Erstwhile Air America host Marc Maron says he will be recording his third CD ("and maybe last") at Giggles comedy club, April 4 and 5, 8pm and 10pm shows.
Update: Marc on Conan O'Brien--
Link: Seattle radio interview in advance of the Giggles gig.
March 31, 2008
March 28, 2008
March 25, 2008
Maybe it's a different "Dino Rossi"
"Rossi worried Gregoire could abuse loophole"
Is this the same Dino Rossi who ran the Backward Washington Foundation as an extension of his 2004 campaign, and de facto fundraising arm for a 2008 campaign that didn't exist yet? Naw, can't be the same one, that would be hypocritical.
For the second year running, the Legislature has provided Gov. Chris Gregoire with potentially powerful leverage to raise money for her re-election campaign -- a loophole that allows her to accept donations during the 20-day period when she signs bills and the state budget into law.
Though Gregoire has vowed not to seek contributions until after she signs all the bills, her campaign is still accepting donations.
Dino Rossi, her Republican challenger, is critical of Gregoire because she could take advantage of the situation. He said she should have implemented a self-imposed freeze on fundraising.
...
"(Gregoire) shouldn't really be doing anything that gives the appearance of doing something underhanded or shady," Rossi said...
Is this the same Dino Rossi who ran the Backward Washington Foundation as an extension of his 2004 campaign, and de facto fundraising arm for a 2008 campaign that didn't exist yet? Naw, can't be the same one, that would be hypocritical.
March 21, 2008
"Unintended Consequences"
The current issue of Newsweek relates the following about expansion of the scope of Patriot Act snooping, and how it caught Eliot Spitzer:
Spitzer, for all his faults, has not been accused of any corruption, has he? The Patriot Act has become the Puritan Act -- and a big Opposition Research drift net.
The Patriot Act gave the FBI new powers to snoop on suspected terrorists. In the fine print were provisions that gave the Treasury Department authority to demand more information from banks about their customers' financial transactions. Congress wanted to help the Feds identify terrorist money launderers. But Treasury went further. It issued stringent new regulations that required banks themselves to look for unusual transactions (such as odd patterns of cash withdrawals or wire transfers) and submit SARs—Suspicious Activity Reports—to the government. Facing potentially stiff penalties if they didn't comply, banks and other financial institutions installed sophisticated software to detect anomalies among millions of daily transactions. They began ranking the risk levels of their customers—on a scale of zero to 100—based on complex formulas that included the credit rating, assets and profession of the account holder.
Another element of the formulas: whether an account holder was a "politically exposed person." At first focused on potentially crooked foreign officials, the PEP lists expanded to include many U.S. politicians and public officials who were conceivably vulnerable to corruption.
The new scrutiny resulted in an explosion of SARs, from 204,915 in 2001 to 1.23 million last year. More
Spitzer, for all his faults, has not been accused of any corruption, has he? The Patriot Act has become the Puritan Act -- and a big Opposition Research drift net.
March 19, 2008
Maron and Seder to fill in for Malloy
Marc and Sam are going to be subbing for Mike Malloy next month on his Nova M show (9-midnight weekdays, KPTK). They mentioned the news near the end of yesterday's Seder vs. Maron vodcast.
Sam will be taking April 7, while Maron will be hosting the April 8, 9 and 10 editions.
Maron said he won't do Air America anymore, because they won't pay him.
Sam will be taking April 7, while Maron will be hosting the April 8, 9 and 10 editions.
Maron said he won't do Air America anymore, because they won't pay him.
The size of the problem
Sometimes people ask me why we need to add innovative technologies such as Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) to our urban transit networks.
The usual argument goes something like, transit ridership is up! If we just add more buses and build more light rail, we'll be able to solve our transportation problem.
In particular, the hackles tend to go up over cost -- PRT is expensive, so it will take resources away from transit. As though PRT would not be transit.
Next year will be my 20th since first learning about PRT. My motivation for supporting it then, as now, remains the same: The transportation problem is too big to continue relying solely on traditional, conventional transit technologies. The magnitude of the problem calls for real innovation, not tinkering around the edges.
A look at what is currently considered transit 'success' actually serves to give the problem its proper context.
Recently the Puget Sound region's leading transit agencies announced ridership was significantly up in 2007. Metro (King County) reported a 7% increase, while Sound Transit (a commuter-oriented agency serving parts of three counties) reported a 12.5% increase.1 The Washington Public Interest Research Group, a fundraising and policy advocacy group, released impressive statistics on how transit usage translates to fuel saved, fuel costs saved, and tons of CO2 not emitted.2
But can annual marginal increases in transit usage get to the kind of ridership we need to reduce numbers of car trips, car miles traveled, and emissions? Interestingly, the recent trumpeting of transit gains made no mention of two important, context-providing numbers: total daily motorized travel, and transit's share of that travel (called transit "mode share," or "mode split").
