Two weeks and 77 tweets later, the Twitter “green_watch” project has come to an end. Lots of insights, problems raised, and beginning of answers. With great input from the La Marguerite blogging community.
8 lessons learned from the project:
#1. The more engaged we are in flow-like activities, the less our propensity to consume energy and buy things that depend on energy for their production:
Adults and children should be encouraged to develop capacity to engage in activities that are deeply satisfying by themselves, eg, hobbies, work, physical activities. Early education could play an important role in that respect. Children’s creativity should be encouraged more, including the ability to do much with little.
#2. Energy vampires, although well known by now, continue to do their silent work of sucking up electricity unnecessarily, and with no added benefit for the end user.
Smart meters, power strips, are available. But how many people use them? How many know much they could save? The effort required is still too great for the mainstream.
#3. There are no readily available monitoring system to alert us when we are consuming energy, and how much, and in ways that talk to us.
I understand $, comparisons, savings, cute pictures, and sensorial signals such as bells and changing colors. Forget kWhs, tables, and graphs. Lots of work is currently being done in this field. But it still has a long way to go, and is still in pilot stage.
#4. The switch from car to alternative low energy mode of transportation requires that people experience first hand the superior benefits of those alternatives.
From riding my bike a few times, I realized that biking was better for my health, took no more time than driving, avoided traffic jam and parking problem, was a lot of fun, and cost me nothing. Same with taking the train, and realizing that I could use time riding productively, working on my laptop, or reading, plus I did not have to find parking. This shows the importance of jumpstarting the conversion process by eliminating barriers to trial of other mode of transportations.
#5. We are addicted to convenience, even more than to things. Rather than fighting that addiction, we should focus on sustainable alternatives that are as, if not more convenient that current solutions.
The bike example also applies here. If we can convince people that biking is as fast, and less hassle than driving, at least for short distances, then we will have an easier sell. Trying to go against that cultural reality of our Western world, is likely to be met with great resistance, and be counterproductive.
#6. There is a huge fuzzy area in collective energy consumption, and indirect energy use. How does one establish the share between individual and institutional responsibility?
At home, and in my car, I am in charge. What happens when I consume electricity from lighting on the freeways, or university campuses? Or when I buy processed food, without any knowledge of the energy that went into producing it? Information becomes critical, as in food carbon labeling, or public display of energy consumption, for let’s say a public pool. Although not a mainstream reality yet, such information would empower individuals to make informed decisions about their use of such collective services.
#7. Green-ness is a privilege of the rich. People with money to spend on home solar installations, hybrid cars, and carbon offsets for air traveling, can lower their carbon footprint, a lot more easily than their less well-off fellow citizens.
That is a fact. In the absence of significant government subsidies and investments, the average person needs to work a lot harder to decrease his or her carbon footprint
#8. Energy efficiency and conservation, the two low hanging fruits of climate change remediation, have not yet entered the public consciousness.
I am dreaming smart homes, smart transportation, smart consumption. No fancy new technologies required. Only a shift in mindsets, and the pulling together of existing technologies.
Good stuff.
Regarding point #7, in the US, the top 10% own roughly three quarters of the total wealth. I’ve never seen a similar “carbon distribution” chart, but I wonder if there is a similar inequality or if emissions are more egalitarian. It could be that we really only need to worry about the rich going green.
Glad to see Twitter still being used for these kind of projects! I was also particularly interested by #7, which is something I have been considering a lot recently. I would be interested in any ideas you have about how to remedy this, either long term or short term.
Good points Marguerite.
#7 caught my eye, too. Regular folks may not be able to afford the solar panels and green products, but smaller homes use less energy, and in theory less disposable income should lead to lead wasteful consumption. Using public transportation also significantly lowers one’s carbon footprint. If you can’t afford to a private car or air travel, is offsetting necessary?
Its important to focus on what one does rather than on what one can buy. Low income people should be role models for wealthier folks going green, rather than the other way around. Americans are more comfortable buying a solution, but in the end I think it is really more about making do with less.
(I don’t mean to preach, I know you know all this.)
[…] sisterhood of Green Moms. These sympathetic souls include Green Moms with college-age kids– La Marguerite, Karen Hanrahan, Anna from GreenTalk and Diane MacEachern – as well as many with elementary school […]
FN, nice blog you have. I have not done the research to substantiate your hunch. Definitely worth exploring further.
I find it interesting that all three of you, zeroed in on #7.
Will do more research and report back to you.
I agree wholeheartedly with ALL 8 points but #5 and #8 vibe the most with my way of thinking.
#8 is something I have believed in and espoused for the longest time.
A shift in mindsets alone can make a big difference. It cannot be the only game in town…but while scientists, technologists, and policy-makers figure out a way to make renewable energy as conveniently and cheaply accessible fossil fuel based energy, lets start with conservation & energy efficiency.
Conservation, unlike what Cheney espoused, is not just a virtue. It has to be a way of life.
#1 The more engaged we are in flow-like activities, the less our propensity to consume energy and buy things that depend on energy for their production
Daring to be different, I zero’d in on #1. What if your flow-like activity is blogging? That requires energy, energy, energy. So we need more energy-efficient computers.
I agree that when I’m blogging along and in the flow, I’m not out buying stuff or needing more things. But I am using energy. Just saying…
Thanks for making these connections.
Beth
Thanks all, for your collective wisdom. 🙂
[…] Green Watch was a twitter project done by the La Marguerite a blog focused on “behavioral solutions to global warming” as well as marketing its own consulting services. They make a couple of interesting points that seem relevant to skiing green: […]
# 7 I have always felt that the more affluent nations have contributed the most to the greenhouse effect whereas the poorer nations eg in Africa live simply and closser to nature and do not have the resources eg a car to cause any major damage to our environment.