Nursing an eco-headache

April 23, 2008

The New York Times recently took advantage of the time of year to launch a “green” issue of its popular Sunday magazine. I know, big surprise—it reportedly got huge ad dollars. But the issue was interesting, and it did give me an appreciation for the complexity of eco-living. Taking into account all the ways a single person can release carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases), the attempt to quantity one’s exact impact on the environment becomes akin to tracking the climate implications of a single Joshua tree in New Mexico.
Does chaos theory at some point take over? If I do manage to figure out my lifetime carbon footprint, do I instantly revert to my final entropic state?

A terrifying thought, I know. Nevertheless, I did my Earthly duty the other day and signed up for a “rideshare” plan at both my workplace and my state’s Web site. The program encourages carpooling (and vanpooling) by putting passenger car commuters in touch with each other. If everyone did it, the theory goes, somewhere between 50% and 75% of the daily traffic load would be wiped out. I’m not so sure about that.

According to the government, the energy consumed by passenger cars in the U.S. in 1975 amounted to about 9,200 BTUs. In 2005, it was about 9,400 BTUs. In spite of rising gas prices, rising fuel economy, and rising number of cars, we have been consuming about the same amount of energy via passengers car for the past 30 years. If I drop out of the picture as a driver, someone else will merely pop in and fill my place.

And even if I do someday manage to limit my movements to the bipedal variety, some opinionists are saying my carbon load actually increases by walking. Can you believe that?

Ultimately, carpooling is best for saving not the planet, but one’s bottom line. Even at an average 30 mpg, 60+ miles of daily commuting is costly. According to the rideshare program a thoughtful colleague pointed me to, yearly transportation expenses easily exceed $5,000 for the average American driver, and I’m sad to say that’s a much easier figure to quantify.

E-mail the editor