Join us as we go Green, one step at a time
In my previous post, I mentioned that McKinsey noted how important energy efficiency in your house is. Well, if you’ve taken that guidance to heart, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy have a checklist for action.
They’ve got the list divided up into things you can do today, this week, and this year. A good one is to “turn down the temperature of your water heater to the warm setting (120°F). You’ll not only save energy, you’ll avoid scalding your hands.”
It’s sour grapes for sure, but since they dinged me when I was interviewing with them during school, I’ve always distrusted those braniacs at McKinsey.
Nevertheless, Diana Farrell at McKinsey’s Global Institute recently listed the five most important things, (in their opinion) which which will help stave off a climate disaster, under the title, “A Simple Plan to Cut Energy Demand Growth and Carbon Emissions.”
According to Ms. Farrell, “it starts with China.” She lists the following:
1. Make Chinese manufacturing more efficient.
2. Make Chinese energy plants more efficient.
3 .Make Chinese buildings more efficient.
Simple! Once we fix China, then we move on to the rest of the world….
5. Reduce fuel subsidies.
“Reduce fuel subsidies that shield consumers from the true price of energy they use—and therefore encourage over consumption. We estimate that reducing fuel subsidies by 80% globally (largely in the Middle East, Venezuela, and Mexico) would reduce global demand for road transportation fuel by 5% of the global sector’s demand in 2020.”
Needless to say, all of the prescriptions listed above will require concerted effort by governments working together. So don’t forget to contact your representatives in government.
You may have noticed I skipped number 4, because you can actually do something about that one. Here’s what it is…
4. Make U.S. homes more efficient.
U.S. homes are the biggest consumers of energy in the world, and “if the energy efficiency of all U.S. households were to increase to the levels of California or Europe, global residential energy demand in 2020 could decline by more than a third—the equivalent of nearly 4 million barrels of oil a day.”
So don’t forget to think about your house, and how you can cut your energy consumption. In case you’re out of ideas, we have some ideas listed here!
Did you know that 1/3 of New Zealand’s greenhouse gases come from animals? It’s hard to believe but it’s true.
Apparently scientists are trying to reduce methane output by eliminating methane-producing microbes which can be found in a cow’s rumen (part of their digestive system). A couple of strategies discussed include genetically engineering the microbes so they stop producing methane, or changing animals’ feed.
Check out this article to read more and to listen to NPR’s broadcast on this story.
If you’ve had the occasion to visit Google’s Mountain View campus recently, you may have noticed that they have been installing solar panels. Well, they’re almost done, and they recently put up a fun dashboard that shows how much energy those panels are generating. See how much energy they generated, and see how much that is in terms of hairdryer hours here.
Inspired by today’s somewhat nauseating Republican presidential debate, which I was for some reason drawn to, I thought it might make sense to spend some time looking at the environmental stands of the top presidential candidates. Although I am a Democrat, I thought I would give the Republicans a fair shake, and I included the top three from both parties. (as measured by Pollingreport.com)
I figured that since the web is so important now, their webpages would tell alot about what they think is important. Soooo…. I went to each candidates website, and looked at the issues they had listed. I’ve compiled the key points in the following Google Spreadsheet. (full sheet)
I noticed a few things. First of all, the Republicans are not really paying attention to the issue. Guiliani and Romney have basically nothing at all about the environment or global warming, and Guiliani doesn’t even mention energy! McCain does mention global warming but is short on specifics. Advantage: McCain I guess. He wins by default, despite the fact that he offers no specifics.
Naturally, the Democrats are better. Edwards has a very long and detailed set of proposals and ideas. However both Hillary and Obama have some deficiencies. Obama’s entire proposal is centered around transportation. On the other hand, Hillary has very few details on her page. Advantage: Edwards. He’s got the most detailed proposals, and covers all the bases.
Of course, it’s still early, and using their webpages to judge who would be a better president for dear Mother Earth may not be the best methodology. However, there’s no doubt that there’s a significant difference between Dems and Republicans on how seriously they take global warming. Take a look and let me know what you think!