It is a pretty Bird:
Still the tree it hangs out in is pretty bizare
Well, it’s not the bird thats weird it’s the tree it was in
Reply
Category Archives: fossil fuels and the United States’ Future
An Inconvenient Truth Wins In Court – New Party Wackos Lose Again
Al Gore wins again. The British Court has ruled that the science does support the “broad claims” of An Inconvenient Truth. There goes another one of Rush Limbaugh’s notorious lies. So much for the “11 massive flaws” in Al Gore’s arguements. Still should it be shown in public schools? I have my doubts which I will express tomorrow. But for now I’ll just bask in the glow…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/11/climatechange?gusrc=rss&feed=8
Gore’s climate film has scientific errors – judge
· Court rules documentary can be shown in schools
· Presentation is ‘broadly accurate’ but lacks balance
-
- The Guardian,
- Thursday October 11 2007
Al Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, was yesterday criticised by a high court judge who highlighted what he said were “nine scientific errors” in the film.
Mr Justice Barton yesterday said that while the film was “broadly accurate” in its presentation of climate change, he identified nine significant errors in the film, some of which, he said, had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration” to support the former US vice-president’s views on climate change.
The film was broadly welcomed by environmental campaigners and scientists on its release last year, and while they did point out that it contained mistakes, these were relatively small and did not detract from the film’s central message – that global warming was a real problem and humans had the technology to do something about it.
The judge made his remarks when assessing a case brought by Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor and a member of a political group, the New party, who is opposed to a government plan to show the film in secondary schools.
The judge ruled that the film can still be shown in schools, as part of a climate change resources pack, but only if it is accompanied by fresh guidance notes to balance Mr Gore’s “one-sided” views. The “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change, he said.
The judge also said it might be necessary for the Department of Children, Schools and Families to make clear to teachers some of Mr Gore’s views were not supported or promoted by the government, and there was “a view to the contrary”.
He said he had viewed the film and described it as “powerful, dramatically presented and highly professionally produced”, built around the “charismatic presence” of Mr Gore, “whose crusade it now is to persuade the world of the dangers of climate change”.
The mistakes identified mainly deal with the predicted impacts of climate change, and include Mr Gore’s claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting in either west Antarctica or Greenland “in the near future”.
The judge said: “This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore’s ‘wake-up call’.” He accepted that melting of the ice would release this amount of water – “but only after, and over, millennia.”
Despite his finding of significant errors, Mr Justice Barton said many of the claims made by the film were supported by the weight of scientific evidence and he identified four main hypotheses, each of which is very well supported “by research published in respected, peer-reviewed journals and accords with the latest conclusions of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change].”
The nine points: fact or fallacy?
· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls “are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming” – but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring
· It spoke of global warming “shutting down the ocean conveyor” – the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was “very unlikely” that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down
· Mr Gore had also claimed – by ridiculing the opposite view – that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed “an exact fit”. The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, “the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts”
· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established
· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: “It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from … population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability”
· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was “insufficient evidence to show that”
· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned “swimming long distances to find the ice”. The judge said: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm”
· The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult
· The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was “distinctly alarmist”
· This article was amended on Friday October 12 2007. A panel in the article above listing the significant errors found by a high court judge in Al Gore’s documentary on global warming was labelled The nine points, but contained only eight. The point we omitted was that the film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was “distinctly alarmist”. The missing point has been added.
- Contact us |
- Print |
- Clip |
- Share | Email
Help, The House Is Burning Down
We Maybe In More Trouble Than We Thought!
U.N.: 2006 set record
for green house gases
By ELIANE ENGELER
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
GENEVA—Two of the most important greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere reached a record high in 2006, and measurements show that one — carbon dioxide — is playing an increasingly important role in global warming, the U.N. weather agency said Friday.
The global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization, said Geir Braathen, a climate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.
Methane, the third of the three important greenhouse gases, remained stable between 2005 and 2006, he said.
Braathen said measurements show that C02 is contributing more to global warming than previously. CO2 contributed 87 percent to the warming effect over the last decade, but in the last five years alone, its contribution was 91 percent, Braathen said. “This shows that C02 is gaining importance as a greenhouse gas,” Braathen said.
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the.atmosphere rose by about, which is a quarter percent higher than in 2005. Braathen said it appears the upward trend will continue at least for a few years half a percent last year to reach 381.2 parts per million, according to the agency. Nitrous oxide totaled 320.1 parts per billion
The World Meteorological Organization’s annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin provides widely accepted worldwide data on the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Studies have shown that human-produced carbon dioxide emissions heat the Earth’s surface and cause greater water evaporation. That leads to more water vapor in the air, which contributes to higher air temperatures. C02, methane and N20 are the most common greenhouse gases after water vapor, according to the meteorological organization.
They are produced by natural sources, such as wetlands, and by human activities such as fertilizer use or fuel combustion. There is 36.1 percent more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than there was in the late 18th century, primarily because of combustion of fossil fuels, the World Meteorological Organization bulletin said.A report presented by a U.N. expert panel said last week that average temperatures have risen 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 100 years, and that 11 of the last 12 years have been among the warmest since 1850. Global Warming also led to a sea level increase by an average seven-hundredths of an inch per year since 1961, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.The panel’s report, which said human activity is largely responsible for global warming, noted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is far higher than the natural range over the last 650,000 years.
Page 33
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Tim Landis,
business editor: 788-1536 _ tim.landis@sj-r.com
Springfield, Illinois
Urgent Alert..Like this will catch us up with Europe Japan and Australia..But everyone is certainly up in arms so..
URGENT ACTION ALERT!!
Call your Senators Friday for a Strong Energy Bill!
Dear Diane,
Our threatened climate and your children, born and unborn, need you to take action NOW, right now, sometime Friday, December 7th! The word from Capitol Hill is that the U.S. Senate may vote on the energy bill by as early as Friday evening.
You can call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or look up their direct phone number here .
You can use this sample script: “Hello, I’m ___________, and I’m calling to urge that Senator ________ oppose efforts to prevent the energy bill from coming to the Senate floor for a vote and support the use of our tax dollars for renewable energy, not subsidies for fossil fuels. For the good of our economy, our pocketbooks and the environment, we want the House energy bill to be passed now.”
This afternoon the House of Representatives passed a good energy bill by a 235-181 vote. Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club, described it this way:
“It is a bill of firsts: the first increase in fuel economy standards in more than three decades, the first national requirement for renewable energy…and the first energy bill to provide billions for clean energy instead of shoveling subsidies to Big Oil and other polluters. Instead of a pork-laden monstrosity tailored to the needs of the dirty energy industry, this bill will give us clean electricity, greener cars, provide billions for clean energy instead of Big Oil’s bottom line, strengthen our economy, make us more secure, and begin to address the challenge of global warming. It is a tremendous achievement for the Congress, but more importantly, it is a victory for the hardworking American families who are now suffering as a result of decades of failed energy policies.”
As you may know, I’ve been on a climate emergency fast since September 4th. Today is my 94th day without solid foods. The focus of this fast from day one has been to help stimulate grassroots pressure on Congress to get them to pass the strongest possible climate legislation. And it is happening!
But there’s a big hurdle, and that’s the planned filibuster by Senator Inhofe, dirty energy advocate and global warming denier number one. To get over that hurdle, we need 60 U.S. Senators willing to stand up for the right thing, willing to vote the right way, willing to follow their conscience and not bend to the demands of the dirty energy lobby.
Tomorrow needs to be a day the U.S. Senate never forgets. Their phones need to be ringing off the hook, hearing from all of us. Senators and presidential candidates Clinton, Obama, Biden and Dodd need to be in D.C. to vote — no excuses on an issue this important! Republican and Democratic Senators need to stand up for the Earth!
You can call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or look up their direct phone number at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm .
You can use this sample script: “Hello, I’m ___________, and I’m calling to urge that Senator ________ oppose efforts to prevent the energy bill from coming to the Senate floor for a vote and support the use of our tax dollars for renewable energy, not subsidies for fossil fuels. For the good of our economy, our pocketbooks and the environment, we want the House energy bill to be passed now.”
And please send this alert out widely to others who might be responsive.
Let’s make history this week! It’s time to act!
For future generations,
Ted Glick, coordinator, U.S. Climate Emergency Council
P.S. You can go to our website, http://www.climateemergency.org, for more information about the energy
The Energy Bill May Pass..Ok so everyone is real excited and the internet is a vibrating so I put this up but TGI(WB)F shall not be ignored!
 |
||||
|
 |
|
||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|||
Free Trade? Germany Does Meaningful Investment Instead.
Not only does Germany invest in energy efficiency at home and export those products, they invest in them abroad as well. What does the US invest in? War. What does the US export? Jobs and Poverty.
Post on Facebook Bookmark on Delicious Digg this Article
From: Paula Leighton, Science and Development Network
Published October 22, 2007 02:09 PM
Germany Supporting Chilean
Renewable Energy Efforts
RELATED ARTICLES
- Solar Power Demand to Soar in Coming Years
- Developing Nations Ripe for Wind, Solar Energy, U.N. Says
- Academies: We must address energy imbalance
- Ontario Plans Renewable Energy for 100,000 Homes
Santigo, Chile – The German government has pledged up to US$126 million to fund Chilean research into renewable energy and energy efficiency.
The Chilean minister of energy, Marcelo Tokman, announced the agreement during an official visit to Berlin, Germany, this month (10 October).
A spokesperson for Chile’s National Commission of Energy told SciDev.Net that the German government will donate US$11.5 million and lend up to US$114.5 million.
During the visit, Tokman also formally accepted an invitation for Chile to become one of the founder countries of the new International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
IRENA — an initiative led by Germany — aims to promote the use of renewable energy sources such as solar energy, wind power, regenerative biomass, wave and tidal power worldwide.
It will also support national energy planning, research centres and technology transfer, especially from industrialised nations to developing countries.
“The invitation to become a member of this agency is a recognition of the work the government is doing to boost sustainable energy development in Chile by promoting non-conventional renewable energies and energy efficiency,” said Tokman in a press release.
Chile is currently carrying out research into geothermal, solar and wind energy, especially in remote areas of the country. Most research and projects receive state subsides.
Chile’s first wind power park looks set to become part of the Chilean interconnected energy system by the end of this year.
Chile is exploring renewable energy such as solar powerChile’s National Commission of Energy says the country can expect wind power capacity to increase from 2 megawatts to over 100 megawatts by 2010.
A bill on renewable energies — waiting to be approved by the Chilean parliament — aims to increase renewable energy from its current level of 2.4 per cent to eight per cent of total energy production by 2020.
Germans Think of the Future, Americans Think in the Past
I forgot all about transparency and the web on Thursday. I write very few of these blogs myself. I take them from other sources, because there is so much written about energy and the environment, I have very little to add. I have written my own posts like the ones on Asimov, but they are not even 1% of the total posts. So to that end I always try to cite my sources and very openly post the sources web site here. Well Thurday I did a lousy job. I want to do more on German Energy Advancement but before I do I used this service to find that article:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1525/is_n1_v80/ai_16111823/pg_7
and the article was from the Sierra Club magazine:
For this I apologize. Also none of the articles links work…from now on I will try to be a better linker or at least delink what I can not support. This article is from:
IGNITING IDEAS
The High-Tech Strategy for Germany
http://www.hightech-strategie.de/en/201.php#top
Environmental Technologies –
Clear Water, Clean
Air, Fertile Soil
In contrast to the 1970s and 1980s when centre stage was given to aftercare environmental engineering – such as filter systems to keep air and water clean – environmental protection considerations are today increasingly being taken into account during the development phase. With this approach, natural resources are to be used efficiently and harmful effects on the environment are to be minimised throughout a product’s entire lifecycle.
