If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of February 26th, 2010
Tag: cars
Links for the week of February 5th, 2010
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of February 5th, 2010
The limits of personal action
I’ve realized recently that it is becoming difficult for us to continue marginally increasing the sustainability of our household.
Pasadena has a relatively enlightened “pay as you throw” garbage collection service. You can choose one of three different sized garbage cans depending on how much trash you generate, and the smaller ones cost less. Both the front house and the back house have the smallest size (32 gallons). Last week when I wheeled the garbage out to the street for pickup one of the two containers was empty, and the other was only half full. The previous week there had been no garbage whatsoever in the bins. In two weeks, between two houses, we’d managed to half fill one container, and it was already the smallest size the City could imagine one house filling on a weekly basis, meaning we generated something like 1/8th as much garbage as we were “supposed to”. Instead most of our refuse ends up either getting composted or recycled. If only we could cancel the garbage service for one of the houses, or have them come only once a month. Thankfully Pasadena does actually have a stated goal of zero waste-to-landfill and incinerators (by the year 2040), as does San Francisco (by 2020) and Vancouver (no firm date for zero yet… but a 40% reduction from their current, already low, levels by 2020). Last year we “diverted” 66% of our solid waste as a city, and both the total amount of waste landfilled, and the per capita amount have decreased over the last several years (as reported in the 2009 Green City Indicators report), though as I’ve noted before “diversion” means some strange things in this context. The city currently considers it likely that we will achieve this 2040 goal. I wonder if the economic downturn has meant less purchasing and discarding of disposable crap. It’s almost certainly responsible for much of the recent reduction in vehicle miles traveled. I’m not sure what additional waste-reduction incentives have been put in place (but then, I’m clearly not the target audience… so maybe I just haven’t noticed).
Another similar strange experience recently was realizing that our natural gas usage, which goes exclusively to heat domestic hot water (we refuse to turn on the furnace in this fine Mediterranean climate…) hardly varies at all with our water usage. The difference in our gas bill between both of us being here and neither of us being here is less than 10%. About $1 out of $15 goes to heat in the water we actually use. $14 out of $15 goes to heat that escapes from the water heater into the air in the crawlspace under the house. Sadly, it was replaced two years ago (after the bottom of the old tank rusted out… that replacement dropped our monthly bill by 2/3, as leaking hot air is a lot better than leaking hot water!) and it could have been replaced with a European style tankless water heater like we had over winter break in the Earthships in Taos, where it’s just a backup for the solar hot water heater on the roof which would also work wonderfully here in SoCal.
I think there are about 6 big things you can do on your own, if you’re at all serious about sustainability:
- Have fewer than 2 offspring.
- Eat a vegan diet, or close to it.
- Don’t own a car, and dramatically reduce the number of miles you drive.
- Avoid flying.
- Live in a small, durable, energy efficient dwelling.
- Stop buying things that will eventually be sent to a landfill or incinerated.
If you’re not doing any of them, I don’t really see how you can say you care about sustainability with a straight face. But what if you’re doing all of them? And also volunteering for organizations that try to promote these behaviors in general? And donating money to others, in a similar vein? And writing your elected officials about the things you care about?
I’m not trying to go off on some holier-than-thou trip here: I haven’t really committed to stop flying (it’s just an idea at this point, one that Amtrak might well talk me out of), and I certainly enjoy eating an omnivorous diet (with the animal products coming as much as possible from discarded food). I’m just saying that I’m starting to feel a little limited. To go much further than the above list, infrastructure and society itself have to start changing, in North America anyway, and that’s an entirely different kind of problem. An interpersonal problem, with which I’m much less comfortable.
Links for the week of November 28th, 2009
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of November 28th, 2009
Regarding the Sentencing of Dr. Christopher Thompson
Dear District Attorney Stone,
I have been a daily cyclist in LA County for more than 15 years, using my bike as my primary means of transportation. As a result, I have experienced many instances of either reckless or malicious behavior by drivers on our streets and highways. Teenagers “having fun” and people out to “teach me a lesson”, no doubt. These are very serious offenses, which needlessly endanger me, and infringe upon my right to use our publicly funded infrastructure in a healthy, economical, fiscally responsible and environmentally friendly manner.
