Check out this short piece by Ahmina James, a Berkeley High senior, on KQED's Perspectives series.
She discusses the problem that many people see environmentalism as a game played only by middle-aged and highly educated white men.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Perspective on Perceptions of Environmentalism
Monday, March 2, 2009
Schwarzenegger Declares Drought Emergency
Last Friday, Governor Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought emergency. Despite this recent spate of rain, Schwarzenegger said that California is facing its third consecutive year of drought and emphasized the possibility that the drought will continue for years into the future. In his declaration, Schwarzenegger urged all urban water users to reduce consumption by 20 percent and instructed the state Department of Water Resources to assist people affected by the drought, expedite water transfers and take various other actions. In addition, the emergency declaration paves the way for state-mandated cutbacks on water supply allocations and for prioritization of urban over agricultural water rights generally and of urban over agricultural users in State Water Project deliveries. Schwarzenegger's action will also make it easier for water suppliers to declare that local water shortages exist within their service districts, allowing them to regulate water consumption and restrict delivery, including the denial of applications for new or additional service connections.
Schwarzenegger's action was a necessary one, even if it did come a tad late. And it is encouraging that the Governor still made the emergency declaration despite the recent glut of rain and emphasized the potentially very long-term nature of this and future droughts. Nonetheless, I have my doubts that water suppliers and the state government will take any significant strides to reform California's water rights, water supply planning and land use planning schemes without continued drought for a few more years to come. Thus, while I personally love rain and deplore the dire effects of drought on people and the environment, I am more than a little worried that this current rain and any significant amount of future rain will cause water suppliers, local governments and the state to lapse back into "everything is fine" mode, continue allowing our state to grow prodigiously and fail to make the necessary structural changes to better plan for and cope with future droughts.
Politicians often lack the foresight or desire to champion precautionary measures to protect against uncertain or temporally distant harms; they instead tend to react to crises as they happen. With drought, it is no different. However, with drought in the American West, the consequences of failing to act preemptively can be particularly disastrous. The West has a history of tremendously long droughts with penchants for wiping out entire civilizations, such as the Hohokam people of the Southwest. The longer we wait to act and the more California's population and water demands grow, the harder it is going to be to cope with drought in the future and the greater the impacts on our people (particularly those with fewer financial resources) and environment will be.
Schwarzenegger's action was a necessary one, even if it did come a tad late. And it is encouraging that the Governor still made the emergency declaration despite the recent glut of rain and emphasized the potentially very long-term nature of this and future droughts. Nonetheless, I have my doubts that water suppliers and the state government will take any significant strides to reform California's water rights, water supply planning and land use planning schemes without continued drought for a few more years to come. Thus, while I personally love rain and deplore the dire effects of drought on people and the environment, I am more than a little worried that this current rain and any significant amount of future rain will cause water suppliers, local governments and the state to lapse back into "everything is fine" mode, continue allowing our state to grow prodigiously and fail to make the necessary structural changes to better plan for and cope with future droughts.
Politicians often lack the foresight or desire to champion precautionary measures to protect against uncertain or temporally distant harms; they instead tend to react to crises as they happen. With drought, it is no different. However, with drought in the American West, the consequences of failing to act preemptively can be particularly disastrous. The West has a history of tremendously long droughts with penchants for wiping out entire civilizations, such as the Hohokam people of the Southwest. The longer we wait to act and the more California's population and water demands grow, the harder it is going to be to cope with drought in the future and the greater the impacts on our people (particularly those with fewer financial resources) and environment will be.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Friday, February 13, 2009
Make Your Own Bike Lane?
I often find myself lamenting the fact that there are not more dedicated bike lanes in U.S. However, instead of waiting around for our lobbying efforts to succeed in getting cities to create more bike lanes, we may soon be able to take our own bike lanes with us wherever we go - at least at night. A couple innovators at Altitute, Inc. have come up with a laser projection system that projects a virtual bike lane onto the pavement behind you. I don't think it's on the market yet, but I'd love to see these in action.
Check it out here.
Check it out here.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Rub-a-dub-pthalate
NRDC’s blog sparked some controversy yesterday over a recent New York decision interpreting the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) as banning all products with certain types of phthalates (a toxic plasticizer chemical), not just those manufactured after the law is set to take effect. NRDC had co-filed the complaint against the Consumer Product Safety Commission so naturally they were thrilled – the small business readers, not so much. They complained (reasonably) that these laws unfairly burdened smaller manufacturers and craftsmen, imposing a huge, possibly ruinous, costs for certification and testing. NRDC’s blogger responded by drawing a distinction and saying that the CPSC should be allowing exemptions for small business owners instead of dragging its feet in implementing the law.
Speaking of dragging their feet, the CPSC recently announced a delay in the part of the law that requires the testing and certification. Wait, what? So, what this means is that starting February 10, it’s illegal to sell goods that don’t comply with CPSIA standards for lead and pthalates? But there’s no way to enforce it? In short, yes. NRDC's blogger says so herself, but quietly, in the middle of the first post:
“That means that while it will be illegal to sell toys with these six phthalates, there is no verification that the toys on shelves will comply with law.”
So, the small business is touting this as a grassroots win (looks like the CPSC responded to something of an online media blitz) and NRDC is pleased with the at least symbolic victory that the law will be enforced.
Regulation is needed – the whole reason this law passed in 2008 (most sweeping product safety legislation in almost 20 years!) was because of the public outcry against all the toxic toys being recalled. But we should find a way to force large companies like Mattel to internalize the cost of outsourcing from countries like China with lax regulations. Actually, this wasn’t my idea: Boalt’s own Guzman and Bamberger wrote a CLR article on the topic.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Who Runs Gov
Check out this new website: Who Runs Gov. It gives pretty detailed profiles for a ton of government officials and officials-in-waiting. Good place to go to get an overview of the new key players and issues surrounding them.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Proposed CEQA Exemption for green house gases
Wait, isn’t California supposed to be setting the standard in climate change policy?
My sources indicate that the California AG's office is "very concerned" that the CEQA exemption listed below may pass as part of the current state budget negotiations. If it does so, green house gas emissions will not trigger the environmental impact report or mitigation requirements under CEQA and government projects will be able to contribute to climate change with impunity.
Get in touch with your state legislators and let them know they better not let this go through.
CEQA Greenhouse Gas Litigation Relief
Section 21097.5 of the Public Resources Code is added to read:
21097.5. (a) The failure to analyze adequately or to mitigate the effects of
greenhouse gas emissions in an environmental impact report, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration or other document required pursuant to this division
for any proposed project does not create a cause of action for violation of this
division.
(b) This section shall apply retroactively to an environmental impact report,
negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or other document required pursuant to this division
that has not
become final.
(c) This section shall remain in effect only until the final regulations specifying
greenhouse gas reduction measures adopted by the Air resources Board pursuant to
section 38562 of the Health and Safety Code become operative and as of that date is
repealed, unless a later enacted statute deletes or extends that date.
My sources indicate that the California AG's office is "very concerned" that the CEQA exemption listed below may pass as part of the current state budget negotiations. If it does so, green house gas emissions will not trigger the environmental impact report or mitigation requirements under CEQA and government projects will be able to contribute to climate change with impunity.
Get in touch with your state legislators and let them know they better not let this go through.
CEQA Greenhouse Gas Litigation Relief
Section 21097.5 of the Public Resources Code is added to read:
21097.5. (a) The failure to analyze adequately or to mitigate the effects of
greenhouse gas emissions in an environmental impact report, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration or other document required pursuant to this division
for any proposed project does not create a cause of action for violation of this
division.
(b) This section shall apply retroactively to an environmental impact report,
negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or other document required pursuant to this division
that has not
become final.
(c) This section shall remain in effect only until the final regulations specifying
greenhouse gas reduction measures adopted by the Air resources Board pursuant to
section 38562 of the Health and Safety Code become operative and as of that date is
repealed, unless a later enacted statute deletes or extends that date.
Obama on FOIA and open government
What? Really? A President who thinks transparency and public accountability have a place in our democracy?
Assuming Obama follows through with promoting this policy and agencies respond in kind, this is a prime example of how drastically different the relationship between the executive branch and the public will be under the new administration.
"The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In
the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information
confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure,
because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract
fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal
interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to
serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies should
act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are
servants of the public. All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of
disclosure. . ."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct/
"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of open-
ness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and
establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration.
Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effec-
tiveness in Government."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/
Assuming Obama follows through with promoting this policy and agencies respond in kind, this is a prime example of how drastically different the relationship between the executive branch and the public will be under the new administration.
"The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In
the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information
confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure,
because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract
fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal
interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to
serve. In responding to requests under the FOIA, executive branch agencies should
act promptly and in a spirit of cooperation, recognizing that such agencies are
servants of the public. All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of
disclosure. . ."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct/
"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of open-
ness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and
establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration.
Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effec-
tiveness in Government."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/
BART and Bicycles
By taking BART instead of driving, travelers generally reduce the amount of air pollution their trips produce. However, this reduction in air pollution is greatly diminished when riders drive to the BART station. This is due to cold starting. For shorter trips (generally, less than 5-10 miles), cold starting can produce the majority of total trip hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions (which contribute to photochemical smog and numerous respiratory and circulatory problems). Thus, to make BART and other rail transit systems most effective for reducing air pollution, we need to maximize the percentage of riders accessing the systems by modes other than single-occupancy vehicle, e.g. bicycling.
