Automobile subsidies and how they make Americans a bunch of free-market hypocrites

U.S. total motor vehicle costs (Roseland 115):         

There's nothing wrong with capitalism...

   $20 billion in taxpayer subsidies

   $290 billion in social/enviro. damage

   $415 billion in costs borne by drivers

And yet, Cervaro (in Wheeler) says that the real-dollar costs of driving and parking are declining (p. 116).  How can that be, you might ask, with rising fuel costs, longer commutes, and increasing regulations on emissions?  I asked the same question, so I looked into it.  Turns out, it’s all possible with a little help from subsidies.

Here are a few statistics/concepts from the book Suburban Nation: 

• 8-10% of GNP is from government subsidies towards highways and parking.

• Cost of these subsidies is passed along to ALL citizens (regardless of vehicle ownership/use) in the form of higher (income, property, sales) taxes.

• Transit spending creates twice as many new jobs compared to highway spending.

• Gasoline now costs ¼ of what it did in 1929 (in real dollars).

• Trucks consume 15x the fuel compared to rail for equivalent freight hauled.

• The U.S. government pays $300 billion in various subsidies for trucking.

• It takes 15 lanes of highway to move as many people as one lane of track.

• Estimated economic inefficiencies from subsidized auto use total $700 billion annually.

• Pew Foundation: 60% of those polled favor a 25-cent/gallon gas tax to slow global warming.

Essentially, in the case of automobile dependence, the U.S. government is the pusher and we are the addicted users.  So how can we kick the habit?  A few ideas...

Five key policies to overcome auto dependence per Newman and Kenworthy (Wheeler 123):

      1.  Traffic calming - remove barriers for cyclists and walkers; results in reduced accidents and less pollution 

      2.   Improve transit alternatives

   3.Improve land use – mixed use, higher density

   4. Growth management – prevent sprawl

      5. Economic Incentives

*And my addition: ELIMINATE AUTO SUBSIDIES

Check out this (somewhat dated, but still relevant) article on road pricing in the Economist.  The idea is painfully simple and not new: charge people that drive at peak times, by themselves, and/or that drive more frequently on heavily-traveled roadways.  

Another crazy concept: building more roads only relieves congestion temporarily, and actually leads to even more traffic problems, because it fails to deter driving behavior or offer alternatives.  “Conventional solutions such as increasing roadway capacity or improving vehicle design, often reduce one problem but exacerbate others, particularly if they increase total vehicle travel” (Roseland 120).  Stop building more roads already!

"Many important revolutions result from more effective use of existing technologies and resources, rather than new technology" (Roseland 117).  In the case of autos, "new technologies" like innovative design, cleaner fuels, and better roads will only increase use.  We need to eliminate subsidies and let pricing mechanisms of the free market take their toll (roads, that is).

Indiv Project Update

I've been in contact with Jacqui Bauer, Bloomington Sustainability Coordinator, regarding the content of the survey and help finding grants/incentives for apartment complex recycling.  I have yet to administer the survey because I wanted to let my landlord know first.  However, he seems to be a hard person to get to.  Maybe I'll just do it, and try to talk to him afterwards?

1st Outside Event: Mark Winne "America’s Food System – A Cause for Concern, A Time for Action"

Before it all runs out of my brain, I figure I should blog about the Mark Winne lecture I attended way back on September 15th.  First, a few of the “good-BUT-bad” statistics gleaned from the lecture:

∙ The local food market is a $5-7 billion industry BUT the fast food industry is $170 billion.

∙ The organics market is a $25 billion industry and continues to grow even in the economic downturn, BUT only 4% of retail food in the U.S. is organic.

∙ There are now 150 local/state food councils in the U.S. with the goal to bring just, sustainable food policies to our communities, BUT there are also 206 food banks and 60,000 emergency food sites (a sign that people are still struggling).

∙ Farm-to-school programs, urban gardening and farmers markets are on the rise BUT 65% of Americans are still overweight/obese (and 1 out of 3 children).

∙ Out of 33 industrialized countries, America is ranked 3^rd for highest level of income disparity and 1^st in food insecurity.  Sorry folks, no good news there.

What I liked about his lecture: he’s a go-getter, optimistic, and feisty.  He started an organic garden with “throw-away” kids in the 70s, and succeeded in growing edible food (which is more than I can say some summers).  If that isn’t enough for you (it was for me), check out his bio and you'll see that Mr. Winne has had his hand in a lot of important projects.  I wish he had spoken more about some of those, but I guess he had a book to promote.  Can't blame him for that.

What I didn’t like so much: he was a bit one-sided/very anti-establishment, read straight from his book, and didn’t really offer any concrete ideas.  For instance, when I asked what financial alternatives exist for food banks instead of taking donations from mega-industries like Snickers and McDonald’s he basically offered the Nancy Reagan “Just Say No” solution.  That’s all well and good until you have to decide between feeding hungry, poor people or paying the energy bill.

Speaking of balancing a budget, can I just say that if I don’t learn anything else in my group project I’ve learned this: there are a lot of people in the public sector making tough decisions about how to run their organizations/departments in a financially-responsible manner among competing interests, political pressures, ethical dilemmas, piles of paperwork, and bureaucratic BS.  Whew!  Sorry, had to be said.

One Man’s Trash Is Another Man’s Treasure

Here’s how waste management works in the North:

First, we start with a standard of living based on high consumption rates.  In fact, it drives our economy. Second, we live in a disposable society that values convenience over all other factors.  Last, we pay to make the waste go away.  Sometimes they offer recycling, and sometimes we actually do it.  The main reason we don’t bother is that resource recovery is usually driven by law and public willingness/concern for the environment.  Only a few industries, such as aluminum, steel and baled plastics, are driven by potential profit.

Here’s how it works in the South:

Waste collection is spotty due to financial and/or institutional constraints.  You’re lucky if you’ve got the service.  If you don’t, sometimes community-based organizations will pick it up for a small fee.  Usually they use low-tech equipment (if any) to collect, and make up for it with manual labor.  Resource recovery is amazingly thorough “because this work is done in a very labour-intensive way and for very low incomes”.  You guessed it: these are usually marginalized, minority populations.

Profit Potential for under-utilized resources + Lack of govt services = Local innovation

The “culture” of formal sector vs informal waste management has always fascinated me.  When I read the encouraging story in Wheeler (p. 161) about Cairo moving towards being a zero-waste system I was thrilled.  I wanted to know more about the Zaballeen community and how they managed to collect, reuse, and recycle most of the waste produced by Cairo’s 15 million citizens.  What’s more, the article talks about the “active support of the city authorities” which really surprised me.  Turns out, the excerpt in Wheeler made it sound a lot better than reality.

The Zaballeen (Arabic for “garbage people”) make a living as a community by collecting and sorting Cairo’s waste, recycling an astonishing 80% of all wastes including plastics, metals, organics, paper, and clothing.  Theirs is one of the most efficient, albeit informal, systems in the world. 

Besides a recycling school and recently installing basic services such as electricity, sewerage, and water, “support” from the city is lacking.  The Zaballeen are an ethnic and religious minority, further stigmatized by their profession/way of life (and admittedly poor hygiene practices).  With little concern for impacting this community’s sole income source, Egypt recently awarded contracts to three multinational companies to handle Cairo’s waste collection.  The presence of these companies means less trash for the Zaballeen to collect, less recyclable material to sell abroad, and less income overall.  There is an excellent documentary about this community entitled Garbage Dreams (get it at the library) that addresses many of these complex issues.  

 Clip from Garbage Dreams

What strikes me most about the Zaballeen is their ability to literally turn trash into gold, and do it with immense efficiency.  Even though the contracted companies are only required by law to recycle a mere 20% of the total waste collected, they are already struggling to do what the Zaballeen have done for years.  One company has already been terminated for failing to keep the streets clean.  

 This is Mokattam, "home" for the Zabelleen

“In the case of solid waste management, cities in the North have much to learn from the ingenuity of waste recycling in the South” (Wheeler, p. 161).  Despite poor living conditions and outright discrimination, it seems like we could take a cue from the Zabelleen in terms of linking “resource conservation and waste reduction with job creation and local empowerment” (Roseland, p. 83).  In Garbage Dreams, a few of the boys from the Zaballeen community have an opportunity to go abroad to study recycling in the developed world.  Their observations?  “Here they have technology but no precision”.  So true.

Quiz results: Ecological Footprint Quiz by Center for Sustainable Economy

I did the footprints awhile ago, but didn't post them. According to the Center for Sustainable Economy, it takes 113.63 acres to support my lifestyle, and we'd need 2.93 earths if everyone lived like me. What made sense: my goods and services footprint is way lower than the national average since I buy everything used/secondhand. What seemed weird: my food footprint is about equal to the national average even though I'm a vegetarian. Quiz results: Ecological Footprint Quiz by Center for Sustainable Economy

According to the Global Footprint Network (www.footprintnetwork.org), it takes 15.4 acres to support my lifestyle and 3.5 earths if everyone lived like me. This one seemed more general and some of the questions were more ambiguous. For example: how far do I drive my car per week depends on whether I go home for the weekend; the difference is between 4 miles per week or 420!

I was unable to find the Lifetime Footprint Calculator again on the National Geographic website, but I do remember being very dismayed at how unsustainable bananas are...because I love them! :(

But I DID find a water footprint calculator on the NG site that was very cool: (http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/water-footprint-calculator)
Again, since I buy stuff secondhand my water use was very low for goods and services. But because I drive home occasionally and make one 2,000 ml flight per year, my water use for energy is higher than the national average. Even with all the water conservation techniques I use, and the fact that I don't eat meat (BIG water user) my daily "consumption" comes to 1,695 gallons! Bummer.

Personal Project

I was wondering if you guys could give me some feedback on my survey for my personal project.  I plan on running around my apartment complex and asking these questions, and then at the end (if they express interest) asking them to sign a "personal pledge" to recycle.  Let me know what you think!  http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/7VG37P3