Pragerblog

My default position on corporations is pretty lefty, that they are not unlike stiff dicks — driven to get what they want, not caring about anything else. Pretty much of all them are chartered for self-preservation with blinders to social interests or social costs.

But I’ve been opening to a more nuanced position, based on the experiences of Adam Werbach and Wal Mart, and to a lesser extent, the writings of Joel Makower.

But when ABC takes the advertising dollars of petroleum pushers and refuses to run this ad by the Alliance for Climate Protection, they make it very hard to envision a time when corporations will be anything but bloodsucking blights that need to be forced by law to act like responsible entities. (We establish plenty of laws for the public good; a more open discussion is definitely in the public interest. And, of course, they’re using the public airwaves; they just think they own them.)

ABC has no defensible ground here. Go here to urge ABC to reverse itself.

GABRIEL ERDE-COHEN, 24, Jamaica Plain
Green City Growers

I usually synopsize what the subject does, but this time, I thought Gabriel said it so well, I’d just let him speak:

“We build and maintain backyard farms on people’s private land for the benefit of them and their family. It’s like having a personal CSA. [CSA, as in “community supported agriculture.” Generally, farms sell shares of their output before the growing season to lessen their market risk.]

“We also acquire and do bioremediation on brownfields [land tainted by past industrial activity] in the city of Boston for the purpose of turning them into city farms and educational centers.

“Our newest program is consulting, designing, and building urban homesteads, which are completely sustainable homes and communities within the city. That’s the dream.”

Green epiphany: “Seeing what farms really look like and seeing what nature can really look like.”

Green hero: “Bill McDonough, who is revolutionizing the way we think about design.”

Why did you choose this pursuit? “If we can find a way to make cities sustainable, we can ease our way into a sustainable world in a peaceful and joyful way.”

A sustainability practice you’ve recently added: “Vermicomposting [using worms to break down organic waste]. I like it because it’s urban-scaled.”

An example of greenwashing that really bothers you: “The lightbulbs. Changing the lightbulbs will not change the world.”

A technology you’re most hopeful about: “Bicycles.”

The one thing you wish people would just get right: “Community. Relationships.”

What’s a question I should have asked you? “What do you consider truly sustainable?”

And your answer? “The world being more vital every year.”

Are we going to make it? “Yes. ‘We’ being a very large sense of ‘we.’”

… and I decide to buy a soda. I see an Au Bon Pain and grab a bottle of Diet Pepsi.

“Probably be, like, $1.69 or something,” I think to myself. “Frickin’ robbers.”

But no. It was $2.30. Nothing gold-plated about it that I could tell. Just a bottle o’ pop.

If I thought $1.69 was greedy, I sure wasn’t going to pay 36 percent more. For a frickin’ bottle of bubble-infused chemical water!

As I left in a huff of miff, I spied a Coke machine 10 steps away.

Buck and a quarter.

Yeah, it was still just bubble-infused chemical water, but at least I wasn’t getting it for a more expected price — and I was getting over on the usurious faux Frenchies.

Serves ‘em right.

350.org, an climate-crisis action organization that I’ve written about before (here and here), is asking people to send word to both presidential candidates, urging them to attend the Conference of the Parties, a global governmental gathering in Poland in December, a post-Kyoto next step toward global cooperation for the environment.

As you know, the US is the only major industrial country that hasn’t joined in these worldwide efforts, and having the president-elect attend, and pledge cooperation, would be a fantastic boon to the entire movement, emblematic of unity on perhaps the most important issue facing us all.

If you’re willing to add your voice to this call to the candidates, please go 350.org’s invitation site.

You probably know it, but the org’s name refers to 350 parts per million, considered the safe level for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We’re already at 388, and rising by 2 or so a year. This ain’t no foolin’ around.

One of the best results of my leaving daily-newspaper journalism is that I’m now able to support the candidates I believe in, instead of quietly hoping that others will. So last night, for the first time since my mid-teens, I worked actively on the behalf of a candidate.

I wasn’t very good at it. It wasn’t fun. The time didn’t fly. I don’t think I talked with anyone who was influenced by my effort. I couldn’t feel a reward. And yet, I believe there was one, and I’m glad I did it.

Some tidbits:

* I made around 80 calls in two hours. I assure you, I would have rather made fewer, because that would have meant I was speaking to voters or possible voters. But most of the numbers I dialed brought one kind of recording (”the number you have reached is not in service…”) or another (”Nobody’s home right now…”) Apparently there was strategy behind calling these particular numbers — they’re identifying neighborhoods of frequent turnover, where there would be likely Obama voters, and going in later to canvass — but still, what I did was punch in hundreds of numbers, 11 at a time, listen for 20 seconds or so, and then hang up.

