Archive for August, 2009

Goes to the Animals: Vibration and Noise Control


Goes to the Animals: Vibration and Noise Control

Noise and vibration control is an issue that is much more common than one might originally think. In fact, it can creep up in the most unlikely of places. A good case in point is animal lab environments. Indeed, ALN Magazine recently ran an article titled “Noise & Vibration Considerations for the Animal Lab Environment.” Therein, the publication pointed out, “In the lab animal facility setting, noise, sound, and vibration affect the life cycle, interaction, and behavior of animals.” However, because “the impact of noise, sound, and vibration is a largely undocumented factor in the research,” it’s an often overlooked issue.

“If the sound pressure levels get too high,” the article continues, “there is a negative impact on animals and structures.” Vibration control, however, is just as important to these animals as noise control in that it “is a driving force behind radiated sound.”

Obviously, exposure to noise and vibration can be detrimental to an animal’s hearing, but the risks don’t stop there. “Sound and vibration can [also] have a physical impact on animals.” Even more startling, “Smaller animals are more susceptible to the affects of sound and vibration over time and will adapt or adjust accordingly. In some cases, mutations may result from exposure to undesirable conditions.”

How can animal laboratories mitigate these problems? The magazine notes, “The designers can control items that are constant disturbances that may greatly impact the animal community. Items within the designer’s control include ventilation system design, machinery vibration isolation, wall construction, lighting selection, and computer terminal placement.”

During the design process, animal labs may want to consult with a producer of custom-molded rubber and rubber-to-metal bonded parts for noise and vibration control. A world leader in the creation of rubber molding and rubber-to-metal bonded parts can help to create an environment that is not only safe for the animals being kept there but is also conducive to a healthy work environment for the people who are employed there.

The Vibro-Insulator line of isolators and mounts, in particular, aid in the control of noise, vibration, and shock. Selecting the right type of mount for an individual animal lab’s specific applications can prove tricky, however. That’s why consultation with an expert with reputable qualifications in rubber molding and rubber-to-metal bonding can be very beneficial.

Of course, once professional advice has been obtained, browsing the Vibro-Insulator catalog allows animal labs easy navigation so they can select the correct mount for their application. Rubber Vibro-Insulators come in a variety of styles and sizes to handle most vibration isolation problems. Most of the mount styles are designed to be used in either the compression or shear direction.
Selection of the proper Vibro-Insulator for a specific application boils down to a multi-step mathematical function that an expert can calculate for the lab or into which the lab’s design team can plug the following information:

1. The maximum load that must be supported.
2. The number of mounts supporting the load.
3. The frequency of the disturbing vibration.
4. Any restrictions on the size or style of the mount based on space limitations or assembly considerations.

Carmen Fontana is a Web Services Manager for Western Reserve Internet Services. Karman Rubber is a world leader in vibration control.

GLOBAL PULSE: The Color of Stimulus


Mark Twain's hard lesson for solar energy investors - SmartPlanet

The Thinking Tech blog focuses on technologies such as virtualization, smart electric grids, enterprise 2.0, open source, data center management, green technology and the intersection between the innovation and application of these …


Solar One » Blog Archive » Some Great Reading for Going Solar

Welcome to Solar One! , dedicated to improving the lives of New Yorkers through innovative education and outreach.


glowing solar led lamp: looks like a ufo landed in your living …

While I’ve been waiting a really long time for the Alien Abduction Lamp to finally get mass-produced, I guess I’ll have to settle for this glowing green orb lamp from Japan for now.


FreeLoader Solar Charger | Keetsa Mattress Store â?? Keetsa! Blog …

You can add another solar charger for gadget geeks with this FreeLoader Solar Charger. As the name of the gadget connotes, this charger thrives on solar energy which can reportedly last up to 3 months. This is one of the eco-friendly …


True Cost of Solar Power | Solar Panels - Green Power

What is the true cost of solar power? The answer to this question may determine whether or not you decide to install solar panels on your home or.

