I have always said that if we stopped the polluters with the 10 to 20 story smoke stacks (look around, you know who you are). And we stopped airplanes from polluting then we would not have to worry about lawn mowers, barbecues and hotdog roasts. But still – can’t they see what they are doing to me?
The smart, no-mess, no-hassles alternative to gas powered lawn mowers. Cut the hassle out of cutting your grass with the Black & Decker 24 Volt battery-powered mulching mower. It saves time getting started without the frustrations of pull cords, messing with gas & oil, trips to the gas station, and costly maintenance. And without the fumes and the
spills from gas, you’re also saving the environment from harmful
emissions. And did you hear? It was rated the highest
performing cordless mower in 2008 by a leading
consumer magazine. Easy to use AND powerful? No brainer!Benefits of the 24 Volt Cordless Mower
No Gas to Mess With
– No fuel to store, spill or clean
– No need for tune-ups
Easy Starting
– No pull cord
– Starts with a pull of the switch
Environmentally Conscious
– Zero emissions in your yard
– Energy Star rated – Reduced noise
– No gas needed for operation, no spills
Use no more gas to mow your lawn! We offer a reliable, cost effective, and environmentally friendly alternative to conventional gas ride mowers.
About our Company
We are a new company, we became incorporated on Oct 17th 2003, over the last few years we have developed and tested this state of the art design, it will cut up to 2 acres of grass on a 50cent charge,
We have made design changes of a special model for a manufacturer in Europe,
We also are hoping to set-up factories to manufacturer electric tractors in Ontario, Canada, and the US and Europe
We have developed a patent pending special microprocessor controller for the kit: this acts as the brains for the tractor and incorporates the safety and other features of the tractor,
The electric tractor is a real pleasure to operate and you will appreciate the no worries starting in any weather with almost no maintenance features, your neighbours will also appreciate the lower noise levels of your electric tractor.
Sincerely,
Brian Edmond
President
Edmond Electric Co. Ltd
Canada.
Announcing the first commercially produced battery-operated riding lawn mower built in the United States since Wheel Horse discontinued their models in the mid-1980’s. The METI Classic. Please see the Products tab for pricing and specifications.
We have taken the original General Electric Elec-Trak concept and design of the 1970’s, which is proven, and then advanced it. Our first completed model is the METI Classic. The new METI Classic has a body-style which is very similar to the original Elec-Trak with minor changes. By following the original Elec-Trak design, the new Classic is compatible with the attachments built for the battery-operated Elec-Trak, New Idea, and Wheel Horse series of mowers of the 70’s and 80’s. We have upgraded the electronics, beefed up the frame, raised the height of the rear battery box to accommodate taller batteries, and incorporated a stronger lift.
It is rare well at least medium rare that I give credit where credit is due but the Peak Oil folks and Leanan in particular deserve so much credit. Day in and Day out..NO MATTER what the price of oil or gasoline…they still believe that we are running out of the stuff. That is great because WE ARE:
The new director of the National Intelligence Agency caused something of a stir last month when he warned Congress: “The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications.”
On that theme, Hampshire College professor Michael Klare sees the world economic meltdown as already prompting “economic brush fires” around the world and worries whether these could prove “too virulent to contain.”
It seems as if the lyrics “trouble, trouble, trouble” from Meredith Willson’s “The Music Man” have become too real in today’s world.
Last November Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank Group, noted that the global financial crisis would hit hardest the “poorest and most vulnerable” in the developing world. At that time, Mr. Zoellick calculated another 100 million people around the world had been driven into poverty as a result of soaring food and oil prices. These prices have eased. Nonetheless, hundreds of millions in poor nations must try to balance household budgets on incomes of $2 a day or less.
Now he’s forecasting the world economy will shrink by 1 to 2 percent this year, with difficulties possibly extending into next year. That’s much worse than the bank group’s forecast last year. It will be the first time world output has actually declined since World War II. And each 1 percent decline
in developing-country growth rates pushes an additional 20 million people into poverty, Zoellick reckons.
“The political ramifications [of rising poverty] will be great … though hard to predict,” says John Sewell, a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars in Washington. Before the election last fall, he assembled a group of experts who urged the incoming president to streamline the nation’s development tools. These are now spread among 12 government departments, 25 government agencies, and almost 60 government offices. “No one is in charge,” the group held.
Powerful droughts around the world could cause food shortages, reversing a dramatic drop in global poverty that the economic crisis recently halted, worries Mr. Klare, an expert on peace and world security.
In Africa and in East Asia, population growth also adds to economic pressures.
As for brush fires, the driest tinder lies in eastern European states such as Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, and Bulgaria, he says. There, the people in fragile democracies had the notion that rising prosperity in the 1990s and up to 2006 would continue forever. Now the money from the West has dried up and gone home, leading to an economic bust.
“That is what is driving them to rage,” says Klare. “The promises have been taken away.”
Wind and solar projects may carry costs for wildlife
Sandy Seth, via Friends of the Bosque del Apache via AP
Sandhill Cranes fly in formation into the Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge near Socorro, N.M., last year. Environmentalists have raised concerns that the birds’ habitats could be affected by a planned sun and wind power transmission line.
WASHINGTON – The SunZia transmission line that would link sun and wind power from central New Mexico with cities in Arizona is just the sort of energy project an environmentalist could love — or hate. And it is just the sort of line the Interior Department has been tasked with promoting — or guarding against.
If built, the 460-mile line would carry about 3,000 megawatts of power, enough to avoid the need for a handful of coal-fired plants and to help utilities meet mandated targets for use of renewable fuel. “We have to connect the sun of the deserts and the winds of the plains to places where people live,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said recently.
But the line would also cross grasslands, skirt two national wildlife refuges and traverse the Rio Grande, all habitat areas rich in wildlife. The graceful sandhill crane, for example, makes its winter home in the wetlands of New Mexico’s Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge, right next to the path of the proposed power line. And much of the area falls under the protection of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
The research efforts and infrastructure needed to supply 50% of the energy for space and water heating and cooling across Europe using solar thermal energy has been set out under the aegis of the European Solar Thermal Technology Platform (ESTTP). Published in late December 2008, more than 100 experts developed the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA), which includes a deployment roadmap showing the non-technological framework conditions that will enable this ambitious goal to be reached by 2050.
A strategy for achieving a vision of widespread low-temperature solar thermal installations was first explored by ESTTP in 2006, but since then the SRA has identified key areas for rapid growth. These focus points include
the development of active solar buildings, active solar renovation, solar heat for industrial processes and solar heat for district heating and cooling. Meanwhile, amongst the main research challenges is the development of compact long-term efficient heat storage technology. Once available, they would make it possible to store heat from the summer for use in winter in a cost-effective way.
The ESTTP’s main objective is to create the right conditions in order to fully exploit solar thermal’s potential for heating and cooling in Europe and worldwide.
As a first step for the development of the deployment roadmap and of the Strategic Research Agenda, ESTTP developed a vision for solar thermal in 2030. Its key elements are to establish the Active Solar Building – covering 100% of their heating and cooling demand with solar energy – as a standard for new buildings by 2030; establish the Active Solar Renovation as a standard for the refurbishment of existing buildings by 2030 (Active Solar renovated buildings cover at least 50% of their heating and cooling demand with solar thermal energy); supply a substantial share of the industrial process heat demand up to 250°C, including heating and cooling, desalination and water treatment; and achieve broad use of solar energy in district heating and cooling.
OK maybe not but all the deniers are now having to become cryers…They lost the public because they lost sight of scientific truth, which of course half of them don’t believe in anyway.
Sarah Palin acknowledges global warming is affecting her state
But the former GOP vice presidential
candidate contends gas drilling will help curb rising temperatures
By Kim Murphy |Tribune Newspapers
April 15, 2009
ANCHORAGE — AlaskaGov. Sarah Palin acknowledged Tuesday that global warming is harming her state but said stepped-up natural-gas production could mitigate its effects.
Palin spoke at a hearing before Interior Secretary Ken Salazar — the third of a series he is holding across the country to consider renewed oil and gas leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf.
The 2008 Republican nominee for vice president said relatively clean-burning natural gas can supplant dirtier fuels and slow the discharge of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
“We Alaskans are living with the changes that you are observing in Washington,” she said. “The dramatic decreases in the extent of summer sea ice, increased coastal erosion, melting of permafrost, decrease in alpine glaciers and overall ecosystem changes are very real to us.”
In the past, Palin has questioned the science behind predictions of sea ice loss.
But at Tuesday’s hearing, she made it clear that she recognizes the problem of global warming and cast energy development as part of the answer.
“Stopping domestic energy production of preferred fuels does not solve the issues associated with global warming and threatened or endangered species, but it can make them worse,” she said.
Palin acknowledged that “many believe” a global effort to reduce greenhouse gases is needed.
“Meeting these goals will require a dramatic increase, in the very near term, to preferred available fuels—including natural gas—that have a very low carbon footprint,” she said. “These available fuels are required to supply the nation’s energy needs during the transition to green energy alternatives.”
The federal Minerals Management Service estimates that Alaska’s offshore basins could hold 27 billion barrels of oil and 132 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
:}
Drill baby Drill. Sustainability, not so much.
As this blogger points out Sarah is always kinda vague about everything. No one can figure out whether that is symptomatic of a vague mind or a generalist’s over intelligence:
Sarah Palin clearly was in her comfort zone when she chatted on-air Tuesday with conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt. As The Ticket noted , she presented a persona and offered some lines that could serve her well in her Thursday debate with Joe Biden.
Tuesday also saw the broadcast of another of her several interviews with Katie Couric of CBS.
This segment may not spark more calls from conservative commentators that Palin give up her spot on the Republican national ticket. But in front of the television cameras — and in the face of more pointed questioning — the self-assurance that marked her conversation with Hewitt continued to elude her.
One answer by Palin will do little to quell concerns about her position on global warming. As she did with ABC’s Charlie Gibson a few weeks back, she did her best to skirt a direct answer on its causes.
From the transcript:
Couric: What’s your position on global warming? Do you believe it’s man-made or not?
Palin: Well, we’re the only Arctic state, of course, Alaska. So we feel the impacts more than any other state, up there with the changes in climates. And certainly, it is apparent. We have erosion issues. And we have melting sea ice, of course. So, what I’ve done up there is form a sub-cabinet to focus solely on climate change. Understanding that it is real. And …
Couric: Is it man-made, though in your view?
Palin: You know there are — there are man’s activities that can be contributed to the issues that we’re dealing with now, these impacts. I’m not going to solely blame all of man’s activities on changes in climate. Because the world’s weather patterns are cyclical. And over history we have seen change there. But kind of doesn’t matter at this point, as we debate what caused it. The point is: it’s real; we need to do something about it.
Pardon us for asking, but would it not be difficult to devise an effective policy to mitigate the effects of global warming without a firm grasp on what caused it?
Buyers choosing the smallest cars for low price and high gas mileage could be endangering themselves and their passengers, says a major auto-safety researcher.
In new crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rammed three automakers’ smallest cars into their midsize models. Although the small cars had passed other IIHS tests, they flunked in collisions with larger but still-fuel-efficient sedans. “The safety trade-offs are clear,” IIHS President Adrian Lund says. “There are healthier ways to save gas.”
IIHS, funded by auto insurers, usually crashes cars into stationary barriers at 40 miles per hour. This time, it was car into car, each going 40 mph.
Barrier tests, in effect, show how a car holds up crashing into one like itself, Lund says. These tests show colliding with a larger car at the same effective speed as the barrier test.
IIHS picked three small cars that got its top rating of “good” in barrier tests. In these tests, they fell to “poor” The report comes as small cars take a larger share of U.S. new-vehicle sales. While R.L. Polk registrations show 13.8% of vehicles on the road are classed “small cars,” their share of new-car sales rose from 14.5% in 2006 to 18.1% last year, says Autodata.
:}
But wait later in the article:
Dave Schembri, president of Smart, says, “If you carry this to the nth degree, we’d all be driving 18-wheelers.” And, he says, fewer than 1% of crashes are as violent as the IIHS test.
Lund says the car vs. car tests are meant to mimic killer crashes, not fender benders. He also says that the only difference between the barrier test, in which Smart got a “good,” and the latest test is the size of the obstacle the Smart ran into.
Cynthia Sholander. of Fairfax, Va., praises Smart. She survived a horrific rear-end crash last October that sent her Smart sailing off Interstate 95, into trees, then bouncing back. Sholander says she suffered a concussion but no other injuries.
:}
The point here is they PUT THE CARS THROUGH TESTS THEY NEVER PERFORM.
Fact is roughly 37,000 people die in cars every year. This has been true since the mid 1960’s. Do you find this shocking? You should. That is again roughly 3,000 deaths a month. Even with the use of seat belts and airbags. Why? Because there are millions more drivers and cars then back then and the increase of large long and short haul trucks. But to slam a much larger vehicle into a much smaller vehicle head on and then “tut tut” that the smaller cars are more dangerous is just dumb. Top that off with Walter Williams and Robert Novak trembling on about the destruction they cause and you can tell the state of emotional alarmism echoing around the far right. That is until Novak ran over a pedestrian with his Corvette for God’s sake. The truth is:
Head-on collisions are an often fatal type of road traffic accident. U.S. statistics show that in 2005, head-on crashes were only 2.0% of all crashes, yet accounted for 10.1% of US fatal crashes. This over-representation is because the relative velocities of vehicles traveling in opposite directions is high. A head-on crash between two vehicles traveling at 50 mph is comparable to a vehicle traveling at 100 mph striking a stationary vehicle.
Head-on collisions, sideswipes, and run-off-road crashes all belong to a category of crashes called lane-departure or road-departure crashes. This is because they have similar causes, if different consequences. The driver of a vehicle fails to stay centered in their lane, and either leaves the roadway, or crosses the centerline, possibly resulting in a head-on or sideswipe collision, or, if the vehicle avoids oncoming traffic, a run-off-road crash on the far side of the road.
Preventive measures include traffic signs and road surface markings to help guide drivers through curves, as well as separating opposing lanes of traffic with wide central reservation (or median) and median barriers to prevent crossover incidents. Median barriers are physical barriers between the lanes of traffic, such as concrete barriers or wire rope safety barrier. These are actually roadside hazards in their own right, but on high speed roads, the severity of a collision with a median barrier is usually lower than the severity of a head-on crash.
The European Road Assessment Programme‘s Road Protection Score (RPS) is based on a schedule of detailed road design elements that correspond to each of the four main crash types, including head-on collisions. The Head-on Crash element of the RPS measures how well traffic lanes are separated. Motorways generally have crash protection features in harmony with the high speeds allowed. The Star Rating results show that motorways generally score well with a typical 4-star rating even though their permitted speeds are the highest on the network. But results from Star Rating research in Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden have shown that there is a pressing need to find better median, run-off and junction protection at reasonable cost on single carriageway roads.
:}
So what are they afraid of and what are they spending billions to avoid? The “old car warrior”:
Published on Friday, August 9, 2002 by CommonDreams.org
The Quest for the Fuel Efficient Car
By Ralph Nader
Once again the Congressional toadies for the auto industry have beaten back efforts by legislators such as Democrat, Senator John Kerry and Republican John McCain to gradually increase fuel efficiency standards from the abysmally wasteful levels now inflicted on your pocketbook. Instead of choosing the path of reduced pollution, consumer savings, efficiency of engines and less reliance on imported oil, these indentured lawmakers turned their back on automotive engineers who know how to do the job but are not allowed by their bosses.
The Sierra Club has decided to stop spinning its wheels on Capitol Hill and go directly to the people. In surveys of likely voters in Missouri and South Dakota, 79 percent of the people wanted the auto industry to be required to increase fuel efficiency and that included light truck owners. The voters do not buy the auto company propaganda that more fuel efficient vehicles means less safety. Sixty percent of these voters say they would pay more for a higher mileage vehicle in return for its much larger dollar savings.
Long time car owners know that fuel efficiency overall is no better than what vehicles did in 1980! They are wary of the sudden spikes in gasoline prices. They also know that the companies spend lots of money on engine hyper-performance rather than on engine hyper-efficiency. Despite massive advertising by the auto companies to the contrary, they do not believe them.
Bolstered by public opinion, the Sierra Club announced a three year campaign to pressure automakers to improve fuel economy. Executive Director, Carl Pope, said “The technology exists today to allow the automakers to continue offering their most popular models, but with significantly improved fuel economy. These new safe, fuel-saving SUVs and pickups could be on the shelf very soon.” (see www.sierraclub.org for specific examples)
The Sierra Club is publicizing a “Freedom Option Package”, which is a set of fuel-saving components that could be added to most standard models and that, taken together, could put the fleets of the Big Three on the road to 40 miles per gallon.
Dan Becker, the Club’s Clean Energy director says that “Detroit wants to sell option packages featuring seat warmers and cup holders” instead. He is mobilizing the Club’s 700,000 members across the country to hold events at local auto dealers. Becker has enlisted a prominent Chevrolet dealer, Chuck Frank in support of this initiative.
The Sierra Club, once enthralled by Bill Ford’s environmental statements and assurances of major increases in Ford’s SUV’s is now so disappointed with his company’s joining the other auto giants to lobby against fuel-efficiency laws that it has singled him and Ford Motor Company for special pressure by motorists.
Soon to come (September 17th) is the most jolting book against the auto company executives since Unsafe at Any Speed came out in 1965. I am referring to New York Times reporter, Keith Bradsher’s devastating expose of the SUVs which he calls the world’s most dangerous vehicles and how they got that way. Titled The High and Mighty, this book explains how the auto industry’s grip on Congress got these SUVs (hoked-up, over-priced light truck) exempted form safety, fuel efficiency and pollution requirements that were imposed on automobiles. That was accomplished when these vehicles were a small percentage of overall sales. Now they are a large part of sales; they kill their occupants in roll overs three times the rate of cars; areuniquely dangerous to other motorists and will become more serious when drunks, teenagers, typically the worst drivers on the road, start buying the older used SUVs, Bradsher says.
With an impressive attention to detail and special documentation, Bradsher reports on the enormous advertising money ($10 billion spent since 1990) to deceive their customers and persuade Americans to switch from cars to the very profitable SUVs. While, he declares, “Gas-guzzling SUVs emit one-third more global-warming gases per mile than cars, and up to 5.5 times as much smog-causing nitrogen oxides per mile.”
If the media grasps the importance of this book, September will be a hot month for the high and mighty in Detroit’s executive suites. And long overdue.
Originally started in response to WWI fuel shortages and escalated during WWII for all the obvious reasons …ummm apartheid and the efforts to defeat the ANC and Nelsen Mandella.
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – South Africa’s energy minister said on Thursday the country was still in the grip of a major power crisis despite being able to keep the lights on since a series of blackouts early last year.
Voluntary energy savings had failed to meet the required levels, and the country was risking new power cuts, the Minister of Minerals and Energy, Buyelwa Sonjica said in a statement.
State-owned utility Eskom, which provides 95 percent of the country’s power, has rationed electricity since early last year, but has not cut power since last April.
Sonjica said Africa’s biggest economy was suffering from a perilously low electricity reserve margin or spare capacity.
“The recent lack of blackouts has led to the assumption that our energy situation has been resolved,” Sonjica said.
“Unfortunately this is far from the truth. We are in trouble unless we all begin to take responsibility for our habits of energy wastage.”
Two years ago, Sonjica urged South Africans to save 10 percent of their electricity usage every year for the next five years but so far energy savings were way below that, she said.
Sonjica said a healthy electricity reserve margin was about 17 to 20 percent, to ensure that sudden changes in demand or supply and power-plant maintenance do not cause blackouts.
Eskom said in January the reserve margin was about 8 percent, and has said its long term target is 15 percent.
She said following the success of the Earth Hour over the weekend, and with winter fast approaching, she wanted South Africans to save power to ensure stable electricity supply.
Lights went out in homes across the globe on Saturday for Earth Hour 2009, a global event designed to highlight the threat from climate change.
Sonjica said the Earth Hour initiative would promote awareness that the country still faced a serious energy crisis because South Africa’s record on energy conservation was poor.
“South Africa is one of the least energy efficient nations in the world and the least efficient in Africa,” she said.
“We also hold the number 11 spot on the top 20 greenhouse gas emitters list and are responsible for 42 percent of Africa’s emissions. Every kilowatt of electricity you use produces 1 kg of carbon dioxide; one of the main greenhouse gases.”
Critics say the energy crisis that dented South Africa’s growth and investor-friendly image was caused by the government’s failure to invest in new power generation plants, coupled with surging demand led to the power crisis. Continued…
:}
I don’t think that sounds so good…SO KEEP TALKING CLEAN COAL BABY…it is a quick way to energy death.
An architect’s rendering of Babcock Ranch, which plans to provide for its electricity needs on site with solar energy
An NFL lineman turned visionary developer today is unveiling startlingly ambitious plans for a solar-powered city of tomorrow in southwest Florida’s outback, featuring the world’s largest photovoltaic solar plant, a truly smart power grid, recharging stations for electric vehicles and a variety of other green innovations. The community of Babcock Ranch is designed to break new frontiers in sustainable development, quite a shift for a state that has never been sustainable and lately hasn’t had much development. (Read “Is Florida the Sunset State?”)
“Some people think I got hit in the head a few too many times,” quips developer Syd Kitson, who spent six years in the trenches for the Green Bay Packers and Dallas Cowboys before entering the real estate business in the mid-1980s. “But I still believe deeply in Florida. And the time has come for something completely different.” (See the top 10 green stories of 2008.)
To anyone familiar with southern Florida’s planning-nightmare sprawl of golf courses, strip malls and cookie-cutter subdivisions named after the plants and animals they replaced, Kitson’s vision for his solar-powered, smart-growth, live-where-you-work city of 45,000 people east of Fort Myers is breathtakingly different. That’s why the press conference held today to reveal his development plans for the historic Babcock Ranch property will feature representatives from the Audubon Society, the World Wildlife Fund and the Sierra Club.
CORVALLIS, Ore. – Engineers at Oregon State University have discovered a way to use an ancient life form to create one of the newest technologies for solar energy, in systems that may be surprisingly simple to build compared to existing silicon-based solar cells.
The secret: diatoms.
These tiny, single-celled marine life forms have existed for at least 100 million years and are the basis for much of the life in the oceans, but they also have rigid shells that can be used to create order in a natural way at the extraordinarily small level of nanotechnology.
By using biology instead of conventional semiconductor manufacturing approaches, researchers at OSU and Portland State University have created a new way to make “dye-sensitized” solar cells, in which photons bounce around like they were in a pinball machine, striking these dyes and producing electricity. This technology may be slightly more expensive than some existing approaches to make dye-sensitized solar cells, but can potentially triple the electrical output.
“Most existing solar cell technology is based on silicon and is nearing the limits of what we may be able to accomplish with that,” said Greg Rorrer, an OSU professor of chemical engineering. “There’s an enormous opportunity to develop different types of solar energy technology, and it’s likely that several forms will ultimately all find uses, depending on the situation.”
Dye-sensitized technology, for instance, uses environmentally benign materials and works well in lower light conditions. And the new findings offer advances in manufacturing simplicity and efficiency.
“Dye-sensitized solar cells already exist,” Rorrer said. “What’s different in our approach are the steps we take to make these devices, and the potential improvements they offer.”
The new system is based on living diatoms, which are extremely small, single-celled algae, which already have shells with the nanostructure that is needed. They are allowed to settle on a transparent conductive glass surface, and then the living organic material is removed, leaving behind the tiny skeletons of the diatoms to form a template.
San Francisco and Portland might be engaged in some electric vehicle pissing contest, but I think both cities just got seriously spanked by Chicago!
Yes…Chicago!
The Windy City just unveiled the first solar-powered electric vehicle charging station during the IOC tour. The Solar Plug-In Stations will be used daily by the City of Chicago Department of Fleet Management to power the city’s electric cars.
“Carbon Day and the City of Chicago are demonstrating true innovation, ingenuity and initiative,” said Richard Lowenthal, CEO of Coulomb Technologies. “Solar energy and electric vehicles are an inevitable partnership that is one more step to reducing our dependence on foreign oil.”
(CNN) — When Jon Bohmer sat down with his two little girls for a simple project they could work on together, he didn’t realize they’d hit upon a solution to one of the world’s biggest problems for just $5: A solar-powered oven.
Inventor Jon Bohmer with the oven he has made out of a cardboard box.
The ingeniously simple design uses two cardboard boxes, one inside the other, and an acrylic cover that lets in the sun’s rays and traps them.
Black paint on the inner box, and silver foil on the outer one, help concentrate the heat. The trapped rays make the inside hot enough to cook casseroles, bake bread and boil water.
What the box also does is eliminate the need in developing countries for rural residents to cut down trees for firewood. About 3 billion people around the world do so, adding to deforestation and, in turn, global warming.
By allowing users to boil water, the simple device could also potentially save the millions of children who die from drinking unclean water.
Bohmer’s invention on Thursday won the FT Climate Change Challenge, which sought to find and publicize the most innovative and practical solution to climate change.
“A lot of scientists are working on ways to send people to Mars. I was looking for something a little more grassroots, a little simpler,” Bohmer said Thursday.
Bohmer’s contest win notwithstanding, solar cooking with a cardboard oven isn’t new. Two American women, Barbara Kerr and Sherry Cole, were the solar box cooker’s first serious promoters in the 1970s. They and others joined forces to create the non-profit Solar Cookers International — originally called Solar Box Cookers International — in 1987
Although Germany is still the leading nation in total grid-connected solar photovoltaic capacity, this news now means Spain has surged into second place there. The report comes as an embarrassment for a floundering Japan, who used to lead the world, but now has fallen to third place in total capacity and forth place in added capacity.
Spain added 1.7 million kilowatts of capacity in 2008, followed by Germany at 1.5 million kilowatts. The United States lagged behind in a distant third place at 300,000 kilowatts, followed by Japan with only 240,000 kilowatts. The news is disappointing for Japan, but it should be equally as distressing for the United States, which continues to show only slow improvements year.
:}
This is why. They give awards for being sustainable!
In 2007, Barcelona won the ManagEnergy Local Energy Action Award for their committment to Sustainable Energy Solutions in Barcelona.The Award was presented to Imma Mayol i Beltran, Vice-Mayor of Barcelona and President of Agència d’Energia de Barcelona, Spain during the plenary session of the ManagEnergy Annual Conference Award by Alfonso González Finat, Conference Chair [left].
Imma Mayol
Deputy Mayor and Chairman of Sustainability, Barcelona
Summary
The goals of Barcelona City Council’s Plan for Energy Improvement in Barcelona (2002-2010) are to increase the use of renewable energy (especially solar energy), reduce the use of non-renewable energy sources and lower the emissions produced by energy consumption in order to meet Barcelona City Council’s international protection commitments. This integrated plan includes a quantification of the energy used and emissions produced in the city and provide scope for municipal action to promote an environmentally sustainable city, reducing air pollution and the consumption of fossil fuels in the process. As part of its plan a Solar Thermal Ordinance has been introduced. The aim of the ordinance is to regulate, through local legislation, the implementation of low-temperature systems for collecting and using active solar energy for the production of hot water for buildings. New buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment are required to use solar energy to supply 60% of their running hot water requirements. Since its enforcement licenses for the installation of a total of 14,028 square meters of solar panels have been requested with annual savings of 11,222 Megawatt hours and a corresponding reduction in eCO2 emissions of 1,973 tonnes per year.
Results
The strategies named promotion policies and demonstration projects have been present in the city for several years, with different examples such as the installation of solar systems in schools, sports centres (solar thermal installation in the Olympics Swimming Pool ) or in some other public buildings (solar photovoltaic installation in the Town Hall building).
Concerning legal instruments, Barcelona is the first European city to have a Solar thermal ordinance. According to this bylaw all new buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment are obligated to use solar energy to supply 60% of their running hot water requirements. This solar ordinance was approved by the Barcelona City Council in July 1999 and entered into force in August 2000. This new policy has brought Barcelona to multiply per more than 10 the surface of solar thermal square metres (licenses requested), moving from 1,1 sqm /1.000 inhabitants (in 2000) to 13 sqm/1.000 inhabitants [as of march 2004, the licenses requested for the installation of solar panels made up a total of: 19.543 sqm of solar panels (before: 1650 sqm)]. We are happy to see these results and specially to see that more than 20 Spanish cities are now “replicating” this initiative taking Barcelona as a model.
The Barcelona Energy Improvement Plan (PMEB), a 10 year plan adopted in 2002, and the Barcelona Energy Agency, are two major management instruments that ensure the commitment of the City to further promote these energy measures in a planned and structured manner. The Barcelona Energy Improvement Plan proposes a series of measures and 55 projects for local action up to the year 2010, these being centred on energy savings and in the use of renewable energies.
The municipal action promoting a sustainable energy city also works towards the integration of sustainable energy measures in urban developments, an example of this integration are thesustainable energy measures in the Forum Barcelona 2004 area. The major Sustainable Energy measures in the Forum 2004 area are the following:
Urban solar FV power station (10.700 sqm, 1,3 MWpic)
Spain forges ahead with plans to build concentrating solar power plants, establishing the country and Spanish companies as world leaders in the emerging field. At the same time, the number of installed photovoltaic systems is growing exponentially, and researchers continue to explore new ways to promote and improve solar power. This is the seventh in an eight-part series highlighting new technologies in Spain and is produced by Technology Review, Inc.’s custom-publishing division in partnership with the Trade Commission of Spain.
From the road to the Solúcar solar plant outside Seville, drivers can see what appear to be glowing white rays emanating from a tower, piercing the dry air, and alighting upon the upturned faces of the tilted mirror panels below. Appearances, though, are deceiving: those upturned mirrors are actually tracking the sun and radiating its power onto a blindingly white square at the top of the tower, creating the equivalent of the power of 600 suns, which is used to vaporize water into steam to power a turbine.
This tower plant uses concentrated solar technology – otherwise known as solar thermal power – with a central receiver. It’s the first commercial central receiver system in the world.
Spanish companies and research centers are taking the lead in the recent revival of concentrated solar power, as expanses of mirrors are being assembled around the country for concentrated solar plants. At the same time, Spanish companies are also investing in huge photovoltaic fields, as companies dramatically increase production of PV panels and investigate the next generation of PV. Spain is already fourth in the world in its use of solar power, and second in Europe behind Germany, with more than 120 MW in about 8300 installations of PV. Within only the past ten years, the number of companies working in solar energy has leapt from a couple dozen to a few hundred.
Power from the Sun’s Heat
Southern Spain, a region known the world over for its abundant sun and scarce rain, provides an ideal landscape for solar thermal power. The tower outside Seville, built and operated by Solúcar, an Abengoa company, is the first of a number of solar thermal plants and will provide about 10 MW of power. The company SENER is completing Andasol 1, the first parabolic trough plant in Europe, a 50 MW system outside Granada that will begin operation in the summer of 2008.
Solar thermal power, also known as concentrating solar, works by utilizing the heat of the sun (unlike PV panels, which work on the principle of the movement of electrons between layers when the sun strikes the materials).
:}
At one level this is great. At a personal level it sucks.
I have this theory that the oil market is broken. I predicted that gasoline prices would spike this summer NO MATTER what the price of oil. In other words the price of oil has been decoupled. I think it is the result of speculators driving the price up last year past 3$$ a gallon. The Saudi’s always said that that was a “psychological barrier” for Americans. Maybe they were right and the speculators were stupid.
Search results for: » hot energy stocks «
See free report below for more information…
FREE Report!
“The Only Energy Stock You’ll Ever Need”
Obama’s “Repower America” initiative will pour hundreds of billions into new energy projects — creating an estimated 3 million NEW U.S. jobs over the next two years!
Domestic natural gas production will surge… In fact, CNBC claims Obama’s administration “should be a boon to natural gas producers.” Today may be your one-time chance to get in early on the coming “Natural Gas Boom.”
Find out the name and ticker symbol of the leading manufacturer of natural gas pipelines and highly specialized equipment for tapping new natural gas wells in a new FREE report from The Motley Fool called, “The Only Energy Stock You’ll Ever Need!”
To claim your copy of this premium stock report just click the “Click Here, It’s Free” button below and you’ll instantly access our latest and best research, FREE!
Even Warren Buffett has been bamboozled by oil.He admitted it in his latest annual report to the shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway(NYSE: BRK-A) — the holding company he runs. In his own words: “I bought a large amount of ConocoPhillips(NYSE: COP) stock when oil and gas prices were near their peak. I in no way anticipated the dramatic fall in energy prices that occurred in the last half of the year.”Specifically, he made the bulk of his purchases during the six months ending Sept. 30, 2008 — you know, the same time in which oil prices peaked near $150 a barrel.
The price of oil is now around $50 a barrel, and ConocoPhillips’ stock price has tanked in lockstep with the oil freefall. Buffett clearly bought oil too early. But is it still too early for us to buy up oil stocks now?
Now may be the time
Those bullish on oil point to the inevitability of “peak oil,” arguing that the time will come when we hit the peak of global oil production. From that point on, we’ll be able to pump less and less oil out of the ground. In economic terms, we’ll face decreasing supply.
Meanwhile, bulls argue that demand will increase greatly, as China and other emerging markets fuel their economic growth with oil. On average, each person in the U.S. consumes about 25 barrels of oil a year; each person in China consumes just more than two. That’s a lot of possible future demand.
And all of us amateur economists know what happens when you restrict supply while simultaneously increasing demand: prices rise.
But then again …
Um, weren’t these the same arguments made when oil was at $147 a barrel? Yup. At that price, all these favorable supply and demand assumptions were baked in, and then some. The subsequent price fall highlights that we’ll only make great returns if we buy at low prices.
With oil prices at a third of their summer highs, oil plays are certainly tempting now. Getting in at steep discounts to the prices Buffett paid is a wonderful thing. However, when we look back in time, we see that current oil prices are four times the lows of the late 1990s.
In other words, looking at price movements by themselves just isn’t that helpful. We need to estimate oil’s intrinsic value.
How do we do that?
Beyond bubbles and busts, oil should sell at its marginal cost of production, plus some profit. Unfortunately, that’s not easy to calculate with much precision. Some oil sources are really easy to find and extract (traditional onshore) while others are especially onerous (especially oil sands and deepwater).
Oil prices fell Wednesday, weighed by weaker stock markets and waning optimism that the U.S. economy will soon recover from its severe recession.Benchmark crude for May delivery fell $1.09 to $48.06 a barrel by afternoon in Europe in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract fell $1.90 on Tuesday to settle at $49.15.Oil and stock markets have dropped this week, winding back March’s big rally, as investors eye what could be a grim first quarter U.S. corporate earnings season.
Oil traders often look to stocks as a measure of investor sentiment about the overall economy. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 2.3 percent Tuesday. Asian and European markets also dropped Wednesday.
Alcoa Inc., the world’s third-largest aluminum maker, reported a loss of $497 million for the first three months of the year as revenue dropped 44 percent. Alcoa was the first blue chip company to report first quarter earnings and is considered an indicator of upcoming results from other firms.
“The rally we saw in oil and equities was based on optimism that all the fiscal stimulus will be effective in sparking demand down the track,” said Toby Hassall, an analyst with Commodity Warrants Australia in Sydney. “But we haven’t seen much evidence of that yet.”
Let us say that you had an operable form of cancer and your doctor offered you chemotherapy. What would you say to him? Let us imagine that you had a torn tendon and your doctor offered you aspirin as your main form of treatment. What would you say? Actually you would probably CHANGE doctors…
Drilling began this week for a carbon dioxide injection well as part of an $84.3 million project beneath Archer Daniels Midland Co. property.Workers have started constructing a well that will reach more than 6,500 feet underground. The drilling of the injection well is expected to be completed in late March or early April.
No objections were filed before a late January deadline for an Illinois Environmental Protection Agency permit approving the process. That clears the way for the drilling equipment to be moved into place, said Sallie Greenberg, Illinois Geological Survey communications coordinator. The project is intended to capture carbon dioxide from ADM’s ethanol plant, convert it into liquid and pump it underground for storage before it’s emitted into the atmosphere. The U.S. Department of Energy expects 1 million tons of carbon dioxide from the plant to be injected over a three-year period, beginning in early 2010. The project is intended to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that contributes to global warming.
Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium receives Phase III funding Storage, Feb 21 2008 (Carbon Capture Journal)
– The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), and the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) have been awarded a $66.7 million contract from the US DOE.
The funding is to conduct a Phase III large-scale sequestration demonstration project in the Mt. Simon Sandstone.
The MGSC, ISGS, and Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) will work together on this carbon sequestration project, which will involve the capture and storage of CO2 from ADM’s ethanol plant in Decatur, Illinois.
The $84.3 million project will be funded by $66.7 million from the U.S. Department of Energy over a period of seven years, supplemented by cofunding from ADM, Schlumberger Carbon Services, and other corporate and state resources.
The project is designed to confirm the ability of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, a major regional saline reservoir in Illinois, to accept and store 1 million metric tonnes of CO2 over a period of three years.
:}
Already they are a year behind..Why does this sound like a replay of NUCLEAR Power. Delays….Cost over runs….Accidents… All to avoid leaving the nasty stuff in the ground in the first place. Even Scientific America gets into the act:
OXYFUEL: In September 2007 the oxyfuel combustion chamber is lifted into place at the Schwarze Pumpe power plant in Germany–one of the first power plants in the world to capture carbon dioxide. Courtesy of Vattenfal
Editor’s Note: This is the first in a series of five features on carbon capture and storage, running daily from April 6 to April 10, 2009.
Like all big coal-fired power plants, the 1,600-megawatt-capacity Schwarze Pumpe plant in Spremberg, Germany, is undeniably dirty. Yet a small addition to the facility—a tiny boiler that pipes 30 MW worth of steam to local industrial customers—represents a hope for salvation from the global climate-changing consequences of burning fossil fuel.
To heat that boiler, the damp, crumbly brown coal known as lignite—which is even more polluting than the harder black anthracite variety—burns in the presence of pure oxygen, a process known as oxyfuel, releasing as waste both water vapor and that more notorious greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2). By condensing the water in a simple pipe, Vattenfall, the Swedish utility that owns the power plant, captures and isolates nearly 95 percent of the CO2 in a 99.7 percent pure form.
That CO2 is then compressed into a liquid and given to another company, Linde, for sale; potential users range from the makers of carbonated beverages, such as Coca-Cola, to oil firms that use it to squeeze more petroleum out of declining deposits. In principle, however, the CO2 could also be pumped deep underground and locked safely away in specific rock formations for millennia.
From the International Energy Agency to the United Nations–sanctioned Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), such carbon capture and storage (CCS), particularly for coal-fired power plants, has been identified as a technology critical to enabling deep, rapid cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. After all, coal burning is responsible for 40 percent of the 30 billion metric tons of CO2 emitted by human activity every year.
“There is the potential for the U.S. and other countries to continue to rely on coal as a source of energy while at the same time protecting the climate from the massive greenhouse gas emissions associated with coal,” says Steve Caldwell, coordinator for regional climate change policy at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, a Washington, D.C. think tank.
Even President Barack Obama has labeled the technology as important for “energy independence” and included $3.4 billion in the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for “clean coal” power.
Today three types of technology can capture CO2 at a power plant. One, as at Schwarze Pumpe, involves the oxyfuel process: burning coal in pure oxygen to produce a stream of CO2-rich emissions. The second uses various forms of chemistry—in the form of amine scrubbers, special membranes or ionic liquids—to pull carbon dioxide out of a more mixed set of exhaust gases. The third is gasification, in which liquid or solid fuels are first turned into synthetic natural gas; CO2 from the conversion of the gas can be siphoned off.
:}
Then there is this:
ckmapawatt at 10:27 PM on 04/06/09
NO, NO, NO. Carbon Capture and Storage is not the answer! It is treating the symptoms and not the disease.
I recently wrote a blog looking at this same issue:
http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/03/13/carbon-capture-and-storage/Basically, we can take BILLIONS and spend it on burying something underground, or we can spend that money and put it to good use while taking the same amount of CO2 out of the air.
Carbon Capture is short term decision making and thinking that is mainly being promoted by the Coal Industry. Would you really call Carbon Capture a sustainable practice?
(Disclaimer: the below article is a thought experiment. I’m not suggesting it as a real solution, but rather a way to analyze two different carbon mitigating strategies. Enjoy!)
You might have seen the environmental articles recently related to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Basically, all CCS does is take the CO2 that coal plants produce, collect it, and pump it underground. Sounds like a good idea right? Well, on the surface it does, but let’s dig down into the actual numbers a little bit.
In order to better understand the proposed function of CCS, let’s walk through a comparison of a power generation plant with and without CCS. I’m going to look at two options:
Option 1: 500 MW (capacity before CCS) IGCC (type of coal plant) with Carbon Capture and Storage
Option 2: 500 MW IGCC plant with the money that would be used on CCS to be spent on a wind farm
In comparing our two options, pretend you’re the President of Power Generation Company for planet Earth (this is a made up company. The point is you base your decisions on what is best for the planet and the people buying your power. You don’t base your decisions on politics). In both options the 500 MW IGCC plant is already installed, you are just comparing whether to spend money on carbon capture and storage, or take the equivalent amount of money and use it for another purpose that would help the environment, in this case a wind farm.
You may ask: Why do I want to install a wind farm if my goal is to reduce CO2 (even though your real goal is to do what’s best for Earth)? Because you are all powerful, you are going to figure out how much energy the wind farm produces, then find an old dirty coal plant that produces the same amount of energy, and take that coal plant off line. Therefore, reducing the amount of CO2 that enters the atmosphere by enabling the old coal plant to be taken off line, and also helping wind power reach economies of scale.
Installing CCS or a Wind Farm that replaces old Coal:
A recent paper by David and Herzog at MIT estimated the future cost of CCS at $1,145/kw (estimated cost in 2012) of installed power. So, for the 500 MW IGCC plant, it would cost $572.5 million dollars to install CCS technology. Now, you have the option of taking this money and using it to buy a Wind Farm instead. The American Wind Energy Association states that it costs about $ 1 million to install 1 MW of generating capacity for a wind farm. Therefore, $572.5 million will enable you to install 572 MW of installed wind energy (with $500 k left over)!
In order to analyze how much CO2 will be kept out of the atmosphere by taking the old coal plant off line, we have to calculate the yearly power output of the wind farm. To do this, you need what is called a Capacity Factor. Basically, this is just the percentage of time during the year that a power producing facility produces power at its rated capacity. The organization National Wind Watch states that in 2003, the average capacity factor for US wind farms was 26.9%. Therefore, to calculate how much energy the wind farm produces (MWh) during the year:
Yearly Output (MWh) = (installed capacity)*(capacity factor)*(hours in a day)*(days in a year) =
Now we have to use this value to decide how big a coal plant this would replace. Using the wind farm yearly output and the average capacity factor for Coal plants in the US, which is 73.6%, we can use the above Yearly Energy Output equation to back-solve for the “installed capacity” the wind farm would replace:
Installed Capacity (MW) = (yearly output) ÷ (Capacity factor * hours in a day * days in a year) =
(1,347,884) ÷ (.736*24*365) = 209 MW
Therefore, if you use the $527.5 million dollars it would cost to install CCS on a 500 MW IGCC coal plant for a wind farm, the energy the wind farm produces is equivalent to a 209 MW pulverized coal plant!
Whenever you save energy, you not only save money, you also reduce the demand for such fossil fuels as coal, oil, and natural gas. Less burning of fossil fuels also means lower emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the primary contributor to global warming, and other pollutants.You do not have to do without to achieve these savings. There is now an energy efficient alternative for almost every kind of appliance or light fixture. That means that consumers have a real choice and the power to change their energy use on a revolutionary scale.The average American produces about 40,000 pounds of CO2 emissions per year. Together, we use nearly a million dollars worth of energy every minute, night and day, every day of the year. By exercising even a few of the following steps, you can cut your annual emissions by thousands of pounds and your energy bills by a significant amount!
Home appliances
Turn your refrigerator down. Refrigerators account for about 20% of Household electricity use. Use a thermometer to set your refrigerator temperature as close to 37 degrees and your freezer as close to 3 degrees as possible. Make sure that its energy saver switch is turned on. Also, check the gaskets around your refrigerator/freezer doors to make sure they are clean and sealed tightly.
Set your clothes washer to the warm or cold water setting, not hot. Switching from hot to warm for two loads per week can save nearly 500 pounds of CO2 per year if you have an electric water heater, or 150 pounds for a gas heater.
Make sure your dishwasher is full when you run it and use the energy saving setting, if available, to allow the dishes to air dry. You can also turn off the drying cycle manually. Not using heat in the drying cycle can save 20 percent of your dishwasher’s total electricity use.
Turn down your water heater thermostat. Thermostats are often set to 140 degrees F when 120 is usually fine. Each 10 degree reduction saves 600 pounds of CO2 per year for an electric water heater, or 440 pounds for a gas heater. If every household turned its water heater thermostat down 20 degrees, we could prevent more than 45 million tons of annual CO2 emissions – the same amount emitted by the entire nations of Kuwait or Libya.
1. Replace old light bulbs with energy saving fluorescent bulbs. They may cost more, but will save you much more in the long run.
2. Turn off all electronic devices that are not in use. Not only turn them off but try to remember to unplug them. You will be surprised how much you will save with this simple step!
3. Air dry your dishes. When washing in a dish washer, the heat generated during the wash cycle is more than enough to dry your dishes.
4. Clean or replace air filters regularly. This can vary depending on the filter you are using. It’s important to follow the instruction found on the packaging. If you no longer have it, here are some basic guidelines:
Deep Pleated = Once or twice a year
Ordinary Flat or Pleated = 2-3 Months
Traditional Fiberglass/Polyester = Monthly
It is also important that your air filter fits properly and air is moving through it and not around it.
5. Close vents and doors in unused rooms. No need to cool or warm areas that people are not in.
The truth is definitely becoming clearer. Thanks to widespread news coverage and Al Gore’s book and documentary, people are becoming more and more aware that energy needs to be conserved, even if it means inconvenience. Recycling isn’t something only “tree-huggers” do anymore. Even big companies are getting into the habit of recycling and reusing their waste products. My local Wal-mart has barrels set up to collect used plastic bags and one of the local grocery stores uses their cardboard boxes instead of bags for their customers to carry their purchases home.
With all the basics covered; changing light bulbs, recycling your paper, plastic and metal goods, and turning off the faucets when brushing your teeth, you are doing a great job of conserving the Earth’s natural resources. But there is more that you could be doing. Follows is a list of lesser-known ways to conserve energy in the comfort of your own home.
Replace the filters on your air conditioner every month that you are using it. By running the machine with a clean filter, it doesn’t have to work as hard and doesn’t need to use more energy to achieve the keep the rooms cool.
Turn down the water temperature on your water heater. By lower the temperature of the water to 120 degrees, the heater won’t have to use as much energy to heat up the water to a warmer temperature. It’s also safer to have the water heater lower if you have young children in the house, as the hot water won’t scald them if the heater is turned to 120 degrees or cooler.
Avoid over checking your food while it is cooking in the oven. Every time you open the oven door while it is on, the temperature inside the oven drops as much as 30 degrees. The oven then has to expend energy to bring the temperature back up. By reducing the number of times you open the door to check on your meal, you can save energy.
Avoid washing your clothes in hot water. Most clothes that are not stained can be cleaned in cold water (it’s also better for the dyes and less harsh on the fabric). Clothes that are dirty but not overly stained can be pretreated and washed in warm water. Hot water is really only necessary for heavily stained clothes or if you are trying to eliminate pests such as lice. Many detergent companies are formulating their products to work as well in cold water as in warm and hot in order to help consumers conserve energy.
Adjust the blades on ceiling fans for seasonal changes. The fan company (and occasionally the blades themselves) will inform you of the optimal position for your fan blade to keep the air circulating during the summer and winter months.
Doing these five things may seem like an inconvenience, especially when all our lives are so busy already. Just remember that we only have one planet and it is up to us to treat the best way we can.
Jennifer Carpenter is a work at home mother of three, two teens and a preschooler. She writes about parenting, social, health, and financial issues from her home in Warwick, RI. Jenn also hosts a website discussing the different ways she is making money online and achieving her financial freedom.
No Gas to Mess With
Easy Starting
Environmentally Conscious
Case Study (45 KB PDF)
