Very interesting question Graham! I had dinner one evening with 3 IPCC lead authors (which are also my friends) and asked the same question. The answers were lame: Recycling, use green energy, cycle to work and use public transport. All offset by traveling a lot for work. Don't get me wrong, I am not blaming my friends, my answers would have been the same (I have no car and cycle everywhere, I don't take plastic bags in supermarkets, I recycle and try to buy local produce and I won't have kids i.e. carbon consumers of the future, but I do travel a lot.) My point is that despite working in the field and being knowledgeable and passionate about this topic, I am thin on personal actions. Why is that? Because it is so bloody hard to change your life style? Because it is so confusing to do the right thing, i.e. you have to do a full life cycle analysis before being sure what is really good? Because all these small bits I can do are just drips on the hot stone? I am very interested to hear what other answers you will get. Katja

On a personal note, Indians have been sharing & reducing their footprint in each area of their lifestyle - example : a shirt usually is shared with your sibling when you grow up. This shirt when it's no longer used as a shirt, becomes a mop.so collectively this sharing of different things in a joint family in Indian homes have been reducing the footprint. since, time is changing and everyone needs a branded t- shirt from a mall and a branded mop (no intentions to snub anyone/ mall owners), But the sharing of things is been gradually degrading, as nuclear families, is what everyone chooses.

I just changed to organic and vegetarian foods instead of using non-organic and non-veg for about six years ago. Trying to avoid the usage of plastic and non-biodegradable materials. Now a days i use public transport facilities to travel before of 2011 i used bicycle to travel. Tell about something about the non-biodegradable material to my friends; and ask them to learn to reduce the usage of the same.

Avoiding the use of a car I think is a very important aspect in this. People are starting to realize that a car is not sustainable at all, however it are fuel prizes that give the biggest incentive for people to keep their car parked in their garage.

Beside the normal initiatives that have been written here already, I manage a small facebook page where news items and other interesting topics around sustainability are discussed. I have gotten some good replies there and have seen that it inspires people to live in a more sustainable way, the public grows every day!

Your personal contributions by adjusting your lifestyle etc. may contribute to your personal C-footprint and in addition ease your mind. However, as scientist with professional expertise and interest in CC and related environmental consequences you must directly address national and international authorities involved in the translation of scientific findings into political reactions and regulations. This is the only way to bring your science based opinion directly to the attention of relevant decision makers.

Everyone, wherever they live, study or work in our globe

Hi Graham, although I feel that anthropogenic climate change is more than a "belief", I am happy to answer. Buildings and transport are the most important things that spring to mind. So I don't overheat during winter (in fact I barely heat at all because the insulation is so good & the neighbours heat our flat almost for free) and I hardly ever use a car, let alone a plane. I also buy local foods. If you read French (or German) here is an interactive web site to which I occasionally contribute and which goes through the main things that we can do in our everyday lives: www.energie-environnement.ch

At the personal level, tapping sun light for the energy and rain water harvesting in house, a habit of lesser wastage of food, optimising the energy use in house, instead of walking to control lifestyle related problems walk while going to wok are some of the personal options for adaptations so that individual carbon footprint can reduce.

Hi Graham: I have reduced my automobile usage, recycle paper, metal, glass and plastic, and compost some organic waste. But I agree with Roland Kallenborn's response; communication of scientific research to practitioners (engineers, water managers, foresters, planners, emergency responders, etc.), and the institutions they work for, will also be important for enabling action on climate change, both to reduce greenhouse gas emissions [mitigation], and to plan for any emerging risks [adaptation].

Hi Graham, great question. Aside from doing the things that people have already mentioned (recycling, cycling, energy effieciency) my response to climate change as an individual has been to work (with others who are alarmed by the science) toward climate change policy in the form of a carbon tax. I am a member of Citizens Climate Lobby and have traveled to Washington, D.C. to meet with members of congress to discuss the matter of climate change and lobby for a revenue-neutral carbon tax. Personal steps will NEVER make enough of a difference at this point, serious steps need to be taken and the most efficient way to do this is through regulation. Many industrialized nations have already implemented some sort of regulation and the US is dismally behind the rest of the world with facing this problem. It's unclear how much of the science you are familiar with, but I have studied many recent publications on the matter of climate change and the outlook is grim. Unfortunately it is hard for the US to act on such a "long-term" problem when there are many more immediate issues to be handled. I would love to continue this conversation with you at any time. I'm not climatologist, but I am an environmental scientist who is deeply concerned about the impact of climate change on future generations.

Besides the usual (recycling, avoiding of buying unnecessities) I happen to own a bit of land. Since this land contains of bits of different habitats, I have made the decision to try to combine different goals which collide in e.g. carbon issue. Parts of it are actively maintained to host maximum diversity of locally declining species (in the case of Finland that means prevention of overgrowth of open land by manual work and help of organic sheep - meaning carbon source. To compensate that, I let the forest bits stay as forests, and let the trees grow as long as they wish, and let the die and rot in peace, and will eventually seek for official protection for them. For fuel I use those trees that are shadowing the crucial xerothermic sites. I have also planted trees to some bits of land where I believe that is the optimal land use. I am also participating some rainforest protection campaigns. I do all that having the unfortunate convincion that it will obviously make no real difference anywhere else but within myself. That nevertheless may be important as well, though in a microscopic scale. But, I have a car - and kids whose best interests may not always be the same as Earth's (in the short run).

Eat organic, grow organic, sell organic, buy organic. think organic - agroecology , permaculture, one straw rev. bio energetic - Rudolph Steiner, Alan Chadwick, John Jevins. and and and.

A number of very interesting answers here. Thanks for your honest replies. I note that nobody has mentioned what they think their personal footprint is, or how this compares to their national average. I also see that most people are doing something, although if I read between the lines correctly, it seems that very few are reducing their personal footprint substantially.

Is this a case of do as I say not as I do? Clearly to hit a 80% reduciton by 2050 (as one target sugests) we need to influence government and industrial consumption, but is this best done by grass roots action (personal changes) or by top down (institutional) changes?

Everyone, wherever they live, study or work in our globe

Dear Graham Smith, I also believe that current climatic changes are the results of irresponsible attitudes of human beings. The materialistic approaches of most of us have caused irreversible loss to nature which is now showing its revenge. But, as “it is never too late” we can still save the Mother Nature and reverse the situation by working honestly and above our interests.

There is a dire need for educating the masses around the world regarding nature conservation and environmental protection and to change their attitudes towards positive, sensible and responsible actions for nature. We know that nations cannot be educated without educating the youth therefore, targeting the youth, I personally took an initiative to educate, train and sensitize the youth in my country regarding nature conservation and environmental protection. I along with my colleagues all working voluntarily, have launched a series of informal meetings and brainstorming sessions for nature lovers from the platform of Pakistan Wildlife Foundation. These meetings are called WILDLIFE TALKS and organized in higher education institutions in Pakistan where 3-4 senior ecologists and environmentalists deliver lectures and then hold a question and answer session for about two hours with 100-125 graduate students and nature lovers. These Wildlife Talks provide a platform for the environment, wildlife and nature lovers of the country to share their wildlife related experiences and to learn from experiences of their seniors and also to discuss their ideas with the seniors in informal and friendly atmosphere. It is also an opportunity of brain storming for wildlife managers and policy makers to get benefited through advises and suggestions of the seniors and to learn about recent trends in wildlife and nature conservation. So far, we have organized eight such seminars in different universities and around 1000 Young Scientists and nature lovers got benefited.

Secondly, from religious point of view, it is obvious that majority of the people have forgotten their Lord The Almighty God and the current devastating climatic changes and destructions are just warnings from the Almighty God. If we want to survive, we should repent and obey The God and His laws for nature. Actually man is evading from its duties and trying to do those things which are the responsibilities of God. We should not try to change nature otherwise nature’s revenge will be dreadful.

