Archive for January, 2012
Google Vs Yahoo – Who’s Greener?
Google Vs Yahoo – Who’s Greener?
Silicon Valley is known for both innovation and hype. Recently, this pool of innovation has extended beyond bandwidth to the protection the environment. Google and Yahoo, the search engine giants, are both headquartered in the Valley and have been making headlines by greening their offices, reducing energy consumption, and carbon trading. The PR motivations are obvious, but are the green benefits really there? To set apart the hype from reality, we have analyzed the green value of both Google and Yahoo’s headquarter facilities.
We looked at the ecological services provided by green landscape features such as trees and open space (i.e. grass). Grass and trees are pervious surfaces, meaning they allow water to permeate into the ground. Roofs, sidewalks, patios, and asphalt parking lots are examples of impervious surfaces, where rainwater drains into the public storm drains. Heavy metals, oil, and other pollutants are carried off parking lots in rainwater, which often lead directly to open water habitats, where fish, birds, and reptiles live.
In terms of ecological services, trees and grass have been proven to:
1. Remove and store carbon from the atmosphere,
2. Remove certain airborne pollutants,
3. Permits rainwater to seep into the ground as opposed to draining into the stormdrains, and
4. Remove certain waterborne pollutants.
Here is a look at how green Google and Yahoo really are and how the measure up against each other.
Google Green Report
Google’s headquarters, the Googleplex, covers 44 acres, nearly 50% of which is grass or tree canopy. This is an impressive paved to open space ratio. The grass and trees on the Googleplex remove roughly 2 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.04 tons per year per acre. In addition, 530 lbs. of air pollution are removed per year (e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter), or 12 lbs. per year per acre. It was assumed that the parking lot of the Googleplex is asphalt, and not a type of porous pavement, so the cost of managing rainfall runoff from the Googleplex is $4,474 per year, or $103 per year per acre. The abundance of grass and tree canopy on the Googleplex go a long way to offset the water quality impacts of the paved surfaces (mainly the parking lot). On average, the grass and trees reduce water pollution by 6%, as opposed to the entire property being paved.
Yahoo Green Report
The Yahoo headquarters, Yahooplex, covers 28 acres, a third of which is grass or tree canopy. This is a classic ratio of paved to open space for large office complexes in California. So far, par for the course. The Yahooplex removes 0.36 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.01 tons per year per acre. 114 lbs. of air pollutants are removed per year, or 4 lbs. per year per acre. In terms of rainfall, the cost associated with runoff is $9,219 per year, or $331 per year per acre. The grass and tree canopy help offset the paved areas with a 2.3% reduction in water pollution as opposed to the entire property being paved.
The final green analysis?
Google kicks Yahoo’s butt, largely due to the forethought, or luxury, of the Googleplex having 50% of its property surface providing green services. The good news for both Google and Yahoo is that over time, as trees grow, so will the tree’s canopy and mass, thus storing more carbon and removing more air pollutants.
Green next steps for both Google and Yahoo is to:
- Install porous parking surfaces, allowing up to 80% of rainwater to seep into the ground,
- Install green roofs, absorbing rainwater while reducing cooling costs and energy consumption, and
- Planting larger trees on the south and west sides of the buildings to reduce cooling costs and energy consumption.
While we crunched the hard numbers to settle the Google vs. Yahoo green debate, this report illuminates the great opportunity that awaits these two Silicon Valley giants to harness the ecological services of green surfaces.
Chris Erichsen is a GIS Mapping consultant with the Erichsen Group, GIS and Mapping in northern California. He has over 10 yrs of GIS experience and helps many industries around the world apply GIS mapping technology. Learn more examples of GIS mapping capabilities.
The News of Green Tech-05
LEED Schools In Houston Get More Than an E For Effort
We send our children to school every day and ask them to learn. They are, after all, the future of our world; and so we ask them to learn about right and wrong, learn about the world, and learn how to take care of each other. But do we want them to learn how to take care of the world, too?
That is what LEED Green Building schools in Houston and around the nation are doing. They are teaching the children, through example, what it means truly to earn an A for awareness of the environment’s needs. They stand for the future of America as a benchmark of creation care.
LEED Green Building schools are K-12 schools that are tailor-made to produce an environment safe and healthy for children, comfortable for teachers, cost-effective for the taxpayers, and easy on the environment. By addressing the uniqueness of school spaces and children’s health issues, LEED for Schools provides a unique, comprehensive tool for schools that wish to build green with measurable results. The rating system addresses issues such as classroom acoustics, daylight and views, mold prevention, and environmental site assessment.
In addition, Green schools cost less to operate, freeing up resources to truly improve students’ education. Their carefully planned acoustics and abundant daylight make it easier and more comfortable for students to learn. Their clean indoor air cuts down sick days and gives our children a head start for a healthy, prosperous future. And their innovative design provides a wealth of hands-on learning opportunities.
No longer must they learn through books about environmental safety and/or green projects around the world. Instead, they can learn hands-on at school – through observation and through practice.
Houston has taken the lead around the nation in building green schools. The Houston chapter is dedicated to showing school district leaders how the LEED FOR SCHOOLS process can benefit them. Other leading organizations in the area are also committed. Earlier this year, the Houston-Galveston Area Council joined with the Houston chapter to produce a year-long symposia to educate the public and educators about the facts and costs for LEED FOR SCHOOLS.
They ideally will have all their schools “Go Green” over the course of the next 10 years.
Other cities are following their lead. Salt Lake City, Grand Rapids and Seattle are all among the top cities with at least three green schools. And more are being built monthly. Both students and parents, teachers and administrators see the need and the benefits for green schools, and are lobbying for all school to change their ways.
For students and teachers, green schools mean reduced incidence of asthma, decreased absenteeism, improved academic performance and increased teacher satisfaction. For parents, green schools offer the confidence that comes with knowing their children spend their days in an environment that is both healthy and conducive to learning.
Green Schools get more than an E for effort. They are the bright and healthy future for our children.
Copyright 2009 – 2010 theLEED.com and Green Efficient. Article may be reproduced, unchanged, as long as it retains author information and linking.
Rick Walker is the CEO of Green Efficient. GreenEfficient is the leader in the LEED building maintenance and operations market. Primarily serving Texas, their LEED Accredited Professionals (LEED-APS) manage commercial facilities using their integrated services portfolio of LEED-compliant janitorial services, Integrated Pest Management services, HVAC maintenance, lawn care services, purchasing oversight, occupant training and USGBC submittal services. Offices in Houston, Austin, Dallas and Corpus Christi enable the most active Texas LEED construction markets to be covered by their specialty services. For information on LEED, green building and sustainable products, visit their blog: theLEED
A Global Disaster From the Perfect Solar Storm
A Global Disaster From the Perfect Solar Storm
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
Water Used in Generating US Electricity
Water Used in Generating US Electricity
In my four-article series on water use (The Resource Matrix), I took you on a journey to reveal the layers of The Resource Matrix in order to help you understand how water will be a highly contested commodity tomorrow, possibly as much as oil is fought over today.
You learned about your water footprint and a website where you can calculate it, virtual water and virtual water transfers, whereby choices here affect water availability elsewhere, to the point of some people not having enough water to drink in order to produce inexpensive dyed cotton, along with insane choices such as growing crops in the desert.
You learned that on average it takes 1854 to 3000 gallons to produce one pound of beef.
Yep, it’s it’s been a great journey through the sidetrip city of the Resource Matrix.
Today, we’ve found the on-ramp to the Green Lighting Interstate and are driving to take a look at water use in generating electricity.
For a simple reason. It takes a lot of water to produce electricity.
How much? 5% of all US water? 10%? Can’t be as high as 25%?
Electricity and water?
I thought the issue was fossil fuels and greenhouse gases
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated water use in the United States in 2000.
Their grand total: 408 billion gallons per day withdrawn for all uses.
