Plastic Bags and Books: Trendsetters in the Making

This week, I chose to explore the blogosphere in search of fascinating and note-worthy articles in the field of environmental protection and preservation. Upon research, I came across two articles that caught my attention about the current trends and the potential outcomes of offsetting the use of plastic bags by businesses, and the printing of environmentally-friendly books by the book industry. The first article that I came across is entitled Book Industry Turns Over a New Leaf, written by Warren McLaren of Tree Hugger, and the second article is entitled Plastic-Bag Bans Gaining Momentum Around the World, written by John Roach of The National Geographic. Although these two articles seem to have little in common, they are, in fact, much applicable under many circumstances. Undoubtedly, these two industries create a substantial amount of damage to the environment: they contribute to the rise in greenhouse gases, some eventually end up clogging landfills, and they destroy precious resources.

As the aforementioned articles illustrate, the current state of these two industries is looking brighter than ever, but progress of this magnitude needs more time and effort to attain its greatest potential. Although environmentally conscience individuals and voices can help implement such change, the major sources of strength must come from the business sector, mainly those of powerful corporations who will adopt more environmentally friendly, ‘pro green’ attitudes. Instigating such changes is not an easy task; while it is in the interest of businesses to adopt environmentally sound methodologies in the long stretch, political action is necessary in the hands of the U.S. government. For instance, if and when the federal government decides to intervene, the utilization of plastic bags may be outright banned or taxed, or the trend of printing books on mostly unrecycled paper may be restricted. Whatever the outcomes, certain organizations and countries have already shown to be trendsetters in a world where environmental protection and preservation is more important than ever. It is riveting to stay apprised of future outcomes. For your convenience, I have attached my comments below.

Comment # 1: Book Industry Turns Over a New Leaf
First off, I was captivated by the plethora of valuable information provided; “The U.S. book industry emits over 12.4 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, or approximately 8.85 pounds of carbon for the average book (.89 lb). Much of this (~63%) is a result of forests losing their biomass carbon store.” The progression of publishing books the outdated way is contrasted by new and improved methodologies, where companies are seeking to curb over-production, recycling unsold books instead of filling up landfills, using recycled and low-weight paper, and ‘maximizing FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certified or equivalent fiber in their papers.” In this fight, the efforts of The Book Industry Study Group (BISG) and The Green Press Initiative (GPI) are commendable. Primarily through their hard work, the book industry is trekking new waters and thus making progress; even though the book industry is not often directly associated with contributing to the rise in greenhouse gases, they are in fact the fourth largest emitters of carbon dioxide in the United States. It is evident that book manufacturers need so-called responsible paper that minimizes production and environmental impacts.

Although various book publishing companies are keeping up to par, how will their efforts be translated in the newspaper and magazine industries? The significance of this relatively new trend is praiseworthy to say the least, but these efforts must be supplemented through the efforts of the government and of various institutions. Institutions such as high schools, colleges, universities, public libraries, and bookstores must keep their end of the bargain by placing incentives for environmentally concerned publishers, and challenging those that do not embrace these means. Meeting the current world’s demand of millions of books is a daunting task, consequently, in order to meet such demands, trees from endangered rainforests and forests alike are relentlessly cut down (GPI). Notwithstanding, it is imperative to understand that the implementation of eco-friendly books can take on a number of forms. For instance, the system of cap and trade, or the advancement of e-book technologies and devices are possible and tangible avenues of hope.

Comment # 2: Plastic-Bag Bans Gaining Momentum Around the World
Thank you for this concise and insightful article. I was thoroughly enthused to read that “From Australia to the U.K., and all across the United States, politicians and corporations are pondering banning or taxing plastic bags.” These efforts are thanks in part to the “hefty surcharge that began in 2003 in Ireland that has spurred the public to spurn plastic bags almost completely in favor of reusable cloth totes.” Although efforts to ban or tax the use of plastic bags have been a sluggish one in the United States, it is fortunate to note that the progressive city of San Francisco recently celebrated its one-year-anniversary of banning the use of “hard to recycle” plastic bags (NPR). By observing the positive outcomes, these numbers translate to about five million less plastic bags each day! As a result, other cities are considering similar bans or restrictions, while companies are seeking to develop alternative modes of carrying goods. In all probability, states like California, New Jersey, New York, and Maryland are going to be the forefront trendsetters in an effort to ease the damaging effects of plastic bags.

It is no surprise that the United States is making progress at a much slower rate due to the vast geography of the country, the structure of the government, and the various interest groups involved. Amongst the heap of influential voices and players, a system of taxation is more preferable; therefore, environmentally concerned companies such as IKEA (who has already banned plastic bans in favor of durable, recyclable, and reusable blue-colored bags) is one of the obvious trendsetters. The gravity of the carbon footprint of plastic bags is no joking matter: every year, an estimated five-hundred billion to one trillion plastic bags are consumed worldwide, which translates to about one million per minute (NPR). Ideally, one would use and re-use already owned plastic bags, but the current situation is a crisis at hand. Plastic bags slowly but willingly poison the soil and waterways. In the meantime, besides ensuing banning or taxing, one can invest in these heftier, larger, and more durable bags (similar to the ones offered in IKEA and in various other stores like Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s). Although some of these bags will still be made partially or entirely of plastic, they will help the environment in the long run. We cannot continue at the pace we are on.

The Arctic Oil Rush: A Virtual Rat Race

It comes as no surprise that prices of crude oil remain at record rates, the Middle East remains less inviting, and the growing attraction of Arctic energy becomes almost inevitable. With the onset of these trends, the potential supply of Arctic energy has the capability to forever alter the geopolitics of competing countries. Recent events have perpetuated a plethora of ramifications. Approximately two weeks ago, a U.S. based company, called Arctic Oil & Gas Corp. (AOAG) controversially laid claim to “nearly all of the Arctic Ocean’s undersea oil.” According to Vast Oil Potential in Arctic, this Las Vegas based company thus attempted to surpass the ranks of other countries in a virtual rat race to see who will profit the most from the promise of the vast amount of petroleum resource. As such, readers undoubtedly wonder, what really lies underneath the ice, closer to the rapidly melting center of the Arctic’s “icy and forbidden waste?” The most optimistic estimates concur that “no less than twenty-five percent of the world’s yet-to-find oil and gas reserves (400 billion barrels of oil equivalent) are hidden beneath the ice. But that may be too hopeful. A more modest recent estimate is about half that (around fourteen percent of the world’s yet-to-find reserves) with about two-thirds of it in gas and the other third, or less, in liquid resources.” This controversial claim by AOAG, which has undoubtedly raised numerous eyebrows across the international sphere, is beyond the territorial claim of Canada, Russia, and other polar nations, as The Japan Times Online notes. More so, these recent, pathetic revelations unravel that various countries around the world, including one of the forerunners, the U.S. will attempt to exploit the environment to its fullest extent by sucking on the bloodlines of the oil industry before truly delving into the era of alternative energies and taking strides towards a green initiative.  

In its latest statement regarding the polar seabed’s “enormous reserve potential,” for petroleum deposits, Arctic Oil & Gas asserts “The Arctic Ocean floor is increasingly believed to hold vast reserves of untapped oil and natural gas, which is expected to become accessible as new deep-sea drilling and hydrocarbons production technology becomes available.” In order to accomplish these aims, workers must tap into “organic rich sediments" that covers all of the Arctic Ocean seafloor, which was once "great fresh water matted Azolla-rich pond, capturing untold billions of tons of organic sediments." As such, the political ramifications of Arctic drilling by various countries will unravel faster than we may have previously thought; scientists

have predicted that global warming could leave the Arctic virtually ice-free within twenty years. The aforementioned source, Vast Oil Potential in Arctic asserts, this prospective “has hastened a scramble among nations with a polar coast namely Canada, Russia, the U.S., Norway and Denmark, which controls Greenland- to try to strengthen their scientific claims under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to extended territorial sovereignty over the Arctic Ocean floor.” In light of these new facts and numbers, a recent European Union report, noting the tense atmosphere of the major international players, mainly among the U.S. and Canada, warned about the potential clashes over Arctic resources. The concerns of the United Nations are well grounded in fear and hope; a spokesperson for the Council on Foreign Relations, declared, “Unless Washington leads the way toward a multilateral diplomatic solution, the Arctic could descend into armed conflict.” If the trend resumes towards the monopolization of oil and gas in the Arctic region, this may indefinitely disrupt, halt, or stop legislation and the fight for sustainable energy development. America’s dependence on oil through the means of fossil fuels is like a nicotine addiction; they think they can stop if and when they choose, but ultimately fail to do so.

Although some progress is made to combat the vitality of fossil fuels in an increasingly energy-hungry world, one invariable truth is that “long-term thinking has never been more important in the energy-industry” given that “energy companies routinely invest billions of dollars in mammoth projects that often have life spans of thirty years or more.” Other harsh realities include the intense acceleration of global energy demand; the world’s population could reach more than nine billion by 2050. The intense rise in population is growing at more alarming rates than energy demand. In addition, current trends regrettably indicate that until the demise of fossil fuels, they will continue to be main source of energy for decades to come; “fossil fuels presently meet about 80% of global energy demand, whereas biofuels, wind and solar energy currently supply less than 1%.” By perpetuating the environmental protection and conservation movement, alternative energies have the potential to supply a far greater demand. These mostly untapped sources of energy are hindered from the existence of fossil fuels. As much of the existing blood lines for extracting oil become more limited and decline in strength, the means of tapping into the world’s future resources located in the Arctic, become more “energy-intensive, difficult and costly to develop,” as a source for the BBC News 

comments. These harsh facts should provide sufficient reason to rally around policies that encourage investment in new technologies of a new caliber that will meet our growing demand for energy, yet at the same, prioritize energy conservation and environmental protection. As James Smith of BBC News comments, no single company or industry will be able to meet the challenge of “satisfying the world’s rising demand for energy while simultaneously reducing CO2 emissions,” such that governments need to formulate the appropriate means (international policies) to ensure a “a relatively smooth transition from a high-carbon global economy to a low-carbon global one.”

Although we need well-defined and proactive policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it is imperative to remain wary of the fossil fuel industry and their claims of carrying about environmental conservation and protection, these so-called untruthful campaigns. While the Arctic Oil & Gas claim that they have a “viable, politically, environmentally and commercially sound solution for easing the global energy emergency by careful shared development of the Arctic oil and gas resources contained in the Arctic Oceans Commons area,” their incentives, actions and policies point elsewhere. Companies like the AOAG and Shell may tout their ‘green’ initiative in the media, yet behind closed doors, they lobby to cast doubt and block any sustainable energy initiative. The cycle of extracting the world’s future energy supply by means of fossil fuels, stuck in the context of a virtual rat race, is reaching even more lowly limits.

Exploring the Web for Outstanding Sites: Part 2

This week, I further enhanced my research for outstanding, high-quality sites that would complement and provide supplementary information in my area of emphasis, the field of environmental protection and preservation. Once again, while engaging in deep explorations of the web, I made judgments based largely upon the criteria set froth in the Webby Awards and the IMSA evaluation assessment. This beneficial exercise was certainly well worth the time and effort, as I had to narrow and pick sites for the second set of ten, well-rounded linkrolls. My goal was to find and narrow down excellent sources in various governmental and non-governmental spheres. Hopefully, these provocative and informative sites will enlighten readers in significant ways.

