SkyScrapers are energy dogs from a lot of perspectives most notably the energy needed to hoist people into the sky…so this concept probably won’t work. But from a local food perspective and from a built environment perspective It has some attraction.
On a personal note, I normally have little conscience about posting stuff here from other sources but this is from a blog, the person clearly put a lot of work into it and the pictures are really beautiful. So I am going to post a little of it here…for the rest goto:
One couldn’t say that the concept of vertical farming isn’t controversial, but they could say that it has serious merits that need to be considered on both sides of the issues.
What is a vertical farm? The basic premise, as you see in this image, is to be able to grow food in urban areas by creating tall buildings where, instead of each floor having offices, each floor is in essence its own super greenhouse, where different crops can be grown to feed people within its own community. The idea is to not only be able to feed the community, but to protect the land that’s being damaged by over-farming and making sure that there will still be enough food for an ever growing population.
Of course, not all designs would be the same, but this model of a design for the city of Seattle helps us to see how it would work. It’s integrated into a city plan so that it fits in, and has areas where people can go inside to not only tend to the plants, but could actually buy their produce at the same time.
Thinking of vertical farm in terms of super stores fits a model like this one, where the ground floor has everything a traditional supermarket would have,
While upper levels would contain areas for growing produce. This particular example tries to highlight how power might be created for all the energy needed to grow crops in urban areas, as the designs for vertical farming wouldn’t be able to provide natural light for all of the crops, so they’d need enhancement from artificial lighting. It’s one of the major criticisms of trying to have vertical farms.
A $2.5 billion clean-coal power plant proposed for Taylorville got a new lease on life Wednesday when the Illinois House overwhelmingly approved a bill developers said is crucial to the project.By an 86-5 vote, the House passed Senate Bill 1987, which will allow design work to begin on the Taylorville Energy Center. It is similar to a bill that failed by 10 votes in the House in the closing hours of the spring session.Rep. Gary Hannig, D-Litchfield, said the latest version contains “some safeguards” to mollify utility giant Commonwealth Edison, which opposed the earlier bill. That includes more oversight of the project by the Illinois Commerce Commission.“They were concerned that some of the cost might be excessive,” Hannig said. “Now the Illinois Commerce Commission will have an opportunity to say yes or no to that. We have to prove to the power companies that we can produce this in Taylorville in a clean and economically feasible way.”The Taylorville Energy Center would use coal-gasification technology and Illinois coal to produce 525 megawatts of electricity while controlling carbon dioxide emissions
Tenaska’s Taylorville Energy Center Selected By U.S. DOE For Loan Guarantee Program; Illinois Electric Ratepayers Could Save Up To $60 Million Per Year With $2.5 Billion Guarantee – 07/13/09
TAYLORVILLE, Illinois – July 13, 2009 – Tenaska, managing partner for the $3.5 billion Taylorville Energy Center (TEC), announced today that, following a competitive six-month application process, it has been selected by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to proceed into the term sheet negotiation phase under the DOE Loan Guarantee Program. The amount of the guarantee will be up to $2.579 billion, depending on the final project costs and capital structure.
Upon completion of due diligence and negotiations, the Taylorville project expects to receive a federal government guarantee of its debt, which will greatly reduce financing costs. Because TEC financing costs are included in electric rates under the recently enacted Illinois Clean Coal Portfolio Standard Law, the DOE loan guarantee results in savings of between $40 and $60 million per year to Illinois consumers.
“This is a very important step toward securing a clean coal facility in Taylorville. The federal loan guarantee would significantly reduce the cost of financing the construction of the facility,” said Attorney General Lisa Madigan. “That’s important because cost will be a critical factor when the General Assembly reviews this project next year.”
The DOE Loan Guarantee Program, instituted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, is designed to spur technological innovation in fossil fuel energy development. It essentially gave the U.S. government the ability to back loans for advanced clean energy projects, thereby lowering financing costs.
Taylorville Energy Center Taylorville Energy Center (TEC) is a proposed 500- to 525-megawatt clean coal power plant using an advanced technology called Hybrid Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (Hybrid IGCC) to make it the cleanest coal-fired power plant in the world.
Located a mile northeast of Taylorville in central Illinois, the plant will convert Illinois coal into clean substitute natural gas (also known as methane) to generate enough electricity to power more than 500,000 area homes.
The benefits of TEC include:
• Millions saved annually on power costs
• Economic development for a job-starved region
• Creation of a new market for Illinois coal
• Protection of the environment and public health through clean-coal technology
Taylorville Energy Center is being developed by Christian County Generation, LLC, a joint venture between affiliates of Tenaska, an Omaha, Nebraska-based power development company, and MDL Holding Co. of Louisville, Kentucky. Tenaska is managing developer of the Taylorville project. Since its inception 21 years ago, Tenaska has built more than 9,000 megawatts of power generation. Forbes magazine ranks Tenaska as the 24th largest private U.S. corporation, based on 2007 gross revenues.
In a province running out of conventional oil and gas, Alberta’s oilsands are seen as a lifeline that will guarantee the continuation of our comfortable energy-driven society.
By The Edmonton Journal July 29, 2006
In a province running out of conventional oil and gas, Alberta’s oilsands are seen as a lifeline that will guarantee the continuation of our comfortable energy-driven society.
Too much of the time, people in this province don’t think about the cost of this gigantic oilsands development. It’s easy to do: most Albertans don’t live in, and rarely visit, the northern one-fifth of the province where the oilsands lie. What we don’t personally see or smell or taste, we tend to ignore.
The four-day series on the environmental impact of the oilsands boom written by Journal environment reporter Hanneke Brooymans, which started on Friday, is a valuable corrective to our neglect.
Most of you are already aware of the damage caused by the burning and the extraction of oil (like the apprehended damage caused by extraction in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, for example). But what about the famous Canadian tar sands? After only two years of digging for bitumen near Fort McMurray in Alberta, Shell has already dug up a pit that is as much as three miles wide and 200 feet deep. 400-ton trucks, said to be the largest in the world, are used to move around all that dirt, and it takes a lot of it since on average 2 tons of tar sand are required to make 1 barrel of oil.
04/01/2009 | 06:49 AMEDMONTON, Alberta — A Canadian oil sands company says more than three times as many ducks died last spring on a northern Alberta toxic waste pond than the 500 birds originally estimated.
Syncrude Canada chief executive Tom Katinas said Tuesday the carcasses of 1,606 ducks were collected from the toxic oily waters. The ponds contain waste from the process of separating oil from sand.
Katinas released the updated figure a week after an Alberta court granted the consortium three more months to enter a plea on federal and provincial wildlife charges. – AP
Construction of a major underground oil pipeline along the eastern edge of Sangamon County could begin as early as this summer.
An energy developer and the Canadian consul general from Chicago are in Springfield this week to seek support for the endeavor as a major boost for jobs and energy security, including a meeting scheduled today with Gov. Pat Quinn.
The first section of the nearly 3-year-old, $350 million construction project has been completed to an area about 50 miles northeast of Peoria.
But the final phase has run into opposition from environmental groups and some landowners, who say the pipeline would only encourage continued reliance on polluting petroleum products and would violate property rights.
“Canada has the second-largest reserves in the world. There’s 170 billion barrels of reserves, and 97 percent are in the oil sands,” said Don Thompson, president of The Oil Sands Developers Group.
While Scooters and Wind Turbines may be the future the past always tries to claw its way back into the picture. In the past week we have had news about ADM’s efforts to inject poison into Mother Earth, a letter to the SJR indicating that a Carbon Tax would create the End Of Civilization As We Know It, and a team of Lobbyists here in Springfield and Chicago drumming up support for the extension of a pipeline from Peoria to the Wood River Refinery to complete the Rape Of Northern Canada…
Thank God no one suggested a New Nuclear Powerplant or I would have run out of space on this blog.
DECATUR — A project to test carbon dioxide storage capacity deep below Archer Daniels Midland Co.’s campus is scheduled to begin this spring.
The company will announce today a partnership with the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium, which is led by the Champaign-based Illinois State Geological Survey, to work on the $84.3-million project.
It will be one of seven projects the U.S. Department of Energy is funding to demonstrate carbon dioxide, or CO2, storage capacity in underground formations throughout the country. Researchers are looking for uses of carbon dioxide other than emitting it into the atmosphere.
“The whole idea is to understand what is going on in any given area to figure out whether this technique can be safe and effective,” said Robert Finley, director of the Illinois State Geological Survey. “Ultimately this is a technique that we are looking at very carefully to understand what the volume of the CO2 is that might actually be placed in the subsurface.”
The consortium will receive $66.7 million to test a part of the Mount Simon Sandstone, a saline-water-bearing rock formation that has increased in notoriety recently because the FutureGen plant in Mattoon also will test it. The formation runs below most of Illinois, Kentucky and Indiana and part of Ohio.
Beginning in late April, workers will drill more than 6,500 feet below the surface to the rock layer where the carbon dioxide will be stored. The drilling is expected to take about two months to complete, Finley said.
The energy department has awarded $4.2 million in funding for the drilling, Finley said. Another $5.24 million to cover the first year of the project is expected to be awarded within weeks, he said.
The project will inject 1,000 tons per day of carbon dioxide from ADM’s ethanol plant into the ground, Finley said. The layer where it will be injected is about 1,000 feet thick in the Decatur area, Finley said.
Injecting is scheduled to start in October 2009 and be completed in 2012. For two years after that, officials will monitor, take samples and make sure nothing is leaking from the formation.
:}
OK let us see – How can something be CERTAIN and yet Experimental? No one will answer that question. The Illinois EPA which is being investigated by the Federal EPA for Collusion with Polluters gave them a permit in a heartbeat..:
One Million Metric Tons of Carbon to be Sequesteres at Illinois Site
(Washington, D.C.) – Drilling nears completion for the first large-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) injection well in the United States for CO2 sequestration. This project will be used to demonstrate that CO2 emitted from industrial sources – such as coal-fired power plants – can be stored in deep geologic formations to mitigate large quantities of greenhouse gas emissions.
The Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) hosted an event April 6 for a CO2 injection test at their Decatur, Ill. ethanol facility. The injection well is being drilled into the Mount Simon Sandstone to a depth more than a mile beneath the surface. This is the first drilling into the sandstone geology since oil and gas exploratory drilling was conducted between 15 and 40 years ago. No wells within 50 miles have been drilled all the way to the bottom of the sandstone, which the storage well will do.
The project is funded by the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity.
“This test represents an exciting step forward in the Department’s collaborative efforts to develop America’s carbon sequestration capabilities,” said Dr. Victor K. Der, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy. “In Decatur, we’re moving from theory to application.”
A collaboration between ADM and the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), the injection test is part of the development phase of the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships program managed by the National Energy Laboratory (NETL) for the Department of Energy’s Office of Fossil Energy (FE).
The project will obtain core samples of the Mount Simon Sandstone during drilling that will be used in analysis to help determine the best section for injection. The sandstone formation is approximately 2,000 feet thick in the test area.
From 2010 to 2013, up to one million metric tons of captured CO2 from ADM’s ethanol production facility in Decatur will be injected more than a mile beneath the surface into a deep saline formation. The amount of injected CO2 will roughly equal the annual emissions of 220,000 automobiles.
:}
What was it that Sarte said about Collaboraters, “shave the women’s heads and shoot the men”. There will be accidents and deaths from this process. THERE ALWAYS ARE in any industrial process. The worst case is explosions and deaths followed by contaminated ground water. If eventually successful, what else will they try to put down there? This is short term planning for short term gain (the hallmark of Corporate Capitolism) at its finest.
The $84.3 million project will be funded by $66.7 million from the U.S. Department of Energy over a period of seven years, supplemented by cofunding from ADM and other corporate and state resources.
Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) is the world leader in BioEnergy and has a premier position in the agricultural processing value chain. ADM is one of the world’s largest processors of soybeans, corn, wheat and cocoa. ADM is a leading manufacturer of biodiesel, ethanol, soybean oil and meal, corn sweeteners, flour and other value-added food and feed ingredients. Headquartered in Decatur, Illinois, ADM has over 27,000 employees, more than 240 processing plants and net sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 of $44 billion. Additional information can be found on ADM’s Web site at http://www.admworld.com/.
From:
Jessie McKinney
ADM Media Relations
217/424-5413
The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), lead by the Illinois State Geological Survey, Archer Daniels Midland Company, Schlumberger Carbon Services, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (DOE) marked a milestone in one of the nation’s first large-scale studies intended to confirm that carbon dioxide emissions can be stored permanently in deep underground rock formations. At a ceremonial groundbreaking celebrating the imminent completion of an approximately 8,000-foot-deep injection well on ADM’s Decatur, Ill., property, officials noted the significance of the DOE funded Illinois Basin-Decatur study.
It is rare well at least medium rare that I give credit where credit is due but the Peak Oil folks and Leanan in particular deserve so much credit. Day in and Day out..NO MATTER what the price of oil or gasoline…they still believe that we are running out of the stuff. That is great because WE ARE:
The new director of the National Intelligence Agency caused something of a stir last month when he warned Congress: “The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications.”
On that theme, Hampshire College professor Michael Klare sees the world economic meltdown as already prompting “economic brush fires” around the world and worries whether these could prove “too virulent to contain.”
It seems as if the lyrics “trouble, trouble, trouble” from Meredith Willson’s “The Music Man” have become too real in today’s world.
Last November Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank Group, noted that the global financial crisis would hit hardest the “poorest and most vulnerable” in the developing world. At that time, Mr. Zoellick calculated another 100 million people around the world had been driven into poverty as a result of soaring food and oil prices. These prices have eased. Nonetheless, hundreds of millions in poor nations must try to balance household budgets on incomes of $2 a day or less.
Now he’s forecasting the world economy will shrink by 1 to 2 percent this year, with difficulties possibly extending into next year. That’s much worse than the bank group’s forecast last year. It will be the first time world output has actually declined since World War II. And each 1 percent decline
in developing-country growth rates pushes an additional 20 million people into poverty, Zoellick reckons.
“The political ramifications [of rising poverty] will be great … though hard to predict,” says John Sewell, a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars in Washington. Before the election last fall, he assembled a group of experts who urged the incoming president to streamline the nation’s development tools. These are now spread among 12 government departments, 25 government agencies, and almost 60 government offices. “No one is in charge,” the group held.
Powerful droughts around the world could cause food shortages, reversing a dramatic drop in global poverty that the economic crisis recently halted, worries Mr. Klare, an expert on peace and world security.
In Africa and in East Asia, population growth also adds to economic pressures.
As for brush fires, the driest tinder lies in eastern European states such as Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria, he says. There, the people in fragile democracies had the notion that rising prosperity in the 1990s and up to 2006 would continue forever. Now the money from the West has dried up and gone home, leading to an economic bust.
“That is what is driving them to rage,” says Klare. “The promises have been taken away.”
Wind and solar projects may carry costs for wildlife
Sandy Seth, via Friends of the Bosque del Apache via AP
Sandhill Cranes fly in formation into the Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge near Socorro, N.M., last year. Environmentalists have raised concerns that the birds’ habitats could be affected by a planned sun and wind power transmission line.
WASHINGTON – The SunZia transmission line that would link sun and wind power from central New Mexico with cities in Arizona is just the sort of energy project an environmentalist could love — or hate. And it is just the sort of line the Interior Department has been tasked with promoting — or guarding against.
If built, the 460-mile line would carry about 3,000 megawatts of power, enough to avoid the need for a handful of coal-fired plants and to help utilities meet mandated targets for use of renewable fuel. “We have to connect the sun of the deserts and the winds of the plains to places where people live,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said recently.
But the line would also cross grasslands, skirt two national wildlife refuges and traverse the Rio Grande, all habitat areas rich in wildlife. The graceful sandhill crane, for example, makes its winter home in the wetlands of New Mexico’s Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge, right next to the path of the proposed power line. And much of the area falls under the protection of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
The research efforts and infrastructure needed to supply 50% of the energy for space and water heating and cooling across Europe using solar thermal energy has been set out under the aegis of the European Solar Thermal Technology Platform (ESTTP). Published in late December 2008, more than 100 experts developed the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA), which includes a deployment roadmap showing the non-technological framework conditions that will enable this ambitious goal to be reached by 2050.
A strategy for achieving a vision of widespread low-temperature solar thermal installations was first explored by ESTTP in 2006, but since then the SRA has identified key areas for rapid growth. These focus points include
the development of active solar buildings, active solar renovation, solar heat for industrial processes and solar heat for district heating and cooling. Meanwhile, amongst the main research challenges is the development of compact long-term efficient heat storage technology. Once available, they would make it possible to store heat from the summer for use in winter in a cost-effective way.
The ESTTP’s main objective is to create the right conditions in order to fully exploit solar thermal’s potential for heating and cooling in Europe and worldwide.
As a first step for the development of the deployment roadmap and of the Strategic Research Agenda, ESTTP developed a vision for solar thermal in 2030. Its key elements are to establish the Active Solar Building – covering 100% of their heating and cooling demand with solar energy – as a standard for new buildings by 2030; establish the Active Solar Renovation as a standard for the refurbishment of existing buildings by 2030 (Active Solar renovated buildings cover at least 50% of their heating and cooling demand with solar thermal energy); supply a substantial share of the industrial process heat demand up to 250°C, including heating and cooling, desalination and water treatment; and achieve broad use of solar energy in district heating and cooling.
Let us say that you had an operable form of cancer and your doctor offered you chemotherapy. What would you say to him? Let us imagine that you had a torn tendon and your doctor offered you aspirin as your main form of treatment. What would you say? Actually you would probably CHANGE doctors…
Drilling began this week for a carbon dioxide injection well as part of an $84.3 million project beneath Archer Daniels Midland Co. property.Workers have started constructing a well that will reach more than 6,500 feet underground. The drilling of the injection well is expected to be completed in late March or early April.
No objections were filed before a late January deadline for an Illinois Environmental Protection Agency permit approving the process. That clears the way for the drilling equipment to be moved into place, said Sallie Greenberg, Illinois Geological Survey communications coordinator. The project is intended to capture carbon dioxide from ADM’s ethanol plant, convert it into liquid and pump it underground for storage before it’s emitted into the atmosphere. The U.S. Department of Energy expects 1 million tons of carbon dioxide from the plant to be injected over a three-year period, beginning in early 2010. The project is intended to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that contributes to global warming.
Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium receives Phase III funding Storage, Feb 21 2008 (Carbon Capture Journal)
– The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), and the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) have been awarded a $66.7 million contract from the US DOE.
The funding is to conduct a Phase III large-scale sequestration demonstration project in the Mt. Simon Sandstone.
The MGSC, ISGS, and Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) will work together on this carbon sequestration project, which will involve the capture and storage of CO2 from ADM’s ethanol plant in Decatur, Illinois.
The $84.3 million project will be funded by $66.7 million from the U.S. Department of Energy over a period of seven years, supplemented by cofunding from ADM, Schlumberger Carbon Services, and other corporate and state resources.
The project is designed to confirm the ability of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, a major regional saline reservoir in Illinois, to accept and store 1 million metric tonnes of CO2 over a period of three years.
:}
Already they are a year behind..Why does this sound like a replay of NUCLEAR Power. Delays….Cost over runs….Accidents… All to avoid leaving the nasty stuff in the ground in the first place. Even Scientific America gets into the act:
OXYFUEL: In September 2007 the oxyfuel combustion chamber is lifted into place at the Schwarze Pumpe power plant in Germany–one of the first power plants in the world to capture carbon dioxide. Courtesy of Vattenfal
Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of five features on carbon capture and storage, running daily from April 6 to April 10, 2009.
Like all big coal-fired power plants, the 1,600-megawatt-capacity Schwarze Pumpe plant in Spremberg, Germany, is undeniably dirty. Yet a small addition to the facility—a tiny boiler that pipes 30 MW worth of steam to local industrial customers—represents a hope for salvation from the global climate-changing consequences of burning fossil fuel.
To heat that boiler, the damp, crumbly brown coal known as lignite—which is even more polluting than the harder black anthracite variety—burns in the presence of pure oxygen, a process known as oxyfuel, releasing as waste both water vapor and that more notorious greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2). By condensing the water in a simple pipe, Vattenfall, the Swedish utility that owns the power plant, captures and isolates nearly 95 percent of the CO2 in a 99.7 percent pure form.
That CO2 is then compressed into a liquid and given to another company, Linde, for sale; potential users range from the makers of carbonated beverages, such as Coca-Cola, to oil firms that use it to squeeze more petroleum out of declining deposits. In principle, however, the CO2 could also be pumped deep underground and locked safely away in specific rock formations for millennia.
From the International Energy Agency to the United Nations–sanctioned Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), such carbon capture and storage (CCS), particularly for coal-fired power plants, has been identified as a technology critical to enabling deep, rapid cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. After all, coal burning is responsible for 40 percent of the 30 billion metric tons of CO2 emitted by human activity every year.
“There is the potential for the U.S. and other countries to continue to rely on coal as a source of energy while at the same time protecting the climate from the massive greenhouse gas emissions associated with coal,” says Steve Caldwell, coordinator for regional climate change policy at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, a Washington, D.C. think tank.
Even President Barack Obama has labeled the technology as important for “energy independence” and included $3.4 billion in the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for “clean coal” power.
Today three types of technology can capture CO2 at a power plant. One, as at Schwarze Pumpe, involves the oxyfuel process: burning coal in pure oxygen to produce a stream of CO2-rich emissions. The second uses various forms of chemistry—in the form of amine scrubbers, special membranes or ionic liquids—to pull carbon dioxide out of a more mixed set of exhaust gases. The third is gasification, in which liquid or solid fuels are first turned into synthetic natural gas; CO2 from the conversion of the gas can be siphoned off.
:}
Then there is this:
ckmapawatt at 10:27 PM on 04/06/09
NO, NO, NO. Carbon Capture and Storage is not the answer! It is treating the symptoms and not the disease.
I recently wrote a blog looking at this same issue:
http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/03/13/carbon-capture-and-storage/Basically, we can take BILLIONS and spend it on burying something underground, or we can spend that money and put it to good use while taking the same amount of CO2 out of the air.
Carbon Capture is short term decision making and thinking that is mainly being promoted by the Coal Industry. Would you really call Carbon Capture a sustainable practice?
(Disclaimer: the below article is a thought experiment. I’m not suggesting it as a real solution, but rather a way to analyze two different carbon mitigating strategies. Enjoy!)
You might have seen the environmental articles recently related to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Basically, all CCS does is take the CO2 that coal plants produce, collect it, and pump it underground. Sounds like a good idea right? Well, on the surface it does, but let’s dig down into the actual numbers a little bit.
In order to better understand the proposed function of CCS, let’s walk through a comparison of a power generation plant with and without CCS. I’m going to look at two options:
Option 1: 500 MW (capacity before CCS) IGCC (type of coal plant) with Carbon Capture and Storage
Option 2: 500 MW IGCC plant with the money that would be used on CCS to be spent on a wind farm
In comparing our two options, pretend you’re the President of Power Generation Company for planet Earth (this is a made up company. The point is you base your decisions on what is best for the planet and the people buying your power. You don’t base your decisions on politics). In both options the 500 MW IGCC plant is already installed, you are just comparing whether to spend money on carbon capture and storage, or take the equivalent amount of money and use it for another purpose that would help the environment, in this case a wind farm.
You may ask: Why do I want to install a wind farm if my goal is to reduce CO2 (even though your real goal is to do what’s best for Earth)? Because you are all powerful, you are going to figure out how much energy the wind farm produces, then find an old dirty coal plant that produces the same amount of energy, and take that coal plant off line. Therefore, reducing the amount of CO2 that enters the atmosphere by enabling the old coal plant to be taken off line, and also helping wind power reach economies of scale.
Installing CCS or a Wind Farm that replaces old Coal:
A recent paper by David and Herzog at MIT estimated the future cost of CCS at $1,145/kw (estimated cost in 2012) of installed power. So, for the 500 MW IGCC plant, it would cost $572.5 million dollars to install CCS technology. Now, you have the option of taking this money and using it to buy a Wind Farm instead. The American Wind Energy Association states that it costs about $ 1 million to install 1 MW of generating capacity for a wind farm. Therefore, $572.5 million will enable you to install 572 MW of installed wind energy (with $500 k left over)!
In order to analyze how much CO2 will be kept out of the atmosphere by taking the old coal plant off line, we have to calculate the yearly power output of the wind farm. To do this, you need what is called a Capacity Factor. Basically, this is just the percentage of time during the year that a power producing facility produces power at its rated capacity. The organization National Wind Watch states that in 2003, the average capacity factor for US wind farms was 26.9%. Therefore, to calculate how much energy the wind farm produces (MWh) during the year:
Yearly Output (MWh) = (installed capacity)*(capacity factor)*(hours in a day)*(days in a year) =
Now we have to use this value to decide how big a coal plant this would replace. Using the wind farm yearly output and the average capacity factor for Coal plants in the US, which is 73.6%, we can use the above Yearly Energy Output equation to back-solve for the “installed capacity” the wind farm would replace:
Installed Capacity (MW) = (yearly output) ÷ (Capacity factor * hours in a day * days in a year) =
(1,347,884) ÷ (.736*24*365) = 209 MW
Therefore, if you use the $527.5 million dollars it would cost to install CCS on a 500 MW IGCC coal plant for a wind farm, the energy the wind farm produces is equivalent to a 209 MW pulverized coal plant!
To sum up and add some odd thoughts that do not fit well anywhere else. The reason that eating locally beginning with growing your own vegetables is that the corporate farms ship food around the world. Raspberries from Chile, Peppers to China, and Bananas from Central America…Not to mention coffee from everywhere. All this takes incredible amounts of energy, to the point where we are literally drinking oil. This is just wrong. I could go on about how, it is good for you and tons of other stuff but this column’s about energy.
Cod caught off Norway is shipped to China to be turned into filets, then shipped back to Norway for sale. Argentine lemons fill supermarket shelves on the Citrus Coast of Spain, as local lemons rot on the ground. Half of Europe’s peas are grown and packaged in Kenya.
In the United States, FreshDirect proclaims kiwi season has expanded to “All year!” now that Italy has become the world’s leading supplier of New Zealand’s national fruit, taking over in the Southern Hemisphere’s winter.
Food has moved around the world since Europeans brought tea from China, but never at the speed or in the amounts it has over the last few years. Consumers in not only the richest nations but, increasingly, the developing world expect food whenever they crave it, with no concession to season or geography.
The creation and implementation of the Department of Homeland Security has intensified the quest to make the nation’s food supply more secure.
That effort along with consumer demand is encouraging the development of an alternative agricultural economy, one that is less dependent upon imports.
Advocates of the local food movement argue that sourcing food grown closer to home would avoid the potential of terrorist contamination.
They also note a more intensive local food economy would conserve much of the massive amount of energy that is currently expended to transport food.
A visit to the local Midwest grocery store which sells tangerines from South Africa, apples from New Zealand, boxes of bananas from Costa Rica and asparagus from Mexico confirms it is truly a global marketplace.
Even for grapes grown in the U.S., the produce can still be trucked hundreds of miles to Midwest or East Coast markets.
:}
If you have extra produce donate it to the local foodbank:
We have all been there. Our little garden produces great big yields, more than we can use. You have canned all your
pantry (and you) can handle, and
given away enough that your family and neighbors hide when you come to their door with vegetables.Do not let that last fresh produce spoil! Donate it to your local food bank!
Call your local food bank and ask if it takes fresh produce donations. If so, find out on what days and times. If not, ask if they have the number of a local charity that does. Times are hard all over, with prices rising like they are, and we can each do a little to help. Believe it or not, it adds up and can truly make a great difference in someone’s life.
Pick your produce fresh the day you plan to deliver it. Wash it well. Pick through and discard spoiled pieces or parts. Place your produce in containers that will be easy to lift and carry. If you can leave the containers, it will save time for the charity volunteers and you. With a permanent magic marker write your name, address, and phone number on the bottom to identify your baskets.Many food banks will hold onto your containers and give them back empty when you stop in again.
:}
If you have extra produce, sell it or barter it at a local Farmer’s Market:
Should You Sell Your Extra Produce at a Farmers’ Market?
7/2/2008
By Andy Larson
Small Farms Specialist
Iowa State University Extension
We are approaching that time of year when Iowa home gardeners have more tomatoes, green beans and zucchini than they can use. The recent buzz about local foods makes you wonder, “Could I make a few bucks selling my extra produce at a farmers’ market?”
The answer may not be as simple as you think…
The number of farmers’ markets has skyrocketed, but few markets are so loosely organized that they allow anyone with a vehicle and a table to sell food. Most markets are administered by a market association with a market master who can provide rules as well as a vendor application.
Market documents should detail
hours and season of operation,
what kind of vendors may sell and whether they may sell only products they produce,
what types of products may be sold,
necessary permits or licenses required, and
the schedule of fees.
Guidelines are established with the safety of the customer and the character of the farmers’ market in mind.
Occasional selling at farmers’ market
Some markets have daily vendor rates. There are a few things to consider before spending six or seven hours of your weekend trying to sell excess produce.
I try to get to GreenMarket a couple times a week, but since I mostly only have nights free I don’t get to the farmer’s markets nearly as often as I’d like. I’m new to the city and am wondering if anyone knows of grocery stores (preferably in the East Village area, but not necessary) where I can buy local, organic produce and meats. The only local produce Whole Foods on 14th has right now is onions… Thanks for the help.
:}
Give it directly to the poor themselves. That’s right find a poor family and give it to them. OR go to a social service agency and have them match you up to a family.
ODDs and INS
Do not burn your YARD WASTE, including garden clutter! Please pretty please…
Seeds from last year – toss them in the river or by the roadside. Give them a chance to grow. I toss sunflower seeds in my compost pile and they go nuts all summer long.
Buy a good juicer and use it. No cooking and very little prep-time. Health. It is a no brainer.
Don’t forget the herbs. Open your pantry door and take out all of that rosemary, oregano, sage, thyme, parsley, cilantro, dumb garlic products, and many other herbs. Throw them on the compost pile. Fresh is BEST.
Every gardener gets to the point where the produce is overwhelming. I am not even talking about having more garden than you need. I mean I DO have more garden than I need BUT even one zucchini plant can fill a bushel basket towards the end of the season. Even a few tomato plants can leave you with a pile every week. It is the damnedest thing too, you can’t give them away because everyone else has the same problem…well you caaaan give them away but more about that later because it is kinda beside the point.
We are planting this garden to save energy. That is because corporate america has forced a food system down our throats that literally has us drinking oil (processing and transportation) for inferior food products. The additives alone consume enough energy to power America for years. What does that have to do with my produce? Fall will fall and winter will set in and then where are you going to get your produce from? That’s right the freedom from the corporate foodchain evaporates as you trudge back to the store dreaming of those green beans you gave to your mom. Who love’s yah now baby? So we need a way to store this produce until we need it. Basically we have to combat rot:
Yes that is right just like poop, rot is stinky stuff that is hard work. But rot is our friend when it comes to poop on the garden and our compost pile. Rot here is bad though. There are many ways to combat food rot, that is to preserve the food until you need it later. You can dry, cook, or chill your food and that will slow down the mold and bacterial processes that degrade your food. Basically what we are talking about is securing the nutrients.
The Oldest method of preserving food is to dry it. This was brought home to me when my wife went mushroom hunting last spring. She took one of my string bags with her. Months later I used the bag for something else and this cute little morel fell out and hit the floor. It was perfectly preserved and hard as a rock. I guarantee that if I put it in water it would reconstitute a mushroom fit for cooking. The fancy pants phrase for taking the water out is dehydrating and the 37$ phrase for putting the water back is reconstituting or re-hydrating even worse. I prefer solar drying. The ingenuity of this is it is solar inputs (growing the food) and solar outputs (preserving the food). Not a drop of oil is spilled.There is a loss of nutritional value and taste/palatability in this or any preservation process, though there are some herbs that are actually better dried.
Drying is the oldest method of preserving food. The early American settlers dried foods such as corn, apple slices, currants, grapes, and meat. Compared with other methods, drying is quite simple. In fact, you may already have most of the equipment on hand. Dried foods keep well because the moisture content is so low that spoilage organisms cannot grow.
Drying will never replace canning and freezing because these methods do a better job of retaining the taste, appearance, and nutritive value of fresh food. But drying is an excellent way to preserve foods that can add variety to meals and provide delicious, nutritious snacks. One of the biggest advantages of dried foods is that they take much less storage space than canned or frozen foods.
Recommended methods for canning and freezing have been determined by research and widespread experience. Home drying, however, does not have firmly established procedures. Food can be dried several ways, for example, by the sun if the air is hot and dry enough, or in an oven or dryer if the climate is humid.
With the renewed interest in gardening and natural foods and because of the high cost of commercially dried products, drying foods at home is becoming popular again. Drying is not difficult, but it does take time and a lot of attention. Although there are different drying methods, the guidelines remain the same.
Although solar drying is a popular and very inexpensive method, Illinois does not have a suitable climate for it. Dependable solar dehydration of foods requires 3 to 5 consecutive days when the temperature is 95 degrees F. and the humidity is very low. The average relative humidity in central Illinois on days with 95 degrees F. temperatures is usually 86 percent. Solar drying is thus not feasible.
Home-food dehydrators fall into two categories: those with stackable trays, and those constructed of a rigid box with removable shelves. Size is a factor; most fit on a countertop, but larger models are free-standing and require more space. Some models have base-mounted fans that move hot air vertically; one has a rear-mounted fan for moving air horizontally; yet another uses convection drying, with no fan at all.
I put these four different models through their paces during the peak of the humid harvest season here in Iowa. Each dehydrator dried lots of herbs and vegetables with comparable ease, but the fleshy crops, like tomatoes and peaches, put the dehydrators to the ultimate test, determining their maximum capacity, efficiency and overall effectiveness.
(dotdotdot)
All of the dehydrators I tested have their appropriate applications, and all performed well under most conditions. Determine your needs, space limitations and budget before you buy. When it comes down to preserving food flavors and quickly drying fruits, vegetables and meats, especially when fully loaded and under humid conditions, the Excalibur Large Garden model won my highest praise. Its rear-mounted fan, in my experience, simply did the best job.
