Archive for August, 2008

Transit gets the Nod

Friday, August 29th, 2008

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit magazine

After months of paring down candidates and dancing around who was going to be running, we’re finally rounding that last corner and heading down the stretch to the finish for the 2008 presidential election.

This week the Democrats put on their national convention in Denver, Colo., with a flood of people coming to see the presidential and vice presidential nominees, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

It was nice to see for the first time in quite a while a candidate mentioning transit in a speech, as Joe Biden did last night:

“…I profoundly disagree with the direction John [McCain] wants to take this country, from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Amtrak to veterans.”

Biden is a firm believer in Amtrak. He rides it everyday on his trip back from the Senate to his home in Delaware, so it is easy to understand how he can be a supporter of increased Amtrak funding. Will this self-dubbed, “Mr. Transportation,” help transit infrastructure in the United States? I hope so.

John McCain is not an Amtrak supporter, stating that only the Northeast and far West can support a viable rail system. Currently McCain’s Web site has a section on reforming the transportation sector, but it doesn’t mention public transit.

Frankly for our purposes here, I don’t care what your political leanings are. If you ask anyone in this industry what his or her party affiliation is, the answer should be “transit.” We’re all in this together and we need to stick together to get transit to the forefront of election issues.

We’re at a crossroads with high gas prices causing people to reevaluate America’s “car culture” for the first time. Our elected officials are getting the message, but we need to make sure they know that transit stays an acceptance speech topic.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Transit Progress and the Kindness of Strangers

Friday, August 22nd, 2008

“Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.”
Blanche Dubois in Tennessee Williams’ “A Streetcar Named Desire.”

I don’t know about you, but I am getting tired of public transit in the United States having to depend on the kindness of strangers. Right now, the strangers who have moved the price of gasoline to $4 a gallon have been very kind to transit, or so it would seem. Did you ever think you would see that many news articles and television spots devoted to the virtues of public transit as we have seen this year? But this season’s combined high-water mark for gas prices, ridership and media attention is already receding. It’s dropped $.25 a gallon since I started this piece! Where it will be by publication date, I do not know. Many in our business think this time is different: that politicians, the public, governments and public interest groups are now firmly behind public transit as a major tool in the battle against foreign oil dependency and high prices. But are they right?

If you’ve been around long enough – about 35 years – you have experienced this several times before. The OPEC oil embargo of 1973 started it all. Gasoline went from $.38 a gallon to – hold on to your seats – $.55 a gallon in less than a year. Then there was the Iranian Revolution of 1979 followed by the Iraq-Iran war, and gas prices spiked again. The war went on for eight years, but from a gasoline-price perspective, things settled down quickly. Transit got another six months of fame when the Kuwaiti invasion by Iraq brought on the first Gulf War in 1990. Gas prices held steady and then dropped during the 90s, and then came the 21st century with the 9/11 attacks, and new wars in the land of OPEC. That pretty much brings us to 2008 where we have had the unprecedented run-up to four bucks a gallon, about 10 times the price of gasoline when the modern era of temporary, but repetitive, media infatuation with public transit began.

It has been nice to be discovered again. And, if you are in the younger half of our industry, maybe your life’s work is being discovered for the first time. We cannot afford not to take advantage of this round of attention. But more than likely, the economy will once again adjust to the new level of energy costs. The emerging decrease or slowdown in the increase of demand will knock the price down a bit, and pretty soon the news articles and television talking heads will forget about public transit until the next time.

As I mentioned, there’s a lot of buzz in the business that this time was different. This time, there was a tipping point. Transit will hold onto those new riders. Ballot issues supportive of transit will appear and be passed. I hope the buzz is right, but must we continue to depend on the kindness of strangers to justify the proper increase in transit investment? Especially when those strangers tend to come in the guise of war, violence and hostile economic strategies aimed at this country?

We have our national and regional associations, lobbying and advocacy groups and our “support groups” from the business side of the business all working to capitalize on the cost of gas. There’s been progress in linking improved transit as a way to reduce the contribution of the transportation sector to climate change and air pollution. We have major trends emerging on sustainable development and a return to city centers for living, working and playing. We have aging baby boomers who will be demanding full mobility, even when they can no longer drive a car. We have a growing weariness with street and highway congestion, which so far is only slightly affected by the price of fuel. So we’ve turned the corner, right? Increased support for transit will be first and foremost on every voters’ mind when they cast their ballot this November, right? Well, not quite.

Transit services are undeniably more popular than a year ago, whether provided by a bus, a rail car or a vanpool 15-seater. But we are also seeing service cutbacks by a large number of providers. Kindness has its limits, and public transit operators are scrambling just as hard as Joe and Judy Six-pack to pay for diesel, natural gas and electricity. At the moment of our highest post-WW II popularity, a lot of us are in retreat. We’re raising fares, eliminating routes and hours of service, and shrinking our coverage area.

Elected officials and citizens in suburbs who want expanded service for the first time in their lives are told there are no extra buses to expand service. And if the transit system can find an extra bus or two, the suburban mayors and wannabe bus riders cannot comprehend that a full bus does not translate into a profit for the bus company! Transit staff, once again, is spending time trying to explain the concept of the farebox operating ratio, and trying to find an audience for the tale of the auto subsidy.

If public transit is ever going to control its own destiny in this country, the industry has to go on a sustained initiative like it has never has before. It helps to be on the right side of a pocketbook issue like gas prices, but we should not let the roller-coaster gas price ride keep us from positioning transit where it should be in local, regional, state and national funding debates. Every manager, every board member, every transit advocate needs to seize the argument about the amount of transit investment in his or her region and in the nation and reshape that argument. It doesn’t matter what the price of gas is. Our cities and citizens need and deserve a higher level of public transit. It doesn’t matter what the current thinking is regarding climate change. Our cities and citizens need and deserve a higher level of public transit.

Did we get to this point of such a huge modal imbalance by listening to the highway lobby tell us that highways were needed to save the planet? No, it just became part of the national conventional wisdom that more streets and highways equaled more economic development, more satisfaction with where we lived and worked more efficiently. In the first part of the twentieth century, states and cities indicated their progress toward civilization by showing how many miles of unpaved roads were remaining. It was accepted that a region could not really call itself civilized unless all the roads were paved. Then we moved the needle to a higher level, the planning and implementation of the Interstate highway system. We need an equivalent goal for transit, whether that is percent of population within walking distance of a bus or rail line, service hours per capita, or just plain old Levels of Transit Service A,B,C,D,E or F, that we define and award to each metropolitan area.

It is time we show there is a new conventional wisdom. We need to go further than just asking for an increase in the budget allotment, national and local. We need a plan, including detailed funding needs, and we then need to get that plan into the collective wisdom and say, “This is where we are going.” And if some strangers help us out along the way, that will be just fine.

Keith Jones is a regional transit planning manager for URS Inc.

 

Employee Health

Friday, August 22nd, 2008

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

On Monday 11 former transit employees or their next of kin filed a lawsuit in the New York Supreme Court against the manufacturers of diesel engines and buses citing exposure to diesel fumes as the cause of severe medical problems.

Since then seven more plaintiffs have been added to the suit, and that number could continue to grow, possibly causing a wealth of problems for the diesel bus industry.

Of those who filed on Monday, nine have various forms of cancer and the others have a variety of heart conditions. According to the plaintiff’s claims, they were exposed to undue amounts of diesel fumes while working in unventilated bus depots.

The defendants include General Motors, Detroit Diesel, Cummins Diesel, Northrop Grumman Corp., Orion Bus Industries and other companies. The most telling claim by the plaintiffs is that the defendants manufactured engines in such a way as to pass emissions standards, but that contained “defeat devices” that could be switched off after testing.

First of all, I believe the fact that more than half again as many plaintiffs have been added in less than a week is just the proverbial iceberg’s tip. As the news of this case spreads across the country, I expect a vastly larger number of plaintiffs to come out of the woodwork.

Just think about how many buses were sold over the 40-or-so year period they are discussing here. If the plaintiff’s claims are true, how many of those buses were outfitted with these “defeat devices”?

Now, while I won’t put it past a massive company to cut corners to make money — it’s happened before and, unfortunately, will happen again — I have to wonder about these “defeat devices.” If they were indeed installed on the vehicles (and I’m not saying they weren’t), then someone would have to turn them off. Did someone at the transit agency knowingly do that?

Or were they surreptitiously implanted in engines? That I find harder to believe. I’ve been around enough bus garages to know that the mechanics in there know the engines in their fleet better than the ones in their own cars.

