Hi All,

We seem to be crossing a threshold on global warming.
Can we use this to get governments to take real action?

Regards,


--------------------------------------------------------

Ian Sample, science correspondent
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1546824,00.html

Warming hits 'tipping point'

Siberia feels the heat It's a frozen peat bog the size of France and Germany
combined, contains billions of tonnes of greenhouse gas and, for the first time
since the ice age, it is melting

A vast expanse of western Sibera is undergoing an unprecedented thaw that could
dramatically increase the rate of global warming, climate scientists warn today.

Researchers who have recently returned from the region found that an area of
permafrost spanning a million square kilometres - the size of France and Germany
combined - has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years
ago at the end of the last ice age.

The area, which covers the entire sub-Arctic region of western Siberia, is the
world's largest frozen peat bog and scientists fear that as it thaws, it will
release billions of tonnes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent
than carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

It is a scenario climate scientists have feared since first identifying "tipping
points" - delicate thresholds where a slight rise in the Earth's temperature can
cause a dramatic change in the environment that itself triggers a far greater
increase in global temperatures.

The discovery was made by Sergei Kirpotin at Tomsk State University in western
Siberia and Judith Marquand at Oxford University and is reported in New
Scientist today.

The researchers found that what was until recently a barren expanse of frozen
peat is turning into a broken landscape of mud and lakes, some more than a
kilometre across.

Dr Kirpotin told the magazine the situation was an "ecological landslide that is
probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming". He
added that the thaw had probably begun in the past three or four years.

Climate scientists yesterday reacted with alarm to the finding, and warned that
predictions of future global temperatures would have to be revised upwards.

"When you start messing around with these natural systems, you can end up in
situations where it's unstoppable. There are no brakes you can apply," said
David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University
of East Anglia.

"This is a big deal because you can't put the permafrost back once it's gone.
The causal effect is human activity and it will ramp up temperatures even more
than our emissions are doing."

In its last major report in 2001, the intergovernmental panel on climate change
predicted a rise in global temperatures of 1.4C-5.8C between 1990 and 2100, but
the estimate only takes account of global warming driven by known greenhouse gas
emissions.

"These positive feedbacks with landmasses weren't known about then. They had no
idea how much they would add to global warming," said Dr Viner.

Western Siberia is heating up faster than anywhere else in the world, having
experienced a rise of some 3C in the past 40 years. Scientists are particularly
concerned about the permafrost, because as it thaws, it reveals bare ground
which warms up more quickly than ice and snow, and so accelerates the rate at
which the permafrost thaws.

Siberia's peat bogs have been producing methane since they formed at the end of
the last ice age, but most of the gas had been trapped in the permafrost.
According to Larry Smith, a hydrologist at the University of California, Los
Angeles, the west Siberian peat bog could hold some 70bn tonnes of methane, a
quarter of all of the methane stored in the ground around the world.

The permafrost is likely to take many decades at least to thaw, so the methane
locked within it will not be released into the atmosphere in one burst, said
Stephen Sitch, a climate scientist at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter.

But calculations by Dr Sitch and his colleagues show that even if methane seeped
from the permafrost over the next 100 years, it would add around 700m tonnes of
carbon into the atmosphere each year, roughly the same amount that is released
annually from the world's wetlands and agriculture.

It would effectively double atmospheric levels of the gas, leading to a 10% to
25% increase in global warming, he said.

Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, said the finding was a stark
message to politicians to take concerted action on climate change. "We knew at
some point we'd get these feedbacks happening that exacerbate global warming,
but this could lead to a massive injection of greenhouse gases.

"If we don't take action very soon, we could unleash runaway global warming that
will be beyond our control and it will lead to social, economic and
environmental devastation worldwide," he said. "There's still time to take
action, but not much.

"The assumption has been that we wouldn't see these kinds of changes until the
world is a little warmer, but this suggests we're running out of time."

In May this year, another group of researchers reported signs that global
warming was damaging the permafrost. Katey Walter of the University of Alaska,
Fairbanks, told a meeting of the Arctic Research Consortium of the US that her
team had found methane hotspots in eastern Siberia. At the hotspots, methane was
bubbling to the surface of the permafrost so quickly that it was preventing the
surface from freezing over.

Last month, some of the world's worst air polluters, including the US and
Australia, announced a partnership to cut greenhouse gas emissions through the
use of new technologies.

The deal came after Tony Blair struggled at the G8 summit to get the US
president, George Bush, to commit to any concerted action on climate change and
has been heavily criticised for setting no targets for reductions in greenhouse
gas emissions.



------                          ###                            -----
J.H. Crawford                                         Carfree Cities
mailbox@...                           http://www.carfree.com

"J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...> wrote:

> Can we use this to get governments to take real
> action?

My feeling that there needs to a HUGE increase in
understanding in individuals about what they can and
must do to defeat, at the top of a long list of
targets,  this HUGE BEAST OF A METHANE-LEACHING PEAT
BOG... and once the people are empowered with
knowledge they can work with govenment to slay the
beast.

Not optimistic, but I do have some ideas...

Unless we think that, for example, a UNEP-sponsored
worldwide TV, radio, newspaper and web campaign
telling people to ride a bike sometimes, turn down the
heat, insulate their home, take public transport, buy
a Toyota Prius etc is enough of a start - or
progressive continuation - in awareness-raising then
we need to do something similar but stronger
ourselves... but will the UNEP and advert agencies
(whose donated time and contacts is necessary to make
this affordable unless we get huge money) work with
us?

