I am an adult supporter of a group called Eco-Air in Edmonton Alberta. Edmonton's Children's Organized Anti Idling Recruiters. The kids are all under age 14. We have gotten press in Edmonton and we are helping with Edmonton's educational campaign. We are working on a CBSM campaign rewarding excessive idlers with decals if they to commit to Idling reduction. We went to city hall yesterday to speak to an anti idling bylaw and discovered the Mayor is worried that a bylaw could cost too much money and not be very effective. Is there any bylaw info people could share that talks about the economic arguments> Any info on return on investment ? In my brief search it seems the costs are underestimated and so I am having a hard time finding anything useful.
Raquel Feroe
FRCPC
For Next FSB
Sign in or Sign up to comment
...
Hi Raquel,
We went to city hall yesterday to speak to an anti idling bylaw and discovered the Mayor is worried that a bylaw could cost too much money and not be very effective. Is there any bylaw info people could share that talks about the economic = arguments ...? The real cost is a different currency ("eco-dollar"? "envo-dollar"?) which is what it costs the planet, not the people. Most people have not yet got as far as making that transition in perception, and whenever one plans to exchange one technology for another - even just one light bulb for another - there is an inevitable cost to be paid in monetary dollars. That is one (by no means insignificant) reason why eco-friendly habits are difficult to instil; unless they are effected as actual Reductions (i.e. buying less) they are regarded as "surcharges" and lose the competitive edge that they need. IMHO it is unwise to play down the monetary costs of changes, because that will only alienate people who come along thinking it is going to be cheaper to themselves to toe the green line. A long-term view is not only essential, it is fair, and it is as honest as one can be. However, it is also helpful to reflect how totally unrepresentative and nonsensical (devoid of relativity) are our present monetary values of things. The cost of a ticket on a train, plane or ship just to get somewhere else could instead buy enough tee-shirts to last a life-time, so which is the "better" way of spending money? Pleasure (if the travel was for that) is temporal. So are so many other things on which we spend our money. Home heating is a major user of fossil fuels, yet if you consider that EVERY SINGLE CALORIE of heat thus put into your house has simply dissipated (into the long-suffering outside world), and that one's house is no warmer unless the same level of heat is continually pumped into it - one begins to get a different perspective on the lack of permanence that pervades our monetary economy.
Elizabeth Griffin
(Victoria, BC)