  Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3128 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: NYT: Stranded in Suburbia So, in short, if you want to fix Detroit then you must fix the infrastructure. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 4322 Registered: 06-2004 |
So many articles like this are based on oil as fuel arguments. The country must simply stop obsessing with oil and oil pricing in order to look beyond it for energy solutions. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 1302 Registered: 12-2006 |
Lilpup, we use oil because it is cheap compared to everything else we've come up with. Every other means of powering our homes or automobiles in the future will be more expensive than what we're doing now. So we're not running out of energy, not so long as the sun functions; we're running out of cheap energy, and it's cheap energy that drove our infrastructure decisions in the 20th century as Iheart quotes. So the point of the article is correct, and it's critical for people to understand it. Unfortunately, Michigan politicians choose to continue to bury their heads in the sand. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3130 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: Or it can change it's inefficient energy consumption habits. We'll eventually see which is most feasible. | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 233 Registered: 11-2007 |
Technology changes. It is true that oil is currently the cheapest feasible way of running cars (it is not the cheapest way of heating at all). But within the next ten years it is very likely that electric cars operating costs will be competitive with gas car operating costs now. On the other hand, the capital costs will probably be higher for the foreseeable future. But there isn't any obvious technology coming to lower the price of things like trucking and paving and plowing, and our existing buildings were mostly not built with any kind of heating efficiency in mind, so certainly we should be trying to figure out how people are going to be able to adapt life in Metro Detroit to this new energy pricing environment. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 4323 Registered: 06-2004 |
Oil's not cheap when war costs are included. edit to add: Oil is also the number one energy source for sending money out of the country. Alternatives might cost more, but at least that money would be circulating in the US. (Message edited by lilpup on May 20, 2008) | ||
Dkhbike Member Username: Dkhbike Post Number: 9 Registered: 10-2007 |
^^^Not to mention the massive federal, state, and local tax subsidies for oil and highways. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 2318 Registered: 07-2004 |
Since I learned everything I needed to know from the 20th century, here's my plan for Detroit in the 21st century. Outlaw unions Expand I-75 to 20 lanes Completely superblock Detroit so that it's all various justice, health care, college and casino campuses Expand I-94 to eight lanes Etc., etc., ad nauseam | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 97 Registered: 04-2008 |
Iheartthed wrote: "So, in short, if you want to fix Detroit then you must fix the infrastructure." Infrastructure is the least of Detroit's problems! I'm not saying it can't be improved, but improving it will not "fix" Detroit. The author argues that high gas prices should encourage denser cities. But if gas prices were to drop, would the corollary also be true: that we should live in less dense cities? If not, then the argument that the price of oil/gas should determine a cities size/density/infrastructure is fallacious. In other words, if there are inherent benefits to dense cities, then that would justify them, not a variable like fuel prices. Less than 10 years ago, gas was $1.00 a gallon. | ||
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d Post Number: 227 Registered: 01-2008 |
Yeah, Long Live D.D.O.T. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3133 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: What the hell are you talking about? There is no Detroit without the infrastructure! That's what has been wrong with that city for some time. | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 98 Registered: 04-2008 |
The "infrastructure" referred to in the article was the transportation infrastructure, particularly public transit. The article was addressing the transportation systems in cities and how they are affected by gas prices. Did you think the author was referring to the entire infrastructure (buildings, homes, etc.)? Sorry, that's not how I read it. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3134 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: Yes, I know that's what it was talking about. And yes, transportation infrastructure is severely lacking in Detroit. This lack of transit infrastructure, believe it or not, makes Detroit a less attractive place to do business. | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 387 Registered: 03-2008 |
When talking about transit, Detroit IS a blank canvas. Whatever the future ends up being, Detroit should be more than able to accomodate it. Who would have guessed it? Detroit... with the advantage!? Let's just make sure we don't screw it up again. Edit: Wording (Message edited by sean_of_detroit on May 20, 2008) |
