State says purchase of fuel-efficient passenger rail cars will have to wait

Friday June 13, 2008
John Dillon

(Host) The state says it will have to wait until fall to purchase new, fuel efficient passenger rail cars.

But the reason for the delay is unclear. The state says it wants guidance from a special committee chaired by the state treasurer. But the treasurer says the Legislature has already approved the deal.

VPR’s John Dillon reports:

(Dillon) The new rail cars are called diesel multiple units.

They’re self-propelled by their own diesel engines and they’re cheaper to operate than conventional trains.

It will cost about $18 million to buy the state of the art equipment. The new cars will allow Amtrak to operate the Vermonter train twice a day.

And this week, the Agency of Transportation told the Vermont Rail Council that the purchase will be delayed until the state figures out how much it can afford to borrow in the years ahead.

John Zicconi is spokesman for the agency.

(Zicconi) “We have to make sure we can afford it. We can’t move forward with purchasing something the state can’t afford.”

(Dillon) A special committee chaired by the state treasurer determines how much Vermont can borrow. Zicconi said the Transportation Agency wants guidance on how the deal will affect the state’s debt load before it goes ahead with the purchase. The committee will meet in October.

But State Treasurer Jeb Spaulding says the Legislature has already approved the purchase.

He says the capital debt affordability committee is not required to sign off on the deal.

(Spaulding) “There is no connection between this sale and the approval by the Capital Debt Affordability Advisory Committee. So that won’t be a hold up.”

(Dillon) But members of the Rail Council say they were told by the Transportation Agency that the treasurer’s committee had to approve the purchase.

South Burlington Representative Sonny Audette is a member of the council and a member of the House Transportation Committee. He doesn’t want to see any delays. Audette says he’s surprised the Transportation Agency now says it has to go to the debt committee first.

(Audette) “I understood that once we agreed to, it was going to proceed. Now I don’t know why the hold-up, but that’s what they want to do.”

(Dillon) Zicconi of the Transportation Agency says the administration is still committed to the project. He says the modern rail cars will save money over time.

(Zicconi) “Running the new cars will actually be a cost savings, because they are more fuel efficient.”

(Dillon) Members of the Rail Council agree, so they want the state to buy the cars as quickly as possible.

That’s because even after the administration decides to go ahead with the deal, it will still take 18 months for the equipment to be made and put into service.

For VPR News, I’m John Dillon in Montpelier.

Putney may take responsibility for Route 5 upkeep in village
By HOWARD WEISS-TISMAN, Reformer Staff

[link to article]

Thursday, January 31
PUTNEY — The town is taking a whole new look at the busiest road in town.

The Selectboard is exploring what it would mean for the town to take over maintenance of the one mile of Route 5 that runs through the center of the village.

The Vermont Agency of Transportation maintains state highways.

The news that Putney may become only the fourth town in Windham County to maintain a Class 1 highway comes as the Agency of Transportation announced that Putney won a $27,000 grant to fund an engineering study of its sidewalks.

The grant, which will reach $33,000 with matching funds and in-kind work, will allow the town tofind out what it will take to install about one mile of new sidewalk from Landmark College down to the Putney Co-op.

The town does not have to take over the state highway to complete the sidewalk project, but it might be easier, and the town would have more freedom to put in sidewalk bump outs and traffic calming devices if it did not have to run everything by the state.

“From our point of view, we might find it easier to design and build if we were responsible for the highway,” Putney Town Manager Chris Ryan said. “This
Advertisement
is the kind of thing we would want to talk over with the state.”

Ryan stressed that the Selectboard was in the very early stages of investigating the idea and had a long way to go before moving forward.

The transportation grant, however, has put the sidewalk project on the fast track.

According to Ryan, the town is going to hire an engineering firm to do a detailed study of the existing sidewalks in town, and what it would cost to install a new walking path.

“It’s a lot of sidewalk, and the existing ones are shot,” Ryan said. “The idea is to get a real idea of what it will cost and identify the obstacles.”

After the engineering study is completed, the town will likely ask the state for help building the sidewalks. Ryan said the whole project will be in the “hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

If the town decides to take over Route 5, and if the state approves it, the town would receive $11,000 annually to help defray maintenance costs. The towns in Vermont receive far less for maintaining Class 2 and 3 roads.

And while the extra cash could help the town highway budget, Windham Regional Commission transportation planner Matt Mann said Putney residents should look at the whole picture before moving ahead with the state highway proposal.

Mann said state highways in Brattleboro, Bellows Falls and Readsboro have been turned over to those towns.

“If the town wants this corridor to look differently, or wants it to be a a certain way, it’s fine to explore,” said Mann. “It could be a good thing for the town if they want to do more with pedestrian and bicycle management. But there are a lot of variables.”

I think we can almost all agree that the desert is not the best place for booming metropolis. - Now, with a tough water year, Las Vegas is feeling the heat. Lake Mead, the primary water source for the western United States and especially Las Vegas, just to the nort, is experiencing a drought. This is bringing water levels to new Lows -

Read the article here -
Tough times in the desert for the City of Las Vegas.

LAKE MEAD, Nevada — Two wooden piers that once extended into Lake Mead, Nevada, now loom over a desert landscape, monuments to the insatiable need for water in nearby Las Vegas and other parts. A “No Fishing” sign perhaps 600 hundred yards from the shrinking lake and a ring of white magnesium deposits marks the high water level like a giant, half-full bath tub that has dropped more than 100 feet in seven years.

Hello All -

This is a promotion for Prosper.com - a peer to peer lending site devoted to returning lenders an above average rate of return for a loan, and a place for people to turn to for small, unsecured loans.

Come to Prosper.com and check it out. Also search for the Vermonters Unite group!

Coming to us from PBS - given the recent scrutiny of the Nation’s Transportation Infrastructure, the US’s Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters spoke on how the US is addressing the problem.

Transportation Secretary Discusses Concerns About National Infrastructure
The bridge collapse in Minneapolis earlier this month raised questions about the state of the aging transportation infrastructure. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters discusses what the government is doing to ensure its safety.

More on this to come - there is a lot here for thought.

One quick read though came up with an interesting little line from Peters:

GWEN IFILL: Who is spending the money inappropriately?

MARY PETERS: Well, there’s about probably some 10 percent to 20 percent of the current spending that is going to projects that really are not transportation, directly transportation-related. Some of that money is being spent on things, as I said earlier, like bike paths or trails. Some is being spent on museums, on restoring lighthouses, as I indicated.

This is an outrage to anyone walking, biking. For instance - in Burlington, Vermont as stated in the 2000 Cencus, 18% of people walked or biked to work! In the Downtown core of the City that percentage jumps to 30%. Burlington is only 40,000 people! Because Land Use and transportation is so incredibly linked - we need to consider these modes as transportation, and sidewalks, and bike paths as transportation infrastructure.

Mary Peters - the head of our transportation department - doesn’t agree. I may be making too much out of it, since she is a very intelligent person, however, there is obviously a tinge of prejudice regarding biking.

You can read the transcript here

Here is a press-release from the Union of Concerned Scientists on Vehicle Fuel Emissions - come on Detroit! The US Car industry is sinking - dying - and yet we cling to the only manner we know best - whining to the government for help.
August 16, 2007

U.S. Automakers Misleading the Public about Benefits of Stronger Fuel Economy Standards, Science Group Says
Detroit Three Holds Rally in Chicago to Protest Proposed Fuel Economy Bill; Second Rally Slated for August 22

U.S. automakers will host a rally today in Chicago to protest a proposed federal fuel economy standard. Sponsored by General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler, the rally is part of an industry campaign to pressure a panel of U.S. lawmakers tasked with resolving differences between Senate and House energy bills to weaken the standard. The automakers plan another rally in St. Louis on August 22.

The standard in question would set a 35 mile-per-gallon (mpg) fleetwide average target for 2020. If fully implemented, the standard would save American drivers billions of dollars at the pump, cut hundreds of millions of tons of global warming pollution, and generate tens of thousands of new jobs, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). The auto industry is backing a feeble proposal sponsored by Reps. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.) that would save approximately 180 million barrels of oil in 2020, which is what we currently consume in about nine days. This approach is significantly weaker than the president’s goal of saving 8.5 billion gallons of gasoline in 2017 through fuel economy improvements of 4 percent per year.

“U.S. automakers are continuing to mislead the public about the very real benefits of a strong federal fuel economy standard and the fact that they have the technology to meet it,” said David Friedman, research director in UCS’s Clean Vehicle Program. “The National Academy of Sciences says existing and emerging conventional technology can boost the fuel economy of all vehicles, from two-seaters to four-by-fours. Detroit can produce 34-mile-per-gallon SUVs, 37-mile-per-gallon minivans and 41-mile-per-gallon family cars. Our own research shows that the auto companies can do even better than that.”

According to a recent UCS analysis, fully implementing the 35 mpg target would:

·  save drivers $25 billion at the pump in 2020, above and beyond the cost of the technology (at the 2006 average gas price of $2.55, in 2005 dollars)

·  generate 22,300 jobs in the auto industry and a total of 170,800 new jobs nationwide in 2020 (for the UCS analysis, go to: www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/fuel-economy-jobs-and-consumer-savings.html)

·  cut 206 million metric tons of global warming pollution in 2020 alone—equivalent to taking more than 30 million of today’s average cars and trucks off the road

·  save 1.2 million barrels of oil per day—equivalent to the amount of oil the United States now imports from Saudi Arabia daily

“U.S. automakers have a long history of whining that they can’t improve their products,” said Friedman. “Their claims about the Senate proposal are just a reprise of their claims that adding seatbelts, airbags, and catalytic converters would bankrupt their industry. Meanwhile they are being outpaced on their home turf by foreign competitors that are producing more fuel efficient cars.”

A recent analysis from Lehman Brothers based on the actual language of the Senate bill showed that a 35 mpg standard with a size-based approach, which would set different targets for different vehicle sizes - from small cars to big trucks - would have no effect on sales of big pickups and SUVs. The analysis showed that these large vehicles would have to only improve fuel economy by 25 percent to preserve existing sales under the new standard. The National Academy of Sciences indicated that those vehicles could more than double that improvement with existing and emerging technologies.

“It is reprehensible that Detroit auto executives are threatening their workers by telling them they may have to close down plants,” Friedman said. ”It would be a very dumb business decision to shut down an SUV plant instead of investing in existing technology. Why would a company turn over the market for millions of vehicles to its competitors when it has the technology to upgrade its plants to make vehicles that get better fuel economy? If they need help making the investments they should be negotiating for tax credits, not working to undermine our national energy security.”

Regardless of the auto industry’s Astroturf campaign to weaken proposed federal fuel economy standards, many lawmakers recognize that tightening standards not only will save Americans money, cut pollution and create jobs, it will strengthen national security, according to Eli Hopson, a UCS spokesperson.

“The good news is that the Senate and the House Democratic leadership have rejected the industry’s scare tactics and are committed to including strong CAFE standards in the bill when it goes to the president’s desk,” said Hopson. “Without increased fuel economy standards, the bill would not reduce our energy dependence or bolster national security.”

I have just read an amazingly intense article from Orion Magazine titled The Idols of Environmentalism by Curtis White.

The premise of the article is well deserving of some intense debate and discussion. I feel that the article left some of the more intense issues underlying the issue out of it - what is life for and how should people live their lives? Maybe that is left up to the next article, where the author will discuss how your job (typically the most obvious significant life choice) could be more tied into nature and the ‘environment.’

Everyone is part of this large economic system - and of course - we are scared to leave it. But could we if we wanted to? Even to try attempting living in the woods and living like a hermit means we have bought land from some government and most probably paying taxes to some government body. We cannot deny that we are part of something bigger. I guess this is where the author started to bring religion into the equation - only here do we start to evaluate the ’something bigger’ issue. If religion was the common denominator of our collective lifestyle, perhaps property rights, perhaps taxes would not be requirements of living.

