5 ways to breathe new life into failed urban plans

By Nicolai Ouroussoff
Tuesday, March 17, 2009

A computer rendering of one of the five proposals for the Slussen project, the redesign of Stockholm's urban center, by BIG, a Copenhagen firm. (BIG Architects)

STOCKHOLM: City officials here have yet to announce the winning design for the Slussen project, which aims to replace a tangle of traffic circles, bridges, underpasses and boat locks in the heart of this city. But they have already done us a major public service.
The five proposals in the competition, on view at Stockholm.se/slussen, offer a snapshot of contemporary urban planning ideas. They include a breathtaking design by Jean Nouvel, a head-scratching proposal by Norman Foster and some intriguing work by younger talents who are still mostly unknown internationally.
But the competition's greatest value is as a measure of just how far many European governments have come in addressing failed urban policies of the past. The designs all seek to breathe new life into the dead zones created unwittingly by Modernist and postwar planners.
Built in the mid-1930s, Slussen is a prime candidate for a re-examination of large-scale Modernist planning. Designed to link two sides of the historic city, its concrete entry ramps curl around a cylindrical office building before stretching over an underground bus terminal and the massive locks that regulate boat traffic between Lake Malaren and the Baltic Sea.
In some ways the weaving of a mind-numbing range of transportation systems into a single integrated network made the project a tour de force. But the structure began to deteriorate decades ago, partly because of the poor quality of its concrete construction. Most planners regard it as a lesson in everything that was wrong with orthodox Modernism: endless swaths of barren concrete plazas and dank underpasses that seemed to invite midday muggings.
The competition encourages us to ponder those values with a fresh, unbiased eye. The most intriguing of the five designs can be separated more or less into two categories: those that try to bring clarity and order to the jumbled traffic systems, and those that seek to draw the bustling energy of the old city across the site.
Mr. Nouvel's entry tries to harness that energy. He begins by rerouting the bulk of car traffic to the west, forging a more direct connection between southern Stockholm and the central business district. An immense public park laid over this freeway would offer stunning views of Lake Malaren.
The existing bridge is transformed into a contemporary Ponte Vecchio, a pedestrian alleyway of shops and restaurants that links the two sides of the city. A series of layered roof structures replicate the density and complexity of the urban tissue on either side; terraces present spectacular watery vistas. The design reflects a conviction that the collision of ideas, even more than architectural forms, gives cities their civilizing power.
The most impetuous challenger to Mr. Nouvel's proposal, from BIG, a young, still relatively unknown firm in Copenhagen, treats emptiness as a virtue rather than a vice. Like Mr. Nouvel, these architects reroute the majority of car traffic to the west. A new pedestrian plaza is then draped over the network of locks and walkways like a soft crumpled blanket. A series of incisions are cut into this surface, and the concrete fabric peels back to make room for retail space underneath. The surfaces of these giant flaps become public bleachers where pedestrians can sit and look out at the sea.
The contrast in philosophies is striking. Mr. Nouvel is part of a generation of European architects whose ideas were shaped by the student uprisings of 1968 and the collapse of old Modernist dogma. Through his architecture, he has sought to recapture the messiness of ordinary life that tabula-rasa planning typically erased. Rather than smoothing over the competing forces that shape the contemporary city, his fragmented forms celebrate tension.
The architects of BIG, weaned in the age of the Internet, seem more interested in fashioning a fluid, integrated relationship among architecture, landscape and public infrastructure. To them the barren windswept plazas of early Modernism are not horrifying; they are a source of inspiration. In an age when we are constantly bombarded with visual noise, these architects seem to be saying that desolation can be a refuge. If their design has a weakness, it may be that it lacks the mix of monumental and intimate spaces that humanize Mr. Nouvel's scheme.
The rest of the proposals fall somewhere between these two extremes. A design by the Swedish architect Gert Wingardh evokes Baron Haussmann's grand arterial plan for Paris, substituting straight lines for the old curves of the 1930s project. The traffic bridge is straightened to create a more direct link to the old medieval quarter. The city grid is extended to the water's edge. The most poetic detail is a small pedestrian bridge whose low form seems to skim over the surface of the water.
But the project is tainted by commercial excess. The matrix of retail and residential buildings that spill toward the water's edge is split in two by a giant staircase that evokes a more vulgar version of the Spanish Steps in Rome. A towering wall of glass shops on the banks of the lake is no more than a glorified mall.
Mr. Foster's entry also disappoints. It is dominated by a pedestrian bridge that corkscrews up over the lake before connecting to a big public plaza. The bridge would take forever to cross while presenting nothing special in terms of visual experience. The plaza, roughly the proportions of Trafalgar Square in London, is framed by pretentious pseudo-traditional buildings that are meant to blend into the surrounding context but only diminish it.
The cool hyperrational spaces of the final design, by Nyrens Architects, may bring to mind Eastern-bloc architecture of the 1960s and '70s. It is dominated by a series of sweeping terraces that step down to the lake. A massive exhibition building sits on top of the bus terminal, its monumental form isolated within a plaza.
But whatever you may think of the individual designs, the range of ideas presented here will be instructive for American urban planners entering an era of potential policy change. Government cash is nice. But we also need government to support fresh and innovative thinking about cities.

