green voice

Green Resolutions: A list of environmental goals for 2009

2009-01-09T21:46:18Z

On New Year's Eve, curmudgeons at Lake Superior State University in Michigan included "green" on a list of overused terms that had lost meaning and ought to be banned from serious conversation.

They have a point. Claiming to be "green" seems to be the theme of half the commercials on TV. Yet making the world "greener" is one of the few universally shared goals of our time. The questions are: What does it entail, how do we do it, and when?

The Voice asked a number of the well-credentialed environmentalists and policymakers who live in Takoma Park or Silver Spring to give us a few ideas that could be enacted soon, sometime this year, at the local or state level.

]]> MIKE TIDWELL:

Pass the Global Warming Solutions Act

The number one priority of all Marylanders for 2009 should be passage of the Global Warming Solutions Act. This bill would mandate a statewide cut of 25 percent from current levels of greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2020. Promoting wind power, solar energy, and dramatic efficiency gains will help Maryland reduce smog pollution, asthma rates, mercury contamination, and acid rain as well as fight climate change.

It would help nationally, too, by making the case to Congress and the Obama administration that what we really need is a national cap on carbon dioxide. Maryland's geographic proximity to federal policymakers offers us the added benefit - and responsibility - of pressuring Congress with everything we do. Federal action would, in turn, allow the U.S. to return to international efforts through the Kyoto process.

So every voter in every city and every county in our state should loudly insist that the General Assembly pass the Global Warming Solutions Act in the next session that starts at the end of January!

Mike Tidwell is the director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network

* * *

JAMIE RASKIN:

Walk, eat veggies, green your roof

As of 2008 walking is Maryland's official exercise. So in 2009 let's have a Green Day in Silver Spring and Takoma Park on a Saturday or Sunday when everyone walks or uses public transit and no one drives unless it's an emergency. Then we can expand it to a Green Weekend next year. After that we could make every weekend Green!

As an unreconstructed carnivore, I am painfully aware how much land and water go into the raising and slaughter of poultry and livestock compared to growing fruits and vegetables, and I also know how much our meat industries contribute to the destruction of the Chesapeake Bay.

Every year I hear from vegetarians about the public environmental and private health benefits of giving up meat, and they're right.

Let's have an official promotion in 2009 of National Vegetarian Week, May 18-24, and I commit right now, along with other sheepish meat-eaters, to give complete vegetarianism a try that week. Perhaps our local restaurants could feature vegetarian specials. And, everyone, please read Michael Pollan's book, The Omnivore's Dilemma.

Let's make Silver Spring and Takoma Park famous for green roofs. I am working on legislation to promote green roofs throughout Maryland, but we can lead the way locally. Green roofs dramatically reduce global warming and absorb storm water, a big pollutant. Consult with Takoma Park's Jim Epstein and his group, DC Greenworks -- they have started to make it happen.

Jamie Raskin is the state senator for Maryland District 20

• • •

SAT JIWAN IKLE-KHALSA:

Green our public buildings

In Takoma Park we should conduct an energy audit of the community center. More than ten years ago the City did a comprehensive analysis of greenhouse gas emissions,resulting in a few remedial improvements. One of the successful pieces was energy efficiency upgrades at several city facilities. But now we have a huge new community center that's not very green.

I have found the building is too warm in the winter, too cold in the summer, and keeps on about twice as many lights as it needs. There are venting devices in the atrium with gaping holes showing daylight and outside air moving in and out of the building. An audit should be able to identify several ways to save money and energy without too much effort or upfront costs.

For the near future, the City should make sure that the upcoming renovations of the auditorium and the public works facility are done to high green standards.

At the county level, we should demand that the $15.5 million renovation of Takoma Park Elementary not take advantage of a loophole to avoid green construction policies. Because the renovation will result in less than a 50 percent increase in size the green policies do not apply, and the current plan is not follow them. This is unacceptable and flies in the face of the County's new law requiring all new government buildings be built to LEED Silver standards, making them more energy efficient as well as healthier to work in or go to school in.