The second larger concept of Mr. White’s article is the concept of Employment and a job. Only in the relative recent history (meaning after World War II) has the United States and other countries of the world seen employment reach the masses. It has always been a chronic issue for the world that approx - at best - only 80% of the eligible workforce was employed. We now regard 95% (this is considered about full employment, since there is always a percentage in between jobs, entering the workforce, or leaving the workforce) being the target. Why was the 80% a bad or undesirable number. Because people went hungry. Because some people were very very poor and lived in extreme poverty while others could live long healthy lives.

Why do we have jobs? What does a job do for us? Has our culture become so bored, that we must keep our lives so busy all the time that job is the only thing that we have to entertain us? We have become defined by ‘what we do’ instead of asking ‘what do love to do’.

Why can’t we work only 20 hrs a week? - If everyone in our large global economic system decided to make the workweek 20 hrs - what would happen? It would be quite an amazing economic theory test. Could we still eat? Be healthy? Would people be happy? Would we start acting more civil to each other? Would crime go down?

I, being a byproduct of this system, am optimistic that we all can remain happy and employed. We all want food on our table, a roof over our head, and a nice shiny new car in our driveway (oh whoops, that isn’t right is it…). Humans have an incessant desire to accumulate - more leads to more which leads to … More. The education and effort that we put into our environmental processes are good - they educate us all on our lifestyle choices. Hopefully - we as a group can learn that we don’t need that extra car, or that extra house in the hills. If we have less stuff - perhaps we can then have more free $$, which then means we don’t need to work 80 hrs a week… If we can begin to reduce or slow that feedback loop, then perhaps when we do consume, we can be aware of any impact that consumption has on the ‘environment’ and the ability for humans, animals, plants…. life… to survive.

This post may be a bit about old news - since it has been going on since November - but a friend of mine from back home in Bellows Falls has been making waves about his effort to have actives in the military show support for a withdrawal. It is exciting and amazing to see that someone from Vermont is leading the way - Good job Liam - Keep up the Good Work!

Here is the article in the Burlington Seven Days: [link]
VT Marine Enlists Fellow Soldiers to Urge Prompt Iraq Pullout

	SGT. LIAM MADDEN

VERMONT — United States Marine Corps Sgt. Liam Madden was opposed to the Iraq war even before he was deployed in September 2004 to al-Anbar, the mostly Sunni province that’s seen some of the war’s fiercest fighting. He became even more opposed after returning to Quantico, Virginia, in February 2005.

As an active-duty service member, Madden was prevented by military regulations from organizing protests or speaking out publicly against the occupation, which he describes as “a pre-emptive and immoral war of aggression.” Nevertheless, the Bellows Falls native felt compelled to take a decisive step to help end the conflict, which he believes is needlessly costing thousands of American and Iraqi lives, depleting military and financial resources, and doing irreparable harm to U.S. prestige around the world.

With the help of a Navy seaman and several antiwar groups, including Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out and Veterans for Peace, Madden discovered a legal avenue for voicing his antiwar sentiments. He launched an online appeal to Congress from military personnel. Known by its organizers as an “Appeal for Redress,” it calls for an immediate end to the nearly 4-year-old U.S. conflict.

“As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq,” the appeal reads. “Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.”

Unlike a petition, an appeal for redress is a legally permissible form of dissent by service members. Although active-duty personnel are prohibited from some types of political activism, they are allowed to communicate with members of Congress, as long as they make it clear they’re speaking on behalf of themselves and not of their military unit.

On Monday, as the nation celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Madden, 22, and Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto, 29, of Atlanta, were on Capitol Hill to present their appeal for redress formally to Congress. More than 990 other active-duty, Reserve and National Guard personnel have signed the appeal. It comes just as Congress debates the president’s request last week for an additional 21,500 troops to quell the rising sectarian violence in Iraq.

The idea of an appeal for redress originated last June, when Hutto, who was stationed in Norfolk, Virginia, organized a screening of the 2005 antiwar documentary Sir! No Sir!, which chronicles the efforts of American GIs to end the Vietnam War. Among those who attended the screening were Madden and David Cortright, a University of Notre Dame professor and author of Soldiers in Revolt and Left Face, two books that explore soldier-resistance movements in modern armies. After the screening, Madden says, he approached Hutto and Cortright, and the three got together to launch the online signature drive.

This appeal for redress isn’t unprecedented — many soldiers during the Vietnam War made similar appeals to their congressional representatives. However, this missive is the first of its kind to come from an all-volunteer military, according to Madden.

The Vermont native says he encountered very little resistance from his fellow Marines and no retaliation from his superiors. He didn’t expect such a benign reception, he says, since the Marine Corps is typically the most gung-ho and conservative branch of the armed forces.

“It’s really been hands-off, and that was surprising,” Madden continues. “I thought at the very least, they would scrutinize me completely and make sure that every nook and cranny of my performance and appearance were perfect.”

His fellow Marines’ acceptance of the appeal may reflect their own growing disillusionment with the war, even if many of them are reluctant to voice their opposition publicly. “Actually, I’ve had a lot of positive feedback,” Madden notes. “The biggest percentage of my peers [in the Marines] disagree with the war, but are not sure if getting out is the right answer, either.”

One notable exception was an email Madden received shortly after going public. It came from a Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, who accused Madden of cowardice and lending aid and comfort to the enemy.

Rather than ignoring the hostile missive, Madden wrote back and explained his rationale for opposing the war and launching the appeal. “It ended up being a back-and-forth correspondence for a couple of weeks,” Madden says. “I was definitely glad that I didn’t resort to slinging mud back.”

Madden, whose mother lives in Rockingham and whose father lives in Keane, New Hampshire, is due to be honorably discharged in the next few weeks and says he’ll attend college “somewhere in Boston” in the fall. Until then, he intends to travel around New England speaking on college campuses and in other venues. Adding his voice and those of other soldiers to the chorus may just bring the antiwar movement to its tipping point.

Sorry this won’t be a full submission based on time and energy on a Sunday evening and feeling a bit under the weather.

Item 1:

TerraBlog from Terrapass has some great news that is starting to be discussed in many political circles in D.C. - Is Bush changing his stance on Global Climate change? It looks as if during the Presidential Address Bush may announce some news that the US supports CO2 caps among other potential solutions to reduce our contributions to climate change. Check it out here: TerraBlog

Item 2:

Reading a recent article in the Rutland Herald (Vermont local news) demographers and economists are lamenting the aging of Vermont. The aging issue does present some very real and difficult issues for Vermont. Our age profile is becoming more lopsided with the majority the population in the retiring class rather than the working class.

“I don’t think you want your economy of the future to basically be a theme park for the rest of the nation, and a retirement home,” Francese said (demographics expert Peter Francese).

I want to look further into this article since it says, “By the year 2030, Woolf said education and human services spending will gobble up 95 percent of state and local revenue.” (Arthur Woolf is an economist in Vermont). I find it hard to believe that based on the facts in this article where our aging population and shrinking school age population will require that large of a percentage of our state and local revenue.

Item 3:

The United Nations Science and Technology caucus that I am working with is having some organizational issues. The organizations that have been running the show for the last few years have decided that they want to remain in control and not participate in the caucus process of involving worldwide science and technology organizations. These organizations, ICSU and WFEO, were supposedly selected by the UN to represent the science perspective during the WSSD.

This causes some problems because the Major Groups part of ECOSOC are meant to represent the entire Science & Technology community. The caucus as currently setup only represents some science - and precludes many other organizations from taking part. We are working with the UN to get a better explanation of this - Stay Tuned!

Just read this post from this freelancer in California - It is amazing that the mainstream is going on the climate change wagon. I just wonder if the guy is driving some SUV -

I know that we have change our way of life - but how? Lets have a big discussion on the ways in which we learn to live our life a bit different. - actually Seventh Generation in Burlington is already doing it. Check it out at http://www.inspiredprotagonist.com/ They are having a video contest where people are sharing how they are reducing their personal impact to Global Warming. It should be good since Burlington just had 50 to 60 degree weather on the 6th of January.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/551152.html

Environment: a resolution for the hottest year ever

RALPH SURETTETHE YEAR we’ve left behind was dominated by a couple large changes of mind: Global warming was finally accepted as real, leaving those in denial sputtering, and the war in Iraq was understood for the irretrievable catastrophe that it is.

That it took such titanic struggles, in both cases, to have the obvious accepted as obvious is hardly a good sign; but here we are, theoretically trying to move ahead.

And the question that will dominate from here on, in both cases, is: What’s the next step?

With regard to the environment, the next step is to get our stories together, the economic one and the environmental one, so that economic growth is not blindly pursued on the one hand while environmental measures are seen as something apart.

For example, the first test of whether the Harper government is serious, with its brand new environment minister, is whether it cuts the tax incentives to oil companies for oil sands development.

The relentless evidence may have made the obvious indeed obvious, but that’s still a long way from getting us to change our ways.

In fact, at the highest level – that of the American presidency – admission of global warming has been accompanied by more of the same: measures of obfuscation and delay, lest good friends of the administration in the dirty industries object.

In Canada, where the Harper government tries to imitate the Bush government in all things, its attempt to do the same has happily blown up in its face. Whether its credibility is permanently gone remains to be seen.

The scientific consensus is that we have some 10 years to turn climate change around before the consequences become truly catastrophic. That means getting very serious right now, in the middle of summer-in-winter.

Still, the old presumption – economic development no matter what – continues without question.

Here’s another example. There’s talk of a new refinery, by American interests, at the Strait of Canso (and yet another at Saint John by the Irvings).

Ironically, the American one is apparently partly motivated by the wish to get out of hurricane alley where Katrina hit, arguably a phenomenon of global warming.

The idea of economic development always creates excitement in these “underdeveloped” parts, but no thought is given anywhere in the system that the real need is to build no more refineries, and to drive less instead, which would constitute true progress.

Instead of starting the necessary work of organizing our ways of doing things to discourage, rather than to encourage, energy waste, the plans for new highways, far-flung suburbs, more oil sands, and so on, continue without respite, negating whatever progress is made towards conservation and energy alternatives.

We’re still wallowing in resistance, then, incapable of looking the issue in the eye – because, quite simply, it challenges too deeply our way of life.

How likely is it that we will, in the coming year, get motivated to in fact meet the challenge?

Hopefully, more likely than you and I think. Last year at this time, my column was a depressing lament about the environment being politically taboo.

I wrote: “As during the 2004 American election campaign, when the U.S. south was being hammered by hurricane after massive hurricane and nobody ever uttered the words ‘climate change,’ here we seem to have the same speech impediment.”

In the runup to the federal election, “we’ve had four national debates in which the words ‘environment’ and ‘Kyoto’ got tossed out once or twice at random, but that’s it. It’s not just the leaders and their parties – the journalistic machinery that prepared the questions didn’t see this as a politically worthy subject.”

In 2006, bingo! It’s off the taboo list. So now I’m genuinely surprised.

Can we resolve for 2007, slated to be the hottest year ever, to finally get the message once and for all?

As for the calamity in Iraq, with Afghanistan seemingly in its train, what constitutes the next step is beyond anyone’s comprehension.

Nevertheless, the whole calamitous mess belongs to the same large order of ideas as the environmental question: the mismanagement of the world.

One figure arrests my attention: It could cost the U.S. in the order of $1 trillion before it’s out of Iraq.

Just imagine what that kind of resource could have done if directed towards improving the world, rather than ruining it.

Ralph Surette is a veteran freelance journalist living in Yarmouth County. ( rsurette@herald.ca)