I dont know... but I see a TV advert of the peat bog
monster, leaching methane... then screaming "oh no!"
as a carfree city lands right on top of them.

Or everyone needs to commit to convince TWO people
about this and have that person convince two people...
and so on...

Todd
www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain
www.WaronPeatBogTerrorism.org
www.telltwofriendsaboutclimatechange.org

p.s. Genocide, slavery, smoking, oppression of
women... we have made some progress in some places but
it has taken many years and nothing is solved....





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Forest fires are ravaging Portugal. Spain is hit by
droughts, suffering severe water shortages... A new
report from WWF, analyzing summer temperature data
from 16 European cities, shows the continent’s
capitals warming by sometimes more than 2°C in the
last 30 years...

<http://www.panda.org/news_facts/newsroom/news.cfm?uNewsID=22334>

Todd,
www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain





___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Hi,

This system is now operating as a pilot in Karlin, a
flat area of Prague! (actually the area that was
flooded to a height of 2m+ in 2002):

<http://www.homeport.cz/pres2.htm>

Another example is in London:

<http://www.oybike.com/OYBIKE/obhome.nsf/example.html>

The Oybike has same Oy as Oyster Card (London-focused
SmartCar) but there seems to be no Oyfficial
connection... anyway... anyone on this have personal
experiences with this?

... related to that, here is the main Transport for
London Journey Planner, with "Advanced search"... it
SEEMS to do a good job for cyclists and especially
cyclist + rail/public  transport BUT I cant tell as I
am not in London... so...personal experiences?

<http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/user/XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2?language=en&ptOptionsA\
ctive=1>

Todd
www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain





___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

Hi! My name is Katti Sta. Ana. I'm a bicycle advocate, a member of the Firefly
Brigade, and a former bicycle officer of the City of Marikina. Right now, I'm an
urban planning student and art teacher in Baguio, a mountain city in the
Philippines. I am trying to change people's opinions on a proposal to
pedestrianize Session Road—the main artery of Baguio City's downtown
area. Many people are opposed to it but I think it is because of a lack of
knowledge about the benefits of pedestrianization.

I am hoping that you could help me by sending me good pictures of
- pedestrianized streets, and
- streets that you think need to be pedestrianized (polluted, chaotic, and
teaming with cars, or scary, blighted, needing to be revitalized are good
ideas).

The pictures can be from any part of the world but if you also have pictures
from Asian, African, or South American cities, that would be great. I will show
them to stakeholders in the proposed Session Road pedestrianization project.
Hopefully, the visual images will help them rethink their position and open up
to the idea of pedestrianization.

If the pictures' resolution would come out well if printed in the standard 3 in.
X
5 in. size, that would be the greatest. Thanks so much! You may email them to
me at fuschia.insect@.... If you email me pictures, and we are able to
convince people in this part of the world to try out a car-free Session Road,
that would be a great achievement for all of us! I promise to let you know
whatever comes out of this project.

Sincerely,
Katti :-)

Hi All,

Interesting, if glum, look at US development today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/national/15exurb.html?hp&ex=1124164800&en=2a36\
4987468e9be3&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Regards,


Living Large, by Design, in the Middle of Nowhere

Published: August 15, 2005

WESLEY CHAPEL, Fla. - New River Township is, for the moment, the edge of beyond.

Its square mile of tightly packed homes is the outer crest of Tampa's
residential swell, four miles from the nearest grocery store and 30 minutes from
the nearest major mall. Just down the road, beyond some orange groves, cattle
graze languorously amid the insect hum of a sun-baked field, and only a few
mobile home parks and a roadside stand selling tiki huts interrupt the vast sea
of pine, palmetto and dense thatch.

The Breuer family, standing from left, Monica, Andrew and Yolanda, and J. J.,
seated, with their dogs at their home in New River. A move from Tampa meant
improvements like more square footage and a larger master bedroom.

In the New River community the houses resemble those of suburbs from the past,
except they are larger and closer together. Developers have done surveys to
determine what potential owners want.

But it will be a short-lived isolation. More than three dozen other communities
in Pasco County, some bigger than New River, are in the works, promising 100,000
new homes in the next five years. A megamall is coming. And the first of the
big-box stores, a Home Depot and a Sam's Club, had their gala openings not long
ago.

"It used to be just us and the retirees," said Ruth Parker, who was busy
decorating a new child care center at the edge of New River, a part of Wesley
Chapel, where she has lived for nine years. "Five years from now, there will be
a city here."

America is growing. And it is growing the fastest here, at the farm-road margins
of metropolitan areas, with planned communities sprouting up and becoming a
prime focus, almost a fetish, for election strategists from both major parties.

Such places do not sprout by happenstance. Driven by irresistible economic
forces and shaped by subtly shifting social patterns, they are being created,
down to the tiniest detail, by a handful of major developers with a master plan
for the new America. In the case of New River, that developer is KB Home, one of
the nation's biggest and most profitable builders with $7 billion in sales last
year, which helped make it sixth among all Standard & Poor's 500 companies in
total revenues.

KB Home has 483 communities under development in 13 states and expects to
complete more than 40,000 new homes this year. Yet it is just one of about two
dozen such corporate giants fiercely competing for land and customers at the
edge of America's suburban expanse.

