Kids Fight Climate Change – What a glorious morning

This may be the beginning of the death of green house gas pollution in our atmosphere. To be clear it is not just carbon dioxide, but includes many other gases such as methane. It is the first generation, so dedicated, and it is magnificent to see. If I could


in print

…………………..//I would.

Kids protest as there’s no planet B

Kids protest as there’s no planet B

Mar—19—2019 03:26PM EST

Last Friday, students across 110 countries walked out of their classes in the massive Youth Climate Strike to bring attention to the effects of climate change. Hundreds of students filled New York’s City Hall Park, the air thrumming with excitement and anxiety. Some even hung from the lamp posts to get  a better view of the swarming crowd before police inevitably invited them to climb down. It was the first protest I’ve been to where children far outnumbered adults.

“I’m here because I don’t want to have to grow up in a world where I am terrified the people I love could lose their home,” Simone Rubin, a senior at NEST+M high school, told The Outline, referencing the potential affect sea level rise could have on New York City’s coast. “It’s unfair that we’re in this situation now because adults refuse to act and now we’re tasked with cleaning up an earth that we shouldn’t have had to do because we shouldn’t have put ourselves in this situation to begin with.”

The Youth Climate Strike was born out of the #FridaysforFuture demonstrations started by 16-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg. In August 2018, Thunberg started skipping school each Friday to protest outside of the Stockholm Parliament House, calling on leaders to prioritize environmental issues. Thunberg’s notoriety grew as she spoke at the U.N. climate talks last December, and the #FridaysforFuture hashtag received more and more attention. She’s since been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for her activism.



Please go there and read most joyously. More next week.


Being Frugal Can Be Funny – Or so it seems from this blog

This Blog on frugality is pretty funny and maybe not for the Joe Sixpack crowd. Things like Retiring In Panama may miss them. But the post about living on food stamps was pretty informative and funny.

Festival of Frugality: Superheroes Are Frugal Too Edition

Hello and welcome to the 325th edition of the Festival of Frugality. The Festival of Frugality highlights personal finance posts that deal with how to pinch those pennies or save that dollar.

I am a sucker for a theme for my festivals or carnivals and while I was tempted to do a leap year facts edition it just wasn’t exciting enough for my blood. So superheroes it is. Because what’s more exciting than superheroes? It also occurred to me that superheroes are quite frugal and who hasn’t sometimes thought that superpowers are needed to stay on the path of frugality.

Editor’s Super Picks

Smart Family Finance has pretty convincing financial reasons to get rid of your junk. There are so may reasons to get rid of your “junk”. It’s nice to have one that will put cash in your wallet too.

Annabelle from Shopping Detox gives her city a frugal audit. This really has me thinking about my own town.

A. Blinkin from Funancials entertains us as usual with how do you judge value?



Go there and read about Wolverine and Batman at least. More next week.


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

Please play this song in the background.

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


Anyway crossing the boundaries between green transportation, energy policy and crowd control, the Germans announced they had come to an agreement to sell Saudia Arabia 200 of their Leopard 2A1 battle main tanks. As Der Speigel quickly pointed out such a sale sends both a crazy signal to Germany’s large peace community but a defeatist one to those countries involved in the Arab Spring (read: food riots). But when it comes to crushing resistance any battle main usually weighs over 50 ton, so that works out pretty well. Do not be fooled either by the nameless chinese man’s dance with the Chinese battle main because that was a once in a century event. The Arab drivers prefer to get them  babies up to their top speeds of 45 miles per hour and roll. At those speeds they get a whopping 1.3333 miles per gallon. But at more cautious battle speeds they get something more like 4 – 5 miles per gallon. Kinda like a 1963 red corvette. Or maybe a Hummer. But when you compare it to its actual soul mates like the Caterpillar 797 which gets a heart pumping 3 miles per gallon at the same speeds the Leopard is a true jungle cat. OK well I have had enough fun for today.,8599,2081566,00.html?


Should Germany Sell Tanks to Saudi Arabia?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

dot dot dot (as they say) 

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


Leopard 2E

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

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

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


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


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

It’s Jam Band Friday –

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.

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.


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.


