the New American Village

Forward to the Future

2008-05-07T08:57:00.006-05:00

Have you ever driven an automobile forward while looking in the rear-view mirror? Don't tell anybody, but I've tried it a few times. Doesn't work very well.

Sure, if the road is perfectly straight with no oncoming traffic, you could feasibly travel short distances, albeit very, very slowly. But I think we could all agree (including our friendly Highway Patrolmen) that driving any distance in a car with your eyes glued to the rear-view mirror is unfeasible and, in fact, dangerous.

Prudence tells us we need to steer our vehicle based on what we see in front of us. What's coming up over the horizon is the determining factor in how we choose to direct our course of action.

So why would we plan for the future by imitating the past? Why should we base decisions about how we build buildings and infrastructure, about how we design our cars and factories, by mimicking old paradigms?

We know what's coming up on the horizon, at least to some degree, and we certainly have a clear focus on our immediate future. The distant future may be a little murky, but that's no reason to discount it, no reason to throw up our hands and say 'I don't know what the road looks like around the curve so I'll just close my eyes and lock the steering wheel in place'.

Here's one thing we know. Some energy sources are finite - oil and coal for example. Some energy sources are infinite - solar and wind and geothermal fall into this category. What does this tell us? In the future, renewable sources of energy will come down in price, and thus be more feasible to employ, and non-renewable sources of energy will become ever more scarce, and the price of utilizing non-renewables will go up and up and up. Already, the trajectory is apparent and playing out right in front of us.

And with the earth's growing population (estimates are in the next half decade, world population will increase from the current 6.7 billion people to over 10 billion), we know we must design for accomplishing more with less.

Transportation planning must recognize that the automobile is one option of many, not the only option. Public transportation infrastructure takes years, if not decades to implement; that makes it all the more important to design for what's on the horizon.

Cars must be dramatically re-designed to meet the obvious challenges of the future. For years, American automobile manufacturers have been resistant to change because they've been focused on what sold last year. Now big gas-guzzling SUV's sit on the lot while dealers place hybrid buyers on long waiting lists.

Buildings must be designed to be more energy efficient, some even for energy independence. Ease and economy of construction is a must. The McMansions that popped up like mushrooms as recently as a year and a half ago, are already dinosaurs.

Doesn't it make sense to design for where we want to go rather than parody where we've already been?

Man with Nature, not Man over Nature

2008-05-01T14:44:00.004-05:00

If Mother Nature gives you a tree, enjoy the shade.

How many times have we seen a beautiful piece of land clear cut and flattened to make way for a new building project? One day - a beautiful forest. Next day, it looks like a World War 1 battlefield. Ouch!

And how many new developments are named after the unique natural landform that was destroyed in the process? In Hattiesburg Mississippi, once-natural Turtle Creek flows through a big concrete pipe buried under – you guessed it - Turtle Creek Mall.

Now I'm not at all against new development. In fact, I am very much in favor of new building projects, especially when I’m designing them. (An Architect against development is like a priest who doesn't believe in God). New projects on a beautiful piece of land are exciting and full of ultimate potential – for good or for bad.

Many developers I’ve met think this way: Step 1 – clear the site, Step 2 – decide what to build, Step 3 – build it. I call this process “Fire, Ready, Aim!” Exactly backwards.

But in the green ethic, the land tells us what to do, not the other way around. It’s not an either/or proposition when it comes to development versus sustainability. Both can coexist when holistically planned.

Preserve unique landforms and look for ways to create a relationship between those natural amenities and the built environment. The goal is to create a dynamic balance between manmade and natural. Integrate the new with the natural and new opportunities to passive environmental control; a healthy patch of deciduous trees can drastically reduce the energy cost of cooling during a hot summer if the new building is oriented properly. And what a view!

So it’s, Man with Nature, not Man over Nature.

Location, Location, Location

2008-04-29T08:10:00.007-05:00

The one thing you can always count on in green is that local is good - mostly.

Environmentally, local materials work best. If the product you're looking for comes from local raw materials, you can be pretty certain that it is compatible with the local environment. For example, stone quarried on site makes for a nice aesthetic for a designed landscape feature -colors and textures are inherently compatible with natural surroundings.

Local requires less energy, and here most likely we're talking about oil, moving items from there to here. Less expended energy in transportation is a fundamental principle of sustainability.

Close-to-home manufacturing, harvesting, processing, designing, servicing, etc. stimulates the local economy. We are all connected in some way in this world, but we are very connected to our local environment. Buying local gives us the opportunity to support our neighbors who in turn support us. And, a wonderful by-product of local commerce is that it raises the level of cultural interaction by putting us in constant contact with those who live around us. A product from China may be cheaper to by in the short run, but the marginal savings at the cash register come at the cost of the many synergies created by buying local.

Growing evidence indicates that significant health benefits come from eating locally grown food. There's even a term for it - "locavore" - introduced by Jessica Prentice to describe the practice of eating a diet consisting of food grown within a 100 mile radius of where you live. You can visit her website dedicated to local cooking and eating at wisefoodways.com.

A common thread in the green ethic is that there are almost always exceptions to everything. There will always be an odd case here and there where on influence outweighs another. Its good to keep looking at the issue from all angles.

If local options demand a disproportionate amount of energy, uses up unique natural resources that society has a stake in preserving, or creates an imbalance in some way, it may indeed be more green to look farther away. For example, if a local processing plant is old and carbon heavy, it may be wise to look for an item assembled by a green facility 300 miles away. The cleaner manufacturing process may outweigh the cost of petroleum to get it from there to here.

It's best that we get used to these complexities. Green is not "one size fits all." There's no silver bullet. But there are infinite opportunities.

So remember, it's location, location, and sometimes - location.

The Green Ethic

2008-04-28T09:07:00.006-05:00

Consider How far we've come.

Just a few short years ago, people who used words like 'green, organic, natural' to describe a better way of life were marginalized and dismissed by most of society, big business, the press, and politicians as if they were a hopeless cult of idealists who "just didn't get it." Conspicuous consumption was pitched as the highest moral paradigm, and Americans bought in - literally. While a few dedicated individuals in the green movement worked tirelessly in the trenches over the 70's, 80's, and 90's, people-turned-consumers were consumed by consumerism.

Now, green is the latest national craze.

"Time to jump on the bandwagon - don't be the last person on your block to go green!" "Look at me, I'm greeeeeeeeeen!!!"