:}
There are some special concerns with fruit:
Food Drying Principles
Dehydrating your own produce does require time and some knowledge of food drying principles.
Preparation
Select the best fruit and vegetables! As with canning and freezing, dehydrated foods are only as good as the fresh fruit or vegetables. When selecting fruits and vegetables for dehydration, choose ones that are ripe, unbruised and at peak-eating quality.
Prepare foods to be dehydrated as you want them to be served. Apples, for example, may be sliced, cut into rings, or pureed for fruit leather.
Keep pieces uniform in size and thickness for even drying . Slices cut 1/8 to 1/4-inch in thickness will dry more quickly than thicker pieces.
Some foods should be washed before drying. Foods such as herbs, berries and seedless grapes need only be washed before dehydrating.
After Drying (for fruit only)
Allow dried FRUIT (not vegetables) time to “condition”: When dry, allow fruit to “condition” for four to 10 days before packaging for storage. The moisture content of home dried fruit should be about 20 percent. When the fruit is taken from the dehydrator, the remaining moisture may not be distributed equally among the pieces because of their size or their location in the dehydrator. Conditioning is the process used to equalize the moisture. It reduces the risk of mold growth.
To condition the fruit, take the dried fruit that has cooled and pack it loosely in plastic or glass jars.
Seal the containers and let them stand for 7 to 10 days. The excess moisture in some pieces will be absorbed by the drier pieces.
Shake the jars daily to separate the pieces and check the moisture condensation. If condensation develops in the jar, return the fruit to the dehydrator for more drying.
After conditioning, package and store the fruit as described below.
So you have your soil test back. Hopefully you have planted several plantings of your favorite stuff to eat so that they will continue to produce for as long as the weather will allow. In a totally fluke year I had some spinach that lasted for a year and well into the next spring.
It is time to start both improving your soil and planting your “main” crops. The soil test says that you “need something”. Now I am not going to cover all of the soil additives but usually there will be somekind of chemical deficiency. Here you run smack dab into your modern industrial farming dilemma. Don’t worry, this will only last for a year. At the end of World War II the world had a total surplus of explosives and poison gas. What to do? Well they converted the explosives to nitrogen fertilizer and they turned the poison gas into herbicides and pesticides. Farmers fell in love with them and well here we are no longer loving our food. NO2 (commonly called Nox) is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 It is estimated that when farmers fertilize there fields they castoff more greenhouses gases than the entire world’s transportation fleet:
“The public does not yet know much about nitrogen, but in many ways it is as big an issue as carbon, and due to the interactions of nitrogen and carbon, makes the challenge of providing food and energy to the world’s peoples without harming the global environment a tremendous challenge.”
The speaker is University of Virginia environmental sciences professor James Galloway (quoted in an AP piece), talking about his paper published (abstract here) in the latest Science.
According to Galloway, “We are accumulating reactive nitrogen in the environment at alarming rates, and this may prove to be as serious as putting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”
Nothing new here that I can tell at first glance. (I’d love to read the paper, but it’s password-protected.) I agree, though, that nitrogen’s role in climate change is way under-discussed.
The same issue of Science also contains an article about how synthesized nitrogen affects the oceans — specifically their role as greenhouse-gas sinks.
:}
So what to do about nutrients? Well it all comes down to crap. That’s right manure, excrement or poo. Not your’s. Though there is a case to be made for that, the small scale gardener is hard pressed to deal with human crap. In fact there are better fertilizers around. But lets take a step backwards, in the “old days” of sustainable farming the farmers had all kinds of animals, goats, cows, horses, mules, and chickens to name a few. They would collect this shit and straw from their animal’s housing and their yards and toss it in a pile. At the end of the growing season they would take all this manure and spread it on their field. Over winter it would break down. Then in the spring when they plowed they would turn it into the soil and “there you have it” fertile soil.
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION SERIES
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Agriculture & Natural Resources
EXTENSION ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, AUBURN UNIVERSITY, AL 36849-5647
Using Livestock Manure As Fertilizer
ANR-723, 1992. By Charles Mitchell,Extension Agronomist, Agronomy, Auburn University
Livestock manure is an excellent fertilizer for the soil, providing such nutrients as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Manure application can also benefit the soil’s water holding capacity and tilth. When using livestock manure, however, one should follow good management practices in order to avoid hazards to the crop and the environment. Sources Of Livestock ManurePoultry waste, cattle manure, and swine manure are all used as organic fertilizers in Alabama. They are all excellent sources for nutrients; however, nutrient compositions will vary among operations and over time. Users of manures from broiler houses, lagoons, or feedlots should have an idea of the total and available nutrient content before they are applied to land.Possible ProblemsBecause nitrate-nitrogen can leach into groundwater and both nitrogen and phosphorus can erode or runoff into streams, manure applications should be based strictly on the nutrient requirement of the crop. Therefore, the soil should be tested to determine nutrient needs for the crop to be grown.Good Management PracticesThe following precautions should be taken in order to prevent nutrient losses through leaching, erosion, and runoff:
Eliminate excessive applications.
Time applications appropriately, rotate crops,
and use winter cover crops. Apply manure when it will be utilized by the crop.
Incorporate or inject the applications into the
soil. Do not leave the manure on the soil surface.
Do not apply manure to steep slopes or during
periods prone to erosion and runoff.
Document the amounts and contents of material applied.
Protect soil from erosion.
Use filter strips or buffer zones between fields
and nearby streams
:}
So when I end my growing season, I take a couple of big tubs to a local animal farm and I get free poo and straw from the farmer. Take it to my garden and toss it on. Big draw backs? It’s hard work and it stinks. But so what? Why did I say that this will be a problem for you only a year? Well because you have started a compost pile (hint hint) and you have located a farmer (hint hint). What to do now for you though. Well, you can go get fertilizer for one year and tell yourself everyone has to start somewhere. Or you can buy composted manure. Here again you have be to careful. Transportation and its oil use is the real issue so read the labels. Buy the composted manured produced the closest to you. If you are lucky you can find some poo from your own state. Now, if you have started your seeds inside and it’s time to plant YOUR plants. Or if you depend on a garden center it’s time to plant THEIR plants. Try to stagger them just like you did for your early crops so that they will produce for the entire growing season.
