October 2005 - Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

Fwd: Coalition for Transit Justice - Help Decide Our Future
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 26 Oct '05

26 Oct '05

Folks, this in from the CTJ. Is the Green Party on board with this? Should this be an item for the TWG and/or GM? Sue Please note: forwarded message attached --- Casey Mills <Casey(a)thclinic.org> wrote: > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 10:28:04 -0700 > From: "Casey Mills" <Casey(a)thclinic.org> > To: "Casey Mills" <Casey(a)thclinic.org> > Subject: Coalition for Transit Justice - Help Decide > Our Future > > Greetings Coalition for Transit Justice folks, > > Hopefully you've all received the hard copy of the > letter I sent out regarding the future of our > Coalition and your organization's role in it. You'll > find it below, as well as attached as a Word > document. Please do read it and let me know your > response. > > It's been rewarding fighting for transit justice in > the past with you, and I hope we can continue our > fight together in the future. Feel free to call or > e-mail anytime with questions or concerns. > > Best, > Casey Mills > 771-9850 Ext. 116 > > > October 1, 2005 > > Dear Coalition for Transit Justice Member, > > We're writing this letter to you in our ongoing > efforts to maintain the Coalition for Transit > Justice. As you remember, we formed early this year > in a concerted effort to stop the recent MUNI fare > hikes and service cuts. Through our broad-based > coalition building, united voice, and hard work, we > helped stop increases to the Fast Pass and cuts to > the Owl lines, as well as forcing the introduction > of a LifeLine pass for low-income riders. > While our victory was certainly not total, our > campaign proved there exists a vital need for a > principled voice in San Francisco advocating for > low-income, senior, and disabled riders; for > environmentalists who believe public transportation > to be a vital key to a healthy planet; for > communities of color underserved by MUNI; and for > MUNI riders who don't want to keep paying more for > less. > We believe this voice needs to continue. However, > to do so, we need to formalize our decision-making > process and reestablish our membership. To that end, > we're proposing the development of a steering > committee, and asking that you express a vote of > confidence in this plan and your desire to either > remain in the Coalition or to be removed from our > member list. > Below you'll find our proposal for the formation of > such a committee, whose members must agree to act in > accordance with our consensus-based platform - the > Platform for Transit Justice, which we've attached. > Please respond at your earliest convenience to > inform us of your desire to stay involved with our > organization. You can find contact info at the end > of this letter. Thank you for joining together to > fight for transit justice in the past - we sincerely > hope you'll wish to continue our fight in the > future. > > Steering Committee Formation Plan > > · A 6-member steering committee would be established > to decide how best to direct Coalition resources, > what campaigns to become involved in, and what > messages to express to the public and media. > · The committee would be created at a November 16 > meeting (date and location TBA), to which a delegate > from every member organization and any > representative from a member organization who has > attended 3 or more meetings would be invited. > · A vote for the steering committee would occur, > with all those invited to the meeting to be > considered candidates. > · Once established, the steering committee would > strive for consensus, but a vote would be taken if > it could not be reached. 2/3 vote would be required. > · The committee would consist of a secretary, > treasurer, and rotating chair. > · A monthly newsletter would be distributed by > e-mail to all member organizations including minutes > from steering committee meetings, upcoming events, > issues and campaigns. > > We look forward to your response. > Sincerely, > > > Casey Mills > Coalition for Transit Justice > 775-7110 Ext. 116 > Casey(a)thclinic.org > > > > Platform for Transit Justice > > The ability to travel throughout the city and region > in order to have equal access to employment, > education, and recreational opportunities is a basic > human need and right. Public transportation remains > the City's only feasible method of providing this > basic need and right to all of its people. > > As a matter of social, economic and environmental > justice, the Municipal Transportation Authority > (MTA) should seek to fund public transit using > monies gained from those most able to pay. > Individuals who opt out of the public transportation > system should be asked first to sacrifice for the > good of the general public. In addition, as a > "transit first" city, San Francisco should encourage > use of public transit instead of cars as a means of > improving the environment. > > > > > > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: About the Mid-Market Redevelopment
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 24 Oct '05

24 Oct '05

Hi Pierre, I think your ideas for ped-only streets (or ped, bicycle and delivery vehicles only) should be recommended for small streets in the plan area such as Natoma and Minna. Small streets that do not restrict car traffic but that dramatically slow traffic down with twists, turns, and planters are all the rage in some parts of Europe I hear and are called "woonerfs." Sue Please note: message attached Hello everyone... At last GM meeting I speak out for the inclusion of totally pedestrian street in the plan to redevelop this area of the city....I was not sure if it was realistic because I didn't recalled the map of the area at that time ... Since then I look at the map : I don't know if the plan and regulation require that the existing public streets been kept "asis" or if the public land is going to be traded with the developpers, but one thing is obvious, all allees, courts, path etc that do not have the standard street size must be converted Full pedestrian; And since the zone is along market streets and covers 6 blocks, that both the pedestrian and bicycling traffic could be redirected inside the redevelopment zone within a "no car" alley connecting 10th to 5th Streets.... Like they did in Okland at the Fruitville village ( see below)... I am craving to see in SF a pedestrian village without cars, noise, stop lights and cross walks...where you can really enjoy shopping, without beeing into a mall... Can we make it happen ? We count on you guys ! Pierre. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ejustice/case/case6.htm

1 0

Re: [Transpo] "A Streetcar Named Displacement"
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 24 Oct '05

24 Oct '05

Hi Jym, Yes, I agree. This hasn't yet been discussed by the TWG. Are you still in NYC? Sue -- Jym Dyer <jym(a)econet.org> wrote: =v= Any thought's on the latest _Guardian_? Offhand I think the problem on 3rd Avenue is the type of development in the works, *not* the light rail: http://www.sfbg.com/40/03/news_train.html <_Jym_> _______________________________________________ Transpo mailing list Transpo(a)sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo

1 0

EnergyBulletin.net | Powering down America: local government's role in the transition to a post-petroleum world
by Sue Vaughan 23 Oct '05

