Category Archives: green economy

Energy Saving Myths – Well not exactly

Posted on by
Reply

What this person is arguing is that the biggest ways to save energy are the most costly thus the least likely. However, anytime you save energy you save money. Same with water, same with food and the same with transportation. Collectively those savings can pay for the bigger ticket efforts.

http://environment.change.org/blog/view/the_biggest_energy_saving_myth

The Biggest Energy Saving Myth

by Jess Leber August 16, 2010

Lots of households have experienced their own turning point on energy. That moment when one more backbreaking utility bill or that 38th sweltering summer day transforms a run-of-the-mill conscientious mother, spouse, or roommate into a certified member of the energy Gestapo. Not a stone, or a light, or a thermostat will henceforth be left unturned as the rest of the household sweats-out what they hope is a passing phase.

Yet according to a new survey, when it comes to saving energy, even the most well-intentioned of watt pinchers often get it wrong.

As The Daily Climate reports, most Americans (40 percent of survey respondents) mistakenly believe the best way to save energy is to turn off the lights or raise the thermostat. Essentially, people think the best option is to change their behavior and cut the waste from their lives. But while these actions may indeed be the easiest and cheapest way to save energy, they are certainly not the most effective. Experts have long-known that it’s long-term investments in energy efficiency — whether in home insulation, washing machines or cars — that best do the trick. Unfortunately, only about 10 percent of survey respondents identified such measures as the single most effective action they could take.

There’s one big barrier to these huge energy-savings: the upfront cost. A homeowner must take a fairly long-term view to realize the payoff of home weatherization investments, for example. In the realm of home mortgages, car loans, and college degrees, people are used to the idea of delayed gratification. But for saving energy? It seems not quite yet.

:}

Go read the rest of the article and sign the petitions to the right. It is well worth your time. More tomorrow.

:}

Cancun And Trains – I keep trying to focus on the residential market

Posted on by
Reply

But stuff just keeps coming up that is too wild or too woolly to not at least post it.  I mean why in the world would you turn down money for high speed rail? The upgrades and new crossings and crossing guards are worth it.

http://www.forconstructionpros.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=25&id=18770

Calif., Fla. Big Winners as U.S. Redistributes Rejected Grants

Jason Plautz, E&E reporter, E&E News PM

California and Florida were big winners as the Obama administration announced the redistribution today of more than $1 billion in high-speed rail grants abandoned by incoming governors in Wisconsin and Ohio.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood officially killed projects in those states after a monthlong dispute with the two Republican governors-elect, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker and Ohio’s John Kasich.

Both Republicans campaigned against the rail projects, saying they would leave their states on the hook for operating costs and take away road-repair money. And both requested permission to redistribute the funds to other transportation projects.

But the Obama administration insisted the states’ stimulus grants be spent on high-speed rail, sparking protests by Wisconsin manufacturers that had been banking on the rail project and jockeying among states seeking fresh cash.

The administration has now reshuffled $1.195 billion — $810 million from Wisconsin and $385 million from Ohio — and is sending it to 14 states. The biggest grant, $624 million, will go to California, while $342.3 million will go to Florida and $161.5 million to Washington state.

:}

Then there is all the mucking around in an alleged Climate Change Conference. Here is what the Climate Change disbelievers have to say. But really for all they are accomplishing couldn’t they teleconference?

http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/10/hypocrisy-alive-and-well-at-cancun-climate-conference/

Hypocrisy alive and well at Cancun climate conference
By Amanda Carey – The Daily Caller

From November 29 to December 10, delegates from 194 countries gathered in sunny Cancun, Mexico to “lay the ghost of Copenhagen to rest,” as one dignitary put it. After last year’s chaotic, disastrous and worthless climate change conference in Copenhagen, the goal this year was simple: avoid further embarrassment.

The focus has been on hashing out details for a global climate fund, extending the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012, and establishing an official agreement among developed countries to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by about 40 percent by 2020.

But in the middle of all the global-warming demagoguery and calls for developed nations to shell out $100 billion per year by 2020 in climate reparations to help less-developed countries cope with the unfair burden of climate change, one thing has very obviously not changed: the hypocrisy.

Yes, hypocrisy was present in Cancun just as it was in Copenhagen in 2009, Ponzan in 2008, Bali in 2007, and the many other climate change summit cities before them. As hundreds of officials travel in gas-guzzling jets and carbon-dioxide emitting cars to the conference site and stay in luxurious, high electricity-consuming resorts, the carbon footprint of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is ironic, to say the least.

