Shravya Reddy's Blog: Living Sustainably

Looking Back - My Week of Environmentally Responsible Living

2009-11-06T17:46:46Z

No Impact Week is long over, but unfortunately I haven't had a chance to blog and record my experiences during the last few days of the effort. Things got seriously busy, but here I am, back in action now, and I thought I'd finish the No Impact Week series off with a few quick notes on energy (Day 5) and water (Day 6), and try to sum up some of the successes and failures from my experiment.

In terms of energy, I did a few high-impact things: I replaced two incandescent bulbs with Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs. The average CFL lasts about 5 years, and reduces carbon emissions by approximately 693 pounds of CO2e during its lifetime. According to EnergyStar, if every American home replaced one regular lightbulb with a CFL, this is the equivalent of taking 2 million cars off the road, or planting 2.85 million acres of trees. If you're about to say '..but what about the Mercury?"...don't say it! There is actually less mercury in a CFL bulb than there is in a thermometer...barely enough to cover the tip of a ball point pen. But do educate yourself about the mercury content, proper disposal and recycling of the bulbs - see what NRDC's expert scientists have to say about this.

Heating and cooling account for about 56% of a household's energy usage. So I decided to reduce the temperature on my thermostat from where it is usually at, 74°F, to 68°F. If the numbers widely available from various environmental groups are to be believed (NRDC is currently working to calculate the most credible, accurate numbers), then for every two degrees of temperature lowered on the thermostat, one saves 2000 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. So, for my six degrees, is that 6000 pounds? Sweet.

My least successful energy-reducing initiative was to take shorter showers. I know I succeeded on some occasions, but not others. Water heating actually accounts for between 14%-25% of a household's energy costs, so this is a significant area for reductions. The U.S. Department of Energy recommends fixing one's water heater's temperature at 120°F instead of the standard, pre-set 140°F. The difference in water temperature is imperceptible, but this 20°F reduction can account for about 500 pounds of carbon a year. But was I able to make this reduction? No. Because my heater was already set at 120°F! If yours isn't, please do it right now! Is your water heater warm to the touch? Then that means you need to insulate it further, which could in turn save about a 1000 pounds of carbon dioxide a year. This could be done with a cheap insulation blanket available in almost every hardware store! Find out how to insulate the heater with the blanket on the Department of Energy's website, and save money on you heating bill too. Want to know more about next-generation efficient water heaters? Check out Lane Burt's blog post here.

In terms of water usage, the best way to save some water (for someone like me who can't save water from a dishwasher or washing machine, because I don't own those) is to install a low-flow showerhead, which can save up to 350 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions a year. But my showerhead is already pretty low-flow, so I decided not to pursue this action. Ultimately, I just tried to remind myself to use less water every time I had to wash dishes or clean up. But this is one big area where I wish I had tried harder to do more, somehow.

What did I do best during no impact week? Probably monitor my diet and keep the carbon footprint of my meals very low. My goal was to be vegan all week, and I basically succeeded. Umm.... Except for one little slip up that I will now cop to. I mistakenly ate some ice cream, completely forgetting in that instant that I was supposed to avoid dairy products!! Yes, I know it sounds unbelievable that I "forgot", but there's no other explanation. In that one, tiny instant of gluttonous desire, I just stone cold forgot I was supposed to be vegan.

(Or make that 'Cold Stone' forgot? See a very guilty me below - caught red handed!).

Later on, I tried to redeem myself by doing what I should have remembered to do the first time - eat dairy-free ice cream. After all, one doesn't have to give ice cream up!

So, my week was largely a success on the transport, diet, energy, and trash fronts, but I was left dissatisfied on the water issue. Of course, I could always try to do more, like ride a bike instead of taking the train, use even less energy by modifying my refrigerator settings, turning my thermostat and water heater down further and bundling up in more woolens, trying a bucket-cleanse occasionally instead of showers, and using absolutely no substance that can't be recycled. And I am realizing that there were so many super-simple actions I could have taken that I didn't - just check out the inspiring Minute, Morning, Month section of Simple Steps, which has handy hints on what each of us can do, even in the shortest span of time - a single minute! Just as cool is the "This or That" section, which answers some of the questions we've all grappled with while making purchasing choices. If one has to buy something, might as well make the most sustainable choice! I bet some of these answers will surprise you - check them out. (For instance, turns out I should have bought a two liter plastic bottle of soda for No Impact Week, instead of a six-pack of aluminum cans!).

Guess what? I have a chance to do this all over again, and improve my record, based on all I learned that week in addition to the new tips I am finding everyday. NRDC and the No Impact Project are hosting a "Carbon Cleanse Week", from November 15th to the 21st. Are you game to try this, and give it your best shot? Join me!

Days 3 and 4 – My Week of Environmentally Responsible Living

2009-10-22T17:26:31Z

For those participating in No Impact Week, Tuesday was all about transportation and taking action on any one environmental issue, and Wednesday's focus was on eating sustainably and making the best food choices.

I wish I could say that I bicycled to work, given that I do live on Manhattan's Upper West Side and have easy access to the Manhattan Waterfront Greenway, a 32-mile traffic-free path that circumnavigates Manhattan. Finding the safest or most direct route would also have been easy, thanks to many of the initiatives the City of New York has been taking to support bicyclists, including the handy Interactive Bike Map feature on the Department of Transportation's website. I am also proud to say that my employer NRDC provides bike racks inside the office as well as shower facilities for those who bike to work. All these factors notwithstanding, I unfortunately did not bike to work because I currently don't own a bike. My neighborhood is notorious for bike vandalism and theft, and until I buy myself one of those nifty (but pricey) foldable bikes that enable me to ride to work, I will continue to do what I do now - take the subway to work. Public transportation is next best thing, and - as those of you who tuned in to watch my colleague Rich Kassel on Tuesday night's No Impact Week webcast know - is central to lowering the footprint of any community.

In terms of taking action, I decided to look beyond the issues I am usually active on such as climate change and clean energy, and lend my voice to various other issues through NRDC's Take Action web page: telling the EPA not to let massive limestone mining ruin the everglades, asking Congress to close the 'Halliburton Loophole' to protect drinking water from contamination, and urging President Obama to stop logging and other destruction in Alaska's pristine Tongass National Forest.

And this brings me to Wednesday and the day's focus area: Food Glorious Food! One of these days I am going to get a Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) test done to see the increased brain activity in my head when the topic of food comes up. While I don't fancy myself a gastronome or epicure (because I am not snooty about food...well, not yet anyway!), I am pretty sure that significant sections of my neural networks are highly attuned to information about food. It is a wonder that I don't have framed pictures of food hanging on my walls! Most people wonder how someone who enjoys food so much can be vegetarian, and I've tried to address this issue in previous posts, but this week I find myself posing a similar question to myself: can someone who enjoys food so much be vegan? Five days into No Impact Week (or my Tread Lightly Week), I think my own personal answer is that I certainly can eat vegan food more frequently, and have a reduced dairy intake, yet revel in the wonders of taste. Probably not a 100% switch, but certainly more than before. Why am I intent on reducing my dairy intake? Because the livestock industry contributes 18% of worldwide GHGs; because raising cows the way we do now is egregiously energy and water intensive, and because science has demonstrated in unequivocal terms (the Eshel-Martin paper is now the single most cited source on this matter by experts) that reducing the percentage of food in one's diet that is tied to the livestock industry is the most effective way to reduce one's carbon footprint.

This week I was also trying to eat more local and organic food. While the jury is still out on the extent to which organic agriculture reduces the climate impact of food, and the variable reductions for different crops in different agro-climatic zones, the fact that it does so is fast moving beyond debate. Given that Nitrous Oxide - a potent greenhouse gas with 310 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide, and also currently the top ozone depleting substance - is released predominantly from agricultural activities, reduction or elimination of nitrogen fertilizer through organic farming is likely to have a beneficial climate impact. And this is all besides the reassurance of knowing one's food hasn't been doused with nasty chemicals.