Solar array to supply utility in California

By Andrew Revkin
Thursday, February 12, 2009


The largest utility in California, squeezed by rising demand for electricity and looming state deadlines to curb fossil fuels, has signed a deal to buy solar power from seven immense arrays of mirrors, towers and turbines to be installed in the Mojave Desert.
The contracts amount to the world's largest single deal for new solar energy capacity, said officials from the utility, Southern California Edison, and BrightSource Energy, the company that would build and run the plants. When fully built, the solar arrays on a sunny day would supply 1,300 megawatts of electricity, more than a modern nuclear power plant.
That is enough electricity to power about 845,000 homes.
The companies acknowledged that several hurdles would have to be surmounted before the first surge of electricity flows from the desert - in theory around 2013 - toward power-hungry cities more than 200 miles, or 320 kilometers, away.
First is approval by the state Public Utilities Commission. But more challenging, they said, is a series of permits for improving transmission lines. That process in the past has taken seven to 10 years per project, said Stuart R. Hemphill, vice president for renewable and alternative power for the utility.
"The reality is that renewable projects are very far away from where customers are," Hemphill said. "The key is to have transmission built."
He said he was confident the solar project would succeed, and he emphasized that it was part of the company's accelerating shift toward new energy sources, including recent large contracts for wind turbines, photovoltaic rooftop panels and geothermal power. "What we're doing is changing the shape of the way the electric system is going to operate in California," he said.
BrightSource, with investors as varied as Google and the VantagePoint venture capital firm - and with advisers who include the environmental campaigner and lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. - has refined a decades-old technology. Thousands of small mirrors focus intense desert sunlight on a central tower, where it generates steam to drive a turbine.
Officials from the utility and plant builder said the cost of the plants and the electricity they will produce could not be disclosed under California law.
The deal is one of many signs that concentrated solar power, after decades of ups and downs, is finding an important place around the world, said Severin Borenstein, a specialist in energy policy at the Haas School of Business of the University of California, Berkeley.
But the technology remains substantially more expensive than coal as an electricity source, Borenstein said, and further expansion will depend on whether the public continues to support renewable mandates or a rising price on emissions from coal burning. "Everybody's for reducing greenhouse gases until you start having to pay for it," he said.
California is imposing one of the country's most aggressive renewable-power mandates on its utilities. Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and other providers are racing to meet a deadline of having at least 20 percent of electricity flowing from renewable sources by the end of 2010.
Vanessa McGrady, a spokeswoman for Southern California Edison, said the utility now gets 16 percent of its electricity from renewable sources.
Even with the new plants and other nonpolluting energy options, the state still faces big energy and emissions challenges, given relentless growth in demand for electricity at peak times.
In 2008, Pacific Gas & Electric, in Northern California, entered agreements to buy nearly 900 megawatts of power from BrightSource of Oakland, California. BrightSource has installed a pilot plant in the Negev, in Israel.
Other designs for plants that concentrate sunlight to generate power are in operation or under development in Spain, the Middle East, North Africa and elsewhere in the Southwest.

Architect trims costs by using computers

By Alec Appelbaum
Wednesday, February 11, 2009

When Bruce Ratner hired Frank Gehry in 2004 to design a wrinkled-looking 76-story residential skyscraper in New York near the Brooklyn Bridge, the market for eye-popping luxury condominiums was booming, and the world-class architect's multimillion-dollar fees probably seemed relatively insignificant. Now, however, the economy is crumbling, the building is envisioned as rental apartments and Gehry is bringing a more potent tool to control costs than most architects can deliver.
For the Forest City Ratner Companies, the developer of Beekman Tower, the project will test the idea that an architect can provide powerful (and expensive) modeling software to help keep costs down. Using the software, fabricators have produced a facade with various textures at a price that Gehry says does not exceed what a developer would pay to build a conventional boxy building of similar dimensions.
The project, Beekman Tower, which has $680 million in debt and is due to open with 904 apartments in 2010, will be Gehry's most important contribution to New York's skyline. With the building's distinctly bumpy silhouette, "the idea I was trying to achieve was a fabric, so it would catch the light," Gehry said.
Gehry developed the software, now called Digital Project, to produce a sculpture of a diaphanous fish for a Barcelona exposition in 1992 and refined it to specify the titanium panels cloaking his celebrated Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, which opened in 1997. He based it on the three-dimensional software that aerospace companies use. "If they can build airplanes paperless, I think buildings can be built paperless," Gehry said.
In 2002, he spun off the software business into a company called Gehry Technologies, which sells Digital Project to other developers and architects and trains project teams to use it.
Digital Project works by modeling, in three dimensions, every odd shape an architect envisions and then letting engineers and architects reconcile the shape with a building's site, ductwork and other features. It shows how one change to a building's ingredients changes all the others.
The stakes in construction are very high. Developers say that the closeness of the match between what an architect draws and what contractors produce can make or break a project. When engineers and contractors misunderstand how parts of a building connect, resulting delays often inflate a construction budget by 5 or 10 percent.
These days, when banks are loath to risk any money, such contingencies are not available. And some developers do not expect them to return soon.
"If you've got a $100 million cost that your bank engineer has approved, you will add $5 million or $10 million contingency for construction errors into your loan," said Donald Capoccia of BFC Partners, which is building a twisty residential tower called Toren near the Brooklyn side of the Manhattan Bridge. "In the future, with stricter underwriting requirements, I believe a building with a $100 million deal will have to be done for $90 million or less."
Architects routinely use modeling software, but the latest version of Digital Project would enable them to try extreme designs for skyscrapers. While acknowledging that the Gehry software is impressive, Carl Galioto of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, a firm that has designed many skyscrapers, says that it is hard to learn and three or four times as expensive as a conventional modeling program. Revit Architecture, the industry standard from Autodesk, is listed at $5,495 on Autodesk's Web site.
At Beekman Tower, the pressure on Digital Project is intense. The returns on a rental building are likely to be lower than on a condominium, and committing to Gehry's ornate design could burn the developer if it leads to cost overruns.
Beekman Tower, with steel panels that bend a little, a lot or not at all and sit in various ways on the building's skeleton, is definitely complicated. "There is a stair-step character that I tried to achieve," Gehry said.
While Gehry fine-tuned his design and Forest City Ratner tweaked the mix of apartment sizes and shapes, Digital Project analyzed the number of stainless-steel panels that could be used while meeting an essentially fixed price. "There are flat panels, panels that curve a little and panels that curve a lot," explained Dennis Shelden, chief technology officer of Gehry's software company.
Software modeling revealed where panels could sit flush against the skeleton, where they could break without letting in too much cold air, and where they could lean outward.
"We had to find places to put cylinders or cones behind the panels to prop them up," said Sameer Kashyap of Gehry Technologies, who oversees the use of Digital Project at Beekman Tower. "This is the first time a 76-story building has had entirely unique slab edges."
Forest City Ratner's relationship with Gehry is not limited to this project. He also created a design for the multibillion-dollar Atlantic Yards project, with 17 buildings, which the company has proposed for downtown Brooklyn. With lawsuits pending and the economy turned sour, however, none of those buildings have gone to construction.
Of Forest City Ratner's financing for Beekman Tower, $203.9 million is in tax-exempt Liberty bonds, which Ratner secured by agreeing to build a public school at the base ( Gehry did not design it) and by directing $6 million to a fund to support affordable housing. The project must repay a $476.1 million loan from a consortium of six international private lenders. The developer says it is current on its debt service.
Gehry professes confidence that Digital Project will guide the tower smoothly through construction. "The Bilbao Museum came in $3 million under on a $100 million budget," he said. "If there were surprises at Beekman, I would know about them."
Forest City Ratner said that the project is on time and on budget. "It will stay on budget," added a spokeswoman, Joyce Baumgarten.
Success with this version of Digital Project seems crucial to Gehry's legacy. He has frequently been commissioned by institutional clients, which might be expected to be more indulgent than profit-minded developers.
But his image suffered when the Massachusetts Institute of Technology sued his firm in 2007 because of leaks in his 720,000-square-foot Ray and Maria Stata Center, a laboratory and classroom building with a day care center and gym. (Neither MIT nor Gehry's companies would comment about the litigation, which is pending in Superior Court in Boston.)
But David Gerber, Gehry Technologies' chief marketing officer, said that future refinements of Digital Project will incorporate more information and avoid foul-ups. The latest iteration, Gerber said in a recent interview, even models a building's basement sprinklers.
Architects and developers agree that software to measure a building's ingredients will gain value as governments tighten rules about buildings' effects on the environment. "You can ask a model to show you what shadow a building casts, or how far materials have to travel to a job site," says Phil Bernstein, a technologist with Autodesk.
So Digital Project may offer Gehry a way to make money in an economic era when relatively few clients are likely to be commissioning ambitious buildings. The Swire Group, a Hong Kong concern, used it to deliver One Island East, a tower in Hong Kong, several months ahead of schedule last year.
"Our service is now in consulting," said Shelden, the chief technologist for Gehry Technologies. "But we are in discussion with some clients about a shared-savings model," under which the company would be paid a portion of a client's savings in construction overruns.

