Yesterday we sent an email to our action network asking how people were coping with high oil prices. The response on our sister blog, the Green Room, was enthusiastic – over 600 comments! Here are some of our favorites, organized by topic:

Strategies to Increase Gas Mileage

From Ann:

I've been driving 60 mph on the highway and have seen a dramatic improvement in my gas mileage. I'm getting 38-40 mpg in my Toyota Camry on the highway! Drive 60 when you go.

From Mike Frisch:

I have dropped my fuel use by 70-80%

1) I bicycle two days per week (25 mile round trip) – great exercise & fun.

2) I purchased an electric bike/scooter (Ego cycle 2 LX, cost $1700) and I use it two days per week – costs 10 cents to charge it – great fun.

3) On the days I have to use my car, I carpool, and I drive 60 mph or less to save fuel.

Editor's Note: For others thinking of trying scooters, be sure to do it safely. Motorcycle and scooter accidents are on the rise due to inexperienced converts.

Alternative Fuels to Power Cars

From Charlton Jones:

In April I completed the conversion of an older car to all electric. I have been driving for less than 5 cents a mile since. I used lead acid batteries and components off the shelf. I didn't invent anything. I can drive on the freeways and have 150 mile range. It's surprising that the car manufacturers can't do as well. GM had the lead in electric cars in 1996 with the EV-1, but then they crushed them all. (If GM had been in change in 1492, Columbus would still be in port.) I enjoy my electric car, but I also ride a bicycle for short trips. It's a shame more people don't realize how smoothly a bicycle fits into traffic at very low cost in fuel, pollution and congestion. Bicycles and electric cars can solve the current oil fiasco.

Editor's Note: Is there a business opportunity here? Another commenter, Bobby J., asks if Charlton would be willing to make one for him!

From Tom Smith:

My dad has always shown an interest in renewable energy. Now he is involved in a project that I find very appealing. Instead of using commodities like corn to make biofuel, his project involves algae. The algae requires CO2 and our nation's power plants are under pressure to reduce CO2 emmisions. If biofuel production plants are constructed next to power plants and other sources of CO2, we can turn the CO2 emissions into a positive by consuming it to grow algae for renewable energy production.

Editor's Note: Contrary to what abinkow says in his comment, algae is indeed a very promising source of fuel.

Electricity from Human Movement

From Abe Velez:

We of course need to find more ways of capturing and re-purposing sustainable energy, and here's one that I think should happen: the fitness industry in the U.S. is bigger than ever, but right now we're powering our treadmills by burning energy (mostly non-sustainable electricity from coal etc.) in order to then burn our bodies' own energy (calories). This doesn't make sense. How can we close the loop and use all this chocolate cake-fueled energy of ours to power our fitness equipment?

Editor's Note: This is happening! See our post on electricity from human movement.

From haikuza:

Has anyone heard of Trevor Field's Play Pumps, or Raj Pandian's Swing Generators? It's the coolest thing. Inventions use playground equipment & all that natural kid energy to pump water and generate electricity. We could get our kids off Ritalin & harness the power! Can't find a proper link to Pandian's work, but you can google him.

Editor's Note: Apparently both were invented by Raj Pandian. He invented a swing, a seesaw, and a merry-go-round that generate electricity (see the links I added). Cool stuff! For more examples of human power conversion, check out our story on electricity from human movement.

Ways to Encourage Solar Power

From Pavel Ivanov:

I want make solar power available in my home and I am looking to buy a house. The problem is the architecture of the city is such that the houses are street oriented (facing the street) and not solar oriented (the main slope of the roof facing south). I would prefer to have a lot of south windows and definitely not west windows. With the south windows the sun can warm the room during the winter but not during the summer – east and west windows work in the opposite way.

From halhurst:

In Idaho there is a prototype generating technology project called the solar road, which produces solar power from a paved driving surface. Considering the vast area, both public and private, which is already paved, this is an idea which bears looking into.

Editor's Note: Interesting! I found some articles on solar roads on Treehugger and Renewable Energy World.

