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

Re:Uranium Mining - Allowed near Grand Canyon Nat'l Park

Expand Messages
  • kwikfile08
    Morgan, Awesome analysis on Bike Vs Car. I will guide folks to the Blog page. We here in Roots are essentially the choir. (Open your Hymnals to page 251
    Message 1 of 4 , May 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Morgan,

      Awesome analysis on Bike Vs Car. I will guide folks to the Blog page. We here in Roots are
      essentially the choir. (Open your Hymnals to page 251 please... Rev Wright will start in a
      moment, Ha, Ha)
      BUT HOW DO WE GET OTHERS ON BOARD (SNAP DECK) rhetorical question obviously, but I
      am vexed by this all the time.
      I am trying by example by being out there, being friendly even in sketchy L.A. traffic
      scene. That is hard too. All the same I dream of the day when there are substantial biker
      out there....

      Namaste'

      Carl

      --- In rootsradicals@yahoogroups.com, Morgan Giddings <mcgurme@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Carl,
      >
      > Here's a way to make this related to cycling. I did a blog post a
      > while back about the oil saved if only 1/3 of the US population rode a
      > bike 2 days a week instead of driving a car. It would have a big
      > impact: http://cycle9.com/Blog/files/TwoCarTrips.php
      >
      >
      > > Okay - It's not "directly" about Cycling but it caught my attention.
      > > Today 5-4-2008 in an article in the Los Angeles times Judy Pasternak
      > > wrote an article
      > > entitled " A GRAND CANYON RUSH FOR URANIUM"
      >
      > Now, the thought of all that uranium contamination along the Colorado
      > river pains me. I grew up in that part of the country, that was my
      > backyard, and I remember well the big uranium tailings piles located
      > right along the mighty red river, a scar on the landscape. I also got
      > my first chance to kayak down the Grand Canyon when I was 14 yrs old,
      > and it is a special place (Glen Canyon, now underwater, was even more
      > special according to my father, who spent time there).
      >
      > That said, the issue of nuclear is not so simple for me anymore. The
      > world is at or near peak oil. The population is huge and energy
      > hungry. As of now, there is no green energy source that will come
      > close to satisfying the demand. In the US alone, our auto and truck
      > fleet consumes several terawatt hours worth of energy per day. There
      > is no green technology (solar, wind, geothermal) that is poised to
      > even provide a fraction of that. And even if we all stop driving and
      > start biking, we still need a huge amount of energy for food
      > production and delivery, heating homes, etc.
      >
      > I was just in China. They are rapidly on a path to a more energy
      > intensive life. Only 1/3 of the population there owns a car now - the
      > number of bikes I saw was huge (I took lots of pictures, I will post
      > them soon). But many there want a car and will buy one as soon as
      > they can afford it. That puts more pressure on the system.
      >
      > Right now, as oil becomes more scarce, the only electric sources that
      > can come close to satisfying all this demand are coal and nuclear.
      > Both have environmental consequences, but in the long run, the
      > question is: which has less consequences? I have drawn my own
      > conclusion, and rather than relating it to the group, I just hope
      > everyone will think about that and come to their own well-informed
      > decision. Given the problems we face as a species, more thinking
      > about the trade offs we face, and less knee jerk reactionary rhetoric,
      > would be a very good thing right now (I'm not singling anyone on this
      > group out, just observing what seems to go on a lot in general).
      >
      > I hope I'm wrong, and that someone comes up with a miracle green
      > energy source.
      >
      > Morgan
      >
    • Morgan
      Hi Carl, I m glad at least one person enjoys the blood, sweat, and tears I put into that site! Actually, I had the same conundrum: how to get more people
      Message 2 of 4 , May 6, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Carl,
        I'm glad at least one person enjoys the blood, sweat, and tears I put into that site!

        Actually, I had the same conundrum: how to get more people onboard. I realized that
        around my area, there were several impediments:

        1. It is hilly here, and hot in the summer. Many people are intimidated by the hills,
        especially women (I'm unusual in that regard, but I grew up in a mountainous western
        state). Electric assist is a great solution for this issue.


        2. The local shops don't promote cycling as transportation as much as they do cycling as
        sport. They are pretty uninterested in the cargo bike/sub/electric bike market.


        3. People think cycling is "unsafe". It's actually kind of self fulfilling, because the more
        people that bike the safer it becomes (and, vice-versa). While I wear a helmet nearly
        always, I personally think the focus on "helmet wearing" as the "#1 safety" thing for bikes
        has actually had a big negative effect. I know many people that are turned off by wearing
        a helmet, and it increases the perception of bikes being not safe. (For an interesting take
        on this from the perspective of mandatory helmet laws, see: http://www.cycle-helmets.com/)

        So, I decided to try adressing #1 and 2 by opening a shop with another family member.
        It's still far from net profitability, and our mortgage has become a lot bigger in the
        process. I just hope that it can sometime break even while at the same time help more
        people locally and nationally get into bikes as transportation. Our goal is similar to that of
        Clever Cycles in Oregon, though here in the Southeast, cycling culture is far behind that
        of Portland, so we have a bigger uphill battle.

        As for #3, I really think the best solution is for more people to get out and bike, to set an
        example that cycling can be safe and fun. The more of us that do it, the safer it is, and
        the more "normal" it seems. So that brings us back to #1 and #2...helping more people
        get on bikes in the first place.

        Anyway, for anyone headed to Chapel Hill NC anytime soon, please stop by our shop and
        give a Yuba, Xtracycle, electric bike, and/or folding bike a spin! We plan to begin normal
        operating hours next week (hours and location will be on our blog and contact page at
        http://cycle9.com)

        Regards,
        Morgan


        --- In rootsradicals@yahoogroups.com, "kwikfile08" <kwikfile08@...> wrote:
        >
        > Morgan,
        >
        > Awesome analysis on Bike Vs Car. I will guide folks to the Blog page. We here in Roots
        are
        > essentially the choir. (Open your Hymnals to page 251 please... Rev Wright will start in a
        > moment, Ha, Ha)
        > BUT HOW DO WE GET OTHERS ON BOARD (SNAP DECK) rhetorical question obviously, but
        I
        > am vexed by this all the time.
        > I am trying by example by being out there, being friendly even in sketchy L.A. traffic
        > scene. That is hard too. All the same I dream of the day when there are substantial biker
        > out there....
        >
        > Namaste'
        >
        > Carl
        >
        > --- In rootsradicals@yahoogroups.com, Morgan Giddings <mcgurme@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hi Carl,
        > >
        > > Here's a way to make this related to cycling. I did a blog post a
        > > while back about the oil saved if only 1/3 of the US population rode a
        > > bike 2 days a week instead of driving a car. It would have a big
        > > impact: http://cycle9.com/Blog/files/TwoCarTrips.php
        > >
        > >
        > > > Okay - It's not "directly" about Cycling but it caught my attention.
        > > > Today 5-4-2008 in an article in the Los Angeles times Judy Pasternak
        > > > wrote an article
        > > > entitled " A GRAND CANYON RUSH FOR URANIUM"
        > >
        > > Now, the thought of all that uranium contamination along the Colorado
        > > river pains me. I grew up in that part of the country, that was my
        > > backyard, and I remember well the big uranium tailings piles located
        > > right along the mighty red river, a scar on the landscape. I also got
        > > my first chance to kayak down the Grand Canyon when I was 14 yrs old,
        > > and it is a special place (Glen Canyon, now underwater, was even more
        > > special according to my father, who spent time there).
        > >
        > > That said, the issue of nuclear is not so simple for me anymore. The
        > > world is at or near peak oil. The population is huge and energy
        > > hungry. As of now, there is no green energy source that will come
        > > close to satisfying the demand. In the US alone, our auto and truck
        > > fleet consumes several terawatt hours worth of energy per day. There
        > > is no green technology (solar, wind, geothermal) that is poised to
        > > even provide a fraction of that. And even if we all stop driving and
        > > start biking, we still need a huge amount of energy for food
        > > production and delivery, heating homes, etc.
        > >
        > > I was just in China. They are rapidly on a path to a more energy
        > > intensive life. Only 1/3 of the population there owns a car now - the
        > > number of bikes I saw was huge (I took lots of pictures, I will post
        > > them soon). But many there want a car and will buy one as soon as
        > > they can afford it. That puts more pressure on the system.
        > >
        > > Right now, as oil becomes more scarce, the only electric sources that
        > > can come close to satisfying all this demand are coal and nuclear.
        > > Both have environmental consequences, but in the long run, the
        > > question is: which has less consequences? I have drawn my own
        > > conclusion, and rather than relating it to the group, I just hope
        > > everyone will think about that and come to their own well-informed
        > > decision. Given the problems we face as a species, more thinking
        > > about the trade offs we face, and less knee jerk reactionary rhetoric,
        > > would be a very good thing right now (I'm not singling anyone on this
        > > group out, just observing what seems to go on a lot in general).
        > >
        > > I hope I'm wrong, and that someone comes up with a miracle green
        > > energy source.
        > >
        > > Morgan
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.