Photo Poser 10: Name this rare car

On my way to Bracebridge recently, I didn’t recognize this rare car at first when it passed me on the inside lane. Then I read the license plate. 

“Hey, grab the camera!” I said to my wife. 

What did we catch?

[Photo by P.Harrison]

***

Please click here for Photo Poser 9

Series of Significance: “Frustrated about traffic congestion? Greater concerns are coming.”

PT 1 “Frustrated about traffic congestion?”

[“The survey found that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters. More public transit means less congestion, another message that has to be delivered forcefully and effectively.” Aug. 27, J. Hendry, London Free Press]

Each year many of us are spending more and more time in our cars. We love them.

We’re driving more miles in more comfort than ever before now that seat warmers are becoming standard fare. Our rear ends love them.

Urban sprawl has created longer commuting times and the automobile is seemingly the fastest and most convenient method of travel for most workers. The economy loves cars.

Cars come equipped with so many other creature comforts (“Kids, wanna watch a movie?”) and conveniences (“The bus stop is three blocks away. The car sits outside my front door, waiting to serve.”) most people will never give them up. Our children love cars too.

But, our addiction level is in the red zone.

So, when city leaders wonder how they will ever get commuters out of cars and onto electric trolleys, diesel-fueled buses or light rail in order to reduce congestion and pollution levels, they’re up against the power of love, comfort, convenience and addiction.


["The 1961 Falcon had a nifty air-venting system..."]

City leaders, along with urban thinkers, environmentalists, bicycle enthusiasts, and other concerned citizens, will face a great challenge when attempting to reduce the number of drivers on the road.

One writer, Jim Hendry, suggests ‘forceful messaging’ and a “well-publicized 50% off day - or even ride free day” to get people to try public transit. (Aug. 27, London Free Press)

About that, all I can say is, “Good try, Jim.”

Recent discussion about commuting times and costs have caused me to rethink my own relationship with the 2005 Honda Civic that sits outside my own front door. I don’t love it, but I do like it enough to keep feeding it. Where did this connection all start?

Like many other boomers (people born between 1947 and 1966) I developed an appreciation for the auto back in my teens. My dad’s 1957 Dodge and 1961 Falcon stand out in my memories, cars that didn’t totally suck in appearance or performance and got me around town and to the movies in a very reliable and fun-filled manner. (The Falcon had a nifty air-venting system that included a small box - with a fairly easy-to-reach door near the driver’s left knee - that was big enough in which to hide two beers in stubby bottles. Put them in warm, pull them out cool, even cold, after a short drive. That feature is one I’ll never forget).

The first car I bought - to get to work across town - was a well-used 1964 Volkswagen, for $400, with no working heater or gas gauge. My wife and I rubbed our hands together a lot in the winter, kept the defroster on high, and, because the reserve tank didn’t work, checked the fuel level by sticking the butt end of a hockey stick (one came with the car) into the gas tank.

Our later cars were in better shape but, if given the opportunity to get one of my earlier cars back, I’d ask for the Volkswagen, dented hood and all.

Twice in my life I’ve tried living without a car, the first time (mid-1970s) because money was really tight, the second time (about 7 - 8 years ago) in order to see if my wife and I could survive without one. Both instances ended with another car purchase, for reasons that seem applicable to the current discussion related to people’s feelings about commuting.

My feelings: Though a recent survey found that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters (I bet the love we have for our vehicles decreases in direct proportion to the amount of time we spend sucking carbon monoxide from the back of somebody else’s pickup), I think congestion should be the least of our worries.

PT 2 “Frustrated about traffic congestion? Greater concerns are coming.”

[“Entering Linfen (China) is like entering another dimension. At dusk, when pollution levels are highest, it’s difficult to see more than twenty feet in front of you. As I take a left turn into my hotel driveway, two people wearing surgical masks appear on bicycles as if out of nowhere; they emerge from the smog. It’s surreal.” Pg. 63, You Are Here by T. M. Kostigen]

Oh, the frustration of it all.

According to a recent survey report from Stats Canada, “the average commute for Canadians in 2010 was 26 minutes, but longer on average for those who live in big cities.” (London Free Press, Aug. 25, 2011)

I can hear the grinding of teeth already. Can you?

And according to a survey by Workopolis, average Canadian workers “spend $269 a month on costs related to working out of the house.” (London Free Press, same date)

Sure, we love our cars, are addicted to their comfort and convenience, but congestion and costs are so frustrating, believe me. After all, the Stats Can report stated that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters.

Some will ask, “When will it end? How can I cut time off my commute?”

Traffic congestion and the dent in our wallets, however, should be the least of our worries. Though we love our cars, and the struggling economy loves our cars (“Buy more of them, please!” say car manufacturers), one day - likely sooner than later -there will be a much bigger price to pay than a mere $269 per month.

T.M. Kostigen mentions the following related matters in You Are Here [Exposing the vital link between what we do and what that does to the planet]:

“A figure that sticks in my brain is the number of items the typical US household has: ten thousand. In the US we shop until we drop, but it takes a lot of energy to manufacture all that stuff. Moreover, it takes a lot of fuel to transport it - and us - to stores. Energy for transportation and manufacturing causes the most pollution.” pg. 58

Undoubtedly, rising fuel costs will only make commuting in the future more expensive. And if more cars are manufactured and purchased per capita in Canada and the US, congestion will only increase as well. If we build more roads, we’ll continue to build more cars to fill them, only extending the already very frustrating cycle of rising costs and congestion. Oh, the inhumanity of it all!


And then, more importantly, there’s the increase in pollution, carbon emissions, rising average global temperatures and climate instability. Talk about your inhumanity.

About one of the world’s giant centers of manufacturing and pollution, Kostigen says,

“The reason Linfen (China) and the province in which it is located are so polluted is coal plants. There are forests of coal plants here. A new one gets built every four days. Coal is cheap to burn and easy to derive power from. And these days, China needs a lot of power...

“Coal plants supply electricity to the nearby cities, towns, and villages, but more so to the industrial plants that manufacture products - products, of course, that are shipped all around the world.


“Manufacturing is the real culprit in creating air pollution. With exports on pace to break one trillion dollars, China is leading the pack in terms of economic growth in the world market. At the same time, China has surpassed the United States when it comes to carbon emissions and is now the world’s leading polluter on a total tonnage basis.” pg. 62

Readers may ask, “Why mention China in a post about commuting and traffic congestion?”

Read on...

***

PT 3 “Frustrated about traffic congestion? Greater concerns are coming.”

[“The reason Linfen (China) and the province in which it is located are so polluted is coal plants. There are forests of coal plants here. A new one gets built every four days. Coal is cheap to burn and easy to derive power from. And these days, China needs a lot of power...” You Are Here, T.M. Kostigen]

Rising fuel prices will make North American commuting more expensive and it’s already a frustrating activity.

Our continued rampant consumption (of cars, fuel, manufactured goods) will only increase the congestion commuters already face day in, day out.

Then, related to the above frustrations, there’s China and growing pollution problems there.

Why mention China in a post about commuting?

Because, when we’re not driving our shiny black SUV or pickup to work, we’re driving it to a big box store and parking our soon-to-be XXL body behind a shopping cart the size of a ’64 Volkswagen. You think commuting costs and congestion are frustrating. Try climate change on for size.


In the book You Are Here, T.M. Kostigen shares his thoughts in a more polite manner.

He writes, “To reduce its air pollution to be on par with stable climate levels, China will have to reduce carbon emissions by 80 per cent - a seemingly impossible task. But there are alternatives that can be sought - cleaner energy, cleaner coal even. And then there’s our participation in this mess.”

See? “Our participation...” Very polite.

He continues, “About 25 percent of the pollution - and 35 percent of carbon dioxide emissions - in China comes from manufacturing goods for export to Western countries. Interestingly, as much as 25 percent of the pollution in Los Angeles comes from the emissions of coal plants - coal plants in China, that is - the winds carry it across the sea.” pg. 64

Many North Americans already know about the links between their commuting (and some job-related activities, driving to the mall, and many areas of consumption) and climate change. (As a result some people are travelling more kilometers/miles on bicycles. Some are decluttering, buying less stuff. Some are car-pooling, taking public transit. Still, carbon emissions in many countries continue to rise except when they are in the grips of an economic recession and rising unemployment.)

Some North Americans also know that when the US economy is humming the air quality in Ontario goes downhill due to the emissions from coal-fired power plants in the Ohio Valley, south of my home in London and Lake Erie. But it was a surprise for me to learn that China is not only exporting many goods of questionable quality to the US but their smog and pollution as well.

About the goods and the smog Kostigen writes, “We (in the US) are contributing to our own demise and health hazards by the products that we buy and the choices we make. The United States is China’s second largest trade partner. Americans buy more than $300 billion worth of goods each year that are made in China.”

Of course, with a much smaller population, Canada purchases far fewer goods from China. Still, as we pull items off shelves in local Wal-Marts, Dollar Stores and Canadian Tire stores, it’s instructive to know we are contributing our fair share to coal-fired production in China, the increase in toxic pollution in the Canadian north, the erosion of shorelines in Inuit villages and the melting of ice shelves in the Canadian Arctic.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, most North Americans are at present fully committed to commuting in cars and will be for some time. A car’s comfort and convenience wins the day.

Most will continue to shop until they drop and only feel a mild to irritating sense of frustration because roads are congested and costs of travelling are high.


["Measure the 'cool' factor vs the 'warming' factor."]

Even as congestion and costs grow in the future - and they surely will - most North Americans will hang onto their cars like an addict to his drug of choice.

While commuting and shopping, should congestion and the price of fuel be our chief concerns?

***

Please click here to read more about Climate Change Concerns.

.

In Cars PT 3: “Traffic congestion should be the least of our worries”

[“The reason Linfen (China) and the province in which it is located are so polluted is coal plants. There are forests of coal plants here. A new one gets built every four days. Coal is cheap to burn and easy to derive power from. And these days, China needs a lot of power...” You Are Here, T.M. Kostigen]

Rising fuel prices will make North American commuting more expensive and it’s already a frustrating activity.

