Archive for April, 2009
Analog Writing Technology
I use computers quite a bit in my personal and professional life, but sometimes you just need the aesthetic qualities of pen and paper to capture a thought. For that, I turn to my trusty Moleskin notebook (unlined, of course) and a Zebra F-301 pen.
I’ve included both here for your benefit (and mine*)
*I’m trying something new: if you purchase either product from the links on this page, you get a good deal from Amazon and I get a small kick-back for presenting the link.
Filed under Uncategorized : Comments (0) : Apr 27th, 2009
How long will it last?
Most of us know that natural resources are finite. Due to those pesky laws of physics, there’s only so much stuff on this little planet of ours. New Scientist poses (and then answers) an interesting question: How much do we have left? And how long will it take to deplete these resources at present rates?
Not surprisingly, we don’t have a lot of years left with many of our favorite natural resources given current consumption rates. The chart presents both the rate of consumption for the U.S. (we’re #1! in a bad way) and for the world, based on an assumption that global consumption goes up to half that of the U.S. (with developing nations striving to match our standard of living, it’s not a bad assumption).
The takeaway here is not that we’re going to all of a sudden run out of Indium and stop making LCD monitors. Instead, this should remind us all that we need to drastically change the way we interact with natural resources over the next century if we want to maintain anything close to our current standard of living.
At the risk of politicizing an otherwise apolitical post, I’ll also add this: When you hear politicians tell you that we can’t do anything to change the way we produce energy or to increase the efficiency of everyday processes because it costs too much, ask yourself this: what’s the cost of doing nothing?
Filed under energy, environment, technology : Comments (0) : Apr 24th, 2009
Rail and the 500 mile flight
The White House is adding some details to the plan for high speed rail in America. As I’ve written before, I’m a big fan of rail transportation. Sadly, our national transportation rail is extremely outdated and woefully inadequate. (Anyone who has traveled in Europe can attest to the efficacy of a good rail system.)
Looking at the map, I detected a subtle pattern. To flesh out my hypothesis, I drew a series of circles with a 500 mile radius. 5 of these circles fit nicely over the proposed high-speed rail corridors.
The 500 mile radius is not arbitrary. This is the distance where air travel is more time efficient than ground based transportation. For airlines, flights less than 500 miles are generally unprofitable.
To understand why, let’s compare two alternatives for travel between Minneapolis and Chicago :
Air travel:
- Drive from your home to the airport. [Time : 30 minutes]
- Check-in and navigate through security [Time : 30 minutes]
- Wait at the gate [Time : 30 minutes]
- Board plane and taxi to runway [Time : 20 minutes]
- Fly to destination [Time : 90 minutes]
- Land, taxi, and deplane [Time : 20 minutes]
- Claim baggage and exit airport [Time : 20 minutes]
- Drive to destination [Time : 30 minutes]
Total travel time : 4 hours 30 minutes
The above analysis is a best-case. Any delays in flights, traffic, baggage, etc. would add to the time.
High Speed Rail travel:
- Taxicab to train station. [Time : 15 minutes]
- Board train and wait for departure [Time : 15 minutes]
- Travel to destination [Time : 3 hours 20 minutes]
- Depart train and taxicab to destination [Time : 15 minutes]
Total travel time : 4 hours 5 minutes
How is it possible that rail travel is actually faster than flying? It’s all about the downtime. Air travel requires many steps along the way that don’t contribute to the primary goal of getting you to your destination.
- Driving to the airport – by necessity, airports are far from the city center.
- Check-in/security – standing in line @ 0 mph
- Waiting at the gate
- Taxiing
- All-too-ubiquitous delays
By contrast, a high-speed rail system takes you directly from city-center to city-center and minimizes wait time. Plus it’s cheaper and more energy efficient. Neat!
Filed under energy, technology : Comments (4) : Apr 19th, 2009
Pedal Powered Grocery Getter
I’m a big fan of bicycles. In most civilized countries, the bicycle is an integral part of the transportation network. Here in the U.S., it’s a relatively small part of the mix. I think this is set to change as more people realize the benefits of bicycling and cities deploy bicycle-friendly infrastructure.
One of the common reasons people like personal automobiles (and especially SUVs) is the convenience of transporting stuff like groceries. Today was a warm day in Milwaukee so I decided to make a trip to the store with only my bike. Just how much could a bicycle with two medium panniers carry? Let’s find out:
Here’s my ride all loaded down. It handles surprisingly well with a full load.
Here’s a view to give some depth to the panniers.
And here’s the haul I was able to carry. Not bad if I do say so myself!
Filed under energy, frugal : Comments (3) : Apr 15th, 2009
Livable Streets
Here is a great description of a few simple, easy to grasp changes that would greatly improve the quality of urban streets. Many of these improvements have low costs and high returns. The key concept is to design streets so that humans and automobiles can coexist peacefully.
1. Allow street vendors
2. Provide pedestrian street lamps
3. Install curb extensions at crosswalks
4. Create dedicated bus lanes
5. Create dedicated bike lanes
6. Install raised, textured crosswalks
7. Adjust street lights to give lead to pedestrians
8. Install bollards at intersections
9. Nurture street trees and plantings
10. Use speeds bumps where necessary
Filed under culture, environment, suburbs : Comments (0) : Apr 8th, 2009
