You Can See Poor From Space

[ArcticSplash]

You Can See Poor From Space - Philadelinquency

By looking at roofs.


Port Richmond - Working Class


Nicetown/Tioga - Poor

[Moonraker]

In the late '60's I recall how green Powelton & Mantua were when viewed from the West Philly dorms. Moreno than Center Cirty.

[MariusPontmercy]

Wasn't there some big federal program to weatherize homes a few years ago? I guess this wasn't part of that plan. Unfortunately renters don't have a lot of leverage to do this. I know our building is not cool roofed and I'd love if it was. It's just another reason why I can't wait to be finished with renting.

[ArcticSplash]

I think you mean this:

Weatherization and Intergovernmental Program: Weatherization Assistance Program

[NE19149]

I'm missing the point here..... how can one tell the "poor" houses?

[ArcticSplash]

I'm missing the point here..... how can one tell the "poor" houses?

It's not specific to an individual house it's when you look at the whole neighborhood.


For instance here's Fairmount and all of it's neighbors to the north of it:



If we revisit the satellite view in a few years, that red line I put there at the northern end of Fairmount will look blurry or you won't be able to see the distinct separation between hot and cool roofs by neighborhood, given the construction activity picking up steam up in B-town.

[MarketStEl]

So cool roofing costs more, then.

Figures.

There's a discussion going on of the recent Rio environmental summit, the one where India led a successful revolt against mandating developed-world levels of environmental sensitivity for all the world's countries, on a listserv I belong to. I shared the Times of India story reporting on the revolt with my Facebook friends, one of whom noted archly and accurately:

"The only nations that can afford to pursue an environmental agenda are AFFLUENT ones."

India argued that reducing poverty should take precedence over "sustainability" as a world development goal. And you know what? The Indians are right.

But if this is any guide, even in an affluent society, "sustainability" appears to be a luxury good.

[FourS]

Silver or white roof sealant doesn't cost much more than black (maybe $150-200 more for a typical Philly row home roof). It pays for itself pretty quickly if you ever run an air conditioner. Additionally, the initial investment is minimal when compared to the total cost of a roof. Education might be a major factor here.

[ArcticSplash]

Think about concepts like TOU billing (Time of Use), which is the billing model utilities and some environmental advocates are pressing.

Time of Use billing changes the rate at which you're billed for consumption based on conditions that change with time. If you remember long distance telephone service back in the 80s and before, Sprint had a concept where you would pay fewer cents per minute on nights and on weekends and holidays than on "peak" periods, which were daylight hours on business days. AT&T, the other competitor and MCI quickly followed. [This pricing model is virtually gone for landline phones but it remains on some cell phone plans]

TOU was introduced to flatten peak usage, when human activity is high, and to shift that demand to periods when human activity is low.



So let's say PECO doesn't want to buy expensive imported electricity during the peak periods of August when air conditioning is at its maximum... which is Monday through Friday from 9AM to 6PM. TOU sets up these time buckets:


Bucket 1 - Monday-Fri 12AM-6AM
Bucket 2 - Monday-Fri 6AM-12PM
Bucket 3 - Monday-Fri 12PM-4PM
Bucket 4 - Monday-Fri 4PM-6PM
Bucket 5 - Monday-Fri 6PM-8PM
Bucket 6 - Monday-Fri 8PM-12AM
Bucket 7 - Weekends


Then the utility during its "Summer Cycle" sends you these rates in the mail:

Bucket 1 costs $0.10/kWh
Bucket 2 costs $0.12/kWh
Bucket 3 costs $0.14/kWh
Bucket 4 costs $0.17/kWh
Bucket 5 costs $0.16/kWh
Bucket 6 costs $0.10/kWh
Bucket 7 costs $0.13/kWh


Then the utility sends you a savings guide: Do your laundry in the cheaper buckets. Run your dishwasher late at night, not during the day. Turn your thermostat up during the day when you're not home and turn it down at night to cool off.

The idea with this is to curtail peak demand enough that PECO is not forced to overpay for importation of electricity or to run "peak plants", which are aging expensive to run or retired plants which yield less profit per megawatt than the production they have available right now. If they can avoid that and stay near full capacity and avoid busting their demand curve, they generate the maximum amount of profit because then they are maximizing the generation that is yielding the best return.



TOU billing is fraught with unfairness. People who are invalids for example and shut-ins who are confined do not have the luxury of going to a worksite in a commercial building who is paying an industrial contract for electricity and can afford to keep the temp at 74F all day and avoid TOU residential billing. Further, anyone who has already minimized their electricity use, usually because of economic hardship, gains nothing financially. They've got nowhere to pull back their demand so they will be faced with a higher bill no matter what.

While TOU may cause consumption shifts, the bills overall will shoot up for all customers, which is basically raising the total cost of energy in aggregate and that in turn removes capital from consumer's pockets and shifts it to the energy sector, which pulls liquidity for consumers to spend on other goods and services.... much like healthcare is the monster that gets larger and larger, sucking up GDP and robs it from other sectors of the economy who are strained to grow because healthcare pulls up capital like a vacuum cleaner.



Now if you want to see TOU be more fair, then I think solar panel installation and assistance for low-income should be a BIG priority on any condition before a utility gets the privilege of billing TOU. And on top of that, if they introduce TOU, then the amount of discount they apply to your bill for solar generation has to adjust to the same proportions they are raising/lowering your rates by the time of day. i.e. if you're being charged more, then you should be credited more for "reverse flow" when your panels push charge back on to the grid.

But if only highly-affluent people can install solar systems, the poor get socked and money stolen from their wallets: so the argument that all of society is benefiting is bunk.

[ArcticSplash]

Silver or white roof sealant doesn't cost much more than black (maybe $150-200 more for a typical Philly row home roof). It pays for itself pretty quickly if you ever run an air conditioner. Additionally, the initial investment is minimal when compared to the total cost of a roof. Education might be a major factor here.

Education and the willingness/skill to do this to one's roof. Obviously rentals make it difficult because a tenant can only ask their landlord to do it and it's a crapshoot whether the landlord would... the landlord gains nothing from it unless the house or apartments have utilities included, otherwise the landlord would be doing just out of altruism.

Low income homeowners probably is mostly to do with education, and also the fear of being ripped off by roofers if they call someone to come do it.

[NE19149]

Silver or white roof sealant doesn't cost much more than black (maybe $150-200 more for a typical Philly row home roof). It pays for itself pretty quickly if you ever run an air conditioner. Additionally, the initial investment is minimal when compared to the total cost of a roof. Education might be a major factor here.

With that said, I really don't think someone can judge by the color of roofing material what their income level is.
It sounds silly.

[MarketStEl]

With that said, I really don't think someone can judge by the color of roofing material what their income level is.
It sounds silly.

Well, if:

--income and education are correlated (such a correlation exists, and it's pretty robust)
--low-income residents may not be educated about the benefits of light roofing or afraid of ripoffs if they are, and/or
--low-income residents may more likely be tenants whose landlords are disinclined to shell out for the lighter roofing

then yes, we can, to a greater degree than we may have thought. And remember, we're talking in the aggregate here. You probably cannot tell the income level of any particular single resident or resident family by this method, true, but you can probably say with some confidence, as ArcticSplash did, that a particular neighborhood is likely higher- or lower-income based on this.

[ArcticSplash]

With that said, I really don't think someone can judge by the color of roofing material what their income level is.
It sounds silly.

You are correct. The light/dark roofing contrast per neighborhood is showing differences in property maintenance, it's not an indicator at the house-level what the income of the inhabitant is.

But the switch to lighter coated roofing is what's showing up from space. The difference seems to follow along areas that are working-class or higher income, at least in most parts of the city, are getting lighter roofing systems while areas we know to be low-income are staying dark. That means there's a strong tendency in lower-income neighborhoods to stay with dark roofing vs. areas where property maintenance is known to be better (Port Richmond for instance is a very well-maintained neighborhood, particularly east of Aramingo Ave).

[FourS]

I wasn't denying the self-evident truths of the article's photos, just adding my two cents. It's a shame that more low income people are not aware of the long term cost benefits. One of my neighbors recently redid his roof. He's relatively low income but owns his home and maintains the property very well with his own labor. I discussed the merits of silver roofing with him (I have it on my roof, that fiberglass sealant paint stuff that you just apply after the job is done) but he didn't seem too interested and wound up with an old-school black roof. He wanted to do it on the cheap. Penny wise, pound foolish.

[Sharkfood]

I have bought many houses from elderly or deceased homeowners in North Philly. The houses are in appalling condition. To imagine that they would put a new roof on, let alone a reflective roof, is pure fantasy. Maybe a patch now and then if the rain is coming down in buckets, but that's about it. They basically run these houses into the ground like a beat up car.

[NE19149]

You are correct. The light/dark roofing contrast per neighborhood is showing differences in property maintenance, it's not an indicator at the house-level what the income of the inhabitant is.

But the switch to lighter coated roofing is what's showing up from space. The difference seems to follow along areas that are working-class or higher income, at least in most parts of the city, are getting lighter roofing systems while areas we know to be low-income are staying dark. That means there's a strong tendency in lower-income neighborhoods to stay with dark roofing vs. areas where property maintenance is known to be better (Port Richmond for instance is a very well-maintained neighborhood, particularly east of Aramingo Ave).

I've got a light grey gravel-type roof.... what's that make me?
T'aint black OR white...

[ArcticSplash]

I've got a light grey gravel-type roof.... what's that make me?
T'aint black OR white...

50 shades of grey?

[NE19149]

50 shades of grey?

I *like* being different!
To hell with following the crowd!

"He's a rebel 'cause he never-ever does what he "should"...
...."Just because he dosen't do what - everybody else does..."

Crystals - He's A Rebel (1965 clip!) - YouTube

[seand]

Reminder I have to do the white coat to my roof. Thanks.

[lemko]

Wouldn't a black roof actually be advantageous in the winter? The roof absorbs the heat from the sun and snow will more quickly melt off of it?