ecological footprint

Rich lifestyles are getting greener, if not smaller

I guess how you react to this story about the rich trying to go green will depend entirely on the assumptions you bring to it: Yet with the green movement in vogue, the rich are looking for ways to compensate for their carbon-dioxide generation, which is linked to global warming, without crimping their style. Some […]

Prius easily beats Hummer in lifecycle energy use; ‘Dust to Dust’ report has no basis in fact

A study came out recently claiming to prove a Hummer has lower lifecycle energy use than a Prius. Because the result was so obviously bogus -- and in sharp contradiction with every other major lifecycle analysis ever done -- I didn't spend time debunking it.

But it made it into the comments of my blog and continues to echo around the internet, and the authors keep updating and defending it. A couple of good debunking studies -- by the Pacific Institute (PDF) and by Rocky Mountain Institute (PDF) -- haven't gotten much attention, according to Technorati, so let me throw in my two cents.

The study's title is revealing: Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal, The non-technical report, from CNW Marketing Research, Inc. Yes, although lifecycle energy use is probably the most complicated kind of energy analysis you can do, this 458-page report is "non-technical" and by a market research company to boot.

Their website says the report "does not include issues of gigajuelles [sic!], kW hours or other unfriendly (to consumers) terms. Perhaps, in time, we will release our data in such technical terms. First, however, we will only look at the energy consumption cost."

Wouldn't want to confuse consumers with unfriendly technical stuff like kilowatt-hours, like those annoying electric utilities do every month. No, let's put everything in dollar terms so no one can reproduce our results. When you misspell gigajoules on your website -- and have for a long time (try googling "gigajuelles") ... you aren't the most technical bunch.

I am mocking this report because it is the most contrived and mistake-filled study I have ever seen -- by far (and that's saying a lot, since I worked for the federal government for five years). I am not certain there is an accurate calculation in the entire report. I say this without fear of contradiction, because this is also the most opaque study I have ever seen -- by far. I defy anyone to figure out their methodology.

The TV show 24 will reduce its carbon footprint

Fans of 24 know that if there's one person that can stop climate change, it ain't Al Gore. It's Jack Bauer.

If you are not familiar with Jack, here are some of his qualifications from the site Random Jack Bauer Facts:

1. There are two hands that can beat a royal flush. Jack Bauer's right hand and Jack Bauer's left hand.
2. Most people would need months to recover from 20 months of Chinese interrogation. Jack Bauer needs a shower, a shave and a change of clothes.
3. The city of Los Angeles once named a street after Jack Bauer in gratitude for his saving the city several times. They had to rename it after people kept dying when they tried to cross the street. No one crosses Jack Bauer and lives.
4. If Jack Bauer had been a Spartan the movie would have been called "1".
5. Some people see the glass as half full. Others see it as half empty. Jack Bauer see the glass as a deadly weapon.

Yup, Jack is one tough son-of-a-gun, and he and the producers of 24 have pledged to fight climate change and take the following steps to reduce their carbon footprint:

A mountaineer calls mountaineers climate criminals

David Crosby and Graham Nash's haunting and hypnotic introduction, "To the Last Whale," before the song "Wind on the Water," is the kind of work that we need more of.

What we really need is someone to write a song "To the Last Glacier" quick, so that more people wake up to the truth that this guy has beamed onto: flying on jets because you love some great natural wonder is like f*cking because you love virginity.

Great article.

While planet burns, Boeing scores a PR victory

At the gym, in between hearing an EMT talk about the heat stroke issues he expects tomorrow, I marveled at how awful news programs were today, devoting huge chunks of time to talking up Boeing's new "Dreamliner" jet, which the blow-drieds say will consume 20 percent less fuel per mile. I even heard one blow say "eventually reducing the cost of air travel."

Man, talk about delusional.

(Oh, and I know I'm not supposed to connect things like our craze for jet travel and high temperatures, as if to suggest a connection between another spate of record breaking temperatures in what's shaping up to be a record breaking year ... bad me. I'll report to reprogramming.)

Umbra on replacing toilets

Dear Umbra, I’m selling my house in Los Angeles and my toilet is not low-flow. One of the inspectors is trying to tell me I need to replace my toilet with a new low-flow. Well, I know the old ziplock baggie filled with water trick. But I saw that you made mention of some kits […]

Eyes wide shut toward global collapse?

Ecological Footprint, Energy Consumption, and the Looming Collapse:

This article explores dynamic relations governing population growth, resource depletion, and world economics by means of a few simple modeling and simulation exercises. To this end, we start out by exploring the concept of an ecological footprint, representing the amount of land that a person needs to produce everything that he or she consumes: food, clothing, energy, shelter, the tools that are needed to make the clothing, etc. and place it in relation with the human development index, a measure of the quality of life of an individual. We then relate the ecological footprint to the per capita energy consumption. This discussion serves to provide a quantitative understanding of the limited resources that are at our disposal.

The article continues by exploring the dangers and seductions of exponential growth, and uses a system dynamics approach to illustrate why we are moving at a rapid pace toward global collapse with our eyes wide shut.

The article ends by discussing what we would need to do in order to avoid the looming collapse.

The roar of jets drowns out the warnings about jet emissions

"New Plane Trips Outstripping Any Ecological Improvements in Flying":

Is the starfish story really just bunk?

The estimable biodiversivist wrote, in another thread, that "What we do as individuals is insignificant compared to changes in carbon neutral energy generation and transportation infrastructure."

Which is both true and not true, I think. It reminds me of the story about the little tyke throwing starfish stranded on the beach back into the water, and being told by the parent that it didn't matter, leading the child to say, "It does to this one."

Cute story, all chicken-soupy-for-the-environmentalist's soul and such -- but is it really just bunk?