No Comments

How Water Extraction is Done in DC


How Water Extraction is Done in DC

There are many beautiful and interesting sights in Washington DC, among them are the White House which has been home to every president of the United States ever since 1800; the Tidal Basin Lake famous for its abundant Japanese cherry trees that blooms in Spring; the Lincoln Memorial and Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument, etc.

But regardless of the beautiful tourist attractions that one could go to in the State of DC, natural calamities in the form of flooding sometimes happen. And when it does, most household residents in DC do the physical cleanup by themselves without hiring water extraction professionals or experts to deal with the situation. Prior to actual removal of water and cleaning, the starting place of the water which caused the flood should be identified as soon as possible and fixed permanently to prevent it from arising all over again.

Cleaning would usually require having to remove all visible waters first by making use of a wet vacuum pump or a bucket - depending on the volume and availability of equipment. The extraction process must be done immediately or as soon as possible to avoid a higher cost of damage inflicted by the dirty waters and also to thwart of any possibility that the area becomes a source of infectious diseases due to the presence of pathogens.

When all the water has already been extracted, floor coverings should be removed immediately and disposed properly. This includes removing items which came in contact with the flood water that are very porous, because the high absorbency rate of such materials has already contaminated the item in question making it very dirty and highly infectious. No amount of cleaning or fixing could reinstate it in its previously clean state; hence replacements should be made eventually if still needed.

Brushing all affected surfaces with a soapy water solution removes the presence of dirt. Pay particular attention to dirt which is inserted within cracks on walls and floors. Rinse the entire area by using a mop and bucket or a garden hose with a spray gadget.

When the rinsing stage has already been done, disinfecting the entire place is a must to remove remaining germ and fungal spores. Remember that disinfecting does not entirely mean total sanitation but a means of making the area or place habitable again. Never mix chlorine bleach with other cleaning products that contain ammonia as this will produce poisonous gas. Before and during application of any disinfectant, make sure to open all air passage ways and vents to avoid inhaling the vapors of the disinfecting agent upon application.

After having done the disinfection phase, the whole area must be thoroughly dried out, and drying usually takes a couple of days or weeks depending on how big the place is and the weather. The re-occupation of any living space which has been previously flooded must only be done once the area is declared by a professional water extraction expert to be absolutely dry. The dryness is tested by a moisture meter which shows the amount of moisture above and below a given area.

Leo Nov is an editorial staff member of RestorationSOS. To learn more about Water Extraction visit our website. Click here for more information on Water Extraction DC.


Mark Twain's hard lesson for solar energy investors - SmartPlanet

The Thinking Tech blog focuses on technologies such as virtualization, smart electric grids, enterprise 2.0, open source, data center management, green technology and the intersection between the innovation and application of these …


Financial Constraints Could Derail India's Ambitious Solar Energy …

Lack of foreign investments owing to the global financial crisis and its own negotiating stance at climate talks could throw back India’s schedule to implement plans of setting up large scale solar energy projects. …


India Proposes Bold Solar Energy Plans | Use Celsias.com - reduce …

One can’t help thinking that the Industrial Revolution missed the solar bus. Vast areas of the world â?? the entire tropical belt and a portion of the temperate belts - are blessed to receive plenty of sunshine throughout the year. …


naked capitalism: Guest Post: Is the Sun Setting on Solar Stocks?

Commentary on current economic and financial news.


Samsung's Blue Earth solar touchscreen phone gets dubbed S7550 …

Samsung has been teasing us with its Blue Earth solar-powered smartphone since February, and now it’s showing us a bit more of that sultry photovoltaic skin a mere day after its budget-minded solar brother, the E1107, came out into the …

No Comments

Reduce - The Holy Grail


Reduce - The Holy Grail

The hard truth is that we all need to reduce. Reduce the amount of money we spend. Reduce the amount of food we eat…and our waistlines. And reduce the amount of stuff we throw away. In fact new we look at the 3 R’s of reduce, reuse, recycle, they are actually in that order for a reason. It is a hierarchy for a reason and reduce is the Holy Grail. Put in its simplest terms reduce means that we use less of the earth’s resources and in any environmental scheme should be our first priority.