:}

More next week

:}

Consumer Reports Can’t Be Wrong – Heating, Cooling and Water Heating 56% of residential energy use

Posted on by
Reply

Something to think about as the weather here gets very cold and nasty. Insulate everything.

http://www.greenerchoices.org/energytips.cfm

You can make a difference
ANATOMY OF YOUR HOME ENERGY BILL AND HOW TO SAVE

This section looks at the environmental impact of our energy consumption, some simple ways to use less of it, and the many positive benefits that can result.

Home heating and cooling: 45 percent
In most households, heating and cooling account for the biggest single chunk of your energy bill. The good news is there are many ways to cut those costs.

Choose energy-efficient furnaces or air conditioners that are the right size for your home.

Properly insulate your home (especially the attic), including the duct system.

Contact your utility company for a free energy audit. If your utility company doesn’t offer free audits, try the do-it-yourself tool, from the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Programmable thermostats, insulated windows, and ceiling fans can also help lower your energy bill. A programmable thermostat, for instance, can cut heating and cooling costs as much as 20 percent when you use it to reduce the temperature 5 degrees at night and 10 degrees during the day when heating (or raise it an equal amount when cooling). Watch how we test programmable thermostats and get recommendations on choosing a thermostat (full report available to subscribers).

Hot water: 11 percent
Overall, water-heater technology hasn’t changed much in recent years. There are, however, newer, instantaneous heating models (with no tank) that can save you up to $50 a year in energy costs, although they cost more initially. Solar hot-water heaters are gaining in popularity as an alternative for or supplement to conventional water-heating units. For more information, visit the Department of Energy online or National Center for Photovoltaics.

Set your water heater to 120 degrees, it can save up to 10 percent in water-heating costs compared to a 140 degree setting.

Wrap an insulation blanket around your hot water pipes and storage tank.

Replace a showerhead that is more than 10 years old with a low-flow model. It can save up to half the hot water used for showering.

:}

More tomorrow

:}

Utilities Around The World Are Real Rip Off Artists – Big suprise

Posted on by
Reply

It doesn’t matter what country you are in.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-this-is-no-time-to-tread-softly-around-the-energy-companies-2132865.html

Leading article: This is no time to tread softly around the energy companies

Saturday, 13 November 2010

The great energy rip-off continues. The wholesale price of gas has risen in recent months so the large household energy suppliers are raising their consumer prices.

British Gas has become the latest to do so, announcing a 7 per cent increase yesterday. This comes after a similar price hike by Scottish & Southern Energy last month. And the rest of the “big six” UK energy suppliers are expected to follow soon.

The problem is that the energy sector is only selectively responsive to fluctuations in market prices. Wholesale energy prices are 50 per cent below their peak in 2008, yet consumer bills have fallen by just 10 per cent in that time. It is a familiar story: consumer prices are sticky on the way down, but well lubricated on the way up.

But the fact that we are used to these gouging tactics by energy firms does not make them any more acceptable. This represents a market failure. Competition should hold down consumer prices. But the number of household power suppliers has fallen from 20 to six since privatisation in the 1990s. A competent regulator would not have allowed this situation to develop. But Ofgem, which supposedly oversees the industry, has repeatedly shown itself to be unwilling to bring the energy giants into line. The result is an energy sector that is uncomfortably similar to a cartel.

And the Coalition has, so far, been no more willing than the previous administration to address this problem. The Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, has warned firms to give customers ample warning of price rises. But he has not indicated a desire to force structural reform. And the Coalition’s decision to abolish the Consumer Focus watchdog, transferring its function to the Citizens Advice Bureau, will only make it more difficult for consumers to resist the excesses of the energy giants.

The suspicion is that ministers are treading softly around these firms because they are relying on them to invest some £200bn in low-carbon energy infrastructure over the next decade. Yet a failure to tackle the vested interests of the energy sector would represent a strategic mistake by the Government. Consumer energy prices will inevitably need to rise over the medium term as firms make investments, under Government pressure, to decarbonise our energy supplies. Massive investment in wind, wave and nuclear power is necessary if Britain is to meet its target of generating 20 per cent of our energy from renewable by 2020.

