Texas view on environment is 18 lanes wide

[The Real Shady]

By Anna Driver Fri Jan 19, 8:45 AM ET HOUSTON (Reuters) - As President Bush readies a new plan on global warming, environmentalists say an 18-lane highway going up in Houston speaks volumes about how people in his home state of Texas view the planet. Between 2003 and 2009, $2.7 billion of state and federal money will have been plowed into expanding 23 miles of Interstate-10 in west Houston to as wide as 18 lanes in some stretches of the city's main east-west road. "It is a concrete monstrosity," said Jim Blackburn, an environmental lawyer in the Texas city who fought the expansion of "I-10" and lost. "It probably shows as much as anything the philosophy of development here." In his annual State of the Union speech to Congress on Tuesday, Bush is expected to call for a massive increase in the use of ethanol -- a fuel made from corn and other farm products -- to try to reduce U.S. dependency on oil imports. Environmentalists say more often he is on the wrong track. They had sought to preserve a rail line that ran along I-10 for a commuter train that someday might bring workers to the city from distant suburbs. But after 15 years of study and discussion about the highway, state officials decided to go with a highway-only strategy. "You can simply get to your destination quicker and better in a car," Bob Lanier, a former Houston mayor, said. If you can get there faster in a car, you are not going to take a train." Texas has a long history of putting energy interests ahead of conservation. The nation's second most populous state also generates greenhouse gases as one of the world's largest oil-refining and petrochemical manufacturing centers. Bush, who had no direct hand in the Houston highway expansion, was governor of Texas from January 1995 until just before he became president in January 2001. He grew up in Midland and Houston and owned a Texas oil and gas business. "Texas has always been pretty far over on the side of exploiting natural resources and not worrying about the consequences," Richard Murray, a political science professor at the University of Houston, said. "Texas generates a huge amount of carbon dioxide because we are such big energy consumers." SPRAWLING HOUSTON The sprawling Houston metropolitan area, home to more than 5 million people, caters to drivers. Multi-deck parking garages are affixed to most large apartment complexes and there are drive-through lanes at pharmacies, banks, dry cleaners and coffee shops like Starbucks Corp.. Lanier, a real estate developer who was chairman of the Texas Highway Commission from 1983 to 1987, said the city's decision to go with buses rather than rail for a mass transit system was the only option that made sense for such a low-density city where rail stations were impractical. Part of the difficulty in weaning Houston off road building, environmentalist Blackburn said, is that the decades-long debate over transit planning has been dominated by the region's energy interests and by developers who made their fortunes building homes in far-flung suburbs. Those pro-growth interests have appealed to Texas voters' preference for rugged individualism over government action. Lanier shrugs off any environmental woes that might come with the expanded highway. "You get a better environmental report moving people rapidly where they want to go, rather than having them sit in traffic," he said. Downtown there is a 7.5-mile light rail line that was built entirely with local taxes after years of fighting over the idea and the funding. Bush has pushed for the use of alternative fuels like hydrogen and ethanol and in his State of the Union address a year ago decried America's "addiction" to oil. But that is little comfort to a man who has spent 35 years fighting for balance between economic and environmental interests in Texas. "There's a sort of arrogance that comes from an oil producing state," Blackburn said. "You've always been able to drill and produce your way out of a problem.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070119/...environment_dc

I presume these environmentalist have never sat in bumper to bumper traffic for an hour trying to get from Katy to downtown, and the idea that enough people would take a train is just naive.

[MadMax]

Real Shady --

I think rail CAN work. But the expansion on I-10 was to CATCH UP to development. The population center of Houston is I-10 and Gessner, at this point. Most projections I've seen have it at I-10 and the Beltway in another 10 years. This was just necessary.

I still don't think this ends up being the biggest freeway in the country...I think there's one with more lanes in LA. But having grown up on the west side of town...and still living there today...I-10 needed this, badly. The genie is already out of the bottle...deal with it and plan for the future with rail or other alternatives. Difficult planning when Houston has the equivalent of about 5 downtowns where people work.

[weslinder]

Great article. Congestion is so much better for the environment than moving cars.

[pirc1]

Originally Posted by weslinder Great article. Congestion is so much better for the environment than moving cars.

I don't know about Houston but I loved the public transportation in UK when I visited London during December, but it seems public transportation is 2nd class transportation in the US.

[DaDakota]

So, what if the cars are hydrogen drive?

DD

[R0ckets03]

Originally Posted by DaDakota So, what if the cars are hydrogen drive? DD

Then we won't have any countries to attack. But Bush calls first dibs on Mars.

[DaDakota]

Originally Posted by R0ckets03 Then we won't have any countries to attack. But Bush calls first dibs on Mars.

Cool can we send him there now?

:D

DD

[Invisible Fan]

It's fruitless for an environmentalist to impose a rail alternative upon a commuter heavy city. He should be aware about infrastructural growth.

If I was him, I'd lobby harder for improving clean air emissions in a state that barely has any other than federal standards. Houston gas prices are 50 cents cheaper than any pump in Southern California. A lot of it has to deal with the refined gas being burned.

