Although somewhat of an abstract idea, most of us would jump at the chance of adding another five months to our lives. I know I would, especially if I can add it on to the additional five months of life-extension reported in today's Intelligencer. If I could do it in a way that won't cost me anything and, in fact, saves me money, I'd jump at the chance.

The study referred to was conducted by several prestigious colleges and reported in the January 22 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. It fingered fine particulate matter from burning coal and from motor vehicle tailpipes, among other sources. The health improvements were attributed to the 1970 Clean Air Act which reduced fine particulate matter from 21 micrograms per cubic meter of air to 14.

If you're wondering what the magic elixer is, it's a simple two-part solution of energy efficiency and conservation. The proportions aren't important and will vary according to your individual case. Energy costs and the environmental consequences are becoming increasingly expensive. And, more than half of all energy is wasted!

Making fiscally responsible choices in our purchasing, use, and operation of devices that cause excess fine particulate matter can eliminate another seven micrograms of needless pollution and presumably add another five months to our lives.

A lack of conservation is improved by measures like turning off all unneeded lights. Efficiency is improved by driving fuel-efficient cars and trucks, buying efficient appliances, and sealing air leaks in our homes. With a little more effort we could parlay this into a year. Of course, it helps if we all pitch in.

There are additional feel-good benefits like the health improvements associated with cleaner air reported in the NEJM. It might slow or reverse the epidemic of asthma noticed in our children and give them a longer, healthier life.

A wonderful byproduct of this plan would be a fifty percent decrease in our CO2 emissions, a leading cause of global climate change. We'd also have bragging rights to be beating current targets and goals for preventing climate change. It would be a really green thing to do. And, for those of us who care, green is the new Cool, you betcha!

RESPONSE TO INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL SUNDAY MAY 11, 2008
New energy, new conservation will cost us a tiny fraction of the cost of not acting.

The lead editorial in the May 11, Sunday edition of the Intelligencer, "Nothing's for free: new energy, new conservation will cost us", takes issue with Governor Rendell's assertion that his $850 million Green Jobs, Energy Independence Strategy (SS HB-1) will not cost the taxpayers. This "straw man" debate ignores the real and very deadly issue of the costs of continued inaction to the economy of Pennsylvania, the nation, and the world.

The proven truth is that every dollar invested in energy conservation and renewable energy has been repeatedly shown to return $4 to $10, or more, in savings and benefits to taxpayers. As a trained energy auditor I see proof of that every day. Merely eliminating inefficient use and the ubiquitous waste of energy can save taxpayers billions of dollars.

Instead of haggling over what such programs will initially cost, and what they might return a little later, we do much better to look at the cost of inaction. The best work on that was the Review completed in October 2006 by Sir Nicholas Stern, head of the (UK) Government Economic Service.

"..The Review estimates that if we don’t act, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least 5% of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risks and impacts is taken into account, the estimates of damage could rise to 20% of GDP or more."

The editorial implies that the Governor's claim that his proposals won't cost the taxpayer anything is "nuts". What is really insane is Pennsylvania's continued failure to take meaningful local action to address global climate change. And since Pennsylvania is the third worst CO2 emitter in the United States, and twentieth worst emitter of any political jurisdiction in the world we have a lot of catching up to do. An $850 million down payment on a little overdue action is chickenfeed when compared to the alternative. The possibility of inaction costing 20% of Pennsylvania's GDP "now and forever" is the real risk and the real benchmark to watch. And it's a cost our children would pay.

And that is just the financial risk. What about the secondary costs? The report concludes: "Our actions now and over the coming decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the depression of the first half of the 20th century. And it will be difficult or impossible to reverse these changes."

Is that the legacy we want to leave our children and grandchildren? Is this how our generation wants to be remembered? To deny that this could happen is the greatest insanity of all.

The original article:

The Intelligencer
www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/318-05112008-1532288.html
Home / Opinions / Editorials

Nothing's for free

GOV. RENDELL has been making the rounds of the state, including a stop last week in Bucks County, to push legislation to promote the conservation of energy and the development of so-called clean energy sources. The governor is talking about spending nearly $1 billion to head off what he termed an impending disaster when legislative caps on utility bills expire next year.

Stop us if you've heard these gloom-and-doom predictions before. The truth is, the crisis in domestic energy usage has been building for at least 40 years. We've heard from presidents and governors, congresses and legislatures, about the need to use energy wisely and come up with new technologies that move us away from our heavy reliance on all fossil fuels and our dependence on the foreign producers of petroleum.

We have gotten nowhere fast. Now, in addition to bearing the unpleasantness of skyrocketing gasoline prices, we're hearing from the governor that we're about to get hammered by significantly higher costs for electricity.

One bill Rendell is touting would provide $850 million for rebates on solar cells, wind energy, home energy loans and “green buildings.” The other legislation sets energy conservation goals and requires electric companies to offer their customers the option of paying less if they use electricity at certain non-peak hours of the day.

Not everyone is convinced that Rendell's proposals go far enough. And they probably don't, since making up for decades of little or no progress in solving the energy problem won't be accomplished all at once. The governor's legislation is a start, and that's all it is.

What really defies belief is the governor's claim that his proposals won't cost taxpayers anything. Is he nuts? The hang-up in developing a sound energy policy for all these years has been the big lie that such a policy could be implemented with little or no pain to the consumer. Now Rendell is telling us that his $1 billion for clean energy grants and conservation programs will materialize without the need to raise taxes. How? The state will simply issue bonds to cover the cost. Well, guess what? Eventually, someone is going to have to pay off those bonds. Then we'll see what happens to taxes.

We're not saying that the energy crisis can be ignored. Continuing to do so is the height of irresponsibility. But it's disingenuous for the governor to say we can avert disaster and it won't cost us anything. That's ridiculous. We're all going to have to sacrifice to bring our energy situation under control, and some of that sacrifice will necessarily be financial.

Walter Williams fools Intelligencer with his Rope-A Dope propaganda.

The outrageously false "Minority View" contained in a widely syndicated Walter E. Williams Op Ed piece, "Global Warming Rope-A-Dope was based on a manufactured propaganda piece penned by James Inhoff's infamous toady, Marc Moreno at Poznan on, or about December 10th. Moreno was author of the now infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attack on John Kerry.

I could excuse Williams for falling for it. After all he's an economist but couldn't predict the financial meltdown. I won't excuse him because he's a Cato Institute adjunct scholar. Cato was heavily involved in trying to debunk the tobacco-cancer link and delayed action on that long enough to kill many more smokers.

I can excuse the crew of Inhoff's propaganda factory because they are well known for the oil industry largess they pocket. And we all know what money can do to one's morals and ethics. What I find inexcusable is false information propagated by the fourth estate.

Any newspaper that falls for Moreno's lies must have fools or idiots for fact checkers. Barring that unlikely event, I hesitate to venture a guess as to why the intelligencer printed it.

It took me a few hours but I was able to trace the source of the "Minority Report" that Williams used to justify his opinion. If I hadn't been following the "climate" story for the last two decades, if I didn't personally know or study under some world-class climatologists, if I didn't know members of the IPCC, I too, might have been fooled… until I checked the source. Alas, the climate is changing, and there is no impending ice age to rescue us. It will be up to our grandchildren to cope with the consequences, and to pass judgment on our responses.

Global climate change is a very serious issue; too serious for any newspaper to lead the public astray. We have already lost valuable time for mitigation. There has been enough misinformation on climate change that the American public has an excuse for confusion and inaction. I find it telling that the so-called "climate debate" is rare outside of America, home of the "big oil propaganda machine".

If the Intelligencer is sincere about its commitment to the truth, i.e. "the facts" it will research that Rope-A-Dope article and expose its lying source. Barring that, I think another way to be accountable is to do a major piece on the psychology surrounding energy and climate issues. This is an emerging concern, and a fertile source for some original and meaningful journalism.

In an article titled "Too Late? Why Scientists Say We Should Expect the Worst" (see link below) suggests that barring a miracle, atmospheric CO2 will exceed 450 ppm before any lowering will take place. In fact, a growing number of scientists believe that levels will reach 650 ppm before any lowering occurs.

With the prospect of global temperatures rising above 2 degrees celcius, phase change in the cryosphere (the frozen parts of the world) is assured. Aside from the potential of changing the deep ocean conveyor system (which represents a global disaster of unpredictable dimensions) catastrophic sea level rise may well be unavoidable.

This poses a challenge for us to craft a strategy that might at least educate those in the best position to impose a solution with a hope of easing this impending crisis.

What must we do?

Larry

Excerpts:

At a high-level academic conference on global warming at Exeter University this summer, climate scientist Kevin Anderson stood before his expert audience and contemplated a strange feeling. He wanted to be wrong. Many of those in the room who knew what he was about to say felt the same. His conclusions had already caused.

Anderson, an expert at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at Manchester University, was about to send the gloomiest dispatch yet from the frontline of the war against climate change.

Despite the political rhetoric, the scientific warnings, the media headlines and the corporate promises, he would say, carbon emissions were soaring way out of control - far above even the bleak scenarios considered by last year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Stern review. The battle against dangerous climate change had been lost, and the world needed to prepare for things to get very, very bad.

("Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, argues that suggestions the IPCC report is out of date is "not a valid position at all".)

"As an academic I wanted to be told that it was a very good piece of work and that the conclusions were sound," Anderson said. "But as a human being I desperately wanted someone to point out a mistake, and to tell me we had got it completely wrong."

Nobody did. The cream of the UK climate science community sat in stunned silence as Anderson pointed out that carbon emissions since 2000 have risen much faster than anyone thought possible, driven mainly by the coal-fuelled economic boom in the developing world. So much extra pollution is being pumped out, he said, that most of the climate targets debated by politicians and campaigners are fanciful at best, and "dangerously misguided" at worst.

