Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Even Boulder Struggles with its Carbon Footprint

From the Wall Street journal, an article about how Boulder, despite heroic efforts in reducing the carbon footprint of its built environment, has only reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 1%.

Turns out it's very hard to spur people to action, even when the city tries to remove as many barriers as possible, including cost.

Boulder has found that financial incentives and an intense publicity campaign aren't enough to spur most homeowners to action, even in a city so environmentally conscious that the college football stadium won't sell potato chips because the packaging isn't recyclable...Since 2006, Boulder has subsidized about 750 home energy audits. Even after the subsidy, the audits cost each homeowner up to $200, so only the most committed signed up. Still, follow-up surveys found half didn't implement even the simplest recommendations, despite incentives such as discounts on energy-efficient bulbs and rebates for attic insulation..."If a place like Boulder that regards itself as being in the environmental forefront has such a tough time, these types of efforts are not going to work as a core policy" for the nation, says Roger Pielke Jr., who studies the political response to climate change at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

A statement like that would give even No Impact Man pause.  But Boulder officials aren't giving up yet. 

Boulder plans to spend about $1.5 million in city funds and $370,000 in federal stimulus money to hire contractors to do basic upgrades for residents.  In the program, dubbed "Two Techs in a Truck," as many as 15 energy-efficiency teams will go door-to-door. They'll ask home and business owners for permission to caulk windows, change bulbs and install low-flow showerheads and programmable thermostats—all at taxpayer expense. The techs will set up clothes racks in laundry rooms as a reminder to use the dryer less often. They'll even pop into the garage and inflate tires to the optimum pressure for fuel efficiency.

And the Boulder example has wider ramifications.

More than 1,000 U.S. cities have pledged to make such cuts, yet analysts say most are stymied—in part because it's extremely difficult to reduce emissions without a wholesale switch to renewable energy sources. Boulder depends almost entirely for energy on a coal-powered plant.

Aye, there's the rub.  And so President Obama has announced a major new funding initiative for nuclear power.  That story has a local edge to it for me - the initiative will fund two new plants built by our own Southern Company in Burke County, Georgia (home to Georgia Power's Plant Vogtle).  There's sure to be more reaction to that - stay tuned.

In the meantime, what's happening in your own jurisdiction?  It is a struggle to change individual behavior at a scale to do broader good.  It's the age old question of individual action vs. collective action, and how to make it all matter.

Thanks to Anthony Flint at the Lincoln Institute for the heads' up about this story, through their e-mail newsletter.

Jamie Baker Roskie

Follow up - here's an article from the NYTimes about environmentalists' response to Obama's proposal to fund the nuclear power plants.

Update two - Friends of the Earth are protesting Obama's visit to Savannah today (March 2, 2010).

Clean Energy, Climate, Environmentalism, Georgia, Local Government | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Even Boulder Struggles with its Carbon Footprint:


People is being aware now than ever that we need greener energy sources. You can see mass movement around the world about this topic. I guess is mother nature claiming its earth back.

Posted by: diy solar panels | Mar 4, 2010 8:29:13 PM