Archive for July, 2009
Water Efficiency – The Resource Matrix Part 2 of 4 – Water’s Role in Global Warming
Last week, we introduced you to the Resource Matrix, which is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
We showed you how economics leads to people maximizing their benefits in “win-lose” propositions: you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom. And how we’ve been hypnotized in believing what they want is also what we want.
But the scales have been falling from our eyes, we’re beginning to see the truth, and the power has been shifting away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd:
- Do-gooders have increased our awareness and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win”
- There is no “free lunch:” finite energy resources will run out; actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible; and that the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth
We now realize we’re all in this together: we have greater awareness of our actions and the desire to change, and have ways to change.
Hallelujah and Praise the Collective!
Today, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.
None of this is to dismiss or diminish the contribution of fossil fuels in global warming. Hey, just like the Special Olympics, if you participate, you get a medal. We just think that gold-medal winner Fossil Fuels has stolen the spotlight, letting silver-medalist Water Use keep us hypnotized in believing that water is a free lunch, and that nature will clear up polluted waters while getting away with breaking the rules.
Water, water, everywhere,
not a drop to drink.
According to our friends at How Stuff Works, who I wrote about sarcastically for their oxymoronic clean coal article in discussing how true public relations stuff really works, gives us this data:
- 98% of the planet’s water is in the oceans. It’s salt water – we can’t drink it or irrigate our crops with it.
- 2% is usable. Of that 2%:
- 80% is locked up in polar ice caps and glaciers
- 18% is underground in aquifers and wells
- 1.8% is in lakes and rivers
- 0.2% is elsewhere: either floating in the air as clouds and water vapor, locked up in plants and animals (and your body), and in foods and beverages.
Okay, so 20% of the usable water (only 0.4% of all water on Earth) is accessible, right?
Well . . . no. Many of the aquifers, wells, lakes, and rivers have been sucked dry like a once-juicy fly carcass in a spider’s web. (The 18% and 1.8% you see above is like the money in the Social Security Fund: there actually is nothing there.)
And many of those water sources that do still have a drop to drink are worse than the ocean’s salt water. Drink salt water and you’ll need to yawn into a bucket. Drink this water and you’ll kick the bucket.
And I know you aren’t asking this burning question:
“So . . . global warming to release fresh water from ice caps and glaciers is a good thing, no?”
Percentage this, percentage that.
Talk my language, will you?
I know I’m pulling the disgusting old government trick: drowning you in an ocean of water statistics.
So let’s make it plain and simple:
You bring in $10,000 a month. You’re also living high on the hog and doing your personal best to outshine every bling-bling Hip Hopster Musical Artist in materially conspicuous consumption:
- $9800 goes to the McMansion mortgage and gold-plated Rolls Royce lease
- $160.00 goes to investments in clothing and accessories
- $0.40 has been lost in the sofa cushions
- $39.60 a month is for everything else: food, phone and electric bills, income taxes, and all the other non-essentials: Don’t spend it all in one place!
Aquifers and wells and lakes and rivers:
Dry or polluted, oh my!
Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it:
We can all save water in the home. But as laudable as it is to take a shower rather than a bath and turn off the faucet while brushing our teeth, we shouldn’t get hold of the idea that regular domestic water use is what is really emptying the world’s rivers. Manufacturing goods … consumes a certain amount, but that’s not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar. (emphasis mine.) (Fred Pearce, When the Rivers Run Dry, Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. p 3)
Here are a few numbers he gives:
- to grow a pound of rice: 250 to 650 gallons of water
- to grow a pound of wheat: 130 gallons
- to produce a quart of milk: 500 to 1000 gallons
- to produce a pound of cheese: 650 gallons
- to produce a 1/4 pound of burger: 3000 gallons
He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms:
- 1 ton (265 gallons) for drinking
- 50 to 100 tons (13,250 to 26,500 gallons) around the house
- 1500 to 2000 tons (397,500 to 530,000 gallons) for food and clothing
—————————————–
sidebar:
How Many Gallons to Produce One Pound of Beef?
Lies, damned lies, and statistics
US Beef industry’s Cattlemen’s Association: 441 gallons
Fred Pearce: 12,000 gallons
Water Footprint Network: 1854 gallons (calculations: 15500 litres of water per kg; 4079 gallons per kg; 1854 gallons per pound)
In an industrial beef production system, it takes an average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef.
The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing.
This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing).
Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water on average.
—————————————–
Where does all that water come from?
From virtually everywhere
If it comes from imported goods (Thai rice or Egyptian cotton), the water comes from those countries.
When the water is collected from rivers or pumped from underground, as it is in much of the world, it’s:
- increasingly expensive
- increasingly likely to deprive someone of water (nothing to drink)
- increasingly likely to empty rivers and underground water reserves
And when the rivers are running low, as they are more frequently, there is less water to grow anything at all.
The water used in growing and producing goods around the world is known as “virtual water” and the trade of these goods is known as “virtual water transfers.”
And who’s the biggest water exporting Mouseketeer of them all? The United States.
When you drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of the region, virtually taking a share of the Costa Rican rains. The same is true within a national and regional boundaries. The Colorado River is drained so Californians can eat their Big Macs and have friends over for a Sunday afternoon barbecue.
In the same way that your use of fossil fuel is measured as a “carbon footprint,” your water use, actual and through virtual water transfer, is measured as a “water footprint.”
How big is my water footprint?
I’ll show you mine if you show me yours
Arjen Y. Hoekstra, professor at the University of Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the water-footprint concept in 2002. It “shows water use related to consumption within a nation, while the traditional indicator shows water use in relation to production within a nation.” (Hoekstra and Chapagain, Globalization of Water, Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008, p. 3)
With Hoekstra and Chapagain’s water footprint calculator (waterfootprint.org), you select your country, input food, domestic water use, and industrial goods consumption, press a button, and you get your:
- total water footprint for the year
- bar charts for the three components
- bar charts for individual food categories
For example, you’re in the US, eat only 1 pound of cereal a week (.4545 kg) and have a low-fat, low-sugar diet, use a low-flow showerhead, use a no-flush eco-toilet, and never run the tap while brushing your teeth. Two extremes:
- You’re the hippiest of the hip: making $10,000 a year: Your water footprint: 245 cubic meters (65,170 gallons)
- You’re the hippiest of the Yuppies: making $120,000: Your water footprint: 2979 cubic meters (792,414 gallons). Difference due to your income’s effect on industrial production.
Three notes on the calculations, because Professor Hoekstra is European and lives in the social welfare country that started birthing hippies in Amsterdam decades before they showed up in the US at Woodstock:
- You input kilograms for food:
- 1 kilogram = 2.2 pounds = 35.2 ounces
- 1 ounce = 0.028 kilograms. 1 pound = 0.454545 kilograms
- Your water footprint is in cubic meters per year:
- 1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet = 266 gallons
- The higher your income, the greater your water footprint, even if you don’t personally consume anything: you’re a capitalist pig supporting the Establishment Regime, I guess
So how is Cinnamon’s capitalist water footprint? Answer: 650 cubic meters (172,900 gallons)
I showed you mine. Now you show me yours:
Get the naked truth: Calculate your waterfootprint now:
Water’s running out:
I get the fossil fuel analogy so far.
And what about climate change?
We return to Fred Pearce’s book to find an example, of which he has oceans:
China’s Yellow River: The fifth longest in the world, it begins high in the mountains of eastern Tibet and journeys more than 3000 miles. Almost half a billion people depend on it for drinking and crop irrigation, and it’s made China the world’s largest wheat producer and second largest corn producer. Yet more than half of the lakes it feeds have disappeared over the last 20 years, and a third of pastures have turned to desert. This desertification generates huge dust storms that choke lungs in Beijing, close schools in Koreas, dust cars in Japan, and rain dust on mountains across the Pacific and Western Canada.
State irrigation projects along the Yellow River soak up the majority of its water – the total official allocations are greater than the actual flow.
The resulting drought could be an early warning sign of global warming.
Much of the declines in moisture reaching rivers is in line with prediction of climate researchers. So how does this global warming happen?
Higher air temperatures from desertification increase evaporation from oceans and intensify the water cycle. This increases atmospheric water vapor – 8 to 10% more than today. This increases global rainfall, but the rain is being redistributed: middle latitudes (read: the US) are becoming drier. Higher temperatures increase evaporation on land, meaning soil dries out faster, meaning less rainfall is reaching rivers.
The higher temperatures melt glaciers and snowpacks. At first, this leads to unpredecented floods. After the glaciers disappear, meltwaters that feed rivers disappear. The combined decreasing rainfall and increasing evaporation will lower moisture by 40% in the southern and western states.
The Sierra Nevada snowpack could diminish by 70 to 80 percent over the next 50 years. And some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions could dry up.
Global climate is becoming more extreme: the dry areas become drier, and the wet areas become wetter. And more areas are becoming dry deserts. Loss of habitat and agricultural lands. It’s a vicious cycle.
So what can you do?
Navigating through the Resource Matrix
As Fred Pearce points out, your drinking and bathing account for 0.05% of your total water consumption. Your food and clothing weigh in at 95.00%, although I find his 12,000 gallons needed to produce a pound of burger rather wild.
As Professor Arjen Y. Joekstra shows with his Water Footprint Calculator, your consumption of meats accounts for a lot, as does your guilt by association of being in an industrialized country.
The obvious solution: eat fewer e-coli burgers from your neighborhood Salt and Fat Slop Bucket restaurant.
The wiser solution: like your choices in energy use, become more aware of the resources needed to produce anything and the consequences. Such as luxurious cotton grown in the Egyptian desert.
Next article in the water efficiency series:
How an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed
peasant on some other side of the globe affects you
We continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.
And all of this is for one purpose:
To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.
Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .
To your green, brighter future,
Cinnamon Alvarez,
A19
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
You can access it now by going to: http://www.a19.com/pub/articles/
From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures
The Resource Matrix Part 1 of 4
“The Resource Matrix is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth. You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.”
In my last water efficiency article (Water-Efficiency: Why Most Advice You’ve Read is Absolutely Inefficient), we began a slow turn away from lighting with a discussion of the 80/20 Rule and how your little positive behavioral changes with water aren’t even a drop in the bucket when your other positive behavioral changes – making homemade pizza – evaporate the entire year’s ocean of benefits in a few tasty bites.
In a four-part series, we talk about a resource besides energy: water.
- Today, we begin far above this “turn off the porch lights and take short, icy showers” efficiency thing to show you how we got to where we are now both in fuels and in other resources.
- Next week, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.
- The following week, we continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.
- And in the final week, we tie together the articles in a symphony of three movements, showing you how all the elements hold the Resource Matrix in place and how, like Neo in the movie, you can break the code that creates the graphical user interface and see the illusion for what it really is. (At least, my version of it, anyway.)
Ready to take the red pill and see how deep the rabbit-hole goes?
We start with one of the most boring subjects known to college students, one birthed out of the Enlightenment when extremely titled, idly rich, powdery wig-headed fancy foppish men dressed like women and walked in high heels and squealed like school girls:
Economics: it’s totally insane
Economics is described as the science of allocating scarce resources. Since it’s the study of human behavior, it’s a social science rather than a physical science.
And although any individual’s behavior may not be predictable, individuals as a group can be. Kinda like the weather: you don’t know much about a single raindrop’s effect but you can track the overall storm and predict what’s next.
Economics likes to fool itself that it can predict behavior based on the assumption that people make rational choices. Understand what people think and you understand what choices people will make.
It unfortunately leaves out the other part of being human: human behavior based on emotions.
And emotions weigh heavily in how we interact with each other, especially in exchanges of value.
Maximizing returns:
“I want your goodies for nothing”
Economics recognizes that people are motivated by self-interest to maximize their benefits at the lowest cost.
On an individual basis, this can turn into a “win-lose” proposition:
- I want to acquire the best stuff for the cheapest terms
- I want to dispose of the lousiest stuff for the greatest terms
In short, you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom.
May the Force be with you:
getting diamonds and gold for nothing:
Economics comes out of 18th century political economy, which studied production, buying and selling, and their relations with law, custom, and government. Political economy itself comes out of moral philosophy.
This moral philosophy apparently had room for colonialism, which comes pretty close to getting your diamonds and gold for nothing: forcibly take over a country and use its people to extract its resources to be reallocated to your bank account. And make sure nobody but you has any say in the matter.
Social good in the equation:
A few people didn’t see the morality in this philosophy. Enter the lousy, meddling individual do-gooders like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mohandas Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Upton Sinclair, and many others who messed with the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd.
And some of the individuals do-gooders formed their own organizations like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace.
They all worked to increase awareness that there are alternatives to being forced to give away your diamonds and gold for nothing while having no say in the matter, and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win.”
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd, who could only lose in the change to “win-win,” found their salvation in the late 1800s with the rise of modern psychology (the scientific study of mental functions and behavior). Applied to politics, it’s called propaganda. Applied to spirituality, it’s called religion. Applied to commerce, it’s called marketing and advertising.
All these applications are forms of hypnotism, and are based on the proven principle that if you repeat anything enough times, including a falsehood, your audience will grow to believe it and then to defend it as the truth.
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd used economics to hypnotically declare for 250 years that fossil fuels, the air, and water were without cost. They called them “free goods.”
And they used force (”Oh yeah, and what the hell are you going to do about it?”) to declare that pollution had no consequences.
What’s an Oxymoron?
“Free Good” in economics
The free good is a term used in economics to describe a good that is not scarce. A free good is available in as great a quantity as desired with zero opportunity cost to society.
Earlier schools of economic thought proposed that free goods were resources that are so abundant in nature that there is enough for everyone to have as much as they want. Examples in textbooks (even in the 1980s) included fresh water and the air that we breathe. However, these are now regarded as common goods because competition for them is rivalrous.
In short, there is no free lunch.
An additional moral philosophy:
“There’s a sucker born every minute”
becomes
“How can I help you help me?”
The “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd continues to rise early and work late to craft their “win-lose” deals every day.
Yet, out of those rising early and working late, a small radical fringe discovered the curious fact that if you don’t beat a dog bloody every time you see it, it’s less likely to bite your hand off, and it even might go out and hunt down a squirrel for your evening stew.
Their moral philosophy became a hybrid offshoot.
The Hybrids still want your goodies, but they are willing to help you get your goodies with less pain and damage to yourself so you’ll be willing to come back to them and hand over more of your goodies.
Both use the same mind-numbing hypnotic slogans: “We care about you.”
The difference is the Hybrids actually do some of those same things that someone who cares about you would do. Even if they don’t actually give a hoot about you. Contrast that to the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd, who merely sends you more hynoptic slogans when they want your goodies.
Where Do You Want to Go Today?
Everywhere but here
We’ve all awaken to the shocking realizations that:
- finite energy resources will run out
- actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible, and
- the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, you could just pop some soma and totally trip out.
But the cowardly old world we’re experiencing has quickly turned into a total bummer of a bad trip, man. Down with the Establishment and praise the Collective.
We’re all in this together, or
Toss the lousy, greedy bastards overboard
The decades of the Do-Gooders increasing our awareness of possible “win-win” possibilities and of the Hybrids backing their “we care about you” lip service with actual service has brought us to another realization:
There’s a price to everything, and if I don’t pay the price, someone else will, and somehow, some way, on some sunny day, they’re going to get even and make me pay.
And this has been an important change in the understanding of energy efficiency and global warming: the environment has a limited capacity within our human-lifetime periods to absorb civilization’s byproducts and transform them into resources. It usually needs geologic time to turn dead trees and critters into oil and gas. In the meantime, the trash piles up in the streets.
The solution: create less trash.
Thanks to the Do-Gooders, we have greater awareness or our actions and the desire to change, and have the Hybrids offering ways to change.
And the result is a shift of power away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd. It’s now Power to the People.
But wait, there’s more …
to the Resource Matrix
Just because you know about fossil fuels, their finite amounts, their polluting, warming effects on the environment, and alternatives offered by the Hybrids – even if you have done your part to the best of your ability to reduce, reuse, and recycle — you haven’t escaped the Resource Matrix.
Energy to power our lives is one component of the Resource Matrix. And it’s the most visible in discussions of global warming and being resourceful. But there’s more:
Coming Attractions!
In the next three articles, we will talk about concepts concerning the resource that makes up 75% of the planet and 75% of your body:
Water.
You’ll learn that, although 75% of the planet is water, only 3% of water is potable (can be consumed), and of that 3%, only a small fraction is available, and of that small fraction, only a small fraction is potable, because the rest is polluted for hundreds of years to come.
You’ll learn how the actions of an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed peasant on the other side of the globe affects you where you are.
You’ll learn how, unlike oil, water is transferred invisibly from poor to rich by sleight of hand, like paying your utility bill through your online bank account.
You’ll learn how poor water decisions, rather than fossil fuel’s atmospheric effects described in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, leads to those drybeds of the formerly humongous Aral Sea and along the Amazon.