Eating local also has an impact on one's carbon footprint, since it reduces transportation-related emissions arising from long journeys in refrigerated vehicles. Additionally, due to the popularity of specific crops from certain areas, production of food in those regions requires massive scale-up, often consuming more energy and water to produce. Some numbers to ponder from David De Rothschild: making 10 gallons of Florida orange juice requires one gallon of diesel and 220 gallons of water to irrigate process and then transport to northern states. A California lettuce eaten in New York devours 40 times its caloric value in fossil fuel to produce and ship. A conventional meal creates 4 to 17 times as many GHG emissions as a locally sourced one. Of course, such estimates vary significantly from crop to crop, and region to region. And the impact of eating local is by itself not necessarily large enough to make a dent in one's footprint. A recent study demonstrated that transportation accounts for 11% of a household's food-related carbon footprint, while the actual delivery from producer to final retailer amounts to even less - just 4%. The real climate killer is the production phase, accounting for 83% of an average household's food-related footprint. So, by and large, what you eat is more important than where it came from. That said, I am still a fan of eating local where possible, so as to support the local community. Find out about good farmers markets in your area, and buy the freshest produce you can by finding out what seasonal foods are available close to you.

For all those concerned about the environmental impact of their diet and looking for a way to lessen their carbon footprint, the bottom-line remains that a dietary shift is the single most effective way to do so. And if a lover of good food and fine dining like me can do it, so can you!.

For more information, visit NRDC's green eating guide.

My Day 2 and 3 pats-on-the-back: cooking vegan curry with organic, local produce from the farmer's market, and going vegan for my pre-existing lunch-meetings with colleagues.

Day 2 Assessment – My Week of Environmentally Responsible Living

2009-10-20T16:17:42Z

Monday's goal for all those participating in No Impact Week (or as I call it, my Tread Lightly Week) was to minimize trash, and to monitor one's own production of trash and waste. I think I managed pretty well, in part because I didn't need to buy anything at all. Therefore, no packaging, no receipts, no bags and no containers. Lunch was leftovers from my vegan dinner the night before, and my Ikea microwaveable container made it possible to eat right out of the Tupperware, so I didn't need to even use dishes (NRDC kitchens have silverware). I cooked dinner at home, so again no trash from my meals. There was organic waste, however, and I felt bad not having a residential compost bin. In theory, I could compost at home and just take the compost to Union Square where they pick it up. I am not sure I am ready for such a big commitment, but I did check out some suitable looking residential compost bins. Baby steps...

The hardest part of the day was remembering to use a handkerchief instead of tissues; something my allergies made me acutely aware of.

I realized that the waste that accumulates at my apartment sometimes has less to do with me and more to do with others. So I decided to tackle the two most visible sources of waste:

Junk Postal Mail: Like many of you, I am outraged by the amount of junk mail that inundates my ~~inbox~~ mailbox. I want nothing to do with all those catalogs, solicitation letters from non profits, and random newsletters from arts and music groups. So, having heard time after time from everyone in the environmental community that the best way to stop unwanted mail and to take action against wasteful deforestation is to sign up for 41pounds.org, that's where I went. The process was really user-friendly, until I realized there was no way to sign up for just one or two years. Alas, the only option 41pounds offers is to sign up for five years. Never mind the fact that I may move from my current address before five years elapse, the main constraint that prevented me from signing up was the cost. The one-time cost for five years was $41 (part of which goes to a charity of your choice). That may not seem like much for such a good cause, but at my pay grade in the non profit sector, $41 in the middle of the month was not feasible. I'll reconsider this when making end-of-the-year charity donations, but with everything I always give to, this is going to add up. 41pounds, if you are listening, please make options for periods less than five years? In the meantime, I signed up - through a far more painstaking process - for the junk mail de-selection service from dmachoice.org and the easy but relatively less effective national do not mail list at directmail.com. And for the little that will still inevitably continue to trickle in, there is always mixed paper recycling.
Metal Hangers from the Organic Dry Cleaners: Some dry cleaning is unavoidable. Especially for business wear. So I use an Organic dry cleaner in my neighborhood. But time after time, I find I end up with metal hangers I have no use for. I rounded them all up and trudged back to the cleaners and gave them back to her, explaining that she should re-use them if possible. She said she'd be happy to. I also told her that next time, I may just take my clothes folded, instead of on hangers. This she was more reluctant to do, but I think with a few gentle nudges, she may come around. The good news for those in New York City is that even if you end up with excess hangers stockpiled at your home, these are recycled by the city. (A great place to check what can be recycled in your city and area is Earth911).

