Archive for January, 2010
Australia’s Emission Trading System
Australia’s Emission Trading System
In Australia the government are introducing an emission trading or cap and trade scheme. There are major concerns about the level of reduction the government wants to sign up to and also whether it will actually work.
As Australians we do need to take action about carbon reduction. We are both the most vulnerable continent for feeling the effects of global warming and also we are the worst greenhouse emitters per head than any other country on the planet. We emit even more than the USA and Canada who are our nearest competitors for this wooden spoon. This is at least in part due to our huge coal industry.
The head of the Australia Institute’s Think Tank says that the Federal Government’s emissions trading scheme will have too many permits and will not reduce carbon emissions.
The Australia Institute’s executive director, Dr Richard Denniss, said the scheme’s flaws related to the 5 to 15 per cent emissions reduction targets, which he described as ”ridiculously low”, and he said there would be too many permits. Dr Dennis said that “We won’t achieve the policy goal, which is to reduce emissions.”
Dr Denniss told the Senate that ”[If] we pass this legislation, we’ve got it for the next 10 years. And anyone that’s got a good idea a year later, it’s not going to help. This legislation is designed to not be tinkered with.”
Professor Clive Hamilton, from the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, said the proposed scheme had damaged Australia’s reputation. A reduction target of at least 25 per cent needed to be set if the Government wanted credibility on the world stage. Australia would be better off taking no policy than the proposed model to the December climate change talks in Copenhagen, he said.
”It not only lowers the ambition of the world community but also excludes Australia from being a forceful player in negotiating … a strong international agreement.”
It is hard to see how exempting large emitters ignoring the 1.9 million small to medium businesses is going to help us reduce our carbon footprint. These same small businesses are currently suffering from financial stress, the business owners and managers are overworked and simply don’t feel able to handle anything new. Many don’t really understand what global warming is about or why it matters.
We urgently need unambiguous communication so that small to medium businesses accept the reality of the need for change and also how easy it can be to make significant reductions with minimal time input and save money at the same time.
We also need to help low income households reduce their carbon footprint with more efficient heating and cooling and effective public transport. We should NOT be giving them even more cash hand outs as “compensation” as currently promised by the government. All households need to come on board and stop wasting power.
We need a clear message that going green applies to all of us, is easy and saves money – just “go for a grumpy walk and just turn it off”. If every small business and householder just went around each office and home and did this it would be relatively easy for every one to reduce their carbon emissions and their power bill by 15-20%. At present we are told it will be difficult and it only applies to big business. Such a wrong message – we all need to pull together.
A Brief given to the Victorian Government advises that the state should only bother with green measures if they are more cost-effective than alternatives. They have been told to rethink programs such as subsidies for solar farms and hybrid car fleets because these will not contribute to any additional emission cuts under the federal scheme.
The Greens have concerns about the cost of emission permits being reduced by the actions of households, councils and governments, hence reducing industry’s incentive to cut emissions. This is more than simply an economic debate. Individuals and households should also be reducing their emissions. Achieving sustainability is a grassroots exercise that involves the entire community, and Australians are becoming aware of the need to remake the economy and society. The momentum must not be lost.
An additional concern is whether the legislation and also the international agreements reached in Copenhagen will be flexible enough to take account of emerging technology. At present this does not appear to be the case. Senator Wong, the Minister for Climate Change, rejected spending on biochar, a form of carbon capture in soil research because that is not listed in the protocol. Thankfully some soil carbon storage research will now be funded in the agriculture budget but that begs the requirement for the legislation to be flexible and allow for new and future technology.
If the ETS cannot deliver real carbon reductions it is really a form of “greenwash” saying we signed Kyoto and have done something before the next election. The big problem is that the government looks ahead 3 years to the next election, Big Biz CEO’s also look to the short term of their contracts and bonuses. Who looks ahead for our children?
Jean Cannon is an energy management and sustainable business consultant. If you would like more information about how to go green in your home or business and increase your business profits why don’t you go to http://www.itiseasytobegreen.com and download a chapter of my book of almost the same name and find out how to reduce your carbon footprint.
Marvell's digital PFC chips
Who’s Greener? Yahoo Vs Google
Who’s Greener? Yahoo Vs Google
Silicon Valley is known for both innovation and hype. Recently, this pool of innovation has extended beyond bandwidth to the protection the environment. Google and Yahoo, the search engine giants, are both headquartered in the Valley and have been making headlines by greening their offices, reducing energy consumption, and carbon trading. The PR motivations are obvious, but are the green benefits really there? To set apart the hype from reality, we have analyzed the green value of both Google and Yahoo’s headquarter facilities.
We looked at the ecological services provided by green landscape features such as trees and open space (i.e. grass). Grass and trees are pervious surfaces, meaning they allow water to permeate into the ground. Roofs, sidewalks, patios, and asphalt parking lots are examples of impervious surfaces, where rainwater drains into the public storm drains. Heavy metals, oil, and other pollutants are carried off parking lots in rainwater, which often lead directly to open water habitats, where fish, birds, and reptiles live.
In terms of ecological services, trees and grass have been proven to:
1. Remove and store carbon from the atmosphere,
2. Remove certain airborne pollutants,
3. Permits rainwater to seep into the ground as opposed to draining into the stormdrains, and
4. Remove certain waterborne pollutants.
Here is a look at how green Google and Yahoo really are and how the measure up against each other.
Google Green Report
Google’s headquarters, the Googleplex, covers 44 acres, nearly 50% of which is grass or tree canopy. This is an impressive paved to open space ratio. The grass and trees on the Googleplex remove roughly 2 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.04 tons per year per acre. In addition, 530 lbs. of air pollution are removed per year (e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter), or 12 lbs. per year per acre. It was assumed that the parking lot of the Googleplex is asphalt, and not a type of porous pavement, so the cost of managing rainfall runoff from the Googleplex is $4,474 per year, or $103 per year per acre. The abundance of grass and tree canopy on the Googleplex go a long way to offset the water quality impacts of the paved surfaces (mainly the parking lot). On average, the grass and trees reduce water pollution by 6%, as opposed to the entire property being paved.
Yahoo Green Report
The Yahoo headquarters, Yahooplex, covers 28 acres, a third of which is grass or tree canopy. This is a classic ratio of paved to open space for large office complexes in California. So far, par for the course. The Yahooplex removes 0.36 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.01 tons per year per acre. 114 lbs. of air pollutants are removed per year, or 4 lbs. per year per acre. In terms of rainfall, the cost associated with runoff is $9,219 per year, or $331 per year per acre. The grass and tree canopy help offset the paved areas with a 2.3% reduction in water pollution as opposed to the entire property being paved.
The final green analysis?
Google kicks Yahoo’s butt, largely due to the forethought, or luxury, of the Googleplex having 50% of its property surface providing green services. The good news for both Google and Yahoo is that over time, as trees grow, so will the tree’s canopy and mass, thus storing more carbon and removing more air pollutants.
Green next steps for both Google and Yahoo is to:
- Install porous parking surfaces, allowing up to 80% of rainwater to seep into the ground,
- Install green roofs, absorbing rainwater while reducing cooling costs and energy consumption, and
- Planting larger trees on the south and west sides of the buildings to reduce cooling costs and energy consumption.
While we crunched the hard numbers to settle the Google vs. Yahoo green debate, this report illuminates the great opportunity that awaits these two Silicon Valley giants to harness the ecological services of green surfaces.
Chris Erichsen is a GIS Mapping consultant with the Erichsen Group, GIS and Mapping in northern California. He has over 10 yrs of GIS experience and helps many industries around the world apply GIS mapping technology. Learn more examples of GIS mapping capabilities.
The Story of Eco Radio
Green Tip – Moms Use Clothe Diapers
Green Tip – Moms Use Clothe Diapers
Sure, this is a little messier than the easier, disposable version. However, do you even realize the amount of disposable diapers that are filling landfills?? Cloth diapers are a choice that every mother should seriously consider. Let’s look at some facts that are quite alarming…
Disposable Diapers Sobering Facts:
* from birth to about 2-1/2 the average child will go through about 7,300 diapers
* the cost for that is about $2600
* 18 billion diapers enter landfills each year
* disposable diapers make up about 3.4 million tons of trash
* health risks such as fertility issues in males, eyes, nose and throat issues and even asthma-like symptoms have been connected to disposable diapers!
