Saving Our World for Tomorrow: A 21st Century Approach to Politics and Sustainable Development (Part 3 of 4)

Brent Densmore returns for Part 3 of his series on sustainable development in the 21st century. Today Brent discusses the relationship between the car and surburban living and the need to reverse urban sprawl

To supplement the implementation of renewable resources, Thomas Friedman argues that governments should increase the current gas tax. This would serve two purposes: Firstly, it would promote the use of energy-efficient vehicles and secondly, it would raise money that can be used to invest in renewable resources. Friedman states:

“There has to be a system that permanently changes consumer demand, which would permanently change what Detroit makes, which would attract more investment in battery technology to make electric cars, which would hugely help the expansion of the wind and solar industries — where the biggest drawback is the lack of batteries to store electrons when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining. A higher gas tax would drive all these systemic benefits”(Friedman, Thomas http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28friedman.html)

While it is extremely difficult for any leader to raise taxes in his or her country, sometimes it needs to be done. David Miller, the Mayor of Toronto, recently raised home property taxes and added new fees for recreational activities in order to balance the budget (CBC.ca, “tax increase for Toronto”http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/02/10/tto-budget.html?ref=rss). This upset many Torontonian’s, as it should, but the public outcry wasn’t that bad. If people are willing to accept the above tax increases then I am sure they will eventually embrace a tax increase aimed at protecting the future of our planet.

In the early 1900s, Henry Ford introduced the first mainstream automobile called the Ford Model T. After years of improving the assembly line, Ford was able to produce automobiles quickly and cheaply, which enabled him to sell them at a reasonable price. As a result, many Americans could easily afford these automobiles which led to a major change in how one could live. It was no longer necessary to live within close proximity of your job; you could now live further away and still get to work without any difficulty. As demand for housing outside of the urban centre increased, the growth of suburban towns skyrocketed. This led to a massive investment in infrastructure; highways and bridges were built so that it would be easy to commute to and from the city.

The suburb was viewed as a great idea; they created thousands of new jobs and allowed people to live outside of the noisy city.

As the demand for suburban living increased as did car sales, which doubled between 1970 and 1995 (Rogers, Richard. Cities for a small planet. Boulder: Faber and Faber Limited, 1997 P. 36). As a result, our addiction to fossil fuels can be directly correlated to the rise in suburban living. In order to travel to and from your home in the suburbs, you have to drive your automobile. In the mid 1900s, oil prices were low and global warming wasn’t an issue. Today, oil prices and carbon dioxide emissions are higher then ever. It is no longer economical or environmentally friendly to drive everywhere. There must be greater use of public transit to offset high oil prices and reduce carbon emissions. Richard Rogers explains why it will be difficult to implement this when he states the following:

“The car has made viable the whole concept of dividing everyday activities into compartments, segregating offices, shops and homes. And the wider cities spread out, the more uneconomic it becomes to expand their public transit systems” (Rogers, 35).

Clearly it is time to move away from urban sprawl and focus on creating densely populated cities. Major urban centre’s will always be the most attractive for jobs and services, but if urban planners do a better job at designing small, densely populated cities, then we can decrease our dependency on them. If people are concentrated in fewer areas then it will be much easier to utilize public transportation. This would significantly cut down on the dependency for the automobile and therefore reduce our consumption of unsustainable energy.

Check back next week for the final part of Brent's four-part series where he will take a look at some real-world examples of successful and sustainable development and the need to act before it is too late. Part four will become available next Friday at 5pm EST.

Saving Our World for Tomorrow: A 21st Century Approach to Politics and Sustainable Development (Part 2 of 4)

Brent Densmore returns for Part 2 of his series on sustainable development in the 21st century. Today on the agenda are some of examples of how and how not to sustain growth with a specific emphasis on the intelligent management and consumption of natural resources during this process. Brent picks up from last week discussing the complications that arise in company compliance with environmental regulations.

One idea to ensure companies comply with new regulations would be to implement a government organization similar to that of the International Organization for Standardization. This new organization would compile a list of criteria that a corporation must adhere to in order to gain certification.

Once certified, the corporation would advertise that they are officially environmentally friendly and use it as a marketing tool. At the same time, the government would provide customers with a refund on products that are purchased from these companies.

This new system should provide enough motivation for corporations to adopt these practices because customers would be more likely to buy their products if they were to receive a refund.
When President Obama discusses green energy, jobs and technologies, he is referring to renewable resources and the many opportunities they would provide. Unlike past American Presidents, Obama has accepted that not only is his country addicted to fossil fuels but so is the rest of the world.

Harry Longwell states that “oil and gas consumption is essential to sustaining growth in the industrialized world and is key to progress in nations working their way towards prosperity” (Longwell, Harry. “The future of the oil and gas industry: past approaches, new challenges.” World Energy 5.3 (2002) 101).

This poses two problems: One, fossil fuels are the main contributor to global warming and two, oil is not a sustainable resource. A perfect example that these two problems have presented can be seen in China.

Elizabeth Economy summarizes this problem when she states that:
“ China’s rapid development, often touted as an economic miracle, has become an environmental disaster. Record growth necessarily requires the gargantuan consumption of resources, but in China energy use has been especially unclean and inefficient, with dire consequences for the country’s air, land and water” (Economy, Elizabeth. “The great leap backward?” Foreign Affairs 86.5 (2007) P. 49).

If our current and future economic growth is dependant on fossil fuels, what does that mean for us in the future? China’s example should be a warning to both industrialized and developing nations that sacrificing the environment for the economy will only get you so far. Economy goes on to state that:

“Although China holds the fourth-largest freshwater resources in the world, skyrocketing demand, overuse, inefficiencies, pollution and unequal distribution have produced a situation in which two-thirds of China’s approximately 660 cities have less water than they need and 110 of them suffer from severe shortages” (Economy, 50).

As you can see from China’s unfortunate example, it is essential that we start the transition process of to moving away from fossil fuels as our main source of energy and begin investing in renewable resources. The two most popular sources of renewable energy today are wind and solar power. While neither wind nor solar power can provide enough energy to cut fossil fuel consumption, by say 50%, they can still provide enough power to significantly reduce our dependence on oil and help clean up our environment.

In order for this to happen, it will require government investment to perfect the technology. In addition, they must provide substantial tax credits for corporations and households that chose to install and use this energy.

In Canada, there is a program called “ecoENERGY retrofit” which aims to provide tax credits and refunds to those who utilize alternative energy (“Natural Resources Canada”). This is an excellent idea but requires greater funding and publicity.

In addition, Walter Rosenblaum outlines further problems that are restricting the expansion of renewable resources: “…payback periods are too long for the average homeowner. Workers skilled in the installation and maintenance of small solar systems are scarce. In most communities, building codes are more an obstacle than an encouragement to solar system installation” (Rosenblaum, Walter "Energy, politics and public policy." Washington: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1981. P. 46.)

These three problems can easily be solved by nothing other than commitment. An investment in the technologies would encourage individuals to learn how to install these systems, especially in today’s tough economic times. Amending building codes takes nothing but a bit of time and should not even be an issue.

Check back next Friday at the 5pm EST for part 3 of 4, where Brent takes an even deeper look at strategies for reducing fossil fuel dependence and the role that the auto industry and suburban living plays in this.

Saving Our World for Tomorrow: A 21st Century Approach to Politics and Sustainable Development (Part 1 of 4)

This is the first in a series of 4 articles by Brent Densmore dealing with the current crisis facing the world as a result of 20th century over-expansion and unsustainable development. Today's article is an introduction to the series, a contextual look at some of the factors that have contributed to where we are today, as well as some of the challenges that we face in moving forward. Please check back at 5pm EST on each of the next four Fridays for the continuing story.

The collapse of the Berlin Will and the subsequent end to the Cold War reinforced the fact that capitalism and democracy were the dominant economic and political systems of the world. The spread of the free market economy and the rapid decrease in telecommunication infrastructure have resulted in an extensive global marketplace that is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Rich western nations, such as the United States and Great Britain, are no longer the economic super powers they once were. India, Japan and China, to name a few, now have the same access to markets and information as the rest of the world.

As a result, these nations are now able to compete with the historically rich nations, something many thought could never be done. It was only 30 years ago that wealth was virtually non-existent in these nations; today, their economies are growing at a rapid pace and their people are reaping the benefits. These nations however, are now consuming more food and water than ever and are demanding many of the same consumer products we have in here in Canada.

While it is a great that these new nations are now prospering, the world as a whole cannot sustain this new level of consumption; never before have our natural resources been depleted at such an alarming rate. There will be nothing left of our planet if we continue to live at this rate for the next 50 years.
(Editor's Note: a recent article from the BBC suggests that global resources will be depleted even faster, please see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7951838.stm)

In order to fix this problem and right the ship for future generations, we must all begin to live a more sustainable way of life. It will take a collected effort to change our old habits, something that may be hard for many, but it must be done.

The first step to implementing a more sustainable way of life requires a change in government policies. Secondly, the use of renewable resources as legitimate energy sources must become a reality. Finally, there must be changes made to how our cities are being built. While this is by no means an inclusive list, these three ideas will build the crucial foundation of a more sustainable way of life.

The development of a more sustainable way of life will require everyone to make a diligent effort. This isn’t something that one person or country can accomplish on their own. In order to make sure that everyone is on the same page, it will require the leadership of all governments around the world. They must be committed to significant change and be willing to absorb public resentment for as with any other new idea, there will be a share of the public who opposes new ideas.

