[music playing] i started out as ahuman rights attorney, and then i got involvedin the un earth summit in '92, looking atthe relationship between human rightsand the environment. so if an indigenous community'srainforest is chopped down by a multinationalcorporation, do they have a right to sueunder human rights laws for their environment andhabitat being destroyed?
i then worked for agroup in washington, dc called the naturalresources defense council, and did a lot ofinternational legal, and did stuff around worldtrade organization and then the nafta side agreementon the environment. we tried to look at waysof holding governments accountable to what they weredoing after their promises in rio. then i worked fora group in cape cod
called the internationalfund for animal welfare. we protected wildlifehabitat all around the world, basically taking lawsuitsagainst companies that would try and destroy habitat. we had a big case in baja,california, against mitsubishi. they wanted to build the world'slargest salt factory in a place called laguna san ignacio. so we're reallylooking at, we can't protect wild spaces that haveexisting legal protections.
is there really any pointin creating new parks? and then that broughtme to san francisco where we have adepartment of environment. when i started, i think wewere about eight people. we're now about 80people doing everything from environmental justiceto energy efficiency, renewable energy, climatechange, urban forest issues, school education. and i'm going to kind of gothrough some of the stuff
that we've been doing. but ultimately, the biggestchallenge is leadership. the last eight years,we had no leadership from the federal government,i think it's fair to say. and so there was a biggap for cities and states to take action. and we had aninconvenient truth, which really startedto change the debate, and really was a paradigm shift.
i think it's kind of odd thatwe only allow people to make one statement, andthis was al gore's. now every time he wants to saysomething, we're like, no, no. you had your chance. it was inconvenient truth. but amazing kind of tide thatalso coincided with hurricane katrina in kind of bringingthe issues of climate change, whether or not thereis a direct correlation or not. in people's mind, there was.
and that really started toshape the debate that we're now having, which is a real debatearound what we should do rather than whether it'shappening or not. also the rise in gas pricesreally got people's attention. you know, now gasprices have gone down, but unfortunately,we have no money. so we're still focusedon fuel efficiency, which is a great thing. people said, you know what?
when gas prices, ifthey ever come down, people are going toforget the prius. they're going to forget bicycleand walking and public transit, but that has provednot to be the case. it's kind of endured. so i think it wasseen as a trend. the environment was seen assomething that was an add-on. and when roughtimes came, people would kind of forget aboutit and move on to something
more substantive. i think people'svalues have remained and people continue tocare about the environment. every single magazine that youcan imagine has a green cover. i mean, literallyeverything either is green car journal, the newyork times, outside magazine. you name it, it exists. we live in a time wherethere's not a lot of hope, and i think what we're tryingto do in san francisco,
at least with our citizens,is give them a sense of hope, show them what is possible,that they can contribute, that these large globalforces like climate change can be dealt with iflots of people that care make a difference. and it's not just about caring. a lot of people care. our whole thing is, we needto be able to measure it. let's not just talkabout doing something.
let's talk about how we canmeasure doing something. i like these ads fromchevron, because if chevron's focused on oil andthe number of cars that will be on the streets in2030, we probably should be. just these facts alwayskind of stunned me, looking at where oil comesfrom and where it is. most of these fivecountries aren't super friendly to the united states. we kind of forgot theoil security issue,
but it remains very much alive. our security and our energyis very much intertwined, as are the forces of pollution. you know, when italk with my kids about-- i have a sevenand a 10-year-old-- and you kind of look up atthe stars on a starry night, it is unbelievable howmany stars there are and how insignificant we are. and sometimes,that insignificance
makes us feel kind oflike we can't do anything. but really, it is empoweringto think about our planet and what we canactually achieve, both negatively and positively. so this is the famouschart of where we are and where we can get to. the magic threshold of500 parts per million is a number thatscientists tell us leads to irreversible climate change.
so there's kind of twoelements of climate change. one is mitigation. mitigation talks tothe issue of what we can do to stop gettingthat number going up. and the other isadaptation, what we need to do to deal withclimate change impacts that are going to come if wedon't act, or even if we do. this is a second chart,which is kind of peak oil. half the room, in most cases,care about climate change.
and people that don'tcare about climate change worry that we'rerunning out of oil. and so the dateshere kind of vary a little bit, whythey're running out, in 16 years or 26 years. but once you get to peak--and every single person in the oil industry will agree. i was meeting withyesterday in san francisco, the ugandan oil ministerwas in san francisco.
