By Worldwatch Institute (11/8/11)

The number of countries running high-speed rail is expected to double over the next few years, according to new research by the Worldwatch Institute. By 2014, high-speed trains will be operating in nearly 24 countries, including China, France, Italy, Japan, Spain, and the United States, up from only 14 countries today. The increase in HSR is due largely to its reliability and ability to cover vast geographic distances in a short time, to investments aimed at connecting once-isolated regions, and to the diminishing appeal of air travel, which is becoming more cumbersome because of security concerns.

In just three years, between January 2008 and January 2011, the operational fleet grew from 1,737 high-speed trainsets worldwide to 2,517. Two-thirds of this fleet is found in just five countries: France, China, Japan, Germany, and Spain. By 2014, the global fleet is expected to total more than 3,700 units.”

A 2006 comparison of greenhouse gas emissions by travel mode, released by the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, found that HSR lines in Europe and Japan released 30-70 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger-kilometer, versus 150 grams for automobiles and 170 grams for airplanes.

Although there is no universal speed definition for HSR, the threshold is typically set at 250 kilometers per hour on new tracks and 200 kilometers per hour on existing, upgraded tracks. The length of HSR tracks worldwide is undergoing explosive growth in order to meet increasing demand. Between 2009 and 2011, the total length of operational track has grown from some 10,700 kilometers to nearly 17,000 kilometers. Another 8,000 kilometers is currently under construction, and some 17,700 kilometers more is planned, for a combined total of close to 43,000 kilometers.

By track length, the current high-speed leaders are China, Japan, Spain, France, and Germany. Other countries are joining the high-speed league as well. Turkey has ambitious plans to reach 2,424 kilometers and surpass the length of Germany’s network. Italy, Portugal, and the United States all hope to reach track lengths of more than 1,000 kilometers. Another 15 countries have plans for shorter networks.

But in Europe, France continues to account for about half of all European high-speed rail travel. HSR reached an astounding 62 percent of the country’s passenger rail travel volume in 2008, up from just 23 percent in 1990, thanks to affordable ticket prices, an impressive network, and reliability. And in Japan, the Shinkansen trains are known for their exceedingly high degree of reliability. JR Central, the largest of the Japanese rail operating companies, reports that the average delay per high-speed train throughout a year is just half a minute. On all routes in Japan where both air and high-speed rail connections are available, rail has captured a 75 percent market share.

Investments for Expansion of HSR

A draft plan for French transportation infrastructure investments for the next two decades allocates 52 percent of a total of $236 billion to HSR.

In 2005, the Spanish government announced an ambitious plan for some 10,000 kilometers of high-speed track by 2020, which would allow 90 percent of Spaniards to live within 50 kilometers of an HSR station.

Currently, China is investing about $100 billion annually in railway construction. The share of the country’s railway infrastructure investment allocated to HSR has risen from less than 10 percent in 2005 to a stunning 60 percent in 2010.

Intercity rail in Japan accounts for 18 percent of total domestic passenger-kilometers by all travel modes—-compared with just 5 to 8 percent in major European countries and less than 1 percent in the United States.

In France, rail’s market share of the Paris-Marseille route rose from 22 percent in 2001 (before the introduction of high-speed service) to 69 percent in 2006. In Spain, the Madrid-Seville rail route’s share rose from 33 to 84 percent.

Reports and High-Speed Rail and Advanced Transportation

Worldwatch Institute High-Speed Rail Report

Spain HSR Traveler’s Experience

Scenario to Reduce California Emissions by 80 Percent

High-Speed Rail to Operate in 24 Countries by 2014 is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

By John Addison (8/19/11)

High-Speed Rail was Faster than Flight, Hotel to Hotel

It was an easy walk from our downtown Madrid hotel to the train station. In less than 3 hours on high-speed rail, we crossed the country to Barcelona. I looked out the window as we traveled at 185 miles per hour leaving the hot plains for the cooler Mediterranean. Traveling car free made the vacation relaxed, talking with locals easy, and neighborhoods a joy to walk.

The vacation was a welcome respite from the gridlocked expressways of America. Where I live in California, highways are being widened at a taxpayer burden of $200 million per mile. Locals in Atherton, Palo Alto, and Menlo Park, armed with signs that shout “Not In My Backyard”, are holding up the California High-Speed rail, at one-third that cost per mile. They claim that HSR is too noisy to run through cities. Tell that to all the people in Europe and Asia who are 50 years ahead of us, none wearing earplugs as these trains glide through the hearts of their cities.

California HSR would connect 25 major transit systems together, and pay for itself in avoided freeway and airport expansion. Diesel rail would be replaced with electric rail at the same time California’s energy mix is increasing from 20 to 33 percent renewable.

“Last Mile” Solutions from Walking to Bicycle Sharing

My wife and I found it easy to zip around Madrid and Barcelona on their efficient metro subway and bus systems. Normally, however, we choose to walk miles daily so that we could experience the sights, restaurants, and people up close and personal.

For busy commuters, however, walking is popular when the distance is under a half-mile. Beyond that, a car is selected over transit, unless other “last mile” solutions are convenient.

For over 100,000 in Barcelona, their “last mile” solution is taking a bicycle down tree covered bike lanes that I enjoyed riding. May bike lanes were safely seperated from the car lanes, but others disappeared into hair raising intersections. Barcelona has 9,000 bicycles in Bicing, a bike sharing subscription program that costs 35 euros per year with added charges for keeping a bike more than 30 minutes. A member goes to one of 400 convenient on the street locations, holds their RFID smartcard near the display, sees which bike to take (e.g. Space 18), rides to their destination, and then secures their bike in the new location. Bicing offers its 100,000 members a smart app with location map and extensive information.

Bicycle sharing has millions of members in European cities. It is now taking foot in the U.S. in Washington DC, Twin Cities, Chicago, Denver, Tulsa, San Antonio, San Francisco, and other cities. Some include special programs for employers and universities to facilitate broad participation. In America, these commuters save a fortune in car costs, gasoline, and parking fees. As a plus, they get some healthy exercise.

electric car and PRT New Urban Mobility

Austin, Texas, has modeled the successful point-to-point (P2P) bicycle sharing with 300 shared Mercedes SmartCars. Someone can exit transit, drive the SmartCar three miles to work, park the car and walk away, paying pennies per minute. In the future, the SmartED electric car will be included in the Austin P2P car sharing.

Millions of visitors to the London Olympics next year will have the opportunity to use a different electric approach – personal rapid transit (PRT). They will get in a pod on an electric rail at Heathrow Airport, push the destination button as someone would in an elevator, and glide a few miles to their destination.

Looking to the future, automakers see new opportunities in urban mobility. Car makers observe the millions of us who use mobile devices with smart apps to best get through our busy days, at times in a car, at times walking, and at times using new technology.

I had the opportunity to test drive the General Motors EN-V urban mobility concept vehicle. The friendly little two-seat pod rests on a Segway drive system. It could easily be steered around the Standor University campus, where the event occurred. In the future, these new light electric vehicles could be navigated along mobility pathways separated from cars in a gridlocked city. The EN-V can also navigate autonomously, automatically stop for pedestrians, and cluster into compact convoys.

A few EN-Vs, or a few dozen, can form themselves into a convoy and route themselves to where they are needed. This would solve a problem that costs millions to manage for P2P car sharing and bicycle sharing. Vehicles must be moved after they cluster in popular destinations. Today some bike sharing members abandon programs after they cannot locate a shared bike when late to work, or get charged extra when every space in the bike rack is full. Personal PRT such as the EN-V could automate having the right vehicles in the right places at the right times.

Could such innovation happen in the USA? Yes. When I visited the vast Marine Corp Camp Pendleton, I saw 291 electric vehicles in use. The military is very interested in autonomous vehicles, especially those that free us from our dependency on oil.

A GM scientist told me that China has enormous potential. Cities the size of New York are being developed through out China. They will have good transit, which is connected by 20,000 miles of high-speed and express rail. China will also have unprecedented auto-congestion and need for last-mile solutions. China is not paralyzed with NIMBY or government gridlock. China could plan new forms of urban mobility in new cities and then quickly implement the plan.

In the U.S. many people that I interview who are under 30 and living in cities or university towns, tell me that a car is not something to own, it is a service to use along with rail, transit, walking, and bicycling. When needed, they use Zipcar or another car share service, they rideshare, they squeeze into a taxi when leaving a club on a Friday night. Millennials may take to new innovations in urban mobility as easily as they took to the internet, social networks and smart apps. At times, leaving the auto behind can lead to a pleasant car-free vacation or a carefree commute.

Car-Free Vacations – Carefree Commuting is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

People take hundreds of million electric rides each year in California. The big news is not the electric car drivers or those happily screaming on Disneyland rides; the larger story is network of connected electric rail, buses with cutting edge electric drive systems, and electric cars.

No LA and SF are not yet NY or Paris, but they are showing off a future of low-carbon and zero-emission transportation solutions. A couple of weeks ago, I went to the highly informative CAPCOA Climate Change Forum which included a couple of hundred leaders from California government, industry, and non-profit. Many of these people have decades of success in improving the health of our air, water, and environment. Now they are taking on the tough challenge of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions of a state that emits more than entire nations such as Spain, or Saudi Arabia, or hundreds of smaller countries. The number one GHG emitter in California is vehicles. Add the emissions of its oil refineries and you have the majority of greenhouse gas emissions in California.

Electric Light-Rail and Electric Trolley Buses

To the rescue are major public transportation operators who are electrifying their rail and bus fleets. These transit operators are unclogging the roads for those who really need cars, reducing air pollution, and reducing California’s carbon footprint.

In fact, I got to the Climate Change Forum on an electrically powered bus. I walked two blocks and boarded a trolley bus connected to special overhead power lines. The electricity is from hydropower. San Francisco has over 300 electric trolley buses, 40 cable cars that use under-street cables powered by electric-motors, an extensive electric light-rail system, and 460 diesel buses which are increasingly hybrid-electric. Like most cities, no one mode is best for the 235 million rides taken in SF each year; what’s best is a portfolio of solutions.

Electric light-rail is popular in many cities. Sleek cars on rail invite people to hop on and off. On their dedicated rail lines they are often the fastest way to get to a city’s major destinations. The rail cars often last 40 years compared to diesel and trolley buses which may only last 12.

Only a handful of transit operators still use the electric trolley buses with rubber-tired vehicles powered by electricity collected from fixed overhead wires. San Francisco and Seattle actively use trolley buses; cities like Boston and Dayton have a few. These buses, connected to overhead electric lines, fight through the car traffic, stop at every red light and stop sign, and require slower boarding than light rail. Transit operators no longer like electric trolley buses. They like the long life, speed, and ridership appeal of electric light-rail. Trolley buses cost more to buy and maintain than diesel hybrid-electrics. Unfortunately, adding a light-rail line can cost $20 million per mile; in a city like SF, $60 million.

A good combination for public transportation is light-rail corridors for the most heavily traveled segments that is well integrated with bus service, bicycling, walking, car sharing, electric car parking, and other modes.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells Extend Electric Range

My wife and I are planning to buy an electric car with 100 mile charge range. That more than meets our daily needs. If you’re driving a 40-foot bus full of people for 12 to 16 hours daily, however, you probably need more than batteries to extend the range to 300 to 400 miles. Hydrogen fuel cells compliment lithium batteries by freeing electrons from hydrogen to feed electric motors and batteries added electricity. Finish the long day with a 10 to 15 minute fill-up of hydrogen and your ready for another day.

AC Transit is currently servicing some Berkeley and Oakland routes with 4 hydrogen fuel cell buses with pure electric drive systems with 8 more on order for the Bay Area. These workhorses go for hours on end, even taking battery draining steep grades. These Van Hool buses use Siemens electric motors, EnerDel lithium batteries, and UTC fuel cells. AC Transit Director Jaimie Levin reports that their UTC fuel cells have worked so well, that they will redeploy several of the older fuel cells in the new buses, even though they have in excess of 7,000 hours of continuous operation on each system, without any failures or repairs, or loss of power.

The AC Transit fuel cell buses provided an inspiration for the Winter Olympics. At CAPCOA, I talked with Dr. Paul Scott, ISE Chief Scientists about the 20 hydrogen fuel cell buses that were used in Whistler for the Vancouver Winter Olympics. Dr. Scott told me that those BC Transit buses have successfully logged 500,000 km in a few months. I estimate that they provided over 100,000 rides during the Olympics. The Vancouver New Flyer buses use Ballard fuel cells, Siemens electric motors, and ISE drive systems and software.

LA Metro subway, light-rail, CNG buses, 40% electric, candidates 300kW pilot

Metro serves a vast geography that extends to the far reaches of the Los Angeles basin. I rode their system for a week, traveling from remote Pasadena to the LA Convention Center faster than I could drive.

At the heart of Metro is an electrically powered subway and light-rail system. From those main arteries, 2,500 CNG buses reach streets and neighborhoods that could never be covered with electric rail. In the long term, up to 40 percent of these CNG buses could be replaced with battery-electric buses for rush hour coverage. Although CNG buses have a range of at least 300 miles and can stay on road for 16 hours daily; battery electric buses are well suited for six to 8 hours of daily use during peak service periods. LA Metro plans to pilot test an electric bus with 300kW lithium battery pack, giving it 100-plua mile range appropriate for peak hours.

Foothill Transit Goes Electric

The Ecoliner silently glides along the streets in San Gabriel Valley giving passengers a break from the famous grid-lock traffic that extends east from Los Angeles for a hundred miles. The Ecoliner is Foothill Transit’s new pure battery-electric 35-foot bus built by Proterra, which is headquartered in Golden, Colorado. The Proterra BE35 is propelled with UQM electric motor using innovative lithium batteries that keep the big bus moving for 3 hours and are then quick-charged in ten minutes. The buses range is extended because the Proterra is aerodynamic made with lightweight composite material.

Proterra’s system allows a battery electric bus to pull into a transit center terminal or on-route stop and automatically connect to an overhead system that links the bus to a high capacity charger without driver involvement, even while passengers load and unload. The charging station technology includes advanced wireless controls that facilitate the docking process and eliminate any intervention from the driver. Proterra’s FastFill™ charge system is comprised of the software and hardware to rapidly charge the TerraVoltTM Energy Storage System from 0% to 92% energy charge efficiency in as little as 6 minutes.

Under California’s zero-emission bus program, 1,000 zero-emission (fuel supply to wheels) buses will be in service by 2020.

Commuter Rail and HSR

Metrolink rail and the Subway link some major Southern California light-rail and bus systems and BART and Caltrain link some Northern California systems. As a rider of these systems, I can testify that navigating through multiple systems is often slow and confusing. Using Google Maps on my smartphone makes the navigation possible.

In the future, California’s 25 major transit systems will be linked with an 800-mile high-speed rail network. Voters approved the system because it is a less expensive solution than widening highways and expanding airports. Because it depends on local and public-private partnership funding, as well as state and federal funding, it will be built in sections. First online are likely to be areas that are currently overwhelmed with passenger vehicles crawling on freeways that should be renamed “slowways.” Likely to be among the first in service are the Orange County – Los Angeles section.

Big Oil Fights Back

California is electrifying cars, transit, and high-speed rail at the same time that it expands its use of renewable energy including wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, agricultural waste, and even ocean power. The transition may reduce the state’s overwhelming dependency on petroleum for over 97 percent of all transportation. By comparison to other nations, California is the third largest market for petroleum. Only the USA as a whole and China use more. California uses more petroleum than Japan, Germany, India, and other nations.

Reducing the use of petroleum, of course, would cost oil companies billions. Texas oil companies are spending million to encourage Californians to vote “yes” for Proposition 23 this November. The proposition would require the State to abandon implementation of a comprehensive greenhouse-gas-reduction program that includes increased renewable energy and cleaner fuel requirements, and mandatory emission reporting and fee requirements for major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, until suspension is lifted.”

Prop 23’s biggest backers, Valero and Tesoro, are responsible for 16.7% of California’s emissions, according to the California League of Conservation Voters. Prop 23 will allow California oil refineries to avoid paying over one billion dollars for carbon emissions, so they are attacking California Global Warming Solutions Act supported by the majority and California’s Republican Governor. Prop 23 is promoted as a jobs creation proposal, but a recent UC study reported that California’s successful efforts to become cleaner and more efficient have saved us money and grown the economy, resulting in the creation of 1.5 million jobs with a total payroll of over $45 billion. Opposition to Prop 23 fears that the law would open a Pandora’s Box of lawsuits against anything that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. CLCV Prop 23 Details

Currently California leads the nation with 25,000 electric cars on the road and thousands of new electric charge stations are scheduled for installation. Hundreds of millions of rides are taken on electrified light-rail and commuter rail. Zero emission buses are on the roads. Renewable energy is growing by gigawatts. In a few weeks, we will learn if California moves ahead with efficient and electrified transportation, or if its initiatives are derailed.

California’s Electric Transit Ride is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

U.S. Car Ownership Drops by 3.5 Million in 2009

In the United States, we embarrassingly have more vehicles than people with driver’s licenses. We have 246 million vehicles. AAA estimates that it costs $8,000 per year for each car owned, which creates a financial burden on cash-strapped Americans.

To the rescue are 10 positive trends that helped Americans scrap 14 million cars in 2009, while only buying 10.5 million new ones. The 2009 drop was the only large decline in the past 50 years shows the U.S. Department of Transportation.

1.    Urban Density. For the first time, most Americans live in urban areas where they need fewer cars, have better public transit, can share cars, and accomplish more trips with walking.

2.   Public Transit. Americans made 11 billion trips on U.S. transit in 2008, a 50-year record. Use dropped only slightly despite transit operators being forced to cut some routes and remove buses as the recession drove down local sales tax revenues needed for public transit.

3.    Smart Growth. Community and regional planners are making cities vibrant, with work, services, and play close at hand. Portland, Oregon, is a role model in creating urban density and great public transportation. California with SB375 is requiring regional plans that integrate development, transportation, and greenhouse gas reduction. Join me on May 11 at the American Planning Association in Chicago when I present “More Smiles, Less Miles.”

4.    One Car Households. The average suburban U.S. household has two vehicles. Some more. The average urban U.S. household has one vehicle. More American families and roommates are going from three cars to two cars to one car.

5.    Employer Commute and Flexwork Programs. Major employers are saving employees billions in travel costs. Employers sponsor ride sharing, last mile shuttles from transit, and guaranteed ride homes. Some employers have web sites and lunch-and-learns to help employees in the same zip codes match-up for car pooling. 57 million Americans work at home, at least part-time, with the help of flexwork programs. Employer programs have helped with reduced car ownership.

6.    Recession. The recession dispelled the myth that demand for cars and gasoline is price inelastic. When consumers are stretched, demand is elastic. About 20 percent of a U.S. carowner’s disposable income is spent on the car, maintenance, insurance, and fuel. Oil prices have more than doubled since their bottom in March 2009. The era of cheap gasoline is over as producers go to more expensive techniques such as deep oil drilling and strip mining Canada for tar sands.

7.    Cash for Clunkers removed 700,000 vehicles from the U.S. roads.

8.    Rail Connected. City transit is enhanced with regional commuter rail and with rail connected cities. Our latest World Series was dubbed the “Amtrak Series” as fans easily whisked between New York and Philadelphia. Rail connects the transit systems of cities into effective regional transportation. Fewer cars are needed. Yes, the United States lags behind Europe and Japan. Even China is implementing 5,000 miles of high speed rail. Given small hope, suburban rail and rail connected cities are on the rise in parts of the United States. APTA Center for High-Speed Rail

9.    Car Sharing. In 600 global cities, cars can be used by the hour.  Car sharing is popular with individuals and fleets. At many university and colleges, students with good grades can participate at age 18. Add transit and bicycling and many students live car free. Zipcar’s  350,000 members each take over 15 personally owned vehicles off the road. Members of Zipcar and car sharing programs report a 47% increase in public transit trips, a 10% increase in bicycling trips, and a 26% increase in walking trips. The success of car sharing has lead to success of bicycle sharing in Europe, giving millions last mile solutions between transit stations and employers and other city destinations.

10.    Intermodal Intelligence. Internet savvy people now use Google Maps, 511, car share apps, and smart phone GPS apps to compare car directions and time with public transit directions and time. With a few clicks on a social network a shared ride is arranged, or a shared car reserved. In the old millennium we got everywhere by solo driving in gridlock. In the new millennium we plan and use a mix of car driving, transit, and other modes to save time and money.

Ten Reasons for drop in Car Ownership is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

By John Addison (12/16/09)

Your heart sinks as you watch your missed plane fly away while you are trapped in gridlock. Parking lots are full. More parking lots attract more cars. Streets jam and more gridlock. Public transit, airport buses, shuttles, and taxis can all help.

The best ground transportation solution that I encountered was when I attended a meeting in Chicago. We landed at O’Hare International Airport, walked to our meeting at the Airport Hilton, and then flew back to our homes after the meeting. The next best solution was at Atlanta’s Hartsfield Airport where I took the escalator up from baggage claim, boarded the Marta rail system, and returned to my home in the suburbs. Actually, the best solution was the web conference and collaboration that eliminated the need to fly.

London Heathrow Podcar PRT

People are continuing to fly in record numbers so better ground transportation is a necessity. As London readies for record travelers during the 2012 Olympic Games, Heathrow airport is installing a personal rapid transit in the form of six seat cars that take you from terminal to parking garage on dedicated pathways. Heathrow’s podcars are like horizontal elevators – no driver needed; just push the button.

David Holdcroft, BAA’s (formerly British Airports Authority) PRT Manager states, “This innovative system forms part of BAA’s plan to transform Heathrow, improve the passenger experience and reduce the environmental impact of our operation through the development of cutting edge, green transport solutions.” The Heathrow system is scheduled to start running in spring 2010 and expand to 18 pod cars with 3 stops over a 2.4 mile path.

San Jose Personal Rapid Transit

By 2015, San Jose plans to have a more extensive PRT system (map) that connects major hubs within two miles of the airport including connections to VTA bus rapid transit, Caltrain rail that connects to the cities within Silicon Valley and terminates in downtown San Francisco, Santa Clara University, major hotels, major employers, and the Kiss N Ride lot. By the end of the decade, also important will be nearby connection to BART and the new 800 mile California High-Speed Rail system.

Yesterday, I shared an hour discussing transportation with San Jose’s Acting Director of Transportation, Hans Larsen. San Jose is the nation’s tenth largest city. With a million people, it has four times the space of nearby San Francisco. With less urban density, get high numbers of people to walk, bike, and use transit. Yet, San Jose plans major increases in all those areas as it plans for a population expansion of 400,000 people by 2040. PRT will be important to connecting people at the airport and major regional transportation systems. San Jose Transportation

Back for the International PRT Conference in Sweden, Mr. Larsen is impressed with the feedback from other PRT implementers and with a test ride of one system. Conference Videos

Mr. Larsen now has a budget of $4 million to assemble a team of PRT experts, start plans, and evaluate alternative systems.  Half the money will be for matching funds for the public and private partnerships necessary to get the first phase of San Jose Airport’s PRT system up and running. The $4 million funding allocation is from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), the transit agency, and countywide transportation planning agency for the San Jose Metro area (the 15-city area within Santa Clara County).

Global PRT Projects

A 2010 personal rapid transit conference is being discussed. San Jose would like to host it. Presenters are likely to include early implementers of PRT such as London, Masdar, Suncheon, South Korea, and Sweden where four cities are competing to be the first selected.

Globally PRT is under consideration in a number of areas where high numbers of people can be moved within a few miles such as airports, university campuses, corporate campuses, industrial parks, and city centers.

Different cities require different solutions. Some are best elevated; others can be kept on the ground. Some will use dedicated roadways designed for self-guided vehicles. Others will use tracks under the pods, or elevated guideways above. Some will use battery electric vehicles; others will always be connected to the electric grid – back to that horizontal elevator comparison.

No doubt that some will dismiss PRT as a short-term waste of money rather than a long-term investment to accommodate San Jose’s 40 percent population growth. Nearby are some innovators that were initially dismissed for having solutions that were limited, buggy, or expensive compared to the incumbent. Their names include Intel, Google, Cisco, Adobe, and EBay.

Innovation is a key to better transportation. We need intermodal choices. The modes need to be connected.

Today, many feel that the car is their only choice. In the future, we will have many choices, especially if we make connections fast and convenient.

Our transportation future will be increasingly intermodal. Each day our web or smartphone app will suggest the best way to meet our preferences. One day it could suggest car pooling to work, the next using the plug-in minivan to take the kids to a game, the next a connection of transit to PRT to rail.

San Jose’s Personal Rapid Transit is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

A portfolio of companies that participate in these long-term trends comprise the portfolio of Invesco PowerShares Global Transportation (PTRP) – an electronically tradable fund (ETF). The fund is based on the Wilder NASDAQ OMX Global Energy Efficient Transport Index(sm). The Index includes global companies engaged in businesses that are likely to benefit from a transition toward using cleaner, less costly and more efficient means of transportation.

The fund attempts to rebalance quarterly with 25 percent holdings in each of four sectors which it defines: alternative vehicles, rail and subway systems, intermodal, and transportation innovation. The clean transportation companies are headquartered in many countries and participate in many sectors:

Country
United States     37.10%
Japan     12.61%
United Kingdom     8.02%
Taiwan     7.99%
Italy     5.81%
France     5.55%
Germany     5.42%
Canada     4.80%
China     4.41%
Chile     2.91%
*as of 7/24/09

Top Holdings
BYD Co. Ltd.             4.41%
Giant Manufacturing Co. Ltd.           4.03%
Merida Industry Co. Ltd.           3.95%
GS Yuasa Corp.           3.85%
Shimano Inc.           3.74%
Maxwell Technologies Inc.           3.71%
Wabco Holdings Inc.           3.45%
Fuel Systems Solutions Inc.           3.29%
Alstom S.A.           3.16%
Piaggio & C.S.p.A.           3.05%

The fund is likely to gain from the growing success of high-speed rail which provides hundreds of millions of annual rides in Japan, France, and Spain, and is destined from major growth in other countries such as China and the United States. Holdings include Alstom, Kinki Sharyo, and Bombardier. Other holdings will benefit from the shift of goods movement from truck and plane to more efficient rail: CSX, Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific, Burlington Northern, and Canadian National Railway.

Over a billion people own bicycles or scooters – e-bikes and e-scooters are high-growth segments of this industry. The fund includes major players such as Giant, Piaggo, Merida, and Shimano.

Lithium batteries and ultracapacitors are integral to hybrids and electric vehicles. The fund includes BYD, GS Yuasa, Maxwell, Ener1, and Saft. Energy storage dominates the business models of these companies. Missing from the fund are electronic giants, where batteries are only part of their business such as Panasonic, Sanyo, Hitachi, NEC, and several others.

Disclosure: I own shares in this fund, as well as Alstom and Giant. Investing in this fund has a number of risks. It is concentrated. Most holdings are international. Illiquidity is a concern with few shares trading daily. Automobile manufacturers, except for BYD, are notably absent from the fund. Nevertheless, its 34 holdings provide some diversified global exposure into key players in the future of transportation.

