A Good Problem to Have

California Electricity Production March 23, 2019

Saturday, March 23, 2019, was a windy, sunny day in California. It was so windy and sunny that at 3pm renewables supplied 68% of the electrical load. As you can see in the chart above, not only did the California ISO, the entity responsible for managing California’s energy grid, throttle back electricity imported from other states, it pulled way back on the electricity it took from natural gas (thermal) power plants. Ramping down California’s lone nuclear power plant wasn’t an option—nuclear power plants are pretty much on or off and take a long time to change from either state. Hydroelectricity can usually be throttled back somewhat, but after a wet, snowy winter in California the reservoirs behind the dams are full.

This is not the first time California has had such a bounty of renewable power. In April and May of last year, renewables at times made up over 70% of the electrical load. For the last three months, December 2018 -- February 2019, renewables contributed more than 60% of California’s electricity at some point in each month. So far, the all time high for renewables contribution to the California grid for any five minute period is 74%.

California has four basic challenges to resolve on its journey to using solely renewables + large hydro to power its electric grid.

Part of the baseload

1)   The state needs baseload power that can supply around 20,000 MW delivered around the clock and around the year. Hydroelectricity, on non-drought years, can provide about 4,000 MW.  Nuclear provides another 2,000 MW; however, California’s aging lone nuclear plant is scheduled to shut down in 2025. Other renewables, such as biogas, small hydro, geothermal and biomass are together reliably supplying 2,000 MW around the clock. This leaves a gap of 12,000 MW that is currently being met by burning natural gas or importing electricity from other states.

2)  California’s second challenge is that summer demand, higher than any other season, generally peaks around 6pm when solar panels have lost most productivity. This demand needs to be reduced, shifted to other times of day, or both.

3)   Challenge three is that in order to meet winter demand, the state needs to figure out ways to produce electricity on cloudy, low wind days in December and January, when both solar panels and on-shore wind turbines may produce only a third of the electricity that they do in other seasons. Sometimes this low sun/wind combination might last for days at a time, so shifting demand to other times of day won’t help.

4)  The last challenge is what to do with the excess electricity that will inevitably be produced on windy, sunny days after solar and wind are built out enough to deal with challenges one through three. With just the amount of wind and solar being added to California 2019, it is likely that renewables + large hydro + nuclear will surpass 100% of demand often on sunny, windy days in 2020. It is likely that renewables alone will surpass 100% of demand on sunny, windy days after 2022. But this is a good problem to have! Read on!

How to Provide Renewable Baseload Power

Leaky, leaky

First let’s discuss why burning natural gas and importing electricity from other states is not a climate-friendly answer for meeting baseload or peak power requirements. Though we’ve been led to believe that natural gas is a “clean” fuel, because the national natural gas distribution system is so leaky, it turns out that burning natural gas to produce electricity, while better for our lungs, is almost as bad for the climate as burning coal. We need to transition natural gas out of our homes and out of our electricity supply in relatively short order. 

But why not just buy electricity from other Western states that have excess to sell? There are a few problems with this. 1.) These states have peak summer demand right around the time California does, which means they’re least likely to have excess electricity when we need it most, especially any produced from hydro, solar or wind. 2) Right now all these states burn coal. Some of them burn a lot. In fact, most would have no electricity to sell at all if they didn’t burn coal. The coal burners even include Washington State, despite its prodigious amount of hydroelectricity. Even if “officially” California is buying electricity produced by hydro, wind turbines or solar panels, if these states weren’t shipping electricity to California, they would burn less coal or none at all. Eventually these states will build out renewables enough to meet their own internal demand. Until then they have no business shipping electricity to anyone else.

Wyoming is the state furthest west with the most purple.

3) Even if all these states installed renewables like crazy, few have much in the way of potential wind resources. Many have great solar potential but their solar would produce daytime peaks very close to California’s solar generation peaks, when California needs to import electricity the least. The exception, as you can see in the wind map adjacent, is Wyoming. Wyoming has both amazing wind and a small population. It could easily build out enough wind farms to sell electricity 24/7 all summer to California. Too bad the state is completely in servitude to coal and perversely unwilling to take advantage of the great renewable, non-destructive source of energy it is so richly endowed with. Since California cannot force Wyoming to become sensible, the Golden State will have to make use of its own great untapped resource to produce baseload energy: off shore wind.

Off shore wind beats on shore with a stick.

On shore wind in California comes and goes. Some days are blustery; some days are still. In contrast, the wind off the coast of California is strong and steady all day, all night, and all four seasons. Perfect for baseload. The wind off the north part of the state is better than the wind south, but even the wind off LA isn't bad.Though the US has been slow to adopt off-shore wind technology, Europeans have not. Europe now has 18,499 MW of off shore wind turbines installed, with 4,543 grid-connected turbines. Of turbines installed last year, the average size was 6.8 MW. Because of deep waters in windy areas, California will likely need to install floating turbines, although there are some locations with shallow water where conventional turbines could be used. But Europeans are ahead of us there, too. There is already a 30 MW floating wind turbine farm off the coast of Scotland, and a €31 million euro floating wind project approved off the west coast of Ireland. Since off shore wind farms take several years to build and install, California should get started now. Building out a reliable baseload power supply is purely a matter of money and political will.

How to Meet Peak Summer Demand

Up, up, up

Renewables contribution as a percent of peak load in California falls in summer months, not because renewable generation falls, but because demand goes way up with the state’s summer air conditioning load. It is then that California turns to burning natural gas and importing electricity in spades.

The main problem is that utility-scale renewables production is strongest from 9am to 6pm, while summer demand peaks from 3 pm to 9 pm. This mismatch is partly due to residential solar dampening daytime demand, but also because heat builds during the day, peaking between 3:30 and 5pm, depending on how far one is from the coast. (The demand curve during other seasons looks quite a bit different but it never exactly matches renewable production.) To meet summer demand without burning fossil fuels or causing other states to burn them, California would have to build out renewables to the point there would often be large oversupplies of electricity fall through spring as well as many summer days until 3pm. Or the state would have to figure out a way to reduce summer peak demand. Or it would have to do a combination of both.

So what are the options? Waste electricity? Have blackouts every summer afternoon? Neither! Excess electricity can be used in productive ways, excess electricity can be stored to be used other times, and peak demand can be shifted or reduced, all with technology that currently exists. Let’s explore.

Store Peak Supply Electricity for Peak Demand Hours

1)  

Pumped hydro storage. During sunny/windy hours, the state can use electricity to pump water up behind a dam, creating a giant battery of potential energy. Let the water fall to provide baseload grid capacity in late afternoon/evenings. The site can be closed-loop, with reservoirs that don’t impact existing river systems. California currently has 3,000 MW of pumped hydro storage. Doubling its pumped hydro storage capacity would go a long ways towards ensuring grid reliability during peak demand hours.

2)  Ice batteries. This is a twofer—ice batteries essentially both store electricity and reduce peak demand. They can be programmed to charge themselves by making ice when renewable supply exceeds demand, say 10 am – 2pm, then use the ice to coast through the hottest six hours with cooling that requires very little electricity. This can be done on an industrial, commercial, institutional and residential level. The technology is relatively low tech and already exists. For homeowners, the cost of an ice battery is equivalent to a conventional AC system.

3)  Encourage home batteries via time-of-use charges. Charge low rates during peak supply hours and very high rates during peak demand hours. This will both make use of excess electricity and shift demand. It would also encourage households to install solar on west-facing roofs, which will provide more electricity late afternoon when it’s most needed.

4)   Utility Scale battery storage—lithium ion, redox flow, zinc hybrid, etc. Charge during peak generation, use during peak demand.

Reduce or shift demand away from peak hours 3pm – 9pm

1)   Ice batteries (discussed above.)

2) Implement steep cost for electricity during peak demand for residential and commercial users (discussed above.)

3)  Reduce amount of sewage treatment, water pumping and water treatment during peak demand hours. Some obviously needs to happen continually, but some can be delayed to off peak times.

4)  

Go no lawn

Conserve water/use greywater in Southern California. The State Water Project is the largest single user of energy in California. Getting water from Sacramento-San Joaquin delta to Southern California requires pumping it 700 miles and then up 2000 feet over the Tehachapi Mountains. Summer is exactly the time lawns and poorly landscaped yards need the most irrigation. Use permaculture techniques to replace lawns and other water-guzzling landscaping with lush, beautiful gardens that require a third the water. Use permaculture water capture techniques plus grey water to keep landscaping going all summer with minimal watering.

   5)  

Singing Frogs Farm--no-till, low water, high biodiversity

Stop water-crazy agriculture in California that requires crazy water pumping electrical use. Cotton, rice, and alfalfa are water-intensive crops that can all be grown in places where water falls from the sky all summer. Beef fed with irrigated forage, and cheese from cows that are fed alfalfa require huge amounts of water. These animals can also be raised in places where water doesn’t have to be pumped hundreds of miles. (Wisconsin! Iowa!) Almonds can’t be grown in many other parts of the US, but if the crop is largely being exported to China, then California is just foolishly exporting cheap water to China. Raising prices to, say, a 1/5^th to a 1/4^th of residential costs instead of the present 1/100^th to 1/50^th  would send rice, cotton, alfalfa and cheese production off to the states they belong in and would encourage dry farming, drip irrigation, mulching, compost use, and bio-intensive farming, all of which regenerate the soil and draw down carbon from the atmosphere. Yes, the cost of food will rise. If we want a planet habitable for the human race this is inevitable. Better to directly subsidize healthy fruits and vegetables for low-income households than to waste water and energy as extravagantly as we do.

6)   Implement a steep time-of-use rate structure to move industrial demand off peak demand hours. Demand response programs already exist but they could be much stronger, on the order of triple for kilowatt-hours used summer months between 3pm and 9pm. Industrial customers will either put their own west-facing solar panels on their rooftops, install their own batteries, or run their operations when electricity is cheaper.

