I have really abused The Buzz lately, without my last post being 5 months ago! There is no good reason for that, and I am going to try to post more frequently this fall, but I have said that before….

Sometimes it takes a ludicrous story that needs to be re-told in order to break me out of my blogging doldrums. Such a story came up last week, when it was reported that All Nippon Airlines of Japan has instituted a pilot project where they are asking their passengers to visit the bathroom before boarding.

You might think that this project is being implemented to reduce passenger disruptions and improve maneuverability for flight attendants. You thought wrong! All Nippon brass decided that a plane full of empty bladders (and colons too) would equate to a lighter payload which would require less fuel to fly. That’s right. The logic behind the empty bladder policy is to reduce the airline’s carbon footprint.

In theory this plan actually could have a positive impact on a flight’s carbon footprint, albeit a minimal one. One article calculated that if every passenger on a fully booked flight went to the bathroom before boarding it would equal the weight of three grown men (however that assumes that all bladders were full, which is not a realistic assumption).

Is this another case of ‘carbon footprint craziness’? It seems like a policy that encourages bathroom use is starting to cross the line into intrusion of personal space. It also is likely that the airline could easily have found another way to reduce the plane’s payload without facing the ridicule in the press or the backlash of irritated passengers. In the meantime, if you are flying All Nippon sometime soon, there should be fewer lineups for the bathroom.

My dad clipped a really interesting newspaper article for me this week that highlights the greening of the Empire State Building. Besides the fact that I love to write about examples of energy efficiency and reduced carbon footprints, this article also gives me a chance to gloat about a bit of Boles family history that I am quite proud of.

As a young man my grandfather Howard Boles was a mechanical engineer for the Otis Elevator Company. In the late 1920s and early 1930s Howard was stationed in New York so that he could contribute to the design and oversee the construction of the Empire State Building’s elevators. No wonder New York has always held a soft spot in my heart, and is the place that my seven year-old daughter wants to visit more than any other.

So I was very impressed when I read the article about the actions the Empire State Building is taking to reduce its carbon footprint and in the process save a lot of money! The building’s greening program officially starts this month and features 8 key measures that are expected to reduce energy use by 38% within 5 years and save more than $4 million (US) per year! About half of those savings are going to be realized within the first 18 months of the project. Here is a list of the 8 actions that are going to be undertaken at the Empire State Building:

• Window retrofits
• Radiator retrofits
• Lighting upgrades
• Air conditioning upgrades
• Chiller plant retrofit
• Building control system upgrade
• Ventilation control upgrade
• Energy management system for each tenant

Most buildings are not going to realize annual savings of $4 million, but then again most buildings don’t have over 20,000 people that work there each day like the Empire State Building does. But even an office complex with only 200 employees can save tens of thousands of dollars a year by taking similar actions as the Empire State. And on top of the annual energy savings that will be realized, there are dozens of incentive and rebate programs from utilities and different levels of government that will cover a portion of the cost to do the work. A word of warning that was passed along by one of my readers when I discussed rebates in a previous post - always make sure to get energy audits done before and after the work is done to make sure you qualify for the incentives.

I’m feeling a bit guilty because it is an hour past the end of Earth Day here in the Eastern Time Zone and I haven’t posted anything yet. Better late than never I suppose.

I came across a great publication that has been produced by a Pennsylvania company called Green and Save. It is called the Family Guide to Going Green and Green and Save is offering it as a free PDF download. This guide does a great job of presenting loads of information on how to green your household in a format that is easy to read and understand and talk about with the little ones in the house. Even if there are no kids in your home it is still jam-packed with good information. I was especially impressed with the several pages dedicated to the costs and benefits of dozens of common (and some not so common) greening initiatives that homeowners can do. They provide the upfront costs of each action, the annual savings that can be expected, the 20-year savings, and the percent return on investment. These kinds of statistics are incredibly valuable for homeowners as they plan on greening their homes and need to decide which actions are going to have the biggest bang for the buck.

To my Canadian readers - the publication is written for Americans but I still think you will find that most of it is incredibly useful for your homes as well.

Happy reading, happy greening, and happy belated Earth Day!

Globe image provided courtesy of a Creative Commons license by ONT_Design

The other day my wife told me a couple of suggestions that one of her blog readers made about saving energy and resources while computing. I hadn’t heard of these recommended products before but was so intrigued with the novelty of the ideas (the first two in the following list) that I decided to make them the theme of this post - ten ways to reduce your office’s carbon footprint. Not all of us can have as green an office as the one shown in the picture, but implementing a few of these actions will put you on the right track:

Use Blackle search engine (if you have CRT monitors)

The Blackle search engine was developed with a black interface to reduce the energy use associated with displaying lighter colors on computer monitors. Blackle’s founders have been criticized for overstating the energy savings associated with their product. In a test comparing the energy use of Blackle and Google search engines, the difference with LCD monitors was negligible. However, the Blackle search engine used an impressive 13% less energy than Google on old cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors. Since a lot of offices and schools still use these old clunkers, Blackle should be promoted as an energy-saving option for them.

