diy solar

diy solar

What Can I personally do to help against climate change?

Shopping at local farmer's markets or buying locally produced goods from stores helps to reduce the carbon footprint in obtaining those foods.
It's just not that simple I'm afraid.

In many cases buying local produce may in fact be worse from a carbon emissions perspective than an imported item. Such an assessment needs to be considered on a case by case basis.

e.g. is it better to buy a tomato from a local heated greenhouse using more fertilisers and water pumping, or one imported from a location with a climate and land suitable for growing tomatoes? In pretty much every case the latter is far better even though it involves more packaging and transport to get it to you.

As a general indicator, on average, transport and post processing of food represents only about 10% of the carbon cost of the produce. IOW just because food is locally produced does not automatically make it a lower carbon choice. There are other much more important factors.

The biggest emissions culprits (combined contribute 80% of emissions) are:
- land clearing / change of land use, especially deforestation
- methane emissions from animals and rice production and
- the use of fertilisers and farm machinery

So, per item, was the local produce better from a land use perspective, from a fertiliser consumption perspective, from a farm equipment perspective (e.g. small scale is almost always less efficient/more embedded emissions per unit)?

Even from a transport perspective local may not actually be better even though it is physically closer. Large scale production reduces the transport element per item significantly, vs local production being trucked in small batches many times over. Big distribution and logistics operations in most cases are very efficient.

Of course there are going to be many occasions when buying local is better from an emissions perspective, and there are many other good reasons to buy local. I'm not against buying local. It's just we can't make a blanket assumption that it is actually better from an emissions perspective.

Reference for some data on emissions for food produce:
 
well, let's see..

bought my new home about a year ago.
as common in these parts there was a natural gas connection.
when we rebuild the house we took that out, and replaced it with a heatpump.
we redid most isolation, putting in sub floor isolation, wall isolation, new isolated inner walls and roof isolation.
lights all currently consist of led's.
the dog kennel has been fitted with a high seer heatpump, inverter based minisplit system
currently building out solar to provide us with as much self generated power as we can ( currently 87% there, just the winter months , which i hope to cover with more battery power), but for now still grid assisted.
my curent car (only 2 years old) will eventually be replaced by electric, first in line tonbe replaced will be my wife's car.

at the remodeling we also took care of water consumption.
put in watersavers where we could.

furthermore we try to grow as much food as we can ourselves, and what we cant grow, we buy from local bio logical farmers, including our meats.

i realize we still leave a footprint, but we try to keep it as minimal as we can
 
I'm just musing here, I don't want to distract from the topic of conversation, but I'm very curious how my footprint has changed in recent months as my lifestyle/living situation has changed dramatically.

In the red column:
  • I'm driving *a lot* in a not super efficient vehicle. On track for 15,000 miles over 6 months @ roughly 19.5mpg (12L/100KM) average.
  • I generate probably ~1-3 plastic shopping bags full of trash per week, this includes food scraps and recyclables (I'm listing this in the red, but I believe there has been a net reduction in my waste generation)

In the green column:
  • I live out of this vehicle. And apart from a single burner isobutane stove, and charging a few AAA batteries, a phone and a laptop while driving or occasionally while idling, I have no large electrical, propane, or fuel consumers. And no home to heat or power. Even my water consumption averages <3 gallons a day with the exception of a long shower once or twice a week.
  • By necessity and/or convenience, my diet has become almost completely plant based, its just easier that way (cleanup/storage/cooking), but while much of that is fresh veggies and bulk foods, a chunk of it is packaged and processed food.
  • I go through very few non-food consumables, one or two rolls of paper towels and TP a month, probably 3-4 metal fuel canisters (but just switched to larger canisters so that should improve. And apart from food, coffee, and the occasional meal out, I'm not buying much of anything consumable or otherwise.
  • I have almost zero food waste, since I only buy a few days at a time, and its cold enough outside I dont even need to buy ice for the cooler, which would otherwise be a factor in the red column.
  • Due to no fixed address, I get virtually nothing shipped.
  • I make more use of large public places (libraries, coffee shops, community centers, visitor centers, and the like) that would be heated/lighted with or without me being there.
The TL;DR, my lifestyle has shifted in such a way that i'm driving *a lot* more which negatively effects my carbon footprint, this is the largest single factor, but its also changed in such a way that many small and maybe a few large changes have a positive effect on my carbon footprint, I wonder whether its a net positive or negative.
 
No kids or pets isn't a solution I'd support, I'd be in favor of one of the plan Bs long before then. That doesn't seem so much like a solution as it does hysteria.

If a couple has two kids, then then the population stays the same. Not all will have two. For example, in the U.S., the average is currently 1.9 kids per family which is up from prior years. That is, by itself the population would be naturally declining.

I'm not saying over-population isn't a problem in a lot of countries, but the IPCC reports takes into account population growth in their report. From what I've seen there is still time to fix the climate change issues without such measures.

I suspect a workable plan isn't going to be one that requires a lot of austerity (e.g., everyone giving up air conditioning). It'll be something like solar which is not only green but cheaper than fossil fuels. If it takes more than that, plan on voters approving a Plan B.
please elaborate how the IPCC reports take population growth into account, thank you for reading the huge report.

"austerity" is really relative, as there is a huge different in our "western" lifestyle with respect to the rest of humanity. I'm so irked by my next door neighbor, who drives SUV & ICE vehicles, lights are constantly on, AC running days/nights during summer, now hold-house furnace ..., but have to hold my tongue as it is a free country. On the other hand, it's also so unfair that my tax $ is indirectly making energy so cheap that it is being wasted. But last weekend, I found myself grinning as I drove by a gas station with $5/gal sign, having just charged my EV.

I guess I can ask my neighbor again how much are his electric/propane/gasoline bills again. He usually dodges them. It's a herculean effort to change someone made-up mind, the paradigm shift has to come from within... sigh
 
I find food shopping little and often significantly reduces waste. It also means I need a much smaller fridge and freezer so a double whammy.

Here is an article I’ve just read linked from the bbc article above


Top 5 ways to cut down on food waste​

  1. Don’t over buy. Keep track of what you’ve bought and used. WRAP suggests taking a ‘shelfie’ – a photo of your fridge and cupboards to remind you of what’s there.
  2. Check the use-by dates of fresh food when you buy it. These are the dates to take notice of, rather than the best-before dates. Only buy what you can use before it expires.
  3. Plan ahead. Think about what you’re going to cook and how you’ll use the leftovers.
  4. Get to know your grocer. They will have plenty of advice on how to use up leftover veg.
  5. Love your freezer. Use your weekends to batch-cook and freeze. There are plenty of freezing tips in our guide.
You can also consider home composting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Had to go back and fix #4... heard the U.S. announced it would be going after methane. That makes great sense as it's lower ppm captures about 3.75x heat all the CO2 does (ignoring half-life anyway). Then I heard pipelines/gaswells which didn't make sense based on prior data -- so I double-checked... sure enough, had data for California (9%) rather the U.S. (31%) or the world (19%).
 
Another personal action some can take is to look at their investment portfolio and divest from fossil fuel companies or companies who have no plan or policy to reduce their carbon footprint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
I think voting would be the best strategy to fix climate change.

Manufacturing globally would need to totally change. Farming, etc…
 
The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago and the planet has been steadily warming ever since. You can't stop it.
This is specifically requested at the beginning of the thread to not be posted… please do not post climate change debunk posts. Participate in the topic.
 
COP-26, after having read though krap loads of articles on it... Lots of doublespeak and bafflegab dashed generously with feldercarb.
The do nothings made a Good Show of it and accomplished nothing but create more polution.

Bottom line, they are not worth the pixels wasted on them, we have to do for ourselves and become independent of the shenanigans being played out by the power hungry manipulators and sheeple whisperers.
 
COP-26, after having read though krap loads of articles on it... Lots of doublespeak and bafflegab dashed generously with feldercarb.
The do nothings made a Good Show of it and accomplished nothing but create more polution.

Bottom line, they are not worth the pixels wasted on them, we have to do for ourselves and become independent of the shenanigans being played out by the power hungry manipulators and sheeple whisperers.
Go Starbuck!
 
plant trees
Adding to this, In concept opting for things like shade grown coffee, and avoiding products known to be strongly associated with deforestation, seem like positives, but as with lots of things of this nature, the devils are in the details. There are groups like the Rainforest Alliance that try to create a framework for certification of sustainable forestry and crop production for things like coffee, tea, bananas, etc, as well as training programs for sustainable farming practices.
 
Geat Video!

...Manufacturing globally would need to totally change. Farming, etc…
Hopefully, all that is in progress/uder consideration... but this thread is aligned with the end of the video... not what governments can/should do... but what can one do personally to do their itty bitty miniscule part... not out of a sense of shame, but more in the belief that every little bit helps. I know there are schools of thought that it distracts from the real problem and the bigger solution, but hopefully, we can do both (Plus a lot of these tips have saved me money, and I like that ; -).

