restoring the American Chestnut

I like this abstract in Restoration Ecology on the most efficient way to reseed the American Chestnut to eastern forests.

Efforts are underway to return the American chestnut (Castanea dentata) to eastern forests of North America following its decline due to the introduction of the chestnut blight (Cryphonectria parasitica). Approaches include developing blight-resistant chestnut lines through breeding programs and via genetic engineering. Reestablishment of resistant chestnut to eastern forests would produce one of the most extensive ecological restoration transformations ever attempted. However, this undertaking is costly and optimization of reintroduction methods is needed. We used the computer program NEWGARDEN to model whether some patterns of founder placement (regular vs. random spacing at differing densities) produce more rapidly expanding populations across a range of gene dispersal distance conditions (via both offspring and pollen). For a simulated introduction project employing 169 founders, placing founders randomly in a square of side 0.85 km produced higher rates of predicted population growth compared with larger or smaller squares under near gene dispersal conditions; this side distance was 1.0 km under far gene dispersal conditions. After 100 population bouts of mating and under near gene dispersal conditions, the trial with founder placement producing the greatest population expansion rate exhibited a 314% increase in census size compared with the founder pattern yielding the slowest expansion. Neither loss of alleles nor inbreeding or subdivision was significantly increased under the founder placement patterns yielding the most descendants. Exploring different numerical and geometrical founding scenarios using NEWGARDEN can provide first estimates of founding patterns or stand manipulations that will return the most descendants produced per founder planted in restoration projects.

So it is possible to give an ecosystem a helping hand. Maybe we can use similar principles not just to restore species and ecosystems that used to exist, but to create truly functional ecosystems in rural, suburban, and urban areas and the transitions between them.

“a single, supple mesh of mobility”

I wrote recently about European cities considering a complete ban on private cars by 2050, and I said that didn’t sound so ambitious. Well, according to The Guardian, Helsinki has a plan “to transform its existing public transport network into a comprehensive, point-to-point “mobility on demand” system by 2025 – one that, in theory, would be so good nobody would have any reason to own a car.”

Helsinki aims to transcend conventional public transport by allowing people to purchase mobility in real time, straight from their smartphones. The hope is to furnish riders with an array of options so cheap, flexible and well-coordinated that it becomes competitive with private car ownership not merely on cost, but on convenience and ease of use.

Subscribers would specify an origin and a destination, and perhaps a few preferences. The app would then function as both journey planner and universal payment platform, knitting everything from driverless cars and nimble little buses to shared bikes and ferries into a single, supple mesh of mobility. Imagine the popular transit planner Citymapper fused to a cycle hire service and a taxi app such as Hailo or Uber, with only one payment required, and the whole thing run as a public utility, and you begin to understand the scale of ambition here.

Now, that’s ambitious! I love the vision. It’s not just about transportation – imagine, if all these transit vehicles are in motion, they won’t be parked. When they do park, they can do it in small, out-of-the-way spaces. If they are autonomous, they won’t need so much space to maneuver around each other and around people. If this is the city of the future, what are we going to do with all the extra space?

So it looks like the race to develop the most sustainable transportation vision is a race to the Finnish! Sorry.

21st Century Cosmopolis

This guy, Steven Colatrella, has drafted a new constitution for the world that abolishes nation-states in favor of city-states. It also abolishes debt, credit, wages, and big business. In short, it sounds like a return to the original concepts of idealized socialism or communism. I don’t know about all that, but there might be a few ideas worth pulling out. I do like the idea of treating metropolitan areas as our society’s core economic and social units – clearly that is what they already are, and our political system is not consistent with that. Another idea that is somewhat interesting is that each city has its local currency, with a universal currency available but used only in transactions between cities.

Bayes’ Theorem

The Theory That Would Not Die: How Bayes’ Rule Cracked the Enigma Code, Hunted Down Russian Submarines, and Emerged Triumphant from Two Centuries of Controversy

There aren’t that many popular books on hard-core statistical approaches to predicting the future. Here is the Amazon description of this book:

Drawing on primary source material and interviews with statisticians and other scientists, “The Theory That Would Not Die” is the riveting account of how a seemingly simple theorem ignited one of the greatest scientific controversies of all time. Bayes’ rule appears to be a straightforward, one-line theorem: by updating our initial beliefs with objective new information, we get a new and improved belief. To its adherents, it is an elegant statement about learning from experience. To its opponents, it is subjectivity run amok. In the first-ever account of Bayes’ rule for general readers, Sharon Bertsch McGrayne explores this controversial theorem and the human obsessions surrounding it. She traces its discovery by an amateur mathematician in the 1740s through its development into roughly its modern form by French scientist Pierre Simon Laplace. She reveals why respected statisticians rendered it professionally taboo for 150 years – at the same time that practitioners relied on it to solve crises involving great uncertainty and scanty information, even breaking Germany’s Enigma code during World War II, and explains how the advent of off-the-shelf computer technology in the 1980s proved to be a game-changer. Today, Bayes’ rule is used everywhere from DNA decoding to Homeland Security. “The Theory That Would Not Die” is a vivid account of the generations-long dispute over one of the greatest breakthroughs in the history of applied mathematics and statistics.

Dense as all this might seem, it matters as we enter a more data-driven future, and we need people with the knowledge and training to deal with it. We should no longer assume that steering our sons into math, statistics, and actuarial science majors means they will never get a date.

There’s a much more hard-core set of slides on Bayes’ Theorem available on R-bloggers.

 

 

1909 – Europe’s Optical Illusion

Europe’s Optical Illusion

I was just looking at this classic from 1909, in which Norman Angell argued that any major wars would be highly unlikely in the modern era of free trade and interlinked financial centers. (I’ve linked to a paperback version, but note that this is in the public domain and a free electronic version is available at archive.org.)

It’s interesting to think about all this as we approach the 100-year anniversary of the first shots being fired in World War I on July 28, 1914. There are two stories I’ve heard told about World War I – first, that Germany was itching for a fight and found its excuse in what could have been a contained confrontation between Austria-Hungary and Serbia – it was looking to grab some territory and thought it could do that quickly without provoking a major conflict; alternatively, that the whole thing was an accident, where Austria-Hungary made a bad decision that ended up sucking in Germany, Russia, France, England, and even the United States.

Today, I don’t think the rational leaders of any country would expect to enrich their country economically by provoking a major war. However, they might seek an advantage by blustering and bluffing just short of actual war. Then if a miscalculation causes one side or the other to cross that line, or some party exercises extremely poor judgment, or an accident simply happens and neither side has the good sense to back down, war can happen. The most obvious danger today is a naval confrontation between China on one side and any number of nations on the other – Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan or South Korea. Any of these would almost surely draw in the United States, and the situation could escalate from there. Let’s hope cooler heads prevail if something like this were to happen.

 

protected bike lanes

Continuing on my recent transportation theme, this article on Alternet has some really good statistics on protected bike lanes. I am convinced that biking (a.k.a. cycling) is just a more practical way to get around urban areas than cars – it gets more people from point A to point B with less infrastructure, less cost, less wasted space, and no pollution. Plus, it promotes a more healthful, active lifestyle and urban design that supports that.

But for all this to happen, we have to build cycling infrastructure that is truly safe, and the U.S. just hasn’t fully committed to that. There are signs of hope, however – here are some of the statistics I’m talking about:

  • 27% of all trips in the Netherlands are made on bicycles. The Dutch designs are not secret but are available here (although their manual costs 90 Euros and it is not clear to me whether an English version is available).
  • The “pioneering” American city in protected bike lanes is…Montreal with over 30 miles (I just remembered, Canada shares our North American continent). But New York City has caught up and surpassed them with 43 miles. Other cities are Chicago (23 miles), San Francisco (12 miles), Austin (9 miles), and D.C. (7 miles). (Here in my native Philadelphia, we have not built protected bike lanes but have closed some lanes to traffic and painted some new stripes on the streets that would allow us to eventually separate them. Philadelphia has a burgeoning cycling culture and I think eventually it will happen. We don’t like to do anything first, we always sit back and watch what New York is doing for a few years before we build up the courage to try something new.)
  • Studies are finding that bike infrastructure boosts retail sales – 49% for a street in New York, 24% in Portland – and 65% of merchants surveyed reporting positive effects in San Francisco. (I’m not surprised by this – there is less space wasted on car travel lanes and parking, less time wasted circling around looking for parking, less money spent on parking, more room for trees and fountains and sidewalk cafes – you have more people in a given space, yet less crowding, with more time and money on their hands and a nicer environment where they want to hang around.)
  • And…duh…protected bike lanes are safer for everyone, and add more capacity to move more people at much lower cost compared to new traffic lanes.

The article also links to this fantastic collection of articles and data on protected bike lanes from “peopleforbikes“.

parking design

ReThinking a Lot: The Design and Culture of Parking

As I mentioned recently, I will return frequently to urban design and urban infrastructure issues because I think these are key to long-term sustainability – and I am talking about sustainability in the dictionary sense of a system (in this case, our human civilization here on Earth) that is built to last. I think of urban sustainability as having two major sides, which are obviously intertwined. The first is green infrastructure, which I am convinced is the answer to managing water and ecosystems. The second is the built environment – buildings and the manmade infrastructure we need to move people and stuff around (roads, rail, pipes, electric lines, and so on).

In the short term, we might think of land use as driving the type of transportation systems we build. But in the longer term, it is really a chicken and egg problem – the way we choose to get around will have a big effect on how urban areas are built. Parking is a big part of this, because currently most cars sit idle most of the time and take up enormous amounts of space that is then taken out of the picture for any other kind of use. Not only that, but car parking takes up so much space that we then need to use cars just to cross the distances taken up by other cars – stuff is just so far apart that walking is not as practical, not to mention hot, dangerous, and deadly boring.

