I thought about taking public transportation to work three days this week but decided against it on Wednesday because I planned to go to the gym after work and didn't want to get home too late (it's a bit slower than driving). So Tuesday and today I took the train to work, but Wednesday I drove and got a flat tire. Hmm, maybe there's a message in that.
Jokes aside, I'm proud that I took the train twice this week. When summer rolled around, I started sporadically taking it again, as I'd done last summer, and this week is my first double. If I'd gone for the triple maybe that mysterious nail or whatever it was wouldn't have lodged itself in my front passenger tire. But luckily the tire just needed to be patched and not replaced. It took a half hour after work and I got to the gym late (irony noted), but all in all it wasn't so bad.
What I really learned this week is that I need to plan out my public transportation days better. I forgot about my book club meeting when I decided to take the train on Tuesday, so by the time I got home I was going to be late so I decided not to go. Then today I planned to run from my office to the train station after work, which saves time because I get my exercise as I'm commuting home. But I'd forgotten that I'm starting tomorrow at a school and needed to bring some stuff home with me. So instead of heading out for a three-mile run at 6 p.m., I sprinted to the bus stop (carrying my bag with my unused running clothes in it). I got stuck in the no-bus dead zone and caught a 16 bus 10 minutes later. I swear that was the slowest bus ever so by the time I got home I was hungry but still had to run. I definitely got that message. I'm not going to take the 16 bus in the evening because it's so unpredictable. It saves time to run to the train station and take the Red Line to the Blue line. So next week, I'll try to plan better.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Do my actions really make a difference?
That's a common question in the debate over protecting the environment and stopping global warming. The refrain we hear is yes, everyone's actions make a difference. Drive less. Take shorter showers. Use reusable bags. Recycle. These are the actions I've discussed in my blog as I've chronicled my attempts to "do my part." They're the changes that while small and fairly easy, make me feel good that I'm making things better. Today after taking a quick shower, I took the train to work. I ate lunch, pulling a cooked chicken sausage out of a reused Ziploc bag. I bought a can of Sprite and meant to recycle it (oops, I left it behind but I have faith that someone else recycled it instead of throwing it away), and then I took the train home at the end of the day.
Then tonight I read an interesting article on alternet.org, a website featuring stories with alternative and progressive viewpoints that don't get covered in the mainstream press. The article, "Taking Shorter Showers Doesn't Cut It: Why Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change," written by Derrick Jensen, an environmental activist, and originally published in Orion Magazine, had some sobering statistics about how our individual actions make little difference in the grand scheme of things. As the headline suggests, taking shorter showers won't save our water supply because 90 percent of water use is by agriculture. I thought a valid criticism was that An Inconvenient Truth focuses only on the solutions individuals can take to stop global warming. This statistic summed up Jensen's argument well: "Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide."
The writer didn't intend to leave us feeling hopeless, he wants to wake us to the reality that we need to change our society and not just our individual habits. So tonight will I leave my computer turned on because it doesn't make a difference? No. But at the same time I can feel less guilty about the bath I want to take.
I'm not sure what to take away from this. I feel good about the changes I've made to my lifestyle because it's better than doing nothing but I'm not working toward larger, community-wide changes. I think cities (or even better, the state and country) should require businesses to charge customers for plastic bags, which would get more people using reusable bags, but I'm not writing letters or attending city council meetings or joining activist groups to fight for it. It's easier to be responsible for just myself and blog once a week about my latest small victory or stumble. In the short term, it's refreshing to know I don't have to carry the burden of the world on my shoulders. But in the long term, am I going to make a bigger commitment? It's something for all of us to think about.
Then tonight I read an interesting article on alternet.org, a website featuring stories with alternative and progressive viewpoints that don't get covered in the mainstream press. The article, "Taking Shorter Showers Doesn't Cut It: Why Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change," written by Derrick Jensen, an environmental activist, and originally published in Orion Magazine, had some sobering statistics about how our individual actions make little difference in the grand scheme of things. As the headline suggests, taking shorter showers won't save our water supply because 90 percent of water use is by agriculture. I thought a valid criticism was that An Inconvenient Truth focuses only on the solutions individuals can take to stop global warming. This statistic summed up Jensen's argument well: "Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide."
