Examining New Urbanism...Overall Conclusions

In today’s society, we are faced with a challenge that will ultimately determine how sustainable our cultural choices regarding our development patterns, transportation choices and consumer-based economy will prove to be.

Suburban sprawl is the product of the combination of all of these choices that continues to negatively affect the environment and threaten the sustainability of our society.

The sustainable response to suburban sprawl is the embracing of smart growth principles as well as the principles of New Urbanism.

This shift in development patterns as well as an overall paradigm shift from consumptionism to conservationism is especially significant in the emerging age of globalization.

As cultures begin to export their economic systems and the associated negative effects of these systems, the embracing of a sustainable form of development and overall environmental practices will help to ensure the overall sustainability of the global community.

Never before has an international effort to reverse the negative effects of unsustainable development patterns and practices been so significant to the health and welfare of the planet’s inhabitants.

The depletion of the rain forests, the desertification of areas due to increased unsustainable industrial practices and the hyper-consumption of non-renewable resources are important environmental issues that must be addressed by the global community.

All of these issues are directly linked with the unsustainable development patterns that have evolved from the practices of the United States. The United States has an opportunity to regain its international status as a responsible leader through the implementation of sustainable development principles.

Through the analysis of the four New Urbanist communities, a matrix has been created that will help developers and designers create truly sustainable communities.

This matrix highlights the six essential qualities that every sustainable community must possess;

 
  (1) a compact and consolidated intensity of uses;

  (2) a comprehensive and complimentary diversity of uses;

  (3) a contained and consistent extent of uses;

  (4) a connected and combined system of communication;

  (5) a centered, configured and comprehensible sense of place;

  (6) a re-configurable plan that allows for flexibility of uses.

Through the application of smart growth design principles and the embracing of New Urbanism principles, these qualities can be generated in nearly every development that is designed in the new millennium.

The importance of creating sustainable communities has never been more evident in this country than it is today.

We are faced with daily reminders of the negative effects of suburban sprawl as commuters sit in hours worth of traffic delays during seemingly endless commutes, wars are fought over the control of non-renewable resources and access to clean water and productive agricultural lands, communities become faceless and meaningless collections of individualist detached housing that ensures the residents privacy and social segregation and the country faces an obesity epidemic for the first time in its history.

Embracing the qualities of sustainable communities is the most effective tool in combating the negative effects of suburban sprawl that threaten our physical, social, cultural and economic health.

After 1980, you never heard reference to space again. Surface, the most convincing evidence of the descent into materialism, became the focus of design. Space disappeared. -Arthur Erickson

Earth day is upon us...

Well, today is the 39th Earth Day.

I find it a bit perplexing that as members of the world-wide ecological community, we require a single day to be set aside to celebrate the planet we live on.

And honestly, with what we have done to this planet I not sure we should be celebrating, but instead begging forgiveness and seeking penance.

So before anyone gets into a tizzy regarding whether or not global warming really exists; or whether or not owning 4 cars in a 2 driver household really contributes to sprawl; or whether or not the trickle-down theory is really the most democratic economic system; or whether or not our development choices have really led to an alarmingly high child obesity rate; or whether or not our use of coal-burning power plants in the Ohio valley has really poisoned every body of freshwater in the Northeast with mercury; or whether or not developing nations really allow rampant deforestation in the name of hyper-capitalism masked as progress; or whether or not our hyper-capitalist driven land-use choices have really destroyed important wetland ecosystems whose function is to protect low-lying areas from flooding; or whether or not our government has really allowed hyper-capitalist auto manufacturers to convince us that an efficient, low-emissions internal combustion engine is not feasible; or whether or not our nation really has the largest privately funded rail network in the world yet we can't seem to implement a reliable high-speed rail network; or whether or not in our democratic and just society that our health care system is really ranked 38th in the world just ahead of Slovenia and Cuba; or whether or not we really allow hyper-capitalists to bulldoze the mountains of West Virginia in search of cheap coal; or whether or not we really celebrate the automobile so much that when a developer actually installs sidewalks or a trail system they want a commendation from the Sierra Club; or whether or not allowing National Home Builders to mass grade, change designated land-uses and leverage their projects based solely on speculation informed by reports that their own lobbyists generate has really contributed to the crash of the housing market; or whether or not hyper-capitalist driven greed has really fueled the subprime lending market in which housewives-turned-mortgage brokers fleece unsuspecting, uninformed homebuyers into products that they could never afford; or whether or not the lack of congressional oversight is really the true culprit behind many of the misdealings of the financial crisis; or whether or not relying on the guise of religion and freedom is really a just means to slaughter innocent people with roadside bombs, dirty bombs, hazardous chemicals, conventional weapons, plutonium-enriched shells or any other means of destruction; or whether or not globalization has really led to the exportation of American-style hyper-capitalism resulting in the further socio-economic stratification of developing nations; or whether or not our coastal development choices have really placed cities, towns and residents in danger of catastrophic weather events; or whether or not saving 10-cents a month on your electricity bill really means you are living a sustainable lifestyle; or whether or not greenwashing your development project with a certified "green" checklist is really a step in the right direction for facilitating a system-wide paradigm shift; or whether or not protesting taxes when nation's survival is at stake as opposed to protesting deficit spending to invade sovereign nations based on lies is really justifiable; or whether or not the United States really has over 1,300 endangered species of plants and animals yet we continue to plan to exploit wildlife refuges for hyper-capitalist gains; I would like to remind everyone of one thing.

Everything is connected to everything else.

If there is one phrase which should become part of the American lexicon, that is it.

The sooner we accept that our actions affect the larger eco-community and that in order for our species to survive we must change our habits, the sooner we can begin celebrating Earth Day everyday of the year.

The universe is wider than our views of it. -Henry David Thoreau

Shades of gray...

So they question remains, how do we facilitate the necessary paradigm shift towards a more sustainable homebuilding model?

This task is much more difficult than one can imagine. In order to demonstrate just how murky the waters truly are, we need to examine one of the organizations whose entire purpose is to defend national builders and their hyper-capitalist ways. This is none other than the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

Just to give you an idea as to exactly what this organization is about, the "NAHB strives to create an environment in which...Housing and those who provide it are recognized as the strength of the nation." Unless you've been living in a cave for the past three years, we all know how this vision has panned out for our nation!

Regardless, the NAHB is making an effort to embrace and promote "Green Building Practices". However, if we take a closer look at this effort we will quickly discover yet another greenwashing smokescreen intended to distract us from the real issues.

(You didn't really think that I would simply point out the NAHB's efforts without immediately proceeding to systematically dissect its true intentions, did you?!?!)

Let us begin with the NAHB's "Green Home Building Guidelines", which is structured somewhat like the LEED rating system. The NAHB's system allocates points for green building "line items", resulting in a gold, silver or bronze rating.

Points for site selection, site design, building materials and so on comprise the overall strategies to achieve a "green" community. But, if we take a closer look at their overall "green" goals, we quickly discover how they truly feel about the movement;

It should be noted that although many green building programs have been in existence for 10 years of more, the concept and practice of green building is not clearly defined and straightforward. Many gray areas remain in identifying and quantifying the precise environmental impact for each particular line item. (NAHB, Model Green Home Building Guidelines.)

Huh, that's funny because as we have come to learn, everything is connected to everything else. That seems like a pretty straightforward concept, but then again it could be construed as a gray area. I mean, does everything include stuff that we haven't invented or produced yet? And does it include thoughts or electrical impulses?

I've changed my mind; it is pretty gray.

Let's look at it another way. How about the view that sustainable development is "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (Brundtland, 1987.)

That doesn't help at all. For instance, what if scientists invent a way to solve all of the world's pollution problems in the future?!?! If that were to happen, then anything we do now won't really hinder the ability of future generations!

Yup, pretty gray.

How about if we look at the very first criteria for site selection; "Avoid environmentally sensitive areas". One could state with some certainty that this would include wetland areas.

Ahh, we remember wetlands don't we? Those diverse ecological communities which perform a variety of functions from cleaning water to providing protection from flooding.

But hold the phone, we may have discovered a gray area.

The NAHB, in all its infinite wisdom is quick to point out that "wetlands are a controversial issue for builders and federal agencies." Furthermore, they are quick to point out that wetland degradation and loss is a "common misconception". In fact, they feel that there has been "no net loss" of wetlands in our nation recently.

Well, those smoke-screening scientists over at the pesky EPA would probably like to step-up to the microphone to refute that statement by saying, "Huh?".

For instance, in Louisiana alone "every thirty minutes, an area of coastal land the size of a football field vanishes. Since the 1930s, more than 1.2 million acres (1,900 square miles), an area the size of Delaware, has disappeared from the Mississippi River Delta."

Yup, so very gray.

Perhaps the NAHB neglected to read the entire memo concerning the federal government's policies on wetlands. If they had read past the first two lines, they would have learned that both President Bushes wanted to implement a regulatory policy which accounted for no net loss of wetlands.

Oops. Missed that one.

A builder can still apply for a permit to "fill" a portion of a wetlands and either construct or "mitigate" their impact somewhere else on their site. Or they can even mitigate that impact to somewhere that is not even in the same area as their site!!!

In an effort to return to our original point, how do we expect the new homebuilding giant Pulex to embrace the concepts of sustainability and "green" building if the organization who supports them doesn't even wholeheartedly believe in these concepts?!?!

Well, in a democratic society operating under an capitalist economic system, We the People are the ones who possess the power to instigate change. That change must come from the consumer who demands nothing less than a truly "green" and sustainable product from organizations who are truly concerned with the impacts they are making on our society.

Remember, yes we can.

Are we not the whores of big business, selling our product for their commercial lust? -Arthur Erickson

Monopolizing sprawl....

During these difficult times for national builders, a feel-good story emerges from the organizations who gave us the concepts of fortified, age-restricted sprawling communities; McMansions and builder-based financing. In case you haven't heard, Pulte Homes is in the process of acquiring Centex. This will create the largest national home builder in the country (and most likely the world).

Hyper-capitalists everywhere are rejoicing!!! Perhaps we can continue to treat the land as a commodity and resume consuming it at an alarming rate!!!

Don't fire-up the mass-grading bandwagon just yet...I think I have some bad news for this sprawling mega-builder.

Perhaps the CEOs of the housing industry were too busy traversing the country in their private planes over the last few weeks to take notice of something that the new administration is fairly keen on...fixing failed business models.

I think that Rick Wagoner, the now former CEO of General Motors could give the new Pulex (which is a new company name that I freely offer the new mega-sprawler) some advice on revising their business plan.

Rick may begin by telling the building giant to steer clear of the "free-money-for-failed-hyper-capitalists" programs that the federal government has been funding over the past few months. That piece of advice would certainly be preceded by the caveat, things just ain't what they used to be.

Here's the real point; the housing industry needs to rethink their hyper-capitalist driven business models if they plan to survive.

This merger will not spur another housing boom. Sorry to burst the bubble before it even inflates, but if we think back about a year and a half, we should be able to remember that it was the national builders and the lending industry which started this economic downturn.

Here's another bubble-flattener; the new administration will not allow the widespread destruction of the American landscape in the name of hyper-capitalism. In fact, not since the 19th century has the federal government made a significant effort to fund and encourage public transportation projects.

What options does this leave our new friend Pulex? How about the opportunity to become the very first sustainable and equitable national home builder in the world.

Granted, the true meaning and practice sustainability and equity are foreign concepts to these folks. But let us imagine for a moment, a national homebuilder that creates truly sustainable site plans, encourages public transportation projects which connect their communities to urban cores, builds communities which encourage healthy living and social interaction and offer a diverse mix of housing types that people from every socio-economic status could afford.

Sounds nice, doesn't it. I'm certain that some hyper-capitalists are decrying the idea of such sustainable and equitable communities. They are most likely pulling out their latest mud-slinging terms; socialism, communists and the dreaded liberal.

But alas, I have some disturbing news for our hyper-capitalist brethren...these types of communities only embody one true political ideal; democracy.

Ahh yes, a concept which has become so clouded that a majority of people in this country don't even remember what it means. But let us remember that this great nation was founded (in theory at least) on the concepts of equality, fairness and opportunity.

These just happen to be the same ideals which drive the concept of creating equitable and sustainable communities. The time has come for a new approach to development in this nation, and Pulex has the incredible opportunity to lead that charge.

The question is, will they?

Instead of noblemen, let us have noble villages of men. -Henry David Thoreau

Making sure they're pleased....

Quick food for thought.

From today's New York Times;

April 3, 2009

Former California Homeowners Lash Out at Builder

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER

LOS ANGELES — A major home builder that helped fuel the country’s building boom is now under attack for what some homeowners and builders say was its role in the bust that
followed.

Several former homeowners spoke here on Thursday about their disenchantment with the builder, KB Home, at its annual shareholders’ meeting. The speakers said the company had pushed them into high-risk, high-interest loans for homes they could not afford and eventually lost to foreclosure.

During the meeting, a few dozen construction workers, many of whom had their work dry up when the home-building market imploded in Southern California, protested across the street.

“I tried to communicate to the board members to try to do better for people in the future,” one of the former homeowners who addressed the board, Santiago Ramos, said after the meeting.

The meeting was closed to reporters. A KB Home spokeswoman,

Heather Reeves, said in an e-mail message, “We want every KB

homeowner to know that we stand ready to assist them in any way

we can to ensure that they are pleased with their purchase.”

I wonder if that assistance includes helping the now former homeowners find a nearby shelter.

We need less regulations. I suspect, we met with a homeowner, home builder yesterday, Congressman. Remember the guy? He was upset that he had to fill out forms at the federal, state, and local level in order to build a house. -George W Bush, Washington, D.C., Mar. 16, 2004

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

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)

Patches, patches everywhere...

Over the past few weeks, there has been a fair amount of attention given to the concepts of backyard farming and "victory gardening". Undoubtedly, this focus has a direct correlation to the failure of the American hyper-capitalist system, the rise in unemployment and the normally unassociated costs of purchasing food from a commercial source.

In many urban communities, residents not only grow organic vegetables, but they raise "small flock" chickens, generally numbering less than 10 hens that produce an average of 2 eggs per day per hen. In addition to providing homeowners with fresh, locally produced eggs, the urban chicken proponents use the flocks as educational tools for children.

Recently, there has been significant attention given to the notion that a portion of the White House grounds should be used to grow organic crops, presumably in an effort to promote what has been called the "sustainable food movement".

Here is where the problem with these concepts lies (and I am sure that many people will accuse the author of merely obsessing over semantics while the overall concept is what is more important). Converting your lawn into a victory garden, raising your own chickens and cracking your own eggs is a fine way to save money, but it is not necessarily a sustainable practice.

Is it organic? Yes.

Does it reduce fossil fuel consumption? Yes.

Does it provide educational opportunities for young Americans? Yes.

Does it help support the local economy? No.

Does it address the needs of American farmers who have been run out of business by their government and now by their neighbors? No.

Do a few fragmented patches of organic gardens, chicken coops and rain barrels make for a fully sustainable local and global community? No.

The same phenomenon which threatens to obliterate forests throughout the world is now threatening to derail the entire sustainability movement; fragmentation. When a forest ecosystem is divided into patches, the inhabitants of the forest may find it more difficult to migrate through the ecosystem, thereby reducing their access to food and potential mates (note: this a fairly broad stroke introduction to the concept of complimentary and connected uses, which we will explore in great detail in the coming weeks).

Because of the lack of a comprehensive, complimentary and cohesive sustainable development regulatory structure, the efforts of those involved in the movement are inadvertently creating "patches" of organic and sustainable elements within their local (and eventually global) community.

A prime example which has been receiving a fair amount of national press is the redevelopment of New Orleans. As many of you know, Global Green has been constructing 8 LEEDs certified, "green" architecture homes in a ward of the city. As many of you may not know is that the city government and redevelopment authority do not have a comprehensive plan that allows for the creation of a truly sustainable city. In other words, the only sustainable project occurring in New Orleans are 8 homes built by Global Green and visited by Brad Pitt.

Let us recall the Brundtland definition of sustainable development; "...development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." In layman's terms, we are putting the cart before the horse.

Without comprehensive planning, we are threatening to derail the purpose and potential of sustainable development and organic production methods.

Without comprehensive planning we, as a local and global community, are threatening to create communities which will become fragmented, thereby derailing our social and cultural development.

And when we fail to evolve and adapt as a society, we threaten our entire existence.

We are not going to be able to operate our Spaceship Earth successfully nor for much longer unless we see it as a whole spaceship and our fate as common. It has to be everybody or nobody. -R. Buckminster Fuller

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's influence continued...

The hyper-capitalist interests of public policymakers have taken precedence over the environmental safety of the general public and have manifested in two recent examples.

In 1998, Senator Trent Lott aided casino developers in circumventing the environmental permitting process in order to ensure that casinos in Mississippi would be built. This example helps to demonstrate how the principles of hyper-capitalism, specifically the pursuit of economic gain with disregard for the hidden costs of development such as environmental degradation, have been embraced when addressing our developmental choices in the Gulf Coast region. Developmental and regulatory policy decisions based upon hyper-capitalist ideals greatly reduces the long-term sustainability of coastal development by infringing on the natural buffers and ecosystems that help to protect the Gulf Coast from the effects of catastrophic weather events.

The second example demonstrates how the Bush administration blocked and nearly eradicated funding that would begin to restore much of the natural buffer that the Gulf Coast region has been losing to development practices that respond directly to the hyper-capitalist paradigm. The Gulf Coast has been protected from storm surges by the large expanse of wetland areas that buffer the shore from the inland portions of the region. “Louisiana’s coastal wetlands act as vast sponges, absorbing billions of gallons of rainfall and shielding people and property from storms. The effect is impressive…every two miles of wetlands south of New Orleans reduces tropical storm surges there by half a foot.”(Center for Progressive Reform, 2005.) It is estimated that the Louisiana coastal wetlands are being lost at a rate of 6,600 acres per year, greatly reducing the ability of the ecosystem to effectively protect inland settlements from storm surges and subsequent flooding.

In 1998, state and federal agencies developed a plan to restore and repair much of the coastal wetlands that had been destroyed in the name of hyper-capitalism. The plan, “Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana”, called for numerous ecological restorative measures that would cost around $14 billion. The Bush budget for 2005 allocated approximately $540 million for the program, which pales in comparison to the cost of rebuilding the Gulf Coast region. The state requested more assistance from the federal government in the form of grants that are related to the income generated through the petroleum industry in the state, but the President denied the funding. This demonstrates that the maintenance of the hyper-capitalist system far outweighed the safety of Gulf Coast residents for the federal government.

"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)

Hyper-capitalism continued...

One of the main precepts of capitalism is to promote the interest of only one’s self, and to accumulate as much wealth as possible in order to raise one’s standard of living. The theory of “supply-side” economics has helped to further these ideals and to create an unequal distribution of wealth within the United States. Supply-side economics, also known as the “trickle-down theory”, is based on the assumption that a small percent of the population actually controls or possesses a majority of the wealth and that through the free-market system, each member of the economic community has an opportunity to obtain some of the wealth as well. This system, in theory, would reward the most resourceful and ambitious with the opportunity to accumulate as much of the available wealth as possible.

This was the basic economic policy of the Reagan and Bush (Sr.) administrations through the 1980s and into the early 1990s. ““Supply-side economics” that would make the rich richer in the hope that some of it would trickle down to the poorer…has proven disastrous for the welfare of the great majority, as not only the unskilled and semiskilled, the sick, the unemployed, and the destitute, but even our farmers and a great number of small business owners discovered [in the 1980s.]”The embracing of supply-side economics throughout the 1980s helped to create the largest gap between the wealthy and the poor in any industrialized nation. “According to a 1998 report by the Census Bureau, the upper fifth of income earners in the United States took home almost one-half of the total income on our country (49.3 percent), whereas the lowest fifth a measly 3.6 percent – a gap between the rich and the poor twice as large as in Germany and three times as large as in Japan.”Social and economic inequalities are a direct result from the uneven distribution of wealth that occurs in a supply-side economic system.

Even with the gap endlessly widening between the wealthiest and poorest citizens of our country, consumers from all segments of the population still manage to spend more on goods and services than in any other industrialized nation. The importance of consuming goods to the capitalist system creates a number of scenarios in which environmental degradation may occur. This has created a new breed of capitalism that can be labeled as hyper-capitalism.

“The national purpose of the United States, from the very beginning, has been to let everyone make as much money as he possibly can. If they found oil under St. Patrick’s Cathedral, they would put a derrick smack in the center of the nave, and nobody would give the matter a second thought.” -Acquaintance of Peter Blake, unknown, as quoted in God’s Own Junkyard

The foundations of hyper-capitalism...

The foundations of hyper-capitalism

In his 1776 book, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith presents the basic structure and “laws” for the establishment of the capitalist economic system. More important to Smith than the establishment of a strict economic structure was the importance of personal freedom, which reflects some of the ideological trends of the time period. Smith’s main objectives were, “first, for the “good of the nation” he wanted to reduce government interference and replace it with greater individual freedom. After all, he reasoned, if every individual had the freedom to achieve his or her potential the result would be the greatest possible good for the whole nation. Second, he wanted to see England enjoy the great increase in output that he felt would result from a division of labor.” The introduction of these ideals into society resulted in the establishment of what has come to be known as the free market system or capitalism. Capitalism can best be described as embracing the following:

1. Private property;
2. Freedom of enterprise and choice;
3. Self-interest as the dominant motive;
4. Competition;
5. Reliance in the price or market system; and,
6. A limited role for government
   

“The primary driving force of capitalism is the promotion of one’s self-interest; each economic unit attempts to do what is best for itself.”

The basic precepts and ideals that are presented by these particular definitions demonstrate the importance that capitalism places on the role of the consumer. The first three parts of the framework of capitalism all revolve around the ability and will of the consumer who stimulates and creates the market itself. The significance of the consumer’s role in a capitalist system creates:

• A climate in which economic security cannot be guaranteed;
• A system in which consumers themselves are responsible for stimulating the economy;
• No guaranteed minimum income for consumers (while they fill their role of providing labor); and,
• A focus on competition while maintaining maximum profits, which assures that manufacturers will strive to operate while incurring only minimum, costs.
  

Although we have become accustomed to the benefits capitalism has generated in general, there is a downside to the manner in which it is practiced today. This is especially true “if you measure efficiency of labor in terms of output per hour of labor time as Western economists do (ignoring such hidden costs as unemployment, erosion of land, pollution of air and water, and squandering of often irreplaceable resources), market societies have been doing rather well.” The unmeasured, yet very real results of these ideals can be seen today with the mass exportation of jobs from the United States to less developed countries that have a lower cost of labor (as well as having less stringent environmental regulations). This has led to less consumer spending and has resulted in an economic downturn, or “recession”, within the American economy.

"Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime." -Aristotle

On capitalism and democracy

Prior to the presentation of the various definitions of the terms used here regularly, here are a few thoughts on capitalism and democracy...

There are no provisions or caveats in the constitution that state wealth should be equally distributed throughout the nation. Additionally, the framework set by the founders does not guarantee financial success or even security; however, the main motivation behind the establishment of the nation was to avoid paying taxes.

On the other hand, we can state that the consensus is that being poor is a bad thing for anyone. Yet, competition, as defined by the precepts of capitalism (especially hyper-capitalism) precludes us from actually taking action in redistributing our “hard earned dollars” to the less fortunate. If we look at a democratic society, which we are (as opposed to a capitalist society – which does not exist by definition), the hoarding of wealth and the exclusion of people based solely on their economic status is an undemocratic practice and goes against the moral and sociological intentions of the constitution and the intentions of the founders.

“The first man, who after enclosing a piece of ground, took it into his head to say, this is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. How many crimes, how many wars, how many murders, how many misfortunes and horrors, would that man have saved the human species, who pulling up the stakes or filling up the ditches should have cried to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are lost, if you forget that the fruits of the earth belong equally to us all, and the earth itself to nobody!” (Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality)