Comments Werdna has made

Link didn't work for me

But this one did (for the videophobes):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/t ...

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Wow. That's horrible

The implied message is that we, as wealthy westerners, deserve our carbon rich lifestyle, but no one else does.  So, let's keep the poor poor instead of dealing with the real problems.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Nice summary.

This election is being completely overshadowed by the US election.  But, I think there are repercussions outside of Canada.  If Dion fails on his green shift (which it seems like he will), then this political tactic will be out of play in all English speaking countries.  His plan is by far the most ambitious climate plan put forth by a major political party in the English speaking world.  If it fails, there is no chance of it spreading.On Committed environmentalist Stéphane Dion faces uphill fight in Canadian election posted 1 year, 1 month ago 4 Responses

Bush and McCain

I think the McCain team has been trying very hard to find a reason why Bush shouldn't go to the convention.  Now, it seems like they have.

Even though McCain would follow almost exactly Bush's horrible and unpopular policies, he still has to seem as if he is bringing in "change".

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Run of the river

Small hydro projects in British Columbia (aka "Run of the River") is starting to make it big.  But there are serious concerns with how it is being implemented.  For one thing, many of the proposed projects are in provincial or regional parks.  This means power lines and roads would need to be placed right through sensitive areas.

Another thing, and this is perhaps a bit more difficult to explain.  Each run of the river project is being produced by a private company, who would likely reap large profits without much regard for maintaining the ecosystems where the projects are built.  Essentially, this means that private companies are building projects on public land and then selling the power back to us.

This is not an anti-privatization rant.  BC has long had some of the cheapest energy in North America and power is provided by BCHydro, a public company (no coincidence there public company and cheap electricity).  Deregulation of energy has caused a debacle in California, and it might to the same in BC.

More information here:

Map of Run of the River projects:
http://www.ippwatch.info/cms/index.php

Campaign to save BC's rivers:
http://ourrivers.ca/

Public opposition to a run of the river project in the Upper Pitt River (a major salmon run and recreation area) was enough to shut the project down:
http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/2008/03/ ...

And a moving video here:
http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/2008/03/ ...

I am not against run of the river projects in theory, but the problem is that in BC they are being created without regard to ecosystems.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

worst is a strong word

It's hard to know if the tar sands are the worst project in the world, but this report makes a good argument for that.

Regardless, if you are into "Facebook activism", check out the stop the tar sands group:
http://facebook.com/group.php?gid=2375244025

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Texas

Not technically "southern", but Texas is the national leader in installing wind energy.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Money as debt

There is a video called "Money as Debt" that advocates for fiscal reform.  That having an economy that relies on an increasing amount of debt to stay afloat is not sustainable.  The video is long, but very enjoyable and describes complex economics in laymen's terms.  Here's a link to it from my blog:

http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/2008/01/ ...

(I am in not any way associated with the creation of this video.  I just think that it is interesting and addresses some of the issues brought up by Jon Rynn.)

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

OK...John, this is outrageous

Normally, I just ignore what you write, but since it is right after one of my comments, I feel I have to weigh in.  Here goes:

1. Technically correct, although practically meaningless.  There is no such thing about being scientifically absolutely sure about something (absolute proof exists only in mathematics and religion*).  All answers are tentative, but we can be pretty damn sure about some stuff.  To find scientific papers that link CO2 and temperature, go here:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/ and search for "carbon dioxide temperature"

2. Who?  Landsea?  He had some issues with actions that other scientists took, but he does not disagree with the basic concepts.

3. Climate is a complicated process.  El Nino and La Nina can affect temperature in the short term, but will not change long term trends.

4. Technically correct, because this year is 10 days old, but 2007 had an above average number of storms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Atlantic_hurricane_seas ...

5. Really?  Have you spoke to the drought afflicted in the South East and South West?  Floods in the UK.  Both were at unprecedented levels.  

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

It's about stature

Being in an academic community (finishing my PhD in an unrelated field) has shown me that academic currency is not measured in dollars, but in respect from your peers.  

So, it is not that scientists have a vested interest in making money (although that is a by-product of respect), but that they want to remain within the scientific community that they are a part of.  Try reading Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

9 times out of 10, when a scientist bucks the mainstream trend the scientist is wrong and the mainstream trend is correct.  But, science will not progress unless we listen for that 1 out of 10 who are making valid points.  

What is my point here?  Well, that mainstream scientists are not out for the money, but they are out to save their reputations.  This is a good thing.  If they want to say something contrary, they should be damn sure that they are correct about it.

I am in no way endorsing the skeptical notion that AGW is a fallacy, but I am concerned that if scientists completely buy into a "consensus" then they will be less likely to speak out if their opinion differs from the mainstream in any way.  Unfortunately, this notion is too subtle to come across in the media, so saying "consensus" is the easiest way to go.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

But, the issue is deeper than just global warming

The problem is that, as you mention, there is disagreement as to how much of a "sacrifice" it will be to properly address global warming.  

Interestingly, another New York Times Op-ed was written by Jared Diamond and addresses consumption and there is clearly a sacrifice:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02diamond.html

The main argument is that if we are to let the developing world develop (and it is our moral obligation to do so), we need to cut down on our own consumption.  Some of this can be achieved through technology and greater efficiency, but we will likely need to sacrifice some aspects of our lives to allow developing countries to westernize.

I think this argument encompasses what we need to do to address global warming, but talks about a bigger issue.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Economics not the answer

Economics theory is a sound basis for decision making (in particular on Climate Change) if two things hold:

1. all of the costs and benefits are appropriately known beforehand and applied to the analysis.