The writer didn't intend to leave us feeling hopeless, he wants to wake us to the reality that we need to change our society and not just our individual habits. So tonight will I leave my computer turned on because it doesn't make a difference? No. But at the same time I can feel less guilty about the bath I want to take.
I'm not sure what to take away from this. I feel good about the changes I've made to my lifestyle because it's better than doing nothing but I'm not working toward larger, community-wide changes. I think cities (or even better, the state and country) should require businesses to charge customers for plastic bags, which would get more people using reusable bags, but I'm not writing letters or attending city council meetings or joining activist groups to fight for it. It's easier to be responsible for just myself and blog once a week about my latest small victory or stumble. In the short term, it's refreshing to know I don't have to carry the burden of the world on my shoulders. But in the long term, am I going to make a bigger commitment? It's something for all of us to think about.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
McDonald's McCafes: a gamble with the environment
On my two-mile drive down Long Beach Boulevard from the train station today, I passed four reminders from McDonald's that I should be drinking its coffee. That would be three McDonald's restaurants telling me "Now serving McCafe" and enticing me with giant posters of mocha lattes topped with whipped cream, plus a billboard in case I missed the ads plastered across the stores. I think McDonald's really wants us to buy its "specialty" espresso drinks.
Even I am not immune to the powers of good marketing (the commercials are funny). Last week I decided to try a McCafe because if it tasted good but was cheaper than Starbucks or another coffee chain, then it would be a good option. I went through the drive-thru and ordered a small iced latte. I shouldn't have been surprised that in McDonald's super-sized world, a small would be 16 ounces of seriously strong coffee. It was so potent I saved half for the next day, which did make the $3 price a good deal, although it wasn't as cheap as I expected (iced drinks are more expensive; their hot lattes are cheaper).
Then the very next day, after I'd enjoyed my day-old latte, I read an article in the Los Angeles Times about McDonald's coffee investment and I felt bad about supporting what will likely lead to an increase in milk consumption, if McDonald's gamble pays off. The article quoted a dairy expert saying, "When per capita milk consumption rose in 2006 for the first time in 20 years, McDonald's was a prime reason." Why? McDonald's had started offering milk in plastic containers, which became so popular that other fast-food chains followed its lead. "The dairy industry is counting on the same sort of effect from McDonald's espresso coffee drinks," the article said, and then had this shocking statistic, "which can contain up to 80 percent milk." If (let's be real ... when) McCafes become popular, that's a lot of milk -- 1 1/2 cups for a 16-ounce drink. That means a lot of milk production, which is not good for the environment (cows are a source of methane pollution, plus concerns over the amount of water used on dairy farms).
But when I made this argument to my coworker, she played devil's advocate and said "So are poor people not allowed to buy coffee but rich people who can afford Starbucks can?" No, of course not. I know that Starbucks and other coffee chains have led to more people drinking coffee and thus consuming more milk, but my concern with McDonald's is that it's even more pervasive in our culture and its coffee is cheaper, which could lead to people buying coffee more often, no matter their income.
I think the solution is that everyone should buy less coffee and try to make it at home more often. I'm not saying I'm a saint. I buy coffee about once a week, the last time being on Sunday after a run. I felt like I deserved to indulge and since I'd gotten up too early to make coffee, I decided to splurge on an iced latte at Seattle's Best. But was my impulse buy worth $2.80 for a measly 12-ounce drink that also wasted a plastic cup? In the time it took me to wait in line, I could have gone home and made my own coffee. And I would have been happier with it. They were out of vanilla so I flavored my latte with cinnamon, which doesn't taste so great. And when I make coffee at home, I use a half cup of milk, probably less than what was in my McCafe or Seattle's Best drink.
And let's face it, making your own coffee saves money too. McDonald's may be promoting their drinks as a cheaper alternative to Starbucks but MyCafe beats out McCafe any day.
Even I am not immune to the powers of good marketing (the commercials are funny). Last week I decided to try a McCafe because if it tasted good but was cheaper than Starbucks or another coffee chain, then it would be a good option. I went through the drive-thru and ordered a small iced latte. I shouldn't have been surprised that in McDonald's super-sized world, a small would be 16 ounces of seriously strong coffee. It was so potent I saved half for the next day, which did make the $3 price a good deal, although it wasn't as cheap as I expected (iced drinks are more expensive; their hot lattes are cheaper).
