Brazil 2014 World Cup

Brazil 2014 World Cup

With World Cup 2014 at its peak, we would be remiss to omit mentioning the ugly business of “the beautiful game.”  The truth is that The Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), the international governing body of association football, futsal and beach soccer, has been embroiled in controversy for many years.

Perhaps the greatest complaint about FIFA is its failure at sustainability.  When we think of sustainability, most of us consider natural systems, i.e., the environment, natural resources, energy, etc.  Often, we ignore the key ingredient of sustainability, namely people or the human factor.

Read More →

Atlantic Ocean shore at Longport, New Jersey

Atlantic Ocean shore at Longport, New Jersey (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The summer beach season has opened officially on the east coast, and while we hear commercials, politicians and even President Obama declaring that the New Jersey shore communities are “stronger than the storm“, we must question the hasty rebuilding of shoreline communities and businesses in time to accommodate the tourist season as a show of strength versus  resilience.

Rebuilding homes in these communities, along with replacing board walks and amusement parks, definitely indicates resilience and determination to continue a tradition and industry that is crucial to the region.  However, these actions alone do not translate necessarily to strength, a required attribute to prevent such devastation during future storms.  The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines resilience as “the capability of a strained body to recover the size and shape after deformation caused especially by compressive strength”.  To that end, many of these communities are resilient in that they have rebuilt and reopened post Hurricane Sandy.  On the other hand, the concept of being stronger, by definition implies “an ability to endure stress, pain or hard use without giving way”.  It is questionable whether these communities, in their hasty return to open in time for the tourist season, actually adopted measures to ensure that they have greater strength than previously to withstand future violent storms.

An interesting and provocative source for  information on rebuilding after a devastating storm can be found in a paper released on December 12, 2012 by the Association of State Floodplain Managers, Inc.  This report “outlines some of the actions that communities, individuals, businesses, and state and federal officials can take to reduce the suffering, damage, and risks from events like Hurricane Sandy in the future.” Acknowledging the need to use the destruction caused by Sandy as a learning opportunity to avoid such damage and destruction in the future, this paper alerts us of the need to alter our reaction to violent weather disasters so as not to keep making the same mistakes.  As stated in the paper, despite the experience of several hurricanes,  including Andrew, Ivan, Katrina, Rita, Wilma, and recently Irene and Sandy, most of the nation still lacks an adequate “rebuilding policy to deal with situations when a large area is impacted by an extreme event.”

This reports details specific steps to take to reconstruct communities that are safer, and disaster resistant.  It specifically addresses concerns with deteriorating and poorly designed infrastructure.  Changes need to be made in the location of power grids and storm drainage systems.  Also, changes in land use, addressing density limits and only allowing open space compatible use is important to protect people in areas that are “100% guaranteed to flood again”.  Careful planning and implementation cannot be done in a hasty fashion.  To do so places these communities at the risk of new destruction during future storms.

As we celebrate the reopening of the Jersey shore communities in time for the beach season, local, state and federal officials must continue to work to make our communities really “stronger than the storm”, not just resilient to the storm.  To do so truly is to “live green, be green.

_________________

Sources for this article:

http://www.floods.org/ace-files/documentlibrary/Hot_Topics/HurricaneSandyRecovery_ASFPM_Actions_12-13-12.pdf

P1304138.jpg

P1304138.jpg (Photo credit: Sigfrid Lundberg)

The reality of climate change, combined with global warming and deterioration of infrastructures, has resulted in numerous power failures in many areas of the country, and now is the time for each of us to accept the responsibility of maintaining power in our homes when our utility companies fail to maintain the flow of electricity during extreme weather occurrences.  The need to take matters into our own hands is more urgent than ever as we now witness the task of finding solutions to climate change being undertaken by our politically divided Congress.  We can assume that major upgrades of power grids will happen one day, hopefully before a complete irreparable power failure ensues.   Meanwhile, on a more frequent basis, we are forced to endure days or hours without electricity during winter and summer storms or during excessively hot days when the present power grids face an undue burden.

A little research shows that there are remedies to ensure house power when the utility companies fail, some more costly than others, but solutions, nonetheless.  We will take a look at few of these.

  • Gas generators.  Most of us are familiar with gas generators that can be purchased for as little as $299, especially if bought during non-emergency periods.  The simplest generators operate off of gas.  Cheaper models can support a few lights and perhaps a fan or electric heater  and a refrigerator during power failures, but not much more.  These generators tend to be very noisy.  However, the biggest issue is that they MUST be placed in an open area to prevent carbon monoxide buildup and exposure, which can be fatal.  In times of power outages, gas generators do help us have access to some power in our homes.
  • Backup generators.  A more sophisticated generator is the backup version which is wired into a gas or propane line.  Depending on the size, these products can keep the lights on in the entire house, preserve refrigerator function to prevent food spoilage, maintain power supply to heating and cooling systems and keep sump pumps and well pumps in operation.  These systems have built-in battery chargers to guarantee battery operation and feature automatic transfer switches between utility power and generator power.  Backup generators are available for purchase or for lease.
  • Solar panels.  As President Obama noted in the State of the Union Address this week, the cost of solar energy is getting cheaper.  As solar energy becomes a more mainstream option, there now are many financing, leasing and equipment options available.  Cost can run from about $1500 to more than $10,000.  When we hear the term solar energy, we immediately think about “photo-voltaic panels,” but there are other sola products available.  They include ground solar panels or grid-tied solar energy systems with a battery backup.  The latter option is very expensive, but it may be a worthwhile investment, particularly in areas of the country that are forced to endure repeated extended periods without power.  Another option is small portable emergency solar power systems that can be used to operate a few small appliances but is inadequate for large appliances, furnaces or cooling systems.  A review of other available products indicate other options, including stand alone systems, remote power systems and emergency power systems.  Solar energy systems often include a bonus of energy tax credits, thereby making them even more attractive.

Considering that the storm season is approaching and that it is more than reasonable to expect as many or more power outages than we have previously experienced during the past summer seasons, it is important that we take charge of the responsibility of keeping our electricity running when the local power grid fails.  We must continue to hold our elective officials, federal, state and local, responsible for enacting policies to protect the environment and to make it a priority to upgrade deteriorating infrastructures and power grids.  Also, we must communicate with utility companies and demand to be included in the conversation on the power needs of our communities.  Lastly, we must continue to rally and speak up for the environment, the need to reduce our carbon footprint, protect our waters and to accept the reality of climate change based on hard scientific facts.  We must continue to fight to live green, be green.

Sources:

http://home.howstuffworks.com/home-improvement/household-safety/security/emergency-power.htm

http://www.getsolar.com/residential_Solar-Roof-vs-Ground-Installation.php

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/tips-renewable-energy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-r-fink/solar-electric-backup-for_b_1696535.html

 

Scientific studies on climate helped establish...

Scientific studies on climate helped establish a consensus. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As the debate over the reality of climate change rages on in Congress and in the news, the details of a promising series of events are emerging that belie the arguments of climate change critics, who deny the existence of climate change and the negative consequences of inaction to address global warming.

Objective data now available clearly indicates a steady movement towards sustainability practices by many businesses.  For instance, recent statistics show that there has been a major shift away from the use of coal and towards natural gas to generate electricity in America.  This shift is documented by a major decline in coal transported by railroads.  This trend is concerning to railroads because coal is the most important commodity for them, accounting for 43.3 percent of  freight railway tonnage and 24.6 percent of gross rail revenue in 2011.  It is important to note that the decline in coal transport by rail, for the most part, is directly attributable to electric utilities’ needs “to take advantage of more price-competitive natural gas“.  While the production of natural gas does pose issues, particularly with fracking, it is a cleaner source of fuel, releasing fewer global-warming gases, such as carbon dioxide, thereby resulting in a reduction of greenhouse emissions in America.  As scientists work to make the fracking procedure safer, natural gas definitely competes against coal as a preferred fuel source.

A look at events going on in Alaska also provides evidence of belief in climate change, a willingness of people to accept its existence and the need to protect the environment.  A recent story chronicles Sarah Palin‘s efforts to address the issues of climate change while she was governor of Alaska.  Palin’s recognition of global warming and its effect on her state and its citizens led her to establish a climate change sub-cabinet to produce ideas on “how Alaskans can save energy and reduce greenhouse emissions”.  During this period prior to her interest in higher political aspirations, Palin was dedicated to find solutions to “protect Alaska’s most at-risk communities“.  Now fast forward to today where we find that current Alaska Republican governor, Sean Parnell (previously a lobbyist for oil companies) has quietly dismantled Palin’s Immediate Action Workgroup.  As a result, it is noted that there are 12 small indigenous communities on Alaska’s coast that need to relocate because of global warming.  Currently in Alaska, the voices are getting louder in support of these displaced communities and in recognition of the reality of global warming and climate change.

A third interesting series of events pointing to acceptance of global warming and the need to seek alternative energy solutions can be seen in the NFL’s increased use of solar energy for stadiums.  Of course, we just witnesses the major power failure at Super Bowl XLVII in New Orleans, Louisiana.  While it may come as a surprise to some people, for the past 18 years the NFL has been pursuing green energy solutions.  It recognized long ago that the sheer  size of most NFL venues were outpacing the infrastructures, thereby taxing the electrical grids and at some point resulting in power failures.  To date, several NFL stadiums are equipped with solar panels, including Gillette Stadium (New England Patriots), MetLife Stadium (NY Jets and NY Giants), FedEx Field (Redskins), and Century Link Field (Seattle Mariners).  The company responsible for most of these projects is NRG Solar Company (www.nrgsolar.com).  These efforts clearly are indicative of the NFL’s recognition of the importance of solar energy and the role it can play in business today, particularly for industries with very large energy burdens at any particular time.

We here at LGBG feel empowered by the efforts of individuals, businesses and organizations who refuse to be deterred in their efforts to seek solutions to global warming.  We know that climate change is a reality.  As we enter the weekend, we are posed to witness another reminder of the reality of climate change and global warming by two huge storms coming from the west and the south and expected to result in a major blizzard in the Northeast, which still has not recovered from Sandy.  We wish the best for everyone in the path of these storms.  They truly are Mother Nature reminding us to live green, be green.

Sources for this Article:
1.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rhone-resch/nfl-solar-power_b_2592901.html
2.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/06/sarah-palin-climate-change_n_2630262.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green
3.  http://www.climatecentral.org/news/new-rail-traffic-data-reflects-big-shift-away-from-coal-15555

The typical picture of Washington currently is that democrats say yes, republicans say no, and vice versa. What then if I were to tell you of a government reform that inspired the exact opposite, an Obama administration proposed reform that had states painted both red and blue competing for federal funds, while taking the reform of an antiquated and failing system seriously? You would most likely point me to a calendar and tell me that the fifties are over, and I would merely show you the Race to the Top.

The Race to the Top program was a product of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), commonly known as the Stimulus Bill. It provided $4.35 billion dollars in federal funding for states’ education systems. However, this was not a simple funding provision, but a competitive grant program. States would compete against each other for these funds by engaging in education reform.[1]For many, the results were somewhat muddled, with different groups focusing on different aspects of education. Regardless the perceived inadequacies of the program, it did accomplish two things: it caused states to recognize and evaluate failures in their education systems, formulating ways to fix them, while also injecting much needed funds into school systems that were facing dire budget cuts and setbacks. As I previously said, the actual results of the program are still hard gauge and likely will not be quantifiable for years to come. That being said, admission of a problem is always the first step to recovery.

With that notion in mind, we can no longer ignore America’s crumbling infrastructure.  This is a subject that I have touched on in the past and which many of us notice on our commutes to and from work every day.  As I stated in my November 27th post, America needs roughly $2.2 trillion dollars in infrastructure investments.[2] The need for these investments could not come at a more opportune or inopportune time. As of December 2012, the unemployment rate stands at 7.8%.[3] Any infrastructure project would be beneficial to increasing employment, not only through the jobs required to complete the task, but also through the multiplier effect. While government infrastructure projects are typically, and sometimes rightfully so, decried as pork-barrel projects, their economic benefit greatly exceeds the majority of government spending.  A report from the fall of last year found that, “each dollar of infrastructure spending increases the GSP by at least two dollars”, and furthermore, “that the multiplier increases during a downturn. Leduc and Wilson found that the multiplier in the wake of the 2009 stimulus was ‘roughly four times’ more than average. That means infrastructure investments offer more value during busts than booms, which should encourage policymakers attempting to counteract high unemployment in the construction sector by increasing spending on highways, roads, and bridges”.[4] However, Washington is driving with its eyes not fixed on the road at the moment, but instead on the debt ceiling crashing through the skies.

The debt ceiling is typically raised by Congress every few years, but over the course of the Obama administration, it has become a partisan sticking point. A majority of America agrees that not raising the debt ceiling is liable to cause economic damage to the United States, but many people are more divided on which outcome is the best, with, “39 percent of [AP-Gfk] poll respondents support[ing] the insistence by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that deep spending cuts be attached to any measure increasing the debt ceiling. That is more than the 30 percent who back Obama’s demand that borrowing authority be raised quickly and not entwined with a bitter fight over trimming the budget. An additional 21 percent oppose boosting the debt ceiling at all”.[5] Not surprising, the survey goes  on to find that the two top issues for Americans are the economy and the federal deficit. The point to take away from this is that the great recession is still firmly locked into the minds of many Americans and that we are not likely to see any significant spending comparable to what our infrastructure actually needs. As such, if we are not going to be able to spend more to dig out of this hole, then we have to spend wiser, and there is no better way to get the best ideas then through competition.

We have in this possibility an intersection of resounding truths: America’s infrastructure is in desperate need of repair, the health of the economy is seen as still in balance, and the concern for the federal deficit will likely curtail spending increases. We’ve already shown that infrastructure investments are one of the most efficient ways that the government can spend. With our constrained ability to spend, but a desire for a healthier economy, we must choose the investment with the greatest track record for success. By making it into a competition in the spirit of the Race to The Top, we are increasing the economic benefit of the spending even more. By cutting out the pork, we are targeting the projects and the plans that would be the most beneficial, the best of the best, one could say. Furthermore, it has been noted that in downturns that the multiplier effect is even more resounding. While the recession may be officially over, unemployment remains high. When we break unemployment down by state, we see states like Mississippi (8.5%), New Jersey (9.6%), and California (9.8%) with unemployment levels well above the national average.[6] What you will also find in these states are infrastructures with extremely low ratings that are in need of drastic improvements. [7] The recession may have ended but for many of these states the wounds have yet to heal. An increase in infrastructure spending would provide a much needed injection of cash into their economies and likely a multiplier effect above the average.

Inspirations for new investments are appearing in the news every day, most recently out of the Netherlands.  While we are attempting to get our infrastructure to meet the standards of the modern day, this nation already is planning and getting set to build the needed infrastructure of the future. Construction is set to begin soon on glow in the dark highways, “treated with a special ‘foto-luminising powder’ that is charged up during the day and illuminates the contours of the road and lane markers at night for up to 10 hours… [And] dynamic paint [that] responds to changes in temperature. A pattern of snowflakes, for example, appears when it is cold and slippery… [While] other innovations to debut in the coming years include an induction priority lane that will charge electric cars as they drive, presumably via induction coils that are powered by wind”.[8] State and national leaders would also be wise to take note of the success of the Dutch bike system, with, “ 27 percent of all daily trips [being] made by bicycle”.[9] In all likelihood America faces a tough road ahead, torn by somewhat contradictory desires and opinions.  Nonetheless, we still possess the capability to determine the difficulty of that road ahead. We can determine this by being smart, spending smart, and letting the spirit of competition drive us down the best road.  Creating a competitive program to improve the nation’s infrastructure indeed is a way to live green and be green.

By Sean P. Maguire

 


[1] http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/executive-summary.pdf

[2] http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

[3]http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm

[4] http://www.businessinsider.com/infrastructure-economic-multiplier-2012-11

[5] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/debt-limit-poll_n_2498441.html

[6] http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

[7] http://www.asce.org/Infrastructure/Report-Card/State-and-Local-Report-Cards/

[8] http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/futureoftech/futuristic-highway-glows-dark-reports-weather-1C6670949

[9]http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/how-to-make-biking-mainstream-lessons-from-the-dutch

The U.S. Department of Transportation announced an award of $40 million to the state of Maryland to upgrade its public transportation system. The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) will use this money, along with $13 million in state funds to replace the bus yard and buildings at the Kirk Avenue facility. This bus yard is a major hub for the transit administration. It has 351 employees and provides a storage and maintenance site for 175 buses that serves 16 routes, transporting more than a million passengers per week.

This upgrade is long overdue. In 2004, The Johns Hopkins Center for Urban Environmental Health conducted a study in the area, and the results of readings indicated that noise levels in that vicinity exceeded the limit set by Baltimore’s health ordinances. Additionally, air samples indicated that the “two-week average exposure to diesel exhaust and other combustion was slightly above the federal safety threshold for a full year’s exposure”.

This new facility will provide the technology necessary to maintain energy-efficient buses. The building will be more environmentally friendly, cutting operating costs. The project will provide off-street parking, which will enhance the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of reduced traffic congestion and aesthetics. This upgrade stimulates the economy by providing for construction jobs and for positions to help maintain the “green” buses.

This project is part of a $787 million package to repair and modernize the transit infrastructure nationwide. It definitely is a positive step in the direction to live green, be green.