Friday, September 10, 2010

Transit Issues

• We in Ottawa are fortunate to have the best transit system system in North America and choosing it requires only the tunnel which is totally paid for by federal and provincial contributions.
• The balance plus the gas tax will allow transit to expand to Stittsville, Manotick and Rockland immediately. No expansion of LRT can occur until after 2020.
• BRT is operational in 5 to 6 years. LRT will take at least 10 years or more.
• LRT, which is in essence streetcars, will squander over 1.4 billion dollars in needless expenditures.
• Calgary is presently LRT, but has chosen BRT for its expansion as has Seattle in the United States
• For those of you who make the effort to conserve energy, imagine the electricity costs of LRT in the peak hours?
• Finally, OC Transpo is mismanaged and must become a commission of elected representatives which will do much to alleviate the morale problems the organization currently faces. OC Transpo used to be a family. It’s time to bring back the family. The present adversarial attitude adopted by the present incumbent is irresponsible

Do You Know....

That to finance the LRT (streetcars) requires $700 million of gas tax over a ten year period, as well as the borrowing of $200 Million Dollars? (2009 dollars)

There is no guarantee that the gas tax will continue for another ten years?

The gas tax is available for other transit projects, rather than be wasted on LRT - if BRT is the chosen technology?

In terms of both the Capital and operating cost and time to complete, High Capacity Grade Separated Bus Rapid Transit is enormously superior than LRT Streetcars?

The proposed tunnel is 10 stories deep and under exhisting buildings? Can you magine how long it will take to retreve people when we have an electric outage? BRT (buses) can be built under the exhisting streets and not as deep. Busses are, becuase they don't use rail, so much more flexible.  In case of an emergency the rail system comes to a dead stop whereas the busses can relocate to the surface.

Freezing rain can bring down the overhead wires for perhaps weeks or months - why risk it!

27 comments:

  1. Election

    How can we help?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Congratulations,Andy,
    You are exactly what our wonderful city needs.
    YOur honesty rings so true.Finally we have someone who not only has a wealth of experience but someone who will tell us what we NEED to hear not what we WANT to hear!

    Let me know how I can assist you!
    Jane Fitzsimmons

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did you know...
    How often our buses break down?
    How often they are late, or overcrowded?
    How much mayhem would be caused if buses had to "relocate" in an emergency?
    How much money is saved on wages with LRT (one driver vs. 20+)?
    How much money is saved on maintenance (rail car lasts 60 yrs, buses not even HALF of that)?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Congratulations Mr. Haydon! This City of Ottawa council has gone far enough, out of control. Tight control like the former City of Nepean, don't have the $ bucks $, simply can't have it. How simple it is. Too many players around the table no wonder it doesn't come to important decision for very important issues in which we must address before it's too late to fix.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr. Haydon please check your facts sir. Both Seattle and Calgary have dumped BRT extensions in favor for LRT extensions. As a former crew person at the TTC I can tell you as much as 50 metres of line can be restrung(repaired)in as little as 10 minutes.

    Rail operations can be as low as 1/15 th the operating costs of busses. The operational cost difference is the whole reason for the TTC's Transit City LRT plan. Depending on the number and length of LRT lines built, up to 400 busses from the TTC fleet will be replaced by a maximum of 100 2-car LRT trains. That will mean up to 700 fewer drivers to pay. BRT will only increase the need to hire more drivers. Each new bus over the current fleet total will require 2 drivers and whole lot of expensive diesel fuel to run them. The cost of diesel will rise far higher and faster than that of electricity. For every 70-110 new passengers a bus driver will be needed. Compared to a single LRT car which can carry as many as 240 Passengers per driver. The best part is you can put LRT Cars together into somthing called a train. Most major LRT designs can operate 4 car trains. That's almost 1000 people / driver.

    The main issue with a Bus Tunnel is the massive air handling and filtering capacity needed because of the diesel fumes. This will add a cost to the tunnel that will not be needed with LRT. If the power goes out in the tunnel you still have to get people out so they do not have to be in a tunnel where all the air handling capability has stoped woking and the diesel fumes can build up.

