SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: abuelita who wrote (5410)2/5/2007 6:19:05 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24211
 
S.F. JOINS THE GREEN TREND
NEW DEVELOPMENT: Many companies eager to build in environmentally friendly manner
Patrick Hoge, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, February 4, 2007



San Francisco is aiming to become one of the nation's first large cities to require that new, privately developed buildings meet rigorous standards of environmental friendliness.

The decision to pursue such standards, which will need Board of Supervisors approval, follows similar actions taken in Boston and Washington. Smaller cities have also adopted such mandatory rules, including several in the Bay Area.

It is part of a nationwide "green building'' revolution that experts say is prompted by government incentives and mandates, growing consumer demand and fears of global warming.

"It's a virtual tsunami of green buildings,'' said Charles Lockwood, a real estate consultant in Southern California and New York, who has written articles about green building for the Harvard Business Review and other publications. "Within the last year, the entire debate has shifted, and it's not a question of can we go green, it's how do we do it and how quickly."

Green buildings minimize environmental impacts with features such as natural lighting, solar power, low-flow water fixtures, no-flush urinals that use a chemical trap instead of water, and even use of nontoxic paints, glue, carpets and varnishes. A popular new product is an elevator that produces electricity as it descends.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, buildings use more than 70 percent of the nation's electricity and more than 50 percent of natural gas. Roughly 15 million new buildings are expected to be built by 2015.

A 2003 study sponsored by the state of Massachusetts showed that the added cost of building according to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards was less than 2 percent, but the financial benefits 10 times that amount due to less energy and water use, waste production and maintenance costs. The study estimated that such buildings were, on average, 25 to 30 percent more energy-efficient and said other studies conservatively suggested that worker productivity in LEED buildings was higher by at least 1 percent.

Publishing giant McGraw-Hill, which owns trade publications aimed at the construction industry, produced a study that predicted 2007 would be a "tipping point'' for the residential green market, with most builders doing at least 15 percent of their work to green specifications.

The study also predicted that green building would comprise 10 percent of the nonresidential construction market, and last month, McGraw-Hill reported that school construction is the fastest-growing part of the green building explosion.

"We think that it's going to become standard for building over the next 10 years,'' said report author Michele Russo.

The firm estimated the green new-home building market at $7 billion a year and projected it would grow to between $20 billion and $38 billion by 2010. That is still only a fraction of the roughly $335 billion residential construction market.

Many local, state and federal government agencies already require that new public buildings meet the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED standards, which rate buildings in five key areas: sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection, and indoor environmental quality. Qualified buildings are given certified, silver, gold and platinum ratings based on a checklist. This has become the nation's most recognized rating system for large buildings.

In San Francisco, planners are considering proposing a mandatory green building program for large projects just months after starting a fast-track permitting program for developers who voluntarily met LEED standards.

"We think it probably makes sense locally. We are giving serious consideration to moving with that as a legal requirement,'' said Dean Macris, San Francisco's planning director. A spokesman said Mayor Gavin Newsom also supports the idea.

A handful of cities in the Bay Area already have mandatory green standards.

Pleasanton in 2002 was apparently the first in the state, and one of the first cities nationwide, to require that large commercial buildings meet minimum LEED standards, and that civic projects qualify for LEED silver certification. The city also has green standards for single-family homes. Other cities with mandatory programs include Cotati, Livermore, Novato and Sebastopol.

So far in Pleasanton, about 25 commercial projects and hundreds of houses have been developed to meet the standards. There, Centex Homes has almost sold out its 30-unit Avignon subdivision of $1.5 million to $3.5 million homes, each equipped with solar panels and other green features such as tankless water heaters and use of recycled materials.

There are dozens of other public and private projects around the Bay Area boasting or seeking green certifications, including a police headquarters in Cotati, Orinda's new City Hall, office buildings in San Mateo, San Rafael and San Jose, and mixed-use buildings in Berkeley and Sebastopol.

"Green building in general was one of the first environmental movements that started to cross party lines because it just makes business sense. There's a really strong fiscal case,'' said Mark Zahniser, director of the Green Building Council's LEED program.

Such buildings result in lower energy and water bills. Studies have also shown that increasing the amount of natural light, using materials with fewer toxins and increasing air circulation translates to greater worker productivity, reduced absenteeism and better employee retention, said real estate consultant Lockwood.

Brian Gitt, executive director of Build-It-Green, a rating and certification agency in Berkeley that is similar to the Green Building Council, said he is fascinated at the surge of interest among builders, architects, engineers and Realtors. The group's certification classes were sparsely attended three years ago, but now the council routinely sells out 100-seat seminars. It has a waiting list for future classes.

"Something happened about a year ago. No one can put their finger on it, but there was an incredible surge in attention to green building,'' Gitt said.

Today, the group is consulting with 70 public agencies around the state.

San Francisco officials say they have been overwhelmed since September with inquiries from developers who want to get on the permitting fast track in exchange for building green projects. Such a perk means developers are assigned a city planner in weeks, not months, and their building plans are also reviewed in just a few weeks instead of an additional six months.

A half-dozen high-rise projects are already getting fast-track treatment. But so many developers sought the speedy approval that planners decided to make green building requirements mandatory. Boston adopted mandatory standards last month, although those requirements aren't as strict as what is proposed in San Francisco.

Mark Solit, the Orinda developer who has proposed a San Francisco development that includes two 1,200-foot-tall skyscrapers at First and Mission streets, said it's not just planners who want green projects.

"More and more consumers are aware of it and want it and are willing to pay for environmentally sensitive products, of all kinds, not just development,'' he said. "Obviously the marketplace is dictating to us that we do some of these things voluntarily.''

Mandatory standards have opposition in the California Building Industry Association, which sponsors a voluntary certification program called California Green Builder.

Don Mull, who heads the Stockton-based program, said that programs ordered by local governments create regulatory inconsistencies statewide and drive up prices by preventing builders from mass producing houses.

The Green Builder program requires 15 percent better energy efficiency than the state's residential standard, and a cut in water usage of 20,000 gallons -- about 12 to 14 percent of normal usage. About 1,100 homes have been completed through the program, and 2,300 more are under construction, Mull said.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elements of a green building
Building

-- Thin building without closed offices on exterior allows

natural light to enter.

1 Solar heat reflection using light-colored roof coating.

-- Skygarden atria with plants for people on upper floors to use.

2 Natural cross ventilation.

-- Concrete using fly ash and slag (industrial byproducts) reduces carbon dioxide emissions.

-- Recycled building components (steel, composite woods).

-- Certified, sustainably managed, urea-formaldehyde-free wood products.

3 Cogenerator: generates electricity and uses waste heat for heating or cooling via an absorption chiller.

-- Paints and adhesives containing low volatile organic compounds.

Facade

4 Sun control, high-performance insulation and glazing.

5 Photovolatic cells integrated in glazing or facade.

6 Automated blinds for daylight control.

-- Individual lighting and climate controls from desktop computer.

Resources

7 Green power purchased for electricity.

-- Encourage sustainable services.

-- Fully integrated recycling system for zero waste.

-- Low-flow fixtures and waterless urinals.

Transportation

8 Close to public transportation.

-- Minimize parking.

9 Bicycle racks and staff showers.

Source: EHDD Architecture

sfgate.com



To: abuelita who wrote (5410)2/14/2007 9:48:18 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 24211
 
British Columbia goes green
by Staff
Good on ya, Rosie. But don't follow California; go out and lead yer elves, and we can follow you :>)

Run, run, run, but you will never beat us. We have too much sun and too many brains and too much money to let you catch us. Even if I have to take a second job so I can solarize every home in da state. Grrrr.

Click on the headline (link at energy bull.)) for the full text.

Green changes sweeping British Columbia
Liberals vow to fight global warming
Miro Cernetig, Vancouver Sun
The B.C. government is trying to out-green California with a sweeping strategy unveiled Tuesday to fight global warming by cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions from everything from cars and industry to the daily energy consumption of ordinary people.

Following the script of California Gov. Arnold Schwarz- enegger, who rode the green wave to a landslide election in 2006, Premier Gordon Campbell is promising to head a "climate action team" that will demand two proposed coal-fired plants pump 100 per cent of their emissions into the ground.

It will also adopt California's automobile emission standards starting in 2009 and encourage citizens to conserve through personal "energy audits."

"The science is clear," said the government in the throne speech. "It leaves no room for procrastination. Global warming is real."
(14 Feb 2007)

A plan to make B.C. the continent's greenest spot
Gary Mason, Globe & Mail
VICTORIA -- Gordon Campbell wasn't kidding.

The B.C. Premier promised a greener legislative agenda in yesterday's Speech from the Throne and he delivered. Mr. Campbell even upstaged California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose groundbreaking environmental-action plan of last year was seen as the standard by which politicians are now measured on this issue.

The B.C. government's plan goes further, making it a new North American benchmark.

