On our great quest for ways to stop global warming, the question of carbon credits arises frequently. Now, there is an opportunity to achieve carbon credits as we engage in cell phone recycling. Who could argue with that, right? Certainly not I! Before we strike at the heart of the matter, though, we should begin with a refresher on my carbon credit definition.

Simply put, a carbon credit is a glorified accounting maneuver in which greenhouse gas emissions which are not supposed to be allowed at a particular location or in a specific region are permitted because emissions which permissibly would occur elsewhere do not happen. If one lives in the fallout zone of those emissions, such a person’s disfavor with the arrangement would be understandable. Measured on a planetary scale, though, a carbon credit can be an important interim point along the journey for a clean future.

Measured against inflation, the price of consumer electronics and information technology hardware has fallen precipitously over the last ten years. In fact, I remember when a decent large-screen television cost 3 months’ salary. Since I am a movie buff, the fact that I can watch a pristine DVD reproduction of my favorite filmed entertainment on a screen which fills my family room all for under $1,000 is exciting to say the least.

The down side, and it’s a big one, is that our move to high-definition, cutting-edge technology means that we will cast off (literally) tons of old equipment which has to go somewhere. Unlike some other types of trash, dumping or incinerating electronic waste should not be done because of toxic side effects such as dioxin. Land pollution facts tell us that burning hazardous waste can leave entire regions contaminated and uninhabitable for decades or centuries.

Where does that leave us? Since I am an environmentalist, it should come as no surprise that I advocate recycling electronic waste. However, that’s not always a practical option for folks. The good news is that government entities have begun to partner with manufacturers to provide collection points. An example of such collaborations is the Plug-In To eCycling initiative from the Environmental Protection Agency.

You can read more at

In some parts of the world, the Christmas season only now is in full swing. At Chez Kroehler, the gifts under the sustainable Christmas tree were unwrapped before Catrin and I were tucked snug in our bed on Christmas Eve and the decorations all were stowed before we opened the egg nog on December 31st.

I wish to begin the new year with an examination of a very important issue and statement of my formal position on the topic of working forests and sustainable commercial forestry. There is no lack of controversy on these marks but achieving consensus is vital if we are to embrace the full panoply of ways to stop global warming with the zeal they deserve.

One firm intimately involved in commercial forestry is Weyerhaeuser. I will make few friends in the inner circle of the environmental community by stating this but Weyerhaeuser must be treated as an ally if we are to progress toward a truly sustainable and environmentally just future. Indeed, Weyerhaeuser reforestation projects are the first aspect of the larger issue of working forests which I would like to engage.

Before I do so, however, I ask that you indulge me in a brief, interrogatory digression:

Was your 2007 Christmas tree paper or plastic?

In my previous post, I assigned a brief online quiz about forestry. Did you take it?

If not, here is the URL once again:

http://www.abundantforests.org/eiq_quiz.html

The first of seven lessons taught by this important online tool is that natural Christmas trees are replaced with saplings when they are harvested. Oftentimes, this is the case. Why is it, then, that pictures of reforestation projects seldom include Christmas trees? How should the answer affect one's decision to buy a natural or plastic tree next Christmas?

If you plan to purchase an artificial tree and store it for repeated use for at least ten years, the environmental impact works out about the same when compared with a natural tree harvested from a sustainable forest which is recycled (made into mulch and other forest products) when you are done with it.

If you purchased a real tree this holiday season and haven't discarded it yet, consider recycling it.

For a list of treecycling services in the United States, visit

Huh? Corbett is off his rocker! He took us from extensive coverage of Christmas trees to desert flowers!

I don’t blame you for questioning my judgment. However, there is a vital core theme here (and method to my madness). As we cover reforestation in great detail in the new year, it is imperative that we understand the central and multiple roles which trees play. So, let’s begin with the general and work toward the specific. The Christmas tree theme was intended in part to prompt you to think about coniferous forest animals, thus allowing me to make a sharp u-turn for a moment.

Here we go.

Everything about healthy stands of trees is about symbiosis, the productive interaction between living things. Hence, even though we think of deserts as barren, lifeless voids, they are, in fact, very much alive. Given the great lack of rainfall in deserts, plants and animals must depend on each other for their very existence.

So, as we explore symbiotic relationships in desert species, we can point to the fact that large animals soften the hard soil with their hoofs, thus providing habitat for smaller creatures. Likewise, air plants which take moisture directly from the air, like the pineapple, offer food even though there may be no rain for months. In short, in the desert, it’s all for one and one for all.

One of the lessons of the E-IQ quiz which I assigned last week is that America’s forests are larger than in recent years. In all candor, that fact is in dispute. What is not in dispute, however, is that the commercial forestry industry does a far better job today of replanting than in any recent decades. Why? Part of the reason is that the general public has demanded the industry’s support in reversing air pollution and causes of global warming.

In the undated photo above, we see that the air between the forest and the snowy mountaintops is fairly clean. Sadly, such is not the case everywhere and while I concur that the forest products industry has cleaned up its act in the United States to a measurable extent, other places around the world continue to suffer from clear cutting and widespread deforestation at historic rates. Humanity must look past territorial boundaries and engage in wide reforestation efforts.

Last year, I wrote about how Florida’s Showcase Green Envirohome was born of family tragedy and natural disaster to become the world’s greenest and most hurricane-resistant home. Parts of that series were syndicated throughout the blogosphere because of the human tale it tells. In no way do I wish to grandstand on profound loss but human history is chock full of examples of how people turned lemons into lemonade and charted a new course for the future.

Right now, as you read this, residents of California are doing just that. So, even as the toll from recent forest fires there is tallied, it is time to spend at least part of the time pondering the ecological response. We need to rebuild businesses and homes which were destroyed, as well as many lives, but also restore the area’s natural beauty. So, I advocate that California forest fire updates henceforth take into account reforestation efforts whenever possible.

One organization with a proven track record of replanting fire-damaged areas is American Forests. The folks there are the real deal. That’s why Jim Griffin, the man with whom I created the Green Earth Expo, selected American Forests as the organization to plant trees from Expo proceeds to help offset the week-long event’s carbon footprint.

Green sustainable modular buildings can offer advantages over conventional construction through economies of scale and waste stream reduction because entire sections are prefabricated. The building industry is to be commended for its accomplishments in this regard. When designing Florida’s Showcase Green Envirohome, though, Nonnie Chrystal sought to do more. She wanted the world’s greenest home which also was as resistant to hurricanes as any above-ground structure could be.

In achieving her goal, Nonnie employed a whole host of innovative technologies in order to make it happen. Last month, I brought Nonnie and her husband Mark to the offices of Global Green Alliance in Orlando to record a video series on the subject. The results of that video shoot now are live.

I have created a playlist of 10 segments on Florida’s Showcase Green Envirohome and you are more than welcome to watch the whole thing at

The concept of a Clean Air Act impact on oriented strand board industry practices and profits may seem far-fetched but I ask that you bear with me. There is a crucial point here.

In the video series which I shot with Nonnie Chrystal regarding Florida’s Showcase Green Envirohome, Nonnie gives several explanations about wood-frame construction and why she avoided it for her amazing project. One of the reasons stems from drawbacks of oriented strand board, such as particle board, which can be highly flammable and/or emit toxic gases which become a grave health concern during periods of long confinement.

Nonnie’s solution comprises multiple technologies which are explained in the video series and my favorite is Armoroc. Not only does it contribute tremendously to the home’s superb resistance to hurricanes but the ingredients used in the manufacturing of Armoroc can be assembled cleaner than with conventional materials. It’s a win-win!

Last week, I told you about the need to shift some of our attention toward reforestation projects in California now that recovery from the devastating series of brush, forest and wild fires has begun. This moment also presents an excellent opportunity to explore the practicality of green building vs. traditional building in California and elsewhere.

The conversations I have had with builders and people engaged in the green building movement have led to a single answer to the question of practicality: done wisely, the price differential of green building vs. traditional building need be only about 10%. Of course, that statistic only indicates raw construction cost and in no way reflects the immediate savings in energy expenses which will result as soon as occupancy begins.

If the difference in cost of green building vs. traditional building is so narrow, why has it not become more prevalent? The reasons are varied. Some development companies claim that their customers seldom ask about green building practices and options. In other places, there is a lack of experienced civil engineers who can guide the process of building structures to green standards such as L.E.E.D.

2008 has been an historic year yet it barely has begun. Given that 2007 was the second-warmest year on record, the alignment of environmental and market forces to move us toward a more sustainable future could not be needed more urgently. Green building plans are an excellent way to begin addressing the vast challenges of a changing climate and in recent weeks they received a warm embrace from factions within California’s construction industry.

In the United States, energy for buildings (cooling, electricity, heating, etc.) accounts for 40% of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions. Of that, homes are a significant contributor. Anything we can do to reduce those numbers can produce a dramatic and immediate benefit. However, until this month, collaborations between builders, real estate managers and environmentalists were rare to say the least.

In short, environmental considerations and practices were determined in corporate board rooms and environmentalists seldom were offered a seat at the table. Fortunately, the situation has begun to change and California has taken up a leadership role, especially in the northern region.

What changed? How have we progressed to having not just a genuine dialog between opposing camps but collaboration and alliances? The simple fact is that some of the opponents to California’s green building plan realized that there are green backs to be made in green building and switched sides of the argument.

I’d like to remain with the California theme which I have embraced this month and give you a bit of follow-up coverage at the same time. Electronic waste is a serious problem and one which must be tackled by the business community and government in tandem. I recently shared with you a handy website maintained by the Environmental Protection Agency for recycling of electronic waste through the Plug-In To eCycling program. The URL is:

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/plugin/partners.htm

Apple is not one of the companies listed. I found that surprising since it has a comprehensive program for recycling electronic waste as part of its larger environmental efforts. For that, Steve Jobs is to be commended, although there is almost always room to do more.

One example is in the design phase. At the risk of allowing this thread to become a commercial advertisement (I do not own Apple products), I would like to turn your attention to the recent announcement by Steve Jobs of the new MacBook Air.

Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a biome as “A major ecological community type (as tropical rain forest, grassland, or desert).” That definition is good but omits a key implied detail: “under the climatic conditions of the region.” I am no lexicographer so I will not argue with the esteemed authors of that dictionary but my point is important.

As we acquire a greater understanding of the impacts on wildlife of commercial forestry and reforestation projects which seek to mitigate the effects, we must take into account scientific research in unspoiled areas. Simply put, some animal species have generational memories which span decades and can be lost easily.