That's pretty neat. I don't see any bicyclists in the picture -- it looks like it would be nerve-wracking for them. But maybe they would have their own lane somewhere.

Mike, that sounds fine. I'l respond by email in a few minutes.

"George" had the most first-place votes, but voters also could pick a second and third choice. "Capital Bikeshare" had the most votes overall.

Reminds me of the commercials for miracle cleaning tools where the actors make it look like using an ordinary broom or mop is impossibly difficult.

The business saves money, and the employees aren't pressured into bringing their personal vehicles to work. Friends of mine, a married couple, could easily get by with one car instead of two, but the guy feels he's expected to have a car available at work. I imagine that's common.

So far, nothing has been taken away from the strong and fearless, the old Masons, and that's good. Regardless of what bike facilities are available, they can still ride in the street and behave as vehicles. But unfortunately, it does seem to increase the resentment of drivers when there's a bike trail RIGHT THERE. I don't know how much that matters, drivers resent bikes in the road whether there's a bike trail or not, and those core cyclists don't care if they're resented or not.

Actually, Steve Offutt's comment reminds me that there are more and more bicycles on the road, and those are also quiet. For cyclists, it's a common hazard to have pedestrians step in front of you without looking. I assume they're depending on their hearing to warn them if a car is coming. I've also had other cyclists blow past me when I'm stopped at a red light, and I never knew they were coming. If I decided to turn right, or even point at something at the wrong moment, there would be a collision. So the issue of quiet vehicles goes beyond hybrids.

I'm with Steve O. on this, but perhaps Toyota could partner with Ford so the cars would rattle more. I kid, I kid.

Here in Baltimore, many of the existing roads are barely used by cars. One-way streets and physical barriers funnel car traffic to a few major streets. Our bike plan seems to be to paint "sharrows" on those same congested streets and call it a day. I've wondered if we couldn't adapt some of the existing, underused infrastructure to be very bike-friendly. A little help crossing major intersections, bike lanes in both directions on a street that's one-way for cars, cut a little bike path through barriers that block streets off, and you have a bike route. Residents along the route would have a street that forces cars to go slowly, which would be a good thing.

RE: WiFi on rail -- Steve's right that it's very important to make rail commuting time productive time. The area's commuter rail systems will get you to DC in about the same time as driving, but unless your destination is the rail station, you still have to get where you're going. So it's going to take longer for most people to commute by rail, but being able to use the time on the train can make up for that. WiFi isn't yet available, but I use a smartphone as a modem to connect to the internet while I'm on the MARC between Baltimore and D.C. It's not as good as working at my home computer, but I'm pretty satisfied with it. For many regular rail commuters, it would be well worth the cost of the phone and data plan to be able to catch up on their email and do other tasks that require web access during the commute. People try to do this stuff while they're driving, but they're risking their own lives, and the lives of others.

I don't think Metro is seriously considering allowing food and drink on the platforms and trains; I hope not. I ride the MARC train, where food is allowed, and I find it pretty unpleasant when a stranger sits down an inch away from me and snarfs down a hot onion sandwich and a large bag of extra-crunchy chips. And exiting a crowded Metro train won't be any easier if we have to worry about bumping people's sodas or brushing past their ketchup-covered fries. However, being able to pick up dinner to take home at the end of a Metro commute would be a convenience at stations that don't have restaurants on the same block. As Steve points out, many of them already do.

Chris, where did you find that video? I'd like to put it on my Facebook page. It's the best Bike To Work Day follow-up I've seen. I don't see any buttons on the player to take me to the source, maybe because the right edge is cut off.

About safety on train tracks, I'd like to add that when there are two sets of tracks side-by-side, it's important to know that trains don't always keep to the right like cars do. I remember a news story about two guys who were killed when they were walking up the left-side set of tracks, thinking they would see oncoming trains. They had to have heard the train coming up behind them, but they assumed it would be on the right-hand set of tracks. Nope.

Thank you; my copy and paste error left the "e" behind. It's been fixed.

The free ride program was a good idea, but difficult to execute, as I said last summer: http://www.commuterpageblog.com/2008/07/the-free-ride-i.html I've read that bus ridership did go up 4-8% on code red days while the program was in effect. It's not clear, though, whether the additional riders were motivated by the free fare, which is only $1.35 to start with. If drivers were persuaded to change their routine and take the bus when air quality was forecast to be bad, I can just as easily believe they did it out of concern for the environment. I can also believe that some of the additional riders decided on the air-conditioned bus because it was too hot and the air was too bad to walk or ride a bike. It will be interesting to see ridership numbers this season, without the program.

Congratulations to DASH on the b-day and for leading the way with Google Transit in this area. And great news about Metro releasing their data. Thanks for pointing me to it.