Vampire power costs
By Lori Bongiorno
Posted Wed May 27, 2009 10:57am PDT
Related topics: Electronics, Electricity, Saving energy at home More from The Conscious Consumer blog
There's a lot of interest in the fact that many electronic devices in our homes are using energy even while they are turned off or not being used. But, how much money do these energy vampires really suck up?
For many people, the standby power used by one device will seem minuscule, but the costs can add up when you take into account just how many things we all have plugged in. What's more, many households, have multiple televisions, computers, cordless phones, and others.
All told, the money wasted by an average U.S. household on standby power each year could easily be used to purchase an iPod Shuffle or in some cases even a Nano.
Below is a list of the annual average costs for many household gadgets that are turned off and plugged in. Just add up the costs for everything you have plugged in at home to find out how much standby power costs you each year.
Keep in mind that these are just averages, and in some categories there are big differences between most and least efficient products. How much energy each of your devices consumes will depend on both the device itself and your local electricity costs.
We calculated the following averages based on energy use stats from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy using a price of 11 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Home Entertainment
CRT TV: $1.00
LCD TV: $2.97
Plasma TV: $2.97
DVD: $1.53
VCR: $4.63
Digital cable box: $17.65
Satellite cable box: $15.50
DVR: $36.63
Digital cable box with DVR: $43.01
Satellite cable box with DVR: $27.52
Video game console: $1.00
Portable stereo: $1.64
AM/FM tuner: $1.11
CD player: $4.99
Home Office
Desktop computer: $3.96
Laptop computer: $8.81
Laptop charger (unattached to laptop): $4.38
LDC monitor: $1.12
Printer: $1.98
Multifunction printer, scanner, copier: $5.21
Computer speakers: $1.98
Other
Coffee maker: $1.12
Microwave oven: $3.05
Cordless phone: $1.98
Answering machine: $1.99
Power tool: $3.96
Handheld vacuum: $2.97
Electric toothbrush: $1.98
Cell phone charger (unattached to phone): $0.26
Costs start adding up when you take into account electronics that may be left on when you're not using them.
Here's a small sampling:
Desktop computer: $71.00
Video game console: $23.10
VCR: $7.69
DVD player: $7.46
CD player: $8.53
There's little consumers can do about set-top cable, satellite, and DVR/TiVo boxes. Television shows can't be taped if boxes are unplugged and it typically takes a long time to reboot boxes. Since it's not practical to unplug them, the best you can do is remember to turn off the box when you're not actively watching TV. I have a Tivo, set-top box and TV, and I wondered how much it costs when not being used, so here the information is. I wish they had a TV and set-top that you could turn off and would turn itself on and off when a program you want to save comes on. I would also like to know how much energy is taken up by my BOINC program, which does reseach number crunching while I'm not using my computer. Its also not clear to me if the $71 figure above represents a monthly or yearly amount.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Is Obama Playing God With the American Electric Car?
Is Obama Playing God With the American Electric Car?
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 05.27.09
It was pretty good news for clean energy enthusiasts when Obama announced $2.4 billion in funding for electric vehicles. Sure, like the high speed rail plans, it didn't seem like enough money, but a couple billion can go a long way. So what's the problem? Decisions as to who gets the funding will be decided by Obama, his team, and state governments--meaning the gov will have a huge hand in deciding which electric cars succeed or fail. Will Obama decide the fate of the American electric car?
The funding will largely go to developing the electric car batteries--meaning the government will find itself charged with decided which battery will be most cost-effective, most marketable, and most economically viable. But are they best equipped to make the decision that could determine the future of the electric car in the US?
Over at Green Biz, Marc Gunther dives into the problem:
Much as I admire Steven Chu, the energy secretary, do we really want to entrust him and his staff to decide which battery technologies are likely to succeed and which companies can most wisely spend that $2.4 billion?
One thing to consider is whether or not the electric car will be deemed mass marketable by the administration:
Some of these batteries, by the way, could well find their way into cars like the Tesla (sticker price:$109,000) and those made by Fisker Automotive, a California firm that plans to sell $88,000 luxury-hybrids next year. So tax dollars collected from working people and the middle class go to subsidize rich boys and their toys.
So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?
Please don’t get me wrong. I think electric cars are a great idea. The faster they arrive, the better. But judgments about which battery-makers to finance should best be left to venture capitalists, investors like Buffett (who bought 10 percent of BYD), big investment banks and the like. They may be no smarter than the people at the DOE but at least they are putting their own (or their investors’) money on the line. If they’re wrong, they’ll be held accountable, or at least they should be. You can be sure that some of them will be wrong, and that’s fine.
It's an interesting perspective to be sure, and free market capitalists (even pro-green ones) are probably cringing a little at what could happen to the electric car industry. Then again, some pretty strong arguments could also be made for better regulatory guidance on industry at the moment . . .
More on Obama and Cars
Obama Kills Hydrogen Car Funding
Obama to Automakers: Make Greener American Cars or Go Under
Obama to Issue National Auto Emissions Standard: All Cars Must Get 42 MPG by 2016
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
GM Defends the Volt, Attacks Smaller Electric Car Start-Ups (Tesla, Fisker, etc)
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Finally! Norwegians Take to the Streets for Electric Cars (and Get Electric Car Sharing!)
Waxman-Markey Bill To Move Forward, After Arrests and Speed Reading
Comments (16)
um.... isn't that kind of his JOB? it's called the EXECUTIVE branch for a reason....
i'd rather him make the decision than mccain, palin, bush, cheney, or even clinton.
May 27, 2009 5:06 PM | flag a problem
aaron says:
um.... isn't that kind of his JOB? it's called the EXECUTIVE branch for a reason....
i'd rather him make the decision than mccain, palin, bush, cheney, or even clinton.
May 27, 2009 5:24 PM | flag a problem
aaron says:
@Brian
{sarcasm ON}Yeah cause trusting big corporations is better than trusting the President ...........{/sarcasm OFF}
May 27, 2009 5:27 PM | flag a problem
Anonymous says:
No... that is not his job. If Congress decides to pass a law stipulating that the government will choose the best battery, he can sign it into law. He can make big pushes to one battery or the other.
Honestly, I would like the market to decide. I don't want to have a cheap piece of junk, or a really expensive battery shoved down my throat. If you want to spur innovation, have a contest and set the standards. First to achieve it gets a boat load of money. A donkey will move a lot better with a carrot than whipping it with a stick.
But I shouldn't be surprised. Obama is expanding governmental role in a lot of things, why would this be any different
May 27, 2009 5:44 PM | flag a problem
Anon says:
The "playing god" bit is hyperbole. He's making exactly the kind of decisions that he's supposed to be making. That's not playing god, that's acting as the President.
The logic of venture capitalists being better at deciding who gets the money is weak. Is he suggesting that Obama give the money to venture capitalists? Is he suggesting that the government not invest the money at all and just let private investors do it? I think he's missing the whole point of what the President is trying to do.
May 27, 2009 6:11 PM | flag a problem
Jason M. Bryant says:
Aaron:
No, it is not the job of the chief executive of the federal government to be the chief executive of the automobile industry.
Maybe you are right that Obama will do a better job deciding which car companies should live and which should die than would Bush, McCain, Clinton, etc. The issue, however, is whether ANY president should be making that decision.
As in every other industry, we should be making that decision. We make decisions about which companies live and which die every day through the purchasing decisions we make. If Electric Car company A makes a better car than company B, we will buy more cars from company A.
The free market is not perfect, of course. Because we don't directly pay for the environmental impacts of cars in the purchase price, we are underpaying for non-electric cars. The government's $2.4B is supposed to equalize that, in theory. The problem is that it seeks to do it by giving it to individual companies. If the government subsidizes the wrong company, then we will be buying the wrong cars.
Why not give the money to buyers of electric vehicles? Then we can make the purchase decision that is right for us, and the government will subsidize the higher cost of electric vehicles across the board. Or tax the fuel consumption of new vehicles, allowing us to internalize the environmental costs of ICE vehicles and make the right decisions accordingly? There are many ways the government can incentivize the purchase of environmentally friendly vehicles without giving one man the decision of which vehicles we will buy, which is almost certain to achieve inefficient results.
May 27, 2009 6:52 PM | flag a problem
Eric says:
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."
--P. J. O'Rourke
May 27, 2009 7:34 PM | flag a problem
Mike z. says:
""When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.""
I thought the first thing to go was the Truth.
Better be careful here, the Ministry of Love might be looking....
May 27, 2009 8:23 PM | flag a problem
Don says:
The question is tossing a card in a cocked hat. MBA's and financial wizards and investors and politicians are all completely unqualified to magage R&D projects and judge reliability and performance characteristics of batteries.
What they can do is evaluate, as a team, the market readiness and affordability of preliminary engineering cost estimates. We are years from that point yet.
May 27, 2009 9:39 PM | flag a problem
John Laumer says:
Problem? What Problem?
"Obama announced $2.4 billion in funding for electric vehicles"
. . . That doesn't sound like a problem,
. . . it sounds more like a solution!
"Obama, his team, and state governments--meaning the gov."
will have a huge hand in decided(ing) which electric cars succeed or fail.
. . . They can't be less competent then the BIG-3?
Tax dollars collected from working people and the middle class go to subsidize batteries, that will be used by everyone,
. . . including some who may be rich?
Venture capitalists, investors like Buffett (who bought 10 percent of BYD), big investment banks and the like,
. . . are still free to make judgments about which
. . . battery-makers to finance.
May 27, 2009 11:14 PM | flag a problem
ed says:
Why so shocked when you suddenly discover The Messiah is playing God? Wasn't that the plan all along?
"So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?"
What? You doubt the ability of someone with all that experience under his belt as a "community organizer" to decide such a simple issue?
The fact is, no matter what amount of government meddling and taxpayer money is flushed down the toilet on this dog and pony show, there is only one place the matter is decided -- the marketplace. And the market has already decided that it doesn't care about electric cars. Nobody wants them at any price.
May 27, 2009 11:49 PM | flag a problem
db says:
I'll support electric vehicles when America stops generating electricity from fossil fuels. As far as I am concerned their is no inherent right to drive any kind of car. It would be better to encourage Americans to use public transportation.
May 27, 2009 11:52 PM | flag a problem
Frank Chavez says:
I love this article , because it show the fascism that comes with green thinking. The best quote is this one "So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?"
It's interesting to me is that If Obama can't save us who will. You should remember what state Obama come from. Where pay to play is everything. I you want your battery endorse by the government,you give a few bucks to my campaign fund or in Obama's case you help me buy my house. Its a big fraud in the making. Electric cars will come to the market some day. We are heading in that direction. Don't dream about God 2.0 (Obama) to bring heaven on earth.
May 28, 2009 1:23 AM | flag a problem
Juan says:
Jeff is completely correct. The key is externalities. Corporate pollution is an externality that the cap and trade pollution tax will address. Polluters will become less profitable, hopefully.
Buyer's decisions can have externalities, too, particularly when specialized expertise is concerned. For instance, if we were all to vote on moon-rocket designs, chances are our voted collective choice would not make it off the ground. Similarly, ordinary buyers know nothing of aerodynamics and they prefer 'styled' bodies rather than 'aerodynamic' bodies. The resulting market inefficiency means that half the gas we use to move our cars from place to place is wasted just pushing air out of the way. Aerodynamic vehicles with government mandated low coefficients of drag would reduce the deficit significantly and end our dependence upon middle-eastern oil. All it is is bending the sheet metal right. Bigger cars get better, far better, gas mileage. See www.aerocivic.com for an example. All our cars should be aerodynamic as soon as possible so we can stop wasting so much fuel. Top speeds would increase. We need to add boat tails, belly pans, and enclose open wheel wells. The bodies could be heavier and still get better mileage. It ain't rocket science.
May 28, 2009 2:59 AM | flag a problem
Ross Nicholson says:
Having someone play GOD is a refreshing change from decades of White House dwellers who played SATAN.
May 28, 2009 3:05 AM | flag a problem
Joe says
I personally like the idea of having a contest and perhaps fund the best 3 or 5 ideas and concepts presented. It seems to have worked pretty well with the solar car and house concept, and the unmanned rocket program, so give it a try! I also like the idea of the Million Solar Roof project in California. The government could agree to underwrite a million solar systems to get the volume pricing and then make them available to those who are interested at a very reasonable rate thru banks, S & Ls, and credit unions. Let people finance their solar system like they do their mortgage, over 20 years. Several cities are already doing that for their residents and collecting payments each month along with the water and garbage bills. The solar system adds value to the house and when its sold the solar mortgage is sold right along with the deed to the house. It would support solar businesses, create solar employment, and kickstart the renewable energy initiatives.
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 05.27.09
It was pretty good news for clean energy enthusiasts when Obama announced $2.4 billion in funding for electric vehicles. Sure, like the high speed rail plans, it didn't seem like enough money, but a couple billion can go a long way. So what's the problem? Decisions as to who gets the funding will be decided by Obama, his team, and state governments--meaning the gov will have a huge hand in deciding which electric cars succeed or fail. Will Obama decide the fate of the American electric car?
The funding will largely go to developing the electric car batteries--meaning the government will find itself charged with decided which battery will be most cost-effective, most marketable, and most economically viable. But are they best equipped to make the decision that could determine the future of the electric car in the US?
Over at Green Biz, Marc Gunther dives into the problem:
Much as I admire Steven Chu, the energy secretary, do we really want to entrust him and his staff to decide which battery technologies are likely to succeed and which companies can most wisely spend that $2.4 billion?
One thing to consider is whether or not the electric car will be deemed mass marketable by the administration:
Some of these batteries, by the way, could well find their way into cars like the Tesla (sticker price:$109,000) and those made by Fisker Automotive, a California firm that plans to sell $88,000 luxury-hybrids next year. So tax dollars collected from working people and the middle class go to subsidize rich boys and their toys.
So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?
Please don’t get me wrong. I think electric cars are a great idea. The faster they arrive, the better. But judgments about which battery-makers to finance should best be left to venture capitalists, investors like Buffett (who bought 10 percent of BYD), big investment banks and the like. They may be no smarter than the people at the DOE but at least they are putting their own (or their investors’) money on the line. If they’re wrong, they’ll be held accountable, or at least they should be. You can be sure that some of them will be wrong, and that’s fine.
It's an interesting perspective to be sure, and free market capitalists (even pro-green ones) are probably cringing a little at what could happen to the electric car industry. Then again, some pretty strong arguments could also be made for better regulatory guidance on industry at the moment . . .
More on Obama and Cars
Obama Kills Hydrogen Car Funding
Obama to Automakers: Make Greener American Cars or Go Under
Obama to Issue National Auto Emissions Standard: All Cars Must Get 42 MPG by 2016
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
GM Defends the Volt, Attacks Smaller Electric Car Start-Ups (Tesla, Fisker, etc)
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Finally! Norwegians Take to the Streets for Electric Cars (and Get Electric Car Sharing!)
Waxman-Markey Bill To Move Forward, After Arrests and Speed Reading
Comments (16)
um.... isn't that kind of his JOB? it's called the EXECUTIVE branch for a reason....
i'd rather him make the decision than mccain, palin, bush, cheney, or even clinton.
May 27, 2009 5:06 PM | flag a problem
aaron says:
um.... isn't that kind of his JOB? it's called the EXECUTIVE branch for a reason....
i'd rather him make the decision than mccain, palin, bush, cheney, or even clinton.
May 27, 2009 5:24 PM | flag a problem
aaron says:
@Brian
{sarcasm ON}Yeah cause trusting big corporations is better than trusting the President ...........{/sarcasm OFF}
May 27, 2009 5:27 PM | flag a problem
Anonymous says:
No... that is not his job. If Congress decides to pass a law stipulating that the government will choose the best battery, he can sign it into law. He can make big pushes to one battery or the other.
Honestly, I would like the market to decide. I don't want to have a cheap piece of junk, or a really expensive battery shoved down my throat. If you want to spur innovation, have a contest and set the standards. First to achieve it gets a boat load of money. A donkey will move a lot better with a carrot than whipping it with a stick.
But I shouldn't be surprised. Obama is expanding governmental role in a lot of things, why would this be any different
May 27, 2009 5:44 PM | flag a problem
Anon says:
The "playing god" bit is hyperbole. He's making exactly the kind of decisions that he's supposed to be making. That's not playing god, that's acting as the President.
The logic of venture capitalists being better at deciding who gets the money is weak. Is he suggesting that Obama give the money to venture capitalists? Is he suggesting that the government not invest the money at all and just let private investors do it? I think he's missing the whole point of what the President is trying to do.
May 27, 2009 6:11 PM | flag a problem
Jason M. Bryant says:
Aaron:
No, it is not the job of the chief executive of the federal government to be the chief executive of the automobile industry.
Maybe you are right that Obama will do a better job deciding which car companies should live and which should die than would Bush, McCain, Clinton, etc. The issue, however, is whether ANY president should be making that decision.
As in every other industry, we should be making that decision. We make decisions about which companies live and which die every day through the purchasing decisions we make. If Electric Car company A makes a better car than company B, we will buy more cars from company A.
The free market is not perfect, of course. Because we don't directly pay for the environmental impacts of cars in the purchase price, we are underpaying for non-electric cars. The government's $2.4B is supposed to equalize that, in theory. The problem is that it seeks to do it by giving it to individual companies. If the government subsidizes the wrong company, then we will be buying the wrong cars.
Why not give the money to buyers of electric vehicles? Then we can make the purchase decision that is right for us, and the government will subsidize the higher cost of electric vehicles across the board. Or tax the fuel consumption of new vehicles, allowing us to internalize the environmental costs of ICE vehicles and make the right decisions accordingly? There are many ways the government can incentivize the purchase of environmentally friendly vehicles without giving one man the decision of which vehicles we will buy, which is almost certain to achieve inefficient results.
May 27, 2009 6:52 PM | flag a problem
Eric says:
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."
--P. J. O'Rourke
May 27, 2009 7:34 PM | flag a problem
Mike z. says:
""When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.""
I thought the first thing to go was the Truth.
Better be careful here, the Ministry of Love might be looking....
May 27, 2009 8:23 PM | flag a problem
Don says:
The question is tossing a card in a cocked hat. MBA's and financial wizards and investors and politicians are all completely unqualified to magage R&D projects and judge reliability and performance characteristics of batteries.
What they can do is evaluate, as a team, the market readiness and affordability of preliminary engineering cost estimates. We are years from that point yet.
May 27, 2009 9:39 PM | flag a problem
John Laumer says:
Problem? What Problem?
