This post was originally posted here: What are the Major Mining Countries?

Mining is one of those professions that are not only most high paying because of its end product but also because they are equally dangerous as well. This is a profession that requires little education but a lot of guts to handle because there is imminent danger quite often. As health safety measures improve, the places to mine are reducing as they are all limited resources of nature. Nevertheless, these major mining countries will always be great places to work for those who want to get a job in the mining industry.

Top Oil Mining Countries

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia always has had the crown of being a top oil producing country in the world. Even though it is not the most developed country, nor easy for immigrants to come over, it definitely has made a lot of money through this resource. Following countries are USA, Russia, Iran, and Mexico. Most of these have a good per capita income which makes a strong reason for people who want to find work in such countries. Oil rigs are dangerous work places for many reasons, especially those that are off shore. These require workers to work at long lengths in dangerous health hazards with little contact with rest of the world. They are confined in a small artificial city for a period as long as 6 months before they can take a time off.

Top Gold Producing Countries

China now has the crown in producing the most gold than any other country. It may earn the merit because it is also one of the largest countries in the world in terms of surface area. This production has risen by a steep increase which explains the explosive employment in this sector. The following countries after China come, South Africa, Australia, United States, and Peru. Gold production has the same risks as coal mining and other forms of mining and they tend to cave in when demolitions are made. Extracting this kind of ore requires some knowledge because they remain in greater depths of the ground, however exploration companies already offer the training required for miners.

Popular Places for Mining and Exploration

Some countries have a well-established setup for mining recruitment of human resources. They have recruiters who have good networks to get people hired on first come first serve basis. Since they don’t require an intensive checkup, they are already outsourced by these hiring agencies. Being this organized makes these countries a lot more attractive to freelance contractors.

One of these countries is Australia where there is significant mining done of various kinds. They are all good paymasters and the flexibility to leave the project is easier. The popularity is contributing more towards competition among new candidates however. Those who already have experience in related fields always get better chances of getting a high paying job than those who are fresh. But there are many other factors that come in to consideration such as:

• Flexibility to work for longer hours
• Availability for relocation
• Single or married with family
• Exposure and experience

Thomas runs a network on Australian websites that focus on mining jobs and news and information about working in the Australian resource sector.

This post was originally posted here: White House Decides Against Tougher Ozone Standards

If you thought that the downturn in the economy might be detrimental to American citizens, you were right in more ways than one.  Obviously it has had a negative impact on the financial situation of many people across the globe, but it seems that it may now be to blame for an impending health crisis of epic proportions.  No, we’re not talking about Obama’s healthcare reform bill, although it was almost certainly passed due to the increased number of people going without healthcare coverage as a result of the recession.  The problem on the table today is the state of ozone (not our ozone layer, specifically, but rather the toxic gas created by many manufacturing plants) and the fact that stricter regulations sought by members of the medical community have been denied.

In a September 2^nd decision, the White House indefinitely shelved a proposal that would create better air quality by imposing new standards for the levels of ozone allowed in manufacturing, and business in general.  Proponents of the plan, including the American Lung Association, have stated that ignoring the proposal will unnecessarily put lives at risk, citing that the current administration has already pushed off these increased standards for two years running.  And the results will be nothing to sniff at (so to speak).

The effects of ozone are not generally considered to be deadly, but they can definitely put a crimp in your lifestyle.  What happens when people breathe in ozone, either in large doses or over an extended period of time, is that it begins to restrict lung function by causing inflammation.  This condition can lead to a number of unpleasant side effects, such as shortness of breath, throat irritation, coughing, and even chest pain or a burning sensation upon inhalation.  In the short term, this is merely annoying, no worse than a common cold.  But repeated or ongoing exposure over time could lead to more serious side effects, especially considering the elevation of free radicals in the body caused by the toxin.  Although there is, as yet, nothing to link ozone exposure to diseases such as cancer, it is well known that free radicals in the body cause damage to healthy cells, potentially leading to any number of diseases, particularly cancers.

So why isn’t the administration jumping at the chance to lower the risk for American citizens?  The simple answer is money, and the truth is that there just isn’t enough at the moment to devote to these types of environmental concerns, especially considering that the cost to implement and monitor the proposed ozone standards would come to an estimated $1 trillion over the next decade.  Obama supported the decision by reminding the public of recently revamped standards for levels of mercury and other toxic air pollutants produced by power plants, as well as a consensus reached with auto manufacturers that will significantly reduce fuel consumption (and emissions) in the coming years.

Also of note is the fact that the EPA will be reviewing and updating their standards for air quality in 2013, at which time ozone levels will almost certainly be addressed (making legislation now a waste of both time and money).  So while the American Lung Association (which sued the U.S. government in 2008 over this very issue) has declared that they intend to exercise their legal rights on the matter, chances are the issue won’t come under review until the government is good and ready to address it.

This post was originally posted here: Obama Backs Solar Company Even After Bad Financial Reports

Solar company Solyndra has recently filed for bankruptcy, not even a year after President Obama visited the plant and claimed it was a fine example of American ingenuity.   The company has stated that it will be cutting 1,100 jobs and that the Chinese market made the solar industry too competitive to keep profitable margins.

But two months before Obama ever visited the plant at the solar company, an accounting firm gave dire warnings about the financial status of the company and that it had serious doubts that Solyndra would be able to dig out of these financial troubles.  What has made this an even bigger story is that the solar company had received $535 million in federal loan guarantees as part of the clean energy initiative to encourage renewable energy companies to invest in newer technologies.

The accounting firm stated that Solyndra’s negative cash flow and their recurring operating losses are what led to the warnings about the company’s future.  They had doubts about Solyndra meeting their business goals also because of their lack of new capital.  This raises questions about why the US government promised so much money to a company that already had red flags popping up all around it, and some are blaming the link of Solyndra to George Kaiser, who is a billionaire and Obama campaign fundraiser.

What made Solyndra different is that they used a thin film and the shape of a cylinder to capture energy from the sun and turn it into electricity instead of using the conventional flat solar panels.  But the materials used to harness this sunlight was also different.  Instead of the standard silicon used in flat solar panels, the cylinder-shaped Solyndra devices used mainly copper, gallium, indium, and selenium.  These materials made the cylinders lighter and the company also claimed that they were easier to install.  Many homes cannot have the standard flat silicone solar panels on their roofs because of the weight of the load and the stress it would put in the structure, but Solyndra supposedly came up with a way to solve that problem with these lighter solar units.

The problem with this new solar panel is that the materials are more expensive, and when the cost of silicone dropped it made the flat panels even more affordable and put more strain on Solyndra’s bottom line.  The company does blame China and their competitive edge in the solar market for their financial problems, but it seems that Solyndra’s solar unit made up of more expensive materials is really to blame.

The forecast for the solar company looks gloomy, even though the company itself had projected that revenues would double in 2011, as they had increased exponentially in previous years.  This is not a plight for solar power in general, but it should remind us all that any clean energy technology that is developed also has to become a reality with good business sense in mind.  When these two ideas are compatible in a solar company, they should not need to rely on federal funds to continue to exist.

Having written about solar power for years, Philip Richards is considered an expert and writes about led solar garden lights as a great way to light up a landscape.

This post was originally posted here: The 5 Biggest Oil Spills In History

Oil spills can cause massive devestation that takes years if not decades to completely clear up, which we have seen with the recent Gulf of Mexico disaster that put PB in the line of fine of almost every environmental group in the world. But was that as bad as they get, or have their been even bigger oil spills? Let’s take a look at the largest oil spills in history and see where the Gulf of Mexico on fits in.

The Biggest Oil Spills In History (In Reverse Order)

• 5. Fergana Valley (Uzbeckistan) – 2 Million Barrels

  Energy and oil refining site, Fergana Valley was working at a production rate of several thousand gallons of crude oil on a daily basis. In March 1992 a mystery accident caused an oil spill of over 2 million barrels of oil onto surrounding land – the oil wasn’t able to be saved.

• 4. Atlantic Empress Tanker (Trinidad & Tobago) – 2.1 Million Barrels

  A Greek oil tanker, responsible for not one but two oil spills – which combined equal the found largest oil spill in history. On the 19th of July, 2979 the tanker collided with another ship near Trinidad and Tobago, and since the damage to the ship was never completely rectified it continued to spill on August the 2nd as it towed.

• 3. Ixtoc (Gulf Of Mexico) – 3.3 Million Barrels

  Ixtoc was actually an exploration well in the Gulf of Mexico that was 2 miles deep into the ocean. After a drilling problem oil and gas fumes ignited a fire that cause the collapse of the oil rig. In the time between it blew out to when it was capped almost 9 months later it was said to be spilling 10,000 barrels a day into the Gulf of Mexico.

• 2. Deepwater Horizon (Gulf Of Mexico) – 4.9 Million Barrels

  And now we get to the BP Oil Spill at number two. I bet the majority of you didn’t even know it was called Deepwater Horizon, as it was always mentioned in the media as the BP oil spill. While it was extremely large, the reason that I gained so much publicity and caused so much damage was because it was close enough to land to make an impact on the ecological environment and the local beachside communities.

• 1. Gulf War Oil Spill (Kuwait) – 10.3 Million Barrels

  The sad thing about this Gulf War oil spill is that it didn’t need to happen. Purposefully released to stop US Marines landing on their shores, the American Airforce actually destroyed oil pipelines after the spill started to try and curb further oil being spilled into the Persian Gulf.

Thomas is an Australian blogger writing for Mining Jobs, a local website looking specifically at different positions in the Western Australia mining industry such as oil rig jobs and unskilled trade positions, as well as recruitment and training information for those looking for their start.

This post was originally posted here: The Political Battle Over Endangered Species

While climate change has captured the focus of the United States political consciousness – at least so far as the US political consciousness is even concerned with the environment – there is another very important and bitterly divisive environmental issue that is brewing. This issue is endangered species.

It all started in April, 2011, when Congress took gray wolves off of the endangered species list in Montana and Idaho. Gray wolves had been on the endangered species list in these states since 1973, when the Endangered Species Act, or ESA, was passed. This act sets federal guidelines that pertain to any animal or plant on the list. By taking the gray wolf off of the list, the opponents of the gray wolf undermined the ESA and scored a political and legal victory.

The opponents of the gray wolf primarily include ranchers, hunters, and those in charge of development. Ranchers seek a lower wolf population because wolves are known to occasionally eat their animals. Hunters dislike wolves because wolves will often eat the prey of hunters. Developers hold animosity towards the gray wolf because so long as protections are extended to the wolf, they cannot develop and profit as much. Now, with the environmental protections out of the way, all of these groups are happy. The only problem is the wolf can now, once again, be driven to the brink of extinction. This, of course, is a big problem not only to the wolves, but to the ecosystems of which the wolves are a small part.

Worst of all, this delisting of the gray wolf has set a terrible precedent for other counties, states, and for the entire United States. Now, other animals and plants have become vulnerable to either being delisted or simply not being allowed to be put onto an endangered species list at all. Why would anyone do this? Primarily, it’s about greed. Money is at stake. For instance, those who stand to profit from the building of dams are eager to get fish that would be endangered by those same dams removed from endangered species lists. Once this is done, dams can be built cheaper and easier. The electricity generated from them can be sold. The diverted waters, useful for agriculture, can also be sold. This means much money is won or lost depending on what fish, animal, or plant is protected by the ESA.

In our crippled economy, developers’ voices – which promise limitless sources of jobs and incomes for everyone – sound especially enticing. Never mind that by tearing the fundamental and natural world out from under our feet the sustainable survival of humanity is also put into jeopardy. Never mind the facts that systems theory has shown us: that if you destroy one node of an ecosystem, you threaten the entire structure of the ecosystem and every other species that forms a node within that ecosystem. The stakes are high and developers are eagerly waiting to see if they will be allowed to cast their bets – – with Mother Nature as collateral.

Comparing quotes online for assurance auto Quebec is the best way to reduce the amount you pay on insurance. Visit Kanetix Assurance today to do a free quote comparison to see which insurance companies offer the best rates for your vehicle.

This post was originally posted here: The Numbers on Plastics: What do They Mean?

With the current “green” movement, there has been a major push for reduction of the use of plastics and an even greater push to recycle plastics. While some companies now offer green packaging solutions, a lot of everyday individuals are reducing their waste production by recycling plastics. The problem is, a lot of companies only take certain kinds of plastic, based on the number labeled on the bottom of a plastic product, surrounded by the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol.

The number engraved into plastic products is the resin identification code, which simply identifies the type of plastic used to make the product to help with sorting for recycling. There are seven different classifications.

#1: Polyethylene terephthalate

This plastic has a variety of uses. While it is generally used for beverage bottles and microwaveable meal trays, it is also used to package pills that come in individual packs, or “blisters” as well as some tape products and first aid blankets.

#2: High-density polyethylene (HDPE)

HDPE is a slightly denser type of plastic that is also used in many common household items. You will most likely find the #2 symbol on refillable water bottles, milk jugs, laundry detergent containers and watering cans. This is also the material used to create the plastic bags used by grocery stores.

#3: Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)

You may be familiar with PVC when talking about pipes, as over half of the piping used in the United States is PVC. But it also has many common uses. Because it is impermeable to water, it is used in raincoats and other types of clothing that are water-resistant. It is also used in many commercial signs for businesses as well as insulation for electric wiring.

#4: Low-density polyethylene

If you own any sort of food storage containers, like Tupperware, you own plenty of this type of plastic. It is also used in rings for six-packs of canned beverages, some computer hardware parts, as well as playground slides. It is also one of the materials used in making milk and juice cartons in school cafeterias, when used with liquid packaging board and aluminum foil, giving it the ability to withstand cold temperatures and to hold liquids.

#5: Polypropylene

Polypropylene is a plastic more resistant to fatigue than the previously mentioned, and is used in a lot of consumer products that get a lot of use. While storage containers are made of polyethylene, the lids are generally made of polypropylene because they need to be more flexible and resistant to fatigue than the containers themselves. Polypropylene is also used in diapers when manufactured to absorb water, as well as some under armor clothing and pocketed pages for trading card enthusiasts. It is even used in concrete mixes to delay cracking.

#6: Polystyrene

A more rigid plastic, it is used in some harder, more resistant products. It is used in laboratories to make test tubes and Petri dishes. In your home, your smoke detector, plastic dinnerware and CD jewel cases are all made of polystyrene.

#7: Special Purpose Plastics

This category contains all other types of plastic that are not nearly as common in households as the previous six. This category includes Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), which is used to make contact lenses as well as covers for rear tail lights on cars, and Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), better known as Teflon, for creating non-stick surfaces on pots and pans for cooking.

So if your recycling company only accepts certain types of plastic, you know specifically what to look for. While it may seem a little difficult at first to understand the different types of plastic, it will ultimately help you learn to recycle and help preserve the planet for a better future.

This post was originally posted here: Japan’s Rethink Of Energy: Lessons We Could All Learn

The Fukushima disaster has fallen off the international news radar somewhat, despite the fact that it still isn’t even over. Though not considered on par with the tragedy of Chernobyl, Fukushima has proven a very comprehensive disaster, only the second disaster classified ‘Level 7’ on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). All three of the reactors in service at the time of the 11th of March Earthquake have suffered Meltdown. In May we learnt that in the case of Reactor 1, that meltdown has been total and in June we learnt that the scenario may even be more serious still. ‘Melt-through’ is the new apocalyptic standard, descriptive of molten fuel burning through the core and its pressure vessels.

The Japanese Government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) have been widely criticised for their optimistic assessment of the disaster. After all, revelations of a Melt-through aren’t recent developments, they’re a reassessment of events within the first week of the disaster. The amount of radiation and contaminated material is similarly subject to continual upward revision. There have been around 80,000 people displaced by the disaster. Japan has consequently suspended its Nuclear expansion plans, long considered essential in a land heavily dependent on imports when sourcing fuels.

Fukushima revealed nothing new to the world about the dangers of Nuclear Power, but this hasn’t stopped governments taking a serious look at their policies. Germany is the biggest industrial power to ever announce a total withdrawal from Nuclear energy. The country’s eight oldest Nuclear power stations have now been taken permanently offline (all but one had been turned off in the wake of Fukushima). The remaining reactors (all built in the 1980s) will all be turned off by 2022. Germany has now made a commitment to renewable energy, having to replace about 25% of its power generating capability. Meanwhile, international analysts are now expecting Japan to commit enthusiastically to Solar and other renewable sources.

Change Starts With The Individual

But perhaps the most interesting effects on Energy aren’t happening on the macro level of policy, but at a household and more individual level. Japan’s energy demands cannot currently be met by its power output, especially as a number of nuclear reactors besides Fukushima were taken offline in the wake of the Earthquake. This has led to changes in the way that businesses and households operate.

Faced with the threat of (scheduled) power cuts, Tokyo has taken a number of actions that seem obvious, whilst flying the face of the selfish demands of modern life. Japan is famed for its vending machines, but it has been suggested that five million of them should be turned off in the summer months (and coffee is supposedly being used as biomass fuel in one steel plant). 24-hour shops are scaling back opening times, with people resigned to not being able to buy a pack of Pocky past midnight in the name of national spirit. Automatic doors have been propped open, neon lights dimmed and people are just generally more conscious of their surroundings. No more leaving the room and leaving the lights on whilst the TV chatters on to nobody in particular.

Air Conditioning is big in Japan, a nation renowned for its rapid and sustained urbanisation. In the summer months, temperatures soar, amplified by the glass and concrete of a thriving metropolis. August highs of 38 Celsius were recorded last year, and a similarly hot summer is expected this year. But the East Tokyo grid cannot currently tolerate thousands of Daikin air conditioning units running at once, so common sense solutions have to be found. The opening of windows in downtown Tokyo (or any metropolitan area in fairness) is the strange sight you’re typically greeted with at the moment. And other businesses are encouraging the nation’s typically conservatively dressed Salarymen to dress for warmer weathers, reportedly in Hawaii shirts and shorts. None of which seems to be helping one unfortunate NHK announcer.

At the root of these simple solutions is a simple truth that we often fail to acknowledge. Nations would need fewer Nuclear Power stations if they simply changed their energy habits permanently. And whilst we should certainly advocate a future where fossil fuels and dangerous nuclear power stations are replaced by truly green and renewable energy sources, surely the greenest alternative is to not generate power at all. Perhaps this is anti-progress, but it bares pointing out that not every convenience makes our lives better. Japan’s vending machines serve the interests of drinks companies  over and above the interests of the people who use them. And when people are forced to consider the bigger picture, they’ll do unremarkably sensible things for the common good.

Steph Wood is a blogger and copywriter currently writing for Air Options, a UK-based Air Conditioning Repair service.

This post was originally posted here: Top 10 Eco-Friendly Countries Of The World

With a number of polluted countries and cities, it would appear as though environmental consciousness hasn’t permeated into our society yet. That’s why the list of environmentally clean countries published by the Yale University’s Center for Environmental Law and Policy and the Columbia University’s Center for International Earth Science Information Network comes as a pleasant surprise. These two universities rank countries based on Environmental Performance Index (EPI), which evaluates individual policies pertaining to environmental health, climatic change, water resources, air pollution and productive natural resources, habitat and biodiversity.

10. FRANCE

European states account for 14 out of the 20 cleanest countries in the world, with France listing at # 10 given its green policy. The French government has taken various steps to keep the country green and clean despite climate change. France has taken the 1990 Kyoto Protocol to heart and is on its way to bringing down its greenhouse gas emission by 5.2%. Having closed its last coal mine in 1994, France now gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear power, which keeps carbon dioxide emissions at a low level.

France is bringing its green policy to fast effect by reducing dependency on plastic products, suspending commercial crops and researching new sources of energy.

09. COLOMBIA

Colombia is ranked as the second cleanest country in the world, and as the ninth cleanest state of the Americas. The country is now making major ecological strides after years spent on deforesting its great forests into illegal oil palm and cocoa plantations. Colombia supports all eco-friendly agricultural policies now, scoring 99.9 in the EPI index related to cropland policy. As per the policy, about 40% of agriculture areas should stay uncultivated in order to allow the soil to lie fallow.

Colombia has deemed unsafe for travel owing to drug violence, kidnappings and armed conflict. However, the country is now back on track, thanks to improved security. The abundant flora and fauna of Colombia calls out to travelers while the breathtaking glaciers, rainforests and lovely beaches act as tourist magnets.

08. LATVIA

Among the European Union states, Latvia is the only country with the lowest CO2 emission per capita. The country has its own CO2 filter with its 35,000 sq km of mires, peat bogs and forests. These natural sources convert carbon dioxide to biomass, a process known as CO2 sequestration. Latvia comes second to Sweden in its ecological policies to leverage renewable natural sources.

The capital of Latvia, Riga, is the cleanest city in Europe. Riga contains nearly half of Latvia’s total population but is still litter-free and neat.

07. NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand can stand improvement when it comes to emission-related issues. Its greenhouse gas emissions have gone up by 22% since 1990, mostly from its transport sector, which accounts for 19% of the total greenhouse gas output. However, New Zealand’s effective conservation index is much higher than other countries owing to the sheer bounty of its natural resources when juxtaposed with its sparse population. New Zealand’s coasts, lakes and mountains are protected by several environmental policies.

06. AUSTRIA

Austria has been facing a number of ecological problems in the last two decades, owing to its position of transit for other large European countries. Austrian highway traffic has gone up from the 1970 count of 600,000 vehicles a year to the 1990 reckoning of 10 million vehicles a year. 40% of Austria’s forest areas are damaged by acid rains and emissions as well.

The country has woken up to what’s happening to its natural treasures and is now implementing environmental protection policies. Half of Austria’s electricity now comes from hydropower. 62.89% of the electricity supply comes from renewable energy sources (hydropower, solar and biomass power plants and wind).

05. COSTA RICA

Costa Rica scored about 97 with regards to its policies for forestry, climate change and air pollution. The country has made great strides in the forestry area. Costa Rica’s main environmental issue till date has been deforestation, with the country’s forests disappearing at the rate of 2.3% a year till the country took charge.

Costa Rica is tentatively ranked 5th in the list eco-friendly countries in the world, even though its EPI index is lower than other countries. This is mainly because Costa Rica boasts of 6% of the world’s biodiversity. 25% of the country is a protected national park system for the preservation of wild flora and fauna.

04. FINLAND

Finland is considered a country of endless forests and lakes. Wild, remote and pure, 78% of the country is comprised of trees while natural lakes take up 10% of the remaining area. With only 5.3 million people who call Finland home, this least populated European Union country is spared of extensive contribution to general pollution.

The forests of Finland grow with a vengeance despite a thriving wood industry, owing to years of forestry research and environmental policies. Paper emissions are kept to a minimum in the country’s paper pulp plants by using filters. Drinking water is extremely pure and tasty as well in Finland. Finland still needs to work on its air pollution rates in order to conform to the limits of the Kyoto Protocol.

03. NORWAY

Norway has been touted as the best country in which to live and as one of the world’s richest and most peaceful locations. This beautiful, remote Scandinavian country with its many fjords and islands is placed at the top of the EPI eco list with an overall score of 93.1, similar to Sweden. Norway’s water quality, ozone levels and sanitation aspects score 100 of EPI. Most of Norway’s electricity is generated via hydro power plants.

With all this, Norway still does not meet the Kyoto Protocol levels for ecological friendliness. Norway plans to limit its greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 to conform to protocol levels.

02. SWEDEN

Sweden is a country that does not ignore environmental issues. With a 93.1 EPI score, Sweden, along with other Scandinavian neighbor Norway shares the runner-up position in the list of the world’s greenest countries. These two countries have thrown themselves heart and soul to preserve their natural treasures and environment.

Sweden has successfully met the Kyoto Protocol stands and is reckoned as the only Nordic nation to reduce its emissions. The Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) compared 57 countries responsible for 90% of the world’s annual carbon dioxide emission. It was found that Sweden implemented the most policies and put in the most effort when compared to others, to reduce the output of its greenhouse gases.

01. SWITZERLAND

Switzerland has a 95.5 EPI score despite its industrial, agricultural, transport and tourism-related pollutions. In the areas of water quality, sanitation, forestry and pesticide regulation, Switzerland scores a 100. This country is very active with anti-littering and recycling regulations. The quality of Swiss air is the best in all of Europe. This climate change sensitive Alpine country has successfully met all national and international commitments towards emission reduction.

Switzerland’s delicate mountainous and valley regions are particularly fragile and vulnerable to climate change, which necessitates much effort to protect the environment.  A great deal of Switzerland’s revenue comes from touristy and protecting its natural habitats is Switzerland’s way to keeping up the commercial advantage as well.

Marina Chernyak is living an eco-friendly life from last 2 years and runs online store of specialty products like etagere furniture, contemporary tables and lot more. She also likes to write about travelling to other countries like this deal to the Canary Islands. Right now you get good deals on Tenerife flights.

This post was originally posted here: Hydroponic Plant Cloners Continue Plant Legacies

Plant cloning has taken place for centuries, but recent years have shown improvements in the techniques used to generate new plants using older ones. For those wishing to learn how to go about cloning their very own plants, stay tuned, and get a glimpse of how hydroponic plant cloners work.

Some may not realize that plants often go through a cloning process as a natural part of their reproductive processes. Cloning is a form of asexual reproduction which provides the original plant with the opportunity to continue to live through their plant siblings. It bears to mention that not every cloned plant is suitable for continued growth or reproduction, nor are they all capable of producing clones.

Hydroponic plant cloners follow the same method that nature uses for reproducing in this manner. A portion of the plant becomes detached from the original plant. This takes place in nature when wind or other factors break a stem along with a leaf or two off of the plant. In the hydroponic system this is done deliberately by cutting a selected area of the plant from the plant.

This terminal growth point, made up of the stem and leaves, in nature will fall to the ground and become covered with debris or dirt. As time goes on it will develop roots and begin to grow into another mature plant. Many of us have seen people take cutting off of ivies and then place them into the soil where it begins to do the same thing that happens in nature. Hydroponic plant cloners use this same natural process only it is enhanced for better productivity.

There are other method that are used to clone plants, including; layering, budding, tissue culturing, division and grafting. Grafting has been used to create healthier fruit trees for centuries and many of our hybrid trees have been developed using this method.

For those interested in using hydroponic plant cloners, there are a few things that you should know before attempting this method of propagation in order to make it as successful as it can be.

1. Make the cutting as quickly and cleanly as possible and do it at a 45 degree angle. This angle will allow you to engage as much surface as possible when encouraging new roots without damaging the stem.
2. All materials used in this process should be sterile including the blade that is used to make the cut.
3. The growth media that you will be using to start your new plant in should be soaked before hand in a nutrient solution. Your new cutting should be dipped into growth hormones prior to placing the stem into the media.
4. Do not bend the stems as you are inserting them into the growth media to prevent damage that could cause the cloning attempt to fail.

Hydroponic plant cloners are a valuable asset to those who wish to continue producing the same quality plants that have proven to be successful in the past. Whether that cloning process is intended to continue the beauty of a particular plant or the heartiness for harsh climate, cloning is a great way to continue a legacy.

Alexandru Chiuariu, Web Content Copywriter for Our Crazy Deals, providing webcopy and articles on the company’s Hydroponic Plant Cloners and special GroClone Hydroponic Cloner offers.

This post was originally posted here: Mormons Going Green With Solar Powered Chapels

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints, known to the uninitiated as Mormons are very proud of their new solar powered meetinghouse. They rolled out the new pilot program and hopes that it will eventually be the standard for all the meetinghouses worldwide.  Of all the religions practiced in the United States the Mormons have been the ones historically associated with environmentalism.  One of the tenants taught by Joseph Smith that is was not good to kill animals unless you were using them for food. Brigham Young regularly admonished them to not waste the Lord’s natural resources.

It is only natural that they have responded to a world that is dangerously close to depleting the resources, with a nod toward a more sustainable source of energy.  In keeping with the edicts handed down by founding members, these solar powered chapels should have a significant impact on energy usage.  They have even installed in the library a monitoring system so members can see in real time their savings. This system tells the congregation, in plain English how many hair dryers, light bulbs and refrigerators the energy saved would operate.  They can see for themselves the impact they are having on the world at large.

The usage of solar energy falls in line with the LDS doctrines. They teach that everything belongs to God and we are only borrowing it. As we are not owners of this planet, we should do all within our power to be good stewards of its resources. Moreover the LDS church teaches its members that God gave the people all that they need and some to spare. Any shortage is due to our own folly and misuse. There are more than 17000 Mormon chapels’ in the world, which is going to mean a lot of work for people retrofitting the old churches and constructing the new ones.

The LEED certified structures features solar panels low water landscaping and high tech insulation. In an attempt to conserve water they also include an environmentally friendly irrigation system as well. Where this will lead is anybody’s guess. We have to stand up and applaud the effort to save energy for the future use of generations to come.

The Mormon Church, in its own quiet and unobtrusive way, will have given its seal of approval to the creation care movement and set a great example, not only for its members but for the world in general. Green is the new way of the world and everyone is jumping into the fray. Today the LDS Church, tomorrow who knows, maybe even the Whitehouse.

Pat Lindles co-owns a metal decking company locatad in Atlanta, GA.  Whether he is working with coming up with new steel decking layouts, drinking his favorite glass of Syrah, or playing baseball with his kids, Pat is always thinking of new ways to help keep our planet green.

This post was originally posted here: 40 Million Reasons a Year to Recycle Your Used Electronics, and 6 Ways to Do It

In the last 20 years, electronics have become must-have accessories, means of contact and requirements for work. Cell phones, for example, are currently in use by 60 percent of the world’s population. That’s approximately 4 billion cell phones all over the world. They are, quite simply, everywhere. So, the most important thing you can do for the environment this year may be the recycling and safe disposal of your used electronics. And it’s probably simpler to do than you think.

The primary problem with e-cycling is that information to help guide individuals and businesses on how to do it efficiently and with minimal impact is not easily available. No government recycling program exists, yet the problem of e-waste is growing every day by the tons.

According to Elizabeth Grossman, author of “High Tech Trash; Digital Devices, Hidden Toxics and Human Health”, three billion electronics products are currently in use in the US alone, with an annual turnover of 400 million items. And increasingly, consumer technologies such as personal computers and televisions are being improved at lightning speed, only encouraging a turnover increase. And here’s the deal—cell phones, televisions and tablet computers all contain heavy metals and toxic chemicals such as copper, gold, lead, nickel, antimony, zinc, beryllium, tantalum, mercury, arsenic and coltan. All are toxic when leached into soil and groundwater.

Now, one cell phone won’t do any serious damage within a landfill. But since only ten percent of cell phones are recycled, 40 million phones end up thrown in the garbage every year. That means they end up in the garbage dump, where in that amount all those metals and chemicals inside pack an environmental wallop, which in turn affects us. Health concerns such as cancer, birth defects, brain afflictions and damage to the nervous, reproductive, digestive, lymphatic and immune systems have been linked to these toxics.

Is there a solution?

Yes. RenovoData Services wants to help you find a way to e-cycle that is quickest, and the best fit for your home or business. So we’ve collected some information on e-cycling, and some other suggestions for used electronics.

1) Donate your computer, cell phone or other electronic item for reuse if you can. Some organizations can take care of that for you, including RenovoData Services, if you’re in Minnesota’s Twin Cities metro area. Other larger groups include the National Cristina Foundation and the World Computer Exchange

2) Contact an e-steward in your state to refurbish and repurpose your used computer. Not all recyclers actually recycle electronics, so be on the lookout—some send them to developing nations for dangerous extractions of metals, or simply for dumping. For a reputable recycler that actually recycles, click here.

3) If you can’t find an e-steward in your state, check out the manufacturer’s take-back program. Many will recycle your old products for free, though they don’t offer much information about how they do it. Some offer trade-in value or money back. Click here for a list of manufacturer take-back programs.

4) If you’re still having trouble finding a convenient location, contact Best Buy or Staples about their recycling programs.

5) Recycling your cell phone may be the easiest kind of electronics recycling to do, since most manufacturers take them back by mail. Another option is Capstone Wireless,  which offers a buyback program for used cell phones made by a range of companies. Also Call2Recycle takes old cell phones for free recycling.

6) Lastly, cell phone battery recycling is important too. RBRC—the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation—takes cell phones and their batteries, and has drop spots throughout the country.

Author

Frank Gustafson is the CEO and Founder of RenovoData Services a Minneapolis computer and electronics recycling firm with a Zero Landfill Guarantee. RenovoData Services offers businesses responsible end of life IT solutions while also ensuring the destruction of confidential data through hard drive shredding.

This post was originally posted here: Investors in Renewable Energy Must Accept Long-Term Payoff Horizons

The price of oil crossed the psychological barrier of “$100/barrel” in April, and, as it continues to rise, so do the hopes for renewable energy initiatives. It is a foregone conclusion that our world must break away from its dependence on fossil fuels as its primary source for energy, but in the absence of a clearly defined global strategy, the effort will take decades to reach material success. In the meantime, there are sectors within this space where opportunities can produce results in shorter timeframes, but the consensus is that renewables will eventually yield double-digit gains on all fronts.
John Doerr, a highly respected Silicon Valley investment executive, believes that renewables could become as lucrative as previous examples in both bio and information technology. In 2006, he observed that, “The field of greentech could be the largest economic opportunity of the twenty-first century. There’s never been a better time than now to start or accelerate a greentech venture.”

Since this simple statement from years back, billions have been invested in this field by venture capitalists, major energy giants like Exxon Mobil, government entities, and individual investors alike. The nature of publicly announced venture deals over the past few quarters is indicative of investor activity in this sector as illustrated in the following diagram:

Solar has been the primary sub-sector to gain recent attention during this period of global economic recovery, but Bio-energy and Wind also have increasing interest. The renewables sector, however, is not all about early development companies. The industry has come of age in the last decade, as evidenced by the rise of many mutual and exchange-traded fund offerings dedicated to this industry on both a domestic and global level. Many “Green” companies actually outperformed the S&P 500 index gain in 2009 of 28.8%, many by a wide margin, but the recession and a drop in oil prices by 50% have retarded performance over the past year or more.

In today’s market situation, concerns exist that higher oil prices might also curb economic recovery efforts in the world’s largest economy, the United States. Speculation may have driven commodity prices higher over the past six months, and a correction has been long over due. This “rocky” scenario is also tethered to the strength of the Dollar in the forex market. The greenback recently hit a new 3-year low, but has apparently found a new support level. Investing in renewables, however, is more a long-term proposition than a forum for those with a trader’s mentality.

Long-term growth is assured due to these varied reasons:

1. Today’s cost for leading sources of energy is continually rising;
2. Fossil fuel sources are declining at an increasing rate;
3. Environmental costs loom large on the horizon;
4. Emerging economies are putting increased stress on the global demand for energy;
5. Large corporations, governments, and the venture capital industry have all made enormous investments in this industry.

Renewables are destined for success, but investors must keep a long-term perspective.

Bi Line: Tom Cleveland is a market analyst for Forex Traders, an online resource for the forex market and forex brokers.

This post was originally posted here: Why Consider Commercial Greenhouses?

The most common misconception about commercial greenhouses – or any greenhouse, for that matter – is that these are covered places with hot and humid temperatures maintained on a 24/7 basis.

• Such idea comes from the name greenhouse that evokes images of a sweltering earth as well as the appearance of perspiration on the walls of the structure.
• There are two ways to come about starting your own commercial greenhouse garden, you can buy one or learn how to build a greenhouse using commercial greenhouse plans.

Cooling Is Key to Growth

But this idea is far from the truth.

• Commercial solar greenhouses are actually equipped with mid-sized to large cooling systems, which are designed to ensure that the interior of the structure is sufficiently cool during the day and warm at night.
• Keep in mind that too hot and too cold environments are detrimental to the growth of most plants cultivated in commercial quantities inside the greenhouse.

Various methods are used to ensure that such a delicate balance of warmth and cool can be maintained inside the structures, of which the most common way is through vents.

• The general rule is that the larger the greenhouse, the warmer the climate and the more tropical the plants, the more vents, shutters and other cooling measures must be in place.
• Another way is to buy commercial glass greenhouses, which can be dangerous if shattered, and are generally more expensive.

Also, commercial greenhouses are not completely covered from the outside world since fresh air is also necessary for the plants to thrive. Oxygen must be introduced from natural sources, which only the atmosphere can provide in sufficient levels.

So, when you are considering the establishment of a greenhouse, be it commercial in scope or residential in scale, be sure to factor in the ways with which to effectively keep the structure cool.

• Besides, you don’t want to work too long in an environment that mimics the Sahara Desert or the North Pole, do you?

Cooling Options for Commercial Greenhouse Structures at Your Fingertips:

Speaking of the ways to keep cool in the greenhouse, experts and manufacturers of these structures have come up with numerous methods to achieve the purpose.

• These choices can be categorized into the manual, electronic and solar types to denote the kind of power needed to put these methods into actual operation.
• Your choice will often be a combination of all three ostensibly to take advantage of existing technology, to save on utility costs and to make gardening tasks easier on your body.

A few of the choices for a commercial greenhouse cooling system include:

1. Roof vents are widely considered the best of all types of ventilation systems since these serve as an escape route for stale air while also providing for the entrance of cool air intake.
2. Side venting can be achieved by glass louvers, which will provide for greater levels of cool during the warmer seasons.
3. Shade cloths and other screening materials are used to provide additional but removable shade to the greenhouse. These sources of additional shade are particularly helpful during the warm summer and spring months.
4. Exhaust fans are also useful in cooling the commercial greenhouse, but not all greenhouses will require these fans. Plants that do require exhaust fans are specialty crops like chrysanthemums, orchids and other tropical flowers with the ideal air exchange rate being one complete air exchange per minute.
5. Barrels filled with water can disperse warm air into the structure at night.

If you are in doubt about the best cooling system for your commercial greenhouse, it’s always best to ask the professionals. Otherwise, you may be looking at a season’s worth of ruined crops.

Whitney Segura is an expert in greenhouse gardening and is the founder and owner of one of the largest distributors of greenhouse kits in the United States, including a full line of high quality commercial greenhouses, professional hobby greenhouses, portable greenhouses, hydroponics equipment, compost bins, and other greenhouse accessories.

This post was originally posted here: Will Our Topsoil Disappear?

Soil is arguably, our most precious natural resource. Without it we will not only be unable to grow vital food produce, but our plants will die, ceasing production of oxygen.

Yet scarily, recent reports have cited that our topsoil, the uppermost and most nutrient rich layer of our earths soil, is depleting, and could be obsolete in as few as sixty years.

Our topsoil is depleting as a result of overuse of fertilisers and ploughing, unsustainable farming practices (for example, burning land as a way of eliminating weeds) as well as poor erosion control. What’s more, all of these factors, and their impact on our topsoil, are believed to be enhanced by the effects of global warming.

In order for the topsoil to regenerate, the plants must collect minerals from the lower layers of soil and bring them to the upper layers. This is the ‘recycling’ of nutrients and it is vital to the continued regeneration of our topsoil. However, modern farming practices make this increasingly difficult, and we are slowly (yet increasingly quickly) seeing a decline amount of the earth’s topsoil. The reduction of ploughing and time in which the soil is left to lie fallow are also both integral – yet our desire for a constant abundance of food makes this significantly difficult.

Recent studies discovered that Australian soil is being lost five times faster than it is able to regenerate through natural processes.  Yet this is only the beginnings of the problem – soil in the United States is being lost 10 times faster than it can regenerate European soil, 17 times faster, and the soil in China, an astounding 57 times faster.

The more worrying thing is that even if all necessary processes are followed, it could still take decades to make a difference, and the rate at which we are losing soil may still outweigh the rate at which it is regenerated.

However, ensuring our gardens benefit from quality topsoil is currently, not of any real concern. At the moment, we are able to purchase high quality, organic and nutrient rich topsoil from most good agricultural suppliers. However, this does not mean that we shouldn’t consider the impact our actions have on global warming, and how this will affect the future condition of our earths topsoil.

But what can we do to help preserve our topsoil?

By only buying organic food, we can encourage a huge difference in the regeneration of topsoil in the future, since the practices involved in organic farming do not have the same agricultural impact as methods using pesticides and chemical fertilisers.

It would also benefit the earth greatly if consumers as well as our food producers and supermarkets could learn to reduce waste. Not only do vast amounts of fruits and vegetables get thrown away simply because they don’t fit within a certain cosmetic specification, many more end up rotting in bins behind supermarkets or in the bottom draws of our fridges. Yet if we simply learned how to not waste food then we would need to grow less food in the first place – thereby incurring less impact on the topsoil.

We can also do more to grow our own food, thereby reducing some of the impact incurred on land that is used and reused on a constant basis.

This post was written by James Harper on behalf of Boughton Loam and Turf Management. James writes on a number of subjects including sutainability and envirionmental issues.

This post was originally posted here: Why Even Climate Change Skeptics Should Go Solar

As most people know, solar panels harvest energy from the sun and convert it into a usable form to power any number of electronic items. While many people think of this technology as a part of the ‘green’ movement from the global warming crowd, the idea of getting solar energy from solar panels has been since 1839.
The technology has advanced a great deal the early days and now solar panels using discrete cell technology can work at 30% efficiency and convert the sun’s energy directly into electricity we can use.

Whether or not you believe that global warming is an issue, we can all see the effects of pollution from coal mining and oil drilling. These actions tend to have a negative impact on our environment and on the quality of air we breath every day and the water we drink. The quest for fossil fuels also has a negative effect on our water supply, through oil spills and seepage of dangerous chemicals from drill sites. Solar energy has the potential to reduce our dependence on these expensive and often dangerous methods of producing electricity. Even the most hardened anti-environmentalist can appreciate improving the quality of life for the people in these most affected areas.
There are compelling financial reasons to go solar as well. The electric bill is one of the largest costs each month or quarter for the average family in an developed country. Installing solar panels can slash this bill and in some cases even eliminate it entirely. If your panels produce more energy than you need, you may even begin receiving a payment each month from the electric company for the extra energy you put into the grid. This passive income goes directly into your pocket and will continue for as long as you maintain your solar panels. Most good solar panel installation should last 20 years or so. Many people are off put by the start up costs of solar, but this form of clean energy will continue paying for itself for many years to come.

Government rebates and tax breaks for solar panel users are available in many countries as well to help you lower the cost of initial installation. Depending on which country and state you live in, selling your kilowatts back into the grid can be paid a feed-in tariff, This is the rate per kilowatt that you will get paid. A gross feed-in tariff will pay you for every kWh you produce, often at a higher rate than you would have to buy them back at. A net feed-in tariff, on the other hand, pays you for every kWh over those that you use – its the left over that you get paid on so the incentive is on people to produce more via solar and trim down usage at the same time.

David is the founder of Solar Panel Free Quotes, a startup in Australia that gets homeowners and businesses quotes from 3 local solar panel installers putting them in the best spot to pick a solar power system at a price they can afford.

This post was originally posted here: The Massage Industry in the US

In the US, the massage industry is one industry that appears to be flourishing in every state. Because of its wide ranging health benefits, it is a very popular and lucrative industry. There are a number of factors that affect the massage industry ranging from consumer practices and demands to new health trends. Every year, the American Massage Therapy Association (AMTA) gathers and analyzes data from such sources as consumer surveys, clinical studies, massage therapist surveys, and government statistics, in order to get an overview of the current state of the massage industry in the US.

Through their analysis, the AMTA has been able to gain valuable insight into the state of the massage industry in the US. The AMTA estimates that in 2010, “massage therapy was a $12-17 billion industry. It also estimated that there are 280,000 to 320,000 massage therapists and massage school students in the United States. Between July 2009 and July 2010, roughly 48 million adult Americans (18 percent) had a massage at least once. And today, there are nearly 90,000 nationally certified massage therapists and body-workers.”  As well, according to the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2010 Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, “employment for massage therapists is expected to increase 19 percent from 2008 to 2018, faster than average for all occupations.”

2010 and 2009 AMTA Consumer Surveys revealed the following: “86 percent agree that massage can be effective in reducing pain. 85 percent agree that massage can be beneficial to health and wellness.” Because an overwhelming number of consumers view massage therapy as an important part of achieving health and wellness, the massage industry is one industry that is showing no signs of slowing down.

This post was originally posted here: Peak Oil Could Boost Demand For Short Term Car Insurance

The World Will Run Out of Oil By 2036.

The number of hybrid and all electric vehicles on the horizon is a sign of the auto industry’s response to the inevitable consequences of peak oil production.  The more optimistic estimates forecast that to be 2020 or later while pessimists suggest that the peak has already occurred.  Saudi reserves may not as bountiful as they are supposedly thought to be!  A leaked Wikileaks cable from a diplomat working for the Bush administration indicated that the US was alerted to the fact that that oil reserves in Saudi Arabia were likely to have been “overestimated” as early as 2007.   Former Executive Vice President for Exploration and Production at Saudi Armco, Dr. Sadad al-Husseini allegedly believes that Aramco’s reserves are overstated by as much as 300 billion barrels!

By al-Husseini’s calculations, approximately 116 billion barrels of oil have been produced by Saudi Arabia, meaning only 64 billion barrels remain before the 50% depletion tipping point of proven reserves is reached and  a slow but steady output decline follows. He believes that a global oil output plateau will be reached in the next five to 10 years and will last some 15 years, until world oil production begins to decline.   What is undeniable is at some point in the not too distant future (2036 by Husseini’s reckoning) there won’t be enough of the black stuff left to squander by burning it as fuel for individual personal transportation.  At least, not at a price most of us would be willing or able to pay!

Other measures that don’t rely on technological fixes to peak oil have been progressively introduced and will probably gain more ground.  Car pooling or car sharing is one approach that is relatively easy to implement and might well boost the demand for short term car insurance as well.  A Minimum numbers of passenger/drivers (in a hybrid, electric or conventional vehicle) could share fuel costs and use bus lanes or dedicated car pool lanes to speed their journey.  Using some form of temporary car insurance is a supremely flexible solution to covering a changing number of drivers who can use a pooled vehicle to make a regular commute.

The idea of a group of friends or colleagues clubbing together to buy a hybrid or electric  vehicle or get one on contract hire and share the monthly cost is also attractive.   While one named driver would have to be the main insured person, 1 day insurance, which actually runs from one to 28 days, could be put in place for the remaining pool drivers.  This would not only be far cheaper than adding several names to the main policyholder’s schedule, but would also allow for last minute replacements should one of the regular pool members be ill or drop out for any reason.   The other benefit is that any no claims bonus on the named individual’s regular policy is fully protected, no matter what happens with the pooled car. Of course, after 2036, they’d be best clubbing together for that pony and trap – assuming the fusion-powered hovercar hasn’t arrived yet.

The author, Kat Cole, is a car owner and works for a company that offers short term car insurance as well as one day car insurance policies

This post was originally posted here: Plugin-In-Car Grant in the UK

The government funded Plug-In Car Grant in the UK has stuttered into action with just three vehicles qualifying for the 25 per cent discount.
The Plug-In Car Grant will allow consumers to claim a quarter of the list price of their chosen EV back, up to the cost of £5,000 and to qualify the cars must have sub-75g/km CO2 emissions.
Currently that means just three cars are eligible for the Plug-In Car Grant; two of which are the same car merely rebadged by their parent brands.
The eligible motors consist of the Mitsubishi i-MiEV and the Peugeot iOn – which share the same design platform and technology – and the Smart fortwo electric drive.
The auspicious start was ignored by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) Chief Executive, Paul Everitt who instead focussed on the potential of the grant:
“The transition to ultra-low carbon vehicles is a great opportunity for the UK motor industry. The Plug-In Car Grant will support the delivery of practical, low carbon vehicles and we will see further progress of new and conventional technologies in the years ahead.”
The benefits of the grant are obvious with the list price of the Mitsubishi i-MiEV standing at £29,000 the electric city car could be available for £24,000 if bought in cooperation with the grant.
The Plug-In Car Grant has been overshadowed by the recent VAT hike and revised London congestion charges, but attention is set to switch to the government funded scheme as the number of eligible vehicles triples over the course of the next year to nine.
Headlining that list is the Nissan Leaf; the 2010 European Car of the Year winner, the Vauxhall Ampera; already released in America under the Chevrolet Volt moniker and the Tata Vista.
As a result, the grant looks set to be a slow-burning process as opposed to the immediate effects of previous government interventions like 2009/2010’s Scrappage scheme incentive.

About the author:
Ant Bradshaw is currently working for Askaprice.com, the UK’s leading car quotation website. As well as providing customers with the best deals around, Askaprice.com can provide you with all the latest news and reviews from the car industry as well as having great information on a range of car manufacturers and models and allowing users to compare car prices online.
For the best Nissan Leaf quotes, visit Askaprice.com.

This post was originally posted here: Who Pays For UK’s Alternative Energy Future?

The Lib-Tory coalition government plans to fix prices for electricity in an effort to persuade the private sector to invest in new, alternative, and low-carbon forms of energy generation.  The aim of this price guarantee is to ensure the UK has the electricity generating capacity it needs while still meeting climate change targets.   About a quarter of the ageing coal fired and nuclear power stations will reach the end of their operational life in the next ten years.  Roughly half will have to go due tightening environmental regulations and many of Britain’s ageing nuclear plants have simply got to be decommissioned and shut down.

The government wants industry to build a new generation of power plants using low-carbon alternative technologies including renewable sources like wind, hydro or tidal, nuclear and clean coal and gas.  Those private investors will expect some form of return on this investment, so a range of incentives will give those same investors the certainty they say they need.    All forms of low carbon generation (including nuclear) will benefit from a feed-in tariff with long contracts and a guaranteed price for the electricity produced.  There would be extra support for what are described as younger technologies like offshore wind and wave power but the government maintains that there will be no specific subsidy for the nuclear industry.   Dis-incentives are also in place, such as support for the carbon price which will make it expensive to generate power using coal.  An emissions performance target should also put the brakes on any new coal-fired electricity generation schemes.    This new framework has been described as a once-in-a-generation chance to set energy policy for the next 20 years, promoting renewable power generation rather than the high-carbon alternatives.  For once, both the politicians and the regulator (Ofgem) admit that there will be a cost involved in doing all this and guess who will pay for it?

Ofgem has estimated that bills could rise by as much as 25% over the coming decade while the price comparison website uSwitch reckons that domestic energy bills will rise by £500 a year.  Even the Secretary of State, Chris  Huhne, has come clean by admitting that the average electricity bill of £500 a year would rise by £160 a year over the next two decades (although he claims that the increase  would be £190 a year if nothing is done).  There is no alternative?   Probably not in the short to medium term, but within 20 years ITER should come on line.  This is an experimental Tokomak fusion reactor which uses magnetic confinement to control the hot plasma and is scheduled to be built in 2018.  It’s hoped ITER will be the first such device to break even by getting more energy out than is put in.   Nuclear fusion has many theoretical advantages over nuclear fission.    It’s most definitely low carbon and has the potential to produce more energy.  We would have a virtually inexhaustible supply of fuel from deuterium in seawater and unlike present day atomic fission plants, fusion produces no nuclear waste products.

ITER is experimental and it will take several years of testing using hydrogen before slowly moving to a deuterium and tritium mix that should achieve full power.    If successful, the next step would be prototype fusion power plant maybe around 2030. Proving that fusion is entirely safe and economically viable would be the final and perhaps most difficult step.

Another potential route to nuclear fusion is Inertial Confinement which uses multiple lasers fired on a pellet of deuterium and tritium to heat the fuel to the necessary high temperature for fusion chain reactions to take place.    Two facilities pursuing this method of achieving fusion are the National Ignition Facility operating now in California and Laser Mégajoule (LMJ) which is planned for France in 2012.  Inertial confinement is much less efficient than Tokomak magnetic confinement, but a “fast ignition” device called  HiPER  is in the planning phase and should be ready around 2020.

Author Byline:

The author, Allan Bisset, works for an Internet marketing company that has multiple clients in the energy, technology and financial sectors providing products and services such as spread betting

This post was originally posted here: Green Changes in the Works for the 2022 Olympics

The United States Olympic Committee USOC is not only looking to further the athletic accomplishments but make sustainable environmental changes to the Winter Games. And with the bid for the 2022 games being award in 2015, they must move fast with their efforts. This began with naming Andrew Liveris and Dow Chemical the worldwide partner in the Olympics for the next decade.

As fantastic and unifying as the Olympics are, it’s quite a carbon-rich event. So while these changes may only seem minor, they’re actually a huge deal. It has been estimated that over 2/3 of the carbon emissions from the event is a result of some of the 1.5+ million attendees traveling (mostly via airplane) to and from the event.

CEO Andrew Liveris and USOC members are looking to do more by basing off of the services used in Beijing and double that impact.  The 2008 Summer Games, held in Beijing, made great efforts to showcase conservation practices and sustainable energy sources and helped begin a process of making the Olympics more green. Exactly what environmentally friendly services did the Olympic facilities feature?

• Solar power – Used to light lawns, courtyards and streets at several venues, including the Olympic Village. A 130 KW photovoltaic system illuminated The National Stadium, where events such as athletics and football were held.
• Water Conservation – Waste water collected from the Qinghe sewage treatment plant was filtered and used for the various heating and cooling needs throughout the Olympics site, yielding a 60% savings in electricity. Rainwater was collected from around the grounds, collecting over 75,000 gallons by using water permeable bricks, pipes and wells installed on roofs, roads and green areas.
• Natural Light – Remember the famous ‘Water Cube’ where the aquatic events were held? The walls of the National Aquatics Centre provided natural light, and for the interior of the building, specially designed ‘beam-pipes’ funneled sunlight into corridors, toilets and car parks at venues, including the Olympic Green.
• Recycling – The 2008 Olympic hosts aimed for a 50 per cent recycling of waste including paper, metals and plastics at venues. A modest expectation, considering that a test run carried out during the 11th World Softball Championships held in 2007, achieved a nearly 90 per cent recycling rate.

The 2008 Olympics made great improvements in making the event more environmentally sound and had great new ways of filtration and insulation for the events. However that vision has progressed to include dozens of other products which will help reduce waste and promote conservation. You can expect these products to appear at the coming events over the next decade and be a part of the USOC recommendations.

Co-written by Nerissa Barry and Daniel Fielding

This post was originally posted here: DOD Plans to Tap Renewable Energy for National Defense

This post was originally posted here: How nuclear waste is stored

All power stations, including nuclear power stations, produce a certain amount of waste. The nuclear power industry takes full responsibility for their waste and the cost of dealing with it is factored into the cost of its product, electricity.

Nuclear waste is all radioactive to some extent. 90% of waste is classed as low-level and contains small amounts of short-lived radioactivity. Although fairly harmless, low-level waste is still disposed of carefully in landfill sites. It is produced by industry, hospitals and the nuclear power industry and typically contains cleaning equipment, paper, tools and other apparatus that has been exposed to radioactivity.

7% of nuclear waste is classed as intermediate-level waste which may contain higher levels of radiation and can need special shielding. It is produced by the nuclear fuel cycle and by decommissioning nuclear reactors. It may be solidified in concrete before disposal. Short-lived intermediate-level waste is often buried in shallow landfill sites, longer-lived waste is stored deep underground.

High-level nuclear waste comprises only 3% of all nuclear waste but contains 95% of the entire radioactivity. It contains high levels of long-lived radioactivity and comes from the core of a nuclear reactor. Before it can be stored it needs to be cooled and requires specially sealed containers for transportation. These containers prevent any radiation from leaking out and also have to be impervious to damage in case of accidents.

The final disposal of high-level waste is delayed for up to 50 years. During this time the waste is stored in canisters which are kept in special ponds or in dry concrete structures. This allows its radioactivity to decay and when it is finally buried, the waste will only have around a 1000th of its original radioactivity. It is then stored deep underground in a stable geological structure and will be safe to handle in around 1000 years’ time. This process is called geological disposal.

To ensure that no radioactivity escapes during this time, the waste is immobilised in an insoluble matrix and sealed in a corrosion-resistant container which is often made from stainless steel. If there is any groundwater found in the structure these containers are then surrounded by clay. The whole structure is then stored deep underground in a stable rock structure for 1000 years. The use of this multi-barrier method reduces the chances of any radioactive leakage to almost zero as all of the barriers would need to fail before radiation levels had fallen to safe levels.

In the future we may see the introduction of ocean-based disposal of high-level waste. This may include burying it underneath a remote man-made or natural island. Or maybe burying it in a subduction zone (subduction being the process by which one tectonic plate moves under another tectonic plate, sinking deeper into the Earth as the plates converge and taking the waste with it), or burying it underneath a stable abyssal plain (an underwater plain on the deep ocean floor, usually found at depths of 3000 to 6000 metres).

This post was originally posted here: North Carolina scientists reveal how water based ‘artificial leaf’ produces electricity

Did you know that a North Carolina State University staff has demonstrated that water gel-based solar devices (named: “artificial leaves”) can act like solar cells to generate electricity?

The study has been released on-line in the Journal of Materials Chemistry by Doctor. Orlin Velev, an Invista Professor of Chemical and Bio-molecular Engineering.

The findings prove the concept for making solar cells that more closely simulate nature. They also have the potential to be less expensive and more beneficial to our environment than the existing standard silicon based solar cells.

The bendable products are composed of water-based gel infused using light-sensitive molecules (like plant chlorophyll) coupled with electrodes coated by carbon components, such as carbon nanotubes or graphite.

Graphene is the simple structural element of a number of carbon allotropes including graphite, carbon nanotubes and fullerenes. Graphene is a one-atom thick planar sheet of carbon atoms that are largely packed in a honeycomb crystal lattice. The name comes from graphite ene; graphite itself consists of several graphene sheets piled together.

The light-sensitive molecules get “excited” by the sun’s rays to create electricity, similar to plant molecules that get excited to synthesize sugars in order to grow.

Dr. Velev states that the study team hopes to be able to “learn how to mimic the materials by which nature harnesses solar energy.” Although man made light-sensitive molecules can be used, Velev says naturally extracted products, like chlorophyll, are also effortlessly integrated in these products because of their own water-gel matrix.

Velev even imagines a future in which rooftops could be covered with soft sheets of similar energy-generating synthetic-leaf sun cells. The concept of biochemically inspired ‘soft’ products for generating electricity may possibly in the future provide an alternative for the present-day solid-state technologies.

About the Author: C. J. Mcguire is currently writing for the <a href=”http://www.solarwaterfountains.org/”>solar fountains for the garden</a> blog, her personal hobby web log focused on recommendations to help homeowners to spend much less energy with solar energy.

Reference: Aqueous soft matter based photovoltaic or pv devices. Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011; DOI: http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2011/JM/c0jm01820a

This post was originally posted here: 1411- Becoming an alarming number

1411…1411…This is the talk of the town nowadays. From a good fat figure of 40,000, presently it has come to 1411. You are wondering what this number is about. This is the number which is indicating the sooner extinction of the tiger community in India.

Pug mark census in 2002, said that there were 3642 tigers but this was reduced to 1411 in 2008. There are 37 tiger sanctuaries in India but 17 of them are in the verge of losing the tigers. Serious efforts are to be made to conserve the tigers.

Tiger is not only a wild animal but a species that maintains the ecological balance.

WWF-India is making serious efforts to maintain, protect and also restore some of the species and their habitats.

Some steps have to be taken to protect the tigers:

1. People must be made aware of the reduction in the number of tigers.
2. They must be encouraged to conserve them.
3. Those living near the tiger habitats must be provided alternative livelihoods in some other place.
4. The Forest Departments must be vested with more powers to control poaching of the tigers.
5. Proper and effective measures have to be framed to conserve the tigers and their habitats.
6. Support from all the sectors have to be gathered to protect them.
7. The tourists have to be responsible and should not aim to harm the animal for their pleasure.
8. The citizens must be equally responsible in reporting any poaching or illegal trade of the animal to the respective authorities which will check such acts.

Remember if you are saving one tiger, you are protecting 100sq.km of area and other species living in the area. You are not only saving the National Animal but also the life span of the humans because the nature’s balance will be maintained if the tigers are alive and other ecological requirements like fresh and clean air, water, temperature regulation and pollination etc will be available to the mankind.

Let’s allow our children and the coming generations to remember the tigers.

This post was originally posted here: New York Green Police

The New York City has now been armed by a fleet of 20 cops who also has a nick name the “Green police”. They are an extension to the concerns that the Department of Environmental Conservation had related to the different violations that people in the New York City made related to the established laws for a green city.

There are lots of rights that the Green police have. In case you are driving a vehicle that is noncompliant with the emission norms of the city then in that case the Green police in the city have all the rights to ask you to pull over. They are responsible for the maintenance and upholding of the emission norms of the city. You need not under estimate them they are well equipped with the exhaust measuring gauges and in case you are caught by one of them, may god help you. Also you ought to be careful about disposal of the garbage from your homes. As the said band of the green police is also on a watch for the disposal of the wastes which should not be discarded openly.

Not only that, they do have all the rights to inspect the food vendors in the city. Just to ensure that they have been maintaining proper standards. Also they would be totally responsible to ensure that these vendors are following the conservation laws those have been implemented by the state. The green police would make sure that the food vendors are following the conservation laws. The green police ought to make sure that the food vendors are not dealing in any of the fishes which are protected under the conservation laws, apart from that they would also be required to confirm that these vendors are not dealing in the shellfishes which are not to be traded in from specific states.

On a whole the Green Police is supposed to take care of all the things in the New York City and ensure greenness of the city is maintained in the city. But what is more important is that no matter what the Green police does, end of the day its your city and its more of your responsibility to ensure that your city is green.

This post was originally posted here: Carbon Footprint

The measure of the effect of our activities on the environment is called Carbon Footprints, particularly on climate change. It is directly related to the amount of greenhouse gases produced through the burning of fossil fuels which is used for electricity, transportation, heating, etc.
This is basically a measurement of individually produced greenhouse gases and is equivalent to tons of carbon dioxide.

Carbon Footprint is primarily made up of primary footprint and secondary footprint.

Primary Footprint
Primary Footprint is a measure of carbon dioxide which is directly emitted by the burning of fossil fuels. This includes domestic energy consumption and transportation.

Secondary Footprints
This is a measure carbon dioxide which is indirectly emitted from the lifecycle of products which are used.

Carbon emission is the term used to refer to the production of gases that go into the atmosphere and warms it. This is emitted by many greenhouses which is measured by converting them to equal quantity of carbon dioxide needed to produce similar warming effect. They trap the heat sent from the Earth’s surface. Sunlight can directly pass through it. It slowly and steadily increases the Earth’s temperature and drives global warming.

Carbon emission comes from the burning of fossil fuels which are used as a cheap mode of energy. Besides fossils fuels burning, carbon is also emitted from agriculture use such as greenhouses which emits carbon dioxide. About 26 billion tons of carbon dioxide is emitted every year and this figure is ever increasing.

The only way of carbon dioxide reduction is if the world uses less energy, or uses renewable energy, such as wind power. Another solution is to trap the carbon dioxide emission underground, but this needs to be done on a very large scale.
Carbon Footprints is one of the main reasons of global warming.

This post was originally posted here: New Discoveries in Solar Energy

New Discoveries in Solar Energy
Anywhere you look today you will see the message, “go green, save your planet and your money.” This is an appealing message for everybody as we are now very much aware of the dire results of ever rising global temperature. Scientists all over the world keep working on finding ways to save energy and improve environment around us.
Solar energy is one such area where many developments have been done in past years. Those days are not very far off when the usage of solar energy becomes a common norm. There’s now a profound conviction among scientist, engineers and professionals that after some years, solar electricity will gain demand and popularity as the overall cost of setting up a solar power system will go down. So, more people will be able to get cheap and sufficient solar energy which will undercut the expenses of oil-generated electric power. The current shortage of fuels and oils has generated a fury amongst individuals, governments and communities into seriously considering solar energy source which is largely available through the sun.
There are not many homes who are taking the benefit from power of the sun. But there are many others who have solar powered their houses and are even getting reimbursed for the surplus solar power they have which gets supplied to the power grid. Currently, heliostats, PV (photovoltaic) cells/plates are being installed to gather the solar energy by placing these solar panels towards the sun. These panels can also be built and installed on spots where the sun shines most.
Now, a polymer foil has been developed which is as thin as a paper sheet and which is lighter by 200 times as compared to the regular solar plates. These inventions and discoveries are mainly aiming to get mass production of solar power. As these polymer foils are extremely light so they can be fixed even to the walls of any structure. This can collect the solar power even on a cloudy day. Now, these plastic solar cells are also invented that could use 6% of the suns energy, but with further study and development they are anticipated to use it to 30%.
Scientists and market analyst agree that in near future many solar farms can be used to harness all our energy needs. That might change radically through the development of the technology and with new breakthroughs. The polymer foil and the flexible plastic materials are only few of the best hopes which will make our environment cleaner, greener and safer.

This post was originally posted here: Radon

Radon is a natural radioactive gas which cannot be seen or smelled. This gas causes cancer. Its presence in homes is a danger for the life’s of our near and dear ones. Radon causes lung cancer among non-smokers and it is found out to be the second leading cause for lung cancer in America.

Thousands of Americans are killed every year because of lung cancer which is resulted by radon. The leading cause of lung cancer is radon, smoking and second hand smoke. Recent study has shown that about 21000 lung cancer deaths are because of radon.

Radon is a colorless, invisible and tasteless gas which is produced by decay of uranium in soil and water. It is the densest gas which is chemically non-reactive and highly radioactive. It has yellow phosphorescence below its freezing point.
Long ago, Radon was produced as required in hospitals to treat cancer.

Radon is always present in the atmosphere in a detectable amount. People are exposed to this harmful gas through breathing air. This is very harmful for humans.

Levels of Radon found in indoor air are more than outdoor air. Level of radon gets high because it enters buildings through cracks in the foundations.

Radon is present everywhere. It is found in indoor and outdoor air. It enters the environment through soil, coal combustion, uranium and phosphate. It also enters through vaporization. It can also move into the groundwater by moving downward and entering the soil. But most of it will remain in the soil. Its life is about four days.

Removing Radon from your house leads to living green by breathing cleaner and healthier indoor air in your home. These days the green building constructed are made in such a way that it prevents Radon from entering the house and buildings.

This post was originally posted here: A Pool of Possibilities with WWOOF

WWOOF or World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farming has opened up a pool of opportunities for people like globe trotters, environmentalists and others who are looking for immigration too. Thousands of organic farms have opened their doors to the volunteers’ world wide. They are free to come over stay and volunteer in the day to day work of the farm and in return they get free food and shelter with the farm owners.

Eco tourism is certainly a benefit that is there in such an opportunity apart from that there are other things like you get to meet people of a different country and see the culture there so on and so forth. For people like globe trotters it’s very important that they should have an arrangement for food and shelter in the country that they visit. Thus this is a good option for them as well. For people looking for immigration to the United States have to arrange for their own visa etc the WWOOF organization is not about paid working and thus they are not going to help you in any thing like a work permit or any thing. But through their net work you can certainly arrange for a host who would be providing you food and shelter in the United States once you have reached there.

It’s a strict no for you to show up in the farm without having made prior arrangements with the farm owner. For all the immigration related questions through the WWOOF program the best people to get in touch with are first the United States Embassy, or your immigration Lawyer. These are the people who would be able to answer all your questions related to migration through the WWOOF program. For immigrants this opportunity may be looked at just as an initial shelter post which new arrangements have to be made. But the benefits that come along with are that you do get some amount of experience in the organic farming and how to create a market for the products which are raised from the organic farms. And other related things.

This post was originally posted here: Planning to attend the Green Festival in DC

While the climate crisis and energy issues loom in an increasingly unstable economy, Americans are eager for a sustainable marketplace that will provide jobs, clean energy and a secure future. These issues will be highlighted and covered as the demands and needs for environmental solutions have never been greater. Every four years, the nation’s focus shifts to Washington, D.C. and this year Green Festival returns with information and insight into the most pressing concerns of the moment.

A joint project of Global Exchange and Co-op America, two leading nonprofit organizations dedicated to environmental and social justice for more than twenty-five years, Green Festival is a forum to explore and build sustainable solutions for communities and the environment. The Washington DC Green Festival will host 150 visionary speakers, 350 local and national green businesses, and dozens of community and nonprofit groups. All exhibitors must meet strict standards set by Co-op America, guaranteeing the highest level of social and environmental responsibility in everything that enters the convention center.

You’ll enjoy more than 125 renowned speakers and 350 green businesses (start your holiday shopping now!), great how-to workshops, green films, a Fair Trade pavilion, yoga classes, organic beer, delicious organic cuisine and live music.

Washington, D.C. Green Festival Highlights

* Nationally renowned speakers such as William McDonough, prominent architect; Barbara Ehrenreich, journalist, historian, and social critic; Katrina Van-Den Heuvel, editor of the Nation; Amy Goodman, award-winning journalist, author, and host; Lester Brown, MacArthur Fellow, Founder and President of Earth Policy Institute; Hervè Kempf, environmental and ecology journalist; Madeleine M. Kunin, author, Deputy Secretary of Education and Ambassador to Switzerland for the Clinton administration; and many more!
* Fair Trade Pavilion
* Green Careers and Education Area
* Green Teen Center & Organic Valley Green Kids Zone
* Socially Responsible Investing
* The Fair Trade Café
* Organic Beer & Wine Garden
* Eco-tourism and Eco-fashion
* Green Film Festival
* Community Action Center
* Green Home Pavilion featuring hands -on workshops
* Bike Valet
* Live Music
* Yoga and Movement Room

Event Details:
Washington, D.C. Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001
November 8th & 9th
Saturday 9AM – 7PM
Sunday 11AM – 6PM
$15 per person- all-access for one or both days.
$10 per person ($5 off admission) for students with ID, seniors over 62, bus riders with transfer ticket/bus pass, BetterWorld book drive participants
FREE: Children 18 and under, Co-op America or Global Exchange members

Green Festival Partners:
Better World Books, Clif Bar, Energy Star, Honest Tea, MOM’s, bgreen, Organic Valley Kids Zone, Pangea Organics, TS Designs, The Globe, WPFW

Check this out:
Arriving bicyclists will be treated to free, secure valet parking steps from the event, as well as a $5 discount on registration fees.
Location:
Corner of 9th and M streets, NW
Provided by . . .
College Park Bicycles and Mt. Airy Bicycles, in cooperation with Hosteling International’s Potomac Council.
Leave both your heavy locks and worries behind.
www.bike123.com

We are planning to attend this DC Green Festival this year. I have been wanting to attend one of these for quite some now. So I’m busy preparing the logistics for this trip. Its not a bad drive from Atlanta. So we’ll probably drive. As far lodging is concerned, I have been looking for Washington DC Vacation Rentals since we’ll be 6 people.
This is going to be a fun trip.

This post was originally posted here: Saving money – Guide to ISAs

Since 1999 there has been a new kind of savings account available– the Individual Savings Account, or ISA. While the ISA can seem like a bit of a confusing mess, taking the time to understand how an ISA works can help you protect your savings from excess taxation.

