ebmgh.com

This week, CARB, or the California Air Resources Board released a draft of the state’s cap and trade program to limit the emission of CO₂ from major polluters. From the original passage of California’s landmark global warming bill AB32 in 2005, cap and trade was intended as a centerpiece for reducing the state’s contribution to global warming. KQED’s Climate Watch has a few details, including some enviros’ disappointment that CARB has not spelled out some of the most pernicious details, including auctioning of allowances (who gets their existing level of pollution grandfathered in, and how much do polluters pay for the right to pollute), offsets (can I pay for a re-forestation project in Borneo instead of making actual changes at my plant?), and markets (are we seriously thinking of allowing hedge funds to create new exotic financial instruments called “carbon derivatives”?).

A group of scientists has released an update to the IPCC‘s 2007 Report, called the Copenhagen Diagnosis. It includes “policy-relevant climate science published since […] the last IPCC report” and is intended to guide policymakers who will meet for climate negotiations in Copenhagen in December.

Overall, it indicates what many scientists already know: the Fourth Assessment Report underestimates many of the anthropogenic climate changes that are happening and likely to continue. Specifically, ice is melting faster in Antarctica and Greenland than was predicted, contributing to global sea level rise about 80% higher than earlier projections. The latest forecasts predict sea-level rise may exceed 1 meter by 2100, with a rise of up to 2 meters considered an upper limit by this time. In order to avoid the worst impacts, we must move to de-carbonize our economy, and global emissions must decline rapidly within the next five to ten years for the world to have a reasonable chance of avoiding the very worst impacts of climate change

“Carbon dioxide emissions cannot be allowed to continue to rise if humanity intends to limit the risk of unacceptable climate change. The task is urgent and the turning point must come soon. If we are to avoid more than 2 degrees Celsius warming, which many countries have already accepted as a goal, then emissions need to peak before 2020 and then decline rapidly.”

–Professor Richard Somerville, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, USA

I continue to be impressed by the Cycling in Cities project at the University of British Columbia, the people behind the Cycling Route Planner for Vancouver,  and an impressive body of research. This is what cycle mapping looks like when it’s done with academic rigor and proper funding. Instead of assuming they know what needs to be fixed to get more people on bikes, they did the unthinkable: they actually went out and asked them!

Their opinion survey found:

Of the 73 features that might influence likelihood of cycling, the following were the top 10 motivators with average scores from +0.5 to +0.8 (with a maximum possible of +1=”much more likely to cycle”):

• the route is away from traffic noise and air pollution
• the route has beautiful scenery
• the route has bicycle paths separated from traffic for the entire distance
• the route is flat
• cycling to the destination takes less time than travelling by other modes
• the distance to my destination is less than 5 km
• I can make the trip in daylight hours
• I can take my bike on the Skytrain at any time
• a 2-way off-street bike path has a reflective centre line for night and poor weather cycling
• secure indoor bike storage is available at my destination

The following were the top 10 deterrents with average scores from -0.9 to -0.6 (with a minimum possible of -1=”much less likely to cycle”):

• the route is snowy or icy
• the street has a lot of car, bus, or truck traffic
• the route has glass or debris
• vehicles drive faster than 50 km/h [30 mph]
• the risk from motorists who don’t know how to drive safely near bicycles
• the risk of injury from car-bike collisions
• it is raining
• the route has surfaces that can be slick when wet or icy when cold
• the route is not well lit after dark
• I need to carry bulky or heavy items

Additionally, and relevant to the what we’re trying to do here in the Bay Area, the survey found that “the availability of a web-based bicycle trip planning tool was a motivating factor for both current and potential cyclists.”

I think it’s relevant to ask: how much do Vancouverites’ attitudes coincide with those in the US? We are all North Americans right? We share a dependence on fossil fuels and motor vehicles for transportation. How similar would the survey results be if they were done in an American city like San Francisco or Oakland?

Recently, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, or MTC,  re-launched the Bike Mapper application on 511.org. It was down for a while as they were revamping the site. While the old version of the site failed to impress, the new version is also somewhat of a disappointment. The launch was not accompanied by much publicity. Below are the comments that I submitted to the agency. Hopefully they’ll follow up on some of them.

Comments on the general bike mapper (http://bicycling.511.org/bikemapper.htm)

1. Why only allow topographic map view? (Please include Satellite, Map, street view, traffic, etc.)

2. Bike routes polylines should either be narrower or have some transparency, so that the user can read street names underneath)

3. When using the search feature, should allow the user to find more than one location and place more than a single map marker.

4. Would be nice to be able to save favorite locations.

5. Additional information would be of great use to cyclists in planning routes: e.g. route attributes such as street name, lane width, presence of shoulder, speed limit, daily average vehicle counts, known road hazards (EBBC & SFBC both have such databases).

6. There is no indication of who to contact for more information, and only the small suggestions button at the side for giving feedback or offering suggestions. There is a huge trove of knowledge with the cyclists and commuters who ride these routes every day. I would suggest tapping into this “wisdom of the crowd” to improve the map. This is also a way of leveraging limited funds.

