gildone

Thanks for posting this, Jerry. I have no doubt that he is competent in many areas. I only wish he and his staff had a better understanding of intercity passenger rail and Amtrak issues. He was openly hostile to passenger rail when he was governor, and based on responses many people received from his office earlier this year about S. 294, he has a long way to go on this particular issue. Well, I don't want to get this thread off on a tangent, so I'll stop here...Back to the transit issues...

^ I don't expect the price fall to be permanent. Production declines continue in several key oil producing regions including, but not limited to: US, Mexico, Venezuela, North Sea, Indonesia, China, etc. Kuwait's Burghan field (the world's second largest) continues it's production decline. In order for prices to stay down permanently, demand will have to fall below the plateau we're currently on, then drop faster than the global decline rate, once it sets in.

By the way, whoever said it was pointless to contact Voinovich is incorrect. If his office starts getting a lot of calls and mail about the same issue, he will have to pay attention in some fashion. After all, he wants to get re-elected.

I just e-mailed the following to Cong. Kucinich. I'm going out on a limb because I'm relying on what I read on this board as to the nature of his comments because I was unable to attend that meeting (which is the one I would have gone to, had I been able): Mr. Kucinich: I hear that you attended the RTA public meeting in Rocky River regarding their proposed cuts to transit services. I had planned to attend, but I had to work late and couldn't get there in time. It is my understanding that you, among other things, stated (and this is a paraphrase) that if RTA increased service, lowered fares, and improved marketing it would increase ridership enough to balance their budget. If this is a correct summation, please provide me with the specific data that backs up your claims. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of how public transit works knows that it's just not that simple (please note I'm not claiming to be an expert). As an elected official, it's your job to know better. RTA's budget problems stem from the following (in no particular order): 1. County sales tax revenue is down due to the economic downturn. 2. The state of Ohio has significantly reduced its support of public transit over the past several years. The state of Ohio's budget for public transit is among the lowest in the country. In fact, it is so low now, that the entire state budget is less than RTA's annual diesel fuel bill. 3. The federal government underfunds public transit, and we've had an administration that has been openly hostile to public transit. So much so that they want to take money from the federal mass transit account to pay for highways. 4. The rising cost of diesel fuel. RTA has no control over the cost of diesel fuel, which, as you are well aware, has significantly increased in price in recent years. Prices will continue to rise because the age of cheap oil is over. If my understanding of your remarks are accurate, I am disappointed that it seems you chose to blame RTA rather than admit to the chronic underfunding of public transit by the federal and state government and offer to do something constructive about it—like make a push in Congress to increase transit funding and help push the Ohio legislature to increase funding as well. It is also my understanding that you criticized the Euclid Corridor Project (ECP) as if it is somehow partly responsible for RTA's budget situation. If you did make remarks of this nature, then again, please provide me with specific data to back up your claims. If you did make such comments, then I am further disappointed. The ECP is a sound investment. Not only is it once again making Euclid Avenue the premier street in Cleveland, it will lower RTA's operating costs along corridor because: 1. The hybrid buses are more fuel efficient than conventional buses, thus reducing fuel costs. 2. Larger buses mean more passengers, and thus more passenger-miles per vehicle. 3. Larger buses mean fewer drivers are needed. 4. Improved signal operation means reduced delays, which will save fuel. 5. The rebuilt street means less wear and tear on buses and reduced maintenance costs, because prior to the ECP, Euclid Avenue was in an abysmal state of repair. It should also be noted that the roomier, more comfortable articulated buses will also attract riders and increase fare revenue, thus improving the financial performance of the route. I also have to ask: when was the last time you were on Euclid Avenue? Have you taken notice of all of the commercial and residential building construction and renovation that the project has already spawned (with more on the way)? This is economic development which will ultimately mean increased business activity and an increased number of residents which in turn will increase city and county tax revenue, including sales tax revenue which will help RTA's budget. Very little of this development would be occurring without the ECP. RTA and transit agencies all across the state need additional funding, not blame-game grandstanding. Please work on behalf of your district in this regard. If my understanding of your comments is incorrect, I apologize and would appreciate clarification. Thank you for considering my comments.

A short term price volatility has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not peak oil is real. Why is it that you think it does, twnipper? Or are you just poking the bees nest to see what comes out? ;-) I don't know how many times it has to be explained before it gets through to people-- Peak Oil is about production rates and natural geological limits.

The public needs to be shouting at are our legislators in Columbus, George W. Bush, and Congress. Why isn't this point being made more clearly to people?

Thanks Jerry. I'm not arguing either, really. I very much appreciate the information you provide.

I don't find those figures interesting, because citing the cost per mile for fuel is not a useful figure. It's not real-world (as KJP puts it). It's not a valid figure with which to to argue about bus or rail either way or for RTA to properly assess it's costs. What matters is how many passenger miles RTA is getting get per unit of fuel on the bus and on the rails. Does RTA have these figures?

