Ultimate Frisbee: Peterborough's Hidden Environmental Gem...

Frisbees are most commonly associated with college kids, hippies and beachgoers. That a sport, ultimate frisbee, could be built around the flying disc might baffle some. I am often laughed at by friends in the hockey, football crowd when they try to picture it.

But when chatting with a fellow environmentalist last night over a few beers, he was equally astonished when I told them that Peterborough's ultimate frisbee league is the most environmentally-focused social network I've come across in all of Peterborough. Having been involved for a few years I had never really tried to organize my thoughts and figure out why. So here it goes.

Ultimate frisbee, by its very nature, encourages social cooperation. The game is not refereed and is instead officiated through a complex honour system. The level of obnoxious competitiveness synonymous with many other sports is non-existent as the game lives by something called the Spirit of the Game, summed up by the Ultimate Players Association:


Ultimate has traditionally relied upon a spirit of sportsmanship which places the responsibility for fair play on the player. Highly competitive play is encouraged, but never at the expense of the bond of mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed upon rules of the game, or the basic joy of play. Protection of these vital elements serves to eliminate adverse conduct from the Ultimate field. Such actions as taunting of opposing players, dangerous aggression, intentional fouling, or other 'win-at-all-costs' behavior are contrary to the spirit of the game and must be avoided by all players.

These 'rules' reflect something of a social contract in which the greater good is prioritized over any individuals. Such an approach is similar to that of the socially progressive and social justice movements, which have traditionally had a strong tie to environmentalism.

Driving is discouraged through a variety of league policies that encourage carpooling, walking or taking bikes, most notably the Carbon Flip, where the beginning disc flip -- similar to a coin toss in other sports -- is not 50/50, but determined by the number of non drivers on each team. Those that enter the league without a hint of environmentalist cares are almost forced to adopt a certain approach to the world during an ultimate frisbee game. This may have as much to do with the type of people playing ultimate in Peterborough as the game itself.

The makeup of Peterborough's players is extremely diverse. It is neither limited to a bunch of hippies nor is it an exclusive club for the rich and famous. I was astonished when I joined my first team to find out it was full of doctors, professors and engineers. Yet any social class system built entirely on household income is non-existent in the Peterborough Ultimate League. The people are generally adults under 40 -- with some exceptions --, an age bracket that seems to be more environmentally conscious that its elders. Many people I've played with are teachers, professors at Trent and Fleming -- two very eco-conscious schools, -- civil servants at the Ministry of Natural Resources, NGO folks and local business owners with green companies.

So you want to find the real movers and shakers in the 'green' world of Peterborough? Just look for a frisbee.

Photo: Tourne Disc

Uber nerds unite: A trip to the Canada Wide Science Fair...

It was like grade 8 all over again. Rows upon rows of display boards; some put together with the artistic prowess of a kindergartener, while others had the scientific precision of a well-published academic. Each student sat well-dressed in front of their projects as onlookers slowly walked by, the more successful ones draped in medals and trying to fend off a scrum of questioners like Crosby after his gold-medal goal, while the less successful sat quietly text messaging or talking with some of their newly-made friends.

In such an atmosphere, the distinction is easily made. But in the real world, each of these kids is at the top of their game. This is after all, the national science fair. Thousands of people are involved, including top level research programs and bigwig multinationals. My science fair was like a pickup game of hockey, but this was the NHL. I was completely blown away by the level of work and intellect put into these projects.

I found it particularly astonishing that roughly half the projects I saw had to do with the environment, be it with a focus on renewable energy, reducing pollution or water issues. I talked to a girl in grade 8 who did a project on water conservation. She knew far more about the global water crisis than many people my age and was able to not only convey her information to me quite clearly, but was also able to have a conversation with me about it. Grade 8!

This focus on the environment was quite indicative of how important this kind of stuff is. Energy, particularly wind and solar energy, garnered a lot of attention. I saw numerous projects looking at how to make more efficient wind turbines, better solar panels and even ways to integrate the two. I talked to one girl who had spent many previous years researching different ways to improve the efficiency of solar panels and this year decided to research how applicable they really are. Her poster was called Solar Fraud, where she told me how financially inefficient they are, how the chemicals used to make them are really dangerous and how some solar contractors are swindlers. This is true. But when I asked her if she had compared any of this to other energy technologies, she hadn't. Because she was so young, I gave her the benefit of the doubt. But what was really impressive was how she responded when I asked her if we should just kick solar technology to the curb. Instead of the expected yes, she said we should instead be investing in more R&D so we don't need to use the dangerous chemicals. Lots of people would simply say solar is stupid.

Several projects focused on assessing how green certain products were, such as the kid who tested the biodegradability of certain soaps with that label in his fishtank. Sadly, none of the fish made it. So much for the biodegradable label.

I should disclose that these were only a handful of projects and the ones that appealed to me. I only had a short time there and wished I could have explored more of them in greater detail. The ones that received high levels of praise were largely incomprehensible to a mere mortal like myself. I also walked in there in a university frame of mind. When I saw projects I thought to myself, "I already know that" or "there's already folks looking at that somewhere else."

It was not until I left that it really sank in how impressive this was. Yes, I already know lots of this. But I'm 22, not 12. And yes, there's already people looking at this stuff. But they are well-educated engineers, not kids. I can only imagine what they will accomplish in the future.

The future is bright.

Green Cities: Peterborough looks to ban the sale of bottled water...

It's about to get more difficult to find bottled water in Peterborough.

The Peterborough City Council voted unanimously on Monday evening to begin the transition towards a ban on the sale of bottled water in municipally owned facilities. The ban, however, will not take full and complete effect for a few years as contracts with service providers at some of the larger buildings, such as the city's main arena, still allow them to sell bottled water. 