Our continued rampant consumption (of cars, fuel, manufactured goods) will only increase the congestion commuters already face day in, day out.

Then, related to the above frustrations, there’s China and growing pollution problems there.

Why mention China in a post about commuting?

Because, when we’re not driving our shiny black SUV or pickup to work, we’re driving it to a big box store and parking our soon-to-be XXL body behind a shopping cart the size of a ’64 Volkswagen. You think commuting costs and congestion are frustrating. Try climate change on for size.


In the book You Are Here, T.M. Kostigen shares his thoughts in a more polite manner.

He writes, “To reduce its air pollution to be on par with stable climate levels, China will have to reduce carbon emissions by 80 per cent - a seemingly impossible task. But there are alternatives that can be sought - cleaner energy, cleaner coal even. And then there’s our participation in this mess.”

See? “Our participation...” Very polite.

He continues, “About 25 percent of the pollution - and 35 percent of carbon dioxide emissions - in China comes from manufacturing goods for export to Western countries. Interestingly, as much as 25 percent of the pollution in Los Angeles comes from the emissions of coal plants - coal plants in China, that is - the winds carry it across the sea.” pg. 64

Many North Americans already know about the links between their commuting (and some job-related activities, driving to the mall, and many areas of consumption) and climate change. (As a result some people are travelling more kilometers/miles on bicycles. Some are decluttering, buying less stuff. Some are car-pooling, taking public transit. Still, carbon emissions in many countries continue to rise except when they are in the grips of an economic recession and rising unemployment.)

Some North Americans also know that when the US economy is humming the air quality in Ontario goes downhill due to the emissions from coal-fired power plants in the Ohio Valley, south of my home in London and Lake Erie. But it was a surprise for me to learn that China is not only exporting many goods of questionable quality to the US but their smog and pollution as well.

About the goods and the smog Kostigen writes, “We (in the US) are contributing to our own demise and health hazards by the products that we buy and the choices we make. The United States is China’s second largest trade partner. Americans buy more than $300 billion worth of goods each year that are made in China.”

Of course, with a much smaller population, Canada purchases far fewer goods from China. Still, as we pull items off shelves in local Wal-Marts, Dollar Stores and Canadian Tire stores, it’s instructive to know we are contributing our fair share to coal-fired production in China, the increase in toxic pollution in the Canadian north, the erosion of shorelines in Inuit villages and the melting of ice shelves in the Canadian Arctic.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, most North Americans are at present fully committed to commuting in cars and will be for some time. A car’s comfort and convenience wins the day.

Most will continue to shop until they drop and only feel a mild to irritating sense of frustration because roads are congested and costs of travelling are high.


["Measure the 'cool' factor vs the 'warming' factor."]

Even as congestion and costs grow in the future - and they surely will - most North Americans will hang onto their cars like an addict to his drug of choice.

While commuting and shopping, should congestion and the price of fuel be our chief concerns?

***

Please click here to read In Cars PT 2: “Traffic congestion should be the least of our worries”

.

In Cars PT 2: “Traffic congestion should be the least of our worries”

[“Entering Linfen (China) is like entering another dimension. At dusk, when pollution levels are highest, it’s difficult to see more than twenty feet in front of you. As I take a left turn into my hotel driveway, two people wearing surgical masks appear on bicycles as if out of nowhere; they emerge from the smog. It’s surreal.” Pg. 63, You Are Here by T. M. Kostigen]

Oh, the frustration of it all.

According to a recent survey report from Stats Canada, “the average commute for Canadians in 2010 was 26 minutes, but longer on average for those who live in big cities.” (London Free Press, Aug. 25, 2011)

I can hear the grinding of teeth already. Can you?

And according to a survey by Workopolis, average Canadian workers “spend $269 a month on costs related to working out of the house.” (London Free Press, same date)

Sure, we love our cars, are addicted to their comfort and convenience, but congestion and costs are so frustrating, believe me. After all, the Stats Can report stated that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters.

Some will ask, “When will it end? How can I cut time off my commute?”

Traffic congestion and the dent in our wallets, however, should be the least of our worries. Though we love our cars, and the struggling economy loves our cars (“Buy more of them, please!” say car manufacturers), one day - likely sooner than later -there will be a much bigger price to pay than a mere $269 per month.

T.M. Kostigen mentions the following related matters in You Are Here [Exposing the vital link between what we do and what that does to the planet]:

“A figure that sticks in my brain is the number of items the typical US household has: ten thousand. In the US we shop until we drop, but it takes a lot of energy to manufacture all that stuff. Moreover, it takes a lot of fuel to transport it - and us - to stores. Energy for transportation and manufacturing causes the most pollution.” pg. 58

Undoubtedly, rising fuel costs will only make commuting in the future more expensive. And if more cars are manufactured and purchased per capita in Canada and the US, congestion will only increase as well. If we build more roads, we’ll continue to build more cars to fill them, only extending the already very frustrating cycle of rising costs and congestion. Oh, the inhumanity of it all!


And then, more importantly, there’s the increase in pollution, carbon emissions, rising average global temperatures and climate instability. Talk about your inhumanity.

About one of the world’s giant centers of manufacturing and pollution, Kostigen says,

“The reason Linfen (China) and the province in which it is located are so polluted is coal plants. There are forests of coal plants here. A new one gets built every four days. Coal is cheap to burn and easy to derive power from. And these days, China needs a lot of power...

“Coal plants supply electricity to the nearby cities, towns, and villages, but more so to the industrial plants that manufacture products - products, of course, that are shipped all around the world.


“Manufacturing is the real culprit in creating air pollution. With exports on pace to break one trillion dollars, China is leading the pack in terms of economic growth in the world market. At the same time, China has surpassed the United States when it comes to carbon emissions and is now the world’s leading polluter on a total tonnage basis.” pg. 62

Readers may ask, “Why mention China in a post about commuting and traffic congestion?”

My answer to follow.

***

Please click here to read In Cars PT 1: “Long commutes lead to more than congestion”

.

In Cars PT 1: “Long commutes lead to more than congestion”

Below is an editted version of an earlier post. PT 2 to soon follow.

[“The survey found that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters. More public transit means less congestion, another message that has to be delivered forcefully and effectively.” Aug. 27, J. Hendry, London Free Press]

Each year many of us are spending more and more time in our cars. We love them.

We’re driving more miles in more comfort than ever before now that seat warmers are becoming standard fare. Our rear ends love them.

Urban sprawl has created longer commuting times and the automobile is seemingly the fastest and most convenient method of travel for most workers. The economy loves cars.

Cars come equipped with so many other creature comforts (“Kids, wanna watch a movie?”) and conveniences (“The bus stop is three blocks away. The car sits outside my front door, waiting to serve.”) most people will never give them up. Our children love cars too.

But, our addiction level is in the red zone.

So, when city leaders wonder how they will ever get commuters out of cars and onto electric trolleys, diesel-fueled buses or light rail in order to reduce congestion and pollution levels, they’re up against the power of love, comfort, convenience and addiction.


["The Falcon had a nifty air-venting system...": photo link]

City leaders, along with urban thinkers, environmentalists, bicycle enthusiasts, and other concerned citizens, will face a great challenge when attempting to reduce the number of drivers on the road.

One writer, Jim Hendry, suggests ‘forceful messaging’ and a “well-publicized 50% off day - or even ride free day” to get people to try public transit. (Aug. 27, London Free Press)

About that, all I can say is, “Good try, Jim.”

Recent discussion about commuting times and costs have caused me to rethink my own relationship with the 2005 Honda Civic that sits outside my own front door. I don’t love it, but I do like it enough to keep feeding it. Where did this connection all start?

Like many other boomers (people born between 1947 and 1966) I developed an appreciation for the auto back in my teens. My dad’s 1957 Dodge and 1961 Falcon stand out in my memories, cars that didn’t totally suck in appearance or performance and got me around town and to the movies in a very reliable and fun-filled manner. (The Falcon had a nifty air-venting system that included a small box - with a fairly easy-to-reach door near the driver’s left knee - that was big enough in which to hide two beers in stubby bottles. Put them in warm, pull them out cool, even cold, after a short drive. That feature is one I’ll never forget).

The first car I bought - to get to work across town - was a well-used 1964 Volkswagen, for $400, with no working heater or gas gauge. My wife and I rubbed our hands together a lot in the winter, kept the defroster on high, and, because the reserve tank didn’t work, checked the fuel level by sticking the butt end of a hockey stick (one came with the car) into the gas tank.

Our later cars were in better shape but, if given the opportunity to get one of my earlier cars back, I’d ask for the Volkswagen, dented hood and all.

Twice in my life I’ve tried living without a car, the first time (mid-1970s) because money was really tight, the second time (about 7 - 8 years ago) in order to see if my wife and I could survive without one. Both instances ended with another car purchase, for reasons that seem applicable to the current discussion related to people’s feelings about commuting.

My feelings: Though a recent survey found that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters (I bet the love we have for our vehicles decreases in direct proportion to the amount of time we spend sucking carbon monoxide from the back of somebody else’s pickup), I think congestion should be the least of our worries.

More to follow.

***

Please click here for a bit of comic relief.

.

In Cars PT 1: Long commutes lead to more than congestion

[“The survey found that traffic congestion is the biggest frustration for all commuters. More public transit means less congestion, another message that has to be delivered forcefully and effectively.” Aug. 27, J. Hendry, London Free Press]

Each year many of us are spending more and more time in our cars. We love them.

We’re driving more miles in more comfort than ever before now that car seat warmers are becoming standard fare. Our rear ends love them.

Urban sprawl has created longer commuting times and the automobile is seemingly the fastest and most convenient method of travel for most workers. The economy loves them.

Cars come equipped with so many other creature comforts (“Kids, wanna watch a movie?”) and conveniences (“The bus stop is three blocks away. The car sits outside my front door, waiting to serve.”) most people will never give them up. Our addiction level is in the red zone.

So, when city leaders wonder how they will ever get commuters out of cars and onto electric trolleys or diesel-fueled buses in order to reduce congestion and pollution levels, they’re up against the power of love, comfort, convenience and addiction.


["The Falcon came with its own beer fridge!": photo link]

Yes, city leaders, along with urban thinkers, environmentalists, bicycle enthusiasts, and other concerned citizens, will all face a great challenge when attempting to reduce the number of drivers on the road.

One writer, Jim Hendry, suggests ‘forceful messaging’ and a “well-publicized 50% off day - or even ride free day” to get people to try public transit.

About that, all I can say is, “Good try, Jim.”

Recent discussion about commuting times and costs have caused me to rethink my own relationship with the 2005 Honda Civic that sits outside my own front door. I don’t love it, but I do like it enough to keep feeding it. Where did this connection all start?

Like many other boomers (people born between 1947 and 1966) I developed an appreciation for the auto back in my teens. My dad’s 1957 Dodge and 1961 Falcon stand out in my memories, cars that didn’t suck in appearance or performance and got me around town and to the movies in a very reliable and fun-filled manner. (The Falcon had a cool air-venting system that included a small box - with a fairly easy-to-reach door near the driver’s left knee - that was big enough in which to hide two beers in stubby bottles. Put them in warm, pull them out cool, even cold, after a short drive. That feature is one I’ll never forget).

The first car I bought - to get to work across town - was a well-used 1964 Volkswagen, for $400, with no working heater or gas gauge. My wife and I rubbed our hands together a lot in the winter, kept the defroster on high, and, because the reserve tank didn’t work, checked the fuel level by sticking the butt end of a hockey stick into the gas tank.

Later cars were in better shape but, if given the opportunity to get one of my earlier cars back, I’d ask for the Volkswagen, dented hood and all.

Twice in my life I’ve tried living without a car, the first time (mid-1970s) because money was really tight, the second time (about 7 - 8 years ago) in order to see if my wife and I could survive without one. Both instances ended with another car purchase, for reasons that seem applicable to the current discussion about commuting and public transit.

My feelings: Long commutes lead to more than congestion, but there will be some winners in the debate.

More to follow.

***

Please click here for another very exciting series about very relevant issues!

.

“IT STRIKES” Again: Know what SUV stands for? Simply Unnecessary Vehicles - the gripping conclusion

[The following story was first published in The Londoner on Oct. 31, 2002 under my current byline, It Strikes Me Funny. Please click here to read PT 1 for context. Go. I’ll wait. The story is funnier, in my opinion, if you’re currently driving an expensive land Rover. gah]

Know what SUV stands for? Simply Unnecessary Vehicles

I would hate to miss out on the golden years by getting mangled by an attacking beast of any kind.

Seeing the Land Rover with the muscular tires and rhino on the rear, I began to wonder: What kind of terrain or neighbourhoods are some people driving through to get their wee ones to Girl Guides or volleyball practice?

Are there inner-city or suburban streets in London that are so deep in mud and mire that 6-inch treads are necessary?

Do some people haul their way over rugged hill and dale to get to work or church on time, to the nearest mall or fast-food restaurant?

I suppose car manufacturers are simply trying to encourage consumers to think of their vehicles as the means to unlimited or unexpected adventure.


["I say, buy a smaller ride. Conserve fuel."]

Buy a Land Rover and the world of the rhinoceros will be at your doorstep; or you could blaze a new trail in your Blazer, head north in your Yukon, go on a lion safari in your Sahara, explore exciting vistas in your Explorer, whistle a happy tune in your Hummer, cut down a pile of trees (or hug as many as you want) in your spanking new Forester).

Folks are entitled to expand their horizons, aspire to do new things and drive into mudholes up to their chins if they want.

It’s just that most of London’s streets are flat and covered with tarmac.

And since Cathcart Street is definitely low in muck, mire and rhino (oh, a couple of us complain about the tenacious grip of the dandelion), the Land Rover with jaw-like treads for a quick escape from danger seems a little out of place, don’t you think?

gah

***

Please click here to read PT 1 Know what SUV stands for? Simply Unnecessary Vehicles

.

“IT STRIKES” Again: Know what SUV stands for? Simply Unnecessary Vehicles

[The following story was first published in The Londoner on Oct. 31, 2002 under my current byline, It Strikes Me Funny. Do you drive an SUV? Could you drive something smaller? gah]

Know what SUV stands for? Simply Unnecessary Vehicles

The parking spots in front of our house on Cathcart Street are usually gone by 8:30 every morning, rain or shine. The church and school across the street create a steady demand for the seven or eight spots on our block.

After fifteen years of living at this location, I barely notice the comings and goings of any of the vehicles. And once I’m focused on a task-at-hand it almost takes an emergency to get me to raise my head.

My wife could yell from the front porch, “Gord! Behind you!”

“Be there in a minute. Just gotta get this last dandelion out of the lawn. Its root must be wrapped around the Union Gas line.”