First, the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a national non-profit organization, dedicated to bringing together scientists, law-enforcement officers, and other professionals, work to ensure the implementation of environmentally safe laws. This exceptional website boasts great content, ranging from breaking news, upcoming events, and various campaigns (an image from their website is posted to the left). The vast source of information is engaging, relevant, and multi-faceted in nature. Second, the National Geographic Society inspires to spread the seed of knowledge, and promote natural and cultural conservation. The main strength of this website is the supreme level of interactivity; it combines different modes of medium (magazine, shorts, documentaries, films) and brings it into one, highly interactive, and entertaining source. Unlike the previous source, this site is more stimulating in the entertainment sense, yet valuable nevertheless. Third, the U.S. Department of the Interior, whose mission is to protect the nation's natural heritage, and honor the Indian tribes and island communities, has an overall poor structure and navigation. The organization of the content does not honor any prioritization of information; instead, it requires more effort from readers. They can strengthen this by providing a more clear, and coherent structure. Next, the Pew Charitable Trusts, who work diligently to solve today's most challenging problems, such as global warming and pollution, is a valuable site to take note of. This almost minimalist site has good functionality, given that it anticipates the diversity of user requirements, and makes navigating both smooth and effortless. At the same time, they should better understand and take advantage of the use of graphics. Subsequently, eNature, an award-winning source for vast amount of information concerning American wild animals and plants, contains information that is updated daily. This site's main weakness is the visual design; even though it still contains high-quality, appropriate, and relevant information, the visual appeal of the site hinders the communication of information. Next, my favorite, Planet Green, run primarily by a talented, six-person panel is an essential site that helps citizens detoxify their homes, their workplaces, and ultimately, the planet. The site's main strength is the extraordinary amount of content; it functions as if it is a culmination of six blogs, yet the posts come together coherently. There is a high level of interactivity from both the panel and the readers; this makes the site highly addictive. Additionally, EnviroLink, a non-profit organization serving to unite environmentally concerned organizations and volunteers around the world, is the perfect source for bringing together vast number of sites under one search. This site introduces and familiarizes readers with organizations they might not have been aware of. The overall experience of using this site is definitely positive; I even signed up for a newsletter. From EnviroLink, I came across Action Network, a government watchdog website that encourages the participation and teamwork of environmental activists around the country. Not surprisingly, the level of interaction between the activists is extraordinary as there is an unbeatable equation of give and take. With just a click of the mouse, someone can become an activist by becoming aware of various environmental issues that interest them the most. This site allows a great medium for inclusion. On the other hand, the Sierra Club, America's oldest and largest grassroots organization has a praiseworthy site to effectively communicate its vast knowledge and influence. Structured in such a way to encourage mebership, the site has a clear and fluid visual design, and brilliant content. Some of the functions, which encourage interactivity, include a focus on local environmental concerns, and the latest news in Congress. Finally, the World Bank Organization, focusing on environmental issues, provides vital assistance to developing countries; with this power, comes the opportunity to implement environmentally friendly and cost-effective policies. The site offers a vast array of information, ranging from their various projects, members, and partners. The level of interactivity may be improved by providing forums for discussion.

The Fooding of the Grand Canyon: An Act of Betrayal

On Wednesday, March 5, federal officials from the Department of the Interior began a three-day mission of flooding the Grand Canyon by pouring millions of gallons of water in order to restore its precious ecosystem and to rebuild the beaches along the Colorado River. This man-made flood was yet another, desperate attempt to restore the canyon to its former glory days since its ecosystem was permanently and drastically altered after the construction of the Glen Canyon Dam and the Hoover Dam. Although the canyon has been flooded twice before, in 1996 and 2004, scientists claim that this exercise must be conducted at least once a year, depending on the arid Arizona conditions, to observe any positive outcomes. Dirk Kempthorne from the Interior Secretary optimistically noted, "This gives you a glimpse of what nature has been doing for millions of years, cutting through and creating this magnificent canyon." Although the Department radiates the picture of perfection on the outside, this false deception should not take attention away from the real issues at hand- they are not acting in an environmentally safe and responsible fashion by not following through with the necessary repercussions after the initial flood; the implementation and execution are, for the current time, failing miserably.

Historically before the Glen Canyon was ever built in 1963 to generate vital hydroelectric energy, natural floods from the warm and muddy Colorado River enabled the existence of numerous native plant and fish species. Unfortunately, after its construction, the once warm water quickly turned into a cool and clear fluid, which perpetuated the extinction of four fish species, while two other species came to the brink of extinction, including the endangered humpback chub. In essence, this sixty-hour flood replicated the natural floods that used to nourish the ecosystem by leaving behind vital sediment. Not only does the Grand Canyon face a loss of richness of the habitat, this disheartening loss is also paralleled with "shrinking beaches" along the Colorado River. A superintendent for the Grand Canyon National Park noted, "shrinking beaches have led to the loss of half the camping sites in the canyon in the past decade. Since Glen Canyon Dam was built, 98 percent of the sediment carried by the Colorado River has been lost."

