Save our cities
The solution
Oh me! Oh life! of the questions of these recurring, Of the endless trains of the faithless, of cities fill’d with the foolish, Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish than I, and who more faithless?) Of eyes that vainly crave the light, of the objects mean, of the struggle ever renew’d, Of the poor results of all, of the plodding and sordid crowds I see around me, Of the empty and useless years of the rest, with the rest me intertwined, The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life. Answer. That you are here—that life exists and identity, That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse.
-Walt Whitman
Our Solution
We feel that the best way to effectively stop overall carbon emissions on a global scale is to either A) Increase quality of life in the inner cities. Or B) improve the economies in suburban environments.
A) An increase of quality of life in the Inner Cities will cause families to move into the inner cities in order to sustain a higher quality of life and provide the best chance for their children. This will decrease overall carbon emissions because families will be driving less to employment and therefore will emit less carbon as a whole.
B) Moving the center of Economy to the suburbs will also cause the working member(s) of the family to drive less and therefore decrease overall carbon emissions.
A) An increase of quality of life in the Inner Cities will cause families to move into the inner cities in order to sustain a higher quality of life and provide the best chance for their children. This will decrease overall carbon emissions because families will be driving less to employment and therefore will emit less carbon as a whole.
B) Moving the center of Economy to the suburbs will also cause the working member(s) of the family to drive less and therefore decrease overall carbon emissions.
This proposed solution has to do with a carbon tax. The ideology behind it is that emitting carbon is free, and to begin to limit carbon emission we must charge people for emitting carbon. The suggests 40$ per ton
The Venus Project and the Khepri project provide us with a utopian style long-term plan for a sustainable future. Look at their website in the button above.
The Four COrners Power Plant
I am a resident of the Four Corners area (Durango, CO), our power plant's license has recently expired, the plant has been running for 50+ years and is unsafe to the population it provides power for. However, the plant is requesting a 50 year license renewal as well as a permit to build a new coal mine in the Navajo Reservation. I wrote a persuasive letter to be presented about the license renewable, I have pasted it on this site below-
50 years is a long time. In 50 years, humanity has gone from 3.2 billion individuals to 7.1 billion individuals. We have landed on the moon, invented the internet, and have made incredible leaps of discovery and innovation. The Four Corners Power Plant has operated for 50 years. In Power Plant Years, it is an old man, wheezing and coughing up smoke, but still providing electricity to the surrounding area. In its final breaths, the power plant asks for a 25 year license renewal. Not only is this dangerous for the environment, it is also dangerous to the places that the plant provides power to, an area that is home to over 150,000 people and countless plants and animals living within diverse ecosystems. This power plant deserves no more than a five year license renewal (time for other energy development), and it should be taken down and replaced with safer, newer forms of energy-producing technology.
Case 1: This plant harms the environment and the air quality of northern New Mexico and Arizona, as well as the Southern Parts of Colorado and Utah. This plant expects 200,000,000 tons of carbon emissions over the next 25 years, which would harm both the air quality and climate of the surrounding region. Carbon Dioxide (emitted when coal is burned) contributes to the greenhouse effect (which slowly warms the affected region). The plant is at a lower elevation than the surrounding areas, which will trap Carbon Dioxide in the region like a bowl. Causing lung problems for people as far as Santa Fe and Flagstaff. Clearly, if environmental sustainability is a priority (like it is in the Four Corners), the plant cannot get the 25 year license.
Case 2: People need electricity. Old plants such as the Four Corners Power Plant often experience blackouts and brownouts much more often than new plants of any sort. The St. Vincent Hospital (in Santa Fe) serves 300,000 people per year, blackouts can harm the lives of any number of these visitors. Blackouts can also cause an overall population decrease to the Northern New Mexico and Arizona area, which will hurt the economy.
Case 3: We have much safer forms of electricity. Wind and solar power require a perfect environment to operate 24/7, hydroelectric power needs specific sites and nuclear power can be dangerous. The best renewable source of electricity lies beneath our feet, in the Earth’s geothermal electricity. We can adopt power plants much like those in Iceland. Iceland relies on fossil fuels for only 15% of its total electric demands. In the Four Corner Region, one needs only to drill 300 feet down to get enough heat energy to heat their house and one needs only drill 500 feet down to boil water, which creates steam, which can turn a turbine, much like a coal plant. Such plants are cheap and can provide electricity for a very long time.