“Gord, the car is on fire!”

“Yeah, there in a minute.”

However, the new blue Land Rover parked recently in front of our house turned my head. I noticed two things.

The tires had such deep treads. The grooves were so deep, wide and jaw-like they appeared capable of grabbing a man by the leg and slamming him heavily to the ground over and over again.


[“Get to the mall safely in The Defender!”: photo link]

Second, as I approached the Rover cautiously from behind, I saw that the spare tire, attached to the outside of the rear door, was wrapped in a wheel cover with a picture on it of a snorting rhinoceros.

I’m not the most energetic, attentive or experienced of world-travellers, but I am alert enough (most days) to know that there are very few, if any, rhinoceri, elephants, lions or tigers roaming the streets of this fair city.

If I’ve missed them (or if they’ve missed me) on my way to the Red Roaster for a cup of coffee and toasted cheese bagel with butter and extra marmalade, just warn me of the danger please.

I would hate to miss out on the golden years by getting mangled by an attacking beast of any kind.

Please stay tuned for the gripping conclusion.

***

And please click here for another brilliant episode of “IT STRIKES” Again.

.

Climate Change Concerns: Don’t plug in GM’s electric Volt

The following isn’t good news, in my opinion:

“The Chevrolet Volt plug-in electric car, the centerpiece of a revitalized General Motors Co., was named 2011 Green Car of the Year Thursday.” (Nov. 19, London Free Press)

What part of any news about the Volt could be good news?

That it’s a green car?

That it costs $41,000 US?

That it can run on electric power for about 64 kms (40 miles) before it is recharged with a gasoline engine?


I’m not charged up at all about it.

If GM boasts it’s green because it is fuel efficient (How much coal must be burned to keep this car on the street?) and helps reduce CO2 emissions (The auto industry emits untold emissions while producing individual vehicles), then it’s an empty boast.

People with money to burn and limited environmental awareness may flock to it. “I’m driving a green car,” some will say.

It’s not a green car.

GM and other car manufacturers still pander to the whims of the individual and their growing transportation ‘wants.’ More cars are filling our expensive and expanding highways each and every year and individuals are collectively driving more miles per year for pleasure and shopping.

The greenest car is the one you don’t buy.

***

More Climate Change Concerns here.

.

Climate Change Concerns: The E-car is not the way to help

The following statement about E-cars concerns me.

“...the range of electric vehicles that will soon be on the Canadian market will have something for everyone.” (‘Electric Empire’, London Free Press, Sept. 25)

Why? Does everyone need or want an E-car?


["E-cars for everyone? Don't you believe it"]

Should we continue to focus on the needs of the individual regarding transportation?

(I say, no. As mentioned in an earlier post, the ‘I must have vs We need’ issue requires a serious rethink.)

And if the upcoming offerings of E-cars are anything like the current models then the concept of ‘something for everyone’ needs real work.

Consider the following:

The Mitsubishii-Miev, a four-seater, is 100% electric and has a range of 120 km. Price (estimated) - $30,000 - 40,000.

News flash - it’s definitely not for everyone.

How many Canadians will be attracted by the price tag for what would essentially become a second car or in-town car?

As well:

The Chevy Volt, at $41,000 US, may not be for everyone either based on its price.


["The Volt is definitely short on volts"]

And though it’s called an electric hybrid, the range of 64 km electric plus 400 km with gas makes it more of a gasoline hybrid (86% gas hybrid to be exact).

Next:

The Tesla Roadster, a 100% electric two-seater, has a range of 257 - 483 km range and lots of horsepower (248), but the price tag is $120,000.

For everyone? Not a chance.

Finally:

According to the article, “the Canadian winter will impact both the range and performance of battery-powered electric vehicles. The colder the temperature, the poorer the performance.

“In addition, while gas-powered vehicles use the heat of combustion to provide interior warmth, electric batteries will have to provide additional energy to ensure passenger comfort.”

I’m already uncomfortable enough with the E-car concept.

Not only are current offerings are off the mark, but feeding the appetites of the individual consumer (business as usual, is it not?) isn’t really the way to show real concern for climate change and peak oil prices, though E-car manufacturers would like us to believe that it is.

Their bottom line depends on our naivety.

Don’t plug in for their sake.

***

G. Dyer said it best:

“...seven billion human beings cannot all live the current lifestyle of the billion richest without causing an environmental and ecological catastrophe. It is inherently unsustainable.”

Please click here to read more Climate Change Concerns.

.

The BP Oil blow-out didn’t need to happen. Not at all.

First, an accusation. BP Oil is not the only major polluter responsible for the Gulf spill.

Second, some numbers.

According to US Geological Survey figures, 12,000 - 19,000 barrels of oil per day have been gushing from the blow-out that occurred about 1,600 meters below the Gulf’s surface.

It’s perhaps as high as 25,000 barrels per day.

Third, some damning figures from ‘The Politics of Oil (see Read This, side margin).

“The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) released a report entitled “Responsible Energy Policy for the Twenty-First Century” in March 2001. The report concluded that by raising fuel-economy standards by 60 percent in the US, automobile oil use could be reduced by 51 billion barrels.


["Car pool one day per week, conserve 20 per cent of your fuel."]

“Another 5.8 billion barrels could be saved if the US required fuel-efficient replacement tires. The savings is based on improving cars’ efficiency to 45 mpg and light trucks’ to 34 mpg.

“Technology that matches these goals has already been developed and is in use in other countries.”

Why did I say these figures are damning?

If BP Oil captured 25,000 barrels of escaping oil per day they would capture 9,125,000 barrels in one year. After refinement, the number of barrels for automobile use would be about half that amount, say 5 million barrels. (Less than that if you subtract the refined oil needed to fuel the refining process).

Fuel-efficient tires would save 5.8 billion barrels in the 21st century, or 58,000,000 barrels per year.

Fuel efficient cars would save 51 billion barrels in this century, or 510 million barrels per year.

Both fuel efficiencies dwarf BP’s production in the Gulf.

North Americans don’t need to be polluting the Gulf in this century. So, why are we there?

.

Give cyclists 20 per cent of Deforest City’s sidewalks

And paint them blue. No signage will be needed.

As I said recently, the stories and issues related to city cyclists are never-ending.

After 60 - 70 years of successfully accommodating more cars and trucks than necessary - at great expense - our City Fathers and Mothers could easily and fairly accommodate cyclists without having to widen existing bike paths, allocate piles of money (literally, piles) to build new ones or kick cars off one of their lanes on some busy streets.

All that’s needed are buckets of light blue paint (I think robin egg blue would be lovely. Thanks for asking).

Paint 20 per cent of London’s sidewalks (east - west, north - south, a couple of the zigzaggy ones) robin egg blue and ask pedestrians to use the other side of the street to play it safe.

“What if I live in a house that faces a blue sidewalk and I wanna walk downtown?”

Walk to the other side of the road. Look both ways for cars and cyclists. Then walk, walk, walk, 'til your heart's content.

“What if I still can’t cycle to where I’m going on the blue sidewalks?”

Use the road on occasion. Stick to the right side of the lane. Wear a helmet.

“What if it robin egg blue doesn’t match my shutters?”

Talk to the Mayor. I’ll be outta town.

(Okay, that’s a lie. I’ll be in my workshop. But talk to the Mayor anyway.)

***

20 per cent is a good start. Only 4 pedestrians would have to make a bit of accommodation.

Thoughts?

.

Even Wortley Village dropped the ball on this one

In all my years as resident of the best neighbourhood in London, Ontario (or anywhere else in the world for that matter), I’ve never said a discouraging word about the place.

In fact, I’m very fond of saying - These are my streets. These are my people - as if I was Mayor of The Village or all I surveyed from the top step of my wee front porch. (Really, I don’t want the job).

However, while peering out the front window and sipping coffee at The Village Red Roaster recently, a few thoughts went through my head and they took a turn for the worse.


The following thoughts have been arranged in precise chronological order:

(Hmmm... maybe I’d make a good mayor after all).

“There’s so much traffic on Wortley Road through The Village. It’s disturbing my cheery mood.”

“Bicycles would be so much quieter.”

“But they’d get squashed like bugs. There’s no room for them.”

“We’re actually trying to accommodate cars to the nth degree on a very narrow street.”

“There’s two lanes for traffic, plus two lanes for parking. Cyclists don’t stand a chance.”

“Wouldn’t three lanes for cars and one lane for bikes be healthier?”

“I’ll even volunteer - whether I’m mayor or not - to paint the bike lane a nice shade of blue, so drivers know it’s not for them.”

“We’ve accommodated cars far too long here in The Village.”

See, I told you my thoughts took a turn for the worse. Drivers of all shapes and sizes would hate to give up a lane, interrupt their drive home to park in a new location or go just one way on what is now a two-way street.

I’m certain drivers would howl - for at least two weeks. But then, after the giant pain died down, they’d accommodate the small change like everybody else.

And bicyclists would feel safer and pat me on the head for being such a good mayor... er, I mean... coming up with such a good idea.

.

It Strikes Me Funny: We should go to war against the machines Pt 1

According to Saturday’s London Free Press the unemployment rate in Deforest City is now pegged at 10.9 per cent, the second-highest urban rate in the country.

[The rural rate sounds like it’s higher, which might mean more trouble for cities in the future, as people move from unproductive farms to less-than productive cities nearby.]

Why are we doing so poorly?

Here’s a clue:

“BMO economist Doug Porter said he had hoped job losses in the London area would ease in July because of signs the auto sector was starting to rebound last month.” (Free Press, Saturday’s issue)


["We can make them, but not sell them": photo link]

So, part of the reason is, the auto industry didn’t rebound very much.

Also, overall in our home province and country there have been significant job losses related to tourism, manufacturing, construction, transportation and warehousing, all areas affecting our city, I’m sure.

If London was a kitchen utensil, it would be a sieve.

Can we recover?

If we lived in a perfect world, of course.