While examining the complexity of the recent event, one is most likely to contemplate whether the flooding is just too little, too late? Proponents of the flood argue that the new flood will not be fatal to the existing ecosystem and species; instead it will remarkably be beneficial, as it will revive both the ecosystem and the beaches. The followers of this argument essentially emphasize that Mother Nature is capable of withstanding drastic changes, while species alike, will also adapt to the new environment. Even though this argument may hold some ground, the negative consequences of the flood are extraordinarily overpowering. Jeff Ruch of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility declares, "This so-called experiment ignores the results of a decade worth of research obtained with more than $80 million tax dollars. This week's high-flow stunt is nothing but a green wash to mask another betrayal of the Grand Canyon by its political custodians." Following this rhetoric, it becomes obvious that the flooding will harm the surrounding ecology and resources in more detrimental ways than previously thought. According to Grand Canyon Gets Flooded, Turns Out It's Man, more so, by denying follow-up floods for months (and years at a time) will undoubtedly "leave endangered species, sandbars used by river-rafting trips, and archeological treasures at river's edge diminished almost to the point of no return."

Furthermore, opponents of the flood, including members of the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, claim that the flood is a deceiving battleground between politics and the environment, where politics is currently, but not surprisingly, on the winning side. A spokesperson for the Grand Canyon Trust stated, "the power industry is driving the Bureau of Reclamation more than anything else, as opposed to what's best for the canyon." As such, environmentalists accuse the government of perpetuating the need to maximize hydropower revenue at the cost of the well being of the canyon. Appallingly, the Interior Department has not scheduled a follow-up flood for another five years! As a result, the net benefits (if any) from the flood will inevitably be lost if the procedure is not repeated. While scientists will document habitat changes and its effects on the aquatic life, science and politics should not prosper at the cost of the other.

More so, what is even more disturbing is that officials from the Interior Department, under an agreement with NBC, chose to exclusively publicize the event on the superficial morning program, the "Today Show," at the expense of the scientists and geologists. Clearly, these sly actions cost the American people vital knowledge. The "Today Show," which often omits, dramatizes and fragments newsworthy occurrences and information, will be unable to communicate the complex nature of the flood. Jeff Ruch, the PEER Executive cleverly remarks, "While the Interior Department's craving for any favorable media coverage is understandable, they should earn it with actual good stewardship rather than from offering some splashy footage." Evidently, the motives of the Interior Department are merely a facade, which ultimately lead to an act of betrayal.

The Grand Canyon, one of the most well-known and significant landmarks of the United States offers incredible insight into the history of the planet's formation; therefore, its economic diversity (resulting in the extinction of species after one-time floods) should not be undermined even at the cost of hydroelectric power, generated from the Glen Canyon Dam. A happy medium between the production of hydropower and biodiversity may be achieved by enabling a more natural and fluid flow from the Colorado River or by enabling consistent flood follow-ups; this way, both sides, to a certain extent, prosper. The current actions of the Department of the Interior should not be tolerated any further, as they are a source of hindrance in more ways than one. It is undeniably necessary and significant to establish and maintain open and honest interactions between the political and the environmental spheres.

Exploring the Web for Outstanding Sites: Part 1

This week, I explored the web for outstanding, high-quality sites that would complement and provide supplementary information in my area of emphasis, the field of environmental protection and preservation. While engaging in deep explorations of the web, I made judgments based largely upon the criteria set forth in the Webby Awards and the IMSA evaluation assessment. While this exercise was beneficial both for myself and for my readers, it was definitely well worth the time and effort. The field of environmental protection and preservation is a fruitful topic to say the least; therefore, the obstacle of this exercise was to pick and choose an exceptional few within the masses to create well-rounded linkrolls. A balanced set of linkrolls will inevitably and provocatively engage to find excellent sources in various governmental and non-governmental spheres. Overall, this exercise enlightened and educated me in significant ways.

First off, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is certainly a valuable government funded and supported organization to acknowledge. The EPA, the nation's leader in environmental science, research, and education provides a plethora of important information about its mission, history, organization, and performance. The site provides engaging, relevant, and appropriate content for its audience in a visually captivating way. While the site may provide an over-abundant amount of information, the functionality of the site is never intimidating; instead, the site is organized in a cohesive, and timely manner. On the other hand, the site may improve its interactivity by providing more opportunity for feedback. Staying within the realm of governmental organizations, the Environmental Defense Fund seeks ways to link science, economics, and law to provide valuable and cost-effective solutions for environmental problems. This site captures one's attention by providing a large sphere for audience participation and interaction because it emphasizes feedback. The EDF even endorses some quality-driven blogs, which is refreshing to see. Additionally, the Council on Environmental Quality coordinates federal environmental efforts with other agencies of the White House to make constructive changes. The overall experience of navigating through this site was poor; for one thing, it is obviously biased. I would merely refer back to this site to observe incoming and current bills effecting environmental policy. Fourthly, the United Nations Environment Programme is an exceptional project, designed to implement environmentally sound policies in developing countries. This site has up-to-date information about their various, current endeavors and future ones. The UNEP site is visually appealing, and structurally navigable as it provides resources for journalists, scientists, businessmen, children, and citizens of the world. Next, the National Public Radio site, emphasizing in environmental issues, provides an extraordinary amount of information that is tangible through various services: radio, podcasts, news feeds, newsletters, mobile downloads. This technologically advanced site breaks boundaries and offers the best medium for audience interactivity. Perhaps my favorite site, TreeHugger, is a brilliant pro-green blog that incorporates science, economics, and public policy together. This highly addictive site is packed with engaging material, written in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek, yet intellectual manner. Although the visual design of the page is sometimes overwhelming, the functionality is not undermined. Furthermore, the Natural Resources Defense Council, a New-York based, non-partisan environmental advocacy group, operates various programs, such as the Air/Energy Program and the Urban Program. Its straightforward visual design gradually uncovers a vast array of international and domestic information. Next, Greenpeace is a highly interactive and noteworthy site that encourages reader participation by featuring a 'Hot Topic' area that hyperlinks one vital blog that is updated daily. This site not only provides relevant information about their main issues of concern, it also stresses the importance of cooperation and the role of the people. Additionally, The Green Guide enables one to learn about ways to preserve energy and to live in an environmentally sound manner while navigating quickly and effortlessly. This optimistic site is user-friendly and content-driven. Finally, Alternative Energy is a compelling and highly specialized blog that utilizes popular media to raise awareness about renewable energy. With new entries updated almost daily, the overall experience of visiting this site is rewarding indeed.

Small Steps: How Little Things Add Up

This week, I chose to explore the blogosphere. Upon extensive research, I came across two different, highly intellectual, external blogs that caught my attention. I came across the first blog, entitled, Honda Looks Into Recycling Engine Waste Heat, written by Michael Graham, and the second entitled, The Footprint of Gmail: How Much Energy Would Deleting Email Save?, written by Sami Grover. Although these two blogs seem almost impossible to compare, upon closer look, one is able to determine that they have a lot more in common as they are situated on the same spectrum of environmentalism. This particular spectrum of environmentalism is one in which utilizing a pro-green attitude means looking beyond so-called big legislative changes for positive outcomes, and instead, focusing on implementing small changes within major corporations. Implementing small changes, gradually and with constant care, may help advance the cause of environmentalism in the long run.

These rather small sets of changes which will ultimately yield great consequences is advantageously off set as "the 2008 Investor Summit on Climate Risk, organized by the United Nations an NGO called Ceres, brought together institutional investors along with Wall Street types and CEO's to discuss the risks and economic opportunities associated with climate change." At the termination of this meeting on February 15, these investors pledged to invest $10 billion dollars over the next two years.

In both of these blogs, their main aim is to demonstrate how these major corporations, (Google and Honda) can lead the fight against climate change by incorporating environmentally friendly methodologies. As they become more 'green,' they simultaneously cater to the green-collar job market through extensive and lengthy research. Executing environmentally friendly changes means rethinking old concepts and theories and emulating their own formulas, while educating the public. As both Google and Honda persevere to reduce their carbon footprint, they are also shaping public opinion while simultaneously setting up a good foundation for further discussion. These seemingly small changes will pave the way for greater outcomes as they perpetuate eco-friendly changes starting from within. For your convenience, I have attached my comments below.

