Thursday’s column: The term ‘sustainability’ may be on thin ice
Pioneer Press | 1908 | Wikimedia Commons
Today we have a status report on the term “sustainability.” For a long time it’s carried implications of thrift, energy efficiency, clean air and water, and so on.
Lately the word has come under attack. Denizens of the Roanoke Tea Party have worked hard to turn it into something dirty and loathsome. They tried again before the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Tuesday night.
Ostensibly they were urging supervisors to drop the county’s $1,200 annual membership in an organization called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives – Local Governments for Sustainability. It’s an international group of 700 or so localities that share voluntary energy-saving and pollution-reducing tips and strategies.
The chief premise underlying ICLEI is that sustainability is good. But at the supervisors’ meeting, Tea Partyers ran down a litany of reasons why the concept is dangerous, contemptible and unconstitutional.
One speaker suggested it could lead to the United Nations spying on Americans through new-fangled “smart” electric meters. Another suggested it’s an insidious movement toward “Marxism from within” that would lead to all of us forcibly uprooted into Soviet-style high rises.
I kid you not.
TO READ THE REST OF THE COLUMN, CLICK HERE.
January 26, 2012 - 6:00 AM
We have the energy saving lights that automatically shut off, here at work. I wonder what diabolical thing will come next, computers that automatically shut off if you dare say anything against the UN?
Sustainability rocks, but why do you have to spend $1200 per year of tax payer money to join an organization to talk about sustainabilty.
JUST DO IT!
Signed, Recyling Liberal Treehugger
Hmm… if I have two electric meters on my home does it mean the government is spying on me twice as much?
I pity the poor Roanoke board that has to deal with this particular element of conspiracy theorists, although it’s likely that if it wasn’t them, it would be some other equally absurd fantasy. There are many from which to choose. We are pattern seeking species and will freely create pattern where none exist to satisfy this uniquely human need.
Ironically, these folks tend to focus of make believe issues, when it’s actually true that most of us are freely giving away private information to corporations without even thinking about it. I guarantee you that Kroger knows more about my habits as consumer than any of my friends. My Internet Service Provider could tell you more about my interests than my mom.
I find it amusing that the Tea Party is so ass-backwards that they would rail against some of our nation’s greatest presidents.
Teddy Roosevelt – His stance on the environment would have him labeled as an agent of Agenda 21. His efforts on workplace safety and food safety would have him labeled as an enemy of business, and therefore, capitalism.
FDR – The New Deal = social engineering.
Lincoln – STATES RIGHTS!
God I hope these people one day realize how big of a joke they really are.
Yeah, I really hate saving money on our energy usage, water usage, and how little we have hauled away by our PSA when they come to pick up the trash (maybe 1 halfway full bag a week). It’s such a drag to save money. I’m really not looking forward to saving money on gas with the car I now drive, which should net 35+ mpg, compared to less than 16 I used to get out of my truck (before it died, anyway).
Sarcasm font off.
So….when they say Obama’s deficit isn’t “sustainable”…..that’s a good thing?
Your pernicious attacks on the TP are redundant let’s move on, shall we!
That’s funny. Just earlier this week, one of the better web comics took a jab at the overuse of the term “Sustainability”. I was thinking more along the lines of all the organic hippies over-using it as a buzzword… but here you go:
http://xkcd.com/1007/
XKCD is great stuff.
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front to rule it”
H.L. Mencken
——————
I thought this was interesting.
“Warren Buffett’s Secretary Likely Makes Between $200,000 And $500,000/Year”
“I have nothing against Debbie Bosanke earning a half million or even more. Buffet is a major player in the world economy. His secretary deserves good compensation. At her income, however, she is scarcely the symbol of injustice that Obama wishes her to project.
I imagine that there are any number of secretaries who would want her job and her place in the Congress gallery for the President’s State of the Union address.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/01/25/warren-buffetts-secretary-likely-makes-between-200000-and-500000year/
GOOD for her!
