Blogs

Top 5 reasons why the Senate must act now

Sheryl Canter — Thu, 15 May 2008 09:07:13 PDT

This post is by Sheryl Canter, an online writer and editorial manager at Environmental Defense Fund.

The Senate is set to vote on landmark global warming legislationin early June -- just a few short weeks away.

Here are our top five reasons why legislators must act now.

Every year we wait means extra effort. If we delay this bill by just two years, weâll have to make twice the annual cuts in carbon emissions to hit the same cumulative reductions by 2020.

The science is unforgiving. As the Earth warms, we approach a "tipping point", after which large destructive climate changes become inevitable.

The political opportunity is ripe. Seventy-nine percent of Americans want Congress to act on global warming. We should take advantage of the tremendous momentum that exists today.

It would be a mistake to miss the opportunity to pass a good law in the hope we could have a more perfect one in the future.

Itâs in our economic interest. Someone is going to win the global race to develop the low-carbon technologies we need. Weâd like it to be America.

Renewable energy, for example, promises to become one of the worldâs most profitable industries. But advances in low-carbon technologies will not be fully realized without a national cap on global warming pollution. The sooner we act, the sooner these new industries will start to flourish.

What legacy will the 110th Congress leave? When future generations look back at this moment, they will either praise the Senate for starting us towards solving the global warming crisis or blame the Senate for squandering this opportunity.

As the Climate Security Act makes its way to the Senate floor next month, we must hammer these urgent points home. The Senate must seize this historic opportunity.

You can help by writing to Congress.

Blogger exposes fake global warming skeptics

Hank Green — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:36:15 PDT

Kevin Grandia, who we are proud to be well-acquainted with through working together in the eco-blogosphere, has just been through a bit of a saga.

Curious about the Heartland Institute's list of "500 prominent scientists" who deny global warming, Kevin decided to contact some of the folks on the list.

He put together a list of 150 email addresses ... simply the addresses he found it most easy to acquire. After only 24 hours, he'd received 45 emails from angry scientists saying that they, in no way, denied anthropogenic global warming.

It turns out that the Heartland Institute had never told the scientists they were going on the list, nor did they check to see if these people actually had any doubts about the causes of climate change. Just a sampling of quotes from emails Kevin received:

"I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite."

"I have NO doubts ... the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there."

"Please remove my name. What [they] have done is totally unethical!"

The Heartland Institute has been publicizing this list for years, and not a single journalist took the time to check the names on the list. The Heartland Institute has now distanced itself from the list and withdrawn its claim that the institute is supported by 500 prominent global warming skeptic scientists.

But the institute has yet to apologize.

Kevin deserves a great big "thank you" from the world. Check out DeSmogBlog and, if you think he's as awesome as I do, you might even consider donating to help him keep DeSmogBLog alive.

Are we ready for climate change's health impacts?

Catherine Malina — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:51:33 PDT

This post is by Catherine Malina, an associate in the Health Sciences Program at Environmental Defense Fund and a survey interviewer for the "Are We Ready?" report.

Environmental Defense Fund released a new report [PDF] today on the U.S. public health systemâs state of preparedness for global climate change. Itâs based on a survey of local health department directors from across the country. I was one of the survey interviewers.

Is our nation ready to address the public health challenges of a warming planet? Our survey found thereâs much work still to be done.Â

Climate change already contributes to disease and premature deaths worldwide, as populations experience greater health risks from more frequent and intense heat waves, extreme weather events, reduced air quality and infectious disease. The new EDF report, written in collaboration with the National Association of County and City Health Officials and George Mason University, evaluates our public health infrastructure based on a survey of 133 local health departments in 39 states.

Public health officials concerned
The survey, conducted over the course of two months, included health officials in all parts of the country - from Utah, Kentucky and Florida, to Wisconsin, North Carolina and Maine.

In each interview I asked public health directors about their perception of climate-related health risks, and the status and adequacy of their departments' programs in response to these dangers. Directors also described their current or planned activities to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the additional resources they would need to more effectively deal with climate change as a public health issue.

I learned that there is widespread concern about climate change and the public health challenges it presents. This was true from small, rural counties to large, urban centers, and the suburbs in between.

Most of the directors were both personally and professionally interested in the issue, and believed climate change had already taken place in their jurisdiction. Even more believed they would see the local climate change over the next 20 years. I was struck to learn that a large majority thought their area would experience one or more serious public health problems as a result of climate change.

Lack of funding for long-range planning
Tellingly, most of the directors I interviewed saw the public health effects of climate change as an important priority for their department, but relatively few identified it as a top priority. Many admitted they lacked the resources and expertise to fully respond to the challenge. One director said:

We have limited staff and budget, so time is spent on routine issues. We don't have the ability to focus on long-range planning.

Another - one of many - echoed this response:

It would be a priority, but I don't have the funding for it.

Though we're not where we need to be, hearing this made me feel optimistic. Public health directors recognize the challenge ahead and are eager to find solutions.

Where we go from here
Our survey shows that local health directors across the U.S. are looking to state and national leadership for guidance and support. Improving public health's capacity to respond to climate change impacts will require closing a gap in resources and funding, but there are many opportunities to reduce health risks through smart policies that serve both climate and health goals.

For a detailed set of recommendations on how the U.S. can prepare for these health impacts, and to learn more about the survey, check out the full report [PDF].

We've come a long way, baby

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:43:56 PDT

Earth Day is like the environmentalist's Christmas, New Years, Valentine's Day, Mother's Day, and Fourth of July wrapped up in one.

Some may poo-poo Earth Day as having lost its true meaning, but like Charlie Brown, we can always rediscover the heart and soul of the day.

Stripped of the recent commercialism, the whole point of this day has always been to bring attention to our environment and what we need to do to clean it up.

So what better time than Earth Day 2008 to look at how far we've come in the past 12 months, and to think about what we can do to make our planet a cleaner place in the future.

Top five signs we're on the right track

Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize -- Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were recognized for their work to spread the word about man-made climate change.

The Nobel Committee made clear the devastating effect global warming will have on human lives and security. For peace in our times, we have to reverse climate change. And thanks to Mr. Gore's work, millions of people are aware of this.

Prius sales topped 1 million -- The icon for green driving, Toyota's Prius hybrid car, hit a million cars sold worldwide in June 2007. Over half of those cars are zipping around the U.S.

The Prius is Silicon Valley's car of choice -- as evidenced by the dozens in Yahoo!'s own parking lot (and my own driveway). Other carmakers are jumping on the hybrid bandwagon every model year.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 signed into law -- This U.S. legislation, while far from perfect, has huge potential to increase our country's energy efficiency.

It raises standard gas mileage for cars and light trucks (aka SUVs) for the first time ages to 35 mpg by 2020. And this act bans the sale of most incandescent lightbulbs by 2014. We should see more Energy Star-rated appliances too.

The Vatican called pollution a sin -- When even the Catholic Church is going green, you know the message has spread. Church official Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti said, "You offend God not only by stealing, blaspheming, or coveting your neighbor's wife, but also by ruining the environment."

Rev. John Wauck from Rome's Pontifical University of the Holy Cross added that protecting the environment is implied in the Bible's Book of Genesis. Pollution is a variation on the mortal sin of gluttony or selfishness.

Wal-Mart went green -- Surprisingly, the world's biggest retailer has jumped on the sustainability bandwagon. How much of this is green-washing is debatable, but it's true that the mega-store has made some big eco-friendly efforts.

Wal-Mart sold more than 100 million compact fluorescent light bulbs in 2007, introduced fair-trade certified coffee in April 2008, and buys 10 million pounds of organic cotton annually.

Considering the company expects 90% of American households will shop at its stores this year, I think it's pretty important that Wal-Mart is doing something green.

We're more aware of climate change than ever before. We know something about how our choices in energy use, travel, and shopping affect the planet and our own communities. Let's pat ourselves on the back... then let's get back to work.

Top five things still we need to work on

Drive less, carpool more, use public transit -- Gas is climbing to $4 a gallon, so really, who wants to drive more anyway? If the nasty emissions don't make you want to share the ride or get out of the car entirely, the cost should.

Start small by carpooling to work a couple days a week. This really isn't that hard for most people, since statistically our commutes aren't long in distance. It's the time spent sitting in traffic that stretches our workday -- but if your city has carpool lanes, you'll zip to the office and back home easily.

Be a conscious consumer, reduce the stuff you buy -- The first step in "reduce, reuse, recycle" is often forgotten, but it's the most important one. The less junk we buy, the less we need to reuse or recycle. We're nipping the problem in the bud.

Do I really need the latest cell phone when I renew my plan? No, even if the company is giving it to me free. The old phone works fine, so why add it to the landfill?

Now personally, I love fashion, but when I feel like having new clothes, I hit the thrift store or look for vintage garb on eBay. At least then I'm not requiring new resources to be used simply for my pleasure, plus I'm keeping stuff out of the garbage.

You don't have to abandon all your possessions and live off the grid, but we can all think a bit more carefully about what we do buy, consider where it comes from, and what we'll do with it after we're finished with it.

Avoid toxic plastics -- We're starting to learn that some very common plastics leach toxic chemicals into our bodies, and these chemicals have been linked to cancer, reproductive problems, and other health dangers.

Two biggies to watch out for are Bisphenol A (also known as BPA) and phthalates. BPA is often found in plastic water bottles and baby bottles -- these containers usually have a #7 in the 'chasing arrow' symbol on the bottom. Phthalates are found in PVC and soft vinyl goods plus in personal-care products like shampoos and lotions. Look for any ingredient with "-phthalate" in the name.

Conserve water -- According to the United Nations, 41% of the world's population lacks access to clean water. The U.S. southeast was hit by a devastating drought last year, and global climate change will continue to screw with weather patterns.

It's always wise to conserve the water we have, and it's easy too. Fix leaks around the house, install a low-flow showerhead, consider drought-resistant landscaping, heck, even let it mellow if it's yellow. I've heard some famous people even do that.

Tell elected officials the environment matters to you (and vote accordingly) -- Our individual actions help a lot. But to make the biggest impact possible, we need our government to act.

Legislation ensures that corporations don't pollute the skies and oceans or use up all our natural resources. Our government can influence other countries to clean up their acts too.

So remind your representatives at the state and federal level that you care about our environment and want them to act with the planet in mind. And in November, when you have a chance to vote for a new president, consider the candidates' views on climate change too.

Inside 'The Story of Stuff'

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:35:52 PDT

If you're like most Americans, you have a lot of stuff. Jeans, MP3 players, kitchen gadgets, DVDs, shoes, TVs, kids' toys, T-shirts, cell phones, sports equipment ... you know, stuff.

We buy it all the time, in stores and online. We're the shopping-ist country on the planet. And our government wants us to shop more to boost the economy -- that's why some of us are getting rebate checks in May. Stores can't wait to help us spend that money too.

While we see the shiny, new gadgets in our hands and the growing clutter in our homes, what we don't see is the series of events that created that stuff and brought it to us. Sustainability expert Annie Leonard has traveled to over 30 countries and looked at factories and dumps. She's investigated the waste we export back to the Third World.

All this experience lead her to create the short film The Story of Stuff, which she launched online in December 2007.

With clever animations and straightforward talk, Leonard makes huge economic concepts approachable. She explains how the things we buy in the store are made from often-toxic chemicals and how factories use up natural resources and harm local communities. Leonard even points out that America's consumer culture is a relatively new phenomenon, created by post-World-War-II economists.

When I interviewed Leonard recently, she admitted that the movie happened because, "I realized I was too deep into this that I couldn't talk about it like normal people talk about it." Fellow activists challenged her to explain these issues so that they could understand her and maybe even so the rest of the world could too.

But Leonard says, "I was not making it to convert anyone, and I was not making it for the general public who was totally new to these ideas. I was making it for my peers who were familiar with these ideas but who didn't see the connections and the systemic nature of the problems."

Still, in four months on the Web, the movie topped 2.5 million views, and in March, it won the SXSW Interactive Award as an educational resource.

