Politics, News & Issues >
Environmental Awareness
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould developers be required to measure the carbon footprint of proposed new developments, as part of the approval process?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Yes | 53% | 10 votes | Total: 19 votes | |
| No | 47% | 9 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesDevelopers should be required to measure the carbon footprint of proposed new developments as part of the approval process.
New washing machines, cars, and kitchen appliances are rated at how efficient they are. These ratings came about for a reason. There is no reason why developers cannot work to the same principles, especially as their products tend to be around for a long time and can become less efficient with age.
Developers want to make money with their buildings. They go to great lengths to present furnished homes to be viewed, show pictures of office layouts and offer incentives to capture the imaginations of the purchaser in order to do this. All these efforts cost money. Some of that creativity could be put into how their development will behave.
Perhaps the issue could be considered from another point of view. Pollution is a big problem in many big cities. Peking had to change the driving habits of it's citizens during the olympic games. Some U.S. cities are notorious for their smog. Smog is caused by pollution which cannot escape. Is there an alternative?
Creating developments which cost considerably less to run and produce less pollution makes everyone gain. In a period of time when the financial arena is wobbly it makes sense to build developments which are not expensive in terms of money or pollution. Lower running costs is always an appealing factor. Clean air is another. Buildings don't have to be cleaned so often, repainting isn't so frequent and the buildings look good for longer.
Transportatio n within developments is something else which should be taken into account. Inexpensive, well run, clean public transport frees the roads of traffic, and further reduces the impact of fossil fuels being burned. If the public is accustomed to crammed and dirty buses and trains it is not surprising they are reluctant to use them.
Modern technology is capable of creating structures which are insulated so that less money, if any, need be spent on heating. Current heating methods are invariably fossil fuels. What will future generations do when they run out eventually?
With the knowledge that architects and engineers have of structures, materials and how they behave, we can have buildings which look traditional yet are easy to run, cheap to run and require little maintenance. The benefit is less pollution and less carbon released into the atmosphere. With cleaner air there would be fewer people suffering respiratory problems. This is another benefit.
Instead of clinging to traditional uses of building methods and materials as well as transportation, thought given to ways of using current knowledge effectively will be to create cheaper - in a money sense and pollution sense - better looking, aesthetically pleasing developments which will be of benefit to generations to come. The knowledge is there. Is the will?
Learn more about this author, Rosemary Redfern.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Requiring developers to measure the carbon footprint of proposed new developments is a one-way ticket to social authoritarianism. Those who pray at the alter of Mother Earth, such as those serving on urban planning commissions, would love for the masses to live in high rise urban settings. That is their utopian dream. Their vision of the future is one in which the ants (the unwashed masses) live within walking distance of shopping and jobs. Oh what a perfect world it would be.
Carbon footprint discussions put suburban and exurban developers on the defensive relative to urban core developers. The greens and planners are already working on Suburban Carbon Taxes'. The planners and the greens will insist that suburban developments purchase Carbon Offsets' in penance for their sins against Mother Earth. People of modest means who enjoy a yard and a garden and who have no desire to be packed like rats in dense urban settings will have to pay these Carbon Sin Taxes' by way of higher housing prices and property taxes.
The ultimate goal of the green movement is to dictate how others should live. The tyrannical green movement will snatch personal freedoms from the middle and lower classes worldwide all in the name of Mother Earth. Politicians will be complicit in this because they never really believed in, nor trusted, personal freedom to begin with. Politicians would rather grant gifts and rebates than to simply allow people to keep and spend their own money as they see fit.
Of course the greens and the urban planners have wanted high density living conditions for decades, unfortunately for them, the masses had no interest in their totalitarian perfect world dreams. What was needed was a cattle prod with which to herd the masses. Fear and greed are the best motivators. Personal greed (the desire for elbow room and peaceful neighbors) drove the suburban expansion. Massive inner city investments have done little to lure people downtown beyond an occasional dinner now and then. No, something bolder would be needed to repack the cities.
As if on cue, along came Global Warming. Our 200+ cable channel screaming multi-media world had found the perfect boogeyman. Now we could all be bombarded with endless pictures of forlorn polar bears and melting glaciers 24x7. It worked. The sainted Al Gore and his freedom hating followers have gone on to convince a nation of sheep that they must repent. They've even provided rosaries with which to pray recycling bins and CFL's and hybrids.
How sad that we are now prepared to set aside our hard fought personal freedoms in the name of Climate Change. Oh yes, it is no longer Global Warming we have to fear, that boogeyman was becoming too hard to find, let alone prove. But by now, the fear movement had too much momentum to turn back, so it expediently morphed into Climate Change. Climate Change is the new and improved all-purpose boogeyman, capable of explaining any dirty weather phenomenon anywhere on the Mother Earth's apron.
Remember, it is not the rich and the powerful that will suffer under the yoke of worshiping Mother Earth. They will still have their private jets and mansions in the countryside (see Al Gore, the Kennedys and the Clintons). No, it is the everyday folk who will see their standard of living greatly diminished from that of their massively energy consuming parents.
Abundant and cheap energy for all is what built the American dream. Don't let the greens, the planners and the scheming politicians take away your right to peaceful and economical suburban living. Take a nice long drive in the country this weekend, before it becomes a taxable offense.
Learn more about this author, John Goodspeed.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Environmental Awareness
- Have we become a throw-away society?
- Are new nuclear plants a good idea?
- Voluntary programs or regulatory mandates: Which is the more effective way to achieve environmental performance?
- Is loud music an environmental toxin?
- Does testing products on animals hurt the environment?
- Do landfills work?