* My last call was to a family of Jehovah’s Witnesses. “We don’t vote,” she said, sweetly. I’m almost certain she was speaking for the larger “we,” and I didn’t know that.

* I’m just beginning to notice that “I’m all set” is becoming part of the argot. I heard it a couple of times, from people who weren’t interested in hearing an Obama pitch, and several fellow callers reported hearing it too.

* I spoke to very few undecided voters. Only a few let me get through the scripted paragraph of what Obama will do and then ask if any of these issues were of particular interest to them. One woman replied, “Well, I want to bring the troops home, but I don’t want them to think they’re unappreciated,” as if keeping them there would send a message of gratitude.

* There was a guy on my list whose name is Thomas Fax. I got a fax tone when I called. Like this post of a few days ago, that’s not a story worth telling if it’s not true, but it did happen, and it did bring a chuckle, though more to me than the two fellow partisans I shared it with.

The first stop on our personal version of the Green Buildings Open House tour on Saturday was off the beaten path, if not the grid, to the several buildings of the Sirius Community in Shutesbury. Even before we arrived, the last dot of the Prius’s gas gauge was blinking, with no gas stations in sight for several miles back.

“If your car used vegetable oil, we could help you,” our tour guide said. She also told us about the community’s root cellar, which was being put to good use again this fall, with perhaps a little more urgency this year because of concerns for the economy, but with the same practices the community has always strived for.

“That’s part of trying to live efficiently,” I observed, sagely but glibly, “you don’t do it only when you have an extra good reason to.”

I had never done much hypermiling, which has become a cultish pastime of some Prius owners, trying to extend the gas mileage of the car by relying as much as possible on battery power, a practice made easier by the power-use animation on the car’s video screen. But especially after our GPS mistakenly led us around a long triangular loop back to where we started, we were highly motivated to try.

We were aided greatly by having a significant uphill lie, but even on the straightaways, we were able to keep our momentum without engaging the gas engine by feathering the accelerator. I was fairly impressed with my hyper-skills as I pulled into the gas station, at least until the conversation I’d had about the root cellar starting replaying in my head, especially my response.

We could be hypermiling every mile, instead of just when we have an extra good reason to.

In these times of $700 billion bailouts, the best and most important presidential election in a generation, and improbable sports heroics, the most e-mailed story on boston.com right now is a recipe for a prize-winning noodle kugel.

Make of this what you will.

I swear the following is true, but it would have to be for me to tell the story; as fiction, it’d be horribly, embarrassingly lame.

At the home of Maria Chao, an architect living in Amherst, one of the points of interest was the Munchkin boiler, whose chief selling points are its efficiency and small size.

We visited her house as part of the renewable energy open house organized regionally by the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association, and nationally by the American Solar Energy Association. But Georgie and I did our tour (more later) in Greater Northampton because our niece, Annika, was celebrating her 7th birthday in Sunderland.

The theme of the party was … “The Wizard of Oz” and it wasn’t expressed in just a couple of posters and some four-color, printed napkins. My sister in law Val, a tireless dynamo of ideas and industry, sewed 30 costumes, engaged a local couple of women to direct, and staged a nine-act performance on the front porch with an audience of parents below. Naturally, there were lots of munchkins.

Annika, the guest of honor and the star of the show, in costume as Dorothy.

I did very little to help organize, though I was dispatched to Dunkin’ Donuts to get a Box o’ Joe. (You see where I’m going with this, no?) While I was there, waiting for them to brew the joe, a guy came in and ordered … 100 munchkins, upping his order to 150 when a few were still left. I could swear they were all for him, but I was probably just projecting.

I mention a few action items in my post about GreenFest. But also that day, I got on the mailing list of The Green Decade Coalition/Newton, an apparently very active group. Here are some events from my first mailing from them…

Tomorrow, Saturday, Oct. 4, a tour of four solar homes and a community solar project. Gather in Newton at 9:30; tour is 10-2. $18 at the door. More information here.