She's been surprised by the interest the film's received. Leonard put it online, "because we wanted to make it free. We're not doing it to make money. And we never expected that many people to watch it!"

In response to the buzz, she's also made DVDs available to those without high-speed net access. "We've distributed 6,000 DVDs to Third World countries, to India, China, Russia, Taiwan, and places are using them in their outreach programs," Leonard notes. "Public schools in the U.S., Native American reservations, churches have all asked for DVDs. We give discounts to anyone who asks." Sponsors like Ben & Jerry's have helped her small team support these efforts.

While the film doesn't prescribe specific actions to solve the problems it exposes, Leonard does suggest that we tackle an area we feel strongly about.

"One of the things I think is so important is rebuilding our sense of communities and a sense of engagement," Leonard says. "I think our greatest sense of joy in our lives is from coming together around a shared interest, whether itâs a book club or getting a bike lane in your town."

To encourage this kind of involvement, each section of the movie has a tab at the top of the website with a "Learn More" link. For example, click on "Consumption" if you want a sampling of groups dedicated to helping consumers be more sustainable. Or check the full list of recommended resources.

Deeper involvement is key. She's a little critical of a '10 simple steps' approach to changing the world. "It's better to change the structure and system so that the default is the right thing," Leonard advocates.

"I think the individual actions are absolutely important, but we shouldn't confuse that with political actions," she continues. "We should always choose the least toxic, most socially responsible option possible. But not because that'll bring about change -- it simply brings our day-to-day actions into congruence with our real values."

The 'grumpies' who comment on the movie often say that "they get the problem, they get the personal cost, the cost to happiness, but they don't know how to unplug from the system," Leonard explains.

"People express concern that if we reduce our consumption how will it affect our economy?" she adds. "This is a valid concern. If we seriously transform our society, it'll involve a lot of hard work. We need to be intentional, strategic, and figure it out. Let's start planning ahead instead of kicking and screaming until the last second."

In this case, knowledge really is power. "The more we can see the connections between these issues," she says, "we can be more transformative, instead of tinkering at the margins."

'The Story of Stuff' is making those connections happen. Leonard has received more than 20,000 emails from people all over the world -- and the vast majority have been very positive. She may not have set out to change minds, but she is. One comment was from "an SUV-driving, die-hard Republican who emailed and had just never considered any of this."

Schools from elementary level through college are using the movie. A fourth-grader in the Midwest saw the film and emailed saying it was "awesome" with lots of smileys. An Oxford professor used it his class.

Watch the movie, and you may not look at your own stuff the same way again.

Carectomy week in review

Joshua Liberles — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:37:08 PDT

Eight ways to overcome excuses and start cycling

You havenât yet begun bike commuting, but youâve considered it. Whatâs putting the brakes on your brilliant plans? Perhaps a handful of good excuses that have made cycling to work a mere pipe dream. Whatever your reason for continuing to take the car, thereâs likely a simple means to make bike commuting an efficient, reliable, and sustainable way to get to work. Here are eight common (probably lame) excuses -- and how to overcome them with chutzpah. Prepare to dust off your helmet.

Birmingham's big city plan

Leader of the Birmingham, UK, City Council Mike Whitby commissioned a study to move the city towards sustainability and revitalize the city centre. Dubbed the âBig City Plan,â the goals include decreasing the city's carbon emissions by 60% by 2026, revamping mass transit systems, and moving the city towards self-sufficiency with livable and walkable neighborhoods, local produce and products sold locally, and homegrown industries to support the residents.

Paris-Roubaix inspires commuters?

Paris-Roubaix is a âhard man's race.â If you never realized that cycling is one of the world's toughest sports, check it out. The event is so over-the-top difficult that it can't help but inspire everyday cyclists to stop making excuses and get out and ride.

Greening the concrete jungle

Asphalt gardening is growing in popularity, as green-thumbed urbanites reclaim the concrete and break ground to turn parking spots into lush, green space.

Al Gore's new slideshow is even more awesome

Hank Green — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:30:35 PDT

I liked An Inconvenient Truth. I liked it because I thought it did a good job of conveying the magnitude of the climate crisis to a lot of people who hadn't thought much about it in the past.

But Al's recent talk at the TED conference is on another level of awesome. It's not about the problem -- it's pretty much all about the solution. The reason why we can't face the climate crisis, he says, is because we in America have to first face the democracy crisis. And I completely agree with him.

"As important as it is to change the lightbulbs ... it's more important to change the laws," he says. And we simply can't do that if Wal-Mart is a more effective leader on climate change than our own government. This problem will never be solved by individuals taking action in their own lives ... we have to make global changes.

So, yes, change the lightbulbs ... but also consider the environment when you're choosing careers, education, investments, and, possibly most important of all: voting. And tell your senators that you think it's disgusting that the U.S. is the only developed country that doesn't have the balls to sign onto the Kyoto protocol.

And, most pressing right now, find your senators' phone numbers, call them, and tell them to vote for the Solar Investment Tax Credit. It's what Al would tell you to do.

Oh, and also, if you watch the whole video, you'll see him liken our exploration of low-quality oil shale to junkies finding veins in their toes because the veins in their arms and legs have collapsed. There has never been a more apt and frightening metaphor. The whole thing really is worth watching.

You can call him Al

Trystan L. Bass — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:51:50 PDT

Happy birthday, Mr. Gore. Former vice president, Nobel peace price winner, and environmental crusader Al Gore turns 60 on Monday.

Those of us who care about the planet have Gore to thank for making global warming an everyday public concern. His book and movie, An Inconvenient Truth, woke people up to the fact that we are causing climate change, and that we can do something about it.

A few naysayers picked apart specifics about the movie's claims, but the majority of credible scientists agree that human activity -- especially burning fossil fuels -- is damaging the earth and has serious consequences.

Let's celebrate Gore's birthday by making sure to do our part for the environment. If you haven't already...

