Sen. Petersen:

Thank you for the opportunity to address you about important issues facing Virginia. In your Virginia 2.0 vision statement, you say: “Moving Freight from Trucking to Rail: New road construction is not the only answer – we need new modal capability. For example, we need a state policy moving inter-state freight traffic from our highways to our railways. This simple step alone will do more to eliminate regional traffic congestion than a new Metro line or highway.”

I agree completely with your statement. We have the best example in the state of where through-state truck taffic diverted from truck to intermodal rail would obviate need for huge highway capacity improvements (estimated in excess of $11 billion) in the I-81 Corridor.

Trucks frequently compose 40% of the traffic along I-81 and most have neither an origin nor destination here. In fact, the I-81 Corridor, traversing 325 miles of Virginia from Knoxville, TN, to Harrisburg, PA, is among the top 5 or 10 truck freight routes in the nation.

For six years we have tried to get state support for diverting that freight traffic to a model 21st Century railroad. We even persuaded 47 counties, cities, and towns, (http://www.railsolution.org/partners/local-government.html) to pass resolutions stating preference for a rail solution to massive widening of I-81.

Yet the Kaine Administration (and Warner’s before that) has pressed forward with a plan to double the size of our rural interstate to eight lanes with tolls contemplated to exceed $100 to pass one time through Virginia.

The costs of proceeding down this path would be disastrous for air quality, future greenhouse gas emissions, public health, land use, safety, and regional economic growth. Whereas developing a truck-time competitive railroad would provide great benefits in all these areas, especially air quality and the economy where rail freight would provide shippers a competitive shipping mode which would have to compete with a toll-free interstate.

Further our plan would open the door for passenger rail in the Corridor by providing a double track which would allow fast freight and passenger trains to pass slow unit freight trains.

Two years ago, a citizens’ organization that I founded, RAIL Solution, pushed through the General Assembly the I-81 Corridor Freight Rail Study. That study, undertaken by the Department of Rail and Public Transportation with assistance from Norfolk Southern Co. which operates the railroad parallel to I-81,is nearing completion. Preliminary data show potential for massive diversion of through-state truck traffic from I-81. Investments to eliminate grade crossings, remove track from congested areas, and straighten the track would result in ability of N S to carry time-sensitive freight competitively with trucks.

Yet, the Secretary of Transportation, Pierce Homer, refuses to engage us on implementing modern rail technology. Under his direction VDOT pressed ahead with an EIS that ignored multi-state rail options and now is being contested in court for this reason.

As fuel prices skyrocketed this summer, more and more freight moved by rail in this Corridor, but Secretary Homer has shown no sign of embracing a multi-modal option.

We are now about to launch a campaign to pursue a demonstration grant for implementing our Steel Interstate vision (http://www.railsolution.org/)for the Knoxville to Harrisburg portion of I-81.

As a supporter of multi-modal transportation systems, how can you help us get support in the General Assembly and with the Kaine Administration and the next administration to break this commitment to a too costly highway solution to freight movement along I-81?

Thank you for taking the time to wade through this complicated topic and respond to us.

Rees Shearer
Chair, RAIL Solution
Emory, VA

Sen. Petersen, First off, thanks so much for joining us today.

In light of your work on last year’s Clean Energy Act and all the things that have since transpired (Governor’s Climate Change Commission and election of Barack Obama for example), what do you think it’s going to take for Virginia to finally have a mandatory RPS?

Hello Sen. Peterson,

What “shovel ready” projects would you suggest that Gov. Kaine submit to Pres. Obama for his stimulus program?

Chap, thanks for taking questions on a holiday week. What did you think of the Climate Commission’s recommendations?

Se, Petersen,

Thanks for joining us. Given the near hiatus on highway building imposed by the economy, wouldn’t this be a good time to open up discussion on the the transportation funding allocation? How can we do that?

It is funny how often times debate on the issues get compartmentalized, when in reality today’s issues overlap. Take the transportation debate in Virginia as it is shelved in 2009 in favor of the budget, the economy and energy. Yet from especially an energy conservation perspective, many of our current transportation projects need to be revisited. For instance, in trying to evolve towards more walkable communities more reliant on mass transit, there are expensive road projects of yesteryear that might not warrant building. What can be done to try to intersect these otherwise “competing” issues?

Hey Everyone:

Great to be here. Thank you Eileen for allowing me to be back in Hampton Roads (at least virtually). It’s bitterly cold outside today in NoVA so it’s a good day to have a cup of coffee and ruminate over our potential legislative successes in 2009.

OK, I’ll start with the last Q asked (1:44 pm) and work my way to the top. If more Q’s are added, I’ll tackle those in turn. Chap

Welcome, Chap. Thanks for joining us on this holiday week.

(response to Eileen at 1:44 pm)

To me, transportation and environment are always interconnected. You asked about transportation being “on the shelf” in 2009. I don’t think it is and here’s why:

There will be a major cutback in state spending if only because we are limited constitutionally by our balanced budget requirement. However, the Feds have no such limit and the early word is a Federal stimulus package of $700-800B which will contain a large portion of transportation money. If Virginia gets roughly 3% of that money, we could be talking about $5-10B in potential Federal assistance which would wipe out the state deficit (recognizing that this may be dependent on our matching funds). Either way, we could be looking at a major expansion of capital available for transpo.

For environmentalists like us, it is imperative that the funds are prioritized to transit, especially in urban areas. In 2008, I supported the State Senate when we voted thru SB 5009 which dedicated the first 25% off the top of the new money (over $400M statewide) for the Commonwealth Mass Transit Fund.

In my area, we need additonal funding for the METRO and VRE lines serving commuters to promote speed and reliability. We also needs some type of transit service along the Rte 95 corridor, perhaps a Bus Rapid Transit. In our area, more roads will only encourage more traffic.

So to summarize … I don’t think transpo is on the shelf in ‘09 and I do think that enviro concerns will play a major role in creating an integrated vision for VA with any new funds.

(response to Roger at 1:33 pm)

Thanks for your question. I am all in favor of changing the allocation formula to favor mass transit. Of course, that’s also a better return for our part of the state.

I have talked with Del. Dave Marsden of Fairfax County about some ideas in 2009 on changing the allocation formulas. I would appreciate some help from the HR area, as it can’t be (and shouldn’t be) only Fairfax pushing this. That won’t work.

The one thing I can tell you positively is that new funds in past sessions have been allocated outside the formula. For example, the notorious HB 3202 dedicated its money to several transit projects, more so than previous bills.

My rule of thumb was 50/50 for roads vs. transit in NoVA, which is very ambitious for most areas. However, SB 5009 did reach 25% for statewide spending. In Tidewater, those funds could be used for light rail connecting Norfolk with the Beach. Or it could be seed money to develop a high speed rail link with Richmond and eventually D.C.

Here’s a question from Richard Ball emailed to me under separate cover:

Senator, many RPS policies, including Virginia’s current voluntary RPS, include landfill gas to energy (LFGTE) as a renewable source. However, I have seen analyses of land fill gas to energy that show that this practice actually increases net greenhouse gas emissions. The small reductions in CO2 emissions from production of electricity are overwhelmed by additional fugitive methane emissions associated with operational changes in landfill management made to enable electricity generation, instead of just flaring the gas. Q: If you could be convinced of that, would you support removing LFGTE as a renewable energy source from existing or new renewable programs?

Richard H. Ball
Annandale, Virginia

(Response to Miles at 1:02 pm)

Thanks Miles (or can I say “Delegate Grant”?)

Thanks for your question. There has been a tremendous amount of thought that went into the Climate Change Commission’s report. Now it’s time for action. Let me give you three places where VA can get off its proverbial backside and join the 21st century in recognizing global warming:

Mandate RPS and Efficiency: As you know from last year, we fought the good fight on this bill last year. The issues haven’t changed and the public clamor is growing. This state needs mandatory legal standards, especially in the absence of Federal law on carbon emissions. This year, I will have a bill on capping consumption, which is critical to this process.

Create Third Party Oversight: One of the biggest burdens on enviro groups is trying to match the lobbyist muscle of investor-owned utilities. It’s impossible. We need a consumer advocate to represent the general public in reviewing energy issues. In the absence of a state official who will do that, we are talking about an auditor — perhaps even a private company — who can oversee efficiency and RPS programs and ensure that the public interest is represented, as consumer, resident and taxpayer. Again, I’ll have a bill on that in 2009.

Promote Sustainable Choices: This is a catch-all for all types of behavior, from telecommuting to using biodeisel. Our state laws, including tax laws, should promote sustainable living, e.g. requiring state buildings to be LEED certified (another bill of mine). But a lot of these choices must be personal. Cut back on unnecessary clutter. Go small (or at least medium) in our housing and vehicle choices. Limit vehicle travel to when you need it. Grow your own vegetables. (my Grandmother did — I still have nightmares)

I’m rambling a bit, Miles, but there’s so much to talk about here. The Commission goals will be useless and a lot of time will be wasted if we don’t pass bills that will push this state to the next level.

(response to Brendan at 9:41 am)

Thanks for your question. It’s been a while since I’ve campaigned statewide, so I won’t pretend to know what’s the greatest need in Norfolk, Richmond, Roanoke, etc.

As for my little place in the sun, we desperately need to extend and increase the scope of METRO service, especially along the 66 corridor. With a Federal grant, we can begin that project and extend METRO to Centreville (I’m already assuming it will go to Dulles based on the current budget). There was an MIS study done in the late 90’s and the project has stalled since then due to lack of funds.

Closer to home and “shovel ready”, there are a number of small road projects here and there in the County (especially Lee Highway) which need to be improved. Also a grade-separated interchange for Ffx County Parkway and Fair Lakes Parkway would be nice. However, the METRO extension (and more trains) is really #1.

By the way, my little boy Thomas and I took the train to the Redskins game yesterday. We left from Vienna and arrived at FedEx about an hour later. Saved $40 on parking. Hail to the Redskins!

As Northern Virginia’s most prominent Creightard, what are your thoughts on the Governor’s primary?

(response to Eileen at 8:57 am)

Thanks Eileen. I talked about RPS in an earlier post. I will simply add that all of these state laws may eventually become superseded by Federal law if (when?) the Obama administration passes a nationwide plan. However, until then, Virginia should have its own laws. Besides the environmental benefits, it also develops alternative energy producers right here in our backyard. Despite the temporary slide in oil prices, I am certain that alternative energy is a long-term growth industry and we need to nurture it.

(response to Rees at 11:33 pm)

Rees:

Thanks for the post and all the info. Yes, I well remember the “roads to rails” issue along Rte 81 from speaking there in spring ‘05. This is a big issue and I don’t know all the facts re VDOT’s present position. I don’t want to sound-bite it other than to say that freight rail should be the long-term solution in Rte 81 corridor. (My recollection was that we killed the toll option last session). We need to get you before the Transpo Committee this session and talk about this to a larger audience. This issue crosses party lines.

(response to Eileen and NLS this p.m.)

Eileen:

In response to Mr. Ball, I am aware that noxious fumes from toxic sources can very often have little (if any) public benefit.

NLS, are you listening?? (smile)

Everybody, have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!!

(I have to run)

Thanks again Sen. Petersen for joining us. More questions will come your way as we get closer to January. We appreciate very much you’re helping us this way.

Have a great holiday and all the best to your family!

Thanks Senator

Hello! It is so nice to be a part of this forum. I hope I can contribute very soon on this forum so that people can also learn from my experience.

Thanks and more power!

_________________
Know more - JP Schoeffel Site Profit Bot

Bull Sell Property Dubai