So, Day 2 ended well. Keeping this up will definitely lower my footprint, and I don't feel like anything I did was particularly difficult, so I think this can be sustained!

Speaking of footprints, this has all got me wondering how my footprint living in America compares to my footprint in India. Let's look at the numbers: According to the Energy Information Administration, the annual per capita carbon emissions of the average American are currently (2006 data) 19.7 tons CO2e and will fall to 17.1 tons by 2030. The same data indicates that the average India's annual emissions are currently 1.1 tons CO2e and will rise to 1.4 tons in 2030. Examining five different independent climate modeling studies performed in India, including by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, by Dr. Pachauri's organization TERI and by McKinsey and Co., one discovers that even with the highest project emissions growth, 4 out of 5 studies estimate that per capita emissions in India will stay below 4 tons in 2030. Clearly, an average Indian has, and will continue to have, a much smaller footprint than the average American. (Per World Bank and UN data, the world average right now is 3.8 tons CO2e annually.)

But averages, as we all know, are misleading. While nearly half of India's population remains without access to electricity and basic infrastructure, those of us who have lived in New Delhi or Bombay know that our lifestyles have a substantial footprint which is not belied by the national average. Even without belonging to the very highest socio-economic strata, middle-class Indians in cities like New Delhi typically own a motor vehicle, at least one or more television sets, have air conditioners, rarely use public transport, dine at restaurants and fast-food chains, and are big retail consumers. Even with their proud standing as Number 1 on the GreenDex ranking of environmentally conscious and sustainable consumers worldwide, Indians who live in big cities are just as consumptive and wasteful as their counterparts in most Western cities. Add to this the preferential use of personal motor vehicles over public transport, the growing sprawl, the absence of effective municipal recycling systems, and one ends up with a sizeable impact. New York City's own greenhouse gas emissions inventory indicates that the average NYC resident has a footprint of 7.1 tons CO2e. Until New Delhi performs its own comprehensive emissions assessment I won't be able to make a real comparison, but a small part of me already feels confident, and also somewhat saddened, that my own lifestyle in New York has a smaller footprint than the lifestyle I would be enjoying in New Delhi right now. If all of India is heading in the same direction, it is critical to ensure that these lifestyles can be achieved with minimal environmental impact. Luckily, India still has time to learn from the West's mistakes and to ensure that everyone can indeed enjoy the good life, but also tread lightly on the planet.

Walking the Talk – My Week of Environmentally Responsible Living

2009-10-19T17:15:18Z

My first thought when I learned of No Impact Week was, "Why couldn't this have been three weeks ago, when I was in Alaska?!" My carbon footprint that week would certainly have been admirably low, with the credit going to my hosts, the Ernsts. They are an example of how one can enjoy all the trappings of a full, rich 21st century life, raise a wonderful family, live well and stay healthy, all the while having little or no impact on the earth. They use solar power and are entirely off the grid. Their household produces barely any waste. Everywhere I went in Alaska, I met people like them who use minimal resources, directly from the land, rivers and forests, and haven't become dependant on large industrial systems that encourage overconsumption. People grow much of the fruits, vegetables and herbs they eat, often raise their own animals for meat, catch their fish according to legally established quotas based on Maximum Sustainable Yield principles, and treat themselves to nature's freshest berries, mushrooms, ferns and lots more.

Here in New York City, my strategy for sustainable living clearly has some constraints. My closet-sized studio doesn't lend itself to backyard farming. I have to buy much of what I use in stores, instead of building it out of raw material from the forests. And I need my little city-life indulgences like good restaurants and the movies. Of course, for an environmentalist in America wishing to minimize his or her footprint, New York City is one of the better choices to live in - less sprawl, more compact living, one of the lowest per-capita energy usages in the country, and a public transit system that - despite its many frustrations! - provides a high degree of round-the-clock connectivity. Like many New Yorkers, I don't own a car, and have never felt the need to. And, like most New Yorkers, the puny square footage of my studio automatically keeps my footprint relatively low. In fact, having measured my footprint with Berkeley's Lifecycle Climate Footprint Calculator, I know that my footprint is 18 tons of CO2e a year, which is about the American average, but a lot lower than "similar households" - at about 41%, according to the calculator.

So, backed by some of these advantages, I've decided to take the plunge and sign up for No Impact Week. Except that I'm making my own rules and turning it into Low Impact Week. Because I cannot have zero impact, and more crucially, I don't think championing 'No Impact' is a particularly compelling strategy for environmentalists. I myself am not ready to change my life in dramatic and onerous ways, so I cannot advocate that to others. But I can advocate what I have always tried to do myself - keep moving along the continuum of environmentally sound living in small steps, making tiny incremental changes. A small step in the right direction which can be sustained is more meaningful than one large but temporary action. So, I am calling this my "tread lightly week", and here are the rules I am going to do this by:

Do everything I normally would do, but just do it in the most environmentally friendly way I can: I am not going to make any drastic sacrifices, and will continue to enjoy the comforts and conveniences I am used to. But with just a little education, I know I can find the best way to go through my routine, and choose the alternatives that have the lowest impact.
Low Cost or No Cost: I will adopt practices or choose options that are not too burdensome in terms of my budget. Respecting the earth should not have to lead one towards bankruptcy!
Energy: Use the least energy possible, and when I do, try to make sure it comes from the cleanest sources. To this end, I signed up yesterday for Wind Power from ConEd Solutions. It took under five minutes to make the switch, and is going to cost me approximately $14.20 per Kilowatt Hour, just a few dollars more every month than the existing mix of dirty fossil fuel power I used to get. I already have Powerstrips that reduce phantom power but I will be watchful of my energy use and reduce even more where I can.
Food: I already am a vegetarian (no meat, poultry or fish), so the only way to lower my impact here is by reducing or giving up Dairy (the livestock industry is a leading emitter of greenhouse gases, and milk and milk products from corn-fed cows comprise part of the demand that enables the large factory farms to persist). If I lived outside of New York City, I would have chosen to merely reduce. But here in NYC, there are a number of exciting and tasty options for vegans, so I know I'll be able to be vegan all week long and still be the gushing foodie that I am. Additionally, I will cook more at home from ingredients that are as fresh, organic and local as possible (I work a few blocks from the Union Square Farmer's Market, so this shouldn't be too bad), and reduce my eating out.
Water: The primary reason water use contributes to one's footprint is heating. Big culprits are hot showers and laundry. I would have considered installing a low-flow showerhead, but my shower pressure is already very low. So I will reduce my shower time by a few minutes each day, and use less hot water for other uses like washing dishes.
Waste: Avoid any packaging that cannot be easily recycled. If I have to buy plastic, metal or paper products, make sure they are recyclable. Reduce paper usage at home and the office. Carry re-usable bottles with me to coffee shops or to soda dispensers. Use less of everything.
Cleaning: Use the most environmentally benign cleaning products, and use less of them. This includes dishwashing soap, laundry soap, tub-cleaning soap and bath products. Simple Steps offers some great tips for reducing exposure to toxics at home, including cleaning products.
Laundry: Instead of the free pick up and drop off home delivery service I use (which transports my laundry in a van), I will walk with my own laundry to the Laundromat three blocks away and take ~~come~~ some environmentally safe laundry detergent with me.
Make it Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable where possible: While some things just can't be measured, others can, and I will try to keep track of how I do on all my goals this week, and calculate the impacts of changes using the best possible approximations.
Inform and educate others about climate issues: The Climate Bill is going to the Senate soon, and we are 48 days away from Copenhagen. The time is NOW, and the best way to tread lighter on the planet is to get others to come along with you.

Day 1 pat-on-the-back: Minimizing gas use with a low cooking-time veggie stir fry recipe. A vegan dinner, plus vegan lunch the next day.

Tomorrow: How does my "American" carbon footprint compare with those around the world and in my home country, India? And would I have a lower footprint just by living the typical New Delhi lifestyle? Plus, of course, my progress during "Tread Lightly Week".

The Indian Diet: Unintended Beneficial GHG Impacts?

2009-06-17T19:36:17Z

That the livestock industry - sustained by meat and poultry consumption by people - contributes significantly to climate change is not really up for debate. Any questions that remained were quelled by the FAO report in 2006, Livestock's Long Shadow', which clarified that the livestock sector contributes 18% of all Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), even more than the transportation sector. This includes 9% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions (mainly due to land use such as forest clearing), 34% of anthropogenic methane (mostly enteric fermentation), and 65% of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (largely from manure and fertilizer).

But here are some other figures that may drive home what this means: Did you know that eating 1 pound of red meat emits the same amount of GHGs as you would when driving an SUV for 40 miles? A pound of meat requires eight times as much energy to produce as one pound of veggie protein. And there is tremendous energy imbalance, given how it takes approximately 32,900 calories of fossil fuel energy to raise one 12-ounce steak, but when consumed, the person eating it only receives 940 calories! The inefficient livestock to human grain consumption ratio is 7:1, and keeps growing. This is even more egregious, when one thinks of the 963 million people who suffer from hunger annually (more than the combined populations of the US, Canada and the European Union), or the 25,000 people who die ever day from hunger-related causes.

Americans consume roughly twice the global average of meat, making this yet another area where even small reductions could make a difference in this country's carbon footprint. For instance, if every American substituted one meal of meat or poultry a week with veggies, this would be the equivalent of taking more than a half-million cars off U.S. roads. Changing the dietary patterns of any community, culture or nation is an extremely difficult proposition, and treading this territory almost always means wandering into discourse about morality, ethics, equity and history, all of which I will not shy away from in future posts. As promised, however, this post will talk briefly about how dietary habits of Indians have been a valuable safeguard against potentially even higher GHG emissions from the country's 1.2 billion people, but how these habits are rapidly changing and moving closer to the Western diet (while Indians continue to consume very negligible amounts of red meat, recent figures do suggest that there is an increase in poultry and egg consumption, leading to an 8-10% growth in the sector).

According to the CNN-IBN Hindu survey, 31% of Indians are lacto-vegetarians (consume dairy), and another 9% are ovo-lacto vegetarians (also consume eggs), amounting to almost 40% of the population or 480 million people who do not consume meat (US figures are 3.2% of the population, or 7.3 million people). Even thought this is really an accident of history, culture and religion (Hinduism prohibits the eating of beef and Islam prohibits the eating of pork), this is still something that India should regard as a positive characteristic, and should ensure that in the attempt to 'modernize' and rise to Western standards of living, it should not blindly ape the unsustainable Western diet, thereby increasing its carbon footprint. Since a meat-based diet produces an annual 5000 pounds more of CO2e per capita than a vegetarian diet, these 480 million people collectively account for 1.2 billion tons of CO2e that is currently not being released into the atmosphere.

I am not unaware of the fact that many Indians have predominantly vegetarian diets due to economic factors, such as the inability to purchase meat. I do not advocate the persistence of such poor purchasing power, and am not suggesting that it is laudable that certain sections of the Indian population do not contribute to diet-related GHG emissions as a result of poverty. I am merely suggesting that as disposable income rises and people have higher purchasing power to buy better quality food, better information on the health and environmental impacts of a vegetarian-oriented diet be made freely available, so that people can make choices that do not necessarily amount to blindly aping an unsustainable Western diet (and thereby prevent the rise of diet-related chronic diseases too). I am glad to note, for instance, the FAO's findings that an increase in personal income in recent years in India did lead to an increase in consumption of wheat, roots and tubers, vegetables and fruits (as well as energy-rich, starchy, sugary foods). Also, I am glad to see from the same study that malnutrition in children decreased substantially in recent years, even without a significant increase in red-meat consumption.

In a lighter vein, I am suggesting that Indian diets can reach global levels of adequate nutritional value, balance and variety, but without needing 'capacity-building' or 'tech-transfer' to leap-frog. After all, Indian cuisine is second to none in its delicious, nutritious and utterly fascinating array of vegetarian food! If you don't agree, maybe we should continue this discussion over Saag Paneer, Navratan Korma, or Idly-Sambar?