Oddly, these numbers are not aggregated in one location, despite transportation having been a major preoccupation of the Puget Sound region for years. However, I have what might be called glacial patience, and I have rounded up data from a number of agencies.
Annual transit ridership for 2007
These numbers are mostly available from transit agencies or news sources.
Annual total trips
For all modes (cars, trucks, transit, etc.) this is about 10 million a day, or 3.7 billion per year.7 I've also read recent claims of 12 million a day, growing to 16 million a day by 2030, but I'll be statistically conservative and keep it at 10.
The size of the problem
Transit's annual mode split in the region is therefore about 4.3%.8 The percentage would of course be lower if a higher number is used for total trips .
It is useful to keep two other things in mind. 1) The length of the average person's "journey to work" varies 10-14 miles depending on household income.9 2) Washington's new law on climate change, recently signed by Governor Gregoire, includes goals to reduce annual vehicle miles traveled 18% by 2020, 30% by 2035, and 50% by 2050. The starting point is 75 billion annual miles, so you can do the math.
These numbers impart a sense of scale. How do you impact that many people, traveling that many times, for that many miles?
In short, 12.5% annual increases are hardly going to make a dent in the problem. Even if we were able to increase daily transit ridership to 1 million (a 230% increase) with more trains and buses, that is a transit mode split of only 9.9%.
Why not innovate?
No one is saying transit is going to do it alone. There is going to be travel demand management (e.g. tolls, congestion pricing), as well as individual lifestyle changes. But the latter is an aggregate of the millions (probably billions) of microeconomic decisions each of us makes about housing, work, shopping, school, recreation, etc. Those are millions/billions of things that have to go mostly right in order to make this dream called Sustainability come true. There are going to be a lot of innovations along the way.
In the face of these challenges, WHY NOT innovate transit too? Current versions of Personal Rapid Transit, an automated peoplemover concept that combines the speed of a train with the flexibility of a bus, convenience of a taxi, and greenness of an electric car, have been researched in Europe during the past decade.10 PRT is basically the 'horizontal elevator' idea you might have heard about in years past.
Potential niches include getting people quickly to and from train stations without driving, circulation transit, and rapid transit service to districts where large footprint rail technology can't fit or isn't economically justified.
The first one is being built now at Heathrow Airport; physical tests have demonstrated greater capacity than any light rail system operating in the UK.11 We should be telling our transit agencies to start planning PRT networks now.
-----------------
1. Pulkkinen, L., "Sound Transit ridership rose 12.5% in 2007." Seattle P-I, Mar. 10, 2008
2. Lange, L., "Transit benefits: new study, new campaign." Seattle P-I, Mar. 6, 2008
3. Lindblom, M. and Gilmore, S., "Riders pack buses in record numbers." Seattle Times, Jan. 24, 2008
4. Community Transit, "Community Transit News." June 28, 2007
5. Austin, A., "Ridership up regionally, a tipping point for transit?" Morning News Tribune, Jan. 31, 2008
6. Sound Transit, "Dump the Pump Day June 21." June 12, 2007
7. Sound Transit, "2005 RTPO Plan Review." April 2005
8. 158,050,000 ÷ 3.7 bil
9. Puget Sound Regional Council, "Regional View Newsletter." Dec. 2007
10. Ironically, based on groundbreaking work done by the old Urban Mass Transit Administration in the 1970s
11. Virginia Dept. of Rail and Public Transportation, House Document 11: "Viability of PRT in Virginia." Jan. 11, 2008, Sec. IV(C)
The usual argument goes something like, transit ridership is up! If we just add more buses and build more light rail, we'll be able to solve our transportation problem.
In particular, the hackles tend to go up over cost -- PRT is expensive, so it will take resources away from transit. As though PRT would not be transit.
Next year will be my 20th since first learning about PRT. My motivation for supporting it then, as now, remains the same: The transportation problem is too big to continue relying solely on traditional, conventional transit technologies. The magnitude of the problem calls for real innovation, not tinkering around the edges.
A look at what is currently considered transit 'success' actually serves to give the problem its proper context.
Recently the Puget Sound region's leading transit agencies announced ridership was significantly up in 2007. Metro (King County) reported a 7% increase, while Sound Transit (a commuter-oriented agency serving parts of three counties) reported a 12.5% increase.1 The Washington Public Interest Research Group, a fundraising and policy advocacy group, released impressive statistics on how transit usage translates to fuel saved, fuel costs saved, and tons of CO2 not emitted.2
But can annual marginal increases in transit usage get to the kind of ridership we need to reduce numbers of car trips, car miles traveled, and emissions? Interestingly, the recent trumpeting of transit gains made no mention of two important, context-providing numbers: total daily motorized travel, and transit's share of that travel (called transit "mode share," or "mode split").
Oddly, these numbers are not aggregated in one location, despite transportation having been a major preoccupation of the Puget Sound region for years. However, I have what might be called glacial patience, and I have rounded up data from a number of agencies.