The number 1 spot, weighing in at 48%, was thermoelectric power.
Irrigation earned the runner-up prize at 34%.
The 195 billion gallons need to come from somewhere, and actions have consequences. Environmental ones, as in 40 million fish in the Great Lakes killed each year due to being trapped against water intake devices. That’s a lot of Friday night fish dinners.
How much water is used in generating electricity?
Large fossil fuel and nuclear plants require incredible quantities of water for cooling and ongoing maintenance.
Water for thermoelectric power is used in generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators. It uses 48% of all water in the US.
According to the Pace Energy and Climate Center, the amount of water used for power plant cooling varies by each specific power plant’s electricity generating technology and size. Nuclear reactors require the most water for cooling, and baseload fossil fuel power plants come in second.
The Salem Nuclear Generating Station alone takes 3 billion gallons a day from the Delaware Bay, according to the Pace Energy and Climate Center.
Nationally:
- Steam electric generating plants across the nation draw in more than 200 billion gallons per day.
- Nuclear and fossil fuel power plants drink over 185 billion gallons of water per day.
- Geothermal power plants add another 2 billion or so gallons a day.
- Most renewable energy technologies require little or no water for cooling.
These numbers are starting to sound like the same ones the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank use.
Imagine watching your favorite science program where astronomers explain that the universe is 78 billion light-years wide (78 billion units of 5,878,630,000,000 miles). There is absolutely nothing in our experience to help us wrap our mind around it.
How much is 3 billion gallons per day?
The Delaware Bay feeds Salem Nuclear Generating Station 3 billion gallons a day.
Imagine this rectangle: a football field with end zones (360 feet long x 160 feet wide). Then add to it walls on each side of the rectangle to create a container to hold the 3 billion gallons you pour into it.
How high do you need to make those walls to contain 3 billion gallons? 6915 feet high. Or 1.3 miles.
Maybe 6915 feet high is still hard to imagine. So how deep do you cover the field in order to feed the Salem plant every minute? Answer: 5 feet deep. Every minute.
48% of all water use: We’re Number One!
How much is 195 billion gallons per day?
Using the USGS figure for 2000, thermoelectric power nationwide used 195 billion gallons a day, or 48% of all water used in the US. My guess is the water use has grown since then.
How high are the walls on our football field now? 449,475 feet or 85 miles high. We’re back to US Treasury and astronomy numbers again.
So, let’s get a higher-level view to help us.
Lake Erie holds 116 cubic miles of water.
Nationally, thermoelectric power uses 195 billion gallons a day – or 64.2 cubic miles a year.
We drain Lake Erie every 22 months.
But the water used is returned to its source.
So what’s the issue about water use?
Power generation returns 98% of the water back to its source (bay, lake, river, ocean).
It’s the environmental consequences.
The Pace Energy and Climate Center explains it neatly:
Withdrawal of large volumes of surface water for either power plant cooling or hydropower generation can kill fish, larvae and other organisms trapped against intake structures (impinged), or swept up (entrained) in the flow through the different sections of a power plant.
Examples include:
- The Salem Nuclear Generating Station is responsible for an annual 11 percent reduction in weakfish and 31 percent reduction in bay anchovy.
- At the Indian Point 2 and 3 reactors on the Hudson River, the number of fish impinged totaled over 1.5 million fish in 1987.
- The 90 power plants using once-through-cooling on the Great Lakes kill in excess of 40 million fish per year due to impingement. (Once-through cooling needs a continual flow of new water, and uses 30 to 50 times that of a closed cycle system. Closed cycles cool down water from steam then reuse it.)
The diversion of water out of the river removes water for healthy in-stream ecosystems:
- Stretches below dams are often completely de-watered.
- Fluctuations in water flow from peaking operations create a “tidal effect,” disrupting the downstream riparian community that supports its unique ecosystem.
- A dam’s impoundment slows water flows, which hinders natural downstream migration of many fish species.
- By slowing river flows, dams also allow silt to collect on river and reservoir bottoms and bury fish spawning habitat. Silt trapped above dams accumulates heavy metals and other pollutants. Disrupting the natural flow of sediments in rivers also leads to erosion of riverbeds downstream of the dam and increases risks of floods.
- The impoundment of water by hydropower facilities fundamentally reshapes the physical habitat from a riverine to an artificial pond community.
- This often eliminates native populations of fish and other wildlife.
- Dams also impede the upstream and downstream movement of fish and other wildlife, and prevent the flow of plants and nutrients. This impact is most significant on migratory fish, which are born in the river and must migrate downstream early in life to the ocean and then migrate upstream again to lay their eggs (or “spawn”).
- As mentioned above, withdrawal of water into turbines can also impinge or entrain significant numbers of fish.
The cleanest kilowatt is the one never used:
Back to those compact fluorescent lamps and LEDs
PowerScorecard.org explains the solution:
By re-directing electricity dollars to support environmentally benign energy resources, consumers are empowered, in states that offer supply choice, to influence the existing generating resources that are deployed to meet demand.
They can also support the construction of new and cleaner electricity resources that will be built to meet overall growth in demand in the future. By supporting these power options, consumers can minimize many water use and consumption impacts. Still, directing your dollars to cleaner power products in no way helps remediate damages that already have occurred. Consumers can stop the construction of new hydropower facilities or alter conditions of siting and operation, but they cannot undo previous environmental degradation that occurred at existing hydropower facilities.
In short, reduce your use of electricity.
More Info:
We used several sources for this article, including the PowerScorecard.org website, which is produced by the Pace Energy and Climate Center, which is part of the Pace University School of Law’s Center for Environmental Legal Studies, Pace University, White Plains, New York.
On PowerScorecard, you can get:
- Ratings of Electric Power Choices for some service areas.
- More info on electricity and the environment:
- Technologies
- Climate change
- Acid rain
- Ozone depletion
- Water use (our article today)
- Water quality
- Land: on-site and off-site impacts
Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .
To your green, brighter future,
Cinnamon Alvarez,
A19
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
You can access it now by going to: http://www.a19.com/pub/articles/
From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures
Notices For New Technology
Responsible For Residential Solid Waste Removal?
Residential solid trash, also called urban solid waste and municipal solid garbage, is refuse that normally comes from households. It is either in solid or semisolid form. There are five general categories of solid garbage that include:
1) Biodegradable waste: food and kitchen
2) Recyclable material: paper, glass, bottles, cans, metals, and certain plastics.
3) Stagnant rubbish : construction, dirt, rocks, and debris.
4) Assorted waste: clothing, plastics,etc.
5) Household hazardous waste: toxic such as paints, chemicals, light bulbs, spray cans, fertilizer and pesticide containers, batteries,etc.
Cities and towns generally contracts out solid garbage removal services. They will submit bids, assess each bid, and recommend a company. The rubbish company will bill the city or town. These companies are privately owned so if a person has a lot of waste after a project such as home renovation, they can hire a garbage removal company to remove the refuse.
Because of environmental regulations and a growing demand for a cleaner environment, junk companies are now performing the following services:
Recycling Programs: Curbside recycling is usually available to all residential customers. Customers will separate their recyclables according to paper and plastics for curbside pick up. Depending on the contract, this is normally done every two weeks. There can be special recycling programs such as Christmas tree recycling. The trees are then made into mulch. Other special programs a town or city can offer are Spring and Fall Clean Ups. They are designed to encourage residents to get rid of large amounts of garbage.
Hazardous Materials: Every year, millions of people accumulate such hazardous waste products as batteries, paints and stains, cleansers and polishes, motor oil, antifreeze, pesticides and herbicides,etc. These are dangerous to the environment, people, and animals. A rubbish removal service is trained to remove these products safely and responsibly. They will sort and categorize the hazardous materials before storing them in containment units. The contracted hazardous waste hauler packs the items in drums and sends them to hazardous rubbish incinerator or other treatment facility for proper disposal. Some materials, such as used motor oil, lead-acid batteries and antifreeze, are recycled.
