**Mass Transit 1ac 1ac – economy advantage
ac – urban sprawl advantage
Download 0.91 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Urban sprawl is the biggest cause of habitat loss and biodiversity
- Habitat loss and species reduction risks extinction
- Urban sprawl and car dependence drastically increases air pollution
- Air pollution causes extinction
- Independently sprawl disrupts photosynthesis which causes extinction
1ac – urban sprawl advantageRoad focus and car dependence promotes sprawl which harms the environmentIslam et.al. 8 (Anna Brandon Lynn, and Bridget Maher, “Negative Environmental Impacts of American Suburban Sprawl and the Environmental Argument for New Urbanism” http://sitemaker.umich.edu/section007group5/home) The dependency on automobiles for transportation is one of the biggest factors in the environmental impacts of “suburban sprawl” and “urban growth.” Suburban growth as a result of highways being built after WWII made rural areas more accessible for development increasing the reliance on automobiles to get to and from the city for work (Southerland 164). This reliance has been furthermore encouraged through the relative decrease in gasoline prices since the 1970s (Southerland 165). City development in the past has been mainly focused on planning, “…towns and cities at a larger scale with a reliance primarily on automobile travel (Doi 485).” This type of urban growth results in a number of adverse effects on the environment. Growth of this nature requires people to travel larger distances for even basic needs, therefore making automobiles a necessary form of travel. One of the strategies for solving the overwhelming reliance on automobiles has been the construction of “compact cities.” The idea is that “compact cities” offer a closer community, a neighborhood, and a better quality of life that decreases the reliance on automobiles and therefore promotes a more environmentally friendly city. Mass transit and public transportation drastically decreases the amount of air pollution and reliance on oil. Urban sprawl is the biggest cause of habitat loss and biodiversityJohnson and Klemens ‘05 Director, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society (Elizabeth A. and Michael W., “Nature in Fragments”, 19)//DD Patterns of development associated with sprawl lead directly to habitat loss and fragmentation, with a concomitant reduction in biodiversity. In addition, sprawl plays a significant role in amplifying other threats to biodiversity. Humans alter the Earth's natural landscape in three main ways: through agriculture, natural-resource extraction, and urban and rural settlement (Vitousek et al. 1997; Marzluff and Hamel 2001). In many areas in the United States, settlement is replacing agriculture and resource extraction as the major land use (Heinz Center 2002). Sprawl and urbanization endanger more species than any other human activity in the United States and are more geographically widespread than all activities except for agriculture (Czech, Krausman, and Devers 2000). According to Meyer and Turner (1992), human dwellings and infrastructure now occupy 2.5 to 6 percent of the Earth, and approximately 10 percent of this area is covered with impervious surfaces. Habitat loss and species reduction risks extinctionRichard Tobin, Associate Professor of Political Science at SUNY-Buffalo, 1990, The Expendable Future: U.S. Politics and the Protection of Biological Diversity, p. 13-14 Every time a human contributes to a species’ extinction, a range of choices and opportunities is either eliminated or diminished. The demise of the last pupfish might have appeared inconsequential, but the eradication of other species could mean that an undiscovered cure for some cancers has been carelessly discarded. The extinction of a small bird, an innocent amphibian, or an unappealing plant might disrupt an ecosystem, increased the incidence and areal distribution of a disease, preclude the discovery of new industrial products, prevent the natural recycling of some wastes, or destroy a source of easily grown and readily available food. By way of analogy, the anthropo-genic extinction of a plant or animal can be compared to the senseless destruction of a priceless Renaissance painting or to the burning of an irreplaceable book that has never been opened. In an era when many people believe that limits to development are being tested or even breached, can humans afford to risk an expendable future, to squander the infinite potential that species offer, and to waste nature’s ability and willingness to provide inexpensive solutions to many of humankind’s problems? Many scientists do not believe so, and they are fearful of the consequences of anthropogenic extinctions. These scientists quickly admit their ignorance of the biological consequences of most individual extinctions, but widespread agreement exists that massive anthropogenic extinctions can bring catastrophic results. In fact, when compared to all other environmental problems, human-caused extinctions are likely to be of far greater concern. Extinction is the permanent destruction of unique life forms and the only irreversible ecological change that humans can cause. No matter what the effort or sincerity of intentions, extinct species can never be replaced. “From the standpoint of permanent despoliation of the planet,” Norman Meyers observes, no other form of environmental degradation “is anywhere so significant as the fallout of species.” Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson is less modest in assessing the relative consequences of human-caused extinctions. To Wilson, the worst thing that will happen to earth is not economic collapse, the depletion of energy supplies, or even nuclear war. As frightful as these events might be, Wilson reasons that they can “be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing…that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by destruction of natural habitats.” David Ehrenfeld succinctly summarizes the problem and the need for a solution: “We are masters of extermination, yet creation is beyond our powers… Complacency in the face of this terrible dilemma is inexcusable.” Ehrenfeld wrote these words in the early 1970s. Were he to write today he would likely add a note of dire urgency. If scientists are correct in their assessments of current extinctions and reasonably confident about extinction rates in the near future, then a concerted and effective response to human-caused extinctions is essential. The chapters that follow evaluate that response in the United States. Urban sprawl and car dependence drastically increases air pollutionFrumkin, 02-Professor of Environmental and Health sciences at University of Washington (Howard, “Urban Sprawl and Public Health,” 201-204)//I.S. One of the cardinal features of sprawl is driving, reflecting a well-established, close relationship between lower density development and more automobile travel. For example, in the Atlanta metropolitan area, one of the nation’s leading examples of urban sprawl, the average person travels 34.1 miles in a car each day—an average that includes the entire population, both drivers and non-drivers.17 More densely populated metropolitan areas have far lower per capita daily driving figures than Atlanta, e.g., 16.9 miles for Philadelphia, 19.9 for Chicago, and 21.2 for San Francisco.17 On a neighborhood scale, the same pattern is observed. In the Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Chicago metropolitan areas, vehicle miles traveled increase as neighborhood density decreases. Automobile use offers extraordinary personal mobility and independence. However, it is also associated with health hazards, including air pollution, motor vehicle crashes, and pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Motor vehicles are a leading source of air pollution.20 Even though automobile and truck engines have be- come far cleaner in recent decades, the sheer quantity of vehicle miles driven results in large releases of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons into the air. Nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons, in the presence of sunlight, form ozone. Nationwide, “mobile sources” (mostly cars and trucks) account for approximately 30% of emissions of oxides of nitrogen and 30% of hydrocarbon emissions. However, in automobile-dependent metropolitan areas, the proportion may be substantially higher. In the 10-county metropolitan Atlanta area, for ex- ample, on-road cars and trucks account for 58% of emissions of nitrogen oxides and 47% of hydrocarbon emissions, figures that underestimate the full impact of vehicle traffic because they exclude emissions from related sources, such as fuel storage facilities and filling stations. In various combinations, the pollutants that originate from cars and trucks, especially nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, ozone, and particulate matter, account for a substantial part of the air pollution burden of American cities. Of note, the highest air pollution levels in a metropolitan area may occur not at the point of formation but downwind, due to regional transport. Thus, air pollution is a problem not only alongside roadways (or in close proximity to other sources) but also on the scale of entire regions. The health hazards of air pollution are well known.24 Ozone is an airways irritant. Higher ozone levels are associated with higher incidence and severity of respiratory symptoms, worse lung function, more emergency room visits and hospitalizations, more medication use, and more absenteeism from school and work. Although healthy people may demonstrate these effects, people with asthma and other respiratory diseases are especially susceptible. Particulate matter is associated with many of the same respiratory effects and, in addition, with elevated mortality. People who are especially susceptible to the effects of air pollution include the elderly, the very young, and those with underlying cardiopulmonary disease. Carbon dioxide is the major greenhouse gas, accounting for approximately 80% of emissions with global warming potential. Motor vehicles are also a major source of other greenhouse gases, including methane, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. As a result, automobile traffic is a major contributor to global climate change, accounting for approximately 26% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.28 During the decade of the 1990s, greenhouse gases from mobile sources increased 18%, primarily a re- flection of more vehicle miles traveled.28 In turn, global climate change threatens human health in a number of ways, including the direct effects of heat, enhanced formation of some air pollutants, and increased prevalence of some infectious diseases. Thus, the link between sprawl and respiratory health is as follows: Sprawl is associated with high levels of driving, driving contributes to air pollution, and air pollution causes morbidity and mortality. In heavily automobile-dependent cities, air pollution can rise to hazardous levels, and driving can account for a majority of the emissions. Although ongoing research is exploring the pathophysiology of air pollution expo- sure and related issues, there are also important re- search questions that revolve around prevention. Technical issues include such challenges as the development of low-emission vehicles and other clean technologies. Policy research needs to identify approaches to land use and transportation that would reduce the need for motor vehicle travel. Behavioral research needs to identify factors that motivate people to choose less-polluting travel behaviors, such as walking, carpooling, or use of more efficient vehicles. Sprawl and car usage have been linked together, which has in turn been linked to pollution. Stone, 06-(Brian, “Urban sprawl and air quality in large U.S. cities,” 689-690)//I.S. A significant relationship between land use and vehicle travel has been widely documented (Transportation Research Board, 1995; Apogee, 1998). Perhaps the most compelling evidence of this relationship is provided by the handful of studies that has examined readily available measures of land use and travel within a large number of cities. In one of the most widely cited of these studies, Newman and Kenworthy (1989) documented a strong and significant negative relationship between population density and per capita fuel usage within 63 large metropolitan regions around the world (R2 1⁄4 0:86).1 Similar significant relationships have been found to exist between population density and vehicle ownership, vehicle trip generation, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in American cities and abroad (Pucher and Lefevre, 1996). Air pollution causes extinctionDriesen 3 (David, Associate Professor – Syracuse Univeristy Law, 10 Buff. Envt'l. L.J. 25, Fall/Spring, Lexis) Air pollution can make life unsustainable by harming the ecosystem upon which all life depends and harming the health of both future and present generations. The Rio Declaration articulates six key principles that are relevant to air pollution. These principles can also be understood as goals, because they describe a state of affairs that is worth achieving. Agenda 21, in turn, states a program of action for realizing those goals. Between them, they aid understanding of sustainable development's meaning for air quality. The first principle is that "human beings. . . are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature", because they are "at the center of concerns for sustainable development." 3 While the Rio Declaration refers to human health, its reference to life "in harmony with nature" also reflects a concern about the natural environment. 4 Since air pollution damages both human health and the environment, air quality implicates both of these concerns. 5 Independently sprawl disrupts photosynthesis which causes extinctionChandler 00 (Lynn, Goddard Space Flight Center, “Urban Sprawl Reduces Annual Photosynthetic Production”, 2-21, http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=20890) According to Imhoff's research, urbanization and industrialization have resulted in the development of mega-cities and urban and suburban sprawl. The environment is altered as a result of replacing land cover with roads, housing, and commercial and industrial structures. "Human survival depends on the ability of the landscape to produce food," said Imhoff. "Food production can be fundamentally linked to primary production or photosynthesis. If the capacity of the landscape to carryout photosynthesis is substantially reduced - then the ability of the planet to support human life must also be diminished." Imhoff said data from the mid-1990's from two different satellite systems were combined with land cover maps and census information on population and housing to study the effect of urbanization on photosynthetic production in the United States. Nighttime images from a Department of Defense satellite, which show a dramatic picture of Earth's city lights, were used to determine which areas and how much land have been converted to urban, suburban, or industrial use. Maps showing urban, peri-urban (suburban), and non-urbanized areas were created from the "city-lights" satellite data. "Using a computer, we combined the city-lights satellite data with another type of satellite data that records a measure of 'greenness' or photosynthetic potential of the landscape over the course of an entire year," Imhoff said. "By merging the satellite data we could examine how urbanization affects the potential of the land surface to carryout photosynthesis by looking at the 'greenness' index inside and outside the urbanized areas for the whole continental United States." Results show that urbanization can have a measurable but variable impact on photosynthetic productivity. Annual photosynthetic productivity can be reduced by as much as 20days in areas where housing and commercial land use is very dense. "However, we also found that in resource limited regions, human activity can increase productivity by altering the environment," he said. "For example, this was the case for arid and semi-arid areas where lawn irrigation and planting changed the ecosystems from shrub lands and desert to deciduous forests." A most interesting finding according to Imhoff was that urbanization seems to elongate the growing season, yet still reduces the overall productivity of the land. "Vegetation greens up earlier in the spring and takes longer to senesce in the fall, but has lower peak season productivity than similar nearby areas that are not urbanized," he said. "This could be demonstrating a profound urban heat island effect and have implications in climate change, especially in the northern Hemisphere where urban development is most intense." Analysis of the data also found clear evidence that human beings definitely tend to locate themselves on the most productive land and that those lands are being transformed into less productive types. "The results of this study should increase our awareness of the importance of land use planning especially in the context of sustainable growth and development," Imhoff stated. "Human survival depends on photosynthesis. If urbanization and industrialization continue, the capacity of the landscape to carry out photosynthesis is substantially reduced. " Mass transit focus is reverse causal – ending road focus leads to high density urban planning and more efficient land use patternsGiuliano 04 (Genevieve, “The Geography of Urban Transportation: Chapter 9, Land Use Impacts of Transportation Investments”, August 6, 2004)//DD The ability of transportation investments to shape or influence urban structure is also a widely held conviction. Today many urban geographers and policymakers are advocating higher density, mixed-use development as a means for solving urban congestion and environmental problems. "Smart Growth" proponents see transit-based accessibililty as a key element in fostering higher density development patterns (Bernick & Cervero 1997; Newman & Kenworthy, 1998). Smart growth proponents target expressways as a major cause of urban sprawl, meaning low-density, dispersed land use patterns. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.91 Mb. Share with your friends:
|