Correction: Last week’s Eco-Briefs (August 20), contained an incorrect date in the story titled “Graywater may no longer be used to flush toilets.” The article stated that a stakeholder hearing on graywater would be taking place on August 25. The article should have said that the hearing is taking place on August 28 at 9 a.m. For more information go to http://tinyurl.com/o54psut
Thank you for the election alert
Joel, I happened across your article regarding Boulder City Council petition shenanigans (Re: “Wanted: Fifty Boulder voters who think local government matters”). Thanks for exposing the bullshit, and for alerting us all to the need to go downtown. I rode over there, found the table, was glad that full transparency ensued so I could decide which petitions to sign (I can’t say “people to support” but that wasn’t my direct mission at this time). I always look forward to reading BW’s election coverage and endorsements.
Bart Windrum/Boulder
Municipalization looking good
The potential benefits to customers of a Boulder Light & Power municipal utility are looking better all the time. A recently completed citizens’ study used publicly available data to double-check the city’s modeling. The study shows that the city results were, if anything, conservative.
The study compared two options for Boulder’s energy future: staying with the current utility, the Public Service of Colorado (PSCo) “status quo,” or opting for a Boulder municipal utility. The results show, with 90 percent confidence, that the municipal option is significantly more likely to provide lower emissions and better financial value for Boulder customers.
For example, in a randomized analysis with 10,000 trials, the range of total customer cost per kWh for the municipal utility is not only competitive with the PSCo status quo in the highest cost trials, but also has a better opportunity for lower cost in the lowest cost trials.
Also, emissions driving climate change are significantly lower with the municipal utility option, which limits CO2 pollution to far less than half of the pollution from the PSCo status quo over 20 years.
Joe McDonald/Boulder
Bicycle safety?
I want to thank Rio and Zach of the Boulder Rural Fire Department, as well as Karen who witnessed my accident, for helping me as I was lying on the ground with my bike at the intersection of 63rd Street and Highway 119 after a car had made an unexpected and illegal right turn across my straight path. To turn right onto 119 toward Boulder you have to take the exit ramp to the right before the first traffic light.
As I started across the intersection, I was suddenly squeezed to the right and to the ground. The lesson for me is that at that intersection I need to check also that any car on my LEFT is not about to turn RIGHT across my path. The state trooper at the scene told me later, “He never saw you!” In sunshine, 2 p.m. —“He never saw you!” Marc Bekoff had the same experience, as have many others: “She didn’t see me!” (Bikes and lights, 7/27/15). Thanks to my rearview mirror I am always wary of such right turns in town, but at 63rd/119 riding south, I wasn’t since I had never seen anyone turn right there, though the trooper said that right turns are actually not illegal there. As Mr. Bekoff suggests, I’m now also turning on my taillight during the day.
The realities here are: if the cyclist doesn’t see the car, he may be injured or killed; if the motorist doesn’t see the cyclist, it’s still the cyclist likely to be injured or killed, but the motorist risks neither. The recent complaints against “bike-friendly” streets and the reduction of motor vehicle lanes are baseless as motorists in their cars never risk life or limb from cyclists riding their bikes, whereas cyclists run these risks every day. As Council Member Mary Dolores Young writes: “You are being asked to sacrifice a little bit of time for the sake of your own and others’ safety” (7/4/15). Major problems for cyclists are, in my view:
1.Driver cuts cyclist off turning right/left;
2. Driver has one hand on wheel, the other on cell phone, while turning;
3. Driver rushes to intersection, wheels barely stopping, as cyclist crosses, unsure it’s safe;
4. Driver signals left turn only 1-2 feet, or no feet, before turning, instead of 100 feet;
5. Driver races to pass cyclist before traffic circle without allowing cyclist to pass safely, though sign warns against it.
This is but a short list of the risks, but it grows longer as driver distractions increase and the pace and complexity of the hectic Boulder life-style go up along with driver impatience.
The days of being able to car-zip from Gunbarrel to downtown Boulder in 15 minutes, as one lady complained years ago, are over. The remedy for such complaints is planning, which is even more important for cyclists than motorists as they can’t just push on the gas pedal. That said, I haven’t missed or been late for an appointment by bike in many years.
Update: Before this went to press, a common repeat of # 4 above: I, the cyclist, ride straight toward intersection; oncoming driver has just stopped at point of our intersecting paths, ONLY THEN signals left turn; as I proceed across slowly, not yet having passed our point of intersection, driver’s wheels start turning — slowly but moving, before I have crossed the intersection. It’s a failure to yield properly; it’s dangerous, it’s illegal, and it is normal for most Boulder drivers. Did I mention that on the day of my accident, June 26, Fort Collins cyclist Steve Studt was not so lucky and became the 10th cyclist killed by a vehicle in Larimer County since 2000? I think it is safe to say that Boulder County’s record isn’t much better.
Manfred Schwoch/Boulder
