Natural Gas for Transportation

Here is the summary of congressional action from Townhall.com: Last week was the culmination of a process begun years ago. A bill was introduced to Congress that could end American dependence on foreign oil. What is called the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act -- more simply put, the NAT GAS Act -- was introduced to Congress on April 6. It has bipartisan support. It ought to pass and pass promptly. It could be called the Boone Pickens bill.

This article from Center for American Progress provides on the realities of natural gas usage in heavy vehicles as a transitional fuel for the next five to 10 decades. It will not end US dependence on oil but it has a good potential to substantially curb it as shown below.

Pension Congestion? Life is a Freeway. Lift the Limit from 65 to 70.

In 1940, an American enjoyed 12 years of life upon retirement, on the average. In 2007, an American is expected to enjoy over 17.5 years upon retirement. This long retirement period of 17.5 years is both the good news and the bad news.

The good news is of course that we all wish to live long lives and the outlook is good. The bad news is that retirement systems worldwide cannot support so many retirees living for so long.

This is one area where indeed Hawaii is not alone, but its government employee retirement system is among the five most troublesome in the U.S. George Berish, an expert in the field, has explained this in a series of articles in the Civil Beat.

The critical measure for the future health of a state's or country's overall retirement system health is the Support Ratio. This is the number that shows how many working people support one retiree.

In 1970 the U.S. had 5.3 workers supporting one retiree. In 2010 the number of workers per retiree dropped to 4.6. This is alarming enough but it gets much worse. In 2050 the estimation is that there will be only 2.6 workers per retiree, so over 25% of their earnings will have to go to the retirement fund to support retirees. At that point overall taxation will surpass 60%, and in theory it is best to move to another country.

Not so fast!

Read my full article in HAWAII REPORTER.

Transportation 2050

In March 2011 the European Commission published a proposed rulemaking for long term transportation standards in Europe titled TRANSPORT 2050. I drafted a similar policy for the US and developed this side by side 2-page presentation.

You may be interested to see the EU's proposed draconian measures against the automobile: Halve the use of gasoline, diesel and LPG fueled cars in cities by 2030 and phase them out in cities by 2050.

While EU's planning for a CO2-free utopia continues unabated, China picks up all the slack: In 2010, China's 18 million vehicle sales far surpassed U.S. light-duty vehicle sales of 12 million, making China the world's largest new car market. From 2003 through 2010, China's vehicle population grew at an annual rate of 18.6%, far faster than even the most ambitious projection.

For Every Green Job, Four Other are Lost

A few posts below you can read my opinion about Wind Energy for Hawaii
http://fixoahu.blogspot.com/2011/04/wind-energy-for-hawaii-great-for.html

Today I was sent this revealing study done at the UK:

Part of the summary in offshoreWIND.biz reads as follows: A study of renewable energy in Scotland shows that for every job created in the alternative energy sector, almost four jobs are lost in the rest of the economy.

Not only has the sun set on the British Empire, but the promise of wind apparently is deserting it as well. A new study called “Worth The Candle?” by the consulting firm Verso Economics confirms the experience of Spain and other countries: The creation of “green” jobs destroys other jobs through the diversion of resources and the denial of abundant sources of fossil fuel energy.

Here is the full report: “Worth The Candle?”

Board of Water Supply: For Crying Out Loud!

In 2009 and 2010 the Board of Water Supply tore up the upper half of Pacific Heights Road to upgrade the water lines and meters. The bumpy condition of the road (in part) cost me $800 in replacing the front suspension bushings of my car at 45,000 miles (normal wear should be 100,000 miles or more.) At the end of 2010 MIRA contractor spent over a month paving the road. They did a decent job.

Four months later the same road is marked to be torn up to fix the sewer lines, by the same Board of Water Supply. It really does not get more costly and disruptive than this…. Heavy machinery… Line up in single stack… Off duty police officers at both ends… Etc.

As can be seen in the photos below, the asphalt is dark black; brand new with a likely service span of 15 to 20 years. Actively being destroyed today.

Huge Combustion Efficiencies Are in the Works

The York Times article Start-Ups Work to Reinvent the Combustion Engine reports that

• Pinnacle Engines is working on an engine that "will be up to 50% more efficient than today's power plants,"
• EcoMotors, "a Detroit area start-up backed by Khosla Ventures(1) and Bill Gates," and
• Achates Power of San Diego

are developing variations on an opposed piston engine...long considered too expensive and unworkable for automobiles. The goal is to reduce the amount of energy "wasted as heat," so as to "to tap more energy to propel a vehicle." Pinnacle says that its current engine is "30% more efficient than current scooter engines." EcoMotors "is also claiming up to a 50% improvement in efficiency for its two-stroke diesel opposed piston engine." Achates Power says that its engine is "15% more efficient than conventional diesel."

