Living Like Ed - The Real Deal

One of the recent online newsletters on powells.com features an essay by famous actor/environmentalist/all around fun guy Ed Begley Jr., who has a new book out, Living Like Ed, A Guide to the Eco-Friendly Life. While new books on green living are being published all the time, we've no doubt that Begley's stands out in the crowd, if for no other reason than he's the real deal - a practicing "ecoist" since the 70's, when his experience of the first Earth Day proved a life-changing one. In his essay, Begley describes growing up in the polluted San Fernando Valley, where ...the smog was so thick you couldn't see the hills or mountains on either side of the valley unless you drove right up next to them. I couldn't run from one end of the block to the other without developing a horrible wheeze that made it impossible to breathe.

Begley writes in his essay about learning to conserve early on in life, as his father, a child of the Depression, taught him about conservation and frugality at home. He also talks about buying his first electric car, his first wind turbine, and installation for solar electricity. In contrast to many of today's nasayers, it is refreshing that he is pleased at the progress we have made, and talks about "challenges" we face, rather then calling them problems, as he believes they are surmountable.

We are starting to live in a world in which there is widespread agreement that issues like global climate change, reduction in fisheries, air pollution, water resources, and dependency on MidEast oil cannot be ignored. And for the first time, we are recognizing that these challenges don't reside on one side of the political aisle or the other — they affect each and every one of us, and are inspiring all of us to make changes in the way we live.

Dolphins and Whales 3D:Tribes of the Ocean

We are really looking forward to seeing this new 3D underwater documentary presented by Jean-Michel Cousteau that recently launched in theaters. The film focuses on humpback whales, manatees, dolphins, and others in exotic locales from the Bahamas to the Tonga.

Going Green, or Else

We found this animation from the sundance channel particularly effective. Makes you think twice about driving 20 blocks for a pint of ice cream...???

Setting the Eco Bar Too High?

A recent New York Times article highlights the challenges of keeping up with the eco-friendly Joneses in today's marketplace, illustrating the need for cities to have a uniform standard when it comes to sustainable programs and services, buildings, transportation systems, and others. Even in relatively green cities such as Arlington, VA, Providence, RI, and Austin, TX, the average citizen is having trouble keeping up with city legislation regarding green requirements and initiatives.

“We have been doing things like filling potholes and reducing crime since cities began,” said David N. Cicilline, the mayor of Providence, R.I., but energy efficiency requires “a whole new infrastructure to evaluate and measure.”

Ann Hancock, the executive director of the Climate Protection Campaign, a nonprofit based in Sonoma County, a wine-growing area north of San Francisco, said that the county and its nine municipalities signed climate-protection agreements with enthusiasm more than five years ago, committing to bringing down greenhouse-gas emissions. Then they tried to figure out how.

“It’s really hard,” Ms. Hancock said. “It’s like the dark night of the soul.” All the big items in the inventory of emissions — from tailpipes, from the energy needed to supply drinking water and treat waste water, from heating and cooling buildings — are the product of residents’ and businesses’ individual decisions about how and where to live and drive and shop.

“They’ve seen the Al Gore movie, but they still have their lifestyle to contend with,” she said.

“We need to get people out of their cars, and we can’t under the present circumstances,” because of the limited alternative in public transportation, Ms. Hancock said. And the county’s many older homes are not very good at keeping in the cool air in the summer or the warm air in winter. “How do you go back and retrofit all of those?” she asked.

Do you have any ideas to make it easier for municipalities to incorporate green initiatives more readily, and to create a more standardized solution?

It's Always Time for a Change - Slate Video

The one thing that never changes in presidential campaigns is the promise of change. In this "Damned Spot Classic," David Schwartz of the Museum of the Moving Image shows us how campaign spots dating back 50 years have used the same theme. As has been noted by many of the green bloggers out there, the candidates better start talking about the environment soon, or there won't be any planet left to change. Why have they all been so quiet on this? Why is Al gore the only one paying attention? Unfortunately, it seems like the impact of "The Inconvenient Truth" may have faded into the background, much like the melting glaciers, only to jarr us to a new reality soon enough.

10 Strikes Against Nuclear Power, from Co-Op America

Currently we draw electric power from about 400 nuclear plants worldwide. Nuclear proponents say we would have to scale up to around 17,000 nuclear plants to offset enough fossil fuels to begin making a dent in climate change. This isn't possible – neither are 2,500 or 3,000 more nuclear plants that many people frightened about climate change suggest. Here's why:

1) Nuclear waste –The waste from nuclear power plants will be toxic for humans for more than 100,000 years. It's untenable now to secure and store all of the waste from the plants that exist. To scale up to 2,500 or 3,000, let alone 17,000 plants is unthinkable. »

2) Nuclear proliferation – In discussing the nuclear proliferation issue, Al Gore said, "During my 8 years in the White House, every nuclear weapons proliferation issue we dealt with was connected to a nuclear reactor program." Iran and North Korea are reminding us of this every day. We can't develop a domestic nuclear energy program without confronting proliferation in other countries. »

3) National Security – Nuclear reactors represent a clear national security risk, and an attractive target for terrorists. In researching the security around nuclear power plants, Robert Kennedy, Jr. found that there are at least eight relatively easy ways to cause a major meltdown at a nuclear power plant. »

4) Accidents – Forget terrorism for a moment, and remember that mere accidents – human error or natural disasters – can wreak just as much havoc at a nuclear power plant site. The Chernobyl disaster forced the evacuation and resettlement of nearly 400,000 people, without thousands poisoned by radiation. »

5) Cancer – There are growing concerns that living near nuclear plants increases the risk for childhood leukemia and other forms of cancer – even when a plant has an accident-free track record. One Texas study found increased cancer rates in north central Texas since the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant was established in 1990, and a recent German study found childhood leukemia clusters near several nuclear power sites in Europe. »

6) Not enough sites – Scaling up to 17,000 – or 2,500 or 3,000 -- nuclear plants isn't possible simply due to the limitation of feasible sites. Nuclear plants need to be located near a source of water for cooling, and there aren't enough locations in the world that are safe from droughts, flooding, hurricanes, earthquakes, or other potential disasters that could trigger a nuclear accident. Over 24 nuclear plants are at risk of needing to be shut down this year because of the drought in the Southeast. No water, no nuclear power. »

7) Not enough uranium – Even if we could find enough feasible sites for a new generation of nuclear plants, we're running out of the uranium necessary to power them. Scientists in both the US and UK have shown that if the current level of nuclear power were expanded to provide all the world's electricity, our uranium would be depleted in less than ten years. »

8) Costs – Some types of energy production, such as solar power, experience decreasing costs to scale. Like computers and cell phones, when you make more solar panels, costs come down. Nuclear power, however, will experience increasing costs to scale. Due to dwindling sites and uranium resources, each successive new nuclear power plant will only see its costs rise, with taxpayers and consumers ultimately paying the price. »

9) Private sector unwilling to finance – Due to all of the above, the private sector has largely chosen to take a pass on the financial risks of nuclear power, which is what led the industry to seek taxpayer loan guarantees from Congress in the first place. »

And finally, even if all of the above strikes against nuclear power didn't exist, nuclear power still can't be a climate solution because there is …

10) No time – Even if nuclear waste, proliferation, national security, accidents, cancer and other dangers of uranium mining and transport, lack of sites, increasing costs, and a private sector unwilling to insure and finance the projects weren't enough to put an end to the debate of nuclear power as a solution for climate change, the final nail in nuclear's coffin is time. We have the next ten years to mount a global effort against climate change. It simply isn't possible to build 17,000 – or 2,500 or 17 for that matter – in ten years. »

With so many strikes against nuclear power, it should be off the table as a climate solution, and we need to turn our energies toward the technologies and strategies that can truly make a difference: solar power, wind power, and energy conservation.