Cap and trade in California

A recent article by James Tansey from the Tyee reports that:

"The ARB (California Air Resources Board) voted unanimously on Friday to approve the final regulations that will create the second largest carbon market in the world, beginning in 2013. While the U.S. Federal government's interest in climate policy has declined, California, still the world's seventh largest economy, will implement a cap and trade scheme that represents the most significant issue in U.S. climate policy since the Kyoto Protocol".

This evidently puts pressure on British Columbia to be more committed to the Western Climate Initiative.

"While British Columbia's interest in climate policy was affirmed by the premier earlier in 2011, the government's commitment to the WCI is currently subject to an economic impacts review; often in government this kind of study is the earliest sign of a retreat from a policy position".

This bold move by California (a state that has had tremendous financial hardship through its budget crisis), marks a sense of commitment and leadership to climate policy. Whether other U.S. states follow in a time when the economy dominates every political discussion is unlikely. However, BC has and should consider its commitment to the WCI, not least for a province that ostensibly prides itself on green initiatives like the carbon tax (which I think needs to be reformed) but for a great opportunity to harness the enthusiasm from down south to move forward on climate policy.

Localizing climate change to move forward

This article by Anna Fahey summarizes how talking about climate impacts on “socially distant groups” (and probably vulnerable species like polar bears) is likely to amplify polarization about the issue. This statement is complimented by the following elaboration:

"Climate change campaigns in the United States that focus on the risks to people in foreign countries or even other regions of the U.S. are likely to inadvertently increase polarization among Americans rather than build consensus and support for policy action".

The writer offers some insights by a recent study which argues that "when information about the risks of climate change are localized, connected closely to values such as public health, and communicated in terms of co-benefits to the community, these campaign efforts are likely to be more successful at transcending ideological differences and building support for action.”

I think this piece is relevant to all discussions that pertain to climate change. Indeed, climate change is so poorly communicated and politically driven that peoples' perceptions constantly shift along political and ideological lines. This is dangerous, I think, as it does not offer citizens a chance to digest the information and to think about the issues and risks themselves and produce their own logical conclusions.

Communication in the climate change arena needs to be ameliorated. There are some positive examples within the British Columbia context of communicating the local impacts of climate change, but more needs to happen. In an era of social media, we could use YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other tools to build a dialogue about what kind of action we can take right now to help us understand and adapt to climate change. No doubt, this is already happening, but it gets diluted with political sentiment.

Planners have a role here, but so do politicians, climate scientists and our leaders.

Bill Rees on the disconnect between economics and ecology

In my first year as an undergraduate student, I took a course called Environmental Science 101. It was a fascinating and comprehensive overview of both the arts and science dimensions of the discipline (e.g. environmental toxicology, energy systems, air pollution, environmental law, politics, planning, public policy and economics, to name a few).

In the first few weeks of class, our wonderful professor exposed us to the ecological footprint analysis, a concept that was co-created by William Rees, a professor in my grad program at UBC. I studied his ecological footprint analysis in my undergrad and explained it (or attempted to) numerous times to my friends in other areas of the academy.

5 years later, I am now taking a class with Prof. Rees on ecological economics. Bill is passionate and his ecological footprint analysis has been widely used, discussed and studied all over the world. The video above is a just a taste of a professor who has done so much in arguing for the importance of ecology in our society and why planning and economic systems must account for ecological dimensions first, before we can begin to even think about sustainbility.

Bill is retiring this year from UBC and I feel quite privileged and honoured to have taken a course with him.

A Green Leader we miss: David Miller

Despite the critiques of David Miller's mayorship of Toronto, he is and will certainly be remembered as a leader in the environmental and sustainability realm. This Globe and Mail articles features Miller's thoughts about Transit City and how  transit is critical to any successful city like Toronto. I wrote about an idea I had to Transit City's financial issues back in May 2010. You can view that post here.

The article from the Globe also provides an update about what Miller is doing these days. He continues to practice his green ethos through a new position as Future of Cities Global Fellow at the Polytechnic Institute of New York University, a post he landed after chairing the C40 group of mayors. He is also going to teach a course to senior engineers and graduate planning students (at NYU) that will use an existing derelict site as a case study in rebuilding cities.

Good on you, David. If only Toronto's current mayor was half as sensible, Toronto would be able to renew its hitherto impressive environmental record, thanks largely to Miller's leadership.

Josh Farley on the Ecological Economy

Joshua Farley is Professor of Community Development & Applied Economics and Public Administration at the University of Vermont. He is a famous ecological economist who has contributed immensely to the field and has provided several strong arguments for its purpose as a discipline. The video above captures it all -- a introduction to ecological economics, its main goals, some of his ideas -- and lasts for about 40 minutes or so.

It's a really useful video that essentially discusses how we can adapt our economic systems to the ecological and physical constraints of our planet.

The Business Case for Public Transit

Chris and I have blogged a fair bit about transportation issues through Enviro Boys. However, rarely have we discussed the business case for public transit and the multiplier effect it creates such as benefits for individual businesses, attracting creative and talented people to a city, moving millions of people everyday and really being the lifeblood of a vibrant and economically productive city.