In LA, trees=cool

    7) Reduce need for cooling throughout California. Plant trees, trees and more trees, especially to the west of buildings. Add green roofs, add living walls. Water them all with greywater. Add awnings to all west-facing windows. Make all roofs that are not green into white roofs that reflect heat. Reduce urban heat island effect by ripping up asphalt and concrete and turning it into low-water (but lovely) green spaces or replace with cool pavements, including vegetated permeable pavers irrigated with grey water. Add solar canopies to shade walkways and parking lots. (Better yet, get rid of parking lots.) Increase the albedo of asphalt by adding light color aggregates or seal existing asphalt with reflective coating. Discourage housing in high summer heat areas. Create gentle density and walkable communities in areas with reliable cooling ocean breezes (within 5 miles of coast) by replacing parking lots with townhouses, duplexes and apartments. (See Ten Minute Neighborhoods.)

Monster Demand Day--July 24th, 2018

Peak electricity demand for all of 2018 in California was 46,284 MW, which occurred at 5:35pm on Tuesday, July 24th. Wind plus solar provided roughly 11,000 MW of that. Total daytime demand that hot day was a behemoth 876,174 MW-hours. If California had developed a renewable base load of 20,000 MW, it would’ve been able to cover 480,000 MW-hours of that 24-hour demand. To produce the other necessary 400,000 MW-hours with solar and on-shore wind, solar and on-shore wind production would’ve roughly needed to have been 2.5 times what it is now. (This is assuming a fair amount of demand shifting and battery storage to better match time of generation.) This much wind and solar would mean a significant amount of excess electricity would be produced fall through spring. Let's look at the winter situation, which is slightly worse.

How to Produce Enough Renewable Electricity on Cloudy Windless Days

Cloudy, windless day, Jan 14, 2019

While the sun shines reliably in California in the summer, it doesn’t in the winter, nor does on-shore wind blow reliably. While demand is lower in the winter, on some days renewable production is much lower than in summer. On Tuesday, January 15^th, 2019, for example, total system demand was 600,000 MW-hours. A baseload of 20,000 MW would have covered 480,000 MW-hours of that, leaving only 120,000 MW-hours for solar and wind to cover. Unfortunately, on January 15th solar plus on-shore wind only produced 42,000 MW-hours. To meet demand on this particular day, solar plus on-shore wind would have had to be built out at nearly three times the level it is now. Since these cloudy, low wind days can occur for days at a time, shifting demand five or six hours wouldn’t fix the problem. The good news is the cost of both solar and wind has dropped and is dropping further! More good news is that there are more than enough rooftops in California where solar could be installed to meet this demand without sacrificing agricultural or natural areas. Tripling the number of solar panels in California is doable. Tripling the number of wind turbines may be less so due to the lack of good wind sites. Maybe quadrupling solar will be a better bet, or maybe adding more floating off-shore wind turbines. It all depends on how expensive floating wind farms turn out to be.

Either way, building out enough renewables to meet December/January cloudy, windless days will result in substantial over-generation of electricity in the spring and fall, summer mid-days, and very often in the winter. Won’t it all go to waste?

No! Or at least, not necessarily. Now we’re getting to the good problem to have.

           

How to Use Excess Electricity in Productive Ways

1) Schedule sewage treatment, water pumping and water treatment when excess electricity is available. Some obviously will have to happen continuously, but there is some ability to ramp and slow down based on electrical supply.

2) Use excess electricity for electrolysis. Electrolysis is used in the production of aluminum, lithium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, chlorine, sodium hydroxide, sodium chlorate, potassium chlorate, electrolytic copper, oxygen, and electroplating. Offer plants nearly free electricity in spring and fall but expect them not to run summer months from 3pm to 9 pm, or on cloudy winter days. Same can be done for hydrogen and ammonia production. (See below.)

3)   Produce ammonia for fertilizer. Permaculture is the future of farming, but there will probably still be a place for chemical fertilizer. Producing it from a simple combination of water, air and electricity is the way to go. Use electrolysis to crack water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. Ramp up ammonia production fall – spring; expect plants not to operate summers from 3 pm to 9 pm or on cloudy winter days.

4)   Same for hydrogen. Though there are high levels of losses using hydrogen as a fuel, hydrogen may very well come in handy soon for long-distance shipping. Taking advantage of excess electricity to produce hydrogen may soon make economic sense even in the Midwest on windy nights.

Oh my gosh, how can these plants possibly make a profit if they don’t operate on cloudy days or summer late afternoons and evenings? Well, if one of your primary inputs is electricity, running when electricity is dirt cheap will make the economics pan out nicely. To extend their operations to, say, 5 pm in the summer, these plants could install arrays of west-facing solar panels so they don’t have to draw from the grid during peak demand hours.

Floating wind--California's future?

California is an interesting case study, but every single state and region will have similar challenges (though different particulars) as they work towards powering themselves 100% by renewables. Up until now, as a society we’ve built our electrical supply to meet demand, whatever the environmental cost. But there are many clever, creative ways we can encourage demand to better meet a renewable supply curve. It requires different thinking and a willingness to work around a different set of constraints, but it is by no means technologically or even economically infeasible. If we think preventing massive die-off in the 22^nd century of both humans and most other species is maybe, just maybe something we owe the both the planet and the future of humanity, then as we enter the third decade of the 21^st century, we need to stop saying, “It costs too much! It’s not possible! It’s inconvenient! We’re too poor!” Instead, we need to roll up our sleeves and start saying, “How do we get this done?”