President-elect Obama is looking for shovel-ready projects to modernize schools and ways to stimulate the economy with green jobs. Could there be any better opportunity than this? The Board of Education and the County Council need to hear from residents now since construction at the school is slated to begin this summer.

Sat Jiwan Iklé-Khalsa is a Voice columnist and a green building/renovation consultant

* * *

CATHERINE TUNIS:

Prevent stormwater run-off, plant trees, eliminate mercury

In Takoma Park our committee is recommending that we revisit and implement the City's climate change action plan and promote retention of storm water on site so it can soak in and recharge the groundwater as opposed to having large volumes of runoff that cause stream damage. The challenge is find money in the budget for someone on staff whose job it would be to make these things happen.

My own green wish is for the City to create a plan to preserve our treasure of large trees, especially the oaks. They contribute more than most people imagine to cooling the climate, protecting the watershed, providing wildlife habitat, and cleaning the air. A treed backyard is 12 degrees cooler in summer than a sunny yard. It can take centuries for an oak to grow and only an instant for an unthinking person to damage one enough to kill it. I would also like to see more trees planted where there are none, for instance along New Hampshire Avenue.

At the state level, to keep toxic mercury out of our food chain, we need to pass legislation to require removal of mercury-containing switches from vehicles being scrapped. Auto manufacturers, who knowingly used mercury, would have to pay recyclers about $4 per switch. We also need to pass the Maryland climate action plan. The State already has 42 recommended actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ranging from urban trees to waste management and recycling to land use and transit.

Catherine Tunis is the chair of the Takoma Park Committee on the Environment

* * *

VALERIE ERVIN:
Plant more gardens--EVERYWHERE

Many local residents, especially those of us who live in multifamily homes without yards, have been very vocal about the lack of green space in our area. We would like to see vacant spaces and pocket parks used in more creative ways to connect us to nature and provide more recreation. That is why my most recent green initiative is the creation of community gardens.

I am working on a pilot project with Park and Planning to create community gardens in local parks that currently attract few users. We will be able to grow our own vegetables and create a community asset that can be used to educate children about sustainable gardening, nutrition and nature. Community gardens are amenities that not only help the environment but also enable residents to build connections with each other in new ways. Or perhaps I should say old ways.

Stay tuned for news about the spring opening of a Silver Spring community garden.

Valerie Ervin is the Montgomery County Councilmember for District 5.

* * *

GEORGE LEVENTHAL:

Use biodiesel and renewable electricity

Biodiesel is a clean fuel refined from vegetable or animal fat, oil or grease. It can substitute for petroleum diesel fuel without any modifications to a truck, bus or tractor engine. Because biodiesel recycles carbon dioxide, it contributes far less to the greenhouse effect, plus it emits less particulate matter, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon than petroleum diesel. Following up on a 2007 resolution that I sponsored the County is now preparing to survey restaurants to determine how we could collect used cooking oils and refine them into this "cool fuel."

Volunteers willing to assist in the restaurant survey can get in touch at 240-777-7811 or Councilmember.Leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov

Montgomery County makes it easy to choose clean, renewable sources of electricity in your home and to receive a tax rebate of a half-cent per kilowatt hour. This reduces your add-on cost of clean energy by 15 to 25 percent. Visit www.montgomerycountymd.gov/cleanenergyrewards for more information. Those who purchase 100 percent clean electricity can entirely eliminate carbon dioxide emissions from all household electrical outlets.

George Leventhal is an At Large Montgomery County Councilmember

* * *

FRANCA BRILLIANT:
Avoid bottled water, watch your thermostat

Governments at all levels should stop buying bottled water. The rapid growth of the bottled water industry exemplifies our tendency to place convenience above all else, including the pocket book. People spend more than 240 times as much for store-bought water as for what comes out of the tap, despite the fact that tap water is better regulated for quality and contaminants.

