Voluntary Lifestyle Changes

Most people are now aware of the importance of saving energy and reducing waste. Many have made simple changes to their lives to reduce carbon emissions, such as purchasing more efficient lighting and appliances, and adding insulation to their homes. A small number have taken further measures such as using clotheslines instead of dryers or purchasing hybrid vehicles. These steps are relatively easy and important, and more simple changes like these are necessary. However, no amount of voluntary personal lifestyle changes will solve global warming or make a significant dent in carbon emissions.

Even if everyone were to take all the recommended simple lifestyle changes to reduce emissions, this would only have an impact of a few percent on global emissions. One of the most optimistic studies, says that if Americans were each to take 17 simple actions, US emissions could be reduced by as much as 7 percent, after 10 years. Since the US is one of the largest consumers and has, by far, the highest per capita emissions, the savings are likely to be much smaller in other countries.

Seven percent of US emissions is a significant amount, and this is nothing to dismiss. We need all the reduction we can get, and each percent is important. However, if everything otherwise remains business as usual, a slow reduction of 7 percent over 10 years is unlikely to be noticeable on a chart of global emissions, since emissions continue to rise much faster than this reduction, which is less than 1 percent per year over a 10 year period. Unfortunately over the past decade global emissions have risen an average of 3.5 percent per year. At best, 100 percent compliance by all Americans would only slightly slow the rate of emissions growth. It would not reduce emissions at all.

Of course, it is completely unrealistic to expect that level of compliance. The issue of global warming has become an ideological battleground in the US, and over 40 percent of Americans don't believe the threat of global warming is significant, or that it is simply a scam. These people are unlikely to engage in voluntary lifestyle changes. The remaining people will likely take many of the recommended steps, but few will take all of them. This suggests a compliance level significantly below 50 percent, which would lower the emissions reduction to around 3 percent over 10 years.

Another problem with focusing on personal lifestyle changes is that it redirects time, energy, and effort away from much more significant and important steps that can be taken at a higher level than the household. The article even suggests that these personal lifestyle changes can remove the necessity to impose any caps on emissions:

To quickly bring down those numbers, the researchers suggested greater focus on consumer behavioral changes and less on efforts to develop new technologies and put in place so-called cap and trade regimes.

This is an extremely dangerous and destructive statement. As the numbers above show, even with full compliance with lifestyle recommendations, emissions will still grow, just at a slightly slower rate. Actual caps are indispensable if the goal is to actually halt emissions growth and to begin to make real reductions in emissions.

The focus on lifestyle changes also ignores the reality of the latest scientific findings. As this article mentions, a new german study, relying on the latest data, says the US must reduce emissions to zero by 2020 in order to prevent catastrophic impacts from climate change. Lifestyle changes simply won't get us there. As with recycling, all the focus in on 5 percent of the problem, while the other 95 percent (reduction and reuse in that case) is being ignored.

If we really want to make significant reductions in emissions, it will require massive infrastructure changes, which will mean significant policy and legislative changes. For example, instead of trying replace all gasoline cars with electric cars, we need an extensive electrified rail system designed to transport the majority of cargo and people. This can get the bulk of cars and trucks off the road, and even allow us to eventually scale back the road system. This is one step that could dramatically help in reducing emissions.

Another way to reduce emissions is to curtail the massive overconsumption in the US, as well as in other western countries. Whether this is done through legislation (banning certain products or groups of products) or through market incentives (massive taxes on certain types of products) doesn't really matter. The important thing is to make the necessary legislative or policy changes required to reduce this excessive consumption.

Changes like these, and many others being proposed, will also involve lifestyle changes, but these aren't the types of lifestyle changes a person or family can take independently. Someone may wish to get rid of their car, but if there is no transit and if it is impossible to work close to where they live, this could be difficult or impossible. Only with infrastructure changes does this become a real possibility for millions of people.

We should continue to educate people on how they can make simple lifestyle changes to reduce their carbon impact, and we should all personally take the steps we can. But we must also push for significant change at the regional, national and international level. With Copenhagen quickly approaching, we have very little time to lose.