What happened?

Well, to be truthful, gluttonous consumerism caught up with us.

Americans bought big gas-guzzling vehicles, trumped up the price of housing (using the home equity loan like an ATM), and maxed out credit cards to buy things we really could do without. We outsourced everything - even the kitchen sink - under the banner of "globalism." Sprawl was crowned king and McMansions became as ubiquitous as Big Macs.

Now as gas prices head towards $4 a gallon, driving that SUV 60 miles to and from work while your spouse chauffeurs kids through traffic jams from this centralized county school to that far-away soccer field just doesn't look like utopia any more.

For the majority of Americans, its now hitting home (especially the one way out in suburbia or even farther out in exurbia). The financial and cultural strain brought about by a consumption-driven ethic has reached a tipping point. Its not just theory any more; our collective blind eye to the idea of sustainability is affecting people's lives in profoundly negative ways. The cost has been exacted in time, money, and culture. In 2008, the consequences of hyper-consumption are painfully obvious to everybody except the ostriches among us.

(Here's where some of you reading this post can mutter a cathartic "I told you so").

With this realization that "green is good," the business community is taking note.

Automobile companies, who for decades fought against raising gas mileage standards, are now trumpeting hybrid vehicles, even though you can't buy them yet. Developers talk up New Urbanist communities as a green living alternative, although most people can't afford to live in one. Oil and chemical companies are even spinning the PR that the only reason they have ever been in the business is to save the planet. All the while their carbon footprints increase.

Has big business now all of a sudden seen the light? Or is this just a new form of consumerism? Is all the clamor a real sea change, or just "greenwashing" - a term defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as 'the dissemination of misleading information by an organization to conceal its abuse of the environment in order to present a positive public image'?

So what's a nascent green enthusiast to believe? How do we define "green"? How can we know which sustainable options enhance our personal well-being and improve the health of the planet, and which choices are just hype?

I submit to you, the "green ethic."

Over the next few days, we will be discussing the meaning of green. Let's dig deeper than "checklists" and PR campaigns - and hopefully we'll cut through the organic bull droppings. Please feel free to join in on the discussion.

Ernie's Epitome

2008-04-25T00:13:00.006-05:00

A beautiful essay by my old friend Ernie. We met in nursery school, grew up together, and to this day, play each other dead even in "cut-throat" scrabble.

I live and work about 65 miles due South of Washington, D.C. in Southern Maryland. The political mindset and terrain of this region reminds me much of my hometown area around Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The region of Southern Maryland consists of four counties of rapidly vanishing farmland which for the last 40 years has been undergoing a transition into a bedroom community for suburban D.C. This land is tucked away between the Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River so it has traditionally been isolated despite its proximity to D.C., but that isolation is disappearing as a result of suburban D.C.'s swelling population.

About a dozen years ago the Federal government's Base Realignment Committee moved my job and about 20,000 other military and civil servant jobs to Southern Maryland, along with all the support contractors and thousands of other workers needed to work in the chain department stores and other required support services. What was once a sleepy community of farmers, fishermen, and workers at southern Maryland's Naval Air test station founded during WWII has now become a sterile community composed of a six lane, six mile shopping strip populated with a BestBuy, fast-food restaurants, a Super Walmart, an Old Navy store, a Target, an Outback, and other national and regional retail chains. What this area also has in common with other exurbs is its lack of sidewalks and lack of good public transportation for all. Common with Mr. Polk's description of the short-sightedness of commercial "strips", southern Maryland, despite its unprecedented growth in the last dozen years, was unable to engage in forward thinking, so southern Maryland, even that six miles of strip malls, still requires the absolute necessity of a personal automobile to conduct such basic living requirements as grocery shopping and transportation to work.

One of the things that lured me to the D.C. region over 20 years ago after I graduated from the school of Engineering at Mississippi State University was D.C.'s cosmopolitan environment: D.C. has the Smithsonian and other museums, the National Zoo, several ethnic neighborhoods like Chinatown and Adams Morgan's multi-ethnic mix of Hispanic, Afghan, and Middle Eastern restaurants in addition to D.C.'s beautiful architecture in its historic communities. I learned to appreciate architectural sensitivity by hanging around my high school friend James Polk when we were both undergrads at MSU. There are also numerous festivals to be enjoyed in D.C. throughout the warm months of each year.

For the first five years I lived in basement apartments in D.C. until I bought a quaint Cape Cod home in the D.C. area town of Cheverly. Cheverly has been described as "a diamond in a coal mine"; its three boundaries are isolated by two limited access highways and access from the third state highway is limited by a clever implementation of one-way roads which all but one lead only out of the town of Cheverly. The houses of Cheverly are not cookie-cutter duplicates, each house is distinctive. Every street in Cheverly has public sidewalks allowing its residents to walk anywhere in town. If you know Mr. Polk you will not be surprised that it was he who made me aware of the advantages of Cheverly when I was in the market for my first home. Incidentally, Cheverly also has a Metrorail subway stop which allows the Cheverly residents to take the subway to almost any community in the D.C. area. The Metrorail allowed me to get to my office if I had car trouble or if there was snow or frozen roads - something which seems to occur less each successive year due, perhaps, to global warming.

After my job was transitioned to southern Maryland about a dozen years ago I commuted the long hour and a half to my new work location for about 9 years. The long commute made my once enjoyable job an ordeal. I still enjoyed the engineering work of my job, but now I'd have to wake at 5 AM, and I wouldn't get home until at least 7 PM or even later if the weather was inclement or if a highway accident caused congestion. I didn't dislike my job, I disliked my commute. After nine years of this craziness and after I turned 40 years old I started falling asleep behind the wheel. Sometimes I'd have to pull off the road and take a 15 minute nap so I wouldn't fall asleep behind the wheel and kill myself and other commuters. The quality of my life kept disintegrating. In desperation I finally bought a house on two little two acres of land only seven miles from my southern Maryland office and then sold my Cheverly home in the middle of this last crazy housing boom.

I exchanged one over-priced house for another over-priced house so that I could be closer to work. All my new neighbors are friendly and, like me, keep well-manicured lawns. One of my new neighbors is about ten years younger than me with two girls in elementary school. Ironically, he's a manager at a warehouse in the area of D.C. which I moved away from so that I could be closer to work. He is one of the many commuters in the exurbs of southern Maryland who forfeits three hours of each day commuting so that his two girls can go to a decent public school and he and his wife don't have to worry about the crime of a large metropolitan community. Also ironic is that the dozen years that I lived in Cheverly I was never a victim of crime. Go figure.

