Worst crab season since the clean water act! The problems of unmitigated pollution and extraction clearly affects life itself on this planet.
Depleted coastal fish stocks displace sustainable farmers moving fuel intensive operations out with drag net fishing that causes havoc in the high seas which allows for pollution intensive hotel uses on the coast. A good resource is Save The High Seas.
Instead of treating symptoms with a blatant disregard for conformance goals we should use the successful energy model in CA to tier price the demand side and change the supply side infrastructure needs. The goal should be to shrink the footprint on the biosphere. Leonhardt writes:
Government agencies usually don’t even have to do a rigorous analysis of a project or how it would affect traffic and the environment, relative to its cost and to the alternatives — before deciding whether to proceed. In one recent survey of local officials, almost 80 percent said they had based their decisions largely on politics, while fewer than 20 percent cited a project’s potential benefits. Please, please don’t just pour more money into the current system.
The SF Examiner highlights one problem of our current infrastructure- permanently damaged lungs for our children.
Harvey Wasserman writes: So let's convert GM's infrastructure to churn out trolley cars, monorails, passenger trains, truly green buses.
The environmental justice result is that congestion management expands capacity at the expense of all other modes. Because of the low real estate cost expansion is disportionately in poor communities.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Equity in infrastructure pricing
Set an equitable cost distribution on pollution. Infrastructure pricing should reflect the burden of polluting the biosphere. The model is tier pricing in energy.
Examples:
CA needs to develop a model off-street parking ordinance that implements "Intelligent Parking" similar to what SF wants and Redwood City may have the begining off (from Mike Bullock).
Traffic impact fees, estimated at 40k per car per ten year period would fund zero pollution changes to the way the air and water basin are destroyed.
PAYD road financing should replace the highway gas tax using GPS or license-plate RFID tags. Roads should be priced so that they produce an agree-to rate of return on the VALUE of the lane. Note that I said value. Value is the price of land plus construction, at the time of collection. Privacy concerns should not allow drivers to permanently impact growing lungs by large roads (Mike Bullock).
A revenue neutral carbon tax to address imports. The market partially addresses this but the impact varies with the price of CO2 intensive fuels like gasoline. Without an extraction fee 96% of fossil fuels won't stay in the ground through 2250 for 350 ppm of CO2.
Universal single payer health care to address pollution through environmental justice.
Tie Federal funds to a tangible goal like reduced traffic or carbon emissions.
Examples:
CA needs to develop a model off-street parking ordinance that implements "Intelligent Parking" similar to what SF wants and Redwood City may have the begining off (from Mike Bullock).
Traffic impact fees, estimated at 40k per car per ten year period would fund zero pollution changes to the way the air and water basin are destroyed.
PAYD road financing should replace the highway gas tax using GPS or license-plate RFID tags. Roads should be priced so that they produce an agree-to rate of return on the VALUE of the lane. Note that I said value. Value is the price of land plus construction, at the time of collection. Privacy concerns should not allow drivers to permanently impact growing lungs by large roads (Mike Bullock).
A revenue neutral carbon tax to address imports. The market partially addresses this but the impact varies with the price of CO2 intensive fuels like gasoline. Without an extraction fee 96% of fossil fuels won't stay in the ground through 2250 for 350 ppm of CO2.
Universal single payer health care to address pollution through environmental justice.
Tie Federal funds to a tangible goal like reduced traffic or carbon emissions.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Landuse efficiencies for sustainable communities
When evaluating landuse Efficiencies needs to have their total impact evaluated. For example saying a Prius is efficient leaves out the landuse element. A Prius is more efficient than a Ford F150 in fuel consumption; but the issue of fuel consumption arises because of the poor landuse choice of living out in what used to be the sequestered carbon of open space. Politically moving policy in favor of a Prius thus means we can continue to expand usage of air and water and food and land basins, i.e the biosphere, that we pollute.
