Signing off for Earth Hour

I'm turning off my computer (and everything else here) for one hour in honor of Earth Hour: 8:30PM local time, Saturday, March 28.

If you're reading this during that hour, please shut down your computer and complete the hour by candlelight. Then tell a friend.

Cheers,

Algernon

I'm throwing down the gauntlet

My last four electricity bills, in reverse chronology:

47 kWh
73 kWh
91 kWh
73 kWh

This, in a state with an average residential consumption of 926 kWh per month in 2007.

In my favor:

- living alone, I can call the shots on electricity usage
- small apartment (500 sq. ft.)
- heating is by natural gas (though the blower fan is electric)
- don't own a TV, microwave (though microwaves have an efficiency advantage over gas ovens), or dishwasher
- I use a laundromat for clothes washing

My bills would be slightly lower, but I made an arrangement with a college student in my building to share my internet signal, so I leave on my cable modem and (his) wireless router 24/7 (I would normally turn them off at night or when away).

What motivates me: knowing that Ohio's electricity mix is overwhelmingly based on coal-fired power plants: 85% in 2008, per EIA. I don't want to breathe any more airborne mercury and other toxic (humanly or environmentally) crap than I have to; nor do I want to eat mercury-laden fish (guess where that mercury comes from).

On Tuesday the 24th, I attended a T. Boone Pickens "town hall meeting", sponsored by Ohio-based energy giant AEP. On the panel with Mr. Pickens was AEP's CEO/Board Chair, Michael Morris. In the meeting, he touted AEP's reduction in coal use, as a percentage of their energy generation mix, down to a current 66% figure. I suppose he was referring to AEP's entire generating capacity in all states where they do business, not just Ohio's. Otherwise, I can't explain the discrepancy in figures.

Eyes on Hawai'i

The island state of Hawai'i has set the admirable and ambitious goal of transforming their energy profile from one heavily dominated by fossil fuels to 70% renewable sources within one generation. Currently, about 90% of Hawai'i's electricity generation and almost all its transportation fuel is based in fossil fuels. Their proposed energy transformation, with a target date of 2030, will be almost total.

And there is every reason to believe they can achieve their goals. Hawai'i is blessed with multiple, reliable energy sources: geothermal, wind, waves, biomass, and solar. Using all these natural resources together will provide a diverse and reliable replacement for imported fossil energy, create jobs and boost the economy, provide energy independence to the state and dramatically lower the costs of imported energy.

As a nation, we will learn a great deal from Hawai'i's experience.

Earth Hour: March 28th at 8:30PM

All you have to do is turn off your lights for ONE HOUR.

Saturday, March 28th, at 8:30PM (local time), millions-- perhaps billions-- of people the world over will make a largely symbolic gesture to acknowledge our enormous global energy consumption and the many problems that consumption produces.

Please visit www.earthhour.org to read about Earth Hour and the impressive list of people, cities and organizations that will be taking part in this global awareness-raising event.

When's the last time you relaxed by candlelight at home?

Please contact everyone on your email list, and especially town or city officials, to get as many households on board for this effort as you can. This is a great common cause.

Thank you.

the many costs of coal-based electricity

I just stumbled on this comprehensive investigative article at truthout.org, about one of the unsung costs of our dependence on burning coal to generate electricity (about half the grid electricity in the U.S. comes from coal-burning power plants).

The recent coal-slurry pond failure in Tennessee may have burst the dam (sorry, had to say it) holding back regulation of this particular toxic by-product of our insatiable fossil energy dependence. The truthout article describes a great deal of the salient (and eye-opening) history of regulation of the waste from coal-burning power plants. Historically, it has been left to the states to regulate and has been generally classified as non-hazardous stuff, despite typically containing a litany of toxic metals. From the article, referring to a specific power plant and its ash ponds in Montana:

Nothing about the existence of the Colstrip ash ponds violates state regulations. Nor are there federal rules for dumping the toxic slurry. Coal ash is hazardous by any common definition - "It's dangerous stuff. ... That's what the public thinks of when thinking of the word 'hazardous,' " says one former EPA employee. But the agency has yet to designate coal ash "hazardous" under federal waste laws - a key designation that triggers strict controls for handling, transporting, and dumping waste...

This problem should sound familiar to those who follow the nuclear power story. Where to put the spent radioactive fuel? In fact, it's the age-old problem of what to do with any waste; the first (and ongoing) version being, "where do we shit?" In the case of coal, the good news is that a major portion of the waste is used in the manufacture of concrete and wallboard, among other (supposedly benign) uses. And I suspect stricter state and/or federal regulatinos are bound to come. Bandaids are all well and good, but we must take aim at the heart of the problem: our dependence on fossil fuels to support a profligate, inefficient lifestyle that keeps us living beyond our means.

Ready for your 1st commitment to Change?

It always comes down to that which is within one's influence: "do what you, personally, can do." As we're learning, with increasing frequency and urgency, the Earth and her creatures are crying out for help in so many ways: melting polar ice, rapid extinction of species, changing climate. We've heard the dire predictions and daily fear reports. So what can we do?

My $0.02:

Forget Our Nation's Savior, Obama, for a moment. Set aside thoughts of a newly Demo-boosted Congress. Put on your reading glasses and focus on the area immediately around you-- whatever you can reach.

Ready? Okay, here's your first assignment: Eat less meat.

"How much less?" you ask, a furrow in your brow as you contemplate a sad sayonara to your twice-weekly bacon double-cheesebuger.

The answer, of course, depends on how much you're eating now. But the fact is, our meat-eating habits are wreaking havoc on the planet and it is within most folks' immediate control to reign in the destruction.

So here are some options for you, depending on your starting point:

1. If you're a heavy hitter-- a "meat and meat-and-potatoes" type, the sort of eater who is only vaguely aware of other food groups-- you can start easy. Make one day a week meatless. You can do that. If you already do that, make it two. Or three. Push just a teensy bit beyond your comfort zone-- so you know you're doing something, making a tangible sacrifice, but you're not setting yourself up for failure by taking on too much too fast.

2. If you are not an inveterate carnivore, but you enjoy a good steak now and then and have no trouble with the occasional burger or bratwurst or bacon slice, try this: limit your intake to once a month. You can turn it into a ritual: a special meal you can especially enjoy because you can no longer take it for granted-- it's too rare (like your steak, if you like it that way, keeping in mind the usual public health caveat to avoid undercooked food; hey, it's a Brave New World).

3. If you find you typically only eat red meat when in the company of others who do so-- at parties or dining out or other events, say-- here's your task: make the commitment to avoid red meat altogether. It's the worst environmental offender of the Flesh Pack. Stick to chicken or fish. (And no, industry marketing notwithstanding, pork is not white meat. It's red as a stuck pig. Literally.)

4. If you've never been much of an eater of flesh, but have no particular qualms about eating it and occasionally indulge, congratulations: you've just discovered you're a vegetarian. Perhaps even vegan. What a small step it is, after all, from indifference to a choice to do good. And how very good it is. Embrace your new commitment and enjoy your newfound lifestyle, knowing that your diet's negative impact on this beleaguered planet is least of all. And perhaps your impact more than just "not negative"-- leading by example can be one of the most positive things you can do as you influence those around you.

Of course, feel free to jump ahead to any commitment you like. #4 is ideal and presents the greatest benefits for your health, your conscience, and your planet (not to mention the animals). But take on only those commitments you can stick to. If you really want to go straight to #4, but you break out in a cold sweat at the thought of the withdrawal you think you'll suffer, give yourself a break and commit only to the easiest one you can stick to and allow that you'll revisit the list later when you're looking for a new challenge. You learn to walk with baby steps because leaps aren't nearly as likely to produce lasting success.

One more thing: proudly display your commitment on a slip of paper under a fridge magnet. That way you'll be reminded not merely of the restriction you've willingly placed on yourself but of the beauty you are simultaneously creating: the beauty of a better world.

hope and promise....

...temporarily restored. Tune in later for detailed results......

Read this book

This book was given me by a friend who pays attention to my endless rants. I must have had my head in the sand not to have heard about it. Quite inspiring and cogent rationale for pursuing an Apollo moonshot-scale national project to convert our energy economy from fossils to renewables within 10 years. It wisely brings to the fore subjects often overlooked by pundits who parrot the promotion of renewable energy sources without examining context: namely, conservation and efficiency, social justice, and power politics; distributed energy generation is democracy-enhancing, while centralized, privately owned power production concentrates power in the hands of a few.

The Apollo Project is promoted by many, including Gore's spin-off group,
the We campaign. Let's see how seriously Obama's administration takes its lessons.