One of the first thing to know about ISAs is how much they’ve changed over the years. There used to be several different kinds of ISAs: mini, maxi, and tessa-only, though these differences have since been combined into one simplified kind of account. Also, you should be aware that in order to invest cash in an ISA you must be over 16, and in order to invest stock or shares you must be over 18.

The current ISA only comes in one form, with rules that have been greatly simplified. Another recent change to the way ISAs function is the abolition of the insurance portion of an ISA. Because you can no longer use an ISA for insurance, you will need to purchase your home and contents insurance somewhere else.

What you can put in your ISA:

Your ISA can contain a total of £7,200, which can include stocks and shares worth up to the whole £7,200, though if you wish up to £3,600 of it can be composed of cash.

How ISA’s handle taxes:

One of the benefits of an ISA is that dividends and interest as well as capital gains are not taxed. However, there are some things you should be aware of. First of all, if you have cash in the stocks and shares part of your ISA, interest on that money will be charged 20%.

Things to remember when using an ISA:

You can only invest stocks and shares with one financial institution per year. To get around this, you can use a Fund Supermarket to keep your stock diverse.

Be aware that while ISAs themselves are a great way to avoid taxes, you are not protected by fees from your financial institution. You should remember that the same fees you would accumulate for dealing with stocks outside of an ISA can happen within an ISA as well, and plan accordingly.

By keeping these rules in mind, an effectively used ISA can be a great opportunity to save money without having it taxed.

This post was originally posted here: Energy Recovery – Controlled Ventilation Systems

Ventilation is the exchange of inside air with outside air. There are two types of home ventilation systems one is natural wherein air comes into the house by means of open doors & windows and other is mechanical ventilation wherein electrical devices like fans are used to circulate and purify the air.
Every house requires ventilation for controlling the dampness, bad smell that flock in badly ventilated homes. Bad ventilated house may also cause irritation and health problems. Though thicker insulation results into energy efficiency and savings, it has made it almost impossible for these homes to breathe. In order to permit outside air in, houses should be built based on proper ventilation.
Energy recovery ventilation system reduces energy loss and helps in ventilating a home. The system cuts down the costs of heating in winters through exchange of hot inside air with the cold fresh outside air. In the summer, the inside air cools the incoming supply of warmer air and reduces ventilation costs.
There are two types of energy-recovery systems: heat-recovery ventilators and energy-recovery ventilators. The main difference between the two techniques is on the working of heat exchanger. In an energy-recovery ventilator, the heat exchanger transfers some water vapor with heat energy, while in a heat-recovery ventilator it only transfers the heat.
As an energy recovery ventilator remove some vapors from the outgoing air to the incoming winter air with lesser humidity, the level of humidity of the house remains unchanged. Because of this the heat exchanger core gets warmer and minimizes the problems of freezing.
In summer energy-recovery ventilator help in controlling humidity of the house by moving some water vapor present in the incoming air to the drier air which go out from the house. To keep indoor humidity levels low, it is advisable to turn off the system in very humid weather.
Almost 75% of the energy in the outgoing air may be recovered by energy recovery ventilation systems. It is also cost effective in extreme winters or summers and where fuel costs are very high.

This post was originally posted here: Obama Announces New Fuel Economy Standards (35.5 MPG in 2016)

We already knew it was coming, but now it’s official. the US fuel economy standards are being beefed up starting in 2012, ramping up by 5% a year to a fleet average (cars & trucks) of 35.5 MPG in 2016. This makes the CAFE law passed by Congress in 2007 (requiring an average fuel economy of 35 mpg in 2020) pretty much obsolete. More details below.

This should also bring a reduction of 900 million metric tons in greenhouse gas emissions (though the White House isn’t clear if this is over the 4 year period or over the lifetime of the vehicles produced during that period.

What’s particularly interesting about this regulation is that it creates a national policy. Instead of having the EPA, DOE and California all fighting with each other and passing different laws that the automakers must then try to follow, this one target should create some predictability that helps everybody.

Of course I wish they had gone even further (maybe it could keep ramping up by 5% a year after 2016?), but after years of stagnation, this is a good start.

Courtesy of TreeHugger.

This post was originally posted here: Conserv-A-Store Joins Twitter

Conserv-A-Store has joined twitter.

Follow us at http://twitter.com/conservastore

Thanks for your continued support.

This post was originally posted here: Toyota cranks up heat on Honda with new Prius

TOKYO (Reuters) – Toyota Motor Corp said on Monday its new Prius had received pre-sale orders for 80,000 vehicles in Japan, kicking off what promises to be a fierce battle against hybrid rival Honda Motor Co.

Toyota, which has dominated the market for gasoline-electric cars so far, is looking to take back the crown after Honda’s new Insight became the first hybrid ever to top the best-sellers’ list in Japan last month.

“The hybrid market is going to be one of the fastest-growing segments in the world,” said JPMorgan Securities auto analyst Takaki Nakanishi.

“With the global economy in a recession, luxury and large cars are not selling but fuel-conscious cars are in fact growing. Toyota’s earnings performance is hurting right now, and they can’t afford to lose the lead in this market,” he said.

Introducing the third-generation Prius, Executive Vice President Akio Toyoda said the upgraded model, which costs about $3,000 less than the previous version, had received more than 80,000 orders ahead of the start of sales on Monday in Japan, where it aims to sell 10,000 vehicles a month.

“We lowered the price to appeal to a broadening customer base,” Toyoda, who will be promoted to president next month, told a news conference.

The new Prius, first unveiled at the Detroit auto show in January, will also go on sale in North America and Europe this month, followed by other markets later. Toyota has set a global sales target of 400,000 units for the car in 2010.

Although gasoline prices have nearly halved since peaking last July, automakers expect growing interest in the fuel-saving technology with consumers continuing to trade in big SUVs in favor of small cars, even in the United States.

By 2018, JPMorgan Securities expects roughly one in every 10 cars to be a hybrid, with global sales reaching 9.96 million vehicles as more brands such as Daimler’s Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen, as well as General Motors Corp’s plug-in Chevy Volt, join the market.

Hybrid sales are also being supported by governments offering consumers incentives to trade in older gas-guzzling cars in favor of more fuel efficient models to stimulate demand amid the worst industry slump in at least three decades.

For a graphic of Toyota’s and Honda’s hybrid sales click here

VOLUME TRAP

The new Prius will start at 2.05 million yen ($21,620), or at least 300,000 yen less than what executives had originally said the car would cost.

The about-face came after Honda’s Insight became an instant hit after going on sale in Japan in early February. Honda sold nearly 10,500 Insights in April, more than double its target of 5,000 units a month.

Toyota had originally planned to raise the price on the latest Prius because it packed more advanced features, a bigger, 1.8-liter engine and better mileage of 50 miles per gallon, or 38 km/liter.

With an eye on competing with the Insight, Toyota will also take the unprecedented move of continuing to sell the entry-level grade of the previous Prius in Japan at the same price as the Insight’s 1.89 million yen, with a monthly target of 3,000 units.

Honda’s boss was critical of the move. “You can’t just suddenly change your pricing policy — that’s going to destroy the market,” Chief Executive Takeo Fukui told Reuters last week.

“We’re not paying any attention to (the Prius). They’re not going to last long with that strategy,” he added, speculating that the Prius would eat into sales of other Toyota cars and hurt its dealers.

JPMorgan’s Nakanishi agreed that striking a healthy balance with sales of non-hybrid cars will be crucial going forward.

“As hybrids become more attractive and cost-competitive, we need to worry about how the other cars are going to hold their own. Hybrids still have lower margins (than gasoline cars,) so there’s going to be some pressure on profitability. All that has to be taken into account while they sell their hybrids,” he said.

Toyota’s shares ended down 0.8 percent at 3,560 yen on Monday, outperforming the benchmark Nikkei average’s 2.4 percent decline. Shares in Toyota, which is forecasting a $8.6 billion loss for the current financial year, have rallied about 23 percent so far this year, lagging Honda’s 41 percent rise.

($1=94.80 Yen)

By Chang-Ran Kim, Asia autos correspondent

This post was originally posted here: Indiana Mandates E-Waste Recyling

Indiana became the first state to pass a major electronics recycling law in 2009 as Governor Mitch Daniels signed HB 1589 into law Wednesday, making Indiana the nineteenth state to pass a law creating a statewide e-waste recycling program. Eighteen of these 19 states, including Indiana, have adopted “producer takeback” laws, requiring the manufacturers to pay for the collection and recycling of old products.

The Indiana law is similar to the law passed in 2007 by Minnesota, and requires manufacturers of video display devices (TVs, monitors, and laptops) to collect and recycle 60% by weight of the volume of products they sold in the previous year in Indiana. After the first two years, manufacturers who fail to meet those goals will pay an additional recycling fee for every pound they fall short of their goal.

While the goals are based on sales of video display devices, the program allows consumers, public schools and small businesses to recycle a larger group of products for free, including TVs, computers, laptops, keyboards, printers, fax machines, DVD players, and video cassette recorders. The program begins collection in April 2010.

“With the signing of HB 1589, Indiana has become a leader among states working to regulate electronic waste,” said Carey Hamilton, Executive Director of the Indiana Recycling Coalition (IRC). Hamilton went on to say, “Because of this law, more of our electronic waste will be safely recycled as opposed to land filled, incinerated or exported. We also believe that HEA 1589 will lead to the creation of new green jobs, including sorting, processing, and recycling jobs in Indiana.”

The Indiana Recycling Coalition has championed producer responsibility in Indiana as a practical and effective way to reduce electronic waste. They presented this issue to the legislature’s Environmental Quality Service Council in October 2008, and led support for the bill throughout the session.

Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of the Electronics TakeBack Coalition, said, “We are already seeing that states which adopted strong laws that include collection goals or convenient recycling standards are getting excellent participation from consumers, who are bringing back their old products in record numbers.”

E-waste recycling laws are under consideration in several states, including Massachusetts, New York, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Utah. Hawaii, Missouri, and Texas are considering laws that would add televisions to their current laws, which only cover computer recycling.

The states which have passed e-waste recycling laws are:

2003 California
2004 Maine
2005 Maryland
2006 Washington
2007 Connecticut, Minnesota, Oregon, Texas, North Carolina
2008 New Jersey, New York City, Oklahoma, Virginia, West Virginia, Missouri, Hawaii, Rhode Island Illinois and Michigan
2009 Indiana

SustainableBusiness.com News

05/15/2009 10:20 AM

This post was originally posted here: Biofuels: No get up and go?

This post was originally posted here: Ecological Intelligence

Ecological Intelligence: Knowing the Hidden Impacts of What We Buy
By Daniel Goleman
Allen Lane £16.99, 265 pages
FT Bookshop price: £13.59

Review by Jonathan Birchall

www.ft.com

Published: May 11 2009 06:06 | Last updated: May 11 2009 06:06

Daniel Goleman, a trained psychologist and erstwhile science journalist, made his name in the 1990s with a book called Emotional Intelligence. It was a huge bestseller that contributed to a movement in US schools to start teaching “social and emotional literacy” along with mathematics and writing – a concept Goleman later extended to business leadership.

Now he has turned his attention to the deteriorating state of the planet and what we can all do about it. How, he asks, can we humans, trained by our evolution to focus on short-term benefits, think instead about the longer term implications of our actions on the environment – what he calls “ecological intelligence”.

Time Magazine has already hailed “ecological intelligence” as one of the “10 ideas changing the world right now” – a refreshingly optimistic view, given the state of the polar ice caps.

Ecological Intelligence is a summary of one school of current thought on the environment; if we as consumers are given sufficient information about the true impact of our actions and our purchases, we will together force businesses to become more sustainable. In short, the virtuous market will save the earth.

Goleman argues that we can train ourselves to think differently – to develop an innate flight instinct when confronted by, for example, a shampoo that contains methylparaben, or a garden chair made from tropical wood.

Helping the consumer along the way are new websites which drive “radical transparency”. Skin Deep, a “cosmetic safety database” evaluates the chemical content of more than 50,000 different products and rates them on a score of one to 10.

An even more ambitious website, GoodGuide.com, rates everything from yoghurt to toys and laundry detergent. It gives products an overall mark out of 10, with subdivisions for its health, environmental and social impacts. Companies will seek to improve their ratings, and all will be well – or at least not quite so bad.

Radical transparency depends on the quality of its data, however. Goleman admits that the data is not always that good, particularly when it comes to assessing issues such as factory conditions. For the environment, the data is better, and can build on the “life cycle assessments” of products and processes increasingly used by companies such as Coca-Cola, Wal-Mart and Tesco. These help to establish a comprehensive picture of the carbon footprint of any product, including its components.

Goleman wants us to use this information to go shopping with our amygdalas – the part of the brain that governs our “flight instinct” – which might work when it comes to perceived direct threats, such as lead levels in children’s toys, or concerns over phthalates.

But all this radical transparency, he argues, could also change the way we think about broader environmental and social issues. “Shoppers in Berlin or Brooklyn or Beijing could make informed choices that would speed the conversion of China’s power grid from coal-belching plants to alternate sources … or enhance the health of miners in Africa,” he writes.

Goleman could take confidence in the argument, recently made by a senior executive responsible for customer research at Procter & Gamble, that the current economic crisis and loss of confidence in public institutions will lead to an increase in “consumer engagement” – the desire for independent information that allows us to assess the value, in a broad sense, of our purchasing decisions.

But the big problem – which Goleman does not get to grips with – is that this is unlikely to be enough. Towards the end of his book, he undermines much of what has gone before by noting that John Ehrenfeld, a founder of the field of “industrial ecology” has concluded that gains delivered by efforts towards increasing the eco-efficiency of business “are too small as yet to offset the growing threats”. Ehrenfeld wants innovations that “radically reduce the amount of stuff that humans all over the globe use to produce well being”.

Unfortunately, history suggests that businesses do not do that kind of thing unless they are pushed, and not just by concerned consumers. Yes, we each need to be ecologically intelligent, and aware of the consequences of our actions. But to really change the habits of the majority of us who carry on regardless will require government action – as well as informed consumers.

This post was originally posted here: IEA: Little gadgets consume gigawatts of power

Without more efficient consumer electronics, the world will need to build hundreds of gigawatts worth of new power plants to run the exploding number of electronic gadgets, according to the International Energy Agency.

The Paris-based energy industry watchdog on Wednesday published its “Gadgets and Gigawatts” report, saying that consumer electronics already account for 15 percent of households’ electricity bills and is rising rapidly.

Around the world, a growing number of people are acquiring electronics, from mobile phones to televisions, which means the total amount of electricity from electronics is poised to explode in the next two decades.

The IEA estimates that the yearly energy consumed from IT and consumer electronics is on pace to double by 2020 and triple by 2030 to 1,700 terawatt-hours. That would be the equivalent of the combined residential electricity consumption of Japan and the United States in a year.

It’s clear that there is technology available to make devices more energy efficient, the IEA said. Because consumers want a long run-time, mobile devices are already more efficient than appliances that run from outlets.

“This example shows us what can be achieved. Where no such commercial drivers exist, governments must step in to ensure that we make the most of every energy efficiency opportunity,” IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said in a statement.

He said that governments should “urgently implement” energy-efficiency policies. The biggest opportunity for energy savings improvements from consumer electronics companies is “making hardware and software work together more effectively to ensure that energy is only used when, and to the extent needed,” the IEA said.

Courtesy of CNET

This post was originally posted here: Google energy guru hot on geothermal

Dan Reicher, the director of climate and energy initiatives at Google.org, says we’re standing on a great untapped source of renewable energy: enhanced geothermal.

Reicher spoke on Tuesday to university students at the announcement of the winners of the Clean Energy Prize organized by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and sponsored in part by utility NStar.

In addition to talking up clean energy, Reicher said Google will “very soon” launch PowerMeter, its Web-based home energy-monitoring software that is now in private beta. The software can now monitor homes’ appliance energy consumption, but over time Google will add features to let consumers take advantage of cheaper, off-peak electricity rates and demand-response programs.

Although it’s core business is search, Google actively promotes renewable energy and efficiency. It has a fleet of plug-in vehicles powered by a very large solar array and is trying to influence policy makers to encourage a more high-tech approach to energy.

Google has also invested in a handful of energy companies, including an enhanced geothermal systems outfit AltaRock Energy, solar thermal provider BrightSource Energy, and wind company Makani Power.

During his talk, Reicher singled out enhanced geothermal as the most underserved area with great potential: “We have three times the potential of wind…and now we’ve got the oil and gas companies interested.”

There are already many geothermal power plants operating in areas where there is underground heat that can be converted into steam to make electricity.

Enhanced geothermal technology calls for pumping water deep underground, making cracks in the rock to create a reservoir of water that is heated by the earth.

Reicher said the big advantage of enhanced geothermal is that it can be done nearly everywhere in the U.S. He said even places like Maine have sufficient underground heat, although drilling must be done three to ten kilometers down. Oil and gas companies are well suited for this business since they know about drilling and geology.

Although the potential is great, Reicher said the commercialization risk is high as well. “I don’t want to oversell this. We have a long way to go,” he said. The recovery act passed earlier this year puts aside $400 million for research in geothermal.

Computing can play a significant role in enhanced geothermal system by providing geological models and simulations. In general, Google expects to see a growing role for IT in energy technology, Reicher said.

“We believe that fundamentally there’s an intersection between information technology and energy technology. IT and ET–that’s where we are heading in part at Google,” he said.

Courtesy of CNET

This post was originally posted here: Hands Free Faucets

On average, a bathroom remodel costs $15,789 and a kitchen remodel costs $55,503 according to Remodeling Magazine’s 2007 Cost vs. Value report. But you don’t need to spend thousands of dollars to get a fresh look in your home. Focus on the items that get used the most, like the faucet.

“The faucet is really a focal point in the bathroom and kitchen,” says Andy Martin of Fontaine Faucets. “It’s the item that gets used the most, and therefore, it always gets noticed. A new faucet is like an instant facelift that can provide upgraded style, functionality, or both! And it’s one of the more easily accomplished DIY projects.”

The faucet has come a long way from years past when it was simply a means of delivering water inside the home. It has become a centerpiece of style. Now, taking that evolutionary step beyond just beautiful designs and great finishes, technology is starting to play a role in the world of water delivery. Helping to combat the spread of germs, conserve water, and help our environment, technology in the form of hands-free operation is making its mark in our homes.

What is a hands-free faucet? They are new “tap on demand” faucets for kitchens. They build upon the technology for faucets in public restrooms that turn on with the wave of a hand. With simple taps or pre-sets you can adjust flow, temperature, and pressure on the kitchen faucet hands-free. The faucets can include motion sensors and a traditional handle if you want to use your sink in another mode.

Touch-free faucets are now available for residential use and are becoming increasingly popular in homes around the country. These new faucets offer homeowners a myriad of advantages:

Advantages

Hygiene: Because it does not require touch, hands free faucets are effective in reducing the spread of germs. This is beneficial for families or areas that experience high traffic.

Water Conservation: Water is only used when the sensor detects a hand next to the faucet. This will minimize the amount of water that is wasted.

Style: When first introduced many hands free faucets did not have a very aesthetic appeal for housing. Today though you can find a variety of finishes & styles that appeal to your taste.

TapMaster is an assembly of two basic components – the valve block that connects in-line to the hot and/or cold water lines and the pilot/actuator valve that activates the unit. A standard TapMaster consists of two valve blocks one for each hot and cold water line and one pilot/actuator valve that may use a cabinet door or foot activator. The versatility and adaptability of this component design allows for a variety of configuration to suit virtually any faucet/sink arrangement.

No electrical, no batteries, no electronics. TapMaster operates using water pressure in existing water lines. Installation hardware and detailed instructions included. 5 year limited warranty

This Hands Free Faucets & many others are available at

Hands Free Faucet

This post was originally posted here: New electric bike adds style and speed to virtue

LONDON (Reuters Life!) – Most motorcyclists are happy enough to go green, except when it comes to the bikes they ride.

Pollution-free electric scooters and bicycles have been available for a while but nothing on the market so far has come close to providing what bikers would regard as a ride with the style and performance they crave.

The Zero, an electric motorcycle from California with enough speed to embarrass other vehicles at the traffic lights, may be about to change that.

Neal Saiki, the founder and inventor of Zero motorcycles, has produced the Zero S, an electric street bike with sharp styling and even sharper acceleration.

“People have waited decades for these things to be practical,” he told Reuters as he launched the new bike in Europe, where he hopes to make half his sales.

“We make every part of the bike. It’s very light, half the weight of a normal motorcycle.”

A quick spin round the streets of east London’s Isle of Dogs confirmed what Saiki meant.

The bike is quick, nimble and easy to ride. With its frame constructed of aircraft-grade aluminum and other high quality components, it’s also an attractive-looking machine.

“We’ve had people put their motorcycles in their living rooms,” Saiki said.

If most electric vehicles are the motoring equivalent of muesli, this bike is more like a martini.

It runs almost silently, which can be a little alarming. I came up behind a small group of people on bicycles, who had no idea I was there until I sped past them.

One of the Zero’s limitations is its range. It will do between 40 and 60 miles on a single electric charge.

This of course cuts out long trips, although most owners will probably stay in town, where it excels, and keep topping the battery up regularly so they are not embarrassed by having to push the bike to the nearest electrical outlet.

When the bike is plugged into the mains, charging it up equates to about one penny a mile in running costs, which is certainly cheaper than fuelling up a petrol-driven bike.

Sadly, what is not cheaper is the price. The Zero S costs 9,000 pounds ($13,500), or about twice what its petrol-powered equivalent might cost.

By Giles Elgood
5/13/09

This post was originally posted here: Solar gloom overshadows Q-Cells, Solon

FRANKFURT (Reuters) – A lack of project funding threatens to undermine the solar industry’s already fragile growth prospects, two of the sector’s biggest players said on Tuesday, reporting profits that missed market forecasts.

Q-Cells, the world’s largest maker of solar cells, slashed its 2009 sales outlook for the third time since December, while German peer Solon, a solar module maker, posted a bigger-than-expected first-quarter net loss.

“In view of the ongoing uncertain market environment due to financing restrictions for larger PV (photovoltaic) systems in particular, it is currently still difficult to give a precise forecast for the full year,” Q-Cells said in a statement.

Q-Cells said it now expected 2009 sales to come in between 1.3 billion and 1.6 billion euros ($1.77-2.18 billion), down from the previous 1.7-2.1 billion euro forecast range.

Massive oversupply of cells, modules and wafer had led Q-Cells — along with the world’s No.2 cell maker Sharp Corp — to cut outlooks or jobs earlier this year, while Solon withdrew its 2009 outlook last year.

“The cut in guidance is somewhat negative but no huge negative surprise,” DZ Bank Sven Kuerten wrote in a note.

“Due to the relatively good cost control, the fact that short-term financing issues are resolved due to the sale of the REC stake and the good project business we keep our Buy rating unchanged,” he added.

Shares in Q-Cells reversed earlier losses and were 3.5 percent higher at 0846 GMT, while the FTSE clean tech index was off 0.1 percent.

Q-Cells posted sales of 224.8 million euros for the first quarter and a net loss of 391.9 million euros, partly linked to writedowns on last week’s sale of its stake in Norway’s Renewable Energy Corporation, a move that was widely expected by analysts.

SOLON SEES Q2 LOSS

Solon’s net loss was 18.5 million euros, missing a consensus of 14 million in a Reuters poll of analysts [ID:nL8287392]

Its stock pared losses but were still down 1.3 percent.

“All in all, reported Q109 results should be taken very negatively by the market especially when considering the recent upmove and the very high likelihood of significant earnings downgrades in due course,” Equinet analyst Sebastian Growe wrote in a note.

Solon shares have more than doubled since hitting a 2009 floor on March 9.

“While demand for solar modules has been on the rise again in the second quarter, the power plants business is still suffering from the ongoing critical situation in project finance,” it said in a statement.

“Therefore assume that Solon will also finish the second quarter with a loss.”

Solon in April said it may have to take an impairment loss of 40 million euros due to funding problems at Silicium de Provence, an affiliated French company.

“The extremely weak operating performance is further increasing the very high liquidity risk of Solon. We see the stock as a very clear ‘sell’,” wrote DZ Bank’s Kuerten.

According to StarMine, which weights analysts’ forecasts based on their track records, Q-Cells trades at 14.3 times estimated 12-month forward earnings, less than half of No.3 cell maker Suntech Power’s 30.6, as well as No.4 Kyocera, trading at 66.5 times. Solon trades at 12 times.

($1=.7349 Euro)

(Reporting by Christoph Steitz; editing by John Stonestreet and Rupert Winchester)

May 12, 2009

http://www.reuters.com/finance/greenBusiness

This post was originally posted here: Industry Looks to LED Bulbs for the Home

Walk around the floor of Lightfair International, the lighting industry’s annual trade show at the Javits Center in New York last week, and you would be forgiven for thinking that lamps based on light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, had already filled our homes and workplaces.

LED bulbs and fixtures dominated nearly every booth on the show floor.

Now all the world has to do is catch up. Most people think of LEDs as the lights blinking from inside electronic devices. They are being used increasingly to light rooms, though few people have ever bought them.

“In the U.S., 78 percent of the public is completely unaware that traditional light bulbs will be phased out in 2012,” said Charles F. Jerabek, president and chief executive of Osram Sylvania, a unit of Siemens. By law, bulbs must be 30 percent more efficient than current incandescent versions beginning that year.

While the current crop of compact fluorescents could do the job, the industry is rallying around LED lamps for many applications. They say LEDs last longer than current bulbs and compact fluorescent ones and their energy consumption could eventually be less than fluorescent lights’. They can also be made in many shapes and sizes, which was evident at the trade show. Unlike compact fluorescents bulbs, they contain no mercury and they work well in cold weather. They provide a more pleasing light than fluorescents.

Manufacturers displayed LEDs incorporated into large warehouse, garage and street-lighting fixtures, flexible light ribbons, and replacements for the halogen reflector lamps used in kitchens and offices. Strips of flexible LEDs from Osram Sylvania put light in places where it could not otherwise fit. Later this year, the company will market tiny LED chandelier lights that use 6 watts instead of the 15 watts typical of an incandescent version. It says they will last 25,000 hours instead of 1,500 for an incandescent bulb. Also this fall, Osram, Lighting Science and Philips will introduce 25,000-hour LED lamps that look like traditional bulbs but use just 8 watts of electricity to produce the same amount of light as a 40-watt bulb.

Much of the industry’s effort is aimed at making LED lamps that emit as much light as a 60- or 75-watt incandescent bulb. Cree, a leading maker of LEDs, showed a new version of its LED ceiling fixture that uses 6.5 watts, compared with 11 watts for last year’s model, to create the light of a standard 65-watt lamp.

Even with the wide range of LED products now available, compact fluorescent bulbs will be the technology of choice for most consumers for years to come. That is a result of LEDs’ high prices — more than $20 for a 40-watt-equivalent bulb — and the difficulty in creating bright bulbs. “The C.F.L. market still has a lot of growth,” said Michael B. Petras Jr., president of GE Lighting, a unit of General Electric. Even so, the company is devoting 50 percent of its research and development money to LED-related technologies.

The advent of long-lasting bulbs means light bulb companies have to shift away from making most of their money selling replacement bulbs. Over the last several years, Philips has remade itself by acquiring several companies that sell lamp fixtures for homes and businesses.

The company expects its LED sales in the United States to increase to $200 million this year from $120 million in 2008, according to Kaj den Daas, president of Philips’s lighting group for the United States.

The industry expects to sell more bulbs at a higher price. “Instead of $1.25 light bulbs, we’ll be selling $10 to $20 systems,” said Mr. Jerabek of Osram Sylvania. He also said today’s larger homes have many more lights than homes 20 years ago. And, as LED energy efficiency improves, he thinks consumers will upgrade their LED fixtures with lower watt versions.

Mr. Jerabek remembers the recent debacle with the introduction of low-price compact fluorescent lamps. Their poor reliability and unnatural light caused widespread dissatisfaction among consumers.

“It will be a huge injustice and setback if we allow the same thing to happen to LEDs,” he said.

This post was originally posted here: U.S. water infrastructure needs seen as urgent

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The crumbling U.S. infrastructure is routinely in plain sight, from potholes strewn across interstate highways built during the Eisenhower administration to rusting Depression-era bridges connecting those old highways.

At its most extreme, neglect can turn catastrophic: Experts had long expressed concern that New Orleans’ aging levees could fail in the face of a major hurricane and they did dramatically in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

By contrast, the condition of the nation’s water infrastructure is often hidden from view. Drinking water and efficient sewage disposal is taken for granted along with the safety of the buried pipes, but was much on the minds of several guests at this week’s Reuters Infrastructure Summit.

Out of sight, water infrastructure remained largely out of mind for U.S. policymakers in the federal economic stimulus effort. The $787 billion program allotted less than $10 billion for drinking and wastewater projects.

State and local officials will not turn the cash away but they say much more is needed to fix and add capacity to the nation’s water systems.

“It’s something that concerns me, because we pay so much attention to things we see and this is something we don’t see — until it’s too late,” Maryland State Treasurer Nancy Kopp told Reuters in a recent interview.

“In Maryland and other eastern states there have been repeated episodes in which pipes carrying clean water or sewage have collapsed,” Kopp said. “Over the next 20 or 30 years, water systems are likely to hit obsolescence.”

CONSERVE OR BUILD?

In Western states where epic water projects from the mid-1900s helped propel growth, many policymakers were likewise underwhelmed by stimulus spending for water works.

California, the most populous state, is receiving less than $1 billion for water projects and the money will not fund the kind of engineering feats that cross hundreds of miles to sustain coastal population centers with water from distant mountains and a handful of rivers, which water-issues researcher Peter Gleick applauds.

Instead of helping to build a new batch of monumental water works, California should focus on making use of its water more efficiently, Gleick, of the Pacific Institute of Oakland, California, said during the Infrastructure Summit.

“About 30 percent of the water used in urban California could be saved with existing technology,” Gleick said.

Paying households to adopt the technology would also help avoid the economic and environmental costs of building traditional and pricey water projects such as dams.

“In a sense, a million low-flow toilets is the same as building a dam, but faster and quicker,” Gleick said.

But if the federal stimulus effort was meant to spur job growth, it flubbed it in giving water such a small slice of its pie, Scott Paul of the Alliance for American Manufacturing said during the Summit.

“Water systems have the biggest bang for the buck,” said Paul, noting his group recently commissioned a study that found water projects topped infrastructure categories in terms of job creation with 19,769 jobs created from every $1 billion spent.

By Jim Christie
Fri May 8, 2009 3:12pm EDT

This post was originally posted here: How changing the planet might help preserve it

A giant mirror drifts slowly through space between the earth’s surface and the sun, intercepting the rays of sunlight before they reach the earth and deflecting them safely away.

The mirror, made of millions of silicon chips, is situated at a point in space where the sun’s gravity and the earth’s cancel each other out. This vast structure, assembled painstakingly for years by spacecraft, drifts naturally away from its starting point over time, but complex on-board systems nudge it gradually back to resume its vital role in keeping us safe.

This space mirror is – so far – science fiction. Such a structure would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, even if it were technically feasible. But soon many scientists say we may need to start building space mirrors, creating artificial clouds, or altering the chemistry of the sea to prevent the worst effects of global warming.

Climate change is occurring faster than predicted and the risks are growing day by day. Altering the earth’s systems to help cool the planet may soon be the only option, many scientists believe, as our runaway appetite for fossil fuels overtakes our good intentions on emissions.

“The chances of reducing emissions fast enough now are very low,” said Stephen Salter, professor of engineering design at Edinburgh University. “This is a jolly strong reason to look at alternatives.”

The science of altering the world’s natural systems is called geo-engineering. Once on the whacky fringes of scientific research, the subject is rapidly becoming mainstream . John Holdren, chief scientific adviser to US president Barack Obama, said in public a few weeks ago: “It’s got to be looked at . . . We don’t have the luxury of ruling [out] any approach.”

The debate has been intensified by a set of studies published last week in the journal Nature. They concluded the world had little chance of holding temperature rises to 2°C – a level widely regarded by scientists as the limit of safety, beyond which climate change becomes irreversible and potentially catastrophic. Such a level of warming risks leading, for example, to the melting of permafrost in Siberia, so releasing large quantities of methane, and in turn causing stronger and more rapid warming.

Most suggestions for geo-engineering fall into one of three categories. Some of the most outlandish would block out the sun’s rays using mechanical means – a sunshade or mirror, for instance. These would be enormously expensive, even if possible. Some of the most promising proposals involve ways to increase the earth’s ability to reflect sunlight back into space. Sulphur particles shot into the stratosphere, could reflect enough sunlight to make a measurable difference. But sulphur causes acid rain, although proponents point out much less sulphur would be needed than pours from power stations.

A cheaper method would be to spray seawater into the air from boats. This creates clouds made up of smaller- than-usual droplets of water, which reflect more light. Prof Salter says a drawback would be that, as well as reflecting sunlight, clouds trap infrared heat. But he says the net benefit would be huge – each drop would reflect 20bn times the amount of energy used to make it. He estimates that a about 500 ships would be needed.

Scientists are also exploring removing carbon from the atmosphere. One way is to fertilise the oceans with iron, so plankton grows and absorbs carbon. Less realistic are enormous air “scrubbers” – banks of sails coated with chemicals that react with CO 2 . Two unsolved problems are mastering the chemical absorption and the sheer amount of energy that would be needed to propel vast volumes of air.

Employing geo-engineering would not remove the need for deep emissions cuts, Prof Salter warned: “No one in geo-engineering would argue that.” The two must be pursued in tandem, or rising emissions would counteract the benefits of the earth-altering projects.

Tim Lenton, professor of earth system science at the University of East Anglia, who conducted a review of geo-engineering methods, said scientists must beware of “tinkering with a system you do not fully understand”. For instance, he said, studies showed that putting sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere caused drying in vulnerable regions.

By Fiona Harvey, Environment Correspondent

Published: May 9 2009 03:00

This post was originally posted here: Nissan’s zippy electric car should generate lots of buyers

The body and interior are not at all like the production version. That’ll be a four-door, front-wheel-drive hatchback that can hold four or five passengers. But the battery pack and electric motor in the prototype are the same that’ll be in the small car, which will start down the assembly line in fall 2010 in Japan.

And when you get to drive a car this far ahead of time — one that the automaker says is “90% there” in performance — how can you not drive and dish?

The still-unnamed Nissan electric, like the Chevrolet Volt electric reviewed last Friday, was a mule: a body from a car about the right size snugged over the correct running gear and chassis. Nissan is using the body of a previous-generation Cube, a small car for the Japan market.

Nissan is short on specifics. We don’t know, for instance, the capacity of the lithium-ion battery pack, which runs down the center under the floorboards. It’ll be at least a 16-kilowatt-hour pack. Nissan promises the car will qualify for the $7,500 U.S. federal tax credit, and that requires 16kWh. Volt’s pack is 16kWh.

The motor was right-by-gosh-now powerful, which is typical of electrics. Unlike gasoline engines, electrics deliver all their torque the moment they begin to turn. No need to rev.

Here’s a bet: Americans in urban or busy suburban areas will fall in love with electrics’ instant response. Hole in traffic? You’re there.

The Nissan felt quicker than Volt. But there was no side-by-side comparison or stopwatch, so that’s totally seat-of-the-pants.

Nissan engineers differ considerably from rivals on how to tune the regenerative braking. Regen braking is the system that turns the electric motor into a generator on deceleration and throws some juice back into the battery pack.

You’d never know the Nissan even had regen braking, based on the mule. Lift the throttle, the car slows exactly the way you’re used to. Hit the brake pedal, and the car slows more, in exactly the way you’re used to.

Nissan says the car will sell best to mainstream buyers if it’s, well, exactly the way they’re used to.

Regen braking in some electrics slows the car severely the moment you ease pressure on the throttle and gets even more aggressive when you hit the brakes. Nissan engineers believe that’s the wrong approach. “We want the driving experience to be transparent,” says Mark Perry, U.S. director of product planning for Nissan.

Truly, it was a refreshing change. The motor is still acting as a generator and refilling the battery, but the oddball feel and typical whine were absent.

To be clear: Electric cars have conventional brakes. The regen system is a recharging setup. It isn’t the primary way to slow or stop the car.

The nod to mainstream buyers is a big issue for Nissan. It must begin selling at least 100,000 electrics a year in the U.S. as soon as 2012 to meet its business plan, and to prevent demanding CEO Carlos Ghosn from whacking some heads.

The Nissan is pure electric. You drive until the battery pack is low, then stop and plug in for a recharge. Unlike the Volt, it has no “range extender” gasoline engine. But Nissan says its car will go 100 miles on a charge compared with Volt’s 40 miles on battery before Volt’s gas engine has to start running to generate power.

Nissan says 100 miles covers about 98% of daily driving needs in America.

As is becoming the norm, Nissan will encourage customers to have a heavy-duty circuit, typically called 220 volts, because that charges much faster than plugging into a standard 110- to 120-volt household outlet. A few hours vs. overnight.

Eventually, merchants and offices may offer 480-volt “fast-charge” hookups — 30 minutes or less — as a shopper lure or worker perquisite.

All Nissan will say about price is that it should be about the same as a bigger family sedan. So — wild guess — maybe $25,000 for a car that — if not electric — would be $15,000.

In return, you can ignore gas stations. And even where it’s expensive, electricity’s cheaper than gas. Nissan swears its electric makes economic sense even if gasoline were just $1.10 a gallon.

The body and interior will play a big role in the car’s appeal. But if the mule was a true harbinger, nobody’s likely to reject it because of how it drives.

By James R. Healey, USA TODAY

5-8-09

This post was originally posted here: Light Bulb Makers Talking Trash

A few companies peddling their cutting-edge, LED lighting products at this year’s Lightfair resorted to trashing — literally — fluorescent and incandescent lamps in their sales pitches.

A transparent trash pail filled with standard and C.F.L. bulbs, for instance, was set up at a booth belonging to Digital Light, and LED supplier. A glowing, LED-powered light stood triumphantly above the refuse.

According to a Digital Light representative, the message behind the display is that with the advent of ultra-efficient LED products, consumers can now toss out their fluorescent bulbs — along with incandescents, which are already being phased out by federal legislation.

(Digital Light distributes Lemnis Lighting’s 6-watt L.E.D. bulb, which Green Inc. wrote about on Wednesday.)

Meanwhile, another LED light maker, Cree, Inc., displayed large posters saying: “It’s time to break your fluorescent shackles.”

The company’s message? Consumers and office desk-jockeys have been suffering the unflattering light of fluorescent bulbs for too long. Cree claims its products cast an attractive, incandescent-like light, but with a lifespan of 50,000 hours.

“C.F.L.s started the conversation with consumers. LEDs are going to convert them,” declared Michelle Murray, a company spokeswoman.

The Fulham Company, whose core business is selling fluorescent lighting components, had the misfortune of having an exhibition space right next to Cree’s smack-talking booth.

Tom Woods, the company’s chief operational officer, believes Cree may be jumping the gun a bit with its fluorescent-bashing campaign – especially given that LEDs cost so much more and are relatively unproven.

“Today there are about as many people saying LEDs are the next great light of the future as there are people saying it’s not,” Mr. Woods said. “There is a place for every technology.”

By Leora Broydo Vestel
greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com
5-7-09

This post was originally posted here: DOE to Invest $93 Million in Recovery Act Funds in Wind Power

DOE announced it plans to provide $93 million from the Recovery Act to support further development of wind energy in the U.S. The funding will support projects that draw on the innovations of DOE’s national laboratories, universities, and the private sector to help improve reliability and overcome key technical challenges for the wind industry. These projects will create green jobs, promote economic recovery, and provide the investments needed to increase renewable energy generation.

DOE will also invest over $100 million in Recovery Act funds for facility and infrastructure improvements at its National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), including $68 million for the nation’s most energy efficient office building, the Research Support Facility, as well as $13.5 million for the Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility and $19.2 million for other infrastructure improvements, such as renewable energy systems to help power the laboratory. The Research Support Facility is currently under construction at NREL; see the NREL construction update.

Of the $93 million in wind energy funding, $10 million will go toward DOE’s National Wind Technology Center (NWTC), which is part of NREL, to enhance the testing of wind turbine drivetrains and to upgrade the electrical distribution system, allowing NREL to feed power from two new utility-scale wind turbines into the grid. Under previous agreements, the two new turbines will be installed at the NWTC for testing and evaluation.

DOE will also award $14 million to support the development of lightweight, advanced materials for wind turbine components and the development of process controls for the manufacture of wind turbine blades. DOE will also offer $69 million through two competitive solicitations: a $24 million solicitation for the development of up to three university and industry consortia, which will focus on critical wind energy challenges, and a $45 million solicitation to support the design and construction of a new drivetrain testing facility for large wind turbines. See the DOE press release, the NREL feature articles on the new funding and the two new wind turbines, and the notices on the DOE e-Center Web site of the upcoming Funding Opportunity Announcements for the university and industry consortia and the drivetrain testing facility.

Weekly Clean Energy Roundup: May 6, 2009

from Sustainablebusiness.com

This post was originally posted here: What’s the Carbon Footprint of Your Toilet Paper?

Tesco is charging ahead with its plans to slap a carbon label on all of its private label products to denote the amount of greenhouse gas emissions it takes to produce each item.

The U.K.-based retailer said on Friday it would include the labels on its Tesco-branded toilet paper and kitchen rolls beginning in late summer. The Carbon Reduction Label accounts for all emissions generated by each stage of the product’s lifecycle; Tesco must reduce emissions or lose the right to use the label.

Not surprisingly, the company’s recycled toilet paper comes with a smaller carbon footprint when compared to its conventional counterpart: 1.1g of carbon dioxide emissions for each sheet of recycled toilet paper versus 1.8g for Tesco’s standard roll.

The company said the emissions savings can be traced to an integrated tissue mill that can turn waste paper into tissue paper in one place in order to achieve greater energy efficiency. The company’s kitchen rolls, or paper towels, made from recycled content also achieved a 15 percent smaller carbon footprint.

The company’s labeling program began a year ago with 20 products in four categories — light bulbs, laundry detergent, potatoes and orange juice — and now rings in at roughly 100 items.
Tesco NonBio liquid detergent with carbon label
The move is part of a collaboration with The Carbon Trust, a government-funded entity that has already worked with companies such as Walkers, Boots and innocent Drinks to test the carbon label pilot program. Coca Cola, Continental Clothing, Halifax, Cadbury, Marshalls and British Sugar are among the companies that have pursued carbon labels for their products and services.

According to Tesco, consumer surveys indicate more than 60 percent seek products with low carbon footprints if they don’t have to sacrifice cost or convenience.

Tue May 5, 2009 1:27am EDT
By Tilde Herrera
Reutersonline