Comment 1: Honda Looks Into Recycling Engine Waste Heat
First off, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this blog entry since it imposes such an interesting fact: "only about 1% of the energy contained in a gallon of gasoline moves the driver of a car" and looks beyond to find a meaningful solution to such an outstanding problem. This fact leaves one dumb-founded because where does the rest of the energy go? As for someone who may be not be as science savvy as the rest, I was thoroughly shocked to read that the rest of the energy is lost as heat through the exhaust. At the same time, it is not surprising that the motor vehicle company Honda is eager to implement changes (although the technology is not yet perfect) given that they made the first vehicle to comply with the Clean Air Act of 1970. This blog is further thought provoking because you beg to ask the question: should we remain content with updating the old combustion engine as oil prices virtually rise every day?

In this situation, as it is the with the general consent of most of the readers, it would seemingly be more profitable for the sake of environmental preservation and protection to get rid of this great polluter, this so-called combustion engine. Even if combustion engines were to be able to utilize more per gallon of gas, they are still a big polluter and a major problem for the environment. The only obvious solution would be to invest more in eco-friendly (alternative energy) to fuel our vehicles. In the future, all our vehicles will surely be hybrid and electric vehicles, so why not cut our dependence on foreign oil sooner?

An additional step, on top of making hybrid and electric vehicles, is to use less plastic packaging that constantly fill up
landfills; "America generates more waste every year, growing from a 247 million tons of non-hazardous waste in 1990, to 409 million tons in 2001." The equation is complex; one would have to consider the amount of energy used in metals in modern-day vehicles, to the amount of energy that will be saved as combustion engines become more eco-friendly, to the amount of energy used in hybrid/electric vehicles. Whatever the outcomes, Honda automakers are setting the standard as they symbolize a forward-moving and progressive comapny. One only hopes that American automakers will be inclined to produce more eco-friendly vehicles in the future so that they may at least stand a fighting chance compared to their Japanese competitor.

Comment 2: The Footprint of Gmail: How Much Energy Would Deleting Email Save?
This blog entry made me realize how one company can assess a growing trend; transition from paper to digital storage, which is leading to major increases in energy consumption. In doing so, Google acknowledges it is "as much of an energy glutton as heavy industry." This heavy-handed remark is offset with the notion that deleting outstanding numbers of old emails, including the ever irritating spam, will help save energy. Even if managing our email accounts will merely save a miniscule amount of energy, this blog begs to ask the bigger question because "we do know that the internet uses around 3% of US electricity consumption- a pretty sizeable figure." As much as this blog encourage the brevity of our email accounts, it also encourages us to rethink and renovate our mediums that connect us to the internet and beyond. We must certainly do our part to make sure that our devices are working to their highest capacity while preserving energy.

An obvious remark to this is: doesn't Google constantly save our searches and emails for a certain period of time, for security purposes? Even if the answer is yes, Google is single-handedly contributing great funds to raise awareness about climate change, global public health and global poverty through their foundation as they annually contribute a chunk of their profits.

As the people of the 21st century are witness to the increased proliferation of information, in a highly globalized society, consumers should support companies that are doing more to preserve the environment. As we attempt to save as much energy from every dimension of our lives, and support eco-friendly companies, we will be well on our way to a more environmentally sound world. Google, one of the most visited websites, is pioneering great changes that will help mankind face a brighter future.

This provocative blog, makes both a micro and a macro argument. While the individual actions of each person are significant, the actions of a large sum of people become even more important. Think of the great outcomes as countless GMail users empty out their junk mails and so forth. At the macro level, which is the next step, we must think of ways to save energy in the private sector- homes, and in the public sector- businesses, and the government.

Updating Building Codes in U.S: Time for Change

It is often said, "necessity is the mother of invention." Within the vital field of environmental protection and preservation, this is familiar territory. For many years, while the American government has been hibernating, reluctant to set forth new precedent for new legislature, other countries, including Great Britain and Sweden (among many), have leapt forward and have made great strides with their new pro-green attitude. While Americans have gotten away with consuming too much of everything, including fossil fuels, oil, and coal, there is new hope that change is finally on the way.

Fortunately, the current situation is not entirely dire even though there is room for major improvements, as evident in the state of Hawaii. On February 7, Gov. Linda Lingle announced the Hawaiian Clean Energy Initiative, which includes the agreement with private industry to install solar panels on government facilities. The Governor states, "This innovative, unprecedented partnership builds on the progress the state has made to increase energy independence by decreasing Hawaii's reliance on imported oil." She continues, "Our islands' abundant natural sources of energy, combined with the considerable capabilities of the Department of Energy, will help Hawaii lead America in utilizing clean, renewable energy technologies." According to this agreement, Hawaii would generate 70% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030. This plan is largely dependent upon the research of federal agencies and research laboratories to develop solar, wind, and biofuel solutions.

As Hawaii makes valuable progress, California, on the other hand, recently adopted a progressive plan, which recommends that all residential buildings be adjusted to a "net-zero energy" performance by 2020 and for commercial buildings by 2030. This recommendation was released in the Integrated Energy Policy Report by the California Energy Commission (CEC). According to the CEC, the 2008 standards will get us closer to updating our energy policies.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that the goals of this program are merely concerned with net-zero energy- "no net purchases from the electricity or gas grid." This means that it does not prohibit the use of fossil fuels; instead, those buildings that use fossil fuels would have to be offset by renewables.
Finally, the initiative applies only to new constructions. On the right, is a picture of one of these net-zero energy homes, built in Borrego Springs, California.

As the US attempts to build momentum, Sweden has been diligently building environmentally friendly homes for years. According to architect Greg La Vardera of Lamidesign, "everything- the pipes, the wiring systems, the doors, the stairs... everything has been engineered and rationalized to reduce labor, find energy and material economy and work with the method of construction where stuff is pre-assembled."

According to the same article, "How They: Build in Sweden: Panelized Prefab," one is inclined to ask, why is it so difficult to implement similar changes here? One main reason is that the construction inspection conventions in the U.S. Construction, including products and standard construction practices must be updated so that we are able to advance this revolutionary fight to protect and preserve the environment. The system is clearly broken.

While Sweden continues to build eco-friendly homes, and while even historic buildings enter the era of clean, green energy, the U.S. is left struggling with establishing basic rules and regulations for their building codes. Particularly, a one-thousand-year-old castle in Great Britain, through the foundation of The National Trust, installed solar panels in an effort to fight the dangerous consequences of climate change. A spokesperson for the project commented, "These panels will demonstrate how we can harness renewable energy even from hugely important conservation sites without affecting their special character."

We are essentially out of excuses; the time has come to for the private sector and the government to work together in unison so that we may live up to our names in the international sphere. So far, we have largely been an embarrassment in both our exaggerated consuming habits and our virtually non-existent preservation practices. The simple notion of give-and-take is tipping over.

Regrettably, on February 7, the Senate thwarted the latest attempts (by one vote) when they voted to halt support for "green tax breaks and incentives." This past vote was a chance to renew the old energy economy and consequently, to step into the new economy of wind and solar power, new clean energy (green) jobs, and energy independence. Favorably, with the onset of a new presidential race, the pathways for a new energy policy have opened again. The Bush-Cheney era was practically a playground for big oil, coal, and gas corporations.

Sooner or later, America must take full responsibility for its actions. The ecological footprint, which measures "human consumption of natural resources in comparison to Earth's ecological capacity to regenerate them," has found that "if everyone in the world lived liked the average U.S. citizen-- that is, had similar eating, transportation, living, and consumption habits-- we'd need 5 1/3 planet to support ourselves." This calculates the fact that the "Earth has about 4.5 biologically productive acres for each person, and the average ecological footprint in the U.S. is twenty-four acres" (Earth Day Network).

The calculation of the footprint takes into account everything from the amount of food we eat, to the house we live, to the cars we drive, and other consumption habits. This very complex calculation simply answers the question: how much of the Earth's resources do our lifestyles require? It is evident that the ecological footprint serves as yet another reminder that we are constantly taking things and not giving enough back; hence, little things eventually add up.

We must follow in the footsteps of other countries and pave the way for our own unique needs. Converting residential homes and commercial buildings into eco-friendly sanctuaries where they emit less green house gases is one of the first and most important steps. The economic recession, as felt in the residential construction industry, is perhaps a good time to rethink and revise this broken system, so that when our economy rises from the slumps again, we may do so in dignity and smarts.