So on that note, here is a new book about parking. Here is the Amazon description:

There are an estimated 600,000,000 passenger cars in the world, and that number is increasing every day. So too is Earth’s supply of parking spaces. In some cities, parking lots cover more than one-third of the metropolitan footprint. It’s official: we have paved paradise and put up a parking lot. In ReThinking a Lot, Eran Ben-Joseph shares a different vision for parking’s future. Parking lots, he writes, are ripe for transformation. After all, as he points out, their design and function has not been rethought since the 1950s. With this book, Ben-Joseph pushes the parking lot into the twenty-first century.

Can’t parking lots be aesthetically pleasing, environmentally and architecturally responsible? Used for something other than car storage? Ben-Joseph shows us that they can. He provides a visual history of this often ignored urban space, introducing us to some of the many alternative and nonparking purposes that parking lots have served–from RV campgrounds to stages for “Shakespeare in the Parking Lot.” He shows us parking lots that are not concrete wastelands but lushly planted with trees and flowers and beautifully integrated with the rest of the built environment. With purposeful design, Ben-Joseph argues, parking lots could be significant public places, contributing as much to their communities as great boulevards, parks, or plazas. For all the acreage they cover, parking lots have received scant attention. It’s time to change that; it’s time to rethink the lot.

 

the future of urban transportation

I like the vision of future urban transportation laid out in this article from Atlantic CityLab:

My utopian vision of how this could play out is to rededicate a lot of space in cities that was de facto applied to cars in the 1950s, after the death of the streetcars and the explosion of expressways, over to active transportation. Cars entering city limits would have to be autonomous or switched to driverless mode, as these will be deemed safe for all users of the transportation system and will operate in much less road space than drivers need now. (As a reference point, auto accidents are the leading killer of young people worldwide.) Parking needs could decrease dramatically, too, as most autonomous vehicles will be on-demand and active, compared to the 95 percent of time that current cars sit parked. We would have a transit backbone consisting of heavy and light rail/streetcars, and regional/arterial buses. The rest of the network and space would be slanted towards walking, bike-share, and other alternative modes.

I don’t necessarily think this is a “utopian vision”. I think a lot of it is just going to happen and is already happening. Enormous amounts of space that have been devoted to car maneuvering and parking are going to be available for other uses. The question is, are we just going to let all the space sit there or have a good plan for what to do with it? Some of it can be used for housing and economic activity, some for parks, wildlife habitat and movement corridors, and food growing, and some for managing water or harvesting solar energy. And of course, combinations of these are possible. But we do need to have a vision and a plan, which some can call “utopian” if they so choose.

falling fruit

This website, called Falling Fruit: Mapping the urban harvest, is attempting to be a worldwide map of harvestable food in urban areas. I think this is a great idea both for sustainability and for livability in urban areas. There must be a lot of fruit and nut trees on private land and in forgotten spaces of public land – median strips, the “tree lawn” between street and sidewalk, and so forth. But in many cases the people who own or control this land may not be interested in taking care of these trees. At the same time, I believe there are a lot of frustrated urban armchair gardeners out there who would love to take care of them, but don’t have permission to access the private property, or don’t know about or feel comfortable taking care of the trees on the public property. So a website like this could begin to connect the trees to the people who are willing to take care of the trees.

That’s just the trees we have now. If something like this took off, we could gradually replace more of our ornamental urban landscaping with edible landscaping – fruit hedges, strawberry lawns, and so on.  We could incorporate rain barrels, rain gardens, compost bins, even chickens and rabbits for people who are open to that. We could take wildlife habitat into account to, and start to take a larger view of the landscape – how patches of urban habitat can be connected, and how patches of urban habitat can be connected to larger urban parks and rural reserves.

By the way, I don’t mean for urbanism to be the primary subject of this blog. The subject is how our civilization is connected to, and impacting, and dependent on, the natural world and what that means for the future. But at the risk of stating the obvious, urban areas are where the people are so I will return to urban design and urban hydrology and urban ecology and land use and transportation topics fairly often.

EU considering ban on gasoline and diesel powered cars

According to Wired, the EU is floating the idea of a complete ban on gasoline and diesel powered cars in European city centers by 2050.

An ambitious set of goals, laid out in the document “Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area” (PDF), calls for a gradual phase-out of gas-guzzling vehicles in favour of electric vehicles and improved rail networks. The EU wants to “halve the use of conventionally-fuelled cars in urban transport by 2030” before getting rid of them entirely by 2050.

This doesn’t strike me as all that ambitious. We can and will switch to electric, natural gas, and propane powered vehicles a lot faster than that if the economics begin to favor it. And they will if, for example, distributed solar energy comes online in a big way. And I expect to see that in decade, not four decades. However, just the fact that most people and governments see it as ambitious illustrates exactly why it is good to get it out there and in peoples’ minds – it may be more likely to happen that way.