Within the framework of how sustainability is defined there varying levels of concepts that can be applied to how people, communities, nations,a nd the world cooperates. A sustainability isssue that came to recent news is that which is noted in the article, Wal-Mart's Chairman Pulls a Long Supply Chain Toward Sustainability, by Colin Sullivan in the New Yok Times. We find a unique perspective of how a corporate firm is providing some resppnisble measure to issues of sustainability, that which is wide ranging and imapcts locally, and globally.
Of particular note is the measures it will be taking to ensure a higher efficiency methodolgy of business while being responsible to the environment, Sullivan highlights this, "...voluntary commitment to slash 20 million metric tons of carbon emissions from its global supply chain by the end of 2015," (Sullivan, 2010). Also within their plans are, as Sullivan states, "pledge to attain 100 percent of its power from renewable sources of energy and a promise to create zero waste," (Sullivan, 2010). Walmart is a gloabl market pressnece and for them to consider and assume responsible management of their ecological impact is innovative and provides a sense of leadership. By assuming this position and attaining these goals ineviatbly would create local and global reductions in pollutants and responsible energy uses.
The whole initiative at Walmart began when small projects to reduce waste and save energy at local Walamrts were effective. The issue grew and emeged as a corporate wide goal and a means to re-introduce the Walamart brand within the scope of global environmnetalism. Sullivan highlights the CEO Lee Scott's perspective, "He says Wal-Mart's new strategy is to link reducing waste -- whether that means trimming fuel use in its fleet of long haulers or using less plastic wrap -- with lower prices, a connection that works with the average consumer, in his view," (Sullivan, 2010).
Basically what we see happening will be local efforts by Walmart stores and it suppliers to provide economic and effcient ways to provide products by reducing packaging, reducing energy outputs, and creating viable waste resources. This will impact the environment on a grander scale because of the national and international scope Walmart possesses. This will create the opportunity for Walmart to feasibly continue to control the market share of its stake and allow it suppliers to flourish accordingly while creating a way to self coantin and be responsible for its impact on the environments and the communities it serves.
The issue here is to make the Walmart brand gain an environmental image, but it is acting within a responsible framework. In order to assess what corporation wants to do, it will obviuosly take time. I like the ideas it has proposed and they are very feasible. cutting back on waste and providng safer and efficient packaging can be incorporated immediatley. Where they will truly gain merit is if they can reduce enrgy and fuel comsumption, since they are a heavily truck fleet transporter. As far as reducing emmissions they will need to invest in efficent and newer technologies to make their stores emmitt less carbons , and also invest in enrgy saving trucks for their transports.
What I find truly interesting is the innovative approach and contrast to the essence of what we read in Robert Goodland's article, The Concept of Environmental Sustainability, "This paper offers the case that ES does not allow economic growth, muchless sustained economic growth. On the contrary, environmentally sustainable development implies sustainable levels of both production (sources), and consumption(sinks), rather than sustained economic growth" (Goodland, 1995, pp. 5). Walmart CEO seems to be hoping fo the opposite, that by becoming environmentally sound they will resource capitals and garner growth and economic profit. Sullivan describes the CEO'S vision, "Ultimately, Wal-Mart wants the suppliers to measure the environmental impact of their products and make the data available to consumers on store shelves --a bonanza for climate consultants, given how many suppliers are reached by the long arm of the world's dominant retailer. Scott says the layered effort is about using sustainability to lower costs, which he views as connected," (Sullivan, 2010).
I see the suggestion of, as Goodland describes, quantity versus quality in this issue (Goodland, 2010, pp.9). Walmart wants to not to continue growth by size and numbers, but in quality by becoming more efficient and environmenally smart in its approach to providing products. There seems to be a nature values coming into play and it does not seem to be a great cost for Walmart to shift its image. Goodland describes the folowing, "There is little admission yet that consumption above sufficiency is not an unmitigated good," (pp. 13). If I am interpreting this correctly, Walmart is progressing away from this type of trend, reduce, and supply more efficiently to create growth.
references:
Goodland, Robert (1995). The Concept of Environmental Sustainability.Annual Review Ecological Systems, 26, pp. 1-24. Retrieved from https://myasucourses.asu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_125080_1
Sullivan, Collin. (2010, April 14). Wal-Mart's Chairman Pulls a Long Supply Chain Toward Sustainability. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/04/14/14climatewire-wal-marts-chairman-pulls-a-long-supply-chain-93984.html
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
assignment 6
HR 672 Military Environmental Responsibility Act
To understand this bill, a good example is the case of water in Wisconsin. As reported by Elizabeth DiNovella, on her local news blog, rural Wisconsin has been impacted by over fifty years of water pollution from the local Badger Army Ammunitions Plant (Dinovella, 2009). According to citizens in the area, they know first hand that federal agencies have not lived up to environmental standards as they should have along this time frame, it is evident in their drinking waters, and groundwaters, which have shown high levels of carcinogenics and pollutants (Dinovella, 2009). The bill would aid the effort to enforce the local plant to reach compliance and maintain it. Local residents,in a letter to government, have research and Dinovella quotes them, "Unregulated military projects have placed countless communities, workers, soldiers, and families at increased risk for cancer and other deadly disease from exposure to military toxins–the hidden casualties here at home," (Dinovella, 2009). Furthermore, evidence shows, as Dinovella quotes local residents, "Independent reviews by the Government Accountability Office have shown that environmental compliance does NOT interfere with the military’s ability to do its job," (Dinovella, 2009). Thus, it seems like th epassage of this bill would aid the community, and help the plant reach compliance, while not creating an impact in their regular duties, a win-win situation.
1. H.R. 672 definitely has the potetial to set off a firestorm of value based
issues. It seems that a mjor economic investment the U.S makes year after year is in military funding. H.R. 672 may impact the way and or where financial resources are used, even how, because it focuses on making agencies in military roles cooperate with environmental guidelines. These agancies will have to decide critically on using their funding to clean up their programs, and reduce costs for their projects, and or continue to impact the environment while pursuing those projects as they are. If increased funds would be appropriated within this bill, it may aid the persuasion to comply, as the case in Wisconsin, since it would not impact the regular infrastructure or duties there within.
2. Currently H.R. 672 has not action pending. The political climate surrounding it is minimal. It is sponsored by Bob Filner from California. The bill is curerently within the committee for readiness, which has had it since February of 2009. Raul Grijalva from Arizona is one co-sponsor.
3. Within the scientific aspects of the bill,it only calls for the agencies to comply with the standards set in the environmental protection act of 1969. Thus it may seem a bit outdated with regards to curent technology and curent standards set for other environmental cocnerns such as emmission, energy, water,etc. I guess the central theme would address whether these agancies can at least meet some minimal environmnatal requirement, and continue their projects with an environmental mindset.
4. Policy design is not a major component of this bill, as it is only a requirement for agncies to meet compliance. The policy design was established in 1969 and any new policy measres would have to be introduced accordingly and through the appropriate measures. I guess within the defense agencies' projects only engineers and scientists could gauge the efficiency of the policy design and attest to its feasibility with any project. If it is a measure for the agency to produce decreasing pollutant levels, it may just be a case of design of the infrastructure and reporting compliance?
5. Management is key within this bill because you are dealing with major government agancies that have protocols of leadership and security measures that are highly complex and tightly monitored. It seems this will be a difficult realm to maneveur within and may be a major point of challenges to regulation of the proposed measures.
References
Dinovella, Elizabeth. (2009, June 5th). Fighting Militarism’s Toxic Legacy. Retreived from http://www.lizdinovella.com/?tag=hr-672
To understand this bill, a good example is the case of water in Wisconsin. As reported by Elizabeth DiNovella, on her local news blog, rural Wisconsin has been impacted by over fifty years of water pollution from the local Badger Army Ammunitions Plant (Dinovella, 2009). According to citizens in the area, they know first hand that federal agencies have not lived up to environmental standards as they should have along this time frame, it is evident in their drinking waters, and groundwaters, which have shown high levels of carcinogenics and pollutants (Dinovella, 2009). The bill would aid the effort to enforce the local plant to reach compliance and maintain it. Local residents,in a letter to government, have research and Dinovella quotes them, "Unregulated military projects have placed countless communities, workers, soldiers, and families at increased risk for cancer and other deadly disease from exposure to military toxins–the hidden casualties here at home," (Dinovella, 2009). Furthermore, evidence shows, as Dinovella quotes local residents, "Independent reviews by the Government Accountability Office have shown that environmental compliance does NOT interfere with the military’s ability to do its job," (Dinovella, 2009). Thus, it seems like th epassage of this bill would aid the community, and help the plant reach compliance, while not creating an impact in their regular duties, a win-win situation.
1. H.R. 672 definitely has the potetial to set off a firestorm of value based
issues. It seems that a mjor economic investment the U.S makes year after year is in military funding. H.R. 672 may impact the way and or where financial resources are used, even how, because it focuses on making agencies in military roles cooperate with environmental guidelines. These agancies will have to decide critically on using their funding to clean up their programs, and reduce costs for their projects, and or continue to impact the environment while pursuing those projects as they are. If increased funds would be appropriated within this bill, it may aid the persuasion to comply, as the case in Wisconsin, since it would not impact the regular infrastructure or duties there within.
2. Currently H.R. 672 has not action pending. The political climate surrounding it is minimal. It is sponsored by Bob Filner from California. The bill is curerently within the committee for readiness, which has had it since February of 2009. Raul Grijalva from Arizona is one co-sponsor.
3. Within the scientific aspects of the bill,it only calls for the agencies to comply with the standards set in the environmental protection act of 1969. Thus it may seem a bit outdated with regards to curent technology and curent standards set for other environmental cocnerns such as emmission, energy, water,etc. I guess the central theme would address whether these agancies can at least meet some minimal environmnatal requirement, and continue their projects with an environmental mindset.
4. Policy design is not a major component of this bill, as it is only a requirement for agncies to meet compliance. The policy design was established in 1969 and any new policy measres would have to be introduced accordingly and through the appropriate measures. I guess within the defense agencies' projects only engineers and scientists could gauge the efficiency of the policy design and attest to its feasibility with any project. If it is a measure for the agency to produce decreasing pollutant levels, it may just be a case of design of the infrastructure and reporting compliance?
5. Management is key within this bill because you are dealing with major government agancies that have protocols of leadership and security measures that are highly complex and tightly monitored. It seems this will be a difficult realm to maneveur within and may be a major point of challenges to regulation of the proposed measures.
References
Dinovella, Elizabeth. (2009, June 5th). Fighting Militarism’s Toxic Legacy. Retreived from http://www.lizdinovella.com/?tag=hr-672
Sunday, March 28, 2010
assignment 5 part 3
Thus far I believe I have narrowed down my search to H.R. 672. This bill constitutes a reform within varying aganecies to comply with federal regulations established within the environmental protection act of 1969. This bill aims to have the standards set within that act to be fully complied by some of the U.S. major defense agancies.
Some of the Agencies that are under the scope of this legislation are the department of defense, department of energy, and the nuclear regulatory commission. Plus the bill also suggests that the President has discretion to include other agancies as necessary.
hat I found most interesting at first read was that the legislation includes for adminsitartive enforcement. This to my knowledge means that the internal review and regulation will constitute the ganecies to self regulate and comply, otherwise they will face action.
as of now I like this bill, but there has been no major action in over a year, so I am still looking for something interesting, I may change it.
Some of the Agencies that are under the scope of this legislation are the department of defense, department of energy, and the nuclear regulatory commission. Plus the bill also suggests that the President has discretion to include other agancies as necessary.
hat I found most interesting at first read was that the legislation includes for adminsitartive enforcement. This to my knowledge means that the internal review and regulation will constitute the ganecies to self regulate and comply, otherwise they will face action.
as of now I like this bill, but there has been no major action in over a year, so I am still looking for something interesting, I may change it.
Part 2 assignment #5
1 and 2.
In a sense we can do little about developing countries and the way they regulate their environments. So, these countries will typically do as they wish. It does effect the global community, but we cannot mandate any regulation outside our national jurisdiction. We can continue to make accords, pacts, create tradeoffs with these countires to raise awarness and educate them about their behavior, but that is the xtent it can reach. In the long run, it is a mjor concern, and we can educate by pointing to ur mistakes, but economic development takes precedence, when it is needed and not priorly existent. Thus, in the short term incremental changes are all we can generate and hope for. Since we have succeeded economically, for the most part, other countries will model this, and subsequently we would hope they could learn from our mistakes, but like anythin in life you must learn from your own mistakes. I do not think other countries should exploit their environment, but it is only because I see the ultimate outcome, and have learned by the mistakes we have made, and from becoming educated from other knowledgeable sources. Ultimately this is the only way these countries can explore change, which cannot be forced.
Equity is not feasible in my opinion, it is only a virtue and a belief, but it would be optimal. As described by Tobin, in his piece Environment, Population, and teh Developing World, in Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Michael E. Kraft and Noman J. Vig, "In short, there are continuing questions aout whetehr the current economic model that depends on growth and extravagant consumption among a few is ecologically sustainable and morally acceptable for everyone, (Vig, 2010, pp. 304). In essence it would be paradise if we could reach equity and create environmental change globally and disperse resources accordingly. Not only would we improve economic conditions and the environment, but would solve many aspects of modern life that need improvement, yet these is a present day illusion. The disparate ideological and societal beliefs that are unique throughout populations in the world are not on the same plane, we barely have economical and market structures that cross these realms. I am not saying it is not possibel on day, but the world populations have never reached any equity or normalcy across beliefs and governoing systems, why would we come togetehr for the environment? We should, but presently we cannot,so what truly governs? economics? a realm which is aalwayd competitive and non equitable, where can we balance this and reach the levels in other problems that we want. We are creatung a consensu, so it is satrt, an an optimistic view is great so I hope we push forth, for example Matthew, in Environmenatl Security, in Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, "It will have to act in a world in which many of its domestic populace see a planet in crisis and beleive that crafting more effective and aggressive policies should be a national priority," (pp. 327).
References
Matthew, Richard A, (2010). Environmental Security. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (327-348). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Tobin, Richard J. (2010) Environment, Population, and the Developing World. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (286-307). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
In a sense we can do little about developing countries and the way they regulate their environments. So, these countries will typically do as they wish. It does effect the global community, but we cannot mandate any regulation outside our national jurisdiction. We can continue to make accords, pacts, create tradeoffs with these countires to raise awarness and educate them about their behavior, but that is the xtent it can reach. In the long run, it is a mjor concern, and we can educate by pointing to ur mistakes, but economic development takes precedence, when it is needed and not priorly existent. Thus, in the short term incremental changes are all we can generate and hope for. Since we have succeeded economically, for the most part, other countries will model this, and subsequently we would hope they could learn from our mistakes, but like anythin in life you must learn from your own mistakes. I do not think other countries should exploit their environment, but it is only because I see the ultimate outcome, and have learned by the mistakes we have made, and from becoming educated from other knowledgeable sources. Ultimately this is the only way these countries can explore change, which cannot be forced.
Equity is not feasible in my opinion, it is only a virtue and a belief, but it would be optimal. As described by Tobin, in his piece Environment, Population, and teh Developing World, in Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Michael E. Kraft and Noman J. Vig, "In short, there are continuing questions aout whetehr the current economic model that depends on growth and extravagant consumption among a few is ecologically sustainable and morally acceptable for everyone, (Vig, 2010, pp. 304). In essence it would be paradise if we could reach equity and create environmental change globally and disperse resources accordingly. Not only would we improve economic conditions and the environment, but would solve many aspects of modern life that need improvement, yet these is a present day illusion. The disparate ideological and societal beliefs that are unique throughout populations in the world are not on the same plane, we barely have economical and market structures that cross these realms. I am not saying it is not possibel on day, but the world populations have never reached any equity or normalcy across beliefs and governoing systems, why would we come togetehr for the environment? We should, but presently we cannot,so what truly governs? economics? a realm which is aalwayd competitive and non equitable, where can we balance this and reach the levels in other problems that we want. We are creatung a consensu, so it is satrt, an an optimistic view is great so I hope we push forth, for example Matthew, in Environmenatl Security, in Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, "It will have to act in a world in which many of its domestic populace see a planet in crisis and beleive that crafting more effective and aggressive policies should be a national priority," (pp. 327).
References
Matthew, Richard A, (2010). Environmental Security. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (327-348). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Tobin, Richard J. (2010) Environment, Population, and the Developing World. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (286-307). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
environmental justice
Living in Arizona, for most of us, has become a routine battle with the weather, in particular, the summer heat. I think at some point people have decided to battle this as best they can, or not and try and adapt to the heat. Interestingly enough studies are being conducted around heat islands, of particular interest is the article by Shaun McKinnon in the AZ Republic, posted september 20th 2009, Study: Wealth buys rescue from urban heat island.
Central to the study, McKinnon states, "That link between money and the ability to cope with extreme weather emerged clearly in the research. Among the startling revelations: For every $10,000 an area's income rises, the average outside temperature drops one-half degree Fahrenheit," (McKinnon, 2009). Mckinnon goes on to report several references that link income and the ability to survive more aptly to heat. The differences range from communities who have residents with higher incomes, thus their environments are funded more diversely to conserve energy and protect against the heat. McKinnon reports, "Heat discriminates. Phoenix's sweltering summer inflicts the most misery and illness in poor neighborhoods, a new study shows, and among people least able to protect themselves from the elements (McKinnon, 2009).
Mckinnon really focuses in on the study conducted by Darren Ruddell and Sharon Harlan, They seem to be researching the intensity of heat exposure for people within or near heat islands, and to define the varying types of heat islands. McKinnon reports on the research by Ruddell and Harlan, "In the most barren urban neighborhoods, residents were exposed to almost 22 hours of the intense heat. In the xeric areas, the exposure was about 16 hours. In natural-desert areas, the exposure dropped to six hours, and in the lushly landscaped areas, residents suffered just four hours of intense heat," (McKinnon, 2009). The study, seems to try and investigate the varying landscaping features that are being used and how they do or do not have an added effect to the heat intensity exposure to people, and how we can combat that to use landscapes that help the heat island effects. McKinnon reports furthermore on Ruddell and Harlan, "What Ruddell discovered was that in many cases, the land cover and the types of landscaping mattered more than the geographic location of the neighborhood," (McKinnon, 2009).
Finally what this research and reporting identifies is the opportunity to alleviate environmental climate change in Arizona. This can be done by being aware of the landscape and heat culmination we live in and invest accordingly to protect people, the environment, and preserve energy. Environmental justice within this issue centers around protecting people who cannot afford to protect themselves from the effects of urban development. As cities grow and develop, particularly in Arizona, there are technological and design features that do have ill effects to people in areas that are not economically sound to design and provide its residents the same. On top of that it is an issue within human rights, lower income and the homeless must be accounted for as more economically viable communities can combat the rising temperatures and climate change. We canot leave them behind, some support must be afforded to them and their environments brought up to a standrad to combat the basic changes and rising climate worries. Finally central to the issue here is the following comments in which we learn what we can do with this data, what come next in solving heat island heat exposure and creating communities that conserve eenrgy and produce climate friendly environments for all people in the valley? McKinnon reports, "Understanding the ways in which heat and land use interact could also help urban planners design neighborhoods in ways that stop heat islands from developing. Landscaped open space, roofs and building materialsthat absorb less heat and even the color of homes and offices could make streets more comfortable," (McKinnon, 2009). McKinnon also states, "Preventing the heat islands from forming could lower temperatures at night enough to reduce the draw on air-conditioners and the energy they use and the extra heat the units emit. Lower energy demands could, over time, help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, which many point to as the driver behind global warming," (McKinnon, 2009).
This issue relates to environmental justice becasue it centers around the unequal distribution of access to resources that can help alleviate climate effects. In this case it does not seem to be a delibirate unequal distribution of resources, it is just a negative effect of urban development that has occured. What needs to be addressed is the way in which we can reduce heat islands as they have been constructed to reduce the heat intensity for all, then create new designs that will lessen the rise of these islands in the future. As these measures are designed there must be some civic responsibility to ensure economic resources are contributed to low income communities. This needs to be addressed because it will help reduce the stress of heat realted illness that has risen in these areas becasue economics is more important between food vs. cooling scenarios. Particularly in the article, Environmental Justice and the New Regionalism, by Joel Rast, he comments the following, other research, "Pastor et al. (2000) have argued in favor of “equity-based regionalism,” which would focus on deconcentrating poverty, tax-base sharing, and more equitable distribution of public services. The authors present evidence that addressing regional inequities creates win-win situations in which regional economies and prospects for lowincome populations are both enhanced," (Rast, 2006, pp.5). What is important to remember within the movements to enhance environmetal quality, are the conomic differences in cities, states, countries, and the globe. There are great ideas, but, it seems that sometimes they do not encompass the totality of varying sectors of the population in reference to economics. Government needs to take initiative to allocate the proper economic sources to help set standrads of viable climate impact for a true and definitive population, in other words all, regardless of any demogrpahic, social, and economic differences. Rast states, "Environmental justice is emerging as an increasingly effective tool for addressing inner-city poverty. Environmental justice advocates are using new federal regulations on environmental justice as well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (which Executive Order 12898 amplifies) to address inequities in health, transportation, employment, and other policy areas for inner-city minorities," (pp. 7). Finally the issue could in a way create the opportunity to address effective EMS. This could be done by landscape business' creating opportunities to support environmetal causes within the communities they provide services to. They could activate responsible awareness of materials they provide and use for the landscaping they provide. Donate adequate resources to lower income areas to create landscapes that are environmenatlly efficient, and or they could create business measures to ensure quality standards in the services and products they provide. They could also create community building with ur busniess; to improve the landscape features in the communities, lower income communites, they service to reduce the ill effects of heat islands and the disparaty between the wealthier communities.
A.
The data to supportt this issue is the geographical annalysis provided by the study from Ruddell and Harlan. Lanscape features in varying areas in Arizoan produce unique effects and in lower income ares it is a risk for peopel who do not have the ability to invest in lanscape features to support energy, and heat diffusion, or land cover away from heat.
B.
The bottom line in this issue is that low income residents are being effected by climate change and the rise of heat islands.
C. The issue addresses enviomental justice within a disparity between people who can afford to cool their environment and people who cannot. Measures by government can help create initiative to allocate resources and funds to help lower income communities cool their environments. The issue could include the ability for local business' to create effective Environmental management strategies to aid the surrouinding communities, lower income communities, and create reliefs and incentives within their companies.
McKinnon, Shaun. (2009, September 20). Study: Wealth buys rescue from urban heat island. The Arizona Republic. Retrieved from http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/09/20/20090920env-heat0920.html
Rast, Joel. (2006). Environmental Justice and the New Regionalism. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25, pp. 249-263. Retrieved from https://myasucourses.asu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_125080_1
Central to the study, McKinnon states, "That link between money and the ability to cope with extreme weather emerged clearly in the research. Among the startling revelations: For every $10,000 an area's income rises, the average outside temperature drops one-half degree Fahrenheit," (McKinnon, 2009). Mckinnon goes on to report several references that link income and the ability to survive more aptly to heat. The differences range from communities who have residents with higher incomes, thus their environments are funded more diversely to conserve energy and protect against the heat. McKinnon reports, "Heat discriminates. Phoenix's sweltering summer inflicts the most misery and illness in poor neighborhoods, a new study shows, and among people least able to protect themselves from the elements (McKinnon, 2009).
Mckinnon really focuses in on the study conducted by Darren Ruddell and Sharon Harlan, They seem to be researching the intensity of heat exposure for people within or near heat islands, and to define the varying types of heat islands. McKinnon reports on the research by Ruddell and Harlan, "In the most barren urban neighborhoods, residents were exposed to almost 22 hours of the intense heat. In the xeric areas, the exposure was about 16 hours. In natural-desert areas, the exposure dropped to six hours, and in the lushly landscaped areas, residents suffered just four hours of intense heat," (McKinnon, 2009). The study, seems to try and investigate the varying landscaping features that are being used and how they do or do not have an added effect to the heat intensity exposure to people, and how we can combat that to use landscapes that help the heat island effects. McKinnon reports furthermore on Ruddell and Harlan, "What Ruddell discovered was that in many cases, the land cover and the types of landscaping mattered more than the geographic location of the neighborhood," (McKinnon, 2009).
Finally what this research and reporting identifies is the opportunity to alleviate environmental climate change in Arizona. This can be done by being aware of the landscape and heat culmination we live in and invest accordingly to protect people, the environment, and preserve energy. Environmental justice within this issue centers around protecting people who cannot afford to protect themselves from the effects of urban development. As cities grow and develop, particularly in Arizona, there are technological and design features that do have ill effects to people in areas that are not economically sound to design and provide its residents the same. On top of that it is an issue within human rights, lower income and the homeless must be accounted for as more economically viable communities can combat the rising temperatures and climate change. We canot leave them behind, some support must be afforded to them and their environments brought up to a standrad to combat the basic changes and rising climate worries. Finally central to the issue here is the following comments in which we learn what we can do with this data, what come next in solving heat island heat exposure and creating communities that conserve eenrgy and produce climate friendly environments for all people in the valley? McKinnon reports, "Understanding the ways in which heat and land use interact could also help urban planners design neighborhoods in ways that stop heat islands from developing. Landscaped open space, roofs and building materialsthat absorb less heat and even the color of homes and offices could make streets more comfortable," (McKinnon, 2009). McKinnon also states, "Preventing the heat islands from forming could lower temperatures at night enough to reduce the draw on air-conditioners and the energy they use and the extra heat the units emit. Lower energy demands could, over time, help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, which many point to as the driver behind global warming," (McKinnon, 2009).
This issue relates to environmental justice becasue it centers around the unequal distribution of access to resources that can help alleviate climate effects. In this case it does not seem to be a delibirate unequal distribution of resources, it is just a negative effect of urban development that has occured. What needs to be addressed is the way in which we can reduce heat islands as they have been constructed to reduce the heat intensity for all, then create new designs that will lessen the rise of these islands in the future. As these measures are designed there must be some civic responsibility to ensure economic resources are contributed to low income communities. This needs to be addressed because it will help reduce the stress of heat realted illness that has risen in these areas becasue economics is more important between food vs. cooling scenarios. Particularly in the article, Environmental Justice and the New Regionalism, by Joel Rast, he comments the following, other research, "Pastor et al. (2000) have argued in favor of “equity-based regionalism,” which would focus on deconcentrating poverty, tax-base sharing, and more equitable distribution of public services. The authors present evidence that addressing regional inequities creates win-win situations in which regional economies and prospects for lowincome populations are both enhanced," (Rast, 2006, pp.5). What is important to remember within the movements to enhance environmetal quality, are the conomic differences in cities, states, countries, and the globe. There are great ideas, but, it seems that sometimes they do not encompass the totality of varying sectors of the population in reference to economics. Government needs to take initiative to allocate the proper economic sources to help set standrads of viable climate impact for a true and definitive population, in other words all, regardless of any demogrpahic, social, and economic differences. Rast states, "Environmental justice is emerging as an increasingly effective tool for addressing inner-city poverty. Environmental justice advocates are using new federal regulations on environmental justice as well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (which Executive Order 12898 amplifies) to address inequities in health, transportation, employment, and other policy areas for inner-city minorities," (pp. 7). Finally the issue could in a way create the opportunity to address effective EMS. This could be done by landscape business' creating opportunities to support environmetal causes within the communities they provide services to. They could activate responsible awareness of materials they provide and use for the landscaping they provide. Donate adequate resources to lower income areas to create landscapes that are environmenatlly efficient, and or they could create business measures to ensure quality standards in the services and products they provide. They could also create community building with ur busniess; to improve the landscape features in the communities, lower income communites, they service to reduce the ill effects of heat islands and the disparaty between the wealthier communities.
A.
The data to supportt this issue is the geographical annalysis provided by the study from Ruddell and Harlan. Lanscape features in varying areas in Arizoan produce unique effects and in lower income ares it is a risk for peopel who do not have the ability to invest in lanscape features to support energy, and heat diffusion, or land cover away from heat.
B.
The bottom line in this issue is that low income residents are being effected by climate change and the rise of heat islands.
C. The issue addresses enviomental justice within a disparity between people who can afford to cool their environment and people who cannot. Measures by government can help create initiative to allocate resources and funds to help lower income communities cool their environments. The issue could include the ability for local business' to create effective Environmental management strategies to aid the surrouinding communities, lower income communities, and create reliefs and incentives within their companies.
McKinnon, Shaun. (2009, September 20). Study: Wealth buys rescue from urban heat island. The Arizona Republic. Retrieved from http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/09/20/20090920env-heat0920.html
Rast, Joel. (2006). Environmental Justice and the New Regionalism. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25, pp. 249-263. Retrieved from https://myasucourses.asu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_125080_1
Sunday, February 28, 2010
General questions
13. I would approach the public in any and all issues within an inclusive strategy. Although there may be some limited scientific understanding, there can always be a way to translate the significanc of an issue. The key would be to be revealing and poignant, and by no means be untruhful nor misleading. Easy to say, obviously, but there should be a a measure to at least create awareness whether the public supports or negates the issue, and or policy. The choices must inlcude their values, it does not necessarily need to convey the policy decision, but at least it should provide a perpective of what the public knows, feels, and understands about the issue. Which in turn helps position the decisons that lay ahead. A perspective that aids health issues, and teens related issues, is public service announcements and youth awareness campaigns. This increase in visual, written, and word of mouth awareness creates value and support, and or negates it, but it puts forth the issues in striking, relevant, and powefully conveyed messages.
14 & 15.
Contingent valuation provides a necessary scope of public inclusion. I really feel that this approach is very inclusive of the public. I feel it could be effective, but how many of us truly like to fill out surveys? Other fields and issues try to survey people and get their opinions and perspectives, it creates privacy issues and it can be time consuming, and creates excess paper work. Don't get me wrong, I want to be informed and want to give my values, especially within environmental concerns that would harm our society, globally and locally. I feel that locally would be the best fit scenario, on a national scale it seems like it would be another census? So within communities, cities, towns, local air, water, and polltuion concerns could bear great perspective from the local poeple attaining to the issue. And really provide their concern and how they feel it should be addressed within that community they participate in. Then, as local water, air, and environmental issues garner effect and are being resolved the the contingent model could be increasedin breadth, until ultimately it captures the largest venue it can, incrementally it will be effective.
Where it seems troublesome would be on private firm actions, like within the cap/trade system. A public individual is and can be affeted by the emmissions from a private firm, but he/she has no legal authority to decide the scope and policy maneuvering the firm can make and does within its emmission standards. Although public value could be effective in raising awareness and concern that could help the firm evaluate its actions, it would merit little effect on the steps the firm is willing to take, economically, to reduce or buy permits to pollute.
anyways just my two cents in answering these questions for assignment 3.
Fabian
14 & 15.
Contingent valuation provides a necessary scope of public inclusion. I really feel that this approach is very inclusive of the public. I feel it could be effective, but how many of us truly like to fill out surveys? Other fields and issues try to survey people and get their opinions and perspectives, it creates privacy issues and it can be time consuming, and creates excess paper work. Don't get me wrong, I want to be informed and want to give my values, especially within environmental concerns that would harm our society, globally and locally. I feel that locally would be the best fit scenario, on a national scale it seems like it would be another census? So within communities, cities, towns, local air, water, and polltuion concerns could bear great perspective from the local poeple attaining to the issue. And really provide their concern and how they feel it should be addressed within that community they participate in. Then, as local water, air, and environmental issues garner effect and are being resolved the the contingent model could be increasedin breadth, until ultimately it captures the largest venue it can, incrementally it will be effective.
Where it seems troublesome would be on private firm actions, like within the cap/trade system. A public individual is and can be affeted by the emmissions from a private firm, but he/she has no legal authority to decide the scope and policy maneuvering the firm can make and does within its emmission standards. Although public value could be effective in raising awareness and concern that could help the firm evaluate its actions, it would merit little effect on the steps the firm is willing to take, economically, to reduce or buy permits to pollute.
anyways just my two cents in answering these questions for assignment 3.
Fabian
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Assignment #2 part 1 Article analysis
In recent months and over the past year we have become accustomed to reports from the auto industry, from economic and environmental perspectives. In respect to environmental policy there has been a pressing issue to create new regulatory measures for emission and fuel economy standards. In the New York Times, in the article, Obama Directs Regulators to Tighten Auto Rules, written by John M. Broder, published January 26th 2009, there is as perspective of environmental policy from the Obama Administration we use to measure previous and current trends within emission and fuel economy standards.
What we can dissect immediately from this early stance on an environmental issue, from the Obama Administration, is that environmental policy will be at the front of the agenda in this presidency. Most notably, this strong stance on increasing and creating much more efficient and high standards aligns with the administration of Bill Clinton. President Clinton's administration set within their environmental agenda to increase corporate average fuel economy for cars, support mass transit, and support renewable energy (Vig, 2010, pp. 82). Also Obama has set a pattern, much like Bill Clinton, that has seen him directly reversing the previous administrations policies, as stated by Michael E. Kraft and Norman J. Vig in the book Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Michael E. Kraft and Norman J. Vig, “ Clinton reversed many of the Reagan- and Bush era executive actions that were widely criticized by environmentalists, and he favored increased spending on environmental programs, alternative energy and conservation research, and international population policy,” (pp. 15) Most notably Obama set within his environmental agenda, specifically, and as presented by Norman J. Vig, “To double automobile fuel economy within eighteen years and to put one million plug in hybrid cars on the road by 2015,” (pp. 91). Obama's policy was to set a higher standard across the board that would help reduce greenhouse gases immediately. He set the timetable for auto makers to make the necessary changes to automobiles that would create changes for cars hitting the road by 2011 (Broder, 2009). This also aligns with the ability to begin to get cleaner cars on the road within his timeline of 18 years. At the center of this policy setting is the indirect, direct order from President Obama to the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department, according to John Broder, in the New York Times, “But the centerpiece of Monday’s announcement was Mr. Obama’s directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to begin work immediately on granting California a waiver under the Clean Air Act to allow the state, a longtime leader in air quality matters, to set standards for automobile emissions that are stricter than the national rules,” (Broder, 2009). This makes the point as where the Obama Administration has a direct opposition to the previous George W. Bush's agenda. In 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency, under Supreme Court decision, was justified to regulate greenhouse gases (Vig, 2010, pp. 90). Yet the Bush Administration denied California the ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from cars, and proposals for the EPA to start to develop regulatory procedures (pp. 90). The Bush administration, according to Norman J. Vig, “Bush refused to acknowledge the growing scientific consensus on global warming and opposed all efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions,” (pp. 90). Another clear difference between Bush and Obama is the emphasis placed on funding for environmental policies, for 2010 the budget would fund the EPA by 48% more than the Bush administration in 2009 (pp. 92).
I praise the Obama administration for attempting to set a highs standard of policy for environmental issues. I like the reduction in emission and higher standard for fuel economy. It seems the avenue that effects the climate daily, even hourly, as vehicles continually operate and pollute the air, thus reducing the pollutants and creating better standards of operation for our vehicles can make quick and significant, positive, impacts on he environment. I also like that Obama is taking a direct approach to challenge and reverse the policies set and ignored by George W. Bush. The only negative I can see from this perspective that he sets out to have 1 million cars by 2025, but he may not be able to see this through because their will have been at least a possible 2 new administrations within that timeframe shaping policy. He should be even more assertive and set even higher goals to get some of this scenarios realized. I know that is easier said than done, but if he shoots higher, the may fall closer to his projected goals, and realistic outcomes could result. Nonetheless, we seem to be headed in the right direct, by setting better fuel standards and emission levels, it will help. Incrementally, by directing the EPA and Transportation department, and auto makers to get things moving by at least 2011, we will begin to see changes soon enough.
References:
Broder, John M.(2009, January 26). Obama Directs Regulators to Tighten Auto Rules. The New York Times. retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/us/politics/27calif.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=obama%20environmental%20policy&st=Search
Vig, Norman J. (2010).Presidential Powers and Environmental Policy. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (75-98). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
What we can dissect immediately from this early stance on an environmental issue, from the Obama Administration, is that environmental policy will be at the front of the agenda in this presidency. Most notably, this strong stance on increasing and creating much more efficient and high standards aligns with the administration of Bill Clinton. President Clinton's administration set within their environmental agenda to increase corporate average fuel economy for cars, support mass transit, and support renewable energy (Vig, 2010, pp. 82). Also Obama has set a pattern, much like Bill Clinton, that has seen him directly reversing the previous administrations policies, as stated by Michael E. Kraft and Norman J. Vig in the book Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Michael E. Kraft and Norman J. Vig, “ Clinton reversed many of the Reagan- and Bush era executive actions that were widely criticized by environmentalists, and he favored increased spending on environmental programs, alternative energy and conservation research, and international population policy,” (pp. 15) Most notably Obama set within his environmental agenda, specifically, and as presented by Norman J. Vig, “To double automobile fuel economy within eighteen years and to put one million plug in hybrid cars on the road by 2015,” (pp. 91). Obama's policy was to set a higher standard across the board that would help reduce greenhouse gases immediately. He set the timetable for auto makers to make the necessary changes to automobiles that would create changes for cars hitting the road by 2011 (Broder, 2009). This also aligns with the ability to begin to get cleaner cars on the road within his timeline of 18 years. At the center of this policy setting is the indirect, direct order from President Obama to the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department, according to John Broder, in the New York Times, “But the centerpiece of Monday’s announcement was Mr. Obama’s directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to begin work immediately on granting California a waiver under the Clean Air Act to allow the state, a longtime leader in air quality matters, to set standards for automobile emissions that are stricter than the national rules,” (Broder, 2009). This makes the point as where the Obama Administration has a direct opposition to the previous George W. Bush's agenda. In 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency, under Supreme Court decision, was justified to regulate greenhouse gases (Vig, 2010, pp. 90). Yet the Bush Administration denied California the ability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from cars, and proposals for the EPA to start to develop regulatory procedures (pp. 90). The Bush administration, according to Norman J. Vig, “Bush refused to acknowledge the growing scientific consensus on global warming and opposed all efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions,” (pp. 90). Another clear difference between Bush and Obama is the emphasis placed on funding for environmental policies, for 2010 the budget would fund the EPA by 48% more than the Bush administration in 2009 (pp. 92).
I praise the Obama administration for attempting to set a highs standard of policy for environmental issues. I like the reduction in emission and higher standard for fuel economy. It seems the avenue that effects the climate daily, even hourly, as vehicles continually operate and pollute the air, thus reducing the pollutants and creating better standards of operation for our vehicles can make quick and significant, positive, impacts on he environment. I also like that Obama is taking a direct approach to challenge and reverse the policies set and ignored by George W. Bush. The only negative I can see from this perspective that he sets out to have 1 million cars by 2025, but he may not be able to see this through because their will have been at least a possible 2 new administrations within that timeframe shaping policy. He should be even more assertive and set even higher goals to get some of this scenarios realized. I know that is easier said than done, but if he shoots higher, the may fall closer to his projected goals, and realistic outcomes could result. Nonetheless, we seem to be headed in the right direct, by setting better fuel standards and emission levels, it will help. Incrementally, by directing the EPA and Transportation department, and auto makers to get things moving by at least 2011, we will begin to see changes soon enough.
References:
Broder, John M.(2009, January 26). Obama Directs Regulators to Tighten Auto Rules. The New York Times. retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/us/politics/27calif.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=obama%20environmental%20policy&st=Search
Vig, Norman J. (2010).Presidential Powers and Environmental Policy. In Vig, Norman J. & Kraft, Michael E. (Ed.), Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century pp. (75-98). Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)