CTA Tattler

According to the linked CTA brochure, "The CTA uses about 24 million gallons of fuel annually. ... To help offset spiking fuel prices, fares will increase from $1.75 to $2 for cash-paying customers and for rail customers who use magnetic strip transit cards."

If they're using this as part of their justification for raising fares, why are the rail riders (who, to my knowledge, aren't using gas to get around, they're using electricity) going to be paying more with their magnetic strip cards than the bus riders (who are clearly using a gas-powered conveyance)?

Good point -- looks like the CTA's publicity people are just as sharp as its upper management. I'm guessing they were just trying to stick to the standard bureaucratese rate hike statement:

"Because of ${reason_out_of_our_control}, we are forced to ${gouge_gouge_gouge}."

Speaking of which: the USPS has a great one right now concerning their upcoming rate hike. Basically, they're saying "the only reason we're raising rates is because Congress is making us fund a trust."

Which, IIRC, is going to be used to keep their pension solvent.

So, if it were up to you, Post Office, you'd keep your prices where they are and hang your pensioners out to dry. Good job!

UNBELIEVABLE. The oil company Citgo (owned by the Venezuelan government, which the Bush administration strongly dislikes) offered to sell the CTA diesel fuel for its buses at a 40-50 percent discount, and the CTA turned them down.

http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2710

Can someone explain to me why it's preferable to raise fares to cover increased fuel costs than to ACTUALLY BUY CHEAP FUEL?

Kudos to Jessica Pupovac, the freelance journalist who uncovered this story. It certainly seems credible to me, knowing the CTA's customer-unfriendly track record.

Jason, you realize that enmity goes both ways, right?

There's always a catch, and in this case, it's probably a pretty nasty one. The article, of course, mentions it only briefly and in a positive light -- and even then, it's really only to follow it up with "teh poor!!!!!!1!!"

It would be interesting to see what the terms of the deal *actually* were. It would be much easier to give you an unbiased answer to your question.

I am quite aware that Hugo Chavez is not a fan of the Bush administration; nor am I. Even if this is largely a PR stunt by Chavez to embarrass the Bush administration, 1) that is not an adequate reason for dismissing the offer, given its possible benefits, and 2) Bush richly deserves the embarrassment, in my opinion, for all the PR stunts he's pulled himself.

So if there's a catch, let's hear it. I'm not so sure there is some mystery killer catch out there. Citgo worked out a similar deal in Boston to assist with low-income residents' heating oil needs, and I've not yet heard what the downside is from that arrangement.

The basic problem is that the CTA leadership does not believe in open government, efficiency, or listening to CTA riders. Chicagoans deserve better.

Ah, it's that time again....time for the CTA to screw its passengers.

With regard to the fuel, CTA has a contract with BP for ultra low sulfur fuel, as indicated in the press release. The article to which the reference was made doesn't say that Venezuela was offering that. P.S. Citgo gas used to be cheaper than BP, but isn't any more.

I don't know if the rail fare increase is justified, and that needs to be investigated. The CTA could be inflating an actually needed increase and blaming it all on fuel prices.

But it's not completely implausible. The CTA may buy electricity from Com Ed or generate its own, but either way you need fuel to do that, and someone has to pay for it.

Fuel price increases don't just affect transportation. The price you pay for food and other goods delivered includes transportation costs. If the price of truck fuel goes up, the price of stuff delivered will also go up.

I believe the chicago electricty comes from the nuclear plant in indiana does it not?

Has the price of uranium increased?

Yes, Jim C., I agree. As a non-car-owner, I've been a bit smug as the prices on gas have increased; but I recognize that I pay for the increase in smaller ways with increased food prices, "fuel surcharges" on airplane tickets, etc.

It's linguistically picky, but I might have bought it if the quote had been "To help offset RISING ENERGY [rather than 'spiking fuel'] prices," and if they had mentioned how much electricity they buy to run the trains.

Ultimately, though, it's no skin off my back, since the price of my monthly Chicago Card Plus pass is staying the same.

So now Jim C. and Kaitlin have me thinking: Does anyone know where the CTA gets its electricity for the trains? Is it ComEd? Another company? Does the CTA have its own electricity-generating plant (coal or nukes or hamsters running on wheels)?

Kaitlin, after digging around on the Exelon (ComEd's parent company) website, I found the March 2004 Environmental Disclosure PDF (search for "Environmental Disclosure")
which says that in the year ending 03/31/04, 68% of ComEd's electricity came from nuclear power (it doesn't say where the reactors are, though), 27% from coal, and the remaining 5% from biomass, natural gas and "other."

According to CTA at 45 and chicago-l.org's page on Samuel Insull, the trolley companies once generated their own electricity, using coal, but Insull (Thomas Edison's deputy) took over the elevated trains and interurbans, which were in effect then owned by Commonwealth Edison, because they were high volume customers (but, apparently, not paying ones; Com Ed was already a creditor of the bankrupt Lake Street company). That all fell apart with the Insull empire's collapse during the Depression and the Public Utility Holding Company Act, and CTA buys electricity from Com Ed.

As to where Com Ed gets its power, it is either from independent companies that bought its coal generating plants (one of which is in Indiana just over the state line) or from another Exelon unit that owns the nuclear plants, which are in Illinois. The manner in which Com Ed will buy its power in the future gave rise to the controvery over the "auction" and Martin Cohen's aborted appointment to the Illinois Commerce Commission.

Here's detail on CTA's power costs and what could happen next year if Com-Ed rates go up.

Com-Ed

Since CTA is a large commercial customer, there is also the possibility that it buys power from a third party generation source, and Com Ed only provides transmission service.

Seeing the post that intervened, I guess not.

"In fact, you CAN transfer for 25 cents using the magnetic transit card on the El."

Yes. I kinda already knew that before January 1st. It's funny to see that even the Tribune was confused. The person writing the story must be well off enough that he or she doesn't have to ride the CTA or the L to work.