Poring over elaborate market research, these corporations divine what young
families want, addressing things like carpet texture and kitchen placement and
determining how many streetlights and cul-de-sacs will evoke a soothing sense of
safety.

They know almost to the dollar how much buyers are willing to pay to exchange a
longer commute for more space, a sense of higher status and the feeling of
security.

"You bring people out here, and they say, man, look at all this open space,"
said Marshall Gray, president of KB's Tampa division. "But I assure you, there
are deals in the works for virtually every significant piece of ground you can
see out here."

Over the next decade, New River will expand to 1,800 acres and be home to 15,000
people living in 4,800 single-family homes, condominiums, town houses and rental
units. It will have a 200-acre town center with 180,000 square feet of office
space, 500,000 square feet of commercial space, schools, government offices and
a 207-acre park.

At the moment, though, it is nothing more than an island of 400 suburban homes
in the middle of nowhere, an infant exurb.

The term "exurb" was coined in the 1950's in "The Exurbanites" by A. C.
Spectorsky, a social historian, to describe semirural areas far outside cities
where wealthy people had country estates. The exurbs of the 21st century are a
different animal. And they are not the same as the older rings of closer
suburbs.

The homes in exurbs are generally larger and the space between them smaller.
They tend to turn their backs to the street, with the biggest and most used
rooms in the rear. And the people who live in them are different. Instead of the
all-white enclaves of the 1960's and 70's, the new exurbs are a mélange of
colors and cultures.

A Different Kind of Flight

"In one sense, these exurbs are just suburbs that take a longer time to drive
to," said John Husing, a political and economic consultant in California. "With
these, white flight has nothing to do with it. It's all housing prices. The
makeup of these communities is a reflection of who's migrating, and that's
people who have enough money to be middle class."

Look deep into the history of many of the new exurbs, and an entrepreneurial
character like Beat (pronounced BAY-at) Kahli, an Orlando-based developer, can
often be found.

etc. for three more pages


------                          ###                            -----
J.H. Crawford                                         Carfree Cities
mailbox@...                           http://www.carfree.com

=v= I had better luck with this URL:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/national/15exurb.html?pagewanted=all

| The homes in exurbs are generally larger and the space[s]
| between them smaller. They tend to turn their backs to the
| street, with the biggest and most used rooms in the rear.

=v= Of course, the streets have no life.  They only have cars
and death.  What a lovely design for keeping people apart, so
as to replace social interaction with shopping and television.

| "With these, white flight has nothing to do with it. It's
| all housing prices. The makeup of these communities is a
| reflection of who's migrating, and that's people who have
| enough money to be middle class."

=v= Since the phrase "white flight" was coined, demographic
trends have shifted in the U.S. and race relations have improved
in a number of ways.  Still, the population with "enough money
to be middle class" remains whiter than the population at large,
despite this realtor's self-serving happy talk.

=v= The antisocial underlying factors of "white flight" still
remain.  Fear of "inner city" crime ("inner city" is code for
"nonwhite"), leaving problems behind for others to deal with
with, and setting up living arrangements so as to be completely
isolated.  (If your life faces away from the street, it doesn't
matter whether your neighbors are black, white, human or robot.
This isn't really an ideal relationship with diverse humanity.)

=v= As for those problems left behind:  suburban infrastructure
such as water, sewers, and especially roads gets built with very
heavy subsidy (on the premise that growth is good and should
be encouraged), but get very expensive to maintain.  The nearer
suburbs are falling apart.  Having used these facilities up,
people of means are fleeing either to the newer far suburbs or
are gentrifying cities, which are of course less expensive to
maintain.  So now the near suburbs lack the economic base to
repair their collapsing infrastructures, and people without
means -- who are disproportionately nonwhite -- are displaced
by gentrifiers into these areas!

=v= When the U.S. Census in the year 2000 reflected some of
these trends, the media spun them as if people of color were
at last living the American dream by moving to suburbia.

=v= The article goes on to profile an "entrepreneur" (though
it's clear that he had to have started with some wealth in the
first place), who cashes in stadiums and concrete -- which of
course means he's cashing in on public subsidy.

| Asked what they wanted in a home, 88 percent said a home
| security system, 93 percent said they preferred neighborhoods
| with "more streetlights" and 96 percent insisted on deadbolt
| locks or security doors.

=v= The same fears that drive "white flight."  Better they
should fear the roads, cars, and SUVs that will dominate (and
quite likely end) their lives.

| Almost all of the fastest-growing counties in the United
| States are in exurban areas. And these far-flung communities
| proved, in the last election, to be among the strongest
| supporters of President Bush.

=v= This was something Andy Singer (the cartoonist) was pointing
out in a little travelling road show he's been giving.  This is
not a surprising trend, though for reasons not covered at all
in this article.  While there is the fundamental problem of oil
addiction going on here, these aren't necessarily Republican
strongholds.  Bill Clinton won over this same demographic,
though in those days they were spun as "soccer moms."

=v= What's really going on is that U.S. Presidential campaigns
are tailoring themselves based on market research on swing
voters, and suburbia is filled with swing voters.  This isn't
surprising.  A population that's isolated, alienated, nothing
nearby but places to shop, and miles and miles away from people
with unmediated ideas is a population that's going to be anomic
and very malleable.
     <_Jym_>

Jym Dyer commented:

>| "With these, white flight has nothing to do with it. It's
>| all housing prices. The makeup of these communities is a
>| reflection of who's migrating, and that's people who have
>| enough money to be middle class."
>
>=v= Since the phrase "white flight" was coined, demographic
>trends have shifted in the U.S. and race relations have improved
>in a number of ways.  Still, the population with "enough money
>to be middle class" remains whiter than the population at large,
>despite this realtor's self-serving happy talk.