Also tomorrow but in Brookline: A “Global Warming Cafe” starts with a light lunch at noon, followed by three hours of presentations:
•    Plenary Speaker: Brookline resident Mindy Lubber, President, Ceres,  “Advancing Sustainable Prosperity”
•    Low Carbon Living Workshop: Easy, initial steps to lower your household CO2 output by 10% or more.  Introducing “The Low Carbon Diet, a 30 Day Program to Lose 5,000 Pounds.
•    Education Forums: Learn about sustainable technologies including solar and geothermal. Experts will discuss retrofit options.
Sponsored by Climate Change Action Brookline. Go there for further details.

On Sat., Oct. 25, an energy-saving fair for homes and businesses is planned in Lexington. 9 a.m.- 3 p.m. at Lexington High School. For more details, go to www.lexgwac.org.

On Sat., Nov. 1, Paul Eldrenkamp of Byggmeister Inc. gives a three-hour seminar on insulating an older home. Cost is $30, $15 for some. Paul is highly sought as a speaker on conservation and home renovation; he’s clear, committed, and knowledgeable. Details here.

But seriously, folks.

It isn’t news when all the planes land safely, but let just one crash and you see what happens. That’s why I was a bit disappointed with the veep debate last night; everyone landed safely.

That said, there were some interesting outcomes.
* Palin was just fine. She presented the greatest possibility for mayhem, but she was just fine. Not impressive in her knowledge, but her ability to parry questions (which is not to say “answer’) was clearly stronger in this setting than in the Couric interview.
* Biden was more than fine, but I doubt he’ll ever get much credit for his feat. Apart from the potential pitfalls having to do only with himself, he had much greater downside in the encounter, and yet he did well. He played nice very nicely, without any patrimony, and still landed several zingers on McCain, who is, of course, the issue.
* I haven’t heard and read any mention of it, but I thought Palin’s answer on what the vice president does was a gaffe. She was talking about the flexibility that the Constitution offers, and there just isn’t any. Biden answered that forcefully, but put in on Cheney instead of pointing out Palin’s ignorance of the nation’s founding document. I’m sure that was strategic, that Biden considered and was prepped on that question thoroughly — finish her off if she slips? — and the collective wisdom was not to do so. That’s less satisfying for me, but I concede it was probably the smart route.
* I continue to marvel at the cultural interest that the event inspired.
— Before the debate, I was with a group of friends, and several said they weren’t going to watch because they’d become too distraught — about the election in general and about Palin specifically. (I just want to repeat: I don’t think the vote will be close. Nor should it be, of course.)
— And this morning at the coffeehouse, I overheard a couple of conversations about how it went; one of them started from halfway across the room as the second conversant entered: “Well, it didn’t go bad enough,” which prompted chuckles at a couple of tables. “It” was on a lot of minds.

Again, this was the vice presidential debate!

Another in a series of miniprofiles of sustainability-minded people who are working to reduce humankind’s footprint on the planet. To recap, they’re “mini” not only because they’re short, but because all the questions are 10 words or less, and the answers are requested to match. Please, no counting.

WARREN LEON, 58, Concord
Senior advisor, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative

Warren formerly was director of the state’s renewable energy trust, but he’s now working with the Clean Energy States Alliance on national energy-policy issues and with the Patrick administration on some international economic development activities. Warren is also coauthor, with Michael Brower, of the book “The Consumer’s Guide to Effective Environmental Action,” which he said is “probably the best-selling environmental advice book of the last 10 years.”

Green epiphany: “The oil crises of the 1970s. It became very clear we were heading down the wrong track economically and environmentally.”

Green hero: “In the Boston area, one is Marty Aikens, a business agent for IBEW Local 103. He got the first wind turbine built in Boston and he’s put a lot of effort into training union electricians in new green technologies and getting them commited to them.”

A new sustainability practice you’ve take on: “Unplugging certain appliances like the microwave and toaster oven when not in use. It doesn’t make a big difference, but it’s easy to do.”

An example of greenwashing that really bothers you: “Companies that spend more money advertising the action they took than they spent on the action itself.”

What don’t people understand? “Which actions make a significant difference, and which actions only have a trivial effect.”

Technology you’re most hopeful about: “Photovoltaic electricity. It’s still expensive, but I hope there will be continued rapid progress.”

Are we going to make it? “I don’t know, but we sure have to try.”

OK, that’s it. Thanks for talking with me. “Wait, you didn’t ask me the other question.”

Which other question? “Paper or plastic.”

OK, what’s the answer? “Neither, or either. It’s better to use neither when you can, but it doesn’t matter a whole lot and neither choice is significantly better.”

I have used this headline before, but why not — I’m just reiterating the sentiment.

The vice presidential candidates are talkin’ tonight, and I can’t wait.

I feel slightly self-chastened to say it, but substance is far down on my roster of anticipation — Biden has it and Palin doesn’t.

But both candidates offer the potential for mistakes and even outright failure.
* Will Biden gaffe again? Will he make some gender faux pas such as offering to hold her chair, or perhaps by not holding it? Will he go for the jugular, and if so, will he miss?
* Will Palin be able to specify any answer? Will she charm her way through, or will she go for the jugular? Will her peeps love it if she does, no matter what?

Four years ago, it was Cheney-Lieberman (hey, why did they have two guys from the same party?). Did you have a party to watch that one?

From ThinkProgress, a recap of a discussion between Jonah Goldberg and Glenn Beck, just being ugly as all get out.

They have a right to say it, and I have a right — obligation! — to be repulsed by it. It is just wrong, objectively and demonstrably.

I used to have a boss who said, “Time wounds all heels.” For these guys, what is time waiting for?

I don’t know anyone who doesn’t have some reservation with the term “green” to describe the movement toward a more environmentally sound future. (Brian Butler, owner of Boston Green Building and a recent respondent to my “Green People” series (and how inadequate is that as a name for a series!) is the most recent example I’ve encountered.)

But in the past couple of days, I’ve read two criticisms of “sustainable,” which is clunky, but at least it’s more specific and doesn’t suffer for trendiness. (Actually, it’s one criticism, expressed by two sources.)

One was published in 2002, making it not even a new objection. It was in a very credible-to-me source, “Cradle To Cradle,” the seminal treatise by William McDonough and Michael Braungart that I started to read, and blog about, months ago. They ask what you would think of someone who described his marriage as sustainable.

Well, yes, there is that.

I came across the passage only last night. Then, this morning, I was picking through Wired’s list of 15 people the next president should listen to and there was Mitchell Joachim saying the same thing. It makes me think that Joachim read the same book I’m reading — few people of any weight in the environmental fields haven’t — but for all I know, it didn’t originate in C2C either.

I suppose I’m reacting as much to the coincidence as anything else. And, I’ll concede that names are less important than the work toward change. But they’re not unimportant, either.

Any ideas? Leave ‘em in the comments, please.

[”Update”: I was speaking with Andrea Atkinson of The Green Roundtable later in the day and mentioned this post, and she added some perspective (on the meat, not the name): “We should be moving toward regenerative. But we’re not even at sustainable yet. If that’s our buzz word, I’m fine with that because we haven’t done any better.”]

Just another slit in the No-Palin zone: Has anyone ever had a better chance to exceed expectations than Alaska’s governor does Thursday night?

The pitch of the ridicule, brought on by her own responses to Katie Couric, is so high that if she just puts her first and last names together successfully, she’s going to do OK in the eyes of many, especially those predisposed to support her anyway.

They are the ones who have to be helped to see how thin her qualifications are, but I fear that, absent a couple of roaring blunders, they will see what they want to see, a plucky woman facing down all those mean elitists.

I rarely delve into sports here, another indication to my wife that I’m not as sports-interested as she thinks I am, or used to be. Anyway…

When cruising Boston.com, I see that the Bruins intend to attempt another season soon. And my reaction is, “wow, I still don’t care.”

I was a huge hockey fan, as a kid and then again when I lived in Hartford Whalers territory. I went to 15-20 games a year then, and thought for sure I would hook back up with my childhood faves, the Bruins, when I moved back to Boston in the early ’90s. But rarely have I met a more callous, fan-unfriendly outfit, and I can barely bring myself now to watch the Stanley Cup finals, let alone a Bruins game.

Please understand, I used to love hockey. In 1994, I flew to Vancouver — another frickin’ country, on the other side of the continent —for three days to attend a Stanley Cup game between the Canucks and the Rangers. Not even a Boston team! I’ve been to two All-Star games in my life, in any sport, and both were NHL games. I attended the World Juniors when they came to Boston in ‘96(?).

But the Bruins’s endless disinterest in putting a good team on the ice, as long as the rink’s full enough and everyone’s eating a lot at the concession stands, has not only killed the hockey fan within me, but left a smoldering ash of resentment in its place.

Generally speaking, I try to plumb my resentments for what I can learn about myself, and then to put them to rest. I am generally charitable, and forgive those who trespass against me. But so far, I haven’t brought those attitudes and actions to bear on the Bruins. Mostly, I want them to suffer for their cold disregard for fandom.

As I said in the headline, it’s a completely uncharitable position, but for today, there it is anyway.

The people at Good magazine have a good name, if you get what I mean. Some people might think you’re saying that the magazine is good, when you’re only meaning to say that the name of the magazine is Good. Especially when it’s the first word of a headline, as it is above. Good thinking, no? No wait…

In this case, however, I’m saying both. I have seen Good, the magazine, only a couple of times but have been impressed, and now I have another reason to be. In conjunction with Starbucks, they’ve put together a series of one-page, graphic-intense issue explainers that are helpful, informative, and easy to take in. (Any graphic journalist would be proud to have such things said about her or his work, and actually, I’ll be glad to hear anyone say that about my work as well.)

Energy was the first topic, followed by health care. Now, immigration is up. They are printed on newsprint of high-recycled content, and have been available for a week each, so far. I believe that they’ll keep coming until the election.

I have my Starbucks issues (discussed here and here), and they sure don’t need me to send people through their portals, so I’m not saying you should make a stop just for these. You could — the explainers are very good — but I’m not sayin’ you should.

If you’re stoppin’ in, though, check these out.

The auction last Thursday brought in more than $38 million altogether, and the state intends to spend its portion on energy-saving efforts.

Here’s more from the Globe’s Erin Ailworth.

Nature showed a bit of ingratitude this weekend, washing out the two planned days of Greenfest and dampening the make-up day Sunday. Though the tables were protected top and sides by tenting, there were still plenty of opportunities to get wet, and I watched an informative presentation by architect Bill Boehm with my shoes in puddles of rainwater.

Still, I learned a few things…

* In 2009, New Generation Energy will offer Renewable Energy Investment Notes. People and/or groups that buy them will be guaranteed term and interest rate. The proceeds will fund loans to support renewable energy projects, at rates as low as 3 percent, for nonprofits, municipalities, and community-based for-profit organizations. New Generation, a nonprofit started two years ago, intends to sell notes worth $50 million altogether, in denominations as low as $1,000.
* A not particularly new UN report says that cattle-raising generates more global warming gases (in CO2 equivalents) than transportation does (18 percent to 13 percent). I knew it produced a lot, but not that much.
*Powervote.org is trying to enlist young people (oops, they let me sign, too) to sign a pledge to promote a pro-renewable energy agenda, including by registering to vote and then voting for candidates who have the same values.
* The local affiliate of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, is offering energy-saving workshops on Oct. 6 and 20, Nov. 17, and Dec. 1 and 15. Call 617-436-7100 for information.
* A couple of green-eyed partisans, Andree Zaleska and Ken Ward, along with their three boys, are engaged in a low-carbon demonstration rehab project in Jamaica Plain. You can follow their progress at jpgreenhouse.blogspot.com.
* Trecia and Phil Reavis Jr. have just opened earthtees.com, a business selling Phil’s clever, environmentally themed slogans and designs on organic-cotton T-shirts. The couple is from Somerville, and they drive a Prius with the vanity plate “FREEUS,” so they might actually be walking what they’re talking.

Lubber is president of Ceres, a national coalition of investors and public-interest groups focused on environmental issues. Yesterday she was one of the Globe magazine’s “earth angels,” briefly profiled with five others as part of the issue’s green focus.

Today, she’s an op-ed contributor, making excellent points that will one day seem so obvious that everyone will wonder why, and rue, that they weren’t conventional wisdom.

She says it better than I will, since, like, it’s her idea, but essentially she contrasts Wall Street’s behavior that necessitated today’s proposed bailout with its broad-based ignorance of the hidden carbon risks in its investment strategies.

A recent Ceres/RiskMetrics report that evaluated climate governance practices found that 14 of 40 banks had adopted risk management policies or lending procedures that address climate change in a systematic way. Only six were formally calculating carbon risk in their lending portfolios. And no bank had a policy to avoid investments in carbon-intensive projects such as new coal-fired power plants. [edited to tighten.]

Unquestionably, climate change has costs — even the semi-deniers (Sarah Palin comes to mind), who concede there is warming but not that humans are responsible, would grant that. So far, we’ve just been letting those costs run up on a public tab, but eventually they’re going to come due in several ways.

The way I see it most affecting Wall Street is when, because of their environmental liabilities, coal-fired power plants are no longer considered prime assets, and once again, an island of bad paper appears from “nowhere.”

No nuclear power plants have been built since Three Mile Island, and one of the foremost reasons is that financing the plants has become so difficult. By implication, Lubber suggests that the same fate should befall coal plants, and I agree.