Diabetes And Pollution – Another reason to save energy

I have tried to get people to save energy at home to save money. You always will. I have tried to get people to save energy to avert global warming. I have tried to get people to save energy to be modern. You know better appliances equals a better life. But now there is a health advantage as well.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/203295.php

Pollution Levels Constantly Linked To Diabetes Risk

rate icon Editor’s Choice
Main Category: Diabetes
Also Included In: Water – Air Quality / Agriculture
Article Date: 02 Oct 2010 – 10:00 PDT

Scientists have found compelling evidence of a link between adult diabetes and pollution levels – when particulate air pollution is higher, diabetes risk goes up, even after taking into account such factors as ethnicity and obesity rates, according to an article published in Diabetes Care. This study was carried out by researchers from Children’s Hospital Boston and Harvard Medical school. The study focused on adult diabetes prevalence, meaning diabetes Type 2.

The fact that higher pollution usually means more cars, which could mean less physical activity, which might lead to higher obesity levels, resulting in higher diabetes rates were factored into this study – in other words, the scientists found a direct link between pollution levels and diabetes risk, after taking into account these variables which may occur in high pollution areas.

This is one of the first large-scale population based studies to detect an association between diabetes rates and levels of air pollution, the authors write. It corroborates previous studies which found a link between higher insulin resistance and particulate exposure among laboratory mice.

The investigators concentrated their attention on fine particulates of 0.1 to 2.5 nanometers, or PM2.5, which is commonly found in motor vehicle exhaust fumes, haze and smoke.

John Pearson and John Brownstein, PhD, of the Children’s Hospital Informatics Program and team gathered data on PM2.5 pollution in every country in mainland USA (not including Alaska) from the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) for 2004 and 2005.

They combined the EPA information with data from the US Census and the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to establish adult diabetes rates, as well as adjusting for obesity, physical activity, geographical location, population density and ethnicity – known risk factors for diabetes.

:}

Clear the air and we are all healthier. More tomorrow.

:}

Cap And Trade Rises From The Ashes – It made it into the Senate

It’s Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ16hEpB_Sk

Conventional post election wisdom has the Cap and Trade legislation being declared dead. But, it is sitting in a Senate that the Democrats control. Will they bust it lose during the end of the year session. Who knows, but I think the issue will not go away so sooner or later something will have to be done. I mean Russia caught on fire. How much more does it take than that.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/4/clean-coal-is-as-dead-as-cap-and-trade/

MILLOY: Clean coal is as dead as ‘cap-and-trade’

Mitch McConnell had better study up on the election results

By Steve Milloy-The Washington Times

While we shouldn’t expect our left-wing elitist president to understand Tuesday’s electoral rejection of his “progressive” prescriptions for America, we should expect Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, to get it.

But Mr. McConnell seems to have missed the message, at least when it comes to “cap-and-trade” – odd for a coal-state politician. The day after the election, Mr. McConnell said, “The president says he’s for nuclear power. Most of my members are for nuclear power. The president says he’s for clean coal technology. Most of my members are for clean coal technology. There are areas that we can make progress on for the country.”

Aside from the canard of President Obama sincerely supporting nuclear power and the fact that Republicans ought to avoid the loaded and already co-opted-by-the-left word “progress,” so-called “clean coal” is a form of Obama-think – a discredited cap-and-trade concept that was more trap than sincere policy.

Some in the coal industry and some coal-burning electric utilities had been talked into supporting cap-and-trade, provided that taxpayers and ratepayers forked over billions (if not trillions) of dollars for so-called “carbon capture and sequestration” (CCS) – that is, burying utility carbon-dioxide emissions deep underground and hoping they stay there safely.

But to the extent that any so-called environmentalists paid any lip service to clean coal and CCS, it was only to lure coal and utility suckers into cap-and-trade. Does anyone really believe, after all, that the greens would allow utilities to inject underground billions of tons of highly pressurized carbon dioxide all over the nation? They fought tooth-and-nail, after all, to prevent the storage of sealed casks of spent nuclear fuel one mile underground in the Nevada desert.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm-pFqdqcZY&feature=related

Which would they prefer, a tax on carbon? This guys lists all the reasons for cap and trade mechanisms to be set up by the Federal Government and heavily policed by the Federal Government. Nonetheless he likes carbon taxes because they supply more stability. But his belief that it won’t be passed on to the customer is asinine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSJdjb6K5i4&feature=fvw

:}

http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/cap-and-trade-legislation/810

Cap and Trade Legislation is Fatally Flawed

My First Ever Mea Culpa

By Nick Hodge
Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

We may never see cap and trade in this country.