Well, in this case, it's interesting that a plurality of the
new residents are not "white" but "Hispanic." I think this
is symptomatic of the new paradigm in the USA: discrimination
is not so much on the basis of race but on the basis of class.
Now, generations of discrimination have led to a situation in
which most well-off folks ARE white, but increasingly there
are more non-white folks with enough money to buy these
McMansions, and they are doing so.

Regards,



------                          ###                            -----
J.H. Crawford                                         Carfree Cities
mailbox@...                           http://www.carfree.com

It is hardly a city (125 families)? but it is being
built from scratch:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050814/news_mz1h14deaf.html

http://www.laurentsd.com/ (warning: cars on the main
page!)

There is also a story behind a new urbanist project in
san diego:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050814/news_mz1h14jerde.html

And a bit more about california new urbanism:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050814/news_1h14smokes.html


Colin
http://carfreeuniverse.org

I can only repeat my views on "burb cowardice" as the new version of "white
flight" ... I wrote a short piece for a net publication about 3 years ago
called "burb-cowards", in which I compared the ordeal of soldiers on the
Somme or their parents with hazards faced by today's UK children and their
parents. I concluded that had those soldiers showed the level of cowardice
in the face of what life presented them most of the army would have been
shot for cowardice or dismissed with extreme moral prejudice.

Naturally - along with modern military thinking - I abhor so severe a
treatment for people who behave with cowardice in the face of the modern
world, but I think that anyone who is so frightened of their fellow humans
that they are prepared to move house to a "safer" area and "stay in their
car" for fear of urban predators and watch their children constantly to
stave off the risk of "stranger dangers", might be referred to as lacking
moral fibre ("LMF" - I think it used to be called) and contributing to fear
in the population - for which there used, in war time, to be penalties.

I am familiar with these fears. I have long struggled with them - not for
myself now - but for my children. I recognise them and seek to control them.
I haven't moved house from the inner suburb of Handsworth in Birmingham - to
the continuing surprise of some traders and estate agents who imply in
various ways a mismatch between my apparent income and social class and my
choice of address. (Changes in urban living are fortuitously going to make
our choice of home look extraordinarily far sighted to these people in
another few years - but that's another matter - and we can all be hostages
to fortune.)

We let our children (boy and girl, now 21 and 16) roam the streets. When
young they could stay out after dark. I let them cycle where they wanted
after accompanying them on early rides and I am content for them not to make
themselves look ridiculous in cycle helmets. Though for the sake of avoiding
controversy I did make my daughter wear one up to the age of 12 when on the
road. (The research seems to suggest that a helmet can be helpful if one
falls over up to that age). They are schooled on the banal menace of
speedophiles - who may well be our otherwise civilised neighbours, but in a
rush or enjoying the power of their car and prone to hang around schools
polluting the air when there are lots of young people milling around.

I share the occasional panics with my wife - and she with me - but did not
and do not mention this to our children except to say things like "please
please call in if the opportunity arises and you're going to be home late".
Mobile phones and phone cards can be a reassurance, but they never stop the
fear. The difference between us and the "burb-coward" is we know this is our
problem not theirs. I do not want to stop my children knowing fear. Quite
the opposite. Fear is part of being human, but I want them to know the real
risks of modern life rather than having their imaginations distorted by the
virtual fears of the "burb-cowards".

So yes, I admit to feeling at least momentary terror on behalf of my
children almost every day. I can get sucked into the phantasmagorial world
of the "burb-coward" - so promiscuous are they about circulating their
actuarial illiteracy. I, like many others, am at the receiving end of daily
propaganda about the lurking dangers that threaten us all - to echo tabloid
phrasing. But I have striven to leave my children out of my neuroses about
these hazards of peace. I teach them statistics. I commit myself - with
temerity at times - to the duties of citizenship in the matter of risk
assessment. Thus some of our best shopping trips to London have been after a
major bomb scare there - when there is much less congestion and the
burb-cowards have stayed at home thinking another atrocity in a conurbation
of 6 millions stretching across ten or more miles will be aimed at them and
their children. "DIY" say I "is a lot more dangerous than the IRA".  I
learned this attitude after the Birmingham pub bombings in 1974. I was
fearful of going into town the next evening to night clubs. My West Indian
friend of those times chided me with playing into the hands of the
terrorists. I fought my temerity and went.

If there is a dreadful fate awaiting me or my wife or my children or others
I love, it is very unlikely to come from the things that motivate the
burb-cowards. Isn't the most dangerous place for us all our kitchen - full
of knives and relatives? I embrace the fable of that appointment in Samara.

I have lived in 50 years of peace. I owe it to those who lived through the
previous 50 years - and indeed those who suffer real terror and deprivation
in other parts of the world right now - not to be timid. I will not avoid
talking to young children in the park or streets for fear of having my
motives impugned. I don't deny the presence of paedophiles, rapists, muggers
and psychopaths - but I am alert to the minor risk they pose in the context
of hazards in the world. This is not Flanders in 1914-18, or the killing
fields of Cambodia, or Buchenwald and its siblings or the gulags and the
endless catalogue of contemporary world horror and injustice to which every
first world citizen should have their attention directed as a qualification
for citizenship.

Fighting one's own tendency to cowardice pays. The coward dies a thousand
times and is forever getting stuck in traffic. I feel the fear and grasp
that it is my duty to those who face real terrors not to succumb to it; to
welcome strangers - with discretion; to embrace the city but watch the road;
to enjoy its streets at all hours; to teach my children to face the real
hazards rather than the medieval inventions of the "burb-cowards".

Simon

From: "Mayer Hillman" <mayer.hillman@...>To:
<s.j.baddeley@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Slower Speeds UK]
Children playing in the street

Simon, I have just got round to reading your passionate email. The tears are
not only metaphorically but actually running down my face. You express my
own thoughts so cogently and so fluently ...It's people like you - and there
are few of them - that motivate me to think it worthwhile not only to keep
up the good fight but to do so with more dedication and diligence. Mayer



> =v= Of course, the streets have no life.  They only have cars
> and death.  What a lovely design for keeping people apart, so
> as to replace social interaction with shopping and television.
>
> | "With these, white flight has nothing to do with it. It's
> | all housing prices. The makeup of these communities is a
> | reflection of who's migrating, and that's people who have
> | enough money to be middle class."
>
> =v= Since the phrase "white flight" was coined, demographic
> trends have shifted in the U.S. and race relations have improved
> in a number of ways.  Still, the population with "enough money
> to be middle class" remains whiter than the population at large,
> despite this realtor's self-serving happy talk.
>
> =v= The antisocial underlying factors of "white flight" still
> remain.  Fear of "inner city" crime ("inner city" is code for
> "nonwhite"), leaving problems behind for others to deal with
> with, and setting up living arrangements so as to be completely
> isolated.  (If your life faces away from the street, it doesn't
> matter whether your neighbors are black, white, human or robot.
> This isn't really an ideal relationship with diverse humanity.)
>
> =v= As for those problems left behind:  suburban infrastructure
> such as water, sewers, and especially roads gets built with very
> heavy subsidy (on the premise that growth is good and should
> be encouraged), but get very expensive to maintain.  The nearer
> suburbs are falling apart.  Having used these facilities up,
> people of means are fleeing either to the newer far suburbs or
> are gentrifying cities, which are of course less expensive to
> maintain.  So now the near suburbs lack the economic base to
> repair their collapsing infrastructures, and people without
> means -- who are disproportionately nonwhite -- are displaced
> by gentrifiers into these areas!
>
> =v= When the U.S. Census in the year 2000 reflected some of
> these trends, the media spun them as if people of color were
> at last living the American dream by moving to suburbia.
>
> =v= The article goes on to profile an "entrepreneur" (though
> it's clear that he had to have started with some wealth in the
> first place), who cashes in stadiums and concrete -- which of
> course means he's cashing in on public subsidy.
>
> | Asked what they wanted in a home, 88 percent said a home
> | security system, 93 percent said they preferred neighborhoods
> | with "more streetlights" and 96 percent insisted on deadbolt
> | locks or security doors.
>

It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are selling
ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
today's lead news in one newspaper was how the rising
price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested to
me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
course the question arises what the corollary then
is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent Transport
(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are selling
ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
today's lead news in one newspaper was how the rising
price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested to
me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
course the question arises what the corollary then
is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent Transport
(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?




__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail

Not to split hairs, the "fuel" for NMT is food...

I do generally like the idea of recasting the debate
by pulling the rug out from under the terminology.

How about "combustion-based transport"?

Regards,


>It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are selling
>ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
>Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
>something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
>today's lead news in one newspaper was how the rising
>price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested to
>me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
>course the question arises what the corollary then
>is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent Transport
>(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
>Unsubscribe (blank message): carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


------                          ###                            -----
J.H. Crawford                                         Carfree Cities
mailbox@...                           http://www.carfree.com

This is a wonderful summation of how I feel.  I often wondered if I
was stupid because I went out by myself at night and never really felt
afraid, just careful.  I also worry about my kids, and now my first
grandkid, but I'm in my late 50s and female and have never had a
problem through years of living without a car, taking the bus, riding
my bike and coming home by myself late at night.  I tell this to
people and they don't even seem to hear me but go off on something
that happened to someone they know, or to someone that someone they
know knows.  I ask if they have ever been threatened and very, very
rarely get a yes but they still feel endangered.

--- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Simon Baddeley
<s.j.baddeley@b...> wrote:
> I can only repeat my views on "burb cowardice" as the new version
of "white
> flight"

=v= Another angle on fear is the gap between perception and
reality.  In the U.S., at least, it is more dangerous for
children to live in suburbs than in cities, and cars are the
reason.  Fearful parents focus more on rarities than on the
clear and present danger.
     <_Jym_>

When I lived in Portland, where car-free living is easy, I was out and
around at all hours, while more timid types cowered in their homes.

I can honestly say that I was never afraid, especially not after I
began volunteering in a program for homeless teens and realized that
the "scary" pierced and tattooed youth were much more sinned against
than sinning.

At the moment, I'm forced to drive here in Minneapolis, and I hate the
expense and the general hassle. However, my mother and stepfather are
about to move to a place that is accessible by bus, and car-sharing is
spreading rapidly, so maybe my tribulations--including a severe cash
hemorrhage for fuel, maintenance, repairs, and insurance-- will be over
soon.