2. policy makers can look at the results of the cost benefit analysis rationally and act swiftly to address the issues

However, in practice for such a complicated and swiftly changing field as climate science, neither of these hold.  We do not know the true cost of not acting because the science is not complete.  Therefore, we cannot accurately determine the benefits of acting without many more years of further study.  Yet, we do know that by not acting, disasterous consequences will occur (we just do not know how disasterous they will be.

Policy makers are not looking at the results of climate science rationally for many reasons.  One of which is that many elected officials have vested interest in keeping the status quo (it was after all what got them elected).

Does this mean that standard economic theory is worthless?  No, but it illustrates its limitations.  The free market and perpetual growth is not a theory of the universe.  Even the universe will begin to contract in a few billion years!

On the other hand, I still don't have an answer for what is better.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Nothing's perfect, so we have to settle for good

There are problems with wind power.  These problems will multiply as we keep adding new windmills without trying to address the fundamental causes of these problems.  

These problems include, of course, affects on wildlife especially birds and lack of a steady power source.  However, these problems seem relatively minor compared to coal and nuclear.  I don't think we would want (or be able to have) 100% of our power come from wind, but to dismiss it outright because it mars the landscape is folly.

Also, talking about the space consumed by wind is a strawman.  Unlike nuclear or coal plants, the area directly under and around windmills is available for farming, grazing cattle, or industrial use.  It does not pollute the land and so if the windmills are ever torn down, the land can immediately be reused.  None of this can be said for other kinds of power generation.

I agree with Keith and would love to see a windmill in my backyard (but unfortunately, by living in a condo, I have no backyard).

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

What are you trying to say?

Sam, I don't know what you are trying to say any more.

Are you saying that cities that are not already old or big or have not already invested in some amount of transit should only invest in roads because that's all they already have?

Are you saying that rural areas should not invest in transit because they are not dense enough?

Or are you saying that in order to manage population growth of a region, some road expansion is necessary?

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

Hybrids and free-flowing traffic

Forgot to mention this earlier...

Many of the same people who are saying that road building will help reduce GHG emissions are also big supporters of hybrid technology (which in and of itself is not a bad thing).  Many of their predictions assume some fairly large percentage of personal vehicles would be hybrids 10-20 years from now.  

However, what often goes unmentioned is that hybrid cars get best mileage in stop and go traffic.  In free-flowing traffic, hybrids are not significantly different than standard internal combustion engines.

Therefore, highways that are free-flowing will negate the benefits of hybrid technology.  I don't believe this was mentioned in your report.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

Outside North America, Gore is not controversial

Well said, Dave!

What Americans and Canadians tend to forget is that Al Gore is not a controversial figure outside of North America.  It wasn't a political move to award him the Nobel prize.  It was simply awarded to him (and the IPCC) because he has had the most positive impact on global issues pertaining in some way to peace in the last few years.  Not only the last few years, actually, but going all the way back to the start of the Kyoto protocol.  In North America, we tend to ignore this and just see how he is skewered by the national media.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

Where's Giulliani?

Very presumptive of you to not put him on the list.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

Bad link

The url to the 60 second to save the earth should be:
http://www.current.tv/ecospot?cpn=gristeco

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

WNYC

I think you mean WNYC, not WCNY.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

Quoting Drudge report???

Does anyone else find it funny that you are grabbing headlines from the Drudge Report?

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

If I were Prime Minister

A similar campaign was done in Canada, called "If I were Prime Minister":
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/tour/watch.asp

30 seconds to tell Canada/the world what you would do to tackle global warming if you were prime minister.

Some are kind of cute, and all are much more intelligent proposals than our current prime minister's (lack of) proposal.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

An embarrassment to the environmental movement

The violent protesters are an embarrassment to the whole environmental movement (and all other movements, except maybe bowel movements).  More good has come from the peaceful organizing, protests, and working within the political system than has ever come from violent protests.

The work is slow, but the results are measurable.On Reflections from the scene of this weekend's G8 protests posted 2 years, 5 months ago 5 Responses

Simple reasons for increased public transit

Ooops...originally posted this in the wrong place (http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/5/18/12579/3294/#9).

There are some simple reasons why Vancouver's seeing a jump in public transit, but other cities aren't.

   
• Transit in Vancouver proper is already pretty good, so most people who live here and don't use it to get to work are either lazy or bike.

   

• Prices here are the most expensive in Canada, which are as a rule more expensive than the US.  Currently, we are paying about $1.30CAD/L  (maybe about $4.00 USD/Gallon).  Three months ago, it was about $1.00CAD/L.

   

• Translink (the transporation authority) has recently added about 50 brand spanking new electric buses all with bike racks, making riding a lot nicer.

So, what I am saying is that in Vancouver, there is the potential for lots of increase (already good transit), there is an impetus to do so (cost), and doing so isn't so bad (new infrastructure).

However, the outlying suburbs are incredibly under-served by transit.  And this is an entirely different issue.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

On Making public transit work posted 2 years, 6 months ago 9 Responses

• WiscIdea:

  Dreaming is good.  :-)

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Between Iraq and a hard place posted 2 years, 6 months ago 23 Responses

• 5 million too many, but there is a progression

  
  Gar said:
  

  
  "Not as bad as WWII" is a pretty low standard.
  

  You're right.  It's no longer 50 million.  It's only 5 million.  Still 5 million too many.

  I would also rather have the 21st century ideals of Europeans ruling the world over hawkish American ideals.  But, this is still better than the hawkish European ideals of the early 20th century.