Neither party will utter the words peak oil, though. If you're not even willing to acknowledge the problem, you're not going to be able to effectively solve it. I just read an article about Cong. Roscoe Bartlett, R-MD, the lone crusader in Congress on peak oil. No one in Congress attends his speeches anymore because no one wants to hear with or deal with the bad news...

^Ah.. Tom Coburn. He must object to S. 294 as pork. He considers himself a crusader against wasteful spending. Some of the stuff he's done, I admire, but sometimes, he carries it too far... this is a perfect example.

From the Texas Highway Commission: http://www.keeptexasmoving.com/index.php/news/Do_Roads_Pay_for_Themselves%3F Do Roads Pay for Themselves? 1. What is a traveler paying for when he or she pays state gas tax at the pump? State motor fuel tax is collected from all over the state and goes into a single pool of revenue—about one quarter of which goes to fund education, and about three-quarters of which goes to the state’s highway fund, where it is spent on transportation uses and some non-transportation functions of government. Then the state receives federal funds as the state’s share of the federal fuel tax; about 70 cents of every gas tax dollar Texans send to Washington comes back for road use. The significant point here is that historically the fuel tax paid in any locality of the state is unrelated to the road projects in that locality. Every fuel taxpayer in the state paid something for any given road—which leads to the next issue. 2. When is a given road actually “paid for?” Just like your car, it never is. You may have paid the note, but maintenance and fuel costs go on as long as you own the vehicle. Once a road is built, maintenance and rehabilitation costs last its entire life, generally about 40 years. The decision to build a road is a permanent commitment to the traveling public. Not only will a road be built, but it must also be routinely maintained and reconstructed when necessary, meaning no road is ever truly “paid for.” Until recently, when TxDOT built or expanded a road, no methodology existed to determine the extent to which this work would be paid off through revenues. The Asset Value Index, was developed to compare the full 40-year life-cycle costs to the revenues attributable to a given road corridor or section. The shorthand version calculates how much gasoline is consumed on a roadway and how much gas tax revenue that generates. The Asset Value Index is the ratio of the total expected revenues divided by the total expected costs. If the ratio is 0.60, the road will produce revenues to meet 60 percent of its costs; it would be “paid for” only if the ratio were 1.00, when the revenues met 100 percent of costs. Another way of describing this is to do a “tax gap” analysis, which shows how much the state fuel tax would have to be on that given corridor for the ratio for revenues to match costs. Applying this methodology, revealed that no road pays for itself in gas taxes and fees. For example, in Houston, the 15 miles of SH 99 from I-10 to US 290 will cost $1 billion to build and maintain over its lifetime, while only generating $162 million in gas taxes. That gives a tax gap ratio of .16, which means that the real gas tax rate people would need to pay on this segment of road to completely pay for it would be $2.22 per gallon. This is just one example, but there is not one road in Texas that pays for itself based on the tax system of today. Some roads pay for about half their true cost, but most roads we have analyzed pay for considerably less. To conclude, in the SH 99 example, since the traffic volume for that road doesn't generate enough fuel tax revenue to pay for it, revenues from other parts of the state must be used to build and maintain this corridor segment. The same is true across the state, meaning that, as revealed by the tax gap analysis, overall revenues are not sufficient to meet the state’s transportation needs

I went downtown yesterday to check out the progress. Other than some sidewalk work here and there and putting the finishing touches on the center dividers, it looks pretty much done between public square and E. 9. I saw more building renovation work underway. There were crews working in the old Halle/May Co. building (at least if I'm remembering right, it's that building), but that's probably not news (I haven't been down there for a couple of months, so it is to me). The project seems to be coming together well.

^looks like we need to be writing the governor too.

I certainly hope that everyone who is concerned about these proposals as called/e-mailed/written their state reps and senators asking that the state restore the deep cuts in transit that it has made over the past several years. It's not enough just to discuss it here on UO.

I sent e-mails today...

^Wow is right... £16 billion on a rail link in one city. We've lost our can-do attitude in this country...

^Peak Oil is about production rates and geologic limits, period. The technologies you mention won't change that. We don't have enough cropland to grow enough biofuels to replace oil the way we currently use it for transportation. The only way to make them work is to reduce driving by about 75% and make the vehicles that we would still have be far more efficient than they are now. We also would have to pretty much eliminate long-haul trucking and warehouses-on-wheels, and 10,000 mile global supply chains for manufacturing and food, etc. Even if we're successful in doing all theses things (and more), none of it will change the reality of oil depletion-- it will still be there. The only thing that would change is the level of impact on human society. The problem is, there is so much to be done and we're so close to depletion setting in and taking over, that the transition is going to be anything but smooth. You need 20-30 years for a smooth transition. We're likely looking at 2015 at the outside. We'll transition because we'll be forced to, not because we've had any foresight. And the ride will be rough.

Great article. The mainstream media is starting to get it: Published Jul 20 2008 by San Francisco Chronicle California must wake up to looming fuel crisis by Erica Etelson http://www.energybulletin.net/node/46007

Most of the time, I ride on the street, but there are a few streets I will not ride on because they too heavily trafficked and are just not safe for a cyclist. For those occasional instances I will ride on the sidewalk, but I take it slow and keep an extra eye out for pedestrians and cars pulling into driveways. Also, I'm sometimes towing a bike trailer with my son in it and in Berea, for example, there are areas where the sidewalks are in far better shape than the streets. Long story short: there are occasions when it is necessary. Addendum: I do not ride on the sidewalk in downtown Berea. If I'm not on the street, I will walk my bike on the sidewalk.

^you raise very real concerns dmerkow. Add in the 800 overseas military installations that we are funding (the only reason any nation needs 800 overseas military installations is if they are trying to maintain an empire) and this country is hemorrhaging money that would be better spent improving our energy security at home.

A plan to electify 36,000 miles of US railways has been posted at TheOilDrum.com: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4301 A Siegel's "Energy Smart Rail" proposal touched on the same themes for rail in far less detail: http://energysmart.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/energize-america-fesa-not-fisa/

The current issue of Trains has an article about how CSX has begun and infrastructure project to compete with NS' "Heartland Corridor. The project is tied in with CSX's new intermodal yard by Rickenbacker airport in Columbus, eliminating the bottleneck through Greenwich, Ohio as well as other projects in Ohio. Each new terminal will create approximately 2,000 jobs "by luring reailer to locate distribution centers nearby" So far, Ohio is the only state that has committed to assist with the project. CSX president Michael Ward says: "Ohio is a key area for logistics development..." Good news for Ohio's economy.

He sure is. The quizzical looks from the guy who only wanted to talk about the "trading end of this thing" were a sad commentary of the outright cluelessness that abounds on the issue. It didn't seem to phase any of them when he talked about how if we end up with gas and diesel shortages, "we'll be out of food in a week". Hello ?!?! Anybody in there?!?!?

Watch the video at this link. This is perhaps Matt Simmons' strongest warning yet: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4287

You ignored the main points of my post and just listed a few small towns that are doing well. I never said they were all doing poorly. I just said I've personally seen a lot in Ohio and elsewhere with dead or dying downtowns and that's indicative of certain economic problems in rural areas-- which are very real in many places. Personally, I think Kunstler is too arrogant for his own good, but you asked what does he expect. What he expects is clear in his writings and rantings, which are his viewpoint on where things are headed. Like it or not, a lot of what he has said since he published The Long Emergency appears to be bearing out. You only need to follow sites like EnergyBulletin.net--which is a clearinghouse for news and articles from the mainstream media, blogs, foreign media, and other places about Peak Oil and related issues-- to see this. Yeah, he's a pessimist, but explain to me how that diminishes how things are currently playing out in the real world? He may not always reference things in his writings (which are mostly opinion), but like it or not, he's been right so far on many points. Here are a few examples: 1. He's tried to explain how it's a problem that most of our economy is based on finance and not producing enough things of value. Read Kevin Phillips' books. He has repeatedly provided well referenced pieces about this, why this is true and why it's a very serious problem for America, and how public and private debt, which is currently 350% of GDP (the highest ever in our history, including 1929), is catching up with us and will overtake us. 2. There has been a slew of articles across the country recently in newspapers and magazines about how high gas prices are affecting real estate values in suburbia and exurbia, how long commutes from these areas under high gas prices are hurting people who live there, how vacant homes in some suburban areas are becoming magnets for crime and vandalism, and how all this is beginning to reverse America's 60-year trend toward car-dependent development. Kunstler has long predicted how he thinks suburban areas are going to suffer. Well, they are beginning to suffer now in some areas around the country. We only need to wait and see now if they are going to suffer as badly as he thinks or to a lesser degree. 3. Articles have cropped up in recent months about how more people than ever in the Northeast were having to choose between heating their homes this past winter or buying food, how more malnourished kids than in years past were showing up at doctors' offices-- including even a few with the swollen bellies long associated with famines in Africa. The warnings and concerns about the upcoming heating season in the Northeast states are becoming more strident. States like Vermont are being forced to develop plans for heating centers and find other ways to help people heat their homes because there isn't enough money available in the heating assistance programs. Tom Whipple has suggested the possibility of heating oil shortages this winter, but we'll have to wait and see on that. 4. We have a whole thread here on airline industry woes with article about how high fuel prices are killing a good portion of the industry. 5. Look at KJP's post above about IEA warnings about oil supplies and the quote about scapegoating. We're still largely in collective denial. We're looking for scapegoats for high oil prices rather than being realistic and taking steps to change our lifestyle and politicians in DC remain openly clueless at best or deliberately evasive on the subject at worst. All of the above and more are among the things Kunstler has been ranting about. I agree he's repetitive, but I think that's because reality still isn't sinking in with a lot of Americans. Besides, repetition only diminishes the message if reality turns out to be different. What I think actually does diminish his message more than anything is his arrogance, but again, so far things appear to be playing out as he has been predicting.