Philip's post today reminds that the IT industry in general is pretty energy-intensive. Today, one of that industry's major players is taking another step forward to reduce the environmental impact of one of its major assets: it's users. Yahoo! Green is a new site by the internet giant that provides users with a range of tools that help them lower their personal carbon emissions.

Meg Garlinghouse, director of Yahoo! for Good, told me on Friday that the new site, which will be officially launched with a big kick-off event in New York City, reflects the company's belief that bringing many people together to take small steps can result in a major reduction of our greenhouse gas emissions. At Yahoo! Green, users can commit to a range of various actions that will reduce their own environmental impact: installing a programmable thermostat, installing a CFL in a porch light, air-drying clothes in the Spring and Summer, etc. The site records each user's plan and calculates the emissions savings produced. These figures are then compiled to show the total amount of GHG emissions saved by all users participating in the program.

Yahoo! will also add an element of competition to the site: user carbon savings, as well as information gathered from other Yahoo! tools, will be calculated by their location, and the US city with the highest totals will be named "America's Greenest City" by the company, and awarded either a fleet of hybrid taxi cabs, or the cash equivalent, which can be used to "green up" a public building. The "Be a Better Planet" competition will run through June 8th. Individual participants will receive a free CFL for their efforts.

We're impressed, and we look forward to Amy's coverage of today's NYC event, which will feature Yahoo! co-founder David Filo, Global Green USA CEO Matt Peterson, and Academy Award-nominated actor Matt Dillon. When combined with it's own carbon neutrality pledge, its sponsorship of 18seconds.org, and its Earth Week challenge to employees to reduce the company's overall environmental impact by 20% (which was rewarded by staging a Sumo wrestling match between Filo and co-founder Jerry Yang — watch the video), it's clear that Yahoo! is taking significant steps to not only operate in a more sustainable manner, but also to educate others about the benefits of living a greener lifestyle.

Yahoo! Green

As Maria reported this morning, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change did release the findings of Working Group III today, which focuses on the steps the global community must take to mitigate the worst effects of climate change.

On one hand, the report was hopeful: we can lessen the effects of global warming with quick, substantive, mandatory action by the world's governments. Furthermore, the costs of such actions would be relatively low, and much of the technology needed already exists. On the other hand, the report does recommend the use of advanced nuclear power (let the arguments on this one begin!), and carbon capture and storage, which is not a fully developed technology.

We've gathered some of the responses to today's report, and provided excerpts below. Please let us know about others in the comments.

Environmental Defense: “We have a window of opportunity, but it won't stay open forever,” said Steve Cochran, national climate campaign director at Environmental Defense . “Anyone pushing for delay is pushing for higher costs and longer odds.”

The Apollo Alliance: “The experts agree. If we act now, we can win the fight on global warming. As today’s IPCC report shows, with strong leadership and the right solutions, we can tackle the challenge of global warming while also creating new opportunities for jobs and growth through increased economic activity.

“By expanding the production of biofuels, we can promote energy security, strengthen our trade position and create jobs in agricultural communities. By investing in renewable electricity we will create economic activity while decreasing air pollution and its associated health care costs. And by making wise investments in new technology, we can reinvigorate our economy though the creation of good, new clean energy jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors.

“We can no longer ignore the facts. Global warming is happening, and if left untreated, the effects will be devastating for our planet and future generations. We have the solutions, now let’s fulfill our responsibility as Americans and international citizens and do everything we can to reduce global warming pollution.” — Apollo Alliance president Jerome Ringo

National Wildlife Federation: “The world’s scientific experts are giving us all the information we need. This latest report provides unmistakable clarity that we must act now, and that solutions are within reach to avoid the worst effects of global warming.

“Global warming is happening now. Our dependency on fossil fuels like oil and coal is causing the problem, and humans and wildlife are feeling the heat. We have a clear path to move forward with solutions that will curb rising global warming pollution, but only if we act with leadership and resolve.

“Scientists are telling us that we must start reducing global warming pollution immediately to limit further warming. Only by acting now can we prevent catastrophic environmental and economic damage that our children will otherwise face. America can do this if we set our mind to it.

“To limit global warming, we must start now and put ourselves on track to reduce pollution by two percent each and every year, ultimately cutting pollution by 80 percent by mid-century. We can do that." — NWF President Larry Schweiger

National Audubon Society: “This latest report from the world’s scientists makes it clear that people and governments have it within their power to curb global warming, but that time is running short. Humans caused the problem, and it’s up to humans to fix it.

“There is much good news here and even reason for optimism if we listen and heed the call to action. The report confirms that many of the technologies we need to address the problem already exist and simply need to be deployed in a serious way. The U.S. can start filling the scientists’ prescription by rapidly adopting emissions caps, renewable electricity standards, energy conservation measures, and improving fuel efficiency.

“The report makes it clear that voluntary measures have had no effect—these cannot be take ‘em or leave ‘em approaches. The world’s best scientists are telling us that it will take serious changes backed by the force of law if we want to minimize the risk to people and wildlife" — Audubon Society President John Flicker

National Environmental Trust: "After all the bad news from scientists on global warming, today we got some good news. The IPCC said that we can avert the worst impacts at a remarkably low price. The U.S. and the world simply need to make more efficient use of our energy and invest in cleaner technologies for the future.

"This newest report confirms that a small investment now is far better than bankrupting the treasury later by trying to build sea walls from Miami to Maine. " — Vice President for Climate Programs Angela Anderson

BioFuels Watch (UK): "It is already clear that the burgeoning demand for biofuels that has been created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is actually increasing them by deforestation in the tropics and accelerating climate change. So far, only 1% of global transport fuel comes from biofuels, yet already biofuels cause steep rises in grain and vegetable oil prices, threatening the food security of poor people and spurring agricultural expansion into forests and grasslands, on which we depend for a stable climate." — Almuth Ernsting

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): “The longer we wait, the more we will pay to fix this problem. The solutions are here. What we need is the leadership to make it happen,” said Daniel Lashof, PhD, the science director of the Climate Center at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The cost of cleaner, more efficient energy technologies pales in comparison to the sweeping impacts on our health and our economy if we continue to do nothing.”

“The IPCC has now completed its triple crown,” Lashof added. “The world’s leading scientists have told us that heat-trapping pollution is causing global warming, that global warming threatens unprecedented disruption of our way of life, and now most importantly that we know how to solve the problem. There are simply no more excuses for denial and delay.”

Friends of the Earth: “The report looks like a compromise rather than a serious plan. It offers something for everyone without making the tough choices,” Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder said. “Some of these recommendations make a lot of sense, but unfortunately, some of them—especially the push for nuclear power—move us in the wrong direction. Nuclear power threatens humans and the environment. It is not necessary to combat climate change.” …

“The IPCC got a number of things right,” Blackwelder said. “Increasing energy efficiency and using clean energy sources such as wind power are steps that can be taken right now to reduce global warming—without damaging other parts of the environment. Let’s focus on those measures, and not nuclear power, which has such harmful side effects.”

U.S. PIRG: “This report provides a roadmap on how to avoid the worst effects of global warming, but we have to start moving right now,” said Ben Dunham, Staff Attorney for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. “The sooner we act, the sooner we start improving energy security, creating jobs, and protecting future generations from the worst effects of global warming,” he added.

Of course, we're also interested in your response… fire away!

Environment News Service

Greenland MYTH: When Eric the Red and his Viking buddies settled Greenland, it was a lush pastoral paradise fit for farming and raising animals.

Facts: As climate change skepticism has developed into a full-blown industry, a number of myths have filtered out about historical patterns of warming and cooling: just mention the “Little Ice Age” or the “Medieval Warm Period” to your favorite skeptic, and let ‘em go…

As a history buff, I always found today’s myth fascinating. As Coby Beck at Grist notes, Viking leader Eric the Red gave Greenland its name not because it was lush and green, but because he wanted folks back home to think it was:

Greenland was called Greenland by Erik the Red (was he red?), who was in exile and wanted to attract people to a new colony. He thought you should give a land a good name so people would want to go there! It likely was a bit warmer when he landed for the first time than it was when the last settlers starved due to a number of factors — climate change, or at least some bad weather, a major one.

But it was never lush, and their existence was always harsh and meager, especially due to the Viking’s disdain for other peoples and ways of living. They attempted to live a European lifestyle in an arctic climate, side by side with Inuit who easily outlasted them. They starved surrounded by oceans and yet never ate fish! (Note: this was not a typical European behavior, and is a bit of a mystery to this day.)

The issue here, of course, really isn’t Greenland’s name; it’s the idea of a Medieval Warm Period that skeptics claim was comparable to the present day in terms of the average temperature (or even warmer!). By extension, ice melts on Greenland aren’t that big a deal: it’s happened before.

Coby has thoughts on the Medieval Warm Period, and points to information from NOAA. RealClimate, the blog for anyone interested in hardcore climate science, also presents a number of reasons why the perception skeptics have about the Medieval Warm Period are likely incorrect.

Greenland wasn’t green in the tenth century… and we don’t want it to become green this century…

MTYH: Cold weather, especially unseasonably cold weather, undermines the concept of climate change.

FACTS: "Global warming" is a problematic phrase for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the belief that cold weather somehow invalidates the concept of a global climate crisis. Climate change skeptics are quick to suggest that instances of winter storms (especially when they coincide with activities aimed at addressing "global warming") are evidence that climate change science is flawed.

Rather than exposing climate change as a myth or a mere belief, these skeptics demonstrate the logical fallacy of not seeing the forest for the trees. A recent report by Minnesota's WCCO addresses the problem with using current weather conditions as evidence of broader changes in climate:

"Don't confuse weather with climate," said WCCO's Chief Meteorologist Paul Douglas. "Weather is a snapshot, climate is a long term trend."

In other words, weather is what happens at any given moment in the atmosphere while climate is how the atmosphere behaves over decades and centuries.

Paul said the term global warming can be misleading.

"I think a better description is probably climate change because there are going to be regional variations across the globe," he said.

We need to keep a global perspective in mind because while the United States is experience record cold, some of Europe and Asia are seeing record warmth.

