Policy makers seem caught in the headlights like deer. Paulson's plan to drive people more into debt is obviously wrong at a time when debt is causing the global economy to tank. "In part, that's because as federal officials reach further out for ways to ease the credit freeze-up that's hogtying the overall economic recovery, they have little choice but to adopt strategies carrying greater risks."
Well not quite. Not at all. You solve debt with jobs. Green jobs that refuel, repower and rebuild will allow people to make their own decisions on how to get out of debt. A revenue carbon tax can encourage better consumption, Removing the deduction for debt will change behavior.
However the infrastructure for energy consumption is the economy and experts do not know any other way around it. That's why they are stumbling today and digging the hole deeper. Strangely environmentalists can align with Republicans to limit the state's ability to build infrastructure for consumption.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Need indicators to measure energy consumption caused by infraastructure
Can we measure how cities have managed to increase energy consumption? And what rules are used to shape energy consumption? For transportation its easy. The increase in road, public works budgets, increasing speed limits, road designs are readily available as physical measures of how fuel consumption has increased with infrastructure. The rule used in Level Of Service. But what about other areas like water and garbage?
Climate change is resonant with the public today which is why we have an interest in less driving and green buildings etc. About 40% of the community Green House Gas footprint comes from building energy use. 55% of GHGs in this area come from the buildings location. Our inability in the past to address the toxic results of city actions, by just addressing pollution through the EPA and CEQA, has resulted in species declines and rising resource prices destabilizing the globe through resource wars, droughts, hurricanes, and fires. We have brought on our own four horsemen of the appocalypse.
On the Belmont Green Committee to address climate change, we just added a debate item, to do a postmortem analysis of city council actions to highlight how the working of city hall and the general plan shape energy consumption.
It was good to see the reporter take back this message:
The article goes on to write: Cities and counties make the rules that shape energy consumption. Why fight at City Hall against carbon dioxide emissions? Because about 45 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions come from transportation, and 28 percent from electricity generation and natural gas burning to heat and power buildings, according to Bay Area air quality officials.
Strangely the inability of city hall to address climate change is itself leading to a global decline from the effects of peak resources. The depression is causing all kinds of good things like a move to more home gardens, and declining energy use.
Climate change is resonant with the public today which is why we have an interest in less driving and green buildings etc. About 40% of the community Green House Gas footprint comes from building energy use. 55% of GHGs in this area come from the buildings location. Our inability in the past to address the toxic results of city actions, by just addressing pollution through the EPA and CEQA, has resulted in species declines and rising resource prices destabilizing the globe through resource wars, droughts, hurricanes, and fires. We have brought on our own four horsemen of the appocalypse.
On the Belmont Green Committee to address climate change, we just added a debate item, to do a postmortem analysis of city council actions to highlight how the working of city hall and the general plan shape energy consumption.
It was good to see the reporter take back this message:
The article goes on to write: Cities and counties make the rules that shape energy consumption. Why fight at City Hall against carbon dioxide emissions? Because about 45 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions come from transportation, and 28 percent from electricity generation and natural gas burning to heat and power buildings, according to Bay Area air quality officials.
Strangely the inability of city hall to address climate change is itself leading to a global decline from the effects of peak resources. The depression is causing all kinds of good things like a move to more home gardens, and declining energy use.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Congestion is a poor measure of mobility.
Congestion management, or building us out of congestion, is a poor way of measuring mobility, which is why access issues for bicycle and pedestrian mobility get locked out of the funding and design streams. CCAG has not been able to implement many of its bicycle master plan provisions over the last two iterations since 1995, and is looking for a new plan, because congestion management has wiped out the routes and created the need for expensive replacement which lack any funding capability in TDA-3. One example is Ralston over 101 where the two right turning lanes on 101 northbound wiped out access and a replacement with the Ralton bike bridge is now more than eight years late and seriously funding challenged. Greg Marsden has proposed alternate measures.
