Living Small — A Christmas Gift for Planet Earth
To wrap our wits around where we truly are as a species and who we need to be to avoid the brunt of the catastrophes heading our way in the 21st Century, let’s observe: How do we actually behave with respect to our consumption of energy?
The answer, generally, is that only a very small minority of people have gotten the message that what they’re doing matters. Almost no one thinks before turning on a light: “I can flip this switch if it’s really too dark to see, and it’s OK to spend that energy if I need to. But if I don’t need to, I shouldn’t, because the world will be a slightly better place if I don’t.” Or: “I could open this (petroleum-derived) plastic container of creamer for my coffee, but isn’t there an open jug of milk within easy reach?” Or: “Walk or ride?” “Bike or car?” — or the dozens of other choices we make on a minute-to-minute basis. Very few people have gotten the message that their personal decisions to use energy actually matter — that they come at a cost to all of us — and worse, that this cost is far higher than we had previously imagined.
Perhaps we can liken this behavioral issue to littering. The reason most of us don’t throw trash from our car windows is not that we’ll personally see that rubbish later on, but that doing so would tarnish and degrade the space in which we all must live. We’ve processed the idea that littering is simply an unacceptable form of slob-like behavior, and we conceive ourselves to be better people than that.
The societal issues around wasting energy take the exact same form. We shouldn’t waste the HVAC (even in a hotel, where we’re not paying for it), or buy unnecessarily large and heavy cars, because doing so actively damages the quality of our living space.
People say there is a limit to what we can do with efficiency, which, of course, is true. But I wonder if we haven’t misestimated that limit. What happens when people 90+% of our population gains the same level of understanding and concern for energy consumption as they have for the concept of littering? In other words, what happens when it becomes cool to be green? It’s hard for anyone to predict with any real accuracy, but the potential consequences are huge.
A quick story, if I may. My wife and her friends are into wine, and so I see stuff for the modern wine connoisseur that suggests that we’re quite a long way from this type of consciousness. I see disposable plastic bubblewrap for transporting opened and recorked bottles. What’s the matter with a towel? I see mini-refrigerators to hold literally one bottle of wine, and to maintain it at the precise correct temperature — a device one plugs in, with its own little refrigerant compressor, chugging along, drawing current (and making noise) for those who want their Chardonnay at 37 degrees F, not the 34 that they’d be forced to suffer if they put the bottle in the main kitchen refrigerator.
I understand that “living large” in energy consumption has been the chic thing to do over the past decades, but perhaps this is merely a matter of a lack of public education. What happens when people think through the consequences of what they’re doing, and realize that a great deal of their behavior is really the equivalent of littering?
To make this happen, of course, we’ll have to contend with the wizards of mass marketing and the billions of dollars they spend every day convincing consumers that they need that new electric dog-polisher or whatever. But I predict we’ll eventually see through this foolishness. There’s a new living large; it’s called living small, and it’s a Christmas present truly worth giving.
No we as a nation do not have the message. About 1960 poet Robert Frost was being taunted about the amount of waste in the US. His response was that the US was not the land of waste. it was the land of splended waste, because we could afford it (and the Europeans could not). Well none of us can afford splendid wasrte but we behave as if we could. And the behavior is most evident in Congress. Until they lead by example we have a tough road ahead
I totally agree with Craig, and that we all need now to stand up, take notice and be counted because the climate crisis will not just go away.
Mahatma Gandhi urged us to be the change we want to see in the world. But when it comes to the climate crisis, this will not suffice – we must also mass-produce and spread globally the change we want to see.
I have, not only a “vision” for seeing trends in addressing climate change but also a mission in trying to create opportunities for companies to address those trends. We all need to be bold, to stand out and to educate. We really need to do address climate crisis by Speed and by Scale.
Well said Craig.
It is unfortunate (for me) that I don’t believe humans will do the “right thing” until their backs are up against it.
In response to your comments “What happens when it becomes cool to be green?” and “What happens when people think through the consequences of what they’re doing, and realize that a great deal of their behaviour is really the equivalent of littering?”, I’m not convinced enough will and I’m afraid that if we try to take the route of changing peoples behaviour to solve the energy crisis then my prediction is that it will be too late. That doesn’t mean to say that I don’t believe we can solve the problem, we can, but not by placing our faith in people to dramatically change their habits. Buckminster Fuller, the distinguished engineer and scientist, once said “there is no energy crisis, just a crisis of ignorance” and I tend to agree with him. We have the technologies to enable us to reverse our emissions trend without substantially altering our energy usage, although that is not to say that reducing energy use is not a good thing but this is only likely to make a minor contribution to the cause.
I hope you aren’t forced to sleep on the couch after your bride realizes you’ve outed her for having a little mini-refrigerator just to keep her Chardonnay perfectly chilled. Obviously, I’m kidding. Surely it was her “living large” friends you were referring to; don’t turn your back on them at your next social event – they’re going to get even when you least expect it…
On a slightly more serious note, it was almost twenty years ago when I had the pleasant opportunity to meet actor, environmentalist and self-described “activist” Ed Begley, Jr. My family and I were traveling by train from San Diego to Denver with a church youth group. It was the week between Christmas and New Years and he happened to be traveling cross-country with his children.
During our short visit, he related to me that for him it seemed altogether inappropriate to expend copious amounts of jet fuel just to move him and his kids across the country. Unlike so many of today’s environmental hypocrites (whose lifestyles support a “global footprint” larger than many small cities once the photo op has ended), he wasn’t judging what others chose to do. Rather, he simply lived a lifestyle of personal responsibility. I must tell you, our actions speak volumes more than do our words and on that particular day, I met a most genuine envronmentalist.
Although it was written in 2010, here’s a link to a piece that demonstrates his genuine lifestyle: http://www.dwell.com/articles/preview-ed-begley-jr.html
Apart from following him on Twitter and hoping his cable program (Living With Ed) comes back for another season, I don’t have any ongoing contact with Ed. I share my experience in meeting him however to put an exclamation point if you will on your premise that what we do really does matter. Thanks for the timely reminder. Best wishes for a prosperous and meaningful New Year.
Bravo to all who have commented so far.
The goal of turning the masses into conservers of energy is noble but I have doubts that it will happen until it becomes an economic necessity.
We don’t really have a handle on littering either. Even if 90% are complying with putting trash in the can and separating recyclables, the 10% or more that do not comply are creating a huge drag on the national and world economy.
Large volumes of recyclables get landfilled because they have been contaminated by unthinking and maybe malicious dolts who put dirty diapers and other garbage into recycle bins.
There may actually be more hope for solving the energy hog problem since the energy price will eventually rise to the point where it makes good sense and cents for most people to cut consumption.
Larry Lemmert
Wautoma, WI
tree farmer and retired chemistry and physics teacher
Hello Craig,
Totally agree with you.This message should reach to the maximum population of this world and particularly to those who matter.It is a slow process but glad that process has started thanks to people like you. We should give it a thought on how to increase this awareness on a geometric progression as Humanity is known to change course WHEN faced with an ultimatum.An adopted village in the third world or a community in the western developed world that has zero carbon emission like the proposed MASDAR CITY of 50,000 residents in ABU DHABI would be a showpiece role model that would enhance awareness of the masses.
Shrinivas:
A boss at a company I used to work for had a term for this approach, it was a WIBNI (wouldn’t it be nice if) in other words this may be the right solution but it is not realistic. Here in the UK we have our own mini version of Masdar City, it’s called ‘The Centre for Alternative Technology’ which is in Machynlleth in north Wales (www.cat.org.uk). As far as I am aware this is the only group like this in the UK; the depressing part is “The Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT) was founded in 1973…”. If this is all we can achieve in 38 years I do not hold a lot of hope for this approach to save the planet. However I do believe, in fact I am sure, that we could supply the levels of energy we currently use both cleanly and sustainably with only minor and acceptable changes to our lifestyles, we have the technologies. True recycling of materials also needs to be addressed but this is not the primary reason our planet is gasping for breath which is the burning of fossil fuels. The problem is we need to stop talking about them (technologies) and start implementing them, this needs political foresight and drive and for governments to directly fund/support them not by trying to set up market frameworks in order to get private capital to fund them, I don’t believe we have the time. Leaving the solution of this challenge to market forces will only provide the solution when the situation becomes desperate (i.e. financially attractive) which will probably be too late.
The quick answer to your question of observance— As a USA cultural society, not very aware or considerable. That is obvious. The pertinent question may be “What size and shape of a timber will it take upside to our (lack of) consciousness to bring us aware?”
