On reducing emissions, one person at a time

01 Jun 2005

Got questions about the environment? Ask Umbra.

Dear Umbra,

I want to adopt the Kyoto treaty myself and adjust my lifestyle accordingly. No waiting, and to hell with George Bush! If my nation had adopted it, I'd have to be doing it anyway. So what is my per-capita fossil-fuel ration for the next 10 years, how do I measure it, how do I account for indirect consumption, etc.? Please advise. Thanks!

Hans Noeldner
Oregon, Wis.

Ask Umbra continues below

ADVERTISING POLICY

Dearest Hans,

Good for you. The average American emits 6.6 tons of greenhouse gases per year. Gadzooks! Lots of room for improvement.

Better calculate than never.

As you live in an industrialized nation, you will be an "Annex I" party to the Kyoto Protocol. The Annex I goal is, between 2008 and 2012, to lower greenhouse-gas emissions to 5 percent below 1990 levels. As you can see, it's not a universal amount; it's related to your own past.

So, how to set your goals? It's going to take a little time and a little math. Using one of the many greenhouse-gas calculators listed by the U.S. EPA, determine your present and 1990 emissions as best you can. Collect your utility bills and travel records before you start, since knowing kilowatt-hours, oil and gas burned, miles traveled, etc., will increase accuracy. For nailing down indirect emissions -- the energy used to, say, ship mangoes to the supermarket -- I once again tout The Consumer's Guide to Effective Environmental Choices. It has two tables in appendix A -- "environmental impacts per household" and "environmental impacts per dollar of expenditure" -- that will give you a ballpark figure for your habits. Go through the charts, list each area in which you indirectly emit, and add that to the numbers from the calculator.

Whew. Now, if your current emissions are higher than 1990 levels, you will need to figure out how to bring them down. What are you willing and able to change? That EPA page also provides tips on reducing your output. Make a specific timeline and targets, and you're on your way. Use these same sources to help measure your progress.

Of course, there are other Protocol protocols you can consider (for a complete overview, go straight to the horse's mouth [PDF]). One is that the treaty did not come into effect until 55 countries had signed on. So if you do make a plan, and think others could easily adopt it, see if you can get 55 people on board. Another facet is emissions trading: once you have other "signatories," you could use your ability to bike to work to make up for someone else's inability to turn the heat down during the day. Together, you will lower your collective emissions.

If you actually follow through, Hans, please let me know how it goes. I'd like to share any successes with other fair readers, in case they are in the mood to annex.

Admiringly,
Umbra

Yours is to wonder why, hers is to answer (or try). Please send Umbra any nagging question pertaining to the environment -- but first check out her FAQs!

The claims made in this column may not reflect the views of this magazine. Neither the magazine nor the author guarantees that any advice contained in this column is wise or safe. Please use this column at your own risk.

Umbra Fisk is Grist Research Associate II, Hardcover and Periodicals Unit, floors 2B-4B.

Comments: (3 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Matching Kyoto

Dear Umbra--Were doing your share to meet Kyoto so easy. First, while the Annex I countries like the US are on average supposed to cut their emissions by 5%, the US commitment is for 7% cuback of 1990 emissions by 2010 (Europe is, I believe 8%; some other countries are less or evan, like Australia, get to increase their emissions). Second, and what makes things really difficult, is that this is a limit for the country, not an individual. Since the US population is growing at roughly 1% per year (and I don't know if this is the growth in the legal population, or also includes visitors and illegal immigrants), this means over a 20% increase from 1990 to 2010, and so what we all have to do, in reality, is to cut our carbon-based emissions by 30% (or a bit more) so that as a country we end up with emissions 7% lower by 2010. By contrast, the population of Europe is level or declining, so they have to cut, on a per capita basis a bit less than 8% (and plans are for some countries to do a good bit more and others to even increase their emissions to head toward more even emissions per capita). So, while the Europeans can spend money replacing their least efficient facilities, the US has to keep old and new facilities open to supply energy to the growing population. Rates of technological improvement are roughly 1%/year, so this helps, and should make things pretty easy for Europe, but even with this rate, those in the US have to make pretty significant reductions, and over a pretty short time. Had the US effort started earlier, had we been allowed to sequester carbon, had we the money and permission and will to buy permits from others, etc., it all might have been easier. This is not at all to say we should not try harder than we are--only that the task is a good bit more challenging than for the Europeans--and than your analysis indicated.

Mike MacCracken (climate change scientist) Bethesda, MD

by MikeMacCracken at 2:48 PM on 01 Jun 2005

Keep It Simple

Want to do your part to address global warming? Organize your life so you don't have to drive (or, if you don't feel you can do that, drive very little) and keep electrical use to a minimum. Don't have more than two kids. Pretty simple, but so far most people aren't willing to sacrifice their unnaturally comfortable lifestyles.

Jeff Hoffman

by jdhlax at 10:54 PM on 01 Jun 2005

Let's talk about "tonneage"

In Canada, the government actually admits that climate change is a problem, and is taking steps to help Canadian citizens (or anyone else who surfs to their website) reduce emissions. Specifically, the website encourages readers to take the "One-Tonne Challenge," reducing their emissions by this amount (the average Canadian citizen produces 5 tonnes of greenhouse gases each year). The site has lots of resources and tips for accomplishing this.

The One-Tonne Challenge

Frequently asked technical questions about Grist's newsletters and website.

by Corey McKrill at 1:29 PM on 08 Jun 2005

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

We Won't Emit Defeat

On reducing emissions, one person at a time