This is big. Although there has been quite a bit of talk all over Ontario about municipal bans, only a few have actually been carried out. And what is perhaps more impressive is the unanimity with which the decision was passed. Decisions of such magnitude tend to inspire debate and disagreement within councils, especially when sharing a similar context to Peterborough:

Like any Ontario municipality, Peterborough is solely responsible for carrying out its waste management services and does not rely on the province to help out. Since these services are not cheap and municipal governments -- like any government -- are not particularly fond of raising taxes, they can use all the help they can get, which is what a major bottled water company offered Peterborough. Nestle, after outlining the risks of obesity and preaching the health benefits of bottled water over other beverages, offered to contribute to Peterborough's recycling program if it didn't go ahead with the ban.

Turning down such an incentive is hard to do. You would expect at least some members of city council to vote against the ban, but instead there was an overwhelming level of support for the ban from council. Indeed, councillors cited the environmental impact of bottled water, the negative move towards privatization and the need to encourage the use of municipal tap water.

Unfortunately, I'm out of the city and unable to gauge the reaction to the decision, but I'm certainly happy to see the city take such leadership. You can imagine that Nestle isn't too happy, but I'm sure they can see the writing on the wall. 

Hopefully this move will add to the movement to ban bottled water in other Canadian regions and even other areas of Peterborough. There is a growing movement at Trent University to have the sale of bottled water banned on campus. The movement has gathered some opposition, particularly from Aramark -- the food service provider on campus -- and a student group in support of bottled water. Aramark's opposition is unsurprising, but opposition from a student group? At granola-munching Trent?

The group's main argument is that a ban on bottled water eliminates consumer choice. Interesting that it has taken side with Aramark, which has a monopoly on food distribution at Trent. After all, nothing says consumer choice like a monopoly. Oh wait...          

Poll results: talking transportation

The results are in. We had a total of 23 votes. The poll statement was “talking transportation: I think my city would benefit most through…”

The use of light-rail transit 5 (21%)
More bike lanes and bike paths 3 (13%)
A city-wide public bike rental system 3 (13%)
Improving the subway system 4 (17%)
Making buses more efficient and comfortable 8 (34%)
Making the downtown more walk-friendly 0 (0%)
None of the above 0 (0%)

Total = 23.

What’s important is that public transit and alternative transit methods (walking, biking) are all critical for any green city. However, not every city needs a subway system. Not every city needs light-rail transit. In a city like Peterborough (pop~80,000) the total land area and population density does not justify the need for these massive public transportation projects. However, Peterborough could benefit from more bike lanes, bike paths and making the overall downtown more walk-friendly. Walk-friendly means constant maintenance of sidewalks, having city parks and gardens and other aesthetic features that make the overall walking experience more enjoyable and safe for citizens.

A city-wide public bike rental system. There is only one in Canada, it’s in Montreal and it’s called Bixi. I am not too sure how popular or successful this initiative is but I will get some insight when I visit Montreal on Friday. A city-wide public bike rental system can be expensive to implement. This too would be justified in a city with relatively high cycling ridership, or cities that have decent bike lanes for cyclists. There have been talks about having such a system in Toronto but nothing has come about.

Light-rail transit…. Well it is expensive. Toronto is currently creating 7 new light-rail transit routes across the city. I spoke with a civil engineer from the Toronto Transit Commission and he told me that it costs $30 million for every kilometer of installation (much cheaper than the $150 million/kilometer for subway).

Making buses more efficient and comfortable had the most votes (8 votes). I think everyone can relate to this irrespective of where you live. Both small and large cities alike have some form of a bus system. Peterborough has a bus system that is mostly used by low-income citizens, seniors and students. The buses are decent but many students complain because their scheduling and logistics are horrendous. Making them more comfortable, spacious and efficient in terms of their routes and scheduling times would be great.

Last, when evaluating alternative transit and public transit options in any city, it is critical to get the public perspective. If the city’s planning department thinks that a public bike rental system would be beneficial, then some sort of survey must be done to gather the public point of view. Transit services (especially in Peterborough) need to do a qualitative study looking at the experiences and feelings of students, low-income citizens and seniors when they take the bus. These studies might help inform policymakers about the importance of ensuring efficient, comfortable and diverse transit choices.

Key message: The key to a successful transportation system is multiplicity of choice.

Using Nature to Sell Housing Part 2...

I had some time last week to bike around Peterborough and photograph some of the newer sub-divisions being constructed on Greenfield sites. I have a group presentation next week and we are going to present these pictures and provide some analysis. The picture to the right illustrates the marketing of a sub-division project called “natural habitat”. If you live in Peterborough, or take the East Bank bus to the university, you can’t miss it. It’s just off Armour Road about 1.5 kilometres south of the university’s campus.

It is evident in the picture that the housing development features nature in some sort of way: Waterfront setting, golf and conservation lands. I wonder if the people who purchase property here actually know what conservation lands mean. A golf course is nearby the development and presumably, with more growth, another golf course will be developed in the coming years. Of course, being on the waterfront setting (next to the Otonabee River) is always an added bonus for aesthetic reasons and recreational activities. So, if you are trying to escape the city (because it is polluted, congested, dirty and so on), and if you are looking for a sense of community, then these sorts of sub-divisions might fulfill your needs.

I am not going to delve into the social exclusivity of these sub-divisions, but it is important to understand the inherent paradox. Having access to nature can give us a chance to embrace it, cherish it and ultimately protect it. We could be good environmental stewards when we move into these sub-divisions but it eventually becomes a hard battle to beat the housing market and its eager developers. Demand for these sub-divisions (in Peterborough) appears to be really good. Developers are quickly jumping on this opportunity to build more and more to meet the demand in the market.

So, residents are seeking nature and open communities yet, more and more sub-divisions are being built on these Greenfield areas which can certainly compromise the natural environment. Runoff from construction, paved surfaces and other can contaminate the water and displace native species and plants in the area. If more of these sub-divisions are built, then Big Box stores might come about to provide everyone with their basic commercial needs. Big Box stores do not encourage walking, biking and alternative modes of transport, they encourage the use of automobility which requires massive parking lots. This takes people away from “getting closer to nature”, both physically and mentally.

Developers are using nature to selling housing, they have been successful not matter how hypocritical they are. Dolores Hayden will tell us that these people move to residential developments on these Greenfield areas because they provide a quieter lifestyle, they are good for raising a family, provide a sense of community and they are close to nature. Getting closer to nature is one thing, actually looking after it is a completely different discussion.

More to come on this…

Using Nature to sell Housing Development

I recently started working on a project for one of my Geography courses titled “The Rural-Urban Fringe”. The focus of this project is on nature and peri-urban development. In essence, my group has to talk about how nature is used to sell and promote housing development in exurban areas. An exurb is a non-rural residential community located outside a city, beyond the suburbs.

Many could argue that Peterborough is an exurb. I would argue that it is a city (pop ~80,000). However, Peterborough’s fringe areas (located outside of the urban environment) are experiencing the construction of numerous sub-divisions. Growth in the sub-divisions? O yeah, those urbanites (many of whom lived in places like Toronto) are seeking housing outside of the urban area where they are closer to nature, have more lot space and the ability to develop a sense of community.

As part of the project, I intend on biking around the fringe areas of the city to collect and document evidence of nature being used to market housing developments. The sub-division that I’m biking to tomorrow is called “Natural Habitat”. The developers have used this title because it’s catchy and will probably sell more and more homes. Underneath the title it reads “conservation lands”, “golf courses”, and “waterfront setting”. So, if you live in this sub-division you will have access to all of these wonderful things.

Empirical evidence suggests that residents of new large lot subdivisions (natural habitat for example) on once rural land have become worried about more residential growth opposing condos, apartments, theatres, restaurants and shopping malls near their homes. These residents escaped the urban setting to get away from these things. However, new growth is happening all over Peterborough as evidenced by the construction of sub-divisions.

This new growth is accompanied with various amenities which makes the rural life congested, chaotic and begins to see some attributes of the urban. Having said this, the housing developments are still selling because residents can enjoy their large open spaces. Being close to Big Box stores is just a bonus, although it will eventually erode any sense of community and pull people away from the downtown (thus eroding the local economy).

Sometimes families are attracted by a small town’s charm and will choose to buy a house distant from the city- only to find that the town’s physical character was soon compromised by excessive new development. The danger is that once one sub-division is built (near nature), this provides more of an economic impetus to develop another one because housing demand is good. Alas, this defeats the purpose which is to find a small community that can provide social and economic needs for these “exurbanites”.

Key message: Humans have always been in touch with nature. Over the years, we have and continue to witness mass urbanization which compromises nature, the environment and our access to green and open spaces. Thus, when sub-divisions are built in places like Peterborough (relatively close to Toronto), and when they use images like golf courses, trees and rivers, people are immediately attracted to it because it will ostensibly provide them with a healthier and more enjoyable lifestyle. There are burning ironies here that I will not discuss. They will be shared as I progress into my research.

Mixed land uses: Downtown Peterborough...

As part of a class assignment, I recently submitted a letter to Peterborough’s Director of Planning and Development Services. It was a letter regarding Peterborough’s downtown and how it can greatly benefit from incorporating mixed land uses. By mixed land uses, I mean combining commercial and residential units together to optimize space and make the downtown more compact. Below, you will find a compressed version of the letter:

As a student studying geography and the environment and learning about the importance of urban densification for sustainability and economic efficiency, the present growth in Peterborough concerns me. I recommend that the city use an intensification strategy to bring about more mixed land uses in the downtown area. Intensification is a common urban planning strategy for achieving compactness, using land more efficiently by increasing the density of development and activity.

I believe that such an undertaking will help boost the economic vibrancy of the local economy and increase the densification of the urban growth centre, ultimately benefiting both the environment and the economy.

Without stifling the city’s housing market, new commercial development in the city should be mixed with residential units. Mixed land use reduces the probability of using a car for commuting, shopping and leisure trips because jobs, shops and leisure facilities are located nearby. This would be a win-win for Peterborough’s local economy as residents would be living closer to local business and retail stores and farther away from the Big-Box stores like Wal-Mart and Future Shop.

As an example, Harvey’s fast food restaurant at the corner of Sherbrooke and Water Street has tremendous potential to turn into a mixed land use development. Located next to the Otonabee River and in the heart of downtown, it can integrate local businesses, retail, restaurants and residential uses. In addition, such a development would replace the eye-sore that currently occupies the land and turn it into a more compact, liveable and sustainable form.

By mixing commercial and residential units, not only would the city increase the densification of the downtown, but it would be ensuring that many services are within a reasonable distance, thus encouraging cycling and walking. Other environmental benefits to this would include a reduction in air pollution and traffic congestion, as well as to stimulate the interaction of residents, by increasing pedestrian traffic and generally improving neighbourhood charm.

By mixing land uses, we are increasing the number of people concentrated within an existing urban area, and thus these people are now living closer to businesses, public amenities and even recreational activities. Recreational activities would include parks, beaches and campgrounds. Therefore, this might generate more revenue for the restaurant, and stimulate more business activity for other services and commercial establishments, thereby directing a greater flow of capital towards Peterborough’s local businesses and less towards Big-Box stores around the sub-divisions.

