Latest Updates: carbon emissions RSS

  • Why Wall Street Protestors Should Demand Carbon Cap and Trade

    10:27 pm on October 18, 2011 | 1 Permalink | Comment
    Tags: carbon emissions, , , limits of growth


    The Occupy Wall Street movement – is it an indicator of a coming Great Disruption, a la Paul Gilding, or just a visible manifestation of the more optimistic Big Shift espoused by John Hagel III and John Seely Brown in Thomas Friedman’s recent column?

    Gilding says our “growth-obsessed capitalist system is reaching its financial and ecological limits,” while Hagel and Seely Brown propose a Big Shift is happening – when globalization and the IT revolution merge to unleash a huge new global flow of ideas and opportunities.

    Maybe they are both right. So what are the protestors, poised on that thin line between the yin and the yang of it all, hoping not to get arrested, supposed to do?

    Agitate for carbon cap and trade. Yeah, it may seem like a funny thing to ask for when you can’t afford car insurance and a lousy bag of groceries cost $50 bucks.

    However, if we really are globally connected and unavoidably linked together, we need a piece of positive change that’s going to work for everyone from Manhattan to Mongolia.

    That’s where Gernot Wagner comes in. He’s writing a book called “But Will the Planet Notice?” that, among other things, tells the greenies among us that composting and going car-free is all well and good but isn’t worth a dime or a renminbi to Mother Nature.

    Policy change, Wagner is quick to note, is the only thing worth fighting for, and the only way to align the values of old Mama Nature with the self-interest of each and every one of us. Wagner, an environmental economist, details policy changes – on acid rain, and lead in gasoline – that let markets continue to work and solve problems.

    Perhaps that approach can work for both controlling climate change and leading us forward to a sustainable model of growth.

    If carbon has a price, and everyone, capitalist and composter, banker and bungee jumper, has to pay the price as they go about their business, the world becomes a different place. Everything changes, and it all boils down to this: If you pollute carbon, you pay.

    Of course it’s not that simple, is it. People have their grievances, their inequalities, their past injustices. Carbon cap and trade won’t recoup the money Wall Street ‘stole’ and redistribute it to me and the other 98.999%.

    However, it will make us stop blindly using and abusing our planet’s resources in continually chasing endless growth. All parents know kids need us to set limits, or they run amok, like the 9 billion-pound hamster. Setting up global carbon cap and trade seems like a logical first limit, doesn’t it?

     

     
  • Bright Light For Sustainability

    7:30 am on August 30, 2011 | 0 Permalink | Comment
    Tags: carbon emissions, lighting

     

    In 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy challenged manufacturers through its L Prize contest to come up with a replacement for the 60-watt incandescent bulb.

    This August, Philips, the only entrant to the DOE’s challenge, won the $10 million prize. It’s a great example of government putting its money into getting sustainable technology to mass market quicker. Too bad legislation is trying to quash U.S. efficiency standards in lighting.

    Philips, which has long been at work on LEDs and efficient lighting technology, produced a light-emitting diode (LED) bulb that looks screaming yellow when unlit but turns a pleasant warm white when screwed into your desk lamp.  Commercial versions of the bulb use 12 watts of energy and should last 25,000 hours – that’s 17 years at four hours a day. Philips’ next generation of these bulbs should be available soon for a retail price of around $22. Yes, that’s a lot for an incandescent (which will last  1 – 3,000 hours) but not a bad deal for a bulb that is slated to keep working 8 to around 25 times longer.

    And Philips’ expects its LED lightbulbs’ price to fall over time. The Netherlands-based company set a goal to have 30% of its sales from ‘sustainable’ product lines by 2012, and met that goal in 2009.

    It’s funny to think that just last year I purchased a single LED lightbulb (all I could afford) for $100 just because I so badly wanted LED bulbs to succeed in the mainstream.

    And now, thanks in part to the DOE (and if the U.S. government stays out of its own way) they will. The EU and 10 other nations are killing incandescents, and a Philips competitor named Cree (working with GE) already  announced an even more efficient LED that replaces a 60-watt incandescent and uses just 8.7 watts of energy. That only spells good news for consumers.

    Now we truly need to do our part, part with some hard-earned cash, and switch out some incandescents for these efficient LEDs.

     

     

     

     

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel