Cambridge Climate Change Week 2011

It’s that time of year again: flowers, green grass, open windows and local events! Cambridge is taking advantage of renewed springtime energy and is hosting Climate Change Week 2011, a citizen initiative, endorsed by the Cambridge City Council. Events will be taking place May 13th through the 21st during the City’s Go Green Month, with events all across Cambridge. The mission of the week is to encourage residents and the city to join together in celebration of local climate-related accomplishments and proceed with clarity to a better, greener future. A list of events and volunteer opportunities can be found here. Hope to see you there!

BP, Tar Sands and Earth Day

Earth Image by Galileo Spacecraft by NASA on The Commons

This is a busy week for the Earth.  One year ago today, the BP Deepwater Horizon spill took place, killing 11 rig workers while leaving a massive wake of environmental and social devastation, impacts of which are still being felt today.  What have we learned one year after such a monumental tragedy?  Friday, April 22nd, marks the 41st anniversary of Earth Day and I’m honestly not certain how much we’ve learned.  BP’s profits are strong and plans to resume deepwater drilling in the Gulf continue while many in Congress adamantly deny climate change even exists.  In fact, just last week, the US Senate and House of Representatives stood at a near stand-still over budget cuts to public programs, like the EPA.

Still, all hope might not be lost for the Earth.  A group of 10,000 inspired youth activists who believe positive change is still possible, descended on Washington, DC last weekend for three days of lobbying, speakers and events organized by Powershift 2011.  Armed with outreach, outrage and a passion for a cleaner, healthier world, social and environmental activists from all parts of the US united to demonstrate the power of peaceful action. Bill McKibben, Tim DeChristopher and the EPA’s Lisa Jackson were among the keynote speakers. The rally did not receive mounting national press, yet the message was clear: the Earth needs our help. Fracking, tar sands and increased oil and natural gas exploration are just a few of the dangerous, and dirty, growing energy sources in the US and beyond.  Given the rate that climate change is occurring and given that tar sands release two to four times the amount of CO2 into the atmosphere as conventional oil production, this is a dire environmental situation that needs immediate attention not just by our legislators, but more importantly, by the public.

That’s where you come in.  The Cambridge Energy Alliance, like many prominent environmental groups, advocates for energy efficiency and simple behavior changes.  Go to cambridgeenergyalliance.org to learn more about what you can do today. With just a little bit of effort, we can all make a big impact.  So, as Earth Day 2011 approaches, reflect on how you want to celebrate – no effort is too little, especially now.

Local Green Happenings for Spring

Oftentimes, I find myself wondering: what green happenings are taking place in and around Cambridge and Boston?  If you have similar sentiments, there are a number of leads that might satisfy your curiosity.

A smart place to start is, of course, the Cambridge Energy Alliance Community Events Calendar, but on the off-chance you still can’t find what you’re looking for, there is still hope!

Whether you’re interested in a weekend afternoon outing, or changing your transit habits, look no further.  The City of Cambridge has designated May, 2011 as “Go Green Month” and the third week of May as “Climate Change Week.” During the month of May, (and hyper-concentrated in the week from May 13th to 22nd), you can find an array of local activities including nature walks, talks, workshops, and other environmentally-focused events.  Guests include Zipcar, MassRIDES, MBTA, CAC Gallery and Cambridge Bicycle Committee, to name a few.  There are also commuter challenges throughout the month, so take a look if you typically drive to work but instead want to try taking public transit, carpooling or biking.

In addition to Cambridge, Boston has an informative site complete with local area green event listings.  The Boston GreenScene also comes complete with a local green directory highlighting area companies and organizations that focus on green-related industry and services.  Services listed include green consulting, green building and green cleaning in addition to community groups such as Boston Green Drinks and various MeetUp groups.

Wild & Scenic Film Festival comes to Boston!

A possum and a movie camera 1943 by Australian War Memorial collection

For those of you itching to see some good, quality short films on everything from climate change, to sustainable, local farming to climbing Mount Kilimanjaro to raise money for charity, then look no further — the Wild & Scenic Film Festival is in Boston March 25th and 26th!

The event, sponsored by e-inc, consists not only of the film festival itself, but a series of panels, fund-raising events and guest speakers, including Robin Young, host of WBUR’s “Here and Now”.  Panelists include: David Cash, Undersecretary of Policy, Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs; Howard Herzog, Senior Engineer, MIT Energy Initiative; Namrita Kapur, Director Corporate Partnership, Environmental Defense Fund; and Alexander Taft, Climate Officer, National Grid.  There will also be a locavore tasting menu of foods and wine and a showing of Carbon Nation with a question and answer session with film producer Artemis Jouzinsky.

I saw the film festival when it came to Maynard last week and was thoroughly impressed by both the high quality of artistic expression and subject matter depth.  I highly recommend going if you can!  Tickets for the Boston showing range from  $10 to $30 depending on which day and events you chose to attend. For more information go to http://www.e-action.us/.

Ultimate Greening Your Home Seminar

Residents of Cambridge, MA were introduced to a new opportunity on February 8th, 2011. Energy efficiency is on the minds of renters, condominium owners, and homeowners alike as the environmental, financial, and physical benefits become more prominently appreciated. Usually when energy efficiency information is available, it is more general and further discussion with specific professionals is suggested, since the process of making home energy efficiency improvements is tailored to unique home and ownership characteristics and often entails several detailed levels of complexity. On February 8th, those professionals were brought together in one place for an evening of sequential enlightenment for curious attendees, with an added bonus of networking amongst their industry peers and less-assumed partners, Green real estate agents.

When the Cambridge Energy Alliance and Coldwell Banker Agents Amy Tighe and Robin Miller designed this new collaborative seminar, their focus was on approaching one seemingly under-served demographic: condominium owners and associations. [This group will, luckily, begin to be served more as the NSTAR 5+ unit (“Multifamily”) energy assessment program rolls out.] That said, this successful design would clearly be valuable to other demographics (e.g. home owners) in addition to condominium owners/associations.

Beginning with the simplest in-home steps and leading to discussion of assessments, retrofits, and financing of projects, Sustainable Life Solutions, Next Step Living Inc., S & H Construction, CPCU Credit Union, CEA, Robin, and Amy engaged enthusiastic condo owners and association representatives in energy efficiency learning in a way that simply made sense. Speakers explained each of their areas of expertise thoroughly in their limited time, intermittently questions were asked and answered comprehensively, sometimes by the several professionals that were in the room, and when presentations were through, meaningful inquiry-fueled conversation rounded out the evening. A happy closeout to the seminar was the drawing of the raffle winner, who took home a wonderful green-living package that was generously donated by Whole Foods.

The results of this innovative event were remarkable: A valuable seminar was put together by unprecedented collaborators in a replicable format; speakers were able to answer significant questions jointly, and see how they might work together effectively in the future; seminar attendees were able to walk out with a mental arsenal of energy efficiency tools, feeling utterly aware of a previously mysterious process, with proper contacts in hand, and ready to share with their peers. This type of event is unquestionably beneficial for all involved, so watch out for announcements of the next installment in months to come!

Speaking with Climate Change Skeptics

The World Revs its Heat Engine by NASA on The Commons Feel like banging your head against the wall each time you try to discuss climate change with someone you know? Below is a highly valuable blog entry that was spawned from climate change concensus-building expert Larry Susskind‘s participation in a CEA/HEET-sponsored event. Here, Mr. Susskind thoroughly discusses how best to communicate with those who are critical of climate change’s legitimacy. Ultimately you must work around confrontation by facts, to get to the heart of concerns for each conversation partner. If you have been experiencing difficulty communicating with skeptics in your life, this is a blog for you.

From Larry Susskind’s blog, The Consensus Building Approach:

On Wednesday, November 10th, I had an opportunity to speak to a packed room of students and community residents at Harvard College seeking advice on how to talk to climate skeptics. The premise was that students would soon be heading home for Thanksgiving. They were looking for advice on how to talk to family and friends around the holiday table who either don’t believe that global warming is happening, or accept the fact that the climate is getting warmer, but attribute relatively recent temperature changes to natural rather than man-made causes. To get things started, we heard from a local radio talk show host who really is a climate skeptic. He made it very clear that he doesn’t trust Al Gore, is sure that scientists disagree about almost everything (because that’s what science requires), and thinks that anyone who believes that climate change is the result of human activity (rather than cyclical natural phenomena) has been sold a bill of goods.

First, I tried to make clear that seeking to convert “non-believers” is probably a mistake, and is certainly no way to encourage constructive dialogue. Rather, I suggested, the goal of dialogue ought to be to share ideas, advance the cause of mutual understanding, and see what opportunities to reach agreement might exist — in spite of fundamental differences in beliefs or levels of understanding. A number of the students present found this unacceptable. From their standpoint, the threat posed by the continued build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is so frightening, they are compelled to convince anyone who doesn’t believe this to admit that they are wrong. These want to repeat and review what the vast majority of atmospheric scientists know to be true — the atmosphere is warming; this is caused by the build up of greenhouse gases, particularly CO2 and methane; this build up is caused by human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels; and the end result will be a worldwide catastrophy — sea level rise that will inundate vast coastal areas, particularly in the developing world; increasing storm intensification the will cause destructive flooding and Katrina-like devastation;increased drought in some areas and increasing numbers of extremely hot days that may cause massive eco-migration; more rapid spread of airborne disease, and irreversible harm to a range of marine and terrestrial species and habitats. The skeptic on the dais with me indicated that scientist can’t possibly know exactly when and where such things will and won’t happen (and he’s right). He also insisted that even if warming is occurring, it is impossible to know for sure whether it is mostly or entirely a man-made or nothing more than a natural phenomenon.

That was my cue. I said I didn’t think that mattered. I urged people interested in engaging in useful conversation with skeptics to shift their conversations to a discussion of risk — to talk about risk and risk management. I used the example of earthquakes. We don’t need to know for sure whether (where and when) an earthquake will occur to seriously consider taking action to minimize its serious adverse effects an earthquake would cause if it does occur. It turns out, we can require construction standards in new buildings that will protect people from collapsing structures. We can even retrofit existing buildings to make them more earthquake proof (although this comes at a cost). While there doesn’t seem to be anything we can do to reduce the odds of an earthquake occurring, there are lots of things we can do (including organizing and practicing emergency relief efforts) to save lives and reduce misery and reconstruction costs when earthquakes do occur. Even if the majority of scientists are right — that if we don’t reduce to 350 – 450 parts per million of CO2 equivalents in the next fifty years the worst effects of global warming will be impossible to correct, we won’t be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough over the next three decades to mitigate the effects of global warming. So, given the chance that the many thousands of scientists around the world who study these issue might be right, we could look for things to do that will reduce the disastrous effects if climate change is, in fact, occurring. And, if we could find things that also serve to achieve other laudable objectives (that help almost everyone), why would anyone be opposed to that?

So, I suggested reframing the discussion around what is called adaptation. If we can switch to energy sources that don’t involve the burning of fossil fuels, but instead rely on infinite energy sources like sunlight, wind, ocean waves, biofuels and the flow of fresh water, we may be able to simultaneously reduce the adverse effects of climate change (if it does occur), decrease our country’s dependence on imported oil and gas, dramatically reduce the health dangers to human beings, minimize the ecological damage caused by air and water pollution and the degradation of surface lands, and create more jobs in our own country. This would be a “no-regrets” response to the possibility of climate change. Similarly, if we can help every household reduce the amount of electricity it wastes (especially at peak times), we can eliminate the need to build new power plants, thereby reducing everybody’s electricity rates and saving all consumers money. Even if the risks are not fully predictable, a shift to renewable energy (especially if planned in a way that compensates anyone who suffers any losses in the short term as a result of the shift), would be a more desirable way to proceed. If you think about each component of climate change risk, it should be possible to brainstorm adaptive responses that minimize the chances of serious harm to the public and to the environment while simultaneously improving the economy, and enhancing social well-being. That’s what you want to ask skeptics to think about. Ask them to join you in various “thought experiments:”