In addition I recently read that both the Engine Research Group of University of Wisconsin-Madison is working on dual fuel engines to achieve high efficiencies and low emissions. An example of dual fuel is engine uses 90% gasoline on high load (acceleration), 90% diesel on low load (cruise) and 100% diesel at idle. Fuel efficiency improved 20% to 25% or large engines for trucks and heavy equipment.

At the same time and the Oak Ridge National Lab is conducting similar experiments using 1.9 liter Euro spec GM diesel engines with good results.

These are all positive and telling signs that the "classic" engine and the automobile are nowhere near their "dawn" days.

(1) Vinod Koshla, of Khosla Ventures, a Silicon Valley venture-capital firm. His profile in The Economist is worth reading. I liked this quote of his: “ENVIRONMENTALISTS are fiddling while Rome burns. They get in the way with silly stuff like asking people to walk more, drive less. That is an increment of 1-2% change. We need 1,000% change if billions of people in China and India are to enjoy a Western, energy-rich lifestyle.” Forget today’s green technologies like electric cars, wind turbines, solar cells and smart grids. None meets what Mr Khosla calls the “Chindia price.”

Wind Energy for Hawaii: Great for Profits, Not So Great for Power

Electric power is all about baseload and predictable peaks of usage. Wind is all about unpredictability. Among all major resources for the production of energy, wind is among the least predictable and dependable. Full article published in Hawaii Reporter.

Wind Speed Variability Sample as Reported in a Presentation by Renewable Energy Laboratory:

"Smart Technologies" Could Improve Transportation

The post below is excerpted from the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) daily newsletter. It summarizes an attempt of Congress to improve transportation conditions by employing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).

I have been teaching these methods for over a dozen years as part of my CEE 661: Intelligent Transportation Systems graduate course at the UH-Manoa. What is different this time is $1.2 Billion dollars in federal funding over six years for the pilot deployment in six competing cities.

I hope that the bill will go forward and I hope (but do not expect) that Honolulu and State of Hawaii will vie for this ITS initiative. Besides being substantially congested, Honolulu presents an excellent, fully controlled traffic laboratory. By that I mean that 100% of the traffic is local, as opposed to, say, Chicago, that at any time 5% to 15% of its traffic is from neighboring Indiana, Wisconsin and other states, thus its local ITS initiative is diluted by a large number of non-participating vehicles. ===========================================

The Hill (3/30, Laing) reports, "A bipartisan pair of lawmakers on Tuesday announced a bill to create six pilot 'intelligent transportation systems' they say will use technology to ease transit woes in cash-strapped American cities. Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Russ Carnahan (D-Mo.) said their 'Smart Technologies for Communities Act' would make improvements to transportation that federal and state governments could not otherwise afford." Notably, "the bill would create pilot programs in six cities to test whether technologies such as cars with crash sensors, bridges that can sense stress from vehicle weight, electronic toll systems and live updates to commuters improve overall commutes."

The Detroit News (3/30, Shepardson) reports the bill "would provide grants to make 'Intelligent Transportation Systems' a reality." They support "spending $1.2 billion over six years" on the initiative. The News says "the pair will tout their bill along with Intelligent Transportation Society of America CEO Scott Belcher in a press briefing Wednesday." Their bill has the support of "the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and its members, including General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group LLC." It would "create a pilot program in up to six communities across the country to serve as model deployment sites for large-scale installation and operation of ITS to improve safety, mobility and the environment on the nation's highways."

Real Energy, Real Jobs

By looking at the title, for a second I thought that I wrote this article and forgot about it, but the Real Energy, Real Jobs article was written by Robert Bradley Jr., CEO and Founder of the Institute for Energy Research and author, Capitalism at Work: Business, Government, and Energy.

Indeed Energy is Big Business and critically important for the US, Hawaii and indeed all civilization. For each location, there is an optimum mix of energy options for abundant, affordable energy, energy jobs and energy profits. There are many sub-optimal mixes that may lead to huge profits, short-term jobs, and unreliably and expensive energy. You can read some of these in Bradley's article.

In addition to the points raised in the article Real Energy, Real Jobs, my own research has revealed that:

• Denmark: 20% of the electricity is from wind, but much of it is exported at no cost to Norway in return for baseload electricity when the wind does not blow!
• Spain: For every 1 green job financed by Spanish taxpayers, 2.2 jobs were lost as an opportunity cost. Since 2000, Spain spent $753,778 per “green job.”
• Germany: Green jobs created by government actions disappear as soon as government subsidies end.
• Texas: After 30 months, countless TV appearances, and $80 million spent on an extravagant PR campaign, T. Boone Pickens has finally admitted the obvious: The wind energy business isn't a very good one. The Dallas-based entrepreneur, who has relentlessly promoted his Pickens Plan since July 4, 2008, announced that he's abandoning the wind business to focus on natural gas. (Wall Street Journal quote.)
  

Nuclear Power Plant ... Oxymorons and Solutions

The Economist has a useful tool for looking up which have nuclear power and how much electricity they produce in a year. The U.S. leads the pack.

One of the oddities of nuclear power is that some countries like Greece are strongly opposed to nuclear power, yet less than 100 miles away their Bulgarian neighbors already have nuclear power plants ... This reminds me of Hawaii with its nuclear power plant constitutional prohibition and the 15 nuclear submarines home ported in Pearl Harbor.

The difficult management of a failing power plant due to major force of nature as witnessed in Japan makes a strong case for locating them on off shore floating platforms (e.g., refurbished decommissioned air carriers.) These platforms, like off shore rigs can be manned as required by helicopter flights but they can be engineered for self power and management by remote control (like the unmanned drones of the air force.)

In the extremely rare care of nuclear reactor failure the floating platform can be de-anchored and de-tethered, and then robotically powered away from populations. This plan offers significant economic, safety and psychological benefits. Perhaps the state of Georgia should look into a floating platform 10-20 miles out in the Atlantic among its alternatives for locating a very large nuclear power plant.

Higher Gas Prices. Go for Trains and Electric Cars?

Fuel prices are trending upward in a hurry due to world events.

Local governments, including Honolulu's also are increasing fuel taxes.

The damage to people's wallets and family budgets will worsen.
So is it more economical to switch to a train or an electric car? This is definitely not a good choice in Honolulu.

Hawaii has by far the highest price per kilowatt-hour of electric power in the nation. The current price on Oahu is about 28 cents per KWh or 230% higher than the U.S. national average. AAA reports today's regular gas price in Honolulu at $4.084 per gallon or 15% higher than the U.S. national average.


Over 75% of the electric power on Oahu is produced by oil.


So it is pain at the pump and pain at the plug. But in relative terms, gasoline is a bargain. Honolulu pays a 15% premium on gas and a 230% premium on electricity.

This has two important implications for transportation in Hawaii:

1. The 100% electric car Nissan Leaf is rated by EPA at 99 MPGe (miles per gallon equivalent) assuming the average price of 11 cents per KWh in the US. This reduces to about 40 mpg in Hawaii because power is 230% more dear. As a result, the Nissan competes with similarly fuel efficient Ford, Honda, Hyundai and Toyota hybrids which cost less and have a range of 400 miles instead of 100 miles.
2. The operating cost and pollution impact of the proposed rail will be staggering because it draws several megawatts of electricity, runs almost empty for 16 out of 20 hours of its daily operation, and has a minimal benefit on traffic congestion.

(Of course by now it is clear that rail is the way for billions of taxes to be reallocated to special groups and politicians -- both of them pushing it madly.)

Recession 2011

Many economists were warning that the 2008-2009 will be a "double dip" recession because of the mounting federal, state and local debts in the U.S.

2010 was not a "banner year" and expectations were that 2011 would be a better one. Did you realize what happened in the first quarter of 2011?

• Momentous changes are occurring in the Arab world including change in regimes, bloodbaths and large increases in oil prices. This in turn makes the recovery of the world economy from the long 2008-2009 recession harder. (See trend below.)
  
• Then a few days ago the world's third largest economy was hit with (perhaps) 10,000 deaths and well over one trillion dollar bill in damages.
  
• Japan, a country of about 127 million people accounts for about 16% of the annual tourist revenues of Hawaii and Japan's debt situation is actually worse than USA’s (at least the federal portion of it.)
• Australia is now expending over $6 billion to cover the damages of extensive floods in late 2010.
• New Zealand's second largest city was hit by a strong earthquake on February 22 causing 166 deaths and damages estimated at $11 billion, or 7% of the country's GDP.
• Australia, population 22 million and New Zealand, population 4 million account for 1% of of the annual tourist revenues of Hawaii.

The direct impacts of these to Hawaii will be more expensive energy, more expensive air fares and much fewer visitors from Japan and from economies that are strongly linked to the economy of Japan, and fewer visitors from Down Under

Higher consumer basket prices and lower revenues and taxes from the tourist industry are a given. Expect that the second half of 2011 will be a mild (at best) recession for Hawaii.

