City Dwellers Greener

Apparently, this nation’s carbon footprint has a distinct geographic bend–an urban resident emits less carbon dioxide pollution than the average American.

The Brookings Institution has released a report which analyzed data on household and transportation energy use and found that the average U.S. resident was responsible for about 2.87 tons of carbon pollution a year, but that residents of the U.S.’s 100 largest metro areas had footprints of just 2.47 tons a year on average.  Overall, West Coast cities fared better than Eastern ones due to warmer climates, more aggressive energy-reduction policies, higher fuel and electricity costs, and a greater reliance on hydropower.

“It was a surprise the extent to which emissions per capita are lower,”  offered Marilyn Brown, a professor of energy policy at the Georgia Institute of Technology and co-author of the report.

The report presented a limited snapshot of overall emissions, focusing on residential electricity and fuel use and the mileage traveled by cars and trucks which contribute to almost half of overall carbon emissions. The calculations do not include industrial emissions, those from commercial or government structures and those from air, rail or sea transportation.

The authors also suggested policy recommendations, including federal legislation setting a price on carbon emissions, increasing financing for energy research and development, revising federal policies that reward states with high levels of travel and fuel use and providing more predictable, financial support of mass transit.

Urban America’s necessary leadership role in addressing energy and environmental challenges must have effective underlying federal policy actions in order to successfully seek metropolitan energy and climate solutions.

   

 

Biodiversity Is Crucial

In research presented at the proceedings of the National Academy of Science, scientists from Brown University have concluded that an ecosystem’s productivity is directly linked to its diversity of plant species. The discovery has granted biodiversity a newfound significance in the fight against climate change—in short, the more varied and prolific the ecosystem, the more carbon it captures.  The results support previous findings and also suggest that the effect of biodiversity in natural ecosystems may be much larger than currently thought

 

The study was conducted for six years in Patagonia, a region of vast steppelike plains located in the southernmost reaches of South America.  The scientists divided an area into ninety plots, and then began to systematically remove native species from each plot and chart the changes in the plot’s productivity. Productivity dropped as species were removed.  The scientists believe that productivity is linked to the diversity of species because of “niche complementarity”. In other words, in a healthy environment each species has evolved its own niche without interrupting other species’ niches. This harmony between species allows them to positively interact with each other and fully utilize the resources of a given space.

“It’s a double whammy,” Osvaldo Sala explained. “We not only are disturbing our planet by putting more carbon into the atmosphere, but we’re reducing the ability of ecosystems to capture and store it.” Sala is the director of the Environmental Change Initiative and the Sloan Lindeman Professor of Biology at Brown.
  
The findings appear to have important ramifications beyond plant species, since high biodiversity of plants depends on non-plant species. Insects, birds, and bats are major pollinators for plant species; some plant species depend on a single insect or animal species for pollination. So, to have a truly productive ecosystem all of the region’s biodiversity must be retained.

The Heat Is On A Bugs Life Too

Bugs are facing a changed world. 

Tropical insects and other species which are sensitive to even more modest variations in temperature than those creatures living in the world’s tundra risk extinction with climate change.  While moderate and cold weather animals are accustomed to large temperature changes, tropical species live under a much more narrow temperature range—thus, these insects face a greater risk of extinction with an increase of merely two to four degrees Celsius according to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The University of Washington researchers responsible for this study examined daily and monthly global temperatures from 1950 to 2000.  They superimposed climate model projections for warming in the first years of the 21st century drawn up by a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  The scientists then compared the information with data describing the link between temperature and fitness for 38 temperate and tropical insects as well as cold-blooded animals such as frogs, lizards and turtles.

They concluded that unlike cold weather animals that can more readily adapt to significant climate change by for example, developing thick fur, tropical species do not have the same mechanisms for adaptation.  Rather, they must use other tactics to protect themselves from higher temperatures such as staying out of direct sunlight or burrowing into the soil.  Unfortunately, it is apparent that the warmer weather brought on by climate change may arrive too quickly for their physiologies to timely respond.   

“In the tropics many species appear to be living at or near their thermal optimum, a temperature that lets them thrive,” remarked Joshua Tewksbury, an assistant professor of biology at the Seattle, Washington University.  “But once temperature gets above the thermal optimum, fitness levels most likely decline quickly and there may not be much they can do about it,” he said.

“Many tropical species can only tolerate a narrow range of temperatures because the climate they experience is pretty constant throughout the year,” said Curtis Deutsch, an assistant professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences at UCLA and a co-author of the study.  “Our calculations show that they will be harmed by rising temperatures more than would species in cold climates,” he added.

“Unfortunately, the tropics also hold the large majority of species on the planet,” said Deutsch.

Climate change—affecting all creatures, great and small.

 

 

Our Oceans Losing Oxygen

An international team of oceanographers, including a scientist from the esteemed Scripps Institution of Oceanography, has determined that expanded areas of tropical oceans are suffering from oxygen depletion as the waters warm globally.  This significant study, entitled “Expanding Oxygen-Minimum Zones in the Tropical Oceans,” was published and appears in the May 2 issue of the journal Science.  The research group was headed by Lothar Stramma from the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences (IFM-GEOMAR) in Kiel, Germany and was co-authored by Janet Sprintall, a physical oceanographer at Scripps.  Lower oxygen levels in the oceans limits the areas in which predatory fishes and other marine organisms can live or enter in search of food.  Warming oceans caused by climate change could gradually starve parts of our essential tropical oceans of oxygen, damaging fisheries and coastal economies.

 

The researchers found through analysis of a database of ocean oxygen measurements that levels in tropical oceans at a depth of 300 to 700 meters have declined during the past 50 years.  Problems of lower oxygen supply likely will add to the already mounting problems caused by over-fishing as the world struggles to feed an expanding population. 

 

In undertaking their research, the team selected ocean regions for which they could obtain the greatest amount of data to document the decline in oxygen. Some of the more recent data came from oxygen sensors which have been added to about 150 of the profiling floats used in Argo, a worldwide network of sensors that track basic ocean conditions such as temperature and salinity. There are more than 3,000 Argo floats operating in the world’s oceans, and it has been suggested that more units in the network should be outfitted with oxygen sensors.

 

The ecological impacts of warmer oceans causing more widespread oxygen depletion in our oceans could very well have substantial biological and economical consequences.

 

 

While on the Topic of Grilling

The last blog on grilling set the taste buds to going.  So, below is a very fine, yet simple recipe for Grilled Butterflied Leg of Lamb, which calls for a local, organic lamb.  Before we embark on the cooking process, a few words on organic lamb…

Organic farming promotes biological diversity and replenishment of soil without the use of toxic chemical pesticides and fertilizers.Organic certification means that the methods and practices of raising livestock have reviewed by an independent third party.  Organic meat production means that only meats labeled Certified Organic are 100% free of genetically modified organisms, pesticides, medications, and growth hormones.

You know what the word “local” means.  Now, on to the victuals:

Butterflied Leg of Lamb

 

Marinade

2/3 cup fresh lemon juice

1 T rice vinegar

½ cup brown sugar

2 T local honey

½  cup Dijon mustard

½  cup soy sauce

½ cup olive oil

3-4 garlic cloves, finely minced

1 inch slice of ginger root, peeled and finely minced

1 inch slice of ginger root, unpeeled and thinly sliced

Seasoning

2-3 cloves garlic, halved

1 tablespoon salt

1 tablespoon freshly ground pepper

Meat

1 boned and butterflied leg of organic, local lamb (5-6 lbs. boned weight)

Rub the halved garlic cloves over the surface of the lamb.  Next, salt and pepper on both sides.  Then, combine marinade ingredients & pour over lamb.  Marinate at least 2 hours at room temperature and preferably overnight in the refrigerator, turning the meat at least once and hopefully more. If it is marinated overnight in the refrigerator, be sure to bring the meat to room temperature before grilling.

Drain before cooking & reserve marinade.

Prepare coals or gas grill for barbecuing.  If using charcoal grill, open vents on bottom, then light charcoal. Charcoal fire is medium-hot when you can hold your hand 5 inches above rack for 4 to 5 seconds. If using gas grill, preheat burners on high with hood closed 10 minutes, then turn down to moderately high.  

Place the grill 4-5 inches above coals & grill, fat side down, covered, 15 minutes.  Turn meat & grill, covered, about 10 minutes more on the other side or until it reaches medium rare.

Before carving, let the lamb rest for at least 10-15 minutes to allow the juices to migrate throught.  If you carve too soon, the juices will simply exit the lamb onto your cutting board and you will have a much drier piece of meat.  To serve, slice the lamb across the grain along the bias and fan them onto plates.  Heat remaining marinade, discard the sliced ginger root, and drizzle over the lamb slices.

 

 

Green Grilling Debate: Charcoal vs. Gas

There has already been lively discourse over the flavor attributes of charcoal vs. gas grills.  Now, debates have been emerging around the country about whether is is greener to  grill over charcoal barbeques or on gas grills.  Which patio toy produces fewer carbon dioxide emissions in the long run?

In an article published in the The New York Times green issue, Tris West, an environmental scientist at Oak Ridge National Laboratories, calculated emissions from the two methods. He concluded that since charcoal is derived from wood products— trees that absorb atmospheric carbon as they grew — burning it on the grill approaches a “net zero” resulat in terms of carbon emissions.  By comparison, gas grills use propane which is a fossil fuel that adds to greenhouse gas accumulations. However,  West cautions that the polemics become a tad more complicated because burning charcoal may release particulates into the atmosphere. 

The good news is that your choice won’t effect any significant change in mass carbon emissions. By West’s estimation, the total amount of carbon dioxide released from barbecue grills on July 4 is on the order of .003 percent of the annual U.S. total.  Has the issue returned to flavor now?

Always The Children

What causes the disturbing reality of adults so consistently harming the world’s precious, unwitting children with our own ”mature” actions?  Starvation, Water Shortages, Disease, War, Indiscriminate Bombing, Civil Unrest, Lack of Education…we could go on.

In recent years, climate change has been added to this historical list of shame.  Several studies have been published which demonstrate that our failure to address the dire climate changes facing the world will have deleterious health effects on millions of the world’s poorest children.   The UNICEF report entitled  ”Our Climate, Our Children, Our Responsibility“ measured action on targets set in a prior UN study which was aimed at halving child poverty by 2015. It found failure on a broad array of issues from health to survival, education and gender equality.

The report opined climate change could add 40,000-160,000 child deaths a year in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa through lower economic growth. It also noted that if temperatures rose by two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, up to 200 million people globally would face hunger – a figure that climbs to 550 million with a temperature rise of three degrees. The UNICEF report said economic damage due to climate change would force parents to withdraw children from schools – often the only place they are guaranteed at least one meal a day – to fetch water and fuel instead.

Environmental changes wrought by climate change will also expand the range of deadly diseases such as malaria, which already kills 800,000 children a year and is now being seen in previously unaffected areas. Scientists predict global average temperatures will rise by between 1.6 and 4.0 degrees Celsius this century due to carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels for power and transport, causing floods, famines, violent storms and droughts. An international agreement is being sought on action to ensure temperatures do not rise more than 2.0 degrees.

 ”It is clear that a failure to address climate change is a failure to protect children,” offered one UNICEF director, David Bull. “Those who have contributed least to climate change – the world’s poorest children – are suffering the most.”

Is it a corollary that those who have contributed the most to climate change – the world’s wealthiest adults – are causing the most suffering to children?

 

 

 

Hang out

Some six to ten percent of U.S. residential energy use goes toward running clothes dryers.  Hang them out to dry.

Earth Day Eve

As a precursor to Earth Day, consider passing on some green moves at the office:

 

1. Retune light
Artificial lighting accounts for 44 percent of the electricity use in office buildings

Turn off the lights when you’re leaving any room for 15 minutes or more and utilize natural light when you can

Buy Energy Star-rated light bulbs and fixtures, which use at least two-thirds less energy than regular lighting, and install timers or motion sensors that automatically shut off lights when they’re not needed

2. Retool computer use
Computers in the business sector unnecessarily waste $1 billion worth of electricity a year.

Turn off or at least hibernate your computer—and the power strip it’s plugged into—when you leave for the day. Otherwise, you’re still burning energy even if you’re not burning the midnight oil. (Check with your IT department to make sure the computer doesn’t need to be on to run backups or other maintenance.) During the day, setting your computer to go to sleep automatically during short breaks can cut energy use by 70 percent. Remember, screen savers don’t save energy

Invest in energy-saving computers, monitors, and printers and make sure that old equipment is properly recycled. Look for a recycler that has pledged not to export hazardous e-waste and to follow other safety guidelines. Old computers that still work, and are less than five years old, can be donated to organizations that will refurbish them and find them new homes

3. Print with forethought
The average U.S. office worker goes through 10,000 sheets of copy paper a year

Print on both sides or use the back side of old documents for faxes, scrap paper, or drafts. Avoid color printing and print in draft mode whenever feasible.

Buy chlorine-free paper with a higher percentage of post-consumer recycled content. Also consider switching to a lighter stock of paper or alternatives made from bamboo, hemp, organic cotton, or kenaf. Recycle toner and ink cartridges and buy remanufactured ones. According to Office Depot, each remanufactured toner cartridge “keeps approximately 2.5 pounds of metal and plastic out of landfills…and conserves about a half gallon of oil”

4. Paperless, paperless, paperless

Think before you print: could this be read or stored online instead? When you receive unwanted catalogs, newsletters, magazines, or junk mail, request to be removed from the mailing list before you recycle the item

Post employee manuals and similar materials online, rather than distribute print copies. They’re easier to update that way too

5. Recycle even more

Recycle everything your company collects. Just about any kind of paper you would encounter in an office, including fax paper, envelopes, and junk mail, can be recycled. So can your old cell phone, PDA, or pager

Place recycling bins in accessible, high-traffic areas and provide clear information about what can and can not be recycled

6. The Basics

Purchase office supplies and furniture made from recycled materials

7. You are what you eat

Bring your own mug and dishware for those meals you eat at the office

Provide reusable dishes, silverware, and glasses. Switch to Fair Trade and organic coffee and tea, and buy as much organic and local food as possible for parties and other events. Provide filtered drinking water to reduce bottled-water waste

8. Travel tips

Take the train, bus, or subway when feasible instead of a rental car when traveling on business. If you have to rent a car, some rental agencies now offer hybrids and other high-mileage vehicles

Invest in videoconferencing and other technological solutions that can reduce the amount of employee travel

9. Your daily commute

Carpool, bike, or take transit to work, and/or telecommute when possible. If you need to drive occasionally, consider joining a car-sharing service like Zicar and Flexcar instead of owning your own wheels.

Encourage telecommuting (a nice perk that’s also good for the planet!) and make it easy for employees to take alternative modes of transportation by subsidizing commuter checks, offering bike parking, or organizing a carpool board.

10. The office environment

Use nontoxic cleaning products. Brighten up your cubicle with plants, which absorb indoor pollution

Buy furniture, carpeting, and paint that are free of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

Comments Are Welcome

As the youth of this world—those who will inherit not only wind, we seek passioned, perceptive leadership on those issues which will affect our earth legacy…what are your thoughts about the first attempt by this President to “address” environmental issues, particularly climage change?  See the text of his remarks below…

Over the past seven years, my Administration has taken a rational, balanced approach to these serious challenges. We believe we need to protect our environment. We believe we need to strengthen our energy security. We believe we need to grow our economy. And we believe the only way to achieve these goals is through continued advances in technology.

I have put our Nation on a path to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of our greenhouse gas emissions. In 2002, I announced our first step: to reduce America’s greenhouse gas intensity by 18 percent through 2012. I am pleased to say that we remain on track to meet this goal even as our economy has grown 17 percent.

When I took office seven years ago, we faced a problem. A number of nations around the world were preparing to implement the flawed approach of the Kyoto Protocol. In 1997, the United States Senate had passed a resolution opposing this approach by a vote of 95 to zero. The Kyoto Protocol would have required the U.S. to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The impact of this agreement would have been to limit our economic growth and shift American jobs to other countries while allowing major developing nations to increase their emissions. Countries like China and India are experiencing rapid economic growth which is good for their people and good for the world. But this also means that they are emitting increasingly large quantities of greenhouse gases which has consequences for the entire global climate. So the United States has launched, and the G8 has embraced, a new process that brings together the countries responsible for most of the world’s emissions.

On the new goal:

In support of this process, and based on technology advances and strong new policies, it is now time for the U.S. to look beyond 2012 and take the next step. We have shown that we can slow emissions growth. Today, I am announcing a new national goal: to stop the growth of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2025.