Then the very next day, after I'd enjoyed my day-old latte, I read an article in the Los Angeles Times about McDonald's coffee investment and I felt bad about supporting what will likely lead to an increase in milk consumption, if McDonald's gamble pays off. The article quoted a dairy expert saying, "When per capita milk consumption rose in 2006 for the first time in 20 years, McDonald's was a prime reason." Why? McDonald's had started offering milk in plastic containers, which became so popular that other fast-food chains followed its lead. "The dairy industry is counting on the same sort of effect from McDonald's espresso coffee drinks," the article said, and then had this shocking statistic, "which can contain up to 80 percent milk." If (let's be real ... when) McCafes become popular, that's a lot of milk -- 1 1/2 cups for a 16-ounce drink. That means a lot of milk production, which is not good for the environment (cows are a source of methane pollution, plus concerns over the amount of water used on dairy farms).
But when I made this argument to my coworker, she played devil's advocate and said "So are poor people not allowed to buy coffee but rich people who can afford Starbucks can?" No, of course not. I know that Starbucks and other coffee chains have led to more people drinking coffee and thus consuming more milk, but my concern with McDonald's is that it's even more pervasive in our culture and its coffee is cheaper, which could lead to people buying coffee more often, no matter their income.
I think the solution is that everyone should buy less coffee and try to make it at home more often. I'm not saying I'm a saint. I buy coffee about once a week, the last time being on Sunday after a run. I felt like I deserved to indulge and since I'd gotten up too early to make coffee, I decided to splurge on an iced latte at Seattle's Best. But was my impulse buy worth $2.80 for a measly 12-ounce drink that also wasted a plastic cup? In the time it took me to wait in line, I could have gone home and made my own coffee. And I would have been happier with it. They were out of vanilla so I flavored my latte with cinnamon, which doesn't taste so great. And when I make coffee at home, I use a half cup of milk, probably less than what was in my McCafe or Seattle's Best drink.
And let's face it, making your own coffee saves money too. McDonald's may be promoting their drinks as a cheaper alternative to Starbucks but MyCafe beats out McCafe any day.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Saving water in the shower
One of the sacrifices I'm making for the environment is publicly sharing my personal life in this blog. So here's my second post about showering. Yes it's about hygiene, but water -- and will we have enough of it in the future -- is a big issue so I feel it's justified.
In my first post I timed my showers for a few days and found that when I tried, I could get them around five minutes long. Not under five, which was my goal, but not too shabby either. One other trick to saving water would be to turn off the water when shaving. But call me a spoiled American, but that just didn't sound pleasant. Today I thought of this halfway through shaving so at that point I sucked it up and reluctantly turned off the water. I expected immediate goose bumps and my core body temperature to take a nose dive. No water diva here, it wasn't that bad. It may help that it's summer, but I didn't get cold. And I shaved faster, theoretically saving time but here I am blogging about it before I leave for work so the time saving is a wash (oh that was bad I know).
I once had a roommate who was from France and I could hear him turn off the water mid-shower, presumably to shave, so my guess is that this is common in Europe but hasn't taken hold in wasteful America. I'm not going to make any grand promises, but I'll try to turn off the water again. If I can get it to become habit, it may become second nature, liking turning off the water when I brush my teeth or wash my face. Now I'd better go because the clock is ticking and my drive to work isn't getting any shorter.
Oh, and coming up, a post about McDonald's. ...
In my first post I timed my showers for a few days and found that when I tried, I could get them around five minutes long. Not under five, which was my goal, but not too shabby either. One other trick to saving water would be to turn off the water when shaving. But call me a spoiled American, but that just didn't sound pleasant. Today I thought of this halfway through shaving so at that point I sucked it up and reluctantly turned off the water. I expected immediate goose bumps and my core body temperature to take a nose dive. No water diva here, it wasn't that bad. It may help that it's summer, but I didn't get cold. And I shaved faster, theoretically saving time but here I am blogging about it before I leave for work so the time saving is a wash (oh that was bad I know).
I once had a roommate who was from France and I could hear him turn off the water mid-shower, presumably to shave, so my guess is that this is common in Europe but hasn't taken hold in wasteful America. I'm not going to make any grand promises, but I'll try to turn off the water again. If I can get it to become habit, it may become second nature, liking turning off the water when I brush my teeth or wash my face. Now I'd better go because the clock is ticking and my drive to work isn't getting any shorter.