7. I see the symbol SM or TM after BikeMapper in several locations. Has MTC or BAAQMD actually registered a trademark or service mark with the US Patent and Trademark Office? I was under the impression that under US law, the information generated and published by government agencies is in the public domain, and that government is not eligible to hold trademarks.

Comments on the Route Builder Tool (http://mtcgis.mtc.ca.gov/bikemapper/default_tripPlanner.htm)

Great! Thank you! Congratulations!  I am so excited to finally see this. There is a lot of good functionality built into this, and some good route data. However, I see this as more of a “proof of concept” at this point, and not something that really helps cyclists. Here are my specific comments:

1. The routes that it chooses are poor, and so not very useful.

• It routes me onto busy streets.
• It routes me over steep hills.
• It should provide turn-by-turn text directions, such as “Left on 34th Street, 0.2 miles”

2. Please consider making the map markers “draggable”, so that the user can change their start or end point. This functionality is built into the Google Maps API.

3. Please consider allowing the user to enter more than two points. I.e. Allow a multi-point itinerary.

4. Once you have entered a start or end point, clicking “Place Route Markers” deletes both of them, when maybe you want to keep one. Consider changing this so the user can remove one or the other, and does not have to start over from scratch.

5. After searching for a location, a marker is placed on the map, but then the user has to click again to add a start or end point for the route. The map should allow the user to convert the search result marker into the route start point or end point.

6. The finished route polyline covers up the bike route overlay, so you can’t tell what type of route you’re on (e.g. bike lane, path, on-street).

7. Many cyclists prefer taking a slightly longer route if it is on roads with less traffic. You should offer that option. Additional research has shown that many cyclists prefer to avoid busy streets due to health concerns over air quality (see for example, http://www.cher.ubc.ca/cyclingincities/default.htm).

8. There has been no publicity or outreach that I have seen. Consider following Google’s model “release and iterate” – do a public release of the beta, which you have done, and then solicit opinions and feedback. Again, the cycling public is a treasure trove of knowledge about these routes. You should tap into that knowledge to leverage limited agency staffing and funding.

9. Question: Does MTC have plans to make use of data from SFCTA’s recently-announced CycleTracks program (http://www.sfcta.org/content/view/666/375) to improve the bike route data? Are there any plans to expand this to the 9-county area?

I am happy to follow up with you to clarify or test out the next beta version. You’re off to a good start, and there are many of us who would like to see more!

Over a year ago, in a fit of industry and enthusiasm, I began working on an online bike mapper for the East Bay. It was born out of frustration with how limited the bike features are at 511.org. Google had recently announced walking directions for its maps, but still there was nothing for bikes.

A good bike route finder for the Bay area must have two things, in my opinion: it must help you avoid busy, dangerous streets, and it must be able to route you around big hills. The shortest path between two points around here is not always very easy! Which is fine when you’re out to get some exercise and get your heart rate up. What I’m interested in really is “promoting the bicycle as an everyday means of transportation

The prototype is here: http://ebmgh.com/bike.hml

I could certainly use help, encouragement, or feedback. Please be in touch: mheberger@gmail.com.

A group of like-minded individuals will also be getting together to discuss collaborating on an SF-area wide bike mapper. Details here:

http://groups.google.com/group/sf-bike-planner/browse_thread/thread/cc60184bd8f2fb65

A friend gave me a fantastic bread book for my birthday last year. A few years ago, bread-baking guru Peter Reinhart saw the light, and jumped wholeheartedly into whole grain baking. I’ve enjoyed reading it, and applied some of his tips and techniques in my once- or twice-weekly bread baking, but hadn’t followed a single recipe start to finish.

While most of the recipes in the book don’t require much active time, many of them take two or three days from start to finish. That requires some serious planning!

Started on Friday evening, and 24 hours later, after lots of long, slow fermentation, ended up with this honey whole-wheat batard. The loaf slumped a bit when I transferred it inexpertly to the pan, and the slashes are a bit ragged.

The loaf has a fine-grained crumb, but is fairly light for a 100% whole wheat loaf. I used King Arthur Flour Stone Ground, the stuff in the brown and red bag. It’s a top quality flour, but on it’s own, it’s challenging to turn it into a loaf that’s not a doorstop. I’ve had more luck with a brand I discovered on the west coast, Stone Buhr, which is ground more finely.

Of course appearance counts for something, but flavor trumps everything else. If it tastes good, it is good. So how’d it taste? A bit sweeter than what I usually make, thanks to the 2 ½ tablespoons of honey. Nice toasty, nutty flavor.  It’s an enriched loaf, which means it’s got oil or butter and dairy, which keeps it soft and nicely chewy.

Tasted great warm with a bit of soft cheese. I’ll have to let it cool completely, and see if those extra hours paid dividends in flavor. Overall, a classic sandwich loaf. Next time, I’ll make it in a loaf tin, and keep the peanut butter and jam at the ready.

Hi, thanks for stopping by. I’ve joked for years that if I had a blog, it would mostly be about water, bread, computing. Let’s see how it takes shape. Stay tuned for fresh loaves, hydrologic musings, thoughts on using Excel and GIS, not necessarily in that order.

Cheers to you for stopping by!