Re: [asa] Global Warming, Ethics, and Social Sciences

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 09:30:00 -0500 "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu>
writes:
 
> Ted replies:
> Actually, Wayne, I haven't forgotten that, not at all. That's
> *exactly*
> what I was driving at.
>
> In the 1950s and 1960s, we got exhuberant about cars and forgot all
> about
> passenger rail. As you say, fixing this is going to require
> tremendous
> lifestyle changes, esp in the "wild west" where population density
> is too
> low to justify much passenger rail--but where far too many people
> now live
> to be sustained very long by their water supplies.
>
> The root problem here, IMO, is the absence of a common understanding
> about
> land use. We all think that we have the "right" to do anything we
> wish with
> our land, and live wherever we want to. That's fine, if our
> population were
> a fraction of what it actually is; or if we didn't expect to use
> public
> moneys to connect everything with roads, regardless of the long
> term
> consequences. In the real "wild west" of the late 19th and early
> 20th
> centuries, of course, there were cars and paved roads, only rail and
> horses.
> It was tougher then, and not nearly as attractive to families with
> young
> children. If we still expected people to fend for themselves once
> they were
> off the "beaten track" of rail lines, we wouldn't be looking at a
> social and
> economic catastrophe when the oil becomes too expensive for most
> people to
> use it casually. And, we'd still have tons of excellent farmland
> that
> hadn't been taken over for developments and malls that are off the
> "beaten
> track."
>
> As a nice example of how we created our own problem, I offer that of
> LA,
> where they once had a giant network of electric trolleys all over
> the city.
> Literally a conspiracy (this isn't one of those false conspiracy
> theories)
> of companies in the petroleum, tire, and automobile businesses got
> rid of
> those clunky old trolleys in favor of those .... well, you fill in
> the
> uncomplimentary adjectives ... freeways. You do the math. The
> environmental and social impact was enormous.
>
> As you say, it will take "an enormous change in life style," and not
> just
> in the "wild west." It isn't going to be popular, but the longer
> we
> postpone it the worse it will be.
>
> Ted
>
Ted,
You skipped a step in the Los Angeles situation. The trolley cars first
became busses and trolley busses, the advanced technology of the time.
They deposited passengers on the sidewalk rather than on safety zones in
the middle of the street. The first freeway, over Cahuenga Pass, replaced
a two lane road that the early cars had trouble traversing. I wasn't
there at the time, but I think my grandfather had to back up so that the
gas tank in the hood, if not full, would feed the carburetor. The new
road was essentially demanded by the population growth in the San
Fernando Valley. But the real growth of freeways came about because of
the need to transport military materials flexibly.

Even in the late 30s, the population of Van Nuys was about 10,000. There
were farms and ranches between North Hollywood, Burbank, Van Nuys,
Reseda, Canoga Park and other population clumps. But the entire valley is
now pretty well solid construction, and has been for decades.
Dave

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 18 15:31:36 2007