This is more than a month old, but it wasn't posted on here.
Tulsa is ranked 26th in the nation in its green-ness.
26. Tulsa, Okla. 16.7
Electricity: 5.0
Transportation: 3.9
Green Living: 3.4
Recycling/Perspective: 4.4quote:
America's 50 Greenest Cities
Want to see a model for successful and rapid environmental action? Don't look to the federal government—check out your own town. Here, our list of the 50 communities that are leading the way. Does yours make the cut?
By Elizabeth Svoboda, with additional reporting by Eric Mika and Saba Berhie
How the Rankings Work:
We used raw data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Geographic Society's Green Guide, which collected survey data and government statistics for American cities of over 100,000 people in more than 30 categories, including air quality, electricity use and transportation habits. We then compiled these statistics into four broad categories, each scored out of either 5 or 10 possible points. The sum of these four scores determines a city's place in the rankings. Our categories are:
* Electricity (E; 10 points): Cities score points for drawing their energy from renewable sources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydroelectric power, as well as for offering incentives for residents to invest in their own power sources, like roof-mounted solar panels.
* Transportation (T; 10 points): High scores go to cities whose commuters take public transportation or carpool. Air quality also plays a role.
* Green living (G; 5 points): Cities earn points for the number of buildings certified by the U.S. Green Building Council, as well as for devoting area to green space, such as public parks and nature preserves.
* Recycling and green perspective (R; 5 points): This measures how comprehensive a city's recycling program is (if the city collects old electronics, for example) and how important its citizens consider environmental issues.
I read this article when it was published. From what I could gather from it, a lot of our points came from the fact that we use hydroelectric power.
We also have a successful Ozone Alert program.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
We also have a successful Ozone Alert program.
The only problem with this is the way it's averaged. It works for the days that it is in effect, but cities are graded on a four year average. It seems that every four years, we have a mild summer around here, which drops our average, keeping us off of the dirty air list. While it makes us look good, those other three years don't do so well.
It is a three year average, but besides that you are correct.
Three year? If that's so, then either the article I read or my memory was mistaken. But still, same point. lol
Here is the scorecard for Tulsa from last year...
http://www.ozonealert.com/Tulsa%20Ozone%20Alert%202007%20Score%20Card.htm
Tulsa is in compliance...but the EPA just announced a new lower standard which we probably will not meet. The old standard is 84 parts per billion, the new standard is 75 parts per billion and Tulsa right now is averaging 80 parts per billion.
We need a windy summer.
Make wind.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
We also have a successful Ozone Alert program.
Not only is it successful, it was the first one in the nation...ever.
Go figure, that was our one success.
While I understand the Ozone is on a running basis (didn't know the # of years though), I still appreciate the program. If would do no good to tell people "we had a bad year last year, we need to really try harder this year!" People don't have that kind of attention span and just stop caring in short order. For that matter, people stop caring if we have 4 or 5 days in a row.
But on a short term basis, within those 4 days, people will stop mowing, abstain from filling up on gas, turn the AC down a bit, and maybe even try to drive less. The cumulative effect of that has to help, if not have the desired difference making impact. It at least gets people thinking of it, where a constant campaign would surely fall on deaf ears.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Here is the scorecard for Tulsa from last year...
http://www.ozonealert.com/Tulsa%20Ozone%20Alert%202007%20Score%20Card.htm
Tulsa is in compliance...but the EPA just announced a new lower standard which we probably will not meet. The old standard is 84 parts per billion, the new standard is 75 parts per billion and Tulsa right now is averaging 80 parts per billion.
We need a windy summer.
Make wind.
Do we have a second for lunch at Ron's?
I think they must have confused "Green Country" with "green city."
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
But on a short term basis, within those 4 days, people will stop mowing, abstain from filling up on gas, turn the AC down a bit, and maybe even try to drive less. The cumulative effect of that has to help, if not have the desired difference making impact. It at least gets people thinking of it, where a constant campaign would surely fall on deaf ears.
If we all did those things, it would have more than just a short-term positive effect on Tulsa's ratings. After all, is it not about the compliance with ratings but about our health, our quality of life, and protecting our own surroundings for future generations? If people would view it as more than just a compliance game, I think more would change.
I can't do much, but here's what I do:
I use fluorescent bulbs and turn them off when I'm not in the room.
I walk where I can instead of driving.
I don't use my air conditioner or heater when it's unnecessary. I haven't had mine on at all in about three weeks except for an occasional cold morning. I instead use my windows (with help from the sun and window coverings).
I wash my dishes by hand instead of in my dishwasher (to conserve water
and energy).
I might make only a small difference in the grand scheme of things (and I'm sure I could do more), but it helps me save a ton of money, and if everyone did something small, it would have a huge impact.