next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects Reply to Owen Hertzman, by John Pearce July 30, 1998 Several points need to be made in rebuttal to Owen's arguments. I hope that both sides of the argument may generate a little thought by those concerned about truly sustainable transport. Perhaps Owen Hertzman is just playing Devil's Advocate to get some badly needed discussion going! 1. The economic costs of eliminating highway deaths is staggering. The provincial quote of 1/4 BILLION to twin 125 miles of road is likely low by at least a factor of two, especially considering the interchanges and overpasses between Newport/Windsor and Coldbrook and the Avon River causeway (which is now only 2 lanes). And this is only a small part of one road (what about Hwy.103 to Bridgewater, and 104 east of New Glasgow?) The money could far better be spent on improving overall health care services and improving air quality through lower transport emissions to save more lives. It seems to be assumed that twinning 101 will stop the many road deaths on other routes down the Annapolis Valley. Universally it is agreed that widening roads only encourages more cars to travel further. Los Angeles is a prime example, and Toronto-style commuter rail, trolley buses, and subways are now replacing freeways on the planners' drawing boards. (would a commuter train from Sackville to downtown Halifax not be better than a 6 lane Bedford highway, Bayers Rd., Young St. etc.?) 2. The road from Mt. Uniacke to Sackville is already twinned. Is that part still "evil", and in what way? 3. Passing lanes are certainly a much cheaper solution, perhaps only a million dollars for each one mile stretch. An (over?) elaborate example of this exists near Ellershouse on highway 101. 4. Highway 118 out of Dartmouth is a good example of the costly type of twinned highway we're talking about. Complete separation of traffic going in opposite directions by grass median rather than "Jersey barrier" is preferred due to ease of plowing, drainage, headlight glare etc. Of course 118 is a short stretch of road in semi-urban area where traffic volumes can justify twinning. 5. One of the important reasons we are not making progress with energy conservation and pollution reduction is that we say nothing can be done unless we all get together. We can't reduce N.S. highway traffic (or air pollution from power generation etc.) because northeastern U.S. or Ontario or Alberta aren't doing it or won't do it. Again we put the onus on someone else. Of course it would help very much if our federal authorities had a firm resolve and ideas to implement the Kyoto accord, instead of more studies and postponements while playing provinces off one against another. 6. Short haul air trips are very inefficient. Getting the airplane taxied and off the runway and up to flight level, only to land within 30 minutes in polluting and energy wasteful, even if aircraft (like cars) have become somewhat more efficient over the last decade or two. The market tells of inefficiency through the high fares that must be charged. Another problem is that a small aircraft takes up air space almost as much as a jumbo jet. They can't be in the same place at the same time. A major reason for the U.S. federal government spending billions of $$ on the 150 mph Amtrak service between Boston, Providence, New Haven and New York (and on to Washington) due to begin with Canadian built equipment next year, is to eliminate many short-haul flights in the busy U.S. northeast and avoid the collosal cost of twinning Boston's Logan airport. Next fall the U.S. federal and Maine state governments will also inaugurate a new 4 times daily rail service from northeast New England (Portland, Brunswick, and Rockland Maine) to Boston, for congestion and pollution avoidance. The same needs to be done at Pearson and Dorval and work is beginning on this. 7. Car and van pools are helpful for daily routine trips. The problem is that they are not open to general public for random trips and in any case are not publicized. If the province of N.S. would licence, market and co-ordinate van services to supplement and feed (but not compete with or replace) our potentially efficient highway bus network, we would certainly benefit a great deal. 8. Re-laying rails is a provincial matter, as the Windsor & Hantsport Ry. between Sackville, N.S. and Kentville is provincially regulated. But I agree that the federal government should pay more attention to its federal rail mandate rather than becoming involved in the provincial jurisdiction of highways. Owen Hertzman wrote: > > At the risk of starting a war here, I don't agree with John and Karen on > the points about the twinning of HIghway 101. Regardless of the energy > and transportation implications, the safety aspects dominate. Both for > local people and for tourists, parts of that road are just plain evil, > particularly the section from Upper Sackville to Windsor. I know less > about the areas beyond Middleton, but surely a major highway to two > ferries and several tourist destinations should at least have more passing > lanes and some separation of the two streams of traffic, perhaps using > barriers as on the 118 in Dartmouth. > > The issue of getting back to rail transportation of goods is going to be > decided on a national, not a provincial stage, since the loading and > unloading of trains and trucks is a real issue in costs and behaviour in > other provinces has to move with us.. > > Finally, you dumped on short haul air trips. Very bad idea. Properly > run commuter air services are very energy efficient, particularly in that > they keep urban workers in more rural areas (viz. Maine, New Hampshire and > Vermont with Boston commuters served by Delta Express and other US > examples). The absolutely ludicrous fares on Air Nova and Air Atlantic > essentially drive away most people except those on expense accounts. > > It is absolutely correct that we ourselves are far greater polluters taken > together than any single point source. However, it's important to ask how > can we realistically reduce (e.g.) auto kilometres driven, without causing > great amounts of wasted time and hardship. If there were a truly > subsidized and frequent van pool service for valley commuters and to the > two ferries (Digby and Yarmouth) I think we would start to see some very > innovative internal travel changes, for both regular and occasional users. > Trips so the QEII Health Sciences Centre could also be more rationally > organized, especially from Digby, Yarmouth, Shelburne, Annapolis and other > locations similar distances away from Halifax. > > I don't see any possibility of relaying rails anytime soon...at least > until we break the mindset in the House of Commons. > > Later. OH > > ________________________________________________________________ > Owen Hertzman E-mail: Owen.Hertzman@Dal.Ca > Dept.