The amount of space required to transport the same number of passengers by car, bus, or bicycle, courtesy of our friends in Germany (7 years ago), who seem to get it way better than we do:

It seems to me that the only good solution of those three is the ban.  While a tax may make the city some cash, paying an extra dime or so for a cup of coffee is not going to encourage people to bring reusable mugs - it will just enrage people and get them mad at environmentalism I think.  A deposit system would probably be better at keeping the streets clean, thanks to our enterprising hordes of homeless folk, but also doesn’t really help tackle the core issue.  We make too much garbage.  However, I can’t really imagine the logistics of a ban - do you always have to have a mug with you?  I try my best to carry one around, but getting a bite/a drink is often an impulse decision, and if we want to encourage people walking/cycling around instead of driving, it doesn’t seem reasonable to demand people carry around all this extra “what if” shit.  I don’t know if this would work that well.

The University of Guelph has also tried to find a solution to this problem, and I quite like it.  It almost falls into the tax category, but instead of charging you more to get a disposable cup, all the coffee outlets charge the price of a small coffee to fill a mug, which are usually bigger than the large sizes.  And there, a ridiculously large number of people carry reusable mugs.

Blah.  That wasn’t supposed to be what this rant was about.  When tackling any big problem (i.e. environmental degradation), it only makes sense to grab the low hanging fruit first - solve the easy problems that would have the biggest impact to start, and then work towards the more complicated solutions.  The city of Toronto seems eager to be a leader in the sustainability movement, but I often wonder if our priorities are a bit out of whack.  Is spending what will probably be months of council’s time debating ways to reduce the amount of coffee garbage we produce really giving us the best bang for our buck?  Wouldn’t it make more sense to tackle to big issues that will have a huge impact?  What about building new subways, streetcar lanes, or bike paths?  Toronto promised a measly 50km of new bike paths this year.  They’re not going to come anywhere close to that laughable goal even.  This coffee cup issue, while definitely legit, seems like a bit of a distraction from much bigger problems with solutions not hanging much further up the tree.

Seeing is believing, however, and this amazing little graphic from Architecture 2030 puts things into painfully clear focus:

If you’re not interested in doing the math, that amounts to a whopping 1.2% of total consumption. Not altogether too far off the impact of proper tire inflation, come to think of it…

“We have someone who wants to participate who supports another member in the debate…”

I guess that’s the reason, then. The Greens and the Liberals both agree that climate change is a pressing issue, and that implementing financial incentives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions might work. I thought the NDP was also “committed” to fighting climate change. Maybe they have a slightly different strategy in mind, but shouldn’t they be excited to have an open forum to discuss ways to reduce our environmental impact? Shouldn’t Jack Layton be especially excited about the possibility of having another leader aching to turn the focus of the debate to global warming? No… it seems that Layton is just another bullshit politician, rehashing the same old shit about working together and finding real solutions, while letting his actions show that all he really cares about is preventing the Greens from stealing too many NDP votes. Fuck you Jack Layton, and shame on you.

While the article doesn’t mention cost of production, announcements like this continue to demonstrate the possibility of the impossible - that is, transitioning the world to a renewable energy economy. While much emphasis is placed on our incredible reliance on petroleum, it’s important to note that 2/3 of our petroleum is burned as transportation fuel. The important uses (that is, where there is no viable alternative) like plastic manufacturing, consume a relatively trivial amount. A future of electric trucks, superconducting trains, wind- and wave-powered barges, and freight airships is hardly inconceivable. And once we achieve low-carbon transport, we will have begun to address the perilous externalities of global trade, and the trade-off between ethics and economics becomes much less stark. This is what I spend my days doing, so that fundamental premise still holds some wonder for me.

I feel like I’m losing my edge, repeating the same optimistic tirade.

In other news, it looks like arctic ice is soon to reach a critical tipping point. Good to know, given that permafrost apparently stores 60% more greenhouse gases than we’d previously anticipated. The saying, “may you live in interesting times,” was once a curse - we may or may not have the means to change that, but there is no denying that we are living in interesting times.