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Wind Power From Lake Michgan – We want it…No we don’t

Posted on by
1

Why would wind energy generation on or in Lake Michigan be controversial? Well first there is the “Chicago Attack”. This will just benefit large cities. Then there is the “pristine view” attack. It will block my beautiful view of this beautiful lake on a beautiful day. Finally there is the, “sure it will create jobs….but not ones I will be qualified for”.

http://domesticfuel.com/2009/12/23/scandia-proposes-1000-mw-lake-michigan-wind-farm/

Scandia Proposes 1,000-mw Lake Michigan Wind Farm

28 Comments Posted by John Davis – December 23rd, 2009

A Minnesota company is proposing to build a massive wind farm in Lake Michigan, but some of the residents of Michigan, which has some of the highest unemployment rates in the country, still aren’t pleased about the project that would bring green energy and jobs to the economically distressed region.

The Detroit Free Press says that Scandia Wind, a Minnesota firm partnering with a Norwegian wind developer, wants to put up a 1,000-megawatt wind farm just offshore from the communities of Pentwater and Ludington:

Several companies have been sniffing out offshore wind farm possibilities in Michigan, but Scandia was the first to jump in and publicly announce its plans. The turbines would be visible all along the shore, which takes in Silver Lake and Mears state beaches, Little Sable Lighthouse and Pentwater Harbor.

The firm wants to build foundations on the lake bottom, which is owned by the citizens of Michigan, and place 100 to 200 turbines — 5 to 10 megawatts each — on top.

The total size would make the wind farm bigger than any proposed new coal plant in Michigan and nearly as large as the Fermi 2 nuclear plant.

Local residents say the wind turbines would ruin the view off their beaches and hurt tourism. Scandia officials point out that the $3 billion project would put people to work to the tune of at least 2 million man-hours.

COMMENTS

LakeShoreOwner

I attended the meeting in Ludington. Dirdal (Scandia Rep) said after the project was completed, only about 100-150 jobs would remain, and that national bidding for these positions wouldn’t guarantee they would be local. The skills for these jobs are not your garden variety skill sets.

I believe this project will only help those who need the energy and are willing to pay for it (Detroit and Chicago). Locally, aesthetically, and economically the Oceana and Mason residents will pay for it in lost property values and tax bases.

Julie Burdick

Wind turbines in Lake Michigan would lower property values and lower the tax base because the reason property values are high in this area is because of the access to the natural resources. This includes sailing, boating and fishing on the great lake and admiring the views from the beaches. This may work in Denmark etc. but it is not the reason people live and visit Pentwater and surrounding areas. Why should Pentwater bear the brunt of creating “green energy” for the surrounding metropolitan areas??

:}

OH then there is the coal, oil and gas push back – they are unreliable and costly.

Dustin

I thought this was interesting…..”Despite their being cited as the shining example of what can be accomplished with wind power, the Danish government has cancelled plans for three offshore wind farms planned for 2008 and has scheduled the withdrawal of subsidies from existing sites. Development of onshore wind plants in Denmark has effectively stopped. Because Danish companies dominate the wind industry, however, the government is under pressure to continue their support. Spain began withdrawing subsidies in 2002. Germany reduced the tax breaks to wind power, and domestic construction drastically slowed in 2004. Switzerland also is cutting subsidies as too expensive for the lack of significant benefit. The Netherlands decommissioned 90 turbines in 2004. Many Japanese utilities severely limit the amount of wind-generated power they buy, because of the instability they cause. For the same reason, Ireland in December 2003 halted all new wind-power connections to the national grid. In early 2005, they were considering ending state support. In 2005, Spanish utilities began refusing new wind power connections. In 2006, the Spanish government ended — by emergency decree — its subsidies and price supports for big wind. In 2004, Australia reduced the level of renewable energy that utilities are required to buy, dramatically slowing wind-project applications. On August 31, 2004, Bloomberg News reported that “the unstable flow of wind power in their networks” has forced German utilities to buy more expensive energy, requiring them to raise prices for the consumer.”

:}

Bunch of crap if you ask me. More tomorrow.

:}

Diabetes And Pollution – Another reason to save energy

Posted on by
Reply

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.

:}

The ANWR Is Nothing But One Giant Dry Hole

Posted on by
1

Oil People are nothing but proven liars. There is always “oil down there” they tell investors. But only 10 or 20 of the holes they drill actually produce any oil, so is it any wonder that they are unprepared when they come in? Especially in the case of the Gulf Spew if they come in violently.

http://www.fcnp.com/commentary/national/7696-the-peak-oil-crisis-the-leading-edge.html

The Peak Oil Crisis: The Leading Edge

By Tom Whipple
Wednesday, November 03 2010 01:01:22 PM

Do you remember the furor over drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge a few years back? The whole country was up in arms. At various times some 50 to 60 percent of Americans favored drilling in the area as they were told this would result in lower gas prices.

