CWLP Does Not Make Its Financial Predictions – Sooner or later someone must take charge

For years Springfield’s CWLP Department has been a black hole. No matter what the form of government, NO Mayor has ever understood the city owned utility’s finances. As a result mysterious things are always going on there. The 50 million $$$ power buying contract that went belly up came as a complete surprise to everyone in the 1990s. The coal contracts in the 1980s were even more questionable. Now they are saying “because of the depressed economy” we will never make our own budget surpluses for the year. Give me a break. People are using less energy it is true. But that is gasoline not electricity. Something ain’t right.

http://www.sj-r.com/top-stories/x1608503929/CWLP-Engineer-Future-depends-on-economy

CWLP engineer: Future of utility depends on economy

Posted Mar 29, 2011 @ 11:00 PM
Last update Mar 30, 2011 @ 05:46 AM

City Water, Light and Power’s chief engineer Tuesday described the state of the city-owned utility as stable, with its future largely dependent on the overall economy.

“With the economic conditions if they return, power prices will go up, and some of those revenues that we had lost and anticipated having, hopefully those will return, and that will improve the economic stability of the utility,” said Eric Hobbie, after an update on the utility to aldermen.

The new, 200-megawatt Dallman 4 was expected to generate millions of dollars annually from selling surplus power. But revenues have fallen far short of projections largely because of a depressed energy market.

CWLP’s spending plan for the fiscal year that began March 1 totals about $352 million, an increase of 10.8 percent over the previous year. Projected electric fund expenses total $295.6 million, an increase of 8 percent. Water fund expenses total $56.6 million, an increase of 27 percent, although that can largely be attributed to capital improvements that will be paid for with prior water rate hikes.

CWLP faces its share of challenges in the years ahead, including an aging work force and new federal laws and regulations, Hobbie and other CWLP officials said. Aging equipment is another concern.

Hobbie, who took over as chief engineer in 2009, said about 25 percent of CWLP’s 700 employees are over the age of 50 and have more than 20 years of experience. He said the utility tries to promote from within, but noted there is a “big gap” between younger employees and those on the verge of retirement.

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

I Was Looking For A Joke – What I got was this

I typed in “best way to avert a nuclear disaster” thinking that I might get a joke or something other then Japan’s smoking nukes. I was wrong but this guy is pretty insightful.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article26916.html

Nuclear Power Industry Praying Japan Will Avert a Nuclear Disaster

Stock-Markets / Nuclear Power Mar 14, 2011 – 10:59 AM

By: Martin_D_Weiss

Explosions and meltdowns at nuclear reactors in Japan this past weekend will forever change the world of energy.

Authorities have already scheduled widespread power outages starting today — and they could continue the planned outages for weeks or even months.

Nuclear power plant explosion in Fukushima, Japan, on Saturday, following that nation's strongest earthquake in history.
Nuclear power plant explosion in Fukushima, Japan, on Saturday, following that nation’s strongest earthquake in history.

But that’s just a metaphor for the sustained global energy shortages that are likely, as the safety and long-term viability of nuclear power comes under more intense scrutiny than at any time in history.

How do we know that’s the likely outcome?

Because prior nuclear disasters, such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, had a major long-term impact on nuclear plant construction.

Moreover, those two disasters were ultimately written off to antiquated facilities or poor safety precautions. In contrast, the Japanese nuclear industry prides itself on safety, and the plants struck by the earthquake had far better staff training and equipment, including multiple back-up systems, all of which failed.

Some nuclear experts will counter that newer and safer technologies now exist or can be developed. But given the history of similar promises in the past, those are bound to fall on deaf ears.

The public will now ask …

Is there a fundamental incompatibility between the potential dangers of nuclear energy and the unpredictable wrath of Mother Nature?

That question defies any quick answer and could take years to resolve. Until then, further growth in nuclear power production could be drastically reduced, with potentially far-reaching consequences:

  • Chronic global energy shortages, especially in countries that were counting on new nuclear energy for a large portion of their electric power.
  • Massive, long-term upward pressure on crude oil prices as producers, consumers, and investors upwardly revise their forecasts of fossil fuel demand.
  • Vast sums of investor money diverted from nuclear power plant construction to other alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar, and bio-fuels.

:}

Still battling viruses. So hopefully more tomorrow.

:}

Either you are furit or agen it but Nuclear Power has a problem

http://blogs.forbes.com/christopherhelman/2011/03/15/in-panic-germany-to-shut-pre-1980-nukes/

Christopher Helman

In Bizarre Panic, Germany’s Merkel To Shut Pre-1980 Nukes

What a bone-headed move. There’s nothing wrong with the 7 nuclear plants that German Chancellor Angela Merkel decreed would be shut down. Just last fall Germany decided to extend the lives of these plants, which provide roughly 10% of Germany’s electricity. With solar and wind entirely unscalable, how’s Germany going to make up the electric deficit? Either by ramping up the use of fossil-fuel burning plants (and importing more natural gas from Russia) or importing power from its neighbors–like nuke-friendly France.

:}

OR

:}

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/16

Published on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 by Truthdig.com

No Nukes Is Good Nukes

When it comes to the safety of nuclear power plants, I am biased. And I’ll bet that if President Barack Obama had been with me on that trip to Chernobyl 24 years ago he wouldn’t be as sanguine about the future of nuclear power as he was Tuesday in an interview with a Pittsburgh television station: “Obviously, all energy sources have their downside. I mean, we saw that with the Gulf spill last summer.” Futaba Kosei Hospital patients who might have been exposed to radiation are carried on stretchers Sunday morning after being evacuated from the hospital in the town of Futaba near the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. (AP / The Yomiuri Shimbun, Daisuke Tomita)

Sorry, Mr. President, but there is a dimension of fear properly associated with the word nuclear that is not matched by any oil spill.

Even 11 months after what has become known simply as “Chernobyl” I sensed a terror of the darkest unknown as I donned the requisite protective gear and checked Geiger counter readings before entering the surviving turbine room adjoining plant No. 4, where the explosion had occurred.

It was a terror reinforced by the uncertainty of the scientists who accompanied me as to the ultimate consequences for the health of the region’s population, even after 135,000 people had been evacuated. As I wrote at the time, “particularly disturbing was the sight of a collective farm complete with all the requirements of living: white farm houses with blue trim, tractors and other farm implements, clothing hanging on a line and some children’s playthings. All the requirements except people.”

:}

You decide. More next week.

:}

SB 1821 Is Dangerous – Carbon dioxiode sequestration is wrong

I know. Barack Obama, Dick Durbin and every other person on this planet is in favor of this Clean Coal technology. But how advanced is it to use a process created in the late 1800s in 2011. The easy answer is it ain’t. Please call your representative to protest.

http://www.riverbender.com/news/wbgz/rfullstory.cfm?newsfile=2011-03-20-20_FutureGen%20Pipeline%20Issues

FutureGen Pipeline Issues

WBGZ Radio | Mar 18, 2011

The pipeline that’s going to carry carbon dioxide from one place to another as part of the FutureGen clean-coal project is the subject of a bill which has passed a Senate committee.  The bill writes a process for Illinois to oversee the construction and operation of such a pipeline.

“This bill is patterned after what the Illinois Commerce Commission currently does with regard to petroleum pipelines, crude oil, water utility lines, and electric transmission lines,” said sponsoring State Sen. John Sullivan (D-Rushville). Opponents include farmers in Morgan County, where the pipeline would be built.  They say the property owners who do want it are the ones who don’t live there.  FutureGen would use a former Ameren plant in Meredosia to convert coal into carbon dioxide, which would be stored near Alexander.  SB 1821 has passed the Senate Executive Committee.

(Illinois Radio Network)

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Illinois HB 14 Is A Very Bad Idea – Utilities try to escape regulation again

Monopolies are a bad thing if you listen to most capitalists. Except when you supply public services like supplying electricity or natural gas. OK so then everyone agrees that those companies need CLOSE regulation to make sure they do not cheat. Well not quite everybody.

http://www.whig.com/story/news/Electric-rates-031111

Published: 3/11/2011 | Updated: 3/19/2011

By DOUG WILSON
Herald-Whig Senior Writer

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Ameren Illinois electric customers would pay an additional $5 a year — less than 50 cents a month more — so the utility can upgrade electric and gas delivery under a plan being considered by state lawmakers. State Rep. Jil Tracy, R-Mount Sterling, is concerned about those higher rates. She is researching the proposed legislation that would allow the rate increase and permit utilities to adjust their rates each year under a different regulatory system. “I think it’s very much a work in progress. We have been having public hearings, and I’m not sure how the bill will end up,” Tracy said of HB 14. As a member of the House Public Utilities Committee, Tracy attended a Tuesday hearing on the rate hike and the regulatory issue. “I don’t want to see bills rise, but there’s no doubt we need to improve the grid,” Tracy said. The $5 annual charge for each Ameren Illinois customers would improve delivery systems for the electric system and the gas system. “These investments will provide significant benefits to the state of Illinois and our energy customers, and will allow Ameren Illinois to provide the safe, reliable and affordable service our customers expect,” said Craig Nelson, Ameren senior vice president.

:}

http://foresightdesign.org/blog/2011/03/illinois-environmental-council-opposes-hb14-legislature-holds-hearing-on-electric-utility-proposal/

Illinois Environmental Council Opposes HB14: Legislature Holds Hearing on Electric Utility Proposal

Thursday (Mar 17) was the deadline for legislation in both the Illinois House and Senate to move out of committee.  While some legislation may receive extended deadlines, most proposals that don’t meet the Thursday deadline will not move further.  Check out IEC’s legislative tracker to determine which bills have not yet moved out of committee.

HB14:
Last week, on March 10, the House Public Utilities Committee and Senate Energy Committee held a joint subject matter hearing on HB14, a proposal from ComEd.  HB14 would change the way ComEd and Ameren are regulated.  It would allow them to receive automatic rate increases if they invested in both the existing grid and in smart grid technology.   At the hearing, ComEd suggested that this rate increase would be about $3/month for each customer, in addition to any normal rate increases.

David Kolata, Citizens Utility Board executive director and IEC board member, expressed concern at the hearing that this legislation would give consumers the “bill without the benefits.”  Smart grid technology uses digital two way communications with a consumer’s home.  Smart grid done right should increase energy efficiency, lower bills for consumers, and otherwise prepare for a clean energy future.  As written, HB14 does not include any renewable energy or energy efficiency provisions.

On the same day as this hearing, Exelon CEO John Rowe was quoted by Crain’s as saying, “Smart grid we are reluctant to embrace, because it costs too much and we’re not sure what good it will do.” Exelon owns ComEd. Read more in Crain’s about this disconnect between the discussion of smart grid technology that occurred Mar 8th and comments by Exelon’s CEO.

:}

More tomorrow

:}

Cheap Energy Is The Problem – Until we change that more disasters await

This is an excellent article on why we have had the disaster in Japan.

http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2011/03/17/how-much-are-you-willing-pay-nuke-free/

How Much Are You Willing to Pay to be Nuke-Free?

Posted by Robert Rapier on Thursday, March 17, 2011

A Plan to Phase Out “Dirty” Energy

After the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico, someone said to me “We have to stop all offshore drilling.” My response was that I could get behind that idea, but I wanted to know what sacrifices the person was willing to make. That turned out to be the end of the conversation, because usually the people campaigning against these sorts of things believe that the consequences will be all good (no more oil spills) with no real downside (like less energy available). I can tell you with absolute certainty that we can live with no offshore drilling, but I can also tell you that the price of your fuel would be greater — and probably far greater — than it is today.

Nuclear power plants fill a need — cheap energy — that consumers demand. Are you willing to give it up?

I believe that the reason we have so much “dirty” energy is that we demand cheap energy. I spoke to a reporter in Japan this week about the crisis at the Fukushima nuclear plant, and he said he couldn’t help but notice that despite some rolling blackouts now, Japan remains very much a country with all of the lights on.

Root Cause: Consumers Demand Cheap, Abundant Energy

This gets right to the heart of why we have nuclear power: We demand cheap energy; energy so cheap that we can afford to leave all of the lights in the house on all day long. Both coal and nuclear-generated electricity are viewed as cheap relative to many other options — admittedly debatable given charges of government subsidies and the occasional environmental calamity — as well as reliable (again, environmental calamities notwithstanding).

My response to the reporter was that I love lobster, but I rarely eat it because it is so expensive. If they served $2 lobster at McDonalds, we would all consume much more lobster and of course the supply of lobsters would be under pressure. If we all demanded cheap lobster and got angry when our lobsters became more expensive, politicians would work to give us what we want lest they be voted out of office. We would see all sorts of lobster-related subsidies designed to bring us all cheap lobsters (which have to be paid through taxes and/or deficit spending). Consequences of our cheap lobster demands — higher deficits and possibly no more lobsters — would be pushed onto another generation.

:}

What he does not say is why we were sold cheap energy. That is sold on the idea instead of sustainability. It’s because resources are seen as free. Buy them, dig them up and sell them. More next week.

:}

Nuclear Power Plants Explode – Gas Prices Explode

I may have crafted the perfect google whore headline. So which do you think is more important? The nukes or the pocketbook? I vote for the nukes. But which source to cite? God what a beautiful day. Actually it is cold and rainy here but I just meant it at a philosophical level. First the ground rules: 1. None of these nukes will create a China syndrome, 2. They will be messy to clean up but produce no widespread radiation meaning spreading any further than 100 miles, 3. They will not kill off the nuclear power movement worldwide.

First the bad news:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2011/0314/Second-explosion-at-nuclear-power-plant-in-Japan

Second explosion at nuclear power plant in Japan

Monday’s blast destroyed the containment building but the reactor is still intact. Japanese officials also said cooling systems have failed at a third reactor

By Jenna Fisher, Staff writer / March 14, 2011

A new explosion hit Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station on Monday, two days after an explosion at a different reactor housing unit at the power plant. Japanese officials said cooling systems have also failed at a third reactor as a result of Friday’s earthquake and tsunami that knocked out electricity to much of the region

Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said 11 people were injured in the blast, which authorities said was probably a hydrogen explosion causing the roof and walls of the building to blow away, reported Japan Today.

Today’s explosion has increased concern about a possible release of radiation, such as the fallout from Chernobyl that devastated Ukraine in 1986. However, a number of American and European scientists, as well as Japan’s nuclear safety agency, have downplayed that risk.

IN PICTURES: Japan’s 8.9 earthquake

Despite Saturday’s explosion at reactor No. 1 and Monday’s blast at reactor No. 3, Japan’s nuclear safety agency has said there is “absolutely no possibility of a Chernobyl” style accident at the Fukushima I plant, according to the national strategy minister, reports The Daily Telegraph. While the explosions blew the roof off each of the reactor containment buildings, officials said the reactors themselves remained intact.

“Everything I’ve seen says that the containment structure is operating as it’s designed to operate. It’s keeping the radiation in and it’s holding everything in, which is the good news,” Murray Jennex, of San Diego State University, told the Telegraph.

“This is nothing like a Chernobyl,” he added. “At Chernobyl you had no containment structure – when it blew, it blew everything straight out into the atmosphere.”

:}

For a better discussion of why I mandated guidelines, please see the below related article. The bottom line is they will probably have to pump sea water into at least three reactors, making them pretty much a total economic loss. It will take at least a month for them too cool down. But they were 40 years old and this is what you get when you put your hand in the nuclear cookie jar.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2011/0313/Japan-s-nuclear-crisis-and-Chernobyl-key-differences

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Gulf Coast Residents Dying – Same thing happened in Alaska

When they tried to find anyone who helped with the Alaska oil spill in Prince William Sound, they could not find anybody. Part of that was natural because it was 20 years ago. But part of it was not. See below.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/03/201138152955897442.html

Gulf spill sickness wrecking lives
Nearly a year after the oil disaster began, Gulf Coast residents are sick, and dying from BP’s toxic chemicals.
Dahr Jamail Last Modified: 09 Mar 2011 15:42 GMT
:}
:}
National and State Parks along the Gulf Coast have posted health warnings along the coast [Erika Blumenfeld/AJE]

“I have critically high levels of chemicals in my body,” 33-year-old Steven Aguinaga of Hazlehurst, Mississippi told Al Jazeera. “Yesterday I went to see another doctor to get my blood test results and the nurse said she didn’t know how I even got there.”

Aguinaga and his close friend Merrick Vallian went swimming at Fort Walton Beach, Florida, in July 2010.

“I swam underwater, then found I had orange slick stuff all over me,” Aguinaga said. “At that time I had no knowledge of what dispersants were, but within a few hours, we were drained of energy and not feeling good. I’ve been extremely sick ever since.”

BP’s oil disaster last summer gushed at least 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, causing the largest accidental marine oil spill in history – and the largest environmental disaster in US history. Compounding the problem, BP has admitted to using at least 1.9 million gallons toxic dispersants, including one chemical that has been banned in the UK.

According to chemist Bob Naman, these chemicals create an even more toxic substance when mixed with crude oil. Naman, who works at the Analytical Chemical Testing Lab in Mobile, Alabama, has been carrying out studies to search for the chemical markers of the dispersants BP used to both sink and break up its oil.

Poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from this toxic mix are making people sick, Naman said. PAHs contain compounds that have been identified as carcinogenic, mutagenic, and teratogenic.

“The dispersants are being added to the water and are causing chemical compounds to become water soluble, which is then given off into the air, so it is coming down as rain, in addition to being in the water and beaches of these areas of the Gulf,” Naman told Al Jazeera.

“I’m scared of what I’m finding. These cyclic compounds intermingle with the Corexit [dispersants] and generate other cyclic compounds that aren’t good. Many have double bonds, and many are on the EPA’s danger list. This is an unprecedented environmental catastrophe.”

Aguinaga’s health has been in dramatic decline.

“I have terrible chest pain, at times I can’t seem to get enough oxygen, and I’m constantly tired with pains all over my body,” Aguinaga explained, “At times I’m pissing blood, vomiting dark brown stuff, and every pore of my body is dispensing water.”

And Aguinaga’s friend Vallian is now dead.

“After we got back from our vacation in Florida, Merrick went to work for a company contracted by BP to clean up oil in Grand Isle, Louisiana,” Aguinaga said of his 33-year-old physically fit friend.

“Aside from some gloves, BP provided no personal protection for them. He worked for them for two weeks and then died on August 23. He had just got his first paycheck, and it was in his wallet, uncashed, when he died.”

National health crisis

Many of the chemicals present in the oil and dispersants are known to cause headaches, nausea, vomiting, kidney damage, altered renal function, and irritation of the digestive tract. They have also caused lung damage, burning pain in the nose and throat, coughing, pulmonary edema, cancer, lack of muscle coordination, dizziness, confusion, irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, and throat, difficulty breathing, delayed reaction time and memory difficulties.

Further health problems include stomach discomfort, liver and kidney damage, unconsciousness, tiredness/lethargy, irritation of the upper respiratory tract, hematological disorders, and death. Pathways of exposure to the chemicals are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact.

Al Jazeera has talked with scores of sick people across the Gulf Coast who attribute their illnesses to chemicals from BP’s oil disaster.

Paul Doom, 22, from Navarre, Florida, was training in preparation to join the US Marines, until he became extremely ill from swimming in the Gulf of Mexico.

“I stopped swimming in July because I started having severe headaches that wouldn’t go away,” Doom told Al Jazeera. “But each time I went to the doctor they dismissed it.”

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Oil Prices, Gas Prices Sky Rocket – Just in time for the weekend

Needing no introduction…

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/market-turmoil-as-iea-warns-age-of-cheap-oil-is-over-2230581.html

Market turmoil as IEA warns ‘age of cheap oil is over’

Unrest in the Middle East drives Brent crude above the $117 per barrel mark

By Nikhil Kumar

Thursday, 3 March 2011

Growing fears of an enduring oil crisis prompted huge volatility on investment markets yesterday – with shares in the world’s biggest oil producer, Saudi Arabia, slumping to a 22-month low – as a top energy official warned that the “age of cheap oil is over”.

Concerns about the turmoil in Libya triggered sharp sell-offs in stock markets across the Gulf, with shares in Kuwait and Dubai sliding to six-year lows. Oil prices also remained volatile throughout yesterday, with Brent crude futures for April delivery breaching the $117 (£72) per barrel mark in late afternoon trading.

In London, the FTSE 100 fell sharply in the morning, declining by more than 2 per cent at one point, before recovering to close only slightly lower on the day.

The nerves among investors were evident in the movements in the gold price, which touched a record high above $1,440 per ounce. The yellow metal, the traditional destination for investors seeking to preserve their wealth during times of turmoil, was up 6 per cent in February, recording its biggest monthly rise since August.

Last night’s swings came as the chief economist of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, warned that the world may have to face up to the prospect of high oil prices over the long term. “The age of cheap oil is over, though policy action could bring lower international prices than would otherwise be the case,” he said.

:}

http://www.suntimes.com/business/4012230-418/gas-prices-in-chicago-climb-17-cents.html

Gas prices in Chicago climb 17 cents

BY FRANCINE KNOWLES Staff Reporter/fknowles@suntimes.com

Feb 26, 2011 04:45PM

Ouch! Gasoline prices in Chicago spiked 6 cents a gallon from Thursday to Friday and jumped 17 cents this past week.

The average price of unleaded regular gasoline in Chicago was $3.50 a gallon Friday, up from $3.33 a week earlier and up from $3.44 Thursday, according to AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express.

Blame it on continuing political unrest in Libya, which has caused the price of oil to spike, even though the country supplies less than 2 percent of the oil consumed globally.

“Everyone’s a nervous wreck,” PFGBest analyst Phil Flynn said. “What we’re seeing is perhaps the greatest threat to global oil supply since the Persian Gulf War.”

The Libyan rebellion has all but shut down exports from the oil-rich nation, and traders say it’s hard to gauge how much world supplies — and prices — will be affected as similar uprisings unfold in North Africa and the Middle East.

:}

As always, go there read more. More next week.

:}

Chicago is such an energy dog – Tear it down and rebuild

Forget the skyscrapers, and forget the suburbs, when you tear down buildings and then replace them you waste tons of energy. Not to mention the crap that they put in landfills. This is especially true when you produce negligible results. If you address the economic issues instead of the housing issues, you solve the problem. Case in point.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/chicago-public-housing-0303.html

Chicago hope

Ambitious attempt to help the city’s poor by moving them out of troubled housing projects is having mixed results, MIT study finds.

Peter Dizikes, MIT News Office

In December 2010, the last remaining resident was removed from the last high-rise building standing in Chicago’s notorious Cabrini-Green housing projects, long a national symbol of urban blight. The relocation was part of Chicago’s ambitious Plan for Transformation, a 15-year enterprise aimed at breaking the poverty cycle in which tens of thousands of the city’s poor have lived, by moving them out of the projects and into better, safer living environments.

So far, according to a study by MIT researchers, the Plan for Transformation is faring only moderately well. Leaving the projects has produced positive psychological effects for some of Chicago’s poor, but has not appreciably improved their economic prospects, while relatively few participants in the program are living in drastically different types of housing.

“The results are mixed and nuanced,” says Lawrence Vale, Ford Professor of Urban Design and Planning at MIT, who produced the report along with Erin Graves, a former postdoctoral research associate in MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning. The report, “The Chicago Housing Authority’s Plan for Transformation: What Does the Research Show So Far?” released in October by the MacArthur Foundation, surveys 83 previous studies of the Chicago plan conducted by social scientists.

On the positive side, the report notes that people leaving Chicago public-housing projects display better mental health; one study showed that the percentage of residents suffering anxiety problems in a given year dropped from 30 percent to 21 percent. Relocated residents also said they felt safer.

However, it is not clear that relocation helps residents increase their employment prospects and incomes. One study shows that among working-age public-housing residents, the proportion employed between 1999, when the plan was founded, and 2010, remained between 50 percent and 55 percent, including part-time workers. “The question of whether they’ve made significant economic gains is unresolved,” notes Vale.

Moreover, as Vale and Graves emphasize, only about 2,100 of the 26,000 households relocated as part of the Plan for Transformation have moved from the projects into mixed-income housing: the smaller, safer developments, where middle-income families are mixed in with low-income households.

“The public perception is that Chicago is replacing all of its infamous public housing with low-rise mixed-income communities,” says Vale. But as the report notes, about 9,000 households have moved to senior-only public housing, and 6,000 households have stayed in renovated public buildings that house only low-income residents. Similarly, Vale says, “The academic literature has focused on the least common experience, not on what the city has done with the majority of the housing.”

:}

Read the rest of the article, but it doesn’t get any better. More tomorrow.

:}