Climate Change

Toronto residents love their cars and driving everywhere, but we might be witnessing that our attitude is starting to change. Residents are searching for alternatives, and public transport is starting to become more important to many. It might be a sign of economic time, but saving money becomes a priority. People have to change and economize their daily routines. Driving a car to their places of employment downtown, midtown or uptown and driving across the city core at all, has become unnecessary and luxury for many. Some reasons for leaving the car at home are easy to see. Cost of the gas and insurance rates that are higher for driving to work. Higher insurance rates include drivers with a clean driving record. Cost of parking plus it is more and more difficult to avoid costly parking fines. $15.00 for slightest excess of paid parking time. If these costs can be minimized or brought under control, they can improve the financial health for many. Maybe allow to pay or credit cards debts. When you get car repair bills, it is all extra costs.

During September, Toronto Transit Commission announced a new record in usage of public transit. They recorded over 1.7 million users on a single day. Is it a proof that we are changing attitudes? Not even transit official were sure, why such a record was broken during a nice, sunny day, rather than in the middle of freezing weather in the middle of winter. A critic of public transit said that the publicly announced record is no more that publicity stunt by TTC. Public transit can be a popular whipping-boy to many people. They have an endless list of reasons to complain, but myself, I do not see most of popular complains as justified. I can list many complains about daily driving to center of the city. There are people with no choice. To go to work, they have to take only whatever is available to them. I do have a choice and chose public transit to arrive to my workplace downtown. Metropass is an excellent choice, giving one an opportunity to make stops, crossovers, on and off our transit, at whim. Our Metropasses are also transferable. It means that anybody can use the pass, but only one person at the time. Wife, a child, relative or a friend. I tend to laugh, when I see people’s car being ticketed downtown. It is expensive and unnecessary. If you live out of town or in the suburbs, you can still drive your car to the suburban subway station, leave it there and continue by transit downtown. Driving downtown, down to the financial core is a status symbol for many drivers, that they do not want to give up at any cost.

Subway is the number one and most used transportation mode in the city. We only wish for having more lines and longer routes. People also complain more about buses and less about streetcars. New Mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford elected in 2010 declared. “Faster, better transit means rapid transit, not just transit on rails,” at the time of press conference, when he also declared Transit City LRT project dead. Not everybody agrees with him. His preference to finish Sheppard Subway line east and west makes a sense. West from Yonge to Downsview and extend on the other side east to Scarborough Town Centre. The current, short line, has only 5 stations and of 5.5km, being ridiculed as “subway to nowhere.” It is definitely underused! Subway line was designed as a political stunt by former Mayor of North York, Mel Lastman for his electors, and there was a genuine need for better transportation. The short length of the line is the problem. It ends just shortly of boundary of the former City of Scarborough. It was also due to ineptitude and lack of foresight from former Mayor of Scarborough Joyce Trimmer. Both cities were amalgamated with other cities, to form a megacity of Toronto in the nineties. Had Joyce Trimmer had some political leverage with the Provincial Government that paid the subway line’s construction costs she would have brought the line to the doorstep of Scarborough, at least. Today, subway would run more in intended-passenger capacity. Residents of Scarborough have to travel down to the busy east-west Bloor-Danforth subway. Subways are so great to overcome long hauls in the city, but they need other forms of transportation to take the commuters on shorter runs, to and from the subways stops. Most stations are also intersections with streetcars or buses. To improve the transit dependability and to even capacity, subway needs an ability to ride in a continuous circle lines. Finishing Sheppard line west 4.5 km to Downsview, it will provide Torontonians with more options to travel downtown. While Yonge line is heavily overused and Yonge-Bloor interchange heavily crowded, University line downtown is not fully utilized, most of the time.

New subway trains have recently arrived to Toronto Transit Commission. They are modern, classy looking and more efficient with higher capacity. They have been introduced in Spadina-University-Yonge subway line traveling U shape line from Downsview to Finch Avenue station. Gradually they will replace all older trains. This line is being extended by 6.7 km and will have 5 new stations. It will be the first time that city subway will extend to neighbor municipality, City Vaughan in York Region. New Vaughan Metropolitan Centre will open just north of Highway 7, and it will be the ending stop of this subway. Four Tunnel Boring Machines are busy cutting the tunnels. They are built by Ontario Company and Toronto Transit Authorities have named them Holey, Moley, Yorkie and Torkie. Toronto Transit has a preferential purchasing treatment from local companies.

What is the case for streetcars benefits for the city and comparing to subways? The present mayor does not like them since they share the road with cars! The war on cars is over; he declared, when he was elected. A transportation mode that is underground and does not interfere with the flow of cars and trucks. It is a faster and convenient travel option, in his opinion. Sightseeing some European cities would prove that street-level rail systems are also fast and convenient public transit, at lesser cost to build and service. Streetcars or trams as they are called in Europe become an integral part of city’s streetscape. They help to make the street vibrant with people since they attract pedestrian traffic, unlike buses. Since people spend more time walking the streets, retailers and specialty stores, restaurants with patios are more attracted to open for business. The property values go up on streets with rail transportation. College, Queen and Dundas Street, are good examples in Toronto. No city puts its buses on postcards, but they all proudly display their streetcars or LRTs. Small investors and business are attracted to invest along streetcar routes, but it takes large real estate developers to follow with their investments along already established subway lines. We can see proof in large condominiums projects taking place along Sheppard Subway line. Ford looks for private-public partnership to build mentioned subway line. His vision is just too shaky for most developers who look for sureness. When you build it, they will come. Eglinton LRT that is still in planning, but has been converted to full-length underground, thanks to efforts and vision of Mayor Ford. This 25-kilometre underground LRT for $ 8.2 billion will be paid by the Province in its entirety. The construction preliminary work has been started, and tunnel boring machines have been purchased. No major real estate development projects along the route have been announced, yet.

Subway lines have stations that are pre-planned and usually close to major roads intersections. These stations become transportation hubs, where people change from buses or streetcars. They also have enormous potential to become the centre of business and commerce. Real Estate values are higher, closer to the subway stations. In Toronto, you can find many stations that fit certain profile. Downtown, midtown and uptown stations on Yonge-University line have different characteristics from stations along Bloor-Danforth line in the suburbs. Suburban stations are built as single purpose for transportation, although some may be surrounded by large parking lots. Downtown stations are just visible as exits and entrances to stations, built as part of buildings. Toronto Transit Commission is always looking for transit funding. Selling the naming rights for their subway stations to the private corporations was just an idea on the table. Imagine getting off at the Coke Station, instead of the Dundas Stations? A big question remains. How will public react to it and if they will ever accept new names? If TTC goes ahead with the idea. A different proposal might be selling Real Estate or rights to build above the stations.

It would apply to that are located beyond the city core. Placing such a valuable real estate to a better use will bring many benefits to different parties. Transit Commission, private developers, users of new buildings and finally Toronto public. Space above ground of the subway station is an ideal location for mid-rise office development suitable for professional offices. Accountants, lawyers, doctors and dentists can most benefit if their offices are located on or near subway stations. Once these professional offices are located on subway, distance is no longer major obstacle for most Torontonians who are transit riders.

What city needs is a new phase of urban development, along some transportation lines. The development should not be based on high-rises towers spread far apart, but rather mid-rises lining the streets. The land along new subway route with Eglinton underground LRT should become too valuable to be wasted with huge parking lots that are part of ugly strip plazas. These have replaced old industrial land and have grown up along Eglinton, from Laird east and in central Scarborough. With new underground LRT line under Eglinton, let us hope for another street makeover. Transit authorities have considered selling the naming rights for subway stations to the private enterprises. Similarly, like with the names placed on some sports stadium. When city owned our largest sport stadium with retractable roof, it was called Skydom. When cable and telecommunication company purchased the stadium, they renamed it Rogers Centre, to advertise it brand name. Transit authority can take a lead and generate much-needed cash by offering rights to build above the stations. Bessarion and Leslie Subway stations are classical example of opportunities lost. Station on major road intersection, but with no commercial activities near the stations. Subway stations’ design on the York extension line, they are perhaps also examples of bad planning. Stations will be built like monuments to their architects, rather than planning for a practical use within a commercial structure. With newly found popularity of public transit, we should be ready for many new changes in our habits. There are billions of dollars to be invested in new transit that will hopefully change our city for better.

For convenient access by Toronto Subway line Downtown Toronto Dentists and other professionals located on or near subway stations.

This month we had an opportunity to see mockup of new streetcar that will be coming to Toronto in near future, we hope. The vehicle is sometimes referred to with more up-to-date label, as LRV. It stands for Light Rail Vehicle. For those who love public transit and look forward to our future, seeing this mockup is a must.

We have to allow that there are many people who will talk down about public transit and prefer cars at any cost. However, such attitudes are not urban. New rail vehicles can bring many changes, and we can hope that it will change attitudes, as well. Taking rails downtown for concert in Roy Thompson Hall of to go to Sony Centre for an opera should be as glamorous as taking a cab or driving a car there. Riding new low-floor streetcars should not be just for those on a budget, or a green thing to do, but a status symbol. Imagine, if, during International Film Festival in Toronto, some movie stars would go to the red carpet with our new LRV, rather than take a limo there? These pictures splashed all over the news might help to change minds of many stalwarts. I have seen some unfriendly comments about the event, posted on transit blog site. I think that these people are just ignorant and need some time.

At the time when cities in North America with streetcars transportation were ripping the tracks and substituting buses, in fifties and sixties, Toronto resisted the trend. Montreal dismantled their trams during August 1959. It is a city that always followed European trends, but Europe always kept their trams. In our capital Ottawa, they dismantled trams during April 1959. Toronto’s rail vehicles were in danger in sixties and seventies, and only strong support from activists saved them until now. North American streetcar manufacturer disappeared from the scene. If you keep the vehicles, how do you replace them, when their useful life is at the end? In North Bay Ontario, there was a plant that had manufactured subway cars for TTC.

Ontario Premier in seventies Bill Davis felt that future of transportation is in public rapid transit and not in auto transportation. He set up Urban Transport Development Corporation as a Crown Corporation to develop and sell rail systems. This company created a new type of technology and transit system called ICTS (Interim capacity Transit System). It is used in our Scarborough RT. The vehicles are smaller size than usual subway trains and are propelled ny Linear Induction Motor (LIM). It was a brand new technology and consequently hard to sell to pragmatic municipal buyers world-wide. The company managed to sell only two other systems. One to Vancouver as SkyTrain and another one to Detroit as UrbanMover. The corporation also designed and built our currently used CLVR (Canadian light Rail Vehicle.) Few years later it came with a stretched version ALRV (Articulated Light Rail Vehicle). They are both our attractions for Toronto. They ride rail network originating in 19th century and called the Legacy Network. Big disappointment was the inability to sell more vehicles, and that signaled the end of UTDC.

Ontario Government decided to sell the company to a private company in 1986. It sold it to Lavalin of Quebec that sold the assets to another Quebec Company, Bombardier. First subway line opened in Toronto in 1954, and the trains were built in Thunder Bay, Ontario by company Hawker Siddeley Canada. It was a division of British hawker Siddeley Group. Government owned, and Kingston-based UTDC acquired Hawker Siddeley in nineties. Bombardier Company bought UTDC and hawker Siddeley. The previous company and the plant in Thunder Bay had a long relationship with Toronto Transit Commission. It has been recognized as favored supplier to TTC. Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) is a public transport agency that was established in 1954. It operates subways, streetcars and buses in Toronto. The Commission is governed by councilors who are elected as municipal councilors, but appointed to TTC. Council is just a, municipal, political, group. It reflects prevailing political directions and those usually change with every municipal election.

Toronto Transit Commission came under strong public criticism, when in 2005, it gave an order to Bombardier for 234 new subway cars. It was an order negotiated between Commission and Bombardier and approved by impartial consultants. TTC realized that it was no longer publicly acceptable practice to let a company win an order with no competitive bids. Another competitive builder of subway cars claimed that it could have saved minimum of $ 100-million with the order.

Unlikely city in USA, Portland in Oregon introduced first modern streetcar in North America in more than 50 years. It was the low-floor Astra model built by Skoda-Inekon consortium in the Czech Republic. This vehicle became a model to emulate by TTC. Portland already had LRT built by Siemens that was connecting Downtown Portland with the Airport. However, LRTs are traditionally built for long and straight stretches with gentle curving. They can’t handle 90 degrees turns are not suitable for mixed road traffic. Streetcar can ride and LRT track, but not vice-versa. Many people have a habit to use LRT or LRV for any modern looking rail vehicle.

Toronto streetcars are nearing their life span and TTC had to start looking for their replacement. In 2006, the Commission issued a Request For Information (RFI). It was circulated to all known streetcars builders around the world. Preliminary consultation followed. Prior to purchasing, the Commission also considered refurbishments with updated electronics and propulsion system for current CLRVs. Since wheel-chair accessibility legislation is coming into effect, these high-floor trams will no longer be acceptable. Commission had to decide between two major types of low-floor vehicles. They are 70% low-floor and 100% low-floor. Which one is better is impossible to say since both models have their pluses and minuses. 100% model is definite trendy! The commission might have been concerned with a step between lower and higher floor in the 70% low-floor model. Somebody could trip there and sue the commission. Request For proposal was issued in January 2008. 6 pre-qualified builders have purchased the documentations and $1 000 000.00 security deposit was required when submitting the bid envelopes. Major surprise was the 25% Canadian content requirement. The other specific technical requirements were already known to all builders. Toronto rail track has a wide-gauge than is standard. The city has higher hills, single-point switches, but major obstacles are the 11m turning radiuses.

When public tenders of such large sizes are issued by Government run agencies, they are always instruments of political objectives. Politics including the backroom one is always decisive in the tenders, and technical characteristics and price are relegated to the side rail. Politicians must be re-elected, and public purchases are handy gears to look good in front of voters. Most politicians are not business people, and costs are not on their mind. Extra costs can be covered with extra taxes. Previous administration led by Mayor Miller had the tax-and-spend mentality and introduced several unpopular taxes. It was the land-transfer-tax and car-registration fee. Streetcar procurement project became politicians’ tools. TTC hired consultants to advise them how much of Canadian content can be required from overseas builders, without causing unnecessary hardship and them losing interest in the assignment. The consultants returned with a report suggesting that no more than 10% of Canadian content can be requested.

During the TTC public meeting in December 2007, the councilors have changed the amount of Canadian content required to 25%. It was purely political decision but had an impact on the process. Request For proposal was also explicit about a “preferred supplier,” without naming the company. Most overseas-based builders saw-through the process that was designed with some partiality in mind and refused to participate. In July 2008, only one favored builder submitted tender envelope together with required $1 000 000.00 security cheque. Actually there was another tender from an upstart English company that was quickly disqualified on two grounds. Not fulfilling; commercial part of the tender and not having any reference. A reference means any vehicle in a revenue service, anywhere. No transit authority wants to buy any unproven vehicles. The other tender submitted was also disqualified since the vehicle offered was not technically compliant with technical specifications published in RFP.

There is no doubt that long and costly process ended like a fiasco for the Commission. It was also a disappointment for Torontonians anxiously awaiting good news about new vehicles for our streets. The Commission had to re-open the process. They approached the builders with fact-finding questions. They wanted to know the reasons for not bidding. Would they be interested in the new process? Do manufacturers have 100% low-floor design that is ready? Selection of 100% low-floor versus 70% low-floor and combined with 11-metre turning radiuses, they are big decisions to make. Some experts were saying publicly that only 70% low-floor can accommodate technical requirements.

25% Canadian content presented a nightmare scenario for overseas builders with no Canadian manufacturing base and provided an unfair cost advantage stacked toward one builder. Consultants warned about this danger in the bidding process. Why would other players participate in the process and playing roles of a patsy?

During July 2008, Commission started one-to-one preliminary negotiations with all builders. At the end, they preselected 3 builders for closed negotiating process. As expected, it was our Canadian Builder, overseas Siemens and French Alstom. Rumors have it that Alstom was not interested at all, but was just persuaded to join the process. TTC used reference for 100% low-floor vehicle as the main criteria to select builders for further negotiations. Some professional opinions differed from the official line, saying that local requirements are so unique that no company has yet, built a car to these specifications. Required reference should not be the most important one, but TTC should negotiate with all interested builders.

Transit Commission needed 204 new cars to be delivered over several years. The budget price was $ 1.2 Billion to be divided among three funding sources. City, Federal and Provincial Government. The Feds have refused funding, so the City is left to pick up the extra cost. The second round of negotiation ended in April 2009. At this time process was successful and the contract was awarded to the expected company. The second bid was $500-million higher, and that differential must account for expected difficulties with fulfilling requirements of Canadian content. Alstom did not submit a proposal in the second round.

It has taken more than 2 years after the tender award for Torontonians to be able to see mockup. Saga of this project is most likely not over yet, since most important testing is yet to be done. Test vehicles are expected during the next year, and nobody is more specific about the dates. One might expect testing to be done before unveiling a mockup.

The process was a text example of protectionism by non-tariff means. It is not just in Canada but in USA and in many countries. Transportation is not paid by private money, but Governments. Therefore, all levels of Governments make public procurement processes instruments of their policies. IN USA, if municipality required Federal money, then 40% must be content of US origin. If you do not require Federal financing is you are able to secure funds locally, then there is no problem with buying vehicles from overseas. All builders of public transportation system work in a difficult environment of uncertainty. Mass production that would allow manufacturing cost come down is non-existent. Major companies maintain plants around the worlds in order to shift the production to fulfill local needs. Cost of these plants creates higher overhead costs that must be reflected in the final price. Bombardier has a plant in Mexico, where most of work will be done. Who is the winner and who is the looser of working with politics? The winners are easy to identify. It is the company with contract, all its employees and subcontractors. Looser is international trade, economics and free market. Political power play is stronger than technical characteristics. We will never know, who would win the contract at what price, had the councilors accepted consultant’s recommendation in December 2007. The real costs are definitely inflated due to the political manipulations.

Politics aside, we hope that the project will come to a successful conclusion. We should see new streetcar coming to the city in few years. Toronto residents and visitors to our city should accept them with great pride and prefer them over cars. There have been some negative comments on the record. I do not believe that they represent the general population. New streetcars in Toronto will have an appeal and that should reflect in higher ridership. Subway lines are currently priority of our city administration. The city need subway lines, but they have to be complemented by streetcars. Both modes will create city-wide transportation. Subways are great for long trips, but streetcars can serve more people on shorter trips with more frequent stops. Transit City project to built new surface rail lines will be resurrected with the next administration.

New low-floor LRVs will come to our cityConsider new alternative to the use of your car. Recycle, re-use and take public transit anywhere!

By the time we will reach the 22nd century we will fast be running out of fossil fuels. This may seem a long way away and no one reading this article nowadays is likely to still be alive at that time, however, we still have an obligation to our descendants and to try and make sure that they do not find themselves living in a world that has more in common with the pre-industrial era than with modern times. Without the fossil fuels we are so dependent upon the world could all too easily disintegrate into a state of anarchy. It is our obligation to build a safer future for those who follow us and in order to do this we need to reassess present day energy policies that are leading us down the road to disaster.

There is a great deal of hype over the issue of renewable energy, but that does not mean that its importance is exaggerated. Look at the current figures. At present, eighty two percent of the world’s power comes from non-renewable sources. This means that only 18% of the global energy that is being generated is renewable. These figures clearly reveal, that despite government declarations, we are not going to be independent of fossil fuels anytime soon. There are many reasons Why can’t we free ourselves of dependency on this form of energy: greed, laziness, apathy, or the “eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die” attitude. But basically the reason is unimportant, only the consequence, which is a lack of funds.

While a great deal of money has never been devoted to the task of developing renewable sources of energy, the funding has in fact diminished over the past few years. Prior to this date economic inducements were offered by various governments, such as the German or American governments. Corporations or individuals who used renewable sources like the sun or even methane from trash were “rewarded.” The trouble is that when the “encouragement” disappeared -so did the ventures. The lack of money reflects a lack of genuine commitment on the part of many states or private individuals. While in theory people know there is a need to make a change, in reality very few people wants to actually dedicate themselves to this end. So even while money is being spent in West Texas U.S.A. to generate wind power many of the people running the project are still running around in 4-wheel drives that use an exorbitant amount of gas. The paradox clearly reflects that the ideology has not been internalized but is merely based on money, and when that runs out, so will the changes.

The amount that gas is taxed by is also reflective of the level of commitment by those in power. The discrepancy shown between three countries speaks for itself. In North America the car owner pays 12.5 cents tax on a liter of gas. The Canadian car owner pays almost double that with 24 cents tax on every liter. But these prices pale in comparison to those in Europe. In Germany the car owner pays four times as much tax. There is the regular tax which is already higher at 86 cents per liter, but then there are taxes on the taxes with a further 19% of Value Added Tax and then there is Fuel tax. All in all the German motorist pays approximately $3.8 per gallon for his gas.

The effects of such tax policies are that they discourage the use of private cars, and encourage the use of public transport which is much more energy efficient than cars. This in turn reduces other transport related expenses and most important provides funds which can be used for the development of renewable energy. The statistics bear this out. In the U.S. renewable energy provides only 10.6% of the total energy production, not including nuclear, while in Germany, the corresponding figure is 18%.These figures are from 2009, and unfortunately the gap is widening every year.

The responsible approach taken by the Germans is an example that desperately needs to be followed by other countries. The odd state here and there exercising an innovative policy does not solve the global problem and if the US, who use more power per capita, does not restrain its fuel “spending” then the impending disaster will not be allayed. We can no longer continue to use fossil fuels as if they are an infinite commodity. We need to find new sources of energy and remember that what we waste today is at the cost of future generations.

Academic Reading

Looking to find the best way to pass your English reading comprehension exams academic reading comprehension #1, then visit www.academic-reading.com to find the best advice on how to pass academic English reading exams how to pass reading exams #2 made easy for you.