Got a lightbulb joke? Send it in to Sierra Club, which today kicked off its new campaign, Lightbulbs to Leadership. The goal: to "remind Americans that it takes more than changing lightbulbs to fix global warming –- it takes changing the will of our leaders." Here's the front page joke on the Lightbulbs to Leadership site right now:
Q. How many conservatives does it take to change a lightbulb? A. None. They liked the old one so much that nothing could compare to it.
The campaign's trying to spread the message with short animated parodies, all themed around lightbulb jokes.
Lightbulbs to Leadership won't be all sarcastic doom and gloom; the campaign will also highlight the economic benefits of moving toward a Clean Energy Economy. So send in your best joke -- and push our leaders to do more than just change their lightbulbs.
(Alex Thompson looks goofy with his tan arms and white hands . . . when will cycling manufacturers make "tan through" gloves?)
I've written about the most basic bike activism -- riding your bike in LA. I wrote about extending that to talking to friends and family, and taking that a step further to volunteer for a bike organization. What's left? A lot. There are many aspects of L.A.'s car culture that cyclists need to adjust in order for LA to be a bike friendly city. Right now there simply aren't enough people doing enough things.
So what can you do? The third way to bike activism is to get creative. You can create an organization, or become a lone wolf agitator. You could organize a group ride, pull off a media stunt, or become a regular at public meetings. You could document biking through writing, blogging, the ibikeu Wiki, film or photograph. You can take a leadership role in an existing bike organization. There are many needs, and even more approaches.
(Bike activists argue at the L.A. Bicycle Master Plan update meeting in West L.A. Photo by Franz Ellers, with Alex's camera!)
What you will do, if you get creative with activism, is fail. I know this because I personally have failed more often than I have succeeded at bike activism. I failed publicly on a joint project called Roll With It. I failed on my first project, Critical Commute, which I embarked on with almost no knowledge of existing bike activism and culture. I failed in trying to organize UCLA cyclists to lobby for a stronger UCLA Bicycle Master Plan. Ask me in private and I'll share my more recent failures. The point is to keep trying, and learn from your mistakes. It's OK to fail because, typically, when you succeed, your success will snowball and catalyze more change than you could have anticipated.
I think that documenting bike culture and bike activism is an area where more creative effort is needed. It's also an area in which one can have tremendous impact. Recently, Emerald City reader Nolen Clark recommended I watch "Return of the Scorcher," an influential movie from the '90s about a resurgence in cycling. As I watched it I felt as if the ideas it presented were useful, but unoriginal and commonplace. Then it hit me -- this movie has been watched by almost every bike activist in the United States who has operated in the last decade. It was so influential that everyone learned the ideas within it, making the ideas ubiquitous, and therefore the movie eventually made itself obsolete. It seems basic to me because it is part of today's base of knowledge; it has become an element of the foundation of knowledge from which bike activists operate. That is powerful.
(Two cyclists ride on the 405 during a traffic jam, a controversial instance of bike activism. Photo by Alex Thompson)
More recently a group called Crimanimal Mass mixed a creative ride idea with careful documentation to make a powerful statement about Los Angeles car culture. 25 cyclists (including me!), along with 3 rollerbladers, took to the 10 freeway, heading east onto the interchange to the 405 North, and eventually exiting onto Santa Monica Blvd. In the midst of the rush hour parking lots we call "freeways," I felt safe riding, since vehicle speeds were below eight mph. Organizers documented the ride using multiple video cameras and carefully crafted the footage for viewing on YouTube and Vimeo. The footage was picked up by numerous bloggers, and hundreds of thousands of people viewed the videos and read the articles.
Now, you might exclaim "what positive impact can breaking the law and riding where you don't belong possibly have?" "People are going to be put off by your wanton disregard for the law," you could argue. Many were, but the footage of cyclists passing cars stopped in bumper to bumper traffic on the gargantuan 405 raised interesting questions. Why is it that our transportation infrastructure is so broken that it doesn't function when it is most needed, at rush hour? Why is it that cyclists are better able to make use of a system designed for cars? Cyclists participating in the (second) Freeway Traffic Jam Ride succeeded in raising those questions in an intriguing way, a way not easily dismissed. They catalyzed conversations between citizens about highway infrastructure and cycling. By starting those conversations, they don't just help cyclists, but they help everyone who is stuck in traffic. It was a unique and creative instance of effective activism.
(Bikes and trees go together, a creative post-Freeway Ride use of trees. Photo by Alex Thompson)
Crimanimal Mass would have been far less effective had they received less media attention. That's the risk with more creative activism: there's no guaranteed payoff. However, the upside is that you can have impacts that conventional activism can only dream about. No mass e-mail by an established advocacy organization could have a similar impact as the Freeway Ride videos or Return of the Scorcher. This is true of other forms -- if you start a new organization there is a chance it will fail, but if it grows, then you have massive success. If you blog, there is a chance you will have trouble reaching new readers, but if you succeed you have created a powerful new voice for cyclists. These are higher-risk forms of activism, but they carry with them a chance of an avalanche of benefits for cyclists.
Next week I'll write about . . . I don't know what I'll write about. Perhaps I will write more about other forms of activism. What would you like to know about cycling in L.A.?
>> Up to 24,000 Californians die from fine particulate pollution each year, according to state researchers. The revised figures are based on a review of new research across the nation about the hazards posed by microscopic particles, which sink deep into the lungs. "More measures will be needed, air board officials said, including eventually lowering the maximum permissible levels of soot statewide."
>> A Senate panel overturned the U.S. EPA's decision against California's bid to limit greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. "In December, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson turned down California's request for a Clean Air Act waiver that would have allowed the state to require that automakers cut global warming emissions by 30% in new cars and light trucks by 2016. Boxer's bill would deem the waiver approved."
>> Polluting paints are getting phased out from SoCal. "Starting July 1, all flat paints made, sold and used within Orange and major portions of San Bernardino, Riverside and Los Angeles counties must have 50 grams or less of volatile organic compounds per liter."
[This article is the second in a three-part series on ways individuals can work to improve conditions for cyclists and encourage cycling. That's exactly the goal of bike activism, so in essence, this is a three-part series about ways to engage in bike activism. Read the first post.]
Two weeks ago I wrote about biking as the most essential act of bike activism, and talking to others about cycling as the natural followup. After you wear out your welcome evangelizing biking to your friends and family (or convert them all), one route to expanding your activism is to volunteer for an organization.
Volunteering is simple, right? You just go to the organization you choose to volunteer for, say "Here I am," and they give you a stack of envelopes to lick. I disagree. Volunteering is a complex and often creative act. There are a variety of factors to consider in choosing for whom you volunteer, and what activities you volunteer to do.
In choosing where to volunteer, you should think about what forms of activism are the most effective for cycling. You might choose a different organization to volunteer for if you believe direct outreach to be more important than advocacy. You are also tasked with evaluating whether the organization you choose is effectively utilizing your effort.
Most importantly, you need to consider what you would like to do. We volunteer our free time and excess energy, so it is important that whatever you choose to do as a volunteer is rewarding. If not, you won't volunteer for very long, and that's no good for anyone. How much energy and time would you like to devote? If you over-commit you won't be very effective, and if you volunteer for a high-energy task when you're tired, you won't be of much help to the organization. Conversely, if you have a lot of energy to volunteer, and you get stuck licking envelopes, you'll be bored to death.
In L.A., I know of five organizations where you can volunteer to help cyclists: CICLE, the three bike repair collectives - the Bike Oven, the Bicycle Kitchen, and the Bikerowave - and the Los Angeles Bicycle Coalition.
C.I.C.L.E., a.k.a. Cyclists Inciting Change Through Live Exchange, recently pulled off a spectacular event series, Bike Week Pasadena, culminating in an all-day Urban Bicycle Commuter Expo. The Expo confirmed that CICLE has the ability and opportunity to delegate to volunteers, as well as access to local government to leverage volunteer efforts. Bike Week Pasadena demonstrated an ability to manage multiple projects simultaneously. If you volunteer for CICLE you can be sure that your efforts will be fully utilized.
(Ashira Siegel staffing a booth at the Urban Bicycle Commuter Expo, volunteers for the Bicycle Film Festival.)
CICLE is a multi-faceted organization, so there's more than one way to contribute. They have a local outreach component, which focuses on events like Bike Week Pasadena as a means to reach demographics not always targeted by bike activists. Their news and views is the best aggregation of bike news (mixed with some original content) available, and has international reach. CICLE also produces a variety of beautiful literature to hand out to people interested in cycling.
If you're interested in volunteering, e-mail info@cicle.org.
Bike Repair Collectives -- the Bike Oven, Bikerowave, and the Bicycle Kitchen -- are not-for-profit bike shops that teach cyclists how to fix their bicycles. All three of these organizations have diverse needs. They need mechanics who will do the basic work of teaching customers bicycle repair. They also need people to help with the organizations' administrative functions: promotion, finances, records, policy, scheduling, etc.
Volunteering as a mechanic for a bike repair collective is very rewarding. Firstly, the organizations will train you in bicycle repair, so no prior bike repair experience is required, and you'll end up with expertise in bike repair. Teaching others how to fix their bikes, you are able to immediately witness the impact you've made in the community. You will be constantly sending customers out the door with newly functioning bikes and an education in bicycle repair. When someone approaches you months later whom you don't recognize, and thanks you for guiding them through a repair, it's a good feeling.
(Eric Weinstein, at the Urban Bicycle Commuter Expo, volunteers for the Bikerowave.)
Volunteering on the administrative side is a chance to get your feet wet steering a dynamic volunteer organization. With the Bicycle Kitchen, you have an opportunity to be part of an organization that is having tremendous impact on the community. With Bikerowave and the Bike Oven you have extremely young organizations that are just starting to structure themselves. Both the Bike Oven and Bikerowave have more administrative work to be done than they have workers, so you can have immediate impact by taking care of a task that needs doing.
I suggest, if volunteering at a bike repair collective interests you, volunteering at the one closest to you. Since they are an unusual form of organization, it might be a good idea to go visit in person to get a sense for how they function, before firing off an e-mail offering your help.
The Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition is the oldest bike advocacy organization in L.A., founded in 1998. They have a variety of needs for volunteers, mostly centered around fundraisers and their bi-monthly socials or upcoming River Ride. You can find out more by visiting the volunteering section of their website.
(Bikes valet-parked at the Urban Bicycle Commuter Expo.)
Besides these five orgs, one other opportunity is the upcoming Bicycle Film Festival. Last year's festival was spectacular, and with the amazing show they put on, there must be a huge operation behind the curtains. E-mail volunteer@bicyclefilmfestival.com to pitch in for the Bicycle Film Festival when it is in L.A., July 16-19.
That's about it. A parting suggestion: when you volunteer for an organization, apply the same degree of professionalism you do to your life or career. When I was a volunteer manager of volunteers it was frustrating when people did not take it seriously. When you volunteer there are people who will be relying on you, so don't let them down. As always, remember: have fun!
Next week I'll write about more unconventional ways to go about activism (or arguably, just ways that aren't volunteering.)
>> For the second time this year, Westside "Criminal Mass" bicyclists took to the 10 and 405 highways last Friday to protest things -- pollution, according to NBC, which aired some of the footage. (via LAist)
>> Will the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee get restructured and organized? Yes, if a motion (PDF) coming before the City Council Planning & Land Use (PLUM) Committee today gets passed. Cyclists have been criticizing the BAC for 64.9% attendance record and lack of action: "During ’07, the BAC took action 10 times. 6 of those actions were to approve minutes and 4 times the Committee voted to send a letter although there is no evidence that any letters were ever sent."
>> Best place to get a used bike: Coco's Variety in Silver Lake, according to Sean Bonner of LA Metblogs. "You can pick up a solid bike in fantastic condition often for less than a brand new piece of crap at Target will cost you, and it’ll last a lot longer too."
>> Plan to bike to Dodger Stadium? The sole bike rack's in Lot P -- though not even the parking attendants seem to know of its existence. Damien Newton offers photographic guidance -- and a lot of constructive criticism for the stadium -- in Streetsblog LA.
>> Organic farming mitigates climate change, says Timothy LaSalle of the Rodale Institute, a leading organic-farming research and advocacy organization. "Synthetic fertilizer and oil-based pesticides release carbon dioxide into the air. But the organic approach, which is truly regenerative agriculture, sequesters carbon: It takes carbon out of the air and puts it back in the soil."
>> The U.S. EPA needs to regulate carbon monoxide, rules a judge. The EPA was told it needs to regulate carbon dioxide too -- but the agency appears set on shirking that responsibility until the end of the Bush administration.
Metro’s plan to convert HOV (high-occupancy vehicle, a.k.a. carpool) lanes to HOT (high-occupancy toll) lanes on portions of Interstates 10 and 210 (variable toll lanes depending on the number of people in the vehicle and time of day) has become controversial. In fact, it's the most controversial transportation project since, well, since legislation was debated in the legislature a couple of weeks ago that would allow L.A. County voters to decide whether or not to place a climate change fee on either gasoline or registration of low-efficiency vehicles.
The most common arguments used against the HOT lane proposal can be broken down into three different categories, all discussed in some detail in my previous Emerald City columns. But for those just joining the congestion pricing debate, here's why these anti-HOT lane arguments don’t hold water. (If you want to read some arguments against congestion pricing, here are two pieces from Pasadena Weekly and the Los Angeles Times.)
The most compelling argument against HOT lanes is that it’s not fair to take away the benefit of a free commute with little to no congestion from people that are trying to do the right thing by joining or starting a carpool. However, we don’t yet know how the pricing structure on the HOT lanes will be structured. Metro hasn’t announced a fee schedule, so defenders of carpoolers could be worrying themselves for nothing.
Once the schedule's nailed down, it very well could be that cars with more than one passenger will be paying a very reduced rate and cars with three or more people driving free. It could also be that cars with two or more passengers will be able to access the HOT lane in non-peak hour periods for free, but have to pay a small fee during peak hours. The truth is, carpoolers probably won’t be seeing much, if any, of a change in the cost of their commute.
The most popular argument against HOT lanes is the claim that congestion pricing is nothing more than class warfare. Writers plead with their readers to think of the impact toll lanes, instead of HOV lanes, will have on the poor. I’m not saying that no poor people use the toll lanes on the 10 and 210 but for the most part, this argument is a red herring.
If people really want to help the poor have a better commute, they’ll call for more funding for better transit service. I don’t think a lot of the working poor are commuting to work in the HOV lanes on the 10, but for those who do, wouldn’t it be better to provide more bus and rail options so that people of lesser means had the option to commute to their job in a more cost-effective way than owning a car and paying for gas and insurance every month?
Also, instead of pompously assuming that we in the typing class know what’s best for “the poor” why don’t we actually ask them what they think? When someone does, the result is that people of all income levels support HOT lanes once they’re already in place.
My favorite argument against congestion pricing is, “they aren’t called FREEways for nothing.” Didya see what they did there, emphasized the word free and all...
There’s two snarky responses to this. First, the roads being considered for HOT lanes aren’t called freeways at all. They’re called Interstates. Second, the origin of the word freeway has nothing to do with whether or not there is a toll on the road. It has to do with access to the road being limited to entrance and exit ramps.
Of course, nobody is really arguing over the definition of the word “freeway.” What they’re trying to do is use the first part of the word to make their point these roads were built with tax dollars and thus drivers (taxpayers) should be allowed to drive on them without paying an additional fee of any sort.
Let’s ignore for a second the added benefits to commuters that will be caused by increased transit and let’s ignore that the “cost” of the car culture that is caused in large parts by our freeway system far exceeds any gas tax.
In modern times, our transportation dollars are stretched thin. Funds generated from the existing gas taxes aren’t enough to build and maintain the transportation network, so if drivers aren’t willing to pay more, then the network will collapse. Remember, under congestion pricing, the funds generated will go back into the transportation projects to the corridors from where the funds came. In other words, the corridors that see congestion tolls will also be the ones that see increased transit capacity and better maintained highways. From the initial federal grant Metro has earned, we’ve already seen funds dedicated to buying 60 high-capacity buses and better Metrolink service.
In the end, one of the costs of living in Los Angeles is that there will be congestion on the roads, highways and interstates. There is no magic way to make congestion go away; all governments can do is offer options for people who choose to live and travel here. Congestion pricing, assuming the money goes into funding a better transit system, does just that.
>> The House aims to go carbon neutral with a green Capitol program, created by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco). The initiative has brought everything from organic food to biodegradable flatware to energy-saving motion-detector lights to the House.
>> What a good carbon policy needs: simplicity, political buy-in and efficiency in reductions. Pick two of the above, says Grist's David Roberts, in a 3-parter (one, two, three) analyzing the different policies, none of which contain all three desirable attributes. He concludes he prefers the cap-and-dividend plan as proposed by Peter Barnes, whose reader-friendly booklet on the topic I've discussed previously.