To reach this goal, we will pursue an economy-wide strategy that builds on the solid foundation we have in place. As part of this strategy, we worked with Congress to pass energy legislation that specifies a new fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, and requires fuel producers to supply at least 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022. This should provide an incentive for shifting to a new generation of fuels like cellulosic ethanol that will reduce concerns about food prices and the environment. We also mandated new objectives for the coming decade to increase the efficiency of lighting and appliances.

Taken together, these landmark actions will prevent billions of metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions from entering the atmosphere.

To reach our 2025 goal, we will need to more rapidly slow the growth of power sector greenhouse gas emissions so that they peak within 10 to 15 years, and decline thereafter. By doing so, we will reduce emission levels in the power sector well below where they were projected to be when we first announced our climate strategy in 2002. There are a number of ways to achieve these reductions, but all responsible approaches depend on accelerating the development and deployment of new technologies.

On the problem of outdated regulations being applied to climate change:

As we approach this challenge, we face a growing problem here at home. Some courts are taking laws written more than 30 years ago to primarily address local and regional environmental effects, and applying them to global climate change. The Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act were never meant to regulate global climate change. For example, under a Supreme Court decision last year, the Clean Air Act could be applied to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.

If these laws are stretched beyond their original intent, they could override the programs Congress just adopted, and force the government to regulate more than just power plant emissions. They could also force the government to regulate smaller users and producers of energy from schools and stores to hospitals and apartment buildings. This would make the federal government act like a local planning and zoning board, and it would have crippling effects on our entire economy.

Decisions with such far-reaching impact should not be left to unelected regulators and judges. Such decisions should be debated openly and made by the elected representatives of the people they affect. The American people deserve an honest assessment of the costs, benefits and feasibility of any proposed solution.

On the wrong way and the right way for Congress to approach climate change legislation:

This year, Congress will soon be considering additional legislation that will affect global climate change. I believe that Congressional debate should be guided by certain core principles and a clear appreciation that there is a wrong way and a right way to approach reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Bad legislation would impose tremendous costs on our economy and American families without accomplishing the important climate change goals we share.

The wrong way is to raise taxes, duplicate mandates, or demand sudden and drastic emissions cuts that have no chance of being realized and every chance of hurting our economy. The right way is to set realistic goals for reducing emissions consistent with advances in technology, while increasing our energy security and ensuring our economy can continue to prosper and grow.

The wrong way is to jeopardize our energy and economic security by abandoning nuclear power and our Nation’s huge reserves of coal. The right way is to promote more emission-free nuclear power and encourage the investments necessary to produce electricity from coal without releasing carbon into the air.

The wrong way is to unilaterally impose regulatory costs that put American businesses at a disadvantage with their competitors abroad which would simply drive American jobs overseas and increase emissions there. The right way is to ensure that all major economies are bound to take action and to work cooperatively with our partners for a fair and effective international climate agreement.

On technology as the key to addressing climate change:

We must all recognize that in the long run, new technologies are the key to addressing climate change. But in the short run, they can be more expensive to operate. That is why I believe part of any solution means reforming today’s complicated mix of incentives to make the commercialization and use of new, lower emission technologies more competitive.

First, the incentive should be carbon-weighted to make lower emission power sources less expensive relative to higher emissions sources, and it should take into account our Nation’s energy security needs.

Second, the incentive should be technology-neutral because the government should not be picking winners and losers in this emerging market.

Third, the incentive should be long-lasting. It should provide a positive and reliable market signal not only for the investment in a technology, but also for the investments in domestic manufacturing capacity and infrastructure that will help lower costs and scale up availability.

On putting America on an ambitious new track for greenhouse gas reductions:

If we fully implement our strong new laws, adhere to the principles I’ve outlined, and adopt appropriate incentives, we will put America on an ambitious new track for greenhouse gas reductions. The growth in emissions will slow over the next decade, stop by 2025, and begin to reverse thereafter, so long as technology continues to advance.

The strategy I have laid out today shows faith in the ingenuity and enterprise of the American people – and that is one resource that will never run out. I am confident that with sensible and balanced policies from Washington, American innovators and entrepreneurs will pioneer a new generation of technology that improves our environment, strengthens our economy, and continues to amaze the world.

Any thoughts?