A lot has changed since I stopped writing a few months ago.  I’ve finished my thesis studying the ways in which renewable energy systems can be integrated into urban architecture.  I graduated from Virginia Tech with a Bachelor of Architecture.  I moved into my new garden apartment in Chicago.  Next week I start working at an architecture firm specializing in mouthwatering modern design with a sustainable edge.  And just last night I learned the definition of a “pneumonia front” and that I don’t like them at all.  A drop of 20-30 degrees in an hour, making it only 44 degrees this late May morning, isn’t my style.

Although I stopped posting, I never stopped trying to reduce my ecological footprint. Graduating from college and starting a new job is giving me the opportunity to completely reshape my life.  It’s a completely new start, it’s Life v2.0.  Honestly it’s been a little intimidating to take a hard look at myself and evaluate where I am, what I want to be, and what I need to change.  But I think the results will include both a happier me and lower impact.

The largest changes resulted from my new location. I chose to live north of downtown Chicago, but still well within the city limits.  My neighborhood is filled with row houses, 2 and 3-flats, and small apartment buildings.  I live in a 1 bedroom garden apartment where I share a small backyard with my neighbors.  Because I’m about 4 feet below ground level, I’m fairly well insulated and will hopefully be able to survive the summer without using the window air conditioner.  The downside of a garden apartment is the smaller and fewer windows, meaning less natural ventilation, although I don’t want for sunlight.

Because I live in a dense neighborhood in a large city, I sold my car. Public transportation is too abundant to warrant the expense and impact of car ownership.  My daily work commute will consist of a half-mile walk and a 15 minute bus ride.  It feels amazing to look at the rising gas prices on every corner and realize that I won’t be paying it anymore.  To further reduce my impact, I’m strongly considering bike commuting.  There’s one or two large intersections on my route that I need to evaluate for rush-hour safety before I commit to that plan.  And should I ever need a vehicle, there is a strong Zip-Car presence in the area that is perfect for occasional driving.

With a yard out back, I’m finally trying my hand at gardening. With permission from the building manager, I’ve planted a barrel and row of green beans, a pot of bell peppers, and smaller pots with cooking herbs.  I hope to add a couple heirloom tomato plants to that mix in the coming week.  If all goes well this fall I’ll have some produce both for myself and to share with my neighbors.

I’m also trying to improve my quality of life by getting rid of my TV. No more black box as the focal point of my living room.  As a college student, I found myself frequently distracted by episodes of Law and Order, CSI, and NCIS marathons.  Most of the TV I watched wasn’t intentional, it was due to habit and the ease of access.  For those shows that hold a special place in my heart (Lost, NCIS, House), I’ll be taking advantage of streaming videos on the network websites.  I might have to wait an extra day, but I doubt I’ll really notice.

Instead of TV, I’m hoping to fill my time with cooking, reading, meditation, and exercise. These are areas in which I want to increase my proficiency.  All of them will increase my quality of life.  Most of them also can be foundations for social interaction.  We’ll see how it goes.

As I said a few months ago, between a job search and finishing my thesis project, there just wasn’t room for regular blogging.  I make no promises now.  Once I feel out this new world of Life v2.0, I’ll decide whether blogging is truly right for me, or if my green desires are better fulfilled in some other way.  In the meantime, thanks for all the support and well wishes, they’ve been most incredibly appreciated.

I’m currently seeking advice and information about architectural intern positions in the Chicago area.  This May I’ll be graduating with my Bachelor of Architecture from Virginia Tech, where I’m ranked #1 in the College of Architecture and Urban Studies.  I’m looking for a firm with a strong commitment to sustainability where I can continue learning about green design and utilize my certification as a LEED AP.  Examples of my work are available here.  If you can recommend any firms or even better, know someone I should contact, then please comment or email me!

My hiatus from blogging has not only been the result of a broken computer.  I’m also currently seeking employment after I graduate this May with my Bachelor of Architecture.  This job search rightfully requires a great deal of my attention, and between it and completing my thesis project, I’m forced to pare down my other hobbies such as this blog.

A major thesis deadline is coming up in two weeks, and will quickly be followed by a trip to Chicago for job interviews.  After those I hope to have more time to devote to my research of green materials and technologies and posting the results for your reading pleasure .  Thanks for your patience and support, I look forward to rejoining the blogosphere again soon!

My laptop fan seems to be broken at the moment, so there may be a couple days wait on the next post while I get it fixed.  Until then, check out the links on the blogroll for your green fix

The BBC today reported that Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, former chairman of Shell Oil, says that the EU should mandate that all cars sold achieve at least a 35 mpg rating. While unfortunately it’s realization is a remote possibility, I think it’s fantastic to hear an industrialist propose something sustainable.