    Mr. Haydon it is nice that you offer your expierence as a former Mayor and Regional Chair however, cutting cost for the sake of cutting cost is the same problem Premier Harris got into. There needs to be directions and reasons for the cost cutting. Many of the cuts that you will propose will only shift costs towards the user. What's the point of lowering my tax increase if I have to pay for it somwhere else. Many of those extra's you plan to cut are sevices people desperately need to get by in this city. We don't need arenas as part of our core services but, how will kids join hockey leagues that have to raise league fees to pay for your cuts. Most new parents can barely even afford house league hockey right now!

    ReplyDelete
  6. We are posting our response to your comments as a new blog. Thank you for commenting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I looked into emissions of BRT and LRT various options some years ago.

    Because this site seems to restrict comments to much less than the 4,096 characters it claims in its error message, I'm attempting multiple smaller postings.

    The Ottawa_Transit_plan_by_Andy_2009 externalizes or otherwise fails to account for the adverse health outcomes associated with BRT diesel exhaust in high concentrations in the streets and neighbourhoods bordering and downwind of the Transitway. Diesel exhaust is believed much more toxic than that from gasoline because diesel particulate is much finer (0.007 thru 0.015 microns) than that from cars and the percentage absorption of particulate by the human lung drops rapidly as the particulate diameter increases beyond 0.1 micron. In Ontario, ten times the number of people die from diesel exhaust emissions as from second hand tobacco smoke exposure. LRT does not have these ongoing diesel exhaust toxics health costs, except during its construction. Currently diesel exhaust emissions from construction equipment is grossly under regulated, and should be capped in City contracts and City bylaws. While coal fired power plants are significant pollution sources, the cost of pollution control on such fixed sources is less expensive than on mobile sources. Additionally, the mobile sources pollute in high concentrations where people are ... ie street level, whereas coal fired power plants with their high stacks dispurse their pollution more broadly, leading to lower per capita absorption. In any case coal fired plants are becoming more regulated and less of the generating mix as new power sources come online.

    ReplyDelete
  8. (2) I looked into emissions of BRT and LRT various options some years ago.

    In the ENVIRONMENT slide 29, Andy Hadon states
    “The majority of transport emissions is from cars”
    but fails to mention the majority of transportation adverse health effects (including but not limited to in the order of 1,000 premature deaths annually in Ottawa-Gatineau) and 25% of global warming is from diesel exhaust particulates. Furthermore Andy’s accounting fails to account for the extra health care costs, and loss of income, tax revenue, IQ, and quality and length of life residents incur with a BRT system. Currently, neighbourhoods bordering the Queensway and the transitways have significantly higher morbidity and mortality than similar neighbourhoods further away from diesel highways. In the May 2004 EPA press release associated with new regulations on new diesel, the EPA identified that, for example with respect to non onroad diesel, for every additional dollar spent to clean up diesel, $40 would be saved in direct hospital spending alone. While the cost of emission reduction technology has been falling, the known adverse impacts and adverse health costs have been rising. Best estimates are total costs are 3 to 4 times direct hospital costs. Assuming all hybrid buses are run in the downtown tunnel on their batteries, this would mean the buses would have correspondingly higher emissions as they recharge and pollute in the neighbourhoods at each end of the tunnel.

    As available and implemented in mines, 99.5% diesel air toxics emission reduction technology is required in order to bring morbidity and mortality from diesel emissions down to the acceptable levels defined in the US Clean Air Act. Currently model year 2007 and later onroad diesels and diesel hybrids only have 90% particulate emission reduction. The 90% reduction level target was arrived at in the 1990s when industry said falsely that higher reduction target levels would have gross adverse effects on the economy. (Additionally Paul Martin was Finance Minister, and had a conflict of interest in his transportation companies.) . NOx reductions are coming in the next few years.

