Posts Tagged ‘positive climate change’

Hi!

You know, the big environmental conferences have other focuses then just the climate. Sure, CO2, climate change (I still refuse to use the term Global Warming) oil, fossil fuels etc are at the top of the agenda. But biodiversity is getting its share of spotlight too. And this is kind of important, even if many people don’t make the connection. Climate change is a threat to the biodiversity of our world, but so is our land use and exploiting of nature.

Corporations often get a lot of flack for not caring about the environment. But many do. They would be stupid otherwise. And they’re not stupid; if they were they wouldn’t be in business. There are many companies that don’t care though. It is sad, but expected.

What surprised me is that many companies also care about biodiversity, ie the diversity of species. It might be because there are many new products to be developed because of said diversity. And because having a green profile give new business opportunities. But the number of companies that care is what is most surprising. A (not so) new McKinsey Global Survey shows that more than 55 % of the respondents say that biodiversity should be in the top ten important items on the corporate agenda. And more then half of the respondents is doing something for biodiversity. Over all it  is still a down prioritised issue, well under climate change and human rights.

I find this interesting. It is easy to get sceptical about corporate environmental responsibility, and you should always be. Greenwashing is a problem after all, and it seems like the oil-industry still don’t want to join in the effort of reducing CO2. At least in USA. And the sceptism is a good thing as it keeps the guys in suits on their toes.

In many countries there are rules that require environmental protection and responsibility from companies, so it is good that an eco friendly attitude pays of. I mean otherwise they would only have the whip, but no carrot. Now they can munch on new opportunities while striking a blow for the environment.

And as for biodiversity, it is an important issue. Look at what modern farming has made with our crops. Pesticides are used because the crops have no other means to defend themselves, and if a parasite survives it can ruin whole crops. And if one key species get wiped out, the whole ecosystem will be affected.

Corporations should show their environmental actions more openly. That would be good PR, if nothing else, as well as giving the employees something to be proud of. Look at Volvo, with all its environmental projects. Putting the environment on the agenda is one thing, but as long as people feel that they stand against an industry that doesn’t care or actively work against action, and governments that only talk, why should they feel the need to change. And it is a hint to the politicians, something that is always welcome. Of course, this is my opinions. But I do think that communication is very important in these issues, and both the industry and the scientific community need to get better at that!

Well, that’s it for today. Take a look at our other media pages, like facebook and twitter. And don’t forget youtube.

I’m off

Fredrik

Hi!

I’m both exiting and sceptical today… The whole “green” community on the Internet seems to be talking about the new Chinese commute option. Or I should say possible future option. It is a bus that should be able to take  1400 commuters, without disturbing the regular traffic. The “bus” is hollow, letting cars drive under it while it drive along rail or painted support lines. Now this is one heck of an idea. This hulking monster is supposed to run of electricity and solar power too, with minimal disturbance to regular traffic. It sounds to good to be true, right? Well, maybe, buses in Shanghai and several cities run of electricity so it may be possible. There are still some major logistic problems to sort out, even when all the engineering is done but the Chinese are resourceful.They may pull this one off.

The most exiting thing about this project, in my opinion, is that it may cut the car traffic by 30 %. That is a lot of CO2, which is even more important in a growing economy like China were more and more are getting a car. It is also an interesting example of looking outside the box, even if the basic idea isn’t new (if you are going to trust rumours and blog comments… I have never heard of it before). I have written several times about the importance of good options and infrastructure for commuters. Sometimes driving is the only option, but this monster may make it possible for massive amounts of people to choose to let the car rest. Options can lead to curiosity, and humans are curious by nature.

Another good thing with this project is that it have opened up debate on the internet. I am not much for spectacle, but this kind of thing draws so much attention that people may start to look at their own city, and their own options. That in turn may well lead to a political debate about alternative or better public transportation. That is of course speculation.

This kind of project can’t be easy to implement. Chinese cities have such a vast amount of commuters so this kind of solution make sense. Could a smaller version be used in the west? Would it be needed here? It is too soon to say, in my opinion. But this project is exciting.

/

I’m off

Fredrik

Hi guys! We’re back and ready to roll again.

You know, I have written a lot about attitudes. And today that will be the subject, but on a different level. Corporations are often getting flack for not caring about the environment. BP-oil is an obvious example but several others are accused all to often. Granted, sometimes it is correct. And a lot of greenwashing is going on. But many corporations are actually very aware that they are part of the problem, and are trying to be part of the solution as well. The world market now includes thousands of companies that have an ISO 14001 or EMAS certification (EU only). The Asian market is getting there as well.  ISO 14001 and EMAS  are standards for environmental managements, and the certification mean that the companies environmental management systems follow the international standard of ISO and EU. The certificate is granted by accredited audit firms to ensure that the certification process is unbiased. Thousands of companies get a certification every year, and the awareness and understanding of environmental problems are spreading.

But, you ask, is this not purely done for marketing and PR? Well, partly. It is always good to be seen as caring and responsible to the public. And communication of environmental work is actually a requirement in both standards. But it is also a way to become more effective, and can save money. For some companies, this is enough. Others do it mostly to do their part. But the point is that due to the unbiased audits, whatever reason you have for implementing a standard for environmental management, the environmental work will have a high lowest ambition. And that so many companies and corporations are getting certified shows a trend toward higher awareness.

Let’s make an example; Volvo Group has done many things for the environment. The three-way catalytic converter, several technical innovations, environmentally friendly server halls and environmental management systems are just some of it. And lets not forget Commute Greener! The latest achievement is a new facility in Shippensburg, North America. This is a good example of well thought out goals and plans for sustainability from an early point in the project. The factory is large, and built for sustainable production with good conditions for the employees. Recycling and Volvo Groups own emaballage system were implemented, as well as several other smaller environmentally friendly practises, and education for all the employees. To quote Chris Stone, director of industrial support and project in Shippensburg, in the press release; “For Volvo CE the most important aspect of environmental care is the promotion of eco-friendly practices – both at work and at home,”

During the build phase they even went so far as to plan for the Carpools, bike-racks and preferred parking for low emission vehicles that were implemented.

This is something more companies should take after. Planing for a more eco-friendly commute, and providing the means to take the bike or bus to work have the benefit of healthier employees and less environmental impact from the company. The small things count, and they add up. Recycling in the cafeteria, turning the light and computer off when leaving, taking the bus instead of the car one day/week are small changes, but when many people do it, the environmental impact can be reduced a lot.  And as long as the cost is low and the work efficiency doesn’t suffer, many directors and managers don’t mind doing some environmental work. Small changes go a long way. Like starting to Commute Greener!

That is it for today! Feel free to drop a line here or at facebook, and be sure to follow us on twitter.

I’m out

/Fredrik

Hi! I’m back!

I found a very interesting article about acid rain today. Do you remember when I wrote about NOx, and mentioned acid rain? This little problem, that have fallen from the spotlight have crawled its way up into the debate again.

Time to harp on drivers again! No, I’m kidding. But CO2 aside, transportation is a huge source of pollution. Particles, NOx, sulphur (mostly from ships) and runoff can do nasty things to our beloved environment. Acid rain is one of those things. It works like this:

Acid rain picture from Wikipedia Commons

In the 70′s and 80′s, sulphur was the main villain. Three-way-converters (a Volvo innovation by the way)  became more common in cars, and NOx from transportation was thought to be more or less a non-issue. (And that is why the picture don’t show it as a contributor, but the principle is the same.) Coal power plants got strict regulations on sulphur emissions, as did petrol manufacturers. So, problem solved, right?

Well, no. We still had the problem of fertilizers, one of the dirtiest but most important parts of the green revolution. And no, I don’t mean the wave of eco-friendliness that moves like a tsunami over the internet right now. I mean agriculture wave during the 50′s that is still in progress today… Fertilizer leak nitrogen via runoff from fields and through vaporising. And it is the biggest contributor to acid rain there is. This is old news, and lots are being done to change this.

The second biggest contributor to acidification used to be coal plants, but with the vast number of vehicles that are on the roads today it is no surprise that transportation have taken that place. Vehicles today are much cleaner and more effective than old ones, but there are a significantly higher number of cars and trucks on the roads today. You can see where I am going with that argument.