Ecofont

This font is available for Windows, Mac, and Linux. The Econfont uses up to 20% less toner ink by embedding small circles within the characters, which they claim is virtually unnoticeable on a standard printed page. This font is free to download and free to use, so there is nothing to lose from giving it a try.

Use a green web host

Computer servers and web-hosting facilities are incredibly energy-intensive. Switch to a green web host that will invest in renewable energy or carbon offsets to counterbalance the energy used on your website. CO2stats is one of the largest providers of green web hosting services, but dozens of other companies are available to choose from.

Turn off computers, monitors, and printers at night

A lot of people are under the impression that screen savers are energy-saving - they are not. Screen savers use as much energy as normal computer use. Use your computer’s ’sleep mode’ during the day when you are away from your desk for more than a few minutes. At night be sure to TURN OFF your monitor, hard drive, and other accessories (printer, scanner, etc.).

Increase the use of teleconferencing and video conferencing

A lot of business trips could probably be avoided through the use of video conferences and teleconferences. Re-think the necessity of each business trip, and if travel is necessary try to make it as efficient as possible by incorporating multiple tasks into the same trip.

Use paper efficiently

An incredible amount of paper can be saved by being more efficient in how it is used, including double-sided printing, reduced margin size, and using less space between lines.

Implement a corporate environmental or sustainability policy

Make energy reduction and carbon awareness a corporate policy so that it becomes engrained in the culture of the company. Over time sustainability will become second nature to your employees and your carbon footprint will decrease substantially.

Provide locally-grown and sustainably-made foods in your cafeteria

Maximize the use of natural daylight or energy-efficient lighting

Use recycled paper that is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)

Image courtesy of Nicolas Sauvage (Flickr Creative Commons license)

NOTE: This is an update of a post that I wrote for the blog Red Green and Blue on March 14, 2009.

You may have noticed that the subject of global warming and climate change have been undergoing some paradigm shifts recently.

The first component of this shift has been the transition from the phrase ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’. As Secretary of State Clinton recently pointed out it has become increasingly difficult to preach about the dangers of global warming during a decade that has featured a significant reduction in the temperature increases that occurred in the 1990s.

The second aspect of this paradigm shift is the noticeable increase in skepticism amongst the general public about the causes and impacts of climate change. Until recently that opinion has remained the domain of primarily right-wing media types - Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus to name a few. But there is a growing body of evidence that suggests a majority of Americans and Britons are now questioning the causes of climate climate.

A recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center ranked global warming as the least important issue amongst 20 political priorities that were included in the poll. And a January survey by Rasmussen Reports indicates that a greater number of Americans (44%) believe that long-term planetary trends are the cause of climate change than the number of Americans (41%) that believe human activity is the culprit. Less than a year ago the reverse was true – 47% of Americans blamed climate change on human actions while 34% believed it due to a long-term cyclical effect. And its not just in the US either – polls in the UK have shown similar doubt amongst a majority of Britons about climate change causes.

So how do those of us that are trying to promote reduced-carbon lifestyles and greener businesses deal with the public’s changing attitudes towards climate change?

I think the most effective communicators are the ones that are able to tailor their message to what the audience wants to hear. I honestly believe that a growing number of individuals and businesses are interested in making more sustainable choices. However, I think their reasons for doing so are not entirely based on fears of climate change, as they might have been just a year or two ago.

Unfortunately during the beginning of a potentially long and painful recession the environmental movement might lose some of the steam that it had picked up over the last five years. This just means the message has to be changed, even if the end goals are still the same. A renewed focus has to be made on energy security and reduced energy costs – the sky-high prices for gasoline, natural gas and heating oil from last year are still fresh in people’s minds. If green practices are promoted as a way for individuals and businesses to save money and reduce dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets, the momentum of the green movement should continue to grow.

For those of us that have been writing about the cause and effect of climate change, this change in communication strategy should not be considered to be giving up. It is simply adapting to the current social and economic realities. Even the Rush Limbaughs of the world will have a difficult time arguing against increased profits and reduced dependence on foreign oil.

So the take-home message to my fellow citizens that are concerned about climate change: stop focusing on the polar bears. Start talking about saving money – and don’t forget to remind people that we are trying to avoid paying $4.50/gallon for gas like we did just last summer.

NOTE: This is a reprint of a post that I wrote for the blog Red Green and Blue (http://redgreenandblue.org) on March 5, 2009.

Given that overall US consumer spending in the fourth quarter of 2008 fell by its largest margin in almost 30 years, one has to wonder how the market for ‘green products’ will be impacted by this recession. Leading up to the economic downturn the momentum of the green economy was chugging along splendidly. The consumer demand for environmentally-friendly products was at an all-time high, even if the products were priced at a premium over standard options.

A recent survey by the consumer research firm Mintel explored the green buying preferences of Americans during this recession. The results should serve as a wake-up call to producers and retailers of green products. Read the rest of this entry »

Like many North Americans I have a morning vice called coffee. Although I am not as bad as some, my day is thrown out of sorts if I don’t start it with about three big cups of strong joe. Most of the coffee I drink is self-brewed - I try to avoid going to Tim Hortons, Starbucks, or Dunkin. Part of the reason I self-brew is cost - it adds up to buy one or two coffees a day from the name brand stores.

Another reason I self-brew is time. I live in a country that is obsessed with Tim Hortons for reasons that I can’t figure. Canadians are so determined to get their coffee from this company that in the morning it is impossible to get a coffee without having to wait at least 10 minutes in your car or in the store. I honestly think Canada’s carbon footprint would be significantly reduced if just a fraction of Tim’s customers actually gave up their morning ritual and brewed their own coffee at home. I am being a bit facetious here, but not entirely. Not only are the drive-thru lineups wasteful in terms of fuel use,  they can actually be dangerous as well. I have witnessed several near car accidents from the drive-thru line snaking out into the city streets.

But the most important reason why I self-brew is because I like to know where my coffee comes from. One of my favorite companies is Vermont-based Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (GMCR). They have an awesome selection of Fair Trade and Organic coffees to choose from. They are not green bandwagon jumpers either - they have been leaders in the sustainability movement for many years now.

Recently GMCR announced a competitive grant program called Changing Climate Change. They are going to award $200,000 to each of four projects ($800,000 US total) that address climate change mitigation. In an era of corporate cost-cutting and mass layoffs, GMCR is actually initiating a funding program to address one of society’s critical issues. Funding of projects targeting climate change is an area that is typically dominated by government agencies - it is very refreshing and encouraging to see a member of the corporate community take some leadership in this area and hopefully others will follow.

GMCR coffees are competitively priced against other premium whole bean and ground brands. Even here in Canada GMCR products are worth a look. Canadian consumers are frequently overcharged for food products compared to their American neighbors. Because of this, GMCR coffee is actually competitive with store-bought organic and Fair Trade brands in Canada even after the exchange rate and shipping charges are added in. A trick that I use to bring down the per-bag cost is to order several bags at one time - this way the shipping charges per bag are much less than with a smaller order.

Do yourself a favor and give them a try - and sip with satisfaction knowing that you are supporting a true sustainability champion. And if you are one of the few brave souls still playing the stock market, click on the graph below to see how GMCR has performed on Nasdaq over the last six months compared to the rest of the index! And GMCR is not compensating me in any way to write this post - I just wanted to spread the word about the great things that they are doing.

Graph courtesy of NASDAQ

photo courtesy Stanford University AAD Group

Over the past year as I have prepared for the launch of the Kuzuka carbon offset marketplace I have become much more aware of how to reduce business carbon footprints. Why have I become a footprint reduction expert? Because offsetting is only the final step in dealing with a carbon footprint - more important are taking feasible and realistic steps to reduce carbon emissions. These steps save businesses money in a couple of ways: it reduces their energy costs and it minimizes the number of offsets that have to be purchased.

Business travel is one area where a lot of manageable and high-impact carbon footprint reductions can occur. Probably the biggest way to reduce business travel emissions is to eliminate the travel itself. Today’s networking technology is so effective that many trips can now be avoided through the use of on-line seminars and video conferencing. For smaller groups teleconferences should always be considered as an alternative to face-to-face meetings.

If business travel is absolutely necessary then it is suggested that non-stop flights be used when available. A disproportionate amount of greenhouse gas emissions from air travel are emitted during the take-off and landing phases of the flight. Therefore a trip with multiple legs has a larger amount of time spent taking off and landing than a direct flight.

Now let me explain my guilty carbon conscience. In a couple of days I have to make the trip across the country to Vancouver for some business meetings that unfortunately cannot be done via email or teleconference. Strike One. When I booked my travel a couple of weeks ago I was given the choice of flying from Toronto to Vancouver (direct) or from London Ontario to Vancouver (with a stop in Toronto). I selected the second choice, which involves a short 40-minute flight from London to Toronto before making the cross-country trip. Strike Two. Thankfully I can’t think of a Strike Three in my trip planning - at least not yet.

What was my reason for breaking the ‘fly direct whenever possible’ rule? It basically comes down to the fact that I wanted to start my trip in a close-by and quiet regional airport (London) instead of clawing my way for over two hours through horrible traffic to the busiest airport in the country (Toronto). Does this make me an eco-terrorist on this trip? I suppose that is up for debate - I do know that I will be a heck of a lot nicer person to deal with after starting my day in London, which the person who has to sit beside me for over four hours to Vancouver should be thankful for. That’s at least one person who should agree with my decision.

Photo courtesy of http://www.sustainablespringfield.org/

A number of months ago I wrote a post about the huge number of rebate and incentive programs that are available to homeowners and businesses that choose to undertake projects (both big and small) to make their buildings more energy efficient. One thing I failed to stress was the fact that many of these incentive programs require an initial energy use assessment by a certified energy auditor. This was pointed out in an excellent comment that I received from Robin Green, who said:

“There are often local, state/provincial, or national grants available to people who have a home energy audit done, then do some home energy upgrades, then have a second audit done to gauge the progress they made making their home more energy efficient.

I had this done about six years ago, and I was surprised at how much the energy auditor found for me to do to improve my home. We started with the equivalent of a 14×14 inch square hole in our home - in terms of the amount of drafts - as measured by a blower door test. We were given a score of 40/100, low but not bad for an 80-year-old house. Two months later on the second audit - after extensive sealing of baseboards, door and window frames, and the attic hatch, plus window upgrades and insulation injected into ground floor walls - we had that square down to 6×6 inches and got a score of 60/100. The financial incentives were big enough without any grants - I would guess that our heating bill dropped about 20-30% that year - but we also got something like $1200 in rebates from the federal government and from our local gas utility.

Just remember to have the first energy audit done before you do any serious home energy upgrade - most grants based on an upgrade only qualify if an audit is done first by a licensed or recognized energy auditor.”

A lot of people don’t like the sound of the word ‘audit’, probably because it makes them think of the IRS (or Revenue Canada for my Canadian readers). To put you at ease about the process, I found an article in one of my favourite magazines, This Old House, that goes through the energy audit process in layperson’s terms.

To make it all the more enticing to get audited, there are a lot of programs that offer free or cost-shared energy audits. Here are just a few that I am aware of, but there are a lot more so check your local government or utility:

For Homeowners:

Ontario, Canada (Home Energy Ontario)

Washington, DC

Tampa, Florida

Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky

Wabash County, Indiana

For Businesses:

Ontario, Canada (Power Savings Blitz)

Tampa, Florida

Over the last several years I have become somewhat obsessed with the wine industry here in Ontario and also in other parts of North America. I not only love to partake in their product, but I am also very impressed with efforts that have been made by a number of wineries to make their winemaking more sustainable. This green shift has occurred over the entire life cycle of the wine, including the sourcing of input materials (barrels, bottles, closures), the vineyard management, the wine production, and the delivery of the finished product.

The May/June 2008 issue of Vineyard and Winery Management has an article called “Going Green”. The first page of this article pictures a bottle of 2006 Pinot Noir by California’s Parducci Winery. Parducci is the first carbon neutral winery in the United States. They accomplished carbon neutrality by implementing a series of actions to reduce their carbon footprint including a solar energy installation, an energy audit, use of biodiesel in vehicles and equipment, conversion to fluorescent lighting, and planting of trees. Parducci purchased carbon offset credits from a reputable retailer for the remainder of their footprint that could not be eliminated.

Carbon neutrality is not the only way that a winery can be green. Here is a list of just a few of the wineries in Canada and New York State that are practicing sustainable, organic, or biodynamic winemaking:

Ontario

Flatrock Cellars, Tawse Winery, Henry of Pelham Family Estate, Frogpond Farm, Southbrook Vineyards, Stratus Vineyards

New York

Red Tail Ridge Winery, Atwater Estate Vineyards, Four Chimneys Organic Winery, Silver Thread Vineyard, Imagine Moore Winery

BC

Painted Turtle, Tinhorn Creek Vineyards, Summerhill Pyramid Winery, Burrowing Owl Estate Winery

Sometime soon I’ll post a follow-up list of wineries in California, Oregon, and Washington that are green. It will be a long list because these wine regions have emerged as leaders in sustainability, thanks to efforts by groups like the California Sustainable Winemaking Alliance and Oregon’s Carbon Neutral Challenge. This is very good news for those of us that want to drink green.