"Obama announced $2.4 billion in funding for electric vehicles"
. . . That doesn't sound like a problem,
. . . it sounds more like a solution!
"Obama, his team, and state governments--meaning the gov."
will have a huge hand in decided(ing) which electric cars succeed or fail.
. . . They can't be less competent then the BIG-3?
Tax dollars collected from working people and the middle class go to subsidize batteries, that will be used by everyone,
. . . including some who may be rich?
Venture capitalists, investors like Buffett (who bought 10 percent of BYD), big investment banks and the like,
. . . are still free to make judgments about which
. . . battery-makers to finance.
May 27, 2009 11:14 PM | flag a problem
ed says:
Why so shocked when you suddenly discover The Messiah is playing God? Wasn't that the plan all along?
"So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?"
What? You doubt the ability of someone with all that experience under his belt as a "community organizer" to decide such a simple issue?
The fact is, no matter what amount of government meddling and taxpayer money is flushed down the toilet on this dog and pony show, there is only one place the matter is decided -- the marketplace. And the market has already decided that it doesn't care about electric cars. Nobody wants them at any price.
May 27, 2009 11:49 PM | flag a problem
db says:
I'll support electric vehicles when America stops generating electricity from fossil fuels. As far as I am concerned their is no inherent right to drive any kind of car. It would be better to encourage Americans to use public transportation.
May 27, 2009 11:52 PM | flag a problem
Frank Chavez says:
I love this article , because it show the fascism that comes with green thinking. The best quote is this one "So if not Obama, and co, who'd be better fit to make the call?"
It's interesting to me is that If Obama can't save us who will. You should remember what state Obama come from. Where pay to play is everything. I you want your battery endorse by the government,you give a few bucks to my campaign fund or in Obama's case you help me buy my house. Its a big fraud in the making. Electric cars will come to the market some day. We are heading in that direction. Don't dream about God 2.0 (Obama) to bring heaven on earth.
May 28, 2009 1:23 AM | flag a problem
Juan says:
Jeff is completely correct. The key is externalities. Corporate pollution is an externality that the cap and trade pollution tax will address. Polluters will become less profitable, hopefully.
Buyer's decisions can have externalities, too, particularly when specialized expertise is concerned. For instance, if we were all to vote on moon-rocket designs, chances are our voted collective choice would not make it off the ground. Similarly, ordinary buyers know nothing of aerodynamics and they prefer 'styled' bodies rather than 'aerodynamic' bodies. The resulting market inefficiency means that half the gas we use to move our cars from place to place is wasted just pushing air out of the way. Aerodynamic vehicles with government mandated low coefficients of drag would reduce the deficit significantly and end our dependence upon middle-eastern oil. All it is is bending the sheet metal right. Bigger cars get better, far better, gas mileage. See www.aerocivic.com for an example. All our cars should be aerodynamic as soon as possible so we can stop wasting so much fuel. Top speeds would increase. We need to add boat tails, belly pans, and enclose open wheel wells. The bodies could be heavier and still get better mileage. It ain't rocket science.
May 28, 2009 2:59 AM | flag a problem
Ross Nicholson says:
Having someone play GOD is a refreshing change from decades of White House dwellers who played SATAN.
May 28, 2009 3:05 AM | flag a problem
Joe says
I personally like the idea of having a contest and perhaps fund the best 3 or 5 ideas and concepts presented. It seems to have worked pretty well with the solar car and house concept, and the unmanned rocket program, so give it a try! I also like the idea of the Million Solar Roof project in California. The government could agree to underwrite a million solar systems to get the volume pricing and then make them available to those who are interested at a very reasonable rate thru banks, S & Ls, and credit unions. Let people finance their solar system like they do their mortgage, over 20 years. Several cities are already doing that for their residents and collecting payments each month along with the water and garbage bills. The solar system adds value to the house and when its sold the solar mortgage is sold right along with the deed to the house. It would support solar businesses, create solar employment, and kickstart the renewable energy initiatives.
Set Your Computer for Energy Savings
Set Your Computer for Energy Savings
Did you know your computer has energy saving settings built in? Utilize them with these tips.
By Jaymi Heimbuch
Santa Maria, CA, USA | Wed Nov 19 09:00:00 EST 2008
READ MORE ABOUT:
Computers | Energy | Laptops | Phantom Power | Saving Energy | Technology
There is a wide range of power-saving software that helps reduce the amount of energy your PC consumes. And yet, your computer is already equipped with power saving settings you can utilize. Try out these tips to set your computer for maximum energy savings.
For PCs:
First, right click on the desktop and select Properties. Then turn off your screen saver. Sounds strange, to be sure. But the screen saver actually doesn't save energy—it keeps your computer running at full power, rather than slipping to sleep. Next, go to your control panel in the start menu and select power options. Set your computer to go to standby after 15 minutes, your monitor and hard disks to shut off after 5 minutes.
For Macs:
Click on the Apple icon and go to System Preferences. Under Hardware, select Energy Saver. Here you can adjust power supply settings for Better Energy Savings. You can adjust the timing for sleep mode for the computer and monitor similar to the steps for a PC.
For Notebooks:
It is also important to use a power save scheme on laptops, which allows you to adjust the screen brightness, display options, and sleep mode timing for further energy savings when you're unplugged from your charger. These settings are also available in the power options area.
Helpful Websites:
Yale.edu has a helpful section that walks you through screenshots of adjusting the settings on your computer to maximize power.
Energy Star also has a range or resources for saving energy on your computer.
Extra Steps:
Turn your computer off at night.
Plug components into a power strip so you can cut off all power when not in use.
For laptops, unplug the charger when the laptop is turned off to prevent vampire power.
Avoid turning your printer on when you don't need it.
If you'd like to do more with your computer energy savings, check out downloadable power saving software, some of which also track your carbon savings. Find out more information about making your computer efficient.
I have a comment to make about this article. I am all for saving energy but I donate my computer when I am away from it or sleeping to the BOINC program that uses distributed computing to look for cancer cures. I allowed them to put a small computational program on my computer that crunches numbers for them and sends it to the University of California, Berkely. It takes small chunks of data and crunches them in the background as I use my computer too. I have been doing this for the past 5 years or so and have had NO problems with this program. The Miami-Dade School Board has approximately 20,000 computers that could be utilized for the BOINC program too, after the kids have left school, and no longer are using them. I would be willing to wager that there are HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of computers in school districts all over the world that could be utilized for this endeavor. Think about how many numbers could be crunched then! It would be like a super-computer! And that idea isn't even taking into consideration how many corporate and governmental computers could be utilized. There are several programs similar to BOINC that can be used for the benefit of mankind. One is a climate prediction program that is intended to help predict future weather for farmers, etc. There's about a dozen research projects that are associated with this concept of distributed computing from established and credentialed university research programs.
I mentioned this idea to the IT guy here at school and he said he would be willing to propose it to his boss but there is a cost associated with leaving the computers on all night. For years all the school computers were left on all night, so it should be easy to tell exactly how much is being saved by turning them off at night by subtracting current bills from old bills. I wonder what that cost would be, as the cost of energy is considerably less during the night.
Perhaps this could be a government grant to different School Boards to pay for the energy used. Or perhaps the Universities themselves could fund X amounts of distributed computing for X amount of computers as a part of their research programs. I wonder how many military computers aren't used after hours?
I recently saw something where virtual computers, up to 36 of them, could be operated off one mainframe at a fraction of the energy cost. perhaps that's something that could be utilized for this project.
Did you know your computer has energy saving settings built in? Utilize them with these tips.
By Jaymi Heimbuch
Santa Maria, CA, USA | Wed Nov 19 09:00:00 EST 2008
READ MORE ABOUT:
Computers | Energy | Laptops | Phantom Power | Saving Energy | Technology
There is a wide range of power-saving software that helps reduce the amount of energy your PC consumes. And yet, your computer is already equipped with power saving settings you can utilize. Try out these tips to set your computer for maximum energy savings.
For PCs:
First, right click on the desktop and select Properties. Then turn off your screen saver. Sounds strange, to be sure. But the screen saver actually doesn't save energy—it keeps your computer running at full power, rather than slipping to sleep. Next, go to your control panel in the start menu and select power options. Set your computer to go to standby after 15 minutes, your monitor and hard disks to shut off after 5 minutes.
For Macs:
Click on the Apple icon and go to System Preferences. Under Hardware, select Energy Saver. Here you can adjust power supply settings for Better Energy Savings. You can adjust the timing for sleep mode for the computer and monitor similar to the steps for a PC.
For Notebooks:
It is also important to use a power save scheme on laptops, which allows you to adjust the screen brightness, display options, and sleep mode timing for further energy savings when you're unplugged from your charger. These settings are also available in the power options area.
Helpful Websites:
Yale.edu has a helpful section that walks you through screenshots of adjusting the settings on your computer to maximize power.
Energy Star also has a range or resources for saving energy on your computer.
Extra Steps:
Turn your computer off at night.
Plug components into a power strip so you can cut off all power when not in use.
For laptops, unplug the charger when the laptop is turned off to prevent vampire power.
Avoid turning your printer on when you don't need it.
If you'd like to do more with your computer energy savings, check out downloadable power saving software, some of which also track your carbon savings. Find out more information about making your computer efficient.
I have a comment to make about this article. I am all for saving energy but I donate my computer when I am away from it or sleeping to the BOINC program that uses distributed computing to look for cancer cures. I allowed them to put a small computational program on my computer that crunches numbers for them and sends it to the University of California, Berkely. It takes small chunks of data and crunches them in the background as I use my computer too. I have been doing this for the past 5 years or so and have had NO problems with this program. The Miami-Dade School Board has approximately 20,000 computers that could be utilized for the BOINC program too, after the kids have left school, and no longer are using them. I would be willing to wager that there are HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of computers in school districts all over the world that could be utilized for this endeavor. Think about how many numbers could be crunched then! It would be like a super-computer! And that idea isn't even taking into consideration how many corporate and governmental computers could be utilized. There are several programs similar to BOINC that can be used for the benefit of mankind. One is a climate prediction program that is intended to help predict future weather for farmers, etc. There's about a dozen research projects that are associated with this concept of distributed computing from established and credentialed university research programs.
I mentioned this idea to the IT guy here at school and he said he would be willing to propose it to his boss but there is a cost associated with leaving the computers on all night. For years all the school computers were left on all night, so it should be easy to tell exactly how much is being saved by turning them off at night by subtracting current bills from old bills. I wonder what that cost would be, as the cost of energy is considerably less during the night.
Perhaps this could be a government grant to different School Boards to pay for the energy used. Or perhaps the Universities themselves could fund X amounts of distributed computing for X amount of computers as a part of their research programs. I wonder how many military computers aren't used after hours?
I recently saw something where virtual computers, up to 36 of them, could be operated off one mainframe at a fraction of the energy cost. perhaps that's something that could be utilized for this project.
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Save water by saving electricity; save electricity by saving water. Increase the savings by saving!
By Josh Peterson
Los Angeles, CA, USA | Tue May 26 13:00:00 EDT 2009
READ MORE ABOUT:
Electricity | Green Your Electricity | Saving Energy | Water | Water Conservation
We live in an interconnected world. A butterfly flaps its wings in Mongolia and a philosophy student ponders about that sort of thing in Spokane. See? Interconnected. As our technology and thoughts about butterflies advance, so does our interconnectedness.
One of our aims at the Planet Green website, is to try and provide people with tips and tricks for saving energy and water. Usually, we round up little household hints about how to save electricity or H2O. Most of the time we speak as if these two things were separate beasts. What you may not know is that saving electricity and saving water are actually the same thing.
How Do Shorter Showers Save Electricity?
You might not equate shower-usage with electricity usage. In fact, you’ve been told 1,000 times in your life to keep electrical devices away from the shower. But taking a shower uses electricity. A hot water heater may consume a fifth of your home's electricity and if you pump your own water from a well, that's a double whammy. But the water-related electricity you use around the house pales in comparison to the amount of energy used by the water companies.
In California, water treatment, storage and transportation accounts for 19% of the state's electricity usage. The good news is that saving water is cheaper and easier than saving electricity.
From the Guardian:
"Some of the cheapest greenhouse gas emission reductions available seem to be not energy-efficiency programs, but water-efficiency programs," said Gleick, president of the California-based Pacific Institute, a global water research center.
How Does Turning off the Lights Save Water?
Electricity uses more water than all the showers combined.
From Power Scorecard:
Most electric power plants require water to operate. 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. Hydropower plants use water directly to generate power. These power plants represent the single largest consumer of water among any industrial, governmental or residential activity. Since 98 percent of the water used in power plants is returned to its source, distinctions are made between use and consumption.
These plants also de-water ecosystems and disrupt wildlife. They also pollute the air which is why we are trying to save the energy in the first place. A great way to conserve water is to decrease the need for so much electricity.
What You Can Do
Don't make a distinction between saving water and saving energy. Just because you live in a state with a lot of rainfall doesn’t mean you’re off the hook in terms of water conservation. And if you want to reduce greenhouse emissions, saving water may be the best way to do it. Everything is interconnected
Save water by saving electricity; save electricity by saving water. Increase the savings by saving!
By Josh Peterson
Los Angeles, CA, USA | Tue May 26 13:00:00 EDT 2009
READ MORE ABOUT:
Electricity | Green Your Electricity | Saving Energy | Water | Water Conservation
We live in an interconnected world. A butterfly flaps its wings in Mongolia and a philosophy student ponders about that sort of thing in Spokane. See? Interconnected. As our technology and thoughts about butterflies advance, so does our interconnectedness.
One of our aims at the Planet Green website, is to try and provide people with tips and tricks for saving energy and water. Usually, we round up little household hints about how to save electricity or H2O. Most of the time we speak as if these two things were separate beasts. What you may not know is that saving electricity and saving water are actually the same thing.
How Do Shorter Showers Save Electricity?
You might not equate shower-usage with electricity usage. In fact, you’ve been told 1,000 times in your life to keep electrical devices away from the shower. But taking a shower uses electricity. A hot water heater may consume a fifth of your home's electricity and if you pump your own water from a well, that's a double whammy. But the water-related electricity you use around the house pales in comparison to the amount of energy used by the water companies.
In California, water treatment, storage and transportation accounts for 19% of the state's electricity usage. The good news is that saving water is cheaper and easier than saving electricity.
From the Guardian:
"Some of the cheapest greenhouse gas emission reductions available seem to be not energy-efficiency programs, but water-efficiency programs," said Gleick, president of the California-based Pacific Institute, a global water research center.
How Does Turning off the Lights Save Water?
Electricity uses more water than all the showers combined.
From Power Scorecard:
Most electric power plants require water to operate. 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. Hydropower plants use water directly to generate power. These power plants represent the single largest consumer of water among any industrial, governmental or residential activity. Since 98 percent of the water used in power plants is returned to its source, distinctions are made between use and consumption.
These plants also de-water ecosystems and disrupt wildlife. They also pollute the air which is why we are trying to save the energy in the first place. A great way to conserve water is to decrease the need for so much electricity.
What You Can Do
Don't make a distinction between saving water and saving energy. Just because you live in a state with a lot of rainfall doesn’t mean you’re off the hook in terms of water conservation. And if you want to reduce greenhouse emissions, saving water may be the best way to do it. Everything is interconnected
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 05.26.09
Business & Politics
Buzz up!
It's long been known that white roofs reflect more heat back into space, reducing the amount of electricity used for A/C and thus drastically cutting down on energy consumption. Some estimates say they save billions of dollars annually. And they've just gotten their most public, most official shout out yet--Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu has recommended that the world should try to have "white roofs everywhere to help fight climate change"--remarks that were carried in hundreds of news wires around the world.
According to Bloomberg,
Painting flat roofs of homes and commercial buildings white would reflect more of the sun’s heat back to space and reduce electricity used for air conditioning by as much as 15 percent, Chu told reporters today in London, citing research by Arthur Rosenfeld, a member of the California Energy Commission.
Chu was speaking at a climate change symposium hosted by the Prince of Wales, and he called for a 'new revolution' in energy--with a number of initiatives like white roofing, stressed necessary for fighting global warming. He said that white or paler roofs would make a huge difference in scaling back energy consumption, and curbing carbon emissions. He also said that for now, he prefers solutions like white roofs to more intensive geo-engineering solutions like injecting the atmosphere with reflective particles--a suggestion that drew widespread attention and some ridicule when announced a couple weeks ago.
“Art Rosenfeld is pushing very hard for geo-engineering that we all believe will be completely benign and that is when you have a flat-roofed building, make it white,” Chu said. “It’s the equivalent of reducing the carbon emissions due to all the cars in the world by 11 years.”
It's such a simple concept that some states, like California, have already mandated commercial buildings be constructed with white roofs. But paler colors shouldn't be restricted to flat roofed commercial buildings, either:
For sloping roofs that are more visible than flat ones, Chu said paints known as “cool colors” are being developed. Those hues look like colors in the visible spectrum while reflecting a bigger portion of infra-red light, he said. Roads can also be made paler, he said.
With endorsements from such high profile figures as Chu--his remarks were carried in over 1,000 news wires--white roofs may be set for a revolution of their own.
More on White Roofs
Build a Greener Roof
How To Help Prevent Global Warming On Your Roof
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Q&A With PJM President & CEO Terry Boston
2008 US Carbon Emissions Were Lowest in 8 Years
Comments (21)
It would be nice if roof color could be changed depending on the season and latitude. After all you might not want the albedo in a cold region.
May 26, 2009 3:57 PM | flag a problem
roy says:
Wow, what a neat simple idea. I wonder why I haven't heard of this before now?
May 26, 2009 4:16 PM | flag a problem
Dallas says:
White roofs help a lot - but only in environments where cooling degree days outnumber heating degree days (ie. where it's hot and sunny). In areas like here in typically cooler, mild Seattle - you'd be better served by a black roof to help heat the home, vs. the two weeks where we actually need air conditioning.
If you use more energy/money to keep the house warm than to cool it, don't paint your roof white.
May 26, 2009 4:45 PM | flag a problem
Steve A. says:
My hero, Amory Lovins at the Rocky Mountain Institute tells of an industrial retrofit for a plant in Nevada that supplied compressed natural gas. (You cool the gas to compress it)
He saved them $68 million in 5 years by putting white sand around everything.
May 26, 2009 4:55 PM | flag a problem
Alex says:
Not being a scientist, I hope that one has tested this. If you reflect more heat back than nature would have with a natural colored roof, what does that reflected heat do to the atmosphere/ozone?
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. I heard that somewhere. :)
Vicki in Vegas
May 26, 2009 6:04 PM | flag a problem
Vicki Kent says:
Instead of a white roof, it would make more sense to me if they suggested planting leafy trees near your house. They'd provide shade in the summer and let the sun through in the winter. And, it costs almost nothing to plant a tree.
May 26, 2009 11:21 PM | flag a problem
Chris V says:
One day we'll look back and say "what were we thinking"?
The human species went to the moon but couldn't figure out that a white roof is beneficial?
May 27, 2009 12:15 AM | flag a problem
Nick says:
One day we'll look back and say "what were we thinking"?
The human species went to the moon but couldn't figure out that a white roof is beneficial?
May 27, 2009 12:16 AM | flag a problem
Nick says:
Where can I get some white PV panels? Mine are black.
May 27, 2009 12:35 AM | flag a problem
Jon K says:
Interesting choice of picture. Is that a private swimming pool behind every one of those eco-friendly, white-roofed buildings?
May 27, 2009 12:40 AM | flag a problem
Captain Morgan says:
The idea of Solar panels being black is to absorb the most light as possible. Electric panels are not terribly efficient and making them white would provide more reflection and less efficiency.
May 27, 2009 3:43 AM | flag a problem
animatt says:
Hasn't anyone ever been to the Greek Islands? All white buildings with a very high thermal mass and louvered shutters on all windows and doors. These buildings maintain a comfortable ambient temperature year round. Hardly a new concept, just one that we have choosen to ignore. The right shape, thermal mass, colour, etc for a certain location is not hard to work out. As usual the simple things are often the best.
May 27, 2009 5:34 AM | flag a problem
Jamie says:
There are plenty of good reasons to consider white roofs where climate-appropriate: saving money for the occupants via reduced cooling costs, using less fuel for electricity generation, and therefore reducing our reliance on foreign oil and emission of fewer REAL pollutants. However, "halting global warming" is not among them!
As serious scientists will confirm, much of the so-called science behind this theory (which enjoys only political consensus, not scientific consensus) is hastily-contrived, politically-slanted "junk science." Look at the facts objectively, people. Don't be sheep that swallow this notion unquestioningly.
May 27, 2009 8:45 AM | flag a problem
Steve Kramer says:
I live in a cool area west of Seattle. Keeping a building warm here is more of a problem and I never have any need for air conditioning. I have a problem with it getting hot for long enough that I have something new to bitch about instead of it being cool.
I do a lot of camping, just bought an old small 5th wheel camper. Going to put a lot more insulation in it and paint it a darkish green to match the environment and hide in the woods well.
And I figure that the darker color will help collect some of the suns heat and save me some propane and wood.
May 27, 2009 9:18 AM | flag a problem
Billy B says:
Jon K,
If solar panels were colored pale instead of dark blue/black, there would be no point! Solar panels need to absorb energy, and a black surface does this best!
May 27, 2009 10:49 AM | flag a problem
Ken Clive says:
I would be interested in seeing data comparing:
- white roofs to black ones
- roofs with solar panels to roofs without
- roofs with roof gardens to roofs without
And this solution, while obvious, has been around for a long time; most roofs in Baltimore, when repaired, are repaired with a high-albedo aluminum-containing paint. It gets dirty pretty quickly, but still better than black tar.
Also, look at the roof of any school bus in the country; they're pretty much all painted white at this point, for exactly the same reason.
May 27, 2009 11:51 AM | flag a problem
jwer says:
I wish I could put white on my very geometrically complicated roof here in the Colorado summers, and black in the winters--both heating and cooling costs are high. Re: trees: we have tons of trees around our house but they don't help to cool it. What about the trend towards green roofs--how would they do?
May 27, 2009 12:48 PM | flag a problem
chad henry says:
Paint your roof white regardless of its' location.
99% of homes are insulated from their roofs, thereby keeping out any solar gain whether the roof is white or not. ie a hot roof does not help heat your home. Where as, you do more good with a white roof by helping nature stay cool.
May 27, 2009 5:31 PM | flag a problem
Christopher Doyle says:
I love the comments about black roofs for winter heat. if you're further north than 50 degree the low winter sun angle probably gives no significant heating, and your roof is probably snow-covered anyway.
Yes, there are probably places where white is inefficient, I've just never lived there.
May 27, 2009 8:10 PM | flag a problem
bryan says:
"Paint your roof white regardless of its' location.
99% of homes are insulated from their roofs, thereby keeping out any solar gain whether the roof is white or not."
Not so on RV's and tents, any solar gain to them is good even if the sun is low. And where I live there is little snow in the winter and it's always above freezing during the day so even a low sun helps warm my green colored home some.
May 27, 2009 9:43 PM | flag a problem
Billy B says:
While I always try to encourage residential clients to go with the lightest color roof posssible for steep slopped roofs in warm climates, 'cool roofing' technologies on flat roofs can be problimatic. The strategy for white or 'cool roofing' for flat roofs is relatively new, so we are just starting to see the drawbacks. The high Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) has a tendency to destroy the building around it, causing unanticipated extreme joint expansion. This expansion effects mortor joints in parapet walls as well quick failure of caulkings sealants and flashing joints. These failures tend to lead to water infiltration into the building envelope causing all kinds of problems; the worst of which may be the development of toxic molds or structural failure. In the end, remediation of these problems wastes more embodied energy in labor and materials than is saved by the 'cool roof'. And, as previously mentioned in this thread, you want a dark roof if you are in a heating (cold) climate.
May 28, 2009 9:07 AM | flag a problem
Andrew Pingle, LEED AP says
I have painted both my 2-story quadriplexes white, with turquoise trim and white roofs. The energy savings were not all that significant. What HAS been significant energy-wise, is the 40-foot oak trees that shade one building and keep it 8-10 degrees cooler than the other building. Here in Miami white roofs make sense year-round as we generally only have 3-4 cool days a year to contend with.
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 05.26.09
Business & Politics
Buzz up!
It's long been known that white roofs reflect more heat back into space, reducing the amount of electricity used for A/C and thus drastically cutting down on energy consumption. Some estimates say they save billions of dollars annually. And they've just gotten their most public, most official shout out yet--Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu has recommended that the world should try to have "white roofs everywhere to help fight climate change"--remarks that were carried in hundreds of news wires around the world.
According to Bloomberg,
Painting flat roofs of homes and commercial buildings white would reflect more of the sun’s heat back to space and reduce electricity used for air conditioning by as much as 15 percent, Chu told reporters today in London, citing research by Arthur Rosenfeld, a member of the California Energy Commission.
Chu was speaking at a climate change symposium hosted by the Prince of Wales, and he called for a 'new revolution' in energy--with a number of initiatives like white roofing, stressed necessary for fighting global warming. He said that white or paler roofs would make a huge difference in scaling back energy consumption, and curbing carbon emissions. He also said that for now, he prefers solutions like white roofs to more intensive geo-engineering solutions like injecting the atmosphere with reflective particles--a suggestion that drew widespread attention and some ridicule when announced a couple weeks ago.
“Art Rosenfeld is pushing very hard for geo-engineering that we all believe will be completely benign and that is when you have a flat-roofed building, make it white,” Chu said. “It’s the equivalent of reducing the carbon emissions due to all the cars in the world by 11 years.”
It's such a simple concept that some states, like California, have already mandated commercial buildings be constructed with white roofs. But paler colors shouldn't be restricted to flat roofed commercial buildings, either:
For sloping roofs that are more visible than flat ones, Chu said paints known as “cool colors” are being developed. Those hues look like colors in the visible spectrum while reflecting a bigger portion of infra-red light, he said. Roads can also be made paler, he said.
With endorsements from such high profile figures as Chu--his remarks were carried in over 1,000 news wires--white roofs may be set for a revolution of their own.
More on White Roofs
Build a Greener Roof
How To Help Prevent Global Warming On Your Roof
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
Did You Know Saving Water = Saving Electricity?
Q&A With PJM President & CEO Terry Boston
2008 US Carbon Emissions Were Lowest in 8 Years
Comments (21)
It would be nice if roof color could be changed depending on the season and latitude. After all you might not want the albedo in a cold region.
May 26, 2009 3:57 PM | flag a problem
roy says:
Wow, what a neat simple idea. I wonder why I haven't heard of this before now?
May 26, 2009 4:16 PM | flag a problem
Dallas says:
White roofs help a lot - but only in environments where cooling degree days outnumber heating degree days (ie. where it's hot and sunny). In areas like here in typically cooler, mild Seattle - you'd be better served by a black roof to help heat the home, vs. the two weeks where we actually need air conditioning.
If you use more energy/money to keep the house warm than to cool it, don't paint your roof white.
May 26, 2009 4:45 PM | flag a problem
Steve A. says:
My hero, Amory Lovins at the Rocky Mountain Institute tells of an industrial retrofit for a plant in Nevada that supplied compressed natural gas. (You cool the gas to compress it)
He saved them $68 million in 5 years by putting white sand around everything.
May 26, 2009 4:55 PM | flag a problem
Alex says:
Not being a scientist, I hope that one has tested this. If you reflect more heat back than nature would have with a natural colored roof, what does that reflected heat do to the atmosphere/ozone?
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. I heard that somewhere. :)
Vicki in Vegas
May 26, 2009 6:04 PM | flag a problem
Vicki Kent says:
Instead of a white roof, it would make more sense to me if they suggested planting leafy trees near your house. They'd provide shade in the summer and let the sun through in the winter. And, it costs almost nothing to plant a tree.
May 26, 2009 11:21 PM | flag a problem
Chris V says:
One day we'll look back and say "what were we thinking"?
The human species went to the moon but couldn't figure out that a white roof is beneficial?
May 27, 2009 12:15 AM | flag a problem
Nick says:
One day we'll look back and say "what were we thinking"?
The human species went to the moon but couldn't figure out that a white roof is beneficial?
May 27, 2009 12:16 AM | flag a problem
Nick says:
Where can I get some white PV panels? Mine are black.
May 27, 2009 12:35 AM | flag a problem
Jon K says:
Interesting choice of picture. Is that a private swimming pool behind every one of those eco-friendly, white-roofed buildings?
May 27, 2009 12:40 AM | flag a problem
Captain Morgan says:
The idea of Solar panels being black is to absorb the most light as possible. Electric panels are not terribly efficient and making them white would provide more reflection and less efficiency.
May 27, 2009 3:43 AM | flag a problem
animatt says:
Hasn't anyone ever been to the Greek Islands? All white buildings with a very high thermal mass and louvered shutters on all windows and doors. These buildings maintain a comfortable ambient temperature year round. Hardly a new concept, just one that we have choosen to ignore. The right shape, thermal mass, colour, etc for a certain location is not hard to work out. As usual the simple things are often the best.
May 27, 2009 5:34 AM | flag a problem
Jamie says:
There are plenty of good reasons to consider white roofs where climate-appropriate: saving money for the occupants via reduced cooling costs, using less fuel for electricity generation, and therefore reducing our reliance on foreign oil and emission of fewer REAL pollutants. However, "halting global warming" is not among them!
As serious scientists will confirm, much of the so-called science behind this theory (which enjoys only political consensus, not scientific consensus) is hastily-contrived, politically-slanted "junk science." Look at the facts objectively, people. Don't be sheep that swallow this notion unquestioningly.
May 27, 2009 8:45 AM | flag a problem
Steve Kramer says:
I live in a cool area west of Seattle. Keeping a building warm here is more of a problem and I never have any need for air conditioning. I have a problem with it getting hot for long enough that I have something new to bitch about instead of it being cool.
I do a lot of camping, just bought an old small 5th wheel camper. Going to put a lot more insulation in it and paint it a darkish green to match the environment and hide in the woods well.
And I figure that the darker color will help collect some of the suns heat and save me some propane and wood.
May 27, 2009 9:18 AM | flag a problem
Billy B says:
Jon K,
If solar panels were colored pale instead of dark blue/black, there would be no point! Solar panels need to absorb energy, and a black surface does this best!
May 27, 2009 10:49 AM | flag a problem
Ken Clive says:
I would be interested in seeing data comparing:
- white roofs to black ones
- roofs with solar panels to roofs without
- roofs with roof gardens to roofs without
And this solution, while obvious, has been around for a long time; most roofs in Baltimore, when repaired, are repaired with a high-albedo aluminum-containing paint. It gets dirty pretty quickly, but still better than black tar.
Also, look at the roof of any school bus in the country; they're pretty much all painted white at this point, for exactly the same reason.
May 27, 2009 11:51 AM | flag a problem
jwer says:
I wish I could put white on my very geometrically complicated roof here in the Colorado summers, and black in the winters--both heating and cooling costs are high. Re: trees: we have tons of trees around our house but they don't help to cool it. What about the trend towards green roofs--how would they do?
May 27, 2009 12:48 PM | flag a problem
chad henry says:
Paint your roof white regardless of its' location.
99% of homes are insulated from their roofs, thereby keeping out any solar gain whether the roof is white or not. ie a hot roof does not help heat your home. Where as, you do more good with a white roof by helping nature stay cool.
May 27, 2009 5:31 PM | flag a problem
Christopher Doyle says:
I love the comments about black roofs for winter heat. if you're further north than 50 degree the low winter sun angle probably gives no significant heating, and your roof is probably snow-covered anyway.
Yes, there are probably places where white is inefficient, I've just never lived there.
May 27, 2009 8:10 PM | flag a problem
bryan says:
"Paint your roof white regardless of its' location.
99% of homes are insulated from their roofs, thereby keeping out any solar gain whether the roof is white or not."
Not so on RV's and tents, any solar gain to them is good even if the sun is low. And where I live there is little snow in the winter and it's always above freezing during the day so even a low sun helps warm my green colored home some.
May 27, 2009 9:43 PM | flag a problem
Billy B says:
While I always try to encourage residential clients to go with the lightest color roof posssible for steep slopped roofs in warm climates, 'cool roofing' technologies on flat roofs can be problimatic. The strategy for white or 'cool roofing' for flat roofs is relatively new, so we are just starting to see the drawbacks. The high Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) has a tendency to destroy the building around it, causing unanticipated extreme joint expansion. This expansion effects mortor joints in parapet walls as well quick failure of caulkings sealants and flashing joints. These failures tend to lead to water infiltration into the building envelope causing all kinds of problems; the worst of which may be the development of toxic molds or structural failure. In the end, remediation of these problems wastes more embodied energy in labor and materials than is saved by the 'cool roof'. And, as previously mentioned in this thread, you want a dark roof if you are in a heating (cold) climate.
May 28, 2009 9:07 AM | flag a problem
Andrew Pingle, LEED AP says
I have painted both my 2-story quadriplexes white, with turquoise trim and white roofs. The energy savings were not all that significant. What HAS been significant energy-wise, is the 40-foot oak trees that shade one building and keep it 8-10 degrees cooler than the other building. Here in Miami white roofs make sense year-round as we generally only have 3-4 cool days a year to contend with.
Crapitalism
Everything Poops + Business Sees The Changing Climate = Crapitalism
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 06.16.07
Months ago we posted on a landfill methane capture project: controversial because "offsets" were being sold to cover the costs of capturing and burning methane emitted from buried solid waste. Some likened the practice to selling indulgences for spiritual gain. Then, months later, the Vatican decided to go for the green, causing that simile to lose currency. Now it seems, covering and capturing all manner of poop gas is headed toward the realm of big business. Raw material in excess. Cows do it. Pigs do it. Even billions of crowded miserable little chickens do it. We think capturing the methane wafting from their piles of excrement and selling the credits for this effort is soon to be a global love story for investors. The business potential is nicely embodied by AgCert International (AgCert™), a business that sells credits for those greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions. "Headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, AgCert was founded to generate emission reductions from livestock farms to reduce the adverse impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions related to global warming and climate change. AgCert is now the worldwide leader in agriculturally derived emission reductions, and we are applying our expertise to create industrial based emission reductions as well. The GHG emission reductions are pooled and sold to industrial emitters, governments, funds and energy traders."
Anaerobic digestion, the biotic and major source of atmospheric methane releases, works on straw, wasted food, animal bedding, manure....all kinds of organic material...not just the collected byproducts of factory farming.
Now if we could just think of an incentive for capitalists to conserve old growth forests and protect biodiversity on this same scale. Oh wait...there are some. Offsetting, again, if deployed for conservation reserve. And, tax credits for donating money to the Nature Conservancy, for example.
If the covered lagoon method (pictured) proves to be globally valuable for business, the upshot is a large scale incentive to prevent lagoon flooding or leakage, and the resulting loss of raw material (the poop) needed profit from a waste that, if not carefully retained to extract economic value, offends neighbors, is a potential disease vector (for Avian flu for example) and poses an ecological hazard to downstream waters. (What are those huge lagoon covers made out of anyway? Could be a good supply chain aspect to invest in.)
US-EPA (other side of pond from Ireland) is offering a Federal grants program to help animal waste handlers do a better job of managing waste, primarily through education and free consultation. Is there a potential synergy between "crapitalism" and the US-style, regulatory carrot/stick method for improving animal waste management? Or could this be a conflict looming?
Via:: RP at The Shaw Group, Inc.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
The Powerdown Show: Exploring Peak Oil and Climate Change (Video)
Prototype Biomass Gasifier To Convert California Yardwaste To Power 30,000 Homes
Blanchett to Corporations: Time to Change Climate Change
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
Comments (7)
part of the energy mix I buy from my utility includes "landfill gas" which is methane. Since cows are the biggest threat to global warming in the USA (info quoted from articles found online), why not capture and use that gas?
Crapitalism. I love it!
June 16, 2007 2:45 PM | flag a problem
dwightstreetrenter says:
Well, that would evolve putting the cows in a sealed container with no in or out air circulation. Sounds even worse than their life now.
===== author's response follows ===
The cows are already in climate controlled stalls. The manure is carried away by a chain driven conveyor , into a pit, from where it is augured by a big worm gear device into storage lagoons. The whole affair is periodically washed down and that rinseate goes also into the lagoon. In the lagoon is where anaerobes do their methane magic. The balloon cover is over the lagoon.
June 16, 2007 4:49 PM | flag a problem
Anonymous says:
...or we could just promote vegetarianism and stop breeding chickens, cows, and pigs all together. But wait...that means people actually have to give something up. On second thought, I'll just wait for the hybrid Hummer.
June 17, 2007 8:30 AM | flag a problem
Joshua says:
This is a significant shift and has a lot of upside. I remember reading about bio-digestion in Mother Earth news about 30+ years ago. Now it's gone mainstream. Then it was skewed as a methodology for the third world and small farms - which is still very applicable.