"Don't look out the window and make assumptions about long-term climate," said Paul. "But that goes both ways. In the summertime on the hot humid days we can't beat our chest and say this is global warming."

The Drudge Report Loves These Kind of Headlines

Grist's Coby Beck made a similar observation last November; RealClimate addresses some of the problems associated with "global warming.". And as happy as I was to see the Rev. Pat Robertson acknowledging climate change last year, we have to note that his recognition was based on the same logical fallacy as those who claim that winter storms in April are valid evidence of problems with climate science.

Our own David Anderson has suggested a new phrase: "global weirding." Given the multiple strange events we're seeing (rapid extinctions of species, shifts in weather patterns, polar ice melts, etc.), it seems appropriate. What other ways can we better communicate the issue of climate change?

From the outset, we wanted Green Options to be a space where people talk to one another about the green topics that matter to them. While we set the agenda here on the blog, and in other portions of the site, our Discussion Forum is the place where you decide what needs addressing. If you haven't visited the Forum, drop in, and strike up a conversation…or join one.

As Ryan and Jimmy showed Tuesday, there's still plenty to discuss regarding the topic of climate change. While I'd guess that most of the team members here at GO fall into the 90% of people who've accepted the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other scientific bodies regarding the role CO2 emissions play in the climate crisis, there's still much to discuss and debate about the action we need to take. Economics tend to be at the core of most discussions about large-scale action, and conversations about the costs and opportunities created by environmental challenges need to occur within the public and private sectors, as well as among informed and concerned citizens.

Some other fodder for discussion:

• The human costs: Climate change is definitely an environmental justice issue, particularly since the developing world will likely "feel the heat" the most.
• The broader ecological costs: We've all read and heard about the polar bears. What other implications does action (or inaction) on climate change hold for other environmental challenges?
• The "marketing" angle: A recent post at The Oil Drum addresses the long-term consequences of climate change in light of research that shows we human beings tend to be very short-term in our thinking. Marketing guru Seth Godin noted last year that "global warming" is an ineffective phrase from a marketing standpoint. How do we communicate the threat of climate change without resorting to "chicken little" tactics?

Clearly, I've just touched the tip of the iceberg (a fitting metaphor, no doubt!). Got something to say about climate change? Say it in the Forum…

We've seen plenty of evidence that the tech world has caught the green bug, and now the search engine optimization (SEO) folks are getting on board. Swedish-based web marketing company Getupdated has announced the creation of the SEO World Championship, and the first one started on Monday. The phrase for which web masters and SEO experts are optimizing in this first competition: "GlobalWarming Awareness2007." Contest creators hope to have fierce competition among webheads aiming for top spots on Google, Yahoo!, and MSN Live, and to generate awareness for climate change along the way. According to Getupdated's press release,

This unique SEO contest is targeting a significant cause as well as trying to make a global difference. The project focuses on creating world consciousness of our continuous planet heat rise. "The SEO World Championship selected this keyword with the purpose of creating worldwide awareness related to the issue of the Earth heat rise". Our contestants will write valuable content about what we can do to prevent Global Warming" said Luar Buso, Vice President for Getupdated Internet marketing.

Search engine optimization is all about getting the word out via the web, so hopefully we'll see some valuable content created on the climate crisis. The contest runs through May 1st; I'm thinking about putting a link to the search on Google so we can keep track of both the horserace and the information presented. Now, if they could just offer greener prizes…

Crossposted at sustainablog

In the blockbuster documentary An Inconvenient Truth, former vice president Al Gore argued that addressing the climate crisis isn't simply a matter of political will — it's a moral obligation. Rabbi Warren G. Stone, a prominent Jewish environmental leader, addresses this same theme in an essay entitled "A Jewish Response to Climate Change," published Tuesday on PlanetSave.com. In the essay, Stone argues for environmental stewardship as an obligation of his faith, and observes that addressing climate change involves recognizing one's responsibility to future generations:

Who is responsible for responding to the challenge of global climate change? We tend to think that it is the scientist, the statesman and the environmentalist upon whom this responsibility lies. But climate change is an urgent moral and spiritual issue for all peoples of our world. We are witnessing its impact right now, and we can for see the havoc it will wreak on the health and survival of further generations. The future will bring environmental refugees in numbers unknown in previous ages. As a result of climate change and habitat destruction, a myriad of species now faces a silent genocide.

As a Rabbi and religious leader, I am concerned about our common future, the quality of life for our families and the threatened species of our world, including our own. I join fellow religious leaders in that concern. It is not enough to care about climate change, forest devastation and environmental threats to clean water, air and seas. It is incumbent upon every religious leader, religious institution and person of faith to serve as beacons to our communities, illustrating by our actions and example our spiritual commitment to our earth and it’s threatened and limited resources.

Stone also points to the efforts of his own congregation, as well as organizations such as the Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life (CEOJL). His examples provide compelling illustrations of faith in action, and set a high standard for believers of all faiths. Let's hope his message resonates throughout the faith community.

PlanetSave.com: "A Jewish Response to Climate Change"

Treehugger: "How Many Jews Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb?"