County Sustainability Group

"Drive-Thru Truths"

Toban Black — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:50:55 -0700

Critics of drive-thrus don't have "any proof"; in fact, they don't "make sense"
Fast foods -- and drive-thru access to those fast foods -- are "vital" "for the disabled, seniors, and parents with small children"; access to these fast foods is not just a matter of convenience; "many people need drive-thrus"
All of "the disabled, seniors, and parents with small children" have cars -- as well as money for insurance and gas; and all of "the disabled, seniors, and parents with small children" don't have disabilities (e.g. blindness) which prevent car-driving; so all of these people have the option of using drive-thrus
Drive-thrus are the only way that we can improve accessibility for all of "the disabled, seniors, and parents with small children" -- even for disabled people whose mobility is not impaired in any way
Cars only make people safer; no one is ever endangered by car driving
It's fine to encourage people to eat and drink while they drive after leaving a drive-thru
The health of drive-thru window employees is not important; it's OK that they inhale fumes from nearby exhaust pipes throughout their shifts
It doesn't matter that all of the employees and customers in establishments with drive-thru windows are exposed to the exhaust fumes that come in through these windows
Drive-thrus are not an environmental problem in any way whatsoever; in fact, drive-thrus are an environmental asset
People don't travel to businesses by bicycle, by bus, or by foot; every customer who doesn't use a drive-thru either will leave their car in a parking lot, or they will leave it idling outside of the building; so without drive-thrus that is what's bound to happen
Tailpipe emissions are the only environmental issue that is relevant here; environmental consequences (e.g. ongoing oil spills) associated with extracting, refining, and shipping the oil used to make gasoline are a separate matter; and the materials (e.g. rubber) needed to manufacture and maintain vehicles (e.g. their tires) are not relevant either; so the extraction, transport, processing, and disposal of these materials also has nothing to do with drive-thrus; and the ecological implications of industrial manufacturing of vehicles and vehicle parts is unrelated as well
Concerns about how oil profits often end up in the hands of authoritarian regimes (e.g. in Saudi Arabia) are irrelevant
Drive-thrus don't encourage additional car driving, so "banning drive-thrus won't reduce the number of overall car trips"; drive-thrus thus have nothing to do with ongoing automobile collisions, or with other problems (e.g. increased obesity) associated with car driving
Eat-in establishments are of no value; "quick service restaurants" are ideal; it's not important that we sit together as a community rather than eating and drinking more privately (e.g. inside vehicles); it doesn't matter that there are fewer jobs and less tips in "quick service restaurants" with drive-thrus
It doesn't matter that younger people who can't drive cars on their own have less access to drive-thrus, and to establishments that are more accessible by car; poorer people who can't afford their own cars ; poorer people who can't afford their own cars -- and everyone else who can't drive on their own -- also don't deserve any consideration
"The public" supports drive-thrus; "the public" does not have any concerns about drive-thrus
Each name on the petition is actually from a separate person who has "read the facts"; there are no duplicate names on the petition, and no fake names were added to it
There is grassroots activism in the "Drive-Thru Truths" campaign -- as the protest signs show
"The experts" dismiss concerns about drive-thrus and tailpipe emissions; "the experts" all agree on this
Tim Hortons and the Ontario Restaurant Hotel & Motel Association -- the people behind these messages -- just want to help us all, while contributing to environmental causes; profit-making strategies have nothing to do with their stance on these issues; unlike "special interest groups," Tim Horton's and the Ontario Restaurant Hotel & Motel Association are concerned about the general interests -- of "the people," whose voices and whose empowerment are considered to be very important

Those are the messages that you'll find at drivethru truth .ca, a pro- drive-thru propaganda site. (Their banner image is at the top of this post; their actual banner is a little larger, however.)
The above points are about what is said on that site, and about what is not said on that site.

There are additional problems with drive-thrus that I could mention, but I'm just responding to the lobbying on and around that particular drivethru truth web site. In other words, this post is just a response to a particular set of industry lobbyists (and without trying to come up with every possible point that could be raised against them).

Some of their propaganda also has been spread through pamphlets (which I've seen on Tim Hortons counter-tops), through mainstream media advertising, and through t-shirts worn at a public event the other day.

Here are a couple of photos of the t-shirts:

(Click to enlarge)

The mob wearing those shirts all seem to have been Tim Hortons employees. (In part, I say that because of how they collectively reacted to what was said during the forum on Tuesday.)

They might have been paid to come out to the forum wearing those shirts; or other pressures or incentives might have driven them there.
I'm not sure why exactly they were there, but I am certain that they didn't have to pay for the shirts; and I'm sure that they didn't have to create the t-shirt design and then produce the actual t-shirts.

