How much does your NHL team travel?

Time flies when one is being lazy! I saw this article a few weeks ago but never blogged it!

Here it is - Dirk Hoag made an awesome table calculating the miles traveled by each NHL team in the 2009/2010 season comparing to their 2008/2009 season. This info can be directly used to update the NHLPA carbon neutral challenge blog where I estimated the amount of carbon emission per Vancouver Canucks player…  it’ll be discussed later.

First, some interesting facts from Dirk Hoag’s article!

• Calgary Flames travels the most - 55,331 miles (89,047km)
• Buffalo Sabres travels the least - 25,991 miles (41,828 km), 47% of Calgary!
• Average - 40,782 miles (65,632 km)
• Vancouver Canucks is ranked 4th in the most distance traveled (48,221 miles or 77,604 km) after Phoenix Coyotes, Dallas Stars, and Calgary Flames
• San Jose Sharks reduced their travel the most by 9,696 miles (15,604km) in 2009/2010!

OK, we know that for each player to participate in the NHLPA carbon neutral challenge, each of them pays $320 to purchase 10-tonnes of Carbon. In my NHLPA carbon neutral challenge article, I estimated that the total travel distance for a Canuck player is 60,000km producing 14 tonnes of carbon dioxide (200g CO2-equivalent per km traveled by air). According to this new info, everyone in the Vancouver Canucks hockey club produces 15.5 tonnes of CO2 per year, which means Canucks players should buy more carbon credits =). I would calculate the actual carbon credits to be purchased by every team in the league, but many teams actually travels by car to some of the games and the carbon emission is different. If and when I find those info, I’d be happy to prepare a table so that players and staff, if interested, can pay appropriate amount of carbon offsets to be truely “carbon neutral”.

What do you think?

Wal-Mart Index - green label for products!

It’s been a while since i’ve last posted - i was away for a trip and just couldn’t keep up with quality postings! Anyway, i’m back and back to blogging about how we can/not shop our way to sustainability!

I’ve discussed Walmart’s sustainability policy before, and I’m excited to see how companies such as Walmart is enforcing some sort of environmental responsibility to their suppliers. Really it’s a win-win situation for Walmart because they really don’t need to do much other than “asking”, while getting all the credits. Personally, I’m just happy that things are moving in the right direction. 

Yesterday Walmart announced that they will be creating “green labels” to measure the social and environmental impact of the products it sells in its discount stores.  Although only 100 out of 40,000 products will bear the label in the beginning (which are the Energy Star appliances), I’m sure more will come eventually. I’ve always wanted to be making green labels for products! Now there might be some opportunities for me to dig in more!

Fight on Climate Change - China Reports 66-Percent Drop in Plastic Bag Use

In January 2008, China banned the use of free plastic bags that are less than 0.025 millimeters thick in shops, supermarkets, and sales outlets.  This article published on the Worldwatch Insititute discussed the report card after a year.

The results?  

• 40 billion bags were eliminated according to the government estimates
• but rural area seem to continue giving out free plastic bags

How do they do it?

• a fine of $10,000 yuan (around $1,650 CAD)
• a large troop of 600,000 inspector and a well funded inspection program

Side effect?

• shut down of a plastic bag manufacturing plant in China

I think overall it’s a great thing that the China government is banning plastic bags.  I was just in Shanghai for a few days and  I must confess that I get free plastic bags everywhere I went. Some of them were quite thick at shops, but I’m not sure how many actually meets the reg! But i guess it’s still a good start!

Time fo Gas Tax Honesty in BC?

This article on Burnaby Now is published on June 6, 2009.  Since 1999, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, had held “gas tax honesty day” each year.  Yes there are a lot of tax associated with gasoline, and it is a tax grab from the government.  Same with tabacco tax and alcohol tax.  But, the Carbon Tax imposed on gasoline and other fossil fuels is not the same!  Again and again, people are misunderstood because those who publish articles do not understand (or do not want others to understand) the “revenue neutral carbon tax” system that is implemented in BC. In BC, the carbon tax is set up so that if you change your behaviour, you may be rewarded!  I don’t want to re-write what i wrote before, you can read more about the BC Carbon Tax here and here. 

I agree that we need to be honest about what tax we’re paying into the “Gas tax”; but we also need to be honest about the “carbon tax”.I don’t think this article was honest about that!  Also, I also disagree that Stephen Harper was right when he said a carbon tax will “screw everybody”.  

The bottome line is that we know that we need a price on carbon so that we’ll eventually change our behaviours! Don’t forget that the carbon tax in BC was found to be the best climate change policy in Canada.

What do you think?

Movie about earth by Yann Arthus-Bertrand - A hymn for the planet

Watch this movie on youtube - A hymn for the planet

I actually haven’t got a chance to view it myself but I intend to (therefore I put it on my blog). Please let me know what you think of the project =).  Some info:
HOME is an ode to the planet’s beauty and its delicate harmony. Through the landscapes of 54 countries captured from above, Yann Arthus-Bertrand takes us on an unique journey all around the planet, to contemplate it and to understand it. But HOME is more than a documentary with a message, it is a magnificent movie in its own right. Every breathtaking shot shows the Earth - our Earth - as we have never seen it before. Every image shows the Earth’s treasures we are destroying and all the wonders we can still preserve. “From the sky, there’s less need for explanations”. Our vision becomes more immediate, intuitive and emotional. HOME has an impact on anyone who sees it. It awakens in us the awareness that is needed to change the way we see the world. (HOME embraces the major ecological issues that confront us and shows how everything on our planet is interconnected.)

Synopsis
In 200,000 years on Earth, humanity has upset the balance of the planet, established by nearly four billion years of evolution. The price to pay is high, but it is too late to be a pessimist: humanity has barely ten years to reverse the trend, become aware of the full extent of its spoliation of the Earth’s riches and change its patterns of consumption.

A People’s Project
By bringing us unique footage from the Earth and sharing with us his wonder and his concern, Yann Arthus-Bertrand lays a foundation stone for the world that, together, we must rebuild. The film HOME intends to shift people’s perceptions, to make us aware of the tectonic movements at work and to incite us to act.

We have a greater impact on the Earth than it can bear. We over-consume and are depleting the Earth’s resources. From the air, it is easy to see the Earth’s wounds. HOME simply sets out our current situation, while saying that a solution exists. The film’s subtitle could be “It’s Too Late To Be A Pessimist”. We have reached a crossroads; important decisions must be taken to change our world. Everybody knows about what the film says, but nobody wants to believe it. So HOME adds its weight to the argument of environmental organizations that we need a common sense approach to change our consumerist way of life.