 |
Rivers UnlimitedFounded in 1972 |
515 Wyoming Ave |
|
|
|
|
Thursday, December 13 How Rivers Affect Our Lives (Talk given at the Harry Whiting Brown House) Wendi Van Buren asked me to speak, and she suggested the title. I’ll tell you how rivers affected my life: I got hooked on marathon canoe racing in 1962, and the nearest good place to practice was the Little Miami at Foster. That became my habitat for about 100 times a year and I would paddle as fast as I could for 5-1/2 miles, 11 miles, 16-1/2 miles or more. Now they let us paddle on Winton Woods Lake which is a lot closer so we’re out there 100 times a year with a few trips to the Little Miami. Canoe racing became so important to me that I wanted to save rivers. In 1968 we passed the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to prevent all our remaining magnificent natural rivers from being dammed and channelized, mostly by the Army Corps of Engineers. In 1972 we founded Rivers Unlimited to protect and restore Ohio’s rivers. We were the first in the country to have a statewide group. In 1973 we founded American Rivers, to bring rivers in the nation into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System because nothing much had happened since passage of the Act. In 1988 we founded River Network to establish more statewide river protection groups – there are now at least 38. But despite all this time and effort – we have given protection only to about 3/10ths of 1% of our river miles: 11,000 miles out of 3,500,000 miles in the 50 states – in 38 years. Here’s another statistic: 40% of our river miles – 140,000 miles -are not fishable or swimmable. They’ve been given over to sewage, industrial, mining including mountain top removal, and agricultural erosion and runoff. We want to restore these streams. We saw our efforts as not being very effective. We were just using birds and bunnies and pretty pictures to sell river protection and restoration. Why not find out if attractive river corridors and clean waters pay off? So we began sponsoring River Resource Economics studies at Ohio State University in 1997. We found that attractive, clean rivers pay off big time. Here’s a study we did on the lower Great Miami, here’s one on the Muskingum – we’re doing one on Mill Creek now. Stop me any time to ask questions. This should be interactive!
MILL CREEK I’ll tell you about Mill Creek. Some of you may remember Roland Richardson – he was Fifi McCaslin’s father I believe. When he was about 90 he told me he had belonged to a canoe club on Mill Creek. It must have been about 1910 and it must have been upstream of Sharonville, because downstream the water quality was terrible. Even in the 1970’s I paddled it past an enormous storm sewer from which gushed pink toothpaste sweet smelling stuff from guess who’s factory. That pink flow raised the creek level noticeably from there on down. Mill Creek flows in a relatively small stream down the valley of what used to be the north-flowing Teays River which I think about 10,000 years ago got pushed south by the Wisconsinan Glacier to become guess what? The Ohio River. If it weren’t for that we wouldn’t be here in Cincinnati, much less Glendale. The only mode of transit in our early days was boats on rivers. The Teays , now Mill Creek, valley was broad and flat and conducive to development compared to anything else along the river in the region. So they changed the name from Maketewah to Mill Creek to attract mills – all kinds of nasty mills including slaughter houses, soap, beer, candles, paper and they discharged their insanely disgusting waste into Mill Creek and made money. One of our creeks is called Bloody Run. Mill Creek has been known as one of the most polluted streams in America. In 1993 we decided to make Mill Creek a desirable place to live, work and play and founded the Mill Creek Restoration Project. Our first product was Dr. Stan Hedeen’s book, The Mill Creek – An Unnatural History of an Urban Stream. It is funny, beautifully illustrated and historically fascinating. Our second product was the Mill Creek Greenway Plan, now being carried out to bring in 100 miles of bikeway in the Mill Creek Basin – and many other good things. We could use your help – your brains, your brawn, your time, your money to carry on this work. Go to millcreekrestoration.org or call 731-8400.
THE OHIO RIVER Here’s a story about the Ohio River. It’s 981 miles long. It carries lotsa barges. 70% of this cargo is fuel, coal, oil, gasoline. Also the not-fully-treated sewage from the Great Miami, Mill Creek, the Little Miami and perhaps 100 streams besides. But flowing water is cleansed by the air so by the time it gets to Cincinnati from upriver the pollution is 25% of what it becomes after it receives the effluent from our local rivers including the Licking. So in this stretch this 75% of the pollution is our fault, it’s from us. We’re required to clean it up so our sewer rates are rising to pay $2 billion to fix our leaky sewers and inadequate treatment – over a period of say 30 years. And for Northern Kentucky about $1 billion. We have proposed a solution to this cost and delay. Sponsor a River Resource Economics study of our stretch of the river. Now the Ohio has a reputation for being dangerously polluted. It is. Don’t use it for 3 days after a rainstorm. That’s how long it can take to clean itself after the sewers overflow from rainstorms. Otherwise it’s ok. But if it were known that we were going to clean it up quick, the developers, realtors, bankers, Chambers of Commerce, Ohio Department of Tourism and Travel would go crazy with development plans. Recreational industries – boats, fishing, water resorts, cottages, second homes, motels, marinas, liveries and service industries would move in. Residential development on the hillsides. Property values would rise, tax base would increase. A resource economics study could confirm our expectations that the cost to restore water quality would be dwarfed by the tax coming from a far larger tax base. With this confidence sewer districts could issue municipal bonds to get the work done in say 5 to 10 years, not 30 to 40. Bonds would be paid off. We would have a clean river, thriving antique river towns like Maysville, Augusta, Higginsport, Ripley, Moscow and New Richmond. We would have more fun recreating, a better public image, attraction to clean development and probably no increase in sewer rates to pay for it. It’s truly an image issue: make it attractive and they will come! You can imagine that we have unwittingly and unwillingly traded off our quality of life to make it cheap to discharge human and animal waste and farm runoff into the river. We’re trying to interest funders in sponsoring say a $100,000 pilot study to determine if this proposal would pay off. After 10 years of sponsoring similar studies at Ohio State we think it will. That would really affect our lives: lower cost, more and better recreational opportunities, better public health, a magnet for tourists, an attractant of economic redevelopment of our 1962-mile waterfront, revival of our river communities. If the pilot study conclusions are favorable that should then lead to a more comprehensive study of the whole river. We’re coming out with a book on our studies next month.
THE LITTLE MIAMI RIVER - is a rare, National Wild and Scenic River, flowing through mostly privately-owned lands. It’s one of our first National rivers, a study river in 1968. Part of it was designated in 1971; the lower part from Foster on down in 1980. It is nevertheless under serious threat since 1974 from another big bridge and superhighway known as the Eastern Corridor in its valley. The bridge would cross the river at Fairfax. The river is noted for its great beauty, for canoeing and kayaking and fishing, for its now 60-mile bikeway, from Yellow Springs to the Cincinnati Waterfront (soon), for its beaches and liveries. In strong opposition to this bridge project, which would be an integral link in the Great Lakes / Mid-Atlantic Interstate 73/74 highway, from Iowa to Charleston’s beaches in South Carolina, Rivers Unlimited, Sierra Club and Little Miami, Inc. are in federal court. The National Park Service calls attention to the “outstandingly remarkable values” that will be lost if the project is built. The bridge and highway, with tens of thousands of trucks and cars a day, would seriously degrade the quiet, natural river; worsen air quality already poor, pollute the river and drive out wildlife. It would commercialize this special place, a de facto park in that part of the valley that already has several parks including Armleder at Beechmont and Duck Creek.
THE GREAT MIAMI We founded Friends of the Great Miami in 1999 and are working to have the lower part declared an Ohio State Scenic River – which is a layer of protection because of course its corridor is threatened with heavy development. This river is a lot of fun to canoe – and it can be challenging. We have paddled all 155 miles of it from Indian Lake to the Ohio River. (See our website www.riversunlimited.org for photos. Rivers Unlimited did a Resource Economic Study of the river corridor through Hamilton and Butler County and discovered that gravel mining within one mile of an average residence along the river would depreciate the property value over $16,000 (and these are not palatial dwellings!). Extending a bikeway along the river would bring economic benefits many times the costs. Providing river access would profit the communities. So ask us any questions. Here are a few recent newsletters which are also on our website. Thank you! Mike Fremont - mike@riversunlimited.org Glendale phone 771-5087, 816 Van Nes Drive 45246 Rivers phone 761-4003, 515 Wyoming Ave. 45215 Thursday, June 09, 2005 "The Death of Environmentalism" is a fascinating document about why the environmental movement has not succeeded with legislation to reduce global warming, to avert terrible catastrophe. It says environmentalists appear as a special interest. We have not framed our issues in terms of the unions, the auto makers, about jobs, we have not emphasized the positives, looked at the real causes of why we haven not made headway. That our solutions to global warming have been technical, not political, that we have not presented a grand vision. To address this failure (which I see as being unfairly attributed to the environmental movement) there has been founded the New Apollo Project. ECO has done superb work with very little money and support. We work with the immediately affected public, with unions, with management if possible, maybe even with the city councils and the enforcement community. The Death of Environmentalism does not represent the history of ECO at all. One of the reasons for founding ECO was that the Environmental Advisory Council of Cincinnati, for various reasons, was no longer an effective force in Cincinnati. Perhaps it was too academic, it liked to study things but did not know how or feared to be activist or was threatened by city control over its works. But ECO has been doing the work the EAC should be doing. Perhaps ECO should make more noise and provide a monthly advisory to Cincinnati and other City Councils. ECO began and continues to use the paradigm shift of the bigger picture, making the coalitions. There may be some other tools out there. Going after polluters can contribute to job creation in the region. As a society we are very interested in quality of life. That includes clean air, clean water, attractive surroundings, security against toxics, explosions, industrial fires, radiation, noise and commotion. We have evolved from a primarily manufacturing community to a recreational and residential service industry one where quality of life is king. A year ago the Cincinnati Post carried our guest editorial on how to revive Cincinnati by making it attractive to the young and well-educated: by cleaning up our air and water quality and toxic waste sites. People with a choice go where it is nice. Where they do, property values rise, tax base rises, we can spend more on schools, public services and parks. Then your place becomes a magnet for development. ECO can use this argument. This is borne out by a new book, The Flight of the Creative Class, by Richard Florida. For ECO and air quality, besides enforcement of the Clean Air Act, perhaps there is a way to emphasize the benefit/cost ratio of enforcing the Act. Until a recent tightening of particulate standards, the economic benefits of pollution controls were over 40 times their costs. What a terrific investment! The estimate for the new tighter standards is 4 to l, truly excellent. And I do not know if these calculations even include tax base appreciation. Reciting these benefits from the studies and applying them to our polluting factories could strengthen our case for vigorous enforcement. We can say these people are hurting our health, our quality of life, they are chasing others away, they are costing the community! Obviously we should enforce all possible! An early example of bringing together allies in an environmental pursuit was in 1975 when American Rivers tried to get the New River into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The ally here was unions. When Walter Reuther headed the United Auto Workers he was a strong environmental advocate. He said the outdoors were playgrounds for his union members. But we were fought tooth and nail by the real estate industry. They feared loss of the option to buy and sell in the region. We won the battle, and two years later the realtors would have become our biggest ally, because land values along the river had increased from $350 an acre to $30,000 an acre, by a factor of 90. Just because of the new image presented by a National River Thus dollars are a way we have of selling environmentally desirable changes. We can show them that if they clean and pretty it up it will pay. Not just because it is the right thing to do but because the community will make money from it. In our Rivers unlimited work back in 1984 I was reminded that restoring a city waterfront can bring great economic returns. Look at Newport and Covington. Even Cincinnati is better. Then we looked at restoring rivers running through small towns, and the thought came, we do not have to invoke the environment, just the economic benefit, to interest the decision makers. They have the responsibility for spending public tax dollars. They want bigger tax base. We want more scenic river corridors and cleaner waters. If we can show them that economic, read dollar, benefits to the community will exceed costs to clean up and restore the river, we have accomplished our environmental purpose by giving them the tax base and income they want. On Tuesday night I am addressing Loveland City Council on this, by invitation of a council member. My message will be: The more attractive and park-like you make the river and its corridor, the more they will visit Loveland, settle there, play there. The more it will become a residential and recreational amenity. It iss clean, it is beautiful, you are on a National Wild and Scenic River, what more could you ask, keep it that way, you are blessed! In the River Resource Economic Studies of Rivers Unlimited, since 1997, when a community is interested in a study of its river, we first ask them their vision of what they want the river to be, to do for them. Do they want a park, a bikeway, an operative septic system, cleaner river water, more access, do they want to get rid of a dam, a dump, abandoned derelict buildings, or to restore eroded streambanks? We study the river and determine the benefits and costs of each investment. They design our study. It is total buy-in. All interests agree. It is their river, for their good. So the paradigm shift is seeing environmental improvements in terms of recreational and property value upgrades. A different approach. A last example. I did a 12-pager on Diet, the U.S. Economy, the Federal Budget, Public Health and the Environment. When I found out that 2/3 of our cropland is used to feed animals that we eat and the milk and eggs they provide, I was amazed (I am a near-vegan for 13 years now). While it would be great for us all to change our diet, direct advocacy would be an instant loser. What would a diet free from animal-derived foods mean? There are many special interests that would benefit from such a change: -we would not have to spend $1500 per GM car for health care. Auto companies and unions would be pleased -animal rights groups would be joyous, as there would be no more slaughter -AARP would be happy we would live longer -We would make lots of land free for redevelopment. New communities, park land, forests, biomass for fuel, wind farms -Going to war for oil would be less attractive. Religious and peace groups would endorse. What could cause the nation to consider diet change? Our paradigm shift was to look at the costs and benefits. No moral freight, no selling it because it is good for you. Just the costs. Fund studies on land use change, energy savings, health care costs, food costs and environmental savings. What we know now tells us we are looking at longer life expectancy, higher quality of life for much lower cost, toward sustainability. With an enormous coalition. And with opponents having immense power! Monday, July 26, 2004
FOOD AND FODDER, OBSERVATIONS In our December 16, 2003 article we averred to efficiency, rivers and the environment, the national diet and their connections. Ten years ago I wrote a 12-pager on Diet, the Federal Budget, the U.S. Economy, Public Health and the Environment which gives inklings of the enormous cost to us of a diet based on animal proteins. We have just updated the figures. By the use of Resource Economics we hope some day to have a study of these costs to use as a factor in public decisions about diet. In no way would that be a crusade to change the national diet. Just the costs! (By the way, they are staggering!). Let me know if you want a copy of the 12-pager. I understand the Dutch Government is buying up dairy farms, giving dairy farmers generous amounts for their lands, which some of them have invested in Ohio to start similar farms here. Ten years ago the Dutch Friends of the Earth had published a Sustainable Netherlands study showing that to avoid the perils of dependence on other countries for food, building materials, energy and other resources, there were certain things they could do. Such as reducing the number of cows. Of course you know that 2/3 of our cropland goes to feed animals for the table. Perhaps the reality of the Dutch plight is sinking in. By the way, do not expect that milk or any of its derivatives will prevent osteoporosis. Studies show just the opposite. The rest of this is - observations. Rock Dust. There is a theory that as our land has eroded and weathered, our soil no longer has the rich mix of minerals and nutrients it used to have, they have all gone into the oceans. Also that our farm land through concentrated use has lost much of what it used to have that would produce superb, bountiful crops. We now have to supplement that with artificial fertilizers. Manure fertilizer is said to provide vitamin B-12 to vegetables, obviously organically-grown. Said vitamin comes only from animals. So B-12 supplements for vegans may not be necessary. Crops of old are said to have defended themselves well against bugs. The rock dust gave them that strength. Now we have to use insecticides. I saw a tape showing the use of rock dust as fertilizer on vegetable farms in Austria and Australia where the crops were amazing. Rock dust may be an important secret, not just for crops but for our health. Atkins, South Beach, Zone etc. Diets. If your concern is fatness, they all work. At least for a time, determined by how long you can stay on them. If your concern is health . . . and you like the diet, be sure to get the supplementary fiber and vitamins they don't give you - elsewhere. And avoid, if you can, the various dastardly fats. Latest studies (including one funded by Atkins) show mixed blood lipid results of low carb diets vs. high carb, all pretty short term and not descriptive of what the high-carb diets consisted of. If I were elderly (good heavens, I am), a child, a pregnant woman, subject to osteoporosis, a questionable heart case... I think these diets are extremely dangerous. Refined Flour. Empty calories. No fiber. The kind of "carbs" to avoid. Soft White Bread, even with additives. But, possibly, great taste! Use whole grains instead. Rats. I think it was - maybe mice. Tests showed that by reducing their caloric input by 30% they live 50% longer. We have similarities, maybe even that one. Some of us would rather live a normal span and not be hungry all the time! Organically-grown Foods. I believe they are legitimately labeled in this country. They reduce the amount of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and rodenticides we are exposed to, some of which build up in our tissues and are accused at times of affecting certain delicate balances in our systems and even causing diseases such as Parkinson's. That's for vegetables, grains and fruits. Organic avoids the extremely frightening threats of genetically modified foods, of which we have no long-term studies. See the book Seeds of Deception, Jeffrey Smith. Although FDA, EPA and USDA say that what's on the market is safe, there are little or no studies to prove it. When it is U.S. trade policy to push this stuff onto other countries - who say NO! how can we trust them? Looking at milk and poultry, beef and hogs, eggs - organically grown animals avoid the antibiotics, growth hormones and animal protein feed inputs that can affect our systems. In my experience there is no reason other than taste to eat any animal protein whatsoever, other than mothers' milk. And we can get over the taste thing (I did). Anti-Oxydants in the Blood. A laser-scan method of measuring your anti-oxydants is non-intrusive (wrap your hand around a cylinder on a small machine for 3 minutes) and it can read the carotene content of your system. Carotene is representative of the other a-o's in you and a measure of the strength of your immune system. Americans have an average reading of 20,000 out of a possible 100,000, with a desirable reading of 50,000. There are supplements to bring you to 50,000 or more. Or you can do it with careful healthy diet alone. Details upon application! Addictions (food). According to Neal Barnard, the prime addictive foods are meat, chocolate, sugar and cheese, for interesting convoluted reasons, clearly having to do with receptors in the brain, release of endorphins etc. There are ways to get off them, one for each addictor, and no longer miss them. See his book Breaking the Food Seduction. I know a person who succumbs to a gallon of ice cream every so often, hates it but can't resist. Water. No one stands up these days for our having to drink 6 to 8 glasses a day. Our systems need to keep the electrolytes in proper balance or we have troubles. Too much water has killed some athletes. Too little can hurt in various ways - kidneys, prostates. Terrible cramps. We continue to send our wastewater into our rivers and lakes, treated to whatever degree or not at all. Other than the fecal coliform we worry about there are sinister additives such as hormones from pharmaceuticals going through us from heart, birth control and countless other pills, pesticides and their metabolites, surfactants (wetting agents) from detergents (they affect fish mucous) and countless other compounds whose effects we do not yet understand or measure. These things go through the treatment plants. Up to 80% of the flow of the National Wild and Scenic Little Miami River is treated wastewater. We may have better luck with treated groundwater (from wells). At least they have pretty big strainers on top of them! There is so little public confidence in our drinking water today that there is an enormous market for bottled water at an insane price. You're on your own! Books. For anyone interested in diet and health, see John Robbins' The Food Revolution for insights into disease-causing foods. It is heavily researched and annotated. It is the antithesis of a fad diet book. Its predecessor, Diet for a New America, was my guide. Also, Reclaiming Our Health by Robbins, more feminine-oriented. Why this Article? The gleanings of the diet information have served me extremely well. The links to our environment are clear. Thursday, May 20, 2004
Lives in the Balance It is difficult to place a price on human life, because all lives are precious, but in our financially driven society money seems to be the primary measure of how business and government measure our worth. That said, let's look at various dollar values assigned a human life: - $6.1 million, USEPA (2000) in its arsenic calculations, Clinton Administration - $3.7 million, USEPA (2002) Bush Administration - $3.0 million, USDOT, date unknown, in figuring highway deaths - $2.3 million, USEPA (2002) if you are over 70 According to USEPA figures as reported in the New York Times on April 4, 2004, "Public health researchers estimate that fine-particulate pollution emissions from power plants shorten the lives of more than 30,000 Americans every year." Mother Jones magazine recently reported, "The estimated amount that Clear Skies-related health problems will cost taxpayers per year - $115 billion." Clear Skies is the government's new plan for allegedly clean air. I am not sure that these costs take into account mercury poisoning from power plant emissions precipitating onto lands and flowing into surface waters where we catch and eat fish. Now consider that a new scrubber for a power plant can cut emissions up to 95%. This would come at a cost to major polluting power plants in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Next, let's review the campaign contributions to the party in power from major utilities, which amounted to about $7 million as reported in the March 6, 2004, New York Times article entitled "How Industry Won the Battle of Pollution Control at the E.P.A." Thus, for a mere $7 million dollars (or the equivalent of 2 lives) the utility industry has bought a decision that will cause 30,000 deaths and $115 billion a year in health-related costs. All this unnecessary misery and suffering so these corporations can save a few hundred million that they should have invested in their plants up to 20 years ago under New Source Review (NSR). Today, they refuse to upgrade their plants. The Bush Administration's answer is to quietly change the law and drop pending lawsuits against the utilities. It's a national scandal. _________________________________ The government is said to favor benefit/cost analysis in its decisions. That is basic to the science of economics and makes sense in many ways. All of us perform benefit/cost unconsciously in our daily decisions. Does it look to you that our government has used benefit/cost in writing the Clear Skies regulation? If they had, the costs to society and our people would calculate out like this: 30,000 lives lost x $3,000,000 per life = $90,000,000,000 subtotal + $115,000,000,000 in health costs = $205,000,000,000 annual cost to American society That's year after year, as compared to the one-time investment of hundreds of millions in equipment, followed by annual operating costs, required of the utilities. So the government is invoking a regulation that will cost us somewhere between 200 and 600 times as much as the corporations' bottom lines will benefit. We will pay with our lives and our public health, to say nothing of our quality of life. Is there any doubt that a double standard that favors the public utilities and harms our citizens is being forced upon us? For those of you who need more convincing, here are some more figures to contemplate: Health care costs in the U.S. are $1.65 trillion a year, about 1/6th of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Power plant emissions cause $205 billion in damages per year or 1/8th of our health care costs. Society struggles to contain spiraling health care costs but guess who pays the bills with tax dollars and lives? We do. It's clear that the government cannot be using the value of human life in its benefit/cost calculations. It cannot even be using the health care costs. It should. It is deeply unpatriotic of our policy makers to condemn 30,000 people to death each year (10 times as many as died on 9-11), by refusing to adopt pollution controls that protect the environment and the public health. The numbers are staggering, especially put in the perspective of war: the Vietnam War took 58,000 lives; the War in Iraq is at 770 and counting. Is the current president, who fashions himself as a war president, waging an environmental war against his own citizens? One burning question, and the subject of much counter spin by utilities, is would preventing the loss of such life put fossil-fuel burning utilities out of business? Hardly. Would prices go up? Not if they were properly regulated. Originally, they were "public" utilities, designed to serve the needs of the public. Now they're nests for the enrichment of corporate kings and for the profit of their shareholders, and tools to support politicians who will favor their interests. Should we take the statistical death costs out of the equation because they are theoretical - or inconvenient to industry's goals? If so, does that mean a human life has zero value? Is that what our government has done? Why should we accept such carnage - in the name of utility profits and campaign contributions! It is simply indefensible. It is an outrage! Tuesday, February 24, 2004
The following was a February 20, 2004, guest column for the Cincinnati Post. It says "Make it clean and attractive and they will come!" An environmental way to bring jobs and development. The message applies everywhere, and to all environmental resources. We've been using Resource Economics to see if specific improvements on rivers will pay. Thus far, all the ones we have looked at will. Communities should look critically and comprehensively at their environments. With study, they will probably find that environmental improvement investments can be of great economic benefit. Our state, county and city haven't given much attention to quality of life in their feverish search, these many years, for increased development. Development means more people, industry, commerce, tourism, housing starts, tax base, exports, etc. There've been many downtown redesigns, highway reroutings, consultants, Smale and other commissions, port and waterfront agencies, and stadium decisions. Hamilton County and Cincinnati have it within their power to make this region significantly richer, healthier, a more desirable place to live and more competitive in drawing the kind of development sought here. The answer is quality of life. Quality-of-life is why those who have some choice in the matter settle where they do. We live and sometimes work where we do because we seek the highest quality of life we can afford. Yes, the quality of life also means good schools and personal security. But it also means clean air, where you don't worry about what your children are breathing and where hospitals don't fill up on bad air days and you don't have to close the windows on certain summer nights. And clean water you can fish in and maybe eat the fish, and swim and kayak in without getting infected or swallowing toxins. And away from the hundreds of acres of sites where the top layer of soils is so toxic as to be Superfund territory. Quality of life has enormous economic value. We go to beaches, forests, parks, lakes and rivers. Tourism and travel are Ohio's second largest industry, after agriculture. The County could decide to clean up air our air, our toxic sites, our tainted waters, our sewer overflows. County resolutions and lobbying could affect legislative and administrative state and national decisions to improve air and water quality and other quality of life issues. Decisions made here could increase the value of our housing stock, therefore our tax base. They could reduce our medical costs and lost workdays. They could improve our public image. They could bring new visitors, new residents and new businesses. Disturbed and threatened areas include the Mill Creek Valley, Western Hamilton County, Fernald and Rumpke impacts, Chevron-Texaco and a garbage transfer station. Opportunities include protecting the Little Miami from an Eastern Corridor Interstate Truckway Connector bridge and highway (Route 32 to I-71). The County should save this rare, priceless natural amenity - a de facto linear park including Armleder, Magrish and Horse Shoe Bend Parks, use it for fishing, hiking, canoeing. It's a National Wild and Scenic River going through 6 miles of Cincinnati. We should support the Great Miami as an Ohio Scenic River and protect it against adverse development. It will pay, as has the Little Miami. We should support Mill Creek's restoration. It too will pay. We citizens worked long and hard in good faith in the public interest to come up with the Community Compass Plan. Competent professional planners helped. Let us carry out the plan! The citizens want quality of life and some security that their neighborhoods won't be degraded by adverse development. The County could require that clean air, water and land rules are observed and enforced. Otherwise the rules are worthless and only a pretense of being in the public interest. The City has abolished its Office of Environmental Management. It has killed Title X. It has defunded its Environmental Advisory Council. We know how rivers can help the regional economies they flow through. And looking at USEPA studies of the Clean Air Act, the benefits of this Act exceed the costs by a ratio of 40 to 1. Benefits are in lengthened lives, public health, work-days saved, reduced crop damage, reduced property damage, medical costs reduced, etc. The County's Department of Environmental Services could help to improve public health, housing stock, tax base and public image -- if told to enforce the laws! This area -- our Hamilton County -- has the potential beauty and attractiveness in our rivers, our hills, our parks and architecture to be world class. We can make it that way! Organizations that have engaged in that effort over the years: our Park Boards; Little Miami, Inc.; Ohio River Way; Mill Creek Restoration Project; Mill Creek Watershed Council; Hillside Trust; Audubon; Oxbow, Inc.; Friends of the Great Miami; Imago; the Land Conservancy of Hamilton County; Southwestern Ohio Trails Association; Sierra Club's Miami Group; Environmental Community Organization; Ohio River Foundation; Greenacres Foundation; Concerned Citizens of Western Hamilton County. There are more. All these are associated with the natural beauty and resources of the region. They are all providing higher quality of life for our residents. Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Efficiency! It's too big a subject to encompass here. Here's a quick visit: Efficiency determines our national welfare: our security from wars and terror, our health and life expectancy, our quality of life, the sustainability however defined of our country and the planet, the markets for our goods and the prospect for a bright future. Our country is unbelievably inefficient, ignoring simple actions that would make this a utopia (leaving out religion and politics). A few examples starting with rivers and water -- * Forty percent of our waters are not fishable or swimmable. That converts to an annual economic loss, or forgone gain, of about $10 billion. We say $666 million in Ohio alone. Yes, every year. * We pay exorbitant prices for water in arid lands while draining our great aquifers such as the Ogalalla and rivers such as the Colorado and Rio Grande. We could be catching the rainfall and storing it in our aquifers instead of pumping melted snow over mountains hundreds of miles where much of it evaporates, or collected behind expensive dams. Some 20,000 villages in India have learned to catch and store rainfall and their crops and gardens profit. * Our 7 years of River Resource Economics have shown the likelihood that most degraded rivers hide their great potential to improve the regional economy - if they were restored. Their benefits in increased property values, tax base, recreation and park land, better public image and amenities for tourism and new settlement far exceed the costs of restoration. * Beyond water, the Clean Air Act has had benefits over forty times its costs and the Clinton-proposed tightening would have benefits four times its costs. The ultimate unwisdom of weakening this Act is under way now. * Agriculture: roughly 2/3 of our crop land is devoted to putting meat, poultry, eggs, and milk on our dining tables. One calorie from meat requires 9 calories from grain to produce. How's that for efficiency? Change our diet? NEVER! Free up our cropland? But we need no meat, no poultry, eggs or milk, none whatsoever, never! Yes, we have addictions, to meat, cheese, sugar and chocolate, but there are cures. Could we change? We've made many changes. Smoking. Social changes: the move toward equality for women, Native Americans, African Americans, gays. * Energy. A huge inefficiency is our waste of and use of fossil fuel, highways instead of light rail, SUV's. S. David Freeman, former director of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) stopped 5 nuclear power plants by offering low-interest loans for 800,000 families to insulate their homes (we live in sieves - Amory Lovins). He said conservation is the largest, fastest, cheapest, safest and cleanest source of energy. Leamington and Kingsville, Ontario (near Detroit) are a good setting for wind farms. An option on 4600 acres for 134 large silent turbines will provide electricity for 58,000 homes -- no oil, no gas, no trucks, no drilling, no air pollution...No need for Middle East oil. Transportation efficiency is how much energy to move a person or a ton of freight a mile. Compare cars with rail! * Public health. Ten years ago we spent one out of every seven dollars on health care. . It is now one out of six dollars and moving to one out of five dollars. Almost all this money goes to repair us, prop us up, not armor us against sickness. That would take a healthy lifestyle. We are fat, sick and inactive. If we moved to a better diet we would charge up this great national battery with higher productivity and enormous savings. * Our tourism and travel agencies print beautiful brochures and flyers and advertise events. If some fraction of their investments went to restoring the natural wonderland that used to be here, tourists would respond to their genes and seek the woods, the trees, the open spaces, waters, birds and animals we evolved among. More would seek our shores. Potentially we have a lot more to offer than we do now. (Only 3/10ths of 1 percent of our rivers are protected after 35 years!) We should invest in that potential. It would have a permanent payoff. ____________________ As a nation, our assets are human resources, natural resources, energy and capital. We watch the exodus of manufacturing to China, Mexico and other low-wage countries including India, which has enormous intellectual capital to do our computer transactions. Our national effort is crimped by our inefficiency. Our waste of human resources because of poor health with high costs, our waste of energy causing us to import 55% of our oil while embarking on a mad hunt to squeeze more out of our remaining natural national monuments; our misuse of agricultural land. These are reasons we have so many poor, are losing our health, quality of life, international competitiveness, possibility of sustainability. |