We are in the midst of reviewing our plug-in electric vehicle forecasts, which means scouring data and news sources to get an understanding of how issues are playing out in the court of public opinion. It’s always the fun part of the job to learn what is “news” and what the public is talking about on forums and the like. One of the interesting trends that is getting more attention in the last year is a concept entitled “peak cars.” Over the years, we’ve heard a lot about peak oil, usually as an argument for electrification of the automobile, but now are we seeing peak in the number of cars in the United States?

Recently, the The New York Times had an article on European cities rejecting cars of any type. Many cities in the United States are also looking to remove cars from specific parts of the city whether that’s through tolls or turning roads into pedestrian avenues. Bill Ford, Executive Chairman of Ford Motor, recently spoke at a TED conference on the change to mobility that will have to include a variety of modes and connected cars. Even Detroit (aka Motor City) is updating our public transportation options.

It makes sense that at some point there will be just too many cars to physically fit within the finite space of a city (I realize this may strike Texans as a foreign concept, but ask anyone in Manhattan and they will know what I am talking about). The Earth Policy Institute argues that the United States has already hit peak cars and the decline is the result of a saturated market with five cars for every four drivers. A study by Lee Schipper and Adam Millard-Ball suggests that despite growing GDP per capita in developed nations, motorized travel peaked in 2003.

The question though remains what does this mean for the automotive industry? Leaving drivetrain aside for the moment, the challenge to an automobile company regardless of the energy source, is sales. If they don’t move metal, they don’t make money. Can big automotive companies still make money if we’ve seen peak sales in the United States at 17 or 18 million vehicles per year?

This is essentially a question of where the peak actually is and, perhaps more importantly, how far below peak is stable sales. To date, U.S. light duty vehicle (LDV) sales peaked in 2000 with 17.4 million vehicles (though 2006 was close with 17.1 million). The number of LDVs in the United States has continued to climb through 2008 (latest data available) with 238.4 million LDVs. So, while the sales of vehicles peak, that number does not necessarily represent the peak number of vehicles in the country.

There are a lot of pieces that come together attempting to calculate whether we have hit peak vehicles in the United States (global is a whole different ball of wax, so we will leave that for another day). With such a precipitous sales fall and climbing vehicle scrappage rates, it should not be surprising to see the overall fleet slip lower. The question is whether it will stay lower.

So what is driving the scrappage rates? Are these being driven by a more urban population that no longer needs vehicles or is it being driven by something else? While it’s not hard to imagine a small nation or a specific area hitting peak cars, what would it mean for automakers, if the majority of the United States has hit peak cars?

Article by Dave Hurst, appearing courtesy the Matter Network.

Related posts:

• America’s Love Affair With the Car May be Coming to an End
• It’s Time for Time-of-Use Pricing for Residential Customers
• Mercedes-Benz’s New Fuel Cell Leasing Program to Bring The F-Cell to the US
• Imagine If All Cars Were Electric Cars
• Thermal Energy Storage: Fiery Growth for an Ice-Based Technology

Many commuters in large metropolitan areas and in big cities both here in the U.S. and globally rely on public transportation for getting to and from places. After all, it is often a hassle to sit in traffic and can be quite inconvenient in a densely packed area to drive a car, not to mention the environmental problems with air pollution associated with driving. So, naturally anyone who lives in or near a city always want to find out who well their city happens to be doing when it comes to their public transit system overall.

According to world rankings of the best public transit systems, the best cities include Hong Kong where it receives a ranking of 4 because its system “absorbs most of its residents’ transportation needs.” Other cities with great public transportation systems include Curitiba, Brazil which comes it at number 1 as a result of things like a highly efficient bus system, a single price system, and what is even most impressive is high usage–whereby 85% of the population uses this public transit system.

