Re: New book: World Ethics and Climate Change
Good day Paul I am so happy to finally see someone go beyond boxed-in borders with Climate Change. I too find the discussions centering on national emissions wasteful and unproductive. Unless we hold everyone to do their part, to reduce their own carbon footprint, and NOW, we will all soon be embroiled in political strife the world has never seen. I fear the violence that could quickly escalate to nuclear weapons, more than the climate change whose impacts would likely occur later. If we continue with the national emissions framework, we run the risk that multi-national corps will move operations to areas subject to less stringent emissions caps, and overall emissions will continue at best to be reduced slightly and too slowly to make much of a difference. Please don't get me wrong--I totally understand people who correctly blame the OECD for most of today's problem. But even then, it is important to distinguish between the haves and the have-nots... The 3 B + folks in this world who barely eek a living, likely represent a minute portion of the emissions (mostly via loss of forests) and have few options available to them without significant changes in how the other almost 4B people live. The urbanites of this world and their consumption patterns around all types of resources need deep changes. Efforts to significantly alter urban resource use should be at the core--regardless of what country you live in. The urban elites everywhere have huge carbon footprints--much of it ingrained in the lifestyle options presented to them. Yet, much can be done at the personal level. My own energy consumption at home is 1/6 that of homes in my area (San Francisco, Calif), and about 1/2 or less of that of middle class homes in Mexico City. It is simply a reflecction of being aware and acting accordingly. Of understanding the difference of a want vs a need. Of living in an area where I can walk everywhere, carpool or take Metro to work. It would be better to telecommute--but that is another behavioral change that though easy to implement, seems hard to get management to buy into. It is perhaps due to the ongoing stalemates about national emissions, that we see more calls to push for personal accountabilility and use spiritual messages rather than scientific arguments, to get people to change their attitudes, lower considerably their consumption patterns, and choose less carbon-intensive choices. Many businesses are realizing that a cradle-to-cradle framework results in more profits and sustainable business. That too needs to be fostered to those who still oppose the changes that need to come. I think your book will help break the insipid and unsuccessful debates around national emissions, and hopefully get consumers to start demanding options to reduce their resource use, so that we see a large decrease in emissions quickly. There are plenty of companies and institutions who are keen on doing more renewable energy developments; even some governments (China, India much more than the US)... and many humans as well. So, let's stop wasting time with huge conferences where politicos meet to talk but not act, and make it a personal effort. At best one could ask for national policies that support and promote a move to lower carbon emissions. Be well and thanks again Rafael -Original Message- From: HARRIS, Paul Gordon To: GEP List Sent: Sat, Nov 28, 2009 2:46 am Subject: New book: World Ethics and Climate Change New book on climate change from Edinburgh University Press, just in time for the Copenhagen conference and next semester's courses: Title: World Ethics and Climate Change: From International to Global Justice Author: Paul G. Harris Publication Date: Nov 2009 Dimensions: 234 x 156 mm Length: 224 pages Series: Edinburgh Studies in World Ethics http://www.eupjournals.com/book/978-0-7486-3910-6 Summary: More than two decades of international negotiations have failed to stem emissions of greenhouse gases that are causing global warming and climate change. This book identifies a way to escape this ongoing tragedy of the atmospheric commons. It takes a fresh approach to the ethics and practice of international environmental justice and proposes fundamental adjustments to the climate change regime, in the process drawing support from cosmopolitan ethics and global conceptions of justice. The author argues for 'cosmopolitan diplomacy', which sees people, rather than states alone, as the causes of climate change and the bearers of related rights, duties and obligations. Key Features: --Describes the role of ethics and justice in world affairs and demonstrates that climate change is a matter of extreme injustice. --Summarizes and critiques the flawed doctrine of international (interstate) justice upon which governments have premised climate change agreements and policies. --Examines the practical and ethical significance for climate change of growing nu
Re: dar es salaam institute for sustainable development
Tapani I would suggest visiting the SF area where there are several interesting options: e.g., the Sustainable MBA program at the Presidio where Hunter Lovins teaches; Paul Hawken who's in Sausalito; the various departments at UC Berkeley (Energy & Resources Group, RAEL, MBA, City & Regional planning, etc); Various energy efficiency or renewable centers in the area, LBNL, etc. Near Denver you should visit the Rocky Mountain Institute (Amory Lovins); or in Virginia (Cradle to Cradle William McDonough). If you could clarify what the focus of the Institute will be that may help us give you appropriate folks to visit. Rafael -Original Message- From: Tapani Vaahtoranta To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Thu, Nov 5, 2009 4:29 am Subject: dar es salaam institute for sustainable development Dear all, Finland and Tanzania have jointly founded the Dar es Salaam Institute for Sustainable Development. Its main task is to train East African officials to build their capacity in the field of sustainable development. The inauguration will be in March 2010. I will be the programme director of the Institute responsible for its training and education activities. I already work on the development of the Institute and meet experts to find out their views on the ecological, economic and social challenges in sustainable development in Africa. I am particularly interested in what the Dar es Salaam Institute for Sustainable Development should teach and how it should do it. I am also looking for partners who could contribute to the training and other activities of the Institute. For this reason, I am planning to come to the United States in December or early January and would like to know what institutions I should visit and whom I should meet. I would really appreciate your suggestions. Best regards, Tapani -- Dr. Tapani Vaahtoranta Programme Director, The Environment and Natural Resources research programme Editor-in-Chief, Ulkopolitiikka -The Finnish Journal of Foreign Affairs Mobile: +358 500 504071 Mailto:tvina...@gmail.com
Re: 2nd Announcement: CfP - 2009 Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change
Are you aware of the behavior, energy and climate change conference in mid Nov 2009 in Wash DC? Check aceee.org and/or the Precourt Institute of Stanford for more details. Pls let the Dutch folks know. Rafi -Original Message- From: Betsill,Michele To: GEP-Ed Sent: Mon, 4 May 2009 4:10 pm Subject: 2nd Announcement: CfP - 2009 Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change C A L L FOR P A P E R S 'Earth System Governance: People, Places, and the Planet' 2009 Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Amsterdam, 2-4 December 2009 We invite you to the 2009 Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global nvironmental Change, to be held 2-4 December 2009. This conference will be the inth event in the series of annual European Conferences on the Human Dimensions f Global Environmental Change, begun in Berlin in 2001. This year's conference will also be the global launch event of the Earth System overnance Project, a new ten-year research programme under the auspices of the nternational Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP). The conference is hosted jointly by the Institute for Environmental Studies at he Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Netherlands Research School for ocio-economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE), in co-operation ith their partner institutions: the European Cooperation in Science and echnology (COST) Action on Transfor mation of Global Environmental Governance; LOGOV.ORG-The Global Governance Project; the Institute for Global Environmental trategies, Japan; the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; the Royal etherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences; the Stockholm Resilience Centre; and he Tokyo Institute of Technology. KEY DATES: eadline for paper abstracts: 15 May 2009 otification of acceptance: 15 July 2009 ull papers due: 15 November 2009 The Earth System Governance Project seeks to analyse the interrelated and ncreasingly integrated system of formal and informal rules, rule-making ystems, and actor-networks at all levels of human society (from local to lobal) that are set up to steer societies towards preventing, mitigating, and dapting to global and local environmental change and earth system ransformation. The notion of earth system governance describes an emerging ocial phenomenon - expressed in hundreds of international regimes, ureaucracies, national agencies, activists groups and expert networks - that ngages numerous actors, institutions and networks at local and global levels. t the same time, earth system governance is a demanding and vital subject of esearch in the social sciences, which we hope will be reflected in lively iscussions at the 2009 Amsterdam Conference. The Earth System Governance Project also reflects recent developments within the arth System Science Partnership, which unites the World Climate Research rogramme, the International Biosphere-Geosphere Programme, the DIVERSITAS rogramme, and the IHDP. The miss ion statement of the Earth System Science artnership calls upon social scientists to develop 'strategies for earth system anagement'. Yet what such strategies might be, and how such strategies are to e developed, remains poorly understood in the social sciences. The challenge of earth system governance raises numerous theoretical, ethodological and empirical questions, many of which are elaborated upon in etail in the new Science and Implementation Plan of the IHDP Earth System overnance Project (earthsystemgovernance.org). The 2009 Amsterdam Conference is organised around the five core analytical roblems identified in this science plan: 1. Architectures of Earth System Governance. We invite papers on the mergence, design and effectiveness of governance systems and the overall ntegration of global, regional, national and local governance. Core questions nclude: How is performance of environmental institutions affected by their mbedding in larger architectures? What are the environmental consequences of on-environmental governance systems? What is the relative performance of ifferent types of multilevel governance architectures? How can we explain nstances of 'non-governance'? What are overarching and crosscutting norms of arth system governance? 2. Agency in Earth System Governance. We invite papers that advance nderstanding of the actors and agents that drive earth system governance and he ways in which authority is granted to them and how it is exercised. We elcome papers on the influence, roles and responsibilities of both state actors nd non-state actors, such as business and non-profit organisations. Core uestions are: What is agency in earth system governance, and who are the gents? How do different agents exercise agency in earth system governance, and ow can we evaluate their relevance? 3. Adaptiveness of Earth System Governance. We invite papers on the daptiveness of earth system governance, a theme
Re: student expectations lead to grade inflation
Although it has been years since I taught last, and do remember the whinny students who not only expected an A, but felt that without it the world would come to an end, I do not agree with everything the article said Teachers are also responsible for students learning. The article's interviewees put all the onus on the students. We've all had professors who were amazing and some who were horrible, and some whose expectations were that only they could get an A, God perhaps a B, and students at best, a C. A good teacher in my view always reviews their own performance, seeking to improve it. R -Original Message- From: Elizabeth L. Chalecki To: 'gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu' Sent: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 5:53 am Subject: student expectations lead to grade inflation Dear gep-ed-ers:? ? I just found this in the New York Times today. After an excellent session on teaching "hopeful" environmental studies at this year's ISA in New York, I thought this might be relevant to our discussion of teaching methods. The article makes a good point: that the professor does not "give" them the grade, they have to earn it. (I recently got a whiny e-mail from student who asserted that a recent quiz must have been too hard because she got a low grade.) How to keep students "hopeful" about the topic while not giving them false hope about getting an A merely because they think they should?? ? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/education/18college.html?_r=1&em? ? Best regards,? ? Beth? ? ? __? Elizabeth L. Chalecki, PhD? Adj. Professor, International Studies Program? Boston College? 140 Commonwealth Ave., Chestnut Hill, MA 02467? chalecki [at] bc.edu? elizabeth.chalecki [at] tufts.edu? ? ?
Re: Green Living Tips
Totally agree with you Richard. Being that I work on energy efficiency, lighting is indeed a small piece of the total and moving to CFLs or LEDs will not solve climate change. Nevertheless, it is a start... and remember that it is a good way to make people realize that there are options when using any energy-device... people talk about the lights going out, never about the electricity went out... so getting them to adopt a CFL is in my view a way to change their cognitive map and hopefully when they go to buy a refrigerator or car, they will think about how much energy it uses... WE definitely need to do much MORE and NOW - before the health of this Planet is compromised beyond our ability to survive the changes that will ensue... and I'm frankly much more worried about humans propensity to violence especially over resources, than Climate Change.. To be blunt, a nuclear winter is something I worry about more... Thus it is in all our interests to redouble our efforts, to bring as many people as we can, of all ages, to join us to change how humans are abusing the planet. Have a great day Rafael -Original Message- From: Wallace, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: rldavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Global Environmental Education Sent: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 6:08 am Subject: RE: Green Living Tips I am looking forward to seeing the FSB list, but I think the debate is still open as to whether the savings from changing light bulbs is or is not=2 0trivial. I find the ongoing discussion of CFLs and similar prescriptions for change increasingly distracting from what is going to be needed to address the problems at hand. Lighting accounts for 5-10% of energy usage in the U.S (though nearly 25% of our electricity usage). The number of CFLs in use accounts for some small percentage of that 5-10%. It's not a small amount of energy in kilowatts, perhaps, but in terms of overall impact on energy usage in the U.S., switching to CFLs is small change. This is probably a good time to recall the Thanksgiving piece that our esteemed GEP-Ed founder, Mike Maniates, had published almost exactly a year ago in the Washington Post, entitled "Going Green? Easy Doesn't Do it". The link is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112101856.html. It just scratches the surface, but is an excellent editorial on the question of "on what scale do we need to be considering change?" This past year has seen a lot of talk and paper devoted to this issue of scale - books by Thomas Friedman, Van Jones, and others, the policy proposals Al Gore has been making. The N.Y. Times' editorial board ran a piece _yesterday_ (again, Happy Thanksgiving!) about the need for higher-level thinking - specifically, marrying economic and environmental policy RIGHT NOW, in this critical time for both (it's here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/27/opinion/27thu1.html?_r=1). It's food for thought as we (in the U.S.) dig into our holiday leftovers. Cheers,=0 A Rich -- Richard L. Wallace Associate Professor and Chair Environmental Studies Program Ursinus College Collegeville, PA From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of rldavis Sent: Thu 11/27/2008 4:25 PM To: Global Environmental Education Subject: Green Living Tips Rado-there is a listserve run by an Environmental Psychologist in New Brunswick called “fostering sustainable behavior” (spelled the US way): [EMAIL PROTECTED] You do have to be approved to join the list. I think that the archives, located at http://www.cbsm.com/forums/search.lasso are open. It is loaded with tips, has great (but fairly low volume discussion and the guy who runs it (but whose name I’ve forgotten) is very interesting. I heard him speak at a Climate Project “reunion” in Boston (that’s the group of Al Gore trained climate change presenters). By the way, he spoke specifically to idling your car and the savings are not trivial, nor are the savings from changing light bulbs. There are dollar savings too. He differentiated between easy things to do that individually were small (such as changing light bulbs) but, because so many bulbs were being change collectively, had a huge impact, and those mega things that saved a lot of carbon through a single action, but were very, very hard to achieve both technically and socially. Larry Davis -- * R. Laurence Davis, Ph.D. Professor of E arth and Environmental Sciences University Research Scholar Department of Biology and Environmental Sciences University of New Haven 300 Boston Post Road West Haven, Connecticut 06516 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Office: 203-932-7108 Fax: 203-931-6097 UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAVEN- A Leader in Experiential Education *
Re: Green Living Tips
ON the energy efficiency/conservation front there are tons of websites including likely your local electric/gas utility. Same with water use from the water utility... I work at PG&E and we have lots of options for customers (pge.com). The California PUC is in the process of developing a website with tips as well. Enviro NGOs of course have tons - nrdc, sierra club, union of concerned scientists, WWF, on and on... most of it can be summarized by being careful in how you live your life, what you eat (yes--meat does imply more resources - as you go up one trophic level and it typically takes about 10 lbs of veggies to make 1 lb of meat), how much you drive when you could walk/bike; how far you live from work and access to all the products and services you think you need (rethink those as well), what resources are used to bring you energy, and of course much you can do to reduce your energy use by also paying attention to how your abode is built, what appliances you purchase and if you don't have CFLs or LED lights--what are you waiting for? Finally, behaviors matter... having the heating or AC system on with windows open... yes--lots of people and schools do this... why? Or insisting on having the huge TV work as a radio... if what you want is music, turn on a radio or use an iPod... not the 60 inch TV! (yes, I see this happen all the time as well)... could go on and on MOst of it could be avoided by paying more attention to how you use energy (yup--trying to go 0 -60 mph in 4 secs is usually wasteful), how much you consume (do you really need 200 pairs of shoes, 30 suits, or for that matter more than 300 ft2/person--as in why do you want/need/worse, purchase a 5000 ft2 (or larger) home? Do you need 2 acres of grass around the house and 40 miles from work? Do you need to fly to attend meetings in person that could perhaps be done electronically? Tips there are aplenty... what seems to be lacking is an awareness at how "entitled" we live our lives... using resources that could improve others livelihoods very significantly, yet provide minimal extra comfort (if any at all) to us... and lets not even get started with how much healthier this planet would be. We need to figure out ways to get people to care more about the Planet and the other inhabitants in it... that is the crux... the tips--they're all around us. And give thanks on this day after thanksgiving, that we can even be worrying about this rather than access to water (clean would be even better), fuel, food, a roof over our heads, Rafael -Original Message- From: rldavis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Global Environmental Education Sent: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 1:25 pm Subject: Green Living Tips Rado-there is a listserve run by an Environmental Psychologist in New Brunswick called “fostering sustainable behavior” (spelled the US way): [EMAIL PROTECTED] You do have to be approved to join the list. I think that the archives, located at ht tp://www.cbsm.com/forums/search.lasso are open. It is loaded with tips, has great (but fairly low volume discussion and the guy who runs it (but whose name I’ve forgotten) is very interesting. I heard him speak at a Climate Project “reunion” in Boston (that’s the group of Al Gore trained climate change presenters). By the way, he spoke specifically to idling your car and the savings are not trivial, nor are the savings from changing light bulbs. There are dollar savings too. He differentiated between easy things to do that individually were small (such as changing light bulbs) but, because so many bulbs were being change collectively, had a huge impact, and those mega things that saved a lot of carbon through a single action, but were very, very hard to achieve both technically and socially. Larry Davis -- * R. Laurence Davis, Ph.D. Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences University Research Scholar Department of Biology and Environmental Sciences University of New Haven 300 Boston Post Road West Haven, Connecticut 06516 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Office: 203-932-7108 Fax: 203-931-6097 UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAVEN- A Leader in Experiential Education *
Re: recycling in the middle east
Or the Arava Institute--where Palestinian, Israeli and other students work to resolve environmental issues for the entire area. They are located in Sde Boker near Beer Sheva in Israel. Aaron Tal leads it. Rafael -Original Message- From: Ruba Marshood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: DG Webster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: GEP-Ed Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:07 am Subject: Re: recycling in the middle east Hi D.G. ? Interesting topic. ? Your student may find it useful to contact Jordanian Environment Society (JES) [EMAIL PROTECTED] I hear they've just had a "Clean up Aqaba" campaign - but do not know what that entailed or targetted.?JES communicates fully in English, though their newsletters and flyers are often in Arabic only.? However, I assume that wouldn't be a challenge for your Kuwaiti student. ? Also, Friends of the Earth Middle East (based in Tel Avis) may be of some assistance.? I do not have any contact info handy at the moment, but I'm sure she can find it online. ? ruba On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 1:01 PM, DG Webster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Everyone, I've got a student who wants to do her summer stats project on recycling in the middle east, particularly her home country, Kuwait, but we're having a hard time finding data. Any suggestions? Thanks, dgwebster -- D.G. Webster, PhD Postdoctoral Researcher Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA 90089-0371 http://wrigley.usc.edu/research/webster.html
Re: global poverty speakers and/or films?
Check also Anuradha Mittal's work on food policies and poverty. Google her. R -Original Message- From: Olivia Bina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: VanDeveer, Stacy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 1:27 pm Subject: Re: global poverty speakers and/or films? Dear Stacy, have found the following talks on TED very interesting, and ertainly 'dynamic'. You can browse through the list on this page: ttp://www.ted.com/index.php/themes/rethinking_poverty.html ut I can add that these are a few of my favourites are: Emily Oster: What do we really know about the spread of AIDS? http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/emily_oster_flips_our_thinking_on_aids_in_africa.html Emily Oster re-examines the stats on AIDS in Africa from an economic erspective and reaches a stunning conclusion: Everything we know bout the spread of HIV on the continent is wrong. Hans Rosling: Debunking third-world myths with the best stats you've ver seen You've never seen data presented like this. With the drama and urgency f a sportscaster, statistics guru Hans Rosling debunks myths about he so-called "developing world." http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html Hans Rosling: New insights on poverty and life around the world Researcher Hans Rosling uses his cool data tools to show how countries re pulling themselves out of poverty. He demos Dollar Street, omparing households of varying income levels worldwide. Then he does omething really amazing. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new _insights_on_poverty.html ope this helps, livia color>7A7A,6262,ADAD*** Dr. Olivia Bina esearch Fellow Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa Tel. +351 91 7451961 Skype name: oliviabina email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.epi-in-china.com/ *** On 30 Jul 2008, at 13:33, VanDeveer, Stacy wrote: excerpt> ArialColleagues, Arial ArialUNH has a ‘dialogue’ opic every year and this year we are focusing on aspects of poverty nd economic inequality. ArialI am wondering if any of ou can suggest films, documentaries, or particularly dynamic speakers elated to global inequality/poverty/poverty alleviation. ArialI’d love to have uggestions with some sort of sustainability connection, but that is ot required. Arial ArialThank you! Arial--Stacy Arial Arial Verdana,, Verdana ,, Times New Roman Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4Stacy . VanDeveer Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4Associate rofessorVerdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 /x-tad-smaller> Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4University f New Hampshire Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 ept. of Political Science Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 orton SSC Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4Durham, H 03824 USA Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4[EMAIL PROTECTED] /x-tad-smaller> Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4tel: /x-tad-smaller> Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 ax: Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 obile: Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 kype ID: Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4(+1) 603-862-0167 < Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 +1) 603-862-0178 Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4(+1) 781-799-1782 < Verdana4E4E,8181,C4C4 tacy.vandeveer Times New Roman Verdana,,Want o always have my latest info? Verdana,,Want signature like this? Times New Roman =
Re: Environmental Policy Failures compiled list
Mike I totally agree with you and I've worked both via pubs say in ACEEE and at forums on the supposedly called Big Bold EE Strategies of the CPUC (more like timid and tepid to me!) to get them to understand that 5000 ft2 homes for 1 person 70 miles from work in downtown LA, in a hotter climate, with porous pavement and double windows, and possibly a 5 kW PV system (instead of a 1 kW at most) are NOT what we want the CPUC is calling for Zero net E homes and businesses... yet at least in the later case, that could definitely mean more urban sprawl, as you need more roof area/volume of building... as a great requirement, they now ask that homes do a home E audit before being able to get the incentive for a PV system.. yet there is NO requirement to implement anything the audit points out... As I just wrote to a dear urban planner chilean friend... I envision us moving to a world where a sustainable community is mixed population and use... multistory (doesn't need to be 100 stories tall--you should see some of the new residential buildings going up in SF!), with green materials, going?back to about 200-300 ft2/person instead of the?~900 ft2 we have today (who can afford such homes at ~ 500$/ft2 in?CA these days!), co-housing type ideas (ie, several "commons" for kids and adults to enjoy), community centers, schools, mini-commerce, locally grown fruits and veggies (organic of course--where older folks can spend their days gardening and/or manually going after the bugs who insist on competing for the watermelons and other greens), with local exercise areas (indoor and outdoor--CA can do this!), free bikes for folks to use and leave for others to use (being done in various cities), and NO need to drive anywhere (working adults can telecommute!, older folk--who eith! er can't drive or don't have the $ to pay for $7-10/gallon gasoline) you get the picture. Make these communities using solar architecture to minimize any need for mechanical engineers, put gardens on the roofs, use solar PV or wind or geothermal or waste heat to heat/cool any spaces that still need that after you build with EE... You get the picture... and make this community the one that shows up in Sunset magazine, Time, Newsweek, AARP, etc... Even pension funds could invest in these types of communities instead of IOUs Yes--this country needs to address both population and its attitude of being "entitled" to bigger, and thinking bigger is better Small is beautiful has never sounded better! The sooner we do that, the better. I remember a paper a fellow ERGie wrote circa 1996 for ACEEE Summer Study where he posed the problem of EE simply letting people be more blasse about really addressing their addiction to more and more and larger... that EE was diluting the signal that the shit was hitting the fan... by doing so more slowly. Alas, our entire community (ie the broader environmental community) has been reticent to clearly state that US society has to do an about face and think very differently! You should see the notes I've sent to newspapers who've blamed China for the price of oil... Quick reminders that with 4% of the world population we still use 20% of world resources... down from 25% thanks to the fact that China is now about as resource needy as we are... Or the fact that Art Rosenfeld loves to tout how CA and blue states in general, who've all had longstanding EE programs, have kept kWh/capita constant for decades versus a 50% increase in the US...and I strongly criticize this as misleading, as CA total kWh has increased ~ 30%, just as population has... and that is NOT solving the GHG issue... that it has helped, but not solved it. I would love to see our community be less timid, be less scared of telling folks--sorry, but you either cut back or you will kill the goose of the golden eggs... And to show them how they actually will live better and healthier... do we really need food that's travelled 6k miles and has been filled with all sorts of hormones and biocides to make it look good at the supermarket? Do we really enjoy sitting in traffic not just during the weekday but also weekends? Do we really enjoy having to use the car to go everywhere? Do we really enjoy reading about the soldiers or the civilians who are dying every day in some place that happens to also have oil? Do we... Anyways--gotta go, am seeing the E Minister of Chile for lunch today... part of the entourage travelling with the Chilean President (who I'll hear talk tomorrow at I-house), and since he went to Berkeley, am seeing him here rather than in Chile--where I was 1 month ago talking about the importance of doing EE instead of coal, diesel, nukes, etc... Be well--always a pleasure to hear from you and let me know when you're in town! Best of the best to everybody at home Rafi -Original Message- From: Michael Maniates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: We
Re: Environmental Policy Failures compiled list
This issue was and still is of concern within the energy efficiency community--known usually as the "takeback effect". Google and you will find tons of stuff on it--mostly circa 1980-90's... less so of late.. I personally think that it is false precision as it assumes you can know what would have happened anyways. For example, how many miles would people really have travelled without CAFE standards? We saw the price of gasoline at US pumps go from $1+ to almost $5 in CA these days, and it was only recently, together with the home sales implosion and other perceived economic downturn signals that people have started to drive less. Yes.. you can find studies that purport to have found that people's magical turning point is 4.5$/gallon--where above this value we will significantly reduce our driving... yet to ignore the context under which these questions are being asked, is to leave aside many confounding effects that may actually be larger influencers. One can also make the c! ase in the energy efficiency field that under the current "greening" of everyone, customers might actually be more careful in how they use say their compact fluorescent lights--ie, they may actually be turning off more of the equipment when it isn't being used, than in the past. Someone trying to study the usual 'takeback' might see a diminished effect today... or even see it be negative--that actual customer behavior is much more efficient. And it is these types of real life nuances that make?this discussion and any 'truths' that might come out of the literature, less valid and interesting to me than teaching the students to think?of the confounding effects that may be important to track before reaching conclusions about any "takeback" effect. ? Environmental advocacy, environmentalism, and whatever other green ism you may want to think about are all part of an ogoing socio-cultural evolution that is heightened when impacted nature and its inability to keep up with our propensity to abuse natural resources, makes it hard to continue to ignore the impacts ensuing from our profligate ways. To try to estimate how improved efficiency leads to increased consumption results in lots of resources focused on measuring the noise, not the signal. Or learning how to see the signal and showcase it to others who need to see it so that they act accordingly. Urge you to focus more on the signal, less on the noise. Be well folks Rafi -Original Message- From: Dana R. Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Steven Bernstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: VanDeveer, Stacy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Ruba Marshood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:04 pm Subject: RE: Environmental Policy Failures compiled list This notion of a "rebound effect" has also been debated within the literature on the Environmental Kuznets Curve in economics and within debates about the theory of Ecological Modernization in sociology.? ? Dana? ? On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Steven Bernstein wrote:? ? > In regard to Stacy's comments, there is a literature on the "rebound? > effect" that might be of interest. I.e., the idea that increased? > efficiencies can have the perverse effect of encouraging people to consume? > more. Sorry I don't have citations offhand. I gather there is also a? > debate about its robustness.? >? > Steven? >? > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, VanDeveer, Stacy wrote:? >? >> Hi - I'll add on too.? >>? >> I think you might look for several examples of policies that improved? >> environmental efficiency (if way use such language), bur failed to? >> protect the environment. For example, neither US CAF? standards nor? >> European style petrol taxes have stopped the growth in vehicle miles? >> traveled or the growth in aggregate demand for gasoline (with all of? >> the incumbent environmental implications). In other words, I think? >> one might pay special attention to policies that were successful in? >> meeting some of their goals, but still failed to curb significant? >> aspects of environmental damage.? >>? >> --sv? >>? >>? >>? >> ? >>? >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ruba Marshood? >> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:05 AM? >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: Environmental Policy Failures compiled list? >>? >>? >>? >> I would suggest adding - to the note on sharks - that they are not only >> harmed via by-catch, but also in targetted fisheries. the biggest threat is >> practice in which they are treated after being caught (whether incidentally >> or not) - in that they are finned and dumped back to sea. Essentially, this >> is cost-effective practice as the market values fins over the rest of the >> body by the tenfold...so for the fishers, it is much greater profit to take >> only the fins of as many sharks as possible rather than take the whole shark >> on board, with limited space, and h
Re: Critique on Amory Lovins / RMI
John et al Again, you may want to bring Amory into this discussion and get it directly from him, but my view on this is as follows: Amory began trying to engage public entities, both governments and multilateral agencies to push his soft E path ideas. The results were less than expected and needed. He then began to engage more and more directly with scions of the enterpreneurial world, and found them more ammenable to adopt his suggestions in a more timely and deeper fashion. That is why more and more you see him engaged with the private than with the public "world" and the discourse has adapted to the audience--hence the move to "natural capitalism". When you contrast the amounts of resources the World Bank can move vs say GE or Google... And when you believe you've finally got a Finance Minister and/or Energy Minister to shift from a Supply-side only paradigm to one that at least sees value in pursuing demand-side efforts, and you see this Minister either be distracted by other issues or get replaced yet again by someone who is clueless about energy efficiency and renewables... you at some point figure out that you can't place all your hopes in the public sector. It is unfortunate, but it is the reality we face in many places. Thus making the business case to the private sector that they can be more successful by becoming more energy (and resource) efficient or making/offering more energy/resource efficient products and services, seems to result in more positive and timely changes. Let me know if you want Amory to participate in this one. I can email him. Rafi -Original Message- From: John M. Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 9:21 pm Subject: Re: Critique on Amory Lovins / RMI I think that -- as Bram and others had noted earlier, and as the piece by amien White that I recommended on this list argues -- it is important to istinguish Lovins' "technical" arguments from his free-market economic rguments, which I believe have become much more prominent in recent ears. I'll offer a first hand example: A few years ago Lovins gave a lecture on my university campus. As a part f that visit, I participated in an informal lunch with him and a number f M.A. students in a practically-oriented environmental program. He was ery generous with his time and invited each of the students to describe heir projects and ideas. He offered them many insightful 'technical' uggestions and insights. In addition, in almost every case, he asked the tudent how they could make the "business case" for their project. Toward he end of the lunch, noting the consistency with which he asked the tudents about this, I asked Lovins: "how far do you think the 'business ase' for sustainability will take us?" Without hesitating, he replied "much farther than we'll ever need to go." I found this to be a very telling response. John Meyer Interesting and thought provoking exchange around Amory. Thanks! I suggest a couple of things--contact him directly--he tends to be quite good about responding to email. You may also want to read/check out William McDonough's work (Cradle to Cradle, etc)... including his current work to design a 1 M person city for the Chinese. I see both as visionaires of what could be, not necessarily what will happen; especially given the reticense of many with huge resources (political, financial and technical) to keep us using obsolete technologies, land use patterns, and mostly business-as-usual patterns. Yes, Amory does talk mostly about technologies, but does also touch on some of the institutional aspects that affect why the ones he proposes are not widely implemented. You do need to take into account that many of the folks who make public policy or decide large capital investments in industry tend to have an engineering or MBA background. They tend to respond better to arguments based on technical merits. I had the pleasure of accompanying Amory in 1992 or so to Mexico where we met with top government officials and utility folks. They responded very well to Amory's arguments and showed a willingness to take actions based on his "technical" recommendations that I have never seen when similar folks have been given social science arguments. I urge you to, when discussing the arguments Amory posses with your students, to also ask them what types of arguments are more likely to lead to the quick action we need if we are to mitigate GCC. This can help the students develop more effective and convincing arguments as they tailor these to those they seek to influence and by doing this, making the academic argument/discussion usable in the world out there. Rafael -Original Message- From: Simon Dalby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Ronnie Lipschutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Critique on Amory Lovins / RMI
Interesting and thought provoking exchange around Amory. Thanks! I suggest a couple of things--contact him directly--he tends to be quite good about responding to email. You may also want to read/check out William McDonough's work (Cradle to Cradle, etc)... including his current work to design a 1 M person city for the Chinese. I see both as visionaires of what could be, not necessarily what will happen; especially given the reticense of many with huge resources (political, financial and technical) to keep us using obsolete technologies, land use patterns, and mostly business-as-usual patterns. Yes, Amory does talk mostly about technologies, but does also touch on some of the institutional aspects that affect why the ones he proposes are not widely implemented. You do need to take into account that many of the folks who make public policy or decide large capital investments in industry tend to have an engineering or MBA background. They tend to respond better to arguments based on technical merits. I had the pleasure of accompanying Amory in 1992 or so to Mexico where we met with top government officials and utility folks. They responded very well to Amory's arguments and showed a willingness to take actions based on his "technical" recommendations that I have never seen when similar folks have been given social science arguments. I urge you to, when discussing the arguments Amory posses with your students, to also ask them what types of arguments are more likely to lead to the quick action we need if we are to mitigate GCC. This can help the students develop more effective and convincing arguments as they tailor these to those they seek to influence and by doing this, making the academic argument/discussion usable in the world out there. Rafael -Original Message- From: Simon Dalby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Ronnie Lipschutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Geoffrey Wandesforde-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Bram Büscher'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Matthew Paterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; willett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Global Environmental Education Sent: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:35 pm Subject: Re: Critique on Amory Lovins / RMI GEPED folks: Lovins' stuff in the 1970s was interesting for numerous reasons, but in many ways much more interesting than his market capitalism stuff more recently. Most people seem to forget that he came out of the anti-nuke campaigns of the 1970s, working in the UK for FoE among other activities. Part of that campaign was to find technical alternatives to nukes and this is where the whole focus on technology and price started. The whole soft energy framework focused explicitly on end use, and then worked backwards to show that there were all sorts of simple technologies (and not any one single magic bullet) that were much more economically and ecologically sensible than the centralised power grids fed by nuke power stations. His early 1980s stuff dealt with the security dimensions of nuclear proliferation, and his arguments back then about security being compromised by making the U.S. dependent on petroleum from the Persian Gulf turned out to be prescient. If you haven't read The Energy Controversy by Amory Lovins and his critics (San Francisco Friends of the Earth 1979) from cover to cover, then you have missed a real gem of policy analysis. OK its 29 years old and even thinking about it is making me worry about my pension, but there is a wealth of stuff back there that is really useful as a template for looking at what has changed, the lessons learned, and yes to use Lovins' master metaphor from the poet, matters of "the road not taken". Most of the Energy Controversy is about US policy issues, but British teachers could do precisely the same exercise with Gerald Leach and his friends A Low Energy Strategy for the UK, also published in 1979 (London: Institute for Environment and Development). The historic comparisons there would be especially interesting given that Margaret Thatcher intervened in all this in the 1980s and her destruction of the coal miners and the coal industry dramatically shifted the UK energy mix. In terms of teaching, and this list is about teaching, the obvious way to use Lovins is to ask the question, well if its all so simple and logical, the physics works, the chemistry works, the economics works, then how come societies aren't actually doing these sensible things? The students can begin to explore which industries get what subsidies. How corporations buy up patents. (Talking of 1979 does anyone remember Ray Reece's The Sun Betrayed?) How licencing of new technologies works. Why people buy ecologically damaging technologies, and all the other things that we teach! (And yes do also read Langdon Winner as Ronnie suggests!) Thirty years later all these themes of foreign dependence, the dangers of proliferation, the economics of what happens when oil prices rise are back again with a v
Re: microfinance and fisheries
Ruba Your note reminded me of a joke about a World Bank functionaire who appalled at seeing?a Mexican fisherman?snoozing under a palapa?for most of the week, admonishes the fisherman?to get up, get a loan, buy a bigger boat and go fishing full-time instead of being unproductive so that after 20 years of ever increasing fishing with more boats and people he could?finally retire to a life of leisure under a palapa... Fisherman simply replied something to the tune of "why wait 20 years to live my current life?" Mexico has a strong government microfinance program but I have not followed it closely. I'm sure you can find similar examples in India and various areas in Africa. Even the World Bank and similar MDBs have publications on the subject. Another option is to tap into remittances and use those for productive uses rather than just consumption. A friend of mine in Mexico was looking at how to empower women to tap into these remitances to invest in better education and health services in their small localities. Be well Rafael Friedmann -Original Message- From: Ruba Marshood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 7:54 pm Subject: microfinance and fisheries Hi All, Wondering if you have any ideas or have information on any microfinance programs designed to assist impoverished fishing communities to develop sustainable practices - whether that entail building their voice in their local political arena, or to develop opportunities for livelihood transitions away from fishing - or any other opportunities.? Would be happy to elaborate, though in this brainstorming stage, don't have much more to offer.? Otherwise, I am very open to any and all suggestions. Many thanks!! ruba Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
Re: envlawprofessors: Climate Change Survey
Folks Thanks for reminding me of RFF and its website with interesting pubs. Unfortunately, as much as I looked around, I was unable to get the pub mentioned. Can one of you please send it to me? As for your discussion on why folks are less keen on increases in gasoline vs electric prices... I'm a bit baffled by some of your comments... I'm not surprised that folks respond more to gasoline--at least at the water cooler... not necessarily with how they vote, or how they protest, nor how legislators have responded to their perceived anger at big oil. Gasoline prices have almost tripled in less than 2 years and doubled in the last one. At the same time oil companies profits and stocks have grown significantly. When folks make 30-40 billion dollars PROFIT, it makes the news! Yet we have yet to see a Carbon tax, or an increase in a gasoline tax of 5 cents! Electricity rates barely go up on a yearly basis. Most jurisdictions use increasing rate tariffs, where the marginal rate can be significantly higher than the base one, yet is only applied to a fraction of consumption. I agree that monthly electric bills vs weekly (or even more often) trips to the gasoline station make gasoline more prevalent in folks minds. Yet how many of them then decide to purchase a hybrid vehicle? In homes, most folks have rudimentary understanding on how to save electricity or heating fuel--yet it is also hard for them to understand which actions are most likely to lead to large savings. When we drive, we know that quick acceleration is a great way to burn gasoline... yet how many of us focus on a variety of other bad driving behaviors, or keep the car in top operating performance via ongoing maintenance (and contrast that to how often we change the filters in our HVAC systems or call the contractor to check on the equipment...). bottomline--we've worked hard at making electricity and natural gas "invisible". Have a good week Rafael Friedmann -Original Message- From: Wil Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: 'Craig Oren' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 3:12 pm Subject: RE: envlawprofessors: Climate Change Survey It's also fascinating to watch this psychology in action: folks will queue t a gas station with hyper cut-rate gasoline for hours despite what that ust translate into in terms of opportunity costs, yet won't do highly ost-beneficial retrofitting in their home. I hope communications experts ike Susie Moser can help us craft some effective messages for public onsumption. wil Dr. Wil Burns enior Fellow, International Environmental Law anta Clara University School of Law 00 El Camino Real, Loyola 101 anta Clara, CA 95053 USA hone: 408.551.3000 x6139 obile: 650.281.9126 ax: 408.554.2745 [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRN Author Page: ttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=240348 nternational Environmental Law Blog: ttp://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intlenvironment/ Original Message- rom: Craig Oren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 9:29 AM o: Wil Burns c: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu ubject: RE: envlawprofessors: Climate Change Survey not to my knowledge. I think the difference is that gasoline prices are ore visible to consumers than are utility bills, partly because gasoline rices are paid more often and affect an important daily activity. But hat's just my guess. On Sun, 24 Jun 2007, Wil Burns wrote: > Hi Craig, Thanks for responding. You obviously know a lot more about utilities ssues than I do; however, my question would be whether there's any empirical evidence that the general public comprehends the regulatory environment faced by utilities. wil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of harrisc Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2007 10:30 PM To: 'Wil Burns'; gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: envlawprofessors: Climate Change Survey i don't think anyone on gep-ed responded to wil burns re-post of craig oren's message on the environmental law professors list . . . if someone did, i apologize for missing it . . . it occurs to me that u.s. citizens are willing to accept higher utility rates because those rates are largely controlled by state and (indirectly) federal public service commissions, but u.s. citizens are not willing to accept higher gasoline prices because those prices are not subject to any formal controls . . . i would suggest that u.s. consumers perceive asoline wholesalers and retailers as already having set prices at a level that ensures a large profit, so consumers do not feel that they should have to pay any more . . . cheers, craig craig k harris department of sociology michigan agricultural experiment station national food safety and toxicology center institute for food and agricultural standards michigan state university http://www.msu.edu/~
Re: China passes the US on GHGs?
And also # 1 in cummulative GHG emissions for some time to come... R -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu Sent: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 2:12 PM Subject: China passes the US on GHGs? Fun facts to know and tell in climate change: According to this article, the US is (finally) no longer number 1 in total GHG emissions. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/03/05/MNG18OFHF21.DTL&type=printable As an American, however, I take unabashed pleasure in knowing that we will remain number 1 in GHG emissions per capita, for a long time into the future. Best, Ron Ronald Mitchell, Professor Department of Political Science University of Oregon AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
Re: IC - IISD Information Centre Bulletin - Focus on SD-Cite
Fellow GEPED'ers: On the issue of public governance: Check also www.oaklandinstitute.com, where Anuradha Mittal continues the fight for public governance of water, food genomes, etc... Not only can you find a wealth of information on current issues, but it could provide case studies of ongoing struggles to protect public governance for inclusion in your upcoming book. I struggle/live with this issue daily; working in the energy sector--both in California and elsewhere. Energy and particularly electricity, can be seen as a basic human need--as it allows the transformation of resources into services, including many basic ones for human sustenance. Even when electricity is provided by investor-owned-utilities, these are regulated. If the regulation is successful, it basically turns these "private" entities into "public" ones. How to ensure that regulation exerts effective public governance at minimal cost is an interesting area of research. For example, the "free markets" paradigm that began in earnest in Chile's electric sector and has tried to spread worldwide, promoted by those who have the most to gain from this, and their buddies in public office and in multi-lateral lending agencies (also "public"), has led to catastrophic and costly situations in this sector. California's 2000-2001 experience was the most visible example. Yet most of the research on this failure of public governance that I've seen has been done by economists. Political scientists, sociologists, anthropologists, etc., have mostly stayed away--albeit having much to contribute. I am very happy to see more work on public governance. I do hope to see more people looking on the energy sector, to help us design better public oversight mechanisms. Would love to collaborate with other GEPED'rs on this. Have a nice day Rafael Friedmann
Re: Strange request for leads
I'm not sure what goes for an "expert" on this subject... we academics tend to consider ourselves experts in this and that... so, I will say I don't work in wildlife management, nor human egocentricity, but: I second Susi's comments... the entire discussion has been entertaining... shows our anthropocentric bias... deer eating "our" trees and plants... "nature fighting back" (are we assuming they're organizing to attack us in coordinated fashion like "freedom fighters"?)... We are encroaching more and more on them, and as Adil pointed out, it typically is the more marginalized elements of our societies who bear the brunt of this... yet is the alternative to wildlife preserves to simply let all this biological diversity disappear? Or should we simply learn to share more and better--both among humans and with the rest of nature? It seems that preserves that have led to ecotoursim have provided better livelihoods for many--and this might be an alternative until we really learn as a species to be less "Entitled" to everything, and learrn to share (thought they taught that in our early years and even in kindergarten!). Rafael
