Greenwashing and Sprawl...Part One

Sprawl.

Remember sprawl? It seems as if the concept and practice of creating/perpetuating sprawl has fallen from the nation's conscious. Is this an indication that we have successfully lobbied against the agents of sprawl and defeated them through the creation of interconnected, pedestrian-friendly, integrated and environmentally-friendly communities?

I am fairly certain we all know the answer to that question.

Why is it then, that the prototypical form of suburban development, adopted shortly after the end of the World War II, has faded into the back of everyone's mind? The answer is simple; most people consider the economic and environmental impacts of sprawl to be insignificant in their daily lives.

Many Americans, especially in these trying economic times, are thankful to even own their own home and have the ability to make the mortgage payment, provide food for their family and own their own private automobile. As former President George W. Bush once said, "I believe part of a hopeful society is one in which somebody owns something." (Source: Third Presidential Debate, Tempe, Arizona, Oct. 13, 2004)

(Granted, home-ownership is a more sustainable form of housing, but I am not exactly sure that's what Dubya meant. And I understand that he's only been the "former-President" for about 24 hours, but it's been a long 8 years.)

Americans, at least a large portion of Americans, for some reason have yet to associate any intangible (or tangible for that matter) costs with the practice of sprawl. Why is that? The answer is simple; greenwashing.

While the national builders and their associated trade organizations will be the first to tell you that they are concerned with developing "communities" and building homes to address our housing needs, in reality they exist for one reason; to make a profit.

The most profitable way for a national builder to develop a community is to acquire "raw land" which in most cases is located away from city centers. The reason for this is simple, volume + low development cost = enormous profits.

It doesn't take a genius to understand that developing a parcel of land that used to be a farm is far less expensive than rehabilitating or adapting an urban structure for housing. More importantly, these builders are mainly concerned with how many homes they can build in the shortest period of time. (As an example, Pulte's Del Webb division requires a minimum potential of 3,000 units plus adequate acreage for a golf course in order to even consider purchasing a tract of land.)

But this is not the point of our exploration today. Admittedly, the effects of sprawl are widespread, numerous and often exhausting to contemplate; which is probably the major factor which has contributed to why we have seemingly "moved on" from being concerned with sprawl.

To simplify our discussion, we need to understand the hidden or intangible costs of sprawl. The most important of which are the added degradation of our overall health, the added expense associated with our transportation choices and the negative environmental impact that suburban developments in rural areas inflict upon the ecosystem.

Consider our national health.

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that 12.4% of children age 2-5, 17% of children age 6-11 and 17.6% of children age 12-19 are obese. While the integration of high-fructose corn syrup into nearly every food product in our society has contributed to this alarming trend, the pervasion of suburban sprawl can be considered one of, if not the largest, contributing factor. Why you may ask? One of the Hyper-Capitalist driven strategies for developing profitable communities is to avoid building sidewalks.

Seems like a silly or insignificant element. But take a tour of any of the new developments in your immediate area and pay close attention to the design of many of the homes. You will notice that the most significant element of the facade is the garage. Simply think back to our discussion of our national transportation choices and we understand why the garage has become so significant in the design and construction of new homes.

In addition to our transportation choices, if we look at the national builder strategy of maximizing the number of potential units,we find that neighborhood parks take away the opportunity to build one more unit. Besides, Americans drive everywhere anyway, so there is no need for spaces that cost money to design, build and maintain without the Hyper-Capitalist benefit of profitability.

Our previous discussions of our national transportation choices eludes to the additional costs associated creating developments which are, in essence, disconnected from basic goods and services. In addition to these costs, increased automobile trips cost us something more important than money; time.

The time Americans spend commuting, obtaining goods and services from sources that are agents of sprawl themselves and working to maintain their primary mode of transportation leads to a disconnect with the landscape, the environment as a whole and with other members of our society. Consider this simple fact: Americans spend more time commuting to and from work (around 100 hours) than they do vacationing (around 80 hours). To further compound the issue, the average American forfeits 3 whole days of vacation per year!

The final cost, the added impact to the ecosystem and environment which sprawling developments exert on previously undeveloped land, contributes to a myriad of costs for our society.

The introduction of petroleum-based products into ecosystems that previously protected themselves naturally from a minimum amount of these products and by-products has had a widespread economic impact on our daily lives. Environmental clean-up programs, the degradation of our clean water supplies and the nitrification and destruction of our soils have led to costs that are increasing daily and will have a long-term impact that has yet to be realized.

