Green Change Begins at Home

The Copenhagen Climate Summit is underway. In the spirit of John F. Kennedy, the motto ought to be, “Ask not what more your planet can do for you, but what you can do for it.” Climate negotiators alone will not solve this problem.

The numbers behind the science explain why. The most frequently used numbers include “before and after” comparisons of greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere, global temperature increases, and basic probability. Along these lines, the Economist magazine reports that “[a]tmospheric concentrations of CO2 equivalent (carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases) reached 430 parts per million [ppm] last year, compared with 280 ppm before the industrial revolution. At the current rate of increase they could more than treble by the end of the century, which would mean a 50% risk of a global temperature increase of 5ºC [9ºF]…Such a rise would probably lead to fast-melting ice sheets, rising sea levels, drought, disease and collapsing agriculture in poor countries, and mass migration.” http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14994872

To stabilize the runaway effects of climate change, a movement is underway to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to 350 ppm by the year 2050. http://www.350.org/about/science. What does this mean in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions? “On the basis of the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC’s)] figures…emissions need to drop by 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020.” http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15017322

So far, neither the Kyoto Protocol nor the United States Congress has set sufficiently high goals to get us there. According to the Economist magazine, “[g]lobal carbon-dioxide emissions have risen by 20% since the [Kyoto Protocol] was signed in 1997…the plan has evidently not worked all that well.” http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15017322. In the US, the favored cap-and-trade legislation currently before the Senate, the Waxman-Markey bill, targets a mere 4% in cuts to greenhouse gas emissions in the short term. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 Greenpeace, along with a few other bold environmental groups, wisely opposes the bill in its current form because, with a target of only 4%, it falls miserably short of the 25-40% range required to insure against catastrophic events. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/press-center/releases2/greenpeace-says-waxman-markey

In plain English, this means that everyone must take initiative. For example, you can urge your US Senator to increase target cuts in the Waxman-Markey bill. At home and in the office, you can also set a range for cuts in your own carbon footprint. Start simple with 5% cuts through the New Year, increasing to 10% cuts by the end of 2010, and increasing again to 20% cuts by the end of 2011. Join me in achieving 50% cuts by 2020.

Do you need help or want company on your journey? Consider signing up for the next No Impact experiment, starting January 10. http://noimpactproject.org/experiment/ You might also consider leaving a comment on this blog, where we can initiate more specific discussions about personal goals, choices and challenges. To help get the conversation started, I will post two blog entries per week on facts and tips that help you and me consider ways to reduce our impact at home. Please, bring your own ideas and let me know how it’s going.