By Jane Dwinell

Ever wonder what it would be like to live in a really small space with just the basics? Ever wonder what it would be like to do this with your sweetheart? Could you stand to be together in such tight quarters, doing all the activities of daily living along with all the fun things you enjoy? Well, if you have a hobby that takes up a lot of space or needs tons of equipment (or you don't want to be that close with your loved one), living in 250 square feet may not be for you. But it is for me.

by Jane Dwinell and Dana Dwinell-Yardley

Worried about high gas prices affecting everything from food to fun? Wondering what to do about your summer vacation? Try having one close to home. There are so many things to do in Vermont — so many reasons people from everywhere else to want to visit here. It’s your turn to discover Vermont.

The story of the Douglas Administration's delay in the purchase of new passenger rail cars that I broke last week and updated last Saturday continues to spread through the Vermont media.

The Brattleboro Reformer covered the story on Wednesday, and they talked to the director of the Vermont Rail Advocacy Network, who points out the importance of moving expeditiously on the rail cars:

But rail advocates say Gov. James Douglas has simply prioritized roads over trains.

"Perhaps the real issue is that Gov. Douglas has proposed (and the Legislature approved) issuing $10 million in bonds for road construction projects," said Christopher Parker, executive director of a new nonprofit group called the Vermont Rail Advocacy Network, in an e-mail. "The problem with the delay is that it risks losing a $2 million grant from Amtrak."

He said the plan, if ever implemented, would be to add runs in the morning and at night, when traffic is heaviest on Interstate 91.

Bruce Johnson has also written a story on the passenger rail cars; look for it in this Sunday's Times Argus / Rutland Herald. (UPDATE: The story is here.)

The Reformer also published an editorial on Thursday, comparing the train service in Brattleboro in 1938 with 2008. The nickel version: There were six departures from Brattleboro to New York City in 1938, vs. one today. And there's only a 25% chance that you'll get to New York within 30 minutes of the scheduled arrival time today. Going east and west from Brattleboro by train is difficult or impossible now, too.

I haven't found answers to the questions outstanding at the end of my previous post. Maybe next week...

UPDATE: Nancy Schulz, Executive Director of the Vermont Bicycle and Pedestrian Coalition, sent out the following email today:

VBPC member and volunteer David Cain is taking the initiative to gather information and supporters to address the issue of bicycles on Amtrak trains. A major obstacle is Amtrak's refusal to allow bikes on their trains to and from New Haven, CT that make connections with the Vermonter. If this specific issue is one that energizes you, then please consider contacting Dave directly to find out how you can help. You can reach Dave by sending an email message and please "cc" me. Thanks.

My Thursday's post on the Douglas Administration's decision to delay purchases of new Amtrak cars has stirred things up some. I started getting some calls returned Friday, and John Dillon of Vermont Public Radio began digging into the story. Dillon's story aired Friday afternoon.

Over the course of the day, my understanding of the story changed quite a bit. And there were quite a few calls among the highest levels of Vermont state government, as the various actors scrambled to get on the same page.

As I explained Thursday, VTrans Operations Director Sam Lewis told the Vermont Rail Advisory Council earlier in the week that the Douglas administration was waiting to move forward on purchasing new Amtrak trains until the Debt Affordability Committee reviewed the purchase in October. The cars will save the state money, burn less fuel, and allow two departures a day for the Vermonter run from White River Junction and southward.

When asked at the meeting who flagged the Amtrak car purchase for review by the Debt Affordability Committee, VTrans Operations Director Sam Lewis said it was the Secretary of Administration (Mike Smith) and the Secretary of Transportation (Neale Lunderville).

John Zicconi, spokesperson for the Agency of Transportation, called me Friday morning, returning a call I'd made before posting Thursday to Mike Smith. Zicconi's explanation was consistent with Lewis' comments. He explained that the Amtrak car purchase would require the $1.8 million in bonding that was in the 2010 budget. If the state decided after its 3-year trial period that it wanted to keep the cars, it would require additional bonding to pay for the $18+ million purchase. The Debt Affordability Committee reviews bonding decisions, he explained, and if there are more projects that require bonding than the state can afford to take on in debt, the Debt Affordability Committee makes an advisory statement about how to spend the money.

I asked him whether it would have been an option for the administration to just buy the new trains and present the Debt Affordability Committee with a fait accompli. He replied, "We think it's wise to let the Debt Affordability Committee weigh in."

Meanwhile, Zicconi explained, VTrans can proceed with preparations for the Amtrak train purchase. For example, they needed to perform a new cost-benefit analysis on the Amtrak purchase to present to the Debt Affordability Committee, so they could have the information in their deliberations. "We need to get our ducks in a row so we can answer their questions," he said.

Friday afternoon, quite a different story emerged.

At Tuesday's meeting of the Vermont Rail Advisory Council (VRAC), VTrans revealed that the Douglas administration had put up a new hurdle in the state's race to purchase new Amtrak cars. The state-of-the art train sets -- lighter cars with smaller engines -- will save fuel and double the departures each day on the Vermonter route, which runs from St. Albans to Brattleboro and on to New York and Washington.

Last year, the legislature authorized the purchase of the new trains, which have not been used in the US yet. Amtrak was so eager to see these new trains in service that it was prepared to contribute money toward their purchase and postpone future increased charges to Vermont for running the train.

Unfortunately, the Attorney General and Treasurer nixed the deal. The legislation contained a "highly unusual" clause, directing that the Treasurer and the Attorney General must be satisfied that the manufacturer could sufficiently guarantee that it could buy back the cars at 90 percent of cost after three years. The AG and Treasurer weren't sure that the young company, Colorado Railcar, would be financially capable of the repurchase in three years, so the deal fell through.

The legislature took a crack at it again this year, with only the Treasurer in the review loop and less strict language about his assignment. Sam Lewis, Director of Operations at the Agency of Transportation, reported to the Vermont Rail Advisory Council on Tuesday that the project's fate is once again uncertain. Because the legislature also passed other bills requiring bonding, the state's Debt Affordability Committee is now scheduled to review the Amtrak purchase before the state moves ahead with it. The committee doesn't meet until the fall.

Members of VRAC were outraged that this long-delayed project would be delayed yet again.

As James Howard Kunstler likes to say: "America has a rail system that makes the Bulgarians look good."

An independent Vermont will need reliable rail transportation more than ever in the years ahead.

Let's hope Robert Ide is as good as Kirk makes him out to be in this SEVEN DAYS article.

He sure looks like he knows his Farmall.

Rob Hopkins' The Transition Handbook is a new, tremendously useful, and inspiring book on how to move, as the subtitle says, "From oil dependency to local resilience."

Richard Heinberg has spent a lot of time visiting Transition Towns in the UK, and he describes the movement as looking "more like a party than a protest march."

And it is a party, not a protest. The Transition Town philosophy is about making change where you are, with the people around you, not pressuring someone else to make the change for you.

Here's one small way this book has helped me:
I give a lot of peak oil slide shows, and I was intrigued by his suggestion for a "do-it-yourself" peak oil slideshow. You create the slideshow by printing up each slide on a piece of 8.5x11 paper, with circles and arrows (or, in any case, a paragraph) explaining the slide on the back of each one, and then hand the cards out to the audience. Each person's job is to meet every other person in the room and explain the slide he or she has. By the time everyone has met everyone else, they have had quite an introduction to peak oil. It really gets people invested in the ideas and helps them get to know each other!

I haven't tried the full DIY slideshow yet, but the idea has inspired me to cut off the final part of my standard slideshow and replace it with a visioning exercise about the future of Vermont. I then ask the audience to break up into small groups and share their visions. The room comes to life when they do it!

Though the book came out in March or so in the UK, it's not scheduled to be distributed in the US until September.* Normally, I try to buy books at local bookstores. This one is too good to wait that long for. You can order it online, with quick and surprisingly inexpensive shipping from the UK.

When I began blogging here last September, I wanted to get out the word about peak oil--what it is, and when it is likely to hit us--as well as describe ways to relocalize production of energy, food, materials, etc. Peak oil, the point at which world oil production reaches an all-time maximum before declining, is a watershed for an industrial civilization that depends on oil for everything. Even something as basic as flour for our daily bread is generally transported thousands of miles before we eat it.

Since then, peak oil has become something of a meme. World Public Opinion, in a survey conducted in 15 countries and published in April, found that 70% of those surveyed believe that we're at the end of the age of oil as a primary fuel source. In the US, it's 76%. Corporate media outlets like the Wall Street Journal now feature regular articles about peak oil, like this one about how even the Panglossian International Energy Agency is sobering up about future oil availability. Business Week and National Geographic are running informed articles on peak oil, and MSN.com recently explored, "What if gas cost $10 a gallon?"

The specific term "peak oil" is probably still unfamiliar to most people, but it's the concept that is important, and I think most people get it now. Or they at least get that "the party's over" soon, even if they aren't familiar with projections about how fast it's likely to be over and don't know how to respond.

Interestingly enough, that same World Public Opinion survey showed that 57% of people in the US believe that government policy is based on the premise that oil will be our primary energy source for the foreseeable future. The people know that our government is off track, and our legislators seem determined prove them right.

by Jane Dwinell and Dana Dwinell-Yardley

So often people rely on "experts" of every kind — to tell them what to do, what to buy, what to eat, what to worry about, what to fear, and what to do to protect themselves and their families from all of the above. We think that reliance on all these "authorities" certainly does one major thing — suffocates all common sense! Here are ten things we think everyone should know, ten things that can help restore common sense to our society:

1. Know your food