I know. I had second thoughts about posting this, given my year in planes.
I wrote a version in March before a trip to Europe to talk about it with the same "enough already" title, it works so well! lloydalter.substack.com/p/enough-alr...
And a note about the next month
I just got back from Australia where I did a lecture on sufficiency in architecture; here is an Australian voice on the subject.
"Workplaces closer to homes, public transport systems that everyone can access and afford, and reducing cars on the road. Sharing building spaces. Providing enough housing, goods, clothing, and food to meet our needs, but not exceed them." #Sufficiency theconversation.com/enough-alrea...
Sufficiency is a new approach to solving humanity’s consumption problems. It’s about using less, ensuring wellbeing for all humans, and staying within planetary boundaries.
Someone in the English department at @torontomet.bsky.social should tell them that Board is singular
Many people are talking about avoided/ Scope 4/ Imaginary emissions these days. I used to be a skeptic but after flying to New Zealand and back, I realized that avoided emissions provide me with an opportunity to deal with the emissions from the trip.
Scope 4 emissions help me justify my flight to New Zealand and compensate for its carbon footprint.
Type "regenerative design" into Google Images, and you get a pile of concrete buildings with trees stuck on top, 11 out of the first 15 the Bosco Verticale building in Milan. Yes, it's greenwashing, or should we call it greentopping?
I could only handle so much idiocy at one time. Besides, the bike lane thing could happen, and the tunnel never will.
I just got back from Melbourne Australia, where I toured the bike lanes, only to find that Doug Ford is bashing bike lanes again, and Brad Bradford has jumped on the bandwagon. A commenter on Bradford's post trotted out 9 complaints about bike lanes, and I take the bait here to address them.
I return from touring Melbourne bike lanes to find the same old bike bashing in Toronto.
The term “carbon positive” was invented in Australia because “carbon negative” sounds so, well, negative. But we shouldn’t be inventing terms with no real meaning or standard, and no matter how much you pretend, this building isn’t it.
I tried to call bullshit on this as politely as I could two years ago. “Carbon Positive” is a meaningless term that is almost always greenwash, and no building made of concrete comes even close. www.treehugger.com/studio-gang-...
Learn more about the hotel that is being called the first carbon positive hotel in the U.S.