Fidelity Select Automotive (FSAVX), representing a more traditional automotive portfolio, is up 86% year-to-date. iShares Dow Jones Transportation (IYT), with diversified goods movement and transportation services holdings, is up about 2% year-to-date. PowerShares Global Transportation (PRTP) is up about 27% year-to-date. As we transition to more efficient transportation with a smaller carbon footprint, PRTP may have long-term potential.

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report. A number of his articles have also appeared in Cleantech Blog and Seeking Alpha. On August 22 he will present Cleantech ETF Investing at the SF Money Show.

PowerShares Global Transportation is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

Diridon Station San Jose

By John Addison (4/7/09).

Intermodal solutions allow people to effectively navigate major cities such as New York, Washington D.C., Paris, Madrid, and Tokyo. Subway and light-rail are especially effective, but expensive to build. As cities grow, change, and morph, not every potential route can be served with subway and light-rail. Bus rapid transit is a cost effective way to duplicate some of the benefits of light-rail, at a fraction of the capital expenditure. Buses, taxis, car sharing, bicycling, and walking are all parts of the solution. For many, cars are their preferred way to get around, yet if all transportation were cars then cities would be frozen in gridlock.

High-speed rail integrates all these systems together and moves people from city to city at high-speed. When the distance is only a few hundred miles, high-speed rail coupled with city transit beats airplane and car every time.

Now an 800 mile high-speed rail network is being started in California. Because it depends on local and public-private partnership funding, as well as state and federal funding, it will be built in sections. First online are likely to be areas that are currently overwhelmed with passenger vehicles crawling on freeways that should be renamed “slowways.” Likely to be among the first in service are the Orange County – Los Angeles section and the San Jose – San Francisco section.

San Jose provides an example of current transportation problems as well as the future promise of high-speed rail integrated with intermodal solutions. Currently, during rush hour, cars crawl from all directions into San Jose, the self-proclaimed capital of Silicon Valley. Vehicles overload some of the nation’s busiest highways – 680, 880, 101, 280, 87, and 17.

Commuters to and from San Jose have a number of options. Many require multiple transit agencies and added time to reach their destination. Caltrain services cities from San Francisco to San Jose, at times taking only an hour, at other times being less frequent and taking much longer. Several transit agencies have special commuter shuttles including AC Transit and Santa Cruz Metro.

Major San Jose employers promote carpool and van pool commute programs. Shuttle buses run to the nearby airport. Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority’s (VTA) light-rail and buses effectively cover major parts of the city and connect to other systems. A variety of private bus, shuttle, car sharing, taxi, and other services all help. A network of bicycle trails and paths helps some enjoy their commute and stay in shape.

A central hub for VTA, Caltrain, and Amtrak is the Diridon Station in San Jose, named after Rod Diridon who provided leadership for the modern transportation system in the greater area as six-time chairperson of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and Transit Board. He has also been chair of the American Public Transit Association; he is the Executive Director of the Mineta Transportation Institute and Chair Emeritus of the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CAHSR).

When I met with Rod Diridon last month he was optimistic about CAHSR breaking ground within two years, and carrying a high volume of riders on at least one segment within ten years. The reasons for success are compelling: high-speed rail is less expensive than freeway expansion, less expensive than airport expansion, secured voter approval during a severe recession, will create up to 400,000 new jobs, integrates all of California’s major transit systems, reduces petroleum use, and helps prevent increased climate change damage. Mr. Diridon feels that support is also strong, because each year of delay could add millions to the ultimate cost of the 800 mile system.

In ten years, the Diridon Station is likely to see high volumes of travelers as high-speed rail shuttles people to and from San Francisco in 30 minutes. The CAHSR system will share the corridor currently in place for Caltrain. The station will allow passengers to board Amtrak and continue on to places like Los Angeles and Sacramento. Eventually, the high-speed rail will continue to those destinations, as all right-of-way and not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) issues are resolved.

In ten years, increased VTA light-rail traffic will flow through the system as San Jose continues to grow. VTA Transportation Planner Jason Tyree described how light-rail will be supplemented with advanced bus-rapid transit that will rapidly move people with modern features such as level boarding, automated fare handling, signal prioritization, and potentially dedicated lane sections. The 60-foot buses will be hybrid diesel.

People from the East Bay area may connect to the station via an extension to BART. Feeding off BART will be AC Transit’s ultramodern buses including its expanded fleet of hydrogen fuel cell buses.

The Diridon Station ten-years from now could well have zero-emission electric bus shuttles from the nearby airport or even a more advanced people-mover service. Preferred car parking at the station is likely to be for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. San Jose, home to advanced vehicle and technology companies like Tesla, is committed to an extensive city-wide vehicle charging infrastructure.

Although many electric vehicles are criticized for only having less than 100 mile in range per battery charge, such range is good for several days when combined with effective public transportation systems. Another way to cover the last miles to and from home and work is the good old bicycle. Bicycle boarding will be permitted on high-speed rail and the other public transportation systems.

As cities are connected with high-speed rail, similar multimodal systems will also be connected in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Sacramento, and other major cities in this state of 40 million people; soon to be 50 million people.

The new high-speed rail and the light-rail transit systems use electricity not petroleum. Electric rail is many times more efficient than diesel engine drive systems. In ten years, by law 33 percent of the electricity will be from renewable sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal. In 20 years, especially with the benefit of California’s new cap-and-trade of greenhouse gases, renewable energy is likely to be less expensive than natural gas and nuclear, with coal already being phased out in California. In other words, the high growth part of California transportation is likely to be zero-emission providing significant relief in emissions and energy security.

Combining improved multimodal transportation with high-speed rail with renewable energy is bringing climate solutions just in time. California’s busy Highway 101, which stretches over 800 miles and which carries millions daily, will find major sections under water if the sea rises only 16 inches.

As leading delegates from 175 nations now meet to discuss climate solutions  scientist agree that global warming is accelerating and the artic ice cap is disappearing.

The multimodal transportation that serves millions of Americans is experiencing record use and provides the foundation for a more promising future.

John Addison is the author of the new book – Save Gas, Save the Planet.

High-Speed Rail Unlocks Intermodal Potential is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

Record Transit Riders in 2008

(3/9/09)

Despite falling gas prices and a recession, increasing numbers of Americans took 10.7 billion trips on public transportation in 2008, the highest level of ridership in 52 years and a modern ridership record, according to a report released today by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). This represents a 4.0 percent increase over the number of trips taken in 2007 on public transportation, while at the same time, vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) on our nation’s roads declined by 3.6 percent in 2008, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
“Even as gas prices fell for the second half of the year and hundreds of thousands of people lost jobs, more and more people chose to ride public transportation throughout the country,” said APTA president William W. Millar. “Given our current economic condition, people are looking for ways to save money and taking public transportation offers a substantial savings of more than $8,000 a year. That’s quite a savings.”
Millar also announced the launch of a new advocacy campaign, Public Transportation Takes Us There, which is aimed at building congressional support for the authorization of the federal surface transportation legislation, which expires Sept. 30, 2009.
Beyond the need for greater public transit investment in a new federal surface transportation bill (the current one legislation expires September 30, 2009), and the 2010 appropriations bill, APTA is advocating for the inclusion of public transportation investment in any energy or climate change bill.
“Every year, public transportation saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline and reduces our nation’s carbon emissions by 37 million metric tons,” said Millar. “Clearly, public transportation is part of the solution for our country’s national goals of energy independence and carbon emissions reduction.
Millar also called on local and state governments to increase their investment in public transportation. Currently, transit systems are facing fare increases, service reductions, and layoffs – at a time of record ridership – because of declining state and local revenues.
2008 Ridership Breakdown
For the second year in a row, ridership on all modes of public transportation increased in every quarter. Light rail (modern streetcars, trolleys, and heritage trolleys) had the highest percentage of annual ridership increase among all modes, with an 8.3 percent increase in 2008. The light rail system that started in November 2007 in Charlotte, NC showed the highest percentage of increase with an annual 862 percent increase. The New Orleans, LA light rail system, which is still recovering from Hurricane Katrina, had an annual increase of 218 percent. Light rail systems with double digit ridership in 2008 were located in the following areas: Buffalo (23.9%); Philadelphia (23.3 %); Sacramento (14.4%); Baltimore (13.7%); Minneapolis (12.3%); Salt Lake City (12.3%); the state of New Jersey (10.9%); Denver (10.5%); and Dallas (10.2%).
Commuter rail increased in 2008 by 4.7 percent. The commuter rail systems with the double digit ridership growth rate in 2008 were located in the following areas: Albuquerque (35.1%); Portland, ME (26.5%); Seattle (23.8%); Pompano Beach, FL (22.9%); Harrisburg-Philadelphia (17.7%); New Haven (17.5%); Oakland (16.1%); Stockton, CA (14.7%); Dallas-Fort Worth (14.1%); San Carlos, CA (12.5%).
Heavy rail (subways) ridership increased by 3.5% in 2008. The heavy rail systems with the highest increases in ridership for 2008 were in the following cities: San Juan (13.3%); Lindenwold, NJ (9.9%); Atlanta (8.6%); Miami (8.2%), Boston (7.9%), and Los Angeles (7.7%).
Bus service saw an increase of 3.9 percent, but in communities with a population of less than 100,000, bus services saw an increase of 9.3 percent in 2008. Major increases by large bus agencies occurred in the following cities: Phoenix (11.5%); San Antonio (10.2%); San Diego (10.0%); St. Louis (8.9%); Baltimore (8.7%); and Denver (8.6%).
Demand response (paratransit) increased in 2008 by 5.9 percent.

complete APTA ridership report

public transportation’s role in climate change and energy independence

Public Transit Supports Record Riders Despite Loss of Revenue is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

These days, Fiona Ma, needs to find new courage every day. As California Majority Whip, she takes on the tough issues and is a force in making things better. For every important issue, there are vested interests on all sides whether it is better health care, better transportation, stopping global warming, or keeping California’s $1.7 trillion economy moving forward. Among her many responsibilities, Assemblywoman Ma chairs the Legislative High Speed Rail Caucus.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) believe they just may have the answer — an 800 mile statewide high-speed rail system that would serve more than 32 million passengers per year by 2020. Because the rail will be powered by electricity, and because of the efficiency of moving up to 1,200 people per train, CO2 emissions may be reduced by 12 billion pounds per year by 2020, and 18 billion pounds by 2030.

If you have ever been stuck in gridlock trying to get to work between Orange County and LA, or between San Jose and San Francisco, you will appreciate that the high-speed rail would add the equivalent of a 12-lane superhighway. Express high-speed trains will take one hour and fifteen minutes between San Diego and Los Angeles, and a little over two and one-half hours from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

CHSRA is upgrading their 2020 forecast to 68 million, from 32 million, and 94 to 117 million passengers by 2030. As Hall of Fame baseball great Yogi Berra observed, “It is difficult to forecast, especially about the future.” 2020 annual passengers will depend on California voters approving the November bond, matching funding, and regulatory approval. CHSRA forecasts are achievable. By comparison, Europe already provides 250 million annual rides, and Japan over 300 million.

High-speed rail systems, using the new grade-separated high speed lines planned for California have not had one fatality in 41 years. Neither automobiles nor airplanes can match the safety of high speed rail.

California high-speed rail addresses a number of goals. Our current highways cannot support the planned growth to 50 million people. Only the USA and China use more oil than California. If there are more price hikes, or if supply is disrupted by war or terrorism, where will California get its needed billions of gallons of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel? Draughts, likely caused by climate change, are already hurting California agriculture and industry. California is unlikely to meet its targeted reduction of greenhouse gases without high-speed rail. Especially damaging are the greenhouse gas emissions from short-haul air travel. The per passenger greenhouse gas emissions of flying from LA to SF are equivalent of each person driving solo in a large SUV. Carbon Calculator

On November 4, 2008, if a majority of California voters approve Proposition 1A, California will have high-speed rail. Proposition 1A is supported by many cities, chambers of commerce, clean air groups, and by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. A majority of Republican and Democratic legislators approved the measure. Although California faces rush-hour gridlock without high-speed rail, a project with a starting price north of $33 billion will face special interest opposition.

With HSR, it’s about money. Proposed is that Californians approve a bond of $10 billion for one-third of the cost. One-third would be matched by federal funds and one-third by private investment. Although some anticipate cost overruns, more are worried that the price of not acting will be much higher. Because California is implementing AB32, the high-speed rail may be able to sell carbon credits to help finance the project and operations.

Since high-speed rail will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 18 billion pounds per year, you would think that all environment groups would support the measure. While there has been some support, the Sierra Club opposed disrupting environmentally sensitive areas and areas of wildlife migration, specifically in the Los Banos area. Beyond some local opposition, however, the national Sierra Club strongly supports high-speed rail. The California League of Conservation Voters endorses Proposition 1A stating, “Developing viable high-speed rail connecting Northern and Southern California is an essential component of California’s transportation future. A high-speed rail system throughout California would deliver an estimated 117 million travelers into downtowns well-served by local transit, all while reducing the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

Southwest Airlines successfully sued and stopped high-speed rail in Texas in the 1990s. Texas is now staring at a $183 billion price for the Trans Texas Corridor as a 4,000-mile-long stretch of 10 auto lanes and six railroad tracks for high-speed freight and commuter trains. This is over twenty times higher than if they had not been stopped from implementing high-speed rail years ago. Opponents of high-speed rail carefully follow Mark Twain’s advice, “Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.”

Even airlines do not voice opposition for high-speed rail. Today, Southwest cannot get the expanded gates and routes in California due to lack of airport expansion everywhere from San Diego to Los Angeles to San Francisco. Some airlines may support high-speed rail as it will more easily bring people to SFO and be part of bringing passengers to other airports more quickly.

Most are optimistic that voters will approve a bond issue for high-speed rail. Voters are faced with high gasoline prices and concern about California’s economic future. More people are commuting longer distances as they are unable to sell their homes in today’s difficult real estate market.

Even if voters approve the bond, high-speed rail will not move forward unless there are matching federal funds. Congressman Jim Costa believes that will happen. As he states in his op-ed: “Congress has begun to take action to help make the idea of high-speed rail in California a reality. Two bills I introduced, HR 4122 the American Investment in Safe, Reliable High Speed Rail Act and HR 4123, the High-Speed Rail Authority Development and Formation Act, will help bring federal dollars to California to invest in the proposed high-speed rail system. The Senate also passed S. 294, which will help high-speed rail development in America…. Overall, for every dollar invested in this system, we will see two dollars in return.” Capitol Weekly Article

Will Californians park their cars and ride the rails? Last year, LAMTA carried 64 million riders. In the Bay Area, BART carried 104 million riders. With gasoline prices rocketing, Amtrak ridership on the Capitol Corridor is up 16% this March over a year ago; on the San Joaquins it has jumped 27%. Although Californians will not exclusively ride rails and rapid transit, but they will ride more and drive less. In fact, high speed rail will integrate with public transportation. All 25 HSR stations will be multi-modal. For example, to get to Sacramento I currently take BART to Richmond, then get on Amtrak in the same station.

As a manager covering several states, I used to travel weekly on airplanes. Point-to-point always required at least four hours to get to the airport, get thru security, taxi in the runway, fly, taxi in the runway, then rent a car. In contrast, when taking a train from Washington D.C. to New York, I found that train travel was faster than airlines and better integrated with public transportation. With high-speed rail, airline travel to cover a few hundred miles would never be a personal option.

Travel between Washington D.C. and Boston is now even faster with speeds of up to 150 miles per hour on Amtrak’s Acela, the only high-speed rail in the United States. Now you can get from the nation’s capital to downtown Manhattan in less than three hours; an impossibility with airline travel and the fastest taxi driver in New York history. Over ten million passengers road this Northeast Corridor in 2007, making it the most popular train route in the U.S. Acela is now profitable.

In 12 years, 32 to 68 million passengers may be riding on an even faster system in California. The high-speed rail will keep California’s economy moving forward, with more jobs, more energy security and far less emissions.

The Clean Fleet Report endorses California Proposition 1A.

High-Speed Rail at 357 Miles per Hour is a post from: Clean Fleet Report