Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Car-free cities and jobs

Expand Messages
  • prometeus57
    ... What s the effect of Paris thousands of trees? Can more be planted / the buildings be greened somehow?
    Message 1 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Neuman" <mtneuman@j...>
      wrote:
      > 15,000 Parishaners died in August from the record setting heat-wave
      > that reportedly took the lives of over 35,000 Europeans last summer.
      > Unless Paris invests heavily in air conditioning (and supplying the
      > electricity for it), I wouldn't advise anyone over 60 moving there

      What's the effect of Paris' thousands of trees? Can more be planted /
      the buildings be greened somehow?
    • mauk_mcamuk
      ... Hrrrrrm... Would it be possible to pitch a carfree city as a planned urban development, or essentially a large suburb? In other words, have the large
      Message 2 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > Not necessarily so. I found two locations in the Netherlands, one
        > of the most densely populated nations in the world, where the
        > Reference Design could be built without significant alteration.
        > It's true that in mountainous regions the good spaces may be
        > mostly taken, but anywhere we're building suburbs today is a
        > potential spot for a carfree city. The spaces don't need to be huge
        > in order to support a large population.
        >

        Hrrrrrm... Would it be possible to pitch a "carfree city" as a
        planned urban development, or essentially a large suburb? In other
        words, have the large industrial areas contain MAJOR parking areas at
        first, and essentially let the first few developments grow using a
        nearby city as the economic base. After you get a few neighborhoods
        established, with a little luck, it would become self-sustaining.



        > >2) Building a city from scratch requires a formidable pile of
        capital.
        >
        > So does any other development project; billion-dollar projects are
        > now routine. The banks have the money; what's required is a
        developer
        > who believes in the idea and can convince a bank to fund it. This is
        > well within the realm of possibility.
        >

        Have you done any work on how much capital it would take? more
        importantly, how would you pay that capital back? Taxes on
        residents?
      • Mike Neuman
        I suppose more trees in the cities would help, if nothing else but to not make things worse with more and more pavement. Spraying with cool water also keeps
        Message 3 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          I suppose more trees in the cities would help, if nothing else but to
          not make things worse with more and more pavement.

          Spraying with cool water also keeps people's internal temperatures
          down. Other ways to stay cool include spending more time in the
          basement (if you have one), staying out of the sun, avoiding
          strenuous physical activities and drinking fluids. But air
          conditioning will become key for many areas, as it has already for
          many metropolitan areas located in the warmer climates.

          There doesn't appear to be much else one can do, other than to hope
          such a heat wave doesn't occur again, in Europe or elsewhere, at
          least in the near future.

          Chances are increasing that it will, of course, as global warming
          continues to worsen. Cities all over the Northern Hemisphere should
          be preparing right now for the potential for more unusually hot
          weather to possibly occur again next summer. If we don't get it,
          that would be great. But if we do get it, we had best be prepared
          for it. Otherwise, what happened in Paris this past August could be
          repeated, many times over, in many other cities. That
          would be catastrophic.

          Unfortunately, this problem is going to get much worse in time. That
          is what 999 scientist out of 1,000 will tell you if they are informed
          at all in this area. (The one remaining will have been paid by the
          fossil fuel/transportation/media industries to tell you otherwise.)

          Every year, global warming will get worse and worse. It has been
          already, and there is no reason to believe things will not continue
          to deteriorate in time.

          Yet most of the people in government, especially at the federal
          agency level in the U.S., will still say they fail to see the problem
          coming, or becoming that serious at any time soon. They are wrong.

          Some might think that, but they won't volunteer to talk about it,
          much less listen to someone else who tries to press on them the need
          to become concerned about it. Bob Dylan called it "killing the
          prophets".

          I know a man who has been working for the National Weather Service
          in this country for 25 years. He and I talked about this problem
          back in January 2000. It was clear to us then, after having read many
          of the studies and having specialized in climate related fields at
          the university, that this was going to be a huge, huge problem if
          society didn't start to act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
          levels, almost right away. We could tell that then. At this same
          time, Dan Rather from CBS news did a program on his nightly news show
          that raised the issue of the growing problem with the warming
          climate. You could tell he was concerned. Even later outgoing
          president Clinton said it was going to be the most important issue of
          the century.

          The man I know started to raise this issue to his superiors at the
          National Weather Service about four years ago. They would have
          nothing to do with it. Global warming was not in their job
          description.

          So the guy send an email to people in Washington about it, about the
          end of January 2000 as I recall. That's when the sh-- hit the fan -
          but just for him, of course. The people in Washington who run the
          National Weather Service - a guy named Jack Kelly, (now deputy
          director of NOAA) & others - they wouldn't stand for it. Who does
          one of our employees think he is telling us in Washington we had
          better stop ignoring a big problem like global warming in our
          weather and flooding prediction policies? (they said.)