But I agree, Obama might want to vet a bit more next time.
The Roanoke Tea Party is not anti-environment. Nor is it anti-conservation. It rightly advocates that free individuals engage in these practices rather than the government using force, deadly force if necessary, to compel people to behave in ways that a corrupt political process has decided they should behave. Mostly because the government does not have many of these authorities that it is imposing. And partly because this is a horrible way to treat your fellow man. I ask you Dan, why do you advocate the abuse of your countrymen?
The OPEN thread’s not open yet, so I hope it’s okay if I post this here.
I think this is pretty interesting. (Hopefully, the link works. Sometimes mine don’t.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31751_162-57366171-10391697/fla-teams-may-be-fined-for-not-housing-homeless-in-stadiums/
Excerpt:
“According to the Miami Herald, when the Florida legislature passed a bill in 1988 to get public money for stadiums, they included an obscure provision that required every taxpayer-funded pro team (as well as MLB teams with Florida spring training facilities) to house homeless people in their stadiums on non-event nights.
Over the past two dozen years, that provision has been totally ignored – until now. That’s right: Senate Bill 816, which would force teams and stadium owners to pony up almost $300 million if they can’t prove that they’ve been housing the homeless on non-event nights, passed with a unanimous vote by a Senate committee on Monday.
“We have spent over $300 million supporting teams that can afford to pay a guy $7, $8, $10 million a year to throw a baseball 90 feet. I think they can pay for their own stadium,” said Sen. Michael Bennett, R-Bradenton. “I cannot believe that we’re going to cut money out of Medicaid and take it away from the homeless and take it away from the poor and impoverished, and we’re continuing to support people who are billionaires.” “
Libertarians and Tea Partiers hate “sustainability” and other environmental concerns because it threatens their secret fantasy. Deep down, they all long to live in the modern equivalent of a frontier log cabin: holding absolute dominion over their little patch of land and never having to deal with the outside world. As soon as you admit that what you do on your own property affects other people, that dream of perfect guilt-free independence and isolation starts to fall apart.
#1 I noticed that when I cut off my TV, the sound system will also go to sleep several minutes later, even if I didn’t turn it off separately. Insidious, diabolical AND evil.
“One speaker suggested it could lead to [1] the United Nations spying on Americans through newfangled “smart” electric meters. Another suggested it’s an [2] insidious movement toward “Marxism from within” that would lead to all of us forcibly uprooted into Soviet-style high-rises. I kid you not.”
[2] – not so much.
[1] is definitely within plausibility, however. Imagine you’re a cold-natured old white dude with thinning blood. You keep the that thermostat cranked at 80°F all winter long and your house is drafty. Your neighbor, however, has a smallish marijuana grow room in his basement.
Both of your “smart” meters indicate “too much electicity” use, however, and the authorities, in their assumptive mode, kick your door down in the middle of the night.
Think that, or 1000 different scenarios such as that, can’t happen?
#7, if the RTP doesn’t want to be called out as being ridiculous, they need to stop saying ridiculous stuff in public.
The Roanoke Tea Party is not anti-environment. Nor is it anti-conservation. It rightly advocates that free individuals engage in these practices rather than the government using force, deadly force if necessary, to compel people to behave in ways that a corrupt political process has decided they should behave. Mostly because the government does not have many of these authorities that it is imposing. And partly because this is a horrible way to treat your fellow man. I ask you Dan, why do you advocate the abuse of your countrymen?
So, do you feel that the government has no right to enforce anti-littering legislation? How about pollution legislation?
#14 George, they’ll also know that you’re a thin-blooded 80 year old.
#14 “the authorities, in their assumptive mode, kick your door down in the middle of the night.
Think that, or 1000 different scenarios such as that, can’t happen?”
The question is, “but has this happened?” Please provide links where the Smart Meter was used by the “authorities” in this way. Thanks
Saving the environment is a noble cause, just don’t do it under the guise of saving the consumer money. Your 35mph car cost about as much to drive at $3 a gallon as a 20mpg car did when the gas was $2 a gallon.Could it be that the increase in gas prices has something to do with the increases in mpg dictated by the government? Do you really think that if electricity consumption falls by 25% the electric company will not raise it’s rates to compensate? The utilities and oil companies are not going to lose money. The real losers in a less consumption scenario are the people who make a living supplying our energy.
And before you jump on the energy corporations shouldn’t you divorce yourself from any investments you may have in said corporations. Many people gripe about corporate greed while they themselves have invested in, and by doing so expect a return from, the very same corporations they gripe about.
“Saving the environment is a noble cause, just don’t do it under the guise of saving the consumer money. Your 35mph car cost about as much to drive at $3 a gallon as a 20mpg car did when the gas was $2 a gallon.Could it be that the increase in gas prices has something to do with the increases in mpg dictated by the government? Do you really think that if electricity consumption falls by 25% the electric company will not raise it’s rates to compensate? The utilities and oil companies are not going to lose money. The real losers in a less consumption scenario are the people who make a living supplying our energy.”
What will is proposing here is that desired profit levels by a corporation always dictate the price of their product or service.
What I know is that now, instead of pumping 30 gallons of gas into my 24 year old truck every 2 weeks, I’ll put 12 gallons into my new car in the same timeframe, for the same miles driven. I’m already getting 41 mpg actually, and it’s not a hybrid, and not an import.
It’s a 2012 Ford Focus, from Wayne, Michigan.
And while I may now have a payment, the cost savings on gas, maintenance, repairs, and general upkeep actually cover almost the entire payment…when I break down the ownership costs of that old truck to a monthly value. And the insurance cost increase was minimal, even though it’s got full coverage vs the liability-only I used to have on my truck…which will be headed to the scrap yard for parts stripping and recycling sometime next week.
Oj@21
Might be a good to praise the Ford brand. I have three of’m, and the 2009 Fusion is economical and a nice ride. The other two are over ten years old and have cost very little to maintain and have been very reliable. The 2000 ranger pick up was used by two teenage drivers and still has a workable clutch. Amazing.
I’m not proposing it Dan and I did not mean this is always the case. That other circumstances contribute to price structure is obvious. All I am saying is when it comes to energy, the less we consume the higher the per unit price goes. For example, when everything is converted to CF and LED lighting the demand for electricity will go down but the cost per kwh will have to go up to meet the expectations of the stockholders. Right? And a by product of less consumption is the loss of good paying jobs for the people who work producing and distributing the energy.
A very interesting piece on the environmental impact of the various proteins we all eat. I had always heard that grain fed beef was high on the list of carbon producing, unsustainable foods but check out lamb!
http://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/a-meat-eaters-guide-to-climate-change-health-what-you-eat-matters/climate-and-environmental-impacts/
Mike, I’m a Ford guy too though I’ve owned many other makes and I find most modern cars to be superior to older models. I now drive a Ford Hybrid Escape and get 30+ mpg. It has 74,000 mis, has had no problems and the electric engine has paid for itself! I feel rather smug about the gas prices though my aim is to do even better next time.
Mike Scott, I’ve owned or had substantial experience with numerous vehicles, and by far the 5 Fords I’ve owned have been the best. My first car was an 88 Ranger 5-speed, and I traded that up for a 4wd Ranger, which could go in anything. Got another 5-speed Ranger when I decided I needed better mileage more than towing or off-road capabilities, and that was the best Ranger of the 3. We traded that for an Escape, which we still own, and that, amazingly enough, had been the best Ford we owned to-date. Now we have the new Focus, and I’m thoroughly impressed. Ford has managed to do some tremendous work on their car line and cranks out some amazing rides now…a huge upgrade from where they were even just 10 years ago. And, to do it without needing a bailout…impressive.