I like living in my new community. There are numerous white-tailed deer in my new semi-rural community which causes me consternation when they use my shrubbery for food. There are also bald Eagles, Ospreys, owls, and geese which make each weekend day and each warm night very entertaining to the nature lover in me. I can also take my canoe and shove off into the creek behind my house and paddle into a serene area of the Patuxent River which empties out into the Chesapeake Bay and enjoy aquatic nature.

Most importantly I'm now only 15 minutes away from my office so my job has become enjoyable again, and I no longer dread waking and making the long commute to work. But I miss the walkable community I once lived in; I miss the convenience of the Metrorail, and I miss the public radio station that I once so easily received on my FM radio - thank goodness for NPR's streaming audio via my broadband internet access!

So after my grass is mowed and my shrubbery is deer-proofed I make my way some weekends to D.C.'s Dupont Circle community. I stroll the streets of Dupont Circle, sit in the public parks in the area and watch the occasional artist engaged in a public performance, rub shoulders with people who many times look and think differently from myself and from my neighbors in southern Maryland, and I take in museum displays and thought-provoking theatre and movies which never come to southern Maryland.

I would never want to forfeit my memories and experiences of camping, fishing, and hunting with my blue-collar Father in the wilds of Mississippi. I would never want to forfeit the experience of hunting the woods with my fraternal grandmother for sassafras root which would then by cleaned and boiled into a slightly intoxicating tea. Every child is not lucky enough to have my Father and grandmother.

But back to the subject of this blog response: One certainty, along with death and taxes, is change, and the United States has now become a debtor nation, and its time for us to pay who we came to the dance with. Gasoline is now over $3.00 a gallon, and with the depreciating value of the U.S. dollar and the growing middle class of India, China, and other areas of the World, the price of gasoline will undoubtedly keep climbing.

Walkable communities, which were once valued only for their social advantages will soon become an economic necessity. Perhaps this necessity of economics will force humans to re-engage with their fellow humans.

Ernest C. Suggs, Jr.

Park It !

2008-04-23T13:28:00.008-05:00

Is it possible to go an entire day without driving your car and go about "business as usual"?

I am happy to report that Tuesday, Earth Day, the answer for me was yes.

A dozen blocks on foot began the day - breakfast with Ed at IHOP. Ed is a long-time friend and running buddy, an Episcopal priest (who single-handedly revived my faith in his profession) and "ombudsman" extraordinaire. You should hear his sermons. Very inspirational, full of insight and love and woven with razor-sharp wit. I call it "stand-up homily."

Took care of an errand along the way.

After a hearty breakfast, and several hearty laughs, we carpooled downtown and took care of a few "necessaries". Employing some cerebral strategic planning (ok, we were really just driving and yacking) we breezed through our to-do lists in one car, not two.

Ed dropped me off at my place and I rode my bike for the rest of the day. It helps that I live only a couple of miles from my office.

So there you go; I did it.

It wasn't easy. The walking infrastructure has deteriorated over the past two generations as sprawl-centered development ignored anything but the car. And there are no bike lanes, so urban jungle rules apply. A rails-to-trails project will soon link the university with downtown with a walking/biking trail and that is a very positive initiative.

But it is possible.

What if every other day, we leave our cars at home. The result: half the cars on the road. Faster commutes, fewer traffic jams, less stress.

I understand that these options are not open to everyone. Some live in the county, and there, the car is really the only way to get from here to there. I live in a city, so I have options. Even though there are few sidewalks and no bike lanes, you can get around without a car. Sure the bus line could have longer hours, and could run more frequently, but with some personal planning, that's an option as well.

The more people insist on alternative modes of transportation, the easier it is for politicians and community leaders to move forward and initiate policies to fill in the gaps.

If we all look for options and engage in our community's effort to expand and enhance transportation alternatives, we can move in the direction of more livable, more humane existence and reverse the destructive trend of sprawl.

What can you do?

Underground No More

2008-04-22T15:13:00.002-05:00

OK, OK...

So for the benefit of those who wondered where I went (thanks for asking), here's the story. I was thrown in the slammer; the official charge was "pamphleteering." Rocking the boat was the crime, or so they said. Turns out, the we-don't-need-no-stinkin'-sidewalks lobby has some pull here with the local authority-figures. I pleaded guilty - I had to tell the truth - and threw myself on the mercy of the court. "Lock him up" screamed the scowl-faced judges. Who would have thought it could come to this? I thought the jury was still out.

OK,

that's not exactly what happened.

I've been spending some time catching up on work. The blog is a wonderful ly stimulating creative outlet, but very demanding on the time. In recognition of Earth Day, I am resuming my posts and plan to log an essay about 3 times a week.

And I am looking for a few guest bloggers. If interested, send me an email with some ideas and enough of a sample of your work so I can get a feel for your writing.

Happy Earth Day

Conservation Neighborhoods by Randall Arendt

2008-03-19T09:47:00.005-05:00

One concept jumps out at me when I study Randall Arendt’s ideas for neighborhood design – balance.

Amid a bulls-rush of conventional thinking by real estate developers telling us that every square inch of raw land must be actively developed and sold off to support the “economic viability” of a project, Arendt has tirelessly advocated leaving significant swaths of common natural space as part of the overall development.

Here’s the idea.

Start by taking the conventionally zoned density of a proposed neighborhood - let’s say it happens to be one acre per home site. Instead of carving out a series of one-acre plots stacked boundary to boundary, consolidate the building site to some percentage of that one acre. For the sake of this discussion, each home site becomes a half acre.

A couple of dynamics result.

By downsizing the individual lots, a cluster rather than a linear pattern takes form resulting in less required infrastructure (roads, walks, water, sewer, site grading, etc.) thereby reducing the cost and effort involved in infrastructure development.

And instead of each homeowner having his one acre, half the land in the development is open for all to enjoy. So in a 100 acre development, each homeowner now has access to 50 acres of natural open space instead of just one acre minus the building footprint and drives.

Arendt brilliantly refers to conventionally designed lots as “too big to mow, to small to plow.” But in a conservation neighborhood, “enough” land is allocated to accommodate a reasonable dwelling, and large contiguous areas of the natural landscape are preserved as a community asset. What manifests is the same building density with lower costs to the developer (translated to the homeowner) along with a more sensitive treatment of the natural environment.

This design approach has been called “twice green.” Simultaneously, conservation neighborhoods save money and preserve large areas of the natural environment.

How do you choose the land that should be conserved?

Identify the unbuildable acreage (wetlands and natural drainage areas), woodlands, and unique and beautiful natural amenities presented by the site.

Wetlands and lowlands, for eons, controlled the storm water runoff naturally and free of charge. Filling them in, as many developers are inclined to want to do, brings about new expensive problems handling the storm water and dramatically increases the cost of site preparation. And, the development process generally bogs down with the jurisdiction’s Department of Environmental Quality which frowns (for good reason) on filling in wetlands.

Preserved woodlands help mitigate carbon produced by development and should always be part of an urban clean air strategy.

And have you ever noticed that many developments are named after the natural amenity the developer just destroyed to build the neighborhood, as in Turtle Creek (that only now exists underground in a pipe!)?

Why not keep the wonderful natural beauty that already exists? Designers, no matter how talented, are hard pressed to match the beauty Mother Nature gives us for free.

Back to the concept of “balance.” Conservation neighborhoods create intrinsic balance between developed areas and the natural landscape. Arendt, over the years, has codified the monetary benefit (for the sake of accountants), but the true balance is recognized by the human spirit. Conservation neighborhoods, by experience, prove that beauty is important for the soul.

Here’s a brief clip of Randall Arendt talking about the economic benefits of conservation neighborhoods.

http://www.landchoices.org/docfilm/arendt_clip1.htm

And read more about conservation neighborhoods in one of Randall Arendt’s many books including “Growing Greener” and “Conservation Design for Subdivisions: A Practical Guide to Creating Open Space Networks”.

http://www.greenerprospects.com/products.html

A note to readers: I'll be away from blogging for a little while to catch up on some things. Viruses and the flu seem to be swirling around excessively as of late and I have not been perfectly immune, if you know what I mean, so I've got lots of stacked up design work before me. Keep checking in; be back soon.

Pringle Creek Community, Salem Oregon

2008-03-17T09:43:00.016-05:00

A holistically planned sustainable development is taking shape in Salem, Oregon – the Pringle Creek Community.

This community features a walkable design, dedicated green space, community gardens, a village commercial center, super-green construction, and environmentally friendly paving on 32 acres of natural woodland.

True to the spirit of sustainable design, the Pringle Creek Community is expressly non-stylistic, instead making design decisions based on a set of over-riding principles.

1. Build efficiencies by building green
2. Celebrate the natural environment
3. Encourage social diversity
4. Activate the local economy
5. Conserve and reuse natural materials
6. Smart transportation and movement

As an extension of these principles, Pringle Creek has established a set of 35 sustainable design goals further articulating and codifying the design ethic. From the community’s website:

http://www.pringlecreek.com/35sustainablegoals.htm

Comprehensive sustainability plans like this do not happen by accident. Sustainable Development Inc., headed by Don Myers, has been engaged in a conscious effort to build green since buying the 32 acres in 2004. The developer brought in Opsis Architecture, a Portland firm specializing in green design, to articulate the vision.

A couple of high points.

Roads in the community, all flanked by 5 foot sidewalks, are constructed of “porous” or “pervious” paving, a technology designed to allow the passage of water through the paving and back into the soil. Almost all paving used today is impervious to water, thus creating stormwater run-off problems typically managed by expensive, intrusive (and always un-natural) engineering efforts. This, according to the developer, is the largest residential project in the US to utilize porous paving.

Recently, a model home was constructed embodying the neighborhood’s design goals. This home, amazingly, graded out as the highest rated LEED Platinum home in the United States. The home incorporates solar energy, geothermal heating and cooling, as well as a comprehensive array of passive environmental elements.

The rub? A $432,000 price tag for this 1460 square foot home - that's almost $300 per square foot. Not exactly what I would call "affordable" but give credit for the herculean effort.

For more on the community, visit their website at:

http://www.pringlecreekcommunity.com/

This Week: Green Communities

2008-03-17T09:31:00.003-05:00

The NAV blog highlights new communities in the United States that incorporate green building ethics into the overall planning and design.

Spring Break

2008-03-12T11:27:00.000-05:00

OK, here we are on Wednesday and I’ve just picked myself up from an unexpected flu bug. Being considerate, I did not want to infect any blog readers with a contagious post. Truthfully, my mind has been mush for the past few days and formulating coherent thoughts was way off my radar. So with a full week of design work ahead of me (and half a week to do it) I’m taking a break from the blog – but only for this week.

Meanwhile, please feel free to dig through some of the older posts. One of my all-time favorites is an essay on strip malls entitled ‘Strip Tease.’

http://newamericanvillage.blogspot.com/2008/01/strip-tease.html

And even though a so-called stimulus package has already passed into law, I opened the floor to alternative ideas to stimulate the economy in more directional ways, like provide federal tax credits for the design, manufacture, and installation of alternative energy systems. The post: Stimulating Proposition. Add your idea.

http://newamericanvillage.blogspot.com/2008/02/stimulating-proposition.html

Monday…

Top 100 Walkable Cities

2008-03-08T14:34:00.005-06:00

Prevention Magazine has a wealth of information on walkability, including a walkability ranking of the ten largest cities in each state and the top 100 walkable in the United States.

The top 10:

1. Cambridge, MA
2. New York City, NY
3. Ann Arbor, MI
4. Chicago, IL
5. Washington, DC
6. San Francisco, CA
7. Honolulu, HI
8. Trenton, NJ
9. Boston, MA
10. Cicinnati, OH

Take a look and see where your city ranks. You will find the criteria used by Prevention on the bottom left of the article front page. And, of course, the article has links to some helpful health-related tips for walkers.

http://www.prevention.com/bestcities/

Post Haste Makes Waste

2008-03-06T23:44:00.001-06:00

This morning (Friday), Hillary Clinton is visiting Hattiesburg (in an interesting turn, she will be standing in for Bill who was initially scheduled to be here) in the run-up to Tuesday’s primary election.

My friend and client Ronnie Shows (former Mississippi Congressman) will be introducing her. Ronnie is developing a passive green affordable neighborhood here in Mississippi; I’ll highlight that project in a month or so when our first home is complete.

I will be attending the event in lieu of making a hasty post. Check back this weekend for the final post on Walkable Neighborhoods.