Rebuttal: The Four Corners Power Plant is the only Power Plant in the Four Corners Region, not renewing this licence will leave 150,000 people without power (opponents argument). A five year license renewal leaves time for the Northern New Mexico area to adopt a power system like that of their northern neighbors; La Plata County, CO. La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) has historically gotten its power from a local coal plant, but lately, business and homes are switching to solar power. There are over 100 business in La Plata County that are soon to build solar generating stations, with over 50 pre-existing sites. 100 homes are in the process of switching to solar. Solar is unreliable (opponents argument). Solar is a very stable alternative as the Southern Colorado and Northern New Mexico areas report an average of 325 days of sunshine a year. Batteries regulate power for darker days. Even the local hospital in La Plata county is a proposed solar site, the hospital is the same capacity as St. Vincents in Santa Fe. Businesses that cannot install solar generating stations on their property are offered to buy green energy from LPEA community solar gardens. Obviously, this plan is simple, and effective for all solar available locations and regions currently powered by coal.
If a 25 year license is awarded to the Four Corners the air quality of the surrounding region will plummet, harming the extensive tourism economy of the area, we will experience smog such as that in Los Angeles on a daily basis, and the St. Vincent hospital (a major source of jobs, and money) will lose its reputation. All of the above consequences are a result of the license renewal. Do not support the continued survival of this plant, if you want the continued survival of the surrounding community.
In conclusion, the Four Corners Power Plant is unsafe and is an unwise power source to invest in for the Northern New Mexico region.
50 years is a long time. In 50 years, humanity has gone from 3.2 billion individuals to 7.1 billion individuals. We have landed on the moon, invented the internet, and have made incredible leaps of discovery and innovation. The Four Corners Power Plant has operated for 50 years. In Power Plant Years, it is an old man, wheezing and coughing up smoke, but still providing electricity to the surrounding area. In its final breaths, the power plant asks for a 25 year license renewal. Not only is this dangerous for the environment, it is also dangerous to the places that the plant provides power to, an area that is home to over 150,000 people and countless plants and animals living within diverse ecosystems. This power plant deserves no more than a five year license renewal (time for other energy development), and it should be taken down and replaced with safer, newer forms of energy-producing technology.
Case 1: This plant harms the environment and the air quality of northern New Mexico and Arizona, as well as the Southern Parts of Colorado and Utah. This plant expects 200,000,000 tons of carbon emissions over the next 25 years, which would harm both the air quality and climate of the surrounding region. Carbon Dioxide (emitted when coal is burned) contributes to the greenhouse effect (which slowly warms the affected region). The plant is at a lower elevation than the surrounding areas, which will trap Carbon Dioxide in the region like a bowl. Causing lung problems for people as far as Santa Fe and Flagstaff. Clearly, if environmental sustainability is a priority (like it is in the Four Corners), the plant cannot get the 25 year license.
Case 2: People need electricity. Old plants such as the Four Corners Power Plant often experience blackouts and brownouts much more often than new plants of any sort. The St. Vincent Hospital (in Santa Fe) serves 300,000 people per year, blackouts can harm the lives of any number of these visitors. Blackouts can also cause an overall population decrease to the Northern New Mexico and Arizona area, which will hurt the economy.
Case 3: We have much safer forms of electricity. Wind and solar power require a perfect environment to operate 24/7, hydroelectric power needs specific sites and nuclear power can be dangerous. The best renewable source of electricity lies beneath our feet, in the Earth’s geothermal electricity. We can adopt power plants much like those in Iceland. Iceland relies on fossil fuels for only 15% of its total electric demands. In the Four Corner Region, one needs only to drill 300 feet down to get enough heat energy to heat their house and one needs only drill 500 feet down to boil water, which creates steam, which can turn a turbine, much like a coal plant. Such plants are cheap and can provide electricity for a very long time.
Rebuttal: The Four Corners Power Plant is the only Power Plant in the Four Corners Region, not renewing this licence will leave 150,000 people without power (opponents argument). A five year license renewal leaves time for the Northern New Mexico area to adopt a power system like that of their northern neighbors; La Plata County, CO. La Plata Electric Association (LPEA) has historically gotten its power from a local coal plant, but lately, business and homes are switching to solar power. There are over 100 business in La Plata County that are soon to build solar generating stations, with over 50 pre-existing sites. 100 homes are in the process of switching to solar. Solar is unreliable (opponents argument). Solar is a very stable alternative as the Southern Colorado and Northern New Mexico areas report an average of 325 days of sunshine a year. Batteries regulate power for darker days. Even the local hospital in La Plata county is a proposed solar site, the hospital is the same capacity as St. Vincents in Santa Fe. Businesses that cannot install solar generating stations on their property are offered to buy green energy from LPEA community solar gardens. Obviously, this plan is simple, and effective for all solar available locations and regions currently powered by coal.
If a 25 year license is awarded to the Four Corners the air quality of the surrounding region will plummet, harming the extensive tourism economy of the area, we will experience smog such as that in Los Angeles on a daily basis, and the St. Vincent hospital (a major source of jobs, and money) will lose its reputation. All of the above consequences are a result of the license renewal. Do not support the continued survival of this plant, if you want the continued survival of the surrounding community.
In conclusion, the Four Corners Power Plant is unsafe and is an unwise power source to invest in for the Northern New Mexico region.