Falling Apart and Falling Behind lays out the economic challenges posed by our ailing infrastructure, provides a comparative look at the smart investments being made by our international competitors, and suggests a series of recommendations for crafting new innovative transportation policies in the U.S. This report frames the state of our infrastructure in terms of the new economic realities of the 21st-century economy and presents the challenges we currently face.

America’s railroads — once the fastest and most comprehensive in the world — opened up the interior of the country but America truly forged its status as a world economic superpower in the decades following World War II as our booming country awash with wealth embarked upon building new infrastructure, airports and an interstate system that was the envy of the world.

There was a time when we led the world in the very real physical infrastructure that drives economic success in our cities and states but those days are behind us as we’re failing not only to build the next generation of transportation systems, but failing to even properly maintain our past investments to ensure they continue serving us and our economy.

The last great vision for transportation our country rallied behind was a national interstate system laid out in the 1950s, but we’ve been rudderless for the last 20 years since completing that system with no grand vision. While we’ve been treading water and spinning our wheels, other countries have been investing the kind of money we once did in their transportation systems, positioning them to succeed for years to come.

This report from BAF is a concise summary of the problem we face and the perhaps obvious solution staring us in the face: If we want to continue leading the world in economic dominance, we’ve got to lead the world in investing in our transportation networks — and casting a vision for the next 50 years of investment.

Read the report here, and you can see an interview with two of the BAF co-chairs, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor Ed Rendell yesterday on MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

Is there a correlation between energy production and the income gap?

Despite Democratic ties, EVs are not very liberal

Today, most Americans can’t even consider buying a new car. It doesn’t matter if federal and state tax credits make a $40,000 plug-in a $30,000 car, a huge percentage of Americans can barely afford the insurance premium on their 10 year old car. Add in $4.00+ gasoline and a new car is simply out of the question.

Yet, EVs are going to save the world, at least the world of rich people.

Overall, I’m a pretty liberal guy. I think we should legalize ALL drugs and regulate them just as we do cigarettes and alcohol — not to mention pharmaceuticals. I also think white collar criminals are more dangerous than most in prison, except those incarcerated for violent crimes. Even then I wonder, if not for white collar crime, would there be as much violent crime in the world today? Moreover, I believe in liberal immigration policies. Again, I’d rather penalize the corporate criminals abusing illegal immigration for profit rather than the illegal immigrants just trying to survive — and lured by white collar criminals.

Furthermore, I think that any rich person that advocates for economic redistribution should — as a matter of good faith — start with their own wealth. Give me a million dollars today, and I could live off it for the rest of my life. No problem. Yet, the rich liberals I hear endorsing redistribution still live like aristocratic kings and queens. Keep a million or two, and give the rest away, NOW.

Hear me Hollywood, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet  — just to name a few?

I mean seriously. Leo DeCaprio might own a Fisker Karma plug-in and several Toyota Prius hybrids, but he also owns a fricken Caribbean Island. If that’s liberal, then call me a conservative.

When it comes to rich do-gooders I’m often reminded of the end of Schindler’s list, when Schindler realizes how many lives he could have saved had he spent less on caviar, whores, fancy suites and posh living quarters.

How many?

Today, nothing is more important than energy when it comes to the quality of life of poor people — of most Americans. Yet, when it comes to energy solutions, rich people advocate nothing but expensive, perfect world solutions, solutions they too often purchase with the help of government tax incentives. In my opinion, tax incentives for plug-in vehicles, for example, should only be available for those making less than $100,000. Even then, there shouldn’t be a plug-in tax credit, but a fuel efficient tax credit.

For example, if you make less than $100,000 per year and buy a vehicle that achieves at least 40 mpg combined, uses natural gas, etc., then that’s worth a tax incentive.

If you make more than $100,000, then put your money where your mouth is.

Energy and the Income Gap

The income gap inextricable tied to energy independence?

Politics aside, if you wanted to help poor people today, nothing helps them more than cheap energy. Since the early 80’s, just following the Iranian oil embargo, the income gap trend between the rich and the poor has been extremely correlated to increases in foreign oil dependency.

Unfortunately, EVs offer very little to reduce foreign oil dependency, or the energy costs of poor people, anytime soon and that won’t change for at least a decade or two, minimally.

Even worse, a singular focus on EVs, coupled with massive tax incentives, is actually counter-productive to the wealthfare of poor Americans — even many middle class Americans.

At the end of the day, new car sales offer little help to most Americans or to reduce foreign oil dependence, and giving upper class Americans billions in tax monies to buy $30,000+ vehicles when many Americans can barely afford to eat just isn’t liberal. Nor is it any different than giving rich bankers sweet tax deals.

