Hi Listserv members,
I am interested to define and classify different carbon reducing behaviours. Could these behaviours be distinguished, as maybe active or passive behaviours, or direct and indirect behaviours? For example, a behaviour may be specific such as installing energy efficient globes, or broader such as undertaking an energy assessment to identify potential energy savings. Both behaviours have the similar carbon reduction objectives, but may not provide comparable carbon reduction savings as direct behaviours have tangible savings. This is in the context of developing a list of carbon reducing behaviours in office based environments. Any ideas on how to define or classify behaviour, and more specifically carbon reduction behaviours?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Andrew Rothberg
carbonDown
Business Analyst
Centre for Innovation & Sustainability Excellence VECCI
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.vecci.org.au
Catalyst Club
Seeking Definition: Carbon Reducing Behaviour
Sign in or Sign up to comment
...
One soapbox item first:
*Compared to carbon used in office-based environments, carbon used in commuting to office-based environments is 40% MORE. Many well-intentioned "green" office efforts focus on energy used inside the office, somehow concluding that workers just magically show up for work and employers/employees have no ability to influence commuting behavior. A flawed taxonomy: "Inconvenient" (active and direct, taking more than 60 seconds per person per day)
*Reducing commute carbon
*Reducing business travel carbon (you have to really work to get around this when your performance measure depends on your ability to read some remote person's facial reactions) "Management Decision-Level" (extreme, career-limiting inconvenience)
*Management cedes substantial authority to an employee Green Team
*Management taking steps to prepare for a Beyond Growth world with less materialism and lower annual revenue.
*Management behaving in a principled manner that will lower management's bonus but will maximize planetary welfare. Shutting down the huge hormone-filled chicken lot, etc. "Less than 60 seconds per day inconvenient" (active and direct, but easy)
*Optimize PC power saving settings
*Turn your power strip off on the way out
*Keeping interior temperature at 2 degrees beyond comfortable (for some people, this might be quite inconvenient) "Bottom-line justifiable to management," hence easy / convenient (where there is no bottom line benefit, then these items need re-classification)
*Select your next office to be located in an urban center near transit (easy to justify if you are hiring 20-somethings or empty nesters) - LEED ND.
*Light bulbs
*Buy energy efficient servers and workstations
*Buy energy efficient packing materia
*Energy-engineer energy intensive processes (kind of a natural capitalism approach to manufacturing or lab processes) "Counterproductive"
*Selecting an LEED Platinum green building 30 miles from downtown
*Rather than reducing energy consumption inside the building, put solar panels on the roof