Cash for Clunkers from a Sustainable Point of View

With the US governments biggest hit so far securely in the books, how did we come out? As far as aiding the automobile industry we did well, we boosted our failing industry up for a few more months. Companies such as Ford and General Motors have been working hard for the past couple years to create more fuel-efficient vehicles for Americans to drive. While it may seem that they are spending millions more in marketing than anyone else, at least we can say our tax-payer monies are going to a few good TV commercials. Back on topic though, the $3 billion federal program was introduced to reduce the amount of out of date vehicles on American roadways. In doing so we had hoped to reduce the amount of petroleum used per family as well as the emissions expelled from these types of vehicles. The final verdict was far from this stand point. Instead of removing a lot of large vehicles with low mpg ratings, it replaced them with large, some what improved mpg ratings. The most common deals exchanged old Ford or GM pickups for new pickup trucks with slightly better gas mileage. AP analysis found that buyers where 17 times more likely to purchase an F-150 with a 16 mpg, than a hybrid Toyota Prius. In total, about 1 in 7 exchanges where for vehicles that got 20 mpg or worse. So for those of you hoping that Cash for Clunkers would help in converting American drivers from large SUVs and gas guzzling vehicles, better luck next time.

Central Park Disaster to Opportunity

This is a topic i found a while back in the USA today and thought that it was very intersting. On the 18th of August, Manhattan experienced freak wind speeds upwards of 80-mph for half an hour. During this time Central Park received heavy damage to its historical woodlots, downing more than 500 individual trees and damaging a thousand others. The winds caused damage to the park never seen in its 156-year history and caused the loss of many of the parks oldest trees. The park was known for having a dense woodland among the dense urban forest of New York City, the trees allowed persons to completely block out the urban landscape while within the parks parameters. Since the windstorm, the Empire State Building and the surrounding Midtown skyline are now visible from within the park, where before the giant Elms, Oaks and Tulip trees blocked these views. After two months of cleanup, restoration is underway, with plans for restoring the park closer to the original Olmsted and Vaux vision. It is estimated $3 million is needed to repair the damage from the storm, which places the city in a even tighter squeeze since funding is already being cut due to the recession. In 2008, workers catalogued all trees within the park with trunks greater than 6 inches across, which totaled 23,568. Those killed during the storm are ‘virtually irreplaceable, particularly 26 American elms’, which have faced difficult times since the introduction of Dutch elm disease. Due to the threat of Asian longhorned bettles, the trees cannot be used for lumber. The replanting of trees will begin in the spring and will take an estimated two years to repair the damaged areas. This opportunity will be used to increase plant diversity and focused on the original planned vistas in the park, some of which were lost, as the trees got older.

Katrina Cottages

A friend posted a blog some time back about the Katrina Cottages http://christianpreuslandscapearchitect.wordpress.com/, it was very interesting to see how the creation of these affordable housing alternatives are simply going to waste without ever being used. During recent research upon the DPZ website I came across the Katrina Cottages proposed by Andres Duany during the Mississippi Renewal Forum. The intent of the cottages where not only to provide emergency shelters following a disaster such as Hurricane Katrina, but also for their life span to be longer than the originally designed FEMA trailers. The cottage design was built upon the principles that they should be more “viable and humane alternatives to the FEMA trailer” (http://www.dpz.com/). A typical FEMA trailer cost between $70,000 and $140,000. While they are considered safe and durable structures, they are intended only to be temporary dwellings. As Katrina showed us, these structures will need to be used much longer than ever anticipated than before. The Katrina Cottages are small houses that can be built or installed on site but are intended to be permanent houses that can be expanded into larger dwellings. The cottages range in size from 225 sq. ft. to 1182 sq. ft. Examples of floorplans and styles can be viewed at http://www.katrinacottagehousing.org/location.html.

The intent of allowing expansion from the original building has given the concept the term, grow house. The concept is to place the emergency building on a section of the lot and

from this place the owners can rebuild by adding on to the cottage itself or seperately. The link provides a PDF that will illustrate the uses of the grow house and how it can be used in the years following the placement of the cottage.http://www.katrinacottagehousing.org/pdf/Grow_house.pdf).

With such a practicable idea as the Katrina Cottage, why has it failed so miserably? This was the original question posed by my friend’s blog; it was ‘a good idea that went wrong’. How can this blunder be fixed or can it? I suggest that you follow up by reading this blog on that question. http://christianpreuslandscapearchitect.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/a-good-idea/

To the left you can see how communities and neighborhoods could be laid out using the cottages.

Solar Roadways

For the past two years, Americans have been alerted to the increasing problems with the deteriorating conditions of our infrastructures. Not only are we witnessing problems with water, pollution but with our roadways. The increase in deterioration of aging roads and bridges has placed an added strain upon the national budget to maintain and manage the roadway systems of the nation. Solutions to the problem are being sought after from all logical, and some not, sources. Recently the Department of Transportation has awarded a $100,000 contract with Solar Roadways to build a prototype of their solution – Roadways paved with rugged specially built solar panels. The solution would aid in the reduction for the need of oil in the construction and manufacture of asphalt roadways and parking lots. Roadway maintenance and construction saw a huge surge in the cost of doing business, due to the higher crude oil prices of recent years. The implementation of solar road panels would allow for many great benefits. Solar panels if placed on all paved surfaces in the nation would provide three time the electricity consumed by this country. Not only would this allow for the generation of electricity, but would contain LED lighting, heating (to prevent icing), high-voltage power transmission lines, and open the door for electric transportation. The arguments for the use of solar panels on roadways out weigh any resistance i could generate. Yes, it would cost a lot of money, but the costs are said to be the same as the amount we spend on power plants, grid infrastructure and asphalt roadways. It does seem to be worth looking into. The only problem I could have with the concept is, would it be dangerous if wet? The contract with the DOT will be used to investigate the feasibility of this solution and I personally have high hopes for the project. To learn more about Solar Roadways visit their web site: www.solarroadways.com