The other vehicles I’ve owned? Chevy Cavalier…tons of problems, lots of repairs…wouldn’t die though, but that’s about the best thing I can say for it. Jeep Cherokee…great in the snow and off road, but lots of repairs, lousy mileage (like 12 mpg), no power, very loud, and parts fell off, literally. Acura Integra…fun little car, decent mileage, handled great…but lots of costly repairs too…was a very problematic car to own because of the difficulty and expense of getting certain replacement parts. Dodge Ram…could pull trailers and haul whatever I needed, but leaked fluids horribly, low fuel mileage for a truck, and eventually just died (could still be functional with a replacement or overhauled engine)…though more age-related than anything else (24 yrs, 249,500 miles)…it actually had served my father-in-law for almost 15 years with very few problems. The other vehicle was my dad’s Chevy S-10 Blazer that I drove until I bought my Ranger…it was a major lemon, requiring substantial warranty service within months of the purchase, lousy fuel mileage, cheap interior that wore out too quickly, and needed substantial repairs several times to keep running…it died not far after 100k.
I too love Fords…my father’s first car was a Ford…and he traded them every two years for a new one. I spent a lot of my childhood in the back of Fords. My first car was a Ford, and have owned them for years [I married a Buick lover] but eventually came around to Fords – especially the pick ups. Three out of the four vehicles we have are Fords. Our oldest is used on our farm – has 300,000 miles and works like a dog. When the JD gets stuck, it is never the beautiful F-250 4WD that does the pulling – it might get dirty! – it’s the good old ’93 Aerostar AWD. Always ready to go. The new Explorer is probably the first car we will trade tho…
I think the new Ford Fusion was the most looked over car at the car show this year…
will, you’ve taught me something new. Thank you. All these years I’d been under the misimpression that higher demand for a commodity tended to raise prices and that lower demand tended to push them down.
Who knew that it’s exactly the opposite?
These were the remarks I delivered to the Board of Supervisors tuesday evening. Dan was there; he can confirm (or not) it was my presentation, as he was a mere ten feet away as I read them from my BlackBerry. Must say, I’m a little hurt that I wasn’t quoted or even referenced in your column Dan. =)
Thank You to this Board for your time today. I’m Gregory Honeycutt; President of Roanoke Tea Party. I’ve been a resident of Roanoke County for nearly twenty-five years, and a property owner and resident at 4090 White Oak Dr. for the past seven of them.
My prepared remarks opposing the County’s membership in the organization ICLEI have been echoed several times this evening, and over the past months. You have all been presented with an abundance of information supporting our desire that the County discontinue this affiliation.
So instead, I’d like to use my time tonight to relate a real-life, common sense example of how energy-saving policies put forth by ICLEI-inspired programs can actually serve to hinder one of the goals most important to us all… saving money on the power bill.
Automatic light switches. We’ve all seen or had an experience with them… often in County owned facilities. Seems like a good idea. Lights going out automatically is nothing revolutionary, and is certainly advisable in some instances. For example exterior lighting.
There is a cost of hardware, a cost of installation. The hardware has to be maintained. None of which are unacceptably expensive on a small scale.
Yet, under adopted guidelines set forth by organizations like ICLEI, building codes begin to mandate these policies in all construction, not just in County buildings.
From a common sense perspective, it often occurs to me that maybe those lights don’t need to be on for 15 minutes each time the sensor is activated.
Gentleman, and Lady of the Board, a post-it note or adhesive label simply requesting “please turn off the lights”, accompanied by an explanatory memo would sufficed.
It’s my opinion this Board, and by extension, the residents of Roanoke County would be well served by a complete re-evaluation of the supposed benefits of affiliation with ICLEI.
Thank You.
Dan, yeah…the logic seems completely counter to what we’ve always heard from conservatives and free-marketers.
The line has always been: demand drive price. High demand=higher prices, because higher demand causes shorter supplies, so companies can charge more for the services and still sell them. Low demand is supposed to equate to lower prices, because companies have to drop the prices to encourage buying.
But now, suddenly with something like electricity, buying and using less electricity is what causes higher prices, because the companies generating it are trying to maintain a certain level of revenue, regardless of the demand for their products? Good to know that it’s not the EPA! But wait, that completely violates the supposed free-market economics that conservatives say always work to deliver the best products at the best prices. Are they admitting that price manipulation by beloved corporations actually occurs, and that traditionally-taught supply vs demand economics might not actually be what drives prices in a free market?
Take for example gasoline, another of those things purported to have price hikes due to less use, because of lower demand for gas as a result of increased auto efficiency. That’s bunk…gasoline/oil consumption on a worldwide scale has increased streadily since the early 1980′s, the last time that demand really plumetted. There was a brief, minimal decline with the most recent downturn, but it was very small compared to the drop from the early 80′s, and during the 70′s oil embargo. If the mantra of less use leads to higher prices was actually true, gas should still be 87 cents a gallon, given that consumption has continued rising in the years since we had prices that low. And, they can’t blame taxes…fuel taxes haven’t been raised in a long, long time. There are a few regulatory changes that have impacted prices, but they have not caused the nearly 4-fold increase in gasoline prices in the US from 2000 to today, which actually occured between 2000 to 2007, before dropping to back to more reasonable levels…when US demand for gasoline fell…and as the economy has recovered some, demand has gone up, and so have prices.
So yeah, I’ve learned something new in backwards world, where up is down, left is right, and dark is light.
No wonder conservatives want to ditch public education, they couldn;t teach this crap there are get away with it.
#30 This also happened with natural gas. Sorry, folks, it wasn’t cold enough last winter and you didn’t use as much gas, so we have to raise the price.
Mr. Huneycutt for years received his paycheck from the government, Roanoke County government. Now he receives a paycheck from the Western Virginia Water Authority (note the word Authority) which is a consortium of governments and basically a monopoly on water and sewer services for customers in their service district. They even put put chemicals in the water their customers are forced to drink. Probably chemicals that turn users into raging socialists or tea party fanatics, depending on how our brains are wired. So the Water Authority is essentially responsible for the divisive nature ot today’s political environment. I therefore request that Mr. Hunnycutt and his Tea Party demand that Roanoke County withdraw from the Water Authority. Please save us all. Oh the humanity.
It is indeed and upside-down world.
I have always strived to save electricity and natural gas in my household. I’ve been doing it since I was a kid during the 70′s energy crisis. I don’t think I have any problems with anyone who wants to save energy. What I have a problem with is people or entities lobbying local, State and National governments for legislation that,in the end, forces me or others to change our energy consumption behaviour so that our man-made CO2 emissions are reduced in hopes that it will somehow reduce global warming. When I say ‘forces me’ I don’t mean someone is going to point a gun at my head or threaten my life. Instead, I mean local, state and federal government will continue to gradually cave to eco-socialist entities by gradually enacting new legislation making it gradually harder on me and others if we exceed our maximum permissible carbon footprint.
The County must submit documentation to ICLEI indicating how the County is meeting its 3% reduction in CO2 emissions per year for 10 years. That documentation is audited by ICLEI to determine if the County can receive the next ICLEI Milestone certificate (Milestones 1 through 5). The County recently began Milestone 4 about the time the Save A Ton campaign began. The Save A Ton campaign’s primary purpose is to help the County achieve Milestone 4 certification. But, you won’t here much about that from the Campaign. Anyone with half a brain can figure out how to save electricity and heating costs without this campaign. Wait until ICLEI Milestone 5 begins, Roanoke County. Then, perhaps you stop laughing at those who are against this UN-partnered organization.
Since you all are so enamored of steps, maybe there is a twelve step program for conspiracy theorists you can join.
How about conspiracy fact, Sandi? Everything I spoke of above back in January has a basis in fact. Wake up, people! Its hiding in plain sight here locally (as well as in many localities across the country)!