The Union of Concerned Scientists – Cooler Smarter
Event at Politics and Prose: Details here and below
Jul 7 2012 6:00 pm
When it comes to climate change, each individual’s everyday decisions have tremendous impact. This science-based guide, informed by a two-year study by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit organization that combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions—looks at transportation, home energy use, and personal consumption, showing how people can cut carbon emissions by 20%.
Location:
- 5015 Connecticut Ave NW
- Washington, DC
All our in-store events are free and open to the public. All event titles are 20% off for members during the month in which the author appears at the store. Click here for directions. There is ample parking available in the lot behind the store and in the surrounding neighborhood.
Description
How can each of us live Cooler Smarter? While the routine decisions that shape our days-what to have for dinner, where to shop, how to get to work-may seem small, collectively they have a big effect on global warming.
Based on an in-depth, two-year study by experts at The Union of Concerned Scientists, Cooler, Smarter shows you how to cut your own global warming emissions by twenty percent or more. It offers science-based strategies to cut carbon, including chapters on transportation, home energy use, diet, personal consumption, as well as how best to influence your workplace, your community, and elected officials.
The advice in Cooler Smarter can help save you money and live healthier. But its central purpose is to empower you, through low carbon-living, to confront one of society’s greatest threats.
About the Author
The Union of Concerned Scientists is a leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
Praise for Cooler Smarter: Practical Steps for Low-Carbon Living…
“Finally, an excellent, short, and readable book that is replete with examples of what each of us can do to improve our lives and, at the same time, reduce our carbon footprint by using energy more efficiently. Whatever your view may be about climate change projections, there are no good arguments that favor wasting energy and launching the world’s climate into an uncertain future.”
-Neal Lane“Cooler Smarter provides great advice backed by data, analysis, and examples. I was surprised how only a few simple steps can cut your environmental footprint by 20 percent—and most of those steps don’t involve sacrifice, but rather pay for themselves and help you lead a healthier life. I plan on implementing several of these strategies and hope others do, too!”
-Rick Needham“We can break our addiction to fossil fuels, stave off the worst of global warming, and generate quality jobs that allow us to support our families and build for the future—but only if we work together and each of us does our part. This smart, sensible, and easy-to-use book lays out the most effective steps each of us can take right now.”
-Van Jones
-The Rev. Canon Sally G. Bingham“It’s doubly important now for each of us to act to reduce our carbon footprints because Washington is doing so little. I love this book–a smart, accessible, clear-headed guide that we can all follow.”
-James Gustave Speth“This accessible, science-based book gives each of us the information we need to do our part to reduce our carbon emissions. This is the smart tool for action many of us have been waiting for.”
-Timothy E. Wirth“A wonderful guide to smarter energy use and a cooler planet that shows how each and every one of us can contribute part of the solution for a better future. Splendidly written, accessible, and essential for any citizen—both virtually and metaphorically cool.”
-Thomas E. Lovejoy“Clear, readable, and genuinely smart, Cooler Smarter answers the question concerned citizens everywhere are asking: What can we do to make a difference?”
-Elizabeth Kolbert
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga
Thank you for sharing the information about this event and this new publication, but I feel compelled to strongly disagree with the Union of Concerned Scientists.
I don’t think it’s useful to lead people to believe that reducing their enormous carbon footprints by only 20 percent is good enough or even something for which they should be congratulated.
I think people need to be convinced that this is a huge crisis — similar to what prompted the Manhattan Project in World War II — and as such, they will be called upon to make real sacrifices for the sake of their grandchildren.
Great! I plan to attend the event this evening and hope to see a good turnout!
I am in complete agreement with Lisa. These kind of “you can make a difference” articles and books are well meaning but misguided. You can’t. Only the collective action of all of us working through national government and international treaties can make a difference.
To lead people to believe otherwise is dangerous in that it takes the focus off the political fights we must have to have even a glimmer of a hope in tackling this issue.
Not available as an e-book. Aren’t they a little ‘greener’?
Available on Kindle:
http://www.amazon.com/Cooler-Smarter-Practical-Low-Carbon-Scientists/dp/161091192X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341750770&sr=8-1&keywords=cooler+smarter
Lisa and John,
I hear what you’re saying, but I’d hesitate to be quite so dismissive. Books such as these are not intended solely and simply as “solutions”. They are part of the adaptation process, as well as for getting people engaged, informed, and prepared for radical lifestyle change. You cannot just dump all of that on people by vote of Congress and by Proclamation of the President.
First, people not nearly as well-informed and self-assured as yourselves on this issue are going to become increasingly curious, concerned, motivated, afraid, angry, and ultimately panicky as climate change events escalate and people increasingly “get it.” Heat waves and wildfires can do that, along with bizarre storms, flooding, food price spikes, water rationing, power outages, and hurricanes. Everyone reacts on their own timetable.
So, people don’t want to feel helpless and hopeless when this starts hitting home. That’s a shitty way to go through life, and in this sense psychological adaptation to a deteriorating climate is going to be a massive existential challenge with public mental health implications no one is yet talking about. People will need tangible things to do that are part of the solution, not part of the problem. Maybe not THE solution, but PART of the solution.
Second, people will figure it out — yes, their individual contributions are not enough, so they will start leaning on others, including politicians, to do more. And as climate impacts accelerate, so will the leaning. Politicians are more likely to follow than to lead.
Third, people “doing something” inevitably bump into, learn from, and mutually motivate like-minded individuals. Every time someone buys a hybrid (or electric car), or puts up solar panels, or converts to drought-tolerate landscaping, or whatever…. others see it and feel more inclined to follow suit. People will increase their sacrifices if others are doing so. We need to start somewhere.
Fourth, at the moment, our central government has taken the concepts of “balance of powers” and “checks and balances” and “two-party system” to a dysfunctional extreme. We do not have the luxury of waiting for the government to tell us all what to do… we need to incrementally be doing things now on our own initiative, individually, locally, and at the state level.
Well said Steve, ME
Steve:
You make many good points, and if I had any sense, I wouldn’t comment on a book I haven;t read, but I have been in this business for 35 years and I’ve seen these kinds of “you can make a difference” books been miss used to misinform or deflect so often it’s sad.
Perhaps their introductory chapter says something like “Until governments take action, as they must, here’s some stopgap measures you can take ….”
If so, great. Although I’m sure some fossil fuel outfit will still use it to deflect responsibility onto the individual.
Well said Steve.
I have solar panels on my house that cover about 60% of my energy use. Many people tell me that PV is not the solution because the sun doesn’t shine at night and yield is too low in winter.
I always reply: “I never intended it to be THE solution, just a step in the right direction”.
I agree that 20% is just the start. We have to get down below 5 tonnes CO2 per person. US is above 20tonnes per person. But every journey starts w a single step. This could be the step for many.
What will the various national carbon budgets look like if countries are allocated equal shares of the allowable (i.e. survivable) global carbon budget on a per-capita basis?
Is there really any other fair basis for allocation, over the long term?
Quite a few assumptions are involved, but it’s still a crucial benchmark to set and refine. This reference figures each person’s share emit in 2050 would be about 0.22 tC/year:
http://www.tenaya.com/globalwarming/EquitableCarbon.pdf
More than an order of magnitude smaller than 5 tonnes CO2 per person.
Kevin, thank you for this information. I won’t quibble with the numbers. I agree that a per person ‘budget’ is the only fair approach. So, let’s follow UCS recommendation to cut 20%, then let’s cut some more. And more.
http://bit.ly/LYoiTH
I’m reading this book (and actually was preparing to write a review of it fairly soon).
Overall a good reference guide (I’m halfway through) with a good bibliography. I learned a lot on the food section, and some stuff about heating and insulation. I am so glad that this material has been gathered together in one book.
A word of warning though. The first 50 pages or so is basically a review of climate science. But then again, it’s geared toward the general reader.
Nonetheless I highly recommend this book. (Other climate change book recommendations on my blog here http://www.imaginaryplanet.net/weblogs/idiotprogrammer/2012/06/best-books-about-energy-environment-climate-change/ )
Given the discussion above (with which I agree – 20% is a first baby step and must be a doorway into far more radical personal, economic, political, infrastructural and cultural changes), I’d love to know: does the book make it clear that 20% is the very first step in a much longer process (that ultimately is going to be aiming at something pretty close to zero within decades at most)?