Oh, and coming up, a post about McDonald's. ...
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Recycling my running shoes
I run, therefore I am ... constantly going through running shoes. Before my environmental awareness was kicked into full gear, I would throw away my old (dirty, smelly) running shoes. But a few months ago when I bought a new pair of my favorite Adidas Supernovas, I held onto my old pair because I vaguely remembered hearing about shoe recycling and donation programs. For weeks and weeks now, they have been sitting in a pile of "things to blog about" as a way of reminding myself to look into that. So today when my co-worker asked the "Urban Dieter" if I knew what to do with old shoes, I didn't have an answer. My other co-worker quickly found information online about shoe recycling offered by Nike (making me feel a little embarrassed for dragging my feet on this). The Reuse-A-Shoe website says the rubber, foam and fabric in your old shoes is shredded and then used in the manufacturing of sports and playground surfaces.
I admit I've never been a Nike fan, especially since my college days when the company was accused of operating sweatshops (although in retrospect I'm sure Nike wasn't the only culprit). I've never worn anything Nike but they take any brand, not just Nikes, and they have a drop-off location down the street from my office at The Grove.
A quick search of "shoe recycling" found some other programs, although Nike's seems to be the biggest. There are a few donation programs that collect newish shoes to give to people in the US and other countries, like Soles4Souls and One World Running, which is based in Boulder, Colorado but my local running store Runners High is a drop-off location. However, I'm not sure if my shoes are too old to be reused.
Either way, this seems easy enough. I can now check blogging about recycling my shoes off my list. The next step is to get around to dropping them off.
I admit I've never been a Nike fan, especially since my college days when the company was accused of operating sweatshops (although in retrospect I'm sure Nike wasn't the only culprit). I've never worn anything Nike but they take any brand, not just Nikes, and they have a drop-off location down the street from my office at The Grove.
A quick search of "shoe recycling" found some other programs, although Nike's seems to be the biggest. There are a few donation programs that collect newish shoes to give to people in the US and other countries, like Soles4Souls and One World Running, which is based in Boulder, Colorado but my local running store Runners High is a drop-off location. However, I'm not sure if my shoes are too old to be reused.
Either way, this seems easy enough. I can now check blogging about recycling my shoes off my list. The next step is to get around to dropping them off.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Bus blues
I have failed yet again in my quest to find the "magic" public transportation route to work that takes no longer than driving. Today I scratched the 720 Rapid bus off my list of options, at least in the way I took it today.
Let me start by saying that the MTA uses the term "rapid" loosely. It was only 10 or so minutes faster than the plodding 16 bus. But with the extra walking I had to do, it ended up taking longer.
I've got the first leg of my journey down because there's only one option. I take the Blue Line lightrail train from Long Beach to downtown LA. But once I get off the train, I've got options galore. Too bad none of them involve a car waiting to whisk me to my office six miles away. My regular route is to walk three blocks to 5th Street and grab the 16 or 316 bus, which runs along 3rd Street and drops me off in front of my office. It takes about 30 minutes and on a good day I get to work right at 9 a.m.
Today was what I call a "bus fail day" and on the way home it turned into a "train fail day," but that I'll get to later. I decided to experiment because I'd always wondered if taking the 720 would be faster. The problem is that the 720 runs along Wilshire, although the downtown stop is on 5th Street. So I walked my usual few blocks to a different part of 5th Street where I caught the 720, but then 20 minutes later it dropped me off at Wilshire and La Brea and I still had to walk another 15 minutes to my office on 3rd (if you're familiar with LA, yes I basically walked several blocks north of Wilshire twice). The good part is that I got to walk more, the bad part is that walking is unfortunately the slowest mode of transportation possible. It didn't help that I had been a little late arriving at the Blue Line station and was running 10 minutes late to begin with, but I got to work close to 9:30 this morning. Oops.
But I don't give up that easy. The 16 bus may be the slow and steady option for me, but a girl's gotta play the field before she settles down! So I have one more route to try, which is taking the Blue Line to the Red Line, then briefly taking the 720 from Western and Wilshire to La Brea and Wilshire, then walking. OK, that may sound crazy, especially to people who live close to their office or don't live in L.A., but when you live 30 miles from work in a city with a pathetic public transporation system, you're willing to work with things as best you can for the sheer joy of not having to drive, not putting miles on your car and not paying $3.15 a gallon for gas.