You’ll learn how to measure the global water impact of any nation, city, corporation, even yourself – to the nearest gallon or liter.
You’ll learn the little changes you can make – the water equivalent of “change your incandescent lightbulbs to compact fluorescent lamps” – and still be able to take your wastefully long showers.
And all of this is for one purpose:
To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
You can access it now by going to: http://www.a19.com/pub/articles/
From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures
The Perfect Solar Storm – From A Global Disaster
The average solar cycle lasts for eleven years. The cycle includes a minimum of solar activity and a maximum. The sun is unusually quiet right now and has been for some time but there should be an increase in solar activity at some point in the near future.
The best current scientific estimate for the next solar maximum is 2012. If this estimate is correct, there is still a few years to try and prevent the potential of a future global disaster. A disaster that would begin on the surface of the sun and could end with tragedy on earth.
The surface of the sun is a mass of plasma that contains highly charged energy particles. Once in a while, some of these particles escape the suns surface and a mass of plasma travels through space on the solar wind. This process is known in scientific terms as a coronal mass ejection but it can also be called a solar storm.
A disaster for the planet would occur if a solar storm reaches and hits the earths magnetic shield in just the right way. If it were to happen, millions of people would lose their lives and the planet would be thrown into chaos as the technology that has become crucial to every day living suddenly gets taken away.
The perfect solar storm will start with skies that will be filled with a bright red aurora. However, soon everything will become dark as every electric bulb becomes devoid of light. The storms damage to the electric grid would be caused through an increased DC current. The runaway current would knock out and melt hundreds of key transformers within minutes, cutting off power for hundreds of millions of people.
Those damaged transformers cannot be repaired only replaced and installing a replacement takes a well-trained crew a week or more. Its incredible to consider that most major electrical utilities have just one or two suitably trained crews available for these type of transformer repairs. In addition, there are only a few spare transformers available and the rest would have to be built to order. Its a process that can take nearly twelve months.
So, the power blackout from the perfect solar storm would last for months but its not just the absence of light that would be the problem. Drinking water would still come through the taps for maybe half a day after the storm. With no electricity to pump water from reservoirs, there would be no more tap water after that.
The electric grid is necessary for almost all natural gas and fuel pipelines to operate. As a result, fuel and natural gas will quickly run out and without food delivery, supermarket shelves would soon become bare. Soon it would become necessary to control public hysteria and the military would have to be called in to restore civil order
There will be no power for heat, cooling or refrigeration until the grid is repaired and after their back up generators run out, hospitals will not be able to provide modern healthcare. A lack of water and food will result in spreading disease but Pharmaceutical companies without electricity will not be able to produce the necessary medicine.
Of course, many will say that this is absurd science fiction and it cannot happen here, but this chilling disaster scenario was outlined in a report released last January (funded by NASA) by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
The fact is that a storm from the sun did hit the earths magnetic field in 1859. The effect of this solar storm on earth became known as the Carrington Event. The event was named after the amateur astronomer who observed two patches of intensely bright and white light emanating from a large group of sunspots that may have produced the event.
The solar storm that produced the Carrington Event created a red aurora across the planet from the poles to the tropics. Throughout the world, telegraph systems crashed, machines burst into flames, and electric shocks rendered operators unconscious. Compasses and other sensitive instruments reeled as if struck by a massive magnetic fist. It can happen again and the technology of the planet is now much more advanced and vulnerable.
The next solar maximum is estimated to return in about three years. A global disaster from the perfect solar storm can be prevented with proper contingency planning. There is still time for the government to be proactive and prepare to avoid disaster by creating a potential response to quickly repair the damage to the electric grid from the perfect solar storm.
James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. He has always been interested in writing and listening to different viewpoints on interesting topics. Visit his website at http://www.eworldvu.com or his daily blog at http://www.eworldvublog.blogspot.com
UNM-Taos a pioneer in solar energy movement – News
The 3.5 acre solar array consists of approximately 3500 solar panels made in the United States by American Capital Energy and installed by Paradise Power Company in Taos. The panels are on a tracking system, so they follow the sun’s …
SF Solar Energy Incentive Program Shines Bright in First Year …
In the year since our solar energy incentive program GoSolarSF launched, we have seen a 450% increase in applications for solar installations in San Francisco over the previous year, from 200 to 850. And despite the current recession, …
Tech Trader Daily – Barron's Online : JA Solar: Needham Launches …
Needham analyst Y. Edwin Mok today launched coverage of JA Solar (JASO) with a Buy rating and $5 target. The stock closed Friday at $3.78. As a leading solar cell producer in China, we believe JA Solar has the lowest wafer-to-cell …
Suntech Signs Up For Huge Chinese Solar Projects | BNET Energy …
BNET Energy provides daily news coverage for managers and executives in the energy industry, with coverage on major utilities, oil companies, and clean tech and renewable energy businesses.
Ascent Solar Appoints Chief Executive Officer | Solar Energy News
Welcoming Dr. Moghadam, Ascent Solar\’s founder and Chairman Dr. Mohan Misra stated, â??Ascent Solar is moving rapidly on many business fronts, and we expect that the addition of Dr. Moghadam to lead our company will help us meet the …
Your Second Hand Clothes: Recycle
Landfill in the UK is becoming a huge problem. With the drop in the price of recycled products, the issue is what to do with all of the waste that we produce. The breakdown of waste in landfill sites creates huge amounts of the greenhouse gas methane. There are also many products that will not breakdown and will remain in the environment for ever with the potential to contaminate water supplies.
Traid, a charity specializing in the recycling of textiles reports that 900,000 tons of shoes and clothing are thrown away each year in the UK. Only 200,000 tons per year are recycled and the rest is dumped in landfill. The government estimates that similar amounts of between 550,000 and 900,000 tons of textiles are thrown away each year.
