Michael Green

Writer and producer

  • About
  • Print
  • Audio
  • Podcast
  • Projects
  • Book
  • Twitter

Landlords and renters

In Greener Homes on July 25, 2009

Both owners and tenants can benefit from retrofitting their houses.

“If a landlord and a renter were in a conversation,” says Jessica Steinborner, from Moreland Energy Foundation. “I think they’d agree that we should do something about sustainability, and that our homes are a good place to start. But how do we actually get the changes to happen?”

It’s tricky to even begin that discussion: communication between landlords and tenants is often fraught and property managers don’t always help.

As a part of its Energy Efficient Homes Package, however, the Federal Government has given all parties a reason to get talking. Owners are now eligible for up to $1000 to install insulation and $1600 to replace electric hot water heaters with solar units.

Landlords can also get rebates on rainwater tanks and grey water setups, and claim tax deductions on eco-maintenance around their properties. What’s more, from May 2011, they’ll be required to reveal the dwelling’s energy performance at the point of lease.

These steps help reduce the so-called split incentives, whereby property-owners pay for big-ticket items, but tenants get the lower bills. Ms Steinborner argues that, in any case, owners do benefit from their investment. “It improves their property – not just the resale value, but also the ability to get long-term tenants. Renters understand that it will be a far cheaper and more comfortable house to live in.”

Moreland Energy Foundation organises free workshops for local renters who want to green their homes. The good news, Ms Steinborner says, is that people can slash their eco-footprints without altering their houses. “About 30 per cent of household energy use is related to behaviour; things like closing the curtains when the sun goes down, using external blinds in summer, shortening showers, washing clothes in cold water, setting thermostats correctly and turning lights off.”

Renters can also install compact-fluorescent light globes and choose efficient appliances without bothering the owner. But before they make other changes – including switching showerheads – they should get approval. “There are small things that often people won’t do because they’re worried about their tenure, and nervous about contacting their landlord,” Ms Steinborner says.

With energy and water prices rising, low-income renters are likely to be the first to suffer. Last year, a group of Melbournians started Just Change, an organisation dedicated to addressing these equity concerns. “We put up to $1800 worth of energy efficiency retrofitting into a house,” says Dougal McInnes, “and ask for up to a one-year rental freeze (in exchange).”

He says it’s been difficult to find homes where all parties are willing to be involved. “We’ve found that real estate agents are the key, both to gaining consent from the landlord and access to the tenants.” There’s a lesson for aspiring eco-friendly tenants and owners: get your property manager onside first.

For oodles more tips and information, browse Environment Victoria’s excellent Victorian Green Renters’ Guide. Also, check out Green Renters, a blog for environmentally conscious tenants.

GreenPower

In Greener Homes on July 18, 2009

Buying renewable energy is the fastest way to cut your eco-impact, but make sure you do your homework.

Half of an average household’s carbon dioxide emissions can come from electricity. That means you can slice your home’s carbon footprint in two simply by switching to 100 per cent GreenPower.

GreenPower is an accreditation program for renewable energy – electricity sourced from the sun, wind, water and waste. When you choose GreenPower, your retailer must buy enough new renewable energy into the grid to replace your old fossil fuel power use. Products that come with the scheme’s tick have been audited to make sure you’re getting what you pay for.

But which product is best? To help consumers cut through the spin, Total Environment Centre started Green Electricity Watch in 2002. The survey – also supported by Australian Conservation Foundation and WWF-Australia – assesses the eco-credentials of the companies and their products.

“All the retailers participate and they compete very fiercely to get a good ranking,” says Jane Castle, senior campaigner at Total Environment Centre. In the last survey, held in 2007, Origin Energy’s 100 per cent wind and solar products scored the most points (the full results are online).

If you’re thinking of making the switch, Ms Castle warns against swift deals offered by door-to-door salespeople, because they can lock you into contracts with only a low percentage of accredited GreenPower. “To actually make a difference, people should buy as high a percentage of GreenPower as they can afford.”

Generally, the higher the renewable energy content, the higher the price – but shop around because rates vary considerably among retailers. “When I switched to 100 per cent GreenPower I was nervous about getting a big bill,” says Ms Castle, “so I turned things off standby and put in compact fluorescent globes and my bill virtually didn’t change. This is not going to kill you at the bank. It might be worth one coffee a week or it might have no impact if you become really energy efficient.”

There’s one important catch to the GreenPower scheme. Although your personal footprint will come down if you buy accredited renewable energy, Australia’s overall emissions won’t.

Since the federal government signed onto the Kyoto Protocol (the global treaty limiting greenhouse gas emissions), any voluntary reductions made by individuals or businesses don’t get added on top of the pre-existing national target. Any cuts you make mean someone else will be permitted to pollute more. The proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme will work in a similar way.

“It means that the big polluters will have fewer restrictions put on them,” Ms Castle says. “We’re trying to get the government to recognise consumer action as additional, by retiring a Kyoto permit for every tonne of CO2 reduced through GreenPower.”

Despite those concerns, Green Electricity Watch still recommends that people buy accredited renewable power, because it supports the industry and helps prepare for a low-emissions future. “We say, yes buy GreenPower, but also join our effort to lobby the government to change their position,” Ms Castle says.

Sustainable timber

In Greener Homes on July 12, 2009

Certified products have got the wood on the competition.

We use timber throughout our homes – for furniture, framing, flooring, decking, veneers, joinery, windows and doors. Trees absorb and store carbon dioxide as they grow, so timber can be a highly sustainable building material.

But according to David Baggs, technical director at Ecospecifier (a database of verified, eco-preferred products), unless you pay close attention, it’s likely your timber purchases are doing far more harm than good.

“Don’t buy timber unless it’s certified,” Mr Baggs says. “If it’s not, the odds are very, very high that you’re buying illegally harvested rainforest. This is particularly the case for furniture, especially if it’s made in Asia.”

There are dozens of certification schemes worldwide, but all are not equal. Mr Baggs recommends Forest Stewardship Council approval, as well as Greenpeace ecotimber. Recycled timber is also a good option, so long as it’s the genuine article.

Second-best options are the Australian Forestry Standard (AFS) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes (PEFC), says Mr Baggs. “At the forest level they have a self-assessment (rather than third party) process.”

“With any of the schemes, it’s important to have chain of custody certification,” he continues. “That means the trail can be audited from the shop right back to the forest and you can make sure you’re getting what you pay for.”

Certified products can be more expensive, but not always. “It’s all about knowing where to find these products and that’s where Ecospecifier comes in.”

Green Loans Program

In Greener Homes on July 5, 2009

Eco-makeovers just became much more affordable.

The Federal Government’s newest household retrofitting scheme – the Green Loans Program – began on July 1. “It’s about trying to help people live more sustainably and also save a lot of money,” says home energy assessor Keith Loveridge. “To be quite honest, I think it’s fabulous.”

The scheme has two parts. In the first, 360,000 households will receive free home sustainability assessments. You can sign up through the government’s website or directly with authorised assessor. Applicants must earn less than $250,000 to qualify.

Then, an eco-assessor will spend about an hour and a half locating the water and energy savings that can be made around your home. You’ll receive a report detailing their findings.

“Typically, heating and cooling consumes about 40 per cent of the home’s energy; appliances, about 30 per cent; and water heating, about 23 per cent,” Mr Loveridge says. “We’re identifying which changes will have the biggest impact. For instance, if you’ve got an old washing machine that chugs away six hours a day, that’ll be one of the biggest energy users in your house.”

Once you home has been assessed, you’ll be eligible – though not obliged – to take up the scheme’s second measure: a four-year interest free loan for up to $10,000 to help pay for the measures recommended in the report. There will be funding to cover about 75,000 cheap loans and they’ll be available through participating financial institutions.

“I’ve been around the environment game for a long time and I think this is one of the best things that the government has put out,” Mr Loveridge says. Depending on your circumstances, “you can almost pay for that loan just by the savings you make.”

The Green Loans scheme is slated to finish in mid-2012, or whenever the money runs out. Given the early demise of the subsidy on solar photovoltaics, the best bet is to get in early.

www.environment.gov.au/greenloans, www.ecoassessment.com.au

Does buy local mean bye local?

In Community development on June 29, 2009

First published on ABC Unleashed

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd may have been lampooned for his Strine, but last week, in its budget, the NSW government fair dinkum went and put it into policy.

Under Local Jobs First, when state agencies and corporations buy their wares, they’ll factor in a 20 per cent discount on Australian manufacturers’ tenders.

Unions liked it. Trade experts, the European Union and the US government did not. The Age‘s diplomatic editor, Daniel Flitton, viewed the measure through the dark and troubling prism of nationalism.

The morning after the NSW budget, bright and early, Federal Trade Minister Simon Crean denounced the policy on Sky News. It would cost jobs, he warned, not save them, and could draw similar moves from other countries. It would threaten trade.

But must trade always be the last word?

Less than an hour after Crean spoke so unequivocally on Sky News, American economist and writer Michael Shuman spelt out a different kind of economic development on Radio National.

“Locally owned businesses that are focussed first and foremost on local markets,” he told Life Matters presenter Richard Aedy, “contribute substantially more to economic development than … schemes to attract or retain non-local businesses.”

Shuman’s two most recent books are Going Local: creating self-reliant communities in a global age, and The Small-Mart Revolution: how local businesses are beating the global competition. You get the idea.

On tour in Australia, he’s spruiking the myriad benefits to be had from boosting our local businesses – from better labour and environmental standards to stronger long-term wealth creation and higher, more resilient employment rates.

The crux of Shuman’s argument, in economic terms, is about the flow-on effect of our spending choices. “When you spend money locally you contribute to what economists call the economic multiplier,” he said on Radio National. “That is, when I spend a dollar, say at a local pharmacy, that pharmacist pays people, they then take their dollar to a local grocery store … you have a dollar that is circulating in the economy. The more times that dollar circulates and the faster that dollar circulates without leakage, the more income, wealth and jobs [it creates]. And it turns out that local businesses do this much better.”

He points to a 2003 study in Austin, Texas, where economists analysed the impact of a proposed Borders bookstore against two local bookstores. They found that $100 spent at Borders would circulate $13 in the local community, while $100 at the local stores would circulate $45.

Shuman draws a distinction between local and non-local ownership, not between domestic and foreign. In The Small-Mart Revolution, the economist criticises promotion of “America First-ism” at a cost to others. Instead, he envisages a future of growing trade and global engagement, albeit “in goods and services less and less vital to day-to-day today survival”.

So where does the buy-Aussie policy fit in?

Despite the fuss, it’s neither a breakthrough nor a break down, and it won’t start a trade war. The rule already existed – NSW just expanded its application. Other countries, state governments and local councils also have guidelines favouring local procurement. And, despite Crean’s protestations, the Australian Labor Party’s current platform includes an almost identical policy.

That’s not to say it will work. According to the localisation theory, an ideal government purchasing system wouldn’t target Australian-made. It would target the tenders that boast the highest multiplier – probably goods made and owned nearby, not nationally.

www.small-mart.org

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • …
  • 76
  • Next Page »

Archive

    • ►Print
      • ►Environment
      • ►Social justice
      • ►Community development
      • ►Culture
    • ►Blog
    • ►Audio
    • ►Projects

© Copyright 2017 Michael Green · All Rights Reserved