You may laugh at him and his video, just like I did. But being a bicyclist, or even a pedestrian, in a car-centric world is dangerous and could easily get you killed. For example. In the UK cyclists made up only 0.5% of the total traffic but accounted for 5% of the entire number of road deaths and 11% of the serious injuries during 2009. The report, done by the road safety charity Brake, also concluded that “while road casualties overall had decreased, cyclist deaths and injuries had not”.

And a recently released report shows that between 2000 and 2009 more than 47000 pedestrians were killed in the USA. The study also shows that more than 668000 other pedestrians were injured because of accidents.

“The Transportation for America report asserts that transportation agencies across the country continue to design infrastructure with only vehicle traffic in mind. “It’s a serious problem that doesn’t get a lot of attention,” said Michelle Ernst, who wrote the report.

Most pedestrian deaths occur on “arterial” roadways, designed for traffic without sidewalks or bike lanes to accommodate walkers or cyclists, the report said.”

But luckily there are cities where they have bicycles and pedestrians in mind when they design their streets and transportation systems.

“Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises,” said Robert Bailey, policy adviser at Oxfam. “It is imperative that we have the full picture. While politicians concentrate on keeping industry lobbies happy, people in poor countries cannot afford enough to eat.”

Rising food prices have pushed 100m people worldwide below the poverty line, estimates the World Bank, and have sparked riots from Bangladesh to Egypt. Government ministers here have described higher food and fuel prices as “the first real economic crisis of globalisation”.

The report “would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House.” The US government claims that biofuels only contribute to about 3% in increased food prices. Senior development sources have said that the report “has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush.”

But it’s not just USA who should feel embarrassed by the findings in the report. The European Union is also a big player in the biofuel world.

Recently the European Environment Agency’s (EEA) Scientific Committee called for the suspension of EU’s target to increase the share of biofuels used in transportation to 10% by 2020. The committee has called for a new, “comprehensive scientific study on the environmental risks and benefits of biofuels” before any targets should be set.

And it wasn’t long ago Jean Ziegler, UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food, called for the suspension of biofuels production saying biofuels are a “crime against humanity.” And before that, Finance Indian Finance Minister P. Chidambaram said that “it is “outrageous” that developed countries are turning food crops into biofuels while billions of people in the developing countries are living on the edge and trying to cope with escalating food prices”.

And even more pressure is expected to come from the British governments own report on the impact of biofuels, the Gallagher Report.

“The Guardian has previously reported that the British study will state that plant fuels have played a “significant” part in pushing up food prices to record levels. Although it was expected last week, the report has still not been released.”

Have our car-fetish really taken us this far? Do we actually approve and like the idea to transform food into fuel to keep our gas-guzzling cars running, no matter what the costs are?

How would the world look like? Would we have a war in Iraq? Would we have a better climate? Would we have less terrorism? Would the US economy be in a better shape?

Chris Pummer, from MarketWatch, says that the increased gas prices in USA should be celebrated.

“Americans should be celebrating rather than shuddering over the arrival of $4-a-gallon gasoline. We lived on cheap gas too long, failed to innovate and now face the consequences of competing for a finite resource amid fast-expanding global demand.”

He also believes that $8-a-gallon gas would do the USA, and the rest of the world good.

“A further price rise as in Europe to $8 a gallon – or $200 and more to fill a large SUV’s tank – would be a catalyst for economic, political and social change of profound national and global impact. We could face an economic squeeze, but it would be the pain before the gain.”

But let’s get back to the question I asked first. How would the world look like if USA had similar gas prices as those in Europe?

Well, besides the war in Iraq and terrorism, we don’t really have to wait to see how the world could look like. We can see it already.

SUVs and other gas-guzzling cars have dropped enormous in sales, as well as in value, lately. It’s like they have been put on the endangered species list.

“If gas prices stay where they are at or continue to rise, the body-on frame SUV is an endangered species and the pickup truck as a personal car is an endangered species.”

“When they find out what you think their truck is worth, they think you’re trying to rip them off or something. Small cars are gone within a week; SUVs are sitting here since last summer.”

Americans are already now leaving their cars at home in favour of public transportation or car-pools.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) recently released their March 2008 report and it shows a massive decline in driving. In contrast to the trend the past 25 years the 4.4% drop sure says a lot.

“2008 marks the first time since 1979 that there has been a drop in miles travelled in over the month of March. This drop corresponds to 11 billion less miles traveled, according to FHWA. Over the first quarter of 2008, greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector have also dropped 9 million metric tons compared to past years, something that no amount of political posturing has yet to accomplish.”