As mentioned previously, the first step in this process is for governments to change certain outdated policies and most importantly, enact new environmental legislation. Mark Lynas states “the environment is still seen as a soft-focus poor relation to the real hard-politics issues such as health, the economy and asylum-seekers and so on” (Lynas: “Bring in the police to save the planet.” New Statesmen 9 May 2005: 40). The era of growing GDP at the expense of the environment must come to an end. While there is no denying that these too are important issues, it is clearly time that the environment becomes part of this list.

During the recent United States presidential election, President Obama released an extensive list of environmental policies and ideas that he believed would help cure our addiction to an unsustainable way of life. Some of his ideas included “government investment in clean energy and green jobs, promotion of green technologies and fuel efficiency standards, protection of the Great Lakes and National Parks, and the promotion of inner-city recycling programs” (“Obama on the Environment”). While by no means is this an inclusive list, it is an excellent start and it is a relief to see that the President of the United States has aspirations to fix this problem.

The most important ideas Obama lists relate to the promotion and investment in clean energy, technologies and jobs. If the government doesn’t promote or invest in these ideas then who will? In today’s competitive global market, corporations will require a long-term commitment from their governments on these issues. They won’t be willing to radically modify their factories, offices and practices unless everyone else is following suit. From their viewpoint, why would they? Aside from a few exceptions, no corporation will sacrifice their profits and reduce shareholder value while their competitors stand pat and face no punishments. Therefore, not only will there be a requirement for new policies to be enacted but there also must reward-based system in order to encourage speedy compliance.

Brent Densmore

Next week Brent will discuss and break-down some of the political changes that have the potential to revolutionize the way the environment is treated within politics, as well as a look a the some of the international issues that pose a challenge in solving this crisis.

Exciting New Developments with The Blog Journalists

Instead of the usual Wednesday blog, this evening we will be introducing some of the topics and events that are percolating in The Blog Journalists newsroom and will be produced for the public over the coming weeks.

Starting this Friday Blog Journalist Brent Densmore will be beginning a 4 piece blog series, appearing over the next 4 Fridays, delving into the ever more pertinent issue of sustainable development. Brent, a graduating student at Ryerson University, has spent hours preparing for this in-depth and concentrated look at how to combat issues such as urban sprawl and find cost-efficient and environmentally friendly ways of improving public transit.

Also, beginning next week, co-founding Blog Journalist Will Grassby will beginning an extended and provocative 10 part series looking at religion, faith and atheism from a number of different perspectives. This series will include snippets from current events as well as references to both contemporary and historical thinkers such as Richard Dawkins, Alister McGrath and even Jesus himself. Will endevours through this series to break down the of the barriers that exist between believers and non-believers as well as to take a new and refreshing angle on a topic that is all to often dragged down (from both sides) by a monotony of worn-out arguments.

In addition to these new developments, Russ MacDonald will be continuing with his usual weekly column which we all look forward to with baited breath. There is no doubt he has some pots on the burners that are boiling over with stories to satiate our intelligent readers' appetites.

That's what is cooking right now with The Blog Journalists. Please be sure to check back at 5pm Eastern time on Friday, armed with your comments, for the premiere of Brent Densmores first major blog series.

That's all for now!

Ciao

Will Grassby and The Blog Journalists

Time to Live a Simpler Life

Maybe Jesus was on to something…

The current economic crisis has started claiming its first victims and each day the signs grow grimmer for our consumeristic way of life. Of course it is the small that fall first; this evidenced in the recent government collapses in Iceland and Latvia as well as the news that GM would be feeding Swedish carmaker Saab to the pecuniary wolves.

Yet as the current uncertainty gives way to a certainty of worse things to come, it is hard ignore the way the superficiality of our the economy is exposed. Everything depends on continued consumption; something we all know is unsustainable, but something we are all unwilling to admit. The scary part is how reliant on this consumption we have become. If people were to stop buying unnecessary items, which ironically enough is also destroying the planet, the job market would dry up and millions of people would be left without work. This sounds like a travesty but I cannot help but see how people like this, including myself, are dependent on frivolity. In the US, each household has an average of 3, count it, 3 TVs. Think how many billions of dollars in revenue would be lost if Americans (and Brits, Canadians, French, Germans…) had, on average, one less TV in their house. TV manufacturers, cable providers, DVD player makers (each of those 3 TVs needs its own dedicated DVD player), video game makers and even the people that make all the parts for those TVs would face massive reductions in revenue and jobs would of course be the moribund currency.

And with apologies to those bible non-enthusiasts, a quote from your favourite book:

"Beware and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions." Luke 12:13-15

Jesus makes a very clear distinction between “life” and “possessions.” What he means is that life is about people, not things. No matter how many TVs we own they will never become a part of our lives the way that friendship, love and our relationships to other people will.

