Author Archives: admin

iPad Adoption in Aviation

Jeppesen, the authoritative source for all things related to aviation charts (IFR charts, VFR charts, etc.) is taking advantage of all of the iPad’s capabilities as they encourage the move from paper charts to electronic. The combination of the iPad and of Jeppesen’s development efforts will make things a lot easier on pilots.

Biofuels in Aviation

Great article on biofuels being approved for use in commercial aviation.

I’ve got mixed feeling about biofuels. I like the idea of replacing fossil fuels but I think corn ethanol has tied the price of a basic food product to the volatile market of fossil fuels. Corn ethanol subsidies are, in part, to blame for the increase in prices for corn and other grains. I can see the effects of this firsthand over in the Middle East where all grains and grain-based products are imported. It’s the law of unintended consequences catching up with political decision-making.

That’s what I was happy to read this part:

Airbus and Boeing, which together manufacture about 80 percent of the world’s passenger planes, are planning to set up biofuel production chains across the world. Airbus is working on a supply hub in India where it’s talking with government and airline officials. Its aim is to form joint ventures and partnerships with growers, transporters and refiners. Boeing is negotiating with companies across the supply chain in South America. Fuel from inedible plants or waste doesn´t put price pressure on crops as can fuel from corn, sugar cane or soy.

These two private companies apparently have the foresight to avoid the food-product ethanol mistake.

In the photo caption was something that hit close to “home” for me:

Boeing is test growing halophytes, a salt-tolerant energy crop, in the United Arab Emirates as part of its renewable fuel supply development.

“Freedom from Oil”

Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon) has released a report titled Freedom From Oil via the Livable Communities Task Force. This report further expounds on Problem No. 4 from our list, Dependence on Foreign Oil. The report also offers some potential solutions.

High gasoline prices have once again demonstrated how dependent American households are on oil. Coping with road networks and development patterns that for the past century have been built to make driving the preferred and often only means of transportation, Americans are suddenly held hostage to a diminishing and increasingly expensive resource to live their daily lives.

Indeed, the government has built a road network and actively promoted development patters that now find us tied to a volatile natural resource. So when is the government going to get out of the way? When are they going stop disproportionately funding road projects? When are local zoning commissions going to allow more mixed-use development? These problems are going to take time to solve.

In the short term, I think that the continued volatility and rising of gas prices is going to help push research and development toward all-electric cars. Hybrids will ease the pain of rising prices, but all-electric vehicles will eliminate it. Such a shift would allow to continue using the infrastructure already in place as well. I think this trend is already starting with cars like the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt, and Toyota RAV4.

American dependence on oil is not necessarily a result of preference as much as policy and investment in the infrastructure to create car-dependent communities.

So many folks are often quick to blame our culture for our car obsession. People are “culturally attached” to automobiles. However, I think the above statement is the crux of the matter. Policy and investment in infrastructure make cars the clear choice for most people. Our subdivisions, schools, supermarkets, and malls are based on zoning structures geared toward driving to get from Point A to Point B.

I’m a little disappointed with the Federal Policy Recommendations put forth in this report though. Most of them consist of more government-meddling. Government policy, partially due to the fact that Politics Trumps Solutions, often suffers the law of unintended consequences. That’s how we got to the point of car-focused policy and investment we are in now.

A few of the better ideas:

  1. Continue to increase fuel efficiency of passenger vehicles, which could save drivers the equivalent of $1.00-1.70 per gallon of gas.
  2. Set clear national priorities for our transportation system, including a strategy and performance measures for reducing oil consumption.
  3. Promote Pay-As-You-Drive insurance, allowing consumers to pay less if they drive less.

A good report. Well worth reading. I’m still polishing off the last of it.

Personal Electronics

An write-up on intercity bus travel at New Geography caught my attention with this tidbit:

The growing prevalence of portable electronic technology, such as laptops and cellphones, gives intercity bus a new competitive advantage over air service and driving.

As portable electronic devices become more affordable (wider adoption) I think you’ll see more impetus to get out from behind the wheel of automobiles. People will start asking themselves, “If I can travel in such a manner that lets me use my iPad to read/browse the web/watch a movie/play a game then why drive my self?”

Responding to Incentives

We should assume that consumers act rationally given the incentives that they face. Repealing the policies that have shaped current behavior such as undervalued public parking, density restrictions, and tax breaks for homeowners will result in people moving closer to their work places and driving less.

Emily Washington at Market Urbanism has a great piece on the long commutes that so many people choose.

I agree with her assumption mentioned above… that is that consumers act rationally based on the incentives in place.

I chose to buy a house and move out amidst the sprawl when I lived in Indianapolis. After getting married and in preparation for having children we bought a house in the suburbs. Government policy favors this decision. Property taxes were lower. Purchasing the house gave us a smaller payment than rent in the city.

After living there for a few years gas prices started rising. My wife drove a Honda Civic, but I drove a 4×4 Toyota truck. I finally broke down and bought another Honda Civic for my commute.

Why? Why didn’t I move closer to my office? Why didn’t I move closer to one of the bus routes? Because the government subsidizes the road infrastructure. Zoning laws promote low-density sprawling suburban developments. Tax law gives an advantage to those who take out a mortgage to buy a home.

I think governmental incentives, and all their unintended consequences, are responsible for the so-called “irrational” decisions made by people when it comes to residences and commutes. Am I silly for thinking that, if governmental incentives are removed, people will naturally move into more dense housing areas that reduce their commute and travel times.