Soaring skyscrapers in dark economic times

The technology exists for super tall buildings that top 1,000 meters, but who could afford rent at that altitude?




Tall buildings go up as the economy goes down, according to the skyscraper index that came to prominence in 1999 in a report penned by Andrew Lawrence, a former researcher at Deutsche Bank.Lawrence argued that skyscrapers preceded economic downturns. He cited the Chrysler and Empire State buildings that went up during the Great Depression, in 1929 and 1930, respectively.And then there’s Chicago’s Sears Tower and New York City’s World Trade Center, both erected in the 1970s when the United States was plagued by stagflation. Switch to Asia and the financial crisis in 1997 and up pop the Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. We now find ourselves in desperate economic times, and last year was the biggest year yet for skyscrapers. The average height of the top 10 buildings reached a staggering 319 meters (1,046 feet), and compared to a decade ago, skyscrapers have grown an average of 31 meters in height. This year, due to the construction of the Burj Dubai Building, which will stand more than 800 meters, the average is expected to rise. In Korea, though, the story is more complex. In the past decade, there have been frequent announcements for plans to build skyscrapers higher than 100 stories, but none have materialized. While skyscrapers have sprung up like mushrooms in Dubai and China, Korea has little to show in that area. “We have the capital, technology and a demand for skyscrapers but we have not moved forward because of regulations and public opposition that few people will really benefit,” said Kim Jong-su, who heads the Korea Super Tall Forum, which comprises academics and people in the building industry who support the construction of tall buildings. People like Kim are frustrated by the government’s reluctance to push ahead with a tall buildings program. When housing prices were roaring in 2005, homeowners in Apgujeong-dong and Cheongdam, southern Seoul, wanted to renovate their existing apartment complexes to 60 stories, but the government cited dozens of reasons for blocking these plans, such as air traffic safety. Even if you don’t trust the skyscraper index, the current global economic downturn has yet again ignited discussions in Korea on building skyscrapers. Currently, the city of Seoul is lifting regulations to make it possible to build skyscrapers along the Han River.
An artist’s impression of American architect Eugene Tsui’s Ultima Tower that, if ever built, would be 3.2 kilometers tall.The Lee Myung-bak administration sees skyscraper projects as a way to create businesses and jobs. That’s why we’re going to construction of Busan Lotte World start in March this year; the Landmark Building in Sangam-dong, western Seoul, to start construction early next year; and the World Business Center Busan project to start in June 2010. All three are very high buildings.




