Transitioning from the automobile
Sooner or later, our energy supplies will no longer be able to keep up with demand. Even without imminant fears of "peak oil", there's too many people in the world aspiring to follow the U.S. consumption levels, or at least European levels, and the supply just won't be there.
Since a transition must happen sooner or later, I wonder what it might look like? I mean thinking of my own stomping grounds, the Twin Cities metro area.
Since transportation is something near 99% dependent upon oil, any sharp rises in oil prices, or even shortages will have a great affect. Given our dependence level is there any way to transition to another fuel?
From what I've heard the next-best energy source for metro transportation is electricity, like Light rail, although perhaps battery technology will advance enough to also help.
My approach would do some mixture of stick and carrot. The stick is to put limitations on automobile travel - stop widening roadways, limit parking, raised "user" fees. These can be justified by assuming land itself is valuable and alternative uses can be found which have a greater value in a future when automobiles won't be as dominate. The carrot is to expand infrastructure to support alternative transportation, development along transportation corridors, and walkable ammenaties.
Now given perhaps 90% are dependent upon auto travel these won't be popular, and perhaps impossible. There's also going to be competition between "central metro areas" and "suburban areas". Businesses perhaps will move if they can't get enough local parking to support them.
The process seems clear for higher density areas, or ones that can be modified to support density. Suburbs themselves can perhaps create their own local centers of walkable development and haSooner or later, our energy supplies will no longer be able to keep up with demand. Even without imminant fears of "peak oil", there's too many people in the world aspiring to follow the U.S. consumption levels, or at least European levels, and the supply just won't be there.
I imagine the transitioning can occur relatively smoothly in cities, smoothly in the sense that some preplanning and gradual changes can make it possible for more to live without owning cars, and it can become a critical mass process of being seen as an attractive lifestyle.
Suburbs and small towns can also move in that direction, with small experiments in "town centers" and transportion corridors and development that allows the brave to live without cars or at least without one car per driving adult!
Exurbs, rural areas are were it is harder to see. It would be interesting to see who does the most driving, but certainly many organize their lives efficiently for auto freedom and not for a future when energy costs much more. I imagine upgrading rail systems for passenger service can help, and smaller electric cars.
Higher energy costs give me hope these things will come, although easy to get impatient, easy to think we ought to be more proactive, and we should, but without a dictatorship I'm afraid the best I can hope for is a milder version of Kunster's "Long Emergency" where small crises trigger a response and hope resources remain to lead.
Debt is still perhaps my bigger fear. A country full of debt means decisions are made on short term gain rather than long term vision. I believe "good debt" is debt that reduces the cost of living in the future. The rest is going to make everything harder when the shit hits the fan.
Since a transition must happen sooner or later, I wonder what it might look like? I mean thinking of my own stomping grounds, the Twin Cities metro area.
Since transportation is something near 99% dependent upon oil, any sharp rises in oil prices, or even shortages will have a great affect. Given our dependence level is there any way to transition to another fuel?
From what I've heard the next-best energy source for metro transportation is electricity, like Light rail, although perhaps battery technology will advance enough to also help.
My approach would do some mixture of stick and carrot. The stick is to put limitations on automobile travel - stop widening roadways, limit parking, raised "user" fees. These can be justified by assuming land itself is valuable and alternative uses can be found which have a greater value in a future when automobiles won't be as dominate. The carrot is to expand infrastructure to support alternative transportation, development along transportation corridors, and walkable ammenaties.
Now given perhaps 90% are dependent upon auto travel these won't be popular, and perhaps impossible. There's also going to be competition between "central metro areas" and "suburban areas". Businesses perhaps will move if they can't get enough local parking to support them.
The process seems clear for higher density areas, or ones that can be modified to support density. Suburbs themselves can perhaps create their own local centers of walkable development and haSooner or later, our energy supplies will no longer be able to keep up with demand. Even without imminant fears of "peak oil", there's too many people in the world aspiring to follow the U.S. consumption levels, or at least European levels, and the supply just won't be there.
I imagine the transitioning can occur relatively smoothly in cities, smoothly in the sense that some preplanning and gradual changes can make it possible for more to live without owning cars, and it can become a critical mass process of being seen as an attractive lifestyle.
Suburbs and small towns can also move in that direction, with small experiments in "town centers" and transportion corridors and development that allows the brave to live without cars or at least without one car per driving adult!
Exurbs, rural areas are were it is harder to see. It would be interesting to see who does the most driving, but certainly many organize their lives efficiently for auto freedom and not for a future when energy costs much more. I imagine upgrading rail systems for passenger service can help, and smaller electric cars.
Higher energy costs give me hope these things will come, although easy to get impatient, easy to think we ought to be more proactive, and we should, but without a dictatorship I'm afraid the best I can hope for is a milder version of Kunster's "Long Emergency" where small crises trigger a response and hope resources remain to lead.
Debt is still perhaps my bigger fear. A country full of debt means decisions are made on short term gain rather than long term vision. I believe "good debt" is debt that reduces the cost of living in the future. The rest is going to make everything harder when the shit hits the fan.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home