A Simple Analysis of USA’s Debt to China and Japan

The March 5, 2011 issue of The Economist states that USA’s debt to China at the end of 2010 in the form of U.S. Treasury notes was 30% higher than had been thought. China holds $1.19 Trillion in U.S. Treasury notes and Japan holds $882 Billion of the same.

So this form of debt of the USA to China and Japan comes to $2,072,000,000,000.

Let’s try to get a handle on this. The U.S. has about 140 million taxpayers (indeed, less than half of the population files for federal taxes) and 20% of them pay minimal amounts. That leaves about 100 million taxpayers holding this bag.

What’s your share? $20,720!

The average U.S. taxpayer owes China and Japan about $21,000. Your rate will vary depending on your income: If you make $50,000 you pay roughly 15% of that to the IRS, but if you make $200,000 you pay 30% of that to the IRS.

We got ourselves into a deep (and deepening) hole. There is one way to lessen this: Devalue the dollar to ½ its current worth. In this way, our average taxpayer debt to China and Japan becomes about $10,000.

Unfortunately at the same time everything at Walmart and at the gas pump doubles in price. Overnight the gas price goes from $4 to $8 per gallon. And a large portion of the population becomes impoverished.

Twenty plus years of tax and spend and entitlements will come full circle. Entitlements are the wrong way to pull people out of poverty. They ballooned the national and local debts. And the poor will pay the heaviest price no matter how hard “socially minded” decision makes have tried to help them.

Hawaii Clean Energy: Part 2 -- Summary of a Presentation

HAWAII’S RENEWABLE ENERGY MANDATES, and HOW IT AFFECTS EVERYONE

Presentation to Hawaii Conservatives in Hilo, Hawaii, on February 27, 2011

We were honored to be addressed by two distinguished speakers at our Feb 27 forum: Michael Kaleikini, manager of Puna Geothermal Ventures, on “Geothermal Energy in Hawaii" and Dr. Panos Prevedouros, Professor of Civil Engineering at University of Hawaii, on “Statewide Implications of the Mandates". Questions were entertained after both speakers concluded.

Mr. Kaleikini described the history and present role of Puna Geothermal Ventures production on the Big Island. The first geothermal wells were drilled in the 1960s in Kapoho. In 1981, the state had a pilot program to prove the viability of geothermal energy production. The plant produced 3 MW of power, and was designed to last 3 years but stayed in production for 6-7 years. In 1993 PGV came on line, the first commercial geothermal plant in Hawaii. It was located on the lower rift zone of Kilauea because “ that is where the resource is."

It uses a hybrid / combined cycle where steam and hot water (brine) comes up in production wells from about 6000 ft down, is used to drive turbines for power generation, and then is returned underground via injection wells. It is a 100% renewable and closed-loop system. Today there are 6 production wells and 4 injection wells in operation.

PGV has 34 full-time employees and contractors. The State of Hawaii owns the mineral rights, and PGV pays royalties to the state and county. Proceeds from those royalties have gone to support the Hele-on bus, lifeguards, park maintenance and other public projects. PGV is owned by ORMAT Corporation, head quartered in Nevada, with geothermal projects located around the globe. They are the only vertically integrated geothermal energy company, involved with drilling, manufacturing of turbines and associated specialized geothermal equipment and electrical power production.

Currently PGV is under contract with HELCO to provide 30MW of electricity, and is permitted to go to 60 MW. They provided 17% of the Big Island total electricity last year, and they just recently signed a new contract to provide an additional 8MW at a fixed price not tied to the price of oil (as their present contract is).

Dr. Prevedouros then addressed us.

He pointed out that Hawaii had the most expensive electricity in the nation, double that of California and 3 times the national average (36 cent per kw-hour on the Big Island). Our energy sources as a state are 77% from oil, 15% coal and the rest “renewable". The Big Island is about 68% oil and 32% renewable, of which geothermal is about 18% and wind 11%. The state is therefore vulnerable to the availability of oil. American national policy has supposedly been to reduce our need for oil as an energy source, but through many different administrations little progress has been made. As Jon Stewart has said about this, "Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Fool me 8 times...am I a @#$% idiot?"

Hawaii has had "renewable energy" mandates since 2001. In 2008, the Lingle administration increased the goal to be 70% "clean" energy by 2030, of which 40% is to be in electrical production and 30% from efficiencies and alternate fuel sources. However, if we kept present oil and coal usage constant, and massively increased production of biomass, H-power (trash), geothermal, wind and solar, we would still not meet the projected demand in 2025.

Part of the problem is how does one define "clean"? Is it energy that reduces greenhouse gases, hazardous chemicals (like mercury and sulfur dioxide), environmental degradation associated from production (like mine tailings and drilling leaks or cutting forests to plow more fields for biofuels), or the pollution hazards of combustion (such as trash)?

In addition, it is true that cheap energy = growth, and this is essential for our economic system. Most of our economic growth is tied to natural resource extraction, which will be limited if resources are not renewable. However, that does not apply to renewable sources of energy, including geothermal, hydro, solar, trash burning, nuclear and potentially algae to fuel.

What is needed is a realistic approach, not pipe dreams", Dr. Prevedouros stated.

• In Spain, it was found that for every 1 "green job" financed by the Spanish taxpayers, 2.2. jobs were lost from the overall economy.

• In Germany, "green" jobs financed by the government disappeared as soon as government subsidies ended.

• One electrical vehicle is the equivalent of a small house in power consumption.

• He himself had a solar system on his roof at home, but the $14,000 system cost him a net $4000 only after state and federal subsidies

• After 30 months, countless TV appearances, and $80 million spent on an extravagant PR campaign, T. Boone Pickens has finally admitted the obvious: The wind energy business isn't a very good one. He's abandoning the wind business to focus on natural gas. On a national scale, it is expected the US will transition heavily from present 49% coal/21% natural gas to 40% cheap natural gas/25% coal.

• Denmark, the poster child of wind energy production at 20%, has to sell much of its peak power to neighboring Norway and buy from them a steady base load in return, as wind is incapable of a steady supply.

• Wind cannot work in Hawaii, as we have no nearby neighbor for such a deal. What are we going to do, turn the elevators on in Waikiki when the wind blows, then turn them off when it stops? Impossible."

• Turning food to energy is no good either. " Food prices world wide are rising as a result. " Former vice president Al Gore said that he regrets supporting first generation corn-based ethanol subsidies while he was in office. Gore said his support for corn-based ethanol subsidies was rooted more in his desire to cultivate farm votes for his presidential run in 2000 than in doing what was right for the environment: "It is not a good policy to have these massive subsidies for first-generation ethanol".

Dr. Prevedouros stated "Energy policy should be grounded in realism, and should pursue the ‘Double A's’: Abundant and Affordable."

Energy policy in the US has consisted of fantasies: fantastical claims of imminent energy independence or imminent technology breakthroughs. Wind and solar power are unreliable for baseload electricity; even with subsidies, they do not scale up enough to reduce fossil fuel use significantly.

Governments simultaneously spend too little and too much on clean-tech. Too little on research, development and demonstration of new technologies, and too much subsidizing the commercialization of older technologies that don’t stand on their own. If clean-tech companies can make a profit making subsidized technologies, why would they try to invent anything better?

So what makes sense for Hawaii?

Clarity of goals is needed

• ENERGY goals pertain to total energy management for electricity and transportation, local and long-distance.
• POWER goals pertain to the management of electricity generation and consumption.
• Hawaii’s priorities should be on ENERGY. Clean POWER cannot bring food, supplies and visitors.

On the Big Island, increase geothermal for complete electrical supply. He notes the geothermal reserve on Earth is 70 million QUADs (hot rock only) but the USA needs only 100 QUAD/yr. In the Philippines they already use 27% geothermal, and in Iceland 100% for electrical power.

On Oahu and Maui, increase trash burning and clean coal as electrical power sources. Australia has a resource of over 75 billion tons of high quality and inexpensive coal: low in sulfur and reduced ash, high in energy content. India recently contracted to purchase 8 billion tons and was building port facilities for that alone. Honolulu should consider that as an alternative to oil.

On Oahu, increased "green bin" biomass use for methanol vehicle fuel, cooking grease for biodiesel, and long-term use of biofuels from algae. Algae have the potential of being both renewable, greater affordable energy potential than wind or solar, and are attracting serious investment.

Also not out of consideration would be nuclear. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is processing permit applications for at least 26 new power plants in U.S. Gallop Poll shows 62% favor the technology, and Obama wants to triple the amount of loan guarantees for new reactors. The current price tag for a large nuclear plant: $6-8 billion. Traditional nuclear power plants are not suitable for Hawaii. However, there is the possibility of extending lengthy power cables to decommissioned Navy vessel with small reactors (50 MW). Also promising are the "micro-reactors" such as the Toshiba 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple) nuclear power system able to supply 10 MW of electricity for 30 years without any new fuel. The plant is simply buried and then dug up and replaced when used up.

The achievable goal would be to bring Hawaii’s overall present 75% oil usage down to 40% by 2040.

Hawaii Clean Energy: Part 1 -- Goals and Reality

Hawaii's past history for electricity generation does not bode well for its "clean energy" goals.

