As I explained in a recent posting here, about 40% of the energy used in the United States is for buildings and homes constitute a large portion of that. Since everyone needs a place to live and since one indication of a person’s socioeconomic status is the site of one’s dwelling, the aforementioned statistic should come as little surprise.

If we want to do something about wasted energy, we must approach the problem from every angle, including residential construction, including educating the public, mandating green building standards in new structures and encouraging the application of strict efficiency standards in remodeling projects.

That’s a tall order to fill. Fortunately, there are excellent websites such as www.HomeEnergy.org which provide us with oodles of material. In fact, so much good material can be found there that the site is worthy of use in any living green curriculum for classroom instruction. Likewise, for those of who no longer attend school but wish to go green in a house design or remodeling project, it is a superb place to go.

In the quest to stop global warming, we all need to give a little. In recent posts, I have covered the importance of embracing commercial forestry operations which are sustainable because our need for wood products will not stop just because we have wrecked our atmosphere. Some of my allies in the environmental movement disagree with my stance. I understand their position.

Another group which may object to this thread is beach enthusiasts. You see, wind power is an important component in the blended approach which we need to take toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions and, as a result, preserving our coast line from rising seas. However, no one solution works everywhere, wind power included. Hence, everyone must compromise a bit.

Arborists and those who cherish trees above all else in nature must come to understand that working forests can protect wildlife, help clean our air and provide wood at the same time, if done sustainably. A similar position is required of people who would like to see our coast line kept free from development.

I just returned from an amazing experience. My good friend Adam Nehr helped me arrange a behind-the-scenes tour of the Kennedy Space Center, the main NASA facility in Central Florida. I had a blast! I had the opportunity to stand directly under a Space Shuttle for several minutes and watch it be prepared for orbital flight! I did many other wonderful things, too.

As something of a space nut, I knew that my NASA escort would provide all sorts of interesting details. I also knew that when the Kennedy Space Center was created, tens of thousands of acres of pristine natural habitat were placed in permanent preservation so that NASA workers could labor on the space program without encroachment from the surrounding community.

What I didn’t know is that habitat preservation is a very big deal at the Kenney Space Center. Impressive! The scrub jay is an imperiled species in Florida and habitat preservation is one of the best things we can do to help these precious creatures. It turns out that NASA and its sister agencies which manage Kennedy Space Center spend big bucks preserving and restoring scrub habitat throughout the facility. This is very good news.

Yesterday, I made my usual weekly pilgrimage to Publix, Catrin’s and my local supermarket. During our 16+ years of wedded bliss, we have alternated between competing grocery chains. Because of its distance from us, we seldom shop at Whole Foods Market. However, a recent policy change on the part of this national grocer may well compel us to modify our buying pattern.

As I have written in recent months, shopping bags used in supermarkets count for a very large chunk of the air pollution which the United States generates each year. Whether you choose paper or plastic, many natural resources are consumed to create the bag and pollution spewed into the air in the process. That’s why I advocate so strongly for using canvas bags or, even better, no bags at all whenever possible, just as I do.

Residents of the Western world such as this author rail against needlessly wasteful forest practices as a significant inhibitor to reforestation. Our argument is valid. However, the air we breathe is blind to territorial borders, as are cyclones, forest fires and hurricanes. In short, if we wish to save ourselves from the worst effects of global warming, we need to take a global perspective on reforestation.

Poverty around the world, including fuel poverty, whether in cities or rural areas, is a big problem not just for the moral fabric of society but for environmental protection. What’s more, many of the regions with the most at-risk species of wildlife are desperately poor, with the average resident earning less than $2.00 per day.

Such regions also are fraught with civil war, coup d’etat activity and rebellion. Arguably the worst side effect of these conflicts between people is the fact that aid workers cannot do their job because of the danger – including the management of reforestation projects.

Since my previous column covered the role of plastic shopping bags in supermarkets, today’s installment may seem a departure. Trust me, my friend. The two issues are related. If we ever hope to succeed in jump starting reforestation projects around the world in order to return our biome to its pre-industrialization state, we must address the question of reforestation in conflict zones.

The image above is from an excellent video clip of a January 31 stunt by the good folks at Greenpeace. I am aware that some find the methods and tactics of the environmental advocacy group Greenpeace objectionable. Nevertheless, they are peaceful and effective. Generally, I support them with a smile, as in this case.

A prime example of their methods is the aforementioned video, which is linked below. You see, despite the fact that 2007 was the second-warmest year on record and that the permanent ice pack, which is the foundation of polar bear habitat, withstood unprecedented melting, some people, including government officials, still declare polar bears not in danger from global warming.

Last time, I showed you a brief but important video about the type of peaceful protest needed to prevent the loss of more polar ice and eventual polar bear extinction. Lest my writings seem alarmist, let us take a sober examination of the problem.

If you didn't have a chance to watch it, the video points to a failure on the part of the government of the United States to list the polar bear as an endangered species.

Why is that a problem? The initial answer may seem obvious. Polar bears are endangered. However, there’s another reason of equal importance. Without global cooperation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we cannot fix the problem. By extension, since polar bears live in northern Canada as well as Alaska, the Canadian government has an equal responsibility to act.

Sadly, our friends to the north are correct in one element of their justification for deferring action. Canadians produce much less pollution than their Yankee neighbors so they should not be compelled to act until the government of the United States does.

Last month, the electronics giant Intel made a very large commitment to renewable energy by signing a multi-year agreement with Sterling Planet, the 2007 Renewable Energy Marketer of the Year, to offset more than 1 billion kilowatt hours of fossil-derived electricity. Wow! That is a very impressive achievement! Everyone involved is to be commended!

The arrangement between Intel and Sterling Planet was certified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as making Intel the single-largest corporate purchaser of green power in the United States. Kudos all around!

Producing electronics involves a great deal of energy. The folks at Intel know this and take their responsibility seriously. While there’s room to do more, this most recent commitment by Intel left my mouth agape with its scope. Well done, folks!

In recent posts, I have tiptoed around politically sensitive topics. Today’s thread will be no different. However, I ask that you strive to remain focused on the environmental theme at the core of the story. Folks in the United Arab Emirates are building a new metropolis, called Masdar City. Green sustainable modular buildings are a central theme and many topographic design principles borrow from mutualism in the desert.

At the following URL, you will find some interesting coverage of Masdar City. I ask that you pay particular attention to the 5½-minute video. It contains some exaggerations about carbon neutrality and the achievement of a zero waste stream. Nevertheless, Masdar City will be an impressive metropolis when complete (assuming that it lives up to its own hype).

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/solar-city-to-rise-in-persian-gulf-why-not-arizona

The National Home Builders Association (NAHB) is one of the loudest and most influential voices in residential construction in North America. I have been pleased to see NAHB take important steps toward embracing green home building requirements. In fact, they were included in the New American Home 2006 project just a 30-minute drive from my home in Orlando. The finished product is pictured above and at the end of this thread.

If you would like to learn more, I encourage you to watch the video clip linked below. It was the promotional piece shown in advance of the 2006 builders show but remains informative on the question of green home building requirements and the construction industry. In short, the message of green building has begun to permeate.

http://www.buildersshow.com/documents/newamericanhome/newamericanhomemid.wvx

As a zealous environmentalist, though, I can’t allow the discussion to stop with one commendable home project, especially since residences are a large contributor to global warming through inefficiencies in energy use - and because the New American Home 2006 falls into the popular culture definition of McMansion.

Since my earliest days as an expert here on Keyboard Culture, I have focused on the need for reducing our emissions of greenhouse gases and carbon as much as possible, through any practical means necessary. One of the most important ways is through carbon offsets, also known as renewable energy credits.

I gave you a list of the 3 carbon offset websites which Catrin and I use as well as the reason for our favoring them. Our opinion of those wonderful sites (Krystal Planet, NWF Wind Current and TerraPass) has not changed. However, I have discovered a charitable website which gives you the opportunity of seeing multiple ways to stop global warming all on a single page. The URL is

http://www.changingthepresent.org/global_warming/gifts

Why is this charitable website important?

Do you read Colette Chandler’s writings here on Keyboard Culture? If you do not, I strongly recommend that you begin doing so immediately. You’ll find the link along the right margin of my column. The name is Green Marketing .

Colette and I have shared real estate here on KBC for quite some time and recently have begun collaborating offline. At the same time we formalized the crossover between our two columns, Colette initiated coverage of the topic of green washing.

It’s a really big deal which we in the environmental community must explain adequately, lest two undesirable consequences come to pass:

1) Our credibility is damaged because consumers who seek an unbiased opinion about a company’s green initiatives distrust us; and

2) Those who engage in pernicious green washing score significant victories.

Here, then, is my take. The term green washing means: