Search Results for: rail projects

34. The Forest Options Group

In the mid-1990s, that portion of the timber industry that depended on federal timber sales was on the ropes. National forest timber sales had declined from 11 billion board feet in 1989 to less than 3 billion in 1995. Mills that had bought most of their timber from the national forests for the previous five decades were hard pressed to find alternate sources of wood.

So perhaps it wasn’t surprising that timber industry representatives were eager to talk with environmentalists about finding common ground for reforming the Forest Service. Nor was it surprising that environmentalists were reluctant to talk; after all, they were winning, so any talks that might lead to a compromise seemed to be unnecessary.

But I wasn’t a typical environmentalist, and as the term was defined by the “progressives” in 1995, maybe I wasn’t an environmentalist at all. I was less interested in “total victory” than I was in getting the answer right. How much was the right amount of timber to be cut from federal lands? What was the right amount of wilderness? What was the proper balance between clearcutting vs. selection cutting given their differing impacts on wildlife, watershed, and other resources? Continue reading

33. Winning the Battles, Losing the War

After winning the battle of Oak Grove, I wanted to help other neighborhoods in the Portland area that were facing similar densification plans. One of the first things I did was call a meeting of people who were fighting densification in their own neighborhoods. Quite a large number of people showed up, and the group decided to call itself Ortem, which was Metro spelled backwards. Ortem never became very powerful but it did help people throughout the region network together and get access to resources and expertise.

About this time, two students from the Maxwell School of Public Affairs at Syracuse University came to Portland to work for me as interns. I hadn’t looked closely at Portland’s light-rail system, so I asked them to study it. Their first response was, “We love light rail!” I told them to look at it with an open mind.

They came back a week or so later and announced, “It’s awful!” They had interviewed some critics who convinced them that it was a huge waste of money. It cost far more than buses and most of the people riding it were former bus riders. In fact, the share of Portland-area residents taking transit to work dramatically dropped after Portland’s transit agency, TriMet, built light rail because it had to cut bus service and raise bus fares to help pay for rail cost overruns. Continue reading

Reducing Mobility to Boost Transit

Reeling from five years of ridership declines, the transit industry is stumbling around looking for a new mission, or at least new strategies to restore some of its revenues. New research and on-the-ground experience suggests the task will be difficult and may be hopeless.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

The opening pages of the American Public Transportation Association’s (APTA) recently released 2019 Transit Fact Book present a cheery picture of transit’s success by comparing 2018 transit numbers with numbers from the 1990s, which saw historic lows in transit ridership. Yes, ridership grew from 1995 to 2014, but bus ridership peaked in 2008 and rail in 2014 and both have been declining since then, a reality APTA hopes people will overlook. This is typical of the kind of cherry-picking of data that transit advocates so often use to promote their agendas. Continue reading

Is Amtrak Guilty of Securities Fraud?

If Amtrak were a public corporation rather than a government-owned entity, a recent press release and other public statements by Amtrak officials would be considered securities fraud. According to the press release issued last week, fiscal year 2019 was Amtrak’s best year ever. The release claimed that operating revenues covered 99.1 percent of its operating costs, and Amtrak officials are so optimistic about the future that they predict the company will actually earn a profit next year.

Click image to download a three-page PDF of this policy brief.

Amtrak made these statements before it released its annual financial report (which is still not available), substituting instead an infographic. Moreover, the press release deliberately misrepresented the information that will eventually be published in that financial statement. Amtrak is counting on the fact that far fewer people will read the financial statement than the press release or news reports about that release. Continue reading

Planning for an Unattainable Fantasy

Austin is one of the fastest-growing cities in America, and the city of Austin and Austin’s transit agency, Capital Metro, have a plan for dealing with all of the traffic that will be generated by that growth: assume that a third of the people who now drive alone to work will switch to transit, bicycling, walking, or telecommuting by 2039. That’s right up there with planning for dinner by assuming that food will magically appear on the table the same way it does in Hogwarts.


Click image to download a 4-page PDF of this policy brief.

Austin planners say that 74 percent of Austin workers drive alone to their jobs. In this, they are already behind the times, as the 2018 American Community Survey found that 75.4 percent of Austin workers drove alone (that’s for the city of Austin; the drive-alone share in the the Austin urban area was 77.0 percent). The 2018 survey was released only a month before Austin’s latest planning document, but even the 2017 survey found that 75 percent of Austin workers drove alone. You have to go back to the 2016 survey to find 74 percent drive-alones. So while Austin planners are assuming they can reduce driving alone from 74 to 50 percent, it is actually moving in the other direction. Continue reading

Amtrak Inspector General Clueless

Amtrak’s inspector general issued a report last week that reveals an utter cluelessness about Amtrak and how it works. The report argues that late trains are costing Amtrak revenues and that, instead of trying to run the trains on time, Amtrak should spend some of its precious resources building a computer model to estimate how many riders it loses for each late train.

The report, titled Better Estimates Needed of the Financial Impacts of Poor On-Time Performance, devotes many of its pages to building such a model itself and concludes that improving on-time performance by 5 percent could increase revenues by $12 million. Since Amtrak’s 2018 operating losses are $171 million, says the report, such an improvement could significantly reduce those losses. Continue reading

How New Starts Harms Transit Riders

Rail transit lines built with federal support have done more harm than good to transit riders and urban transportation systems as a whole. Too often, the high cost of rail has forced transit agencies to cut bus service and raise fares. In the worst cases, the systems lost more bus riders than they gain rail riders. In most other cases, per capita ridership and/or transit’s share of commuting declined. These regions and transit systems would have been better off without the federal government enticing them into build rail transit.

Click image to download a 6-page PDF of this policy brief.

A little over a century ago, more than a thousand American cities, including every city with more than 15,000 people, had some form of rail transit. Then, in 1927, the first buses were produced that cost less both to buy and to operate than rail transit. By then, many of the rail lines built in the nineteenth century were wearing out, so transit riders appreciated the buses because they were faster and more comfortable than the railcars and could easily take on new routes. Buses can also move more people per hour than almost any rail line because buses, though having lower capacities per vehicle, can safely operate far more frequently than rail lines. Continue reading

Transport Costs & Subsidies by Mode

Supporters of increased subsidies to urban transit and intercity passenger trains often argue that all transportation is subsidized, so it’s only fair that transit and Amtrak should also be subsidized. While it’s true that most transportation is subsidized, it is worth looking at the extent of those subsidies to judge whether subsidies to some forms of transport should be increased or reduced.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

Americans spent about $1.3 trillion of their personal incomes on transportation in 2017 (based on the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) table 2.5.5, lines 53 and 116). On top of this, transportation received about $200 billion in subsidies from federal, state, and local governments (based on subtracting total government expenditures on transport from total government revenues from transport). Continue reading

Congestion Is a Problem, Not a Solution

Phoenix has seen the least increase in congestion of any major urban area in America. According to the data set accompanying the Texas Transportation Institute’s recently released 2019 Urban Mobility Report, the average commuter in Phoenix suffered from 80 hours of delay in 2017, up 26 hours from 1982. That compares with an 82-hour growth in delay per commuter in the San Francisco and Washington urban areas and an average 53-hour increase in delay for the nation’s top 50 urban areas.[*]

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

Phoenix’s relatively small increase in traffic congestion is largely due to the massive increase in freeways in the region. According to an earlier edition of the urban mobility report, Phoenix had 210 lane-miles of freeways in 1982, growing to 2,015 by 2017. Part of this increase was due to an expansion of the urban area, leading to the addition of freeways that already existed but were previously outside the urban area. But the region has little more than doubled in land area since 1982 while the freeway lane-miles increased by nearly ten times. No other region has seen such a large increase in freeway lane-miles. Continue reading

Solving the Amtrak Conundrum

Amtrak is a conundrum that has been difficult for both politicians and Amtrak managers to solve.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

  • Politicians and the media act as if it is an important mode of travel, yet it carries less than 1 percent as many passenger miles as domestic airlines and just 0.1 percent of total domestic passenger miles.
  • Rail advocates claim intercity passenger trains are economically competitive, yet Amtrak fares per passenger mile average nearly three times airline fares, and when subsidies are added Amtrak costs four times as much per passenger mile as the airlines and well over twice as much as driving.
  • Amtrak claims that some of its trains earn a profit and overall passenger revenues cover 95 percent of its costs, yet even the Rail Passengers Association, the leading supporter of intercity passenger trains, believes Amtrak’s accounting methods misrepresent reality.

It will surprise you to discover prescription de levitra the strength you cultivate within as you hold to being true to yourself. Men usually do not react much but when they do it through the purchase cheap cialis power of intention. Under normal circumstances, endometrial covered on cialis side effects uterine cavity surface. Take in of cialis online from india should be regarded as food as opposed to supplements. Continue reading