Hawaii has a goal of reaching 40% renewable energy by 2040. Possible? Yes! Probable? Definitely not!

Here is why, based on our past history as documented in DBEDT statistics. I used 1993 as the reference year because in 1993 three large energy projects came online: Two on Oahu, the AES coal plant and the H-Power plant, and one on the Big Island, the Puna Geothermal Venture plant.

As a result of these large new power plant investments, oil consumption in 1993 dropped by 11.5% compared to 1992. Ten years later, in 2002 Hawaii was back at the 1992 level of oil consumption for electricity generation!

DBEDT statistics I could find had 2008 as the most recent year in the data series, so I used the 1993 to 2008 period and estimated that Hawaii energy needs increased by 12.75%. I assumed that this will be the growth of demand for electricity for 2025.

I also assumed that:
(1) Both oil and coal consumption will stay constant at the 2008 level.
(2) Covanta will successfully bring online a third "boiler" and increase power production by 50%, by expanding from 2 boilers to 3 boilers.
(3) Hydroelectric power will stay constant.

Based on these assumptions, all the additional energy will need to be produced from renewable energy sources. How much renewable energy does Hawaii need to add compared to its 2008 renewable power plant set?

• 300% increase in geothermal
• 300% increase in wind
• 300% increase in biomass, and
• 1,000% increase in solar

[Note: these are numerical examples of renewable energy shares that may satisfy Hawaii's electricity needs in 2025. These shares of renewable sources of electric power are not a recommended strategy for Hawaii.]

All these investments in renewable energy are only sufficient for keeping the oil and coal "dependency" constant at 2008 levels.

If these investments were to be executed in the next 14 years, Hawaii's renewable attainment will be 19.8% in 2025.


The pie-in-the-sky state goal calls for 33% renewable electricity generation by 2025. My 19.8% estimate is optimistic: If by 2025 Oahu has a working rail system and several thousand electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles, they will require much more electric power than the amount I used for my estimations of Hawaii's 2025 power needs. As a result, the renewable energy attainment will be lower than 19.8%.

It is critically important for Hawaii to (1) set realistic goals, and (2) ensure that the right types and technologies of clean and renewable energy are installed.

This article in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald contains some of my views on energy for Hawaii.

Cut, Cut, Cut -- Tax, Tax, Tax

Recent samples of governance by Cuts and Taxes, as published in Hawaii Reporter

Reckless Spending -- Panos' Version

Thomas Sowell wrote a great article on Reckless Spending in Real Clear Politics. I copied his article below and modified it for our Honolulu rail situation. The bold words are my edits to Sowell's article. Small world really... Washington reckless spending and Honolulu reckless spending is one and the same.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing more clearly illustrates the utter irresponsibility of Peter Carlisle than his advocacy of "rail." The man is not stupid. He knows how to use words that will sound wonderful to people who do not bother to stop and think.

High-speed rail may be feasible in parts of Europe or Japan, where the population density is much higher than in Hawaii. But, without enough people packed into a given space, there will never be enough riders to repay the high cost of building and maintaining a high-speed rail system.

Building a rail system between Kapolei and Honolulu may sound great to people who don't give it any serious thought. But we are a more spread-out country than London, Paris or Tokyo.

However little Mayor Carlisle knows or cares about economics, he knows a lot about politics-- and especially political rhetoric. "Rail" is simply word to justify continued expansion of government spending. So are words like "investment in education" or "investment" in any number of other things, which serves the same political purpose.

Who cares what the realities are behind these nice-sounding words? Carlisle leave that to the economists, the statisticians and the historians. His point is to win the votes of people who know little or nothing about economics, history or statistics. At the same time that Carlisle held his fake "ceremonial groundbreaking," he also blanketed his supporters with $150 to $1,000 per person Election 2012 fundraiser solicitation!

To talk glibly about spending more money on "rail" when the national debt has just passed a milestone, by exceeding the total value of our annual output, for the first time in more than half a century, is world-class chutzpa. The last time the U.S. national debt exceeded the value of our entire annual output, it was due to the cost of fighting World War II.

When World War II ended, in less than four years of American participation, we began paying down the national debt. But our current national debt has been expanding by leaps and bounds in peacetime-- and with no sign of an end in sight for the next decade.

Since more than 40 percent of our national debt is owed to foreigners, this means that goods and services produced by Americans, equal in value to more than 40 percent of our current output, will have to be sent overseas, free of charge, by either this generation or the generations that follow.

Since the generations that follow cannot vote today, the Obama administration's latest budget keeps the spending increasing, while regaling us with wonderful plans for big reductions in government spending-- years from now, after Obama is gone.

Make no mistake about it, spending wins votes, and votes are the ultimate bottom line for politicians. If fancy words and lofty visions are enough to get the voters to go along with more spending, then expect to hear a lot of fancy words and lofty visions.

One of the most successful political ploys is to promise people things without having the money to pay for them. Then, when others want to cut back on the things that have been promised, blame them for lacking the compassion of those who wrote the checks without enough money in the bank to cover them.

If all else fails, politicians can always say that we can pay for the things they promised us by raising taxes on "the rich." However, history shows that, when tax rates go up to very high levels, people put more of their money in tax shelters, so the government ends up collecting less revenue than before.

But history is so yesterday. What is far more exciting is to think of rail in the future, even if it is speeding us toward bankruptcy.

Dallas Light Rail: Costs Up, Ridership Down

Time and again mainland cities shine a (dark) light on Honolulu's future with rail. Of course given our tiny population size and huge rail construction costs, the actual consequences will be far worse for Honolulu than these "achievements" of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), as summarized by the National Center for Policy Analysis:

• The fixed-route (bus and rail) ridership on DART is less than it was 10 years ago, despite population in the service area growing 17 percent since 2000.
• In that same period, DART has collected almost $4 billion in local sales taxes and hundreds of millions of federal tax dollars on a system that makes hardly a dent in area traffic congestion.
• DART's staff has grown from just under 2,800 employees in 2000 to 3,900 in 2010, an increase of 39 percent.
• For comparison, the Dallas district of the state Transportation Department -- which includes seven counties with a population of more than 4 million and oversees almost 11,000 lane miles of highways -- has fewer than 1,000 employees.
• DART's operating expenses from 2000 to 2010 grew from $242 million to $402 million, a growth of 66 percent to operate a system with declining ridership.
• Meanwhile, as predicted, the agency has reduced the number of bus miles to force ridership onto the light rail system, in many cases making the commute last longer for the regular rider.
• Every time a rider stepped on a rail car or bus in 2010, local taxpayers were paying a $4.45 subsidy for that ride, compared with $2.94 in 2000.
  

Reject the “Jobs” Justification for Transportation Projects

I fully agree with Robert Poole's article which in part reads as follows:

• On a tour of China, government officials took renown economist Milton Friedman to a major construction site, where Dr. Friedman expressed surprise at seeing legions of workers digging away with shovels. When his host responded that a major purpose of the project was to create jobs, Friedman replied that if that was the case, they should equip the workers with spoons instead of shovels.

• That point was underscored in a report issued last month by the Bipartisan Policy Center. “Strengthening Connections Between Transportation Investments and Economic Growth”, written by economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin and civil engineering and urban planning expert Martin Wachs.

• Instead of focusing on short-term construction job-creation, the authors argue for a focus on long-term returns from infrastructure investment. “Over the long-term, higher productivity—the ability to generate more output and income from each dollar of capital or hour of work—is the key to higher labor earnings and improved standards of living,” they write.

• Hence, infrastructure policy should select projects that do the most to enhance long-term productivity—as did the creation of the Interstate Highway System, which dramatically lowered the cost of personal and freight transportation, leading to the world’s most productive logistics system.

Speaking of highways, three California Congressmen are asking that the funds of the California high speed boondoggle be diverted to correct the ills of SR 99. Part of their positions is as follows:

• The economic and environmental benefits of SR 99 improvements are strongly contrasted by the uncertainty of California’s now infamous bullet train, which has been described by the national press as “the train to nowhere.” Providing the state the option to redirect high speed rail funding to SR 99 will give state and local leaders the opportunity to step-back from what is likely to become a bottomless pit of spending.

The bottom line is government needs to invest taxes in productive and necessary infrastructure. For Hawaii this means road repairs, water and sewer line repairs, and airport and harbor upgrades within our ability to borrow and pay. All these are necessary projects and with proper scheduling and financing they can get done without breaking the citizens' backs.

The airport modernization, and the Middle Street merge fix projects that Gov. Abercrombie wants to do should be done asap. The Mufi/Carlsisle rail boondoggle needs to be thrown in the trash. The accumulated rail funds should be used immediately for the Middle Street construction, the Honolulu airport upgrades and for the design of the secondary treatment facility mandated by the EPA for our Sand Island effluent treatment plant. Now these are construction and engineering jobs worth paying for.

Albert Einstein and Neil Armstrong Discuss Honolulu's Rail

Click to see my short movie for your infotainment.

Sorry, this very popular animation no longer exists. XTRANORMAL, the free service on which I developed it went out of business.

Did Honolulu City Council Get the Memo from U.S. Congress?