  I'm not really disagreeing with you, but I am saying that there is a progression here (at least for the past 50+ years).  And, if the world continues in this direction, then wars will become a thing of the past (or at least extreme rarity).    Perhaps one day soon, we'll get a government that understands this and allocates resources accordingly.  It won't be easy or guaranteed (eg- peak oil could cause many wars clamoring for limited resources), but I think it is possible and more likely to occur than wiscidea's idea.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Between Iraq and a hard place posted 2 years, 6 months ago 23 Responses

• Over simplifying

  Gar, I think you are simplifying things a bit too much, and in doing so make some logical leaps.

  I agree that no nation can be pacifist until all nations are.  And that's the big problem.  Although the US has made some terrible military choices in the past 7 or so years, I think most Westerners can agree that they would rather see the US as the dominant super-power than China (who would be more than ready to take the US's place if it stepped down).  

  Additionally, you neglect to mention that the number of war deaths in the last 50 years or so is vastly smaller than the number of war deaths from the 50 years before that.  I don't know the numbers, but I believe it's an order of magnitude.  We must be doing something right.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Between Iraq and a hard place posted 2 years, 6 months ago 23 Responses

• Innovation and science on decline in US

  One paragraph I found particularly amusing was this:

  
  One of the reasons I am optimistic about the future of America is that we will experience between four and seven times as much new scientific knowledge and innovation in the next 25 years as we have had in the past 100. This means that America will excel at precisely those capabilities that will be required to renew and protect our environment -- unless, of course, we saddle ourselves with higher levels of regulation and taxation.
  

  Where does he get these numbers!?!?!

  From my experience, scientific knowledge and innovation is on the decline in the States.  For example, academic funding in my area (computer science) in the states is so hard to find that many professors simply cannot afford to do any research.  Whereas academic funding in Canada and Europe is still healthy (which is one of the reasons why I moved to Canada).  You see the effects of this at academic conferences where there are very few Americans attending even if the location is on American soil.

  This is all related to the systematic strangle-hold that the current administration is putting on any science that is not directly related to bomb making (I'm serious...the only people I know who do have funding are those who can pique the ear of the military).

  I know, I know, this rant has had nothing to do with environmentalism.  But, I can guarantee that we will see the effects of this 5-10 years from now when the rest of the world has surpassed the US in terms of innovation and new technologies (both green and not).

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On It's not an alternative, it's a subset posted 2 years, 6 months ago 9 Responses

• Science and politics---Andrew D and Dave R

  It's a good conversation to have: what makes a scientific argument vs what makes a political argument and when is it justified to use one or the other.

  Clearly, it is only justified to make a political argument when you have the science to back it up.  

  Also, clearly, a political argument is one that tries to persuade us to take action and so it will have to play to our emotions.

  I think Andrew D's argument is that both Gore and Hayward have science on their side.  But, that Gore makes a better emotional/political argument because it is less misleading.

  That's where I disagree.  You are implying that the more emotional an argument is, the more scientifically misleading it is.

  The point is that scientists make scientific arguments (because that's all they are trained to do).  We need to rely on non-scientists (or some very few, multi-talented scientists) to make emotional appeals to the general public to spur us into action.  

  Even without Gore's minor omissions in the film, I think he makes an excellent visceral argument for why AGM is a huge problem.

  ps- apologies for over-philosophizing,  but that's what I do as a (computer-)scientist.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On No, but we still know enough to start taking action posted 2 years, 6 months ago 20 Responses

• Vancouver Sun, actually

  It was the Vancouver Sun.  And, it was a great issue.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Suzuki edits the Sun posted 2 years, 6 months ago 2 Responses

• Gore's movie also distorted science please explain

  You said that Gore's movie also distorted science for the case of advocacy.  While I can believe this, I think this is a claim that you should back up, especially when posting to this site.  I have heard claims that An Inconvenient Truth incorrectly stated that melting ice caps on Kilimanjaro was due to global warming, and that the movie left out the fact that it would be 100 years or so before sea levels rise to the degree mentioned in the movie.

  If these are the only misrepresentations, then they are relatively minor and do not effect the thesis of the movie.  And, as you mention, they pale in comparison to what Hayward did.

  Regardless, this is something that I think you should have mentioned or linked to in your post.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On No, but we still know enough to start taking action posted 2 years, 6 months ago 20 Responses

• Ramming through devastating development

  The main problem with the Olympics in Vancouver is that the Premier is seeing this as a chance to ram through development that is likely to devastate the Lower Mainland (ie- greater Vancouver).  

  The highway expansion plan mentioned in the post may be the worst.  It's being seen as part of a larger development plan, the Gateway Project, that is supposed to open the region up to trade from Asia.

  But, in reality, it will cause more pollution, more sprawl, more traffic, etc.  The region would be better served by public transportation and more rail options.  You can read all about it here (a website that I help maintain): http://livableregion.ca

  The irony is that the Premier of British Columbia, Gordon Campbell, is being portrayed as some sort of green hero:
  http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/14/131847/917

  When the reality is that few of his green initiatives will ever go through as long as he keeps on pushing expansion.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Not lookin' so good posted 2 years, 6 months ago 3 Responses

• Dang...

  What happened to the formatting of the article?  It looked good in the preview.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On It's like riding a bike ... posted 2 years, 6 months ago 8 Responses

• Cheonggye Freeway

  Interestingly, Seoul has had a similar experience when it removed the Cheonggye Freeway.

  Sorry...don't have the link, only the text:

  Wednesday November 1, 2006
  The Guardian <http://www.guardian.co.uk>

  One year ago this month, several million people headed to a park in the
  centre of Seoul, the capital of South Korea and seventh largest city in the
  world. They didn't go for a rock festival, a football match or a political
  gathering, but mostly to just marvel at the surroundings, to get some fresh
  air and to paddle in the river that runs through it.