The efficiency is thus only relative to the reduced variable of fuel consumption and not the total impact of the biosphere disruption. The sustainable state would go beyond what architect S. Mouzon called Gizzmo Green in The Original Green. Growing Cooler points out that if VMT continues to grow three times faster than population growth any improvements in fuel mileage will quickly be negated. Without a competent urban strategy gains from technological improvements will be overwhelmed by suburban inefficiencies leaving us less sustainable in the future.
A combination of strategies are necessary taking advantage of efficient building types, efficient locations, reused infrastructure, efficient goods and service movement, rebuilt carbon basins, efficient technologies, and equity efficiencies to attain a sustainable state. As Zack and Lyon say the important indicator is lower per capita resource consumption, not necessarily deploying flashy new machines.
The efficiency is thus only relative to the reduced variable of fuel consumption and not the total impact of the biosphere disruption. The sustainable state would go beyond what architect S. Mouzon called Gizzmo Green in The Original Green. Growing Cooler points out that if VMT continues to grow three times faster than population growth any improvements in fuel mileage will quickly be negated. Without a competent urban strategy gains from technological improvements will be overwhelmed by suburban inefficiencies leaving us less sustainable in the future.
A combination of strategies are necessary taking advantage of efficient building types, efficient locations, reused infrastructure, efficient goods and service movement, rebuilt carbon basins, efficient technologies, and equity efficiencies to attain a sustainable state. As Zack and Lyon say the important indicator is lower per capita resource consumption, not necessarily deploying flashy new machines.
Monday, November 10, 2008
GW GHG solutions
Worldwide agriculture is the largest generator of green house gases partly because carbon sinks are burned for vast mono cultures sold into the industrial food markets for packaged food like substances (Pollan's words) or feedstock. Indigenous self sufficient subsistence farmers are displaced to acquire the land thereby entering the "economy" as poor peasants or landless slum dwellers. I been thinking that's what's really needed is the right to land to feed oneself. It seems counterintuitive that a human on this planet does not have the right to plant his food and feed himself. And if we feed ourselves the CO2 footprint from food would go to zero but the desire to work would also be reduced thereby reducing the availability of funds to spend recklessly toasting the planet.
Solving climate change will need to change the way we consume which means a sustainable way to get by. Right now only taxes and death are certain which means we have to be part of the consuming society to earn money to pay taxes and its killing us as a planet. So if we could feed ourselves we can ignore all the fuss around the latest ipod etc.
The carbon tax is just a way of moderating consumption and cap and dividend is a way of providing an incentive to consume differently. But land reform, through community gardens or whatever, can be a fundamental change.
1- Sign the ILO which recognizes right of indigenous peoples to their lands.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/indigenous.htm
2- Enact land reform to allow creation of farm belts around cities with Traffic Impact Fees and Congestion Charging going toward Agland preservation and the right to community gardens.
3- A revenue neutral carbon tax that replaces a portion of the income tax and DOES NOT TOUCH FICA.
4- A cap and dividend on emissions including other sources like methane which is returned to all Americans and not used as a extension of predation on the public commons by renting out our lungs.
5- Enable existing technologies with 15mph neighborhood and collector streets in the city and 20 mph in city arterials to make Neighborhood Electrical Vehicles viable. The goal should be to reduce pollution of the air and water sheds and expand environmental services outside the urban boundary. Vehicle tracking for Pay As You Drive insurance should be required for engines that generate CO2.
6- Require green building standards to address locations.
7- Make a $1/kwh excess feed in tariffs and allow choice within 300' of a renewable location to dramatically expand renewable power and reduce the cost of transmission from non co2 sources.
8- Allow Transit Agencies (like Universities) to control landuse decisions within 1/4 mile radius of a transit center to achieve sustainable revenue streams.
9- Tax gasoline with a ladder to bailout fossil fuel intensive industries like auto.
One and two can address imports but can address the need for solar overs elsewhere if the equity issues are taken into account. The carbon tax on extraction and processing should go to viable solutions from agriculture, landuse, and fuels.
Solving climate change will need to change the way we consume which means a sustainable way to get by. Right now only taxes and death are certain which means we have to be part of the consuming society to earn money to pay taxes and its killing us as a planet. So if we could feed ourselves we can ignore all the fuss around the latest ipod etc.
