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.

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).

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.

Gridlock isn’t the issue. The issue is lack of a provincial public transportation network. People live in the suburbs because it’s cheap, they have more space and can afford bigger homes.

Isn’t that the tradeoff? One trades the freedom of space for the freedom of time?

But the fault doesn’t lie entirely with the commuters. They are forced to drive their cars to and from work since there is no viable transportation network in and around the cities. By downloading public transit infrastructure to the municipalities the result is a disjointed  system. Transit systems should be uploaded to the provincial governments and a costsharing agreement should be worked out between the provinces and the municipalities, based on ridership demographics.

While I endorse gridlock as an election issue, it should not be a standalone issue. It should be raised with public transit and land use plans; it should be a part of the connectivity issue.

The conference started out with David Miller’s last appearance of the Mayor of Toronto. He spoke about the initiatives Toronto was undertaking to reduce their carbon footprint, including the waste diversion programs and gas collection from landfill sites. He spoke passionately about being the leader of the C40 cities. Miller was honoured by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Donna Cansfield, and Stockwell Day, the Minister of the Asia-Pacific Gateway. Toronto can only hope that the succeeding mayor will be as passionate about sustainability (ha!).

Sustainable Electricity. Sustainable Transportation. Sustainable Cities. Building Sustainable Lives for all citizens

… Was the theme of the first day. Barry LePartner, somewhat of an alarmist, spoke about the failing infrastructure in the US. He predicts that the Minneapolis bridge disaster might just be the first of many. Dalton McGuinty lunch speech was about Ontario’s leadership in sustainable energy, with the FIT program and promotion of electric vehicles. His speech may have been more credible had he left the new Harry Potter movie out of his speech.

The second day was about the past/current (?) financial crisis, and was disappointing in comparison to the first day. Speakers skirted the main topics ‘Have we seen the bottom?’ and ‘What are the fundamentals for Sustained Growth?’. Perhaps these issues were avoided because commenting on them would be insulting both the Canadian and American Economic Advisers.

The highlight for me over the two days was an interview between Amanda Lang and Martin Wolf. Wolf spoke to the failing US economy and the reliance of the Canadian Economy on the US (given that 75% of Canadian exports go to the US). But it was not just the hard facts that he laid out, he also shared his views that the Developed Nations are naive to think they can continue on the path their on; the Developing and Emerging Countries will not only overtake the Developed Nations but they will surpass and leave them behind in their dust. He couldn’t repeat enough that we have to change the way we currently conduct business. He eluded to the fact that we value the ‘wrong’ things, we are too much of a commercial society that consumes meaningless goods. His candor and enthusiasm were welcomed by the crowd, especially in comparison to the high-level, reluctant speeches of his peers.

A more inclusive summary of the conference can be found here (shortly )

The other day I was thinking about how the system could be better, at the municipal, provincial and federal level. My thought was,

The individuals in charge of a specific portfolio should have some experience in that sector.

For instance, the Minister of Education should have worked in education, as a teacher, a principle, a professor, etc. The Minister of Justice should have worked in the legal field. The Minister of Finance should be a finance guy or gal. The Minister of Transportation should be a transportation engineer.

And this would work at the municipal level too. We need hard working technical officials to help put Toronto back together.  Sorry to pick on you Adam Giambrone, but your lack of knowledge of public transit systems has not been good for Toronto, neither was your scandal!

I’m not saying we should take away from the elected officials. We live in a democracy and should be represented by an elected official of our riding, district, area, however you want to call it at the federal, provincial and municipal levels.

What if instead of having to draw from the elected individuals as top cabinet representatives that we either elected or appointed technical representatives?

Although there maybe some drawbacks, including more officials that need to be paid a salary (could we increase the size of a riding and decrease the number of elected officials?) or lack of policy knowledge (easier to learn than technical knowledge), I think the benefits could far outweigh the disadvantages.

• Technical Knowledge: officials would have technical knowledge of their portfolio and could provide more sound advice to the premier
• Timely Decisions: officials could make timely decisions and not have to rely on the technical knowledge of a support staff. This could not only be a time savings but also a $ savings too (didn’t we learn enough from the EHealth scandal?)
• Public Support: the public may have more trust in the decision made my a technical representative with a thorough understanding of the problem

Our democratic makeup has got us so far but as with everything else I think it’s time for an evolution. We need hard working, technical people to help us move forward in the 21st century. We need forward thinkers. We need officials who are not afraid of change, not afraid to push the envelope and not afraid to make a few mistakes along the way.

Here are some of the highlights:

LEED for Homes

Last year I achieved the LEED AP accreditation, just before the new system of rating was implemented. Now LEED has introduced new rating systems for New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Existing Buildings, Neighbourhood Development and Homes. Both Derek Satnik and Richard Vermeulen gave presentations the Thursday morning on how to design homes and neighbourhoods to be sustainable and more livable. They argued if you looked at it from both a bottom line and a life cycle cost perspective that you could build a home for none to very little additional cost.

Although it is argued that a LEED home only saves about 15% of the energy of a traditional home, it does get you thinking about how to do things with a minimal foot print. Ideally we begin to design and construct homes that are 50% more efficient, off the grid, and with recycled or renewable materials. Satnik discussed the other environmental standards including Energy Star, EnerGuide,  BREEAM and many, many others. While he said none of these is perfect it does help to minimize the impact of homes.

And think how good would it feel to not have to pay your hyrdo or water bills ever again…

Furniture

Made in Canada by Canadian designers with Canadian materials (mostly), meet Nienkamper. Their website seems to be down this morning but I was really impressed with the quality of the furniture at the store. I’m currently trying to figure out if I can order a coffee table from them without having to put a commercial order in.

Fatboy also peaked my interest. They have unique lounging chairs and blocks for the home. I think I’ll have to get one of their hammocks for reading and relaxing next summer!

While there were many textiles that were intriguing, they were only available for commercial purchase. While I’m interested in purchasing eco-friendly textiles I do not need to outfit a commercial space; I only need enough for a small 1-bdrm space.

I was also interested in the green roof and gardening materials. I attended a presentation on Thursday morning regarding gardens, but it was more about the International Garden Festival than about how we can use vegetation to minimize our carbon footprint.

I will be reluctant to attend the Green Building Festival next year. Although the presentations I attended were well done, I was not impressed with the exposition this year. The Direct Energy Centre was an improvement in venue location from when I attended two years ago out by the airport. It would be good to see industry getting together with the universities to brain storm both large and small solutions to our sustainability conundrum.

I’ll be there with the My Sustainable Canada team hopefully enjoying another epic day of skiing under blue sky and sunshine.

And as an added bonus it’s St. Paddy’s Day (my favourite holiday – ok it’s not a holiday, but a great day for celebration!) I’ll be drinking green beer in the village in honour of the earth and St Paddy’s Day!!