Looking in the TEP for alternate funding is also wrong. SMCTD Transportation Expenditure Plan Program Categories Pedestrian and Bicycle 3 0% $45.0 million $25 million (page 7) to implement either Millbrae Avenue/US 101 pedestrian/bike overcrossing (Millbrae)
or US 101 near Hillsdale Boulevard pedestrian/bike overcrossing (San Mateo) are replacement funding for not providing routine accomodation. Both Pedestrian overcrossings should have been included as Routine Accomodation fundings when Caltrans and Bart completed the projects that left these projects up to the local municipalities. When all is said and done, there would be all too little money left in the pot to fund any other project that the 19 other Cities might propose.
In the Economist building out, or Braes Paradox, was recently described and the following letter received:
SIR – It may be of interest to your readers to know that it was actually economists who first figured out that an individual's selfish behaviour when selecting an optimal travel route would yield different traffic flows and times than if one were to assign flows in a centralized manner to try and minimize the cost to society ("Queuing conundrums ", September 13th). Arthur Pigou wrote "The Economics of Welfare" in 1920, by which time he was well aware of the distinction between different traffic behaviours.
Curiously, traffic and queuing problems keep on getting (re)discovered by different disciplines; now it seems to be the turn of the physicists.
Anna Nagurney
Director
Virtual Centre for Supernetworks
Isenberg School of Management
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Massachusetts
Note the solution- permanent Sunday Streets!
Looking in the TEP for alternate funding is also wrong. SMCTD Transportation Expenditure Plan Program Categories Pedestrian and Bicycle 3 0% $45.0 million $25 million (page 7) to implement either Millbrae Avenue/US 101 pedestrian/bike overcrossing (Millbrae)
or US 101 near Hillsdale Boulevard pedestrian/bike overcrossing (San Mateo) are replacement funding for not providing routine accomodation. Both Pedestrian overcrossings should have been included as Routine Accomodation fundings when Caltrans and Bart completed the projects that left these projects up to the local municipalities. When all is said and done, there would be all too little money left in the pot to fund any other project that the 19 other Cities might propose.
In the Economist building out, or Braes Paradox, was recently described and the following letter received:
SIR – It may be of interest to your readers to know that it was actually economists who first figured out that an individual's selfish behaviour when selecting an optimal travel route would yield different traffic flows and times than if one were to assign flows in a centralized manner to try and minimize the cost to society ("Queuing conundrums ", September 13th). Arthur Pigou wrote "The Economics of Welfare" in 1920, by which time he was well aware of the distinction between different traffic behaviours.
Curiously, traffic and queuing problems keep on getting (re)discovered by different disciplines; now it seems to be the turn of the physicists.
Anna Nagurney
Director
Virtual Centre for Supernetworks
Isenberg School of Management
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, Massachusetts
Note the solution- permanent Sunday Streets!
Universal health care should be the first priority.
THE NY TIMES reported today that AIG will need another $40B on top of the 121B already spent. Without addressing the underlying landuse issues, of failure on the outskirts of the driving economy, we are leaving this problem to fester and worsen.
Hurricane Katrina and the fires in California have created other problems with insurance companies. Florida, Louisiana were looking to join CA in providing state insurance for disasters because insurers were bailing out. The load on employers have also taxed the ability of insurance companies to provide health insurance and states are trying to grapple with this problem too.
HR 676 cost of a $60bn-$110bn plan to provide universal health insurance for Americans is insignificant relative to the broken system we have today. We should replace it and reduce out costs quickly and help employers reduce their burden. This will allow employers to use critical funds elsewhere in rescuing their business. Then the government can tackle the investment in the urban environment to reduce the need to drive with the balance of the bailout bill.
Bailing out GM and other losers of the past system without using a gas tax is just bad policy.
Hurricane Katrina and the fires in California have created other problems with insurance companies. Florida, Louisiana were looking to join CA in providing state insurance for disasters because insurers were bailing out. The load on employers have also taxed the ability of insurance companies to provide health insurance and states are trying to grapple with this problem too.
HR 676 cost of a $60bn-$110bn plan to provide universal health insurance for Americans is insignificant relative to the broken system we have today. We should replace it and reduce out costs quickly and help employers reduce their burden. This will allow employers to use critical funds elsewhere in rescuing their business. Then the government can tackle the investment in the urban environment to reduce the need to drive with the balance of the bailout bill.
Bailing out GM and other losers of the past system without using a gas tax is just bad policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
