A. Thomas's criticism of the proposed bus-route finding system (letter, 22 January), is based upon the argument that "most Metro Transit customers do not have Internet access." Thomas then proceeds to call for a "system that helps the average customer rather than the customer with Internet access."
This criticism overlooks at least three possible ways that someone could use the system without having direct Internet access:
Ideally, everyone in Halifax would have direct access to the bus-route finding system; however, until that day comes, there are viable alternatives to help the "average customer".
Published: 29 January 2000 (Daily News)
The town of Hurup on Denmark's Jutland peninsula consists of several hundred homes and a number of small manufacturing industries. What is peculiar about the town is that despite its northerly location and proximity to the North Sea, as well as the fact that wood is used as the heating fuel, few buildings have chimneys. The lack of chimneys is easily explained -- the town uses district heating.
In Hurup's district heating system, almost all buildings in the town are connected to a wood-fired central heating plant. This plant produces hot water that is pumped through insulated pipes around the town; homes and other buildings extract heat from the pipes to obtain hot water for heating and domestic hot water. Hurup is far from unique; many northern European governments require cities and towns to heat buildings with district heating.
Sources of hot water for district heating can be a dedicated central heating plant, such as the one found in Hurup, or it can be the 'waste' heat from a thermal electrical generation station. In fact, 'waste' heat from electrical generation is a common source of hot water for district heating systems (since most electrical generation stations discard over 60 per cent of their energy as low-grade heat, utilities use the hot water to heat buildings).
So what does district heating have to do with Nova Scotia? Sadly, not much. If it did, things might be considerably different here, both economically (by reducing our reliance on imported oil, as well as providing employment opportunities) and environmentally (by using fuels more efficiently).
Nova Scotia has at least two sources of low-cost energy that could support district heating:
Before dismissing district heating as being one of those peculiar European things, it is worth noting that Charlottetown has a large wood-fired district heating system that heats both public and private buildings (including individual homes). Other cities across Canada are also installing district heating systems to help reduce energy costs and emissions. Nova Scotia Power was, until recently, pushing for district heating in Halifax, but the lure of 'cheap' natural gas caused several large potential users to pull out of the project.
The financial crisis that many low and fixed income Nova Scotians are facing today because of the recent cold weather, coupled with rising world oil prices, could be alleviated by installing district heating systems in the province's cities and towns. Helping these people with some form of rebate is a sensible, short-term solution; however, if there are two things we can be certain about (other than death and taxes), it is that we will continue to have cold winters for the foreseeable future and that world oil prices will continue to rise.
A forward thinking government would recognize the possibilities of district heating and enable legislation to encourage its development.
Published: 15 February 2000 (Daily News)
In his letter of 17 February, Alex MacPherson proposes that a special fund for highways be created from a two cent per gallon tax on all gasoline sold in Nova Scotia. Despite its seeming appeal, such a tax would make very little impact on the provincial 'transportation' budget.
In 1997, Nova Scotian automobiles, light trucks (including SUVs) and heavy trucks consumed about 1.2 billion litres of gasoline. A two cent per gallon fund (roughly half-a-cent per litre) would generate about six million dollars. This is enough to twin about 5 kilometres of highway.
Interestingly enough, even with a provincial fuel tax of 13.5 cents per litre (raising about $200 million a year), Nova Scotia must use other tax revenues to pay for its yearly road construction and maintenance projects (about $220 million in 1997). If the costs of policing our highways and accidents were covered by road users, the provincial fuel tax would have to more than double.
Published: 22 February 2000 (Chronicle-Herald)
According to Nova Scotia Finance Minister Neil LeBlanc, the province will get about $30 million for infrastructure projects over the next three years. The $30 million is intended for projects such as road upgrading, housing, and environmental initiatives.
Twinning advocates, such as Anne Cameron of Kentville, co-founder of Twin-2-Win, are said to be disappointed because they had hoped for sufficient matching federal funds to pay for half of the twinned Highway (about $60 million dollars). Transportation Minister Ron Russell is quoted as saying that he will continue talks with the federal government to determine what funds, if any, are available.
Since safety (as opposed to economics) is said to be the reason for twinning, it would seem sensible for the province to adopt immediate policies to improve the safety of Highway 101. One effective, low-cost approach would be to lower the speed limit.
During the oil-crisis of the 1970s, the United States government instituted a 55 mile-per-hour (about 88 kilometres-per-hour) speed limit, which resulted in a 32 percent decline in road fatalities. However, when the speed limit was raised from 55 to 65 miles-per-hour in the mid-1980s, the number of fatalities rose; for example, in New Mexico it almost doubled within a year.
Decreasing the speed limit from 100 km/hr to 90 km/hr will increase travel time by about 11 percent. It will also save lives, lessen the burden on our health care system, and make infrastructure funds available for other important initiatives.
Submitted to Chronicle-Herald and Daily News (29 February)
I would like to make two comments regarding this morning's broadcast and the rising price of oil.
First, Nova Scotia Finance Minister Neil LeBlanc is quoted as saying that the province is not making any revenue from the increasing cost of gasoline because Nova Scotians are driving less and are therefore buying less gasoline.
If this is the case, then how are these people travelling around the province? In most communities outside of Halifax, the only method of travel is the private automobile.
Perhaps you could ask Mr. LeBlanc or Transportation Minisiter Ron Russell how Nova Scotians are travelling in a time of rising fuel prices and whether the province has any plans to develop a provincial public transportation system.
Second, the 7:50AM interview with the academic from Dalhousie University regarding the rising cost of gasoline contained numerous factual errors. For example:
(At 50 billion barrels a day, OPECs reserves would run out in 16 days.)
Perhaps you will take a few moments on tomorrow's programme to correct these errors.
Submitted to CBC Radio, 2 March
Late last month, Halifax Regional Municipal council voted unanimously to build a 670-space parking garage in downtown Halifax. According to city staff, the $11.8 million garage will never make money and will require an annual subsidy of $386,400.
If only Metro Transit passengers were as lucky:
If HRM council would be only half as generous to Metro Transit passengers as they will be to those who will use the new parking garage, many previously discontinued services could be re-established, potentially attracting passengers back to public transportation. Subsidizing parking garages while eroding public transportation services is not the way to create a 'world-class' city.
Published Daily News (9 May 2000)
Last April, during a week-long visit to England, I spent several days in Sheffield, which, like many industrial revolution cities built upon ‘old’ economy industries, has undergone radical changes over the past 25 years. The steel mills, foundries, and coal mines are long gone, replaced by ‘new’ economy industries, including leisure and entertainment, education (Sheffield has two universities), call centres, and numerous Information Technology (IT) companies.
Sheffield’s evolution from the old to the new economy includes major changes to the city’s downtown core. Several major thoroughfares have been replaced by a large pedestrian mall that incorporates a Peace Garden in front of the city hall, a large shopping precinct, several theatres, numerous restaurants and pubs, hotels, as well as a new art gallery. The downtown core is linked to the surrounding areas by rail (the station is within walking distance of the pedestrian mall), bus, car, and the Supertram.
The Supertram is an urban mass transit system connecting various parts of Sheffield with the downtown. The system consists of 29 kilometres of track and about 24 articulated electric trams. Each tram is 35 metres long and can carry over 200 passengers at speeds of up to 80 kilometres per hour. Throughout the centre of Sheffield, each tram is separated from other vehicular traffic, while outside the centre, much of Supertram’s tracks share the roadway with cars and trucks.
Each Supertram station consists of a ‘low-level’ platform, about 20 cm high. The platform height is the same as that of a tram’s floor, allowing easy access for all. Many stations are near transportation nodes, such as railway stations, bus routes, and park-and-ride lots, adding to the convenience of Supertram.
Since its introduction in 1995, Supertram has reduced the need for cars in Sheffield’s centre, resulting in less inner city traffic congestion and air pollution. Furthermore, the presence of Supertram encourages extra travel both to the city centre and to the large number of leisure, educational and retail developments along the route, all without increasing car traffic.
When I returned to Halifax, I was soon brought back to the realities of HRM’s auto-centric transportation policies with the announcement that council had unanimously approved $11.8 million for a parking garage. In response to a question regarding the cost of the garage, Mayor Fitzgerald was quoted as saying, "If you don’t have parking, the downtown dies."
The Mayor couldn’t be further from the truth in making this statement. Downtown Halifax needs people, not parking, in order to survive. Cars do not encourage people to stay in the downtown. Forward thinking Mayors and councils all over the western world have recognized this, creating high quality pedestrian facilities in their city centres. Experience from cities such as Sheffield, Portland (Oregon), Manchester (England), and Curitiba (Brazil) has shown that these facilities, when coupled with efficient mass transit systems, increase retail turnover, directly benefiting local businesses and maintaining employment in the retail sector.
Later, when asked about the possibility of funding a $75,000 study of commuter rail from Beaverbank to Halifax, Mayor Fitzgerald made references to NHL hockey in Halifax, then went on to say that commuter rail has been studied before and it isn’t viable, claiming, "It just doesn’t work."
The 1996 commuter rail study to which Mayor Fitzgerald was referring has been shown to be of questionable value. The study recommended using 1950-vintage ex-Canadian Pacific dayliners (so-called Budd cars). These dayliners had numerous limitations: grossly fuel-inefficient, lacking spare parts, and not designed for commuter rail. Could commuter rail work here? For the price of three parking spaces in HRM’s new parking garage, a team of consultants who are familiar with today’s technology could be hired to answer the question.
Time is running out on this matter. CN Rail is putting pressure on HRM to make a decision by the beginning of September 2000. If a decision is not reached by this date, CN will remove the double track between Windsor Junction and Prince’s Lodge. The loss of this second set of tracks means that any commuter train will be required to share the line with CN’s freight operations. Although this can be done safely, it will require scheduling agreements with CN that could be avoided if the second set of tracks were allowed to remain.
In some respects, the issue of a commuter rail system for HRM is no longer a municipal matter; it is a provincial one. For example, Windsor, West Hants, and King’s counties are becoming ‘dormitories’ of HRM as people move to rural areas but continue to work in HRM. As it stands now, most of these people are forced to commute by driving their cars on Highway 101. As the price of gasoline and the cost of owning an automobile continue to escalate, a commuter train service becomes a cost effective means of transportation between the Valley and HRM. Such a service could reduce traffic volumes on parts of Highway 101, improving our air quality, eliminating the need for the province to spend tax dollars on twinning, and reducing the need for parking in the downtown core of Halifax.
Sheffield, with its downtown pedestrian mall and the Supertram, is an example of how a city can take the first tentative steps in breaking its reliance on the automobile. By initiating similar changes now, HRM and the province could lay the foundations for a transportation system for the 21st century. One that helps all Nova Scotians, regardless of age or ability, reduces our dependence on expensive fossil fuels, and saves our downtown.
Published 11 June 2000 (Sunday Herald)
Mayor Fitzgerald's election slogan, "Building on Success", is an insult to anyone who uses our decaying public transportation system. During his time as Mayor of HRM, ridership on Metro Transit buses has fallen by almost 10 percent, from 13.1 million riders in 1996 to 11.8 million in 1999.
And small wonder. During the past four years, fares have skyrocketed: adult and student cash fares have increased 27 percent ($1.30 to $1.65); senior citizens now pay 29 percent more for a sheet of 20 tickets ($17.00 to $22.00); while the cost of taking a child on the bus has risen 46 percent for a sheet of 20 tickets ($15.00 to $22.00). The lowest fare increase was for student bus passes: a rise of over 18 percent ($43.00 to $51.00).
Rising fares, coupled with declining ridership, has resulted in service cuts on many routes and the elimination of some routes entirely.
In addition to fare hikes and service cuts, Metro Transit riders were subject to a month long strike in the summer of 1998, during which time the Mayor seemed to show little or no interest. When the strike ended in late June, fares were raised the following month.
Progressive cities around the world are waking up to the importance of reliable public transportation systems. However, Mayor Fitzgerald, despite his claim that HRM is "world class", remains mired in the 1950s with his auto-centric policies that encourage automobiles rather than people to the downtown core. Expensive parking garages and proposals for turning Quinpool into a one-way street are short-sighted solutions that will, in the end, solve nothing.
Mayor Fitzgerald's proposal for a high-speed ferry between Bedford and Halifax is yet another example of his complete lack of understanding of HRM's transportation problems. When questioned on this proposal, the Mayor then said that a consultant should be hired to examine transportation in HRM. Although this may sound like a good idea, one can't help but wonder, why hire a consultant when HRM has a Traffic and Transportation Services department?
HRM needs a Mayor who recognizes the importance of public transportation and will push for the development of a transportation system that encourages people reduce their reliance on the automobile. Based on his past performance, one can only conclude that Mayor Fitzgerald is not that person.
Published 27 September 2000 (Chronicle Herald)
I would like to thank Fred Bushor for reminding the readers of this newspaper that it is more than just the mayor who is "auto-centric". Organizations, such as the Downtown Halifax Business Commission, are arguing for less public transit in the downtown core, ostensibly to reduce wear-and-tear on public streets. Mr. Bushnor is also correct in his observation that clever public relation ploys, like adding bike lanes to downtown streets, hide the continued erosion of Metro Transit's budget.
Of course, maybe there is an upside to making Halifax completely dependent on the automobile -- HRM could boost its tourist trade by by attracting people from Europe and the U.S. who are fed up with living in cities that are making their downtown cores more pedestrian friendly by restricting car access.
Who needs "eco-tourism" when Halifax can have "auto-tourism"?
Published 13 October 2000 (Chronicle Herald)
Your editorial, "Metro rail service can't be ignored" (16 October), sensible as it is, suggests that there is not the population base to run a train service from the Valley to Halifax. This view fails to recognize a number of significant issues that are taking place both in Nova Scotia and around the world.
First, various rural development groups in the Valley have been actively seeking to attract people from Halifax to move to the Valley for "the good life". As a result, parts of Kings and West Hants counties are experiencing a significant growth in population. This, in turn, has contributed to the growth in weekday traffic on Highway 101 as many of these people are forced to commute between the Valley and Halifax in the morning and evening.
Second, Nova Scotia has an ageing population, many of whom live in the Valley. As a society, we have a choice: do we force these people out of their rural communities into larger centres such as Halifax simply because they are unable to drive an automobile? Or do we recognize the importance of our rural communities and develop community-based transportation systems whereby these people can continue to live in their communities yet have access to other regions of the province?
Third, the price of gasoline is rising, not only because of government taxes, but because world consumption of oil (at some 72 million barrels a day) is quickly catching up to the world rate of production (at about 73 million barrels a day). This fact, coupled with a decreasing rate of discovery, means that prudent governments will be looking for other means of transporting goods and people in the future.
Fourth, hybrid vehicles (gasoline/electric) and fuel-cell vehicles may appear to be a panacea, but they are not without their problems. It is estimated that it will be at least 20 years before the number of these vehicles make up a significant portion of the North American automobile fleet. Although many of these vehicles are more fuel efficient, many still use oil or natural gas (another inexpensive fossil fuel). Furthermore, these new vehicles don't help our ageing population who need access to transportation services nor do they reduce the number of vehicles on our roads.
Fifth, the impact on humans because of the automobile continues at an alarming pace: road salt poisoning wells, premature deaths and respatory diseases from low-level ozone (smog) and benzene, bronchitis from PM-10 (particulate matter, 10 microns or less in size, from exhaust, brake pads and tires), changing the climate through increases in greenhouse gases, and, of course, the cost to our healthcare system from traffic accidents.
These five issues alone make it worth considering re-instituting rail service between Halifax and the Valley (and Halifax and Truro for that matter, given the population growth along the Highway 102 corridor in towns such as Enfield and Elmsdale). Such a service would help people living in the Valley, reduce our dependance on fossil fuels, reduce traffic on Highway 101, and potentially make downtown Halifax more pedestrian accessible.
Recently, Nova Scotia's Minister of Transportation, Ron Russell, repeated his pledge to spend almost $25 million to 'twin' the 20 kilmetres of section 40 of Highway 101 (Mount Uniacke to Ellershouse). For less than half this amount, ($11.5 million), the province could buy a single train set (consisting of a locomotive and three bi-level carriages) that could carry almost 15 percent of the rush-hour commuters between Windsor and Halifax (about 450 each way) for a $15 return ticket. Such a service would require a government subsidy of about $1.5 million per year.
Moving people by rail is both sensible and affordable. But it requires the vision and participation of a forward thinking provincial government.
Published 20 October 2000 (Daily News)
For more than a decade, Canadians and their politicians have been told about the problems associated with anthropogenic climate change caused by greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Canada has repeatedly committed itself to reducing its emissions, but has never found the will to initiate the changes. Consider:
Despite these commitments, Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions have risen steadily: between 1990 and 1997, emissions increased over 13%. Given present trends, Canadian emissions are expected to be 25% over 1990 levels by 2010.
At present, the Kyoto Protocol is not binding; nations, such as Canada, have signed the protocol but their national governments have not ratified it. If it were ratified, Canadians would be expected to make significant changes to their lifestyles, affecting all sectors of the economy. However, the concern of some, primarily those in the energy sector, is that the upcoming Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC being held in The Hague this November will be the first step in the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.
There are two requirements for the Kyoto Protocol to come into force. First, at least 55 countries must ratify the protocol. Second, sufficient Annex I countries must be signatories so that the total 1990 emissions of the (Annex I) signatories exceeds 55 percent of all 1990 Annex I emissions.
To date, only a few island nations have ratified the Protocol (in part, as an attempt to ‘shame’ developed countries into action). No Annex I party has done so. Achieving the 55 percent emissions will not be an easy task, given that a handful of Annex I countries, notably Australia, Canada, Japan, and the United States, account for 50 percent of the total 1990 Annex I emissions. If these countries were to band together and refuse to ratify the Protocol, it could not come into force.
Canada may well join Australia and the United States in refusing to ratify the Protocol because of the issue of carbon sinks (things that can sequester or capture carbon dioxide, such as forests and plants). The original UNFCCC document states that Annex I parties should, amongst other things, "...promote and cooperate in the conservation and enhancement, as appropriate, of sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases...". Australia and the United States are already on record as wanting to claim their forested regions as areas where carbon is sequestered. Canada may well do the same, given that the federal government, several provincial governments, utilities, and oil companies, have already invested over $1.5 million in sequestration research.
The European Union (EU), as well as a number of other groups, including the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), claim that carbon sequestration in forests cannot easily be measured, making it difficult to determine how much carbon dioxide reduction has actually taken place. Furthermore, sequestering carbon in forests is a risky business, since a fire can release the carbon back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Opponents of sequestration point to last summer’s forest fires in the western United States as an example of why sequestration does not work.
The Kyoto Protocol has a number of mechanisms whereby Annex I countries can exchange emission ‘credits’ with other Annex I countries as well as with developing countries. For example, because the economies of most countries in the former Soviet Union (FSU) collapsed shortly after 1990, these countries are already well below their emission reduction targets. A country that is below its emission reduction target can sell the difference (between its current emissions and its reduction target) to other countries that have not met their reduction target. The United States has already expressed an interest in buying many of the FSU’s emission ‘credits’.
Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol, the so-called Clean Development Mechanism (or CDM), was introduced by Brazil and the United States at the Kyoto negotiations in December 1997. Its purpose is to allow Annex 1 countries to obtain greenhouse gas emission credits through the development of sustainable energy projects in developing countries. Although still subject to some debate, sustainable energy is broadly defined as PV (photovoltaic), solar thermal, micro-hydro, wind, geothermal, ocean energy, and "modern" biomass.
A number of countries around the world are encouraging the growth of sustainable energy through research grants, tax incentives, and energy subsidies. As a result, the European Union and the United States are well placed to benefit from the CDM.
In Europe, years of state support have resulted in some of the world's most advanced wind energy systems. Denmark, Germany, and Spain all stand to benefit from the CDM through their expertise in wind energy, selling wind turbines around the world (including to Hydro Quebec and Vision Quest in Alberta). Germany, in addition to fostering its wind industry, is now encouraging the development of solar energy through their "100,000 Roofs" campaign, in which 100,000 buildings will be fitted with photovoltaic panels and modules.
Similarly, in the United States, major technological advances are occurring in the field of photovoltaics, supported by government programmes to encourage the adoption of solar energy, such as the Million Solar Roofs Initiative. U.S. vice-president Al Gore has spoken of the world demand for U.S. renewable energy technology during his presidential campaign. In addition to governments, forward thinking companies also recognize the potential CDM market. For example, BP Amoco, through its BP Solarex division, is manufacturing solar equipment for use in the developing world.
Despite the federal government’s recent announcement of the $500 million "Action Plan 2000" to counter Canadian greenhouse gas emissions, it is debatable whether Canada will be a major player in the CDM. For example:
Canada will be forced to pin its CDM hopes on two technologies, one old (Candu nuclear reactors), and the other new (fuel cells). However, neither of these will be appropriate for the estimated 2 billion people in developing countries without access to electricity or basic grid connections. To make matters worse, the EU is adamantly opposed to including nuclear power as part of the CDM (which could be another reason for Canada to refuse to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, since the Canadian government could sell Candu reactors if nuclear power was included as part of the CDM).
Developing and selling renewable energy technology at home reduces national greenhouse gas emissions. Making the same technology available through the CDM to developing countries results in emissions credits. It is widely acknowledged that countries with active, renewable energy programmes will benefit from the Kyoto Protocol.
If the Kyoto Protocol is ratified and Canada does not opt out (as it is permitted to do, three years after ratification), Canadians will be required to reduce their emissions, through activities at home and through emissions trading. Buying emissions credits is an easy, short-term solution, offering little economic benefits to Canada. The development of a renewable energy sector, will initially be costly, but will have the benefit of employing Canadians while reducing emissions at home and potentially abroad. Regardless of how Canadians reduce their emissions, it will be necessary to reduce fossil fuels consumption, first through more efficient usage, then through energy substitution.
The Kyoto Protocol offers Canadians and their politicians an opportunity to keep their commitments, help the planet, and improve Canada’s economy. Ignoring the Protocol will, in the end, be more costly than adopting it.
Published 5 November 2000 (Sunday Herald)
Your editorial, Heated Argument (27 November 2000), refers to two remarks made by University of Virginia professor Fred Singer regarding the rise of greenhouse gas emissions over the past century.
Recent research using data back to the mid-19th century, ice cores, corals, old documents, and tree rings have extended our temperature record back over a thousand years. Over the past half-century, global average temperature has increased by more than half a degree. The seven warmest years on record occurred in the 1990s, with 1998 being the hottest.
This claim was dismissed in mid-1998, when it was shown that the orbital decay of satellites (about one kilometer per year) influenced their readings. When the orbital decay is taken into account, upper atmosphere cooling was detected.
It shouldn't be surprising the Professor Singer makes these claims, given that his research has been funded by groups, such as large oil companies, who have an interest in discrediting the science of climate change. What is surprising is that the Daily News would base an editorial on his remarks.
Published December 2000 (Daily News)
Anyone concerned about safety on Highway 101 should be questioning the wisdom of the Department of Transportation and Public Works in its spending of $800,000 to upgrade the Mount Uniacke interchange (Exit 3) (Province Gears Up for Twinning Highway 101, 9 December).
Earlier this year, the Department of Transportation and Public Works hired a consulting firm, Atlantic Road and Traffic Management, to undertake a study of Highway 101. The study concluded that parts of Highway 101 are indeed unsafe due to a variety of factors, most notably people’s driving habits. The report recognized Nova Scotia’s budget problems and recommended a number positive solutions that could be undertaken now, including changing speed limits and the elimination of the at-grade intersection at Ben Jackson Road (Exit 8A).
People who know Highway 101 will tell you that the intersection of Highway 101 and Ben Jackson Road is a deathtrap and should have a proper interchange to allow safe access on and off the Highway. Yet despite this, the province ignored the consultant’s report (issued in August of this year at a cost of almost $30,000) and proceeded to upgrade the Mount Uniacke interchange in mid-November.
The upgrading of the Mount Uniacke interchange is intended to make those who drive Highway 101 and those who are demanding that the Highway be twinned believe that the province is taking action. In reality, the upgrading is an expensive gesture designed for short-term political gain.
If the provincial government is concerned about safety on Highway 101, it should spend our limited resources on those parts of the Highway most in need, such as Ben Jackson Road. Furthermore, if the twinning lobbyists were concerned about safety on Highway 101, they would be lobbying the provincial government to construct an interchange at Ben Jackson Road.
Published 18 December 2000 (Chronicle-Herald)