Grist: What Other Cities Can Learn From Seattle’s Green Fail

One of the main problems I have with terming things “green” is that it is no longer about the environment, but about reducing CO2, ie, the carbon footprint. That, and that the Warmists go way, way, way overboard. Here’s Grist

In 2009, Seattle set out to to create the next generation of cutting-edge green buildings and inspire other forward-thinking cities to follow suit. Three years later, only one of these space-age structures is under construction, with just two more in the planning stages. What happened to the Emerald City’s “deep green” dreams?

Under the Living Building Challenge Pilot Program, which went into effect in 2010, the city offered special incentives to the first 12 developers who managed to meet at least 60 percent of the requirements of the Living Building Challenge, a program that leaves the LEED green building standards in the dust.

Can you guess how many took the challenge? Three. Why? The explanation by Grist (other than a real estate market in the toilet) are

  • Green buildings freak out the code cops. (hmm, government getting in the way? Shocker!)
  • Bankers don’t know what to make of this stuff, either. (no, they do know, and understand that these projects are Bad Investments and Stupid Loans)
  • Green building is expensive. (well, yeah. And lots of “green” ideas fail spectacularly, like $25k “composting” toilets )
  • NIMBYism reigns. (that’s weird. Uber-leftist Seattle doesn’t want this crap in their own area)
  • To make a “deep green” building work, you actually have to change people’s behavior. (that’s weird. Uber-leftist Seattle citizens don’t have the right behavior, and don’t want to change. Well, why would they, when most Warmists who push globull warming refuse to change their own behavior?)

And there you have it. So, what’s Seattle to do? Well, extend the program for 3 years, rubbing the flanks of unicorns in a vein hope that more will jump in. But, hey, not everyone wants to bike to work, have few parking spaces, only use water from the sky, and all the other measures that make business more like the 15th century. They do not want to use composting toilets, which are stinky.

I do find it rather hilarious that government itself is getting in the way with regulations, despite liberals telling us that regulations are mega-awesome.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “Grist: What Other Cities Can Learn From Seattle’s Green Fail”

  1. The Worm says:

    Seattle is a lovely town. Every winter I try to keep up with the snow storms in that neck of woods (even though I’m on the other side of the country) because the city refuses to salt icy roads for environmental reasons.

    It makes for some great youtube videos. Here’s one with just 2″ of snowfall. Enjoy the Slidey Liberals.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XLtYHqon1w

    Cheers,
    The Worm

  2. Gumball_Brains says:

    It’s worse than that. THey dont just refuse to use salt (because it adds salt to the runoff and then in to the water and then in to the … ocean), but they don’t even use sand or pumice. Pumice is typically used in the PacNW as a replacement for sand and salt.

    It works ok, but it really sand blasts your vehicle when the pavement dries out. They then have to hire lots of streetsweepers to clean it up. Some places are even starting to use gravel on ice instead of salt.

    I wonder why the 5% of the population dont want to fund greenery for the rest of the populace. Especially if they truly believe that its for our own good. And, why don’t they like buildings without A/C and night time lighting. Why don’ they like self-pump pipes? Or sharing a building with 40% coverage in plants that need constant watering. Or maybe its the use of unconventional building methods and materials in a a high earthquake prone area.

  3. Interestingly, the use of salt brine and plain salt is creating salt water marshes in the upper Mid-west, totally changing the ecosystem.

    Personally, I hate the use of salt brine because it means that when there is big snow (here in NC that means a few inches) I still have to go to work. Hell, we had 8 inches a bit ago, and had to work next day. Not supposed to happen in NC.

  4. john says:

    the average TOTAL yearly snowfall in Seattle is 8.1 inches. This is typically spread out over 3-4 months and doesn’t last long on the ground.

  5. john says:

    and Teach why is it that you never seem to fact check back to primary sources? If you had you would have seen that Seattle DOES use both salt and salt brine. http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/winter_faq.htm And Seattle does lead the nation in LEED building starts. But you probably already did know that, just forgot to put it in

  6. Gumball_Brains says:

    Well, for those who have lived there, we know the true stated policy can differ from published policy (much like this current presidential administration). It wasn’t just but a few years back that they proposed to stop using any salt products or even sand to limit stream runoff impacts.

    And, we’ve seen the funny youtube videos ever since.

    Now, they do use Mag-Chloride as a pretreatment and that does seem to help the early morning black-ice.

  7. Uh, John? I never said that.

  8. gitarcarver says:

    and Teach why is it that you never seem to fact check back to primary sources?

    That is the most coffee spewing fail of a statement I think I have ever seen.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8692 access attempts in the last 7 days.