BlueMarbleKids
A YouTube channel devoted to educating about climate change, and what you can do to help. This is a terrific and inspiring set of educational videos presented by a young woman. Each video focuses on a specific step, explaining why it makes a difference.
Climate change can seem like such an overwhelming issue, especially at a young age. BlueMarbleKids identifies ways that young people can make a difference in their communities. Topics include composting, food waste, and pollinators. Check out the videos at the BlueMarbleKids Youtube channel!
Write a Letter
Building greater sustainability takes a village. Writing a letter to the editor of a local (or national) news source, or posting a note to social media or any other “public square” is one of the most direct steps you can take to influence and bring change. And it’s easier than many think to get published.
Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy.
~ Walter Cronkite
Small action. Big results.
A letter can accomplish many things:
- Inform. The topic of sustainability is broad. Letters can help provide background on specific elements, and how different elements fit together.
- Amplify. We are all “swayed” by what we hear. Topics that are discussed more get greater attention. Every additional voice for sustainability elevates the topic and demonstrates its importance.
- Positive action. Elected officials, business leaders, and community members all seek to be “in step” with public opinion. A constant stream of public dialogue around sustainability builds momentum for constructive action.
- Action lever. A published letter can be a great tool to request a meeting (and prompt attention) from public officials and other leaders in the community. It can also generate follow-on community interest.
Keys to an effective letter
- Simple. A good letter conveys a straightforward message. The “take away” is clear.
- Attention-getting. A good letter attracts the attention of readers because it includes a “hook” that resonates.
- Topical. A good letter will address how to build greater sustainability.
Some tips to get a letter read
- Choose a reference that resonates! Use a current event, news item, or topic of attention as a hook to bring your message about sustainability to readers.
- Use facts. Footnotes to show sources are helpful. Try not to repeat second hand assertions.
- Be positive. No need to disparage or demonize anyone. Be respectful. Humor and wit go a long way to opening others’ mind to issues, challenges, and potential ways forward. Is your letter written in a way that would make members of your family proud?
- Stay focused on your message. One issue for one letter is PERFECT! Published letters generally are very short. The same advice is good for longer submissions as well, e.g., and op-ed should develop a single, clear, focused message.
- Offer a solution or constructive step. Ask readers to join to reach a common goal. Presenting a call to action can be a powerful tool. Offering resources can also be very helpful to build awareness, generate enthusiasm, and prompt participation.
- Close strong. Rhetorical devices like repetition can be effective.
Practical Tips
- If you are sending your letter to a publication, it’s especially important to be timely and topical. A response to an article, story, or event should be within two or three days.
- It can be helpful to mention elected or public officials, especially if the issue is one voters are talking about, e.g., a new rule or referendum related to sustainability.
- Refer directly to whatever your letter is responding to as it appeared in the publication, e.g., story title and page number.
- Follow any submission guidelines, e.g., max word count. Make your submission part of the email, not a separate attachment that might be lost.
Additional Resources
Information from Citizens Climate Lobby on effective letter writing.
Advice to write a letter to the editor.
Coming Soon
We are at work building Yaroki, and look forward to making this resource available soon.
What Our Future Could Be….
The IPCC’s Working Group I included released a new tool with its report in August. The Interactive Atlas displays projected climate impacts based on the underlying data that the working group gathered and used to underpin its findings. Users can select from different parameters to see potential effects on global and regional climates. The tool has two components.
The first enables generation of global and regional maps in a variety of formats. The underlying data covers both observed and projected climate change for time periods, emissions scenarios or global warming levels of interest. The second component provides qualitative information about changes in climatic impact-drivers – variables that drive climate change such as heat and cold, wet and dry, or coastal and oceanic.
Anyone can use the Interactive Atlas to visualize what a changed climate may look like. Users can choose from among different assumptions and output parameters. For example, what will rain patterns look like if global average temperature rises by 3°C.
Instructions for using the tool are provided here. The data used by the Atlas is freely available. Information about the data sets is available here.
The Interactive Atlas is novel tool that enables a user to see the physical impacts climate change is likely to bring under different scenarios. It is worthwhile to explore.