The difficulty has always been collecting the wastes efficiently. Free range cattle require hundreds of acres per cow, and you can't really send someone out with a shovel to follow them all.
Feedlots and industrially scaled penned livestock are the main beneficiaries here, which has pluses and minuses.
The downside is that this makes it more cost effective to keep livestock confined by the thousands, with all of the disease and quality of life issues for the animals that this entails. The quality of the meat, dairy and byproducts is also problematic, compared to animals who can roam to greater or lesser degrees.
The upside is that the multiple-acre manure lagoons can be brought under control, and their environmental effects mitigated. Pig farms have been particularly problematic in the SE US where they dominate certain regions, where the stench, flies, contamination of groundwater, blowouts into rivers and wetlands, and dispersal of antibiotics and hormones have despoiled entire counties.
The processed manure that results from bio-digestion is sterile, less smelly, and better suited for crop fertilizer. The burning off of the methane removes an aggressive greenhouse gas. The CO2 from burning methane is probably in carbon balance with the livestock feed. Plus you can generate electricity, and do co-generation to provide process heat, heat the livestock barns, and provide hot water for cleaning needs.
This also works for towns and cities with waste treatment plants, you know. My local plant has a series of huge egg-shaped digesters. They capture the heat from burning the methane for much of their needs. The released, treated effluent water is the most innocuous that's ever been released into the waters of the city. Not quite a Clivus Multrum, but a vast step up from what a million people had done previously.
==== author's response follows ====
Thanks for the insightful comment. I hope all readers of this post take the time to ponder the tradeoffs you cite here.
Extrapolations on your thoughts follow.
As any naive person who has traveled in the Lancaster PA, USA area can easily observe, the "nature friendly" free range livestock operations often mean trampled pastures, severely caved stream banks, high silt loads, and excessive nutrients flowing into the Chesapeake Bay.
Better management practices surely are available at low cost - where there is a will there is a way - but we should not romanticize, as often is done, about a more natural farming method being good for nature in all aspects of the product life cycle.
This applies also to the production of goat cheese and sheeps wool. Goats and sheep are extremely destructive to the environment from their over grazing if not properly managed. Every wonder why almost every new photo you see of the landscape of the Middle East shows a near barren landscape? Two millennium of goat and sheep will do that.
June 17, 2007 9:25 AM | flag a problem
jon says:
Ahh, well we certainly should talk about the positives of Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). Because far be it from us to consider something like factory farming could go away. Or that people could fathom not eating meat.
Sustainability can supersede ethics and consideration for animals, because the people actually changing their diet or lifestyle is inconceivable. And I also forgot how destructive free range, pastured animal farming is. It must be that, and not the concentrated Smithfield Farms hog lots that are polluting the Chesapeake.
Crapitalism is exactly how it sounds and smells. A reeking compromise and excuse because it's "the best we can do".
I am dumbfounded here. People talk about it as though "making the best of a horrible industry," but ultimately that message gets distorted into "oh it may be a good thing". Before you know it the greater population deludes itself into thinking it some kind of sustainable closed loop system. It's like the Canadian and Russian governments talking about the economic boons they may reap from global warming.
I'm with Joshua: I'll nibble my vegan happy meal in my hybrid hummer.
PS to Jon: Cynicism aside, I'd love to read something that quantifies the damage of free range farming in contrast to factory farming.
June 19, 2007 2:19 PM | flag a problem
Jon says:
I'm not a complete vegetarian but after having been raised to eat meat I have cut back by over 90%.
The reason the economy of meat "works" is the final step when a truck is loaded up with the very dense weight of meat. Compare a truckload of tomatoes to a truckload of meat. Even though meat started at a deficit in terms of costs to create, it's the final step where it gets loaded into a truck that it becomes economically feasible.
Localized farming is probably the best solution. Read up on South Central Farms in South Central Los Angeles. Here was a 15 acre plot of land that was divided into a couple hundred individual garden plots, but in the end the land was basically given back to the original owner at far below market value so that the land can be "developed". Developed means put a building up on it that then becomes energy dependent on non renewable resources with a property overvaluation that causes the businesses that will reside in the property to import their goods so they can heavily mark them up to pay for their overhead. This destructive practice continues to proliferate. Yes, local cities do there part to create the problem as much if not moreso than the federal government.
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 06.16.07
Months ago we posted on a landfill methane capture project: controversial because "offsets" were being sold to cover the costs of capturing and burning methane emitted from buried solid waste. Some likened the practice to selling indulgences for spiritual gain. Then, months later, the Vatican decided to go for the green, causing that simile to lose currency. Now it seems, covering and capturing all manner of poop gas is headed toward the realm of big business. Raw material in excess. Cows do it. Pigs do it. Even billions of crowded miserable little chickens do it. We think capturing the methane wafting from their piles of excrement and selling the credits for this effort is soon to be a global love story for investors. The business potential is nicely embodied by AgCert International (AgCert™), a business that sells credits for those greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions. "Headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, AgCert was founded to generate emission reductions from livestock farms to reduce the adverse impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions related to global warming and climate change. AgCert is now the worldwide leader in agriculturally derived emission reductions, and we are applying our expertise to create industrial based emission reductions as well. The GHG emission reductions are pooled and sold to industrial emitters, governments, funds and energy traders."
Anaerobic digestion, the biotic and major source of atmospheric methane releases, works on straw, wasted food, animal bedding, manure....all kinds of organic material...not just the collected byproducts of factory farming.
Now if we could just think of an incentive for capitalists to conserve old growth forests and protect biodiversity on this same scale. Oh wait...there are some. Offsetting, again, if deployed for conservation reserve. And, tax credits for donating money to the Nature Conservancy, for example.
If the covered lagoon method (pictured) proves to be globally valuable for business, the upshot is a large scale incentive to prevent lagoon flooding or leakage, and the resulting loss of raw material (the poop) needed profit from a waste that, if not carefully retained to extract economic value, offends neighbors, is a potential disease vector (for Avian flu for example) and poses an ecological hazard to downstream waters. (What are those huge lagoon covers made out of anyway? Could be a good supply chain aspect to invest in.)
US-EPA (other side of pond from Ireland) is offering a Federal grants program to help animal waste handlers do a better job of managing waste, primarily through education and free consultation. Is there a potential synergy between "crapitalism" and the US-style, regulatory carrot/stick method for improving animal waste management? Or could this be a conflict looming?
Via:: RP at The Shaw Group, Inc.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
The Powerdown Show: Exploring Peak Oil and Climate Change (Video)
Prototype Biomass Gasifier To Convert California Yardwaste To Power 30,000 Homes
Blanchett to Corporations: Time to Change Climate Change
White Roofs to Sweep the World, Fight Climate Change
Comments (7)
part of the energy mix I buy from my utility includes "landfill gas" which is methane. Since cows are the biggest threat to global warming in the USA (info quoted from articles found online), why not capture and use that gas?
Crapitalism. I love it!
June 16, 2007 2:45 PM | flag a problem
dwightstreetrenter says:
Well, that would evolve putting the cows in a sealed container with no in or out air circulation. Sounds even worse than their life now.
===== author's response follows ===
The cows are already in climate controlled stalls. The manure is carried away by a chain driven conveyor , into a pit, from where it is augured by a big worm gear device into storage lagoons. The whole affair is periodically washed down and that rinseate goes also into the lagoon. In the lagoon is where anaerobes do their methane magic. The balloon cover is over the lagoon.
June 16, 2007 4:49 PM | flag a problem
Anonymous says:
...or we could just promote vegetarianism and stop breeding chickens, cows, and pigs all together. But wait...that means people actually have to give something up. On second thought, I'll just wait for the hybrid Hummer.
June 17, 2007 8:30 AM | flag a problem
Joshua says:
This is a significant shift and has a lot of upside. I remember reading about bio-digestion in Mother Earth news about 30+ years ago. Now it's gone mainstream. Then it was skewed as a methodology for the third world and small farms - which is still very applicable.
The difficulty has always been collecting the wastes efficiently. Free range cattle require hundreds of acres per cow, and you can't really send someone out with a shovel to follow them all.
Feedlots and industrially scaled penned livestock are the main beneficiaries here, which has pluses and minuses.
The downside is that this makes it more cost effective to keep livestock confined by the thousands, with all of the disease and quality of life issues for the animals that this entails. The quality of the meat, dairy and byproducts is also problematic, compared to animals who can roam to greater or lesser degrees.
The upside is that the multiple-acre manure lagoons can be brought under control, and their environmental effects mitigated. Pig farms have been particularly problematic in the SE US where they dominate certain regions, where the stench, flies, contamination of groundwater, blowouts into rivers and wetlands, and dispersal of antibiotics and hormones have despoiled entire counties.
The processed manure that results from bio-digestion is sterile, less smelly, and better suited for crop fertilizer. The burning off of the methane removes an aggressive greenhouse gas. The CO2 from burning methane is probably in carbon balance with the livestock feed. Plus you can generate electricity, and do co-generation to provide process heat, heat the livestock barns, and provide hot water for cleaning needs.
This also works for towns and cities with waste treatment plants, you know. My local plant has a series of huge egg-shaped digesters. They capture the heat from burning the methane for much of their needs. The released, treated effluent water is the most innocuous that's ever been released into the waters of the city. Not quite a Clivus Multrum, but a vast step up from what a million people had done previously.
==== author's response follows ====
Thanks for the insightful comment. I hope all readers of this post take the time to ponder the tradeoffs you cite here.
Extrapolations on your thoughts follow.
As any naive person who has traveled in the Lancaster PA, USA area can easily observe, the "nature friendly" free range livestock operations often mean trampled pastures, severely caved stream banks, high silt loads, and excessive nutrients flowing into the Chesapeake Bay.
Better management practices surely are available at low cost - where there is a will there is a way - but we should not romanticize, as often is done, about a more natural farming method being good for nature in all aspects of the product life cycle.
This applies also to the production of goat cheese and sheeps wool. Goats and sheep are extremely destructive to the environment from their over grazing if not properly managed. Every wonder why almost every new photo you see of the landscape of the Middle East shows a near barren landscape? Two millennium of goat and sheep will do that.
June 17, 2007 9:25 AM | flag a problem
jon says:
Ahh, well we certainly should talk about the positives of Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). Because far be it from us to consider something like factory farming could go away. Or that people could fathom not eating meat.
Sustainability can supersede ethics and consideration for animals, because the people actually changing their diet or lifestyle is inconceivable. And I also forgot how destructive free range, pastured animal farming is. It must be that, and not the concentrated Smithfield Farms hog lots that are polluting the Chesapeake.
Crapitalism is exactly how it sounds and smells. A reeking compromise and excuse because it's "the best we can do".
I am dumbfounded here. People talk about it as though "making the best of a horrible industry," but ultimately that message gets distorted into "oh it may be a good thing". Before you know it the greater population deludes itself into thinking it some kind of sustainable closed loop system. It's like the Canadian and Russian governments talking about the economic boons they may reap from global warming.
I'm with Joshua: I'll nibble my vegan happy meal in my hybrid hummer.
PS to Jon: Cynicism aside, I'd love to read something that quantifies the damage of free range farming in contrast to factory farming.
June 19, 2007 2:19 PM | flag a problem
Jon says:
I'm not a complete vegetarian but after having been raised to eat meat I have cut back by over 90%.
The reason the economy of meat "works" is the final step when a truck is loaded up with the very dense weight of meat. Compare a truckload of tomatoes to a truckload of meat. Even though meat started at a deficit in terms of costs to create, it's the final step where it gets loaded into a truck that it becomes economically feasible.
Localized farming is probably the best solution. Read up on South Central Farms in South Central Los Angeles. Here was a 15 acre plot of land that was divided into a couple hundred individual garden plots, but in the end the land was basically given back to the original owner at far below market value so that the land can be "developed". Developed means put a building up on it that then becomes energy dependent on non renewable resources with a property overvaluation that causes the businesses that will reside in the property to import their goods so they can heavily mark them up to pay for their overhead. This destructive practice continues to proliferate. Yes, local cities do there part to create the problem as much if not moreso than the federal government.
Ugandans Make Biogas From Wastes
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 01. 5.08
Science & Technology
In developing countries - where food is scarce and reliable energy supplies are even scarcer - necessity often becomes the mother of invention; so it is in Uganda, where farmers have resorted to using human urine and excreta - mixed in with banana peels, algae, water hyacinth and poultry droppings - as an inexpensive source of biogas. This cheap alternative is being pushed by Heifer International Uganda (HIU), an NGO working to reduce hunger and poverty around the world by sharing livestock and knowledge.
In an effort to stave off the growing threat of deforestation in Uganda, HIU is working with several partners to build biogas plants; the inflammable gas is typically produced by bacteria in an air tight container called a digester. Biogas made from excreta contains 60 - 90% methane - enough for it to burn without further purification. There are currently three available plant models: floating, polythene tubular system and Chinese fixed dome - the latter of which is most commonly used by HIU's beneficiaries.
"It keeps the environment free of organic wastes, is convenient, time-saving and reduces smoke-related illnesses often associated with the use of firewood. If the majority of Ugandans adopted biogas, we would preserve our biodiversity. People should exploit decomposing raw materials, which are free. Biogas plant maintenance is not regular, constant energy, no load shedding, local technicians are available, appliances are now locally-made and there is no metering. Therefore, no monthly power tariffs," explained Patrick Nalere, the Heifer Project International country director.
In Uganda's Mukono district - where the technology is being used for cooking, lighting pressure lamps and in various engines - the residents are already reaping the benefits: Many are pulling themselves out of poverty and are using its byproduct, a "slurry," to enrich their soil, contributing to larger crop outputs.
Via ::The New Vision: Uganda: The Fuel in Human Excreta (news website)
See also: ::The Sucking Sound? Just A Little Biogas, ::Biogas-Powered Fuel Cell System Wins Big, Crowd Goes Wild, ::Everything Poops + Business Sees The Changing Climate = Crapitalism
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Biochar Fund Project Gets Big Financial Boost from Congo Basin Forest Fund
Just 2% of Africa's Forests in Community Control: No Wonder Deforestation Rates are So High
Do Horizontal Farms on Buildings Make More Sense than Vertical Farms? Paul de Ruiter Thinks So
Pee-to-Water Converter Is Neat And Kinda Gross
Science & Technology
In developing countries - where food is scarce and reliable energy supplies are even scarcer - necessity often becomes the mother of invention; so it is in Uganda, where farmers have resorted to using human urine and excreta - mixed in with banana peels, algae, water hyacinth and poultry droppings - as an inexpensive source of biogas. This cheap alternative is being pushed by Heifer International Uganda (HIU), an NGO working to reduce hunger and poverty around the world by sharing livestock and knowledge.
In an effort to stave off the growing threat of deforestation in Uganda, HIU is working with several partners to build biogas plants; the inflammable gas is typically produced by bacteria in an air tight container called a digester. Biogas made from excreta contains 60 - 90% methane - enough for it to burn without further purification. There are currently three available plant models: floating, polythene tubular system and Chinese fixed dome - the latter of which is most commonly used by HIU's beneficiaries.
"It keeps the environment free of organic wastes, is convenient, time-saving and reduces smoke-related illnesses often associated with the use of firewood. If the majority of Ugandans adopted biogas, we would preserve our biodiversity. People should exploit decomposing raw materials, which are free. Biogas plant maintenance is not regular, constant energy, no load shedding, local technicians are available, appliances are now locally-made and there is no metering. Therefore, no monthly power tariffs," explained Patrick Nalere, the Heifer Project International country director.
In Uganda's Mukono district - where the technology is being used for cooking, lighting pressure lamps and in various engines - the residents are already reaping the benefits: Many are pulling themselves out of poverty and are using its byproduct, a "slurry," to enrich their soil, contributing to larger crop outputs.
Via ::The New Vision: Uganda: The Fuel in Human Excreta (news website)
See also: ::The Sucking Sound? Just A Little Biogas, ::Biogas-Powered Fuel Cell System Wins Big, Crowd Goes Wild, ::Everything Poops + Business Sees The Changing Climate = Crapitalism
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Biochar Fund Project Gets Big Financial Boost from Congo Basin Forest Fund
Just 2% of Africa's Forests in Community Control: No Wonder Deforestation Rates are So High
Do Horizontal Farms on Buildings Make More Sense than Vertical Farms? Paul de Ruiter Thinks So
Pee-to-Water Converter Is Neat And Kinda Gross
Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
by Kimberley D. Mok, Montreal, Canada on 06.26.07
Business & Politics (news)
In the tropical green south Indian state of Kerala, there is a fresh strategy of dealing with an old problem of waste: specially designed, efficient organic 'digesters' that turn solid waste into energy.
Beginning in 1994, a local NGO called Bio-tech pioneered the development of their ‘integrated waste recycling plant,’ where large amounts of organic waste generated by the markets, slaughter houses, and restaurant kitchens are treated and converted into methane (cooking gas) and fertilizer.
Saji Das, the man behind Bio-tech, then chose town of Kadakkal in Kollam district (which fortuitously had the largest dump in the state) as the location for the first integrated recycling plant. Today, the plant is capable of digesting daily one tonne of waste – producing three kilowatts of energy – enough to power 120 street lamps.
The conversion process begins with the manual segregation of wet waste, dry biodegradable waste and recyclable solids like glass, metal and plastic. The plant utilizes five technologies in order to complete the transformation of waste to energy in the form of biogas, namely biomethanization, biocineration, leach beds, waste water treatment and vermicomposting.
Wet waste – including blood and other waste matter from the slaughter house – is critical in producing biogas and is actually run through a pre-digester in order to boost the bacterial action that will break the waste down further. Once the process is complete, it generates biogas that can be used as fuel, in addition to electricity used for lighting and organic NPK (Nitrogen-Phosphorus-Potash mix) fertilizer.
No waste is left behind, as the different components of the Bio-tech integrated recycling plant are designed to address specific types of waste, which distinguishes them from traditional, less-efficient treatment plants. For instance, the biocinerator unit is designed to handle wastes that degrade slowly, such as paper, dry leaves and plants, while the biomethanization unit processes all organic waste. The leach beds dispense with vegetable matter. Anaerobic waste treatment takes place in another separate unit and the final process incorporates earthworm action in a vermicompost unit.
Back at Kadakkal, this thorough efficiency is reflected in the reuse of water that is extracted and recycled so that it can be sent back to flush out abattoirs. Electricity produced by the plant is used to run all the equipment, while the incinerator runs only on the biogas produced by the methanization unit.