What is so bad about acid rain then? Well, excessive acidification damages plants, and may destroy sensitive limnic (freshwater) ecosystems. Acid lakes contain little life, and many types of trees can’t grow in acid soil. In urban areas acid rain damages concrete buildings and wither stonework. Take a look at an old statue that have been exposed to acid rain… not a pretty sight:

Damaged by acid rain

And as of late, the acidification of the oceans have become a focus in the environmental debate. I must admit that I don’t know enough to comment on this, but it does sound scary…

But what do we do about this problem? Well, I’m no scientist, and even if I was I wouldn’t have the answer. Many things play a part here, as in every subject of environmental science. However, we will have to stop our excessive driving. Telecommuting (ie working from home), public transportation, new infrastructure to let bike riders commute safely, etc will play a huge role in coming to terms with many problems. But it is not a total solution. There is no complete solution that I know of yet. Feel free to link to any research to prove me wrong, as I am always looking for things like that.

But once again, you who use Commute Greener!, and everyone that choose public transportation or zero emission alternatives are playing a part for a better environment. Not only are you helping the reduction of the worlds carbon emissions, you are helping the reduction of acidification (the result of acid rain) and many different things. You can feel proud of yourselves!

I hope you have found this interesting. I did! Remember to follow us on twitter and facebook and to Commute Greener!

I’m off for today

Fredrik

Hi everyone!

This Monday, I went of on a rant about transportation, campaigns and some other stuff. Today, I red an article at grist.org. It is about the rather pessimistic tone the environmental debate have taken in USA, were the “left” wing present ideas to solve environmental problems and the right wing shoots them down, in the name of the market. This is a very simplified picture of course. And I am sure it isn’t totally like this in USA.

But it does raise a couple of new questions that I have touched before. The government need to understand that the car isn’t sacred, and that mass transit actually is a good thing. The car isn’t sacred, as the Michael Linds article that the Grist article was based on seems to assume. It is true that rich countries have a higher density of cars, as people can afford them. Does that mean that public transportation isn’t an option in the future, especially in urban areas? And the reason many drive to work from the suburbs is 1) habit and 2) lack  of descent mass transit systems. So when new suburbs are built, make sure there are bus-lines! Trains may be expensive, but buses use the same infrastructure as the rest of the traffic. This is how it is done in Sweden, at least in cities that think ahead.

Michael Lind is right on one thing though… Asphalt may not be exciting, but new and low particle emitting asphalt is something to pay out for. It reduces wear and tear on the road, noise, particles and lowers fuel consumption, and thereby CO2 and NOx…
But the bottom line is that there have to be an attitude shift. I have said that before, haven’t I. Both from the politicians point of view and from the people. I am not talking about USA here, but in general. While the European governments are less conservative and are more keen on discussing CO2, there is still to much discussion and to little action. And climate denialists and traditionalists exist here to. The difference is that religion is less of an issue in the politic game in Europe and the climate model is the norm. I am not going to harp about religion being bad, because in itself there is nothing wrong with being religious. Hiding behind it or using the argument “god wants it” is a bit medieval though, right?

Ok, I got sidetracked again… Sorry. Attitude shifts… I really think that the conservative wing, regardless of continent view environmentalists as smug, self righteous, smug hippies. And there are many of them around. You know who you are! Many seems to hate cars, or even development. But is this how most people who work with environmental issues are. Is this how most interested persons out there are? Once again, to much focus is placed in the wrong places. Get serious and see opportunities instead of sticking the head in the sand. So much could be done for the environment if one started to look for opportunities. Wind and solar power and publit transportation are some of those opportunities. In Europe, they have expanded. Why haven’t they in North America? With the oil-spill, declining amount of fossil fuels, climate change, thinning glaciers and disturbed weather, it is time to open our eyes!

Well, I’m off. I have some statistics to finish. Have a nice one, and remember to follow us on facebook and twitter, and to Commute Greener!

/

Fredrik

Hi!

Somehow, I survived the midsummer traffic. I’m amazed how smooth it went, despite rail repairs and hot weather.The train was even on schedule.

Anyway, I have been toying with some ideas lately. The commute is the least favourite part of the day for most people, yet one of the habits they are least inclined to change. Do we need a paradigm shift? Is this the politicians responsibility, or do the change have to come from the grass roots? And more importantly, why do people hate the commute?

Transportation is one of the largest contributors to environmental problems. CO2, NOx, particles, VOC’s (I haven’t written about them yet, right?), ozone and smog are no brainers, and many know about at least some of the problems.  Runoff from roads and chemicals from washing at the driveway are other important problems that are often forgotten. Considering all these issues, why do the society promote driving over every other mode of transportation?

Not that driving have to be a bad thing. It is after all a good way to travel long distances in a short time. There are many ways to reduce the environmental impact from driving, like eco driving, pumping up the tires and getting rid of roof boxes.

London, Shanghai, Copenhagen, Berlin, and many other cities all over the world is upgrading their public transportation system. Shanghai is buying electric buses, London is getting new double deckers. Bike lanes and a good environment is high on the agenda for the politicians. In North America it seems like public transportation is for the poor or for losers. I don’t want to offend anyone, but this is the impression I get. If you can afford it, you have to have a car.

I wonder if awareness campaigns like bike-to-work day, and all the nudist cyclist events actually does anything good. They reach people that are interested in the environment, but do they change any habits or actually raise awareness? I don’t know, but I doubt it. They raise a commotion, people look at those crazy hippies, and continue with their life like they always have. Names of the bigger forums is an issue in close relation to this. Take Treehugger for example, a site I absolutely love. That name is catchy, but I don’t think it impresses people not interested in the environment (or people that really love trees:-) )

What I’m getting at here is that there need to be a shift of focus from the top. Trying to scare people with climate change and standing over them with the whip is not the way to go, but there have to be campaigns aimed at regular people, based on actual traceable facts from a governmental standpoint. A real effort to get people to get out of the car and looking for other modes of transportation. At the same time, the grassroots have to understand that there are other ways to get around then driving. We all need look beyond our noses and realize that oil isn’t going to be an option in the future. And politicians and regular people alike must realize that saving our globe cost money. Environmental taxes ARE needed, as is stricter regulations like US EPA’s newest rules and Californians assembly bill 32. Deal with it.

Enough ranting for today. You know the drill, follow us on facebook, check out the new application, follow us on twitter, watch our videos at youtube and take a look at our flikr account.

I’m out of here

Fredrik

Hi!

The series on environmental problems is not over yet. After all, we have loads of the stuff, and I try to cover as much as possible. I have ranted a bit about climate and the climate debate, but let’s bring it down to a more personal level. After all, CO2 and the other pollutants are difficult to visualize.

I red an interesting article yesterday on SolveClimate.com. It was about visualization of the carbon dioxide footprint. When I was working with carbon emissions, I usually gave results in metrics. “You have released so and so many kilograms of carbon dioxide, and must save so and so much.”  Not the best way of presenting the issue. The way Commute Greener! does it is better, showing progress and giving some examples of what the CO2 savings really amounts to. But the concept of a “carbon dioxide blanket” or a carbon dioxide balloon is just wonderfully illustrative! And it is important, as most western countries have huge CO2 footprints.

So what is the different countries carbon dioxide footprints? Well, lets just say that the west have big feet… at least if you look at the footprint. USA have a staggering 20 tonnes/person/year, most European countries have about 10. Countries that work hard on energy efficiency and transportation efficiency have much lower per capita values, for example about 5-6 for France and Sweden (yep, I had to bring Sweden up as the good guys).

But what does this mean? USA will have to do a lot of CO2 savings to cut their emissions. Industry and transportation are big contributors, even though they are getting better with better technology. And USA is a huge trade nation, selling anything from grain to electronics and cars, so focusing on cutting emissions from transportation may be very important. But better, safe and affordable public transportation is needed, as well as safe bicycle lanes. An overall change of attitude is needed and possible, as shown in California and many other states.

Europe and the rest of the world need to do the same. We travel way to much, eat way to much imported food, have inefficient transportation and in rural areas a car is needed. The difference is that EU can move somewhat fast (in governmental terms, ie. there is a bit less political bickering) compared to other countries as the global warming problem is widely accepted by all politicians. Most leaders are very interested in the environment and some fight very passionate for quick changes based on science.

But enough politics. We all saw how it went at COP 15. We all have to pitch in after all. Changing commuting habits is one important part, at least in my opinion. So many could probably use sustainable transportation instead of driving to work. But that is not enough of course, even if it is a huge step in the right direction. Low energy lamps, or even LED save  money on the energy bill as well as save resources. Yes, low energy lamps contain mercury, which is an environmental toxin, but so does strip lights that we use both at home and in the office. Handle them with care and that isn’t a problem.  Try to buy near produced food, at least from the same country you live in. We are all sick of these kind of advise but the small efforts adds up and make it easier to get used to the change. We all have a responsibility to reduce our carbon dioxide footprints.

That’s it for today. As always, follow us on facebook and twitter.

I’ll end with a question today. Are there any topics you would like me to write about? Or feedback on Commute Greener! Feel free to drop a line here, on facebook or email us your opinions. You opinions are important to us!

I’m off

Fredrik

Hi everybody!

Changing habits can be really hard, right? Who haven’t promised to give up smoking, loose weight, drink less or start going to the gym. I know I have (well not smoking… that is one habit I just don’t get). The same is true with the commute. Most people seems to  complain about their commute. It is boring, take to much time, is straining and hundreds of other things. And most people seems to drive to work. And in Europe were bicycle is a common mode of transportation many promise to ride the bike to work during the summer. Many do it for a week and get tired of it.

Changing commuting habits is the same as changing any habits. You have to make a commitment, the family/co-workers need to be supportive etc. I would like to share a couple of tips on the way to changing habits.

1. ) One thing at a the time! This is usually were I fall. I always try to change to much to fast. Start small, like taking the bus/bicycle one day a week. Get used to that first.
2. ) Commitment! This is why some competition is good. It is easier to commit to something if you have others to compare yourself to. If you start to get sloppy with habitual changes, they will not succeed. We all know this, right? Write down your progress (easy with Commute Greener!), and set a fixed date to use alternative transportation (ie. every Friday or something like this) and stick to it.
3. ) Support! Get others to support you. It is easier to do things in a group. And much more fun. Get together in a group and ride the bus together, or share the car. Or, if everyone around you refuse, join an online community and discuss with other commuters. There are lots of websites for this out there. And the 100 % man Jan Arvidsson (as well as his colleagues) have shown what a bit of support can do for morale.
4. ) Support others! If other people try to change commuting habits, support them. Do unto others and so on.
5. ) Reward yourself! It is easy to just see the whip, and not the carrot when one commit to a change of habits. Don’t do this. Make it fun and interesting instead of difficult and boring. Buy a new book to read, and keep getting interesting reading material, get a new pair of walking shoes or other clothing. But make it feel like a real reward!
6. ) Track the results! Keep track of your results. Use Commute Greener! and all tools you can get your hands on. But be careful to monitor your progress carefully.

Oh, and don’t nag others about following your example. It is not polite, and have the opposite effect. Plus, there are many ways to go about it that is not as offensive. I wouldn’t even bring it up but I have encountered too many extremists in my day…

Well, I think this is all for the day. I have some other things to do today. Keep following us on facebook, twitter and remember to Commute Greener!

By the way, try our new app on facebook. It let you update your Commute Greener! status and progress to facebook. Think of the bragging rights

/

I’m off

Fredrik

Hi!

Yesterday’s entry had a serious tone and a very serious subject, so let’s lighten up the mood with a user story. A story about changing habits. While not all of this users success can be attributed to Commute Greener!, it helped along the way.

Jan Arvidsson at Gothenburg City Biskopsgården is called the 100 % man by his colleges. Biskopsgarden, a part of Gothenburg, have been using Commute Greener! for two months now. As a whole, the 750 employees have reduced their emissions from commuting by about 10 %. The different branches of the administration, ranging from schools and daycare to the social office and clinics have competed in saved CO2. It is always fun to look at the statistics from the different departments. They are doing really well.

Jan used to be a habitual driver, ie. he drove out of habit. Nothing special or unusual with that. When they started using Commute Greener!  and a bicycle initiative at work he made a commitment. Switch from driving to bike commute.

Jan Arvidsson a windy day at Orust

Jan have stood by his word to a 100%. He seldom use the car nowadays, and only for long distance meetings. If he have to drive he leaves the car at home on his way back, opting for the bike the rest of the way. He states that changing habits aren’t hard, but one must make a commitment and show some dedication. It takes some preparation and afterthought and planning after all. Rainproof clothes and a change of clothes  are good to have at the office on hot or rainy days. Commuting by bicycle does require a bit more time to. The fact that Gothenburg is a good city for cycling with lots of bicycle lanes, scenery and few real hills certainly helps.

As a result of the change of habits, Jan states that he feel healthier, have gained some stamina and that he get to enjoy the scenery more then when he drove. He even use the bike on weekends for errands most of the time.  Now that is commitment!

The question is if this change had come to if the whole organisation hadn’t started to use Commute Greener!, as a starting point if nothing else.  There have of course been discussions, some groaning and complaints. But as a whole the organisation have adopted a positive attitude. Jan’s colleges have been supportive, and try to change their habits as well. They now call him the 100% man, and while we spoke Jan took the opportunity to point out that I am not exactly a good example for Commute Greener! since I don’t commute by bike regularly. I suppose he is right as I only live 5,5 km from work. I don’t have an excuse not to cycle other then loving the half an hour of reading on the way home.

As you all can see, even a habitual driver can change habits. Anyone can. The only thing you need is some commitment, a stubborn attitude and plan the day a bit. I guess I will have to get my bike out to. It’s time to walk the talk.

That’s all for today. Have a nice one

I’m off

Fredrik

Hello.

Today’s entry will have a more serious tone then yesterdays. Once again, I had something else planned but got sidetracked. Through one of our followers on twitter, I came across this article. I promised myself not to delve into the oil-spill, but here I go. The article is about the BP oil spill, and what have to be done to reduce the effects. The author makes a good case about what he thinks  must be done. For all of you that don’t have time to read a full article, here is the short version: The gulf oil-spill is causing a shortage of oil in USA. Instead of trying to remedy that with short term oil imports there have to be long term changes in attitudes from drivers and government. Public transportation needs to be spruced up, and bicycle lanes need to be better planned and constructed. And a total of 20% of reduction of driving is required.

Commute Greener! is all about reducing needless driving and promoting use of public transportation and bicycle lanes. 20% reductions of driving sounds harsh, but statistics from users show that IT IS possible. But many reductions pre-suppose the existence of well planned and proportioned public transportation network, as well as bicycle lanes. The main part that struck me in the article was how different views Americans have compared to the situation for me on this side of the pond. The car is holy, taxes are bad and a tax on gasoline is sacrilege. And petrol is dirt cheep. I have of course known this for a long time but never really considered the problems of trying to change the citizens’ habits.

When I look at this article and the environmental debate in USA from an outsider’s perspective, I see a need for stronger regulations and environmental taxes. I come from Sweden however, and that is what is normal for me. The problem of excessive driving is very much an economical issue as well as one based on attitudes. People are afraid of change. And as long as it is cheep to take the car, why take the bus. As long as the gasoline is somewhat expensive, they may consider different options. The problem here is that interest groups of habitual drivers always get so much attention in the debate. While I understand the need for a car, driving five miles to work is not a sustainable way of commuting. But if you never have taken the bus and have heard all kinds of bad things about it, or never rode the bike in town, would you really dare to try? 

There has to be a change of attitudes from the top to stimulate the public transportation system. At the same time I am a huge advocate of grassroot action, but for something as big as this, will also need governments to take actions as well. California’s “new” Assembly Bill 32 may bring an interesting and inspiring change in 2011. Only time will tell.

What I wrote yesterday about that there is a demand for bicycle lanes that is very important. If you like to use the bike you will have to demand proper and safe roads from the politicians. If the public transportation system is under-dimensioned and slow, get active. The politicians don’t know if they should act if no one tells them. After all, they are there to serve you, the voters. I do understand that there are many of them who don’t care about the environment, and think that climate change is a hoax, but they will think about the election. The same is true for a better public transportation system.

Most of what I have written today is aimed at USA but is true in other parts of the world as well. Canada, UK, China, Japan, Sweden, it doesn’t matter which country; CO₂ emissions must be reduced. Building functioning and environmental friendly commute systems are a crucial factor in changing the habits of commuters. We can’t reduce the dependence on oil, and the following environmental problems, without changing habits. And then we are back were we started.

Well, I think I have ranted enough for today. Feel free to comment, and give tips about how to change people’s habits. Good ones will be quoted in a later entry. And remember to follow us on twitter and facebook. And Commute Greener!

/

Fredrik