I've been writing submissions this week focused mainly on tranport - and specifically on trying to get our local councils here in Canterbury to recognise the need for them to provide cycling and walking facilities.
For some reason they seem to have lost the plot on this one perhaps because of some misguided reaction to the economic downturn but their answers seems largely to focus on providing for more private cars or (and this is not quite so bad) for significant upgrades to our public transport system.
It worries me that organisations charged with looking after our environment and with thinking about the future can ignore the fact that they need to privilege active transport over private cars and that roading is a tremendously bad investment when we are heading into post peak oil and a growing recognition of the issues associated with climate change. Politics is a weird business.
Still there is hope, as this blogger points out - just a pity it is on the other side of the world!
Quality is a Journey to Excellence
6 days ago
1 comment:
True, mostly I think. The issue is that we will not get rid of cars. They are too much embedded in the structure of our lives. And I don't just mean symbolically, but functionally. And to be frank, Chch suffers from economies of scale. To get a public transport system that could actually work, it would need an enormous investment that cannot be made.
Bike paths are good and I like those but they will only ever suit a smallish number of people.
I really do think the better strategy is to produce much more efficient vehicles and to plan to rid ourselves from oil. That is a strategy that will make a REAL difference. Even the threat of peak oil (and when that is to take place is highly debated - petrol is getting cheap again in Australia where I live) will not change the mobility structure of the community very much. Unless we run out but that would be economically catastrophic and very shortly after socially dangerous. Most wars are fought over resources, even Darfur.
Post a Comment