Obstacles to Saving Energy at Home

From fugue137:

The increasing rate of renters vs. homeowners presents another interesting conundrum: few landlords will upgrade the energy efficiency of their rental properties, preferring to force the energy costs onto their tenants. Of course, energy efficiency of a house depends both on equipment and on usage patterns, so I propose a federal law mandating that landlords and tenants must split utility bills 50-50. Um, except that it's unconstitutional. But nobody really reads that thing anymore anyway, and this law would surely do some good.

From Marilyn:

To use less energy, we should be able to hang our laundry out on clotheslines. But many Homeowner Associations (HOAs) across the country have restrictions against their use. Pressure should be placed on HOAs and state legislatures to rescind this regulation. It is just common sense to dry laundry using solar energy and not use the electric or gas dryer.

We Need Improved Public Transit!

From Mark Farmer:

Do away with toll roads and instead pay for the repair of bridges and highways with increased gasoline taxes!!

This past Saturday I and thousands of other motorists on the Mass. Turnpike spent nearly one hour to go less than ten miles just to get through the limiting toll booth at exit 9. There was no accident, just a back up from the toll plaza. There must be millions of gallons of fuel wasted at toll booths and millions of man hours lost at these uneeded bottle necks.

Editor's Note: Believe it or not, many states do not allow motorist user fees like tolls to be used for public transit! A pending bill in the House would change this.

From Carolyn Moore:

[Build Better] Public Transit – Yeh! I wanted to use it to get to my last job which was a 20 minute drive from home. Turns out it would take 2 hours with one transfer plus a mile walk at beginning, middle and end, and if one didn't make the transfer in time, add another hour. No one has 4 to 6 hours a day to commute when 40 minutes will do it. Then I wanted to make a trip from Phoenix, AZ to Portland, OR (2 major cities) by train. This is the route: Bus to Flagstaff, train to LA, switch to a train to Stockton, bus to Sacramento, train to Portland, and better part of 3 days. Insane!

From Andrew:

I saw on the local news here in the Chicago area how Amtrak had SOLD OUT tickets for seats aboard their trains this weekend. When was the last time any of you heard that on the news??? I think it's awesome. Proof positive that when faced with hardships, people WILL explore alternatives. We can whip the oil problem, America! Taking the first step is often the most difficult part of it all. Once done however, the rest comes with relative ease. That said, SUPPORT AMTRAK! Give us MORE TRAINS!

From Jeannine Mead:

I believe public transportation is of vital importance…not only in cities, but between cities, small and large. Amtrak should be upgraded in all parts of the country and have regular schedules starting in early morning and run until at late in the evening. I live 40 miles from a large city and trying to get into it for anything is impossible with the traffic. We are not commuters, but we do enjoy going into our large city for concerts and other activities although town has turned into a commuter town and this is happening all over the country.

Innovative Ways to Get to Work

From Linus:

I work in a remote location about 30 minutes outside a moderate-sized rural town. To save money and the environment, my coworkers and I changed our schedules to 9-hour days and convinced our employer to let us use a company vehicle (a hybrid Escape, no less) to make the commute. We buy punch cards to keep track of payment and have a set departure time and scheduled drivers, so we don't have the headaches typical of standard carpools. Five people in a car getting over 30 mpg is a big improvement!

From Lisa Petrie:

I approached the Supt. of Schools in my district a couple of years ago, and asked if teachers could ride the local school bus instead of driving our own cars. He loved the idea! I had to carry my school photo ID so that the bus drivers recognized me, but that's easy enough.

My schedule this past year prevented me from riding, but I plan to work around that this year.

Kids in my school call the bus the "loser cruiser". But when they see adults taking the bus, by choice, perhaps this could be a first positive lesson in mass transport for them…? Honestly, I've had great conversations with high school kids on the short ride to school. Nice.

From Joe Thurston:

I am a systems programmer at a large insurance company. I could easily do my job at home. Give employers incentives to re-think the need to have a body on site. Virtually everyone in my organization could work at home 2 days a week – think of all the commuter miles that would be saved! The biggest stumbling block is an old-fashioned attitude among management – they need to have a reason to think differently.

Make Cities More Bike-Friendly

From Michael Mullowney:

In areas where public transportation is not an option, people ought to consider biking as a more realistic option and great way to exercise. In the long run, employers could help here by providing locker rooms so an employee could clean up after a potentially sweaty commute.

