After reading the brilliantly lucid, if frightening, analyses and conclusions put forth by Jim Hansen (see additional articles here ) in MIT's July 11, 2006 Technology Review (read the article: The Messenger), I had to write a second email to Stantec & the Premier to advocate for rail expansion and against highway expansion.

From: Yule <yule.heibel@xxxx>
To: Stantec Consulting <malahat@stantec.com>, Premier@gov.bc.ca
Date: Jul 17, 2006 12:37 PM
Subject: Malahat Corridor Study, second email


Dear Sir or Madam, Mr. Premier:

I emailed on July 15 in support of expanding rail transit as opposed to expanding highways in the Malahat Corridor. I wish to follow up with a reference to the following article, "The Messenger: The best scientists, scrutinizing atmosphere, ice, earth, and sea, say global warming is approaching a tipping point. But we still have time to keep it from reaching catastrophic levels," by Mark Bowen. It appeared in the July 11 edition of MIT's Technology Review. See:
http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=17057

The article focusses on the work of Jim Hansen, who "may be the most respected climate scientist in the world. He's [sic] been director of NASA's premier climate research center, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), for 25 years and a member of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for 10."

Dr. Hansen's work has been systematically ignored by policy makers in Washington, but as Jeremy Harris and Ben Lee, in their recent talk on building sustainable cities (at Victoria City Hall July 13) pointed out, cities can lead even if federal governments drag their proverbial feet. The Malahat Corridor serves the City of Victoria and its surrounding communities, and BC's capital would be a great place to show some environmental leadership. This is why I'm writing again to state that I don't support highway expansion and that I favour rail expansion.

Following, some excerpts from Mark Bowen's article:

"...growing emissions from coal-burning power plants and transportation posed the greatest threats. 'Efficiency of energy end-use in the near term is critical for the sake of avoiding new, long-lived CO 2 -producing infrastructure,' Hansen notes. 'Green' building codes, combined with energy-efficient lighting and appliances, would be sufficient to hold electrical needs -- and the number of power plants -- constant for many years. The team also developed an achievable plan for limiting vehicular emissions, a plan that starts by improving fuel efficiency with existing technologies. It is 'technically possible to avoid the grim "business-as-usual" climate change,' said Hansen last December. 'If an alternative scenario is practical, has multiple benefits, and makes good common sense, why are we not doing it?'"

- The alternative scenario before us here on southern Vancouver Island, in the absence of immediate improved fuel efficiency (we won't have gas-guzzlers off the road any time soon), is public rail, while more highways will add up to more business as usual.

"In his living room overlooking the Hudson, Hansen tells me that climatologists have now 'made the science story much stronger than it was in 2000.' Yet, he says, 'we have not been able to impact the U.S. position. And when you get to the further step, where not only do you have the information to make the story clear but you have this censorship, you know, that's when you really get angry. I think the only way to get action now is for the public to get angry, [for] the public [to] see the frustration and ... see that we have political leaders who are under the thumb of special interests. ...

"'No court of justice or court of international opinion will forgive us for what we're doing now, because now we know the problem and we're just pretending we don't understand it. We are going to be responsible, but it will be our children and grandchildren that have to pay.'"

- As Hansen & Lee pointed out last Thursday, politicians want to get in front of a parade. Well, the public is anxious and angry about environmental degradation and climate change, and will only get angrier about "political leaders who are under the thumb of special interests." It's a great opportunity for political leaders to lead a parade heading in the right direction, toward sustainability. Please don't build more highways for cars -- expand the rail system instead.

Sincerely,
Yule Heibel