My friend, Lewis Kelly, wrote a brilliant article for Alberta Venture on making the business case for public transit. His article is mostly focused on the new Light Rail Transit lines in Calgary and Edmonton. Here is an excerpt from his article:

"Regardless of their fiscal efficiency, rail lines tend to get built because of their political expediency – and the reasons for that are the same reasons that make building new train lines do wonders for business. People like riding trains and living in cities with extended rail networks. There’s an expectation among prospective employees that any world-class city will offer a certain level of cultural sophistication, diversity and a well-run rail network. “It really comes down to incubating and becoming a draw for talent,” says Brunnen at the Calgary chamber. “When we invest in these major public-transit infrastructure projects, we become more desirable for new investment – because we become more desirable as an international destination of talent.”

He also quotes two professors I think highly of, Professor Eric Miller at U of T and Professor Murtaza Haider at Ryerson U.

I think planners, environmentalists and other transit advocates should spend more time discussing the economic and business benefits of transit. After all, when glancing at the numbers, it is clear that investments in public transit can yield benefits far superior to simply investing in roads and highways. Ultimately, transit systems improve mobility and accessibility for our cities which in turn, create environmental and social benefits. And when transit is clearly linked to economic productivity (and being good for individual businesses) it is hard to argue against it. The more advocacy from different sectors and groups in society, the better!

FLOW Tour: Saskatchewan update

As part of my internship with the Adaptation to Climate Change Team, I will be blogging about updates and stories from the FLOW cross-Canada tour. FLOW stands for the Forum for Leadership on Water.

FLOW Co-Chair, Bob Sandford (who was also the lead author of the ACT report I helped edit this summer), is going across Canada to present some of the positive lessons learned from the Northwest Territories Water strategy and to hear from Canadians about what they think needs to be done to better protect our water resources.You can view a list of Bob's tour dates here.

Here is short summary of what came from the Saskatchewan tour stop:

Saskatchewan experienced droughts and floods in the same basin this year, with farmers submitting insurance claims for both in a first for the insurance industry. The issue of flooding, accurately projected from climate models, is a major concern for the people of Saskatchewan and this was manifested at the tour stop through questions regarding ways the province’s water infrastructure should be managed and how to account for the “new normal”.

You can read more of my post here.

Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report

In May 2011, I started an internship with the Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) out of SFU. One of my job responsibilities was to review and provide on-going feedback to the Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance report led by policy author Bob Sandford. After months of revisions and feedback from several professionals, academics and students working in the field of climate change adaptation, ACT released the finalized version of the report on Tuesday October 4th. Here is a snapshot of it:

“The days when Canadians take an endless abundance of fresh water for granted are numbered,” warns Bob Sandford, lead author of ACT’s new report Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance. “Increasing average temperatures, climate change impacts on weather patterns and extensive changes in land use are seriously affecting the way water moves through the hydrological cycle in many parts of Canada, which is seriously impacting water quantity and quality."

“The reform of water governance structures in Canada is essential if we want to successfully manage and protect our water supplies and minimize climate-related impacts on our environment, our economy and our society,” says Sandford."

To inquire about more details of the report along with some of the work I have been doing over the past 5 months, see here.

Roads vs. transit in the U.S.

The Infrastructurist provides a thoughtful discussion of federal funding for roads versus funding for transit in the United States.

"Take Obama’s latest proposed jobs bill, which includes $27 billion for immediate spending on highways and bridges, and around $9 billion for rail. Clearly, that’s a huge tilt. What about changing that ratio of fund distribution, on the basis that nearly every large city is currently working to introduce transit? In other words, what if we gave $27 billion to transit, and $9 billion to roads?"

The conclusion of the post:

"Given all of this context, where should the federal dollars go (assuming that any ever get distributed)? The answer, according to transit experts, may lie in a compromise — adjusting our standards for design, say, so a bridge reconstruction must include accommodation for a future rail line. And making transit decisions with a discerning eye. “Transit lines should expand in response to land use – not just because of the desire to expand,” Eddy says. “And on the highway side, what needs to be wrestled to the ground is the idea that you must always get in a car to get where you want to go — and that your car is the best way to get there.”

The bottomline is that cities in the U.S. and all over North America are growing and demanding better transit service. Transit has grown tremedously in popularity across North America's biggest cities since the 1980s. In Vancouver, transit ridership has grown 50% over the past 10 years while the population has only grown by 15%. Reasons for this increase in demand are numerous but principally revolve around gains in efficiency, service and comfort level.  Beyond federal funding though, transit systems need to be financially sustainable in order to provide good service. David Levinson's offers us some ideas on how transit systems can be financed sustainbly.

Evaluating the merits of small wind turbines

A recent NY times article reports that there has been a rise of small wind turbines in the U.S. and Britain:

"In a report to be released later this month, the American Wind Energy Association says that the market for small wind turbines in the United States grew 26 percent last year — faster than in prior years. And in Britain, a report in April found growth in the year ending in December 2010 even higher, at 65 percent — making it the “greatest year on year increase” for the small-turbine industry, according to the report."

Through reading articles about wind energy over the years, and through listening to Chris talk about it a lot in 4th year undergrad, it appears that any successful wind energy market needs strong incentives. Such incentives may include feed-in-tariff programs that are being used in Britain, Ontario and most recently, Nova Scotia.

I think wind is a very promising renewable technology and it's great to see it taking off in different parts of the world.