BIKE: The energy crisis; transportation, economics, and politics

[Roger Baker]

On Oct 9, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Patrick Goetz wrote:

> Roger Baker wrote:
>> For similar reasons, I think that Mike Dahmus' and Patrick Goetz's 
>> current opposition to even a modest commuter rail start (largely on 
>> the grounds that one modest initial rail start doesn't solve that 
>> many problems linked to our current transportation behavior and 
>> thinking) will soon enough be regarded as an inappropriate political 
>> stance closely related to our currently widespread denial of cheap 
>> oil addiction. We'll know soon.
>
> This is patently absurd.  We're both suggesting that a considerably 
> more comprehensive rail system providing service to useful 
> destinations be implemented sooner rather than later, that the public 
> will to build and pay for such a system exists, and that the modest 
> commuter rail start could actually serve to turn public opinion 
> against rail rather than increase support for it.  Please engage again 
> in the creative visualization exercise of hundreds of motorists 
> sitting behind rail crossing arms at such major intersections as 
> Airport & Lamar during rush hour for minutes at a time while nearly 
> empty commuter rail cars scoot by, horns blasting so loudly that it 
> hurts their ears just to add insult to injury.  Yep, you can bet that 
> every one of these motorists is going to become a rail supporter 
> forthwith, if not sooner.

The real issue is whether it is better to support the only rail 
opportunity in this area that the road lobby and the backward nature of 
Texas politics is willing to permit the voters.  Why was comprehensive 
light rail removed as a future possibility for this area after one 
close vote and why can't we vote on toll roads? Rep. Mike Krusee has 
made sure that we must vote on rail but can never vote on roads. But 
even assuming that this one modest scaled back rail start were voted 
down, the facts I provided in my last post indicate that a peak in 
world oil production will probably occur within a few year. After that 
happens it won't matter a whole lot in terms of public support for 
alternatives.  The fact is that the road lobby has already crippled the 
potential of the Austin area through decades of building roads to serve 
sprawl, to the extent that Austin drivers now drive the fourth most in 
the world in terms of per capita travel.

If you want to argue on the basis of painting a mental image of the 
imagined future hostility of car drivers to one infrequent passenger 
rail train, which amounts to an emotional argument, then you should 
bolster your credibility by coming up with some specific numbers that 
support your fear. Rail is is doing very well in Dallas. The per capita 
travel is almost equal to Austin at about 30 miles per day. The major 
difference, as I see it is, that the road contracting and real estate 
lobbies like RECA and AARO and CATCO are politically stronger here than 
in Dallas. The following link explains the situation to all those who 
are not willfully blind to the politics involved:

http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2004/05/03/daily34.html

>
> Please explain how the preceding is closely related to a denial of 
> cheap oil addiction?  And for the record, Roger -- please inform the 
> list how it is that you get around town.  I ride my bicycle:  cheap 
> oil/gas consumption = 0 gallons per week.  If we're talking about 
> walking the walk, who is actually in denial about their own 
> consumption of cheap oil?

If you go back a quarter century, the Austin Tomorrow Plan was a very 
progressive transit-oriented master plan for this area. It was never 
accepted as our urban development policy because it helped the wrong 
people. The major problem was that it did not line the pockets of the 
politically powerful Austin area real estate interests -- any more than 
the trolley lines and streetcars lined the pockets of General Motors in 
the large cities of the United States in the 1930's and 1940's.  Sprawl 
politics dominated urban development in both cases with similar 
results. So now we have spent or committed billions in the Austin area 
to road infrastructure that demands cheap oil forever to function 
properly.  The Austin area is therefore in serious trouble when world 
oil peaks, even when compared to most American cities.

I personally get around town by driving an automobile, in part because 
I think bikes are pretty dangerous in Austin due to decades of neglect 
of serious attention to safe alternative transportation. As a 
transportation reform advocate I spend a lot of time working for 
political change intended to make it more possible and practical for 
others to get around using transportation alternatives like bikes and 
transit.

Along similar lines, I marched and picketed to desegregate Austin in 
the early 1960's, even though I am white, and I have since worked to 
support civil liberties for others who suffer from injustice much more 
than I do. I now actively oppose the war in Iraq, even though I am 
probably not going to be called up to fight.  I think we're all in this 
mess together, and that we all need to support rational public policy 
even though it might not feather our own nest personally, so to speak.  
-- Roger