  But this was no ordinary park or river. The very old people of Seoul still
  remember how, more than 50 years ago, the river Cheonggyecheon was a wide
  but shallow seasonal stream that traditionally divided the city between the
  rich in the north and the poor in the south. It was where people went to
  wash clothes and where kids went to play, but as Seoul grew from being
  semi-rural to a vast, smog-bound east Asian metropolis, the Cheonggyecheon -
  which means "clear valley stream" - became little more than a sewer.

  By 1970, the riverside had become slums, and the water progressively more
  polluted, having been first canalised and then concreted over. As cars took
  over the city, the river bed was turned into a road, and then an elevated
  six-lane motorway was built above it. It was one of the most comprehensive
  obliterations of the natural environment ever perpetrated.

  But in a revolutionary act of ecological restoration that is now being
  examined around the world, the city of Seoul, under the leadership of the
  then mayor, Lee Myung Bak, pledged in 2002 to restore the river, tear down
  the motorway and create a five-mile long, 800-yard wide, 1,000-acre lateral
  park snaking through the city where the river once ran.

  The vision was ordinary enough: to create a focal point of both historical
  significance and aesthetic appeal, with the Cheonggyecheon triggering
  long-term economic growth, attracting tourists and investors alike, but it
  meant thinking the culturally impossible. The road carried 160,000 cars a
  day and was perpetually jammed, but was still considered indispensible for
  the city's economy.

  If the fate of the river has reflected Seoul's urban development in the last
  century, the motorway was seen as a proud but decaying symbol of South
  Korea's emergence from a rural to an industrial economy, and of the
  investment of the lives that had been sacrificed to achieve it. So to tear
  it down was "above all, a symbolic act", says Kee Yeon Hwang, a professor in
  the department of urban planning and design at Hongik University and who was
  involved in the project from the start. He led the feasibility work in the
  late 1990s, and was the principal author of the masterplan.

  Increase the flow

  "The idea was sown in 1999," Hwang says. "We had experienced a strange
  thing. We had three tunnels in the city and one needed to be shut down.
  Bizarrely, we found that that car volumes dropped. I thought this was odd.
  We discovered it was a case of 'Braess paradox', which says that by taking
  away space in an urban area you can actually increase the flow of traffic,
  and, by implication, by adding extra capacity to a road network you can
  reduce overall performance."

  He and his team asked thousands of people what they thought was the most
  important thing in the city, and they all said the environment and water.
  The research team spent six months investigating what would happen to the
  traffic and developing a forecasting model which said it would slightly
  improve the traffic overall. It was put to the electorate that the motorway
  should be removed, and mayor Lee was elected partly on the environment
  ticket. "There were worries about the traffic,"says Hwang, "but we explained
  what would happen, and that there would be alternatives, and they began to
  understand"

  Work started in July 2003. It had taken 20 years to build the roads and to
  obliterate the river, but it took contractors just two years to pull them
  down and restore it. It cost $380m (£201m) and required 620,000 tonnes of
  concrete and asphalt to be removed and recycled. Twenty-two new bridges were
  built, and the water in the river was restored, albeit mainly from
  groundwater. There was fierce opposition and protests to begin with from
  nearby traders, who feared that cars would no longer be able to get there,
  and thousands of hawkers and other people who used the space below the
  motorway were forced to leave. They were eventually relocated.

  But other opposition came, unexpectedly from urban planners. "They did not
  like it," says Hwang. "They always want to build more roads to survive.

  "To start with, I felt very alone. Nobody wanted to talk to me. But I was
  very confident about our traffic forecasting model. Ordinary people were a
  bit sceptical to start with, but then when they saw the river reappear, they
  got very excited.

  "The tearing down of the motorway has had both intended and unexpected
  effects. As soon as we destroyed the road, the cars just disappeared and
  drivers changed their habits. A lot of people just gave up their cars.
  Others found a different way of driving. In some cases, they kept using
  their cars but changed their routes."

  The city had beefed up its bus service and given people options to avoid the
  motorway, and the effect on the environment was remarkable. Hwang says: "We
  found that surface temperatures in summer along the restored river were an
  average 3.6 degrees Centigrade lower than places 400 metres away. The river
  is now a natural air conditioner, cooling the capital during its long hot
  summers. Average wind speeds in June this year were 50% higher than the same
  period last year. It was extraordinary. Also, many birds came back, plus
  fish, insects and plants. The variety of wildlife has vastly increased since
  we tore up the road."

  The scheme has had a ripple effect, Hwang says. A new mayor has come to
  office and he is now getting to work on the Han river, an important river
  that is not at all pedestrian-friendly. He is going to shrink the road space
  for cars and replace it with pedestrian walkways.

  Similar scheme

  Shanghai is thought to be considering a similar, though smaller, scheme.
  Tokyo has an elevated road above an ancient bridge and is investigating the
  possibility of removing it, and other cities in east Asia are taking an
  interest.

  Critics say that it has been gentrification on a massive scale, that it has
  forced thousands of people away from the area and threatens the livelihoods
  and homes of people nearby. Others say the city is really only masking its
  problems. The water for the river is now pumped from deep below the city and
  collected from the nearby Han river. There have been accusations of
  profiteering, and the rich moving in to appropriate the views and the better
  quality environment.

  For Simon Evans, head of Creative Clusters, the Sheffield-based group that
  works for the regeneration of cities, it is a triumph. "Mayor Lee and his
  team took a crumbling, filthy motorway, turned it back into a river, and
  reclaimed the area for pedestrians. New contemporary bridges and walkways
  were built, and the banks of the

  newly-revealed stream was animated with public artworks. There are now
  marsh-plants and ducks, running tracks, clean waterfalls where children can
  play, and a park replaces the old Clover-leaf Road intersection. There is a
  new museum, and an events programme that attracted upwards of 10 million
  visitors within three months of the project's completion.

  "The Cheonggyecheon restoration is a perfect example of joined-up
  regeneration and environmental progress. It asserts that intimacy and
  creativity is still possible in the mega-city."

  Evans is strongly backed by most locals. "Our life has been changed," says
  Inchon Yu, an actor and cultural adviser to the former mayor of Seoul, Lee
  Myung Bak. "People feel the water and the wind. Life becomes slower. Many
  people are changed. Economic life has changed, too. The price of land nearby
  has risen. But it reminds people of their own hearts. It gives a new heart
  to the city - 30,000 people use it every weekend."

  Last week, the verdict of ordinary Seoulians, asked at random what they
  thought of the development, was overwhelmingly positive. "The city centre is
  so much cleaner," said Rhoda Chung, a young pharmaceutical worker. "The
  shopkeepers were arguing against the restoration. but now that they can see
  the difference they all like it." Soo Chul Kwak, a retired driver, said:
  "Before, you only heard the traffic, but now you can hear the water."

  "I am so proud of what we have done", says Hwang. And so is former mayor
  Lee, who is now the frontrunner for the presidency - and known as Mr
  Bulldozer.

  · Road block

  Braess's paradox, named after mathematician Dietrich Braess, gives the lie
  to governments and local authorities that argue that building more roads
  reduces congestion.

  According to Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia, it works like this: "For
  each point of a road network, let there be given the number of cars starting
  from it, and the destination of the cars. Under these conditions, one wishes
  to estimate the distribution of traffic flow. Whether one street is
  preferable to another depends not only on the quality of the road but also
  on the density of the flow. If every driver takes the path that looks most
  favourable to him, the resultant running times need not be minimal.
  Furthermore, it is indicated by an example that an extension of the road
  network may cause a redistribution of the traffic that results in longer
  individual running times."
  

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On It's like riding a bike ... posted 2 years, 6 months ago 8 Responses

• Of course Grist has no legal obligation...

  but that's not the point.  Coming to a place like Grist can sometimes feel, well...insular.  So far, it hasn't been by policy to make it so.  This site attracts like minds, and that's great.  But, going too far in this direction, and you get an echo chamber.  Everyone on the inside agrees with each other, and everyone on the outside are idiots.  

  I'm not suggesting that the being trolls mentioned are moving the argument along, but they are grounding us in the reality that not everyone thinks like grist.

  Restricting posters and moderation is a very heavy handed way of dealing with trolls.  If not done well, it can stifle even good discussion.  For this reason, I believe that moderation should be done with the lightest touch possible.
  

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Churchill, not Chamberlain posted 2 years, 6 months ago 58 Responses

• A longer term solution

  Building on David's suggestion, a website like slashdot (http://slashdot.org) applies a point system to posts.  Each user gets a certain number of points (or negative points) they can apply to posts.  Posts can have anywhere from -1 to 5 points.  The more points a post has, the better it is deemed to be by the community.  Users can configure their browsers to only see posts that are above a certain threshold (thereby avoiding trolls and dumb comments).

  Maybe it sounds complicated, but it works very well.  

  It would take a fairly massive reworking of this website, but if implemented, it makes the messages self-moderating.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Churchill, not Chamberlain posted 2 years, 6 months ago 58 Responses

• Half of Americans live withn 5 miles

  If this quote is right, which I am not convinced of (but it may be...anyone able to back it up???), then the other half lives more than 5 miles away.  How far?  That's not stated.

  To answer your questions:

  1. Mass transit works best if there is already high density in the area it is serving.  Lots of people living 5 miles from work implies that they would be easily served by buses.

  2. Hmmm...why indeed?  To get out and breathe fresh air?  To not have to deal with gridlock?  To be able to read a book instead of curse at the guy in front of you?  To save money on insurance?  To save money on repairs?  To be less likely to be injured/killed in an accident?  Exercise?

  3. Good point.  Get a good $500 bike, but I suggest donating the rest to your favorite charity (environmental or not).  But buying an $8000 bike is still a lot cheaper than buying and maintaining a $15000 car.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Electric hybrid bikes going mainstream posted 2 years, 6 months ago 10 Responses

• Yes.

  I have a skeptical father-in-law.  A smart guy and an economist by training, but he really wants to believe that a strong economy will solve all the world's ills.

  Every time there is a new editorial, article, or documentary claiming that Global Warming is a "Swindle", he sends it to me.  

  It would be very, very nice to simply point him to Grist, where he can read a point-by-point rebuttal of whatever.

  I imagine that there are others dealing with the same thing I am.

  That being said, a point-by-point rebuttal does not necessarily require new material.  It is quite reasonable to recycle old stuff (because that's all that they are doing).

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Vote! posted 2 years, 6 months ago 96 Responses

• GMO not the cause

  I am not a GMO lover, but I have yet to hear credible evidence that GMO food has anything to the bee-icide.

  A good analysis of why GMO probably isn't a factor is described here:

  http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2007/05/02/gm_honeybee2/in ...

  In particular, it is in extremely bad form if people keep blaming GMO for faulty reasons.  That's no better than global warming deniers.

  That being said, however, if anyone knows of any credible evidence that GMO is a partial cause, please let me know.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On So far, small-scale, local-minded beekeepers have dodged hive collapse. posted 2 years, 7 months ago 19 Responses

• What's wrong with the word denier?

  I proudly proclaim that I am a Zeus denier!  Zeus never existed.

  The salient point, is not the act of denial, but rather the failure to change one's mind when faced with overwhelming evidence.

  Denial is not the same as skepticism.  A skeptical person has an open mind and will change beliefs given sufficient evidence.

  From what I've read so far, the evidence strongly favors AGW.  This does not seem to affect Pielke and other deniers, who have not changed opinions as their body of evidence shrinks over time.  Is it inertia?  Fear?  Machismo?

  ps- OK, a slight change---I am a Zeus skeptic!  Show me the proof and I will change my mind.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On New Monbiot piece posted 2 years, 7 months ago 31 Responses

• He's paid to be a musician

  Let's keep it that way.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On From pop star John Mayer posted 2 years, 7 months ago 31 Responses

• Congestion pricing needs options

  As a native New Yorker currently living in Vancouver, BC, I am really looking forward to congestion pricing in NYC.  It will be a great thing for the city.

  However, a similar proposal comes up for Vancouver every once in a while.  Here, I think it will fail, or at least it won't be an immediate success.

  The reason is that as Livingstone mentions, reducing car traffic relies on having other options.  In Vancouver, we have great transit within the city, but the suburbs have abysmal public transit.  Without significant increase in transit all congestion pricing would do is piss off people who live in the boonies.  They still have to drive and now they have to pay more.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Imagine: charging polluters to encourage the others! posted 2 years, 7 months ago 4 Responses

• Making the market safe for offsets

  Danny, you make an excellent comment that if we pay to offset what is emitted now by promising to do something in the future, then we never know if that promise will be kept (or to what extent it will be kept).  I haven't read the Monbiot articles you linked to (but I plan to).  

  My response is this, though.  I would bet that a good deal of those "promises" will be kept.  For example, if your offset pays to install wind power in some region.  And the "promise" is that your money will offset X tons of CO2 in Y years.  An earthquake might destroy the windmill in Y-1 years, or any number of other things will break the promise.

  However, some carbon has been offset.  What percentage, though?  In the small scale, it is random, but in the large scale we can amortize and come up with a pretty good idea that if you pay $100 to offset X tons in Y years, it is really (on average) going to be X-1 tons.

  My point is that I don't think that the offset business is fundamentally flawed, but just that it is all about making a safe, regular market that is transparent and people can feel confident that they actually get what they pay for.  It will be complicated, but there are other markets that have similar features (think of the futures market for grains, etc).

  We're not there yet.  I still think there is huge benefits for the offset market, but only if governments and industry together help to monitor the market and make it really work before bad press can kill it.

  Offsets in and of themselves can never be the whole solution, but as many others have posted, it can be part.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Dueling assumptions posted 2 years, 7 months ago 18 Responses

• Masking China's real problems

  Although what Alejandro Gutierrez is doing can be seen as a blue-print for model cities around the world (which is great), it does nothing but mask China's real stance towards the environment.

  Until the world's economic markets start judging China based on its stance towards the environment (and its citizens), then we are in real trouble.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Building the world's largest eco-city posted 2 years, 7 months ago 5 Responses

• Actually..a reason that has nothing to do with GHG

  As someone who has once haunted some conservative blogs, I know that there's a lot of talk about removing our dependence on the Middle East.  It's a very noble reason to look into alternative fuels that has nothing to do with GHG or peak oil.

  Unfortunately, that leads to this country's current short-sighted obsession with biodiesel.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On If we aren't causing it, why would reducing emissions fix it? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 9 Responses

• ps

  Two posts on BC in one night...this has got to be a record!

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On The Tyee busts Harper posted 2 years, 7 months ago 5 Responses

• More Greenwashing in BC

  As I mentioned in an earlier comment to another post on BC, the Premier, Gordon Campbell is proposing to expand the highway system around the lower mainland (Vancouver and suburbs), called the Gateway project.  Ostensibly, as the Minister of Transportation claims, this will reduce GHG in the area since fewer cars are idling in traffic.  There are many reasons why this is wrong.  For one, more roads encourages more sprawl which encourages more cars eventually.  

  Many local groups are instead advocating for a different proposal that primarily involves beefing up public transit.  It's a tough struggle, but people are beginning to listen.

  For more information on this, catch the link in my signature.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On The Tyee busts Harper posted 2 years, 7 months ago 5 Responses

• Yes, Gordon Campbell talks the talk

  Gordon Campbell, the BC Premier (like a Governor), talks a bunch about fighting climate change, but he also has big plans to continue spewing more GHG.  

  He has been pushing for expanding the highway system throughout the Lower Mainland (greater Vancouver area) without doing anything for public transit.  There are many reasons why this is a bad idea and one of them is that this will encourage more cars on the road and hence more GHG emissions.

  There are many local groups who are opposed to this plan, called the Gateway project.  People who are interested to learn more can go to any of these sites:

  http://www.livableregion.ca/
  http://www.spec.bc.ca
  http://www.gatewaysucks.org/

  In many ways, Vancouver itself is a model for how to build a great city, but unfortunately, the suburbs are not following that model.

  All of Campbell's talk will not mean anything if he continue's with the Gateway project.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On More exciting than it sounds posted 2 years, 7 months ago 13 Responses

• I feel your pain...

  I used to bike all the time when I lived in Houston.  People just couldn't understand why I would choose to be outside, out of the air-conditioning.  Several almost accidents from drivers who refused to acknowledge my existence.  And most of the time not a bike rack in sight.

  Now, I live in Vancouver, BC.  Although things can be better for cyclists, it is worlds ahead of Houston.  Many public events now have (volunteer) bike valets and there are requirements at all public buildings for bike racks.  Good stuff.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Bike racks in rain, smokers under cover posted 2 years, 7 months ago 14 Responses

• Love the idea

  Love the idea, and it's this kind of thinking that can really help us.  However, I doubt that the skyscraper farms could ever actually work.  

  Tokyo is one of the most amazing places in the world.  Sure, it's not for everyone (it's got more crime, bad smells, crowds, etc), but it also has art, culture, communities, history, etc.  There is nothing Judge Dred-ish about it.  It's the density of people that makes the city so great.  Anything to encourage cities to densify without increasing poverty (American, Canadian, and Australian cities in particular) I take as a good thing.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Can we live with skyscraper farms? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 29 Responses

• Lomborg's article is insiduously misleading

  On the surface, Lomborg's article will seem reasonable to many people, but this paragraph is particularly insidious:

  
  Take the Kyoto Protocol. As the nearby chart shows, Kyoto - even if it had been successfully adopted by all signatories (including the United States), and fully adhered to throughout the century - would have postponed warming by just five years, at a cost of $180 billion a year.
  

  In it he makes several incorrect assumptions.  First, that the Kyoto protocol is meant to be the end of action towards climate change.  This is incorrect.  It is meant to be a first step with other protocols coming into effect as Kyoto is finished (but...where are they?).  It assumes that new technologies will not come into play to offset costs.  One of the good things about Kyoto is that it doesn't prescribe how GHG should be reduced.  That is left up to the individual country (and the markets).  This is a strong motivator for new technology.

  And then there is the horrible graph in the side bar.  Perhaps someone with more time can tear that apart.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Is climate change the most important global problem? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 31 Responses

• Just to pick apart

  You (Michael, Dave, and Zarkov) said that Global Warming does not in and of itself do any damage, but rather the effects that it causes.  It's like saying that it's not a fire that causes the damage, but rather the heat and the smoke that does it.

  OK, this may be a silly point to make.  What I am trying to say, though, is that now it may seem that GW is not directly causing harm, but I would bet that in 10-20 years time we will be seeing a direct link and its effects will be obvious.

  Andrew Eisenberg
  The gateway project is wrong---http://www.liveableregion.ca/

  On Is climate change the most important global problem? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 31 Responses

• Good news

  Yahoo! seems to understand that carbon credits are not necessarily trustworthy and will never be the whole answer.  If they do this thing in the right way, it will be a good thing for the carbon credit industry and environmentalists as a whole.

  They just got a new customer.  I am changing my search engine from google right now.On Yahoo! posted 2 years, 7 months ago 4 Responses

• God is Green

  Bill Moyers just did an excellent documentary about environmentalist evangelicals:
  http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/green/index.htm ...

  (podcasts and videocasts are available and highly recommended)

  These people essentially believe that because humanity are god's stewards we must treat the world well.

  On all other issues, this group of conservative Christians walk the party line (eg- abortion, gay marriage...).  It's interesting and refreshing to see a different kind of green.  It's also these kinds of people who must be embraced if the environmental ideals are to be spread beyond hippie liberals.

  Here's a brief summary of their beliefs:

  
  Our common Judeo-Christian heritage teaches that the following theological and anthropological principles are the foundation of environmental stewardship:
  

  
     

  1.       God, the Creator of all things, rules over all and deserves our worship and adoration.
        

  2.       The earth, and with it all the cosmos, reveals its Creator's wisdom and is sustained and governed by His power and loving kindness.
        

  3.       Men and women were created in the image of God, given a privileged place among creatures, and commanded to exercise stewardship over the earth. Human persons are moral agents for whom freedom is an essential condition of responsible action. Sound environmental stewardship must attend both to the demands of human well being and to a divine call for human beings to exercise caring dominion over the earth. It affirms that human well being and the integrity of creation are not only compatible but also dynamically interdependent realities.
        

  4.       God's Law-summarized in the Decalogue and the two Great Commandments (to love God and neighbor), which are written on the human heart, thus revealing His own righteous character to the human person-represents God's design for shalom, or peace, and is the supreme rule of all conduct, for which personal or social prejudices must not be substituted.
        

  5.       By disobeying God's Law, humankind brought on itself moral and physical corruption as well as divine condemnation in the form of a curse on the earth. Since the fall into sin people have often ignored their Creator, harmed their neighbors, and defiled the good creation.
        

  6.       God in His mercy has not abandoned sinful people or the created order but has acted throughout history to restore men and women to fellowship with Him and through their stewardship to enhance the beauty and fertility of the earth.
        

  7.       Human beings are called to be fruitful, to bring forth good things from the earth, to join with God in making provision for our temporal well being, and to enhance the beauty and fruitfulness of the rest of the earth. Our call to fruitfulness, therefore, is not contrary to but mutually complementary with our call to steward God's gifts. This call implies a serious commitment to fostering the intellectual, moral, and religious habits and practices needed for free economies and genuine care for the environment.
     

  
  

  http://www.stewards.net/CornwallDeclaration.htm

  Interesting that they come to many of the same conclusions as I do, but for very different reasons.On Why are environmental activists so clueless at marketing climate change solutions? posted 2 years, 7 months ago 36 Responses

• Vancouver, BC

  Global TV in Canada has some video of the rally in Vancouver, BC:

  http://video.canada.com/Global_VideoContentHTML.aspx?1894 ...

  There was a lot of media at the rally, so I expect that there will be more coverage coming up soon.

  Strangely, there's no mention of Vancouver on the StepItUp website.On Mostly in the local papers posted 2 years, 7 months ago 15 Responses

• Gin is made from grains, not juniper berries

  Not that I want to be nit-picky, but I will...Gin is made from grains and merely flavored with juniper.  Remove the juniper from gin and you have vodka!On Umbra on organic liquors posted 2 years, 7 months ago 5 Responses

• TerraPass

  It's an interesting story.  They accuse TerraPass, an offset trading company, of having funded dubious offset projects.  TerraPass has responded by doing a full review of the project in question.  The review is being done openly and the current status can be found here:
  http://terrapass.pbwiki.com/
  and a blog posting about it here:
  http://www.terrapass.com/terrablog/posts/2007/03/digging- ...