Those are words I never thought I’d write.

In fact, I’ve been touting the benefits of a cap and trade market since 2007. But new ideas, unraveling facts, and recent events have changed my thinking.

So today, I’m publishing my first ever mea culpa.

Cap and Trade Legislation is Fatally Flawed

My First Ever Mea Culpa

By Nick Hodge
Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

We may never see cap and trade in this country.

Those are words I never thought I’d write.

In fact, I’ve been touting the benefits of a cap and trade market since 2007. But new ideas, unraveling facts, and recent events have changed my thinking.

So today, I’m publishing my first ever mea culpa.


Carbon Should Still be Priced

To be clear, I’m not saying that carbon shouldn’t have a price. By all means, it should.

What I’m saying is that cap and trade isn’t the way to implement it.

At the end of the day, carbon dioxide is a harmful waste product that needs to be handled. Companies don’t get free passes for treating and disposing of other waste streams their businesses generate. Why should carbon be any different?

Not charging companies for emitting carbon is giving them free reign over something they cannot and will not ever own: the atmosphere.

We don’t let companies freely dump waste into rivers or lakes… We don’t allow companies to dump waste in forests… So why, then, are we still letting companies dump a known pollutant into the atmosphere unchecked?

This is why everyone speaks of how cheap coal is. It’s not really that cheap, we just don’t include the price of carbon in its costs.

Carbon isn’t a business externality — meaning, companies that produce it can shift the cost to society — and it can no longer be treated as such.

The Trouble with Cap and Trade

:}

You can go to the article for the rest. I personally support a carbon tax. But I have always said that Cap and Trade is what we get because high finance wants it that way. More Monday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdAhR-c–20&feature=related

:}

Amish Space Heaters Are Fraud, Edin Pure Heaters Are Fraud, and Ultraviolet Heaters Are Fraud

The reason that the title is true is that they charge like 500 percent too much money. I don’t care what Bob Vila says modern 40 $$$ electric heaters are not dangerous and have temperature controls. So why don’t all of these people go to jail? Well, for one, they change their companies’  names every year so they are hard to track down. But there is an argument in the energy efficiency community about what constitutes saving energy, ie. saving money.

http://www.buyenergyefficient.org/energyefficientspaceheater.html

Energy efficient space heater

Click here to see our selection of energy efficient space heaters.

Overview
Energy efficient space heaters are one of the best ways to cheaply lower your heating bill.  According to US Government statistics, the average American spends $1,900 per year for home energy of which nearly half goes to heating and cooling.  Space heaters can help lower this bill.  Here is the fundamental information you need to make the correct choice for your situation.

Potential Savings

By lowering your home thermostat only 5 degrees and employing the use of energy efficient space heaters in frequently used rooms you can lower your heating cost by 10% and eliminate 800 pounds of C02 emissions from the environment.  Space heaters will re-warm your space for a fraction of the cost associated with running the central heating.  But, to make sure you get the most savings, you have to select the space heater that is right for you and your home.  Numerous choices exist including Convection, Micathermic, Ceramic, Radiant, Kerosene, Wood Burning and Gas.  With so many choices, we recommend doing your research before making a purchase.   No one choice is the correct choice.  It will depend on your needs as to what the correct type of space heater is best for you.

Factors to Consider

The first, and obvious factor, is temperature.  You will probably want to exclude any that don’t have automatic temperature control as the space you are attempting to heat will either be too hot or too cool and you will constantly have to be monitoring the unit and turning it on or off.  This is both uncomfortable and time consuming.

Everyone is well aware of the effect of temperature on comfort.  However, the second, and less discussed component of comfort is relative humidity.  Relative humidity is the percent of water vapor in the air at a specific humidity.  In simple terms, a dry house with 20 percent relative humidity will need a higher temperature to feel as warm as a home with medium humidity of 60 percent.  That is because your body is giving up heat by the process of evaporation.  The lower the relative humidity the faster your body gives up this heat as the higher moisture of your body evaporates to the atmosphere.

A third factor to consider is wind speed.  As the air in your house moves it affects the rate at which your body gives up its heat.  This is due to the process of convection which is the attraction of hot air to colder air.  A house in which the heat is constantly running feels cooler.  This is one of the reasons the old steam style radiant heaters felt so warm.  There is little wind speed when compared to a centralized blower.  It’s also the reason a fan feels so good in the summertime.

