Conservation 101: the Compete to Conserve Blog

photo credit: rick

Last week, city planners met with the San Francisco Transit Authority to consider congestion pricing, and now initial plans are out. “Drivers could pay $3 to enter, leave or pass through parts of San Francisco during morning and evening commutes under a proposal designed to push motorists out of their cars,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported Wednesday.

For a map of the areas that would be affected by congestion pricing, go to: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/26/MNS614C8S1.DTL&hw=congestion+pricing&sn=003&sc=570

photo credit: kke227

This Tuesday, San Francisco officials will consider the feasibility of congestion pricing as part of an ongoing effort to ease traffic and reduce pollution in some of the city’s busiest areas.

Congestion Pricing a Tough Sell

Congestion pricing, which requires motorists to pay a toll to drive in heavily trafficked areas, is already at work in London and Stockholm. But starting congestion pricing in the United States is a tough sell: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg had suggested charging drivers $8 to enter certain parts of Manhattan, but his ambitious plan was killed the the New York state Assembly in April.

The idea of congestion pricing has the support of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, as well as some of the 11 elected county supervisors who make up the San Francisco County Transportation Authority’s board.

But when city planners present various pricing and zone scenarios to the board this Tuesday, a wide-ranging group that includes business owners and motorists will be ready to voice their dissent. Even San Franciscans who might otherwise support the idea of congestion pricing may be leery of imposing an obstacle to business in these challenging economic times.

Voice Your Opinion on Congestion Pricing

The public is invited to attend meetings in San Francisco to learn more about the city’s congestion pricing plans, Tuesday, December 2, 2008, and Monday, December 8, 2008. City planners are also hosting an online meeting Friday, December 5, 2008, for those unable to attend the other sessions in person. For details and to register for the online event, visit: http://www.sfcta.org/content/view/302/148/

Local thoughts on San Francisco’s congestion pricing study that kicked off last year:

“Congestion Pricing in the News,” Transbay Blog, September 17, 2007:
http://transbayblog.com/2007/09/19/congestion-pricing-in-the-news/

“Baby, You Can Charge My Car,” SFist, September 19, 2007:
http://sfist.com/2007/09/19/baby_you_can_ch.php

photo credit: stevelyon

CEOs of some of the world’s most prominent companies are floating the idea that the U.S. “consider raising taxes on gasoline,” according to Real Time Economics on The Wall Street Journal Online.

Idea “Tucked Away”

The idea, which according to Journal editors was “tucked away” in a proposal on long-term tax policy, came about during a two-day session this week in which nearly 100 CEOs of global companies gathered to define the priorities they believe President-elect Barack Obama and the new Congress need to tackle when they take office in January. (Finance and the U.S. economy; energy and the environment; health care; and America’s role in the global economy were the four key issues the CEO Council discussed, underscoring that there will be no dearth of work Obama’s administration will face.)

Proponents of raising the gas tax say that it will lower gasoline consumption, encourage both the production and market for fuel efficient vehicles, lower imports, and decrease polluting emissions.

Critics argue that increased taxes unfairly burden consumers, especially the poor, and that reduced consumption hurts industry. (I haven’t found anyone yet that says pollution is good, but I’m sure there’s someone out there!)

Support Gaining Steam?

Raising the gas tax, of course, is nothing new. But until now its support has been limited. Because most Americans are dependent on cars to get to work, school, and every else, opponents have been able to build a broad coalition that makes politicians think that championing the cause would be certain political death.

But now something different is happening. There is an increasing awareness of the interconnectedness of energy use, economy, the environment, and public health. And when CEOs of companies that collectively employ 5.9 million people and $2.2 trillion in annual revenues say officials should consider raising the gasoline tax, my bet is that this idea won’t go away quietly this time.

The Wall Street Journal will report results of the CEO Council Monday, November 24, 2008.

More resources:

The Wall Street Journal CEO Council:
https://ceocouncil.wsj.com/index.html

photo credit: Glenn Loos-Austin

This November, as families across the U.S. prepare for the button-popping holiday known as Thanksgiving, a growing number will give thanks for belonging to a CSA. CSAs, short for community supported agriculture, allow consumers to purchase fresh, in-season produce directly from a farm.

This subscription-based arrangement cuts out the middlemen (distributors and grocery stores) and provides a dependable income for the farmers. In return, consumers receive weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly boxes of fruits and vegetables, usually organic and at a better price than what one would pay for comparable produce at the market.

Thankful for a Variety

Growers can also offer a diverse selection of produce, because subscriptions give them a guaranteed market. While a typical grocery store may offer organic apples and tomatoes, a CSA box could also contain difficult-to-find foods such as organic daikon, tomatillos, and chili peppers.

Thankful for the People Who Grow Our Food

CSA members say they also enjoy developing a personal relationship with the people who grow the food they eat. Most CSAs distribute newsletters or have blog detailing their plantings, harvests, and other interesting news on the farm.

Thankful All Year Long

Some CSAs run spring through fall, offering a bounty of seasonal produce. In California, most of the CSAs operate year-round, though members should prepare to get lots of kale and dark greens through the cooler winter months. Thanksgiving can be a real treat because of the amazing sweet potatoes, butternut and acorn squashes, and colorful potato varietals.

In my experience as a member of the Eatwell Farms CSA, summer was my favorite season because of the berry fruits and unusual variety watermelons. In the winter, I have to confess, many of my dark greens went toward making vegetable stock. Still, I appreciated the variety of local, seasonal vegetables it provided the family. Without it, I may have been tempted to buy more than one box of blueberries imported from Argentina in February.

More resources:

Search for a CSA near you:
http://www.localharvest.org/

Eatwell Farm blog:
http://www.eatwellfarm.typepad.com/

Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association:
http://www.biodynamics.com/csa.html

photo credit: miss_rogue

Wrap rage, the anger, frustration, and, sometimes, injury that occurs when opening a new package will hit its annual peak this December. Instead of kissing under mistletoe or roasting chestnuts, millions of consumers will instead spend time untwisting sharp, poky twist ties and slicing through airtight plastic clamshell packaging that seems better suited to seal off biological weapons than iPods.

For people trying to conserve resources, wrap rage is particularly vexing because, in the end, they’re left with piles of waste that can be neither reused (how many twist ties can one family really use?) or recycled (just because there’s a recycle symbol on a plastic bag doesn’t mean your local recycling facility will accept it). Paying customers are also annoyed knowing that much of this packaging is produced to deter shoplifters. (It’s also designed to make shipping and stocking more efficient.) Remember the terrible wasteful 6×12-inch cardboard box CDs used come packaged in? Consumers complained enough to rid the industry of the boxes. Now a new generation is aiming to put an end to wrap-rage packaging.

Some, fed up with overconsumption and inspired by the “reduce” movement, say that the best way to avoid wrap rage is to not buy anything–or at least not buy anything overpackaged or sealed in a clamshell. That would mean swearing off all electronics and many toys. So while there are merits to this argument, like other abstinence-only pledges, it may not be realistic. The cultural traditions and comforts of giving and receiving gifts during the holidays run strong.

One happy medium suggestion is to reduce the number of gifts you buy this season. Faced with economic uncertainty, many consumers are already pledging to buy less this year (much to the dismay of retailers). In light of mindful holiday buying, Amazon.com is hoping its “Frustration-Free Packaging Initiative” will lure shoppers fed up with overpackaging.

The Seattle-based online retailer has teamed with toy maker Mattel, electronics manufacturer Transcend, and Microsoft to sell 19 products that use less packaging and are easier to open. Amazon says, for example, the Fisher-Price Imaginext Adventures Pirate Ship “is now delivered in an easy-to-open, recyclable cardboard box. The new packaging eliminates 36 inches of plastic-coated wire ties, 1,576.5 square inches of printed corrugated package inserts and 36.1 square inches of printed folding carton materials. Also eliminated are 175.25 square inches of PVC blisters, 3.5 square inches of ABS molded styrene and two molded plastic fasteners.” Transcend memory cards will be shipped in recyclable cardboard rather than plastic clamshells.

Nineteen is an awfully small number of products to choose from. And it won’t end wrap rage overnight. But it’s a start.

photo credit: AlbySpace

California’s Proposition 8 is wrong.

While I am a big proponent that this Website remains nonpartisan, I feel strongly about that first sentence, and more strongly that it has nothing to do with partisan politics whatsoever.

At the end of the day, Proposition 8 added Section 7.5 to Article I of the California Constitution, which states:  “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

The Bill of Rights refers to our nation’s first ten Constitutional amendments.  Seventeen more came into existence thereafter.  If there is a common theme among all, it is the protection and granting of individual rights in defense of possible tyranny by a federal sovereignty.  After passing a series of articles establishing a nation, the Bill of Rights provided some sort of guarantee that this new nation would not usurp individual rights.

So it naturally follows that the 27 Constitutional Amendments — with the one obvious exception (prohibition, which was later repealed) — give rather than take.  The First Amendment grants the individual right to speak freely.  The Second lets you own a gun.  The Third provides some protection in the home.  The Fourth protects against unlawful searches and seizures.  Five ensures protection from an unlawful “taking” by the federal government.  Six, Seven and Eight were crafted to ensure that our justice system afforded the necessary safeguards for those accused, and convicted, of a crime.

The actual right established by an amendment is more obvious in some instances than others, such as 13, 14, 15, 19 and 26 (abolishing slavery and granting citizenship rights, and also establishing voting rights for most men and women over the age of 18).  While some amendments may be construed as taking rights away (e.g., 16 (income taxes) and 27 (limiting Congressional pay increases)), a deeper analysis reveals that this was not the intent.  Only 18 (prohibition) “took away”, but that was later repealed by 21.

When working properly, these amendments should provide inspiration for all that our nation exists with unlimited potential. But sometimes this is not the case.  Proposition 8 establishes no rights upon anyone whatsoever.  While proponents may have argued that Proposition 8 provided both moral and practical protections to certain parts of society, a simple reading of its text does nothing more than eliminate one specific option for one specific group in society.

So I voted against Proposition 8 for these reasons. I didn’t even get to the other more substantive and contemplative issues.  Does this cross the line of separating the church from the state?  Does it take away from the notion of traditional “family values”?  Should we make a fundamental distinction between same sex marriages and opposite sex marriages?

What Prop 8 reveals is how antiquated and dangerous the system of propositions in California is.  Under Article 16 of the California Constitution, decisions of public finance require agreement by two-thirds of the California legislature.  Since that rarely happens, propositions are the only other mechanism for deciding decisions of public finance.

If the legislature is not able to make these important decisions, then I question whether California has simply outgrown its operating instructions.

That’s probably a larger discussion for another website, perhaps the same website that can figure out how a state as large as California can elect a governor, then un-elect him a couple of years later, and then elect another governor who is virtually powerless to do anything given California’s political infrastructure.

So what does this have to do with energy conservation?  Not much.  But it has everything to do with sustainability, and if California — our nation’s most populous state — is ever going to be able to sustain itself on all fronts, it needs to rethink the instruction manual under which it operates.  The definition of sustainability is very broad and covers everything from the environment to healthcare to individual rights.  It is going to take a lot of work for California to get where it needs to be.  But much like the discussions contained within this website, it starts with creating an environment that fosters change.

Turmoil in the financial markets, declining consumer confidence, and a renewed interest in the environment have created a perfect storm for conservation. Suddenly, it’s chic to be cheap.

As the Wall Street Journal reports: “Retail and manufacturing clients are seeing almost an aversion to consumption,” says Todd Lavieri, chief executive of Archstone Consulting, which tracks retail spending patterns. “In previous downturns [such as in 1991 and 2001], we have often seen shopping as therapy.” Now, with credit conditions so tight, Mr. Lavieri says, “people aren’t shopping to feel better. They actually are not shopping to feel better.”

To aid in the catharsis, the new website Spendster.org invites consumers to record their former profligate ways and post videos to share. For anybody who has ever regretted purchase (that’s pretty much everybody), the site is a humorous relief. Take a walk through users’ homes and you’ll see closets bulging with seldom-worn purses and hats and never-used appliances–electric can openers, anyone?–and other next-to-useless items likely found in your home, too.

