Travel – Page 27 – a sibilant intake of breath

SpaceShipTwo

Virgin Galactic – Richard Branson’s space company – has released the design of its next generation craft: SpaceShipTwo. The machine will carry passengers into the upper atmosphere after being carried to an altitude of about 15km by a larger mothership. After spending time at 110km of altitude, the vehicle will re-enter the atmosphere. While the technology is new and doubtless interesting, there is good reason to ask whether it serves any valuable purpose.

The three aims commonly described for the technology are delivering extremely urgent packages, launching small satellites, and entertaining rich people. While it can certainly be argued that manned spaceflight has not generally been a valuable undertaking, this sort of rollercoaster ride does seem like an especially trivial use of technology. For about $200,000, you get a few minutes in microgravity, the view out the windows, and bragging rights thereafter. Satellite launching could be a lot more useful, though the Virgin group has yet to demonstrate the capability of their vehicles to do so – a situation that applies equally to the idea of making 90 minute deliveries anywhere in the world.

The Economist provides an especially laughable justification for the whole undertaking, arguing:

When space becomes a democracy—or, at least, a plutocracy—the rich risk-takers who have seen the fragile Earth from above might form an influential cohort of environmental activists. Those cynics who look at SpaceShipTwo and think only of the greenhouse gases it is emitting may yet be in for a surprise.

Hopefully, they won’t become ‘environmental activists’ of the Richard Branson variety: investing in airplanes and gratuitous spacecraft while hoping someone will develop a machine that will somehow address the emissions generated.

Earth Flotilla

The 1997 and 1998 LIFEboat Flotillas were exceptional undertakings that I was privileged to participate in. Organized by Leadership Initiative for Earth, each centred around a week-long sailing experience in the Gulf Islands of British Columbia, intended to help make young people more aware of environmental issues and better connected with those similarly interested.

In March of this year, a smaller but similar expedition is taking place, organized by the World Wildlife Fund, in cooperation with some of the people involved in the original flotillas. Applicants must be residents of British Columbia between 13 and 17. They must be interested in environmental issues and willing to put in the time required.

As someone lucky enough to do something similar in the past, I recommend the opportunity wholeheartedly. If any readers of this blog match the description – or know people who do – application information is online.

[Update: 11 February 2008] I am pleased to report that Tristan’s brother will be participating in the Earth Flotilla, and because his family found out about it from this site, no less.

Carbon constrained travel

Pondering the era of post-air travel tourism, I have been thinking about places to visit by train. There are actually quite a lot of appealing prospects:

Halifax: see the Maritimes for the first time, and perhaps Caity Sackeroff as well
Boston: visit Iason, Sheena, Loretta, and perhaps Claire
New York: re-visit the city five years after my first foray
Bennington, Vermont: visit family

Have any readers undertaken the exploration of North America’s east coast using ground-based means? Are trains generally much more expensive than buses? How do they compare, in terms of speed?

The moral unacceptability of air travel has also left me thinking more seriously about the kind of grand backpacking tours that were more common when long-haul flights were ruinously expensive. The most ambitious possibility – flitting around at the edges of imagination – is to travel by ground all the way from London to Hong Kong, seeing as much as possible between the two. Emitting a couple of tonnes of carbon, in the form of flights across the Atlantic, would be a lot more ethically acceptable than undertaking multiple hops. Of course, a truly conscientous traveler would emulate a friend of a friend of mine and book passage across on a container ship.

Airborne and streaking eastward

I should now be in the air on my way back to Ottawa. Many thanks to all the people who helped to make my holiday in Vancouver so entertaining and personally meaningful. It has been a reminder of how important friends and family really are, and it has left me thinking with renewed energy about possible means of returning to British Columbia on a more permanent basis in the medium to long term.

For now, I need to get back on top of work projects and tardily finish my December book for the reading agreement with Emily.

Trains and buses

Commenting on the possibility of Seattle installing a streetcar system, Dan Savage has argued: “People like trains. People hate buses.” Though public transportation policy is hardly his area of expertise, he does understand how people think and he is able to express himself forcefully and directly. On some level, it is definitely true. I like trains and subways. In London, I took the subway all the time; not once did I ever take a bus. Taking the train from Oxford to London feels like a luxury; taking the bus feels like a jerky, tedious chore.

In Heat, George Monbiot argues that the solution is to make buses nicer: cleaner, newer, and with attractive add-ons like wireless internet. He also argues that inter-city buses should avoid city centres, with all the nightmares of traffic and fiddly intersections they inevitably involve. While that would improve point-to-point travel in the UK, it doesn’t really reveal the reasons for which buses are treated with everything from moderate dislike to outright disdain. Is it a class issue? Lisa Simpson called the bus “”the chariot of the poor and very poor alike.” Is it a practical matter of comfort and efficiency, as Monbiot describes? If so, can it be overcome through practical measures like those he suggests. Are buses doomed to forever be an inferior good?

It is generally recognized that increasing bus services is the cheapest way of expanding public transport – both in terms of capital considerations and overall lifetime costs. That said, if transit use is significantly hampered by the dislike people feel for buses, perhaps alternatives should be more strongly considered. Arguably, this is especially true when it comes to people who have the financial means to use a car instead. If they get driven off the public transit system as soon as they hit that level of affluence, the system remains dominated by users without a great deal of political influence. In an argument akin to those about two-tier healthcare, it is possible that the self-exclusion of the wealthy from the public system perpetuates mediocrity.

One way or another, we need to hope that the private vehicle is reaching its apex in human history. Even with the eventual development of electric vehicles and other low or zero-emission options, the sheer amounts of space and resources devoted to producing and maintaining private transportation infrastructure are probably not sustainable. Given that it will be politically impossible to drag people from their cars kicking and screaming, we need to think seriously about how to encourage voluntary shifts to public or non-motorized transport. Better bike infrastructure and public transit seems crucial tot that campaign.

The efficiency of solar

Robert Rapier, petroleum expert, and Steve Heckeroth, writing for Mother Earth News, agree that solar power is the future.

Based on their calculations, the overall efficiency of biomass “from sun to wheel” is between 0.01% and 0.05%. By contrast, charging electric vehicles using solar power can produce efficiencies of 3% to 20% on the same metric. Electric drivetrains are also “5 to 10 times more efficient than internal combustion engines.” Even if power from conventional fuels is charging the vehicles, overall emissions are likely to be lower. It is also much easier to sequester greenhouse gas emissions from big power plants than to do the same thing with car exhaust.

If you insist on maintaining a car-based society, basing it around electric vehicles charged using renewable energy or fossil fuel generation with sequestration seems to be the way to go. Hybrids are only a minor improvement and hydrogen fuel cells are a non-starter.

Shipping and invasive species

Globalization has been profoundly associated with massive sea freight shipments. Primary commodities flow from states with rich resource endowments to others with processing facilities. Labour intensive goods are shipped from where labour is cheap to where the goods are demanded. In the process of all this activity, a lot of oceanic species have been able to move into waters they would never otherwise have reached. This unintentional human-induced migration has occurred for two major reasons: the construction of canals and the transport of ballast water. This brief discussion will focus on the latter.

Each year, ships carry 3 – 5 billion tonnes of ballast water internationally. The water is taken on in port, once a ship has been loaded. This is necessary to make the ship balanced and stable at sea. The water taken on can easily include hundreds of marine species of which many of which are capable of surviving the journey. If they get expelled in a suitable environment, these creatures can alter ecosystems and crowd out local species. Sea urchins that have arrived in this way have been extinguishing kelp beds off the west coast of North America, destroying sea otter habitat in the process. Zebra mussels are another infamous example of a problematic invasive species.

Efforts to prevent the transmission of species through ballast water take a number of forms:

Ejecting the water taken on in port in the open ocean: most of the species expelled should die, and the new waters taken on should be relatively free of living things
Poisoning the creatures in the ballast water: this can be done with degradable biocides like peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide
Transferring ballast water to a treatment facility at the arrival port
De-oxygenating the water in ballast tanks: this kills most species, if the deoxygenated conditions are maintained for long enough

None of these approaches is completely effective. Each retains some possibility of unintentionally introducing invasive species. Several also have other environmentally relevant effects.

That said, simply making an active effort to prevent species transmission between ecosystems marks a big change in human thinking. Not long ago, species were often introduced willy-nilly into entirely new environments: for aesthetic, practical, or whimsical reasons. Infamous cases include those of Eugene Schieffelin – the man who introduced starlings to North America because he wanted to continent to contain all the birds mentioned in the works of Shakespeare – and Thomas Austin – the British landowner who introduced rabbits to Australia because he missed hunting them. Wikipedia has a comprehensive list of such introduced species.

Today’s best biofuel: Brazilian ethanol

Many people see biofuels as a promising replacement for oil in transportation applications. Indeed, being able to replace the oil that contributes to climate change and must often be imported from nasty regimes with carbon-neutral fuels from domestic crops has a great deal of intuitive appeal. For this process to be worthwhile, however, there is a need to consider both life-cycle energy usage and net carbon emissions.

A study conducted in 2004 by Isaias de Carvalho Macedo at the University of Brazil focused on the production of ethanol from Brazilian sugarcane. This is considered by the majority of commentators to be the most energy efficient source of biofuel currently available. This is because most Brazilian sugarcane requires no irrigation and must only be ploughed up and replanted once every five years. The Macedo study found that producing a tonne of sugarcane requires 250,000 kilojoules of energy. This represents the need for tractors, fertilizers, and other elements of modern mechanical farming. The ethanol from one tonne of sugarcane contained 2,000,000 kilojoules of energy. Furthermore, the plants that produce it burn bagasse (the pulp left over when sugarcane has the sugar squeezed out) and can contribute net electricity to the grid. Corn ethanol (the kind being heavily subsidized in the United States) takes about as much energy to grow as is ultimately contained in the fuel.

In terms of net carbon emissions, cane ethanol is also fairly good. Using one tonne of ethanol instead of the amount of gasoline with the same energy content produces 220.5 fewer kilograms of carbon dioxide, when all aspects of production and usage are considered. Burning one litre of gasoline produces about 640 grams of carbon dioxide. Since ethanol has about 25% less energy than gasoline, the relevant comparison is between 1,000 kilograms of ethanol and 750 kilos of gasoline. The gasoline would emit 460 kilos of carbon dioxide, while the ethanol would emit 259.5 kilos.

This is an improvement over the direct use of fossil fuels, but not a massive one. The Macedo study concludes that widespread ethanol use reduces Brazilian emissions by 25.8 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Their total carbon emissions from fossil fuels are about 92 million tonnes per year – a figure that increases substantially if deforestation is included.

The conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that ethanol – even when produced in the most efficient way – is not a long-term solution. Producing 259.5 kilos of carbon is more sustainable than producing 460, but it isn’t an adequate reduction in a world that has to cut from about 27 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent to five. Bioethanol may become more viable with the development of cellulosic technology (a subject for another post), but is certainly no panacea at this time.

References:

Macedo, I. et al. Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Production and Use of Fuel Ethanol in Brazil (prepared for the Government of the State of São Paulo) (March 2004).
Environmental Protection Agency. Emission Facts: Average Carbon Dioxide Emissions Resulting from Gasoline and Diesel Fuel.

[Update: 8:54am] The above numbers on carbon dioxide emissions produced by gasoline per kilometre are disputed. If someone has an authoritative source on the matter, please pipe up.

Montreal Sous Bois Hostel: WiFi and bedbugs included

The Sous Bois hostel in Montreal is quite a lively place. In some ways, it is an unusually good establishment. The atmosphere is positive, there is free wireless internet, the location is good, and the facilities are fairly well maintained. One nice touch is providing a big bowl of earplugs (a necessity in almost any hostel).

The biggest problem with the Sous Bois, in my experience, is the bedding. The bunks consist of squeaky air mattresses and the sheets they provide are awfully scanty for Montreal in winter. It is a good thing I ended up sleeping in my shoes, trousers, and jacket, since I woke up with my hands and ankles covered in small, itchy insect bites. All told, I have about 100 of them, after two nights in the place. Lots of other ex-guests mention the bugs, which demonstrates the importance of researching low-cost accommodations, rather than choosing one that appears high on Google and has a nice webpage. The lack of secure storage facilities is also a problem.

This definitely wasn’t the worst hostel I have stayed in (the Hosteling International places across from St. Mark’s Square in Venice and on Amsterdam Avenue in New York City share that dishonour), but it isn’t one I would be quick to stay in again.

[Update: 29 October 2007] This afternoon I spoke with Fred Bouchard, a manager at the Sous Bois Hostel. He seemed suspiciously familiar with bedbugs: asking me whether the bites were clustered in lines (as bedbug bites are) and then telling me that the hostel policy was to refund the cost of your stay (within two weeks) and to pay for any bite-related medications prescribed by a doctor. He told me to see a doctor immediately and that I need to either immerse everything I had with me in boiling water or put it through the dryer on high for at least half an hour. Once it gets cold enough, I will freeze the suit-carrying luggage that is presently in garbage bag quarantine for at least three days.

It seems pretty clear that this hostel is well aware of their infestation. That probably explains the minimal sheets and the air mattresses, as well as the ease with which the staff recall their bedbug policies. Once I find the right phone number within the City of Montreal bureaucracy, I will file a report with the public health authorities. In some cases, bedbugs can carry hepatitis; also, infestations that people bring home could easily cost thousands of dollars to clear up. As such, it seems reasonable that the city authorities would be concerned that this place is still operating in such a dodgy manner.

[Update: 31 October 2007] The hostel refunded me for my stay. One person contacted me through one of the hosteling webpages to tell me that they gave her a refund too, after she found their non-paying guests snacking on her.

Francophone drizzle

So far, Montreal is proving disappointingly soggy – so much so that I fear for my laptop whenever I venture out of cafes. All of today has been marked with persistent drizzle and punctuated by proper downpours at regular intervals. Last night involved some good fireworks, scores of people tramping around the Old Town in Halloween costumes, extensive conversation with people in the hostel, and a very late night introduction to the actual game of dominoes (rather than the practice of knocking them down sequentially).

For now, I am off to seek something both non-inundative and interesting to do for the evening. Quite possibly, I will make my way over to the Plateau, near Mont Royal itself.