San Francisco International to install nation's first dispenser of carbon offset credits
Come spring, eco-conscious travelers flyhing out of San Francisco International Airport will be able to buy certified carbon offsets at self-service kiosks in a one-year pilot program (yes, that's an intentional pun) set up by 3Degrees, a local company that deals in renewable-energy and carbon-reduction investments. The San Francisco Airport Commission has authorized a $163,000 startup costs to provide kiosks, initially at the customer service desk in Terminal 3 and two wings of the International Terminal.
The kiosk will probably look a lot like an ATM or airline check-kiosk. According to a report in the San Francisco Chronicle, the flier will punch in the destination, and the kiosk's computer will calculate the carbon footprint and the cost of carbon credits to offset that particular flight. A credit card swipe then will buy the necessary credits.
Buying this credits will be an environmental good deed, but it's not a charity, so the cost is not tax-deductible. 3Degree's Krista Canellakis told the paper, "While the carbon offsets purchased at kiosks can't be seen or touched, they are an actual product with a specific environmental claim whose ownership is transferred at the time of purchase."
According city and airport officials, 3Degrees and city will choose projects to be funded from a list certified by the city's Environment Department such as "renewable energy ventures in developing countries, agriculture and organic waste capture, coal mine methane capture, and sustainable forestry." A portion of each offset purchase will also go to "the San Francisco Carbon Fund, which supports local projects such as energy-efficiency programs and solar panel installations for low-income housing, as well as efforts to convert waste oils into biodiesel fuels."
The cost of these offset purchases for travelers has not be finalized yet, but 3Degrees' web-based "carbon calculator" suggests that offsetting a two-hour trip using about 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide would cost about $4 per person. Offsetting a trip to Europe would is guesstimated at $36. Thirty percent of the revenues will go to 3Degrees and the rest to the city. If it works at SFO, it's sure to spread to other airports as well. Profits for the company, revenues to the airport without requiring any additional services other than electricity and a clear conscience for travelers. Seems like a good bet for success.
Ironically, just as SFO is ready to welcome the 21st century commodity of carbon offset credits, the city is set to bid farewell to Stacey's Bookstore, an 85-year-old institution at 581 Market Street, one of the diminishing independent book dealers that have sadly fallen victim to changing times.
Showing posts with label Envrironment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Envrironment. Show all posts
Monday, February 28, 2011
Saturday, February 5, 2011
29 Lights is 28 Too Many
Hotels' excessive lighting isn't luxury -- it's wasteful
I am currently in a lovely small suite at the Inn at Lost Creek in Telluride's Mountain Village. Getting here (where it hasn't been snowing) from the Front Range (where it snowed a storm) was an odyssey that I might blog about some other time. Unfortunately, despite my constant asking about it after I had been reticketed to Cortez instead of Telluride, my checked bag is still in Denver and will (hopefully) join me tomorrow.
The folks at the inn could not have been nicer, more sympathetic and more dismayed at my luggagelessness, but when I opened the door to my room, I got annoyed. Really annoyed. The foyer, the living area, the kitchenette and bathroom have, among them, twenty-nine (29) light bulbs, and every single one of them was on -- and had been for who knows how long. Twenty-eight of these bulbs are incandescent, including five on a table lamp. Only one, above the kitchenette, is fluorescent. And the TV is turned on to an audio station.
The inn is a congenial boutique property with 29 suites. If every one is occupied, 29 x 29 = 841 light bulbs burning for countless hours when no one is in the rooms in this property alone -- and that doesn't count lights in the lobby, hallways, underground parking garage, restaurant, spa and elsewhere --to say nothing of Christmas lights that will doubtless appear soon . IMO, it is a misplaced notion of luxury. And the little refrigerator, which the inn had thoughtfully stocked to tide me over, was cranked down so far that the half-and-half and eggs were frozen, and the appl and pear had the consistency of popsicles.
This is not the first time I've been appalled at excessive use of electricity -- and it's not the first time I have complained about it. I have been told that hotel rating services require some of this nonsense in order for properties to earn that extra star or diamond. This is a wasteful and outdated practice. I have a sign on my mantlepiece asking me to opt in or out of fresh linens every day in the interest of environmentalism. There should be something comparable when it comes to lights. I'm calling housekeeping tomorrow to ask them to restrain themselves.
I am currently in a lovely small suite at the Inn at Lost Creek in Telluride's Mountain Village. Getting here (where it hasn't been snowing) from the Front Range (where it snowed a storm) was an odyssey that I might blog about some other time. Unfortunately, despite my constant asking about it after I had been reticketed to Cortez instead of Telluride, my checked bag is still in Denver and will (hopefully) join me tomorrow.
The folks at the inn could not have been nicer, more sympathetic and more dismayed at my luggagelessness, but when I opened the door to my room, I got annoyed. Really annoyed. The foyer, the living area, the kitchenette and bathroom have, among them, twenty-nine (29) light bulbs, and every single one of them was on -- and had been for who knows how long. Twenty-eight of these bulbs are incandescent, including five on a table lamp. Only one, above the kitchenette, is fluorescent. And the TV is turned on to an audio station.