Mis-representation is the accepted response order, and only form is the main concern.
You seem to be trying to change will and content thru diagnosis of form. That is not where the problem lies. That is it’s effect, not it’s cause.
First, I would call your attention to the annual average electricity consummation level for the USA and compare with various European countries.
There IS a vast difference! In France the annual average electricity consummation level is half that of the USA.
Examples
1. red wine is kept in the cave/basement and never placed in the refrigerator!
2. replacement of light bulbs by the new electronic bulbs save electricity use.
3. the majority of the homes are not air-conditioned nor dehumidified – another savings.
These are only a few examples – but leaving lights on and having 5-televisions in a household is not necessary.
I don’t know where you live but in my part of the country very, very few homes have basements (and I don’t know a single person who can boast having a cave in their abode) but in any case, red wine should never be stored in the refrigerator!
Thanks for this piece. Yes, Craig, I agree that many people will eventually see consumerism as utter foolishness. I also have to agree with some commentators here that this will most likely happen when people are with their backs up against the wall. But it ain’t efficiency on which to focus. For one the efficiency paradox means that what is gained (in energy saving) somewhere is quickly taken up elsewhere. No, it’s our internalised beliefs about what makes us happy that must change. Lust for material growth without limits is no less than a surrogate for our deeper human need for human, psychological and spiritual growth. The surrogate’s veil is lifted by simply acting as dependent, vulnerable people who live within limits and develop their individual potential in interdependent relationships with others and their environments. This can be done in myriad small acts, and give immediate satisfaction of making some change within the huge scenario that is climate change. It also enables people to be more resilient under the now inevitable environmental, economic and social impacts of climate change. Values change/human growth does regularly happen when people make a decision to enlarge their worldview under highly challenging circumstances. People who suddenly have to live with disablement, poverty, dying and ageing do find creative ways to live well, sustainably, nevertheless. Their lessons are there for the picking. Someone near you can tell you all about how…
we spend a lot of our lifes in the believe that climate change is man made, yes man is part of it but can never stop it. i was at a commercial show a few years ago and i wanted to purchase a new electric truck with a range of 150miles, so i thought great good for 80 miles however as a small business, and anyone haulage would know cost is everything you are prepared to pay more for green but it has to work to pay its way,looking at the truck it was great i would have bought 1 and moved all my trucks over to 100% green, except when the truck comes back to base it has to sit there for 8 to 10 hours on charge, i said they need the battery pack to be removable and a new pack on charge, as all i would do is replace the battery pack and use the truck again so it could be used 24hrs a day, the company that made this truck has gone to the big green bin of great ideas yet could have been saved by just having a swapable battery pack, so all we do now is fill the tank up and use the trucks again.
our company recycles 99% of all our waste back into recyclable products, so lets all play a part in energy saving, and enjoy our world Happy New Year
For many decades, industrial fork lift trucks have had exchangeable batteries. When one battery runs down, it is put on charge and a freshly charged battery is put in. Using a similar approach would help solve the range problem of electric cars and trucks. The battery pack could contain an meter indicating how much battery power is used and the driver would pay for the battery exchange based on how much power he had used. If the driver were not going far from home, he / she could recharge at home or at work instead of exchanging batteries.
I am not the only one to suggest this approach to solving the range problem of electric vehicles, but it seems that little thought has been given to it. Of course there would have to be a limit to the number of battery designs to make it practical, but surely that problem could be solved.
My vision of and hope for the future home is one of self subsistence. A combination year round greenhouse and living space where we produce the bulk of our own fresh foods in biologically balanced aquaponic (fish under/plants over) systems in structures that take advantage of all the available natural energy sources and minimize the use of imported energy. We have the technology to capture solar, wind, geothermal, and where available hydro energy. We have the technology to establish and quite easily maintain biologically balanced aquaponic systems that can provide a healthy food source that would reduce packaging by mega tons, income requirements, and provide a wholesome cooperative family environment where our children learn the value of participation in family work producing the bulk of the food the family consumes. From the producer to the consumer off the store shelf the cost skyrockets by a factor of 10 or more. A 1200 sq ft green house is capable of feeding a family of 6 or more with a healthy diet. And because the water is constantly recycled, there is very little water use.
It’s back to basics my friends, but in a modern technological world of indoor gardening for self subsistence. We all need to reflect on what made America strong, it is Family values and working together as a family, community, and country seeking joy and happiness that will not be found in the social network we have created that consumes our time and resources, true joy and happiness is found in the basics of life within our homes and Families. Living small, living basics, living for love in the home.
I am a farm boy and participated in family work from a very young age and looking back those were the best days of my life. Do you know that there is legislation in the works that will prevent farm kids under 16 being allowed to work on the family farm? Just who will produce the food for your children? By 16, if not involved, 100% the youth will leave the farm for the social city life. Do you know the average age of the farmer is now well over 60? We are in serious trouble folks! Please help stop such legislation, vote for freedom.
It would be interesting to see how that approach would work in huge cities where most people live in high rise apartment buildings.
Frank, check out http://www.verticalfarming.com, I think this will respond beter to your question than I can. Enjoy the thought.
Darrell
Ooops, that is http://www.wirticalfarm.com
Well Geez! One more try! http://www.verticalfarm.com Sorry all!
I hate to sound like an ignoramus, but I’ve never understood this concept. The energy that plants ingest comes from the sun. So you put them indoors? What am I missing here?
Don’t confuse efficiency with conservation. Efficiency is about reducing waste, energy use and emissions associated with an energy-consuming task, while conservation is about avoiding the energy use altogether.
It’s common if not normal for modern efficiency not to relate to how much energy volume is actually used, or whether conservation is even considered. For example, we might encourage higher R and airtightness in a new home design, but if the new home has more conditioned space per person than the last home, the energy use can easily increase per person despite the increased efficiency. Similarly, energy use often declines per person by moving from a larger per-person space to a smaller one, even if efficiency factors like R and airtightness are not upgraded. Same is true with our vehicles where smallest size and least weight often achieve more fuel-use and emissions reduction than higher engine efficiencies.
So understand that choosing smaller and less is conservation, not to be confused with efficiency. Conservation also means turning stuff off when not being used or useful. Sure we can specify auto-switches to do that for us, but the old manual method works great and has the fastest payback of all. Everytime I hang a load of laundry to dry on my outdoor solar clothesline, I remind myself that I’m saving abt 5 kWh of electricity use + abt 5 kW of load on a powerplant. Sure, I have a more efficient electric dryer, but no mfr’d dryer uses less electricity than the clothesline!
I also have 70-something efficient CFL and LED lightbulbs in my home and office, but during most days including today, my entire house and office are lit by daylight. Daylighting is much more efficient than any electric lighting. But daylighting doesn’t save any money or energy unless the electric lights are turned off. It’s conservation to turn off the electric lights! Sure, I could buy and install a bunch of sensors to do that for me, but the manual way works very well! Also develops good habits. I don’t even think about conserving. It’s a habit.
I teach that 25% to 33% of how much energy reduction we can achieve in our homes and offices relates to how we behave and operate. This is mostly about conservation. Most conservation opportunities are about our behaviors and operations, stuff we ourselves can control. The more automated our environments become, the less control we usually have. Hard to apply much conservation when there’s less to control. Since I prefer more control, I also prefer less automation. BTW, automation also uses energy, more energy use than manual. It all counts.
Craig, your parallel between littering and energy waste is absolutely brilliant, and it truly gives me hope. Through a subtle but crucial shift in public consciousness, littering in the US was vastly reduced in a mere couple of decades. While this shift was firmly shoved in the correct direction through a massive public relations campaign, it’s heartening to look back and see how quickly the population changed both its mind and its behavior. I still recall with empathy the Italian American actor, Iron Eyes Cody, playing the tearful old indigenous gentleman and gazing into our eyes with his silently pleading indictment of the litter he has witnessed.
The success of that campaign also bolsters your excellent point about “wizards of mass marketing and the billions of dollars [their clients] spend every day”. On so many vital issues we’re confronted with the power of cunningly organized money seeking its own interests at the expense of the larger community. This organization has been astonishingly successful at excluding ideas and framing debates in terms that minimize opposition and favor its desired ends – “climate change” instead of “climate disruption”, “government spending” instead of “public investment”, the use the revered phrase “Freedom of Speech” to enshrine open bribery, and ascribing the standing of “person” to a mere legal fiction.
Money has long organized, and has done so very effectively across every facet of human society. This is not a “conspiracy theory” – it is simply a statement of long-established fact. To quote a man whose memory and work have been much abused and misused in the interests of great wealth, Adam Smith himself cautioned us, “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”
The only remedy against organized money is organized humanity. Ken Chan wisely recounts Gandhi’s words about ‘being the change’ in this matter, and I am often mindful of another admonishment that great man had for us, ““Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is important that you do it.” Similarly, and with additional clarity, he told us “You may never know what results come of your action, but if you do nothing there will be no result.”
In so many areas of human welfare, the thinly veiled philosophy of ‘profit over people’ dominates the strategy and the outcomes. This is particularly obvious in healthcare, where the more money flows the sicker we become, and therefore the focus is on the mere management of symptoms rather than the prevention and cure of disease.
The influence of money in governance (which makes the rules by which we are required to live) is a primary threat to a healthy future, from the continual shredding of our Liberty in the name of “security”, to the ever-expanding legal powers and “rights” of corporate entities – to include the preservation and expansion of irrational subsidies and tax loopholes, and even the use of eminent domain for commercial purposes. Instead of the government/public supported digital infrastructure now enjoyed by Germany and Japan (to the advantage of both those nations), we here continue to settle for a second rate private sector offering. Rather than a national effort to pursue the energy efficiencies and alternatives that are already available to us, we continue with the same old technologies that grant the greatest return to the dominant interests.
The poisonous influence of cash in election campaigns, in my estimation, must be the first action item on our agenda. Until we get the foxes out of the legislative henhouse, we will increasingly have leadership of the most heartless greed and spineless cowardice imaginable.
You want heart and spine? Restrict campaigns to public money and stop the bribery! To begin, this means a constitutional amendment like the ones very recently introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ted Deutch. This solution is supported by a variety of truly grass roots organizations, and is nicely aligned with the core thrust of the non-violent direct action movement now taking hold across the world.
Liberty is priceless and America shouldn’t be for sale. In short, a prostituted America is a dying America. We need to start work now, and we don’t have a couple of decades for this. Not only our sons will suffer – not only our daughters will pay… we talk of our parent’s children.
Being in the advertising business for years and watching the ads that had profound and lasting effect on the intended targets led me to the conclusion years ago the the Iron Eyes Cody commercial was one of the most effective ever made; there have been numerous attempts to copy that approach but none have come near to its success. That said, education and the right advertising approach – without “scare tactic”(s) could be just as effective concerning energy use. The problem is every other fossil fuel based company will fight any attempt and they have the dollars to do so. Just look at the natural gas companies’ advertising spouting “clean fuel” even though they were called on that statement and now state “cleaner fuel” in their advertising. Rather than say that they realize the goal is no pollution and understand that NG is a transition tool they continue to claim that NG is the future. On the flip side the the NGO’s who use scare tactics and little or unmentioned facts do just as much harm when folks find out the truth.
With the numerous media opportunities available the right national advertising approach could get peoples attention; all Americans respect the truth and in fact recognize it when they see it, but what ever message is used it must be truthful, open, transparent and direct. Lets do some brain storming and put the results out there.
For everyday, I’ve switched to boxed wines. Some of the newer brands are doing well in blind tests, and I’ve found several that are quite nice “house” wines. The boxed versions are much more efficient to ship because of reduced weight and less wasted volume. There are still some issues with the plastics used in the bag part of bag-in-box, but those seem to be being addressed.
Happy New Year Craig,
I hope 2012 is a rewarding and fulfilling year.
I’m not a great believer in the sort of smug, moralistic, and completely unrealistic ambitions of many of your contributors. The majority of these aims are simply feel good measures and achieve very little in the greater scheme of things.
It’s true, as ‘the Age of Oil’ draws to a close, we live in a time of great challenge. But when was it any different? The Human race has always had to share the great boons of mankind’s technological advances with the risks and downsides those same advances .
There has alway been a ‘Utopian desire to retreat ‘back to nature’.
Like all impractical dreams, these desires are kept as fancies, while humanity marches forward on the nectar of our own technology. rather than concentrate on what makes us smaller, we should delight in the discovery of greater advances, even to the stars themselves.
This is the true nature of the human species, always onward, and ambitiously, avidly, seeking new frontiers to conquer!
Excelsior!