An interesting article on studies that show spending time in nature can help the brain function: How the city hurts your brain - Boston.com. Apparently even children with ADD function better if they spend time in nature.
Apologists for the Gateway Program appear to be re-writing history and claiming that Translink had no plans to run transit over the Port Mann bridge. In actual fact a transit route with queue jumpers was originally planned to be implemented in 2004-2005 (see page 93 of Tanslink's South of Fraser - Area Transit Plan, Final Report - June 2000 : http://www.translink.bc.ca/files/pdf/plan_proj/area_plans/south_fr_final.pdf) Later it appears this was changed to 2007 (see page A8 of Three Year (2005 - 2007) Implementation & Financial Strategy - December 2004 :http://www.translink.bc.ca/files/pdf/plan_proj/ThreeYr05-07Strategic.pdf ) The two maps below produced by a third party illustrate the plans outlined in the documents referenced above. The Port Mann bus route is shown in red. The 2000 Transit plan had the route stopping at central Surrey - this map extends that route. The queue jumper lanes. Update: This project is also mentioned in the "KEEPING GREATER VANCOUVER MOVING...
Morning commuters were greeted with new messages along Gateway Program construction routes this morning. The construction announcement signs had been modified to read "Farms not Freeway", "Peatland not Pavement", "Homes not Highways" and "Transit not Truck Routes." The action occurred on the last scheduled day of climate talks in Copenhagen. Government reports estimate the Gateway program will increase greenhouse gas emissions by over 160,000 tonnes per year. Independent modelling puts the figure at over 300,000 tonnes. The signs modified included promises that transportation experts have consistently questioned. Some sign promise that the project will be " Reducing Congestion." Yet, Gordon Campbell said in 2003 “You cannot build your way out of congestion”. The signs also promise that the government is "Strengthening the Economy ." The Provincial and Federal governments have provided massive investments to the Port in...
I recently got into a online discussion with someone who made the ridiculous argument that CO2 (carbon dioxide) can not be classified as a pollutant. Below are the reasons he gave that it is not a pollutant and my responses: ".. benign gas..." Many pollutants are "benign" at low levels. The are several ways in which CO2 is not benign at higher concentrations. "..occurs naturally..." Many pollutants (maybe even most) occur naturally - asbestos, mercury, sulphur, radiation, "helps to maintain the earth at a temperature suitable for life" Ozone as it exists in the atmosphere also helps to maintain life on the earth. But it is also considered a pollutant. "...essential to the growth of all plants..." Nitrates are essential to plant growth. Sulphur is an essential element for cell growth. But both are considered pollutants.
Comments