The inn is a congenial boutique property with 29 suites. If every one is occupied, 29 x 29 = 841 light bulbs burning for countless hours when no one is in the rooms in this property alone -- and that doesn't count lights in the lobby, hallways, underground parking garage, restaurant, spa and elsewhere --to say nothing of Christmas lights that will doubtless appear soon . IMO, it is a misplaced notion of luxury. And the little refrigerator, which the inn had thoughtfully stocked to tide me over, was cranked down so far that the half-and-half and eggs were frozen, and the appl and pear had the consistency of popsicles.
This is not the first time I've been appalled at excessive use of electricity -- and it's not the first time I have complained about it. I have been told that hotel rating services require some of this nonsense in order for properties to earn that extra star or diamond. This is a wasteful and outdated practice. I have a sign on my mantlepiece asking me to opt in or out of fresh linens every day in the interest of environmentalism. There should be something comparable when it comes to lights. I'm calling housekeeping tomorrow to ask them to restrain themselves.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
US Airlines Recycle Just 20% of Their Trash
Unhappy ending for the 880 tons of newspapers, aluminum cans, plastic cups and more annually generated by airlines
When flight attendants roam up and down the aisle with large trash bags to collect passengers' discards, I've always wondered whether someone somewhere sorts it, or whether it just ends up in landfills. Responsible Shopper, a consumer watchdog website, has issued a new report cleverly called “What Goes Up Must Go Down: The Sorry State of Recycling in the Airline Industry.”
I wish it had been otherwise, but their disheartening finding is that of the more than 880 million tons of waste that carriers generate annually, only 20 percent is recycled while, the organization says, fully 75 percent could be. Delta, Virgin America, Virgin Atlantic and Southwest are doing the best job of recycling and United and US Airways, the worst.
Lookout Landfills, Here It Comes!
According to research published by the Natural Resource Defense Council, airlines annually throw away 9,000 tons of plastic, enough aluminum cans to build 58 Boeing 747 jets, and enough newspaper and magazines to cover a football field some 700 feet deep. The council says that energy savings from recycling this waste "would represent a contribution by the airlines to reducing their environmental impact in the face of the considerable climate impact of jet fuel, including 600 million tons of carbon dioxide per year pumped into the atmosphere by commercial jets alone."
According to the Responsible Shopper report, airlines could recycle nearly 500 million more tons of waste each year (including 250 million tons of in-flight waste) than they do. Furthermore, no airline recycles all the major recyclables: aluminum cans, glass, plastic, and paper, and no airline has a comprehensive program for minimizing or composting food waste or waste from snack packages. It is probably out of embarrassment that no airline provides good public information about their recycling program, or reports out on progress in relation to any stated goals. In addition, the report says, that all airlines provide over-packaged snacks and meals (below), and not one is working with manufacturers to reduce this waste.
It doesn't have to be this way. A lifetime ago, I worked for Swissair in New York. Even then, the carrier had a contract with pig farmers near Zürich to take all the food waste. But then, the Swiss always seem to do things better than most of the rest of the world. When I think of how little flight attendants have to do on most domestic flights in these times of hardly any food service and minimal snack service, it doesn't seem to much to ask them to bring two trash bags down the aisle, one for recyclables and one for landfill-bound trash.
Ranked from best to worst with even the best receiving only a B- grade for current recycling efforts and future plans:
Green America and Responsible Shopper have a call to action too. They are asking passengers respectfully ask flight attendants whether materials on their specific flights are being recycled, and go online to report their findings. The recycling report also contains a list of the airlines and their contact information for anyone who wants to contact them directly.
Responsible Shopper's lead researcher, Victoria Kreha, has some advice for passenger wanting to be proactive, "For concerned consumers looking to spend their travel dollars wisely, airline waste may be the ultimate example of ‘what goes up must come down.’ The good news is that airlines are starting to pay attention to recycling; the bad news is that they have a long way to go to improve the situation. Fortunately, airlines can overcome any of the challenges to creating in-flight recycling programs, including employee education and involvement, knowledge of the type of waste produced, and a time- and space-efficient system.”
I'm not about to preach about the environmental benefits of recycling, even though airlines practice pathetically little of it, better waste management has the potential of creating jobs nationwide, since according to Colorado Recycles, recycling creates six times as many jobs as landfilling. High time for airlines to step up to the recycling plate.
When flight attendants roam up and down the aisle with large trash bags to collect passengers' discards, I've always wondered whether someone somewhere sorts it, or whether it just ends up in landfills. Responsible Shopper, a consumer watchdog website, has issued a new report cleverly called “What Goes Up Must Go Down: The Sorry State of Recycling in the Airline Industry.”
I wish it had been otherwise, but their disheartening finding is that of the more than 880 million tons of waste that carriers generate annually, only 20 percent is recycled while, the organization says, fully 75 percent could be. Delta, Virgin America, Virgin Atlantic and Southwest are doing the best job of recycling and United and US Airways, the worst.