So I promised to explain why I failed on the way home too. This was all my fault. Things started out fine. I ran from work to the Red Line station at Western and Wilshire again, which I'm liking, but then feeling tired after the run, I spaced out on the train and missed my stop at the 7th Street Metro Center. I ended up taking the Red Line all the way to Union Station. I jumped out of the train and jumped into a waiting train heading in the other direction, barely getting in before the doors closed. I'll have to remember to pay more attention next time.
We had a former student stop into our office today who grew up in LA but didn't know anything about the rail system. She had just returned from a semster studying in Paris and loved taking the Metro because she felt more connected to the city and the people. I don't get that same satisfaction using L.A.'s system because it fights you all the way. And so few people use public transportation that I don't feel like part of something greater. The Red Line train was empty today (in both directions, oops) from around 6:45-7:15 p.m. I would expect it to be popular since it's in the heart of LA but apparently not, although maybe it's busy earlier. It's too bad more people don't try out the train and bus, although I can't say I blame them either.
Let me start by saying that the MTA uses the term "rapid" loosely. It was only 10 or so minutes faster than the plodding 16 bus. But with the extra walking I had to do, it ended up taking longer.
I've got the first leg of my journey down because there's only one option. I take the Blue Line lightrail train from Long Beach to downtown LA. But once I get off the train, I've got options galore. Too bad none of them involve a car waiting to whisk me to my office six miles away. My regular route is to walk three blocks to 5th Street and grab the 16 or 316 bus, which runs along 3rd Street and drops me off in front of my office. It takes about 30 minutes and on a good day I get to work right at 9 a.m.
Today was what I call a "bus fail day" and on the way home it turned into a "train fail day," but that I'll get to later. I decided to experiment because I'd always wondered if taking the 720 would be faster. The problem is that the 720 runs along Wilshire, although the downtown stop is on 5th Street. So I walked my usual few blocks to a different part of 5th Street where I caught the 720, but then 20 minutes later it dropped me off at Wilshire and La Brea and I still had to walk another 15 minutes to my office on 3rd (if you're familiar with LA, yes I basically walked several blocks north of Wilshire twice). The good part is that I got to walk more, the bad part is that walking is unfortunately the slowest mode of transportation possible. It didn't help that I had been a little late arriving at the Blue Line station and was running 10 minutes late to begin with, but I got to work close to 9:30 this morning. Oops.
But I don't give up that easy. The 16 bus may be the slow and steady option for me, but a girl's gotta play the field before she settles down! So I have one more route to try, which is taking the Blue Line to the Red Line, then briefly taking the 720 from Western and Wilshire to La Brea and Wilshire, then walking. OK, that may sound crazy, especially to people who live close to their office or don't live in L.A., but when you live 30 miles from work in a city with a pathetic public transporation system, you're willing to work with things as best you can for the sheer joy of not having to drive, not putting miles on your car and not paying $3.15 a gallon for gas.
So I promised to explain why I failed on the way home too. This was all my fault. Things started out fine. I ran from work to the Red Line station at Western and Wilshire again, which I'm liking, but then feeling tired after the run, I spaced out on the train and missed my stop at the 7th Street Metro Center. I ended up taking the Red Line all the way to Union Station. I jumped out of the train and jumped into a waiting train heading in the other direction, barely getting in before the doors closed. I'll have to remember to pay more attention next time.
We had a former student stop into our office today who grew up in LA but didn't know anything about the rail system. She had just returned from a semster studying in Paris and loved taking the Metro because she felt more connected to the city and the people. I don't get that same satisfaction using L.A.'s system because it fights you all the way. And so few people use public transportation that I don't feel like part of something greater. The Red Line train was empty today (in both directions, oops) from around 6:45-7:15 p.m. I would expect it to be popular since it's in the heart of LA but apparently not, although maybe it's busy earlier. It's too bad more people don't try out the train and bus, although I can't say I blame them either.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Taking the bus out of the equation
I had a great experience taking public transportation today. And no, I'm not referring to the verbally abusive woman asking for money on the Blue Line train this morning (raise your hand if you think calling someone -- no it wasn't me -- a b**** will get you a free handout). No, it's because I saved time and killed two birds with one stone by running part of my commute home.