Ultimately what this whole economic crisis is going to come down to, along with other crises such as climate change, is who is willing to make sacrifices and who is going to hold on to their possessions. Regardless of whether one is atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, CEO of a company or assembly-line worker, those that cling to their 3 TVs will go down with the ship. Those that value humanity, morals, knowledge and recognize the adequacy of one TV; they might just make it through.

And now to satisfy those that might not be a big Jesus fan; a quote from a popular beer commercial that some in Canada might remember:

“It’s all about balance.”

Whether you are talking about the balance between spending time with the guys and, well, watch the commercial here, or the sustainability of the world’s resources and quality of life, there is a lot of wisdom in the idea of balance.

All jokes aside, the economic crisis will no doubt have a major effect on the entire world, and it would be naïve to think that it will just be the little guys that will suffer. Everything is connected. Those that value their possessions need to learn that the future will not be about excess. It will be about balance. Just ask Bob. ("Thanks for gettin' me away from all that sex!") If people can learn that a simpler life might be the answer (something that, as always, is easier said than done), this crisis can be turned from black cloud into a silver lining that forces us to change our ways before it is too late.

Maybe Jesus was onto something...

Or maybe it was the beer guys.

Will Grassby

How We Are All Destroying the Rainforest in Borneo

In yesterday’s (Nov.23rd) Svenska Dagbladet (“The Swedish Daily Paper” in English) there was an extremely interesting and discomforting article discussing the ravaging of the rainforest on the island of Borneo.

The island of Borneo is governmentally divided between the countries of Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei and is the third largest island in the world. As of today over three quarters of the lowland rainforest, a major source of biodiversity as well as endemic species, have been destroyed through logging, fire and the replacement planting of oil palms.

Mattias Klum, the source behind the aforementioned article and one of the world’s leading nature photographers, has traveled to Borneo a total of 35 times documenting and researching into the destruction of the rainforest. He paints a bleak picture and does not hold any punches titling his article “The Nightmare on Borneo.”

The problem is the ongoing replacement of rainforest by oil palms, trees that provide masses of valuable palm oil, a commodity that can be found in almost anything from shampoo and soap to chocolate, margarine and chips. These trees provide a needed fiscal shot in the arm for the economically challenged economies of Indonesia and Malaysia but also, as Mattias Klum reports, hold massive environmental and ecological consequences.

Klum describes the brutal and devastating way the rainforest is set ablaze, releasing over 1652 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air for each hectare burnt. Multiply that by an area Klum says is equivalent to the size of Switzerland and you have what he calls “One of the world’s biggest environmental problems.”

In the case of the Borneo rainforest it is, as usual, difficult to simply intervene and say “No…Bad!” The problem is that the people have come to rely on palm oil and forestry and would be jobless and living under extreme poverty if it weren’t for the jobs provided by these industries.

Does the reliance on consumption and the consequential environmental destruction necessitated sound in any way familiar? This is in no way isolated to developing countries. Our dependence on the destruction of the environment has become conventionalized and is engrained in the daily lives of people around the world.

The situation on the island of Borneo eerily mirrors the worries presented to the industrialized nations of the world in the recent so called finance crisis. Jobs will no doubt be lost and people will struggle to keeps their homes and maintain the now cliché status quo we call “quality of life.”
In this crisis has anyone stopped to re-think this seemingly universally accepted truism? Scientists have for years beat around the term “sustainable development” and warned that current levels of consumption are not possible to maintain. In a lot of ways the current financial crisis looks like it might act to force us into more sustainable practices. One almost has to wonder if there is a genius environmental activist pulling the strings.

When it comes to the rainforest in Borneo it is not just factory owners and dubious governments that are to blame. Unsustainable consumption and lack of regulation in developed nations is directly fueling the palm oil industry. Despite laws against destructive de-forestation there is, as of now, no way for consumers or manufacturers to know if the oil they are receiving comes from legal, government approved producers or illegal ones.

It is easy to pinpoint problems such as consumption and lack of regulatory bodies, but in what way can this message be relayed to the public and the people who actually have the power to make change?

Weeks after vast brown clouds of pollution settled themselves over parts of Asia providing visual confirmation of the atmospheric suicide we are committing one has to wonder what it will take to bring about change. Is there anyone capable of prompting the type of change needed to make a difference?

It is easy to reject responsibility while issues remain invisible and theoretical, but when these same things become visible they become for many actualized. We are all doubting Thomases and yes, seeing is still believing. In the same way that these perceptible brown clouds brought international attention back to the urgency for change, the pictures taken by Mattias Klum speak an indescribable story.

If we truly want the public and governments to take climate change and environmental problems seriously we need to make them visible for people and Klum does us all a service in this respect.

Once again here is the link to his report and pictures (in Swedish):

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/utrikes/artikel_2083765.svd