather there be automatic enforcement and penalty across the board, no matter if you're driving with a child in the back seat or a DUI on your record.

^Based on the map we're looking at, it seems like light rail *would* serve Newport, Covington, and Bellevue. Each of the interstate corridors south of the river already serve these neighborhoods. I wasn't referring to several-stop neighborhood access. We all know, at this point, that that's not the point of light rail, but to serve a region. I don't believe in "might as well". It's easy to get caught in those sorts of dreams, when we're not even certain it will ever become a reality. I believe that we should to take a closer look at *why* we should provide service to certain areas, not just because we have a corridor where it'll look pretty. Additionally, if it costs another $100 million or $500 million to extend a line to a more desired terminus (in this case, the airport), I don't see that has being worthy of a "might as well". That's a huge chunk of change that we could do without if it's not actually in demand.

^I think that extended streetcar service would be more sensible for NKY areas like Newport, Bellevue, and Covington. If NKY wants to extend light rail down to the airport, that's on them, but I think it would be a huge mistake.

Exactly. Since you are the owner, you're responsible for what happens with your car. If a friend is driving you car, you're responsible.

^Exciting. I'll be in NJ and NY during the last week of the year. I hope to go out of my way to ride the V on Sunday the 28th. :)

I think that, by the time the light rail lines are built, the airport line will become somewhat of a white elephant. Do we really think that people will be traveling even like they do today to the airport? I don't believe that light rail to the airport is economically sensible. In this situation, I'd be for rapid bus down to the airport from Cincinnati via 471 to 275 or 75 to 275. However, express bus service to the airport *today* doesn't have the ridership. What happens when there are half as many passengers going to and from the airport? Everything else looks good decent though. John, could you tell me what is the rationale behind some of those termini?

^Well, that's a good point. How *do* you track in-state miles driven without a GPS system?

It would be up to the State whether certain GPS information about individuals would be available to police. In the case of catching felons on the loose, I think it would be a great way to put the smack down on illegal activity...stolen vehicles, violent offenders, etc. I'd rather that we place less burden on our police force so that they can concentrate on other areas more fruitfully.

^Why would you oppose a GPS-based system? It seems that if you go on the honor system of filling it in on your insurance, that just complicates the process of the cop checking on your mileage status, enabling cheaters in the first place, etc. I'd rather there be no question of what one's mileage is, how much they owe, and not to give police one more vice to battle.

Great job to those guys.

^^^Thanks, moonloop. I should stop by there sometime to check on the old streetcar.

Trader Jake, I would agree with that. UC has at least exhibited some stability in the Big East this season, which is more than can be said by the flip-flopping ACC.

^I'm assuming that "reserved" is "floor"? There is no seating chart available for the event. I'm thinking about it for a holiday gift.

I do want to make it clear that I'm not fully against hydroelectric power, despite my tone earlier. Hamilton has a resource that is very valuable, and its power source produces very little pollution. Until we have the means to make solar a reality, hydro power is a safe alternative to coal and oil. However, widespread hydro damming could be very harmful.

Strong points. I agree with each of the above. However... Artificial alternation of an ecosystem can damage the natural balance that exists in each. Obviously though, solar panels in the desert would be lower risk than elsewhere.

The one thing that holds us back from any advancement is in battery technology. Hydrogen-ion batteries will replace Lithium-ion batteries that we use today. Battery life and storage expands our ability to move forward. Solar power depends on this. I see it as the *only* best alternative because as long the sun's here, we're here. We can't depend on limited and polluting resources such as oil, coal, and natural gas. Wind and water are volatile sources of power that are less dependable and more harmful to ecosystems than solar can be. With individual installation and future energy storage, solar power looks to be the most sensible option.

^Mt. Carmel Copper Ale is spectacular. If I'm at Mac's or Dewey's, that's what I get. I'm assuming that you're naming Yuengling on experience rather than availability. I'd agree with you on that one too though. Whenever I head up to Erie or Rochester, I pick up a tall or a six of it.

This is what I'm talking about though. I don't agree with the installation of solar panels over swaths of land at all. There's no reason why each home can't generate its own power with some sort of local power storage facility. Solar panels would be included in the price of each home, much like energy savings is used as a marketing tool in real estate. Widespread damming and irrigation has run rivers and streams dry in some areas of the world. Like green roofs, incentives are crucial for widespread solar.

Destroys ecosystems, creates buildup of silt upstream, and breaks up connectivity of rivers for recreation and transport. No thanks. We should be concentrating nationwide on solar power and adequate power storage systems.

I really don't see Taft as having a problem with horrible traffic. I don't agree that we need a new highway interchange to solve a relatively benign traffic condition.

^I would agree with that, GHOST TRACKS. I'd say we should take the least volatile route with the greatest return.