23 Oct '05

Ross is mentioned way down in the body of this article, as is Larry Robinson, Green mayor of Sebastopol. Note: images, links and other non-text elements may have been removed from this article. Click below for full version: http://www.energybulletin.net/9999.html Powering down America: local government's role in the transition to a post-petroleum world By Jennifer Bresee and David Room, Global Public Media Published October 21, 2005 Cheap, energy-dense liquid fuels have enabled the human species to proliferate across the globe, and in the process the transport of people, products, and resources has become an inescapable part of normal life in industrialized nations. Thanks to cheap and abundant energy, the energy intensity of our normal lives is unprecedented. Now demand for liquid fossil fuels seems to be approaching if not exceeding supply. This narrowing gap between supply and demand has fueled a steep price jump, rocketing from $28 per barrel of crude in early 2004 to over $70 per barrel at the end of August 2005. Even if the current price spike abates, geology tells us that global extraction of oil will reach a peak or plateau (very soon according to a growing number of experts) and then go into inexorable decline, approximating the downside of a bell curve. This phenomenon is called “Peak Oil.” The actual inflection point is referred to as “oil peak,” and can be thought of as the point when about half of the original endowment of economically extractable oil on the planet has been burned. After peak, our growing demand for oil and the multitude products for which it is a critical feedstock will necessarily go unsatisfied. Oil scarcity will also increase pressure on supplies and pricing of America’s second most important energy source, North American natural gas, which is already often strained to its limits despite recent mild winters. Natural gas, which is a primary fuel for electricity generation and heating in many parts of the United States and a common industrial feedstock, has already seen production peak in North America. The global peak of natural gas production is extremely hard to predict - some say it decades away and others (with good reason) suggest that it might happen in a matter of years. For North America the key problem is that it now needs to import more and more natural gas from far away and often unstable or unfriendly places. Furthermore, the required infrastructure is complex, costly and takes years to build. Once oil crests and goes into decline, much of today’s global-scale transport, industry, and trade will become economically unviable. With the diminishing viability of global-scale human activities, local economies, transport, governance, and culture will become increasingly effective and necessary. As national and global-scale operations and institutions peter out in the face of energy shortages and price shocks, local and community-supported organizations will need to step up and assume responsibility for many social services like food security, transportation, and energy security. Relocalization of key activities and local provisioning could make the difference between a sustainable future and social breakdown. What is in question, at this juncture, is how much effort local governments will put in now, while energy is still relatively cheap and plentiful, to prepare for an energy-constrained future, and how hard we, as the constituents of local governments, are willing to push for timely and substantive action. Today’s global economic system and monoculture of consumption tie practically every aspect of human life at all levels of organization to cheap energy-dense fuels and petrochemicals, which means, more often than not, to oil. Many less industrialized nations are even more dependent on oil than the industrialized nations, which often have more diverse energy resources and infrastructures (e.g. hydroelectric, coal) and the funds to further expand on this diversity. In industrialized nations, individuals, families, neighborhoods, towns and cities, states, and non-governmental organizations are all dependent to a large extent on just-in-time access to cheap fuels and petrochemicals. For example, individuals who live in energy-intensive urban environments, such as residents of the average suburb or sprawling city, rely on cheap, energy-dense fuels to drive to and from work, to go out with friends and family, to take the kids to school, and for access to affordable food and consumer goods. Cheap petrochemicals are the raw materials for everything from roads and tires to computers, medicines, disinfectants, and food packaging. In many places, cheap fossil fuels enable homes and businesses to have running water, heat and electricity. It takes a lot of energy and material to keep a city, suburb, state or nation habitable. Without a shift from reliance on cheap fuels and petrochemicals, future oil and gas shortages may incapacitate certain municipal services such as public transit, sanitation, and emergency medical services. Public transit relies on cheap fuel and subsidies for its very existence, as it cannot compete with privately owned transportation in today’s car culture. Without adequate preparation and increased support, increasing costs due to high fuel prices may sound the death knell of many public transit systems. Medical and sanitation services rely on cheap fuel for the availability of supplies and personnel and to power medical technology. Cheap petrochemicals are the raw materials of just about everything – from medicines to plasma bags – that modern hospitals use. Without cheap fuel and petrochemicals, local and national law and emergency response organizations, global agribusiness, national and international disaster relief organizations, and national militaries (just to name a few of the types of large-scale organizations affected) will become very expensive to run, possibly prohibitively so. Fortunately, not all political leaders are ignorant of or unwilling to address our energy predicament. To help spread the message of such leaders, Global Public Media is conducting a series of interviews with political leaders worldwide who are concerned about peak oil and who advocate immediate response and preparation. To support peak-aware politicians, Global Public Media’s sister organization, Post Carbon Institute, is developing a “Powerdown” platform1 as well as a program for local government to catalyze the powering down of their bioregion that includes transition and contingency planning, the oil depletion protocol, relocalization, and ecological city design. National Responses are Few The October newsletter of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO)2 reports that the French Prime Minister is the first world leader to publicly recognize peak oil. “We have entered the post-oil era”, said Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin on September 1, 2005. “I want to draw all the consequences of this and give a real impulse to energy savings and to the use of renewable energies.” Villepin promised that several million low income households would receive a 75-euro ($91.49) check and to boost the use of renewable energy. As of October 2005, New Zealand has the only two national political parties worldwide that have openly taken a stand on Peak Oil.3 Less than a year after initial communications with local activists Robert Atack and Kevin Moore, on 5 May 2005, Turiana Turia co-leader of the Maori Party of New Zealand issued a press release indicating that “all parties must wake up to this emerging crisis... Aotearoa4 is economically dependent on continuing oil extraction from wells very far away, along thin vulnerable transit routes, to support our long-range exporting and global tourism, and underlie nearly all economic activity. All people of this nation, have the right to information and planning, to awaken them to the looming price hikes and shortages of oil for which there are no solutions known, only responses which may soften the blows.”5 On August 18, 2005, the Green Party of New Zealand posted a Peak Oil Toolkit on their website which unequivocally dispels the myth of the magic solution and presents steps that can prepare the nation for energy descent such as a revenue neutral “feebate” for cleaner cars and increasing incentives for renewable energy.6 Jeanette Fitzsimons, one of the New Zealand Greens’ two Members of Parliament, says “give people the facts, let them go out and read the information for themselves, do some workshops and public meetings, have a bit of a road show, so that people have the tools that they need to make the right decisions… for their own lives.”7 On the other side of the world, also on the national level, United States congressman Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R, Maryland) has been repeatedly raising the issue of Peak Oil in his special order speeches.8 More resources at the national level have not been mobilized because, according to Bartlett, politicians and industry are only focused on the near term. Politicians run for office every two to six years, and industry strives to keep the next quarter report positive for their Boards of Directors and their investors. The perception is that if a political or business leader takes the risk of supporting preparations for an energy-constrained future, voters and directors will simply find someone else who is willing to promise a future of growth and prosperity. Bartlett explains, “telling the American people that we’ve got to have some belt-tightening in the future, life is not going to go on quite like it’s gone on now because oil is not forever. This is not a happy thing to tell people. I understand why politicians don’t like telling people this.”9 Remarkably, the Republican Bartlett suggests that America needs to redefine success. “Right now, success is judged by how much energy is used. Think about it, the person who is successful has a really big car; they take really expensive vacations; they have a really big house. We have got to have another yardstick by which we measure success because success can’t continue to be measured by how much energy we use.” He further laments, “we think God gave us the right to this quality of life.” After six months of being an indefatigable advocate of peak oil awareness and policy work including multiple special order speeches, a conference10, pushing sane energy policies, sending peak oil posters and books to his colleagues11, and a private conversation with President Bush12, Bartlett remains the sole U.S. national politician to openly discuss peak oil. Getting Started Locally: Transition Planning and Town Hall Meetings According to Post Carbon Institute and other organizations focused on managing energy descent including Ecocity Builders, From the Wilderness, and The Community Solution, the most effective responses to our energy predicament will be place-based and community-supported. In this context, local government can play an important role in initiating projects and programs, removing obstacles and creating incentives, and fostering an environment of cooperation, experimentation, and urgency. Local government assuming this role is essential in large cities and metropolitan areas where grassroots organizing has not been able to mobilize large fractions of their electorate.13 While most activity at the national and global levels consists solely of talk about the problem (which is valuable and commendable), some local and regional governments are talking about and actually implementing such responses. Andrew McNamara, a member of the Queensland Parliament for Hervey Bay, Australia, has raised the issue of Peak Oil in his local, regional and national governments. In a recent interview, McNamara explains his motivation for addressing the problem of energy dependence.14 “We're entirely road and rail dependent, and accordingly, it struck me that if the price of fuel doubled, and then doubled again and then doubled again, that the tourism industry, which provides the life blood of my town, would simply collapse. And, similarly, the issue of feeding a town like Hervey Bay becomes problematic… Locally, I think we're better than some, better than many larger cities, but our networks are built around cheap fuel, and if Peak Oil represents the end of cheap fuel, then it is a substantial threat to everything that happens in my part of the world. So again, the motivation was very simple. ” Responding, however, to that motivation was not so simple. “At the heart of the Peak Oil story is that tomorrow there will be less of something, and that's a difficult sell for politicians. The way it works is that [as a politician] you promise more, not less.” His less-kind colleagues in Parliament have dubbed his first Peak Oil speech in Parliament “Peak Career.” Despite the tendency of politics to punish bearers of bad news, McNamara continues to push for action and has established the Queensland Oil Vulnerability Task Force, “a task force across a number of departments to look at how vulnerable Queensland is to global oil depletion.” McNamara is also pushing for expanded public transit and non-petroleum fueled transport in his constituency of Hervey Bay. Similarly, a local law to create an energy shortage contingency plan has been sent to council in none other than New York City. The local law (Int. No. 374)15 would define energy emergency response stages, a communication structure to alert the public, conservation strategies for city agencies and the private sector, and rules concerning energy usage and appropriate methods for enforcing such rules for each of the energy emergency response stages. Though this law does not mention peak oil and the authors may not necessarily have been peak aware, such laws can be entry points to get our energy predicament on the local government radar and open a can of worms that can no longer be ignored. In the context of an energy shortage contingency plan, thoughtful consideration of the likely ramifications of global oil peak on local energy availability and prices as well as on the costs and availability of goods from afar, could be the tipping point that springs local government into planning and even preemptive action. The final speaker of the Petrocollapse conference16 on October 5, 2005, chairman of Post Carbon NYC Dan Miner, called upon attendees and local peak oil activists to campaign for the energy contingency shortage plan with an amendment to address peak oil. Dan is doubtful that neighborhood grassroots organizing approach that is transforming towns in Northern California will be effective in New York City. “While our group has a good number of regular attendees, compared the vast population of the New York metropolitan area, we are not even microscopic” says Miner. “While many are aware of rising fuel prices, very few understand the full scope of the situation, and most are resistant or unwilling to prepare for the new energy paradigm, and we have to meet the people where they are.  We have to gain leverage by partnering with organizations that can support parts of the peak oil message that overlap with a conventionally progressive, environmental mindset.  We hope that by encouraging people to focus on concrete steps to conserve fuel in emergencies, they will be expanding their reality picture, so when financial pain increases, the seeds of greater awareness we are planting may yet sprout.” In the city of Sebastopol in Northern California, Mayor Larry Robinson has been instrumental in mobilizing his community to discussion of Peak Oil and action toward energy independence. Robinson told Global Public Media in a recent interview17 that “what I'm trying to do as mayor is shape our future development as a city in such a way that it will minimize, to what ever extent it's possible, the impact of skyrocketing energy cost…” Robinson also said he uses his office as a “bully pulpit” to raise community awareness of Peak Oil and of the need for energy independence. On September 21, 2005, Mayor Robinson convened a town hall meeting “Peak Oil – Adapting to an increasingly scarce energy supply”. Over 200 people attended, mostly from Sebastopol and with contingencies from Santa Rosa and nearby towns. After an introduction by Mayor Robinson and a presentation by Richard Heinberg about local responses, attendees offered their ideas in a community brainstorming session covering both what the city of Sebastopol can do to prepare for oil scarcity and how can citizens support the city in this endeavor. The intention is to form two working groups of citizens and city employees to explore these issues on an ongoing basis. (Similarly, San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkirimi has requested a hearing on peak oil for the Board of Supervisors that is likely to occur in late October or early November 2005.) When asked about political backlash from his open discussion of Peak Oil, Robinson said that while he has had plenty of backlash from his stance on other issues such as his opposition to the Iraq war, rampant corporatism, and sprawling development, this has not been the case with his discussion of Peak Oil. (Of course, reining in militarism, corporatism and sprawl are some of the best ways to mitigate energy consumption and dependence.) Robinson said of his experience talking about energy independence, “… even the business leaders in this community are realizing that we need to shift to a much more sustainable way of living, that we're all going to pay a high price if we don't. In fact, you know, the longer we wait to make that shift, the higher the price it's going to be, the much more suffering it's going to be in dislocation of people and resources, so I think this issue brings people together across the political spectrum.” One way that the city of Sebastopol has brought people together to work for energy independence is through the Solar Sebastopol program. Solar Sebastopol is a co-operative agreement between the city, private photovoltaic (solar power, or PV) vendors, the energy technology program at Sonoma State University, and individual citizens. It provides a database of rooftops in Sebastopol that are good candidates for PV installation and free appraisal by the PV companies. The goal of Solar Sebastopol is to, within the next year, install enough PV panels within the city limits to meet a third of the city’s electricity demands. Robinson said that the problem with a big generator is that it is centralized, that “… somebody else is in control of our energy. Whereas a PV system on your rooftop or a small wind generator or a community owned generator puts the power literally in peoples own hands and that’s both a more democratic way and I think ultimately safer and more sustainable.” The city of Willits, also in Northern California, is also working towards energy independence. Dr Jason Bradford, formerly of UC Davis, facilitated town meetings on Peak Oil after screenings of “The End of Suburbia.” The meetings brought together the Willits Economic Localization (WELL) project, and resulted in the formation of ad-hoc groups of WELL members to address the problems of providing sustained sources of food, water, shelter, health and medicine, communal living and planning, and energy to the community of Willits. “Nobody has a full time job doing this, we’re all volunteers, we all have our own lives”, Bradford says about WELL. “So the trick is try to figure out how to create something new while you are still dependent on the old… that’s very complicated... We have 60 people, 70 people showing up for meetings once or twice per month. They happen at the community center… City Hall just gives us free space.”18 Along with WELL and the Willits Ad-Hoc Energy Group, City Councilman Ron Orenstein sponsored an energy independence report for the city of Willits. Entitled, “Recommendations towards Energy Independence for the City of Willits and Surrounding Community,” the report paints a picture of an urban area that could, given timely action, adjust to expensive energy by achieving energy independence and emerge as a strong, organized and self-sufficient municipality. It also does not sugar-coat the consequences of apathy. The report states, “… if we want to be able to develop alternative sources of energy in order to maintain some semblance of our society today, we need to do so now while energy is still cheap and plentiful. We cannot afford to wait until fossil fuels decline to the point of severe economic impact – the changes to ensure our survival need to begin today. Those same fossil fuels we save by striving for energy independence today will provide the basis for sustaining agriculture and healthcare tomorrow.”19 The report points out that, independent of issues oil peak and energy scarcity, the process of achieving energy independence can be positive stimulus for the local economy. “In presenting these potential steps that the city of Willits can take, every effort has been made to find ways that the transition results in revenue streams to the city and community, with the long-term objective being a stronger self-sustaining economy.” Small towns are not the only places where Peak Oil awareness is growing. John Hickenlooper, mayor of Denver, Colorado, is a retired petroleum geologist and has done much to prepare his city for the onset of energy scarcity. In a guest editorial for the online magazine terrain.org20, Mayor Hickenlooper listed the environmental strides his city has taken. Among these are the use of environmentally responsible or energy-efficient technologies in the city’s infrastructure, such as LEDs in traffic lights and biofuels for the city’s fleet of vehicles. Denver sports two “national models” of infill development, one a former Air Force base and the other a former airport. The city has also begun work to institute green building standards, and has started work on “the most ambitious local transit project in our nation’s history,” a wide network of both light and commuter rail transit. These actions address many common urban problems and would be beneficial to any urban center, independent of our oil and gas predicament. Not surprisingly, the aforementioned actions have thus far been implemented without public discussion of Peak Oil. Yet now the City of Denver is opening discussion of Peak Oil by co-sponsoring the World Oil Forum with the US chapter of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO-USA). The Forum will be held on November 10th and 11th of this year. Mayor Hickenlooper, as well as an array of industry experts, political leaders, authors, and others, will speak at the conference. Denver’s World Oil Forum is set to address both global and local issues related to energy scarcity. Among the many topics covered will be, according to the conference’s web site21, an “exploration of policy options, especially at the municipal level.” One of the goals of the conference is to help Denver to formulate effective responses to Peak Oil problems through better understanding of the issues. The conference hopes to show that “citizens, corporations, cities, and states can take intelligent actions now to prepare for more expensive petroleum and to mitigate the negative impacts of peak oil.” Communities everywhere can benefit from Denver’s efforts to open a dialogue on the issue of Peak Oil on the local level, if we, as community members, choose to follow up with our own local dialogues about our energy-constrained future. Community discussion of the ramifications of global oil peak is a vital first step for making preparations for an energy-constrained future. Coverage of the possible effects is growing as the mainstream media begins to take notice, though the media has been unwilling to take a stand since there are credible talking heads on both sides of the “is Peak Oil for real?” fence. Along with the growing supply of cogent and accessible summaries of our oil and gas predicament on the web and print news, more ideas and working models for responses are surfacing. In addition to relocalization, two important mitigating responses are the Oil Depletion Protocol and reconfiguring our settlements to be ecologically, rather than just economically, effective. Adopting the Oil Depletion Protocol The Oil Depletion Protocol (otherwise known as the Rimini Protocol or Uppsala Protocol) is a global agreement conceived by Dr. Colin Campbell, founder of ASPO and first proposed at the 2003 Pio Manzu Conference in Rimini, Italy. It will be the central theme of the October 2005 Pio Manzu Conference.22 Currently both Dr. Campbell and author Richard Heinberg have published articles and spoken extensively on the Protocol.23 24 The protocol requires oil exporters to reduce exports by their national depletion rate and oil importers to reduce imports by the world depletion rate. Put simply, “depletion rate” is the total supply of oil that remains to be extracted, divided by the amount of oil extracted per year. Depletion rates would be used as percentages to determine how much a country must reduce its exports or imports. An exporting country would inventory all recoverable oil, divide this number by the amount of oil the country extracted in one year, and then reduce exports by that percentage. Heinberg reported in August 2005 that worldwide, 944 billion barrels (Gb) had been extracted. The amount remaining in known fields is 772 Gb and the estimated amount yet to be found is 134 Gb, totaling 906 Gb yet to be extracted. Production of conventional oil in 2004 was 24 Gb, yielding a Depletion Rate of 2.59 percent (24/906). As an example, Norway reports remaining reserves of 11.3 billion barrels (Gb) in known fields with about 2 left to find, or 13.5 Gb left to produce. In 2004, Norway extracted 1.07 Gb, representing a Depletion Rate of 7.4 percent (1.07/13.5). This is a comparatively high rate, typical of an offshore environment. To adhere to the protocol, Norway would have to reduce production from the 1.07 Gb in 2004 to 0.99 Gb in 2005 and an additional 7.4% every year. The protocol requires importing countries to reduce their imports by the world depletion rate with the intention to bring demand in balance with the diminishing supply. In 2004, the U.S. imported 3.68 Gb of oil.25 If it were to adopt the protocol, the U.S. would reduce its imports by 95 million barrels (2.5% of 3.68 Gb) and an additional 2.5% each year. Implementing the protocol would require importing countries to rapidly institute conservation and efficiency programs to reduce consumption. As years passed and such programs yielded diminishing returns, adopting countries would likely need to shift the balance of their programs towards reconfiguring their economies and cities. The protocol is intended for adoption by national governments, and frankly would be most effective if all countries were to sign on; this nonetheless seems quite unlikely in the near-to-medium-term. Yet any country that ratifies the protocol now will likely benefit tremendously, as adoption of the protocol will act as a buffer between that country and inevitable energy shortages and price spikes. If regions and cities in laggard nations like the United States adopt the protocol and act accordingly, those regions and cities will also benefit to the extent that they lessen their dependence on oil and gas. Already many cities, states, and regions in the United States are acting along the lines of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon emissions. For example, the state of California and a number of states in the New England region of the US all have passed laws that essentially support the Kyoto Protocol and require reductions in greenhouse gas emissions far beyond those mandated by the federal government. A similar strategy on the municipal and state level could jump-start adoption of the Oil Depletion Protocol. As the ASPO-Ireland website states, “A positive development [in the adoption of the Oil Depletion Protocol] comes when communities, cities and provinces take steps to cut energy consumption paving the way for national responses.” Many oil exporting countries have already hit a plateau or have begun to decline in their extraction capacity, so reducing exports by their depletion rate would not be as drastic a move as it may sound. Oil exporting countries could enjoy such benefits as a more predictable oil market and a longer time period in which to find other sources of revenue than oil. Oil importing countries would benefit equally, also enjoying more stable oil prices and a longer time period to implement lifestyle change and invest in alternatives to oil. Cities, states, and regions, whether they are oil importers or exporters, could gain the same benefits, independent of their federal governments. Oil importers will, however, have to work hard at redesigning their societies, technologies and economies to achieve even a small percentage reduction of oil imports. Fortunately, ideas and plans for reducing demand exist that can help provide some direction. Recognizing that 2004 oil prices reached levels unprecedented in recent years, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released a book titled “Saving Oil in a Hurry: Measures for Rapid Demand Restraint in Transport”. A core mission of the IEA is energy supply security. As such, the IEA has the power to mandate that member countries apply voluntary and mandatory measures for reducing oil consumption on very short notice during an oil supply disruption. The book explores measures to help cope with fuel shortages and oil price shocks. As the transport sector is the prime consumer of oil in most OECD countries, the book focuses on options to rapidly reduce oil demand in the passenger transport sector, over short periods of time. As shown in Table 1, the cost effectiveness of demand restraint policies in the transport sector ranges greatly and depends on the policy context in which they are pursued. Such policies could be applied to meet the obligatory oil consumption reductions for countries, regions, and municipalities that adopt the oil depletion protocol, and are likely to be imposed by IEA on member countries during upcoming oil supply shortages. Parallel policies with respect to rationing and energy efficiency are also likely to be pursued in the early stages of implementation of the oil depletion protocol. While such policies may be sufficient initially, they will soon yield diminishing returns. Significant oil and energy consumption is built into the economic system and locked in by the built environment. Additional reductions in oil consumption will require us to reconfigure our economies and cities. Table 1: Summary of direct cost-effectiveness of various policies Direct Cost Effectiveness Range Measure Other Potential Impacts Oil Savings VERY INEXPENSIVE Less than $1 per Barrel saved Carpooling: large programme to designate emergency carpool lanes along all motorways, designate park-and-ride lots, inform public and match riders   Very Large Driving ban: odd/even licence plate scheme. Provide police enforcement, appropriate information and signage Possibly high societal costs from restricted travel Very Large Telecommuting: large programme, including active participation of businesses, public information on benefits of telecommuting, minor investments in needed infrastructure to facilitate   Large Compressed work week: programme with employer participation and public information campaign   Large Tyre pressure: large public information programme Likely safety benefits Moderate Carpooling: small programme to inform public, match riders   Moderate INEXPENSIVE Less than $10 per Barrel saved Speed limits: reduce highway speed limits to 90km/hr. Provide police enforcement or speed cameras, appropriate information and signage Safety benefits but time costs Very Large Driving ban: 1 in 10 days based on license plate, with police enforcement and signage Possibly high societal costs from restricted travel Large MODERATE COST Less than $50 per barrel saved Bus priority: convert all existing carpool and bus lanes to 24-hour bus priority usage and convert other lanes to bus-only lanes   Small EXPENSIVE More than $100 per bbl saved Telecommuting: Large programme with purchase of computers for 50% of participants   Large Transit: free public transit (set fares to zero); 50% fare reduction similar cost   Moderate Transit: increase weekend and off-peak transit service and increase peak service frequency by 10%   Moderate Source: International Energy Agency (IEA), “Saving Oil in a Hurry: Measures for Rapid Demand Restraint in Transport”, 2005. Reconfiguring Local Economies Relocalization is the process of bringing production closer to consumption obviating the need to rely on long supply chains and distant markets so that communities can largely provision themselves. Post Carbon Institute suggests that communities start with local food, local energy, essential goods, and community currencies with the aim to integrate these efforts into a parallel public infrastructure that can serve as a safety net for when times get hard and a launch pad to scale up operations. The process will require experimentation since each community has different circumstances including natural systems, built infrastructure, community resources, and culture. Communities should start the process in earnest now so as to learn as much as they can about what works and what does not before we find ourselves in a full scale energy crisis. Local government can provide a much needed boost to relocalization efforts by removing obstacles such as zoning ordinances, subsidies to corporations, home owner association restrictions, and local laws that prohibit activities such as gray water recycling. Local government can also provide incentives and make rules favoring purchasing of local goods and funding of relocalization projects. Local government can also provide financial, promotional, moral, and other types of support for relocalization efforts. In August 2005, the City of Willits and WELL signed a joint statement toward a healthy sustainable community that recognizes, in light of both climate change and oil and gas depletion, the need to “localize” their economy. The City of Willits and WELL will focus initially on food and energy production and on shifting economic development to small, local community enterprises. Implementation of these changes will create businesses and avenues for local youth to express their creativity, improve the landscape, and will provide a “quieter, less expensive, and more dependable set of services, while providing an array of interesting employment.” The statement commits the city to a series of community events, news articles, reports and forums in subsequent months that will provide opportunities for citizens to learn more.26 Reconfiguring the Built Environment A vital part of reducing overall energy demand is to redesign our settlements so that they demand less energy from those who live in them. Cities are the largest things that we create and their structure drives material and energy consumption and transportation. According to Richard Register, President of Ecocity Builders in Oakland, California, the most effective way to reduce energy consumption, and the only way to produce ecologically sustainable cities, is to reconfigure our cities to be ecologically healthy. Healthy climax ecosystems have low energy and material throughput (meaning that energy and matter tends to cycle within the system, rather than flow through and out), tend to have large amounts of biomass per unit of land, and high diversity. Ecologically healthy cities incorporate those characteristics, and tend to work with the surrounding environment in mutually beneficial ways. Currently there are no truly ecological cities in existence, but existing cities can be redesigned to incorporate more ecological design principles. Ecological cities rely on renewable energy sources that are, as much as possible, integrated with the city itself, and are therefore energy independent, using, for example, solar and wind generators on the tops of buildings. They are also compact, built for pedestrians and bicyclists rather than motorists, and zoned for a diverse number of uses in a small area so that residents can walk or take public transit to workplaces, schools, and commercial centers. At the same time as being densely developed, ecological cities also leave space for gardens and parks where residents can grow some of the food consumed in the city, reducing the food shipments from outside and maintaining a healthy and pleasant environment even in the city’s core. Compact, diverse cities that provide for their own energy needs are the only way to preserve urban populations while letting go of our car culture and all of its energy demands. If we cut down on the energy demands from our normal ways of being, we will then have more energy resources available for making other, vital transitions, such as weaning our agricultural system from its dependence on oil and natural gas, and redesigning (and in some senses reverting) our transportation systems to run on electricity rather than liquid fuels. Since an energy-constrained future is inevitable, ecological city design is the best prospect for an urban lifestyle that we can sustain for generations to come. Cities, suburbs and towns, as we construct and live in them today, stand to lose nearly all of their services and comforts as life-supporting environments in our energy-constrained future. But if those in power act now to change our constructed environments to better reflect the coming reality of expensive energy, cities could preserve far more services for their citizens than could higher levels of government or national organizations. With informed and timely action on the part of both local governments and individuals, cities could adjust to an expensive-energy environment. Given the energy expense associated with engaging in global-scale transport, production, and politics, and energy savings associated with staying local, cities have a better chance of retaining their effectiveness while national-level transport, production and government goes into decline. Conclusion While local government may not be ready to jump directly into adoption of the oil depletion protocol, relocalization, or ecological city design, all municipalities would do well to follow the lead of Hervey Bay, Sebastopol, Willits, and Denver. Government has a duty to determine its vulnerability to energy shortage and to develop viable energy and material alternatives in order to maintain a working support structure for its citizens.27 It also has the duty to hold the space for open conversations about preparing for an energy-constrained world in their locale. Similarly, constituents must hold local government responsible for the performance of its duties. Failure to do so by either government or its constituents will likely be seen as dereliction of duty by future generations. If municipal leaders and planners take action now, cities could become the most relevant political and economic arenas for their citizens. If we, as citizens, follow the action taking place in Hervey Bay, Sebastopol, Willits, and Denver, and spur our leaders to similar action, we may be able to transition to a more ecologically sustainable, socially just, and spiritually fulfilling future, rather than suffer through systemic breakdown for lack of cheap energy. While the leaders described above are openly facing the problem of Peak Oil, inviting dialogue on the subject, and even implementing solutions, the vast majority is still conspicuously silent and manifestly inert. Shall we continue to reward this majority for shirking its duties? Or shall we leverage on the courage of the few leaders who have broken the silence and inertia, and demand that all of our leaders – politicians and otherwise – step up to the plate and earnestly begin preparations for the post-petroleum future? 1 Powerdown is a term coined by Richard Heinberg in his book of the same name meaning the government led response to peak oil that involves self restraint, cooperation, and mutual sacrifice. The Powerdown response focuses on drastic demand reduction and simultaneous development of sustainable energy resources.] 2 www.peakoil.ie/newsletters/651 3 Individuals and agencies of many national governments know about peak oil and many are covertly acting on this information; a contingency in the peak oil community believes that the Iraq war and China’s many recent deals with oil producers worldwide are such examples. 4 The Maori word for New Zealand or traditionally the North Island 5 www.globalpublicmedia.com/articles/403 6 www.greens.org.nz/searchdocs/other9099.html 7 blog.greens.org.nz/wp-content/050818jfpeakoil.mp3 8 On October 18th, Congressman Bartlett was joined on a special order speech by five other Republican Congressmen Gil Gutknecht, Wayne Gilchrest, Peter Hoekstra, Sherwood Boehlert, and Vernon Ehlers. www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/531 9 www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/397 10 On September 26, 2005, Bartlett had a conference which featured Ken Deffeyes, Richard Heinberg, and Matt Simmons in Fredericksburg, Maryland 11 Bartlett has sent The Oil Age poster by SF Informatics http://www.oilposter.com and The End of Fossil Energy and the last Chance for Sustainability by John Howe 12 Bartlett had an extensive conversation with President Bush about peak on June 29, 2005. Bartlett declined to discuss or characterize any of his private conversation with President Bush, but said he was very happy about the meeting. www.bartlett.house.gov/latestnews.asp?ARTICLE2900=7308 13 It appears that grassroots organizing on peak energy issues is most effective in small towns 14 www.globalpublicmedia.com/en/andrew_mcnamara_on_queensland_oil_vulnerabilit… 15 webdocs.mycouncil.info/attachments/61517.htm 16 http://www.petrocollapse.com 17 www.globalpublicmedia.com/en/oil/mayor_of_sebastopol_ca_on_peak_oil_prepara… 18 www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/434 19 http://www.willitseconomiclocalization.org/EnergyIndependencePlan.pdf 20 www.terrain.org/columns/17/guest.htm 21 www.aspo-usa.com/fall2005/index.cfm 22 www.piomanzu.com/ita05/set.htm 23 See the ASPO-Ireland website (http://www.peakoil.ie/protocol) and Richard Heinberg’s Museletter website (www.museletter.com/archive/160.html) 24 http//www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/103 25 www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/crudebycountry.htm 26 http://www.willitseconomiclocalization.org/JointStatement0905.pdf 27 Post Carbon Institute is currently developing a Municipal Emergency Energy Transition program, which will be available in 2006. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Editorial Notes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Updated 22 October. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- www.EnergyBulletin.net Energy and Peak Oil news clearinghouse

1 0

"A Streetcar Named Displacement"
by Jym Dyer 22 Oct '05

22 Oct '05

=v= Any thought's on the latest _Guardian_? Offhand I think the problem on 3rd Avenue is the type of development in the works, *not* the light rail: http://www.sfbg.com/40/03/news_train.html <_Jym_>

1 0

FWD: Muni Fare Strike Bulletin #13: November 10 Community March
by Eric Brooks 21 Oct '05

21 Oct '05

We should endorse and join the march. Eric Brooks [Begin Forward] MUNI FARE STRIKE Bulletin #13 Friday, October 21, 2005 http://www.MuniFareStrike.net STOP THE SERVICE CUTS! REVERSE THE FARE HIKE! PAY MORE TO WAIT LONGER? NO WAY! THE FARE STRIKE CONTINUES! BELOW: > November 10 Community March Set > "Cascade of Complaints" about Muni Service Cuts > Muni Revenue Gains Smaller This Year Than Last Year *** NOVEMBER 10 COMMUNITY MARCH SET *** In the wake of ongoing anger with Muni's service cuts and fare hike, the San Francisco Day Labor Program has initiated a call for a Community March to demand that the service cuts and fare hike be reversed. The march is set for Thursday, November 10, starting at 4:00 pm. It will start at 24th and Mission Streets, and go to City Hall. To date, the call for the Community March has been joined by Mujeres Unidas y Activas, POWER (People Organized to Win Employment Rights), the Chinese Progressive Association, St. Peter's Housing Committee, HOMEY, La Raza Centro Legal, CARECEN (Central American Resource Center SF), and Muni Fare Strike. Save the date, and be there! More information will follow. For updates, or to download flyers for the march, check our website at http://www.MuniFareStrike.net. *** "CASCADE OF COMPLAINTS" ABOUT MUNI SERVICE CUTS An article in today's Beyond Chron reports that riders on the 38-Geary, the 71-Haight and the N-Judah are reporting significant "delays in getting to work on time," as well as serious over-crowding, in the wake of Muni's recent service cuts. These complaints contradict Muni's claim that the wait on the 38-Geary has only increased by "one minute," and that they have made no cuts at all to the 71-Haight or the N-Judah. Beyond Chron also reports that Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi has reported a "cascade of complaints" from his constituents complaining about Muni's service cuts. According to the article, Mirkarimi's office is getting complaints from riders about "buses and street cars passing them by, arriving late, or being crowded to the point where it's a safety concern and people are unable to board." Both the 71-Haight and the N-Judah run through Mirkarimi's district. Mirkarimi has written a formal complaint to Muni, citing his "strong frustration with Muni's service." The full article is at http://www.beyondchron.org/link.asp?smenu=110&sdetail=2638. *** MUNI REVENUE GAINS SMALLER THIS YEAR THAN LAST YEAR *** New figures we have seen from Muni show that the revenue from the recent fare increase is not the rip-roaring success story that they claimed it would be. For example, Muni is now bragging about an alleged 11% increase in revenue in September 2005 over September 2004. Yet, that is LESS than the 12% revenue increase they had in September 2004 over September 2003 -- a year without a fare hike. Those who are afraid of numbers should skip the rest of this piece. But, if you do, be forewarned against buying into the spin Muni is now putting out about "soaring revenue" from its recent fare hike. In September, the month that the fare hike took effect, Muni took in about $4.358 million in cash fares on regular transit lines, not including cable cars. In August, just before the fare hike, Muni took in about $4.182 million in cash fares. That's an increase of only $176,000. This works out to an average 7.7% increase in daily cash revenue in September over August. Contrast that 7.7% increase with the fact that Muni raised adult fares by 20% and youth, senior and disabled fares by 40%. Something isn't adding up right. This minimal increase in cash fares is also offset by the fact that ridership usually goes up in September, when tens of thousands of students return to school. Muni's public relations operation has claimed that a lot of riders who had been paying the cash fare would switch to buying the monthly Fast Pass as a result of the fare hike. But, according to Muni's own figures, the increase in revenue from Fast Pass sales this September (2005) compared to September last year (2004), was a mere $110,000. (Muni has not provided Fast Pass sales figures for August, so we can't compare that month.) According to Muni, that is a 2% increase in revenue from Fast Pass sales, very far from the big boost they had been predicting. In fact, Muni reports that sales of the youth discount pass dropped by over 6%, despite the fact that the youth cash fare was raised from 35 cents to 50 cents. Similarly, revenue from the sales of the weekly pass is down by over 4%, in spite of Muni increasing the cost of the weekly pass from $12 to $15. Many low-income people who can't afford $45 for the monthly pass buy the weekly pass -- but obviously fewer are buying it now. Where Muni is making significant revenue gains is in the cable car division. This is hardly surprising, however, given that they raised the fare $2 a pop, from $3 to $5. These days the cable cars are pretty much a tourist trap, and tourism is way up this year. Muni, trying to spin these numbers, has produced elaborate spreadsheets comparing September 2004 revenue to September 2005 revenue. But this comparison is very misleading. According to a recent statement by Stuart Sunshine, Muni's Acting Executive Director, the increase in Muni revenues from September 2004 to September 2005 "may also reflect increases in ridership," not only increases as a result of the fare hike. The fact is that many more San Franciscans are working this year compared to last (over 12,000 according to figures from the California Employment Development Department), and many thousands more Bay Area residents are working in San Francisco. Thousands of these workers are undoubtedly now regularly riding Muni to and from work. In addition, San Francisco is having a banner tourist year, bringing many more people aboard Muni. That is why we have sought to compare August 2005 revenues to September 2005 revenues whenever we have these figures, in order to minimize the effect of increased ridership from last year. What we would like to see next from Muni is data that would allow us to compare August and September cash fare revenue on specific lines, particularly in lower-income communities like the Mission, the Bayview and the Western Addition. We would also like to see revenue figures for October, so that we can see what effect the September 24 service cuts have had on revenue. We'll see whether or not Muni is forthcoming with such data. We would like to thank Supervisor Chris Daly's office, and in particular John Avalos, for help in getting these figures. ***** Please let us know if you are getting duplicates of this bulletin, or would like to unsubscribe. Reply to this message from the email address you would like removed, with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line. (415) 648-1904 MuniFareStrike(a)yahoo.com http://www.MuniFareStrike.net Feel free to forward this bulletin.

1 0

Fwd: Re: [worldoilboycott] Digest Number 158
by Don Eichelberger 21 Oct '05

21 Oct '05

Here is a link to great info on Peak Oil. >To: worldoilboycott(a)yahoogroups.com >From: "Matt Shortridge" <mshortridge(a)gds.org> >Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:01:07 -0400 >Subject: Re: [worldoilboycott] Digest Number 158 > >worldoilboycott(a)yahoogroups.com writes: > >http://www.durangobill.com/Rollover.html >Excellent overview of the reality of oil peak. >I have read a lot of peak oil sites and books, but I hadn't seen that one >before. Thanks for the link. > >-Matt >mshortridge(a)gds.org > >Although economists treat energy just like any other resource, it's not >like any other resource. >Available energy is the precondition for all resources -- including more >available energy. >(Jay Hanson) > > > > > >------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> >Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! >http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/1bSolB/TM >--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > ><*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/worldoilboycott/ > ><*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > worldoilboycott-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com > ><*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > "><"<>"><"<>"><"<>"><"<>"><"<>"><"<>" Organizing is Sorting in to smaller piles, Then dealing with them. Wonder why you can't? It is always best practice To ask how you can. Don Eichelberger Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse http://www.energy-net.org San Francisco Green Party http://www.sfgreenparty.org California State Green Party Issues Working Group Co-coordinator http://cagreens.org/giwg/ Green Community/GreenWorks project for sustainable small businesses http://www.sfgreenworks.org 2940 16th St., #309 San Francisco, CA 94103 phone 415-861-0592 or 415-567-4577 done(a)energy-net.org done(a)greens.org done(a)ispwest.com

1 0

meeting for Tuesday, October 26: what should our agenda be?
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 21 Oct '05

21 Oct '05

Hey folks, What should we have on the agenda for October 26? Sami Sunchild of the Red Vic, for one thing, is eager to have us back. Sue

1 0

Fw: Opening on Transportation Authority's CAC
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 20 Oct '05

20 Oct '05

Hey Everyone, Regina in Ross's office forwarded this to the Green stafflist. Let's try to get someone from the Green Party, especially the TWG, appointed to this (not me, I'm too busy). Sue reply to: Regina.Dick-Endrizzi(a)sfgov.org Please send this email to the Green Party list serve. Regina Dick-Endrizzi Legislative Assistant Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi City Hall 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, RM 244 San Francisco, CA 94102 415-554-7630 ----- Forwarded by Regina Dick-Endrizzi/BOS/SFGOV on 10/20/2005 12:40 PM ----- Hi all, Pleae be advised that there will be a vacancy on the Authority's Citizens Advisory Committee, to be filled at the November 8 Plans and Programs Committee meeting. With this vacancy, there is no representation from Districts 4, 5 or 6 on our CAC. This vacancy is due to a term expiration, and the incumbent is NOT seeking reappointment. I have enclosed the application for your reference, and will be happy to answer any questions. I will also come by with a hard copy of this within the next day or so. Thank you, Pooja Jhunjhunwala Clerk of the Authority San Francisco County Transportation Authority 100 Van Ness Ave., 25th floor San Francisco, CA 94102 415.522.4831 (f) 415.522.4829 <<Recruitmentletter1005.pdf>> www.sfcta.org

1 0

Transbay Joint Powers Authority Community Info Meetings TOMORROW
by Jym Dyer 18 Oct '05

18 Oct '05

What: Transbay Joint Powers Authority Community Info Meeting When: Wednesday, 19-Oct-2005, 12:30pm AND 6:30pm Where: Fire Commission Board Room, Room 101 698 Second Street (at Townsend) Join Supervisor Chris Daly and members of the TJPA to learn more about plans for the Trnasbay Transit Center, slated to replace the Transbay Terminal at First and Mission Streets. RSVP and/or learn more at: http://www.transbaycenter.org/ -- G is for the Glory of it all. Vote NO on G.

1 0