From Mary:

Make bicycling safer. There are a few bike lanes and they are not enforced. I see cars in them all the time. People here have been killed by motorists. There are alot of people who get angry because we want bike lanes. I am fortunate enough to live in a neighborhood where alot of my errands can be run locally. The places are too far for me to walk to due to my disability but I can easily make these trips on a bike. Unfortunately, bicycling is hazardous and I have a baby and don't care to put our lives in danger doing so.

From Brian:

Change public transit vehicles to accommodate all bicycles. Some, such as the older trolley cars in San Diego, make it difficult to load your bicycle. You must climb narrow vertical steps up and down to get from street level to car floor level. Holding the bicycle firmly your front wheel swings around wildly, banging on the sides. You may find things knocked off your backpack. The newer cars permit a street-level entry. Road bikes are especially difficult to load, what to speak of mountain bikes.

Thanks to everybody for posting so many useful observations and ideas!

Think back to your last all-you-can eat buffet. Did you eat more than you would have ordering à la carte? The same applies to driving and car insurance. With insurance policies giving almost no consideration to miles driven, if you drive an average amount or less compared to other drivers in your neighborhood, you pay much more per mile for car insurance than high-mileage drivers, which are in the minority. Yet accident risks are clearly linked to miles driven.

Shouldn't your insurance premium correspond to your risk, saving you money if you drive less? That's the idea behind Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) Insurance – drive less, pay less. Pricing insurance by the mile not reduces premiums for the majority of drivers, but if universally available, would cut traffic by 8 percent, with corresponding reductions in greenhouse gases, air pollution, congestion, and oil imports.

Those are the findings of a new report on PAYD by the Brookings Institution's Hamilton Project, which reveals the unfairness of current insurance pricing. Two-thirds of households would save money from PAYD, with those households saving on average 28 percent or $270 per car per year. Low and moderate income families would benefit the most because they are disproportionately represented among low-mileage drivers. Miles driven closely corresponds to income.

PAYD Concerns Addressed

Some have raised privacy concerns about PAYD insurance because some insurers propose using Global Positioning System (GPS) devices to obtain information. GPS devices can track where, when, and how aggressively people drive, in addition to mileage. But basic PAYD insurance needs only periodic certified odometer readings, which can be obtained during periodic inspections or through devices that transmit only mileage.

Still, there's a good argument for GPS-based systems. Aggressive drivers who often accelerate and decelerate rapidly are not only more accident-prone, but produce more greenhouse gases and air pollution, and use more fuel. Why should calm drivers subsidize the insurance premiums of aggressive drivers who endanger lives and harm the environment?

To address privacy concerns, GPS-based PAYD insurance can be kept voluntary, so only motorists who choose to save more by driving calmly will opt into these extra cost-saving plans. But I expect many Americans would choose it. GPS-based PAYD is no more intrusive than toll transponder tags, cell phones, and credit cards – technologies that are widely accepted for their convenience, even though they can reveal information about our behavior. Current law generally protects this data from unreasonable disclosure.

Another concern about PAYD is that it might discriminate against rural families who have to drive more, compared to urban drivers. But this concern is unfounded. Premiums still would be risk-adjusted for other factors, and urban driving is riskier than rural driving. The average mileage rate for rural drivers still would be far lower than for urban drivers. A person is classified as a high or low mileage driver relative to others in the same rating area.

A minority of all drivers account for a disproportionate share of all driving in urban, suburban, and rural areas. The Brookings study finds that a majority of drivers in each of these areas and in every income group would save money under mileage-based insurance.

Making PAYD Available to All

PAYD has been successfully implemented in Israel (Aryeh), the Netherlands (Polis), the United Kingdom (Coverbox), South Africa (Hollard), Canada (Aviva), and Japan (Aioi). In the U.S., PAYD is available though Progressive Insurance (the MyRate program, which is rapidly expanding) and GMAC Insurance (OnStar program), but not in every state. Other companies are preparing to launch PAYD products in the U.S. market in the coming year.

(This GMAC calculator lets you estimate your savings.)

But many state regulations do not permit PAYD – either by outright prohibition or conflicting requirements. Michigan, for example, requires that premium charges be stated upfront. California requires that insurers price auto policies according to driving record, miles driven, and years of driving experience, in that order.

California is working on eliminating these barriers. A bill to allow PAYD, A.B. 2800, passed 72 to 2 in the Assembly, and is expected to pass easily in the State Senate as well. Plus California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner has taken up the torch, and is pursuing PAYD programs through regulatory changes.

For PAYD to take off in the U.S. it needs regulatory support at the state level. But it also needs funding and stronger encouragement at the federal level. From the Brookings report:

There is a lack of knowledge on the part of insurance firms and state regulators about how to price and design PAYD, significant start-up costs involved with being a first mover, and barriers to potential entrants. Given the small private benefit but large social benefit from PAYD, a booster shot from the government may be needed for an insurance firm to offer it, which may then push other firms to follow suit.

PAYD pilot programs currently receive several million dollars a year in funding through the federal Value Pricing Pilot (VPP) program, but this isn't enough. The recently proposed Blumenauer bill (see my previous post) includes PAYD as one of the transportation choices eligible to receive funding. Another bill introduced by Rep. Gerlach (H.R. 2296) encourages PAYD through start-up tax credits for insurers that offer PAYD policies.

States need federal funding support to identify and eliminate regulatory barriers to PAYD insurance. It would be money well spent. PAYD, with its incentives to drive less, is one of the most readily available strategies to cut fuel consumption and greenhouse gas pollution while saving consumers money.

At a time of $4 a gallon gas, increased support for PAYD should be part of any economic stimulus package that Congress enacts to fight high gas prices.

People tend to do things the way they've always done unless something forces them to change – even if the new way is better and cheaper. So Hawaii has taken action to spur people along. From an article in the L.A. Times:

California last year passed legislation offering homeowners and businesses $250 million in incentives to install 200,000 solar water systems over the next 10 years.

But Hawaii Thursday took far bolder action, becoming the first state in the nation to require all new homes built after January 1, 2010 to be equipped with solar or other energy-efficient hot water systems.

The article goes on to say that Hawaii's switch to solar hot water will save homeowners money, and prevent the emission of more than 10,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year.

Are you thinking about climate-related New Year's resolutions? In addition to this list of ideas from our Web site, here are some articles we've posted on green living that can give you some ideas.

Your Home:

• Personal Impact: Does It Really Matter What You Do? (easy-to-do tips)
• Making the Invisible Visible (energy usage feedback devices)
• The Next Big (Light bulb) Idea (LEDs)
• Why Switch to Compact Fluorescents?
• Heating with Lightbulbs: A Bad Idea
• Food Miles: Is Local Always Better?
• Energy-Efficient Mortgages: It Pays to Go Green

Your Car:

• Turn Off Your Engine!  
• Tips for Cleaner Driving
• To Drive Less, Live Closer to Work

If you need some last minute gift inspiration, check out our annual round-up of earth-friendly ideas.

We'll be off for a few days, so we won't be posting again until next Thursday. Have a great holiday.

When we think about climate change and the burning of fossil fuels, the discussion often centers around alternative sources of energy. But another key element is energy efficiency – simply using less power. A recent report published titled "The Twin Pillars of Sustainable Energy" says the two should be considered together.

When public policy takes both energy efficiency and renewable energy into account, there can be significant synergies. The report is over 50 pages long with many detailed case studies, but you can find a good summary of the findings on the World Business Council for Sustainable Development Web site.

There's a new site on Yahoo! that can calculate how much your carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions go down when you try their energy saving tips. It's fun to use, and I especially appreciate the snazzy interactive features because I know how hard people worked to build it. My colleagues and I provided the Yahoo! design team with the data they use in their calculations.

I hope you'll visit the site to see how simple changes in your house and car can save energy and lower emissions. But first, let me take you behind the scenes to the complicated world of carbon calculation.

When Yahoo! turned to us for help in calculating the environmental impact of different actions, they gave us an impressive list of things to quantify. I don't know if they expected the equally long list of questions they got in reply! Here are just a few examples of the questions you need to ask when building a carbon calculator:

• Which emissions do you count? For the Yahoo! calculator, we focused on emissions from home energy use, personal driving, and commercial aviation. We could make solid estimates of average emissions from these activities, and there are easy steps individuals can take to reduce those emissions. These three activities account for 9.4 tons of CO₂ per person per year, which is about half of the total CO₂ emissions per person in the U.S.
• How do you count those emissions? Greenhouse gas emissions are often higher when you consider gases other than CO₂, but non-CO₂ emissions can be difficult to calculate. Many carbon calculators ignore all non-CO₂ emissions. The Yahoo! calculator includes non-CO₂ gases for flying and dietary choices.
• How much information from the user? The more information I have, the better job I can do calculating your baseline emissions and your savings. What's your current average annual electricity consumption? What state do you live in? How long do you keep each of your light bulbs on every day? What make and model are your appliances? Obviously that approach can get ridiculously cumbersome to users. So instead we often use national averages.
• Do you include regional differences? Some factors, such as the amount of CO₂ emitted per kilowatt-hour of electricity, vary enormously from state to state. The national average emissions rate is 1.34 pounds of CO₂ per kWh. But in North Dakota it's 2.24, and in Vermont it's a clean 0.03! We accounted for these differences in our calculators on www.fightglobalwarming.com; Yahoo! uses the national average.

Designing a tool like this involves a lot of interesting discussions and decisions (and headaches from boring federal reports like the EPA's emissions inventory [PDF]), but the end result is very useful. Americans have a huge impact on global warming, there are many things we can do to make a difference.

So click around the site, get a sense of which changes will have the biggest impact, and pledge to do something. Did an item on the list surprise you? What have you already done? What do you plan to do next? I look forward to the discussion.

Carbon dioxide (CO₂), while not the only greenhouse gas, is the most abundant. CO₂ is emitted into the atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels, and most of the energy in this country comes from burning fossil fuels. Thus, anything that requires energy to manufacture, transport, or operate causes the emission of CO₂ (see my previous post, The Carbon Footprint of… Everything).

A "carbon footprint" is the amount of CO₂ released by an activity or entity. So what's your carbon footprint?

It's difficult to make an exact calculation because the carbon footprint of so many things is unknown – for example, the amount of CO₂ emitted in the manufacturing of your shoes. But the basics are known, and can give a very good picture of how your choices contribute to global warming. The kind of home you live in, how much you drive, and how often you fly can account for half a person's carbon footprint.

You can calculate your carbon footprint for these three main elements on our Web site. You enter basic information about your lifestyle, and we take it from there. After the calculation, the site describes how you can minimize or offset your emissions – smart heating and cooling, smart use of appliances, smart driving, switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs, and selecting offsets.

Here are some statistics to think about:

• The average American car emits seven tons of CO₂ per year.
• The average American person emits 20 tons of CO₂ per year.
• The United States emits 7 billion tons of CO₂ per year.
• The world emits 30 billion tons of CO₂ per year.

If you're confused by the notion that gases like CO₂ have weight, check out my earlier post Picturing a Ton of CO₂.

For the past eight months I've been honored to be a part of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's advisory council to develop a city plan for sustainability. The team has been meeting to hammer out ideas for making New York a world model of a "green" megacity.

Frankly, when I joined the Advisory Board, I didn't know where it would end up. With my colleagues at Environmental Defense, I put forward big ideas for healthy air, less traffic, green buildings and energy efficiency, more trees and parks and cleaned-up waterways. In December 2006, the mayor announced 10 bold goals, including achieving the cleanest air of any big city in the country, cutting greenhouse gases 30 percent from today's levels by 2030 and making sure that every New Yorker can walk to a park within ten minutes.

Great goals — but could they be made real?

Yesterday, the mayor announced the details of a bold, practical plan, called plaNYC, for creating a healthier city and leading the way toward a low-carbon, climate-friendly economy. As an advocate, it's rare to see a political leader step up in such a big way. Mayor Bloomberg has proposed congestion pricing, energy reform and many other steps in one visionary framework.

Most important, Bloomberg is promising to "fight like heck" to make it happen. This is a guy who brought a smoking ban to NYC, tackled failing schools and got trans-fats out of city restaurants. Frankly, I believe him. And Environmental Defense will be there every step of the way, fighting like heck for a greener city.

It was truly satisfying to hear him lay out the plan at the American Museum of Natural History yesterday, knowing all the months of work and thought that went into it. I am thrilled that we have this opportunity to make New York an environmental world capital. What, exactly, will that mean?

I was born in NYC and now my wife and I are raising two kids here. As I walk with them through the streets of Manhattan I often wonder what the city will hold for them in 20 years. Will my kids breathe clean air, have parks to play in, be able to enjoy the sidewalks without the black diesel soot that sometimes coats their skin?

New York is already a cultural capital, drawing people and ideas from around the world. It's a financial capital, too, with Wall Street a powerful engine of growth. But can it become the world leader in how to green a megacity? And can it compete with London, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Tokyo and other megacities if it does not solve these challenges?

We're already a good way there, with a great transit system and magnificent parks. But our roads and subways are getting old. Our streets are clogged with traffic (quick – what's faster, walking across midtown or riding a bus?). Our apartment and office buildings are far from models of energy efficiency (how many of us open windows in winter when there's too much heat?). And our air doesn't meet healthy air standards. It's time to change all that.

New York's population is projected to swell by nearly a million people by 2030 – that's like adding most of Boston and Denver to the five boroughs. Green building technology and energy efficiency are keys to making the city more livable even with all the new New Yorkers. How we handle that growth will set an example for other cities around the world.

And one of the best things we can do to improve our quality of life, even as we grow, is to cut traffic congestion. It's not just about being stuck in gridlock. Traffic is also one of the fastest-growing sources of the pollution that causes global warming. One third of carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. comes from transportation.

And traffic is killing us, as our new ad campaign says. Living near a heavily-trafficked roadway, as more than 2 million city dwellers do, increases risks of asthma, cancer, lung and heart disease.

One key to fighting traffic is congestion pricing. Environmental Defense has been a proponent of congestion pricing for decades. In fact, when the Nobel-prize winning economist Bill Vickrey — the "father" of congestion pricing — died ten years ago, my colleague Jim Tripp wrote in our newsletter that "EDF [as we were known back then] intends to honor his memory by aggressively pursuing transportation congestion pricing proposals both in New York and in California."

Ten years later, here we are – and it's great to be part of the team. I'm thrilled that New York is the first American city to make pricing part of its plan. Places like London have used a pricing system to encourage less driving in the city at peak times, and achieved drops in both traffic delays and pollution. (See more on congestion pricing and the results in other cities.)

With a bold "greenprint" for the city's future, I'm proud that my kids and I will be part of the vibrant, cleaner, greener city of the future.

And how do you know the carbon footprint of a product? Through eco-labeling – a label disclosing the amount of energy used to produce the product, or the amount of CO₂ that producing the product released into the atmosphere. The idea is similar to nutrition labeling – give consumers the knowledge they need to make informed choices.

Eco-labeling is springing up all over the place:

• In January, the British supermarket chain Tesco announced it will label its 50,000 Tesco-branded food and clothing products with a carbon footprint measure. Impressive – especially since it will cost the company almost $1 billion.
• Timberland labels its shoes with "Our Footprint", which includes the amount of energy, in kilowatt hours, used to produce the pair of shoes.
• Last week Wal-Mart announced that it will score its electronic products on environmental sustainability.
• Also last week, the U.K. company Carbon Trust announced the launch of a Carbon Reduction Label. The label will show the greenhouse gases released in the manufacture, transportation, and disposal of consumer goods.
• Yahoo's Green Car Center provides a "Green Rating" for new automobiles.

You can find more examples at Eco-Labels, the Consumers Union Guide to Environmental Labels.

While eco-labels are a great idea, there are two problems. Carbon footprints are complicated to assess, and without standardization and evaluation by a third party there's no way to know their accuracy. Also, without an industry-wide standard measure, you don't know whether a particular carbon footprint is good or bad – how it compares to other products in the same category. Still, you have to start somewhere and this is a good start!

]]> http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/03/20/eco-labeling/feed/ 2