Bumming, Borrowing and Biking

How I survived a Dallas 3 day weekend without a personal vehicle


I had 3 days and 3 nights planned in Big D, but no plan as to how I would get around. The need to visit 2 newborns, attend a fancy party and end up somewhere I could sleep would clearly require some kind of transportation....but a rental car? I got a headache just thinking about it.

The unfortunate circumstance of needed a car for parts of the trip would require the rental for the entire trip (blah). Of course I’d feel pressure to upgrade the insurance, given the chances of dead tree limbs falling during the first storm in months (literally). Looking to voice my frustration with Dallas’ lack of hourly car rental options, I took to social media. I doubt I got the attention of car rental company Zipcar (I have only myself to blame for the lack of Zimride network), but I did catch the eye of a family member who reminded me that I had a network of Big D people to assist me. This got me thinking that a weekend with no car would not only be cheaper, but it would make for a better story. So began my quest to live car free in Big D for a 3 day weekend. Expecting frustration and inefficiency, the results were shocking. Here’s the transportation breakdown

Friday Night:
Bummed: Friend picked me up from DFW.
Walked (in Dallas, shocking, I know): Rocco’s and Gingerman

Saturday:
Walked: Breadwinners (Breakfast Tacos)
Bummed: Ride to visit baby #1, Harper Banks
Bummed: Ride w Harper’s Dad to visit my Aunt, borrow vehicle*
Borrowed: Used the Volvo SUV to get to grandfathers house, pick up date, Crescent Ballroom for the party, (rideshare to the Ritz and back**), drop off date, and back home.

Sunday:
Borrowed: Since I had the car, went to Watermark before family lunch, then saw all Dallas family plus new addition, C. Caleb McGuirk (handed over Volvo)
Bummed: Ride back to grandfather’s house
Bummed: Ride to new sleeping location and Mexican dinner #1

Monday:
Biked: to Highland Park Chick-fil-a (coming soon to the bay, can’t happen soon enough)
Bummed: Ride to Mexican dinner #2
Borrowed: Last minute meet-up before flying back to CA

Tuesday Morning:
Bummed: Cousin was nice enough to take me to DFW

It might sound complicated, but it was all done on the fly, and so much more enjoyable that driving around by myself. I went to Dallas to see people after all, and the time in the car was just as enjoyable as the visits. Despite my willingness to help people traveling to the bay area, I consider it a burden to ask favors of others when I’m home - that’s kind of ridiculous.

My network was established and accessible without much planning, but how could this happen for everyone? What if a place like Dallas had rent by the hour vehicles like other big cities had. Then for the ridesharing moments, an established Zimride network to request rides. I know Dallas is a far ways off, but establishing innovative transportation networks isn’t impossible.

Look at the cities that are most often visited in the US: NYC, SF, DC - all places that tourists enjoy going car-free. Dallas will not compete for their tourist dollars, but if people thought of it as a well run transportation hub, maybe people would look at in in a different light. I certainly do.


*I tried to do the nice thing and fill up the Volvo before I returned it, but ended up angering my Aunt more than anything. It’s how I was raised, but I think she considered it a gift that I wasn’t accepting (love you Aunt Mel). Interestingly enough, the bill came out to be around what a Zipcar would cost for the day, which includes fuel costs.

**We planned to walk, but jumped in the car with a friend that was driving from the Crescent to the Ritz, which is located across the street, literally. Valet to valet, it’s how we roll in Uptown Dallas.

For What It's Worth - why we need gun reform, not control

A new year, a new government, and talks quickly shifted back to immigration reform. Birthright citizenship came back into the spotlight, and it appeared that the anchor baby defenders would finally have to answer the hard questions.

These talks came to a halt, and for good reason. Tucson, Arizona joined a list that no resident wants their hometown to be on. A senseless act of violence killed 6, injured 13, and left distraught families and a grieving nation wondering why it happened. It makes me physically sick to think about the amazing individuals who were injured or are no longer alive, and I cannot imagine the pain being felt by their families.

The scenario is not a new one: mentally unstable, weapon acquired, violent plan executed. A breakdown at any stage would have prevented it, but much attention will go to the weapon of choice – the gun. I understand how gun defenders argue that crazy people can use other violent means. I also feel that it is in gun rights activist's best interest to prevent violent individuals from carrying out these acts with their prized possession. In my opinion, the best way to preserve the right to own guns is to help make sure they are not used in senseless acts of violence. Make sense?