MAKE YOUR ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINTS SMALL AND GREEN

The responses to Mr Graham C. Smith's question are heartening. Somethings we do are not costly: insulating the attic, recycling, reducing consumption, reusing materials, composting and planting trees. Other steps I have taken are expensive, buying a solar hot water heater, or driving a hybrid vehicle (alos driving less and car pooling to work) which we bought are not practical for most working people. We in the west and I myself live way beyond our means, so reducing water use and capturing rain water is something my students encouraged me to do, so we have a cistern for our garden's water needs. As one person suggested -- in Geneva, I believe, eating locally grown fruits and vegetables is an important -- but costly and time consuming alternative to buying at the local chain store.

The motives for taking this simple and more costly steps are varied, some respondents suggested their religious faith dictates stewardship of the Earth. Others of us are altruistic and seek to counter the prevailing egoism so rampant in material culture. We have also sent money overseas to support an family in southern Asia so that their children have access to education. There are steps small and large that all of you are taking and that is commendable. Perhaps the best thing I can do is turn off the lights right now and enjoy the evening's darkness, as we are intended to genetically speaking.

Having raised this question and read some very interesting replies, I feel I should come clean on what I do, and invite comment. I recycle and correctly dispose of batteries and electrical goods, shop local sometimes, buy organic sometimes. I have only flown for work reasons in the last three years, and although I own a 12 year old car, I only drive 3000 miles a year (I commute by bicycle 16 miles a day). I have installed solar electric (thanks to the UK feed in tariff!), and a solar hot water panel and solid wall insulation (our house is over 100 years old and does not have a cavity wall). I also host regular events, inviting members of the public to visit during a 2 hour open house every few months. My reason for doing this last one was that I have already reduced my own carbon footprint substantially, and I felt it easier and more cost effective to help people reduce their footprint by a substantial amount, rather than reduce mine by some small amount. These events are advertised in the local paper and we know of at least a dozen people who have installed solar panels after visiting.

At my individual level I am using water and electricity very cautiously. My kids also make aware of this.

Previously I wrote: Everyone, Wherever they live, study or work in our globe, now I add my opinion:

Change is the rule of Nature, as a natural phenomenon, but is helping by pollutions, damages, etc. through the activities in productions and services, carried out by man and women living and working in our globe, because there are environmental impacts and effects measured and presented step by step by environmental objectively verifiable indicators ... Yes, I agree it, the climate change is not an exception, becuase it is continuing of the live in our globe. The role of both, man and women is a biogeophysical subjective factor that have impact and increase the speed of change.

We should be concerned but not bother, because we are at the peak of stress, but we need to have global strategy with programs and plans that have to adapt to these climate changes, with specific activities and not with empty words and sentences through workshops, conferences, congresses etc..I believe that each man conclusions from those which are located in Manhattan, USA.

With the mean global temperature increase due to GHGs generated by the uncontrollable act of anthropogenic intensive and progressive science and technological developments, today our ease of life has become a great cost. Since Kyoto Protocol, Rio, 1992, indigenous knowledge has been debated in numerous

international flora for not only mitigation of GHGs but for ecological pressures crisis. Current trends and recognition has spread issues of biodiversity and intellectual property to natural disaster preparedness, impact assessment, food security and climate change mitigation & adaptation keeping in mind the Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of indigenous peoples who have recognized the global changes in the life-line sectors of climate. Albania is not far behind in the progress of mitigation and adaptation; being a developed country although found to be a relatively low net emitter of GHGs, with relatively low per capita CO2 emissions, due to the fact of 95% of electricity utilization from hydropower sources. However, energy sector contributes to over 60% of total emissions; still Albania is making rapid strides towards ecological stabilization for sustainability because by 2020 there will be an increase of five times higher GHG emissions due to urban energy usage that comes from other means. Already

