Recently in Here's How to Reduce Now by 10% Category

Green and Save estimates that you spend $20, save $24/year = 120% savings via standby power reduction.

Read more ways to save energy and see associated ROI.

Treehugger's, "More than 100 iPhone Apps for Green Shopping," says it all.

Oakridge National Laboratory published an interesting article. Check out: Shopping on-line reduces a midnight clear's carbon dioxide.

The use of standardized reporting tools, such as the Global Reporting Initiative's (GRI) standards, represents a growing transparency in business. The improved disclosure, not traditionally a part of corporate governance practice, reflects businesses' desire to avoid risk and seize opportunities posed by climate change. GRI is one of many standards now commonly employed in corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting.

As of 2009, there are over 1,500 companies reporting using GRI standards . These companies, and the investors and financial institutions that invest in them, represent a collective power of $7 trillion.

Ceres, a nonprofit organization that creates tools to tie businesses' market success to ecological and social responsibility, has all the details.

That's right GREEN Porn.

I hope including the words porn, sex, graphic, hardcore, wild, outrageous---and Isabel Rossalini--increases this blog's number of visitors. These words are accurate descriptions of this amazing ecological pornography. Enjoy!

It takes more energy to raise a cow for a steak or glass of milk, than it does to grow a tomatoes and garbanzo beans for a vegan lunch. Of course, there's also the fact (that Michael Pollan details in his new book, "In Defense of Food,") that most the food in the Safeway across the street is grown on massive farms, using large (read: fossil fuel powered and carbon emitting) machinery. Add in the CO2 emissions of distribution and storing the food at safe temperatures until it is sold, and you can see it's quite a CO2-intensive operation. So it's easy enough to make the leap to the basic principal that eating vegan and eating locally grown food from small farmers, contributes less to global climate change. If you doubt me, you may see University of Chicago study CO2 emissions of foods and diets. Or, measure your own diet's emissions with Bon Appetit's food carbon calculator.

It's not too difficult for a native Californian to go vegetarian; in my case, I often do. But VEGAN? OMG. It's already getting harder and harder to find safe sustenance. The thought of giving up milk in my chai and cheese on my pizza, it tortures me. I'm going to add consuming-dairy to giving-up-flying as the two activities that most pain me in my meager, personal fight against climate change. Any recommendations? (Don't say, eat soy-cheese and bike to Muir Woods!)

At last, a Michigan State University study was just released to support what I've suspected all along: behavioral changes likely to be cheaper and faster, in the short term, at reducing carbon emissions than developing new technologies.

Thomas Dietza, Gerald T. Gardnerb, Jonathan Gilliganc, Paul C. Sternd and Michael P. Vandenbergh, of the Department of Sociology and Environmental Science and Policy Program, explored a short-term, high-potential solution for carbon emissions reduction. In the study, policy and behavioral intervention were considered for their ability to promote adoption and usage of existing carbon-emission reducing technologies in national residential buildings and for non-business travel in the U.S..

The study reports that household reductions via behavioral changes such as those recommended could result in US emissions reductions equivalent to the entire emissions of any country in the world outside of China and the U.S.

"Direct energy use by households accounts for approximately 38% of overall U.S. CO2 emissions...This is approximately 8% of global emissions and larger than the emissions of any entire country except China."

The study notes that the potential benefits have potential of cutting emissions in the United States by nearly 8% nationwide, and:
• Avoid overshoot of emissions targets
• Create demonstration effect
• Provide extremely, low-cost emissions reduction
• Buy time to explore other reduction and adaptation solutions

"National implementation could save an estimated 123 million metric tons of carbon per year in year 10, which is 20% of household direct emissions or 7.4% of U.S. national emissions, with little or no reduction in household well-being."

Notably, the study quantifies the carbon emissions reductions of these policy- and intervention-based behavioral changes as being greater than the amount of emissions reductions that would occur if all petroleum refining for steel and aluminum processing (the largest industrial emitter) in the US were to cease.