To simply say, “bad people do bad things and there's nothing we can do” is WEAK. There has to be a better way. We are a country of innovators, and that should go beyond science and technology. We are the United States of the great compromise, the balance of power, and a constitution that is solid as a rock, but flexible enough to change if needed. Our portfolio of innovation is more than Apple's latest lineup of gadgets.

I find it wrong to scream about a problem without offering a solution. Here goes:

In the recent cases of Virginia Tech, Ft. Hood and Tucson, one thing stands out that (to my knowledge) has never been highlighted: they all purchased their weapon alone. All shooters walked into a respected place of business, met the requirements of gun ownership, and walked out with the tool that they would need to carry out their disgusting plans.

Owning a gun is a big deal. There are great uses for guns (primarily rifles and shotguns), but in a civilized society, the potential negatives far outweigh the positives. The amount of responsibility that goes along with gun ownership is huge – kind of like owning a car (stick with me on this). Buying a car takes a while to process, and the bank loaning the money does a good job making sure the borrower will pay it back. It’s typical for a young person looking to buy a car to need co-signers. The young man or woman has to ask parents or well-off friends if they will assure the bank that it’s safe to make the loan, and this means the co-signers will have to put their money where their mouth is.

What if we made firearm buyers do the same thing? What if we required someone to cosign for a gun? It wouldn’t take away any rights of the law-abiding gun buyer (what hunter doesn’t have buddies?) and it would prevent a reclusive lunatic from easily purchasing a firearm from a store. Sure they could buy from the black market, but at least there’s the chance that the seller is an undercover cop.

I would be happy to cosign for a close friend who wanted to make that purchase, and I would take on the responsibility of remembering the gun if I ever thought they became unstable. It won’t completely prevent bad things from happening. I get that no one can read the minds of their best friends, but it says something if someone can get a few people to vouch for them on this type of purchase.

Like I said before – it’s a big purchase, and there should be disclosure amongst friends and community. I’m planning on becoming a gun owner, maybe soon. Regardless of the rules, I’ll be sure to take some friends.

If conservatives are demanding that the 14th amendment be reinterpreted because the current conditions call for a different policy, they need to give the second amendment the same treatment.

Change or die…

An open letter to my former employer

Quick vocab lesson:
• Ridesharing – filling the empty seats in your car (Zimride)
• Car-Sharing – renting a car by the hour or day (Zipcar)

People are a bit surprised to hear that I’ve worked in the polluting car industry before I started with Zimride. I’ll admit that I wasn’t as green-minded when I started with Ford out of college, but I also know that the automobile is an important partner in this ride-sharing concept, and we need that industry to stay healthy. This move to California has opened my eyes in many ways. I’ve had the dream of a vast rideshare network for some time, but I’m gaining more understanding of another factor that's changing things – car-sharing.

Coined “Collaborative Consumption” by Rachel Botsman, this new movement is making “loanership the new ownership”, moving from a “society of me”, to a “community of we”. According to AAA, in 2006, American spent $7,834 on auto related expenses. While Americans love their vehicles, most people try to minimize their time behind the wheel. Cars typically sit idle for 23 hours a day. Most insurance rates don’t factor in how much you drive, so that single hour of driving can be expensive. Now consider that the vehicle is either taking up your precious garage space, or sitting outside, waiting for a thief or hailstorm to smash a window.

Generation Y likes cars, but we view them as a means of travel rather than a personal possession. Vehicles (typically) are not good investments. You’d probably be better off aging wine in that extra garage space.

Most “go green” lifestyle changes require paying a premium (buying organic) or high up-front investment (solar panels) to see results (better health and lower bills). But adopters of the rideshare/car-share movement save money...lots of money. And as a bonus we use less fuel. The Gulf of Mexico should be sending us all a message. A driver blaming BP for the oil spill is like a druggie blaming the gangs for the border violence. We’re all fueling (pun intended) the exploration of oil a mile under the water surface.

What makes the new green movement in the auto industry different is the social factor. The online information collaboration, plus some awesome car-sharing technology, is allowing many two-car families to switch to one, and some people are giving up car ownership completely. Like I said before, the car companies are partners in this, but they will only benefit if they make changes soon.

If I could sit down with the current Ford management, I would provide three suggestions:

1. Innovate and downsize. Someday in this country, less will be more. We will pay a premium for the amount of gas a vehicle sips, not the monstrous size it boasts. “Speak softly and carry a big stick” was great advice for our country. I think we can apply Teddy’s words to the automaker's situation – don’t go screaming about a looming oil crisis, but have an arsenal of small and efficient cars when it happens.

2. Sharing is saving. The car company that encourages it’s customers to share their ride and split costs will create a client base that makes payments on time and trades up faster. If ridesharing takes a car off the road, let it be the competitor’s car sitting idle all day long. The advantage goes to the first mover.

3.Get in the game.
a. Become a supplier to the car-sharing companies. Car-sharing customers are paying to take test-drives. If you have a good product, they’ll talk about it, and maybe buy one someday.
b. Soon, people will own hourly rental cars and lease them out when they’re not using them. Apparently Ford and Toyota are looking into this (article), but I haven’t heard anything about buying a sharable car, or adding the package aftermarket. This will take some time to become the norm, but it could be a game changer. These cars will require plenty of maintenance and will quickly be replaced. There is money to be made here.


You probably thought the blog title is from the Web 2.0 side of the story. It’s actually from Ford President Mark Fields. He made it his battle cry while I was with the company. With great help from Alan Mulally, Fields has helped Ford in their current turnaround; I just hope he has the insight to see the even bigger change that’s on the horizon.

Ford can let the competitors encourage buyers to own a vehicle, and stick with their current slogan: Ford. Drive (and share) One.

Pascal’s Environmental Wager

I’ve been around a lot of churches, mostly in Texas, and a few in Tennessee. From what I can tell, they don’t seem like the type that cares much for the greener side of life. I’m not talking about individual members; I’m talking about the overall attitude of the church and how it doesn’t motivate the group to make changes and develop good habits for the sake of the planet/our health. I suspect that some groups fear they could lose members ($$) over it, but I think they all don’t really see it as a priority.

I don’t worry much about the Earth – what’s to worry about? Regardless of what it’s inhabitants and Mother Nature do to it, the planet will still be around (maybe less green and more brown). My motivation for environmental change has to do with the people on Earth, more specifically with their quality of life.

I’ve been to a few churches in California so far. It’s hard to find a good one when the last place I went was The Village Church. At a church in Menlo Park, I had the privilege of hearing an informal talk by Dr Kyle Van Houtan. I felt an instant connection with him. We both have the same feelings toward God and the environment, except he has advanced degrees to back them up. Without making the group feel guilty, he explained that there are places in the scripture that clearly state that we are responsible for the well being of all creatures on earth. I think it’s typically translated to say that humans are rulers over all the Earth.

My favorite point he made involved Pascal’s wager. Wikipedia defines Pascal’s Wager as:

Even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Basically, it boils down to 4 scenarios:
• If you believe in God and you’re wrong, you’ve lost nothing because you’re dead, and that’s it (no afterlife).
• If you don’t believe in God and you’re correct, the celebration for being right is short-lived because you’re dead (again, that’s it)
• If you believe in God and you’re right, you gain everything.
• If you don’t believe in God and you’re wrong, you’ve lost everything.

Logically speaking, the only way you can win is to believe in God.

Now consider a different setting for the same situation. Let’s say we live our lives believing in “being green”, that we should minimize our trash waste, properly dispose of electronics, and reduce our consumption of material products and energy/oil. And what if we later find out that it didn’t make much of an impact – what have we lost? Not much, mostly the convenience of throwing things away without thinking about it (aka the ignorance is bliss mindset).

Now what if we live our lives with no regard for our carbon footprint, thinking that our landfills will never be full, that our electronic waste never gets to our waterways, that our air quality doesn’t really impact our health; we are essentially taking the same side as the person who doesn’t believe in God. If we’re wrong, we have everything to lose – or at least our future generations will lose.

If we make small lifestyle changes, it will cost us little more than time and convenience. We will see a dramatic shift in our collective lifestyle and solve some major problems with our society. You don’t have to believe in global warming to understand that if you breathe what comes out of a car’s exhaust pipe, you die. Having less of it in the air can’t be a bad thing.

TX TRIP

TX Wal-Mart. I rarely did this when I lived here, but don't expect to do it in NorCal anytime soon.




I saw this on SNL - can't believe it actually exists.




I'll be honest, I didn't know exactly what I was doing, but I learned.




We're good at country dancing, not so good on spelling.




Most other states would call this a mega-church.




Sorry Cali, TX had the superior weather this weekend.

@GOOD Contest: Simple Idea - Big Change

In response to the tweet by GOOD magazine
@GOOD Project: Design an everyday solution to an extraordinary problem | http://su.pr/1QG9NF

Turning Plastic Trash into School Cash
By Curtis Rogers

Abridged version:

Reusable bags are great, but they are not yet the norm. Using our own bags means the cheap plastic ones will never be litter (in neighborhoods, the ocean, or anywhere else) and they’ll never be produced (lowers carbon footprint).

This idea creates an incentive for people to get into the habit of using their own bags: each time they shop with their own bag, a small donation will be given to a local school, whose logo could be printed on the grocery bag. If we can encourage kids and parents to use re-usable bags to benefit schools, they’ll be encouraged to take a good concept and convert it into a good habit. Once people get in the habit of using their own bags, they’ll realize their benefits. It’s simply easier to carry 2 canvas bags than several plastic bags.


Long Version:

The Problem

Cheap plastic bags offer few solutions, and a world of problems. In the last year, the informed public has become aware of the trash heap in the Pacific Ocean that rivals Texas in size. If this garbage patch wasn’t alarming enough, it’s hard to drive around a city without seeing white plastic litter in the roads, stuck in trees, or wrapped around barbed-wire fences. The people that throw these bags away think it’s not their fault, but too often the bags are swept up by the wind. This happens at the dump, or somewhere in the transfer process. These bags break down in the elements, but not in the good, biodegradable way. Some believe fish and other water inhabitants ingest these small pieces of plastic.

American schools are constantly in financial crisis. This is simply an ongoing problem that will not be solved easily, but one idea is a start.

The Idea

Many retailers, including Target and Albertson’s Grocery, give 5 cents back for every reusable bag that the customer uses. This provides a cash incentive, in case the “green” concept isn’t enough motivation. Many customers are either unaware of this refund, or they just can’t change their habits over a dime a week. If that money was pooled and given to a worthy cause, it could make people give it a try.

My plan is this – partner with a school system and the area retailers to give all bag refunds to the local schools. The customer could still get the cash refund, but they would also have the option to give it to the schools. This would begin with a program to have the school children selling the bags (at market prices) to their parents and neighbors. The bags could be custom printed with the school logo and numerical code. A customer that had no school preference could donate to the entire system, with the funds split evenly. Someone using their own bags could still send the money to a specific school; they’d just need to remember the code.

The initial cash generated would not be substantial, but just $100 means 2,000 bags will never be produced. This lowers our carbon footprint and keeps our communities (and world) clean. It provides a way to educate children and parents about this simple solution. Schools could have contests to see who could raise the most money. Schools could set goals and incentivize the students with special perks, such as a field day. The sight of people walking into the store with their bags will serve as a positive peer pressure to try it, and a reminder for the people who normally forget to carry them in.

Retailers and educators are very motivated to “green” their organizations. Once the program is successful at a local level, it will be easier to introduce in other areas.

Results

Fewer plastic bags created | Fewer plastic bags wasted | Promoting good habits | Promoting education


Special thanks to Will Rogers for help collaborating.

It's Not About The Bike

I don't think a lot of Lance Armstrong. His recovery from cancer was a miracle, there's no doubt about that, but as a person, I'm not impressed with his life as a ex-husband and father. I have gained respect for his ability on the bike. I recently borrowed a road bike from home, and just a brisk ride around White Rock Lake has taken me one step closer to knowing what it's like to ride competitively. I have no plans to do anything more than a ride around the lake a couple times a week, but what's more surprising than the physical exhaustion, is the dangers of the course when the tires are a half an inch thick. I've watched YouTube videos about how to change a tire, but I'm fearing that it will happen when I'm at the south end of the lake.

A flat tire wouldn't be the worst thing on earth, since I could still walk home if I had to. The real fear is that I'll have to have someone use the emergency info I put on my helmet. It's there in case I can't tell the paramedics anything, this way they know what type of blood I am.

I think I'll go give blood again, since I guess I've increased my chance that I'll need some. I hope they still think of me as a Type O Hero. Maybe the blood center has a nice spandex onesie I can buy!