Green Options

A post of a few months ago considered whether the Cape Town City Council would have to charge residents to manage the Peninsular Baboons - now they have approved funds and plan a workshop while residents have baboons droping into their bathroom.

City Supports Baboon Monitoring and Wants to Develop a Plan

In the first news story since the recent post on the Cape Peninsular baboons, the Cape Town City Council has set aside a quarter of a million dollars to continue the funding of the baboon monitoring programme on the Peninsula.
This was good news for many as there has been uncertainty, as to whether the city council would continue to fund a ten-year-old baboon monitor programme. The programme has minders keeping watch over baboon troops and where possible keeping them away from the urban areas. Sensibly the city has also decided that the quarter of a million dollars is only an interim solution and will also be working with South African National Parks (Sanparks) and Cape Nature Conservation to address the problem. The city will host a baboon expert workshop at the Civic Centre on July 2, with the aim of finding “the most effective strategy for baboon management in the Cape Peninsula” and determining how best to implement it.

The economic downturn is making it tough to be a member of the middle class, now there’s evidence that ‘middle class’ coral reef fish are hurting too.

According to a new Wildlife Conservation Society study, reef fish levels along middle class coastal communities in Eastern Africa tend to be significantly lower– up to 4 times lower– than along areas bordering wealthy or poor communities.

Reasons for the disparity are numerous, and they involve a complicated interplay between traditional customs, economic development and population dynamics. But middle class apathy could also be to blame.

We are a single car family and have been so for five years. This is seen as a sacrifice by some, especially my own father who has four vehicles of his own and just married a woman with two more. To me, living with one car is a convenience. I work from home and we live in a small town where almost everyone can walk to work, school, and the beach. Weeks go by when I don’t even get behind the wheel. This is all about to change as we move across Canada to eastern suburbia.

Though we’re excited about the change and the opportunity to be closer to family, my husband insists that we’re going to need two cars. I think “need” is too strong of a word, though I’m close to admitting that it will be difficult living with one car when the kids get older. Still, I want to try, and this is one eco-battle/financial scrap I’m determined to win. Here are our arguments. What do you think my chances are?

While gas prices have dropped from their historic highs of earlier this summer, many believe they’re never likely to return to the low levels that made the U.S. such a motor-happy nation for decades. Because of that, social observers like James Howard Kunstler and others see a bleak future for car-dependent suburbia, with the sprawl degrading into vast slums or being abandoned altogether.

But does that have to be the case? Suburbs might not have been developed with New Urbanism in mind, but maybe they could be reinvented. Perhaps they could become the 21st Century version of the 18th Century farm community, with lots of individual homesteads dotted across a wide swath of agricultural land.

When the award-winning film The End of Suburbia was released in 2004, it was considered by some to be an amusing but exaggerated view of what Peak Oil will do to the suburban way of life. As gas prices approach $5/gallon, it doesn’t seem quite so shocking.

As a passionate enemy of suburban sprawl, I listened intently to an interview this morning on NPR with Brookings Institution demographer William Frey in which he notes that housing prices are falling faster in the areas outside cities. Is this a permanent correction that is making “exurbs” less desirable overall? And how are gas prices influencing this loss of home value? Mr. Frey was cautious in his answer, saying “the jury is still out” and that Americans have a history of moving outward from cities in order to buy more housing for less, seeing long commutes as an acceptable trade off.

However, it doesn’t take a genius to see that, when a commute costs more than one is saving on housing, while sucking up hours of one’s valuable time, (and as the saying goes, “They aren’t making more of that”) why would one buy a home in the far suburbs? Why, indeed?

Sperling’s Best Places did a survey two years ago when gas prices were at $2.90 a gallon. The following were the most expensive cities in which to commute and listed the average annual commuting cost:

City Annual Commuting Cost (2006)

1. Atlanta $5,772
2. Birmingham, Ala. $5,464
3. Orlando, Fla. $5,404
4. Jacksonville, Fla. $5,360
5. Pensacola, Fla. $5,173

So, if gas prices reach $6.00, Atlanta’s commuting cost would be over $10,000 per year. Yikes.