An artist’s impression of American architect Eugene Tsui’s Ultima Tower that, if ever built, would be 3.2 kilometers tall.

All three are very high buildings.Needless to say, building standards have changed as technology has grown more sophisticated. In 1890, buildings over 10 stories were considered tall but nowadays the Council on Tall Buildings and Habitat define tall buildings as those 50 stories or taller. Buildings in Korea that are 50 stories high, or over 200 meters tall, qualify as skyscrapers. The country’s first skyscraper was the 63 Building in Yeouido, Seoul, that commands a height of 249 meters. Construction started in February 1980 and was completed in May 1985. At the time of its completion, it was the tallest building in Asia. In the late 1990s, other buildings such as the Tower Palace buildings in Dogok-dong, southern Seoul, that range from 55 to 69 floors replaced the 63 Building as the No. 1 skyscraper in Korea.
An artist’s impression of Busan Lotte World complex, which begins construction in March this year. [JoongAng Ilbo]Inevitably, architects, engineers and property developers want to build even higher, and today’s building technology make buildings like Busan Lotte World possible. It’s expected to have 120 floors. For the Seoul area, the Yongsan Dream Tower and Incheon Tower are mammoth buildings slated for the metropolitan area. Both should be higher than 600 meters when finished. But aiming for the sky is not cheap. According to experts, a 60-story building is 1.3 to 1.4 times more expensive than building two 30-story buildings because construction costs rise with the ever-increasing height of the building. From a technical viewpoint, it is possible to go as high as 1 kilometer, but only the super rich could afford the rent.



An artist’s impression of Busan Lotte World complex, which begins construction in March this year. [JoongAng Ilbo]

From a technical viewpoint, it is possible to go as high as 1 kilometer, but only the super rich could afford the rent. Yet, despite the high costs involved, companies that engage in such projects argue that skyscrapers have a positive impact on the local economy. Lotte Group argues that if it spends at least 1.7 trillion won ($1.2 billion) to build a 112-floor second Lotte World in Jamsil, southern Seoul, about 2.5 million people will be employed during the duration of the project on a yearly basis.
Not only that, about 23,000 permanent jobs will be created upon completion of the building, Lotte claims. These tall buildings are also viewed as tourist attractions, and that means cash and development. Experts say that a 100-floor building is usually home to 10,000 permanent workers.Critics of tall buildings argue that they are not healthy places to live.People living in tall buildings over a prolonged period report feelings of dizziness, but people like Kim Jong-su of the Korea Super Tall Forum dismiss such concerns, saying research from overseas suggests that living in an apartment 80 floors up poses no health problems. What is undisputed is the risk of fire: It’s much harder to evacuate people from the top floors if a fire breaks out lower down the building. That is why the city of Seoul has separate rules when it comes to tall buildings. Provided they are not counted in the overall space of the building, construction companies are required to build a special floor for evacuation purposes every 25 to 30 floors. In addition, builders have to install elevators for the exclusive use of evacuation.Nevertheless, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs tried recently to relax safety measures for tall buildings and add more flexibility to regulations for building design.But the National Emergency Management Agency objected, saying that current laws that require heliports for certain buildings be enforced.Striving to build buildings even higher than existing ones is part of human nature, but tall buildings are also seen by some as the ultimate solution to resolve the Earth’s population problems. The American architect Eugene Tsui conceived the idea of the Ultima Tower as part of a study of the compact urban area of San Francisco. The project combines nature with an urban environment on a scale that would blow away all competition. This tower would be 3.2 kilometers high and, if built, would easily be the world’s tallest building, a title it would probably hold for a very long time.


By Hoh Kui-seek JoongAng Ilbo [africanu@joongang.co.kr]

Stars align for maker of electric car infrastructure

By Bill Vlasic
Monday, February 9, 2009

DETROIT: When Shai Agassi set out in 2007 to develop an infrastructure to service electric cars, circumstances were hardly in his favor.
Gasoline was cheap, and big pickups and SUVs still ruled the road in the United States. While auto companies were working on alternative-fuel vehicles, they seemed destined for a tiny niche market of green-minded consumers.
But now Agassi and his start-up company, Better Place, are riding the tailwinds of an industry that is suddenly obsessed with going electric.
Nearly every major auto company in the world is committed to building electric cars, and President Obama has made reducing oil consumption a centerpiece of his energy policy.
It's a fortuitous turn of events for Agassi, a former software executive who is bringing his Silicon Valley business acumen to devising a system to increase the driving range of electric cars.
The 40-year-old, Israeli-born entrepreneur is selling the sizzle of a new idea at the same time he is putting it into practice.
The key to consumer acceptance of electric cars, he said, is installing a network of stations that can replace drained batteries with fresh ones - just like filling a vehicle with a new tank of gas.
By building its first battery-changing stations in test markets like Israel, Denmark and Japan, Better Place is positioning itself to be a critical link in the evolution of the electric-car market.
"The battery is a consumable part of the car, just like gasoline," Agassi said during a recent interview. "Cars in the 1950s only went about 100 miles on a tank of gas, and that problem was solved by installing an infrastructure of gas stations."
Agassi acknowledges that there is much work to do to perfect the mechanics of switching a vehicle battery in a few minutes during a roadside stop.
But his concept has already won powerful converts in government and industry, including Shimon Peres, a former Israeli prime minister, and Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of the Renault-Nissan auto alliance.
Agassi has also tapped into a spirit of change and an anything-is-possible mentality fostered by the hopeful, new Obama administration.
"I start with the question, how do you run a country without oil?" Agassi said. "To get there, you need the number of electric cars coming into the market to exceed the number of gasoline vehicles."
Up until recently, such a goal would have seemed a fantasy. But auto companies are now putting vast resources into electric-car projects, with several of them vowing to have a model on the market by 2011.
Advances in lithium-ion battery technology have increased the range and reliability of prototype electric models. Agassi is betting that batteries will become commodity products that can be leased and then replaced on demand in the ordinary course of driving.
Better Place has joined forces with governments in several countries to test its switching stations, and has also signed agreements in Hawaii and with a nine-city alliance of communities in the San Francisco Bay area.
The mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, envisions his city as an incubator for electric vehicles.
Part of the challenge is to convert existing sources of electricity - like municipal light poles - into charging stations for consumers.
"But what Shai is doing with these switching stations is taking the worry out of charging your car," said Newsom. "It relegates the concern about running out of electricity to the back of one's mind."
Agassi has no previous experience in the auto industry, but has been a devotee of electric cars for some time. He owns one of the 1,500 battery-powered RAV4 sport utility vehicles that Toyota built for testing purposes in the late 1990s.
He was a computer programmer who started a series of software companies with his father, the last of which they sold to the software giant SAP in 2001. He rose to become SAP's chief technology officer, and appeared on track to one day become chief executive.
In 2005, Agassi joined a business forum called Young Global Leaders, and attended the Davos economic conference. In one of the discussion sessions, attendees were asked to consider ways to "make the world a better place" - a concept that stuck with Agassi.
He left SAP two years ago and founded Better Place in Palo Alto, California, with $200 million in backing from venture capitalists in Israel and the United States. In a few months, he was meeting with Peres and Ghosn - again in Davos - to finalize an agreement to build switching stations in Israel for electric cars produced by Renault.
He has since signed similar deals in Denmark, Japan, Australia, and, most recently, Canada.
The Better Place system includes software that analyzes a vehicle's battery consumption, and can direct drivers either to small-scale charging spots or full-size switching stations.
Agassi estimates that a single battery-switching station will cost about $500,000 to build. A vehicle will park on a conveyor similar to the track in a car wash, and within minutes its depleted battery will be removed and replaced with a fully-charged one.
The batteries themselves might possibly be owned by Better Place, with consumers simply purchasing electric charges as they would cellphone minutes.
Renault and Nissan have already agreed to make electric cars that use stations built and owned by Better Place in test markets, and Agassi has pitched his plans to several other auto companies.
One auto industry analyst said the business model should be particularly appealing to automakers.
"Frankly, we are not aware of any reason why they would not sign up for this, as the automakers do not need to commit capital for infrastructure or for batteries," Rod Lache, a Deutsche Bank analyst, wrote in a research report on electric vehicles.
Better Place will open its first battery-switching stations by 2010, in Israel. Agassi expects that tax credits for electric cars will be widespread in several countries by then. Demand for the vehicles, he said, will grow in proportion to the ease of charging batteries or exchanging them.

