I thought about posting something, and then this happened.

And now I pretty much just don’t know what to say.  I mean, a lot of thoughts have crossed my mind since the “Great BP Oil Faucet” turned on at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico (I’ll admit that one of them was “I drink your milkshake“), but generally speaking, about all I can come up with is the following:

Good luck to everyone that’s trying to clean this up, especially to the folks trying to help clean up the animals, and to everyone whose livelihoods are being obliterated by this disaster.  I cannot even imagine.

Oh and good luck to BP … maybe you should start making more solar panels now?  Last time I checked solar panels didn’t destroy entire ecosystems?  Just saying.

On the other hand, when you decide you need to go “real” shopping, you might never really consider Goodwill to be your first choice.  Right?

Well, let me introduce you to the concept of second-hand shopping “for real”, which is to say, going to the second-hand clothing store to buy items that you might wear every day, or at least NOT to a pimp & hooker party.  I realize this isn’t a new concept; vintage stores have been around for a while now and happy hipsters are no stranger to the ironic high school t-shirts from the 70’s.  But shopping at vintage stores has always been an unsatisfying experience for me – unless it’s a really REALLY special piece, I don’t hold the belief that clothing, like houses, appreciate in price over time.  So, NO, I don’t want to pay $80 for that dress that probably cost $15 in 1982.  Nice try though.

All of that changed when I discovered Buffalo Exchange.  Merely coming to the realization that places like Buffalo Exchange exist was a revelation for me.

Image courtesy of Time.com; visit the article here

A quick search around the internet tells me that I might be late to the second-hand clothing party, but then again if it took me so long to figure it out, then I know that there are others who haven’t yet.   Anyway, as per my usual disclaimer, this blogger is not paid to endorse or hawk any particular product or store, but if I find a product or a place that I think fits into a  “greener lifestyle” mantra, then I’m happy to talk about it.   Here’s a few reasons why I enjoy shopping at Buffalo Exchange so much:

1. Their clothes are not so “vintage”. Most of the clothing that seems to show up at the Exchange is from within the past 10 years or so… Sure, there’s some vintage items in there, but it’s actually contemporary stuff.  It’s a bit like having the chance to raid your roommate’s closet except that you are raiding ALL roommate’s closets all at once.
2. The prices are well within reason. Shopping at this second-hand clothing store – which sells both used AND new stuff – will not break your bank.  Most of the clothing I’ve bought has been between $12 – $20, and every once in a while, if you’re lucky, you’ll come across a pair of jeans or a designer piece that was once sold for upward of $200.  It might still cost you $50 at the Exchange, but it beats paying the original marked-up price.  (Back to my housing analogy, I think clothes are much more like cars, in that there is always an initial sticker price that is jacked up for name-brand appeal, and then as soon as you put it on it is worth about half as much.  But I will save my lecture about buying used cars for another post…)
3. Having less choice is sometimes really awesome. So this may not make too much sense, but let me explain.  Sometimes when I walk into a store, and they have an entire section devoted to cute dresses, each in about four or five different colors, I become really overwhelmed.  I am a very careful decision maker and if I like even two or three of those dresses, I could spend an entire evening trying to decide which two I want, and in which colors.  Buffalo Exchange takes that stress away from me.  There’s something almost liberating about going straight to your size section and knowing that what’s there is there, and that unless it’s a new piece sold only at the store, you’re not worrying about which colors to get, because that’s your only choice.  AND, per #2 above, you’re probably going to spend less on it, as well.
4. You can sell your own used clothes there too. It’s very satisfying to know that an outfit you might not be interested in wearing anymore might be very appealing to someone else.  My advice is to purge your closet before going, sell your clothes back to them for store credit, and then reward yourself for recycling by shopping!  They rarely buy all of your clothing but if it’s a unique and well-maintained piece, you’ll probably get something for it.  They also take shoes and bags!

In conclusion, next time you need a new outfit, or next time you start to take that bag of old clothes to Goodwill, try Buffalo Exchange, or another local second-hand store*.  Your wallet will appreciate it, as will the planet, since you’ll be diverting those materials from the waste stream.

*Note:  it’s been my experience that consignment stores are much more complicated than the second-hand stores that I am speaking about… If I remember correctly there are usually membership fees involved, but you should investigate for yourself if a consignment store might be as good – or a better – option.

• Buffalo Exchange   (www.buffaloexchange.com)
• Recently featured in Women’s Day and Lucky magazines
• 14 states nation-wide  (Including two here in Portland!)