Compost Services: Many cities and towns offer a compost service. They will provide compost bins for people to place such items as kitchen food garbage, newspaper, and other items that can be composted. A contracted junk removal company will pick up the compost left on residential curb sides.
Energy Recovery Plants: Plants that convert rubbish to energy are popping up all over the country. These plants burn garbage to heat water which produces steam in much the same way power plants burn coal, oil, natural gas, or wood. The steam can cause a turbine to produce electricity. Junk removal companies that have energy recovery plants in their area will make use of these services.
Special Handling waste Removal Services: Cities and towns will have a contracted service to remove large items such as tires, air conditioners, household appliances, and construction debris. Tires are sent to a recycling or recovery facility and household appliances, after chlorofluorocarbon gas removal, are taken to recycling stations.
Individual Contracted waste Removal Services: There are situations where a person has too much waste to be removed by a city or town removal service. They will then enlist the services of a private company. They are trained and certified to dispose of waste, compost, and recycle residential goods. For a nominal fee, a company will come to your home and remove all of your excess trash.
Because of growing environmental concerns, most companies dispose of waste in ways that will have the least environmental impact. You will feel good knowing that you are doing your part to protect and conserve the environment.
It is important for individuals to be mindful of what is in the trash. That way, the environment can be better protected. If you are looking for a junk removal and rubbish company located in the GTA please visit us at: Garbage Removal Toronto.
2008 – Going Green Tech News
Our Family’s: The 3 R’s – Our Commitment to Do More
So How You Do’ing? In the spirit of recycling, I thought I would use those famous words from Friends character Joey. I have shared with you in other articles ideas that my family are using to cut our carbon footprint on this precious Earth that we call home.
Reducing is always a challenge, because it goes in the face of our societal values of having more and doing more, but it is the highest form of recycling.
Re-using is something that has been natural for me through out my life. It may be challenging at times to creatively transform old household items into new uses, but this has become one of the staples of our family’s efforts to be more environmentally friendly…and save money.
Recycling has become the catch phrase for the 3 R’s, but is strictly speaking altering one thing into another. It is important that we recycle as much as we possibly can, because making consumables from recycled goods is always cheaper and better for the environment than making them from raw materials. But we should recognise too that recycling should only be used after we have reduced and re-used. For our children and their futures, we must use all the arsenal of tools embodied in the 3 R’s: reducing wherever we can, re-using everything that we possibly can, and recycling every item that our councils and recycling centres will accept.
Today I am wanted to look at those things that my family could do better:
1) Reducing excess packaging. I think this might be the most challenging to tackle; partly because a great deal of it is beyond our control. We are, I admit, large consumers of electronics (blame techie husband). Have you ever noticed how much packaging goes into one tiny piece of plastic? A memory stick that is one inch by two will most often come in a plastic (non-recyclable) package with a large cardboard inset and an information packet. I recognise that this is an anti-theft device, but aren’t there other alternatives? What about putting such items behind the counter? The other side of that is that the packaging contributes to the cost of that piece of plastic and metal. Of course, this is an issue that will require a concreted effort from consumer and most likely government intervention to address. What I can do for now is to choose to purchase my fruit and vegetables loose. I am also hoping this will cut down on both spending and waste by purchasing only what we need.
2) I am going to remember to use those little switches on the power plugs. As I mentioned, being American we do not have such things. It has been hard for me change a lifetime of habits. But with my husband’s help, I am going to use these magic little buttons more often.
3) We are going to replace all batteries with rechargeable ones. About half of our batteries are rechargeable; mostly the ones in our keyboards and mousse. But over the coming weeks, we will replace all batteries with rechargeable ones…since these are particularly toxic waste in our landfills.
4) I am going to use less water when washing dishes. I have this habit of running the water to rinse dishes as I go. The new plan is to wash everything and sit it on the counter until I am done. Then use the same pan to rinse the dishes in cold water.
