"Seal the Deal" - 86 days to Copenhagen Climate Conference

Copenhagen Climate Conference

Formally known as COP15, the Copenhagen Conference (December 7-18, 2009) must unite the world on emissions reduction post-2012.

Arguably, this will be one of the most important world conferences ever to be held. But, no deal is guaranteed.

Something can and must be done at every level.

For us, as individuals, please sign the UN petition "Seal the Deal"

It's quick and the UN won't spam you.

Next, check on your local government. Santa Cruz (city and country) are members of ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability).

In preparation for Copenhagen ICLEI has world-wide City Climate Catalog (background info)

Here is Santa Cruz's entry in ICLEI

Here is Entire city catalog (your city listed?)
More information about California.

More about Santa Cruz, more about Santa Cruz County

Thanks to Ross Clark, city of Santa Cruz Climate Coordinator, who the also provided information below.
==

Santa Cruz (City of Santa Cruz) California, USA City

Inhabitants (2000): 54.593 Territory size: 40 km2

Baseline year used: 1996

Targets: Water savings target: 282 million gallons per year by 2010 (community)

30% reduction below 1996 by 2020
80% reduction below 1996 by 2050
All new buildings zero net energy by 2030

Steps implemented:

Conducted a GHG emissions inventory Yes (1996, 2000,2005,2008)
Adopted an emissions reduction target(s) Yes
Developed a Local Action Plan In progress
Implemented policies and measures In progress (many implemented)
Monitored and verified results Monitoring in progress.


Community wide results to date:

Staff of Life & Parking, Smoking Ban

Staff of Life & Parking
===

The same is true of New Leaf (westside), the new Safeway (westside) and now Staff of Life (east side):  building more parking.  (The 2 new Whole Foods  used strip malls, already with too much parking.)

One of the recommendations from Santa Cruz Master Transportation Study (2003?) was to reduce parking on new development, from current 3.3 spaces (per 1000 sq ft of retail) to 2.75 spaces.   According to recent Sentinel article, the new Staff of Life will have 150 spaces (21,000 sq ft), which is 7 spaces per 1000 sq ft.  Moreover the Staff of Life is on several bus lines.

Not trying to pick on Staff of Life, a local store known for good service and reasonable wise policies (although they did do away with the excellent and slightly eccentric vegetarian restaurant in about 2000).

Safeway boasts its new westside location has adequate public transportation:  did anyone check?   And, I couldn't even find the entrance to the westside New Leaf because all  the entrances are in the parking lot.  I showed up at intersection on foot - no entrance.

But where is the City leadership?  Where is the will to emphasis alternative transportation over the automobile?  Friendly communities over sprawl?  To follow the recommendations the City paid half a million for?


Santa Cruz Bans Smoking
===

What took so long?  After all, the American Lung Association gave us a rating of 'D'.
And if the issue is really health why not ban smoking in all interior places?

To those who live here, we know the probably reason is related to situation on Pacific Street, where there is abundant pan-handling, perhaps some drugs and an increasing uncomfortable situation for many.

Like all the other ordinances to combat this, let see how the smoking ban is enforced.


Full article in Sentinel:
Staff of Life

Smoking Ban

(Sub)Urban Homesteading and Sustainable Living Group

I arrived late to this meetup (sub)urban homesteading and sustainable living but found a delightful conversation about sustainability, world population, influence of our free-market system in controlling the discussion and what we can do. (shorter showers isn’t the answer). Most of the 10 or so attending were optimistic (or hopeful) about the future rather than fearful. Skip did an excellent job. Good Santa Cruz group.

But what is the next step?

Sustainability at UCSC

Aurora Winslate, UCSC sustainability coordinator, gave a good talk last night at UCSC Summer Sustainability Lecture series and discussed some of the challenges and rewards of trying to shift the behavior of a large organization, such as UCSC.

Ms. Winslate's profession - sustainability coordinator - is a new one with with only 500-1000 in the US. But it is growing quickly!

To change an organization is a bit harder than even changing one's personal habits, like shorter showers. Different departments, with different purposes, budgets and internal 'culture', need to work together differently. It isn't enough to design a green building; they must also be maintained (different budgets and people). Academics and operations don't always work closely. Purchasing can be very different, new contracts, RFPs, expectations, etc.

Some administrators 'get it' and some don't (haven't we done enough?) and some are caught in the bureacracy (we have to change contracts, but I don't have the staff, it isn't in my job description yet). Ms. Winslate seems to have the patience and political savvy to go for the "low-lying fruit" (change the paper, more composting, a lot has been with dining halls) and she reports that in many cases employees become enthusiastic about finding more opportunities to make changes.

Of course, many of the projects she described also lower costs, something every administrator these days listens to. Students are also eager to get involved and apply problem-solving skills to real problems in their world, a possible shift in American education. (And students in this decade appear especially eager to be involved because of deep disallusionment with the last president.)

Ms. Winslate seemed to doing well and there are plans to rank different schools for sustainability, which we all hope UCSC will do well.

The empowerment of lower level employees pleased me but something kept bothering me. What happens when we run out of 'low lying fruit', and change starts to cost money? Or, change becomes a little less convenient? Or, my favorite topic and may god forbid it, private automobilies and the revenue from parking fees must go away?

And I was troubled too by "beefless days" in the dining hall. Nothing wrong with that. I grew up in a Catholic community and Friday's everyone had to eat fish. That's an old idea, but still a good one. But in the past decades we've had other reasons to not eat meat: the animals, for health reasons. But guess those haven't reached the dining halls yet. If sustainability kicks us out of the meat habit, then it's great. But somehow I am not convinced this is enough, or it will last or it will scale up.

With smoking, once the cultural norm everywhere, our society somehow, someway changed despite intense resistance from a wealthy industry. It wasn't cool anymore (well, except on Pacific Avenue). Will sustainability become 'cool' .... do we have time?


August 18 - Agroecology & Sustainable Farming
August 25 - Sustainable Transportation