Comments on: Robertson unveils new green branding campaign for Vancouver

By: Mira

Mira — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:39:37 +0000

That link was supposed active. My bad. There you go:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/about.html
For the ones who want to find out where our elected officials are getting their “original” ideas read on…

By: Mira

Mira — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:36:15 +0000

EXTRA! EXTRA!
Two Gregors for a Penny! Only in today’s paper…
In the spirit of Copy & Paste Power Point presentations, useless reports and green studies advanced by the office of Multiple Public Embarrassment Relations of the City Hall of Vancouver, in the spirit of plagiarism and ripping off all this European initiatives I applaud you for your Kermit the Frog demagogy. Ah, those darn Europeans:
ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/about.html
Tell me it ‘s not like so. My point exactly!

By: Muskie

Muskie — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 01:29:06 +0000

Toby has been trying to get Strathcona declared a special green economic zone for a long time, before Gregor declared himself a mayoral candidate.

http://209.205.95.211/joomla/index.php/business-trends/39-feature/76-eastside-upside

By: Urban Dweller

Urban Dweller — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:51:35 +0000

You want to be green, why don’t you actually densify then. The Canada line stations beckon you to do so.

By: Joe Just Joe

Joe Just Joe — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:49:06 +0000

“Blaffergassted

Oh, whatever happened to the good old days when Green meant money?”

It still does.

By: Blaffergassted

Blaffergassted — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:21:21 +0000

Oh, whatever happened to the good old days when Green meant money?

By: IanS

IanS — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:23:07 +0000

Chris,

Fair enough. Just to be clear, I’m not AGT and I don’t take his position. My only point, which was relevant to this thread, was that the bike lane wasn’t really a “green” initiative. FWIW.

I am curious to know why the City removed the travel time data, though.

By: Chris Keam

Chris Keam — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:19:19 +0000

Ian:

We can all make suppositions. Maybe I’m wrong and there’s a negligble increase in emissions… although I’m doubtful, since in my personal observations I haven’t witnessed congestion due to the trial. My major criticism is with the sketchy arithmetic and inflated figures AGT used in his column. It struck me as irresponsible and inaccurate, and a disservice to his readers.

With that, I’ll remove myself from the thread. This issue gets way more column inches than it deserves.

By: IanS

IanS — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:58:16 +0000

Hmm.. in looking at the city’s statistics, I notice that the travel time statistics and analysis has been removed. Anyone know why?

By: IanS

IanS — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:55:40 +0000

Chris:

Just to update your statistics:

Daily averages (Sept 1 – Sept 27)

Average number of cyclists per day crossing the bridge during the trial: 3,683
Average number of cyclists per day crossing the bridge before the trial: 3,775

Now, given the lack of real comparative data, I’m not convinced these figures mean a lot, but, if you are going to continue to cite them as evidence of success, I suppose they might equally be used as evidence of failure.

Of course, as far as increased pollution goes, the key point is that car traffic has remained steady and travel times have, at least to some extent, increased. I am not suggesting that this has resulted in a great increase in pollution, though I imagine it’s pretty unpleasant if you are unfortunate enough to live near Pacific and Burrard, but I don’t think it can be argued that the bike lane hasn’t resulted in a least some increase in pollution. At least in the short term.

Which leads to the point relevant to this thread, ie. notwithstanding the mayor’s plans to “brand” Vancouver as a “green” city, very little of substance has actually been done.