In addition to the problems of waste and landfill in the UK, there is also the consideration of the energy used and waste generated by the manufacture and distribution of clothing and textiles. Growth of cotton uses a huge amount of chemical pesticides and environmentally damaging cultivation methods. The manufacture of man made fabrics also has a huge environmental impact with. Demand for polyester the most widely used synthetic fabric has almost doubled in the last 15 years. The manufacture of polyester uses large amounts of crude oil and an energy-intensive process. It releases emissions including volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, and acid gases such as hydrogen chloride, all of which can cause health problems for workers by causing or aggravating respiratory disease.
Second hand clothing is becoming more popular as people begin to recognise the real costs of fast fashion. Consumers are becoming more aware of their buying choices and ways that they can help the environment.
Finally, there is one more great reason to recycle second hand clothing. Just because you are fed up with a piece of clothing or it does not fit you nay more, it does not mean that it has no worth. You can make sure that the worth of your second hand clothing is realized by swapping it at a swishing party on a clothes swapping website, selling it or donating it to your favorite charity.
This article was written by Ceri Heathcote for posh-swaps.com, a website for swapping, buying and selling second hand and vintage clothing.
Clothes swapping and buying and selling second hand clothes is a great way to reduce the impact of fashion on the environment and to save money.
Australia’s Emission Trading System
In Australia the government are introducing an emission trading or cap and trade scheme. There are major concerns about the level of reduction the government wants to sign up to and also whether it will actually work.
As Australians we do need to take action about carbon reduction. We are both the most vulnerable continent for feeling the effects of global warming and also we are the worst greenhouse emitters per head than any other country on the planet. We emit even more than the USA and Canada who are our nearest competitors for this wooden spoon. This is at least in part due to our huge coal industry.
The head of the Australia Institute’s Think Tank says that the Federal Government’s emissions trading scheme will have too many permits and will not reduce carbon emissions.
The Australia Institute’s executive director, Dr Richard Denniss, said the scheme’s flaws related to the 5 to 15 per cent emissions reduction targets, which he described as ”ridiculously low”, and he said there would be too many permits. Dr Dennis said that “We won’t achieve the policy goal, which is to reduce emissions.”
Dr Denniss told the Senate that ”[If] we pass this legislation, we’ve got it for the next 10 years. And anyone that’s got a good idea a year later, it’s not going to help. This legislation is designed to not be tinkered with.”
Professor Clive Hamilton, from the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, said the proposed scheme had damaged Australia’s reputation. A reduction target of at least 25 per cent needed to be set if the Government wanted credibility on the world stage. Australia would be better off taking no policy than the proposed model to the December climate change talks in Copenhagen, he said.
”It not only lowers the ambition of the world community but also excludes Australia from being a forceful player in negotiating … a strong international agreement.”
It is hard to see how exempting large emitters ignoring the 1.9 million small to medium businesses is going to help us reduce our carbon footprint. These same small businesses are currently suffering from financial stress, the business owners and managers are overworked and simply don’t feel able to handle anything new. Many don’t really understand what global warming is about or why it matters.
We urgently need unambiguous communication so that small to medium businesses accept the reality of the need for change and also how easy it can be to make significant reductions with minimal time input and save money at the same time.
We also need to help low income households reduce their carbon footprint with more efficient heating and cooling and effective public transport. We should NOT be giving them even more cash hand outs as “compensation” as currently promised by the government. All households need to come on board and stop wasting power.
We need a clear message that going green applies to all of us, is easy and saves money – just “go for a grumpy walk and just turn it off”. If every small business and householder just went around each office and home and did this it would be relatively easy for every one to reduce their carbon emissions and their power bill by 15-20%. At present we are told it will be difficult and it only applies to big business. Such a wrong message – we all need to pull together.
A Brief given to the Victorian Government advises that the state should only bother with green measures if they are more cost-effective than alternatives. They have been told to rethink programs such as subsidies for solar farms and hybrid car fleets because these will not contribute to any additional emission cuts under the federal scheme.
The Greens have concerns about the cost of emission permits being reduced by the actions of households, councils and governments, hence reducing industry’s incentive to cut emissions. This is more than simply an economic debate. Individuals and households should also be reducing their emissions. Achieving sustainability is a grassroots exercise that involves the entire community, and Australians are becoming aware of the need to remake the economy and society. The momentum must not be lost.
An additional concern is whether the legislation and also the international agreements reached in Copenhagen will be flexible enough to take account of emerging technology. At present this does not appear to be the case. Senator Wong, the Minister for Climate Change, rejected spending on biochar, a form of carbon capture in soil research because that is not listed in the protocol. Thankfully some soil carbon storage research will now be funded in the agriculture budget but that begs the requirement for the legislation to be flexible and allow for new and future technology.
If the ETS cannot deliver real carbon reductions it is really a form of “greenwash” saying we signed Kyoto and have done something before the next election. The big problem is that the government looks ahead 3 years to the next election, Big Biz CEO’s also look to the short term of their contracts and bonuses. Who looks ahead for our children?
Jean Cannon is an energy management and sustainable business consultant. If you would like more information about how to go green in your home or business and increase your business profits why don’t you go to http://www.itiseasytobegreen.com and download a chapter of my book of almost the same name and find out how to reduce your carbon footprint.
Solar Powered Nightgarden in Jerusalem | O*GE Architects
a contemporary architecture, interior and design online magazine.
Solar Energy Takes Another Giant Step Forward in Arizona …
â??It puts Arizona in a position to be a leader in the solar industry. We look forward to working with leaders in the solar and renewable energy industry, and this program gets us in the game to bring more projects to our state.â? …
Newark Post – Newark, DE > Archives > News > Markell signs solar …
Standing next to solar panels at the DuPont Co.’s Chestnut Run Plaza on Thursday, Gov. Jack Markell signed three pieces of legislation into law that encourage homeowners to install solar panels and wind turbines on their property. …
Solar-powered e-ink display revealed by Neoluxiim – TechShout
The innovative portable e-ink display is powered by a solar panel and aims to lower the strain on the environment. It adorns a thin form factor measuring just about 7.5mm. Also the maximum display size is 26 x 12 cm. …
Solar Power – How To Build a Solar Power System
Solar Power – How To Build a Solar Power System. Learn how to build a solar power system. Get to know the necessary tools and materials required along with informative tips to guide you through the process.
Is it our fault? Global Warming
Global warming is one of those topics that I still find myself wondering what to truly believe. Is our CO2 production really the culprit in the warming of the planet? Or are there some other larger influences at play here. I have a hard time believing mankind’s activities are solely to blame for any kind of climate change.
After all, CO2 is only one of many greenhouse gases that can affect the warming trend. Water vapor is by far the most abundant and effective at influencing the greenhouse problem. But I don’t see any kind of public concern over evaporation of water in any way at all. Okay, I realize that there is little or even nothing that can be done about that but the point is CO2 is just a tiny fraction of the greenhouse gases affecting our climate. So if water vapor is by far the largest greenhouse gas then why are we so obsessed by manmade CO2? Mankind’s ego.
We see a small trend in the planets temperature rising and of course we assume it must be what we are doing. I am truly pleased to see that we are taking an interest in reducing pollution from cars and industry but I really have my doubts about the connection to global warming at least in the significant way the media would like us to believe.
The media is sounding the alarm bell which of course sells more newspapers than reporting the less extreme predictions surrounding the warming trend. The weather models produced by scientists predict a reduction in the temperature differences between the poles and the equatorial regions. This will in fact reduce the number of violent tropical storms, as there will be less of a temperature discrepancy to stimulate them. Also the warming of the regions closer to the poles will allow agricultural pursuits in areas where it was not possible before. Food production would be able to rise accordingly. The alarmist media isn’t interested in those types of stories it seems.
The change in the world’s temperature is just that, change. There is irrefutable evidence that the temperature of the planet has and most likely will always be changing regardless of what we are doing. What are we so afraid of? Do the alarmists doubt mankind’s ability to adapt and cope with a few degrees of temperature change or even sea levels rising a meter or so? There will doubtless be hardships and even some displaced people in some regions but man has the ability to adapt and change. We have demonstrated this through the ages. I am confident that we will not only survive these changes but also learn to use them to our advantage.
I live in Canada and if you ask anyone living north of the temperate zone about rising temperatures the resounding response would be “bring it on, we could use a little global warming around here”. Life will improve greatly for huge numbers of the world’s population with a couple of degrees increase in the planet’s temperature. Migration to areas that were before considered uninhabitable by most will have a more moderate climate allowing for farming and other activities. You can’t sell newspapers with stories like that.
The scientific data indicates that 1998 was the warmest year on record. The planet has been cooling ever since. A quote from Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences “The earth is at the peak of one of its passing warm spells, It’ll start getting cold by 2012, and really, really cold around 2041″. So who are we to believe? A respected scientist or Al Gore who has made millions from his crusade for the planet and his questionable agenda and phony pseudo science.
If the planet is warming I can honestly say I hope so. We will get by and probably do well in the process. What really concerns me is the muzzling of real science in the debate. An objective media would go a long way in helping us all deal with the facts as they truly are. Focusing on the alarmist perspective only causes undue fear where none is warranted.
Is driving our SUV’s and minivans really the problem here? Or is our planet just going through another climate cycle like it has done so many times before? The only thing I know for sure is I can’t count on the media to provide the answers.
I recently produced the feature film The Harvest Project. Find out more and view the trailer at http://www.theharvestprojectmovie.com The movie is also available for sale at http://www.filmannex.com/search/searchkey/harvest%20project You can contact me at doug_king@shaw.ca
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Doug_G_King
How Can Technology Help the Environment?
How can technology help improve the environment? Are we promoting a more singular existence, where individualism is the force that is driving us along? We are now living in a world that is in an accelerated mode of change and innovation. Is this rate of change detrimental to our existence? Think about this for a moment. On the one hand we have improvements in all areas of our lives some are greater than others. On the other hand we are looking at the effects of the harmful destruction of our planet earth.
The first computers started to emerge around the 1940’s, now we have computer processors in a lot of the electronic equipment we use every day. We even have computers that can fit in your hand that have more power than the first computers.The first Television and television transmission appeared in 1925 and now we are watching gigantic flat screens, some as big as buildings and others screens as small as wrist watches. In the past 80 years the medical field has also grown in leaps and bounds in the areas of IVF, genetic research, cloning, stem cell research, along with the progress in the prevention, cure and management of various diseases. Other fields such as astronomy, environmental science, weapons/warfare and engineering have also had their fair share of extraordinary development achievements.
Looking at the issues of Global warming and human environment interaction we are currently facing within our natural environment. Should we really be in a race to ruin the land where we live? We cannot keep up with the current technology, just look at all the equipment you have taken to the recycle tip in just the last 12-24 months. Consider how many Televisions, Videos, DVD players, Computers, Laptops, Hi-fi’s and Home entertainment systems you have changed or bought recently, the list is endless. When an improvement is made to a product it can sometimes make the original product obsolete. Satellite Navigation equipment a new and easily available product for everyone. Even if you only use it once a year it is believed to be a must have product. Mobile phones is another product every man and his dog has one these days. How often do you change your mobile phone for the latest model? Can you ever imagine being without a mobile phone? How did we ever cope without them? The raw materials used to make a phone cannot be recycled easily.
I believe as we get to understand one part(s) of our lives we seem to lose sight of others parts that are equally as important. What can be done to slow down the rate of change or how do we as a nation become more aware of the effects of the rate of change has on our environment.
If we could not have a new television or other new product until the old one had been recycled properly we would help the environment tremendously. Today if we implemented this many products or versions of products would be missed because of the speed at which technology changes. Like the latest flat screen with super clear picture quality. It seem that every other week we get the next new and improved product. Just look at washing power or washing up liquid advertisements.
Just some food for thought more to come soon.
Take advantage of more free valuable content at this website: http://computerbass.com/
You will find something of interest…
Tech Trader Daily – Barron's Online : First Solar: ThinkEquity …
ThinkEquity analyst Colin Rusch this morning upgraded First Solar (FSLR) to Buy from Accumulate, lifting his price target to $188, from $180. He also raised his 2010 EPS estimate for the company to $8.99, from $8.55, above the consensus …
Solar-Powered County Fair Makes So Much Sense | Gizmodo Australia
img|http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/07/ferris-carousel.jpg|left]This year’s Marin County fair in northern California took its envi…
Interactive Solar Energy by Martin Willers » Yanko Design
While solar power and other such similar â??green energyâ? solutions might very well be the solution to the 36% of carbon dioxide pollution sent up by commercial buildings in Europe, the business owners are reluctant to join the team. …
Mind the Gap: LDK Solar and Cheap Silicon – Environmental Capital …
The market is hammering LDK Solar after signs that prices are slipping quicker than expected.
NREL confirms Ascent's flexible solar at 10.4 percent | Cleantech …
CIGS thin-film can be used in small tiles to power mobile devices or in 15-foot strips for building-integrated photovoltaics.
Environmental Improvements – Calling Leaders
The environment, which its current emphasis on ‘Global Warming’ and ‘Climate Change’ important though it is, is not the most vital matter facing humanity.
During recent speaking and teaching visits to Uganda and Kenya, and hearing something of the actual situation, I have become angry and occasionally tearful at the gross injustice, greed and corruption which is rife.
Our world has become so unstable over these past months in a way totally unpredictable by man. If I had written prophetically, 15 months ago, about what we are presently experiencing in the area of finance, you would have said I was off my head and just daft!
The Carbon Footprint issue might be causing some environmental damage although is being question by many, but the financial greed and mismanagement footprint is hurting millions as people loose income, jobs, houses and basic security.
When I was in Kenya last November, I was informed that the economic problems hitting America and Europe would hit Africa in three months time, and visiting schools and orphanages in the various slum areas I was very much aware of how a little extra resources could help so many more people with very little effort.
The structures are in place to utilise and distribute AID in a responsible manner. I have seen the projects designed to help those whose lives are confronted with unnecessary suffering, one example of this in Methere in Nairobi and the River of Life School in Manyatta, Kisumu. Now, there are other projects and schemes in various other nations and by investing in these immediately, the environment would improve slightly within a few months, but for the people who live there the improvement would be immense.
I write this as the G20 Summit is meeting in London. The money spent on that alone could feed the poor in Kenya (or some other nation) for months. It is just that I know a little about Kenya.
Earthquakes, floods and droughts will continue, and these will undoubtedly increase, with environmental disaster and tragedy resulting, but what concerns me is the area where substantial and significant improvements could be made, if only leaders would make sensible wise decisions.
You see, I write as a committed disciple of Jesus Christ, and I am not given the option of being quiet on these issues.
One sentence really challenged me this week. If you were reading the Sermon on the Mount for the first time, in Matthew’s Gospel, Chapters five to seven, how would you change your life?
How might this motivate us in the areas of fresh water and sewers, immunisation and basic health services, and feeding programmes and education for those who genuinely want to study and contribute positively towards the welfare and well-being of their nation.
To make these environmental improvements, strong, radical leadership will be required, but it is often in times of real darkness that the risen and living Lord Jesus Christ chooses, redeems, and raises up a leader or leaders to shepherd people out of their predicament.
Sandy Shaw
Sandy Shaw is Pastor of Nairn Christian Fellowship, Chaplain at Inverness Prison, and Nairn Academy, and serves on The Children’s Panel in Scotland, and has travelled extensively over these past years teaching, speaking, in America, Canada, South Africa, Australia, making 12 visits to Israel conducting Tours and Pilgrimages, and most recently in Uganda and Kenya, ministering at Pastors and Leaders Seminars, in the poor areas surrounding Kampala, Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu.
He broadcasts regularly on WSHO radio out of New Orleans, and writes a weekly commentary at http://www.studylight.org entitled “Word from Scotland” on various biblical themes, as well as a weekly newspaper column.
His M.A. and B.D. degrees are from The University of Edinburgh, and he continues to run and exercise regularly to maintain a level of physical fitness.
Sandy Shaw
sandyshaw63@yahoo.com
Inhabitat » SOLAR SPEEDSTER: UC Berkeley's Gold Rush Racer
A Green Design Blog, Sustainable Design Blog, Future-forward design for the world you inhabit – your daily source for innovations in sustainable architecture and green design for the home.
Taiwan opens doors to global solar market | Cleantech Group
New regulations that will encourage the adoption of solar at home leaves Taiwan looking to European countries for help.
San Francisco Housing Authority Goes Solar : CleanTechnica
San Francisco Housing Authority to Install Solar Panels It’s a match made in green heaven: the San Francisco Housing Authority has joined with the venerable affordable housing developer McCormack Baron Salazar to install more than 365 …
Threat to Solar Market: Government Budget Woes
Grid parity represents something of a Holy Grail for solar companies — a point where they can compete on cost …
Photovoltaic Solar Panels Coming to San Francisco's Public Housing …
Mr. Mayor was going on about San Francisco being number one in California rooftop photovoltaic solar installations on a per capita basis – his statement was just one caveat shy of being operational. It would appear the rich yuppies and …
Some Eco-Friendly Green Thoughts
How often when you go to the grocery store are you asked if you want paper or plastic grocery bags? Well the best answer to that would be NEITHER. To keep the U.S. stocked with paper and plastic grocery bags, takes about fourteen million trees and twelve million barrels of oil every year! Investing in a few reusable bags makes a lot of sense.
Think about those little paper receipts you get at the gas pump and the ATM machine. If all people would simply note it in their checkbook, or in a small notebook when they made a purchase or withdrew money, it would be saving enough paper to encircle the globe fifteen times!
If every American would by one roll of recycled paper towels instead of the others, it would save over half a million trees. And how about turning the car off when you are waiting for someone, in the drive-thru lane or stuck in a huge traffic jam? When a car idles for more than a minute it is polluting the air and wasting your gas.
Cordless phones are replacing conventional phones. But think about it… sitting in a recharging cradle and using up your electricity twenty-four hours a day and every day of the week! Replace one or two cordless phones with your old conventional ones and you’ll save energy. The old fashioned ones use only a tiny bit of electricity, and will work when the power is off. If you insist on the convenience of cordless phones, make sure the ones you do get are Energy Star-rated, for high energy efficiency.
|
Lisa is a freelance writer with a specialty in Internet content and SEO articles. She has written thousands of articles, hundreds of ebooks and thousands of website pages and related content. She has also authored her own books and works as a consultant to other writers, Internet marketers and Internet businesses. Professional wordsmith for hire: gamer, wife, mother, entrepreneur, published poet, co-owner of game guides company (http://www.liti4.com), public speaker and Internet business consultant. You can learn more or follow Lisa’s blog from her website: http://www.freelancewriter4hire.com
|
|
Australia’s Emission Trading System
In Australia the government are introducing an emission trading or cap and trade scheme. There are major concerns about the level of reduction the government wants to sign up to and also whether it will actually work.
As Australians we do need to take action about carbon reduction. We are both the most vulnerable continent for feeling the effects of global warming and also we are the worst greenhouse emitters per head than any other country on the planet. We emit even more than the USA and Canada who are our nearest competitors for this wooden spoon. This is at least in part due to our huge coal industry.
The head of the Australia Institute’s Think Tank says that the Federal Government’s emissions trading scheme will have too many permits and will not reduce carbon emissions.
The Australia Institute’s executive director, Dr Richard Denniss, said the scheme’s flaws related to the 5 to 15 per cent emissions reduction targets, which he described as ”ridiculously low”, and he said there would be too many permits. Dr Dennis said that “We won’t achieve the policy goal, which is to reduce emissions.”
Dr Denniss told the Senate that ”[If] we pass this legislation, we’ve got it for the next 10 years. And anyone that’s got a good idea a year later, it’s not going to help. This legislation is designed to not be tinkered with.”
Professor Clive Hamilton, from the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, said the proposed scheme had damaged Australia’s reputation. A reduction target of at least 25 per cent needed to be set if the Government wanted credibility on the world stage. Australia would be better off taking no policy than the proposed model to the December climate change talks in Copenhagen, he said.
”It not only lowers the ambition of the world community but also excludes Australia from being a forceful player in negotiating … a strong international agreement.”
It is hard to see how exempting large emitters ignoring the 1.9 million small to medium businesses is going to help us reduce our carbon footprint. These same small businesses are currently suffering from financial stress, the business owners and managers are overworked and simply don’t feel able to handle anything new. Many don’t really understand what global warming is about or why it matters.
We urgently need unambiguous communication so that small to medium businesses accept the reality of the need for change and also how easy it can be to make significant reductions with minimal time input and save money at the same time.
We also need to help low income households reduce their carbon footprint with more efficient heating and cooling and effective public transport. We should NOT be giving them even more cash hand outs as “compensation” as currently promised by the government. All households need to come on board and stop wasting power.
We need a clear message that going green applies to all of us, is easy and saves money – just “go for a grumpy walk and just turn it off”. If every small business and householder just went around each office and home and did this it would be relatively easy for every one to reduce their carbon emissions and their power bill by 15-20%. At present we are told it will be difficult and it only applies to big business. Such a wrong message – we all need to pull together.
A Brief given to the Victorian Government advises that the state should only bother with green measures if they are more cost-effective than alternatives. They have been told to rethink programs such as subsidies for solar farms and hybrid car fleets because these will not contribute to any additional emission cuts under the federal scheme.
The Greens have concerns about the cost of emission permits being reduced by the actions of households, councils and governments, hence reducing industry’s incentive to cut emissions. This is more than simply an economic debate. Individuals and households should also be reducing their emissions. Achieving sustainability is a grassroots exercise that involves the entire community, and Australians are becoming aware of the need to remake the economy and society. The momentum must not be lost.
An additional concern is whether the legislation and also the international agreements reached in Copenhagen will be flexible enough to take account of emerging technology. At present this does not appear to be the case. Senator Wong, the Minister for Climate Change, rejected spending on biochar, a form of carbon capture in soil research because that is not listed in the protocol. Thankfully some soil carbon storage research will now be funded in the agriculture budget but that begs the requirement for the legislation to be flexible and allow for new and future technology.
If the ETS cannot deliver real carbon reductions it is really a form of “greenwash” saying we signed Kyoto and have done something before the next election. The big problem is that the government looks ahead 3 years to the next election, Big Biz CEO’s also look to the short term of their contracts and bonuses. Who looks ahead for our children?
Jean Cannon is an energy management and sustainable business consultant. If you would like more information about how to go green in your home or business and increase your business profits why don’t you go to http://www.itiseasytobegreen.com and download a chapter of my book of almost the same name and find out how to reduce your carbon footprint.