Green Crawler Blog

When choosing a college in the past, most students did not factor in the environmental initiatives taken by their prospective schools, but as this issue becomes more and more vital to our nation’s future, “green” rankings may start to play a larger role in the decision process.  I believe that showcasing institutions that are at the forefront of environmental dedication will set the bar for colleges, universities, and even companies across the country.  After browsing through the latest issue of Sierra Club’s Green College Guide, I decided to do my own research online and find the schools that are most consistently featured in top “green” college lists provided by companies like Forbes, The Daily Green, The Princeton Review and Grist.  After doing my research, I found 5 colleges that were consistently labeled as the “greenest” colleges in the U.S., based on their environmental initiatives.  

1. Middlebury College (Middlebury, Vermont)

The school has committed to carbon neutrality by 2016.  A wind turbine supplies 25% of the school’s recycling center’s energy and a power plant fueled by wood chips from a local farm could cut fuel–oil use in half.  The campus recycles 60% of its waste. When the school needed to tear down an aging structure, it was carefully dismantled so the parts could be used again in green “reconstruction.”

2. Harvard University (Cambridge, Massachusetts)

School buildings have achieved up to 3/4 reductions in waste.  Harvard has installed motion sensors to manage light usage and other energy efficiency devices as well, and has converted school vehicles to run on spare vegetable oil from campus restaurants. Harvard’s “Green Campus Initiative” is one of the leading campus-sustainability programs in the country. The school is also among the Environmental Protection Agency’s short list of the top renewable power purchasers, and its food services buy between 35% and 70% of their produce from local farmers.

3. College of the Atlantic (Bar Harbor, Maine)

It awards a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree solely in the field of human ecology.  Last December, the school became the first college to go 100% carbon neutral by purchasing carbon offsets for their emissions through the Climate Trust of Oregon. The College of the Atlantic has its own organic farm, uses only recycled paper and composts all of its food waste.

4. Oberlin College (Oberlin, Ohio)

The campus has Ohio’s largest solar display, and is made up of gorgeous “green” buildings.  These geothermal heated buildings use only about 20% as much energy as a typical structure, and employ such advanced features as extensive daylight impressive insulation, recycled materials, powerful ventilation and green roofing.  50% of the school’s energy comes from renewable sources and the school is also transitioning to 100 percent earth-friendly cleaning products.

5. Evergreen State College (Olympia, Washington)

Evergreen State purchases 100% clean energy and is investing in electric vehicles. The school’s Seminar II Building is Gold LEED certified, which serves as a standard for all future campus buildings.  Evergreen State also features a 13-acre organic farm and a compost facility.  Student activism is a key feature of Evergreen State’s environmental dedication, featuring over nine campus organizations that take on environmental issues. 

Seattle has just passed a law that will require convenience, drug and grocery stores to charge $.20 per plastic or paper bag that each shopper needs to carry out his or her groceries.  This law will go into effect on January 1, 2009.  This is an attempt by the city to encourage people to bring reusable bags when they shop.  Residents won’t even have to pay for reusable bags, as the city is offering to provide every household with a couple of free bags.  ”The best way to reduce waste is not to create it, and today, we have made that a little easier in Seattle,” said Seattle Mayor, Greg Nickels.  

While I do agree that charging a fee for a disposable paper or plastic bag is a good way to encourage people to bring reusable bags when grocery shopping, I do not think it is the best solution.  First of all, the city estimates a 50 percent reduction in the use of disposable bags, if a fee was charged for the bags.  360 million disposable bags are used in Seattle every year, which is about 607 bags per person annually and 12 bags per person every week.  The petroleum in 14 plastic bags could drive a car 1 mile and the disposal of these bags costs the average city 17 cents per bag.  And with the new law and the estimates provided by the city of Seattle, every person in the city will still use 6 disposable bags every week.  