    Mr Haydon, please will you re-cost you plans to show the externalized health costs and the costs to upgrade the default 90% air toxics emission reduction to 99.5% ?

    An idea worth exploring is to allow the hybrid buses to both quick recharge and be powered by power grid electricity in the tunnel, as they travel through its length. In tunnels, overhead lines will not be subject to the weather. Large high power capacity stationary liquid metal batteries are expected on the market within the next 2 years that will greatly facilitate load shifting from off-peak, being recharged overnight. These stationary batteries could also recharge buses at their end of line locations where the drivers take their breaks.

    ReplyDelete
  9. (3) I looked into emissions of BRT and LRT various options some years ago...
    Unlike Mr. Haydon, I hope the links and material below are more easily checked. However, in some cases one may need to use searching and or a wayback internet tool to find the original documents as their owners move them.
    The statistics mentioned above are based upon application of published peer reviewed air pollution analysis epidemiology applied to conditions found in Ottawa-Gatineau. This published peer reviewed air pollution analysis epidemiology includes but is not limited to:
    * Ottawa Slater Street Air Pollution Analysis
    Prof. Deniz Karman, PhD, P.Eng, of Carleton University has been repeatedly engaged by Environment Canada to do particle counts and other air pollutant analysis. He has posted 3 weeks of winter and 1 week of summer PM2.5 2 hour and 24 hour Slater Street Ottawa based readings at:
    http://www.carleton.ca/~dkarman/OMDB.htm
    http://www.carleton.ca/~dkarman/PM25WS.xls
    The average 2 hour PM2.5 reading was 27.4μg/m3, with 15 of 43 samples being above the not to be exceeded Canada wide standard of 30μg/m3 .
    (For Canada’s PM2.5 standard ref: http://www.ec.gc.ca/cleanair-airpur/caol/pollution_issues/cws/s3_e.cfm
    .) The average 24 hour reading was 14.8μg/m3, with 3 of 4 weekday samples exceeding the American Lung Association’s recommended 24 hour maximum of 18μg/m3; reference
    http://www.lungusa.org/press/legislative/epacontact.html

    ReplyDelete
  10. *Pollution at street level often much higher than that at stationary monitoring stations
    Of note is that as reported at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/schoolbus/summary.pdf
    Research has shown that concentrations of vehicle-related pollutants on and near roadways can be up to ten times higher than those measured at the nearest ambient monitor (e.g.,
    • Rodes, C., Sheldon, L., Whitaker, D., Clayton, A., Fitzgerald, K., Flanagan, J., DiGenova, F., Hering, S., Frazier, C. (1998) “Measuring Concentrations of Selected Air Pollutants Inside California Vehicles.” Final Report, Contract No.95-339. California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA.
    • Chan, C.C., Ozkaynak, H., Spengler, J.D., and Sheldon, L. (1991) "Driver Exposure to Volatile Organic Compounds, CO, Ozone, and NO2 under Different Driving Conditions." Environmental Science and Technology, 25:964-972.
    • Shikiya, D.C., Liu, C.S., Hahn, M.I., Juarros, J., Barcikowski, W.
    (1989) “In-Vehicle Air Toxics Characterization Study in the South Coast Air Basin.” Final Report, South Coast Air Quality Management District, El Monte, California. Rodes et al., 1998; Lawryk et al., 1995; )
    *Averaging Error: PM2.5 Chronic risks nearly 3x that thought prior to 2005/12

    ReplyDelete
  11. A study titled “Spatial Analysis of Air Pollution and Mortality in Los Angeles” by Michael Jerrett, Ph.D., associate professor of preventive medicine at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, published in Epidemiology, November 2005; vol 16, concludes in looking at risk, major studies have failed to take into account wide differences (ie: 20 micrograms per cubic meter in Los Angeles) in air pollution levels within a single city, and risk exposure ratios may be nearly 3 times that previously identified.

