The numbers on flying are jaw-dropping. This underpins the urgency for the US to develop a nationwide high-speed-rail network.

8 should be vegan not vegetarian - dairy cows are SUPER POLLUTERS. it should also be #1!!!

Why dont people want to change the way they eat? There could not be a bigger hipocrite than a non vegan "environmentalist". Ok, maybe 20 years ago it was "hard" but now its easy.

I am tired of all the excuses (protein needs ect are BS), its proven that going vegan is a huge way to stop pollution. There are so many alternative foods these days, try some!!!

Tempeh Bacon
Scheeze - way better than cheese.
Coconut ice cream - Blows doors on Dairy!

Google VEGAN FOOD.

Go vegan for your health and OUR planets!

I agree, Robert. I wish people understood how much better our rail system could be. The one time I rode Amtrak, it wasn't that bad. But I remember how much faster and more comfortable travel by rail was in Europe. I think opponents of rail are basing what they say on one or two or even zero trips in the US with it's outdated infrastructure. And think how many unemployed people could find jobs if we started rebuilding our rail system.

At the moment, I'm not going to go vegan or vegetarian. One of the things that turns me off from going vegan or vegetarian are comments like the ones from Michelledavegan.
I understand going vegan is great for our planet but by making such rude comments won't make me go vegan any faster.
I'm trying to reduce my meat consumption and try meat alternatives. At the same time, I'm a very picky eater.
I might be a hypocrite in your eyes but at least I'm TRYING to do positive things for the earth, rather than not trying at all.
I really suggest you watch the way you talk to people if you're trying to convince them to go vegan. You can win more bees with honey than with vinegar.

Also, rail corridors are an obvious choice for sloar, wind and geothermal sites with a ready-made right-of way for smart grid transmission.

http://theredmullet.blogspot.com/2008/07/multiple-birds-one-silver-bb.html

Im vegan, for years now (even before knowing that its great for the environment), and i would agree with Courtney!

message to michelledavegan:
dont be like PETA (ie, "any publicity is good publicity") The best way to promote veganism is to be respectful of people, and dont judge them by there food choices. Be the role model, not the raging judgmental. In order to further animal welfare we must keep negative attention away from the movement. No one changes there lifestyle after someone gives them heck.
I know it can be frustrating, and at times you may think that chastizing people will speed up the progress... but it wont. It actually puts us further behind.

I support animal "rights", I support the ideas and reasoning that PETA is grounded upon, but I do NOT support PETA in there champagne which makes vegans (such as myself) look like nutcases. I feel that a lot of what PETA does undermines the public support that it needs to actually help the animals in the long run.

It is frustrating to know that my veggie eating and bike commuting are more than canceled out by the fact that I fly a couple of times a year. ARRG!

I've only been off the North American continent once, and I want to see more of the world. My self rationalization is that it is worth some environmental toll in exchange for the cultural learnings/awareness. At least that is what I tell myself.

Oh no, I already do all of these things! I need another list...

Nate,

(You remind me of a Nate I knew in undergrad, strangely enough).

You are 100% correct. The world needs people with international experience as much as it needs "local" thinkers. Whatever the predilections of this blog or other similar sites on the interweb may be, many of the problems facing us today are not local-- they are global. Global thinkers, not people limited to their own regional educations and paradigms, will offer the greatest solutions.

One of my biggest criticisms of the Western "green blogosphere" is how little I see it looking outside of the West.

Offering the oftentimes unique solutions presented in other regions may help us to cut our inefficiencies and better our society as a whole. For better or for worse, that's tied to travel.

So don't fly for no good reason, but do try to see, and learn from, the rest of the world. You'll offer us all a lot more.

It's a good book and he seems to be a good guy. I've read through a couple of his drafts and exchanged a few emails with him, and I like the cut of his jib.

Rgds

Damon

I would argue that going Vegan or Vegetarian is good if you are currently eating as part of the factor farm system. However, the same can not be said about eating locally sustainably produced meat.

I would say that wager to bet that my driving 5 miles to my neighbors farm that does intensive rotational grazing to buy my meat and vegetables. (And that said farm reuses all byproducts from its farming operations). That scheme is better than eating only vegetables, soy products, and wheat gluten flown and drive across continents.

I get kind of tired of the eat vegetarian because it will save the planet argument. That is only true if the only other option is being a part of the industrial agriculture system. If you can, the better thing to do would be to eat local.

Intensive rotational graving has an amazing effect on our environment. We should be encouraging more of this type of farming.
Report 1
Report 2

Those are two good studies on the very large potential up side to intensive rotational grazing.

I was a vegetarian for 15 years and a vegan on and off for part of those years. I started to look at what I was buying to supplement my diet. Things like soy based products which are highly processed and fly/drive thousands of miles to make it to my plate. Any environmental effect of my not eating meat was negated by the miles my food had to travel. I eventually found a local farmer that practiced humane treatment of animals, reuse, sustainable farming practices and I joined their CSA and get my meat from them. Now most of my food comes from a few miles of my house.

"Why dont people want to change the way they eat? There could not be a bigger hipocrite than a non vegan "environmentalist". Ok, maybe 20 years ago it was "hard" but now its easy.
...
I am tired of all the excuses (protein needs ect are BS)"

Hypocrite is a bit strong don't you think? People are trying. Sorry we all can't be such tremendous "environmentalists" as you. If everyone that doesn't live up to your impossible standard is a hypocrite, what word do we use for the real hypocrites? You know, the ones who talk about being energy independent and then go invest in Exxon.

Protein needs are BS? Why? Because you say so? You cannot maintain muscle mass without protein. And you cannot get the high-quality proteins needed to maintain that muscle mass from a vegan diet. Soy doesn't cut it.

The blog entry correctly mentions vegetarian diet as that includes eggs, which are an excellent source of whey protein. You can certainly maintain a healthy level of muscle mass on a vegetarian diet. Vegan, not so much.

Awesome list! Seperate metering and no flying and a little beef...sounds like living in Cuba.

Wait, what's a wooly jumper? Is that a hairy suicidal person? How will they keep me warm? How about a pelt from the dingo...that ate my baby? Cheerio!

My criticisms (positive and negative) of this list are based on my thinking that we should pick the lowest-hanging fruit first, and attempt the largest net marginal gains. In other words, it's more important to have one hundred people do something that yields a gain of 5 units each than to have one or two people do something that yields 30 units each.

1. This makes sense for some, not as much for others. Parents, for example, may not exactly relish the idea of simply putting a wool outfit on a newborn in the winter. It might be more effective for those who have those sorts of concerns to consider space heaters instead of central heating. Net reductions are more important than individual reductions, and it may be the case that a few space heaters will do more than simply lowering thermostats.

2. This is an interesting idea, but probably not the most important-- therefore, it should be lower on the list. Going after low-hanging fruit, not ideological desires, should be the goal. People are busy, and probably don't want to bother with this sort of activity. Lower it, and focus on things with greater potential for returns.

3. This comment is too broad and is unlikely to yield much. Instead, it should be offering prescriptions toward how to offset time spent flying, and how to pick airlines that fly the newest, least polluting birds.

I think you'll yield more reductions in GHG emissions by directing people toward airlines that fly newer designs than by simply saying "don't fly."

I spend a considerable amount of time in Asia. How should I get from NY to Tokyo otherwise?

4. This one is easy enough, and therefore should be much higher on the list.

5. This one strikes me as a bit too simplistic. While I agree with the notion of not constantly replacing gadgets (I had a 3rd gen iPod until this year), I think that it's even MORE important to guide people to green manufacturers. People will buy gadgets, one way or another, and it's very important that people have INFORMATION available to them on who to buy from.

Remember that buying electronics, no matter how rarely, is a tacit form of support for whichever firm you buy from. Buying from companies with poor environmental records is bad no matter how rarely you do it.

Information is lower-hanging fruit than broad suggestions, after all.

6. This should be at the top of the list! Not only is it an area where we could stand to gain a great deal, it's an area where people may change very willingly and quickly! This is the ultimate low-hanging fruit and should be pursued much more aggressively than meter reading...

7. I don't honestly get what "clutter" means. One man's clutter is another man's art. I also think that while it's noble to avoid packaging, it's not happening for a lot of us. Instead, a good way to reduce impact is to encourage recycling and to help people find ways to increase recycling programs.

8. This one is a bit too severe for most of us, and may therefore not yield much. A more realistic prescription would be to show which meats are worst, how often to cut them out, and show how much of a marginal gain can be had with reduced consumption of each meat.

Again, I think these ideas are helpful, but they are also probably not going to be implemented as is. Gradual, marginal gains are more important than having a few of the choir keep down the road. Make this an issue of money savings, and you can rest assured that people will be more interested.