Carbon toe-prints or carbon footprints?

Nowadays, there's a lot of discussion about carbon footprints. One can choose the most climate-friendly diet, car or holiday destination by comparing the carbon footprints of various products and services. The term carbon footprint can be defined as "shorthand to describe the best estimate that we can get of the full climate change impact of something." It is possible to estimate the carbon footprint for anything: a service or a product, an item or an activity, a country or a municipality. Or for example for the 2010 World Cup: 2.8 million tonnes of CO2.

In CHAMP we are also trying to promote low carbon footprint project management. In the project most of the carbon emissions are produced by travelling. For this reason, we are aiming at reducing our carbon footprint mainly by using e-communication instead of having to travel. As we were calculating our emissions caused by travelling, it was quite interesting to see how far from each other the results of different carbon calculators were.

There are great differences between the many carbon footprint calculators one finds online, and sometimes it is hard to evaluate which calculator gives the most truthful answer. The results some of the calculators could even be called carbon toe-prints since many of them don't take into account all emissions or even miss out most of the emissions. If we take for example flying, a lot more information than just the distance to destination is needed. An accurate calculation is only possible if the type of the plane, number of the stops etc. are known. The same goes with direct and indirect emissions - they must both be noticed to calculate the true carbon footprint of something.

Many online carbon calculators are only rough estimates but can anyway give a conception of the total climate impact a certain activity or item has. It is almost impossible to measure a carbon footprint accurately, but at the same time it is an essential part of understanding the whole picture of climate change response.

Source: The Guardian
Picture: Footprint Designs

Who's your World Environment Day hero?

Tomorrow, on June 5th, we are celebrating World Environment Day (WED) 2010. WED has been organized by UNEP since 1972 and is aimed to be the biggest, most widely celebrated, global day for positive, environmental action. As part of the 2010 International Year of Biodiversity, this year’s event will celebrate the incredible diversity of life on Earth under the theme Many Species. One Planet. One Future.

Last year, the topic of World Environment Day was climate change and the highlight of the celebrations was to launch the Climate Heroes. This year the Climate Heroes initiative has been broadened beyond just climate change-related advocates to include exceptional individuals advocating solutions for all environmental issues.

WED Heroes are individuals who inspire and motivate people to environmental actions by undertaking exceptional personal feats, high-profile expeditions, and other acts of environmental activism to demonstrate their commitment to the planet.

In the end, the WED heroes is a call for each of us to do what we can: from adopting the simplest habits like turning off running water when we are brushing our teeth, to organizing a public or workplace event for World Environment Day or even rowing across the Pacific Ocean, like a WED Hero Roz Savage did in 2009, and later walked 600 miles from London to Copenhagen for the UN climate conference.

See the World Wide WED here and find activities near you.

Pictures: UNEP

Dunkerque makes me think

Last week the 6th Conference on European Sustainable Cities and Towns took place in Dunkerque, France. It resulted in a common Local Sustainability Declaration that stresses the need to create innovative, sustainable and inclusive communities.
At the same time a Call on Climate Action was released, which aimed at stressing the key role of local and regional governments in the international negotiations. Find more info here

In three days the over 1500 participants were offered panel discussions, parallel sessions to all kind of sustainability related topics and of course organistaions, regions, cities and companies presented themselves and their work for a more sustainable future.

The city of Dunkerque was the host - and they did great. The conference participants were well taken care of with volunteers and cocktail parties and shuttle busses. We got the impression that the whole city IS a conference venue and all citizens are happy to be part!

But it wasn´t. On the last morning the shuttle bus to the conference venue was escorted by a honking crowd of cars (which most of us mistook as a wedding/football game - reaction), just to see people unrolling banners in front of the Kursaal as well as on the beach, right at the lunch venue to demonstrate for "Solidarité" with them.
Those were people from the local chemical industry and oil plant, fearing to loose their jobs. So they were demonstrating against all the people at the conference, who want a sustainable, carbon(oil-free) world!

I have to say, that this end of the conference made me think.
Not that this was the most important that happened in Dunkerque and not that it "destroyed" the spirit that we had. But nevertheless it made me think, how people can demonstrate "against sustainable development" in which they mainly see a thread?

How do we actually communicate our vision of a sustainable future?And how holistic do we actually think? How much do we, who work with this everyday, actually really take into account the social aspect, the fear of people?
No doubt that the "unsustainable" industries employ loads of people...what alternatives do they have when (if!) industries are shut down?

A sustainable future is carried by people - not by political decisions and strategies or the economy. It´s about the people, who can influence with their everyday life, behaviours and choices.

But what if many see this sustainable future as something to be afraid of?
Isn´t it our task to take care of that, to improve our communication skills and messages that we give out? No doubt that a greener economy will also create loads of jobs, but this message seems not to have reached the people...

And isn´t a development only sustainable if all have the chance to get something out of it, live a good life and not fear?

No solutions from my side (yet), but this really makes me think.
Perhaps it makes you think, too.

You are welcome to leave your opinion here!

American cities acting for climate

The USA is the 2nd largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world. It is also a major player in international climate change negotiations but has been lacking the political will to commit to climate protection. This hasn't stopped cities of tackling the issue of climate change locally: many local governments have climate action plans and ambitious targets for cutting their GHG emissions.

The State of California at the head is adopting statewide climate policies and regulations. The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 is expected to reduce carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050. Moreover, a law to redesign communities to reduce greenhouse gases connects land use with carbon reduction goals. By offering carrots, the regulations encourage cities to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy that requires new development to be near transit or clustered with existing development. Many Californian local governments, Santa Monica, Pasadena and Los Angeles, for example, have already implemented green building standards and resource GHG emissions programs.

At the same time, Austin, Texas is the first city in the US committing to going carbon neutral. Interestingly, Austin is the Capitol of a conservative state that is the national leader in greenhouse gas emissions. In 2007, Austin resolved to make city facilities, vehicles and operations carbon-neutral by 2020 and move the city-owned energy utility toward this goal over time. To this end, a Climate Action Plan targeting four areas: municipal operations, utility, homes and buildings, and community, is to be developed and implemented. In Austin, an integrated approach to climate work has been adopted: An inventory of greenhouse gas emissions has been completed for all city departments and a Climate Action Team composed of representatives from all city departments is working on department-specific plans to attain the municipal goal, as well as greenhouse gas-reduction strategies specific to their roles across all four areas.

Source:
SolveClimate.com / Patricia Kirk
Pictures: Cities of Los Angeles and Austin

Read more:
California Climate Change Portal
CoolCalifornia: Local Government Case Studies
Austin Climate Protection Program: CoolAustin.org

Cities are key to fight climate change

With more than 50 % of the world' s population is living in cities, we are an urban species. Cities account for about 80 % of the world-wide pollution. According to Anna Tibaijuka, Executive Director of UN-HABITAT, this clearly shows, that human species is putting the world in danger and cities are key in addressing this challenge. At the same time, cities are leading the world-wide process to fight climate change both in mitigation and adaptation. Adaptation strategies in developing countries are by nature survival strategies. Global climate governance should therefore include those managing the habitats. This discussion has been recorded as part of the series 'Time for Real Questions' during COP15 in Copenhagen.

Lights off on Saturday: It's Earth Hour!

Earth Hour 2010 is taking place on Saturday the 27th of March, 8:30 PM (local time) and switching off the lights around the world for an hour. The idea is not to save electricity but to take a stand against climate change. Individuals, businesses and communities all over the world are called to action: to take responsibility and get involved in the fight against climate change.

In 2009, over 4 000 cities in 88 countries took part in Earth Hour making it the largest climate change initiative in the world. This year, many global landmarks such as the Eiffel tower in Paris, Big Ben in London, Empire State Building in New York City and Sydney Opera House are going to stand in darkness.

Earth Hour has been visible in social media such as Facebook and Twitter and there's a lot of enthusiasm around the event.One could ask if Earth Hour is really making a change. Turning off your lights for an hour per year is a great way to seem green to the public without really committing to mitigate climate change in everyday actions. But at the same time it is an easy way to show that you care.

One of the aims of Earth Hour is to show politicians the concern of the general public. Especially after the failure in the Copenhagen Summit, this kind of global campaign and enthusiasm is hopefully a way of giving world leaders the mandate they need to make the right climate deal.



More information on the campaign: Earth Hour website
Earth Hour is organized by WWF.

"Adaptigation"

There are different views when it comes to administrations and climate change response. The opinion of many is that climate change mitigation is most important while others believe that adaptation to the effects of a changing climate is more critical. Most, however, admit that both perspectives have to be taken into account.

Recently there has been a dramatic change in the perspective of how administrations act in response to climate change. After focusing almost solely on climate change mitigation for years, different administrations are now concentrating more on climate change adaptation. According to a Senior Research Fellow in Nordregio, Richard Langlais, good planning integrates both perspectives: adaptation and mitigation. He argues that separating the two perspectives in planning is becoming obsolete and can also lead to contradictory measures.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate change adoption is defined as "initiatives and measures to reduce the vulnerability of natural and human systems against actual or expected climate change effects". Climate change mitigation, on the other hand, means "implementing policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance sinks".

Langlais uses a simple example of a municipality planting a new forest along a local river. As he argues, this measure should be seen as both adaptation and mitigation, that is: "adaptigation", by which he means a response to climate change that integrates a focus on adaptation with a focus on mitigation, to avoid conflicts and create synergies. "Seeing this newly planted forest as both adaptation (it buffers the impacts of flooding) and mitigation (it absorbs carbon) is good planning", writes Langlais. The most important thing is to keep "adaptigation" in mind: adaptation and mitigation can be outcomes of the same measures.

Source: Richard Langlais, Journal of Nordregio 9:4, 2009.