Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« New Issue | Santorum on The Daily Show »

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Seattle v. Berkeley on Climate Change

Posted by on July 12 at 16:52 PM

Greg Nickels has gotten considerable credit and political capital, including in both Vanity Fair and the Stranger, for convincing some 300 US mayors to endorse a resolution supporting Kyoto-level reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to global warming. Meeting the Kyoto targets, while a good first step, is a relatively paltry goal: complying with Kyoto would require Seattle to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by just 7 percent, or about 680,000 tons a year. We could do much better. (And we need to: According to a recent study, snowpack in the Cascades, which provides our region’s water, could be reduced to 20 percent of current levels within 80 years, with temperatures in the Puget Sound region rising 2 degrees by 2050.)

In Berkeley, California, they’re taking the threat of climate change far more seriously. Earlier this week, Berkeley’s city council just voted unanimously to put a measure on the ballot that would encourage efforts toward an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. (Funding would come from the city’s general fund or from taxpayers through a second vote). Since cars are the main source of greenhouse-gas emissions, cutting emissions by 80 percent will require a drastic reduction in car use and ownership, something Nickels’s own policies (which emphasize maintaining capacity for cars rather than encouraging people to combine trips and seeks alternatives to driving) scarcely address.


CommentsRSS icon

I wonder why Nickels is more focused on car capacity over transit. Was he soured by experiences with Sound Transit? The crappy management of the monorail project?

It's such a bizzare contradiction on his part...

Once again proving that his own policy towards Viaduct replacement is flawed, and that we'd be better off going for something like the PWC Streets+Transit solution that distributes capacity through the grid and makes a far more significant investment towards getting people out of their single occupancy vehicles.

Yeah!
It's time for us to demand some action. The commitment was sold far and wide, national momentum was generated, the publicity was swell. Meanwhile, back at home the Green Ribbon Commission did excellent work, not pulling any punches: the #1 priority here -- because most of our emissions come from vehicles -- is to take fewer and shorter trips by car.

So let's demand all transportation infrastructure decisions are analyzed for their effect on greenhouse gas production. Let's demand some financial commitment in solutions that move us toward that goal, not in the opposite direction as the tunnel does. As the Mayor of Vancouver says, "Budgets are idealogy without the rhetoric."

A City official actually told me that Kyoto commitment doesn't cast any doubt on the tunnel plan, it just creates a bigger marketing challenge to sell it as the sustainable solution.

Grrrrrr.....

This article would have been better had it been titled, How I spent my Summer Vacation.

I have to say, the more of ECB's stuff I read, the more she reminds of the A-Typical '80 & 90's Hippie Chick, you used to meet at a Grateful Dead shows.

You know, the ones that would rant how meat is murder and preaching about the health aspects of a vegan lifestyle, while, they are chainsmoking cigarrettes (that they keep bumming from you) and wrestling with a heroine habbit.

Heroin habit aside I have an obvious solution which our all-Democratic state government would never go along with but which makes total sense:

-Knock down the viaduct
-Use the $2b that was earmarked to replace it, and build the monorail through there instead (cus remember how much the monorail cost before financing?)... this time they could even allow competetive bidding for the contract so as to keep the price low.
-Ideally they'd turn it into a park, but if the money's tight they can sell the land to make money.
-serves more people (from ballard to west seattle) reduces auto use dramatically, makes our waterfront non-ugly, plan is not stupid or crazy, blah blah blah.
-every other city has a normal mass transit system and not just some skeleton light rail. (such as montreal, toronto, chicago, new york, boston, washington dc, every city in Europe, etc...)

Eating vegan can save the planet too. Seattle should give tax breaks to vegan restaurants. Also I drive a hybrid car. Why not insist all Stranger staff drive hybrids or ride bikes? It'd be a start.

Good post John. Let's study it for 40 years ...

oops, sorry, typical Seattleite thinking process. must turn that one off.

aig auto insurance aig auto insurance

autoinsurance autoinsurance

aig auto insurance aig auto insurance

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).