The two major adversaries to such a regulation are car companies and the public. This is true both in the EU and the US. Politicians don’t want to piss off the factory workers that build gas-guzzlers, nor the constituents that drive them. And let’s face it: as a Western culture we are addicted to big and fast. We want that spine-tingling pedaltothemedal zoom that you just can’t get in a Prius. And the movies never show Johnny getting Susie’s shirt off in the back of a Civic hybrid. It’s a giant van spewing the same amount of smoke outside that is *cough* “occurring naturally” inside.

Changing our attitudes about cars is tough. We’re romantically involved with the idea of limitless boundaries of speed, size, and distance. It’s hard to give those up in the name of a globally-conscious ideal that often just doesn’t have the same sex appeal. But starting to equate big=bad and efficient=sexy is the way to eventually make not only an mpg regulation a reality, but a culture centered on sustainability. Let that tingle your spine. With the public on their side, politicians would willingly tell the auto companies to step it up.

While breaking a cultural addiction sounds truly daunting (and near impossible) there are some easy ways to start changing both your mindset and those around you.

• Next time you see a hybrid or high-efficiency vehicle, (even if it’s old or small or puke yellow) compliment it. To the owner or to your friend; demonstrate that it’s a quality you appreciate in the world around you.
• Next time you see a jaw-dropping, souped up racer, keep your mouth closed. Even if it’s owner is begging for attention. There’s no need to be whiny or condescending and ask about the horrible gas mileage it gets, your silence will be enough to send the message.
• When deciding which car to take (often an issue in my group of friends) always suggest the one with the highest mpg. Feel free to disclose your reasoning if asked, but just saying “oh I like Rachel’s car..” will make Rachel feel good and cause your other friends to think of her car in a positive light. Mind you, if you’re always suggesting Rachel’s car it’s a good idea to help with the gas money. It shouldn’t be much.

I try to keep this mindset when I’m at home. My mother drives a Prius, my father a Yukon, and there’s about a 30 mpg difference between them. If I have to borrow a car, my first choice is always the Prius. When we make long trips to visit family I try to suggest it as well, although it doesn’t always work. But me nagging about the “behemoth” is just going to make Dad tune me out.

The basic idea is to praise the sustainable while keeping mum about the less-so. Keeping a positive tone will do more than constantly worrying others about pollution. And while I would never encourage a girl to go to second base just because it’s a hybrid, maybe a second date is an option? After all, with the savings in gas money he can buy you dessert.

How do you support high-efficiency vehicles?
image via

Let me know if you like it.  Theoretically the sidebars being a dark blue should reduce your computer electricity usage when viewing the page , ala blackle.

best graphic award – link below (UK)

For each person concerned with reducing their personal carbon emissions, there’s a carbon calculator on the internet. Enter in your driving habits, household heating system, and number of yearly trips to the Bahamas and *poof*, your impact on the environment is handed to your all wrapped up in a nice little number. But how do they come up with that little number? And more importantly, who’s they and why should you trust them to accurately calculate your carbon emissions?

One of the most important aspects of a carbon calculator is transparency. The EPA does a great job with this in their calculator located here. Not only do they have a list of all their assumptions, they even have a spreadsheet version with all the formulas you can download. They have the data, after all, they’re the EPA! They take home heating, transportation, waste disposal, and CFL usage into account. However, they miss out on plane trips and other occasional items.

Details can really make a difference, especially when counting transportation emissions. An Inconvienent Truth’s calculator lets you include the make and model of your car, as well as list the number and length of flights you take. They also provide a list of their assumptions. However, in those assumptions they mention that all the aspects their calculator covers account for only 32% of per capita emissions in the US. Therefore, they provide a ranking system that helps measure your emissions compared to the US average.

Including as many aspects of your lifestyle helps achieve the most complete emissions estimate in relation to that overall per capita number. That means looking for a calculator that includes not only your home and transportation emissions, but your recycling, diet, and hot water usage as well. Sadly, most calculators I found revolve around only the first two. Let me know (or comment!) if you find a good calculator that includes some of these extras!

Know who produces your calculator. Government agencies and nonprofits are usually fine, but I would be wary of sites trying to sell products or services based on your results.

Locality is the last crucial step in finding a carbon calculator that is accurate for you. If you live outside the US, don’t just pick a state and use a US calculator. The calculations usually base emissions on the types of power (coal, hydro, etc) prevalent in each state, and these can vary widely. Use a calculator that is designed for where you live. Here are some decent calculators I found for the UK, Australia, and just about everywhere else.

It’s important to remember that no online calculator will likely be complete enough to discover your true and total emissions. What’s important is realizing the difference you can make through sustainable choices to your lifestyle. Some emissions factors you can change more easily than others, and calculators are great at helping you discover those areas in which you can make the largest difference.

I’m the kind of person that fights off the cold morning chill with a scalding hot shower.  However, I’ve learned that taking showers that are too hot actually cause your skin to be dryer and less healthy.  In addition, although shower length is generally how carbon output is reduced, shower temperature also effects the amount of energy needed.  So by dropping my shower temperature a few degrees I can not only help reduce my carbon output, but improve the health of my skin.  Tricks like this, which improve quality of life while helping the environment, are my favorite kind of green living. 

So how much can we save?  My residence hall shower isn’t new in the least, so I can safely assume that a 10 minute shower uses about 25 gallons (200lbs) of water.  Heating it to scalding, about 120 F, from 60 F takes 12000 BTU.  But heating the same amount of water to just 110 F uses only 10000 BTU.

(200lb)(120-60)=12,000 BTU       (200lb)(110-60)=10,000 BTU     12,000-10,000=2,000 BTU

That difference of 2000 BTU is equivalent to .586 kWh a day.   As my university uses coal power, it means 1.227 lbs less carbon released each day.  Over a year, that’s 447.86 lbs of carbon.  Putting this in perspective, with the energy and carbon savings you could instead keep 5 10w CFLs (40w equivalent) on for 10 hours a day.  All for giving up just 10 extra degrees of heat in my shower, ones I likely won’t even notice.

Now this is just one specific way to reduce the carbon impact of your shower.  As I live in a residence hall it’s really the only aspect I can control, besides with the length of my showers.  If I were to reduce that time by even a minute, that’s an extra .36 lbs of carbon saved per day.  But if you want to do more, here are some easy tricks you might be able to use that are even easier:

-Install a low-flow shower head and use 50% less water (1.8lbs of carbon a day with a 10min shower).  Also look for one with a stop valve so you can soap up without wasting water.

-get an insulating blanket for your old water heater

-turn down the heat on your water heater

-get a tankless water heater

-and for the really ambitious, install a solar hot water heating system (no more carbon guilt!)

Good luck and happy showering!!

(data for calculations found here and here) 

Greendweller has been around about 3 months now and will likely reach the 1000 visitors milestone this week.  Hooray!  During that time I’ve realized to an extent what I can expect from myself, this blog, and you readers, so I’ve decided to make a couple changes to Greendweller.

Posting Schedule-  I’m dropping my posting schedule to 2/week, with every 4th-6th post or so double posted to The Sietch.  With most of my time devoted to graduating and finding a job in Chicago, there just isn’t time to write 5 well-researched posts a week.

Posts- That said, I still see a lot of value in blogging as a platform for yours and my own questions about sustainability.  My favorite posts are still those where we actually got down to numbers and were able to effectively evaluate practices or options.

Attitute- While everyone loves a warm fuzzy CFL post, there are some more controversial green issues I would like to explore here.   Expect to see more posts in the future covering such things as McMansions, meat consumption, and personal responsibility.

Thank you to everyone that has commented, become a regular reader, or just stopped by as a result of a random Google search.  Your support is the best motivation.

After getting a comments about EarthLab (thanks Alex) and questions about other carbon calculators I realized it’s sometimes difficult to evaluate the legitimacy of the sustainable “facts” you see online.  Whenever I visit a website for research purposes (for this blog or my own knowledge) here’s what I look for:

Google Rank- If it’s the first or second result on your google search then it’s a very popular site and that can typically attest to a website’s legitimacy.  However, this also can give very commercialized sites so google rank should never be your sole indicator.

Page Design- Nearly every website of worth can afford to have decent to good typography, graphics, and general layout.  The exception to this is the government, but they have their own credibility.

Sponsoring Organization- This is a big one.  Personally I favor using U.S. governmental organizations websites for information, especially the USGS and DOE.  While conspiracy theorists may disagree, there is a rigor and standard to the research presented on these sites, and usually the information is extensive.  Otherwise your next best bet is probably a non-profit organization.  Since they’re not trying to make money off you, the only thing they’re selling is their ideals.  Look for broader or nationally known affiliations when evaluating the reliability of a non-profit’s information.  The USGBC is probably more reliable than John Doe’s Corncob Building Association.

Bias- Once I get past the above three, I start really looking at the information/advice a site is presenting.  Usually every site has some bias, but does that bias affect the truthfulness of their information?  A bit of reading and critical thinking can differentiate between a passionate but scientific source and extremists who would say anything to prove their point.

Is there anything else that you look for when determining the validity of a site?  Next post I’ll focus on just carbon calculators and where to go for reliable estimates.