Virginia 2.0
Posted by Chap at 9/6/2007 7:35 PM and is filed under uncategorized 
For the past several months, I've been working on a draft paper on land use, energy efficiency and transportation. I started working on this project after the Assembly passed transportation and energy bills in 2007 that failed to answer the fundamental question ....
What kind of Virginia are we leaving for our children?
I've talked with ordinary citizens and leaders in the environmental and business community. How can our state can succeed economically yet still maintain its natural beauty? Part of the discussion has dealt with macro-topics like "global warming" and part has dealt with local issues like "Tysons Tunnel."
Along the way, I have tried to write a semi-coherent guide for Virginia in the 21st century. It is a summary and designed to be updated as these issues develop. It does not explain the nuance of every issue.
"Virginia 2.0" is the name of the plan. (I started it off with "Fairfax 2.0" but there were too many state issues involved so I changed it). It is on our website at http://www.fairfaxsenator.com/virginia.htm
One of the boldest ideas was the promise of cellulosic ethanol (from Virginia switchgrass) as a domestically-produced alternative fuel. The idea is that switchgrass can replace tobacco as an agricultural commodity in downstate Virginia and the resulting ethanol can be sold as a "clean fuel" in Northern Virginia, which has dreadful air quality. Unfortunately, I got scooped by the Washington Post which yesterday carried a front-page Metro article on this very subject.
There is a tremendous debate about open space, renewable resources and our quality of life. It's a debate we must have. We must find and develop national solutions and it should begin in Virginia.
I've put my ideas out there. Some are probably good, some are probably bad, and some are probably obvious. Either way, that's the Virginia that I'd like to see.
What kind of Virginia are we leaving for our children?
I've talked with ordinary citizens and leaders in the environmental and business community. How can our state can succeed economically yet still maintain its natural beauty? Part of the discussion has dealt with macro-topics like "global warming" and part has dealt with local issues like "Tysons Tunnel."
Along the way, I have tried to write a semi-coherent guide for Virginia in the 21st century. It is a summary and designed to be updated as these issues develop. It does not explain the nuance of every issue.
"Virginia 2.0" is the name of the plan. (I started it off with "Fairfax 2.0" but there were too many state issues involved so I changed it). It is on our website at http://www.fairfaxsenator.com/virginia.htm
One of the boldest ideas was the promise of cellulosic ethanol (from Virginia switchgrass) as a domestically-produced alternative fuel. The idea is that switchgrass can replace tobacco as an agricultural commodity in downstate Virginia and the resulting ethanol can be sold as a "clean fuel" in Northern Virginia, which has dreadful air quality. Unfortunately, I got scooped by the Washington Post which yesterday carried a front-page Metro article on this very subject.
There is a tremendous debate about open space, renewable resources and our quality of life. It's a debate we must have. We must find and develop national solutions and it should begin in Virginia.
I've put my ideas out there. Some are probably good, some are probably bad, and some are probably obvious. Either way, that's the Virginia that I'd like to see.
Nothing in your VA 2.0 plan can be accomplished until we undertake fundamental constitutional reform. As a Dillon Rule state, Virginia stymies attempts at providing adequate stable funding to improve infrastructure and allows interests downstate to hold the urban and suburban interests hostage to their whims.
P.S. How about a Hokie maroon stripe in your Wahoo blue and orange campaign signs?
Hokie Annie:
Thanks for your comments. Actually, since a lot of these ideas are state initiatives (like requiring LEED standards for state buildings), we can do them right now. I will agree that the Dillon Rule does preclude localities from enacting their own ordinances on conservation, but an ambitious statewide standard may be better anyway. Otherwise, some counties will float to the bottom. (Note that counties like Fairfax can require green standards in making their own purchases -- and they're the largest consumers in NoVA).
On a far more important note: when is Frank Beamer going to give Tyrod Taylor a chance??!!
Chap
In Virginia 2.0, you might consider stressing the role that GMU can play in making Northern Virginia a leader in fighting global warming. The website for GMU's Department of Environmental Science and Policy is
http://esp.gmu.edu/
The department has the talent and the vision, and with state and federal funding could work with the various municipal and state agencies in the region to develop a strategy for overcoming pollution and congestion while working with private companies to lead in new technologies.
--Don
Chap,
Agree on all your points, but saw no mention on the expanded use and development of Nuclear Power in your paper. I think ignoring this proven technology is a mistake. VA has had success with use of nuclear power and Calvert Md is also a local model that should be studied. Not only does this provide a source of non-fossil energy, it can also provide revenue that could be directed to the traffic initiatives you outlined. At this point in the debate I think we need to consider all options and pursue the ones that have proven track records.