Ever heard of Blue Efficiency?

I found this video on the Freakonomics blog. Mercedes-Benz is now pitching blue efficiency to its avid buyers who ostensibly have an interest in reducing their carbon emissions. The horse manure part of the video was also covered in SuperFreakonomics when Dubner and Levitt discuss New York City's egregious horse manure problem in the late 1890s/early 1900s and how the automobile became the "environmental savior" by eliminating the issue.

Elizabeth Kolbert from the New Yorker discusses the horse manure problem in greater detail and provides a scathing critique of SuperFreaknomics.

Are you Green or Congreenient?

I certainly hope you are genuinely green and not congreenient.

Thanks to urban dictionary for providing a hilarious and clever word for the day:
Congreenient: The practice of recycling, or being green, only when convenient. A person who only recycles when it is convenient to do so.

Used in a sentence: I really dislike recycling my glass bottles because recycling is a futile act. Luckily, it is congreenient that my neighbour recycles bottles and pays me 10 cents for every bottle I don't throw out in the garbage.

Transportation planning in Austria?

I got this image from David Levinson's Transportationist blog. Perhaps a good example of bad urban planning in Klagenfurt, Austria.

Buy bottled water and you get a free water bottle...

I took a picture of this Volvic ad because I thought it was hilarious. It's posted right outside a grocery store near my place. If you purchase bottled water (four to be precise) you are eligible to receive a “Free” water bottle. That seems a bit odd in that water bottles (which are a perfect way to carry around your water) are also used because they are reusable and better for the environment than bottled water. But, the store will only give you the water bottle if you buy four un-recyclable, over-priced, energy intensive and wasteful bottles of bottled water.

Let’s do some quick math: if twenty customers, on average, everyday over one week were attracted by this bizarre incentive and went ahead with the deal, we would have the following:

20 persons/day x 4 bottled water = 80 bottles of water/day in aggregate or 4 per person/day.

80 bottles/day x 7 days = 560 bottles per week.

The price of one 500 ML bottled water at the store is 15 HK dollars ($2.02 CAN). So you need to spend $60 HK dollars in order to receive the free water bottle that probably costs the same price but, alas, is harder to find.

Not to totally criticize the Volvic deal, but it’s pretty horrendous for the environment. We have blogged about bottled water and its unfortunate realities numerous times. Sadly, drinking water from the tap in Hong Kong is simply not the same as it is in Canada because the water is not treated as adequately. I have been advised not to drink tap water so I have been consuming bottled water here at my place. Indeed, I am somewhat of a hypocrite, but truthfully, I have no other option.

It makes me think how fortunate we are in Canada to have clean, affordable and environmentally-friendly drinking water right at the turn of the tap.

Sometimes a picture can sum it up...

From The Economist:

A Real Canadian Gold Medal Flush...

Chances are, if you live in Canada, you didn't visit the bathroom while Canada and the U.S. were battling for hockey glory. I certainly know that bathroom breaks during play were frowned upon as unpatriotic at the venue where I watched the game.

As a follow up to my post on the energy consumption spikes that occurred during the Men's Olympic Gold Medal hockey game, I came across this graph from The Globe and Mail. Water consumption.

It pretty much speaks for itself, but is certainly an interesting case of cultural influence on our environment. I'm hoping more and more examples of things like this continue to pop up.

The Fun Theory...

I think the last time I had fun recycling a product was tossing a glass bottle into a recycling bin like a basketball, which quickly turned to guilt-ridden fear as the bottle shattered and I ran away. But for the most part, activities like recycling or cleaning up litter are far from exciting. A self-induced pat on the back is probably the most many people get when they toss their can in the recycling bin.

German auto manufacturer, Volkswagen is trying to change that. As part of an initiative known as the Fun Theory, Volkswagen has launched a website filled with videos that are dedicated to making mundane but important activities fun. According to the website, "This site is dedicated to the thought that something as simple as fun is the easiest way to change people’s behaviour for the better. Be it for yourself, for the environment, or for something entirely different, the only thing that matters is that it’s change for the better."





Some of the videos I have attached showcase how fun is being used to engage people to take part in activities that they might not otherwise engage in. For example, bottle return stations -- not used in Ontario and some other jurisdictions because of curbside pickup programs -- are about as thrilling as watching paint dry. But when they are turned into a flashy arcade game, people flock to it.





Or how about waiting for the bus? In some cities it might be difficult to know whether the bus is actually on its way. And standing around awkwardly not talking to other people is all too common. But this all changes when a street periscope is built at the station. People can look through the periscope to see if their bus is on its way, and can also explore other parts of the city. Plus it gives them something to talk to others about at the station.





And when you are coming off the subway, why would you take the tiring and boring stairs when the elevator doesn't require you to really do anything? To play a song of course! When the stairs are turned into a piano, use of the stairs increases significantly. 


Our friend Kingsley -- who happens to originate many of the ideas that appear on this blog, although he never seems interested in writing anything himself (hint, hint, cough, cough) -- was telling me about can-crushing Plinko. Based on the famous game from The Price is Right, people crushed their cans and then dropped them onto a Plinko board and then settled into a recycling bin. You can only imagine how much of a hit that'd be.


One of the biggest problems with environmental programs is getting people to buy into them and become engaged. No matter how green they are, how convenient they might be, how healthy they are or how nice they are financially, people just might not care enough to get engaged. But if they are made fun and exciting, as the videos above indicate, people will participate.


Now of course, the novelty would quickly wear off if every set of stairs in a city all of a sudden allowed you to practice Beethoven's Fifth and get in your fitness workout at the same time. But there are undoubtedly countless creative and innovative ideas out there waiting to be unleashed on the unexciting but important aspects of our world. 


What is more, having these fun programs out in the public generates all sorts of community energy. Rather than having everyone walk past each other on the street without offering as much as a glance to one another -- as I have encountered far too many times when travelling through downtown Toronto -- people could share in the fun of these activities, talk with one another and generally just have a good time. A happy, lively and friendly community is a good community.


Being told to take part in things in order to evade guilt and simply getting beaten over the head with the negative consequences of our actions is not always the best way to get people to buy into something. Sometimes they might do the opposite just to spite you. But putting a positive spin on things is a win-win for everyone involved. Well done, Fun Theory.  

The environmental movement is killing the mood, but there is still hope...

The world is facing an epidemic. Every year, people are having less and less sex in cars. The time honoured tradition was once rampant with the bench seat featured in the massive American vehicles of the 1960s, but has been stifled by a combination of bucket seats, heavier traffic and smaller cars -- largely driven by the environmental movement. But all is not lost.

In this hilarious article in the Globe & Mail, Andrew Clark describes how vehicular sex can be salvaged, even in these troubling times. Just in time for Valentine's Day, too.

For those of you looking for a really good laugh (rare in the G&M) and maybe some 'driving' tips, I highly recommend reading "Your Valentine's Day guide to vehicular sex".

Raaawwwwrrrrr! Me eat wind turbine...

The opposition to wind power is becoming increasingly diverse. The disdain for the industry is no longer reserved for upset property owners, saddened bird and bat lovers, low-frequency electromagnetic wave health worriers or the powerful fossil fuel industry.

No, the newest threat to wind power is a giant, four-armed monster. Where these monsters can be found is so far uncertain, but warnings are being issued to the world on value-brand tissue boxes.

I took this picture of my sister's tissue box. At first (and still) am not sure whether the tissue company is advocating the destruction of wind turbines, or whether it is highlighting how these monsters will soon rid the world of all its trees and wind turbines. Unless of course, an unnamed band of green superheroes are able to fend it off with large orange balls.

If the latter is indeed the case, a certain irony can be found in the message: the monster is destroying trees and tissue paper is made from trees. So who is the box really attacking?

Whatever the reason, be prepared to see a few of these monsters at any upcoming town hall meetings on a wind power development. Just make sure to pack your orange balls.

Stupid Green Ideas: No pee on this plane...

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it sitting in my inbox. The headline said it all: "Japanese airline wants you to go before boarding".

A Japanese airline, All Nippon Airways (ANA), has introduced a pilot program (pardon the pun) asking its passengers to use the washroom before boarding for a flight.

The reason, you ask?

ANA believes that if every passenger chooses to use the washroom before boarding, the weight of the plane will decrease, ultimately increasing fuel efficiency and reducing the level of greenhouse gas emissions from the flight.

Here's the math they use. On average, a human being carries up to one litre in their bladder, which weighs approximately one kilogram. Each flight can carry 247 passengers. So if everyone goes to the washroom before boarding, in theory the flight should be 247 kg lighter. Over the course of one month and 42 flights, ANA hopes to achieve a 5-tonne GHG reduction.

Several issues arise with this policy. Firstly, most people already go to the washroom before boarding a flight, so the theoretical savings are probably well overshot. And they certainly don't do this for the environment, but instead for convenience because they don't want to go through the hassle of lining up to use the shaky in-flight toilets.

Secondly, this could be a pain for passengers. Along with all the security protocols people have to go through these days at the airport, the last thing many people will want as they present their boarding pass is someone asking them if they have gone to the washroom yet. This was common when I was a kid, but it was my parents asking me, not airline staff.

Thirdly, this gives a bad name to environmental policies all across the board. It's fairly condescending and any backlash would not be particularly surprising. Hopefully its sheer silliness and short life span (fingers crossed) will lead it to be ignored and fall into the forgotten gallows of time forever.

One reporter on CBC made a very good point when she asked what might be next? Are they going to ask you to eat beforehand, too? (This wouldn't be all that effective either, though, considering the reputation for the quality of airline food...).

Unsurprisingly, Canada's major airlines are making no such steps. Westjet even called it "a bit extreme".

Let's just hope ANA flushes this one down the toilet. Before getting on the flight, of course.

Don't steal bikes...

This picture should serve as a warning to any potential bike thieves.

Stupid Green Ideas: hybrid parking spots...

A recent story in the Winnipeg Free Press, "Environmentally concious shoppers get prime parking spots", reports that a large local shopping mall has reserved several parking spots near the building for hybrid vehicles. The aim -- at least, from the mall's marketing director -- is to reward more environmentally concious drivers by giving them membership to the exclusive club previously limited to expecting mothers and the handicapped.

Apparently this is not the first of its kind. Larger box stores like IKEA and Whole Foods have dipped into these waters, too.

So is it a silly idea?

Well, enforcement is a bugger. Finding non-permit vehicles parked in handicapped spots is certainly not a rarity and such an offence probably strikes witnesses much more severely than parking illegally in a hybrid spot.

Secondly, the environmental benefits of hybrids over traditional vehicles is certainly not absolute. What if the hybrid driver drives tens times as much as the driver of an SUV? Which of these drivers should really be rewarded? And furthermore, hybrids are not always the most fuel-economic vehicles. Lexus has several hybrids, one of which has 438 HP V8 engine. Its fuel economy is worse than that of its parent company's Toyota Tacoma pickup truck. Even Cadillac's Escalade (pictured above) has a hybrid version. There is no way these vehicles should be given priority over non-hybrid, but more fuel-efficient vehicles. And what about an electric car? Would it qualify?

Thirdly, lots of people think poorly of hybrids because the drivers are sometimes perceived to be rich, snobby, self-righteous, do-gooding elites. They always aren't, but the perceptions will stick and this certainly won't help. Most people don't have a problem giving priority to the handicapped or expecting mothers, but they might think the hybrid spot a tad elitist.

Lastly, this seems like nothing more than a marketing ploy for those who employ such a strategy. It allows the stores to brand themselves as 'green' and attract more customers, without actually implementing an effective policy. It just looks good.

So yes, it is silly.

But then again, even if it is silly, at least it is something. The majority of hybrids out there are much more fuel-efficient than the rest of vehicles on the road. It probably won't hurt anyone, since angry drivers will soon drop their threats of switching supermarkets and just find another spot. And lots of corporations are employing 'green' strategies, so a harmless one like this can't hurt, right?

That is of course, if you live by the mantra 'an empty policy is better than no policy'.

I don't own a hybrid, but I do spot one in the parking lot across the way. I think I might steal the 'hybrid' logo on its rear end and attach it to my car so I can take advantage of this great deal.

Out of my way, soon-to-be mothers and handicapped, I'm saving the world!

Environmental irony...

Sometimes the green guys can't always win.

An ambitious 5,000 mile carbon-neutral sailing trip took a turn for the worst when stormy weather rendered the 40 ft. sailing boat disabled. 

The boat, Fleur, was on a long journey from Plymouth, England to Greenland, where the two crew members would reach Greenland, ski across the ice cap and back to the boat, all with minimal environmental impact. The boat would be powered through solar panels and of course, wind. The intention of the trip was to show that some of the most extreme trips could be taken and remote areas explored in such a manner that only required environmentally-friendly technologies to get there.

Great. Except that within the first month of travel, everything went wrong. An intense storm capsized the boat, destroyed the solar panels and sailing capabilities of the boat. Oops. Luckily, the ocean is so awash (pun completely intended) with ships that they were very quickly rescued. They may have been thankful and happy to be alive, but the adventurers may not have been as excited to find out that their rescuer was a massive oil tanker carrying nearly 700,000 barrels of crude oil.

Nobody says it better than Alanis: Isn't it ironic?

Green is good, but it isn't perfect.   

It's a bird! It's a plane! It's...Water?

In the weeks before Tim and I's presentation on water conservation, I read a book aptly titled "Water". It's written by an ecologist from England, Julian Caldecott, and provides a wonderful overview of the topic.

In his chapters discussing the history of water on Earth, he describes a well-accepted theory on how water first appeared on Earth. It basically works like this. Comets and asteroids have been found to contain vast amounts of water, usually contained as ice. Throughout the Earth's billions of years in existence, comets and asteroids (many containing water) crashed into the planet, gradually filling up the Earth's oceans, rivers, lakes and aquifers.

I think that's pretty cool. So here's something to ponder: The Earth is running out of fresh water. What if we were to somehow access that water on those galactic rocks? Perhaps by landing on them and steering them to Earth and safely getting the water from inside. Or even directing them to hit Earth's surface. The human and environmental costs of that would be massive, but at least we'd get some water. There's all this talk regarding comets destroying the Earth and whatnot, but maybe it could have some benefits.

I think it's quite the idea.
Outlandish? Yes.
Expensive? Absolutely.
Technilogically feasible? Not even close (yet...).
Necessary? Probably not.

But it does have the makings of a ridiculous Hollywood motion picture. Let's see what you got, Spielberg.

Here comes climate change. I hope you packed your Advil...

It is commonly known as 'clinical folklore', but many have believed for years that there was a link between headaches and the weather. Well, it's fair to say it's no longer just a piece of folklore. Researchers from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston just published a study in the journal Neurology demonstrating a link between weather conditions and the incidence of headaches and migraines.

Interestingly, warmer weather and changes in atmospheric pressure are shown to significantly influence headaches and migraines. The researchers estimate that each 5 degree rise in temperature can increase the risk of severe headaches by 8% compared to colder weather. Lower barometric pressure also appeared to be associated with more headaches. 

While air pollution didn't indicate any changes, nor did the researchers prove strong causation, there was a definite evident linkage between the two. And I'm going to guess that our headaches aren't the ones influencing the weather. Humans have impacts, but that might be pushing it.

So why do I bother writing about this? Well, with warmer air temperatures come more headaches. Climate change is certainly expected to increase average air temperatures, as well as the frequency of the extremely high temperature changes, like the heat wave seen in Western Europe in 2003. There could be a lot more headaches in our future.

Oh, conspiracy theorists, here's something to consider. Maybe the drug companies are causing climate change. Oooooooh. I see a straight-to-video movie... 

A good joke for the day. Something that was passed on to me from a friend.

Why the USA has Crisis

A Swiss doctor says 'Medicine in my country is so
advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have
him looking for work in six weeks.'

A German doctor says 'That is nothing; we can take a
lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in four
weeks.

A Russian doctor says 'In my country, medicine is so
advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and
have them both looking for work in two weeks.'

An American Texas doctor, not to be outdone, says 'You
guys are Way behind, we recently took a man with no brains out of Texas, put him
in The White House for eight years, and now half the country is looking for
work.'