Climate Change

[watervole]

 I've been sort of promising myself that I'd do a series of posts on saving energy and the like.  It's difficult, because when I'm stressed I find it very hard to deal with comments from climate change deniers.

I'm not sure if there are any reading my journal these days, but if you are, just consider this a series of posts on how to save money.  Almost anything that helps reduce carbon emissions has good chances of saving money as well.

It's the Paris conference now. Whatever governments decide is unlikely to be enough to save us from a 2C rise in temperature by the end of the century. It may/may not be enough to save us from a 4C rise.

I have a granddaughter.  This is the world she will inherit. 

Governments alone cannot do it, but if we  all act as individuals, then it becomes possible.

When did you last look at your carbon footprint?

There's a calculator here.

According to the calculator, I need 1.72 planets to maintain my lifestyle.  However, there are some  assumptions in the model that probably mean I'm a bit lower than that.  In particular, our household uses very little hot water (there was no question of how often you bath/shower/etc).  We also have solar panels (which don't generate masses but help a bit) and get all our electricity from renewable sources.  (About 5% of our gas is renewable and Ecotricity hope to increase that over time)
I've just realised that I didn't factor in food grown on the allotment, so that will be a small gain as well.

I doubt I can ever  get down to one planet, but I'm ahead of most of my friends.

The main reason is very simple, I haven't been on a plane since 2002.

I looked at the environmental cost and I quit. (I used to go to SF conventions in America, and I still miss the friends I made there)

Just one flight across the Atlantic emits as much CO2 per person as a typical year's driving.

I know many people (especially those with family overseas, for whom it's a particularly hard choice) who live very green lifestyles, but who continue flying.  It's the environmental cost people try to overlook, and there's enormous social pressure to overlook it.

I have one friend who did attempt to give it up, and was pushed back into it by social pressure from friends.  

Because the hard fact is that your friends will feel you're trying to guilt-trip them and they only way they can prevent that is by telling you that you're silly, that the plane will fly anyway, that you can offset the emissions, etc.

The truth is that the plane will use less fuel if you aren't on it (or won't fly at all if enough people decide not to go) and that carbon offsetting is often deeply flawed (I'll explain why if you want me to) and in any case does not remove the CO2 that you have emitted for that flight.

This is why I hate to post on environmental issues.  My friends get unhappy.  If I post about how to save energy with a new boiler, then no problem, but when it comes to flying, the vast majority of my friends fly, and those who have also chosen not to tend to keep quiet for exactly the same reasons that I do.

But, I have Oswin to think of.  And millions of other little Oswins with friends and family who love them.  I want them to have a future.  I don't want them to inherit a world with droughts, erratic water supplies, ruined soils, pollution, extreme weather, vanished wildlife.

I'm not an environmentalist because I hate people.

I'm an environmentalist because I love people.

Comments

[lexin]

As you know, I don't fly for much the same reasons as you. There is much more that I could do for the environment (give up meat, for example, or not have a cat) but I do my small best to keep my carbon footprint low.

Not having a cat is not an option: Smokey is an important part of me maintaining a decent level of mental health.

They didn't ask about showers (I only shower once a week or when I'm going out of the flat, partly because my skin dries out if I do it more often) and they didn't ask about how much you use a car (nil, I don't have a car). So my footprint is probably a bit lower than the 1.92 they estimate.

[watervole]

Giving up meat isn't as simple as it sounds, anyway. Organic farming can only work with inputs of manure, and that requires livestock.
As far as I can see, the ideal is low meat consumption rather than no meat.

Smokey is essential - I'd argue against some cats, but never Smokey. I know what she does for you.

I wish the calculation had included showers and the like. Heating water is a big CO2 cost. I shower even less than you. I found that the less I washed, the less I needed to wash - especially if I stick to clothing made from natural fibres.

[ranunculus]

Mmmmm.
I shower about 3 times a week, mostly because less than that makes my head itch. Here in California we have water issues too....

Carbon footprint: Occasionally I fly, but I also maintain a ranch where I am actively restoring carbon sinks. In addition, our ranch is under a conservation easement which helps maintain the mature oaks on our land, further locking carbon up for generations. Yes, I probably fly more than my carbon savings allow - but I did sign away a small fortune when we put the conservation easement on the Ranch.

We seriously considered taking our SF house off the grid, however our home uses so little energy it would take 30 years to repay the cost of installation, far longer than the life (not to mention the carbon foot print) of the components. I do want to take the Ukiah house off the grid, but the folks who live there now aren't the right people for that just yet and they live very, very energy frugally.