Last week the USGS lowered its estimate of the amount of oil that could be extracted from the region all the way from 10 billion barrels down to less than one billion, making drilling in the area uneconomical. By the way, the amount of crude being pumped down the Alaskan pipeline now has fallen from 2 million barrels a day (b/d) when the pipeline first opened back in the 1970’s to about 600,000 b/d in recent weeks. The trouble is that when the flow of oil falls below a quantity estimated to be 200-300,000 b/d (some say 500,000) the line will have to be closed as there will simply not be enough hot oil being sent down the pipeline to keep it from freezing in winter.

Last week an organization in California, The Post Carbon Institute, released a new book, “The Post Carbon Reader,” which draws a much broader picture of the serious issues facing mankind. With 30 authors, each specializing in some aspect of the multiple troubles we face, the scope of the book touches on nearly every aspect of our civilization that is out of balance, unsustainable, and headed for a fall. The basic proposition of the book is that the world has reached the limits of growth in terms of its population, economic activity, and the ability of the atmosphere to absorb more carbon emissions. Either the world’s peoples must transform themselves into a sustainable number living in a sustainable manner or there will be many dire consequences right up to the possibility that the human race itself could become extinct. Clearly, this is serious stuff.

As long as a problem is perceived as being decades, or even a few years away, it is not a concern.

Some hold that our sustainability problem started when we first started planting crops and domesticating animals 10,000 years ago. This thesis says if we had stuck with hunting and gathering as a race we would have been able to sustain our act indefinitely, but then we would never have had enough surplus energy to learn reading & writing, and to build cities, the Internet and space ships. Our immediate problem, however, started in earnest with the industrial revolution about 200 years ago when we first started digging up prodigious quantities of coal and feeding it into steam engines. It wasn’t long before we struck oil and the rest is history. The world’s population went from an estimated 5 or 10 million when we first started farming, to a billion when we started serious coal digging, to about 7 billion today. We also got incredibly richer in terms of material goods and could sure get around much faster.

:}

More tomorrow.

:}

Energy Efficient Roofs – Paint it white or

Posted on by
1

It’s Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvYsBlg4QEM

:}

http://www.professorshouse.com/your-home/environmentally-friendly/energy-efficient-shingles.aspx

Energy Efficient Roof Shingles

Home > Your Home > Environmentally Friendly > Articles > Energy Efficient Roof Shingles

image of energy efficient shinglesThe right roof is essential to designing an environmentally friendly and energy-efficient home. If you’ve got typical shingles or hot asphalt on your roof—as many homeowners do—you could be doing better. Below are a few cutting-edge roofing techniques that can cut your energy costs and make your house greener at the same time.

Use recycled shingles. If you want an environmentally friendly roof, the worst thing you can do is install 15-year, non-recycled shingles. These are among the most disposable building materials, are hardly ever recycled, and contain toxic volatile organic chemicals that evaporate under the heat of the sun. This means that just by sitting under the sun and heating up, your home is releasing toxic chemicals into the air. For a greener option, use recycled asphalt shingles that use reclaimed materials, reducing waste. These shingles often have a 50-year lifespan instead of 15, so you won’t have to replace them as often.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kilR-4rQS5g

:}

Consider metal. Metal roofs are more energy-efficient than shingles. Metal roofing is typically made from aluminum, copper, or steel, and you should ensure that your roofing is lead-free. Metal does not have the kind of heat-absorption qualities shingles have, so it will absorb and radiate less heat into your home. In fact, the right color metal will actively reflect sunlight, keeping your home cooler in hot summer months when the sun is most intense. Metal roofing also stands up to the elements better than shingles typically do—it’s the best for rainwater catchment systems, and snow slides off it easily.

Reflective coatings. To make your shingled roof more energy-efficient, brush a reflective coating on. Uncoated shingled roofs typically absorb around 80% of the sunlight that hits them—heating your home in the summer and driving up your air conditioning bill. A coated roof, however, can reflect about 80% of heat—giving you significant energy savings.

Clay and slate. Two natural materials that make excellent green roofing choices, clay and slate are both energy-efficient, can be disposed of without pollution, and are much less toxic than shingles. Corrugated clay tiles encourage air flow on the surface of the roof, keeping the home cool in the summer. However, hail will shatter it, which is why it’s typically only used in warmer climates. Slate is far more durable—it can last up to 100 years with minimal maintenance. Slate can also be reclaimed and recycled.

:}

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B7YeDmmTFc

:}

Building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV). This is a roofing system that’s coated with a film that converts sunlight into electricity—a solar-power coating for your roof. This system uses tiles or shingles, and the electric current flows on the edge of the roof. The tiles look like slate, and can be installed by most roofers—an electrician will also be needed to hook the solar-energy system up to your home’s electrical system. The charge it generates isn’t huge—about 1 kilowatt of energy per 100 square feet of tile

Roof turbines. Companies in the Netherlands, Scotland, and Britain are developing small turbines designed to install on roofs and convert wind power into home electricity. The turbines are typically around six feet across, and are usually mounted on the roof or a pole. Roof turbines feed energy into a converter, which transforms it into electricity for home use. They can typically provide enough power to operate lights, a refrigerator, a television, and a computer—providing significant energy savings. However, the amount of energy an individual house sees will depend on how windy its location is

:}

More next week.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EAog6Crv7c

:}

Residential Geothermal Is The Way To Go – Damn the cost…full speed ahead

Posted on by
Reply

One of the best purveyors of geothermal in the country and it is right next door in Fort Wayne.

Save energy with water furnace, geothermal, or geoexchange systems.

Choosing a Residential WaterFurnace Comfort System Is Simply Smarter

WaterFurnace manufactures and sells more geothermal systems for homes than anyone else in the business. Why? Because we offer a wide variety of residential geothermal products. Our dealers and installers are the most highly trained in the industry. And we are wholeheartedly committed to customer support. All that makes us the first—and smartest—choice for a residential WaterFurnace system: the system that’s “Smarter from the Ground Up.”

Geothermal vs. Ground Water vs. Water Furnace
Geothermal energy has been used to heat and air condition buildings for several decades, and, during that time, these geothermal systems have been called many different things. Some of the more popular variations include geo-thermal, geoexchange, ground-water, ground-water assisted, ground-water-source, water-to-water, and even our company name, water furnace heating and cooling.

All of these terms, though, convey the same thought: use of geothermal heat pump technology to tap the energy in the earth’s surface and drive a heating and air conditioning system for both residential and commercial uses. The result is a green or natural heat pump that saves energy and benefits the environment.

For more information on geothermal technology, go to How it works.

Geothermal Heat Pumps
Cleanest, Safest, Most Reliable choice.
Savings Calculator
Keep more of what you earn.
Literature
Product Brochures & Technical Literature

:}

More tomorrow

:}

Jetson Green – What a cool site

Posted on by
Reply

Everyonce in awhile you come across a site that is just the bees knees. This would be one.

http://www.jetsongreen.com/2010/10/versatile-origin-prefab-from-blu-homes.html

Versatile Origin Prefab from Blu Homes

By Preston Koerner | October 11, 2010 | topics: Prefab, Residential, Single-family

Blu-homes-origin-haney

Shown is a new installation of three Origin series prefabs by Blu Homes.  Each with a mixture of standard and custom elements, these modules were installed behind a company co-founder’s existing home in Wayland, Massachusetts.  The prefab cluster is used as a photo studio, art studio, and media room and was built with radiant floor heating, cedar sunshades, a roof deck, galvalume siding, heat recovery ventilation, and bamboo flooring.

Blu-homes-origin-haney-sunshades

Anne Haney, spouse of Blu Homes co-founder Bill Haney, said, “I adore my new home studio – it’s modern, airy and bright. I no longer have to commute, pay rent, and we both get to see more of our kids,” according to a statement.

These completed Origin modules cost about $100,000 each, though the newly revamped Origin series starts from $82,000 for a shell and from $109,000 for a full home.

Origin is available in 18’x24′, 18×36′, and 18×48′ plans, with up to one bathroom and two bedrooms.  Blu also offers flat, shed, or gable roof lines.

Standard features include energy-efficient recessed lighting, Energy Star appliances, efficient ventilation, low-flow fixtures, and cement board siding.  Custom options include LED lighting, cedar v-groove siding, FSC certified floors, and cedar screens.

:}

More tomorrow.

:}