Monday, June 9th, 2008
While the State of California plays with the idea of restricting growth based on adequate water access, Los Angeles continues to move forward on its plan to recycle waste water. Los Angeles is modeling its plan on a similar project already in use in Orange County. The Los Angeles Times describes the OC plan as:
“There, officials use multistage, state-of-the-art reverse osmosis, microfiltration and ultraviolet light exposure with hydrogen peroxide to take sewage effluent to near-distilled water quality. The water is then pumped to spreading grounds, where it filters through purifying substrata to mix with underground supplies serving 2.3 million residents across the county.”
An interesting graphic representing the Los Angeles plan can be found here.
The big question to us seems to be: is Los Angeles taking a responsible step towards the continued health and sustainability of our society, or is it inadvertently exposing the population to a process that is unproven and potentially dangerous?
While current studies have shown that the process of recycling waste water removes known pollutants and dangers, we wonder about the potential for chemicals that are only recently being found to be present and dangerous in drinking water, such as pharmaceuticals and antibiotics, as well as other unknown dangers that may come to light in the future. Intuitively, it seems a little scary to think that we (and generations to come) will be drinking the same reused water that has been looped multiple times throughout the system, although scientifically, no heightened risks have yet been identified. Nonetheless, for something so integral to human health as drinking water, it seems we should be very sure about what we are doing before implementing such a plan.
Photo credit.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in Human Health, Los Angeles, Water | No Comments »
Friday, May 30th, 2008
The controversial Orange County toll road proposal, intended to relieve traffic on the gridlocked Interstate 5, is being revisited. The ruling of the California Coastal Commission, rejecting the proposal back in February, is being appealed to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. The Secretary has the authority to overrule the Coastal Commission because the route at issue for the proposed toll road runs through Camp Pendleton Marine Corps base and is leased to the state.
The appeal, launched by the Transportation Corridor Agencies, is being supported by eight local Congressmen, Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar), Ken Calvert (R-Corona), John Campbell (R-Irvine), Ed Royce (R-Fullerton), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach), Darrell Issa (R-Vista), Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) and Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley).
It will be interesting to see how this conflict is resolved. The situation typifies the conflict between creating more efficient roadways and protecting the environment. Clearly the resolution of these types of conflicts must be a balancing act. Ideally, “all or nothing” solutions can be avoided.
Photo credit.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in Los Angeles, Politics, Transportation | No Comments »
Friday, February 8th, 2008
The LA Times is reporting today that while the California Coastal Commission denied the expansion of the toll road route as proposed, there is still the option of appealing the decision to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce since the land is owned by the federal government and leased to the state by the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps base. According to the Times, since 1977 about a dozen of these types of appeals have been made and about half of them were successful. The other option for the toll road is to take a different route near the coast which could potentially take it out of the jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission. It looks like the potential for a happy medium might be reached after all?
Photo via The City Project
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in Los Angeles, Transportation | No Comments »
Thursday, February 7th, 2008
In a follow up to our previous post the California Coastal Commission decided to deny the request to extend the toll road on Route 241 to Interstate 5. This is a victory for both surfers and environmentalists. It will be interesting to see what, if any, more environmentally friendly alternatives to the gridlock on Int. 5 will develop. One common proposal is a widening of the 5 itself. We wonder how those environmental impacts will rate in comparison to those that would have resulted from the now rejected toll road. One of the arguments opponents made was that the expansion would have allowed for increased development in Orange County which would consequently do more damage to the environment. We wonder if the more likely reality is that development will continue but only without the necessary infrastructure? Might this be a Pyrrhic Victory for the road’s opponents?
Photo credit.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in Los Angeles, Transportation | No Comments »
Wednesday, February 6th, 2008
The California Coastal Commission is set to decide whether the proposed extension of toll road Route 241 should be allowed. The proposed extension is controversial mainly due to the location of the road’s interchange with Interstate 5 just south of San Clemente near the San Onofre nuclear power station. The major objections are that the 6 lane highway will cut through natural wild lands and potentially degrade the quality of the famous surf break at Trestles Beach.
The proponents, including Gov. Schwarzenegger, argue that the extension is necessary to reduce traffic problems in that already overloaded section of Interstate 5 (the main artery between LA, Orange and San Diego counties).
There seem to be valid arguments on both sides. This situation illustrates the tension that often arises between preserving the environment on the one hand and maintaining an efficiently functioning society on the other. Clearly neither can exist without the other, thereby dictating that a balance must be met. Whether that balance includes the construction of this toll road will be determined in the very near future.
As a side note, regardless of how the Coastal Commission rules, an even bigger issue not being discussed in this current debate is the woefully absent options for effective mass transit between the three counties. Currently there is a single Amtrak line that “runs” roughly parallel to Int. 5. The reason for the snarky quotes is due to the numerous hurdles in place to using the Amtrak line as an alternative means of inter-county transit, including: the need to fight extreme traffic just to reach the stations (e.g., from the westside of LA to downtown could be 1+ hrs after work), the many delays the trains face (including pedestrians being hit on the at-grade tracks and trains having to pull off the main line just to let trains from the opposite direction through) and overcrowding during the summer holidays and Del Mar Racetrack season.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in Los Angeles, Transportation | No Comments »