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.–20&feature=related


Hungarian Responsible For Toxic Spill – Doesn’t think he is

It’s Jam band Friday –

This appears to say it all:

CEO doesn’t ‘feel’ responsible in Hungary spill, but will aid efforts

By the CNN Wires Staff
October 15, 2010 10:55 a.m. EDT

(CNN) — The CEO of the Hungarian company behind a huge toxic spill on Thursday said he doesn’t know whether he’s responsible for the disaster, but added, “I have moral duties and I will fulfill them.”

Zoltan Bakonyi, the chief executive of the MAL aluminum plant, spoke with CNN’s Diana Magnay a day after he was released from jail pending trial. Bakonyi was detained on Monday, accused of public endangerment and harming the environment.

:} :}

“It’s said I should be responsible although I don’t feel it,” Bakonyi told Magnay. He insisted that MAL was in compliance with all Hungarian safety regulations and pointed out that he has only been CEO for two years. Bakonyi argued that the problems presented by the reservoir and the accumulation of toxin in it stretched back 25 years or more.

But he added that it is his “moral duty” is to “help” and put his energies “120-percent into the aid effort.”

Bakonyi categorically denied that a hole was present in the reservoir in the days or weeks before the spill happened. Bakonyi said he had visited the reservoir in the weeks before the spill happened. But, he said he hadn’t seen the photo released by the The World Wildlife Fund showing one of the pools of sludge — a byproduct of the process to turn bauxite ore into aluminium oxide — leaking into a nearby field. The WWF says the photo was taken in June.

Bakonyi also denied the spill was a consequence of overproduction or improper payment of workers. He maintained that there was no way to anticipate the accident. “The only way anyone could have imagine this happening,” he said, “was in a terrorist attack.”

MAL has “an idea” about how the spill occurred, but Bakonyi won’t comment on what it is. He says no statement on causes will be released until Hungarian authorities complete their own investigation.


He may have an idea??? More next week.


The Nastiest Pollution On Earth – End this week with ickypoo

It’s Jam Band Friday –

Next week I will try the cleanest places on the planet as a topic. But do not get your hopes up.

8 of the Most Toxic Energy Projects on the Planet

BY Ariel SchwartzTue Sep 7, 2010

BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico served as a wake-up call for many of us who never before paid attention to the destructive energy projects happening all around the world. But while Deepwater Horizon may have attracted the lion’s share of media attention this past Spring and Summer, there are a number of other toxic projects still going on. Below, we look at some of the worst.



Alberta Tar Sands

Alberta, Canada is home to the second biggest recoverable oil reserve in the world: the infamous Athabasca tar sands. But the massive deposit of heavy crude oil (aka bitumen) is under a staggering 54,000 square miles of boreal forest and peat bogs, which are slowly being destroyed by the open pit mining used to recover Alberta’s oil. These open pit mining projects also deposit toxic mercury, arsenic, cadmium, and lead into the Athabasca river system, creating “masses of toxic soup.” Suncor Energy, Syncrude Canada, Shell Canada, Marathon Oil, and Chevron are all pursuing projects in the Athabasca sands.

Three Gorges Dam

China’s Three Gorges Dam, a hydroelectric dam in the Yangtze river, is world’s largest electricity-generating plant. Completed in 2006, the dam has already produced 348.4 TWh of electricity since its inception. But the Dam has its drawbacks–construction displaced 1.2 million people (not the only Chinese water project to displace huge populations), increased the risk of landslides in the area, and made nearby Shanghai significantly more vulnerable to flooding.


Please read this gut wrenching article. More next week.


Most Polluted Places – Apparently I could do this for a long time

Its Jam Band Friday –


Why is that. Because the WHOLE world is polluted. Most of these places didn’t even make the last two lists.

Our Most Polluted States

by The Daily Beast Info

BS Top - Polluted Sites Greenpeace marine biologist Paul Horsman shows globs of oil on a jetti at the mouth of the Mississippi River on May 17, 2010. (John Moore / Getty Images) As the EPA and BP fight over the Gulf oil spill cleanup, the Daily Beast crunches the numbers and ranks the most contaminated sites in the nation.

The BP oil rig explosion has led to untold millions in lost income for people who make their living from the Gulf, but toxic hazards are an everyday occurrence: The EPA estimates that there are 3,500 chemical spills each year, requiring $260 million to clean.

Above those, however, are the Superfund sites—places that have sustained major, long-term damage, necessitating years of cleanup. Established in 1980 after a series of toxic disasters, including the infamous Love Canal district of Niagara Falls, which turned the neighborhood into a virtual ghost town, Superfund has largely succeeded in centralizing hazardous waste cleanup and holding responsible parties financially accountable.

The BP fiasco—both a natural and human disaster—got us thinking: what are today’s most polluted toxic dumping grounds? To figure it out, we examined all available Superfund data from the Environmental Protection Agency. We filtered the results, focusing on sites that remain dangerous for human exposure and sites that have dangerous ground water. And then we ranked them using the following criteria:

· Toxicity per acre: The number of instances of each toxin, multiplied by the severity of each toxin, according to the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, and divided by the acreage of the site.

· Toxicity per population: To determine potential human exposure we took the number of instances of each toxin, multiplied by the severity of each toxin, and divided by the population within one mile of the site. (The EPA gives a population range, and we used the higher number for this calculation.)

Since toxicity per acre is a more concrete statistic than potential human exposure (one can live near a toxic site and avoid contact), we weighted the former three times the impact of the latter. An important note: The human exposure element does not measure exposure levels, but rather indicates that the EPA believes there is a reasonable expectation that people may be exposed to contamination—exactly what the Superfund teams spend their time trying to alleviate.



Acres: 2
Population: 10,000
Toxic chemicals: 34

History: From 1949 to 1991 Fletcher’s Paint Works operated a retail store and storage facility in this small New Hampshire town along the Souhegan River. In 1982 New Hampshire officials found leaking and open drums of paint chemicals in the storage area. Soil and groundwater around the site was later found contaminated with arsenic, lead, PCBs, and a slew of other nasty chemicals. The nearby Keyes Municipal Water Supply Well was shut down in the early 1980s after it was found contaminated by volatile organic compounds—gases emitted from paint and other household supplies. Cleanup began in 1988 and continues today. The EPA has tested homes in the area for gases seeping from soil into basements, with no health risks found in the homes and another round of testing due for June 2010. The main concern now is that fish in the Souhegan contain PCBs, and that the EPA has found evidence of people fishing in the river.



#2, Haverford, Pennsylvania:
Havertown PCP

Acres: 15
Population: 50,000
Toxic chemicals: 59

History: Getting rid of toxic waste used to be so simple. National Wood Preservers, which treated wood on the site from 1947 to 1963, would take their liquid waste lined with pentachlorophenols (PCPs) to a well, and dump it down. Or they would toss the PCP-laden liquid onto the ground. A nearby stream was contaminated, though residents living within a mile of the site don’t use it for drinking water. In 1992 the EPA removed 97,000 tons of liquid waste, and 60 tons of sludge from the site. The EPA is armed with $4.2 million from the Recovery Act to finish the final cleanup phase, which includes removing contaminated soil from residential property and public spaces.


There is 2. For the rest read the article. HAPPY LABOR DAY everyone. More next week.


Renters And Energy Conservation – Here’s what the government thinks

It’s Jam Band Friday –

So here is the governments thought for you renters out there.

Top 10 Tips for Renters!

Even if you rent an apartment, townhouse, or a home, you can make a big difference, too! These tips will show you how to be more energy efficient and save energy, money, and reduce the risks of global warming. If there are things you can’t change on your own, share these tips and encourage your landlord to help you make a change for the better.

  1. Lighting is one of the easiest places to start saving energy. Replacing your five most frequently used light fixtures or the bulbs in them with ENERGY STAR qualified lights can save more than $65 a year in energy costs. ENERGY STAR qualified compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) provide high-quality light output, use 75% less energy, and last 6–10 times longer than standard incandescent light bulbs, saving money on energy bills and replacement costs.
    • Remember to always turn off your lights when leaving a room. Turning off just one 60-watt incandescent bulb that would otherwise burn eight hours a day can save about $15 per year!
  2. Considering purchasing a room air conditioner? Consider an ENERGY STAR qualified model. They use at least 10 percent less energy than standard models.
    • In the winter, be sure to insulate room air conditioners from the outside with a tight-fitting a/c unit cover, available at your local home improvement center or hardware store. This keeps heated air from escaping outside. Alternately, you can remove the window unit in the winter months to prevent energy losses.
    • Be sure the window unit fits tightly in the window so outdoor air is not getting in.
  3. If possible, install a programmable thermostat to automatically adjust your home’s temperature settings when you’re away or sleeping.
    • When used properly, a programmable thermostat with its four temperature settings can save up to $150 a year in energy costs. Proper use means setting the thermostat at energy-saving temperatures without overriding that setting. You should also set the “hold” button at a constant energy-saving temperature when you’re away or on vacation.
  4. Consumer electronics play an increasingly larger role in your home’s energy consumption, accounting for 15 percent of household electricity use. Many consumer electronics products use energy even when switched off. Electronics equipment that has earned the ENERGY STAR helps save energy when off, while maintaining features like clock displays, channel settings, and remote-control functions.
    • Unplug any battery chargers or power adapters when not in use (like your cell phone charger!).
    • Use a power strip as a central “turn off” point when you are done using equipment.
      • Even when turned off, electronic and IT equipment often use a small amount of electricity. For home office equipment, this stand-by or “phantom” power load can range from a few watts to as much as 20 or even 40 watts for each piece of equipment. Using a power strip for your computer and all peripheral equipment allows you to completely disconnect the power supply from the power source, eliminating standby power consumption.
  5. A ten minute shower can use less water than a full bath.
    • With a new 2.5 gallon-per-minute (low-flow) shower head, a 10-minute shower will use about 25 gallons of water, saving you five gallons of water over a typical bath. A new showerhead also will save energy — up to $145 each year on electricity — beating out both the bath and an old-fashioned showerhead.
    • To avoid moisture problems, control humidity in your bathroom by running your ventilating fan during and 15 minutes after showers and baths.
  6. Make sure all air registers are clear of furniture so that air can circulate freely. If your home has radiators, place heat-resistant reflectors between radiators and walls. In the winter, this will help heat the room instead of the wall.
  7. During cold weather, take advantage of the sun’s warmth by keeping drapes open during daylight hours. To keep out the heat of the summer sun, close window shades and drapes in warm weather.
  8. Save water by scraping dishes instead of rinsing them before loading in the dishwasher. Run your dishwasher with a full load and use the air-dry option if available.
    • Rinsing dirty dishes before loading your dishwasher uses a lot of water and energy. Most dishwashers today can thoroughly clean dishes that have had food scraped, rather than rinsed, off — the wash cycle and detergent take care of the rest. To make the most efficient use of your dishwasher’s energy and water consumption, run the dishwasher only when enough dirty dishes have accumulated for a full load.
  9. Wash your laundry with cold water whenever possible. To save water, try to wash full loads or, if you must wash a partial load, reduce the level of water appropriately.
    • Hot water heating accounts for about 90 percent of the energy your machine uses to wash clothes — only 10 percent goes to electricity used by the washer motor. Depending on the clothes and local water quality (hardness), many homeowners can effectively do laundry exclusively with cold water, using cold water laundry detergents. Switching to cold water can save the average household more than $40 annually (with an electric water heater) and more than $30 annually (with a gas water heater).
    • Washing full loads can save you more than 3,400 gallons of water each year.
  10. Don’t over dry your clothes. If your dryer has a moisture sensor that will automatically turn the machine off when clothes are done, use it to avoid over drying. Remember to clean the lint trap before every load. Dry full loads, or reduce drying time for partial loads. Learn more.
    • It’s easy to over dry your clothes, if one setting is used for various fabric types. Try to dry loads made up of similar fabrics, so the entire load dries just as the cycle ends. Many dryers come with energy-saving moisture or humidity sensors that shut off the heat when the clothes are dry. If you don’t have this feature, try to match the cycle length to the size and weight of the load. A dryer operating an extra 15 minutes per load can cost you up to $34, every year.
    • The lint trap is an important energy saver. Dryers work by moving heated air through wet clothes, evaporating and then venting water vapor outside. If the dryer cannot provide enough heat, or move air sufficiently through the clothes, they will take longer to dry, and may not dry at all. One of the easiest things you can do to increase drying efficiency is to clean the lint trap before each and every load. This step also can save you up to $34 each year.

Learn More!

View the full list of tips

Launch ENERGY STAR @ home



Bringing you a prosperous future where energy is clean, abundant, reliable, and affordable

Energy Savers

Your HomeYour VehicleYour WorkplaceRebates, Tax Credits and FinancingProducts and ServicesRenewable EnergyInformation ResourcesHome

Your Home


Simple energy conservation measures can lower your utility bills while increasing the comfort of your apartment. Although your landlord or management company is ultimately responsible for your building’s energy efficiency, you make dozens of energy decisions every day.


Many ways for cutting electricity costs in houses also apply to apartments. See our section on reducing electricity use for ways to lower these costs.

Heating and Cooling

Here are some ways to reduce your heating and cooling costs. They can also make your apartment more comfortable. You might need your landlord’s or management company’s permission for some of the suggestions.

Water Heating

If you have your own water heater in your apartment, see our section on energy-efficient water heating. If you don’t have your own water heater, you can still save energy by reducing your hot water use. You may need your landlord’s or management company’s permission for some of these energy conservation measures.


More next week.


I Wish Illinois Cared For Us As Much As California Does – Sniff

It’s Jam Band Friday..Yippe…Yahoo –


California Energy Commission Consumer Energy Center

tips page graphic 1 tips page graphic 2 page title
navigation spacer image
two color top bar / tips


Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency are two sides of the same coin. Most people think they mean the same thing, but they don’t.

Energy conservation means reducing the level of energy use by turning down a thermostat, or turning off a light, or turning up the temperature of your refrigerator.

Energy efficiency means getting the same job done while using less energy. Efficiency is usually done by replacing an older, less efficient appliance with a new one.

In this section, you’ll find both energy conservation and efficiency tips for your home, office, school, car or truck, and other areas.

You’ll learn how to get your home ready for summer or winter. You’ll learn how to be prepared in case the power goes out. And you’ll learn some interesting facts about energy.


Energy Tips for Schools


Energy Tips for Your Vehicle


More next week.

He is so good-


ECOBuild In Britain – These events are so cool

In memoriam of Richie Hayward one founder of Little Feat It is Jam Band Friday…


Ecobuild 2010 was a huge success with more than 1,000 exhibitors, over 41,000 visitors, and dozens of new attractions, initiatives and special events. Here are just some of the highlights…..


Milliband launches Pay As You Save initiative

Secretary of State for Energy & Climate Change, Ed Milliband, chose the opening day of Ecobuild to launch the Government’s new Pay As You Save initiative.  After the announcement, the Minister went on to meet some of Ecobuild’s 1,000 exhibitors.

Watch the announcement

First stage of Saint-Gobain’s solar decathlon completed at Ecobuild

The collaboration between Saint-Gobain and Nottingham University to design, build and operate Europe’s most attractive, effective and energy efficient zero carbon solar powered house came to fruition at Ecobuild with the debut of the Nottingham HOUSE (Home Optimising the Use of Solar Energy).  The structure now moves on to Madrid for the final of the Solar Decathlon Europe competition.

Watch the Nottingham HOUSE video

2010 BREEAM awards winners announced

BRE Global announced the winners of the 2010 BREEAM awards at Ecobuild, each building representing exemplary sustainable design and construction.

Click here for all the winners and case studies

Hundreds of new products launched

Ecobuild was the launch platform for hundreds of new sustainable construction products.

‘Ecobuild was extremely good, with near continuous traffic to the stand. With a good mix of customers and the right media present it was a great vehicle to launch our new products.’ Richard Hartley, Monier Ltd

Click here to see more products launched at Ecobuild 2010

Award for best innovative sustainable construction product

Winner of the Green Shoots Best Innovative Sustainable Construction Product award, Thomas Lipinski of Green Structures, received a cheque for £5,000 from Green Shoots sponsor, Neil Morgan, Lead Technologist – Low Impact Buildings, Technology Strategy Board.


More next week.