I do not find this to be a suitable solution.  What if grocery, convenience and drug stores didn’t offer disposable bags at all?  The point of “the grocery bag” is to get your groceries from the cart or basket into your car or bus, and finally, into your home with the least amount of trips back and forth.  With a $.20 fee per disposable bag, I don’t think there is going to be sufficient incentive for the average shopper to remember these reusable bags for every trip to the grocery store.  Bags from shopping always end up in the home, because that is the final spot in which they are used (to unload the groceries).  The odds that every shopper remembers to put these reusable bags back in their car after unloading the groceries is very low.  This only covers a portion of the grocery shopping demographic.  People that use public transportation or even those that ride a bike, would have to always carry a reusable bag with them, just in case they need to make a quick, unplanned stop at the grocery store on the way home.  Again, very unlikely that every shopper will keep a grocery bag on them, especially when the punishment is a $.20 fee.  

If grocery, convenience and drug stores did not offer disposable bags, 75% of Seattle’s disposable bags would no longer exist.  People will have greater incentive to remember and bring reusable bags through an efficiency cost, rather than a low monetary cost of $.20/disposable bag.  No estimates would be necessary, as the percentage by which the use of disposable bags (at least in the grocery, convenience and drug store industries) would be reduced by is 100.  To control the production of reusable bags, the city could then analyze the number of reusable bags needed to be given to households each year, based on how many reusable bags the average shopper would require to carry his/her groceries, population growth, etc.  Until every city adopts this law and issues a production ceiling on reusable bags, Green Crawler will be sure to include eco-friendly reusable bags in its product database.

The 6 Seat "Air Car"

It’s cheap, it’s fuel-efficient, but just looking at the picture of this car, most of you are probably thinking, no.  It’s not exactly the sexiest car on the market and it looks about the size of a go-cart.  The car is a compressed air vehicle that Zero Pollution Motors (ZPM) is introducing to North America in 2010, and it achieves a fuel economy of 106 mpg.  The vehicle is powered by the Compressed Air Engine developed by Motor Development International.  Whether the engine uses solely air or a combination of air and fuel, depends on the speed of the car.  It would run purely on compressed air at speeds less than 35 mph.  Since the car could only go a short distance when using just air, fuel is needed to get the full range.  The “air car” is able to reach speeds over 90 mph, seat six people, and it meets all safety standards in the U.S.  All very impressive, but is this the best way to reduce our carbon footprint (via transportation)?  

Let’s go back to the size of the car.  Such dramatic fuel efficiency is associated with tiny experimental cars…not bigger, mainstream vehicles.  No six-seat passenger car has ever achieved more than 75 mpg.  Also, the size of the “air car” doesn’t really attract the mainstream buyer, as it is compact, and doesn’t hold much of anything.  The “air car” claims that it can seat 6 people, and by the looks of it, I would say it can seat six cabbage patch kids comfortably.  People need space, if and when they must drive.  Space for lugging around those bulk items from a trip to Costco, hauling you and your wife’s golf clubs, and even just carpooling comfortably to work with a couple of friends.  Cars the size of the “air car” (or electric cars) encourage individual driving (as they are optimal for 1 or 2 people) and they encourage the kind of driving that just gets you from point A to B…and when I say “you”, I mean you and maybe a friend.  They are useless in situations that basically require a car.  If you just need to get somewhere to be there, I think public transportation would be a much more beneficial investment for our energy independence, providing public transportation availability to everyone (for more on the perks of public transportation, read my last blog).  Using pubic transportation when possible provides an astonishing short-run contribution to CO2 reduction.  

Another concern is the amount of energy it would take to generate the required air pressure to fuel the “air car”.  According to CNN.com, it would take 4,500 pounds per square inch (120 times more than the tire pressure of a typical four-door sedan).  How is that pressure acquired?  A compressor (an industrial size compressor too).  This compressor requires quite a bit of horsepower, too, in order to compress the air up to 4,500 pounds per square inch.  Count all of that energy.  Probably not much more energy efficient than the electric cars we have seen before.  

While it is great to see dedication to the advancement of energy-efficient vehicles, I believe we need to invest in practical alternatives.  Public transportation is an excellent area to invest in, for a short run reduction in CO2 emissions.  Fuel-efficient cars are also a great hope for the future of family transportation, but the practicality of these cars must be addressed as well.

Source: Public Transportation and Petroleum Savings Report

No, that is not a typo.  The average two-worker household can save $6,251 annually by using public transportation instead of driving a car, according to the Public Transportation and Petroleum Savings Report.  This is a significant amount of money in today’s struggling economy.  The average credit card debt among all American households is $5,219, according to the Survey of Consumer Finances in 2004.  This means the average household can erase their debt, just by using public transportation.  With the price of gas and oil reaching all time highs, the entire economy is suffering.  Consumers find a large portion of their income going towards, well….just getting around.  

And guess what? Breaking news! People that choose to ride public transportation also reduce their carbon footprint and conserve energy.  If an average two car household eliminated one car and switched to public transportation instead of driving, they would reduce 30% of their CO2 emissions, according to Public Transportation’s Contribution to U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reduction.  And if that isn’t convincing enough, here is an idea of how much public transportation benefits our planet.  Public transportation reduces energy consumption by the equivalent of 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline each year, the equivalent of 320 million cars filling up almost 900,000 times a day, according to the Public Transportation and Petroleum Savings Report.  

Portland's Tri-Met is a large reason the "Rose City" is one of the greenest cities in the U.S..

Public Transportation also benefits the cars that are on the road, by reducing congestion, which reduces overall time spent driving (less stop and go traffic and more parking spaces available), which increases fuel efficiency.  

Public transportation gives us an opportunity to be energy-efficient without losing our mobility, which is vital to our economy…the ability to get to our jobs, sporting events, movies, etc.  It is capable of reducing CO2 emissions by 37 million metric tons annually.  

With that said, we also need to realize that a large portion of U.S. households do not have convenient access to public transportation, and in order to get mainstream America on board, public transportation expansion must be a high priority in our legislative branch.  It’s a win-win situation.

Click the Map to Watch the Video

Every week I sit on my couch and brainstorm topics for the Green Crawler blog through hours of web browsing. Ok, a good amount of that time is spent checking baseball scores on ESPN.com, but this weekend I came across an amazing video presentation (click the map on the left to watch) from Kevin Gurney, an assistant professor of earth and atmospheric science at Purdue University, that displays a map and system that shows U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels. And you are probably thinking to yourself, “cool…and?”

Well…this isn’t the traditional emissions map that scientists and researchers have been publishing for years now. Kevin Gurney is leading a project called Vulcan, a map and system that shows CO2 emissions at local levels on an hourly basis at more than 100 times more detail than the traditional CO2 emissions maps.

The maps were created from a method that extracts the CO2 information by transforming data on local air pollution, such as carbon monoxide and nitrous oxide emissions. Team Vulcan was able to combine inventories from different sectors that produce fossil fuel CO2 emissions…from power plants, industrial sources, mobile sources, etc. and make a “total” map of fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

According to an article by Steve Tally in the Purdue University News from April, researchers believe that “the increased detail and accuracy of Vulcan will help lawmakers create policies to reduce CO2 emissions while also increasing scientists’ understanding of the sources and fate of carbon dioxide.”

The first thing I noticed was the drastic difference in CO2 emissions between the western states and the eastern states. It is astonishing. The northeastern U.S. has been recognized before as being responsible for a large part of our country’s CO2 emissions, but this map really put it in perspective. One of the more surprising findings was the amount of CO2 emitted from southeastern U.S. “The southeastern U.S. is a much larger source than we had estimated previously,” said Kevin Gurney.

A very interesting part of this presentation is a 2D video showing transport of the fossil fuel CO2 emissions into the air over the U.S., recording data so often that you can see interesting comparisons, such as day and night cycles (obviously more emissions during the day compared to nighttime hours) and spatial patterns across the country…one very interesting piece noted by Kevin Gurney is the west to east transport of the fossil fuel CO2 emissions.

Vulcan provides an extremely detailed and interesting data representation of the fossil fuel CO2 emissions across the U.S. and sets a new standard for future environmental research and analysis of fossil fuel CO2 emissions. Vulcan shows our impact on the environment like no other interactive map has before, and hopefully instead of placing blame on one another, it can influence a more environmentally proactive America.

If you’re like me, you grew up hating bees.  Every summer I would suffer from a bee sting, whether accidentally stepping on one (trust me, it can happen), cleaning out the garage, or just walking to the mailbox.  We are terrified of these little insects the size of a piece of pocket lint.  And how do we handle “bee” situations?  In two ways.  Either we run away from them (when they are in flight) or sneak up on them and swat the living [insert noun here] out of them.  But killing three bees every summer isn’t nearly as shocking as the nationwide “Houdini Act” (aka Colony Collapse Disorder) that is happening to the honeybee population.  These insects are dying and disappearing on a national and global level…and I mean at a shocking rate.

One third of the honeybee colonies in the United States died last winter, according to researchers.  Over the past 25 years, the managed honeybee population of the U.S. has been cut in half…we’re talking about billions of bees.  How important are bees to the planet?  Well, if you haven’t seen Bee Movie, here is a description of how important these little insects are.  According to a theoretical physicist named Albert Einstein (you might have heard of him), “if the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man.”  Bees pollinate around 30% of America’s food supply, which is around $15 billion worth of crops.  Bees are essential to our environment, and ironically, our environment is destroying them.

One factor in this bee genocide is air pollution.  Bees are known to communicate through many different chemicals and odors, which is common in insects.  Air pollution destroys the fragrance of flowers, which then hinders a bee’s ability to follow scent trails, according to a University of Virginia research study.  This causes a massive decrease in the pollination process, harming plants and bee life, which happens to be reliant on pollen for protein.  

Another factor is the use of pesticides, which kill bees through two types of contact.  Contact insecticides kill by making direct contact with bees, usually caused by directly spraying them (you’ve seen the cans of Raid…that is an example of a contact insecticide). Systemic insecticides, those that are incorporated by treated plants, can contaminate pollen and thus kill bees in their hives. 

Elizabeth Kolbert wrote an alarming piece in The New Yorker, describing the dissection of bees that live in today’s environment.  ”Normally, if you cut open a bee, its innards, viewed under a microscope, will appear white.”  Lately, what you find is much different across the U.S. and Europe.  ”Bees were filled with black scar tissue. They seemed to be suffering not so much from any particular ailment as from just about every ailment.”  

While these dissections cannot prove the exact cause of death, nor the black scar tissue, it is clear that something is wrong.  Bees across the United States are all disappearing and dying in the billions, making a compelling case that this massive decrease in bees is due to the unhealthy state of our environment.  Just remember, one in every three bites we take relies on bees.

A May 2008 poll from Environmental Protection Online shows that two-thirds of all U.S. adults believe it is important that the next U.S. president has a policy that addresses climate change. Forty-four percent believe it is extremely or very important.  With the environment being such an important issue among voters and the final two presidential candidates still deciding (at least it appears so to the general public) on running mates, I have made a list of the best VP candidates based on their “greenness” and ability to influence others- measured by their contributions to minimize the carbon footprint that the human race is leaving on this planet.  A celebrity VP candidate like Leonardo Dicaprio would be great for motivating our citizens (and people across the globe) to be more involved in the environmental movement, but let’s be honest, being an actor without any political experience doesn’t sit well with most voters, and acting seems like a more appealing job than a VP (plus he can still have a large influence on people without taking on such a role - i.e. check out his documentary, “The 11th Hour”).  So with that said, who are the best VP candidate based on “greenness”, ability to influence and experience?

1.  Arnold Schwarzenegger - powerful, charismatic, and environmentally motivated.

Assuming Article II of the Constitution was modified, he would be an ideal VP for either party.  Former actor, body building icon, and current Governor of California, Arnold has the experience and the popularity to guide this country into an eco-conscious mentality.  At a green conference over a year ago in Georgetown, the “Governator” said the green movement will only gain a mainstream audience if it’s considered sufficiently “sexy”.  He has been striving to turn this movement into more than a fad, signing the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (the act pushes to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% of what they were in 1990 by the year 2050), supporting a program with a goal to have 50% of new homes install solar photovoltaics (starting in 2005), endorsing California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard, which requires that 20% of the state’s total power supplies be generated from renewable sources by 2017, and also fighting against offshore oil drilling along California’s coast.  He is the total package.

2.  Al Gore - different than Arnold in the fact that he is politician turned celebrity.  Either way, his experience and popularity make him a viable candidate.  The reason he is 2nd to Arnold is because he isn’t as popular to voters in both parties…Arnold is a moderate Republican that is leading a “blue” state (the largest state…red or blue).  His documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth”, was a hit, introducing many Americans to the facts behind Global Warming and what measures can be taken to reduce the carbon footprint left by the human race.  His efforts earned him the Nobel Peace Prize.  He founded the We Campaign, an effort to convince and push policymakers into adopting tough legislation to combat climate change.  Despite not being in office for 8 years, Al Gore is just as active (arguably more) as he has ever been in fighting global warming.

3.  Susan Collins - The Maine Senator was awarded the “Greenest Republican in Congress” a couple of months ago, after receiving a score of 104 on her Congressional Scorecard for environmental issues.  It was the highest score in Congress.  Susan obviously lacks the popularity of Al and Arnold, but her experience and dedication to the environment make her another top candidate.  She has introduced her “Ten-Point Energy Plan” to get the nation started on the important effort to protect our environment for future generations and she is a member of Republicans for Environmental Protection.

4.  Greg Nickels - Seattle is consistently recognized as one of the “greenest” big cities in the U.S., and what better mayor to take his responsibilities and environmental influence to a higher level?  Nickels announced an “Environmental Action Agenda” with the goal to reduce Seattle’s greenhouse gas emissions “to meet or beat” the levels suggested in the Kyoto Protocol.  He instigated the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, an agreement between over 600 US cities that are striving to reduce carbon emissions.  His involvement in the launch of this agreement puts him at the forefront of “city governing” VP candidates. He won the 2006 Climate Protection Award from the EPA and the 2006 Edgar Wayburn Award for Environmental Leadership from the Sierra Club.  

5.  Kathleen Sebelius - Rumored to be a potential Obama running mate, Gov. Sebelius of Kansas is a very popular politician with the environment at the top of her agenda.  She is calling for an increase in federal support for wind energy, she vetoed bills that permit new coal-fired power plants in Kansas and she is pushing more widespread recycling programs across her home state as well.  

With gas prices well over $4 a gallon, you probably wish you were driving your friend’s Toyota Prius…the same Prius you used to make fun of for having a more oversized rear section than Kim Kardashian.  But not all of us own a hybrid.  They are (on average) a bit pricier, they only come in select models, and not every car owner can just wake up and replace their current car with a hybrid.  So what can you do to make your traditional gas guzzler more “green”?  This list includes tips such as driving techniques and pre-trip preparations.

1.  Avoid sudden stops and drag-racing-type starts…this overexerts your engine and requires your car to burn extra fuel.  Keep your engine speed between 1200 and 3000 RPMs and upshift between 2000 and 2500 RPMs.

2.  Optimize your tire pressure…if every car in America had properly inflated tires, we could save around 2 billion gallons of gas each year.

3.  Carry only necessary belongings in your car.  You don’t need that dog carrier in your back seat if your dog rides in the car every 6 months for a vet visit.  For every extra 250 pounds your car hauls, the engine loses about one mile per gallon in fuel economy.  

4.  I know it’s hard, but try not to speed.  Fuel efficiency decreases rapidly when traveling faster than 60 mph. Every additional 5 mph over that threshold is estimated to cost motorists “essentially an additional 30 cents per gallon in fuel costs.”  

5.  Manage your air conditioning.  A good strategy is to use the air conditioning and close the windows on the highway, but in stop and go traffic, turn off the air conditioning and roll down the windows…plus it makes sense when listening to music too (you can’t hear the music if you’re driving down the highway with the windows down).  On the highway, closed windows decrease air resistance, so run the air conditioner. But in stop-and-go traffic, shutting off the air conditioning and opening the windows can lighten your fuel use. Air conditioning can lower your fuel economy by 10 percent to 20 percent.

6.  Get regular tune-ups.  Maintaining your car by changing the oil, having clean air filters, aligning the wheels, etc., will help you burn less gas, pollute less, and prevent car trouble down the line.

7.  Since most of us are not descendants of Ferdinand Magellan and Meriwether Lewis, we get lost on trips.  Use a navigation system or an online maps service like Google or Mapquest to plan your trips…it’s a waste of gas to back track after going the wrong way for 15 minutes.  Plus, navigation systems and online map services usually have a “fastest” route option…this will help plan the most “gas efficient” route.  