New Day on Climate Change

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

In one dramatic stroke, President Obama has removed any doubts that he intends to break sharply from President George W. Bush's policies on yet another vital issue - this time repudiating Bush's passive approach to climate change. At a news conference on Monday, Obama directed the Environmental Protection Agency to consider immediately California's application to set its own rules on greenhouse-gas emissions from cars and trucks. Bush had rejected that application.
Once California receives permission to move ahead - as it surely will - 13 states, and possibly more, are expected to impose similar rules. The result will be to force automakers here and overseas to begin producing cars and trucks that are considerably more fuel efficient than today's models and on a faster timetable.
The California decision is of great significance not only for that reason but for what it says about Obama's commitment to the cause of reversing the rise in greenhouse gases. Bush began his tenure by breaking a campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide and by withdrawing the United States from the Kyoto agreement on climate change. Obama begins his with a clear signal that he will not hesitate to use the regulatory levers provided by the Clean Air Act and other federal statutes to fight global warming.
California has long had the right to set stronger air pollution standards than the rest of the nation, provided it has federal permission. Its earlier requests to set stronger air pollution standards were routinely approved, but in this case the Bush administration said no, dredging up all manner of arguments to support its case. One was that California had not demonstrated "extraordinary and compelling" reasons to limit greenhouse gases; another was that a national regulatory system was preferable to state-by-state laws - even though the administration itself had shown no interest whatsoever in a national system.
In a companion move, Obama directed the Transportation Department to complete the interim nationwide fuel-efficiency standards called for in the 2007 energy bill. These standards would eventually require fuel-efficiency increases in the American car and light-truck fleet to roughly 35 miles per gallon by 2020 from the current average of 27 mpg The California standards would require automakers to reach the same 35 mpg target four years ahead of the federal timetable.
The California rules cannot by themselves stop the rise in greenhouse gases. In addition to regulatory controls, Obama must eventually embrace a broader strategy involving major federal investments in clean-energy technologies and, down the road, some effort to put a price on greenhouse-gas emissions in order to unlock private investment. But after eight years of inaction, this is a wonderful start.