The "Drive-Thru Truths" campaign is a 'top'-'down' form of lobbying. Executives, managers, and marketers have been leading the way.

---

As for the lobbyists' pamphlets, here's text from one that I picked up from a Tim Hortons counter -

"Banning Drive-thrus in London?

It's a bad idea all around.

Fact: A drive-thru ban would hurt the less mobile.

Drive-thrus are a vital access point for the disabled, seniors, and parents with small children.

Fact: ZERO Environmental Benefit.

Crowded parking lots create the same or more emissions"

Basically that pamphlet text is a condensed version of messages at drivethru truth .ca (which the pamphlet refers readers to).

On the pamphlet a hand is holding up a sign that says "4 KIDS IN A VAN. BLIZZARD. DRIVE-THRUS HELP."
How ridiculous is it to bring up that situation? Generally speaking, why would someone drive to a fast food outlet in that weather? -- when there actually are blizzards (which do happen now and then around here). A parent who does that would be endangering their children; yet, the lobbyists are encouraging that behaviour.

On the pamphlet there also are two other hand-held signs--the "DON'T BAN DRIVE-THRUS" sign, and the one about using a walker (which also are on the drivethru truth site).

How many people with walkers also drive cars though?

Messages like that are an insult to the intelligence of humanity.

---

Here's a web site which was set up in response to drivethrutruth.ca:
http://drivethrulies.wordpress.com

(Those campaigners don't have the help or resources needed to make a more eye-catching and easy to navigate site. That's 'democracy' for you.)

---

On a barely related note, here's a blog post (elsewhere) about Tim Hortons here in London, Ontario -
"You’ve (do not) always got time for Tim Hortons - lady previously sacked for giving away a timbit"

I'm only posting that here because I expect that, like me, others will enjoy reading this because they are frustrated with the industry propaganda (which Tim Hortons has had a huge hand in).

The case described in that blog post also symbolizes a lot of other issues I've been alluding to--issues which come down to sheer inhumanity (e.g. in exposing employees to car exhaust fumes).

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Chatham-Kent Oil Age Planning Group (CKOAP Group)

Forum on drive-thrus in London, Ontario

Toban Black — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:15:55 -0700

On Tuesday night there was a forum (at a local hall) about drive-thrus in London, Ontario.

A mob was there wearing blue t-shirts associated with this pro- drive-thru lobbying web site. (In the next post I'm going to write about that web site and those blue-shirted people; that post will show up above this one).

The local campaigners challenging drive-thrus have been taking pioneering steps, so industry lobbyists have tried to stamp out the campaign. (This aggressive lobbying has come from Tim Hortons and the Ontario Restaurant Hotel & Motel Association, in particular.) London thus has been made into a sort of flashpoint--within the province of Ontario at least. (I don't know how contested drive-thrus are elsewhere.)

Several local environmentalists went out to the event to speak. One of them was there on behalf of Post-Carbon London, which I'm part of as well. Others (like the gentleman in the photo, who is from a neighbourhood association) also came out to raise different concerns about drive-thrus.

---

Before the event the Council of Canadians sent out this announcement:
http://londonontario.indymedia.org/?q=node/582

They also distributed these posters:
http://www.relocalize.net/files/drivethru-idling.pdf
http://www.relocalize.net/files/drivethru-oil.pdf

---

Here's some mainstream coverage of the event -

Videos -
http://www.achannel.ca/london/news_59453.aspx
http://torontosun.feedroom.com/linking/index.jsp?skin=oneclip&ehv=http://sunvideo.canoe.ca&fr_story=45ac70340aebefd48700a4d1eb6a6d557ec94cfd&rf=ev&hl=true'%20width=402%20height=338%20scrolling='no'%20frameborder=0%20marginwidth=0%20marginheight=0

Photos:
http://www.lfpress.ca/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?x=galleries&s=gallery&p=2546&pg=6

Written journalism -
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2008/07/16/6170906-sun.html
http://www.londontopic.ca/article.php?artid=10054

A blog post -- and the comments on it -
http://frommybottomstep.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/drive-thru-debate-turned-circus/#comments
(I think that the author's responses to my comments show that they are intent on misrepresenting the event. For instance, this person dismisses the idea that the blue shirted people were "causing a scene"--despite how their propaganda shirts were an obvious "scene," and despite how they would respond to happenings en masse--usually by clapping.)

