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.