Carbon Footprint Calculators

Give the airlines credit: unlike the automakers for whom greenwash is the order of the day, they and in turn the environment i.e. all of us benefit when they find ways to cut energy use. The lighter the weight, the more the aircraft can carry per pound of thrust the less fuel is needed leading to lower emissions. Let's face it: even if we developed high-speed rail networks everywhere, air travel is the only practical means to carry people and highly-valued cargo over medium to long distances and to remote locations. One of the means airlines have been using to gain productivity is seat pitch. The more bodies on thinner, lighter furniture packed tighter together that they can squeeze into the maximum certifiable capacities of today' well-engineered aircraft the less BTUs-per-customer they must expend while achieving more per-passenger revenues. Yet there are limits to this as anyone taller than 5'5" can testify. Today's seating arrangements make online work next to impossible in economy i.e. hoi-polloi class while making flying close to becoming unbearable. (Replacing much-maligned but actually very nutritious and overall very good airline food with salt-and-fat-laden fare at most airports adds to the discomfort further because salt makes the joints ache) Air travel though is about pushing the limits. An Italian company, Aviointeriors is promising to go beyond it when it comes to human endurance with its new 23-inch pitch (compared to typical 28-inch-31-inch pitch) "SkyRider" seat. Not yet FAA-approved, the "SkyRider", is says Aviointeriors "an ultra-high density seat presently completely engineered and to be finally tested. The SkyRider has been designed and engineered to offer the possibility to even further reduce ticket prices while still maintaining sound profitability, which, even with a dual or three class seating arrangement, will allow maximum certified passenger capacity of the aircraft. With a much reduced seat pitch, the SkyRider preserves a comfortable position for the low fare passengers." "Furthermore, in the SkyRider arrangement, a partial overlapping of the passengers seating between rows is allowed, thus further increasing the cabin density. The seat structure itself also provides space for personal baggage." The seat row roughly resembles like those on amusement park rides without the over-the-shoulders harnesses, or the comfort. But don't give the airlines (or the FAA) any ideas. We've all been on flights that would merit such contraptions. "The SkyRider is intended as a new basic class," says the firm. "The passenger's seating position is similar to that of a touring motor-scooter rider. This posture permits that the overall longitudinal space occupied by the seat." If the Aviointeriors release had come out April 1 it would have been treated as a joke. Yet with domestic air travel--with the laudable exception of JetBlue--becoming a commodity where cheap-and-timing is what matters; if the FAA approves this cross between a seat and-straphanging don't be surprised if one carrier then another then another follow suit. Lowest common denominator. This is despite condemnation from reporters and users if the site Farecompare is any indication.After all, the carriers know that if you have to fly, because your company tells you to or that you have to see your family or bury them you will have no choice, or so they think to endure the torture. The only thing--barring Congress-driven mandates to the FAA--barring such a discomfort-inflicting device from being contemplated is for the individual business customers and for powerful consumers organizations like the AARP--to tell the airlines "don't even think about it or we'll switch/tell or advise our employees and members to switch to video/webconferencing, and Skype." Given the airlines' better-but-still razor-thin profits, it doesn't take much of a shift in customers to change their ledger colors from black to red. For while the air travel experience has been deteriorating and prices climbing that for online virtual communications has been taking off and declining respectfully. And one doesn't have to worry about strip-searches, what's in the other's person shoes, weather delays and lost bags, or tolerate the food on a Skype, web or videocall...the greenest "transportation" there is. Tags: air travel, aircraft, greenwash, Skype, video conferencing, web conferencing Related tags: pitch skyrider, skyrider, airlines, seating, pitch, while , air travel, aircraft, greenwash, Skype, video conferencing, web conferencing Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Truly Going Green in Air Travel - Jun 03, 2010 The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds - Apr 19, 2010 Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19, 2010 To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009 To Go Green, Make Videoconferencing Affordable - Oct 13, 2009 Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010 Is Wind Energy Green or Greenwash? - Nov 02, 2009 Five Five Keys to Selecting Effective Green Technologies From Verismic - Aug 11, 2009 Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009 Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps - Apr 22, 2009 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or Web/Videoconference Copyright Green Blog - 20 months ago

Canada is a big source of American packaging material, and that includes newsprint. So applause should be offered to a recent editorial in the Peace Arch News, a newspaper which is distributed in the Metro Vancouver communities of South Surrey and the city of White Rock, British Columbia, Canada that face the U.S. border which called for manufacturers and retailers to cut down on the waste.Here are some excerpts from the piece: "The sheer amount of packaging we deal with every day is staggering. According to the U.S.-based Dogwood Alliance, 25 per cent of the 2.4 million hectares of trees cut down every year in the southeastern United States ends up wrapping and boxing consumer goods.""The computer age, which was supposed to diminish our need for paper, has only made things worse.""The little plastic cartridges for inkjet printers, for instance, are notoriously over-packaged, contained in complicated boxes, attached to cardboard or plastic trays, wrapped in sticky plastic and accompanied by a series of instruction pamphlets and promotional paperwork."The problem, says the editorial "is compounded if you happened to order that inkjet cartridge from an online retailer; chances are it was shipped in a cardboard box five or six times larger than the already voluminous box encasing the little plastic cartridge, and then further protected by crumpled paper, bubblewrap or styrofoam peanuts." "Responsible, environmentally-conscious consumers can only do so much to keep all these boxes, containers, trays and whatnot from filling landfills."For Metro Vancouver and environs like nearly every city is facing a waste management problem. There is rising in adjacent to an environmentally-sensitive area of Burns Bog a landfill that is beginning to look (and smell) like the first stages of New York City's infamous and now-closed "temporary" Fresh Kills dump on Staten Island. Barges, railcars and trucks leave this scenic part of "Beautiful British Columbia" to be disposed of elsewhere. Incineration is being debated as an option in a region where thanks to traffic from urban sprawl plus the pollutants from ships, trucks and trains along with that from factories air quality is becoming problematic.The editorial quite correctly recommends "manufacturers and retailers to do their part and reduce the amount of packaging material they use. Most of it we can do without."What is needed to make that happen is leadership from the largest manufacturers and retailers e.g. BestBuy, Dell, HP, Staples, WalMart, for this bulk and waste costs them money too. Perhaps a LEED for packaging?The other option is VAT or GST for waste i.e. disposal fees added to the prices. The more it costs to clean, destroy, recycle or transport or to clean up from the processing i.e. air and water pollution, solid waste disposal, the higher the costs. This is fair; why should these expenses, including resulting increased healthcare costs from tending to those who become ill from the effects be foisted onto taxpayers?Either method--while the former is more preferable the latter will likely be the case knowing human nature--the net results will be developing greener packaging or a switch to virtual alternatives: cloud computing, doing away with printing and online-only reading.  Tags: environment, paperless, recycling Related tags: manufacturers retailers, british columbia, metro vancouver, little plastic, distributed metro, packaging , environment, paperless, recycling Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Power IT Down This Friday! - Aug 26, 2010 Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No, Really? - May 18, 2010 To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste - Apr 22, 2010 Mining Environmental and Social Responsibility - Mar 11, 2010 Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia (Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01, 2010 Backup Green and Philanthropic Promises with Actions - Jan 11, 2010 E-Cycling Nortel Gear - Oct 02, 2009 The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25, 2009 Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One - Aug 21, 2009 Beautiful Land, New Opportunities, Wasted Space - Jun 15, 2009 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut Down On Packaging Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 21 months ago

Friday August 27 is "Power IT Down" day. Organizers say "just by turning off your computer, monitor and printer -- and any other peripherals -- when you leave work for the day, you can help save tens of thousands of costly kilowatt hours."(There are also the knock-on benefits of reducing dangerous emissions, slowing down climate change and minimizing havoc-causing brownouts and blackouts.)"Think saving a few kilowatt hours won't make a big difference?" says the web site. "To demonstrate the benefits of Power IT Down Day and how energy savings can be put to good use, its sponsors will make a donation to the Wounded Warrior Project. Last year, we donated $45,000!"The Wounded Warrior Project's mission is, says that site to "raise awareness and enlist the public's aid for the needs of severely injured service men and women, help severely injured service members aid and assist each other, and provide unique, direct programs and services to meet the needs of severely injured service members." CDW's 2009 Energy Efficient IT Report backs up the benefits of such efforts as Power IT Down day. It found that organizations working to reduce energy consumption are realizing tangible results:* Through routine measures, such as training employees to shut down equipment when they leave for the day, 52 percent of organizations actively working to reduce energy consumption have reduced IT energy costs by one percent or more* If the average organization surveyed were to take full advantage of energy-saving measures, IT professionals estimate they could save $1.5 million annuallyThe message is getting out. CDW says 59 percent of organizations are training employees to shut down equipment when they leave their offices for extended periods, versus just 43 percent in 2008.The 2009 report identifies where energy efficiency ranks in IT decision-making priorities, improvements in IT energy efficiency and remaining challenges, as well as uncovers strategies that successfully reduce IT energy bills. More invaluable data and insights are on their way; CDW is readying to release The 2010 Energy Efficient IT Report that will be out in just a few weeks.   Tags: energy conservation, energy consumption, energy reduction, environment, Power IT Down, Wounded Warrior Project Related tags: injured service, severely injured, reduce energy, service members, energy consumption, energy , energy conservation, energy consumption, energy reduction, environment, Power IT Down, Wounded Warrior Project Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010 The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25, 2009 Green Ideas Overheard At ITEXPO West - Sep 22, 2008 To Go Green, Go Dumb (as in computing) - Jul 21, 2008 Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut Down On Packaging - Aug 30, 2010 Steel Rails are Green - May 06, 2010 To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste - Apr 22, 2010 The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010 Mining Environmental and Social Responsibility - Mar 11, 2010 Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia (Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01, 2010 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Power IT Down This Friday! Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 21 months ago

Electric vehicles (EV) presently and will continue to suffer one crippling flaw for most applications: the lack of range. Note the words 'most applications' for there is an imaginative and practical means of using them that is discussed later on.A recent National Post 'Motor Mouth' article by David Booth points out that the batteries required to move EVs generate electrical energy far less efficiently than do gasoline or other fuels.  Gasoline produces about 6,000 watt-hours/pound whereas the "most optimistic numbers" he has seen for advanced lithium-ion batteries is 110 watt-hours/pound. "That means good old- fashioned gasoline punches 54 times harder for the same amount of weight, the fundamental reason electric cars' ranges are so pitiful compared with those fossil fuelled," writes Booth.Simply put: there is no way you can pack that much battery power to match what gasoline, or even less efficient fuels like compressed natural gas (used in fleet vehicles, like taxis) can produce for your typical trips.What about the vaunted greater efficiency of electric motors?"In the electric vehicles' defence, electric motors transmit that energy more efficiently to the road," says Booth. "Some electric motors boast 90% efficiency, while internal-combustion engines can transmit as little as 15% of their energy into vehicular motivation. However, even being generous, that means EVs face a nine- times deficit versus traditional cars."And that doesn't take into account driving on hilly terrain. My city is noted for just that. I sit on the city council's transportation advisory committee and had my vote recorded against the majority that supported endorsing allowing small EV maintenance vehicles on local streets as they would have to crawl up the grades, blocking traffic; they are not fitted with the cumbersome flywheels or heavy gasoline engines that would have given them the needed oomph. Moreover, re-energizing EVs are just as inefficient compared with filling up the tank even with the latest technology. GE has come out with GE WattStation that it says on average decreases electric vehicle charging time from 12-18 hours to as little as four to eight hours compared to standard charging "level 1", assuming a full-cycle charge for a 24 kWh battery. In contrast it takes me about 5 to 7 minutes including payment time to fill up my-recreational/occasional-trip-only (I work from home) Subaru Forester. For that reason EVs are limited to about 80 miles-90 miles per day. This may seem a lot but not when the typical urban or more accurately sprawl-to-sprawl commutes run in the range of 20 miles or 30 miles or more: less in stop-and-go traffic as well on grades. The real crippler though is the personal trips e.g. picking up/dropping off kids, food shopping, stopping by the hardware store, going out for lunch, meeting the gang after work, or having to take Aunt Millie to the airport.So does that relegate EVs to the realm of jetpacks and other cool if ultimately impractical means of getting around?No, because there is a way to use them that minimizes their downsides i.e. range and charging time and maximizes their benefits: zero-direct-emission mobility and that is as a bidirectional "station cars". In this app EVs would bring commuters from their suburban homes to bus, ferry or train park-and-ride lots in the AM, take those coming off these modes that are going to suburban workplaces or other destinations e.g. conference centers, institutions, back to the transit terminals in the PM, and finally transport commuters on their last legs back to their domiciles. Next-(ahem)-gen chargers like GE's WattStation would be installed at residences, offices, institutions, which would permit morning, evening and work-time errand journeys. EVs can be deployed single-occupancy or better yet in shared-ride configurations. As with vanpools, those who drive get to use EVs on weekends. This for all practical purposes would favor the suburban residents but there are many instances where both can benefit i.e. trip to the city on the train for a ball game, ride out to the country to a resort or beach or see some friends, depending on the frequency of transit service.This use of EVs will help to not only reduce emissions in general but it affordably manages the air-killing matter of reaching suburban destinations that are at present impractical i.e. very costly to reach by mass transit because they are laid out to exclusively favor auto access. It also maximizes the use of this investment. Recharging at home and work gives the range needed for both sets of users' personal trips, which makes EVs practical for them. So how do you employ EVs in this fashion? In much the same fashion as vanpools, with the use of computerized booking, plus with new-gen password vehicle access and starting. Transit agencies either independently or preferably (as they are cash-strapped) in partnership with the power companies would buy them and the chargers at fleet rates and in turn charge drivers, much like car renting or leasing. The renters/lessors and their employers would pay for the power to juice up their vehicles.This is a multi-win application of this technology. Commuters will not have to own (and gas up) a second vehicle, thereby saving them thousands of dollars a year. Transit agencies will not have to extend routes to office parks or can conserve resources by pulling back poor performing ones if EVs are used instead while the ridership and revenue on bus, ferry or train reverse commute runs will grow because there will now be a viable option for such commuters. There will be fewer vehicles-miles travelled and resulting less pollution and congestion and accidents.Yes, the markets that EVs can be used in this fashion are limited, but they are the ones with the biggest pollution and sprawl problems and with long transit spines e.g. Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, L-A basin, New York /Tri-State, Philly, San Francisco Bay area (including Silicon Valley), Seattle/Bellevue, Washington, D.C and in Canada: Montreal and Toronto. How about it? Who wants to climb aboard?  Tags: automotive, electric vehicles, mass transit, station cars Related tags: electric vehicles, electric motors, transit agencies, ferry train, miles miles, electric , automotive, electric vehicles, mass transit, station cars Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No, Really? - May 18, 2010 Why EVs (etc.) are NG - Jan 15, 2009 Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010 Green Campus Project - Apr 08, 2010 Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One - Aug 21, 2009 Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps - Apr 22, 2009 Green Jobs? - Jan 19, 2009 Subaru: the truly green automaker - Nov 25, 2008 Goodbye, GM, Chrysler, Hello Green Alternatives - Nov 17, 2008 America voted 'green' - Nov 11, 2008 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles: Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars Copyright Green Blog Comments on this Entry: (mark miglio on Oct 31, 2010 3:12 PM) The power/pounds argument is not valid, as I see it. Suggestion: Filling stations could become facilities to quickly switch out depleted batteries with previously charged batteries. Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 22 months ago

Nearly every firm, agency and especially nonprofits subscribes if not reads to the notion of doing more with less as the key to productivity, profits or achieving other desired results.So why not take this sensible, proven concept to energy? And in the process slice the U.S. deficit, chop healthcare and other high costs, kickstart the economy and breathe and live easier?That's the argument made by David Goldstein, who is co-director of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC's) energy program and a MacArthur Genius Award grant winner in 2002 for his work on energy efficiency, in his new book, Invisible Energy: Strategies to Rescue the Economy and Save the Planet in which he challenges the assumption that we are powerless to our addiction to oil and other dirty fuels.Goldstein's book, says the NRDC argues that by using energy more efficiently, "we can cut our energy demand, improve quality of life, cut global warming pollution, and reduce pressure to drill for oil in sensitive ecosystems like the Gulf.  And in the process, we will be taking one of the few steps available to stimulate the economy while cutting the federal deficit." "Goldstein emphasizes that we don't need the oil in the Gulf (or in other sensitive areas). He says the United States could do everything we are doing today - and in the foreseeable future - using currently available technologies to save more than $10 trillion over the next 40 years, reducing our demand for energy to perhaps 30 percent of what it is today.""He also cites the failure to pursue strong energy efficiency policies since the 1970s as a primary cause for our global today's economic troubles, which can be remedied with energy efficiency policies that would pay off long-term dividends." In a recent blog Goldstein writes: "Energy efficiency is one of the strongest tools we have at our disposal to recover from the recession. It can address all of the major problems that led to the Great Recession and that continue to hold back recovery: from the fear of inflation that [Paul] Krugman warns about to the trade deficit, high unemployment, and government deficits. Yet the policies that could work are not seen by policymakers to be of sufficient importance to implement with the needed urgency, and the economy continues to drift."One of the underlying causes of the downturn that Goldstein correctly identifies is sprawl in that the transportation and energy costs of this development form has not been assessed in the total costs of house prices. If it were then consumers and lenders would have made more sensible and financially sound decisions. Alas in the talk about mortgage changes these factors have been left out.He points out: "For mortgage lending, we have made almost no progress on incorporating energy and transportation costs into underwriting. When lenders evaluate or not whether borrowers can reliably make payments on a median mortgage of about $150,000 (or 80% of a median house price of about $180,000) they continue to ignore the 30-year commitment to pay some $300,000 in transportation expenses for a house located in suburban sprawl, and another $75,000 in utility costs.""While these cost obligations are not contractual commitments, they are in practice real issues that affect whether or not the borrower can make their payments. Think about it. If you are in financial distress in Chicago in the winter, and you can't pay both your mortgage and your heating bill, which will you pay first? If you live in sprawl and need your car to drive to work, or look for a job, which bill will you pay first, your auto loan and gas or your mortgage?"Goldstein if anything is understating the case, for supporting urban sprawl: commercial and residential is one reason why local and state taxes are so high that also adds to homeowners' financial distress, and why cash-strapped governments are cutting back essential services. It costs far more to provide and maintain roads, sewer/water, emergency response, transit, schools (including pupil and employee transportation) to low-density sprawling developments than it does to compact, efficient or smart walkable neighborhoods.Why do local and state governments, knowing this, still encourage sprawl? Just check out who contributes to election campaigns...one more reason there should be limits on them (full disclosure: I am on the executive of a Canadian political party and have been a candidate in a local government election in which I did not take any money from developers)This blogger has argued that to get moving greener--in more ways than one--we need to end all subsidies to energy and environmental waste. That also includes slicing mortgage subsidies. If you can afford a dream house, including the full costs, that's great. If you can't, well you can't. There's nothing wrong with settling for a smaller place or for renting.Home ownership is such a shibboleth that it has blinded society to the hard costs it incurs. Yes it is nice to own your own home--you can within limits do what you want with it--something that provided your kids want it you can pass on to them. As investment it is hoary at best. Owning one limits flexibility in case circumstances change i.e. careers, life events e.g. marriage, kids, divorce, deaths. I've owned homes and I've rented and there are pros and cons to both. The bottom line is why should all of us have to subsidize the choice of living in sprawl?The hard fact is though that for now there are millions of Americans (and many Canadian) that are stuck in homes, just trying to make ends met, and couldn't move out if they wanted to because what they would get in return would put them underwater.Here's where teleworking can help: for we have also subsidized office-based employment and the energy it wastes both in buildings and in commuting at taxpayers' and the economy's expense, resulting as this blog has pointed out in huge healthcare costs.Shifting the work to the worker saves them $4,000 to $5,000 in work-related employment costs than they can use to pay bills. They can also write off some of their house costs namely utilities for their workspaces. And they can sell one of their cars and rent out the garage to generate more cash. Doing so in turn also generates some $20,000 per employee/per year in net benefits to employers in the way of facilities costs and productivity gains. Meanwhile taxes can be lowered through less commuting resulting in minimizing road wear-and-tear, transit costs, and in emergency services.And we get to breathe easier.Something to think about as you relax at home, or return home from your 4th of July or extended (for those who are playing hookey) Canada Day holidays.P.S. Be part of the solution. Walk, bike, take mass transit and carpool with others when you travel this holiday     Tags: energy conservation, energy efficient, energy reduction, Natural Resources Defense Council, sprawl, telework Related tags: energy efficiency, local state, financial distress, efficiency policies, energy, costs , energy conservation, energy efficient, energy reduction, Natural Resources Defense Council, sprawl, telework Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010 The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25, 2009 Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009 Going Green All the Way In Ontario - Feb 12, 2009 Power IT Down This Friday! - Aug 26, 2010 Steel Rails are Green - May 06, 2010 Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia (Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01, 2010 To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009 Going Green Advice From DMG Consulting - Sep 16, 2009 CDW Report: Energy Efficient IT Yield Savings, Yet Millions Are Still Wasted (and Environment Harmed) - Sep 09, 2009 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient. Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 22 months ago

With excellent timing, following U.S. President Barack Obama's taking BP to the woodshed for what may have been a preventable Gulf of Mexico oil drilling disaster the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) issued a release asking people to ride mass transit on June 17, the 5th annual National Dump the Pump Day. "Sponsored by APTA which is partnering with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Sierra Club this year, the National Dump the Pump Day is a public awareness day that highlights the benefits of public transportation, two of which are saving money and promoting energy independence.""This year offers more than an opportunity for people to save money by using public transit," said APTA President William Millar.  "Given the Gulf spill crisis, Americans can also make a statement in support of public transit and its ability to help our country reduce its reliance on oil."U.S. public transit ridership saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline annually," Millar said. "America needs to be energy independent and public transportation plays a critical role in our country attaining energy independence.""Representatives from the NRDC and the Sierra Club agree that public transportation is part of the solution for helping our country reduce its reliance on oil."Preventing future national tragedies like the Gulf spill requires moving America beyond oil, and Dump the Pump Day reminds us that public transportation options such as trains and buses are important tools for driving down our dangerous dependence," said Deron Lovaas, NRDC Federal Transportation Policy Director."Taking transit this Thursday and every day after is something we all can do in response to the BP oil disaster," said Ann Mesnikoff, the Sierra Club's Green Transportation Campaign Director.  "Public transportation is key to ending our dependence on oil and reducing our global warming pollution.""Besides helping our country reduce its dependence on oil, people can also help improve their bank balances.  The average household spends 18 cents of every dollar on transportation and 94 percent of this goes to buying, maintaining, and operating cars - the largest expenditure after housing.  In addition, according to the monthly APTA Transit Savings Report, which tracks savings for public transit users, the national average savings per year is more than $9,000 for an individual in a two-person household who downsizes from two cars to one car. ""More than 120 public transportation systems are participating in National Dump the Pump Day activities this year.  Some public transit systems are offering free or reduced rides; holding contests with giveaways such as free transit passes; and spreading the word through social media.  Proclamations have been issued, including one from Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson."The irony is that despite the rhetoric from the President about the need to move away from oil dependency, and in the face of stimulus-driven investments in new bus and rail transit system expansions APTA members are having to cut back transit services because of shrinking state/local government resources to fill the financing gaps. IOW there is and will be fewer trains, buses and ferries to ride.Almost every day there are announcements of service reductions. Here are just two of many examples:"Caltrain will cut service in October, raise fares in January"--San Mateo County Times"Bus-service changes ahead Sunday and holiday bus service by Community Transit in Snohomish County will be suspended for two years, starting this weekend, and some weekday trips will be reduced, because of recession-related budget cuts."--Seattle TimesTime to match the rhetoric with action, folks, on reducing oil dependency and pollution. Provide transit systems with stable operating income sources while putting pressure on the labor unions to get real on wage demands and give a little to so that their members can continue to work by serving the public. Supply incentives to firms and nonprofits alike to shift their work to employees' homes and business travel from in-person to conferencing.And at the same time end the massive indirect subsidies to auto use and air travel by making the environmental damage, illnesses and emergency services costs incurred user-pay in fair portion by the oil companies, employers who by corporate decisions such as locating away from transit routes, motorists and air travellers and to those who buy and lease on greenfield i.e. urban sprawl lands.   Tags: air travel, APTA, automobile, BP, Dump the Pump, mass transit, oil spills, telework Related tags: public transportation, public transit, country reduce, trains buses, energy independence, transit , air travel, automobile, APTA, BP, Dump the Pump, mass transit, oil spills, telework Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Truly Going Green in Air Travel - Jun 03, 2010 To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009 Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps - Apr 22, 2009 SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or Web/Videoconference - Sep 27, 2010 A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles: Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars - Jul 21, 2010 Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010 Cars, Sprawl Are Killing Us: American Public Health Association - May 24, 2010 The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds - Apr 19, 2010 The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010 Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19, 2010 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives) Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 23 months ago

I used to like flying but no longer. I now loathe even the thought of getting on a plane.A once-great experience has been turned into, well, the most appropriately named commercial aircraft is the "Airbus", which speaks volumes for it. Namely cramming as many bodies to a hairline above the pain thresholds of most humans into a huge of hunk of material and transport them via their conveyance from Point A to Point B.And that's without taking security into account--whose strict and now degrading and often tokenistic measures and procedures are lousy substitutes from lazy and incompetent intelligence. It is easier to force passengers to virtually strip than to gather, analyze, and most importantly act on potential threats. And yes I was there in New York City on 9-11-01 where I witnessed the attacks on the World Trade Center. And I have in my files a New York Times op-ed from July 10, 2001 written by Larry Johnson, a former State Department counterterrorism expert titled "The Declining Terrorist Threat."On top of that, flying, like driving, wastes an awful lot of energy, eats up Earth-regenerating greenspace for massive runways and facilities and is not surprisingly a significant source of air pollution that leads to serious and deadly, and costly illnesses. Rail, buses (the highway variety), and web and videoconferencing requires fewer resources and spews less in return.Even so, flying is a necessary evil. So I applaud efforts by the airlines, their suppliers and airports to take steps to minimize their substantial environmental footprints. I recently toured the Boeing plant in Everett, Washington that is rolling out the 787 Dreamliner with my father whom at the beginning of his career worked for Rolls Royce aero engines. He did his U.K. National Service i.e. conscription in the RAF as an aircraft mechanic, working on then-state-of-the-art turbojet engines built into Gloster Meteors and DeHavilland Vampires as well as their piston predecessors that had kept Britain free from Nazi rule in the bravely-piloted airframes of Spitfires, Hurricanes and Typhoons. The Dreamliner is green technology in more ways than one. It will use 20 percent less fuel for comparable missions than presently similarly sized airplane. Advanced engine technologies -from General Electric and yes, my father's old company (I saw his smile and pride as he checked over a model of one of its turbofans)--will account for eight percent of the savings. Moreover, the Dreamliner's kit-built global manufacturing and assembly--in what is the world's largest building--is amazingly efficient compared to the old-fashioned piece-by-piece construction and is well worth the visit just for the facility.Less impressed I am with voluntary carbon offset programs like the one between Air Canada and Zerofootprint. Both firms announced an expansion of it that includes a landfill gas recovery project in Ontario that takes the methane from rotting garbage and distributes it to a nearby plant that produces recycled content paper, along with a tire recycling program in Quebec.While laudable the problem with such programs is that they "do good to atone for doing evil". Which in one cynical sense is better than just doing evil, but the programs they support should have been funded in the first place.Instead Air Canada should be doing more to shrink the environmental footprint it and the other air carriers create. Re-equipping their fleets with new efficient airliners like the Dreamliner for medium-long haul flights is one step. Lobbying governments for proven-effective European-styled airport-high-speed-rail (HSR) ground spokes to minimize short-haul flights (which are the big polluters and runway eaters) is another.Canada is pathetically behind even laggard U.S. on that count. Only one airport (YVR, in Vancouver, B.C.) has a rail rapid transit link. Yet there are airports in Edmonton, Alberta, Montreal, Quebec and Toronto, Ontario that lie in a jet-fuel-whiffing range of existing HSR-candidate railroad tracks that have had intercity rail (Edmonton) or presently have higher-speed passenger train services (Montreal and Toronto, including commuter rail). There is a rail spur three rapid transit stops from the YVR terminal building that can bring travelers directly to/from the fast-growing Fraser Valley communities.(Canada's air carriers should also tell the federal government to dump the long-proposed Pickering airport east of Toronto, a project so controversial in its environmental impacts and long out-of-date that not even Mark Holland, the Member of Parliament representing the area wants it.)Still another step is to recycle the garbage used by passengers. The airlines are saving fuel and reducing emissions by getting rid of onboard food services. The offset is the take-on food trash. How about joint programs with the airport authorities and the concessions to use lightweight recyclable/reusable cutlery and packaging? There's a win-win (rail operators e.g. Amtrak in the U.S. and VIA in Canada should do likewise).Here's another source of emissions that the airport authorities can mandate: low-emission/zero-emission airporter shuttle vans such as by buying and leasing them to operators to get rid of the smelly fuel-belching clunkers that prowl the terminals.The airlines could also take a hint from JetBlue and go virtual i.e. home-based agents with their contact centers. Why waste money and energy and crap up the air in the process by providing facilities and requiring staff to commute to them?In this fashion travel is only kept to when it is truly needed. Which is really the way to go green.  Tags: air travel, aircraft, Boeing, buses, carbon offsets, contact center, high-speed rail, recycle, telework Related tags: rapid transit, airport authorities, canada should, airport, canada, programs , aircraft, air travel, Boeing, buses, carbon offsets, contact center, high-speed rail, recycle, telework, Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or Web/Videoconference - Sep 27, 2010 Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010 To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009 Going Green Advice From DMG Consulting - Sep 16, 2009 Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010 The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds - Apr 19, 2010 The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010 Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19, 2010 Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia (Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01, 2010 To Go Green, Make Videoconferencing Affordable - Oct 13, 2009 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Truly Going Green in Air Travel Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 23 months ago

If there is any doubt that locating in car-oriented poor-transit served office parks and residing in likewise-vehicle-dependent low-density suburbs are injurious to our health--and one reason why healthcare costs are so high--a new report by the American Public Health Association, "The Hidden Health Costs of Transportation," should quell them.The report's data indicates that if organizations truly want to make a difference in their costs, environment and quality of life that they need to get out of the "parks" altogether. For no matter how "green" the buildings in energy efficiency the dirt from the pollution and other even more deadly and expensive impacts on public health from car dependence resulting from their locations far outweigh the benefits.This comprehensive study, prepared for the APHA by UrbanDesign 4Health examines all impacts and their staggering costs in 2008 dollars from transportation and land use that is shaped by and which shapes transportation choices. These include accidents, air pollution and obesity including administrative expenses (such as billing and contact centers) and where appropriate lost productivity and wages, property damage, travel delays and costs due to pain, suffering and lost quality of life and premature death.The toll from cars in poor air quality alone range from $50 billion to $80 billion per year. Yet even that high amount is overshadowed by the costs of accidents that reach about $180 billion annually.(Keep in mind that hybrids and zero emission vehicles also create pollution from extracting, refining and distributing petroleum products, in highway construction and maintenance, and in emergency vehicles responding to accidents. Like the one my paramedic stepson works out of, scraping motorists and truckers out of their vehicles and hauling them to the ER. Then again thanks to car commuters he has a great job and future.)Then there is obesity. Car dependence: driving and driving others makes us and them fat because we're not exercising, leading to a vast range of horrible ailments including diabetes and heart disease, and ca-chinging up to $142 billion per year.(This is more good news from my stepson and his young family; more bad news for everyone else and society as a whole.)The physical toll is head-shaking. Traffic crashes causes over 40,000 deaths annually, say the report. Some 35 million people live within 300 feet of a major roadway, and are at higher risk of respiratory illness due to exposure to traffic-related air pollution. At the same time about one-third of adults are estimated to be obese and another third are overweight "due in part to sedentary lifestyles and the lack of opportunity for everyday physical activity."Add these factors together and they are responsible for over nine percent of the U.S's fast-rising healthcare bill: from $2.4 trillion in 2008 to $3.1 trillion in 2012, and $4.3 trillion by 2016. "The consequences of inactivity, obesity, exposure to air pollution, and traffic crashes in the U.S. are staggering when viewed in terms of cost," says the report. "Tragically, these costs are also largely preventable. "To enable such prevention requires a serious adjustment in transportation financing and decisions. The APHA report says that much more work is needed in the area of health evaluation and cost assessment in transportation policy. There also needs to be investments in healthier transportation. It recommends a few key policy changes to achieve these objectives, among them:* Encourage federal planning, funding practices, and decisionmaking to include health impacts, costs and benefits* Support development of healthy communities, active transport and incentives for transportation investments that support health* Promote measurement and evaluation of health, safety and equity in planning and development processes* Fund research to evaluate health impacts and costs of transportation and land use actionsThat means more bus, rail and ferry transit and sidewalks and bike paths as opposed to arterials and freeways and more traditional pedestrian-friendly compact development and fewer subdivisions. The report outlines several illustrative examples. "Our country depends on a robust transportation system that facilitates easy, safe commutes and promotes physical activity in order to reduce the burden of death and disease and improve health outcomes of all communities," said Georges C. Benjamin, MD, FACP, FACEP (E), executive director of the American Public Health Association. With companies picking up the tab for health insurance there are steps that they can take to do their share i.e. "think globally, act locally", which benefits the bottom line while shrinking those on their employees' physiques:* Shrink the office by deploying telecommuting and encouraging employees to use the time saved to work out every day* Move to offices and sites on high-transit-served corridors* Dump the gym. They cost money, pose liability and potential harassment issues and lower-ranked staff especially (such as contact center agents) want to get the Hades out of there when their shift ends; when they clock out their time is theirs.Instead if you own/lease employee parking then charge employees for it while level the playing field with alternative modes by paying for bike racks and transit passes* Support transit investments and urge polluter-pay programsBy solid actions recommended by the APHA report and individual corporate practices and advocacy together we could achieve a greener, cleaner, healthier and safer environment.   Tags: accidents, air pollution, automobile, emissions, land use, public health, telecommute, transit-oriented development Related tags: public health, american public, health association, costs transportation, health impacts, health , accidents, air pollution, automobile, emissions, land use, public health, telecommute, transit-oriented development Follow me: Facebook Profile Google Reader Profile Twitter Profile Related Entries Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One - Aug 21, 2009 Another Great Reason To Truly (No Sprawl) Go Green: Your Health and Healthcare - Aug 29, 2008 To go green, avoid greenfields for offices and homes - Jul 28, 2008 To Go Green, Go Dumb (as in computing) - Jul 21, 2008 Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010 To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste - Apr 22, 2010 The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010 To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009 The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25, 2009 Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009 TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Cars, Sprawl Are Killing Us: American Public Health Association Copyright Green Blog Sponsored by the Call Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community - 24 months ago