Tub Needs a Plug!

Ships in Harbour a Source of Air Pollution -- To be Plugged... In.

Commerce and tourism are two important parts of the economy of many communities and MetroVancouver¹ is one of those places where it plays a very important role. With that importance comes a price and there are prices in polution to be paid to do with the port.

Something many people might not consider -- when looking at the powerful freighters moored in the harbour or docked at the term; or watching the graceful cruise ship sailing under Lions Gate Bridge (image to left -- image from Dubman Tours) to dock at the passenger terminals --  is that those ship while parked keep engines running the whole time in order to run generators for electral works and other systems on the ship the whole time in port. Undoubtedly they aren't running their main engines and producing the same amount of exhaust as they would at sea, but they do produce a substantial ammount. I was surprised recently reading how substantial it is and on a percentage basis how much it might become.

The Vancouver Sun²:

Collectively, ship exhaust emissions comprise one of the biggest sources of air pollution in the Metro-Fraser Valley region - port electrification would allow marine vessels to switch off their engines
and plug into the grid instead.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer³:

But the image also has a less obvious, troubling aspect. For every day it's in the harbor, the ship's smokestacks may be spewing as much nitrogen oxide into the city's air as 12,500 cars, as much as an oil refinery.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer³:

A 2003 British Columbia study said marine vessels have produced more than a million tons of pollutants in a year, more than half the total there. The Greater Vancouver Regional District, which put together the study, predicts the marine industry will produce a growing percentage of key pollutants in that region as ship traffic grows and auto pollution is reduced.

A partial solution is to provide some sort of method for ships to connect to the electrical grid of the port that they are docked at. Metro Vancouver is towards implementing that. Port Metro Vancouver wants to see cruise ships plugged in for the 2009 summer cruise season. One of the large issues is a lack of federal money. There is a need for $4 million needed to add to contributions from Metro Vancouver port authority, the region, the marine industry, and the province.²

The system of providing shore power to cruise ships is something that was first implemented on the West Coast at Juno Alaska in 2002 and since then Seattle has provided shore power plugs to tow of their three berths. In  Long Beach, San Pedro, San Francisco and San Diego there are plans to do so as well.⁴

In addition to ports providing the infrastructure to allow ships to plug in to shore power there must also be provision for the ships to be able to take advantage of this as well. Holland America and Princess Cruise ships are able to plug-in in Seattle.⁴

Power provided by the shore electrical grid costs about the same as that generated by diesel on the ship if you discount the investment for a transformer on the ship required to plug-in to the grid.

The cruise ship industry has been a first step because it is in the public eye seem to be more willing to comply with requests. Two container terminals in the inner harbour -- I am assuming that is referring to Coal Harbour or elsewhere on Burrard Inlet between First and Second Narrows -- have the infrastructure in place for wiring to go to the dockside. The new third berth at Deltaport on Robert's Bank will have that infrastructure when it is completed.⁵

There are some hurdles to do with BC Hydro and the BC Utilities Commision in order to develop pricing schems for these customers. The port authority has formally applied to BC Hydro for the interconnecting service.

(image to left, 2005 registration of merchant ships - image from Wikipedia⁶)

There are greater difficulties in dealing with pollution issues in the shipping industry as most of the oceangoing ships are "foreign-flagged" so reducing emissions takes significant amounts of time.³ This action would help with emission issues for when the ships are travelling in and out of harbour -- and of course at sea -- as well as if they have to be running engines for power at anchor. But acting on merchant shipping is something that has to be initiated on an international level -- the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a United Nations agency.³ When regulations are put into effect by the IMO they would be enforced by individual nations and ports. The IMO was looking at revising their 1997 regulations in 2006.⁷

(image to right from Wikipedia⁶)

Plugging into shore power will solve problems of idling ships which are docked, but for ones at anchor in the harbour... Personally I wonder what solutions might there be other than improved air-pollution standards internationally. Somehow I think that providing docking stations in the harbour at anchorages so that ships could plug in would be prohibitive in cost. Perhaps tenders or barges with huge hydrogen fuel cells might provide these plug-ins? They'd be refuelled and moved where needed. Perhaps in future ships might have hydrogen fuel cells or solar panels for in port and other needs on their own? Perhaps a power barge might have fuel cells, solar panels, wind turbines, and wave power generators all in one? (I can really be a dreamer.)

