Posted on 09/21/2007 2:16:14 PM PDT by republicpictures
Don't want to fork out for a Prius? Can't see tanking up with ethanol? Can't afford solar panels for your roof?
Not to worry, you can still do something to fight global warming: Live closer to work.
That's one conclusion of a major national report published Thursday by the nonprofit Urban Land Institute.
...A hotly contested bill sponsored by Sen. Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) would require regional planning groups to set targets for reducing greenhouse gases, and could stop millions of dollars in federal, state and local transportation funds from being spent on roads that could encourage sprawl.
...two-thirds of the structures in the U.S. in 2050 will have been built between now and then. Construction will include 89 million new or replaced homes, and 190 billion square feet of new offices, stores and institutions. If only 60% of that development is clustered in mixed-use, compact areas, it could slash greenhouse gas emissions from transportation by 7%, the report said.
...The California Chamber of Commerce and the California Building Industry Assn. declined to comment on the report, but James Burling, litigation director for the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative group that has battled environmentalists over land-use issues, dismissed "the latest anti-sprawl crusade based on global warming" as "no different from every other anti-sprawl campaign from Roman times to the present."
"So long as people ardently desire to live and raise children in detached homes with a bit of lawn, there is virtually nothing that government bureaucrats can do that will thwart that," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
by the way I didn’t mean YOU...I was referring to the person who wrote the article or the ones who try to be “big brother” to the rest of us. Just wanted to be sure you didn’t think I meant you. :)
It would also be nice to wave while passing you in my beautiful black M5 with nobody hogging the left lane...
Oh the horror! We know face the threat of: Nuclear war, terrorism, Ebola, ... and suburban family-raising. These folks are nut-cases. Living a decent life is a bad thing to them.
It has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with having more family time.
Amen. I moved about a year ago to within 4 miles of where I work because the commute was killing me. I've gained at least 30 hours a week. You can't pay any amount of money for time like that.
However, requiring people to move or some other such silliness is just stupid. Little wonder it is supported by environmental whackos.
ANother factor is environmental laws themselves. The liability that comes along with buying previously used property ( especially that which has been used commerically or industrially) in urban areas requires expensive testing and clean up.
Not that it's so polluted, but the laws are so strict, that even one property owner whose poured something "hydrocarbon" down the drain into a septic tank can throw up a red flag.
SO developers naturally want clean farm land or pasture, located out in the far suburbs.
read painfully
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.