One of the main objectives of Peterborough’s new amendment to their Official plan is to provide greater choice in housing types to meet the needs of people at all stages in life. I would challenge developers by saying that housing and commerce will increasingly be concentrated in the urban area; so exploring multi-unit housing complexes near the downtown can be profitable.

As other cities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe increase their urban densities through more compact and mixed use development, Peterborough will face pressures to follow suit.

Key message: Developing Peterborough into a more economically and environmentally sustainable city is a process that might take many years; however, engaging private developers on this matter is a good first step.

Water meters coming to Peterborough…

Water metering is becoming a popular municipal water conservation strategy. For those unfamiliar with water metering, it is when the utility company of the city measures the volume of water usage for your household. So essentially, running your tap for 5 minutes, taking 20 minute showers, or watering your lawn excessively will now cost you substantially.

The Peterborough Utilities Commission (PUC), the utility company that provides water and electricity to the city and its residents, has announced that they are going to install water meters in the near future. The exact date has not been officially confirmed but the installation process will take a number of months. They are going to install 25,000 meters (Pop of Peterborough ~78,000). This will cost $10 million and the costs will be built into water rates. This means that we will be paying for the installation of the meter and the meter itself.

Currently in the city, billing for water is based on the number of rooms in your house plus the size of your lots, plus an additional charge for those with a pool. The main rationale for metering in Peterborough is to minimize stress on the wastewater treatment plant. In short, with less water being used in your household, the amount of wastewater entering the city treatment plant will be reduced. This takes pressure off the system and decreases infrastructural costs (which are really expensive).

I have done extensive research on water metering for my honours thesis and I personally think that the PUC is installing meters because of Peterborough’s egregious water consumption rate. The average Peterborough resident consumes roughly 487 litres of water per day- the Canadian average is 343 litres per person per day. Other municipalities are raising their eyebrows with Peterborough`s rate, knowing that it should come down.

The city’s water consumption is well over the national average. Other cities that have had high water consumption rates have turned to metering to lower that consumption rate to something more sustainable. Stats Canada will tell us that cities with pricing structures have an average water utilization of 269 litres per person per day. Conversely, those with flat or fixed water rates use 457 litres per capita. Considering Peterborough currently has a fixed water rate structure, we are not too far off from the 457 L mark.

Because I am a big proponent of water metering I am not going to go on and on about its significant advantages. In short, with metering, residents are paying per unit of water consumed. Therefore, for many people the potential money savings will be an incentive to use less water. Residents can actually see their water consumption on their monthly bill and if it is excessive, then there is a great incentive to consume less to save money.

When you pay for water based on how much you consume, people raise the question of water privatization and social equity. Low income families of five or six people who use more water may find it hard to pay for their water as they are now paying based on units consumed. Other citizens may just be against the idea of paying for water because it is seen as “privatization”.

For these reasons, when cities introduce pricing structures to replace the conventional fixed rate system, guidance and education to residents must follow suit. Residents must be fully informed about the benefits of metering on the environment, the local economy and for future generations. The utility company does not have to carry out this public education, but other community organizations can step up to inform the public.

Key message: Water metering is great.. but it better be accompanied by public education otherwise people may not see its benefits, purpose and be angry because they are now paying for water. With water meters in Peterborough, it is estimated that water usage based on consumption should reduce city water demands by ~15-20%.

On another note, this is our 200th post. Thank you everyone for your ongoing interest in reading this blog. On Tuesday of this week, Chris and I presented our blog to my Environment and Communications class. We talked about our experiences with blogging, why we do it and how much fun we have.

Where'd the Otonabee River go?...

Well, it has finally happened. All the Maude Barlows and Tim Shahs of the world were right all along about the water crisis. Peterborough has run out of water.

I kid, of course. But considering the state of the Otonabee River over the past few weeks, it wouldn't be too surprising.

I was probably as surprised as anyone else when I walked downtown by the waterfront to find a dainty little stream where the mighty Otonabee River used to be. The water levels were down drastically, as the few small islands of the Otonabee all of a sudden looked like overbearing mainland. Worst of all -- aesthetically, at least -- was the unfortunate state of the exposed ground that had formerly been river-bottom. The weirdly coloured muddy surface was not a particularly desirable replacement for the river.

But more of a problem was the fact that there was very little water left. So where did it go?

Well, as it turns out, some emergency repairs had to be done on one of the locks south of Lansdowne. Clearly the necessary repairs warranted more than a couple folks hopping in with SCUBA gear with a hammer and nails in hand, so the federal authorities (who manage the lock system) decided to drain the thing. Apparently, this involves draining the river several kilometres upstream, too.

The pictures I've included are from outside my house just north of downtown on the Otonabee. The river was down between two and three metres and looked considerably different. Some islands have been exposed, a big patch of mud lies covered with seagulls and ducks and the river's edge has a tidal feel to it. The river looked much worse farther south. Compare the third with the fourth, which are taken from the same area.

Draining a river several metres is not without its risks. In an interview with the Peterborough Examiner, Trent professor Tom Whillans outlined several of the environmental effects this could have. Many of the concerns are focused on the impacts it might have on wildlife. According to Whillans, all sorts of creatures are at risk, but only if the river bed area freezes for an extended period. Lucky for the fishes and turtles, this December has been usually warm. I knew there was a silver lining to the Tar Sands projects.

The water levels appear to be back to normal now and the timing couldn't be better. The snow is finally coming down and it is expected to stay, for a few days at least.

So the crisis is averted. Phew. That I know our water is OK, I think I'll go water my driveway for the day...  

Nature Provides, Industry Develops...Really?

Walking past Peterborough's City Hall this evening I happened to see a flag raised with the logo of Vancouver's Winter Olympics. I decided to peruse the event's website and found out that the Olympic Torch will be coming through Peterborough on December 15th & 16th. This is kind of cool, but I also noticed something else on the site. It listed Peterborough's city motto: "Dat Natura, Elaborant Artes". 

In English, this translates to "Nature Provides, Industry Develops".

So maybe I'm simply a jaded Trent student that sees things through a certain lens, but even so, this is completely ridiculous. Peterborough repeatedly touts itself as the "Gateway to Cottage Country" and a wonderfully green city. Indeed, it was recently listed as one of Canada's most walkable cities. But such a city motto emanates everything that is wrong with how we approach our relationship with nature.

I decided to look it up on Wikipedia and found that the motto -- also titled on its Coat of Arms -- is supposed to mean "Nature gives bountifully and the crafts and energy of the people elaborate nature's gift". Forgive me, but that's a load of BS.

What it really means (and is very much reflective of) is the belief that nature has provided us with wonderful things that we can develop and exploit at our will. We can take from nature, but we don't care too much about giving back, or at least not taking too quickly.

Now before you roll your eyes and ride this off as simply a broken-recordesque hippie rant against "the establishment", I have nothing against development as a whole. But there is a right way to do it and a wrong way. For the large part, we've been doing it the wrong way. And such a simplistic view that is very much reflected in the Peterborough motto only perpetualizes this.

I understand that such a motto might be traditional and untouchable in the eyes of some, but going with what is traditional has left us with a lot of problems to deal with. 

Let's take a second look at our official mottos and rethink how we really want to represent ourselves.    

Special talk on eco-psychology next week....

This coming Wednesday, the World Affairs Colloquium at Trent is hosting the 2009 Jack Matthews fellow, Douglas Blakey. The talk is titled "Eco-psychology and Educational Leadership: Bridging the Gap". It will be hosted in the Camp Kawartha Environment Centre (2505 Pioneer Road) on November 18th from 3-5pm. The centre is just south of Gzowski College. For a map of the centre in relation to the university, see here.

Douglas Blakey spent over 30 years as a teacher and principal of Upper Canada College in Toronto. Mr. Blakey has recently worked as an advisor on environmental sustainability for independent schools. Using a unique pedagogy approach based on “Learn it By Living It” concepts, Mr. Blakey uses these concepts to upgrade facilities and grounds with environmental technologies and integrates them with curriculum and organizational behaviour. Also working with local communities, Douglas Blakey has recently developed a fascination with eco-psychology and is interested in the interplay between eco-psychology and its positive impact on inspiring educational leadership.

The Jack Matthews Fellowship was created in 2008 to honour the founding contributions Jack made to to Trent University, Lakefield College School and the Canadian Canoe Museum.

It's going to be a great talk that you definitely don't want to miss.

Should we be thinking about urban containment policies?

The United States circa 1975, had 95% of its population growth occur in suburban areas outside of cities. Even today, many cities like Los Angeles or even Miami have a vast portion of their populations living in suburban areas and commuting to work (downtown) thanks of course to the automobile.

Urban sprawl has allowed for low-density development and commercial strip malls in the suburbs. More importantly, the automobile has allowed this to happen and consequently, this has emerged as the common development pattern in the United States. Can urban containment policies help encourage increased urbanization, high-density development, public transit improvement and overall better city living? Some experts believe so, but it is always hard to tell because the citizen ultimately makes the final call and influences the decision.

An urban containment policy would impose geographical constraints on urban growth to contain sprawl. What's more, it prevents the outward expansion of the urban field and forces the development market to look inward.

The rationale of an urban containment policy is to preserve natural landscapes, encourage urban development and reinvest in existing urbanized areas. In terms of the policies themselves, there are regulatory urban growth boundaries, the implementation of greenbelts and restricting new residential development in agricultural areas. The interesting one I find is regulating urban growth boundaries. Their rationale is a simple one: to curb sprawl, protect open space and encourage redevelopment of inner-city neighboourhoods. This may work well for large American metropolises but not in a city like Peterborough.

Much of Peterborough's population growth has occurred on these "urban growth boundaries" not within them. That's where the demand is- for single detached housing away from the urban growth centre and usually on open space. Developers know that the housing market demand calls for these types of development which are low-density and inefficient from a mixed land use perspective.

While regulating urban growth boundaries can theoretically encourage more pedestrian friendly cities, they should only come about if the economic rationale is a good one. Regulating urban growth boundaries in Peterborough would be impractical because that is where the population is growing. Alternatively, the city should encourage developers to construct mixed use (commercial and residential) units in the city to optimize space and be more attractive for the suburbanites.

Key message: Urban containment policies can do many things.... above all, they help minimize automobility.

An angry wind is blowing around Peterborough...

"No more wind! No more wind!"

These were the fledgling cries flying from directly behind me last night. The source of the quickly defunct chant was an irate man attending a public meeting in Manvers, Ontario where a controversial wind farm is being proposed. After the initial and vague proponent-driven open house drew hefty criticism from the community, a second, more open meeting was held.

Manvers is only one of the many small towns sitting southwest of Peterborough that lies within the study area of the proposed Settlers Landing Snowy Ridge Wind Park, a hypothetical wind farm being developed by a group based out of Brighton, ON, known as Energy Farming Ontario (EFO).

The project was initially considering 30 2MW turbines over an area covering several thousand acres, but has since been reduced to several clusters of turbines.

I attended the packed meeting last night in Manvers and arrived to find a large room in the local arena packed with so many people that we were forced to stand by the doors -- where a photo similar to the one above was plastered -- for much of the meeting. Estimates of attendance were well over 500, a sure rise from the 150 or so that attended the open house earlier.

Although I have been studying these kinds of meetings all summer, I had never actually been to one. But it played out just as expected. The proponents, well-dressed out of towners and armed with fact-filled powerpoint presentations, went through the motions of describing the project, its numerous benefits and perhaps stealing some of the fighting energy from the crowd as it drew on and on and on.

