Cars, twinned Highways and short haul air flights

Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 12:18:09 -0300 (ADT)
From: Owen Hertzman <hertzman@atm.dal.ca>
To: Paul A Falvo <pfalvo@chebucto.ns.ca>
cc: Sustainable Maritimes <sust-mar@chebucto.ns.ca>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <sust-mar-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects


I'd like to attempt a partial response to some of what has been said about
my position on the 101 highway and on short haul air flights.

1)  The 101 Highway

It is clear to me that there are two interlocking problems which are being
confused here:  one is safety  the other is the way we (and others) choose
to travel.  Regardless of the big issues (such as providing decent bus
and/or train service to get people out of their cars) there is a current
issue of safety.  This requires two immediate steps:  a)   some spearation
of vehicles going in opposite directions  and  b)  some ability for cars,
buses, trucks, trailers of different speeds to pass each other safely.
Some of this can be accomplished cheaply by putting physical barriers
between the different directions of traffic in the very dangerous areas.
The second thing which can be done is to build "turn outs" such as are
employed by Washington state.  There, it is illegal to NOT use a turn out
when there are 5 or more cars directly behind you.  This system works very
well and should be employed here.
Beyond those measures, there should be a serious debate about a frequent
subsidized and timely bus system which will enhance travel to activitios
in the Valley for those in Halifax and vice versa.
Take an example of the Atlantic Theatre Festival, a very worthwhile and
excellent cultural activity.  Twice in the last month I have driven out
there in the afternoon (with 4 and 3 people in my Honda) to have a meal
and see a play.  This involved driving home from Wolfville after 11 pm
both times.  This is not a pleasant experience.  If there had been bus
service coordinated with the ATF we sould have used it...you try driving
home after Othello!!
If a good bus system is employed (one with reservations and buses less
than 50 years old) then questions about which sections of the road are
dangerous can be brought up in the context of options for those who wish
to use the road.  Then a rail versus road debate would make sense.  The
problem with rail in areas with distributed population is the high cost
per trip compared to a bus.  Also buses can alter their routes as
necessary (eg ACADIA football games, ATF, Fairs, etc. which happen
intermittently).  Some comibination is also possible.

2)  Short Haul Air Flights

In many parts of the US, and in South America, short haul air routes are
removing cars from highways and providing quick access to the city for
country people  (eg) Mexico, Brazil and some western states.  In some
parts of the  US, people are actually living in one city and working a few
days a month in another, while doing most of theit work on home computer.
Thbe question of what distances should be done by air versus on the
surface is certainly an issue.  I know of the commuter air network into
Boston from parts of New England works very efficiently (I experienced the
service in 1989 while working briefly in Brunswick, ME.)  It seems to me
that the goal of any commute is to make it no more than 60-75 minutes.  If
distance, weather, road or rail conditions makes a surface trip longer
than  that then air should be looked at.  Certainly trips from Halifax to
Boston should be done by air unless someone is hauling an RV for a long
camping trip.  Which brings up my final point....

3) Cars

I think it is very arrogant for any of us to assume that every car and/or
every car trip that is not essential should not be taken.  There are many
people who don't get around very well...who don't bike, who don't walk
easily and who still wnat to get out.  I think that having one car with a
four cyclinder engine for two people is not excessive. As far as pollution
is concerned our auto use represents less than a third of our home heating
use on a litre by litre basis.  So, our pollution from non-essential trips
is a fairly small fraction of our personal ecological footprint.  I have
argued both in my class and publicly that houses with 3 people and 5
vehicles are the problem (unless they're farms).  I would stick with that
analysis.  I think it is a no-win position to try to brand all cars as
evil.  Before we have a functioning alternative way to get city people to
the country and vice versa, I see no alternative.  There are many crafts
people who require transport like this.  

More later.  OH

________________________________________________________________
Owen Hertzman                     E-mail: Owen.Hertzman@Dal.Ca
Dept. of Oceanography             Phone: (902) 494-3683
Dalhousie University              FAX:  (902) 494-2885
Halifax, NS CANADA, B3H 4J1

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects