Topics
15 Comments
-
Footprint of an Email
2009-11-02 12:02:59 UTC
When I opened the weekly Monday morning CBSM/Fostering Sustainable Behavior email with nothing but null messages ("No New Threads") it occurred to me that this is a great reminder about why it's always much easier to think about changing the behavior of other people than it is to change our own.
For example, the resources required to send an email all over the world are not tracked or billed in any way, so there's no incentive to choose software that would not send null messages.
I've seen huge estimates for the internet's energy draw, and Google recently opened a huge server installation near some hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River to tap into cheap power because they use so much.
Does anyone have a good estimate of how much energy one commits (in mail servers) when you send an email to a single person? To a list?
It would be cool if there were a gadget that was on everyone's cell phones and computers that monitored the number of addressees on mail sent out from that device and showed you how much energy you had caused to be used.
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Creating Pro-Sustainable Social Norms
2009-10-28 03:00:52 UTC
The NYT has a small series of essays on clotheslines (vs. dryers). This guy posted an essay on a study in hotels that got significantly more of the desired behavior (reusing towels) by in-room cards that said that most other people did so as well. Important to know when trying to foster sustainable behavior.
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/rethinking-laundry-in-the-21st-century/#robert
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Reviews of "Making Sustainability Work" by Epstein?
2009-10-27 16:26:34 UTC
I just got a catalog from Barrett-Koehler that includes a title I've not seen before, "Making Sustainability Work: Best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economic impacts" by Mark J. Epstein of Rice University.
Has anyone seen this and care to comment on whether it's worth the cost ($37)
ISBN is 978-1-57675-486-3
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Can Efficient Devices Erode Efficient Behaviors?
2009-07-25 12:30:32 UTC
There's an interesting opposite effect that we might be overlooking here, and that an article reminded me of today (http://rss.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2009/07/24/riding-the-bus-cause-julie-is-cool) --
The "good example" effect. Probably a real bear to measure and model, and thus easy to overlook. But undoubtedly (by me, anyway) real.
So it seems that we need to understand the overall change -- not only in the person who adopts the more efficient device but also in how that change affects others in their social group. If person A ends up using MORE energy as the result of purchasing more efficient appliances, it might be that persons B, C, D, and E (seeing A's purchase) make up for it when they start to think that "everyone's being more energy conscious now, look at A."
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Green Procurement Language in Municipal Code
2009-07-15 12:44:47 UTC
Not directly responsive to the request but possibly helpful is the idea of using quality function deployment, a technique that helps you approach the customer's wants into product attributes systematically. Presumably could be applied to procurement easily.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_function_deployment for overview.
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Can Efficient Devices erode Efficient Behaviors?
2009-07-09 11:56:19 UTC
It may even be worse than the classic rebound effect (sometimes discussed as Jevon's Paradox -- that as usage becomes more efficient, overall consumption _increases_ to reflect the lower cost of usage) suggests.
A while ago I posted a story that discussed a study that had been done on the effect of adding healthy foods (salads, e.g.) to a fast food menu: the bizarre result was that the consumption of the french fries increased just by adding the "good foods" to the menu. The authors theorized that people acted as though simply choosing restaurants where there were healthy food options was enough -- they didn't have to actually make healthy choices; in fact, they were giving themselves a "reward" for having made the healthy choice (choosing that restaurant) anyway!
Applied to natural resource use, I've seen troubling signs of this same effect -- the more we try to institutionalize better choices (labeling programs to give consumers information about energy consumption, e.g.) the more oblivious people seem to be about their part. I think there's a similar effect going on: when people are shopping in the stores where there are low energy products touted, they seem to think that's enough, and they buy the 60" plasma TV anyway.
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Please Read: Feedback Sought on New Digest Format
2009-06-12 10:49:43 UTC
I think the number of people who have struggled with the tiny font that the digest arrives in (and I did as well, until I asked) means that you should put a note in the footer down by the copyright statement explaining how to increase the font size. Something like "To increase font size of this email, press CTRL and + at the same time. (For Mac users, Apple+)."
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Please Read: Feedback Sought on New Digest Format
2009-06-11 11:57:01 UTC
Like it. Very much like the table of contents idea.
The only improvement --- and maybe it would not be an improvement, but possibly is --- would be to number threads. You could use an alphanumeric identifier to separate the categories (AC for Ag/Conservation; E for Energy; T for transport, etc.) and simply number threads serially as they develop.
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Making Transit Options a Standard Part of Your Business Address
2009-03-11 13:37:03 UTC
Tina, good for you! Has anyone noticed/commented on the info in the newsletters?
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/ -
Re: Climate Change
2009-03-04 03:19:21 UTC
Saw this on The Oil Drum this morning in a comment posted here
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5162
at 8:16 p.m.
1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas (Tyndall 1859).
2. CO2 is rising (Keeling et al. 1958).
3. The new CO2 is mainly from burning fossil fuels (Suess 1955).
4. Temperature is rising (NASA GISS, Hadley CRU, UAH, RSS, etc.).
5. The increase in temperature correlates with the increase in CO2 (76% for temp. anomaly and ln CO2 for 1880-2007).
("Global warming in five bullet points", by Barton Paul Levenson.)
John Gear
United States
http://lovesalem.blogspot.com/
0 Recommends
You haven't saved any recommendations.
Messaging 0 colleagues
