Chico, Sustainable

There is a company out there that will take a USGS topography map of your region and turn it into a 400-piece jigsaw puzzle, with your address in the center.

My wife and I received one this year has a holiday gift.

Despite using the most recent USGS map available, the entire vicinity of 8th Avenue, 11th Avenue, 12th Avenue and Henshaw is depicted as orchard. East Avenue from Esplanade to Nord isn't even shown. After some research, I found out that the information on the map is from 1978.

A lot has changed in 30 years.

In 1978 I was six years old, and I played in remnant apricot orchards in the South Bay that look a lot like parts of Chico today, with its small stands of walnut or almonds trees that stand defiant in the face of a Chico's growing population.

Until someone decides to build another block of houses.

The "growth' issue is tumultuous territory for a sustainability blog, but one that must be addressed nonetheless.

Let me begin by saying that I truly believe growth is inevitable. I also believe that infill is the way to go, and that Chico's "Greenline" and the farmland it protects should be respected. I think that tasteful, well-planned, well-thought-out, high density, green developments can and should be part of the future of Chico (and many other cities, for that matter). Denser communities are more energy efficient--New York City is considered by some to be one of the most sustainable cities in the country for that reason.

But new construction within the city limits must be balanced with the recognition of what may potentially be lost as a result. I am talking about open spaces, remnant orchards, lingering valley oaks and black walnut trees, and unobstructed views to the hills. Before we let the developers build, we as a community must take the time to understand the true value of these spaces even as we consider building on them, and we must ask, is there a way for both to co-exist?

The development on 8th Street and Forest, though not perfect, is perhaps one such example of this, as the builders have fenced off oak trees as well as (so I am told) a unique variety of walnut to protect and even incorporate them into the building plan. There have been criticisms that the heavy equipment is still operating too close to the trees that they are trying to protect, and is potentially impacting the soil around the roots. Nonetheless, I am impressed that any effort is being made to protect the 1-2 foot diameter oaks in the first place, which are a small enough size such that another developer might have chosen to eliminate them altogether.

Again, perhaps not perfect, but its a start. I have high hopes that New Urban Builders' Merriam Park Development will improve further on this example in the upcoming years, protecting and respecting the Little Chico Creek riparian area while at the same to adding additional vibrancy, both human and natural, to what is presently a vacant field between Humboldt Road and East 20th:

View Larger Map

Posted by jmiller at 08:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

It is all-too-easy to get the SUV blues as I bike around town, dodging one gas guzzler after another, each with a single occupant who always seems to be chatting it up on his or her cell phone.

But just when I think we are doomed, I turn on to Broadway and I am encouraged by the bikes in the bike racks. These aren't just any bikes, mind you, these are bikes with baskets. Or trailers. Or saddlebags.

In fact, I often think that bicycles in Chico that lack some sort of basket are in the minority.

Awesome.

Looking for a bike basket or trailer? Can't find one on Craiglist in Chico? Not surprising, as they are in such high demand here. But here is a simple tip: Try the Bay Area. The next time you or a friend make the trip down, search Craigslist ahead of time. I plan on bring back ten or twenty and selling them up here and making a killing.

On a related note, I read in an article the other day that a bike is 53 times more fuel efficient than a car when comparing food calories to gasoline calories. Intrigued, I did some online research to see how accurate this was.

What I found was that a lot of people have spent a lot of time playing eco-math:

http://gotoes.org/bikestuff/index.htm
http://kenkifer.com/bikepages/advocacy/bike_co2.htm
http://constructal.blogspot.com/2006/03/whats-mileage-on-that-bicycle.html
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question527.htm

But let me summarize: When you take into account the amount of energy that goes into making and maintaining a car vs. a bike, as well as the amount of energy required to manufacture and transport respective fuels for a car and a bike (gasoline vs. a breakfast burrito), and then take the average weight and biking speed of an American cyclist, and factor in the fact that a Prius is five times more fuel efficient than an H2, you will find that. . .

. . .a bike is indeed much more fuel efficient than a car.

Finally, my thoughts go out to Ed McLaughin and his family. As recent transplant to Chico, I have yet to meet him, though from what I have read our community owes a lot to his efforts.

Posted by jmiller at 06:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I can come up with a pretty good-sized list of the kind of businesses that I wish existed in Chico that would help folks to live a sustainable lifestyle. Someday I will expound on this further.

But I think it best to start off with the basics.

I would like to find a burrito joint that serves strictly organic burritos.

Nothing fancy, mind you. I am not talking about a place where you the waiter takes your order or brings the food to your table. I don't need a menu that has 50 items to choose from. And I don't need to choose between a spinach, tomato, whole wheat, or flour tortilla.

Actually, the last one would be nice.

But what I really want is an organic burrito. With tortillas made from organic flour, stuffed with organic black beans, organic rice, organic jack cheese, locally-grown in-season veggies and topped with organic salsa.

Grilla-Burrito, where are you?

Posted by jmiller at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Sometimes trying to do the right thing just isn't easy.

The dishwasher, hot water tank and my house's 1959 water pipes are conspiring against me and my eco-conscious ways.

I try to wash dishes in the most energy and water-efficient manner possible. The Green Industry would have you believe that this is a pretty basic exercise:

Wash a full load of dishes in the dishwasher, rather than by hand. Do not pre-rinse the dishes. Ideally, use an Energy-Star dishwasher on Normal Cycle. Allow your dishes to air-dry.

All of this is fine, assuming you have a dishwasher. If you are washing by hand, try to do so without keeping the water running. People who have bought dishwashers know they are not cheap appliances, especially good dishwashers. Many folks are stuck with what they have. However, when it does come time to replace your dishwasher, and you can afford it, get an energy-efficient one. Also, spending a little extra for a well-made dishwasher can save money in the long run in terms of being able to avoid maintenance costs.

Which brings us to the present dilemma. I have the Energy-Star dishwasher, and I am using the normal wash cycle, and I am letting my dishes air-dry. Yet I am still wasting water and energy. Here's why:

1) The manual begins by instructing me to run the water in the sink until the water gets hot. For the antiquated piping system in my house, that requires, sadly, about a minute and a half of letting the water run down the sink. The best I can do is time when I run the dishwasher to coincide to when I am washing larger pots and pans, otherwise I am wasting water.

2) If the water is not hot enough for the dishwasher, I am told that it will heat the water up itself, though its hot water heater is less efficient than that of the house. This is why the manual says to run water in the sink first to get the water hot.

3) I keep the hot water heater in my house set on "warm," which is fine a fine temperature for showers and washing clothes, but is apparently below the "ideal temperature" for doing dishes (I have been told that at lower temperatures the dish soap doesn't "activate" and clean the dishes properly). So even after I have run the hot water in the sink for the sake of the dishwasher, the dishwasher still needs to heat the water further.

4) Lastly, I could set the temperature on my hot water heater higher, but the issue is that the previous owners felt that the house needed a 50 gallon tank. Keeping that much water heated to the hottest temperature simply for the sake of the dishwasher (which is run 1-2 times a week) doesn't make much sense. The tank is less than three years old, so economically there is no point to replacing it at the present time (though when we do we will likely consider a tankless system).

It's all just frustrating. That's all I've got to say.

Almost makes one want to switch to using disposable paper plates and plastic utensils.

Just kidding.

Posted by jmiller at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

A friend emailed me with a link to the League of American Bicyclists Bicycle Friendly Communities website, and asked why Chico wasn't on the map as a "Bike Friendly Community." This surprised me, considering Chico's pride (now apparently dated) in being named "America's Greatest Bike Town" by Bicycle Magazine in 1997.

13 California cities are on the Bike Friendly Communities map, including Sacramento, San Francisco, and San Jose.

Provided that these organizations do indeed have their finger on the pulse of the biking community, what has happened to Chico since 1997?

I wasn't here 10 years ago, but I have some theories. My big one is that a late 1990's boom in development (both commercial and residential) emphasized the car, not the bike. And why not? After all, in February 1999 gas was 95 cents per gallon.

Meanwhile, the population of Chico increased dramatically during this time, bringing a larger proportion of drivers than bicyclists into town.

The end result--We have a town that is very good for biking, but could still be exponentially better.

For example:

--The crosswalk and island at the intersection of Cohasset and the bike path is great, but we could use similar ones along Oleander and Arbutus.

--The roundabouts on 8th avenue are just as convenient for bikes as for cars, provided the drivers remember that the person in the roundabout has right-of-way, even if that person is on a bike.

--We have a bike trail going out to the airport (and there is even a bike rack at the airport--how cool is that!), but navigating to any of the stores in SE Chico (20th Street and south) by bike is pretty hairy.

--There is ample bike parking at S & S, but the bike rack at Trader Joe's seems to always be hidden by some display (most recently Christmas wreaths) and thus can only handle two bikes.

--And the list goes on. . .

Perhaps some relief on the way? Today, (Tuesday Dec 18) from 3-4 there will be a special meeting of the Bicycle Advisory Committee which will review the newly updated City of Chico draft bicycle map in the Engineering Conference Room on the second floor of the Chico Municipal Building. The public is welcome to attend. I will be there.

Some City Council members and city staff are in the process of gaging the amount of community interest in having a regular Bicycle Committee, not just an ad hoc group. Showing up for this review of the proposed bike map is one way to indicate that you think that planning for bicycles is an important function of city government.

Posted by jmiller at 09:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Hello, my name is Jeremy.
Hello, Jeremy!
I am addicted to television.
It has been almost two years since I have lived in a place that had a TV, but the one-eyed monster still calls to me at hotels, pizza joints, my mom's house, the electronics section at Circuit City. . .

Like most children of the '80's, the number of hours I spent in front of the TV is mind-boggling. I "won" an award my freshman year of college for being the most likely person to be seen watching television.

I am since glad I have seen the light. Of day.

Of course not all television programming is mindless. There are shows that give us various versions of the news, that provide us with insight and information, and inspire conversation. Though I would say this accounts for less than 1% of the programming available to the average American.

What does this have to do with sustainability? Its just that there are so many better things a person can do with one's time. Time is not a renewable resource. And besides, the world needs doers, not TV zombies.

But what about time to just sit down, unwind, veg-out, and not think? What about watching something for pure entertainment purposes, like "Survivor," "The Simpsons," or a football game?

As much as I would like to list off a plethora of other things a person might do to unwind (like reading a book, or gardening), I have to admit the thought of watching an hour of "The Simpsons" will always be very appealing. But I would ask, is there something else that you can do while watching TV that is sufficient mindless such that you can still follow the program but is at the same time productive? How can the time be made just a little more useful?

Here are some simple thoughts:
--Food preparation (shelling walnuts, peeling potatoes, etc.)
--Knit
--Exercise/stretch
--Fold laundry
--Clip coupons
--Mend clothes
--Sort and roll loose change
--Organize collections (cd's, photo albums, crafts supplies, etc.)

But please, don't eat a meal while watching TV, especially a family meal. This is like adding butter and sour cream to the couch potato. Both the food and any people you are with deserve better.

Posted by jmiller at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Rice for the holidays? Why not? I picked up 7 bags to give to various out-of-town friends and family who are not blessed with having access to Greg Massa's organic brown rice, which is grown about 20 minutes west of Chico. I think it is the perfect gift for someone who cooks. It is healthy, tasty, and unique. It helps to support a good local guy who is doing good things for the right reasons. And at $3.50/bag at Chico Natural Foods or S & S (or $3.00 directly from Greg at the Chico Farmers' Market) it didn't break my holiday budget.

The ribbons were saved from gifts we received in the past year.

For more information about Massa Organics, check out the website.

How to cook rice:
1) In a pot, add twice as much water as rice.
2) Bring to a boil.
3) Stir once, cover pot, reduce heat to low and let simmer until all water is absorbed (about 45-60) minutes).
4) Rice is done.

Posted by jmiller at 01:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Okay, I understand that West Nile Virus is nothing you want to mess around with, however I am wary of the present strategy of fogging our neighborhoods with pyrethrin. Just because it comes from a pretty flower (the chrysanthemum) doesn't do it for me. Smell the flowers, sure, but breath them in? Biking in a t-shirt and shorts through a flower extract fog? In September, Karen Laslo in a letter to the Chico Beat cited reports that New Yorkers were already reporting health effects related to the spray.

I personally have long memories of the malathion spraying in the Bay Area in the 1980s, and we are still tallying up the health and environmental consequences. So you can understand why I am skeptical about pyrethrin.

I would like to inform the Butte County Mosquito and Vector Control District that I have my own natural mosquito abatement system in place, and they need not do any more fogging in front of my house.

My property is home to a small population of Mexican free-tailed bats. This is the same species of bat that provides mosquito abatement service for the city of Houston, where a 250,000-strong colony of bats consume an estimated 2.5 tons of insects every night. For free.

One study found that bats provided $1.7 million in insect pest suppression for cotton growers over an 8-county area of Texas; another study found that urban-based bat colonies added about $8 million to the economy of the city of Austin through tourism and other direct and indirect benefits.

No doubt Chico has its own unsung colonies of bats hanging out beneath the bridges over Lindo Channel and elsewhere.

The bat population on my property isn't quite as extensive (perhaps a couple dozen), but it does the trick. As a bonus feature, they provide me with an all-natural fertilizer--100% natural processed high nutrient content bugs--which I collect and add to my compost pile every few weeks.

Above: Bat box is placed high on the side of the house, protected from squirrels. Below: Happy bats (though not totally pleased with the flash of my camera).

Posted by jmiller at 10:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

For those that still have holiday shopping to do, check out the Green and Local Holiday fair this Sunday at the Chico Grange Hall on Old Nord Avenue. There will be many local merchants and independent artisans displaying holiday gifts, with the focus on green/sustainability minded gifts (ecologically positive, using recycled materials, etc.)

There will also be live music, hot dinner food prepared by the group G.R.U.B. as well as quiche and dessert available for purchase.

There will also be a raffle with the grand prize of a custom-made granite top table.

For further info. please call 895-9925 or e-mail redi-cab@sbcglobal.net

Posted by jmiller at 08:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Our salads have gone into winter mode. Rather than purchase out-of-season veggies from south of the border, we are enjoying adding sunchokes, watermelon radishes, and grated carrots to our greens, and we have bidden farewell to cucumbers and heirloom tomatoes until next summer.

The watermelon radishes can also be sliced thin to add nice crunch and zip to a sandwich, while the sunchokes are good raw for dipping, or when boiled can take the place of artichoke hearts in most recipes.

Both veggies are grown locally and can be found at the Saturday Farmers' Market.

Posted by jmiller at 10:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Taking my own advice, I kept my Subaru Impreza between 65 and 70 mph on my Thanksgiving trip to the Bay Area, 5 mph less than what I usually drive. There were a lot of cars passing me on I-5 and I-505. My fuel efficiency for the trip was 30.4 miles per gallon, 1.4 mpg better than the EPA estimate, and it took me about 15 minutes longer to make the trip to Mountain View.

This got me to thinking, what is the value of that 15 minutes? If slowing down five miles per hour on the highway improves your fuel efficiency by, say, 2 mpg, is the gas savings worth more than the time "lost" due to the slower rate of travel?

(Algebra teachers out there, what follows is a good real-world problem for your students).

Seeking an answer to this problem, I dusted off the 'ole 9th grade math skills and crunched some numbers.

Let's say you want to take a vacation from Chico to Yellowstone, 910 miles away. At 70 mph, you can make the trip in 13 hours. At 65 mph, it would take you 14 hours, but your hypothetical fuel efficiency would increase from 28 mpg to 30 mpg. Thus at the slower speed you would save 2.5 gallons of gas over the 910 miles.

At $3.40/gallon, this works out to $8.50 savings for an extra hour on the road.

Obviously, in a more realistic scenario 910 miles might be stretched over a few weeks of commuting, and the hour would broken up into smaller chunks (for example, driving the 62 mile stretch of I-5 from Orland to Redding at 65 mph versus 70 mph would take 4 minutes longer).

Also, though reducing one's highway speed is certainly one of the most basic ways to improve fuel efficiency (most conventional cars reach their peak fuel efficiency between 45 and 60 mph), I have mentioned in previous posts that there are certainly other ways to save on gas.

I would be irresponsible if I didn't mention that the impact on one's wallet is by far not the only reason to reduce gas use, as less gas being burned means fewer emissions (= healthier air) and less money being spent on foreign oil.

But for those folks that look at their pocketbook first when making such choices, I ask, at what price will the cost of gas begin to affect how we drive? Or for that matter at what point will the cost of transporting food from the other side of the country (and beyond) affect our choices in the supermarket?

Oh, and FYI, here is the average cost of premium gas per gallon (with taxes) on November 12 in various European countries, according to the Energy Information Administration (U.S. Department of Energy). For comparison, the U.S. average was $3.33 per gallon.

Belgium: $7.88
France: $7.40
Germany: $7.97
Italy: $7.46
Netherlands: $8.39
United Kingdom: $7.87

Back to our original 910 mile trip to Yellowstone, at $7.50/gallon that extra hour of driving would be worth $18.75.

Posted by jmiller at 05:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)