When Good Neighborhoods Go Bad

2008-03-06T09:08:00.006-06:00

Contiguous sidewalks are the lifeblood of a walkable neighborhood.

Any mode of transportation, including walking, must be thought of as a “system” and planned as such. Otherwise, viability and practicality is compromised.

According to Dictionary.com, “system” is defined as an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole.

Think about other systems and how they work.

If the electrician does not connect the fixture to the switch, would you expect light?

If the carpenter decides to omit an exterior wall, would you expect your house to stay warm in winter?

If the plumber installs pipes randomly here and there with few connections, would you expect water to appear when you turned the faucet? Forget about flushing.

So why should it be different with sidewalks.

I took the first photo (above) in my neighborhood, 3 blocks from the university. Notice the conspicuous absence of sidewalks; walkers are forced by default to share the road with cars or walk on the occasional boggy lawn.

There is actually one sidewalk up ahead in between sidewalk-less blocks. A very good thing, but without being plugged into the system, it is rendered practically useless. A couple of weeks ago, a contractor parked his van right in the middle of that one lonely pedestrian consideration and left it there for the day. When I asked him if he had ever considered that he might be blocking pedestrian traffic, he told me to “walk around” and “nobody walks here anyway.”

“Who could?” I asked pointing to the van. Could have used a laugh track. Tough crowd.

The second photo is of a neighborhood in Baton Rouge. Again, here is a sidewalk - very nice. But wait! It ends abruptly as it “dies” into a brick pier. The same density of housing is just beyond this terminated sidewalk. Another disconnection.

This on again-off again patchwork frustrates and discourages walking even in very dense areas. The contractor was very observant when he indicated that nobody walks here.

And really, how could they?

A Walk On The Wild Side

2008-03-04T09:08:00.020-06:00

In the abstract, my neighborhood is perfect for walking.

A major university is 5 blocks away. A grocery store is 4 blocks in the other direction; a park and zoo just beyond that. Restaurants, a pharmacy, an elementary school, retail shops, churches, bars, and liquor stores – a veritable smorgasbord of life’s basic necessities.

But there’s one big problem.

Its completely unwalkable.

According to my neighborhood’s walkscore (see previous post), the area around my house should be moderately walkable. The density sets the stage. Approximately 30,000 people occupy the real estate (during the day) within a mile of my home. But with very few sidewalks, and even fewer crosswalks, getting from here to there on foot becomes entirely impractical.

Over the past 50 years, neighborhoods have been planned as if pedestrians do not exist. Planners and politicians, aided and abetted by architects and engineers I might add, have orchestrated land development with the assumption that the car is the only viable means of transportation, the silver bullet, the one-size-fits-all solution.

That predisposition brings us to where we are today: Sprawl - even in the midst of dense urban development. And walking, as a means of transportation, has been forgotten.

The university chronically complains about a lack of parking. Yet my neighbors (and in fact my Dutch roommate who is accustomed to walking) drive the 5 blocks to campus and park there instead of taking a 10 minute stroll.

Why? Because lack of any planning for pedestrians has created an urban frontier. Walking in this environment means taking your life in your own hands. Pedestrians must share the road with zooming cars (driven by distracted cell-phone yappers) and race across major thoroughfares without the benefit of crosswalks or overpasses.

In fact, in a current “improvement” project on Hardy Street at the edge of campus, crosswalks have been removed with none added. The local Department of Transportation came up with a design that widened the roadway and removed a couple of intersections effectively channeling the traffic and increasing the average speed noticeably. With restaurants, coffee shops, bookstores, campus parking, and even a dormitory across the street, pedestrians now have to run for their lives with no crosswalks in sight. The photo above is of just that.

A few weeks ago, I was in a conversation with a couple of women on the university track team. I suggested that the team be housed in the dorm across the street. Those who survive the semester without being hit by a car keep their scholarships. “Yeah,” one girl replied laughing, “that’s how we can hold tryouts!” They knew what I was talking about.

The real consequence of America’s addiction to the automobile (my friend Doug Michels of Ant Farm fame called it “autonationalism”) is that we create problems that did not exist before.

Sprawl related traffic jams and long commutes suck up time, energy, and money. Same applies in a densely developed area when you are forced to drive to your next destination just around the block.

Urban space is eaten up (and heated up) by too many parking lots. Modern car-centered zoning regulations result in stretching out the space between buildings to accommodate parking making the surrounding area even less walkable.

Public transportation of any kind is not viable when the metro stop is inaccessible by foot traffic. Lack of bus or train service adds inconvenience on top of inconvenience to the traffic weary commuter and would-be walker alike.

Studies have shown that people living in non-walkable neighborhoods are on average more obese, causing or exacerbating many health problems.

Maybe one of the most tragic aspects of an unwalkable neighborhood is its negative impact on our culture. When driving, there are only two ways to communicate to your neighbor – wave or flip them off! Walkable neighborhoods, by design, offer unlimited opportunities to meet and get to know your neighbors on a more personal level. In an unwalkable neighborhood, people generally know each other by their cars. Not much of a cultural exchange there.

As the trend of sprawl plays out, many are coming to a greater awareness of the inherent problems. The benefits of walking are many – I’ve just outlined a few. Here's a site for more info on walking (and biking) in neighborhoods:

http://www.walkinginfo.org/

Any insights out there?

What Is Your Neighborhood's Walk Score?

2008-03-03T11:03:00.013-06:00

With the price of gas above $3 a gallon, people are starting to think about living and working in a walkable neighborhood.

Over the past 50 years, with low gas prices and abundant undeveloped land, our neighborhoods have increasingly become unwalkable. We fell in love with the car, and in the process, we may have lost our way.

Unwalkable neighborhoods have given us traffic jams, increased rates of obesity, and have disconnected us from a sense of "community."

On the other hand, walkable communities promote good health, convenience, rich cultural interaction, multiple transportation options, and economic advantages for individuals and the business community.

Over the next few days we will explore different facets of neighborhoods, why they respond to the human condition, and why unwalkable neighborhoods do not. We will also entertain suggestions and list resources that help bring about a more walkable built environment.

But today, here is a fun site – walkscore.com - where you can get a sense of the walkability of your neighborhood. Enter your address, and this site generates a number between 0 and 100 depending on proximity to various essential destinations like schools, grocery stores, parks, restaurants, etc. It also maps out the location of those services.

