South Carolina Endorses Green Socialism

Back in 2007, Gov. Mark Sanford created the South Carolina Climate, Energy & Commerce Advisory Committee (CECAC). Today, it was announced that CECAC had produced it’s final paper on the results. And they are scary…

First, what I didn’t notice until now is the composition of the group. Take a look through the list. Notice anything? There’s lots of academics, industry leaders and special interest groups represented. But not a single “common man”. Nobody is there representing the people of South Carolina. Which makes the recommendations not that surprising.

Here’s the final report in all of it’s glory. Covering 600+ pages, I doubt that anyone is going to take the time to read through all of it’s heft, including the myriad of policy suggestions that the group is making. Here, I’m going to focus on the “cross-cutting” issues, because those are the policy ideas that are the most disturbing to me, and to anyone who values freedom of ideas.

Mostly this is on the basis of “education”. This is the FIRST paragraph on their education section:

A well-articulated, meaningful, broadly implemented and sustained educational process is the means to achieve effective and durable actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Much of
the response to climate change requires a disciplined alteration in lifestyle that shares many things in common with a healthy lifestyle. Furthermore, people have to be motivated to attempt and succeed with basic changes in lifestyles. Individual responsibility, community action, conservation, and prevention are the principles upon which change of this magnitude is accomplished. It is no less than a shift in culture. The effort will benefit all aspects of society.

The educational process must define the basic aspects of climate change, including the evidence for cause-and-effect issues; it must specify the significance of climate change for the target audience and each individual; it must clarify and emphasize the role of the target audience and each of its members for a plan of action to mitigate and adapt to climate change; and it must relate the necessary changes in all aspects of people’s lives and their basic beliefs and values— e.g., health, environment, and economic viability.

Public education and outreach programs must build upon existing efforts and institutions, avoid unnecessary duplication, and promote best practices. The sustained success of policy actions recommended by the CECAC, as well as those that might evolve in the future, depends upon lifestyle changes resulting from education, experience, and practice. (All emphasis added)

This is a shocking amount of changing people that’s involved here. But that’s just the start of it. Here are some sections of the policy recommendations that should be, at the least worrisome for anyone who values academic freedom:

• Future generations—Integrate climate change and healthy lifestyle issues into educational
  curricula, post-secondary degree programs, and professional licensing. Emphasize the common basis and goals of response to climate change with protecting the environment and
  achieving optimum health for all people. Consider creating the South Carolina Health Corps, as outlined in Annex B of this document.

• What this means: Teachers will HAVE to follow the party line if they want to be certified as teacher. It will also mean that some climate change education may become required for graduation from HS or college, and this education will have an environmentalist bend to it. I’ll go into the Hitler Youth Health Corps further down.
• The coordinators for each of the target audiences should be credible with those audiences and have the ability to recruit and energize statewide networks of volunteers within each target audience. The state legislature should provide funding for the basic operations of the committee and the coordinators. Funding should be structured in such a way as to take maximum advantage of established mechanisms for education of each of the audiences.
• What this means: The idea is to get as many people “fired up” about climate change as possible. And it’s going to be paid for by your money, whether you like it or not.
• Level of Group Support: Unanimous
• What This Means: All of the people in the advisory panel approved of these measures. There was probably strong pressure to put out a united front (about 90% of these had unanimous approval). I don’t know how you get 20+ supposedly independent people together and get them to agree THIS MUCH on something as controversial as climate change/environmentalism. This goes to speak to the probability that the people put on the committee were selected more on ideological purity than representativeness.
• The state legislature should provide funding to support development and ongoing revision to the
  state Climate Change Adaptation Plan, including (but not limited to) funds to support the analyses needed to guide and inform the development and implementation of the plan and to cover expenses incurred by the Commission on Adaptation to Climate Change and its members.

• What This Means: A legislative blank check for the panel. Not surprising considering that this is coming from the group that would BENEFIT from the blank check.
• Add climate change to public education performance standards for science and social studies; identify gaps in climate change education and specific curricula to fill gaps. [From their notes] Someone has to be the initial teacher of the science of climate change. Integrate climate change and sustainability into core college curricula. (A more direct way of saying what I gleaned from above.)
• Introduce core competencies on climate change into professional licensing programs (energy efficiency in building design and construction, use of recycled materials, etc.).
• What This Means: Now even your plumber has to know the party line on climate change.
• Identify individual community leaders who are not yet acting on climate change, and make a special effort to educate and encourage them to act.
• What This Means: Target the politicians and those in the community who do not parrot the environmentalist/global alarmist policy. May include shaming or punishing those people.
• Develop and use a state-based “brand” on climate awareness and action.
• What This Means: You probably start seeing the Palmetto Tree/Crescent Moon tied into environmentalist agitprop. Possibly the same with “Carolina Girls: Greenest in the World”.

And that’s just ONE section. I’m going to go after the Hitler Green Youth in my next post, because it’s just that troublesome.

And these ideas are not just limited to South Carolina, as 30 other states have done something very similar. For example, compare the South Carolina website to the Montana website, or the Vermont website.

Look similar. I can only hope that South Carolina didn’t spend too much for the Center for Climate Strategy’s expertise. Because they’re pretty much copying the same exact template for every state. Which means that it’s pretty likely that Gov. Sanford got steamrolled on this one. Which is a shame, because Gov. Sanford is supposed to be a maverick Republican, who’s supposed to be a hawk on fiscal issues. I guess not here.

More on the Gas Run

Gas prices surge as Ike moves in | ajc.com.

States warn gas stations against price gouging

These stories is just full of juicy quotes about indignant consumers (read: voters) about this gas run.  I’ll present some quotes:

Larry Ruiz of Duluth said it cost him $45 Tuesday to fill up his small pickup. Friday, it cost him $60. “It really is just too expensive,” he said. “The government has lost control of the gas.”

Larry, the government doesn’t have control over gas prices.  At all.  It controls one thing, the location and siting of oil refineries.  You know who has control over gas prices?  You.  But I bet you’re not willing to take responsiblity for your actions.  It’s alot easier to set blame on the government than yourself.

The wholesale price for a gallon of gasoline rose about $1, to $4.25, Thursday morning, topping the high price five years ago when hurricanes Katrina and Rita raked the Gulf Coast, said Tom Kloza, publisher of the Oil Price Information Service in Wall, N.J. It was uncertain whether that price spike will filter down to the retail level.

“It’s pure panic,” Kloza said. “It’s related to the fact that there are worries about whether there’s going to be enough (gasoline) in the distribution system to satisfy some of the September pumping needs on the Gulf Coast.”

More proof that this is a run.  People don’t know if there’s going to be supplies, so they hoard.  This will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

“Every time there’s a hurricane this happens. They’re just doing this to rip people off,” said 19-year-old Megan Cohen, a South Carolina college student who settled for paying $4.11 a gallon after going to three stations.

Uh, this wasn’t the case in any other hurricane season except following Katrina, Megan.  It hadn’t happened with any of the hurricanes this year, including Gustav, which hit another large section of the oil and gas producing area of the country.  But Megan, you’re not helping by going to three gas stations and “settling” for $4.11 a gallon.  This means that you didn’t need gasoline (then why go to three stations unless they were out, and there’s an easy way to figure out if the station is empty: noone’s getting gas).  But Megan probably has never taken an economics class at her South Carolina college, otherwise she would know about SUPPLY AND DEMAND.  It’s not that hard people.  Less supply means prices go up.  Demand going up sharply because of panic buying means prices go up even futher.  Or, if they don’t go up quickly enough, there’s a shortage.

S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford asked residents to avoid filling up unless necessary. “Instead, this is a time to think of ways in which each of us can make a difference on what may come our way if refineries in Texas are significantly damaged,” Sanford said in statement. “It might mean riding to the football games with a neighbor or on Sunday riding to church with a friend. It might mean watching a video at home rather than going to the movies or riding to work with a co-worker.”

I know there’s not alot that can be done legally, but as the leader of a state, can’t Mark do something with a little more leadership?  Making a difference?  Throwing out silly suggestions?  This is wimpy politico talk here.  Man up, Mark!  Tell people to stop being so stupid and panicking, if this isn’t a problem.  If it is… be more forceful in telling them that this might be the case for a while.  But if this is his idea of leadership, then this state’s got problems.  This was also true of the Hanna situation, which was equally feeble in the public response.

In South Carolina – where gas prices increased about 20 cents a gallon on average Friday – Attorney General Henry McMaster said gas stations that price gouge would face criminal prosecution. He did not set a threshold, saying each case must be investigated separately to see whether prices were raised to an “unconscionable” level.

But putting the gouging laws into effect?  Now THAT’S going to make things better!  Making the suppliers walk on egg shells in pricing so that if some 19-year old tart with no clue of how things work gets pissed off and files a complaint, then you’ll have to deal with investigations for the next year.  Or you could price it so low that you’ll be out in 5 minutes, but you don’t have to deal with the state lawyers.  Or you could just go on vacation for the next 15 days until this expires.  Then you’re fine and it’s only the customers who get screwed.  But we already knew that about these types of laws.

North Carolina Republican Congressman Robin Hayes called for a federal investigation into some prices rising more than $1 per gallon in a day.

“I understand there is a substantial hurricane in a sensitive area of the country, but this dramatic spike in gas prices is breathtaking,” he said.

I just wanted to point out the party of the pandering politician here.  What’s a federal investigation going to do that the myriad of state investigations won’t?  Oh, that’s right.  Make it seem like you’re doing something about it.

Run on Gas in South Carolina

The State | Gas reaching $5 in Columbia

Everyone knows what a bank run is.  Someone gets word that the bank is close to failure, or doesn’t have enough deposits to carry through to the next business day.  So people want to get their money out before the well dries up.  One person sees this and thinks the same thing, and it continues until the bank actually runs out of money.  This could even be the case when the bank IS solvent and would have had enough money to stay open during normal operations, but the stampede action and groupthink mentality forces the bank to close because they couldn’t satisfy the demands of it’s depositors.

The same thing is starting to happen in South Carolina.

I first heard about the run this morning (shows how much I’m in the loop around here), but at that point, I was probably asleep when it started yesterday afternoon and into the evening.  When I got into work, two things caught my attention.  The first was that the Pitt Stop gas station had run out of gas, as evidenced by the bags on the nozzles.  The second was that I looked down the street to the Gator (independent) gas station and thought I saw a 4 in the dollar place.  I thought I was seeing things though at the time.  Then while at work, the supervisor notified all of us that we were to fill our tanks completely when we finished our routes, because there would be shortages of gas this weekend and going into next week.

The run was on.

By the time I left the city, gas was already at $3.73 to $3.92 and there were reports on the radio that there had been long lines in Sumter and Lexington.  Driving to Myrtle Beach was a mixed bag.  The truck stops (Pilot) along I-20 and I-95 were showing normal prices, at least the same as yesterday, $3.62 or so.  Then when turning on the local sports radio show, I was somewhat surprised when the announcer started off the show by going on a rant about gas prices.  Basically, he was saying that anyone charging over $4 a gallon was “gouging you” and that you should talk to the manager.  As he was saying this, he announced that the Markette convenience store he was broadcasting from dropped their price from $4.20 to $3.93.

Continuing on to Myrtle Beach, I saw a trend appearing.  Most stores had raised their price to $4, but the ones that had left them at $3.80 or so had nothing left.  At the Costco in Myrtle Beach, I saw about 15 cars getting gas (this was at approx 10:15 AM), not surprising for Costco on some mornings.  When I left about 10 minutes later, the amount of cars waiting had doubled, with cars beginning to block the entrance to the store.  The price was a relatively miniscule $3.52.  The cheapest in the state at the time, most likely.