That said, it is also the hardest to accomplish. When I thought about all the things we do to be greener, the number of examples of reducing stumped me. I suppose the most obvious example of our efforts to reduce was the decision some months ago, not to purchase an automobile. My husband has the use of a company van, but even that is rarely used. The difficulty comes when we want to go anywhere as a family. The work van has only one bucket seat in the front that fits three people. Obviously this presents difficulties. Even on our Saturday shopping trips with my mother-in-law, I end up sitting in the back of van; a solution that is both dangerous and illegal for the children. About a year ago, when I was working full-time, we were seriously considering buying a vehicle. But in the end, we thought the expense was too much when you consider not just payments, but insurance, road tax, maintenance and gas. Instead, we signed up for StreetCar; a car rental scheme that you pay a monthly fee to join and an hourly or daily rate only when you need to use a car or van. Looking back, that was one of the best decisions we have made both for the environment and family finances.

The other obvious example I found of reduction was our decision a year ago to switch to bags for life. We now have a stack of them beneath our kitchen sink and faithfully use them for our Saturday shops. But I do admit to occasionally forgetting them when just running out to grab something quickly. When this happens though, we make certain to re-use (we’ll talk more about that tomorrow) any plastic bags we get for outings or for small bin liners. Did you know that in the UK alone 100,000 TONNES of plastic bags are thrown away each year; that is the equivalent of 70,000 cars? So if there is one thing, I can encourage you to do, it is purchase bags for life. My store sells the sturdy plastic ones for about forty pence, the jute ones are about a pound, and the pretty cloth ones are about three pounds with a portion of the proceeds going to charity. Or it is very simple to make your own if you sew.

Speaking of which, sewing and mending our clothes is another excellent way of reducing. My boys from my husband to my sons are always wearing holes in their jeans on the inside thighs. Before the economic downturn, I admit we were likely to just toss them out and purchase new ones. But since I have not been working, we have instead taken them to the drycleaners and had them patched. The cost of the repairs is less than the cost of purchasing new (although I am committed to mending them myself from now on…a further savings). And we have reduced in a very small way the demand for jeans.

Of course, as I sit at my desk in my bedroom I am witnessing another reduction…the daylight streaming in through the open curtains. One of the first things I do each morning is open the curtains and the blinds. By using natural light when and where possible, we are reducing the amount of electricity that we consume and that the power grids must generate. We are also of course saving money on our bills. My husband is a genius at this; going around and turning off and unplugging everything he can each night before bed. I admit though that being American this whole switch on the plug thing still gets me and I often forget to do that, but I am improving. Of course, another example was turning down our thermostat during the winter and wearing heavier layers of clothes instead. In fact, I can think of only a couple of days this winter when we turned our heat on before night fall at all.

These are just a few ideas of ways that our family is reducing. There are many other things that we and you can do to cut back on the things we consume and help save our earth’s precious resources. On Friday as I said, we will do a mini-inventory and I will commit to new ideas on how our family can better live the 3 R’s reduce, re-use, recycle. I will be especially focusing on reducing since this is the most important of the R’s.

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/.

Your Green Life Segment Of Sun Light

No Comments

THE 3 Rs - Lazy Ways to Reduce, Reuse and Recycle


THE 3 Rs - Lazy Ways to Reduce, Reuse and Recycle

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

KETV News

No Comments

Water Used in Generating US Electricity


Water Used in Generating US Electricity

In my four-article series on water use (The Resource Matrix), I took you on a journey to reveal the layers of The Resource Matrix in order to help you understand how water will be a highly contested commodity tomorrow, possibly as much as oil is fought over today.

You learned about your water footprint and a website where you can calculate it, virtual water and virtual water transfers, whereby choices here affect water availability elsewhere, to the point of some people not having enough water to drink in order to produce inexpensive dyed cotton, along with insane choices such as growing crops in the desert.

You learned that on average it takes 1854 to 3000 gallons to produce one pound of beef.

Yep, it’s it’s been a great journey through the sidetrip city of the Resource Matrix.

Today, we’ve found the on-ramp to the Green Lighting Interstate and are driving to take a look at water use in generating electricity.

For a simple reason. It takes a lot of water to produce electricity.

How much? 5% of all US water? 10%? Can’t be as high as 25%?

Electricity and water?

I thought the issue was fossil fuels and greenhouse gases

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated water use in the United States in 2000.

Their grand total: 408 billion gallons per day withdrawn for all uses.

The number 1 spot, weighing in at 48%, was thermoelectric power.

Irrigation earned the runner-up prize at 34%.

The 195 billion gallons need to come from somewhere, and actions have consequences. Environmental ones, as in 40 million fish in the Great Lakes killed each year due to being trapped against water intake devices. That’s a lot of Friday night fish dinners.

How much water is used in generating electricity?

Large fossil fuel and nuclear plants require incredible quantities of water for cooling and ongoing maintenance.

Water for thermoelectric power is used in generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators. It uses 48% of all water in the US.

According to the Pace Energy and Climate Center, the amount of water used for power plant cooling varies by each specific power plant’s electricity generating technology and size. Nuclear reactors require the most water for cooling, and baseload fossil fuel power plants come in second.

The Salem Nuclear Generating Station alone takes 3 billion gallons a day from the Delaware Bay, according to the Pace Energy and Climate Center.

Nationally:

  • Steam electric generating plants across the nation draw in more than 200 billion gallons per day.
  • Nuclear and fossil fuel power plants drink over 185 billion gallons of water per day.
  • Geothermal power plants add another 2 billion or so gallons a day.
  • Most renewable energy technologies require little or no water for cooling.

These numbers are starting to sound like the same ones the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank use.

Imagine watching your favorite science program where astronomers explain that the universe is 78 billion light-years wide (78 billion units of 5,878,630,000,000 miles). There is absolutely nothing in our experience to help us wrap our mind around it.

How much is 3 billion gallons per day?

The Delaware Bay feeds Salem Nuclear Generating Station 3 billion gallons a day.

Imagine this rectangle: a football field with end zones (360 feet long x 160 feet wide). Then add to it walls on each side of the rectangle to create a container to hold the 3 billion gallons you pour into it.

How high do you need to make those walls to contain 3 billion gallons? 6915 feet high. Or 1.3 miles.

Maybe 6915 feet high is still hard to imagine. So how deep do you cover the field in order to feed the Salem plant every minute? Answer: 5 feet deep. Every minute.

48% of all water use: We’re Number One!

How much is 195 billion gallons per day?

Using the USGS figure for 2000, thermoelectric power nationwide used 195 billion gallons a day, or 48% of all water used in the US. My guess is the water use has grown since then.

How high are the walls on our football field now? 449,475 feet or 85 miles high. We’re back to US Treasury and astronomy numbers again.

So, let’s get a higher-level view to help us.

Lake Erie holds 116 cubic miles of water.

Nationally, thermoelectric power uses 195 billion gallons a day - or 64.2 cubic miles a year.

We drain Lake Erie every 22 months.

But the water used is returned to its source.

So what’s the issue about water use?

Power generation returns 98% of the water back to its source (bay, lake, river, ocean).

It’s the environmental consequences.

The Pace Energy and Climate Center explains it neatly:

Withdrawal of large volumes of surface water for either power plant cooling or hydropower generation can kill fish, larvae and other organisms trapped against intake structures (impinged), or swept up (entrained) in the flow through the different sections of a power plant.

Examples include:

  • The Salem Nuclear Generating Station is responsible for an annual 11 percent reduction in weakfish and 31 percent reduction in bay anchovy.
  • At the Indian Point 2 and 3 reactors on the Hudson River, the number of fish impinged totaled over 1.5 million fish in 1987.
  • The 90 power plants using once-through-cooling on the Great Lakes kill in excess of 40 million fish per year due to impingement. (Once-through cooling needs a continual flow of new water, and uses 30 to 50 times that of a closed cycle system. Closed cycles cool down water from steam then reuse it.)

