How non-profit and government housing can pay for itself- it not only works in Vancouver, but in just about any other city or country......If we want to address the chronic housing shortage, rapidly build as many affordable homes as possible and expand the stock of valuable public land assets, this option is waiting at our fingertips. To be clear, this approach of developing rental housing isn’t a complete solution to the housing crisis. For example, given how quickly land and construction costs have escalated in recent years, self-financing housing may still require rents that are higher than many people can afford, even if they are below market. Further measures are needed to achieve deeper levels of affordability. The housing crisis is a multi-headed beast, and tackling it requires policy action in a range of areas including property tax reform and ending the exclusionary low-density zoning that dominates our cities. The provincial government has taken some modest positive steps through its 10-year housing plan. But it is progressing too slowly and its new housing construction targets were too low from the outset. B.C.’s current plan doesn’t make use of the self-financing model described in this analysis, which could provide a foundation for a rapid and much-larger expansion of affordable homes in B.C. starting today .                                                                                                                                                      Self-financing housing: how it works......Let’s consider the basic model for private rental development a little more closely. Different projects unfold in different ways, but the key sets of costs are the same from the perspective of the developer. Different projects unfold in different ways, but the key sets of costs are the same from the perspective of the developer. First, land needs to be acquired on which municipal zoning policy allows multifamily housing like rental apartments to be built (or on which the developer believes a rezoning for this purpose is very likely to be granted). Then the developer must engage and pay for contractors to design and construct the project. Third, there are the ongoing operating and maintenance costs for the building and its amenities.Finally, there is the cost of interest owed on the capital borrowed to finance the upfront investments. A private-sector rental developer will only undertake a project if the anticipated income from rents will cover all these costs — land, construction, operating and financing — plus a healthy profit margin. Public or non-profit housing projects can also cover their upfront costs with ongoing rental income. However, eliminating the developer profit margin can achieve lower break-even (or self-financing) rents. [Furthermore many cities have land banks where they could release land at less than market or even at no cost.] In addition, the government can borrow at cheaper interest rates than the private sector and can amortize those costs over a longer period of time (50 or more years, if desired), both of which can further reduce break-even rents. In short, not unlike a private developer, the government can borrow money to develop new housing and use the rental income generated to fully cover the cost of servicing that debt over time, with no effect on the cash flow or tax revenue needs of the public sector overall. There’s no real dispute about the basic logic of this. In fact, a recent report prepared by Coriolis Consulting for Metro Vancouver notes that government investment could be used to create “all the rental housing needed in this region” on a cost-recovery basis “depending on how rents are set.”The report points to jurisdictions like Vienna that have built public and non-profit housing on a massive scale. But like much of the housing policy discussion, the report assumes there isn’t the political will to go this route, noting that the idea would run up against the “willingness of government to pay” up front......read more-               https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2022/05/25/Massive-Expansion-Public-Housing-Can-Pay-For-Itself/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=250522         

Climate–Poverty Connections: Opportunities for synergistic solutions at the intersection of planetary and human well-being provides concrete evidence of how climate solutions can also be win-win opportunities for meeting development and human well-being needs while boosting prosperity for rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. This first-of-its-kind report produced by Drawdown Lift shows that leaders do not have to choose among human development, climate mitigation, and climate adaptation; win-win solutions are at hand. The Drawdown Lift Human Well-Being Index, introduced in this report, serves as a framework for assessing 12 health, socioeconomic, and societal dimensions of human well-being and highlighting evidence of the nexus between climate mitigation solutions and human well-being in a scientifically consistent manner.

The report summarizes the co-benefits of five groups of a subset of Project Drawdown climate solutions(28 total solutions) for advancing human well-being in rural areas of low- and middle-income countries. For example, several climate solutions related to improving agriculture and agroforestry also improve income and work because higher crop yields and improved crop resilience to climate extremes can result in higher income. Increased income can subsequently lead to better educational outcomes through more time allocated to, and funds spent on, education. Better education can further contribute to gender equality and social equity by improving economic opportunities for women and boosting women’s ability to participate in decision making. Policymakers, donors, non-governmental organizations, and other decision-makers will use this report to promote the socioeconomic co-benefits of climate solutions, collaborate to mobilize ambitious solutions, and channel funding to meet climate, development, and human well-being needs while boosting prosperity and equity for rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Download the comprehensive report by clicking GET THE PUBLICATION button, or download the two-page fact sheet (available in English and French). Follow Project Drawdown online for more climate solutions resources all year long.              https://drawdown.org/publications/climate-poverty-connections-report    

Mammals forced to move to cooler climes amid global warming are “already” spreading their viruses further – with “undoubtable” impacts for human health, a new study says. The research, published in Nature, uses modelling to map how climate change could shift the geographic ranges of 3,100 mammals species and the viruses they carry by 2070. It finds that climate change is increasingly driving new encounters between mammal species, raising the risk of novel disease spread. The world’s “biodiversity hotspots” and densely populated parts of Asia and Africa are most likely to be affected. The findings suggest that climate change could “easily become the dominant [human] driver” of cross-species virus transmission by 2070, the authors say. The research comes in the third year of the Covid-19 pandemic, a disease passed from animals to humans that has so far killed more than six million people across the world. In their study, the scientists “caution against overinterpreting our results as explanatory of the current pandemic”, but add the “ecological transition” they have identified will “undoubtedly have a downstream impact on human health and pandemic risk”.                                              Reshuffling nature..... Climate change is shifting where species live. As temperatures increase and rainfall changes, some species are being forced to seek out new areas with climate conditions they are able to tolerate. (Species that are not able to move could face extinction.) In 2008, a scientific review of 40,000 species across the world found that around half are already on the move as a result of changing climate conditions. In general, species are seeking cooler temperatures by moving towards the Earth’s poles. Land animals are moving polewards at an average rate of 10 miles per decade, whereas marine species are moving at a rate of 45 miles per decade, according to the review. As species migrate to new areas, they carry their viruses with them. The new study says there are “at least 10,000” viruses that have the capacity to infect humans, but “at present, the vast majority” of them “are circulating silently in wild mammals”. The research specifically examines how climate change could affect the likelihood of species coming into contact with each other for the first time as they move into new areas. This is because new encounters between species are a key element for a “zoonotic spillover” – the passing of harmful pathogens from animals to humans, explains study co-lead author Dr Colin Carlson, a global change biologist at Georgetown University in Washington DC. He tells Carbon Brief: “Species are going to show up in new combinations because of climate change and, when they do, that’s an opportunity for them to share viruses with each other.”  In addition to pathogen sharing, first encounters between species also provide a platform for viruses to evolve, he explains: “The best analogy that exists is thinking about wildlife markets. One of the reasons that people are so concerned about spillover risk in markets is that, if you have a bunch of animals in poor health in close proximity, it’s not just a chance for animals to contact humans, it’s also a chance for viruses either to evolve or to jump through a stepping stone host to get to humans. We’ve seen this over and over again with coronaviruses.”                Read more.... https://www.carbonbrief.org/climate-change-already-raising-risk-of-virus-spread-between-mammals?utm_campaign=Weekly%20Briefing&utm_content=20220429&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Revue%20newsletter

A good Common Dreams article says that "The emissions from a single billionaire spaceflight would exceed the lifetime emissions of someone in the poorest billion people on Earth." The richest people on the planet, representing a small sliver of the total population, are emitting carbon dioxide at a rate that's imperiling hopes of keeping global heating below 1.5°C, prompting fresh calls for government action to rein in "luxury" pollution and combat the intertwined crises of inequality and climate change. New research by the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) and the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) shows that by 2030, the carbon footprints of the wealthiest 1% of humanity are on track to be 30 times larger than the size compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5°C by the end of the century, the Paris Agreement's more ambitious temperature target. If current trends continue, the richest 1% will account for 16% of global CO2 emissions in 2030.The carbon emissions of the poorest half of the global population, meanwhile, "are set to remain well below the 1.5°C-compatible level," according to the analysis, which was commissioned by Oxfam International and published Friday. The emissions from a single billionaire spaceflight would exceed the lifetime emissions of someone in the poorest billion people on Earth," Nafkote Dabi, Oxfam's climate policy lead, said in a statement. "A tiny elite appear to have a free pass to pollute." "The emissions of the wealthiest 10% alone could send us beyond the agreed limit in the next nine years," Dabi added. "This would have catastrophic results for some of the most vulnerable people on Earth who are already facing deadly storms, hunger, and destitution.