[Aceshigh7]

Wow. It's really wonderful how the writer of that article managed to link Bush to Texas environmental practices that he has had absolutely no part in. If you don't read the article with a fine toothed comb, as most won't, you might actually fall for it.

[Vengeance]

Just out of curiosity, what good would a rail line do where those tracks used to be? What would compel people to ride the train from the suburbs into work when they don't ride the bus into the city. I was in Houston in December, and worked downtown for three days. I took the bus down there each day, and it was great! It was clean, convenient, fast, and NOT CROWDED. There just aren't that many people who ride the bus into downtown -- what would convince people who don't take the bus to take a train instead?

I am very big on public transportation -- I take it all the time. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I took the bus a lot, and now that I live in Chicago, I take the CTA Trains (The "El") everywhere I can. And while public transit works pretty well for both of those cities, there is no way that I can see it translating to Houston. Among many, many other issues is the fact that Houston is so freaking hot most of the time. Here in Chicago, we had an unprecedented heat wave in mid-July -- it was in the mid to upper 90s and even topped 100 for a few days. At the time, I had just started my job, so I was working in the Sears Tower, and taking the train into work -- I live about ten minutes from the station. Walking that distance in the incredible heat was just awful. I'd get home and stand in front of my window AC for a few minutes. Thankfully the heat wave passed and temperatures got back to the 80s, which was not so bad. But I would never expect most people to walk ten minutes outside in that heat for months at a time. Especially with Houston's humidity.

I don't know -- as much as I usually side with environmental groups, I just think that sometimes they are very short-sighted when it comes to things like this.

[TECH]

The article seems to take a bunch of irrelevant jabs at Texas. Since Texas is one of the largest refiners of oil in the world, and it's the second most populous state, not to mention vastly larger in area than most states, then we are bad in these respects?
Texas doesn't use all those oil products by itself, it gets shipped to many other "environment concious" states as well. It has to be done somewhere.
Lets just shut down Texas and let other states "exploit" the natural resources.

[SamFisher]

Originally Posted by The Real Shady http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070119/...environment_dc I presume these environmentalist have never sat in bumper to bumper traffic for an hour trying to get from Katy to downtown, and the idea that enough people would take a train is just naive.

You know what historically happens when they build bigger roads in most cities?

Traffic increases. You build more lanes, then more people drive in them. Atlanta tried to super-highway its way out of traffic for decades and now boasts among the very worst traffic in the country, because the excess of freeways encouraged people to build far away in inefficient locales.

Who/what does that help?

[krosfyah]

I don't oppose the I-10 expansion ...but I do oppose that it was built not only without future possibility of rail but they ripped up what rail did exist. Light rail isn't the answer for commuters. Instead, commuter rail would work very well ...if they hadn't ripped it up.

All that said, one of the biggest complaints about light-rail is how it negatively impacts businesses during construction. Freakin' A ...I-10 expansion has decimated countless businesses but nobody seems to be upset about that.

[NewYorker]

buses are a night mare in the city - i took a bus from a job interview in north houston down to mt vernon and it took me 4.5 hours. that was 15 years ago - but still.

i can't imagine rail working, but once you take the train into the city - you probably still won't be close enough to walk in the scorching heat. Houston is not NYC or London, where the downtown area is compact enought to make rail efficient. I think Houston would need a rail plus some kind of transport system within the city other then buses.

[hotballa]

I cant think of any situation hwere you would need 18 lanes. That's just ridiculous.

[NewYorker]

Originally Posted by hotballa I cant think of any situation hwere you would need 18 lanes. That's just ridiculous.

You should go to China or India man. They need more then that there.

New Jersey. One day we'll have 50 lanes ya know? Think about that. Triple decker highways. Which level do you pick to express on?

[Kam]

the smack about the drive through things were funny.

I went to CVS this evening to pick up some prescription meds for a family member. And I saw the back and thought, why the hell did I not go through the drive through?

[rhadamanthus]

I hate Houston traffic.
I hate the Houston solution to houston traffic, which creates more traffic.

I really enjoy everything else about Houston (even the weather), but the traffic is starting to wear on me. I'm here for at least five more years, but after that I dunno. Better get in as many Rockets games as I can.

[hotballa]

Originally Posted by NewYorker You should go to China or India man. They need more then that there. New Jersey. One day we'll have 50 lanes ya know? Think about that. Triple decker highways. Which level do you pick to express on?

I've been to China. ok I can see why it might be necessary there since it has 5 times more people than the U.S. The NJ Turnpike has 16 lanes some places which is completely unnecessary IMO.

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by NewYorker i can't imagine rail working, but once you take the train into the city - you probably still won't be close enough to walk in the scorching heat. Houston is not NYC or London, where the downtown area is compact enought to make rail efficient. I think Houston would need a rail plus some kind of transport system within the city other then buses.

that's why we have tunnels downtown. you can get virtually anywhere downtown without having to step on the streets, at all.

look, the Metro Park & Ride buses do quite well. they're pretty heavily used. they're fast and efficient. commuter rail could do that same job, as well...and maybe it would attract more people due to rail bias. maybe.