Ultimately, I have no doubt that plug-in advocates — whether rich or poor — are nobly intentioned. I’d bet almost ALL are. But the data doesn’t support their case when it comes to plug-in vehicles.

At the end of the day plug-in vehicles are a mid-term solution at best, but probably more of a long term solution. While even cheaper hybrid cars offer a better economic tale for poor consumers, even hybrids aren’t the solution. Today’s poor people — a massive percentage of Americans — need bridge solutions, solutions that make economic sense today. TODAY. Right now, right this minute, especially as part of a plan to serious change via long term solutions like plug-in vehicles.

The solution for poor people inevitably comes back to the legacy effect because nothing achieves energy independence greater than tackling the legacy effect, and that comes back to new drilling, shale, oil tars, public transportation, etc — almost everything plug-in advocates hate, and often for good reason. Nevertheless, hybrid and plug-in advocates must accept our role in this extremely difficult conundrum. We can do some of our part by buying hybrids and plug-ins, but we’re still not doing nearly enough.

Like Schindler, we could do so much more.

We, unlike our more narrow-minded conservative energy brethren — whom believe drilling will solve ALL woes — are the best chance for reason in the energy conversation debate. And, if we use our reason, it’s obvious that plug-ins are not the critical solution today. Certainly, hybrids and plug-ins are the future, but only if we help build a bridge to that future. If not, there will be no future — at least not any future we would ever wish upon our children.

Could smart charging make plug-ins a win-win for consumers and employers?

Plug-in success will ultimately be driven by cost effectiveness and nothing else

What’s the best EV range to achieve plug-in cost-effectiveness? While most plug-in proponents typically believe the most range possible is the best range, it’s cost-effectiveness that ultimately matters most to mainstream consumers — the key to plug-in success — not range.

Of course, EV range does matter, particularly if it’s not perceived to be enough range. Therefore, plug-in hybrids are seen as a critical bridge to pure battery-powered electric vehicles with essentially every forecast through 2030 demonstrating that hybrids will dominate plug-in sales.

But just how much range should plug-in hybrids and range extended EVs offer?

Again, cost-effectiveness will be the key metric to plug-in success, and earlier this year Oxford University completely a study that suggested that small battery plug-in vehicles with almost dynamic charging offer the greatest mainstreaming potential. Unfortunately, ‘dynamic charging’ just isn’t yet on the table.

Still, the point of the Oxford study was that keeping the battery in plug-ins as small as possible keeps costs down the most.

Today, most hardcore plug-in fans mock the EV range of small battery plug-in hybrids such as the upcoming Toyota Prius plug-in hybrid, but a new UK EV study demonstrates that Toyota’s 13 miles of EV range might be far closer to the sweet spot of plug-in cost-effectiveness than critics might want to admit. In the UK, for instance, the average single way commute is just 7 miles.

For years now, Toyota has claimed that most one way commutes are less than 10 miles. 10 miles to work, 10 miles home and 6 miles back and forth to the grocery store, for instance, for a total of 26 miles. Or just 20 miles if the store isn’t need. In the UK, it might be just 14 miles. And then 300 miles back and forth to the weekend camping spot.

So, what’s the best plug-in option?

Both the Chevy Volt and the Prius plug-in hybrid can both meet the needs of these commuters, but which does it better? GM’s 40 miles of range enables the Volt to achieve most commuting needs with home-based electricity, and 37 mpg for the weekend trips.

The Prius plug-in hybrid offers 13 miles of EV range, backed up by 50 mpg.

Which car wins? Well doesn’t that ultimately boil down to costs?

The Volt costs about $40,000. The Prius should come in at least $5000 cheaper, but could undercut the Volt by as much as $10,000 or more. In fact, Toyota has indicated that a plug-in Prius might only cost $3000 more than a conventional Prius. One way or another the plug-in Prius will have an upfront pricing advantage.

Then again, the Volt can use nothing but electricity for 70 percent of all commutes — at least based on averages thus far — while the plug-in Prius is just half that, at best. Thus, the Volt is a better foreign oil dependence fighter, right?

Maybe. However, if every car in America’s fleet achieved 50 mpg, America wouldn’t need to import any foreign oil. The current Prius achieves that without any plug. So EV range isn’t necessarily the key to foreign oil independence, it’s replacing America’s gas-guzzling fleet as quickly as possible that is the real key to US energy independence. And that’s only going to be achieved with the cheapest, most cost-effective solutions.

Nevertheless, the Prius plug-in could still match the Volt’s EV range, without adding more expensive batteries. For instance, what if businesses start adding smart grid technologies and smart chargers to their locations? Consequently, a plug-in Prius driver could still use mostly electricity on a 20 mile commute, even though EV range is only 13 miles.