As such, the lesson from Brazil is that a good public transportation system is not one that simply happens to be located in a big city or is available for use by all individuals. Rather, a good public transportation system is one that uses a highly reliable and efficient system, is relatively cost affordable, and encourages rather than discourages use. In the U.S., there are public transportation systems some of which are ranked well like New York, Portland, Chicago, and Washington DC among others, but overall they are not in the top 10 and do not compare to the Brazil style public transportation system. What they all lack in particular is the concept of affordability in terms of a “single price system.”

For example, in the DC metro system, there are often differences in prices depending on where one gets on and where they get off. Furthermore, the prices change throughout the day. As such, the single price system in Brazil is quite appealing and makes them ahead of the curve in terms of being a model for not only an efficient public transportation system, but also one that is relatively cost affordable. Often, individuals may avoid taking public transportation because of things like rates that are not stable at least in the U.S., as public transportation costs here vary from city to city and even from stop to stop. Thus, the Brazil system has clearly figured out a way to make public transportation more cost effective.

Article by Patrick Kenney, appearing courtesy Justmeans.

Related posts:

• What Brings Sustainable Transport in Urban Centers?
• How Does Green Transportation Pay Dividends?
• U.S. Cities Grapple for Electric Vehicle Cash
• Guangzhou’s Remarkable Bus Rapid Transit System
• Wisconsin Stalemate Imperils Transit Funding

All over the news, one can see the massive sea of protest currently befalling the state of Wisconsin in a dispute between workers and the governor. Most news outlets have discussed how it is a dispute between the governor’s cuts and workers’ rights issues over things like collective bargaining. Governor Walker’s budget dealing impasse is problematic for public transit in Wisconsin because it “could remove that collective bargaining protection from transit workers, thereby risking $3.6 million in annual federal aid that Green Bay metro receives.”

The reason why this stalemate must be resolved is, if the U.S. is to move forward on transportation, then a robust and effective public transit system is essential. This stalemate, therefore, has the potential to cause problems for the Green Bay area especially if Federal funds for public transit are not allocated or awarded.

In particular, the “Green Bay Metro cannot provide the service it does if it loses federal funding, but ‘I don’t want people to panic and say we won’t have bus service. That’s not been decided. Things are dynamic.”

Indeed, the situation in Wisconsin is unfolding before our very eyes in a dynamic fashion. How the impasse will be resolved and what, if anything, it means for future public transportation funding in particular is also uncertain. What needs to be looked at are ways to resolve budgetary issues so that crucial funding for green transportation is not lost because of this impasse.

Without compromise and a path to move forward, therefore, things like green transportation can get imperiled. The lesson clearly coming out of Wisconsin clearly says something about the politically charged and vitriolic climate to the point that what should be bipartisan initiatives like investments in green transportation and infrastructure can get imperiled. Even though buses won’t necessarily stop running tomorrow in Green Bay, this impasse currently happening certainly has a degree of uncertainty associated with it.

The degree of uncertainty in Wisconsin should be something that environmentalists and transportation officials should be concerned about. If the dispute does not get resolved soon in terms of the collective bargaining issues with transit workers, that may mean loss of funding to public buses, metrorail, and transit generally for Wisconsin. For the U.S. to move forward with green transportation as a whole, it is clear that all public officials should come together to resolve this dispute in Wisconsin. Therefore, the dispute in Wisconsin is not something that should be shrugged off solely as an internal state matter. Funding for public transit should be a bipartisan effort and hopefully the dispute will be resolved soon so funding is not imperiled.

Article by Patrick Kenney, appearing courtesy Justmeans.

Related posts:

• Prospects for US Energy Efficiency Companies in Israel
• Going against the Trend: For one Locality the Price of Public Transit is not Increasing?
• More Funding For Cellulosic Ethanol Research
• Majority of New Buses Will Use Alternative Fuels by 2015, Report Says
• Your On-Call, Electric Taxi: Personal Rapid Transit

Masdar’s Personal Rapid Transit is cool and all, but will it be the next greatest thing in e-mobility?

Masdar City, the ambitious project to build a sustainable city on the outskirts of Abu Dhabi, has been criticized by some for not moving fast enough or for making too many changes in its development strategy. But planning, designing and building a sustainable city from the ground up is no easy task, just ask Masdar City Director Alan Frost.

