Page 37 - Sustainable Cities and Communities Design Handbook

14 Sustainable Cities and Communities Design Handbook

Why? The confusion is exacerbated by the American media with its digital
communication systems that are ubiquitous and instantaneous, yet are shallow
and politically biased when dealing with significant issues. The public is
besieged by the latest “buzz words” and concepts like sustainability, renewable
energy, green jobs and careers along with energy efficiency, conservation,
greenhouse gases, global warming, and climate change. All these words are
without definitions.
Basically, as Clark and Fast (2008) argued in their book Qualitative Eco-
nomics, there must be definitions of concepts and ideas such as “clean.” For
example, there is a qualitative and quantitative difference between “clean” and
“green.” By 2010 with the success of Al Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth”
making the public and policy makers aware of the problem of global warming,
too many concepts were “green washed” and passed off as something they are
not. The terms get tossed back and forth by scientists and politicians so that
everyone thinks they know what they mean, until they try and use them in a
sentence and then the conversation quickly becomes as painful as that of the
2007 South Carolina’s Miss Teen Contestant YouTube video incident.
Even The Economist admitted that “modern economic theory” (July 2009)
had failed along these lines. As they put it, “economics is not a science.” To
help sort this out, Clark helped to create the field of “qualitative economics”
(2008) to make distinctions between words, concepts, and even numbers that
are often misused (see Appendix B for an example of how audited data was
misused by ENRON during the California energy crisis). The issue is that
numbers, words, and ideas are all too often not defined or even discussed. The
public and decision makers just use them. So do companies and lobbyists to
whom “clean” energy means the use of energy and fuels such as natural gas
and diesel. These are fossil fuels and emanate gases and particulates that
pollute the environment. These chemical wastes cause massive health and
environmental problems. “Green” on the other hand, in the context of energy
and fuel, means renewable energy from natural resources like wind, sun,
geothermal, ocean, and tidal waves as well as the flow of water in rivers.
Whether America is ready or not, GIR is at its doorstep, now. The huge
amounts of federal stimulus money in 2009dabout $250 billion earmarked for
energy conservation and renewable generationdcoupled with crashing local
government budgets (particularly in California and New York) will propel
Americans to look in the direction of energy independence, sustainable
activities and communities. In the small town of Benicia, California (population
of 30,000), the city’s $2 million annual energy bill represents about 5% of the
budget. Eliminating that expense would allow the city to beef up safety
personnel and community services, or give the city a buffer for the leaner days
ahead. Unfortunately, most of the federal stimulus funds for energy are focused
only on efficiency and conservation.
While a start, renewable power generation is the core need for GIR. Again,
will America fall further behind? There is that distinct possibility as the EU,