California Cities Considering Alternatives to Grass

Cookie Smith won a home beautification award from the city of Garden Grove, California, for her lush, green lawn. Smith was especially proud of the reward considering that her lawn – which set her back an incredible $10,000 – was artificial, and the city couldn’t even tell. In fact, Garden Grove has a ban on artificial turf.

Ironically, Garden Grove – and many other areas of California – is under a water conservation order, yet they still require homeowners to keep their lawns alive. Smith’s neighbor was shocked when he complied with the order to conserve water and was hit with a $50 fine when his grass withered and turned brown.

From the Ventura County Star:

“It’s kind of like saying ‘We want you to look like Brooke Shields, but we don’t want you to use any makeup,’” Smith said.

Now some cities are reconsidering their lawn laws and exploring alternatives to homes with perfect rectangles of green.

The state’s ever-growing population and the threat of a prolonged drought could kill the concept of the traditional lawn in California, where some communities conduct patrols looking for signs that homeowners are lavishing too much water on their lawns or letting it dribble down driveways.

Officials estimate that up to 70 percent of a family’s water bill is spent on landscaping.

Still, many will be reluctant to abandon lawns entirely. Thick carpets of grass have defined the landscape of suburban America for more than a century, and a healthy lawn in this semiarid climate is a status symbol.

Okay, this is ridiculous. California city councils, what the hell are you thinking? How irresponsible is it to waste precious, scarce water resources on a lawn that does absolutely nothing but sit there and look pretty? Lawns aren’t even as attractive as native gardens can be. They don’t provide food. They don’t provide a welcoming habitat for wildlife. Californians complain about the water restrictions and then turn around and waste thousands of gallons of water on this bourgeoisie ‘status symbol’.

Sorry if I sound like your mother telling you to clean your plate, but there are people in Africa who don’t have a drop of clean, fresh water to drink. This is the sort of thing that makes people across the world view America as a land of selfish, narcissistic idiots.

And people, artificial turf is NOT THE ANSWER. For one, it’s often toxic. It’s made from petroleum. It heats up and kills all of the beneficial organisms in the soil below, essentially rendering the land barren. It can harbor germs. And when your neighbor’s dog drops a deuce on it, that pile isn’t going to decompose and disappear into the earth. It’s just going to sit there until you clean it up. Have fun with that.

Californians and residents of other parched areas of America are going to have to part with their lawns eventually, like it or not. More water isn’t going to magically appear to meet the needs of all of these people plus the millions more that will move there in the next couple of decades, and keep their stupid lawns green.

Link [Ventura County Star]

George W. Bush Sewage Plant Proposition Fails

Sadly, there will be no sewage treatment plant in California named after George W. Bush. Backers of the proposition gathered in excitement awaiting the results, only to be crushed to learn that it had been defeated by a 70-30 margin. Especially sad were Bob Katz, who flew in all the way from Florida for what he thought would be a Proposition R victory party, and Peaches Christ, the proposition’s “basket-ball player sized drag queen” spokesperson. Reality is so often stranger than fiction.

From The Snitch:

Not all of the folks gathered near the Abe Lincoln statue voted for the proposition — or even knew about it. Barbara Coleman said Bush didn’t deserve the honor of having anything named after him.

“He done fucked the country up. What I want is for him to pack up his shit and get his ass out of the White House so Barack Obama can move in — tonight!”

Jacinto and McConnell quietly puffed on cigarettes and sipped from clandestine beers in the shadow of city hall. “We gave it the college try,” noted Jacinto, a city planner when he’s not writing ballot propositions. “We got our message out far and wide to get people thinking about George W. Bush’s legacy.”

Check out one of the group’s campaign ads:

“Pansy” from Brian M on Vimeo.

Ah, San Francisco.

Link [The Snitch]

Specialty Garage in San Francisco Makes Hybrids Even Greener

Hybrid car owners in San Francisco can have their car repaired in at an eco-friendly garage so clean, you could eat off the floor. Luscious Garage has solar panels on the roof, hanging plants and paper lanterns everywhere you look, and a line of recycling containers for paper, plastic, rubber, metal and oil. The garage’s real specialty, though, is transforming hybrids into fully-electric vehicles.

From The New York Times:

Luscious is a secular temple built to serve hybrids, the cars powered by both an electric motor (most often engaged when starting or stopping, thus most efficient in city traffic) and a gasoline engine (most efficient on the open road). But its owner’s forte is converting them to plug-in hybrids, which are functionally all-electric cars that can go 12 to 15 miles on one charge.

That’s right. Fifteen miles, maximum. For a mere $6,000. (If you go farther, the gasoline motor kicks back in. )

“People do it because they are ideologically committed,” said Ms. Coquillette, the co-founder and now sole owner of the garage, which employs two other mechanics, one male and one female.

That’s certainly expensive for 12-15 miles per charge, but many dedicated environmentalists are willing to pay – especially those who have a short commute. One Luscious Garage customer said he can now go the entire week without buying gas. He used to spend $100 a month on gas, so while it would take him five to six years to regroup the cost of the conversion, he figures he can either spend that money being green and efficient or on gas.

Coquillete recycles almost everything, including air filters, and makes her own windshield-washing fluid with vinegar. The shop was named ‘green business of the year’ by The San Francisco Bay Guardian.

Link [The New York Times]

California’s Proposition 2: Money vs. Animal Rights

Proposition 8 isn’t the only battle raging in California this election season, with the lives of millions hanging in the balance. Farm animals raised for food will either get a big break next Tuesday, seeing better treatment than they’ve ever received in America, or they’ll continue to be treated cruelly, confined to tiny cages so they can’t even stand up or turn around.

From Grist, via The Huffington Post:

It’s not just another one of those far-out Left Coast things. The Prop. 2 campaign is playing on a mainstream, national stage. Oprah Winfrey devoted a show to the issue of food-animal care and Prop. 2 last week, and the New York Times editorial page voiced support for the proposition.

The changes called for in Prop. 2 are small but significant. The ballot wording says simply that Prop. 2 “requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens, and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.” It would take effect Jan. 1, 2015.

There’s a lot at stake here, not just for the animals who live such heartbreakingly sad, painful lives before ending up on our plates or producing the eggs we eat, but for the quality of our food in the future. The nation’s big factory farmers will be watching the results of Prop 2 carefully, because if it passes, it’ll be sending them a strong message from voters: that we do care where our food comes from and how it’s raised.

If you’re a California resident, please vote yes on Proposition 2. Learn more about it at the California Voter Guide.

Link [Grist] + [Huffington Post] + [Voter Guide]
Photo credit: LA Times

Orange County, California’s Sewage to Drinking Water Treatment Plant Finished

Here in America, we have a water problem – and I’m not just talking about shortages. We waste incredible, mind-boggling amounts of it. There are so many things we can do to use water more wisely, and in parched Santa Ana, California, officials are getting creative in a way that has some residents angry and disgusted. They’re recycling toilet water. Like it or not, people might as well get used to ideas like these – it’s wasting so much water that’s really disgusting.

From The New York Times:

When you flush in Santa Ana, the waste makes its way to the sewage-treatment plant nearby in Fountain Valley, then sluices not to the ocean but to a plant that superfilters the liquid until it is cleaner than rainwater. The “new” water is then pumped 13 miles north and discharged into a small lake, where it percolates into the earth. Local utilities pump water from this aquifer and deliver it to the sinks and showers of 2.3 million customers. It is now drinking water. If you like the idea, you call it indirect potable reuse. If the idea revolts you, you call it toilet to tap.

Recycling sewage into potable water was a no-brainer for Orange County; an ever-rising population meant that a new $200M sewage pipeline would have needed to be built, and they over-pumped their groundwater basin to the point of drawing seawater into their water supply. So, the sewage to water plan works out for a lot of reasons. It sounds gross at first, but the process used to clean the water really is incredibly thorough.

If you think about it, though, why are we flushing so much fresh, clean, potable water in the first place? Greywater systems that at least divert used water from the bathroom sink and/or shower could be used to flush toilets instead. It seems absurd to foul perfectly good drinking water in such a way. The way we use water is so messed up and backwards. Hopefully we’ll do a lot of catching up in the coming decades as people realize how precious a resource it really is.

To read about the full treatment process that transforms the sewage into drinkable water, read the full piece in The New York Times.

Link [The New York Times]
Photo credit: Flickr user Oracio Alvarado

No Love for Whole Foods in the Haight

If corporate natural foods chain Whole Foods thought the Haight Ashbury neighborhood of San Francisco would give them a groovy welcome with open tie-dyed arms, they were sorely mistaken. Whole Foods had planned to fill a vacant spot on the corner of Haight and Stanyan with one of their food stores, topped with apartments. SF Curbed writer Sarah Hromack reports that the idea has been nixed after anger and disgust from the community.

From SF Curbed:

Is 690 Stanyan Street a dead man waking? Perhaps so, says the developer. The Whole Foods-pimped, Haight Ashbury Improvement Association-approved project, which would replace the now-defunct Cala Foods with 62 condos and a Whole Foods on ground level, has been met with staunch opposition by the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council. (Do we have a neighborhood brawl on our hands here? Oh yes, yes we do. How very North Beach of you, Haight!) Though he hasn’t gone on record, Supe Ross Mirkarimi hasn’t exactly supported the development. Neither has the city, which is reportedly dragging its feet on the environmental review process— the developer has languished in limbo for 2 and-a-half years at this point, and sees no end in sight as the Planning Commission hasn’t even granted an initial approval hearing. The dev has spent over $1 million on the EIR, and has “little to show for it except a stack of heavy draft documents.”

Big surprise – a bunch of Haight residents don’t want an expensive natural food store gentrifyin’ the area. If a chain is going to move in, many people would rather have Trader Joes, which is more affordable. There are plenty of others, however, who see the area as a blight and think the Whole Foods project would have cleaned up the area. Here’s hoping they’ll come up with something that reaches a middle ground between a parking lot that stinks of urine and an ugly, car-magnet upscale shop.

