This paper is designed to find out more about the consequences of personal and household decisions for greenhouse gas emissions. You will be asked to develop and carry out a personal program of greenhouse gas reduction, and report on the results. On the basis of this experiment with your own lifestyle, you will analyze whether we as Americans can change our behavior in time to prevent dramatic climate change and its consequences. By most accounts, this goal requires at least a 75-80 percent reduction in annual emissions from the United States by the year 2050.
You will carry out a lifestyle assessment and an intensive experiment on how you can reduce your emissions. The paper should describe and reflect on your lifestyle analysis and the initial experiment you are required to undertake to reduce your emissions.
Here are recommended steps for going about this experiment, and analyzing the results:
1) As an initial step in the exercise, identify areas of your personal consumption that are promising for you to pursue reductions in your own greenhouse gas production.
A crucial component of this exercise is the use of greenhouse gas calculators, which estimate your emissions automatically when you enter selected data. Over the last several years these have proliferated, but they vary widely in precision, accuracy and general usefulness. Since there is variation even among reputable calculators, more than one is usually necessary to establish what the emissions are. Some of the best calculators target only a specific product or activity, such as travel, rather than all sources of emissions.
To calculate your emissions and reductions for purposes of this exercise, we have selected two of the most comprehensive and precise calculators, plus at least one other. You will be required to calculate results using two of the three most highly regarded calculators, along with one other. You can use any combination of the following calculations, as long as two of them are from choices a, b, or c. (For example, you can choose the Nature Conservancy Calculator and the Cool Climate Calculator, and then the gas mileage calculator).
a) The Nature Conservancy calculator, maintained by an environmentalist interest group,
b) The Cool Climate Calculator maintained by the UC Berkeley Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory,
c) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency calculator, maintained by the chief environmental agency of the federal government, and
d) At least one other calculator of your choice (e.g, the gas mileage calculator at EPA).
Web links to the first three calculators along with an assortment of others may be found at the end of this paper.
Use the calculators first to estimate your existing rate of greenhouse gas emissions. To see what difference you can make, experiment by entering in realistic alternative behaviors or products. Results will generally be given on an annual basis (i.e. pounds of carbon per year if you use your stereo a certain number of hours a week). This gives you a chance to assess the cumulative results of any change in behavior over time.
2) Based on this information, develop a plan of action for a short term program of greenhouse gas reductions. You will have flexibility to set when the plan will be carried out, but the period should last no less than two days (48 hours). Using the calculators and any other sources available, try to maximize your reductions.
3) Now carry out your plan. Make sure you keep track of the kinds of reductions, the obstacles you encounter, and any other ideas that come to mind. It will be a good idea to keep a running diary of your reflections as you go along, to generate material for your report.
4) Finally, write up the report on your exercise. There is no required format for the report, but it should include answers to several questions:
a) What were the main components of your greenhouse gas emissions? Be as specific as possible, taking into account the variations in the calculators. A table of your emissions according to the different calculators is highly recommended for this part of the exercise.
b) What sources of emissions did you succeed in reducing, and how much difference did it make? How much were your emissions reduced? (Compare cumulative annual rates before and after to assess this.) Again, specific figures (even if estimated) should be used to assess your reduction.
c) A critical analysis of your experiment and its implications is crucial. What does your experience in the exercise say about how difficult it will be for Americans to attain the reductions that will be necessary to address the greenhouse gas problem? Did you encounter obstacles in accomplishing your reductions (e.g., in finding a product that would make it possible, or using a more sustainable form of transportation)? How could those obstacles be overcome?
Were there aspects of the exercise that were surprisingly easy or fun, or that had other benefits (e.g., saving money)? If so, what does this suggest about what might make reductions easier for everybody?
On the basis of your experience, can we expect that Americans will be able to make many of the changes that are necessary through personal choices alone?
d) For a sustained program of reducing your greenhouse gas emissions, what other measures does your experience suggest you should undertake?
5) Assessment. will be based on
a) the thoroughness and accuracy of your assessment of possible reductions,
b) the seriousness of your program for reductions,
c) the thoroughness and reasonableness of your reporting of the results,
d) the critical thinking you demonstrate in your answers to questions 4(c ) and 4(d), and
e) the style and organization of your report.
You are required to use a standard bibliographic form and scholarly citation form for the references to your paper, including listing in a bibliography at the end. You will be expected to use a standard citation form (the American Psychological Association is the standard form in many of the social sciences, but University of Chicago or Modern Language Association forms are permissible) and to apply it consistently. Attach printouts from calculators used in your research to the back of your paper.
The Nature Conservancy (Environmental Advocacy Group) Calculator:
The Nature Conservancy’s carbon footprint calculator estimates how many tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases your choices create each year. The calculator examines the following categories: home energy, transportation, food/diet, and recycling/waste. You can select to calculate your personal carbon footprint or your household footprint. To help reduce your climate impact, climate-saving tips and ways to offset your carbon footprint are given.
The goals of this project are to help individuals and households understand the relative, cumulative impact of everyday activities on climate change, and provide resources to help users reduce their climate footprints. The calculator examines the following areas: Transportation, Housing, Food, and Goods/services. The site also contains a widget with helpful suggestions for reductions that you can also use to calculate the effects from specific measures. Once you have viewed your results, you can compare your emission equivalencies with the EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator at
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the main U.S. administrative agency in charge of environmental policy, maintains one of the most detailed, up-to-date and useful calculators:
Other Lifestyle Calculators:
Carbon Footprint calculator:
One of the more detailed calculators, maintained by a UK company that sells carbon “offsets” to companies and households to compensate for emissions. The calculator includes a variety of transportation choices as well as relatively specific entries for various choices about eating and shopping.
Gas Mileage Impact calculator:
This site offers specific calculations of emissions by vehicle make and model. By choosing the year, make, and model of the car, can get the information on the carbon footprint, annual fuel cost, and the MPG of your car. This site is especially useful if you have future plans to purchase a new vehicle.
EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator:
This helpful all-purpose site enables you to convert kilowatt-hours of electricity or therms of natural gas into tons of greenhouse gas emissions. Also converts vehicle miles traveled to greenhouse gas emissions, based on national averages. But if you already know the make and year of your vehicle, it is best to use another site that allows this more specific data to be entered as the basis for calculating vehicle emissions. The site also enables comparison of different greenhouse emissions sources: you can estimate how many cars your overall energy reductions effectively take off the road, or how many railcars of coal you save!
Josh Chaplin "The Earth would be an altogether different spot without the moon. Talk about… " The facts demonstrate that without the moon, the earth would be a less sentimental spot. Legendary werewolves could never have been considered, nor would we have a schedule dependent on the idea of the lunar stages. It has without a doubt affected human culture over centuries, however can the equivalent be said for our neighboring divine satellite in topographical terms? An apparently immaterial piece of shake in correlation, it very well may be difficult to understand that the moon has had such possibly noteworthy effects on molding the earth as it shows up today. Be that as it may, as it appears, a chain of occasions were gotten under way from the moment the moon was framed which have left us here confused by it, yet have left us here in any case. The heft of the moon's duty regarding affecting upon the planet lies with its attractive energy and vicinity to the earth. Such a situation takes into account it to affect the tides of our seas, which thusly serves to slow the world's revolution and heave the moon further away from us. The gravitational fascination of the moon is additionally the settling factor in a divine fight between the huge assortments of the nearby planetary group to startle the planet's hub obliquity. The very reality that the moon is here in any case recounts how blessed the effect that shaped it was, on the grounds that were it not for that unassuming crash over 4.5 billion years prior, life on earth would be inconceivably extraordinary today in any event (and possibly even missing at the very least). Its essence has additionally invigorated the utilization of science and actuated superstition in ages of people, while giving all out sunlight based shrouds which are an all around uncommon, characterizing part of earth. The normal month to month cycle of the lunar stages has additionally been connected to mating groupings, chasing ceremonies and even the menstrual cycle, which 51% of the world's human populace will involvement for a huge amount of their lives. Over the majority of this, the moon has characterized the view of the night sky alongside the stars and mirrored the daylight to hose its pitch dark dimness since days of yore, accomplishing ubiquity in a huge number of present day media. "The earth would be an altogether different spot without the moon". It just appears to be judicious to start with the most punctual ordered appearance of the moon. The most generally acknowledged current hypothesis for its development is revolved around a speculative protoplanet by the name of Theia. It is proposed to have been around the size of Mars, and about 10% of the mass of the earth.  Isotope examination of lunar rocks repurchased from the Apollo mission discloses to us that Theia is conjectured to have crashed into the earth at 4.527 ± 0.010 billion years before present.  Earth as it was in those days would have been completely changed by this effect, modifying its creation and at last enabling it to turn into the planet it is today. This impact would have additionally created a lot of flotsam and jetsam, which would have along these lines accumulated to frame the moon.  This is the main doable model which clarifies why the moon winds up in circle with the earth; physical science based electronic reproductions demonstrate that it would not have been conceivable to catch a going by moon with the gravitational field of the earth, nor would it have been conceivable to start from launch of material from the liquid earth because of parting by outward power.  Assuming that this theory is right, clearly earth has been broadly changed as a result of the moon. For one, upon effect, material from the thick iron center of Theia would probably have sunk towards the center of earth because of gravity, while mantle material would almost certainly have been accumulated onto the outside of the early earth.  This is the purpose behind the trademark inward layers of the earth today. The moon would have then framed from abundance material from the effect combining in the encompassing regions of the early earth. In this manner, the development of the moon both included and removed material from the early earth, vigorously affecting its very organization from as right on time as 4.537 Ga. ,  http://www.propagation.gatech.edu/ECE6390/venture/Fall2012/Team06/Webpage%20Folder/Webpage%20Folder/img/radiation1.pngHaving thought about that this moon-framing effect would have been a noteworthy wellspring of a great part of the earthbound iron found on earth today, the size of our iron-nickel center would have been legitimately influenced by it. The world's mantle synthetically separated in an occasion called the iron fiasco, all through the initial 500 million years of the planet's arrangement. Very huge amounts of iron surrendered to gravity and sunk to frame the center. The deepest piece of the earth was in this manner contained conductive components, an iron-nickel combination, which ended up ready to produce electrical flows while turning due to the coriolis impact in communication with convection in the mantle  (which started in any case from warmth getting away from the center). Therefore, the generally dipolar magnetosphere was considered, offering ascend to the radioactive Van Allen Belts by catching charged protons and electrons in concentric groups encompassing the planet.  Figure 1 above is a scaled portrayal of the undetectable magnetosphere and Van Allen belts encompassing the earth. Just found in 1958, the notoriously 'destructive' belts have been unvoiced yet key in the advancement of life on our planet. This is because of the particles' capacity to anticipate awful ionizing radiation to arrive at the outside of the earth and successfully fry anything which at any point tried to exist superficially. The magnetosphere itself would likewise have counteracted any charged particles of sun powered breeze from arriving at the world's surface and causing comparable harm. Among different factors, the quality of the world's attractive field would be legitimately corresponding to the size of the center as indicated by dynamo hypothesis,  and consequently we have the moon-framing effect to thank for a cordial and pleasant planet. It's subsequently reasonable for state that without the moon coming into fulfillment, the earth may never have done either. There are progressively evident continuous impacts of the moon on the earth today however, than there were back in the Hadean. It is genuinely basic information that the moon has effect on the tides of our oceans and seas. Alongside the sun, it delivers the twice-day by day rise and fall of the oceans that boggled beach front tenants for centuries preceding Newton's plan of the all inclusive law of attraction in 1687. Normally, the gravitational fascination between two separate substances is conversely corresponding to the separation between them.  Thus, while the sun might be approximately multiple times as enormous as the moon, it is (unintentionally) around multiple times further away than it, thus applies less impact over the tides.  The zone of the earth nearest to the moon at some random point will see a projection of its seas, as the water is pulled in to the moon's gravitational field.  Simultaneously on the contrary side of the earth farthest from the moon, the outside layer itself surrenders to the lunar attraction and is, as a result, http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/moon-8.gifmarginally died down, creating an extra maritime lump.  Figure 2 (right) represents and explains this gravitational marvel, by marginally overstating the potential lump of the tides! Nonetheless, contingent upon the geography of shoreline areas and nature of mainland inclines far and wide, the variance can differ fiercely among low and elevated tides.  In extraordinary cases, this can influence the jobs of littoral occupants by managing angling timetables or placing their homes in threat, demonstrating how the moon truly is a premier effect on making the earth the spot it is. One such situation is the unprecedented tidal range at the Bay of Funday in Eastern Canada, which can outperform 12 meters.  Circumstances like this can happen upon the landing of 'spring' tides (from the German action word springen, 'to jump', not from the name of the period) whereby the sun and moon adjust, causing greatest fascination toward them and in this manner intensifying the stature of the tides.  Alas, the moon is a tyrannical specialist on the tides of our seas, and apparently has been since the seas conformed to 3.8 billion years prior. Washing and swashing the seas for ages of land time has not gone by without its results be that as it may. The moon's gravity has made the tides from one viewpoint, while the pivot of the earth has somewhat balanced the area of them on the other; the real area of the crested tidal lump is marginally in front of where it would intelligently be, at the nearest point on the world's surface to the moon.  subsequently, a shockingly enormous measure of mass (the tidal projection of the seas) is balanced somewhat from the nearest area on earth to the moon by then, implying that a specific amount of the gravitational force is no longer legitimately between the earth and moon, however at a 90° point to it.  Thus, torque is viably made between the two planetary bodies,  and is regularly called 'tidal erosion,' 'tidal increasing speed' or 'tidal braking'. This implies the nearness of the moon makes our trademark 24 hour days extend by around 2.3 milliseconds consistently.  Taking Newton's third law of equivalent and inverse responses into record, the earth is additionally pushing the moon away by 3.82±0.007 cm every year because of this 'torque'.  Would the majority of this truly mean however that without the moon, the earth would be an altogether different spot? Extrapolating back so as to 4 billion years prior discloses to us that the moon was exactly 15,000 km closer. Tidal powers would have been enormous, with theorized steady tidal wave w>GET ANSWER