Transition Communities – Why I will spend hours today weeding strawberries

House cleaning: I will soon be on vacation and I think not posting. Or at least intermittently posting. Until then I want to post meditations on the transition community movement.

:}

These are conscious communities that try to wean themselves from hydrocarbon fuels. While they look to be like other commune movements such as the most recent “back to the land” movement of the 60s and 70s, they are purposeful in their reduction of greenhouse gas production. They are all around the world and have their own network of publications and even conferences. But as I was trying to dig my strawberry patch out of the grass attack that killed it this summer, I was thinking that I started “stoop” labor when I was a small child gleaning for corn and working in my great grandfathers truck patch. I thought then “when I grow up I will never do this again”. But look at me now. It can be a tough life. And if we had to get by on our strawberry crop this year we would be dead before winter even started. Still IF we had to depend on our strawberry crop we would have done a better job. So first up some of the bigger sites and some in odd places.

http://www.transitionnetwork.org/news/2011-08-31/august-round-whats-happening-transition

August round up of what’s happening in Transition

Published on August 31, 2011 by Ed Mitchell

 

We’ll start down under in Australia where Transition Eudlo (NSW) held a talk in the wonderfully named Mullumbimby which means ‘small round hill’ in Aboriginal. It was presented by Sonya Wallace, founder of Transition Town Eudlo and Transition Sunshine Coast. Also in Australia, MINTI, the Melbourne Inner Northwest Transition Initiative, held a local food forum and asked ‘What’s Eating Australia?’ poster

Over in Balingup, Western Australia, following a successful speaker event by a sustainability lecturer and member of Bunbury TT, public screenings are being held around town to raise awareness of the Transition movement. Balingup locals plan to spread the word and help make Transition as thriving in the west of Australia as it is in the east. Read more about it here.

In Japan, this August update (to the TN website) from Paul Shepherd in Tokyo on the emergence of a Japanese national hub is well worth a read. The headline is that following the existing TT’s in Fujino, Hayama & Koganei, there are now about 20 to 25 emerging Transition Towns in Japan.

Sara and Emilio (www.nu-project.org) would like to share their latest short film which includes an interview with members of Transition Barcelona, some footage of the 15M protest movement across Spain and how it’s connected with Transition.

Transition Town Kinsale in Ireland have been busy this month with a butterfly walk, a sanctuary walk and talk in a restored limestone quarry with Ted Cooke of The Woodland League (to help mark National Heritage Week) and a Kinsale Hub BBQ fundraiser on the dock. Check out this great poster…:

:}

Go there to read much much more. More tomorrow.

:}

 

 

 

Green Highways – We end the week at LID

Apparently there have been some changes in the recent months at this organization but it is easily one of the coolest green sites I have been to in awhile. It is great to be around an organization that talks nothing but green planning. It’s like being in the future.

http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/about.htm

Low Impact Development Center
Follow us on twitter

image
image

About Us
imageThe Low Impact Development Center was established in 1998 to develop and provide information to individuals and organizations dedicated to protecting the environment and our water resources through proper site design techniques that replicate pre-existing hydrologic site conditions.

Organization Profile

Balancing growth and environmental integrity, the Low Impact Development Center (LID), Inc. is a non-profit 501 (c)(3) organization dedicated to research, development, and training for water resource and natural resource protection issues. The Center focuses on furthering the advancement of Low Impact Development technology. Low Impact Development is a comprehensive land planning and engineering design approach with a goal of maintaining and enhancing the pre-development hydrologic regime of urban and developing watersheds. This design approach incorporates strategic planning with micro-management techniques to achieve superior environmental protection, while allowing for development or infrastructure rehabilitation to occur. This innovative approach can be used to help meet a wide range of Wet Weather Flow (WWF) control and community development goals.

:}

More next week.

:}

Green Roads Choked By Contractors – The past always repeats itself

This is a guest post. I concur with it. I can’t post the whole thing here because it is a little long. Please go to the website listed below and read the rest.

http://www.softwareadvice.com/articles/construction/green-roads-construction-are-constractors-our-roadbloc-1070711/

Green Roads Construction: Are Contractors Our Roadblock?

by Derek SingletonERP Analyst, Software Advice
Jul 07, 2011

The buzz of innovative ideas on how to build cheaper, greener roads is all around us. These ideas range from using scrap construction materials and rubber tires to using recycled glass to reduce our reliance on asphalt. While these brainstorms are laudable, they’ve yet to prove themselves in a total life-cycle analysis.

The green construction practices that have a demonstrated track record can’t gain traction because of an archaic contractor bidding process. And herein lies the problem. A problem that we can no longer afford to ignore given the sheer cost and impact of our highway system.

“Our roads are everywhere. Anywhere you turn, you’re automatically on a road. We can’t get away from them. We step outside of our house and we’re on a road. If we go to a National Park, we take a road. People don’t realize this but [building roads] is one of the highest impact things we do.” – Shane Stathert, Think Green Roads

The need for lower impact roads is a pressing economic issue. Each year, we spend roughly 7 percent of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on transportation infrastructure. For fiscal year 2010, that amounted to nearly $1 trillion. A key input to these costs is the amount of asphalt we use. But the costs don’t end there.

A typical two-lane mile stretch of highway uses roughly 25,000 tons of crushed stone, which is what makes aggregate (the base layer for roads) one of the most mined materials in the world. Then there’s the CO2 emissions. The 32,300 lane miles of road the United States paves every year emits millions of tons of CO2. Here’s a conservative estimate.

Constructing a single-lane mile of road emits 1,200 tons of CO2. If we assume every mile of road built is single-laned (yeah right, not in America) then building our roads emits 38,760,000 tons of CO2 every year. That’s the same as the annual energy use of 6 million homes. Seriously, 6 million, stop and think about that for a second.

Needless to say, these exorbitant costs – both fiscal and environmental – left many in the industry wondering: how can we reduce expense and still maintain the quality of road construction? Thus, the green road construction movement was born.

Recycled Materials: A Reliable Aggregate Alternative?

With 94 percent of paved roads covered in asphalt, the first obvious target was determining how excessive use of asphalt could be reduced to minimize economic and environmental impacts. One idea that’s gaining a lot of attention in the green construction movement is the use of recycled materials for aggregate.

The logic is simple: pick a material with a good consistency that would normally sit in a landfill, grind it up and you’ve got an aggregate substitute or aggregate base. Popular fillers and aggregate replacements include rubber tires, roofing shingles and even glass.

Using recycled material for aggregate in this way not only saves money, but it also makes use of a material that would otherwise remain unused. A single lane mile of road constructed with rubber tires will use roughly 2,000 tires and save as much as $50,000. It also diverts rubber tires from landfills where they’d otherwise pile up and present a fire hazard or act as a breeding ground for disease-carrying mosquitoes.

But putting what would otherwise be considered trash into our roads raises a healthy amount of skepticism. What happens when the roads break apart? Is it safe for plastics, rubber and used construction material to be exposed to the elements? What if these wash into our water system?

There is a dearth of research on the environmental costs of using such recycled materials for aggregate or mixing them with asphalt. And using recycled rubber is one of the most promoted ways to green a road today. Both the Green Highway Partnership and National Asphalt Association tout recycled rubber as an environmentally safe and viable alternative.

:}

More tomorrow

:}

As often as this has been documented, you would think peeps would get it by now.

http://www.good.is/post/nine-of-out-ten-climate-denying-scientists-have-ties-to-exxon-mobil-money/?fb_ref=rightrail

Nine Out of Ten Climate Denying Scientists Have Ties to Exxon Mobil Money

Nine Out of Ten Climate Denying Scientists Have Ties to Exxon Mobil Money

2011 • 2:30 pm PDT

newsweek, global warming is a hoax, global warming, climate change, denial,

If you spend any time at all browsing comments on articles about climate change (and bless you if you’ve managed to avoid it), you’ve likely read the same handful of long-debunked arguments against the reality of anthropogenic global warming (or “man-made” global warming). Recently, you’ve also almost definitely seen links to this website—”900+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming (AGW) Alarm”—created by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

The problem is, of the top ten contributors of articles to that list, nine are financially linked to Exxon Mobil. Carbon Brief, which examined the list in detail, explains:

Once you crunch the numbers, however, you find a good proportion of this new list is made up of a small network of individuals who co-author papers and share funding ties to the oil industry. There are numerous other names on the list with links to oil-industry funded climate sceptic think-tanks, including more from the International Policy Network (IPN) and the Marshall Institute.

Compiling these lists is dramatically different to the process of producing IPCC reports, which reference thousands of scientific papers. The reports are thoroughly reviewed to make sure that the scientific work included is relevant and diverse.

It’s well worth reading the rest of the Carbon Brief analysis.

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Green Transportation For The Saudis – Germans sell Leopard 2A1 tanks

Please play this song in the background.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqJDuZIcQ34

It is kind of a return to our old Jam Band Friday format.

:}

Anyway crossing the boundaries between green transportation, energy policy and crowd control, the Germans announced they had come to an agreement to sell Saudia Arabia 200 of their Leopard 2A1 battle main tanks. As Der Speigel quickly pointed out such a sale sends both a crazy signal to Germany’s large peace community but a defeatist one to those countries involved in the Arab Spring (read: food riots). But when it comes to crushing resistance any battle main usually weighs over 50 ton, so that works out pretty well. Do not be fooled either by the nameless chinese man’s dance with the Chinese battle main because that was a once in a century event. The Arab drivers prefer to get them  babies up to their top speeds of 45 miles per hour and roll. At those speeds they get a whopping 1.3333 miles per gallon. But at more cautious battle speeds they get something more like 4 – 5 miles per gallon. Kinda like a 1963 red corvette. Or maybe a Hummer. But when you compare it to its actual soul mates like the Caterpillar 797 which gets a heart pumping 3 miles per gallon at the same speeds the Leopard is a true jungle cat. OK well I have had enough fun for today.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2081566,00.html?

?

Should Germany Sell Tanks to Saudi Arabia?

By William Boston / Berlin Thursday, July 07, 2011
Click here to find out more!

Troops of the 37th Armored Infantry Brigade (37. Panzergrenadierbrigade) prepare to board their Marder light tanks.

It’s never easy to balance idealism with political realities, but as Germany grapples with the challenges posed by the Arab Spring it is sometimes hard to tell which side
Berlin is on.

The capital’s latest foreign-policy faux pas is an alleged behind-closed-doors deal to sell state-of-the-art tanks to Saudi Arabia. The deal — so secret the government won’t even acknowledge it was ever discussed — has kicked up a firestorm of protest, uniting an unlikely coalition of leftist politicians, human-rights groups, church leaders and senior members of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s own Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party. (See “Angela Merkel: German Rules.”)

News of the deal broke on Sunday, when the newsweekly Der Spiegel reported that Germany’s ultra-secretive Federal Security Council, whose members include Merkel, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, and Defense Minister Thomas De Maiziere, approved the sale of 200 Leopard 2 tanks, Germany’s most modern battlefield tank, to Saudi Arabia. During a meeting of the CDU parliamentary group on Monday, Norbert Lammert, the president of the Bundestag — the German parliament — and Ruprecht Polenz, head of parliament’s influential foreign affairs committee, argued forcefully that Germany could not sell such heavy arms to a country known for routine violations of the most basic human rights. “Such decisions cannot be taken at a time when people are fighting for democracy in the Arab world,” said Juergen Trittin, a Green Party leader, on German television on Tuesday.

Protests have also been raining in from church leaders and human-rights activists, who argue that Saudi Arabia is on the wrong side of history in the tide of rebellion sweeping through the Arab world. As the momentum of protests in Tunisia and Egypt carried the Arab Spring into the tiny nation of Bahrain last March, some 2,000 troops from Arab nations close to the ruling monarchy, including heavily armed Saudis, quashed the rebellion. Meanwhile, the German government still faces criticism for abstaining from the U.N. Security Council vote authorizing air strikes in support of Libyan rebels, and still refuses to offer direct military aid, even after softening its position (it does provide about $5.3 million in financial assistance for NATO’s Libya mission.) Against that backdrop, even Merkel’s closest party allies are at a loss to justify the sale of weapons to a nation with a history of oppression.

(See where Angela Merkel falls on the most powerful women list.)

The deal, were it to take place, is stunning not only because of the political signal it sends to pro-democracy activists in the Middle East and North Africa. A weapons sale of that order would mark a significant change in German arms-export policies. For the past 20 years, Germany has refused to sell such heavy artillery to the Saudis, citing concerns over human-rights abuses. German law also forbids weapons exports to countries engaged in a direct conflict — though the definition of conflict is open to interpretation.

dot dot dot (as they say) 

The Leopard 2 tank is manufactured in Germany but is also produced under license in Spain. And the Saudis are believed to have also negotiated with the Spanish, putting Madrid and Berlin in competition for defense jobs. Germany has a small army and with the end of the Cold War there is little requirement for tanks like the Leopard 2 on potential European battlefields. NATO is scaling back its traditional European land defenses in favor of lighter, rapid deployment forces to support campaigns out of the European theater, such as Afghanistan. The shrinking demand at home leaves defense companies looking abroad for contracts.

:}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2E

Leopard 2E

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Leopardo 2E. zaragoza 1.jpg
Spanish Leopard 2E in Madrid, October 2006
Type Main battle tank

The Leopard 2E (E stands for España, Spanish for Spain) is a variant of the German Leopard 2 main battle tank, tailored to the requirements of the Spanish Army, which acquired it as part of an armament modernization program named Programa Coraza, or Program Armor. The acquisition program for the Leopard 2E began in 1994, five years after the cancellation of the Lince tank program that culminated in an agreement to transfer 108 Leopard 2A4s to the Spanish Army in 1998 and started the local production of the Leopard 2E in December 2003. Despite postponement of production due to the 2003 merger between Santa Bárbara Sistemas and General Dynamics and continued fabrication issues between 2006 and 2007, 219 Leopard 2Es have been delivered to the Spanish Army.

The Leopard 2E is a major improvement over the M60 Patton tank, which it replaced in Spain’s mechanized and armored units. Its development represented a total of 2.6 million hours worth of work, 9,600 of them in Germany, at a total cost of 1.9 billion euros. This makes it one of the most expensive Leopard 2s built. Indigenous production amounted to 60% and the vehicles were assembled locally at Sevilla by Santa Bárbara Sistemas. It has thicker armor on the turret and glacis plate than the German Leopard 2A6, and uses a Spanish-designed tank command and control system, similar to the one fitted in German Leopard 2s. The Leopard 2E is expected to remain in service until 2025.

:}

Gets better mileage then the Space Shuttle, which “leapt from the ground like a scared cat” today for the last time. God speed. More next week.

:}

Greenest Cars For 2011 – We might as well stay on topic

Since Evan got me started on transportation I figure we might as well stick with it for awhile. This from Mother Earth News. The obvious suspects are the Leaf, the Volt and the Prius. You will have to go read the article for their reveiws but here is the lead in.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/2011-best-green-cars-zm0z11zroc.aspx

Best Green Cars, 2011

The hybrid car that changed the world • The electric cars that will change the world • $1,000s in rebates and incentives • 40 mpg for the long haul • All-electric daily driving • 38 mpg with smiles • $2.75 to recharge • No range anxiety • 35 mpg with zip

June/July 2011

By John Rockhold

Back in 2000, Toyota released the Prius, a gasoline-electric hybrid, in the United States. That year, the average price of gas was just $1.49, yet here was a quirky little car that touted 40-plus mpg. A 2004 redesign gave the Prius even better mpg and its iconic shape, and it became so popular Toyota couldn’t keep up with demand. Today, the Prius is the most successful hybrid by far and has basically come to define “green car.” It’s no surprise, then, that the Prius is back among the annual MOTHER EARTH NEWS Best Green Cars.

Have you ever wondered what the heck “Prius” actually means? It’s a Latin word meaning “to go before.” Toyota chose it to signify that the car and its hybrid technology would be a precursor of the energy-efficient cars of the future?—?which has certainly proved true, given the numerous hybrids released by Toyota and others. However, it’s the two all-electric cars on our 2011 list that herald the next revolution in green transportation.

Yes, practical and accessible electric cars from major automakers are finally here. Neither electric car is perfect, but the Prius wasn’t either back in 2000. Of the many features that make the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan Leaf compelling, their driving range and cost to own are what may make them most appealing. The Leaf has a range of about 100 miles, depending on driving conditions. The Volt has a shorter all-electric range, but uses a gas engine to power its two electric motors when needed for a total range of about 375 miles.

Sick of paying about $50 to fill the tank of your gas car? How does $2 to $3 sound? Given the national average cost of electricity (11 cents per kilowatt-hour), that’s about what you would pay to “fill up” an electric car by recharging it overnight. And if you’re curious about the environmental costs of gasoline versus fossil fuel electricity, read Why Electric Cars Are Cleaner. In short, while there is regional variability, electric cars are cleaner than gas cars. That said, the ultimate solution is to recharge with renewable energy.

The three other vehicles that make up our 2011 Best Green Cars are revolutionary in their own right: The Ford Fiesta has the best blend of affordability and efficiency; the Honda CR-Z proves that hybrids can be fun to drive; and the Jetta TDI is the best example of clean diesel’s efficiency and workhorse longevity.

Whether you own one of these six cars now, later or never, you’ll benefit from them. They’re making mobility greener, reducing our dependence on oil, and instigating more innovation in the auto industry. In this new era of green car competition, we’re all winners.

Best Green Cars: Keys to the Data and the Experts

Base Price: the manufacturer’s suggested retail price + destination fee

EPA Gas Mileage: official fuel economy estimates (your mileage may vary)

Annual Fuel Cost: assumes $3.75/gallon regular gasoline; $3.95/gallon premium gasoline; $3.97/gallon diesel; $0.11 per kilowatt-hour of electricity; 15,000 miles driven annually at 55% city, 45% highway

Air Pollution Score: from the EPA; zero = most tailpipe emissions, 10 = least

Greenhouse Gas Score: from the EPA; zero = most greenhouse gas emissions, 10 = least

ACEEE Green Score: from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy; the higher the score, the better; best 2011 score is 54; see www.GreenerCars.org

Brad Berman: founder and editor, www.HybridCars.com and www.PluginCars.com

Terry Penney: program manager for advanced vehicle technologies at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Ron Cogan: editor and publisher, Green Car Journal

Todd Kaho: executive editor, Green Car Journal and editor of www.FrugalDriver.com

Chelsea Sexton: founder, Lightning Rod Foundation; electric car advocate

James Kliesch: research director for the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists

Jim Motavalli: author of High Voltage: The Fast Track to Plug in the Auto Industry

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Electric Scooters And Other Electric Vehicles – Maybe, maybe not

A hidden premise of mine is that we will have an energy crash in the future and when that happens most electricity will be diverted from the residential market to municipal and national security needs. After that food production and other necessities. Still people have their own electrical generation capacity. Enough to charge batteries so there will be a lot of “light” vehicles around. I don’t think many Volt sized cars will be workable but heh compared to a horse, 40 or 50 miles an hour is not bad.

http://www.electric-bikes.com/

Welcome to Electric-Bikes.com

Practical transportation for errands and short commutes.

Electric bikes are part of a wide range of Light Electric Vehicles (LEVs) that provide convenient local transportation. Generally designed for one person and small cargo capacity, electric bike range, speed, and cost are moderate. For most of us, the majority of our trips are less than 10 miles – within the range of most e-bikes. Clean, quiet, and efficient LEVs offer the advantages of an extra car without the burdens.

To learn more about the range of electric bikes, kits and LEVs, visit our introduction page. Or, click on your favorite type of vehicle below.

Scooters E-Bicycles E-Trikes Conversion Kits Betterbikes™ Folding E-Bikes
Pedicabs Motorscooters Motorcycles Neighbr. EVs Commuter Cars TriTrack Street

 


The following organizations suppport changing the California Vehicle Code to simplify the rules, reduce barriers, and fairly treat LEVs as viable transportation alternatives.

:}

More next week.

:}

A Bicycle’s Best Friend – What happens when we quite using hydrocarbons

The secession of the use of hydrocarbons for fuels could be sudden. The President could order it. He could order all American troops home. He could order them to convert anything nonessential like “factories making crap” to make solar panels of the water and electrical kind. He could order larger factories to convert to wind turbine manufacturing. He could order the closing of all coal mines and the opening of Yucca Mountain. He could prohibit the importation of liquid fuels beginning with oil and eventually including natural gas. As the coal runs out the coal plants would have to convert to natural gas. Or it could happen gradually as the planet warms and people  die. Either way the bicycle is gona be a big part of it. People can go 10 miles on a bike easy.

http://www.bicycle-riding-for-boomers.com/

Boomers Are Discovering The Fun Path
To Fitness Through Bicycle Riding

Bicycle riding for boomers offers a boomers perspective on the sport of bicycling that is almost never seen in the cycling world. It is a compilation of lessons learned over more than 15 years, on three continents and several islands, years of research, and the unveiling of new boomer-friendly cycling products.

 

There is an exciting re-awakening in the world of bicycle riding driven by boomer aged riders looking for fun and fitness. Old line bike manufacturers are producing more products for mature riders and new manufacturers are appearing frequently.

When riding a bicycle you notice the sights and sounds that you, almost always, miss when driving or riding in a car and you get a whole new perspective on your environment. It gives you a chance to leave the rat race behind and lets you stop and smell the roses. Or, if you are a more active type, you can step it up and get all the action you want.

 

The days of bicycles being just toys for the young are long gone. Older folks are finding new bikes that are boomer friendly and new ways to enjoy them. New bike paths, clubs, and organized rides are becoming more available then ever and the numbers are growing every day. And, it can be as solitary or social as you want it to be.

Remember how much fun bike riding was as a kid? Guess what. It can be more fun now and you don’t have to be home by dinner time. It is an awesome way to attain fitness and how many fitness programs are really fun? Yet, if you are having fun you are much more likely to stay with it and reap the many health benefits that it gives you.

 

Just about any sport, or fitness program, has on-going expenses like greens fees, membership fees, etc. But, a very modest investment in cycling gear will last for years and your on-going expense is almost zero.

The good news is there is a bicycle, or tricycle, for anybody that wants to ride, at any skill level. So, if you want to ride there is one for you.

Some of the articles and products shown here will be amazing to people that have not ridden for years but they are here now for us to enjoy. Bicycle riding is more attractive than ever to boomers and seniors.

An estimated 80% of the average persons travel is, driver only, and within 10 miles of home. Imagine how much money bicycle riding can save you!

I promise I won’t get too hi-tech. Unless you intend to ride competitively it isn’t necessary. ( I’ll leave that for the Lance Armstrong wannabes) It’s just us folks and it’s all down to earth stuff so……..

JUST RELAX AND ENJOY THE RIDE.

 

Daily news update on ..

Cycling

Boomer interests

Safe cycling

bicycle trails

boomer health

Boomer fitness

Electric bicycles

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Americans Waste Energy Just Getting Out Of Bed – Even while they sleep

This is a great blog post. I will only quote part of it because its point is that we must decentralized our energy sources to avoid losses. But I just want to focus on the losses part. Next week we start another meditation. Have a great Memorial Day weekend. (I realize you can not  see the entire graphic below. More reason to go read the source.)

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/04/us-wastes-more-energy-than-it-uses.html

Thursday, April 21, 2011

It’s Not Just Alternative Energy Versus Fossil Fuels or Nuclear – Energy Has to Become DECENTRALIZE

dot dot dot

This basic trend can be seen around the globe with many energy sources. We’ve most likely already found and tapped the biggest, most accessible and highest-E.R.O.I. oil and gas fields, just as we’ve already exploited the best rivers for hydropower. Now, as we’re extracting new oil and gas in more extreme environments – in deep water far offshore, for example – and as we’re turning to energy alternatives like nuclear power and converting tar sands to gasoline, we’re spending steadily more energy to get energy.

For example, the tar sands of Alberta, likely to be a prime energy source for the United States in the future, have an E.R.O.I. of around 4 to 1, because a huge amount of energy (mainly from natural gas) is needed to convert the sands’ raw bitumen into useable oil.

Professor Charles Hall of the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry provides the following graphic to illustrate the point:

 

“Balloon graph” representing quality (y graph) and quantity (x graph) of the United States economy for various fuels at various times. Arrows connect fuels from various times (i.e. domestic oil in 1930, 1970, 2005), and the size of the “balloon” represents part
of the uncertainty associated with EROI estimates.

(Source: US EIA, Cutler Cleveland and C. Hall’s own EROI work in preparation)Click to Enlarge.

(click for larger image.)

The take away message from the graph is that the energy return on investment was very high for oil in 1930, but it is very low today, since the cheap, easy-to-get-to (and less dangerous) oil is gone.

:}

dot dot dot

America uses 39.97 quads of energy, while it wastes 54.64 quads (i.e. “rejected energy”).

As CNET noted in 2007:

Sixty-two percent of the energy consumed in America today is lost through transmission and general inefficiency. In other words, it doesn’t go toward running your car or keeping your lights on.

Put another way:

  • We waste 650% more energy than all of our nuclear power plants produce
  • We waste 280% more energy than we produce by coal
  • We waste 235% more energy than we produce by natural gas (using deadly fracking)
  • We waste 150% more energy than we generate with other petroleum products

The Department of Energy notes:

Only about 15% of the energy from the fuel you put in your tank gets used to move your car down the road or run useful accessories, such as air conditioning. The rest of the energy is lost to engine and driveline inefficiencies and idling. Therefore, the potential to improve fuel efficiency with advanced technologies is enormous.

According to the DOE, California lost 6.8% of the total amount of electricity used in the state in 2008 through transmission line inefficiencies and losses.

The National Academies Press notes:

By the time energy is delivered to us in a usable form, it has typically undergone several conversions. Every time energy changes forms, some portion is “lost.” It doesn’t disappear, of course. In nature, energy is always conserved. That is, there is exactly as much of it around after something happens as there was before. But with each change, some amount of the original energy turns into forms we don’t want or can’t use, typically as so-called waste heat that is so diffuse it can’t be captured.

Reducing the amount lost – also known as increasing efficiency – is as important to our energy future as finding new sources because gigantic amounts of energy are lost every minute of every day in conversions. Electricity is a good example. By the time the energy content of electric power reaches the end user, it has taken many forms. Most commonly, the process begins when coal is burned in a power station. The chemical energy stored in the coal is liberated in combustion, generating heat that is used to produce steam. The steam turns a turbine, and that mechanical energy is used to turn a generator to produce the electricity.

:}

The main point being we waste energy to make energy. There is something wrong with that. It really means that resources are not free. But that is another post. More Tuesday.

:}

USA Wastes 59% Of The Energy It Uses – We are energy pigs

Great article and great graph. Please see the rest. The comments are particularly stupid.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-energy_1.html

US energy use chart shows we waste more than half of our energy

April 9, 2011 by Lisa Zyga report

US energy use

Enlarge

This flow chart shows the amount of energy (in quads) that is produced by different energy sources and consumed by different sectors. Image credit: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the US Department of Energy.

(PhysOrg.com) — This flow chart of the estimated US energy use in 2009, assembled by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), paints a pretty sobering picture of our energy situation. To begin with, it shows that more than half (58%) of the total energy produced in the US is wasted due to inefficiencies, such as waste heat from power plants, vehicles, and light bulbs. In other words, the US has an energy efficiency of 42%. And, despite the numerous reports of progress in solar, wind, and geothermal energy, those three energy sources combined provide just 1.2% of our total energy production. The vast majority of our energy still comes from petroleum (37%), natural gas (25%), and coal (21%).

:}

More tomorrow.

:}