Democratic feud hurts Obama's climate agenda

By John M. Broder
Tuesday, January 27, 2009

WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama is moving quickly to act on the environmental promises that were a centerpiece of his campaign. But tackling global warming will be far more difficult - and more costly - than the new emissions standards for automobiles he ordered with the stroke of a pen Monday.
Already, the congressional Democrats Obama will need to carry out his mandate are feuding with one another.
By coincidence or design, most of the policy makers in Congress and in the administration charged with shaping legislation to address global warming come from California or the East Coast, regions that lead the United States in environmental regulation and the push for renewable energy sources.
That is a problem, says a group of Democratic lawmakers from the Midwest and the Plains states, which are heavily dependent on coal and manufacturing. The lawmakers have banded together to fight legislation they think might further damage their economies.
"There's a bias in our Congress and government against manufacturing, or at least indifference to us, especially on the coasts," said Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio. "It's up to those of us in the Midwest to show how important manufacturing is. If we pass a climate bill the wrong way, it will hurt American jobs and the American economy, as more and more production jobs go to places like China, where it's cheaper."
This brown state-green state clash is likely to encumber any effort to set a mandatory ceiling on the carbon dioxide emissions blamed as the biggest contributor to global warming, something Obama has declared to be one of his highest priorities. Obama has said he intends to press ahead on such an initiative, despite opposition within his own party in Congress and divisions among some of his advisers over the timing, scope and cost of legislation to curb carbon emissions.
The centrist Democrats who urge a slower approach represent states that are crucial electoral battlegrounds and that stand to lose the most from such regulation. They say they believe that global warming is a serious threat and they will support legislation to address the problem - but not at the expense of their already-strained workers and industries.
These Democrats are concerned, they say, that climate bills will be written by committees in the House and Senate led by two liberal California Democrats, Senator Barbara Boxer and Representative Henry Waxman, and shaped by Obama's team of environmental and energy advisers, virtually all of whom are from California or the East Coast.
For decades, California has led America in environmental regulation, including the most sweeping effort to address global warming by imposing mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions starting in 2012.
Following California's lead, a group of Northeastern states have created a partnership known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to control carbon emissions.
But California and many East Coast states also differ sharply in the extent to which they depend on coal - a fossil fuel that is a major culprit in producing carbon emissions. California, for example, derived only 20.7 percent of its electricity from coal and 40 percent from hydroelectric power and renewable sources in 2005, while Ohio drew 86 percent of its electricity from coal that year, according to the Department of Energy. Other states of the Great Lakes and the Plains are much more like Ohio than California in energy usage.
Obama and leaders in Congress have endorsed a so-called cap-and-trade system in which power plant owners and other polluters could meet limits on heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide by either reducing emissions on their own or buying credits from more efficient producers.
Obama's energy and environmental advisers include Lisa Jackson, the former head of the New Jersey environmental agency who will lead the Environmental Protection Agency; Steven Chu, former director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, who is the new secretary of energy; and Nancy Sutley, former deputy mayor of Los Angeles for environmental affairs, the new chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Among other things, the appointees will have to deal with bruised feelings among many Democrats over the coup Waxman mounted last November to wrest the gavel of the Energy and Commerce Committee from its longtime leader, Representative John Dingell, Democrat of Michigan and a longtime champion of the auto industry and other Midwest manufacturers.
"For us, it's still a big disappointment," said Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan, referring to the unseating of Dingell, who was pursuing a more moderate climate proposal than those advocated by Boxer and Waxman.
Stabenow is a leader of the so-called Gang of 10, representing the coal-dependent states in the middle of the country; the group was formed after the failure of a Senate global warming bill pushed by Boxer last June. The members' goal is to assure that their concerns are met in any future legislation.
"We will play an important role in the final bill," Stabenow said.
Representative Edward Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who has been a leader in Congress on environmental matters for three decades, has been assigned by Waxman to write the House's version of global warming legislation. Markey said he was very aware of the concerns of coal-state Democrats.
He noted that Obama, who comes from Illinois, a coal-dependent state, had traveled to Ohio last week to speak at a factory that produces parts for wind turbines. "Every single wind turbine takes 26 tons of steel to construct," Markey said. "A lot of new jobs will be created if we craft a piece of global warming legislation correctly, and that is our intention."