Das has now set up ten such integrated plants all over Kerala. In towns such as Kumbalangi, environmentalism and tourism have joined forces in transforming it into a “model tourism village” where, with government support, 140 Biotech domestic units have been designed to run on human waste from lavatories, in addition to 800 units that convert biogas from other wastes. Other municipalities, such as the tourist-friendly Kovalam, are following suit as well.
In the larger scheme of things, these integrated recycling plants make conventional, centralized garbage disposal systems look like, well, junk. There is no need to address the challenges of collection and transportation and all maintenance happens on-site. The units themselves can be tailored to suit the requirements of the customer and the domestic version only needs one square metre of space – and manages both solid and liquid waste at the same time. Costs to imported Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) for cooking are saved.
In a state where its ‘Annual Economic Review’ published by the government shows that only 50 per cent of the 2,500 tonnes of waste created per day in Kerala is collected for disposal – and where the tourism industry generates additionally one tonne of waste daily – the bio-waste digesters are looking like an ecologically-effective and versatile way around the looming spectre of the waste problem in India and beyond.::InterPress Service
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Indian State Achieves Western Standards on Fraction of Income: A Slideshow
Do Horizontal Farms on Buildings Make More Sense than Vertical Farms? Paul de Ruiter Thinks So
German Town Becomes World's First With Dedicated Biogas Network
[5] Comments | Related Tags: Bio-tech | biogas | india | integrated waste recycling
Comments (5)
I live in New Delhi region and have been seriously considering installing Biotech's residential system which costs around just $232 (without rebates). It has a 1 cubic meter capacity and can supply gas for 1-2 hours' operation a day. Combining it with solar cooking I think one can be completely off fossil fuels as far as cooking is concerned.
By the way, Saji Das (Biotech) just won the Ashden Award a few days ago. I wonder when will Treehugger cover the awards.
June 27, 2007 3:54 AM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
Hi Manu,
I see that an article on the Ashdens was published today here.
On a side note, another Indian from Karnataka won an Ashden... wonderful to see this!
June 27, 2007 6:03 AM | flag a problem
Kimberley says:
Definitly this has worked out among so many areas in Kerala,South india.
Specially where people have cows,waste foods,leaves,Rubber waste water any thing .One more advantage is that u can dump any thing that is decomposble in this pit.
comparing the cost of One govt supplied LPG cylinder costs INR 270 .Initial implenatation for whole pit is INR 6000,then up to 20 years no need to look any thing.Its all maintainance free.
Also I heard govt are giving subsidies for this plants.All you need is 1.5 meters diameter mesh and some concrete mixs.one out inlet,one out let and top a hole for gas to come out.
Simple stuff.
June 27, 2007 6:43 AM | flag a problem
sreyass says:
Hi Kim,
I'm aware of that post from May that covered the finalists. The winners have just been announced on 24th June. And yes, there were actually three entries from India winning awards this year. It's not the first time either, two of them (Biotech & Selco) have won awards in the past as well.
Ashden encourages companies that invest money won from their awards back into their businesses.
June 29, 2007 3:07 PM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
In case anyone in India or elsewhere wish to contact Biotechm here is their contact info
BIOTECH
PB No 520
MP Appan Road
Vazhuthacadu
Thyncaud PO
Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala. India 695 014
Telephone: +91-471-2332179, +91-471-2321909
Email: biotechindia@eth.net
February 27, 2008 4:43 AM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
by Kimberley D. Mok, Montreal, Canada on 06.26.07
Business & Politics (news)
In the tropical green south Indian state of Kerala, there is a fresh strategy of dealing with an old problem of waste: specially designed, efficient organic 'digesters' that turn solid waste into energy.
Beginning in 1994, a local NGO called Bio-tech pioneered the development of their ‘integrated waste recycling plant,’ where large amounts of organic waste generated by the markets, slaughter houses, and restaurant kitchens are treated and converted into methane (cooking gas) and fertilizer.
Saji Das, the man behind Bio-tech, then chose town of Kadakkal in Kollam district (which fortuitously had the largest dump in the state) as the location for the first integrated recycling plant. Today, the plant is capable of digesting daily one tonne of waste – producing three kilowatts of energy – enough to power 120 street lamps.
The conversion process begins with the manual segregation of wet waste, dry biodegradable waste and recyclable solids like glass, metal and plastic. The plant utilizes five technologies in order to complete the transformation of waste to energy in the form of biogas, namely biomethanization, biocineration, leach beds, waste water treatment and vermicomposting.
Wet waste – including blood and other waste matter from the slaughter house – is critical in producing biogas and is actually run through a pre-digester in order to boost the bacterial action that will break the waste down further. Once the process is complete, it generates biogas that can be used as fuel, in addition to electricity used for lighting and organic NPK (Nitrogen-Phosphorus-Potash mix) fertilizer.
No waste is left behind, as the different components of the Bio-tech integrated recycling plant are designed to address specific types of waste, which distinguishes them from traditional, less-efficient treatment plants. For instance, the biocinerator unit is designed to handle wastes that degrade slowly, such as paper, dry leaves and plants, while the biomethanization unit processes all organic waste. The leach beds dispense with vegetable matter. Anaerobic waste treatment takes place in another separate unit and the final process incorporates earthworm action in a vermicompost unit.
Back at Kadakkal, this thorough efficiency is reflected in the reuse of water that is extracted and recycled so that it can be sent back to flush out abattoirs. Electricity produced by the plant is used to run all the equipment, while the incinerator runs only on the biogas produced by the methanization unit.
Das has now set up ten such integrated plants all over Kerala. In towns such as Kumbalangi, environmentalism and tourism have joined forces in transforming it into a “model tourism village” where, with government support, 140 Biotech domestic units have been designed to run on human waste from lavatories, in addition to 800 units that convert biogas from other wastes. Other municipalities, such as the tourist-friendly Kovalam, are following suit as well.
In the larger scheme of things, these integrated recycling plants make conventional, centralized garbage disposal systems look like, well, junk. There is no need to address the challenges of collection and transportation and all maintenance happens on-site. The units themselves can be tailored to suit the requirements of the customer and the domestic version only needs one square metre of space – and manages both solid and liquid waste at the same time. Costs to imported Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) for cooking are saved.
In a state where its ‘Annual Economic Review’ published by the government shows that only 50 per cent of the 2,500 tonnes of waste created per day in Kerala is collected for disposal – and where the tourism industry generates additionally one tonne of waste daily – the bio-waste digesters are looking like an ecologically-effective and versatile way around the looming spectre of the waste problem in India and beyond.::InterPress Service
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Indian State Achieves Western Standards on Fraction of Income: A Slideshow
Do Horizontal Farms on Buildings Make More Sense than Vertical Farms? Paul de Ruiter Thinks So
German Town Becomes World's First With Dedicated Biogas Network
[5] Comments | Related Tags: Bio-tech | biogas | india | integrated waste recycling
Comments (5)
I live in New Delhi region and have been seriously considering installing Biotech's residential system which costs around just $232 (without rebates). It has a 1 cubic meter capacity and can supply gas for 1-2 hours' operation a day. Combining it with solar cooking I think one can be completely off fossil fuels as far as cooking is concerned.
By the way, Saji Das (Biotech) just won the Ashden Award a few days ago. I wonder when will Treehugger cover the awards.
June 27, 2007 3:54 AM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
Hi Manu,
I see that an article on the Ashdens was published today here.
On a side note, another Indian from Karnataka won an Ashden... wonderful to see this!
June 27, 2007 6:03 AM | flag a problem
Kimberley says:
Definitly this has worked out among so many areas in Kerala,South india.
Specially where people have cows,waste foods,leaves,Rubber waste water any thing .One more advantage is that u can dump any thing that is decomposble in this pit.
comparing the cost of One govt supplied LPG cylinder costs INR 270 .Initial implenatation for whole pit is INR 6000,then up to 20 years no need to look any thing.Its all maintainance free.
Also I heard govt are giving subsidies for this plants.All you need is 1.5 meters diameter mesh and some concrete mixs.one out inlet,one out let and top a hole for gas to come out.
Simple stuff.
June 27, 2007 6:43 AM | flag a problem
sreyass says:
Hi Kim,
I'm aware of that post from May that covered the finalists. The winners have just been announced on 24th June. And yes, there were actually three entries from India winning awards this year. It's not the first time either, two of them (Biotech & Selco) have won awards in the past as well.
Ashden encourages companies that invest money won from their awards back into their businesses.
June 29, 2007 3:07 PM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
In case anyone in India or elsewhere wish to contact Biotechm here is their contact info
BIOTECH
PB No 520
MP Appan Road
Vazhuthacadu
Thyncaud PO
Thiruvananthapuram
Kerala. India 695 014
Telephone: +91-471-2332179, +91-471-2321909
Email: biotechindia@eth.net
February 27, 2008 4:43 AM | flag a problem
Manu Sharma says:
Cow Poop to Electricity in California
by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 03.11.08
Science & Technology (alternative energy)
You can almost smell the photo above: "a vat of liquid cow manure covering the area of five football fields and 33 feet deep". Ew. But as long as we are stuck with all that manure from industrial farms (and aren't using it locally like on the Polyface Farm), something might as well be done with it.
The Vintage Dairy Biogas Project, the project of dairyman David Albers, wants to provide enough natural gas to power 1,200 homes a day. "As cow manure decomposes, it produces methane, a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide. Scientists say controlling methane emissions from animals such as cows would be a major step in addressing climate change."
To tap the renewable gas from cow manure, the Vintage Dairy farm first flushes manure into a large, octagonal pit, where it becomes about 99 percent water. It is then pumped into a covered lagoon, first passing through a screen that filters out large solids that eventually become the cows' bedding. [...]
Weights on top of the digester channel the gas to the small facility where it is "scrubbed" of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide. The end product is "close to 99 percent pure methane" according to BioEnergy Chief Operating Officer Thomas Hintz.
The the gas is injected into PG&E's pipeline, where it will be shipped to a power plant in Northern California.
There are many other manure lagoons like that one that aren't capturing the methane, so that seems like the thing to do both economically and environmentally.
A second dairy in Fresno county has already agreed to join the Vintage Dairy project and Albers estimated gas from the two dairies combined could power 2,500 homes a day.
It would probably be a good idea to start thinking about harnessing biogas from other sources as well. There's a low of cows, but there's also a lot of us. How about human sewage?
::California cows start passing gas to the grid
See also: ::TreeHugger Picks: Behold - The Power of Poo, ::Biogas: Poo-Powered Prison in Rwanda, ::Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda, ::Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Big Oil to Become Big Biofuels?
The Return of the Lowly and Lovely Cowslip
Will Allen: "Industrial Agriculture One of Most Polluting & Dangerous Industries"
Are Vertical Farms the Answer After All?
Science & Technology (alternative energy)
You can almost smell the photo above: "a vat of liquid cow manure covering the area of five football fields and 33 feet deep". Ew. But as long as we are stuck with all that manure from industrial farms (and aren't using it locally like on the Polyface Farm), something might as well be done with it.
The Vintage Dairy Biogas Project, the project of dairyman David Albers, wants to provide enough natural gas to power 1,200 homes a day. "As cow manure decomposes, it produces methane, a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide. Scientists say controlling methane emissions from animals such as cows would be a major step in addressing climate change."
To tap the renewable gas from cow manure, the Vintage Dairy farm first flushes manure into a large, octagonal pit, where it becomes about 99 percent water. It is then pumped into a covered lagoon, first passing through a screen that filters out large solids that eventually become the cows' bedding. [...]
Weights on top of the digester channel the gas to the small facility where it is "scrubbed" of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide. The end product is "close to 99 percent pure methane" according to BioEnergy Chief Operating Officer Thomas Hintz.
The the gas is injected into PG&E's pipeline, where it will be shipped to a power plant in Northern California.
There are many other manure lagoons like that one that aren't capturing the methane, so that seems like the thing to do both economically and environmentally.
A second dairy in Fresno county has already agreed to join the Vintage Dairy project and Albers estimated gas from the two dairies combined could power 2,500 homes a day.
It would probably be a good idea to start thinking about harnessing biogas from other sources as well. There's a low of cows, but there's also a lot of us. How about human sewage?
::California cows start passing gas to the grid
See also: ::TreeHugger Picks: Behold - The Power of Poo, ::Biogas: Poo-Powered Prison in Rwanda, ::Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda, ::Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Big Oil to Become Big Biofuels?
The Return of the Lowly and Lovely Cowslip
Will Allen: "Industrial Agriculture One of Most Polluting & Dangerous Industries"
Are Vertical Farms the Answer After All?
A Dung Deal: Power From Poop
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 07.25.08
Science & Technology (alternative energy)
Larger version of illustration at Globe and Mail
At a properly run farm, "nothing is waste. Everything is a resource. It's just a matter of harvesting." With 750 cows, Laurie Stanton's farm has a lot of manure to harvest. Martin Mittelstaedt writes in the Globe and Mail about Ontario's largest farm-biogas installation. It seems like the perfect solution to a big problem; there are only so many places to put the 50 million tonnes of "biomass", as it is politely called, that is produced each year in the province. Instead, it is fermented in a big tank, and the methane is collected and piped to a diesel generator. The leftover liquids make a good fertilizer and the solids become bedding for cows.
It is about time; in Germany, biogas produces as much energy as a large nuclear plant; here we just build mountains of manure.
From the Globe and Mail:
HOW WILL IT WORK
The province announced funding for a $5-million anaerobic digestion power plant at Laurie Stanton's dairy farm in the hopes that it will suggest a way of dealing with some of the nearly 50 million tonnes of biomass, or waste residues from plants and animals, that Ontario produces annually. If successful, Mr. Stanton's farm will produce about 1.3 megawatts, enough to power about 800 typical homes.
1. BARN: Slurry of manure is washed and scraped from cow stalls into a series of sewage pipes that run under the barn. The manure is mixed with other food wastes.
2. DIGESTER: The slurry is heated to around 37 degrees and kept at that level for the five days needed for the microbes to decompose the cow dung. This process gives off methane gas, which bubbles through the slurry and is collected at the top.
3. DIESEL GENERATOR: The gas runs to the generator, where it is burned to produce electricity to power the digester and the farm, and to feed into the grid.
4. SOLIDS SEPARATOR: Leftover liquids are used as fertilizer and the solids are strained to make a material to be used as bedding for the cows. ::Globe and Mail
More on Biogas in TreeHugger
Cow Poop -> Electricity: Biogas Project in California
Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda
Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
Bioenergy in Yunnan, China Video Podcast
Biogas Plant in Eastern Germany Will Be the World’s Largest
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Will Allen: "Industrial Agriculture One of Most Polluting & Dangerous Industries"
Expanding Waste-Based Renewable Energy
The Biggest Threat to the Democrats' Climate Bill: Democrats
Aktivhaus Generates More Heat and Power Than It Needs
Science & Technology (alternative energy)
Larger version of illustration at Globe and Mail
At a properly run farm, "nothing is waste. Everything is a resource. It's just a matter of harvesting." With 750 cows, Laurie Stanton's farm has a lot of manure to harvest. Martin Mittelstaedt writes in the Globe and Mail about Ontario's largest farm-biogas installation. It seems like the perfect solution to a big problem; there are only so many places to put the 50 million tonnes of "biomass", as it is politely called, that is produced each year in the province. Instead, it is fermented in a big tank, and the methane is collected and piped to a diesel generator. The leftover liquids make a good fertilizer and the solids become bedding for cows.
It is about time; in Germany, biogas produces as much energy as a large nuclear plant; here we just build mountains of manure.
From the Globe and Mail:
HOW WILL IT WORK
The province announced funding for a $5-million anaerobic digestion power plant at Laurie Stanton's dairy farm in the hopes that it will suggest a way of dealing with some of the nearly 50 million tonnes of biomass, or waste residues from plants and animals, that Ontario produces annually. If successful, Mr. Stanton's farm will produce about 1.3 megawatts, enough to power about 800 typical homes.
1. BARN: Slurry of manure is washed and scraped from cow stalls into a series of sewage pipes that run under the barn. The manure is mixed with other food wastes.
2. DIGESTER: The slurry is heated to around 37 degrees and kept at that level for the five days needed for the microbes to decompose the cow dung. This process gives off methane gas, which bubbles through the slurry and is collected at the top.
3. DIESEL GENERATOR: The gas runs to the generator, where it is burned to produce electricity to power the digester and the farm, and to feed into the grid.
4. SOLIDS SEPARATOR: Leftover liquids are used as fertilizer and the solids are strained to make a material to be used as bedding for the cows. ::Globe and Mail
More on Biogas in TreeHugger
Cow Poop -> Electricity: Biogas Project in California
Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda
Bio-Digesters in India: Nothing Wasted, A Lot More Gained
Bioenergy in Yunnan, China Video Podcast
Biogas Plant in Eastern Germany Will Be the World’s Largest
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Will Allen: "Industrial Agriculture One of Most Polluting & Dangerous Industries"
Expanding Waste-Based Renewable Energy
The Biggest Threat to the Democrats' Climate Bill: Democrats
Aktivhaus Generates More Heat and Power Than It Needs
German Town Becomes First With Dedicated Biogas System
by Matthew McDermott, New York, NY on 05.29.09
It's been a while since a major new poo power project graced these digital pages, but this one's certainly worth noting: The Guardian reports that the German town of Lünen, will become the first town in the world to have its own dedicated biogas network:
The 6.8 MW power plant at the heart of the network with take cow and horse manure, as well as other agricultural waste and spoiled crops from surrounding farms, and process it all into biogas, which will be used to generate both heat and electricity. When completed it will generate enough power to supply about 26,000 homes.
About 30-40% of the town's heat and electricity will be provided through the biogas network.
UNH Get's 85% of Power From Landfill Gas
Germany isn't alone in getting in one the biogas act: Closer to home for most TreeHugger readers the University of New Hampshire just completed a landfill gas pipeline, which will supply 85% of the school's heat and electricity.
This was a picture of a cow grazing.. powering up, so to speak!
Biogas
University of New Hampshire is First School in the US to Run Off Landfill Gas
Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda
A Dumg Deal: Making Power from Poop
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Expanding Waste-Based Renewable Energy
Drinking Water And Hydroelectric Power - Binding The Common Future Of Canada And The USA
Nuclear Power Not Cost Competitive With Coal Or Natural Gas - Could Benefit From Cap & Trade
Could Clean Energy Cause the Next Cold War?
It's been a while since a major new poo power project graced these digital pages, but this one's certainly worth noting: The Guardian reports that the German town of Lünen, will become the first town in the world to have its own dedicated biogas network:
The 6.8 MW power plant at the heart of the network with take cow and horse manure, as well as other agricultural waste and spoiled crops from surrounding farms, and process it all into biogas, which will be used to generate both heat and electricity. When completed it will generate enough power to supply about 26,000 homes.