Perhaps someday there might be solutions for ships at sea, but for now while we think globally we have to act locally and work on the pollution on more local selfish levels like the increase to pollution burdens in our cities.

Later!
~ Darrell

137

__________
¹Metro Vancouver is the name of what was once known as the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) or colloquially as Greater Vancouver and which Statistics Canada defines as "Vancouver CMA" (Census Metropolitan Area) "having perfectly coterminal boundaries with Metro Vancover" -- Metro Vancouver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

² "Plug-in power a key to cleaner air" Scott Simpson, Sept 4, 2008; Vancouver Sun.

³  "Air pollution from cargo ships stirs growing concern" Larry Lange, January 20, 2004; Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

⁴ John Hansen, President of the NorthWest CruiseShip Association - Vancouver Sun "Plug-in power a key to cleaner air" Sept 4, 2008

⁵ Darryl Desjardins,  Environmental programs director for Port Metro Vancouver - Vancouver Sun "Plug-in power a key to cleaner air" Sept 4, 2008

⁶ "Ship transport" Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

⁷ "Plan May Ease Air Pollution at Ports" Dan Weikel, July 6, 2006; Los Angeles Times

Unattributed images from Image*After.

Mile i Pod

Watching What You Want to Watch Where You Want to When You Want to

Alright here is something perhaps new for you... Where do your rights start when it comes to where you can watch or surf something on the privacy of your own PED (Personal Electronic Device -- Notebook or Laptop computer; iPod; Portable DVD player; mp4 player; personal video player...)?

American Airlines has an in-flight Wi-Fi service now for passengers which started on some flights August 20th¹ and there are concerns voiced by flight attendants and passengers about people using the service to access porn sites while on flights. An article on Bloomberg.com mentions that there were "a lot of complaints"¹and that the Association of Professional Flight Attendants has brought up the issue with management  They recommend that American filter its Wi-Fi service -- blocking black-listed sites -- in order to block offensive content² as I believe there are plans to screen VoIP service as well³. VoIP is Voice over Internet Protocol which basically is the primary way of making telephone calls by way of your Internet connection. (image to left* from Image*After)

There are a number of issues involved. There are the worries that passengers will complain that their neighbouring passengers are watching objectionable material on their PED. Of course there are also worries that passengers might be disturbed that their ability to access any site they could from home would be blocked in a form of censorship. More seem to be accepting of this in the case of the VoIP¹. Perhaps they can see that is in direct competition with the telephone service the airlines already charge for on flights?

Flight Attendants in addition to not wanting to get an eyeful of something they'd rather not see on someone's PED also do not want to become "moral policemen"¹ and have one more area where they might have to lay down the law. They have their hands full with other aspects of the job and likely don't want to have to settle disputes between passengers -- which might be either "they've got something objectionable on their screen" or "the person behind me keeps looking over my shoulder". Another aspect is people doing lewd things while watching explicit content.

(image to right from Image*After)

This is not something that came up just with the introduction of WiFi and Internet connectivity on airliners. This issue also comes up with whether an airline can prohibit what sorts of DVD or other content a passenger is viewing on their PED. A person can have a DVD with nearly any sort of content imaginable and pop it into a player -- whether computer or not -- and play it with no Internet involved at all. Likewise for video podcasts or even audio ones -- remember the "faked orgasm scene" from "When Harry Met Sally".

Of course these things did not appear with digital electronics. The same problems can be said about explicit magazines. Anyone could flip open the magazine of their choice on the airplane and start "reading the articles". Things like this have been a part of life for quite a while and are not really new.

Anyone who is offering the service of an Internet hookup probably has the right to say what they want to provide or block -- perhaps other than the actual providers? If  coffee shop provides WiFi connection to its customers, they probably can block access to some sites with blocking programs. I know when I go to places that provide such services the first thing I get when I try to access the Web is a screen asking if I accept the limits and risks imposed on me and that I might be exposed to by connecting to the Internet there. I can just imagine someone suing a coffee shop for a virus they picked up on their computer when the were downloading pirated game software.

(Image to left from Image*After)

I am not sure if it is a "non-problem" really. I don't know that it has been a problem with people sitting in coffee shops drinking Latte and watching XXX. For the most part regular people behave themselves in public. The times they don't seem to tend to be the times when they are getting intoxicated or high... and that is an issue on its own whether on land, "see" or airline. Control the booze and you likely won't have to worry  about controlling the people.