© 2021. What our future could be… is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
IPCC Rolling Out 6th Global Assessment
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has published a report Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. The report is part of the IPCC’s 6th global assessment of Earth’s climate.
The IPCC is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. The IPCC provides scientific assessments on climate change. IPCC assessments address relevant impacts and potential future risks. The IPCC was created in 1988, and now has 195 Member countries.
Through its assessments, the IPCC determines the state of knowledge on climate change. It identifies where there is agreement in the scientific community on topics related to climate change, and where further research is needed. The IPCC seeks to present adaptation and mitigation options.
The report addresses the most up-to-date physical understanding of the climate system and climate change, bringing together the latest advances in climate science, and combining multiple lines of evidence from paleoclimate, observations, process understanding, and global and regional climate simulations.
Key findings from the report:
The Earth is warming faster than previously thought.
Unless there are immediate, rapid and large-scale reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, limiting warming to close to 1.5°C or even 2°C will be beyond reach.
Climate change is impacting the whole world.
Climate change is already affecting every region on Earth, in multiple ways. Impacts are not uniform; some areas will be harder hit than others. The nature and degree of risk will vary across regions.
Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis is the result of tremendous, worldwide collaboration. More than 200 authors from 66 countries as well as more than 500 additional contributors drafted the report, which includes over 14,000 cited references. This report is the first of several to be released by the IPCC as part of the current global assessment. The synthesis report is expected to be published in the spring of 2022.
© 2021. IPCC Rolling Out is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
IEA PROMOTES GREEN ENERGY
The International Energy Agency or IEA was created in 1974 in response to the 1973 oil crisis with a mission to promote oil security and coordinate a collective response to any major disruptions in the supply of oil.
For years, IEA’s focus was primarily on oil and fossil fuels. But in more recent years, the IEA has broadened its vision to include sustainable sources of energy. Now, the IEA recommends policies that enhance the reliability, affordability, and sustainability of energy. This year, the organization has doubled down on that approach, releasing reports that lay out a path to zero carbon energy grid, and propose pathways to finance those energy sources.
The fact that an organization like the IEA has now pivoted toward renewables and is devoting its effort to their promotion reflects a seismic shift in global thinking and sends a strong signal that clean energy and a zero carbon future are not pipe dreams of well-intentioned, but largely irrelevant “fringe.” Rather, these are achievable objectives and potentially highly profitable ones to those that recognize the opportunity.
IEA Net Zero Report
The pathway set out in the IEA report calls for a smaller total energy supply serving a greater number of world inhabitants. Nearly 90% of electricity would come from renewable sources, mostly solar. Solar PV and wind together would account for 70%. Near-term reductions would come from existing technology. Out-year reductions would come from developing and new technology, advanced batteries, electrolysers for hydrogen, and direct air capture and storage, for example. Other highlights of the Net Zero Report include:
- No investment in new fossil fuel supply projects, and no further final investment decisions for new unabated coal plants.
- Major worldwide energy efficiency effort to reduce overall demand.
- No sales of new internal combustion engine passenger cars beyond 2035.
- Net-zero emissions from the global electricity sector by 2040.
The IEA Report projects a surge in total annual energy investment to $5 trillion by 2030. Based on work by the International Monetary Fund, the Report anticipates that global GDP would increase almost half a percent per year with millions of new jobs. By 2030, global GDP would be 4% higher than the current growth line.
IEA (2021), Financing clean energy transitions in emerging and developing economies, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/financing-clean-energy-transitions-in-emerging-and-developing-economiesIEA Financing Clean Energy Transitions Report
Last month, IEA published Financing Clean Energy Transitions in Emerging and Developing Economies in collaboration with the World Bank and the World Economic Forum. The Report seeks to address a key challenge to meeting climate goals: How can the world community effectively direct capital resources to build the clean energy infrastructure we need to limit global warming?
The Report highlights investment opportunities and showcases real-world case studies. It offers policy recommendations to help guide private enterprise and leverage public-private partnerships. A key finding is that more investment is needed in developing countries. Historically, global investment has been lacking in these regions, which are also the most populous, and if current trends do not change, will soon become the largest sources of emissions. But there is tremendous economic and environmental opportunity: Yet, the cost to avoid adding atmospheric carbon is about half what it is more developed nations.
