Keep in mind: NYC is more diverse than Portland, and the populace is probably more environmentally conservative, especially in its outer areas. We are also more separated from nature. NYC gets more immigration, and probably has more poverty. There's less outdoorsy, middle-class whites, which tend to be the big pushers for sustainability as we know it at this point in time. That's just a fact - look at other "sustainable" leaders in the country - Burlington, VT; Boulder, CO may be? Berkeley? NYC also happens to be a huge city with plenty of other problems to worry about -- crime, schools, poverty, etc. Sustainability just doesn't rank up there with the average New Yorker trying to make a living and live the American Dream.

Oregon, Portland in particular, is clearly a sustainability model in the sense that their sustainability is deliberate.

When I lived in NY, I couldn't understand why OR became the first state to place a recycling redemption on beverage containers (how long ago was that?) and no others followed.

When I go out for coffee here in the Bay Area, I always bring my coffee mug, and the retailers invariably offer a discount. I tried doing that in NYC, and the clerks gave me a "Forgetabout it" response.

When I try to recycle my water bottles in the City, the markets won't even accept them - "put it in the trash", is the response.

And how long did it take for NY to ban smoking in restaurants and work places? (incredibly CA beat OR in this all-important aspect of sustainability).

Sorry to be such a skeptic, but I don't think New Yorkers really think "sustainably" (and I can't even define the term for this posting...it's really meant to be a 'mentality' of being eco-conscious).

A former Bayside resident now living in Palo Alto.

In early 2005, I calculated carbon dioxide emissions from mechanical transport -- cars, trucks, buses, rail and ferries -- in NYC, as a data consultant to a six-city project at the London School of Economics. It took me a couple of days.

True, I didn't do planes, helicopters, heating, electricity (except for transit and street lighting), and industrial fuel use, but these are readily available and could be number-crunched in just a day or two.

So why is the City budgeting six months, particularly when the need to reduce carbon emissions is so pressing?

BTW, when I last checked, earlier this year, the LSE study was expected to be out in late 2006.

The Earth Institute of Columbia University is led by Jeffery Sachs, a great innovative thinker on sustainable development.

I guess my only concern is that he didn't annouce some quick hit initiatives (maybe that's for next week as well).

One easy place to find some good off the shelf common sense sustainability proposals is the NYC Council Report on Sustainability that was prepared by former City Council Speaker Gifford Miller's legislative director, Marcel Van Ooyen, now the president of the Council on the Environment of NYC and co-signed by current City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and CM Gennaro.

I've heard good things about the Earth Institute. I do hope they factor in transportation into their Carbon calculations...it would be crazy to just focus on electricity production.

Tischman Construction..hmmm... Welcome to the party man. We need some good green buildings and green renovations.

I look forward to seeing the kick-off next week.

If transit advocates want to make the case for another Board member who is expereinced in transportation planning, who should we suggest? We do not have to be limited to cheerleading. We can and should take an active part.

The 16-member Sustainability Advisory Board is broadly based, with representation from environmental justice (Shepard and Yeampierre), labor (Ott), affordable housing (Brown), and mainstream enviro groups (Bystryn, Goldmark, Gupta, Northrop, Yaro). And new mayoral advisor Doug Foy is a lifelong high-achieving and principled environmentalist. (We assume that in calling NYC “a model of urban sustainability nationally,” Foy was referring to the energy-saving facets of our urban form — proximity, low car ownership, high transit use, shared building walls, high rises — and not to energy-conscious public policy, which has mostly been missing-in-action.)

But with the exception of the Regional Plan Association’s Bob Yaro, none of the members is an experienced advocate for transit, walking or bicycling. None is identified with the resurgent movement to reclaim the streets from cars. None has been a public proponent of congestion pricing plans to prioritize the city’s precious street space and expand the revenue stream for transit.

A cheer-and-a-half, then, for this first step in making New York a worldwide leader in reducing carbon emissions. But no cheers, yet, in liberating the city from the tyranny of the auto.