Durham’s New “Carbon Catalog”
Mission
Fossil Fuels have provided us with host of benefits, including: fertilizer, fabrics, electricity, plastic, and fuel, to name just a few. In fact, nearly all advances in the last 100 years since its discovery can be laid at the feet of inexpensive energy. Now, we are beginning to understand the consequences and true costs of carbon emissions from chemical pollutants and global climate change to hyper resource consumption and poorly designed communities. We have yet to begin to commit to the large-scale changes necessary to create an emissions-free energy structure. To do so will require a number of innovative strategies, of which internalizing into our economic decision-making the true costs of our emissions is critical. Political capture, in action and slow response on the state, national and international levels are forcing municipalities to take leadership in the effort to combat climate change. The development of a carbon mitigation system at the local or community level may be the most effective mechanism for immediate action. Durham recently contracted for an greenhouse gas emissions characterization, see:
www.durhamnc.gov/ghg
The massive economic growth created by industrialization and market society has completely altered human expectations about living standards, and in the developed world, demolished our immediate sense of dependence on the earth. Thomas Berry calls this detachment “the incapacity of humans in the industrial cultures to be present to the Earth and its various modes of being in some intimate fashion.” As consumers and as industry, we have begun to respond to ecological crisis by calling ourselves “green,” by recycling on a personal level and by purchasing carbon offsets on an institutional level. As Thomas Friedman writes, “The dirty little secret is that we’re fooling ourselves.” We are not changing our patterns of consumption, because we are not fully appreciating our human role on the planet.
Addressing the post-industrial challenges of global warming and species loss requires not only scientific research, but a universally renewed attachment to nature. As places of research and learning, universities will have to lead this transformation. The institutions leading the way have realized that the possibilities for real change lie in the politics of the local and relationship to place, specifically collaborative sustainability efforts on a local and regional level. The real plan to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels lies in local initiatives. By forming a coalition for local carbon mitigation projects, we can engage our community with the Earth in such a way to allow a deeper transformation in how we live our lives.
Goals
The primary goal of the Working Group is to create a local fund to support the Community Carbon Mitigation Catalog, that offer the largest carbon mitigation equivalents (”bang for the buck” and “low hanging fruit”), such as:
energy conservation,
transportation,
green space, and
solar electricity and hot water.
By creating a way for individuals and businesses to make recognizable donations (i.e. “trades” in money for carbon) locally, the Working Group can begin to internalize external costs of pollution while instilling a sense of community, keeping money local (with a multiplier effect on the economy), and supporting worthy local projects.
Together with other organizations, it is hoped that a system of resources and services in education, training and consulting can be developed to support these field projects. The Working Group can develop a program to not only help and support the area’s clean energy, but to provide a training system that can give university students and faculty experience and opportunities.
To fulfill its goals, the Working Group proposes four objectives:
A. Development of an Advisory Board:
The first step is to have a meeting and establish an advisory board. Jeff Chase, of Duke’s computer science department, did a thorough equivalence for bio-diesel, using a $15-30/metric ton price for carbon emissions. He has offered to host the first Working Group meeting at his house. Most important is the determination of the management structure of the entity of this Community Carbon Mitigation Catalog. Will it be a non-profit or not-for-profit? Should it be run as a business? What overhead should be added? To date, Clean Energy Durham has agreed to take the lead and The Forest Foundation has offered it’s offices and infrastructure to house a staff member and operations.
B. A Carbon Equivalent Catalog:
CED’s intern James Hicks will work with Self-Help’s Jane Brown through June 13 to prepare a business plan for the local carbon mitigation catalog, including the sales model and the items to be sold. This catalog can become a precursor to a more sophisticated mitigation and trading system, helping to establish carbon equivalents and identifying local projects.
CED’s intern Rob Baird will work part-time in his fall semester to finalize the business plan and confirm the participation of product suppliers.
C. Marketing:
A student marketing consultant can begin to market these projects to for-profit companies that might underwrite them for tax credits, like: Duke Energy, GlaxoSmithKline, IBM or SAS.
These projects can also appeal to already existing commitments for mitigation, who, for the most part, are using projects outside the Triangle and the State to achieve their carbon reduction. Examples are Pratt School of Engineering, Fuqua School of Business and Nicholas School of the Environment.
D. List of participating organizations:
Compiling a list of both potential buyers of credits and sellers of credits as well as possible sponsors or underwriters of the infrastructure to create and update the catalog and operate the trading/mitigation system.
Each organization interested in participating in the Catalog should compile their own catalog or carbon offsets with carbon equivalents. For example, Clean Energy Durham could list 100 CFLs installed for $1,000 ($5 for the bulb and $3 for labor and $2 for overhead) would achieve 1/3 of a ton x 100, or 33.3 tons (2240 lbs/ton) over 12,000 hours. That’s .033 tons per $1, or 75 lbs. per $1 over the lifetime, approximately 5 years. That’s a great deal! Triangle Land Conservancy could list an acre of land, or 10 tree plantings, and Carolina Biodiesel could list 100 gals of biodiesel, displacing 100 gals of diesel, achieving roughly 2000 lbs of carbon for $350 (plus 70% less air pollution and locally produced fuel). Each equivalent should be certified or confirmed by a third party, say by The Nicholas School at Duke’s students.
Protocol for Membership
· A letter is required from all possible Members and Organizations stating their interest in participation;
· Attendance at meetings, conferences or lectures;
· Input on draft and finished publications of the Working Group;
· Assistance in identifying Board members and/or funding sources.
Copy produced by James Hicks, intern (with edits from Marc Dreyfors)
for
Clean Energy Durham (CED) and
The Forest Foundation, Inc.