Well, that may soon change, at least a little bit.  Enter the HOME STAR Jobs Bill.   HOME STAR provides two paths for consumers to save energy in their homes (from their Web site):

1. The Silver Star prescriptive path provides a near-term incentive for specific energy saving investments that is simple to administer and easily introduced into the existing marketplace. Homeowners receive between $1,000 and $1,500 for each measure installed in the home, or $250 per appliance, with a benefit not exceeding $3,000 or at least 50% of total project costs (whichever is less). Covered measures include air sealing; attic, wall, and crawl space insulation; duct sealing or replacement; and replacement of existing windows and doors, furnaces, air conditioners, heat pumps, water heaters and appliances with high-efficiency models. The legislation will utilize existing standards for qualifying products at a level sufficient to significantly increase consumer demand for highly energy efficient building materials and mechanical systems.  SILVER STAR improvements may be implemented by any appropriately licensed and insured contractor, but all participating contractors will receive information about opportunities for accreditation and training programs.
2. The Gold Star performance path offers an incentive to households that choose to conduct a comprehensive energy audit and then implement a variety of measures that are designed together to provide greater total returns in energy savings. This performance path represents the future of home efficiency: state-of-the-art building science is used to identify problems, present solutions and deliver verifiable energy savings, generating confidence among homeowners and investors alike. This technology-neutral approach is based on performance, not specific products, so market forces will direct funds to solutions that achieve the best results. A certified professional with accreditation from the Building Performance Institute (BPI), the Residential Energy Services Network (RESNET) or an approved equivalent conducts an energy audit before work begins, and a test-out when the performance retrofit is complete. Consumers receive $3,000 for modeled savings of 20%, plus an additional $1,500 incentive for each additional 5% of modeled energy savings, with incentives not to exceed 50% of project costs. Contractors implementing the GOLD STAR performance path must be BPI accredited.

What this means is that, essentially, if this legislation passes, millions of people will very quickly have several options available to them by which they can implement energy-saving measures in their homes by actions as simple as upgrading appliances or by doing an all-out renovation.  The bill primarily hopes to quickly create as many jobs as possible, while providing energy efficiency on a massive scale, which not only will ease the burden on our aging energy infrastructure, it will ultimately reduce carbon emissions.  (Both of which, incidentally, were the goals when I started this Web site.)  Additionally, anyone wishing to implement these measures will have financing options available to them that are guaranteed through the provisions of the bill.

Pretty neat, eh? Now we just need to hope that the legislation gets passed! If you’d like to learn more about HOME STAR, visit their Web site here.  If you’d like to join the coalition supporting it, visit the Efficiency First Web site to sign up and find out how you can contact your legislators to voice your support.  Even if you don’t own your own home or aren’t in a position to change your living situation to make it more efficient, I think we can all agree that adding a couple hundred thousand jobs during a recession to a very depressed construction market is a good idea, and making several million homes more efficient is an even better idea.   So CHECK IT OUT!!!

Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, there are some pretty vocal people who are still working hard AGAINST even the very notion of climate change, mostly because it’s in their own best interests to do so.  The newest issue of Rolling Stone magazine, always a bit of a lightning rod, has a list of the “17 polluters and deniers who are derailing efforts to curb global warming”, within an even bigger piece about the industries working hard to block progress on climate change. What an eye-opener!   I’ve always kind of thought of Warren Buffett as a sort of “benevolent billionaire” who does the right thing with his billions … imagine my surprise to learn that he bought the BNSF railroad because it’s a large hauler of coal!

Anyway, you should read the list, it’s a good one.  And no offense against anglo-saxon caucasian types, but the list consists quite literally of a bunch of older white “gentlemen” and Senator Mary Landrieu (who, frankly, is taking a rather bizarre pro-drilling stance in her home state of Louisiana, which stands to lose possibly the most if the ice melts and the seas rise).  If it weren’t so sad, it would be comical … you can almost throw these guys in costume and put them in any period piece as “the villians” of every Hollywood epic ever made.  The sad part is, they have to know they’re wrong – but they don’t care, because A) they are all too rich to care, and B) their continued wealth depends on them being willfully and purposefully deceptive.  When you consider how much is at stake … well, it would be nice if these people experienced a “rehabilitation” from “climate killer” to “climate buddy”.

Enter Senator John Kerry and Senator Lindsey Graham.  I have always had respect for both of these men, and fortunately I do not think they fall into the category I just mentioned, but they have really stepped up today, with a joint Op-ed in the New York Times about how they can see a path to a bi-partisan compromise on climate change legislation by the end of the year.

WOW.  I mean, here I am writing blog posts about 2015 and how I doubt we’re capable of hitting that target, and these guys step up to my challenge, and the challenge of the international community, and they say, “we can do this.”  I am impressed.  And I am not normally impressed by legislators in the Federal Government.

And I realize that many people think it’s comical, even undeserved, that President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday.  (I, myself, thought it was an Onion article when I first saw the news.)  But whether the President’s political enemies accept it or not, I think this type of collaboration and cooperation is a direct result of the change in tone and requests for responsibility that the President brought to the office with him.  He needs this type of initiative from the lawmakers in the Legislative Branch if he is to go to Copenhagen in December and make a real case for how the U.S. can go from ignoring climate change (under President Bush) to leading the charge on it.

So, here’s the thing: despite my blogging about it, and them writing about it, I don’t see Senator Kerry’s and Senator Graham’s Op-ed getting much attention because the mainstream media (MSM) has way too many scandalous things they can talk about instead.  But I am serious about thanking them, and if you think they had some good things to say, you can thank them too.  See here:

Click here to email Senator John Kerry and thank him for his initiative on climate change legislation.

Click here to email Senator Lindsey Graham and thank him for his initiative on climate change legislation.

…And when it comes time to get the job done, let’s not let the Senators forget what they said in this Op-ed!

First the definition:  Dictionary.com says that weatherization is the process of making (a house or other building) “secure against cold or stormy weather, as by adding insulation, siding, and storm windows.” All right!  That’s a good starting point.  But perhaps we should expand this definition to include all types of small gestures in and around homes or other buildings that makes them “weather tight” and more energy efficient.  To me, weatherization could include something as simple as putting plastic wrap over drafty windows during the winter, or something as intensive as tearing out old insulation and putting new insulation in your walls.

So how do people achieve these results?  Where do they start?  Well, as usual the Department of Energy seems to be one step ahead.  Behold the U.S. DoE Weatherization Assistance Program, which “enables low-income families to permanently reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient.”  And, just in case you’re wondering why ALL families don’t get this kind of assistance, check out the DoE’s reasoning:

“By reducing the energy bills of low-income families instead of offering aid, weatherization reduces dependency and liberates these funds for spending on more pressing family issues. On average, weatherization reduces heating bills by 32% and overall energy bills by about $350 per year at current prices. This spending, in turn, spurs low-income communities toward job growth and economic development.”

I think growth and economic development is a concept that we can all get behind.  So let’s hear it for weatherization!

Image courtesy of the Washington Post

So what do we have to do to get Americans to care about climate change?  Sadly it took a giant hurricane and the near total destruction of a beloved American city during Hurricane Katrina to get the country to wake up; the following year, An Inconvenient Truth came out on the heels of the environmental disaster in New Orleans, and people did start to kick it into gear.  But here we are, three years later, essentially in the same spot.  Between the presidential election, the housing bubble bursting, and the economy collapsing, we are a country with a lot on our plate.  So it’s understandable that we may have lost focus, and are tempted to dilute things like the Energy Bill that’s currently making its way through Congress.  But, although the economy may bounce back without changes in environmental policy, the environment CAN’T bounce back if we don’t try harder to fix it.  And climate change may only get worse.  The scary part is that we really don’t know.  But not caring is not helpful.

View Larger Map

Included in the map are instances where the General Services Administration (the GSA) is using allocated funds to affect 250 buildings, with an emphasis on converting them into “high performance green buildings,” under one of the following categories:

• New construction, including Land Ports of Entry
• Full and partial building modernization
• Limited scope projects
• Small Projects

So, the good news is, the stimulus IS stimulating and the funds are going towards green building projects.  If anyone has any suggestions on how to get involved in working on those green building projects, aka, for a salary, please let us know!

Also, Secretary Chu gives Jon Stewart a t-shirt that I simply must have. You’ll see.

• Many employers provide health insurance options to their employees.  Great, but what about the millions of us who are unemployed or whose workplaces do not offer this option?  Nobody is required to provide health insurance to those of us who have been laid off or who can’t find post-graduation jobs in this ridiculous recession.  And sure, if we are independently wealthy we can buy Cobra or some other type of interim health insurance… for what, $600 a month?  Just “in case” we need to see a doctor?  This is more than one month’s rent in many places.  And it’s completely mental.
• Most other developed countries, including all of Europe and our friends to the north in Canada, have what is called a “single payer” health care system.  Which is to say the government runs it, doctors are government employees, it’s free to every citizen of that country, and it’s paid for with their tax dollars.  So, if they have a health situation, they go to the doctor, they are treated, and they don’t have to pay a dime.  And yes, in some countries this means that for non-life threatening surgeries, there is a long waiting period.  But it still doesn’t cost them anything!
• More is spent on health care in the United States on a per capita basis than in any other nation in the world.  The prices paid for health care services are much higher in the U.S. but it is the leader in medical innovation, with three times higher per-capita spending than Europe and producing more new pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and affiliated biotechnology than any other country.  The U.S. also has higher survival rates than most other countries for certain conditions, such as some less common cancers, but has a higher infant mortality rate than all other developed countries.  The U.S. is also 46th for highest total life expectancy (courtesy of Wikipedia) and has the highest obesity rate in the world, with 64% of adults being overweight or obese.

Needless to say there are a lot of things to consider when trying to figure out a better health care system!  But, since we always like to think about “green things” here, what is the environmental impact of having poor health care? Or maybe a better question is, how do we improve our situation by having a better health care system?  Remarkably there doesn’t seem to be a lot written about this in the public sphere but I did find an article entitled Green Medicine: Environmental Impact of Health Care in a Canadian medical journal by a Kathy S. Worton, MD, and the article is not so scary with medical jargon that it can’t be read by normal people.  Incidentally, one of the biggest impacts that I think a preventative health care system based on wellness could have on our country, as opposed to a reactionary system based on sickness (which is what we currently have), is a reduced overall obesity rates.  Which, theoretically, would cause less strain on farming and food production.  But, as I have not done a full-scale study on this, I can only speculate!

Whatever your opinion on the health care debate, I think there is no doubt that the system we have here in the U.S. needs to be fixed.  Exactly HOW we fix it remains to be seen but here at the GDC we can only hope that it means less environmental impact in the long term!