10:10

[skean]

10:10 is a simple challenge: cut your emissions by 10% in 2010

Comments

[esran]

Here's a thought. If public transport is running anyway, is biking instead actually less green? (water/heating use for shower, etc

[andygates]

Biking's good base training too, so it ticks two boxes.

Since the challenge is 10:10, how about 10% of flights into non-flight transport? That doesn't sound too gruesome.

[esran]

Good point on the biking.

The other bit doesn't sound like it will reduce emissions by 10%. If my maths is ok and assuming alternative transport is 50% less emissions you'd need to do 20% flights into non-flight transport. So 1 in 5. Which doesn't sound so bad. I've no idea whether 50% less emissions is anywhere near the right ball park though!

[aldric]

You're looking at this the wrong way round. As flights will cover the vast majority of your total emissions you could probably eat all the meat you want, turn the heat up, buy and run a car and still reduce your overall emissions by 10% just by cutting out a flight or two :)

[fialta]

I like your thinking! :-))

[sciolist]

Yay for the less meat diet!

Plant a few trees to offset the flights you can't cut.

[andygates]

How credible is that nowadays? I never fly (just a dirt-poor homebody) so I'm out of the loop on that one.

[flitljm]

Not great - your emissions are going into the atmosphere now, the offset will avoid emissions over a long time line. Depends a bit on the type of offset. Its better than nothing, but not nearly as good as cutting back.

The right trees in the right place do have other obvious benefits.

At work we use http://www.jpmorganclimatecare.com/ for offset, which mainly supports alternative energy projects in developing countries.