There is huge waste in the production and transportation of bottled water, more than 17 million barrels of oil annually or enough to fuel 100,000 cars, according to the Pacific Institute. What's more, it has contributed to the privatization of aquifers, i.e. the control of vital natural resources for private gain. So stop buying bottled water for your family, at sporting events, in the office, when you're traveling, and instead invest in a couple of good reusable bottles. If governments do the same thing it will have the happy effect of saving taxpayers money while helping the planet. The good news is that Takoma Park and dozens of other cities around the country have already done this.

Heating and cooling consume vast amounts of energy, and if government offices lowered their thermostats in winter and raised them in the summer, the energy savings would be enormous. If you're above a certain age, you'll remember when President Carter asked Americans to turn winter thermostats down to 65 degrees. It's still a good idea. Besides conserving energy, it saves money. Estimates range, but the lowest one matches a one-degree drop with a one-percent reduction in energy bills.

This is another step that can be done individually as well as mandated by public policy. California has taken the extreme position of proposing centrally controlled thermostats to be set by an external authority. Even Takoma Park may not be ready to go that far, but I do think we're ready to be a little warmer in the summer and a little colder in the winter.

Franca Brilliant is a longtime advocate for sustainable consumption.

* * *

PAUL CHROSTOWSKI

Study impact on new construction, limit growth

For any major expenditure or significant action at the city or county level - e.g. the Takoma Park community center or the Silver Spring civic center -- there should be an environmental review, analogous to the federal review established by the National Environmental Policy Act.

The review should include impacts on air, water, and soil quality, energy use, waste generation, biodiversity, forest preservation, noise, endangered species and other concerns. From the outset alternative options should be developed, and these should go through the same review so the option with the least environmental impact is selected. An independent committee with expertise in environmental science, engineering and policy areas should carry out the review, as well as solicit public comment.

A strict limit on growth is a critical step toward a sustainable community. For a period of time no permits for new commercial or residential construction or expansion of existing structures should be granted at the county level. Permits should be restricted to repairs or renovations of existing facilities with no increase in size. During this period the countywide use of energy can be calculated through utility records for electricity and natural gas and distributor records for heating oil. If a stable level of energy use is attained, the next step should be to reduce the generation of wastes and the use of materials that cannot be recycled. If a stable level of energy use is not attained, more severe measures may be required to reach sustainability.

Paul Chrostowski is president of CPF Associates, Inc.

Regular cars changed into electrics

2008-05-27T13:41:03Z

It looks like it is only in Quebec, but what a good idea:

Click Here

Don't eat read meat if you can help it

2008-05-21T17:23:58Z

It takes 10 times as much grain to feed a person with an cow doing the initial digestion on the vegetable matter as not. Given how many of our compatriots are using agricultural lands to power their driving habits via ethanol, now is a particularly useful time to cut way back on meat eating. Particularly if you also want to live in a world without food riots.

I understand that not every person can make this change, but most of us don't have an excuse.

Why not use plastic?

2008-02-06T16:29:54Z

Sensational article here or a bit more sober but still plenty alarming link at Wikipedia.

The signs in Whole Foods about the cost of paper make it tempting (and Whole Foods will take back and claim to recycle plastic bags), but, if you haven't remembered your reusable bags, try to avoid the plastic anyways.

The Ethics of the Environment

2007-07-14T17:52:05Z

I am starting to write a series of entries telling people what to do (carbon tax, stop using bottled water) to protect the environment, and why it should be done (why as far as the physical, chemical, and biological effects that various actions have; global warming, plastic particles in wild animals on the bottom of the ocean). Before I address what and why, however, I would like to describe how to think about deciding what to do about our actions affecting the environment.

There is a whole body of various environmental derived theories of spirituality and ethics, but I'm not going to write about those. They mostly extend the ideas of rights or inherent value from just humans to other sentient beings or just to all of life, or even to landscapes as they existed before humans. The problem with these sorts of theories is that they tend to blow up a big beautiful romantic bubble of idealism that is popped the first time someone gets a roach infestation. It's fine to try regard all life as being equally deserving of legal rights as ourselves, but for many people that perspective is distant from why we should bend over and pick up some trash or stand up and turn off a light.