Let’s hope that the gas prices keeps increasing but also that our politicians helps to ease the pain that comes “before the gain” with smart and long lasted solutions (and not short-sighted and stupid ones).

Image credit: Futureatlas.com. Image licensed under a
Creative-Commons Attribution license.

Well, that was the question behind a recent survey commissioned by the Fairfax County (VA) Economic Development Authority, one of the leading economic development organizations in the US.

700 American adults were asked this question:

What do you believe should be the highest priority, in terms of investing money and resources, in order to achieve a meaningful technological advancement in the next 10 years?

The result might surprise. According to the survey Americans wants a solution to the gas crisis more than they want a cure for cancer, heart diseases or other similar medical breakthroughs.

37% of the people who took part in the survey “thought money and resources should be placed into a breakthrough in fuel efficiency or alternative fuels, while 30 percent wanted the effort placed against an advance in medicine.”

The environment (climate change) was only ranked on third place with 14%.

Security and defence was ranked shortly after the environment with 10%. Transportation and space exploration each had 3% while telecommunication and media was placed at the bottom with only 2%.

The full survey result can be found below:

Top priority for technological breakthroughs?
Surprise: Four in 10 Americans say “fuel efficiency and alternative fuels”

Focus on medical and environmental concerns place second and third in national survey by the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority

Second survey reveals similar priorities among British respondents

Fairfax County, Virginia USA, April 3, 2008 – Nearly four in 10 Americans polled in a new survey say that improving fuel efficiency and developing alternative fuels should have the highest priority for investments that will lead to meaningful technological advances within the next decade.

In a just released national survey, commissioned by the Fairfax County (Virginia) Economic Development Authority (FCEDA, www.FairfaxCountyEDA.org) and conducted by IPSOS Public Affairs, an independent, leading global research company, 37 percent of those polled selected “fuel efficiency and alternative fuels” from a list of seven categories of potential investment. Placing second was “medical” (30%) followed by the “environment” (14%). As a percentage of the total, the other categories registered at 10% or less.

“These results are a snapshot in time of what people believe today should be the focus of technological investment,” said Gerald L. Gordon, Ph.D., president and CEO of the FCEDA. “As one of the world’s most prominent breeding grounds for creative discovery and technological exploration, Fairfax County needs to know what is important to people. These survey results tell us that there is a tremendous interest in new technologies that will address a range of energy, medical and environmental concerns. These are instructive findings for large corporations, emerging startups and the investment community.”

The top line results of the survey, conducted by telephone of close to 700 American adults on March 7-9, were as follows:

If you had to choose from the following categories, what do you believe should be the highest priority, in terms of investing money and resources, in order to achieve a meaningful technological advancement in the next 10 years?

Fuel efficiency and alternative fuels Medical Environment Security and Defense Transportation Space Exploration Telecommunications and Media Don’t know/Not sure

37% 30% 14% 10% 3% 3% 2% 1%

There were some notable demographic distinctions among the findings, including:

• For female respondents, the top investment focus was medical (33%), which was cited foremost by 26% of men.
• More than four in 10 men (43%) said fuel efficiency and alternative fuels should be the highest priority, while only 30% of women placed it on top.
• Forty-six percent of college graduates named fuel efficiency as the number one priority versus 31% for those with high school degrees or less. (The highest priority cited by high school graduates was “medical” at 36 percent.).
• Respondents in western states cited medical as the utmost priority at 34% versus 33% for fuel efficiency and alternative fuels.
• Older survey participants were more inclined to select fuel efficiency and alternative fuels – 42% for those ages 55 and older versus 37% for those aged 35-54 and 31% for those between the ages of 18-34.

A parallel survey conducted by the FCEDA in Great Britain found that respondents favored advancements in “medical” technology and “fuel efficiency and alternative fuels” (38% and 33% respectively) above other categories. A desire to see breakthroughs in the “environment” ranked third in GB with 14 percent. As a percentage of the total, the remaining categories registered at 10 percent or less among British respondents, as they did in America.

The top-line results of the survey, conducted by telephone of more than 500 adults throughout Great Britain March 7-9 by Ipsos MORI, were as follows:

If you had to choose from the following categories, what do you believe should be the highest priority, in terms of investing money and resources, in order to achieve a meaningful technological advancement in the next 10 years?