If we had unlimited material resources, boundless supplies of clean air, energy and water and could print our own currency [money doesn’t grow on trees, and if it did, in Deforest City we’d just cut them down to make way for another large single-family home or big box store - sorry, I digress] we’d be fine. We could just produce, buy and sell stuff without end and not worry about the consequences - if we lived in a perfect world of limitless consumption.

But we don’t. Our physical world has limits.

***

More to follow.

.

Letter to the Editor: Some streets are unsafe for cyclists

If the list exists - Top Ten Cities with the Worst Drivers - and dear old London, Ontario is in top spot, I’d like to see it.

For the second week in a row a local citizen makes the claim there are no worse drivers anywhere on planet earth.

Edward H. wrote the following in the Aug. 7 issue of The London Free Press:

I do not ride a bike and have not for 10 years. I have lived in three different cities in Ontario and have travelled extensively. Drivers in London are by far the worst I have seen anywhere.


["Man's best friend?": photo GAH]

Personally, I think I need more proof before I will believe we’re the worst anywhere.

I’ve heard drivers in Quebec are pretty bad.

“Yellow lights? They mean 'go faster' in Montreal,” said a friend.

“Short people in Japan are the worst - especially women,” said another.

With those kinds of sentiments (or is it sediment?) out there, Edward’s experience sounds limited.

Three cities in Ontario? That’s it?

What if one was Perth? That’s a touristy area. How could we know for sure a car full of tourists didn’t throw off the results of his survey? The streets of Perth might be pretty mean in the winter time.

Though my experience is slimmer still - I’ve lived in London and Norwich, that’s it - I agree with Edward partly when he adds, I don’t blame cyclists for being on the sidewalk. The streets are simply too dangerous.

I think ‘some’ streets are too dangerous. Gutters and tarmac are in sad shape in some parts of town and riding a bike on the sidewalk at times seems like a reasonable way to prolong one’s life.

Some drivers are dangerous as well. Not all drivers check their speed when sharing a lane with cyclists or know how to manage an SUV the size of small nation or a pickup with wide side mirrors on some of our narrow streets.

Some drivers, equipped with more horsepower than common sense, accelerate when they should brake when faced with a cyclist in their lane and an approaching car in the other.

Edward mocks the idea that cyclists should be kicked off the sidewalks. “Is it illegal to try to save your own life?” he concludes.

No. Use the sidewalks at times, but bike paths and roadways more often.

.

Same old same old and the next ‘new’ recession

Globally, car sales are increasing ever so slightly.

During the first 3 months of 2009, 43 million units were sold, and we’re not talking units produced in any sort of sustainable manner.

During the next 3 months, 48 millions units were sold world-wide, with China and Germany leading the way.

Thus the headline ‘Revival Forecast On the Way’ in our local paper.

Is this the shot in the arm our Market-First economies need? Will we soon be living the high life again, not caring a hoot about future generations?


The smart money says no.

"Most immediately, we face the end of the cheap fossil fuel era. It is no exaggeration to state that reliable supplies of cheap oil and natural gas underlie everything we identify as a benefit of modern life." [The Long Emergency by James H. Kunstler]

Any revival depending on the production of cars for the individual driver will be short-lived, end in a blind alley and another ‘new’ (as in, we never saw this coming) recession.

Reduce your spending, save your money, take mass transit or walk.

You’ll be better off in the long term.

.

The small town of Ilderton survives - for now

If you haven’t visited Ilderton recently I’d say take a chance.

It’s the poor step-child of a group of towns and villages in the area and keeps hanging on... and on... and you might learn something about how present day life goes on... and on - for now - while grabbing a slice at For Pizzas Sake and washing it down with a half pint of Guinness at the King Edward Pub.

I did.

I learned the town has good bones and good people.

For example, the Red Star Garage dates back to 1855 and looks good for its age; the friendly owner and his wife (Tony and Toni) have lived across the street for 45 years and will retire there.

I also felt the small place is a perfect example of unsustainable development, the kind that drives some environmentalists wild.

A once quaint village (in some respects) of 300 residents, with rural roots, is now 4 - 5 times as big and pre-dominantly serves as a bedroom community to hundreds of newbies who live in much larger homes than the original residents and are only outnumbered by nearby cattle, acres of corn and soy and the many cars, SUVs and pickups parked in new driveways.

“They’re (new residents) good for business,” said one woman as she poured me a cup of coffee.

“It’s crazy how fast it’s happening,” said another.

“Commercial businesses aren’t coming to town. And they didn’t build a bigger school, just added portables,” a third person told me while paying for ice cream cones for her three grand daughters.

Because the village amenities are in very short supply compared to the growing population, everyone seems to spend lots of time driving here, there and everywhere, to Lucan, Ailsa Craig and London for food, clothing, furnishings, hardware, recreation etc.

And because fossils fuels for cars and homes won’t always be as cheap as they are now, I feel the clock is ticking on communities like Ilderton.

I’d take a chance on another visit (The King Edward had Wellington Pale Ale on tap) but I wouldn’t want to live there.

***

Do you live in a bedroom community? Do future expenses come to mind?

.