          Over time, they awarded the guy 3 separate disciplinary suspensions
          (without pay of course).

          With NOAA and the National Weather Service now under the "new"
          administration (Global Warmer Bush, etc.), things haven't gotten any
          better. In fact, they are worse now than ever. He is preparing now
          for reactionary measures again -- probably dismissal --
          because he went ahead and issued his own public news release, on a
          study he recently completed that provides increasing evidence of more
          rapid global warming now than ever before. He put out $500 of his own
          money to do it even. And now he's probably going to loose his job as
          well, only a couple of years away from retirement.

          I could go on with more details about this, but this forum doesn't
          seem to be the correct place to do that. It's just that it turns my
          stomach. Here's a guy who had no other motive than to speak up about
          an impending threat to all of us - to raise awareness of the problem
          so others would start to take the issue more seriously and work
          constructively to solve it. Yet the people he raises the problem to
          dump all over him for it. These are people in high places of our
          government, people who are paid generously with public money to
          protect the public's welfare in a matter as universally important to
          everyone as the climate and weather. Blame them -- not the
          scientists, messengers and profits for this problem. Those bums
          should have been thrown out before Bush took office. Just look what
          they have (not) done!

          --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "prometeus57"
          <prometeus57@y...> wrote:
          > --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Neuman"
          <mtneuman@j...>
          > wrote:
          > > 15,000 Parishaners died in August from the record setting heat-
          wave
          > > that reportedly took the lives of over 35,000 Europeans last
          summer.
          > > Unless Paris invests heavily in air conditioning (and supplying
          the
          > > electricity for it), I wouldn't advise anyone over 60 moving
          there
          >
          > What's the effect of Paris' thousands of trees? Can more be
          planted /
          > the buildings be greened somehow?
        • Jym Dyer
          ... =v= Deciduous trees shade nearby buildings in the summer and let sunlight shine through in the winter. It s a good idea to plant more. I like the green
          Message 4 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            > What's the effect of Paris' thousands of trees? Can more
            > be planted / the buildings be greened somehow?

            =v= Deciduous trees shade nearby buildings in the summer and let
            sunlight shine through in the winter. It's a good idea to plant
            more. I like the "green roofs" approach, as well.

            =v= And oh yeah, gotta stop all these cars from heating up the
            planet in the first place.
            <_Jym_>
          • Bijan Soleymani
            ... I realize that the world is probably getting warmer, but I ve been to Paris twice (both times in the summer) and have to say that the weather was much
            Message 5 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              "Mike Neuman" <mtneuman@...> writes:

              > 15,000 Parishaners died in August from the record setting heat-wave
              > that reportedly took the lives of over 35,000 Europeans last summer.
              > Unless Paris invests heavily in air conditioning (and supplying the
              > electricity for it), I wouldn't advise anyone over 60 moving there
              > any time soon. Thanks to the U.S. and other heavy fossil fuel
              > burning countries of the world, the possibility of more of these
              > tragedies happening in the world will grow with each passing year,
              > especially in cities vulnerable to "heat island" effects.

              I realize that the world is probably getting warmer, but I've been to
              Paris twice (both times in the summer) and have to say that the
              weather was much better (cooler) than the weather where I live. And
              that happens to be Montreal, Canada :) Maybe it's less humid...

              Bijan
              --
              Bijan Soleymani <bijan@...>
              http://www.crasseux.com
            • Bijan Soleymani
              ... They could charge the residents for the convenience of living on their development. This is called rent. Another option is selling the housing units to the
              Message 6 of 23 , Nov 7, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                "mauk_mcamuk" <mauk2@...> writes:

                >> >2) Building a city from scratch requires a formidable pile of
                > capital.
                >>
                >> So does any other development project; billion-dollar projects are
                >> now routine. The banks have the money; what's required is a
                > developer
                >> who believes in the idea and can convince a bank to fund it. This is
                >> well within the realm of possibility.
                >>
                >
                > Have you done any work on how much capital it would take? more
                > importantly, how would you pay that capital back? Taxes on
                > residents?

                They could charge the residents for the convenience of living on their
                development. This is called rent. Another option is selling the
                housing units to the residents and having the banks lend them the
                money: mortgage. :)

                The problem isn't that there is no money to be made in carfree cities,
                but that it's easier for developpers to build suburban sprawl. It's
                easy, it's standardized, doesn't require as much capital, etc.

                Bijan
                --
                Bijan Soleymani <bijan@...>
                http://www.crasseux.com
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.