"We find that the national reasonably achievable emissions reduction (RAER) can be approximately 20% in the household sector within 10 years if the most effective nonregulatory interventions are used. This amounts to 123 MtC/yr, or 7.4% of total national emissions--an amount slightly larger than the total national emissions of France. It is greater than reducing to zero all emissions in the United States from the petroleum refining (69 MtC), iron and steel (38 MtC), and aluminum (13 MtC) industries, each of which is among the largest emitters in the industrial sector. The cost of achieving such a reduction through behavioral change may be far lower than the cost of many alternatives."

Read the findings at the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences site.

Hello Fellow 10:10ers,

I saw Franny Armstrong's film, The Age of Stupid; immediately promised to spend an hour a day minimum learning about and promoting the Copenhagen Climate Conference (COP15, which was 74 days away at that time); and then proceeded to sign the 10:10 promise the following day.

To share ideas on climate change and serve as a hub to others promoting COP15, I set up the blog: Climate of Change. There are already some 30 entries, along with collaborations from other concerned individuals, artists and sustainability minded folk from around the world including the US, Belgium, UK and Australia.

Now there are only 49 days left until the conference and much left to be done. Please share your tips via the comment section at 74days.GOsustainably.com regarding how to reach our 10% emissions reductions by 2010; how to get others to sign the promise; and/or how to get our leaders--especially U.S. President Obama--to sign a fair and binding accord as tough as the science demands at the Copenhagen Climate Conference!

Your help and ideas are needed.

Many thanks,

Pamela

Thank you, Alex, for the comment. Here's one way to make a windmill work. William Kamkwamba, of Milawi, powered his village at age 14.

Alternatively, this one's for sale for under $500. Description on from Sunforce reads, "The Sunforce 44444 400 Watt Wind Generator uses wind to generate power and run your appliances and electronics. Constructed from lightweight, weatherproof cast aluminum, this generator is also a great choice for powering pumps or charging batteries for large power demands. With a maximum power up to 400 watts or 27 amps, this device features a fully integrated regulator that automatically shuts down when the batteries are completely charged. The 44444 is virtually maintenance free with only two moving parts, and the carbon fiber composite blades ensure low wind noise while the patented high wind over speed technology guarantees a smooth, clean charge. Assembly is required, but this generator installs easily and mounts to any sturdy pole, building, or the Sunforce 44455 Wind Generator 30-Foot Tower Kit. The 44444 uses a 12-volt battery (not included) and measures 15 x 9 x 27 inches (WxHxD)."

As I mentioned in my last entry, the EPA tells us that the average household in the US generates a whopping 16,290 pounds (what does that look like?!) of carbon emissions annually from electricity usage alone.

Where else do a household's emissions originate? Home heating and waste. The EPA says:

During the winter, many people rely upon furnaces or boilers to heat their homes. Most furnaces and boilers burn fossil fuels such as heating oil or natural gas, which emit greenhouse gases. The amount of emissions can vary by fuel, furnace or boiler efficiency and by the temperature setting in the home.

Most people don't realize that the trash they throw away leads to emissions of greenhouse gases. Each pound of trash you throw away will emit approximately 0.94 pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent in the form of methane, and the average person in the U.S. throws away over 1,130 pounds of waste per year. For every person in the U.S., about 1,060 pounds of CO2 equivalent comes from the garbage we throw out every year.

So, perhaps more realistic than installing a windmill, I figure I could make simple changes and cut my waste in half. In the coming days I will monitor my own trash and see where I could reduce it.

I'll leave you with closing words from the EPA:

The goods we throw away require energy to create and by recycling some of those goods you can save energy and minimize emissions. In most cases it takes more energy to create a new product than it takes to produce something from a recycled good. By recycling more we can minimize the waste we send to landfills and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The average recycling rate for the United States is 30.6%. If the recycling rate increased to 35%, greenhouse gas emissions from waste could be reduced by 67 pounds of CO2 equivalent per person.

More than 365 landfills in the U.S. recover the methane from their landfills and use it to produce electricity or heat. These projects help businesses and communities protect the environment and build a sustainable future. EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) is a voluntary assistance and partnership program that promotes the use of landfill gas as a renewable, green energy source.