Green Medicine – How to save energy by never using it in the first place

Posted on April 1, 2010 by Doug Nicodemus

Funny I just saw a report on PBS that relates to this:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/latin_america/jan-june10/peru_03-31.html

The vast majority happen in remote areas, 99 percent of them in developing countries. In Peru, a new national strategy to turn those numbers around is taking shape. And the program is being seen as a model for Latin America and the developing world.

Here, in the remote region of Ayacucho, 12,000 feet above sea level, sits the village of Vilcashuaman. Many hours from the nearest airstrip, it’s a town so remote that even the impressive Inca ruins draw few tourists.

A casa materna, or birthing home, was built for women late in pregnancy to live in as their due date nears. And it’s a centerpiece in the government’s new strategy.

Dr. Oscar Ugarte Ubillus is Peru’s health minister.

DR. OSCAR UGARTE UBILLUS, Peruvian health minister (through translator): We detected that one of the critical problems is the amount of time and distance it takes to get attention when complications arise in childbirth. So, we have created 450 waiting homes throughout the country.

RAY SUAREZ: At the casa materna in Vilcashuaman, pregnant women bring their children. They make their own meals with ingredients from a hospital garden, and live as if at home.

Twenty-nine-year-old Eulalia Centro is here with her 1-year-old daughter. Eulalia had her first child at home without complications, before the birthing home existed. But she lives in an area with no roads. It takes a full day on horseback just to get to Vilcashuaman.

So, Eulalia chose to have her second, then her third child at the birthing home.

EULALIA CENTRO, mother (through translator): Pregnant women are always dying at home, so that is why we decided to come here.

RAY SUAREZ: The birthing home is occupied nearly every day of the year. Pregnancies in the region are tracked with a simple felt map. The circles represent each pregnant woman’s home and the number of hours it takes to reach them.

Red felt represents pregnant teenagers, at greater risk for death in childbirth because their bodies haven’t fully matured. Twenty-four-hour staff are trained to deal with obstetric emergencies, like breech babies, placenta blockage, and hemorrhaging.

Josefina Montes Perez is an OB-GYN at the casa.

They did not try to build an air conditioned hospital, with a helicopter pad filled with 1.5 million $$$ a year doctors. They made it a place where they grow their own food, heat water with the sun, use natural herbs for labor and have an an ambulance, with blood and someone who knows how to control the bleeding if there is a problem. They cut the mortality rate by 50%. You can supply healthcare to people cheap. You can not supply industrial healthcare cheap…what got me to thinking about this?

http://www.greenmedicine.net/

MISSION

The mission of Green Medicine™ is to investigate and support research efforts on medicinal substances and medical foods from Peru.

ABOUT GREEN MEDICINE

GREEN MEDICINE is the website for information on Dr. Williams’ research in the upper Amazon under the Institute for Amazonian Studies (IAS), which he founded in 1996, and the Pino Center for Traditional Healing in 2004. His intention is to advance the mission of Green Medicine by working closely with Peruvian research organizations, individual investigators, universities, socially and environmentally responsible businesses, and traditional tribes of the upper Amazon and Andes for the purpose of exploring the following areas of study:

Evolutionary Biology in Tropical Rainforests:

Fragmentation of natural ecosystems
Robustness of plant and animal evolution and behavior
Complexity theory in natural ecosystems

Basic Research in the Therapeutic Value of Natural Compounds from Plants and Other Biological Substances

Development of rainforest botanical and biological medicines and extracts from natural products including antiviral, anticancer, immunomodulatory, and health promoting adaptogenic substances

Healing Methods and Medicines of Traditional Tribal Peoples

Ethnobotanical investigation for new plant medicines
Ethnomedical investigation of indigenous healing practices in addition to plant medicines
Consciousness exploration among indigenous people involving natural entheogenic compounds and medicinal plants

Dr. Williams has been working in Latin American since 1969 and in Peru since 1996.
For information on his books and integrative medicine practice, visit www.drjewilliams.com.
To view his site on shamanic healing, go to www.andeancodex.com.

Healthcare And Computer Energy Savings – Turn them off and save money

Posted on March 30, 2010 by Doug Nicodemus

That is right – turn off your computer when not using it and the medical world could save millions of $$$. Why don’t they energy manage their data networks? Because they don’t have to, they think they are Gods.

http://it.med.miami.edu/x1159.xml

Computer power management

What’s the big deal?

Research shows that personal computers (PC) are not being actively used during the vast majority of the time that they are kept on. It is estimated that an average PC is in use 4 hours each work day and idle for another 5.5 hours. It’s also estimated that some 30-40 percent of the US’s work PCs are left running at night and on weekends.

Office equipment is the fastest growing electricity load in the commercial sector. Computer systems are believed to account for 10 percent or more of commercial electricity consumption already. Since computer systems generate waste heat, they also increase the amount of electricity necessary to cool office spaces. (Yes, they lower the cost of heating somewhat. That’s not a big factor in Miami.)

For the Medical Center, we estimate the savings from PC power management to be hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, even without factoring in increased office cooling costs. Considerable savings are also possible from easing wear-and-tear on the computers themselves.

If you’d like to make a savings calculation for yourself or your organization — on electricity, dollars, trees, CO2 emissions — you can do that here.

Isn’t this “automatic” on most computers?

Almost all computers and monitors sold in the US today come with ENERGY-STAR energy-saving features. But they generally don’t work unless you set them.

Both Windows and Apple/Mac systems allow you to set the amount of idle time that occurs before the system goes into “standby” or “sleep” mode:

On Microsoft (Windows) systems, times are set in the Power Options section of the Control Panel. Get there by the following path: Start > [My Computer >] Control Panel > [Performance and Maintenance >] Power Options.
On Apple (OS X) systems, standby and power option settings are set under System Preferences. Go there and then select Energy Saver.

Standby/sleep modes are suitable for when your computer is idle for an hour or more. A full system shut-down and power-off is appropriate at the end of the work day.

Will power management hurt my computer?

It’s a myth that turning computers off and on shortens their lives — unless you turn them off many, many, many times every day. It’s also a myth that starting the computer requires a lot of “extra energy”: it actually only takes the equivalent of a few seconds of running time power.

Computers generate a lot of heat — principally from their central processor units (CPU). Allowing a “cool down” during a power-off period will generally increase the life span of the entire system. Allowing your computer to rest its moving parts, like the spinning hard drive, cooling fans, etc., will tend to increase the life-span of those components.

The reboot of the system that takes place when power is restored has another positive effect. Many software patches and upgrades require a reboot to be fully installed and functional. A computer that is only rarely rebooted may lag behind on software updates, and accordingly be more vulnerable to malware attacks.

Is there any downside to power management?

Obviously you have to consider the value of your time too. A fully powered-down “off” computer takes a considerably longer time to restore to operational status than one in stand-by mode. One in stand-by takes longer to restore than one that is fully on — although not much longer.

We’re not recommending you turn your system entirely off unless you plan to be away from it for a long time — such as at the end of the work day. We do recommend setting a sleep/stand-by mode for when your system is idle for 30-60 minutes or more.

Unless your system is controlling an ongoing process, such as running/monitoring laboratory equipment, there is usually no good reason to leave it on when you are away for extended periods. And many good reasons not to.

How does power management work?

Power management savings come from reducing hardware power to sleep levels when the computer is not fully active. Idle-ness is defined by an absence of mouse or keyboard activity (and no on-going processes for applications) for a set time period.

That’s right they saved hundreds of thousands of $$$. So how many Medical Centers like this exist? Well how many Major Universities are there in the US. That is right…hundreds of millions of $$$$

Green Hospitals And Environmental Doctors – They sure are hard to change

Posted on March 25, 2010 by Doug Nicodemus

People always ask me, “why did you study psychology”? I always reply, “because saving the planet Earth from Humans is all about changing behavior. Doctors are a case in point. Doctors are investors. What do they invest in? Why highly profitable things…like coal mines, plastics manufacturing, and utilities. So they know that if they change their behavior at work – even though they make money in the short run – in the long term they could lose money as the very things that make them wealthy become less profitable. They also know that their work load will drop because people stay healthier. So, while all other businesses are cutting costs through things like recycling and waste reduction on the back end and enviro friendly practices on the front end you still hear terms like “barriers” and “hurdles” in the healthcare industry. These are polite terms for “no way” and “not in your lifetime”. In all fairness, this article is dated 2003 and in some ways that is a lifetime ago…others not so much…

http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/archives/2003/06/medical_product.html

« The Future of the Medical Device Industry | Main | Move Over X-Rays, Welcome T-Rays »

June 5, 2003

Medical Products Struggle to Get “Green”

By Katrina C. Arabe

Designing medical products for recyclability is tough. And recapturing medical equipment for recycling is even trickier. Learn how the industry is managing the journey toward “green”:

The eco-friendliness drive is accelerating in the medical products industry, but the road to “green” is marked with many potholes. For starters, increased use of disposable products has exacerbated hospital waste. And designing medical products to be easily disassembled and recycled continues to be confounding because many medical devices are required to be extra-tough—able to endure falls and harsh sterilization. But many manufacturers, vendors and suppliers are facing such obstacles head-on.

“Two years ago you couldn’t get group purchasing organizations for hospitals to talk about environmentally preferable purchasing,” says Laura Brannen, co-director for Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E), “but now many champion the cause.” For instance, Baxter Healthcare of Illinois, one of the largest medical products manufacturers, together with group purchaser Premier Inc. and Catholic Health Care West, both of California, is trying to create an advisory group that will delve into recycling and waste-reduction issues, such as decreasing medical packaging and recycling single-use plastics.

And the H2E program is attacking the environmental problem from many fronts. “H2E hopes to provide the framework and initiate discussions on how the industry can create processes and infrastructure that develop take-back programs, or products and packaging that are stackable and returnable,” says Brannen. “H2E is also pursuing partnerships between manufacturers and distributors to establish methods that let distributors back-haul plastics to the manufacturer or plastic recyclers. The group’s ultimate goal is reaching medical device designers so products have minimal environmental impact.”

What a Waste

Hospitals produce over 6,600 tons of waste per day, estimates H2E, at least 15% more than 10 years ago due to the proliferation of disposable products. And this estimate does not even take into account the output of private medical and dental clinics, veterinarians, long-term care, laboratories and independent blood banks.

Accounting for 75-80% of a healthcare facility’s waste, solid waste is the most sizeable portion, says H2E, encompassing paper, metal, glass and plastics. Chlorinated materials, such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC), are especially problematic because incinerating waste with chlorinated content produces dioxins, which can cause cancer and hormonal defects. In fact, burning medical waste with chlorinated materials is the third biggest source of dioxins in the environment, says Health Care Without Harm (HCWH). And globally, waste incinerators account for 69% of dioxins, estimates HCWH.

PVC is found in a wide range of medical products, from disposable intravenous (IV) bags and tubing to bedpans and notebook binders. Additionally, it’s common in durable medical products, where it is particularly difficult to reduce because of a dearth of PVC-labeling and PVC-free devices. “A first step in reducing PVC use in these applications would be to require vendors to disclose the PVC content in their products,” says Brannen. “Medical products and their packaging are often not labeled with their contents.”

Currently, there is no U.S. industry standard that calls for the labeling of injection molded parts, says Chris Belisle, senior project engineer for injection molder Phillips Plastics Corp. of Wisconsin. However, several internationally owned medical OEMS are preparing for recycling mandates that may be enforced in the future. For example, Datex-Ohmeda Inc. of Finland, a supplier of anesthesia equipment, denotes the resin acronym on every injection molded part.

Designing for Disassembly

An even more fundamental approach to the “green” issue is designing medical products for easy dismantling and recycling—not an easy feat for many medical devices. “Common methods for making disassembly easier such as snap fits, may work well for some products, but they may not be appropriate for use in certain medical applications,” says Belisle. Unlike other products, many medical devices are required to pass demanding drop tests and to withstand severe sterilization that could damage fragile internal electronic circuits. In some cases, designing for recyclability could even negatively impact medical product design and increase production costs.

Nonetheless, some companies are incorporating recyclability concerns in product development. Says Pedro Torres, a supply manager for Datex-Ohmeda’s manufacturing plant in Wisconsin, “Taking time to review each step in a development process may at first appear to slow it down, but we found that strategic cradle-to-grave program reviews improve current products and provide cost-saving initiatives for future programs.”

Design engineers can take certain measures to promote a product’s future recyclability. According to Jack Pape, a VP with rotational molding company, Meese Orbitron Dunne Co., New Jersey, engineers can reduce the priciest part of disassembly—labor—by incorporating simple hinges. Furthermore, he recommends specifying recyclable materials, such as linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE), as well as materials that are commonly used and likely to remain in wide circulation.

Engineers should also refrain from modifying the material through additives, textures and foaming agents because this drives up the cost of recycling and diminishes the recycled material’s potential market and value, Pape says. Moreover, he advises engineers to consider the effect of weathering—dirt, debris, and wear and tear—on recyclability. Finally, he tells engineers to steer clear of adhesive labels and inks whenever possible because they are difficult and expensive to remove.

Other Hurdles

Pape’s company already designs many products for future recyclability, but he acknowledges that it’s only a start. “Just because a product can be recycled doesn’t mean it will be economically viable to do so when the product is ready to enter the waste stream,” he explains. “Nor is there any guarantee there will be a market for the recycled material.”

And that’s not all design engineers must take into account. Another issue is how the price of the recycled material will match up against that of the virgin material at the product’s anticipated date of obsolescence or disposal. “Further clouding the forecast,” he notes, “are the possibilities that new materials may be developed after manufacturing that render recycled material useless. And environmental regulations may be enacted after manufacturing that could eliminate use of the material or increase the cost to use it.”

“After considering these possibilities, design engineers must address their greatest and most costly challenge: how the product will be removed from the waste stream and transferred into the recycling stream, assuming there’s a market for the material,” continues Pape. He points out that there is currently no government-sponsored collection program for obsolete medical equipment. “Who will bear the responsibility for tagging a given product for recycling at the end of its useful life and who will assume the cost of shipping it to a recycling operation that can accommodate the given material?” he asks.

Long Road Ahead

Indeed, medical product manufacturers, vendors and suppliers have their work cut out for them. But through more conscientious purchasing, eco-friendly design and established recycling programs, they can make steady progress in their long journey toward a “green” medical products industry.

Source: Think “RECYCLE” for Medical Products
Jean M. Hoffman
Medical Design News

The link to the article was broken so I printed only the author’s name for attribution. However here is the drirect link to the publication and part of a 2008 article. Apparently GREEN In Medicine has gotten a bit more lively:

http://www.medicaldesignnews.com

http://medicaldesign.com/engineering-prototyping/sustainable_design_medical/index.html

Sustainable design for medical devices

Mar 1, 2008 12:00 PM, Chris Kadamus, Principal Design Engineer, Cambridge Consultants, Cambridge, Mass.

Chris Kadamus

Medical products account for an enormous amount of the solid, industrial, and chemical waste in developed countries throughout the world. In the U.S. alone, hospitals produce more than 6,600 tons of waste per day, including 800 tons of non-hazardous, and potentially recyclable, plastic parts. In addition, many medical products use hazardous chemicals and solvents during manufacture or include materials that can be harmful if not disposed of properly. Disposal of non-hazardous and hazardous medical waste can be costly from an environmental and financial point of view. As such, it could benefit the medical-device industry to embrace sustainable design, a concept in which products are evaluated in terms of financial impact and social and environmental impact as well.

Historically, the medical-device industry as a whole has been risk averse. This is primarily because of stringent FDA regulations, fear that alternate methods or materials may compromise patient health, and an overarching fear of legal liability. Adding design for sustainability to an already rigorous set of design requirements, including biocompatibility and aseptic assembly, can put an additional burden on design teams whose primary goals are time-to-market and FDA compliance.

Furthermore, much of the medical-device industry generates most of their revenue from disposable products. Approximately 90% of medical-device waste consists of items designated for one-time use. Fears of contamination, the high costs of sterilization and reprocessing, and the desire for continuous revenue have firmly anchored the disposable products’ business model in the minds of industry leaders.

There are, however, a number of driving factors and significant competitive advantages in bringing sustainable design to the medical-device industry. First, while the U.S. has lagged in the ratification of environment legislation, the European Union has moved to ban some hazardous materials, promote recycling and encourage energy efficiency using legislation. Standards such as WEEE (Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment), RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment), REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals), and the EuP regulations (Energy Using Products), while not currently applicable to the U.S. or enforced for many medical products, have gained significant support in recent years. Many experts agree it is only a matter of time before these or similar standards will be enacted in the U.S. and become applicable to the medical-device industry.

Risk adverse my ass.

Cutting Healthcare’s Enormous Energy Waste – This article is not on topic BUT

Posted on March 24, 2010 by Doug Nicodemus

I had originally planned on taking a look at how much an X-Ray costs in energy terms. The Healthcare industry sucks up huge amounts of energy. Another thing I planned on looking at is their huge computer usage. Like utility companies, hospitals are nothing but giant billing agencies, add to that all of the data they must store and a hospital has got to be gulping the juice. This articles points out that ALL BURNING Behavior is much like most medical behavior, just plain sloppy living.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1907514,00.html

The Key to Fixing Health Care and Energy: Use Less

By Michael Grunwald Monday, Jun. 29, 2009

Our health-care crisis and our energy crisis are complex dilemmas made of many complex problems. But our biggest problem in both health care and energy is essentially the same simple problem: we use too much. And in both cases, there’s a simple explanation for much of the problem: our providers get paid more when we use more.

Undoing these waste-promoting incentives — the “fee-for-service” payment system that awards more fees to doctors and hospitals for providing more services, and the regulated electricity rates that reward utilities for selling more power and building more plants — would not solve all our health-care and energy problems. But it would be a major step in the right direction. President Obama has pledged to pass massive overhauls of both sectors this year, but if Congress lacks the stomach for comprehensive reforms — and these days it’s looking like Kate Moss in the stomach department — a more modest effort to realign perverse incentives could take a serious bite out of both crises. (See pictures of Cleveland’s smart approach to health care.)

Everyone knows we use too much energy. Our addiction to fossil fuels is torching the planet, empowering hostile petro-states and straining our wallets. Meanwhile, studies by scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere suggest that more than half of our energy is lost through inefficiencies, calculations that don’t even include the energy we fritter away through wasteful behavior like leaving lights on or idling cars. We’re on course to increase electricity usage an extra 30% by 2030, which could require trillions of dollars’ worth of new emissions-belching power plants, so it would be much better to eliminate the usage that doesn’t add to our quality of life.

Please read the rest of the brief article. It is thought provoking.

More on Green Medical Technology tomorrow.

Copenhagen Wraps Up With An Agreement As Thin As Gruel – Cold gruel at that

Posted on December 18, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

First it is Jam Band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVs6X9yIM_k

Things have gone pretty dismally in Copenhagen. The Developed Countries tried to bully the Developing Countries. The Newly Industrializing Countries sniffed at the DeIndustrializing Countries. The US yelled at China and China yelled back and jingled the coins in its pockets. After all that excitement I must say:

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t291-e4FLs

GRUEL

Gruel is a food preparation consisting of some type of cereal— oat, wheat or rye flour, or also rice— boiled in water or milk. It is a thinner version of porridge that may be more often drunk than eaten and need not even be cooked. Historically, gruel, often made from millet or barley, or in hard times of chestnut flour and even the less tannic acorns of some oaks, has been the staple of the human diet, especially that of the peasantry. The importance of gruel as a form of sustenance is especially noted for invalids^[1] and recently weaned children.

Gruel consumption has traditionally been associated with poverty. Gruel is a colloquial expression of any slop that is of unknown character, e.g. pea soup; soup is derived from sop, the slice of bread which was soaked with broth or thin gruel.[2

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM77dUW-DBI )

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/dec/18/copenhagen-climate-change-summit-liveblog

Copenhagen climate change summit – final day live blog

World leaders are still trying to thrash out a last minute compromise climate deal. These are the final day’s main developments:
• In a disappointing speech Obama admitted that the talks are in the balance.
• Leaked documents showed a draft agreement is extremely weak.
• Obama held two crucial talks with the Chinese premier Wen Jiabao.

Posted by Matthew Weaver Friday 18 December 2009 08.14 GMT guardian.co.uk

4.43pm:
Greenpeace has expressed its disgust at the draft Copenhagen accord currently doing the rounds.

Its climate campaigner Joss Garman said:

This latest draft is so weak as to be meaningless. It’s more like a G8 communique than the legally binding agreement we need. It doesn’t even include a timeline to give it legal standing or an explicit temperature target. It’s hard to imagine our leaders will try to present this document to the world and keep a straight face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dnrosVyamY

All this haggling is going to get us right where the top 500 POLLUTERS want us, sucking up their soot and poisons:

4.57pm:
A third draft of the climate is agreement being considered by world leaders, according to AP. But they are some way off the pace, according to our environment editor John Vidal – he’s looking at sixth version.

For what its worth the third version reinstates targets omitted from earlier ones. It says rich countries should reduce their greenhouse emissions by at least 80% by the year 2050.

It adds that developing countries’ emissions should be 15-30% below “business as usual”.

Stay tuned for more details on that later version.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8jw-ifqwkM )
This not the way that JESUS would have acted:

5.28pm:
Tim Jones climate policy officer from World Development Movement, joins the chorus of disgust.

This summit has been in complete disarray from start to finish, and now appears to be culminating in a shameful and monumental failure that will condemn millions of people around the world to untold suffering. The leaders of rich countries have refused to lead and instead sought to bribe and bully developing nations to sign up to the equivalent of a death warrant. The best outcome now is no deal. Leaders of rich countries should go home and adopt new year resolutions to become low carbon economies and pay their climate debt. Then we may have a chance of a properly just and effective agreement in 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3354flS1KJs&feature=related

On A Happier Front:

Energy-thrifty White House turns deeper shade of green

By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The White House complex and the federal government are going green — and not just with Christmas trees and holly.

As President Obama meets with world leaders at the United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen today, the government he runs at home is quietly engaged in an unprecedented effort to reduce its carbon footprint, increase energy efficiency, conserve water, cut waste and more.

In the complex that includes the White House, that means more efficient heating and cooling systems as well as organic paint, low-flow toilets and lights that turn off by themselves. Even the 800 Christmas ornaments adorning the 18-foot tree in the White House Blue Room were recycled from previous administrations in a nod to the environment and the bad economy.

GREEN HOUSE: Eco-friendly living tips

In many of the federal government’s other 500,000 buildings, the effort to go green includes cutting the amount of garbage produced in half and installing more efficient lights.

“This is a big leap forward for the federal government,” says Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of Obama’s White House Council on Environmental Quality. And the effort will be “sustainable itself beyond this president.”

Sutley says the federal government is the country’s single largest energy consumer, using 1.6% of all the power used nationwide, so reducing energy consumption will mean big savings.

The nation is the world’s second-largest producer of greenhouse gases, behind China, and the cuts could help there, as well, environmentalists say.

Erich Pica of Friends of the Earth says, “There are many economies of scale that President Obama can achieve by forcing the federal government to rethink its energy habits.Dot Dot Dot (as they say)

Environmental groups say Obama’s efforts go far beyond what’s been done before. “There’s real substance behind the rhetoric,” says Joel Makower, editor of GreenBiz.com, which reports on the greening of mainstream business.

Under a 15-page executive order Obama signed in October, government agencies must implement a host of changes, Sutley says. Among the requirements:

• Agencies must reduce waste by 50% by 2015.

• Agencies must show a 26% improvement in water efficiency by 2020.

• All new buildings and any major renovations to existing buildings must be eligible for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification given by the U.S. Green Building Council to environmentally responsible buildings. In and around Washington, the Pentagon and the ornate 121-year-old Eisenhower Executive Office Building adjacent to the White House are in the process of becoming LEED-certified.

• The government’s 600,000 vehicles must operate with 30% less petroleum by 2020.

Pentagon officials, Sutley says, are “thinking about how they can power their vehicles in different ways, so they don’t have to transport as much fuel,” a change that would save money and improve safety for servicemembers.

So Copenhagen was pretty much a bust but it’s Christmas so let’s rock out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQXMT_QhguI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYcCnL7cu10&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBKPhD1LIqA

Alice In Greenland – Guest poster Jed Morey has his say

Posted on December 14, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

I rarely have “guest posters”, mainly because nobody asks but also because I like to run my mouth. I forget how I found Jed’s Column but it makes so much sense in such a short space that I actually ASKED Jed if I could use it. How rare is that? So far that would be 2 people Jed and Dan Piraro soooo without further ado (I always wanted to say that…damn).

http://www.longislandpress.com/2009/12/09/alice-in-greenland/

Alice In Greenland

Written by Jed Morey on Dec 9th, 2009 and filed under Columns, Off The Reservation. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

Want to take a trip down the environmental rabbit hole? Spark a discussion about climate change and watch human warming reach extremes far greater than any place on the globe.

To the right you have the laughable stance adopted by the conservative movement that humans are having no effect on climate and the atmosphere. At the other extreme are non-scientist policy makers and pundits holding “The End Is Near” signs on every street corner claiming that Iowa and Chad will be beachfront property by the end of next year.

Personally, I’m not qualified to discern which side is closer to representing the truth.

What I do know is that the debate should remain in scientific circles because I have yet to meet anyone qualified to entirely explain the variances in global temperatures. While world leaders are dithering in Copenhagen and arguing over hacked e-mails about tree rings versus thermometers, the public needs to close its ears to the noise produced on both sides of the global warming debate and focus on the tangible aspects of industrial pollution.

You don’t need to be an expert on carbon emissions or reference “parts per billion” to understand that we are seriously screwing up the planet. Public health has been compromised by the rise of industry. While there are several factors that contribute to the decline in public health, much of the discussion centers on energy production and sources because it’s the baseline driver of industry. So let’s look at it.

First of all, there is no such thing as clean coal. True, you can clean coal emissions, but the process of scrubbing coal to burn cleaner is just as much of an environmental disaster. There is no such thing as clean nuclear energy either, for that matter. True, the emissions are carbon neutral, but at some point every nuclear facility must dispose of the spent fuel used in production. The spent fuel must be stored somewhere and wherever that place is, it’s no place you want to be near.

Large wind farms in lakes and oceans are unrealistically expensive and remarkably inefficient. The Danes will tell you differently and espouse the virtues of wind power—just look at the marvel that is Copenhagen—but the fact remains that they are the largest manufacturers of wind turbines and have a vested economic interest in, shall we say, massaging the numbers. However, wind, solar and geothermal energy present viable options on a micro level and should be encouraged in every corner and backyard of the world. Individuals and small businesses need affordable access to clean energy solutions, not just municipalities.

Economically, there is no such thing as cheap oil anymore. Whether or not the Saudis or Venezuelans care to admit it, we have hit peak oil in the largest, most accessible oil fields around the world. Period. Are there places on Earth with large reserves of oil and natural gas? Yup. Is it easy to get to? Nope. Expensive to retrieve? Yup. Environmentally secure to extract? Nope.

As far as Cap and Trade is concerned—please. Giving large corporations and polluters the ability to buy their way out of cleaning their emissions is a lousy practice. Lisa Jackson from the EPA is on the right track by simply drawing a line in the sand and taking it out of the hands of Congress. The message from the Obama administration is clear: Clean it up. If Cap and Trade is allowed to continue one can only imagine Goldman Sachs creating a derivatives market that bundles pollution credits in with mortgages on homes with inefficient boilers and selling them to school boards in Greenland. No more government-backed securities bought by large corporations and sold on opaque markets, especially if they contain something as ethereal as carbon credits.

This is it folks. We have reached the tipping point. The only option heretofore is conservation.

If you wish to comment on “Off the Reservation,” send your message to jmorey@longislandpress.com.

Can’t say it any better than that. By the way those who know me know I disagree with Jed about renewables, broadly stated, to replace fossil fuels but as he says “Cheap nope, time consuming Yup”. Thanks Jed.

Iceberg Attacks Australia After Destroying New Zealand – Get out the Nukes it is the end of the world

Posted on December 11, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

It is Jam Band Friday Delbert style – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxNnEEK6uG0

OK now that I have everybody’s attention. The people who do not accept Man Caused Global Atmospheric Destabilization (some people call it Global Warming I don’t) are insane or delusional. They just don’t want people to notice the obvious. They try to draw the arguement so far back into the clouds because if they admit MANKIND is contributing to the mess then the rest of their rhetorical walls begin to tumble. But to ignore this is pretty hard to do.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdXzJaCeHP8 )

Australia shipping alert over massive iceberg

Fri Dec 11, 2:34 am ET

SYDNEY (AFP) – Australian authorities Friday issued a shipping alert over a gigantic iceberg that is gradually approaching the country’s southwest coast.

The Bureau of Meteorology said the once-in-a-century cliff of ice, which dislodged from Antarctica about a decade ago before drifting north, was being monitored using satellites.

“Mariners are advised that at 1200 GMT on December 9, an iceberg approximately 1,700 kilometres (1,054 miles) south-southwest of the West Australian coast was observed,” it said, giving the iceberg’s coordinates.

“The iceberg is 140 square kilometres in area — 19 kilometres long by eight kilometres wide.”

Experts believe the iceberg — known as B17B — is likely to break up as it enters warmer waters nearer Australia, creating hundreds of smaller icebergs in a hazard to passing ships.

“It’s still 1,700 kilometres away, so it’s quite a long way away, it’s not really on our doorstep yet but it’s been heading steadily towards us,” glaciologist Neal Young said Thursday.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeNNBUhobNg&feature=related )

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/12/11/tech-iceberg-australia.html

This satellite image shows several icebergs breaking off the Antarctic ice shelf in 2000. The iceberg B17B on the left has been spotted 1,700 kilometres from Australia. (Australian Antarctic Division/Associated Press)

Scientists say that ice shelf calvings such as the one in 2000 happen about once every 30 years.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMwpHkQlrtQ&feature=related )

Wish they would make up there minds…is this a once every 30 years experience or once every 100 year event…but in a way it is so monumental that it is amazing that there is a Climate Summit going on and the deniers have everyone talking about stolen emails and NOT this. Cover your ears and go lalalalalalala.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUgzsdqY1uE&feature=related )

This chap’s post is in the same vein as mine but alas he is a Denier.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/11/australia-iceberg-casting-the-news

Casting the news: The Blizzard of Oz, the Australian iceberg disaster movie

This week we need your help producing the big-screen version of the smackdown between one big island and one mammoth iceberg

Strewth! An iceberg passes under Sydney Harbour Bridge. Photograph: Dennis Degnan/Corbis

A crowd of suntanned Australians stand at Sydney harbour. As is traditional, they are having a barbecue. Someone has set up a cricket wicket in the middle of the road. The mood is a happy one. Then, all of a sudden, the light disappears from the sky. Men and women alike turn round to find a 50bn-tonne iceberg where the sun once was. This is B17B, the superberg, and it’s headed right for them, bringing with it a nightmare microclimate: cyclones filled with swirling tinnies, raining wombats and vicious blizzards (to enable the title).

The latest Guardian/film/films production – working title: The Blizzard of Oz – promises to take the disaster movie where it’s never been before. Australia. Inspired by latest events, we plan to tell a tale of ecological disaster that will keep you on the edge of your seat for pushing three hours and guarantees a flying CGI kangaroo every 15 minutes.

To clarify: the latest news seem to suggest that B17B, a 140 sq km block of ice that has broken free from the Antarctic ice shelf, looks set to miss Australia altogether. What’s more, it was heading for the west coast, not the east, so featuring Sydney would be a stretch, too. But this is the movies; rules get bent. Which is how we came to cast Stefan Dennis in the lead role.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qY1e2hGQ2o&feature=related )

After Australia it is probably headed towards India and they are concerned…

http://trak.in/news/iceberg-19-km-by-8-km-drifting-towards-australia/33597/

Iceberg, 19 km by 8 km, drifting towards Australia

2009/12/09Tags: australia news, australian antarctic division, neal young, ross ice shelf

in India News, International

Sydney, Dec 9 (DPA) An iceberg twice the size of Sydney Harbour is heading towards Western Australia, news reports said Wednesday.

They don’t have too much else to say about it. They must emit one hell of a lot of green house gases…do you think?

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYuo5jxuzQ&feature=related )

Jeremy Rifkin Writes A Book For Every Crisis – He usually gets some things right

Posted on November 23, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

For instance his stand against genetically altered food only makes sense in the context of the chemical and seed companies attempts to patent biology or biological sources. All our food is genetically altered. It has been for thousands of years. Frankly I prefer the genetic altering we can see, so to speak as opposed to the genetic altering that went on before which was mainly guessing.

http://tnjn.com/2009/nov/18/the-dawn-of-the-third-industri/

The news web site of the School of Journalism and Electronic Media | University of Tennessee, Knoxville

The dawn of the Third Industrial Revolution

By Birgitta Anderson

published: November 18 2009 10:13 AM updated:: November 21 2009 05:59 PM

“The most hated man in science” said that it may be too late to save civilization.

Civilization is on the cusp of the Third Industrial Revolution and “our Second Industrial Revolution is on life support,” according to Jeremy Rifkin, president and founder of the Foundation on Economic Trends said.

We are in emergency mode. Our dependence on non-renewable resources for energy is breaking the economic system we rely on, he said.

The National Journal named Rifkin as one of the most influential people in shaping federal policy. He has written 17 books on the impact scientific and technological changes have on the environment, the economy and society.

Rifkin co-authored an article in the European Energy Review December 2008 issue, which says that we are facing a triple threat when it comes to the structure of our economy. “The global credit crisis, the global energy crisis, and the global climate change crisis are interwoven and feed off of each other.”

“We need a new economic vision,” Rifkin said. New energy, coming from renewable resources, combined with advancement in communication technology is needed for an effective energy revolution to take place. Rethinking distribution of energy is the solution to the energy crisis, according to Rifkin.

Making a smooth transition from the Second Industrial Revolution into the Third depends on the construction of four pillars, Rifkin said. The first pillar is creating dependable forms of renewable energy. The second pillar is turning buildings into miniature power plants, which can be done by installing solar panels on rooftops. The third pillar is hydrogen storage. “Hydrogen is the universal medium that ‘stores’ all forms of renewable energy,” and allows for easy transport. The fourth, and final pillar is the reconfiguration of the power grid. By changing the way energy is produced and distributed, businesses and homeowners can create and share energy with each other.

Course then there is the other view.

http://www.activistcash.com/biography.cfm/bid/1342

Jeremy Rifkin

Biography

Jeremy Rifkin, the founder and president of the Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET), is the intellectual guru of the neo-Luddites, especially as their anti-technology principles apply to food. He is the author of 16 books, most of them littered with errors and false predictions. A professional scaremonger who has been called “the most hated man in science” by TIME magazine, Rifkin nonetheless has a wide following and genuine influence on public policy debates. National Journal magazine named Rifkin one of the 150 people in the U.S. that have the most influence in shaping federal government policy for his “skillfully manipulated legal and bureaucratic procedures to slow the pace of biotechnology.”

Rifkin’s international campaigns against beef consumption and genetically enhanced crops are motivated by his anti-technology philosophy. Rifkin disparages efficiency, promotes “empathy” with nature, and thinks human beings were better off in less advanced centuries. Always prone to exaggeration, Rifkin wrote in his book Beyond Beef that giving up steaks and burgers “is a revolutionary act” that heralds “a new chapter in the unfolding of human consciousness.”

Background

Founder and president, Foundation on Economic Trends; former advisory board member, EarthSave International; national council member, Farm Animal Reform Movement.

Associated Organizations and Foundations

Organization: EarthSave International
Position: Advisory Board Member
EarthSave began in 1988 as a pet project of John Robbins, one-time heir to the Baskin-Robbins ice cream fortune. His book Diet for a New America had…
find out more »

Organization: Farm Animal Reform Movement
Position: National Council Member
Farm Animal Reform Movement (FARM) is on the outer fringes of the animal-rights universe. Its membership adheres to a strict vegan diet, and its…
find out more »

Organization: Foundation on Economic Trends
Position: Founder
The Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET) is a platform for the neo-Luddite intellectual guru Jeremy Rifkin. Lacking scientific or technical…
find out more »

I got this request today so I will just put it up:

Hi,

Since you have some information about inventing on your site, I wanted to mention http://www.FreePatentsOnline.com and http://www.SumoBrain.com.

They are great, free resources for inventors and intellectual property research. Far faster and more complete than the US PTO, and they provide patents in PDF format.

If you have a spot on your web site, a link would be great.

Sincerely,
James

If We Just Changed People’s Behavior We Could Save The Earth – I used to believe this

Posted on November 20, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

It’s Jam Band Friday ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJbFVJvRqOQ&feature=PlayList&p=DA3BD18D4E01082D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=16 )

Until I realized that all the capitol involved for social investments the size of a nuclear powerplant or a huge wind farm of the same megawattage was controlled by people who had a vested interest in one or the other. The simple way to put this is that which Energy Infrastructure we have is a political decision. That means that we will never have an Earth Friendly Economy until we have Earth Friendly governments. Don’t get me wrong people can make a difference. They can try to stop some of the damage being done. They can change themselves and their children to adopt Earth Friendly behaviors. I do not believe that they should have to give up mowing their grass, or back yard barbeques however because it is the big polluters that are causing the problems. But let’s look at the literature:

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/11/19/19climatewire-how-understanding-the-human-mind-might-save-16335.html?pagewanted=2

I know I know the New York Times is hardly literature and the “difficulty” of changing behavior is well understood by anyone who has ever tried to get someone to quit sucking their thumb or give up their bankey. But it is helpful to show some examples:

How Understanding the Human Mind Might Save the World From CO2

By ANNIE JIA of ClimateWire

Published: November 19, 2009

What will solve climate change? Will it be technology? Policy? A growing number of researchers and activists say it’s what’s behind it all: people. And understanding them is vital to addressing climate change.The problem is that people don’t understand people very well, research shows.

In the 1970s, a researcher at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University named Scott Geller and colleagues conducted a workshop in residential energy efficiency and then measured its impacts. A newspaper advertisement recruited 40 participants on a first-come-first-served basis, and the workshop lasted three hours. Before and after the workshop, subjects took surveys measuring how much they knew and cared about energy efficiency. The change was significant — participants significantly knew and cared more about the issues after the workshop than before.

But when the researchers looked at the actual actions that people took afterward, the results were discouraging. One person lowered the temperature on the hot water heater. Two additional people had installed insulating blankets around their hot water heaters — but they had done it before the workshop. Eight people did install low-flow shower heads — after all 40 participants had been given the low-flow shower heads at the workshop.

If these were people who cared enough about energy efficiency to attend a three-hour workshop, what hope was there for people who didn’t?

Of course since this talk is being given by famous environmentalist Doug McKenzie-Mohr who believes that social marketing is the answer to the question, “how do you change people’s behavior”, I will put up a few more cuts from this article because some of it is intriguing . But infrastructure and public policy are controlled by the moneyed elites and the government officials. Good luck with the social marketing scheme with them.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZVzH5yBFQA )

While the study, spurred by the last energy crisis, was conducted in the 1970s, its lessons about human nature still apply today, said McKenzie-Mohr, a professor of psychology at St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick, and author of the book “Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-based Social Marketing.”

dot dot dot

“Social psychologists have now known for four decades that the relationship between people’s attitudes and knowledge and behavior is scant at best,” said McKenzie-Mohr. Yet campaigns remain heavily focused on brochures, flyers and other means of disseminating information. “I could just as easily call this presentation ‘beyond brochures,'” he said.

dot dot dot

Bridging the gap between attitudes and action

To bridge the gap between attitudes and action, people must first address the barriers that stand in the way of action, McKenzie-Mohr said.

dot dot dot

As the U.S. Senate debates sweeping climate legislation and leaders express increasing doubts that next month’s Copenhagen climate negotiations will lead to a treaty, a poll conducted in October by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed that only 57 percent of Americans believe that climate change is happening. Only 36 percent believe humans are the cause.

Individual behaviors can achieve fast, immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, if they are implemented, presenters said. But Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change and a leading expert on public opinion on climate change, said that what will have the most far-reaching effect is policy changes. And for that, public opinion is critical.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqeSUAlI5uI&feature=related )

As I said before…they always get around to the politicians and public policy WITHOUT talking about the moneyed elites that hide behind their hedgerow.

McKenzie-Mohr gave an example of a town’s efforts to reduce idling at schools. After learning that air quality was something residents cared about, leaders of the effort placed signs by where parents parked to pick up their children from school. The signs had no effect. But when, instead, a person dressed as a public health official spoke to parents personally as they waited, the frequency of idling dropped by 32 percent, while the average length of idling dropped by 72 percent.

dot dot dot

Ultimately, McKenzie-Mohr, Leiserowitz and other speakers said, what the climate movement needs is vision — which it currently lacks.

“I think we have become very, very good at describing that we’re against. … We’re terrible at describing what we’re for. We’re against climate change, we’re against biodiversity extinction, we’re against land-use change, etc., we’re against pesticides … but what are we for?” Leiserowitz said.

For more on the same topic please see

http://www.cbsm.com/public/world.lasso

http://www.conservationpsychology.org/profiles/31/

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSMW4Gwi0y0&feature=related )

Other approaches have been tried but they always “start from the bottom”…why because they are afraid of the “top” that’s why. More on this Monday. Have a good weekend.

http://eetd.lbl.gov/eetd-org-dc-uecb.html

Washington, DC Projects Office

Understanding Energy Consumption Behavior

Research to understand the psychological, cultural, and institutional context within which energy-related decisions are made and how these factors influence energy consumption. Applying these insights to help public agencies design and implement more effective energy-saving policies and programs.

Projects

Thank god for Burton Cummings and Randy Bachman

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQJ4toj-JY&feature=related )

Oil Bubble – No way! There would have to be a Market in Oil for there to be a Bubble

Posted on November 2, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

There is no such thing as supply and demand in the liquid carbon fuel markets so it is tough to argue that there was a “Bubble” per se in the run up to 140 $$$ oil. For instance, oil spikes and gas hikes are being blamed on a “weak dollar” but in fact should be attributed to the fact that 2 major refineries in the US have been shut down and a 1000 workers laid off. In the case of the oil spike, speculators clearly ran up the price. Nearly 25% of the oil mysteriously “disappeared” from the market, only to reappear as the market fell. Those are the classic “finger prints” of a speculator driven rip off. But some people want to fog the headlights with argle bargle.

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/article_opinion?id=161551563

An oil bubble

Mary King

Monday, November 2nd 2009

Following on last week’s topic, some have suggested that maybe, like the housing bubble in the US, the spike in oil prices and their subsequent collapse could have been an oil price bubble that also pulled up the prices of natural gas.

First, we should examine the phenomena that govern the life cycle of the economic bubble-its start, growth and eventual collapse. There is no consensus on what causes a bubble. Further, one view is that a bubble can only be identified after it has manifested itself in all of its stages. It is not clear-cut since even now after the collapse of oil prices there are still questions as to whether there was an oil economic bubble. (Did we have a housing bubble?).

One thesis is that high market liquidity is necessary, though not a sufficient condition for its start. This encourages people to invest in a particular asset both to preserve the value of their money in the face of inflation, but also to sometimes sell at a higher rate later to make, as it were, a killing.

What was of particular concern in the US housing bubble is that people were persuaded to enter into mortgages that they could not really afford while the prices of the assets were rising. High liquidity encourages mark-up inflation across the board and investing in a bubble suggests that such activities may also be seen as hedges against headline inflation.

At the peak of the bubble the price fetched by the asset is far greater than the real market value, even to produce it from scratch. When the bubble bursts, prices fall and many are left with an asset, say, houses, for which they hold inverted mortgages whose values are far in excess of what the asset is worth.

Also, the mortgagee may not be able to service these assets and we have heard stories of people returning the keys of houses to the banks and walking away in the aftermath of a bubble. Looking back at the investment frenzy of the bubble many commentators have remarked on the herd instinct of the investors -more like a stampede as the herd races towards a cliff.

Last week’s article demonstrated that because of the absolute elasticity of the supply of paper-oil on the futures market, this market on its own, without reference to the economic fundamentals of the physical-oil market, cannot support a bubble. Therefore, the evidence, if any exists, has to be sought in the physical market.

In order for speculators to influence the trend price of physical-oil, futures and index investors have to continue to buy large quantities of physical-oil and hold these quantities off-market. There is no evidence that this occurred and if it did it would have to be immense quantities to manipulate a worldwide physical market as large as the present crude oil market.

Yet because of Peak Oil a bubble in oil prices could be established. Oil inventories were not excessive and any increase that there was can be explained away by the fact that oil use, particularly in China and India, also increased, impacting positively on the associated inventories.

Another test for an oil bubble (Stuart Sandiford in the Oil Drum, “Is Oil in a Price Bubble”) is the rate at which the asset price increased and if this was faster than exponential growth a bubble is in the making.

dot dot dot (as they say)

If one were to examine the depreciation of the US dollar (the currency in which oil/gas prices are quoted) then with the US dollar now pegged at 1.09 Euros, the lowest it has been for seven months, it is clear that oil price adjustment is in part related to producers trying to counteract the depreciating US dollar and (temporary) stockpiling.

As the US dollar depreciates the TT dollar (tied to it) also depreciates, compounding its local depreciation against the US dollar. Thus our foreign revenues will reflect this US dollar depreciation, stockpiling and the resulting price volatility.

maryking@tstt.net.tt