Overbuilding
No credit market
High gas prices
And now... S.2191, a "cap & trade" law on carbon emissions.
Anyone know anything about this, or have any thoughts? Though this will have significant financial ramifications to US economy and markets, IMHO as an urbanite it's about time policy caught up with climate change. Summary of bill is below. How far behind can application to suburban developers be?
QuoteTitle: A bill to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a program to decrease emissions of greenhouse gases, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] (introduced 10/18/2007) Cosponsors (11)
Related Bills: S.3036
Latest Major Action: 5/20/2008 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 740.
Senate Reports: 110-337
SUMMARY AS OF: 10/18/2007--Introduced.
America's Climate Security Act of 2007 - Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish: (1) a greenhouse gas (GHG) registry; and (2) a GHG emission allowance transfer system for covered facilities, including specified facilities within the electric power and industrial sectors and facilities that produce or entities that import petroleum- or coal- based transportation fuel or chemicals. Sets forth emission allowances for 2012-2050, with a declining cap on GHGs.
Provides for selling, exchanging, transferring, submitting, retiring, or borrowing emission allowances. Establishes: (1) a domestic offset program to sequester GHGs in agriculture and forests; and (2) the Bonus Allowance Account.
Establishes the Carbon Market Efficiency Board, which shall observe and report on the national GHG emission market and provide cost relief measures if it determines that the market poses significant harm to the U.S. economy.
Provides for the distribution of emission allowances, including initially giving allowances to: (1) specified owners and operators of covered facilities; (2) states; (3) load-serving entities that deliver electricity to retail consumers; (4) the Secretary of Agriculture to reduce GHG emissions in the agriculture and forestry sectors; (5) international forest protection activities; and (6) the Emission Allowance Account for covered facilities in the electric power and industrial sectors.
Establishes in the Treasury and provides for allocations from: (1) the Energy Assistance Fund; (2) the Climate Change Worker Training Fund; (3) the Adaptation Fund; and (4) the Climate Change and National Security Fund.
Establishes the Climate Change Credit Corporation to auction emission allowances. Provides for the use of auction proceeds, including for a zero- or low-carbon energy technologies program, an advanced coal and sequestration technologies program, incentives for production of fuel from cellulosic biomass, and an advanced technology vehicles manufacturing incentive program.
Amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to set forth provisions concerning appliance energy efficiency requirements and state building energy efficiency code updates.
Requires the President to establish an interagency group to determine whether foreign countries have addressed GHGs.
Directs the Administrator to establish an international reserve allowance program. Requires the proceeds from sales of such allowances to be used to mitigate the negative impacts of climate change on other countries' disadvantaged communities.
Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to require the Administrator to permit commercial-scale underground injection of carbon dioxide for purposes of geological sequestration.
Requires the Secretary of Energy to study the feasibility of the construction of: (1) pipelines for the transportation of carbon dioxide for sequestration or enhanced oil recovery; and (2) geological carbon dioxide sequestration facilities.
Directs the Administrator to establish a task force to study the cost implications of potential federal assumption of liability with respect to closed geological storage sites.
Authorizes the President to waive this Act's requirements in a national security emergency.
Requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to direct securities issuers to inform investors of material risks related to climate change.
The odds of this passing in the next 9 months is nill. I would probably only expect to see it pass if the Dems win the white house, and establish a near filibuster-proof majority in Congress.
That said, I would agree, it sure seems to slam the door on outward expansion, and encourages people to re congregate into community centers near where they can work, shop, and play.
Actually, DTP, all three candidates are supporting a cap and trade system on emissions in some form or another. Take a look at this link:
http://www.johnmccain.com/climatechange/
Still think it won't pass? With America's growing environmental concern, all candidates will have to take some carbon emissions measure. One proposed alternative to cap and trade is a carbon emissions tax. I can't imagine any of the candidates wanting to embrace that one.
Stigmatization of suburban anything is growing.
It's already happening. Some suburbs in the U.S. are sliding toward becoming wasteland ghettos, and it's a frightening thought. The poor will be stranded in a sprawl without the ability to move to denser, walkable locations and the jobs that exist there. A living hell for the much less well off. Makes me shudder.
"Slum-burbs"
heard that one recently...
Subruban Decay is another catch phrase I have heard a couple of times. In some cities in the NE and Mid-west, the housing slump alone has caused it. I believe it was Stephen who posted a rather scary story about Shaker Heights ohio. I will see if I can find it again.
Damn... Theres more than one story out there...
http://www.startribune.com/local/west/17932454.html
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/27/news/economy/irvine_subprime/index.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/business/yourmoney/02village.html?_r=2&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
http://www.zillowblog.com/foreclosure-epicenter-maple-heights-ohio/2007/09/
http://consumerist.com/378108/life-in-a-subprime-ghost-town-not-paying-the-mortgage-feels-great
I wonder what the ignorant forumers on the Vanguard News Network would say about the Sinclairs decision to not pay their mortgage?
That was an accident. I didnt read the thread, I just posted the thread because it had the story Stephen had posted about Shaker Hieghts. Im really sorry About that. I will see if I can find the thread on here and repost it.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article3422322.ece
Maybe it is just a matter of time before all the money moves into the major cities, builds a moat, and raises the draw bridges.
Excerpt from a white paper called "Driven to the Brink" showing effects of gas prices on housing.
Housing Prices Are Declining Fastest in the Suburbs
Observers of local real estate markets have noticed that not all neighborhoods in a given metropolitan
area are affected by the same degree by the housing downturn. Within metropolitan areas, it appears
that markets on the suburban fringe are generally experiencing the greatest declines, and consumer
demand remains relatively stronger for close-in properties. For example, while exurbs in places
like Denver and Salt Lake City offer big houses on large lots at low prices, many buyers today are
forsaking size for the conveniences of being close to the city, often in areas that are redeveloping
(Opdyke 2008).
Our analysis of intra-metropolitan patterns of housing price changes over the past year finds that
prices have declined most in the most distant suburbs. On average, over the past 12 months, the
decline in a neighborhood 12 miles from the center of the central business district is 2 to 4 percentage
points greater than the decline in housing prices in neighborhoods 2 miles from the CBD.
Link to complete white paper (tried to attach, but file too large):
http://www.ceosforcities.org/rethink/research/index.php
the "carbon trade" is already wildly accepted. Lieberman obviously has a lots of clout. I expect the carbon trade to pass no matter who is in the white house.
Quote from: fatcat on September 20, 2008, 01:25:14 PM
the "carbon trade" is already wildly accepted. Lieberman obviously has a lots of clout. I expect the carbon trade to pass no matter who is in the white house.
Let's all pray that it doesn't.
Give me my back yard, not a concrete jungle.
Not everyone wants to live stacked on top of each other, I rather prefer to mow my yard and and breath much cleaner air.
Not all of us want to be bombarded by neon signs, some of us actually prefer being able to see the milky way with our naked eyes from our back porch.
Even if gas goes to 100$ a gallon, my career would allow me to work entirely from home, negating the need to move into a city.
Its fine that most on here want us to live all in cities, but not everyone shares that same sentiment. I would much rather live by myself on 100 acres than have a neighbor close by. The suburbs are a good compromise for my current line of work and my lifestyle needs.
Quote from: jandar on November 04, 2008, 07:16:01 PM
Give me my back yard, not a concrete jungle.
Not everyone wants to live stacked on top of each other, I rather prefer to mow my yard and and breath much cleaner air.
Not all of us want to be bombarded by neon signs, some of us actually prefer being able to see the milky way with our naked eyes from our back porch.
Even if gas goes to 100$ a gallon, my career would allow me to work entirely from home, negating the need to move into a city.
Its fine that most on here want us to live all in cities, but not everyone shares that same sentiment. I would much rather live by myself on 100 acres than have a neighbor close by. The suburbs are a good compromise for my current line of work and my lifestyle needs.
Anti social?
Quote from: Coolyfett on November 04, 2008, 07:37:55 PM
Anti social?
No, I am actually an extrovert. I just enjoy space more than people.
why are you reading and/or responding to a thread posted on the "urban neighborhoods" board? check out "the burbs" section where you can enjoy the chatter of other suburban extroverts.
Quote from: zoo on November 06, 2008, 02:14:44 PM
why are you reading and/or responding to a thread posted on the "urban neighborhoods" board? check out "the burbs" section where you can enjoy the chatter of other suburban extroverts.
Uhmmmm read the title
Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place. Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices. Right now it does not. If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.). Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth. If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2008, 04:07:27 PM
Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place. Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices. Right now it does not. If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.). Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth. If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.
Isn't that just "white flight" all over again?
I agree there should be more options, but the downtown option does it even exist in Jax? I know there are few condos and lofts here and there, but still downtown is a ghost town.
No, repopulating and redeveloping areas of town with a decent amount of infrastructure already in place is not white flight.
However, I agree that the downtown option right now is not ideal for a metro of 1.3 million people. We have a lot of work to do here before it becomes a viable living alternative for most urbanites.
Quote from: jandar on November 04, 2008, 07:16:01 PM
I would much rather live by myself on 100 acres than have a neighbor close by. The suburbs are a good compromise for my current line of work and my lifestyle needs.
The Brookings Institute released a study that showed roughly 1/3 of Americans feel basically like you (suburban/rural). Another 1/3 of Americans prefer urban. The remaining 1/3 don't have a strong opinion.
In a city like Jacksonville, less than 1% of new development is truly urban (I'd wager far less) thanks to all sorts of stupid market distortions by our government. This implies that our city is underserving at least 32% of our population. For that matter, it means that your suburban paradise is crowded with somewhere between 100%-200% more people than it needs to be. If we actually had realistic urban options available, the suburbs wouldn't die - they would just have less people, less traffic, and more open space - which is exactly what the 1/3 who prefer suburbs should want.
That alone should make the true suburbanites the most passionate urban development supporters of all!
If you enjoy rural living, you should definitely be in support of urban living. More people living in cities equates to less people living around your rural land.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2008, 04:07:27 PM
Jandar's position is an additional reason to refocus the city's future growth on older sections of town where the infrastructure is already in place. Our community should be able to offer residents a variety of living and lifestyle choices. Right now it does not. If our growth patterns don't change and continue to follow the path of outward development, neighborhoods that people like Jandar enjoy will eventually lose their appeal and end up like the city's older suburbs (ex. Arlington, Emerson/Philips, University Blvd., Edgewood Avenue, etc.). Right now, we have the chance to learn from our past mistakes and develop a different strategy for growth. If we play our cards right, all residents, both urban and suburban, will benefit.
Good post.
It is the benefit of all to make a strong urban core, so that it can benefit everyone, including antisocial outcasts like me who enjoy more countrified air.