The diversion of water out of the river removes water for healthy in-stream ecosystems:

  • Stretches below dams are often completely de-watered.
  • Fluctuations in water flow from peaking operations create a “tidal effect,” disrupting the downstream riparian community that supports its unique ecosystem.
  • A dam’s impoundment slows water flows, which hinders natural downstream migration of many fish species.
  • By slowing river flows, dams also allow silt to collect on river and reservoir bottoms and bury fish spawning habitat. Silt trapped above dams accumulates heavy metals and other pollutants. Disrupting the natural flow of sediments in rivers also leads to erosion of riverbeds downstream of the dam and increases risks of floods.
  • The impoundment of water by hydropower facilities fundamentally reshapes the physical habitat from a riverine to an artificial pond community.
  • This often eliminates native populations of fish and other wildlife.
  • Dams also impede the upstream and downstream movement of fish and other wildlife, and prevent the flow of plants and nutrients. This impact is most significant on migratory fish, which are born in the river and must migrate downstream early in life to the ocean and then migrate upstream again to lay their eggs (or “spawn”).
  • As mentioned above, withdrawal of water into turbines can also impinge or entrain significant numbers of fish.

The cleanest kilowatt is the one never used:

Back to those compact fluorescent lamps and LEDs

PowerScorecard.org explains the solution:

By re-directing electricity dollars to support environmentally benign energy resources, consumers are empowered, in states that offer supply choice, to influence the existing generating resources that are deployed to meet demand.

They can also support the construction of new and cleaner electricity resources that will be built to meet overall growth in demand in the future. By supporting these power options, consumers can minimize many water use and consumption impacts. Still, directing your dollars to cleaner power products in no way helps remediate damages that already have occurred. Consumers can stop the construction of new hydropower facilities or alter conditions of siting and operation, but they cannot undo previous environmental degradation that occurred at existing hydropower facilities.

In short, reduce your use of electricity.

More Info:

We used several sources for this article, including the PowerScorecard.org website, which is produced by the Pace Energy and Climate Center, which is part of the Pace University School of Law’s Center for Environmental Legal Studies, Pace University, White Plains, New York.

On PowerScorecard, you can get:

  • Ratings of Electric Power Choices for some service areas.
  • More info on electricity and the environment:
    • Technologies
    • Climate change
    • Acid rain
    • Ozone depletion
    • Water use (our article today)
    • Water quality
    • Land: on-site and off-site impacts

Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .

To your green, brighter future,

Cinnamon Alvarez,

A19

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


Eneloop Portable Solar

The Eneloop Portable Solar is now available in Japan via GeekStuff4U online store. This portable ready-to-use solar power generator allows you to gather.


Solar-Powered Ferries | Deep Sea News

In November, Hong Kong’s harbor will see four solar-powered ferries. On a sunny day, 3/4 of ferries’ energy needs will be met by solar power. On a.


FuturePundit: Main Battles For Solar Power Cost Reductions In Industry

The federal government is behind the times when it comes to making decisions about advancing the solar industry, according to several solar-industry experts. This has led, they argue, to a misplaced emphasis on research into futuristic …


Us Firms Raise The Roof For Onsite Solar Power | News | Solarplaza …

An increasing number of multi-nationals are turning towards rooftop solar systems as a cost-effective means of hitting their environmental corporate social responsibility targets.


SunCat solar catamaran : The Alternative Consumer

Taiwan-based, Horizon Group, is developing a series of zero-emissions, solar powered boats. The first boat in the program is the stylish SunCat 23, a 23-foot, open deck catamaran. The SunCat, which will be powered by a 2.8 kilowatt …

No Comments

What it Really Is: Recycling


What it Really Is: Recycling

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:

  • Recycling one aluminium can saves enough energy to run a TV for three hours — or the equivalent of a half a gallon of gasoline.
  • Each ton (2000 pounds) of recycled paper can save 17 trees, 380 gallons of oil, three cubic yards of landfill space, 4000 kilowatts of energy, and 7000 gallons of water. This represents a 64% energy savings, a 58% water savings, and 60 pounds less of air pollution!
  • The 17 trees saved (above) can absorb a total of 250 pounds of carbon dioxide from the air each year. Burning that same ton of paper would create 1500 pounds of carbon dioxide.
  • Recycling plastic saves twice as much energy as burning it in an incinerator.
  • The energy saved from recycling one glass bottle can run a 100-watt light bulb for four hours. It also causes 20% less air pollution and 50% less water pollution than when a new bottle is made from raw materials.
  • A modern glass bottle would take 4000 years or more to decompose — and even longer if it’s in the landfill.