At 6 p.m. I changed into my running clothes, put my bus pass, ID, credit card and some emergency cash in my back zippered pocket, grabbed my cell phone, iPod and keys and headed out the door, feeling light and unencumbered. The distance from my office to the Red Line station is three miles so I ran through the neighborhood streets of the mid-Wilshire district, into the tree-lined streets with million-dollar homes in Hancock Park, then into Koreatown, turning down Western for the last quarter mile to the Red Line station at Wilshire. It took about 30 minutes but I saved time because I'd gotten my exercising out of the way. And it put me in control of my commute because I didn't have to wait for the bus and be at its mercy. I know the Red Line train comes at 6:41 and by changing up my pace, I can make sure to get there in time.
I took the Red Line to downtown, where I switched to the Blue Line and pretty much slept until my stop. But it didn't matter that I was tired or that it was late (7:45) because I didn't need to find motivation to run or go to the gym. I parked my car at my apartment at 8:01 p.m. and felt so good. I had plenty of time to cook dinner (not reheat a meal or nuke a veggie burger, but actually cook) and even treated myself to a beer.
This is a good option for me in the summertime, when it's still light out when I'm running and it feels safe being on the train a little later than I normally would be. Sure, I would have preferred the city planners to have some foresight and extend the Red Line farther west when it was originally built, but this isn't a bad backup plan.
At 6 p.m. I changed into my running clothes, put my bus pass, ID, credit card and some emergency cash in my back zippered pocket, grabbed my cell phone, iPod and keys and headed out the door, feeling light and unencumbered. The distance from my office to the Red Line station is three miles so I ran through the neighborhood streets of the mid-Wilshire district, into the tree-lined streets with million-dollar homes in Hancock Park, then into Koreatown, turning down Western for the last quarter mile to the Red Line station at Wilshire. It took about 30 minutes but I saved time because I'd gotten my exercising out of the way. And it put me in control of my commute because I didn't have to wait for the bus and be at its mercy. I know the Red Line train comes at 6:41 and by changing up my pace, I can make sure to get there in time.
I took the Red Line to downtown, where I switched to the Blue Line and pretty much slept until my stop. But it didn't matter that I was tired or that it was late (7:45) because I didn't need to find motivation to run or go to the gym. I parked my car at my apartment at 8:01 p.m. and felt so good. I had plenty of time to cook dinner (not reheat a meal or nuke a veggie burger, but actually cook) and even treated myself to a beer.
This is a good option for me in the summertime, when it's still light out when I'm running and it feels safe being on the train a little later than I normally would be. Sure, I would have preferred the city planners to have some foresight and extend the Red Line farther west when it was originally built, but this isn't a bad backup plan.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Back to the bus
I took public transportation to work today for the first time in, well, so long I can't remember. It was like riding a bike. It all came back to me ... what time I had to leave my place, what time the Blue Line train arrived to take me to downtown LA, and where to walk to catch the bus to my office.
The trip to work was pretty uneventful and the train and bus were surprisingly uncrowded. On the way home it was a little hairier but that's always the case. I never know when the bus will arrive so I sometimes rush out of the office only to sit at the corner and wait 10 minutes, like today. But I got home at my usual "bus" time and got some exercise in the form of speed walking from the bus to the train (only to sit another 10 minutes) so I can't complain.
It takes longer to take public transportation to work so sometimes I grudgingly do it, but one great benefit is that I have time to read the newspaper cover to cover ... I even inspect the ads. Bumping along Third Street on the bus this morning, I read on A9 about a digital camera class at Samy's that I decided to take on Sunday. However, tomorrow it's back to my car because I have to drive somewhere for work. I'm definitely not complaining.
The trip to work was pretty uneventful and the train and bus were surprisingly uncrowded. On the way home it was a little hairier but that's always the case. I never know when the bus will arrive so I sometimes rush out of the office only to sit at the corner and wait 10 minutes, like today. But I got home at my usual "bus" time and got some exercise in the form of speed walking from the bus to the train (only to sit another 10 minutes) so I can't complain.
It takes longer to take public transportation to work so sometimes I grudgingly do it, but one great benefit is that I have time to read the newspaper cover to cover ... I even inspect the ads. Bumping along Third Street on the bus this morning, I read on A9 about a digital camera class at Samy's that I decided to take on Sunday. However, tomorrow it's back to my car because I have to drive somewhere for work. I'm definitely not complaining.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)