About 30-40% of the town's heat and electricity will be provided through the biogas network.
UNH Get's 85% of Power From Landfill Gas
Germany isn't alone in getting in one the biogas act: Closer to home for most TreeHugger readers the University of New Hampshire just completed a landfill gas pipeline, which will supply 85% of the school's heat and electricity.
This was a picture of a cow grazing.. powering up, so to speak!
Biogas
University of New Hampshire is First School in the US to Run Off Landfill Gas
Human Poop and Urine Provide Cheap Biogas Source in Uganda
A Dumg Deal: Making Power from Poop
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Expanding Waste-Based Renewable Energy
Drinking Water And Hydroelectric Power - Binding The Common Future Of Canada And The USA
Nuclear Power Not Cost Competitive With Coal Or Natural Gas - Could Benefit From Cap & Trade
Could Clean Energy Cause the Next Cold War?
Norwegians Parade Electric Cars
According to the Plugs and Cars blog, a small parade of around 50 electric cars tooling through the streets of Oslo this week underlined Norwegians' frustration that their government hasn't made much effort to support TH!NK as it struggles to be solvent and fulfill the multiple orders it has from municipalities around Europe to assemble its popular TH!NK City car. At the same time, Norwegians got a chance to drive and experience electric cars when the city's first car share program Move About added electric City cars to its roster.
TH!NK's sad tale of underfunding
TH!NK started seriously ailing at the same moment that it was ready to start mass producing City cars. Unfortunately, easy world credit dried up at the same moment that the company needed massive infusions of cash, and the doors to the assembly factory were closed in December.
Photo of TH!NK Move Around 'bildeling' cars by Kjetil Maeland via Nettavisen.
Miraculously, TH!NK continued to cut contract deals with city governments all over Europe, and continued to build cars using existing part supplies. Different pro-electric-car groups in Norway took to the streets on Wednesday to protest the government's lack of help for TH!NK and demanded the company receive loan guarantees so that it can stay in business.
In the meantime, one company that managed to get its hands on a fleet of new TH!NK City cars is Move About (the new company's CEO is TH!NK's former chief Jan-Olaf Willums. Move About currently has a fleet of 13 cars in the center of the city and wants to ratchet that up to 75 within the year. By car share standards, Move About's electric cars are not exactly cheap - membership costs 100 Norwegian crowns a month and 100 crowns an hour (around $15.75). Membership cards have an TH!NK Move Around to open a reserved car's doors. Inside the TH!NK City cars there's also a special button that when depressed for six seconds or more automatically sends a help signal to the Move About offices. Perhaps that's to help new users who might get 'range anxiety' while getting used to driving electric.
Read more about electric cars at TreeHugger
Affordable Electric Cars: Why is Europe Getting All the Goodies?
Video: Test Driving an Electric Smart Car
Tesla Motors: Affordable Electric Cars Are Coming
Affordable Electric Cars Beating Major Manufacturers to Market
TH!NK Electric Cars Considering U.S. Market - You Can Help
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Finally! Norwegians Take to the Streets for Electric Cars (and Get Electric Car Sharing!)
Global Standard Charge Plug For Electric Vehicles
Is Obama Playing God With the American Electric Car?
GM Defends the Volt, Attacks Smaller Electric Car Start-Ups (Tesla, Fisker, etc)
TH!NK's sad tale of underfunding
TH!NK started seriously ailing at the same moment that it was ready to start mass producing City cars. Unfortunately, easy world credit dried up at the same moment that the company needed massive infusions of cash, and the doors to the assembly factory were closed in December.
Photo of TH!NK Move Around 'bildeling' cars by Kjetil Maeland via Nettavisen.
Miraculously, TH!NK continued to cut contract deals with city governments all over Europe, and continued to build cars using existing part supplies. Different pro-electric-car groups in Norway took to the streets on Wednesday to protest the government's lack of help for TH!NK and demanded the company receive loan guarantees so that it can stay in business.
In the meantime, one company that managed to get its hands on a fleet of new TH!NK City cars is Move About (the new company's CEO is TH!NK's former chief Jan-Olaf Willums. Move About currently has a fleet of 13 cars in the center of the city and wants to ratchet that up to 75 within the year. By car share standards, Move About's electric cars are not exactly cheap - membership costs 100 Norwegian crowns a month and 100 crowns an hour (around $15.75). Membership cards have an TH!NK Move Around to open a reserved car's doors. Inside the TH!NK City cars there's also a special button that when depressed for six seconds or more automatically sends a help signal to the Move About offices. Perhaps that's to help new users who might get 'range anxiety' while getting used to driving electric.
Read more about electric cars at TreeHugger
Affordable Electric Cars: Why is Europe Getting All the Goodies?
Video: Test Driving an Electric Smart Car
Tesla Motors: Affordable Electric Cars Are Coming
Affordable Electric Cars Beating Major Manufacturers to Market
TH!NK Electric Cars Considering U.S. Market - You Can Help
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Finally! Norwegians Take to the Streets for Electric Cars (and Get Electric Car Sharing!)
Global Standard Charge Plug For Electric Vehicles
Is Obama Playing God With the American Electric Car?
GM Defends the Volt, Attacks Smaller Electric Car Start-Ups (Tesla, Fisker, etc)
Kansas City Missouri To Get Electric Truck Plant
Kansas City Missouri To Get Electric Truck Plant - More Green Supply Chain Jobs To Come
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 05.29.09
The Smith Newton Electric Truck. Image credit:Kansas-City Star
As reported in The Kansas City Star, "Smith Electric Vehicles US is on track to begin building electric trucks in July at a plant near Kansas City International Airport. The company is betting that it will find sufficient demand because the delivery market is ideal for electric trucks." The Smiths are expensive but do have far lower operating costs than a gas or diesel delivery truck: even compared to hybrids. If plans work out, a nearby battery making plant will also expand. See below for details.
Smith Electric said that to stay in the area it needs a local supplier of electric batteries. That could be Kokam America in Lee’s Summit, which says it wants to be the supplier. Missouri is willing to give incentives to help build the battery plant, an 800,000-square-foot expansion of Kokam’s current facility. That plan is pending.
Via: a Smith USA press release we also learned that:
SEV U.S. Corp has already received a strong expression of interest from fleet operators. Canteen Vending Services, a national vending company and an operating division of Compass Group North America based in Charlotte N.C., has signed a letter of intent with SEV U.S. Corp to purchase some of the first zero- emission vehicles to roll off the assembly line. Frito-Lay North America, a division of PepsiCo that is headquartered in Plano, Texas, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company, headquartered in San Francisco, Calif., have also signed on as launch partners.
Listen to Smith CEO Bryan Hansel explain how the truck drives (ergonomic advantages); how the US supply chain needs to be created; and, how the supply chain expansion will drive costs down.
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 05.29.09
The Smith Newton Electric Truck. Image credit:Kansas-City Star
As reported in The Kansas City Star, "Smith Electric Vehicles US is on track to begin building electric trucks in July at a plant near Kansas City International Airport. The company is betting that it will find sufficient demand because the delivery market is ideal for electric trucks." The Smiths are expensive but do have far lower operating costs than a gas or diesel delivery truck: even compared to hybrids. If plans work out, a nearby battery making plant will also expand. See below for details.
Smith Electric said that to stay in the area it needs a local supplier of electric batteries. That could be Kokam America in Lee’s Summit, which says it wants to be the supplier. Missouri is willing to give incentives to help build the battery plant, an 800,000-square-foot expansion of Kokam’s current facility. That plan is pending.
Via: a Smith USA press release we also learned that:
SEV U.S. Corp has already received a strong expression of interest from fleet operators. Canteen Vending Services, a national vending company and an operating division of Compass Group North America based in Charlotte N.C., has signed a letter of intent with SEV U.S. Corp to purchase some of the first zero- emission vehicles to roll off the assembly line. Frito-Lay North America, a division of PepsiCo that is headquartered in Plano, Texas, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company, headquartered in San Francisco, Calif., have also signed on as launch partners.
Listen to Smith CEO Bryan Hansel explain how the truck drives (ergonomic advantages); how the US supply chain needs to be created; and, how the supply chain expansion will drive costs down.
Retrofitting Exterior Foam on Existing Walls
Retrofitting Exterior Foam on Existing Walls
Achieving necessary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will require almost every home in colder climates of the U.S. to undergo a deep-energy retrofit, often increasing wall insulation to R-30 or more and attic insulation to R-50. Although these retrofits are not technically challenging, they are extraordinarily expensive, running $50,000–$100,000 per house (see EBN July 2007). A new product from Quad-Lock Building Systems, a Canadian manufacturer of insulated concrete forms (ICFs), can simplify the installation of exterior foam on existing houses. The R-etro System includes four components: 4¼"-thick (110 mm) panels (called Plus Panels), plastic clips (called R-etro Ties), galvanized steel starting track, and fasteners.
The r4st of this article is at Building Green.com. I would join if it was free and easy, but I have so many passwords and web names now I dont think I can tolerate another one. Thius snippet doesnt say how much this retrofit would cost, compared to blown-in insulation, etc. so that would be interesting to know. Or perhaps I am just becoming lazy.
Achieving necessary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will require almost every home in colder climates of the U.S. to undergo a deep-energy retrofit, often increasing wall insulation to R-30 or more and attic insulation to R-50. Although these retrofits are not technically challenging, they are extraordinarily expensive, running $50,000–$100,000 per house (see EBN July 2007). A new product from Quad-Lock Building Systems, a Canadian manufacturer of insulated concrete forms (ICFs), can simplify the installation of exterior foam on existing houses. The R-etro System includes four components: 4¼"-thick (110 mm) panels (called Plus Panels), plastic clips (called R-etro Ties), galvanized steel starting track, and fasteners.
The r4st of this article is at Building Green.com. I would join if it was free and easy, but I have so many passwords and web names now I dont think I can tolerate another one. Thius snippet doesnt say how much this retrofit would cost, compared to blown-in insulation, etc. so that would be interesting to know. Or perhaps I am just becoming lazy.
Michigan Will Lead the Green Industrial Revolution ?
Jennifer M. GranholmGovernor of Michigan
Posted: May 27, 2009 05:26 PM BIO Become a Fan Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index
Michigan Will Lead the Green Industrial Revolution
Read More: Big Three Automakers, Chevy Volt, Chrysler, Detroit, Electric Cars, Ford, Gm, Green Energy, Michigan, Uaw, Green News
The battle against global climate change was kicked into a new gear this month, and Michigan is leading the charge.
That's right: Michigan.
The so-called "rust belt" state that has been putting cars, trucks, and SUV's on the road for over 100 years is putting the pedal to the metal on making the U.S. less reliant on fossil fuels.
As Governor of the state that has been ground zero for the nation's economic crisis, I was proud to stand with leaders of the UAW and ten automakers as President Obama announced a truly historic, aggressive national agreement to lower greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles.
Out with the old gas guzzlers of the past. Out with the old thinking of the past. Out with the old politics of the past. Out with the old rust belt.
May was the first month of the New: new technology, new ideas, and a new era of cooperation that will purposefully drive Michigan and America into the new clean-energy future.
Michigan's Big Three automakers, the UAW, Michigan's world class engineers -- they are working together to reduce more greenhouse gas emissions than ever before in this country's history. It's not Silicon Valley. It's not Route 128. It's Motown that is making a more significant impact on global climate change than any other place in America.
In addition to the new fuel efficiency standards, May was also the month that five innovative new Michigan companies submitted their applications to the Department of Energy to receive federal funding to design and build the advanced batteries that will power the electric vehicle of the future. Their applications are backed by $700 million in state incentives.
In Michigan, we're not only redesigning the current generation of vehicles to be more fuel efficient, but as the world's epicenter for automotive research and design, we're literally redesigning the entire notion of the automobile. The Chevy Volt will be the first ever mass produced car designed around a lithium ion battery pack rather than an internal combustion engine. Ford is preparing for the introduction of a full line of new hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, and just announced their first fully electric vehicle will be made at an efficient Michigan factory. Chrysler is also electrifying its product lines, with announcements to come. The key challenge we need to overcome to make the transition to an electric vehicle fleet is perfecting the battery. To meet that challenge, world class companies like A123 Systems, Johnson-Controls-Saft, KD Advanced Battery Group, LG Chem, and Sakti3 are partnering with Michigan's Big 3 automakers and Michigan's Dow Chemical to put the world's best battery engineers to the work on solutions.
As the Arsenal of Democracy during World War II, Michigan was called upon in a time of crisis to transition our auto manufacturing base to tanks and B-1 bombers. Today, Michigan will use our manufacturing know-how and infrastructure to make green energy products -- fuel efficient cars, advanced batteries for electric cars, wind turbines, solar panels, smart grid technology, carbon-fiber materials, energy efficient building materials, and more. We have reinvented ourselves before, and we will do it again. Hard work is in our DNA, and no state is hungrier than Michigan.
Some doubters on this website have advocated "pulling the plug on Detroit." Instead, I invite you to plug in to the power of American ingenuity and American transformation. Plug in the new electric car, made in America, by your neighbors in communities across the country. In Michigan, we're plugging in to a new paradigm. We are reimagining and remaking the American automobile, the American industrial sector, and our nation's energy future. Watch -- Michigan will lead a green industrial revolution. I invite you to watch us, encourage us, and join us.
And the doubters?
I encourage them to just try and keep up
Posted: May 27, 2009 05:26 PM BIO Become a Fan Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index
Michigan Will Lead the Green Industrial Revolution
Read More: Big Three Automakers, Chevy Volt, Chrysler, Detroit, Electric Cars, Ford, Gm, Green Energy, Michigan, Uaw, Green News
The battle against global climate change was kicked into a new gear this month, and Michigan is leading the charge.
That's right: Michigan.
The so-called "rust belt" state that has been putting cars, trucks, and SUV's on the road for over 100 years is putting the pedal to the metal on making the U.S. less reliant on fossil fuels.
As Governor of the state that has been ground zero for the nation's economic crisis, I was proud to stand with leaders of the UAW and ten automakers as President Obama announced a truly historic, aggressive national agreement to lower greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles.
Out with the old gas guzzlers of the past. Out with the old thinking of the past. Out with the old politics of the past. Out with the old rust belt.
May was the first month of the New: new technology, new ideas, and a new era of cooperation that will purposefully drive Michigan and America into the new clean-energy future.
Michigan's Big Three automakers, the UAW, Michigan's world class engineers -- they are working together to reduce more greenhouse gas emissions than ever before in this country's history. It's not Silicon Valley. It's not Route 128. It's Motown that is making a more significant impact on global climate change than any other place in America.
In addition to the new fuel efficiency standards, May was also the month that five innovative new Michigan companies submitted their applications to the Department of Energy to receive federal funding to design and build the advanced batteries that will power the electric vehicle of the future. Their applications are backed by $700 million in state incentives.
In Michigan, we're not only redesigning the current generation of vehicles to be more fuel efficient, but as the world's epicenter for automotive research and design, we're literally redesigning the entire notion of the automobile. The Chevy Volt will be the first ever mass produced car designed around a lithium ion battery pack rather than an internal combustion engine. Ford is preparing for the introduction of a full line of new hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, and just announced their first fully electric vehicle will be made at an efficient Michigan factory. Chrysler is also electrifying its product lines, with announcements to come. The key challenge we need to overcome to make the transition to an electric vehicle fleet is perfecting the battery. To meet that challenge, world class companies like A123 Systems, Johnson-Controls-Saft, KD Advanced Battery Group, LG Chem, and Sakti3 are partnering with Michigan's Big 3 automakers and Michigan's Dow Chemical to put the world's best battery engineers to the work on solutions.
As the Arsenal of Democracy during World War II, Michigan was called upon in a time of crisis to transition our auto manufacturing base to tanks and B-1 bombers. Today, Michigan will use our manufacturing know-how and infrastructure to make green energy products -- fuel efficient cars, advanced batteries for electric cars, wind turbines, solar panels, smart grid technology, carbon-fiber materials, energy efficient building materials, and more. We have reinvented ourselves before, and we will do it again. Hard work is in our DNA, and no state is hungrier than Michigan.
Some doubters on this website have advocated "pulling the plug on Detroit." Instead, I invite you to plug in to the power of American ingenuity and American transformation. Plug in the new electric car, made in America, by your neighbors in communities across the country. In Michigan, we're plugging in to a new paradigm. We are reimagining and remaking the American automobile, the American industrial sector, and our nation's energy future. Watch -- Michigan will lead a green industrial revolution. I invite you to watch us, encourage us, and join us.
And the doubters?
I encourage them to just try and keep up
Thursday, May 28, 2009
An Excellent intro to Smart Grids
The Smart Grid: An Introduction
U.S. Department of Energy
Published: January 8, 2009
The Smart Grid: An Introduction
Message Subject:
This report (PDF) explains what a smart grid is, the benefits of a smarter electrical grid and what the Department of Energy is doing to put a smart grid in place.
"The Smart Grid" overviews the status of the U.S.'s electrical guild, why it needs to be improved and what technologies (both available today or in the future) comprise a smarter, safer, more-efficient grid.
Web Site:http://oe.energy.gov/DocumentsandMedia/DOE_SG_Book_Single_Pages.pdf
GreenerBuildings.com
U.S. Department of Energy
Published: January 8, 2009
The Smart Grid: An Introduction
Message Subject:
This report (PDF) explains what a smart grid is, the benefits of a smarter electrical grid and what the Department of Energy is doing to put a smart grid in place.
"The Smart Grid" overviews the status of the U.S.'s electrical guild, why it needs to be improved and what technologies (both available today or in the future) comprise a smarter, safer, more-efficient grid.
Web Site:http://oe.energy.gov/DocumentsandMedia/DOE_SG_Book_Single_Pages.pdf
GreenerBuildings.com
Modec to Gain EC Whole Vehicle Type Approval
Modec to Gain EC Whole Vehicle Type Approval
28 May 2009
Modec, the British manufactured electric van (earlier post), says that it will soon be the first commercial electric vehicle to gain EC Whole Vehicle Type Approval (EC WVTA). This will see Modec granted full N2 EC Type Approval, allowing it to sell its vehicles in all EU member states without the need for individual national approval.
All tests have been completed and final paperwork is being processed. The approval is important to Modec’s expansion plans—dealers are being set up in The Netherlands, Ireland, France, Spain and Denmark thanks to strong market demand for the unique electric commercial vehicle.
Modec chose Millbrook to undertake the type approval program. The Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) worked closely with Modec and Millbrook during the certification process.
