Janna L. Sylvest
My feedback
37 results found
-
21 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
In supporting a move from petroleum fueled cars to electric-fueled cars, I hope that people keep in mind that the lesser foot print is to reduce overall car ownership and use. The carbon footprint of producing a new car, whatever its fuel base, is enormous. Rapid, accessible, transit and pedestrian infrastructure is a better outcome than a change in the way cars are fueled. 78% of Manhattan residents do not own cars. Car co-ops, less cars per household, and less use of existing cars ... that's a worthwhile goal. The other thing to keep in mind is that electricity is only as "green" as the source used to generate the electricity. Most places in the world generate electricity from coal or nuclear sources. And even in BC, BC Hydro purchases a significant amount of power generated from natural gas burning generation plants. Additionally, hydro generation from water has enviromental impacts. The flooding of plains and wet lands, the disruption of fish habitat, etc. This is not to say that electric cars are "evil", it's to say that transit and pedestrian-friendly corridors to and from transit, are better.
-
15 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
I'm confused, is this comment supportive of the idea or opposed? Isn't the goal to effect a lot of people? How can there be change in the absence of broadly reaching initiatives, and what would be the point of supporting initiatives that would have the least impact on the least number of people?
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
I agree with this initiative ... it's at least a start to acknowledging that these materials have a three fold negative environmental impact (1) first at the production stage, plastics and plastic coatings are a petroleum based product and the chemical additives in plastics produce noxious production waste; (2) in distribution/transport costs, rather than the one time distribution-impact if long life re-useable tableware, these disposable substitutes are being distributed time and time again from maker to distributor to food retailer; (3) on disposal, primarily as litter where the waste ends up in the plastic deposits in our Oceans once it rains and it travels through our curb side sewer systems and as off-gassing toxins in landfills. There has to be an accountability at some level to address such a grotesque affront to our environment. In addition to a container fee and broadening of the class of
containers that carry a deposit refund (ie. disposable coffee cups and take-out food containers with a food-grade rating)Mandate that food and beverage establishments use only recyclable materials in take-out or takeaway food and beverage containers.
Require a litter-receptacle fee for additional containers as part of all take-out and fast-food food and beverage business licenses.
-
82 votes
BC Hydro and other energy utilities make rate proposals to the BC Utilities Commission who are the regulator for energy rates. For more info check out: www.bcuc.com
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
Bravo for an innovative, unique idea. BC Hydro already has different rates: commercial, residential, and rates for use above a set ceiling. Adding a rate for night time use is grounded in fairness, as the route to lowering costs is simple: turn off equipment and lights that are not in fact in use. I'd go one further, and impose this overnight rate on residential and commercial. Even with electric heat, lowering your power consumption at night requires adding a blanket and a pair of flannel sheets in the winter, in place of cranking the thermostat, and most homes run DVD, personal computers, appliances such as Microwave and stove clocks, and numerous other electrical consumers over night when they are not required and not in active use.
-
42 votes
-
15 votes
The City is supportive of this idea, but implementation requires action outside municipal jurisdiction. The City has and will continue to advocate to the Province and ICBC for PAYD and/or other distance-based forms of auto insurance.
Janna L. Sylvest
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
This idea is a natural extension of the fuel tax and ought to work both ways: decrease in insurance rates with a decrease in mileage, and an increase in insurance rates with an increase in mileage. The risk assessment relationship to rates is obvious, so that relating it to an incentive to drive less and disincentive to drive more program would be "icing on the cake" for ICBC.
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
In addition to increasing the deposit value, the program should be expanded to MORE products. For example, BRANDED TAKE AWAY cups and containers should carry a deposit. Starbucks and Tim Hortons use the fact people take away their one-time-use containers and throw them on the ground as a mobile marketing tool. If a container has a brand mark of any kind, it should have to carry a 25 cent deposit on it. At least the cups would make it back into the recycling stream and why in the world shouldn't these branded litter-in-the-making wasteful practices pay for their social cost!
-
0 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
I’m delighted to see this issue raised. Excessive ,unnecessary night light is a greening issue. Vancouver would be rising above the obvious if it were to recognize, and act, to turn out and turn down night lighting.
To be clear, and to address the concerns raised about night safety ... The point of decreasing the night lighting is not to make every place dark, it’s to make less places light. Lighting on demand and when needed is key. In general, women are safer after dark when there is less draw to those who would cause harm to being out, “prowling” so to speak after dark! With less lighting overall, and hence a greater concentration of people in the areas still lit, it stands to reason that there would be a lower risk to women after dark as they would less likely to go into areas that were seemingly unoccupied and there would be a wider range of people with purpose other than to cause harm in those corridors of light.
For two very compelling articles on the benefits of turning out the lights, see the National Geographic article on light pollution:http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/Light_Pollution
And The New Yorkers The Dark Side: Making War On Light Pollution: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/20/070820fa_fact_owen
The New Yorker article cites urban crime statistics where crime drops as the lights are turned off, of particular note is the decrease in vandalism - it takes good lighting to effect ones graffiti tags on school buildings and other public facilities, after all.
I’ve had first hand experience with the benefit of turning out the lights, where I was successful after two successive summers of frequent and nightly calls to the Police, in getting the overhead basketball court lights turned off at a near by elementary school. The nightly underaged drinking parties, facility vandalism, and incidents of assault, both sexual and otherwise stopped immediately. It’s been 6 years of peace and quiet in the summer since those lights were turned off!
-
10 votes
Will not be mandatory but are exploring ways to promote, support and develop training & job creation opportunities as part of the draft Greenest City Action Plan.
-
3 votes
-
7 votesJanna L. Sylvest
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesJanna L. Sylvest
shared this idea
·
-
89 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
A Property Tax credit for adding trees is essential. We won't change attitudes to trees as undesireable without incentive based encouragement in these regions.
Janna L. Sylvest
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
Trees really are an essential cornerstone to our green future. Very few strategies have as direct a relationship to carbon offset as does the planting of a tree. However to effectively achieve the planting of more trees (and protection of existing stock) will require a paradigm shift from the current passive City policy, For example: 1)Boulevard tree planting (and replacement of damaged trees) under the Parks Board program must be proactive. There are still too many neighbourhoods without any trees. These neighbourhoods are so unlivable, with the lack of tree cover, that it is clear the residents rely on air-conditioned car travel as their primary mode of transport in the heat of the summer. Witness the swaths of housing stock East of Rupert/South of East Hastings and West of Clark/South of Kingsway. There are areas where the only green comes from patches of lawn. Without the benefit of a boulevard tree, these areas are concrete deserts. (2) To encourage tree planting in existing developments, landholders could receive a property tax grant for the addition of up to three trees.
-
7 votesJanna L. Sylvest
shared this idea
·
-
334 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Janna L. Sylvest
commented
Tackle Plastic By Banning It! Banning plastic bags outright is far more effective than taxing their use. Consider fossil fuels, they're heavily taxed with minimal impact on consumer behaviour - people continue to want cars, buy cars, and drive cars. A tax promoted as a behaviour deterrent has, in effect, become a general source of revenue for the government, a cash cow that they do NOT want to forgo, perpetuating government policy that is, if not entirely favourable to production and consumption of fossil fuels, is certainly less than discouraging. Banning plastic bags has the immediate impact of decreasing both consumption AND production. Consumption is bad because of the shelf life of the plastic in the worlds ecosystem AFTER use. Production is bad because of the use of petroleum and other toxic chemicals required to manufacture soft plastics. If we ban plastic bags, we’re encouraging the production of biodegradable, nontoxic alternatives such as bags made of corn starch and we’re encouraging the use of re-useable options such as fabric, reusable bags. Adding a fee to the continued use of plastics merely shifts the economic positioning of plastic bag consumers. And really, Vancouver, the state of India banned plastic bags, what the heck is the hold up here?!
-
226 votesJanna L. Sylvest
shared this idea
·
-
5 votesJanna L. Sylvest
shared this idea
·
-
13 votes
We have looked at the ""green lanes" pilots and reported to Council in 2008 (summary — they’re 3-4 times more expensive than our now-standard strip pavement, there is a definite "price point’ of how much residents would be willing to pay for the treatment, and they will likely have higher maintenance costs and a shorter service life). We’re currently finalizing our test site for the lower-cost lane treatment option — a permeable lane pavement design.
Here is the full Council report, including the resident survey.
http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20081030/documents/pe4.pdf
Definitely an option for Council to increase the funding (reduce the property owner’s share) for these projects to promote more green lanes. More broadly speaking, the Greenest City team is supportive of the idea to make make laneways and alleys more pedestrian friendly environments, while maintaining essential functions (e.g. access for loading, parking and waste collection).
Janna L. Sylvest
supported this idea
·
