URBAN PHILOSOPHER
Conscience Laureate

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

THREE IN ONE

Three follow up stores of recent news.






(1) A  GLOWING RECOMMENDATION



Whenever I read  a story in the newspaper that has numbers in it, I first have do my own figuring to see if they are correct, and second, I want to try to take the numbers to the next level.  I was compelled (then again, “obsessed” might be a more accurate description!) to examine a story in the Sun-Times about Chicago getting new metal-halide street lights that will glow white instead of yellow.  


The story said, “So far, about 2,300 lights along Lake Shore Drive from 71st Street to Hollywood Avenue, nearly 3,000 lights along Western Avenue from Howard Street to 119th Street and about 300 miles of alleyways across the city are scheduled for replacement.”  Normal people would read that sentence and then go on to the next one.  My mathematical brain would not allow that because I then had to know what the length of those streets were, what the average spacing between the street lamps was, and how many lights would be needed for 300 miles of alleyways.
The distance from 71st Street to Hollywood is 17.52 miles.  So if there are 2300 street lights, we have an average of 48 feet between the poles.  The distance of Western Avenue from Howard Street to 119th Street is 27.32 miles.  Therefore, there are street lamps every 40 feet.  Those facts fact alone were interesting to learn (at least it was interesting for obsessive math eggheads like myself).
So then, how many street lamps would there be in 300 miles of alleyways?  I decided to use an average of 44 feet between light poles and arrived at the number of 36,000.
Luckily, federal funding from the U.S. Department of Energy is paying for the new lights and Chicago will save about $2 million a year in electricity costs.  No scandal here, just some interesting mathematical facts!
(2)  ROADKILL

On April 13th, I wrote a blog about  an Illinois bill, HB 3178,  that would amend the Wildlife code:
HB 3178 Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Wildlife Code. Provides that a person who possesses an appropriate license, stamp, or permit for fur-bearing mammals and the season for the species is open, shall be able to take or possess a fur-bearing mammal that is found dead or unintentionally killed by a vehicle along a roadway. 

I made fun of the bill because newly elected state legislator Rep. Norine Hammond (R-Macomb) had introduced the legislation (solely sponsored) as her first bill ever. I wrote, “If I were a newly elected state legislator, I would want my first bill to be something memorable in a positive light—probably dealing with babies or the elderly.  That way when I was up for re-election, I could proudly include the information on my campaign literature with a cute picture of me with an old person or toddler.”
The bill got passed, but last week Illinois Governor Pat Quinn said in his veto message that he was worried about the safety of drivers who stop to pick up road kill. He asked lawmakers to come up with a version that would include some safety measures.
What possible safety measures could be devised for people to pick up dead animals from the street that would be secure?  If a person runs out onto a road to get a pelt, a car could easily hit them.  There is no way to legislate people from being ignorant and irresponsible!  Forrest Gump told us, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

(3) Billboard License Plates



On June 16th, I wrote a blog about how Illinois State Sen. John Mulroe,
(D-Chicago) wanted the state to research if it would be feasible to sell advertising to corporations on license plates.  Mulroe wanted the Secretary of State’s office to produce a report by January 1st.

I did all the computations and figured out that the idea is a loser! 
The state of Texas sells corporate sponsored plates and in two years only 489 have been purchased!  The income to the state is miniscule.  More money was spent on implementing the plan than any revenue that came in.
Last week, Illinois Gov. Quinn signed the measure requiring the Secretary of State’s office to investigate whether such a venture would benefit Illinois.  I want to know how much will that cost the taxpayers.  I volunteered to serve on the fact-finding committee for free.  Free, not because I am stupid, but gratis because I am smart.


2 comments:

  1. Why don't you volunteer to help our country with it's money problems?

    No one knows numbers like you do. Certainly no one in politics!

    ReplyDelete
  2. My question is why exactly do we need to replace the lights? Come on Kathy, just because the US Dept of Energy is "paying for the new lights", doesn't mean we're not still paying for them. That sounds like a bureaucrat’s response. What does each new light cost, i.e. what is the breakeven point on the $2 Millions "saved" in electricity costs each year. Using round numbers, say the installation of each new light is $500 (could be more, could be less I don't know) that would mean $20,650,000 for the 41,300 lights as mentioned in the article; or 10 years to even start to realize a savings with the upgrade to the new lights. There are a few other factors to consider, like increasing electric rates, but I figure that is a wash against the on-going cost of fixing/replacing the lights.

    So, the question should be: Why do they have to replace all the lights now? Why not just replace them on an as needed basis?

    ReplyDelete