I very recently became part of a program called TerraPass, which provides a way to counterbalance the amount of carbon dioxide emissions generated by cars and planes by funding various renewable energy and forestry projects. I purchased a TerraPass Hybrid membership, which offsets the 6,000 pounds of carbon dioxide my Prius is expected to emit over the next year.

TerraPass has long been an item of interest for the media (as well as other offset programs such as Drive Neutral, Climate Care, or the very interesting Better World Club). Expedia recently announced that it would begin offering TerraPass flight offset programs to its visitors booking flights, which is an admirable move, but certainly not the only way of purchasing such an offset (a user of Orbitz or Travelocity, for instance, could simply purchase an offset independently).

These programs feel backwards, because they don’t create a visible result – it’s certainly not the case that you no longer see carbon dioxide rising from that exhaust pipe! So what’s the point? Some argue that it’s a “feel good about yourself” move, which, to some extent, it is. I prefer a more holistic view: this is a way to create positive change and to begin to neutralize your own impact, whether that is through controversy or through the funding of programs that promote cleaner energy technologies and a greener environment. Human generation of massive amounts of carbon dioxide isn’t our only problem, but it is a problem. We must do what we can to help minimize the impacts of our existence in what is, at best, a fragile world.

Apparently, the process intended to curb global warming by eliminating chloroflourocarbons (otherwise known as CFCs) wasn’t quite as easy as it first looked. Replacing CFCs have caused some unanticipated consequences, namely making the global warming problem worse. CFCs, commonly found in older refrigerators and aerosol canisters, are used as propellants and fire suppressants, among many other uses, and have been essentially illegal since the Montreal Protocol was put into force in 1989.

Some of the replacement chemicals whose use has grown because of the Montreal treaty – hydrochloroflourocarbons, or HCFCs, and their byproducts, hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs – decompose faster than CFCs because they contain hydrogen.

But, like CFCs, they are considered potent greenhouse gases that harm the climate – up to 10,000 times worse than carbon dioxide emissions.

The Kyoto treaty’s goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, motor vehicles and other sources that burn fossil fuels by about 1 billion tons by 2015.

Use of HCFCs and HFCs is projected to add the equivalent of 2 billion to 3 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere by the same year, U.N. climate experts said in a recent report. The CFCs they replace also would have added that much.

“But now the question is, who’s going to ensure that the replacements are not going to cause global warming?” said Alexander von Bismarck, campaigns director for the Environmental Investigation Agency, a nonprofit watchdog group in London and Washington, D.C. “It’s shocking that so far nobody’s taking responsibility.”

“A massive opportunity to help stave off climate change is currently being cast aside,” he said.

The U.N. report says the atmosphere could be spared the equivalent of 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions if countries used ammonia, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide or other ozone-friendly chemicals, rather than HCFCs and HFCs, in foams and refrigerants. Such alternatives are more common in Europe.

— “Ozone fixes prove worse for warming”, The Associated Press, August 21, 2006

Solutions, however well intentioned, must always be crafted in such a way as to ensure that implementing that solution always has a net positive impact. Certainly, the elimination of CFC is a good thing – with unintended side effects. The Montreal Protocol was somewhat short-sighted by only targeting CFCs in its ban, but was an essential starting point. It’s time to go further and ensure that ozone-depleting substances are phased out entirely, no matter what their use or origin.

The  New York Times today has an op/ed piece on the lessons of Prudhoe Bay – in it is a very well-stated paragraph:

Until we have marketable alternatives to oil, the only thing that will truly reduce Americans’ vulnerability to oil shocks is reduced demand. According to the nonprofit National Environmental Trust, if Americans had started a 10-year phase-in of 40-mile-a-gallon driving standards in 2001, they would already be saving 267 million barrels of oil a year. That’s nearly twice the amount produced annually at the Prudhoe Bay field. [ed.: emphasis added]

— “Lessons from Prudhoe Bay”, New York Times, August 9, 2006

Despite this, another New York Times article reports:

Yet Americans’ overall gasoline appetite has barely budged. Total use this year is up about one-half percent to 1 percent compared with 2005, according to federal figures — a slower rate of growth than in the past, but hardly the mark of a nation with its foot fully on the brake.