Swap a few incandescent light bulbs with more efficient CFLs

Adjust your thermostat and water heater to use less energy

Don't idle in your car

Enjoy tap water, not bottled water

Carpool to work once or twice a week

Get off junk mail lists

Add a little more green living to your routine every week, and when Gore is another year older, you'll have made a positive climate change of your own.

Just one hour

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:02:52 PDT

What difference can an hour make? You'd be surprised -- when 2.2 million residents and 2,100 businesses in Sydney, Australia, all turned off their lights for an hour in 2007, they reduced energy use by 10.2% that day. That's equivalent to taking 48,000 cars off the road.

Just by turning off the lights for 60 minutes. It was the first Earth Hour, sponsored by several Australians and the World Wildlife Fund.

This year, they've taken the idea global, and Earth Hour will be celebrated on Saturday, March 29, 2008, from 8Â p.m. to 9Â p.m., with more than 20 cities officially participating.

More important than just the energy saved is the idea that one person's actions really do have an affect on global warming. The little things add up when we're all involved. Conserving resources, lowering pollution -- each of us can make an impact by doing things as basic as turning off a light.

To encourage individuals to get involved, many world landmarks are joining the Sydney Opera House in shutting off non-essential lights on Saturday. San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge will go dark. The Sears Tower in Chicago, plus both Wrigley Field and Soldier Field will dim. Toronto's CN Tower will go dark, and even Niagara Falls won't be lit up during Earth Hour. The Coca Cola headquarters in Atlanta is turning off the lights. And in the Philippines, the worldâs third largest mall is flicking the switch.

Your city doesn't have to be going totally dark for you to join in. Sign up at the Earth Hour site so organizers have an idea of how many people are involved. Tell your friends and neighbors.

Then simply turn off lights in your home from 8Â p.m. to 9Â p.m. on Saturday night. Enjoy the dark, or break out your beeswax or soy candles and have a romantic dinner with someone special. Play a board game by candlelight with the family. Take a walk with a friend or your dog. Soak in a bathtub with candles nearby.

Looking for more adult ways to enjoy the dark? Check out the Daily Green's list of eight sexy ways to spend Earth Hour. Earth 911 even offers lights-out fashion tips, such as glow-in-the-dark gear and shiny bling.

Shutting down for Earth Hour

Hank Green — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:56:37 PDT

I love my computers and Internet, no doubt about it. But I'm looking forward to powering down my life and turning off my house for Earth Hour.

Last year, Sydney, Australia, turned off its lights for an hour in order to save some energy. Mostly,Â it was a statement -- to see the combined effect of a lot of people agreeing that something needs to be done. The event was such a success that the World Wildlife Fund decided to take it global in 2008.

So on March 29th, whenever 8pm rolls around, over 350 cities in 35 countries, millions of individuals, the Sears Tower, the Golden Gate Bridge, and 2,100 corporations including HP, Coca Cola, and McDonald's, are all turning off their lights.

Organizing mass action to recognize the treat of climate change is certainly something that I can get behind. And I'm sure there are going to be lots of pretty pictures of dark skylines to share on the morning of the 30th which I will excitedly write about.

I've signed myself up for Earth Hour and will be having a quiet evening playing cards with my wife in the dark. I encourage all you EcoGeeks to participate as well. Take some time to remember what darkness is, it's good for you.

Restaurants tap into water

Trystan L. Bass — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:27:42 PDT

New York City's famed Algonquin Hotel, Zagat-rated l'Absinthe Restaurant, and flashy Ruby Foo's on Times Square all are serving up tap water. The posh A.O.C. restaurant and wine bar in Los Angeles is adding tap water to its list of potables. And San Francisco's influential Slanted Door restaurant is going with plain ol' H2O too.

Why are more than 2,000 restaurants around the U.S. selling glasses of ordinary tap water for a buck this week?

It's called the TAP Project, and this is a nationwide effort supporting UNICEF and World Water Day.

Between March 16 and March 22, participating restaurants will serve tap water at $1 a glass. For every dollar raised, a child in a developing country will have clean drinking water for 40 days.

Search on the project's website to find restaurants near you. More are still being added.

If there isn't one in your town, you can also donate directly to the TAP project.

UNICEF's water sanitation work reaches out to the 425 million children around the world who don't have access to clean water. The TAP Project makes it easy to help right now at your local restaurant.

A cool, clean drink of water

Trystan L. Bass — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:00:21 PDT

In the U.S., we often take clean water for granted. Turn on the tap and - ta-da! - drinkable H₂O. But across huge swaths of the planet, it's not that simple.

According to the United Nations, 2.6 billion people - that's 41% of the global population - lack access to clean water.

That's why the U.N. has set aside March 22 as World Water Day, which calls on governments and individuals to recognize how crucial water is to our health, economy, and environment.

While the numbers can be staggering - 6,000 children die each day from diseases that could have been prevented by having access to clean water and sanitation - the solutions are surprisingly simple.

A mere one-dollar investment in providing access to clean water will return seven dollars in economic productivity, because people don't get sick, don't miss work and school, and live longer.

Folks like you and I can help those in the developing world get access to sanitation.

One way is through the Give PÅªRÂ® Water campaign. For every P&GbrandSAVERÂ® coupon you redeem during March and April 2008, Procter & Gamble will donate one liter of safer, cleaner drinking water to needy children in developing countries. Look for these coupons in your Sunday newspaper.

You can also give directly to a nonprofit like WaterAid America, which works in communities around the world to build clean water systems. A donation of just $30 can train a mason to build latrines in Nepal, while a contribution of $120 can buy a rope-pulley water pump in Uganda.

You can also donate your time, either in person or online, through WaterPartners International, a nonprofit group that helps provide safe drinking water and sanitation around the world. It also works with U.S. schools to raise awareness, create unique fundraisers, and inspire the next generation to help the planet.

On March 22, you can participate in live or virtual water marches sponsored by Starbucks. In New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, Las Vegas, and other cities, people will walk miles to draw attention to water issues. These marches are inspired by the 3-6-mile journey women and children in many countries make every day just to get water.

Dip your toes in these great opportunities to help the world to a cleaner drink of water!

Carectomy week in review

Joshua Liberles — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:09:56 PDT

Drive your computer â not your car

Modern technology has made it increasingly easier to conduct business from anywhere, yet as Christian Renaud, a Cisco executive, asks, âSo why do people still hop on cross-country flights for two-hour face-to-face meetings instead of using rich collaboration technologies like video conferencing, voice over the Internet, and virtual worlds?â

Albuquerque gives residents a free ride

In spite of Albuquerqueâs low-riding love affair, the city is trying to step up its public transit. Itâs introduced D-RIDE, a free bus service that travels a popular circuit through the downtown area.

The problem? D-RIDE covers all of six city blocks -- which, by my standards, are short and totally walkable. (Planners might be wise to improve transportation throughout the city, instead of investing in a tiny and unnecessary upgrade. Then again, some free transit is better than none.)

The D-RIDE also connects to the downtown transit center, where commuters can hop aboard after a ride on the new Rail Runner train.

Blumenauer introduces the National Bike Bill

On March 4th, thousands of cyclists gathered in support of biking at the National Bike Summit in Washington, D.C. They threw their collective weight behind Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and his National Bike Bill, which ârecogniz[es] the importance of bicycling in transportation and recreation.â

Put on your walking shoes, generate some power

It has become clear that we need to figure out greener, renewable sources of energy. Well, what if we could produce our own damned power? Walkingâs about as carectomy-friendly as it gets.

This week, we look at some concepts in the works that will allow us to crank out some electricity while keeping healthy, happy, and pollution-free out on our strolls.

Earth: The Sequel

Fred Krupp — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:17:30 PDT

This post is by Fred Krupp, President of the Environmental Defense Fund.

Earth: The Sequel tells the story of an exciting race that is just beginning -- the race to develop low-carbon energy in time to turn our greatest environmental crisis into our greatest economic opportunity.

Many people have expressed surprise that Iâd write a book like this about a problem so serious. And global warming is serious. With each passing year, scientists get more and more alarmed at the increase and extent of disturbing impacts. But this book is not about the doom and gloom of global warming. In fact, itâs just the opposite.

Earth: The Sequel is about hope, invention, ingenuity, entrepreneurialism, capital markets, commerce, and profit. These are words that most people don't think of when they hear the term "global warming," and they especially don't expect to hear them coming from me. After all, I'm an environmental lawyer running one of the country's most respected and influential environmental groups, advocating for good environmental policy.

I wrote this book because, after 20 years of studying global warming and trying to craft solutions to stop it, I know that government policy alone is not the answer. Enacting a hard cap on carbon will play a key supporting role, but the starring role belongs to American commerce.

The stars are the ingenious inventors and risk-taking entrepreneurs who are creating flying windmills, artificial carbon-eating trees, and breakthroughs in solar and biomass technologies. The book explores how we will reinvent everything from cars to concrete, and replace the old, dumb, centralized electrical grid with a smart, multidirectional energy network.

The vibrancy of our future lives largely depends on our winning this race - a race both to stop global warming, and to win the upside of new opportunities if we do. We can win and win big, or we could lose and lose big. It's both the scariest and most exciting race of my lifetime.

I wrote Earth: The Sequel to describe the race and change the conversation about global warming. I want others to know about the real people doing the real work that will change our lives, and I want to inspire people to embrace a new and different future, rather than be afraid of it.

Earth: The Sequel is available in stores now, so I hope you'll take a look. Please let me know what you think.

(moreâ¦)

Pedal-powered '86 Buick gets pulled over

Hank Green — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:17:31 PST

Hahaha! This is awesome. Carectomy.com spotted this pedal-powered car that's been making its way around the intertubes.

The 1986 Buick Regal, was designed by artist Michel de Broin and was being displayed as part of a touring gallery exhibit in Toronto. Broin removed the engine, suspension, transmission and electrical system in the car â all of which the artist calls "superfluous devices," and replaced these motorized mechanisms with the human-powered pedals and gears.

It's pretty awesome to see the car out on the street, with the pedal cranks hanging out of the bottom. I thought the best part of the video was when they were just pushing with their feet at the beginning, but it turns out the best part was when they got pulled over.

According to the police officer, "I don't disapprove of the idea, but the safety factor is unsafe." Frankly, it's hard to imagine that a car with a top speed of ten miles per hour can be unsafe. Possibly, it's unsafe because the people stuck behind the thing might flip out on the pedalers. But, still, as we feature a lot of fancy schmancy cars here at EcoGeek, it's nice to see someone making a different sort of statement.

Via Carectomy

Time to act, not despair

Nat Keohane — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:43:59 PST

This post is by Nat Keohane, Director of Economic Policy and Analysis at Environmental Defense.

In his December 11 post on Grist, Ross Gelbspan argues that we've already passed the point of no return with global warming, and climate activists are full of "hollow optimism."

There's no doubt we're already seeing signs of global warming. In our Climate 411 blog, we post signs of it all the time (see here, here, here, and here, for example). But just because the boat has started to leak doesn't mean it can't still get much worse. Our most dangerous response to climate change is despair. Now, more than ever, we need to act.

Gelbspan agrees. Where we disagree is in what action to take.

He says that the American public has a "mindless belief in the divine power of markets" and the "antidote" is a "revitalization of government" -- that the government should pour hundreds of billions of dollars into carbon-free technologies.

This is where we part company. Technological innovation is not most quickly and efficiently implemented by government programs. Markets are much more nimble and able to respond in real time to what works and what doesn't. Our best hope is to get the power of markets working for us through a cap-and-trade system.

Global warming is a classic example of market failure. The pollution that causes global warming has skyrocketed because the environmental costs are hidden, and we don't factor them into our decisions. Factories and power plants pay for the fuel they burn, but not for the pollution they emit. The solution is to harness the power of market forces by establishing firm caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

We have proof that this works in the acid rain program. When we put a cap on sulfur dioxide (SO₂), the cause of acid rain, the power sector and its suppliers came up with a range of technological innovations to meet the new limits. Some were relatively mundane -- for example, figuring out how to burn low-sulfur Wyoming coal in boilers designed for high-sulfur coal from Illinois or West Virginia. Others were more dramatic. The prospect of a cap on SO₂ prodded a team of GE engineers to figure out how to turn the waste from a "scrubber" into gypsum, which could be sold as a byproduct.

Research by Carnegie Mellon University showed that patent filings spiked after the Clean Air Act [PDF] though the government had been supporting research for long before that. They conclude, "The existence of national government regulation stimulated inventive activity more than government research support alone."

Again and again, American entrepreneurs and investors have shown the ability to solve problems -- when there is a market incentive for them to act. If the government will lead by capping carbon pollution, the primary cause of climate change, theÂ market will respond with investment and innovation on a scale to solve this problem. Already, venture capitalists are pouring more than $300 million a month into new energy technologies. But it will take the certainty of a cap, an overall limit on carbon pollution, to unleash a sustained wave of investment and innovation.

Take one example of many: Burning coal to produce electricity is responsible for about 40 percent of the CO₂ emissions from the United States. In a typical coal-fired power plant, nearly one-third of the coal's energy is lost as waste heat, greatly contributing to this pollution.

A cap on carbon would give companies a monetary incentive to reduce that waste, so work to increase efficiency would rapidly expand. The new technologies could then be sold overseas, not only helping our balance of trade, but reducing greenhouse gas emissions in places like China.

The incredible momentum for action on climate change is, in itself, a testament to the fact that we can solve this problem.

The more than two dozen CEOs, from firms like GE, Caterpillar, and Duke Energy, who endorsed a mandatory cap on carbon are hard-headed realists. They spoke out for a better world, but they also spoke up for their stockholders. It is the considered judgment of these corporate leaders that the carbon cap they endorsed is both technologically achievable and economically sound.

With sufficient motivation, we can rise to the challenge and do what's necessary. A cap on greenhouse gas emissions is the incentive we need to drive innovation and efficiency. We know what we need to do, and we have the ability to do it.

Help developing countries cut carbon, not trees

Sheryl Canter — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:03:50 PST

This post is by Sheryl Canter, and Online Writer and Editorial Manager at Environmental Defense.

In last Friday's post on the Bali climate talks, Kyle mentioned giving countries incentives to leave their forests standing. This was also the topic of an excellent piece on NPR this morning, "Climate Experts Mull Payment to Stop Deforestation." Our own Annie Petsonk was interviewed for the story:

The U.S. government has been cool to the idea of reduced deforestation. But Indonesia, with some of the biggest tropical forests on the planet, appears to like it, said climate analyst Annie Petsonk of Environmental Defense.

"They may steal a march on the United States by taking a lead and saying, 'We're willing to go forward with programs to cap and cut our greenhouse emissions from deforestation if you in the industrialized world open your carbon markets,'" she said.

Cutting down trees accounts for one-fifth of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, and it will be next to impossible to avoid catastrophic global warming if we ignore it.

Our paper on Compensated Reduction [PDF] goes into more detail about why we must include deforestation in the new carbon market. The NPR report said that it may get a boost simply because other topics of discussion in Bali are so much more controversial.

Florida and climate change: The costs of not acting

Gerald Karnas — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:49:29 PST

This post is by Gerald Karnas, Florida Climate Project Director at Environmental Defense.

Florida stands to lose big-time unless Congress enacts strong climate legislation, soon. The longer Congress delays, the harder climate change will hit Floridians. Damage to just three sectorsâtourism, electric utilities, and real estateâtogether with hurricane damage would shrink the stateâs gross domestic product by more than 5 percent by the end of this century.

Thatâs the key conclusion of a new report by Tufts University economists. Environmental Defense commissioned the report and is helping to launch it today via a press conference in Tallahassee.

The report, "Florida and Climate Change: The Costs of Inaction" compares two scenarios: a rapid stabilization case and a pessimistic business-as-usual case. These scenarios represent what will happen if the world succeeds in cutting the pollution that causes global warming, versus what will happen if we do very little. The analysis focuses on direct economic impacts. It doesnât even begin to reflect the human and environmental damage that would also resultâdamage that may well outstrip the dollar costs.

This report complements a study released last month by the University of Maryland. The Maryland study was national, and this Tufts study âdrills downâ and provides a lot more detail on potential effects specific to Florida.

Under the business-as-usual scenario, sea-level rise is projected to reach 23 inches by 2050, and 45 inches by 2100. That would flood the land where almost one-tenth of Floridaâs current population, or 1.5 million people, lives. Tourism, one of Floridaâs largest economic sectors, will be the hardest hit as much of the stateâs natural beautyâsandy beaches, the Everglades and the Keysâdisappears under the waves. The vulnerable zone also includes key infrastructure, including two nuclear power plants, three prisons, 68 hospitals, 74 airports, 334 public schools, and nearly 20,000 historic structures.

When people argue against strong action to combat climate change, they often implicitly assume that inaction would be cost-freeâthat we can chose a future that looks much like today, even if we let emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases grow unchecked. But the overwhelming scientific consensus now holds that this rosy assumption is simply wrong. The more greenhouse gases are released, the worse the consequences will be.

This new study shows us a future for Florida that we must avoidâand we still can, with swift, strong action.

IPCC's final words: Reduce emissions

Lisa Moore — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:09:16 PST

This post is by Lisa Moore, Ph.D., a scientist in the Climate and Air program at Environmental Defense.

This past week, IPCCâs Nobel Prize-winning scientists met in Valencia, Spain to write a synthesis of their three-volume report. The Summary for Policymakers of the Synthesis Report [PDF] makes it very clear that we need to act immediately to avoid the worst effects of global warming.

IPCC Chairman Dr. Rajendra Pachauri summarized the main message as follows: "Climate change is a serious threat to development everywhere. Today, the time for doubt has passed. The IPCC has unequivocally affirmed the warming of our climate system, and linked it directly to human activity. Slowing or even reversing the existing trends of global warming is the defining challenge of our age."

The report warns that if greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase, temperatures will continue to rise and cause even larger changes in the climate system. Some of these changes could be "abrupt or irreversible." However, there is hope amid the urgency. According to the summary:

"Many impacts can be reduced, delayed or avoided" by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We need to act now because the decisions and investments we make in the next 20 to 30 years will have a large influence on the long-term outcome.
Fortunately, we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions using "technologies that are either currently available or expected to be commercialised in coming decades, assuming appropriate and effective incentives are in place."
One of the key incentives for change will be an "effective carbon-price signal."

The call for action couldnât be any clearer. The IPCC has done its job, and done it well. Now it's time for Congress to do the same!

Public health professionals are catching the fever

John Balbus — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 11:11:53 PST

This post is by John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Health Scientist at Environmental Defense.

Damage to public health from climate change is already occurring around the world, with over 160,000 extra deaths occurring annually from malaria, diarrhea, malnutrition, and flooding.

Public health professionals are taking notice, and looking for solutions.

Climate change and its effects on human health took center stage at last week's annual meeting of the American Public Health Association (APHA). Three sessions were devoted to the topic, including a plenary session attended by 700-800 people. A policy resolution calling for an economy-wide cap on greenhouse gases passed easily.

After the plenary session, APHA executive director Georges Benjamin held a press conference where he announced that climate change will be the theme of next April's Public Health Week. The organization plans to release a set of recommendations for addressing the health impacts of climate change at that time.

Many presentations focused on how to stop global warming.

Dr. Brian Schwartz of Johns Hopkins caught the audience's attention with an eloquent call to "reconnect the disconnect" between our intellectual understanding of the need to lower greenhouse gas emissions and our personal energy consumption choices, from house size to automobile use.

Dr. Howard Frumkin of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) discussed how public health professionals can apply their skills to the health challenges of climate change. He showed a great "back to the future" slide describing the health benefits of low-carbon behaviors from the past like walking children to school.

When it identifies a clear threat to health, the public health community can mobilize significant change. Messaging and advocacy from the public health community has transformed the fast food hamburger from a staple to a symbol of our obesity epidemic, and removed soft drink marketing from our schools.

It took the finding that tobacco harmed bystanders to eliminate smoking from public spaces, and that may be the type of framing that can build momentum for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr. Jonathan Patz from the University of Wisconsin made this case in his presentation at the plenary session. Public health professionals might be able to drive change by likening the carbon dioxide coming from automobile tailpipes to second hand smoke emitted from cigarette tips, while at the same time demonstrating the health benefits of other modes of transportation.

The challenge is making this case stick when the people harmed live on another continent or in the future -- far removed from the "smoker."

One thing is certain. The public health community is starting to get it. Look for more action from this corner as April and Public Health Week draw near.

Save energy by saving water, and vice versa

Mary Kelly — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 13:46:20 PST

This post is by Mary Kelly, Attorney and Co-Director, Land, Water, and Wildlife Program at Environmental Defense.

If you've been watching the news, you know we have a climate problem, and you may also know we have a drinking water problem in some parts of the country.

What you may not realize is that these two problems are related.

Yes, global warming can impact rainfall, but that's not all. The water-supply sector uses large amounts of energy to transport, treat, and deliver water. On the flip side, vast quantities of water are required to generate power.

Every year, the U.S. thermoelectric industry uses 3.3 billion gallons of water [PDF]. That's 20 percent of all the water used in the country, excluding agriculture. And this number is projected to more than double to 7.3 billion gallons by 2030.

Water is used in all stages in the creation of energy: extracting, processing, refining, and transporting fuel to power generation plants. Power plants themselves also uses vast amounts of water, particularly for the towers that cool the water heated in the generators.

Then there's the energy used to treat and deliver water.

California was among the first states to take a close look at this, and they discovered that supplying municipal water accounted for almost 20 percent of the electricity used in the state [PDF].

On average, 75 percent of the cost of municipal water comes from the electricity used to capture, treat, distribute, and use the water. After the water is used, more energy is required to treat the wastewater.

As cities grow, particularly in water-scarce areas, supplying municipal water uses increasingly more energy. Understanding this relationship highlights the importance of conserving water and practicing energy efficiency.

For every kilowatt saved, water also is saved. For every gallon of water not used, energy usage is reduced. Investments in and incentives for energy and water conservation must be our highest priority.

In addition to bolstering our conservation efforts at all levels, states and the federal government need to better integrate water and energy supply planning. Other states should follow Californiaâs example and quantify the local relationship between energy and water.

Environmental Defense is partnering with the Jackson School at the University of Texas to quantify this relationship in Texas. This information will help the state evaluate water and power projects to ensure that these resources are available to citizens in the future.

A la peanut butter sandwiches

Trystan L. Bass — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 20:45:42 PDT

The Amazing Mumford on Sesame Street may have been right: Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are magic. They could help save the world.

According to the PB&J Campaign's website, this classic kid's sandwich lowers your lunch's carbon footprint by 2.5 pounds of CO2 over a tuna sandwich, grilled cheese, or hamburger.

How does this work? Well, simply explained, a meat-based lunch requires a lot more energy, land, and water resources to produce than a lunch that comes from plant sources. Peanut butter, jelly, and bread are pretty low-impact foods.

If peanut butter sticks to the roof of your mouth, the campaign has recipes for equally earth-friendly alternatives.

Cook a batch of vegetarian chili, stir up some black bean soup, stuff a falafel in a pita, try General Tso's Tofu, or roll together a bean burrito. They're all tasty and can help slow global warming.

But the easiest way to start is with good ol' PB&J. Pack a sandwich for yourself, your kids, and your spouse today. Grover will be proud.

Lights out in San Francisco, L.A. on Saturday

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:48:53 PDT

Mom always told me to turn off the lights when I left the room. Don't know if she was being environmentally conscious or didn't want a fat electric bill. Either way, the habit stuck.

This weekend, San Francisco aims to do one better than my mom and turn off all the lights in the city, for one hour at least.

Lights Out SF is "a citywide energy conservation event" on Saturday, during which the city's 700,000 residents are encouraged to turn off their lights between 8 and 9 p.m.