    Ref: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171144,00.html

    http://blogforcleanair.blogspot.com/2005/09/science-update-new-studies-underscore.html

    http://www.epidem.com/pt/re/epidemiology/abstract.00001648-200511000-00004.htm


    NB: Canadian air pollution studies have consistently incorporated the
    identified error. This includes that at:
    https://www.oma.org/Resources/Documents/2008LocalPrematureSmogDeaths.pdf
    https://www.oma.org/HealthPromotion/Smog/Pages/default.aspx

    ReplyDelete
  12. One of the latter report’s authors told me the study group chose to give the most conservative analysis of avoidable air pollution deaths, (ie: Ottawa-Carleton 503, Ontario Total 9,500), rather that the most likely true number they believe occurs, so as to facilitate the conclusion that
    even when estimates of adverse affects are minimized, extraordinary measures to reduce air pollution are very cost effective and are urgently needed to immediately address the ongoing health crisis caused principally by diesel exhaust.


    * Diesel emissions alone contributed 89 percent of the cancer risk of outdoor air, (2002 Analysis)

    ReplyDelete
  13. DANGERS OF DIESEL: How Diesel Soot and Other Air Toxics Increase Americans’ Risk of Cancer. As formerly found at http://static.uspirg.org/us.asp?id2=8122&id3=USPIRG& Similar findings by State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials, released March 15, 2000 at http://www.4cleanair.org/comments/Cancerriskreport.PDF


    *EPA’s May 2004 news release - new diesel emission regulations
    http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/
    News Release and Fact Sheet.
    http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/2004fr/420f04032.htm


    *Each 10μg/m3 of PM2.5 is linked to a 76% increase in women’s cardiovascular death rate.2007

    Women living in areas with higher levels of air pollution have a greater risk of developing cardiovascular disease and subsequently dying from cardiovascular causes, according to a University of Washington study lead by Dr. Joel Kaufman, professor of environmental & occupational health sciences, epidemiology, and medicine. The study appears in the Feb. 1 2007 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine. The study is one of the largest of its kind, involving more than 65,000 Women's Health Initiative Observational Study participants, age 50 to 79, living in 36 cities across the United States, and took into account known risk factors such as blood pressure, cholesterol, and smoking. This study was the first to look specifically at new cases of cardiovascular disease in previously healthy subjects and local air pollution levels within metropolitan areas. A summary article appeared at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070131204115.htm

    ReplyDelete
  14. Some studies identify the CHD risk highest or uniquely in women, such as [Environ Health Perspect 113:1723–1729 (2005). doi:10.1289/ehp.8190 available via http://dx.doi.org/ [Online 2 August 2005] http://www.burningissues.org/car-www/pdfs/women-heart-dis05.pdf ].
    While the above 2007 prior data sample was limited to women, there is no reason to believe the effects limited to females. Consider that well controlled double blind studies find “brief exposure to diesel exhaust at levels encountered in urban road traffic promotes myocardial ischemia in (male) patients with existing heart conditions.
    http://www.circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/112/25/3930
    http://www.acc.org/media/ann_scientific_session_07/pdfs/1026-34,%201019-179,%201016-108,%201013-70,%20805-5_Lifestyle_Press%20Release.pdf
    and clotting heart attack and stroke risk in healthy men: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071106092015.htm

    ReplyDelete
  15. *Association between mortality and indicators of traffic-related air pollution in the Netherlands: a cohort study.

    published in the Lancet. 2002 Oct 19;360(9341):1203-9, available for $30US from link with abstract at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12401246&dopt=Citation
    This study found the relative risk for living near a major road was 1.41 (0.94-2.12) for total deaths. Non-cardiopulmonary, non-lung cancer deaths were unrelated to air pollution (1.03, 0.54-1.96 for living near a major road. Diesel use is much more prevalent on major roads.)



