I hear john shars is in for an ‘interconnected’ blog next week on the topic. US/NZ content since kiwis are keen to home insulate – winter a-coming and all..
if your folks have the time c’mon over — http://sharsj.blogspot.com

Urine is great for plants. Mictrurate outside in the summer on your tomato plants, or micturate in a bucket and take it outside!

Consider a “green burial”; even cremation has a huge carbon footprint.

http://daily.sightline.org/ daily_score/ archive/ 2007/ 09/ 19/ it-s-in-the-bag

I can’t vouch for the math in this brief calculation, but this comparison of the embodied energy in a meat-based diet compared to a veggie-based diet appears to show a difference on the order of 20-30 kWh of energy per day per person.

There are probably some conversion factors and other losses involved here, so the math may be off. But if the numbers are in the ballpark, that’s about the same amount of electricity as is used by an entire household each day.

Changing from meat to veggies appears to be a heck of a lot more green than changing your light bulbs.

Thank you for your thorough examination of my interview in the New York Times. And thanks to the constructive commenters.

Several friends have sent this to me, so I think it warrants a response.

CONFUSING THE MASSES:
In the early days of the environmental movement, I found that infighting among other greenies only hurt our mutual goals. It leads to confusion from the outside.

The easiest thing for most Americans to do, is to do nothing. It is easiest for them to continue wasting energy, water and resources because it does not require any additional effort on their part. Making changes is hard. Our job is to provide them with enough information and incentive to take action.

While I value your analysis, and even agree with some of it, you have made some fundamentally incorrect assumptions. By rejecting the information I offered, you have now created confusion to those reading both articles. Left bewildered, many people will probably reject all the measures you and I have provided. So now we have both lost.

Instead, you should have contacted me to discuss it first. Then we could have published the entire exchange with a summary for the readers.

I know blogs are not held to journalistic standards, but that is what a responsible reporter would do.

SELECTION OF THE FIVE:
This interview wasn’t to be the five “easiest” things, or the five “most important” things, or even the five “first and only” things.

It was five “must do” things.  Five out of 300. Five out of so many other things people should do to lower their footprint.

In the original interview, I gave the Times 20 things to do, all geared at making people look at their home in a new way.

[JR: I don't necessarily agree with what you have written below, but I will make two comments. First, these are not five "must do" things in my mind. Second, I'm very glad you clarified that you gave the Times 20 things to do. That apparently was a mistake, since they wrote an article but did not leave that impression at all. It would have been much better had they explained the list was 5 of 20 things to do. I still prefer my list -- especially if it is "must do" things that any typical NYT reader interested in greening their home should do. I stand by my comments.]

Since there are nearly as many renters as homeowners in this country (and changing rapidly now), I felt it important to discuss things renters could do as well. I didn’t have the space to include all 20, and the Times wanted things people hadn’t heard about already.

Everyone knows about CFLs. Telling renters about solar is a joke.  Even your #2, “Buy 100% renewable power” is impossible to someone in California who can barely afford our 19 cents a kilowatt. Buying green power is a fine suggestion, but only after load reduction.

In your own #6: Compact fluorescent lightbulbs – you even confirm this by saying, “But then you’ve already done that haven’t you?” See what I mean?!

(Coincidentally, our largest coal producing state, Wyoming, has their electricity subsidized by the coal and gas companies and they pay only 5 cents a kilowatt. It is impossible to calculate an ROI on solar in Jackson Hole.)

My job is to get people thinking about resources in a new way. From lecturing around the country I have a good sense of what people know about the environment.

I’ve been to hundreds of conferences lined with booths offering free CFLs, HW wraps and pipe insulation. You don’t need me telling people about those things. I’ve done hundreds of interviews (and several books) on those things. My five things doesn’t negate the need for those things – just increases the readers overall awareness of the other issues.

WATER
You suggest having only one water saving feature out of five. You suggest it is best saved for “people living in a drought.” You live in Washington DC, and perhaps the perception there is of an abundance of water. I live in California and live with water shortages and rationing on a daily basis.

For you to say, “if you do live in an area suffering from drought… …you probably already are [using water saving measures],” is a bad assumption to make. The ENTIRE country is in a drought, they just don’t know it yet. Most people are not taking advantage of water savings. Look at the research of the DOE, EPA and EnergyStar. I refer you to the books of Vandana Shiva, Anita Roddick and RFK Jr.

The water issue IS an energy issue. Joe, you’re an energy guy and should know that. They are linked and we can’t solve one without the other.

You assume the “Water Use It Wisely” list is in order? Using a broom instead of a hose does not save more water than replacing your showerhead!

Most people are unaware there is something called “greywater” or that water can be reused. You assumed, “the vast majority of the readers already have low-flow toilets.” This is incorrect.

California law (Title 24 Code) requires all new toilets to be low flow at 1.6 gpf. This has been a great success. We are installing ultra low flow, greywater and even composting toilets in our projects to push this even further. But when I cross the California border into Oregon or Nevada, I stay in places with 5 (or even 7) gallon per flush toilets. The need for national legislation is obvious, but the need to change the existing infrastructure is even more important.

VAMPIRE LOADS
As an architect, I see my clients assuaging their guilt through RECs and solar installs. Load reduction is vital to our survival. If through load reduction we can cut a 5 kW system down to 3, even better. I can’t control client usage behavior, but I can make sure the baseline house requires as little load as possible.

Vampire loads are one of those things I can help control. They have a direct effect on the monthly energy bill and people can start to reclaim control of their usage. Most people know their remaining cell phone minutes better than their monthly kW usage. By the way, you’ll never get anyone with kids to turn off their DVR at night!

[JR: Then your suggestion on vampire loads must come with the same caveat. Sorry this just isn't a priority action.]

YOUR REMAINING LIST
#3. Green your appliances.
#4. Wrap your hot water heater.
#5. Get ceiling fans.
#7. Turn off your computer (and DVR) at night. (SEE MY vampire loads)
#8. Do some water-saving stuff. (SEE MY tips)
#9. Cool roof.

…All things that were in my original list as well. In fact, I have incredible facts and potential impacts for all of them. Your readers can email me if they want to know more.

Let’s remember we are fighting the same fight. Let’s work together to make positive change. Keep up your good work and let me know if there is a way we can work together or if I can be of help to you.

Thanks.

Eric Corey Freed
Principal, organicARCHITECT
Author, “Green Building & Remodeling for Dummies”