5) I am going to have a spring clean out. I may be doing pretty well at re-using but I could help others to do better by donating all the stuff I am not using to Freecycle, the Islington Swap Xchange, or my local Mind shop. This will make my husband very happy as he has been complaining about my daughter’s toys for a while now.
So what can you do better? Remember though this is not about being perfect, but the little things that we can realistically do and continue to do. The things that may seem so small that you don’t think they will make a difference: things that if we all did would make a huge difference. I invite you all to share your list with me.
Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme.
Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end.
Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.
Save the Planet by Becoming Energy Efficient
Save the Planet by Becoming Energy Efficient
Save the planet! As Earth Day approaches April 22, what are you doing to get ready? Earth day is an event that started to bring attention to our environment. How we handle our garbage reflects our environment. Here are three tips to help save our environment.
- First, recycle. Recycling is taking some of our garbage and reusing it, directly or indirectly. To recycle a water bottle, you may reuse it again and again. But for gallon milk jugs or 2 liter soft drink bottles, you may opt to collect them and bring them to a recycling center. The recycling center will forward them on to a company that will melt them down and reprocess them.
- Second, shop efficiently. Try using what your Grandma used when she cleaned her house. Try using vinegar and baking soda. There are lots of sites that recommend natural cleaning products instead of chemicals. Also, buy those products in bulk. It reduces packaging which ends up in our garbage dumps and it may be cheaper, the more you buy, the cheaper it is.
- Third, conservation. Since I already have compact fluorescent light(CFL) bulbs installed, turning off the lights when I leave is the next best thing. My Mom always told me to turn off lights when I leave a room. She was right. Using more electricity only raises your electric bill. It will also increase your carbon footprint.
Education is a goal of Earth Day. Educating everyone from adults to children can get involved. Challenge your kids to come up with projects to bring attention to our environment. When we teach our next generation, we are saving our planet. But first, we must start ourselves. Be a steward of what God gave you. Become energy efficient by recycling and conservation. Our planet is worth it.
And now I would like to invite you to join me in learning energy saving tips you can do yourself to decrease your electric bill at http://energyconsciousconsultant.com Energy conservation should be out goal.
Save the Plastic Bag or Ban the Plastic Bag?
Save the Plastic Bag or Ban the Plastic Bag?
As part of the conservation and environmental movement worldwide there are several campaigns aimed at banning the plastic bag. These fit in perfectly with going green at home and with our longer term life styles.
A quick search on the web will take you to the San Francisco Bay Area, “Bay vs Bag”, to the Daily Mail’s (UK) “Banish the Bags” as well as similar situations in Canada, Holland, China, elsewhere in the US and even Zanzibar.
A lot of the focus is based on the damage done to wild life, including sea mammals and birds; the effects on waste and the average number of bags used per person in different countries. In one of the lists I saw, Singapore was topping the list at 625 bags.
One of the targets is to reduce by 10% the yearly consumption of these bags.
On the other hand there are also “Save the Plastic Bag” campaigns, with the plastic industry behind it. Their main focus is highlighting what they call misinformation. Their points are based on “exaggerations” on the damage done to wild life; errors in how plastic bags are made (from ethane gas that would otherwise be burnt and not petroleum); effects of co2 vs methane; potential job losses and so on.
On the banning side of the argument, there can be exaggerations as well as questionable scientific data – questionable as in anybody can question it, after all to have an argument you must always have at least two points of view.
From the “saving” the industry point of view, there can be many counter arguments to the data that is presented. And this is quite understandable, after all their industry could be hit very badly. (This just reminds me that all businesses have a life time curve that goes from birth, to growth, to maturity and finally to demise. The time scale can be as short as a year to as long as a hundred years or more, but the end result is that it is replaced by something else).
Some of the arguments are saying that nets and not plastic bags are causing marine life casualties, that paper bags are a worse alternative (side stepping the plastic bag issue) and basically attacking the “plastic bag misinformation campaign”.
Very probably both sides are looking to make their points by reducing or ridiculing their opponents point of view. But the overall issue is still there – are plastic bags affecting our environment?
To get back to the plastic bag banning situation, where paper bags have the negative effect of more trees cut, the information that is being retrieved is very important. But it must also be as objective as possible. Having said that, we know that it takes literally centuries for plastic to degrade and this should be the foremost argument.
Just to expand a little on the paper bag argument, which is totally reasonable, the option is not to cut more trees. The options are to recycle and use bio-degradable alternatives.
In the old days, when plastic bags hadn’t been invented but grocery shops had, natural fiber bags were used and the customers were the ones who brought their own to the shop.
With just a little effort on the individual front, these campaigns wouldn’t be necessary.
Want to know about environment and natural living? Information, news and facts can be found at: http://natural-living-tips.com/
Recycling – What it Really Is
Recycling – What it Really Is
Recycling has become the catch all phrase often used in place of the 3 R’s. But in its truest form recycling means taking one thing and changing it, usually chemically, into another. This is not to say that recycling is without value; it is certainly better than putting the items in the bin where they will end up in landfills and leach chemicals into our ground water. It is though to say that before you place anything in the recycle bag, first consider if you could reduce or re-use it, because everything that ends up in the recycling bag will have to be altered before it can be used again. Even then it is cleaner to produce goods from recyclables than from raw materials.
Here are just a few reasons to make certain that after you have reduced the amount of waste your create and re-used as many things as possible that your family puts as many things as possible into the recycling bins:
- Recycling one aluminium can saves enough energy to run a TV for three hours — or the equivalent of a half a gallon of gasoline.
- Each ton (2000 pounds) of recycled paper can save 17 trees, 380 gallons of oil, three cubic yards of landfill space, 4000 kilowatts of energy, and 7000 gallons of water. This represents a 64% energy savings, a 58% water savings, and 60 pounds less of air pollution!
- The 17 trees saved (above) can absorb a total of 250 pounds of carbon dioxide from the air each year. Burning that same ton of paper would create 1500 pounds of carbon dioxide.
- Recycling plastic saves twice as much energy as burning it in an incinerator.
- The energy saved from recycling one glass bottle can run a 100-watt light bulb for four hours. It also causes 20% less air pollution and 50% less water pollution than when a new bottle is made from raw materials.
- A modern glass bottle would take 4000 years or more to decompose — and even longer if it’s in the landfill.
Today is the actually a great day to talk about recycling. Each Thursday the council sends around men to collect our recyclables. The council gives us re-usable sacks, which we can use to collect all paper, cardboard, tin cans, aluminium, glass bottles and jars and plastic bottles. Unfortunately, they do not over recycling for other plastics. As I have been writing this series of blogs that has been one thing that I have been especially mindful of: how much plastic packaging manufacturers use that cannot be recycled and that it is estimated takes over 500 years to decompose in landfills.
But it is not just our plastics, glass, metals and paper that we recycle. Thanks to a wonderful programme through the Islington council, last year we were able to purchase a subsidized wormery to recycle our food waste into compost and liquid fertilizer for growing my own food. Actually, even though we may think that food thrown into the bin will degrade relatively quickly in the landfills, the biggest problem is the amount of methane, a dangerous green house gas, which it produces in that time. Methane is twenty times more potent than carbon dioxide and a major contribute to climate change. While my wormery cannot accommodate meat products I put all peels and unused fruits and vegetables into it. I should soon be harvesting my first patch of compost…just in time for my summer garden.
So how does my family do on recycling? Not too bad honestly. This week we had two bags of recyables and will only have two half full 13 gallon bin bags of other rubbish. Actually hubby and I got into a minor disagreement over the trash last night. One of the first rules of the 3R’s is to only throw out your garbage when the bag is full. In our case though, it had begun to smell. I am still looking for a solution…if anyone has ideas they would be greatly appreciated. But for a family of three adults and one pre-schoolers two large bags of recycling and one full 13 gallon bin bag in a week is pretty good I think. I imagine that there are single people, who put more than one bag in the bin each week.
Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme.
Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end.
Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.
the Toronto Auto Show
A Summary of the Pending GHG Regulations
The newly formed Obama administration has listed greenhouse gas (GHG) tracking and reporting as a major goal, with the objective of protecting the future of the environment by reducing today’s carbon footprint. If no action were taken, the makeup of the earth would significantly altered. Future actions will establish a market drive carbon cap and trade program to drive GHG emissions reductions.
Greenhouse Gas tracking is outlined in The Climate Registry Protocol, which details the requirements for mandatory monitoring and tracking. The premise around greenhouse gas tracking are included in the U.S. Clean Air Act, aimed at improving air quality and lowering greenhouse gas emissions.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes mandatory reporting of the gases contributing to global climate change from about 13,000 facilities nationwide. These facilities account for the majority of greenhouse gas emissions within the United States and present a logical starting point for emissions reductions in the US. The regulation would cover companies that either release large amounts of greenhouse gases (GHG) directly or produce or import fuels and chemicals that when burned emit large amounts of carbon (CO2) gases.
One of the major focuses of the Greenhouse Gas tracking protocol is refrigerant gases used in refrigeration and cooling systems by numerous facilities, including manufacturers, food processors, retailers, grocery stores, office buildings, municipalities and hospitals, just to name a few. Because of their chemical makeup, refrigerant gases contain significant levels of carbon in the form of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). Use of these compounds has been regulated under the U.S. Clean Air Act for several years.
Greenhouse gases absorb and release radiation into the atmosphere, setting off a global warming effect on earth. The intent and overall goal of GHG tracking relates to better collection and management of the emissions data now so informed decisions can be made about future carbon trading schemes. The tracking protocols also help government entities to more accurately inventory the amounts of emissions reaching the atmosphere. The new GHG legislation puts in motion the data collection, organization, and first stage reporting mechanisms to allow the US to accurately calculate and maintain a GHG emissions baseline across the entire economy. This will allow for better understanding today as well as to determine progress for future Cap and Trade programs. With this accurate information, it can be determined if the guidelines are effective in lowering the harmful effects of these substances to the ozone layer.
Greenhouse Gas tracking involves measuring direct and indirect emissions and keeping extensive records on its usage, maintenance, leak containment and disposal. Heating and cooling systems, as well as other energy consumption, are defined as direct emissions.
Better and more effective GHG management is an objective of the current US government. No longer will the US sit by and watch the world attack the issue of climate change. The US is now taking action to lower carbon emissions to the betterment of future generations. By taking no action, the earth’s makeup would significantly change, with humans and animals adversely affected and marine and plant life severely damaged.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) management and reporting is now falling under the EPA regulations contained within The U.S. Clean Air Act because the causes of global climate change is now well know. Human activities and the use of global warming substances, like refrigerant gases, are all leading to increased global warming. The substances are carbon dioxide, chlorine, bromine, nitrous oxide, chloroflurocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, methyl bromide, methyl chloroform, sulfur hexafluoride, hydroxyl, perfluorocarbobs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, fluorine, and the fluorinated gases hydrofluorinated ethers and nitrogen trifluoride. The mandatory law is aimed at reducing the use of these substances to lower the effects of global warming.
Beginning in 2010, GHG management, tracking, and reporting will be environmental law for the highest emitting facilities. Part of the management will revolve around better tracking and reporting of refrigerant gases. Entities must submit usage reports and service records for all refrigerants having high GWP. Special calculations are applied to refrigerants when any leads occur. The GHG emission reporting rules and related protocols allow for progressive companies to take advantage of software already created to help with carbon emissions reporting. Some web applications allow organizations to track GHGs to the asset level across global, distributed facilities.
Software provided by Verisae tracks carbon dioxide (CO2) gas emissions according to The Climate Registry protocols across all sites so companies can manage their carbon emissions and work towards reducing their carbon footprint. To learn more effective refrigerant management tactics and the tools, you can research http://www.Refrigerant-Tracker.com