“Whatever you think the chances are that a buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is causing global temperatures to rise, and that such increases will trigger a host of dangerous and costly consequences, can we brainstorm cost-effective ways to reduce the harm that would occur if the worst happens and achieve a host of other benefits at the same time?”

Improved emergency preparedness in cities will help if flooding of the sort that occurred in New Orleans happens more often. (Increased storm intensity is one of the presumed effects of climate change.) It will also help cities whether any kind of natural or man-made emergency. Almost every city could do more at a modest cost to update and practice its emergency response procedures.

Investments in expensive transportation, wastewater treatment and other municipal infrastructure should probably be made greater consideration for the possibility of sea level rise, saltwater intrusion into fresh water marshes, and increased storm intensity. It would be crazy to be in a position of having to pay off infrastructure bonds long after a facility is no longer useable because we didn’t think twice about climate change risks. Instead, by factoring the risks associated with climate change into infrastructure planning, safer locations or new designs for new facilities might be selected.

As we think about the possibility of a lot more hot days (over 95 degrees farenheit) every summer, what improvements might we make in public and elderly housing that would help people without air conditioning survive? It should be possible to design or retrofit public housing units and to add trees and plantings to keep these units cooler. It should also possible to designate public cooling centers along with ways of helping the disabled get to these locations during a heat wave. Many lives could be saved. These are things worth figuring out regardless of whether anyone is sure that the increase in the number of hot summer days over the past decade was caused by climate change. People died in Chicago two summers ago because of what is now called “the heat island effect.”

When you getting into brainstorming sessions with skeptics, avoid asking yes or no questions. Instead ask “when, where and how” questions. How could we reduce certain risks while accomplishing other worthwhile goals? When we have the information in hand, and the public dialogue that follows could look at the full range of costs and benefits (and I don’t just mean in dollar terms) what kinds of choices might be made? People with very different views about what climate change science allows us to know might still agree on useful steps to take to reduce the risks associated with climate change because these same activities would help them achieve other things they see as important.

Don’t personalize these discussions. Focus on outcomes that would respect everyone’s principles. Talk to people you disagree with in the same way you would like to have them talk to you.

Don’t paint people into corners by saying something like: “Since science knows Fact A to be true, then you must agree that everyone ought to take Action 1.” That will just provoke a counter-attack arguing that there must be someone (somewhere on the web) who disagrees wit Fact A. Moreover, everyone who agrees that Fact A is true will not agree that only Action 1 is the logical thing to do. Instead, ask “Forget for a moment whether Fact A is true or not. What are things that people who don’t necessarily agree about Fact A would suggest are worth doing for a variety of reasons?

Smart Growth Awards

[Laundry, barbershop and store, Washington, D.C.?] (LOC) by The Library of Congress

The EPA recently announced the winners of its Smart Growth Awards program, a program that ranks national cities and communities on metrics of green development and environmental design sensitivity.  The program also ranks urban planning elements such as density and compact community development.  The recent winners are: Portland, Oregon, San Francisco, NYC, Baltimore and 20 rural Maine communities. NYC came out on top this year with increased bike paths and carved out public spaces as key improvements. “New York City has achieved a relatively small carbon footprint, given its size, through its commitment to creating compact and walkable neighborhoods” the EPA said.

Portland won EPA recognition for its “Making the Greatest Place” growth plan which “…calls for maintaining connections with nature, preserving existing neighborhoods, strengthening employment and industrial areas, and concentrating growth in designated centers.” In Maine, 20 towns linked by Route 1 collaborated in an effort to preserve the region’s rural character, while in San Francisco, a seedy alleyway South of Market area was turned into vibrant public space lined with restaurants, shops, and a farmers market. Finally, Baltimore won for a green building design that rehabilitated an historic building into a mixed-use residential and commercial space that revitalized the surrounding neighborhood.

With Cambridge and/or Boston’s ever-increasing commitment to sustainability, let’s hope that we make the list next time!

Green Medford: Reverse Trick or Treat Bewitches Columbus School Neighborhood

What would you do if your doorbell rang on Halloween and instead of saying “trick or treat!” your visitors handed you a new, curly-cue light bulb (or two)? This year’s Halloween saw an event that was a brand new take on the usual compact fluorescent light bulb canvasses that the CEA hosts.  We are thrilled to see that this creative event went off without a hitch, and that it has set a great precedent for following years!

Please see below for the post featured on the Green Medford blog:


A group of us from Green Medford and Fletcher Green (a Tufts graduate student group) trolled the streets around the Columbus School last night–Halloween evening–handing out bags of treats to delighted and laughing residents at 84 addresses. People who answered their doors expecting to give out candy were instead handed a bag containing two new energy-efficient lights. Event participant “Sherlock Holmes” noted, “It was gratifying to see how surprised and happy this made people.”

One resident told us, “This is such a great idea! We recently switched all of our bulbs to CFLs and are saving $60 a month.” She turned to her neighbor and said, “You have to take some. This is amazing!”

We gave out more than 180 CFLs that were donated by National Grid and the Tufts Office of Community Relations. The First Annual Medford Reverse Trick or Treat exceeded our expectations, and we are already looking forward to expanding on our success with a bigger event next year!

Thanks so much to all the sponsors and others who helped organize this event, especially JR Siegel, Allie Lipps, Becky Hemperly, Kim Wardwell, Catherine Smith, Alicia Hunt, Brad Steele of EFI, and Barbara Rubel at the Tufts Office of Community Relations.

Susan Altman
Green Medford

Reverse trick-or-treat CFL event!

The Cambridge Energy Alliance has participated in many CFL exchange canvasses. On a chosen day, we and volunteers head out into neighborhoods and knock on doors, offering to give an equal number of CFLs for the number of regular light bulbs a household will hand us. As a special treat with Halloween approaching, Green Medford has announced an event that is a new take on this idea.

From the Green Medford blog:

Hi all! I want to share with you a very fun idea and ask for your help in making it a big success!

We’re calling our event “Reverse Trick or Treat,” thought up by JR Siegel, a student at the Fletcher School and a Medford resident. The idea is for a bunch of residents to get together on Halloween, hopefully including kids, to make it more fun for everyone.

Dressed in fun costumes (but nothing too scary), teams of two or three (no kids without an adult) will ring doorbells in a residential neighborhood during trick or treating time. We’ve been given several hundred energy-efficient lights (CFLs) by National Grid and Tufts to give away to folks who answer their doors. The more of us there are to participate, the more bulbs we can give out. The kids, of course, will do regular trick or treating at the same time!

We want to focus on a neighborhood with lots of families that might not already have CFLs or know all they need to about saving electricity and money by switching to energy-efficient lights.

We also would like to find a reporter to walk around with us and take pictures and talk to people about the event.

In addition to us in Green Medford, we already have all these sponsors committed!

EFI/National Grid, Tufts University Office of Community Affairs, Fletcher Green (a student group at Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy/Tufts), and the Medford Energy and Environment Office.

Please join us! Contact Susan Altman, Green Medford, susan.altman@comcast.net, 781-395-4664, or J.R. Siegel, Fletcher Green, j.r.siegel@gmail.com.

Happy Halloweeeeeeeen!