Annual transit ridership for 2007
These numbers are mostly available from transit agencies or news sources.
| Agency | Annual riders | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Sound Transit | 13,500,000 | based on 1.5 million being a 12.5% increase |
| Metro Transit | 110,000,0003 | |
| Community Transit (Snohomish County) | 10,400,000 | Based on a midyear report that ridership was trending 5.4% higher than 9.9 million trips in 2006.4 |
| Pierce Transit | 16,900,0005 | |
| Skagit Transit | 450,000 | |
| Intercity Transit (Olympia) | 4,300,000 | |
| Kitsap Transit | 4,000,000 | I had to estimate this as one-third of Sound Transit's ridership. The only good data on KT is that they serve 15,000 per weekday, a little more than a third of Sound Transit's 44,000 per weekday.6 |
| TOTAL | 158,050,000 | This is about 433,000 a day on average |
Annual total trips
For all modes (cars, trucks, transit, etc.) this is about 10 million a day, or 3.7 billion per year.7 I've also read recent claims of 12 million a day, growing to 16 million a day by 2030, but I'll be statistically conservative and keep it at 10.
The size of the problem
Transit's annual mode split in the region is therefore about 4.3%.8 The percentage would of course be lower if a higher number is used for total trips .
It is useful to keep two other things in mind. 1) The length of the average person's "journey to work" varies 10-14 miles depending on household income.9 2) Washington's new law on climate change, recently signed by Governor Gregoire, includes goals to reduce annual vehicle miles traveled 18% by 2020, 30% by 2035, and 50% by 2050. The starting point is 75 billion annual miles, so you can do the math.
These numbers impart a sense of scale. How do you impact that many people, traveling that many times, for that many miles?
In short, 12.5% annual increases are hardly going to make a dent in the problem. Even if we were able to increase daily transit ridership to 1 million (a 230% increase) with more trains and buses, that is a transit mode split of only 9.9%.
Why not innovate?
No one is saying transit is going to do it alone. There is going to be travel demand management (e.g. tolls, congestion pricing), as well as individual lifestyle changes. But the latter is an aggregate of the millions (probably billions) of microeconomic decisions each of us makes about housing, work, shopping, school, recreation, etc. Those are millions/billions of things that have to go mostly right in order to make this dream called Sustainability come true. There are going to be a lot of innovations along the way.
In the face of these challenges, WHY NOT innovate transit too? Current versions of Personal Rapid Transit, an automated peoplemover concept that combines the speed of a train with the flexibility of a bus, convenience of a taxi, and greenness of an electric car, have been researched in Europe during the past decade.10 PRT is basically the 'horizontal elevator' idea you might have heard about in years past.
Potential niches include getting people quickly to and from train stations without driving, circulation transit, and rapid transit service to districts where large footprint rail technology can't fit or isn't economically justified.
The first one is being built now at Heathrow Airport; physical tests have demonstrated greater capacity than any light rail system operating in the UK.11 We should be telling our transit agencies to start planning PRT networks now.
-----------------
1. Pulkkinen, L., "Sound Transit ridership rose 12.5% in 2007." Seattle P-I, Mar. 10, 2008
2. Lange, L., "Transit benefits: new study, new campaign." Seattle P-I, Mar. 6, 2008
3. Lindblom, M. and Gilmore, S., "Riders pack buses in record numbers." Seattle Times, Jan. 24, 2008
4. Community Transit, "Community Transit News." June 28, 2007
5. Austin, A., "Ridership up regionally, a tipping point for transit?" Morning News Tribune, Jan. 31, 2008
6. Sound Transit, "Dump the Pump Day June 21." June 12, 2007
7. Sound Transit, "2005 RTPO Plan Review." April 2005
8. 158,050,000 ÷ 3.7 bil
9. Puget Sound Regional Council, "Regional View Newsletter." Dec. 2007
10. Ironically, based on groundbreaking work done by the old Urban Mass Transit Administration in the 1970s
11. Virginia Dept. of Rail and Public Transportation, House Document 11: "Viability of PRT in Virginia." Jan. 11, 2008, Sec. IV(C)
March 15, 2008
March 11, 2008
Ma(ro)n on the street interview
So 27 minutes ago I'm listening to KPTK, and an AP Radio report about Eliot Spitzer comes on. They sought out a "man on the street" for a reaction, and guess who it was: Marc Maron, erstwhile Air America morning guy! But is that how the newsreader described him? No. How about "comedian," "genius humorist," or "Marc Maron of the internet's Seder v. Maron Hours"? Nope, nope and nope. AP described Maron as "New York resident Marc Mara"!
Next time Marc, spell it out for the reporter!
Q: ...New York resident Marc Mara says Spitzer should resign.
Maron: Yeah, based on this, on his, his career, and now come to find out he's tricked everybody. He's not the high moral standing fella he's portrayed himself as."
Next time Marc, spell it out for the reporter!
March 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)