Lookout Landfills, Here It Comes!
According to research published by the Natural Resource Defense Council, airlines annually throw away 9,000 tons of plastic, enough aluminum cans to build 58 Boeing 747 jets, and enough newspaper and magazines to cover a football field some 700 feet deep. The council says that energy savings from recycling this waste "would represent a contribution by the airlines to reducing their environmental impact in the face of the considerable climate impact of jet fuel, including 600 million tons of carbon dioxide per year pumped into the atmosphere by commercial jets alone."
It doesn't have to be this way. A lifetime ago, I worked for Swissair in New York. Even then, the carrier had a contract with pig farmers near Zürich to take all the food waste. But then, the Swiss always seem to do things better than most of the rest of the world. When I think of how little flight attendants have to do on most domestic flights in these times of hardly any food service and minimal snack service, it doesn't seem to much to ask them to bring two trash bags down the aisle, one for recyclables and one for landfill-bound trash.
The List
Ranked from best to worst with even the best receiving only a B- grade for current recycling efforts and future plans:
- Delta Airlines
- Virgin America
- Virgin Atlantic
- Southwest Airlines
- Continental Airlines
- Jet Blue
- American Airlines
- British Airways (I'm not sure why this British flag carrier is on the list either)
- Air Tran
- United Airlines
- US Airways
Green America and Responsible Shopper have a call to action too. They are asking passengers respectfully ask flight attendants whether materials on their specific flights are being recycled, and go online to report their findings. The recycling report also contains a list of the airlines and their contact information for anyone who wants to contact them directly.
Responsible Shopper's lead researcher, Victoria Kreha, has some advice for passenger wanting to be proactive, "For concerned consumers looking to spend their travel dollars wisely, airline waste may be the ultimate example of ‘what goes up must come down.’ The good news is that airlines are starting to pay attention to recycling; the bad news is that they have a long way to go to improve the situation. Fortunately, airlines can overcome any of the challenges to creating in-flight recycling programs, including employee education and involvement, knowledge of the type of waste produced, and a time- and space-efficient system.”
I'm not about to preach about the environmental benefits of recycling, even though airlines practice pathetically little of it, better waste management has the potential of creating jobs nationwide, since according to Colorado Recycles, recycling creates six times as many jobs as landfilling. High time for airlines to step up to the recycling plate.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
New National Monument Designations on the Horizon -- Maybe
Western towns will benefit if sites are federally protected
An internal memo about more than a dozen natural areas considered for possible National Monument designation has surfaced. The areas that the Department of Interior is studying for management and protection by the National Park Service or other federal agency reported are:
An internal memo about more than a dozen natural areas considered for possible National Monument designation has surfaced. The areas that the Department of Interior is studying for management and protection by the National Park Service or other federal agency reported are:
- San Rafael Swell, UT
- Montana's Northern Prairie, MT
- Lesser Prairie Chicken Preserve, NM
- Berryessa Snow Mountains, CA
- Heart of the Great Basin, NV
- Otero Mesa, NM
- Northwest Sonoran Desert, AZ
- Owyhee Desert, OR/NV
- Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, CA (expansion)
- Vermillion Basin, CO
- Bodie Hills, CA
- The Modoc Plateau, CA
- Cedar Mesa, UT
- San Juan Islands, WA
Predictably, two Utah politicians immediately came out in opposition -- just in case the two potential monuments made it even into the official proposal state. Senator Orrin Hatch has already been quoted as threatening do everything in his power to prevent the proposal from moving forward, and Governor Gary Herbert keeps arguing that states should be allowed to manage their own natural resources. Click here for the leaked document that has raised the hackles of these rib-rock Republican aginners.
I suppose Messrs. Hatch and Herbert don't think of the economic benefit that accrue to their state annually from visitors to Utah's magnificent national parks: nearly 1 million Arches, more than 1 million to Bryce Canyon, nearly half a million to Canyonlands, about 600,000 to Capitol Reef and 2,689,840 who visited Zion. And that doesn't include those who visit Monument Valley Tribal Park at the Arizona border and assorted national monuments, federal wildlife preserves and other public lands under federal jurisdiction. Rather than tourist dollars, I suppose Utah's H-team prefers landmarks like the enormous, open-pit Kennecott Copper Mine, the world's largest, just outside of Salt Lake City or uranium mining, even though a tailings pile from a mill near Moab is still leaching into the Colorado River.
The Grand Staircase-Escanlate National Monument in southern Utah was declared and placed under Bureau of Land Management protection under the Clinton Administration, raised howl of indignant protests from the legions of highly placed Utah aginners, including Senator Hatch who called it a "land grab." It it was, the government grabbed 1.9 million acres, including land eyed for coal mining development Andalex Resources, a Dutch company.
Today, regardless of its stance then, the Kane County Chamber of Commerce now boasts: "Near the National Parks you will also find many State Parks and National Monuments, such as Kodachrome Basin State Park, Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park, Pipe Spring National Monument, Cedar Breaks National Monument, and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. With ninety-five percent of county lands administered by State and Federal Agencies, you'll never run out of things to do, or places to go. Drive roads less traveled, and find a place to call your own." Unspoken is" and stay, shop, eat and pump gas in Kanab and other nearby towns. And people who never would have heard of the place without national monument status do just that.
Fingers crossed that the government ignores the likes of Hatch Herbert, creates more federally protected areas -- and provides the funding to manage them well
I suppose Messrs. Hatch and Herbert don't think of the economic benefit that accrue to their state annually from visitors to Utah's magnificent national parks: nearly 1 million Arches, more than 1 million to Bryce Canyon, nearly half a million to Canyonlands, about 600,000 to Capitol Reef and 2,689,840 who visited Zion. And that doesn't include those who visit Monument Valley Tribal Park at the Arizona border and assorted national monuments, federal wildlife preserves and other public lands under federal jurisdiction. Rather than tourist dollars, I suppose Utah's H-team prefers landmarks like the enormous, open-pit Kennecott Copper Mine, the world's largest, just outside of Salt Lake City or uranium mining, even though a tailings pile from a mill near Moab is still leaching into the Colorado River.
The Grand Staircase-Escanlate National Monument in southern Utah was declared and placed under Bureau of Land Management protection under the Clinton Administration, raised howl of indignant protests from the legions of highly placed Utah aginners, including Senator Hatch who called it a "land grab." It it was, the government grabbed 1.9 million acres, including land eyed for coal mining development Andalex Resources, a Dutch company.
Today, regardless of its stance then, the Kane County Chamber of Commerce now boasts: "Near the National Parks you will also find many State Parks and National Monuments, such as Kodachrome Basin State Park, Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park, Pipe Spring National Monument, Cedar Breaks National Monument, and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. With ninety-five percent of county lands administered by State and Federal Agencies, you'll never run out of things to do, or places to go. Drive roads less traveled, and find a place to call your own." Unspoken is" and stay, shop, eat and pump gas in Kanab and other nearby towns. And people who never would have heard of the place without national monument status do just that.
Fingers crossed that the government ignores the likes of Hatch Herbert, creates more federally protected areas -- and provides the funding to manage them well
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Boeing 787 Dreamliner's First Flight -- At Last
Long-delayed maiden voyage of Boeing's newest plane aircraft
The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a mid-size aircraft (290 to 330 passengers), is the first large commercial jet made of light-weight, high-strength composite materials for fuel efficiency, reduced emissions and reduced noise. It was rolled out in July 2007, with an original plan for the first flight to take place in September 2008 and for it to enter commercial service in May 2009. Fifty-six airlines had placed orders for more than 900 of these new-generation planes, which would make it the best-selling widebody, two-aisle plane in aircraft history. There were delays of various sorts (subassembly part shortages, subcontractor issues, fastener issues and other unglamorous manufacturing problems), and that, coupled with the global economic downturn, resulted the cancellation of 70 orders, but there are still Dreamliner 777 orders on the books at this writing. All the frustrations seem to have washed away two days ago when the Dreamliner took off from Boeing's airfield in Everett, Washington. Click here for the video of that first three-hour-plus flight, and then click on "webcast" on the upper right part of the screen.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Travel Industry to Tackle Climate Change
"Live the Deal" initiative emerges from Copenhagen conference
The United Nations Climate Change Conference that wraps up tomorrow in Copenhagen has been in the news mainly for the estimated number of demonstrators, the number of demonstrators arrested and the heads of government who would or wouldn't be attending, and if the were, when, and if they weren't, why not. A travel-industry initiative called Live the Deal has emerged from Copenhagen. Let's hope it helps people continue to travel while decreasing the environmental burden caused by those travels. We have already seen hotels go green, but lodgings are only a small part of the travel picture. International industry leaders are, of course, just beginning to talk, but as the old proverb says, "Even a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."
Below is the press release about those first steps:
The United Nations Climate Change Conference that wraps up tomorrow in Copenhagen has been in the news mainly for the estimated number of demonstrators, the number of demonstrators arrested and the heads of government who would or wouldn't be attending, and if the were, when, and if they weren't, why not. A travel-industry initiative called Live the Deal has emerged from Copenhagen. Let's hope it helps people continue to travel while decreasing the environmental burden caused by those travels. We have already seen hotels go green, but lodgings are only a small part of the travel picture. International industry leaders are, of course, just beginning to talk, but as the old proverb says, "Even a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."
Below is the press release about those first steps:
Copenhagen, Denmark/ Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates/Madrid, Spain 16 December - "Live the Deal", an innovative, global campaign to help travel companies and destinations respond to Climate Change, reduce their carbon footprint and move to the Green Economy, was launched this week during the Copenhagen Climate Summit.