“Four years ago, we locked into the PRT, we thought that was the strategy,” Alan Frost told me when we sat down to talk Wednesday at the World Future Energy Summit in Abu Dhabi. “But now if you look at how quickly the regular electric vehicles have moved,” the strategy has changed somewhat, Frost explains.

“When we first started, everything was moving, we had waste to energy, we had desal[ination], we had PV moving, everything in the renewable energy field was moving at the one time, and its very hard to lock stuff down and very expensive, because every second day something is better than what you had the day before. So when do you stop?”

Along with a public metro line and light rail, Masdar’s driverless cars, or Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) vehicles were at the core of Masdar City’s public transportation strategy, but that strategy has changed as the technology has advanced so quickly in electric vehicles. It’s a bit like hitting a moving target. And if you miss, it can be an expensive mistake.

After touring Masdar City, I can personally attest to the fact that cruising around in a driverless electric car that is pre-programmed to take you to the next station at the touch of a button is a remarkable experience, the ooh factor doesn’t necessarily mean they are the solution.

Frost says PRTs will continue to play a role, but so will electric buses and other electric point-to-point vehicles.

“We have three to five years to lock into the solution of phase I and five to ten years to lock into a permanent solution,” Frost says.

And being able to make changes, has allowed Masdar to avoid jumping into the wrong technology, whether in transportation or energy generation. “If you want to put PV panels on the roof, when do you buy them? If you bought them last year, they’re now half the price.”

“What we’ve realized is you have got to lock into the absolute best technology you can do on the day, monitor it, check it, add to it, whatever, and then learn from it and go again. That’s part of the secret of what we’re trying to do,” Frost explains.

“At the end of the day, that’s part of what Masdar is all about.”

Article by Timothy B. Hurst, appearing courtesy Earth & Industry.

Related posts:

• Electric Car Testing Heating Up In Abu Dhabi
• Masdar, DOE Collaborating on Moisture, Dust-Resistant Solar Panels
• Masdar’s Green City Built by Clean Technology Experts in High Demand
• Green City Project Masdar’s Fate May Hinge on Dubai Debt
• Can “Green Cities” Like Masdar Really Translate In Abu Dhabi?

Report suggests current transportation policy in most U.S. states will likely worsen greenhouse gas emission trends.

With federal policy action on climate and energy appearing unlikely for at least the next couple years, public policy and financial analysts are increasingly turning to state-level analyses to inform policymakers, business leaders about the policy and business landscapes for clean energy, energy efficiency, and in the case of a report released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the link between transportation and greenhouse gas emissions.

NRDC released a report with Smart Growth America evaluating how well state-level transportation decisions are aligned with greenhouse gas emissions reductions efforts by examining a selection of key transportation policies currently in place in the 50 states.

The report, “Getting Back on Track: Climate Change and State Transportation Policy” (pdf), examined 17 criteria across three categories: Infrastructure Policies, Investment Decisions and Touchstone Policies, and found that there is lots of room for state-level progress on reducing transportation-related carbon emissions. “[M]ost states use few of the available transportation policy tools to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, and in most cases make decisions that will likely increase emissions,” the report’s authors say. (Click to expand)

Only three states, California, Maryland and New Jersey scored in the top tier, with the rest of the states showing the most room for improvement. But even those states in the top tier scored no higher than a B-.

“Most states do not make any effort at all to connect transportation policy with climate change and energy goals, and some put in place systems that effectively sabotage these goals,” the authors write.

But the beauty of having more than 50 venues to experiment with transportation policy that can reduce emissions is that it leaves plenty of room for recommendations — and the authors make some for both state and federal levels.

State Policy Recommendations

• Set a course to reduce emissions by setting per capita transportation GHG or VMT reduction targets.

• Balance state transportation investments by using state and federal resources to support robust public transportation service, prioritize highway repair and safety over new capacity, and support non-motorized transportation.

• Manage traffic with road use pricing tools and incentives for low-carbon transportation options through comprehensive commuter programs.

• Link transportation and land use in transportation plans, implement growth management policies, and promote development in areas with high quality transit service.

Federal Policy Recommendations

• Set a national transportation sector GHG reduction target to reduce emissions, and require states and regions to set similar targets.

• Increase funding parity for clean transportation infrastructure.

• Require consideration of GHG emissions in the transportation planning process.

• Reorient federal transportation programs to support greater implementation of clean transportation projects.

Article by Timothy B. Hurst, appearing courtesy ecopolitology.

Related posts:

• Submit CleanTech Link
• Low Carbon Transition Plan: UK Takes Lead in Global Climate Change Fight
• CleanTechies Launches “Community News” Service
• Congress: Start The Energy Revolution Without Me
• Russia and the World Looks Towards High Speed Rail

Municipal fleets, including buses and other forms of city transportation, use a heavy amount of energy every year.  Much like the military, we’ve seen a steady decline in the rate at which they consume. Factors include:

As part of a systematic attempt to increase fuel efficiency through technology, the CGI (Clinton Global Initiative) has partnered with ESRI and NAVTEQ to decrease our carbon footprint.

Brainchild of Doug Band, the CGI is a large collaborative unit of corporations,  non-profits, and political figures that are aiding in the process of route optimization. Route optimization can be clearly be defined as the fastest route from point A to B; the algorithm used be these companies (ESRI and NAVTEQ) is similar to that of consumer GPS systems.

In a partnership with the city of San Francisco,  the CGI and Doug Band provide a call to action approach at incorporating plans to decrease greenhouse gas emissions from fleets in the San Francisco Bay Area through Fleet Route Optimization Software. This includes anything from public transportation to work-force vehicles. NAVTEQ actually distributes digital maps and content that drives navigation- and location-based services solutions worldwide, including:

Congruently, ESRI utilizes GIS mapping software – this helps the user interpret data, further aiding in transportation-based decision-making, reliant on the best information and analysis. Much of this is similar to what the average consumer finds on his/her portable GPS. Furthermore, it’s important to note that this technology has been around and is widely used.

Most of the time, these feature will be labeled as “alternate routes,” and will allow the user to view multiple paths, along with other elements like fuel cost, distance, time and gas station stops. Similarly, developers incorporate mechanisms that permit users to view weather/traffic in their area. This is greatly beneficial for travelers as nobody likes to get in bad weather, or a traffic jam for that matter! Typically, users will have to pay a little extra for these features, and may even have to attend to a monthly fee for traffic/weather updates.

Both forces hope to provide powerful solutions for cities like San Fran. Once a seamless integration of communication and navigation has been implemented, transportation will become much more efficient. Again, this is something that has already taken effect and will continue to improve energy efficiency in regards to transportation fuel costs. As we technology progresses and becomes more affordable, individual consumers will begin seeing GPS as longer just an option, but rather a integral part of any vehicle.

Article by Jack Lundee, appearing courtesy 2GreenEnergy.

Related posts:

• Indiana Unveils Alternative Fuel Vehicle Initiative
• BrightView Systems and EPFL announce thin-film solar collaboration
• Leading by Example: GSA Electrifies the Fleet; Delivers First Electric Vehicle to Navy
• ‘Generals’ Devise Tactics for Grid-EV Collision
• iPhone App Simulates Electric Car Experience

Cars promise mobility, and in a largely rural setting they provide it. But in an urbanizing world, where more than half of us live in cities, there is an inherent conflict between the automobile and the city. After a point, as their numbers multiply, automobiles provide not mobility but immobility, as well as increased air pollution and the health problems that come with it. Urban transport systems based on a combination of rail lines, bus lines, bicycle pathways, and pedestrian walkways offer the best of all possible worlds in providing mobility, low-cost transportation, and a healthy urban environment.

