Today the construction site at SE False Creek appears to be directing cyclists on the Ontario Bike route to use the  sidewalk on 2nd avenue as a detour.  Asking cyclists to use this narrow sidewalk is both dangerous and illegal.   This is clearly in an inadequate cycling facility for a city that claims to be promoting cycling as part of it's “Greenest City” imitative,According to maps published on October 14th the city was supposed have a marked detour in place using 3rd Ave and parts of Quebec street.  It is now two weeks later and this route is still not marked.According to the Host City Olympic transportation plan, page 4:“Some bike routes will be temporarily altered during the 2010 Winter Games to accommodate operational and security needs. Wherever possible, bike route closures will be accommodated by safe and well-marked alternatives.”The current route is neither “safe” nor “well-marked”.When will city be addressing this problem?Is the Olympic Transportation plan already failing?

rob_'s ramblings

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

Despite rhetoric to the contrary it appears that yesterday's BC Liberal budget is designed to increase greenhouse gas emissions in this province.

The largest sources of greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions in our province are from transportation and the fossil fuel extraction industries. So, the government chose to specifically increase activities in these areas.

There were cuts in health care, education and other social services. But no cuts in the province's controversial highway expansion projects. Even though the province's own documents admit that these projects will increase ghg emissions.

And the province kept in place the massive subsidies to the fossil fuel extraction industries. Costing the tax payers millions will increasing pollution.

But the government was not content to rely on these measures alone to increase ghg emissions. It cutback and cancelled many programs designed to reduce emissions.

The PST exemption on bikes, renewable energy systems and energy efficiency products is gone with the new HST. It also cancelled the LiveSmart program which also helped fund renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.

And funding for public transit is up in the air. The government has made promises about funding for transit. But Translink, the agency responsible for delivering the services has said it does not have enough money for the evergreen line, the third seabus or additional much needed bus capacity. Again there seems to plenty of money for highway expansion but not for transit even though transit investment creates three times as many jobs.

This government's actions are clearly criminal and need to be stopped.

---

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

b
Climate Change Rally
Originally uploaded by Rob__

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

A recent article (also here) is perpetuating one of the most persistent myths of modern society - that cyclists aren't paying their fare share for road use.In fact private car ownership is one of he most subsidized aspects of our society.  In Metro Vancouver taxpayers subsidize car owners to the tune of $6.6 billioin per year.  In places like Ontario it is even higher.So cyclists who drive little or never are actually helping to subsidize the polluting habits of frequent car drivers.

rob_'s ramblings

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

At the beginning of July I attended a two week intensive permaculture design course on Denman Island presented by Pacific Permaculture . Learned a lot and am now looking forward to applying some of these permaculture design techniques in Vancouver.

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

During the current BC election campaign there has been much discussion about the carbon tax. Some environmentalists have even endorsed the Liberal party based on the tax. But how does it stack up to other climate-related policies?Based on modeling doneby the Carbon Tax Center, I estimated that the BC Carbon Tax would reduce greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions by 570,000 tonnes annually at the current rate and by 901,000 tonnes by  2012 when the rate is raised to $30/tonne.I used a model developed by the Sightline Institute to estimate emissions from the Gateway Program. I calculated annual increases of 388,000 - 621,000 tonnes.  The Gateway program alone would wipe out one to two thirds of the gains made by the Carbon Tax.During 2001 - 2006 the emissions from Oil and Gas production increased by 1,040,000 per year.  The Liberals have committed to supporting this industry so it can be expected that these increases will continue.  These two policies (Gateway and Petroleum Industry support) would result in an increase that is more than 50% higher than any reduction from the Carbon Tax.So why all the emphasis on the Carbon Tax when other policies will wipe out any gains made by the tax?Notes on calculations:Calculations used a baseline year of 2006 with total emissions of 62.3 Mt CO2 eq.The Carbon Tax Center's model uses 0.25% reduction in emissions from gasoline consumption at a $10/tonne tax and a 1.09% reduction at $30 / tonne.  36% of the BC's emissions are from transportation. So I estimated a reduction of 244,000 tonnes for a $30 tax.  (62,300,000 x 36% x 1.09%).The Carbon Tax Center's model uses 0.25% reduction in emissions from gasoline consumption at a $10/tonne tax and a 1.09% reduction at $30 / tonne.  36% of the BC's emissions are from transportation. So I estimated a reduction of 244,000 tonnes for a $30 tax.  (62,300,000 x 36% x 1.09%).The Carbon Tax Center's model uses a 3.06% reduction in emissions from "other" sources at $30 / tonne.  I estimaed that another 45% of the BC's emissions would fall in this category.  (consistant with other estimates that the carbon tax would cover about 70% of BC emissions). I estimated a reduction of 657,000 tonnes for a $30 tax.  (62,300,000 x 45% x 3.06%).   This gives us a total annual reduction of 901,000 tonnes compared to baseline year when the tax reaches $30/ tonne.

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

Burns Bog Pilgrimage
Originally uploaded by Rob__

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

VANCOUVER - The Society Promoting Environmental Conservation and the Wilderness Committee delivered petitions with over 10,000 signers to the Premier's office today. The petitions ask that the government cancel the Gateway Program's highway expansions components and invest more in transit instead.The gateway program is a transportation infrastructure project that includes over 260 km of new highway lanes.Dozens of activists rallied outside the office in downtown Vancouver including two dressed as polar bears.  The premier's office initially declined to accept the invitations.  After the activists attempted to enter the nearby convention centre where the premier was speaking, staff working with the Premier agreed to accept the petitions.“Translink is currently exhausting its capital reserves just to keep existing service going,” said Karen Wristen, Executive Director of SPEC. “At this rate, they will be broke in two years. We simply can’t afford both freeway expansion and transit development: we have to solve the transit crisis first.”“It will be virtually impossible to reach BC’s commitments to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) if Gateway is allowed to proceed. Gateway is not just an irresponsible plan, it’s immoral,” said Ben West, the Wilderness Committee’s Healthy Communities Campaigner.The government calculates that greenhouse gas emissions will increase by over 170,000 tonnes per year from the Gateway program.Premeir Gordon Campbell has not yet responded directly to the petition. In recent interviews he has defended the Gateway Program.

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

Saturday also saw citizens from West Vancouver to Chilliwack hoist banners on Highway 1 overpasses across the region in a coordinated Day of Action, with slogans such as "Stop the Gateway to Global Warming" and "Better Transit, Not Freeways". Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in BC, and the protestors said emissions are expected to rise substantially if the Gateway Project is built.

Activists South of the Fraser also marked the riding office of provincial Highways Minister Kevin Falcon a "Global Warming Crime Scene" Saturday morning, and piled sand used by Ministry contractors for highway construction in front of the door.

"Kevin Falcon is a Climate Criminal, bulldozing us with freeways, and roasting the planet with greenhouse gases," said Surrey resident Jim Shook as he attached large strips of yellow "Global Warming Crime Scene" tape across the door to Falcon's office. "In solidarity with the region-wide Day of Action on Highway 1, we declare this a 'Global Warming Crime Scene' and return this freeway construction material to let him know that he should cancel the Gateway project immediately."

The activists emptied buckets of highway construction sand in front of the office, taken from an area of recently bulldozed homes in Surrey's Bridgeview neighbourhood that is being dumped with sand to prepare for possible construction of the South Fraser Perimeter Road.

According to Bridgeview resident Sonia Nazar, "Kevin Falcon has raped our community for his billion dollar freeway scheme, but our transit system is still starved for cash. Would he do this to his own neighbourhood?"

"Thousands of people from throughout Metro Vancouver have signed petitions against Gateway," says Carmen Mills, spokesperson for GatewaySucks.org. "The people of the region are clearly opposed to this project, and we will make our voices heard. With this action, we're saying it loud and clear: No Falcon Freeways!"

NowPublic

Environment | Vancouver | Liberals | Chilliwack | Highway | BC | Climate Change | WEST VANCOUVER | falcon | stopgateway

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog

In the last few days it seems that the debate about "green" power here in the BC has heated up. The subject has come up in blogs, newspaper editorials, email lists and even at a business reception last night.It is frustrating for me that so much of the focus for climate change solutions in BC is on electrical power generation.Please don't get me wrong - we shouldn't ignore electrical generation. I certainly don't. My professional life is spent working on renewable energy and energy conservation solutions.But, here in BC electrical generation accounts for only a small fraction of our ghg emissions (2%). The largest source of greenhouse gas emissions is transportation (36-40%). Shouldn't our focus be on reducing emissions in the transportation and building sectors? We are not going to meet the targets required unless we start to focus on these areas.Why aren't these sectors generating the same amount of discussion when in fact they are far more significant than electrical generation?In the last few days I have seen the word "hypocrisy" applied to those on one side of the "green" energy debate. It may be justified but it can certainly be applied to both sides. There are some people who have jumped on the "green" energy bandwagon claiming that they are doing so because of their concern over climate change. Yet, they they don't seem to acknowledge the much larger contributors to climate change in our province. In fact, in some cases they have even argued that we should NOT oppose the construction of new highways.Climate Change is such a significant threat that we need to focus on all sources of emissions and all potential solutions. We certainly shouldn't be ignoring the most significant sources.

---

rob_'s ramblings

Imported from external blog