It's not you, it's the list (the very very bad list)

Let's get smarter about what really counts

This is a to-do list from the Thai edition of The Armchair Environmentalist

In a world over-endowed with organizing methods and manuals, environmentalists are still producing very very bad lists of things to do to save the planet. Here’s a typical example:

1. Tell your lawmakers

2. Cancel junk mail

3. Eat ugly fruit

4. Stop eating red meat

5. Convert to renewable energy

6. Conserve water

7. Compost

8. No more plastic water bottles!

9. Bring a bag

10. Ride a bike

11. Reduce, reuse, recycle

12. Turn on the fans

13. Use LEDs

14. Wash in cold

15. Install solar

Or a longer one, from a Sierra Club chapter: 100 Things You Can Do to Save the Planet. Or this, from the Center for Biological Diversity: 12 Ways To Live More Sustainably.

It’s not that any individual item is wrong. But there’s no rhyme or reason to these lists, no groupings, no sequence, and no awareness of the crucial factors: time, money, and impact.

And there are some daft ideas presented along with reasonable ones, sometimes because the writer was trying to hit a number. A book published by Penguin aimed at 1001 tips, and on the first page was this gem: “Write small so you use less paper.”

It’s not that we can’t find good models. Cooks Illustrated and Fine Gardening and Family Handyman in the US have incredibly precise instructions and tips, and the BBC and Royal Horticultural Society (and many others¹) put out great how-to.

If we are serious about climate change - and god knows we should be, given that Tuesday was hottest day recorded on the planet - we need to have solid, specific advice available to all.

Some of it will cover the same topics as the publications I’ve just mentioned: cooking, gardening, home repair. But we need more, and that’s what Home Ecology is about.

Mobility is probably the biggest and most challenging topic because most of the modern world’s built environment has been designed for the automobile and the airplane.

Travel Matters

After 3 years when our travel was drastically curtailed, everyone seems to be getting on the road or on a plane. I think of this when I read advice about green meals or going plastic free, remembering the Norwegian study² showing that green families and other members of environmental groups are no more ecofriendly than their nongreen counterparts.

For instance, people who recycle, or bicycle to work, or buy green products to reduce their carbon footprint, have something else in common: they travel more during holidays and vacations, which nullifies their attempts at home to reduce their impact on the planet. Kristin Linnerud, one of the authors, commented, “When we sacrifice something, we think we deserve a reward.”

The center’s FLYWELL project is tackling that issue, first by acknowledging that “Travelling for work, leisure, and family is often associated with experiences of relatedness, belonging, physical health, autonomy, and freedom” and that the travel sector cannot be decarbonized simply through  increased efficiency and technical improvements. I’ll be writing more about this in future letters, and drawing on my years of work on the Train Campaign.

Impact Assessment

Meanwhile, people are still obsessing over paper while doing nothing about their car use or air travel. I was reminded of the emphasis on paper when I saw, for the first time, a recording of a TV interview I did for a Discovery Channel program in 1991. This is a good example of how simplistic media coverage was (and I’m not sure it’s any better now). The segment itself is far shorter than the time I spent with a makeup artist.

I still use cloth napkins and cleaning rags, and carry a cloth shopping bag. But what really matters?

As the 2023 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report makes clear, what counts when we talk about climate change is eliminating fossil fuels.

It’s that simple, and that challenging.

All too many people think that the answer is electricity, an easy fix. This is a dangerous misconception. (I blame inadequate science and geography lessons in school!) The fact that electricity arrives in our houses without fumes doesn’t make it pure and green.

In the United States, 60% of our electricity is generated from fossil fuels, often in poorer regions of the countries. Climate justice is a major issue, and the fossil fuel companies are lobbying hard against change. It’s going to take time and political will and a great deal of money to drop that percentage as drastically as we need to.

The legitimate reason for thinking of electricity as climate friendly is that it can be generated from sun and wind and geothermal energy. And once a vehicle or appliance runs on electricity, there’s flexibility about its energy source - unlike an internal-combustion engine.

But renewable-sourced electrification is not a quick fix. LED lightbulbs, Energy Saver washing machines, and electric cars are not enough. In that case, what can you do?

Sure, as all the environmental groups say, write to your state and national legislators and your town officials, and to anyone in a position to move the needle. But that’s not enough. Do the harder things: divest yourself of fossil fuels. This means looking not only at your heating and lighting and driving, but at your investments, and perhaps even at your profession.

Find out if you are supporting an industry that is on course to wreck the future, and do something about it.

Changes in the food sector, electricity, transport, industry, buildings and land-use can reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, they can make it easier for people to lead low-carbon lifestyles, which will also improve health and wellbeing. A better understanding of the consequences of overconsumption can help people make more informed choices. --IPCC 2023

Why you, and me? Because we are the affluent global citizens, especially energy- and resource-glugging Americans, who can make the biggest difference. We can also make it easier for our leaders to negotiate globally, instead of being in a position where they argue for restraint by less wealthy developing countries as well as giants like China and India, when we are, and have been for a very long time, the biggest contributors to global warming.

But you want a list, a good list, don’t you? Here’s one to start with, focused on travel and summer in the northern hemisphere:

• Plan less frequent but longer trips.

• Test the alternatives to car travel available to you, one trip at a time.

• Gear up for walking and cycling comfortably and safely. If you haven’t cycled in years practice off road.

• Use A/C if you have to, but do not refrigerate your house or office (Americans are ridiculous about this: freezing in the summer, and cranking the heat up in the winter).

If you want to take a closer look at how experts assess and measure impact, both negative and positive, Volume 6 of the Encyclopedia of Sustainability: Measurements, Indicators, and Research Methods for Sustainability, is fascinating.

This topic was suggested to me by a colleague and I wasn’t sure we could find authors, but it’s actually a significant field and you can read the introduction here. The coverage includes all kinds of measurements and indicators, including quantitative and qualitative approaches, risk assessment, and various ways to look at human impact. This is a library reference publication (that means expensive), but available digitally through most of the major aggregators. We’d also appreciate your recommending it to your library.

A few thoughts on staying cool

And from the British edition of The Armchair Environmentalist:

• Travel lightly. For every 90 kilograms of weight you carry in your car, your petrol economy is reduced by .4 kilometres per litre.

• Plump up at the pump. Eighty percent of tyres are underinflated. By keeping your car’s tyres properly inflated, you can save money at the petrol pump, make your tyres last longer, and help the environment. If all drivers kept their tyres properly inflated, we could save more than 7.5 million litres of petrol a day.

• Less cool, less fuel³: When we drive slowly, using the car’s air conditioning can reduce petrol efficiency by more than 20 percent. When we drive faster than 64 kilometres per hour, however, using the air conditioning is actually more petrol efficient than rolling down the windows because less aerodynamic drag is created.

• Combine trips if possible, and reduce your family’s motor pool to a single shared car. Getting by with just one car can lower your petrol, insurance, and maintenance costs by several hundred pounds a year.

Coming next: The story of a very small pond

1. Please share your favorites in the comments, or send a short review to me directly.

2. By the Center for International Climate Change and Environmental Research–Oslo (CICERO).

3. An editor added the corny headings. My apologies.