Aralie.com was created to support independent artists, by giving them a free market place to sell and promote their music. We are dedicated to helping small artists by doing anything we can to help them get exposure, gigs, sponsorship, and interviews. All music on Aralie.com will always be available DRM free, with no strings attached, and always downloadable for what ever price you choose (including $0).

After talking to Wyatt, the man behind this operation, and browsing the site, I feel pretty optimistic that the pay-what-you-can model can thrive. Even if the average download generates just a couple dollars, that’s still matched with the money from a traditional record deal - minus all the hassle and controlling influences. And I love Aralie for how little they demand from the artists that use their download service - no contracts, exclusivity, any of that shit. I just hope that people will throw a few bucks to the up and coming bands, not just the Radioheads of the world. I guess we can just watch and find out.

Of late, Iran has renewed its threats to respond to any military action by closing the Strait of Hormuz, a shipping lane through which 20% of the world’s oil supply travels. While this is nothing new - Iran’s geography and influence on the oil trade is its main strategic advantage in a conflict between it and the West - it still represents a serious threat to the oil trade.

So should war break out with Iran, and the Strait of Hormuz closes, where does that leave us? An instant spike in the price of oil up to $200+ per barrel would be a huge hit to the economy, driving explosive inflation in the price of food, consumer goods, and transportation; the perfect trigger for a recession.

The price of diesel fuel has already nearly tripled in the past year - while this has been painful for the trucking industry, it’s also shown up in the price of nearly everything we buy, as a result. While the price of jet fuel has ‘only’ doubled in that same period, airlines are folding at a rate of one every week - on some routes, the price of fuel now represents more than half of the total ticket price. Oil prices (and the present misplaced emphasis on food-crop biofuels to compensate) have played a huge role in the global food crisis, and a further spike in prices could have devastating effects on the developing world.

But maybe its exactly what we need. I’m loathe to put a price on lives, but dramatic short-term pain may be the only way to bring the severity of the global energy crisis (and climate change, by association), into clear focus. Despite complaints from SUV drivers, the average person in the U.S. has largely been able to tread water with $150/bbl oil. At $200/bbl, the prognosis changes. The entire world, developed and developing, would need to take notice, and a short-term crunch today could alleviate catastrophic suffering in the distant future, at a time when we may no longer be able to address it.

This situation is not without precedent. The 1973 oil crisis spurred rapid and widespread societal change in America. Government policies were instituted to promote conservation (some of which were silly and ineffective, such as daylight saving time), including, for the first time, vehicle fuel economy standards. Buyers abandoned large gas-guzzlers in droves, embracing tiny, poorly-built (but efficient!) imports, heralding the slow decline of the American auto industry. Brazil began its highly effective sugar-cane ethanol program, which today supplies 40% of the fuel for Brazil’s transportation fleet. Alternative energy in the form of solar and wind power experienced a nascent boom, despite immature technology.

In today’s world, I expect the impacts would be at least as stark. Automotive efficiency is already under serious scrutiny by industry and buyers alike. At current prices, commuters from the GTA into Toronto spend nearly $10,000/year on gasoline alone. If prices increase another 30-50%, the suburbs will die, or they will collapse in on themselves, becoming self-sustaining communities, rather than mere dormitories. Commercial electric vehicles, mass-transportation systems, and thoughtful urban planning will become imperative. Already this summer, gas prices have led to a surge in urban commuters who walk, ride, or take the TTC, rather than drive. On the utility front, at $200/bbl, the economic incentive for pursuing renewable electricity and storage becomes impossible to ignore. High gas prices would be more than enough to sustain the solar industry over the hump in 2010, when a huge increase in supply is expected to depress growth (from its current triple-digits down to a more modest 20%, perhaps). And while it is wishful thinking from a veggie, the price of food may even nudge people into changing their eating habits - while the government heavily subsidizes meat prices, the costs stand to grow exponentially with the price of grain. Even now, chicken is supplanting beef due to its healthful image - with the useful byproduct of a significantly reduced environmental footprint.

From my bubble of privilege, I say bring on the blockades, Iran. Let’s shake things up.

I’m starting to get really excited about the whole open source design concept.