Perhaps the main reason that the issue of sprawl has fallen to the wayside is that it can be exhausting. Our discussion today has barely scratched the surface of the overall effect that this practice has exerted on our culture and society.

It seems as if this discussion has also strayed from the original topic; greenwashing. Admittedly it has, only in the sense that we have yet to discuss how greenwashing is utilized in the continued pervasion of sprawl.

Considering the somewhat overwhelming evidence that we have presented today, we shall continue our exploration of the use of greenwashing in our next post.

Our settlement of land is without regard to the best use of land. -Arthur Erickson

Back on the Greenwashing Express...

With the hope of a political paradigm shift that should correct many of the mistakes made over the past 8-years on the nation's mind, we will reopen our investigation into the practice of greenwashing.

Since our original discussion, it seems that the nearly every manufacturer, corporation and political candidate has attached themselves to the "green" movement. As our discussion over the next few days should demonstrate, much of what people consider "green" is actually a far cry from where we (as a society and as a culture) should be headed.

Greenwashing is a concept which has already moved past the simple masking of environmentally destructive behavior. Over the next few days, we will explore how greenwashing practices have masked unsustainable and inequitable choices in the following areas:

• Corporate Pollution
• The Pervasion of Sprawl
• The Glorification of Unsustainable Site Planning Practices
• The Masking of Unsustainable and Inequitable Transportation Planning Choices (from a consumer-based and policy standpoint)
• The Pervasion of Consumptionism
• The Degradation of the Design Process
• The Perversion of American Landscape Architectural and Architectural Heritage

Our examination begins with two prominent players from the auto industry bail-out, Ford Motor Company and General Motors.

If you had the opportunity to view the NFL Championship games this past weekend, you may have noticed that nearly every automobile commercial claimed some form of commitment to sustainability. Under the influence of Hyper-Capitalism, the average consumptionist might believe such statements.

Honestly, they wouldn't say something on television that wasn't true, would they?

Let's take a closer look.

Our friends at Ford, specifically Ford's current (and Boeing's former) CEO and President, Alan Mulally, makes the following statement;

Ford is becoming smaller, leaner, more globally integrated and more focused on meeting customers' needs and wants. It is also a company with sustainability at the heart of its business. Our vision for the 21st century is to provide sustainable transportation that is affordable in every sense of the word: socially, environmentally and economically. (Source: Alan R. Mulally President and Chief Executive Officer, 2007/8 Ford Motor Company Sustainability Report.)

Interesting. Especially the portion about environmental sustainability.

However, let us dissect exactly what Alan is referring to when he talks about sustainability. A closer look reveals that he is only referring to "transportation".

But wait, shouldn't that sustainable vision extend to every aspect of providing those transportation choices? (Incidentally, we will examine just exactly how Ford is providing sustainable and equitable transportation choices for our nation in a few days.)

But Alan, why was your company recently named the 17th worst air pollution producer in the U.S.?

Through the mask of greenwashing, we are led to believe the notion that Ford is forging ahead on a truly sustainable path.

Along the same lines, and out of fairness to Ford, General Motors makes the following statements on their corporate website;

The following environmental principles provide guidance to General Motors personnel worldwide in the conduct of their daily business practices.
1. We are committed to actions to restore and preserve the environment.
2. We are committed to reducing waste and pollutants, conserving resources, and recycling materials at every stage of the product life cycle (Source: GM Environmental Principles)

Not to diminish GM's standing in the nation's conscious, but they do not pollute our nation's atmosphere nearly as much as Ford; they are only 18th on the list.

We can clearly see where all of this is heading. Masking the process of creating these allegedly sustainable products helps these entities to continue with their Hyper-Capitalist driven agendas.

To finish our discussion, we will turn (once again) to our favorite home improvement retailer; Lowe's.

We can all recall what our friend's at Lowe's claimed was their commitment to sustainability.

Well, it seems that Lowe's research department needs put in a little overtime.

Lowe's recently named Owens Corning their "Supplier of the Year".

The only problem is that Owens Corning was also recently named the 26th worst air polluter in the United States. Not exactly the most sustainable and equitable choice for a corporation that claims to be "stewards of the environment".

So where does this leave us?

It leaves us exactly where we started, with the desperate need to implement and foster a systematic-wide paradigm shift that sheds the cloak of greenwashing in favor of choices and practices that actually make a difference.

And all of you Hyper-Capitalist supporters need not worry; sustainability, equality, and profits are not mutually exclusive.

As previously mentioned, greenwashing extends beyond the masking of environmental degradation in the form of pollution. As consumers, and more importantly, as members of the wider ecological community, we must be vigilant in examining every practice and ideal which greenwashing helps to mask.

It is only through this vigilance that we will be able to achieve the much-needed systematic paradigm shift that will help ensure our social, cultural and ecological sustainability.

No face which we can give to a matter will stead us so well at last as the truth. This alone wears well. -Henry David Thoreau

Laying the foundations...

Designers, planners, academics and writers are often accused of and fall victim to the phenomenon of analysis paralysis. In short, we continue to collect data on a quest to make the best decision we can regarding an issue; but then we become overwhelmed with data and fail to take action.

As designers, this comes in the form of site analysis. Simply stated, "...the site is analyzed for its fitness for the purpose of the plan..."(Site Planning, Lynch/Hack. 1984.).

In retrospect, our discussion of the auto industry bail-out and our national transportation planning problem has been a broad-stroke, preliminary site analysis. We have identified some core issues, behavioral patterns, social and cultural preferences, environmental impacts and are now prepared to offer a preliminary planning structure that will benefit our nation and our society.

So without heading into a analysis paralysis, let us begin our national recovery.

As we have mentioned, there is a dire need for a systematic paradigm shift with regards to our national transportation planning goals. This will require participation from a variety of stakeholders; resulting in the implementation of a plan which will ensure an equitable and sustainable national transportation strategy. So without further adieu, let us begin.

1. Impose a higher tariff on foreign automotive imports.

Proponents of NAFTA, G8 nations and a host of economists are already beginning to boil-over with reasons we should avoid this avenue. However, if we plan to resuscitate our domestic automotive manufacturing industry, we must give consumers a reason to purchase domestic products. These tariffs not only encourage consumption of domestic products but they will provide a revenue source for our nation that does not come from the pockets of our own citizens.

2. Streamline the domestic manufacturing process.

If we look back to the factors which lead to the creation of the Hyper-Capitalist system, we can argue that its founder was a simple man named Henry Ford. When that name is mentioned, many people conjure images of the now famous "assembly-line process". The Hyper-Capitalist system has distorted the original intention of this process which has lead to a disparity among the compensation workers receive for such work. Consider this fact; an auto worker in the United States averaged a salary equivalent to $70-per-hour while teachers in this nation averaged only $33-per-hour (for a 9-month position). Is manufacturing an automobile truly more challenging and important than educating our nation?

3. Establish more stringent standards for fuel efficiency and tax manufacturers whose products fail to meet or exceed those standards.

The average fuel economy for American autos (2007 model year) is 34-mpg, while the average for Japanese imports is 40.6-mpg. Furthermore, the Chevrolet Aveo tops the list at 37-mpg while the Toyota Prius achieves 51-mpg (both averages shown are for highway miles).

4. Impose regulations which match users with the type and size of vehicle they require as opposed to what their Hyper-Capitalist fueled consumption habits desire.

This will probably be considered the most unattractive element of the plan, but this is essential to the systematic paradigm shift that we must achieve. In simple terms, if you are not employed in the construction trade or don't own a farm, you do not need a truck capable of hauling tons of materials. If you are a homemaker, you do not require a Cadillac Escalade to perform daily short-trips errands. This restriction allows the automotive manufacturers to focus on more fuel efficient autos while also reducing the cost of manufacturing (less steel, etc...); allows designers to destroy less of the landscape to accommodate oversize passenger vehicles and reduces the consumer's expenditures on automobiles.

5. Impose a car-pool tax on single-driver commuters, impose a higher tax on gasoline, offer higher tax credits for the manufacturing of smaller and efficient automobiles and offer tax credits for car-poolers and transit riders.

All of these elements are simple revenue generators that will encourage and facilitate the systematic paradigm shift.

6. Utilize our existing Interstate System for the implementation of alternative forms of viable transit systems; specifically Bus Rapid Transit (BRTs).

Our friends at AASHTO (The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) have been requiring transportation planners and engineers to design highways with ample amounts of "extra space" (e.g. recovery areas, over sized shoulder widths, wide median widths, etc..). With a retrofit that utilizes these spaces, we can definitely re-design our Interstates to accommodate BRTs. This action will also result in development patterns which encourage and foster more compact, compatible and cohesive designs that can combat the adverse effects of sprawl.