8.  If you have a manual transmission, shift up as soon as you can and shift down at the last possible moment.

9.  Turn off electronics when done driving. Starting your car with electronic devices (radio, air conditioning, those hip LCD monitors on the back of the seats) turned off will put less strain on your engine which translates to better gas mileage.  

10.  Use cruise control on highway trips (if the roads are flat).  This will keep the speed constant and the RPMs down, making your engine work as little as possible.  

Through 200,000 years of existence, the Earth in which modern humans have inhabited has never been ice-free at the North Pole, and for the past 2,000 years, that chubby man from the arctic has used a sleigh to deliver our presents.  This summer (for us in the northern hemisphere), that may all change.  

In a recent article from National Geographic, several scientists that are studying climate change in the arctic, have stated that “arctic warming has become so dramatic that the North Pole may melt this summer.”  This would be the first time in modern history.  

The disappearance of the North Pole sea ice is one of the most significant pieces of evidence of global warming here on earth.  In a December article from National Geographic, scientists speculated that summer ice in the North Pole could be gone by 2012.  Seven months later, it is now feasible that this ice will be melted by the end of this summer…making it possible to sail to the North Pole through open water for the first time…ever.  

One argument that I’ve heard tossed around is the “pole shift” effect, in which the Earth’s rotation axis of 23.5 degrees changes slightly every 40,000 years or so, effecting the climate in a dramatic way.  If this was the case, why haven’t we seen an iceless North Pole in modern human history, which is at least 5 times the length of the average “pole shift” cycle?  In my opinion, global warming is really showing its effect.  This summer’s forecast is a dire warning of how quickly the polar regions are being effected by global warming and climate change.  

To see the whole article from National Geographic…click here.

After buying my laptop a few weeks ago, I was curious as to how “green” it was compared to the other laptops on the market.  During my research on how to evaluate how “green” a computer is, I found a great procurement tool called EPEAT (Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool).  This tool measures the environmental impact of computers and monitors based on 23 required criteria and 28 optional criteria.

The criteria includes the environmental impacts of all stages of a product’s life cycle, which includes initial product design, manufacturing, packaging, use, dis-assembly, recycling and ultimate disposal.  Products meeting or exceeding all of the 23 required criteria are recognized as EPEAT Bronze products. Products meeting all of the required criteria and at least 14 of the optional criteria are recognized as EPEAT Silver products and products meeting all of the required criteria and at least 21 optional criteria are recognized as EPEAT Gold products.  Click here for a detailed view of the criteria.

All of the major computer manufacturers are registering their computers and monitors in EPEAT, striving to get that market edge over their competitors, since customers are increasingly seeking environmentally preferable alternatives.  

So what is the “greenest” laptop on the market, according to the EPEAT tool?  

Standing alone in first place, with 22 of the 28 optional criteria, the Toshiba Portégé R500-PPR50U is the most environmental friendly computer on the market.  Some of its highlights include 8 out of 8 points for its reduction/elimination of environmentally sensitive materials, 5 out of 5 points for its design for end of life, 3 out of 4 points for packaging, 2 out of 2 points for product longevity and 1 out of 2 points for its energy conservation.  

Toshiba, Hewlett Packard and Dell all have a few laptop models in 2nd place, with a Gold rating (all receiving 21 out of the 28 optional criteria points).  The Lenova ThinkPad X300 also has a Gold rating, with 21 points.

The very popular Apple brand has five laptops with 20 out of 28 optional criteria points, which are still “green” enough to receive a silver rating.  The five laptops include the Macbook Air 1.6GHz (MB003), the Apple Macbook Pro 15.4inch 2.4GHz (MB133LL), the Apple Macbook Pro 15.4inch 2.5GHz (MB134LL), the Macbook Air 1.8GHz (Z0FS) and the Apple Macbook Pro 17 inch LED Display (Z0F2).  

EPEAT incorporates all of the necessary criteria (and more) in determining if computers and monitors are created, delivered, used, and disposed in the most environmental friendly manner.  This tool is a great motivator for computer manufacturers, as the consumer industry is experiencing a “green” revolution.  As Green Crawler strives to add products from all industries, we will be sure to consider adding computers and monitors that are registered in EPEAT.

For the entire list of eco-friendly laptops, click here.