---

Update -
Here's the PowerPoint presentation that Cory Morningstar -- the head of the local chapter of the Council of Canadians -- prepared for the Tuesday forum on drive-thrus:
http://www.relocalize.net/files/Drive-thru%20Presentation%20CoC%20-%20Ju...

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Chatham-Kent Oil Age Planning Group (CKOAP Group)

The G8 summit and global warming

Toban Black — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:58:51 -0700

Robert Weissman on the G8 agreement on global warming -

"Dragged down most of all by the anti-leadership of the United States, the G8 announced a commitment to a 50 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050. Well, a sort-of commitment.

The best science says the world needs at least an 80 percent reduction from 1990 emissions levels by 2050, and very likely more, so the G8 commitment is totally inadequate on its face.

But the G8 position is even more lame than it first appears. A statement from an environmental coalition including Friends of the Earth International explained the key flaws. 'First, the G8 formula is a global cut,' not imposing particular responsibility on the rich, high carbon-polluting countries. Second, 'the cut has no clear baseline. It was revealing that in announcing it, Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda initially said it was from 1990 levels, then had to take back that statement and subsequently mentioned a 2000 baseline.' Third, the statement is not binding, and 'indeed, the G8 announcement reinforces the G8 as a site for climate action that rivals the UN process [for climate change negotiations] and effectively subverts it.'"

---

Additional reporting from Les Whittington -

"It appears intended to paper over the stark divide between Bush, whose country did not sign the Kyoto treaty, and European countries that favour strong climate change action, the [environmental] groups said."

"Antonio Hill, spokesperson for Oxfam International, said, 'At this rate, by 2050 the world will be cooked and the G8 leaders will be long forgotten. Rather than a breakthrough, the G8’s announcement on 2050 is another stalling tactic that does nothing to lower the risk faced by millions of poor people right now,' Hill said."

" 'While the statement may appear as a movement forward, we are concerned that it may, in effect, be a regression from what is required to make a meaningful contribution to meeting the challenges of climate change,' South African Environment Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk said in a statement.

'To be meaningful and credible, a long-term goal must have a base year. It must be underpinned by ambitious mid-term targets and actions,' he said."

---

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Sustainable Burlington

Is The World About To Be Running On Empty?

Toban Black — Sun, 25 May 2008 08:23:55 -0700

Sustainable Burlington

Rising oil prices

Toban Black — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:11:35 -0700

Andy Rowell - "Oil Price 'May Hit $200 A Barrel'"

"Do you remember the days when oil was only $100? Although there has been speculation in recent days concerning the oil price, one of the most authoritative predictions so far has the price of crude oil at $200 within as little as six months.

The prediction by Goldman Sachs was made as benchmark US light crude passed the $123 mark for the first time. Surging demand was increasingly likely to create a “super-spike” past $200 in six months-to-two years’ time, said Goldman Sachs.

Oil prices have now risen by 25% in the last four months and 400% since 2001. Soaring global demand for oil is being led by China’s continuing economic boom and, to a lesser extent, by India’s rapid economic expansion.

Both are now increasingly competing with the US, the European Union and Japan for the lion’s share of global oil production."

---

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Sustainable Burlington

Gas prices

Toban Black — Tue, 06 May 2008 06:52:23 -0700

A YouTube video

"My response to an email circulating to '300 million people!' about boycotting major gas companies -

I'd just like to take a moment and comment on the flaw of this plan."...

---

In this video Cassandra stresses how driving less is a way to save money while doing good at the same time.

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog)

Sustainable Burlington

Home-grown food

Toban Black — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:37:51 -0700

Sharon Astyk on what we can gain from home-grown food -

"- Better Food - Fresher, better tasting, straight off the plant food money literally cannot buy!

- Better Health - More nutrition in just picked vegetables, grown without chemicals, while getting the kind of exercise many of us pay the gym for! Safety from industrial food contamination and toxic imports.

- Food Security - Food in your pots as prices get higher, supplies that can’t be disrupted by energy shortages, greater regional self-sufficiency. Millions of new gardeners can make sure that Americans don’t have to wait for distant food supplies to be trucked in - weeks after they are needed. Every gardener makes your region more secure.

- Higher Quality of Life - A more beautiful environment, stronger community, a better environment.

- More Money in your Pocket, More Time for What Matters - If you don’t need as much money for food, or to work as many hours to pay the grocery bills, you can use that money or take that time for what you really care about.

- The Chance to Serve Others and Create a More Just Society - Your [home garden] can be a strike against hunger and poverty - you can have food to donate, and the ability to teach others to fish (ok, garden), and thus, eat for a lifetime.

- Reduce Corporate Power and Improve Democracy - We cannot simultaneously deplore the power corporations have in our society and depend on them to supply our most basic necessities. If we stop giving our hard earned money to the corporations who undermine our democracy, they will be less powerful!

-Protect Against Climate Change - Humus rich soils, full of organic matter can sequester tons of carbon, quite literally - and grow the best vegetables. We reduce our carbon emissions when we don’t have to drive to the store or buy fossil fuel grown food.

- Reduce our Energy Dependence - Fossil fuels are used in agriculture, both industrial and industrial organic at every step, from the fertilizer in the ground to the refrigerated truck to plastic bag they come in. We can eliminated fossil fuels from almost every step when we grow our own.

- Create Peace - We’re at war for oil right now. If we can cut back on our need for the stuff, we don’t have to kill or die for it.

- Hope for the Future - In a changing world, the ability to grow food, to share and enjoy it, and to live in a healthy world full of beautiful gardens may be the best legacy we can our children and grandchildren."

------

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Sustainable Burlington

Oil depletion and other energy & carbon -related crises -- as well as associated interests

Toban Black — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:39:20 -0800

"I used to worry for my grandchildren. Now there is a fairly high probability that I will experience the more severe effects of climate change at first hand."
- Jeremy

------

Matt Price (of Environmental Defence) and Allan Adam (of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation) address issues surrounding the Albertan tar sands in an Ottawa Citizen op ed (February 21st)

Terrance Berg at DeSmogBlog - "Report: Alberta [Tar] Sands Most Destructive Project on Earth" (February 18th) -
Yet "approvals have already been given that will double the size of existing operations"

Joseph Romm on a Chinese liquid coal plant (February 21st) -
"Nothing is worse for the climate than large scale coal-to-liquids. Not even the tar sands."

A coal industry advertisement (in a February blog post)

Mark Trevelyan in Reuters - "Cheap, renewable energy years away: Shell" (February 21st) [via Sharon Astyk] -
"The world faces a doubling of energy demand by 2050 but renewable sources are still too expensive and will take decades to make a big impact, Royal Dutch Shell CEO Jeroen van der Veer said"

Andy Rowell - "[Tar] Sands Firms See Record Year" -
"The Canadian oil industry is poised for record year with 2008 profits rising 18 per cent to nearly $23 billion"

Ross Gelbspan and Kevin Grandia at DeSmogBlog on ExxonMobil profits from oil sales in 2007

Joseph Romm on corporate greenwashing--and "Beyond Petroleum" greenwashing, in particular (February 23rd)

Andy Rowell on how the company that dubbed itself Beyond Petroleum has invested in the Albertan tar sands (February 8th)

Richard Littlemore at DeSmogBlog - "Environment Canada's Muzzle Mandate Available for Viewing" (February 25th) -
"We now have a copy (attached) of the new Media Relations Protocol with which Environment Canada is muzzling its scientists."

Kevin Krolicki in Reuters - "GM [Vice Chairman] Stands by Calling Global Warming a 'Total Crock of Shit'" (February 23rd)

Tom Krisher in the Associated Press - "GM urges automakers to oppose greenhouse-gas limits" (February 9th) -
"General Motors Corp. CEO Rick Wagoner [has] urged a group of auto dealers ... to lobby against individual states trying to set their own limits on greenhouse-gas emissions.

Rachel Oliver for CNN - "Shipping's impact on the air" (January 20th) -
Shipping "emissions could be double the amount everyone previously believed."

A blog post about temperature measurement trends and global warming

Simon on a book with images that show impacts that global warming has had and might have on Spain -
The images show "how tourist paradises sinks down in the sea, how huge wildfires destroy the forests and how severe droughts turns everything to a desert.

Terrance Berg at DeSmogBlog - "First Nations to Alberta Government: Enough Already!" (February 25th) -
"A coalition of First Nations aboriginal groups in Northern Alberta has called for a freeze on all new [tar] sands development"

Simon Lewis in The Guardian - "Climate Change Is Killing Us. It’s Time for a Body Count" (February 26th) -
"Why are we relying on a single, limited, out-of-date study for our information on the numbers of people killed by climate change?"

Michael T. Klare at TomDispatch - "Something Had to Give: How Oil Burst the American Bubble" (February 1st) -
"Oil, in fact, has played a critical, if little commented upon, role in America’s current economic enfeeblement — and it will continue to drain the economy of wealth and vigor for years to come."

------

We're in trouble.
Please do what you can--with others--to get us out of this mess!

If not you? Then who? If not now? When?