  What I like about this is that if TerraPass is truly be upfront and honest about its review, it is raising the bar for all other offset trading companies.  

  At this point, selling carbon offsets feels like the wild west.  Anyone can say they are selling offsets, but how do we know if they are telling the truth or if the offsets really do remove the GHG that they are supposed to?  

  If all carbon trading companies voluntarily follow the same rigor that TerraPass is, then this industry has a future.
  On Among bad deals, TerraPass's methane offset project? posted 2 years, 8 months ago 7 Responses

• Chaotic system can have predictive qualities

  Perhaps another way of saying this is: yes, climate is complicated, but that doesn't mean that we can't make meaningful predictions about it.

  I am not up on my chaos theory mathematics, but I don't think, as jabailo says above, that it has anything to do with a number of independent variables (Wikipedia says nothing on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaotic_system).

  I guess the best way would be to have counter-examples.  Although, a colony of ants can be represented by a chaotic system, we can still predict that they will make an ant hill.  We may be able to predict its size and its depth.  We may even be able to predict how fast it will grow, etc.On 'Chaotic systems are not predictable'--Sure, but who says climate is chaotic? posted 2 years, 8 months ago 13 Responses

• Science is based on facts, public opinion is not

  I agree with thebrowze who says that scientists should only state the facts, and not use rhetoric or emotion to sway public opinion.

  Actually, I only agree sort of.

  The other side doesn't stick to the facts and they seem to be winning, sometimes.  Look at the debate a few nights ago between deniers (Michael Crighton, et al), and global warming scientists.  The deniers seemed to have a greater affect on the audience.  Why?  Because they spoke to them using good rhetoric and jokes.  The scientists were, well...scientists.

  We can see the same thing happening in the Evolution vs. Creation "debate".  The scientists have all the facts, but none of the social grace.  And creationists continue to make ground.

  Finally, a charismatic figure came around, Al Gore, who was able to bring the issues to the public.

  Although, in my ideal world, the scientists would make their discoveries, and dispationately describe them to the public, who would proactively take action on the discoveries---it just doesn't work like that.

  Is a scientist who steps down from the ivory tower tarnishing the very idea of science?  I think the problem with scientific training as currently practiced (and I can say this first hand as a phd student) is that we are expected to make scientific discoveries, but not taught how to communicate them to the non-scientists.

  This unfortunate situation is hurting our efforts to really get the public to act on climate change.On Tedious posted 2 years, 8 months ago 11 Responses

• The full documentary on Google Video

  Since no one else has posted it, here's the full video, in all of its glory:

  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458 ...On It ain't pretty posted 2 years, 8 months ago 17 Responses

• OK...consider me wrong

  After reading the article, it is indeed worse than I imagined.On Are you? posted 2 years, 8 months ago 16 Responses

• This is news...how?

  Yes, this is bad, but is there anything new?  On Are you? posted 2 years, 8 months ago 16 Responses

• finally, seeing the bigger picture

  Wow.  That is exactly what I have been wanting to hear for so long.  We don't have to agree on who wrote the bible, or when life begins, or any of a number of things as long as we do agree on the Big issues.  

  Maybe with a little more spinning, all of those hot-topics can be seen as what they are---diversions, and we can focus on really making progress in poverty, health, and the environment.On Over global warming, of all things posted 2 years, 8 months ago 48 Responses

• What about the rain forests?

  All this talk about Brazil and not a mention of it's rain forests?  

  The land to grow sugar cane must come from somewhere.  It's my understanding (and unfounded at that) that a significant portion of land used to grow sugar cane is coming from chopping down rain forests.

  Can anyone shed some light on this?  How much jungle has been lost to produce fuel?  Is it worth it?On A biodiesel entrepreneur in Argentina spreads seeds of wisdom posted 2 years, 8 months ago 5 Responses

• What about the rain forests?

  All this talk about Brazil and not a mention of it's rain forests?  

  The land to grow sugar cane must come from somewhere.  It's my understanding (and unfounded at that) that a significant portion of land used to grow sugar cane is coming from chopping down rain forests.

  Can anyone shed some light on this?  How much jungle has been lost to produce fuel?  Is it worth it?On What Brazil can teach the U.S. about energy and ethanol posted 2 years, 8 months ago 5 Responses

• What about the rain forests?

  All this talk about Brazil and not a mention of it's rain forests?  

  The land to grow sugar cane must come from somewhere.  It's my understanding (and unfounded at that) that a significant portion of land used to grow sugar cane is coming from chopping down rain forests.

  Can anyone shed some light on this?  How much jungle has been lost to produce fuel?  Is it worth it?On The strangest biofuel sources you've never heard of posted 2 years, 8 months ago 5 Responses

• Not yet convinced, but...

  Unfortunately, after years of fighting it, Wal-mart is going to open a store in Vancouver BC.  

  It's going to be one of those "eco-friendly" designs.  It's going to be situated right next to a stop on the new subway line.  That's the good news...

  The current city council, which is more right leaning than the previous one believes that we need more of these big box stores.  Therefore, Best Buy, Canadian Tire (Canada' version of Sears), Home Depot, and  many others are popping up all over the city.

  This of course has a ripple effect.  Now the city and the province, together, are lobbying to build more roads and bridges so that people can get to these stores more easily (public transit is barely being thought of).

  It's tough out here, but there are plenty of groups and organizations that are trying to prevent these types of changes from occurring.  Sometimes we're successful, and sometimes we're not...On Al Gore takes his green message to Wal-Mart headquarters posted 3 years, 4 months ago 9 Responses