What this site does not indicate is how well the area is planned for pedestrians - whether there are sidewalks or crosswalks or not, for example.

Walkscore.com classifies the rating system as such:

90 - 100 = Walkers' Paradise: Most errands can be accomplished on foot and many people get by without owning a car.

70 - 90 = Very Walkable: It's possible to get by without owning a car.

50 - 70 = Some Walkable Locations: Some stores and amenities are within walking distance, but many everyday trips still require a bike, public transportation, or car.

25 - 50 = Not Walkable: Only a few destinations are within easy walking range. For most errands, driving or public transportation is a must.

0 - 25 = Driving Only: Virtually no neighborhood destinations within walking range. You can walk from your house to your car!

Type in your address or find out how other neighborhoods ranks:

http://walkscore.com/

My home - in a neighborhood near the University of Southern Mississippi and a block from the main east-west thoroughfare in town – is 60. No mention of the mad dash across the highway to get to the university just 5 blocks away or the sprint across Hardy Street to get to the grocery store. Very few pedestrian crosswalks or overpasses exist in the middle if this, the most densely populated area within a 60 mile radius, but I’ll talk about that later on in the week. My office in downtown Hattiesburg comes in at 92.

What is your neighborhood's walk score? Post a comment and let us know how your neighborhood rates.

This Week: Walkable Neighborhoods

2008-03-03T11:01:00.001-06:00

Why walkable neighborhoods respond to the human condition, and why walkless neighborhoods do not.

Solar Village in Freiburg

2008-02-28T09:43:00.005-06:00

New “plus energy homes” in Freiburg, Germany’s Vauban district produce more energy than they use.

Since the 1970’s, the city of Freiburg has taken proactive steps to become an eco-friendly city with an ethic of conservation, environmentally-responsible master planning, and development of alternative energies – especially solar.

In 1992, the city council mandated that all new municipal buildings must be “low energy” buildings employing both passive and active solar components. Freiburg’s green ethic goes all the way to the top; the mayor is a member of Bundnis 90/Die Grunen, Germany’s green party.

The Solarsiedlung, or solar village, designed by Freiburg Architect Rolf Disch, is powered by a rooftop solar panel array. Each home is considered a mini power station. Electricity produced by each home feeds into the existing grid contributing a net surplus of power, thus producing revenue for the homeowner.

Hot water is used for heating as well as domestic purposes and comes from solar heated tubes on the roof of an adjacent business park designed by the same Architect.

In the winter months, an on-site heating plant fueled by wood chips supplements the solar hot water heating system.

Rainwater is gathered and utilized for toilets and irrigation. Catching storm water in an urban context helps relieve pressure on the city’s storm water drainage system.

And in any good green building, a whole array of passive measures have been employed such as sun orientation, sunscreens to shade in the summer and let winter sun in, and triple glazing to reduce heat loss.

Natural ventilation is also an integral feature of this new breed of homes – an eternal concept that works as well now as before the days of advanced mechanical systems.

For more on this development, including Sonnenschiff, the solar powered nearby business park and other green urban projects, see the Architect’s website. A link to projects:

http://www.rolfdisch.de/project.asp?sid=-1411551097

America's Greenest Cities

2008-02-27T08:54:00.008-06:00

The results are in.

Portland, Oregon is the greenest city in the United States according to a new study by Popular Science.

Portland scored high on its use of renewable energy, public transportation, green space, and for its abundance of green buildings. Walking and biking in Portland is an option to many inhabitants, improving the health and air quality of the region.

The Top 10 Cities:

Portland, OR
San Francisco, CA
Boston, MA
Oakland, CA
Eugene, OR
Cambridge, MA
Berkeley, CA
Seattle, WA
Chicago, IL
Austin, TX

The study rated cities with populations over 100,000 in four categories to compile the rankings:

Electricity : Cities score points for drawing their energy from renewable sources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydroelectric power, as well as for offering incentives for residents to invest in their own power sources, like roof-mounted solar panels.

Transportation : High scores go to cities whose commuters take public transportation or carpool. Air quality also plays a role.

Green living : Cities earn points for the number of buildings certified by the U.S. Green Building Council, as well as for devoting area to green space, such as public parks and nature preserves.

Recycling and green perspective : This measures how comprehensive a city’s recycling program is (if the city collects old electronics, for example) and how important its citizens consider environmental issues.

For a list of the 50 greenest cities in the United States and to find out what cities are doing in the area of environmental responsibility, see the article. Here’s the link.

http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2008-02/americas-50-greenest-cities

Green Roofs

2008-02-26T12:06:00.003-06:00

Its a jungle up there – or at least it could be.

Green roofs have their advantages according to Chicago’s mayor Richard M. Daley.

"As well as saving building owners money, green roofs…improve the environment and contribute to a healthy city," said Mayor Daley. "These are the kinds of things that improve the quality of life in a city. Our trees, flowers, fountains and benches soften the city's rough edges, add some color and make people feel more at peace with the urban environment."

What is a green roof? In essence, a green roof is composed of indigenous plant life and soil over a waterproof membrane – all on the rooftop of a building.

Environmentally, green roofs offer many benefits. The insulated thermal mass keeps building temperatures warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer. Vegetation in an urban environment counteracts the “heat sink” affect of concrete and asphalt. Green roofs reduce storm water runoff; they clean pollutants from the air and pump additional oxygen into the urban environment.

Functionally, planted roofs lengthen the lifespan of the roof and provide extra patio space for the inhabitants. And urban gardens, including herbs and vegetables, make great use of city rooftops.

Structure must be considered in any green roof adaptation. Smaller plant life takes less soil and can generally be installed on most roofs. Larger trees with bigger root balls should be located above existing structural elements (a column or large beam) so the weight can be transferred to the ground.

A few years ago, Chicago started a grant program (up to $5000) to encourage the installation of green roofs across the city. Chicago City Hall sports a green roof installed by the city in 2001. Since then, the city has saved tens of thousands of dollars on energy costs for this building alone.

Here’s a link for Chicago’s green roof program.

http://www.artic.edu/webspaces/greeninitiatives/greenroofs/main_map.htm

And a link to a site devoted to green roofs.

http://greenroofs.com/

This Week: Green Cities.

2008-02-26T11:57:00.004-06:00

Living green in an urban environment.

Hillary Clinton

2008-02-25T13:15:00.011-06:00

Hillary Clinton is the “mom” we love to complain about.

“Why does she make me wear a coat when I go outside...she never lets me stay out late...she's so annoying when she tells me to wear my seat belt...she’s just being mean when she says “we can’t afford it”…why can’t I live off chips and coke?...she doesn’t understand me.”

But somehow I get the feeling that Hillary is going to do what’s best for me – whether I like it or not!

Senator Clinton’s plans call for us all to participate in a new way of thinking starting with a shift of focus from a carbon-based economy to clean green economy, producing millions of new jobs in the process.

Forget the old paradigm that its either the economy or the environment; Hillary wants to create a whole new generation of “green collar” jobs by restructuring incentives (both for corporations and individuals) focused on creating a carbon-neutral economic model.

From her website:

Hillary would transform our economy from carbon-based to clean and energy efficient, jumpstarting research and development through a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund and doubling investment in basic energy research. She would also spur the green building industry by funding the retrofitting and modernization of 20 million low-income homes and take concrete steps to reduce electricity consumption, including enacting strict appliance efficiency standards and phasing out incandescent light bulbs.

Recognizing that transportation accounts for 70 percent of U.S. oil consumption, Hillary would increase fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030, but would help automakers retool their production facilities through $20 billion in "Green Vehicle Bonds."

To take the steps necessary to transition to a clean and renewable energy future, Hillary will urge all of the nation's stakeholders to contribute to the effort. Automakers will be asked to make more efficient vehicles; oil and energy companies to invest in cleaner, renewable technologies; utilities to ramp up use of renewables and modernize the grid; coal companies to implement clean coal technology; government to establish a cap and trade carbon emissions system and renew its leadership in energy efficient buildings and services; individuals to conserve energy and utilize efficient light bulbs and appliances in their homes; and industry to build energy efficient homes and buildings.

Hillary's plan to promote energy independence, address global warming, and transform our economy includes:

A new cap-and-trade program that auctions 100 percent of permits alongside investments to move us on the path towards energy independence;

An aggressive comprehensive energy efficiency agenda to reduce electricity consumption 20 percent from projected levels by 2020 by changing the way utilities do business, catalyzing a green building industry, enacting strict appliance efficiency standards, and phasing out incandescent light bulbs;

A $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund, paid for in part by oil companies, to fund investments in alternative energy. The SEF will finance one-third of the $150 billon ten-year investment in a new energy future contained in this plan;

Doubling of federal investment in basic energy research, including funding for an ARPA-E, a new research agency modeled on the successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency;

Aggressive action to transition our economy toward renewable energy sources, with renewables generating 25 percent of electricity by 2025 and with 60 billion gallons of home-grown biofuels available for cars and trucks by 2030;

10 "Smart Grid City" partnerships to prove the advanced capabilities of smart grid and other advanced demand-reduction technologies, as well as new investment in plug-in hybrid vehicle technologies;

An increase in fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030, and $20 billion of "Green Vehicle Bonds" to help U.S. automakers retool their plants to meet the standards;

A plan to catalyze a thriving green building industry by investing in green collar jobs and helping to modernize and retrofit 20 million low-income homes to make them more energy efficient;

A new "Connie Mae" program to make it easier for low and middle-income Americans to buy green homes and invest in green home improvements;

A requirement that all publicly traded companies report financial risks due to climate change in annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission;

Creation of a "National Energy Council" within the White House to ensure implementation of the plan across the Executive Branch;

A requirement that all federal buildings designed after January 20, 2009 will be zero emissions buildings.

Here’s a link to a more comprehensive outline of her Energy and Environmental agenda.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/files/pdf/poweringamericasfuture.pdf

To be sure, Hillary’s plans are full of “go clean up your room” items. And like a good mom, she pencils in how to pay for it. Maybe we’ll all appreciate her efforts when we grow up.

Barack Obama

2008-02-22T09:23:00.005-06:00

Barack Obama, evangelist of change, spells out chapter and verse on his vision for America’s Energy and Environmental policy.

On Energy.

Obama’s position paper, entitled “Barack Obama’s Plan To Make America A Global Energy Leader,” covers wide-ranging (but integrally important) topics such as building efficiency standards, investment in new energy technologies, and re-thinking the energy grid.

Although this description barely skims over the mountaintops, the campaign sums up the Energy plan as follows:

Obama’s comprehensive plan to combat global warming and achieve energy security will:

Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the level recommended by top scientists to avoid calamitous impacts.

Invest $150 billion over the next ten years to develop and deploy climate friendly energy supplies, protect our existing manufacturing base and create millions of new jobs.

Dramatically improve energy efficiency to reduce energy intensity of our economy by 50 percent by 2030.

Reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce oil consumption overall by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels of oil, by 2030

Make the U.S. a leader in the global effort to combat climate change by leading a new international global warming partnership.

On the Environment.

Again, Obama addresses this issue with great detail. Clean air, clean water, climate change – all covered. But that’s just the start.

Here are some of what I found to be his most interesting proposals:

Create a Green Job Corps:

Obama will create an energy-focused youth jobs program for disconnected and disadvantaged youth. This program will provide participants with service opportunities to improve energy conservation and efficiency of homes and buildings in their communities, while also providing practical experience in important career fields of expected high-growth employment. It will also engage private sector employers and unions to provide apprenticeship opportunities. The program will also work closely with Obama’s proposed Clean Energy Corps to help participants find additional service opportunities after they complete the Green Job Corps.

Build More Livable and Sustainable Communities:

Reform Federal Transportation Funding: Barack Obama will re-evaluate the transportation funding process to ensure that smart growth considerations are taken into account and he will also re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country.

Require States to Plan for Energy Conservation: Barack Obama will require governors and local leaders in our metropolitan areas to make “energy conservation” a required part of their planning for the expenditure of federal transportation funds.

Use Innovative Measures to Dramatically Improve Efficiency of Buildings:

Set National Building Efficiency Goals: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He’ll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.

Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters: Barack Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps in implementing new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency. He will also provide a federal match for those states with public benefits funds that support energy efficiency retrofits for existing buildings.

Flip Incentives to Energy Utilities: Barack Obama will work to provide incentives for energy conservation by ensuring utilities get increased profits for improving energy efficiency, rather than higher energy consumption. This decoupling of profits from increased energy usage will incentivize utilities to partner with consumers and the federal government to reduce monthly energy bills for families and businesses. Obama will provide early adopter grants and other financial assistance from the federal government to states that implement this energy efficient policy.