© 2021. IEA Promotes Green Action is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
Greening Our Mail
A Proposal for the US Postal Service
Since our inception as a country, the United States Postal Service (USPS) has been among the most recognized public service providers of the federal government. By enabling communication and commerce between all parts of our nation, it has served to help build and strengthen our republic and build a shared American identity.
With the advent of email, and increasingly digitalization of communication and commerce, mail volume has decreased. Mail delivery service peaked in the mid-2000s at about 210 billion units delivered annually. Nevertheless, the USPS still handles an impressive amount of mail. In fiscal year 2019, the Postal Service delivered 143 billion pieces of mail to 160 million delivery addresses. This includes over 46 million rural addresses, where often, the USPS is the only delivery option.1 This service generates significant revenue. For example, between January 1 and March 31, 2020, the USPS reported total revenue of $17.8 billion. For context, that single quarter revenue is more than the full year budget for the US Department of the Interior ($12.8 billion, 2021), which among other things operates the National Weather Service and National Parks System. And on an annual basis, USPS revenue exceeds the budget of the the Department of Education ($66.6 billion, 2021) and is more than triple the budget of NASA ($69.9 billion, 2021).
Not exactly “chump change”! Even a smaller USPS is still a significant business operation, and it is one that both serves and represents our country. As such, it bears asking the question: Is the way the USPS carries out its function aligned with the values and needs of our country? When it comes to climate, the simple answer is the the USPS could do a lot more.
The majority of Americans see climate as a pressing issue. Recent polls indicate that 50 percent of voters believe climate change poses a “critical threat” to the country’s vital interests in the next decade. Another quarter rank climate as important.2 According to a report from the non-partisan Pew Research Center, about 2/3 of Americans believe that the federal government should be doing more to address the issue. And among a variety of policy proposals almost three-quarters (73%) support taxing corporations based on carbon emissions.3
Weather events confirm almost daily the need to address climate risk. The 2021 heat wave in the Pacific Northwest has already claimed hundreds of lives, and direct and indirect economic costs are likely to range into the hundreds of millions of dollars. “Once in a hundred year” events seem to be occurring every year.
The situation is simple: extreme weather is extremely costly.
In its day-to-day operations, is the USPS aligned? In some respects, the Postal Service has taken some modest positive steps. For example, USPS recycles oil used in delivery jeeps. It facilitates recycling by USPS customers. It has implemented bicycle delivery routes and purchased some alternative fuel vehicles. It has piloted some solar projects. It has also established the USPS BlueEarth Product Carbon Accounting service. The service provides large commercial customers a customized statement of carbon emissions associated with the customer’s mailings, which can help customers track progress toward carbon neutrality.
These actions are laudable, but in many respects, fall short of more ambitious goals. As a large business operated by the US government on behalf of the American public, the USPS should be a leader on issues like sustainability and mitigating climate risk. The simple fact is that the USPS could and should be doing much more.
One very specific step that would have an outsize impact: Introduce incentives through tiered postal rates for commercial business mail that uses carbon neutral, 100% recycled paper or wood paper alternatives and other environmentally sustainable products. In other words, offer tiered postage rates that take account of the sustainability (or lack of it) in the materials being shipped.
The USPS can easily leverage the work of organizations that provide certification for such products. Not only would companies respond to the economic signal, but as a US government business, the USPS would also set a new standard for other domestic and global mail and logistics companies.
As more companies use these “alternative” products, new supply chains will develop, and cost premiums for such products would diminish. Driven by the business use case of large commercial mail clients, the availability of truly sustainable mail materials will increase for retail USPS clients – individuals, community organizations, and small businesses.
To facilitate the change, the new policy could be phased in with plenty of advance notice. And at the start, it could apply to only the largest, commercial mail clients. Over time, the sustainability-based postage rates could extend to additional companies. In regard to enforcement, the USPS could rely on a simple system of company certification and recipient feedback. Mail receiving a tiered shipping rate could be marked, perhaps with a colored leaf. Getting mail that seems not to be in compliance with the leaf mark? A recipient could call the USPS, and if the mailer was found to be “cheating,” a fine could be issued.
Getting to carbon neutral is going to take vision and the capacity to imagine new, better ways of doing business. Tiered sustainability-based postage rates represent a positive step forward.
Common sense? Perhaps, but there can be an enormous chasm between what seems like embarrassingly easy policy and legislative action. In fact, the idea of tiered postal rates is not new. It was actually suggested a generation ago.4
The Postal Rate Commission undertook a feasibility study of implementing incentives to mailers who used recycled paper. Members of Congress took some interest during oversight hearings. In its written response to questions put by members of the congressional oversight committee, the head of the Postal Rate Commission testified.
Question 4: What is the status of your inquiry into the feasibility of creating a class of mail for mailers who utilize recycled paper?
Answer: The Commission’s inquiry into the feasibility of rate incentives for mailers who use recycled paper was established as Docket No SS93-2 Recycled Mail Incentives and noticed in the December 29 1992 issue of the Federal Register [57 FR 61936]. The notice which also posed a series of questions for discussion invited comments from interested parties by May 1 1993. As of April 15 1993 the Commission has received 37 comments. Of these submissions, about half are from persons or organizations with ties to envelope manufacturing or the paper industry; the remainder generally are from environmental interests consumer groups, local government entities, and interested individuals. At the close of the public comment period, the Commission will review all submissions in the broader context of the inquiry that has been requested.5
There was strong opposition from businesses that saw the proposal as a punitive tax. The proposal went nowhere.
Many expressed versions of the idea that, “if the public values using recycled paper, mailers will respond and do so without the need for any government involvement.” The following is one such example.
Question 2: The Rate Commission is presently conducting a study on the feasibility of creating a class of mail for mailers who utilize recycled paper. Would you support this separate class of mail?
Answer: I would not favor the creation by the Postal Rate Commission of a separate class of mail for mailers utilizing recycled paper. That would violate the current statutory ratemaking scheme. I would oppose legislation authorizing the creation of such a class because it would involve an unprecedented interference by the Congress in the business affairs of a selected group of businesses that is mailers. All kinds of businesses utilize paper in the operations of their business and would not be effectively taxed by the federal government for their failure to use recycled paper. We see no justification for singling out mailers among all of the business community for such a punitive measure. On the other hand as the American people become more sensitive to the social value of the utilization of recycled paper and express that sentiment in their consumer choices it can be expected that mailers as well as other businesses will find that it is good business to utilize recycled paper. Reforms in business behavior of this kind should be generated by the marketplace and not by governmental interference.6
While markets can be important drivers of activity, including socially beneficial outcomes, there are myriad ways that markets may break down. Trained economists know this. But it doesn’t take a degree. We all know this to be true from day-to-day experience.
The last 30 years have demonstrated that the “leave-it-to-the-markets” approach is not resulting in positive change. This is not because there isn’t public interest in sustainability or mitigating climate change. Nor is it because mail recipients and the American public would not prefer mail to be sustainably sourced and fully recyclable. So clearly there is a disconnect.
In this case, perhaps the best explanation for why there has not been a market-generated increase in use of recyclable commercial mail is that the connection between mail recipients and others who value sustainability and senders of such mail is simply too attenuated. It is exactly in these sorts of cases that government action — which is effectively, collective public action — is both warranted and appropriate.
A punitive tax? Hardly. There is no reason that non-sustainable business practices should be subsidized by the public through the USPS. Those who do not use sustainably sourced and fully recyclable mailing materials are creating a variety of additional costs that we collectively must bear. Moreover, there is no requirement that anyone mail anything through the USPS. If individual entities find a tiered postal rate structure unacceptable, a variety of alternatives are available. Protests against policies that are environmentally conscious and sustainability focused on the grounds that they are punitive taxes ultimately are red herrings. We must move beyond this way of thinking to achieve a sustainable 21st century economy.
To be sure, tiered postal rates for using recycled paper and other sustainable practices is not typically strong click-bait. It’s not the kind of thing that generates headlines and lots of media attention. But it is exactly the sort of action that can have meaningful impact, particularly because of the “ripple effects” that implementing the policy could have.
© 2021. Greening Our Mail is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
Sources:
1 See https://about.usps.com/news/delivers-facts/usps-delivers-the-facts.pdf.
2 See, e.g., https://morningconsult.com/2021/04/27/paris-agreement-climate-change-threat-poll/.
3 See https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/.
4 See Oversight Hearings on the U.S. Postal Service–1993: Hearings Before the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, First Session, March 25, 30; April 20, 27; June 8, 1993.
5 See id., at 52.
6 See id., at 144-145.
Cut down the clutter…
… and support sustainability at the same time!
Another catalog from them? But they just sent us one! Baby clothes? That won’t fit my teens! How did we get on that mailing list? What am I going to do with these paper coupons? The closest one of these stores is miles from here. What a waste!
If these or similar thoughts are a familiar part of getting your mail, know that you are not alone! Most of us get plenty of mailings, catalogs, and solicitations that head straight from the mailbox to the recycling bin. Recycling is good. But, when it comes to sustainability, it’s far better not to get things we don’t want or need in the first place. Sadly, a lot of the mail we receive is a case in point. The aggregate environmental cost of “junk mail” –the energy, materials, and other resources necessary to produce and distribute it – is not trivial.
Reducing junk mail, unwanted catalogs, and duplicative mailings is easier than you may think. Very simply, you can opt yourself off bulk mailing lists. Catalog Choice and Bay Area Recycling Outreach Coalition are two great resources to help you get started.
A few minutes can save a lot.
© 2021. Cut down the clutter is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
Keeping Walks and Drives Safe – Sustainably
In northern climates, winter brings snow and ice leading to slippery surfaces. Keeping entries, walks, driveways and other surfaces safe is an imperative. Because it lowers the freezing point of water, table or rock salt (sodium chloride) is often a tool of choice. What many do not realize is that the use of salt causes significant damage to local environments. And many are not aware that there are safer, readily available alternatives.
Using rock salt can damage the local environment and, as it washes away with the snow melt, ecosystems far away. Rock salt may also damage stone and concrete, so switching to a more sustainable alternative may also reduce maintenance costs and save money over time.
Harms of Sodium Chloride
- Harms grasses, trees, and plants by causing a water imbalance in plant roots.
- Kills soil bacteria.
- Damages soil structure.
- Upsets the existing, natural pH balance.
- Because chloride ions do not evaporate, eliminating them from an ecosystem once introduced is difficult.
Sustainable, Safe Alternatives to Salt
| Advantages | Availability | |
| Calcium Chloride | Less impact on nearby plant life Less damage to concrete and structures | Local shops |
| Sand | Practically no impact on local or distant ecosystems | Local Shops / home recycling |
| Kitty Litter (natural) | Biodegradable; little to no negative impact on local ecosystems | Local shops |
| Coffee Grounds | Biodegradable; little to no negative impact on local ecosystems | Home recycling |
© 2021. Keeping Walks and Drives Safe is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
Sustaining Progress Toward Sustainability
The usefulness of positive self-talk and a “journey mentality” in the face of the climate challenge.
Athletes and sports psychologists know the power of positive self-talk, the inner monologue a competitor can use to maintain optimism, enhance performance, and keep going, even in the face of fatigue, physical limits, or other challenges. The benefits of positive self-talk, of course, are not limited to athletics. Whenever we face a personal challenge, positive self-talk can a great tool to keep us focused on the progress we are making.
But what about challenge of sustainability? The problem is much bigger than any one individual. Making meaningful progress depends on the action of many. Knowing this naturally can lead to questions and doubt. And then perhaps despair, a sense of powerlessness, and giving up. Here, too, positive self-talk can help.
But how exactly? What can we tell ourselves about a challenge – a crisis – that is undeniably massive and which will require much more to resolve than any one person – even any one nation – can do alone?
Ultimately, positive self-talk is about maintaining a positive mentality, a perspective that individual action does matter and can make a difference. That idea is at the core of what Yaroki is all about. How can we do that with a challenge as big and daunting as the global environment? One way is to use positive self-talk to transform our own mentality form an object orientation to a process orientation.
The idea is simple. Rather than seek to focus on the ultimate end state, focus instead on the journey we are on to get there. This mode of thinking is incredibly empowering. Instead of feeling individually unimportant in the face of what can seem a problem too-big-to-solve, we can feel individually indispensable to contributing what we can to the collective, ongoing process of change that is the necessary driver of meaningful progress.
Adopting a “journey mentality” can liberate each us from feeling inadequate or “bad” simply because we individually cannot solve the whole problem ourselves or take every possible action. It can help us begin down a path of positive action that develops and grows over time. (Yaroki itself proves that it’s often getting started on a project that is the hardest step.)
The journey mentality enables each of us to choose a starting point, an individual action that is positive for the greater world. And it enables each of us to appreciate each step we take as a measure of progress. Collectively, those small steps add up to significant, positive impact.
Those small steps matter. Using positive self-talk to remind ourselves of that and see the path forward as a true journey can help each of us move beyond the barriers of doubt and despair. As such, positive self-talk and a journey mentality are potent tools.
© 2021. Sustaining Progress Toward Sustainability is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
January 20, 2021
With the new day comes new strength and new thoughts.
Elenor Roosevelt
Together, we can make the future greener and more sustainable. Let’s get to work.
© 2021. January 20, 2021 is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
Local Action on Climate
Independent of national headlines, public awareness is growing about the need to address climate change. Some local communities are putting forward ambitious plans. Montgomery County in Maryland is one.
The County has recently released a Draft Climate Action Plan (DCAP). The DCAP is ambitious in scope and timing. As described in the County’s press release, the DCAP covers buildings, clean energy, transportation, carbon sequestration, adaptation, governance issues, as well as public outreach and education.
The Climate Action Plan is Montgomery County’s strategic plan to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2027 and 100% by 2035. The Climate Action Plan details the effects of a changing climate on Montgomery County and includes strategies to reduce GHG emissions and climate-related risks to the County’s residents, businesses, and the built and natural environment. After receiving community input on the Draft Climate Action Plan, the County plans to finalize the Plan in Spring 2021.
The DCAP is long and includes several appendices. The Executive Summary provides a useful place to start. You can provide comments here.
© 2021. Local Action on Climate is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.
(Soft) Launch
Yaroki’s soft launch is today. With so much in our world that needs to be done, it can feel overwhelming. With that in mind, it seemed time to get started.
The idea is simple: An online effort to build capacity for individual action to advance sustainability.
Notwithstanding the simplicity, the idea lay dormant for a time. Newton observed the power of inertia. Maybe ideas are not so different from objects. They tend to stay at rest until an outside force gets them going. In the case of Yaroki, it was the coming together of two such forces: First, a growing sense of urgency about the threats facing our planet Earth – our home. Second, a realization and strong sense of empowerment that individual voices and individual action are the critical ingredients to meeting that challenge.
There was a clear need for a fresh, bottom-up approach. Powerful forces, it seemed, were debasing our autonomy and weakening our power to act just as we most needed to join together in common cause. Commercialized social media and click-bait “journalism” were not only polarizing us, but also obscuring and misrepresenting basic truths. Truths about the threats humanity faces, truths about where we are and what can still be done, and most important, truths about our power as individual human beings who share a basic responsibility to each other and to those who follow.
Of course, there are many environmental advocates, many excellent organizations already doing fantastic work. But, part of the idea motivating Yaroki is a sincere belief that, at the end of the day, real progress will not come as a result of a few people making rules for a large number of other people to follow, but rather raising a collective consciousness about and commitment to create a sustainable world.
So it is with both urgency and empowerment, humility in the face of the challenge and optimism that we can yet build a sustainable future that Yaroki begins.
Yaroki looks forward to your feedback and input as we continue to fine tune and grow.
© 2021. (Soft) Launch is an original post from Yaroki, and may not be copied on other sites.