7. Utilize alternative energy uses in the development of BRTs, specifically fuel-cells.

While fuel-cell technology was once a hopeful aspect of passenger automobile development, the amount of cells required to efficiently power passenger cars was found to be unachievable. However, buses are a perfect match for the utilization of fuel-cells and many are currently being developed and deployed in various areas of the nation.

8. Utilize our national rail network for commuter and light-rail systems.

Encouraging automotive manufacturers to explore other technologies (especially trains) is not a unrealistic proposition. (In fact, I must give credit to Car Talk for helping to foster this particular part of the planning strategy). Our friends at Car Talk raise a very valid point, Ford CEO Alan Mulally was once CEO of Boeing!!! So a establishing operations for the development of alternative forms of transportation should not be a stretch for Ford.

What we have outlined here are the basic elements of a national transportation strategy which will foster a systematic paradigm shift towards an equitable and sustainable society. Many of these elements impose taxes on various users, manufacturers and limit the need to create over sized swaths of paved areas throughout our nation.

In the Hyper-Capitalist system, the most effective of way of encouraging a systematic paradigm shift is by relating every aspect of every element to the almighty dollar.

People should think things out fresh and not just accept conventional terms and the conventional way of doing things. -R. Buckminster Fuller

Life is a highway...

So where do all of these fantastical percentages, dollar amounts and dizzying statistics leave us? It leaves us with facts; facts which state that Americans spend more on their automobiles than they do on education. That is worth repeating.

Americans spend more on their automobiles than they do on education.

Consider this the ultimate example of the influence which Hyper-Capitalism holds over our lifestyle choices. Hyper-Capitalist ideals are so ingrained into our culture that it will require nothing short of a nearly complete paradigm shift to address the issues we face as a nation and as a society.

This is not to say there is no hope. Spanning our nation is an obvious yet oft forgotten asset; fixed-rail lines. The United States boasts the largest fixed-rail network in the world. And unlike the expansive, obsolete Eisenhower Interstate System; the fixed-rail network of the United States was built with private funds.

If we examine the long-range transportation plans of a majority of the metropolitan areas of the United States, we find that they are centered upon the interstate, outer-loops, inner-loops, bypasses and on and on and on. Highways, bridges, interchanges and many of the other components of the national highway system are in a state of disrepair. So much so, that the president-elect has planned to focus the $850,000,000,000 stimulus package on the repair of our auto-centric infrastructure.

But consider the environmental, economic and social impact associated with highways, asphalt and automobiles. All three of those elements rely on one common item; oil. Are we starting to see the connection? It seems as if this is not some half-baked conspiracy theory. Oil.

Think back to the bailout of an industry who relies on this non-renewable and limited natural resource. They are moving in an unsustainable direction! Just as a reminder; "the ability of present generations to meet their needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

If there is a limited amount of oil, we are spending more on our autos than on educating our children, we continue installing additional lanes of oil-rich asphalt highways, we consume more automobiles than we can drive and nearly 80% of drivers are sitting in traffic alone; our transportation plan seems to be moving in a direction of obsolescence. Perhaps it has already reached that point, but Hyper-Capitalism's influence is preventing many of us from admitting that fact.

So to borrow a phrase from the slayer; "where do we go from here?"

We, as a nation and as a society need to commit to a universal paradigm shift which ensures our survival and the survival of future generations. We must shed the chains of Hyper-Capitalism and begin to explore alternatives to building more highways. This is not as difficult as it sounds, and in fact, many Americans have already begun to make changes that will help to alleviate many of the troubles which our nationals transportation plan causes.

With that in mind, we will begin to explore the alternatives that will help propel our nation to greatness once again.

"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." -Nelson Mandela

Going down the road...

When an aging and nearly defunct industry makes strides for innovation that would have marvelled the world 30-years ago, they use their hyper-capitalist connections to give themselves a proverbial "pat-on-the-back".

The automotive industry has been in possession of the technology to produce fuel efficient products for decades, a fact which is neither a half-baked conspiracy theory or a secret. However, even David Frost would probably not be able to get any auto industry executive, oil industry executive or steel manufacturer to admit to that fact.

Fuel efficiency, innovation in design, durability and efficiency in manufacturing are all factors which lead us to the next portion of our analysis of the national transportation scheme; maintenance and operation of your private automobile.

Let us begin with a number from the previous discussion; 1.75 or the average number of licensed drivers per household in the United States. In the same data set, we find that there are an average of 1.90 automobiles per household; which shows that there are more automobiles than drivers in the U.S..

What this demonstrates is Hyper-Capitalism's deep-seeded influence on our consumption habits. Essentially, there is a surplus of automobiles which are owned by licensed driver but not driven on a regular basis.

If we move on from this point, we are introduced to another overwhelming statistic; in 2006 American drivers logged 2,658,621 highway miles in private passenger cars alone. Keep in mind that this does not include motorcycles or any other form of private transportation.

Passenger cars accounted for more than half of all miles logged on highways in 2006. More than motorcylces, trucks and buses COMBINED. Additionally, American passengers logged a meager 52,154-miles on all forms of public, private or subsidized transit in that same year.

Furthermore, 79% of commuters drive to work alone. A measly 9% of commuters utilized carpooling. Keep these numbers in mind while we continue our exploration.

Getting back to the operational costs of driving a private automobile, we find that in 2004 it cost approximately 56-cents per mile to operate an auto. What this means is that Americans spent a whopping $1,488,827.76 on operational costs for their private autos.(note: in 2004 the number of highway miles for passenger cars was around 27,000-miles more than in 2006)

Looking at similar data we find that the average cost-per-vehicle (while driving 15,000-miles per year, which for most people is far less than the actual miles they log) is around $8,000. Combine that with the 1.90 autos that Americans own and we find that the average American spends approximately $15,430 per year owning and maintaining their autos.

So, in addition to the $167.24 that you have contributed to the automobile manufacturers in the past month, the average American is spend over $15,000 per year simply maintaining and operating their automobiles.

Remember, 79% of commuters drove alone to-and-from their place of employment, while only 4.3% utilized a means of public transportation.

The development of and access to a viable means of public transportation becomes the issue; and leaves with our next challenge in developing, planning and implementing an equitable and sustainable transportation plan for our nation.

“Present highways are to a large extent the three-dimensional representation of existing laws. If more creative highway planning and design concepts are to be realized, they must be preceded by legislation to permit and encourage them.” -Michael Rapuano, unpublished memo

Starting by the numbers...

It is common knowledge that there is a transportation problem in this country. Many Americans experience the short-comings of our system on a daily basis while they battle congestion, pollution and the side effects of sprawl on their journey to work. The automobile industry recently received $19.4 Billion (which is this many zeros: 000,000,000.00) of American Taxpayer money in order to prevent an overhaul and much-needed update of their goals and objectives.

Prior to the proposal of an alternative transportation plan for our nation, I felt it necessary to present the case for why America is poised for a complete systematic overhaul. The best way to achieve an understanding is to provide you with data in a format everyone can comprehend; dollars.

Let us take a quick look at the amount of money that the automobile manufacturers received in their bailout; $19,400,000,000. In 2006 (note: the most recent data available), there were 203,000,000 licensed drivers in the United States out of a total resident population of 299,000,000 persons. If we look at what only the licensed drivers gave, donated, allocated, or loaned (anyway you slice it, they simply asked for a handout), the manufacturer's received $95.57 from every driver in the country.

Doesn't seem like much, but the question I pose to you is that could you and your family use an extra $95.57 this week?

Considering the fact that there are (note: the most recent data available) 1.75 drivers per American household, this translates to a household contribution of $167.24.

Could your family use an extra $167.24 this week?

These contributions that you have made are in addition to the funds that you have already provided to the auto manufacturers by simply purchasing an automobile!!! In 2007, the average American spent 11.2% of their disposable income (many of you may not remember disposable income, just think back to the Clinton Administration) on transportation related expenses.

That same year, the only other expenditures that Americans spent more on were Medical Care, Housing and Food/Tobacco.

$374,400,000,000.

That is how much Americans spent on purchasing cars, trucks and RVs in 2006.

***Time out, you say. Your data sets are from all over the place!?!?! Admittedly this is a side effect of the data available this morning from the various agencies of the United States Government. The most recent, and considerably more accurate data will not be available until September 2009; personally speaking, we cannot wait that long to perform a preliminary analysis.***

Let us take a day to absorb the information which has been presented thus far in our discussion of a sustainable and equitable transportation plan for our struggling nation. Truly, you should be focused upon one number; $167.24.

I encourage you to make a list of what you could do with $167.24 this week.

$167.24.

"Gasoline helps power the American dream, giving us the freedom to travel where we want and when we want -- for work, for school or for recreation. A steady supply of clean-burning gasoline is central to our nation's economy." (Source: www.factsonfuel.org)

For every action...

Just as we have concluded our brief discussion of the influence which hyper-capitalism wields over the comprehensive planning process, we are reminded of the dedication needed to facilitate actual change. Disrupting hyper-capitalist driven federal land auctions has caused a bit of a stir in the profit-driven world, while environmentalists, conservationists, the stewards of the land, the National Geographic Society and Teddy Roosevelt are all applauding one activist's efforts.

The fact that it has taken two-years of litigation between the BLM and various other governmental agencies, environmental protection groups and conservation groups to even hold a federal land and drilling-rights auction, demonstrates the obvious need for a closer look oat our nation's energy consumption and ultimately our overall transportation planning efforts.

We could isolate and analyze these two topics, however that would prove to be counter-productive and violates Barry Commoner's main law of ecology that we have discussed in previous posts; that everything is connected to everything else.

This national dilemma is inclusive of more than the ecological issue; our actions and decisions (which, in this case, seem to be based solely on hyper-capitalist ideals) are most certainly causing long-term, residual effects on what remains of the undeveloped "natural" landscape of the United States.

These actions, which begin with the policy set forth by our elected officials, sets the tone for how our state and local governments (and ultimately us as consumers) plan and develop our nation; which for the past half-century, has been based upon our love of the automobile and our hyper-capitalist driven need to use our automobiles to consume everything from fossil fuels to the aesthetic qualities of our nation's natural beauty.

"We need an energy plan that encourages consumption." -George W. Bush

Resolute...

As the calendar year comes to a close, our society prepares for the upcoming challenges (which in reality are no different in 2009 as they were in 2008) by generating lists and "countdowns" to determine how great, or poor, the year has been. That being said, you will find no such lists in this post. Admittedly, the end of 2008 does have some superstitious meaning for the author, however we must keep in mind that only we (as individuals and as communities) control our own destiny, possessing the ability to have a "good year" or "bad year" through the decisions that we make.

If the popular media would focus on the decisions and choices which lead to the most news-worthy events of the past year, we would most certainly grow as individuals, as communities and as a society resulting in a better world for all.

So, nostalgia aside, here is a rough outline of some of the topics that will be discussed here on enVisionGreen over the coming weeks;

• revisiting the concept and practice of greenwashing (featuring our favorite home improvement greenwashers),
• Our American Architectural Heritage (or what would the Romans think of our civic buildings),
• the development and implementation of Big Ideas versus the celebration of details (or what does it all mean versus what makes it so pretty),
• Wii and the destruction of link between you and the outside world (or why go outside for a run when you can stomp around in your living room on a tiny piece of plastic while your family and friends sit on the couch stuffing their faces with high fructose corn syrup based snacks while watching a cartoon version of your human form run around a virtual landscape),
• a closer examination of the bailout of the auto industry and how our government once again missed the boat by helping the hyper-capitalist cause as opposed to grasping an opportunity to make our nation a better place to live and work,
• the case for Cuba (a sustainable paradise versus it's potential destruction by the forces of hyper-capitalism).

Our adventures in the new year will begin with a more detailed exploration of greenwashing, as the notion of "being green" has been used to death over the holiday season to peddle everything from cellular phones to automobiles.

"A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues." -Theodore Roosevelt

Bailouts as band-aids...

It seems as if every day there are a new group of private firms appearing on Capitol Hill asking for assistance during these trying economic times. Is this a sign of a weak consumer market? Perhaps. It seems as if this is more of a sign of failed business plans based upon hyper-capitalist ideals which emphasize profit over sustainability.

Let us quickly examine the case of the "Big 3". In the years and months leading up to this economic crisis,ask yourself if you remember, at any point, news of the automakers scaling back production simply because there was a waning demand for automobiles, or because the average licensed American already owns two automobiles.

In a World of exponentially advancing technology, why does it seem that American automobile manufacturers act as if they deserve a Nobel Prize whenever they introduce a hybrid vehicle? The answer to that question is quite simple; greenwashing. The auto makers are one of the biggest perpetrators of greenwashing, and they have been practicing it for decades.