they were talkingabout how great it was that theyfound oil in uganda. and i was like, yeah. but globally, we're running out. we're absolutely running out. and so the good news iswe have just enough oil to cause catastrophicclimate change. the bad news isthat we soon won't be able to fill up our cars.
another thing that'sreally driving the debate is insurance losses. so the insurance industryholds a lot of the keys to the climate change debate. it used to be thatwhen you wanted to insure your home onthe eastern seaboard they would look at historicaldata relating to all the storms that happened in thelast 50, 100 years. and that's how yourpremium would be set.
now they're looking atclimate change models coming out of the internationalpanel on climate change and saying, wow. why would we be crazy enoughto ensure these houses? there's going to behurricanes all up and down the eastern seaboard. we're not going toensure your house. if you don't insure your house,you can't get a mortgage. difficult enough to geta mortgage as it is,
but if they stripyour insurance, you cannot get a mortgagein the united states. so you ended up with morestranded, toxic assets that no one will insure. cities, ultimately,have a lot in common. we all have waste and recycling. we all have water issues. we all havetransportation issues. we all have urban forests.
we all have energy. and mayors used to bethought of as kind of people that filled up potholes. i think now the shifthas come that mayors are seen as people that are onthe front line in the battle of climate change. and shockingly, 80% of theworld's co2 comes from cities. so my background ininternational law would say, you know what?
the people that really dealwith the international crisis of climate change are goingto be the state departments, because they have tocome up with treaties. but these treaties,we have about 400 internationalenvironmental treaties on everything fromtrans-boundary movements of hazardous waste to conventionon the trade of endangered species. and most of them arecompletely ineffectual.
they don't do anything. no one implements them. they're paid lip service to. and so if we wantanything done, my position is we need to include cities. they produce 80%of the world's co2, and they're not at atable, and so we need to bring them to the table. this is a picture of kidsswimming in a beautiful river
in jakarta in indonesia. and this is kind of-- wecould have cities like this. this city exists now. this scene exists today. we have a choice about whatthe cities of the future will look like. we brought together for unworld environment day in 2005 70 mayors from the largestcities, basically to start talking for the firsttime about the environment
as an urban issue that they haveresponsibility to deal with. and we signed an accordof 21 action items that each city could take calledthe un urban environmental accords, and really just triedto move the agenda forward. it led to something calledc40, which is 40 cities dealing with climate change. and i'm actually going toseoul in may for that meeting. the first meeting was inlondon, the next meeting was in new york withmayor bloomberg,
and now we're going to seoul. so the kind of momentum behindurban environmental issues is heating up. lest we forget ourrole in climate change, the united states is this one. this is the world averageof co2 output per person, which is just under four tons. the us is now 23tons per person. so our contribution--uganda yesterday,
when i was talking tothem, is under one ton. so for every one ton that oneperson produces in uganda, we produce 23. so looking at globalequity issues, when you hear aboutthis imbalance, well, why are all these people soangry at the united states? we're doing our best. the issue is thatthere's a huge imbalance per capita of how muchco2 we're all producing.
you can see the difference. it's pretty hard to see, butthe uk where i'm originally from is at 11. japan is just over nine. south africa is about seven. you know, china here isabout four and a half. so a huge disparity. the reason that india and chinahave so many co2 emissions is primarily becausethey have so many people.
it's not an issue ofindividual output. so equity is going to playa big role in determining how we solve these problems. so this is ourclimate action plan. we adopted the goal in2001 to reduce our co2 20% below where we were in 1990. so if you can imagine1990, less economic output, less people at that time. but it's the internationalbaseline for measuring co2.
so 1990 is the yearby which you measure how you're reducing your co2. and we're going to geta 20% reduction by 2012. so the kyoto protocol is6% below 1990 by 2012. so significantlybeyond kyoto, we spent about a quarterof a million dollars to work out what ourinventory was in 1990. and so you can see, abouthalf of it is transportation and the other is buildingenergy and waste.
so really kind of divided. and this varies greatly. the more coal you havein your electricity mix, the more buildingenergy goes up. california hasrelatively clean energy until transportation becomesa much bigger part of the pie. so california hasa lot of history on the issue of the environment. it has 34 million people.
it should be able to solvesome of these issues, and it's struggled to workout what the solution is. recently, the governor signed ab32, the climate solutions act, which took a lot ofpushing and effort. and actually, he madehis first statement on it in san francisco at unworld environment day. this is what happensto the three big cities when you look at differentscenarios about what could happen relatingto extreme heat.
and we found this very useful. the more real data youcan give people about what different scenarios arekind of in the offing if they don't take action. and it really shows. there's a lowerwarming range that we could get to if we takeenough mitigation action, and there's a higher warmingrange, which is possible. wildfire frequency.
this is a nasa imagefrom last year. you can drive up and down--i did drive up and down the state of california. there's virtually nowhere youcould go that wasn't burning. it was really likedante's inferno. it was incredible. this is actually a picture wetook on our family vacation up to mount shasta. i mean, literally,you drive along roads
and you suddenly seefire popping out. you could not see the carin front of you five feet, the smoke was so thick. my parents from england thoughtit was a great family vacation. [laughter] they're like, are we evergoing to get out of the smoke? yeah. snowpack, we get all our water. this morning, we're lookingat the decision theater
about where you getyour water from. 100% of our water comes fromsnowpack in the sierras. and you can kind of see thediminishing amount of snowpack based on differentclimates scenarios. i mean, 20% of what we hadin the warmest scenario is pretty dire. and other issues,obviously the melting further north and south. one meter sea level risemakes a big difference
in the san francisco bay. it leads to $48billion of damage. and this is our airport here. so the good news isthat you can still get duty-free at theterminal right in the middle. unfortunately, you won't beable to fly out of the airport. so a lot of low lying areasin san francisco, a lot of fill into the bay. and if we don't take action--even if we do take action,
this is a likely scenario. a one in 100-year stormbecomes a one in 10-year storm. this was last summer as well. so we not only had fires,but we had flooding. so the total goalis 2.6 million tons, which is about thesame amount as the goal for the entire countryof ireland under kyoto. so it's a significantamount of reduction we're trying to achieve.
and we're actuallyon track to meet it. we're about 6% below 1990 now,and hopefully we'll be at 20% by 2012. so this is whateveryone wants to know. how can we win thewar on global warming? there's a huge amountof confusion out there. this is just literally a tenthof the number of different eco labels that exist. so the public is very confused.
businesses are very confused. so our role incity government is to help reduce confusion andpromote clearheaded action that people can follow. so we've set up a green businessprogram that walked businesses through every elementof not only climate change, but toxic reduction,transportation, recycling, water, everything withreally high standards. and that's somethingthat anyone can steal.
it's on our website. we want people to steal it. in the kind ofglobal competition around the environment,we want people to steal every ideathat exists out there. and that's partlywhy i'm here today to work with john and others. energy efficiency hasbeen a big program. we've spent about $32 millionto reduce people's energy
bills, mainly small businesses. and we save small businesses nowupwards of $20 million a year on their utility bills. this is the solar map,which was kind of an idea that we want to promotesolar power in san francisco. we have steph stoppenhagenhere with ch2m hill who is a partner on this project. and we said, how can weuse digital technology to promote solar?
and really, the firstquestion is, well, what does my roof look like? i mean, people don't spenda lot of time on their roof. and even if theydid, they wouldn't know the solarpotential of the roof. so here you enter your addressright above get my info. every single parcel, everysingle one in san francisco has been digitized. and we looked at both theshading and the square feet
to determine the roof size, thenthe estimated solar potential, the electricity thatcan be produced, the savings, and thenthe carbon savings. so for any-- this ison harrison street-- any business can phone upor they can look themselves. it also allows solarinstallers to start mining this data to find thebest roofs in the city for them to put solar panels up. then it shows youall the incentives.
state incentives, sanfrancisco-created incentive, and federal tax credits. and then the facebookaspect is that everyone wants their picture nextto their solar panel, so people put their ownpictures up and then tell you the installer that they use. so it's become like a phenomena. people want to get solar. they want to be in competitionwith their neighbors.
they want to show theirgrandparents back east, or whatever the story may be. people get excited by it. and then you cankind of see the goal. the department ofenergy gave $5 million based on what wedid in san francisco to make other cities adoptthis for little or no money. so this is something thatphoenix or any of the cities that you come fromcan do really easily.
and if you want to, talkto steph afterwards. so money is a biggoal of most people. they like money. i like money,especially $100 bills. that's why i putthis one up there. and so you can putmandates out there, you can kind of guiltpeople into doing stuff. none of that really works. people are tired ofbeing told what to do.
but if you say, youknow what, we're going to give you six grandto put solar on your roof, people are like, oh, now i'mstarting to get interested. so we tied our socialvalues into the money. we said if you get $6,000,you have to hire someone from a local jobcreation program, and it has to be a localsan francisco-based company. we don't want peoplecoming from out of state to get this rebate.
if you get this rebate, you needto be focused in san francisco and hire at-risk youth througha job training program. and this is that program. we've done a lot of solar. this is another project. san francisco is in the greenon the bottom of the picture. marin's at the top. the red is the power goingthrough the golden gate. that's where the goldengate bridge goes on top of.
and this is what tidal powerunderneath the golden gate bridge could look like. so we're reallyexploring what we can do to harness thatand also the waves. we have a permit applicationinto the federal government to do a five-megawatt--basically enough to power 5,000 homes--project off ocean beach. as a result, we getto close power plants. there's nothing more gratifying.
i can actually see this inthe distance from my window. nothing more gratifyingthan closing a power plant. now it's completely gone. completely gone. not even a trace of it. they spent two yearsdemolishing it, and it's really an incrediblesense of satisfaction, especially forthe community that lived right next to it thathad incredibly elevated levels
of cancer and asthma. this is a remaining powerplant in san francisco that we're workingto get rid of. so this motivates me. it was actually taken frommy wife-- as a painter. and the studio, this is whatthe window looks out to. so trash is anothercomponent of climate change. every city has trash,and we've spent a lot of time getting to our goals.
i like this shell ad. "don't throw anything away. there is no away." which is true. doesn't really go anywhere. so today, actually, you'rethe first people to hear this. the mayor hasn'tannounced it yet. but actually today, ourrate is 72% recycling rate for all the waste.
total amount of waste, which isclose to two million tons, 72% of it is recycled or reused. and then our goal isto get to 75% by 2010, and to zero waste, nowaste going into landfill or incineration by 2020. this is what we collect. so we spend a lot of timelooking at what we do collect. so we havesingle-stream recycling. so all bottles and cansand paper and glass
can go in the blue. food scraps, whichnow 400 tons a day from our homes and restaurants,get collected curbside and get turned intoorganic compost. and then the black card is foreverything that's left over. so this is our compost facility. we actually sellthat 400 tons a day to organic vineyards andgolf courses and farms, and then the food comesback to san francisco,
and we're actuallyclosing the loop. vehicles, 49% of our emissions. this is the firstproject we did with cisco to create a connected busthat had wi-fi and made people want to get on the bus. we have lots of ways. critical mass is a very coolbicycle anarchist program, that basically the lastfriday of the month, just goes on to the streetsand closes traffic down.
but people have alot of fun doing it. i'd recommend it if you'reever in san francisco. and these old formsof transportation, we never got rid of. san diego, chicago,a lot of cities got rid of theirold trolley cars. we actually ended up-- [inaudible] sorry.
i didn't hear. phoenix too. you got rid of yours, too? you're getting yours back. light rail back, at least. so we ended up buyingeveryone else's, which is a really smart move. so we kind ofcornered the market in antique electric vehicles.
i like this ad, becausei bike every day. i hate cars that goin the bike lane. we have a goal of getting 100%zero emission fleet by 2020. so our fleet is now prettymuch on the way there. all our dieselvehicles are biodiesel and the rest are all electric. we have a fleet ofplug-in electric hybrids. they go about 100-- thisone goes about 110 miles to the gallon.
so green buildingis a huge component of energy across the us. 65% of electricity, 30% of rawmaterials, 30% of solid waste. and this hopefullyis the answer, which is our newest museum, thecalifornia academy of sciences. it's a leed platinum witha four-acre green roof. it just opened in golden gatepark, and it's truly amazing. hopefully you'll allget the opportunity to go there when you'revisiting san francisco.
the nice story is thatthis was the old one. 100% of the old buildingwas used in the new one. so legislation,we love mandates. i know in arizonayou have a little bit of fear around mandates. anything that wecan mandate, we do. i've never seen a reallyuseful voluntary program that we couldn't make mandatory. so--
--with that spirit, we pushedto get all new buildings to be leed gold by 2012. and that's from literallya garage to a skyscraper has to be leed gold by 2012. and that legislation haspassed, and now we're looking at existing buildings. this is where our watercomes from, hetch hetchy. it was the valleynext to yosemite. it remains the valleynext to yosemite,
except it's full of water. john muir, the founderof the sierra club, kind of cried whenit was filled. i actually think it's reallybeautiful with water in it, but maybe it would bemore beautiful empty. so water is a big issue. we've attacked lots of differentissues related to water, but my favorite one iswe were the first city to ban the use bycity government
of single-serveplastic water bottles. a billion water bottles endup in landfill in california every single year, not recycled. a billion. that's not countingthe recycled ones. so a billion of them endup in landfill a year just in the state of california. it makes absolutely no sense. nor does this.
this is kind of seen asbetter, but it isn't. it's still the waterthat's taken around, driven in these truckscauses huge emissions. and i'm not surewhy anyone would want to get the bisphenola from the tanks leeching into your water. so there's a much bettersolution, which is this. so now throughoutcity government, we've saved half amillion dollars a year
by going from that to this. just that one change. so really, theenvironment is secondary. we're in the middleof the worst recession that we've had in our lifetime. so even if you didn't careat all about the environment, you should still do energyefficiency, green building, and getting rid ofthis to put in these. because why not?
if it saves half a milliondollars a year, it's worth it. an issue that kind of getsswept under the carpet relates to toxicity, pesticides. it's just incrediblethat when you look at the list of pesticideand synthetic chemicals created since world war ii, there's been80,000 synthetic chemicals that have been manufactured. new chemicals thatdidn't exist before. and in the us, we've testedeight for their impacts
on the brain. so got a few to still test. and we don't seem to reallythink about this that much. san francisco'sspent a lot of time looking at electronic waste. they're now bannedfrom the landfill. we throw them all intoour sky, and hopefully they just getcaught in the wires. a lot of electronic wastewas ending up in china,
and we were exporting oure-waste problem somewhere else, causing cancerand other problems in other parts of the world. so we banded together withother cities in california to push the legislature tocreate an advanced disposal fee. so with every computer orcell phone or tv screen sold, you have to pay now $10 forthe disposal when you buy it. we do a lot ofpublic information
in three languages, english,chinese, and spanish, explaining to peoplewhat to do with stuff. it's not enough justto have great programs. you need to constantlyremind people what they are and how to use them. we eliminated the most toxicpesticides from all our parks and reduced therest of them by 80%. so we categorizedall those pesticides. and that's all on our website.
any city can just take those andsay, we're going to use these. we have an approved listthat says these are approved, these are not. it's very, very simple. everything in city governmenthas to be relatively simple, we find. food. there's a big movement towardseating organically and locally. luckily, we've got a greatclimate and a lot of food
is grown very closeto san francisco. so our point is ifwe can't eat locally, it's very difficult for anyother region on the planet to do so. so we're reallylooking at how we can source foodfrom either organic or local and organic sources. the biggest issue isthe people that we feed. prisoners-- and no one reallycares if they're eating organic
or not. they don't really care ifthey're eating anything. you know, we're in adifficult budget time. we're like, shouldwe spend more money to serve organicfood to prisoners? so it's been a littlebit of a hard sell. we work with business. so we believe thatyou can't achieve any of the sustainabilitygoals without getting business
on board. so everyone from google torei to clif bars, ch2m hill, brought in to createa collaborative called the business council onclimate change with the united nations to sit down and say,what should we be doing? and the first thing thatpeople don't understand is how to measuretheir carbon emissions. they don't know there'sa lot of opportunities, b2b opportunities to workout how to reduce them.
so that's the purpose of that. and then we did a wholemarketing campaign to look at, well, whatis the core message? and for us, the coremessage in all our programs is do the little thingsand make a big difference. people are overwhelmedby thinking they need to do everything. and so if you canmake it bite-sized and really show people that theyare making a big difference,
it goes a long way. so the ecomap cameout of a partnership with cisco, thecomputer manufacturer, and it talked about-- the intro,i'm just going to talk through. you can read it. the goal was to be able touse zip codes to determine co2 footprints in san francisco. so the idea was, individualswant to make a difference, but they don't really knowwhat that difference would be.
if you fill out acarbon calculator or do a pledge on theinternet, it doesn't really lead to any aggregated number. and so the point here wasto be able to replicate what we do so that you canone day compare a phoenix zip code with a san francisco zipcode with a beijing zip code. and this is-- wait one second. so this is what you see. and the website'slaunching in a few days.
so you see san francisco. you get a sense ofall the zip codes. on the top, it tellsyou your zip code because you can nowautomatically-- your ip address on your computer can betabulated with your zip code. so rather than you havingto type anything in, the computer tellsyou your zip code. and then it shows you thezip codes based on greenness. so the lighter the green, thebetter actual green you are.
so the first thingit shows you here, which is kind of maybe hard toread from where you're sitting, but it shows you thethree indicators, which are transportation,energy, and waste. and then it ranks the top 10zip codes in san francisco, and it shows you thepercentage for each category. so in the first one, 50%is from transportation, 46% is from energy, andonly 4% is from waste. so on energy, it shows youthe amount of electricity used
and the amount of gas. so we went to ourutility and said, we want, by zip code,the residential data for both gas andelectricity, and then we looked at theamount of carbon in gas and thegas-electricity ratio, and came up with azip code ranking. and you can see thelittle green or red arrows next to the number.
so each month, there's kind ofthe potential to go up or down. so in your community, ifyou get 30 or 40 people to do small actions, youcan get your whole zip code to go from number two,let's say, to number one. the other thingthat it shows you on the bottom, that greenbar, is the city average and the city goal. so we have thesegoals, but they're very hard to translateso that people
understand what they are. so the purpose here is tobe able to show people, you're not quite wherethe city goal is. if you took these actions,you could get there. so waste. it shows you the weight of theblack [? cart, ?] the weight of the green [? cart, ?] sothis is average per household weight-- and the blue[? cart. ?] and you can see huge disparities between thetop zip code with 295 pounds,
and the worst inthis one is 925. so three times moreis being thrown away in one zip code than another. and it turns out that the zipcode that's doing really well is called south beach. it's a new development. it's young people thatlive in small apartments. they're producingthree times less trash than single-familyhomes in the richmond.
but really, i mean,it's startling starting to look atthat data, and who's throwing away moregreen material, and who's throwingaway more refuse. transportation. we managed to get the statedata and regional data so that you can start lookingat the number of hybrids, the number of suvs, andthen the miles per year driven to commute in eachzip code, which gives you
your carbon footprint. so really starting to get prettyhigh-level granularity of data to look at this issue. you can do it by zip code, youcan start comparing two zip codes, and eventually, you'llbe able to take two zip codes from differentplaces on the planet and compare suv versus hybridownership, for instance. so the next thing we did is lookat these three key indicators, which are effort,cost, and impact.
so that's what welearned from our market research was that thoseare the three drivers. people want to lookat the effort they need to take to dosomething, the cost it's going to be to do that thing,and then, what is the impact? so there's some thingsthat are very high impact, but they're also very higheffort, like going car-free. if you said, i'm goingto give up my car and just walk, bike,and take public transit,
it's a huge impact, but it'salso quite a lot of effort. putting solar panels isnot a huge effort, really, but it's a huge cost. and so some people maynot be willing to do that, or able to do that. and so we tailored,rather than just coming up with generic thingsthat you could do, based on what your personalprofile is by effort, cost, and impact, we thengenerate a list for you
of what you can do. so it comes up witha list, and then you get to decide out of thosewhich actual actions you want to take in the threedifferent categories. and as you take them,it fills out your tree. and as it fillsout your tree, you can then add it to facebook. we really wanted to add thesocial networking dimension, and we used themayor here, so you
get to see themayor's facebook page. and his tree goes on there. and then it goes back and looksat the people that live around the mayor that are also usingthe site through facebook and finds out whatthey're doing. so he decides he wantsa plan a bicycle route. so it doesn't just giveyou a high level of data. it starts to mine down deeper. so it says he's going to go fromcity hall to see the giants,
and then it shows the route. and one of the cool things thatwe did with the route planner is that it also showsyou the gradient, you can see on the bottom right. san francisco, wehave a lot of hills. people want to know, ifthere's an easy route, how long does it take? and then at the bottom, itlinks you to a bike buddy through facebook.
so if you don't wantto bicycle alone, you're just starting tobike, it helps you do that. and then it linksyou to other people. this person can teach youhow to learn how to compost. the next person is going tobe part of a green business, and they happen to have avideo on cole hardware, which is a small hardwarestore that can tell you moreabout what you want to know about green businesses.
so you can reallystart linking this to real-lifeexperiences in the city rather than making itsome abstract tool that is of little use. so this will launch in seoul. we started in san francisco. amsterdam and seoulare the next two cities that are going to do it. and then the goal is toreplicate the model by greening
each zip code. and zip codes reallyare a scale that you can start measuring things. i mean, if you get enoughzip codes to do it, you can really see whatthe impact on the planet is going to be. thank you. [applause]
Post a Comment for "hybrid suvs uk"