What a total dud NBC’s Green Week turned out to be. I thought that

1. the shows would find clever ways to promote green themes
2. this would launch NBC on becoming greener.

Not! Indeed, the only good news is that the shows bombed across the board. Looks like viewers aren’t suckered by greenwashing.

As for #2, you can’t even find a single reference to being green on nbc.com today (you have to click on the tiny “corporate info” item at the bottom, and then look for the “Green is Universal” link under Headlines.). But, amazingly, what you will see on the NBC homepage is multiple ads for the Nissan Rogue, a cross-over SUV that gets 23 or 24 mpg! I guess green isn’t really that universal. [And, coincidentally, the TV writers are striking in part because greedy producers won't share this kind of online ad revenue with them.]

The shows were very, very lame from a green perspective. The funniest was 30 Rock (click on David Schwimmer picture/Greenzo episode), but it was a brutal satire on corporate greenwashing. The only person who is genuinely green is Schwimmer, who is a stereotypically obnoxious about the environment. Al Gore has a funny cameo, but he is mainly spoofing himself.

Scrubs is pretty funny, but the janitor’s effort to green the hospital fails for lack of interest. Thanks NBC! Grist was similarly disappointed with the Thursday night line-up.
Deal or No Deal had the models saying things like “Recycling is Cool, America” Recycling? Seriously? Uhh, that is like, so 1980s retro, please! Even dumber, Kermit the Frog (or what sounded like a lame imitation of him) was on the show to green it up, although he didn’t actually say any environmental things that I recall. But he was green-colored!

What really convinced me this was not just a meaningless but actually a counterproductive exercise was that I happened to catch Las Vegas. NBC should be embarrassed for calling this a “green” episode (you can watch the episode, titled, “It’s Not Easy Being Green” — gosh, how original — here):

Read more

As E&E News (subs. req’d) reports today:

An industry group released standards yesterday for carbon dioxide offsets in the hopes of attracting existing and still-forming emission-trading markets.

The Voluntary Carbon Standards (VCS) are aimed at evaluating clean-energy projects in developing countries that are used to offset industrialized nations’ emissions of greenhouse gases under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism.

You can read all about the new standard on their website. I am not terribly impressed with this new standard. Among other things, it allows tree projects (no! and no!). They also didn’t consult with a lot of environmental groups, and as I pointed out to E&E News and WWF, their website has this bizarre and I think inappropriate listing under Board members:

James Leape, WWF International (invited)

Seriously. How do you list an invited — but not accepted — Board member on your website? Especially from an organization that seriously criticized the previous draft of your offset standard.

The rest of the E&E article, with quotes from me and WWF, is below:

Read more

Perhaps not the best strategy:

The House purchased these carbon credits to offset the impact of 30,000 tons of carbon emitted by the U.S. Capitol’s coal-burning power plant each year. The funds will be used on carbon reducing measures, such as planting trees and underground storage of carbon dioxide, as well as green technologies like wind and solar power. The auction was oversubscribed with a weighted average clearing price of $2.97 per ton.

I hope they didn’t plant a lot of trees — they aren’t the greatest offsets (see here also). And I really hope the underground storage carbon dioxide isn’t used for enhanced oil recovery — a very dubious offset.

I personally wouldn’t recommend the Chicago Climate Exchange for offsets– too many environmental groups have doubts about it, and I have heard some serious concerns directly from people involved in their offset projects.

At least the House is cleaning up its own act first:

The House will become carbon neutral by purchasing wind power for the electricity it uses, and by substituting natural gas for coal to generate the House’s portion of the electricity produced by the Capitol Power Plant. To offset the carbon emitted from burning natural gas, the House will purchase carbon offsets.

That’s much, much better than just trying to offset coal power with, say, trees.

Rising Demand for Oil Provokes New Energy Crisis – New York Times. This isn’t your father’s oil shock: “This is the world’s first demand-led energy shock,” said Lawrence Goldstein, an economist at the Energy Policy Research Foundation of Washington.

World must be careful on food miles issue – diplomat – Reuters. One popular personal strategy to fight global warming — buying local food to reduce transportation emissions — has unintended consequences on development: “Ending imports of fresh food from Africa under the pretext of combating climate change risks destroying entire communities that have become dependent on the trade, Ghana’s High Commissioner to Britain said on Wednesday.”

N. America emits far more CO2 than it absorbs – msnbc.com. “North America released 1,856 million metric tons of carbon into the air in 2003 — 85 percent from the United States, 9 percent from Canada and 6 percent from Mexico. At the same time, growing vegetation and other sources took in about 500 million metric tons of carbon.” Full scientific report here.

L.A. Auto Show: How Green Is My Valley? – New York Times. Good piece with interesting comments on whether the auto is really going green, or just greenwashing.

Governors Join in Creating Regional Pacts on Climate Change – New York Times. “Frustrated with the slow progress of legislation in Washington on energy and global warming, the nation’s governors have created regional agreements to cap greenhouse gases and are engaged in a concerted lobbying effort to prod Congress to act.” For now, the real action is in the states.

Everything you could possibly want to know about clean technology in the Golden State can be found in an excellent new report, the California Green Innovation Index published by Next 10, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. The report tracks the state’s economic and environmental performance and analyzes key indicators to better understand the role green innovation plays in reducing emissions and growing the economy.

California is a state whose growth has always been built around innovation, as this figure from the report shows:

We’ve often written about California’s leadership policies in energy efficiency — but the report points out a number of fascinating factoids we weren’t aware of:

Read more