HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 02:26:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.230121.12630@pbhye.PacBell.COM>, mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
[ in response to <92358.33465.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> ]
> -Yes, it's *possible* that a highway can cost almost $1 billion per mile and
> -that light rail can cost "only" $10-$15M per mile.  But those amounts are
> -*far* from the norm, and you know it damn well.  And in most areas of the
> -country, where starter homes don't cost $250,000, the cheaper land acquisition
> -costs make freeways cheaper (usually).  Half of the cost in building Route 85
> -is in land acquisition.  Very little of the cost of rail is for that purpose.
> -
> -Highway 85:  About $500 million for an 18-mile stretch, or $27.8 million per
> -mile.  How much did light rail cost through downtown San Jose?  I'll bet it
> -was a hell of a lot more than $27.8 million per mile.  My point isn't that
> -rail is always more expensive--it's that you can use numbers to say pretty
> -much whatever the hell you want them to, and you're being disingenuous by
> -peddling off those loaded numbers as a typical, normal comparison.  That's
> -bullschmidt.
>  
> Your comments are worthless, unless you propose better figures. Plan a light
> rail line (not BART -- we are talking about light rail) & an EQUIVALENT
> freeway (in person-carrying capacity: one rail line = several freeway lanes)
> and THEN do the comparison.

Look, Mike.  This started out as a simple statement.  This comparison of
one billion per mile of freeway with 10 to 15 million per mile of light rail
just doesn't wash.  1 billion per mile is at the upper end of freeway costs,
while 10 - 15 million is at the low end of light rail costs.  Typical costs
are about the same, at least in Santa Clara county.

jeremy
From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 30 Dec 92 00:26:00 GMT
Reply-To: mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

>>> Your comments are worthless, unless you propose better figures. Plan a light
>>> rail line (not BART -- we are talking about light rail) & an EQUIVALENT
>>> freeway (in person-carrying capacity: one rail line = several freeway lanes)
>>> and THEN do the comparison.
>>
>>To me the comparision would be 
>>
>>	freeways <-> heavy rail
>>
>>	main roads <-> light rail
>
>Actually, a light rail line can carry the equivalent of a freeway, I 
>am told. They can reach 55 MPH or more.

Actually, I believe that a heavy rail line can carry far more than any 
freeway full of SOVs, so is in a class by itself.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,sci.environment,ca.environment
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Subject: Re: Natural Gas?
Organization: Unocal Corporation
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:41:08 GMT

In article <JMC.92Dec20223032@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>I don't understand what this 575 Tg/yr is.  If it is spontaneous
>emission through the soil all over, it is extremely difficult
>to capture for human use.  Must we spread plastic over the whole
>world including the oceans and then separate out the CH4?
>Anyway 575 Tg is only 575 million tons.  The U.S. used to produce
>500 million tons of petroleum, and in 1988 produced 288 million
>tons of natural gas.  It appears, therefore, that collecting the
>surface emissions from the entire world would not satisfy U.S.
>domestic needs.

Cow burps.  Put bags on both ends of the cows to collect it :-)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,sci.environment,ca.environment
Subject: Re: Natural Gas?
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:48:31 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <ELM.92Dec16234349@joyride.berkeley.edu> elm@cs.berkeley.edu writes:
>
>Yes, we might need more than we can generate from organic waste.
>*Any* organic material will do the trick; we can grow plant matter
>just for this purpose.  In fact, decaying plants even give off heat
>that we can harness to get more energy.  If you *still* can't get
>enough energy, the human race is using too much.  Can you say
>"sustainable energy use?"  Humanity is currently drawing from natural
>reserves.  We don't need to do this, since we still get far more
>energy in sunlight than we use.

Hey, I can say "sustainable energy use", it's a pleasant enough noise,
but has little meaning in this context. Sunlight draws on a finite
supply of nuclear energy, just like any other energy source. The
timescale is rather long, but then so are other nuclear energy options 
available to us such as fission and geothermal. The real choice lies in 
which method of tapping nuclear energy is most efficient given our current 
and projected technology. Right now we still have large supplies of 
stored and concentrated nuclear energy in the form of coal, oil, and gas.
In the future we will have to decide whether current biomass inventories
are sufficient, or whether we will have to approach nuclear energy more
directly through fission, geothermal wells, or active mechanical solar
collection via hydropower dams or windmills or solar cells or solar
thermal plants. The amount of energy we require and the economics of
tapping that energy will determine which technology we embrace most
strongly.

