most | Andy Arthur.org

True Believers

Andy | September 20, 2012

I was looking at the coal company advertisements that the “Quit Coal” project put up. Basically, those advertisements criticize “aggressive” regulations put forward by the government, and policies pursued by Congress to control air pollution. Not surprisingly, the folks that worked in corporations did not want to be told how to run their business, much less do something that would put uncertainty in their business.

Some will say that coal companies were actively spreading lies and falsehoods. Or did they actually believe in what they were advertising — a statement of belief of reality as it appeared to a coal power plant operator? Certainly many of the pollution control technologies of early 1970s were not to the point where well tested or even scaled up. A coal power plant operator, who always operated their plant one way, did not want to deal with the risk of changing operating methods and technologies.

Some will claim that coal-fired power plant operators were mostly motivated by greed. Yet, if you look at historically, did the clean air equipment on power plants actually cost that much — especially compared to existing revenue? Most upgrades to power plants were covered by small increases in electric rates, granted by public service commissions. If anything, more pollution controls meant more employees, and more opportunities for companies to profit because now operated more complex power plants in a regulated market that fixed their profit above cost.

In retrospect, the coal power industry is run by people who believe their mission — to provide inexpensive electricity, using proven technologies. These people who are resistant to change, because they don’t always understand what it will mean in the future.

The lessons of coal advertising is three fold:

Most people don’t actively lie due to moral conscience, nor do the corporations that represent the aggregation of people lie due to threat to litigation
People and corporations that make them up are highly resistant to change, because they fear the unknown and potential costs of unknown, even if the costs really don’t prove to be significant over the long run.
Government has an important role in setting emissions and efficiency standards, to force corporations, which represent large aggregations of people, to take calculated risks to improve their environmental preformance.

90% of Wild Forest is Actually Wilderness

Andy | July 16, 2012

A secret of the Adirondack State Land Master Plan is that well over 90% of the lands officially dedicated as Wild Forest are actually forever: wilderness, even though it’s not called that.

Here is why from Adirondack State Land Master Plan:

4. Public use of motor vehicles will not be encouraged and there will not be anymaterial increase in the mileage of roads and snowmobile trails open to motorized use bythe public in wild forest areas that conformed to the master plan at the time ofits original adoption in 1972.

That language basically makes it clear that no new roads or truck trails will be created in Adirondack Forest Preserve. Therefore, except for a handful existing roads, the vast majority of lands of Adirondack Forest Preserve will forever remain free of motor vehicles and snowmobiles (in winter). The milage of snowmobile trails and truck trails will only decline in coming years, strictly fitting into defination of “wild forest”.

Moreover per the consitution:

The lands of the state, now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed or destroyed.

Therefore per the consitution, no timber may be removed or destroyed in the forest preserve, which means the consitution explicitly prohibits any new road from being constructed in the forest preserve, except where an existing road exists. You can’t build a new road through the forest without cutting timber.

The only constraint from designating all of Adirondack Wild Forest as wilderness, is some of the parcels are smaller, and there a minimal roads going to campsites, lakes, destinations, and private lands throughout the park, mostly low-speed forest preserve roads, with minimal use.

… no roads, no timber cutting = wilderness area

Does the US Senate or US House Represent Rural Folks More?

Andy | March 18, 2012

That’s an interesting thought. The United States Senate has two senators for each state, while the US House is propotionally represented. While an urban state like New York State recieves 29 representives, we only get two senators, a rural state like Vermont recieves only 1 representive and 2 senators.

In theory, that would mean a rural state like Vermont, Wyoming, North Dakota, or even Iowa would have have a disproptionate impact on the legislation through the US Senate. While it’s true that such states have more of a voice in the US Senate, it’s not clear rural residents get more representation in the US Senate.

Why not? For one thing, US Senate districts are larger. Much larger, typically covering whole states. The problem is that by representing complete states, every senator represents both urban and rural areas, and in most states, urban populations outnumber rural portions of states.

If any thing, urban consituencies have more power in the US Senate then the US House. There are representives in US House Districts that are predominately rural, in contrast to even rural states, where population is dominated by urban centers — such as Burlington, Vermont.

Does Living in a Rural Area Mean a Longer Commute in NY State?

Andy | October 16, 2011

Commuting is a big consumer of time in people’s lives. For every ten minutes added to a person’s daily commute, each way, takes 43 hours per year out of a person’s life, that could be spent doing other activities. Moreover, as most people commute by private automobile, time spent in cars, is time not doing physical exercise or getting outdoors, promoting obesity and poor health.

From this map of Albany County, you would think rural people all have long commutes to work. Indeed, people who live in Renselearville, where there are few jobs, often commute to downtown Albany, leading to a very long commutes, that are particularly challenging in the winter.

However, that is not the norm in NY State. Indeed, the Adirondack Mountains, have some of the shortest commutes in the state. Residents of the North Country and Southern Tier also have very short commutes. Many work in the small towns they reside in, or farm the land they live on.

Also of interest is that commutes, in general are much shorter upstate then downstate. In some areas — like Albany — commutes from suburban areas to jobs are shorter then in more urban areas, due to the use of private automobiles over mass transit.

Population Density-based Democracy

Andy | May 7, 2011

One of the concepts I have grown interested in lately is the use of density to draw districts for governing bodies. Rather then draw districts based on historical lines, partisan politics, or ethnicity, why not draw them based on a formula that considers density?

How it would work…

Take the entire population of a region, state, or country, and divide it by the number of districts one views as appropiate.
Neighborhooring census blocks with the closest average density would be grouped together until they had equal population.

Why this is a good idea…

Areas with similiar densities have the most similiar needs.
Connect farming areas with other farming areas, connect dense urban areas with other dense urban areas, suburbs with suburbs.
Representives are non-conflicted by different consituencies, they can be pure in what they advocate for in their elected bodies.
Rural, suburban, and urban infrastructure needs are best met when communities are grouped together and non-conflicting in their nature.

Politicians probably would not like this system as it would make it hard to game the system. There would be far fewer marginal districts, far fewer competitive non-primary races. Yet, fewer consituencies would be underr-epresented due to their minority status in their districts, and there would be more cohesive blocks of land.