    *Babies of Affluent Mothers living within 200m of Montreal highways, suffer an 81% increased risk of having had low birth weights, and 58% increased risk of having had preterm births

    Researchers at the University of Montreal, the Institut national de santé publique du Québec and the University of South Australia found the above disturbing results after analysing records of almost 100,000 live single births in Montreal between 1997 to 2001 in which mothers lived within 200 metres of a highway. Their resulting report was published in the August 2008 issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health and summarized at:
    http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2008/07/31/mothers-highways.html
    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080731/highway_babies_080731/20080731?hub=Health

    ReplyDelete
  16. *Air pollution exposure before birth linked with lower IQ scores in childhood, bolstering evidence that smog may harm the developing brain.
    “The results are in a study of 249 children of nonmoking New York City women who wore backpack air monitors for 48 hours during the last few months of pregnancy. They lived in mostly low-income neighborhoods in northern Manhattan and the South Bronx. They had varying levels of exposure to typical kinds of urban air pollution, mostly from car, bus and truck exhaust. At age 5, before starting school, the children were given IQ tests. Those exposed to the most pollution before birth scored on average 4-5 points lower than children with less exposure. ... the findings suggest exposure to air pollution before birth could have the same harmful effects on the developing brain as exposure to lead, said Patrick Breysse, an environmental health specialist at Johns Hopkins' school of public health. . ... The researchers took into account other factors that could influence IQ, including secondhand smoke exposure, the home learning environment and air pollution exposure after birth, and still found a strong influence from prenatal exposure. ... the study can't completely rule out [effects of] pollution exposure during early childhood, [and ] ... fewer mothers in the high exposure group had graduated from high school .”
    “In earlier research, involving some of the same children and others, Perera linked prenatal exposure to air pollution with genetic abnormalities at birth that could increase risks for cancer; smaller newborn head size and reduced birth weight, ... developmental delays at age 3 and with children's asthma.”
    Ref: Associated Press. 2009/7/20. http://wvgazette.com/News/200907190357
    Frederica Perera, the study's lead author and director of the Columbia
    Center for Children's Environmental Health. Pediatrics August 2009 issue
    http://www.pediatrics.org/

    ReplyDelete
  17. *Diesel particulate is much finer (0.007 thru 0.015 microns) than that from cars and the absorption of particulate by the human lung drops rapidly as the particulate diameter increases beyond 0.1 micron.

    First refer to the graph is from page 42 of the document titled: Fine Particle (Nanoparticle) Emissions On Minnesota Highways, sponsored by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and produced in May of 2001, then updated in December 2001, both by the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, 111 Church St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. A copy of the document,
    http://www.lrrb.gen.mn.us/PDF/200112.pdf may be downloaded via the internet page:
    http://www.lrrb.gen.mn.us/more.cfm?code=1125

    The authors have made multiple summary presentations of their paper with additional graphs, observations and conclusions incorporating knowledge of other’s research. The presentation slides may be found
    at: http://www.osti.gov/fcvt/deer2001/kittelson.pdf(DEER 7) 01/08/05
    http://www.pca.state.mn.us/air/pubs/nanoparticles-presentation.pdf
    02/03/26

    ReplyDelete
  18. In addition to that visible from the above graph, the report and/or its presentation slide observed that with diesel exhaust:
    • As the temperature drops, particles fail to clump together during initial formation and so the observed particle counts increase substantially without a change in mass output. For each 10˚C increase over the temperature range 15-35˚C, the counts of particles formed smaller than 0.01 microns increases by an order of magnitude under cruise conditions. Since study’s initial sampling was in the 1-13˚C range, the high particle count numbers being much greater than previously published, can be explained by colder temperatures, different dilution and sampling conditions, and different instrumentation present during observation sampling. (Apparently most other studies have been based upon stationary setups in labs with warmer temperatures as opposed to real on-road sampling.)
    • High-speed, and accelerating traffic produced high nanoparticle number concentrations.
    • Measurements from vehicles running at speeds less than 20 mph resulted in a lower number but larger diameter particles.
    • Idling temporarily stores volatile compounds in the exhaust system, only to be later emitted on road with higher engine exhaust temperatures.
    • >90% of particles count and 30% of particle mass are formed during exhaust dilution, (after exit from tailpipe), with large nonlinear changes resulting from small changes in environmental, dilution and sampling conditions.
    • Volatile or semi-volatile matter, (sulfur compounds and organics),
    typically constitutes 30% (5-90%) of the particle mass, 90% (30-99%)
    of the particle number. The lubrication and fuel oil soluble organic fraction typically constitute 20% of particle mass.
    • Carbon and ash initially form as particles <0.05 microns (nanoparticles). These particles have a relatively short life in the atmosphere on the order of a few minutes as they merge to form larger particles. (Thus how far from the roadway these nanoparticles remain significant is in part dependent upon the volume of production and the wind speed.) Though the number of particles that form decreases with the ratio of carbon to sulfur compounds in the exhaust, very low sulfur fuels also produce nanoparticulates.)
    • Volatile compounds such as sulfuric acid and oils form the majority of ultra-fine particles, (>50nm, <100nm). Most ultra-fine particles revaporise at less than 100̊C. Clumping together and reduction over time of ultra-fine particles, was not identified or at least not reported.

    ReplyDelete
  19. In addition to that visible from the above graph, the report and/or its presentation slide observed that with diesel exhaust:
    • As the temperature drops, particles fail to clump together during initial formation and so the observed particle counts increase substantially without a change in mass output. For each 10˚C increase over the temperature range 15-35˚C, the counts of particles formed smaller than 0.01 microns increases by an order of magnitude under cruise conditions. Since study’s initial sampling was in the 1-13˚C range, the high particle count numbers being much greater than previously published, can be explained by colder temperatures, different dilution and sampling conditions, and different instrumentation present during observation sampling. (Apparently most other studies have been based upon stationary setups in labs with warmer temperatures as opposed to real on-road sampling.)
    • High-speed, and accelerating traffic produced high nanoparticle number concentrations.
    • Measurements from vehicles running at speeds less than 20 mph resulted in a lower number but larger diameter particles.

    ReplyDelete
  20. • Idling temporarily stores volatile compounds in the exhaust system, only to be later emitted on road with higher engine exhaust temperatures.
    • >90% of particles count and 30% of particle mass are formed during exhaust dilution, (after exit from tailpipe), with large nonlinear changes resulting from small changes in environmental, dilution and sampling conditions.
    • Volatile or semi-volatile matter, (sulfur compounds and organics),
    typically constitutes 30% (5-90%) of the particle mass, 90% (30-99%)
    of the particle number. The lubrication and fuel oil soluble organic fraction typically constitute 20% of particle mass.
    • Carbon and ash initially form as particles <0.05 microns (nanoparticles). These particles have a relatively short life in the atmosphere on the order of a few minutes as they merge to form larger particles. (Thus how far from the roadway these nanoparticles remain significant is in part dependent upon the volume of production and the wind speed.) Though the number of particles that form decreases with the ratio of carbon to sulfur compounds in the exhaust, very low sulfur fuels also produce nanoparticulates.)
    • Volatile compounds such as sulfuric acid and oils form the majority of ultra-fine particles, (>50nm, <100nm). Most ultra-fine particles revaporise at less than 100̊C. Clumping together and reduction over time of ultra-fine particles, was not identified or at least not reported.

    ReplyDelete
  21. When conditions are right, a significant portion of the material that would form independent ultra-fine particles will precipitate out on the carbon based particles, which continue to agglomerate and then precipitate out of the atmosphere. Thus removing soot from exhaust can result in an increase of long lived fine volatile particulates remaining in the atmosphere. Other factors contributing to increasing the number of volatile particles include: high sulfur content fuel, fast highway dilution, high exhaust tempertures as produced by high engine loads, low ambient air temperature, and low ambient relative humidity.

    ReplyDelete
  22. • Over time and distance concentration of particles < 0.1 microns decreased whereas > 0.1 microns increased.
    • Exhaust filters reduce exhaust particle concentration by 2½-3½ orders of magnitude but volatile nanoparticles may form down stream.