The Lessons of the Great Beaufort Skedaddle

View of Beaufort, SC, Dec 1861

The American Civil War can be viewed through many lenses, but a perspective rarely employed is that of the South's refusal to make what was essentially an energy transition--from slave labor to nascent fossil fuels. A small, moneyed elite, who made most of the economic and political decisions for the region, feared loss of wealth. If an orderly transition away from slavery, say over twenty years, had been negotiated between the North and the South, with a gradual introduction of Constitutional rights for former slaves, the great wealth of the antebellum South would undoubtedly have diminished, but much would have remained. Instead, half a million Americans died in war, and the entire South, black and white alike, experienced violence, hunger, and massive destruction of property and infrastructure, to be followed by a hundred years of grinding poverty, during which many of the worst abuses of slavery--racism, segregation, confinement of blacks to the lowest economic strata, black disqualification from voting, and white control of the black population through violence--remained intact. (The decade of Reconstruction was only a partial respite.) Even today, seven of the ten poorest states in the nation are former Confederate states. 

Sometimes history plods along slowly. Sometimes it turns on a dime. On the 157th anniversary of the Great Beaufort Skedaddle, it's worth remembering that sometimes doubling down on one's way of life brings about catastrophe from which there is no recovery.

They were at church when the word came. In the pews of Saint Helena’s in Beaufort, South Carolina, master and slave alike heard that an enormous Yankee fleet was massing off Point Royal Sound a mere ten miles away. If Confederate defenses didn’t hold, the town would have to evacuate in a matter of hours. It was time to pack and to pray.

Beaufort antebellum charm

In 1861, Beaufort was one of the wealthiest, most cultured cities in America. The town boasted not only a library of three thousand volumes but also some of the most erudite, educated men in the South. Having built their elegant Greek Revival mansions with ballrooms, chandeliers and two-story piazzas, planter families gathered here each summer to escape the heat and ague of their Sea Island plantations, as well as socialize and talk politics.  Secession politics. For more than a dozen years cries for secession had risen from Beaufort, much of them led by its native son, rabble-rousing, fire-eater Robert Barnwell Rhett, remembered as the “Father of Secession.”

The Confederacy knew full well that Port Royal might be a target for a Northern base, but they couldn’t be sure other sites weren’t also in the running and so were somewhat lackadaisical in establishing defenses for Port Royal Sound. During the summer of 1861, local plantations reluctantly provided slaves to begin construction of two forts to guard the Sound’s entrance: Fort Walker on Hilton Head Island and Fort Beauregard on Phillips Island. But not only were the forts still incomplete by November, the artillery installed fell far short of what was originally proposed and even farther short of what was needed when the Yankees came calling.

Plans had been underway in the North to take a Southern port since early summer, with Lincoln himself involved in the selection. After all, to implement the “Anaconda Plan”—a tight blockade of the Southern coastline intended to cripple the Confederate economy—U.S. Navy warships needed a place to refuel with the coal that gave them power. Port Royal was one of the choicest deepwater ports on the Southern coast. That a massive Northern fleet was poised to sail was common knowledge to anyone who could read a newspaper once The New York Times published the details in the article, “The Great Naval Expedition,” on October 26^th. The only unknown was the destination, a secret that, remarkably, was successfully kept.  It wasn’t until they were at sea that the captain of each vessel opened a sealed envelope telling him where his ship was headed.

The Great Naval Expedition en route

The fleet that set out on Oct 29^th would prove to be the largest U.S. naval and amphibious expedition in the entire nineteenth century.  It included 17 warships, 25 colliers, 33 transports, 12,000 infantry, 600 marines, and 157 big guns. Port Royal, with its two cobbled-together forts supplied with only 2500 men, 4 gunboats, and 39 guns between them, didn’t stand a chance.

Bombardment of Port Royal

Nature came to the South’s aid in the form of a storm that sank some of the Northern fleet along the way, and then rough water delayed the day of the final attack. But when November 7^th dawned clear and calm, the water so still it was glassy, enough of the North’s warships were available to commence battle. Union ships concentrated their enfilade on Fort Walker. To the soldiers inside, the sound of artillery was deafening. By noon, only three of Fort Walker’s water battery guns were still operational; by 2:30 p.m., all powder was gone. The time had come to abandon the fort. The command at Fort Beauregard, concerned about being trapped on Phillips Island with no line of retreat, quickly followed suit. Thankfully, casualties on both sides were light. Accounts vary, but the Confederates finished the day with between 11 and 59 killed and an equivalent number wounded or missing, while the Union fleet saw 8 dead and 23 wounded.

Even with the enormous attacking naval force, Sea Island planters had been so confident in the defending forts manned with recruits from their very own Beaufort Volunteer Artillery that many watched the battle from shore on nearby Saint Helena Island. But when Confederate cannons grew silent and cheers reverberated from the Northern ships, they knew something had gone dreadfully wrong. They hurried home to evacuate, no doubt pained to leave bolls of valuable Sea Island cotton still unpicked in the fields.

When news of the battle’s outcome reached Beaufort, a kind of panic ensued. Facing an invading army of Yankees was too dreadful to contemplate; flight was of the essence. But what to take, what to leave behind? The daguerreotypes? The silver? Of course the family bible must be packed. Some loaded up carriages, hoping to stay ahead of the Yankees on the long overland route to safety. But Beaufort was lucky that day—there was a steamer anchored in the river that could take hundreds swiftly to Charleston. However, it had only so much room. Furniture, clothing, horses, and the vast majority of their most valuable property—slaves—would have to be left behind. In the tumult, even food and dinner dishes were abandoned on dining room tables, testament to the haste involved. That evening the steamer departed overflowing with Beaufort’s white citizenry along with every jewel and sentimental item they could squeeze on board. Legend has it that when Yankee forces arrived two days later to occupy the town, they found just one white man remaining in Beaufort, and he was dead drunk.

What must the deserted slaves, who spoke Gullah, their own Sea Island patois, have thought as the laden steamer chugged away from Beaufort’s dock? Did they realize that history had unexpectedly turned a corner right in front of them, and that now, after centuries of captivity as a people, they were suddenly free? Perhaps the political ramifications didn’t sink in that night, but before the first Yankees arrived, clothing and other finery had been looted (liberated?) from the grand homes, and food and liquor thoroughly consumed in an understandable celebration of events. 

Five generations now free (1862)

It is estimated 8-10,000 slaves were left behind in the Sea Islands when the white population fled. They were soon joined by thousands of others who escaped to the region once they realized that Northern occupation meant freedom.  They all needed food and shelter, and since the Emancipation Proclamation had yet to happen, their legal status, beyond being “contraband,” was unclear. The Army asked for help and received it in the form of the Port Royal Experiment. Financed and organized by Northern abolitionist charities, the Experiment worked as a test case to create self-sufficiency among the former slaves. Its success points to what Reconstruction might have been if less corruption and more competence had been at its helm.  Northern missionaries and teachers flocked to the Sea Islands to create schools and aid societies. Former slaves were allowed to farm the confiscated plantations and were paid $1 per 400 lbs of cotton they were able to harvest.  The Penn School on St. Helena Island was one of the earliest schools established for freed slaves and can be visited as part of the Penn Center today.

Yankees at home on a Beaufort piazza (1862)

The Union Army found Beaufort a pleasant setting for officer’s quarters, administrative offices and hospitals.  Because the Army occupied Beaufort until the end of the war, the fine mansions, while suffering damage, were not burned to the ground like so many other Southern towns and surrounding Sea Island plantations. To this day Beaufort’s centuries-old live oaks and antebellum charm remain. Port Royal turned out to be as advantageous a harbor as the Union had hoped and did much to strengthen the potency of the blockade. After the war, most planter families—their sons dead, their plantations burnt, their Beaufort homes sold in government auctions for back taxes (often without their knowledge)—never returned. The civilization that was antebellum Beaufort vanished into the night with that last steamer.

It is rare that the wheel of fortune spins as violently as it did on November 7, 1861. The town that had advocated so fiercely for secession was the first to feel the brunt of an occupying army. A people remarkable for their wealth lost almost everything in a matter of hours. A region that so defiantly insisted that its way of life—slavery—was non-negotiable ended up being the first to have a colony of former slaves experiment with what it meant to be free. The Great Skedaddle indeed.

Beaufort 1849 is a novel by Karen Lynn Allen set in Beaufort, South Carolina, at a point when the Civil War might still have been avoided.

Come Plog With Me. (Yes, Litter Matters. A Lot.)

Results of island plogging

Plogging, or picking up litter while jogging, is a new fad created by the Swedes. One might think the Swedes are a tidy enough lot that litter wouldn’t be a concern, but after watching videos of bags of trash collected by enthusiastic Swedish joggers, I guess the craze has utilitarian benefits even there.

I started plogging a few months back on my morning runs in San Francisco. I’d been sweeping the sidewalk and picking up all litter in front of my house (and three of my neighbors’ houses) for some time. Devoting one morning run a week to plogging meant I extended my caretaking to five kilometers. And boy have I collected trash. It was so bad at first that I ignored the gutters and just focused on the sidewalk. Even then I filled up five bags each run, emptying them at public trashcans as I went along.

As time has gone on, I’ve noticed that due to prevailing winds, trash tends to collect on the western side of north-south streets. I’ve also noticed that some people keep their sidewalks tidy and others are slobs. There is one particular apartment building that is invariably the worst spot on my entire route. I’ve noticed that if the winds are bad after recycling bins are set out, wind whips the tops of the bins open and all sorts of recycling blows far and wide. (Bad design!) Though eliminating plastic straws might be a good idea, I have to say I haven’t encountered all that many while plogging. What I do pick up is an endless number of candy wrappers, convenience/junk food wrappers and cigarette butts. In the weeks preceding California’s primary election I also picked up an absolutely ridiculous amount of campaign material, inclining me to despise the glossy faces smiling up at me from the sidewalk. I’ve also noticed that since our trash collection fees in San Francisco rose significantly, the public trash cans are now often very, very full.

When candy is not dandy

As I write this, I am currently on an island where my family has spent the last twenty-five Julys. This largely rural community with vacation homes along the water is a very crunchy-granola, environmentally-conscious haven where many citizens participate in an all-island clean up twice a year. But even here when I plog, I am picking up candy and junk food wrappers galore from the ditches, and an extraordinary number of cigarette butts from the roadsides. The cigarette butts are especially mystifying since no one here appears to smoke. In terms of litter, this is no San Francisco: during a 5K run, I collect only half a bag of trash instead of five. Still the level of litter surprises me. While the disposal fee for household trash is pricey (after all, it has to be carted off-island on a boat) collected street trash is free.

I encourage you to join me in plogging or plalking. First off, plogging and plalking is good for you! I’ve written many times before about the benefits of walking and walkable neighborhoods. We all need thirty minutes of exercise a day for just basic health, so plogging (or plalking) is a great way to get outdoors and accomplish two positive things at once. Plogging burns more calories per hour than straight running and can offer as good cardio if your route is not so crazy bad as to slow you to a crawl. (If it does slow you to a crawl the first time you do it, I promise it will get better.) Squatting and leaning over when plogging nicely trims your waist, and the stopping and starting can be a form of interval training. Secondly, plogging is good for the environment. Thirdly, plogging is good for humanity on a physical, social and even spiritual level.  Let’s examine why. 

Unplogged litter

Plogging and the Environment.  Surely everyone has heard by now that there is an entire continent of plastic floating in the ocean, and marine animals are dying en masse from ingesting human detritus. If you live anywhere near water, be assured that plastic on your streets gets blown and washed out to sea. However, know that human litter is also toxic and hazardous for your local fauna, from insects to birds to mammals. Cigarette butts in particular contain toxic chemicals like arsenic that contaminate soil and water. Yes, we should reduce or even eliminate single use plastics, but we should never use our streets, roads, parks and beaches as trashcans and ashtrays. The only species that really benefits from litter is rats. If your city or town has a rat problem, litter is a serious business.

When I plog, I pick up everything except needles and dog poop, even the tiny bits of plastic that are on their way to becoming microplastic. I also even pick up paper that, in theory, is biodegradable. The problem is that a lot of “paper” is coated with plastic that won’t break down. Beyond that, studies have shown that litter begets litter. When people see litter, consciously or unconsciously, they absorb the message that no one cares, that this place doesn’t matter. That throwing a wrapper, can or bottle on the ground is no big deal. Paper litter sends this signal just as much as plastic or metal litter. If you want to reduce litter on your route long term, all of it has to go short term.

This brings up another prime benefit of plogging. You are showing that you disapprove of litter. Again, because we humans are such imitative, peer-driven creatures, studies have shown that this disapproval actually creates social norms that make people feel constrained not to litter. You don’t have to howl and shake a fist at the sky. The fact that you are spending time picking it up speaks loudly enough. 

From the road

Plogging and Cigarette Butts. Before I address why plogging is good for humanity, I want to specifically address the issue of cigarette butts. First off, they’re toxic to wildlife. Secondly, the butts contain plastic that doesn’t break down. Thirdly, they’re ugly and smelly. Fourthly, they’re a fire hazard. After picking up a good thousand or so butts, noticing along the way that many have clearly been thrown out car windows, I began to give this particular form of litter some thought. Now, I don’t smoke, nor do my parents, children or siblings. My grandfather smoked and died at age 89, although, tough old bird, he probably would’ve lived to 109 if he hadn’t. I don’t like the way cigarettes smell, and I detest breathing in secondhand smoke. In fact, I think one of the few genuine advancements of the last forty years is how much less I have to deal with cigarette smoke in my daily life.

Smoking cigarettes takes an average of ten years off your life. Plus it will likely make the five years leading to your death unpleasant. But there are reasons not to smoke besides an early death: it’s an expensive habit, you are profiting nasty corporations, it ages your skin terribly, it makes your clothes smell bad, etc. I bet every smoker has heard all these a million times. Still they smoke. It’s addictive. It meets a need.

Cup-holder ashtrays (self-extinguishing!)

In society’s push to condemn smoking we have ostracized and condemned smokers. We have pushed them to the margins to do the deed: parking lots and cars. Beyond this we have tried to make smoking inconvenient (i.e. not “enabling” smokers) by taking away ashtrays. I have to admit that during my crazy sixties/seventies childhood, one year in elementary school my class made ashtrays as Christmas gifts for our parents. Mindboggling. I am not suggesting we go back to this. But by taking away every single freaking ashtray in existence, we have forced smokers (or at least made it extremely convenient) to use the world as their ashtray. To the planet’s dismay. If we provide ashtrays, cigarette butt littering decreases. It’s a fact.

Two-thirds of all cigarette butts end up as litter, making them the most littered item in the world. Trillions find their way to the ground every year. If there is litter already on the ground, smokers toss and flick their butts at an even higher rate. A significant proportion of littered butts find their way to the ocean where they are ingested by unsuspecting animals, or they join the mass of plastic that lurks like a giant Portuguese man-of-war of retribution that will swallow us someday.

Recyclable plastic!

Surprisingly (at least to me) cigarette butts contain high quality plastic, the kind that can be turned into pellets that can be turned into benches and plastic lumber. One company is doing this. They even offer free shipping to send collected cigarette butts to them. However, the resulting pellets don’t quite pay for the recycling and mailing costs, and so this enterprising company organized a subsidy from a tobacco company. Now this particular tobacco company is one of the least evil ones out there. Still cigarettes kill, so at first I suspected this subsidy to be bogus greenwashing. Now I’m not so sure. Now I’m wondering if this is a valid attempt to move towards a circular economy, where the entire lifecycle of a product is designed to create zero waste.

Portable butt collection

Perhaps by shaming and vilifying smokers we have done some social good. But the fact is, sitting on your human butt all day is flat out as bad for you as smoking. Do we shame and vilify that? Or does our society aid and abet it at every turn by making driving super convenient and walking and biking dangerous and unpleasant? By not accommodating smokers in the most basic way (with a few measly outdoor smoking areas with ashtrays) what the heck are smokers supposed to do with their detritus? These days many cars don’t even have ashtrays. Yes, non-smokers should not be exposed to second-hand smoke. Yes, smokers can and should use personal ashtray pouches and receptacles. I totally support this and I encourage you to buy them and gift them to all your smoking friends and relatives. But a few strategic self-extinguishing ashtrays here and there would go a long ways towards reducing our toxic litter problem. Collecting and recycling cigarette butts would 1) tell smokers that throwing their butts on the ground is not the natural, most acceptable way to dispose of their cigarette even if it is convenient, 2) acknowledge that smokers are part of our society and their actions matter, and 3) give smokers an avenue to participate in a different, more conscious approach to human waste. It’s time to reintegrate smokers back into civic life. 

Litter has impact. (Center for Active Design)

Plogging and Humanity. Humanity benefits if our planet is not destroyed. I hope that’s obvious. But there’s more. Litter is expensive to clean up. Indeed businesses and government in the US spend tens of billions of dollars each year trying to keep up with litter and still fail. There is strong evidence that litter diminishes community pride, creates the belief that community members don’t care about one another, erodes civic trust in general, and in particular erodes trust that both local government and even the police will do what’s right. It also reduces the likelihood of citizen participation in public life. People loathe litter. In one survey of over five thousand respondents across the United States, 23% listed litter as the one thing they most wanted to change about their community. Wow. They chose litter over crime, noise, and traffic. (Personally, I would choose noise, another form of pollution, but that’s because I can plog and pick litter up myself. Can’t clean up noise myself.) Litter in a neighborhood or community significantly decreases property values. Litter can injure, from slipping on it or stepping on broken glass, etc. Litter is a fire hazard, especially half-extinguished cigarette butts. Litter can bring both rats and disease. Parks and beaches strewn with litter are less psychologically restorative to the human psyche than litter-free ones. But far more importantly, litter is both a symptom and a cause of not right relation with oneself, with one’s community, with nature, and with the planet as a whole.

Not right relation. Let’s explore it.

Ditch before plogging

One of the most necessary tasks for human beings over the next two decades is for us individually and collectively to become conscious of and responsible for our waste. At the macro level, nations must take responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions (among other waste) and drive the net amount to zero. At the micro level, individuals must become aware of their personal waste stream, reduce the amount, and dispose of the remainder in a manner that does not harm others or the planet. It is possible to design the potential for litter out of many of the products we consume, but remember, even if we were to replace all plastic packaging with paper or glass, when tossed on the ground, even paper and glass harm the environment (just less so than plastic), decrease civic trust, encourage more litter, create safety, health, and fire hazards, etc. To truly address litter we have to make littering unacceptable.

Either we change human consciousness so that no one litters because they understand the impact, or we change behavioral norms so that no one litters because it is socially unacceptable. I posit if someone is unconcerned or unconscious about their micro-waste, it’s nearly impossible to get them to become conscious and concerned about their country’s macro waste. I also posit if we can change the behavior of micro actions, larger consciousness has a chance to follow.

Ditch after plogging

Littering is a small crime, a small act of aggression against society, the planet and the future. The litterer consciously or unconsciously expects “someone else,” whether it be the government or nature, to deal with the paper, metal, or plastic that they find convenient to toss to the ground. Maybe they were taught dilution is the answer to pollution (seriously, people used to say this) and that nature can take care of any trash they care to throw. Maybe they feel society doesn’t treat them well, so dealing their trash is the least society can do for them. If they believe powerful and important people don’t have to worry about their waste, maybe strewing their waste makes them feel powerful and important. Maybe they are children who are imitating their parents. Maybe they are smokers who mistakenly believe their butts are made of paper or feel society has given them no other choice for their butts.

The thing is, these small crimes make it impossible to live in right relation to nature and to society. All but the very youngest of us know we do a wrong when we litter. We may tell ourselves it’s no big deal, but consciously or subconsciously we carry guilt for the mini-transgression. This is why people litter much more frequently when they think no one is looking. It is also why in interviews with observed litterers, 35% denied having littered in the past month even though the interviewers had just seen them do so.

But it’s just litter I hear you say! No one is dropping atomic bombs. Stay with me here. Because littering disrupts our right relations with nature, it closes our heart to it and causes us to lose our ability to be rejuvenated by nature. We can’t hear its whispers, we can’t feel its inspiration, we can’t absorb its solace. Maybe you think this is craziness, but if you have a right relation with nature, you know what I mean, and you know what a terrible thing it is to miss out on this. Once you have a right relation with nature, you can no longer endorse its destruction. This is huge. Yes, something as insignificant as littering gets in the way of this.