Oh, and for awhile you maybe a standard “row” gardener but there are more efficient ways to use your land:
Photo Credit: Courtesy of Barbara Wilde, L’Atelier Vert,Everything French Gardening, frenchgardening.com
This juvenile bed in a French garden shows how closely young plants are crowded together in intensive planting.
Crowding a bunch of plants in a narrow plot might not seem like a good idea at first. After all, it runs counter to everything you’ve learned about gardening. But this specialized method of planting – called French intensive gardening – is actually a tried-and-true technique to maximize your harvest in a small space. Even if you’ve only got a tiny plot, you can get amazing results if you develop it properly.
As you might’ve guessed by its name, French intensive gardening evolved in Europe. Its purpose is to make the most of limited growing space. Known as “square-foot gardening” in the US, it’s also the preferred method of many growers who want extra produce for themselves or to share with friends and neighbors.
Plant a garden. You think I am kidding right. BUT if everyone on the planet who does not have a vegetable garden planted one, the world would change. Most products that you buy in the grocery store in America travel 1,500 miles…That’s a lot of gasoline products. All the produce, herbs and flowers you grow soak up carbon dioxide, especially sweet corn. Plus if you compost your garden waste you put that carbon directly into the soil where it will not be released. Plant a tree while you are at it. If all 7 billion people in the world planted a tree our problems would temporarily be over. Young trees soak up an incredible amount of carbon as they grow. Not to mention the health and well being benefits from working out doors and being away from modern stress inducers. Or the health benefits of eating good nutritious food. If you have kids teach them how to do it (it is no longer innate) and you will have passed along a valuable skill. Invest in an efficient refrigerator and a small efficient freezer to store your valuable products. This saves bunches too. If you are really adventurous invest in a dehydrator and a solar cooker or make your own. You save even more. By the time you are done heck you wlll amaze yourself at how much you have done. Seem impossible? NOPE, it starts with the first seed you plant. So lets get agrowing.
Getting Started:
Some of you are lucky to have year round growing conditions. As the world warms more of you will enjoy that perk. But where I live in Illinois it’s pretty much a 3 season affair. Today is March 6th and I plan on planting a row of peas and some lettuce and spinach. That will be dicey though and if we have an ice storm in April or early May it will be a wipe out. Such is life. If I get lucky I will be freezing sweet peas by the end of May. Here are some great sources for getting in the groove.
So you’ve decided to grow some veggies this year? Welcome to the club. Before you decide on what to grow or pick up a spade, you need to make some basic decisions about your garden’s location, size, and shape. Here are some things to consider.
Vegetables do best in full sun. You will get decent results with less than that, but in general strive for a site that gets at least six hours a day during the summer. Remember that sun patterns change dramatically with the seasons; a site that looks good in April may be too shady when the leaves come out.
Another factor to consider is proximity to your kitchen. You are more likely to check out your garden frequently if it is close to the house. My garden is maybe 30 feet from the kitchen door. When I need some parsley or mint, or maybe a few more tomatoes for a salad, it’s not a big deal to go out and get them.
If you have a choice, a flat area is better than a hilly one. A gently sloped site can work well, especially one that faces south or west.
What about water? You will most likely want a source close by, be it an outside tap, a rain barrel, or even a stream or pond.
Don’t despair if your lot is is very small. Even if you don’t see a way to create a separate garden area, you can probably tuck a couple of vegetable plants in somewhere: near the house or by the garage, perhaps. Or on the deck in containers.
Size and shape For a garden of moderate size, aim for 400 square feet (20×20) to 625 square feet (25×25). You’ll have enough space to grow several different crops, but not so much that you’ll be overwhelmed. If even that seems daunting, start small. You can always enlarge the space later.
Gardens are generally square or rectangular, but they don’t have to be. You may want a different configuration to take advantage of sun patterns, to work around boulders, or just for artistic reasons. The plants won’t care if they are arranged in straight lines or curves.
:}
Personally I pick any 10 x 20 ft area that is unshaded and jump in. Begginners should start smaller. But if you are going to grow peppers, squash, corn or tomatoes you need a lot of space. Just think, the bigger your garden the less grass to mow.
Gardening is not too complex. Almost all of us–probably in grade school–planted a seed in a cup of dirt, watered it, and watched it grow. But creating a garden that produces fresh food and flowers all season is not so elementary, especially to those who did not grow up gardening. So we’ve compiled this guide to the basics of organic gardening and the keys to success we’ve learned over the years. When you’re done reading, look at your thumb–you may see a tint of green that wasn’t there before.
No. 1 Plant Seeds
1. Make your bed. About three weeks before you are ready to plant, after the soil has dried so that it doesn’t clump when you pick up a fistful, sink a fork into the earth. Loosen it down to about 12 inches, add a half-inch layer of compost, and rake the surface of your garden until it has no weeds, dirt clumps, or big stones. Over the next three weeks, pull any weeds that come up. Raking and then letting the soil sit for a few weeks brings out weed seeds that were lurking in the soil.
For more information on garden beds, check out this article about raised beds and this video to see how to build a raised bed, or watch this video to see how to turn your lawn into a garden bed.
:}
I am not going to copy all of this stuff. go and read it yourself. If you have never done it before this is essential reading:
Taylorville Energy Center (TEC) is a proposed 500- to 525-megawatt clean coal power plant using an advanced technology called Hybrid Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (
The creation and implementation of the Department of Homeland Security has intensified the quest to make the nation’s food supply more secure. 