Some of the most innovative public transportation systems, those that shift huge numbers of people from cars into buses, have been developed in Curitiba, Brazil, and Bogotá, Colombia. The success of Bogotá’s Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, TransMilenio, which uses special express lanes to move people quickly through the city, is being replicated not only in six other Colombian cities but in scores elsewhere too, including Mexico City, São Paulo, Hanoi, Seoul, Istanbul, and Quito. By 2012, Mexico City plans to have 10 BRT lines in place.

Beijing is one of 11 Chinese cities with BRT systems in operation.  In southern China, Guangzhou officially opened its BRT in early 2010. Already carrying more than 800,000 passengers daily, this system is expected to serve one million passengers per day by the end of the year. In addition to linking with the city’s underground Metro in three places, it will soon be paralleled throughout its entirety with a bike lane. Guangzhou will also have 5,500 bike parking spaces for those using a bike-BRT travel combination.

In Iran, Tehran launched its first BRT line in early 2008. Several more lines are in the development stage, and all will be integrated with the city’s new subway lines. Several cities in Africa are also planning BRT systems. Even industrial-country cities such as Ottawa, Toronto, New York, Minneapolis, Chicago, Las Vegas, and—much to everyone’s delight—Los Angeles have launched or are now considering BRT systems.

Some cities are reducing traffic congestion and air pollution by charging cars to enter the city, including Singapore, London, Stockholm, and Milan. In London—where until recently the average speed of an automobile was comparable to that of a horse-drawn carriage a century ago—a congestion fee was adopted in early 2003. The initial £5 (about $8 at the time) charge on all motorists driving into the center city between 7 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. immediately reduced the number of vehicles, permitting traffic to flow more freely while cutting pollution and noise.

In the first year after the new tax was introduced, the number of people using buses to travel into central London climbed by 38 percent and vehicle speeds on key thoroughfares increased by 21 percent. In July 2005, the congestion fee was raised to £8.  With the revenue from the congestion fee being used to upgrade and expand public transit, Londoners are steadily shifting from cars to buses, the subway, and bicycles. Since the congestion charge was adopted, the daily flow of cars and minicabs into central London during peak hours has dropped by 36 percent while the number of bicycles has increased by 66 percent.

In January 2008, Milan adopted a “pollution charge” of $14 on vehicles entering its historic center in daytime hours during the week. Other cities now considering similar measures include San Francisco, Turin, Genoa, Kiev, Dublin, and Auckland.

Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoë, who was elected in 2001, inherited some of Europe’s worst traffic congestion and air pollution. He decided traffic would have to be cut 40 percent by 2020. The first step was to invest in better transit in outlying regions to ensure that everyone in the greater Paris area had access to high-quality public transit. The next step was to create express lanes on main thoroughfares for buses and bicycles, thus reducing the number of lanes for cars.

Photo Credit: iStockPhoto/Sander Nagel

A third innovative initiative in Paris was the establishment of a city bicycle rental program that has 20,600 bikes available at 1,450 docking stations throughout the city. Access to the bikes is by credit card, with a choice of daily, weekly, or annual rates ranging from just over $1 per day to $40 per year. If the bike is used for fewer than 30 minutes, the ride is free. The bicycles are proving to be immensely popular—with more than 63 million trips taken as of late 2009.

At this point Mayor Delanoë is working hard to realize his goal of cutting car traffic by 40 percent and carbon emissions by a similar amount by 2020. The popularity of this bike sharing program has led to its extension into 30 of the city’s suburbs and has inspired cities such as London to also introduce bike sharing.

The United States, which has lagged far behind Europe in developing diversified urban transport systems, is being swept by a “complete streets” movement, an effort to ensure that streets are friendly to pedestrians and bicycles as well as to cars. Many American communities lack sidewalks and bike lanes, making it difficult for pedestrians and cyclists to get around safely, particularly where streets are heavily traveled.

This cars-only model is being challenged by the National Complete Streets Coalition, a powerful assemblage of citizen groups, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, AARP, and numerous local and national cycling organizations. Among the issues spurring the complete streets movement are the obesity epidemic, rising gasoline prices, the urgent need to cut carbon emissions, air pollution, and mobility constraints on aging baby boomers. The elderly who live in urban areas without sidewalks and who no longer drive are effectively imprisoned in their own homes.

The National Complete Streets Coalition reports that as of April 2010, complete streets policies are in place in 20 states, including California and Illinois, and in 71 cities.  One reason states have become interested in passing such legislation is that integrating bike paths and sidewalks into a project from the beginning is much less costly than adding them later.

Closely related to this approach is a movement that encourages and facilitates walking to school. Beginning in the United Kingdom in 1994, it has now spread to some 40 countries, including the United States. Forty years ago, more than 40 percent of all U.S. children walked or biked to school, but now the figure is under 15 percent.

Today 60 percent are driven or drive to school. Not only does this contribute to childhood obesity, but the American Academy of Pediatrics reports fatalities and injuries are much higher among children going to school in cars than among those who walk or ride in school buses. Among the potential benefits of the Walk to School movement is a reduction in obesity and early onset diabetes.

Countries with well-developed urban transit systems and a mature bicycle infrastructure are much better positioned to withstand the stresses of a downturn in world oil production than those that depend heavily on cars. With a full array of walking and biking options, the number of trips by car can easily be cut by 10–20 percent.

As the new century advances, the world is reconsidering the urban role of automobiles in one of the most fundamental shifts in transportation thinking in a century. The challenge is to redesign communities so that public transportation is the centerpiece of urban transport and streets are pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly. This also means planting trees and gardens and replacing parking lots with parks, playgrounds, and playing fields. We can design an urban lifestyle that systematically restores health by incorporating exercise into daily routines while reducing carbon emissions and eliminating health-damaging air pollution.

Article by Lester Brown appearing courtesy Celsias; originally posted on the Earth Policy Institute website.

Adapted from Chapter 6, “Designing Cities for People” in Lester R. Brown, Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009), available on-line at www.earthpolicy.org/index.php?/books/pb4

Related posts:

• The Folding e-Bike: Urban Transportation Solution?
• Taming the Electric Bicycle: E-Bikes Win Converts in the U.S.
• Green Gift Ideas: Battery-Free Bike Light
• The Rebirth of the Electric Bicycle
• Electric Buses Using Ultracapacitors Will Be Put To The Test in Washington

While electric vehicles are the most environmentally friendly transportation solution of today, there is one start-up that thinks further ahead. What might sound like a futuristic idea borrowed from a sci-fi movie will soon become reality in some cities.

I’m talking about personal rapid transit, a system somewhere between mass transportation such as metros and buses, and more private transportation such as taxis. The Finnish start-up BM Design has the solution to our transportation needs of tomorrow.

Asko Kauppi, Founder of BM Design and among the several hundred people who invented personal rapid transit, describes it as “packaged routing of people.” The idea itself is nothing new and has its roots in the 1960s and 70s. However, a company still needs to present a viable commercial solution for PRT.

The advantages of personal rapid transit include this: Instead of you waiting for a bus or metro to arrive, the PRT vehicle — a lightweight, battery operated vehicle seating two to three — is waiting for you. Check in at the passenger-friendly ground level station, let the computer know your destination, and it takes you there without stops. Traveling times will always be the same, and with a vehicle waiting for you there’s no more running to catch the bus or metro.

A first attempt at personal rapid transit is being undertaken by ULTra PRT at Heathrow airport in London, where a line of “urban light transport” should go live this spring. The company describes its system as “sustainable,” consisting of “small, lightweight, computer-driven electric vehicles running on slender, special-purpose guideways.”

But the real competition for personal rapid transit? The means of mass transportation we use today, including bus, metro, tram and taxi.

Despite favorable research about personal rapid transit for mass transport, people remain timid to adopt it.
Their timidity comes from the associated risks of being the first mover, and costs.

BM Design plans to make it easy for communities to make a purchasing decision, as they will offer their patent pending personal rapid transit solution on leasing terms.

Also, instead of doing everything –- from building and maintaining the tracks, vehicles and planning the track network -– BM Design concentrates on what they do best and outsources the rest. It has its partners lined up, and the response to the company was “very positive,” as Kauppi described presenting it at the Transtec Conference in Delhi last week.

India and China are very interested in personal rapid transit because it is cheaper and faster to build than metros, and it can handle their growing urbanization and associated transportation needs. There’s no more digging immensely expensive metro tunnels or laying tracks for trams. The installation of the PRT rails is quick and they have a low-key visual impact on the cityscape.

Kauppi plans to have a test track installed by the end of 2012, which would go live to the public in 2013. It is not a laboratory track in a closed environment, but a real track with real commuters using it.

“This way we can collect data in an authentic environment and tweak the interface accordingly,” Kauppi said.

The plan is to be sales ready in 2014 after a year gathering feedback. To get the test track ready, Kauppi is looking for funding, seeking 2 million euros initially. And ideally, investors should share the vision and bring connections and knowledge into the company.

“I have a talented team of eight people ready to start working as soon as funding is secured,” Kauppi said. To contact him, check out BM Design on the ArcticIndex as their website will go online at the end of May.

I am very excited about BM Design and PRT. While public transportation in Finland is ranked the fifth best in the world, I personally think it still has a lot to improve. Bus operators drive like they’d be sitting in a rally car, trains are usually late, metros are packed. And while patience is a virtue, waiting for a bus to arrive is such a waste of time, that a waiting vehicle which brings me straight to my destination is a salvation.

I strongly believe that personal rapid transit will be the future of transportation, and BM Design will be one of the leaders in its proliferation.

The article was originally published on ArcticStartup.

photo: BM Design

Related posts:

• Catching a Ride in a Driverless Electric Vehicle: Masdar City’s PRT
• London’s New Black Cabs Must Be Electric by 2020, Mayor Says
• Better Place Brings a New Era of Taxis to San Francisco
• Ford Transit Connect To Become All-Electric Van in 2010
• Guangzhou’s Remarkable Bus Rapid Transit System

On December 17^th 2009 the Sapsan (Russian for Peregrine Falcon) high-speed train made its maiden voyage from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 3 hours and 45 minutes.

Nothing has ground America’s collective gears worse than losing to the “Ruskies” for the majority of the past century, so this development could provide the spark needed to ratchet up speed rail development in the United States as a matter of national pride.

When Sputnik slung Yuri Gagarin into orbit, the United States launched into the space race with the Apollo missions.  America prides itself on its tech capabilities, which makes it even more puzzling why the high speed rail resistance has held out for so long and why we are behind the Russians in this regard.

The Sapsan is the latest and greatest of Russian rail, and adds to the heritage the zheleznya doroga (meaning railway, or  literally “iron road”).

One of the most impressive feats of its day was the Trans-Siberian Railway that linked Russia’s European and Asian parts. Approved by Tsar Alexander the Second in 1889, the project was a record expenditure meant to unify a large country with a little in the way of rail (a large country with no rail, sounds awfully familiar). With a blistering speed of 15 mph, the Russian Empire could move populations to its mainly empty eastern frontier, along with troops and munitions to establish itself as an Asian power as well as a European one.

The Japanese severely dented those ambitions with a resounding victory in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-5.  Nevertheless, the eastern regions became more developed thanks to the rail link with European Russia, and Vladivostok (literally meaning “Ruler of the East”) became one of Russia’s major cities.

For those who have never been to that part of the world, one becomes overwhelmed by the vastness of Russia and Central Asia.  Flat steppe extends as far as the eye can see in any direction, well over the horizon line. In the wintertime it is a virtual white out, a blank slate of snow and ice that goes on for hundreds of kilometers. The Sapsan and the high-speed rail lines that will follow have the potential to do something that could bring a great benefit to the Russian Federation: shrink it.

Getting around the former Soviet Union is a time-consuming experience, so most people do not travel far unless they absolutely must. Were travel times to be cut, a much more mobile society would emerge and the citizens of the world’s biggest country would want to get out and see more of their own land. More travel options would lower prices, giving more of an incentive to go a bit further a field for vacation than the dacha homes.

There is a big social dividend in the shrinking of a country. It obviously brings people together. There is so much to explore in Russia for both its own citizens and foreigners, and the prospect of fluid Western European style transportation is very exciting indeed. Now, to get rid of those visa requirements…

photo: Inside Russia

Related posts:

• Russia and the World Looks Towards High Speed Rail
• Florida Will Build Nation’s First High-Speed Rail Corridor
• Study Evaluates Markets for High-Speed Rail Systems in the U.S.
• New Chinese Rail Line Said to be Fastest High-Speed Train
• Job Creator & Travelers’ Dream: High Speed Rail Chicago Hub

The first stop on the international showcase of high speed rail that I am writing for CleanTechies, will be in Germany. As much as I try to avoid writing in first-person narrative, this topic is quite close to my heart as Germany (where I lived for most of 2002-2003) is where my eyes were opened to how great public transportation can be and how it’s presence or absence severely affects quality of life.

The calamitous state of transportation in the US became apparent when I returned to my old Pennsylvanian home. Being thrust back into the car-dependent nightmare is still the source of much of my angst to this day.

Deutsch: Durch Erfahrung wird man klug.
English: Through experience man becomes clever.

It is my highest possible recommendation to go to Deutschland and zip around on their stellar 300 km/hour ICE (InterCity Express) trains. Take in the sights while enjoying a cold Franziskaner and dream of the day when you can travel with such ease in the good old US of A (be sure to save up beforehand because our dollar is pretty worthless over there). Amenities abound with roomy reclining seats, air-conditioning, wi-fi access, a full bistro and a television if you want to spring for first class. Long distance ICE trains can move you about the country at great speeds and seamlessly connect you to the transportation networks of cities. For example, the ICE feeds into Berlin’s ultramodern main train station and can get a traveler to anywhere in the capital via subway (U-Bahn), elevated train (S-Bahn) or by bus. Lehrter Bahnhof is a model of integrated transport.

Why do Germans get to have cool stuff like these sleek trains and other useful knick-knacks like health care and free higher education while millions of Americans do not have access to public transportation, go uninsured and face a mountain of debt if they chose to get a higher education? It boils down to one word: Solidarity

Solidarity is a German core value whereas in America the concept does not exist. This is not a matter of opinion. It is an obvious fact when you compare any number of aspects of German and American society when it comes to the rich and the rest. Public transportation is simply the most obvious case, but many other very important societal issues follow the same path.

The previous paragraph is where conservatives of the Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh crowd (which number in the millions) gets irate when it is pointed out that their ethos is not to care about anyone else but themselves. You hate freedom if you think it is sensible to tax the über-wealthy to build infrastructure that would benefit the rabble that make less than $1,000,000 a year. Irrelevant that taxing the ludicrously rich will improve mobility, create jobs, eliminate car-related overhead for lower-income individuals, reduce pollution, increase productivity by reducing time lost in traffic and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

That is the difference. Not money nor technological expertise, but a simple societal value allows German citizens to have access to world-class public transportation and leaves Americans with pathetic, nearly non-existent mass transit. It is time Americans realized that we need to work together on some level regardless of socio-economic background. Great American thinker/genius John Nash (an American) thought so.

Have the lessons of A Beautiful Mind already been forgotten? Adam Smith needs revision:

“The best result will come from everyone in the group doing what’s best for himself… and the group!”

[photo credit: Deutsche Bahn AG]

Related posts:

• New Chinese Rail Line Said to be Fastest High-Speed Train
• High Speed Rail at 90 mph?! ARRA & the Northeast Corridor
• Train in Vain: Epilogue on High-Speed Rail Series
• High Speed Rail in France: Le TGV — C’est Cool.
• Florida Will Build Nation’s First High-Speed Rail Corridor