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/.

Green technology

No Comments

Christians and Earth Day


Christians and Earth Day

Earth day is coming soon (4/22/09). This month we have Easter as well…so it got me thinking. How should Christians respond to Earth day?

First, I think we need to keep it all in perspective. Yes, we are to be good stewards of the planet. However, we are not to be earth “worshipers.” The earth is just another thing in our lives that God wants us to be a good steward with. Yes, it is important…However, Jesus Christ and His shed Blood is much more important. Saving souls should be above saving polar bears. You know what I mean?

So, do I think Christian’s should celebrate Earth Day?

Sure. Just make sure you have this whole eco, green planet stuff in perspective. Make sure that you are lined up with the Word and that God is your priority and His will. Do not let being green override sharing the Love of Christ and your true God-given purpose.

All that said, I thought it would be cool to add some fun stuff to do for earth day…

Earth Day Activities:

Plant a tree. This could be a fun family project.

Recycle. Take those cans you have been saving and turn them in.

Make the whole day green. Make eco choices all day long.

Clean up. Take your family to the park and clean up the junk left by others.

Make a point to add more green. Add at least one more green activity to your life.

Go on a nature walk. Enjoy the beautiful environment that God created for you.

Organic. Visit your local Ma and Pa farmer and shop for some earth friendly stuff.

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).

Clean Green Engine Fox News

No Comments

To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?


To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?

Sometimes, simple acts such as going to the grocery store can turn into a moral dilemma. Is it better to choose the piece of organic fruit produced on the other side of the country or the non-organic version grown locally, 50 miles away? Are the benefits of chemical-free shampoo worth an extra 5 bucks a bottle? Will I really be able to enjoy a cheap chocolate bar knowing that the growers of the cocoa beans were likely not fairly compensated?

As much as I’d like to say that I always buy the product that is environmentally safe and sustainably produced, in reality, that’s not always the case. First, the sheer amount of information required to be able to distinguish between products is staggering. You need facts regarding environmental impact, transportation costs, and fair trade practices, to name just a few. And there are plenty of misinformation and greenwashing campaigns out there to steer you in the wrong direction.

Second, of course, there are times when the high cost of an ethically made product turns me off from buying it. Even consumers with the best of intentions have their breaking points.

The thing is, companies who go out of their way to implement sustainable practices endure a greater cost of production. Sure, they can sometimes capitalize on this by marketing to conscientious consumers who are willing to pay a bit more, but the fact remains that in today’s system, environmentally minded production is punished.

On the other hand, companies who move their factories (and jobs) to developing countries with lax environmental standards and cheap labor are able to make products at a fraction of the cost and undercut their competitors (while shipping materials and finished goods all around the world and adding to our greenhouse gas problems).

The way it’s set up, high environmental standards in one country drive companies to relocate in places where it’s permissible to pollute in order to compete in the marketplace. Chaco, the Colorado-based athletic sandal company, is a prime example of even a well-intentioned company being forced to follow suit to maintain competitive pricing on their products. In fact, 95% of all footwear in the world is produced in China, whose poor environmental regulation and sometimes dangerous environmental problems are well known.

With current talk about cap and trade emissions programs, this phenomenon may only get worse.

So how do we even the playing field and reward companies for good business practices?

When I think about this problem, I keep coming back to an idea I encountered in a casual conversation with a stranger while traveling. I can’t remember his face or his name, but his idea has stuck with me and festered in my mind for the better part of a year. His take was that putting the financial burden of environmental responsibility on the companies just doesn’t make sense for the reasons I’ve given above. In a global marketplace, it renders companies less competitive than those that operate free of environmental and labor regulations.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to put an “environmental impact” or “ecological footprint” tax on the product itself?

Ugh, a tax?

Initially, I didn’t warm to the idea either. But think about it: adding a tax proportionate to a product’s ecological and social footprint eliminates the cost advantage of irresponsible production. All those environmental costs that are currently not included in our economic system would be factored in and would increase the price of unsustainably made products.

This, in turn, would make moral dilemmas at the grocery store much easier. Is it more sustainable to buy distant, organic produce or local, non-organic produce? The tax-adjusted pricing should inform my decision. Can I afford the chemical-free shampoo? Yes, because the price of its chemical-laden competitors would be raised through the environmental impact tax and eliminate the cost advantage of choosing that product.

The money raised from the tax could fund its implementation and other sustainable programs such as public transportation (high speed rail, anyone?) and alternative energy. Perhaps it could even make a dent in our gaping budget deficit.

Won’t this cost me money?

You may be thinking, “Sure, that’s a good idea in concept, but that will raise my bills - grocery, clothes, everything.” Well, yes, that’s true. But maybe if we see the true cost of the products we casually consume, we can make a more informed decision about what is really necessary to our lives.

Additionally, programs such as this often have the greatest impact on the poor. But this could be compensated for by using some of the tax revenue for need-based assistance programs.

Regardless, running an economic system on the assumption of infinite resources is fundamentally flawed. Currently, environmental impacts such as air pollution, water pollution, and deforestation are not factored into the cost of a product: they are considered “externalities.”

These costs need to be included in the system in a way that does not punish those who engage in sustainable business practices. By taxing a product’s environmental impact, it levels the playing field for the consumer.

Disclaimer

Of course, I am not an economist or policy guru. I don’t know how to implement such a tax or if it would even be possible (though compared to creating a carbon trading market, perhaps it’s not that difficult). This is only the musing of a concerned, intelligent citizen trying to brainstorm ways to make our economic system fit within the bounds of our ecological constraints.

What do you think? Would such a tax have a beneficial effect on our production system? Join the conversation over at our website!

Jill Mueller is a conservation biologist, avid cyclist, and freelance writer. She has combined forces with a good friend and dietitian to start The Barefoot Badger, a blog promoting healthy, sustainable living. Check us out!

The Technology News of Megawhat Gadget


Are rainy days gone for solar? - Green Chemicals

While some reports indicate that investments in the solar market is shining again, others claimed continued cloudy days because of capital intensive projects and growing overcapacity in some regions (ok, I’ll stop the weather talk). …


Worldchanging: Bright Green: Solar Into Space

Californians could be catching the rays come rain or shine if the world’s first space-based solar power project gets off the ground. Plans to send a solar farm into orbit are awaiting final approval after a major power provider signed …


Holy solar: Statue of Catholic saint will produce renewable energy …

Why build an ordinary everyday statue in commemoration of one of Catholicism’s most cherished saints when you can build one that literally delivers rays of light to the people? [[social-toolbar]]


Live: eSolar Flips the Switch on First Solar Power Tower in U.S.

Updated with notes from the event:eSolar, a solar developer that uses modular designs, small mirrors and computing power to lower …


Official google.org Blog: Turning on the Solar Power Tower

In many respects eSolar has turned conventional thinking about solar power tower technology on its head in order to drastically reduce the capital and operating cost of solar thermal power plants. Instead of employing a small number of …

No Comments

Green with Pure Water Technology


Green with Pure Water Technology

To Reveal a Product’s True Cost An Environmental Tax?

Sometimes, simple acts such as going to the grocery store can turn into a moral dilemma. Is it better to choose the piece of organic fruit produced on the other side of the country or the non-organic version grown locally, 50 miles away? Are the benefits of chemical-free shampoo worth an extra 5 bucks a bottle? Will I really be able to enjoy a cheap chocolate bar knowing that the growers of the cocoa beans were likely not fairly compensated?

