Isn’t that how you build a case? You load it with proven fact

Our ability to predict the weather, actually our ability to predict almost anything long-term, is feeble at best. I just finished Dan Gardner’s Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail – and Why We Believe Them Anyway and it was loaded with information and statistics about how our predictions about the stock market, housing values, human demographics … pretty much anything and everything, fail. Most of the time we would be as successful if we flipped a coin when making these decisions.

Towards the end of the book Gardner starts discussing climate change, a favourite topic of mine. Gardner believes in climate change but he is skeptical of the climate models to forecast changes in our climate years, decades or centuries out.

“Climate scientists are quite blunt that there is lots about climate that science does not understand, which is precisely why scientists find the field exciting to work in. Combine that ignorance with the almost indescribably complex interactions at work in the massive, non-linear systems that make up climate and there are huge uncertainties woven into every climate prediction. … These models may overestimate the extent of climate change and the damage it does. But the may also underestimate it…”

But even if science is underestimating climate change there are still some other benefits to doing projects that lower ones carbon footprint. Gardner argues the economics, social and environmental cost of carbon accounting schemes. ‘Carbon sequestration’ (pumping CO2 into the ground) will be a waste of money if our climate predictions do not pan out. But he argues the opposite case for methane capture off landfills – it’s win-win-win. Economically you make/save money by capturing a resource naturally emitted from a landfill. Socially, the harmful methane is captured from our atmosphere and has decreases our negative health impacts. And environmentally one reuses a gas that would otherwise be harmful to the atmosphere for electricity production.

Carbon taxes actually have a similar effect, or they can. Raise the carbon tax and cut other taxes. Under this scheme one then also raises the “effective price of fossil fuels thus making alternative energy more competitive.” Europe got it right. After the price crash of oil in the mid-80’s Europe decided to keep fuel prices artificially high with taxes. Thus research and development in conservation and alternative fuels continued. And what do we see today? Alternative energy in Europe is competitive, and they now rely on it and have to rely less on fossil fuels.

I enjoyed Gardner’s book. At times it was a little overwhelming with the amount of data he presented debunking our science of predictions, but again that was the point. He wanted to hammer the point home that we cannot make predictions about our future. The future is chaotic, non-liner … unpredictable, and as a scientist/engineer I find that exciting.

Who actually won the debate?

Unfortunately politics, at least what I’ve seen as of late, in Canada (recent Federal and Toronto Mayoral elections) is about attacking your opponents instead of announcing your platform. And when we do hear about parties platforms, we hear about outlandish claims to make the city, province, country, etc a better place. But have any of these candidates actually considered the consequences of their promises on the budget?

Where promises meet reality, reality bites!

Here is a bit of reality (well at least in my opinion). Costs for education, transportation, health care, etc. are rising. Costs are increasing at a rate greater than what our tax system can manage. Instead of looking at reality (i.e paying more taxes) candidates make promises for more services with less taxes. That equation just doesn’t add up!

During the CBC debates 6 questions were posed by Ontarian citizens. The last question raised the issue of a tiered health care system. NONE of the candidates were able to directly answer the question (Although do candidates ever really directly answer debate questions?!). But the final question on tiered health care raised an interesting point;

We already have a tiered income tax tariff, why not introduce a similar program for other sectors?

The objective is tiered system is not to benefit the low income earners. Having said that the objective is also not to punish the high income earners either.

Energy: What about increasing taxes on increasing consumption? For the first ‘x’ number of watts there is no tax, the next ‘y’ units consumed are charged the HST, and above ‘z’ units consumption is charged an extra nominal tax. Consumption blocks would have to be broken up for residential and commercial. But this does a few things. First of all it promotes everyone to conserve, to consider the environment, you pay no tax if you’re a low consumer. Secondly it’s fair; it does not discriminate between high- and low-earners, each consumer is considered the same. And finally it would likely benefit the low-income earners. Typically they own small residential units , do not own a bunch of ‘energy-sucking gadgets’ that do not consume a lot of power. Seems pretty win-win-win to me, but I do understand the policy implications and the difficulty in setting up such a program.

Education: We are so fortunate for everyone to have access to great education in Ontario. I am a product of the public school system and loved every minute I spent there. From my classes (nerd coming out again) to the athletics to the organizations I was involved in; I was incredibly fortunate. I do not want to see that slip away for future generations. Keep those teachers that love what they do. I’ve never really thought about how to ‘tier’ education… I think that will be the thoughts of my run today.

Health Care: It’s a bit of a ‘can of worms’ when you discuss health care. It comes down to essential services and necessities; there is a lot of abuse in the health care system. I have no problem with 6-figure administrative salaries; all competitive CEO’s are paid these salaries and I want the best and brightest to be running the hospital I visit. Administration is needed; how else do you bring those essential services to the patients? Trust me the doctors are too busy to take care of all the administration and I’d rather have that amazing doctor working on me and other patients than pushing paper. Of course there is no easy answer. Many countries, who previously had a completely publicly funded health care system, are now privatizing some costs. Given that Ontario has the largest population in Canada, I would like to see a trial with some of the current health care services (for instance MRI’s, CT scans, x-ray..).

Transportation: Bring on the tolled highways. Not every lane, not every highway. HOT (high-occupancy-toll) lanes have proven successful. Congestion charging has proven successful. We have come to think that driving a car is a right, not a privilege. But to maintain that right we are going to have to pay the ‘actual’ cost to drive on our roads.

Ok, these examples are my opinion and fairly volatile. With the right policy they can work. I’m not saying it’s a perfect solution, but under a Nash Equilibrium you’re always looking for the second best solution!

I go by the ‘Sasha Diet,’ it is sustainable, affordable  and most importantly delicious!

What is the ‘sasha diet?’ It’s a mix of local foods, what’s affordable at the local grocery and convenience stores and what I feel like eating. It’s an attempt to eat a balanced diet of fats, proteins and carbohydrates and the essential nutrients and minerals. It’s not that I count my calories or scrutinize food for specific nutrients, but I figure if I eat a variety of foods I’ll be able to capture the essentials.

This what I’m thinking about when I’m planning my meals:

• Meats: Opt for organic, grain fed, etc. And as much as possible try to source out local meats. Make sure you include a variety. Remember red meat is rich in iron and if you’re like me, you’ll need lots of it
• Fish: I try and eat fish once a week. I’m always checking out what’s local and try to eat a variety of fish. One of my favourite things to do in the summer is go for sashimi, it’s light, refreshing and packed with protein.
• Nuts and Legumes: Snack on nuts instead of chips and candy. Make or buy your own dips; hummus, bean dips and bring some veggies along to snack away. I prefer to make my own dips, since you can eliminate the chemically preservatives, I make small batches or larger batches that I share with friends!
• Veggies and Fruit: I try and eat a variety of both each day. As much as possible I try to buy what is in season and local or local greenhouse. There are always exceptions, like bananas; you cannot exactly grow a banana in southern Ontario! I try and eat fresh fruit over dried fruit. The fresh fruit provides you with the added water and most of us do not drink enough water in a day. I’ve also heard that consuming fresh fruit over dried fruit makes you feel fuller.  For those of you cutting calories fresh fruit is the way you should go; compare the calories on a cup of fresh vs. dried fruit and you’ll see why.
• Grains: while I try to minimize my bread consumption, you do need to eat some grains every day. I’ve recently started eating oatmeal, red river cereal and cream of wheat again. It’s a great start to the day or even try it as a snack. Add some nuts, raisins, dried fruit etc. And I always add a touch of maple syrup for some sweetness! When I do consume bread I try to pick breads packed with nuts and seeds over conventional white and whole wheat bread.
• Dairy: My favourite recovery snack is chocolate milk! I consume one to two glasses per day depending on the number and intensity of my workouts. I also try to consume some yogurt and fruit as my mid morning snack. Cheeses are not big on my list, not because I don’t like them, they don’t like me. Goat cheese seems to sit ok so I consume a lot of it, and it’s lower in fat than most cheeses.
• Water: Part of a healthy diet is to stay hydrated. Coffee and soft drinks don’t count, they’re laden with caffeine and can be high in calories. Fruit juice is ok, but try to pick the more natural ones with less sugar and less ‘fake’ stuff.

Pick foods that are local. Pick foods that are bright colours. Eat a variety of different things. Shop the perimeter and avoid things that come in a cardboard box. It’s healthy and it’s sustainable. Pick foods that you like and that you’ll eat. Throwing out food is a waste of money and resources.

My diet also includes a lot of physical activity. Compared to most people I do a lot (my Tuesday was an early morning 40k road ride and ultimate frisbee that evening!). I’ve been called everything from dedicated to crazy. While it is not necessary to workout as much as I do, I think part of a healthy diet is being active daily.

As I continue with my blog I think I’ll add a page on recipes. Hopefully it will inspire you to make healthy choices each day.  Check out today’s recipe Summer Spinach Salad.

Why is flying the most sustainable?

The triple bottom line analysis consider the economic (the raw cost of travel), the environmental (my carbon footprint) and equity (the social cost).

The Economic Cost

I decided to redeem some travel rewards so the flight cost me $161.88 (for taxes, security and admin fees). The least expensive ticket one can book according to Expedia this morning was $499. When I looked earlier in the week both Air Canada and Porter had seat sales on; flights were $338. Given that I booked the flight earlier in the week I’ll use the $338 value in my analysis.

Via rail is Ontario’s only rail carrier. You can take the GO train within the Greater Toronto Area but it does go beyond the GTA borders. When I looked at booking it was $155, but when searching today it was $202.50. (And knowing me I would have bought my ticket at the station today!)

If I was going to drive I’d have to spend $117.68. According to fueleconomy.gov my car requires premium gasoline and goes 11.5km/L on the highway. The round trip distance is 888km and for simplicity I’ll say that the drive is all highway kilometres (10km total is not on the highway). Thus it will require 78L of fuel (round up to 80L and ignore any congestion encountered on the way). Gas was $1.47.1 at my corner gas station according to Toronto’s Gas Prices this morning.

Summary: Flight: $161.88, Train $155, Drive $117.68

The Environmental Cost

The carbon footprint cost. How much damage am I doing by going to Ottawa? According to Carbon Finance one could sell a tonne of carbon on the European market for €12.32 or $16.64CAD today.

When I booked my flight Air Canada stated me that the total carbon footprint for my portion of the flight round trip was 0.21tonnes of CO2 emissions for a value of $3.49.

According to CarbonFund.org each km of long distance rail travel emits 0.49lbs/mile or 0.12kg/km. The Toronto Travel Guide says it’s 446km, which totals 107kg (.107tonnes) of CO2 emissions round trip or $1.78.

The footprint of my car is 174g/km according to NextGreenCar but that is based on a combined urban and highway driving. For simplicity I’ll use this value, so for my 888km my calculated footprint would be 154kg (.154tonnes) of CO2 emissions, bringing the total cost to $2.56.

Summary: Flight $3.49, Train $1.78 or Driving $2.56.

The Equity Cost

It comes down to what I value my time at. I remember when I wrote my thesis (in 2007) that the average value for an hour of work was $20. I could have valued at what my current salary pays me at, or I could have been a little more conservative and used my ski coaching salary. Both of these were greater than $20 so I think I’ll stick with that (Note: I do value my time more than $20/hr! )

Ignoring the time it takes to get to each mode of travel here is what the cost breakdown is for travelling to Ottawa.

My flight is 1hr gate to gate, probably 40mins in the air. Roundtrip, $40.

The train varies between a 4 hr&24min trip and 4hr&48min trip, for an average of 4hrs&36mins. Cost of my time to take the train roundtrip is $184.

For the drive lets assume I drive the speed limit, the 444km trip would take just under 4.5hours. Round trip the total cost would be $190.

Summary: Flight $40, Train $184 or Drive $190.

From the table you can see that the cost of flying is by far the cheaper option. Even if I only valued my time at $10 it is still significantly cheaper to fly, driving is $30 more than flying and taking the train is more than $60 more. However, if I’d had to pay for the full price ticket (at $338) it would make flying the least viable option; I guess that reminds us all to collect and redeem those travel miles!

(Note: This was a quick, basic way to calculate my triple bottom line total cost of travel. I do not claim that it is the most accurate method to calculate the cost of traveling. This exercise was merely meant to demonstrate the ability to account not just for economic costs but also the environmental and equity (social) cost).

Bixi Bikes comes to Toronto

BIXI Toronto launched May 3rd with 1000 bikes in over 80 locations. They can currently only be found within the downtown core (from Bathurst east to Jarvis and Queens Quay north to Bloor) but Bixi is hoping to expand. If you live and/or work in the downtown area Bixi might be for you, especially when it’s only $95/year for a well tuned bike whenever you need it. If you’re only in Toronto visiting BIXI has both day rates ($5/day) and 3-day rates ($12). I was hoping to use BIXI when I go to one of my favourite restaurants this week, Pizza Libretto. But there are no BIXI stations near by and it could be up to an extra $12+ if I don’t return the bike within 90 mins!

Toronto Bike lanes

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford recently announced that he is removing the bike lanes on Jarvis Street. Traffic engineers at the city of Toronto claim that commuters are faced with much longer commuting times and only 600 cyclists are using the Jarvis Street Bike lanes. This may have been more digestible to city cyclists if Ford had offered up some alternative. There is a cycling culture in downtown Toronto and Ford could have proactively offered up another street for bike lanes. Cyclists could instead be offered north routes on one-way Bleecker Street and southbound access on another adjacent route to Jarvis.

For an urban, supposedly active city Toronto’s bike lanes are disconnected, random and usually dangerous to say the least. Biking Toronto has a great website where cyclists can interact and they offer up a map of the existing bike lanes. I try and ride my bike in the city, but it’s usually not on bike lanes (mostly because there aren’t many in the area I live in). Driver behaviours vary day to day; you never know when someone is going to try and cut it close. My suggestions for safe city riding:

1. Wear a helmet (duh!)
2. Ride about 0.5 to a full meter from the curb or parked cars. As a cyclist you have the right to be in the right hand lane (as a slower moving vehicle). If you leave yourself some ‘wiggle’ room by the curb you can save yourself from falling over. It also indicates to drivers to move almost over into the left hand lane to get around you.
3. Do NOT ride on the sidewalk (it’s for pedestrians)
4. Wear bright colours. The more visible you are, the more likely other cars and cyclists will see you.
5. Carry ID, a mobile phone and have money for a cab.

The Sidewalks are for Pedestrians

Suggestion #3 is to not ride on the sidewalk. One it is illegal. And two it frightens pedestrians.

One of my favourite ways to stay active and healthy is to run track workouts down at Varsity Stadium with the University of Toronto. For my warm-up and cool-down I usually go and adventure through Queens Park and campus, seeing old buildings I used to attend classes in and getting my legs ready for something blisteringly fast (well fast for old lady legs!). Recently my fear factor has gone up significantly; there are so many cyclists jumping on and off sidewalks or just steadily riding on sidewalks. I am very afraid that one of them is going to plow into me one day. While it wouldn’t be as devastating as being hit by a car, I think the damage could still be quite significant.

Cycling friends please leave the sidewalks to those of walking and running.

With summer here I’m going to try and get in as much time on my bike as possible. I may even start waking up and ridiculously early hours just to get in a long road ride before I go to work. My goal is try and ride my bike to work once my competitive track season is over, but we’ll see given how dangerous it may be.

Enjoy your summer.  Why not enjoy your summer on your bike?

A co-worker was going on mat leave so we all decided to have lunch together. We picked a restaurant close to work and agreed to meet at the lobby 15 minutes before our reservation. We congregated in the lobby chatting, waiting for the stragglers to come down from their offices, and then the debate over who was going to drive began!

Drive!? ‘You want to drive?’ I asked. I was absolutely adamant that I was walking. It was a beautiful sunny day. I wanted to stretch my legs. But my friends insisted on driving. I overheard ‘I want to make sure I’m back in good time.’

I just GoogleMaps’d the location and it is 850m! I think I arrived one minute after they did. Returning back to the office, with the left turns and the lights, I was back at my desk before my office mates.

We relate our cars to efficient, time-saving machines, but sometimes they are quite the opposite.

I decided to look up what the average distance people are willing to walk to amenities.

In order to get the points for being close to amenities under the CaGBC/USGBC LEED for New Homes one has to construct within a half mile/800m of a frequent transit stop or community resources. I also did a quick Google search and found on average people are willing to walk between 1/4 mile/400m and 1/2 mile/800m.

Physical and mental health is on the decline and obesity is on the rise. A simple way to help combat this is to walk to lunch.

The book is divided into 5 sections: Gaia’s tools, One in Ten Thousand, The Science of Prediction, People in Greenhouses and The Solution. Personally, sections 3, The Science of Prediction, and 5, The Solution, were my favourite. Unless you’re a science or climate geek (like myself) the book can seem a little dry, but it is possible to read a section and put it down while you entertain yourself with something a little lighter.

I read the 2005 edition and from what I can tell online the book has not been updated. That’s not to say it’s out of date; the information presented is still relevant. I recommend this book to the climate enthusiast and the climate rookie; there is something for everybody in it.

It’s summer. It’s time for some new footware in your closet.

But what to get?

Recently I purchased a pair of TOMS; a light weight pair of slipper-shoes, almost like an espadrilles (on the TOMS website it states they are based on the Argentinian alpargata design, which is an espadrilles).

While I may not be a fashionista I still like to look classy-casual; and these shoes fit the role. Plus by purchasing a pair of these shoes I’ve donated a pair to someone else, it’s a win-win situation.

Founded by Blake Mycoskie, TOMS’  inspiration for creating the One-for-One program:

“Many children in developing countries grow up barefoot. Whether at play, doing chores or going to school, these children are at risk:

• A leading cause of disease in developing countries is soil-transmitted diseases, which can penetrate the skin through bare feet. Wearing shoes can help prevent these diseases, and the long-term physical and cognitive harm they cause.
• Wearing shoes also prevents feet from getting cuts and sores. Not only are these injuries painful, they also are dangerous when wounds become infected.
• Many times children can’t attend school barefoot because shoes are a required part of their uniform. If they don’t have shoes, they don’t go to school. If they don’t receive an education, they don’t have the opportunity to realize their potential.”

Help more children by purchasing a pair of TOMS for your summer wardrobe.

Different government agencies are developing individual green manuals for their jurisdictions, since each jurisdiction faces unique climate and construction constraints. These manuals are much like the LEED manual; the points system for constructing sustainable buildings. Buildings are a simpler than highways, while the foundation may change the general construction as the building goes up remains the same. It’s why each road jurisdiction necessitates its own individual manual.

What can we expect on the greener roads?

• Reduced raw material: recycled pavements, long life pavements, life cycle assessments of the road structure, etc
• Improved Human Health and Safety: intelligent transportation systems, pedestrian and cycle friendly road and highway intersections, etc
• Water: reduced water use during construction, proper storm water management, etc
• Optimized land  and habitat use: crossings for wildlife, minimize the width of roads and clear zones, protect streams and wetlands, etc

Greener roads will continue to evolve. Our traditional way of road construction cannot continue, not just due to the environmental hazards, but the cost to build and maintain our current infrastructure is not possible.

From the Climatic Science Email Scandal to recent Tornadoes in the US and New Zealand, the debate on human-induced climate change seems to be in the news most days. How much of an influence do human’s have on climate change? What about the influence of La Niña?  Is there anything else contributing to these extreme weather events?

Who’s to blame for Climate Change?

Of the things I read this week, this quote really stuck with me:

“If you look at the past 60 years of data, the number of tornadoes is increasing significantly, but it’s agreed upon by the tornado community that it’s not a real increase,” said Grady Dixon, assistant professor of meteorology and climatology at Mississippi State University.

“It’s having to do with better (weather tracking) technology, more population, the fact that the population is better educated and more aware. So we’re seeing them more often,” Dixon said.

Tornadoes are a combination of bad thunderstorms, wind coming from the opposite direction of the thunderstorm and a strong updraft. But the number of thunderstorms is increasing. So are the number of wind storms. I agree with the science of tornadoes I disagree that the sole reason we are recording more tornadoes is because of our ability to measure them.

Given that the latest tornadoes in the US were about a mile wide, some of the biggest ever recorded I think tornadoes, like other natural disasters are changing, and not for the better.

I’ve been reading Tim Flannery’s, The Weather Makers, a book about “How we are changing climate and what it means for life on earth.” It’s “a straightforward and powerfully written look at the connection between climate change and global warming” (Publishers Weekly on Amazon).

The evidence is overwhelming from our consumption of coal for electricity, our desire to drive our personal automobiles, our need to acquire ‘stuff’ that we are affecting the weather on earth. Every time we ‘consume’ we pump harmful CO2 back into the air, causing the planet to warm, oceans to dry up, glaciers to melt, which in turn affects the precipitation patterns (less rain here, a little to a lot more over there).

What do we do? Do we live with an increased number of storms? With more intense storms? Or can we admit that there is a change in weather patterns and do anything and everything we can to minimize their impacts?