The summer of our discontent
As the price of gasoline in the U.S. pulls itself up to $4/gallon, and the realities of our poor housing, transport, and investment choices set in, I’m glad to see that we as a nation are slowly coming around. Mass transit ridership is up, the Hummer and its ilk are dying a much-welcomed death, and even the shill of the auto industry has made predictions about a decline in travel.
If one was, say, a presidential candidate, now might be a good time to make note of the unreality of our previous way of life, note the positives that higher gas prices can bring, and propose setting a floor on gas prices.
On second thought, one might be wise to keep this plan hush-hush until after one has obtained the office. Selling this plan while campaigning presupposes an electorate with enough brains to realize the benefits.
But what the government can’t, or won’t, accomplish, the market will, for better or for worse. I think the ratchet effect is in full swing. $3/gallon gas, we hardly knew you: $4 is here to stay. It’s just a shame that we couldn’t have realized this earlier, skimmed a bit off the top, and done a better job of preparing ourselves for a different way of life.
Mediocrity on parade
If this report is an honest appraisal of Washngton’s state of thought on the nation’s gasoline “crisis,” then we’re truly fucked. I have not heard anything more depressing than these stuffed shirts trying to devise increasingly absurd ways to keep our fantasy of a happy motoring country afloat.
Practiced outrage at this issue is a safe bet politically, no doubt. But whether it’s the administration looking to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), presidential candidates calling for a gas tax holiday, or a windfall tax on oil company profits, it’s apparent that no one has stopped to think that the underlying premise — that we must keep our national fleet moving at any cost — is wrong.
The “one million” barrels of additional production that ANWR would bring to the table is, relatively speaking, a drop in the bucket. The U.S. imports 10 million barrels of oil a day, and produces another 5 million or so domestically. In a report authored three years ago, the Energy Department said that opening ANWR to drilling “might reduce world oil prices by as much as 30 to 50 cents per barrel” (see “Results”). This corresponds to a pennies on the gallon decrease, which is hardly the kind of relief touted by the administration. The report goes on to say that the impact of the influx of ANWR oil could easily by negated by an equal decrease in OPEC exports, so as to keep the amount of available oil static.
I’m also disappointed by Clinton’s echoing of McCain’s call for a gas tax holiday, for it shows that her intentions with respect to the environment are not as pure as I had hoped. Obama’s characterization of the candidates’ tax holiday as an idea “designed to get them through an election” is spot-on.
(Update: The Freakonomics blog issues a challenge to find an economist who thinks the tax holiday is a good idea. I await the results with bated breath. The unsurprising results are in.)
McCain’s plan would do nothing to replace the lost revenue to the Federal Highway Trust Fund, causing it to miss out on about $10 billion in revenue. Clinton, on the other hand, proposes to replace this lost revenue with a windfall profits tax, which, having been repealed in 1988, has not seen the light of day since. While this tax would put Republicans in the hot seat — does one pander to one’s NASCAR base (votes), or does one kowtow to the oil industry (money) — I doubt such a measure would pass.
Though their ways may differ, Republicans and Democrats alike offer nothing new. And in such a tightly contested Democratic primary, I think it’s safe to assume that any ideas offered up will not stray far from what is considered safe politics.
Surely nothing will be heard on efforts to improve our national passenger rail system, better urban mass transit, and curbing sprawl. Instead, the desperate clinging to the status quo of “more houses/more roads/more cars”, as shown by recent talk of bailout of the adjustable-rate mortgage market, ensures that this election season, though notable for the makeup of the ballot, will remain mired in tired ways of thinking which only serve to hasten our country’s decline into a muddling pool of shit.
A better schedule getter
Inspired by Nathan’s self-motivated improvement to the Port Authority’s Trip Planner, I decided to task myself with my own small project that would eliminate the need to visit the Byzantine structure that is the Port Authority website. I hope you like it.
Whoops, wrong project.
Actually, my goals were much more modest. As one who is not altogether trusting of the times given via the online scheduling tools, I prefer to rely on the paper, or “hand schedules,” that the Port Authority distributes.
However, carrying more than three paper schedules at a time leaves one open to the valid assumption by others that you are a nut who hordes bus schedules like Elliot Spitzer hordes prostitutes. Believe me, I’ve seen the type in every city we’ve been to.
So I prefer to do my hoarding electronically, via PDF. Since my laptop is never far from my person, it’s an ideal situation. Throw Spotlight into the mix, and I can summon up any bus schedule at will, and can out-crazy the best of the crazies.
Well, almost. See, the process of getting the schedules and keeping them updated is the not fun part. There are about 11 bus routes that I use with varying degrees of regularity, and I despise having to remember if I grabbed the newest schedule and, if I didn’t, visiting the Port Authority’s website to get a new one. Too much thinking and too many clicks.
Enter the Mac, its Unix underpinnings, and the beauty that is shell scripting.
I spent some time tonight polishing a project I had started a couple of months ago — a command-line schedule retriever. It uses wget and a lot of pipes and output redirection to download and manage the latest Port Authority schedules. It’s not pretty (although it does have a cool ASCII progress bar), but if you are a CLI ninja, it beats the alternative.
However, if you didn’t understand that last paragraph, it’s probably not for you.
My experience with releasing software that doesn’t run within a web browser is somewhat limited, so your mileage may vary, but I welcome you to download it and give it a shot.
Update: Also see the simplified Port Authority Hand Schedule retriever for quick access to PDF schedules through your browser.
Getting in the way
Leave it to Allegheny County to muck up the elegant Flexcar process.
From the Flexcar website:
The Allegheny County Council has enacted a $2 per day Rental Vehicle Tax to help fund mass transit programs. The tax code states that any establishment that rents motor vehicles without a driver for less than a thirty day period must comply with the provisions of the law and charge the new tax to its respective customers.
The Allegheny County Treasurer has informed Flexcar that we must begin to collect the Rental Vehicle Tax from members starting January 1, 2008. You will see this tax reflected on invoices for any January Flexcar charges. The rate of tax assessment shall be $2 per day, or any part of a day, on which a Rental Vehicle is rented within Allegheny County.
Flexcar apologizes for any burden this may cause. Flexcar intends to address the issue by educating Allegheny County on the community benefits of car-sharing and key differences from traditional car rental. We are prepared to work with the County on a differing interpretation of the current law or to achieve a fix that will more specifically exempt car-sharing from the Rental Vehicle Tax.
While I do support these unfortunate taxes as a way to keep the buses rolling, I hope something can be done to lessen the burden for Flexcar users, whose rentals are measured in hours, not days.
I figure that writing the county council and county overlord is a good start.
Take two
The local transit system is having problems with their website.
The Port Authority of Allegheny County’s Web site is down because of a server problem, and technicians hope to have the matter resolved today.
Fortunately, there are better alternatives.
Of the fox and the henhouse
There is a long-held notion that the construction of an expressway between Pittsburgh and West Virginia via the economically-depressed Monogahela River Valley is the kick in the ass that this area needs in order to… well, I’m not exactly sure. But is sure is a great way to get money in the hands of friends, family, and potential political donors!
It’s a stupid idea that blithely ignores any consideration of the future of motoring in this country, not to mention the environmental ramifications, the destruction of entire towns, and the futility of it all thanks to induced demand.
Progress on the project is moving along at a glacial pace, thankfully, and the latest assessment of the state of things confirms as much.
Although times look bleak for this ill-fated project, one can always count on the endless stream of contractors, consultants, and advisors nuzzling up to the tit of public funding to provide sunny assessments of the situation. Like this one, for example:
David Zazworsky, special consultant to the turnpike for the expansion project, discussed the latest hurdles facing completion of the second largest new-highway-construction project in the United States.
“It hit home when I (recently) read about the population losses in Allegheny County,” he said. “What would help reverse that loss more than any other thing would be completing this project,” the northern link in the 70-mile highway now about half built in the Monongahela River corridor south to the West Virginia border.
Great idea, my man. The best way to stem the county’s population loss? Give them a faster way out.
I believe what Mr. Zazworsky meant to say is this:
“It hit home when I (recently)
read about the population losses in Allegheny Countylooked at my retirement savings,” he said. “What would help reversethat loss more than any other thingmy eventual forced sale of my vacation home would be completing this project,” the northern link in the 70-mile highway now about half built in the Monongahela River corridor south to the West Virginia border.
My sentiments exactly
This letter to the Pittsburgh City Paper gets the closest to my mixed feelings about the looming Pittsburgh transit crisis. In short, it’s not a nice thing to do, but some things need to change.
What kills me are stories like those of Ellen Fox, who, while looking like a perfectly nice lady, expects to carry on her normal daily routine that is, to some degree, absurd. While it is nice that she has been able to sustain her 13 mile trip from her home to downtown to transfer to another bus that takes her 20-odd miles north of the city, I can’t get behind the argument that this uber-commute is the “normal” way to do things.
But what do I know of normal? We probably paid too much for a small place right by a noisy bus stop and some railroad tracks.
But boy, do I enjoy walking to work — and just about everywhere else too.
The transit problem
Pittsburgh’s transit agency, the Port Authority, recently announced a major service reduction plan (details) aimed at eliminating the staggering $80 million deficit faced by the agency next fiscal year. Over half the routes — many of suburban in nature — are on the cutting block; overall service hours will be reduced by about 25%.
Needless to say, this has created quite a stir. I’ve been thinking about the issue for some time and finally sat down to write a letter to the Port Authority tonight. My take on the situation? The Port Authority’s is squeezed in several directions: a lack of a dedicated source of funding, relatively high management and labor costs, increased operating expenses, and an expectation to cover a nebulous service area.
The biggest losers in this round of cuts are the suburban commuters. As evidenced in this comparison of the current and proposed route maps (large, small), the fat that is being trimmed comes largely from the outlying routes. Instead of a fairly uniform dense web of coverage, the cuts leave in place a skeleton of routes running along major corridors.
Is this bad? Obviously something had to give, and based on the comprehensive route scoring performed last fall, it was determined that the suburban routes were the least cost-effective (I take issue with the elimination of the airport bus service, and question the scoring logic on these types of routes, however). As an opponent of the wasteful suburban commute, it pains me to see the retreat of bus service from these areas, but the numbers don’t lie: some of these routes aren’t worth the effort. And when you are required by law to operate in the black — well, desperate times call for desperate measures.
I feel that it is ultimately up to the government — from the city to the country — to pull their heads out of their collective ass and get serious about funding transit systems. They may never be profitable on their own, but they serve a common good that provides a more sensible alternative than the auto-heavy lifestyle that we live now. If corn ethanol is seen as a “way out” of our predicament (hint: it’s not), then certainly mass transit — the movement of large numbers of people by means other than their own private vehicles — qualifies as a winner.
Wrong way
Ironically, these two stories appeared side-by-side in my ‘transit’ Google News Alert. The direction of this country appears to head further down the toilet. In relation to our world neighbors, we’re a sorry bunch.
Similar to our vapid leadership, Americans continue to ignore the reality of the situation and instead prefer to live in a make-believe world that will somehow make itself better just because we say it’s so.
Nothing good can come of this
The Pittsburgh Port Authority is making noises, and they aren’t happy ones. Faced with a $30 million deficit, they are proposing massive price increases and service reductions if things don’t improve. Calling this their “Doomsday Plan,” the Port Authority officials paint a bleak picture for the future of mass transit in Pittsburgh.
Among the “highlights”
- A 75ยข raise in the standard fare, which is a 43% increase over the current fare of $1.75;
- Elimination of weekend service;
- Elimination of all routes after 9:00 PM on weekdays, and;
- Elimination of “an untold number” of weekday routes
Estimates place the daily ridership of the city buses at 235,000. A quarter of a million people, and then some. If Pittsburgh thinks they have traffic problems now, just imagine if even 10% (a conservative estimate) of those people, 23,500, were forced by the cuts to change their commute to one by private automobile. It’s madness.
And what of those who can’t make the easy switch to an automobile? Don’t they deserve fair access to transportation? Some people simply can’t afford a car, while others realize that their money could be better spent elsewhere. Is it acceptable to let these people slip through the cracks?
If the state legislature fails to make additional tax revenue available to public transportation, I will feel let down and more so, disgusted. For too long public transportation has gotten the short end of the stick while money has flowed freely to road-building projects that have only been successful in causing more congestion, not less. Government has a responsibility to make wise use of the taxes collected from citizens; investment in a solid transit infrastructure is among one of the most rewarding investments a city can make.