(image to right from Notebook Review¹¹)

Of course if you control porn sites, then you'll want to control pirate software sites too. You'll want to screen out any site that would have illegal activity on it. But what about violent video games? ...music with violent lyrics? ...content that might be deemed offensive for racial, religious, or other sexual reasons? What if someone is watching news content from an enemy country? ...or news from a country that has opposing views to your own country? What if one person is offended that the person next to them is watching religious programming?

I think that often the answer given by peace officers is "then don't look" -- though sometimes it is hard when it is presented nearly on your own lap. Luckily nearly everyone has the decency to use headphones or earphones. I think that rather than blocking things, it perhaps should all be taken care of on a case by case basis.

I was remembering back when I was in university and calculators were a novel thing still, but becoming commonplace. There were worries about people cheating by seeing the numbers on someone else's calculator. I think that manufacturers foresaw this because it wasn't very long before calculators -- at least scientific and engineering calculators -- had recessed numbers so that you could only read the display from where you were using it. If you were to the side at all you couldn't read the numbers.

Anti-glare shields that came out for early computer monitors (image to left - image from Ergo in Demand) also had this function and it was considered to be a feature for offices where you wouldn't want confidential information seen by people nearby. With some older laptops it was difficult to see the screen unless you were in front of them. But because many people want to share what they show on their laptop screen, many consider it a bonus to have the screen viewable from a broad range of angles -- otherwise there would be less problem with neighbours seeing what you see.

But there are purposes for such a product for notebooks especially and perhaps there are such products out already... Yup There is a 3M PF14.1 - notebook privacy filter! (image to right - image from CDW Canada)

Perhaps though there might be a market for disposable/resusable "blinders" for computers? Perhaps the airlines might offer them for safe viewing? They could also double as glare shields from the cabin lighting.

Protection provided for your viewing pleasure.

Later!
~ Darrell

135

__________
¹ "American Air Attendants Urge Fiters to Bar Web Porn (Update3)" Mary Schlangenstein, Sept. 10, 2008; Bloomberg.com: News.

² "Porn on a plane: Flight attendants fret over inappropriate Web surfing" David Carnoy, Sept. 12, 2008; Crave, the gadget bog -- CNET, news.cnet.com.

³ "Airlines planning to filter, censor in-flight 'Net access" Jacqui Cheng, Dec. 24, 2007; From the News Desk -- ars technica.
"Porn on a plane! Concerns raised over naughty in-flight WiFi" Jacqui Cheng, Sept. 12 2008; From the News Desk -- ars technica.

¹¹ "Coffee Shop Laptop Zombies" Andrew, May 23, 2007; Notebook Forums and Laptop Discussion - Notebook Review

* Images of airliners not intended to represent American Airlines or specific airline

Of Belts and Books, Briefcases and Backbacks... Part-1

Belting One On -- Front Seat Bad-Backseat Good

I come from a reckless generation... perhaps lucky we were wreck-less.

When I grew up, cars seldom had seatbelts as standard equipment -- as I mentioned in "Wandering Wags: Travelling Time With Your Dog" -- with our first car with seatbelts being a '66 Meteor. (image to right -- image from "Winged Messenger - Canadian Cars") That is referring to our Parent's car, that is. Our '72 Mercury was the first care that had convenient seatbelts and we only really started regularly using them towards 1976 or so. Those were such reckless times...

Back then too, my Sister and I considered it a treat to ride up in the front seat with Dad. There really were only a few times when that happened: When Mom stayed home -- she didn't drive and so the passenger seat was Mom's seat; when we went on a long highway trip and my Sister got carsick -- and Mom would have her sit up front with her; when there were more than two guest passengers in the car meaning that the back seat was full so there'd be three up front; and when on a few rare occasions when the trunk was so full of stuff -- like when Grandpa gave Dad a side of beef one Christmas -- that the suitcases took up the half of the back seat that my Sister normally sat on and so she had to sit in the front seat. Those were such reckless times...

(image to left, 1972 Mercury Monterey -- image from "Down On The Street")

I won't say my Parents were neglegent. Things were different in the 60's and early 70's. My Parents were quite strict actually that my Sister and I were to stay seated in the car while we travelled and that we were not to be standing on the seat like it seemed at least half the parents let their children do. They also didn't let us hang out the window like the family dog either like it seemed some families did. Even our dogs were required to keep their heads inside the car... true they were allowed to have their front paws on the back of the front seat so their nose could get out the window, but they had to keep their head in the car.

As time went on, accelerated -- perhaps with my defensive driving courses which my parents thought it was a good idea to have -- I began to figure it a good idea to wear a seatbelt. I worked to get myself into the habit of wearing one which was enforced in Driver Training. I decided I would always wear one driving and that it became part of my driving ritual when I got my first car when I was 17. I have always worn one since if there was a seatbelt and if it was at all possible or prudent. On some jobs as a security officer doing patrols on the dock it wasn't prudent. Driving without wearing a seatbelt feels naked to me.

Airbags seemed like a good idea to me. I did worry about people deciding not to wear seatbelts becausethey had airbags, but... people will be people. I do recall there being discussions early on about the dangers of airbags, but airbags were only found on upscale cars as options. Issues about dangers of airbags to children and smaller adults were something that were in the hands of the people who opted for the airbags. Things were different when airbags started becoming the norm. (airbag deployment image to right -- image from "GarageLibrary.com")

That is history. Since then seatbelt use, like helmet use on motorbikes and now bicycles, has become manditory and enforced by law. (image of child in bicycle helmet to left from "HAMAX") There have been stricter and stricter regulation on seating for children riding in motor vehicles. At first the regulations did rankle me because I was a poor student and though I had a car never had much money and I tended to taxi around friends who did not have cars yet had children. I could not afford to buy carseats for children or modify my older though well loved and cared for cars. Still since then there have been put into place resources for low income families to buy carseats for their kids even if they don't have a car so that they have them when it comes time to transport their children.

I think that carseats are a good idea, just like I think seatbelts are. (image to right from U.S. Census Bureau) I think that other safety equipment like airbags are good things too.

But there is something that has been bothering me... it is about the whole thing of it being a bad thing for children to be in the front seat of a car. I can agree that if the airbag is dangerous to children and small adult, that a child should ride in the backseat. ...but... I think there is a problem -- the problem not being with where the children ride, but why they must ride there. I think that the problem is with airbag design and rather than moving children and small adults out of the front seat, airbags should be made safer!

I see many arguments about the back seat being inherently safer from objects penetrating the interior of the car or crumple damage. There is validity there, and long, long ago I recall Mom talking about the front passenger seat being called "the suicide seat" -- though a lot of that was from pre-seatbelt days due to the fact that the front passenger would be catapulted through the windshield since they didn't have anything in front of them to stop them. The driver had the steering wheel and the back seat passengers had the back of the front seat to stop them from hurtling forward... remember this was before people so regularly wore seatbelts.

Okay so there were more dangers in the front passenger seat. That is especially true I know when nobody wears seatbelts. I think though where the argument wears thin is that if the back seat is safer... why let even the driver sit in the front seat? I know that sounds stupid. But if the seat is dangerous, then should anyone be allowed to sit there? Couldn't the front seat be made as safe as the back?

(image to left of forward facing car seat from "AAP -- Car Safety Seats: A guide for Families -- 2008")

I think in part the airbags and shoulder harness in the front seats -- especially for the passenger seat -- were to increase that safety, as were things like padded dashboards and so forth.

I think rather than all the propaganda to push children to the back seat, airbags that are not dangerous to them should be designed! There is a flaw in the airbags if they injure. I would have thought more research would have been done in the time since they were invented to solve this problem. There are better airbag systems coming out now and in development, but I rather think that kids are being asked to sit in the back of the bus.

Later!
~ Darrell

130.

Where's the Caboose?

Road Trains!

You might think that reducing fuel costs is a new thing which has been spurred on only in recent times by talk of the environment and increased oil prices -- but any freight company owner or manager who has any idea of keeping their business profitable has been interested in this all along. I can imagine that even in the days of the original teamsters -- the ones who drove and took care of teams of horses and possibly oxen -- kept their eyes on how many coins it cost to haul oats.

One of the ways that were used in bygone days -- probably before the days I remember of my Dad's trucking in the 60's and 70's -- was to pull more than one trailer with a tractor. When I say tractor, you would possibly say "truck" or perhaps "articulated lorry". "Tractor" being a term for the truck that pulls a "semi trailer truck unit". That basically means that the "trailer" doesn't have front wheels of its own, but instead rests its weight on the back axles of the "tractor". That is done through a pivoting plate called a "fifth wheel".

Here is a shot of a "Semi" or "semi trailer truck" from the same company my Dad drove for many years ago in the 1970's. (image to right -- image from Ken Goudy's Collection)* I think most you are familiar with those sorts of rigs on the highways nearly anywhere in the world.

Something that some might be less familiar with are multiple trailer or semitrailer units which are called different things in different places. In some places they are called "Road Trains" in others: "Truck Trains" "Doubles" "Triples" "Rocky Mountain Doubles" "Turnpike Doubles" "Turnpike Triples" "Queen City Triples". Those are some of the Canadian names for them, I guess legally they tend to be called Longer Combination Vehicles (LCVs), Extended Length Vehicles (ELVs), or Energy Efficient Motor Vehicles (EEMVs).

In Canada and the US you get A, B, and C-train variants which can be two and more rarely three trailer units. The three designations refer to how the trailers are attached to each other. Some places in Canada and the US allow them and some do not and there are differing restrictions as to just where and when they can travel; who can operate them; and how big they can get.

In the first half of the 1970's and perhaps later '60's my Father drove A-train doubles through the Rocky Mountains between Calgary, AB and Vancouver, BC as well as A-train triples between Calgary and Edmonton, AB. He was driving for B-Line Express at the time though with a bit more modern equipment than in this picture of single axle tractor with twin pups. (image to left -- image from Ken Goudy's Collection)* Dad always drove a tandem tractor and often both trailers had tandem axles too -- although the converter had only the single axle if I recall correctly.

Dad mostly hauled hanging beef from Calgary to Vancouver. That meant a load of beef hanging in refrigerated trailers from the roof of the trailer on hooks. You have to keep in mind that the entire load hung from the ceiling of the truck and could swing. Dad just called them "A-trains" or "Doubles" at the time, but I think today they would call them "Rocky Mountain Doubles" like the one to the right. (image to right -- image from Rigs, part of Bear's Trucking Glossary)** The "Triples" might have looked something like this to the left. (image to left -- image from Rigs, part of Bear's Trucking Glossary)** I wasn't sure if the "pups" were single or tandem axle trailers.

That was back in the 60's and 70's though and it was done because it was more efficient from the viewpoint of wages, equipment, and fuel. Perhaps you might recall there was an "energy crisis" back then too...

But that is history. Still history really isn't something to forget and really we are no different from people back then. (Some of us are people from back then.) Some of use were already environmentally conscious back then as well.

These "Truck Trains" or "Road Trains" are nothing compared with what they do in places like Australia. I don't mean everywhere in Australia. Their cities are no different than cities in Western nations anywhere else, they'd be too congested for even the shortest "trains". (There have been shown to be benefits to using short tractor-trailer units in cities rather than larger body-trucks/lorries though.)

In the "Outback" just like in Canada's North long straight stretches beg for interesting transportation solutions. This is where "Road Trains" come into their own and where they really were invented... (image to right from 009's Car Blog) Though this is even just small compared to some of the record setting ones in Australia that I have read about in another blog: Youngistan - Incredible Road Trains!!!

While more typical road trains might top out at 200 tonnes with the majority being between 80 and 120 tonnes - 80 - 120 being similar to Canadian and US sizes.

Monster trains in the outback in Guinness Book of Records in 1999 was for 45 trailers and 603t (601m long) in 2003 87 trailers (1,235m long) (no weight given) in 2006 112 trailers (1,474m long).

It all started out with someone buying a very powerful army surplus tractor and a bunch of army surplus "Bren-gun carriers" and wanting to carry more bulls across the outback.

Wikipedia - Road Train, History***

Australian Kurt Johansson is recognised as the inventor of the road-train. After transporting stud bulls 200 miles (320 km) to an outback property, Johansson was challenged to build a truck to carry 100 head of cattle instead of the original load of 20. Provided with financing of a couple thousand pounds to develop the vehicle, two years later his first road train was running.

Something different are the "Trackless Train" used in parking lots or fairgrounds for pedestrians or similar to the luggage trains in airports. There are also bus systems which actually put buses on track-like systems and articulated bus systems. But I will talk of them elsewhere.

It is a way to reduce the amount of fuel used in transporting goods on the highways, though it does take a bit of planning so that these long rigs can mix with other traffic.

Later!
~ Darrell

110

__________
* "Ken Goudy's Collection", Ken Goudy's Canadian Trucking Pictures -- Canadian Carrier Collection; "Hank's Web Site".

** "Bear's Trucking Glossary"

*** "Road Train" Wikipedia

Grumpy Old Man - One Side Please

Making My Way... Out of the Elevator

I'm not coming out of the closet, but sometimes it can be difficult to come out of the elevator. ...bus, or rapid transit train. For some reason people can't grasp the concept that things move smoother if you give folks a chance to exit the "vehicle" before you enter.

An elevator is a confined space without much room to move around in. It is difficult to squeeze around people in the elevator and much easier to move around inside if you let the folks who are trying to get out -- get out -- before you try to enter the car. Standing nose against the door waiting for the elevator to arrive really doesn't help either. You don't really get onto the elevator any faster and if there are people trying to get off, you are simply getting in each other's way. If you merely step back a step or two from the doors while you wait, the people can get out and you can easily step in.

The same goes for getting on and off buses if the doorway is used for both entering and exiting. Here the front door is intended only for entering the bus with the exception of people who are in mobility aids; the elderly; and people otherwise who would have problems making their way to the back of the bus. During crowded times this can include people who simply are at the front of the bus and can not make their way through the standing crowds in the aisles to the rear exit doors.

Our rapid transit trains, the SkyTrain, has doors similar to those on elevators although larger amounts of people might be flowing through at any one time. If people only stand back a little bit from the train as the doors open, then people can exit simply and quickly and others can enter the train just as simply and quickly. Otherwise it is a packed jumble and people might even get caught on the train unable to exit before the train leaves the station. It gets even more complicated if people are trying to exit with a stroller, wheelchair, or mobility aid.

I have seen people with strollers and baby carriages line up with the front of the battering ram... I mean stroller nearly against the door so that nobody can get out and even make room so that same stroller pusher can get into the SkyTrain car.

So if people just stand back a couple steps when the doors open and allow people out, there will be room to slip into the elevator, bus, or train easily. So one side please, make room.

Later!
~ Darrell

108.

Wandering Wags

Travelling Time With Your Dog

I was going to title this Pet Pilgrimages, but my experiences in life lead mainly to travelling with the family dog so I figured best to write about what you know at least a little about. While I am on that topic -- don't take my word as gospel! Ask your Veterinarian, SPCA, Groomer, or other Pet Professional for advice and take that before you take mine -- Please! I know they should have good advice and information. I imagine that should include "Kennel Clubs" and Breed Associations, though not being an expert I can be missing some... and I think in the US, what we call the SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) is called the ASPCA.

Perhaps we have always been lucky in our family, but our dogs always travelled well. We never had a problem taking them on the highway with us on our vacation trips and quite often those trips could be 2000 mile round trips. (That was in the days the Mile was King which is why I used miles... that's over 3200 kilometres.) That was the round trip between Calgary and Southern Manitoba where my paternal Grandparents lived and it crossed the very hot and dry Canadian Prairies in Summer and equally frozen and windy same Canadian Prairies in Winter. As a child I much preferred the Winter crossing -- I didn't do too well in hot temperatures -- although with a parent who smoked in Winter with the car closed in we were all fairly well cured by the time we reached our destination. (I wonder how many packs 20 or so hours of second hand smoke is worth?)

Those were on simpler times, many of them at a time when seat belts were options on North American Cars and no thought was given to dogs or children being lose in the back seat. (or front seat for that matter) Mom would fret about the dog sticking his head too far out into the 80mph windstream... (sometimes faster) in summer worrying that the dog might take a hit from a big bug like a bee and the dog would end up being content with his head on Dad's shoulder while driving getting not quite so much air. I would worry most about the dog getting lost in a strange town. Dad was confident that the Dog would always come when he called him. We never did lose a dog. (A golden lab, a long haired corgi, a Chihuahua-Pekinese, cross, and a miniature poodle, over the years.) We never had problems with car-sick dogs or whining and crying or barking in the car. Maybe we were lucky or maybe we just acclimatized the dogs gradually with short trips that most often did not end up at a groomer or vet.

Today though we are a bit more conscious of things. They even have seat belts for dogs! -- I hear they don't allow children in the front seat any more though. I'm thinking that they'll be having us kennel the children in the near future.*

I totally agree with the concept of having a kennel for the dog. Dogs are den animals and so having a den in the home can be a comforting thing I am told. A nice cozy kennel with favoured blankets and cushion (I almost said pillow! We all know that never happens.) and a place for some toys. We never had a kennel for our dogs, but I think there is provision for food and water in the too. There are appropriate sizes for the different breeds too and if you ponder getting a nearly 50kg dog plus kennel into a car, van, SUV, or truck -- the dog has 4 legs and can jump up and into the kennel after it is in the vehicle. Then not only is there a secure place for the pooch that you can strap down, but the dog has their own home den with them and there is a place for the dog to stay at your destination as well.

Kennels are also well ventilated and while there are some cage sorts there are others that have vents that can be opened or shut. Regardless you don't keep the dog locked into the kennel the full time either, just as you wouldn't keep a child locked in a small room.

For shorter trips, I know there are harnesses which are intended to allow you to link your dog to the car's seatbelt system. I recall ones that allow limited movement allowing the dog to sit or lay down, but not run around and if there should be an accident keep them from being hurtled about the car. I think I might invest in a harness style collar though rather than the simple neck one. I have also seen systems for the backs of trucks which allow larger breeds more freedom while still restricting them and keeping them safely in the box of the truck. I note that professionals tend to use kennels still and if I recall K-9 squads actually have the back of the car set up as a kennel?

Most important is not to leave the dog in a car on even a warm day. The temperature will climb quicker than you would ever expect to levels lethal for a dog -- or for a child or elderly person for that matter. This is even with the window cracked a bit for ventilation. Dogs can not survive the heat that a Human can. Their panting is not as efficient as our sweating. When it gets hot, canines in nature have already sought out cooler spots with good ventilation and a source of water. That is one of the natural instinctive ways that animals survive heat. A dog in a car can not do that. Dogs, children, and the elderly die each year in cars due to heat on days that you wouldn't consider part of any heatwave or even excessively hot. I would imagine that cats and other small animals might even have it worse.

The last horse trailer I saw had air conditioning! Of course it was for the horses of the police department.

It does make me wonder if there is a market for air conditioned kennels...

Still, not all dogs travel well, for some it would be a gift to put them up in a canine kennel for the vacation time. They might fret and whine a bit when you leave them, but from my experience they tend to just settle in for a wait after if they are the sort who really miss you. For the ones you might have to sedate to travel with, maybe better they nap and mope a bit in a kennel rather than having to tranq and sedate them for a journey which might make them sick. For some dogs it might even be an adventure. I think it would be a good idea to know how they treat animals there and if you are comfortable leaving your dog in their care. Then at least there is an option if you absolutely must leave your dog -- even if normally you include them in on vacation trips.

Traditionally some people also have had house sitters who were also pet sitters. Often they were neighbours, nephews, and nieces who were responsible enough -- sometimes under supervision of an adult -- to come into your own house to take care of your dog. I have done it a few times. Traditionally too some people would leave their pets with a friend or relative for the duration of the vacation.

Regardless of what your plan is, do that -- plan! Do more than throw a cottage cheese container and bag of kibble in the back seat before making sure you have the leash that works with the collar. Do your homework, find out about hotels; motels; relatives allergies; shots and paperwork needed if you cross the border or even enter a national, or provincial park; special booking and requirements if you travel by boat, plane or train; and so many other things...

Consider this, even on a day trip -- if you plan on eating in a restaurant, where will the dog be? If it is anywhere between spring and fall and not a rainy day it will be too hot to leave the dog unattended in the car, someone might have to dog-sit while others are in the air conditioned restaurant. Some picnic grounds might even be a problem. How about getting the dog across a lava hot parking lot?

Things to consider. We normally were travelling to Grandma and Grampa's farm and only had to worry about keeping the dog out of the barn and cow pies.

Later!
~ Darrell

88.

__________
*Yah, yah, I know why children are not allowed in the front seats of cars. I do not agree with it... I think there is something wrong if airbags are too dangerous to allow children to safely ride in the front seat. But that is another article.