With a 240 volt charger and with 3 miles of EV range left in the battery, a Prius plug-in could be fully recharged in just a little over an hour. Therefore, in a 9 hour day — one hour for lunch — the plug-in Prius only needs one hour of charging, leaving 8 hours for load balancing, especially during peak hours.

Eventually, businesses might be able to cut down on energy costs, while also providing free energy to employees.

Sure, that’s a bit futuristic and perfect world-ish, but the technologies for such an arrangement exist today, it’s all about implementation and whether or not such systems could actually be a win-win for commuters and businesses. More important, however, such systems get closer to the dynamic charging that the Oxford study suggests could lead to far faster plug-in adoption than anyone — even the most optimistic researchers — are forecasting.

Of course, while many commuters only travel 10 miles or less, many others might travel 20, 30 or even 40 miles one way. In such situations the Volt might make more cost-effective sense than a plug-in Prius, especially using the same smart grid possibilities. In fact, since the Volt offers greater range, maybe Volt drivers might pump excess range — electricity –  into the grid for a profit. Thus, a Volt owner with a home solar array might sell excess electricity to his employer, transported via the Volt’s battery pack.

Furthermore, the Prius plug-in could offer greater range as an option, just as the Volt could offer less range as the cost-effectiveness of EV range is better understood. So, this really isn’t a Volt versus Prius argument, as neither is the perfect plug-in option for everyone.

Ultimately, EV range should be determined by overall efficiency and cost-effectiveness, not by marketing executives. Moreover, EV range needs to be reviewed from a more systemic approach that connects commuters and their destinations, especially since one of the most frequent destinations is for-profit businesses, because if business can reduce energy costs while providing free energy to their employees, everyone wins.

eAssist: GM's base powertrain of the future?

Hybrid payback in less than 4 years at $3.71 per gallon

Yesterday, GM announced that the new Buick Regal eAssist will cost $28,670 + an $860 destination fee, or about $2000 more than the non-hybrid 2012 Regal.

While the Regal eAssist doesn’t serve up terribly exciting fuel economy numbers — 25/36 mpg, city/hwy — in terms of hybrid cars, eAssist does provide real world cost-effectiveness.

Compared to the conventional Regal’s 18/29 mpg, the Regal eAssist offers hybrid payback in less than 4 years. Hold onto the car and you’ve saved $1000 in gas-money after 5 years. Certainly, financing an extra $2000 in costs means a higher upfront price tag, as well as greater interest payments, still eAssist’s numbers make financial sense for 5+ year owners.

Will eAssist’s numbers make consumer sense?

According to a good bit of research, most consumers expect payback in 2 – 3 years or less. Many won’t even pay extra. Nevertheless, the pricing difference between GM’s eAssist hybrids and their conventional versions is only about $2000 or less — not a drastic difference.

Consequently, it will be very interesting to see what kind of share eAssist vehicles can garner. In the last year some GM execs have suggested that eAssist could be GM’s base powertrain of the future. If Buick eAssist vehicles can grab a good chunk of Buick sales, GM will have a lot of incentive to mainstream eAssist even sooner.

The road is scheduled to be closed:

From 4 a.m. on Saturday, June 25, 2011 to 6 p.m., Sunday, June 26, 2011.
From 4 a.m. Saturday, July 2, 2011 to 6 p.m., Monday, July 4, 2011.

Electronic message boards will be in place to alert motorists of this closure. Motorists should use Speedway Boulevard or Broadway as alternative travel routes. Visitors to Sixth Street businesses and the University will be detoured through campus, around the construction area.

Work to install the new video scoreboard began on May 15, 2011. Over the past several weeks, work crews have installed concrete caisson foundations 45 feet deep south of Arizona Stadium. The next phase of work will include installing 55-foot-tall steel pipe columns and structures that will support the video scoreboard.

The traveling public can expect delays when driving, bicycling or walking in this work area. Business access will be maintained. For your safety, please observe all traffic control signage, message boards, and obey reduced speed limits. Watch for construction personnel and equipment in the work zone.

The road is scheduled to be closed:

From 4 a.m. on Saturday, June 25, 2011 to 6 p.m., Sunday, June 26, 2011.
From 4 a.m. Saturday, July 2, 2011 to 6 p.m., Monday, July 4, 2011.

Electronic message boards will be in place to alert motorists of this closure. Motorists should use Speedway Boulevard or Broadway as alternative travel routes. Visitors to Sixth Street businesses and the University will be detoured through campus, around the construction area.

Work to install the new video scoreboard began on May 15, 2011. Over the past several weeks, work crews have installed concrete caisson foundations 45 feet deep south of Arizona Stadium. The next phase of work will include installing 55-foot-tall steel pipe columns and structures that will support the video scoreboard.

The traveling public can expect delays when driving, bicycling or walking in this work area. Business access will be maintained. For your safety, please observe all traffic control signage, message boards, and obey reduced speed limits. Watch for construction personnel and equipment in the work zone.

The road is scheduled to be closed:

From 4 a.m. on Saturday, June 25, 2011 to 6 p.m., Sunday, June 26, 2011.
From 4 a.m. Saturday, July 2, 2011 to 6 p.m., Monday, July 4, 2011.

Electronic message boards will be in place to alert motorists of this closure. Motorists should use Speedway Boulevard or Broadway as alternative travel routes. Visitors to Sixth Street businesses and the University will be detoured through campus, around the construction area.

Work to install the new video scoreboard began on May 15, 2011. Over the past several weeks, work crews have installed concrete caisson foundations 45 feet deep south of Arizona Stadium. The next phase of work will include installing 55-foot-tall steel pipe columns and structures that will support the video scoreboard.

The traveling public can expect delays when driving, bicycling or walking in this work area. Business access will be maintained. For your safety, please observe all traffic control signage, message boards, and obey reduced speed limits. Watch for construction personnel and equipment in the work zone.

The road is scheduled to be closed:

From 4 a.m. on Saturday, June 25, 2011 to 6 p.m., Sunday, June 26, 2011.
From 4 a.m. Saturday, July 2, 2011 to 6 p.m., Monday, July 4, 2011.

Electronic message boards will be in place to alert motorists of this closure. Motorists should use Speedway Boulevard or Broadway as alternative travel routes. Visitors to Sixth Street businesses and the University will be detoured through campus, around the construction area.

Work to install the new video scoreboard began on May 15, 2011. Over the past several weeks, work crews have installed concrete caisson foundations 45 feet deep south of Arizona Stadium. The next phase of work will include installing 55-foot-tall steel pipe columns and structures that will support the video scoreboard.

The traveling public can expect delays when driving, bicycling or walking in this work area. Business access will be maintained. For your safety, please observe all traffic control signage, message boards, and obey reduced speed limits. Watch for construction personnel and equipment in the work zone.

David Goldberg, T4 America communications director, penned a thoughtful op-ed on the Raquel Nelson story that ran in the Washington Post today.

The prosecution of this grieving mother was shocking. In truth, though, no one should be surprised that tragedies like this are happening every day across America: Transportation officials and local planners routinely create the very conditions that underlie these “accidents” and allow them to persist…

…This is a major issue in inner-ring suburbs across the country, places originally built as auto-only suburbia that now are home to many lower-income families who don’t have access to cars. Neither the public transportation system nor the highway designs work for those who live, work and walk in these areas. People are being punished and killed simply for being pedestrians. Our research shows that thousands of lives could be saved — and millions more lives improved — by retrofitting these dangerous roads, as many communities are trying to do.

In related news, Nelson has officially announced her intention to seek a new trial, which will begin October 25. She talked about her decision with Ann Curry on the Today Show in a second interview. While Nelson is concerned with clearing her own name, she knows that others face the same situation every day.

“It’s for myself, my children, single mothers, anybody who has to take public transportation and had to be in a scary situation like that,” she told Today.

We’re still gathering signatures to join with the others petitioning Gov. Nathan Deal and the Cobb County authorities to pardon her and clear her of the previous charges without having to go through another trial. Add your name and spread the word.

Watch the full video below:

David Goldberg, T4 America communications director, penned a thoughtful op-ed on the Raquel Nelson story that ran in the Washington Post today.

The prosecution of this grieving mother was shocking. In truth, though, no one should be surprised that tragedies like this are happening every day across America: Transportation officials and local planners routinely create the very conditions that underlie these “accidents” and allow them to persist…

…This is a major issue in inner-ring suburbs across the country, places originally built as auto-only suburbia that now are home to many lower-income families who don’t have access to cars. Neither the public transportation system nor the highway designs work for those who live, work and walk in these areas. People are being punished and killed simply for being pedestrians. Our research shows that thousands of lives could be saved — and millions more lives improved — by retrofitting these dangerous roads, as many communities are trying to do.

In related news, Nelson has officially announced her intention to seek a new trial, which will begin October 25. She talked about her decision with Ann Curry on the Today Show in a second interview. While Nelson is concerned with clearing her own name, she knows that others face the same situation every day.

“It’s for myself, my children, single mothers, anybody who has to take public transportation and had to be in a scary situation like that,” she told Today.

We’re still gathering signatures to join with the others petitioning Gov. Nathan Deal and the Cobb County authorities to pardon her and clear her of the previous charges without having to go through another trial. Add your name and spread the word.

Watch the full video below: