Interview: Dr. James Hansen, Part 2

  • Dr. James Hansen's book, 'Storms Of My Grandchildren: The Truth About The Coming Climate Catastrophe And Our Last Chance To Save Humanity' (Photo courtesy of Bloomsbury USA)

James Hansen is the author of
‘The Storms of My Grandchildren:
The Truth About The Coming Climate
Catastrophe And Our Last Chance To
Save Humanity.’ This is the second
half of our interview with Dr. Hansen.
He’s a climate scientist for NASA
and was the first scientist to testify
before Congress about climate change.
He stresses, he’s not speaking for
the government, but only for himself:

Transcript

James Hansen is the author of
‘The Storms of My Grandchildren:
The Truth About The Coming Climate
Catastrophe And Our Last Chance To
Save Humanity.’ This is the second
half of our interview with Dr. Hansen.
He’s a climate scientist for NASA
and was the first scientist to testify
before Congress about climate change.
He stresses, he’s not speaking for
the government, but only for himself:

Lester Graham: Doctor Hansen, in the book you say we should scrap the cap and trade system to reduce greenhouse gases, and instead go with a fee on fossil fuels and then give that money to the people directly to help them adapt to higher energy costs. How would that work?

Dr. James Hansen: The fee would be charged at the mine or the oil head or the port of entry for imported fossil fuels. It’d be collected from the fossil fuel companies and then they money should be distributed to the public on a uniform basis. You’d introduce this gradually so that people can change their habits, the technology that they use, the vehicles that they use, for example. So, you introduce it gradually, but by the time it’s reached a dollar of gallon on gasoline, at the rate of fossil fuel use last year, that would be generating $3,000 per legal resident of the country with to half a share to each child, up to two children per family. So a family with two or more children would be getting $9,000 a year in this dividend, which should be sent to them monthly just automatically, electronically, to their bank account or their debit card if they don’t have a bank account.

Lester: We’re talking about getting that through Washington D.C, where special interests drive the agenda often. I don’t want to accuse you of being naïve, but I believe many in Washington would.

Dr. Hansen: Yes, they do, however, there is a growing realization, environmental groups, like Friends of the Earth, which now recognize this is exactly what’s needed and they’re beginning to promote that. I think that’s why it’s a good thing that we’re kinda taking, probably taking, a year off dropping this cap and trade and give us a chance to discuss this because it’s what’s in the interest of the public as opposed to the lobbyists.

Lester: Since you first made congress aware of climate change as a pressing issue, the Clinton-Gore administration did nothing. President George W. Bush indicated he would deal with the emissions causing climate change, and then evidently Dick Cheney worked to kill that effort and Bush reversed his position. Now President Barak Obama has indicated we must do something, but legislation in Congress is stalled right now. What do you this is stopping this effort if this is such a serious threat?

Dr. Hansen: It is the role of money in Washington and other capitals around the world. Special interests have more influence on these policies than the public’s interest and that’s why, you know, we had hoped with the election of the new president things were really going to change, but I think he hasn’t really looked at this issue closely enough to really understand what’s in the people’s interest. And I hope that over the next year we can convince them that we need to move in a direction that is in the people’s interest rather than in the big businesses interest.

Lester: James Hansen is the author of The Storms of My Grandchildren, the truth about the upcoming climate catastrophe and the last chance to save humanity. Dr. Hansen, thank you very much for your time!

Dr. Hansen: Uh huh, thank you!

Related Links

Interview: Dr. James Hansen, Part 1

  • Dr. James Hansen is a climate scientist for NASA and the author of the book, 'Storms Of My Grandchildren.' (Photo courtesy of Bloomsbury USA)

James Hansen is the author of ‘The Storms
Of My Grandchildren: The Truth About
The Coming Climate Catastrophe And
Our Last Chance To Save Humanity.’
He’s been a climate scientist for NASA
and was the first scientist to testify before
Congress about climate change. In the
book, Hansen wrote about climate change,
‘We seem oblivious to the danger, unaware
how close we may be… to our demise.’
Lester Graham talked to Hansen and noted
that we don’t often hear strong language
like that from scientists:

Transcript

James Hansen is the author of ‘The Storms
Of My Grandchildren: The Truth About
The Coming Climate Catastrophe And
Our Last Chance To Save Humanity.’
He’s been a climate scientist for NASA
and was the first scientist to testify before
Congress about climate change. In the
book, Hansen wrote about climate change,
‘We seem oblivious to the danger, unaware
how close we may be… to our demise.’
Lester Graham talked to Hansen and noted
that we don’t often hear strong language
like that from scientists:

Dr. James Hansen: Well, the public is unaware of the situation, and that’s partly because of the way nature works. You know, weather is highly variable – 10 or 20 or 30 degree variations are common – while the global warming, so far, is about 1 degree Celsius, which is about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. So, people have a hard time seeing it. But the consequences are already becoming apparent, as we see with the melting sea ice in the arctic. The Northwest Passage is now actually open. Mountain glaciers melting around the world, sub-tropics expanding – which is affecting the Southwest United States and the Mediterranean region and Australia. And the problem is that those things are going to grow, and we’re going to pass tipping points, which will have disastrous consequences if we pass them. We don’t have to pass them though. And that’s why it’s appropriate for us to try to communicate the situation to the public, because the kinds of things that we need to do with our energy systems make sense anyway for different reasons.

Lester Graham: The evidence for climate change is growing – almost every week more studies are released, often indicating the future will be worse than first thought. What do you think we need to do to minimize the effects of climate change?

Dr. Hansen: Well, it’s very clear what we need to do. The carbon dioxide is increasing because of the burning of fossil fuels. If you look at how much carbon there is in oil, gas, and coal, you see that coal is, by far, the biggest reservoir. And then there’s the unconventional fossil fuels, like tar shale and tar sands. What we need to do is phase out the coal use and prohibit the use of these unconventional, dirty fossil fuels – and we could solve the problem. But to get there, there’s a very practical requirement, and that is that we begin to put a price on carbon emissions. The reason that people use fossil fuels as their main source of energy is that it’s the cheapest energy. And, as long as that’s the case, we’re going to keep using more and more. But the reason that they’re the cheapest is that we subsidize them – our government subsidizes them – and they don’t make them pay for the costs that they cause for society. The human health problems due to air pollution and water pollution, the mercury and the arsenic that comes from coal, and the costs of future climate change for our children and grandchildren – all of these are free for the fossil fuel companies. They don’t have to worry about those at all. The way we would solve that is to put a gradually rising price on carbon emissions. And there’s actually some good news in the newspaper, and that is that Senators Kerry, a Democrat, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, announced that they’re not going to push cap-and-trade – which had been the big banks’ proposed solution to put a ‘cap’ on carbon emissions, and then they, you would (chuckles) – it was a complicated system where you could trade the rights to pollute. But the big winners would be the traders and the losers would be the public.

James Hansen is a climate
scientist for NASA and the author of the
book, ‘Storms Of My Grandchildren.’ He
spoke with The Environment Report’s
Lester Graham. We’ll hear
more from Dr. Hansen tomorrow, including
his idea on how to reduce using fossil fuels.

Related Links

Parks in Parking Spaces

  • Every other day of the year, this little green oasis in Brooklyn is a parking space. (Photo by Norah Flaherty)

On September 18th, thousands of
people around the world will spend
the day sitting in parking spaces –
without their cars – as part of an
annual event called “Parking Day.”
The idea is to spark a conversation
about how we’re using our public spaces.
Nora Flaherty attended
last year’s Parking Day, and here’s
what she found:

Transcript

On September 18th, thousands of
people around the world will spend
the day sitting in parking spaces –
without their cars – as part of an
annual event called “Parking Day.”
The idea is to spark a conversation
about how we’re using our public spaces.
Nora Flaherty attended
last year’s Parking Day, and here’s
what she found:

(sound of park)

Last year at about this time, this little park on a busy Brooklyn
corner was packed. Packed with people like freelance writer Karen
Sherman. She was sitting cross-legged in the grass and just
beaming.

“Amazing! And the sun’s out and it’s this beautiful fall day and I
wish we could do it every day.”

But she couldn’t have done it every day— that little park was
temporary. Every other day of the year it’s a parking space.

In New York City last year, there were more than 50 parking day
parks – some with grass and fences, some with tents and lawn
chairs. And they didn’t just spring up overnight – as much as it
might have looked that way.

A few days before last year’s parking day, planning was underway
at a Brooklyn coffee house.

“So how long do we think it’s going to take to set up?”

Sod needed transporting, city permits needed confirming, and—
because of New York City’s unusual parking regulations—the
parking place had to be staked out at 3 am.

Anne Pope is the director of Sustainable Flatbush – the
organization that put together the parking-spot park in Brooklyn.
She says although Flatbush is one of the greenest neighborhoods in
Brooklyn, there aren’t a lot of public, green places where people
can just go and hang out.

“If you walk around the neighborhood you’ll say, ‘wow there’s so
much greenery and green space,’ but if it doesn’t happen to be
attached to a house you own you can’t access it.”

(sound of child fingerpainting)

So on Parking Day last year, parking spaces did become a place to
hang out, for adults, and for kids like brother and sister Quinn
Isreal and Yusuf Francis.

Quinn: “Whoa, Yusuf, you’re pushing me.”

Yusuf: “Whoopsie, sorry.”

Quinn: “It’s okay.”
They had just moved here from Georgia, and Quinn said this park,
with its soft grass, was a nice change from New York’s mostly
concrete playgrounds.

“‘Cause usually in parks when you fall you hurt yourself, but in
this park you don’t hurt yourself if you fall down, you’re going to
fall down on the grass.”

Now, finding a parking space on any day in New York City is
competitive.

Matt Shafer is with the Trust for Public Land – they were one of
the major sponsors of last year’s Parking Day. He says that not
everyone is thrilled to find they can’t find a place to put their car
because people are hanging out in parking spaces.

“Some people don’t quite grasp the concept of parking day; that’s
perfectly fine. In most cases it’s, ‘why are you taking up our
parking space?’”

For some people, though, the biggest disappointment is that the
little parking space park is gone the next day. Keka Marzigal is
with Sustainable Flatbush.

“A kid came by after school and he said, ‘this is so fun, we can
come here tomorrow and do our homework!’ and it really got me!”

There was no tomorrow for that little park. But, that kid might just
find another one this year as more people convert parking spaces
into parks for a day.

For The Environment Report, I’m Nora Flaherty.

Related Links

New Heights for Water Recycling

  • Koichi Wakata (left), space station commander Gennady Padalka (center), and Michael Barratt (right) take ceremonial sips of recycled urine in a key milestone for the lab complex. (Photo courtesy of NASA TV)

NASA has technology light years ahead of what’s available to the rest of us. Advanced water recycling is
one of them. For years, astronauts have collected and recycled sweat and even water vapor. Shawn Allee
looks at NASA’s latest water recycling technology and whether anything like it is already on Planet Earth:

Transcript

NASA has technology light years ahead of what’s available to the rest of us. Advanced water recycling is
one of them. For years, astronauts have collected and recycled sweat and even water vapor. Shawn Allee
looks at NASA’s latest water recycling technology and whether anything like it is already on Planet Earth:

A press conference between NASA headquarters and the International Space Station got some attention
recently.

It was about making drinkable water from astronauts’ urine.

Headquarters: “The Expedition 19 crew inaugurating the use of the water recovery system to
produce recycled, purified water.”

NASA figures sending water into space wastes rocket fuel.

Why pay good money, if you can just reuse water that comes out of astronauts’ bodies?

Astronauts have recycled other fluid, but urine was kinda the final frontier.

Astronaut: “Everybody’s talked about recycling water in a closed-loop system, but nobody’s ever
done it before. So, we’re going to be drinking yesterday’s coffee frequently up here, and happy to do
it.”

Three astronauts hold up their drink pouches.

Astronaut: “And, here we go. Here’s to everybody who made this happen.”

Group: “Cheers.” (laughter)

Headquarters: “That’s looks really, really good from down here. Um…”

For all the jokes cracked in space, water’s a serious problem down here on Earth.

Is anyone recycling urine like they are on the space station? Depends on how you cut it.

NASA’s system is a closed loop: water out, urine in, water out.

Similar technology’s used during some natural disasters, and the country of Singapore gets close.
Singapore recycles sewage water but it’s sent to reservoirs where it’s diluted.

How far does America get with recycled water? Public service announcements hint at who’s furthest
along.

“Southern California is getting drier. Go to bewaterwise.com. Find out how your community is
dealing with mandatory conservation.”

For decades, California utilities have used recycled waste water to spruce up landscaping and golf courses –
but you’re not allowed to drink it.

Orange County goes a tad further. It replenishes an underground aquifer with recycled water. The utility
draws water out of that aquifer.

So, it’s a kind of water recycling – more like Singapore’s diluted variety than NASA’s fully-closed loop.

According to the federal Environmental Protection Agency – no city in America has astronaut-style water
recycling.

But, some water utility managers predict some city will.

“It’s a non-issue. From purely a perception standpoint, Oh my god you’re making
me drink toilet water. You know, get over it, because you’ve been doing it anyhow.”

That’s Frank Jaeger. He runs the water system in Parker, a Denver suburb.

He says most water systems are more like Singapore’s and Orange County’s than you might think.

“I was in New Orleans, and I had the chance to go through their treatment process. And, they
pointed out that ten years in a row they had won the drinking water award for turbidity, taste, odor –
and that water going down the Mississippi had been through 12 stomachs by the time it had gotten to
New Orleans. They mix it with a little more scotch than we do, but they drink it.”

Jaeger says, think of the advantages a full water recycling system would have.

Some cities would save energy since they’d pump water shorter distances. And you’d get a consistent
supply of water, since you can count on people bathing and flushing on a regular basis.

“It is silly, in this day and age, to be worried about these sorts of things – especially
here in the United States, where we have such good wonderful treatment
processes.”

There’s no federal regulation that specifically prohibits full toilet-to-tap water recycling.
So, Jaeger says, someday, some politically brave local government will move forward.

Just not his.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Growing a City in a Greener Way

  • Trussville, Alabama Mayor Gene Melton may not be a staunch environmentalist - take a look at his car - but he still thinks greenspace is important in his city (Photo by Gigi Douban)

For many small town mayors, growth is all good. After all, more houses means more tax revenue, more retail, more jobs. One Alabama mayor agrees, but he also recognizes green space is an amenity worth keeping. And for that, the timing couldn’t be better. Gigi Douban reports:

Transcript

For many small town mayors, growth is all good. After all, more houses means more tax revenue, more retail, more jobs. One Alabama mayor agrees, but he also recognizes green space is an amenity worth keeping. And for that, the timing couldn’t be better. Gigi Douban reports:

Here at the grand opening of a subdivision in Trussville, Alabama, a few dozen families gather outside the sales office for the usual ribbon cutting with giant scissors.

(sound of applause and cheers)

Soon, everyone heads down to the Cahaba River. The river literally will be in the backyard of these houses once they’re built. On the river, they’re having a rubber duck race.

(announcement of duck race)

It’s gimmicky, but these days developers will do just about anything to attract potential buyers.

Another developer had approached Trussville about building homes along the Cahaba River, but then the housing market took a nose dive. The developer wanted out.

Trussville Mayor Gene Melton says the city would have been crazy not to buy the land.

“This property was probably going to sell for $35,000 or $40,000 an acre. We got to the point where we were able to acquire this for $4,500 an acre.”

The city could have turned it into an industrial park or zoned it for retail. But instead, they’ll turn it into a greenway. It’ll connect to nearby parks with the river as the centerpiece.

Now, the mayor of Trussville is not a staunch environmentalist, by any measure. He tools around the city in a gas guzzling SUV. He’s pro-development. But, he says, the same way a city needs development, it needs greenspace, too.

“Have you ever flown in to a big city like Atlanta or Los Angeles and for miles and miles all you see is rooftops? Well that’s how not to build a city.”

The Cahaba River watershed stretches through Alabama’s most populous county. Recently, heavy development along the Cahaba has polluted the water. It’s endangered habitats not just here, but downstream. Trussville is very near the headwaters, so what happens there affects the entire river.

Randall Haddock is thrilled about the new greenspace. He’ a field director with the Cahaba River Society, a conservation group. Haddock says the Cahaba River is among the most biologically diverse in the country.

“It turns out that Alabama has more fish species, more snails, more crayfish, more turtles, freshwater snails more than any other state in the US. So when it comes to things that live in rivers, we’re at the top of the list by a long way.”

(sound of people walking near river)

Haddock says all along the Cahaba, he’s seen plenty of examples of how not to build near the river.

He says this greenspace is an example of how easy it is to minimize impact. Keeping grass on the ground not only means a cleaner river, but it might help reduce flooding.

“When you make so many hard surfaces, the water runs off real fast and gets into the river real quick. And you’ve increased the volume of water and the only response that a river can make is to get bigger.”

The bank erodes, the water is polluted and soon, you start to see species diminish.

(sound of high school students)

David Dobbs is the city’s high school environmental science teacher. He takes his students out behind the school to check on the river. The result: a clean bill of health.

“All the little bugs, they end up being food for the fish, and the more they are of the good ones that are here, that means there’s more food for the fish, so therefore there’s more fish, it’s a very healthy part of the river.”

Trussville, like many small towns, still says without growth, there’d be no city. But now they know, that growth has to protect one of its top amenities – the river.

For The Environment Report, I’m Gigi Douban.

Related Links

Nasa Launches Carbon Satellite

  • Artist's concept of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory. The satellite crashed into the ocean on Tuesday, February 24th, 2009. (Photo courtesy NASA Jet Propulsion Library)

(NOTE: THE SATELLITE FEATURED IN THIS STORY CRASHED INTO THE OCEAN ON TUESDAY, FEB. 24TH)

Drive your car. Mow your lawn. Heat your house. It all puts climate changing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But not all of the carbon dioxide stays up there. Vincent Duffy reports scientists at NASA hope a new satellite will help them solve the mystery of where some of that CO2 goes:

Transcript

(NOTE: THE CARBON SATELLITE CRASHED INTO THE OCEAN ON TUESDAY, FEB. 24TH)

Drive your car. Mow your lawn. Heat your house. It all puts climate changing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But not all of the carbon dioxide stays up there. Vincent Duffy reports scientists at NASA hope a new satellite will help them solve the mystery of where some of that CO2 goes:

People worried about climate change pay a lot of attention to carbon dioxide.
It’s one of the chief causes of climate change. And people put a lot of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere, almost 8 billion tons a year.

That has former Vice President Al Gore worried. Here he is testifying before
Congress last month –

“Our home, earth, is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the
planet itself of course, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for
human beings.”

If we are in danger, then scientists need a good handle on what happens to
all that carbon dioxide.

About half of the CO2 created by humans is absorbed back into the earth by
what scientists call ‘carbon sinks.’ Scientists know half of the absorbed
carbon dioxide goes into the oceans, and the other half is sucked up by
plants. But scientists don’t know which plants are absorbing the most carbon
dioxide, and how the CO2 travels there.

The scientists at NASA hope a new satellite, called the Orbiting Carbon
Observatory, will help them answer those questions.

David Crisp heads up the project. He says measuring carbon dioxide levels
from the ground doesn’t provide enough information to know where the
CO2 actually ends up.

“But from space we can actually make much more detailed measurements,
make a snapshot of the carbon dioxide distribution in the atmosphere. That
will give us much more information about where the carbon dioxide is and
from that we can infer where the sources are and where the sinks are.”

Right now it’s a bit of a blur. Anna Michalak is a professor at the University
of Michigan and part of the NASA team. She says to track what’s going on
with all the CO2 on the earth is like trying to figure out how cream went into
a cup of coffee.

“If I give you a cup of coffee, and I pour cream into the cup of coffee, and I
ask you what’s going to happen when I start stirring, it’s pretty easy to
predict that you’ll have a creamy cup of coffee. But what we do instead is
someone hands us a creamy cup of coffee and asks us, ‘Did we pour the
cream in on the left side or the right side, and did we pour the cream in five
minutes ago or ten minutes ago?’ And you can imagine that’s a much more
difficult question.”

Michalak says the satellite observatory will help answer that difficult
question, and help us understand how plants may react to carbon dioxide in
the future, as the earth’s climate changes. She says right now plants seem to
be absorbing more CO2 than ever before.

“And we have no guarantee that this is going to continue in the future. And
so you can imagine that something that has such a high value, there is an
interest in us knowing how predictable and how reliable this service is to us.
Because the cost for us to replicate anything resembling that is just
astronomical.”

The satellite will also answer other questions about climate change. Things
like which countries emit the most CO2.

Jiaguo Qi studies climate change at Michigan State University. He says the
satellite may show that people concerned about the cost of reducing green
house gasses may unfairly blame the United States and other developed
nations.

“Media report that North America is primarily responsible for global
warming. But we don’t know how much carbon dioxide other countries are
emitting, because we donít have good measure. This one will tell us who is
emitting and how much they are emitting instead of just blaming us.”

And the data from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory might show that it’s not
just the forests and jungles that help keep climate change at bay. It might
also be forests and farmland in the United States, and your lawn, and even
golf courses.

For The Environment Report I’m Vincent Duffy.

Related Links

Wanted: Affordable Art Space

  • Back in 2000, Laura Weathered and fellow artists were drafting what their artist community would look like. (Photo by Lester Graham)

When artists make a check-list for the ideal place to live – they add things the average family
might not, like plenty of work space and being close to other artists and galleries. Big cities
usually offer all the things on that list – but there’s a problem. Big-city real estate prices have a
habit of rising quickly – and pricing artists out. Shawn Allee found artists who’ve tried to stay
put:

Transcript

When artists make a check-list for the ideal place to live – they add things the average family
might not, like plenty of work space and being close to other artists and galleries. Big cities
usually offer all the things on that list – but there’s a problem. Big-city real estate prices have a
habit of rising quickly – and pricing artists out. Shawn Allee found artists who’ve tried to stay
put:

Laura Weathered began her career in painting in Los Angeles.

It was tough enough finding her muse – but it was also tough finding places to live that stayed
affordable.

“This kind of history of settling into a space and then the neighborhood going through
gentrification was chasing me all over L.A.”

Fed up, Weathered left for Chicago.

Before long, she found some Chicago artists had the same problem – rents and home prices just
weren’t stable.

Weathered and fellow artists got tired of toughing it – so about thirty of them put their heads
together and looked into buying property – to live in, to work – and maybe share with artist
groups, too.

“And someone’s comment was, You know, this is going to cost more than a million
dollars – who’s going to rent a bunch of flaky artists a million dollars?”

But then they did some back-of the napkin kinda math.

“We had a everyone go around the room and, What are you paying for rent? And that
was the Aha moment – collectively we could afford much more than a million dollars,
because that’s what we’d been paying all along.”

It took almost ten years to dig up funding and expertise, but eventually – they transformed a
former metal-stamping factory into artist housing, studio and office space.

People have been living in the artists’ community for five years now.

When you walk around, you see paintings in some loft windows and sculptures near the front
step.

Weathered shows off some shared gallery space.

“So, this is really important. You can bring test audiences in and see how it plays and get
feedback and the like without taking huge risks.”

All this is great – but the big idea was to make the space stay affordable for artists and artist
groups. So far, it’s worked.

“We can stay here a long time.”

This is Denise Zaccardi.

Zaccardi runs the Community TV Network. It has offices at the Bloomingdale Arts Building.

The network teaches low-income teens how to produce news, TV and documentaries. Zaccardi
says arts organizations like hers can benefit from this stability.

“Kids can tell their brothers and sisters down the line we’re here – we’re not moving
every three years, which is a common thing for people who rent, especially for artists.”

So, sounds like everything is an artist’ dream, right?

Well, like in other condo-associations, members have fought over repair costs. And artists who
own their units can only sell them to other artists. Plus, if they do sell … their profits are
capped. That’s made the units much lower in value compared to their neighbors’.

Laura Weathered says there’ve been second thoughts.

“I think some people are saying, ‘Did I agree to this too quickly?’ because it’s restrictive,
but the agreement originally was that we wanted an artist community and not just for one
generation for the future.”

Weathered says the idea was to keep units affordable for artists – and that’s been the case for
five years.

She says it’s not perfect, but if it works for a decade or two more, it might be a model for other
artists to follow.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Commuter Parking on the Rails

  • The South Shore Commuter Rail Line runs between South Bend, Indiana and Chicago. The line's reaching its 100th birthday, and as it does, its ridership is near a 50-year high. It serves many sizable towns, such as Hammond and Gary, but commuters from smaller towns, suburbs and even rural areas drive to, and sometimes cram, the rail lines' stations. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

More and more people who live in
suburbs have been climbing onto commuter
trains over the past few years. They’ve
got every reason to: they’re fighting high
gas prices, traffic congestion, or even big
road construction projects. But oddly enough,
cars remain a problem even when people choose
commuter rail. Shawn Allee found
that out first hand when he checked out one
system:

Transcript

More and more people who live in
suburbs have been climbing onto commuter
trains over the past few years. They’ve
got every reason to: they’re fighting high
gas prices, traffic congestion, or even big
road construction projects. But oddly enough,
cars remain a problem even when people choose
commuter rail. Shawn Allee found
that out first hand when he checked out one
system:

I’ve just got into a parking lot in a commuter rail station in Northwest
Indiana. This rail line runs from towns like Gary and Hammond Indiana to
Chicago, where there are a lot of jobs.

Anyway, officials with the rail line tell me parking happens to be one of the
biggest complaints. I’m here to check it out, and I gotta tell you I’ve been
driving past hundreds of parked cars, and I haven’t been able to see an
open spot yet.

Okay, finally found one.

(sound of door slamming)

Shawn Allee: “Getting a parking spot in this station took a lot longer than I
expected. This commuter here, Celia Ramirez, says she has the same
problem. What’s it usually like?”

Celia Ramirez: “It’s a dread, because I don’t know where to park.
Sometimes I park where I’m not supposed to park, on the residential
streets.”

Allee: “And then you’re taking your chances.”

Ramirez: “Yes, of getting a ticket.”

Allee: “In fact there are signs all around us right now that pretty much
warn you not to do that.”

Ramirez: “And I break that rule.”

Well, you can guess spillover parking around the rail station in Hammond ticks off
the neighbors.

To make matters worse, a lot of the commuters, they don’t even in live in Hammond.
They’re from towns or suburbs even farther out.

In fact, the local government and The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation
District don’t always agree on how to solve the problem.

John Parsons is the rail line’s marketing director.

John Parsons: “We have over 700 spaces in Hammond. Unfortunately, we
need more. But the residents in the area are reluctant to expand parking.”

Shawn Allee: “How difficult is it to convince towns to do that, especially if
they feel that they’re creating parking for people outside of their area?”

Parsons: “It’s a difficult problem. For one thing, we’re a tax-exempt
organization and what we’re doing is acquiring residential property that
currently pays taxes and that property’s no longer on the tax rolls.”

Now, this particular rail line had a growth spurt a few years ago. It’s lightened up,
but parking’s still an issue.

So, just imagine pressure other rail lines have, especially ones that saw double-digit
growth over the past year.

The situation’s familiar to transportation experts.

Joe Schwieterman teaches at DePaul University.

He says, when it comes to parking, suburban commuter rail is often behind the ball.

“The ridership is surging on our transit system, and parking spots, you
know, it’s a five a five-year process. If we start now, we have new spots you
know, in 2013. Clearly that’s not fast enough to tap into that new market.”

So, is there a way out of the parking – commuter rail conundrum?

Schwieterman says one idea is to add bus service that branches out from stations.

But not all towns can afford it, or they don’t have enough riders to justify buses.

So, Schwieterman says some commuter rail lines are stuck.

They advertise that they’re a cheap, convenient alternative to driving. And when gas
prices rise, people take that advice.

“It’s a bad idea to encourage floods of people to take public transit if you’re
not ready to accommodate them. You lose them for life, frankly, if it’s a bad
experience.”

Still, Schwieterman says you can look at the parking problem two ways.

Sure, you can shake your head because suburban stations’ parking lots fill up.

But, at least for now, those drivers aren’t clogging roads and spewing even more
pollution on their way to work.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Subdivisions Go for Green Acres

  • Conservation Subdivisions by definition must preserve at least 50% of the total land that can be built on in a development. Local land trusts typically oversee the preservation of meadowlands, forests, and orchards -like this one - once they’re surrounded by condos and single family homes. (Photo by Lisa Ann Pinkerton)

Developers are designing a new type of
subdivision that is selling even in this down
market. They say these homes sell better than
traditional ones because they give people what
they want: the feeling of living in the country
while living near the city. Lisa Ann Pinkerton
reports the new subdivisions are getting mixed
reviews:

Transcript

Developers are designing a new type of
subdivision that is selling even in this down
market. They say these homes sell better than
traditional ones because they give people what
they want: the feeling of living in the country
while living near the city. Lisa Ann Pinkerton
reports the new subdivisions are getting mixed
reviews:

(dog chain rattling and walking sound)

Robbie Dryden is walking her golden retriever Casey past a large apple
orchard in her neighborhood.

“The orchard’s great! Because when the apples start coming off the trees, my kids and I
walk down here and we just pick apples.”

But Dryden doesn’t live in the country. In fact, her subdivision is near a major
intersection, just south of Philadelphia.

“We’re off the street, so a lot of people don’t even really know we’re back here. I tell people where we live, that live in this area, and they’re like ‘where is that?’ It’s
where the orchards are. Because all the houses are kinda tucked back, so it’s private.”

Dryden’s neighborhood is known as a Conservation Subdivision. Its design
preserves the orchard and surrounding meadows forever. A land conservation
easement protects 70% of the subdivision from ever being developed.

Across the country, a few zoning boards have begun to mandate such
preservation in new residential developments.

(construction sound)

One of these is going up just a few miles east of Dryden’s neighborhood. This
subdivision is called ‘Weatherstone’. Out of its 300 acres, 180 of them are reserved as
open space, the form of small parks, a working farm and surrounding fields.
Weatherstone is being built by the Hankin Group and Vice President Jim
Fuller. He says his company preserves open space in all of its projects,
whether it’s required or not.

“It’s certainly more challenging to try to get this kind of project approved, and more challenging to build it as well,
but it’s definitely more rewarding.”

Fuller says conservation design builds the same number of homes as a traditional
subdivision. But instead of spreading the homes out, conservation lots are smaller
and closer together. That makes them cheaper to build compared to traditional
houses. That’s because the smaller lot sizes mean shorter roads and sewage
lines are needed. On top of that, since the houses are surrounded by open
space, builders can charge 10% to 20% more for the homes.

The downside, Fuller says, is smaller lot sizes can make local planning boards
nervous, especially if they’re not familiar with the idea. Building houses closer
together is known as higher density, and it’s associated with cheaper housing.

“Density is something that people are afraid of. They think that if the lots are smaller
than the values are lower, and will change the values of the adjoining houses. I think it’s been proven many times over that the opposite is
the case.”

“As a concept its fine. But it doesn’t work everywhere, that’s the problem with it.”

That’s Isobel Olcott, who serves on the local and county planning boards in
her area of Harding, New Jersey. Her board recently rejected a conservation
design that would have preserved 91 acres.

She says some townships cherish rural character. Township officials think
they can better preserve that by restricting developments to large lots.

“If they don’t want to live in clusters, it doesn’t matter how much opens space surrounds
them, they will always opt for low-density zoning.”

But across the country open space is being marketed as an amenity and
people will pay for it – even in a bad housing market.

Shyam Cannon is with the real estate research firm Robert Charles Lesser. He
says demand for these types of developments is out-pacing supply 2 to 1.

“There’s a fundamental need for water, for air, for access open space and I think the
traditional development paradigm simply doesn’t satisfy those desires anymore.”

Cannon and others say today’s generation of homebuyers don’t want a typical
suburban neighborhood. Often they want a neighborhood that simulates a
rural experience – and they’re willing to pay for it.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lisa Ann Pinkerton.

Related Links

Eminent Domain Debated

  • The intersection of Devon and Broadway in Chicago, just a few blocks from Lake Michigan. Alderman Patrick O'Connor is concerned that this corner is a bad use of space - not as walkable as the rest of the neighborhood. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

Cities are always coming up with projects to improve land or even create jobs, and sometimes existing buildings just don’t fit into those plans. Often, owners of such property won’t sell to make way for new development. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon rule on the legality of one tool cities use to force reluctant landowners to sell. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee looks at one politician’s use of this legal power:

Transcript

Cities are always coming up with projects to improve land
or even create jobs, and sometimes existing buildings just don’t fit
into those plans. Often, owners of such property won’t sell to make
way for new development. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon rule on the
legality of one tool cities use to force reluctant landowners to sell. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee looks at one
politician’s use of this legal power:


This big-city neighborhood is the kind of place where shoppers usually park their cars and walk around. Brick store fronts and restaurants are usually just a few feet from the sidewalk.


But there’s a corner that looks different, though. A lot different.


It’s home to three fast-food buildings. The first business is a popular donut shop. Next door, there’s a fried chicken drive-through. And the last building was once a burger joint, but today it’s home to a car title lender.


To hear the alderman, Patrick O’Connor, tell it, the strip looks like a piece of suburbia landed right in his big-city ward.


“There’s no symmetry, no walkability, it’s all car-related and it’s all basically parking lot. There’s more asphalt than there is building in those places.”


He says this corner on Chicago’s North Side is a bad use of space, and he’s hoping to attract new, more pedestrian-friendly businesses or buildings. But what’s to be done about it if these shops are already there and don’t want to sell? One of O’Connor’s options is to have the city force the owners to sell their properties and then redevelop the land.


The power to forcibly buy property is called eminent domain, and O’Connor says the city’s using it to speed redevelopment throughout Chicago. But O’Connor’s concerned time may run out on the use of this power.


Governments have long-used eminent domain for public use. For example, a city or state might condemn a whole neighborhood, buy out the homeowners, and level the buildings to make way for a road or airport.


But the U.S. Supreme Court, in a case called Kelo versus New London, is considering just how far government can go when using eminent domain to bolster private development.


O’Connor hopes the court sides with local governments.


“In our community there’s not too many open spaces. So what we look to do is to enhance what we have to try to utilize space to the maximum effectiveness. That’s really where the court case hinges, you know, Who’s to say one use is better than another?”


And that question – who decides the best use of a property – is the rallying cry of critics who say cities abuse eminent domain powers.


Sam Staley’s with the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think-tank. He says the Supreme Court case is really about fairness.


“Those people that know how to use the system and know the right people in city council really have the ability to compel a neighbor or another property to sell their property whether they want to or not.”


Staley and other property rights advocates are also convinced that cities don’t need eminent domain for economic development. Staley says local economies can improve without government interference.


“The private sector’s just gotten lazy. They no longer want to have to go through the market, so they don’t come up with creative ways of accommodating property rights of the people that own the pieces of land or building that they want to develop.”


Staley says, instead, developers find it easier to have cities use eminent domain.


But most urban planners and some environmentalists say a court decision against this use of eminent domain could threaten redevelopment of both cities and aging suburbs. John Echevarria is with Georgetown University’s Environmental Law and Policy Institute.


“If you don’t have the power of eminent domain, you can’t do effective downtown redevelopment. The inevitable result would be more shopping centers, more development on the outskirts of urban areas, and more sprawl.”


Alderman O’Connor says constituents will always push urban politicians to put scarce land to better use. He says that won’t change if the court strikes down the broadest eminent domain powers; cities will just have to resort to strong-arm tactics instead.


“The alternative is the city then has to become harsher on how they try to enforce laws. They have to try and run sting operations and go after businesses that are breaking the law and then try to close them down and live with empty places until the sellers get tired and they sell.”


The small business community finds this attitude outrageous. They say as long as they improve their businesses and people frequent them, the market should decide whether they stay or go.


On the other hand, urban planners say the market doesn’t always make best use of land. They say local governments need eminent domain powers to control development, and they’re looking to the court to protect those powers.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links