    The report notes that from a health point of view, it is the smallest particles that represent the largest health risk. (The body appears to be able to handle particle larger than 8 microns.) The report also identified that the current methodology of regulating particle emissions based upon total mass below relatively large diameters is flawed in that the risk to the body appears highest from the smallest particles which are not directly regulated. (While small particles clog in lung tissue,
    the smallest particles are known to actually enter the blood stream.)

    ReplyDelete
  23. “Exhaust Particulate Size Distribution: Vehicle and Fuel Influences in Light Duty Vehicles”

    study by: Rickeard, D. J., J. R. Bateman, Y. K. Kwon, J. J. McAughey and C. J. Dickens. Society of Automotive Engineers Tech. Pap. Ser. No. 961980, 1996. The European study found that:
    • In low speed traffic spark ignition (gasoline) vehicles produce many less particulates per unit vehicle mass.
    • As the vehicles are under increasing load such as for acceleration and/or speed, both diesel and gasoline vehicles produce more particulates, with the total output mass of both being similar at 120 kph..

    While since study, fuel standards have greatly reduced sulfur content of fuel and increased regulations for improved emission reduction technology, comparisons of today’s vehicles would be expected to reconfirm above 2 points.

    ReplyDelete
  24. *Tobacco smoke deaths
    Statistics Canada and
    Passive smoking deaths as outlined in the Ontario Medical Association
    February 2003 study titled The Duty to Protect: “Up to 2,600 people
    in this province die every year as a direct result of second-hand smoke”, found at: http://www.oma.org/phealth/2ndsmoke03.pdf


    *Diesel and other soot may be 2x as bad as CO2 in causing Global Warming

    Reference the article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (100 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2237157100) by James Hansen and Larissa Nazarenko. to be available free 6 months after Dec 22,2003 publication, at http://www.pnas.org/ . According to summary articles at:
    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2003/HansenNazarenko.html (abstract)
    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/stories/20031222/ (includes a
    link to a soot density map)
    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/intro/hansen_10/
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/science/nature/3333493.stm
    http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994508

    ReplyDelete
  25. “Grains of soot deposited in snow have also caused about one-quarter of the observed rise in global surface temperature” from 1880 to 2000. ... “The findings could be good news on climate as soot emissions may be easier to cut than carbon dioxide. Hansen says technology exists to more cleanly burn fossil fuels without releasing large quantities of soot. “Technology is within reach that could eliminate most soot, restoring snow albedo to near pristine values, while having many other benefits for climate, human health, agricultural productivity and environmental esthetics. The largest source of soot in developed countries is now diesel fuel, while in developing countries biofuels are also important.” “The "payback" in terms of climate would be faster by cutting soot than carbon dioxide gas emissions.” ... Stabilizing carbon dioxide emissions is still needed. Soot has a short lifetime in the atmosphere, on the order of weeks or months, compared to some 100 years for carbon dioxide. Thus, control of soot emissions should bring immediate environmental benefit, while greenhouse gas emission effects would linger for generations. Follow on research by T. Bond, in:

    ReplyDelete
  26. • Bond, T. and Haolin, Sun, "Can Reducing Black Carbon Emissions Counteract Global Warming?" Environmental Science & Technology , August 2005, p. 5921-5926, estimates GWP100 of 680, (from which 80 needs to be subtracted to account for the reflective organic carbon component);
    • Bond, Venkataraman, Masera, "Global atmospheric impacts of residential fuels," Energy. Sustainable Development, July 2004. and referenced in the December 2006 document “Climate Change Roadmap for New England and Eastern Canada,” by the public interest advocacy group Environment Northeast available at:
    http://www.env-ne.org/ENE_Climate_Change_Roadmap_New_England_Canada.htm
    identifies:
    The black carbon (or "soot") portion of PM2.5 has a global warming potential (GWP100) of about 600 times that of CO2 As an aerosol (not a gas), black carbon warms via a different mechanism than GHGs. Its dark color makes it a potent absorber of energy from the sun, which it converts to heat.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete