Archive for 2009

A personal message from Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder

Last week, the Portland metropolitan region’s transportation leaders put their stamp of approval on a transportation and livability blueprint for this region - a proposed list of projects and innovative policies collectively known as the Regional Transportation Plan. And today the Metro Council - in its federally recognized role as this region’s transportation planning agency - also gave its approval to this plan.

Adoption of the RTP marks a major milestone in Metro’s Making the Greatest Place effort. We now have a bricks-and-mortar plan shaped by values created by the people - not traffic models - that will  create a sustainable region through smart investments.

There will be many challenges ahead associated with increasing population, rising petroleum prices, shortages of public funds and, in particular, reducing carbon emissions.

This plan sets us on the right path toward a sustainable future through projects and policies that help us use land inside the urban growth boundary more efficiently, which prevents sprawl, protects farm and forest lands, attracts jobs and housing to urban centers, encourages more transit use, and creates places where people can choose to walk and bike for pleasure or to meet everyday needs.

This  RTP reduces - on a per capita basis - carbon emissions from where we are now.

It also helps a rapidly growing population sustainably thrive. The smart investments and policies in this plan will create vibrant, bustling urban centers where we want them, and keep farm and forestland protected from undesirable and expensive sprawl.  Its policies on freight mobility support our economic competitiveness.  It also commits more resources to safety, high-capacity transit, and pedestrian-oriented projects than ever before. It prioritizes $1 billion in bicycle investment opportunities alone.

However, aggressive targets for reducing GHG emissions - in Oregon’s case, a 75 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050 - puts tall demands on even the greenest of future plans to be even greener. Even with technological advances in cleaner fuels and engine efficiency, we will constantly need to improve our plans and practices.

I believe we can get there. This RTP not only continues our strong legacy of sustainability, it also improves our strategic position.

To begin with, we can all be encouraged that the Portland region already leads the United States in reducing transportation emissions. Our vehicle miles traveled per capita have been declining, transit and bike use are increasing, and we enjoy shorter trips due to our compact urban form. So we’re already on the right path. Because of Metro’s smart land use and transportation policies the average resident drives 17 percent less here than our counterparts around the country. That’s big savings in money, too, estimated at over $1 billion a year!

Furthermore, this RTP puts us ahead of the national curve by putting carbon emission reduction explicitly and directly into our planning so we can address any state or federal requirements without delay.

Just a few weeks ago after discussions with other regional leaders we adopted a “RTP Climate Action Plan,” which outlines additional steps to be completed by January 2012:

• Consistency across the board - Make sure that all local plans are consistent with the regional ones, namely in how they reduce GHG emissions;
• More multi-modal transportation - Metro will use flexible federal funding to bring more car-free choices, enhancing residents’ daily experiences and improving air quality;
• Activity areas - We’ll be prioritizing plans to more fully develop centers and corridors, a key to lively urban landscapes and job creation, which also minimizes GHG emissions and saves money;
• Improved cities, protected farms - In December 2010, Metro will adopt rules committing everyone to specific land use actions that keep housing, jobs and amenities closer together in order to minimize trips and GHG emissions.

Despite all this trend-setting work and positive results, we will need to do more. I welcome efforts to push even harder to reduce carbon emissions.

Fortunately, with a plan in place that improves upon our solid foundation of sustainability, we’ll be able to meet immediate needs and make real-time adjustments, whether with new ideas, technologies or economic trends, to bridge the gap toward increasingly climate friendly practices. And that, ultimately, will help us turn our current and planned per capita decline in carbon emissions into drastic overall reductions in order to meet our aggressive goals.

I am very proud that the Metro Council has adopted this plan and I look forward to working with my Metro Council colleagues in the years and months ahead to keep this region at the forefront of sustainability.

Learn more about the Regional Transportation Plan

Posted on December 17, 2009

By Abby Haight, The Oregonian

December 17, 2009, 6:15PM

View full sizeMotoya Nakamura, The OregonianRon Carley and Jill Fuglister of the Coalition for a Livable Future, which comprises about 50 nonprofit organizations working for sustainable communities. Recently, the coalition derided the I-5 Columbia River Crossing project as well as a $20 billion plan by Metro to restore and expand the region’s roadways, among other things.
Ron Carley once had a conversation with a group of Portlanders living in a low-income neighborhood. Carley talked about sustainability, about consuming less, driving less and conserving energy.

The Portlanders taught him a lesson.

“When they heard that — ’sustainability’ — it almost brought a bitter laugh,” Carley recalls. “They said, ‘My life is not sustainable. I’m looking to change my lifestyle. Tell me how to do that.’”

Carley co-directs the Coalition for a Livable Future with Jill Fuglister, and they use ‘livability’ to describe their campaigns to make the Portland metro area a greener and more inclusive community. Affordable housing, access to parks and greenspaces and political participation are among the criteria that make the region not just sustainable, but livable, they say.

It’s not easy. Or even well-understood.

With about 50 non-profit groups as members – wide-ranging in their first purposes – the coalition is one of the few organizations in the country that combines ecological, social and economic goals.

Coalition members meet regularly to discuss and set their policy strategies. And they don’t always agree. But in finding common ground on core issues such as public transit and housing, they make it possible for Carley and Fuglister to argue their case to pertinent public agencies.

Carley brings a background in environmental work. He became a member of the coalition’s board in 1994 and joined its staff as a fulltime co-director in 2007. Before that, he oversaw stormwater management grants for the City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services and spent 12 years as the urban conservationist at the Audubon Society of Portland.

A broad membership is coalition’s strength

Some Coalition for a Livable Future members are:

- American Institute of Architects, Portland chapter
- Audubon Society of Portland
- Bicycle Transportation Alliance
- The Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
- Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon
- League of Women Voters of the Columbia River Region
- Multnomah County Community Action Commission
- Oregon Environmental Council
- 1,000 Friends of Oregon
- Sisters of the Road Cafe
- The Urban League of Portland
- The Wetlands Conservancy

Abby Haight

Fuglister has worked for the coalition since 1999 after a career in environmental and social justice non-profits. She has overseen the coalition’s programs, managed collaborative projects and directed fundraising.

Recently, the coalition publicly opposed two of the region’s biggest projects: Metro’s plan to spend $20 billion on 1,000 projects over the next 25 years, many of them expanding roads; and the Columbia River Crossing project, which would spend $4 billion to construct a new I-5 bridge over the Columbia River, helping to ease a well-known bottleneck on the West’s main north-south highway.

These projects may seem big and gray and wonkish, but the coalition feels they are the stuff of quality of life: More roads or not, wider bridges or not, more traffic and suburban sprawl — or not.

We sat down with Carley and Fuglister to talk about transportation as a foundation of livability and why the coalition is fighting projects that many regional leaders say are necessary to alleviate congestion and deal with rising population.

Why is transportation a concern?

RC: So much of the money used to develop our communities is spent on transportation. On a really fundamental level, where you live, how you get to your job, how you recreate, it’s linked to transportation. Whether you’re on your bike or walking to get groceries. How far you are from things and how you make that journey affects your health, affects your well-being, affects your time with your family and affects the safety of your community.

JF: But we’re further along with environmental restoration than we are on community restoration.

Metro is developing its 2035 regional transportation plan to cope with population growth. How should Metro plan for transportation needs?

RC: Almost 40 percent of our global warming pollution comes from transportation. If we move ahead with Metro’s regional transportation plan, we actually do worse with greenhouse gas emissions than if we do nothing at all. And doing nothing at all is intolerable… . Three-quarters of the money is for roadway expansion. We want to increase transportation options for people and invest more in transit, bike lanes, sidewalks. We want to focus on neighborhoods that need sidewalks.

JF: There’s just a massive amount of information that no one could possibly digest. This is a lot of money and it has a lot of impact on peoples’ lives. We have a bunch of sidewalk projects planned for outer Southeast Portland, but there’s no way to move them up on the list and remove other projects.

Why have you asked that officials start over with the Columbia River Crossing?

JF: If you add more lanes, you’re offering incentive for more driving, you’re increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Our big concern is that it’s a project out of the past. Yes, it has light rail and that’s good. It does have some bicycle and pedestrian improvements. But essentially it’s a big highway expansion project.

RC: We’re supportive of tolling as a method of managing congestion. Why not start tolling now on I-5 and I-205? As you phase in congestion pricing, maybe you take care of the problem — enough of an incentive to get people to drive at different times of the day. Why not give it a try?

JF: There’s talk of fixing the train bridge so that it would minimize bridge lifts, which is one of the main arguments for replacing the bridge. You have all these interchanges that are too close together, which causes cars to weave and cause collisions. There’s a huge expense in upgrading the interchanges. Instead, take out some of the interchanges. Taking out interchanges would remove some of the pressure.

Make light rail a priority and put more into pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

RC: We’ve said we’re not anti-replacement. We’re not pro-replacement. We don’t like what’s being suggested. We need to take a considered look at alternatives and that hasn’t been done yet.

By Scott Learn, The Oregonian

December 04, 2009, 10:57AM

ZeaChem has won a $25 million federal grant to build an advanced biofuel plant in Boardman that converts poplar trees to motor vehicle fuel.

The U.S. Department of Energy grant, announced today, will help Colorado-based ZeaChem build a $73.4 million demonstration plant. The company says the “core technology” of the plant will come on line next year.

ZeaChem’s planned refinery was one of 19 nationwide to receive $564 million in grants from federal economic stimulus money. The grants will leverage private investment and non-federal subsidies of $700 million, the energy department said.

The federal government’s biofuel mandates call for 21 billion gallons a year of advanced fuels — those that cut greenhouse emissions by half or more compared to petroleum-based fuel — by 2022.

Woody “cellulosic” feedstocks — from trees to switch grass to forest slash — are not food crops, don’t require fertilizer and can grow on marginal lands. As feedstocks, they should be more stable in price than food crops such as corn and soybeans.

But the technology for breaking down cellulose is still developing, and critics question whether advanced biofuels will be able to compete on cost with conventional fuel.

ZeaChem plans a 250,000-gallon capacity demonstration plant in Boardman. The company will take fast-growing poplar trees from a nearby 17,000-acre tree farm owned by GreenWood Resources of Portland, then convert the material to ethanol using microbes found in termites.

Additional feedstocks, including agricultural residues, will also be evaluated in the pilot plant, the energy department said.

ZeaChem officials say the company’s fuel will have 12 times the energy content that went into producing it and needs far less land than ethanol made from corn. The company’s investors include Valero Energy, the largest oil refiner in the United States.

– Scott Learn

The White House is celebrating Christmas this year with recycled ornaments, energy-saving LED tree lights  and natural materials, including dried hydrangeas that were previously used in floral arrangements.

The official White House Christmas Tree, a Douglas Fir, stands 18 1/2 feet high and nearly 13 feet wide, in the Blue Room.

CAPTION

By Alex Wong, Getty Images

“Reflect, Rejoice, Renew” is the theme for the Obama family’s first Christmas in the White House, First Lady Michelle Obama said Wednesday as she gave the media a holiday preview. She explained why:

For the Obama family, Christmas and the New Year has always been a time to reflect on our many blessings, to rejoice in the pleasure of spending time with our family and our friends, and to renew our commitment to one another and to the causes that we believe in.  And I wanted to continue that part of the tradition during our first holiday season here at the White House. 

For the 18-foot tree in the Blue Room, 800 ornaments from previous administration were taken out of storage and sent to 60 community groups nationwide to be decorated in tribute to favorite local landmarks. Among the landmarks honored: the Statue of Liberty, Mount Rushmore, the Kennedy Space Center and the Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago, the First Lady’s hometown.

The decorations also include a 400-pound gingerbread replica of the White House, covered in white chocolate, and a small replica of Bo, the Obama family’s Portuguese water dog.

In addition to the East Wing and residence staff, 92 volunteers from 24 states spent 3,400 hours decorating the White House, which expects 50,000 visitors for the holidays.

To keep the environmental theme, CNN reports that six of the trees on display at the entraces will be replanted after the holidays by the National Parks Service. 

by Mandalit del Barco

December 2, 2009

Bicycling magazine called it “the road rage incident heard ’round the cycling world.”

A driver in Los Angeles was recently convicted of using his car as a weapon against two cyclists. And the case is focusing attention on the often uneasy relationship between motorists and bicyclists who have to share the road.

It happened last year on the Fourth of July, on a steep, narrow road in L.A.’s Mandeville Canyon. Cyclists Christian Stoehr and Ron Peterson were riding side by side when a doctor who lived in the neighborhood came up from behind in a sedan.

“There was an exchange of words,” Stoehr recalls. “He then accelerated within five feet in front of us, pulled over and slammed on the brakes.”

Stoehr says there was no time for them to stop. He was thrown over the car and landed across the road. But Peterson didn’t have time to swerve.

“And he went right in through the back window of the car,” says Stoehr, adding that Peterson crashed headfirst. “I think they found his teeth in the back seat.”

The impact severed Peterson’s nose and separated Stoehr’s shoulder. Christopher Thomas Thompson, the driver of the car and a former emergency room doctor, was arrested and put on trial. The jury found him guilty of six felonies, including assault with a deadly weapon: his car. Thompson now faces 10 years in prison.

“For someone to do this to you on purpose, it’s unfathomable,” says Peterson, a cycling coach for the University of California, Los Angeles. He says he still can’t feel his nose, he now wears false teeth, and he will forever have scars.

“I’m happy that justice was served,” Peterson told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict. “I think all of our hope is that this brings to light just how vulnerable cyclists are out there.”

During the trial, other cyclists told the jury of previous incidents with the driver. And a police officer testified that Thompson said he deliberately slammed on the brakes to “teach the cyclists a lesson.”

Landmark Case

“The road rage was so egregious,” says Bicycling editor Loren Mooney. She says this may be a landmark case in protecting cyclists and pedestrians. “It’s the intent, the actual road rage, that’s part of the conviction in this case.”

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, traffic crashes killed 716 cyclists last year and injured 52,000 people riding bikes, trikes and unicycles. That includes recent fatalities from Brookline, Mass., to Portland, Ore. But unlike the Los Angeles case, Mooney says drivers who kill or injure cyclists are rarely convicted.

“It’s easy for a driver to say, ‘Oh, I didn’t see you. You’re small, you’re traveling slowly in the roadway. It was an accident,’ ” says Mooney. “It takes an enormous amount of evidence to get a conviction of a reckless driver, or in this case, a driver with an intent to hurt somebody with a vehicle.”

Mooney says crashes often happen when drivers are distracted by cell phones, texts and other hazards. And she warns bike riders not to aggravate or escalate tensions on the road.

Driver Resentment

The Mandeville Canyon driver’s reaction was perhaps an extreme example of the everyday resentment heard from other motorists.

“These bicyclists are extremely rude, and they take up the road — four, five people at a time,” complained one caller to NPR member station KPCC’s show AirTalk. The caller said he lives in Mandeville Canyon, and he has had it with cyclists.

“When you pull up alongside them and ask them to stay out of your way, they yell at you,” he said. “They’re extremely provocative, they’re asking for trouble, and this is not the worst case that’s going to happen. Someone’s going to get killed, and to be frank with you, the residents aren’t going to feel too bad about it.”

Another Mandeville Canyon resident, Tom Freeman, is sympathetic to vulnerable cyclists. But as president of the homeowners’ association, he hears complaints that when drivers try to pass bike riders, “they give them the finger.”

“If they catch up with them at a stop sign, they’ll kick their cars,” he says. “Somebody was spit at. It’s the few that cause the problems, and they help create a perception.”

Cycling In Fear

East Hollywood boasts what’s known as a “bicycle district,” with a bike shop, cafe and bike repair co-op. Here, cycling activist Stephen Box complains that police officers don’t take bike crashes seriously. And he says cyclists feel the brunt of car drivers’ frustrations.

“I’ve been left-hooked and hit. I’ve been hit from behind and left in the streets,” says Box. “And they expect cyclists to ride where it’s unsafe: It’s unsafe to ride through potholes in the gutter pan; it’s unsafe to ride through broken glass in the gutter pan; it’s unsafe to ride in the door zone.”

His wife, Enci, says that’s why cyclists often ride the way they do — to survive, even if that means sometimes running red lights.

“When I see the light turn red, I try to race as fast as I can through it,” she says, “because I know I will have a block of peace and quiet, where there won’t be cars behind me.”

These cyclists point out that it’s actually legal to ride side by side in the streets of L.A. But the rules of the road can be confusing. That’s why Alex Thompson wrote what’s known as the Cyclists’ Bill of Rights.

“Cyclists have the right to travel safely and free of fear. We have the right to the full support of the judicial system,” says Thompson, a bike blogger who also co-founded the L.A. bike cooperative Bikerowave. “These are all rights cyclists already have, but we need to reaffirm these.”

But even Thompson and another bike blogger, Ted Rogers, disapprove of reckless bike riders who maneuver through traffic as if playing a video game.

“Oh, we hate these guys,” says Rogers. “We absolutely hate them. The driver you tick off is the one who’s going to run me off the road.”

Leah Nash for The New York Times

Logs cut to thin the Deschutes National Forest in Oregon, an effort to promote sustainability.

By WILLIAM YARDLEY

Published: November 28, 2009

SISTERS, Ore. — A patch of ponderosa pines here in the Deschutes National Forest has been carefully pruned over the last few years to demonstrate the United States Forest Service’s priorities in the changing West: improving forest health and protecting against devastating wildfire while still supporting the timber economy.

Yet occasionally, when tour groups come through, someone will ask what role the trees might play as the nation addresses global warming. After all, forests soak up carbon dioxide as they grow.

“We’ve always said that’s outside the scope of this project,” said Michael Keown, the environmental coordinator for the Sisters Ranger District, which includes more than 300,000 acres in the Deschutes forest in central Oregon. “But those days have come and gone.”

The giant evergreens of the West have long been proclaimed essential, whether the cause was saving salmon and spotted owls or small towns and their sawmills. Now, with evidence showing that American forests store 15 percent or more of the carbon gases produced in the nation, expectations are growing for them to do even more.

Over the next 50 years or so, experts say, some forests could be cultivated to grow bigger, more resilient trees, potentially increasing their carbon storage by 50 percent and providing an important “bridge” to a time when the nation will theoretically have shifted away from greenhouse-gas producing fossil fuels.

But even as some private forests are already being marketed as “carbon sinks,” or storehouses, that could play a role in a future carbon cap-and-trade program, government agencies and academics are struggling to understand and measure how carbon is stored and released. After decades of controversy surrounding the management of forests, debate persists over how they can best be used to fight global warming while also being protected from their threats, including more and bigger wildfires.

“While healthy, functioning forests may serve as a means to sequester carbon, under current practices, many of our Western forests are at risk of turning from a carbon sink to a carbon source,” Tom Tidwell, the head of the Forest Service, told a Senate subcommittee on Nov. 18 in a hearing on forest management and climate change.

“Projections indicate that while these forests continue to sequester more carbon in the short-term,” Mr. Tidwell said, “in 30 to 50 years, disturbances such as fire and insects and disease could dramatically change the role of forests, thereby emitting more carbon than currently sequestering.”

The challenges and benefits range by region. Studies show that the potential carbon capacity of the predominantly fir forests on the wet west side of the Cascade Range in the Pacific Northwest is at least three times as high as that of the drier regions over the mountains and to the southwest.

Many drier forests, including here east of the Cascades, have grown unnaturally dense after logging and efforts to save them from wildfires. Experts say measures taken to stop fires can end up causing more devastating ones by allowing the growth of small trees and underbrush, “ladder fuels” that ignite bigger trees.

On federal lands, the Forest Service has recently emphasized removing ladder fuels, including in the demonstration project here in the Metolius Basin.

“The suite of things we’re doing benefits the carbon sequestration,” said Brian Tandy, who helps oversee forest growth in the Deschutes. “We weren’t doing it to address some of that specifically, but the way we’re moving is sort of in line with that.”

Still, after years of fights over logging practices, including lawsuits to reduce clear cutting on federal land, distrust of the Forest Service’s motives remains. Mr. Tandy made a point of saying that one reason he does what he does is to help meet “society’s needs for wood products.”

Beverly Law, a professor of global change forest science at Oregon State University, pointed to the Deschutes project as an example of the Forest Service protecting against climate change while potentially improving carbon storage. Yet Ms. Law also said fire officials should not presume that what might keep a forest from burning will enhance it as a carbon asset.

“There’s this opinion out there that when people see smoke from fire, they think it’s all going up in smoke — well, no, it’s not,” Ms. Law said, referring to forests that experience relatively low-intensity fires, a common dynamic in dry areas like central and eastern Oregon and parts of California. “Only 5 percent of the total ecosystem carbon is going up in smoke. When you talk about trying to prevent that, it’s not as big a carbon pulse to the atmosphere as people think.”

Ms. Law, along with Mark E. Harmon, a professor of forest ecology at Oregon State, and others say that forest policy should be tailored to individual forests and that the risk of carbon released in a wildfire should be weighed against the carbon costs of trying to prevent fire.

“They say they have to do thinning all over the place because they say fire might happen here,” Ms. Law said, “but it might not happen for decades.”

The math only gets more complicated. Newer, ostensibly environmentally friendly efforts to use cleared brush and small trees as biofuel could potentially release more carbon through transportation and processing than if the material were simply burned in the woods. By the same token, removing a completely burned forest can end up releasing more carbon than if the dead trees are left alone.

Others counter that thinning and fire prevention efforts now under way will have long term benefits, even if they release some carbon initially.

“You can regain that emitted carbon and actually put on even more carbon by redirecting the growth in the forest to the large trees that you leave in the forest — and you avoid the substantial emission of carbon you’d have in a wildfire,” said Malcolm North, a research ecologist at the Forest Service’s Pacific Southwest Research Station and an associate professor of forest ecology at the University of California, Davis.

In his comments to the Senate subcommittee, Mr. Tidwell pointed out that while the Forest Service manages vast tracts of the West, private landowners control the majority of forest land in the United States. Still, said Andrea Tuttle, the former director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention, the government has a different obligation than private owners.

“The Forest Service as a public agency should be managing the forest for the people,” Ms. Tuttle said. “Part of that is to make them resilient to climate change and at the same time find opportunities where appropriate to use the forest as a carbon sink.”

Portland, OR, November 25, 2009 –(PR.com)– Portland-based alternative transportation provider ecoShuttle is proud to announce a new, promising partnership with Green Drop Garage, a local auto repair shop specializing in alternative fuel conversions. EcoShuttle currently has a fleet running on 100% biodiesel, and their mission has been clear from the beginning: To pave a car-less road using only the most environmentally-friendly fuels available. Now with five vehicles in their fleet and social entrepreneur Farhad Ghafarzade of Green Drop Garage at their side, they now have the resources to increase their triple bottom line by making the switch to Straight Vegetable Oil (SVO).

(more…)

November 24th, 2009 – 11:02 am Posted by Jaclyn Abergas

Tagged as: Environment

Portland, Oregon, and San Francisco, California, top the list of the greenest cities in the US. But how is that ranking determined? Which factors are considered to be placed in the list of green cities?

Air Quality

Top green cities all have less polluted air and more public smoking bans. Anchorage, Alaska, has the best Air Quality Index median at 19 and St. Louis, Missouri, has the worst at 79.

Electricity Use and Production

Green cities are highly encouraged to use solar or wind power, instead of those with unfriendly emissions. Rebates and property tax exemptions are given as rewards for the people’s efforts.

Environmental Perspective

The government’s environmental concerns also were considered. Committing to environment care as a top priority results in achievable and good results. Among the top green cities, environment care was always in the top five of their priorities.

Environmental Policy

The city’s environmental policy is taken into consideration. The presence of this policy is enough for a city to be considered as part of the green city list.

Green Design

Green designs are encouraged in these cities and even have their own city policies to accommodate it.

Green Space

Green spaces include parks, athletic fields, public gardens and waterfronts, among others. The overall city area percentage it occupies also affects a city’s ranking in the Green City List.

Recycling

When a city recycles more than seven categories, they rank high on the Green City List.

Socioeconomic Factors

When a city manages to keep its national average of families above minimum wage and the poverty line, they score high on the list.

Transportation

Cities which make an effort to get people to stop using their cars and instead use other means of transportation (including walking, biking, bus/rail/subway) rank high on the list.

Water Quality

Based on the Safe Water Drinking Act, hefty fines are charged on cities with serious health violations.

This is all very technical, but it’s important to know the factors. It makes us aware of what we can do to help keep our cities part of the Green City List or to introduce it there.

ecoShuttle is Recycle at Work Certified—meaning our business has improved its recycling practices and reduced the amount of waste it produces by implementing all of the City of Portland’s five recycling steps.

If you are interested in planning a more ethical and green wedding, but don’t want to sacrifice fabulous fashions and design, then Portland’s Eco-Elegant Wedding Show is your must-attend Fall event.

Held at the newly renovated Platinum LEED certified Center for Architecture building which is located in the Pearl District, the event will showcase some of Portland’s premiere wedding vendors, all of whom are committed to offering eco-friendly and sustainable products for brides & grooms looking for local solutions.
(more…)