* long term negative affects on animal and water life.
* the chemicals that make disposable diapers white increase the risk of cancer
* affect development
* they use more water. yep. you may need to wash cloth diapers, however, way more water is used making disposable diapers!
* a study, conducted by Anderson Laboratories in 1999 and published in the Archives of Environmental Health, found that disposable diapers release chemicals called volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and dipentene. They have been shown to have toxic health effects, such as cancer and brain damage, when used over time or high exposure.
* they use 1.3 million tons of wood pulp. that’s about 1/4 million trees every year.
* they take up to 500 years to break down.
* more viruses than you want to know about…including polio, survive for two weeks or more after disposed of.
There are many many many more reasons to avoid disposable diapers. However, I think our readers are intelligent and the above information is enough to get you thinking! Research for yourself. You will be shocked!
Go for organic natural reusable cloth diapers. You will not only be helping the environment and saving money, you will also protect your sweet precious love bugs from harm!
Copyright © Green Christian Network, All Rights Reserved
About the Author: Cindy Taylor is a Christian stay at home Mom who love the Lord and cares about God’s planet. You can see her passion and writing at her website, Green Christian Network (http://greenchristiannetwork.com).
Tech Lab's Comedy Hour
Recycling of Electronics
Recycling of Electronics
Society’s technological advancements have grown significantly over the years. Electronics devices such as telephones, cell phones, radios, CD and DVD players, televisions, and computers are products that are used in every household. These items are just a few of the many electronic devices that can cause serious environmental damage due to their toxic components. Electronics that are in need of disposal are referred to as e-waste, or electronic waste. Because of the advancement of electronic products, there has been a growing concern about the hazards of electronic waste. Some of these concerns include: improper disposal of toxic materials, health and safety concerns for people disposing of these items, as well as dangers to the soil and water supply. For instance, electronics are made using a considerable amount of toxic substances such as lead, cadmium, aluminum, zinc, copper, and plastics which can all leak poisonous material in the ground and water. These environmental concerns have resulted in the establishment of electronic recycling facilities and industries who take old electronics such as computers for the purpose of recycling and safe disposal.
Electronics containing materials such as metals, plastic, are valuable to the recycling companies. Disposing of electronics through a recycling company will result in fewer electronic devices going into landfills and lower carbon emissions.
Recovering Raw Materials: Recycling electronics involves recovering raw materials from the electronic equipment. Materials such as steel, copper, wires, aluminum, brass, plastics, glass,etc., are extracted and sold to smelters so they can create raw materials. Depending on the type of metal being extracted, they can be processed and used in products required by such businesses as the steel, construction and cement industry. Plastics and wood can be used as fuel to provide heat to industrial furnaces which converts to steam. Metals such as copper are sold to metal refineries.
Plastics: Plastics from such items as computers, computer mice, and keyboards, are sent through shredding processes and machine sorted. They are then sent to other recyclers for further processing.
Larger Electronics: Items such as televisions and computer monitors are dismantled by hand. The leaded glass cathode ray tubes are removed and disposed of safely. Plastics, copper, and circuit boards are removed, separated, and processed.
Hazardous Items: Toxic items are removed from electronic devices and disposed of safely. Toxic substance can include leaded glass, rechargeable batteries, non-rechargeable batteries (i.e.alkaline, lead acid, cell batteries) mercury in lamps and switches, parts containing polychlorinated biphenyls, as well as ink and toner cartridges. The remaining non toxic materials are processed and the recyclable materials are recovered. The materials are shredded and separated according to type. For instance, they can be divided into such materials as steel, copper, aluminum, and plastic.
Refurbished Electronics: There are now many companies that acquire used computers, repair and update them, and resell them at a much lower price. This is a great way to keep electronics out of landfills and make technology more affordable.
Donate Your Computer: If you are getting rid of your old computer because of a recent upgrade, consider donating it to charity. Many schools and non profit organisations are in need of computers. There are companies and businesses that will take your computer, refurbish it, and donate it to a needy cause. Make sure your computer is wiped clean of all information before donating it. Donating your computer helps the community and the environment.
We are fast becoming a technology dependent society. When it comes to protecting and conserving our environment, we have to adapt and change our technological practices to ensure a sustainable future. Recycling electronics is a great way help the planet.
Know that repairing a computer or laptop repair Toronto is not cheap, but it can be cheaper than having to replace the computer. If you run into these situations, you will need to hire a onsite computer repair service Toronto.
ioGear Solar Bluetooth hands-free car kit
[CES 2010] ioGear knows that green is in (can’t you tell by their corporate color?), and their Solar Bluetooth hands-free car kit is pretty self-explanatory. It allows you to hook up with any Bluetooth-enabled device, letting you have …
Solar geomagnetic index reaches unprecedented low â?? only â??zero …
As the theory goes, lower magnetic activity of the sun lets more GCR’s into our solar system, which produce microscopic cloud seed trails (like in a Wilson cloud chamber) in our atmosphere, resulting in more cloud cover, resulting in a …
New Life for Solar-Updraft Technology? – Green Inc. Blog – NYTimes.com
The technology relies on an elementary principle of physics: heat rises. An Australian company seeks to take that principle to utility scale.
2400-Foot-Tall Solar Turbines To Power Arizona | Popular Science
Today’s solar power plants work either through photovoltaics or heated steam. If Enviromission gets its way, tomorrow’s plants will combine wind and solar, with acre-sized mirrors and multi-thousand-foot-tall chimneys generating …
Solar PV Firm Bets on Bioplastic | CleanTechies Blog …
Shrink Nanotechnologies is one of several companies that is using bioplastics to find a new way of making devices that will minimize the use of.
NEW WORLD SAVIOUR
Recycling has become the catch all phrase often used in place of the 3 R’s. But in its truest form recycling means taking one thing and changing it, usually chemically, into another. This is not to say that recycling is without value; it is certainly better than putting the items in the bin where they will end up in landfills and leach chemicals into our ground water. It is though to say that before you place anything in the recycle bag, first consider if you could reduce or re-use it, because everything that ends up in the recycling bag will have to be altered before it can be used again. Even then it is cleaner to produce goods from recyclables than from raw materials. Here are just a few reasons to make certain that after you have reduced the amount of waste your create and re-used as many things as possible that your family puts as many things as possible into the recycling bins: Today is the actually a great day to talk about recycling. Each Thursday the council sends around men to collect our recyclables. The council gives us re-usable sacks, which we can use to collect all paper, cardboard, tin cans, aluminium, glass bottles and jars and plastic bottles. Unfortunately, they do not over recycling for other plastics. As I have been writing this series of blogs that has been one thing that I have been especially mindful of: how much plastic packaging manufacturers use that cannot be recycled and that it is estimated takes over 500 years to decompose in landfills. But it is not just our plastics, glass, metals and paper that we recycle. Thanks to a wonderful programme through the Islington council, last year we were able to purchase a subsidized wormery to recycle our food waste into compost and liquid fertilizer for growing my own food. Actually, even though we may think that food thrown into the bin will degrade relatively quickly in the landfills, the biggest problem is the amount of methane, a dangerous green house gas, which it produces in that time. Methane is twenty times more potent than carbon dioxide and a major contribute to climate change. While my wormery cannot accommodate meat products I put all peels and unused fruits and vegetables into it. I should soon be harvesting my first patch of compost…just in time for my summer garden. So how does my family do on recycling? Not too bad honestly. This week we had two bags of recyables and will only have two half full 13 gallon bin bags of other rubbish. Actually hubby and I got into a minor disagreement over the trash last night. One of the first rules of the 3R’s is to only throw out your garbage when the bag is full. In our case though, it had begun to smell. I am still looking for a solution…if anyone has ideas they would be greatly appreciated. But for a family of three adults and one pre-schoolers two large bags of recycling and one full 13 gallon bin bag in a week is pretty good I think. I imagine that there are single people, who put more than one bag in the bin each week. Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme. Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end. Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.
NEW WORLD SAVIOUR
What it Really Is: Recycling
Green Tip – Moms Use Clothe Diapers
Green Tip – Moms Use Clothe Diapers
Sure, this is a little messier than the easier, disposable version. However, do you even realize the amount of disposable diapers that are filling landfills?? Cloth diapers are a choice that every mother should seriously consider. Let’s look at some facts that are quite alarming…
Disposable Diapers Sobering Facts:
* from birth to about 2-1/2 the average child will go through about 7,300 diapers
* the cost for that is about $2600
* 18 billion diapers enter landfills each year
* disposable diapers make up about 3.4 million tons of trash
* health risks such as fertility issues in males, eyes, nose and throat issues and even asthma-like symptoms have been connected to disposable diapers!
* long term negative affects on animal and water life.
* the chemicals that make disposable diapers white increase the risk of cancer
* affect development
* they use more water. yep. you may need to wash cloth diapers, however, way more water is used making disposable diapers!
* a study, conducted by Anderson Laboratories in 1999 and published in the Archives of Environmental Health, found that disposable diapers release chemicals called volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and dipentene. They have been shown to have toxic health effects, such as cancer and brain damage, when used over time or high exposure.
* they use 1.3 million tons of wood pulp. that’s about 1/4 million trees every year.
* they take up to 500 years to break down.
* more viruses than you want to know about…including polio, survive for two weeks or more after disposed of.
There are many many many more reasons to avoid disposable diapers. However, I think our readers are intelligent and the above information is enough to get you thinking! Research for yourself. You will be shocked!
Go for organic natural reusable cloth diapers. You will not only be helping the environment and saving money, you will also protect your sweet precious love bugs from harm!
Copyright © Green Christian Network, All Rights Reserved
About the Author: Cindy Taylor is a Christian stay at home Mom who love the Lord and cares about God’s planet. You can see her passion and writing at her website, Green Christian Network (http://greenchristiannetwork.com).
How Common are Solar Systems Like Ours? | Universe Today Solar system montage. Credit: NASA On the whole, we’d like to think we’re special, but we also hope we aren’t alone in the Universe. Astronomers have been. Solar panel project to bring affordable power to African schools … Rooftop solar panels will soon be keeping the lights on in 117 schools and health clinics in rural Kenya. Photovoltaic … a solar minumum : Dynamics of Cats A protracted solar minimum would lead to reduced radiative forcing, by about 0.3 W/m2. This corresponds to about 0.3 C cooling, and would on a time scale of decades partially mask anthropic warming – of course when the sunspots come … Importing Solar Power with Biomass – Renewable Energy World Every six hours the sun bathes the lands of the earth in as much energy as the world consumes in a year. If we could just find a way to collect and distribute that energy our energy problems would be solved. Unfortunately, most of our … Bharat Book Bureau :: Thin Film Solar Cells Market Potential … Solar power is the technology of obtaining usable energy from the light of the Sun. Solar energy has been used in many traditional technologies for centuries and has come into widespread use where other power supplies are absent, …News of Online -G.1440
Green Technology – Bloomberg
The 3 Rs (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) is no longer simply a mantra for environmental activists, it’s a ticket to saving you money while you consider the planet. The 3Rs ask you to buy less, reuse more, and recycle products at the end of their useful life-wonderful guiding principles for reducing our environmental footprint and bringing our lifestyles into balance with nature. But in practice, how many of us are really willing to cut back on the stuff we want to own, to reuse what we’d like to throw out, and to recycle when doing so is often incredibly inconvenient? Fortunately for budget-conscious Lazy Environmentalists, the 3Rs are receiving a twenty-first-century facelift, making them easy to implement and even easier on the wallet. Reduce, the first of the 3Rs, releases you from the hassle, expense, and waste of unwanted stuff while helping you use less energy and create less trash. And while most of us can’t imagine life without our most prized four-wheeled possession, the first place to embrace Reduce is with our cars. That’s because our automobiles generate about half of our personal greenhouse gas emissions-the other half comes from our homes. Today, you can enjoy the freedom of being in the driver’s seat while eliminating all of the expense of owning-or leasing-and maintaining a car by joining a car-share service. Zipcar is leading the way. Available in more than 40 U.S. cities, Zipcar lets members locate cars conveniently parked at designated spots around the city and reserve them for an hourly fee (typically between $10.50 and $16.50). Members arrive at the parking