Courtesy of Yahoo.com

Commuters Inhale Heavy Dose of Pollution

By LiveScience Staff

posted: 30 October 2007 04:46 pm ET

Driving is more hazardous than anyone knew: A heavy commuter inhales more pollution while driving than in the entire rest of the day, a new study finds.

The research was done in Los Angeles, where the average driver spends 1.5 hours behind the wheel. That time in traffic accounts for 33 to 45 percent of total exposure to diesel and ultrafine particles (UFP), the study showed.

On freeways, diesel-fueled trucks are the source of the highest concentrations of harmful pollutants.

"If you have otherwise healthy habits and don't smoke, driving to work is probably the most unhealthy part of your day," said Scott Fruin, assistant professor of environmental health at the Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California. "Urban dwellers with long commutes are probably getting most of their UFP exposure while driving."

Ultrafine particles are of particular concern because, unlike larger particles, they can penetrate cell walls and disperse throughout the body, Fruin said. Particulate matter has been linked to cardiovascular disease, but the ultrafine fraction on roadways appears to be more toxic than larger sizes.

Previous research found children on school buses breathe more pollution. And a study in London found people in taxis, buses, and cars all inhale substantially more pollution than cyclists and pedestrians.

In the new study, researchers measured exposure by outfitting an electric vehicle with air pollution instruments. A video recorded surrounding traffic and driving conditions on freeways and arterial roads throughout the Los Angeles region. Measurements were collected during a three-month period from February to April 2003, and four typical days were selected for a second-by-second video and statistical analysis.

"This study was the first to look at the effect of driving and traffic conditions at this level of detail and to demonstrate the specific factors leading to the highest pollutant exposures for drivers," Fruin says. "The extent that a specific type of vehicle—diesel trucks—dominated the highest concentration conditions on freeways was unexpected."

Driving with the windows closed and using recirculating air settings can modestly reduce the particle pollution exposures but does not reduce most gaseous pollutants, the researchers concluded.

"Shortening your commute and spending less time in the car will significantly reduce your total body burden of harmful pollutants," Fruin said.

The study was supported by the California Air Resources Board.

Sep 16, 2007 7:39 pm US/Mountain

Union Pacific Wants Service From Greeley To Denver

By Bill Jackson, Greeley Tribune

(© 2007 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. )

The Des Moines Register

Richardson: 'Fixation' on highways has to stop

Government must plan for more efficient transportation,

says the presidential candidate.

By WILLIAM PETROSKI
REGISTER STAFF WRITER 

September 5, 2007

Creston, Ia. - The United States' transportation system is "fixated on highways" and should include more emphasis on energy-efficient modes of travel with planning to ensure preservation of open spaces, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Tuesday.

Richardson told a crowd of about 80 people at Creston's historic railroad depot that he's been struck by the massive traffic jams and congestion he's encountered while visiting as many as three states per day while seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

The problem, he said, has been caused by poor planning and by policymakers' inability to look forward toward providing alternatives to driving automobiles.

"What I am seeing right now is all across the country ... individuals in cities are asking for a more active federal role in not just funding bills to create new highways, but also light rail transportation, commuter rail and open spaces," said Richardson, whose campaign talk was interrupted several times by the rumble of freight trains and a Chicago-bound Amtrak passenger train that rolled past the depot.

Federal transportation policy should include cooperation with state and local governments to find ways to repair the nation's infrastructure to avoid situations such as the collapse of the Interstate Highway 35W bridge in Minneapolis, he added. These improvements should include upgrading the nation's electric grid, he added.

Richardson, a former congressman and energy secretary, also visited Osceola Tuesday, ending a two-day Iowa trip. He generally got good marks from members of the Creston audience.

Keith Daniels, a retired farmer who lives in Creston, said Richardson can count on his backing. "He's a good man. I think he has a lot of experience, and he knows how to handle things," Daniels said.

State Rep. Clel Baudler, a Greenfield Republican, said he was heavily leaning toward supporting Republican Fred Thompson for president, but he's interested in learning more about the New Mexico governor's stance on issues.

"I am open to supporting the best person," Baudler said.

Baudler previously met Richardson at a National Rifle Association event in New Mexico, and he said he subsequently went elk hunting there and people spoke highly of him. On Tuesday, Baudler said he liked Richardson's pledge to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and a plan to help people pay off student loans through national community service or military service. But he said he was disappointed with Richardson's stance on some social issues.

Reporter William Petroski can be reached at (515) 284-8547 or bpetroski@dmreg.com

Boston Globe

August 31, 2007

I-93 widening in N.H. set back

By James Vaznis, Globe Staff

The widening of Interstate 93 in southern New Hampshire will be delayed again, after a federal district court judge ordered state and federal highway officials yesterday to further study the environmental consequences of the project.

US District Judge Paul Barbadoro said the highway departments used out-dated population projections in their federal environmental impact report to evaluate the effect of a wider highway on air and secondary roads. The agencies failed to include the estimated 35,000 people who are expected to move to New Hampshire because of the wider highway, Barbadoro said.

The $750 million project, on and off the drawing board for nearly two decades, would double the number of lanes to four on each side of a 20-mile stretch between Salem and Manchester, a popular corridor for New Hampshire residents who work in Massachusetts and Bay State residents who vacation in the White Mountains.

More than 110,000 vehicles travel the highway each day, more than twice the volume the highway was designed to carry when it was built in the early 1960s.

New Hampshire highway officials had hoped to begin construction next summer, but now do not know how long the additional study could delay the project.

"We're still trying to digest what it all means," said Bill Boynton, New Hampshire Transportation Department spokesman. "On one hand, we are encouraged that some elements in the case have been dismissed, but on the other hand, we need to go back and do some work."

The Conservation Law Foundation, which filed the lawsuit in February 2006, applauded the decision, although it will continue pushing for a commuter rail as part of the project.

Barbadoro agreed with highway officials that building a commuter rail line from Manchester to Massachusetts would not reduce traffic flow on I-93 enough to scale back the project to three lanes. Adding commuter rail would have added a whole other round of regulatory approvals with Massachusetts.

The ruling pointed out that the most heavily traveled section of the road, at the New Hampshire-Massachusetts state line, will experience severe congestion by 2020, even with the four lanes.

"Our hope is in the end this additional review will show that widening to four lanes is not a wise investment of public dollars and we need a more balanced approach to address traffic along this corridor that includes rail," said Tom Irwin, a staff attorney in the Conservation Law Foundation's New Hampshire office.

The delay comes as New Hampshire grapples with a serious shortfall of transportation project dollars. The state Transportation Department recently announced that its 10-year list of priority projects will take 35 years to complete, and putting off a ground-breaking for the I-93 widening project will only add to the costs. In the last five years, the project's price tag has nearly doubled.

Highway officials say there is an urgent need to address the heavy traffic, which causes miles of back-ups and frequent fender-benders for commuters and weekend travelers.

Also, 18 of the 47 bridges in that area are structurally deficient. The project received the federal go-ahead in 2005.

But many environmentalists and residents worry that the wider highway might further expedite growth in southern New Hampshire, where acres of farmlands and woodlands have been transformed into subdivisions.

The anticipated residential growth is expected to stretch much farther north than Manchester, with even the state's capital, Concord, feeling the effects.

© Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Global Meltdown

By Andrew Revkin, July & August 2007

It’s becoming a legacy issue for older Americans: what type of planet are we leaving our children? One of the nation’s top reporters on the environment reveals the latest science behind climate change.