After scoffs by the crowd in response to certain claims by the proponents -- surrounding property values might actually increase -- members of different 'wind awareness' groups informed the audience, several times inaccurately, about the dangers of wind power. This included a man who spent over thirty minutes associating decibel levels from wind turbines with a myriad of health and quality of life defects, prompting several people to leave as he droned on.

However, another presenter showed a very powerful video taken by a farmer in the US showcasing the effects of the shadows of the turbines on his property. The thought of these very significant light changes going 24 hours/day and 7 days/week was sure to ramp up the opposition to the project.

The most interesting, and exciting aspect of these meetings is the question period. The floor was opened to anyone, as members of the public took turns blasting the project, lambasting the province's Green Energy Act -- which will reduce the power of local governments -- and pushing the proponents for answers they were never really able to give.

As you may have gathered, the crowd was less the excited about the project and there were consistent hoots and hollers from the audience.

Several interesting talking points were raised in the car ride back. Are the developers naive? Did they not know what types of questions would be asked of them? Are they really bad people, or are they well meaning people dipping their feet into a sensitive issue? Is their out-of-town nature a severe hindrance?

What about the public? How many of them were really against it? Are they just selfish landowners expressing NIMBY attitudes in the face of climate change? Will they even stay interested in the project?

The questions are endless, but an especially important question needs to be asked. How much are we willing to risk the change of our livelihoods against that of the changes coming from climate change that will ultimately effect nearly everyone?

One last interesting piece were the politics at play. The local MPP, Rick Johnson, a member of the Liberal Party -- the majority government pushing the Green Energy Act through -- was quoted as wanting to defend his community's interests, although it was implied that this would involve some criticism of the Green Energy Act. Dalton McGuinty & George Smitherman might get a little upset with him.

Trent University, Aramark and Bottled Water...

Venture into a university campus across Canada and, when you find yourself hungry, you will likely be directed to a food court operated by Aramark. Be prepared to reach into your wallet. Deep into your wallet.

Aramark is an American giant. It is the 19th largest employer on the Fortune 500 and routinely generates nine-figure profits. It is one of the largest food service providers in the world, supplying businesses, sporting events and hospitals. But it is its role in schools, specifically Trent University, that I will dwell on in this discussion.

At Trent, Aramark holds a near monopoly on food service. With the exception of a small, basically student-run cafe, Aramark operates all five cafeterias on campus, including a small Tim Horton's satellite. Students living in residence are almost forced to buy into an outrageously priced meal plan and others are commonly found trying to scrape together the nine dollars charged for a simple burger and fries.

Several controversies have stiffened Trent's relationship with Aramark over the past years, but because of its efficiency and well-managed size, it is seen as an actor Trent can not live without. Even as its contract expired amidst student anger, Aramark was signed on again last year and was even granted permission to raise its meal plan prices nearly $300 -- citing commodity price increases -- from Trent's seemingly pro-business Board of Governors, a topic out of the scope of this piece.

But as much as I dislike Aramark's involvement at Trent, I will offer them some credit in relation to the work they have done with Trent's environmental student group, Sustainable Trent, of which I serve as an executive member. ST has worked with Aramark to develop notable, popular and successful programs. The Lug-a-Mug program, whereby customers using a re-usable mug receive discounts for beverages has been a hit, as has been the implementation of 'Resource Recovery Stations', organized and well-labelled stations to deposit waste, compost and recyclable goods. These are only a few of the many joint-programs.

But ST is embarking on what might be its most difficult project with Aramark: the ultimate ban of bottled water from campus. And since Aramark is in charge of the sale of all bottled water on campus, removing the beverage from its shelves is necessary for such a task. Although we are unsure of bottled water's share of revenue for Aramark, judging by the number of bottles seen around campus daily, it is a fairly significant share. Convincing a multi-national giant to drop the sale of such a lucrative product in even one of its locations is a tall order.

An anti-bottled water sentiment is slowly moving over the school. This summer, Trent held Canada's first bottled water-free convocation. Posters proclaiming the downsides of bottled water are frequently seen on campus and stainless steel water bottles are attached to nearly every backpack or bookbag you pass in the halls. Even bottled water filling stations, essentially modified water fountains, are being installed on campus after years of resistance from Trent administration and, I speculate, some influence from Aramark, who might see a significant drop in drink sales as thirsty schoolgoers will refrain from paying the two bucks for a Coke.

Aramark has even agreed to work with ST to develop a bottled water education campaign, but my pessimism predicts that the ST version might be considerably watered-down once Aramark goes through it (pardon the pun).

But bottled water is rapidly becoming an eyesore in the eyes of the public. Some schools have already banned the sale of the stuff and municipalities throughout Canada are banning the sale in its public buildings. Despite the arguments of bottled water companies and their distributors, it appears as though the battle might be leaning in the direction of the opposition.

That being said, ST certainly has its hands full. Keep your eyes peeled.

And remember, tap water is just as good, often safer and a hell of a lot cheaper. Buy smart.

Green Cities: Peterborough is one of Canada's most walkable cities...

Nevermind the fact that Westjet and walking are at the opposite sides of the spectrum, but the airline's magazine, Up, along with the Canadian Federation of Podiatric Medicine (foot doctors) recently announced what it believes to be Canada's most walkable cities. Vancouver took first prize, followed by Toronto, Victoria and Halifax.

But in fifth place and the highest ranked small city is our very own Peterborough.

Peterborough's walkability is certainly something it can be proud of. I have been here for three years and have walked much of it. There are over 62 km of walking & hiking trails in the city limits that make it very comfortable and easy to get around.

Unlike many other cities, Peterborough's downtown core is located within easy walking distance to a series of diverse neighbourhoods, making it very easy for those from all walks of Peterborough life to walk downtown. And it is downtown where much of the action is.

Many of the city's trails are very well-maintained and link to all sorts of landmarks in the city, including the large Liftlock, Trent University even the Wal-Mart (if you so desire...). As a result of its wonderful walkability -- and perhaps income also plays a part -- there is only an average of 1.4 cars per residence in the city.

Walking is important, especially in a city. I often talk about the advantages of using a bicycle, but sometimes a walk can be much more appropriate. What a wonderful, sociable and clean way to get around.

Way to go, Peterborough.

Green Cities: Peterborough's expanding trail system...

Peterborough is known for its natural prowess. The streets are laced with trees and greenery, parks can be found all throughout the city and a sparkling, yet slightly polluted river runs right through it. It is justifiably regarded as the "Gateway to Cottage Country" in central Ontario and acts as a wonderful transition from the busier metropolis of south-western Ontario (Toronto etc) to the isolated wilderness of the Canadian Shield.

Over the past few years I've maintained that one of the best ways to travel and see the world is on a bicycle. Such a statement is very easily applied to seeing and getting around in Peterborough. The city of approximately 70,000 people (many of which are seniors and students) is filled with a picturesque and convenient trail system. The trail system runs all the way from the busy, box-store filled Lansdowne St all the way to Trent University at the northern tip of the city. It is a paved path that runs along the river most of the way and has very few crossings of major roadways. In addition the system goes west from downtown in the large and beautiful Jackson's Park.

The trail system, which is home to walkers, runners, cyclists etc, is expanding. The city is ripping up abandoned railway lines and putting in smoothly paved trails, connecting the southern end of the city, much of which is a large industrial park, to the trail system. There are several abandoned rail lines throughout the city that are expected to be replaced with concrete, making the trail system more user-friendly and accessible for those around the city.

Additionally, the city has put in bike lanes on some of the busier streets that connects some of the separated trails, allowing for a much more continuous system.

Having a connected, easy-to-use and naturally aesthetically pleasing trail system will encourage people in cities to try alternative modes of transportation--most notably, bicycles--by making the rides easy, convenient and enjoyable. Good on 'ya, Peterborough!

A naturalized swimming pool...

I saw this on TV a little while ago and was immediately fascinated. As you'll see from the video, this Peterborough resident decided to build a swimming pool in his backyard. But rather than building a regular concrete, chlorinated swimming pool, he built a naturalized one.

That is, rather than requiring chemicals like chlorine or salt, the homeowner planted different trees, bushes and other plants in on the edges of the pool that naturally clean the water. He also has a rock waterfall where the water is pumped up to the top of the waterfall and is slowly fed back through the rocks, which also helps to filter the water.

It has a rubber lining underneath which was covered by rock, gravel and plants to simulate a pond. It's deep enough the jump into from a well-hidden diving board and most importantly, blends into the backyard very well.

It's clean, green and looks very natural.

I'm personally intrigued by such a thing because I (like many other people) love swimming pools, but am fully aware of the environmental downsides of them. This type of thing could be a wonderful, guilt-free alternative. And he lives in the city. It's a little touch of the cottage or country in your urban backyard.

No word on cost, but maintenance sounds very low. No need to add chemicals or to unnecessarily heat it (it might be a bit cold, but perhaps you could look into heating it slightly, maybe with solar...) and no need to drain it in the winter. He just shovels off the snow and turns it into a make-shift hockey rink.

One bit of opposition to such a thing is that this particular pool has wildlife in it: frogs, water-insects and other little creatures. While it certainly makes it more natural, it can creep some people out...

E-Bikes on Peterborough trails...

It's like a bike, but better. Well, maybe. E-bikes are just as the name entails: electric bikes. Originally designed as regular mountain bikes with a small electric motor mounted on the frame, the designation of an e-bike has since been extended to larger, wider "bikes" that are nearly identical to the electric scooters you might see people driving around the streets.

In Peterborough, these types of vehicles had been left only to travel on city streets - where the drivers of the e-bikes feel less than safe with cars flying by - and the city's bike and walking trails. Just like regular bicycles, e-bikes can not be ridden on city sidewalks. But in light of the growing danger of the larger, heavier and faster e-bikes on the trails, a few weeks ago city council elected to prohibit them on the city's bike trails. The infamous Segway was also included in the prohibition.

But last week the city changed its mind. In a lengthy, four hour meeting, many members of the public and council members fought out the e-bike issue. Very good points were made on both sides.

Those in opposition of the ban argued the environmental benefits of e-bikes (they use them instead of a car), the advantage they have for people who are less able-bodied (less pedalling is required), the dangers faced by e-bike riders on city's streets (the fastest e-bikes can only go up to 32 km/h) and the onus of responsible trail riding falling on the operator rather than the bike itself.

However, those in support of the ban consistently cited the dangers e-bikes might pose to others on the trail. The brakes on e-bikes are argued to be less than effective when travelling at speeds above 30 km/h, which is particularly dangerous on the heavily-travelled Peterborough trails where (this comes from much personal experience) some people are less than aware of other people or bikes around them. This is especially worrying with the larger e-bikes, that weigh several hundred pounds and could do severe damage to anything it might hit. The definition of an e-bike is also controversial, as the electric scooter types are only considered e-bikes because two small and nearly unusable pedals are inserted on the sides in order to fit with the legislative definition.

A local environmental group and a city councillor brought up the issue of this repeal of a bylaw as opening the door to other modes of transportation. Where does it stop? If a golf cart tacks a few pedals on, could it be allowed? What about a new Chevrolet Volt? It seems ridiculous, but laws have been exploited in worse ways before.

Furthermore, there are legitimate concerns that the e-bike speeds might be too fast for the trails. Proponents of the e-bikes argued that many road bike riders exceed 32 km/h, which is true, although the riders that travel at those kinds of speeds are often very experienced riders and tend to travel on the roads rather than the trails.

The province is supposed to come up with a provincial policy position on e-bikes and their appropriateness on city trails in the coming months, so many of those in favour of the ban argued that Peterborough's city council should wait to reverse the ban until that time. Makes sense. It is better to be safe than sorry.

Personally I don't think a ban on the traditional e-bikes is in order because of the wonderful benefits they could have and the fact that they seem just as safe as any other bike. However, banning the larger, heaving 'e-bikes' is completely appropriate. The dangers are too high with such things on the trails and the way in which the manufacturers have put dinky little pedals on them to get around legislation is very bothersome.

I love using the paths in Peterborough and there are many nice, happy and responsible people who use them. But there's also a lot of idiots. Putting those 'bikes' on the trails will only lead to people being hurt or worse. It's true that it's dangerous using the roads on one of those things, but I've been doing it for years on my bicycle, which many would consider more dangerous. But allowing them onto the main paths could be more dangerous.

The solution I could propose is to license those who want to go on the road so only those who are confident on the roads can use them and people who don't want to use a larger one can use a traditional e-bike. Some might not be happy. Tough.

Trent University's summer endeavours...

Universities are interesting things. The idea of one probably brings thoughts of learning, knowledge and especially at a liberal-arts school like Trent, progressive policies. While we could bat around the actual definition of progressive for days, I use the term to describe policies that are more holistic, perhaps edgy and certainly less than holistic.

Environmentalists should be familiar with the idea of progressiveness. After all, environmentalism in its modern form is a component of progressiveness.

University's are often at the forefront of developing or at least implementing new technologies and ideas. I'm currently working at Trent University over the summer and I'm witnessing a whole swath of these new technologies and ideas being put into place.

Thanks in large part to a generous donation Montreal Canadien's GM Bob Gainey, Trent is currently constructing one of Canada's greenest buildings. Known as the Camp Kawartha Environment Centre, the straw-bale building will be powered by the sun, have innovative rainwater collection systems and have composting toilets.

Last week, this year's Trent graduates gathered with guests, faculty and staff for convocation. The convocation turned out to be a very "green" affair. Apart from grads sporting green gowns, free transit passes were given out to discourage driving to the ceremonies and encourage the use of public transportation and graduates were encouraged to take the "green pledge", an oath to take the environment into consideration during one's future endeavours. The most notable aspect of the ceremonies was the decision to not provide bottled water, which was a significant change from the norm at Trent and throughout North America. The move was expected to save thousands of bottles from being consumed. Appropriately, bottled water's worst nightmare and Canada's own Maude Barlow was awarded an honorary degree as well.

A significant addition is also being added to the Athletic Centre, which is supposed to be standardized at one of LEED's (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) highest bars.

But we must also acknowledge the institutional nature of Trent. It may be a wonderful breeding ground for progressive ideas, but every breeding ground needs an infrastructure. As such, the 'green' endeavours of our small university this summer may very well be overshadowed by the 'not-so-green' activities.

While the Camp Kawartha Environment Centre might be one of Canada's greenest, the DNA Building being built just north of it is anything but. Despite a multi-million dollar price tag, the facility is being built very quickly and the materials are fairly cheap in quality. There is no effort to make the buildings architecturally interesting or to even make them fit with the rest of the school. And because Trent is almost completely surrounded by Nature Areas, a good deal of greenspace has been removed for building and parking lots.

To the north of the campus, a highly controversial hydro dam is being built. While it will deliver greenhouse-gas free power to Peterborough, its construction has resulted in the clearance of acres of Trent's famous Nature Areas.

Roads are parking lots are being put all over campus. One such road, currently designated 'temporary', has gone over a wonderful piece of grassland by the athletic facility that once housed two beach volleyball courts. Unfortunately, I've learned over the years that nothing like that at Trent is really temporary. And even if it were, I highly doubt they'd put the volleyball courts back.

Even some of Trent's most modest 'green' efforts are being squashed. Literally. A month or so ago, landscapers started digging up tons of grassy area around the sides of the buildings to replant grass seeds. Just as that slowly started to get going, we find this morning that a construction crew brought all their trucks into the replanted area. Bye bye grass.

Trent is a wonderful place. It's full of greenery and is trying its best to maintain its 'green' reputation. Unfortunately, sometimes other forces are a little too strong. The worry is that these other forces will eventually remove so much of the 'green' that Trent will lose the majority of its natural environment. That environment, both physical and amongst the people, is what makes Trent unique and so great.

There's walleye in the Otonabee?...

I just received a public notice from the utility company, Peterborough Utilities Inc. (exciting name, eh?), warning me not to be afraid of the team of flashlight-wielding intruders running up and along the banks of the Otonabee River during the next few nights.

It turns out these suspicious assailants are not robbers or even secret FBI agents searching for a downed alien spacecraft, but actually investigators from an environmental firm. They're checking out the spawning activities of the walleye that gather near the hydro generating station directly beside our neighbourhood.

Apparently it's all part of the "new Species at Risk legislation". That legislation is the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA), which is six years old, which I suppose might be considered "new".

In any case, it's nice to know that they're looking out for the walleye. As a fisherman, I might be tempted to take advantage of these spawning areas. But there's little fun in that. And it's not like they interrupt me in the bedroom.

Thanks for the notice, PUI. It's a lot better than the military regiment located down the road. They seemed to overlook the fact that residents might be afraid of camouflaged warriors darting through the neighbourhood at night with assault rifles. It might have only been "exercises", but I had my spatula ready to combat any would-be assailants.