January 17 Vancouver Real Estate Stats Update
I know some of the blog readers have a soft spot for Conrad Black (especially, I think, Blueskies, among others). In Getting Past Keynes he writes:
“Just from reading what routine articles and groceries cost Dr. Samuel Johnson in the 18th century, Charles Dickens almost a century later, and famous writers such as George Orwell and Robert Graves just after the First World War, one can tell that the rate of inflation from 1770 to 1920 was almost imperceptible”.
If that’s true then we should keep it in mind when we talk about historical increases in real estate values (especially when we cite Amsterdam). So, is it true? Is inflation (something those of us alive have always known) a relatively new thing?
Inventory for REBGV and FVREB attached and detached was 14,650, of which 4,801, or 32.77%, were over 90s. For the REBGV the numbers were 9,149, 2,928 and 32.00%. For the FVREB the numbers were 5,501, 1,873 and 34.05%.
REBGV detached and attached numbers for last week were 1,356 new listings, 247 price changes, and 391 sales for a sell/list of 28.83%.
9,149/(391*4.25) = 5.51 MOI.
FVREB detached and attached numbers for last week were 656 new listings, 158 price changes, and 210 sales for a sell/list of 32.01%.
5,501/(210 *4.25)= 6.16 MOI.
Combined detached and attached numbers for last week were 2,012 new listings, 405 price changes, and 601 sales. Sell/list was 29.87%.
14,650/(601*4.25) = 5.74 MOI.
First chart is REBGV, second if FVREB, third is combined. All stats courtesy of the REBGV, and while every effort has been made to ensure their accuracy, the REBGV assumes no responsibility for them.
Rob’s Report Generator
Data for File: SalesJanuary172010REBGV.csv
| All Properties | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 391 | $658,456.35 | $633,369.12 | -$25,087.23 | -2.17% | 60 |
| Attached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 244 | $443,837.42 | $433,423.20 | -$10,414.22 | -1.84% | 50 |
| Detached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 135 | $1,045,014.81 | $993,622.63 | -$51,392.19 | -2.67% | 73 |
Data for File: SalesJanuary172010FVREB.csv
| All Properties | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 210 | $442,559.09 | $426,272.02 | -$16,287.07 | -3.08% | 67 |
| Attached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 87 | $303,786.31 | $296,131.03 | -$7,655.28 | -2.45% | 57 |
| Detached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 107 | $551,728.04 | $536,382.48 | -$15,345.56 | -2.53% | 62 |
Data for File: SalesJanuary172010REBGVFVREB.csv
| All Properties | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 601 | $583,018.04 | $561,005.74 | -$22,012.30 | -2.49% | 62 |
| Attached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 331 | $407,026.40 | $397,337.34 | -$9,689.06 | -2.00% | 52 |
| Detached Properties | |||||
| Sales | Average List Price of Sales | Average Sales Price | Difference ($) | Difference (%) | DOM |
| 242 | $826,908.68 | $791,454.46 | -$35,454.21 | -2.61% | 68 |
93 comments
“Is inflation … a relatively new thing?”
Currencies in Renaissance Italy were known to lose value over time for various reasons. I believe a small amount of inflation is deemed required to keep a fiat currency regime stable.
“Average List Price of Sales $1,045,014.81″
When the Olympic tourists come to town next month and they see the average asking price of a detached house is $1 million, I wonder if they are going to say:
a) What a deal…let’s buy one! or
b) WTF? Why is it so expensive compared to where we live?
2 – Option B….
And you must be salivating with the rising inventory eh?
WoW
FTB, you must be estatic. More listings and fewer buyers, you may win your next bidding war, you RE warrior you.
Listings/moi surge continues. I guess this can still be attributible to seasonality, its too early to listen for the fat lady singing. That said, this trend is interesting – Rob, where is the buying, and do you feel that there are hordes of owners looking to bum rush the exits? What do you make of these numbers?
Rob thx for the data.
http://www.rabble.ca/news/2009/10/canadas-sub-prime-mortgage-time-bomb
Canada’s not so different after all. It’s just that we have an explicit taxpayer guaranty for all the subprime mortgages, the banks are not stupid enough to hold any risk, and it hasn’t blown up yet.
One thing I haven’t seen yet is the breakdown of who owns this garbage my good name is standing behind.
Slim pickings… however, for AC… something methodological….
[HuffPo] ShadowElite: Are They Responsible for the SubPrime Mortgage Crisis?
http://tinyurl.com/y98xm33
And for SenorCaballero – why settle for a 46 TaylorCraft when you can get one of these babies, CHEAP… (HP’s preferred leader would have read, “Batteries not included, some assembly required”)…
[HuffPo] NASA Space Shuttles Go On Sale – At A Discount
http://tinyurl.com/ybkxeez
Rob,
I know I asked this before and you disagreed, but do you think the high number of listings has anything to do with sellers hoping a couple of tourists might just be interested in their place?
I dont think it will happen, but everyone seems to think that visitors have unlimited money to spend and when the dust settles we will all be rich.
I think the number of sales is to be expected, who wants to deal with buying less than 30 days before the big party, but the number of listings seems quite high.
If there was a way to find out how many tourists buy places during the olympics (there isnt, is there?) I would be shocked if that number is over 20.
It is going to be quite a shock to everyone when they find out that they may not get personally rich of the games.
MOI haiku for WoW:
illiquid purchase
makes me rent to lesser folk
the race for more MOI
Thanks BS!:)
Well, its too short a time frame for us to break out the champagne and listings are still quite low overall.
Guess I’ll have to wait for more and more data before I send out the party invitations.
That said, January does not look like an easy one to spin for the rebgv and valley – comments?
Why are we referring to barely 9K listings as a high level of inventory? At 13,900 the market was so hot, prices increased every single month, and bidding wars were everywhere. January is a stupidly easy month for the REGBV to write about. They just list out how buyers and sellers and both coming back to the market after the holidays–AS NORMAL.
Honestly, WoW, give it a rest. You’re misleading people.
“If there was a way to find out how many tourists buy places during the olympics (there isnt, is there?) I would be shocked if that number is over 20.”
I don’t think the idea is that they buy a house here the week after returning home. It’s just a form of advertising. If people ever decide to relocate they’ll think “Oh, remember Vancouver? That was a nice place, let’s go there.”
Have to agree with VD – market conditions are returning to normal – thats all. No matter what happens in the next few months, the market conditions will be anomalies. They will not be an indication of where things are going. Probably just some cancelled listings (before the holidays) returning, and some people floating their houses waiting for the “rich Olympic asian visitors” to buy their place. After the Olympics, the listings will be cancelled…
FTB,
Sorry I didnt mean that the tourists would move here, I meant buy a second home (or vacation home, whatever you want to call it).
I dont see it happening, but some people seem to have the idea that people coming are all millionairs. Hell even if they were they could still really only afford a condo in the GVRD with the money they can burn.
VD,
Good points, that’s why its too early to call an inflection point.
But, let me point out something:
sales/list is bearish
MOI, even with low inventory, has skyrocketed
So, bears watching, that’s all.
VD, two questions for y0u:
1) what % do you expect listings to grow by this month (month over month)?
2) where are the buyers?
Anon,
Haven’t you been asking “where are the buyers” for several years now? and each and every year they materialize…
h
I know that I dont have a lot of friends here on this subject , but I will post it anyway
)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
“I know that I dont have a lot of friends here on this subject”
GG:
you are barking up the wrong tree
desperately searching for anomalies
to disprove the reality on the ground…..
AGW is real and we, in our ever increasing
numbers, are to blame…. 200,000 new people every day
Saturday’s output will replace all the lost souls in Haiti
If the expectation is that interest rates are going to increase in spring, then wouldn’t a tide of buyers trying to lock in fixed rates be expected?
Someone asked: where are all the buyers? I think every single one of them is putting a bid in on the one nice house to list in 3 months in the neighborhoods where we are looking or on the dump I looked at yesterday with 50 pairs of shoes in the foyer.
ang
Ya, lots looking I guess from the ’shoes in the foyer’ data, I don’t doubt it. That said, MOI is telling…
I have no idea how many listings will show up this month. And for what it’s worth, it doesn’t matter if 4,000 more people list their house next week and then no one lists until the Olympics. Anything below 15K is a sellers market because buyers are waiting to snap them up. And who can care at what velocity they come in at.
Where are they? Go to one of those Open Houses in your neighbourhood. Suguar went this weekend and said they were led in by groups of 4, group after group, for every minute of the open house and then some. Buyers are buying. House Prices might even INCREASE this month. In January, fer Chris’s sake.
I now personally think the market will rock on for January, possibly even February and March. It’s not like any locals are going to see the Olympics anyway!!!! Nothing will stop this train until either the bond market does or the government does. And they are both nowhere to be seen. Maybe, maybe, headlines of unemployment post-Olympics will show up… but why would they? Gotta pump the city.
As for shoes in the doorway, I am sure that is the case for anything up to 600k, which represents roughly maximum affordability for your two income 5/35ers, and some that have a little larger DP. Based on mortgage data from 2008/2009, we know that this group constitutes the largest % of buyers.
I am interested in hearing stories from the trenches from people that are looking above that “ceiling.” By buddy has had his 950k downtown apartment for several months without even one visit by a potential buyer…
“AGW is real and we, in our ever increasing
numbers, are to blame…. 200,000 new people every day
Saturday’s output will replace all the lost souls in Haiti”
So, following your logic, maybe war is not such a bad thing after all.
23, how big is it, and which part of downtown is it in? Is it in a desirable building?
VD
thanks, I don’t think your out to lunch on your analysis/views…not at all…I’m just saying…Got surging listings/moi?
Note, per HP, China real estate sales hit a wall, and sales here are SLOOOOOOWWW so far (and listings strong (I know, its off a low base, but my intel informs me that they’ve never seen a surge like this before)), so its interesting, that’s all…still, I agree with your point about lots of potential buyers/lookey loos circling the air looking for product…well, they’ve got about 6 months worth now to look at – let’s see what happens.
I’m going to try and do the following:
- not comment till the stats get updated next week…let’s see if I can do this…
any prediction on sales and moi? interest rate? please keep me update every second if you can. my wife is filing a divorce if i dont make up something!
I guess 2 hours does not a success make.
28, that was not me (27), that was an imposter/jokster/meanie!:)
27, my wife begrudgingly knows that i’m usually right in the long-run, and I’ve been right about pretty much everywhere else (ie London/US/etc), and that even her friends are like “this is nuts, who can afford a place now, who is buying, I’d never pay these prices”, etc…..
AgentWill comments on a brisk sales pace in January thus far (and sales are delayed in their reporting), I don’t doubt him, so I guess we are still low inventory and tight market, overall, and no changes to cmhc rules and interest rates yet, Olympics still ahead (will the local mountains be able to host their events???), euphoria reigns supreme?
I dunno, truth be told, I have not seen a huge uptick (ie. dramatically noticeable, as it was this time last year) in For Sale signs yet, and so any inflection point that may be building is as of yet unprove.
There, I said it!
sooooo…..perhaps MOI is more reflective of holidays/etc., and reported sales the same…let’s see what this week brings!
Rob, ANY CHANCE of a quick mid-week snapshot?
Anon #29,
Is this a major request — how about attaching a name with your questions, comments, etc.?
26-30:
An impostor jumped in, granted, but you still only lasted 2 1/2 hours. How about instead of risking a head explosion, you just resolve to supply one link/data point/concrete observation along with every “has the crash started yet?” ?
(Can I use quotes and question marks like that?)
I love ya, WoW, but you do get a tad repetitive. And to show my good will, Re your link last thread…. I think our next Europe trip may be to Greece, and 1/3 the price it would’ve been last year.
GG:
Please have a look at this.
http://www.clubtread.com/sforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=32595&SearchTerms=wedgemount,glacier
Scroll down a bit to where ChuckLW put together a sequence of pictures of the glacier from 1976 to this year. Look not only at the toe, but also the thickness, the width and the adjacent glacier to the left, joined in earlier shots and now orphaned. Look closely. I have seen this one up close with my own eyes in the very early ’80s and several times recently. The glaciers ARE vanishing.
You are grasping at a mild caveat, when the glaciers are clearly and evidently melting away. Some will disappear before 2035, some will hang in a bit longer, a few may even remain, but most WILL go, with disastrous effects on late summer river flows in areas that previously had water. We have sufficient rainfall, lakes, swamps and vegetation here that few if any rivers will actually go dry, but in some places they will. (Some will think “Alright! My Vancouver RE can only go up”, but I’m not so callous to the effects on people who depend on that waterflow.)
GG: Interesting article, thanks for posting some contrary views. However, I think the article illustrates a few points. One, the IPCC needs to work on it’s peer review process, certainly it’s lost a little credibility with me. Two, it mentions that climate scientists disputed the claims right away, showing that overall the scientific process is still working and there is a continued quest to ensure we get the data right and right data. Three, it’s not very effective at all as proof that AGW is not real. Note that there’s no dispute of whether GW is happening, just the rate of the glacier loss. As I think was mentioned earlier, the loss of glaciers which provide water to a quarter of humanity has the potential to be a disaster and a hugely destabilizing geo-political event, whether it happens by 2035, 2055 or 2155.