Announcing the new initiative, long time tourism green campaigner Geoffrey Lipman UNWTO Assistant Secretary-General said: "What Copenhagen represents is a new commitment by the world community towards sustainable low carbon growth patterns. The targets and mitigation actions that countries develop and negotiate through this process will be a new base for travel industry action. What we are providing is a very simple way to get behind the evolving government initiatives, to keep pace with changing patterns and to demonstrate that our sector is acting, not simply talking." He added "We should not be ashamed to promote the growth of smart travel – clean green, ethical and quality - it’s the lifeblood of trade, commerce and human connection".
"Live the Deal" follows the pattern established in the UN led Copenhagen Seal the Deal campaign by its single minded focus, its simplicity and its broad based engagement goals. It will seek to encourage the sector directly and through representative organizations.
It has been developed with the support of UNWTO, whose Secretary-General Taleb Rifai calls it "The kind of link between global policymaking and responsible tourism action that we are looking to inspire and encourage. Our sector fuels the economy, creates jobs and is one of the biggest development opportunities for the world's poorest countries – and it can be a leader in the transformation to a green economy".
The campaign will be underpinned by a simple carbon calculation tool that allows easy correlation with government targets and implementation measures, as well as a Think Tank and Annual Innovations & Investment Summit. The inaugural Summit will be in Abu Dhabi in the last quarter of the year. Live the Deal will be promoted by a multimedia video "We can take this Climate Change" from platinum album writer and singer Alston Koch which will be profiled around the world in 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
San Miguel de Allende'sBotanical Garden
Charco del Ingenio showcases Western Hemisphere cacti in a protected landscape
The roughly 154 acres occupied by the unique botanical garden called Charco del Ingenio outside of San Miguel de Allende is reportedly second most important collection of cacti in Mexico, after Mexico City. That would rank Cacti Mundi that my husband and I visited in San Jose del Cabo several years ago number three or less. The Chacro del Ignenio is a pirvately funded ecological preservation area that began 18 years ago with 60 species now dispays some 550 cacti varieties from native habitats that stretch from Patagonia to Canada, but mostly species that grow in Mexico.
Mario Hernandez is knowledgeable passionate about the plants under his care. He is still awed by cacti's ability to store water and yet transform CO2 into O2 He points out that cacti are edible, and have religious, medicinal and spiritual value as well. And did I mention that they are great to look at too? He didn't bother saying that. I think he realizes that is self-evident.
Below are just a few examples of the varied and wonderful cacti growing at the Charco del Ingenio Botanical Garden.
Cactus "buds" and cactus flowers.
When the Dalai Lama visited Mexico in 2005, he came to Charco del Ingnio and blessed the Plaza of the Four Winds, a ceremonial and scenic gathering place designed by architect Enrique Pliego and honoring local indigenous groups.Built with inlaid colored stones,wasinspired by the 16th-century Chichimeca-Toltec codex, the plaza is designed with four outer circles that indicate the four cardinal directions and corresponding figures that evoke the four natural resources (earth, water, flora and fauna) in traditional pre-Columbian colors. Reached by a smooth, flat but unpaved trail, it is one of the few places in San Miguel Allende that is wheelchair-accessible.
The Charco del Ingenio is open for self-guided visits, with 2 1/2-hour guided tours presently given on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 10:00 a.m. The cost is 50 pesos.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Machu Picchu Under Tourist Seige
UNESCO warns that too many tourists now threaten Peru's top tourist attraction
I have not yet been to Machu Picchu, the Inca citadel high in the Peruvian Andes, but it is certainly on my go-to list. Maybe I had better move it up. According to an Associated Press report, "conservationists advising UNESCO's World Heritage Committee warn that landslides, fires and creeping development threaten the site," due to soaring visitation (800,000 annually) and excessive construction near the site.
The World Heritage Committee meeting in Quebec City, itself a UNESCO World Heritage Site, "was called to determine which of the world's cultural treasures should be added to its [endangered sites] list — and which of those already included there are now threatened. UNESCO committee spokesman Roni Amelan declined to confirm that Machu Picchu, which was named a World Heritage Site in 1983, would be classified as endangered, but said 'it's a possibility'."
The report continued that "unregulated growth, including a boom in hotel and restaurant construction in the nearby mountain town of Aguas Calientes, is putting pressure on erosion-prone riverbanks and could undermine the site." Agua Calientes is without "adequate sanitation" and "Peru's government has done little to address landslide concerns on the winding, mud thoroughfare that leads to the citadel, according to the report."
Residents of Cuzco, the an ancient Inca city and now a jumping-off point for excursions to Machu Picchu, have protested private development in Aguas Calientes, although Machu Picchu itself appears to be protected thus far. Continued uncontrolled visitation could change that as well. The article quote said Luis Lumbreras, identified as "an independent, Lima-based archaeologist who has studied Machu Picchu for more than 40 years," as warning, "Machu Picchu was never made for lots of people... "If we put tourists with boots [instead of people in sandals or bare feet] that are jumping, running, climbing the walls, etcetera, that's the danger."
Last February, locals protested plans to build more hotels and other tourist facilities, causing suspension of rail service, cancelation of tours and blocking of roads. At the time, the BBC reported, "Hundreds of local farm workers, students and teachers have blocked access roads and the only railway line, barring the way to tourists, who have been reduced to taking pictures of the demonstrators rather than the ruins themselves. The protesters want the government to invest more money in the area, and especially to improve the dirt roads."