Link [SF Curbed] via [Sfist]
Photo credit: Flickr user wili_hybrid

Energy Efficiency Could Cut Greenhouse Gases 30% by 2030

What’s the best way to keep power plants from polluting the earth? Cut demand for electricity. It’s so simple, and it could work so well if everyone participated. Power companies are basically paid to pollute right now, with a drop in demand being the only way to prevent them from constantly building new power plants. In 2007, consulting firm McKinsey and Co. found that we could cut greenhouse gases by 30% in just over 20 years if we improved energy efficiency in buildings, appliances and factories.

From Salon:

While a few states have energy-efficiency strategies, none matches what California has done. In the past three decades, electricity consumption per capita grew 60 percent in the rest of the nation, while it stayed flat in high-tech, fast-growing California. If all Americans had the same per capita electricity demand as Californians currently do, we would cut electricity consumption 40 percent. If the entire nation had California’s much cleaner electric grid, we would cut total U.S. global-warming pollution by more than a quarter without raising American electric bills. And if all of America adopted the same energy-efficiency policies that California is now putting in place, the country would never have to build another polluting power plant.

How did California do it? In part, a smart California Energy Commission has promoted strong building standards and the aggressive deployment of energy-efficient technologies and strategies — and has done so with support of both Democratic and Republican leadership over three decades.

Most of us already know about the more obvious ways to conserve energy - through better insulation and more energy-efficient lighting, heating and cooling. California has gone far above and beyond that, however, plugging residential air duct leaks, redesigning the outdoor lighting in parking lots, requiring flat roofs on commercial buildings to be painted white to reflect sunlight and subsidizing LED traffic lights.

Another important factor is that the state of California adopted regulations that “decouple” utility company profits from how much electricity they sell and allowing utilities to take a share of any energy savings they help businesses and consumers achieve.

Just making these sorts of changes – without going to extremes like sitting around in the dark half the time – can help us all offset all of the projected demand for electricity in 2030 AND mostly negate the need for new coal-fired electric plants! Time to get started.

Link [Salon.com]
Photo credit: Northwest Community Energy

Couple Fined for Letting Lawn Die During a Drought

On June 4th, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought, so Anne Hartridge and Matt George, a Sacramento couple who already lived a pretty green lifestyle, decided it was as good a time as any to let their lawn die in preparation for doing something more productive with it. Not long after the grass turned brown, a neighbor complained to the city and the Code Enforcement Department gave the family a citation.

From redOrbit:

Their small brick home was declared a “public nuisance” in violation of city code section 17.68.010, which states that front yards “shall be irrigated, landscaped and maintained.”

A $746 fine will be next unless they correct the violation.

“In order to make the lawn go, I would have had to keep watering it intensely, and since the drought was declared, I decided that wasn’t a good idea,” said Hartridge. “Honestly, I think there’s a disconnect within the city about priorities.”

Two weeks ago, The Bee reported that Sacramento’s per capita water use is among the greatest in the world. Later that week, the same day Hartridge got the citation, an audit revealed that the city has lost or misplaced nearly 5,000 water meters, out of more than 100,000 it must install citywide to comply with state law.

“On one hand they’re mislaying their water meters, and on the other hand they going out and putting enforcement on people who don’t have green lawns,” Hartridge said. “And there’s water running down the gutters of my neighborhood every day.”

Food, not lawns! Seriously, this is absurd. Messed up priorities, indeed – and most of it comes from the fact that the city Code Enforcement Department doesn’t communicate with the Utilities department about water usage. Well, that and douchebag neighbors. There’s a drought, and this person goes and complains about a lawn that’s less than perfect? Unbelievable. Our freshwater resources aren’t bottomless, and someday everybody’s going to look back on all of this lawn watering with disgust and disbelief.

Furthermore, $746?!?! Sacramento needs to get their shit together. I wonder how many more cities around the nation have the same stupid, backwards laws.

Link [redOrbit]
Photo credit: Flickr user james.thompson

California Uses More Gasoline than Any Country in the World

California has a reputation for being one of the greenest states in America, environmentally speaking. We hear so much about their progressive laws and programs, and how people there are on the frontlines of the fight against global warming. And yet, somehow, they manage to be huge resource hoggers. California alone uses more gasoline than any country in the world (aside from the US as a whole).  Even China.

From Wired:

That’s according to the California Energy Commission’s State Alternative Fuels Plan, which was posted online last Christmas Eve (pdf). The whole report makes for some fascinating reading because it’s a blueprint for a low-carbon and renewable transportation fuel future. The dominant takeaway: it ain’t going to be easy.

One more choice statistic: gasoline usage in California has increased 50 percent, that’s 10 6.7 billion gallons, since 1988. Has there been anything close to a commensurate increase in quality of life here to accompany that rise in energy use?

Of course, China will quickly catch up and their consumption rate will far exceed California’s – and it won’t be too long before that happens. Still, though – that’s a lot of gas, even for a large populous state.

If you’re a Californian, what’s your take on this? Poor public transportation, too many people on the road, and lots or sprawl?

Link [Wired]
Photo credit: Flickr user respres