In December, the Berkeley City Council took a step in the right direction by (finally) allocating funds for a new bicycle garage for BART riders. The garage will be located in a Shattuck Ave. storefront and will replace the current, and much smaller (~90 bike capacity), facility inside the Downtown Berkeley station. It will have a 250 bike capacity and come replete with a guard, mechanic services and potentially even a coffee shop - and the parking will remain free. If all goes well, the new facility could be opened as soon as next spring. Still, despite this localized progress, bicycle-BART integration is still not where it should be in order to maximize BART's potential to reduce air pollution.
We need to make it easier for bicyclists to use BART, particularly during those commute hours when bicycles are prohibited on most or all BART cars. The creation of a new, expanded capacity bike garage at the Downtown Berkeley station is a great step, but it will not make a huge impact on its own. Free parking garages (with ample capacity, unlike the current Berkeley facility) should be provided in or near all BART stations - and widely publicized. Currently, such facilities exist only at the Downtown Berkeley, Embarcadero and Fruitvale stations. BART and the cities housing BART stations should also secure funds to staff the garages for longer, and more continuous, hours. In addition, BART and the host cities should work together to provide networks of safe and accessible bike routes, boulevards, paths, etc. that lead to the stations. Planning for these improvements should start now.
You might say argue that these investments are too costly, especially in our current economic climate. However, these investments would create jobs (or at least create work for existing workers) and could be designed to become self-sufficient. For instance, the new Downtown Berkeley bike station might include a coffee shop whose revenues would be used to offset the garage's operating costs. Fees for bicycle maintenance provided at the bike stations could be similarly used. Another option would be to raise the car parking rates at BART stations, which would have the concomitant benefit of forcing drivers to internalize some of the negative externalities of driving.
In any case, regardless of cost, it is clear that for BART to reach its full potential (to reduce air pollution) we need to significantly reduce the number of riders who access BART stations via single-occupancy vehicles. Increasing access for bicyclists is one essential component of any such effort, alongside improvements in service, frequency and geographical reach of transit feeder systems, land use changes near stations, and numerous other things.
In December, the Berkeley City Council took a step in the right direction by (finally) allocating funds for a new bicycle garage for BART riders. The garage will be located in a Shattuck Ave. storefront and will replace the current, and much smaller (~90 bike capacity), facility inside the Downtown Berkeley station. It will have a 250 bike capacity and come replete with a guard, mechanic services and potentially even a coffee shop - and the parking will remain free. If all goes well, the new facility could be opened as soon as next spring. Still, despite this localized progress, bicycle-BART integration is still not where it should be in order to maximize BART's potential to reduce air pollution.
We need to make it easier for bicyclists to use BART, particularly during those commute hours when bicycles are prohibited on most or all BART cars. The creation of a new, expanded capacity bike garage at the Downtown Berkeley station is a great step, but it will not make a huge impact on its own. Free parking garages (with ample capacity, unlike the current Berkeley facility) should be provided in or near all BART stations - and widely publicized. Currently, such facilities exist only at the Downtown Berkeley, Embarcadero and Fruitvale stations. BART and the cities housing BART stations should also secure funds to staff the garages for longer, and more continuous, hours. In addition, BART and the host cities should work together to provide networks of safe and accessible bike routes, boulevards, paths, etc. that lead to the stations. Planning for these improvements should start now.
You might say argue that these investments are too costly, especially in our current economic climate. However, these investments would create jobs (or at least create work for existing workers) and could be designed to become self-sufficient. For instance, the new Downtown Berkeley bike station might include a coffee shop whose revenues would be used to offset the garage's operating costs. Fees for bicycle maintenance provided at the bike stations could be similarly used. Another option would be to raise the car parking rates at BART stations, which would have the concomitant benefit of forcing drivers to internalize some of the negative externalities of driving.
In any case, regardless of cost, it is clear that for BART to reach its full potential (to reduce air pollution) we need to significantly reduce the number of riders who access BART stations via single-occupancy vehicles. Increasing access for bicyclists is one essential component of any such effort, alongside improvements in service, frequency and geographical reach of transit feeder systems, land use changes near stations, and numerous other things.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Van Jones...Again
On the topic of Van Jones, Treeblogger is not the only outfit writing about him. There is a seven page article about him and the green jobs movement in the Jan. 12, 2009 New Yorker, and it's certainly worth a look. It provides interesting insights into both the power and limitations of a single person with a dream. Additionally, it depicts how quickly an untested and somewhat vague idea can gain steam and turn into a full-fledged public policy movement - a testament to the power of image and the prospect, whether realistic or not, of killing two birds with one stone. It remains to be seen whether a green economy is truly a holy grail for the chronically un- and underemployed or just another mirage. However, with Obama seemingly on the green economy bandwagon and willing to push supportive federal policies and programs, we should see some more definitive results in the years to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
