Easy ways to help the environment
October 16, 2010 8:50 PM Subscribe
What are the 1 or 2 most effective and easy-to-implement things that I (your average American) can do to reduce damage to the environment?
The question is broad, because I want to do something to help, but even if I tried following every environmental suggestion I came across (example), there is no way I'd muster the willpower to stick to all of them.
The worst outcome would be for me to be penny wise and pound foolish -- spending my effort on measures that have little impact, while failing to do the things that make the most difference. Help me prioritize!
The question is broad, because I want to do something to help, but even if I tried following every environmental suggestion I came across (example), there is no way I'd muster the willpower to stick to all of them.
The worst outcome would be for me to be penny wise and pound foolish -- spending my effort on measures that have little impact, while failing to do the things that make the most difference. Help me prioritize!
Effective and easy to implement do not necessarily mean easy or comfortable. My home's energy usage is remarkably low compared to neighbors - part of it is that it was built recently, but the other part is that we keep it at 64ish and wear sweats if we're cold. I also turn off the water while I soap up in the shower, keep the water fairly chilly (which naturally keeps my time down in the shower) and limit the water usage to 5 minutes tops (and I'm a girl with long hair).
Choose veggies when you can and it is no more effort (like when picking between items on a restaurant menu with comparable veggie and meat offerings) and at home as much as possible.
Don't buy stuff you don't need to, and reuse or buy secondhand as much as possible.
None of those things should probably require tons of effort, and they're all addressing some of the biggest problems with our lifestyles. However, they may be uncomfortable for you. It's worth it.
posted by R a c h e l at 8:59 PM on October 16, 2010
Choose veggies when you can and it is no more effort (like when picking between items on a restaurant menu with comparable veggie and meat offerings) and at home as much as possible.
Don't buy stuff you don't need to, and reuse or buy secondhand as much as possible.
None of those things should probably require tons of effort, and they're all addressing some of the biggest problems with our lifestyles. However, they may be uncomfortable for you. It's worth it.
posted by R a c h e l at 8:59 PM on October 16, 2010
It's not a popular one, and I'm not trying to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do. But to meet your stated goal, while adhering to your qualifications, the runaway #1 answer would be:
1. Don't procreate, and effectively campaign for others to do same.
posted by jjjjjjjijjjjjjj at 9:00 PM on October 16, 2010 [9 favorites]
1. Don't procreate, and effectively campaign for others to do same.
posted by jjjjjjjijjjjjjj at 9:00 PM on October 16, 2010 [9 favorites]
Yeah, and what Sara said. Sooo much of the problem is irresponsible corporations. Not a lot we can do about that, which scares me. Lobby people, I guess.
posted by R a c h e l at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by R a c h e l at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2010
I agree with Sara C. that individual action doesn't have anywhere near the impact we've been socialized to believe it does -- but that hasn't stopped me from swapping paper napkins for cloth and bringing canvas tote bags to stores so I don't take their plastic.
My suggestions for your two effective and easy to implement changes:
Change your light bulbs over to the CFL bulbs. They last a long time, take less energy, and are cheapish for what you get.
Keep your living space a little cooler in the winter and warmer in the summer. Even just a couple of degrees can make the difference. If you're cold, put on socks and a sweater and grab an extra blanket; if you're warm, strip down to shorts and a tank top and suck on a piece of ice.
You know, that link is actually a bunch of really practical suggestions that should be easy to incorporate into your life -- turn off the lights when you leave the room, keep your car in good condition, recycle the stuff you have that can be recycled instead of throwing it away, take short showers. If you pick one of those things to focus on incorporating into your routine every month, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised at how quickly you can change the simple things in your life to be more environmentally friendly.
posted by shamash at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
My suggestions for your two effective and easy to implement changes:
Change your light bulbs over to the CFL bulbs. They last a long time, take less energy, and are cheapish for what you get.
Keep your living space a little cooler in the winter and warmer in the summer. Even just a couple of degrees can make the difference. If you're cold, put on socks and a sweater and grab an extra blanket; if you're warm, strip down to shorts and a tank top and suck on a piece of ice.
You know, that link is actually a bunch of really practical suggestions that should be easy to incorporate into your life -- turn off the lights when you leave the room, keep your car in good condition, recycle the stuff you have that can be recycled instead of throwing it away, take short showers. If you pick one of those things to focus on incorporating into your routine every month, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised at how quickly you can change the simple things in your life to be more environmentally friendly.
posted by shamash at 9:01 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Stop eating meat. The American meat industry is among the very worst environmental offenders. On this score, poultry is the worst, with beef and pork slightly better but still pretty appalling.
After that, give up your car. If you can't get someplace by your own power or using public transportation, try not to go.
And seriously, that list is ridiculous. I'm no environmentalist, but I do 90% of those things just because I'm cheap or because it seems silly not to. Seriously, who are these people who leave water running while they're brushing their teeth? And unless you drink 100 cups of coffee a day, your coffee stirrers are irrelevant to the state of the planet. These people are recommending paper Q-tips and not preheating your oven? That's nonsense. I mean, not that those things don't have benefits in some way, but they're not going to reduce meaningfully the demand for energy or the content of our landfills.
Think about the things you do every day, all the time. Your food, your transportation, the way you power your home. If anything is going to matter (and I'm not convinced it will), it's going to be those big things.
posted by decathecting at 9:05 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
After that, give up your car. If you can't get someplace by your own power or using public transportation, try not to go.
And seriously, that list is ridiculous. I'm no environmentalist, but I do 90% of those things just because I'm cheap or because it seems silly not to. Seriously, who are these people who leave water running while they're brushing their teeth? And unless you drink 100 cups of coffee a day, your coffee stirrers are irrelevant to the state of the planet. These people are recommending paper Q-tips and not preheating your oven? That's nonsense. I mean, not that those things don't have benefits in some way, but they're not going to reduce meaningfully the demand for energy or the content of our landfills.
Think about the things you do every day, all the time. Your food, your transportation, the way you power your home. If anything is going to matter (and I'm not convinced it will), it's going to be those big things.
posted by decathecting at 9:05 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
This is long-term planning, but considering living in an apartment building instead of a detached home, if you do not do so already.
posted by griphus at 9:07 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by griphus at 9:07 PM on October 16, 2010
1) Do not have children.
2) Everything else.
posted by klanawa at 9:11 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
2) Everything else.
posted by klanawa at 9:11 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Don't buy anything new. Ride a bicycle, don't drive a car. Don't shower so much, let yellow mellow. Eat local. Stop flying. Wear a sweater instead of putting the heat on. Grow your own food.
Don't support anything that does too much of the above.
posted by alex_skazat at 9:15 PM on October 16, 2010
Don't support anything that does too much of the above.
posted by alex_skazat at 9:15 PM on October 16, 2010
Oh, and completely dismantle the US military. They use some insane percent of the oil/energy for the USA.
That's the simplest thing you could possibly come up with. Benefits everyone in the long run!
posted by alex_skazat at 9:17 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
That's the simplest thing you could possibly come up with. Benefits everyone in the long run!
posted by alex_skazat at 9:17 PM on October 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Best answer: This great video - How Many Lightbulbs? - will help you get a sense of proportion, and see what makes the biggest difference, and what hardly moves the needle at all. In a nutshell, the quickest and most impactful things for most people are likely to be:
- Turn down your heating a little
- Drive a smaller / lighter / more fuel-efficient car
If you've got more time than the six minutes it takes for the YouTube video, you can visit the guy's website: Without the Hot Air.
There you can get his book for free in PDF, and it also has links to longer videos, like talks he gave at Caltech, Berkeley and Warwick University.
posted by philipy at 9:18 PM on October 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
- Turn down your heating a little
- Drive a smaller / lighter / more fuel-efficient car
If you've got more time than the six minutes it takes for the YouTube video, you can visit the guy's website: Without the Hot Air.
There you can get his book for free in PDF, and it also has links to longer videos, like talks he gave at Caltech, Berkeley and Warwick University.
posted by philipy at 9:18 PM on October 16, 2010 [5 favorites]
Do not have children.
Everything else is peanuts.
posted by smcameron at 9:25 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Everything else is peanuts.
posted by smcameron at 9:25 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: philipy's answer is the type of thing I am looking for: a standardized way of comparing environmental impact. What other kinds of data-driven rankings are out there?
posted by lunchbox at 9:31 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by lunchbox at 9:31 PM on October 16, 2010
I forgot another simple one...
- Avoid super long distance trips as much as poss.
Normally that means flying less, but it wouldn't be any more efficient if you drove the distance. It's the huge distance that drives the huge amount of energy involved.
posted by philipy at 9:37 PM on October 16, 2010
- Avoid super long distance trips as much as poss.
Normally that means flying less, but it wouldn't be any more efficient if you drove the distance. It's the huge distance that drives the huge amount of energy involved.
posted by philipy at 9:37 PM on October 16, 2010
Graham Hill (of treehugger) has three easy steps to reduce your carbon footprint. I'd list them but I don't think I'd do his talk justice. He's got some data in there.
posted by acheekymonkey at 9:44 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by acheekymonkey at 9:44 PM on October 16, 2010
Don't buy leather goods produced in developing/environmentally lax countries. Byproducts from leather dyeing are among the most horrific, and go straight into streams, rivers etc.
Eat lower on the food chain.
Don't reproduce.
My environmental biology prof told us this list of 3 about 25 years ago. He also comforted a student who was sniveling about the planet by saying, "Don't worry. The PLANET will be fine. Humans just won't be here."
posted by cyndigo at 9:49 PM on October 16, 2010 [3 favorites]
Eat lower on the food chain.
Don't reproduce.
My environmental biology prof told us this list of 3 about 25 years ago. He also comforted a student who was sniveling about the planet by saying, "Don't worry. The PLANET will be fine. Humans just won't be here."
posted by cyndigo at 9:49 PM on October 16, 2010 [3 favorites]
Decreasing your carbon footprint just isn't going to make any difference in the short or long term. Leading by example is admirable, and failing to do so is immoral. But it's not going to have any practical effect, one person can't make a difference. Environmental problems are the result of the way that, on a global level, we allow public resources like clean air, water, land, etc. to be exploited for private use at little to no cost. The only way to solve these problems is to work toward changing those policies that shield the cost of these activities from producers and consumers. Everything else is just bailing out the boat without plugging the leak.
posted by bluejayk at 9:58 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by bluejayk at 9:58 PM on October 16, 2010
The suggestions about not having children? That is no joke.
Also, as Sara C. pointed out, stop shopping. Chances are you already have everything you need.
Follow these two rules, and it won't matter if you accidentally leave the lights on in the basement all night long.
posted by BostonTerrier at 10:12 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
Also, as Sara C. pointed out, stop shopping. Chances are you already have everything you need.
Follow these two rules, and it won't matter if you accidentally leave the lights on in the basement all night long.
posted by BostonTerrier at 10:12 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
In addition to not having children, supporting policies that encourage others to do the same.
posted by The ____ of Justice at 10:13 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by The ____ of Justice at 10:13 PM on October 16, 2010
Buy less stuff. Don't live in a big house and fill it with stuff. Stuff has to be manufactured, shipped, and eventually, disposed of. When you buy stuff, buy environmentally friendly, quality goods.
Drive less. Cars are a scourge on the environment.
posted by theora55 at 10:15 PM on October 16, 2010
Drive less. Cars are a scourge on the environment.
posted by theora55 at 10:15 PM on October 16, 2010
Choose not to have children.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 10:34 PM on October 16, 2010
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 10:34 PM on October 16, 2010
Best answer: Dedicate your efforts towards supporting environmental lobbies that are pushing for a carbon price (a carbon tax, or cap and trade).
I'll list Graham Hill's points to save you the talk.
1. Eat less meat. ("weekday vegetarian")
2. Don't fly or fly consciously
3. Buy green electricity
The reason a carbon tax is important is that all of these things happen automatically when it is in place. High-carbon behaviors including flying, eating meat, and coal-powered electricity become more expensive; lower-carbon behaviors become cheaper. Suddenly there are incentives to develop things like biofuel vehicles, carbon capture and storage at coal plants, efficient heating and cooling systems for buildings, etc. We need these things to make any real progress, but there is currently a financial disincentive against doing them, and (econ 101) people and especially business respond to incentives.
To be a little more helpful, though:
You can see the US greenhouse gas inventory, prepared by the EPA, over here. Note that the large majority of total GHG comes from fossil fuel combustion (80%).
You can read their answer to this question: Action Steps
When thinking about how to reduce fossil fuel consumption in the home, a bit of thermodynamics helps. It costs a large amount of energy to change the temperature of air and water, and this increases both with the volume of air or water, and the number of degrees. Investing in efficient heating systems and insulation is a good bet. Appliances that involve heating or cooling (fridges, washers/dryers, dishwashers) suck a lot of power but newer models are much more efficient. For electronics, large TVs and especially the set-top cable or sattelite boxes suck the most power; one of the best things to do is make sure these things are turned off when not in use. Again, newer TVs tend to be much more efficient than older (especially CRT TV's).
How big are these numbers? See Table A4 (pg 10) in the US Energy Outlook reference case (found here). US residential consumption by end use, in quads:
Space heating 5.34
Space cooling 2.88
Water heating 2.90
Refrigeration 1.21
Cooking 0.58
Clothes Dryers 0.91
Freezers 0.26
Lighting 2.30
Clothes Washers 0.11
Dishwashers 0.30
Color TVs and set top boxes: 1.03
Computers and related: 0.48
Furnace fans and boiler pumps: 0.41
Other: 2.86
Total: 21.54
Regarding the influence of "stuff".
I found this: The CO2 list -- which tell you how much carbon is embodied in a range of products. (These numbers look okay to me.) Going back to the GHG inventory above, given that the US total annual emissions are about 7 billion tons of CO2 and a population of 300 million people this means each person does about 20 tons per year, of which about 16 tons is due to direct fossil fuel combustion.
If you look at The CO2 list you see most products are quite small by comparison. One pound here, one pound there, they'll add up sure, but most individual products are rounding errors compared to direct fossil. One exception may be food because of the sheer volume of it. They say a balanced diet is 1.7lbs per 500 calories, which works out to roughly a ton per year given 2000 calories a day, but if you eat a lot more meat this number will get quite a bit larger. So I will agree that eating less meat is reasonable.
I poked around trying to find a website that breaks down average annual footprint by activity and consumption, in order to give a better answer regarding "stuff" -- with all the carbon calculators out there you'd think such a thing would exist, as the data is certainly available -- but no luck.
posted by PercussivePaul at 11:10 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
I'll list Graham Hill's points to save you the talk.
1. Eat less meat. ("weekday vegetarian")
2. Don't fly or fly consciously
3. Buy green electricity
The reason a carbon tax is important is that all of these things happen automatically when it is in place. High-carbon behaviors including flying, eating meat, and coal-powered electricity become more expensive; lower-carbon behaviors become cheaper. Suddenly there are incentives to develop things like biofuel vehicles, carbon capture and storage at coal plants, efficient heating and cooling systems for buildings, etc. We need these things to make any real progress, but there is currently a financial disincentive against doing them, and (econ 101) people and especially business respond to incentives.
To be a little more helpful, though:
You can see the US greenhouse gas inventory, prepared by the EPA, over here. Note that the large majority of total GHG comes from fossil fuel combustion (80%).
You can read their answer to this question: Action Steps
When thinking about how to reduce fossil fuel consumption in the home, a bit of thermodynamics helps. It costs a large amount of energy to change the temperature of air and water, and this increases both with the volume of air or water, and the number of degrees. Investing in efficient heating systems and insulation is a good bet. Appliances that involve heating or cooling (fridges, washers/dryers, dishwashers) suck a lot of power but newer models are much more efficient. For electronics, large TVs and especially the set-top cable or sattelite boxes suck the most power; one of the best things to do is make sure these things are turned off when not in use. Again, newer TVs tend to be much more efficient than older (especially CRT TV's).
How big are these numbers? See Table A4 (pg 10) in the US Energy Outlook reference case (found here). US residential consumption by end use, in quads:
Space heating 5.34
Space cooling 2.88
Water heating 2.90
Refrigeration 1.21
Cooking 0.58
Clothes Dryers 0.91
Freezers 0.26
Lighting 2.30
Clothes Washers 0.11
Dishwashers 0.30
Color TVs and set top boxes: 1.03
Computers and related: 0.48
Furnace fans and boiler pumps: 0.41
Other: 2.86
Total: 21.54
Regarding the influence of "stuff".
I found this: The CO2 list -- which tell you how much carbon is embodied in a range of products. (These numbers look okay to me.) Going back to the GHG inventory above, given that the US total annual emissions are about 7 billion tons of CO2 and a population of 300 million people this means each person does about 20 tons per year, of which about 16 tons is due to direct fossil fuel combustion.
If you look at The CO2 list you see most products are quite small by comparison. One pound here, one pound there, they'll add up sure, but most individual products are rounding errors compared to direct fossil. One exception may be food because of the sheer volume of it. They say a balanced diet is 1.7lbs per 500 calories, which works out to roughly a ton per year given 2000 calories a day, but if you eat a lot more meat this number will get quite a bit larger. So I will agree that eating less meat is reasonable.
I poked around trying to find a website that breaks down average annual footprint by activity and consumption, in order to give a better answer regarding "stuff" -- with all the carbon calculators out there you'd think such a thing would exist, as the data is certainly available -- but no luck.
posted by PercussivePaul at 11:10 PM on October 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
The number of answers above that hit the bullseye -- DON'T REPRODUCE -- is incredibly heartening. This really wasn't on the list much five or ten years ago, and I'm not sure what's driving the rising awareness -- but whatever it is, it makes me happy and hopeful.
posted by FLAG (BASTARD WATER.) (Acorus Adulterinus.) at 12:17 AM on October 17, 2010
posted by FLAG (BASTARD WATER.) (Acorus Adulterinus.) at 12:17 AM on October 17, 2010
Stop driving. Stop flying. Stop eating industrial meat. ... and avoid buying stuff wrapped in layers and layers of plastic.
Flippant answer; go itunes/amazon-kindle or pirate rather than buying physical media. It's ... sick ... thaat something that could be delivered digitally is mummified in multiple layers of polycarbonates and RF detection devices.
posted by porpoise at 12:21 AM on October 17, 2010
Flippant answer; go itunes/amazon-kindle or pirate rather than buying physical media. It's ... sick ... thaat something that could be delivered digitally is mummified in multiple layers of polycarbonates and RF detection devices.
posted by porpoise at 12:21 AM on October 17, 2010
This old thread has lots of info about the costs of wasting water.
I'm surprised to see so many people saying that personal responsibility just doesn't have anything to do with helping the environment and that the task falls entirely on government and corporations. Those corporations wouldn't even exist -- let alone be as big and bad-for-the-environment as they are -- if it weren't for us consumers buying their stuff! Of course everyone's behavior affects the environment. I notice that everyone in the water thread says it's important for individuals not to waste water; not one of the many commenters says, "Eh, it doesn't matter what you do." Perhaps the way a question is framed affects the answers.
posted by John Cohen at 7:48 AM on October 17, 2010
I'm surprised to see so many people saying that personal responsibility just doesn't have anything to do with helping the environment and that the task falls entirely on government and corporations. Those corporations wouldn't even exist -- let alone be as big and bad-for-the-environment as they are -- if it weren't for us consumers buying their stuff! Of course everyone's behavior affects the environment. I notice that everyone in the water thread says it's important for individuals not to waste water; not one of the many commenters says, "Eh, it doesn't matter what you do." Perhaps the way a question is framed affects the answers.
posted by John Cohen at 7:48 AM on October 17, 2010
I'm surprised to see so many people saying that personal responsibility just doesn't have anything to do with helping the environment and that the task falls entirely on government and corporations.
Nobody here is saying that.
What is being said is that no one thing that any one individual can do will come even remotely close to fixing anything. Whereas there is a lot that the government could do in the form of regulation, or that corporations could voluntarily do in terms of taking responsibility for the garbage they create and the dangerous substances they pump into the environment.
Nobody is suggesting that people not conserve resources, recycle, etc.
posted by Sara C. at 11:36 AM on October 17, 2010
Nobody here is saying that.
What is being said is that no one thing that any one individual can do will come even remotely close to fixing anything. Whereas there is a lot that the government could do in the form of regulation, or that corporations could voluntarily do in terms of taking responsibility for the garbage they create and the dangerous substances they pump into the environment.
Nobody is suggesting that people not conserve resources, recycle, etc.
posted by Sara C. at 11:36 AM on October 17, 2010
Sara C., I think my point is pretty clear. But in case it isn't, I'm going to email you so we don't get into a back-and-forth on the site about who said what.
posted by John Cohen at 11:54 AM on October 17, 2010
posted by John Cohen at 11:54 AM on October 17, 2010
Well, John, I would say there are two kinds of personal responsibility: reducing your own consumption habits, and doing what you can to influence elected officials and public opinion; and I would argue the latter is more important, and focusing on the former to the exclusion of the latter can leads towards precisely what the OP fears: "spending my effort on measures that have little impact, while failing to do the things that make the most difference".
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:41 PM on October 17, 2010
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:41 PM on October 17, 2010
Not having kids is a technically correct but unreasonable answer. It marks out environmentalists as hairshirt types, and does political damage as a message. If the general population are unwilling to switch from big cars to small, or stop using tumble dryers, there's no point in telling them to abstain from one of the most fundamental human desires. Don't have more kids than replacement is better as a mass-media message, and more reasonable as individual advice.
The actions you should take above all are those that save money and don't take up time day-to-day. Once they're done, they're done, and you can use that money and time for further changes, or just keep pace effortlessly with many of those straining to make behavioural changes. The most clear-cut universal advice is to buy energy efficient appliances and fuel efficient cars when your old ones break, and to replace your light bulbs with CFLs. After that the suggestions are location-specific because they deal with heating and cooling, which in my case represents a majority of household energy usage. In temperate areas that means cavity and loft insulation, double or triple glazing, energy-efficient boilers and ground-source heat pumps, and in warmer areas energy-efficient air conditioning. Solar thermal water heating returns its investment in Britain, and so probably also in America; your lower energy costs are balanced out by a generally higher insolation. The EERE Energy Savers website is good for general information, and also seems discuss rebates.
If you're happy spending money but not time, renewable energy tariffs are in principle a good idea, although you have to read up about them. Over here power companies sell renewable energy twice, once as part of their legal requirement and again to consumers.
Then the behavioural changes, lots of which are suggested above. Don't fly when you can avoid it, don't use a tumble dryer when you can avoid it, turn the thermostat down a degree or two, have showers rather than baths, have shorter showers, recycle cans and tins etc.
posted by Marlinspike at 12:41 PM on October 17, 2010
The actions you should take above all are those that save money and don't take up time day-to-day. Once they're done, they're done, and you can use that money and time for further changes, or just keep pace effortlessly with many of those straining to make behavioural changes. The most clear-cut universal advice is to buy energy efficient appliances and fuel efficient cars when your old ones break, and to replace your light bulbs with CFLs. After that the suggestions are location-specific because they deal with heating and cooling, which in my case represents a majority of household energy usage. In temperate areas that means cavity and loft insulation, double or triple glazing, energy-efficient boilers and ground-source heat pumps, and in warmer areas energy-efficient air conditioning. Solar thermal water heating returns its investment in Britain, and so probably also in America; your lower energy costs are balanced out by a generally higher insolation. The EERE Energy Savers website is good for general information, and also seems discuss rebates.
If you're happy spending money but not time, renewable energy tariffs are in principle a good idea, although you have to read up about them. Over here power companies sell renewable energy twice, once as part of their legal requirement and again to consumers.
Then the behavioural changes, lots of which are suggested above. Don't fly when you can avoid it, don't use a tumble dryer when you can avoid it, turn the thermostat down a degree or two, have showers rather than baths, have shorter showers, recycle cans and tins etc.
posted by Marlinspike at 12:41 PM on October 17, 2010
Depending on where you live and whether you own your home, solar electricity may be one of the best things you can do. Right now there are some significant rebate programs in Massachusetts; the array I'm having put up next week is costing me $10,500 less than it would have two years ago, because of a state rebate. There are also state and federal tax credits, and it seems that I will be paid for generating green electricity, even if I use every bit of it myself. I won't; the system I bought produces more than I use. The power company buys the excess, so theoretically, they'll be paying me at least in the summer. The payback period on the (admittedly pricey) system is estimated as 7 years. After that, it's at worst free. Since the panels have a life of about 30 years, that's more than 20 years of zero- or negative-carbon electricity.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:35 PM on October 17, 2010
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:35 PM on October 17, 2010
Oh, and completely dismantle the US military. They use some insane percent of the oil/energy for the USA.
From your own link:
posted by coolgeek at 1:55 PM on October 17, 2010
From your own link:
FACT 1: The DoD's total primary energy consumption in Fiscal Year 2006 was 1100 trillion Btu. It corresponds to only 1% of total energy consumption in USA.Bogus assertions hurt the cause. We're supposed to be the ones with the facts on our side.
posted by coolgeek at 1:55 PM on October 17, 2010
The payback period on the (admittedly pricey) system is estimated as 7 years
I don't suppose you could give a break-down of that? I'm at a similar latitude, and my calculations, even with a 50% subsidy, gave a pay-back period of more than 50 years. Albeit that was without a feed in tariff.
posted by Marlinspike at 3:01 PM on October 17, 2010
I don't suppose you could give a break-down of that? I'm at a similar latitude, and my calculations, even with a 50% subsidy, gave a pay-back period of more than 50 years. Albeit that was without a feed in tariff.
posted by Marlinspike at 3:01 PM on October 17, 2010
Back to the OP's original question...
Donate cash to organizations that:
1) Lobby for increased environmental regulation and enforcement, or do wilderness conservation
2) Do family planning assistance in areas where people routinely have huge numbers of children. I like WINGS Guatemala but there are lots of other good charities out there.
posted by benzenedream at 7:40 PM on October 17, 2010
Donate cash to organizations that:
1) Lobby for increased environmental regulation and enforcement, or do wilderness conservation
2) Do family planning assistance in areas where people routinely have huge numbers of children. I like WINGS Guatemala but there are lots of other good charities out there.
posted by benzenedream at 7:40 PM on October 17, 2010
I don't suppose you could give a break-down of that?
Actually, no. It depends on so many variables that I really can't. Things like the electric rates you pay, the amount of power you use, whether you get full sun and can orient your panels to the south, and any tax breaks and incentives available to you.
Here is a site that purports to estimate how much capacity you need, how much it would cost to install, and how long it takes to pay for itself. Their estimate is a little more optimistic than my installer's; I think they used a steeper projected inflation rate for electric rates. OTOH, they underestimated my state rebate. (MA has two levels of rebate, depending on the valuation of the home. I get the higher rebate, but the estimator used the lower one.)
If you think a PV system is possible for you, get as many quotes as you can. I had some difficulty getting quotes from installers; the first one said my roof was too small to mount enough of their panels to provide all of the power I use. The second one uses more-efficient panels and had no problem sizing the system to my needs, for about the same money. Nobody else responded to my inquiries.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:24 AM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]
Actually, no. It depends on so many variables that I really can't. Things like the electric rates you pay, the amount of power you use, whether you get full sun and can orient your panels to the south, and any tax breaks and incentives available to you.
Here is a site that purports to estimate how much capacity you need, how much it would cost to install, and how long it takes to pay for itself. Their estimate is a little more optimistic than my installer's; I think they used a steeper projected inflation rate for electric rates. OTOH, they underestimated my state rebate. (MA has two levels of rebate, depending on the valuation of the home. I get the higher rebate, but the estimator used the lower one.)
If you think a PV system is possible for you, get as many quotes as you can. I had some difficulty getting quotes from installers; the first one said my roof was too small to mount enough of their panels to provide all of the power I use. The second one uses more-efficient panels and had no problem sizing the system to my needs, for about the same money. Nobody else responded to my inquiries.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:24 AM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]
Thanks for that. Really interesting website.
Sorry for the derail (to everyone else).
posted by Marlinspike at 10:35 AM on October 18, 2010
Sorry for the derail (to everyone else).
posted by Marlinspike at 10:35 AM on October 18, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
Sadly, individual actions by the average person don't have nearly the impact that decisions made by giant companies do. Reduce, reuse, and recycle to your heart's content, but it won't actually make much of a difference in the grand scheme.
The other best thing you could do - buy less stuff.
posted by Sara C. at 8:57 PM on October 16, 2010 [14 favorites]