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

Re: Car-free cities and jobs

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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.