The climate-change debunkers include Richard S. Lindzen, 67, a meteorologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who claims that human-caused warming is inconsequential, and Michael Crichton, 64, the novelist and moviemaker. Crichton stirred the climate debate with a 2004 novel, State of Fear, in which the bad guys were radical environmentalists trying to scare the world about global warming in order to line their pockets. Opposed are three climate scientists: one from NASA, one from a leading university, and one from a private group called the Union of Concerned Scientists. Most of the night focuses on their differences, mainly concerning the value of quick, aggressive cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

Richard C.J. Somerville, 66, a veteran University of California, San Diego, climatologist, attacks the “not a crisis” position. “[A crisis] does not mean catastrophe or alarmism,” he says. “It means a crucial or decisive moment, a turning point, a state of affairs in which a decisive change for better or worse is imminent. Our task tonight is to persuade you that global warming is indeed a crisis in exactly that sense. The science warns us that continuing to fuel the world using present technology will bring dangerous and possibly surprising climate changes by the end of this century, if not sooner.”

But Crichton insists that pressing real-time problems trump an iffy, long-term one. “Every day 30,000 people on this planet die of the diseases of poverty,” he tells the crowd. “A third of the planet doesn’t have electricity. We have a billion people with no clean water. We have half a billion people going to bed hungry every night. Do we care about this? It seems that we don’t. It seems that we would rather look a hundred years into the future than pay attention to what’s going on now.”

What’s largely lost in the sparring—Crichton’s team prevails in an audience vote—is that the debate has not been about whether humans are contributing to rising temperatures. Crichton and Lindzen, both of whom consider former vice president Al Gore and his allies alarmists, readily agree that human-generated greenhouse gases warm the earth. Indeed, the list of people accepting the need to cut these gases includes former foes of environmentalists. One convert is evangelist Pat Robertson, who said on his 700 Club TV program last year that “it is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a buildup of carbon dioxide in the air.… We really need to do something on fossil fuels.” Another conservative taking warming seriously is former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. “The evidence is sufficient,” he said in April, “that we should move toward the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon loading of the atmosphere.”

What’s driving the change in attitudes is a steadily growing body of scientific evidence on human activities and warming. A report released earlier this year by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—made up of hundreds of the world’s leading climate experts—said with 90 percent certainty that most of the warming since 1950 has been driven by the buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The report concluded with “high confidence” that human-caused climate change was already affecting regional conditions from the poles to the Tropics, and that hundreds of millions of people could be harmed by coastal flooding, dwindling water supplies, and shifting weather patterns within a few decades. The changes could also drive many species toward extinction, particularly those with rapidly shrinking habitats, such as polar bears. Warming in this century, by many estimates, could be between three and eight times the warming in the 20th century, when the planet’s average temperature rose just over one degree Fahrenheit in all. The United States was among 113 countries that endorsed the report.

The new report also predicts a mix of consequences, not all bad. More rainfall and longer growing seasons will likely benefit higher latitudes for decades, while less rainfall and harsher droughts are likely in some of the world’s poorest places—most notably, Africa. An open-water Arctic Ocean in summers, while posing a threat to polar bears, could create new intercontinental shipping lanes thousands of miles shorter than existing ones.

What the debate comes down to is not whether changes are coming but when they’ll occur—and how severe they’ll be. There is serious scientific disagreement about such vital questions as how fast and far temperatures, seas, and storm strength could rise. Warmer waters, for example, could lead to more Katrina-strength hurricanes. Yet new studies find that hurricanes might be torn apart by wind conditions associated with, yes, rising temperatures. This uncertainty is not humanity’s friend, experts say, especially as the global population crests in coming decades, putting ever more people at risk of flooding, famine, and other climate-driven threats.

“We’re altering the environment far faster than we can possibly predict the consequences,” says Stephen H. Schneider, 62, a Stanford University climatologist who has been working on the puzzle of humans and climate for more than half his life.

Schneider has long believed that responding to the greenhouse challenge is as much about hedging against uncertain risks as it is about dealing with what is clearly known. And the risks, as he sees it, are clear: there is a real chance things could be much worse than the midrange projections of a few degrees of warming in this century—and any thought that more science will magically clarify what lies ahead is probably wishful thinking.

When he lectures about global warming these days, Schneider often asks listeners about a more familiar risk. “How many of you have had a serious fire in your home?” he begins. In a crowd of 300 or so, usually three or four hands rise.

His next question: “How many of you buy fire insurance?”

Hundreds of hands go up.

For Schneider that pattern shows how well people deal with uncertain but potentially calamitous risks in their daily lives. The trick lies in transferring that same behavior to dealing with a risk facing our common home—the planet itself.

PASADENA, CALIFORNIA

I’m standing in a cramped lab at the California Institute of Technology, squinting at a blinding light. It’s visible through a small glass port in the side of a metal furnace where scientists are cooking up a new kind of device for turning sunlight into electricity. Inside, atoms of metals are being deposited onto minute rods in ways that could someday boost the efficiency of solar panels.

Solar power is widely seen as the sole alternative energy source that is abundant enough—and someday could be cheap enough—to eventually supplant fossil fuels. Windmills, while effective in certain conditions, face problems at large scale. In Texas, for example, the hottest days—which prompt the biggest surge in power use—tend to be the least windy. Nuclear power, while producing few emissions, has its own problem of scale. Princeton experts recently estimated that the world would need nearly 900 new nuclear power plants in the next 45 years just to reduce the expected carbon dioxide release by 10 percent in that time.

And so research sites like this one in Pasadena are the critical, yet largely overlooked, battlefronts in the global warming war. In the mist-draped hills of New Haven, West Virginia, engineers and scientists have drilled more than 9,000 feet beneath one of the country’s giant coal-fired power plants to see whether layers of rock can provide a repository for vast amounts of CO₂ released as the coal burns. In the “biology building” at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory outside Denver, special strains of algae slosh like pea soup in racks of beakers under bright lights. In certain conditions these algae can generate bubbles of hydrogen, a tantalizing substitute for fossil fuels if it can be produced cheaply and cleanly. So far, the gas has been produced in teacup amounts.

The gulf between such embryonic efforts and what’s needed to avoid a buildup of greenhouse gases remains wide, despite statements by politicians of both parties about solving U.S. energy and climate problems. Funding for such research peaked in the United States and abroad during the oil shocks of the 1970s, then dwindled. It has never grown since—only Japan has sustained investment in such research. Scientists at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory were heartened when $34 million of new money was included in their latest science budget last year. But Arthur J. Nozik, 71, a chemical physicist there, notes that this is roughly the cost of one F-18 jetfighter. In the end, only $8 million was authorized by Congress in 2007.

The challenge of shifting to new energy options is made vastly more difficult because the world’s existing energy system—85 percent based on coal, oil, and other fossil fuels—is so integrated into modern life. “We already have electricity coming out of everybody’s wall socket,” says Nathan S. Lewis, 51, a chemistry professor who codirects the Powering the Planet project at Caltech. “This is not a new function we’re seeking. It’s a substitution. It’s not like NASA sending a man to the moon. It’s like finding a new way to send a man to the moon when Southwest Airlines is already flying there every hour handing out peanuts.”

Numerous experts say the only way to propel such a change is with taxes on fuels that produce the most greenhouse gases, or new emission-reduction treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol (which the United States did not ratify), or bills—like many being discussed on Capitol Hill—that require emissions reductions. But there are major political impediments, both globally and domestically. And do Americans have the stomach for higher taxes and heating bills? Perhaps, says Peter Schwartz, 61, who analyzes risks for corporations and the government, if we see global warming as a security threat—one that could create calamities ranging from large-scale migrations to conflicts over food and water.

With or without new laws or taxes, the need for technological advances is vital, says Martin I. Hoffert, 69, a physics professor at New York University. Hoffert has testified repeatedly before Congress about the lack of investment in energy research—efforts that could help avoid oil wars, lower energy costs, and help poorer countries advance without overheating the planet.

“Technology evolution is like biological evolution,” he says. “Most mutations, like most innovative technologies, don’t survive. But without mutations, evolution stops. It only takes one transistor to change the world.” And it won’t necessarily cost a fortune: John Holdren, 63, an energy and climate expert at Harvard, says that a rise in the federal gas tax of 2.5 cents a gallon would triple the federal energy-research budget.

Meanwhile, the demand for energy worldwide is increasing, and not only in such countries as India and China. Two billion people still cook meals on firewood or dried dung, and more than 1.5 million of those—mainly women and children—die young from breathing clouds of indoor smoke. In a world heading toward 9 billion or more people by 2042 who either are born into—or dream of—our plugged-in, air-conditioned, frequent-flier lifestyle, revolutionary new energy sources are needed.

It may be that what we face is less a climate crisis than an energy challenge. Many experts believe the key to limiting climate risks and solving a host of momentous problems—including the end of abundant oil—is to begin an ambitious quest for new ways to conserve, harvest, and store energy without creating pollution.

Harnessing the power of the sun remains the Holy Grail of most energy experts. But research on solar technologies remains tiny in scale, though the potential has been clear for decades.

Consider this incredibly prescient quote: “I’d put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don’t have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that.”

The year? 1931. The speaker? Thomas Edison.

“The biggest challenge is how to get people to wake up and realize this is a one-shot deal,” says Caltech’s solar guru, Lewis. “If we fail, we are witting participants in the biggest experiment that humans have ever done: moving CO₂ levels to more than twice their value in the past 670,000 years and hoping it turns out okay for generations to come.”

Andrew Revkin is a reporter with The New York Times and the author of The North Pole Was Here: Puzzles and Perils at the Top of the World (Houghton Mifflin, 2006), the first book on global climate change written for both children and adults. His stories on global warming can be found at www.nytimes.com/revkin. 

IEA sees oil supply crunch looming

By Alex Lawler Mon Jul 9, 2007  

LONDON (Reuters) - World oil demand will rise faster than expected to 2012 while production lags, leading to a supply crunch, the International Energy Agency said on Monday.

In its Medium-Term Oil Market Report, the adviser to 26 industrialized countries said demand will rise by an average 2.2 percent a year between 2007 and 2012, up from a previous medium-term forecast of 2 percent.

The outlook, which updates an IEA forecast last issued in February, coincides with a jump in oil prices to more than $75 a barrel, closing in on a record high near $79, on concerns of a tightening market.

"Despite four years of high oil prices, this report sees increasing market tightness beyond 2010," the IEA said.

"It is possible that the supply crunch could be deferred -- but not by much."

The IEA's previous Medium-Term report called for world demand growth of 2 percent a year between 2006 and 2011.

It now expects global demand to reach 95.8 million barrels per day (bpd) from 86.1 million bpd in

2007. The forecast assumes average global GDP growth of 4.5 percent annually.

"The results of our analysis are quite strong," said Lawrence Eagles, head of the IEA's Oil Industry and Markets Division. "Something needs to happen."

"Either we need to have more supplies coming on stream or we need to have lower demand growth."

The Paris-based IEA also said additional global refining capacity over the next five years will lag earlier expectations as rising costs and a shortage of engineers delay construction.

It said world production of biofuels would reach 1.75 million bpd by 2012, more than double 2006 levels, but the fuel will remain marginal as economics hobble further growth.

LOWER OPEC CAPACITY

Oil prices pared an earlier loss after the report was released. Brent crude was unchanged at $75.62 a barrel as of 1247 GMT.

The report points to a greater reliance on the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, source of more than a third of the world's oil.

While foreseeing higher demand, the IEA expects less supply to come from producers outside OPEC and the agency also trimmed a forecast for the 12-member group's unused production capacity.

"A stronger demand outlook, together with project slippage and geopolitical problems has led to downward revisions of OPEC spare capacity by 2 million bpd in 2009," said the report.

The forecast assumes no net expansion of capacity from Iran, Iraq and Venezuela and that the 500,000 bpd of Nigerian production that has been shut for a year will not reopen during the next five years.

Ten OPEC members began cutting production last year to stem a drop in prices. The IEA in its Monthly Oil Market Report has for the past four months urged OPEC to open the taps to avoid over-tightening the market.

Some analysts say the agency is being alarmist and that its warnings about supplies are actually leading to higher prices.

"The International Energy Agency has put such a fear premium in the market that crude futures remain bought no matter what," said Olivier Jakob of Petromatrix.

The IEA said fundamentals of supply and demand are prompting price gains.

"The simple thing is we are there to project the market as we see it," Eagles said. "The price response is due to fundamentals. We are simply pointing out the fundamentals. That's our job."

PLATEAU OIL

The IEA trimmed its forecast for supply from non-OPEC producers by 800,000 bpd in 2011, partly because of project delays, and touched on the thorny subject that oil supplies are nearing a peak.

"Certainly our forecast suggests that the non-OPEC, conventional crude component of global production appears, for now, to have reached an effective plateau, rather than a peak," the report said.

Falling output at ageing fields and setbacks such as 2005's hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico have slowed growth in non-OPEC output in recent years.

Lower supply from non-OPEC countries and rising demand will boost the requirement for OPEC oil.

The IEA said demand for OPEC crude, or the call on OPEC, will rise to 34.7 million bpd in 2011, up 1.3 million bpd from the previous projection. 

Rail service group votes to oust chief

Authority gave ex-lawmaker a contract in June

By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News
July 7, 2007

The group working to bring high-speed commuter rail service to Colorado on Friday ousted the leader who organized the effort nearly three years ago.

The board of the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority, which only last month approved a contract with former state Rep. Bob Briggs to be its executive director, voted 8-4 to terminate Briggs' contract.

Board Chairman Harry Dale said the move is about Briggs' promotion of specific projects and activities without board approval.

Dale says that could create a conflict of interest for the authority since it is supposed to be approaching an upcoming feasibility study with an unbiased position.

Briggs says it's about Dale wanting to run the authority and put more emphasis on a rail transit system to serve the Interstate 70 mountain corridor than the I-25 Front Range urban corridor. Dale is a Clear Creek County commissioner who has advocated an electrified high-speed train between Denver and the mountain communities where he lives.

The authority is made up of 30 cities, counties and transit agencies around the state - 10 of them admitted as members at the same Friday meeting.

Twelve voting board members terminated Briggs' contract by an 8-4 vote. The nays came from metro Denver members Arapahoe County, Thornton, Weld County and RTD.

Dale said even thought he board had approved Briggs' contract last month, it felt he had continued to compromise the authority's need to be neutral while entering into a contract with the Colorado Department of Transportation for a feasibility study that would determine whether a rail system could work.

"There've just been some problems and we hoped they would be addressed," Dale said. But he said Briggs continued to set up activities with the political group. "This kind of thing hurts our credibility," Dale said.

Briggs and Bernie Zimmer, president of the Colorado Rail Association, denied there was any mixing of their missions. Zimmer's group would be the entity that would advocate for rail in any future statewide election over funding, while the authority cannot engage in political activity.

"Bernie Zimmer and I talk on a regular basis," Briggs said. "But we both understand the difference between the two organizations."

Briggs started the commuter rail effort in November 2004, after Denver area voters approved the FasTracks transit measure, to try to link a statewide commuter rail network to the metro system. It envisioned a commuter rail line that would eventually extend from Cheyenne or even Casper, Wyo., to Albuquerque.

flynnk@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5247

What's Up With Gas Prices?

by Randy Udall, ASPO-USA

Randy Udall served as a panelist for a 2005 Our Future Summit forum on gas prices-ED 
 
       Visiting a gas station these days is like going in for a root canal. First comes procrastination, followed by dread, and then "open wide." There's no laughter at the pumps anymore. The Toot 'n' Moo is as somber as a morgue, full of glum motorists mourning the demise of cheap gasoline. Spending $75 used to be a penance reserved for truckers, but now everyone can tithe. Take your pick: Shell, Exxon, Chevron, they are all eager to drill your wallet.

    I've been thinking about energy, trying to make sense of energy trends and energy appetites and the main conclusion I've reached is that energy is an IQ test that we Americans tend to fail.

    Because our continent was a great piñata, stuffed with coal, oil, and natural gas, we've never developed an energy ethic. An English poet once wrote that energy was "eternal delight." But for an American to put "energy" and "ethic" into the same sentence seems revolutionary, the breaking of a taboo.

    The value of land we have long understood. The value of energy we never have.

    America invented the hot dog, baseball, and the national park. Yellowstone dates to 1872. Teddy Roosevelt got the national forests going a century ago. Aldo Leopold published Sand County Almanac in 1949, urging us to "think like a mountain." With the Endangered Species Act, we took Noah out of the Bible and put him into law. Some ranchers hate the ESA, but it was the first right-to-life act.

    It is peak driving season, and Americans are on the move. (A typical motorist drives the distance to the Moon every 20 years.) With oil over $70, CNBC invited me to do an interview on a low-grade, high-ash proto-petroleum otherwise known as oil shale. This was one of those biz shows, with a crawling stock ticker, and traders drunk on high-octane currency flows.

    The opening gambit hasn't changed for a century: "There's a trillion barrels of oil shale in Colorado, more oil than in all of Arabia, enough oil to run this country for the next 100 years, when are you redneck hayseeds going to unlock that prize?"

    The only people more clueless about energy than politicians are reporters. "There's more energy in a ton of Cap'n Crunch than in a ton of oil shale," I replied. "Oil shale provides just one ten-thousandth of world energy, far less than animal dung, and prospects for expansion are poor."

    As the camera cut back to the trading pit, I tried to frame our dilemma in a way he might understand. "You're selling dollars, yen, euros, and gold, but energy is the original currency." I could have been shouting down a well.

    Later that day I got an email from a retired Saudi oil executive. There's been a lot of blog speculation about declining production at Ghawar, the Kingdom's largest field. I asked this oil man for the real scoop.

    The Saudis have done Yankee bidding for a long time, but this guy offered only tough love. "There has been a paradigm shift in the energy world," he wrote. "Oil producers are no longer inclined to exhaust their resource for the sake of accelerating the misuse of a precious commodity."

    This is what the pump price is trying to tell you. That twenty nations produce 85% of the world's oil. That production in half of those countries is flat or declining. That Chavez in Venezuela and Putin in Russia have figured out that they can make more money by pumping less oil. Which is the flip side of the value proposition at your local Kum 'n' Go.

    What remains is a bumper crop of clueless politicians. Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl wants to sue the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. New Mexico Senator Pete Domenici, who has spent decades crusading against fuel efficiency standards, fatuously claims that "oil shale will rock the world," putting the fear of God into the Arabs.

    For all the happy talk about energy independence, only eight states, including five in the Rockies, produce more energy than they consume. The others are as helpless as patients in intensive care. The risk is that these parasites will, over the coming decades, suck us dry, leaving our landscapes as eviscerated as Halloween pumpkins.

    When it comes to energy, Americans resemble spoiled children who are used to always getting their way. Since the oil is in the Mideast, and its most avaricious consumers are here, it might be useful to run Phoenix or L.A. like Baghdad for a week or two. Close the pumps, turn the power off, let the taps run dry, and see what gives. We'd quickly relearn that civilization is a thin veneer, that energy invented comfort and wealth, and that decades of clueless policies have now put prosperity at risk.

    The American land ethic is based on the common sense idea that they "aren't making anymore." So too, it seems, with energy.

Randy Udall directs CORE, a non-profit energy office in Carbondale, Colorado. He's also a co-founder of ASPO-USA, a nonpartisan, proactive effort to encourage prudent energy management, constructive community transformation, and cooperative initiatives during an era of depleting petroleum resources.

Denver Post

perspective

Colorado's travel crisis

Roads aging faster than we can fix them

By Robert MacDonald and Jennifer Schaufele

Article Last Updated: 06/02/2007 03:12:18 PM MDT

Colorado is in a crisis, one that has been brewing for decades and is hardly invisible. Our transportation system - roads, bridges, tunnels, buses, airports and rail - is in acute need of repair and expansion to accommodate our growing communities. And we are not alone.

Across the country, states are grappling with how to improve their aging transportation networks, provide more public transportation and reduce congestion, while the primary funding source - the gas tax - remains flat. In Colorado, the gas tax simply is not keeping pace with escalating needs and the rising cost of materials.

Since the late 1990s, the Colorado General Assembly has worked to mitigate this looming problem by directing, through state law, excess revenue from the general fund into transportation, in addition to the traditional gas tax. This only occurs, however, if the general fund reaches its 6 percent annual growth limit, known as the Arveschoug-Bird limit, triggering the flow of funding into transportation.

So what's the big deal? Some believe transportation is already a cash cow, awash in money. Others question the wisdom and prudence of spending scarce dollars on transportation when other programs such as higher education remain underfunded.

Here's why all Coloradans should care:

If current trends in need and cost continue over the next two decades, Colorado will have to spend more than $160 billion (nine times the state's current annual budget) just to maintain the existing transportation system.

What does that existing system look like? Today, only 63 percent of our highways are in good or fair condition, more than 100 bridges need to be replaced at a cost of $877 million, and tunnels like the one in Glenwood Canyon require multimillion-dollar repairs. Current projections show the state will likely receive less than half of $160 billion from existing revenue sources, which means by 2035, only 25 percent of our highways will be left in good or fair condition.

Enter traffic congestion. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, nationwide congestion costs are growing faster than the gross domestic product. In Colorado, that cost breaks down to $1.2 billion a year.

It's not just urban areas, either, that are facing traffic issues. Congestion is growing at faster rates in rural areas and small cities.

In two decades, Colorado's population will climb to 7 million. Without a significant investment in transportation, population growth will compound existing capacity and maintenance problems and increase the average delay per commuter to 70 minutes a day. This is bad news for business as "just-in-time" delivery strategies require shorter and more frequent trips.

Then there's the issue of maintenance. Every $1 million used for new construction eventually requires an additional $6.5 million in maintenance over the life of a facility.

The funding situation is also grim at the federal level. By 2009, the Highway Trust Fund, which provides 40 percent of Colorado's transportation dollars, will become bankrupt. For Colorado's metropolitan areas (Denver, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins-Greeley, Pueblo and Grand Junction), that translates into major project cuts from regional transportation plans.

Both on the campaign trail and now in office, Gov. Bill Ritter has made solving the transportation crisis a pillar of his policy agenda. Last month, he hosted a transportation summit to kick-start his newly appointed panel on transportation finance and implementation that will assess all options for creating a stable, reliable source of revenue. The final recommendations of this panel will likely require Coloradans to make some important decisions - however difficult - about how to invest in transportation.

As the governor stated recently, "We must explore new ways to prioritize our transportation needs and secure sustainable funding sources for a 21st century transportation system." Doing nothing is not an option.

The authors reflect the views of the five metro planning organizations in Colorado: the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments, Denver Regional Council of Governments, North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization, Mesa County Regional Transportation Office and Pueblo Area Council of Governments. 
 

CDOT Reconsidering Trains Along I-70?

Tue May 22, 2007 at 10:21:06 AM

 

Eight years ago C-DOT began a study of end the bumper-to-bumper traffic along the highway. Over the coming years, the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, or PEIS, outraged environmentalists and stakeholders who favored a transit solution – like an elevated, high-speed train or monorail. Since then-Governor Bill Owens preferred highway widening, they saw the study as biased in that direction. And in 2004, a draft was released that listed highway widening as the “preferred alternative” for I-70 because its estimated cost fell under the $4 billion cost cap CDOT had arbitrarily set. An advanced guideway system, such as a monorail, was deemed unfeasible because it would cost more than $4 billion.

More recently, when I contacted CDOT about the $25 million, still unfinished study and the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority’s plans to get high-speed rail along the corridor (“Rail Roaded,” March 15), I was told by George and Region I Director Jeff Kullman that six-lane widening was still the “preferred alternative,” but that during the expansion CDOT would preserve a corridor to add transit later. (Likely in twenty years when the highway would be finished.) Governor Bill Ritter, however, was less confident about the recommendation in the pending study. He told me that no decision was final.

Last week, George announced that CDOT would be re-examining the recommendation in the PEIS. He said communities had been shut out of the study process too soon and that a project without their support would struggle to attract the necessary funding. CDOT spokeswoman Stacey Stegman explained that a neutral facilitator will now be selected through the US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution to lead a collaborative stakeholder process, though the agency has yet to determine what that process will look like. “The study will not start over,” she said. “We’ll be looking at alternatives already listed in the study to see what we might have missed, where we have common ground.”

Clear Creek County Commissioner Harry Dale, a vocal CDOT critic and transit supporter, had previously threatened legal action against the agency if highway widening with preservation for transit was offered as the final I-70 recommendation. Now Dale says he’s impressed with the governor and his head of transportation. “[George ] should be commended for his insight, vision and courage to place the PEIS process on hold and bring the stakeholders back to the table,” Dale said.

“Ultimately, if a state sponsored public project will spend billions of taxpayer dollars, it better have broad based public support. Both the Governor and Mr. George clearly recognize that the PEIS process to date does not have the necessary public support to produce a positive outcome. It is unfortunate that the previous administration chose to exclude key stakeholders from participating in the decision making process and ignore years of public opposition to the both the PEIS process and the PEIS outcomes. Had the Owens Administration actually empowered stakeholders and included them in the formation and selection of alternatives, this study may have produced a positive outcome for all stakeholders much more rapidly and for much less than the $25 million spent to date. Clear Creek County looks forward to the consensus building process and believes that it will produce a positive outcome.”

CDOT hopes to release a final recommendation for the I-70 mountain corridor by the end of the year. -- Jessica Centers

CDOT takes new look at fixing jams on I-70

CDOT has put the brakes on its study of how to fix Interstate 70's mountain traffic jams, bowing to pressure from communities opposed to a widening-only approach. Russ George, executive director of the Colorado Department of Transportation, is under orders to mend fences with communities.

By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News
May 18, 2007

CDOT has put the brakes on its study of how to fix Interstate 70's mountain traffic jams, bowing to pressure from communities opposed to a widening-only approach.

Russ George, executive director of the Colorado Department of Transportation, said Thursday that going forward with an alternative that lacks consistent support in the communities most affected is a formula for failure.

Projects that don't have community support have a harder time attracting the funds necessary to complete them.

George said his marching orders from Gov. Bill Ritter were to mend fences with communities that felt shut out of studies and to speed up work on projects that were stalling.

"When I got here, it was clear that as decisions were being made, we left our friends and constituents out along the way," said George, who took over CDOT in January after Ritter took office. "We shut them out too soon, and they didn't like it and it probably wasn't right. It gave the appearance that the decision was pre-ordained."

CDOT's seven-year, $25 million study on the 155 miles of I-70 from Golden to Glenwood Springs zeroed in on widening to six lanes but only preserving a space for a future undefined transit system.

People from Idaho Springs to the Vail Valley, as well as environmentalists and transit advocates, fought CDOT chief Tom Norton during Gov. Bill Owens' administration over what they saw as a summary rejection of transit.

CDOT considered transit too expensive to have a realistic shot at funding, a requirement to be included in a final study.

Norton had placed an arbitrary $4 billion cap on whatever solution was selected.

George said he has tossed out that cap and will listen to all solutions.

He said CDOT will take a step back in the process to the point where the stakeholders felt they were left out, then move forward again with the assistance of a professional facilitator to help build consensus.

But he added that the process needs to move swiftly and not throw new alternatives on the table. He hopes to have meetings start this summer re-examining earlier proposals and have agreement by the end of the year.

"I can't say I have a consensus decision if I haven't kept the consensus together," he said.

Plus, George said, there's a more pragmatic reason for building greater consensus.

"If my friends in the corridor are happy with me, maybe they will help me find the money to do something up there," he said.

Jeff Kullman, CDOT's regional director for most of the corridor, said Ritter heard complaints about the process from mountain constituents during last year's campaign and sought the change.

"Had there not been a change in administration we might have made an announcement already about the final results of the study," Kullman said. "Now we're going to take a step back. Our ultimate goal is to walk out of this sometime in the months ahead with a solution that everybody can accept."

flynnk@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5247

The cost of doing nothing

Tim Schlough
Wildernest
April 29, 2007

From someone who works and drives the roads from Vail to Denver on a regular basis, where are the people from out of state? They are here for our destination resorts.

Most of the cars that travel I-70 are from Denver. The studies show that traffic is growing, by the time they finish adding another lane, the traffic will be just as bad. As it is now, it takes an ambulance four hours to get to the city on any given Sunday, three hours when running emergent. Where is the money for the road coming from?

I hear it's from the mountain area, because that's were the people are going, but they all seem to be from the metro area. If they widen the road, where are they going to park these vehicles? They already park the roads at Copper Mountain and Vail on a more frequent basis. This makes it hard to respond to the incidents for all the emergency services.

The increased cost of government services? What about the impact of putting too many people on the slopes? It increases the number of collisions on the hill, and increases the number of patients dealt with by ski patrol and the ambulance service. This is a Band-Aid fix on another problem associated with growth.

Writers on the Range: Driving ourselves crazy, or another traffic tale from the West

BY BILL COOK
Writers on the Range
April 29, 2007

This winter. my family discovered that Oregon's Mount Hood is known for more than dramatic mountain rescues. Would you believe it could also be called the mother of all traffic jams? Tail lights for as far as the eye could see, gridlock for nearly an hour: That's what the highway through the Mount Hood National Forest becomes on a snowy winter weekend. With five lift-served resorts and numerous backcountry trails within striking distance of the Portland metro area's 2 million inhabitants, the mountain teems with skiers, boarders, snowshoers and sledders when good snow and fair skies coincide.

As the five of us squirmed cheek to jowl inside our compact sedan, my thoughts gravitated toward two seemingly unconnected subjects: Oregon's congressional delegation, and the Swiss transit system.

The leap of consciousness from a traffic jam to our local congressional worthies really wasn't such a stretch. Last year, Reps. Earl Blumenauer, D-Portland, and Greg Walden, R-Hood River, crafted the Mount Hood Stewardship Legacy Act, which included a provision directing the Forest Service to work with the state to develop "an integrated, multi-modal transportation plan for the Mt. Hood region." Planners would look for non-car alternatives such as gondolas and other ways of moving lots of people efficiently to key recreation destinations. Amen to that.

That was promising news - especially if the bill gets anywhere - and it also made me think about my family's recent trip to Switzerland. Two years ago, when our daughter was attending a Swiss university, we spent Christmas in the Alps, and during our entire 18-day stay, we never entered an automobile. Using the nation's integrated transit system, we relied entirely on buses, trains and cable cars to visit cities, villages and world-class snow resorts. It was heaven.

Back home in Oregon, a day trip to the slopes means grueling hours behind the wheel, struggling amid a surging tide of SUVs. But while in Switzerland, we zipped from the lowlands to the heart of the Alps on an ultra-modern train, all the while stretching out comfortably and sipping schokolade.

We also spent a week in one of Switzerland's famous car-free mountain resorts, of which there are nine. Some simply can't be reached by auto; everyone arrives by train or cable car. Others can be accessed by vehicles, but cars and buses are left at the town limits, with the streets reserved for pedestrians and tiny electric taxis. In either case, they draw snow-sport enthusiasts from around the world, and in the summer, they cater to tourists, hikers and climbers.

Could the Swiss model - or something like it - be replicated at Mount Hood or in other resort areas close to Western American cities? A few mountain resorts in North America have incorporated some pedestrian-friendly elements in their town planning; in particular, Whistler, in British Columbia. At least one Western resort, Winter Park, in Colorado, can be reached by train, and most larger resorts sponsor a few buses to bring some of their clientele to the slopes. Coloradoans also talk about a train linking Vail to the Denver area, but when state transportation planners talk about mass transit costing upwards of $4 billion or more, the conversation shifts to expanding the interstate instead.

Nowhere on our continent is there really an "integrated, multi-modal transportation plan" that comes close to what the Swiss have achieved. In the American West, going skiing or boarding almost always involves an uncomfortable, unsafe, gas-guzzling, environmentally unfriendly drive. And that assumes that the roads are even open. This winter, avalanches repeatedly closed Interstate 70 and other roads feeding Colorado ski resorts, and a massive debris flow over Oregon's Highway 35 isolated Hood's largest resort for weeks.

We of the Portland area pride ourselves as being pioneers in environmentally-sound urban transit, with an integrated web of buses, light rail, streetcars and an aerial tram, as well as efforts to encourage walking and cycling. Looking to the Alps for successful planning, why not translate their same approach to Mount Hood and similar Western resort areas? Why do we say we can't afford to do what's right, when spending huge amounts of money only perpetuates what's wrong?



Bill Cook is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News in Paonia (hcn.org). He writes in Lake Oswego, Ore.

denver & the west

RTD opens door to tech

NEW TALK OF MAGLEV TRAIN

By Jeffrey Leib
Denver Post Staff Writer

Article Last Updated: 04/14/2007 11:01:22 PM MDT

RTD's decision to encourage private companies to finance, build and operate FasTracks commuter trains has revived the possibility of a high-tech "maglev" train to DIA, transit officials say.

Maglev refers to magnetic levitation, by which trains elevate over a guideway and are propelled for fast, frictionless travel.

The Regional Transportation District is seeking federal support for a plan to contract with private firms to finance, design, build, operate and maintain as many as four commuter rail lines.

The north metro, northwest, Gold and DIA rail lines will cost more than $2 billion.

RTD is considering private partners for the projects because the FasTracks budget has been caught in a vise between rising construction costs and lower-than-projected sales-tax revenues.

"We'd be remiss if we didn't look at every tool out there," RTD board member David Ruchman said about the agency's consideration of public- private partnerships for FasTracks. "We want to keep faith with the public and deliver everything we promised them."

RTD pledged to voters that all of FasTracks would be completed by 2016, including six new lines and extensions of the southeast light-rail line to Lone Tree and the southwest line to Highlands Ranch. Metro Denver voters endorsed FasTracks in 2004 when they backed an RTD sales-tax increase.

The most intriguing element of quasi-privatization would be the possibility of advanced rail technologies such as maglev for the Denver International Airport line and possibly others.

Private companies have contacted RTD about bidding on the rail partnerships, and some parties have talked about exploring maglev technologies for the DIA train, said RTD general manager Cal Marsella.

For years, promoters of a mass-transit solution for congestion in the Interstate 70 mountain corridor have talked about advanced rail from the Denver area to Vail. Proposals have considered monorail and maglev, but up to now, the Colorado Department of Transportation has shelved all rail alternatives to highway widening because of the higher expense.

It is not clear if private firms can submit a proposal for mag lev or other advanced rail technology for anything close to the $702 million budget that RTD has for the DIA train.

But Marsella said the public- private partnership process "opens opportunities for any and all alternatives" and it will be up to firms to present proposals that meet RTD's needs.

RTD board member Ruchman endorses the exploration of public-private partnerships for bringing FasTracks in on schedule, but he offered a caution: "In our rush to be on time and on budget, I hope we don't sacrifice quality and excellence."

To get started, RTD applied late last month to join the Federal Transit Administration's public-private partnership pilot program, which promotes more extensive links between public transit agencies and private businesses.

The Bush administration is eager for successful projects showing the viability of more private-sector involvement in transit systems.

"We think these arrangements can expedite the design and construction of these projects, improve their performance once constructed and realize cost savings without compromising safety," said FTA chief counsel David Horner, who leads the pilot program.

In its FasTracks finance plan, RTD included the assumption that the federal government would underwrite at least $815 million of the project's $4.7 billion initial total cost.

Typically, transit agencies ask FTA for federal dollars to cover part of a line's cost.

In its application, RTD described how rising construction costs and lower sales-tax forecasts threaten FasTracks.

"The combination of these factors is leading to an overall funding shortfall, which would limit RTD's ability to deliver the program within the time frame approved by the voters of the district in 2004," the agency said.

The depth of problems facing FasTracks became clear in February when a draft analysis of FasTracks finances showed the entire program might cost $2 billion more than planned.

Public-private partnerships for FasTracks rail, supported by FTA, could get RTD back on track, Marsella said. "It presents an opportunity to revise cost estimates downward, which could balance against cost increases we've experienced since we went to the ballot."

Proposals to let private firms design, build, operate and maintain new transportation proj ects are known as DBOM ventures. Government entities often add an F, looking for private financing as well.

"DBOM contracts have been quite common in the highway field," said Ken Orski, who edits a national newsletter that charts innovations in transportation policy. "What FTA is trying to do is adopt the same approach in the field of transit."

Transit agencies save money in public-private arrangements because private companies assume some of the risk of avoiding cost overruns and delivering projects on time, Orski said.

"Contracts can be very tightly written so the transit agency specifies the level of performance, service and maintenance" that private operators must meet, he added.

Staff writer Jeffrey Leib can be reached at 303-954-1645 or jleib@denverpost.com.

Lt. Governor Denish Officially Opens Rail Runner Service to Belen

(Belen, 2-2-07) – Lieutenant Governor Diane Denish joined

Transportation Secretary Rhonda Faught, Belen Mayor Ronnie Torres,

and other elected officials this afternoon to officially open the Rail

Runner service to Belen.

“I am pleased to be present to celebrate the new Rail Runner service

to Belen which completes the administration’s commitment of Phase

One,” Lt. Governor Denish said. “As New Mexico grows in the 21st

century, we have made a solid investment with the Rail Runner to

more efficiently move our residents and reduce pollution to our

environment.”

The lieutenant Governor also discussed the economic incentives for the

City of Belen. “In addition we have provided a foundation for Belen

and other local communities to build transit oriented businesses and

new investment opportunities. The Rail Runner will pave the way for a

journey towards a brighter future for all of New Mexico’s residents,” Lt.

Governor Denish said.

Service on the Rail Runner Express will now officially serve commuters

between Bernalillo, Albuquerque, Los Lunas, and Belen, completing the

50 miles of Phase One on the commuter line. Residents of Belen

commuting on the Belen to Albuquerque line will receive free fares

until April 1.

“When we embarked on this mission over two years ago, we knew

then we would make this journey to Belen,” Secretary Faught said.

“With the addition of service to Belen today, the Rail Runner brings

even more New Mexicans an extremely convenient form of

transportation. Other states in the nation are looking upon us now with

high regard; we have truly made significant history by bringing first

class transportation to our citizens.”

“This now provides an affordable transportation alternative for the

people of Belen and Valencia County”, says Lawrence Rael, Executive

Director of the Mid-Region Council of Governments. “This important

link creates a stronger connection for Belen to the other communities

in the region."

Rail Runner is part of Governor Richardson’s Investment Partnership

(GRIP). GRIP is $1.6 billion transportation and infrastructure initiative

that is improving highways in New Mexico, creating new modes of

transportation like commuter rail and bus services and providing local

jobs.

Trains proposed for I-25 & I-70
By The Associated Press
Article Last Updated:11/14/2006 07:54:22 AM MST

http://www.rangerxpress.com.

Town on track for preservation

Depot part of Castle Rock's vision

By Joey Bunch
Denver Post Staff Writer

Article Last Updated:11/22/2006 11:40:45 PM MST

Castle Rock's Denver & Rio Grand railroad depot was converted into a museum in the 1970s. (Colorado Historical Society)

Castle Rock - Local leaders are banking on Castle Rock's past as they plan for its future.

Next week, the town will close a $140,000 deal to buy an old train depot, vacant, unlocked and vandalized for years. But someday, it could house a second town museum, a welcome center, a public meeting hall or even find new life as a depot for commuter rail.

The depot is the latest cornerstone in the town's plan for historical preservation. Next year, the town hopes to survey its historic buildings, if it can score a $30,000 grant to fund the task.

"I hope the town can save all the old buildings it can," said Castle Rock Museum director Lionel Oberlin, as he looked over the dilapidated Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad Depot.

"There aren't that many left."

Fires from primitive home heating took out many of this historic town's original quarters, and in recent years, scrape-offs for new construction have taken many of the others, Oberlin said.

While the town celebrated its 125th anniversary this year, only one in five of its downtown businesses are older than 60.

But in Castle Rock, unlike most of south metro's modern boomtowns, the past is everywhere, and a railroad runs through it.

"This is a railroad town; always has been," said resident Harry Williamson. "Any money the town puts toward preserving that, I'm for it."

Preserving historic character pays off, according to the Colorado Historical Society.

Heritage tourism is a $3.4 billion a year business in Colorado, while attracting residents, businesses and private investment. The Douglas County seat sprang up along the rail lines in the 1870s and flourished because of them. Older buildings are built from stone from local quarries and timber from the foothills; newer buildings are constructed to resemble them.

"A lot of towns have to invent their history," said Fabby Hillyard, Castle Rock's downtown coordinator. "People here are interested in that history. It makes people feel more grounded. The depot is a manifestation of that interest."

The old depot, at 928 Prairie Hawk Drive, is already connected to downtown by a trail under Interstate 25, along Plum Creek. Its high perch on the east provides a soothing view of downtown and Castle Rock's namesake butte.

The 1,480-square-foot Santa Fe depot served the rails from 1911 until the late 1940s. Two previous Santa Fe depots at the site, dating back to the 1880s, burned.

Before the depot becomes a public building, the town must remove lead paint and asbestos, an estimated $2,000 job. The depot also is hooked up to a well and a septic system, problems for a public building. Town water and sewer lines are nearby, however.

But if the depot stays at its current location, the rail crossing will have to be reclassified as public, meaning anywhere from $30,000 to $250,000 in safety improvements, according to the town's assessment of the site.

The value, however, far outweighs the possible costs, said Hillyard, who pitched the project to the Town Council.

"The structure is an important part of the town's historic rail history," she said. "We think that it's a good investment."

PLAN EYES WYOMING FOR HIGH-SPEED RAIL

CASPER, WY --Passenger rail service in Wyoming is edging toward a "back to the future" scenario as interest grows in a high-speed railroad corridor down Interstate 25.

The line would run from Casper to Cheyenne, down Colorado's Front Range, all the way to Albuquerque, NM.

Many Wyoming communities started as railroad towns: Cheyenne was created by the Union Pacific, while Casper owes much of its early growth to the Chicago and North Western line. And Wyoming's tourism industry was jump-started by railroads funneling tourists into Yellowstone National Park.

This rich history might come alive again, boosters say, with high-speed passenger rail operations carrying passengers at the breathtaking speed of 90 to 124 mph. Business planners and railroad boosters say high-speed rail could lessen the congestion of major highways and airports.

Here and there along the I-25 corridor, communities are already embracing rails as the most cost-effective way to move people. Earlier this month, Denver opened a 19-mile southeast light-rail line along I-25, part of the

Fas-Tracks project. Farther south in New Mexico, the Rail Runner Express started service for the Albuquerque metro area this past summer.

Vision

Bob Briggs, president of Front Range Commuter Rail, envisions high-speed rail lines running up and down the I-25 corridor, from Albuquerque to Casper and beyond, and possibly over to Yellowstone National Park. Another section of his proposed Ranger Express line would run along Interstate 70 from Grand

Junction to the Denver International Airport. 
 

"We're raising money for a feasibility study," said Briggs, a former board member of Denver's Regional Transportation District who's been ramrodding the high-speed passenger service idea for the past two years. He wants to knit together a system of more than 1,000 miles of track, with the Denver Fas-Tracks system which plans to build a $4.7 billion, 119-mile light rail system by 2016.

Briggs has just about lined up $1.5 million from Colorado. He needs $400,000 from Wyoming and $600,000 from New Mexico to reach a $2.5 million regional goal before he seeks $2.5 million from the federal government in matching funds.

Last week, Briggs addressed Cheyenne LEADS, the local economic development organization for Cheyenne and Laramie County.

"I asked a roomful of people if they knew any commuters to jobs in Colorado," Briggs said. About 60 percent of those in the room raised their hands, he said.

Need

Briggs said the three-state region of Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico is going to have a total population of 10 million people by 2015, and desperately needs high-speed passenger service to avoid expensive gridlock

on the region's streets and highways --as well as horrendous congestion in airports including DIA. He estimates that his proposed system could move 26 million commuter trips a year between Pueblo and Fort Collins by 2015.

"The key question is whether there is the political will to do this," Briggs said.

A big step would be construction of new north-south rail lines out on the eastern plains of Colorado, bypassing the built-up Front Range and freeing the Front Range rail lines for passenger service.

Randy Bruns, director of Cheyenne LEADS, said he believes the railroad companies will ultimately do just that, so they can sell and/or develop their Denver railroad yards --all bordering on some of the most valuable

real estate in the Denver metro area.

Bruns said he has identified sources of money in Cheyenne, Casper and Wyoming to support Briggs' feasibility study, which also requires a federal designation of I-25 as a high-speed rail corridor --making it the 11th such

corridor in the nation.

Briggs wants to use existing BNSF Railway Company and Union Pacific Railroad tracks and right of way.

The feasibility study will look at train traffic, tracks, topography and much more to determine whether trains could operate at 90 mph or faster for 75 percent of the time. Briggs' research indicates that an interstate

highway can move some 1,550 cars per hour in each lane at 65 mph or better. Yet a double-track rail line can transport more people than eight lanes of interstate, taking far less space.

The top limit for the proposed system, Briggs said, is 124 mph. Faster than that, he said, and the federal government requires much more stringent standards that could triple the cost.

"I'm a flaming optimist," said Bruns, who sees the idea for high-speed passenger rail service rippling out from Denver, extending sections city by city.

In a real sense, rapid rail service will tend to negate the disadvantages of distance, just as the Internet has done, Bruns said. "That's when we can play to our local strengths," he said.

Rocky Mountain News

November 25, 2006

SILVERTHORNE -With another ski season ramping up over the busy Thanksgiving holiday, travelers along the I-70 corridor are preparing for the inevitable congestion that can make the trip to and from the mountain resorts slow and dangerous.

There's no immediate solution in sight. The burgeoning Front Range population means a steady growth in the number of I-70 trips, and plans by the Colorado Department of Transportation to significantly improve the highway are years away from being implemented. In fact, release of the final version of a long-awaited I-70 study has been pushed back until early next year. And once the

plan is unveiled, it may be several years until construction actually begins.

But some short-term relief could come from a transportation demand management (TDM) plan forwarded by the I-70 Mountain Corridor Coalition, representing communities and businesses from all along the transportation corridor between Golden and Glenwood Springs.

The TDM plan includes a slew of incentive-based measures intended to address peak-time congestion in the corridor. Some of the ideas floated in a draft version of the plan include free close-in parking at ski areas for carpoolers, as well as coupons for discounted goods and services for visitors willing to adjust their travel times to outside peak hours.

Additionally, the plan calls for installation of a high-tech traffic monitoring and notification system, which was implemented in a pilot phase this summer, visible to travelers in the form of new signs along the highway that detail travel times between key points.

It's not clear to what degree such measures will actually alleviate the crushing peak loads on the highway. The potential benefits haven't been quantified, coalition director Flo Raitano said. But similar measures have been tried - with mixed success - in other areas, notably in some of the long-distance travel corridors along the Eastern seaboard.

"The goal is spread out the traffic and numbers we have now," Raitano said, "We'd like to hear from people who are in the traffic on I-70," she said. The idea is try and find out if some of the incentives would actually be effective in changing travel habits.

"Would you change your travel times if you got free close-in parking at the resorts and a coupon for a free latte? Would free season-long ski storage be an incentive to carpool?" Raitano asked. Other incentives could include "mountain money" for early and late arrivals, and for visitors willing to carpool, she explained.

Summit County Commissioner Bill Wallace, chair of the coalition, said other measures could include preferential parking for overnight guests, and a tiered parking rate structure based on vehicle occupancy.

Wallace said the idea is to start a shift in people's attitudes about traveling the I70 corridor.

Even when physical improvements are made to the highway -and that day could still be 10 years away -changing travel patterns will have to be part of the long-term solution, Wallace said. solution for the corridor. Nay-sayers claim the technology just isn't available yet, but a pair of neighboring states have aggressively pushed ahead with transit projects that offer a potential roadmap for

Colorado.

In both cases, government leadership and buy-in from the business community were crucial to designing and executing transit plans.

In New Mexico, along the Albuquerque to Santa Fe corridor, Gov. Bill Richardson put some of his political capital on the line to develop the Rail Runner system, said project manager Chris Blewett at a conference last month.

"He (Richardson) said, 'I'm going to have the first phase of this done in two years.' It was the most important statement he could have made," Blewett said.

"A lot of people thought this was crazy ... People kept saying, 'You can't do this.'We didn't accept any of the conventional wisdom. We kept saying, 'Why not?'"

The first phase of the project, between Belen and Albuquerque, was completed in just more than two years, just slightly behind the schedule announced by Gov. Richardson. Achieving that goal required an innovative approach, Blewett explained.

"We used a streamlined procurement process. We had no public process and not a single intergovernmental agreement, we didn't do ridership projections, and we had only three budget meetings in two-and-a-half years," Blewett said. "We tried to make this thing believable and real. We tried to adopt a European attitude,"Blewett continued. "This isn't about today. This is about New Mexico's future."

Along Utah's Wasatch Front, squeezed in between the mountains and the Great Salt Lake, key stakeholders recognized that transportation is the backbone of the state's economy, said Steve Meyer, engineering and construction manager for the Utah Transit Authority.

Meyer said winning over the private sector was key to moving ahead with the mass transit project currently in the corridor, where ridership is already double the projected level. Meyer said the state transit agency took a bare-bones, no frills approach -for example buying used railroad cars from other areas. The Utah rail system will serve demand equivalent to an entire lane on I-15, he said.

"It shows you can get it done," Vail town manager Stan Zemler said. "We need to cut the same path and not accept no. And we need to find a statewide solution,"Zemler said. "We need to keep an eye on the PEIS process and make sure it offers a multi-modal solution with transit as a component," he said. "We have to get a transit corridor secured and a commitment to transit," Zemler concluded.

The biggest stumbling block to developing transit for the I-70 corridor is funding. But the change to a Democratic administration in Colorado could result in changes in I-70 policy, Wallace said, anticipating new leadership at CDOT. Wallace said he wouldn't be surprised to see some discussions about a statewide transportation funding measure in the next few years.

Planning and building a transit system will require not only innovative technology, but an equally creative financing mechanism, most likely through a combination of statewide taxes and bonds, experts said during the recent I-70 Coalition transit workshop and retreat at Copper Mountain.

The most frequently discussed transit alternatives, including various fixed guideway systems running from DIA to the Eagle County Airport or beyond, could cost as much as $6 billion. For the sake of comparison, CDOT's annual budget runs about $800 million.

Statewide funding options could come from a statewide sales tax or a levy on gasoline, said Alan Matlosz, senior vice president of George K. Baum and Company.

"There is no limit to the amount of money to fund the project ... the difficulty is, you have to pay it back," said Matlosz, whose company provides investment banking and financial advisory services to local governments throughout Colorado.

Matlosz outlined several ways that the I-70 coalition might be able to raise the money through existing mechanisms already authorized under state laws, including formation of a metro district that could levy property taxes, or a regional transportation authority that could be funded by sales taxes.

A regional transit authority would require a complex intergovernmental