stimulate this

President Obama and his staff have been working diligently getting a stimulus package approved to jump start the economy.  And, as promised, he focused on creating a “green” stimulus package.  While some things were cut, in the end, we have $60 Billion going to green initiatives.  

Here is the list:

$11 B for a smart energy grid

$8.4 B for public transit system, including high speed train

$6.3 B for state energy grants

$6 B for cleaning up test areas by the Department of Defense

$4.5 B for greening of Federal Buildings

and 1.2 B for EPA clean up programs

The remaining $20 B  is a compilation of funds going to our National Parks, aquaculture, and jobs.

What was cut: updated the federal car fleet with hybrids (conflicted with the Buy American part of the stimulus bill), assistance to citizens in weatherizing and greening their homes, and updating of school buses.

recession… good?

Over the last few weeks, there has been report after report on how the recession is going to be bad for the “green” movement. Slate magazine begs to disagree.

The Green House: The recession is the best thing that could have happened to Barack Obama.

The feeling amongst many is that Obama believes that the “green” movement and setting the economy back on track go hand in hand. By tackling things like the infrastructure and energy, there is a double benefit of saving money due to efficiency, while also creating “green jobs” and getting people employed, again.

Newly Nobel-ed economist Paul Krugman has taken the lead in arguing that “the usual rules of economic policy no longer apply.” Normally, if you wanted to retrofit a building or weatherize a home, you’d have to get the money from somewhere. The usual way is to increase revenues or reduce spending. No longer. With the economy in freefall and interest rates as low as they can go, the only hope for recovery is to spend—and to err on the side of spending too much.

The best part: Even though we have to borrow money, eventually the government can pay itself back by printing more. Yes, that would devalue the currency and therefore would not be, to use a technical economic term, free. But the way Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research sees it, we have to spend the money now, anyway, to stimulate the economy: “It’s like what Keynes said: Even if we pay people to dig holes and fill them up again, it’s still good.” And if we’re going to spend, we might as well spend on something that’s going to save us—both economically and environmentally—in the long term.

The argument against all of this… spending more and deflating the value of the dollar may lead the way to the Amero and there is always the backlash of a growing economy hurting the green movement.

You can read the article from Slate Magazine, HERE

green isn’t just the color of their fatigues

For the first time, the U.S. Army released a Sustainability Report in a move that shows its commitment to going green. This is due in part to a global action to environmentally sound living, but also because the Army has found, like many of us, that it is just simply cheaper to be green.

In their efforts, they have:

1.) committed to making all new buildings LEED certified
2.) decreased their water usage by a third
3.) moved towards making environmentally friendly “war machines”, including a tank that can be broken down into recyclable parts.
4.) built a 12 acre solar farm in Colorado

Nevertheless, “The Army is at the very early stages of its sustainability journey… There is still much progress to be made and still much to learn,” warns the 62-page report.

A shortfall is the Army’s inability to stop producing so much hazardous waste – 45 million pounds in 2006 alone. Not only is the amount large by any standard, but it is 35 percent higher than in 2003. One reason for the rise is that the Army produced more ammunition and trained its soldiers more often to prepare them in the “Global War on Terror.”

They may still have a long way to go, but at least they have started down the path. I, for one, think that is a major step in this progress.

You can find the entire article at the Environmental News Network, HERE.

i really don’t know what to think

Lately, I have been reading a lot about Wal-Mart’s to be a more sustainable company; switching to CFL’s, lowering air conditioning, new buildings being LEED certified, and the list really does go on and on.

I just read an article about Wal-Mart’s Personal Sustainability Project (PSP). It is program where employees are encouraged to live a more sustainable life, even going so far as ‘vowing” to do something, or not do something.

Since 2007, all Wal-Mart employees in the US have been asked to take a simple, concrete step to benefit their health, their local community, or the earth. PSP pledges, which can involve work or home life or both, have included vows to drive the speed limit (to save gas), clean up trash, quit smoking, switch to a reusable bottle, or turn off the tap when toothbrushing.

Wal-Mart has reported that 45% of its employees enrolled in the program, and this is with no financial incentive to them. However, maybe there should be? In many cases employees have found things that the stores can do to improve their sustainability (i.e., turning off lights in the breakroom). These changes have saved the company over $1Million dollars.

The criticism is that yes, these employees are doing this on their own, as encouraged by the company. But, the company has a long history of demanding things from their employees without any gain to the employee. So, do you praise the company for implementing green initiatives or do you criticize the company for bullying its staff to change how they live without any benefit except they don’t get fired?

It is an interesting debate. I, personally, have had trouble with ‘ends justify the means’ attitude. We saw with gas prices, that when the cost was high, people were trying to incorporate ‘green’ ideas to keep the personal cost low. Now that prices have gone back down, they are back in their SUV’s having not learned a thing about being sustainable.

I think we will see more and more of this in many other companies, with many more examples. It will be interesting to see what effect it has….

You can find the article HERE, via MotherJones.