[kerravonsen]

I am a friend who is unhappy. Not because of the flying thing -- I haven't flown since I last visited you. Okay... unhappy is not the word. Upset. Because if you, with all your frugality and effort, can only get down to 1.72, what chance do the rest of us have? I was foolish enough to do the calculator (though it's wrong for me for some questions since it's geared to a cold climate) and even with tweaking the wrong questions, I apparently use up 3 planets. Well, shit. Seems like the best thing I could do for the planet would be to kill myself. Because then at least I wouldn't be adding carbon. I try. I try as much as I can. There are some things I can't do, like buy local or buy much organic, or have more than a one-person household, or compost food -- don't tell me I should garden, I have a BROWN thumb. I recycle cardboard, tins, plastic, glass. I buy green power (power from windfarms). I try. And still I apparently use up 3 planets. So what's the bloody point? It's all useless anyway. None of us will ever be able to do enough. We're all doomed.

I'm not angry at you, my dear. I have just lost hope. I have run out of "try".

[watervole]

I don't think this particular calculator covers some things very well. I'm not sure it even asked about green electricity (I have a feeling that it's quite an old calculator).

I do wonder if you tripped over the question about jewellery. How did you respond to it?

You make a lot of jewellery - depending on what raw materials you use, you can potentially have a big saving there. Precious metals have a high environmental cost, as do gemstones. (I'm not sure how aluminium scores, but smelting uses a LOT of energy)

I'm going to see if I can find something that is more helpful about telling you what the high parts of your score are. And something that takes hot countries into account.

Of course, if people had fewer children, there would be enough planet.

You have no children (though I appreciate it may not have been from choice), but it does mean you are not making the problems even worse.

[frith]

3.78 planets. Probably because of the car and the meat. I live in the country, I use my bicycle as long as there is enough daylight and no snow, otherwise there is no train and no bus. I suspect that this survey does not take into account that my electricity is 100% Hydro power. My annual electricity bill is about equal to my phone/internet bill. I don't heat with anything but passive solar and electricity, although I do have a slow-burning wood stove and 7 acres of wooded property from which I can get wood.

Despite getting pressured, I have been on one round trip plane flight in the last 25 years. I think they think I'm afraid of flying. 9_9

I have no clue what the survey meant by "double glazing" and a "condenser boiler".

In the big furniture/appliance question, no allowance was made for buying second hand items. The only thing I bought this year was a glass cabinet. $50, second hand. Still smells like cigarette smoke, but that will fade, eventually.

We are the species that lives by made up rules, even rules that go against nature. To reduce our greenhouse gas production to sustainable levels, there will have to be legislation and penalties across the board.

[watervole]

I need to find a better survey to allow for renewable electricity. It make a big difference.

I chose not to enter a piece of second-hand furniture as I think the question was aimed at new. Likewise anything second-hand.

I think you're right about legislation. A carbon tax is essential.

What part of the world do you live in? Sounds like terminology is different.

Double glazing is two layers of glass in a window with an air gap between them.

[eledonecirrhosa.livejournal.com]

Embarassingly I'm 2.25 planets. I don't know if that's because I eat meat, spend half my life on the bus, or because the council doesn't collect plastic or food waste recycling in my area.

The flights thing... I haven't flown for well over a year, but the economics that is likely to drive me back to it is not crossing the Atlantic - it is (sadly) going to the other end of our own country. Last time I looked at train tickets to see my Mum, the website quoted £400 for the return trip. The plane was about half that. Which is an utterly ridiculous state of affairs.

Trains should be cheap. Planes should be expensive.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

I eat meat two or three days a week. Buses are fairly good on the environmental front.

The artificial subsidy for aviation makes my blood boil.

I remember first discovering it about 15 years ago on a train in the Netherlands chatting to a guy who was going to some conference.

Basically, there is an international agreement dating back to god knows when that says there is no tax on aviation fuel. Fuel for trains, buses, etc, is taxed.

This is what is causing the difference in fares. I agree, it's crazy.

I've written my MP about that one, but it requires international agreement to get rid of it.

How many people live in your house? That's often a big one. Our footprint is shared between three of us. Anyone who has a single occupancy house will have a large carbon footprint.

[rockwell-666.livejournal.com]

@eledonecirrhosa Have you looked at https://www.splitticketing.com/ ?

Instead of buying a ticket from A to C which goes via B, it can be a lot cheaper to buy tickets from A to B, then B to C and do the same journey whilst staying on the train!

[vjezkova.livejournal.com]

Yes, I am the single occupant of the house but this is a result of how life goes - we used to be a family of four.
But I am sure my life style is not as bad as it seems according to the test. I live quite modestly and I do my best to protect all forms of Nature actively.
I share your fears and I care!

[watervole.livejournal.com]

It will be the single occupancy that makes the biggest difference. Try doing the test again, but as if you were a family of four.

I know my footprint will get worse if Henry leaves home. (He'll be here until he finds a suitable girl - I hope he finds someone, but I'll miss him when he does.)

Have you ever thought of taking a lodger?

It's good for your income as well as your carbon footprint.

Any long journeys you take will also make a difference.

The test will be reasonably accurate - most people massively underestimate their footprint. Many people

People like you and me have always cared, but having that little toddler in the family makes us care even more.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

I have little faith in that quiz, because it gives me no credit for the single biggest positive impact (or rather lack of negative impact) I've had on the environment: the fact that I have no children and never will.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

Actually, that too, for me.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

Not having children is a VERY big plus.

I must admit that I'd like to see a calculator that includes that.

I stopped at two children because I felt the world was overpopulated, and if I was having a family now, I'd likely stop at one.

You definitely score higher than I do on that point.

[vicarage.livejournal.com]

The How Many Earths argument assumes you want all the all people on the planet to have your lifestyle. It might seem callous to deny them what you have, but it is callous to wish there were fewer of them, and instead of tutting about consumption, tut instead about reproduction.

I find myself reacting negatively when people talk about their 4 children, for example, whether they be western CEOs or subsistence farmers.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

I fully intend to move onto family size at some point.

I think having more than two children is one of the most selfish things anyone can do.

We need to tackle both consumption and reproduction.

[sallymn.livejournal.com]

Mine's higher than I'd like, though there were a few questions I squinted at (the housing and insulation ones were very northern-hemisphere-centric). They also didn't allow for 'mixed' questions, like someone with both gas and solar heating.

I think my probably worst print wasn't even in there - air conditioning, which we literally canNOT give up in summer, though we use it as little as we can. Other than that, Sis and I do what we can (speaking of, I think our house (bungalow for two) got marked down).

[watervole.livejournal.com]

Yes, an Australian based quiz would undoubtedly include air conditioning. It's not used much here, though it will inevitably increase as the world warms.

It's a big problem. You're right in that it's very energy-intensive, yet given what I know of Aussie summer temperatures, I know that I would use it if I lived there.

I wonder if there are really imaginative solutions to air con. Are there many houses build underground? Would that make a difference?

White painted roof?

Shade trees?

[pennski.livejournal.com]

Gulp! I think the trip to New Zealand and the trip to the States combined with driving to work have really put me in the red zone.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

'Fraid so.

[sam-t.livejournal.com]

Yes. I try to find alternatives where I can, but so far I haven't been prepared to stick my neck out and insist where the result would be a family row. So far this has resulted in two European flights (i.e. there and back, UK to Continental Europe) a year for the last four or five years.

The number of ferry options has been shrinking, which makes it trickier.

I hadn't realised airline travel was subsidised to that extent... wow.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

There's no VAT on aircraft tickets either... (though rail is also exempt, I believe)

It's always hardest when family are involved. I have a niece in Canada, but we aren't close, so not travelling there is an easy choice for me.

Is there any chance they'd settle for video calls over Skype? A long shot, I know, but might be worth a try.

There are other subtle ways in which aviation is subsidised. I may go into more detail at some point.

[temeres.livejournal.com]

Governments alone cannot do it, but if we all act as individuals, then it becomes possible.

I disagree. The collective actions of individuals will count for nothing without government backing and direction. Governments can implement the structural changes necessary to allow those who want to live sustainably to be able do so, and to make those who don't want to live sustainably (or simple can't be arsed) to knuckle down and comply. The subsidisation of aviation is just one example of the kind of thing governments - not people - can change.

Without governmental direction, the individual actions of well-meaning little people like you and me will be next to ineffectual so long as selfish greedy rich bastards are allowed to carry on trashing the planet. And how many governments are going to stop them doing that?

[watervole.livejournal.com]

I think we need both government and individual action.

Governments need a mighty big shove, but it takes individuals to make that shove.

Individuals can cause social movement. To be human is to imitate. The guy down the road put in better loft insulation after seeing the results of my loft insulation.

Little changes can accumulate, but I agree that government action is essential.

[rockwell-666.livejournal.com]

Well I got 97% which was quite a surprise as I was expecting the survey to be more biased. However in the results it gave me:

Home 49% - Tip Check your house for insulation and double glazing.

Err, I've already *got* them! Full loft insulation, double glazing and thick curtains, cavity wall insulation etc, so why does it give me a boiler-plate tip that tells me to do what I already have?

Travel 36% - Tip Take up cycling, carpool, or walk to work.

I *SAID* I cycle and my walk to work is into the next room!

Stuff 4% - Tip Recycle and buy second hand.

Again, I do that and it's only four bloody percent!

Also I don't have kids, I don't recycle glass, but that's because I don't buy anything that is in glass bottles, I don't recycle food waste because I don't *have* food waste etc etc etc

It seems much too targeted towards some very basic and generalised assumptions to me.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

The tips on this site are very poor and not responsive to the answers in the quiz. I'm very disappointed in it.

I'm going to look for something better.