At the same time, new environmental technologies offer economic benefits. Organic solvents pollute ground water and air, have to be separated and recovered – frequently with considerable energy input – and are also questionable in terms of occupational safety. Such solvents could, for example, be replaced in the future by supercritical fluids which – thanks to their easy-to-modify state of aggregation – are much easier to separate.The German environmental engineering sector – which includes the waste and water management industries and parts of the mechanical engineering and plant manufacturing field – employs some 1.5 million people today. At international level, German firms are particularly successful in the air pollution control, noise abatement and recycling fields.With its national sustainability strategy, the German government aims to reduce the air pollution load by 70 percent by the year 2010, double German industry’s energy efficiency and resource efficiency by the year 2020 and reduce land development from currently 100 hectares a day to 30 hectares a day. The German government has committed itself to reducing the emission levels of the six greenhouse gases cited in the Kyoto Protocol by 21 percent over 1990 levels by the period 2008 through 2012.These national sustainability goals cannot be achieved without cleaner and more efficient technology. German industry should therefore be helped with identifying and developing new R&D findings with environmental protection potential and applying them immediately in the domestic market. The German government aims to tap the global market for the German environmental engineering industry and to adapt technologies and know-how to local conditions in threshold and developing countries.
Progressively develop environmental technology for the domestic market
Economic and ecological targets can often be met simultaneously when a product’s entire life cycle is taken into account during the planning and production processes. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research funds collaborative projects in the manufacturing sector with a view to linking new research approaches with problems in actual practice.
Innovative environmental protection technologies such as self-healing surfaces and waste-free processes are a focus of surface technology and spill over into many sectors – from car manufacturing to the construction sector and furniture industry all the way to the shipbuilding industry. Surface technology has not however had a joint R&D platform because the field has a wealth of user industries and is therefore highly fragmented. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research is therefore planning a comprehensive research initiative for this area.
Bionics use nature as a source of inspiration for technology. In order to make it easier to translate creative ideas into products, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research is planning a new research campaign aimed at supporting work to develop such ideas to the stage where they are functioning demonstration models or production-ready prototypes.
The Ministry’s Research for Sustainability funding programme supports and funds the development of new environmental protection technologies.
Pilot projects create trust in the reliability of new technologies
In contrast to years past, when the focus of funding was on the retrofitting of systems and on downstream purification processes (so-called end-of-pipe technologies), financial assistance today is provided primarily for first use of new integrated environmental protection technologies, with priority being given to SMEs. The Environmental Innovation Programme of the Federal Ministry of Research and Development funds these industrial-scale pilot projects. These activities, which receive flanking technical support from the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), establish the prerequisites necessary for defining technical standards and establishing legally binding emission ceilings.
Use Germany’s strong domestic market as a springboard for tapping the global market
Sustainability in trade and industry is not just a German aim – it is also a European aim. For this reason, Germany has joined up with Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland and Spain in the ERA-NET Sustainable Enterprise (SUSPRISE) project to co-ordinate its national research activities aimed at fostering sustainable enterprises.
Export credit guarantees granted by the federal government (Hermes guaranties) are an important instrument for spurring foreign trade, including in the environmental technology field. The OECD member states agreed in 2005 to extend the maximum permissible terms for export credits for renewable energy and for water and waste-water projects to 15 years. With the new aval guarantee that was launched in 2006, the German government will cover a share of the third-party risk borne by the guarantor. This will substantially improve liquidity, particularly for small and medium-sized exporters. The Federal Environment Agency’s Internet portal at www.cleaner-production.de offers extensive information about the capabilities of German environmental technologies and services.
Protect the global water supply
Many threshold and developing countries suffer from an inadequate supply of drinking water and – particularly in megacities – from waste-water problems that can scarcely be handled. The development and sustainability goals adopted by the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000 include halving the proportion of the global population that has no access to safe drinking water or adequate sanitation services by the year 2015. This goal is a pressing humanitarian task. The development of the requisite water and waste-water infrastructure however also constitutes an enormous investment market.
The German government is supporting the development of an integrated water resource management (IWRM) system in numerous partner countries, particularly in the Middle East and Africa.
In addition to its development policy projects in this field – Germany is one of the world’s largest donors in the water sector – the Federal Ministry of Education and Research also funds the continued development of IWRM methods and approaches.
German and regional partners from research institutes, government agencies, engineering offices and the water industry participate in these projects.
The International Postgraduate Studies in Water Technologies fellowship programme has been set up to train German and foreign water specialists who, as future decision-makers in their home countries, could help develop the know-how urgently needed there. The networking this will generate between participants could facilitate the German water industry’s access to the growing water markets in threshold and developing countries.
The Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation and Development will offer funding for ten years for a Water Decade office at the University of the United Nations in Bonn as a step to support collaborative international research activities.
More Topics
Lower Pollution Levels Lead To A Vibrant Economy
Germany is a perfect example of how producing energy with no pollution (in many case no burning) leads to an economic expansion and creates new good paying jobs. Bush and the Republicans have been wrong all along. Nixon, Reagan and Bush oh my!
Green revolution in the making –
innovative German
environmental protection efforts
Sierra, Jan-Feb, 1995 by Curtis Moore
<< Page 1 Continued from page 6. Previous | Next
The cumulative effect of all these programs is to place Germany in a commanding position as nations beset with environmental problems search for ways to reduce pollution quickly and inexpensively. Thailand, for example, decided to install scrubbers on its coal-fired power plants after a single episode of air pollution in Mae Mo District sent more than 4,000 of its citizens to doctors and hospitals. Smog-bound Mexico City has been forced to implement emissions controls on cars and factories. Taiwan is even going so far as to require catalytic converters for motorcycles. Such mandates will almost inevitably benefit Germany because, as Harvard Business School economist Michael Porter explains, “Germany has had perhaps the world’s tightest regulations in stationary air-pollution control, and German companies appear to hold a wide lead in patenting–and exporting–air pollution and other environmental technologies.”
In the United States, however, where environmental standards were relaxed by a succession of Reagan/Bush appointees, often in the name of competitiveness, “as much as 70 percent of the air pollution control equipment sold…is produced by foreign companies,” according to Porter, whose 855-page study of industrial economies, The Competitive Advantage of Nations, examines the impact of environmental regulations on competitiveness.
Germany’s actions continue to contrast sharply with those of the United States, even under President Clinton, whom most environmentalists supported as the green answer to George Bush. Germany’s emissions limits on power plants and incinerators are 4 to 300 times more stringent than those of the United States. German companies that generate electricity from wind, solar, or other renewable forms of power are reimbursed at twice to three times U.S. levels. German recycling is mandatory, while American programs are usually voluntary where they exist at all.
Still, support for Germany’s environmental initiatives is by no means unanimous. Wolfgang Hilger, for example, the chairman of Hoechst, Germany’s largest chemical company, complained bitterly in 1991 that the government had lost all sense of proportion. He claimed that regulations had jeopardized 250 jobs at his company, and threatened it with a $100-million loss. But Hilger represents a minority view. Most German citizens and businesses remain convinced both that environmental protection is essential and that the technological innovation stimulated by stringent environmental requirements will, over the long term, strengthen their national productivity and competitiveness.
Tragically, U.S. political leaders continue to embrace the outmoded and false view that the environment can be protected only at the expense of the economy, when the truth is precisely the opposite. Meanwhile, products of American genius continue to depart for Japan, Germany, and other nations, only to be sold back to U.S. industry sometime in the future. So far, the homes-from-pollution process hasn’t traveled full circle back to its place of invention in the United States. But don’t be surprised if sometime soon you see a piece of wallboard being nailed into a new office or a remodeled home only to find it boldly emblazoned: “Made in Germany.”
What Do G.E. and Chevron have in Common besides being Environmental Pricks?
When you type “Hot Environmental Topics” into google search, they are the FIRST TWO websites that pop-up. I am not kidding! So I clicked on the first link. The contradictions are amazing:
http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/emergingenergy/
The page you go in at is all gushy about the future but when you click on their global warming page whoa does the corporate speak snap into play?