As much as I’d like to say that I always buy the product that is environmentally safe and sustainably produced, in reality, that’s not always the case. First, the sheer amount of information required to be able to distinguish between products is staggering. You need facts regarding environmental impact, transportation costs, and fair trade practices, to name just a few. And there are plenty of misinformation and greenwashing campaigns out there to steer you in the wrong direction.

Second, of course, there are times when the high cost of an ethically made product turns me off from buying it. Even consumers with the best of intentions have their breaking points.

The thing is, companies who go out of their way to implement sustainable practices endure a greater cost of production. Sure, they can sometimes capitalize on this by marketing to conscientious consumers who are willing to pay a bit more, but the fact remains that in today’s system, environmentally minded production is punished.

On the other hand, companies who move their factories (and jobs) to developing countries with lax environmental standards and cheap labor are able to make products at a fraction of the cost and undercut their competitors (while shipping materials and finished goods all around the world and adding to our greenhouse gas problems).

The way it’s set up, high environmental standards in one country drive companies to relocate in places where it’s permissible to pollute in order to compete in the marketplace. Chaco, the Colorado-based athletic sandal company, is a prime example of even a well-intentioned company being forced to follow suit to maintain competitive pricing on their products. In fact, 95% of all footwear in the world is produced in China, whose poor environmental regulation and sometimes dangerous environmental problems are well known.

With current talk about cap and trade emissions programs, this phenomenon may only get worse.

So how do we even the playing field and reward companies for good business practices?

When I think about this problem, I keep coming back to an idea I encountered in a casual conversation with a stranger while traveling. I can’t remember his face or his name, but his idea has stuck with me and festered in my mind for the better part of a year. His take was that putting the financial burden of environmental responsibility on the companies just doesn’t make sense for the reasons I’ve given above. In a global marketplace, it renders companies less competitive than those that operate free of environmental and labor regulations.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to put an “environmental impact” or “ecological footprint” tax on the product itself?

Ugh, a tax?

Initially, I didn’t warm to the idea either. But think about it: adding a tax proportionate to a product’s ecological and social footprint eliminates the cost advantage of irresponsible production. All those environmental costs that are currently not included in our economic system would be factored in and would increase the price of unsustainably made products.

This, in turn, would make moral dilemmas at the grocery store much easier. Is it more sustainable to buy distant, organic produce or local, non-organic produce? The tax-adjusted pricing should inform my decision. Can I afford the chemical-free shampoo? Yes, because the price of its chemical-laden competitors would be raised through the environmental impact tax and eliminate the cost advantage of choosing that product.

The money raised from the tax could fund its implementation and other sustainable programs such as public transportation (high speed rail, anyone?) and alternative energy. Perhaps it could even make a dent in our gaping budget deficit.

Won’t this cost me money?

You may be thinking, “Sure, that’s a good idea in concept, but that will raise my bills - grocery, clothes, everything.” Well, yes, that’s true. But maybe if we see the true cost of the products we casually consume, we can make a more informed decision about what is really necessary to our lives.

Additionally, programs such as this often have the greatest impact on the poor. But this could be compensated for by using some of the tax revenue for need-based assistance programs.

Regardless, running an economic system on the assumption of infinite resources is fundamentally flawed. Currently, environmental impacts such as air pollution, water pollution, and deforestation are not factored into the cost of a product: they are considered “externalities.”

These costs need to be included in the system in a way that does not punish those who engage in sustainable business practices. By taxing a product’s environmental impact, it levels the playing field for the consumer.

Disclaimer

Of course, I am not an economist or policy guru. I don’t know how to implement such a tax or if it would even be possible (though compared to creating a carbon trading market, perhaps it’s not that difficult). This is only the musing of a concerned, intelligent citizen trying to brainstorm ways to make our economic system fit within the bounds of our ecological constraints.

What do you think? Would such a tax have a beneficial effect on our production system? Join the conversation over at our website!

Jill Mueller is a conservation biologist, avid cyclist, and freelance writer. She has combined forces with a good friend and dietitian to start The Barefoot Badger, a blog promoting healthy, sustainable living. Check us out!

No Comments