Last month, I flew to Queensland, Australia, to address a planning conference, there to speak about the topics of our times: urban design (Vancouver-style), post-Motordom cities and, of course, sustainability.
Which created a bit of a dilemma.
The distance between Vancouver and Brisbane is about 12,000 km, if you’re a crow. If you’re an Air New Zealand jet, it’s more. And more than that, it’s a lot of carbon. To be exact: 302 tonnes – for a single passenger, return.
Now, I could have purchased the 21st century equivalent of indulgences for the partial remission of my carbon sins. And Air New Zealand would happily make the arrangements – for $162.90. No doubt some good work would occur; perhaps some Auckland elementary school would get energy-efficient lightbulbs. But I decided to take another course.
I doubled the amount and offered it to some planner at the Queensland PIA conference – if they came up with a good idea for some incremental change that would make a difference, some small gesture of sustainability. It could be for a project aleady underway; it could cover the expenses of a meeting; it could go for a grant, a gift or a good idea.
And I got some: planting of local endemic trees on degraded riparian corridors; building a public notification sign that, instead of proposing a new development, invites community members to propose their own ideas; promoting the abolition of all car-parking space controls in planning schemes.
But the winner was Kim Campbell, the Deputy Chief Executive Officer of Croydon Shire Council.
Croydon, population 322, is an ex-gold mining town in Queensland’s remote gulf savanna region. Car dependency for even small trips is high in part because of the climate with late dry season temperatures often reaching 40 degrees. Consultation on the shire’s community plan identified the continued preservation and presentation of the town’s built heritage places and public spaces as a high priority despite the shire’s limited sources of revenue.
My project is to encourage pedestrian movement between the town’s civic heritage precinct and the town centre through using tree planting (est. 8–10) for improved way finding. By providing what will become a shaded path, locals and visitors will hopefully be more inclined to move around and more fully explore the town and its wonderful heritage places on foot.
Covers all the bases, doesn’t it? A small action that improves the quality of life and retail economy, respects heritage and even removes a bit of carbon from the atmosphere. So Kim got my cheque.
What I didn’t quite expect was this:
For the record: I’m not an Urban Planner (or a professor), but I did get my ‘graduate education’ from 15 years on city council. And that’s why I’m so pleased to see that what Kim has done goes way beyond the planting of some trees:
I took the opportunity to present our mayor, Cr Trevor Pickering, with your cheque and brief Council on the background to your initiative which led to a healthy discussion on carbon credits.
(Here’s also an image) of Ergon Energy’s barbaric tree pruning under powerlines. The tree provided shade over
picnic tables in a public park well frequented by travellers, including tour groups. We then took the decision to completely remove the tree as it couldn’t have survived. The irony of winning the award then losing mature shade trees in parks to overly aggressive pruning five days later wasn’t lost on me and may be the subject of a paper in Queensland Planner.
At the conference dinner I received an offer of assistance from RPS consultants to provide us with landscape architect advice – so the idea is snowballing. Interestingly, when I got back to Croydon following the conference, the temperature went over 40 degrees for the next 5 days – scorching. It was during that time that Ergon carried out their ‘pruning’.
A small investment with political impact – and perhaps some resonating results.
I’ll be keeping in touch with Kim, hope to get some shots of the planting, and someday hope to get to Croydon to see how my trees are doing.
In fact, I was so pleased with the results that I decided to up the ante on the next stage of my tour to New Zealand, and give some money in lieu of offsets to some Kiwis. Results of that to come in a subsequent post.
Finally, a challenge: if you’re flying long distances and have considered carbon offsets, go that extra step if the opportunity allows, and challenge others to come up with some small idea that you’d be prepared to finance.
Nice story.
My fine eye also noticed further carbon savings by the non-use of a 6′ x 3 ‘ novelty cheque for the pic. 😉
My first (morning-dulled) thought upon seeing the photograph was “boy, Gord’s let himself go. And changed his face? Oh.”
Nice initiative and selection of a community; the pruning of trees by utilities is bad enough in Metro Vancouver, but a tragedy when facing 40 degree celsius weather…
http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/1yorkshirelad/vancouver.re-boot/Vancouver.re-boot.html
There is every good reason, economic, enviro, quality-of-life to apply this incremental concept throughout all of Metro . . .
But . . . .
“I’m not an Urban Planner (or a professor), but I did get my ‘graduate education’ from 15 years on city council.”
Not enough Gord!
Not nearly enough Gord!
Judging by your obsessing with AGW, the chorus blinding you to other scenarios, your inability to see other scenarios, indeed your hostility to other scenarios, your antediluvian gloating over a carbon count, your obsession with shiny trinkets . . . not nearly enough Gord . . . not nearly enough!
PS Your chorus, Gord, is far far too unified. There are other valid ways.
Be wary of pant sniffers and people wanting to use your good name!
Great story Gordon, and what a creative way to make the environment a better place.
Very innovative with a direct impact!
Roger, you didn’t link to your own website in that last post. Come on, you’re slipping. If you’re going to shamelessly whore yourself out on every blog I’ve seen you at, at least be consistent.
I don’t think that “302 tonnes – for a single passenger, return” can be right. This would require over 40 tonnes of kerosene per passenger each way. The plane would never get off the ground.
Wikipedia says that long haul air travel generates 114 g / km. Assuming a 14,000km trip each way, that is 3,192kg or 3.2 tonnes. Carbon is about 23% of the weight of CO2 so that would be about 734 kg of carbon which would be approximately 900kg of kerosene or 450kg each way. That seems to make more sense.
Math got away from me there. More like: Carbon is about 27% of the weight of CO2 so that would be about 861 kg of carbon which would be approximately 991kg of kerosene or 495kg each way.
Thanqxz for the correction yvrlutyens.
If Gord had any integrity, if he really believes C0² is the problem, he not would indulge these vanity junkets.
Talk, talk, talk . . . that’s all he’s good for . . .
So far as I am concerned he and his minion-brown-noses have lost all cred . . . their single minded rudeness and hostility does not scare me . . .
Don I do not shameless ly whore</I. my web site. The link I provide shows an alternative city to mindlessly accepting the status quo hoping will will accept expensive gadgetry that just exacerbates the problems
Raising taxes for new gadgetry is not the answer as evidently Richmond is exploring.
Please save your acrimonious commentary for those who just follow the herd and make no attempt to explore real alternatives.
Name calling exposed your weakness: Gord’s silent collusion substantiates my criticism of him.
Good heaven’s what a lack lustre bunch.
“. . . shamelessly whore yourself out on every blog . . .”
What a sad, sad commentary on the content of Pricetags
Is there no room to seek another way because obviously the CO² mantra isn’t working: look at Gord’s itinerary.
Is that what real people do?
The content of this blog? No, it is the content of your posts Roger. Your tired, old, self-congratulating, condescending, repetitive posts.
Rodger, whats up? I have historically been able to just ignore you but you have recently become so rude I find myself having to respond. People react much better if you keep your insults to a bare minimum.
Rico Name spell please. I have asked you before . . .
And none of the silly hyperbole.
I am not being rude.
I am logically trying to explain alternatives to the gospel according to Gordon Price!
Why the hell do you keep spending so much time around here on this blog if you hate the author and the topics to no end. Enough already, Jesus man, enough already!
Rodger dodger, perhaps you should reread your posts over the last few days. Apart from a link to one newspaper article that states Global warming is not happening as fast as current climate models predict the rest of your posts are pretty much name calling, hardly the height of logical arguement. Try constructive discussion (I realize that you don’t have much to work with in your odd crusade against talking about Global Warming but…), you may be surprised by the response to politely phrased critisism.
Gord. You’re awesome. Can you ban the grumpy old man from your blog?
See Gordon aren’t you ashamed of the quality of your acolytes: no intellectual rebuttals, no exchange of alternative ideas just invective . . . a united front of more of the same . . .
. . . such is your ilk . . .
I find it odd you continue to insult the owner of this blog (and everyone else) yet expect respect in return?
I think the most appropriate ‘indulgence’ for long-haul air travel emissions is to donate to groups trying to reduce short and medium distance flights by improving passenger rail and bus service and opposing spending on airport expansion. My fave is based in the UK – http://www.planestupid.com/
I think we need Canadian versions – of both the cheeky activist and policy wonk variety
How do you get to New Zealand?
G’day from Downunder. Is there a Canadian expression that equates to our “mad as a cut snake”? I’m interested as I wonder how you would describe Roger Kemble. The man clearly has a problem.
I am sure we have such a saying but it is eluding me for now. Not sure what is up with Roger, he has a long history on our local blogs and until recently has been somewhat polite even if some of his positions were a bit bizarre. It certainly seems that something has made Roger go a little off the deep end (he has also been very rude on several other blogs lately).
Oh and BTW Gord, if you still attribute Sandy to AGW how come its snowing there now?
And since you are well protected by your phalanx of Hoplites maybe its time to sic them onto someone more gullible.
Oh and remind rico to tell us his real name or we may thinq he’s guilty of something . . . or “a little off the deep end” or “a little rude” or something.
Good nite!
snow today = weather
30-year average of weather = temperature.
These are common scientific terms and things you should be aware of Roger. It’s part of the reason why nobody here takes you seriously. You are being rude. The technical term for this type of behaviour is trolling. This is a workable community of people who contribute, disagree, debate and discuss. We’re hardly followers. Yet you appear to be behaving purposefully disruptive, which is why people have reacted the way they have.
Not that it is relevant because I could lie but Rico is my real name and if you are interested in convincing anyone about your belief that global warming is not happening you probably should come out with stronger arguements than questioning why it is snowing in New York today (and it is going to be -10 in Burns Lake tommorrow….so what). What is important are long term trends (most scientists and science organizations agree that average temperatures have risen over the last century, most also agree that the frequency of extreme events like Sandy have increased as well). Whether or not the temperature rises 0.5 degrees or 2 degrees it will have an impact on peoples well being and we should try and understand the likely consequences (don’t buy property that is right at sea level, insurance companies may not be a good investment, big changes in the arctic etc.). Now take a deep breath and try to have a civil discussion or at least go to the doctor to have your meds adjusted.
rico is a Spanish word meaning rich, as in wealthy.
In common English usage a proper name graces its first letter with a capital.
“Not that it is relevant because I could lie but Rico is my real name . . .” is condescending used to hide your lack of confidence: i.e. to obfuscate.
Rico can be a real name in common English usage. rico, sans capitol, in common English usage is a pseudonym.
Usage is relevant!
As for the original controversy regarding the cause of Sandy, it is not AGW or CO². There is ample evidence available on line by real scientists to the contrary if you would take the trouble to up-date to the present.
If you and your cohort wishes to cling to old myths so be it. I cannot help: indeed, you are past help!
In conclusion your lack of self-respect is evident in your frequent, uncalled for, and vapid use of such phrases as “ Now take a deep breath and try to have a civil discussion or at least go to the doctor to have your meds adjusted.” you are not only wrong you are impertinent!
I suggest sir, it is you who should do the deep breathing for your own sake . . .
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Gee Rodger thanks for all info about MY name, don’t think I have ever had a lecture about how to use my name before (you missed itsuse in Northern Italy though). You should also note I did not say Sandy was caused by global warming (although it could have been), individual weather events are difficult to link to global warming, what is commonly accepted is that the frequency of extreme weather like Sandy increases with global warming. If you have information that says otherwise you should link to it or summarize since obviously most people on this blog have not seen credible evidence that global warming is not real and I don’t think anyone is taking your word for it.
The earth warms! The earth cools! Has done for eons.
Now little man if you have nothing to say don’t say it.
Go pee on your corn flakes . . . QED.
The earth warms! The earth cools! and when the climate changes people are affected, don’t you think it is in our best interest to understand what is happening and how it will likely affect us? Not to mention if we expect negative consequences try and prevent those consequences? Now I guess by your lack of discussion about global warming means you have no credible information to share?