Minutes ago I sent this message to our City Council:

Dear Council Members,

On Tuesday House Transportation Committee Chairman John Mica, R-Fla. said this: “Rather than focusing on the Northeast Corridor, the most congested corridor in the nation and the only corridor owned by the federal government, the Administration continues to squander limited taxpayer dollars on marginal projects.”
Source: http://transportation.house.gov/news/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1065

By this statement it is clear that:

(1) Mica urges focus on the Northeast Corridor and he does not seem interested in preserving funds for the Florida ("his own") rail project.

(2) If it comes to a choice for Mica between SunRail and Honolulu's rail, he would most likely opt to save SunRail. It does not matter that SunRail is an FRA project and Honolulu Rail is an FTA project. It's all coming from the federal budget, specifically, the Highway Trust Fund. (Indeed, more rail projects does mean more potholes and falling bridges.)

(3) Mica knows that projects are rated good, marginal or poor. He's not interested in marginal and poor projects. Honolulu's overall FTA rating is medium (marginal) and our financial plan is defective and the population projections used to derive ridership are wrong.

At a minimum, the Honolulu City Council must not approve any expenditures on rail construction until the FFGA is concluded and the contribution is the promised $1.85 Billion.

After that point, the responsibility of adding $4 Billion debt onto Oahu taxpayers will be all yours.

Aloha,
Panos

Who Opposes Honolulu Elevated Rail?

Pearl Johnson lists some of the groups opposing the elevated rail proposal in the letter to the editor of the Honolulu Star Advertiser copied below. Quite a few!

Additional groups include the HonoluluTraffic.com group, the Fix Now Campaign of yours truly and many architects, engineers and planners. Let's not forget that Bishop Estate favors light rail. Also Federal Judges oppose the rail route using Halekawila Street.

The Sierra Club and Blue Planet Foundations have not had time yet to assess the colossal environmental and pollution impact of this boondoggle, but they are welcome to join when they peel off rail's pseudogreen labels and discover all the soot.

============================
Groups oppose elevated rail

Recent media portrayal of the growing opposition to the city's rail transit plan was unfortunately reduced to a political dust-up between former Gov. Ben Cayetano and Mayor Peter Carlisle. It obscured our shared belief that the city's proposed elevated heavy rail project will destroy mauka-makai view planes, create a physical barrier between the city and our famed waterfront and disturb native Hawaiian burial grounds along its right-of-way.

We consequently are united in opposing the construction of an elevated heavy-rail system through historic downtown Honolulu and strongly urge consideration of a less destructive and more neighborhood-friendly system.

"We" includes the League of Women Voters of Honolulu, The Outdoor Circle, Hawaii's Thousand Friends, Life of the Land, Residents Along The Rail, Save Oahu Farmland Alliance, Friends of Makakilo, Hoa'aina o Hawai'i'imiloa of Leeward Community College and Donors of Irwin Park.

Everyone must learn about the realities of the city's plan and the steamroller process that is propelling it. There's much more to come.

Pearl Johnson
League of Women Voters of Honolulu

Where is The Money for The Rail

Where is the Money? is one question everyone should be asking of the Carlisle Administration.

The other is: How dare you start construction with no guarantee of the federal monies?

Today Minneapolis/Saint Paul concluded their funding agreement with the FTA for Light Rail. See article below.

Notes relevant to Honolulu:

• Twin Cities did not start before they got their money.
• Their cost is under one billion. Ours is close to six billion for one third the population!
• They got a 50% match like we got in 1990. Now our match is about 30%.
• Over the last few days I contacted experts who said that rarely if ever a city starts construction before the Full Funding Grant Agreement is concluded.
• Except for Honolulu. Mayor Harris and Transit Planner Hamayasu (also in charge of the rail project now) jumped the gun with the BRT. In a case of national embarrassment, the FTA withdrew Honolulu's Record on Decision. (History has a way of repeating itself...)
  

Hot off the press: Twin Cities’ light rail project clears money hurdle

Minneapolis — The Metropolitan Council and other local agencies finally have the news they have been seeking: The Federal Transit Administration has sent to Congress the grant agreement for the Central Corridor light rail project.

The move launches a 60-day review various officials described as a courtesy, meaning Congress is expected to approve the grant agreement in early April.

That will let the FTA and the Met Council sign the agreement contract that guarantees the federal government will pay for half of the $957 million light rail project. Officials in Washington, D.C., had delayed delivery of the grant agreement several times, but it was not clear why.

The Central Corridor, the biggest public works project in Minnesota history, will connect the downtowns of St. Paul and Minneapolis via an 11-mile route when it opens in 2014.