From my apartment in Calgary, Alberta, I look across 1970s SFDs to the University of Calgary, the city centre, and three major hospitals. Today, at -17Ā°C & 84% relative humidity, I see great plumes of water vapour rising in the sky until they reach a stable state and form low clouds in the still air. Even brand-new buildings are burning vast quantities of methane/fossil gas for heating. I feel very frustrated at the more-than-sufficient use of gas heating ā oh, wait, this is Danielle Smith's UCP jurisdiction, which is fuelled by and promotes the fossil fuel industry. Now, the UCP imposes high annual registration fees on electric cars "because they wear out the roads faster" than enormous, heavier pick-up trucks and SUVs.
I guess each one of us must do what we can on the drop-in-a-bucket principle and hope...
hear, hear. but you knew i would say that š. i think we are living on the border of a revolutionary moment--the point where all of those personal choices coalesce into an actual movement and revolt against deranged reactionary policy and propaganda. by placing the responsibility on the consumer, one also unleashes the masses, should they choose to seize the opportunity. good luck on the new semester! Maybe it will make it up to Ontario this year (was Quebec-heavy last year...)
Sufficiency appeals to me because it is a simple action that anyone can do. The charts and numbers that you show in your posts may be meaningful to many, and I hope they are, but they just don't translate into useful information for me. But start talking about using what we already have, being satisfied with it, and not being so consumption oriented, I understand that and implement it every day.
The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions ā at least, in adequate levels and relatively fast ā is a lost cause, unfortunately. If one enjoys the process of trying to bring about change, despite the fact that it will be futile, then one should of course keep doing it. But if there are other things that one enjoys doing, in my view one should focus on them while, perhaps, spending some time into preparing accordingly.
Over half of all the energy used in the world is used by industry. Basically, the mining / manufacturing sequence.
Over half of all the remaining energy is used in transportation.
Of the energy used in transportation, the majority is used to transport industrial products to end users.
The heavier the object, the larger the object, and the farther it travels, the more energy it takes to transport it.
All the homes in the world consume less than 13% of global energy. All the homes in the US consume less than 13% of US energy.
There is no product, tool, or thing that can be made which does not add to the two largest sources of carbon emissions before it ever goes into service.
Those things which are made to reduce residential energy demand, or to serve residences with low carbon energy, add emissions to our largest sources for the specific objective of reducing our second smallest emissions source, houses.
We can see the records of the outcomes. It's not working.
Fully agree. The time to start is now. The goal is two fold: reduce fossil fuel use, and capture as much carbon dioxide as possible. Individuals can do a lot, but not enough. It takes everyone and every institution. The problem is that we are captured by the economic fallacy that continuous growth is possible. So, we also need a reframed economics that emphasizes health rather than wealth. Health includes ecosystems and neighborhoods. Health is inclusive and local.
I agree the building industry can/should take a lead in reducing carbon and emissions and even increasing these efforts with innovation - and they are. We also must combine all this effort with a circular economy. Economics drives everything and it's all about growth. Certainly, deliberate Policy changes would influence a change in this, however, wealth does buy power so, that's where we're at.
From my apartment in Calgary, Alberta, I look across 1970s SFDs to the University of Calgary, the city centre, and three major hospitals. Today, at -17Ā°C & 84% relative humidity, I see great plumes of water vapour rising in the sky until they reach a stable state and form low clouds in the still air. Even brand-new buildings are burning vast quantities of methane/fossil gas for heating. I feel very frustrated at the more-than-sufficient use of gas heating ā oh, wait, this is Danielle Smith's UCP jurisdiction, which is fuelled by and promotes the fossil fuel industry. Now, the UCP imposes high annual registration fees on electric cars "because they wear out the roads faster" than enormous, heavier pick-up trucks and SUVs.
I guess each one of us must do what we can on the drop-in-a-bucket principle and hope...
hear, hear. but you knew i would say that š. i think we are living on the border of a revolutionary moment--the point where all of those personal choices coalesce into an actual movement and revolt against deranged reactionary policy and propaganda. by placing the responsibility on the consumer, one also unleashes the masses, should they choose to seize the opportunity. good luck on the new semester! Maybe it will make it up to Ontario this year (was Quebec-heavy last year...)
Sufficiency appeals to me because it is a simple action that anyone can do. The charts and numbers that you show in your posts may be meaningful to many, and I hope they are, but they just don't translate into useful information for me. But start talking about using what we already have, being satisfied with it, and not being so consumption oriented, I understand that and implement it every day.
You should read my book, Living the 1.5 Degree Lifestyle!
I will ask my library to get it, that will minimize the carbon footprint and allow one physical book to be read by many people. No?
The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions ā at least, in adequate levels and relatively fast ā is a lost cause, unfortunately. If one enjoys the process of trying to bring about change, despite the fact that it will be futile, then one should of course keep doing it. But if there are other things that one enjoys doing, in my view one should focus on them while, perhaps, spending some time into preparing accordingly.
Carbon Upfront: how that works.
Over half of all the energy used in the world is used by industry. Basically, the mining / manufacturing sequence.
Over half of all the remaining energy is used in transportation.
Of the energy used in transportation, the majority is used to transport industrial products to end users.
The heavier the object, the larger the object, and the farther it travels, the more energy it takes to transport it.
All the homes in the world consume less than 13% of global energy. All the homes in the US consume less than 13% of US energy.
There is no product, tool, or thing that can be made which does not add to the two largest sources of carbon emissions before it ever goes into service.
Those things which are made to reduce residential energy demand, or to serve residences with low carbon energy, add emissions to our largest sources for the specific objective of reducing our second smallest emissions source, houses.
We can see the records of the outcomes. It's not working.
Fully agree. The time to start is now. The goal is two fold: reduce fossil fuel use, and capture as much carbon dioxide as possible. Individuals can do a lot, but not enough. It takes everyone and every institution. The problem is that we are captured by the economic fallacy that continuous growth is possible. So, we also need a reframed economics that emphasizes health rather than wealth. Health includes ecosystems and neighborhoods. Health is inclusive and local.
This might contribute to your mission. The possibility of a negative carbon footprint AND it's Canadian! š
https://justbiofiber.com/
I agree the building industry can/should take a lead in reducing carbon and emissions and even increasing these efforts with innovation - and they are. We also must combine all this effort with a circular economy. Economics drives everything and it's all about growth. Certainly, deliberate Policy changes would influence a change in this, however, wealth does buy power so, that's where we're at.