Medical Fuel efficiency and alternative fuels Environment Transportation Security
and Defense Space Exploration Telecommunications and Media No opinion

38% 33% 14% 8% 4% 1% 1% 3%

There were also some notable demographic distinctions among the British findings, including:

• 44 percent of male respondents said fuel efficiency and alternative fuels should be the highest priority, while only 23 percent of women placed it on top.
• Women chose “medical” technology as the top investment focus (46%) while men placed medical second on their list (28%) behind fuel efficiency and alternative fuels.
• Survey participants ages 55 to 64 were more inclined to select medical as their top priority (43%), while respondents 65+ selected fuel efficiency and alternative fuels (36%).
• In terms of regions, the South East, Wales and the South West chose fuel efficiency and alternative fuels above all other categories (38 and 39% respectively). The Midlands, North England and Scotland all pinpointed medical as their key issue.

Survey Methodology
The FCEDA survey was conducted March 7-9, 2008 by Ipsos Public Affairs, which is owned and managed by research professionals. As part of its weekly U.S. Telephone Omnibus Study, IPSOS interviewed 692 adults ages 18 and older. The margin of error for the entire survey is 4% at a 95% confidence level.

About the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority
The Fairfax County Economic Development Authority (www.FairfaxCountyEDA.org) promotes Fairfax County, Virginia, as a business and technology center. In 2007 Time magazine called Fairfax County “one of the great economic success stories of our time.” It is the Washington, D.C., area’s private-sector job leader and is a major hub for regional economic activity. The FCEDA maintains marketing offices in San Francisco, Bangalore, Frankfurt, London, Seoul and Tel Aviv.

Thousands of people flocked to the NY International Auto Show at the Javits Center on Saturday. In the midst of it all, Lady Liberty ended her 100 year “spectacularly combustible love affair” with the automobile. Lady Liberty said, “Frankly, this relationship has just gotten to be much more work than it’s worth. My health, liberty and freedom have suffered greatly, and now I hope that my new relationships will finally give me security and happiness.” Then Reverend Billy officiated her marriage to “Mr. Transit” and the Stop Shopping Gospel Choir sang in celebration.

Video after the jump:

You can also watch the video on StreetFilms.org.

He still foolishly tries to defend his comment by saying, in a blog entry titled Talk About a Crock, that his “thoughts on what has or hasn’t been the cause of climate change have nothing to do with the decisions I [he] make to advance the cause of General Motors.”

Yeah. Right.

Bob Lutz have also opposed laws that would force automakers to sell smaller cars saying it would be “like trying to address the obesity problem in this country by forcing clothing manufacturers to sell smaller, tighter sizes”.

There is no wonder that GM is doing so good financially and falling behind the “green” auto-industry leaders like Toyota (with their Prius) when they have people like Bob Lutz running the company.

Image credit: Rockershirt. Image licensed under a
Creative-Commons Attribution license.

On a news conference Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, said that he believes that “this ground-breaking initiative will have an impact throughout the world with other cities following suit as they step up their efforts to halt the slide towards catastrophic climate change.”

Ken Livingstone admits that the new tax will only have a minor impact on greenhouse gas emissions in London. But, he says the new congestion charging scheme for gas-guzzling cars will send signals that its time to change lifestyle.

“I have every sympathy for a Scottish hill farmer who needs his 4×4 to get around,” Livingstone said. “But there is absolutely no justification for cars producing high amounts of pollution being driven in central London.”

The new scheme is expected to bring in around £30-£50 million ($60-$100), every year. The money will go to fund the cost for a major cycling initiative in London.

While environmental organisations and a majority of the citizens in London welcome the new scheme the motor industry is not happy. Automobile Association president Edmund King welcomes incentives for greener cars, but says that “larger families who do low mileage will be clobbered by this new tax.”

Tony Juniper, from Friends of the Earth Director, welcomes the new scheme but says more is needed.

“Road traffic is one of the biggest contributors to climate change. Measures that get people to choose greener cars, as well as to drive less, are urgently needed. Charging gas-guzzling vehicles more to drive in central London is extremely welcome and supported by most Londoners. We are delighted that Mr Livingstone is taking a lead on this issue.”

Below is a video from SkyNews where Tony Juniper and Porsche go head to head on congestion charging in London:

Image credit: Joshua Kaufman. Image licensed under a
Creative-Commons Attribution-Share Alike license.

Did you know that about 25% of the entire size of Los Angeles is made up of roads, parking places and other areas designed for cars?

Also check out this picture, taken by the Press-Office City of Münster (Germany). It demonstrates the amount of space required to transport the same number of passengers by car, bus or bicycle.

It’s really mind-boggling.

Image credit: Marshall Astor. Image licensed under a
Creative-Commons Attribution-Share Alike license.