]]> The environment is an example of a commonly held property, where anyone benefits by hurting the property, but where all suffer if everyone harms the property. Once I own a car, it is both quicker and cheaper for me to drive than to use mass transit. But if everyone keeps driving more and more, the atmosphere will be so full of carbon dioxide and the roads full of empty cars that we are all harmed. But even if I can just convince everyone else to stop driving, my own driving is still cheaper and quicker than public transit for me.

This is a class of decisions called the "Prisoner's Dilemma" There is an interesting article on some current research on this in the May 2007 Scientific American. It is quite a puzzle to economists why people choose actions that are personally disoptimal but optimal if the whole group chooses the same way.

The missing ingredient here is that people aren't that different, and we know that we aren't that different, and therefore we use a rule of thumb for deciding between A and B, "Do I want to live in a world where everyone chooses A or where everyone chooses B." Obviously, people don't use this principal all the time, but the experiments described in the links show pretty conclusively that people are using it, and I think that this principal of reasoning is crucial to the changes we need to make to fit everyone on the globe in the upcoming decades without massive social breakdown and without totally ruining the environment (being humans, we have already missed the window on not messing up the environment; that alternate history of maxing out at 3 billion humans and launching the first star ships in the year 1990 is not the kind of species we are; we wait until the precipice of disaster before changing our behavior).

I think that thinking about things, "Do I want to live in the world with everyone doing A or doing B?" is a pattern of decision making that we can teach and spread. Do I want a lot of trash in these woods? No. So I'll pick up the trash I see. Do I want yummy, tasty tuna to become extinct? No, so I won't eat it until it is being harvested in a sustainable fashion. Assuming everyone else makes the same choices, I'll walk through litter-free paths and my grandkids will get to enjoy tuna. And having that assumption while I'm deciding will make my decisions better.

The moment of choice is a somewhat mysterious thing to science. Choices are somehow not quite in the realm of modern physical theories. There's not really a water-tight definition of what a choice is, and we are all aware of the chain of cause and effect that go into our habitual choices. "I feel lonely when I'm the only person in a house, and so I feel better when I turn all the lights on." "I don't want to use these scuffed shoes, ... those jerks in junior high school...." So when we are making a choice, we are aware both of our limitations and our freedom. In this we share the same experience as all people making a choice, so it seems quite reasonable to make a part of our decisions that we are deciding for everyone. We aren't deciding for everyone, but we are a part of everyone, and we are deciding our part. Given that people do decide this way anyways, I think that it is time to make this perspective part of our toolkit for reasoning about choices.

What do you think?

EarthTalk: Everyday products can harm health

2007-07-13T15:36:03Z

Is there any proof linking human breast cancer to exposure to chemicals in the environment? Or do researchers think most cases of breast cancers are genetically inherited?

Are mothballs safe to use? If not, are there any environmentally friendly alternatives?

See the responses from E Magazine by clicking on the link below.

]]> Is there any proof linking human breast cancer to exposure to chemicals in the environment? Or do researchers think most cases of breast cancers are genetically inherited?

A groundbreaking research study coordinated by the non-profit Silent Spring Institute and recently published by the American Cancer Society found that synthetic chemicals have likely played a large role in the rising incidence of breast cancer throughout the world over the last half-century. The study identified 216 man-made chemicals—including those found in everyday products like pesticides, cosmetics, dyes, drugs and gasoline (and diesel exhaust)—that have been shown to cause breast cancer in animals. Researchers believe these substances, many of which “mimic” naturally occurring hormones once inside the body, are also to blame for the increasing prevalence of human breast cancer.

According to epidemiologist Devra Lee Davis of the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health and one of the lead researchers on the new study, the more hormones cycling through a woman’s body during her lifetime, the more likely she is to develop breast cancer. Synthetic chemicals that mimic hormones magnify the risk, as the body doesn’t know the difference between its own real hormones and other introduced chemicals. Only one in 10 women who develop breast cancer inherits a defective gene from their parents, Davis adds, meaning that in 90 percent of breast cancer cases studied, external non-genetic agents (e.g. synthetic chemicals) contributed to the development of the cancer.

Another telling clue is the fact that the breast cancer risk of adopted children parallels the risk of the family they grew up in, not that of their biological family, as proven by analyzing medical records from Scandinavian countries that keep detailed registries following people from birth to death. “What we understand is that if cancer runs in your family it could be because your family had similar eating patterns, similar lifestyle patterns as well as lived in the same area,” says Davis. “It’s really important that we take another look at…the kinds of chemicals that we are using everyday,” she adds. “We think that there are alternatives that can be used.”

The U.S. government has been reluctant to institute new restrictions on the production of highly profitable synthetic chemicals, but European regulators are taking the issue very seriously. The European Commission’s new Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Program calls on chemical manufacturers selling anywhere in Europe to re-register and re-evaluate the potential health hazards—including cancer risks—of their products. Environmental and public health advocates hope that American chemical companies will follow that lead with chemicals sold here.

In the meantime, consumers can help prevent cancer by buying and eating organic foods, avoiding pesticides and other synthetic chemicals whenever possible, using non-plastic containers to reheat and store foods (some plastics are thought to leach cancer-causing chemicals into food when heated), and supporting government regulation and more research on synthetic chemicals and their effects.

CONTACTS: Silent Spring Institute, www.silentspring.org; European Commission’s REACH Program, ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/reach/reach_intro.htm.

Are mothballs safe to use? If not, are there any environmentally friendly alternatives?

Even though they are not as popular as they once were, mothballs are still used by many people to keep stored clothes, furniture and carpets free of hungry pests like moths. But the very ingredients that make mothballs so effective as household pesticides—namely naphthalene or paradichlorobenzene (PDB)—also make them dangerous to any person or animal who breathes the fumes or ingests them directly. Such chemicals are often listed as primary offenders when household air is tested for indoor air pollution.

Exposure to naphthalene or PDB can induce relatively minor human health problems such as nausea, vomiting, headache, coughing, burning eyes and shortness of breath. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer considers both naphthalene and PDB to be hazardous carcinogens as well. These chemicals, which are also found in some dry cleaning agents as well as household air fresheners and solid toilet-bowl deodorizers, have been found to nearly double the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma—a cancer of the blood—for those who come into frequent contact with them.

So what’s a conscientious homemaker to do? For starters, removing all mothballs and their flakes from the home is a good first step. Experts suggest donning gloves and even perhaps a mask before manually removing intact mothballs. Affected clothing can be machine-washed and dried several times, preferably on high heat settings. If the smell of mothballs continues to linger, any such clothes can be ironed—also with high heat settings, which tend to break down the active chemicals quicker. Sunlight also breaks down naphthalene and PDB, so leaving any affected items outside on hot sunny days may also help.

Carpets and upholstery co-mingled with mothballs should be vacuumed thoroughly, with vacuum cleaner bags containing mothball traces emptied immediately outdoors. If the mothball smell lingers after vacuuming, a professional cleaning might do the trick, although such services can introduce other harmful chemicals, such as the carcinogen perchloroethylene, into the household as well. (ChemDry and Zoots both offer in-home carpet and upholstery cleaning services that do not rely on harmful chemicals.) After any kind of mothball removal effort, the cleaned house or closet should be aired out, ideally with one or more fans blowing as much fresh outdoor air through as possible.

As to alternatives for keeping moths and other critters away from clothes and other valuable fabrics, Care2.com’s green home guru and author Annie Berthold-Bond suggests using home-made sachet pillows filled with a dried herb mixture combining two parts each of rosemary and mint, one part each of thyme and ginseng, and eight parts whole cloves. The herbs can be mixed and combined in the center of a bandana or handkerchief that is then tied with a ribbon and placed among the stored items. Also, Richards Housewares makes Moth-Away Herbal Moth Repellant, a pre-packaged product that makes use of a similar formula. It’s available from planetnatural.com and other online environmental product websites.

CONTACTS: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Napthalene page, www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/naphthal.html; PlanetNatural Moth-Away page, www.planetnatural.com/site/moth-away.html.

Phone Bank Volunteers Needed for Chesapeake Climate Action Network

2007-07-13T14:54:33Z

An announcement from our friends at CCAN

Wednesdays from 7-8:30, July 18 to August 15

CCAN’s Takoma Park office,
6839 Eastern Ave, Takoma Park MD 20912

If you have a great phone voice and think you can pitch CCAN, please volunteer for our membership drive phone bank. Our goal is to reach 500 members by August 15, and we need your help! If you have never phone banked with us before, don’t worry, we’ll get you fully trained. DINNER AND FUN INCLUDED! Just contact Susanna at susanna@chesapeakeclimate.org and let her know which of the following dates would work best for you: July 18, July 25 (tentative), August 1, August 15

Take our 4 question Volunteer Survey

Get credit for your volunteer time!
Many companies offer benefits for their employees who do volunteer work. We want to help you get the credit you deserve. Often times companies need nonprofits to register as a charity; if so, contact Susanna at susanna@chesapeakeclimate.org and let us help you get set up.

For more information email Info@chesapeakeclimate.org or call 301-270-3722

Clean Energy Open House and Native Plant Garden Tour!

2007-07-13T14:25:30Z

Sunday, July 22nd, 1-5pm
7125 Willow Ave, Takoma Park, MD

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network will once again open to the public Maryland's only 95-percent renewable energy household. The home, owned by Mike Tidwell of Takoma Park, is equipped with energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs, and is powered by photovoltaic solar panels, a solar hot-water system, and a corn-burning home-heating stove.

The house has been featured in magazines, newspapers, and TV and radio stations (including NPR) all across the United States and Europe, and was recently featured on the Voice of America all across the world. One of the most newsworthy aspects of the home is the fact that all of these energy changes were made for the cost of just a cup of coffee a day!

]]> Come learn how you, too, can affordably reduce your home fossil fuel use by 50-90 percent and so help fight global warming. As a special feature, we'll also have two hybrid cars and an electric truck for you to view and learn about their affordable, climate-protecting features. And as a new feature, we'll show you how to landscape your yard with native plants and water them with rain barrels that catch rooftop runoff.

Plus, there will be a solar food cooker on display (free solar-baked cookies) and an ingenious barbeque grill that runs on corn kernels. We'll be selling energy-saving compact fluorescent light bulbs for a big discount. We'll also have lots of free literature on the rising threat of global warming and steps you can take to help save the planet.

Come see solar panels! View electric, biodiesel, and hybrid cars firsthand! Eat solar-baked cookies and barbequed veggie burgers from a grill that burns corn kernels! Learn how to landscape your yard with native plants! Buy wind power certificates and energy-saving light bulbs! Test drive a tofu-powered lawn mower! And more!

MAP TO THE OPEN HOUSE

As a part of CCAN's summer membership campaign, we are giving away a free Energy Audit at the open house! It's just one of the ways we can say thank you for supporting our work. And, if you haven't joined yet, join now and you also have a chance to win a free green cleaning from Green Clean USA! Click here to enter!

DIRECTIONS:
By Metro: Take the red-line train to Takoma Station and walk east along Carroll Ave. toward downtown Takoma Park. After three blocks, turn left on Willow Ave. We're the fourth house on the right. Five-minute walk from the Metro.

By bike or car from DC: Take 16th Street north to Aspen. Turn right on Aspen and follow under the Metro Bridge. Take your second left after the bridge onto Willow Street. At the first light, turn right on Carroll Ave and take an immediate left onto Willow Ave.