The case of Dr. Thompson is an extreme one, and I believe that he deserves the harshest penalty under the law for his violent act, which might well have ended the lives of one or more cyclists in Mandeville Canyon. However, he is only one person, and there are many lesser and some greater offenses committed against cyclists in LA County every month, which go largely unnoticed by the media or law enforcement, or if noticed, are dealt with in a manner which does not appropriately apportion responsibility. Drivers wield hundreds of times more power, in the literal sense, with their vehicles than cyclists do, and travel at much higher speeds, with much greater energies. They have the ability to cause much more harm than cyclists. This should result in greater responsibility. “I didn’t see him”, as drivers often say after an accident involving a cyclist, is not a valid excuse; it is evidence of their dereliction of this responsibility, a responsibility that all road users have to be aware of their surroundings, and the potential consequences of their actions.
More than any particular sentence for Dr. Thompson, I would like to urge you to take less spectacularly reckless behavior by drivers more seriously. For instance, driving while using a mobile phone, while now illegal, is not being aggressively ticketed, despite being an impairment on par with driving while under the influence of alcohol. Drivers who do not take their responsibilities seriously, or worse, who use the power their wield with their vehicles as a means of intimidation against other more vulnerable road users, should have their drivers licenses revoked for a long period of time. They need to be taken off the road. Losing your license is often seen as an extreme punishment, because we have built our city, and more broadly our society, so entirely around the idea that everyone will own and drive a car on a daily basis. But driving is not necessary, even in LA, as I can attest having never owned a car here, and I do not believe we should confer the right to operate a motor vehicle on every citizen when they turn 16. It should be a privilege that is earned and maintained through consistently responsible actions.
Thank you for your time and attention,
Zane Selvans
Links for the week of November 6th, 2009
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of November 6th, 2009
Stop framing transportation and bicycles as identity politics
Hello Mr. Mason,
I just read your article For the Danes, city planning is all about the bike. As a daily bicycle user and advocate in automobile dominated southern California, I couldn’t help but be disturbed by the tone which was set in the first two sentences:
From his second-floor office overlooking a Baltic-fed canal, Andreas Rohl ponders a daily question: How can he make life hell for the car drivers of this Scandinavian capital? Mr. Rohl, you see, is the bicycle program manager for the city government of Copenhagen.
Based on the quotes you took from him throughout the rest of the article I have a hard time believing that this is really how Rohl thinks about his job. It seems like a much more North American perspective on bicycle planning to me. Making these the first words in the article creates an antagonistic lens through which the reader sees all the examples you point out of resources being shifted from cars to bikes, especially if the reader uses a car as their primary means of transportation, as I suspect most of your Canadian (and US) readers do. It would be a very different article if instead you’d said “How can he make life easier for the bicycle riders of this Scandinavian capital?” (I’m really curious, do you primarily drive, or ride a bike to get around?)
When there is a finite resource that has to be shared between cyclists and cars, such as lane width or timing priority on the “Green Wave” streets, a rational transportation planner would ask themselves “How can I allocate this resource between the competing modes to most effectively meet my transportation goals?”. What cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam and Groningen have decided, I think correctly, is that quite often transportation goals can best be met by
allocating more of these finite resources to bikes than we do in the US and Canada. In an urban environment, per unit transportation utility, bike infrastructure is much cheaper than automotive infrastructure to build and maintain. The vehicles it supports (bikes) are also cheaper, safer, quieter, do not pollute or rely on imported fuels, and contribute to the health of the general population, reducing health care costs. Parking for bikes takes up an order of magnitude less real estate and money, making multi-modal public transit much more feasible. All of these are functional, dispassionate reasons to shift planning priorities toward bikes and away from cars.
The antagonistic framing that your introduction sets up, and which unfortunately also permeates a great deal of bike culture and bike advocacy in the US, does not help anybody make rational, dispassionate transportation decisions. It encourages the reader to pick a side. It turns transportation choices into issues of identity. Am I a driver, or am I a cyclist? Really, we’re all just people trying to get somewhere, and I think the Dutch and the Danes understand that better than anyone, as your final sentence makes clear.
Sincerely,
Zane Selvans
CC: Andreas Rohl (Copenhagen Bicycle Planner), Mikael Colville-Anderson (Copenhagenize), Dale Benson (Caltrans District 7 BAC)
Links for the week of September 11th, 2009
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of September 11th, 2009
Links for the week of September 4th, 2009
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of September 4th, 2009
Links for the week of August 20th, 2009
If you want to follow my shared links in real time instead of as a weekly digest, head over to Delicious. You can search them there easily too.
Continue reading Links for the week of August 20th, 2009