Type Approval is a process of ensuring that vehicles meet the required environmental and safety standards outlined in the relevant EEC Directives and ECE regulations. Historically, European Type Approval has been available to M1 passenger cars, motorcycles and agricultural vehicles. Other types of vehicle, including electric, needed to gain Type Approval, where required, from each individual member country. From the end of April (2009), a change in legislation made it possible to Type Approve all cars, buses, commercial vehicles and trailers, so that one Type Approval will be valid in all EU member states.
Modec vehicles are purpose-designed around a large, removable battery cassette. Modec currently offer two battery options; 60 mile range (Lithium-iron Phosphate batteries) and 100 mile range (“Zebra&rduqo; Sodium Nickel Chloride batteries) A higher range Lithium-iron Phosphate pack is also in development and will be available later in 2009.
28 May 2009
Modec, the British manufactured electric van (earlier post), says that it will soon be the first commercial electric vehicle to gain EC Whole Vehicle Type Approval (EC WVTA). This will see Modec granted full N2 EC Type Approval, allowing it to sell its vehicles in all EU member states without the need for individual national approval.
All tests have been completed and final paperwork is being processed. The approval is important to Modec’s expansion plans—dealers are being set up in The Netherlands, Ireland, France, Spain and Denmark thanks to strong market demand for the unique electric commercial vehicle.
Modec chose Millbrook to undertake the type approval program. The Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) worked closely with Modec and Millbrook during the certification process.
Type Approval is a process of ensuring that vehicles meet the required environmental and safety standards outlined in the relevant EEC Directives and ECE regulations. Historically, European Type Approval has been available to M1 passenger cars, motorcycles and agricultural vehicles. Other types of vehicle, including electric, needed to gain Type Approval, where required, from each individual member country. From the end of April (2009), a change in legislation made it possible to Type Approve all cars, buses, commercial vehicles and trailers, so that one Type Approval will be valid in all EU member states.
Modec vehicles are purpose-designed around a large, removable battery cassette. Modec currently offer two battery options; 60 mile range (Lithium-iron Phosphate batteries) and 100 mile range (“Zebra&rduqo; Sodium Nickel Chloride batteries) A higher range Lithium-iron Phosphate pack is also in development and will be available later in 2009.
'Bone putty' holds it together
May 24, 2009 6:10 AM PDT
'Bone putty' holds it together
by Mark Rutherford
An all star research team is developing a putty-like material to help regenerate shattered bones, a technology that could allow soldiers to avoid amputation and quickly regain full use of badly broken legs.
'Fracture putty' is a biocompatible compound designed to be packed in and around non-union fractures. It provides a load-bearing, osteoconductive, bone-like structure to give regenerative growth a chance. Then, once the bone heals, the putty degrades into harmless, absorbable by-products.
"The fracture putty will serve as a bioactive scaffold and will be able to substitute for the damaged bone," said principal researcher Mauro Ferrari. "At the same time, the putty will facilitate the formation of natural bone and self-healing in the surrounding soft tissue through the attraction of the patient's own stem cells. The putty will have the texture of modeling clay so that it can be molded in any shape in order to be used in many different surgical applications, including the reconnection of separated bones and the replacement of missing bones."
Traumatic, compound bone fractures are very difficult to treat on the battlefield, often requiring multiple surgeries with bone screws, plates, and rods to cobble together grafts with healthy bone. They also take a long time to heal. Bone putty could have the patient up and around in as little as a week, according to the researchers.
The program, which has been called "the ultimate convergence of materials science, mechanics, and orthopedics," will first be tested on animals, but could eventually lead to the use of 'bone putty' in emergency rooms to treat civilians injured in traffic accidents and other traumatic events, researchers hope.
The two-year research project is funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and includes the University of Texas Health Science Center and M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Harvard University, the Institute for BioNanotechnology in Medicine at Northwestern University among others.
Mark Rutherford is a West Coast-based freelance writer. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Email him at markr@milapp.com
'Bone putty' holds it together
by Mark Rutherford
An all star research team is developing a putty-like material to help regenerate shattered bones, a technology that could allow soldiers to avoid amputation and quickly regain full use of badly broken legs.
'Fracture putty' is a biocompatible compound designed to be packed in and around non-union fractures. It provides a load-bearing, osteoconductive, bone-like structure to give regenerative growth a chance. Then, once the bone heals, the putty degrades into harmless, absorbable by-products.
"The fracture putty will serve as a bioactive scaffold and will be able to substitute for the damaged bone," said principal researcher Mauro Ferrari. "At the same time, the putty will facilitate the formation of natural bone and self-healing in the surrounding soft tissue through the attraction of the patient's own stem cells. The putty will have the texture of modeling clay so that it can be molded in any shape in order to be used in many different surgical applications, including the reconnection of separated bones and the replacement of missing bones."
Traumatic, compound bone fractures are very difficult to treat on the battlefield, often requiring multiple surgeries with bone screws, plates, and rods to cobble together grafts with healthy bone. They also take a long time to heal. Bone putty could have the patient up and around in as little as a week, according to the researchers.
The program, which has been called "the ultimate convergence of materials science, mechanics, and orthopedics," will first be tested on animals, but could eventually lead to the use of 'bone putty' in emergency rooms to treat civilians injured in traffic accidents and other traumatic events, researchers hope.
The two-year research project is funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and includes the University of Texas Health Science Center and M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Harvard University, the Institute for BioNanotechnology in Medicine at Northwestern University among others.
Mark Rutherford is a West Coast-based freelance writer. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Email him at markr@milapp.com
Houston, CCI Announce Building Retrofit Project
05/28/2009 07:24 AM
Houston, CCI Announce Building Retrofit Project
SustainableBusiness.com News
Houston is the first C40 city in the U.S. to announce a comprehensive building retrofit project under the Clinton Climate Initiative’s Building Retrofit Program.
The C40 is an association of large cities around the world that have pledged to accelerate their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The city has selected 271 buildings, containing 11 million square feet, in a variety of ages, sizes and configurations--from high-rise offices to single story structures--that are candidates for performance contracting.
Houston awared TAC, the building management and energy services business of Schneider Electric (SCH.L), a $9.6 million performance contract involving seven of the city’s 271 buildings. TAC will implement numerous energy conservation measures (ECMs) at these city facilities to improve the efficiency of the buildings, and the money saved in utility costs will pay for the upgrades.
Performance contracting offers many long-term benefits for municipalities of all sizes, such as improved facility efficiency, environmental protection and financial management. As a part of the agreement with the city of Houston, TAC will guarantee the amount of savings and agrees to pay the difference if that amount is not realized.
The CCI Building Retrofit program brings together many of the world’s largest cities, energy service firms and financial institutions in a landmark effort to reduce energy consumption in existing buildings.
“The city of Houston conducted a thorough search to find an ESCO that shared our objectives to find proactive solutions, use state-of-the-art equipment, and emphasize renewable energy sources and sustainability,” said Issa Dadoush, general services director for the city of Houston. “Buildings are responsible for more than 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in most cities, so retrofitting our facilities with more energy-efficient products and technologies is an important way we can reduce both energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.”
For the first phase, the city of Houston selected TAC to perform energy audits on seven municipal buildings containing 1.2 million square feet. Because existing structures comprise a massive source of energy use within cities, improving their efficiency will have a major impact. The retrofits TAC completes in a typical performance contract can lower energy use from 20% to 30%, according to a CCI release.
The CCI signed its first retrofit project agreement in February 2008 for the renovation of a 700,000-square-feet mall in Mumbai, India.
Earlier this month, CCI and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) launched the Sustainable Urban Development Program.
Website: www.clintonfoundation.org
Houston, CCI Announce Building Retrofit Project
SustainableBusiness.com News
Houston is the first C40 city in the U.S. to announce a comprehensive building retrofit project under the Clinton Climate Initiative’s Building Retrofit Program.
The C40 is an association of large cities around the world that have pledged to accelerate their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The city has selected 271 buildings, containing 11 million square feet, in a variety of ages, sizes and configurations--from high-rise offices to single story structures--that are candidates for performance contracting.
Houston awared TAC, the building management and energy services business of Schneider Electric (SCH.L), a $9.6 million performance contract involving seven of the city’s 271 buildings. TAC will implement numerous energy conservation measures (ECMs) at these city facilities to improve the efficiency of the buildings, and the money saved in utility costs will pay for the upgrades.
Performance contracting offers many long-term benefits for municipalities of all sizes, such as improved facility efficiency, environmental protection and financial management. As a part of the agreement with the city of Houston, TAC will guarantee the amount of savings and agrees to pay the difference if that amount is not realized.
The CCI Building Retrofit program brings together many of the world’s largest cities, energy service firms and financial institutions in a landmark effort to reduce energy consumption in existing buildings.
“The city of Houston conducted a thorough search to find an ESCO that shared our objectives to find proactive solutions, use state-of-the-art equipment, and emphasize renewable energy sources and sustainability,” said Issa Dadoush, general services director for the city of Houston. “Buildings are responsible for more than 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in most cities, so retrofitting our facilities with more energy-efficient products and technologies is an important way we can reduce both energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.”
For the first phase, the city of Houston selected TAC to perform energy audits on seven municipal buildings containing 1.2 million square feet. Because existing structures comprise a massive source of energy use within cities, improving their efficiency will have a major impact. The retrofits TAC completes in a typical performance contract can lower energy use from 20% to 30%, according to a CCI release.
The CCI signed its first retrofit project agreement in February 2008 for the renovation of a 700,000-square-feet mall in Mumbai, India.
Earlier this month, CCI and the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) launched the Sustainable Urban Development Program.
Website: www.clintonfoundation.org
Small wind turbines blow out big sales
May 28, 2009 9:33 AM PDT
Small wind turbines blow out big sales
by Martin LaMonica
Sales of turbines big enough to serve a single home or office building grew rapidly last year and are poised for even faster growth this year, according to a report from the American Wind Energy Association.
The report, published on Thursday (click for PDF), found that sales of small wind turbines smaller than 100 kilowatts grew 78 percent last year, even though there was a sharp drop-off at the end of last year and beginning of this year.
The actual number of small turbines installed, though, is very small at about 1,000 units, comprising 17.3 megawatts of added capacity.
The stimulus act passed earlier this year gives people who buy a small wind turbine a 30 percent tax credit on the installation, which addresses the challenge of the upfront costs, which can be several thousand dollars to install.
Apart from policies, the other important factor to making a small wind turbine economical is siting. A study done that analyzed small wind installations in Massachusetts and one looking at roof-mounted turbines in the U.K. found that the machines underperformed manufacturers' claims.
The best location for small wind turbines, most of which are mounted on poles, is an area with an average wind speed of about 12 miles per hour, said Ron Stimmel, the small wind advocate at AWEA.
"It all depends on your wind resource to get a decent payback," he said. "You need a little bit of land so you're not talking cities, but mostly suburban and rural locations."
Many municipalities have height limitations on structures but turbines generally perform well when they are 30 feet above any structures in a 500-foot radius, he said.
"If you find the wind annoying or have trouble keeping things on your porch, then you probably have enough," Stimmel said.
Unlike large turbines, you don't need to put up a tower to get data on wind speed but customers should look at wind maps and rely on installers to assess the resource, he added.
The dominant small wind turbine design is essentially a smaller version of the three-blade horizontal axis large turbines used in wind farms. But there are now hundreds of different small turbines, some of which are designed for homes or structures such as streetlamps
Small wind turbines blow out big sales
by Martin LaMonica
Sales of turbines big enough to serve a single home or office building grew rapidly last year and are poised for even faster growth this year, according to a report from the American Wind Energy Association.
The report, published on Thursday (click for PDF), found that sales of small wind turbines smaller than 100 kilowatts grew 78 percent last year, even though there was a sharp drop-off at the end of last year and beginning of this year.
The actual number of small turbines installed, though, is very small at about 1,000 units, comprising 17.3 megawatts of added capacity.
The stimulus act passed earlier this year gives people who buy a small wind turbine a 30 percent tax credit on the installation, which addresses the challenge of the upfront costs, which can be several thousand dollars to install.
Apart from policies, the other important factor to making a small wind turbine economical is siting. A study done that analyzed small wind installations in Massachusetts and one looking at roof-mounted turbines in the U.K. found that the machines underperformed manufacturers' claims.
The best location for small wind turbines, most of which are mounted on poles, is an area with an average wind speed of about 12 miles per hour, said Ron Stimmel, the small wind advocate at AWEA.
"It all depends on your wind resource to get a decent payback," he said. "You need a little bit of land so you're not talking cities, but mostly suburban and rural locations."
Many municipalities have height limitations on structures but turbines generally perform well when they are 30 feet above any structures in a 500-foot radius, he said.
"If you find the wind annoying or have trouble keeping things on your porch, then you probably have enough," Stimmel said.
Unlike large turbines, you don't need to put up a tower to get data on wind speed but customers should look at wind maps and rely on installers to assess the resource, he added.
The dominant small wind turbine design is essentially a smaller version of the three-blade horizontal axis large turbines used in wind farms. But there are now hundreds of different small turbines, some of which are designed for homes or structures such as streetlamps
DOE Announces $467M For Solar and Geothermal
05/28/2009 07:43 AM
DOE Announces $467M For Solar and Geothermal
SustainableBusiness.com News
President Obama on Wednesday announced more than $467 million from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to expand and accelerate the development of geothermal and solar energy.
The funding is meant to help the solar and geothermal industries overcome technical barriers, demonstrate new technologies, and provide support for clean energy jobs.
"We have a choice. We can remain the world's leading importer of oil, or we can become the world's leading exporter of clean energy," said President Obama. "We can hand over the jobs of the future to our competitors, or we can confront what they have already recognized as the great opportunity of our time: the nation that leads the world in creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy. That's the nation I want America to be."
Geothermal Energy
The Recovery Act makes a $350 million new investment in this technology, dwarfing previous government commitments. Recovery Act funding will support projects in four crucial areas:
Geothermal Demonstration Projects ($140 Million)
Enhanced Geothermal Systems Technology Research and Development ($80 Million)
Innovative Exploration Techniques ($100 Million)
National Geothermal Data System, Resource Assessment, and Classification System ($30 Million)
Solar Energy
DOE will provide $117.6 million in three areas to leverage partnerships that include DOE's national laboratories, universities, local government, and the private sector:
Photovoltaic Technology Development ($51.5 Million)
DOE will expand investment in advanced photovoltaic concepts and high impact technologies, with the aim of making solar energy cost-competitive with conventional sources of electricity and to strengthen the competitiveness and capabilities of domestic manufacturers.
Solar Energy Deployment ($40.5 Million)
Projects in this area will focus on non-technical barriers to solar energy deployment, including grid connection, market barriers to solar energy adoption in cities, and the shortage of trained solar energy installers.
Concentrating Solar Power Research and Development ($25.6 Million)
This work will focus on improving the reliability of concentrating solar power technologies and enhancing the capabilities of DOE National Laboratories to provide test and evaluation support to the solar industry.
More information on these and other funding opportunites is available at the link below.
Website: www.energy.gov/recovery/funding.htm
DOE Announces $467M For Solar and Geothermal
SustainableBusiness.com News
President Obama on Wednesday announced more than $467 million from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to expand and accelerate the development of geothermal and solar energy.
The funding is meant to help the solar and geothermal industries overcome technical barriers, demonstrate new technologies, and provide support for clean energy jobs.
"We have a choice. We can remain the world's leading importer of oil, or we can become the world's leading exporter of clean energy," said President Obama. "We can hand over the jobs of the future to our competitors, or we can confront what they have already recognized as the great opportunity of our time: the nation that leads the world in creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy. That's the nation I want America to be."
Geothermal Energy
The Recovery Act makes a $350 million new investment in this technology, dwarfing previous government commitments. Recovery Act funding will support projects in four crucial areas:
Geothermal Demonstration Projects ($140 Million)
Enhanced Geothermal Systems Technology Research and Development ($80 Million)
Innovative Exploration Techniques ($100 Million)
National Geothermal Data System, Resource Assessment, and Classification System ($30 Million)
Solar Energy
DOE will provide $117.6 million in three areas to leverage partnerships that include DOE's national laboratories, universities, local government, and the private sector:
Photovoltaic Technology Development ($51.5 Million)
DOE will expand investment in advanced photovoltaic concepts and high impact technologies, with the aim of making solar energy cost-competitive with conventional sources of electricity and to strengthen the competitiveness and capabilities of domestic manufacturers.
Solar Energy Deployment ($40.5 Million)
Projects in this area will focus on non-technical barriers to solar energy deployment, including grid connection, market barriers to solar energy adoption in cities, and the shortage of trained solar energy installers.
Concentrating Solar Power Research and Development ($25.6 Million)
This work will focus on improving the reliability of concentrating solar power technologies and enhancing the capabilities of DOE National Laboratories to provide test and evaluation support to the solar industry.
More information on these and other funding opportunites is available at the link below.
Website: www.energy.gov/recovery/funding.htm
Trilliant buys broadband wireless for smart grid
Trilliant buys broadband wireless for smart grid
by Martin LaMonica
Trilliant on Thursday said it has acquired SkyPilot Networks to bring broadband wireless networking to utility smart-grid programs. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
The acquisition of SkyPilot Networks, which used to sell municipal Wi-Fi systems, will allow Trilliant to offer utilities a way to build a private broadband network, according to company executives.
So-called smart meters have a communications link back to utilities, which use that information to getter understanding of changes in demand to run the transmission grid more efficiently. Trilliant supplies radio communications cards that go into meters and software for utilities to run these networks.
To carry information from people's home meters back to the utilities' data centers, the route is combination of networks. Trilliant's gear can create a mesh network among different homes where it can then be transferred to an aggregation point such as a substation. Often, utilities rely on digital cellular networks for the "backhaul" network back to their data centers, said Eric Miller, the senior vice president of marketing at Trilliant.
With SkyPilot's base stations, utilities can do that backhaul network using relatively long-range Wi-Fi, Miller said. With the signal range as much as 10 miles, Trilliant imagines that SkyPilot's gear will be used to aggregate smart meter information in one city for transmission back to utilities or to be used to reach rural places that don't have good cellular service.
Another option for longer networking jumps is WiMax. General Electric, using Intel chips, is testing a WiMax-based system with utility CenterPoint. Cisco, too, said it is entering the smart grid area with a range of networking options.
Both WiMax and Wi-Fi offer faster bandwidth, which is important to communicate an outage or for demand-response applications. In general, broadband connection are important to realize the potential of the smart grid, letting utilities run many applications on the communications infrastructure, said Jesse Berst, the founding editor of Smart Grid News.