Please don't assume that others will sort all of this out.
That isn't happening.
Attention to these issues has been very superficial and watered down (as in talk about simple "things you can do," for instance--talk that implies that the ecological problems around us aren't very serious.) Again and again as I've tried to raise energy & carbon issues (such as global warming) through Post-Carbon London I've found that few people out there are very concerned or interested in these crises.

There's much to be done--and very, very soon. Please pitch in.

Battles are underway on many fronts--and, on the whole, they aren't going well. If you've been on the sidelines, please step into the fray.

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Sustainable Burlington

"If you care about climate change forget about ‘saving the planet’"

Toban Black — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:34:35 -0800

George M. on why we shouldn't ask others to "save the planet" -

"One psychological response to climate change is to find language and images that create distance - to suggest that it will affect someone else in the future. So the talk and images are of ‘climate’ not ‘weather’, polar bears not hedgehogs, African children not our own.

‘The Planet’ is about as distant as one can get - I am not being called on to save my family, my community, my country, my world or even my Earth. It is The Planet - a lump of cold rock seen from space. I’ll be honest - I don’t give a damn about ‘The Planet’ - it means nothing to me."

------

George raises other noteworthy points in the rest of his blog post, which is worth reading.

------

A related issue (which I've raised here--albeit without editing my comment carefully enough) -

People often imply that global warming will only harm arctic wildlife--and particularly polar bears.
That view is conveyed by these protestors, for instance:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/isisdc/sets/72157602622773240/
http://www.indiescribe.com/2008/02/greenpeace-prot.html
http://www.desmogblog.com/this-oil-sands-campaign-could-show-up-anywhere-in-alberta

How many people will commit to dramatically restructuring their lives and our society in order to save polar bears (and penguins and seals--not to mention less familiar arctic wildlife)?
Very few of us will do so -- and the blog post exerpt above indicates why this is the case. Although it's downright tragic that we are wiping out polar bears and other animals in the arctic, most people are not apt to care much about these distant creatures.

As usual, a radical message--in this case, about how we need to dramatically reshape our way of life in response to global warming--has been watered down.

The phrase "climate change" likewise is a less threatening alternative to talk about "global warming" (or, to be more precise, "global warming and related climate changes.") And neither of these terms are as dramatic as Joseph Romm's phrase "hell and high water," which hasn't caught on (yet). People aren't about to flock to this more frightening way of framing global warming, and George's post--the one quoted above--sheds light on this as well.

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

Unsafe at Any Price ...

Toban Black — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:51:53 -0800

Sustainable Burlington

www.countysustainability.ca

donchism — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:01:24 -0800

Start: 2008-02-16 11:56

County Sustainability Group

Versatile bicycle parts

Toban Black — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:16:31 -0800

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98rXCoEk6vE
http://www.bikeforest.com/?p=77
http://www.blogto.com/arts/2007/12/vidto_pedal_power_vs_toronto_police/
http://www.ecofriend.org/images/bicytaxi.jpg

Bike machines can be semi-motorized, they can be enclosed (rather than leaving riders exposed to the wind and what not), and they can be collaboratively peddled; we have a lot of options.

------

Update -
Related blog posts -
"The Twike"
"Velomobiles"

------

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

Different means and approaches

Toban Black — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:01:17 -0800

Kurt Cobb on services, assumptions, and oil depletion -

"Unfortunately, most people, especially those in North America, equate their cars with transportation. They may also equate air-conditioners with a cool environment in summer. And, they may unconsciously think of grocery store shelves as the point of origin for their food. To simply tell them that all of this is coming to an end because it is unsustainable seems to imply that every service they depend on for mobility, comfort and nutrition will abruptly disappear. People either won't believe it or they'll say that the situation as described seems hopeless.

But neither the need for these services nor the means to provide them will disappear. Rather the mode in which they are offered and the cleverness and amount of effort needed to get them will change. The challenge then is to get people to think not about such notions as electric cars, but rather about how to get the mobility they want, say, through public transportation, passenger rail, cycling and even walking. They need to be led to contemplate how they can keep their homes and offices and themselves cool in ways other than turning on their air-conditioners. They need to be encouraged to think about alternatives to getting the food they need such as farmers' markets, local farms, and home or community gardens. In short, they need to participate in the response. All of this seems plainly obvious. The point then is this: It is only half a discussion to talk about the things we'll have to give up after peak oil and not about the ways in which we'll obtain the services those things represent."

------

Toban Black
(http://tobanblack.net/blog/)

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

China’s Not Alone in Environmental Crisis

Toban Black — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:37:54 -0800

Sustainable Burlington

Franchises

Toban Black — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:29:12 -0800

Franchises take away and obstruct localization, and Wal-Mart is at the forefront of this franchising and the anti-localization that it entails. The documentary Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price addresses these issues (among others). So does the book Big-Box Swindle, which I recommend (even though I found the author's emphasis on buying from more local and more independent businesses to be insufficient to say the least; feeble strategies like that won't do).

Wal-Mart is also closely tied to the energy demands of 'developing' countries like China. Here's a recent article that addresses how Chinese natural material demands are tied to the First 'World': "China’s Not Alone in Environmental Crisis" (Unfortunately, the author doesn't take oil and gas depletion into account, but I'm sure you can see how the article relates to energy reserve issues.)

Of course, vast quantities of carbon energy are also burned up as products and materials are transported around the world...
for now--while supplies last.

Correction - This post is about franchises and chains rather than just franchises

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

... So far the Bali deal is worse than Kyoto

Toban Black — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:48:08 -0800

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

Luz: Girl of the Knowing

Toban Black — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 06:01:19 -0800

Part of Luz: Girl of the Knowing - Episode 4 by Claudia Dávila ("Fran") (in Toronto)

Claudia's work is important because she's grappling with oil & gas depletion in a fresh way -- a way that may reach people who haven't connected with other presentations (e.g. The End of Suburbia, e.g. Kunstler's blog, etc).

Of course, the comic is only one approach to the future that might come and how we might respond to it. We can't know what will happen, and there are several strategies and visions out there. Claudia's take is a relatively positive one, I think. She sure isn't advocating a Mad Max or Night of the Living Dead last-one-standing and/or bunker-building vision. So the comic doesn't only put peak oil and gas issues on the table in a new way; it's also a constructive approach.

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

Social and environmental problems and opportunities

Toban Black — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:35:09 -0800

A version of a speech given at the December 8th International Demonstration on Climate Change in London. This version is much longer and slightly edited. I’ve also added web links, as well as reading and viewing recommendations.

———-

Hello everyone,
My name is Toban, and I’m part of Post-Carbon London, a group that I’ll be telling you about. I’m also a graduate student. I research and write about environmental problems—-specifically the social causes of these. I’m speaking to you now to try to offer you some insight. I’ll begin by discussing the energy issues Post-Carbon London addresses.

Energy Issues

When we use fossil fuels—-in cars, in power plants, and elsewhere—-we contribute to global warming and other climate changes. Global warming is, to say the least, a great threat. We are creating more violent storms (like Hurricane Katrina). There are many tragedies and catastrophes on the horizon if we can’t stop global warming.

Post-Carbon London challenges fossil fuel dependency, which is behind global warming. We concentrate on carbon energy dependency in London in particular. We do this in response to global warming as well as a closely related problem:
Post-Carbon London also highlights how more affordable and relatively accessible supplies of oil and gas are rapidly being used up. I’m sure you know that there aren’t endless supplies of oil and gas in the ground. What few people realize, though, is that we have been exhausting the more readily available and inexpensive supplies of these fuels.

This is why Middle Eastern oil imports are more and more important, and this is why so much of Canadian supplies are sent to the United States. Americans had burned through more than half of their oil by the 1970s. Since then United States oil outputs have been dropping. Now U.S. companies and the U.S. federal government are leading an international scramble to claim what’s left of worldwide oil supplies. Of course, the largest reserves of this oil are in and around the Persian Gulf. As fossil fuels outside this area in and around the Gulf are being used up more rapidly, the Middle East is being made more and more internationally significant. I mention these international trends to explain fossil fuel depletion, but Post-Carbon London focuses on the London area—specifically on local fossil fuel dependency, so usually we don’t address particular sources of oil.

Natural gas sources, on the other hand, are much more of a local issue-—because it’s far more difficult to transport these fuels. So nearby gas supplies are crucial. This means that regional supplies (from around southern Ontario, in our case) are required for local natural gas heating and electricity. Most likely very little of the natural gas in and around the Persian Gulf will be brought here. And I’m sorry to say that it looks like we shouldn’t expect the natural gas supplies around London to hold out for long—much as we can’t count on international oil supplies.

What I’m saying is that oil and gas supplies will rapidly dry up—more and more-—as the cost of these fuels will skyrocket. This problem is often referred to as “peak oil” (a phrase that doesn’t take natural gas into account). What I’m telling you about “peak oil” and gas isn’t just a theory. As I’ve said, “peak oil” already happened at a national level in the United States during the 1970s, when U.S. oil outputs began to fall (which is why sociopolitical developments at the time in the Middle East had such an impact on North American oil prices—-because so much U.S. oil had been used up, so there was demand for the Middle Eastern oil that was not available.)

So what consequences are likely given diminishing supplies of oil and gas fossil fuels?
Since most people don’t think much about how we use oil and gas, I’ll say more about this. Natural gas is often used to heat homes and other buildings; it’s also an important source of the electricity that is used to power factory machinery and other equipment. And we make fertilizers with natural gas. Without oil we generally can’t run cars, airplanes, ocean freighters, and other vehicles—-some of which are used to ship goods to stores like Wal-Mart and Loblaws. Farm equipment and other oil-fuelled machines also won't be usable. And plastics, as well as many other products that we take for granted, are made with fossil fuel chemicals.

Basically, society as we know it cannot function without fossil fuels. Yet we’re rapidly burning through oil and gas supplies anyway. As we do this we are bringing global warming down on our heads. We are driving ourselves towards outright social breakdown—partly because we won’t be able to fuel our society. Given how our economy is set up, reduced access to oil and gas will mean recession, if not depression, if not eventual economic collapse as currencies become worthless. No one knows the future, but it’s clear that—-right now—-we’re headed for a rocky one.

Alternative and unconventional sources of energy, alone, are far from enough to allow us to escape this future. These energy sources are either too expensive (as with solar panels) or they don’t offer enough energy (as in the case of ethanol; the same is true of the Albertan tar sands, which a lot of energy must be put into—-along with dwindling water supplies—-before energy can be taken out.)

Coal is an option, but it’s one that is environmentally devastating. (So-called 'clean coal' technologies may prove to be ineffective, and they are not being developed and used to any significant extent.)

There’s also nuclear energy, which is very controversial. Post-Carbon London rejects nuclear power, and for good reasons. One grounds for not depending on it—and this is one that you probably don’t know—is that uranium supplies are limited. As with fossil fuels, if we continue to use uranium, it will be made increasingly less affordable and available.

Limited materials also are needed to produce and maintain renewable energy technologies (such as wind turbines).

As for energy efficiency improvements, these have lagged well beyond rising energy demands. There's no reason to believe that this will change if demands continue to rise. Even if we can level off our energy demands, there are only so many energy efficiency improvements that we can find and create.

Beyond Energy Issues

Ultimately, all energy demands must be drastically cut back to tackle oil and gas depletion as well as global warming. These are only two of many broader environmental problems, however. I now will discuss others (by stepping outside of Post-Carbon London for a moment). We are running out of fresh water supplies; species are dieing off more quickly than most of you would ever believe; pollution is pretty much everywhere, including our bodies; we are destroying top soil, which we need to grow food; somehow we also are killing off bees, which pollinate plants. This list is a taste of the devastation that we are spreading across the planet. We may well see mass starvation—-even in Canada—-if we aren’t able to change our course. It’s not pretty, but we are headed toward social breakdown.

This is an upsetting prospect, but it comes with opportunities. Even without ecological problems we should want to change our society. Otherwise, we’ll continue to live in a world where automobile fatalities are a leading form of violent death; people often are lost in TV and computer screens; advertising is difficult to avoid; obesity and body image obsessions are common; and females are regularly made into sex objects. These are merely examples,
and conditions are far worse further from home, where there is war, shanty towns, famine, and sweatshop labour—among other appalling conditions.
We can do so much better. Why settle for these social conditions?

One way or another, our society has to change. We’ll either accomplish this voluntarily—by bringing our society back into balance with nature—or it will fall apart (due to a lack of fuel; or because of the various other problems we are creating).
Humanity may not survive.
If we choose to make our society environmentally sound before it crumbles before our eyes, we can achieve so much more at the same time. We can work toward equality, peace, and genuine democracy. In short, we can form vibrant, healthy community relationships.

In fact, if we don't accomplish this, we'll fail to confront the environmental crises around and ahead of us.

A quotation will help me to explain how these goals are connected to confronting the environmental problems that we are creating. Maurice Strong has said that “the environment isn’t just an issue, something to be fixed while everything else remains the same.”

You see everything in this world either is from nature or it is nature. Food, clothing, electricity, and electronics are all extracted from nature. An ecologically sound society must have environmentally-friendly education, professions, medicine, community, and culture. Ultimately, an entire society must be brought into balance with nature. If it is to survive—let alone flourish—our ecologically unsound society must be changed from the ground up. These changes must involve greater attention to the future, while transcending self-interests as well as prevailing currents that drive people to place money and profit before all else—-
to give a few examples of what must change.

Sweeping changes like these cannot be accomplished by them—-the politicians, the corporate executives, the bureaucrats, and other distant figures at international climate negotiations, and elsewhere. They are only human, and they have vested interests in society as we know it. If they challenge the status quo too much, their careers will not last. There are rewards for conformity (-- usually).
Besides, only so much can be achieved through policies and through tinkering with product manufacturing (by, for instance, changing the materials that are used to make toilet paper and other products).

They can’t fix environmental problems on their own, and neither can you. Alone, you can’t accomplish much. Isolated consumption, isolated recycling, and isolated voting won’t amount to much.
If you must focus on those approaches, at least find ways to draw others into what you’re doing. Make proactive change contagious…
because what matters is us—-what we do about how our whole society is set up. Although it’s important to be the change that you want to see in the world, there won’t be a great deal of constructive change if we don’t work together.

Here are some examples of ways that we might constructively remake our society; we could:
• Dramatically improve bus and train transportation
• Arrange for more communal forms of housing
• Eliminate fossil fuel and automobile subsidies
• Subsidize greener products (such as bicycles and mopeds)
• Set up smaller shops and workplaces closer to home
• Establish many more community composting and community gardens
• Set aside far more bicycle trail space

To bring about changes like these anytime soon we’ll have to act together, and we’ll have to find ways to make it attractive and relatively easy for people to join us.
It can be done.

But this proactive change won’t happen if people continue to be so disengaged from public life. We are being led toward disasters, and society will continue on this course if we don’t intervene. There is a need for far more active participation in managing our collective affairs. In other words, there is a need for genuine democracy.

Don’t let the mind-numbing normality all around us fool you…
We are on the brink of major changes. The direction of these changes will depend on what we do next…
and on what we don’t do.

I like to think that Post-Carbon London can contribute to the changes that I’ve started to describe here, but re-making society from the ground up will require much more than attention to fossil fuel dependency, energy demands, and carbon emissions. These and other ecological problems are issues to rally around, but to do that we will have to see well beyond environmental degradation.
To avoid many related calamities that lie ahead, and to pursue numerous interconnected opportunities for constructive change, we must see beyond the narrow constraints that are being imposed on our thoughts and actions.

The long-term vitality of our communities is at stake.

———-

I recommend that you read the speech that Cory Morningstar—the president of the local chapter of the Council of Canadians—read at the December 8th demonstration. The writing that I've posted above addresses many of the issues that Cory also covered in her speech. The two pieces fit together well.

———-

Viewing recommendations

• Crude Impact
• Escape From Suburbia
• The End of Suburbia

———-

Reading recommendations

Constructive social change
• International Forum on Globalization - Alternatives to Economic Globalization: A Better World Is Possible (specifically the chapters about “Alternative Operating Systems”)
• Julian Darley, David Room, and Celine Rich - Relocalize Now!: Getting Ready for Climate Change and the End of Cheap Oil

Oil and gas depletion
• Richard Heinberg – The Party’s Over
• Richard Heinberg – PowerDown
• Julian Darley – High Noon for Natural Gas

Global warming
• Joseph Romm - Hell and High Water
• Ross Gelbspan - Boiling Point

Related problems and opportunities
• Heather Menzies – No Time

Carp Ridge Ecowellness Centre (CREWC)

Brief History of CSG

donchism — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:33:49 -0700

CSG History and events to September 07
On February 1/07, a meeting of individuals, know to have concerns about social heading, was called. Discussions led to the general agreement that continuing organization should be formed, and the agreed name was County Sustainability Group (CSG). In subsequent meetings we have decided to have 10 key members including a chair and co chair for decision makers (equivalent to directors), and also general membership.

Our first public event was an afternoon reading session and discussion at a local bookstore, Books On The Bay.

Lending Library: Members have made a list of books for lending among CSG membership.
See: http://www.countygreen.ca/csg.html

Peak Oil Speaker: On June ‘07 we invited the public to Bloomfield hall to hear Richard Embleton explain the global and local implications of peak oil. A lively discussion followed. http://oilbeseeingyou.blogspot.com/

County Local Currency:
CSG member formed a LETS (Local Exchange Trading System), as part of our localization strategy. An easy to use software package makes it easy to set up. See: http://www.community-exchange.org/

Invitation to local County Council: In July ‘07, CSG sent an initiation to local council members to attend one of our meetings in order to explain the purpose of our organization, and to ask how CSG can help then move sustainability issues forward in our county. This led to some fruitful exchanges and ideas.

<<<<^^^^>>>>