aldyen donnelly from Vancouver, Canada writes: I really enjoyed Deborah Jones's first article about the family's attempt to conserve energy and very much look forward to the next installation. The family appears very committed--going so far as to sell their home and buy at a new location to cut car use. This takes courage and commitment. I look forward to hear, in the next article, how the family will tackle houeshold emissions. Deborah noted that her family's home generated 8.2 tCO2e in 2000. The average Canadian family home generated 6.5 tCO2e in 2000. This estimate includes prairie homes that cope with much colder winters than we do here in BC. It also includes emissions associated with the electricity that households buy. It is also surprisingly low, compared to the estimate for Ms. Jones' family. The contribution of electricity emissions to the Jones family 2000 inventory is much smaller than it would be for an Alberta family with an otherwise identical insulation and similar pattern of appliance use, because BC power is virtually GHG-free while coal is burned to make electricity in Alberta. Every Canadian home has to cut direct and indirect emissions from their fuel and electricity consumption below 4.7 tCO2e/year by 2012 to achieve compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. We are trying hard in our 5-person household, and are still well above that target. Washing baby diapers is a notable problem. But while switching to disposables would cut the environmental footprint for our house, it is simply shifting inventory from our home to the municipal waste management system. Many decisions that look effective when we think within the walls of our house are not when we look at their impact beyond these walls. I look forward for new tips from Ms. Jones' next article.

• Posted 26/03/07 at 1:07 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Terry F from Edmonton, Canada writes: Carbon coach? Thank goodness Kyoto won't see the light of day in Canada.

• Posted 28/03/07 at 4:59 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Jimmy O from Toronto, Canada writes: Unfortunately for Terry F of Edmonton, Kyoto will not see the light because it requires only a modest reduction - he will soon have to cope with massive reductions. Carbon dioxide has just been legally declared a pollutant by the US Supreme Court. Therefore the environmental protection agency can now set limits on emissions outside of the government's policy. It also allows for litigation and believe me the legal bill Canada will have to pay will be enormous. Terry F. will be one of the more vulnerable to these changing economic circumstances if he continues to put his head in the sand on climate change.

• Posted 04/04/07 at 10:06 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment