In a recent Wall Street Journal article entitled ‘Wind Jammers," the Journal manages to take both sides of the Cape Wind issue, without really taking either, while at the same time firmly sticking their foot into their mouths. If you are not familiar with Cape Wind (or I should say the war over Cape Wind), here is a brief update. A company wants to install a big wind farm off the coast of Cape Cod; they say it will produce 75% of the areas power. It has passed every major environmental and government review process so far. Some very rich opponents of the wind farm claim it will ruin the aesthetic value of the cape (their view), and some fisherman think it might interfere with fishing. If built, it will be America’s first offshore wind farm. Even the Daily Show weighed in on the project. (warning: highly funny)

I have lived in the trenches of this battle for the last four years, and the "war" has been going on for the last 6 years. Getting a large renewable energy project built in the backyard of some of the nation’s richest, and most politically-connected people, is not an easy task. The Wall Street Journal (supposedly one of the nation’s best newspapers) has some interesting, and in my opinion foolish, things to say about the issue.

"But advocates often tout renewable energy not for its economics, but because it’s virtuous. Many of those who are willing to impose the costs of various environmental schemes on other Americans based on "ideals" suddenly have started looking more closely at the tradeoffs when something they hold dear would have to be sacrificed, like a nice view. Wind energy is never going to be anything but a bit player in meeting the world’s energy needs. The Nantucket tempest is useful mainly as a real-world test of whether some of the world’s most privileged liberals wear their ideals all the time, or only when it suits them."

That’s a lot to chew on so lets break it down.

"Renewable energy is only about virtue and not money"

Advocates of renewable energy certainly look at the economic impacts of green energy projects. Wind farms often cost hundreds of millions, even billions of dollars. No investor in their right mind would ever build one if it wasn’t going to make them money. You might say "Aha! But renewable energy gets subsides from the government to make it profitable." I would respond, "So do big oil, gas, and coal companies, even though they are making hundreds of billions of dollars in profits each year (meaning they don’t need the subsides), whereas renewable energy gets far less in subsides, and is still the fasted growing market in the energy sector." When you factor in the massive economic damage that will be caused by continuing to burn fossil fuels (global warming, pollution, destruction of the environment to get them, etc), you will see that coal, oil, and gas are really the options with the large price tag.

"Liberals like renewable energy, and are hypocrites because they don’t want it near their home"

It is true: many progressive people do like renewable energy. It is also true that Ted Kennedy and Robert Kennedy are against the Cape Wind project because they don’t want to have to look at it from their sprawling oceanside mansion. But it is also true that the opponents of Cape Wind have been funded heavily by people with ties to the oil, gas and coal industries, and by many a staunch Republican. The Kennedy opposition to Cape Wind is a shameful example of hypocrisy; Robert Kennedy in particular is a long-time fighter against pollution, and a supporter of renewable energy in the past.

The statement overlooks the heavy opposition from wealthy oil/coal/gas magnates that have also opposed the project. The article didn’t mention that this is yet another example of big carbon trying to keep its strangle hold on the energy market by crushing any and all new comers. Instead, it tried to focus on the hypocrisy of a couple of liberals. Some of the most conservative people think renewable energy is a good idea because it will allow us to become free of Middle East oil, thus allowing us more choices in our foreign policy. In only focusing on what I will readily admit is hypocrisy of a few, it ignores the equally shameful actions of the rest.

So we know that rich Democrats, and rich Republicans, don’t want the project, but what do the majority of the people who live in the area think? A recent study showed that over 80% of Massachusetts residents are in favor of the project, and that 58% of Cape and Islands residents (the people closest to the project) support it. So in both cases, strong majorities of the people who will actually benefit from the project are for it.

"Wind power sucks, and will only ever be a bit player in the industry"

I felt this was the most shocking statement of all in the entire article. For one, the wind industry is growing at record speed worldwide. AWEA, the American Wind Energy Association, puts American wind industry growth at a staggering 27% in 2006, and an estimated 26% growth this year. This rapid growth is expected to continue: this year alone, over 4 billion dollars were invested in just the American wind industry. Similar growth is happening worldwide. For examples of what wind power can do, look to some European countries: Denmark for instance gets 15% of its power from renewable energy. German, Portugal (they are trying for 45% by 2010!), and the other European nations are also getting significat portions of their energy from renewable sources, much of it wind power.

With the specter of global warming on the horizon, the problems that "oil diplomacy" has caused in our relationships with other parts of the world, the diminishing supplies of cheap oil, the pollution caused by burning fossil fuels, and the high cost (money, environmental and regrettably lives) of securing these fuels, renewable energy not only makes sense, but it seems like the only option. Wind alone will not solve our problems, and neither will one wind farm. There is no silver bullet that will solve our climate problems. There is, however, silver buckshot: wind power, combined with solar and other renewable energy technologies, efficiency, and shifting the way we live our lives, can.

So often we are bombarded with messages relating to our purchasing choices. Billions of dollars are spent each year trying to get us to buy the latest this, and the newest that. Lately a new and promising trend has emerged. Driven by customer demand, big companies are now promoting green and sustainable products. We hear a lot about organic, free range, hormone free, etc. So much of what we read and hear is about what products to buy: is this bamboo night stand better than this recycled plastic one? This article is not going to talk about what items you should buy to make your life greener, but rather about the actual act of shopping itself.

There are several green options for making your shopping experience more sustainable, regardless of what you are shopping for.

Lose The Bag:

A lot has been written lately about reusable grocery bags. Canvas or recycled plastic bags that you can use over and over at the grocery store instead of wasting another plastic bag. These are a great idea, and everyone should be using them. Some stores even offer a discount for shoppers who buy their food in them. But why stop there?
In the produce isle you will often find people taking one apple, placing it in a small plastic bag, then grapping a pear and putting it in a different small plastic bag, and then grapping a peach and putting it in a third plastic bag. Honestly, I have no idea why we ever started doing this. It’s not to keep the food clean, that apple you are wrapping in plastic has been handled by a bunch of humans and machines before it got to your cart (and even organic food should be washed thoroughly before you eat it). 

If you can bring a reusable bag for your groceries why not get one for your produce as well?
In fact why stop at grocery shopping; why not bring reusable bags with you to the mall, to the electronics store, etc. Every time you don’t use a plastic bag you will be reducing your oil consumption just a little. The stores won’t mind, you are saving them money. If enough people catch on to this trend hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil would be saved every year.

Lose The Car:

The modern automobile is a marvel of construction. Thousands of pounds of steal, glass and plastic that will go from 0 to 60 in just a couple of seconds. There is however an even more marvelous construction that lives attached to your hips, human legs! Let’s see a car climb a mountain, or pole vault, or for that matter stand on one wheel. The human form has evolved over millions of years to be very good at getting us where we want to go. If you live within a couple miles of a store, why not walk, or bike down to the store instead of driving. This has the added benefit of keeping you in good shape, reducing oil use, lowers your carbon footprint, and promotes community (never know who you might meet on your walk/ride).

Buy Less Stuff:

The billions of dollars spent each year on advertising have one goal. They hope you will like what you see and buy it. They hope you do this a lot. They have been practicing for years, and are getting very good at what they do. The truth however is that most of what we buy, we don’t need, and many times don’t even want. The next time you are contemplating a purchase ask yourself “will this be in a box in my basement in a couple of years?” or “How long will we use this before it breaks?” or “Do I really even need this?” Some things you need, other things you want, and still other things are so called impulse buys, that later leave you puzzled as to why you paid good money for a product you don’t use or want.
Buying less stuff saves you money, reduces the amount of junk in your closest, and also helps to reduce waste going into landfills.

Buy The Good Stuff:

So you have your reusable bag, you biked to the store, you are only going to buy stuff you really want or need, so finally you get to the point where you have to pick between that bamboo night stand and the recycled plastic one. Honestly it is hard to tell which one is the better product. It’s hard to get information about the energy costs of things, about the lifecycle impacts, about the company labor practices. Imagine if you had to do all that research for every item you purchased? It would be a nightmare. There is however a couple of things you can look for.

Packaging:

The less packaging a product has the better. Why wrap something in ten layers of plastic that are 3 times as big as the product itself? Every scrap of packaging is something you paid for but can’t use, and most likely will either wind up in a landfill, or take energy to recycle.
Distance: How far away did that product have to travel to get to you? Organic potatoes from 2000 miles away are not good for the planet. Buy local as much as you can. Try farm stands, and farmers markets. You will be helping keep money in the local economy, and the food tastes better. Frequent local stores that feature local products. More money in the local economy means more people will have the extra cash to visit your business. You will also be reducing the amount of gas it took to ship all of these items thousands of miles to your area.

Recyclable/Reusable:

What are you going to do with this product when you are finished with it? Is this something that you can get years and year of happy use out of? Or is this something that gets used once and thrown away? Strive to purchase things that will stand the test of time. Use them till they can’t be used anymore. But inevitably most of our modern devices wear out quickly. Will you be able to recycle this object? Can it be reused later for something else? Buying durable products will save you money in the long run, and thinking about the end of life for products will help you make better choices.
These are but a few things you can do to make your shopping less about consumerism, and more about sustainable living. Start slow with one change at a time. Can’t wait to see you on the bike path!