:}

http://www.nlcpr.com/Deceptions4.php

Deceptive and Overpriced
Radiant Space Heater Scams

There are a number of companies selling electric heaters that imply that you will save a great deal of money, some even claim you will cut your costs by 50%. This is extremely misleading. It is sort of like claiming “Save 100% on your heating bills*” where * = “don’t turn it on”. It isn’t a fraud, but is certainly misleading.

Examples are EdenPure, iHeater, so called Amish heaters, the chinese made Heat Surge Roll-n-Glow (their marketing material is the most honest of the bunch).

All portable electric heaters consume electricity and degrade it into heat. All are 100% efficient for one obvious reason. The heat has nowhere else to go except into the room. Anyone that makes a claim otherwise, especially outrageous ones like “10x more efficient than a space heater”, is making a fraudulent claim.

In the images below, cut from an advertisement by Krystal Planet, we see some typical claims — let’s examine them:

a) no combustion, flames or fumes.This is true of all electric appliances,including your coffee maker unless something is terribly wrong.

b)less electricity than a coffee maker. If this is true, then it will give off less heat than your coffee maker. Can you heat your house with a coffee maker? If you can, I’d like to hear about it 🙂

c)Does not dry out the air. Of course not. Electric heaters never dry out the air. How could they? Where would the water go? No matter how you heat up the air in a room, the warmer air can hold more moisture so the relative humidity will go down — unless you want to use a humidifier, vaporizer or keep the kettle boiling on the stove.

d) healthy comfortable infrared heating. Infrared is radiated heat, like you get from a heat lamp or the sun. The product details below imply that the heat source is four 375W heat lamps, but if they are inside the wooden looking box in the picture, then they are not shining on you. They would heat the box and the box in turn would heat the air nearby, which is called convection.

:}

So do they make a natural gas space heater that is safe to use indoors?  I have no idea. More tomorrow.

:}

10 – 10 – 10 And CES – We help Starhill Forest Arboretum

Loading up the greenhouse was a lotto work but a lotto fun. The Burgoo was pretty good too.

Though you can’t really tell, this green house is stuffed. It took us 3 hours of steady work to get er done. Then we had a great Burgoo at their picnic table on the south face of the hill.

:}

More Tomorrow

:}

CES And 10 10 10 – Starhill Forest Arboretum’s greenhouse is full

CES’ volunteers went to Starhill Forest Arboretum to help fill up its greenhouse.

http://www.starhillforest.com/

Guy supervised us.

We started with stuff like this.

And ended with this.

:}

More tomorrow

:}

White House Goes Solar – Finally after they refused earlier efforts

There answer in September was NO!

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/white-house-spurns-solar-panel/


September 10, 2010, 11:54 am

White House Spurns Solar Panel

By JOHN M. BRODER

:}

The answer in October is YES! Wonder what changed?

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/122559-solar-panels-heading-to-white-house-roof

White House roof to get solar panels

By Ben Geman – 10/05/10 10:06 AM ET

The Obama administration on Tuesday announced plans to install solar panels on the White House roof.

“This project reflects President Obama’s strong commitment to U.S. leadership in solar energy and the jobs it will create here at home,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu in a statement. “Deploying solar energy technologies across the country will help America lead the global economy for years to come.”

The action highlights Obama’s support for low-carbon energy at a time when environmentalists are smarting from the collapse of climate legislation — a bill that was not the top White House priority.

Chu and White House Council on Environmental Quality Chairwoman Nancy Sutley announced the plan Tuesday at CEQ’s GreenGov symposium hosted by George Washington University.

The Energy Department-led project will install two White House solar systems — one that converts sunlight into electricity, and a solar hot water heater for the White House residence.

:}

More tomorrow

Illinois Solar Tour Oct. 3RD – Wish I could give you more

But the links don’t work so well. The place in Springfield is the FitClub Gym.

http://www.illinoissolar.org/

10/2/10:
The Illinois Solar Energy Association (ISEA) is hosting a Solar Tour where home owners and businesses across the state welcome visitors to explore how to use renewable energy systems to reduce utility bills while minimizing the environmental impact of their buildings. If you’re interested in learning more about the practical application of solar power check out the ISEA website for locations and more information.