The CO2 level is currently over 380ppm, up from 280ppm at the time of the industrial revolution, and it rises by more than 2ppm each year. The government's official position is that the world should aim to cap this rise at 450ppm.

Lost cause

Anderson is not the only expert to voice concerns that current targets are hopelessly optimistic. Many scientists, politicians and campaigners privately admit that 2C is a lost cause. Ask for projections around the dinner table after a few bottles of wine and more vote for 650ppm than 450ppm as the more likely outcome.

Bob Watson, chief scientist at the Environment Department and a former head of the IPCC, warned this year that the world needed to prepare for a 4C rise, which would wipe out hundreds of species, bring extreme food and water shortages in vulnerable countries and cause floods that would displace hundreds of millions of people. Warming would be much more severe towards the poles, which could accelerate melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets.

Watson said: "We must alert everybody that at the moment we're at the very top end of the worst case [emissions] scenario. I think we should be striving for 450 [ppm] but I think we should be prepared that 550 [ppm] is a more likely outcome." Hitting the 450ppm target, he said, would be "unbelievably difficult".

For the full article go to:
http://culturechange.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2...

GREEN BUILDERS: A Green Revolution Takes Root in the Garden State, is the next video offering by the ECLA PA, the Post Carbon Institute's voice in Bucks County. Their monthly video-discussion series will feature this NJN documentary on December 12 in Warminster. The video shows what a green building is, the advantages they offer, and the remarkable growth of this movement just across the Delaware River in New Jersey.

Thanks to a virtual cornucopia of state grants and incentives a first wave of innovative green design projects large and small have already hit the ground. NJN's Green Builders profiles a cast of green building pioneers who have taken the leap into making their part of the "built environment" a more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly place. Many of the pioneers shown in this documentary are from this area, but find more opportunities in Jersey.

Green Builders will be shown in the Astronaut's Auditorium at the historic Centrifuge Building located at 780 Falcon Circle (at the former Johnsville Naval Air Development Center). Starting time is 7 PM and the admission is free. The discussion will focus on local barriers to green building. The discussion will be lead by ECLA PA Coordinator, Larry Menkes, an advisor to a major green project that is scheduled for 2009 in nearby Ivyland. The Centrifuge Building is scheduled for a green makeover and will be the site of a new, green aerospace museum.

For information call 267.992.8020 or email soundsynergy@comcast.net
Contact: Larry Menkes 215.328.9128 or 267.992.8020 (cell)

Background:
A quiet green revolution is taking place all over the world, from the city of Masdar in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates to the Bank of America Tower at One Bryant Park in New York. When it comes to green architecture they don’t get much greener than that. The revolution in green building is important for slowing global climate change and literally insulating building owners from rising energy costs. Building green is recognized as the most fiscally responsible choice and is growing exponentially across the world.

But in Southeastern Pennsylvania, green building projects lag behind much of the United States and the world. Although it has vowed to become the greenest city in the US, Philadelphia is ranked 24th in a list of the top 50 cities for green buildings. Many of the regions best green builders are working almost exclusively in New Jersey because of a lack of incentives and local ignorance about the benefits of green buildings.

Philly has a lot of competition for the green title, especially from San Francisco, which currently ranks as number six. The U.S. West Coast has long been a leader in green buildings. California has mandated such energy efficient new construction by 2020 and three European Union countries have already adopted a higher standard known as Passive House (the Energy Performance Buildings Directive). The rest of the EU is scheduled to follow by 2009 or shortly after.

According to the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, the single greatest barrier to Green Building is a lack of political will and strong leadership at the top levels of government. Since they identify the probable cause is an educational gap, the Green Builders video discussion is a step toward bringing this essential information to area citizens and interested local leaders.

TURNING GREEN BUILDING THEORY INTO GREEN REALITY
There is no single way to build green. Green Builders takes a wide-ranging look at a variety of approaches and levels of commitment, and at the individuals who have helped turn green building theory into reality. These individuals are not just builders and designers; they’re teachers and homeowners, corporate leaders and academic specialists, leaders of institutions and universities as well as renegade inventors. From The Willow School to PNC Bank to the first solar-hydrogen home called The Hopewell Project, people talk about why they made the move to go green, what the challenges were, and how their project has fared. In most cases, one finds that a green building project has more to do with smart planning and a mindset change about energy use than expensive technologies or consumer sacrifice. Innovation helps, and there are plenty of innovations included in Green Builders that are making green technology effective and affordable. Geothermal storage, wind farms and extensive solar array systems are examined in the program. As the stories in the documentary demonstrate, it is crucial for us to change our perspective on how we build, recognizing the wasteful impacts of the traditional mode of building and operating our structures, and realizing the environmental and economic benefits of building green. Only then will the green building movement be successful.

CHANGING YOUR CARBON FOOTPRINT: Collectively Building the Foundation for a Movement

The individuals in Green Builders have made the move to building green without suffering, sacrificing, or experimenting with a wispy might-happen. These are real projects on the ground, working businesses and college campuses that prove you can change your carbon footprint once you change your way of looking at how a structure operates. Collectively, the green builders are building the foundation for a more widespread movement toward making America’s built environment less harmful to the dwindling supply of healthy natural resources and even less expensive to operate. Their homes and offices are the proving grounds for green building, and their personal experiences reveal that building greener is less complicated and expensive than you probably thought, and more rewarding in the long run.

The University of Pennsylvania and the Rockefeller Foundation marked the 50th Anniversary of their groundbreaking 1958 Conference on Urban Design Criticism by holding an international symposium on the Penn campus on November 6 - 8.

Fifty years after the first Urban Design conference at Penn, the subject was revisited on the threshold of at least two relatively unexpected events that will have a massive impact on life as we know it. Peak oil and global climate change threaten to overturn our notion of the normal, the usual, and the pace of change at the dawn of the third millennium.

Urban design after the age of oil may have to wait until urban designers get over their inability to wrap their finely tuned aesthetic minds around the Black Swans of the end of cheap oil, the possibility of global energy and resource insufficiency, and the vagaries and uncertainties of global climate change.

After two days at Penn, watching, listening, questioning and commenting in the company of a stellar cast of international speakers, precious little new information emerged to illuminate what urban design might look like after the age of (cheap) oil.

What happened to the topic after a promising opening by Professor of Urban Design, Dean Emeritus of the University of Pennsylvania's School of Design, Gary Hack, and Judith Rodin, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, is anybodies guess. Although global climate change was mentioned a bit I didn't hear nearly as much about the end of oil except for a public complaint about it's absence. That came from Trudeau Foundation Fellow, William Rees of British Columbia's SCARP in Vancouver on the last day of the conference, and was greeted by applause.

As a sustainability advocate who has spent half a decade grappling with a host of related energy issues (and over twenty years coming to grips with environmental issues at a critical threshold, approaching phase change) the enormity of the design challenge seemed to have escaped the attention of most of the otherwise talented and often brilliant presenters.

A presentation at the start of the second day of the conference, Managing Cities After the Age of Oil, promised one inescapable topic that I had looked forward to hearing. I had hoped to be able to take home nuggets of sound advice to my second-class Pennsylvania township from the top leaders in managing cities. But, with the exception of Clive Doucet, a "maverick" Councillor from Ottawa, none seemed prepared for managing a city after the age of oil. Doucet seemed well aware of the need for a plan but admitted that Ottawa was, as yet, virtually unprepared for peak oil.

I posed a simple direct question on the subject to Andrew Altman, Deputy Mayor of Economic Development for the City of Philadelphia, arguably the eighth greenest city in America. "If Philly was threatened", I asked, "by a sudden, unexpected interruption of petroleum fuel supplies that could last at least for a month, what is the plan for coping? His answer was that there was none, and his facial expression seemed to confirm that fact.

Perhaps the answers to this egregious lapse of focus lie in two areas. Emotionally, few of us are prepared to accept the inevitability, let alone the uncertainties of the hazards that could accompany peak oil and global climate change. It's likely that the stages of grief (more appropriately known as "Stages of reaction upon hearing catastrophic news") come into play and can short circuit the even the best educated and experienced designers. The second is that fewer professionals have entertained what it might be like to create designs under the potentially dystopic conditions of life after the age of oil.

Is urban design after the age of oil an oxymoron? Will humanity survive?
I think both mislead in much the same way that E. F. Schumacher says these questions mislead. What is needed, he might say, is to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

What is the work we must do? The signs and symptoms are numerous enough to say that our best hope is to begin the real conversation on life after the age of oil, and life in the age of global climate change. This is a conversation that must include other stakeholders, as articulated in the Manifesto crafted by four working groups convened at the end of the last day.

Which stakeholders should be invited into this conversation? Many come to mind, but among the first must be Daniel Lerch, author of Post Carbon Cities, Rob Hopkins, author of The Transition Handbook, and the Natural Step innovators, Dr. Karl-Henrik Robèrt, and physicist, Dr John Holmberg. Other essential participants include Sandy Wiggins, ex-president of the United States Green Building Council, Amory Lovins, Paul Hawken, Hunter Lovins, (all originally from The Rocky Mountain Institute), Steven Nadel (From the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy), Dr. Wolfgang Feist, Passive House Institute, (Cepheus Project), Harold Finigan (arguably the best informed researcher of net-zero building in the Delaware Valley), and finally, Janine M. Benyus, author of Biomimicry.

During the symposium the idea of including potential consumers of urban design came forth. It was noted that social justice required that the least heard, most impacted, and least powerful should be given a voice to articulate their needs and their reactions to our work. Only when they are invited to take their seat, as equals, at our collective table will there be the full mind and heart power required to address these crucial challenges and perhaps answer the question of urban design after the age of oil.

The Financial Times front-page headline on Tuesday, October 28th, 2008 declares, "World will struggle to meet oil demand: Output falling faster than expected", reinforcing the MIT vetted Royal Dutch Shell report (Davos, Feb. '08) that global oil demand will exceed supplies within seven years.

The FT lead article by Carola Hoyos and Javier Blas will trigger fears but could spur efforts to deal with the crisis before Shell's "Scramble" scenario becomes more of a reality. "Scramble" will certainly be bad for business and the original report hints at resource conflicts that could easily dwarf the current oil wars in the middle east.

"Output from the world’s oilfields is declining faster than previously thought, the first authoritative public study of the biggest fields shows.

Without extra investment to raise production, the natural annual rate of output decline is 9.1 per cent, the International Energy Agency says in its annual report, the World Energy Outlook, a draft of which has been obtained by the Financial Times.

The findings suggest the world will struggle to produce enough oil to make up for steep declines in existing fields, such as those in the North Sea, Russia and Alaska, and meet long-term demand. The effort will become even more acute as prices fall and investment decisions are delayed.

The IEA, the oil watchdog, forecasts that China, India and other developing countries’ demand will require investments of $360bn each year until 2030.

The agency says even with investment, the annual rate of output decline is 6.4 per cent."

The Financial Times concludes, "This is the clearest indication yet that the focus of the industry on the demand – not just the supply – side is moving away from the US, Europe and Japan, towards emerging nations."

The entire article can be read online at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e5e78778-a53f-11dd-b4f5-000077b07658.html?nclick_chec...

Note:

I recently screened The End of Suburbia again and was surprised to notice how well that documentary predicted the current economic crisis would be triggered by a crisis in housing. Comparisons to the Great Crash of 1929 and the depression are becoming more common in the media but from a Post Carbon perspective, that too, misleads.

The end of cheap oil will likely resemble a "Black Swan" event. The NYT best-seller by Nassim Christopher Taleb is beginning to emerge as the best guide to the major unprecedented events of today.

ECLA PA helping to create a green "Ambitious, fantastic" project in Ivyland and Johnsville, (Warminster) PA

Once slated for destruction, both the Centrifuge Building, the world's largest and most powerful dynamic flight simulator, at the Historic Johnsville Naval Air Warfare Development Center, and Hobensack's Mill, one of the original buildings in historic Ivyland, PA have been saved from the wrecking ball by a couple of unconventional visionary developers.

How this came to be is as fantastic as anything else in the story. It actually started many years ago.

On a sunny summer afternoon in 1971, 13 year-old Bob Cremeans sat beside the New Hope and Ivyland Railroad tracks behind Hobensack's Mill in Ivyland, Pennsylvania, waiting for locomotive repairs. Bill Hobensack, the mill owner, found him and chewed him out for being so idle. Shortly after that conversation Bob dreamed of seeing the mill restored to its former glory, decked in red, white, and blue bunting.

Thirty years later, Cremeans answered a newspaper ad placed by Italo Cosantino, current owner of the mill now called Seasons Hearth and Patio. The two formed a business relationship and the dream awoke.

A half-mile down the tracks from Ivyland, Sam Cravero was busy settling his business, Concealed Technology Services, into new office spaces at the centrifuge building. He was also remodeling unused space for prospective tenants. The building at the old Johnsville Naval Air Defense Center was a relic from WW II and the dawn of supersonic flight.

Cravero didn't realize that he also bought the world's largest and most powerful dynamic flight simulator. After a chance 2007 encounter with Cremeans, Cravero knew he had a date with the history of the American race for space.

Calling their collective vision "Freedoms Way" the two held an open house on May 16 for local and national elected leaders, and representatives from area organizations.

The sites will house a new aerospace museum, celebrating Warminster's little-known but essential contribution to the race to the moon. Ivyland will be host to a new museum of agriculture and industry, celebrating their unique contribution to the American Centennial and growth of Bucks County.

The two also recognized opportunities created by rising fuel prices and concern for the environment. They called in Larry Menkes, a relocalization coordinator for the Post Carbon Institute, and a cofounder of Warminster Township's Energy Advisory Council. Menkes assembled a "green-ribbon" pre-planning team to install efficiencies to slash operating expenses by cutting CO2 emissions.

Cravero and Cremeans plan railroad stations at both sites to allow tourists and history buffs to travel between the two by rail. They'd like to establish regular rail service between Warminster and New Hope with other historic stops along the way.

The local press fell in love with the dream. One paper called the plan 'Ambitious' and 'fantastic'. The two visionaries are calling on everyone to get aboard and find their ambitious or fantastic place in the project.

A non-profit corporation called the Ivyland Foundation for Historic and Architectural Preservation was created to oversee the museums. Interested parties may now purchase $100,000 shares to invest in and own a part of this. You can reach Bob Cremeans at 267.253.6108 and Sam Cravero at 215.444.9411.

Additionally the two museums will link up with the Moland House in nearby Hartsville, where George Washington forged the historic alliance with the Marquis de Lafayette and turned the tide against the British during the Revolutionary War. Also connected will be at least two more related aerospace buildings in nearby Warminster Community Park; Craven Hall, a key building from the founding of Warminster, two centuries ago; a new John Fitch museum, where the first American steamboat was built; and the Wings of Freedom museum at the Willow Grove Naval Air Station and Joint Reserve Base in Horsham, PA, also in the neighborhood.

The ECLA PA has been intimately involved in the sustainable planning of this project. Bill Marston, AIA, LEED II, and Dean of the ECLA Academy, was consulted on creating a pre-planning team thAt included Sandy Wiggins, outgoing chairman of the US Green Building Council, Scott Kelly the, the Philly AIA's "green guy", and a veteran of numerous local LEED projects, Harold Finigan, who restored Fort Mifflin, Chris Zelov, founder of the Knossus Project, Todd Ballantyne from the Environmental Home Store, Susan Halteman, curator of the Harold Pitcairn Wings of Freedom Museum at the NAS JRB in Willow Grove (Horsham), PA, Kent Baird, co-founder of Bucks County Sustainable Business Alliance, Don Borden, of Delaware Valley College, and others.

This unique project is another example of how a Relocalization chapter can be a key player in sustainable development in a community. The ECLA will be launching another sustainability video-discussion series at the Centrifuge beginning Friday, June 13 at 7:30 PM. (see listing in the "events pages"). The videos will be screened in the same theatre where astronauts from Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo trained for their historic missions.

One of the real benefits about being part of the Post carbon Institute is the credibility it confers when we respond to irresponsible journalism. The article in question is the lead editorial in today's The Intelligencer (wwwphillyburbs/intel.com). The following was my response. I hope they print it, though at 469 words it's a bit long. They've printed longer.

RESPONSE TO INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL SUNDAY MAY 11, 2008
New energy, new conservation will cost us a tiny fraction of the cost of not acting.

The lead editorial in the May 11, Sunday edition of the Intelligencer, "Nothing's for free: new energy, new conservation will cost us", takes issue with Governor Rendell's assertion that his $850 million Green Jobs, Energy Independence Strategy (SS HB-1) will not cost the taxpayers. This "straw man" debate ignores the real and very deadly issue of the costs of continued inaction to the economy of Pennsylvania, the nation, and the world.

The proven truth is that every dollar invested in energy conservation and renewable energy has been repeatedly shown to return $4 to $10 or more in savings and benefits to taxpayers. As a trained energy auditor I see proof of that every day. Merely eliminating inefficient use and the ubiquitous waste of energy can save taxpayers billions of dollars.

Instead of haggling over what such programs will initially cost, and what they might return a little later, we do much better to look at the cost of inaction. The best work on that was the Review completed in October 2006 by Sir Nicholas Stern, head of the (UK) Government Economic Service.

"..the Review estimates that if we don’t act, the overall costs and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least 5% of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risks and impacts is taken into account, the estimates of damage could rise to 20% of GDP or more."

The editorial implies that the Governor's claim that his proposals won't cost the taxpayer anything is "nuts". What is really insane is Pennsylvania's continued failure to take meaningful local action to address global climate change. And since Pennsylvania is the third worst CO2 emitter in the United States, and twentieth worst emitter of any political jurisdiction in the world we have a lot of catching up to do. An $850 million down payment on long overdue action is chickenfeed when compared to the alternative. The possibility of inaction costing 20% of Pennsylvania's GDP "now and forever" is the real risk and the real benchmark to watch. And it's a cost our children would pay.

And that is just the financial risk. What about the secondary costs? The report concludes: "Our actions now and over the coming decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the depression of the first half of the 20th century. And it will be difficult or impossible to reverse these changes."

Is that the legacy we want to leave our children and grandchildren? Is this how our generation wants to be remembered? To deny that this could happen is the greatest insanity of all.

Larry Menkes: Coordinator
ECLA PA (a Relocalization chapter of the Post Carbon Institute)
(215) 328-9128 home 267.992.8020 cell
Sustainability advisor to the Ivyland Foundation for Historical and Architectural Preservation
Bucks County Environmental Stewardship Council
Delaware Valley Green Building Council Residential Working Group

I've been watching the growth of public awareness of the "triple-threat" (peak oil, global climate change, and global resource depletion) in the "public mind" for more than a decade, and decades longer for the environment. I've stopped wondering when I could shift my efforts from getting people's attention to the issues to my true goal, helping the public begin to cope with the effects in their lives.

I believe that in the northeastern United States, that time has come. As I've asked (myself and others in and around the Relocalization network) before, will we be ready to shift our focus and efforts from education about the existence of peak oil and global climate change, to activities to prepare the public for worse news and help them to mitigate the effects.

Moreover, there are events on the horizon that foretell more public concern for the environment and sustainability. The beginning of spring and fall in these parts have been reliable moments, sure to bring news of ice melting at the poles. This year is no exception. Earthweek, A Diary of the Planet, and other sources lead with headlines like "Antarctic Collapse" (www.eatrhweek.com). This year's news about regeneration of winter ice in the vicinity of the North Pole was positive for total area regenerated, but negative on ice thickness. We can reasonably expect another ice-free summer in the Northwest Passage and the polar region north of Russia.

NASA Goddard Institute reported that 2007 was tied with 1998 as the second warmest year in the last century. The 14 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1990. "The greatest warming in 2007 occurred in the Arctic and neighboring high latitude regions." "The large Arctic warm anomaly of 2007 is consistent with observations of record low geographic ectent of Arctic sea ice in September, 2007." According to James Hansen, "Barring a large volcanic eruption, a record global temperature exceeding that of 2005 (the warmest year in over a century) can be expected within the next few years, at the time of the next El Nino', because of the background warming trend attributable to continuing increases in greenhouse gases." (parens, ours)

Closer to home the price of gasoline went above $5 a gallon in parts of California, locally well above $3 a gallon, with diesel well above $4 a gallon. Newspaper and other media reports of automobile commuters and truckers feeling the squeeze, and an ominous growing trend among homeowners going broke as energy costs begin to exceed mortgage payments. Requests for certification of energy efficient new homes is at an all-time high and rising. The need for assistance from owners of existing homes is not high because many don't even know that help is available for them.

Toward that end I've stepped up my acceptance of speaking engagements and setting up my Post Carbon booth at more events. I've been so busy I've had scant time to post these on this website but a layoff at the hearth shop where I work has allowed me today to focus on doing that. See the events section for the new Friday evening video series I've been trying to launch. We've secured an excellent venue in Hatboro, PA and expect at least two more dates to finalize this week.

A project I've been working on in connection with the hearth shop has morphed into the Ivyland Foundation for Historical and Architectural Preservation (IFHAP). The original site, a nearly 4.5 acre commercial tract in Ivyland, has two historical buildings still in continuous use since the founding of Ivyland a few years before 1874. The five buildings on the site are slated to be restored and/or renovated as "green" and LEED certification will be sought, although there is interest in going "net-zero".

IFHAP has caught the interest of the new owner of a building housing a centrifuge used for the testing and training of early astronauts at the Naval Air Development Center in Warminster, also known as the Johnsville base. We are developing a charrette for creating a LEED certified renovation there with an excellent group of "green" professionals. Tomorrow we will hold the fourth tour of the facility for members of the pre-planning team.

Although we came in just after renovations began on first floor office rental spaces the remaining interior office spaces there, as well as meeting rooms, the cafeteria, and other specialized rooms are already getting a treated to non-toxic VOC paint and other healthy wall, floor, and ceiling materials and furnishings. The owner is convinced that getting the facility certified will help him attract and keep tenants, and keep energy costs for his own business manageable in a time of energy uncertainty and potential insufficiency.

The "green" renovation will also enhance the opportunity to create an aerospace museum on the site using that facility and others nearby. A partnership is being established with the Harold Pitcairne Wings of Freedom Aircraft Museum of the Delaware Valley Historic Aircraft Association at the Willow Grove Naval Air Station (NAS JRB) in nearby Horsham. A large lobby and small theatre located in the building will be used for that. Our environmental and sustainability video series will probably eventually find a home there.

As you see, we've been very busy. Our Dean of the Academy, Bill Marston AIA, LEED II, is deeply involved in steering this project in the right direction and keeping us on course for more and better successes. ill, by the ay is involved with a group in Philadelphia, Green Village Philadelphia, that's bringing in Paulo Lugari, founder of Las Gaviotas in Colombia, to Philly from May 1-4, 2008. Green Village Philadelphia is one of many reasons why Philly is regarded as one of the top ten sustainable cities by several sources. You can get further information on this at: or 215-922-2345.

I'm sure there's more I could write (not being known for brevity) but I have to have my delayed lunch and get down to Hatboro to post flyers for the new video series.

recruiting allies

I'm about ten days back from a week off after Thanksgiving. I attended an intensive course on home energy auditing. My email failed on return and just got baxck up yesterday. I'm wading through almost 700 emails.

When I get closer to the light at the end, I'll make a full report. For now, all I can say is that if I thought I knew something about home energy efficiency, and I did think that, I was wrong. There is a lot to it, and I'm glad that I had an audit done to my house a few yerars back. The Resnet HERS course is very thourough and can come close to putting actual numbers to the work they advise.

ECLA PA's Coordinator comment posted on New York Times' Andrew Revkin's Dot Earth blog

Sometimes staying up past my bedtime to post an item pays off. I responded to an interesting item in Andrew Revkin's new blog, Dot Earth. I didn't expect it to get published but a flurry of replies led me back to: http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/ice-on-air/#comments. There it was, to my surprise and delight. I've reprinted it below, with a snippet of Revkin's blog.

#3.
October 30th,
2007
10:21 pm

The elephant in the living room that almost no one is talking about is that global warming may have entered a new state of disequilibrium. That could easily signal a significant, if not complete, melting in the Arctic and Greenland. This year’s ice melt was “so vast and rapid it unnerve(d) the experts” at a recent conference on the subject at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks.

The real issue seems to be that few of us are acting appropriately given the risks. The stakes could not be higher. It is quite possible that conditions in the Arctic are further proof that the warnings from eminent scientists like James Lovelock and Jim Hansen are substantially correct. It may already be too late to prevent significant sea-level rise .

If this is even possible, prudence dictates that nothing short of an all out international program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would constitute an acceptable effort to stabilize this condition.

Of course, the psychology of catastrophe is such that we’d have to fight our natural tendency to get stuck in denial, anger, bargaining, and depression for long enough to regain whatever is left of the advantage of early, appropriate action. If we are to survive it may well require us to make a substantial shift in our thinking and actions.

— Posted by Larry Menkes

The article I was responding to was the following, with another Delaware Valley connection:

October 30, 2007, 12:44 pm
Ice on Air

By Andrew C. Revkin
icebreaker in arcticThe Coast Guard icebreaker Healy in the Arctic last summer (Credit: Dave Withrow/United States Coast Guard via Associated Press

I discussed the extraordinary retreat of Arctic Ocean sea ice this year, and the implications of opening northern waterways, on Marty Moss-Coane’s Radio Times show on Monday on WHYY radio in Philadelphia.

Here’s the station’s summary of the hour: “This summer, Arctic ice in the the Northwest passage melted enough to open up this historic travel route. We discuss the environmental, economic, and political implications of this change with Andrew Revkin, who reports on the environment for The New York Times and wrote “The North Pole Was Here” and with Michael Byers, professor of international law and politics at the University of British Columbia.” An mp3 audio file of the show is online here.

Have a listen and post your thoughts.

You can also hear the amazing chugging, huffing, crunching sounds that the thick Arctic sea ice makes as floes drift and collide on our site here."

The Arctic ice cap shrank this past summer to an extent unparalleled in a century or more, reported The New York Times this morning. The poles, canaries in the mine of global warming because of their sensitivity to global temperature, have recently experienced unprecedented summer ice losses, but this year's Arctic melting dwarfs all prior events.

(see: www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/science/earth/02arct.html?th=&emc=th&pagewant...)

Andrew C. Revkin, reporting on a new study by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said, "The pace of change has far exceeded what had been estimated by almost all the simulations used to envision how the Arctic will respond to rising concentrations of greenhouse gases linked to global warming."

In each of the prior three summers scientists have stated that the Arctic sea ice melt has been much greater than their prior predictions and estimates based on weather modeling. This year's data elevates their observations into a new dimension. The data begins to take on a "hocky-stick" appearance that signals a critical threshold. This occurs where a natural system experiences a "phase change" into an entirely new state or condition. In this case it could mean the end of summer ice at the top of the world and a retreat of winter ice toward an essentially ice-free state.

The implications of this could be enormous. Not only would the fabled Northwest Passage over Canada and the Northern Sea Route over Russia open to shipping during the summer months, a boon to those dependent on low-cost sea transport, but the possibility of mineral extraction from the polar sea bed seems more affordable.

On the downside, loss of polar albedo (the reflectivity of heating rays from the sun back to space) could accelerate ice losses from land-masses like Greenland. In the unlikely event that all of Greenland's ice cover melted, global sea levels would rise by as much as 23 feet. Such a massive amount of fresh water entering the polar seas could produce disastrous effects, slowing or stopping the deep ocean conveyor, the system that transfers warmer tropical waters up the US eastern seaboard toward Greenland and western Europe that moderates their winter temperatures.

The unremitting avalanche of bad news from the cryosphere adds urgency to need to slow global warming. Changing practices attributed to human activities and eliminating the production of greenhouse gasses as rapidly as possible is the only way to do this.

Yet without some palpable assault on the lower latitudes, like a large sudden rise of sea-levels, human societies will likely continue to act as if nothing really serious is happening.

Jared Diamond, the Pulitzer Prizewinning author of "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed", documents similar reactions from other societies and cultures. Although there are several parallels in some of the reasons for failure unearthed by Diamond, the one that most closely resembles our modern predicament is quite surprising to the researchers. "Contrary to what (they) would have expected, it turns out that societies often fail even to attempt to solve a problem once it has been perceived." Some of this is attributed to selfish behavior and a clash of interests between people.

Whatever the causes, humanity seems to be on the brink of the unparalleled catastrophe predicted by Albert Einstein. His prescription was for us to substantially change the way we think. At the moment the reductionists seem to be having their way.

How this all turns out will depend on the actions or inactions of everyone who has a stake in the outcome. Unfortunately, those who have the most to loose have yet to be born and their voice, if any, must from our mouths or not come at all. At the moment, the silence is almost deafening.

Since the mid-nineteen eightees I've been an avid reader of the Tuesday New York Times because they have an interesting science section called the Science Times. I have never been moved to write a response before this, although I probably should have. But the Scitimes (as they are known online) and their correspondent, John Tierney, went over the line in an area of our mutual concern and I had to write the following reply.

On 9/13/2007 8:21 PM I wrote:

Dear Scitimes editors and John Tierney,

Bjorn Lomborg, who enjoyed the page 1 cover story in this Tuesday's NYT Science Times (A "Feel Good' vs Do Good' Response to Warming: Findings, by John Tierney.) Lomborg says that the best strategy is to make the rest of the world as rich as New York, so that people elsewhere can afford to do the things like shore up their coastlines and buy air conditioners. That's a pretty dumb thing to say for a man of his credentials, unless he has a rewarding conflict of interest.

And, if he, or John Tierney think that "preparing for the worst in future climate is expensive" they might check out the expense of not preparing for global warming. The Stern Report was very clear about the potential for expenses of as much as 20% of global GDP if we fail to prepare in a timely fashion. Yet only 1 to 5% of that GDP could probably forestall catastrophic effects if we begin now.

"For every £1 invested now we can save £5, or possibly more, by acting now." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6096084.stm)

I wonder if he realizes that, according to reliable sources like the World Watch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute, if China and India joined the New Yorkers in affluence it would take 3.5 earths to supply all the natural resources they'd need.

Moreover, it disregards the looming crisis of a rising energy demand curve that will soon intersect the waning oil resources supply curve. New York City and Mr. Lomborg require a supply of cheap oil to float their assertions. It's also the kind of news that's probably unfit to print.

Larry Menkes: Coordinator
Earth Charter Lifeboat Academy of PA
soundsynergy@comcast.net

There is mounting evidence that the "Hard Truths" about peak oil, global warming, and population is being taken ever more seriously in official circles. The July 18 Draft Report from the US National Petroleum Council, Facing Hard Truths About Energy: A comprehensive view to 2030 of global oil and natural gas, finally gives legitimacy to the concept of peak oil, while Roscoe Bartlett rightly accuses the report of pulling its punch.

Bartlett, along with Al Gore, is one of the leaders who long ago got over denial about global warming and peak oil. It didn't show much if they spent much time being angry, or with bargaining in the magical thought that we could find an easier, softer way out og our addiction to oil. And they didn't act depressed, at least in public. They found that blessed final stage of dealing with catastrophic news that is called acceptance. For it is only in that state that solutions and best-possible coping strategies can be found.

Of course, there is probably a similar clarity somewhere in the inner recesses of power and control. They have the financial and power resources to get, and then conceal, the best possible estimates of the "State of the World". I'm sure that some are saying theat the public can't handle a clear picture of where we're headimg. I'm also sure that the leaders of certain industries, the likes of which met with Vice President Cheyney not too long ago, would like to continue a disasterous policy of business as usual. There are many billions riding on the public believing the spin they impart.

After reading the National Petroleum Council's Executive Summary and the "five core strategies to assist markets in meeting the energy challenges to 2030 and beyond", several important statements stand out.

First they say, "All five strategies are essential, there is no simple, easy solution to the multiple challenges we face." And, first among them is, "Moderate growing demand for energy by increasing efficiency of transportation, residential, commercial, and industrial uses."

They document the growing disparity between global supplies and demand. They raise concerns about atmospheric carbon loading and call for carbon constraints through a system of direct regulation, cap-and-trade regulation, and carbon taxes or fees. Finally they address peak oil with a clarity and candor that has been rare in published, public reports.

Yet this report, together with the UN IPCC 4th Assessment Reports, the Stern Report, the announcement that in the near future the United Nations will likely be unable to provide food to regions where mass starvation is immenent due to rising food costs, continuing news about accelerating ice melt in world glaciers and the two poles, sea level rise uncertainties, Katrina and Rita, and other inconvenient truths about the lack of real recovery in the US Gulf coast from one season of mega-storms, the global crash of fishing industries, are among a series of dots that, when connected, describe an ominous potential for a historic global catastrophe for the human race.

There are other dots that the well-informed among us know, and they all seem to suggest a reasonably clear pattern. The one piece of news that few have noticed, the lack of an announcement of crash programs to address these and other realated issues, spell a probable trajectory that seems headed over a waterfall for some and over the cliff for the rest of us.

I would like to see a rapid "coming together" of all of our organizations to choose to focus on, and propose a few "first steps" solutions similar to those proposed in a recent Energy Bulletin. First among these is for a global crash program for energy efficiency and conservation. It is not THE solution but a fairly reasonable first step to end waste (always a noble thing to do), become fiscally responsible with energy and our money (which might provide funds fom the energy savings for next steps), and finally to buy the world some time to come to grips with the gravity of our collective situation.

Energy efficiency and conservation is a strategy of hope. It is something for all of us to do, which is far more productive than complaining or trying to convince someone else to start solving these problems. And an exponential grass roots movement can take hold and spark a rapidly building movement that leapfrogs the efforts of our feckless leaders and the world's power brokers. It is all a matter of choice, and acceptance.

One thing is certain, if we do our best will have few regrets no matter how this all turns out. And since population, especially an aging one, has been a huge part of the problem, those of us who are not actively making a difference during these historic days will become the most expendable in the eyes of those who will have to live most of their lives with the devil-may-care recklessness of those of us who've enjoyed the last days of the golden age of oil.

I recently saw A Crude Awakening, a new video on peak oil. I was deeply impressed and was surprised that it didn't come from Global Public Media. While doing some research in preparation for presenting a screening by ECLA PA this summer, I found this gem at the following url: http://www.crudeawakening.org/re-localization.htm

RELOCALIZATION

Re-localization is a concept that needs more attention. It is the process by which communities rebuild their culture, economics, and governance, to localize (produce locally) their economies and essential systems, such as food and energy production, water, money, culture, governance, media, and ownership, to assure a vibrant community, particularly in preparation for the affects of oil depletion. It means drastically lower consumption, greater local self-reliance, and more cooperative and inclusive communities.

Being dependant upon an imported resource also offers the additional challenge of competition for that resource from other communities and/or consumer groups. Should supply fall short of demand the resource generally goes to the highest bidder or the easiest distribution point. Today's urban environments function on a broad dependency of resources imported from outside the immediate urban area, meaning the residents are not only dependent upon a competitive supply system of the imported the goods and services, but that the community's economic prosperity is being exported.

A great example is the import of electricity. Considering the enormous amounts of electricity that are imported into the community from outside sources, one must consider that payment for that energy is being exported to suppliers outside the community, thereby converting those dollars to unavailable economic benefit for the local community. Assume for a moment that your urban community imports roughly $5 Billion worth of electricity per year, with that $5 Billion leaving the local economy. If that structure were somehow reversed, say the community somehow begins to generate its own power locally, that $5 billion not only stays in the community to be reused (in the form of salaries for local employees, local infrastructure, etc.) but also eliminates the export of that enormous economic activity for use elsewhere. The end result is actually a $5 Billion economic benefit to the local community versus the exported $5 Billion dollar economic loss -- a $10 Billion dollar economic impact. An excellent case study outlining this principle is located here.

in a world with increasing energy shortages a significant number of important products and services that are generally in constant demand by a community may become subject to severe supply shortages or astronomical price increases. Such products certainly include things like gasoline and electricity, but also extend to food and dairy products, clothing, bottled water, building supplies, office supplies, and so on. Re-localization means establishing local industries to produce these products upon which citizens are highly dependant.

Here are some research questions affecting re-localization that might generate some perspective:

For the purposes of this list of questions, the “Zone” refers to the CAP Metro five-county geographic area of Austin, but could apply to any urban area.

Energy

o How much energy does the zone use?

o How much in dollars does the zone currently send outside the zone to suppliers to import the energy used within the zone?

o How much land is covered by roofs (sq. ft.) and parking lots in the zone?

o How many square feet of PV panels with grid intertie would be required to deliver an equivalent amount of the energy currently consumed in the zone?

o What economic benefits can the zone gain by becoming totally energy self-sufficient?

o What economic benefits can the zone gain by becoming a net exporter of energy to the Texas grid?

o If all traffic lights and city street lighting were converted to solar energy, powered by PV Panels atop the lighting fixtures, what economic benefits would this bring to the zone in terms of energy savings and reduced electrical infrastructure vs. the cost of the PV panels and batteries?

o What economic benefit could the zone realize by establishing a solar panel manufacturing industry within the zone to supply all local PV panel requirements?

o What percentage of raw materials for PV panel manufacturing is available from local sources?

o What economic impact would occur if every resident exchanged half of their incandescent light bulbs to compact florescent bulbs which require only 1/4 of the energy for the same amount of light?

Water

o How much potable water is used in the zone for all purposes (including bottled water)?

o What is the typical annual rainfall total in the zone?

o How much square footage or harvesting area would be required to capture enough rainwater to supply all the potable water needs of the zone?

o What economic benefits can the zone gain by diverting to public water supplies the rainwater that falls on building roofs and parking lots?

o How much bottled drinking water is imported into the zone?

Food

o How much food is imported into the zone?

o What is the annual dollar value of these imports?

o Which of these foods could be produced in the local area?

o How much arable, tillable land exists within a 50 mile radius of the zone?

o What percentage of these foods could be produced using the arable, tillable land in the zone?

o What would be the dollar value of that production kept in the local economy?

o What economic benefits can the zone gain by replacing imported foods with the percentage of replacements made possible by local production?

Policy Changes

o What economic benefit (and energy consumption impacts) would the zone realize if residential customers were permitted a given amount of electricity use per month at normal rates, with rates doubled for energy used beyond that amount? For business users? For industrial users?

o What energy consumption impacts would occur if the zone had a building code requiring solar panel installations with grid intertie for all new construction, which would produce a minimum of ¼ of the typical energy usage for a structure of that type?

o What energy consumption impacts would occur if the zone had a building codes that required:
•
an increase of 20% of the “R-“ values for wall insulation, 30% for floor and ceiling insulation, and triple-paned thermal windows?
•
solar hot water heaters for all new construction?
•
geo-thermal as the approved source of HVAC for all new residential construction?
•
Mandatory minimum and maximum thermostat settings for different seasons?

o What commuting impacts would occur if the zone converted all roadways of two or more lanes in each direction to include at least one HOV lane? (I-35, Loop 360, Mopac, RR620 Hwy 280, Hwy 71, Hwy 183, etc.)

o What commuting impacts would occur if the zone created business district tolls which would be charged to all entering vehicles except those registered to an address within the district, and those that were carrying two or more occupants (to include all public transportation)?

Can you think of more re-localization impacts that could be reversed in our community to create additional economic benefit to our residents?

(c) 2006 CrudeAwakening.org

Other tools are available. One excellent resource is from Rocky Mountain Institute (www.rmi.org) and called the community energy finder. It's been redesigned and is easier to use, I'm told.

Also, their "Community Energy Workbook: A Guide to Building a Sustainable Community" is one of the classic tools. It was very useful to our Warminster Project and we virtually lifted our strategic plan from its pages.

TIPS FOR SUSTAINABLE LIVING and SAVING ENERGY $

RECYCLE: (from the song- Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, by Eco-Man)
From aluminum cans, glass, plastic bottles, newspaper, cardboard, grass, and kitchen scraps, all helps the environment.

LIGHTING: Switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs will cut your lighting bill by about 70%, and is a great way to start.

CONNECT YOUR ELECTRONICS to POWER STRIPS: Turn off strip to kill the phantom loads when you're not using device. Save $$

CONSERVATION: Is the light, appliance that you turn off when not using; the thermostat setting you drop (heat) or raise (A/C) will help a lot. Don't just let the water run. Bring your own bags to the market. Don't let the car engine idle for more than 2 min.'s, etc. A digital, programmable 7 day/4setback thermostat will help you keep the heat low when you're not at home. You can setback as much as 35 degrees.

HOME IMPROVEMENTS & NEW HOMES: Plug all air leaks. Insulate to USGBC standards. Install super efficient-windows. Build additions (or new homes) with 2x6 lumber to increase insulation by 50%. Install water saving appliances. Buy the most efficient Energy Star appliances. Build a LEED certified home. Cut utility $ up to 90%.

TRANSPORTATION: Use public transportation as much as you can. Buy a hybrid electric vehicle, get big tax break, save big $$$ on gas. Bike or walk when you can. Combine trips. Car-pool whenever possible.

PURCHASE WIND ENERGY; BECOME CARBON NEUTRAL by buying carbon offsets from companies like Native Energy. Use biofuels like ethanol and bio (or fryo) diesel and heating oil. This will tide you over until you become free of the grid.

LEARN WHAT ELSE TO DO by GETTING INVOLVED - JOIN !
Philly Beyond Oil: - www.fossilfreephilly.org
US. Climate Emergency Council - www.climateemergency.org
Post Carbon Institute SE PA: - www.relocalize.net/groups/earthcharterpa
Or call: Post Carbon Inst. Outpost in SE PA: 215.328.9128

Hybrids to be hurt by new EPA dual-standard

Submitted by xtraspatial on Wed, 2006-01-11 13:58.
The EPA will require car manufacturers to more correctly estimate the fuel economy of their cars starting with the 2008 models. The 2008 cars will see their "window sticker" estimated mpgs go down by up to 25% and probably more for highway driving with hybrids, thus making hybrids look less attractive to potential buyers. But, at the same time the CAFE standards and the methods used to determine the efficiency numbers the auto industry reports to the EPA to avoid fines (for inefficiency) will remain unchanged! Talk about a double standard. Who seems to be in bed with whom here?

NPR has an audio segment on this as well.

OM Shanti,
Jim Zack, Sustainable Saratoga Springs (NY)

Often, when presenting information about Peak Oil or Global Warming to individuals or groups, I notice that some people exhibit reactions, well known to psychologists, that followed Kubler-Ross's model that is popularly known as the Five Stages of Grief. On researching this a bit to deepen my understanding, and refresh my memory, I discovered this very interesting article.

Although I've long observed these reactions in audiences and elsewhere, reading this has lead me to notice that it often applies to ALL OF US. Although few people in the sustainability community exhibit Denial, I do notice that some go into denial about selective aspects Peak Oil, Powerdown, and Global Warming.

There is a significant amount of anger among climate and energy activists. It often expresses as a polarizing influence that divides the world into a relatively useless false dichotomy of US and Them.

I also notice a considerable amount of bargaining in the choices activists make for specific actions. For example, some prefer one proposed remedy over another, and will argue about and for the relative merits of their favorite course of action.

Although I'm not a psychologist, I seem to notice a bit of depression among some of the faithful that usually resolves (or sublimated) in "getting back to work, or "getting back into the fray". Occasionally it expresses in burnout.

Whatever the response, I'm sure that we'd all profit from a better understanding of this emotional phenomenon. I find it very useful to notice when I'm confronted by this in others, and it helps me be sympathetic to their reactions.

Occasionally, when noticing unusual reactions in my self, I seem to be able to step back more easily and remember my OWN vulnerablility as well as my humanity.

"BEWARE THE FIVE STAGES OF GRIEF"

Editorial - TLC Group, Dallas Texas

Few concepts have insinuated themselves into the popular culture as thoroughly as the so called "5 Stages of Grief": Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. We've heard it from professionals in all areas of the healthcare system (who should know better) as well as from lay persons of all ages (who shouldn't). There is even a lengthy comedy routine about it by Dustin Hoffman playing Lenny Bruce in the movie Lenny. The time has now come to ditch it as the concept has done more harm than good.
Three Common Myths about the 5 Stages:

The 5 Stages of Grief were defined by Elsabeth Kubler-Ross In her book "On Death and Dying", Macmillan Publishing Company, 1969, she presents 5 stages terminally ill persons may go through upon learning of their terminal illness. She presents them as "an attempt to summarize what we have learned from our dying patients in terms of coping mechanisms at the time of a terminal illness".

These stages were not originally the 5 stages of Grief but better: The 5 Stages of Receiving Catastrophic News.

Over the next 28 years, healthcare professionals, clergy, nurses, doctors, caregivers, students, and other readers of the book somehow mutated the stages into the 5 stages of Grief.

The 5 Stages define the process a bereaved person must go through in order to resolve their grief. Grief is a complicated, multi-dimensional, individual process that can never be generalized in 5 steps. In fact, as will be shown, a person will generally have to go through the 5 stages before true grieving can even begin.

A person who isn't progressing through the 5 stages in sequence and in a timely manner needs professional help. This common belief has caused a lot of problems and misunderstandings. One researcher has shown that some caregivers have actually gotten angry at the bereaved person for not following the stages in order! The person shouldn't be angry yet because they haven't been through Denial.

All of the above points to a basic misunderstanding about what grief is to begin with so it's not surprising that myths continue to propagate. This is most likely because the pervasiveness and impact of grief wasn't really recognized by the psychological community until around the 1980s and even then it was slow in coming.

For example, in 1974 "The Handbook of Psychiatry" defined grief as "...the normal response to the loss of a loved one by death." Response to other kinds of losses were labeled "Pathological Depressive Reactions".

In 1984, Dr. Terese Rando---a noted grief specialist, researcher and author---defined grief as "...process of psychological, social and somatic reactions to the perception of loss".

In 1991, the Grief Resource Foundation of Dallas, Texas found that, for them, a good working and practical definition of Grief as "the total response of the organism to the process of change".

Today, in December 1996, we at TLC Group have come to accept the Grief Response as the Unified Field Theory of All Mental Illness (a subject of another Tip of The Month!)

Curiously, most non-grief specialists commonly accept the definition of grief given in 1974. So what is grief and what produces it? A helpful equation, which proves itself daily in all instances is: Change=Loss=Grief.

This means that:

A change of circumstance of any kind (a change from one state to another) produces a loss of some kind (the stage changed from) which will produce a grief reaction.

The intensity of the grief reaction is a function of how the change-produced loss is perceived. If the loss is not perceived as significant, the grief reaction will be minimal or barely felt.

Significant grief responses which go unresolved can lead to mental, physical, and sociological problems and contribute to family dysfunction across generations.

So, are the 5 Stages without value? Not if they are used as originally intended, as The 5 Stages of Receiving Catastrophic News. One can even extrapolate to The 5 Stages of Coping With Trauma. Death need not be involved.

As an example, apply the 5 stages to a traumatic event most all of us have experienced: The Dead Battery! You're going to be late to work so you rush out to your car, place the key in the ignition and turn it on. You hear nothing but a grind; the battery is dead.

DENIAL --- What's the first thing you do? You try to start it again! And again. You may check to make sure the radio, heater, lights, etc. are off and then..., try again.

ANGER --- "%$@^##& car!", "I should have junked you years ago." Did you slam your hand on the steering wheel? I have. "I should just leave you out in the rain and let you rust."

BARGAINING --- (realizing that you're going to be late for work)..., "Oh please car, if you will just start one more time I promise I'll buy you a brand new battery, get a tune up, new tires, belts and hoses, and keep you in perfect working condition.

DEPRESSION --- "Oh God, what am I going to do. I'm going to be late for work. I give up. My job is at risk and I don't really care any more. What's the use".

ACCEPTANCE --- "Ok. It's dead. Guess I had better call the Auto Club or find another way to work. Time to get on with my day; I'll deal with this later."
This is not a trivial example. In fact, we all go through this process numerous times a day. A dead battery, the loss of a parking space, a wrong number, the loss of a pet, a job, a move to another city, an overdrawn bank account, etc.

Things to remember are:

Any Change Of Circumstance can cause us to go through this process.
We don't have to go through the stages in sequence. We can skip a stage or go through two or three simultaneously.

We can go through them in different time phases. The dead battery could take maybe 5 to 10 minutes, the loss of a parking space 5 to 10 seconds. A traumatic event which involves the Criminal Justice System can take years.
The intensity and duration of the reaction depends on how significant the change-produced loss is perceived.

It was mentioned above that Grieving only begins where the 5 Stages of "Grief" leave off. Grief professionals often use the concept of "Grief Work" to help the bereaved through grief resolution.

One common definition of Grief Work is summarized by the acronym TEAR:

T = To accept the reality of the loss
E = Experience the pain of the loss
A = Adjust to the new environment without the lost object
R = Reinvest in the new reality

This is Grief Work. It begins when the honeymoon period is over, the friends have stopped calling, everyone thinks you should be over it, the court case is resolved, "closure" has been effected, and everything is supposed to be back to normal. It's at this point that real grieving begins.

Notice that the first step of Grief Work is ACCEPTANCE, the last stage of the 5 Stages of Grief. Let's throw out the 5 stages of grief and replace it with a greater understanding of Grief Recognition and Resolution.

(TLC Group grants anyone the right to use this information without compensation so long as the copy is not used for profit or as training materials in a profit making activity such as workshops, lectures, and seminars, and so long as this paragraph is retained in its entirety.)

This article can be found at the MSN Real Estate web site.: http://realestate.msn.com/buying/Articlenewhome.aspx?cp-documentid=74252...

Could rising gas prices kill the suburbs?

When a high-cost commute reaches the point of no-return, home buyers will start finding houses closer to work. In fact, some already are.

By Marilyn Lewis

10 cities hurt worst by rising gas prices
Great, cheap places you'd want to live
On Money: Gas-saving devices mostly scams
Rising fuel costs are being blamed for everything from soaring utility costs to lower retail sales and higher airline tickets. And now, experts say high gas prices could reshape U.S. cities.

"Most analysts believe that crude oil prices in the $50s and $60s will be with us for some time," says Stuart Gabriel, director of the Lusk Center, a think tank at the University of Southern California devoted to studying real estate forces and trends. There's even talk of crude hitting $100 per barrel -- or 10 times what it sold for in the summer of 2005.

Once the realization soaks into the American consciousness that high-cost gas is here to stay, Gabriel predicts, those high commute prices will pull more homeowners -- even young families -- to live in central cities and create a push for more public transportation.

City of the future: here, soon

Gabriel already sees change in car-centric Los Angeles, where the commuter culture has for years pushed mile upon mile of city sprawl into neighboring towns and farmland. But now Gabriel says KB Home is leading the way to a new type of neighborhood.

Once thought of as a first-home builder, KB in June launched KB Urban to develop high-density, mixed-use projects. The first such project will be a 2-million-square-foot complex of luxury hotels and private residences built in partnership with hotelier Marriott International and sports-and-entertainment company AEG, owner of L.A.'s Staples Center. This kind of development, Gabriel believes, will help make L.A. a denser, European-type central city. It is celebrated in a 2004 film called "The End of Suburbia."

"If you or I come back to Los Angeles 15 years from now, we are not going to see (the current) persistent pattern of building single-family detached homes farther and farther into the desert," Gabriel says. Instead, he says, expect "a denser center city, denser inner-ring suburbs … a city that is more vertical."

High gas prices added incentive to in-fill

In truth, the trend toward city living began before the oil-price run up, Gabriel says. But high gas prices are reinforcing the changes already begun by homebuyers reacting to congested freeways, long commute hours and the desire for a different kind of life.

In San Jose, Calif., builders have clustered attractive condominium developments at and around light-rail stations as the system was built and expanded. An example of transit-oriented development, planners have expected for some time that high commute costs would create a market for such homes.

Walter Molony, spokesman for the National Association of Realtors, says that the gas-price spike is still too new to have generated much in the way of hard data. But if one informal Web survey is correct, commuter wariness looks like it could soon shape home-sales trends. At HomePages.com, 45% of 2,000 readers polled during one week in May agreed that gas prices were "very important" to them in choosing a home. Among the most-important factors in a home location, a short commute was second only to a safe neighborhood.

Gas prices shape the hunt for homes

How important have rising gas prices been in how you think about where you want to live?

Very important 45%
Somewhat important 25%
Not very important 11%
Not important at all 6%
No change 13%

Which factors are most important to you when choosing where to live? (Check all that apply)

Safe neighborhood 74%
Short commute to work 40%
Close to good schools 39%
Close to parks, water or other recreation 24%

Source: May 2006 Web site survey at HouseValues.com consumer sites, including HomePages.com and JustListed.com.

When market research experts from Kelton Research performed a similar survey in 2005, only 8% of the people who responded rated a short commute as important, says Hugh Siler, of HouseValues.com, which owns the HomePages site.

A shorter commute

Matt Loose, 28, and Dana Loose, 29, chose their first home -- in the close-in Denver suburb of Centennial -- with an eye to keeping their commutes as short as possible while fulfilling their dreams of owning a brand-new home. They recently closed the sale of their $250,000, three-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath home in a KB Home development called Village at Centennial.

"The main driving force behind our move was the convenience of the commute, as opposed to moving to a location that is farther outside of the metro area," said Matt. The new home is near a park-and-ride lot and a soon-to-be-built light-rail line, which will give him a 30-minute commute to his job as a civil engineer in nearby Englewood. Dana, a meeting and hospitality specialist, will be able to get to her job at a downtown Denver law firm in about 30 minutes.

While they won't be able to walk to work, many of their contemporaries are driving 45 minutes to an hour, to new subdivisions being built on farmland. "We really liked the surrounding neighborhood," Matt says of Centennial, "and we liked the fact that it wasn’t way, way out in the middle of nowhere."

The economics of suburbia

Economist Jack Lessinger points out that suburbia not only depends on autos for commuting to and from jobs, but that everything in the suburbs -- from stores to schools to restaurants -- requires increasingly expensive trips in cars. Lessinger is the author of "Penturbia: Where Real Estate Will Boom After the Crash of Suburbia."

"Suburbia is full of far-flung destinations," says Lessinger. "It was oriented as a place where they could sell more goods and services, with shopping centers and subdivisions everywhere. It really maximizes the use of cars. It makes sense that, with high gas prices, the more-distant places are going to be hit the most." Like Gabriel, Lessinger predicts that the shape of communities to come will be circular and concentrated, and dictated by the need to conserve, where "the suburban plan is here, there and everywhere."

Young families may have previously been lured out of cities in search of big back yards for the kids, but driving their flight to suburbia were escalating house prices in cities and the relative affordability of new subdivisions at the edge of towns.

Trading miles for mortgage dollars

But with the cost of gas hovering around $3 per gallon on average in the U.S., it's worth considering whether a shorter commute would pay for the incremental cost of a more expensive in-city home.

Assuming a full-time job, $3 gas, 26 mpg and 50 cents a mile for maintenance and no parking fees, a 50-mile roundtrip commute costs $646.15 a month, or $7,753.80 a year, according to the City of Bellevue, Wash.'s, Commute Cost Calculator.

Moving closer to work boosts your house-buying power. Everything else being equal, a 10-mile, roundtrip commute costs just $1,550.76 yearly -- saving about $6,200 per year, or $517 monthly. That can add about $80,000 to the total amount of a mortgage loan, says one Chicago lender. The rule of thumb: Each $250 a month you can free up for mortgage payments equals roughly $40,000 more you can borrow at current rates (using the recent national average of 6.5%), says David Kasprisin, district sales manager for National City Mortgage Co. in Chicago.

Of course, if you're driving to work in a city, you're likely to pay up for parking. But even factoring in $200 per month for those fees, you'd still save $3,800 a year with the shorter commute -- good for at least another $40,000 on your mortgage. And chances are city living would make public transportation a viable option. Taking the bus -- in Bellevue, at least -- cuts the cost of the commute to between $600 and $1,000 per year, depending on whether you need a one- or two-zone bus ticket. This puts your savings back up around $558-$590 per month.

Kasprisin says it's not hard to make the argument to his underwriters that a low-commute applicant should get a bigger loan: He says, "Look, these people live near public transportation, you can take that into account. We're pretty flexible and look at the entire person's picture for getting their loan approved. We're not just looking at debt-to-income ratios; we're looking at a whole mixture."

Additionally, Gabriel predicts that "in-fill" developments eventually will make city living even more affordable. The key is building homes closer together -- say, 20 units on a site, rather than five, he says. Such homes are smaller than suburban homes, but closer to work and priced right.

Not there yet

As Matt and Dana Loose's house-hunting shows, not everyone with an eye to shortening their commute today can eschew the suburbs altogether. The Looses would have liked to have purchased even deeper into the city, if they could have found an affordable new home there.

So despite rising gas prices and the interest in urban in-fill, most big developers are still focused on the traditional bread-and-butter suburban projects.

"While we have increased the amount of attached homes in recent years to accommodate buyers who chose to live closer to urban centers, we continue see a large percentage of buyers who are willing to trade a bit of a drive in order to have the home of their dreams," says Sierra Wilson, KB Home spokeswoman.

The trick for consumers, then, is still finding that sweet spot between a shorter commute and affordability. For many, that means the suburbs are still in the running.

As Matt Loose says of his new neighborhood, "It's the suburbs, but it's not way out in the boonies."

Published on Friday, August 11, 2006
by the San Francisco Chronicle

Greenland's Ice Cap is Melting at a Frighteningly Fast Rate

by David Perlman

The vast ice cap that covers Greenland nearly three miles thick is melting faster than ever before on record, and the pace is speeding year by year, according to global climate watchers gathering data from twin satellites that probe the effects of warming on the huge northern island.

Greenland's ice cap is melting at a frighteningly fast rate.
Chunks of ice regularly fall into the sea in Greenland, where ice is melting at a rate three times faster than it was only five years ago. The consequence is already evident in a small but ominous rise in sea levels around the world, a pace that is also accelerating, the scientists say.

According to the scientists' data, Greenland's ice is melting at a rate three times faster than it was only five years ago. The estimate of the melting trend that has been observed for nearly a decade comes from a University of Texas team monitoring a satellite mission that measures changes in the Earth's gravity over the entire Greenland ice cap as the ice melts and the water flows down into the Arctic ocean.

"We have only been watching the ice cap melt during a relatively short period," physicist Jianli Chen said Thursday, "but we are seeing the strongest evidence of it yet, and in the near future the pace of melting will accelerate even more."

The same satellites tracking Greenland's ice cap also are monitoring the melt rate of Antarctica's ice cover, and there too the melting is adding to the global rise in sea level, according to another team of scientists.

Next to Antarctica, Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, is the largest reservoir of fresh water on Earth and holds about 10 percent of the world's supply. The increasing flow of fresh water -- most of it from glaciers melting on Greenland's eastern coast -- is already beginning to change the composition of the ocean's salt water currents flowing past Northwestern Europe, the scientists say.

The result could be a critical change in the composition of the main ocean current that flows past Europe's northern edge, blocking off warmer waters that normally flow there and -- ironically -- making Northern Europe's weather colder than normal, at least temporarily, while the rest of the globe continues warming.

The report on Greenland is being published today in the on-line edition of the journal Science by the University of Texas scientists at Austin, including Chen, aerospace engineer Byron Tapley and geologist Clark Wilson.

According to the researchers, surface melting of Greenland's ice cap reached 57 cubic miles a year between April of 2002 and November of 2005, compared to about 19 cubic miles a year between 1997 and 2003.

"The sobering thing is to see that the whole process of glacial melting is stepping up much more rapidly than before," said Tapley in a statement.

If the Greenland ice cap ever melted completely -- a highly unlikely event, at least in the foreseeable future -- the scientists estimate it would raise world's sea level by an average of 6.5 meters, or about 21 feet, more than enough to drown all the world's low-lying islands and even some entire nations, like Holland.

The possibility of future sea level rises becomes even more evident when Antarctica's huge ice sheets are considered.

Only last March two University of Colorado physicists used the same satellite system to measure melting of ice on the Antarctic continent. Although earlier evidence using other techniques appeared to show that the East Antarctica ice sheet was actually thickening, satellite data gathered by Isabella Velicogna and John Wahr at Boulder found that melting -- primarily from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet -- had turned at least 36 cubic miles of ice to fresh water each year from 2002 to 2005.

A recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- known as the IPCC -- estimated that during all of the past century worldwide melting ice from global warming had raised sea levels by only two-tenths of a millimeter a year, or about 20 inches for the entire century.

But, according to Chen and his Texas team, the melting of Greenland's ice cap is already raising global sea levels by six-tenths of a millimeter each year, and the Colorado group estimates that melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet alone is adding up to four-tenths of a millimeter of fresh water to sea levels each year. In other words, the global sea level, due to melting of the ice in Greenland and Antarctica combined, is already rising 10 times faster than the IPPC's tentative estimates, the two analyses indicate.

Both the Texas and Colorado groups have been obtaining their data from two satellites known as GRACE, the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, which fly in orbit 137 miles apart and determine with extraordinary accuracy just how the mass of even small regions of the Earth change as ice melts and flows away from the land to the sea.

The GRACE satellite mission is due to end next year, but the Texas team is awaiting NASA approval for a new and improved satellite system to continue the work, using laser beams rather than microwaves to measure ice cap melting, Chen said.

In a recent summary of the ice cap melting problem and its effect on sea levels reported by Richard Kerr in Science, geoscientist Michael Oppenheimer of Princeton said, "The time scale for future loss of most of an ice sheet may not be millennia," as glacier models have suggested, "but centuries."

©2006 San Francisco Chronicle

Environmental frames, metaphors, elevator pitches

Submitted by slgalt on Tue, 2005-03-22 00:46.
Ready Frames & Tips
Here is some wording from the contest at Grist for
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2005/1/25/105939/300

* Conservation is about health. We are our environment: the air we breathe, the water we drink. The health of our bodies, spirits, economies, and communities depends on a healthy environment.
* Do you love breathing air and drinking water? Mountains, oceans, cities, streams? Want kids to grow up healthy, happy, and peaceful? That's environmentalism. It's about everyone and everything you love.
* Environmentalism is waking up every day breathing clean air, drinking safe water, eating healthy food, having a real vote, and knowing that your grandkids -- and theirs -- will too.
* Think of the Earth as a great bank whose funds are natural beauty and resources. Environmentalists are certified financial advisors. They give free advice about maintaining and increasing our wealth.
* Environmentalism is about creating the world I want my grandkids to live in.

By Simon Retallack from Open Democracy
Wednesday 17 May 2006

A new way of framing the climate change issue that makes sense in people's daily lives is needed in order to translate passive awareness into active concern, says Simon Retallack.

More newsprint, broadcast time and web space is being devoted to the issue of climate change than ever before, so it would not be a surprise if journalists were to pat themselves on the back for their efforts. Far from it. On 18-21 May 2006 at a country retreat in northern Germany, journalists and writers from Britain, Germany and the United States will be meeting to discuss where they are going wrong and how they can do better.

Writers taking part in the "Ankelohe Conversations" on the twin problems of climate change and the oil endgame will be asking themselves why - despite all the coverage they are now giving these issues - the public is doing so little to take action.

to see full article go to: http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/051906EA.shtml

"We are being taught...to assume as closely as possible the viewpoint, the patience, and the competence of God." — R. Buckminster Fuller

Someone recently criticized Amory Lovins by calling him a "techno-cornucopian". I liked that phrase but I had to think about it for a while to see if I could agree. I've met Lovins, studied his work, heard his presentation, and confess that I like him.

I've had a lot of success over the years working with Rocky Mountain Institute. Lovins' video presentation on Natural Capitalism has proved to be an excellent sequel to End of Suburbia in symposiums and panel discussions that I've arranged. He's well respected in the Delaware Valley and I was taken aback by the criticism.

My reaction reminded me that when studying the work of R. Buckminster Fuller I was equally disconcerted by Bucky's conviction that humanity is affected more by technology than a philosophy. (I don't recall this well but if you can cite the exact quote please contact me.) The example that I think he used was indoor plumbing but it might have been sewer systems. Having had some experience living with the outdoor type, I thought I understood his point.

At the time I was also studying art, culture, and psychology. The great social and intellectual movements afoot in the sixties and seventies seemed to be shaping modern thinking, action, and history. And I was leaning toward the notion that some form of communalism or socialism (perhaps the kind advocated by Jack London) was the key to a higher form of social organization.

What I found instead was this. According to J. Baldwin, "As it became clear to Bucky that political systems were incapable of reforming people in order to bring about a good life to everyone, he announced a "design science revolution".

"Virtually no other designers were thinking that way at the time, and few are today. The environmental movement has focused attention on ecologically beneficial (or at least benign) design, but biology-based ecological designers tend to be suspicious of technology."

"Bucky did not claim to be a scientist, but he asserted that science-base, well-designed technology holds our only chance for survival. With it, we can "reform the environment [ he meant the built environment] instead of people".

"Comprehensive anticipatory design science demands maximum overall efficiency with the least cost to society and ecology." To Fuller, maximum overall efficiency was expressed by his concept of comprehensive ephemeralization. In other words, ever doing more and more with less and less.

Given that planet Earth is an open energy system it seems that some, if not many, of the effects of peak oil and other fossil fuel energy shortfalls will potentially be a short-term disruptor of human activity.

What strikes me most is that in the long run, peak oil could be the best thing that could happen to the environment. In the logical move to renewable energy, some of the great sources of pollution will be removed from the waters, land, and atmosphere. It could also become the best thing to happen to humanity. We will be called upon to develop and use our best post-patriarchal values such as cooperation, decentralization, non-violence, power with, egalitarianism, respect for diversity, intuition, and love.

Of course, there are some caveats. Will political systems contain their reactivity to energy supply issues? Will human systems contain their tendency to over-reproduce? Can we ignore multi-cultural prophesies and popular notions about end-times? And foremost is the question of whether or not we've already passed a critical threshold (tipping point) and triggered a runaway greenhouse effect?

It's hard to be patient and harder to become competent. Yet, the survival of humanity, and life on Earth as we would recognize it, may depend on developing both qualities.

I think that Einstein would agree. He said, that "since the splitting of the atom everything has changed except our way of thinking. And thus mankind drifts toward catastrophe. If humanity is to survive it shall require substantially a new way of thinking."

In a non-material universe we need more than lifeboats. We need "substantially new way of thinking" to provide better navigation. Nothing would be more tragic and ironic than a huge fleet of lifeboats continuing the drift toward the abyss. I believe that relocalization is representative of that new way of thinking. I believe relocalization could effect a course change and redirect humanity's drift toward safer waters.

I think Fuller would also agree. "Nobody has done anything wrong", he said. "We had to have almost overwhelming experience with failures to learn that we could become successful."

"But from now on I think that we must all assume that Malthus was wrong and thus it is normal for man to be a physical and economic success - that it is abnormal for any to be a failure - that man's preoccupation must be with his exquisite antientropic functioning in universe at-large and at-small - that by producing machines and tools that will produce more with less than was ever produced before, man must continually demonstrate the mastery of the physical by the metaphysical faculties with which he is endowed." And I would say, Amen.

The Trib ran an extraordinary four-part series on a topic that was supposed to be impossible to research and print. It's 'well' worth checking out.

When Tribune correspondent Paul Salopek asked the industry if he could track crude flows from across the globe to a single gas station, the answer was unequivocal: It simply can’t be done.

An industry spokeswoman reinforced that notion by referring Salopek to a Web site debunking popular legends. Snopes.com declared: “[B]y the time crude oil gets from the ground into our gasoline tanks, there’s no telling exactly where it came from.”

As it turns out, that’s not always true.