Quebec plans to spend more than a half-billion dollars on a green transportation plan over the next three years.

Premier Pauline Marois says the plan includes up to $8,000 in subsidies for the purchase of electric or hybrid vehicles; and up to $1,000 for people installing a charging unit at home.

She says the goal is to add 12,500 electric vehicles on Quebec roads by 2017, accelerating a program introduced under the previous Charest government.

It also calls for 5,000 public charging stations; 525 electric taxis; and 25 electric trolleys in Montreal.

In the days leading up to the announcement, there was some controversy over the fact that Hydro-Quebec chairman Pierre Karl Peladeau had been sitting in on Parti Quebecois cabinet meetings about the plan.

Peladeau is also the president of Quebecor, which owns the province’s main tabloid papers and private TV network, along with the Sun media chain in English Canada.

Before the announcement, his Journal de Montreal newspaper reported exclusive details of the plan in a multi-page spread, promoted on the cover.

VICTORIA – The concept of a house is changing as architects and home owners reinvent the buildings they decide to use for their homes.

Vancouver architect Tim Ankenman has been part of designing many spaces that he calls “building recycling.”

Ankenman’s designs repurpose abandoned warehouses or even multi-purpose commercial space, including movie theatres, into mixed-use residential spaces.

But the vision for his building recycling is based upon the same approach he uses for new buildings: making sure the spaces have the longest life possible.

“The main motivation for these projects is the environment,” said Ankenman. “Even in our new buildings we are designing we try to keep in mind what could happen should that use ever change and we try to design the project accordingly.

[quote]A lot of buildings that are purpose built are stuck being what they were designed for, and either have to be torn down or undergo extensive renovations in order for them to be reinvented.[/quote]

Ankenman has recently been involved in the conversion of two abandoned Vancouver warehouses: the Bowman Block on Beatty Street and the Paris Block on West Hastings.

Old buildings bring seismic challenges

While the environmental benefits of recycling old buildings is important, Ankenman said there are challenges such as zoning and seismic upgrades.

“You have to look at everything from the existing foundation to the ability to put in an elevator and new stairs and looking at whether there is the possibility to add storeys to the existing building and have it make economic sense,” he said.

For both the Bowman and Paris Blocks Ankenman designed the buildings to accommodate commercial space on the bottom and either penthouses or studio and one-bedroom residential spaces in the upper floors.

Schoolhouse lofts

Warehouse loft spaces have become increasingly common in cities like Vancouver, but in Escott, Ont., northeast of Kingston, one entrepreneur brought urban lofts into a former elementary school.

John Simpson had originally purchased the school with the intention of converting it to a seniors complex. When he ran into issues with the surrounding farmland he decided to make the school his home with options for generating income through offices and self-storage units.

“My son and my daughter thought I was crazy when I bought it,” said Simpson. “I had a beautiful farm where I raised horses, alpacas and llamas.

[quote]They couldn’t figure out why I would go from that to an old commercial building, but I’m a big hit now that I’ve done it. All the birthday parties, anniversaries and get-togethers are at my place now because of the space.[/quote]

Switching the building from a 1965 elementary school to something suitable to live in required a considerable financial investment by Simpson. He said the renovation cost between $220,000 and $240,000.

[signoff1]

But instead of changing the character of the space, Simpson worked on restoring much of the school’s charm and adapting it to his residence.

“My living room is at least 2,500 square feet (232 square metres) if not more,” he said. “I was able to bring back the original clay tile floors and in the rest of the house like the bathroom I restored the terrazzo floors.”

In Simpson’s bedroom, which was once the school’s performance stage, he brought back the original birch floors.

“A lot of it was in great shape but needed to be revamped,” he said.

All across Canada, many small communities face great difficulties in trying to establish regulations regarding the protection of navigable waters environments – that is, waters which fall under federal regulatory jurisdiction, The Canada Shipping Act in particular.

Not only are these communities paralysed in their efforts to address the growing numbers of motorized boats on waterways, but they also find themselves helpless to deal with the proliferation of “Hummer” type boats, or wake boats, with their 330 horsepower (HP) to 550 HP engines. The powerful,  destructive waves they generate cause shoreline erosion, damage docks,  make non-motorized boating unpleasant and disturb shoreline enjoyment.

Laws don’t work

Unfortunately, The Canada Shipping Act is an inefficient tool to address the aforementioned challenges, because the Act, which dates back to the early years of Canada, was not conceived to protect the environment.  More precisely, the prime purpose of the Act is to protect the rights of navigators and minimize barriers to navigation.

But the worst part about this Act is that it makes it exceptionally difficult for a local government to obtain federal approval for a new regulatory proposal – up to 5 years from the time a request is made to the moment when a proposal may be approved – and the guidelines on the Act make it abundantly clear that the federal government seeks non-regulatory solutions by way of voluntary codes of conduct.

The latter point is the source of eternal conflict within communities, as they must achieve nearly 100% voluntary adherence to a proposed code of conduct.  Surveys and referendums are not regarded by Transport Canada as a basis for a community to formulate a new regulatory proposal.

Consequently, most communities are not able to follow through to achieve federal regulatory approval.

It is against this legislative backdrop that the matter of the proliferation of wake boats on Canadian waterways has contributed to community dialogues of the deaf over irresolvable conflicts.

New breed of boat

Wake boats are not at all like conventional motor boats. The combination of 1) horsepower ranges similar to those offered for Volvo tractor-trailer trucks and 2) ballasts ranging from 1,500 to 2,000 lbs, produce high, powerful waves, even at modest speeds.

As if this is not enough, the turbidity caused by wake boats churns up sediments and fuel consumption is in the stratosphere. With respect to the latter point, so much for tackling climate change!

For other water bodies, the depth and size of the lake may mean little environmental tolerance for any type of powerful boat.  In BC, on the Shuswap River, the environmental challenges pertain to jet boats navigating up sensitive spawning habitats.  These jet boats can travel upstream at high speeds in very shallow water.

To address the increasing environmental challenges posed by problematic boats,  I was involved in forming the Canadian Coalition on problematic boats, otherwise known as The Coalition – officially created on September 1st in a small Quebec community, St-Faustin-Lac-Carré, Québec.

Coalition calls for legislative changes

In effect, the Coalition wishes to see modifications of two pieces of legislation, the Fisheries Act and the Canada Shipping Act.

With regard to The Fisheries Act, prior to the Harper administration’s changes to it, the Act was a very effective tool to protect marine life habitats.  But in response to a request from the pipeline industry, the Conservatives considerably weakened the protection of the marine habitat.

[signoff1]

Accordingly, The Coalition’s objectives entail the modification of both the Shipping Act and the Fisheries Act, plus the linking of the two Acts, in order to make it possible to impose restrictions on certain types of boats, based on impacts on the marine environment and community decisions.

Clear national environmental criteria and local government authorities would be the pillars of the new legislative framework and the concept of voluntary codes of conduct would be abolished.

Of course, to be politically realistic, The Coalition does not have any hopes with the current government. In this regard, it proposes an inter-regional and inter-provincial Coalition to formulate innovative legislative recommendations for the next federal government, in 2015.

As for the rationale for the inter-regional and inter-provincial approach, it is a reflection of the fact that a small community, acting on its own, cannot hope to have sufficient influence to request a change to two Acts and the linking of the two. By contrast, a pan-Canadian Coalition would be hard for any future government to ignore.

For more information on the Coalition, contact author Will Dubitsky directly: willdubitsky@yahoo.ca

Not long ago, dining out, going for a drink, working in an office, riding an airplane or intercity bus and going to a movie meant being subjected to second-hand smoke. Cigarette smoking was a fact of life, and smokers were everywhere – indoors and out.

In many countries, including Canada, that’s changed. But it wasn’t without a fight. Restaurant and bar owners fretted loudly that regulations to limit smoking would destroy their businesses, and tobacco companies lobbied and launched massive PR campaigns to convince people that smoking wasn’t harmful, that new laws were an infringement on smokers’ rights and that reducing smoking would devastate the economy.

Through a combination of public education and government regulation, including taxation, profound societal change took place over a relatively short time. In 1965, half of Canadians smoked. By 2011, that had dropped to about 17.3 per cent, or 4.9-million people, with only about 13.8 per cent daily smokers. Unfortunately the downward trend has levelled off in recent years, and tobacco remains the leading cause of preventable death in Canada, according to researchers at the University of Waterloo. “More than 37,000 Canadians will die prematurely this year due to tobacco use. Each day, 100 Canadians die of a smoking-related illness,” the 2013 report, “Tobacco Use in Canada: Patterns and Trends”, says.

With increasing regulation, high cigarette prices driven by “sin taxes” and the current stigma attached to smoking, it’s bewildering that people take up the pointless habit in the first place. Smoking prevalence is still highest among young adults, especially those aged 25 to 34, although education is a factor, with smoking rates for university graduates less than half those for people with less education.

I sometimes wonder if it’s lack of education that causes many smokers to litter their butts without giving it a second thought. It’s astounding how many people who would likely not otherwise drop garbage on the ground see nothing wrong with flicking butts without regard for where they land. It may seem trivial, but it’s not.

According to the Surfrider Foundation’s Hold on to Your Butt campaign, cigarette butts are the most littered item in the world, with 4.95-trillion tossed onto the ground or water every year. The U.S. spends about $11-billion a year on litter clean-up, and 32 per cent of that is butts. They’re washed from the streets into storm drains and rivers and eventually to oceans and are the most prevalent type of debris collected in beach clean-ups around the world.

The environmental impacts are nothing to sneeze at, either. Surfrider notes that cigarette butts are made of “cellulose acetate, a non-biodegradable plastic, which can take up to 25 years to decompose.” The toxic butts can be ingested by children and animals, especially birds and marine animals. Tossed cigarette butts are also a major fire risk.

Obviously, the best way to reduce cigarette butt pollution is to step up efforts to prevent people from starting smoking and help those who have to quit. But we aren’t going to stop everyone from smoking overnight, so we have to find ways to address the litter problem. Again, a combination of public education and regulation will go a long way.

In San Diego, Surfrider installed outdoor ashcans and gave smokers pocket ashtrays. Many places, including Vancouver, have banned smoking on beaches and in parks. Stepping up enforcement of litter laws also helps. Some people even recommend banning filtered cigarettes or at least requiring filters to be biodegradable, arguing they’re more of a marketing ploy than a safety feature. In Vancouver and other cities, some people have been pushing for a deposit-and-return system similar to those for bottles and cans.

Besides reducing litter and environmental damage, methods that also increase the price of cigarettes have proven to be effective in reducing smoking rates.

Some consider tobacco a sacred herb. It’s used by many indigenous peoples for ceremonial purposes. With widespread use spurred by marketing, it became a costly and unhealthy addiction and a toxic blight on the environment. Smoking trends in countries like Canada show that societal change is possible and – with education and regulation – people will do what’s best for themselves and for the world around them.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Communications Manager Ian Hanington.

What makes a city great? Among other things, great cities are tolerant communities that welcome and celebrate ethnic diversity. They support and foster local arts, have access to venture capital to spur entrepreneurship and innovation, and benefit from healthy local environments with clean air, clean water and access to nutritious, locally grown food.

New York City is world class, not just because it’s a driver of global finance and a hotbed of cultural innovation; it’s also known for its green spaces, like Central Park and the award-winning High Line.

San Francisco is celebrated for its narrow streets, compact lots and historic buildings. These contribute to the city’s old-world charm, but they’re also the building blocks of a more sustainable urban form. They facilitate densification and decrease the cost of energy and transportation for businesses while improving walkability.

When it comes to urban sustainability, cities in the U.S. and Canada are employing innovative programs and policies to improve the health and well-being of residents and their local environments, like reducing waste and improving recycling (Los Angeles), containing urban sprawl (Portland), conserving water (Calgary) and passing policies to combat climate change (Toronto).

But most cities in Canada and the U.S. are lacking in infrastructure to move millions of people safely and affordably. With some notable exceptions, such as Vancouver and Calgary, no successful rapid transit infrastructure projects have been built in Canadian cities for decades.

A recent survey of urban experts and other “city-builders” across Canada – planners, municipal politicians, academics, non-governmental organizations, developers and architects – concluded the abysmal state of public transit is the Achilles’ heel of urban sustainability and is holding many cities back from achieving greatness.

Toronto residents spend more time battling congestion to get to and from work than in any other city in North America. This shouldn’t be a surprise, as successive governments have failed to sustain and expand transit systems, even though the region has grown by about a 100,000 new residents a year. Toronto now scores 15th of 21 on per capita investment in public transit among large global cities – well behind sixth-placed New York City, which spends twice as much.

This failure to address transit infrastructure is serious. The Toronto Board of Trade estimates congestion costs the economy $6 billion a year in lost productivity.

Furthermore, air pollution from traffic congestion is a major threat to public health, especially for our most vulnerable citizens, like children and the elderly. According to the Toronto Board of Health, pollution-related ailments result in 440 premature deaths, 1,700 hospitalizations, 1,200 acute bronchitis episodes and about 68,000 asthma-symptom days a year.

Fortunately, politicians are starting to respond. Ontario’s government plans to spend billions to expand its regional transit system in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area, under a plan called the Big Move. It’s also looking at new financing tools to ensure funding levels are adequate and continue into the future. But before we spend enormous amounts on improvements, we need to ensure projects contribute to a region-wide rapid transit network using the latest technology and adhering to the highest sustainability standards. They should also move the most people in the most cost-effective way.

That’s why a proposal to use diesel trains for the Air-Rail-Link plan to connect downtown Toronto with its international airport in Mississauga is concerning. A rapid transit link with the airport is long overdue, but heavy diesel trains emit particulates and other contaminants, including known carcinogens. The proposed rail line would be close to dozens of schools and daycare centres, several long-term care facilities and a chronic respiratory care hospital.

Numerous experts, including Toronto’s Medical Health Officer, have urged the Ontario government to abandon its diesel plan in favour of electric trains that could be better integrated into a region-wide rapid transit network.

Vancouver, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle and New York City have consistently ranked among the most livable cities on the continent, in part because they take the environment into account for planning decisions. They all have world-class public transit systems that move residents in a safe, affordable and sustainable way. It’s time for Toronto and its suburbs to do the same. Effective transit and transportation solutions can spur economic productivity, protect the environment and improve quality of life.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Ontario and Northern Canada Director General Faisal Moola.