collaboration between indigenous knowledge holders and mainstream scientific research is generating new co-produced knowledge relevant for effective adaptation action on the grounds of mitigation of Global Warming. The current paper profiles the tremendous steps taken by the Albania Government in mitigation

lines of GHGs and adaptation strategies implemented through an array of schemes. Documentation by taking records of other Nations on the importance of indigenous people and their Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in handling of changing and/or changed climatic factors and alternative measures to cope up with the current trends to provide similar considerations for Albania. The authors provide new aspects of research and development in lines of eco-friendly sustainable and renewable methodologies to mitigate GHGs generation by bio-conversions of urban wet garbage, agricultural wastes and agro-industrial effluents. The stress is also laid on reforestations by making use of barren mined land areas and uncultivable hilly areas for biomass energy productions through bamboo plantations without hampering the food crop productions but to generate renewable sustainable bio-fuels for “green energy” that lines with carbon credits, ecological balance and upliftment of poorer rural sectors.

I unfortunately have no idea what my carbon footprint actually is. I suspect it is somewhat below the average value of individuals in the industrialized world as I have adapted my lifestyle by walking and using public transit whenever I can, and I am careful about how I spend my dollars (buy less, buy local etc). This way, I hope to contribute to a changing world in my own little way, by influencing what gets produced and how, and which economic and environmental policies are being implemented.

By weather forecastings and predictions we can know about the natural phenomena, but can never see these natural feneomene unaligned with human activity, which occur at a certain time and place of this globe, or at one segment, zone of our globe, but if we or you are even in Antraktide, you or we are influenced by activities in the committedof humankind, because pollution, damage to the ravages are the product of the activity of mankind, as a source of pollution and thus passed up there, in Antraktide by means of one or more of the pathway, transport environment and Antraktida back host source of these these pollutions, damages to the ravages. Then it is necessary to assess side effects of adverse environmental effects it through objectively verifiable indicators of the environmental impact, to the objectively verifiable indicators of environmental pressure, in order to take concrete measures for minimizing, or reduction of such pollution, damages to ravages.

I have stopped using my car for errands and I walk or take my bycicle. I don't buy plastic containers or aluminum cans. I have lived without can food for 8 years so far and I love it. I recycle everything even when I go to a restaurant, I take the trash home if the restaurant does not recycle. I make my own compost with my vegetable peels and grow my own vegetables. I turn off the water heater and the house AC/heater and open windows instead. I collect rain water to water plants and wash clothes and I only run the dryer and washer when I have a full load of clothes. I use degradable detergents, I recycle the dryer sheets. I make good use of my computer when I turn it on and I never leave it on unnecessarily. I dont' watch tv very often, I turn on only the light of the room I am in, and I turn off the lights of the rooms when I leave. I measured the amount of water I use every day and keep track of it. I also track my electric bill. I don't buy anything that has to be transported by car over 40 miles and I plant trees and vegetables any chance I get.

 Maria Corena-McLeod ,

with what you have written, I am happy with you, makes time for everyone to do as you do! With special consideration for you!

Thank you Dr. Lushaj ! I appreciate it !!!

I admire the endorsed consensus by scientists, on climate change, and their claim that human activity is the main cause-effect of global warming. It has been argued that over the last few decades the industrial development has accelerated the trend of global warming. There is clear evidence that global warming has been increasing sharply since 1960s. Moreover, It was revealed that air bubbles trapped in ice consists of the concentration of not more than 270 ppm of CO2, over the period until 1960s, and afterwards CO2 concentration reached up to 400 ppm nowadays . Since then the global average temperatures have been rising for more than 0.6 degree of Celsius (°C) . Perhaps not evenly in all places, nevertheless it is worth to point out that, this phenomenon should be considered as an issue of concern. The most important thing is that we managed to get a consensus about not harming our atmosphere by greenhouse-gasses. As a result of the effects of global warming, not scientists only are involved in this issue. Thus, even media attention has shifted recently onto environmental issues. I'll just summarize the main points of the argument in a few lines. I think that we should continuously rely on two important approaches. Firstly we support environmentally friendly use of natural resources, thus relying on renewable resources. Secondly, to ensure a safe and healthy environment for present and future generations. My viewpoint is that the climate change is a dominant challenge nowadays. Many scientist are trying to find the solutions to alleviate global warming, otherwise the whole society holds the responsibility to solve this question.

Similar to Maria I have tried to make small changes to my lifestyle to reduce the energy I use. I use the bicycle where possible for work. I have changed my energy supplier to one that uses much more renewable energy, and I am very aware of the energy I use in the house. I save energy where I can (lower wattage and energy efficient lightbulbs), only running applicances when they are full. I never use a tumble dryer as clothes dry naturally, I odn't understand why is there such a need in our society to have clothes dried instantly! My house has cavity wall insulation and full loft insualtion, so keeps the heat in well. In the winter I often use the wood cut down from my garden to heat the room (in my real fire), rather than using gas. I often only heat one room instead of the whole house when only I am in. I recycle everything I can including taking things from work home if they are not recyclable there. I collect water for the garden and very rarely use the hose. I save water in the home my having bricks in the toilet cisterns and special devices on the shower to reduce water use (and never have a bath). I also think it is important to buy less and use goods for longer, we need to go back to how life was 50+ years ago when clothes were sewn instead of thrown away, electrical items were fixed rather than put in the bin for landfill. My car is 19 years old and still works fine, I don't need a new car every two years. I get annoyed with insurance companies that are willing to write off a car so easily, what happens to this car afterwards, it just gets left to rot? I also use biodegradable detergents (and sometimes little balls in the washing meaning no need for detergent at all!). I never use the standby on the TV or other devices and only have lights on when I need them.I try to buy local and buy British, althuogh this is less easy when it comes to electrical goods. I only use the brand of toilet paper that plants 3 trees for every tree they use in making it. Having less children than the average means I'm not contributing to the growth in population, which possibly contributes to another slight reduction in resource use. If we all make some small changes, it has to help the future of our planet for the next generation!

I guess my footprint is around 3 tons. The best response for me is to better understand the principle of sustainanbility in the concrete context in which I live: housing, mobility, food consumption, energy use etc. and to try to convince others, particularly family and friends to be responsible in all we do.

Gian, I particularly like the last part of your answer. Like you I have a relatively low footprint, and I think the best thing I can do now (and the easiest), is to convince a few other people to lower their footprint by a small amount, since this will have a greater impact than anything I can do for my own footprint.

I have had a materially-simple lifestyle for the past half century--well before carbon footprints were invented, or global climate change was seen as a problem. I have neither driven a car or been overseas for over 35 years. I've been a vegetarian for over 30 years. I don't believe we'll make any progress if we don't abandon our obsession with economic growth, a point I've been making in my publications in recent years.

Having read numerous tomes on "living off the grid", I believe that we simply cannot as a species live an independant lifestyle. And neither should we. Cooperation has been the very means of our survival for millenia. It seems though that technology has given us the illusion to live outside of the group, until you realise that if the power went off that independance vanishes. This illusion has broken the bonds of community, and led to the western way of life we are now experiencing.

There does seem to be a way forwards though, and many of the above have embraced a set of ethics that are fundamental to slowing anthropogenic impact. I recycle, use the car rarely and my family avoid processed foodstuffs whenever possible. My last job role involved me cycling 16 miles to work (1 hour each way) and what I found surprising that people were incredulous that I would do this. Sitting in your car for an hour to do the same journey on a busy day is a both detrimental to your own health and the environments. Perhaps a change in mindset, where we embrace the fact that we are able to enjoy and participate in "getting about under your own steam" would be a good place to start.

We also need to get away from the "hippie" image that environmentalism seems to attract, - it sets us apart, diminishes our message and ultimately leads to a less informed society.

Great to hear a lot of responses and am very happy to note the contributions to climate change from various individuals.

From my side, I always carry my own shopping bags, which are reusable and i reuse them till their functional limit permits!! I try to avoid the usage of plastic bags and plastic materials to the maximum possible extent. I send to recycle almost all products I use after i decide to discard them. I try to utilize public transportation, where i feel i cannot walk, otherwise i prefer to walk for the sake of my health as well. I try to use my clothes for the longer duration, of course till their functional limits and once i decide i cannot use them any more for their actual purpose, i reuse them for secondary purposes. I also try to procure recycled products and try to procure things available from local sources to the possible extent. I try to teach my kids also to follow all these to stress the importance of climate change and environmental conservation..

I work for one of the largest retailers in the UK, and have done for the last 15 years. This has given me a fairly broad insight into shopping habits and the way retailers manage their business. One area that I have seen change radically is the fresh meat dept. When I first started with the company, 90% of our meat sold was Scottish (this is posted from Scotland BTW!), now less than half is homegrown sales so to speak. Large volumes of non-Scottish/overseas sourced product now makes up the rest.

This is not me as a Nationalist complaining, rather me as a concerned individual and how do we better manage our carbon footprint. While it is cheaper at the shelf to buy imported beef/chicken for the consumer, I fear that it has already damaged the farming infrastructure locally, and this then has much larger ramifications for the wider environment.

We also hand our plastic bags for free, and in one store I worked in, that could amount to 40,000 bags per day, with even small stores doing 10,000 per day. Retailers say that this is managed by encouraging recycling old bags, and by offering customers the option to use empty boxes of the fruit/veg dept. This however accounts for only a tiny fraction of the way in which customers move their goods, and it seems to me that only legislation will end the nonsense of continuing the scourge of one use plastic bags.

Plastic bags are a massive issue in terms of their environmental impact. In oceanic environments they are ingested by various species mistaking them for jellyfish. The outcome for theses species is not pleasant, causing bowel blockages and stomach issues. On land they are unsightly (just head for your nearest landfill and see how many are stuck to the fence for starters). We also now use biodegradable bags, as do most UK retailers, so that unfortunately impacts on the desire to mitigate CO2 levels.

The only answer for now seems to be to charge consumers for bags and then use that cash not to supplement supermarket incomes, but to work towards changing consumer habits through better information campaigns. Retailers are inherently opposed to a change in the way we transport their goods as they believe it will impact their bottom line, so it will be an uphill challenge to convince them of the long term benefits.

In the discussion above, I would submit that we need to take into account the resources required to produce the bags in the first place. I realize I offer no specifics at this point. But biodegradable or not, these bags have a negative impact on the environment. How about not consuming as much? I think this is the most important question to ask oneself.

In terms of numbers, when 20,000 people come through your tills on a daily basis, as a member of staff, it is extremely difficult to minimize the use of bags once you have run out of any available boxes you may have from the shop floor. The answer for me lies very clearly with the retailer getting behind (regulated by government if necessary) a campaign to better inform customers of the impact of bags.

We also see customers demand the use of bags in their home shopping deliveries, an option that really could be tailored to individual circumstances. As we deliver direct to their properties in large plastic trays used by shop floor pickers, and cant deliver to a home unless the goods are signed for, we perhaps by informing customers of overall weekly bag use would give them an incentive to reduce their use of them.

Colin, you are quite right. In Seattle, we just went through the implementation of a ban on plastic bags in retail, and the operation went very smoothly. The public was engaged early on by being made aware of the upcoming ban and why it was being implemented. As far as I can tell, everyone responded very positively. But still, nothing beats using reusable canvas bags for personal shopping. I see more and more of it. People are becoming more and more aware and sensitive about their footprints.

OK! - so there are clearly some very interesting details on this site. However if I were to be critical, I would say it is very one sided, is a protectionist site defending the interests of bag makers and it stands just as much on rhetoric as do the proponents of " The great pacific garbage patch" etc, etc.

In saying that though, I can identify with some of what they say.

A) we have to get the groceries home somehow

B) most folk only do a big shop once a week and this helps to cut down carbon emissions by minimizing vehicle trips

C)plastic bags are way more durable than paper (I would guess that paper bags are reused even less than plastic ones)

So based simply on the economics and environmental impact, I would have to fall on the side of plastic. But I do have some issues with this site in the way they interpret information. They downplay the issue of bags as "rubbish", when in our town of 75,000 people we use (conservatively) 13 million a year. To say that tiny percentages end up being cleaned up by municipal refuse teams is "stretching" it a bit.

Not only that, but they make a great deal of how important bag companies are in the economic sector in the state of California (or were), - you could infer from that the amount of bags they produce would be astronomical.

This gets away from the core argument though - how do we reduce the amount we use. Next time you buy three items and bag it, think!, would I be better off just using my pockets, the ultimate in reusable bags I would say.

And just to muddy the waters a bit, a recent programme I saw had a fairly well funded research trip look at "the garbage patch". It was interesting that when they trawled the ocean there were no red or yellow micro particles. This apparently is because fish ingest them as they think they are plankton, and there is increasing evidence to suggest that POP's within the fish bio accumulate, leading to concerns for human health. A recent review by the US EPA http://www.epa.gov/region9/marine-debris/pdf/MarineDebris-NPacFinalAprvd.pdf shows some of the issues facing the Pacific. The Scripps institute too have raised concerns about plastic, http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/Releases/?releaseID=1271 so the idea that there is no problem or its over exaggerated is a bit of a red herring!

In my opinion, the most important thing need to do is to change the people's concept of consumption. Nowdays is a fast consumption era, a fast-paced society. I still can not understand why we pursue so much from nature. So the final answer may be the combination of related authorities and individuals.

My wife and I do not think in terms of numbers but rather in terms of doing everything possible as a moral imperative. We have saved, recycled and conserved for decades both having grown up under the most modest circumstances in the rural Midwest in the 1930's and 1940's. We long ago gave up incandescent light-bulbs and since the climate crisis became clear, we have continued all our lifelong conservative ways, adding other practices consistent with our improved resources, and foregoing many luxurious practices of many Americans of our generation. Specifically: (1) We heat and cool our home with a ground-source heat pump; (2) We have installed the most efficient windows and the finest blown-foam insulation, (3) We have installed a solar panel array, connected to the grid with net metering, that provides 3/4 of our electricity needs; (4) We have surrounded our house with vegetation both for shade and for cooling; (5) We drive a hybrid car, a Volt; (6) We have completely abandoned air travel; (7) In the depths of winter, we spend most of our day in one room of our house where we use a wood-burning stove to reduce the load on the heat pump---the wood is harvested from our own woodlot; (8) We abstain as much as is convenient from eating meat, treating meat only as a condiment for the most part; (9) We buy locally produced food as much as possible; (10) We raise fruits (raspberries, apples and cherries) and a variety of vegetables in our own garden. (11) we compost everything possible---kitchen waste, trimmings from plants, grass cuttings, small branches from trees and shrubs, (12) we stack tree trimmings in a brush pile to disintegrate over a period of years. (13 We share in and contribute to  local and national organizations and activities working to reverse the current course toward disaster. We think about anthropogenic climate change essentially without stopping. It informs virtually every decision we make. We despair that the false god of the economy had led the world of man  to abandon logic, reason and even common sense.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318760929_My_Village_Biodiversity_Documentation_of_Western_Ghats_Biodiversity_through_Network_of_Students_and_Teachers

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331076568_Global_Warming_Mitigation_Through_Carbon_Sequestrations_in_the_Central_Western_Ghats/stats

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323180165_Salient_Ecological_Sensitive_Regions_of_Central_Western_Ghats_India

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332331409_Sustainable_Management_of_Bannerghatta_National_Park_India_with_the_Insights_in_Land_Cover_Dynamics

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301609558_Geospatial_analysis_of_forest_fragmentation_in_Uttara_Kannada_District_India