BC’s Real Estate market is one of the few markets in the world that has not been affected by the global downturn, yet.
We are always on the tail end of the cycle. US, Ontario/Quebec then west to BC/Alberta. And that downturn will come.
This nice bounce is exactly what I saw in Toronto in 1991. The market declined in 1989 – 1990 then had a bounce up, everyone started talking about the Real Estate maket was back, unfortunately it continued down until 1999.
My projection is that the BC Real estate market will start declining after the games and will continue for another 5-6 years. Aberta will fare a lot worse.
Are we there yet? Yes we are.
FTB
IF MOI does not fall below FIVE-O before month end, would you view this as a softening of the market?
Rob, thanks for coffee last week, I think your insights are well placed.
Rick
http://bx.businessweek.com/vancouver-2010-olympics/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fc.moreover.com%2Fclick%2Fhere.pl%3Fr2473959230%26f%3D9791
rennieknowsbest
Rob, so I’ve been puzzling some more over AGW. Specifically, you point that if AGW is such a big problem, why are we doing so little to address it, from a personal and societal level. There was an interesting discussion over at ‘The Oil Drum’, talking about this from a peak oil perspective, some really interesting thoughts:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6130#comment-579828
“…This appears to be the same kind of trading risk faced by a cubicle drone considering shifting to off-the-grid, shotgun toting, deer hunting, oxen- following sustainability. The leap of faith itself is extraordinarily risky. It cuts 180 degrees against default ‘USA Jetsons Future Narrative’ of flying cars and unlimited convenience @ very low prices. It does so as advertising keeps insisting that the flying cars are right around the corner. The sustainability process itself discounts measuring the risks associated with it; the measuring process is part of Jetsons’ lexicon. The process – as Gladwell suggests – rewards caution and trend- following rather than risk- taking, eventually, no changes take place because there is no way to manage associated risks. Like Paulson’s ABX shorting, there is too much to invest, we each only have one life…”
holy crap batman
four for sale signs (new and shiny) on my block this evening, incroyable.
Hate to agree with Rennie but most of the inventory got sold off last year (remember Mac Bulk?). T hat took care of a lot of would-be overhang and the other chunk got put on hold. In this article, he seems to be massaging Chinese buyers to buy after the Games whereas I recall his last article stated that no one really buys after seeing an event. I’m guessing his outlook is changing with the market. And his money is on what I’ve said for the past few months now, that Asian money is being parked here. Screw the statisticians. They can no more follow the flow of money out of Asia than Hoover could figure out how the mafia skimmed off the casinos in the good old days. That’s why he needed wire taps.
How else can you explain this:
Sold 5 years ago for 680K is. Appeared on the market months after our major decline for 1.69 M, then sold recently for only a few tens of thousands less. Now up for rent:
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/van/apa/1556021105.html
Who would have the interest or money to float that kind of insanity, if not a foreign buyer. Send the mistress to decorate the place, rent it or not, live in it or not,hold for X years. Gotta stash the money somewhere. Bonds? Fogghedabout it. GICs only for fools like me (and you!!). Stock market? They’re all in and need to diversify the profit.
Holy OUCH, Batman.
Holy crap, that’s a lot of new listing – sales are low as usual for the time of year.
Downtown condos (ground zero crash site) listings are up 20% in 2 weeks.
I didn’t expect the rats to desert the sinking ship until AFTER the Hellympics.
Inflation has been around as long as written history. One of the reasons Rome fell was that the emperors kept watering down the amount of precious metal in the currency in order to create more coins.
“One, the IPCC needs to work on it’s peer review process, certainly it’s lost a little credibility with me.”
The IPCC stated that there was a 90% chance Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 based on a WWF report, which was based on an 8 year old story in New Scientist, which was in turn based on an interview with an obscure Indian scientist who later said he was just ’speculating.’ IPCC head Pachauri called criticism of the claim ‘voodoo science.’
In sum there’s a hell of a lot more wrong with the IPCC than its peer review process. There was no peer review.
“Two, it mentions that climate scientists disputed the claims right away, showing that overall the scientific process is still working and there is a continued quest to ensure we get the data right and right data.”
No. The criticisms were brushed aside (see above) and it took three years and a media campaign, not a scientific campaign, to get the IPCC to own up.
“Three, it’s not very effective at all as proof that AGW is not real. Note that there’s no dispute of whether GW is happening, just the rate of the glacier loss.”
You’re missing the point. The IPCC adopts for itself a shield of the highest scientific integrity. Instead, we get the cheapest of political stunts masquerading as science. And it’s not just Himalayan glaciers. In 2005 the head of the US Hurricane Center resigned from the IPCC because the IPCC’s lead reviewer on hurricanes not only hasn’t published anything on the subject but started telling the media that AGW will significantly increase hurricane activity, a statement at odds with EVERY peer reviewed study.
Meth
thanks – I think thought that ’sentiment’ will not shift until the increase in listings/MOI becomes palpable, which does seem some ways off (that said, let’s see h0w many listings get added (if any) this week)…trend in motion?
The increase in listings would have to keep its same pace for over three months in order to get to that nice 2008 breaking point of 20k….so just relax…
samesame
you think it would take 20,000 listings to break the back of the market? and remember, we had 20,000 listings build up in a hurry in ‘08, so why could it not occur again?
not saying your not saying any of this…in fact, you are right, listings still low…fair ‘nough.
” We had 20,000 listings build up in a hurry in ‘08, so why could it not occur again?”
Because history never repeats itself, but it rhymes.
OK. I’m giving this blog a rest until the Olympics. There is no point in watching the microbes multiply 2 x 2. Call me when the patient is admitted to Hospital. Until then, you’ll find me on the golf course.
chip:
“Inflation has been around as long as written history”
Watering down the amount of precious metals in coins is similar to printing more paper money, or going off a gold standard, no? So, could it not be right to say inflation has existed as a concept since just after money was concieved of, but that it hasn’t been a continual feature of the global economy? (Just asking. I’m not touching the AGW stuff yet…
)
V-Dog:
“I’ve said for the past few months now, that Asian money is being parked here”
You don’t need to be an AGW-denier to to recognize that the IPCC has a full quota of BS in its bag.
I’m sure that’s true to an extent (different people have different ideas of income) but it doesn’t seem as huge as in past years (relatively speaking) and doesn’t explain the Lower Mainland wide strength, imho.
Purp:
I need to get back to you on the IPCC stuff, but…if they’ve lost a little credibility with you, how do you think all of us old cynics with trust issues have felt for years?
“You don’t need to be an AGW-denier to to recognize that the IPCC has a full quota of BS in its bag. ”
And you don’t need to accept that the IPCC is 100% lily-white pure in intentions and honesty to recognize that there is a heck of a lot less ice in most glaciers.
Irregardless of the cause, the exact rate of melt or ourt response to it, a great many vulnerable people will not have a source of late summer water that they have depended on for all history. That, of course, is the reason for concern over vanishing glaciers. Nothing to do with photogenic landscapes, mountain climbers or tourists taking glacier tours.
AC:
“And you don’t need to accept that the IPCC is 100% lily-white pure in intentions and honesty to recognize that there is a heck of a lot less ice in most glaciers.”
Less ice on glaciers is something I’ve recognized and expressed concern about. A glacier here in BC is one thing. Its the Tibetan Plateau that scares me, as I think you’re implying.
Its a policy question as soon as it leaves the laboratory. Who cares if the IPCC is lily white in its intentions or honesty? Nobody and everybody, right? My opinion is only one tiny data point. The fact is, they aren’t doing the job.
Where do we go from here? What are we going to do about it?
BTW, I didn’t mean to imply that I think the IPCC is lily-white etc. Far too much politics involved, and of course the scientists themselves are also human.
But I have seen the glaciers up close and personal, and there is indeed a lot less ice.
Not just the Tibetan plateau either. The dry strip on the Pacific side of the Andes, California, parts of Europe watered by the Alps, and more I’m sure. Closer to home Alberta, Saskatchewan and much of the American midwest will see less meltwater during the driest part of the year, and even here where few rivers will be in danger of actually drying up the lack of the ice-cold water entering the rivers will raise temperatures to the point of affecting fish.
AC:
I hadn’t looked at your pics when I responded, but that kind of stuff is so widespread now its really tough to deny.
What do we do? Where do we go? What’s the next step? Right now it seems as if we’re being told “martyr yourself and your economy in order to make a statement, because not enough people are going to get on board anyway” or “do this, even if its not a solution, because it will make us all feel like we’re doing something”. That’s a problem.
Purp:
Funny you should bring that stuff up. Matt Gurney wrote in the NP today:
” The lessons of history had been demonstrated yet again — when people lose access to food, clean water, electricity and shelter, the basic needs of survival will quickly erase respect for the rule of law and the norms of civilized conduct. ”
I don’t expect Canada to descend into chaos overnight due to AGW, and don’t envision a Mad Max lifestyle, but I do expect the climate change story to take on very real characteristics. Speculate away!
‘Right now it seems as if we’re being told “martyr yourself and your economy in order to make a statement, because not enough people are going to get on board anyway” or “do this, even if its not a solution, because it will make us all feel like we’re doing something”. ‘
Couldn’t disagree more.
The problem with being eco friendly is that it usually comes at the cost of something else. Walking is slower than driving. Organic food costs more than regular stuff. Turning down the heat makes us cold.
If you really want people to go green you have to make that choice the best one. For example make the bus free (this is an example, I know translink is already broke and i am not necessarily saying we do this). If I already own a car with insurance then really the only cost of using it is gas. If my friend lives a 10 minute car ride away then I would use far less $ of gas than it would cost to take the bus. It really doesnt make sense to take the bus in this situation because the car is more convienent and cheaper. If the bus was free then each side would have a good argument. You could also have a better arguement that you dont need a car at all.
I am still not even convinced the world is warming entirely because of humans and their love of burning things. The world temperature changes all the time, way before humans were around. There were 3 ice ages, then it warmed up after each one. Cant really blame that on SUVs.
I do think that what we are doing to the world is bad. All this crap in the air cant be helping most things. I also think it is probably warming up the world a bit. I do not believe that we are the soul cause of the temperature going up.
“Walking is slower than driving”
Who’s suggesting you have to walk everywhere? What if next time you were shopping for a car you weighted fuel efficiency more heavily into your buying criteria than number of cup holders? Or not wastefully speeding towards every red light only to have to apply the brake and waste gas? What if you turned off the engine instead of leaving it idling for 5 minutes while you’re waiting outside your friend’s house to pick them up?
It’s possible for a large number of people to have a significant effect if a little intelligence is applied at the individual level.
why can’t we get mid-week snapshots?
what does the sell/list metric look like this week thus far?
anyone know? anyone care? anyone care to know?
I dont own a car so all of those things dont apply to me.
People should do those things, and I believe most do. Yes there are those who dont, but there isnt much we can do about it. Take Al Gore for example. The guy preaches being green till he is blue in the mouth then goes home to his house that costs 10K to heat every month.
What I was trying to say is a good chunk (i never said all) of the things you can do to be “green” take more effort. Guess what, people are lazy. The best solution is to find something as good or better than what people currently use and is also more eco friendly. Then people basically have no choice.
I make an effort to be eco friendly, but it would be a lot easier if it took no effort at all. I think R&D into green technologies is the best way to reduce the negative impact humans have on the planet.
I agree, we suck at taking care of the planet. People are wasteful. There are things pretty much everyone can do. However, we need good ideas that work. Trying everything under the sun might not help much. We need well thought out solutions, not “do everything now or we are screwed!” mantra.
“The guy preaches being green till he is blue in the mouth then goes home to his house that costs 10K to heat every month.”
One would hope that the results of the preaching offsets a great deal of that. If he was using 10K in energy every month and sitting aroung doing nothing all the time, then I’d have cause for concern.
‘We need well thought out solutions, not “do everything now or we are screwed!” mantra.’
I think that’s a strawman. The only people who I believe are saying we must “do everything now or we’re screwed” are those who are trying to find an excuse against ANY sort of change, and somehow think that reduction of CO2 emissions means a return to the dark ages. Remember the ridicule Obama suffered when suggesting that people simply try to keep their tyres inflated correctly?
I agree that investment in R&D is the way forward. Solar cell efficiency is increasing, but could surely be increased more with additional investment. Fusion power always seems to be 30 years away – perhaps intelligently spent cash could improve the situation? I’d like to see more “X Prize” style competitions to encourage blue-sky innovation – one of these managed to get a private company to build a spacecraft, which goes to show how a large prize can motivate in new areas.
http://money.ca.msn.com/investing/jim-jubak/article.aspx?cp-documentid=23265372
will chinese buying slow – or reverse into net selling? Is the peak past or post tense?
Rob, “I don’t expect Canada to descend into chaos overnight due to AGW, and don’t envision a Mad Max lifestyle…” — Neither do I, I suspect the results will be somewhere between ‘business as usual’ and ‘mad max’, but how exactly it will play out I have no idea. The reason I posted that link was not about Mad Max and survivalism, but because I saw some parallels with the difficulty in doing the right, sustainable things beyond recycling and taking the bus. Real commitment to change at this point requires one to go completely against the status quo, and it’s a risk that can’t easily be managed.
Davers “..If you really want people to go green you have to make that choice the best one…” — Totally agree with this, and it often comes down to cost because all of the negative effects aren’t properly priced into products that are harmful to the environment.
Chip — “…You’re missing the point…” — You’re right, I don’t really understand what your point is? Clearly something went wrong at the IPCC, that’s unfortunate and it should be and was corrected. If you are trying to extrapolate that all the science is faulty based on this, that’s a pretty weak argument. In fact, in both cases, there is no debate among those involved that AGW is happening, only disagreement on the rate of thaw of glaciers and effect on hurricane severity and frequency.
FTBuyer “…I agree that investment in R&D is the way forward….” — along with an understanding that technology most likely will not find a way to harness energy cheaply enough to allow our profligate lifestyles to continue for much longer. There simply is no feasible replacement for oil in terms of energy density and cost. We’ve burned through a million years of stored sunlight in less than 200 years, it was a one-time gift. Pretty soon we’ll have to make do with less energy that costs a heck of a lot more, which may change our lifestyles more than fears of AGW.
Davers:
“The problem with being eco friendly is that it usually comes at the cost of something else. Walking is slower than driving. Organic food costs more than regular stuff. Turning down the heat makes us cold.”
I think that is actually the point. There is no measurable benefit to the individual to being eco-friendly in the ways that you describe. What we get out of being eco-friendly is the purely abstract belief that this has a positive effect at a scale that is so large that it has no impact on the hear and now. Can you think of anything else that works that way? Yes, that is correct. I am thinking of religion. It is also true that, just as with religious behavior, the merit lies in the inconvenience and the self denial itself. The more onerous it is, the more pious the person doing it is.
China stock market cooling…last time this happened, buying stopped here and turned to selling. That was an interesting time.
Look forward to see this week’s data…are we adding or subracting from listings…will MOI punch 6.0….hmmm, lots to chew on.
What will happen to the Olympics if there is no snow on the local mountains? Could this actually happen, or is there enough packed away?
“The problem with being eco friendly is that it usually comes at the cost of something else. Walking is slower than driving. Organic food costs more than regular stuff. Turning down the heat makes us cold.”
Walking is good exercise and de-stresses you. Organic food tastes better and is healthier. Put a pair of socks and a freakin’ sweater on for god sake! Also the excessively dry air caused by too high a heating level contributes to upper respiratory tract discomfort and infections.
There is a measurable benefit to the individual. We are a nation of fat, lethargic, stressed, miserable wage-slaves, constantly seeking more of what is seriously impairing our health and happiness.
“What will happen to the Olympics if there is no snow on the local mountains?”
They do have enough snow stored under tarps to spread out and make the course. It’ll be hard horrible snow, and there may be huge expanses of brown outside the crash fence, but that doesn’t matter to competition. They aren’t there to have fun.
A bigger worry is driving rain and especially fog, also heavy snowfall during competitions. That can just wreck it, but there will be a layer of what looks whitish on TV covering the course.
WoW/multiple.. re: China… the operative words are ‘knife edge’… much will depend on how Chinese RE/capital markets react to the end of QE and stimulus… clearly, Chinese investors are ‘jittery’…
[Xinhua] Chinese shares fall on liquidity concerns
http://tinyurl.com/yzbv3bj
AC/63 re: “We are a nation of…. ” Somehow, I am minded to think of Hunter S. Thompson’s brilliant take on that theme (with apologies to SenorCaballero’s Arizona compadres)….
… It’s a strange world. Some people get rich and others eat shit and die. Who knows? If there is in fact, a heaven and a hell, all we know for sure is that hell will be a viciously overcrowded version of Phoenix — a clean well lighted place full of sunshine and bromides and fast cars where almost everybody seems vaguely happy, except those who know in their hearts what is missing… And being driven slowly and quietly into the kind of terminal craziness that comes with finally understanding that the one thing you want is not there. Missing. Back-ordered. No tengo. Vaya con dios. Grow up! Small is better. Take what you can get…
Gonzo Papers, Vol. 2: Generation of Swine: Tales of Shame and Degradation in the ’80s (1988)
Afterthought re: AC64/Owelympics… snow [or lack thereof] may well prove to be the least of VANOC’s problems….
[NY Post] Intrawest foreclosure a threat to Olympics
http://tinyurl.com/ye58w2w
PS – Capital markets are having a little melt-down this morning…
FT Buyer:
I wrote: ‘Right now it seems as if we’re being told “martyr yourself …” or “do this, even if its not a solution, …”. ‘
And you said:
“Couldn’t disagree more.”
Let me see if I can clarify my thoughts. On a personal basis, I can’t do my business without burning lots of carbon. I’m in competition with lots of guys who do my business the same way. If I, on my own, stop burning to a significant degree, I’ll be out of business, and my competitors will replace me and continue doing what they’re doing. Its possible that even with my carbon footprint reduced to zero they’ll just replace the output when they take my business over. I’ve martyred myself in order to do something good, yet accomplished nothing, or next to nothing. I certainly haven’t accomplished anything significant.
On a larger scale let’s say Canada reduces its carbon footprint substantially. We close down the tar sands, stop running pulp mills and sawmills, stop burning fossil fuels to transport goods and provide services. Additionally, we raise taxes in order to send money to developing countries (as proposed in Copenhagen).
Our economy undoubtedly suffers. Meanwhile, China, the US, India, Russia, Brazil, etc, all continue doing what they’ve been doing. There is negligible net benefit to the climate issue, because we’re small players. We’ve martyred ourselves to no good end.
The critical components are not those who get on board, but those who don’t. This has been a problem with AGW since the beginning, and we haven’t realistically addressed it. The message has been “It has to start somewhere, so it may as well start with us”. That message doesn’t have a lot of traction, and hasn’t been succesful. (Again, you don;t have to be an AGW denier to see that, imho).
As far as doing “this”, even if its not a solution, cap and trade is an example. By monetizing carbon output (a sound idea in some respects) we almost always allow for more of it. I can have a big carbon footprint, buy offsets from Al Gore, pass the cost along to you, the customer, and both AL and I get rich without actually reducing my footprint. Everyone feels good because we’re all green. (That’s why if you look at an oil company’s website they’ll spend a lot of time explaining how green they are).
Recycling or driving a Prius or a flex fuel SUV is the same thing. Its not making a big enough difference, but it makes us feel good. I know people who recycle and wash the cans out with hot water in order to be clean. Then we pay a big truck to drive around picking the stuff up (the green way would be to just let the binners have their way with it).
Anyway, I’m not saying we shouldn’t do anything. I’m saying that if AGW is a real problem we aren’t doing what we need to do.
“It’s possible for a large number of people to have a significant effect if a little intelligence is applied at the individual level.”
I disagree because of the inclusion of the word “little”. To solve a global challenge that effects us all we’ll all have to do something (willingly or not). But, a little intelligent action isn’t going to stop glaciers from melting. We’re looking at some pretty big changes, and they didn’t occur because of marginal actions. If we caused GW we did it as a result of the Industrial Rev., population and technology explosion.
“What if next time you were shopping for a car you weighted fuel efficiency more heavily into your buying criteria than number of cup holders?”
I think fuel efficiency has been shown to promote fuel consumption (not sure about that – could be an urban myth) but the idea is that if I have $100 to spend on fuel I’ll do it. If I get 10 miles/gallon I drive less, if I get 20/gallon I drive more. Efficient use of something isn’t the same as not using something.
re AL Gore:
“One would hope that the results of the preaching offsets a great deal of that. If he was using 10K in energy every month and sitting aroung doing nothing all the time, then I’d have cause for concern.”
Hope springs eternal, I guess, but I think Mr. Gore has been a net negative for AGW. The choir bought into him, but he hardened the position of many opponents. Frankly, if you’ve got a dispute you need to convince the opponents, not the people who agree with you. AL Gore gave up on that, I think, quite a while ago.
davers:
“I make an effort to be eco friendly, but it would be a lot easier if it took no effort at all”. That’s part of the problem. The frog would like to jump out of the boiling water, but it seems like too much work.
“I think R&D into green technologies is the best way to reduce the negative impact humans have on the planet”. No offense, but that’s magical thinking. R&D may or may not come up with a solution. While we’re waiting we’re still, apparently, burning down the house. R&D may fix many things, but in many areas we’ve hit brick walls.
purp:
“I saw some parallels with the difficulty in doing the right, sustainable things beyond recycling and taking the bus. Real commitment to change at this point requires one to go completely against the status quo, and it’s a risk that can’t easily be managed.”
Exactly. Its sort of like rasing the flag of rebellion. Works great when everyone is onside. Not so much when you’re the only guy to object. Compare dissidents to victorious revolutionaries. What’s the dif? The number of people getting onside. What gets them onside? Not R&D.
The idea that if you want people do do something you have to make it the best or easiest choice is not, I think, supported by history. Who here thinks they can define “best” successfully and get the majority of people to agree with them? What significant changes in human history occurred as a result of taking the easiest route?
Newcomer:
Insightful, and yet not inflammatory. Nicely done!
AC:
“We are a nation of fat, lethargic, stressed, miserable wage-slaves, constantly seeking more of what is seriously impairing our health and happiness.”
If that’s true then you’re essentially saying, I think, that we want to harm ourselves even when we know better (are you saying we’re all addicts?
) If that’s the case, what’s the solution? I can’t get that old joke about how many psychologists it takes to change a lightbulb out of my mind. (Anyone who knows the punchline gets a prize).
HP:
I eat and eat and eat, and yet…I’m still hungry.
“along with an understanding that technology most likely will not find a way to harness energy cheaply enough to allow our profligate lifestyles to continue for much longer.”
Oil is going to start getting expensive the scarcer it gets. At some point alternative becomes the economically feasible option. Yes, we’ll feel a small “bump” as we cross that line, but it’s a one-time cost.
With additional R&D, alternate energy could become feasible before that point.
Hydrogen has a much higher energy density than oil.
can’t get that old joke about how many psychologists it takes to change a lightbulb out of my mind.
…….only one but the light bulb has to really want to change
OT:
Lenders foreclose on Intrawest
Banks have seized Intrawest Holdings, the owner of the Whistler ski resort that’s hosting the Olympic downhill races next month, after the resort operator missed a big debt payment, and now plan to auction the company off right in the middle of the games.
http://tinyurl.com/y94qouw
BS, will this impact the listings surge/MOI in any way?
AgentWill says sales are brisk, I don’t doubt him – but could the whistler thing change sentiment at all? thoughts?
70
No one understands the foreclosure, nor with they care. The mountain will still be there, there will be some operator that will allow you to ski, and the mountains will remain a selling feature for Vancouver.
“Let me see if I can clarify my thoughts. On a personal basis, I can’t do my business without burning lots of carbon. I’m in competition with lots of guys who do my business the same way. If I, on my own, stop burning to a significant degree, I’ll be out of business, and my competitors will replace me and continue doing what they’re doing. Its possible that even with my carbon footprint reduced to zero they’ll just replace the output when they take my business over. I’ve martyred myself in order to do something good, yet accomplished nothing, or next to nothing. I certainly haven’t accomplished anything significant.”
That’s kind of my point – you’re arguing your case as if it’s an “all or nothing” scenario, when in fact it isn’t. Let’s assume for a second that you don’t power down your office’s computers overnight, just to contrive an example – how would it affect your business in a way which means you cease to be competetive in the market? Too many people seem to think that change, any change, will mean they have to suffer as a consequence. I don’t believe that to be true.
70 (WoW) –
I know you’re keen for a big meltdown, but I’m just curious — can you think of any reason why what happens in the 2 months prior to the Olympics will have any effect on what happens afterwards? Could there be a trend that starts that could actually continue through? I don’t think so. When you have an upcoming event that has been anticipated for almost a decade, and is quintessential hype, you have no way of knowing how the aftermath will pan out.
Anything pertaining to “hype” and “Vancouver” will start from scratch on about March 1, 2010.
So, just a suggestion, if you really want to talk RE between now and then, go out and find some points for discussion. Wander and open house, read the Financial Times about mortgage trends, speculate on hyperinflation, but don’t fuss with week-to-week changes in the numbers, because it’s irrelevant.
Throw us a bone — give us a topic for conversation.
Yours truly,
WBWUCR’t'13?
>> and now plan to auction the company off right in the middle of the games.
Cute. But, since Whistler is only one of a bunch of resorts all across North America, and since one of the owners was Lehman Brothers, it is indeed “off topic” as it is not a judgment on Van RE or the BC economy.
But, still, it might get people *thinking* about Van RE or the BC economy, and they might be less inclined to invest after a little research…
WBWUCR’t'13?
On the other hand, from their website:
>> Ownership opportunities are currently available in world-renowned Whistler Blackcomb – a host venue for the upcoming 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games; Honua Kai – the only new whole ownership condo hotel to hit Ka’anapali Beach, Maui in more than 25 years; Florida’s Sandestin Golf and Beach Resort with 2,400 acres of white sand beaches and world class golf courses; and Tremblant resort in Quebec – ranked by Ski Magazine’s as the #1 Eastern Ski Resort for 13 consecutive years.<<
So, how many empty condos does Intrawest own? And what sort of bearish/bullish attitude will the new “owners” have?
What is would Intrawest be worth in a good market — a billion? 5 billion? I have no idea. But if the only buyer is one who wants to liquidate the assets rather than sit around for a market turnaround, THAT could be a judgment on Vancouver RE…
WB… WU… CR… ‘t13???
WoW, what do you think Intrawest is worth?
vancouver school board laying off up to 800 teachers
bc gov’t just announced a 2nd round of layoffs
nvan school board looking to close 3 schools
i think the negative newsflow is pretty high at the moment
ac, gotcha, will do
FTB, “Hydrogen has a much higher energy density than oil.” — Hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source like oil. It doesn’t exist as a fuel in nature, it needs to be produced by breaking apart other molecules (water, natural gas etc.).
“Oil is going to start getting expensive the scarcer it gets. At some point alternative becomes the economically feasible option” — This is exactly my point, the cost where alternatives become feasible is much higher than fossil fuels are today. The effect will be that we will be spending a greater proportion of our energy and wealth acquiring useful energy, leaving less for other pursuits. Google EROEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) to get a better explanation.
An excellent book on the subject is Thomas Homer Dixon “The Upside of Down” or websites like ‘The Oil Drum’ or ‘The Energy Bulletin’.
The main point is, there is no combination of alternative sources of energy that will allow us to continue ‘business as usual’.
WhyBuy75+76… the following piece may help to contextualize /answer your question (it’s only been a couple of months since publication and quite relevant to IntraWest)… It is also of doubtless interest to MIA’s folks [MIA, prices are always stickier on the way down; at least initially - but when events precipitate/necessitate the proverbial 'rush to the exits', not so much]… we shall see…
[ROB] The great B.C. real estate bust
http://tinyurl.com/yfecca4
SenorCaballero/67…. “I eat and eat and eat, and yet…I’m still hungry.”… That sounds quite deep!… is this the direction you’re heading in?…
http://tinyurl.com/yh7ujos
FTB58
If I save 10 lives does that give me the right to kill a few others? Just because Al Gore has convinced people to go green that doesnt absolve him. Practice what you preach.
AC63:
I walk/bike/bus/skytrain everywhere. I dont own a car. The things are way too expensive and just arent worth the trouble. However I dont have kids and live in the city, so this doesnt apply to everyone.
Organic food isnt really all that green anyway. It takes way more land to produce the same amount of food as using pestacides, due to all the lost crops. I heard in a documentary a few years ago that if the entire world was to eat organic it would talk 1/3 of the earths farmable land to feed everyone.
For the heat thing, I do leave my place pretty cold. I am just trying to give reasons why other people arent being green.
Rob67
I dont mean to say that nothing should be done but R&D, but lots of the money spent now on intermediate solutions could have found long term ones. There is lots the average person can do to reduce their carbon footprint, and I dont mean to discount any of that. What I am talking about is things like hybrid cars. Sure they save the owner a few bucks on gas but all the batteries and the extra electric motor costs could very well offset the benifit to the environment. I think it is terribly stupid to have the gas engine haul the electric one (and its batteries) around and vice versa. A car only needs 1 motor. Check out “who killed the electric car” if you want to know a few reasons why there arent many full electric cars out there.
FTB68
“Hydrogen has a much higher energy density than oil.”
Not sure I buy that. Got a source?
Hydrogen is possibly the stupidest fuel ever. It is hard to transport and has countless issues in cold weather, not to mention storage. The idea is just insane. Take water, use a bunch of power to seperate into hydrogen and oxygen. Ship it places. Put it in cars where they combine oxygen to get an electrical reaction which moves the car. I have heard different things but anywhere between 50% and 80% of the original energy used is lost in this process. Since a good chunk of the worlds electricity still comes from fossil fuels this saves us nothing.
It makes so much more sense to just use batteries. Well over 90% of the energy put in gets used for motion. It even recaptures the energy when breaking, just like a hybrid. The only issue with that is for long trips you dont really want to be stopping every 4 hours and charging the things for a few hours. The only fix for this is faster charging and longer lasting batteries.
Honnestly though over 95% of trips could be done on an electric car now. For those other 5% it would probably be easier to stick with gas cars for now. There is no perfect solution, but I dont think hydrogen is even a good one.
“If I save 10 lives does that give me the right to kill a few others?”
Worst analogy ever?
ftb 81
You basically said because al gore convinced other people to save energy he doesnt have to do it himself. If I prevent a bridge from falling does that mean I get to knock another one over?
People are people, bridges are bridges and energy is energy. Just because you have saved some in the past doesnt mean you now have future credits to waste some in the future. If you saved energy yesterday, great, try and do that again tomorrow.
Al Gore and is sasquatch-esk carbon footprint are the deffinition of a hypocrite. How you can reason that because hes done some good means he is absolved is beyond me.
FTB:
“That’s kind of my point – you’re arguing your case as if it’s an “all or nothing” scenario, when in fact it isn’t. Let’s assume for a second that you don’t power down your office’s computers overnight, just to contrive an example – how would it affect your business in a way which means you cease to be competetive in the market? Too many people seem to think that change, any change, will mean they have to suffer as a consequence. I don’t believe that to be true.”
I’m not making your point or your argument. I’m saying that to reduce my carbon footprint a meaningful amount I’d have to radically change my business, and if my competors didn’t do the same thing, I’d cease to exist. If they did the same thing I’d continue to compete.
You’re saying that making a change that didn’t effect my competitiveness would be significant, and wouldn’t hurt my competitiveness. You’re clearly right on the latter. However, turning off my computers at night won’t solve AGW. The world’s been going down that road for years and the results are nil. We’ve still got the problem.
If we’re going to live in gloabalized trading world with increasing standards of living for exploding populations we better hope that AGW is a hoax. If its not a hoax I don’t think we can expect to maintain our current lifestyles. I guess you have to colour me doubtful.
Here’s an exmple: I re-use 1939 clear cedar siding on my new house – lots of labour to salvage it, but throwing that out would have been a sin. That said, has my re-use of that old siding made a significant dent in deforestation on one end or land fills on the other?
Purp:
“The main point is, there is no combination of alternative sources of energy that will allow us to continue ‘business as usual’.”
I don’t know if this is or isn’t true, because, again, its something I don’t know enough about. It certainly seems reasonable to me, however. On the other hand, the belief that we’ll transistion easily from oil to something else seems a faith based argument more than anything else.
We talked about that Jarrod Diamond book Collapse, and the question “What was the Easter Islander thinking when he chopped down the last tree?” ; I’ve got a variation on that: “What were the Polish Calvary thinking when they rode out in September 1939 to face the Germans?”
Did any of them think they had any chance of success? Did they realize before they saw the tanks that their day had come and gone already? Did any of them think “It can’t happen to us”?
Substitute “Germans” or “Romans” or “Japanese” for “Polish calvary” and change the time frames accordingly and the question can still be asked: scant years before their worlds came crumbing down, did any of them think “It can’t happen to us”?
Why do we assume that when faced with what many describe as the biggest challenge to ever face mankind we will somehow invent some sort of way to maintain a lifestyle similar to the one we enjoy now, but with perhaps lower voltage lightbulbs and green cars? I don’t think it will happen. If glaciers melt and agricultural areas dry up and people begin to starve, carbon footprints won’t seem important.
Re: hydrogen, I spoke to a guy recently who is involved in storing power in hydrogen overnight. The dam produces electricity 24/7, but flow fluctuates. Usage peaks and demand is higher than production. Storing it in hydrogen allows them (I think) to use ot in fuel cells and get more electricity at peak times. Happening right here in BC, but very small scale.
HP:
Its totally deep. Sakymuni deep. I think. :-)
Davers:
“If I save 10 lives does that give me the right to kill a few others?”
Depends who you’re saving and who you’re killing. In the Gospel According to the IMDB the answer comes up as “yes”. My question would be: what is Al Gore really preaching? If he gave a seminar detailing his secrets of success, what would he tell us?
Rob 67:
Well put. The tragedy of the commons writ large.
http://tinyurl.com/y9wo53k
Davers re organic food… I’m well aware of that quandary, yes indeed. Somewhere in the middle perhaps. Europe has relatively little “organic” food, but there mainstream food is a lot less industrialized than ours. Pesticide, herbicide, fertilizer use all a lot lower, food quality higher, yields somewhat lower. If I had that option here I wouldn’t buy as much organic as I do, but it’s rather all or nothing here.
Hydrogen is a red herring, pure and simple. Not in any way an energy source, and a very inefficient storage and transport system.
There is a very good reason why countries with high fuel prices have more efficient cars driven less. Double our gas prices, put all the revenue into transit and energy alternatives and by the time we have to we will be able to do without oil. But it ain’t gonna happen in North America.
Europe could make the switch to a fully sustainable energy society overnight. It would be very painful, disruptive, politically suicidal, societally divisive and so on, but they wouldn’t starve in the dark. We would.
AC,
I have my doubts that doubling fuel prices would cause us to drive much less. 14 or so years ago gas was 50 cents a litre. Now its well over a buck and it was as high as 1.50 for a while. I know part of this is caused by inflation though. People are so used to driving that it would need to get far more expensive for people to really change their habits. And fuel isnt really a huge cost of driving. Insurance and the initial cost of the vehicle (or monthly cost if you lease/finance) are still higher than fuel unless you drive to vernon every day.
Hey if we want to bring this back to the topic of the blog, look at house prices. Prices are insane and sales increased. It isnt a completly fair comparison, but it is still interesting. People think they need it, so they will pay any price.
Increasing the prices of driving probably wouldnt slow down current drivers much. It would (i think) reduce the number of new drivers, and then they would get used to not having a car and maybe not get one when they can afford it.
I think for the time an electric car would be an easier switch than to no car at all.
Rob,
Interesting thing about the storing hydrogen at the dams. That makes far more sense than using the stuff to power cars. I know sometimes when excess electricity is being produced they pump water back into the lake above for use later, but this doesnt solve the problem of demand higher than the dam can output. I dont know much about hydrogen fuel cells, but it would be interesting to see if this really is better than plain old batteries. Batteries store DC so you need an inverter to put it back into the system. I dont know what hydrogen fuel cells put out.
“Why do we assume that when faced with what many describe as the biggest challenge to ever face mankind we will somehow invent some sort of way to maintain a lifestyle similar to the one we enjoy now, but with perhaps lower voltage lightbulbs and green cars?”
Perhaps because we are pretty flexible. We have a very diverse interconnected society and an awful lot of tech power. But even if that were not so, there is not much point in planning for the Apocalypse. If the fecal matter is going to make contact with the ventilator, things are going to be unplannable-for. From a practical the point of view, it makes more sense to plan for everything working out, because that is the only future in which a plan hatched now will be of any value, and by extension, only plans directed at such a future have the potential to be of use.
Davers:
Are you basing what you “think” on any sort of empirical data?
http://tinyurl.com/yh5vkxk
Higher gas prices DO work to reduce driving and affect car-buying behavior. It’s slow in some ways, people don’t make dramatic changes en masse overnight, but it works. Filling your tank, although not the biggest cost of car ownership, is very frequent and visible. People respond to to those inputs much more than things they only have to think about rarely.
I dont doubt that high fuel prices have an effect on the amount people drive. I just dont think it would make enough difference to have a signifigant amount of people give up driving all together.
I think the best way to do that would be to provide better alternatives. Better, cheaper transit is the first thing that comes to mind. If transit was so good that you could get most places as fast as driving then you would have to be a fool to drive.
I know this is much easier said than done, but if it magically happened I think we would see far less drivers than if fuel prices went up. This is just what I think, and I am not really basing it on any facts.
I still think (again, no facts) that people would sooner give up things like $5 starbucks drinks than driving their car. I would agree that high fuel prices do affect peoples driving.
My dad recently started taking the skytrain to work because he now has to pay $4 for parking every day (it used to be free). Add that to the fact his employer pays for 30% of his pass and it makes more sense to drive; but he still hasnt given up his car for good.
Sorry that should have said, “makes more sense to skytrain” in the last paragraph.
When commuting by car affects your standard of living or takes much longer than transit then people will change. Gas is so cheap here it will be a long time before vancouver drivers take the plunge. I took the seabus every day for 9 years, then I moved now I drive…
If you want to talk about an overdue market correction in BC then I’d start with monthly car insurance premiums!
On the MOI calculation, why are sales adjusted by a factor of 4.25? Any math tutors out there?