spot, swipe their membership card over the windshield sensor to unlock the door, hop in, and go. There’s no need to pay for gasoline or insurance; Zipcar has got you covered. You won’t sacrifice your ride either; Zipcar lets you choose from models like the BMW 325, Mini Cooper, Honda Fit, Volkswagen Jetta, Toyota Prius, Honda Civic Hybrid, Volvo S40, Mazda 3, and Subaru Outback. According to the company’s surveys, over time Zipcar members reduce their car usage by as much as 50 percent. Zipcar estimates that each of its cars removes the equivalent of about 15 privately owned vehicles from the road. Other car-sharing services are popping up across the country and around the world. Visit Carsharing.net for a comprehensive list. Reuse-the middle child of the 3Rs-has been a part of our lives before we were “eco” anything (eco-conscious, eco-savvy, even a tentative eco-curious). Think about it: Every day, we reuse items like T-shirts, cereal bowls, and underwear without a second thought. We don’t toss them after one use. We reuse. The secret to twenty-first century Reusing is to discover how to reuse other people’s really cool stuff as well as our own. Reuse logic is in effect at Goozex.com, where gamers gather to swap their video game. Visit the website, create an account and list the games you own that you’d like to trade. Then Goozex quickly locates other gamers who want them and makes instantaneous matches for you. With each game you mail, you earn Goozex points, which you can then use to acquire the games you want from other members. Instead of spending lots of money on new games (and paying for all that packaging waste), you’ll pay Goozex $1 each time you receive a game. Whether you’re partial to Xbox, Wii, Nintendo, or many other gaming platforms, the Goozex trading community has got you covered. Get your reused copy of Call of Duty 2 or NCAA Football 09 today. Swapping websites are emerging in all kinds of categories. Bookworms can browse more than two million titles available for trade at Paperbackswap.com. Movie collectors can visit Swapadvd.com to trade both new and classic DVD titles. CD fans (you know you’ve still got ‘em) can tap into more than 130,000 titles available at Swapacd.com. And new and expecting parents can trade for baby strollers, bibs, bedding, bumpers, and more at Zwaggle.com. Recycle, the last of the 3R trio, is the most transformative of the Rs. When we recycle, we’re giving used products the chance to be reborn as something new. That’s especially the case thanks to companies like Preserve that has partnered with Stonyfield Farm to recycle its yogurt cups-from organic yogurt, of course-into ergonomic plastic toothbrushes, razors, and an assortment of colorful kitchenware (and now also does the same with Brita pitcher filters). TerraCycle, another green innovator, is on pace to redefine much of America’s relationship with trash. The company that began with its signature Plant Food-made from worm poop, packaged in empty Pepsi bottles and sold at the likes of Home Depot and Wal-Mart-has evolved into an innovation powerhouse that continually introduces new products made entirely from waste. Take the E-Water Trash Cans and Recycling Bins available at OfficeMax for $10.99 each and made from crushed computers and fax machines (that would otherwise end up in a landfill). Or the rain barrels and composters made from Kendall-Jackson oak wine barrels that sell for $99 each at Sam’s Club. They’re both prime examples of a company that sees opportunity where others see garbage. In so doing, TerraCycle helps us make attractive choices that are mindful of the planet and our wallets. Josh Dorfman is an environmental entrepreneur, media personality and author of The Lazy Environmentalist: Your Guide to Easy, Stylish, Green Living. He is also the founder and CEO of Vivavi, a retailer of modern, green furniture and home furnishings. His latest book, The Lazy Environmentalist on a Budget: Save Money. Save Time. Save The Planet, is now available. For more information, please visit: http://www.lazyenvironmentalist.com
Green Technology - Bloomberg
Reuse and Recycle, THE 3 Rs – Lazy Ways to Reduce
Green with Pure Water Technology
The cost of fuel has gone up again that people are thinking of alternative ways to save up on other things just so they can still continue to make use of their vehicles. Actually, there is a better way by which we can save up on fuel without having to let go of other necessities or luxuries that we have in our life. Sometimes we need all this to keep us going. When you take away one or two, you may take away your only source of happiness. So think twice before cutting off hobbies or things that you are already accustomed to. One thing by which we can save gas is if we make it ourselves. It is possible since homemade biodiesel kits are available for consumers to buy them. There are instructions online and there are even step-by-step videos on how to make biodiesel fuel. These are especially useful for people who prefer to see it than reading about it. The great thing about seeing how it is made is you can actually see the equipments that are being used. So you can always pattern your equipment with what is being shown. Since you will be doing it yourself, there are a couple of things you have to watch out for. You have to watch out for methanol and lye because it is dangerous. Aside from that, since you will be making use of heat and vegetable oils, fire is always a possibility. First time makers of biodiesel fuel should be extra careful when proceeding and like any other endeavor it takes practice to perfect it. Cheryl Forbes owns and operates the website http://www.homemadebiodieselkits.com
Green with Pure Water Technology
Homemade Biodiesel Kits Are Used to Make Biodiesel Fuel by First Timers
Bucks USA economic trends – Green technology
Last week, we introduced you to the Resource Matrix, which is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth. We showed you how economics leads to people maximizing their benefits in “win-lose” propositions: you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom. And how we’ve been hypnotized in believing what they want is also what we want. But the scales have been falling from our eyes, we’re beginning to see the truth, and the power has been shifting away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd: We now realize we’re all in this together: we have greater awareness of our actions and the desire to change, and have ways to change. Hallelujah and Praise the Collective! Today, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming. None of this is to dismiss or diminish the contribution of fossil fuels in global warming. Hey, just like the Special Olympics, if you participate, you get a medal. We just think that gold-medal winner Fossil Fuels has stolen the spotlight, letting silver-medalist Water Use keep us hypnotized in believing that water is a free lunch, and that nature will clear up polluted waters while getting away with breaking the rules. Water, water, everywhere, According to our friends at How Stuff Works, who I wrote about sarcastically for their oxymoronic clean coal article in discussing how true public relations stuff really works, gives us this data: Okay, so 20% of the usable water (only 0.4% of all water on Earth) is accessible, right? Well . . . no. Many of the aquifers, wells, lakes, and rivers have been sucked dry like a once-juicy fly carcass in a spider’s web. (The 18% and 1.8% you see above is like the money in the Social Security Fund: there actually is nothing there.) And many of those water sources that do still have a drop to drink are worse than the ocean’s salt water. Drink salt water and you’ll need to yawn into a bucket. Drink this water and you’ll kick the bucket. And I know you aren’t asking this burning question:
“So . . . global warming to release fresh water from ice caps and glaciers is a good thing, no?”
Percentage this, percentage that. I know I’m pulling the disgusting old government trick: drowning you in an ocean of water statistics. So let’s make it plain and simple: You bring in $10,000 a month. You’re also living high on the hog and doing your personal best to outshine every bling-bling Hip Hopster Musical Artist in materially conspicuous consumption: Aquifers and wells and lakes and rivers: Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it:
We can all save water in the home. But as laudable as it is to take a shower rather than a bath and turn off the faucet while brushing our teeth, we shouldn’t get hold of the idea that regular domestic water use is what is really emptying the world’s rivers. Manufacturing goods … consumes a certain amount, but that’s not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar. (emphasis mine.) (Fred Pearce, When the Rivers Run Dry, Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. p 3)
Here are a few numbers he gives: He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms: —————————————– sidebar: US Beef industry’s Cattlemen’s Association: 441 gallons In an industrial beef production system, it takes an average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef. The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing. This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing). Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water on average. —————————————– Where does all that water come from? If it comes from imported goods (Thai rice or Egyptian cotton), the water comes from those countries. When the water is collected from rivers or pumped from underground, as it is in much of the world, it’s: And when the rivers are running low, as they are more frequently, there is less water to grow anything at all. The water used in growing and producing goods around the world is known as “virtual water” and the trade of these goods is known as “virtual water transfers.” And who’s the biggest water exporting Mouseketeer of them all? The United States. When you drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of the region, virtually taking a share of the Costa Rican rains. The same is true within a national and regional boundaries. The Colorado River is drained so Californians can eat their Big Macs and have friends over for a Sunday afternoon barbecue. In the same way that your use of fossil fuel is measured as a “carbon footprint,” your water use, actual and through virtual water transfer, is measured as a “water footprint.” How big is my water footprint? Arjen Y. Hoekstra, professor at the University of Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the water-footprint concept in 2002. It “shows water use related to consumption within a nation, while the traditional indicator shows water use in relation to production within a nation.” (Hoekstra and Chapagain, Globalization of Water, Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008, p. 3) With Hoekstra and Chapagain’s water footprint calculator (waterfootprint.org), you select your country, input food, domestic water use, and industrial goods consumption, press a button, and you get your: For example, you’re in the US, eat only 1 pound of cereal a week (.4545 kg) and have a low-fat, low-sugar diet, use a low-flow showerhead, use a no-flush eco-toilet, and never run the tap while brushing your teeth. Two extremes: Three notes on the calculations, because Professor Hoekstra is European and lives in the social welfare country that started birthing hippies in Amsterdam decades before they showed up in the US at Woodstock: So how is Cinnamon’s capitalist water footprint? Answer: 650 cubic meters (172,900 gallons) I showed you mine. Now you show me yours: Get the naked truth: Calculate your waterfootprint now: Water’s running out: We return to Fred Pearce’s book to find an example, of which he has oceans: China’s Yellow River: The fifth longest in the world, it begins high in the mountains of eastern Tibet and journeys more than 3000 miles. Almost half a billion people depend on it for drinking and crop irrigation, and it’s made China the world’s largest wheat producer and second largest corn producer. Yet more than half of the lakes it feeds have disappeared over the last 20 years, and a third of pastures have turned to desert. This desertification generates huge dust storms that choke lungs in Beijing, close schools in Koreas, dust cars in Japan, and rain dust on mountains across the Pacific and Western Canada. State irrigation projects along the Yellow River soak up the majority of its water – the total official allocations are greater than the actual flow. The resulting drought could be an early warning sign of global warming. Much of the declines in moisture reaching rivers is in line with prediction of climate researchers. So how does this global warming happen? Higher air temperatures from desertification increase evaporation from oceans and intensify the water cycle. This increases atmospheric water vapor – 8 to 10% more than today. This increases global rainfall, but the rain is being redistributed: middle latitudes (read: the US) are becoming drier. Higher temperatures increase evaporation on land, meaning soil dries out faster, meaning less rainfall is reaching rivers. The higher temperatures melt glaciers and snowpacks. At first, this leads to unpredecented floods. After the glaciers disappear, meltwaters that feed rivers disappear. The combined decreasing rainfall and increasing evaporation will lower moisture by 40% in the southern and western states. The Sierra Nevada snowpack could diminish by 70 to 80 percent over the next 50 years. And some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions could dry up. Global climate is becoming more extreme: the dry areas become drier, and the wet areas become wetter. And more areas are becoming dry deserts. Loss of habitat and agricultural lands. It’s a vicious cycle. So what can you do? As Fred Pearce points out, your drinking and bathing account for 0.05% of your total water consumption. Your food and clothing weigh in at 95.00%, although I find his 12,000 gallons needed to produce a pound of burger rather wild. As Professor Arjen Y. Joekstra shows with his Water Footprint Calculator, your consumption of meats accounts for a lot, as does your guilt by association of being in an industrialized country. The obvious solution: eat fewer e-coli burgers from your neighborhood Salt and Fat Slop Bucket restaurant. The wiser solution: like your choices in energy use, become more aware of the resources needed to produce anything and the consequences. Such as luxurious cotton grown in the Egyptian desert. Next article in the water efficiency series: We continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars. And all of this is for one purpose: To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you. Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . . To your green, brighter future, Cinnamon Alvarez, And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today. You can access it now by going to: http://www.a19.com/pub/articles/ From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures
Bucks USA economic trends - Green technology
Water’s Role in Global Warming
not a drop to drink.
Talk my language, will you?
Dry or polluted, oh my!
How Many Gallons to Produce One Pound of Beef?
Lies, damned lies, and statistics
Fred Pearce: 12,000 gallons
Water Footprint Network: 1854 gallons (calculations: 15500 litres of water per kg; 4079 gallons per kg; 1854 gallons per pound)
From virtually everywhere
I’ll show you mine if you show me yours
I get the fossil fuel analogy so far.
And what about climate change?
Navigating through the Resource Matrix
How an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed
peasant on some other side of the globe affects you
A19