Bag of not-right relations

When we litter, we shift the burden of our waste from ourselves to some other entity. We know we are making a mess. (Studies have shown 80% of litter is intentional, not accidental.) We know we are diminishing our community, making it more unpleasant for everyone. Knowing that litter harms those around us produces guilt and gets in the way of our relationship with others. Can you say hello cheerfully to someone in whose garden you’ve just thrown a chips bag? Can you smile at a child after you’ve just let your dog poop in her playground? Even if you can, I suggest your actions do get in the way of genuine human interaction, that they prevent you from receiving the gifts of community. We share our parks, our streets, our planet. Even if our laws don’t reflect this the way they should, shirking your duty for your waste violates a basic contract between human beings.

Think of all this little guilt building up like plaque in the arteries of our soul. Slowly, invisibly, inexorably, it clogs things up until you’re not in right relation with anybody or anything. Believe it or not, most people fundamentally want to believe they are a good person. This desire to do good, to be good, is what makes redemption possible and is why we don’t need to be absolutely hopeless about the human race just yet. Does one piece of litter make you a bad person? Of course not. But I would say littering gets in the way of being a good person. Good people have integrity. They take responsibility for their actions, and they try not to harm others. Refraining from littering is a small thing, but it’s easy to do. Sure a napkin or a scrap of plastic might get away from you once in a while, but on the whole, carrying an empty bottle to a recycling bin (or, better yet, bringing your own water bottle) is just not that hard. So failing to do it is a transgression.

Eventual circle of life

Since we know litter begets litter, the best way to keep people from littering is not to scold and guilt trip them, but rather to provide them with a litter-free environment and plenty of receptacles so not littering is reinforced and easy. Yes, eliminating plastic bags and plastic straws help, but they are a small part of the litter I currently pick up. Yes, designing consumer products to be litter-resistant is a step-level advance that we should advocate for. Yes, we must head towards a circular economy where waste is avoided entirely or productively reintegrated by design back into raw material for future products. But that's going to take a while. By plogging and plalking you not only keep toxic crap out of nature today and make your community more pleasant today, you also gently nudge people along a path of right relations that will hugely benefit them.

But why should you plog in particular? Why not instead pressure your local government to do a better job keeping your parks and streets picked up? After all, the result is the same, a litter-free park or street.

Yes, the end result is the same. But how it is achieved makes a hugely different psychological impact. If a person prone to litter observes a local government maintenance crew picking up a park, that person will think, yeah, that’s what my tax money is for. To clean up after me. And so that person will continue to litter. The litter-free park will discourage littering in general (good!), but the fundamental social norm won’t change. If that same person observes you picking up litter with slight moue of distaste, the person will read from your body language that you think littering is bad. He/she might not agree with you, might think you’re some kind of environmental lunatic, but his/her littering habit has been challenged, not reinforced. That person will get the message that some other human being thinks less of them for their action. You’ve just given them a gentle nudge to life-affirming right relations that may transform their life.

By now you think I’m nuts or you’re intrigued. So let’s get down to the basics of plogging, how I do it anyway. I use a lightweight nylon bag that is both strong and washable. I pick up everything I see that is both man-made and obviously not supposed to be there. Literally every single thing, including small bits of glass and plastic. You should be able to eat off the sidewalk after I’m done. I’ve never seen a needle on my plogs, but if I did, I wouldn’t pick it up, nor do I pick up dog poop. (I have a friend who does pick up dog poop left by irresponsible dog owners in his neighborhood. He is a saint. If you are also that generous, I applaud you.) I also don’t pick up hubcaps (seriously, I see more than a few) or other items that are too heavy to jog with. But aluminum cans and plastic bottles find their way into my bag, as does the odd pizza box, clothes hangers, or even, once, a full box of cereal. In San Francisco, I put most of the trash I collect in public garbage bins. Sometimes, if it’s garbage day and lots of recycling is on the ground, I’ll pick up the recycling and randomly put it into people’s bins. Trash near my house goes into my own compost/recycling/garbage bins.

I don’t wear gloves, but you can if you choose. I pick up things gingerly, I’m very careful with glass, and I consciously don’t touch my face until after I get home and can wash my hands. I don’t confront people who are littering, and I advise you not to either. Guilt can make people defensive and nasty. Just pick up the item and move on. They’ll get the message. When you get to a park where people are around, you can say brightly to an accompanying friend (or the world in general) “What a nasty mess!” before you cheerfully go about picking it all up.

The first time you plog a route, it may take you a while, but don’t despair. It will get better and eventually you’ll get some good stretches of running in. If your route is really bad, just plog the last two blocks the first time, the last four blocks the second time, the last six blocks the third time, etc. until you get your route into shape.

Once you start plogging, beware. You will now always need to bring a plogging bag with you as you walk to the store or other errands because the litter you see will annoy you. When I’m walking with others, I don’t pick up every single thing because it would try their patience, just the stuff that bugs me the most. But once you start plogging, you’ll discover the rewarding secret. Even though clearing litter from a block or a park is not permanent, even though no one may thank you, even though it will seem as if people throw down cigarette butts and fast food wrappers just to spite you, once you’ve got it all picked up and that block or park looks great, even if just for a moment, the result is satisfying. You’ve done one small but mighty act to get human beings in right relation with the planet.