We describe in Baltimore what is a growing militarized policing and security apparatus to include transportation. Yesterday we shared an article below showing CHINESE FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE----with global factories like FOXCONN using
MILITARY-STYLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM HIGHLY REGIMENTED AND EVEN ABUSIVE WORKING CONDITIONS.
' Labor rights groups said they believed that Foxconn’s military-style management system and the company’s highly regimented and even abusive working conditions were contributing factors in the deaths'.
NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG are indeed a criminal network----global SEX TRADE PORN CARTEL----but the 'HITTING' AND ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE is tied with installing these overseas military-style workplace structures.
No one knows better than our global banking 5% freemason/Greek LATINO players-----they know MOVING FORWARD in US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES involves slave labor/brutal work conditions/and DEEP DEEP REALLY DEEP STATE----Stanford Total PRISON MODEL as a societal structure. So, our 99% of LATINO global labor pool ARE VICTIMS of NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG-----being HIT------being made GROUP SPEAK AND CHATTERS.
CASA de MARYLAND is not a left social civil rights and liberties NGO----it is far-right global banking FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT NGO.
7 Of The Richest People In New Orleans And Here’s How They Did It
If you’ve ever wondered who the richest people in New Orleans are, there’s good reason for it. There’s no comprehensive list out there that ranks everyone’s net worth, but there are some big movers and shakers in New Orleans whose wealth is well known. We’ve rounded up a list of business men who have proven their business acumen and made a fortune for themselves. Here are 7 of the richest people in New Orleans.
1) Sidney Torres IV, IV Capital
'Gustavo Torres, the executive director of CASA de Maryland, an immigrants’ rights group, said the policies enacted in Baltimore ought to be a model for other parts of the state'.
Our new to Baltimore immigrants are DUCKING AND DODGING being HIT-----and being subjected to illegal surveillance and told what they can and cannot say and do-----just as is happening to ME -----my LAWSUIT against NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG-----illegal surveillance and PORN network----often working for CRIMINAL POLITICAL MACHINES.
Baltimore mayor signs order protecting immigrants as city renews funding for lawyers for potential deportees
By Ian Duncan
Baltimore Sun |
Aug 07, 2019 | 11:15 AM
Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young signed an executive order Wednesday directing city agencies to protect immigrants and approved new funding for lawyers to represent residents facing deportation. In this July 31, 2019, photo, a Guatemalan migrant's identification wristband is shown upon his arrival at an air force base in Guatemala City after being deported from the United States. (ORLANDO ESTRADA/Getty)Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young signed an executive order Wednesday directing city agencies to protect immigrants and approved new funding for lawyers to represent residents facing deportation.
The Democratic mayor took the steps after immigrant communities have faced the prospect in recent weeks of federal raids promised by Republican President Donald Trump.
“As a Welcoming City, we firmly believe in respecting the rights and dignity of New Americans," Young said in a statement. "As such, we would like to ensure that the newest members of our community are extended the same rights and protections the rest of our residents and visitors enjoy.”
The mayor’s office said the order is designed to encourage immigrants who are the victims of crime or witnesses to feel comfortable dealing with the police. It builds on a policy Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison set out last month, prohibiting city officers from telling immigration agents where people they’re looking for are.
Harrison said in a statement that he supported Young’s order and that it would remain the police department’s policy not to inquire about people’s immigration status.
“Public safety demands that all members of the community trust law enforcement officers and feel comfortable and safe when they report crimes,” Harrison said.
City Solicitor Andre Davis said the order affirms and clarifies existing policies.
He said officials are also working on a second order that would ensure people can deal with the city government in a language they know.
Related: Schools' proposed budget reflects growth in immigrant population » Also Wednesday, the mayor and the rest of the city’s spending board approved $150,000 for lawyers to represent city residents facing deportation. The city launched the program last year in a partnership with the Vera Institute of Justice, a New York-based nonprofit organization, and the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition, a legal services group.
The total funding for the coming year for the Baltimore program represents a cut of $50,000. Last year, Vera provided $100,000 to match a $100,000 contribution by the city; that money is no longer available. Catalina Rodriguez-Lima, the director of the mayor’s immigrant relations office, said the new figure was developed based on an assessment of last year’s caseload.
When Baltimore was said to be among 10 cities U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement targeted last month for roundups, the immigrant relations office reminded people who could be taken into custody of the ability to get a lawyer through the city fund.
Prince George’s County is also part of the Vera program, along with 10 other jurisdictions across the country. The Prince George’s County Council voted in May to increase its funding for the program from $200,000 to $300,000.
Related: City approves $1.25 million to turn theater into hub for Latino community » The Capital Area Immigrants Rights Coalition said in its annual report for 2018 that it represented 20 detained people from Prince George’s and 19 from the city of Baltimore that year. The organization says its ultimate goal is to provide a lawyer for every detained immigrants who could not otherwise afford an attorney.
Gustavo Torres, the executive director of CASA de Maryland, an immigrants’ rights group, said the policies enacted in Baltimore ought to be a model for other parts of the state.
“As our communities continue to face attacks at the national level, Mayor Young has once again stepped up to ensure that immigrants are welcome in our city,” Torres said in a statement.
When thinking about PORT OF BALTIMORE as super-duper global cargo ship import export--------expanding industrial zones across GREATER BALTIMORE----what kind of transportation? We have shouted since these UBER/LYFT products were introduced that the goal with what is called RIDE SHARE for our 99% of WE THE PEOPLE is simply the structure for what will be ONLY COMMERCIAL DRIVELESS VEHICLES---TRUCKS.
Aug 7New York City’s first self-driving shuttle service launches today'
Global banking has already stated------these DRIVERLESS technologies are too expensive to be mainstream automobiles---the market will promote only COMMERCIAL VEHICLE products. So, UBER LYFT as an on-call 'taxi' and job for our citizens will MORPH in a decade or so into what will be PORT OF BALTIMORE-----WAREHOUSES, FACTORIES, ENERGY PLATFORMS-----robotic transport systems.
US national media will sell the idea that all this DRIVERLESS TECHNOLOGY and RIDE-SHARE corporations is about giving our 99% of citizens MORE CHOICES-----advertising has FAMILIES ------MERELY RICH-----getting into auto brands ------while the global market in these vehicles are tied to COMMERCIAL MODELS------
'Ford Autonomy Chief Outlines Plan for Self-Driving Commercial Van
February 15, 2018 by Ryan ZumMallen, @Zoomy575M
Ford's fully autonomous Fusion Hybrid drives the streets of Dearborn, Michigan. The automaker plans to use technology like this to deliver a fully self-driving vehicle in 2021 for use in commercial applications. (Photo: Ford)
Ford Motor Co. has big plans for autonomous commercial vehicles'.
The only reason global banking 1% CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA pretended these ride-share corporations were PUBLIC BENEFIT was to attain infrastructure for vehicles on our public streets, curbs, and sidewalks.
Like ZIP CAR-----LYFT UBER will be given CURB SIDE PARKING SPACES for their products------they will be given parking meter and APPS tied to efficient parking because they are going to be COMMERCIAL ----DELIVERY----PICKUP-----CARGO TRANSPORT.
What will our 99% WE THE PEOPLE do as LYFT UBER push our PUBLIC TAXI CAB CORPORATIONS out of business? We will not have any RIDE-SHARE structure not tied to corporations moving WORKERS around/between corporate campuses
REMEMBER-----MIT is a global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----MILITARY RESEARCH corporation.
Self-Driving Trucks: 10 Breakthrough Technologies 2017
Search + Menu
10 Breakthrough Technologies 2017
Tractor-trailers without a human at the wheel will soon barrel onto highways near you. What will this mean for the nation’s 1.7 million truck drivers?
by David H. Freedman
MIT-----MASS INSTITUTE TECHNOLOGY
Feb 22, 2017
Roman Mugriyev was driving his long-haul 18-wheeler down a two-lane Texas highway when he saw an oncoming car drift into his lane just a few hundred feet ahead. There was a ditch to his right and more oncoming cars to his left, so there was little for him to do but hit his horn and brake. “I could hear the man who taught me to drive telling me what he always said was rule number one: ‘Don’t hurt anybody,’” Mugriyev recalls.
But it wasn’t going to work out that way. The errant car collided with the front of Mugriyev’s truck. It shattered his front axle, and he struggled to keep his truck and the wrecked car now fused to it from hitting anyone else as it barreled down the road. After Mugriyev finally came to a stop, he learned that the woman driving the car had been killed in the collision.
Could a computer have done better at the wheel? Or would it have done worse?
We will probably find out in the next few years, because multiple companies are now testing self-driving trucks. Although many technical problems are still unresolved, proponents claim that self-driving trucks will be safer and less costly. “This system often drives better than I do,” says Greg Murphy, who’s been a professional truck driver for 40 years. He now serves as a safety backup driver during tests of self-driving trucks by Otto, a San Francisco company that outfits trucks with the equipment needed to drive themselves.
At first glance, the opportunities and challenges posed by self-driving trucks might seem to merely echo those associated with self-driving cars. But trucks aren’t just long cars. For one thing, the economic rationale for self-driving trucks might be even stronger than the one for driverless cars. Autonomous trucks can coördinate their movements to platoon closely together over long stretches of highway, cutting down on wind drag and saving on fuel. And letting the truck drive itself part of the time figures to help truckers complete their routes sooner.
But the technological obstacles facing autonomous trucks are higher than the ones for self-driving cars. Otto and other companies will need to demonstrate that sensors and code can match the situational awareness of a professional trucker—skills honed by years of experience and training in piloting an easily destabilized juggernaut, with the momentum of 25 Honda Accords, in the face of confusing road hazards, poor surface conditions, and unpredictable car drivers.
And perhaps most important, if self-driving trucks do take hold, they figure to be more controversial than self-driving cars. At a time when our politics and economy are already being upended by the threats that automation poses to jobs (see “The Relentless Pace of Automation”), self-driving trucks will affect an enormous number of blue-collar workers. There are 1.7 million trucking jobs in the U.S., according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Technology is unlikely to replace truckers entirely anytime soon. But it will almost certainly alter the nature of the job, and not necessarily in ways that all would welcome.
- BreakthroughLong-haul trucks that drive themselves for extended stretches on highways.
- Why It MattersThe technology might free truck drivers to complete routes more efficiently, but it could also erode their pay and eventually replace many of them altogether.
- Key Players- Otto
- Availability5 to 10 years
Otto’s headquarters, in the once-seedy South of Market section of San Francisco, isn’t much like many of the other tech startups that have transformed the area. Proudly oblivious to that neighborhood upgrade, it’s a barely renovated former furniture warehouse converted to a garage and machine shop, with semi trucks in various states of dismantlement hulking over benches of tools and computers. “No fancy, shiny offices here,” brags Eric Berdinis, Otto’s young and clean-cut-looking product manager.
Berdinis shows off the latest generation of the company’s fast-evolving technology, which is currently installed on Volvo semis. Unlike the bolted-on, kludgy-looking hardware that’s been on testing runs for the past year, the newer versions of the company’s sensor and processing arrays are more sleekly integrated throughout the Volvo cab. The equipment includes four forward-facing video cameras, radar, and a box of accelerometers that Berdinis boasts is “as close as the government allows you to get to missile-guidance quality.”
Particularly key to Otto’s technology is a lidar system, which uses a pulsed laser to amass detailed data about the truck’s surroundings. The current third-party lidar box costs Otto in the vicinity of $100,000 each. But the company has a team designing a proprietary version that could cost less than $10,000.
A human can push the red buttons to the right of the steering wheel to instantly take over from the self-driving system.
The driver can sit in the back of the cab while the truck drives itself—albeit in the right lane only.
A shipment of Budweiser was loaded onto an autonomous Otto truck last year.
1 of 3Inside the cab is a custom-built, liquid-cooled, breadbox-size micro-supercomputer that, Berdinis claims, provides the most computing muscle ever crammed into so small a package. It is needed to crunch the vast stream of sensor data and shepherd it through the guidance algorithms that adjust braking and steering commands to compensate for the truck’s load weight. Rounding out the hardware lineup is a drive-by-wire box to turn the computer’s output into physical truck-control signals. It does this through electromechanical actuators mounted to the truck’s mechanical steering, throttling, and braking systems. Two big red buttons in the cab—Otto calls them the Big Red Buttons—can cut off all self-driving activity. But even without them, the system is designed to yield to any urgent tugs on the steering wheel or heavy pumps of the pedals from anyone in the driver’s seat.
Even if drivers stay on in the cab, it’s not clear the economics will work out in their favor.
Otto was founded early in 2016 by Anthony Levandowski, who had been with Google’s self-driving-car effort, and Lior Ron, who headed up Google Maps, along with two others. It was a natural move to build on Google’s vast experience with its autonomous cars, which have driven more than two million miles on U.S. roads in several states, with an eye toward the four million trucks in the U.S. alone. Volvo Trucks, Daimler Trucks, and Peterbilt have been working on their own autonomous-truck technology.
Then, as further validation, Uber snatched Otto up for a reported $680 million last August. That deal has given Otto’s team access to roughly 500 engineers at Uber working on self-driving technology, according to Berdinis. Levandowski now heads that effort for Uber, which has said it envisions providing an overarching and largely automated transportation network for both goods and people.
Otto has only seven trucks on the road with its technology, but it hopes owners of many more trucks will eventually take on the equipment for free to test it out. Berdinis says the company is working to drive down the cost of the technology to the point where it offers a one- or two-year payback. That’s likely to mean something in the vicinity of $30,000 for a retrofit. “We expect the government to mandate this technology eventually, and for truck manufacturers to integrate it into their vehicles,” says Berdinis. “But new-truck development is on an eight-year cycle, and we’re not waiting.”
Greg Murphy, left,a longtime long-haul trucker, keeps an eye on things during tests of Otto trucks.
Roman Mugriyev, right, wonders how well self-driving trucks would handle dangerous situations.
Last October an Otto-outfitted self-driving truck carried 2,000 cases of Budweiser beer 200 kilometers down Interstate 25 in Colorado from Fort Collins to Colorado Springs—while the truck’s only human driver sat in the sleeper berth at the back of the cab without touching the vehicle’s controls.
That commercial delivery, the first ever to be handled by an autonomous heavy truck, illustrated the potential of the technology. But it also demonstrated the current limitations. The human driver piloted the truck to and from the highway the old-fashioned way, because the technology doesn’t drive on small rural roads or in cities. Even after it was on the highway, a car drove ahead of the truck to make sure the far right lane remained clear. Otto’s system is programmed to stay in that lane, because on many roads trucks are restricted to the far right and are generally considered safer there. And the truck was surrounded by several cars carrying Otto personnel and Colorado State Patrol staff.
In all other testing of Otto-equipped trucks, a professional driver like Greg Murphy sits in the driver’s seat, constantly ready to take the controls at a moment’s notice, even on the highway. Another Otto employee is in the cab as well. Murphy hits the Big Red Buttons when there’s debris on the road, or construction. “My hands are always on the wheel, and I have to concentrate pretty hard to be ready,” says Murphy. “It’s actually harder than normal driving.” (I was invited to sit in on an Otto test ride, but shortly before I was due to show up I was told there had been a scheduling miscommunication and a truck wouldn’t be available. I suspect the cancellation had more to do with that morning’s heavy rain—which can throw off autonomous vehicles—but Otto stuck to its story.)
In fact, Otto insists it has no plans to release products intended to operate trucks without a driver in the cab. “We’re at least a decade away from having trucks with no driver in it,” says Berdinis. But Otto does expect to free up the driver during highway cruising to remain in the back of the cab relaxing, working, or even napping. And therein lies the strongest part of the economic case for self-driving trucks. Drivers are legally restricted to 11 hours of driving a day and 60 hours a week. Given that a new big rig goes for about $150,000, and taking into account the vast delays that pulling over to rest injects into the movement of goods, trucks that can cruise nearly 24/7 could dramatically lower freight costs.
There are other anticipated savings from having trucks drive themselves across America’s 230,000 miles of highway. Fuel is about a third of the cost of operating a long-haul truck, and while drivers are capable of wringing maximum miles per gallon from their trucks, many are too heavy-footed on the pedals. (Berdinis says the best drivers are 30 percent more fuel-efficient than the worst ones.) Otto’s equipment is programmed to keep trucks pegged to optimal speeds and acceleration.
Otto says it has no intention of getting drivers out of the cab entirely—at least for the next decade.Then there’s the potential to cut down on accidents. Truck and bus crashes kill about 4,000 people a year in the U.S. and injure another 100,000. Driver fatigue is a factor in roughly one of seven fatal truck accidents. More than 90 percent of all accidents are caused at least in part by some form of driver error. We don’t yet know what fraction of those errors would be eliminated by autonomous technology—or what new errors might be introduced by it—but tests of self-driving cars suggest the technology will cut down on mistakes.
As long as self-driving trucks require a driver to remain on board, driving jobs seem safe. In some ways those jobs, which pay an average of about $40,000 a year, could even improve. For one thing, driving a truck 11 hours a day is stressful. “You get physically and mentally tired,” says Mugriyev, the driver in the Texas accident, which occurred in 2013. (He was not found to be at fault.) Besides being able to nap and relax in the cab while Otto does the driving, says Berdinis, drivers could use the time away from the wheel to catch up on trucking’s heavy paperwork, locate a “backhaul” load that would pay for the return trip, chat with family and friends, learn a second trade, or run a business. “And while they’re doing it, the drivers are still getting paid for driving,” he says.
These potential benefits could help with recruiting and training truck drivers—a key concern, because there’s actually a big shortage of drivers in both the U.S. and Europe. The American Trucking Associations pegs the current U.S. shortage at about 50,000 drivers and predicts that a total of nearly 900,000 new drivers will be needed over the next eight years. “We have customers calling us up saying they’ll buy 10 new trucks from us if we can provide the drivers, too,” says Carl Johan Almqvist, who heads product safety at Volvo Trucks.
One endorsement of the potential benefits of autonomous trucks to both trucking companies and drivers has come from the state government of Ohio, a trucking hub that’s home to more than 70,000 drivers. The state has committed $15 million to set up a 35-mile stretch of highway outside Columbus for testing self-driving trucks. The heads of both the American Trucking Associations and the Ohio Trucking Association have publicly suggested that autonomous trucks will be good for truckers.
However, the technology is not just a way to make the job more attractive to human drivers; it’s potentially a way for trucking companies to fill in for drivers who aren’t available. And if self-driving systems someday become accepted as capable of standing in for drivers, why keep human drivers on at all? After all, drivers account for a third of the per-mile costs of operating a truck.
Even if, as is likely for the foreseeable future, drivers stay on in the cab of self-driving trucks, it’s not clear the economics will work out in their favor. That’s because there’s currently no regulation that would require companies to pay drivers for the time they spend in the back of the cab. What’s more, freight companies are likely to be forced to convert the cost savings from always-rolling trucks into lower hauling charges in order to compete. Those dropping fees could put pressure on truckers’ pay. “If load prices get pushed down with this technology, the company will say, ‘You didn’t do as much driving, so you don’t make as much,’” says Mugriyev.
Is Otto’s technology up to safely piloting 80,000 pounds of truck down a busy highway? Having a driver in the cab won’t do much to make up for any shortcomings in the system, given that by Otto’s own reckoning it can take up to 30 seconds for a driver resting in the back to fully orient to the driver’s seat.
The extensive history racked up by Google’s self-driving cars is encouraging, with only 20 crashes over seven years and millions of miles. Only one of the crashes was found to be the fault of the car: a traffic merging situation of the sort that Otto hands off to the driver.
But that record doesn’t easily translate into a prediction for the safety of self-driving trucks. As Berdinis notes, trucks can’t swerve to avoid a hazard the way cars can. A fast, hard turn of the steering wheel at high speed would set the truck to fishtailing and possibly jackknifing. From the moment the brakes are applied in a truck going 55 miles per hour, it takes well over the length of a football field for the vehicle to stop. There are only six inches of lane on either side of a truck, meaning even small hazards at the side of the lane can’t be avoided without leaving the lane. “Many avoidance algorithms for self-driving cars just don’t apply to trucks,” says Berdinis.
A key detail not seen in most images of the Budweiser delivery: Otto staff and police riding nearby in cars to ensure safety.One advantage for trucks is that some of the sensors can be mounted at the top of the cab, providing a high-up view that can see over traffic far ahead. But even state-of-the-art sensors can struggle to provide accurate, unambiguous data. Bright sunlight can briefly blind cameras, computers can’t always differentiate between a car by the side of the road and a big sign, and systems can be thrown off by snow, ice, and sand. They also can’t interpret facial expressions and gestures of nearby drivers to predict the driving behavior of other vehicles. And few systems would be able to differentiate between a hitchhiker and a construction worker gesturing to pull over.
Self-driving cars have managed to do well in mostly city driving in spite of these limitations, but at highway speeds and with limited maneuverability, trucks may come up short more often. “We’re still having problems with these challenges,” says Volvo Trucks’ Almqvist. Heavy-truck drivers typically spend months in driving school, and go through thousands of miles of supervised driving, before taking full charge of a big rig. Thus, matching a human driver’s skill is harder for a self-driving truck than it is for a self-driving car. Mugriyev wonders, for example, if an autonomous system would be able to do what he did: wrestle to a safe stop a truck with a blown front axle and a smashed-up car pasted to its front.
Because of such safety concerns, Volvo has no current plans to field its autonomous trucks on public roads. Instead, it intends to limit them to private locations such as mines and ports. “On public roads, we’ll use the technology to support the driver, not to replace the driver,” says Almqvist. Volvo is still unsure about social acceptance of the technology. The company sometimes identifies the license plates of passing cars when testing its autonomous trucks, and then tracks the car owners down and surveys them about their perceptions.
Berdinis acknowledges the challenges, but he insists Otto’s technology is rapidly evolving to meet them. “We won’t ship until we’re confident there are no situations where we’d need a human to immediately take control of the truck,” he says.
Otto will also have to convince regulators its systems are ready for the highway. Unlike Uber, which has relied on the consumer popularity of its passenger service to take to the roads first and wrestle with regulations later, Otto will do everything strictly by the book, notes Berdinis.
Even Volvo’s Almqvist thinks the technology will make it to public roads in the not-too-distant future. But timing will be crucial, he adds: “If we do it too soon and have an accident, we’ll hurt the industry. And if you lose the public’s trust, it’s very difficult to regain it.”
APTIV is a global foreign corporation headquartered in IRELAND----not American. This video is FAKE NEWS as it sells the idea that these vehicles will first, not displace UBER/LYFT drivers who use their own cars-----and it pretends these global corporations CARE about seniors getting to doctors appointments. You know, what our MTA DISABILITY/SENIOR public transit vehicles do today.
The people using their own cars as UBER/LYFT are ordinary people with no so much money as to own a commercial SELF-DRIVING FLEET of vehicles ------even those 5% freemason/Greek players being allowed an initial buy-in of self-driving vehicle FLEETS will be thrown under the bus.
IMAGINE-----MEDIA TELLS US TRUCKS ARE BACKED FOR MILES WAITING AT PORT TERMINALS TO LOAD/UNLOAD----
Idling for hours -----driverless tractor trailers will be doing this.
HeadquartersDublin, Co. Dublin (Ireland)
Type Company - Public (APTV)
Industry Electrical & Electronic Manufacturing
Revenue $10+ billion (USD) per year
Aptiv is a global technology company that develops safer, greener and more connected solutions enabling the future of mobility'.
'We took a self-driving Lyft around Vegas
Published on Jan 8, 2018 YOU TUBE
Lyft is bringing autonomous vehicles to the streets of Las Vegas with the help of Aptiv technology. CNN Tech's Samuel Burke took a ride in one'.
The DELIBERATE policy of bringing super-duper global cargo ships into US PORTS that do not have the infrastructure to handle that cargo-----is FORCING localities to pass laws and zoning to ACCOMODATE the decisions to open our ports to these ships. WE HAVE THESE SHIPS---WE MUST HAVE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE say global banking 1%.
Nothing says WASTE AND POLLUTION than idling tractor trailers miles in line ------ergo, we need efficiency and INNOVATION to make this work.
We want emphasize it will take a few decades to build these GREATER BALTIMORE as super-duper industrial zone infrastructure as these PORTS allow more and more super-duper cargo ships to moor. Remember, during OBAMA-era US PORTS were consolidated to one global port management corporation---which happens to be A FOREIGN ASIAN GLOBAL PORT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION. There is no competition between US ports-----
'So it's just a labor dispute?
No. Though the dispute is exacerbating it, there are way bigger issues at play here—like America's aging port infrastructure and its ability to keep up with the flow of trade through its ports'.
'Most U.S. Port Terminals Are Foreign-Run
February 26, 200611:59 AM ET
Heard on Weekend Edition Sunday'
The money lost to global cargo corporations in these manufactured failures of READINESS for US PORTS -----is being subsidized by those hundred trillions of dollars off-shored from US TREASURY and people's pockets during ROBBER BARON FRAUDS.
Why Are These Massive Cargo Ships Trapped at 29 U.S. Ports?
You've probably read about it, even if it didn't really register. Something about a backlog. Something about unions. Imports and exports. Now the dispute that's paralyzing 29 ports on the U.S. West Coast has the potential to affect all of us—and to empty the shelves in countless stores.
What seems to be the problem?
West Coast ports were shut down over the weekend, as part of a strategy designed to win a fight that pits the dockworkers—basically, the skilled workers who keep the ports running—against the shipping companies. The dispute's actually been going on for months, as has the congestion. But things are coming to a head this month, blossoming into a straight-up traffic jam this weekend: The LA Times says there are now 33 ships anchored along the coast, while 55 are at a stand-still in port.
Consider that each of those ships is carrying thousands of containers, and that 40 percent of American imports (and 70 percent of trade from Asia) come through the ports of LA and Long Beach, and you'll get a sense for the scale of the stand-still. Yesterday, the CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers said that the situation is costing $2 billion a day.
Who's fighting, and why?
The dispute is between two parties. First, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union or ILWU, which represents 20,000 dockworkers who are highly-skilled, highly-paid workers. Then, the Pacific Maritime Association, which is represents the shipping companies. They've been slogging towards a new deal for months, but have had trouble agreeing on a number of issues, including how contracts are arbitrated.
The shipping companies of the PMA blame the dockworkers, claiming they are staging mass "slowdowns" in their work that creates congestion. This weekend, the PMA locked out workers entirely to put pressure on their union to sign a contract deal. Meanwhile, the ILWU shot back that the PMA, describing the lock out as unnecessarily aggressive. "The employers are deliberately worsening the existing congestion crisis to gain the upper hand at the bargaining table," said the ILWU pesident Robert McEllrath in a statement.
In short, it's a battle between two very tough opponents who need each other to survive. Today, the AP reports that the PMA is distributing the contracts directly to workers on the ports, seemingly to undermine the union bosses who are negotiating directly with the association. This week, President Obama even went so far as to sent Labor Secretary Thomas Perez to help end the stand-still, leading some speculate that Obama could pull a "nuclear option" on the talks.
The Port of LA on Tuesday. AP Photo/Jae C. Hong
So it's just a labor dispute?
No. Though the dispute is exacerbating it, there are way bigger issues at play here—like America's aging port infrastructure and its ability to keep up with the flow of trade through its ports.
The best explanation of the problems come from Forbes and The Washington Post, which explained this week that there's simply so much more cargo leaving and entering America right now than there ever has been. More cargo means more containers, which means more ships, and of course, bigger ships. That's not bad news in and of itself. But the way those ships are unloaded—and what happens to the containers once they're off the ship—is much more complicated than it once was, and American ports have had a hard time upgrading their systems to handle the complexity and increased load.
A longshoreman with the union's Local 13 branch, looks out at the unusually quiet dock at the Port of Los Angeles in January, 2015. AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes.
Why can't they just put my stuff on a train?
Good thing we didn't turn all our railroads into bike paths and garden beds, right? There's just one problem with relying on trains for transport: America's train infrastructure is also stretched to a breaking point, as Forbes also pointed out in its story.
As North Dakota's oilfields have exploded over the past few years, it's depended on outdated railways to transport its black gold. As a result, it's been increasingly difficult for other customers to find a way to ship their goods via train. Last year, we learned that the oil boom is causing huge problems for companies that depend on railways, from farmers to carmakers.
How will any of this affect me, lady?
It might not today, but businesses across the country are already having trouble stocking products, from shoes to, uh, NBA bobblehead dolls, apparently. It's definitely adversely affecting companies who depend on international trade—from farmers who export to China to stateside manufacturers who get their parts or materials from abroad, like Honda. It's probably going to take some time for it to have an obvious effect on you, but if the slowdown continues, it may very well mean you won't have access to certain foods and products, including cars.
If you want a deep dive into the booming world of US freight, check out Dan Glass' amazing post from October here. But here's a few numbers: A mind-boggling 40 percent of everything imported into the US comes through the Ports of the LA and Long Beach. Consider that roughly 90 percent of everything we own arrives on a cargo container, you'll see why a shutdown—or even a slowdown—could impact everyone.
Oh yeah: The LA Times says all those idling mega-ships are making the air quality in Southern California worse. Bonus!
Whether FEES, restrictions via kinds of auto emissions, privatized and eliminated parking spaces------whether streets allowing only commercial corporate driverless vehicles------the goal MOVING FORWARD is to eliminate ALL personal car/truck movement inside these PORT INDUSTRIAL ZONES. Whether using the excuse of being GREEN---is if SUPER-DUPER FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES with SUPER-DUPER GLOBAL FACTORIES with SUPER-DUPER ENERGY PLATFORM NEEDS ----has anything to do with being GREEN------
We seeing yet again global banking 1% FORCING NEW TECHNOLOGY in battery/electric/self-driving to sell more products.
Here in Baltimore this is the goal------transit will only occur via global corporate campus vehicles---workers will be restricted in travel ------and the streets, curbs, sidewalks will be PRIVATIZED for COMMERCIAL-USE ONLY.
'Restrict Car Access Even Further
One more radical approach would be to further cut the amount of road space cars can use'.
Traffic in London Is Still Out of Control. Now What?Oct 28, 2016
The U.K. capital was a global leader in taming congestion 13 years ago. But the traffic has come back, with a vengeance.
In 2003, the city of London made a bold move in an effort to tame traffic: It instituted a congestion charge, making motorists pay a fee in order to drive into the city core. The law was the first of its kind in a major city, and similar schemes were later adopted in Stockholm, Milan, and other cities.
Today, 13 years later, the U.K. capital is drowning in vehicles: London has the worst road delays in Europe. What happened?
Several things, say transportation experts—and not all of them are bad. In a sense, London’s snarled streets are in part a reflection of its roaring success. It may also be a harbinger of what’s coming for many other cities.
The positive spin on this is that London is now in a great position to provide a blueprint for better managing the future of urban congestion everywhere. But first, let’s take a closer look at what’s going wrong.
The Limits of Congestion Charging
London cars may now be moving “slower than a horse and cart” but that doesn’t necessarily mean the congestion charge was a failure. When introduced, it was designed largely to slash the number of private cars driving in to central London. In this, it has proved very successful. As the Financial Times reports, private car use has indeed dropped off sharply.
The problem is that the space vacated by those private cars has since been filled up (and then some) by other vehicles—specifically, private-hire cabs and online shopping delivery vans from the likes of Uber and Amazon. The on-demand economy is choking the city.
They weren’t a major factor in London traffic 13 years ago, and they’re are not deterred by the current £11.50 ($14) daily charge to drive into the zone. Because they count as public transit, Ubers don’t even pay the fee.
Hmmmmm, same will be true when UBER/LYFT become only commercial vehicles.
These new congestion-charge-immune vehicles motor into a city whose road space has shrunk, thanks to lane closures caused by major construction work and new cycle highways. Add London’s galloping population growth, which surpassed its previous peak of 8.6 million in 2015 and could reach 10 million by 2030, and you have a complex knot of problems that will take some unpicking. But how?
Install Better Traffic Systems
Transport for London, the city’s overseeing transit body, is developing better traffic signaling and predictive modeling to help control inner-London congestion, says Garrett Emmerson, TfL’s COO of Surface Transport. Two-thirds of London’s 6,000 traffic lights now use the SCOOT adaptive control system. This changes each set of lights’ signaling patterns to respond to demand—not working independently of each other but connected up to a system managing flow through junctions and key corridors.
This already-common system will soon be linked up to bus services, a major factor in a city that hosts 6.5 million journeys by bus passengers daily (compared to 10 million by private car). Data relayed by the SCOOT system could, for example, signal to bus drivers to give up their normal priority at traffic lights, if doing so would increase traffic flow. The sheer frequency of London’s buses still makes this challenging. “Joining up the traffic light and bus systems is harder in London, because our buses run so frequently that they don't run to timetables,” Emmerson says. “They run to headways [i.e. ensuring a fixed distance between each bus], so that there is an even flow of buses down the route. That makes it much more complicated for the traffic signal systems to understand what's happening with the buses, but we're now getting there.”
TfL is also trying to smooth flows by giving more information to private drivers. Over 1.5 million people (equivalent to a quarter of London’s drivers) now follow the TfL Twitter account, for example, which dispenses traffic alerts and other useful information. A possible next step Emerson and his colleagues are exploring is relaying traffic information to motorists via screens on the back of buses, which can display traffic advice specifically relevant to the bus’ GPS location.
These measures that are already underway could help grease the wheels of London’s road system. But to actually resolve rather than just ease the problem will probably take something more drastic.
One more radical approach would be to further cut the amount of road space cars can use. TfL has already done this to an extent by creating new segregated “cycle superhighways” carved from the road network, much to the consternation of certain Londoners. On this issue Emerson makes another important point: Bike lanes being used at full capacity actually can actually channel more people than motor-vehicles-only roads. “The cycle superhighways have taken out some road capacity [for motor vehicles], but there's more capacity for actual people,” he says. “The number of cyclists on these routes has grown over 50 percent in just 6 months, which means we're now getting more people down those corridors every hour than we ever did before.”
While building more bike infrastructure should lure more drivers out of their private cars, it would be less effective on easing van and private-hire cab congestion on the road space that remains. To do that, you might need to entirely restrict car access to certain areas, a strategy suggested by Ashok Sinha of the London Cycling Campaign.
“One of the biggest barriers to cycling is fear of collisions—that's addressed not just by cycling infrastructure but by reducing traffic volumes and speed in places where most traffic really isn't necessary, such as residential areas,” Sinha says. “You can ask yourself: ‘What is the purpose of most traffic going through a particular area?’ In a lot of cases it isn't necessary for traffic to go through narrow streets. Instead, motor vehicles could be re-routed through a coarser grid of higher-volume roads, which would leave the smaller roads within them much calmer. This would mean more people could walk and cycle through them, already common practice in the Netherlands, where most cycling is done on roads or paths that aren't specifically separate.”
Such a system could be introduced in a more sophisticated way than by simply blocking off roads, Sinha notes. Street plans could be reshaped so that it was possible to drive in and out of an area, but not to drive through it. Bollards can also be retractable, sinking into the ground when emergency access was required or during quieter periods of the day.
Another way to get cars off surface streets—build sub-surface ones. Burying the highway can be a wildly expensive traffic solution, as Boston demonstrated with its infamous Big Dig, but several similar projects are being tried in European cities. Stockholm is currently constructing a huge subterranean bypass that, when completed in roughly ten years’ time, will channel through-traffic across the city away from the existing surface road system. London’s former Mayor Johnson proposed a similar solution for the UK capital in February.
The plan has some attractions. If existing arterial roads were buried, the areas around them would be far less polluted, while burying car lanes could also free up road space at surface level for building more homes. The idea nonetheless has some obvious drawbacks, encapsulated by a speech made by Darren Johnson, a Green Party representative addressing the London Assembly last year. “Sticking traffic in underground tunnels is counterproductive,” he said. “It will do nothing to get cars off the roads. If these plans go ahead, we will waste the money that we need to be spending on encouraging public transport, cycling, and walking.”
Given the huge expense of burying roads (and the departure from London politics of the plan’s main advocate, ex-Mayor Johnson) it seems unlikely that this direction will be adopted in the near future.
Create “Bus Gateways”
In London, it’s not solely cars, truck and vans that cause congestion. Buses are so numerous along key corridors such as Oxford Street that they form bus-jams that belch out Beijing-level pollution. Rethinking routes could ease these jams by reducing the number of larger buses driving empty.
“At the moment you have a situation where double-decker buses are coming into Central London, rapidly depositing passengers before traveling along the rest of their route, often with few people left on them,” says Ashok Sinha. “TfL are currently looking at the possibility of creating several ‘bus gateways’ around the edge of Central London, where larger buses could arrive, drop their passengers, and turn back out of the city. Passengers could then transfer onto smaller hopper-style electric buses to continue their journey, with the larger buses essentially acting as shuttles.”
Clearly this is a system that would need careful management if the gateways themselves weren’t to become bottlenecks. But while passengers would need time to change buses, they could potentially earn this time back if the smaller electric vehicles can make better progress.
A road shield making an entrance to London’s congestion charge zone. (Mariordo59/Flickr)Introduce Surge Pricing
Just because London’s congestion charge doesn’t deter Amazon and Uber doesn’t mean that the entire concept of congestion pricing should be jettisoned. David Begg, professor of Sustainable Transport at Plymouth University and publisher of Transport Times, argues that the system needs updating, extending and streamlining. In fact, the city could borrow a page from the Uber playbook and introduce congestion surge pricing. Such a system would raise or lower congestion charge fees depending on the hour of the day. This would provide a genuine disincentive to driving at busy times rather than just a skim-off tax that deters only the less wealthy.
“We need to move towards a dynamic charge that reflects the level of congestion,” Begg says. “It's no different from the way we pay for other utilities—you get a reduction for using electricity during the night rather than at peak hours. You can get off-peak prices on trains. The market and price mechanism is working for other utilities, just not for roads.”
Reroute Delivery Vans
London’s problem with online delivery vans isn’t just that they are too many of them. It’s where they are: delivering to people’s workplaces in the city during the day rather than to their homes in the evening. This needs to change, says Begg. “We have to encourage delivery vehicles to make more evening drops-off to homes, when people want the parcels to be delivered, rather than during the day or the middle of the rush hour. It costs more for delivery companies to deliver in the rush hour because they're traveling slower, they're using more fuel, more drivers time. You would have thought that congestion itself would have given an economic incentive for the Amazons of this world to deliver in the evening, but currently it's not working.”
Another way of diverting delivery vans from the city core could be to provide more local depots for click-and-collect shopping—places where shoppers can pick up goods by providing a customer code.
Hold Out for Autonomous Vehicles
In the current discussion of urban transit and congestion, autonomous vehicles inevitably show up as the future fix-all. There’s a vigorous debate raging in transit-geek circles about whether AVs will relieve or exacerbate current traffic trends. But there should be at least one clear benefit: High-speed highways filled exclusively with driverless cars should at least be less prone to human-error-caused jams. That should help ease delays for suburban commuters heading into the city.
“Humans tend to drive at different speeds relative to the other,” says Carnegie Mellon University’s Raj Rajkumar, an expert in vehicular information technology. “We also tend to at first underreact to things around us because we are distracted, then overreact to compensate for the delay. That cycle ultimately causes a cascading effect. First, one person cuts up another vehicle on the road, causing them to slow down. The driver behind then slows down too much until eventually a vehicle comes to a stop and a jam starts to form.”
As Rajkumar says, a platooned formation of autonomous vehicles could break this jamming cycle of under- and overreaction to create a smoother flow. “If all the cars that end up in these jams were self-driving, they would be constantly reacting appropriately. The net result of that is that they could all be moving forward at a collectively uniform speed and therefore the throughput of existing roads would go up.”
Self-driving also holds promise for fixed-route vehicles such as buses and vans—major sources of London congestion—since they’ll probably be among the first vehicles to go fully autonomous. But when that happens remains an open question. Despite headline-grabbing stunts like Uber’s recent autonomous beer delivery and Tesla’s claim that all its new vehicles are fully rigged for self-driving, by Rajkumar’s estimations AV technology won’t be fully mature for another ten years, and it could be 40 years until they truly own the roads. In the long interim, autonomous vehicles will need navigate among and around us imperfect humans, so their ability to dramatically reduce congestion will be limited.
Let Congestion Itself Produce a Modal Shift
Could London’s traffic get so bad that drivers simply give up and try to get around some other way?
David Begg does not advocate this as an option (nor does TfL). But he does point out that, if action is not taken, this problem may essentially solve itself: Simply staying home will become London’s unofficial default means of reducing pressure from drivers. This white-flag strategy could have some benefits: According to the London Cycling Campaign’s research, 25 percent of Londoners would like to cycle more than they do. Making the driving experience more miserable is one way to encourage more of them to switch over.
“The way we run our road system is the last remnant of the Stalinist state,” Begg says. “We ration demand by queueing. We can do that, and accept that there's not going to be any proper road pricing system, but what will happen is congestion will be the regulator.”
Letting congestion essentially flourish unchecked this way would be likely to create political backlash from driver/voters, a disincentive to commercial deliveries, dangerous problems for emergency access, and no drop in air pollution. As such, it’s hardly tempting. But it could be the future London is lumbering towards anyway unless real changes are made, warns Begg.
“If we go down that road, we just have to say, ‘We've not got a solution for congestion. It's going to get progressively worse and traffic will be at walking speeds.’ If we do that, we have to collectively accept it. Alternatively, we can take radical action.”