For the rest of the drive, I could see that prices were in the $3.60 to $3.80 range but nothing out of the ordinary.  One store, the Petro United in Surside Beach, was at $3.58 and there wasn’t a line of cars there.  The remainder of the drive to Georgetown was uneventful in terms of long lines or high prices.

The trip back to Columbia was an entirely different story.  While local news didn’t have anything to say about the gas prices, the Fox News national report had an excerpt about how “one regional gas store that operated in 11 southeast states” was asking customers to limit this information, but nothing else was new here, as this was already reported locally.

When I arrived in Lake City, that all changed.  The first store I saw (a little mom-and-pop), had taped over their $3 with $4 sheets of paper.  It was $4.57.  I thought that this was just a little store taking advantage of the situation.  Not even close.  Getting into the downtown area of the town, I saw how relatively ;inexpensive; this all was.  One store was at $4.70 and a group of three at the main intersection of US-52 and Business 378 were all at $4.80 a gallon.  It was also the first time that I saw any price (including premium) at $5 as well.

Going from there to Sumter I saw a pattern emerge.  Anyone who was actually selling gas had their price set at $4.  Anyone not selling gas had a price below that (probably because they ran out at that price).  This continued all the way into Columbia.  There, prices were generally at $4 with the cheapest being $3.90 at a Murphy USA (read Walmart).  I was able to fill up at $4 at a Sunoco, although some of their pumps said that they only had diesel remaining.  I pumped regular, paid the regular price (vs. the cheaper diesel price), so I should have regular in my tank.  If I don’t, then I suppose Monday will be an interesting trip to the coast.

Getting back to my workplace, I saw that the two places that tipped me off this morning had changed their prices.  The Pitt Stop had raised their price to $4.30, but they had gas.  The Gators…$5.  The highest I’ve seen in the state.

And people are still flocking to get gas as far as I can see.

So while nobody is talking about it, there is a full-fleged run on gas in South Carolina, and perhaps in the Southeast.  And there’s no FDIC to backstop this run.

Sanford issues oxymoron

Sanford issues voluntary evacuation order – Local – Myrtle Beach Sun News.

What’s a voluntary order?  This is one of the more amusing things I’ve heard about the storm that really isn’t, but the media really, REALLY wants it to be.  They’re hoping that it’ll get back to hurricane force winds, though the prognosis isn’t very good for that to happen, especially considering that Hanna continues to weaken.

And as he was announcing the order, even the Governor had to reiterate that it was voluntary.  So why give the order in the first place?  How about issuing an advisary?  Or a suggestion?  But it has to be an order to make it sound important, even if it doesn’t have any meat to it and most people are going to ignore it anyway.

And the best part:

Gov. Mark Sanford just told beachside South Carolinians in Horry and Georgetown counties that if they feel more comfortable getting out of the wind and rain forecast for the next 36 hours, they can begin to evacuate.

So South Carolinians needed to be told by the governor that it’s ok for them to evacuate.  Thank God he said this, because people might have been forced to STAY if they weren’t comfortable with being in the storms path.  Yeeesh.  Have we become so dependent on the state that we can no longer take our safety into our own hands?

The answer is:  of course not.

So far, we have the Governor issuing the voluntary order, the local schools closing up shop for the day as well as the local university, and yet everyone I talked to today was pretty much unfazed with this storm.  As usual, it’s a matter of the tail wagging the dog, as the media is trying to make something out of this.  And as a result, it’s forcing the government to make sure it doesn’t look bad with the media.  In fact, it’s IKE that the people I talked to today are more worried about than Hanna, but that would require long term planning, something the drive-bys are uninterested in doing.

Meanwhile, while the local government employees will get their day off, I’ll be making the drive to the beach, like I do everyday.  Except they have me going from SOUTH to NORTH, instead of NORTH to SOUTH like I normally do.  Which makes no sense, but the bureaucratic dictates of someone two hundred miles away and has probably never done the drive before must be obeyed.  So I have to do something useless and more likely to be problematic, just because someone thinks they have a better idea of how to do my job than the person who has done the job for the past year.  Just like pretty much every bureaucracy.
And I’m sure they also didn’t think that this would force me into the major evacuation route instead of driving against it.  But they wouldn’t think about important details like that.  So I’ll probably be stuck in traffic on US 501 or US 378 tomorrow, all because some genius in middle management came up with a great idea.

Response to a Barrett Comment

From the comments on the Gresham Barrett Brings the Stupid post:

Right on, Mike! I’m with you all the way. Next time I’d like to hear you thoughts on Jane B Dyer the Democratic Party’s candidate for Barrett’s job.
She is the kind of candidate SC needs but the media seem to be conspiring to keep her candidacy quiet. She’s been an Air Force flier, She is now a FEDEX captain on one of those big freighters besides being a Mom and a Grandmother. She lives in Easley and she needs the help of guys like you.
Bill

Well, lest anyone think that I’m partisan in my distrust of politicians (unlike most of the media out there), here’s my thoughts on Ms. Dyer:

Sorry Bill, but it looks like Barrett doesn’t have any kind of competition in this race. Ms. Dyer is parroting the same rhetoric that has become standard for all politicians. But I think she’d get the T. Boone Pickens seal of approval.

Below is a more detailed look at Ms. Dyer and her environmental energy policy.

Gresham Barrett Brings the Stupid

Here in Columbia SC, we’re doomed to have at least one talk radio host who’s a complete moron, Kevan Cohen. He’s the definition of a neo-conservative, and makes my ears bleed if I listen to him for more than 15 minutes at a time. You can’t go five minutes without him making some pro-military or pro-war comment, but on every other topic, he’s about as spineless as they come.

So that’s why I didn’t hear him and Congressman Gresham Barrett talk about energy until the end of their conversation. Hannity wasn’t doing it for me today, so I switched to the other station. I only caught the end of the conversation, but this is where Mr. Barrett brought it. And by it, I mean his completely stupid idea.

Make SOUTH CAROLINA energy independent.

There’s enough problems with making the US energy independent. Like the fact that our electric grid is connected to both Canada and Mexico. But it’s at least possible given the resources of the entire country.

South Carolina, on the other hand, doesn’t have the resources to independent from anyone on energy. We don’t have coal beds, we don’t have natural gas production areas, we don’t have uranium mines. And most importantly, we don’t have the ability to use solar, wind or geothermal energy:

So in order for South Carolina to be energy independent, we’d have to completely rely on the state’s hydroelectric dam system. Needless to say, this isn’t a very smart way to encourage economic development, or keep the lights on in South Carolina.

So what does energy independence for South Carolina look like for Mr. Barrett? Pork. Lots and Lots of Pork.

Pork for nuclear.
Pork for biofuels.
Pork for hydrogen.
Pork for universities.
Pork for everyone.

He will basically be hiding a pork bill under the guise of making South Carolina the “leader in energy.” But he has to return the investment that his sponsors have made in him. His top sponsor, Washington Group International runs the Savannah River Site, which handles, you guessed it, the Department of Energy’s nuclear research. He also has received money from South Carolina’s investor-owned and electric cooperatives who have a heavy stake in all of the nuclear reactors found in the state. So any pork toward nuclear, which he’s pushing heavily, goes towards his financial benefactors. Big surprise there.

Finally, he came up with this bit of genius. He mentioned in passing that by building nuclear reactors, they can serve as desalinization plants as well. Uh, yeah. There’s just a little question of… where are you going to put this nuclear desalinization plant? Myrtle Beach? No, they can’t even handle motorcycles, nevermind a nuclear reactor? Charleston? Perhaps. But do you remember a little thing called Hugo, Mr. Barrett?

The point is that “energy independence” has become a phrase that has lost all meaning. Much like “going green,” this is a phrase that means whatever the person using it wants it to mean.

Columbia’s HOV Future – Part 2 (I-20 Northeastern Richland County)

This is the second in a series of looking at the various stretches of highway in Central South Carolina that the SC Dept of Transportation wants to look at for traffic improvements.

Today’s area of interest is Interstate 20 from I-77 to Spears Creek Road. Here’s some stats on the stretch of highway:
Start: Exit 76 A and B (I-77 and Alpine Roads)
End: Exit 82 (Spears Creek Rd)
Length: 6 miles (per the AP)
Interchanges:

• Exit 76 A – I-77
• Exit 76 B – Alpine Rd.
• Exit 80 – Clemson Rd.
• Exit 82 – Spears Creek Church Rd.

Lanes:

• 2 Lanes in Both Directions

Notes:

• This section of I-20 leads to one fastest growing areas in the region, Northeast Columbia.
• Northeast Columbia has numerous traffic issues, due to a lack of planning and insufficient capacity. The existing roads are overburdened by any stretch of the imagination.

Map

View Larger Map

Biggest Problem:
Massive undercapacity. I-20 being two lanes for this area of the state makes it woefully unable to deal with the commuter traffic and regional/national traffic that uses this highway as the main east-west route in South Carolina. This stretch of road starts with the bottleneck of 3 lanes merging to two along with traffic merging from I-77.

Possible Solutions:
Additional Lanes: Extremely Likely. This stretch of road has plenty of land on both sides of the road in addition to plenty of median space to add lanes in the middle of the road as well.
Converting Current Lanes to Carpool Lanes: Not Happening. Because there are only two lanes each way, there’s no way that there’s only going to be one lane each way for trucks/non-commuters and one lane for commuters. But then there would be strong incentive to carpool, but the road would not be interstate standard at that point.
Converting Current Lanes to HOT Lanes: Unlikely. This would toll the road, but you run into the same problem of having only one lane in each direction. However, you could toll the entire road, but they’re trying to avoid this and this would be rather politically unpopular.

Most Likely Solution: Expand to three lanes each direction, with one lane designated HOV. HOT would not have the political clout to stand on its own (there are few other potential areas for HOT lanes in the region, so you wouldn’t have any economies of scale). However, HOT lanes would allow for financing the lanes much easier.
Best Solution: Northern Virginia-style HOT lanes and an additional lane each way. There’s plenty of room to do this, as there’s enough space on each side AND in the median to add both another lane of mainline traffic with a NoVA style reversible two-lane HOV/HOT lane. Making it HOT would enable the project to get additional money to expedite construction and financing.

This is a short stretch of road, compared to the other areas that are looked at, but has really really been used beyond the scope of what it was intended to do. The SCDOT did not anticipate the growth in Northeast Richland, and as a result, this area of I-20 suffers from daily congestion. Exit 80 (Clemson Rd.) is also situated at the top of a hill, so traffic will back up here, both in the morning and at night. The nice thing is that there is enough space and clearance at this exit that it could easily accommodate two lanes of reversible traffic.

Columbia’s HOV Future – Part 1 (I-26 Lexington County)

As an update, The State has posted a somewhat more in-depth article on the proposal for HOV lanes in the Central SC area. They didn’t go into any more specifics than what you could get from the wire service article I posted yesterday, except they interviewed one person, someone who works for local governments. Not exactly an expert on transportation issues, but this is a newspaper. Yet, Keven Cohen thinks this is a good article. Not exactly Kevin.

But onto what I want to, which is what The State should be doing, a more in-depth look at what the situation currently is and what can be done.

The first area I want to discuss is the stretch of I-26 in Lexington County. Here’s some stats on the stretch of highway:
Start: Exit 108 (I-126 into downtown Columbia)
End: Exit 116 (I-77, US 21, 321 and 176 exits)
Length: 7.22 miles (per the AP)
Interchanges:

• Exit 108 A – Bush River Road (Part of Malfunction Junction)
• Exit 108 B – I-126 (Part of Malfunction Junction, also a left exit)
• Exit 110 – US 378 (Exit terminates at one of the few SPUI interchanges in South Carolina, leading to some… interesting driving maneuvers.)
• Exit 111 A & B – US 1 (Cloverleaf interchange with VERY short merge lanes)
• Exit 113 – SC 302 (Exit to Columbia Metro Airport, mingles with frontage roads)
• Exit 115 – US 21, 321 and 176
• Exit 116 – I-77 (Another left exit with two lanes)

Lanes:

• 3 in both directions between Exits 110 and 113.
• 4 Lanes westbound (northbound) between Exits 110 and 108.
• 4 Lanes Eastbound (southbound) at mile 114 to Exits 115/116

Notes:

• This stretch of highway never goes into Lexington (as The State article says), it’s stays well to the east of Lexington city, while remaining the whole time in Lexington County, which is a big difference)
• This stretch of highway was widened to three lanes already, very much limiting the ability to expand or even shift the alignment to accommodate any changes.
• Originally, at Exit 108, it was two lanes into Columbia (via I-126) and ONE lane through for I-26. This suggests that the original alignment was to continue closer to Columbia or for I-26 to move straight and I-126 to exit left, but the geography of the area, in particular the Saluda River, prevented that from happening.
• The cheapest gas in Columbia can be found at the Bush River Exit.

Map

View Larger Map

Biggest Problem:
Old Interchanges with Poor Alignment. Most problems on this stretch of highway occur at the exits, in particular, the US 378 exit (traffic will back up on the ramp and to the highway due to poor clearance for right-hand turns onto US 378 ) and the US 1 Exit (sharp turns and a very short merge between the first on-ramp and the second off-ramp for this cloverleaf style interchange).

Malfunction Junction (I-20/26/126/Bush River Rd./St. Andrews Rd.) is a completely different story and requires an entry by itself.

Possible Solutions:
Additional Lanes: Not likely. This is due to the expansion already completed in the area and the quasi-urban surroundings on I-26 especially between US 378 and SC 302. However, this wouldn’t solve the interchange problems without dedicated lanes for each exit. This is possible for US 378, unlikely for US 1 or SC 302. However, past I-77 to the south, an additional lane can and should be added as this becomes a bottleneck for traffic to Charleston and I-95 (Florida and Georgia coast).
Converting Current Lanes to Carpool Lanes: Most Likely, but still difficult. There would need to be some realignment of the road to accommodate separating the carpool lanes from mainline traffic. It helps here that traffic is not too bad that the loss of a lane would seriously tie up traffic. But due to the proximity of the exits, it would be difficult to allow for traffic to get off at multiple exits. There may have to be limits on which exits HOV vehicles would be allowed to enter or exit at.
Converting Current Lanes to HOT Lanes: Unlikely. The proximity of the exits would make putting tolls in a problem, requiring a station every mile or so. Also exacerbates the entrance, exit areas problems with additional merges and lane changes. The other problem with HOV/HOT lanes is that it wouldn’t allow for traffic to stay separated past I-77 (east/southbound) due to the left exit. Traffic would have to blend or merge before that point or result in a much more costly fly-over and touchdown on the other side of the 26/77 interchange.

Most Likely Solution: Convert left lane to Atlanta-style HOV lane.
Best Solution: Realign US 378 and US 1 exits to allow for better flow of traffic. No HOT/HOV lanes.

Outside of the merges with exits, there are not problems with traffic flow itself. It also helps that I-77 takes a good portion of northbound traffic on the other side of the city, allowing for traffic to by-pass the city to the east. While there is some commuting from this area to other parts of the city, most commuting in this area is east-west, while this stretch of I-26 is primarily north-south. This is area of I-26 in the area with the least problems.

South Carolina Considers Carpool Lanes

From The State:

Lanes that will encourage carpooling on Interstate 26, Interstate 126 and Interstate 20 in the Midlands are being studied by the S.C. Department of Transportation as an option to relieve growing road congestion.

Less traveled HOV lanes — or High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes — would be set aside for vehicles traveling with at least one passenger. The quicker access those lanes provide have encouraged carpooling in states that have HOV lanes.

If such lanes are created, SCDOT is also studying whether to give drivers without passengers an option to pay a toll and use the less traveled lanes.

Last month, SCDOT began exploring this idea on a 22-mile stretch between Charleston and Summerville on I-26.

HOV lanes are being considered in the Midlands because of the growing suburban population in Lexington County, Northeast Richand and Irmo.

Sections of I-126 and I-20 cannot be widened. SCDOT says traffic will double by 2030.

SCDOT is studying HOV lanes for these four commutes:

• IRMO to DOWNTOWN. A 9.22 mile section of I-126 between Irmo and the Huger Street exit. This is one of the two most heavily traveled interstate highways in S.C.

• I-126 to I-26. A 7.22 mile section of I-26 starting at the I-126 interchange near Bush River Road and headed east toward Orangeburg

• I-20 to I-126. A 6-mile section of I-20, east of Interstate 77.

• NORTHEAST RICHLAND to LEXINGTON. A 14.45-mile section of I-20, west of the I-77 exchange in northeast Richland and stretching to west to U.S. 378 in Lexington County. SCDOT says this section of highway is heavily graveled and cannot be widened.

Ignoring the poor formatting of the article there are three areas they are studying:

1. I-26 to I-126 into downtown Columbia
2. I-26 from I-126 east toward Charleston
3. I-20 from Spears Creek Rd to US 378 in Lexington, a 20 mile stretch of road.

The next three days I’ll look at these three areas and see what it looks like now and what should be done. Here’s a general guideline:

• Increasing capacity is good
• Decreasing capacity is bad
• Market-based tolls are good
• Revenue-based tolls are bad
• Simplifying traffic patterns is good

We’ll start tomorrow off easy with I-26 Eastbound between I-126 and Gaston. It’ll be easy because it’s really simple to look at and critique.

What Robert Novak Can Teach Us About Driving (and the Media)

I saw this article on Friday and was all set to post it this week about the scourge of aggressive driving and how the elites think they can get away with anything:

Novak cited after hitting pedestrian

You can just see in the article all of the ways that the writers try to paint Novak in a bad light. His previous record. His driving off from the scene, only to be stopped by the vigilante biker. Even the caption on the photo says it all: “Novak, 77, has earned a reputation around the capital as an aggressive driver.”

It’s pretty easy to see how one could see how Novak is the bad guy. And his only excuse was that “he didn’t see him. I didn’t know he was there.” Pretty lame excuse, right?

Not so much: Robert Novak diagnosed with brain tumor

This makes it quite clear that Novak was telling the truth. But the problem now becomes whether a $50 citation is enough. There’s no reason for Novak to be on the roads right now, but he’s not going to be required to turn in his license or be medically cleared to drive. At least that’s not what it’s looking like. Heck, he might even get a handicapped sticker for his illness.

But this brings up the larger question of how to treat older drivers as the general population of the United States ages. Just this week, there was a story in South Carolina about a taxi driver who had a heart attack, while driving his taxi, and hit a telephone pole:

COLUMBIA, SC (WIS) – New information has been released in the death of a Columbia tax driver.

The driver died of a heart attack before the crash happened, according Richland County Coroner Gary Watts.

The crash happened Wednesday afternoon on Broad River Road at Greystone Boulevard.

State troopers say 54-year-old Johnny Dotson was driving the taxi when it crossed the median and hit a pole.

Dotson worked for the Blue Ribbon Taxi Company.

There was a passenger in the car who was also injured; authorities expect her to be fine.

This leaves the question of what to do with older drivers on the road as America ages. Given the political clout of America’s seniors, I doubt anything is going to get done. But there’s going to be more accidents of these types as drivers age. Anything mandatory for seniors has already been met with fierce resistance, since these are the drivers who vote and have time to pepper their representatives with phone calls. I think the first thing to keep in mind is that driving is a privilege, not a right, granted by the state. There are already restrictions on commercial drivers for health reasons. It will only take more high profile cases to start introducing restrictions on non-commercial licenses as well.