Consider this: By 2020, the provincial government plans to reduce B.C.'s greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 33 per cent below current levels. That would put B.C.'s greenhouse-gas emissions at 10 per cent below 1990 levels.
(14 Feb 2007)

Premier's green plan will be the acid test for environmental concerns
Editorial, Vancouver Sun
As politicians everywhere learn to talk the green talk, Premier Gordon Campbell has decided to walk the walk.

The throne speech opening the legislature marks a radical change in direction for British Columbia aimed at seriously tackling global warming.

If implemented as promised, Campbell's ambitious green plan will have dramatic effects on the lives of British Columbians and put our province at the forefront of the battle against climate change.
(14 Feb 2007)

New rules threaten proposed coal projects
Wendy Stueck, Globe & Mail
VANCOUVER -- Tough new regulations for coal-fired electricity plants have cast a pall of doubt over two proposed coal projects in the province, with one proponent saying yesterday he is "extremely disappointed" by the bold provisions.

But the requirements are likely to be welcomed by energy experts who have argued the coal sector needs a push to embrace cleaner, but more expensive, technology.

David Slater, president and chief executive officer of Vancouver-based coal miner Hillsborough Resources Ltd., which is pursuing a coal-fired project with U.S. energy company AES Corp., said his company had not yet decided what its response would be to the new requirements, which specify that any coal-fired electricity project would require 100-per-cent carbon sequestration in which greenhouse gases are injected back into the earth.

But given that such technology is still in the development stage, it's hard to see how proponents would plan, implement and finance carbon-capture systems by 2016, the deadline set in yesterday's Throne Speech for net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions from the province's electricity.
(14 Feb 2007)

Too timid a response considering the climate change consequences
Bill Henderson, Vancouver Sun (submitted, not published yet)
Bill Henderson writes:

[This is] my e-mail to the VanSun editorial pages editor with a differing perspective. We need an expansive debate not the greenwash of business as usual that's happening. Yes Campbell and the Terminator are leading, but only in solving the political problem of fitting climate change into their agendas
Premier Campbell and his Liberal government are to be applauded for addressing the climate change challenge with the green energy initiatives in the new budget. But if the worst climate change possibilities are to be avoided the new emission reduction targets are woefully inadequate. The Liberals are proposing a 33% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from present levels by 2020 but the emerging scientific consensus is that a 90% reduction of GHG emissions is needed by 2030.

The Liberals are proposing government carbon neutrality by 2010, complete CO2 sequestering from any coal fired power and very laudable emissions targets for all energy generation in BC, but they are still subsidizing the oil and gas industry, still planning increased spending on car infrastructure, and - bottom line - are still committed to growing the present unsustainable economy. This will make achieving the already inadequate GHG targets difficult if not impossible.

The emerging scientific consensus is that a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels risks the increasing probability of runaway climate change as present carbon sinks start to add CO2 and methane to the atmosphere. Runaway climate change would almost certainly mean the extinction of humanity and most of the species we recognize as nature.

This means keeping GHG levels below 450 parts per million in the atmosphere. Given carbon cycle time lags there is already more GHG emissions in the pipeline. And we are already several decades late in beginning the needed change to a clean energy economy. The bottom line must be a 90% emissions reduction by 2030 (See George Monbiot's HEAT, chapter one, for the science explaining the runaway climate change danger and the full quantification of this necessary emission reduction target.)

Canadians are just waking up to the serious dangers of climate change and by the end of this year there will be no ignoring the 2 degree scientific consensus. Unfortunately, the inadequate, halfway Liberal emission reduction policies may lull British Columbians into thinking that their government is leading in fighting climate change. Like California, BC will be one of the leading emission reduction jurisdictions, but because the reductions do not cut emissions deeply enough the result will probably just wrongfoot the public with an illusion of climate change leadership.

Furthermore, citizens of the rich, developed world have huge GHG footprints - Canadians have an annual 19 ton per capita footprint vs the less than 2 ton global average needed to keep below the 2 degree bottom line. The present accumulation of GHGs has been almost totally produced by the developed world. We owe a substantial reduction in our GHG footprint and we need to show rapidly developing countries like China and India that there is a sustainable clean energy development path instead of their ambitions for a 20 ton lifestyle for their citizens.

What is needed is an emergency, conscious decision to get off of the fossil fuel economy path as quickly as possible, not merely a cosmetic "Clean Air Act' style tinkering with business as usual. This will mean a major restructuring of our present socio-economy but it doesn't have to mean economic and societal collapse. We are rich and resource fortunate. There is a possible clean economy with quality lifestyles with open-ended wealth creation opportunity. But we won't get there continuing down the fossil fuel path, continuing the drawdown and sprawl growth economy that fossil fuels made possible. There must be a conscious, consensual plan that organizes and nurtures BC unblocking rapid and massive change.

We don't need a throwback, heavily centralized economy, but we do need full accounting so that markets work, and government innovation and power to effectively regulate so that path dependence may be overcome and so that change of a necessary scale becomes possible.

The Campbell government is joining with California (and probably at least Washington and Oregon too) in developing emission reduction strategies. This should lead to increasing awareness amongst policy makers of the 2 degree, 450 ppm - 90% by 2030 bottom line, and, hopefully, the need for governance innovation - a new green energy, global, New Deal for only one possible example.

The Campbell government should be commended for starting to address climate change. But considering: "the more timid our response is, the harsher the consequences will be" the policies put forth in the throne speech are far, far too timid and as Canadians will learn this year, time is far too precious for timid steps at this late date. 90% by 2030 is the all important bottom line.

Bill Henderson
Gibsons, B.C.
(14 Feb 2007)
Just added this item. -BA

energybulletin.net



To: abuelita who wrote (5410)2/21/2007 11:35:42 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 24211
 
'Energy-rich' B.C. could be self-sufficient in 20 years
Develop solar, wind, biomass, geothermal and tidal energy, report urges

Published: Tuesday, February 20, 2007
British Columbia has the potential to become energy self-sufficient within 20 years, according to the Vancouver-based Globe Foundation, and could do so using entirely renewable sources.

The non-profit Globe Foundation, in a study titled The Endless Energy Project unveiled Monday, acknowledged that forecasts call for B.C.'s population to increase by 30 per cent by 2025, which would raise demand for energy by 20 per cent under current patterns of use.

However, aggressive energy conservation measures in building construction, a shift in auto fleets toward hybrids and more fuel-efficient cars could help reduce provincial energy demands to near 2000 levels by 2025, the foundation argues.

And the development of solar, wind, biomass, geothermal and tidal energy resources could displace the rest of B.C.'s non-renewable energy, including providing the power needed to create biofuels for domestic automobile travel.

The forecast relies on some assumptions, report author Keith McPherson said, one being that energy prices will rise and the cost of technology for solar, wind and geothermal energy will drop enough to make them economically attractive.

And some of the foundation's other assumptions, such as building the Peace River system's Site C dam and the gasification of coal into liquid fuel as a "cleaner" energy source, are likely to prove controversial.

However, John MacDonald, chairman of the solar energy firm Day 4 Energy, a contributor to the report, said its objective was to look at the possibilities.

"Within this century, the way we source energy will change fundamentally," MacDonald said.

"The point of this project here is that British Columbia is one of the places in the world that actually has the luxury of being energy rich," and if there is any place in the world where it is possible to prove renewable energy "it's a place like this."

On the conservation end of the equation, McPherson said consumption of gasoline in British Columbia is declining, despite the rise of SUV sales.

He added that if 10 per cent of B.C.'s autos were hybrids, combined with a 45-per-cent decrease in gasoline consumption among all other light vehicles, energy demands in the transportation could be greatly reduced.

In buildings, McPherson sees energy-saving measures, such as better heating control systems and recovery of grey-water heat, being adopted in all new construction and a significant number of existing buildings due to higher energy prices.

On the supply side McPherson added that "micro-utilities" that provide heat to business parks or residential developments through geothermal-exchange and solar-hot-water systems, or even electricity through solar-photo-voltaic systems, also become possible as the cost of technology comes down.

McPherson also sees significant potential for large-scale supplies being drawn from alternate sources, such as geothermal sources. In geothermal, heat is drawn from deep underground to create steam that drives electric turbines. A project at Meager Creek near Pemberton, for example, has the potential to generate between 100 megawatts and 250 megawatts of electricity.
1 2 next page
canada.com



To: abuelita who wrote (5410)4/17/2007 8:44:50 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24211
 
Cascadia: More than a dream

(Where is NorCal? I think that idea came from here.)

The notion that the continent's west forms a natural bloc has deep roots -- now powerful forces are joining to make it true
Miro Cernetig, Vancouver Sun
Published: Saturday, April 14, 2007
It's always been more a state of mind than a tangible place on a map. Yet the empire of Cascadia, what some dreamers have long believed the westernmost states and provinces of North America might one day be called if they ever banded together, may not be quite the fantasy it once seemed.