In transit,
Karen Sandness

On Aug 16, 2005, at 11:51 AM, carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> This is a wonderful summation of how I feel.  I often wondered if I
> was stupid because I went out by myself at night and never really felt
> afraid, just careful.  I also worry about my kids, and now my first
> grandkid, but I'm in my late 50s and female and have never had a
> problem through years of living without a car, taking the bus, riding
> my bike and coming home by myself late at night.  I tell this to
> people and they don't even seem to hear me but go off on something
> that happened to someone they know, or to someone that someone they
> know knows.  I ask if they have ever been threatened and very, very
> rarely get a yes but they still feel endangered.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Combustion sounds too nice.  Isn't it really chemical
based transport?  Or burning chemical transport?


Eric
--- "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...> wrote:

>
> Not to split hairs, the "fuel" for NMT is food...
>
> I do generally like the idea of recasting the debate
> by pulling the rug out from under the terminology.
>
> How about "combustion-based transport"?
>
> Regards,
>
>
> >It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are
> selling
> >ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
> >Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
> >something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
> >today's lead news in one newspaper was how the
> rising
> >price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested
> to
> >me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
> >course the question arises what the corollary then
> >is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent
> Transport
> >(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> >Unsubscribe (blank message):
> carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> >Group address:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------                          ###
>           -----
> J.H. Crawford
>  Carfree Cities
> mailbox@...
> http://www.carfree.com
>
>
>
> Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> Unsubscribe (blank message):
> carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> Group address:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     carfree_cities-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>




____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

--- Eric Dupre <edupre94117@...> wrote:

> Combustion sounds too nice.  Isn't it really
> chemical
> based transport?  Or burning chemical transport?

Hi, to respond to the above and other suggestions...

"Non-motorised transport" is technical definition but
of course has the negative thing.

Bikes arent "fuel free" (because of BBF (banana-based
fuel) and also because manufacturing and delivery of
bikes... not "pollution-free" for the same reason...

"Combustion-based" isnt compelling enough - doesnt
have a ring to it - so perhaps it should not be taught
in the Carfree Cities 101 (introductory class) that we
need to get going everywhere... it also refers to
trains, buses, etc.

I hate saying "non-motorised AND public transport" or
"non-motorised AND buses, trams etc"

How about "CST"?: Complementary Sustainable
Transport/Transit - perhaps a problem because
"complementary" gets confused with the more common
"complimentary" - but it does include EVERYTHING -
perhaps even walking? - though it could be co-opted by
"Green Car" pushers.

But CST, sounds like "See Estee", rrrrolls well off of
the tongue...

Todd,
Happy to live in a city that is not acronymfree if it
IS carfree...
Green Idea Factory
see OTTF at www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain










>
>
> Eric
> --- "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Not to split hairs, the "fuel" for NMT is food...
> >
> > I do generally like the idea of recasting the
> debate
> > by pulling the rug out from under the terminology.
> >
> > How about "combustion-based transport"?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > >It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are
> > selling
> > >ourselves short with the terminology we are
> using.
> > >Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
> > >something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact
> that
> > >today's lead news in one newspaper was how the
> > rising
> > >price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested
> > to
> > >me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
> > >course the question arises what the corollary
> then
> > >is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent
> > Transport
> > >(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > >http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> > >Unsubscribe (blank message):
> > carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> > >Group address:
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------                          ###
>
> >           -----
> > J.H. Crawford
>
> >  Carfree Cities
> > mailbox@...
> > http://www.carfree.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> > Unsubscribe (blank message):
> > carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> > Group address:
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >     carfree_cities-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>
>
> Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> Unsubscribe (blank message):
> carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> Group address:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     carfree_cities-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>






___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

--- Todd Edelman <traintowardsthefuture@...>
wrote:
>
> But CST, sounds like "See Estee", rrrrolls well off
> of
> the tongue...

Addendum from Todd:

Google results:

1 - UK: Results 1 - 7 of 7 for "Complementary
sustainable transport". (0.41 seconds)

[examples are all sentence fragments]

2 - USA: Your search - "Complementary sustainable
transit" - did not match any documents.

3 - Results 1 - 10 of about 8,220,000 for "CST"
[definition]. (0.17 seconds)

T





___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

=v= One term that's been adopted is "human-powered vehicle,"
or HPV.  I've also seen "muscle-powered vehicle," though that
would presumably also include horses and such.
     <_Jym_>

--- Jym Dyer <jym@...> wrote:

> =v= One term that's been adopted is "human-powered
> vehicle,"
> or HPV.

TODD: Yes, I like that one - it emphasizes our legs
and arms and hearts  - but I forgot about it... it is
adopted but how widely used? Isnt it mostly about
those special vehicles used in races, as in:

International Human Powered Vehicle Association
(IHPVA)
www.ihpva.org

Did they actually co-opt or monopolize the term?

Anyway, it would I suppose be a component of the
proposed "CST"...

Todd





___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

According to Debra Efroymson,
> It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are selling
> ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
> Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
> something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
> today's lead news in one newspaper was how the rising
> price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested to
> me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
> course the question arises what the corollary then
> is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent Transport
> (dependency sounds appropriately evil)?

Keep the acronym, ditch the words.

NMT = Nasty Motorized Transport

According to Todd Edelman,
>
> --- Jym Dyer <jym@...> wrote:
>
> > =v= One term that's been adopted is "human-powered
> > vehicle,"
> > or HPV.
>
> TODD: Yes, I like that one - it emphasizes our legs
> and arms and hearts  - but I forgot about it... it is
> adopted but how widely used? Isnt it mostly about
> those special vehicles used in races, as in:
>
> International Human Powered Vehicle Association
> (IHPVA)
> www.ihpva.org
>
> Did they actually co-opt or monopolize the term?
>
> Anyway, it would I suppose be a component of the
> proposed "CST"...

The International Human Powered Vehicle association ...

   ihpva.org

... is perhaps best known for races of bents and trikes and
boats and subs and flying machines, but it's also interested
in practical daily-use vehicles, as evidenced by many
articles in their Human Power magazine and the Open Source
Velomobile project hosted at their site...

   http://www.ihpva.org/wiki/index.php/Open_Source_Velomobile_Development_Project

I've never known them to be proprietary about the term HPV,
and I'd say, let's use it.  No point splitting the mindshare
and all that.

Another term in common use is "velomobile", but that is more
specific.; i.e. it excludes conventional bicycles.

Yes, "human-powered vehicle" (HPV) is a good option sometimes used, but at
this stage one is only talking about "vehicles".  Presumably, this does not
include "walking" since the human body is not generally regarded as a vehicle.
  NMT is a term that at least covers both walking and bicycling.

Further, doesnt't the word "bicycle" cover most of what we are talking about
on the vehicle side?  Of course, there are skateboards and push-scooters, but
for the most part it is a bicycle or a derivation thereof (e.g. trikes,
pedicabs, rickshaws).  Thus, "walking" and "bicycles" for the most part do a
great job of describing the core concepts.

Of course, these words perhaps don't have the same marketing value as a fancy
acronym, so we end-up with NMT, HPV, Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV), etc.
Additionally, perhaps we are seeking other terms in part because "walking" and
"bicycling" have a negative image for some audiences.

There are also other phrases sometimes used to capture these concepts:
"Sutainable Transport" and "Green Transport".  These also generally include
public transport, but depending on one's definition of "sustainable" and
"green" it could also include less environmentally-friendly options such as a
Prius or simply a lighter SUV.

I suppose the answer ultimately depends on the audience and what one is trying
to convey.  In general, my preference is to avoid acronyms altogether and be
as direct and clear as possible, but of course sometimes a marketable spin is
indeed required.

Best regards,

Lloyd

------ Original Message ------
Received: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 04:03:32 PM EDT
From: Jym Dyer <jym@...>
To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] CST ( was NMT vs FFT)

=v= One term that's been adopted is "human-powered vehicle,"
or HPV.  I've also seen "muscle-powered vehicle," though that
would presumably also include horses and such.
     <_Jym_>

>From: "glen dolhan" <glendolhan@...>
>To: "Andrew Dawson" <m82a1_dawson@...>
>Subject: Fw: Fw: Hard To Please                                       j
>Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:55:00 -0500
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: sbelzac
>To: John Wilkey
>Cc: george b ; glen dolhan
>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 8:04 PM
>Subject: Fw: Fw: Hard To Please j
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       -------Original Message-------
>
>       Subject: Fw: Fw: Hard To Please
>
>
>
>
>
>
>             Hard to please
>
>              Soon after my wife and I met, she mentioned how she really
>wished that she could afford a riding lawnmower.  She was a single gal that
>worked all day and was often tired in the evening when she got home from
>work.
>
>
>             So, being the handy sort of guy that I was,  I made her a
>riding lawnmower.
>
>
>             I guess I thought she would squeal with delight
>
>             and give me a big hug.
>
>
>             To this day I have never been able to understand
>
>              why women are so hard to please.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>             As you slide down the banister of life, may the splinters
>never point in the wrong direction! ~Irish Blessing !
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

According to Tony Godshall,
> According to Debra Efroymson,
> > It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are selling
> > ourselves short with the terminology we are using.
> > Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
> > something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact that
> > today's lead news in one newspaper was how the rising
> > price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested to
> > me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
> > course the question arises what the corollary then
> > is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent Transport
> > (dependency sounds appropriately evil)?
>
> Keep the acronym, ditch the words.
>
> NMT = Nasty Motorized Transport

Oops.  Got it backwards.  Sorry, all.

--- Lloyd Wright <LFWright@...> wrote:

> There are also other phrases sometimes used to
> capture these concepts:
> "Sutainable Transport" and "Green Transport".  These
> also generally include
> public transport, but depending on one's definition
> of "sustainable" and
> "green" it could also include less
> environmentally-friendly options such as a
> Prius or simply a lighter SUV.

TODD: Yes, that is why I came up with CST...

>
In general, my preference is to avoid
> acronyms altogether and be
> as direct and clear as possible, but of course
> sometimes a marketable spin is
> indeed required.

TODD: I am more concerned with the term, not the
marketing specifically or  acronym.. just some thing
PRECISE... but typing out the whole phrase is a
problem. Now, if  someone can create a keyboard
shortcut...

Complementary Sustainable Transport would probably be
defined by many to include carsharing... that is okay
maybe but do need a term for carfree CST...CCST?

Gotta run (!), I am jumping on my LPT (leg-powered thing)...



___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

> Of course, these words perhaps don't have the same marketing
> value as a fancy acronym, so we end-up with NMT, HPV,
> Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV), etc.

=v= Ugh.  In my experience, ZEV is never ever used honestly.
It's sheer doublethink, along with ULEV and especially PZEV.
Let's not bring dishonest marketing terms into consderation.

> Additionally, perhaps we are seeking other terms in part
> because "walking" and "bicycling" have a negative image for
> some audiences.

=v= Frankly, such audiences need some educating.  If they're
under the mistaken impression that something's wrong with these
wonderful activities, new names aren't going to help much.

                              * * *

=v= After reading a "CST" message earlier today, I went outside
and discovered that somebody local* is using that as a tag.
In fact, somebody painted, "Ride Yer Bike.  CST." on a mailbox.
Needless to say, I was a bit flabbergasted about this.

=v= Half a block away, they'd painted, "Drink In Public.  CST."
on a traffic sign.
     <_Jym_>

According to Lloyd Wright,
> Yes, "human-powered vehicle" (HPV) is a good option sometimes used, but at
> this stage one is only talking about "vehicles".  Presumably, this does not
> include "walking" since the human body is not generally regarded as a vehicle.
>  NMT is a term that at least covers both walking and bicycling.

FFF- fossil fuel free?

> Further, doesnt't the word "bicycle" cover most of what we are talking about
> on the vehicle side?  Of course, there are skateboards and push-scooters, but
> for the most part it is a bicycle or a derivation thereof (e.g. trikes,
> pedicabs, rickshaws).  Thus, "walking" and "bicycles" for the most part do a
> great job of describing the core concepts.
>
> Of course, these words perhaps don't have the same marketing value as a fancy
> acronym, so we end-up with NMT, HPV, Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV), etc.
> Additionally, perhaps we are seeking other terms in part because "walking" and
> "bicycling" have a negative image for some audiences.
>
> There are also other phrases sometimes used to capture these concepts:
> "Sutainable Transport" and "Green Transport".  These also generally include
> public transport, but depending on one's definition of "sustainable" and
> "green" it could also include less environmentally-friendly options such as a
> Prius or simply a lighter SUV.
>
> I suppose the answer ultimately depends on the audience and what one is trying
> to convey.  In general, my preference is to avoid acronyms altogether and be
> as direct and clear as possible, but of course sometimes a marketable spin is
> indeed required.

Avoiding acronyms and "transport" (which implies passivity
and excludes walking)...

"Dino-free?(tm)"

brings to mind ...

  - the origins and finiteness of fossil fuel (dead dinos)

  - fossil fuel transport is going to have to go the way of
    the dino

  - sort of implies that people who use fossil fuel are dinos


"What's your Dino-rating(tm)?"

"How dino-free are you?(tm)?"

You're a 10 if you walk or bike everywhere.

You're a 9 if you take electric mass transit.

You're a 8 if you carpool in a ZEV.

You're a 7 if you carpool in a NPEV or hybrid.

You're a 6 if you take fossil fuel mass transit.

You're a 5 if you carpool in a small SUV.

You're a 4 if you carpool in a large SUV.

You're a 3 if you carpool in a Hummer or other large truck as if
it were a car by yourself.

You're a 2 if you drive alone in a ZEV, NPEV, or hybrid.

You're a 1 if you drive alone car or small SUV.

You're a 0 if you drive alone in a large truck as if
it were a car (Hummer, Escalade, Expedition).

Adjust + if you have a short transit or go fewer than ten
segments per week.

Adjust - if you have a long transit or go more than ten
segments a week.

Best Regards,

Tony

Hmm, this seems to have sparked quite a debate...a
multitude of terms seems fine, I just suggest we
consider the effects before using them.

I don't consider fuel-free such a stretch--don't
fat-free foods mean less than 1%?  And I do like
fuel-dependent.  But this is in the context of
Bangladesh, where fuel is at the center of the debate.
  Human-powered here would again sound like there's
something wrong--why not put an engine in?

I'm not suggesting there's a best term for everyone;
just that we choose our terms carefully!  I've been
using MT and NMT too long and realize I'm playing
right into the hands of our enemies.

Anima

--- Eric Dupre <edupre94117@...> wrote:

> Combustion sounds too nice.  Isn't it really
> chemical
> based transport?  Or burning chemical transport?
>
>
> Eric
> --- "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Not to split hairs, the "fuel" for NMT is food...
> >
> > I do generally like the idea of recasting the
> debate
> > by pulling the rug out from under the terminology.
> >
> > How about "combustion-based transport"?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > >It suddenly occurs to me that perhaps we are
> > selling
> > >ourselves short with the terminology we are
> using.
> > >Non-motorized transport (NMT) sounds like there's
> > >something lacking--what, no engine?  The fact
> that
> > >today's lead news in one newspaper was how the
> > rising
> > >price of fuel is destroying our economy suggested
> > to
> > >me a better term:  Fuel-Free Transport (FFT).  Of
> > >course the question arises what the corollary
> then
> > >is--Fuel-Based Transport or Fuel-Dependent
> > Transport
> > >(dependency sounds appropriately evil)?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > >http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> > >Unsubscribe (blank message):
> > carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> > >Group address:
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------                          ###
>
> >           -----
> > J.H. Crawford
>
> >  Carfree Cities
> > mailbox@...
> > http://www.carfree.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> > Unsubscribe (blank message):
> > carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> > Group address:
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >     carfree_cities-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>
>
> Post messages to:  carfree_cities@eGroups.com
> Unsubscribe (blank message):
> carfree_cities-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
> Group address:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     carfree_cities-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>




____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs