Technical Tipping Point?

We continually see new graphs, maps and tables showing changes in temperature, sea level, precipitation, ice cap area, etc., etc., BUT the impact on public perception of Climate Change seems minimal. How come?

Most people are pretty self absorbed-- interested in themselves--and perhaps their immediate family and a few friends. Information concerning global trends doesn't resonate. It's not so much the technical aspects as the fact that people don't pay much attention to information that is not local and specific and readily visible. There's a tendency for humans to depend on innate perception of what could possibly affect their immediate environment. Of course that innate sense has been wrong, dead wrong, countless times over the millennia--but that fact offers no solace for the future of Climate Change mitigation.

Soooo, as far as technical information goes---it probably doesn't matter that much. I find each new data point intriguing, but I'm a scientist. It will be a long wait till some particular study galvanizes massive public action to reduce CO2 emissions in an attempt to save the Earth as a quality human habitat.

Consider folks who fly on commercial airlines (which account for a HUGE amount of CO2 emissions, by the way). Most do NOT even vaguely understand aeronautical engineering, navigation systems or cockpit flight controls. They still board the planes and fly at 20,000+ feet of elevation at amazing speeds, through storms and think nothing of it. Why? Because some entity WANTS them to fly---and spend money for the experience. There's profit in flight--perhaps not what there used to be, but there's still profit. People don't understand the technology of automobiles, but they buy and drive them by the millions. Fortunately, with automobiles, there is labeling--mpg figures have made a difference--at least to some Buyers. There's a lesson there, but few are learning from it.

Generally, less CO2 emission means less profit. Of course there's the Earth to consider and future generations of humans and other living creatures, but our track record as a species isn't that great at preservation and enhancement. Humans are more highly skilled at discovery and exploitation. Rain forests, ivory, buffalo herds, gold, coal, oil, etc etc all displaced and destroyed or decimated. How do we perform against that pattern with Climate Change? Is there a tipping point in terms of behavioral change among individuals? Can that change occur quickly and create small, but significant reductions in CO2 emissions holding the potential to avert non-linear, catastrophic climate events?

I believe it can and that is has in various communities around the world--none in the US.

I read an important book recently (below) that focuses on those communities and suggests that similar efforts could occur nearly anywhere, given some carefully planned programs that address human perceptions and Climate Change in a realistic way. The book has a huge amount of material, from which I plan to pull some particularly interesting ideas that might produce easy, pleasant changes in human behavior.

Visualizing Climate Change

A Guide to Visual Communication of Climate Change and Developing Local Solutions

By Stephen R.J. Sheppard

The documentary "I AM"

This is a post that got deferred---for a while!!

If you haven't seen this short documentary (77minutes) you should. It's not primarily focused on Climate Change--made back in 2008 when that topic was not quite as prominent as it is now. 

www.iamthedoc.com 

The above link takes you to the website--info, order the DVD, watch, join forum, etc. 

The movie involves discussions with famous intellects concerning what is wrong with human society (much), how come (many reasons) and what can be done to change it. 

From the Climate Change perspective TIME is the most ominous problem. If there is a 4-5 year window of opportunity within which to avoid unknown non-linear acceleration of climate degradation, slow progress toward change is not going to avert a major reset of the Earth's environment and the biota dependent on it. 

Humans tend to ignore warnings in preference for "business as usual, as long as possible".
This is often followed by "OOPS" episodes and in the case of Climate Change, a very big 
"OOPS" may transpire. 

For the 1% that makes partial sense, because however bad things get, the rich will find a place and a way to minimize any diminution in their lifestyle. The health effects in terms of disease, famine, etc will be borne mostly by the 99%.  

2012 retrospective

Yes, this retrospective is a little strange--this blog didn't start till way into 2012 and then it sorta went sideways along the way. With escrow challenges, plus Sandy effects, and general malaise arising from  a lack of engagement during the election followed by post election fiscal cliff posturing, inconsequential Doha UN Climate Talks, etc, etc. , there's been an big gap in posting. 

Nonetheless 2012 was a significant year for Climate Change. The Climate IS changing--faster than most forecasts and although humans are the primary cause, they have, at this point, no control over the process and for the most part no clue in how to get that control. Guess that means I'm not using "significant" in a good way?

The local Green Your Business Challenge finished up with some winners--well, most offices were winners, but there weren't many participants. It's safe to say the gasoline consumed by the members of the committee in attending the meetings exceeded the CO2 saved by the conservation measures undertaken by the offices. That's pretty common with many Climate Change programs. The Energy Event put on the the County of San Luis Obispo was another example in which the carbon footprint of the gathering far exceeded any CO2 savings generated by the content (there were photo-ops for politicians, so it wasn't a total waste--LOL). 

Personally, the most important epiphany of the 2012 occurred when I quit trying to identify a threshold of factual information about how bad things were getting in a more rapid than forecast way to turn the tide. The scientist in me kept seeking the holy grail of statistics that, when viewed by any remotely rational person, would instantly galvanize them into focused, energy wise action. The information keeps flowing, but there is no magical tipping point related to public action. Quite the contrary, many people are sick of hearing, reading, thinking about the negative news concerning Climate Change. The incredible super storm Sandy came, went and except for the areas still recovering, or attempting to, has largely left public consciousness, certainly as a possible artifact of Climate Change. I still review the latest new on the science front, but that's my background. The majority of people really don't care to be aware of the details. 

This "tuning out" process is a danger, because of the time factor. As I've mentioned previously, there may be a 4-5 year window within which CO2 emissions must depart the "business as usual" curve and begin to decline. If they don't, the chance of non-linear, unpredictable climate events occurring could increase to a virtual certainty. Few of the governmental, organizational, technological "solutions" aimed at achieving CO2 reduction will come to meaningful fruition inside that 4-5 year window. 

What CAN happen within 4-5 years are simple changes in personal behavior that could reduce CO2 emissions by 10-20% with little adverse affect on lifestyle. The challenge to find a way to achieve that behavior change. Forget media and big money. They flow elsewhere, as does the political power. In fact, it makes many of those industrial-institutional types extremely uneasy that the public even consider changes in present lifestyle---who knows where that might lead? 

I'll explore this line of reasoning further soon (really!), but it is really very simple. Motivation and awareness meet a trigger and choices are made. Where does that process happen every day, millions of time across the nation? Restaurants! People desire food (motivation) they become aware of options and consequences (the promise of gastronomic delight vs calories and price) and with the help of a menu (the trigger) they make choices. WHAT IF there were a menu or menus to help trigger energy wise decisions? 

That's one of the projects in development for early 2013. 

WebRep

currentVote

noRating

noWeight

Great vid clip!

Still getting caught up from state association meetings and an escrow that resulted from a negotiation completed while at the meetings---way too much time in the hotel room on the phone!

I ran across this Huffington Post clip a couple days ago---which is 54 minutes long. It has an excellent panel and it goes fast. Take it in a couple of doses if necessary, but I bet you'll watch it all.

http://youtu.be/ii9b8V6PhlM

It raises some tough questions and makes the point that I am now stressing at every opportunity.

Technology, government and corporate enlightenment MAY provide some significant CO2 emission reductions EVENTUALLY. That's MAY and EVENTUALLY.

What if tipping points representing non linear and unpredictable rapid climate change events arise in the next 4-5 years, if CO2 emission continue along the "business as usual" curve? What can be done in the next 4-5 years to prevent or reduce the odds of that happening?

How many degrees centigrade does it take to set off the non-linear hounds of hell? 2 or 2.5 or 3? If it goes to 4, is there any way out of population crashes and species extinctions? I won't be around by then, but this contest between humans and the Earth has no end and no winner. Our materialistic win/loose perspective has no relevance.

Fortunately, behavior can change NOW. CAN--we're back to ABILITY, MOTIVATION AND TRIGGER among individuals, but it CAN happen. It is also the Earth's best hope.

So the question is this: could most people cut their personal CO2 emissions by 10-15% with little effort, while experiencing little change in lifestyle? I'm betting the answer is YES!! 

We need a movement to encourage that sort of behavior change. Many people making a small change can reduce CO2 emissions rapidly. Many people also could grab the attention of politicians and corporate heads.

If the institutions finally get their acts together, that will be a huge help, but what if they don't? They haven't so far---as evidenced in the election campaigning. Energy was a bigger issue in 2008 than it is now and we know much more than we did in 2008---AND NONE of it is good news.

Individuals should do what they can do now. The present prevailing lifestyle of excessive consumption isn't all that alluring, when viewed from the perspective of a future Earth unable to support human populations living quality lives.

BTW you'll not see much about real estate in this blog---I've come to the conclusion that the real estate industry/trade organizations and Climate Change are not ready for each other just yet. There are more effective ways to spend my time than bucking the inertia of a multi million dollar a year lobbying/marketing machine focused on Climate Change denial and protecting antiquated business practices out of step with the best interests of the public.

Individuals in the industry and among the public have the ability to make better decisions about real estate and their future, decisions that are more consistent with sustaining the future of the Earth as a habitat for a rich diversity of living organisms, including humans.

SLO Happy

I attended an MLS event for the City of San Luis Obispo mayoral candidates on Tuesday. As expected the prepared questions focused on point of sale issues regarding greening the existing housing stock. Barasch at least mentioned that there were already point of sale requirements, but none of the candidates, Marx, Barasch and Hedrick, even suggested that point of sale for retrofits, upgrades or even energy ratings was on the near horizon. Fortunately, none of the questions touched on how the City of San Luis Obispo plans to meet AB32 requirements. The plan (see their Climate Action Plan) seems to be "business as usual whenever possible", but just before 2020 a magic energy wise wand (yet to be invented) appears to transform the buildings and behavior of the population to achieve compliance. That's all off in the future. It's all about the current election--whether it's national or local. The idea of working backwards from 2020 to determine what needs to be done in 2012 to meet the AB32 standards, leaving room for economic cycles, unexpected events (good and bad), etc. doesn't receive much attention. The focus is how little can be done. What if AB 32 standards could be exceeded by a substantial margin to the benefit of the community, the individuals in it and the Earth? That's a question that won't be asked. Will the Happiest City in America remain so in 2020? We'll find out pretty soon. 2020 is just around the corner in government years (AB32 passed in 2006).

I promise next post will get back to the POSITIVELY GREEN mode! Elections get in the way of positively anything.

Light up ahead?

Business got crazy, been a while. Slight progress evident, along with a sobering realization that, at least in real estate, business as usual remains the prevailing strategy. Three new developments were pitched at the last MLS meeting---none of the speakers mentioned energy efficiency during their presentations. The buildings DO meet current high energy efficiency standards and may even exceed them, but that aspect is evidently not deemed worthy of mention.

The progress part of the last few weeks was the passing (3-2 vote) by the SLO County Board of Supervisors of the Green Building Ordinance that, among other things, requires remodel projects with a value of over $10,000 to comply with the constructions standards of the ordinance AND produce a HERS II rating for the residential structure at completion.

SLO has many older house with no insulation single pane windows, etc etc. It's often assumed those are small cottages---BUT there are some LARGE older homes in SLO. Those are heritage energy hogs. In addition to some historic character (if not actual designation), they also hold the promise of greatly improved energy efficiency. Incentives are needed to encourage energy efficiency upgrades.  Some of these large, older houses are used by Poly students at relatively high density. These houses represent the proverbial "low hanging fruit" of energy conservation. Are they targeted in any local efforts to comply with AB 32 requirements---nope. I wonder if anyone in the government sector really believes, or cares, whether the AB 32 requirements are met or not. Maybe it's just a job? As I've said before, I don't expect the needed changes to occur. 2020 isn't far off and AB 32 was passed in 2006.

Just this AM as I was waking up I had one of those moments of clarity--the struggle with climate change HAS NO FINISH LINE!! That sounds simple and obvious, but with the election rhetoric and partisan politics taking control of the media, that simple fact gets lost in the messages. In an auto race, it's OK to push the car beyond its limit to get to the finish line. People sometimes undertake great risks pursuing a bucket list--with the finish line posed by their own mortality in mind.

Climate Change isn't like that. THERE IS NO FINISH LINE, only continuation of a contest involving the future of the Earth as a quality habitat for living things. Most of our institutions operate in a tightly constrained world of the next election, next quarterly corporate report, next bonus, etc. There's a disconnect between laws of nature (not all even understood) and human laws, mostly crafted by those in power for their own benefit---short term benefit.

The positive perspective is that humans have the capability of deeper understanding than that evidenced by their institutions. Individuals still have considerable freedom to act in the best interests of the Earth.
Many environmental groups seek to put pressure on the institutions, lobbying government, protesting corporate actions, etc. Those efforts have great merit and achieve a degree of success, but seem to ignore the ominous timeline taking shape as climate data accumulates.

More and more scientists believe the next 4-5 years are critical in shaping the future path of Climate Change. Unless significant reduction of CO2 emissions is achieved in 4-5 years, the process of change may shift into an unpredictable realm described by tipping points, catastrophe cusps and other non-linear models.

The fastest, most predictable way to reduce CO2 emissions in a short period of time, without depending on new technology, governmental/corporate enlightenment and other fantasy scenarios is behavioral change by a large segment of the population. Behavior can change TODAY using current technology and a very modest learning curve. It need not involve major shifts in lifestyle or a decrease the quality of life. It's flexible--a buffet of choices presents itself daily. Slightly different choices can achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions. If enough people make those different choices, CO2 emission could be reduced 5% or 10%, or even more.

If and when technology and government achieve success, CO2 reductions can accelerate, but for the next 4-5 years, the people of the Earth need to take a lead role in mitigating Climate Change, because they have the ABILITY to make the needed behavioral changes NOW, and they COULD have the MOTIVATION to make those changes, and they COULD perceive the TRIGGER necessary to make those changes.

Incorporating those changes into an existing lifestyle CAN be a process of discovery, exploration and fun. The journey to becoming energy wise can be as enriching as the goal--helping Earth remain a quality home for living things. It's your home--your only home.

Next---more about ABILITY, MOTIVATION AND TRIGGER.

Positive! Positive!

Ok, I'm done (for the moment) with major posts focused on how houses are bought and sold in the US with respect to energy efficiency.

The intent of this blog is to stay in the cup is half full sector. SOOOO

Here's a great link to a story about net zero (and better) houses being built in New England--NOW!

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/just-two-minisplits-heat-and-cool-whole-house?utm_source=email&utm_medium=eletter&utm_content=20120822-two-minisplits-heat-cool&utm_campaign=green-building-advisor-eletter

There's quite a bit of material in the article and links to the firm's website. Pretty amazing stuff and not in a mild climate by any stretch. Much of the technology is simple and could be adapted anywhere. 

How many people in your community can select from net zero homes when they decide to buy in a new subdivision, or even purchase a resale? If net zero houses were available, would they sell for a reasonable premium over "typical" houses? If not, why not? Should they sell for a premium at all? As long as energy efficiency in the existing housing stock is factored out of the decision process, Buyers and Seller are operating in the dark (perhaps literally in a few decades). Is that healthy environmentally and economically, given climate change? 

BTW European countries are building net zero homes in large numbers with some innovative technology. Some are better than net zero--electric cars can even recharge on the excess.