There is much more about this story that is going to come out. I think the truth is going to fall somewhere in the middle between the two parties. What will the end result be? It’s hard to say with anything of this nature, but with the desire for alternative fuels and desire for public transit both at all-time highs, it might just hasten agencies to switch to hybrid or electric vehicles.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

 

Hacking the MBTA

Thursday, August 14th, 2008

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit magazine

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) was in court last week getting a temporary restraining order (TRO) against three MIT students who were planning a presentation on how to hack the MBTA’s CharlieTicket and CharlieCard systems at the Defcon hacker conference in Las Vegas. This week the authority was back in court seeking to extend the TRO while it scrambles to plug the security holes pointed out by the students.

Unfortunately it seems that the MBTA might be a bigger security risk than the defendants in this case.

The students pulled their presentation from the conference and presented MTBA with a more detailed paper on the security flaws entitled “Fare Collection Vulnerability Assessment Report Analysis and Recommendations.” The MBTA took the report and offered it as evidence to the court of how damaging this information would be if the student’s released it to the public. Except when you enter materials into a court case they become a matter of public record — whoops!

Yep, this report that could be so damaging to MBTA is now being spread all across the Internet. A simple Google search got me a story with a link to the offending document. But here’s the thing, I read the document and I realized that while in fact, CharlieTickets and CharlieCards could indeed be hacked, I couldn’t do it.

What the MBTA in its zest to suppress this information failed to realize was that the paper isn’t a blueprint to ripping them off. It states in broad terms how the tickets could be hacked, but it doesn’t give you step-by-step instructions. It even presents ways the students found MBTA could solve these security holes.

I have to wonder whether or not MBTA would have targeted these students with legal ramifications so quickly had their paper been released at APTA’s Fare Collection Workshop or TransITech as a cautionary tale for other agencies with provided solutions. Should the three MIT students (or their professor) have presented the document to MBTA before they planned to present it at Defcon? Yes. Of course, they may have called MBTA and had their calls fall on deaf ears. Earlier this year Dutch researchers showed how the card the CharlieCard is based on could be hacked, but the MBTA stated in court documents that its proprietary encryption made those concerns moot.

The report is vague enough that unless you are dead set on hacking the MBTA’s system and have a moderate level of skill you aren’t going to be able to figure out how from it. And if the document as it stands allows people to start wildly hacking MBTA’s fare collection system, maybe it’s time it took a longer look at its own security. I know three college students from MIT who could probably help them out.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Staycation Planning

Thursday, August 7th, 2008

Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit

Last week was the local fair in where I live. Sure in a small town in Wisconsin the local “fair” is a weekend of the same carnival rides you’ve seen for the past five years, the same games and a few bands (both local and past their prime). Of course over the last few years the local fair has become the family vacation as gas prices rose, making traveling for a vacation less than desirable.

Remember when vacations meant taking a plane to some far-off, but still-familiar location, or the multiday car trip with convenient stops to visit rarely seen relatives. Come to think of it, I guess there may be a benefit to not traveling so much.

I heard that airline tickets are going up again next year with an average around $600. Soon this will eliminate the casual flyer from taking a vacation anywhere they want to go. Of course here in the United States we can always fall back on the classic road trip. Of course, with $4-a-gallon gas, the classic road trip might be more local than long distance.

In Europe should you want to travel and not use a plane or have a car, you can always use the train system. Here in the United States that’s not going to be so easy. I looked into using Amtrak for the summer vacation this year, but there wasn’t a local station (despite trains traveling through my town), the times were difficult to plan around and the tickets weren’t much less than flying.

So we stayed home again this year. And from reports, my family and I weren’t the only ones. The term “staycation” has been coined meaning a vacation spent at home enjoying what you can find locally. This can be a great thing, but it could also isolate us as we lose our ability to quickly travel large distances at a low cost.

This is where transit can be so beneficial for the United States. We need a national rail system. There I said it. We need Amtrak to be nationwide what it is in the Northeast Corridor. We need a high-speed regional rail system around every major population center in the country — Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas. And we need to make it happen soon.

What we need is the game-changing investment into rail that happened with the creation of the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Notice that last little part? The Interstate System was built upon military defense backing. Interestingly enough Eisenhower was inspired by the German autobahn and how it was a necessary component for national defense. Now we are looking at Germany’s rail network with longing as Eisenhower once did with the autobahn.

It’s time we made rail as much of a priority and make staycations mean going anywhere within the United States cheaply again.

Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com