— “Gas Prices Alter Habits of Many, but Far From All”, New York Times, August 9, 2006

Will it take prices rising to $4/gallon or more in order to make us wake up and see the problem?  If it does, it does – I can only hope that prices rise sooner rather than later.

With the shutdown of Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay oil fields, the nation, particularly the West Coast, could be faced with sharply increasing oil prices:

The average U.S. retail price of a gallon of unleaded, regular gasoline was $3.036 on today — near its all-time high of $3.057, reached Sept. 5 after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast.

“I suspect that record will fall in the next 48 hours,” said Tom Kloza, an analyst at Oil Price Information Service in Wall, N.J., noting that pump prices around the country are likely to rise 5 to 10 cents a gallon.

— “Oil prices spike on news of Alaskan field shutdown”, Associated Press, August 7, 2006

My only reaction to this is positive. With oil prices pushing higher, the nature of our oil addiction will become more and more painfully obvious to those who would deny it. This is the perfect opportunity to inform people of and adopt alternative energy technologies, and as gas prices climb higher, awareness must inevitably increase. Part of the problem is due to politicians who turn a blind eye towards a sound energy policy, but part of it is also due to our own blindness. But let’s not take this time to point fingers. The best time to act is now:

• Encourage legislators to adopt a coherent alternative energy policy on a state-by-state and nationwide basis. Movements such as the Apollo Alliance have started this, but it takes a grassroots campaign to truly do this well.
• Whenever possible, decrease your energy footprint by turning off lights and unneeded appliances. Those lights you see on your appliances when they’re off indicate that they still draw energy – turn appliances off at the surge protector or unplug them entirely.
• Demand the adoption of better mass transit systems that decrease or eliminate the need for cars in city cores.
• Work with friends and neighbors to help them better understand what they can do to help decrease their energy bills.

Energy independence begins with individual actions at home and grows from there. This oil field shutdown offers another clear reason why we cannot continue to depend on oil – foreign or otherwise – to support our lifestyles.

I recently had to take my 2004 Prius in for emergency maintenance because of a soft squealing that had been happening for the last few days when the car was at speed (pretty much anything over 10mph).  I decided, since my maintenance required warning light was on, that I might as well also get an oil change.  After paying for the maintenance (some rocks got stuck in my brake pads), I noticed an odd little line on my invoice.

Continue reading →

For the college-aged crowd (and those who really don’t want to purchase a house), it’s inevitable that the only other alternative available is renting. Renting certainly has many benefits – someone else is primarily responsible for maintenance, the landlord may pay some utilities – but in some ways, it’s also a drawback, especially if you’re eco-conscious.

Sean’s written recently on discovering an inefficient refrigerator and replacing it, showing some rare initiative in asking his complex to replace his refrigerator. There is certainly an obligation on the part of the landlord to replace appliances that are dead or close to dying, but Sean was particularly lucky in his ability to discover the problem before the unit actually died. But what about other, less obvious savings? For instance, my rent includes water, sewage, and garbage charges, as well as lawn maintenance charges for my townhouse. What’s obscured because I don’t see those bills?

Continue reading →

In my original post, I briefly outlined the need for a national speed limit:

Reestablish a national speed limit. In 1973, the National Maximum Speed Limit (public law 93-239) briefly penalized states that refused to set their maximum speed limits to 55mph (88 km/h) by withholding funds for transportation projects. The law was fully repealed in 1995, allowing states to set their own speed limits. Something like the National Maximum Speed Limit must be reestablished, either at 55mph (88km/h) or 60mph (96km/h).

Many would likely say that such a measure is impractical (in fact, the National Motorists Association made just that argument in fighting to repeal the National Maximum Speed Limit).  But the fact is, there is no real reason to have it above 60mph from a purely economic standpoint.  For every 5mph (8km/h) over 60mph (96km/h) you drive, it is the equivalent of paying an extra 20 cents for gasoline, according to fueleconomy.gov.  Furthermore, such a measure, while increasing slightly the amount of time required to travel places, would encourage more relaxed driving – I find myself much calmer driving at the speed limit than I would speeding at even 5mph over the posted limit.  I routinely drive at or close to 60mph when I drive on the highways, and very rarely does this get me someplace significantly later than it would have otherwise.

Continue reading →