Ian Gartshore

Simplistic and populist politicians frequently fail to appreciate the long-term consequences of their platform and thrust. Dropping a stone into a still pond send ripples in every direction. Everything is connected and related to some extent; those who have eyes to see will recognise this truth in human activities. I understand the hardships being experienced by increasing numbers of people in the world due to the inflationary effects of higher fossil fuel costs. The ‘ripples’ from their excessive profits have impacted the price of food (largely grown on oil/gas dependent chemical fertilisers, pesticides and other inputs), oil-dependent transportation, and virtually everything else. Now interest rates are rapidly climbing, further impacting those who have limited incomes. In the same way, cities negatively impact the cost of living (and far more) by being car-centric. The physical space to accommodate the automobile takes up valuable real estate that would otherwise be available for

This is the letter I have just sent to the mayor and council of the city of Nanaimo (mayor&council@nanaimo.ca is the e-address should you wish to do the same) Mayor and Councillors: I believe it was about three years ago I addressed the Regional District of Nanaimo, encouraging them to engage the Nanaimo Recycling Exchange, and noting to them how much the NRE benefits us all. Evidently the negotiations between the staff of the NRE and the City that followed went nowhere; the NRE simply did and does not have the capital to have met their expectations. Why should they? The NRE alone accepts materials that cost money to properly recycle. They do not get a slice of the income from recycling cans (apart from a few donations). One of the materials they alone accept is Styrofoam. This material alone can occupy up to 25% of the space in landfills, but because the waste industry considers only the WEIGHT of materials the NRE is given inadequate credit f or continuing to gre

In light of Nanaimo’s aging population (somewhat higher than Canada’s and even B.C.’s) and that the future looks dim without a greater immigration and retention of younger adults (called “the Millenniums”) who are keen to have a planet worth living on, what does Nanaimo need to do to survive and thrive? A Master’s thesis written by Lan Le Diem Tran, a Millennial who hails from Vietnam, answers this question. Her thesis focused on leisure mobility in Nanaimo for Millennials (born 1984 to 1996). After surveying them in 2016 she concludes that in order to thrive Nanaimo needs to attract and retain talented workers by greatly improving our sustainable transportation system. Young adults want to live in mid-sized cities such as Nanaimo, especially with the natural beauty and amenities offered here if such cities catch up on sustainable transportation, including far more transit and active options afforded by dedicated cycling and walking infrastructure. They want an affordable,

The City of Nanaimo has just released its proposed Transportation Master Plan . This plan is designed to take us 25 years into the future. Very tragically the proposed Plan does little to take us away from the very expensive existing car-centric city we currently pay for. In this 13 page document I outline how it could be vastly improved so as to save us money and improve the city's sustainability, leading us to better health, lower costs, and far more. It requires us to work together, adjust to significant (positive!) changes. It means making it possible to cycle safely, use buses that are frequent and fast, invest in infrastructure and in carsharing, and more. To view the slides and text to my 5 minute presentation to City Council May 26, 2014, click here. To see the Council meeting and the 10 presentations about the Transportation Plan, including mine (second one on the list) you can view it here . The presentations start at about 15 minutes. The picture above could

Should Nanaimo be the site to burn garbage from the lower mainland? As I see it: Pro: As an energy advisor I know that the more local source of electricity we generate the more stable the electrical grid becomes.  The proposed plant would yield little actual power output; not much more than the potential of power being generated from our drinking water supply (gravity-fed from the mountains). But every bit of power counts. It is FAR better to burn garbage than it is to landfill it in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Why? Rotting compostable materials in the absence of oxygen (typical in dumps) create enormous amounts of methane gas, thousands of times more powerful in changing climate than is the carbon dioxide created when incinerating the same material. Local construction and maintenance jobs would be created. Local garbage could be incinerated. The waste heat could be used by another facility (which would then be responsible for the emissions, giving the i