The group estimates that just one dark hour could cut about 15 percent of the energy used on a typical Saturday night.

Further down the coast, Los Angeles is encouraging the Hollywood glitterati to chill their shine this weekend. Lights Out LA also is scheduled for Saturday from 8 to 9 p.m. The same supporters are behind the coordinated efforts.

These actions are inspired by Sydney, Australia's Earth Hour. From 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on March 31, 2007, more than 2 million Aussies turned off their lights. That caused a 10.2 percent drop in energy use.

The Down-Under results were pretty impressive. Businesses joined in the act too, and 90 McDonalds shut off their usually golden arches around town. Even the iconic Sydney Harbor Bridge had its lights out for an hour.

Some critique these efforts as just stunts, not sustainable habits. But like mom nagging me to turn off the light when I left a room, maybe seeing big cities go dark for an hour will remind us to turn off non-essential appliances and swap out old bulbs for efficient compact fluorescents ongoing.

Mom will be proud!

Project Laundry List

Molly McCall — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:01:01 PDT

We understand why communities bar nuclear waste dumps, outlaw smoking in public places, and police litter bugs. We can even get behind neighborhood strictures on some noise pollution.

But does the innocent clothesline truly require similarly strict treatment?

It seems out of place, and yet "tens of thousands" of homeowners' groups across the U.S. have made it a fugitive act to string and use a clothesline. Since 1999, Project Laundry List has fought local embargos on open-air wash-drying.

The group offers guides to products such as environmentally friendly detergents and umbrella-style clotheslines. It promotes writing and installations honoring the ages-old tradition of letting your clean white sheets flap in the wind.

And it has taken action in campaigns such as "Right to Dry." Not only do clotheslines promote good stewardship of the Earth, they produce sweet-smelling, crinkly-dried apparel. Be a lover, not a hater. Hang a clothesline.

Find the original review for this siteâand other reviews of the Web's coolest offeringsâon Yahoo! Picks.

The "green" Toyota backlash is on

Hank Green — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:04:06 PDT

A couple weeks ago, EcoGeek blogged about how NRDC was getting a bit perturbed about Toyota fighting intelligent mileage legislation. Well, this morning I got several emails from individuals and organizations with titles like "Toyota: Moving Backward" and "The Truth About Toyota."

Well...it looks like the backlash has begun. Toyota, you made yourself into a green brand, and now you either have to live up to your shiny new image, or get pwned.

Environmental orgs are actually quite good a pwning big corporations (no matter what they'd have you believe.) Already, there's a broad coalition set up working together at "TruthAboutToyota.com." NRDC, National Environmental Trust, Union of Concerned Scientists, and the League of Conservation Voters are all very angry at Toyota right now.

Thomas Friedman even got in on the game with an column entitled "Et Tu Toyota?"

One child per family: a green innovation?

Hank Green — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:22:00 PDT

It's not easy to defend a social program as broad and controlling as China's one-child policy, but from a purely EcoGeek perspective, it needs attention. Don't accuse us of promoting the idea, though. It's weird, it's broken, it's dangerous, but if it could only be voluntary, it would be the finest environmental innovation our world has ever seen. Aside from, possibly, the innovations of birth control, without which any kind of family planning is impossible.

China recently released some statistics defending its one-child per family policy, and you can't argue with the significance. So far, they say, the policy has 'prevented the births' of over 300 million children...roughly the population of the United States. And they estimate that the policy has prevented the release of 1.3 billion tons of CO2, roughly equivalent to the output of Germany.

Population is the single most important factor in climate change, urban pollution, the water crisis, agricultural collapse and ecological destruction. Yes, our ultra-fabulous way of life in America doesn't help, but the strain of an estimated 9 billion people by 2050 is going to push the earth close to its breaking point no matter how simple a life those 9 billion people lead.

China is careful to point out that it doesn't believe the one-child policy is right for every nation. But they stand strong behind their assertion that population control is entirely vital to the fight against climate change. It's not a popular assertion, but is, without doubt, entirely correct.

Via Reuters

Texting fuels Chinese green revolution

Alex Pasternack — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 09:40:00 PDT

One million text messages. That's how residents of China's port city of Xiamen spread word to protest -- and eventually halt -- construction of a chemical plant on Thursday. The $1.4 billion facility was meant to produce the petrochemical paraxylene, exposure to which can cause eye, nose or throat irritation, affect the central nervous system and may cause death. Though international standards dictate that such a plant should be 100 km from the nearest city, the short text messages that mobilized Xiamen's smart mob warned the factory would have been only 16 km away.

While the central government is clearly showing more interest in protecting the environment, local governments, eager to cut corners in the name of economics, are helping block the path to sustainable development. But the Xiamen protests, thousands of people strong, are the latest sign of people power in China, where tens of thousands of protests over tainted land and water are recorded every year, threatening the government's dream of a "harmonious society" while pointing the way forward for environmental action in a place that seriously needs some.

That local officials in Xiamen reportedly began blocking text messages too in an attempt to stem the protests, and that the protests continued apace, is an indication that, try as it might, China's authoritarian controls simply can't keep up with the power of cell phones blogs, bulletin boards, and the smartmobs they might create. (Local governments are getting into the SMS act themselves, using text messages to warn citizens of floods and even stop protests.)

Clearly, stopping protests just isn't possible the way it used to be. Between increasing countryside unrest (there may be nothing scarier to the government) and deadly pollution (China's rural cancer rate rose by 23 percent in the past two years, and more than 70 percent of the country's waterways and 90 percent of its underground water are contaminated ) something's gotta give.

Since the plant's not been completely scrapped, residents are still protesting, according to Reuters. And the more word spreads, the more likely it is that protests will continue elsewhere too. An large expansion of a chemical plant in the southeastern city of Quanzhou that produces paraxylene and other chemicals was announced in March, funded by China's No. 2 oil company, Sinopec, Saudi Aramco, and ExxonMobil Corp. Paraxylene is a key material in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) saturated polyester polymers -- the stuff of which the world's plastic bottles are made.

Via SFGate and Asia Sentinel