So let's please not open the thread into all the different technologies and possibilities that individuals can't do as that would distract from those that want to see what actions they can take.

I did see two things in the video that haven't been mentioned earlier. The first is voting with their wallet. Choosing new technologies helps them emerge by purchasing them. For example, the price of the Impossible Burger/Beyond Meat should go down if purchases go up, either by volume or by competitors.

The second is a sub-spin on voting at the polls. Politics tend to divide us to where it's difficult to even talk about what should be simple things. For example, everytime there is an attack on net-metering here it is nearly impossible to figure out which way to vote as the legislation is confusing. What we can all do is to try to have an open and honest conversation so there is clarity rather than confusion.
 
I know this may sound overly harsh but the best way to help against the "Sinister Event" without a major technology breakthrough is this: suicide. Beyond that you can eat local mushrooms and reduce your thermostat by a degree or two , put some solar panels on your roof and no doubt a some self-esteem building efforts, but all on the assumption that the 7 billion+ people in the world that are worse off than you at this point will not aspire to your wealth, housing and lifestyle, will leave their future oil wealth in the ground after we pumped it all out to become rich, and will also be happy to stay at home and not see the world like you (and I) did. I skip another litany of things we take for granted. I didn't check where you are based, should you be based in the Central African Republic and feel good about your standards of living then you are on the right track and may actually be living borderline sustainably except that you should likely stop using plastic as in keyboards e.a.. Anybody who believes we will do fine in the future if we just quickly switch from oil to electricity and then start providing the same consumer goods to the entire world population, and can live the same type of life, is, in my view, a naive optimist. Given human nature, I also strongly believe there is only one single posslble solution: nuclear fission. I am not holding my breath.
While I can see where you are coming from and respect your opinion, and think you make some good broad points (particularly re: population, consumption, standard of living, human nature, and the realities of a society centered around capitalism/consumption), to me it seems like this black/white approach to this problem (or any problem) results in inaction/apathy sometimes by design sometimes as an unintended consequence. There are about 1000 steps on the spectrum from the premise "plastic is bad, lets limit our consumption of it" to "literally you can't own a plastic keyboard" and jumping right to the extreme, in my opinion is more often a cop out or a self defeating mindset than a constructive dose of 'realism'.

Where you see efforts to reduce as only practical IF "the assumption that the 7 billion people in the world that are worse off than you at this point will not aspire to your wealth, housing, and lifestyle," I see it differently. In my eyes, because at least a large portion of the world population does aspire to a higher standard of living, it becomes all the more important and essential to make sure that a high and medium standard of living is as sustainable as practically possible (which will be an interative and ongoing process) and to change the culture, and change our individual mindsets, as to what should be aspired to, and how environmental costs are priced into our daily lives and to society. There are other important factors that I wont bring up so as not to derail the post. Our current warped view of affluence and "middle class" in the western world is a very new thing, maybe what people aspired to ~75 years ago isn't sustainable either, idk, but it would be a huge step in the right direction when combined with current and future improvements in efficiency and technology.
 
While the "Elimination" of crude oil based products & materials may be quite some time away, the burning of it for fuel and allowing emissions from refinement and processing is quite another matter. Modern Society regardless of how anyone wants to "dream about it" is addicted & dependent and it will take time to ween off it completely. "Petroleum" based byproducts are contained in nearly everything and in many medications and such as well, far too many people FAIL to realize & appreciate such. SAD but TRUE !

That said, we can and must reduce & be realistically appropriate to the region we live in.

Take an Empty Bucket, start adding water drop by drop, while increasing the rate of drops, soon enough the bucket overflows. Every Drop Counts !
 

Pressure Cooker​

Not for everyone. But I eat like a king, probably better. It's because my wife loves to cook.

When we moved here we saw one of those instapots on sale during the Amazon holidays and snagged if for a good price. She had never used a pressure cooker before and now she loves it. Yes, it cooks in less time taking less energy. But, it also allows us to get cheap cuts of meat no one else wants to buy and turn them into tasty tenders. All that collagen that made them tough? It got melted out and becomes tasty soup stock.


After chopping up veggies the "remains" go into a freezer bag. Left over bones? Into a freezer bag. Something else... into a bag. When a bag is full the pressure cooker comes out and they get reduced into stock which gets frozen as ingrediants for other things.

She didn't change her behavior because of the instapot, she's always done this. But previously the stuff would have to cook all day, now it's done in a jiffy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Back
Top