The carbon tax is just a way of moderating consumption and cap and dividend is a way of providing an incentive to consume differently. But land reform, through community gardens or whatever, can be a fundamental change.
1- Sign the ILO which recognizes right of indigenous peoples to their lands.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/indigenous.htm
2- Enact land reform to allow creation of farm belts around cities with Traffic Impact Fees and Congestion Charging going toward Agland preservation and the right to community gardens.
3- A revenue neutral carbon tax that replaces a portion of the income tax and DOES NOT TOUCH FICA.
4- A cap and dividend on emissions including other sources like methane which is returned to all Americans and not used as a extension of predation on the public commons by renting out our lungs.
5- Enable existing technologies with 15mph neighborhood and collector streets in the city and 20 mph in city arterials to make Neighborhood Electrical Vehicles viable. The goal should be to reduce pollution of the air and water sheds and expand environmental services outside the urban boundary. Vehicle tracking for Pay As You Drive insurance should be required for engines that generate CO2.
6- Require green building standards to address locations.
7- Make a $1/kwh excess feed in tariffs and allow choice within 300' of a renewable location to dramatically expand renewable power and reduce the cost of transmission from non co2 sources.
8- Allow Transit Agencies (like Universities) to control landuse decisions within 1/4 mile radius of a transit center to achieve sustainable revenue streams.
9- Tax gasoline with a ladder to bailout fossil fuel intensive industries like auto.
One and two can address imports but can address the need for solar overs elsewhere if the equity issues are taken into account. The carbon tax on extraction and processing should go to viable solutions from agriculture, landuse, and fuels.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Bailing out the fossil fuel economy
Bonds have been the traditional instrument for government to spread the cost of installing a fossil fuel intensive infrastructure. The fight over road building and reconstruction on many of the nation's inventoried but undeveloped areas is an example.
In San Jose the RDA (with projects in light rail, 87, etc.) offices are across the hall from Merrill Lynch. Its ironic that the AB32 governor pushed bonds; and then gas prices raised family expenses 25%, stretched by debt to benefit Vehicle Miles Traveled, on the outer suburbs of the job intensive cities, and threatens his legacy. Bonds were necessary because the governor got his job by bankrupting government so commuters could own a planet toasting car with reduced vehicle license fees.
Banks Albach in the Palo Alto Daily News notes that, only from Lehman, Belmont Redwood Shores school district will lose about $3M in construction monies. The San Mateo Community College district lost $25M.
In another write up on the melting planet of bond financing Mark Olbert, a trustee on the San Carlos School Board of Trustees, observes:
I found it interesting that Lehman was almost the only investment discussed. The fund invests in many other names that have been in the news lately. As of Sept. 24, more than 80 percent of the investments are in what I think of as the financial services sector, a fascinating concentration given what’s been unfolding over the last year or so. I hope the Treasurer’s Office knows what it’s doing... and I personally hope it diversifies the portfolio as soon as it can.
In other words business as usual at least as long as gas stays under $4/- a gallon.
In San Jose the RDA (with projects in light rail, 87, etc.) offices are across the hall from Merrill Lynch. Its ironic that the AB32 governor pushed bonds; and then gas prices raised family expenses 25%, stretched by debt to benefit Vehicle Miles Traveled, on the outer suburbs of the job intensive cities, and threatens his legacy. Bonds were necessary because the governor got his job by bankrupting government so commuters could own a planet toasting car with reduced vehicle license fees.
Banks Albach in the Palo Alto Daily News notes that, only from Lehman, Belmont Redwood Shores school district will lose about $3M in construction monies. The San Mateo Community College district lost $25M.
In another write up on the melting planet of bond financing Mark Olbert, a trustee on the San Carlos School Board of Trustees, observes:
I found it interesting that Lehman was almost the only investment discussed. The fund invests in many other names that have been in the news lately. As of Sept. 24, more than 80 percent of the investments are in what I think of as the financial services sector, a fascinating concentration given what’s been unfolding over the last year or so. I hope the Treasurer’s Office knows what it’s doing... and I personally hope it diversifies the portfolio as soon as it can.
In other words business as usual at least as long as gas stays under $4/- a gallon.
Friday, October 3, 2008
bail our of the fossil fools economy
People would consider it ludicrous if we suggest that we privatize the air. But there is a company today in Japan that is selling oxygen in China where the air pollution is very bad. People also surprisingly would consider it ludicrous if we suggested that they must buy water. But in the US we essentially do that today paying Coca Cola and Pepsi 10,000 times more to buy bottled tap water which doesn't have to meet any of the quality tests for municipal water (and a third of a bottle of water equivalent in gas to ship it around.)
Surprisingly people today won't look back and say we have a right to growing our food the way we have a right to air and water. And yet that's what's happened two hundred years ago when the right to land was privatized and a bank system to finance purchase was setup. The creation of the federal reserve and the privatization of the creation money put in place the ability to enforce property rights on privatized land.
What sprawl did was extend the area of where banks could function. The result was exponentially larger consumption of resources like water and wetlands and deterioration of both the commons and the resource basins (like air) and their ecological services. For example Rice harvest in CA was delayed because smoke from the fires stunted growth. Even in sparsely populated areas fire departments were restricted by sprawl to "save lives" instead of keeping large tracts from burning.
The larger question to address concerns this corporate warfare state; that cannot sustain itself; and is taking the country to a similar post soviet union Russian debacle; which we can see in the story of GM, Ford, etc.; primarily because the end game around declining oil resources for the range of banks will place unequal down-spirals on the value of money.
Instead Congress in the pocket of the fossil fuel special interest is betting that the fossil fuel era can be extended with a global decline in fuel prices from decreased consumption due to the ongoing credit crisis and praying that the effects of peak oil can be postponed.
Surprisingly people today won't look back and say we have a right to growing our food the way we have a right to air and water. And yet that's what's happened two hundred years ago when the right to land was privatized and a bank system to finance purchase was setup. The creation of the federal reserve and the privatization of the creation money put in place the ability to enforce property rights on privatized land.
What sprawl did was extend the area of where banks could function. The result was exponentially larger consumption of resources like water and wetlands and deterioration of both the commons and the resource basins (like air) and their ecological services. For example Rice harvest in CA was delayed because smoke from the fires stunted growth. Even in sparsely populated areas fire departments were restricted by sprawl to "save lives" instead of keeping large tracts from burning.
The larger question to address concerns this corporate warfare state; that cannot sustain itself; and is taking the country to a similar post soviet union Russian debacle; which we can see in the story of GM, Ford, etc.; primarily because the end game around declining oil resources for the range of banks will place unequal down-spirals on the value of money.
Instead Congress in the pocket of the fossil fuel special interest is betting that the fossil fuel era can be extended with a global decline in fuel prices from decreased consumption due to the ongoing credit crisis and praying that the effects of peak oil can be postponed.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Not this bailout
When you add the interest, because this make and sold $700B money is borrowed from the banks, and then add in the fees they'll charge to figure out what home values are relative to their toxic mortgage, the cost will be $3T.
Gas prices by raising costs 25% pushed stupid negatively amortized keeping-up-with-the-jones families over the edge on the outer rings of sprawl nation. And as these home compete in the foreclosure market, and future gas prices and related food and energy prices rise, the effect of increased poor quality inventory, will continue to be felt in declining home values.
So if a bailout is to occur it should change the way we do business, particularly the fossil fuel economy of the warfare state, that brings us to this stage, with incentives for walkable cities and penalties for a jobs housing imbalance. Interesting to see that houses on the outskirts of the driving economy, like Modesto, Merced and even the suburbs of Sacramento, if you google foreclosure and put in a destination like North Fairoaks, will show houses in the 50ks which is no where near where housing prices are in San Jose or SF, are, an equivalent price decline putting values at 220k; while Cheney is still having wet dreams over sending our kids to Iran. The papers are full these days about hedge funds. If I draw up a list of the first hundred people I'd care to talk to tomorrow not one is in a hedge fund. So who are we bailing out and why not do something useful to help people get local jobs and walking access to services and food.
