May 30, 2008

Environment forces us to change or be changed

Construction Corner

Korky Koroluk

The world’s changing climate will affect both the shape of our cities and the way we manage them.

It will force us to re-examine many long-held beliefs, change many customs of long standing, and take a long and thoughtful look at the very idea of progress.

We now know enough about what’s happening to our planet to say with certainty that we had better start making significant changes, because if we don’t, they will be forced upon us, and if that happens, we’re not going to like what we get.

Earth-system science, like all science, is a work in progress, so no one can expect iron-clad answers to every question. But we know enough that we should be worried about a good deal more than the high price of gasoline and diesel fuel.

I’ve been reading Dry Spring, by Canadian writer Chris Wood. Although he is a popular writer, he shares the view of many scientists that we in North America are heading for a water crisis, and he offers up some suggestions for coping with it.

A water shortage is a tough one for most Canadians to grasp, since we have so much of the stuff. But if you live on our southern prairies, you don’t have a lot. And in some parts of the country, the problem isn’t quantity but quality.

We spend a lot of money (and energy) to capture, treat and distribute potable water, then allow as much as a third of it to leak away because we haven’t maintained our water lines.

We occasionally use large amounts of it to fight fires, but why do we need potable water for that? Or for watering our lawns, or for many industrial processes?

We’re moving away from that, with our growing emphasis on capturing and using storm water, or recycling grey water from apartment and office buildings. But we’re still a long way from twin systems with potable water in one, and untreated water in the other.

Watching Ottawa City Council struggle with the future shape of the city, I’ve been struck by the mixed messages the public has been getting.

First we were going to have a light rail system to link southern and southwestern suburbs to the city core. City fathers tried to sell it as “smart development.”

Now council is grappling with a new proposal that would keep light rail inside the city’s “green belt,” where it would serve a dense population, and encourage even greater density. And they’re referring to that as “smart development.” But it’s a tough sell to suburbanites, who are now being told there will be no light rail for them unless and until suburbs develop something approaching downtown densities.

There apparently is no thought of incentives so businesses might establish in the suburbs, creating jobs there and thus contributing to higher densities. Besides, they couldn’t involve cash, because the city has none to speak of.

But as we approach an era of gasoline at $2 a litre, our suburbs must offer residents the chance of jobs close to home or face the possibility of steep declines.

People will use their cars less, but we may not need a lot more in the way of big highways. Instead, roadbuilders in new developments might find themselves building streets like those we are seeing more and more of in cities like Vancouver and Seattle —streets lined with swales and shrubbery designed to capture and retain stormwater, pervious pavements for sidewalks and even some street running surfaces — all designed to quiet and slow traffic, greatly reduce the need for storm sewers, and even to capture stormwater for local irrigation use.

Wood’s book is worth reading. I liked it because he doesn’t offer any impractical, utopian solutions. His ideas are firmly rooted in market economics, while emphasizing that market economics don’t mean business as usual. Instead, it means finding a need, then filling it at a fair price.

Korky Koroluk is an Ottawa-based freelance writer. Send comments to editor@dailycommercialnews.com

Print | Email | Comment