A friend and her family recently returned from Machu Picchu filled with enthusiasm about the experience. She didn't mention protests or inadequate sanitation or overcowding, but other government have capitulated to development interests at the cost of local culture or respectful preservation of ancient treasures. The relevant UNESCO committee is concerned about this one -- and therefore so am I.
I have not yet been to Machu Picchu, the Inca citadel high in the Peruvian Andes, but it is certainly on my go-to list. Maybe I had better move it up. According to an Associated Press report, "conservationists advising UNESCO's World Heritage Committee warn that landslides, fires and creeping development threaten the site," due to soaring visitation (800,000 annually) and excessive construction near the site.
The World Heritage Committee meeting in Quebec City, itself a UNESCO World Heritage Site, "was called to determine which of the world's cultural treasures should be added to its [endangered sites] list — and which of those already included there are now threatened. UNESCO committee spokesman Roni Amelan declined to confirm that Machu Picchu, which was named a World Heritage Site in 1983, would be classified as endangered, but said 'it's a possibility'."
The report continued that "unregulated growth, including a boom in hotel and restaurant construction in the nearby mountain town of Aguas Calientes, is putting pressure on erosion-prone riverbanks and could undermine the site." Agua Calientes is without "adequate sanitation" and "Peru's government has done little to address landslide concerns on the winding, mud thoroughfare that leads to the citadel, according to the report."
Residents of Cuzco, the an ancient Inca city and now a jumping-off point for excursions to Machu Picchu, have protested private development in Aguas Calientes, although Machu Picchu itself appears to be protected thus far. Continued uncontrolled visitation could change that as well. The article quote said Luis Lumbreras, identified as "an independent, Lima-based archaeologist who has studied Machu Picchu for more than 40 years," as warning, "Machu Picchu was never made for lots of people... "If we put tourists with boots [instead of people in sandals or bare feet] that are jumping, running, climbing the walls, etcetera, that's the danger."
Last February, locals protested plans to build more hotels and other tourist facilities, causing suspension of rail service, cancelation of tours and blocking of roads. At the time, the BBC reported, "Hundreds of local farm workers, students and teachers have blocked access roads and the only railway line, barring the way to tourists, who have been reduced to taking pictures of the demonstrators rather than the ruins themselves. The protesters want the government to invest more money in the area, and especially to improve the dirt roads."
A friend and her family recently returned from Machu Picchu filled with enthusiasm about the experience. She didn't mention protests or inadequate sanitation or overcowding, but other government have capitulated to development interests at the cost of local culture or respectful preservation of ancient treasures. The relevant UNESCO committee is concerned about this one -- and therefore so am I.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Airline Woes Could Cripple US Economy, Study Shows
Bad news and dire predictions continue for air travel
"Oil-fueled catastrophe in the airline industry would cripple US economy and eliminate US jobs, study reveals" is a ponderous title for an Internet post, but it is the gist of a feature on a travel site called eTurbo News. It cited a Business Travel Coalition study equally ominously and equally ponderously called "“Beyond the Airlines’ $2 Can of Coke: Catastrophic Impact on the US Economy from Oil-price Trauma in the Airline Industry" that predicted the domino effect of rapidly rising oil prices on jobs, the supply chain for the manufacturing that still exists in this country, lower tax revenues, American competitiveness, communities, and tourism. These, according to the article, "are just some of the predictable results from airline liquidations that could happen as early as the second half of 2008 as a direct result of unsustainable fuel prices."
As a global community and as a nation, we continue to use oil at an undiminished rate. Public transportation ridership is up in this country, but for many people, it is not an option because it simply does not exist. So people still drive around -- often one per vehicle -- in cars that are considered to get "good" gas mileage if they approach 30 MPG.
"The study expands on the analysis released on June 13, 2008 by AirlineForecasts, LLC and BTC and points to the real news about the airlines’ fuel problems: how multiple liquidations at legacy US airlines – now a serious possibility – would have a wide-ranging impact on many facets of the US economy," wrote eTurbo News.
But what we can do as individuals -- whether we drive less, carpool more, ride our bikes, cancel our vacations or simply fork over 15 bucks to check a bag or $2 for an inflight soda -- pales compared to the government's fuel consumption. Oil Change International, which is promoting the "separation of oil and state," reports that the Department of Defense (or shall we return to its old name, the Department of War?) is the country's single largest user of oil -- 1.6 million gallons a day. And every gallon that is pumped into a heavily armored HumVee (4 MPG), a mine-resistant tank (6 MPG), a helicopter (a 1,500-pound Bell Ranger reportedly burns 65 gallons in four hours; a big troop carrier way more than that) or a military jet is unavailable for civilian aviation, automobiles, buses, taxis or to heat homes in Maine and New Hampshire next winter.
The monetary cost is staggering -- $153 million for the 1.2 million barrels of fuel the armed forces use each month at $127.68 a barrel, which only seems trivial in comparison to the $10.3 billion a month America's Iraqi adventure is costing. The total so far is something on the order of half a trillion deflated US dollars, according to the Congressional Research Service. Politics, morality and even economics aside, the environmental cost is staggering. The US military burns more fuel and leaves a greater carbon footprint than the greening of the travel industry and the home-building industry combined.
"Oil-fueled catastrophe in the airline industry would cripple US economy and eliminate US jobs, study reveals" is a ponderous title for an Internet post, but it is the gist of a feature on a travel site called eTurbo News. It cited a Business Travel Coalition study equally ominously and equally ponderously called "“Beyond the Airlines’ $2 Can of Coke: Catastrophic Impact on the US Economy from Oil-price Trauma in the Airline Industry" that predicted the domino effect of rapidly rising oil prices on jobs, the supply chain for the manufacturing that still exists in this country, lower tax revenues, American competitiveness, communities, and tourism. These, according to the article, "are just some of the predictable results from airline liquidations that could happen as early as the second half of 2008 as a direct result of unsustainable fuel prices."
As a global community and as a nation, we continue to use oil at an undiminished rate. Public transportation ridership is up in this country, but for many people, it is not an option because it simply does not exist. So people still drive around -- often one per vehicle -- in cars that are considered to get "good" gas mileage if they approach 30 MPG.
"The study expands on the analysis released on June 13, 2008 by AirlineForecasts, LLC and BTC and points to the real news about the airlines’ fuel problems: how multiple liquidations at legacy US airlines – now a serious possibility – would have a wide-ranging impact on many facets of the US economy," wrote eTurbo News.
But what we can do as individuals -- whether we drive less, carpool more, ride our bikes, cancel our vacations or simply fork over 15 bucks to check a bag or $2 for an inflight soda -- pales compared to the government's fuel consumption. Oil Change International, which is promoting the "separation of oil and state," reports that the Department of Defense (or shall we return to its old name, the Department of War?) is the country's single largest user of oil -- 1.6 million gallons a day. And every gallon that is pumped into a heavily armored HumVee (4 MPG), a mine-resistant tank (6 MPG), a helicopter (a 1,500-pound Bell Ranger reportedly burns 65 gallons in four hours; a big troop carrier way more than that) or a military jet is unavailable for civilian aviation, automobiles, buses, taxis or to heat homes in Maine and New Hampshire next winter.
The monetary cost is staggering -- $153 million for the 1.2 million barrels of fuel the armed forces use each month at $127.68 a barrel, which only seems trivial in comparison to the $10.3 billion a month America's Iraqi adventure is costing. The total so far is something on the order of half a trillion deflated US dollars, according to the Congressional Research Service. Politics, morality and even economics aside, the environmental cost is staggering. The US military burns more fuel and leaves a greater carbon footprint than the greening of the travel industry and the home-building industry combined.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
United and Continental Expect to Be Bedfellows
Rivals are vowing cooperation -- and Southwest is implementing next-generation air-traffic efficiencies
The on-again, off-again romances, courtships, engagements and miscellaneous liaisons in the American air transportation industry are positively dizzying. The latest announcement involves a planned linkage of former rivals United and Continental in a bilateral agreement for domestic and international cooperation, in reality a cost-cutting measure by two struggling legacy carriers that have invidually trimmed costs and tapped new revnue sources, largely by charging passengers for services that were until recently free.
The new relationship, which is yet to be approved by regulators, is described as a "partnership" and not a merger. It is supposed to include code-shared domestic flights and also reciprocity between United's MileagePlus program and Continental's OnePass program, enabling to earn miles when flying on either airline and redeem awards on both carriers, including accruing miles toward elite status -- though whether they will be any easier to redeem is yet to be seen. Similarly, members of Continental's Presidents Club and United's Red Carpet Club will have access to both.
Continental has also been invited to join the Star Alliance, which has announced an "enhanced transatlantic partnership of the two U.S. airlines and Star Alliance member carriers Air Canada and Lufthansa" -- whatever that will turn out to be. This latest venture into airline togetherness is supposed to be implemented sometime in 2009. Forgive me for being a tad skeptical, but when it comes to airline coopration, several similarly optimistic plans have unraveled.
Meanwhile, go-it-alone Southwest seems to be stepping in to the tune of $175 million to help implement Required Navigation Performance technology that "allows the aircraft to fly more precise, direct, and accurate paths, allowing more 'lanes' to be built into the same limited airspace," an airline press release quoted executive vice president and chief of operations Mike Vande Ven as explaining. Within six years, Southwest expects to have RNP at the 64 airports it serves. Southwest calculated that every single minute of time saved on each flight, would reduce carbon emissions by up to 156,000 metric tons annually by 2015 and result in $25 million in fuel savings per year.
Southwest has partnered with Naverus, a leader in RNP development, and the Federal Aviation Administration since May 2007 to train the airline's pilots on RNP, equip the airline's fleet to be RNP capable to and to produce RNP-charted procedures. In other times, the FAA might have taken this responsibility upon itself, but Southwest appears to have provided the impetus to get fuel-saving and green procedures underway. Southwest's goal is to begin flying with RNP procedures in place by fall 2009 and have the entire fleet under such operations by 2013.
The on-again, off-again romances, courtships, engagements and miscellaneous liaisons in the American air transportation industry are positively dizzying. The latest announcement involves a planned linkage of former rivals United and Continental in a bilateral agreement for domestic and international cooperation, in reality a cost-cutting measure by two struggling legacy carriers that have invidually trimmed costs and tapped new revnue sources, largely by charging passengers for services that were until recently free.
The new relationship, which is yet to be approved by regulators, is described as a "partnership" and not a merger. It is supposed to include code-shared domestic flights and also reciprocity between United's MileagePlus program and Continental's OnePass program, enabling to earn miles when flying on either airline and redeem awards on both carriers, including accruing miles toward elite status -- though whether they will be any easier to redeem is yet to be seen. Similarly, members of Continental's Presidents Club and United's Red Carpet Club will have access to both.
Continental has also been invited to join the Star Alliance, which has announced an "enhanced transatlantic partnership of the two U.S. airlines and Star Alliance member carriers Air Canada and Lufthansa" -- whatever that will turn out to be. This latest venture into airline togetherness is supposed to be implemented sometime in 2009. Forgive me for being a tad skeptical, but when it comes to airline coopration, several similarly optimistic plans have unraveled.
Meanwhile, go-it-alone Southwest seems to be stepping in to the tune of $175 million to help implement Required Navigation Performance technology that "allows the aircraft to fly more precise, direct, and accurate paths, allowing more 'lanes' to be built into the same limited airspace," an airline press release quoted executive vice president and chief of operations Mike Vande Ven as explaining. Within six years, Southwest expects to have RNP at the 64 airports it serves. Southwest calculated that every single minute of time saved on each flight, would reduce carbon emissions by up to 156,000 metric tons annually by 2015 and result in $25 million in fuel savings per year.
Southwest has partnered with Naverus, a leader in RNP development, and the Federal Aviation Administration since May 2007 to train the airline's pilots on RNP, equip the airline's fleet to be RNP capable to and to produce RNP-charted procedures. In other times, the FAA might have taken this responsibility upon itself, but Southwest appears to have provided the impetus to get fuel-saving and green procedures underway. Southwest's goal is to begin flying with RNP procedures in place by fall 2009 and have the entire fleet under such operations by 2013.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Overpackaged Travel Accessory -- on Earth Day
Bad enough to be in the air, leaving a carbon control, but extra waste galls
We're leaving soon for England and Scotland, feeling a twinge of guilt for flying and probably a pinch in the purse because of the dollar-to-pound exchange rate. To make the long Denver-London nonstop a tad more bearable, I just got new Sony MDR-NC40 noise-cancelling headphones that plug into a plane's sound system.
I can't swim or row to England, but because it's Earth Day, I'm particularly aware of the un-green packaging for these lightweight, made-in-China headphones. The cardboard box encasing the product and its protective plastic cocoon is about 10 by 6 1/2 by 4 inches. The black background means that in many places, the box cannot be recycled, and it appears not to have been made from recycled material either.
Inside, the headphones are encased in a plastic clamshell box secured with with one transparent plastic tape, with another compartmented plastic tray inside. Four strips of adhesive foam are on these plastic parts. I do not see a recycling code on anything. The bilingual instructions were printed and warranty -- seemingly not on recycled paper -- in Malaysia. I realize that an electronic gadget needs to be protected.
It might seem hypocritical or hair-splitting, given that they are designed for use on airplanes, but I do wish that my new headphones had left a smaller carbon footprint. Now, I'm going to have to toss all that packing material that could have been made from recycled materials and itself be recyclable.
We're leaving soon for England and Scotland, feeling a twinge of guilt for flying and probably a pinch in the purse because of the dollar-to-pound exchange rate. To make the long Denver-London nonstop a tad more bearable, I just got new Sony MDR-NC40 noise-cancelling headphones that plug into a plane's sound system.
I can't swim or row to England, but because it's Earth Day, I'm particularly aware of the un-green packaging for these lightweight, made-in-China headphones. The cardboard box encasing the product and its protective plastic cocoon is about 10 by 6 1/2 by 4 inches. The black background means that in many places, the box cannot be recycled, and it appears not to have been made from recycled material either.
Inside, the headphones are encased in a plastic clamshell box secured with with one transparent plastic tape, with another compartmented plastic tray inside. Four strips of adhesive foam are on these plastic parts. I do not see a recycling code on anything. The bilingual instructions were printed and warranty -- seemingly not on recycled paper -- in Malaysia. I realize that an electronic gadget needs to be protected.
It might seem hypocritical or hair-splitting, given that they are designed for use on airplanes, but I do wish that my new headphones had left a smaller carbon footprint. Now, I'm going to have to toss all that packing material that could have been made from recycled materials and itself be recyclable.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)