And I could go on and on. Really. I urge you to dive into these two outlines of Senator Obama’s Energy and Environmental policy. It may not be hellfire and brimstone, but policies like this may just keep us from experiencing it on earth.

On Energy:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

On the Environment:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnvironmentFactSheet.pdf

John McCain

2008-02-21T09:21:00.006-06:00

John McCain says nothing about energy policy on his campaign website; by all indications, the once-maverick McCain whole-heartedly embraces the policies of the current administration.

On the environment, the Senator sites Teddy Roosevelt as a model and calls for an ethic of good stewardship.

In the words of the campaign:

John McCain has a proud record of common sense stewardship. Along with his commitment to clean air and water, and to conserving open space, he has been a leader on the issue of global warming with the courage to call the nation to action on an issue we can no longer afford to ignore.

America has been blessed with a rich and diverse natural heritage. In the tradition of his hero, Theodore Roosevelt, John McCain believes that we are vested with a sacred duty to be proper stewards of the resources upon which the quality of American life depends. Ensuring clean air, safe and healthy water, sustainable land use, ample greenspace - and the faithful care and management of our natural treasures, including our proud National Park System - is a patriotic responsibility. One that must be met not only for the benefit of our generation, but for our children and those to whom we will pass the American legacy.

John McCain believes that America's economic and environmental interests are not mutually exclusive, but rather inextricably linked. Our economic prospects depend greatly upon the sustainable use of ample and unspoiled natural resources. A clean and healthy environment is well served by a strong economy. History shows that poverty is a poor steward.

As John McCain said, "Americans solve problems. We don't run from them." He believes that ignoring the problem reflects a "liberal live for today" attitude unworthy of our great country, and poses a serious and unacceptable threat to our environment, our economy, and U.S. national security. He has offered common sense approaches to limit carbon emissions by harnessing market forces that will bring advanced technologies, such as nuclear energy, to the market faster, reduce our dependence on foreign supplies of energy, and see to it that America leads in a way that ensures all nations do their rightful share.

By addressing this problem responsibly, John McCain believes we can meet our obligation to be proper caretakers of creation, in a manner of which we can be proud - by protecting our country, strengthening our economy, and addressing the challenges of our time, rather than leaving a much worse problem for our children.

The campaign did not list any specific policies, timetables, or specific goals in the area of energy or the environment. Feel free to fill me in if I've missed something.

note to readers: You may notice that this post was scheduled for yesterday. Some sort of wicked virus (I'll spare you the details) took me out of commission for a day and a half, thus no post yesterday. I'll be posting Barack and Hillary's Energy and Environmental positions on Friday and Saturday.

Mike Huckabee

2008-02-19T09:39:00.009-06:00

A few years ago, Mike Huckabee reduced his carbon footprint by over 100 pounds with a healthy diet and exercise.

Fast forward to 2008 and he's running, literally, for President with a radical idea that America can be energy independent in 8 years. Although Huckabee mentions nothing about the environment per se on his campaign website, the idea of energy independence is an environmentalist’s dream.

Of course the devil is in the details, or as I like to say - and I suspect Gov. Huckabee might give me an “Amen” on this - the angels are in the details.

Huckabee:

The first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. We will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term.

Achieving energy independence is vital to achieving success both in the war on terror and in globalization. Energy independence will help guarantee both our safety and our prosperity.

We have to explore, we have to conserve, and we have to pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.

Energy independence has been on our "to do" list for over thirty years, my whole adult life. In 1973, in response to OPEC's oil embargo against us, President Nixon established Project Independence, which promised independence in 1980. We could have been energy independent a generation ago! The truth is, we are so pathetically behind the curve right now that federal spending for energy research and development is only 40% of what it was in 1979. Our efforts are haphazard and often pointless: today we have six million flex-fuel vehicles built to run on biodiesel or on E85, which is 85% ethanol, but only 1,413 pumps for those fuels in a country with 170,000 gas stations.

When energy shocks and crises come, we take aspirin to deal with the pain, but we don't address the underlying symptoms. This oil addiction is killing us. We have to stop popping pain pills and get ourselves cured. For all these years, we've never lacked the means, just the will. We've never harnessed the real energy source that independence requires - the energy of the American people.

The first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. I'll use the bully pulpit to inform you about the plan and ask for your support. I'll use the bully conference table to meet with members of Congress until I have the votes. The plan will get underway during my first term, and we will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term. The Huckabee Administration will be remembered as the time when we finally, finally achieved energy independence.

We have to explore, we have to conserve, and we have to pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass. Some will come from our farms and some will come from our laboratories. Dwindling supplies and increasing demand from newly-industrialized countries of fossil fuels are driving up prices. These price increases will facilitate innovation and the opportunity for independence. We will remove red tape that slows innovation. We will set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels. Our free market will sort out what makes the most sense economically and will reward consumer preferences.

We think of globalization as primarily an economic issue and the war on terror as primarily a military issue. Yet the same key unlocks the door to success in both, and that key is energy independence.

None of us would write a check to Osama bin Laden, slip it in a Hallmark card and send it off to him. But that's what we're doing every time we pull into a gas station. We're paying for both sides in the war on terror - our side with our tax dollars, the terrorists' side with our gas dollars.

Our dependence on foreign oil has forced us to support repressive regimes, to conduct our foreign policy with one hand tied behind our back. It's time, it's past time, to untie that hand and reach out to moderate Muslims with both hands. Oil has not just shaped our foreign policy, it has deformed it. When I make foreign policy, I want to treat Saudi Arabia the same way I treat Sweden, and that requires us to be energy independent. These folks have had us over a barrel - literally - for way too long.

Energy independence will ease the effects of globalization because the future energy demands of countries like India and China, as their middle class grows, are going to be tremendous. Even if Middle East supplies remain stable - a huge if - that increased demand will drive prices up dramatically, which will hurt our economy by making everything more expensive here. But if we are energy independent, we will be able not just to take care of our own needs and protect our economy, we will also create jobs and grow our economy by developing technologies that we can sell to the rest of the world to meet their needs.

Achieving energy independence will make us safer and more prosperous, and is yet another way that I intend to lift America up.

So there you have it. You be the judge, unless of course you don't want to be judged by others. Huck know's what I mean.

If anyone from the Huckabee campain would like to enlighten us on his position on Environmental policy, verily, I say unto thee, please do so.

Huckabee's website:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/