When Should Property Owners Install Electric Car Charging Stations

A year ago, I never got questions about electric charges. Today, I get several inquiries from our clients each week. When a client asks whether or not they should install a charger, I first ask, "What are you trying to accomplish?" If they say, "I want to meet demand and maybe make some money," I explain that there is no demand yet, and the only reason they should install a charger today is for the PR purposes of being a first adopter. Or perhaps the client can take advantage of the tax breaks before they expire. I go on to say, "You do not want to install more than a couple chargers, but you may want to build in the infrastructure to expand later on if it takes off."

A recent article "Charging Stations Multiply But Electric Cars Are Few" in the Wall Street Journal explains why electric chargers are multiplying much faster than the plug-in vehicles that can use them. While the federal subsidies help, some in the business community believe that the chargers will attract customers.

"Charging equipment is popping up largely because of subsidies. As part of a $5 billion federal program to subsidize development of electric vehicles and battery technology, the U.S. Energy Department over the past two years provided about $130 million for two pilot projects that help pay for chargers at homes, offices and public locations."

Although the subsidies will not last forever, the cost of chargers will fall as production rises, meaning that if you wait, you will probably not pay much more than you would today with the subsidy.

Congestion Pricing Only True Road to Relief

How do you relieve traffic congestion? The assumption is that you either need to build more roads, more transit, or both. And most of the time, this pits transit advocates against road advocates. Well, maybe neither is necessary.

In a new study published in this month's American Economic Review and reported by Eric Jaffe for The Atlantic Cities called The Only Hope for Reducing Traffic, researchers contend that congestion pricing is the only solution to decrease congestion.

Two economists from the University of Toronto analyzed data and road capacity in U.S. cities from 1983 to 2003 and found that there is such an enormous latent demand for road space, they believe that whenever a new lane is built or a driver shifts onto public transportation, another driver quickly grabs the open space.

They believe congestion pricing programs are the only things that will decrease overall car use and delays during peak hours.

StreetFilms.org produced a video on congestion pricing in March:
http://www.streetfilms.org/mba-congestion-pricing/

The US DOT put out this report on congestion pricing in October 2008:
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08039/cp_prim1_00.htm

Why Motorcycles Get to Use HOV Lanes

Have you ever wondered why they allow motorcycles in HOV lanes? [Find out the REAL reason at the bottom of this post] I just assumed it was because they pollute less than cars. Well, I caught a recent episode of the Disney Channel's "Mythbusters" and was very surprised to find out that the car pollutes less than motorcycle.

Hosts Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman collaborated with Kent Johnson, an assistant research engineer at the University of California at Riverside, to conduct the experiment:

"Three cars and three motorcycles, each built in either the 1980s, '90s or '00s, were fitted with tailpipe probes that measured the carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide emissions of each vehicle over a closed course... In the end, Mr. Johnson observed that while the motorcycles burn fuel more efficiently and produce lower levels of carbon dioxide than the cars, the noxious pollutants generated by the bikes exceeded the levels generated by cars. Insofar as the hosts sought to determine the greenest mode of transport, the car won by virtue of its lower pollution profile."

Read the full story here, Source: New York Times, September, 30, 2011.

The REAL rationale behind allowing motorcycles to use HOV lanes is that it is safer to keep two-wheeled vehicles moving than to have them travel in start-and-stop traffic conditions, but states can choose to override this provision of federal law, if they determine that safety is at risk.

Can Freeways be Saved from Themselves?

When you think about a freeway, you think of a wide expanse of pavement, imposing retaining walls, limited landscaping, and a myriad of steel and concrete crossings. Driving on an interstate freeway is not a particularly pleasant experience.

I guess that is why motorists drive as fast as they can with their windows up. Can this experience be transformed into a more positive, memorable experience for the driver as well as the community that the freeway surrounds?

Atlanta leaders think so. They have created the Connector Transformation Project to explore ways to transform a five-mile stretch of Interstate 75/85 that bisects Midtown and downtown Atlanta. This effort will look at bringing art, vegetation, lighting and sustainability to what some consider a very unforgiving place.

Video about the project
Article about the Project
Project Facebook Page

Below are examples of other communities around the globe who have made an effort to beautify their freeways.
Houston, TX
Seattle, WA
Los Angeles, CA.

Bike and Pedestrian Funding Facing the Budget Ax

In a few days, the U.S. Senate may vote on a measure to eliminate the primary sources of funds for all dedicated federal bike and pedestrian projects. Opponents of the funding say during these tough times, all of our precious transportation dollars should go to roads.

The pro-bike and pedestrian group "Transportation for America" is encouraging like-minded folks to tell their senators to "oppose any mvoe to eliminate the Transportation Enhancement (TE) program."

NPR aired a story about the controversy on Thursday.

What do you think? Let your voices be heard.

Will Car Drivers Fight Efforts to Make Transit Fashionable?

So, you're driving down the road and you spot a person traveling on foot, or perhaps a cyclist in business attire. Maybe someone waiting for the bus. What is your perception of that person? Do you feel sorry for them? Or are you irritated by their smug sense of superiority? Or both? Can you feel both of these things at the same time?

I'm reminded of a piece in Planetizen last December in which Brian Ladd describes how transit is appealing more to riders of choice, contradicting the belief, often reinforced by politicians, that public transit is for people who have no choice.

When a Los Angeles bus rider asked presidential candidate George W. Bush about transit improvements in 2000, Bush responded, "My hope is that you will be able to find good enough work so you'll be able to afford a car." Bush was undoubtedly sincere. Like many Americans—probably most—he saw a bus (like a bicycle) as a nothing more than a pathetic substitute for a car.

How we feel about people who use alternative forms of transportation affects policy and ultimately the resources we spend on them. Ladd worries that as alternative transportation becomes more fashionable, car drivers will adopt a bunker mentality and try to demonize policies that favor bikes, trains, and buses.

Just remember, for every person you see on foot, on a bike, or waiting for a bus, that represents one car that is NOT in your way.

What to Do About a Lack of Crosswalks: Prosecute Pedestrians?

The issue of providing safe crossing for pedestrians has been front and center ever since the national media took notice of the Raquel Nelson story in Atlanta. Ms. Nelson was convicted of vehicular homicide because her four-year-old son was hit and killed as the family crossed a four-lane road. There were no crosswalks nearby.

From Atlanta to Mumbai, the transportation infrastructure has deemed cars a far higher priority than pedestrians. The result is soaring pedestrian death rates.

The Times of India reports "nearly 78% of road fatalities are pedestrians," a result of the country's focus on widening roads to accommodate the surge in cars.

Policies in most American cities aren't that different, with transportation and transit planners' single purpose being to move as many cars through an area as fast as possible. The solution isn't how to eliminate the cars but how to slow them down to accommodate other modes.

Ben Welle, assistant project manager of Health and Road Safety at EMBARQ, says “The thing to remember is that the one thing that is always involved in a car crash is a car, so slowing them down through good design and shifting trips through high quality mass transit, walking and biking facilities can really reduce risk.”

To read more about Raquel Nelson's story and the issues they have raised check out the following links:
Pedestrian Infrastructure Essential to Safer Roads Worldwide - The CityFIX

Georgia Mom Convicted of Vehicular Homicide For Crossing Street With Kids

Prosecuting the Victim, Absolving the Perpetrators