Land Development Releases Greenhouse Gases

Land use change releases stored carbon and should be counted under Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reporting.  

Example of a wildflower meadow (left) that was bulldozed to create a parking lot (right). This land use change results in direct emissions of stored soil carbon and plant biomass, as well as continuing opportunity costs: the meadow can no longer accumulate sequestered carbon. If this land is owned by the developing company, this would count as Scope 1 Emissions under GHG reporting requirements.

New GHG reporting standards for land use change are due to be finalized in 2024. According to these new standards,

"Companies shall:

-Account for land use change emissions from land carbon stock decreases across all carbon pools (biomass, soil organic carbon and dead organic matter).

-Account for and report direct land use change (dLUC) emissions or statistical land use change (sLUC) emissions in scope 1, scope 2, and scope 3."

This is important because, according to the IPCC AR6 (2023), land use change accounts for approximately 15% of anthropogenic emissions.  Interestingly, the parts of the land and ocean that have not been developed by humans still absorb 30% of our emissions.  As we degrade more and more land and water, the Earth loses this buffering capacity, in addition to the extra emissions created from land use change.

Emergy is not the new Money

Emergy analysis aims to document and compare the amount of energy required to produce different products. In comparison to Embodied Energy analysis, which measures just human inputs of energy, Emergy analysis measures both natural and human energy inputs. The laudable goal is to put all calculations in the same currency so that everything can be compared. However, emergy is an impossible concept and, in the end, really just weird.

First, it is weird economics. In fact, it is Marxist economics because Emergy, like Marxism, seeks to go beyond the capitalist system that assigns value based on demand to an alternative system based on supply. But then Emergy turns around and assigns emergy to dollars, a blatant contradiction. Also, emergy is not able to account for opportunity costs. For example, there is still no way to value the salmon that would have lived had it not been for the dam that destroyed their spawning grounds.

Second, it is a weird way of valuing raw resources (inputs). Putting everything in terms of solar energy makes some sense, but not when a dubious logic is used to convert rain and wind into solar equivalents, let alone when metal ores are assigned an arbitrary emergy. The urge to put everything into a hegemonic coinage is as old as the simplifying instinct, and as faulty. Everything can't be reduced to solar energy. Sustainability needs a more adaptive system and a more adaptive framework to ask questions.

Third, it has weird system diagrams (see above). While they look cool at first, one quickly realizes their myriad failings by comparing emergy diagrams to contemporaneous dynamic stock-and-flow modeling software like Stella. Also, emergy puts the controlling forces in the same format as the flows of energy, confusing both.

Fourth, it is weird ecology. The idea of "resources required" for a certain product seems to assume that the resources are "used up" in making that product, but ecosystems don't work that way. The grass that the cow eats might otherwise have died and decomposed, or if a cow eats all the grass in the lot it may create better habitat for some bird species. Presence and absence, especially of niches, are not physical qualities of a habitat. An emergy-type analysis applied to fishing suggests that eating one tuna is equivalent to eating 1,000 sardines, but that is only true if you have to farm the sardines to feed a farmed tuna. In the wild, that tuna has already eaten 1,000 sardines, whether you now eat the tuna or not. In fact, your eating the tuna may spare the next 1,000 sardines from being eaten! While it may be desirable to spare the tuna for other reasons, emergy fails any.

Fifth, it is a weird idea of sustainability. Emergy explicitly doesn't want to "double count" sun and wind, yet a smart farmer could do just that by harvesting wind energy and solar energy. Emergy doesn't do a good job of figuring out what is sustainable versus what isn't: it provides a plethora of weird ratios for calculating "Environmental Yield Ratio" and other indices of sustainability, but these ratios are all based on predetermined categorization of whether a given input is sustainable or not, thus assuming the very thing they seek to prove.

To put everything in the same system to compare everything comes from a good motivation but the conclusions end up being trivial. In my humble opinion, it may be impossible to accurately compare fish and electricity and sedimentation in terms of the energy that went in to them. Weirdly, dollars are still best.

Americans throw away more food than most people consume

According to a paper by Kevin Hall et al in PLoS, Americans waste about 1,400 Calories a day, about as much as is needed to feed an average adult in much of the world. They arrived at this figure by calculating the total number of food calories produced on farmland in America (plus imports, minus exports) and compared this to the total calories consumed by Americans. Although we Americans are doing our best to consume large amounts of food, we still end up throwing away or otherwise wasting enough food every day to feed another person.

Financial Revolution

Revolution?
Pull with every ounce and fiber --total war-- if monkey wrenches or bazookas worked, we'd have them...the criterion for our Revolution is Sustainability. All extractive industries, premised as they are on destruction, are dead ends. Limitless growth within limited resources is illogical and unsustainable.

“Two paths lie before us. One leads to death, the other to life. If we choose the first path… we in effect become allies of death, and in everything we do our attachment to life will weaken; our vision, blinded to the abyss that has opened at our feet, will dim and grow confused; our will discouraged by the thought of trying to build on such a precarious foundation anything that is meant to last, will slacken; and we will sink into stupefication, as though we were gradually weaning ourselves from life in preparation for the end.

"On the other hand, if we reject our doom, and bend our efforts toward survival...then the anesthetic fog will lift;our vision, no longer straining not to see the obvious, will sharpen; our will, finding secure ground to build on,will be restored; and we will take full and clear possession of life again. One day- and it is hard to believe that it will not be soon- we will make our choice.”
Jonathan Schell - The Fate of the Earth

Post-Industrial
Their economic arguments are no longer valid. "Those who make it an us-against-them problem insure that it is an insolvable problem." But, since they are invested in self-perpetuating self-interest, they will fight against us, the people. So we will fight back. But ours is NOT a negative vision: we are working toward a post-industrial world where sustainable industries can grow to replace the pirate corporations.

Citizens have a responsibility to steer capital to create wealth sustainably. Part of this is understanding the nature of wealth; wealth differently defined from the outdated GDP measures of the economists. It is not money. It is not more asthma, cancer, and high blood pressure. It is understanding; understanding that wilderness has more value than consumption, that local organic food is net-cheaper than processed...We are motivated by this vision that is more than logic. It is passion that keeps us awake at night.

Post-Capitalist?
Investing in mutual funds and stocks of large corporations is not Honorable or Responsible. Handing over your accumulated money, which is time and power, to the corporations so that they can spend it for you -- doesn't it smack of feudalism?? Venture capital is usually OK, because it is usually administered personally. Also, VC investment returns are based on actual dividends (i.e. profits) as opposed to stocks, which are only really a glorified casino whose expected payouts are a shell game of speculation not directly tied to any real dividend. Real Estate is also a good investment, for the same reasons of promoting, rather than abnegating, personal responsibility.

I'm not arguing for a return to the gold standard, or trying to repeal the law of comparative advantage, but do understand what is real and what isn't. Hold onto tangibles, especially property...or better yet, don't make any money to begin with. "All money, in whatever form, should be put into land conservation." To really invest in the future, invest in preservation of our vital natural heritage that provides the fresh air we breath and the clean water we drink. The ultimate revolution is understanding what is important.

We Are What We Eat

Top Ten Things To Do To Make Tucson Sustainable

(1) Harvest and conserve water

Step One:  Enjoy sponge baths or basin baths rather than showers.

Note:  A person can bathe in less than a quart of water this way!

At full sustainability Tucsonans will have cisterns, composting toilets, neighborhood water harvesting, and comprehensive water education.    

(2) Use the sun's energy

Step One:  Hang your laundry to dry in the sun.  

Note:  Some communities have restrictions against hanging out laundry.

At full sustainability Tucson will derive all its electricity and transportation from the sun's energy.

   

(3) Eat local and native foods

Step One:  Visit a farmers market.

Note:  Farmers Markets are listed in Tucson Weekly.

At full sustainability Tucson will have a City Food Policy to ensure access to healthy food for all Tucsonans.   Large daily farmers markets with bioregional products will supplement neighborhood food production and neighborhood desert food harvesting.  

(4) Work outdoors with neighbors

Step One:  Organize a neighborhood walk/doorknocking to discover neighborhood assets and what projects interest your neighbors.  

Note:  For tips on organizing neighborhood doorknockings, contact Pro Neighborhoods, (520) 882-5885.

At full sustainability every neighborhood will be safe for pedestrians and bicyclists, have a workable plan for emergencies which cares for all dependents, and engage in sustainable urban food production.

                 

(5) Ride bicycle or walk to your eco-village hub

Step One:  Identify your local commercial hub and do errands there without using fossil fuel; take public transit if your destination is further or you are physically challenged.

Note:  As you walk and bike your neighborhood you may notice places which need   shade trees.  These locations can become urban agriforestry projects.

At full sustainability Tucson will be organized into 60 to 80 complete eco-villages to which people can walk or bike.   These eco-villages will be connected by a safe comprehensive system of bike paths which do not mingle with auto traffic.

(6) Plant A Food Bearing Tree

Step One:  Dig a hole and bust through the caliche.  

Note:  This is more fun if you dig with friends and throw a party when the tree is planted.  Get hold of a caliche bar.  Contact Tucson Botanical Gardens or Tucson Organic Gardeners for best species of trees to plant in your location.

At full sustainability Tucson will be an edible urban forest.

(7) Save food scraps and compost with worms

Step One:  Build a simple home made "worm farm."  Many websites teach how, e.g.: www.earth911.org/master.asp?s=lib&a=organics/composting/wormcompost.asp

Note:  Worms create worm castings and worm juice which are rich plant food.

At full sustainability Tucson's home kitchens, restaurants and cafeteries will be connected by a comprehensive composting program.

(8) Grow food in home garden or community garden

Step One:  Contact Tucson's Community Food Bank or Tucson Organic Gardeners for information on how to grow food.

Note:  We can garden year round in Tucson.   Water is our limiting factor; therefore, water harvesting for gardening is crucial.   Sustainable Tucson highly recommends Brad Lancaster's book Rainwater Harvesting for Drylands, available at Antigone Books, Silverbell Trading, and through Sustainable Tucson in case quantities.

At full sustainability, Tucson and its bioregion will be mostly food self-sufficient.  

(9) Educate yourself and Tucson's representatives about sustainability. 

Step One:  Read the voter's guide for the upcoming election.   Who takes sustainable positions on solar and wind energy, mass transit, bike paths, water conservation?

Note:  Sustainability education is enjoyable in a group.  Our eco-zone potlucks are a wonderful way to share books, DVD's, videos, and ideaswith each other.  Why not start a group in your neighborhood?  Then invite a person running for office.

At full sustainability any school child will be able to tell a visitor to Tucson how our sustainable city works.

(10) Become an entrepreneur in the growing sustainable economy

Step One:  Identify your own art/passion/potential product or service.

Note:  Many entrepreneurs (self-employed people) market products and services. 

At full sustainability, Tucson (including its bioregion) will be mostly self-sufficient for water,

food, energy, and transportation.  Tucson's sustainable infrastructure will need to be planned, installed, and maintained by local businesses attuned to our city's terrain and culture.   Tucson will have a local credit clearing house which keeps our region's financial resources circulating locally.  

Written by Lindianne Sarno with Nicole Christine, Bob Cook, Tom Greco, and Joanie Sawyer.  

©Sustainable Tucson 2006.