We actually have affordable housing these days. And 5 to 7% unemployment is not horrific. And there are many good solutions out there. For example the government could take a house before foreclosure and negatively capitalize it. i.e. take the loss in value plus 10% (for a down payment if necessary)and park it, until the house is sold (the same way a senior can borrow from a house until they die and then the sale pays back the loan). Simultaneously reduce the mortgage by the parked value and fix the rate to the new mortgage less 10%. Very little out of the government's pocket, it keeps people in their homes, and when the market stabilizes (not recovers, because just as pets.com is not coming back, so this housing bubble is not going to realize the same high prices as before in our life time; and on another topic its all relative) the government can share the loss with the lending authority. Amortize and defer in other words.
There are other more complicated schemes out there like this one by Stiglitz who projects in addition that the $3T cost of the Iraq war will hamper future generations for decades.
The majority of the "market drop" is not related to the fundamentals but to hope that this administration's scorch and burn policy can once more allow their funders on Wall Street, of what Norman Solomon in Made Love Got War calls the Warfare State, to once more bank on their irresponsible actions.
This looks like the Japanese Economy (which looks like it foretells us by about 5 years), the bubble in the late 80s and 90s was similar to the 1920s. Many sane heads have been saying for twenty years that we should reduce debt and address the consequent ecological problems like dead seas and fish stocks and poisonous air, and depleted resources like oil and water, which lead to conflicts like Iraq, and Darfur.
Gas prices by raising costs 25% pushed stupid negatively amortized keeping-up-with-the-jones families over the edge on the outer rings of sprawl nation. And as these home compete in the foreclosure market, and future gas prices and related food and energy prices rise, the effect of increased poor quality inventory, will continue to be felt in declining home values.
So if a bailout is to occur it should change the way we do business, particularly the fossil fuel economy of the warfare state, that brings us to this stage, with incentives for walkable cities and penalties for a jobs housing imbalance. Interesting to see that houses on the outskirts of the driving economy, like Modesto, Merced and even the suburbs of Sacramento, if you google foreclosure and put in a destination like North Fairoaks, will show houses in the 50ks which is no where near where housing prices are in San Jose or SF, are, an equivalent price decline putting values at 220k; while Cheney is still having wet dreams over sending our kids to Iran. The papers are full these days about hedge funds. If I draw up a list of the first hundred people I'd care to talk to tomorrow not one is in a hedge fund. So who are we bailing out and why not do something useful to help people get local jobs and walking access to services and food.
We actually have affordable housing these days. And 5 to 7% unemployment is not horrific. And there are many good solutions out there. For example the government could take a house before foreclosure and negatively capitalize it. i.e. take the loss in value plus 10% (for a down payment if necessary)and park it, until the house is sold (the same way a senior can borrow from a house until they die and then the sale pays back the loan). Simultaneously reduce the mortgage by the parked value and fix the rate to the new mortgage less 10%. Very little out of the government's pocket, it keeps people in their homes, and when the market stabilizes (not recovers, because just as pets.com is not coming back, so this housing bubble is not going to realize the same high prices as before in our life time; and on another topic its all relative) the government can share the loss with the lending authority. Amortize and defer in other words.
There are other more complicated schemes out there like this one by Stiglitz who projects in addition that the $3T cost of the Iraq war will hamper future generations for decades.
The majority of the "market drop" is not related to the fundamentals but to hope that this administration's scorch and burn policy can once more allow their funders on Wall Street, of what Norman Solomon in Made Love Got War calls the Warfare State, to once more bank on their irresponsible actions.
This looks like the Japanese Economy (which looks like it foretells us by about 5 years), the bubble in the late 80s and 90s was similar to the 1920s. Many sane heads have been saying for twenty years that we should reduce debt and address the consequent ecological problems like dead seas and fish stocks and poisonous air, and depleted resources like oil and water, which lead to conflicts like Iraq, and Darfur.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
