TRANSPORTATION & MASS TRANSIT

Fueling Cars and Trucks in the 21st Century (Feb. 2002)

One month ago, the Bush Administration announced a program to promote hydrogen fuel cell technology for cars and trucks. National environmental organizations strongly support such development but urge that the U.S. must do much more than the administration has proposed to quickly reduce this nation's dependence on foreign oil and emissions of greenhouse gases. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in partnership with the Union of Concerned Scientists (USC), and the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) propose a combination of stricter fuel economy standards for today's cars and trucks combined with specific production targets for clean technology vehicles.

The Administration's Proposal
On January 9, 2001, the Bush Administration announced a program called Freedom Cooperative Automotive Research (FreedomCAR). The new program aims to promote development of hydrogen-based fuel cells for future cars and provide a hydrogen refueling infrastructure.

Fuel cells produce electricity from the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen. Because fuel cells do not require petroleum, shifting to fuel cell technology could sharply reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. (See "How Fuel Cells Work" p.2.) The administration and environmental organizations are in agreement that U.S. dependence on foreign oil puts this country's national security and economic well-being at risk.

The Dangers of An Oil-Dependent Economy
In its report, "Dangerous Addiction, Ending America's Oil Dependence'' the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) states that U.S. oil dependency will grow from 51 percent today to 64 percent by 2020 if current trends continue. The U.S currently imports more than half its oil supply. Twenty-five percent of our supply comes from Persian Gulf States. Without a program to produce better vehicles and fuels, U.S. dependence on oil imports from volatile parts of the world is expected to grow, making this country even more susceptible to supply shortages and rapid rises in world oil prices.

Drilling here won't significantly reduce dependence on foreign oil because the U.S. holds only 3% of the world's known supply. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, for example, would increase world reserves by less than one-third of one percent. Federal lands already account for 29 percent of U.S. crude oil production, and most are already available for oil exploration.

Combustion of fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide (CO2), a global warming pollutant. Cars and passenger trucks are a major U.S. source of carbon dioxide pollution -emitting 1.3 billion metric tons of heat-trapping gases in 2000. Cars and trucks also emit air pollutants that are linked to respiratory disease, especially in urban areas.

U.S. oil demand also creates constant pressure to drill unspoiled wilderness areas like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Utah 's Redrock canyon country, and lands in the vicinity of Yellowstone National Park. An oil-based economy poses the additional risk of spills to the land, water, wildlife, and coastal area. Almost 1.5 million gallons of oil were spilled into U.S. waters in 2000.

NRDC/UCS/ACEEE Proposed Energy Policy
NRDC, in partnership with the Union of Concerned Scientists (USC), and the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE), urge that the U.S. should reduce U.S. oil dependency by making better cars and fuels in this decade. They object that the administration's FreedomCAR proposal won't curb U.S. oil dependency and greenhouse gas emissions soon enough because it relies on vague research and development goals.
NRDC, UCS and ACEEE claim that to increase U.S. oil security, there is no substitute to raising fuel economy standards over the next 12 to twenty years. Their energy proposal combines stricter fuel mileage standards for today's cars and trucks with specific production targets for cars powered by clean technologies such as fuel cells in the near future.

To improve fuel mileage, Congress should boost fuel economy standards for the combined new car and light-truck fleet to 40 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2012 and 55 mpg by 2020. NRDC, UCS and ACEEE claim automakers can reach 40 mpg with improvements in conventional gasoline technology, and 55 mpg with expanded production of gasoline-electric hybrids.

Fuel Savings
NRDC, UCS and ACEEE predict the following fuel savings from fuel economy standards of 40 mpg by 2012 and 55 mpg by 2020:
- nearly 4 billion barrels of oil saved over the next dozen years
- by 2012, more than one-quarter of the oil we now use every day to fuel our cars and light trucks
- by 2020, 4.8 million barrels per day, more oil than we now import from the Persian Gulf.
Oil savings would grow as fuel economy standards continue to rise and as new vehicles replace old ones.

Environmental Benefits
These fuel economy standards would also bring huge reductions in global warming pollution. Emissions of CO2 and other global warming pollutants would be cut by more than 320 million metric tons (CO2-equivalent) by 2012, compared with business-as-usual projections for that year. By 2020 the reduction from business-as-usual emissions would be over 800 million metric tons, reducing passenger vehicles ' global warming emissions in that year by 40 percent.

Feasibility Studies
NRDC claims that studies by the National Academy of Sciences, UCS and other independent analysts have all demonstrated that a 40-mpg fleet average is achievable within a decade or so, using technology that is available today. Fuel economy for new passenger cars nearly doubled between 1975 -when standards were first adopted -and 1988. Fuel economy for new light trucks increased by 50 percent. Average mileage of new cars and trucks stopped improving and in fact today is at its lowest level in 20 years. The current low fuel economy is not due to technology limitations, but because of the increased number of gas-guzzling SUV's, and other light trucks on the road.

What You Can Do
Urge your legislators to enact legislation to implement the NRDC/UCS/ACEEE energy policy, especially the following components:
- ramping up the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for the combined fleet of cars and light trucks in regular steps to 40 mpg by 2012
- creating tax credits to promote consumer demand for gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, which get double the mileage of today 's cars
- expanding the use of renewable, non-petroleum fuels, such as ethanol made from crop wastes, by steadily increasing requirements for "renewable content " in gasoline
- putting hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles onto the road using incentives and requirements to ramp up production to 100,000 vehicles by 2010 and 2.5 million by 2020.

Websites
For a summary and the full text of the NRDC/USC energy policy, go to www.nrdc.org. For information about UCS's analysis of the FreedomCAR proposal and a full range of energy issues, go to www.uscusa.org. For information about fuel cells and their applications, go to www.fuelcells.org and the Rocky Mountain Institute's web page at www.rmi.org.

What Is a Fuel Cell? (Feb. 2002)

A fuel cell is a device that produces electricity without combustion, directly from the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen. The electrochemical reaction begins when hydrogen enters one side of the fuel cell where it is separated into an electron and a proton ion. The ions move through a membrane (called a proton exchange membrane) to combine with oxygen on the other side, making water. The electrons, which cannot pass through the membrane, leave the fuel cell as electric current, powering the vehicle's electric motor. The motor drives the wheels of the car. Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, "Fact Sheet: How a Fuel Cell Powers a Car,"
www.ucsusa.org.

The SUV Story (Feb. 2002)

The current fuel economy rules allow SUVs and other light trucks to meet a lower standard than ordinary cars-20.7 mpg versus 27.5 mpg. Over the past 20 years, automakers have created SUVs and other vehicles that are regulated more leniently as light trucks but are marketed and used as ordinary passenger vehicles. Light-truck sales now account for half the market and, as a result, the fuel economy of the combined car and light-truck fleet has eroded to its lowest level in 20 years. Source: NRDC, "Dangerous Addiction, Ending America's Oil Dependence" www.nrdc.org.

Transit Update-Letters to State Senators Needed (May 2002)

The Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority (DARTA) legislation passed in the state House of Representatives by a 74-23 vote in December and is currently in the state Senate Transportation and Tourism Committee.

This legislation would establish DARTA which would be primarily responsible for coordination of the region's public transportation. DARTA would oversee, not replace, existing public transportation providers such as SMART and DDOT. As the legislation is currently written, the authority would include Detroit and Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, Washtenaw, and Wayne counties. Each would be represented as part of a governing board (Detroit and Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne counties would each have two votes and Monroe and Washtenaw counties would each have one vote). A citizens advisory commission would also be created to ensure that community residents would have a voice.

The legislation has hit a roadblock in committee due to concerns expressed by two labor unions. As discussions continue to address these concerns, please contact your state Senator and members of the Senate Transportation and Tourism Committee and let them know that it is critical for this legislation to be passed before the summer recess. Without it, DARTA would not be established soon enough to be a contender for federal transit funding. We already pay into the Federal Transit Fund and are losing out on $100 million each year. DARTA could also be eligible for additional federal funding which would cover 50-80% of the construction costs. We need Senators to vote to support passage of the DARTA legislation this spring so this authority becomes a viable candidate for receiving those federal transit dollars.

Visit EMEAC's website at www.emeac.org for links to contact information for state Senators as well as a sample letter regarding the DARTA legislation.

Senate Transportation and Tourism Committee Members:
Senator Bullard, Chair (517-373-1758 or senbbullard@senate.state.mi.us)
Senator Steil, Vice Chair (517-373-1801 or sengsteil@senate.state.mi.us)
Senator North (517-373 2413 or senwnorth@senate.state.mi.us)
Senator Hart (517-373-6820 or senghart@senate.state.mi.us)
Senator Leland (517 373 0994 or senbleland@senate.state.mi.us)

Might the Road Ahead Include Transit? (Dec. 2001)

Out of 25 major metropolitan areas, southeast Michigan is the fifth largest in terms of population and eleventh in population density. Yet southeast Michigan is one of the few major metropolitan areas without rapid transit. Transit would provide commuters with the option not to drive and, as a result, reduce traffic congestion. Transit also minimizes sprawl, protecting green space and revitalizing development in urban areas. The Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) has prepared a regional mass transit plan made up of four tiers.

The first tier would involve establishing a regional rapid transit system. Rapid transit is recommended along 12 major corridors: 8 Mile Road, 16 Mile Road, Fort Street, Grand River Avenue, Gratiot Avenue, Greenfield Road, M-59, Jefferson Avenue, Michigan Avenue, Telegraph Road, Van Dyke Avenue, and Woodward Avenue. The system would add 259 miles of rapid transit service with stations every 1/4 to 1 1/2 miles. Although a detailed alternatives analysis would be conducted for each rapid transit corridor to examine the effectiveness of different transit modes,1 a specific type of bus rapid transit known as SpeedLink is proposed. This mode of transit is suggested over other forms of transit for two main reasons: it is easier to install and less costly to install. SpeedLink would include features such as ticket vending machines prior to boarding, use of dedicated lanes, and signal priority at all intersections.

The second tier would entail improvements to fixed-route bus service (such as DDOT and SMART) including increasing the frequency and extending the hours of service, improving the reliability of fixed-route bus service, and providing service to locations not currently served.

The third tier would involve improvements to community transit service. The plan calls for expanding service (into areas where there is lower population density), improving existing service, reducing the amount of advance reservation time, and improving coordination among community-based transportation providers.

The fourth tier recommends exploring the feasibility of establishing the following regional links:

• Passenger rail between Lansing and Detroit
• Express bus service between Ann Arbor and Metro Airport
• Commuter rail between Ann Arbor and Detroit
• Bus service between Metro Detroit and Livingston, Monroe, and St. Clair Counties
• Bus service between Brighton and Ann Arbor

The total estimated cost for implementing the plan (tiers 1-3) is $2 billion over the next 25 years. An additional $200 million per year would be required to operate the system. On October 25, 2001 SEMCOG's General Assembly voted to adopt the plan. The next steps include establishing a regional transportation authority (RTA) and identifying sources of funding for transit.

On November 29, 2001 Representative Kwame Kilpatrick, the House minority leader and Detroit Mayor Elect, introduced legislation which would establish a regional transportation authority (HB 5467). The regional transportation authority would be overseen by a Board with two representatives each from Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb counties and Detroit. You can view the legislation at www.michiganlegislature.com.

Now that southeast Michigan has a plan that has been approved, we may be eligible for federal funds that could cover 50-80% of the cost of constructing the mass transit system. However, additional sources of revenue would be needed. The Citizens' Research Council of Michigan has been researching funding options and their preliminary findings include three possible regional tax options (for the tri-county area of Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb): a tax on services, a personal income tax, or a payroll tax paid by employers. A 1% regional sales tax on services would raise about $300 million a year and a 1% regional income tax would raise roughly $700 million a year. Their report is expected to be released in the near future and will be available on-line at www.crcmich.org.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

The RTA legislation passed on December 13, 2001 in the House of Representatives. Urge your state Senator to support the RTA legislation.

Attend "Dealing with Urban Sprawl: The Potential of Mass Transit" at 8 p.m. January 8 at Nativity Episcopal Church, 21220 W. 14 Mile in Bloomfield Hills. Speakers will include: Ed Hustoles, Southfield Planning Commission, and Carmine Palombo, SEMCOG.

SEMCOG Releases Mass Transit Proposal (Sept. 2001)

If you agree with Ferndale City Manager, Tom Barwin that ". . .mass transportation is the foundation we need to begin to revitalize the entire region" then take a look at the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) mass transit proposal and be sure to voice your opinion. The main recommendations of SEMCOG's mass transit proposal are to provide light rail or SpeedLink along 12 major corridors, improve fixed-route bus service, and expand existing community transit. Over a 25 year period, the cost of the project is approximately $2 billion to implement and an additional $200 million to operate. SpeedLink is a rubber-tired form of rapid transit which is considered to be easier and less expensive to install than light rail. Implementing SpeedLink would involve, among other features:

• use of dedicated lanes
• stations with fare collection systems allowing passengers to pay prior to boarding
• traffic-signal preemption permitting SpeedLink vehicles to more easily flow through traffic signals and congested intersections.

You can view the plan at SEMCOG's website www.semcog.org or call 313-961-4266 for a copy. Comments are being accepted until October 25th by:

Phone 800-961-3334

Fax: 313-961-4869

Mail: SEMCOG Transit Plan, 535 Griswold, Suite 300, Detroit, MI 48226

Email: transit@semcog.org

Sources: "Council expected to endorse rapid transit plan" article appearing in Daily Tribune (August 26, 2001) and SEMCOG's "Improving Transit in Southeast Michigan: A Framework for Action (Summary)" [July 2001].

Metro Detroit Studies Rapid Transit Option

If you have lived in the Detroit area for any amount of time, you have undoubtedly experienced the lack of inexpensive, efficient public transportation, especially between the city and suburbs. For years, the Detroit Dept. of Transportation (DDOT), the Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART), and others have proposed various ways to provide this service, including a light rail system, or a merger between DDOT and SMART, but for one reason or another, these ideas have not come to fruition. Most of the studies have not been implemented because of an inability to provide local and state dollars to match federal operating funds, as well as an inability to demonstrate a steady regional source of operating funds to ensure the continued viability of whatever system is put in place. Michigan's Constitution contains several barriers to raising operating funds with gas and sales tax revenues, the most common sources in other regions.

Recently, four Detroit organizations, the Metropolitan Affairs Coalition, Detroit Renaissance, the Greater Downtown Partnership and the Detroit Regional Chamber, have joined forces to promote the idea of a rapid transit system for the metropolitan Detroit area. Based on an prototypical system currently in operation in Curitiba, Brazil, Speedlink is a bus rapid transit service, which would provide affordable, reliable transportation throughout the metro area. The service is similar to a light rail system, with specific routes and stops, but uses large buses and designated lanes on existing roads and can be set up at less than one tenth the cost of a light rail system. Color-coded Speedlink buses would pick up and drop off passengers at 2 minute intervals along main thoroughfares such as Gratiot, Michigan Avenue and Woodward. Stops would be sheltered and traffic lights would be timed so that buses preempted cross traffic to have a green light to provide faster service. Low floor buses with multiple wide doors and fare collection before boarding, would allow many more passengers to board with less dwell time at each stop. Buses could be powered with natural gas for lower emissions than dirty diesel.

In mid-July, the Metropolitan Affairs Coalition announced that private funding has been secured to begin a study to determine the feasibility of such a system in our area. The study is expected to last about six months, and will explore the issues of funding, design, engineering, and oversight.
If the first stage of Speedlink is implemented in this area, there might next be an expanded system, including Interlink, a traditional bus system for longer journeys that don’t require the speed of the Speedlink system, and Homelink, a flexible neighborhood-based system of smaller vehicles circulating within residential areas to local stores, medical facilities, schools and parks within a community.

In an area where traffic is rapidly getting worse, and with an urban area in which only one-third of households owns a car, Speedlink provides the metro area with an exciting new option in public transportation.

[The concept for Speedlink was first introduced in Detroit by Stephen Hands, a student at Grosse Pointe South School, and co-founder of Transportation Riders United (TRU). Stephen circulated a video about the Curitaba Speedlink system to Detroit-area transportation planners.]