Q. What is Chevron’s position on The Kyoto Protocol?
A. The Kyoto Protocol assigns mandatory emission limits of greenhouse gasses to signatory nations. We support the intentions of Kyoto in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and respect the individual countries that have made the decisions to sign. However, while we support the global engagement that it envisions, we believe it focuses on signing up many countries rather than truly engaging the 10 – 12 critical emitting countries. Further, we think it asks for emission reductions that are too aggressive too quickly, given the technologies that are currently available. Finally, we don’t think the economic consequences are fully outlined.
Q. Does Chevron support measures such as California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32)?
A. In 2006, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act. The legislation seeks to cap California’s greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by 2020.
Again, we support the intentions of the state in reducing GHG emissions. But we believe that effective mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions can only occur at a global level, given that climate change is a global issue. This requires coordinated national frameworks, and fragmented actions by individual states have the potential for undue economic costs without effectively mitigating the climate change risk.
We have experience with state–by–state and region–by–region regulatory approaches, and these have not been favorable to consumers.
Bottomline “YOU CAN’T TELL US WHAT TO DO”
When you click on General Electric’s web site you get very pretty animated stuff. Do these guys have bucks or what?
http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/index.html?kw=environmental%20issues&c_id=environmental#home
But the first thing they offer up is CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY! Sorry Caz I wish I was a good enough blogger to put up the video but this is the link:
http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/index.html?kw=environmental%20issues&c_id=environmental#tampa
Everyone should ask google how this is possible? Especially after they announce that they are going to spend big bucks on clean energy production??????
Springfield Has A New Architectural Standard
A new standard has been set for any new buildings in Springfield and Central Illinois in general. While I think they should have included some generation capacity, its pretty good. Please see the specifications below:
Melotte Morse Leonatti, Ltd.
213’/2 South Sixth Street, Springfield, Illinois 62701-1502 (217)789-9515 FAX (217)789-9518
illinois municipal electric agency headquarters
building fact sheet
features:
• project team:
o owner: illinois municipal electric agency o architect: melotte morse leonatti, ltd. o engineer: eta engineers o contractor: o’shea builders
• prairie style influences• 2.5 acre lot, 75 stall parking lot• 33.OOO gross square feet• s-bay garage• 36 seat board room with integrated AV and voting, 25 seat gallery• executive conference facility with integrated AV & phone• 24/7/365 CONTROL CENTER IN 3,53O SQUARE FOOT TORNADO SHELTER (DESIGNED FOR
category F5 storms) with 72 hour generator backup
green features:
• alternative transportation (Bus rte, car pools, Low CO2 cars)• bicycle storage/shower
•—»- “cool” roofing/paving, light pollution reduction
• goal of 3o% water use reduction• building envelope 16% better than code• 10o% geoexchange (geothermal) heating/cooling:
o 82 tons capacity – 54 tons = bl_dg. 28 tons = data racks
o methalene solution in > 5o,ooo feet of polyethelene piping
o 1 1 high efficiency heat pumps — each heat pump a zone
o 6 loops (thermal exchange zones) of (1 2) 4″ diameter holes, 3oo feet deep
— reverse return system
o fossil fuel consumption = O at the building o energy savings: 84,601 kwh/year over similar water source heat pump
system. $6,10o estimated annual energy savings over conventional
system (as defined by ashrae 9o: electric boiler for heat and air-cooled
chiller/vav system for cooling) — 3o%
• fundamental & enhanced commissioning• goal of 5o% construction waste diversion• goal of 2O% recycled content a 2O% regional materials• automatic lighting controls:
o interior based on available daylight and occupancy o exterior based on astronomical time clock
• daylighting/views, operable windows• Low VOC finishes/indoor air quality• goal of silver level LEED certification
Rails C. Melotte, A.I.A. • Richard R. Morse, A.I.A. • David J. Leonatti, A.I.A. • T. David Parker, A.I.A., Principals
Darrell R. Schaver, Associate