A few months ago I wrote about the possibility of a carbon tax in California in my post “What Gets Measured Gets managed”. You can check it out at http://www.ecounit.com/blog/?p=17. Well, the speculation is over and it’s now official - northern california will impose a carbon tax on its largest corporate carbon emitters. For more info you can read this overview: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/05/bay-area-carbon-tax.php

I am naturally suspicious of government regulations, but I’m willing to chalk this up to “a step in the right direction” given the immediacy of the climate crisis. Let’s watch this one closely…

I prefer to keep the eco-discussion apolitical, but I want to make a couple observations from the political scene. First, though not a huge McCain fan myself, I am proud of him for taking a stance on the importance of climate change and the need to address it at a global, multi-national level. Certainly the proof and the devil are in the details - and I will withhold judgement until I’ve had a chance to delve into them - but McCain clearly went against the conservative base in his republican party…and for that I applaud him.

Observation #2 flows directly from #1 - I am stumped by the fact that staunch conservatives are unable to accept the reality of climate change. Why is that? The response I usually hear is that conservatism is closely aligned with big business, and big business is threatened by climate change and the likely responses to it. But there are plenty of big businesses that see huge opportunity in climate change…and increasingly big businesses are at least *recognizing* that it’s a threat that represents real business risks. So I can understand differences of opinion in terms of *how to deal* with climate change…and I can see how preferred approaches could differ along conservative & liberal, republican & democratic lines…but I still can’t understand why one group would be unable to accept that climate change even *exists*.

Yet I hear folks like Sean Hannity on the radio - who while considered to be conservative, typically bases his positions on reason - continue to speak about climate change as a “hoax”. In my view these folks are really shooting themselves - and their positions on a variety of issues - in the foot. With such wide acceptance that climate change is a real threat, what is the purpose in denying its very existence?

one of the IPCC report authors, speak about our climate crisis last night. He painted a picture of the current situation in stark facts, showing the science behind the problem as well as driving home the enormity of the problem. It starts with the fact that economic progress as we know it is almost perfectly correlated with fossil fuel usage (and therefore CO2 emissions), but the problem of climate change touches nearly all aspects of our lives and our culture. The climate’s stability is connected with food production, land use, population growth, poverty, and a myriad of other factors…and the challenges we currently face in each area will be exacerbated by an unstable climate.As I listened, I was struck by the scale of the changes that we’ll need to make, from how we define progress to how we interact with our neighbors and other nations. On the one hand I am optimistic about the rising awareness and small steps that many of us are making, but I am frightened by the brave new world that we must create in order to sustain ourselves on this planet. My fear, I think, comes from the fact that we don’t have a clear picture of where we need to be. What does a world look like that has double the population, strong economies in China, India, and the developing world, and simultaneously a sustainable environment?

Many of us are trying to develop a roadmap, but where does it lead? What does that brave new world look like? We need a picture of progress that we can make sense of, then we will be able to chart a course to get there.

At last we have a metric that works. The recently formed 350.org, leveraging research done by the noted climatologist Jim Hansen, is beginning to publicize the goal of 350 ppm (parts per million) as the safe amount of carbon in the atmosphere. Currently we’re at about 380 ppm. Yes, we have work to do - but we’ve heard about that for a while. Now we have a hard and fast target, an easily measurable metric, that our global community can aim for.

I see this as a critical moment in the “marketing” of climate change. With the simplicity of this approach, the burden of proof now shifts to the naysayers - if 350 is not the right number, then what is? Why is that a better number than 350? All of the questions that they’ve been asking for years are now turned against them. We now have a consumable, digestible, and consistent rallying cry for this all important cause. Get used to the number - it’s going to become embedded in everything we do.

Predicting the future is an imperfect science, but here’s a prediction you can bet on: 5 years from now the 2008 Beijing Olympics will be viewed as the turning point in the fight for our planet’s sustainability. To be sure, most of the press leading up to the event has focused on the high levels of pollution in Beijing. The environmental concerns are substantial, here are some startling statistics:

70% of all fresh water around the city is undrinkable

1,200 new motor vehicles are added in the city each day

Over 400,000 people die prematurely from air pollution each year

Air pollutants over China increased by 50% in the past 10 years alone

These concerns are shared by the International Olympic Committee which has weighed in with their own assessment, stating that for certain events “there may be some risk” to the athletes. Given the substantial pollution concerns surrounding the event, the IOC and other international groups are setting up a measurement system and fallback plans in case the health risks to athletes are excessive.

Beijing’s “Clean Up” Effort

In an effort to deal with these concerns and avoid a black eye once the eyes of the world tune into the Games, the city of Beijing and the Chinese government have taken several near-term steps. The city has shut down or relocated many factories to places outside of the city and put into place a system of measurements and standards to assess the number of clean air days (called “blue sky days”) each year. Beijing has taken other measures, including trial traffic bans, increased tree planting and ordering its power plants to switch from coal to gas. For their part, the Chinese government established a far-reaching set of rules, guidelines, and goals that are part of a 5-year environmental plan from 2006 through 2010. The 5-year plan includes improving energy efficiency by cutting energy consumption by 20 percent per unit of GDP, along with a 10 percent cut in major pollutants, between 2006 and 2010.

But China is a huge country whose economy is growing quickly, with a voracious appetite for fossil fuels and related pollutants. On the one hand, it’s not realistic that the economy will slow significantly for any event, even the Olympics. Equally unrealistic is that measures put in place within the past 1 to 2 years could have a meaningful impact in such a short timeframe. Indeed, the country’s discharge of sulfur dioxide and COD (a measure of water pollution) saw year-on-year increases of 1.2% and 1.8% in 2006. And the government recently announced that the air pollution goals for 2007 were missed. So what’s the real story? Are the changes going on in Beijing and China prior to the Olympics just for show? Are are they the beginning of systemic changes that will have a global impact?

Turning Olympics Promises Into Environmental Realities

If you read between the lines and dig into the action plans, you’ll see that the Chinese government is taking broad and meaningful steps to address the environmental crisis that threatens the country long after the Beijing Olympics are gone and forgotten. Some of these steps are bold not only in their scale but also in their intent. A few examples:
*Measurement - Hebei Province, near Beijing, has installed over 500 air and water monitoring facilities

*Accountability for waste – the government is testing a new system that charges residents by the amount of trash they generate

*Automobile emissions – the government has placed a ban on sales of cars that don’t meet “China IV standards” (same as Euro IV) from March 2008

*Investment in new technologies – the government has committed to increase investment in nanotech, including eco-friendly applications

As the Games approach and China is faced with global shame amid the spotlight, we will hear a lot of debate about the sincerity and breadth of China’s environmental \commitment. I can hear the claims of greenwashing already. But to me, the symbol of China’s environmental efforts surrounding the games – the water cube – is an appropriate symbol. It’s a perfect example of the meaningful steps taken over the past few years – indeed, 80% of the facility’s water is recycled, it was designed for use after the Olympics end, and it contains a bevy of other green building features. So while the Olympics may have indeed been the catalyst that spurred the Chinese government into action, the combination of heightened awareness among top officials coupled with meaningful actions taken will serve to make this the turning point in the globe’s largest environmental challenge. And as the rest of the world looks upon China, with its huge population and seemingly insurmountable environmental challenges, and realizes that they have taken substantive steps to decrease their environmental footprint in a short timeframe, it should give the rest of the planet reason for hope.

Americans have awakened to the environmental crisis that has been building for decades, and the impact will be felt in all aspects of our lives. Certainly, travel and vacations are no different. There are eco-tourism destinations sprouting up by the day, but they tend to be expensive and not exactly appealing to the “average family on vacation”, at least not yet. But the “average” family will feel the effects of global warming, water scarcity, and all of the other environmental ills that will plague us if we don’t change our ways immediately.

So the question is: what can the Smiths, Johnsons, Changs, and Shahs do to make a difference during their travels? The answer: a lot. There are significant steps that the traveling family can take in every dimension of their trip - from transportation and lodging to dining and entertainment.

Getting there:

Flying - if going far, flying may be the only realistic option. Try to avoid short-haul flights which are the most damaging to the environment. Whatever the distance, be sure to offset your flight with a few extra bucks.

Driving - studies show that when your tire pressure is 3% below the optimal level your car emits 3% more CO2 per mile. Be sure to check your tire pressure before your trip. Also, extra weight increases emissions, so leave the non-essentials at home.

Alternatives - consider whether a train can get you there…fun for the kids, but make sure they have a bar car!

Once there:

Rental car - it’s easy to find hybrids for rent. If you’ve never tried them, you’re in for a treat - it will add a fun dimension to your trip and help educate the whole family about how technology and innovation play a role in the emerging green economy. Despite common misperceptions, hybrids tend to have good safety ratings and plenty of power.

Public transportation - availability definitely depends on the location of your trip, but be sure to check out your options. It’s fun to ride the L in Chicago, the trollies in SF, and the subways of NY.

Eco-tourism at a local level – see the sights and do the activities that focus on the outdoors. A lot of great cities are best enjoyed on foot. Plan your days with “walking tours” in mind. Not only will you be able to better savor the sights, you will be able to work off some of the extra calories that we all have a tendency to put on during vacation.

Hotel:

Look for “green” hotels that provide benefits to green travelers. The hospitality industry is an “early adopter” of green techniques and products - from non-toxic cleaning products to providing travelers the option to re-use their towels on multi-night stays.

Towels and sheets - make sure you and your kids choose to re-use your towels and bed linens on multi-night stays. After all, how often do you launder these items at home?

Dining:

“Organic” restaurants - as long as you’re going out somewhere new, look for restaurants specializing in locally grown ingredients and organic foods. By using no chemicals or pesticides and minimizing transportation, these foods both taste great and are good for the environment.

Eat on premises - an easy way to lower your footprint is to eat where you sleep even while on the road. Of course you wouldn’t want to do this every night, but staying out of the rental car for even 1 meal will make a difference to the environment.

Throughout your vacation:

There are many other easy and eco-friendly actions you can take during your travels that are also good habits to follow when you’re not on vacation.

Refillable water bottle - not only will you save lots of plastic waste, the bottle will be a constant reminder that you need to stay hydrated on the plane and throughout your travels.

Backpack - we always need to carry items around while site seeing, and we often buy knick-knacks along the way - save the paper and plastic bags by putting them in your backpack.

Hopefully these tips will make your next trip more eco-friendly. If you have other ideas for how we can all go easier on the environment while we’re on vacation, let us know!

In case you missed it, Matt Feldman at Carbon Neutral Digest ran a quick interview about EcoUnit on his blog. It’s great to see more folks getting exposed to the EcoUnit program, and more and more people are signing up to participate! Check out Carbon Neutral Digest and stay up to date on carbon emissions issues, the largest single barrier that we face on the road to a sustainable future.