To help personalize the auto maker's expertise at greenwashing, simply visit one of your local "Big 3" dealerships. Walk around the showroom, enjoy that "new car" smell, avoid the sales staff and then take a stroll through the "back-lot" inventory. Chances are that strolling through the inventory could take you the rest of the day due to its shear size. Consider the following example:

This image depicts an average sprawl-driven residential neighborhood. Within the confines of the highlighted area are approximately 113 residences with an approximate population of 293 people (using the Census Bureau 2000 data of 2.59 persons-per-household).

This image depicts a local "Big 3" auto dealership. The images are shown at the same scale, and as you can clearly see in the next image, they occupy approximately the same amount of acreage.

What you are asking yourself is correct. This local "Big 3" dealership occupies enough acreage to house nearly 300 people. There seems to be a serious flaw in the hierarchy of our basic principles, and this is a direct result from embracing hyper-capitalist ideals and planning our entire existence around these ideals.

So, as we as taxpayers prepare to loan our money to yet another industry driven (pun intended) solely by greed, we must ask ourselves if they are truly pursuing a logical and sustainable business strategy? Are they, and other industries, meeting the needs of the current generation while ensuring that the needs of future generations can be met?

From the simple example presented here today, the answers to these questions seem fairly obvious.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life. -Theodore Roosevelt

Hyper-capitalism and unsustainable land-use choices...

Hyper-capitalism has guided our economic choices throughout the centuries to become a society that is centered upon consumerism. Hyper-capitalism can be best defined as system that places greater importance on consumption than it does on the welfare of the citizens. It is within this system that economic and social inequality is greatly exaggerated and the only response to an economic crisis is to persuade consumers to purchase more goods. It is through this economic evolution that decision-making regarding our land-use choices has been directly influenced by the hybrid economic structure that has become a flagship for progress, success and freedom.

While natural competition and free-market economies are better left to economic discussion forums, the influence that hyper-capitalism has had on our society can be seen through a majority of our developmental choices. These choices have been based on principles that repeatedly and deliberately ignore the principles of sustainability.

In the United States, the role that hyper-capitalism has played in our development can best be illustrated by the adoption of an auto-centric mindset by our society. The most obvious example of this influence is in the design and implementation of the Eisenhower Interstate System. The Interstate System was always intended to become more than an aspect of our nation’s defense policy. The approval and implementation of the interstate system signified how important the automobile (and its related industries) was to the daily maintenance of what would become our hyper-capitalist economy.

Since the design and construction of the system, Americans have become increasingly enamored with automobiles, regardless of the fact that throughout their history the technology associated with the design and operation of these vehicles has changed very little. The United States government spends more money on road-based transportation than on any other mode, including the airline industry. In addition to added government expenditures, the number of registered vehicles (240,059,464) in the United States exceeds the number of licensed drivers (203,000,000), demonstrating our appetite for automobiles and the required infrastructure to operate these vehicles.

Discussing definitions and economic theories belies the driving reasons the United States in particular and other nations with imperiled coastlines must address the needs of sustainability even within the bounds of a hyper-capitalistic drive. The damage inflicted to the landscape of the Gulf Coast of the United States as a result of the pursuit of hyper-capitalism extends beyond the auto-centric nature of governmental transportation planning.

“The Federal Government, directly and indirectly, through the laws it writes, the programs it enacts and the regulations it issues, has contributed more than its share to the ugliness of our landscape.” -Sen. Harrison Williams (1919-2001)

Taking action...

An article in the Washington Post helps to illustrate the need for our diligence and activism. The expansion of highways and interstates has often found its way through wetlands, stream corridors, watersheds and various other ecologically sensitive areas. More often than not, proponents of these transportation projects ususally have a financial interest in the further development of the roadways. Transportation corridors, especially those associated with the Eisenhower Interstate System, have been driven by the hyper-capitalist need to consume more automobiles than necessary. Consider this alarming data gathered from the Bureau of Tansportation Statistics:

In 2007, Americans owned 136,568,083 passenger cars which cost an average of 52.2-cents per mile to operate. That 52.2-cents assumes an average of 15,000-miles per year. If we extrapolate the numbers, that's an annual cost of 1.07-TRILLION dollars spent per year on the cost of operating a passenger car.

Huh, that's quite a bit more than say, $700-Billion. And, as drivers we all know that 15,000-miles per year is unreasonable number in most sprawling areas of the United States.

If we continue to allow hyper-capitalist driven planning decisions to dominate the development of this nation, there are far-reaching consequences that will add to the already dismal state of transportation and development in our nation.