You Matter: Public Forum
Share Your Feedback on Our Coverage
We want to hear from you.
What are your thoughts on Chicago Matters programming thus far?
What do you think about the future of our region?
Start a conversation today!
DISCLAIMER: Submissions monitored and edited for content. Comments should be limited to 400 words per post. Users should limit their comments to one post per issue. Users can respond to each other's posts, but not continue to post at length. Opinions shared on this forum do not represent the views of The Chicago Community Trust or Chicago Matters multimedia partners or affiliates.
Responses
Post Your Response
*required
Initiated and funded by The Chicago Community Trust, Chicago Matters is an annual exploration—via television, radio, print and community dialogue—of an issue of broad concern to the Chicago region.
989 | Posted by Anna P from northwest Indiana, IN on Jun 7, 2008 6:05 pm
Hello!
I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but I heard on Chicago Public Radio a spot asking us to share our ideas for how we can help Chicago become more "green."
Here is my idea: ban plastic shopping bags, like San Francisco has. AND, ban water bottles. AND, require that water bottles be made of 100% renewable resources, so that they are biodegradable.
And also—please keep the green in Grant Park, and don't allow any Olympic buildings to be built near the lake, or on any green spaces.
We NEED the life that nature allows us!
Thanks :)!
988 | Posted by Richard R. Gill from Chicago, IL on May 13, 2008 8:13 pm
Your Chicago Matters program May 13 about the proposed CN/EJ&E rail merger was excellent. The program accurately set forth the issues and gave good, authoritative coverage to both sides of the argument. It looks like your staff really did their homework.
My only criticism is that you barely mentioned a key driving force behind the merger proposal, which is the failure, thus far, of a more comprehensive Chicago area rail restructuring program to gain much traction. That program, the $1.5 billion Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) plan, would help to unplug many more freight railroads and railroad lines, and would also benefit Metra and Amtrak. The CREATE plan would reroute trains on existing lines and would not significantly involve the EJ&E. Unlike the privately-financed CN/EJ&E proposal, CREATE would require a lot of public money, in addition to railroad money. Only a small fraction of the public money has, thus far, been forthcoming, and CN apparently grew impatient with the delay and uncertainty of CREATE funding.
Thanks for the great program, and for the Chicago matters series.
987 | Posted by Dan Finn from Chicago, IL on May 13, 2008 8:09 pm
The CN RR pending purchase of the EJE RR is being met with outrage in suburbs like Barrington and Aurora because they'll see more than 3 trains a day. Ha! I've lived 50 years on the Southwest side of Chicago, went to high school on the southeast side with many track-laden Hegewisch residents and east-siders(anyone in Barrington and Aurora know there is an "east side' in Chicago?). Plenty of times I've seen 3 trains in an hour! Tell them to get used to it. I'm sure those trains are moving a lot of stuff intended more for the residents of Barrington and Aurora than those of us on the South side of Chicago.
You'd better accomodate the railoroad. It represents ongoing American commerce, even if the train is partially-loaded with Asian-made goods. The trains reduce energy expense and fossil fuel pollution.
The cost of building overpassess and underpasses should largely be paid by the US Department of Transportation and should have been done decades ago, as part of the basic care of our crucial infrastructure.
If you put the railroads out of business, you'll get 'depravity'. Just read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand for that picture.
985 | Posted by Laurie Summers from Crete, IL on May 8, 2008 9:54 am
Keep up the good work. It took a life impacting decision made by the Village of Crete elected officials to really open my eyes. In March of 2007 the folks who live in here unincorporated Crete Township were blindsided by the announcement that an Intermodal rail facility will be our new next door neighbor.
Exactly across the street from this proposed facility (about 600 feet away). About 300 residential homes will butt right up against this proposed facility some only 150 feet away. The Village has also annexed a strip of farm land that will be the new access road for the 1500 Semi trucks that will be leaving this proposed facility to enter Route 394.
Senior Citizen retirement village will be the recipients of all the trucks fumes and traffic. If you do not know this area you should come and take a look. Route 394 is in horrible shape which is no different from the rest of the States infrastructure and yet they plan to add all this traffic and pollution without any forethought to enviormental impacts, Air quality impacts and life safety issues.
And all that was done after the annexation agreement was signed! They will be accessing our water table to run this facility, I could go on and on.
Thank-you,
984 | Posted by Linda Ogren from Deerfield, IL on Apr 15, 2008 6:55 pm
I think the whole concept of "Chicago Matters" is great. Keep up the good work.
I have a wish for the region — that we would start saving huge, stunning amounts of energy, without having to wait for carbon caps, just the right incentives, unbearable prices, state wake-up calls, or anything else. I don't even think that one has to "believe" in global warming to be motivated, because there is plenty of evidence that the constantly increasing fuel prices for heating and electricity are here to stay, and importing so much just makes it worse. It is harmful to the economy. I'm not too keen on the next nuclear power plant we're being threatened with, either. There is a groundswell of enthusiasm right now, so please, let's save a little affordable energy for those who will live in the houses that survive us.
The utilities provide plenty of excellent on-line guidance for making your home more efficient. I have one complaint, however — there is a subtle, unstated suggestion in the monthly bills that if you can afford to pay, then you must be efficient enough. It may be far from the truth. If you go through utility or government interactive analysis, you will be given a comparison, but still no definitive understanding of how good or bad that is.
I recently studied our home's heating efficiency extensively. After agonizing over the details, it finally became clear to me that our house could be and should be sealed better. I am embarrassed to say that I just hadn't suspected it — I thought we were living pretty lightly on this earth. It was a shock. I realize that an energy auditor could have told us, but who has the time to organize and deal with an analysis? Anyway, I'm saving that for identifying the next level of improvements, which are bound to be trickier.
Most of us heat with natural gas. Bear with me — my education is in math and physics, so I am not completely out of my realm here, though this has not been the focus of my career. If you add up one year of natural gas therms from your bills or on-line account, subtract annual gas water heater and/or cooking usage (estimated by studying non-heating months), then multiply by 100,000 BTU's (British Thermal Units) per therm, then divide by 6,000 heating degree days (HDD), then divide by the area in square feet that you heat, you will have the annual rate of energy consumption of your house. The heating degree days are based on the average daily temperature offset from 65 degrees Fahrenheit — you could get a closer estimate for the last 12 months from the web, but in any case, this calculation will give you a number that will enable you to compare your house to various studies of energy efficiency across the Midwest.
R BTU's per Heating Degree Day per Square Foot = (100,000 * T / 6,000 ) / S
Here is my take on the studies I have found. If the value of R is
— 1.5 or less, that is great — it is what you expect from your newer highly energy efficient home, and we can humbly hope to achieve that someday before it's too late, realizing that there are indeed a few perfectly normal looking Midwestern homes that consume less than 1.0 BTU/HDD/SqFt (gulp).
— 5.0 or less, then that is respectable, and you won't easily improve it without some serious energy focus.
— 9.0 or greater, then sorry to say, you are needlessly wasting energy, and it is a powerful clue that you have lots of energy leaks that must be stopped before you spend any money on more insulation, and don't bother to think about new windows yet because that just is not going to contribute enough.
Both the electricity and gas utilities urge me to improve my heating efficiency, since they both compete for natural gas, and both recognize that improving the home heating envelope will also reduce the cooling demands that consume so much electricity. I believe the time is ripe for the utilities to come right out and give us a little more information to make it easy to do this calculation, and then empower us to understand how we're doing against meaningful targets such as the above.
For my husband and me, I can't tell you how sad it was to discover two major gaps that were introduced years ago by contractors. Then there were drafts from outlets, plumbing passages, behind baseboards, some minor duct leaks, unsealed attic entrance, a threshold gap, etc. Our major culprit was the sunroom addition. We knew that all those windows made it inherently inefficient, but we never before took note of all the cold gaps, such a surprise for newer construction, so don't presume anything based on structure age. Further, it couldn't be closed off from the rest of the house even though it has independent heating and is populated with plants that respond well to cooler winter temperatures. We're not done yet, but the improvements we've made thus far have already reduced our rate of consumption by 15% over the prior year. When we attack the intersection between the foundation and the wood structure, we expect another major drop, and will consult with an expert about a pre-heated fresh air source for the furnace. We'll probably add more insulation. These are all rather trivial things that make sense even though we live in an area of tear-downs and it might not be wise to invest in expensive improvements.
Why am I telling you all this? It's because it was the jolt that finally woke me up, and I cannot help but suspect that there are others just like me. I want you to know that it is actually taking very little effort. I'm desparately trying to make amends for the energy that escaped while I wasn't paying attention. Beloved, green, Chicago metro, won't you join me?