SkyPilots Wi-Fi mesh networking gear has the range of WiMax but is cheaper, said Brian Jenkins, director of marketing for the company. "We take standard chips and make system look like a WiMax in terms of range and capacity," he said.
The company will continue to serve its municipal Wi-Fi customers but shifted its focus to utilities recently, Jenkins said.
by Martin LaMonica
Trilliant on Thursday said it has acquired SkyPilot Networks to bring broadband wireless networking to utility smart-grid programs. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
The acquisition of SkyPilot Networks, which used to sell municipal Wi-Fi systems, will allow Trilliant to offer utilities a way to build a private broadband network, according to company executives.
So-called smart meters have a communications link back to utilities, which use that information to getter understanding of changes in demand to run the transmission grid more efficiently. Trilliant supplies radio communications cards that go into meters and software for utilities to run these networks.
To carry information from people's home meters back to the utilities' data centers, the route is combination of networks. Trilliant's gear can create a mesh network among different homes where it can then be transferred to an aggregation point such as a substation. Often, utilities rely on digital cellular networks for the "backhaul" network back to their data centers, said Eric Miller, the senior vice president of marketing at Trilliant.
With SkyPilot's base stations, utilities can do that backhaul network using relatively long-range Wi-Fi, Miller said. With the signal range as much as 10 miles, Trilliant imagines that SkyPilot's gear will be used to aggregate smart meter information in one city for transmission back to utilities or to be used to reach rural places that don't have good cellular service.
Another option for longer networking jumps is WiMax. General Electric, using Intel chips, is testing a WiMax-based system with utility CenterPoint. Cisco, too, said it is entering the smart grid area with a range of networking options.
Both WiMax and Wi-Fi offer faster bandwidth, which is important to communicate an outage or for demand-response applications. In general, broadband connection are important to realize the potential of the smart grid, letting utilities run many applications on the communications infrastructure, said Jesse Berst, the founding editor of Smart Grid News.
SkyPilots Wi-Fi mesh networking gear has the range of WiMax but is cheaper, said Brian Jenkins, director of marketing for the company. "We take standard chips and make system look like a WiMax in terms of range and capacity," he said.
The company will continue to serve its municipal Wi-Fi customers but shifted its focus to utilities recently, Jenkins said.
Tree Hugger Article
by Kristin Underwood, Sacramento, CA on 05.28.09
Science & Technology (solar)
On Tuesday, I wrote an article about how the PV system supply chain is going to explode over the next few years, bringing with it new jobs and new services. Hot on the heels of that article is a new device created to boot your PV system's output by 10-40%. Smart thinking, National Semiconductor.
For homeowners with less than ideal roofs - maybe your pitch is wrong or those panels had to be put on an east-facing roof, or maybe that tree that was once a sapling is now a towering pine - you may be forced to purchase fewer panels because some will be shaded. Even on a perfect system, over time things change and your system will lose performance. This is why National Semiconductor took existing technology, tweaked it a little bit, and voila, developed a product that helps current and future customers make the most of their solar performance with what they call SolarMagic.
What is SolarMagic?
SolarMagic was created in the labs at National Semiconductor as a way to maximize energy output for your system. Essentially these little boxes do the same thing as microinverters except that these do not do the DC/AC conversion function and are easy to retrofit into older, existing systems that have shade or other issues. Microinverters on the other hand require redesign and rewiring of the system. Not to get too technical, but whereby a typical solar array is connected in a series of strings and then works in parallel when its get to the inverter, if any portion of this string is shaded, the whole string loses power exponentially, not proportionally. This means major losses if you have even a small bit of shading on one panel. SolarMagic optimizers ensure that each panel is counted individually so one bad panel can't take down an entire string. This is perfect for areas that might have one string with partial shading or for areas that get intermittent shading from clouds on a regular basis. You only put the SolarMagic products on strings that you know will have shade. In addition, you will also need to purchase one diode per string to ensure that no energy is allowed to go back along the line, as energy will be fluctuating due to the SolarMagic optimizers.
National Semiconductor is even claiming that this allows engineers to design systems with different string sizes, panel wattages and orientation because SolarMagic will make up for the changes in voltage. By optimizing performance, roofs and areas that would typically be considered less than desirable can now be considered for installation because SolarMagic will make up for the losses, in theory. This gives engineers and system designers more flexibility.
Each SolarMagic box has a blue, flashing LED so you know when the box is performing correctly. The trick is to mount it on the rail so that you can see the LED without having to take each panel off to check it. Just like all the other parts of your system, this power booster has a 20 year warranty but costs way less than any of the other parts going into your system. The system can be installed on both commercial and residential applications.
Looks like this could be the start of a new solar business. While current customers can get SolarMagic systems on their new installations, existing customers could also call up a company and have them come out and give their system a turboboost. For a fee, a small crew could come out, turn off the system, add these maximizers and turn the system back on with virtually only a one day loss in production.
National Semiconductor makes power management technologies including energy efficient technologies and now SolarMagic power maximizing systems. Each SolarMagic optimizer retails for USD$199 and are available on the market now from solar distributors.:SolarMagic
More on Solar Technology
Improve Solar Technology: Design a Biomimic of Photosynthesis
South Africa Pioneers New Solar Technology
Get to Know: SMIT, Solar Power Ivy
Who Knew? The Amish Love That Fancy Solar Technology
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Green Jobs Booming Along PV Supply Chain
Solar Power and Bluetooth Bring Coolness to Gigantic Headphones
Seal Those Ducts for Improved Air Quality, Energy Efficiency
Green Schools Bill to Boost Energy Efficiency, Grow Jobs
Science & Technology (solar)
On Tuesday, I wrote an article about how the PV system supply chain is going to explode over the next few years, bringing with it new jobs and new services. Hot on the heels of that article is a new device created to boot your PV system's output by 10-40%. Smart thinking, National Semiconductor.
For homeowners with less than ideal roofs - maybe your pitch is wrong or those panels had to be put on an east-facing roof, or maybe that tree that was once a sapling is now a towering pine - you may be forced to purchase fewer panels because some will be shaded. Even on a perfect system, over time things change and your system will lose performance. This is why National Semiconductor took existing technology, tweaked it a little bit, and voila, developed a product that helps current and future customers make the most of their solar performance with what they call SolarMagic.
What is SolarMagic?
SolarMagic was created in the labs at National Semiconductor as a way to maximize energy output for your system. Essentially these little boxes do the same thing as microinverters except that these do not do the DC/AC conversion function and are easy to retrofit into older, existing systems that have shade or other issues. Microinverters on the other hand require redesign and rewiring of the system. Not to get too technical, but whereby a typical solar array is connected in a series of strings and then works in parallel when its get to the inverter, if any portion of this string is shaded, the whole string loses power exponentially, not proportionally. This means major losses if you have even a small bit of shading on one panel. SolarMagic optimizers ensure that each panel is counted individually so one bad panel can't take down an entire string. This is perfect for areas that might have one string with partial shading or for areas that get intermittent shading from clouds on a regular basis. You only put the SolarMagic products on strings that you know will have shade. In addition, you will also need to purchase one diode per string to ensure that no energy is allowed to go back along the line, as energy will be fluctuating due to the SolarMagic optimizers.
National Semiconductor is even claiming that this allows engineers to design systems with different string sizes, panel wattages and orientation because SolarMagic will make up for the changes in voltage. By optimizing performance, roofs and areas that would typically be considered less than desirable can now be considered for installation because SolarMagic will make up for the losses, in theory. This gives engineers and system designers more flexibility.
Each SolarMagic box has a blue, flashing LED so you know when the box is performing correctly. The trick is to mount it on the rail so that you can see the LED without having to take each panel off to check it. Just like all the other parts of your system, this power booster has a 20 year warranty but costs way less than any of the other parts going into your system. The system can be installed on both commercial and residential applications.
Looks like this could be the start of a new solar business. While current customers can get SolarMagic systems on their new installations, existing customers could also call up a company and have them come out and give their system a turboboost. For a fee, a small crew could come out, turn off the system, add these maximizers and turn the system back on with virtually only a one day loss in production.
National Semiconductor makes power management technologies including energy efficient technologies and now SolarMagic power maximizing systems. Each SolarMagic optimizer retails for USD$199 and are available on the market now from solar distributors.:SolarMagic
More on Solar Technology
Improve Solar Technology: Design a Biomimic of Photosynthesis
South Africa Pioneers New Solar Technology
Get to Know: SMIT, Solar Power Ivy
Who Knew? The Amish Love That Fancy Solar Technology
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
Green Jobs Booming Along PV Supply Chain
Solar Power and Bluetooth Bring Coolness to Gigantic Headphones
Seal Those Ducts for Improved Air Quality, Energy Efficiency
Green Schools Bill to Boost Energy Efficiency, Grow Jobs
Put Green Builders Foil In Your Attic
Wrap Up Your Attic Fri Jun 13 13:30:00 EDT 2008
READ MORE ABOUT:
Electricity | Energy | Green Home | Heating | Penny Pinching | Saving Energy
By Megan Cohen
On World's Greenest Homes, innovative solar panel placement and other energy-smart tactics trim household electricity usage to a bare minimum. Installing radiant barrier foil in your attic is a novice-friendly DIY project that can seriously shrink your own home's energy footprint. Radiant foil can cut the environmental impact of your climate control systems by up to 13% annually.
Attic barrier foil provides extra insulation year-round, so you'll save energy every single time you flip on your heating or your air conditioning. The foil itself is a thin layer of aluminum which blocks radiant heat from seeping upwards through your roof during the winter, and blocks downward heat gain so your house stays cool during the summer. In a four-season climate, the energy savings can have a dramatic enough impact on your household's utility bills that your attic foil will pay for itself in six or seven years, and keep giving you lasting savings well after you've recouped your investment.
Because barrier foil is a relatively forgiving medium, if you have confidence with basic measuring, an ability to see and access your attic ceiling, and a willingness to handle a heavy-duty staple gun, you can slap up this great green solution in your own domicile over the course of a weekend, or in as little as a day if you have a friend or two to help you out. Basically, you want to create a loosely draped layer of foil covering the underside of your home's roof, which is the same as your attic's ceiling. So, you staple the foil to the ceiling. That's the short version-easy, right?
Okay, it's not quite that simple. The long version is that first you need to identify and measure the roof trusses in your attic, or the lines of roof decking if your trusses are covered, then cut your foil into strips that are appropriately sized to staple to the trusses. You'll have to go up and down into and out of your attic a bunch of times, and you'll probably sweat and complain a little along the way. But, although the process takes several steps, it's still a relatively quick endeavor with substantial and long-lasting results. Plus, the foil medium is pretty forgiving, so a few accidental tears or snips won't ruin your project, making this an attainable green upgrade for even relatively novice DIY-ers.
I have heard of this before, when I took a Green construction course. The builder teaching the course suggested we consider it, as its effective and doesnt cost much.
READ MORE ABOUT:
Electricity | Energy | Green Home | Heating | Penny Pinching | Saving Energy
By Megan Cohen
On World's Greenest Homes, innovative solar panel placement and other energy-smart tactics trim household electricity usage to a bare minimum. Installing radiant barrier foil in your attic is a novice-friendly DIY project that can seriously shrink your own home's energy footprint. Radiant foil can cut the environmental impact of your climate control systems by up to 13% annually.
Attic barrier foil provides extra insulation year-round, so you'll save energy every single time you flip on your heating or your air conditioning. The foil itself is a thin layer of aluminum which blocks radiant heat from seeping upwards through your roof during the winter, and blocks downward heat gain so your house stays cool during the summer. In a four-season climate, the energy savings can have a dramatic enough impact on your household's utility bills that your attic foil will pay for itself in six or seven years, and keep giving you lasting savings well after you've recouped your investment.
Because barrier foil is a relatively forgiving medium, if you have confidence with basic measuring, an ability to see and access your attic ceiling, and a willingness to handle a heavy-duty staple gun, you can slap up this great green solution in your own domicile over the course of a weekend, or in as little as a day if you have a friend or two to help you out. Basically, you want to create a loosely draped layer of foil covering the underside of your home's roof, which is the same as your attic's ceiling. So, you staple the foil to the ceiling. That's the short version-easy, right?
Okay, it's not quite that simple. The long version is that first you need to identify and measure the roof trusses in your attic, or the lines of roof decking if your trusses are covered, then cut your foil into strips that are appropriately sized to staple to the trusses. You'll have to go up and down into and out of your attic a bunch of times, and you'll probably sweat and complain a little along the way. But, although the process takes several steps, it's still a relatively quick endeavor with substantial and long-lasting results. Plus, the foil medium is pretty forgiving, so a few accidental tears or snips won't ruin your project, making this an attainable green upgrade for even relatively novice DIY-ers.
I have heard of this before, when I took a Green construction course. The builder teaching the course suggested we consider it, as its effective and doesnt cost much.
Olive Oil Rich In Antioxidants
The benefits of olive oil go beyond salad dressing
By DR. LESLIE BAUMANN
LBaumann@med.miami.edu
Ancient Greeks bathed with olive oil, and today the practice still holds up to the scrutiny of science. Olive oil contains at least four types of antioxidants, which neutralize damaging free radicals that can lead to skin aging and skin cancer.
Studies have shown that mice that drink extra virgin olive oil develop skin cancer less often after exposure to UV light. The most exciting finding of these studies is that applying topical olive oil on the mice after UV exposure also decreased the number of skin cancers.
Olive oil contains linoleic acid, a component of skin that helps prevent water from evaporating from the skin. Linoleic acid cannot be made by the body and must be supplied topically or in the diet.
Those deficient in linoleic acid develop dry skin. Eating olive oil or olives, adding the oil to the bathtub, or applying it directly to the skin can help hydrate the skin. It is really the best bath oil and after-sun moisturizer around.
To get the best results, it is crucial to use extra virgin olive oil, which is made from the first press of the olives and has the highest amounts of antioxidants.
My favorites include LA Organic Olive Oil found at Bay Harbor Fine Foods and Costa dei Rosmarini Olive Oil sold at Fratelli Lyon restaurant in the Design District. The restaurant Quattro on Lincoln Road serves the Costa dei Rosmarini olives to diners.
By DR. LESLIE BAUMANN
LBaumann@med.miami.edu
Ancient Greeks bathed with olive oil, and today the practice still holds up to the scrutiny of science. Olive oil contains at least four types of antioxidants, which neutralize damaging free radicals that can lead to skin aging and skin cancer.
Studies have shown that mice that drink extra virgin olive oil develop skin cancer less often after exposure to UV light. The most exciting finding of these studies is that applying topical olive oil on the mice after UV exposure also decreased the number of skin cancers.
Olive oil contains linoleic acid, a component of skin that helps prevent water from evaporating from the skin. Linoleic acid cannot be made by the body and must be supplied topically or in the diet.
Those deficient in linoleic acid develop dry skin. Eating olive oil or olives, adding the oil to the bathtub, or applying it directly to the skin can help hydrate the skin. It is really the best bath oil and after-sun moisturizer around.
To get the best results, it is crucial to use extra virgin olive oil, which is made from the first press of the olives and has the highest amounts of antioxidants.
My favorites include LA Organic Olive Oil found at Bay Harbor Fine Foods and Costa dei Rosmarini Olive Oil sold at Fratelli Lyon restaurant in the Design District. The restaurant Quattro on Lincoln Road serves the Costa dei Rosmarini olives to diners.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Most Americans Support Hybrid Cars But Won't Buy Them
Should We Be Happy or Sad? Survey Finds Most Americans Support Hybrid Cars But Won't Buy Them
by Michael Graham Richard, Ottawa, Canada on 05.21.09
A new survey released by Johnson Controls contains some encouraging statistics about Americans, but also some discouraging and even puzzling ones (about 30% of people who answered think that hybrids should be less expensive than comparable gasoline-powered cars). The good news is that 90% of US adults are open to choosing a hybrid if they were in the market for a new vehicle, which shows that at least people aren't scared of them anymore. Read on for more details.
In fact, 90 percent of U.S. adults are open to choosing a hybrid if they were in the market for a new vehicle. However, they also perceive major obstacles to such a purchase today, most notably cost concerns: Four in five adults (80%) think financial barriers such as purchase price and/or insufficient cost savings prevent people from buying a hybrid car. At the same time, most see incentives and tax credits as an effective way to encourage consumers to purchase hybrid cars (84%). Among adults who do not already own a hybrid, more than one in three (35%) would buy a comparable hybrid vehicle as long as it was priced the same as the gasoline-powered equivalent, and more than one in five (23%) would be willing to pay more. However, one-third would expect to pay less.
One interesting thing to note: Reducing our impact on the environment comes third among reasons why the US should be a leader in hybrid cars (with 64%). First is "reducing the nation's reliance on foreign oil (81%)" and second is "creating jobs (67%)".
While the current crop of hybrid cars are far from being truly green, the most fuel efficient of them are better than current gasoline-only cars and their acceptance into mainstream culture is paving the way for the next step (plug-in hybrid cars, battery electric cars, etc).
by Michael Graham Richard, Ottawa, Canada on 05.21.09
A new survey released by Johnson Controls contains some encouraging statistics about Americans, but also some discouraging and even puzzling ones (about 30% of people who answered think that hybrids should be less expensive than comparable gasoline-powered cars). The good news is that 90% of US adults are open to choosing a hybrid if they were in the market for a new vehicle, which shows that at least people aren't scared of them anymore. Read on for more details.
In fact, 90 percent of U.S. adults are open to choosing a hybrid if they were in the market for a new vehicle. However, they also perceive major obstacles to such a purchase today, most notably cost concerns: Four in five adults (80%) think financial barriers such as purchase price and/or insufficient cost savings prevent people from buying a hybrid car. At the same time, most see incentives and tax credits as an effective way to encourage consumers to purchase hybrid cars (84%). Among adults who do not already own a hybrid, more than one in three (35%) would buy a comparable hybrid vehicle as long as it was priced the same as the gasoline-powered equivalent, and more than one in five (23%) would be willing to pay more. However, one-third would expect to pay less.
One interesting thing to note: Reducing our impact on the environment comes third among reasons why the US should be a leader in hybrid cars (with 64%). First is "reducing the nation's reliance on foreign oil (81%)" and second is "creating jobs (67%)".
While the current crop of hybrid cars are far from being truly green, the most fuel efficient of them are better than current gasoline-only cars and their acceptance into mainstream culture is paving the way for the next step (plug-in hybrid cars, battery electric cars, etc).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)