motorcycles are highly polluting

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/12/the-greening-of.html

"Motorcycles may deliver 70 mpg or more, but they can be 10 times more polluting per mile than passenger cars"

D: !!!

I heard something similar about outboard motors on boats.

All-electrics seem a good in-town solution.

Keep in mind a bike has a lousy drag profile.
Sure, the front cross-section is small.
But the rider is upright, and there are few drag bodies / many turbulence areas.

bus in winter not so convenient

I'll post pics when I get them.

1) many bus stops don't have a concrete pad
2) you step onto mud or snow
3) even on main routes, you stumble on piles of snow that aren't removed.
4) once off the bus, since the city doesn't clean sidewalks, good luck
5) instead of using traffic bylaw enforcers, a sole guy in an office seems to handle complaints.
Again, good luck.

Maybe we are trying to save the big-3 auto makers by simply forcing everybody to buy a car...

cambridge gets 36 not 24 hours to clean snow

Property owners now have 12 more hours to shovel their sidewalks after a snowfall. This week, council changed the 24-hour limit to 36 hours to give homeowners -- especially seniors -- more time to clear snow and ice after a storm. The bylaw also applies to ice and snow on roofs overhanging sidewalks. The bylaw came into effect three years ago, but this will be the first winter it will be enforced. In Waterloo and Kitchener, residents have 24 hours to shovel sidewalks.

D: so MORE snow in 36 hours will be easier for retireees?

OR once it has solidified a bit more?

This year, for K-W, I will be using lotsa snapshots to highlight my 'Hall of Shame'.

Last year, with the heavy snowfall, there were many large businesses that never bothered to clear snow. I cursed a lot...

They included 7-11 and the Beer Store.

This year they will get a post and a call to the city.

pics of dark woods right by U ave sidewalks

D: the woods on both sides of Univerity near Westmount are criminogenic.
There are steep ravines just off the one side too.

Couldn't the city trim back the underbruch 5' or so?
This is mugger heaven...
D>

we need liberal carbon tax to fund public transit. history of fed gov't debt/deficits. infrastructure sacrificed.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080923.wtransit23/BNStory/National/home

TORONTO — A long-awaited master plan to boost public transit, unveiled Tuesday, pledges to transform the Toronto region over the next 25 years – but fails to detail how it would cover most of its $50-billion price tag.

The plan from the province's Metrolinx agency, chaired by former Burlington mayor Rob MacIsaac, comes after months of discussions about the need for radical measures to raise billions for public transit, including a 10-cent-a-kilometre toll on major expressways, a parking tax or a regional sales tax.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080518/carbontax_liberals_080518/20080518

D: Suzuki backs their platform too. I personally consider the man an extremist for some of his statements in the past about shooting people...

After hearing the NDP's criticism of Dion's plan, Suzuki said: "I'm really shocked with the NDP with this. I thought that they had a very progressive environmental outlook."

D: Though I did vote for Rae (]=...), I consider the federal NDP to be totally irrelevant. I still recall the Former federal New Democratic Party leader Audrey McLaughlin dropping the ball right before election day. A significant portion of the female voters were undecided - all she had to do was say their votes could propel the NDP into more riding seats. Instead, when asked if folks would be throwing their vote away, she tried harping on all the hot-button issues. Today, the NDP act like economic Luddites. Their platform is pretty much ban-bank-fees, when I see ads for that from the private sector anyway, and PC bank made inroads based on lower fees. Plus talk of looking into price fix of gas, with the implication of price controls. Which don't work, never have, never will. The negative informal side effects of that policy negate any benefits.

Leaving the Liberals as the party that would invest in public transit infrastructure.

Regarding the carbon tax: it *can* be a tax cut, dummy! Sadly, Dion is a 30-second soundbite guy in an age of 10 second soundbites (still with me? [=)

Liberal.ca :: Media Releases

18 Sep 2008 ... TORONTO – A new Liberal government will commit more than $70 billion over the next 10 years to improve the critical infrastructure that ...
www.liberal.ca/story_14704_e.aspx - 17k

D: so they'll essentially use private transit to subsidize public transit.
Since cars are not taxed to reflect their cost to society (see my blog entry, the very first one, "cars are not cost effective"), this is actually FAIR.

Aside: John Ralston Saul decries the lack of our linear historical memory. One of the reasons I love the Daily Show so is his ability to use sound clips from the past to point out the amoral flip- flopping politicians do. They count on the absence of linear historical memory in the populace.
Why do I mention this?
Because it was the 'debt slaying' Liberals Chretien and Martin that first cut payments to the provinces! The buck was passed to consecutively lower level of gov'ts. It never just 'went away'. It was swept under the rug.

Jesus fuck, how do I shut off these goddamn italics???

Oh. More cut 'n paste.
We're...
there.
Right.

Here is the order of events, from the beginning:
1) Trudeau.
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2000/10/trudeau_canadas.php
*In 1968, when Trudeau went from rich, socialist professor who had never held a real job in his life to prime minister, Canada’s national debt was a modest $11.3 billion; the federal deficit was zero. When Trudeau left office in 1984, the debt had mushroomed to $128 billion; the deficit to $25 billion annually. But this was just the beginning.

(wiki)
Some consider Trudeau's economic policies to have been a weak point. Inflation and unemployment marred much of his prime ministership. When Trudeau took office in 1968 Canada had a debt of $18 billion (24% of GDP) which was largely left over from World War II^{[citation needed]}; when he left office in 1984, that debt stood at $200 billion (46% of GDP), an increase of 83% in real terms.^[27] However, these trends were present in most western countries at the time, including the United States.
D: sounds pretty incriminating, huh? Keep reading.

http://www.andrewspicer.com/article388.html

Here's another way to look at it. If you take the surplus or debt from each year, and use the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator to convert them to constant dollars, the Tories borrowed over $400,000 in constant dollars, while Chretien's team borrowed under $80,000 (over one more year).

http://www43.statcan.ca/04/04a/04a_008_e.htm

As a result of persistent deficit financing, Canada's total debt load (the accumulation of all past deficits and surpluses since Confederation) had grown from $20 billion in 1971 to an all time high of $588 billion by 1996/97...

In 1994, the federal government undertook a massive program to reverse the nation's financial course. Because of a reduction in program spending and a growing economy, Canada was well on its way to achieving a financial turnaround before the decade ended. By 1997/98, the government recorded a surplus for the first time in 28 years.
--
D: so 2) Mulroney dramatically INCREASES debt.
So much for conservative small taxes/ small gov't.
Witness Reagon in the US. It was the North-Am debut of the NEO-conservative. NEO meaning not. Small taxes.... BIG gov't.

3) Chretien, in shining armour and on a white steed, slays the debt.
But not really.
Look up statscan consolidated multi-level gov't debt.
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060425/d060425b.htm

March 31, 2004

Previous release

The consolidated net financial debt of the federal, provincial, territorial, and local governments, defined as the excess of liabilities over financial assets, increased to $798.4 billion as of March 31, 2004, up $3.9 billion or 0.5% from March 31, 2003. An increase of $17.2 billion in financial assets and $21.1 billion in liabilities accounted for the rise.

The federal government net financial debt declined by $2.8 billion, while the net financial debt of the provincial, territorial, and local governments rose by $6.7 billion.

D: do you see the old man operating the machine behind the curtain yet?

On a per capita basis, net financial debt fell from $25,164 in 2003 to $25,044. The highest per capita net financial debt was recorded in 1997 at $28,543.

D: not so impressive now, is it?

And the price?

When the municipal-level gov't finally has the buck stop there from federal debt-slaying exercises, they have 2 choices:

1) raise local taxes

2) reduce services. Don't maintain infrastructure.

And there you have it folks - the rest of the story.

The lack of public transit funding, going right back to when I was born.

The fact that the Liberals started deficit budgets the first time round.

The Conservatives aggravated it.

The Liberals (nominally) licked it.

And now... the Liberals are promising to fund infrastructure, largely in reaction to Mulroney.

Linear. Historical. Memory.

Yes, in real dollar terms, Mulroney's final-year deficit was 15% smaller than the deficit in 1983-84, but that left Chretien and Martin to do the other 85% of the job, and then continue on into surplus.

The overall accumulated debt, grew (as a % of GDP) in every Mulroney year, but fell consistently from 1995-96 until the present. In other words, Mulroney always grew the debt faster than the economy, and the tide was reversed only after his 9 years in office

crime and sidewalks and foliage

D: I was biking home the other night.
University is pretty good. I took the trail by the tracks by UW.
Went towards Westmount.
On either side, there are woods.
They are flush with the sidewalks on both sides.
This is right by UW.

http://www.nrps.com/community/cpted.asp

Natural Surveillance
The placement of physical features, activities, and people in a way that maximizes visibility is one concept directed toward keeping intruders easily observable, and therefore less likely to commit criminal acts. Features that maximize the visibility of people, parking areas, and building entrances are:

• unobstructed doors and windows,

• pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and streets,

• front porches,

• effective nighttime lighting

For instance, streets designed with gateway treatments, roundabouts, speed bumps, and other "traffic calming" devices establish territories and discourage speeding and cut-through traffic. By keeping public areas observable, you are telling potential offenders that they should think twice before committing a crime. Criminals prefer low-risk situations, and public visibility increases the chances a thief will be caught.

These measures are simple, inexpensive to implement, and will have a more positive effect on residents than gates and bars.

D: my suggestion? Trim the underbrush. 5 or 10' only.
I think the sidewalks along Albert has the same problem.

D.

how bad bike lane design/construction sabotage car bus and pedestrians.

D: Father David Bauer Drive was repaved this summer.
Nominally it has a bike lane. Nominally...

The top pic is as a good stretch. While the sewer grate is best recessed out of the bike lane entirely at least it is flush with the road surface.
The bottom pic is all too common. This is the result when the sewer grate does not line up with the pavement level. Asphalt, I should say.
The soothing stretch becomes a very unpleasant ride.
On a no-suspension bike with high-pressure tire, I imagine very much so.

A car driver would complain if a section of road felt like it would knock your fillings out.

The lip on the extra asphalt is also in line with my tire path.
Meaning I get nervous that my tire might skip sideways on it.

After rain, huge puddles form around these elevated sewer grates in the bike lane.
Now not only will my feet get soaked, even with fenders.
But now I cannot see what I am riding on, making me doubly nervous.

A cyclist is left with 2 options:
1) ride on the sidewalk
2) periodically swerve into the car lane, unexpectedly at least from a driver's point of view.
This undoubtedly results in grumbling about 'why should we bother building bikes lanes if the cyclist won't use them anyway'.

A coworker that drives offered a similar opinion about the Westmount/Northfield bike lane. Since I ride it, I can testify the construction if typically of high quality.
However, patches of broken glass from broken bottles are a regular appearance.
To be fair, the city has been good about cleaning it up every coupla weeks or so.
But after a couple weeks, there is so much debris in the lane that picking out broken glass on sight becomes difficult.
I switch to a different route to work in that final week before the street sweeper helps.

I reiterate, simply 'build it and they will come' is not true.
1) build it WELL and
2) maintain it well,
3) even if the quality is at the expense of quantity,
and only THEN is cycling not an exercise in masochism.

Leaving sewers in a bike lane implies that this bike lane won't last anyway, that it is a mere afterthought, that it simply exists as a temporary feature while in transition to additional car lanes.
With that attitude, of course sensible people will not cycle more.

how bad bike lane design/construction sabotage car bus and pedestrians.

make uptown waterloo one-lane each way only

D: I'm reading that book "Traffic".
Next stop: "The High Cost of Free Parking".
There is 3x more parking than cars.
More cars than people.
And it is 'free' on prime real estate.

http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=072
A good review.

www.city.waterloo.on.ca/.../57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/PWS_ROADS_documents/2008ParkingBrochure.pdf

Here's an aerial view of all parking in the uptown area.

D: I propose we lose the King Street roadside parking. We replace them with a view dropoff/pickup points. We expand the sidewalks and lay in bike lanes by sidewalks.
We add trees to that new huge sterile development across the street.
We add more bike stands.

"But it will slow traffic!", you say. No, it won't.
We presently NEED 2 lanes each way cuz we HAVE on-street parking.
The number of parking spaces cannot be more than a dozen per block - which considerably exceeds bike parking.
Every time somebody wants to parallel park, something most folks are terrible at, traffic backs up for a block. Ergo the right-hand lane is really just the parking lane.
Remove the parking and remove the lane.
See the feedback in a past post on what the public wants from uptown.
I just described it.

review: a book called "Traffic"

D: I sort of need to read this book.
The book is very readable, other than the author's pressing need to use "timorous", a word I have never heard before. I guess he was insecure.

It begins with a review of traffic patterns historically. The author mentions Pompeii, Rome, feudal London and so on.
He shows the impact of new modes of transportation, including chariots, bicycles and cars.
The book is *really* about the automobile.
The sections on driver habits and such are terrifying.

I find myself wanting to lobby to place a cam in every car, so drivers can get feedback about just how bad their driving is!
The level of narcissistic personality and matching aggressive driving (and a grimmer view of other drivers) can be demonstrated over recent decades.
We are getting WORSE.

The cell phone and I-pod deserve mention.
It is dialing and looking for a song that critically draw eyes and attention away from the road. But talking on the phone can reduce attention even though eyes are nominally on the road. The eyes, however, only look straight ahead.
Long conversations increase risk somewhat - the duration makes it serious though.
Essentially, talking on a cellphone introduces a bad habit into an already complex task.

Instead of banning it, why don't we just subsume cell-phone related accidents into existing demerit systems? Get in accident when on phone- get 'dangerous driving' demerit.

The risk pyramid was illuminating. It is based on workplace accident studies.
For each 300 unsafe acts, there are 30 near misses and finally ONE HIT.
1x30x10...
Think of it was the tip of the iceberg. We consistently ignore the vast number of factors that need to go wrong before one accident happens.
Then we call it an 'accident'.
A comet falling on you is an accident.
Somebody with sloppy driving habits is an accident waiting to happen.
Talking on a phone while fiddling with one's I-pod and then mowing down a pedestrian at crosswalk is not an accident.
It is somebody with no sense of their prowess, or else a disrespect for others' safety.

Perhaps police reports should not stop at reporting seat-belts and the presence of alcohol.
Ipods, cellphones, looking at baby in the back seat, et al - why don't we illustrate how accidents happen?
Even just 'an Ipod was present and on at the time'.
Or: a cellphone conversation was cut off on impact.

From a cyclist's point of view, the concept of 'safety in numbers' is valid.
An occasional biker is not watched for. A steady stream slows drivers who are then paying attention.

For this reason, I think we should not focus on LOTS of bike lanes, but rather upon the high quality of key ones.

review: a book called "Traffic"

GRT makes bus pass hard to get.

http://www.grt.ca/web/transit.nsf/DocID/7C4554FA47B2B074852571730059AEC8?OpenDocument

D: update: a new Shoppers may also sell them.

D: My pal Ron went to the downtown bus terminal to by a bus pass yesterday (Sunday).
There was ONE teller.
The waiting line went around the CORNER.

That is one helluva way to run a business...

wacky free-for-all pedestrian crosswalk

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080828.wscramble28/BNStory/National/home

Before the morning rush hour, city workers will remove coverings from new pedestrian crossing signals and unveil Toronto's first experimental "pedestrian scramble" intersection, a traffic-light configuration that stops cars in all directions with a red light to allow pedestrians to cross in all directions, even diagonally.

From behind a windshield, however, the change may not be so popular. It will mean much longer red lights for drivers to make way for this new 28-second, pedestrian-only phase in the traffic-light cycle. Currently, the longest wait at this intersection for drivers (those on Yonge Street) is 31 seconds. As of today, the longest wait for a green light will stretch to 57 seconds, and green lights for drivers will also be five to eight seconds shorter.

D: disliked by cars but loved by walkers.

The scramble concept, long ago implemented in several other cities around the world, is also known as a "Barnes dance," after Henry Barnes, a traffic commissioner in Denver credited with coming up with the idea there in the 1950s and reportedly making pedestrians so happy they were "dancing in the streets."

D: before we get too worked up about drivers waiting for a minute- pedestrians wait 1-2 minutes at some crosswalks all the time. So suck it up!!!

canucks driving more.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080814.wdriving0814/BNStory/National/home

Statscan said Canadian drivers have shown they can sharply curtail consumption in the face of higher prices:

• The volume of gasoline purchased by consumers fell 12.1 per cent between 1980 and 1984 as prices rose 65 per cent.

• Consumption fell 5.1 per cent from 1989 to 1991 as prices increased 12 per cent.

A major difference in both periods was that real incomes were being squeezed by recessions, the agency notes.

D: but

A major difference in both periods was that real incomes were being squeezed by recessions, the agency notes.

Since 2002, real incomes have risen steadily.

D: the main reason folks switch to 'green' products, for example, is:
1) better product
2) better deal
In fact, being green rarely has anything to do with it.

The only way Canadians will drive less is an strong overall impact on their bottom line.
In the wallet.
Carbon taxes are useful in that fashion.
D>

air pollution casualties.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2008/08/13/air-pollution-health.html

"This year, an estimated 20,000 Canadians will die from heart and lung illnesses brought on by breathing polluted air, the CMA said. Most of the deaths will be among people over 65, who are most vulnerable to heart disease.

The costs of dirty air, in terms of treating the illnesses in hospital and visits to doctors, as well as indirect expenses for time off work, will add up to $10 billion this year.

The costs will rise to $300 billion by the year 2031 if no improvements are made, said Dr. Brian Day, CMA president."

D: put another way, our vehicles will contribute $2-3B in medical costs this year.

So, does yer SUV still look cheap?

While bicycling in traffic, and stuck behind a car that revs its engine, and inhaling the fumes, I think of this one song lyric. "I eat what you excrete."

Pic:

http://www.ec.gc.ca/doc/media/m_124/brochure/images/BR_fig3_s_e.gif

why car drivers don't signal

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/1100924,CST-NWS-ride11.article

The good:

Danek says some people are afraid that if they signal to change lanes, the car in the next lane will speed up to block their car.

The bad:

He noted that turn signals didn't even become standard in cars until the 1960s -- people who wanted to signal used to have to stick their left arm out the window.

The ugly:

He said it's also a matter of habit -- like buckling your seat belt. Some people aren't taught properly and don't get into the habit of doing it

D: over half of Americans don't signal!

See my bike blog. The accident types cars/bikes get into are aggravated by a lack of signalling.

But folks who signal don't automatically get off the hook. Some:

1) signal a mere second before hauling on the brake to turn. Useless

2) signal a whole block ahead of time, passing parking lots and turnoffs the whole way. Useless.

D: Might I suggest signalling 3 seconds before turning, after the last turnoff prior to the one you want?!

I saw a car with the rear running lights off last night. Get a second person to check your car once in a while, or walk around your car while parked.

Sadly, if I try to indicated a light is out with the "L -sign", folks may think I'm calling them a loser.I try toggling or covering my bike light to imply it sometimes.

toronto selling sidewalks at expense of pedestrians

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/473664

Lay-bys cut into sidewalk space to permit room for vehicles to load and unload or drop off and pick up passengers. Supporters say they improve traffic flow. Critics say they eat into public space, endanger the disabled and do not further the city's commitment to pedestrians and cyclists.

"Lay-bys are designed for cars, not for pedestrians, not for cyclists," says Shawn Tracy, president of the Bay Corridor Community Association. "There are a growing number of them. Once one establishment gets a lay-by others will want them – it sets a precedent."

D: Funny. The order of events is as follows. Before:

1) park car

2) walk there using sidewalk

After:

1) lose sidewalk

2) use lay-by

3) explain that parking/walking is not practical.

This sort of thing will snowball!

bus lane, hybrid bus.

http://gttavisions.blogspot.com/2007/05/bus-only-lane-pitched-for-dvp-toronto.html

"It could take a few years, but Toronto is looking at making transit-friendly changes to one of Canada's busiest roads, including a bus-only lane to unplug the congested expressway.

There's no room to expand, but officials want to squeeze buses onto the centre median lane to let transit users zip ahead of car drivers in the regular lanes.

The concept, already used in Los Angeles, Minneapolis and Ottawa, would help GO Transit buses draw more passengers out of their cars, said managing director Gary McNeil."

D: Toronto had high hopes for hybrid buses. But they are not much more efficient for long steady driving.

http://www.e-traction.com/buses.htm
D: this is a nifty setup. It uses an all-electric at the wheel.
It is powered by a small steady generator that recharges the battery banks.

volt, rx8 are everything wrong with next-gen cars

http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/07/22/volt-gm.html
D: This will be full sedan size. But as an electric, it really is only of use for short in-city commutes.
It is also very expensive.

http://media.ford.com/mazda/article_display.cfm?article_id=17134&make_id=227
The Mazda RX8/hydrogen also has a very limited range with hydrogen.
Its Renesis engine is promising. Sadly, they built a large version for sports cars/SUVs.
Placing a miniature version in a compact would have made sense.
The H2 doesn't have the range for anything but city car apps.

The future apparently involves a painless, if expensive, 'biz as usual' model.
Full sized cars that would feel at home in pre-oil crisis 1970s America.

The Renesis is particularly important since it is compact and light - appropriate to mount mid-body, which is useful for a quasi-trike layout (see yesterday).

There IS a proof-of-concept cyro/high-pressure H2 tank.
https://publicaffairs.llnl.gov/news/news_releases/2008/NR-08-06-02.html
D: but keep in mind the Trishield 5000psi costs $5000.
I am curious what the price could be with proper economies of scale.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5325/is_200202/ai_n21308637

D: note that a H2 tank able to handle long road trips necessarily will occupy the entire trunk or back seat. Allowing for cargo and luggage, what I'm saying is it cannot be a 4-5 adult passenger system in any practical fashion. Sorry. I'd like H2 to be a silver bullet as much as the next guy, but the facts just don't add up to that.

I kept running into know-it-alls that read a single book on the subject - "The Hydrogen Economy".
http://www.amazon.com/Hydrogen-Economy-Jeremy-Rifkin/dp/1585422541/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216742979&sr=8-1
They all proved hopelessly naive.
They didn't consider that without onboard O2 (impractical- see the size of that tank!!!), a H2 combustion engine still produces 1/3 the Nox.
The VOLUME required to store H2 was lost on them.
The off-gassing of H2 if cryo was also.
The losses, from feedstock to H2 gas to cryo gas (or even single OR dual stage compressor for gas) are staggering!
Combined with the 'box on wheels' able to hold 5 adults exemplified by the Volt and RX8, this would be disaster. It would simply consume all remaining coal very fast.
Without next-gen clean coal, it is bad on every count.
Aside: since India, China AND the USA are all building relatively old-school coal plants which are not cheap or effectively upgraded to clean coal tech (with 90% co2 retention), the CO2 cap is already lost. I'm just extrapolating a world with 18% o2/ 1000pm CO2 when the dust settles.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/26/MNGKVBHHQ51.DTL
The USA wants to help China clean up its act? Physician, heal thyself!
http://www.saskpower.com/cleancoal/index.html
D: since USA generates 50% of its energy from coal, and H2 and electricity will both likely be derived from coal, where ever coal plants go, so too all the 'clean' energy storage methods.
Then.... we plop it in a big vehicle design.

teardrop shaped cars for lower drag.

D: this is post WWII car that used a 10hp moped motor initially.
The rear axle is recessed. This
1) saves much weight
2) improves drag profile
3) means no differential drive is needed.
I'd like to see this updated. Every now and then, a 3-wheeled car comes out.
See the Trimagnum for example. 3 wheels are not quite as stable.
It also requires carefully designing the car to keep the mass low and between the tires.
We've all seen the Prius drag profile. That is about as good as it gets- if we are trapped with the 'box on wheels' design. It cannot taper horizontally at the rear.
Aside: many cars that look low drag are not. Without a big spoiler, the rear window on most sedans ends laminar flow and has the eddies/vortex of turbulence.
Ideally, the rear cross section before turbulence should be 1/2 the front.
I propose:
1) we switch from box on wheels. i.e. 2 bucket seats front/ 3 on sofa rear.
2) at first, we switch to 2 and 2.
3) then 2 and 1/ or 2 kids.
I would also like to see:
1) electric motors mounted on the front wheels. For regenerative braking.
2) an axle rear mounted engine. BUT place the whole narrow rear axle on a pivot.
The result? The ability to move SIDEWAYS for parallel parking.
As well as very narrow turn radius.
The Isetta-style rear axle allows the wheels to pass under the rear passenger seats.

I thought this would work for highway commutes.
For in the city, a Vive-style profile is adequate. Or SmartCar.

The 3-wheeler died when Buckminster's 3 wheeler crashed and caused a fatality.
People are irrationally afraid of it in the same way the Hindenberg crash scared them of hydrogen.
Perhaps we can use a 'boiled frog' approach to sneak it up on them though...

city plan 2.0

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB3/index.htm

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/07/redesigning_urb.php

D: "(PARIS) The first step was to invest in better transit in outlying regions to ensure that everyone in the greater Paris area had access to high-quality public transit. The next step was to create express lanes on main thoroughfares for buses and bicycles, thus reducing the number of lanes for cars. The third step was to establish a city bicycle rental program"
D: it looks like a zero-sum game.
But every person who finds reforms make public transit or cycling viable are off the road.

"The cars-only model is being challenged by the "National Complete Streets Coalition", an assemblage of citizen groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council, AARP (an organization of 38 million older Americans), and local and national cycling organizations. This coalition has aggressively lobbied for "complete streets" policies"
D: COMPLETE STREETS. A handy slogan to rally around.

D: the cost of 'free parking' to society is enormous.

http://completestreets.org/

http://www.walkable.org/library.htm
D: this is terrific, for cyclists too.
(pic)

thoughts on plug-in hybrids, electricity source, v.s. alternatives

D: the two maps show:
1) location of coal plants (purple dots) and
2) the potential for wind power.

Notice anything? That's right- we have coal plants where the wind is best. ?!?
Now, many folks suggest hybrids and plug-in cars are always more green. Not really.
If the electricity comes from coal plants, then the co2 and pollution is roughly comparable to just using a standard gasoline vehicle.
Here's where it gets interesting. Plug-in hybrid/electric battery cars, when connected to the power grid, can address a limitation of wind power. Wind power is not reliable. Sometimes there is wind but sometimes not.
So:
1) build wind generators
2) a policy (see below) of incenting use of plug-in hybrids/electrics is implemented
3) 2) offsets a limit of 1)
4) we minimize the use of coal.

Another aside: electric discharge does create ground-level ozone. We don't have any perfect solutions.

There is a problem with automatically handing out rebates for a hybrid car. Just like the tech of the last few decades, hybrid cars can be a performance booster v.s. a way to gain efficiency.
Well, if we used the innovations in car performance since the 1970s to improve efficiency, we'd have vehicles 25% better on gas.
Instead, we now have sedans that rival the performance of many 70s sports cars.
Well, hybrids can be used the same way.
I expect to see drag-racers availing themselves of 'green' rebates in the name of performance.
That's right - your tax dollars at work!

Slapping hybrid (and H2) power trains in full-size sedans and SUVs ignores a fact. Most families choose not to use a scooter, moped, motorbike, subcompact or microcar in lieu of a larger vehicle.
We are attached to the idea of a box-on-wheels that can hold 5 adults for one commuter.
THAT is the problem.
Just using an efficient diesel subcompact matches a hybrid sedan's performance sans all the high-tech wizardry.

A rectangular car chassis precludes adoption of a teardrop shape which would be low drag.
See the Isetta for some ideas about this.

So long as we are trapped in a mindset which requires a full-size sedan that can match an old sports car for acceleration, all the nods to being green are nothing short of laughable!


http://www.hybridcars.com/local-incentives/region-by-region.html

" Ontario...

Residents of these three provinces are eligible for partial sales tax rebate on all hybrid vehicles. In British Columbia, residents can get a rebate of up to $2,000, in Ontario up to $1,000 and in PEI up to $3,000. These rebate are apparently for all hybrids, regardless of make or model. Check with regional tax authorities or a tax professional."

map of parking around uptown waterloo

D: the amount of parking within a coupla blocks of uptown is huge.
Why does the city feel a need to spend 10s of millions to make more?!

Aside: I counted all the bike stands uptown Waterloo. It was less than on-road car parking, on one block, one ONE side of the street!

The placement of signposts does not generally seem to consider car doors and such.

I spoke to a cafe owner uptown. Actually, he didn't like the idea of more greenery. It seems the store name is hard to see through foliage.
He pointed out there were multiple green park areas within a few blocks.

roads at tracks better maintained than sidewalks

D: pic 1 is in the uptown Waterloo mall parking lot. Notice the rubber guide to keep the pavement in place
D: pic 2 is the same place, but with steel guides to prevent the pavement from cracking. Note it is in the best shape of any.

D: pic 2 and 3 are by Kumpf Drive on Northfield. The severe cracks on the sidewalk have not been repaired, unlike the road, which shows recent asphalt patches.
That track on the sidewalks is BRUTAL.
I have a mountain bike.
Now say baby stroller. Or wheelchair. Or decrepit old lady.
A twisted ankle, a broken hip.

I want you to complain. Call the city, or your local politician.
Ask why sidewalks are treated as the 'poor cousin' of roads.
Why have we made the car king?

D: aside - John called back in a timely fashion from Urban Planning.
It seems the bike lane sweeping was behind schedule cuz
1) they were playing catch-up on leaves that were caught by the fall snow and
2) the UW was spilling a lot of gravel.

D: OK... but Father David Bauer Drive still looks like a bomb hit. There are chunks of pavement the side of my fist all over the place. And heaps of gravel.
My advice: go on the sidewalk.

Many say 'build it and they will come'. No, they won't.
Build it WELL and MAINTAIN it and then they will.

some cars have hard2C signals

D: the other day, watching for a car signal in case it was turning, I still couldn't see it.

I think NewScientist posted an article on it last week. Sadly, their search engine interface is nigh unto useless.

Does anybody know which new car models place the turn signal towards the center of the bumper?

the dangers of outdoor exercise

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080512150141.htm

As environmentalists have pointed out, it can be as dangerous to be outdoors behind a city bus -- walking or bicycling -- as it is to be in front of one.

The main culprits are ozone, fine particulate matter, and carbon monoxide, he says. These pollutants irritate the lungs and respiratory system, and can exacerbate the problems of individuals with underlying disease

The pollutants affect the lungs by causing inflammation or irritation of the airway lining. More mucus and phlegm is produced, he says, and small muscles surrounding the airway respond by squeezing down. The work of breathing increases and it becomes more difficult to get oxygen into the body.

Ozone adversely affects a person's breathing pattern and causes the airways in the lungs to become smaller and more resistant to oxygen exchange. Because of ozone, a person working out has difficulty taking deep breaths, and has to breathe faster. As a result, the exercise becomes more stressful and difficult.

Carbon monoxide arises from cigarette smoke and automobile exhaust. It has a tremendous ability to force oxygen out of our circulatory system -- it combines with hemoglobin 200 times faster than oxygen. Overexposure may lead to headache, dizziness, confusion, and dangerous increases in body temperature.

D: That is what I love about smog alerts.
Instead of incenting folks to drive LESS in the first place, we tell folks to *just* drive- thereby aggravating an existing smog alert.
I watch cars go by and see on average 1.5 occupants of each 5 person 'box on wheels'.
D: here's an idea. During smog alerts, the price of gas jumps a buck. To deter driving.
I think our bus gives one free smog day a month or something.

See
http://kwbusblog.blogspot.com/

D: I see hardcore joggers training in smog alerts. I point out the alert to them.
It never seems to stop them.
Madness- damaging your lung capacity due to some obsessive training!
After all, your cardio V-max is the ultimate bottleneck in your performance.

more money wasted on parking

http://news.therecord.com/News/Local/article/349415

"A new parking strategy for uptown Waterloo includes paid on-street parking and up to three new parking garages.

One of the garages could be built at Caroline Street South and Willis Way by 2013 at a cost of $18.7 million. It could have up to 750 spaces."

D: Everybody likely noticed the new buildings built by the Market Square.
I kept asking what that would do to parking.

Apparently, it means
1) private parking is lost
2) the tax base - your money - is used to subsidize this private parking loss.

I got a question:
The garage might open the way for a Westin luxury hotel in the core.

D: this is an example of a private profit-based company making use of externalizing the negative cost of parking.
I'm not against a hotel - I'm just against them off-loading the cost of parking.
If they want to build a hotel, they can build the parking too.

D: it's funny. We can afford to cover a vast swathe of land with asphalt.
But public transit initiatives are expensive!
D.

breakdown of city funding for street, sidewalk, bike lanes

http://therecord.metrolandwest.com/article/339663

D: great article today!

"A quick look at some of the municipal budgets in this region shows there is no balance to transportation spending. Roads get the overwhelming amount of taxpayer dollars; sustainable transportation -- walking, cycling and transit -- get comparatively little.

This year, Kitchener will spend $17.2 million on roads, $1.6 million on sidewalks and $486,000 on paths and trails.

Cambridge will spend $10.3 million on roads, $225,000 on sidewalks, $204,000 for on-road bike lanes, and $35,000 for off-road trails.

In Waterloo, roads will get $6.9 million, sidewalks $254,000 and bike paths $250,000.

"Let's be honest, the vast majority of money goes into roads," Wellar says.

Waterloo Region is the only municipal government in this region that approaches balanced spending between infrastructure for roads and sustainable transportation -- at least for 2008.

Waterloo Region will spend $92.5 million this year on roads. But it will also spend $81 million on Grand River Transit. It will also spend $1.6 million to build 108 kilometres of sidewalks and bike paths."

D: the car is king, but only cuz cars get the lion-sized share of transit funding.
Funny, my bike doesn't wear out roads or cause potholes.

For a caricature of the 'ugly car-driver' cliche, let us study the local representative.
Fred Snider.
http://therecord.metrolandwest.com/article/301210

"What's with the stupid, idiotic people who ride their bicycles on snowy roads?

Roads are made for vehicles, and cyclists are privileged to use them also. The roads are narrower in the winter because of snowbanks, so cars don't have the room they have in the summer. And roads with snow make it easy for cyclists to lose control and fall.

If they fall they deserve what they get for being stupid -- and no helmet is going to save them -- but how about the poor driver who runs over them? The driver is going to feel guilty when they shouldn't -- not to mention being made late for wherever they were going.

Waterloo Region should stop wasting time and money on useless bylaws (like the pesticide issue and bicycle helmet issue), and outlaw riding a bicycle on snowy/icy roads. Get these idiots off our roads now."

D: as much as reading that makes my blood boil, I will refrain from making comments about Fred himself. Others have already done so for me.
Rather, I will examine the assumptions behind his argument. His position exemplifies the unspoken assumptions about how things ought to be, which closely resemble the status quo, and why the car is king.
1) somehow, snow removal doesn't apply to bike lanes even though they are considered a feature of roads
2) somehow, buffers for snow between road/lane and the sidewalk is 'wasted space'. Heck, why not just use the bike lane?
3) leading back to his initial argument in a charming case of circular logic.

I think we've all seen that at LEAST a buffer of one yard between road/lane and sidewalks is needed to pile snow. My poor old boss from Club Ab was out there every day cleaning the sidewalk adjacent to King Street. Many local businesses were not so conscientious.

Somehow, car-bigots such as Fred just assume that continued neglect of anything but full-width high-speed vehicle lanes which leaves cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians!) nowhere else to go means everyone ought to drive cars.
My newer boss offered that opinion after I got hit by a car. For the record, the snow was cleared and had nothing to do with that. I tried to stay calm when I pointed out that
a) not everybody can afford a car and
b) not every residence has parking for cars.
I live above an old grandfather-claused biz uptown Waterloo. I cannot park here during business hours, making owning a car both expensive and essentially impossible.
It is likely best that I bit my tongue.

I cannot help but think of my Aunt Marian in California. While driving, we passed a cyclist. She muttered, "damn cyclists." Later while walking down the sidewalk there was a cyclist there instead. And once again, the charming tolerant open-minded woman muttered- you guessed it- "damn cyclists". This can be translated to:
1) I drive
2) I walk
3) I don't happen to bike.
4) So screw cyclists.
Of course, she is quite broadly compassionate. She also believes in building a big ditch to drown as many Mexicans sneaking in as possible, as well as withholding organs from people in need of transplants.
Thanks auntie!

Thank you, Fred, for exemplifying everything that wrong with the system, and being the quintessential ugly car driver.

dumb cyclists become hurt cyclists

D: this is for yesterday's post on too-wide parking merges. This one on Northfield is extremely dangerous for the sidewalk. I'd like to see very wide ogives like that across sidewalks banned.

D: is anybody reading this a cop or nurse? I'd be curious which spots result in the most accidents.

Don't assume I am automatically sympathetic with bad cyclists.
Sure, I occasionally break the rules.
For example, I am unwilling to cross the vast swath of Northfield during rush hour on a left hand turn onto Kumpf Drive. You see, I'm not suicidal.
If there was a place to take refuge mid lane I would.
I walk my bike across the crosswalk at Parkside, then cycle along that sidewalk. Sorry.

Conversely, I nearly got taken out by a cyclist last summer. I had right of way on Regina behind uptown on the way home. I had lotsa blinky lights. He came gunning on a hi-G turn off a side street without looking or slowing down at all. He missed me by a second.
Had he struck my bike, we would have had Words.

Here are a coupla Darwin Award candidates locally:

http://news.therecord.com/article/260918
"

A 64-year-old Kitchener man died yesterday afternoon after he fell off his bicycle.

Police said the man and another individual were riding their bicycles on the sidewalk on Strasburg Road near Bleams Road at about 5 p.m. when they encountered a pedestrian.

It's believed the man swerved to avoid the pedestrian, losing control of his bicycle, Waterloo regional police said.

He fell off, striking his head. He was not wearing a helmet."

http://news.therecord.com/article/274689
"CAMBRIDGE

An 18-year-old Cambridge cyclist has been charged with going through a red light in connection with a collision in Cambridge last month.

The crash occurred around 7:25 p.m. Oct. 31. The cyclist was westbound on Pinebush Road. The driver of a pickup truck was heading south on Franklin Boulevard at the same time.

The two collided in the intersection.

The cyclist was taken to the Cambridge Memorial Hospital with serious internal injuries. He was later transported to Hamilton General Hospital.

Waterloo regional police said the cyclist was wearing dark clothing and had no light on his bicycle."

http://news.therecord.com/article/257688

"MOUNT FOREST

A 23-year-old Palmerston cyclist is in serious condition in a London hospital after he was struck by a transport truck Tuesday morning on Highway 6.

The collision occurred shortly after 6:15 a.m. when the truck, travelling north on the highway just past Mount Forest, struck the cyclist who was also travelling north, Wellington OPP said.

Adrian Joseph Evans, the cyclist, was transported to hospital in Mount Forest and later airlifted to Victoria Hospital in London. He is listed in serious but stable condition, police said.

The truck driver, a 41-year-old Burlington man, was not injured.

Police said Evans was wearing dark clothing at the time. No charges have been laid in connection with the crash."

D: I selected cases where there was fault and a lack of safety on the part of the cyclists.

The theme is clear. No helmets, no lights, dark clothing at night, sometimes wrong lane or on the sidewalk.

I see these cyclists on King at night. They have slick 1000 buck racing frames, wear spandex, have an low-drag helmet ... and no 20 dollar bike light. Wow.
It's not like they lack the cash!

Not a popular opinion, but if one must ride at night, use the sidewalk if you have no light.

Sure, it's illegal- but you won't get as dead.

D: I talked to my bud about riding on the Highway on the tiny sliver of pavement on the outside of the lane. He pointed out that a transport truck with heavy uneven load can swing the trailer up to 2' side to side. I have a mountain bike so go onto the gravel when I hear a truck coming.

A meter-wide edge for cyclists sure would be nice.

D: tomorrow, just to balance the tables, we will talk about cyclist renegade advocates protesting car-is-king culture.

wide ogive parking lots danger

D: this is a nasty traffic pinch point. It is bad for walkers and cyclists.
It is by the sports complex on Father David Bauer Drive.
When events are getting out, there is a steady stream of cars that pour out with rolling stops. Perhaps they are trying to be courteous to the drivers behind them. Nonetheless, this stretch is very dangerous on foot or bike during such times. The sidewalk is behind a fence visibility barrier for most of the road. However, there is 10-20' of visibility - if they look...

I am sure the occasional cop car parked nearby would fix that.

D: there is a similar traffic pinch point for pedestrians on Northfield.
The mall on the corner of King and Northfield has a liquor store.
I'll snap a pic on the way to work today.
I have nearly been smacked there repeatedly.
That spot has traffic spilling out onto Northfield.
The sidewalk is recessed from the street about 10'. On the bright side, it didn't get buried by the snow plow this winter.
On the down side, the parking lot exit and entrance lanes have a gradual long rounded ogive shape. Cars have a habit of beginning to accelerate prior to the sidewalk.
Most drivers don't look specifically for pedestrians, being intent on oncoming traffic.
You see the problem?
I'd like to see broad parking lot exit lanes with very gradual curves banned.
I don't want cars to be able to gun their engines near the sidewalks.
I know it is nice to merge with traffic at speed, but just having the nearby stop light on Northfield turn on occasionally would take care of that.
This is rolling stop heck for pedestrians.

I always said I thought the two most lethal martial art moves were the no-blind-spot-check and the rolling-stop. Cars can be 2000 pound martial art practitioners. Ouch.

road construction - build it and you will need to keep building

I live in Waterloo. I wrote our local newspaper in response to the following.


http://news.therecord.com/article/248928
Jeff Outhit:

"September 29, 2007

JEFF OUTHIT
RECORD STAFF

The cost of a new Highway 7 between Kitchener and Guelph has soared to $300 million, and may exceed $400 million by the time it's completed.

...

The new road -- 18 kilometres long -- will cut a 100-metre swath through the countryside, north of the current two-lane highway.

It will displace five businesses and 11 homes. It will span the Grand River, bisect a wetland, and consume 144 hectares of farmland, affecting more than a dozen farms."

D: My response:

"The Record has covered plans to expand highways and parking for automobiles. Absent from the discussion is any consideration of carpool lanes. Despite studies showing that high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lanes carry more people faster, none of the political parties are backing this.

The phenomenon of "slugging," which has drivers picking up strangers travelling to the same destination to qualify for HOV lanes shows just how successful this idea can be.

Build new highways, and in a decade we'll just have to build more. Convert existing lanes for HOV use, and the fines will render this approach self-funding.

Instead the community's leaders wish to spend a huge amount of money -- money which supports a regressive fiscal policy being of benefit only to people who can afford cars."

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=256918

In 1992, 68% of Canadians aged 18 and older drove everywhere, according to a new report from Statistics Canada.

By 1998, that proportion was 70%.

In 2005, the most recent year for which numbers are available, 74% of Canadians were full-time drivers.

Biking and walking rates, meanwhile, declined to 19% in 2005 from 26% in 1992...

Canadian cities are sprawling almost unchecked, he said, and the search for affordable housing has pushed many people to the outskirts where an automobile may be the only realistic transportation option."

D: Depressing, indeed. By the time such concepts as public transit and bike lanes are discussed, we can see that the battle is already half over. All the ace cards are in the hands of drivers.

D: Leading to... smog days!
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/06/14/smog-oma050714.html

"The damaging effects of breathing smog could contribute to 5,800 premature deaths in Ontario this year, the Ontario Medical Association said Tuesday."

But is it? http://news.therecord.com/article/276887

It now turns out government forecasters are wrong most of the time when they predict poor air.

Only 13 of 40 local smog days since 2006 have had poor air quality, environment records reveal. A pollution index shows there was never poor air during 27 of 40 smog days.

D: a good first step - free bus on smog days.

http://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web/region.nsf/$All/E6677789A1F22F2785256ED8004E46D9?OpenDocument

Region offers free transit on first smog advisory day in August

Waterloo Region – In an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality, Grand River Transit (GRT) in cooperation with Region of Waterloo Public Health will provide free transit on the first smog advisory day in August.

The objective of this pilot initiative is to increase public awareness about the link between transportation choices and air quality. Motorists will be urged to leave their vehicles at home and ride transit free in an effort to encourage wise transportation choices on smog days.

“Public transit is a great defense against climate change,” said Regional Chair Ken Seiling. “A free transit initiative is just one way we are working to enhance our public transportation system and improve air quality in Waterloo Region.”

Waterloo Region often experiences extended periods of smog and poor air quality. Traveling by public transit creates 65 per cent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than traveling by car, making it a “green” transportation alternative.

D: I have air quality reports sent to my e-mail. I avoid hard cardio training during smog alerts.
http://www.airqualityontario.com/alerts/signup.cfm

D: a summary of the last decade or so of Ontario air quality alerts.
http://www.airqualityontario.com/press/smog_advisories.cfm

D: In summary, we encourage remote sprawling suburbs. Cheap vehicle fuel (relative to societal cost) encourages folks to commute from out of town to their workplace.
We may not associate these indirect health costs to motor vehicles, but suburbs are very unhealthy.

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/272582
"Toronto's inner suburbs are the urban epicentre of an obesity and diabetes epidemic that is shortening lives and threatens to overwhelm our health-care system, says a groundbreaking study to be released today."

D: whence cometh the suburban sprawl?
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03october/october03corp1.html

Sprawl and Its Discontents
"Suburban sprawl" usually refers to development patterns with low density and a lack of mixed-use (for example, no apartments above stores), a lack of transportation options (forcing everyone to drive to work), strict separation of residential from non-residential property, and job growth in newer suburbs with job decline in older areas (both the core city and older suburbs).

Sprawl causes increased dependence on automobiles and longer average commuting times, deteriorating air quality, and rapid consumption of open space in outlying areas. It also causes disinvestment of central city infrastructure and services, and strains city budgets at the core (due to a declining tax base) and in some suburbs (because of hyper-growth at the edge).

The decentralization of jobs in manufacturing, wholesale and retail means work becomes scarce for low-skilled workers who are concentrated at the core. Since the suburbs lack affordable housing (often due to exclusionary zoning) and public transit fails to reach many suburban jobs, sprawl effectively cuts central city residents off from regional labor markets. That means greater concentrations of poverty for residents of core areas...

http://www.financialpost.com/analysis/columnists/story.html?id=b42fe4e0-eeed-4e64-a127-123d5afebe35&k=61625

A Toronto megalopolis, 150 kilometres in girth, will be born of the Ontario provincial budget announced this week. The budget's big-ticket transportation projects will drive this outcome through measures that will undermine public transit in the city while accelerating suburban sprawl in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond.

The Toronto subway system, rather than being expanded in the city's highly populated and underserved downtown areas, will instead be revamped to serve as a commuter rail line, extending to a rural highway in a regional municipality north of Toronto. The province expects as many as 100,000 extra suburban trips will be made daily on the new subsidized service, giving a big boost to suburban development.

D: our taxes and fiscal policy favour urban sprawl. Urban sprawl is unfriendly to public transit. It favours cars.

D: so there we have it. Build lotsa roads for car drivers from the suburbs, which are in turn encouraged through other monetary means.
I am NOT saying we should give up on alternative transportation, despite this heavy emphasis on long commutes and distant, low-density residential zones.
Since this blog is primarily about transportation, I will focus more exclusively on more immediate and practical concerns.

Tomorrow I will discuss road features that are bike/bus/walk friendly.

cars are not cost effective

D: if it sounds like I am anti-car, well that is probably true.
I have spent my life as a pedestrian and cyclist.
I have been nearly kneecapped so many times at crosswalks it just isn't funny.
I have been cut off with great visibility so many times cycling on the road, ditto.
I have ended up on one car hood at a crosswalk. All the time in the world, great visibility - and she guns it. I sometimes imagine that crosswalks are what the army calls a 'kill zone' - an area where one herds the foe to slaughter them, rather than a safe crossing.

Cars are not cost effective. Drivers explain to me that they pay fees for their cars and licenses, plus taxes, so they are paying their way. I hate to burst their bubble (no actually I don't).
They don't.
I need to introduce a term from economics here. The term is negative externality.
That is a negative drawback of a product/service that is not paid in the price tag.
That does not mean nobody pays it. Somebody does. Collectively, via government taxes or lost productivity to an individual, we all do.

There are 2 main costs that motor vehicles incur:
1) health costs (and related loss of productivity/disability) from accidents
2) health costs from the pollution that combustion motors produce.
The actual manufacture of the vehicle produces a significant fraction of the vehicle's overall pollution, but we will address that another day. I already have those numbers.

Anyway, let's look at the breakdown.
From the Medical Journal of Australia:
"In Australia, pedestrian injury is the leading cause of death among
1-14-year-olds.1 In 2000, 38 child pedestrians in this age
group died and about 1140 (29 per 100 000) were
hospitalised, often with lengthy stays, because of injuries sustained
when hit by a vehicle." I imagine our numbers are similar.

From http://www.davidsuzuki.org/:
"Estimates of the number of preventable premature deaths, mainly among
senior citizens, caused annually by air pollution in Canada range from
5,900 to 16,000. The most recent study by the federal government
estimated 5,900 premature deaths annually in eight major cities.

“In a country that cherishes its health care system, we offer weaker
protection from air pollution than the U.S., Australia, or the European
Union,” says David Boyd, report author and Trudeau Scholar"

D: both the old and the young suffer. Pollution is linked to asthma in kids, BTW.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4419

"A 1994 report on the adverse effects of particulate air pollution, published in the Annual Reviews of Public Health, noted a 1 percent increase in total mortality for each 10 mg/m³ increase in particulate matter. Respiratory mortality increased 3.4 percent and cardiovascular mortality increased 1.4 percent. More recent research suggests that one possible link between acute exposure to particulate matter and sudden death may be related to sudden increases in heart rate or changes in heart rate variability.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared that "tens of thousands of people die each year from breathing tiny particles in the environment.""

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/injury-bles/ebuic-febnc/index-eng.php

"In 1995 preventable injuries cost Canadians $8.7 billion or $300 for every citizen. Falls accounted for $3.6 billion or more than 40 per cent of the total amount. Motor vehicle crashes cost almost $1.7 billion or 20 per cent of the $8.7 billion."

"

Preventing motor vehicle crashes

Wearing seat belts and installing air bags can reduce motor vehicle injuries by 61 per cent. Drinking and driving is responsible for about 40 per cent of all fatal motor vehicle crashes. It is estimated that mortality can be reduced by 20 per cent through a reduction in drunk driving. Reducing speed limits by 10 km an hour could lead to a 15 per cent decrease in mortality, with the number of deaths lowered and severity of injury reduced.

With a 10 per cent reduction in crashes caused by poor road design and maintenance, and based on the assumption that 20 per cent of those injured end up in hospital, there would be 1,100 fewer deaths each year. By implementing a prevention strategy based on buckling up, driving sober, slowing down and looking first on the roads, there would also be 2,800 fewer hospitalizations, 19,000 fewer injuries treated outside a hospital setting and over 750 fewer injuries leading to permanent disability. The net savings to Canadians amount to over $500 million annually."

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/air/out-ext/effe/health_effects-effets_sante_e.html
"A recent study examined the economic value of reducing the health effects of air pollution by introducing cleaner vehicles and fuels in Canada. This study found that the economic value of avoiding these health effects was $24 billion over a period of 24 years, compared to a cost of $6 billion to implement the program. This methodology has been used by Health Canada and Environment Canada in a number of initiatives to examine the benefits of control measures..."

http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/stats/overview/2004/menu.htm
"

There were 2,778 deaths due to motor vehicle traffic collisions in the year 2001 - a rate of 8.9 deaths per 100,000 population.^1,2 In 2000-2001 there were 24,403 hospital admissions for traffic-related injuries, corresponding to a rate of 79 hospitalizations per 100,000 population.³ Many victims are young and traffic collisions are a leading cause of premature death and long term disability.

Since Canada has one of the highest per capita vehicle ownership rates in the world, it is not surprising that vehicle occupants account for approximately three quarters of all road users killed and seriously injured each year. The remaining victims are vulnerable road users: pedestrians, motorcyclists and bicyclists.¹ When health care costs, property losses and other factors are considered, the economic cost of traffic collisions to Canadians is as high as $25 billion annually."

D: pretty staggering, huh?

Note there are 2 separate themes here. One is the heavy use of motor vehicles, the other is the pollution they emit from their combustion engines.

Of course, plugging a hybrid into a wall for electricity still produces combustion if that power source is a coal plant!

I have not even touched upon wear and tear of road infrastructure from use.

A gallon of gasoline produces of 20 pounds of CO2. I produce 1 pound by living a day, and maybe 2 if I bike hard that day.
I produce what pollution the food required to be made. Since modern agriculture can be called the science of turning oil and land into food, this is quite a lot still.
For example, a typical North American diet requires as much petroleum to produce as a typical commuter car uses in a year.
However, if I consume a bit more food per day cycling, these equations still greatly favour me.

In summary, society foots the majority of the bill that vehicle drivers incur.
If these costs were factored into gasoline prices at the pump, imagine how much it would be!
Please note that owning a car that is left in the garage does not emit combustion pollutants. Such a car still made pollution simply by being made, though.

In case you didn't guess, I am all for making vehicle drivers pay the actual cost to society of operating their motor vehicles.
Cars are not cost effective.

how walking, biking and taking the bus are linked

We had record snowfall this winter.

The Record online is a treasure trove of local sentiment on this subject!
" Kitchener is the centre of the snow controversy, presumably because the city recently boosted fines for property owners who don't clear snow off their sidewalks within 24 hours of a snowfall. The fine now for a snow-covered sidewalk on a regular lot is $300. It increases to $500 for wider properties or corner lots."

D: Folks that use the bus then use the sidewalk. Uptown Waterloo, for a whole week, I got on and off the bus on a huge heap of compacted slick snow. If I was old or decrepit, I would have feared for my safety. I had an older gentleman beg me to delay the driver so he could wade through the uncleared snow to another bus. I heard many stories like that.
Taking a bus is not viable unless the mount/dismount areas, and nearby sidewalks are all clear.
Some mount/dismount areas lacked concrete to step out onto. Many were cleared only sporadically. A bus service without a related snow removal service is a problem.
Even on King Street/Waterloo, there were long periods this winter when they were nearly impassable in spots.

Everybody wins from good service from the bus system, from cleared and available sidewalks, from bike lanes. Including car drivers! Think about it. The more sidewalks and bike lanes, the more people bike or walk or take the bus. This means less drivers, less cars, less traffic- and less traffic congestion. The remaining drivers get to work easier and faster.

The industrial section of Waterloo I work in has no sidewalks. I walk on the road with heavy transport trucks. When nearby factories are getting out, the rolling stops are dangerous too.
I am curious why this stretch of low-wage factories assumes everybody will drive.
We all cut down the nearby hill rather than walking 2 extra blocks for Kumpf Drive.
I am curious why steps could not be put in near the overpass.

This is not restricted to industrial sectors. Regina, with poles in the middle of sidewalks, are of no use to parents with baby strollers. My friend J was honked at for walking on the street with her toddler- but she had no choice.
Clearing sidewalks entails more than a narrow path, with one foot placed in front of the other.

Uptown Waterloo wishes to attract customers. Well, folks with strollers and who have fragile bones and bad balance will stay home if they feel getting there will involve an obstacle course!

Not supporting bike and bus and sidewalks means more traffic. Everybody loses.
With good city planning, everybody wins.
D.

Tomorrow I will review the actual cost of car pollution to society,once the negative externalities of accident costs and pollution health costs are factored in. The answer might surprise you!