(Curmudgeonly L.A. cyclist Alex Thompson's rants cause the conflict-adverse discomfort, but he cares a whole lot.)
Between 1996 and 2008, the city of Los Angeles added 5 miles of bike paths or lanes each year. That's an astronomical success!
No, that's a complete failure. The city of Los Angeles encompasses 469 square miles. Adding 5 miles of bike lanes per year corresponds to adding 56 feet per square mile each year. 56 feet. That's the width of a small 7-11 parking lot. Ride your bike for 2 seconds, and that's how much farther you can expect to be able to ride on bike lanes in your neighborhood next year. You can expect a complete network of bikeways in about 100 years. City of L.A., EPIC FAIL.
There isn't just failure on cycling infrastructure. There's failure on all cycling issues. The Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee, which advises the City Council on cycling issues, can't find a steady meeting location. The committee president, appointed two decades ago by then-Mayor Bradley, still fails to follow basic rules of order or treat the public with courtesy. Councilman Bill Rosendahl is indulging residents of Mar Vista who are convinced bike paths cause crime, rather than insisting on better law enforcement.
Worst of all is the institutionalized bias against cyclists at the L.A. Department of Transportation (LADOT). LADOT bicycle staff spend most of their time explaining to bike activists, "here's why you can't have what you want." In order to update the L.A. Bike Master Plan, the LADOT and Planning department scheduled four meetings for community input. That's about one meeting per million people. Portland had one meeting per 12,000 residents to update their bicycle master plan. It gets better, if you visit LADOT's Bicycle Services website and follow the link to "planned bikeways" it sends you to this map:
This map is from 1996!!! I was still a virgin. "LADOT, planning to make a difference since 1996."
The only reasonable way to interpret the city's inaction is as a collective "Go **** Yourself" to cyclists. Punk rock til the end, cyclists irreverently flipped this, and interpreted it as "Do It Yourself!" And so a large segment of cyclists have found new and innovative ways to make progress without the cooperation of local government. Indeed, when the Bike Kitchen's budget purportedly surpassed the LACBC's, it was a quiet signal that doing it OURSELVES is the way to go. Does that sound angry? That's an echo of a whisper of the frustration that exists throughout the cycling community.
So we've been doing it for ourselves. Outreach?Midnight Ridazz has developed it's own brand of outreach: F.U.N.! Fun rides through the city -- a nightlife that revolves around biking -- is the unexpected form that cycling outreach takes in L.A. Most Ridazz prefer not to describe their activities as activism, it's just what they do for fun. Whatever it is, it's fun and effective. Thousands have been inspired to bike by these epic displays of F!U!N!
Cyclist education? The bike repair collectives -- the Bike Kitchen, Bike Oven, and Bikerowave -- do more to educate cyclists than any other L.A. org, governmental or not. These entirely volunteer organizations mobilize over a hundred volunteers weekly to teach cyclists how to fix their bicycles on a not-for-profit basis. Informal education on other topics takes place here as well. Step into the Bike Oven and mention a recent problem with a motorist and you'll likely hear several similar stories, and learn a couple new coping strategies. To a certain extent this happens on Midnight Ridazz rides too; I learned a lot of the tricks that keep me safe talking with other riders at group rides. There might even be a motorist education effort on the way, and not from the Metro, but from cyclists.
Bike infrastructure? At Semiotics of the Ride, activists are developing a signage system to turn 4th St. in Hancock Park into a bicycle boulevard. Is the city supportive? As far as I know, they're not. These activists lobbied hard, to no avail, to get cycling improvements on 4th St. This DIY effort is a reaction to unassailable status quo that persists within city departments. So, now we do our own infrastructure.
There are a few people in the city, or other local governments, that get it. The Santa Monica Planning Department has shown not only a progressive attitude toward cycling, but a remarkable willingness to open their planning process to the public. Lynne Goldsmith of Metro is doing good work to connect cyclists and bus operators to try to prevent conflicts. The city of Pasadena & CICLE successfully worked together to produce Bike Week Pasadena last year. They did so well that the 2nd Annual Bike Week Pasadena takes place in two weeks. Surprisingly, one of the best allies of cyclists is the LAPD. LAPD treats social bike riders with an open mind, allowing big group rides to continue if the ride is safe and moves along quickly. As well, anecdotal evidence suggests that officers in the LAPD are far better educated in the rights and needs of cyclists than in other jurisdictions.
There are people in local government who do right by cyclists, they're just the rare exception to a daunting rule. News that the L.A. bike culture is a fully DIY culture should resonate ominously within deaf ears at City Hall. 100% independent of city support, a growing constituency of cyclists can now bring uncompromising political will to bear on city officials.
(Next week I'll summarize some ways you can get involved in bike activism.)
Although AB 2058 is weaker, it does allow for a per-bag fee if voluntary targets are not met. If a store fails to decrease plastic bag use by 70% by July 1, 2012, a 15 cents per bag fee would kick in.
And that fee will likely go up! According to Jessica Belsky at Heal the Bay, Assemblymember Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), who authored AB2058, has agreed to revise the legislation to up the fee to 25 cents per bag, and to take out language that would preempt local governments from placing their own fees on plastic bags.
AB2058's now been referred to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. If the bill makes it through that committee, it will then go to the Assembly floor.
The following is a guest post by Damien Newton,who blogs at Streetsblog LA.
When I was a kid, I remember my Dad once remarking about some
pandering politician, "Wow, I sure hope he's lying and doesn't actually
mean that." That's how I felt when I heard that John McCain had
announced a plan to give Americans a "Summer Holiday" from the federal gas tax.
Basically, to make it more cost effective for people to drive to their
vacations, McCain proposed cutting the 18 cent per gallon gas tax and
24 cent per gallon diesel tax to nothing during the summer travel
season.
Even if we ignore that lowering gas prices isn't necessarily a
laudable goal, there are so many reasons a gas tax break is a bad idea
that I can't list all of them here. But for all our sakes -- after all,
there's a 50-50 shot this man will become our next president -- I hope he's just
pandering to a population sick of gas prices and doesn't really mean it.
First, it's not like the money that is earned from gasoline taxes
goes towards the general fund. Gas tax funds go back into
transportation projects. While it can certainly be argued that the
government wastes money on stupid projects such as road widenings, the
gas tax also provides funds for repairing the system, modernizing and
expanding transit and even funding some bicycle and pedestrian projects.
It was just last year that the nation was given a harsh reminder
that our transportation infrastructure is old and falling apart when a
highway bridge in Minnesota did just that. Across the country the
condition of our roads and bridges get worse every day. We didn't build
our highway system to handle heavy freight trucks and SUV's. We built
it to handle Model T's and milk trucks. The pounding our pavements
receive every year is taking its toll. Now is not the time to cut off
funding for fixing them.
There's no word on whether or not McCain will call for a holiday for
American roads and bridges this summer by requiring people to stay home
for three months as of this article's publication.
Pulling no punches, John Horsely, the director of the American
Association of State Highway and Traffic Organizations (basically a
non-profit or people that work at DOT's), said in a written statement about McCain's plan:
"This proposal would have devastating impacts upon the federal-aid
highway and transit programs, sharply reducing funding available to
states and jeopardizing hundreds of thousands of jobs nationwide. Such
a move would be short-sighted and damaging to our nation's economy,
while providing little relief to America's drivers."
It's probably not everyday that highway engineers and
environmentalists are in agreement, but based on this quote from
Friend's of the Earth's Colin Peppard (found on the blog of Smart
Growth America) that's exactly what happened. Peppard tells SGA:
"Suspending the gas tax will set back our fight against global
warming. Eliminating the federal gas tax will increase driving and
resulting global warming pollution at a critical time. Further, his
proposal will hamstring the federal government's ability to invest in
the energy-efficient, climate-friendly transportation alternatives we
need to reduce transportation emissions. If McCain were serious about
addressing global warming, he'd be thinking of ways to decrease this
pollution rather than proposing actions that would send it through the
roof."
To summarize, McCain's plan would further destroy our transportation
infrastructure, reduce state's ability to produce transportation
projects and encourage more people to drive, thus increasing oil
prices, all with one proposal.
Here's my counter proposal. Instead of encouraging more people to
drive, McCain should call for more people to take alternative
transportation. If the Straight-Talker wants to lower gas prices, he could do so by promoting activities that reduce the
demand for foreign oil.
One easy idea would be to back legislation that is currently
moving through the House of Representatives that allows cyclists and
transit users to write off a greater portion of their transportation
expenses, similar to a benefit that car drivers have now. Instead of
taking a windfall of cash that is dedicated to transportation; this
plan would take a smaller amount from funds dedicated to the general
fund. Instead of encouraging people to spend more time in their
greenhouse gas creating, pollution spewing and oil consuming cars; he
would be encouraging people to exercise on their bikes or sneakers or
getting on a bus or train with their fellow commuters.
Or if he doesn't want to push a tax cut for the general fund
during a time of massive budget deficit and debt, he could encourage
people to take a "Summer Holiday" from the gas tax by taking a vacation
that doesn't require a long car trip.
McCain famously admitted that he wasn't an expert in economics
during the Republican Primary this winter. While he certainly tried to
prove that statement with this proposal, at least we can glean that he
realizes that there's a lot he has to learn. Hopefully he'll learn
something about transportation funding and fix this proposal before it
goes any further than a statement read at a press conference.
Forget to bring your own bag? That eco-sin could cost you a quarter in the future (unless you go for paper, not plastic). A California Assembly bill, if passed, would put a 25 cent "plastic carryout bag impact fee" on each single-use plastic shopping bag given out at large grocery stores and pharmacies statewide.
AB 2829, introduced by Assemblymember Mike Davis (D-Los Angeles), proposes using the collected fees to on litter prevention and reduction efforts. If passed, the bill "would mark the most aggressive action by any state legislature to curb the proliferation of plastic bags and limit their negative impacts on the marine environment, local economies and quality of life for millions of citizens," according to Santa Monica-based environmental organization Heal the Bay.
Surprisingly, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors have endorsed the tougher AB 2829. Perhaps the board regrets its past decision -- or perhaps they'd like someone else to enact the rules so they don't have to personally face the wrath of the plastic bag industry....
"You know, if you dyed your hair black, you'd look just like Al Gore." That, says Gore, is what one kind-looking older woman told him. Has enviro-activism's aged the Nobel prize-winner a bit? Perhaps -- but Gore's keeping busy, and is back with a sequel of sorts to "An Inconvenient Truth."
This new slideshow -- which Gore debuted at the TED conference -- shows the drastically shrunken north polar ice cap. Yet Gore remains an optimist -- and encourages you to be too:
Sometimes I hear people respond to the disturbing facts of the climate crisis by saying, "Oh this is so terrible -- What a burden we have." I would like to ask you to reframe that. How many generations in all of human history have had the opportunity to rise to a challenge that is worthy of our best efforts, that has a challenge that can pull from us more than we knew we could do?
Can you face the challenges posed by the climate crisis with "profound joy and gratitude"? That's what Gore encourages you to do -- even though he's quick to point out the many problems and obstacles facing us. The solution he proposes sounds simple: "Put a price on carbon." Politically, however, this has been difficult to do -- which is why he's encouraging Americans to get more engaged.
"In order to solve the climate crisis, we need to solve the democracy crisis," Gore says. "Be an active citizen. Change the lightbulbs, but change the laws."
Would you pay an extra $90 on your car registration to improve public transit and help the environment? How about an extra 9 cents per gallon? That question could be showing up on your ballot, due to a recently-introduced bill in the California State Assembly, the L.A. Times reports.
If AB2558, a.k.a. the "climate change mitigation and adaptation fee," passes, Metro will be allowed to ask voters whether they'd be willing to pay a fee. A majority vote would get the fee passed, making fuel-efficient lifestyles more financially attractive while potentially providing $400 million a year for public transit projects.
Metro's pro AB2558, though the agency hasn't decided whether or not it will even pursue such a fee, and if so, which type of fee it'll pursue. But AB2558 joins many of the public transit funding ideas that have already been floating around, as L.A. tries to figure out how it's going to deal with its traffic congestion issues.
But the transit funding issue remains far from resolved, and solutions seem rather slow in coming. Even this new "climate change mitigation and adaptation fee" idea has many hoops to jump through. The bill would first need to pass and not get vetoed, then Metro would have to decide to put a measure on the ballot, then people would have to vote for it.
Would you vote for this fee? The half cent tax? Or both? Here's what the vote tally looked like for the half-cent tax idea a couple months ago.
How much more does 100% post-consumer recycled paper cost? Earlier this month, Green Cities California -- which includes L.A. and 10 California cities and counties -- pledged to make a complete switch to 100% post-consumer recycled copy paper -- though with no set date for finalizing the switch. I'm support the initiative, but I started wondering what the financial implications of this green decision would be.
After all, even though making post-consumer recycled paper doesn't kill trees and saves lots of energy, the eco-friendly paper market still hasn't reached the scale to make it cost-competitive with virgin paper, as I found out the hard way through my research on green business cards.
Santa Monica couldn't tell me how much more the switch to 100% post-consumer recycled paper cost the city, partly because they made the switch back in 2004. Getting an accurate number would mean accounting for inflation, paper use reduction programs, structural changes in the city, etc., making calculations difficult.
Luckily -- at least for this numbers-crunching mission -- the city of L.A. hasn't made a full switch yet. Only 30% of the paper the city of L.A. uses is 100% post-consumer recycled. So I was able to find out what the cost difference of switching the rest of that paper would be from Gerald St.Onge, who does environmentally preferred purchasing for the city L.A.
St.Onge said that 100% post-consumer recycled paper would cost about 50% more than virgin paper. In fact, the reason L.A. hasn't gone all post-consumer recycled already is due to budgetary reasons -- not due to lack of availability, the reason Shannon Parry, an environment analyst for Santa Monica's Environmental Programs Division, pointed to.
"Right now we're tying to [make up] the difference in cost by paper reduction," St.Onge said. The higher cost of 100% post-consumer recycled paper is a bit of a chicken or the egg problem. Due to the added expense, government agencies, companies, and individuals don't buy more of it. But because not enough of it is bought, the recycled paper market doesn't grow as fast in scale to bring down those prices.
Although the city of L.A. hasn't set a deadline to complete the switch too all post-consumer recycled paper, Onge said "we're committed and we're doing everything we can to change all the commodities that are being purchased into environmentally-friendly products." There's reason to be hopeful: Along with the Green Cities California initiatives, L.A. City Council approved an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing statement and program last month, committing the city to opting for eco-friendly products whenever possible.
When: TODAY, Wed., March 12, 4:15 pm. Where: Rose Hills Theater in Smith Campus Center (PDF campus map), Pomona College (directions), Claremont. Cost: FREE and open to the public.
Pomona College's flier notes that a "false distinction between 'environment' and 'justice'" threatens to hold back the success of both kinds of activism -- and that Dorsey will speak to this very challenge.
Environmentalists say the mainstream media hasn't asked presidential candidates enough questions about global warming. But if the questions were asked, would people even understand the debate?
Let's play a little game: Raise your hand if you can tell me the difference between a cap-and-trade program and a carbon tax program -- You get 20 points. Raise both hands if you can explain the difference between the cap-and-trade program Hillary Clinton supports, versus the one that McCain supports -- You get 80 points. 100 points wins the game here -- Did you win?
More seriously: Clinton, McCain, and Obama all say they support a cap-and-trade program, while Nader's behind a carbon tax. Nader's lone wolf stance perhaps gives you an idea of how politically infeasible a carbon tax program would be to institute -- but if you're like me, you'll still want to know why that's so. Yet you probably don't want to slog through hundreds of articles or commit to reading long, wonky tomes full of numbers to figure out what's going on....
Thanks to Peter Barnes, you don't have to. The author of "Capitalism 3.0" has come out with a new quick read -- a little booklet called "Climate Solutions: What Works, What Doesn't, and Why." Labeled as "a citizen's guide," this 120-page booklet (81 pages without all the front and back matter) seeks to give enviro-conscious people a digestible yet thorough primer on today's major political debates about lowering carbon emissions.
"Climate Solutions" is a simple guide to the big environmental policy decisions that are soon going to be made. The U.S. needs to decide what program to put in place to reduce our carbon emissions, and this booklet explains in plain language what these different carbon-reduction-related programs are -- as well as what political, environmental, and social implications are tied in each of these programs. By reading these few pages, the average voter will be able to figure out what programs to support and what to fight against, instead of simply shrugging one's shoulders and hoping for the best.
Read this, and you'll find out the difference between carbon taxes, carbon caps, and carbon regulations. In fact, did you know that there are in fact three different cap-and-trade programs? Well there are: Cap-and-giveaway, cap-and-auction, and cap-and-dividend.
While laying out the options, Barnes isn't shy about sharing his opinions. He's clearly not behind carbon taxes, asserting that "A carbon tax is an economist's dream but a politician's nightmare." To believe carbon taxes will work, Barnes says we need to "assume heroic behavior by a majority of Congress members for several decades, an assumption not grounded in reality." That's rather sad news for the environmental justice groups that have been pushing for carbon tax programs instead of cap-and-trade -- though I (and most environmentalists and environmental groups) agree with Barnes' opinion.
In fact, Barnes comes out in clear support of cap-and-dividend programs -- and makes a pretty good case, because he takes an unflinching look at all the options on the table first, dissecting their possibilities and potential failures.
Read the book yourself to see whether you agree or disagree. You can buy the booklet for $9.95 -- or download an abbreviated free PDF version titled "Carbon Capping A Citizen's Guide" at onthecommons.org. This version's just 22 pages long, and is mostly limited to covering just the carbon capping programs. However, this PDF also has information on current legislation -- and will be continuously updated to reflect the latest news.
That money comes thanks to Proposition 1B, a $20 billion infrastructure bond Cali voters passed in 2006. L.A. County also received public transit funding for the Expo Line and for new and rehabbed buses, for a total of $171 million.
Unfortunately, the bus-only lane project's still not fully funded. StreetsblogLA reports that Metro Spokesperson Marc Littman said more federal funds are expected in the next year, but even that won't be enough to move the project into construction.
So it may still be a while before bus riders gleefully zoom past passenger car drivers, stuck in gridlock gritting their teeth....
Can't afford to go green? Environmentalism's seen by some as a rich, elitist group -- what with the $100K electric sports car Tesla and the $1,799 eco-ish Macbook Air getting a whole lot of attention. But many of our urban environmental problems, such as industry pollution, strike the poor and underprivileged the hardest.
Why is environmental justice important? Take a look at this handy map the LA Weekly put together (PDF), which color-codes cancer risk in L.A. and vicinity. The threat is greatest for people living near the ports of L.A. and Long Beach, where "1 in 200 residents are expected to get cancer because of the dirty air."
In general, the poorer a community, the more polluted it is. Sadly, those with the least power to fight back often get shafted again by rich companies and the public policies they influence. As the Utne article points out: "As stories about global warming, sustainable energy, and climate change make headlines, the fact that some neighborhoods, particularly low-income and minority communities, are disproportionately toxic and poorly regulated has, until recently, been all but ignored."
But the number of environmental justice activists is growing and getting louder. Of course, this means some growing pains for the environmental movement at large. Most recently, a number of Californian environmental justice groups launched a campaign against carbon emissions cap-and-trade programs, over concerns that such programs would impact negatively the communities that are already disadvantaged. Many established environmental groups are not against cap-and-trade programs, as these carbon reduction programs are most politically feasible than carbon fees.
Still, the environmental movement's already showing a willingness to pay closer attention to environmental justice concerns. The Sierra Club, for example, released a statement concurring with some of what the environmental justice groups said: "We share many of the concerns of the EJ groups regarding pollution trading, like possible hot spots, loopholes and windfall profits."
All retail locations in Santa Monica, regardless of type or size, will have to go plastic bag free and offer reusable bags for sale instead. The ban would apply only to the plastic bags given out at point-of-sale, not the flimsier bags found in the produce or bulk sections of supermarkets. Paper bags -- which the staff pointed out is not a significant source of marine pollution -- will still be allowed -- but the city council asked its staff to come back with recommendations on charging a fee on these bags.
The plastic bag ban had more or less unanimous support from both the members of the City Council and the community members who spoke at the meeting. Many spoke about marine pollution caused by plastic bags -- from getting tangled in them while surfing to seeing the eyesore crated by them on the beaches.
In contrast to the plastic bag ban, the paper bag tax raised a number of questions and concerns including outright opposition from Council member Robert Holbrook, who said "I just think they out to be free." Some felt that the paper bag tax should not be charged for food take-out, fast food places, or grocery deliveries -- businesses where reusable bags are not an easy solution. In addition, questions remained as to what the minimum charge per paper bag would be, and where the money would go.
Staff recommendations regarding those questions -- as well as a drafted ordinance for a plastic bag ban -- will come back to the City Council. Once the plastic ban is drafted and passed, businesses will likely have at least a 6-month transition period before the ordinance is allowed to take effect.
The City of L.A.'s offices will be getting greener! On Tuesday, the L.A. City Council approved an Environmentally Preferable Purchasing statement and program, committing the city to opting for eco-friendly products whenever possible. The city council also voted to request that the Boards of the Harbor, Water and Power, and Airport Commissioners adopt similar green purchasing program policies.
L.A.'s already been slowly greening its purchases, according to Jane Paul, a researcher and consultant with the enviro-coalition Green L.A., which has worked with the city to move this policy forward. In fact, L.A. even approved funding for this green purchasing effort last year; some of that money went to hiring two people in the General Services Department to help carry out this policy.
Now, the green purchasing policy's official. Says Jane: "That means that the city's many millions of purchasing dollars will begin to go to the right places: products that are recycled, recyclable, have reuse in their life cycle, minimal packaging, eliminate uncertified hardwoods, reduced energy /water consumption, heavy metal free, are biodegradable, reduced greenhouse gas emissions in manufacturing, made from renewables, low toxicity, etc., etc."
Of course, product cost and quality issues will remain key. The policy calls for "purchasing and using recycled and other environmentally preferable products whenever possible, while recognizing that their principal requirements are product performance and fiscal responsibility." You can read more details of this policy in the Tuesday's City Council Agenda (PDF).
Los Angeles looks ready to adopt a green building ordinance! Yesterday, two city council committees voted to require that large developments meet basic LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards.
This ordinance would apply to privately-built projects over 50,000 square feet, and would "slash projected energy and water use and reduce the overall environmental footprint, placing the city on the cutting edge of an international movement to address the global warming effects of buildings," according to the L.A. Times. If buildings go beyond the basic requirement to achieve the higher LEED silver standards, their permits would be expedited.
On his own blog, Councilmember Eric Garcetti called the ordinance "a huge step forward," and raved that "This standard will take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, cut down on energy and water bills, and put Los Angeles at the forefront of the green building movement."
The City Council now needs to adopt these standards -- which Garcetti says is expected to happen within a month. Then, after a six month period, the ordinance would take effect. If all goes according to plan, starting September 2008, every large development built in Los Angeles will meet basic LEED standards!
Forget "paper or plastic." Santa Monica residents might soon be hearing "paper, period -- and you'll have to pay for that." That's right -- If the Santa Monica city council takes its staff recommendations, both plastic AND plastic-like biodegradable bags will be banned, as will non-recycled paper bags. Paper bags with more than 40 percent or more post-consumer content would be allowed -- but you'd have to pay a tax for them.
Santa Monica's bag ban and tax initiative comes on the heels of L.A. county's less-than-successful anti-plastic-bag effort, which ended up being neither a ban or a tax, but simply just a voluntary reduction measure. That result disappointed many L.A.-area environmentalists. But now, the "Ban the Bag" fight's gone to individual cities -- and Santa Monica's considering one of the toughest measures at its city council meeting next Tuesday.
The Santa Monica city staff recommends drafting a tough ordinance to ban and tax bags. Here's the skinny on the staff's recommendations:
No free bags, period. The point is to discourage one-use bags and encourage reusable bags.
Plastic bags banned at all retail locations in the city.
Biodegradable one-use bags banned at all retail locations in the city, because these bags "present many of the same environmental litter and marine environment problems as plastic bags."
Paper bags that contain old growth fiber, or are not 100% recyclable, or contain less than 40% post consumer recycled content banned at all retail locations.
Recyclable paper bags that contain at least 40% post consumer recycled content AND don't contain any old growth fiber allowed FOR A FEE.
All affected stores must provide reusable carryout bags for sale and, with assistance from the City, promote their sale and use.
To be clear, this bag and tax ordinance, once drafted and passed, would apply only to bags at the point of sale (at the cash register). The ban and tax would NOT apply to those flimsy bags in the produce or bulk items section, for example.
When: Tues., February 19. Council proceedings begin 7 p.m.; Consideration of bag measure estimated to begin 8 p.m.
Where: Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main St., Santa Monica
Even if the city council votes with the staff recommendations, the ban
/ tax won't happen anytime soon; this council meeting would simply
allow for the drafting of an ordinance. Once drafted, the ordinance
needs to be passed -- and staff recommends at least a 6-month
transition period before the ordinance is allowed to take effect.
In a way, becoming an environmental activist in L.A. is easy. The city certainly has no shortage of enviro groups. Love the beach? Join Heal the Bay. Like clean air? Try Breathe L.A. Miss trees? Plant a few with TreePeople. But if you think all these things are important, the huge number of environmental groups vying for your attention can get overwhelming. You might start wishing these organizations would consolidate themselves somehow, so you don't feel like you're choosing between clean air and clean water.
Enter Green L.A., a coalition of 50 or so environmental and community-based organizations in L.A, working to shape city policies. According to Jonathan Parfrey, director of Green L.A., the coalition basically came together when Mayor Villaraigosa got elected, because many groups saw the new mayor's enviro-commitment as an unprecedented opportunity to push the city into a greener direction. After all, back in 2005, Villaraigosa said "Let's dare to imagine Los Angeles as the cleanest and greenest big city in America." So enviro and community-based groups linked arms and launched Green L.A. in Dec. 2005 to take Villaraigosa at his word.
Why haven't you heard of Green L.A.? For one, the organization doesn't have a website -- yet. For another, Villaraigosa's own plan for greening L.A. is also confusingly named Green L.A. But more to the point, Green L.A. the coalition works mainly with the city, not with grassroots organizing. According to its brochure, Green L.A. provides "environmental guidance and expertise to the City of Los Angeles in an exciting model of collaboration between decision-makers and advocates, helping to inform City policies and programs."
To that end, Green L.A. has formed collaborative work groups, each with a couple co-chairs from environmental and community organizations, as well as advisors that serve on City of L.A.'s commissions. At the moment, Green L.A. has formed five work groups:
Energy: Pushing city agencies to become carbon neutral, increasing energy efficiencies throughout the city, working with the Department of Water and Power, etc.
Transportation: Pushing for bus-only lanes, developing both a pedestrian and bike master plan, etc.
Water and Urban Ecosystems: Working with the L.A. River revitalization plan, the Million Trees L.A. initiative, the parks initiative, etc.
Cumulative Impacts: Addressing environmental justice issues and improving health in disadvantaged communities.
Port of LA: Working with the city and the ports to reduce air and water pollution, etc.
In addition, Green L.A.'s working on five specific projects:
Green purchasing for the city: Making sure products bought by the city are environmentally-preferable ones (i.e. 100% post-consumer recycled paper vs. paper made by clear-cutting rain forests).
Green business certification: Encouraging businesses to incorporate environmentally-sound practices. (i.e. encouraging restaurants to compost food waste) The city of Santa Monica, for example, has a program like this in place.
Green building.
Zero Waste Plan, also known as SWIRP (Solid Waste Integrated Resource Plan): Finding ways to reduce, reuse and recycle, thereby diverting our trash away from landfills. Green building: Encouraging environmentally-friendly building practices.
How much more does 100% post-consumer recycled paper cost? Earlier this month, Green Cities California -- which includes L.A. and 10 California cities and counties -- 
