September 2008


Or for that matter any supporting evidence. Also note that he has 2 seperate policies, 1 for energy and 1 for climate change. Like the 2 have nothing to do with each other. Thus carbon is a problem twice. Also realize that cap and trade is an industry creation with the neoconservationists or collaboraters, thus suspect from the beginning.

Climate Change John McCain will establish a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mobilize innovative technologies, and strengthen the economy. He will work with our international partners to secure our energy future, to create opportunities for American industry, and to leave a better future for our children.John McCain’s Principles for Climate Policy

  Climate Policy Should Be Built On Scientifically-Sound, Mandatory Emission Reduction Targets And Timetables.
  Climate Policy Should Utilize A Market-Based Cap And Trade System.
  Climate Policy Must Include Mechanisms To Minimize Costs And Work Effectively With Other Markets.
  Climate Policy Must Spur The Development And Deployment Of Advanced Technology.
  Climate Policy Must Facilitate International Efforts To Solve The Problem.


John McCain’s Cap and Trade Policy
John McCain Proposes A Cap-And-Trade System That Would Set Limits On Greenhouse Gas Emissions While Encouraging The Development Of Low-Cost Compliance Options. A climate cap-and-trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and allow entities to buy and sell rights to emit, similar to the successful acid rain trading program of the early 1990s. The key feature of this mechanism is that it allows the market to decide and encourage the lowest-cost compliance options.How Does A Cap-And-Trade System Work?A cap-and-trade system harnesses human ingenuity in the pursuit of alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Market participants are allotted total permits equal to the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. If they can invent, improve, or acquire a way to reduce their emissions, they can sell their extra permits for cash. The profit motive will coordinate the efforts of venture capitalists, corporate planners, entrepreneurs, and environmentalists on the common motive of reducing emissions.Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets And Timetables

2012: Return Emissions To 2005 Levels (18 Percent Above 1990 Levels)2020: Return Emissions To 1990 Levels (15 Percent Below 2005 Levels)2030: 22 Percent Below 1990 Levels (34 Percent Below 2005 Levels)

2050: 60 Percent Below 1990 Levels (66 Percent Below 2005 Levels)

The Cap And Trade System Would Allow For The Gradual Reduction Of Emissions.

The cap and trade system would encompass electric power, transportation fuels, commercial business, and industrial business – sectors responsible for just below 90 percent of all emissions. Small businesses would be exempt. Initially, participants would be allowed to either make their own GHG reductions or purchase “offsets” – financial instruments representing a reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions practiced by other activities, such as agriculture – to cover 100 percent of their required reductions. Offsets would only be available through a program dedicated to ensure that all offset GHG emission reductions are real, measured and verifiable. The fraction of GHG emission reductions permitted via offsets would decline over time.Innovating, Developing and Deploying TechnologiesTo Support The Cap And Trade System, John McCain Will Promote The Innovation, Development And Deployment Of Advanced Technologies. John McCain will reform federal government research funding and infrastructure to support the cap and trade emissions reduction goals and emphasize the commercialization of low-carbon technologies. Under John McCain’s plan:

Emissions Permits Will Eventually Be Auctioned To Support The Development Of Advanced Technologies. A portion of the process of these auctions will be used to support a diversified portfolio of research and commercialization challenges, ranging from carbon capture and sequestration, to nuclear power, to battery development. Funds will also be used to provide financial backing for a Green Innovation Financing and Transfer (GIFT) to facilitate commercialization.John McCain Will Streamline The Process For Deploying New Technologies And Requiring More Accountability From Government Programs To Meet Commercialization Goals And Deadlines.John McCain Will Ensure Rapid Technology Introduction, Quickly Shifting Research From The Laboratory To The Marketplace.

John McCain Will Employ The Inherent Incentives Provided By A Cap-And-Trade System Along With Government-Led Competitions As Incentives For New Technology Deployment.

John McCain Will Foster Rapid and Clean Economic Growth

John McCain Believes An Effective And Sustainable Climate Policy Must Also Support Rapid Economic Growth. John McCain will use a portion of auction proceeds to reduce impacts on low-income American families. The McCain plan will accomplish this in part by incorporating measures to mitigate any economic cost of meeting emission targets, including:

Trading Emission Permits To Find The Lowest-Cost Source Of Emission Reductions.Permitting “Banking” And “Borrowing” Of Permits So That Emission Reductions May Be Accelerated Or Deferred To More Economically Efficient Periods.Permitting Unlimited Initial Offsets From Both Domestic And International Sources.

Effectively Integrating U.S. Trading With Other International Markets, Thereby Providing Access To Low-Cost Permit Sources.

Establishing A Strategic Carbon Reserve As A National Source Of Permits During Periods Of Economic Duress.

Early Allocation Of Some Emission Permits On Sound Principles. This will provide significant amount of allowances for auctioning to provide funding for transition assistance for consumers and industry. It will also directly allocate sufficient permits to enable the activities of a Climate Change Credit Corporation, the public-private agency that will oversee the cap and trade program, provide credit to entities for reductions made before 2012, and ease transition for industry with competitiveness concerns and fewer efficiency technology options.

A commission will also be convened to provide recommendations on the percentage of allowances to be provided for free and the percentage of allowances to be auctioned, and develop a schedule for transition from allocated to maximum auctioned allowances. Cap-and-trade system will also work to maximize the amount of allowances that are auctioned off by 2050. John McCain Will Provide Leadership for Effective International Efforts John McCain Believes That There Must Be A Global Solution To Global Climate Change. John McCain will engage the international community in a coordinated effort by:Actively Engaging To Lead United Nations Negotiations.Permitting America To Lead In Innovation, Capture The Market On Low-Carbon Energy Production, And Export To Developing Countries – Including Government Incentives And Partnerships For Sales Of Clean Tech To Developing Countries.Provide Incentives For Rapid Participation By India And China, While Negotiating An Agreement With Each.

John McCain Will Develop a Climate Change Adaptation Plan John McCain Believes A Comprehensive Approach To Addressing Climate Change Includes Adaptation As Well As Mitigation. He believes: An Adaptation Plan Should Be Based Upon National And Regional Scientific Assessments Of The Impacts Of Climate Change.An Adaptation Plan Should Focus On Implementation At The Local Level Which Is Where Impacts Will Manifest Themselves.A Comprehensive Plan Will Address The Full Range Of Issues: Infrastructure, Ecosystems, Resource Planning, And Emergency Preparation.

 
On The Issues• The Economy
• Health Care
• National Security
• Education
• Iraq
• Climate Change
• Veterans
• Immigration
• Values
• Second Amendment
• Judicial Philosophy
• Ethics Reform
• Natural Heritage
• Space Program



John McCain has a remarkable record of leadership and experience that embodies his unwavering lifetime commitment to service.Read More 



Learn More About John McCain’s Climate Change Plan. Read More

Massive disclaimers first. This Blog is usually written by Board President Doug Nicodemus. I am a life long democrat and an Obama supporter because I believe that America is long overdue for someone to reduce the deficit and BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW. Sorry. CES is a nonprofit organization and as such can not and will not endorse any political candidate. In fact when they were in the race I picked John (your having my baby) Edwards and Bill Richardson as first and second, because their energy plans forced industry to pay the costs. Is it any suprise that their campaigns came to abrupt ends. Now we are left with Barack and John.

There are real differences between the McCain and Obama. The thing that galls me about McCain is how he morphs into what anybody wants to hear. When we started this Presidential Campaign you couldn’t you could find his Energy Policy. Well it was hidden on his tax page and if you do not believe me go look. Now McCain is all “green” with his own Lexington Project to make us energy independent. But see for yourself:

 http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/17671aa4-2fe8-4008-859f-0ef1468e96f4.htm

Our nation’s future security and prosperity depends on the next President making the hard choices that will break our nation’s strategic dependence on foreign sources of energy and will ensure our economic prosperity by meeting tomorrow’s demands for a clean portfolio. John McCain has made the necessary choices – producing more power, pushing technology to help free our transportation sector from its use of foreign oil, cleaning up our air and addressing climate change, and ensuring that Americans have dependable energy sources. John McCain will lead the effort to develop advanced transportation technologies and alternative fuels to promote energy independence and cut off the flow of oil wealth to repressive dictatorships like Iran.

“In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project — named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment: In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.”

John McCain, June 25, 2008
Read the entire speech…


Expanding Domestic Oil And Natural Gas Exploration And ProductionJohn McCain Will Commit Our Country To Expanding Domestic Oil Exploration. The current federal moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf stands in the way of energy exploration and production. John McCain believes it is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions and to put our own reserves to use. There is no easier or more direct way to prove to the world that we will no longer be subject to the whims of others than to expand our production capabilities. We have trillions of dollars worth of oil and gas reserves in the U.S. at a time we are exporting hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas to buy energy. This is the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind. We should keep more of our dollars here in the U.S., lessen our foreign dependency, increase our domestic supplies, and reduce our trade deficit – 41% of which is due to oil imports. John McCain proposes to cooperate with the states and the Department of Defense in the decisions to develop these resources.John McCain Believes In Promoting And Expanding The Use Of Our Domestic Supplies Of Natural Gas. When people are hurting, and struggling to afford gasoline, food, and other necessities, common sense requires that we draw upon America’s own vast reserves of oil and natural gas. Within the United States we have tremendous reserves of natural gas. The Outer Continental Shelf alone contains 77 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. It is time that we capitalize on these significant resources and build the infrastructure needed to transport this important component of electricity generation and transportation fuel around the country.


Taking Action Now To Break Our Dependency On Foreign Oil By Reforming Our Transportation SectorThe Nation Cannot Reduce Its Dependency On Oil Unless We Change How We Power Our Transportation Sector. John McCain’s Clean Car Challenge. John McCain will issue a Clean Car Challenge to the automakers of America, in the form of a single and substantial tax credit for the consumer based on the reduction of carbon emissions. He will commit a $5,000 tax credit for each and every customer who buys a zero carbon emission car, encouraging automakers to be first on the market with these cars in order to capitalize on the consumer incentives. For other vehicles, a graduated tax credit will apply so that the lower the carbon emissions, the higher the tax credit.John McCain Will Propose A $300 Million Prize To Improve Battery Technology For Full Commercial Development Of Plug-In Hybrid And Fully Electric Automobiles. A $300 million prize should be awarded for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars. That battery should deliver a power source at 30 percent of the current costs. At $300 million, the prize is one dollar for every man, woman and child in this country – and a small price to pay for breaking our dependence on oil. John McCain Supports Flex-Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) And Believes They Should Play A Greater Role In Our Transportation Sector. In just three years, Brazil went from new cars sales that were about 5 percent FFVs to over 70 percent of new vehicles that were FFVs. American automakers have committed to make 50 percent of their cars FFVs by 2012. John McCain calls on automakers to make a more rapid and complete switch to FFVs.John McCain Believes Alcohol-Based Fuels Hold Great Promise As Both An Alternative To Gasoline And As A Means of Expanding Consumers’ Choices. Some choices such as ethanol are on the market right now. The second generation of alcohol-based fuels like cellulosic ethanol, which won’t compete with food crops, are showing great potential.Today, Isolationist Tariffs And Wasteful Special Interest Subsidies Are Not Moving Us Toward An Energy Solution. We need to level the playing field and eliminate mandates, subsidies, tariffs and price supports that focus exclusively on corn-based ethanol and prevent the development of market-based solutions which would provide us with better options for our fuel needs.John McCain Will Effectively Enforce Existing CAFE Standards. John McCain has long supported CAFE standards – the mileage requirements that automobile manufacturers’ cars must meet. Some carmakers ignore these standards, pay a small financial penalty, and add it to the price of their cars. John McCain believes that the penalties for not following these standards must be effective enough to compel all carmakers to produce fuel-efficient vehicles.


Investing In Clean, Alternative Sources Of EnergyJohn McCain Believes That The U.S. Must Become A Leader In A New International Green Economy. Green jobs and green technology will be vital to our economic future. There is no reason that the U.S. should not be a leader in developing and deploying these new technologies.John McCain Will Commit $2 Billion Annually To Advancing Clean Coal Technologies. Coal produces the majority of our electricity today. Some believe that marketing viable clean coal technologies could be over 15 years away. John McCain believes that this is too long to wait, and we need to commit significant federal resources to the science, research and development that advance this critical technology. Once commercialized, the U.S. can then export these technologies to countries like China that are committed to using their coal – creating new American jobs and allowing the U.S. to play a greater role in the international green economy.John McCain Will Put His Administration On Track To Construct 45 New Nuclear Power Plants By 2030 With The Ultimate Goal Of Eventually Constructing 100 New Plants. Nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power. Currently, nuclear power produces 20% of our power, but the U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. China, India and Russia have goals of building a combined total of over 100 new plants and we should be able to do the same. It is also critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times to move forward with our nuclear plans. John McCain Will Establish A Permanent Tax Credit Equal To 10 Percent Of Wages Spent On R&D. This reform will simplify the tax code, reward activity in the U.S., and make us more competitive with other countries. A permanent credit will provide an incentive to innovate and remove uncertainty. At a time when our companies need to be more competitive, we need to provide a permanent incentive to innovate, and remove the uncertainty now hanging over businesses as they make R&D investment decisions.John McCain Will Encourage The Market For Alternative, Low Carbon Fuels Such As Wind, Hydro And Solar Power. According to the Department of Energy, wind could provide as much as one-fifth of electricity by 2030. The U.S. solar energy industry continued its double-digit annual growth rate in 2006. To develop these and other sources of renewable energy will require that we rationalize the current patchwork of temporary tax credits that provide commercial feasibility. John McCain believes in an even-handed system of tax credits that will remain in place until the market transforms sufficiently to the point where renewable energy no longer merits the taxpayers’ dollars.Protecting Our Environment And Addressing Climate Change: A Sound Energy Strategy Must Include A Solid Environmental FoundationJohn McCain Proposes A Cap-And-Trade System That Would Set Limits On Greenhouse Gas Emissions While Encouraging The Development Of Low-Cost Compliance Options. A climate cap-and-trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and allow entities to buy and sell rights to emit, similar to the successful acid rain trading program of the early 1990s. The key feature of this mechanism is that it allows the market to decide and encourage the lowest-cost compliance options.

How Does A Cap-And-Trade System Work? A cap-and-trade system harnesses human ingenuity in the pursuit of alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Market participants are allotted total permits equal to the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. If they can invent, improve, or acquire a way to reduce their emissions, they can sell their extra permits for cash. The profit motive will coordinate the efforts of venture capitalists, corporate planners, entrepreneurs, and environmentalists on the common motive of reducing emissions.

Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets And Timetables: 2012: Return Emissions To 2005 Levels (18 Percent Above 1990 Levels)
2020: Return Emissions To 1990 Levels (15 Percent Below 2005 Levels)
2030: 22 Percent Below 1990 Levels (34 Percent Below 2005 Levels)
2050: 60 Percent Below 1990 Levels (66 Percent Below 2005 Levels)
The Cap-And-Trade System Would Allow For The Gradual Reduction Of Emissions. The cap-and-trade system would encompass electric power, transportation fuels, commercial business, and industrial business – sectors responsible for just under 90 percent of all emissions. Small businesses would be exempt. Initially, participants would be allowed to either make their own GHG reductions or purchase “offsets” – financial instruments representing a reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions practiced by other activities, such as agriculture – to cover 100 percent of their required reductions. Offsets would only be available through a program dedicated to ensure that all offset GHG emission reductions are real, measured and verifiable. The fraction of GHG emission reductions permitted via offsets would decline over time.


Promoting Energy EfficiencyJohn McCain Will Make Greening The Federal Government A Priority Of His Administration. The federal government is the largest electricity consumer on earth and occupies 3.3 billion square feet of space worldwide. It provides an enormous opportunity to lead by example. By applying a higher efficiency standard to new buildings leased or purchased or retrofitting existing buildings, we can save taxpayers substantial money in energy costs, and move the construction market in the direction of green technology.
John McCain Will Move The United States Toward Electricity Grid And Metering Improvements To Save Energy. John McCain will work to reduce red tape to allow a serious investment to upgrade our national grid to meet the demands of the 21st century – which will include a capacity to charge the electric cars that will one day fill the roads and highways of America. And to save both money and electrical power for our people and businesses, we will also need to deploy SmartMeter technologies. These new meters give customers a more precise picture of their overall energy consumption, and over time will encourage a more cost-efficient use of power.


Addressing Speculative Pricing Of OilJohn McCain Believes We Must Understand The Role Speculation Is Playing In Our Soaring Energy Prices. Congress already has investigations underway to examine this kind of wagering in our energy markets, unrelated to any kind of productive commerce, because it can distort the market, drive prices beyond rational limits, and put the investments and pensions of millions of Americans at risk. John McCain believes that where we find abuses, they need to be swiftly punished. To make sure it never happens again, we must reform the laws and regulations governing the oil futures market, so that they are just as clear and effective as the rules applied to stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments.John McCain Does Not Support A Windfall Profits Tax. A windfall profits tax on the oil companies will ultimately result in increasing our dependence on foreign oil and hinder investment in domestic exploration. Jimmy Carter put a windfall profits tax in to place with little to no useful results. Click here to learn more about John McCain’s energy plan for America.:}Please notice that “Drill here, Drill now” is front and center even though the Democrats already passed it. Doesn’t he read the newspapers?
:}

OK so it is Friday and I miss Weird Bird Friday.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/080924-pf-wind-energy.html

5 Myths About Wind Energy

By Michael Schirber

Wind energy might be the simplest renewable energy to understand. Yet there are misconceptions about what makes the wind industry turn.

The United States now has nearly 17,000 megawatts of wind power installed, which can supply about 1.2 percent of the nation’s demand for electricity, according to a recent report from the Department of Energy (DOE).

With these numbers projected to grow in the coming years, it might be good to be aware of a few myths that are blowing in the wind.

1. Wind is cheap

No one owns the wind, so it might seem like wind energy should cost less than other technologies that require costly fuel, such as coal or natural gas, to operate.

However, the initial investment for wind energy is high.

2. America is way behind the rest of the world

Denmark gets 20 percent of its energy from wind. Germany has the most wind turbines of any country. China is set to nearly double its wind energy capacity in just one year.

3. Wind turbines are loud

Wind turbines used to be loud, but newer designs are less so.

4. Wind turbines kill birds

This one is actually true, but the problem is not as bad as some people claim.

The impression that all turbines are dangerous to birds comes from Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area in California. This was one of the first big wind farms, and unfortunately it was placed in a migratory bird pathway, Moriarty said.

5. Any house can own a windmill

Unless you have a good chunk of land around your house, it’s probably not a good idea to get a wind turbine. If it’s too close to buildings or trees, the wind will be turbulent and won’t produce the power that it’s supposed to.

:}

And if you think that isn’t enough Myths well hell:

http://www.bwea.com/energy/myths.html

Wind Energy

Top Myths About Wind Energy

Many people make many claims about wind turbines and the effects that they allegedly have. We’ve collated our favourites and given the answers.

  1. Myth: Tens of thousands of wind turbines will be cluttering the British countryside
    Fact: Government legislation requires that by 2010, 10% of electricity supply must come from renewable sources. Wind power is currently the most cost effective renewable energy technology in a position to help do that. Around 3,500 additional modern wind turbines are all that would be needed to deliver 8% of the UK’s electricity by 2010, roughly 2,000 onshore and 1,500 offshore.
  2. Myth: Wind farms won’t help climate change
    Fact: Wind power is a clean, renewable source of energy which produces no greenhouse gas emissions or waste products. The UK currently emits 560 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), the key greenhouse gas culprit, every year and the Government target is to cut this by 60% by 20501. Power stations are the largest contributor to carbon emissions, producing 170 million tonnes of CO2 each year2. We need to switch to forms of energy that do not produce CO2. Just one modern wind turbine will save over 4,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually3.
  3. Myth: Building a wind farm takes more energy than it ever makes
    Fact: The average wind farm will pay back the energy used in its manufacture within 3-5 months of operation4. This compares favourably with coal or nuclear power stations, which take about six months. A modern wind turbine is designed to operate for more than 20 years and at the end of its working life, the area can be restored at low financial and environmental costs. Wind energy is a form of development which is essentially reversible – in contrast to fossil fuel or nuclear power stations.
  4. Myth: Wind farms are inefficient and only work 30% of the time
    Fact: A modern wind turbine produces electricity 70-85% of the time, but it generates different outputs depending on the wind speed. Over the course of a year, it will typically generate about 30% of the theoretical maximum output. This is known as its load factor. The load factor of conventional power stations is on average 50%5 . A modern wind turbine will generate enough to meet the electricity demands of more than a thousand homes over the course of a year.
  5. Myth: Wind energy needs back-up to work
    Fact: All forms of power generation require back up and no energy technology can be relied upon 100%. The UK’s transmission system already operates with enough back-up to manage the instantaneous loss of a large power station. Variations in the output from wind farms are barely noticeable over and above the normal fluctuation in supply and demand, seen when the nation’s workforce goes home, or if lightning brings down a high-voltage transmission line. Therefore, at present there is no need for additional back-up because of wind energy.
    Even for wind power to provide 10% of our nation’s electricity needs, only a small amount of additional conventional back-up would be required, in the region of 300-500 megawatts (MW). This would add only 0.2 pence per kilowatt hour to the generation cost of wind energy and would not in any way threaten the security of our grid6. In fact, this is unlikely to become a significant issue until wind generates over 20% of total electricity supply.
  6. Myth: Installing wind farms will never shut down power stations
    Fact: The simple fact is that power plants in the UK are being shut down, either through European legislation on emissions or sheer old age. We need to act now to find replacement power sources: wind is an abundant resource, indigenous to the UK and therefore has a vital role to play in the new energy portfolio.
  7. Myth: Wind power is expensive
    Fact: The cost of generating electricity from wind has fallen dramatically over the past few years. Between 1990 and 2002, world wind energy capacity doubled every three years and with every doubling prices fell by 15%7. Wind energy is competitive with new coal and new nuclear capacity, even before any environmental costs of fossil fuel and nuclear generation8 are taken into account. The average cost of generating electricity from onshore wind is now around 3-4p per kilowatt hour, competitive with new coal (2.5-4.5p) and cheaper than new nuclear (4-7p)9. As gas prices increase and wind power costs fall – both of which are very likely – wind becomes even more competitive, so much so that some time after 2010 wind should challenge gas as the lowest cost power source.
    Furthermore, the wind is a free and widely available fuel source, therefore once the wind farm is in place, there are no fuel or waste related costs.
  8. Myth: The UK should invest in other renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency instead of wind power
    Fact: Wind energy’s role in combating climate change is not a matter of either/or. The UK will need a mix of new and existing renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency measures, and as quickly as possible. Significant amounts of investment have been allocated for wave and tidal energy development, and these technologies, along with solar and biomass energy, will have an important role in the UK’s future energy mix. However, wind energy is the most cost effective renewable energy technology available to generate clean electricity and help combat climate change right now. Furthermore, developing a strong wind industry will facilitate other renewable technologies which have not reached commercialisation yet, accumulating valuable experience in dealing with issues such as grid connection, supply chain and finance.
  9. Myth: Wind farms should all be put out at sea
    Fact: We will need a mix of both onshore and offshore wind energy to meet the UK’s challenging targets on climate change. At present, onshore wind is more economical than development offshore. However, more offshore wind farms are now under construction, with the first of the large-scale projects operational at the end of 2003, and prices will fall as the industry gains more experience. Furthermore, offshore wind farms take longer to develop, as the sea is inherently a more hostile environment. To expect offshore to be the only form of wind generation allowed would therefore be to condemn us to missing our renewable energy targets and commitment to tackle climate change.
  10. Myth: Wind farms are ugly and unpopular
    Fact: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and whether you think a wind turbine is attractive or not will always be your personal opinion. However, studies regularly show that most people find turbines an interesting feature of the landscape10. On average 80% of the public support wind energy, less than 10% are against it, with the remainder undecided. Surveys conducted since the early 1990’s across the country near existing wind farms have consistently found that most people are in favour of wind energy , with support increasing among those living closer to the wind farms.
  11. Myth: Wind farms negatively affect tourism
    Fact: There is no evidence to suggest this. The UK’s first commercial wind farm at Delabole received 350,000 visitors in its first ten years of operation, while 10,000 visitors a year come to take the turbine tour at the EcoTech Centre in Swaffham, Norfolk. A MORI poll in Scotland showed that 80% of tourists would be interested in visiting a wind farm. Wind farm developers are often asked to provide visitor centres, viewing platforms and rights of way to their sites.
  12. Myth: Wind farms harm property prices
    Fact: There is currently no evidence in the UK showing that wind farms impact house prices. However, there is evidence following a comprehensive study by the Scottish Executive that those living nearest to wind farms are their strongest advocates12.
  13. Myth: Wind farms kill birds
    Fact: The RSPB stated in its 2004 information leaflet Wind farms and birds13, that “in the UK, we have not so far witnessed any major adverse effects on birds associated with wind farms“. Wind farms are always subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment and BWEA members follow the industry’s Best Practice Guidelines and work closely with organisations such as English Nature and the RSPB to ensure that wind farm design and layout does not interfere with sensitive species or wildlife designated sites. Moreover, a recent report published in the journal Nature confirmed that the greatest threat to bird populations in the UK is climate change14.
  14. Myth: Wind farms are dangerous to humans
    Fact: Wind energy is a benign technology with no associated emissions, harmful pollutants or waste products. In over 25 years and with more than 68,000 machines installed around the world15, no member of the public has ever been harmed by the normal operation of wind turbines. In response to recent unscientific accusations that wind turbines emit infrasound and cause associated health problems, Dr Geoff Leventhall, Consultant in Noise Vibration and Acoustics and author of the Defra Report on Low Frequency Noise and its Effects16, says: “I can state quite categorically that there is no significant infrasound from current designs of wind turbines. To say that there is an infrasound problem is one of the hares which objectors to wind farms like to run. There will not be any effects from infrasound from the turbines.”
  15. Myth: Wind farms are noisy
    Fact: The evolution of wind farm technology over the past decade has rendered mechanical noise from turbines almost undetectable with the main sound being the aerodynamic swoosh of the blades passing the tower. There are strict guidelines on wind turbines and noise emissions to ensure the protection of residential amenity. These are contained in the scientifically informed ETSU Working Group guidelines 199617 and must be followed by wind farm developers, as referenced in national planning policy for renewables18. The best advice for any doubter is to go and hear for yourself!

:}

THERE ARE JUST SOOOO MANY MYTHS – STELLA STELLA ok so there really only is a lot of talk sigh…

 http://www.wind.appstate.edu/windpower/myths.php

Dispelling Common Myths

about Wind Power

Compiled by the Wind Working Group

Myth #1: Wind turbines are unusually harmful to birds.

Although birds do infrequently collide with turbines, wind energy poses less of a threat to birds than many other commonplace structures. In fact, the National Audubon Society has stated that it supports the development and use of wind power. Based on numerous studies that have taken place in  New York, Oregon, Vermont, Colorado, Wyoming, Minnesota, and California, collision with turbines result in 1-2 bird deaths or less per turbine per year. For comparison, each year at least 60 million birds die in collisions with vehicles; at least 98 million in collisions with buildings and windows; and at least 4 million in collisions with communication towers. Important consideration should be given to placement of wind turbines to ensure that turbines are not located along migratory bird flight paths or the flight paths of threatened or rare species.
Consider the alternatives; bird deaths that result from fossil energy based power production:

  • Tall smokestacks- A study at a single Florida coal fired power plant with four smokestacks recorded an estimated 3,000 bird kills in a single night during a fall migration.
  • Oil spills at sea – In a single oil shipping accident, – the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska’s Prince William Sound – more than 500,000 migratory birds perished, or about 1,000 times the estimated annual total in California’s wind power plants.
  • Additional threats to birds from other energy sources include: mercury emissions from coal fired power plants; global climate change resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels; acid rain resulting from coal fired power plant emissions of SO2 and NOx and; destruction of habitat as a result of mining activities associated with the coal, gas, oil and uranium industries.

Myth #2: Wind turbines are noisy.

Today’s large wind turbines make less noise (about 45 decibels-dB) than the background noise you hear in your own home (50 dB)! According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), today an operating wind farm at a distance of about 750 to 1,000 feet is no noisier than a kitchen refrigerator or a moderately quiet room.

Myth #3: Many wind turbines are necessary for minimal power generation.

Improved technology has enabled far fewer turbines to produce more electricity. The standard output of a turbine grew from .5 mW in 1995 to 1.5 mW in 2003.

Myth #4: Wind turbines are unattractive

In North Carolina, a study to determine public attitudes towards wind energy was recently conducted. The study found that 77.1% of participants who had seen first hand a utility scale turbine said that they liked its appearance. Studies from numerous US states and other countries report that a majority of people think wind turbines are graceful, elegant structures. Many people find turbines to be interesting features in the landscape, enhancing the vista overall. In the UK, the British Wind Energy Association notes that wind farms are popular tourist attractions, with thousands of people each year flocking to visit attractions.

Myth #5: Conventional power sources are less unsightly and environmentally harmful than wind turbines.

Wind turbines cause little damage to the surrounding environments beyond the footprint of the facility and transmissions system and are much less unsightly than conventional power sources.

For comparison, consider the following:

  • Conventional power sources require acres and acres of land for unsightly power plants that spew pollutants from smokestacks. In addition to the electric generating facility itself, the plants also require on-site fuel storage facilities and access to cooling water, both of which require additional land.
  • Construction of hydropower dams floods riverside lands, permanently eliminating riparian and upland habitat.
  • Most generating facilities also produce solid waste by-products of combustion that can be toxic. Solid wastes from power plants are typically dumped into a landfill, another way in which a generating facility impacts land as it extends its environmental footprint beyond the boundaries of the power plant site.
  • Mountain top removal strip mining – the process of blasting off entire mountaintops in order to extract thin seams of coal – can strip up to 10 square miles and dump hundreds of millions of waste into as many as 12 valley fills that can be 1,000 feet wide and 1 mile long.
  • Conventional power sources rely on the combustion of fossil fuels which are largely responsible for the 78% decrease in visibility from natural levels that has occurred in the southern Appalachian Mountains. In the Great Smokey Mountains National Park, summertime visibility averages only 16 miles, and on many days air pollution reduces the visibility range to less than 5 miles. In this case, one might prefer to see a few turbines on top of a mountain than not be able to see the mountains at all.

Myth #6: Wind power will destroy mountain vistas.

Placement of wind turbines should be restricted so as to not detract from places of important scenic beauty. Potential areas that should be excluded from turbine placement consideration are:

  • National Parks
  • State Parks
  • National Forest lands
  • View shed buffers along the Appalachian Trail
  • View shed buffer zones along the Blue Ridge Parkway
  • Spruce-Fir Forest lands ( one of the most unique and endangered ecosystems in the Appalachian region)

Wind turbines should be located where there are:

  • Existing communication towers
  • Existing transmission lines
  • Other forms of existing structures

Myth #7: Wind power will decrease property values in surrounding areas.

Views of wind turbines will not negatively impact property values. A recent study on the economic impacts of wind power states that, “based on a nation-wide survey conducted of tax assessors in other areas with wind power projects, we found no evidence supporting the claim that views of wind farms decrease property values.” Other studies, conducted in both the US and abroad, have made similar findings.

Myth #8: Wind Energy will negatively affect tourism.

Large turbines have been found more often to be a positive influence on tourism. The British Wind Energy Association notes that wind farms in the UK are popular tourist attractions, with thousands of people each year flocking to visit them. In Australia, the wind farms are highlighted as one of the attractions for visitors amongst other historical and scenic points of interest. A Scottish study found that nine out of ten tourists visiting some of Scotland’s top beauty spots say the presence of wind farms makes no difference to the enjoyment of their holiday, and twice as many people would return to an area because of the presence of a wind farm than would stay away. Yet another survey of more than 300 visitors to Argyll, Scotland found that 91% of visitors said the presence of wind farms in the area made no difference to whether they would return.

Myth #9: North Carolinians don’t support wind power.

North Carolinians are in favor of developing wind power in our state. A recent study on public attitudes towards wind power in Western North Carolina found that Western North Carolinians are favorably disposed toward the development of a wind energy industry in the Appalachian Mountains. They want more of their future electricity derived from renewable sources and less from fossil fuels. The study also found that, by over 2 to 1, western North Carolinians do not believe that ridge top turbines should be prohibited. 3 out of 4 study participants feel that if a ridge top already has existing cell towers, they would not mind adding a wind turbine to the clutter. An even higher ratio believes a person should be allowed to erect a turbine on his/her own property for residential use.

References and Contact Info

This fact sheet was prepared by the North Carolina Wind Energy Working Group, February 2003. For more information contact: Amber Lynn Munger (828) 216 2362 or Michael Shore (828) 254 7359


1“Facts about Wind Energy and Birds,” American Wind Energy Association. http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WEandBirds.pdf
2 “Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A summary of existing studies and comparisons to other sources of avian collision mortality in the United States.” National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC) Research Document, 2001. http://www.nationalwind.org/pubs/avian_collisions.pdf
3 “Facts about Wind Energy and Birds,” American Wind Energy Association. http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WEandBirds.pdf
4 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Wind Power Market Update, Feb 2003 at http://www.eere.energy.gov/windpoweringamerica/pdfs/wpa/wpa_update.pdf
5 Grady, D., “Public Attitudes Toward Wind Energy in Western North Carolina: A Systematic Survey.” 2002.
16 From powerscorecard.org: http://www.powerscorecard.org/issue_detail.cfm?issue_id=7
7 “Blueprint for Breathing Easier; Southeast Strategy for Clean Air,” Environmental Defense, 2002. http://www.cleanenergy.org/air/breathingeasier.pdf
8 Grover, S. for EcoNorthwest, “Economic Impacts of Wind Power in Kittitas County.” Portland, OR, 2002.
9 View this study at: http://www.bwea.com/pdf/mori_briefing.pdf
10 Grady, D., “Public Attitudes Toward Wind Energy in Western North Carolina: A Systematic Survey.” 2002.

:}:} 

harry guy haynes, ckd

harryh@bourildesign.com

:}
Harry sent this along. My response is the US should have been here 30 years ago. The Republicans are getting swept up by the history they resisted:

 http://www.energy.gov/

Challenging the Status CodeThe U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) attended the Final Action Hearings of the International Code Council® on September 17-23, 2008, at the Minneapolis Convention Center, Minneapolis, MN. Released before the hearings, the new Setting the Standard highlights this event in its series about DOE’s goal to reduce the energy consumption of International Energy Conservation Code® (IECC) compliant homes by 30%, relative to the 2006 IECC, by the year 2012.
The Final Action Hearings closed a three-year code development cycle that considered more energy efficiency improvements than any development cycle in the history of the IECC. See the Final Action Hearings results at http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/2007-08cycle/results-MN.html.
Raising the Standard of Energy Efficiency
In each edition of Setting the Standard, Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) staff provide an update about their work to increase the efficiency of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2010 by 30% relative to Standard 90.1-2004. BECP’s forward motion toward the 30% goal is being supported by a strong partnership with ASHRAE. Recent articles focused on BECP’s achievements in lighting to support the 30% goal. This article highlights another major BECP activity to improve the Standard: whole-building simulation.

BECP is using the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) new, state-of-the-art, simulation tool, EnergyPlus, to develop Benchmark buildings. Benchmark buildings will be used to provide feedback to DOE and ASHRAE on how ASHRAE is progressing toward 30% improvement as well as to prepare DOE’s formal determination of energy savings for Standards 90.1-2007 and 90.1-2010.

 


Setting the Standard is published by the Building Energy Codes Program. Visit www.energycodes.gov for more information.

The Building Energy Codes Program would like to continue sending you information about energy codes and compliance tools, but if you would like your name removed from our contacts list, click unsubscribe. Please contact techsupport@becp.pnl.gov if you need immediate assistance; this mailbox is hosted by an automated system.

:}

You can read it there because I can’t copy it here:

http://www.energycodes.gov/news/sts/pdfs/standard_september08.pdf#page=3

:}

When you go to their actual website you would be hard pressed to find anything about the new codes however:

 http://www.eere.energy.gov/

September 17, 2008

Deputy Assistant Secretary Honored with Service to America Medal

Sept. 16, 2008 – Steven G. Chalk, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Renewable Energy in DOE’s Office of EERE, was honored with a Service to America Medal.

 

September 12, 2008

New Campaign Encourages Tweens to Make Smart Energy Choices

Sept. 12, 2008 – DOE and the Advertising Council announced the launch of a new series of public service advertisements designed to educate tweens about the importance of energy efficiency.

 

August 27, 2008

EERE Kicks Off Old Refrigerator Recycling Effort

A special exhibit at the National Building Museum features old refrigerators made into art for DOE’s ENERGY STAR® Recycle My Old Fridge Campaign.

DOE to Invest $35 Million in Concentrating Solar Power Projects

September 19, 2008

DOE Awards up to $7.3 Million to 14 Water Power Projects

September 18, 2008

DOE and Ad Council Launch Energy Efficiency Campaigns for Kids

September 12, 2008

  • Subscribe to EERE Newsletters
  • Information for Media 

:}

All the at way at the bottom is the “subscribe to the newsletter switch”. NOT the “read the newsletter switch” and their web pages collectively say nothing about the above newsletter at all. After 8 years of Bush and the science deniers, it is time to move on.

Oh and by the way, they are seeking 8 billion $$$ in loan gaurentees. Where is the irony in that.???

hahahahahahaha:

http://wilderness.org/ourissues/wilderness/

Andrew Bush sends this along

Dear reporter/editor:

Given today’s announcement that Congress will allow the offshore drilling ban to expire—opening many more acres to drilling—we thought you would be interested in the story below from yesterday’s business wire, “Chesapeake Energy (CHK) Plans To Reduce Drilling Budget.” In a nutshell, before the dust has settled on the oil and natural gas industry’s “drill, baby, drill” multi-million dollar advertising campaign, the country’s largest independent natural gas producer has announced that it is curtailing – or “shutting in” — its near-term natural gas production, and slashing its drilling budget by 17%. All because the price of gas to consumers has apparently drifted “too low” for consumers, in the company’s view.

“ Chesapeake ’s actions and attitude typify the ‘public be damned’ manner in which the oil and gas industry in this country operates,” said Wilderness Society Senior Policy Advisor Dave Alberswerth . “American consumers and Congress were convinced by the industry’s ‘drill baby drill’ campaign that the key to lowering energy prices was “more drilling”, at the same time that one of our nation’s largest gas producers was apparently laying plans to curtail its own drilling and production operations for fear that their profits weren’t high enough. American consumers should take note of Chesapeake’s actions, because this company is among those that have promoted the notion that American has abundant natural gas supplies, that all we have to do is drill for it, and has even urged Congress to subsidize greater use of natural gas to fuel our vehicle fleet.” Alberswerth noted that although most of Chesapeake ’s operations are on non-federal lands, it is likely that other natural gas producers who do have operations on federal lands will follow suit.

“ Chesapeake ’s action is another good example of why increasing domestic drilling is an inefficient solution for reducing energy prices,” said Wilderness Society Economist Pete Morton , who also noted that after eight years of the Bush drilling boom and more than 170,000 new natural gas wells, energy prices are still high. “Whether Chesapeake ’s action is driven by high extraction costs or a profit-maximizing desire to keep prices high for consumers, it reinforces the need for a thorough economic analysis of proposals to increase domestic drilling.”

Contact:  Dave Alberswerth (202/429-2695) and Dr. Pete Morton (303/650-5818, ext 105), The Wilderness Society

http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/Chesapeake+Energy+(CHK)+Plans+To+Reduce+Drilling+Budget/4008656.html

Chesapeake Energy (CHK) Plans To Reduce Drilling Budget 

September 22, 2008

Chesapeake Energy Corporation (NYSE: CHK) announced plans to reduce its drilling capital expenditure (capex) budget during the second half of 2008 through year-end 2010 by approximately $3.2 billion, or 17%, in response to an approximate 50% decrease in natural gas prices since June 30, 2008 and concerns about the possibility of an emerging U.S. natural gas surplus in advance of increased demand from the U.S. transportation sector. Of the $3.2 billion drilling capex reduction, $0.8 billion is attributable to the drilling capex carry associated with the company’s recently closed Fayetteville Shale joint venture with BP America (NYSE: BP), $0.5 billion is attributable to the drilling capex carry anticipated in a Marcellus Shale joint venture and $1.9 billion is attributable to reduced drilling activity. The company plans to reduce its current operated drilling rig count of 157 rigs to approximately 140 rigs by year-end 2008 and expects to keep its rig count relatively flat through 2009 and 2010.

In addition to reducing drilling capex, Chesapeake has elected to temporarily curtail a portion of its unhedged natural gas production in the Mid-Continent region due to unusually weak wellhead natural gas prices that are substantially below industry breakeven costs. The company has curtailed approximately 100 million cubic feet (mmcf) per day of net natural gas production (approximately 125-150 mmcf per day gross) and plans to restore this production once natural gas prices recover from recently depressed wellhead price levels of $3.00 – 5.00 per thousand cubic feet (mcf). This curtailment represents approximately 4% of the company’s current net natural gas and oil production capacity of over 2.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas equivalent per day (92% natural gas).

The company has also reduced its full-year 2008 production growth estimate to 18% from 21% to account for the temporary curtailment discussed above, the sale of 45 million cubic feet of natural gas equivalent (mmcfe) per day of production associated with its Fayetteville Shale joint venture with BP, the anticipated sale of 60 mmcfe per day of production in the 2008 fourth quarter associated with the company’s fourth volumetric production payment (VPP) and shut-ins in the 2008 third quarter of onshore production associated with natural gas processing plant limitations as a result of damage by Hurricane Ike.

Additionally, as a result of reduced drilling activity levels announced today, the company has lowered its anticipated production growth forecasts in 2009 and 2010 to 16% per year from 19% per year. At these levels, Chesapeake believes its production growth will still remain at or near the top of its large-cap peer group, particularly in light of continued strong drilling results from its shale plays. Notably, during the month of September, Chesapeake completed three additional horizontal Haynesville Shale wells with average per well initial production rates exceeding 10 mmcfe per day bringing its total horizontal Haynesville Shale wells on production to 14.[SM]

Drew F. Bush

Communications Associate

The Wilderness Society

drew_bush@tws.org

Phone: (202)-429-7441

Fax: (202)-429-3945

The Wilderness Society’s mission is to protect wilderness

and inspire Americans to care for our wild places.

Its not just OIL. Every form of hydrocarbon will become  flash points as part of the world abandons the carbon economy while others rush to it as a salvation.

 http://ecoworldly.com/2008/09/16/fight-over-natural-gas-has-bolivia-on-brink-of-collapse/

Fight Over Natural Gas Has Bolivia on Brink of Collapse 

 Written by Levi Novey

Published on September 16th, 2008

Posted in Bolivia

Having gained confidence after handily winning a recall election with 67% of the vote last month, Bolvia’s President Evo Morales has proposed some controversial changes to Bolivia’s Constitution. He wants to redistribute wealth obtained from the sale of Bolivia’s abundant natural gas resources in a more equitable way to help the poor. He also wants to change the constitution so that he can run for a second term. These proposals have lead to violent protests in the country’s eastern provinces, that contain the bulk of Bolivia’s natural gas reserves. These regions are now threatening to break away. Tension is high and a civil war might soon emerge.Some of Morales’ opponents claim that he is trying to obtain dictatorial powers. They subsequently have blockaded roads, and temporarily shut down natural gas pipeline flow to Brazil (which gets 50% of its gas from Bolivia). Martial law has been declared in one province and the details of one particularly violent incident are still sketchy. It is unclear if Bolivia’s military is entirely behind Morales. At least 30 people have died so far during the conflict, and countless others have been injured.

Last week Morales also accused the United States of helping to fan the flames of the conflict, framing it as a coup d’etat to remove him as president. He expelled the American ambassador to Bolivia to send out his message of disapproval. The U.S.’s ambassador has denied the claims made against him.

:}

But this has happened before:

http://www.oilcrisis.com/bo/

Bolivia’s Mesa Offers to Step Down as Protests Mount, by Andrew J. Barden in Mexico City for Bloomberg [2005 March 7]

“Bolivian President Carlos Mesa offered his resignation to Congress almost 17 months after taking office, amid stepped up protests against the government’s energy policies…”It’s a highly dangerous moment for Bolivia,” Mesa said in a letter to Congress, read aloud by Cabinet Chief Jose Galindo and broadcast on CNN’s Spanish network. “These movements are leading the country to a point that is unsustainable. I can’t continue to govern under these circumstances,” the letter said.

“Mesa’s resignation would throw the South American country back into a political crisis less than two years after former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada was forced from office following deadly riots in opposition to his plans to export natural gas to the U.S. and Mexico.”

“Evo Morales, leader of the second-largest party in Congress, the Movement Toward Socialism, is leading protests to demand a new hydrocarbon law that raises royalties for foreign companies in Bolivia such as Spain’s Repsol YPF and Total SA of France. Bolivia has 28.7 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, Latin America’s second-largest reserves after Venezuela, according to BP Plc’s statistical review of world energy.”

Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, the former President of Bolivia:
Our country’s long-term energy needs are dwarfed by its vast supplies.”

What does vast mean in Bolivia today?

“”According to the Oil and Gas Journal, Bolivia’s proven natural gas reserves were 24 trillion cubic feet (Tcf), as of January 2003. A study by U.S.-based consulting firm DeGolyer & MacNaughton in April 2003, however, certified Bolivia’s natural gas reserves at 54.9 Tcf, giving Bolivia the second-largest reserves in South America after Venezuela. The graph to the right reflects the large increases in reserve estimates since 1997.” From USA’s Energy Information Agency

Comparing Bolivia’s Natural Gas reserves with Global consumption of 90 TCF of natural gas per year, giving the benefit of the doubt that reserves are “certified” indeed at 54.9 TCF, Bolivia would be able to meet humanity’s Natural gas needs for 223 days. Is that a vast amount?

Peasants in Bolivia organized in September 2003 to revolt against “selling” [giving away?] their energy inheritance to the USA, where the average person consumes 40 times more natural gas, 15 times more electricity and 15 times more oil. To characterize this transfer of natural wealth as necessary for the economic well-being of their country is to completely misconstrue the inherent value of this resource in the long term as a mechanism for internal economic development. Furthermore, it could only come from ignorance of realistic global oil and natural gas reserves and prospects, or because Sanchez is deliberately ignoring these facts to support a political agenda

:}

And you know what this always leads to? When will they ever learn that standing in the road of social justice is foolish at best and disruptive at worse. People that have nothing have nothing to lose:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/12/content_9938579.htm

Even the Chinese know that.

Bolivia crisis cuts natural gas supply to Brazil by half

 RIO DE JANEIRO, September 11 (Xinhua) — The political crisis in Bolivia led to a 55-percent reduction in the country’s natural gas supply to its biggest customer Brazil, Transierra pipeline company said in a statement on Thursday,    The reduction was due to malfunction of a pipeline in southeastern Bolivia. It remains unclear if it was a technical problem or an act of sabotage.

    It is the second incident with Bolivia’s pipelines in less than24 hours. A pipeline in the Yacuiba region exploded on Wednesday, leading to a 10-percent reduction in the natural gas exports to Brazil.

    Brazil needs about 60 million cubic meters of natural gas everyday, and half of the supplies comes from Bolivia.

    Edison Lobao, Brazil’s Minister of Mines and Energy, has met with technical personnel and experts from the country’s state-owned oil and gas company Petrobras to work out a contingency plan to deal with the supply reduction.

    Sao Paulo city, which depends on Bolivia for 60 percent of its natural gas supply, has already launched a contingency plan. Sao Paulo state’s Basic Sanitation and Energy Secretary Dilma Pena said that the industrial sector will face the biggest reduction in gas supplies.

    She added, however, that residential and commercial clients, as well as hospitals, will be spared from the supply reduction.

    Protests, which broke out two weeks ago against Morales’ plans to amend the constitution and reallocate gas revenues, turned violent this week in southeastern Bolivia. Anti-government protesters blocked the road, stormed official buildings and clashed with supporters of the president.

    The borders to Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay have been closed and Bolivia’s ambassador to Brazil, Rene Mauricio Dorfler, said his government is considering declaring a state of emergency in the country.

:}

This recent article in the UK Guardian caught my attention. While I don’t post the whoooooooole thinggggggg because it really long, I include some other sites and some art.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/sep/21/scienceofclimatechange.climatechange

Einstein fridge design can help global cooling

Scientists relaunch a 1930 invention that uses no electricity and would reduce greenhouse gases

An early invention by Albert Einstein has been rebuilt by scientists at Oxford University who are trying to develop an environmentally friendly refrigerator that runs without electricity.

Modern fridges are notoriously damaging to the environment. They work by compressing and expanding man-made greenhouse gases called freons – far more damaging that carbon dioxide – and are being manufactured in increasing numbers. Sales of fridges around the world are rising as demand increases in developing countries.

Now Malcolm McCulloch, an electrical engineer at Oxford who works on green technologies, is leading a three-year projectto develop more robust appliances that can be used in places without electricity. 

His team has completed a prototype of a type of fridge patented in 1930 by Einstein and his colleague, the Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard. It had no moving parts and used only pressurised gases to keep things cold. The design was partly used in the first domestic refrigerators, but the technology was abandoned when more efficient compressors became popular in the 1950s. That meant a switch to using freons.

Einstein and Szilard’s idea avoids the need for freons. It uses ammonia, butane and water and takes advantage of the fact that liquids boil at lower temperatures when the air pressure around them is lower. ‘If you go to the top of Mount Everest, water boils at a much lower temperature than it does when you’re at sea level and that’s because the pressure is much lower up there,’ said McCulloch.

At one side is the evaporator, a flask that contains butane. ‘If you introduce a new vapour above the butane, the liquid boiling temperature decreases and, as it boils off, it takes energy from the surroundings to do so,’ says McCulloch. ‘That’s what makes it cold.’

Pressurised gas fridges based around Einstein’s design were replaced by freon-compressor fridges partly because Einstein and Szilard’s design was not very efficient. But McCulloch thinks that by tweaking the design and replacing the types of gases used it will be possible to quadruple the efficiency. He also wants to take the idea further. The only energy input needed into the fridge is to heat a pump, and McCulloch has been working on powering this with solar energy.

‘No moving parts is a real benefit because it can carry on going without maintenance. This could have real applications in rural areas,’ he said.

McCulloch’s is not the only technology to improve the environmental credentials of fridges. Engineers working at a Cambridge-based start-up company, Camfridge, are using magnetic fields to cool things. ‘Our fridge works, from a conceptual point of view, in a similar way [to gas compressor fridges] but instead of using a gas we use a magnetic field and a special metal alloy,’ said managing director Neil Wilson

 http://www.overstock.com/Books-Movies-Music-Games/Einsteins-Refrigerator/401711/product.html?cid=123620&fp=F&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=2823969

einstein.jpg 

Einstein’s Refrigerator

And Other Stories from the Flip Side of History

by Silverman, Steve

  • $9.95
  • $9.45
  • $0.50 (5%)
  • Paperback
  • 04/01/2001
  • 9780740714191
  • 2823969

:}

But think of the irony here, Einstein went from being a patent clerk to being a patent clerk. Or better yet he went from a patent clerk to being patented:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_refrigerator

 200px-einstein_refrigerator.png

From 1926 until 1933 Einstein and Szilárd collaborated on ways to improve home refrigeration technology. The two were motivated by contemporary newspaper reports of a Berlin family who had been killed when a seal in their refrigerator broke and leaked toxic fumes into their home. Einstein and Szilard proposed that a device without moving parts would eliminate the potential for seal failure, and explored practical applications for different refrigeration cycles. Einstein used the experience he had gained during his years at the Swiss Patent Office to apply for valid patents for their inventions in several countries, the two eventually being granted 45 patents in their names for three different models.

It has been suggested that most of the actual inventing was performed by Szilard, with Einstein merely acting as a consultant and helping with the patent-related paperwork. Additionally, Einstein’s name lent the research prestige and credibility.[1]

The refrigerator was not immediately put into commercial production, the most promising of their patents being quickly bought up by the Swedish company AB Electrolux to protect its refrigeration technology from competition. A few demonstration units were constructed from other patents.

The invention of Freon in 1930 rendered the vapour compression process the standard for refrigeration.

:}

Then there is view of the regular fridge:

http://nga.gov.au/Exhibition/Sculptureprize05/Detail.cfm?IRN=139757

german-art.jpg 

:}

If folks just used their common snse and the materials around them the USA could have low energy consuming elegant housing:

http://www.rammedearthhomes.com/

 rotator.jpg

Offering:

  • Passive-solar design/build
  • Rammed earth wall construction for homes, businesses, gardens, art projects.
  • Passive-solar-design and rammed-earth-technical consultation with architects, engineers and owner-builders.
  • Rammit Yourself workshops. 

 Work continues on our home in 2008. If you would like to participate in a workshop format during this process, please, in an email to Julie@RammedEarthHomes.com 

state your first, second and third choices for workshop dates. We will try to compile workshops that accommodate dates within those choices.

If you would like to discuss possible dates, please call Julie at 520.896.3393. Reservations for chosen dates may be made by phone.

 :}

This site is so huge. It contains 12s of books. If you want to build a house, this site is a must visit.

 http://www.greenhomebuilding.com/rammedearth.htm

 buildtodaylogo.jpg

Rammed Earth

Ramming earth to create walls is at least as old as the Great Wall of China. It is really quite similar to adobe and cob techniques, in that the soil is mostly clay and sand. The difference is that the material is compressed or tamped into place, usually with forms that create very flat vertical surfaces. Modern rammed earth typically utilizes heavy mechanized equipment to move and compress the material . The walls are normally at least a foot thick to give enough bulk to be stable and provide the thermal mass for comfort. It is best to apply insulating material to the outside of the building to keep the interior temperature constant. The interior surface can be finished in a variety of ways, from natural oil to more standard surfaces. Rammed earth houses tend to have a very solid, quiet feeling inside.

:}

This site is also extremely helpful:

http://www.diyrammedearth.com/

Do It Yourself


Rammed Earth

We are Bill & Stephen Betzen, a father and son team who started the planning process in 2004 to build a rammed earth home in Dallas, Texas by 2009.  We are on schedule. We want to share research we have done and make connections with similarly interested Do It Yourself (DIY) people also interested in rammed earth construction and benefits.

Our home is planned to be a 2400 sq ft, 2 story home with a covered balcony and porch surrounding the home. The ground floor earthen walls will be 2 ft thick with 18″ thick walls above the second floor. The goal is a home that will be as cool as possible in the hottest Dallas summer. With a home fully surrounded by both a shaded porch and a shaded balcony, as well as many trees, we hope the worst Dallas summer sun will never heat the thermal mass of the rammed earth walls. Combined with a ventilated, reflective metal roof over insulation, we hope that annual air-conditioning needs will be greatly reduced if not totally eliminated.

Our research shows rammed earth construction to be the most simple, environmentally responsible method for building the thermal shell of a home.  It will be a strong, quiet, healthy, termite-free, fire-resistant, comfortable home, one weighing 300+ tons and lasting many generations. It will save thousands of dollars annually in utility and maintenance costs along the way. 

Stephen’s mother and maternal Hungarian ancestors were born in, built, and lived in rammed earth homes for hundreds, if not thousands of years. They speak fondly of the quiet, year-around comfort of their rammed earth homes. We will simply add about 3-5% cement to the mixture, with a reflective, ventilated roof, and extra shade for the Dallas heat.

Continue to explore what is already online about rammed earth with www.google.com or with some of the following links, including the web ring at the bottom of the page linking with similar web pages.

  1. At http://www.rammedearthhomes.com/ you will find Quentin Branch’s pages describing the work he does in Arizona with rammed earth.

  2. You can find research done in 2004 in Del Rio Texas relating to the cooling qualities of rammed earth in an article linked online at http://www.toolbase.org/techinv/techResources.aspx?technologyID=144. It is the research by John J. Morony titled “Logged Data for Heat Wave, Del Rio, Texas, 31 May – 2 June 2004.”  It shows the superior ability of rammed earth to stay cool, even in direct sun in a heat wave, when compared to cement brick or adobe construction.  With our plans we need to know what happens when you keep these walls in the shade.

  3. How To Build a Rammed Earth House is a 1973 article published in Mother Earth, written by John O McMeekin about the home he had build 25 years earlier of rammed earth, and continued to live in at that time.  It appears he still lives there now but we are attempting to verify that at this time. His utility bills would be very interesting to compare with his neighbors in similar sized homes.

  4. Introduction to rammed earth is a web site from the UK and covers the basic facts about rammed earth.

  5. Steve Davis’ rammed earth house web pages with FAQ’s.

  6. Rogers Rammed Earth, a DIY home with photos.

  7. Green Home Building: Rammed Earth Questions and Answers by Leonard Jones, P.E.

  8. Contemporary Rammed Earth Homes Benefits

  9. Australia’s guide to environmentally sustainable homes – Passive Cooling – the basics!

  10. National Association of Home Builders Research Center web site

If you know of rammed earth building resources near Dallas please let us know.  We are searching

:}

This is at one time really cool, a really cool site and depressing if you live in the heart of the energy hog.

http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/09/12/sustainable-homes-from-easy-domes/

easydomes2.jpg

:} I can’t say enough about this publication. Its great! :}

 Echoing the structures of Buckminster Fuller’s Geodesic Domes, Danish Architect Kári Thomsen and Engineer Ole Vanggaard have created Easy Domes, a series of quick assembly, low-energy homes! Following the success of the first Easy Dome home built in 1992 for the Greenland Society on The Faroe Islands, a number of dome-shaped cottages were erected as tourist getaways. Since then, the buildings have been put into production and delivery of these fabulous prefab buildings was initiated early this summer!

The unique shape of the Easy Dome, called an icosahedron, is designed to optimize the amount of interior space inside each home. Made up of several hexagonal pieced together, the dome hosts a wealth of interior nooks and crannies, making it stand out from other prefab home designs.

The dome offers individuals the opportunity to build their own high quality homes, coming with pre-built wooden sections, ready to assemble on either a concrete or timber plinth. Once on site, the dome houses take only one day to raise and seal, and for domes less than 500 square feet, no crane is needed to complete construction. The load construction is extremely strong and built for extreme weather, including wind speeds of 200 mph with one meter of wet snow on the roof.

The completed two-floor homes come with living room, kitchen, bathroom and two bedrooms and are constructed using only sustainable and recycled materials. The exterior is covered with non-toxic impregnated pinewood, and the roof is covered with grass. The construction is ventilated on the exterior and insulated with wood-wool or flax, with fiber gypsum to cover all installations and cables. The floor is made up of a plate of reinforced concrete with pressure-resistant insulation and vitrified gravel underneath. Laying on top of the concrete are insulation and floorboards. Furthermore, each home is installed with solar panels and a brick stove, both of which are thermostat-controlled and connected to a water tank. Other renewable energy systems are also available

With a minimum use of materials, the domes are sustainable, energy efficient, spacious and cost-efficient. There is also the potential to erect two or three domes together.

 :}

You can find much more at their site:

 http://www.easydomes.com/

easydomes1.jpg 

The Easy Domes concept sets up for advantages in a very quick and easy assembling and raising of the building and its finish. On a concrete or timber basic it takes one day to raise and seal the construction which is made of quality plywood and 3×4? to 3×6″ timber in pinewood.

All sections are premade and ready to assemble with bolts and nuts and the sealing of the edges with asphaltpaper or rubber. The climate shelter and finish out – and inside are also precutted plates / sections ready for mounting.

Floor, partition walls and windows and doors are offered as the house by this becomes ready for kitchen, bathroom, furniture, lamps and other installations done by the dome owner.

The Easy Domes products are certified and of high quality and precision made materials fullfilling  international building rules and standards.  Transport is easy in container  and no crane is needed to erect buildings untill the 50 sq.ft. domes.

As domes are geometrical structures optimized on loads and climate conditions – with a minimum use of materials –  advantages are reached in a sustainable, energy efficient and  spatial building on a very suitable cost level.

What does it matter? At least they are trying.

:}

http://www.theorionproject.org/en/index.html

lead_nebula.jpg

Our Vision and Purpose

The Orion Project is a non-profit foundation created to transform the current energy, environmental and social crisis into a world of sustainability and Enlightened Abundance.

Technological progress in the areas of advanced physics and electromagnetic systems, if appropriately supported, will enable humanity to live on the Earth with a minimal footprint with genuine long-term sustainability.

For over 100 years, these advanced concepts in energy generation have either been ignored or actively suppressed due to the power of fossil-fuel based economic and industrial interests.

Imagine a world where every home and village has its own clean source of electrical energy, free from the cost of fossil fuels, nuclear power or a centralized electric grid.

Imagine every means of transportation running off of clean power plants, using no source of fuel and creating no pollution.

Imagine the developing world blossoming with these new technologies and the equatorial rain forests protected from slash and burn subsistence farming and logging.

Imagine all inter-city transportation above the ground and the millions of acres paved over with highways freed for productive agriculture and recreation.

Imagine all manufacturing being clean-fuel sourced, using no-cost or low-cost energy.

Imagine the possibility of 100% recycling because the energy cost of transporting recycled materials, processing them and scrubbing pollution out of the air and water approaches zero.

Imagine…

This is no mere pipe-dream, but a world that is well within our grasp to create- in our lifetimes. Imagine… and see that it is a reality.

The Orion Project is dedicated to:

  • Supporting the world’s most accomplished engineers, physicists, and inventors who have developed innovative solutions to energy generation.
  • Cleaning up the fossil fuel power sources currently in use.

How You Can Help:

The Orion Project urgently needs your help. Nothing short of a global, peaceful Manhattan Project can reverse the growing crisis of energy resource depletion, environmental collapse, global warming and geo-political conflict created by our current dependence on oil, gas and nuclear technology.

The technologies outlined on our website – in addition to solar and wind – provide our best hope for attaining true sustainability, peace and Enlightened Abundance for all of humanity.

Please make a donation to The Orion Project to support our Technology Development Program and to see that these emerging sciences are disclosed and implemented globally as soon as possible.

Our immediate goal is to raise a minimum of $3 million from individuals like you and from foundations and corporations concerned about the looming environmental and energy crisis. This sum will enable us to substantially support the research and development of the technologies outlined on our site through our Breakthrough Campaign.

Volunteer your skills to help The Orion Project meet its goals. We have a need for volunteers with a variety of skillsets, and this list will continue to grow as the project gathers momentum.

The future of our planet and of human civilization depends on wise, courageous and bold leadership and innovation. Will you join us?

:}

They got cool pictures too and you know how we like that.

Next Page »