Cascadia will never involve the loopy idea of provinces or states splitting off from their countries, as some western separatists once hoped. There won't ever be a seat for Cascadians at the United Nations. Cascadia won't ever be on a map any time soon.

Where you will find Cascadia, though, is in the mindset of the millions of people who live on the continent's western edge. For them it's a concept, an increasingly real regional abstraction -- one backed by some rich and influential people, including Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates who has supported a think-tank that tries to breathe life into an idea that goes back from the time Europeans explored the continent's western wilderness.

Email to a friend

Printer friendly
Font: ****Cascadia's guiding principle today isn't nationhood but what might be best called regionhood -- the sense that Alaska, the Yukon, B.C., Alberta and the states of Washington, Oregon, Montana and Idaho -- often share similar regional goals and ambitions. Cascadians may be in separate countries, states and provinces. They often have different national agendas. But, the thinking goes, in an age when centralized governments are often devolving their powers, they often share similar agendas. In Cascadia, these range from environmental issues, a heightened sense that their collective futures are tied to the Asia-Pacific and a desire for more autonomy from federal governments that are thousands of kilometres to the east, in Ottawa and Washington, D.C., and often out of touch with the big questions to the west.

In fact, when taken as a whole, Cascadia has evolved into a powerful economic entity with clout its members alone can never hope to wield.

If you add up the states' and provinces' individual GDPs and populations, Cascadia is a significant geographic area and market: It comprises a market of more than 20 million people and what would be the world's eighth-richest nation, with a GDP of about $848 billion US, according to the Pacific Northwest Economic Region, the entity that was formed in 1991 by the legislators of Cascadia's provinces and states. Those same leaders will be in Anchorage, Alaska, from July 22 to 26, to continue their work to foster regional cooperation and the idea of an economic bloc.

Some, however, even look at Cascadia as bigger than that. If you add California to the concept, as Premier Gordon Campbell was wont to do in a recent interview when he discussed Cascadia, you would get an entity that would include about 60 million people and a GDP of more than $2 trillion, about the size of China.

"I think there is a very strong, natural pull of the region called Cascadia," he said.

Campbell isn't suggesting that there could ever be a full integration of the region, one that could ever challenge the sovereignty of either Canada's or the United States' federal governments. That is the pipe dream of a small band of separatists who hijacked the name years ago. But on issues such as climate change, Campbell suggests, looking at the region as a whole makes good political and economic sense.

Shortly after meeting with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Campbell said they both agreed the region could push their respective national leaders to take aggressive approaches on fighting climate change. "I think the fact of the matter is that, as the governor said, sometimes you can't wait for the rest of the continent to catch up."

Here's one way, Campbell believes, Cascadia might lead the way.

The premier is touting the creation of a Cascadia-wide carbon market. The U.S. western states have already signed initiatives to join in the creation of a carbon trading market involving the western states. But B.C.'s premier also sees his province, and perhaps Alberta and others, as natural members of such a market. Campbell promised as much in the latest throne speech, which borrowed much of California's climate-change agenda.

"We think there's a real potential for a regional carbon market," Campbell said after his meeting with Schwarzenegger. "We [Schwarzenegger and Campbell] also both agree that the larger the market the better it is. From California's perspective, B.C. offers some real opportunities to help them meet their goals [to reduce greenhouse gas emissions]. I think there's some real synergy that California and B.C. offers. I think the Pacific Coast can set an example that will grab both the imagination and inspire the rest of the continent."

To make that idea happen, Campbell is doing something never before tried by a B.C. premier. He is trying to meet with the governors of Alaska, Oregon and Washington to create a consensus on tackling climate change, and perhaps eventually a summit of the region's leaders in British Columbia.

"I'm going to be meeting the governors of Washington and Oregon and the governor of Alaska in the last half of April," he says. "There's lots of room for cooperation."

n

Cascadia is hardly new as a concept. U.S. president Thomas Jefferson initially thought the region, still unmapped by explorers about two centuries ago, as potentially a separate country. He even called it -- what might be described as the land west of the Louisiana Purchase -- the Republic of the Pacific.

That was never to be, of course. But the idea of Cascadia as a distinct region has had remarkable staying power. It's been called Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach's fanciful name for part of the region in a novel that imagines northern California, Oregon and Washington breaking away from the U.S. to form an environmentally integrated country.

Cascadia was further defined in a more continentalist way by Joel Garreau, whose book The Nine Nations of North America saw the region's common traits as based in market and lifestyle. The idea seemed to take on more concreteness in the early 1990s, when the region's leaders even formed PNWER. That is not unlike some international regional blocs, such as APEC, except that it exists within a continent.

Cascadia, however, has never really caught on as a mainstream concept. Its states and provinces don't always share the same agendas or the same national interest. They compete for Asian trade, they exist within different nation states. Yet, there are undeniably increasing examples where there is cooperation. Consider a few of them:

n After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, B.C. teamed up with Washington and Oregon to press the U.S. government to loosen its demands for passports when crossing the Canadian border. That fight is continuing, but both Ottawa and Washington have taken note and contemplated ways to shift border policy.

n Alberta and B.C. have recently teamed up with an unprecedented agreement to create a common market by 2009, one that essentially eliminates economic barriers. Called the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility agreement, it seeks to create an integrated regional economy within Canada, a first that some say will accelerate the Canadian West's power in Confederation.

n There are attempts underway to create a unified ports strategy on the West Coast to ensure similar standards and equipment for handling shipping. While the plan does not eliminate competition for Asian shipping between U.S. and Canadian ports, it is meant to ensure North America's West Coast -- that is Cascadia -- can be a seamless destination for Pacific Rim trade.

n Efforts are underway to create a viable carbon market, for clean industries to sell their "carbon credits" to those that are polluters. California, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico and Arizona have already signed a deal to create that regional market and B.C. is expected to try and join that new "carbon bloc."

n There are plans for the West Coast to create an integrated "hydrogen highway" from California to Whistler to prove the possibility of using hydrogen fuel-cell technology in cars. There are also plans to increase rail traffic between Washington state and B.C., a promise that has been made for years but is now happening with recent rail upgrades.

n And community leaders and Seattle and Vancouver have even put forward the idea of Seattle and Vancouver cooperating on a joint bid to hold future international events such as a Summer Olympics, a World Cup or a World's Fair.

"I think at long last the idea of Cascadia is beginning to get some real traction," said Bruce Agnew, who heads the Cascadia Center for Regional Development, a Seattle-based think-tank that counts the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as one of its benefactors. "It was the people in Ottawa, who said it was just a western separatist thing, part of that old Ecotopia thing. But Cascadia is an idea that has staying power. In terms of trade, regional transportation, tourism, climate change and alternative energy, there are common interests in this region that make Cascadia a real thing."

mcernetig@png.canwest.com

PACIFIC NORTHWEST ECONOMIC REGION

In economic terms Cascadia would be the world's eighth-richest nation, with a GDP of $848 billion US

PNWER Region (GDP/Pop.)

State/Prov. GDP* Population Alberta 180,300 3,413,464 B.C. 139,377 4,327,431 Yukon 1,255 31,151 Alaska 39,314 670,053 Idaho 47,189 1,466,465 Montana 29,885 944,632 Oregon 144,278 3,700,758 Wash. 267,308 6,395,798 Total 848,906 20,949,752

If PNWER were a separate country, it would rank ninth in total GDP, just ahead of Canada.

Country GDP*

1. US 11,927,094 2. Japan 4,505,912 3. Germany 2,781,900 4. China 2,228,862 5. U.K. 2,192,553 6. France 2,110,185 7. Italy 1,723,044 8. Spain 1,123,691 9. PNWER 848,906 10. Canada 794,260 11. Brazil 794,098

Source: PNWER/Urban Futures

CASCADIA ODD AND ENDS:

B.C.:

Capital: Victoria

Official flower: Pacific Dogwood

Official animal: Spirit Bear

Motto: Splendor without diminishmnent

Notweorthy Company: Electronic Arts, Jim Pattison Group

Home-grown celebrities: Bryan Adams, Sarah McLachlan, Steve Nash, Pamela Anderson

ALBERTA:

Edmonton

Wild Rose

Big horn sheep

Strong and free

Petro-Canada

Michael J. Fox, k.d. Lang, Arthur Hiller, Rae Dawn Chong

YUKON:

Whitehorse

Fireweed

Raven

No motto

Minto Copper Mines

Pierre Berton

Oregon:

Salem

Oregon Grape

Beaver

She Flies with her own wings

Nike

Michael Cassidy, Margaux

Hemingway

WASHINGTON:

Olympia

Coast Rhododendron

Willow Goldfinch

Alki "by and by"

Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks

Bill Gates, Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain

ALASKA:

Anchorage, Forget-me-not

Moose

North to the future

Arco Alaska, Alaska Airlines

Jewel
canada.com