The idea, of course, is to be mindful of one’s purchases. Though Spendster focuses on the financial benefits of buying less, it’s easy to see the environmental benefits as well.

More:
“Luxury Consumers Scrimp for the Sake of the Planet, and Because It’s Cheaper,” Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2008:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122575617614495083.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

“Shoppers Turn to Consignment Stores,” Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2008: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576228664895683.html?mod=dist_smartbrief

Join these CTC members in their Cheap Is Chic goals:
Buy Less Stuff
Buy All My Clothes at Secondhand Stores
Create Less Waste
Have a “Green” Christmas
Purchase More Bulk Items = Less Packaging Waste

As founder and CEO of Compete to Conserve, I’d like to welcome you to our new and improved beta site. We’re not quite done—like conservation efforts, there’s always room for improvement—but we hope you find our latest updates useful and fun.

We’ve made it easier to see when other Compete to Conserve members have posted and made it easier to connect with people in the community. We encourage you to try our improved features: follow interesting members to see what they’re up to, add a goal and post your thoughts or progress, and challenge others to do the same.

Make a Difference, Not a Statement

We believe that you don’t have to be an environmentalist or an expert to conserve resources. Compete to Conserve is designed so you can make small everyday changes that add up to create real impact.

In the fall of 2007, cofounder Tim Barkow and I hatched the idea for a nonpartisan online community that inspires changes in the way we consume natural resources. After countless hours of work and the addition of six more team members, we launched July 22, 2008.

Since then, all of us have made significant adjustments in our lives as a result of what we have learned from our community. We take a practical, realistic approach as leaders in our online community. We do not publicly endorse candidates, and if possible, we present “both sides” to an argument. We want to learn how much energy CFLs will save and how to clean them up if they accidentally break on the carpet at home. We struggle to understand the balance between the growth of the GDP in our nation and worldwide while still promoting conservation.

Jump Right In

We are very proud of what we have accomplished. Our community has grown, and we continue to emphasize our focus on people helping other people learn more and discover solutions to their consumer- and energy-related lives. We may argue about the impact, but few disagree that we create a lot of waste. So jump in and tell us what’s working for you and what’s not. To make things easy for you, here’s a link where you can provide some feedback. http://getsatisfaction.com/competetoconserve.  We’re ready to make a difference, not a statement.

–Craig Garner

Winter in Juneau, Alaska

Winter is here (or almost here) for many people across the United States.  While it doesn’t quite feel like it in sunny Los Angeles, it’s pretty hard to ignore, having just returned from a icy vacation in Alaska where I witnessed the first snow of the season. 

This week, we’ve gathered eco-friendly tips across the web to help you cope through the impending chilly season:

• The Daily Green posted a slide show, highlighting natural remedies for 12 Winter Aches and Chills.
• VegNews shared some chic earth-friendly fabric ideas to keep you feeling toasty throughout the season.
• Yahoo! Green revealed a few helpful home tips for saving heat during those cold, blustery nights.
• TreeHugger outlined ways to get better gas mileage under these cold conditions that overwork your vehicle.
• Care2 unveiled a a natural remedy for dry winter skin, as recommended by health expert for Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Dr. Brent  - goat milk soap.  Who knew?!?!

photo credit: otisarchives3

Hospitals use a lot of energy, and not surprisingly the healthcare sector ranks second in energy intensity.  Hospitals use 836 trillion BTUs of energy annually (over 2.5 times the energy intensity and CO2 emissions of commercial office buildings), produce 28.575 million tons of CO2 and over 30 lbs of CO2 emissions per square foot on an annual basis.  It would logically follow that Hospitals have at their disposal myriad resources to make a change toward sustainability.  Regrettably, this is not the case.

While my approach in trying to make a difference and improve our environment has been deliberately non-partisan, at some point it is necessary to take a definitive stand on something, even if that “something” is mired in controversy.  Working in hospital administration these past six years, I fear that the healthcare system in California today is so dysfunctional that it borders on the edge of cataclysmic failure.  Surprisingly, this systemic problem has not received the necessary attention a crisis of such magnitude should mandate. (more…)