Solar Tour Website:http://tour.illinoissolar.org/

To find the location of an open house near you click here:http://tour.illinoissolar.org/directory-of-buildings

If you have questions contact Lesley McCain atLesley.McCain@CommunityEnergyInc.com

Illinois Solar Tour
October 2, 2010
10 am – 3 pm
FREE
Interested in renewable energy and have questions?  Then this is the place to start learning.

:}

More next week.

:}

Louisiana Environmental Action Network’s Fundraiser Tomorrow

I hope everyone who can go will go…

:}

Please join us at a special screening of the film:

SOLA Louisiana Water Stories
with
filmmaker Jon Bowermaster

and a


Louisiana Art Show
featuring:

Rhea Gary
CC Lockwood
Jeffrey Dubinsky
Jerry Moran
Kyle Jeffrey
Natalie Clay

Stefan Andermann

…and more!


First 50 people will receive a FREE DVD of a Jon Bowermaster film!

and
Live Louisiana Music
too!

at the
Manship Theater


September 24, 2010


Gallery opens at 6:00 p.m. – Film starts at 7:00 p.m.

SOLA, Louisiana Water Stories

The event will take place on September 24, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. at the Manship Theater in Baton Rouge. For more information go to:


SaveOurGulf.orgVisit SaveOurGulf.org to get more information about the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster from Waterkeeper organizations across the Gulf Coast and donate to Save Our Gulf!

:}

:}

More Tomorrow

:}

Foam Roofs – They’re better than tar and gravel

This is so cool in so many ways. No heat absorption. High insulation values. Walkable. Why would anybody do anything else.

http://www.getwithgreen.com/2007/11/11/roofing-looking-for-an-eco-friendly-alternative-for-a-flat-roof/

ROOFING: Looking for an eco-friendly alternative for a flat roof?

November 11 2007

Do you have a flat roof, or an area of your roof that is flat?   Some of us do, and when you talk to almost any roofer they will give you standard options such as tar and gravel, or large asphalt sheets.  Both of which are not good for decreasing urban heat.   Well there is an option that is a bit greener.  Foam.  Yes a foam roof.

Cedric, and his wife Mai, in Redwood Shores, CA, recently installed their foam roof as an alternative to tar and gravel.  Using a product from Sierra Spray Foam Roofing the couple simply removed the gravel from their existing room, and applied the foam product from Sierra Spray.

spray foam green roof spray foam green roof alternative
OLD ROOF                                                              NEW ROOF

GetWithGreen.com does not know the chemical breakdown (environmental friendliness) of the actual foam contents itself, or its sustainability, but we like the other eco-friendly positives that Cedric and Mai talk about in their blog:

  • We didn?t need to rip out the existing roof, just to remove the gravel
  • The roof is white so it is a ?cool roof?, keeping our house cooler in summer and avoiding the ?urban heating? effect of dark roofs
  • The foam material provides both water-protection and insulation, thus improving the energy efficiency of our house
  • In 10 to 15 years when the roof needs to be redone, we simply need to add another layer of foam to give it another 10 to 15 years of life!

Cedric also tells GetWithGreen.com that the insulation value of the foam roof is extremely high because there is no air circulation at all — the whole roof is one piece.  The effective insulation of this roof is much higher than equivalent R value using traditional technologies that let some air circulate at the junctions between the insulation boards.   The roof can also be walked on.

Pricing:  $6 per square foot

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Cleanest Places In The World – This one the US did not make

Not even close which as it should be. But when they picked the worst, they picked all third world countries. I mean really. Unless you have money no one wants to live in a  third world country. What is the point? Also much of the pollution there is created by US corporations one way or another. Anyway.

http://blisstree.com/live/cleanest-and-greenest-places-in-the-world-71/

Thursday, October 25, 2007 – 12:54 am ET

Cleanest and Greenest Places In The World

By: Noel

I delved deeper into the study done by Reader’s Digest as I have talked about in my previous post. After all, come the day I decide to go live in another country, I would certainly want to live in somewhere green.

As per the authors of the study, they said, “It’s an inescapable fact: People living in affluent countries tend to be better educated, enjoy a higher standard of living, live longer lives and have a brighter future. The downside: Their material wealth results in a larger carbon footprint.”

Anyhow, here are some of the top ten lists that you may want to know about as per the results of the study.

10 best countries

  1. Finland
  2. Iceland
  3. Norway
  4. Sweden
  5. Austria
  6. Switzerland
  7. Ireland
  8. Australia
  9. Uruguay
  10. Denmark

:}

Read more there. More here next week.

:}