By bike or car from the Beltway: Exit at New Hampshire Ave heading south. Take a right on Piney Branch and a left on Carroll Ave. Follow Carroll till you're almost in downtown Takoma Park and take a right on Tulip Ave. Take your next left onto Willow Ave and we're the third house on the left.

PARKING:
Please park in the parking lot at the corner of Willow Ave. and Carroll Ave., just four houses down from the expo.

For more information call 301-270-3722.

www.chesapeakeclimate.org

Free buses!

2007-07-09T16:27:41Z

Buses should be free is an interesting article from Canada proposing a practical fix for increasing our passenger miles per gallon rating.

Make the Ride-Ons come every 15 minutes instead of 30 minutes, and they'd start to look useful for a day of errand running. I have to say that since the fares are payable by Metro Smartcard, I've been riding them a lot more often.

Carbon Offsets

2007-05-15T13:31:55Z

Over a morning cup of joe, Eric and I got to talking about the pros and cons of carbon offsets.

It's easy to see why hardcore environmentalists would disapprove of them conceptually because of the disincentive to change our own consumptive behaviors. But on a practical level, they are a step in the right direction... aren't they?

Help us frame the debate. Please comment on carbon offsets and whether you think they are a good or bad thing.

"Remember how biofuels were going to save us?"

2007-05-10T14:08:21Z

It's in the wind, my friends. I have been following headlines about biofuels with great interest and this one hit me hard.

It's true that biofuels are a clean energy source we can get behind but we can't go all willy nilly on biofuels without addressing CONSUMPTION of all that is unclean.

This blog is awesome by the way.

Earthtalk: How much green does it take to have a green home?

2007-05-08T17:12:02Z

Dear EarthTalk: I’m “pro-solar” all the way for the sake of the environment, but solar power has not historically been very cost-effective. What innovations are coming down the pike that will bring costs down to make solar competitive with other energy sources?

]]> The prospect of generating pollution-free power from the sun’s rays is appealing, but to-date the low price of oil combined with the high costs of developing new technology have prevented the widespread adoption of solar power in the U.S. and beyond. At a current cost of 25 to 50 cents per kilowatt-hour, solar power costs as much as five times more than conventional fossil fuel based electricity. And dwindling supplies of polysilicon, the element found in traditional photovoltaic cells, are not helping.

According to Gary Gerber of the Berkeley, California-based Sun Light & Power, not long after Ronald Reagan moved into the White House in 1980 and removed the solar collectors from the roof that Jimmy Carter had installed, tax credits for solar development disappeared and the industry plunged “over a cliff.”

Federal spending on solar energy picked up under the Clinton administration, but trailed off again once George W. Bush took office. But growing climate change worries and high oil prices have forced the Bush administration to reconsider its stance on alternatives like solar, and the White House has proposed $148 million for solar energy development in 2007, up almost 80 percent from what it invested in 2006.

In the realm of research and development, enterprising engineers are working hard to get solar power’s costs down, and expect it to be price-competitive with fossil fuels within 20 years. One technological innovator is California-based Nanosolar, which replaces the silicon used to absorb sunlight and convert it into electricity with a thin film of copper, indium, gallium and selenium (CIGS). Says Nanosolar’s Martin Roscheisen, CIGS-based cells are flexible and more durable, making them easier to install in a wide range of applications. Roscheisen expects he will be able to build a 400-megawatt electricity plant for about a tenth of the price of a comparable silicon-based plant. Other companies making waves with CIGS-based solar cells include New York’s DayStar Technologies and California’s Miasol .

Another recent innovation in solar power is the co-called “spray-on” cell, such as those made by Massachusetts’ Konarka. Like paint, the composite can be sprayed on to other materials, where it can harness the sun’s infrared rays to power cell phones and other portable or wireless devices. Some analysts think spray-on cells could become five times more efficient than the current photovoltaic standard.

Environmentalists and mechanical engineers aren’t the only ones bullish on solar these days. According to the Cleantech Venture Network, a forum of investors interested in clean renewable energy, venture capitalists poured some $100 million into solar start-ups of all sizes in 2006 alone, and expect to commit even more money in 2007. Given the venture capital community’s interest in relatively short-term returns, it’s a good bet that some of today’s promising solar start-ups will be tomorrow’s energy behemoths.

For more information
• Sun Light & Power
• Nanosolar
• DayStar Technologies
• Miasol
• PowerFilm
• Konarka

Dear EarthTalk: Do buildings with various “green” features cost more to build and operate than traditional buildings?

It is difficult to do an apples-to-apples cost comparison of a “green” structure against one that is not due to differences in design, materials and other factors, including the location. But the general consensus is that a green building might well cost slightly more up front, but it will very likely reap the rewards of lower operating costs going forward.

The U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program is the standard-bearer used today in evaluating the relative green-friendliness of building projects. A 2004 nationwide study conducted by Greg Kats of the research and consulting firm Capital E found that structures that qualified for the lowest LEED rating (“LEED Certified”) cost builders less than one percent more up-front than equivalent non-green buildings. For projects with more ambitious green features that qualified for higher LEED ratings (silver, gold and the highest, platinum), the cost premiums went up from between 1.9 percent and 6.8 percent, still surprisingly low.

What surprised Kats even more, though, was the value of the payback. Overall, Kats found that the average cost premium for building green was about $4-5 per square foot, while the financial benefits derived over 20 years from incorporating sustainability features—such as lower energy and water bills—was in the range of $49-65 per square foot, or about 10 times the value of the initial investment. Another 2004 study by Lisa Matthiessen of the consulting firm Davis Langdon came to similar conclusions. According to Matthiessen, incorporating sustainability elements in a project’s design from the get-go—not layering them on later in the process—is essential to keeping the costs down.
Despite these financial benefits, Kats points out that there is unfortunately a “consistent disconnect” in peoples’ minds between the higher up-front costs of building green and the ensuing savings in operating costs. He says that overcoming this is fundamental to understanding the value of green building.

And, of course, money is not the only issue. Transitioning to a greener built environment is important for the conservation of natural resources as well as for reducing pollution. According to statistics gathered by the U.S. Green Building Council, the 76 million residential and five million commercial buildings in the U.S. collectively consume 65 percent of America’s electricity, 37 percent of its energy, 25 percent of its water supplies and 30 percent of its wood and materials. Likewise, buildings account for 35 percent of the nation’s solid waste, 36 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, 46 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 19 percent of nitrous oxide emissions and 10 percent of fine particulate emissions.

Sustainable buildings, such as those that qualify for LEED certification, consume fewer resources, generate less waste, cost less to operate and provide healthier living and working environments for everyone—both indoors and out.

For more information
• U.S. Green Building Council, www.usgbc.org; Capital E’s “Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits,” www.cap-e.com/ewebeditpro/items/O59F3481.pdf.

Got an environmental question? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php

"the ridiculous that is bottled water"

2007-04-19T13:51:57Z

ah, but if it could be my quote, but it's not.

Check this out: Wisebread.com.

(Thanks, Chris.)

You never know where you'll find the voice of reason...

2007-04-19T10:41:37Z

I was just checking my morning weather on weather.com, and I found out they have a blog on climate change: climate.weather.com/blog and it's really good!

Ethanol impact

2007-04-18T15:09:17Z

A month or so ago I read an article in the Post citing that tortilla prices are going through the roof in Latin America thanks to an international demand for ethanol. Columnist Marcela Sanchez called the region "the 'Persian Gulf' of Biofuels"

]]> My basic understanding of economics based on a freshman class is AU tells me that corn production will rise and Latin American culture will be restored, so I took the indicator as a positive one.

A more complex analysis is available at Marginal Revolution.

Closer to home, Maryland is discovering corn to be a major cash crop.

The Baltimore Sun recently reported that rising corn prices will be good for MD grain farmers but hard for farmers growing livestock and raising poultry- since corn is a major feed supply.

Maybe we'll see an agricultural shift, since the outlook for the next decade keeps corn prices high.