Urban Issues and Actions

There is currently a lot of hype around “green energy,” sources of energy that are environmentally safe. Green energy is an especially valuable concept in crowded urban areas with high pollution. However, it is very important for supporters to be educated about different types of energy and their actual efficiency. Rather than blindly supporting wind energy, be wary of those who are backing the construction of windmills and be mindful of other available types of energy.

William Tucker is an author who has been writing for over two decades about environmental and energy concerns. He published Terrestrial Energy in September 2008 about the advantage of nuclear power over other alternative sources of energy. I first became aware of his work when I read an article he wrote in  the August, 18 2008 issue of National Review. It is titled “Tilting We Will Go?” and describes how “windmills are not an energy policy.”

William Tucker analyzed energy sources, namely wind and nuclear energy, in terms of “energy density,” which is how much energy can be produced from a specific measure (size, weight, etc.) of a source. He notes that energy obtained from  fossil fuels (ex. coal) ranges from 5 to 50 times stronger than solar power, wind, water and biofuels. The early dream of green energy was idealistic. In reality, it takes a lot of space to produce a fraction of the energy produced by oil. The typical wind farm takes about 125 square miles. A coal mine just takes a few square miles. (I acknowledge that those are a few dangerous miles, as coal mining is not a safe job.) Further, wind is sporadic and unpredictable, and wind farms only produce a fraction of their ideal capacity. The erratic nature of wind causes another major issue. The energy grid in America is designed so that energy must be immediately used (cannot be stored). So the output of energy must be very close to the demand. The energy grid must be very carefully managed. Tucker writes, “Now imagine introducing a power source that is constantly fluctuating…Putting windmills on the grid is a little like the Flying Wallendas’ hiring a new crew member to shake the wire while they are doing their balancing act.”

Why do so many people support wind energy? One obvious answer, Tucker points out, is the government requirements and subsidies. Many states require the use of green energy, including wind energy, without truly measuring its benefit. Investors in wind energy (such as T. Boone Pickens) earn tax benefits and can make a profit on their wind farms.

If not wind energy, what sources of green energy are effective? Tucker and many others support nuclear energy, which is splitting the nucleus of an atom to release energy. Nuclear reactors take much less space than wind farms, run much closer to their ideal capacity, are much more stable sources of energy, and produce relatively little waste.

I find the phenomenon of wind energy support an example of how people can easily be swept up by glitzy ideals. It is important as citizens to be educated about the realities of policies. Yes, green energy is an important concept in modern America. But not just any type of green energy deserves support, government funding and investment.

Today, I came across a New York Times article called Home Prices Plunge in October, and I felt obliged to read it and see how the economic and housing crisis was progressing, based on the title, not well. Living here at the University of Richmond, we are in a bubble. Even if it is not the ‘Richmond bubble’ that people talk about, we are definitely in a college bubble. The biggest concern college students have, including me, is getting through their classes, finishing their work that is due tomorrow, and then trying to get as much sleep as they can with the little amount of time available. Once you add working out, research, extracurricular activities, and socializing there is very little time for worrying about the real world beyond this college campus.

So, I took time from all that to read this article about the housing crisis, which is unfortunately linked in a cycle with the economic crisis. As the housing crisis worsens, it hurts the economy, and as the economy fails, the housing crisis worsens. The article believes that the housing crisis will improve when housing prices hit bottom and then the buyers will start buying again, which will benefit the economy and pick everything back up. However, until then we have to wait for everything to get worse. This just seems wrong.

Why do we have to let the economy do as it pleases? Is it wrong to want regulation of the economy? To have financial and local stability? We discussed some similar questions in sociology recently, and the conclusions my fellow classmates and I came to involved increased government regulation of businesses. If the government played a larger role in the economy and businesses, then it could regulate the economy and hopefully prevent these recessions and depressions from occurring. Recessions and depressions are always going to happen for as long as we have a free economy. However, I am not saying that we should allow the government to have complete control because that would potentially lead to conflict of interest. If elite government officials owned all businesses then they would enact laws and regulations for their benefits. Although, if the government owned a small portion of every business, like one-fourth, then they would be capable of keeping businesses alive and regulating the economy, but they would not have a large enough conflict of interest to be corrupted (hopefully).

As I continue reading articles about the housing crisis, I cannot help but wonder how many more homeless people there will be over the next year. With the majority of houses that are being sold on the housing market due to foreclosures, one must wonder where the people that were foreclosed upon go. Fortunately, there are a lot of great programs and shelters in Richmond that can help the homeless, but hopefully they have enough resources for the amount of people that will need help over the coming months, especially through the holiday season.

I hope everyone has a wonderful Thanksgiving and remembers how lucky we are to go to a great school like the University of Richmond. Don’t ever take good health and happiness for granted

As Circuit City declares bankruptcy, our Big Three Auto manufactures self-destruct and our economy is in a state of peril unrivaled in our history, I wonder how effective our current economic system is? Throughout the 2008 presidential election the dangerous “S word” was constantly hurled at Barack Obama in an attempt to discredit him, but clearly the “C word” is crippling our society, so how bad can the “S word” actually be? In case you did not get the reference, the “S word” stands for socialism, which no red-blooded American would ever want to be. We would never want a system of equality where everyone has a roof over their head, food in their stomach, clothes on their back and a decent shot at success. Equal education, a stronger welfare system and a redistribution of wealth such that it’s not concentrated within 1% of our population is an outrageous suggestion- Thus; we remain ever faithful to our good old American system of capitalism. However, since capitalism clearly is struggling at the moment, and we would never want to be a socialist society, maybe we can find a happy medium in compassionate capitalism. We can still have our system of stratification, where one can claim the elusive title of the upper-class and others can revel in the normalcy of the middle-class, but also have a system where everyone can make a living wage and get a decent education. We constantly complain about illegal immigrants taking “our jobs” and “our jobs” being shipped overseas, but if it wasn’t for our system of capitalism those jobs never would have been taken away from “us” in the first place. So maybe we need to move away from this unchecked system of capitalism which we have come so heavily to rely on. Substitute cheap megastore prices for the ability of everyone being able to clothe and feed their families. Not tying the idea of middle-class to the fact that some people can’t pay rent. Because, at the end of the day, our current situation is hurting us all. The sad part is that it took us this long to realize that our system wasn’t working. It took gas prices rising, and homes’ foreclosing for people to begin to realize that a change needs to be effected, even though for some people these new found hard-times have been a life long reality. But on a positive note, let’s take the struggle of the times, and try and help everyone struggle less, not just the middle-class, not just Joe the Plummer, not the movers and shakers on wall-street, but EVERYBODY.

Article about urban development in the economic crisis

It is interesting to note that the economic crisis is affecting development in areas that are dependent on automobile transportation more than it is affecting urban areas. Public transportation is proving to play an important role in housing values. Usable community networks give urban residences an advantage over suburban sprawl. Less dependence on gasoline especially allows some urban housing to keep its value even as the economy slips. There is one notable exception for condos, due to an oversupply. Otherwise, the economic decline is giving urban residential areas an upper hand.

Scott Bernstein, president of the Center for Neighborhood Technology, is quoted in the article. “I think we’re just starting to understand how high energy costs may reshape the landscape. New urbanist developments in traditional towns do provide an economic advantage.” He makes an important point that the advantage must be marketed.

At the present time, it is unfortunate that seemingly well-planned projects are put on hold becaue of lack of funds. As a consqeunce, urban growth will most likely not be completely stumped, but instead take a less organized path of development. The Vickery development in Georgia was a mixed-used, renowned project. It was developed by Hedgewood Properties, which is currently in a bad finiancial situation with Wachovia Bank. The project, a model for other developments, is postponed until there are market improvements. If projects such as this and others listed in the artcle are not supported by the communities, urban development could easily lose its advantage. It takes thought and planning for communities to be successful, and the well-planned communities should not be the first to be abandonded in times of need. Bertstein is quoted, “I think people are going to be a lot more sensitive to cost-of-living reduction.” Rather than have this sensativity emerge in a time of desperation, we should make careful plans now to protect our communities and urban investments.

Alison Isenberg’s Downtown America brought up a lot of interesting points regarding the development and redevelopment of downtown spaces in America.  However, I found the notion of the feminization of downtowns and its connection to the resistance to the feminization movement both interesting and unsettling.  Isenberg describes the growing discontent and restlessness many housewives experienced after WWII and the concern over the possibility of woman working that arose as a result of these sentiments.  The redevelopment of the downtown was then geared to draw white middle-class woman back into the cities to shop and spend their days so that they would no longer be discontent and pent up in their houses all day. 

Executives worked to make cities “desirable for my wife your wife and your neighbor’s wife to go downtown and shop” and they focused on details such as parking, aesthetics, and carry-out services at stores to attract housewives to spend their days in the downtowns.  Luckily for the Woman’s Movement, this redevelopment failed in its mission to keep women housewives and women were able to break free of their roles as housewives regardless of how enticing the downtown shopping areas were and of how pervasive advertisements were for women to spend all of their husband’s money and come home with an empty purse.  However, it is interesting to see the efforts to which downtowns went to in an attempt to “keep them housewives” as well as to better understand the connection between policies for redevelopment and cultural concerns over gender roles.

As mentioned before, downtowns focused on details such as parking and aesthetics to create a calming atmosphere for white, middle-class housewives to go and spend a pleasant day shopping, dining, and relaxing.  Working woman and women of color were not considered when making plans for the downtown areas because they were not considered a threat to the established structure where men made the money and woman spent it.  In addition, cities also ignored the consumer potential in African Americans and other ethnic groups who lived in the city and were nearby to downtowns because they viewed these people as “poor customers.”  They didn’t want the presence of these people in downtowns to disturb the aesthetic ideal they had created for housewives or to create a “lower-class ethnic island” to which housewives and other “upper-crust” customers would be disinclined to visit and commerce.

However, in limiting the clientele that they sought to attract, cities ran the risk of losing business because they had a very narrow vision of who was acceptable in their downtowns.  If women chose not to shop downtown and, instead, went to the nearby malls in the suburbs, then the city would not have as many potential customers as they might have had they aimed their redevelopment towards a wider array of groups and people.  The decline of downtowns could actually be linked to this oversight of other potential consumers because with the Women’s Movement many women did leave home to get jobs and, as a result, the cities lost a large portion of their customers.  Downtowns reacted with the implementation of bargain basements to attract customers from nearby slums; however, clearly downtown developers had failed in their mission to create a “playground” for women as they had hoped to.  In addition, they had failed to create a sense of satisfaction and contentment for housewives with the attraction of shopping as a way to spend a day.

In class today we discussed numerous qualities we believed a downtown area should possess including public transportation to the downtown space that was then connected to the rest of the city, walkable areas (potentially a pedestrian street), street vendors, easy parking, mixed-use and mixed-income, and green space, among others.  In light of the development of cities after WWII which was designed to attract middle class, white women and, in particular, housewives, one must wonder who the ideal city we have created in class is designed to attract.  It seems that every development plan for downtowns must have some sort of target group and this has been supported historically as we can see through the feminization of downtowns. 

The idea of a space for professional youths or youths in general was mentioned, however, how would this group change the dynamics of downtown spaces?  Currently, there is a pervasive nostalgia for downtowns that many elderly people possess so my question is how can this nostalgia be reconciled with the infantilizing (or efforts to attract younger people) of downtowns to create spaces that are not designed merely for one group but that are attractive to a variety of people?  After all, isn’t the diversity of downtown one of its greatest assets?  In addition, how can the creation of our ideal downtown eliminate many of the problems the feminized downtowns faced back in the 1950’s and 60’s?  What does our city offer that theirs didn’t?                  

As a part of my leadership class I was required to read Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed, an ethnography about her experiences actually working and trying to live as a low-wage laborer in America.  She describes her efforts to give up her prior middle-class lifestyle and to authentically live a life like that of other low-wage workers who struggle to keep up with multiple jobs, work for minimum wage, and have to find affordable housing a continually more expensive market.  While she never truly gave up her former lifestyle, due to the fact that she continued to keep her computer with her and brought several thousand dollars with her into the project as a sort of safety net, she did get a taste of what it is to continually live on the edge of poverty.  Her interactions with the other workers were also very telling and interesting and gave a glimpse into the harsh realities that many Americans are forced to confront on a daily basis. 

            Barbara met several interesting characters throughout her experiences.  She started out as a waitress as a hotel’s restaurant and the people who worked here were generally friendly, attentive to the customer, and older in age.  From here, she switched to a more commercial chain restaurant where serving was a mechanical operation and interaction with the customer was discouraged.  In addition, she noted that the servers was so busy trying to wait on their numerous tables that they often had no time to interact with each other either.  Thus, the workers were isolated from each other and their customers and this resulted in a sense of loneliness and alienation.  Barbara commented on this saying how even though she was surrounded by people all day she never really connected to anyone and then after work she was so exhausted that she would just go home by herself and go straight to sleep.  This cycle, she said, resulted in a disconnect between workers and was management’s way to discourage or prevent the workers from joining together to talk which, God forbid, could lead to discussions of higher wages or more flexible hours.

            Barbara also noted this disconnect among workers when she was employed in commercial cleaning service.  While here she worked with another woman who was pregnant and had a severely injured ankle.  Barbara tried to persuade the woman to take the day off, however, the woman was adamant in her refusal to Barbara’s suggestion and, when Barbara told the manager that he should give the woman time off due to her injury, the woman was actually angry with Barbara.  This, Ehrenreich claims, is due to the “every man for himself” philosophy many workers have.  The woman understood that she was disposable to the company and that if she couldn’t make it to work then they could easily find someone else to replace her.  This could have been disastrous to the woman’s finances and to the health of both her and her baby.  In addition, Barbara mentions that many workers actually plotted against each other so that they could advance at the expense of others.  This, again, goes back to the notion that every worker is on his or her own and must look out for herself.

            However, why should the worker feel as though they are alone and alienated?  Our country continues to function because of the work these low-wage workers do and, as such, shouldn’t they be shown a little appreciation?  Barbara notes how she and her fellow workers were seemingly invisible to others, particularly when they were cleaning houses, and when I worked as a plant care person one summer I noted a similar sense of invisibility.  Sometimes I would go into a house to take care of someone’s plants and they would sit and watch TV as I pruned the exotic plant beside the television set without even acknowledging my presence.  It was very disheartening to see the total lack of respect and decency I was afforded simply because of the nature of my job and I could understand how this kind of treatment day in and day out could make one feel invisible and worthless. 

In David K. Shipler’s The Working Poor, anther book I read for my leadership class, many welfare recipient who were currently unemployed expressed a sense of worthlessness and attributed their failure to call work on days they weren’t coming in as a result of their sense of not being needed by the company.  If this is the case, then what role does the company have in making the worker feel valued?  And if companies did value the worker more how would this affect the worker’s future work performance?  I know that if I had received even a smile or a “Hello, how’s your day been?” while working I would not have felt so alienated and ignored.  And, really, how hard is that to manage?        

Nearly every American would argue that the 2008 Presidential Election is an historic event in American history. I personally never thought that Obama, a Black man would actually become the 44^th president of the United States. Race has always been one of the biggest issues in American history and it is quite hopeful to see the possibility that racial tensions can ease up. Nonetheless, just because Obama was elected as president does not mean that America no longer has racial issues. America still has a long way to go before it can really deal with the race issue it has helped perpetuate throughout its history. In addition, Obama’s victory story of a man who suffered and overcame racial and economic hardships and now becomes president does mean that there is equal opportunity for all to succeed in this country. The race issue on an individual level and on the institutional level still exists in American society. It will take time and change on both the individual and institutional level in order to strive toward equal opportunity.  The 2008 presidential election is one step toward change in America. Whether or not Americans voted for Obama because they were ready and willing to entrust him with power or Americans were simply desperate for change because of our economic crisis or just for the fact that he was a Black man, America made history on Tuesday November 4, 2008.

 Now what? Obama actually stated in his speech that hard times will come for America in the near future and that the change Americans are looking for may not happen in a year or even in his presidential term. Still Obama promised that change would happen for America. My biggest concern is that Obama will not be able to create change as soon as Americans are hoping. America’s current economic crisis, war and international crisis will make it quite difficult for Obama to quickly enact positive change. Even if McCain had won the presidency, he would be faced with the same issues.  I’m concerned that if Obama does not quickly come through with his word for change, then Americans will not only be angry with him, they will blame his incompetency on the race factor: he’s Black.  If this occurs, then there will be dire consequences in regards to racial issues in America and there may never be future opportunities for minorities to become president or hold high office positions. I’m sure Obama knows what is at stake while he is in office and he is going to carefully make his decisions. Nevertheless, no one knows exactly what is going to happen during his presidency and Americans can only hope for the best. I just hope that Obama uses knowledge and wisdom in his decisions and that Americans are patient with him.   Yes, Americans want change, but they must realize that change does not come easily or quickly. Whether Americans voted for him or not, Obama is the new president and he is going to need America’s patience, time, support and even prayer.

As millions of people prepare to vote in this historical 2008 presidential campaign one question comes to mind – who is this election really for? In debates, advertisements, attacks, and rebuttals, one group of people have been the focus, middle-class Americans. The public has been constantly bombarded with what the candidates will do to ensure a better life for America’s middle-class. “Joe the Plummer” has taken center stage, as a hardworking, blue-collared, white man from heartland America, and has come to literally embody the image of the middle-class American. We have heard about how gas will be made affordable… for Middle America; how affordable health care will be a goal… for Middle America; how jobs will be created….for Middle America; but this begs the question: what about the millions and millions of people who do not fit into the idea of Middle America? What about the urban working-class or the urban poor, who do not make a living wage, who work two or three jobs but still struggle from paycheck to paycheck- where their main goal is keeping a roof over their head due to ridiculous rent prices, astronomical mortgage rates, and forced gentrification? What about our cities that are literally collapsing from the inside out? What about the homeless who do not have a place to sleep, and often have nothing to eat? What about minorities, women and non-heterosexuals who continue to be discriminated against by the biases built into so many of our institutions? What about immigrants who do not have enough services and resources dedicated to them? What about the rural poor, who are constantly ignored in our discourse about America?

There are just so many issues ignored that need to be thought about, but they aren’t. It is assumed by both parties that the poor will vote democrat, and the rich will vote republican, and due to those assumptions they are completely overlooked by both parties. I implore you, as you go to the polls take a second to think about those who are never thought about. Think about the problems that affect people’s livelihood, where it is not affordable gas they are worried about, but affordable food. Think about the people who work 60 hours a week and still cannot provide for their family. This election has been billed as an election of change, so take a moment to think, as you fill out your ballot, about how change can be brought about for the people who need it most.

Volunteering at Boaz and Ruth in Highland Park has been both a trying and rewarding experience.  Boaz and Ruth is a program for ex convicts to integrate back into society and obtain the skills they need to hold a job.  Even though they have paid their debt to society, they cannot find jobs and many have no money for a place to live.  Many employers believe that the ex offenders may be a repeat offenders and this is a perception that the program participants deal with all the time.    Politicians rarely address the issues they face unless the discussion is negative.  Incarceration causes a cycle to form in their lives because they are unable to get a job to support themselves, forcing them to engage in criminal behavior once again to stay alive.

Though they are experiencing many issues, this election could potentially be a turning point.  At the last group meeting I attended, one woman stood and spoke about her excitement about becoming a registered voter for the first time.  She was so excited to have the right that make Americans do not appreciate.  Given the hype surrounding this year’s presidential election, many ex offenders decided to research their assumed lose of voting rights.  Across the country, news reports show an increase in the number of registered ex offenders.  I hope that the increased activity and visibility of offenders will spark an increase in the number of programs like Boaz and Ruth so that they will not be forgotten any longer.   

Imagine that you live in a small European town about twenty minutes out from the city. Fields of farmland surround your town. You have three transportation options to get out of this town: you can bike (15 minutes) or walk 30 minutes) to the next town; you can take a bus, with a stop five minutes down the street; and you can ask your parents for a ride. The last option isn’t very plausible, since your parents will probably say no. The second option makes more sense, since you can be in the middle of the city in 30 minutes, with extending bus and street car lines reaching into every section of the city and beyond. Even the first option makes sense, since the next town has more shops and businesses, plus a more direct route to the city.

Once you make it to the city, you notice that almost everything is within walking distance, and, if its not, your destination is only a few stops away. The train station is located a few stops from the heart of the city. You could easily take a regional train from the city to the town next to yours, and then take a bus to your town to get home. At the heart of the city, you find the Hauptstrasse, or Main Street. This street is strictly a pedestrian zone; any cars you see will be small delivery vans or police cars. Restaurants and shops line the street, along with historic churches and buildings. City hall and a few governmental buildings are also on this street. Side streets are lined with small houses and apartments, all highly desirable places to live. Once you’re done with shopping or enjoying the night life, you can simply walk to the Bismarckplatz, the central bus/street car stop in the city, and ride public transportation home. All, of course, without a car.

Now imagine that you live in a small town in America. The only way for you to get anywhere is to get on an interstate. Bus lines and stops are virtually nonexistent. Trains are slow and unpredictable. There are few bicycle paths and sidewalks. You and thousands of other people are trying to find parking, which is expensive. On top of that, you pay high gas prices already.

How did these significantly different cultures develop? My mom started a new job recently, and is excited because she can bike the 6 km to work. At a new strip mall in Texas, I couldn’t cross a 6 lane street because there were no sidewalks and no pedestrian lights. In Europe, bicyclists on the street are considered traffic. In the U.S, they are considered nuisances.

Of course, Americans enjoy more living space than Europeans. Sprawling land is available to Americans, evident by huge roads, houses, and cars. In Europe, the houses are smaller and more compact, the roads narrower, and the cars smaller. Can these physical differences account for a radical difference in culture? Has simple need driven Europeans to socialize themselves differently, better utilizing space and public transportation?