The All-Powerful NIMBY

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Tammemagi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Modern Technology ◽  
Strong Trend ◽  
The People ◽  
Transfer Stations ◽  
Almost All

Our society has reached a frustrating impasse: everyone wants consumer goods, but nobody wants the associated waste. In all levels of society from the grass-roots to the highest level of politics, enormous public opposition has developed to siting landfills, incinerators, or transfer stations. With complex judicial and political systems that promote empowerment of the people, it has become common for opposition groups to delay or halt altogether the introduction of new waste management facilities. The NIMBY—Not In My Back Yard—syndrome has become a powerful force. This chapter explores the process by which the sites for landfills and related waste facilities are selected. This fascinating topic goes far beyond technical issues: it provides insight into human behavior and the ways political decisions are made. An understanding of the NIMBY phenomenon is essential for anyone who wishes to pursue a career in waste management. In some regions there is already a crisis. In New Jersey, for example, the number of landfills has dropped from more than 300 to about a dozen in the past two decades. As a result, more than half of New Jersey’s municipal solid waste must be exported to other states. In New York state, 298 landfills were closed and only 6 new ones opened in the decade since 1982. The same story is unfolding in almost all jurisdictions in North America; the number of landfills in the United States dwindled from 20,000 in 1979 to about 5,300 in 1993 (Miller, 1997). There is a very strong trend toward fewer—but much bigger—landfills. In the United States it is estimated that 8% of the existing landfills handle 75% of the country’s garbage. As the number of landfills decreases, their heights grow, casting dark shadows across the land. There is no doubt that new landfills are safer than old ones: they are generally better sited and incorporate better engineering and modern technology such as liners, covers, and leachate and gas extraction systems. However, people still do not want them next door. Thus, the few new landfills that are being developed are getting larger and larger; the megadump is the trend of the future.

scholarly journals Reverse Migration to Mexico Led to US Undocumented Population Decline: 2010 to 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Summary ◽  
Reverse Migration ◽  
The Us ◽  
Almost All

Executive Summary This report presents estimates of the undocumented population residing in the United States in 2018, highlighting demographic changes since 2010. The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) compiled these estimates based primarily on information collected in the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS). The annual CMS estimates of undocumented residents for 2010 to 2018 include all the detailed characteristics collected in the ACS. 1 A summary of the CMS estimation procedures, as well as a discussion of the plausibility of the estimates, is provided in the Appendix . The total undocumented population in the United States continued to decline in 2018, primarily because large numbers of undocumented residents returned to Mexico. From 2010 to 2018, a total of 2.6 million Mexican nationals left the US undocumented population; 2 about 1.1 million, or 45 percent of them, returned to Mexico voluntarily. The decline in the US undocumented population from Mexico since 2010 contributed to declines in the undocumented population in many states. Major findings include the following: The total US undocumented population was 10.6 million in 2018, a decline of about 80,000 from 2017, and a drop of 1.2 million, or 10 percent, since 2010. Since 2010, about two-thirds of new arrivals have overstayed temporary visas and one-third entered illegally across the border. The undocumented population from Mexico fell from 6.6 million in 2010 to 5.1 million in 2018, a decline of 1.5 million, or 23 percent. Total arrivals in the US undocumented population from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras — despite high numbers of Border Patrol apprehensions of these populations in recent years — remained at about the same level in 2018 as in the previous four years. 3 The total undocumented population in California was 2.3 million in 2018, a decline of about 600,000 compared to 2.9 million in 2010. The number from Mexico residing in the state dropped by 605,000 from 2010 to 2018. The undocumented population in New York State fell by 230,000, or 25 percent, from 2010 to 2018. Declines were largest for Jamaica (−51 percent), Trinidad and Tobago (−50 percent), Ecuador (−44 percent), and Mexico (−34 percent). The results shown here reinforce the view that improving social and economic conditions in sending countries would not only reduce pressure at the border but also likely cause a large decline in the undocumented population. Two countries had especially large population changes — in different directions — in the 2010 to 2018 period. The population from Poland dropped steadily, from 93,000 to 39,000, while the population from Venezuela increased from 65,000 to 172,000. Almost all the increase from Venezuela occurred after 2014.

“The Olmsted City”

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-41
Author(s):  
Stewart Weaver
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Manufacturing Industry ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
York State ◽  
Almost All

This chapter talks about the Niagara Section of the New York State Thruway, which hurtles thoughtlessly through the sprawling geography of nowhere. It refers to Frederick Law Olmsted's Humboldt Parkway as one of the most beautiful and distinctive streets in America. It also discusses Olmsted's surving work in Buffalo, both physically and psychologically, that even in its mangled form remains one of the most original and distinctive park ensembles in the United States. The chapter recounts how Buffalo lost half its people and almost all its manufacturing industry between 1950 and 2000. It illustrates Buffalo as the client for whom Olmsted exercised the fullest measure of his genius.

Seasonal Activity of Haemaphysalis longicornis (Acari: Ixodidae) in Southern New York State

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas P Piedmonte ◽  
Vanessa C Vinci ◽  
Thomas J Daniels ◽  
Bryon P Backenson ◽  
Richard C Falco
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
Activity Patterns ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Haemaphysalis Longicornis ◽  
Seasonal Activity ◽  
Eastern Asia ◽  
Short Life ◽  
Human Bite

Abstract The Asian longhorned tick, Haemaphysalis longicornis Neumann, is a species native to eastern Asia that has recently been discovered in the United States. In its native range, H. longicornis transmits pathogens that cause disease in humans and livestock. It is currently unknown whether H. longicornis will act as a vector in the United States. Understanding its seasonal activity patterns will be important in identifying which times of the year represent greatest potential risk to humans and livestock should this species become a threat to animal or public health. A study site was established in Yonkers, NY near the residence associated with the first reported human bite from H. longicornis in the United States. Ticks were collected once each week from July 2018 to November 2019. Haemaphysalis longicornis larvae were most active from August to November, nymphs from April to July, and adult females from June to September. This pattern of activity suggests that H. longicornis is capable of completing a generation within a single year and matches the patterns observed in its other ranges in the northern hemisphere. The data presented here contribute to a growing database for H. longicornis phenology in the northeastern United States. Potential implications of the short life cycle for the tick’s vectorial capacity are discussed.

Shakers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Nicoletta
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
New York State ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leadership Roles ◽  
Eastern United States ◽  
Economic Success ◽  
Linear Arrangement ◽  
State Prisons

Arriving in the colony of New York in 1774 from England, Ann Lee and her eight followers set about creating a model communal society in what would become the United States. Officially known as the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing, the Shakers believed in Christ’s imminent return. Their support of pacifism, near equality between the sexes that allowed women to take on leadership roles, and perfectionism set them apart from most Americans. Within a decade, they had begun creating a Kingdom of Heaven on Earth through their worship, work ethic, and construction of orderly villages with buildings and furniture meant to reinforce religious belief and shape and control behavior. From humble beginnings, the sect created a total of twenty-two communities beginning in the 1780s, spreading from Maine to Indiana and as far south as Georgia and Florida, though these latter two sites and the one in Indiana were short lived. During periods of religious revivalism in the United States in the late 18th and early19th centuries, the Shakers attracted hundreds of converts who gave up their worldly possessions to live celibate, communal lives. After a peak population of over three thousand in the1840s, the Shakers have dwindled to just three members inhabiting the only surviving living community of Sabbathday Lake, near New Gloucester, Maine. The Shakers’ demographic and economic success over several decades left a legacy of buildings at numerous locations throughout the eastern United States. Some of these villages have become museum sites, most notably Hancock, Massachusetts; Mount Lebanon, New York; Canterbury, New Hampshire; and Pleasant Hill and South Union, both in Kentucky. Other Shaker buildings remain as private residences and parts of retirement communities and state prisons. In many ways, Shaker architecture reflects contemporary regional vernacular building practices, such as the closely spaced anchor bents in the framing of the earliest meetinghouses in Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, and eastern New York State, and the rather grand masonry structures of the dwelling houses and trustees’ offices in Kentucky. The linear arrangement of buildings, their large size, and separate entrances for men and women distinguished Shaker buildings from those of the outside world, though stylistically they appeared much like non-Shaker buildings. The Shakers organized building interiors to use space efficiently with many built-in cabinets and drawers, installed pegboards on walls for storage and to help keep floors clear for cleaning, and included separate staircases to demarcate men’s and women’s areas. The buildings, especially the meetinghouses and dwelling houses, reminded Shakers of their commitment to their faith and to their distinctive way of living and encouraged them to “put their hands to work and their hearts to God,” a saying attributed to Ann Lee. Nevertheless, the Shakers were not immune from influences from the outside world. They needed to interact with outsiders to encourage the economic success of their villages and to attract converts. As their population shrank in the latter half of the 19th century, they turned increasingly to hired help to assist with building construction and other aspects of daily life. The Shakers also embraced stylistic changes in architecture and furniture; their buildings of the late 19th and early 20th centuries reflect these influences with added ornamentation inside and out, as well as embellished furnishings either made by the Shakers or purchased from non-Shaker furniture makers. Rather than undercut any appreciation of the simple style for which the Shakers are best known, these changes show the group as always practical and responsive to changes in mainstream society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document