Gary
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Midnight 1.5-mile trip to Safeway
Date: 28 Dec 92 07:37:57 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <1992Dec24.204637.7407@pbhye.PacBell.COM> mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>You should point out the fallacy to her. LOTS of muggings & carjackings
>happen to drivers in parking lots.

As for carjacking types of assaults, there is no way that having a car
makes you MORE vunerable than not having a car.

As for parking lot muggings, you must be talking about BART parking lots.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: Sources (was Re: Cars as "something better")
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:19:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.153528.20219@pbhye.PacBell.COM> mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>Just be honest about how selfish that attitude is: the auto use is vary
>bad for your kids. 20 min. of being with you can't compensate for having
>their lungs destroyed with toxic emissions. You are like the beggars

Based on my last SMOG test, it seems that my car puts out very
little in the way of toxic emissions.

And buses and trains are not pollution free anyway. In fact, I
wouldn't be surprised if my car polluted LESS than a stinky bus.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
From: mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain scheduling musings
Date: 24 Dec 92 07:05:57 GMT
Reply-To: dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
Distribution: ba
Organization: DOS Bears

In article <1992Dec22.211142.10275@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.010246.21195@erg.sri.com>, rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent) writes:
>|> In the referenced article, adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>|> >What's lousy is that grade-separations are more often than not
>|> >funded out of "rail" funding pots, but really don't provide much
>|> >real benefit for rail service.
>
>|> 1) They keep the trains from having to stop at intersections like
>|> light rail sometimes has to
>
>Light rail does not have signal/crossing priority like a fast-moving
>heavy rail train has to.  That's why CalTrain (or most any other train)
>has crossing gates.  Your comment doesn't apply to private right of way
>rail systems--especially fast-moving heavy rail.

First, the nit.  If it's "private right of way" there are no crossings
so what is the problem?

Second, to address the issue.  Light rail (like the SF or SJ trolleys)
(a) is already planning to stop at the crossing to pick up passengers,
(b) is travelling much slower, and (c) weighs MUCH less than heavy
rail.  A car travelling at 60 takes one heck of a lot longer to stop
than one travelling at 30.  A heavy car takes longer to stop at 30
than a light one.  Combine them.

>|> 3) They improve safety
>
>Ok, where there is a safety problem, you grade-separate.  I've looked
>at the accident stats for every single crossing on the Peninsula.  From
>what I remember, the average number of grade-crossing accidents per
>crossing is on the order of 2 or so over the last 30 or 40 years.  When
>you look at fatalities, it's even lower--with many crossings being
>fatality free for as long as there are records.  I doubt you'd find
>many auto intersections (signalized or not) with such a low incident
>rate.

Where you have a crossing, you have a safety problem.  How many
deaths are acceptable?  For how much money?  Comparing crossings
with auto intersections is a bit of a red herring (at least, until
you have as many trains through the intersection as you have cars.)

>|> is it a real issue?
>
>As real as waiting for real CalTrain upgrades while trains are delayed
>as they tip-toe around grade separation construction projects that offer
>little or no benefit to the train rider, or *potential* train rider.

Um.  There are other people in the county.  And, just as I am
subsidizing the auto junkies, they are subsidizing the train
junkies.

--
Mike Lipsie                            584 Castro #614, San Francisco, CA 94114
dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
mikel%dosbears.uucp@ingres.com    Running rn (for DOS) with UUPC/Extended 1.11k
From: dsherman@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Daniel P. Sherman)
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 18:53:42 GMT
Subject: Re: Sources (was Re: Cars as "something better")
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: ba.transportation

adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:

>or on their cellular phones) or just sleeping, I think about the
>comments I sometimes read here that say things like "some people
>find riding on various forms of transit to be anywhere from un-
>pleasant to physically sickening to physically dangerous" and smile.

Try riding train 90 from SF for a few Fridays and Saturdays in a row.
You might not smile so much on that train.

It is very nice that you can be so comfortable on your commute time
train.  But there are lots of people who don't work the hours you do.
It isn't always that nice.

I tend to believe there are a lot of people who fit the description
you quoted above.  I also believe your sample is biased.  You are
basing it on what you see on the train.  I would venture to state that
a very large percentage (approaching 100%) of those for whom the above
quoted description is acurate, are not in your sample as they are 
finding other ways of getting around (their cars, most likely).

I believe there are lots of people who would simply rather get from
point A to point B in the shortest time possible without considering
what else they could be doing on the way.  Mass transit
doesn't come in the winner in very many locations outside of places
such as downtown SF.  It doesn't win the contest on my commute.

It takes 40-45 minutes by car, 60 minutes using train 30, and 90
minutes using any other southbound train to get to work.  It takes a
minumum of 85 minutes to get home no matter which train I take.  The
bus connection from the station to home is nonexistant after 5:30 pm.
Home is San Bruno.  Work is Palo Alto.  In spite of the loss of the
time, I am on train 30 almost every day.  It does save me cash money.

I am aquainted with quite a few people who would not want to lose
that time in that particular way.  It doesn't matter to them that
there are things you can do with that time.  They can't do those other
things as easily as you on a moving vehicle.  Many of them have other
things they consider higher priority do be done than the things they
could do as they ride to work.  They would rather spend some
money to buy back that time.

Dan Sherman
Hewlett-Packard Palo Alto ITC
dsherman@corp.hp.com
From: lau@sunset.ai.sri.com (Stephen Lau)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Bicycles to commute within a work campus: Any successes ?
Date: 23 Dec 92 22:32:36 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA
In-reply-to: jaxtell@netcom.com's message of 23 Dec 92 20:17:39 GMT


Some East Coast companies have shuttle buses that constantly run between
one complex and another. Raytheon, for one, is spread out all over
northwestern Boston and has a couple of shuttles that circulate between the
complexes. 

I've worked at a hospital that had satellite parking for its employees
and would shuttle between the parking lot and hospital grounds. 

Another hospital I've worked for, namely UCSD Medical Center, is seperated
from the main campus by about 10 miles. They had a shuttle that ran between the
campus and the hospital every half hour for free. 

McDonnell Douglas and Raytheon both have bicycles allocated to different 
departments for intra-departmental usage. Some of the departments are split
up across several buildings, some of which are not very close together.

If there's a lot of traffic between your two sites, you might suggest they
set up a shuttle service. There must be a need for some type of paperwork/supplies
traffic between the two. They could combine the two into one, much like what
UCSD does. It carried mail and paperwork and other stuff in the back of the
van.

Steve



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Lau                 lau@ai.sri.com| "I'm not sure if you're a 
SRI International                         |  mysterious person or just still
333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA. 94025|  water that doesn't run very deep."
(415) 859-2925              (415) 326-6200|               - Gene Kelly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 24 Dec 92 06:13:38 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Dec23.150919.7450@pbhye.PacBell.COM>, mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
> -- --- Light rail is more cost-effective than freeway construction. 
> -- Estimates for urban freeway construction range as high as $1
> -- billion per mile, while new light rail costs only $10 to $16
> -- million per mile.
> -
> -Where do they get this stuff?  The light rail built in Santa Clara
> -county was far more expensive than this, while the freeways were far
> -less expensive.  Don't they think they can make their point without
> -gross exaggeration?
>  
> It's not much of an exaggeration. The Cypress Freeway will cost over
> a $billion for 1.5 miles. You must be talking about construction of
> additional lanes in existing ROW. What about highway 85??

I don't know the exact cost of 85, but I've read it before.  I think
it's under one billion for the whole thing.  The SCCTD lrt was 25
million per mile, and I believe it got the ROW for free.  I can
believe that one mile of 8 lane elevated freeway where they have to
buy all the property from scratch might be one billion dollars, but
that is not the typical case.  Similarly, building a light rail line
in such a situation will cost substantially more than 10 to 16
million per mile, even though its ROW is cheaper.

jeremy
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Cars as "something better"
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:04:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.211932.22655@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.173025.6440@pbhya.PacBell.COM>, whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>|> Some people find riding on various forms of transit to be anywhere
>|> from unpleasant to physically sickening to physically dangerous.
>
>or on their cellular phones) or just sleeping, I think about the
>comments I sometimes read here that say things like "some people
>find riding on various forms of transit to be anywhere from un-
>pleasant to physically sickening to physically dangerous" and smile.

Smile all you like.  I find that reading--or attempting to read on a
bus frequently results in headaches and sometimes in nausea.  Currnet
media reports are quoting BART riders who are afraid to walk in BART
parking lots after dark.  Various forms of assaults are regularly
reported on the SF Muni.

I made no claims that the majority of people have these problems--only
that some do.  The counter claim implying that it's all made up by
folks who prefer to drive is disingeneous.  The problems are real.
They are shared by enough people that writing them off as grumbles
from a few die-hards won't wash.

The general claim is made that driving wastes "productive" time.  This
begs the question of what time is valued in what ways.  You cited
people listening to personal stereo systems.  On BART, all to
frequently I find myself wondering where the annoying drumbeat is
coming from--only to realize it's somebody's Walkman 15 or 20 feet
away--somebody who must have severe hearing loss if I can hear *his*
stereo, through past the headset and over the interior noise of a BART
train--and hear it loud enough to be a nuisance.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch)
Subject: CalTrain Automatic Ticket Mailout no longer automatic
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems; a div of Booz, Allen & Hamilton
Distribution: ba
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:42:23 GMT


am i the only one who's unhappy with the notice i received with my
january ticket?  the notice says that all mailed-out tickets must be
paid in advance ... it effectively destroys the utility of the
automatic ticket mailing program.

why did this happen, and how can it be fixed?

--
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <henry@ads.com>
# "fight the real enemy."  -- sinead o'connor, and many others.
#     for information on the league for programming freedom, 
#                     write to lpf@uunet.uu.net
From: henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Cars as "something better"
Date: 1 Jan 93 23:45:47 GMT
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems; a div of Booz, Allen & Hamilton

jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) wrote: 
->> But in MUNI`s case it really doesn't matter so much, because one
->> (usually electric) vehicle gets you from the Financial District to any
->> neighborhood, and the neighboorhoods are small enough that the walk to
->> your apartment or house is a few blocks.  When 800,000 people live in
->> 49 square miles, the need for transfers goes way down.
->
->Not everyone goes to the financial district, you know, even among
->commuters.

well, they should: it's the best transfer point in the city.  i ride
the caltrain up from mtn view regularly ... upon "detraining" (puke),
i walk outside the caltrain station, and a #32 embarcadero bus is less
than 60 seconds away.  this drops me at market and embarcadero; i cross
the embarcadero and walk one block, and there are several options
which will take me home. 

--
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <henry@ads.com>
# "fight the real enemy."  -- sinead o'connor, and many others.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Sources (was Re: Cars as "something better")
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:01:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.153528.20219@pbhye.PacBell.COM> mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>Such hypocracy!!!

I love it!

"Hypocracy" is obviously "Government by Photographic Chemicals."

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Bicycles to commute within a work campus: Any successes ?
Keywords: bicycles work
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:12:48 GMT
Reply-To: mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Distribution: ba
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

-Does anyone work for or know of a company that encourages its workers to 
-get between the buildings of a spread out (1/2 mile) campus ?
 
Apple?
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Subject: Re: Midnight 1.5-mile trip to Safeway
Reply-To: mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 20:46:37 GMT

>>My wife doesn't like walking in the dark. Riding a bike leaves her feeling
>>about as exposed to crime as walking does. Sure, there are car-jackings in
>>the ant-farms but in the suburbs, driving a car gives her a much better sense
>>of security and that is worth a very high price.

You should point out the fallacy to her. LOTS of muggings & carjackings
happen to drivers in parking lots.
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:45:40 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <tumbucs@sgi.sgi.com> jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.005006.2291@pbhye.PacBell.COM>, mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>> Estimates for urban freeway construction range as high as $1
>> billion per mile
>
>Where do they get this stuff?

I would not be surprised if the new Century Freeway (coming soon to
an LA near you!) cost close to $1 billion/mile. It has interchanges
with at least three very large freeways in a fairly short distance 
(maybe 10-20 miles?). Talk about big/high/expensive connecting ramps...

I suspect the Century will be LA's last new freeway.

Whether it's fair for Mr. Vandeman to use such numbers is a different issue.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Cars as "something better"
Date: 3 Jan 1993 21:35:04 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1i7jipINNdvt@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> fuzzface@cats.ucsc.edu (Aaron Priven) writes:
>
>
>Well, I think you attribute quite a lot to the transit system.  But I
>agree, it's one piece.

Yes, I agree totally ... rarely do businesses make a location decision
based on a single factor alone. But the value of transit is not
trivial or negligible to such decisions. For example, imagine you are
making the decision as to whether to put a 20-person software company
in Emeryville or in downtown Berkeley. Because both are in the same
county, all government issues above the city level are equal.  Office
space in downtown Berkeley is more expensive than Emeryville, the city
government in Berkeley is more hostile than Emeryville, freeway access
in Emeryville is better, parking is more available, so why are there
any software companies in Berkeley?

Easier access to the university is a plus, for sure, as are the
creature comforts of a college town (bookstores, cafe's), but a BART
station within walking distance is also an attraction that factors
into the decision. Maybe some folks from those companies would like to
comment ...



Newsgroups: ba.transportation