Feed: Green Blog - AggScore: 82.0
Summary: Green Blog
Helping environmentally-conscientious business leaders choose environmentally-friendly solutions.
SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or Web/Videoconference
Give the airlines credit: unlike the automakers for whom greenwash is the order of the day, they and in turn the environment i.e. all of us benefit when they find ways to cut energy use. The lighter the weight, the more the aircraft can carry per pound of thrust the less fuel is needed leading to lower emissions.
Let's face it: even if we developed high-speed rail networks everywhere, air travel is the only practical means to carry people and highly-valued cargo over medium to long distances and to remote locations.
One of the means airlines have been using to gain productivity is seat pitch. The more bodies on thinner, lighter furniture packed tighter together that they can squeeze into the maximum certifiable capacities of today' well-engineered aircraft the less BTUs-per-customer they must expend while achieving more per-passenger revenues.
Yet there are limits to this as anyone taller than 5'5" can testify. Today's seating arrangements make online work next to impossible in economy i.e. hoi-polloi class while making flying close to becoming unbearable.
(Replacing much-maligned but actually very nutritious and overall very good airline food with salt-and-fat-laden fare at most airports adds to the discomfort further because salt makes the joints ache)
Air travel though is about pushing the limits. An Italian company, Aviointeriors is promising to go beyond it when it comes to human endurance with its new 23-inch pitch (compared to typical 28-inch-31-inch pitch) "SkyRider" seat.
Not yet FAA-approved, the "SkyRider", is says Aviointeriors "an ultra-high density seat presently completely engineered and to be finally tested. The SkyRider has been designed and engineered to offer the possibility to even further reduce ticket prices while still maintaining sound profitability, which, even with a dual or three class seating arrangement, will allow maximum certified passenger capacity of the aircraft. With a much reduced seat pitch, the SkyRider preserves a comfortable position for the low fare passengers."
"Furthermore, in the SkyRider arrangement, a partial overlapping of the passengers seating between rows is allowed, thus further increasing the cabin density. The seat structure itself also provides space for personal baggage."
The seat row roughly resembles like those on amusement park rides without the over-the-shoulders harnesses, or the comfort. But don't give the airlines (or the FAA) any ideas. We've all been on flights that would merit such contraptions.
"The SkyRider is intended as a new basic class," says the firm. "The passenger's seating position is similar to that of a touring motor-scooter rider. This posture permits that the overall longitudinal space occupied by the seat."
If the Aviointeriors release had come out April 1 it would have
been treated as a joke. Yet with domestic air travel--with the
laudable exception of JetBlue--becoming a commodity where
cheap-and-timing is what matters; if the FAA approves this cross
between a seat and-straphanging don't be surprised if one carrier
then another then another follow suit. Lowest common denominator.
This is despite condemnation from reporters and users if the
site Farecompare is any indication.
After all, the carriers know that if you have to fly, because
your company tells you to or that you have to see your family or
bury them you will have no choice, or so they think to endure the
torture.
The only thing--barring Congress-driven mandates to the
FAA--barring such a discomfort-inflicting device from being
contemplated is for the individual business customers and for
powerful consumers organizations like the AARP--to tell the
airlines "don't even think about it or we'll switch/tell or
advise our employees and members to switch to
video/webconferencing, and Skype."
Given the airlines' better-but-still razor-thin profits, it
doesn't take much of a shift in customers to change their ledger
colors from black to red. For while the air travel experience has
been deteriorating and prices climbing that for online virtual
communications has been taking off and declining respectfully.
And one doesn't have to worry about strip-searches, what's in the other's person shoes, weather delays and lost bags, or tolerate the food on a Skype, web or videocall...the greenest "transportation" there is.
Tags: air travel, aircraft, greenwash, Skype, video conferencing, web conferencing Related tags: pitch skyrider, skyrider, airlines, seating, pitch, while
, air travel, aircraft, greenwash, Skype, video conferencing, web conferencing
-
Truly Going Green in Air Travel - Jun 03,
2010
-
The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds -
Apr 19, 2010
-
Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19,
2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
To Go Green, Make Videoconferencing
Affordable - Oct 13, 2009
-
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The
Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010
-
Is Wind Energy Green or Greenwash? - Nov
02, 2009
-
Five Five Keys to Selecting Effective Green
Technologies From Verismic - Aug 11, 2009
-
Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In
The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009
-
Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps -
Apr 22, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or Web/Videoconference
Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut Down On Packaging
Canada is a big source of American packaging material, and that
includes newsprint.
So applause should be offered to a recent editorial in the
Peace Arch News, a newspaper which is
distributed in the Metro Vancouver communities of South Surrey
and the city of White Rock, British Columbia, Canada that
face the U.S. border which called for manufacturers and retailers
to cut down on the waste.
Here are some excerpts from the piece:
"The sheer amount of packaging we deal with every day is
staggering. According to the U.S.-based Dogwood Alliance, 25 per
cent of the 2.4 million hectares of trees cut down every year in
the southeastern United States ends up wrapping and boxing
consumer goods."
"The computer age, which was supposed to diminish our need for
paper, has only made things worse."
"The little plastic cartridges for inkjet printers, for instance,
are notoriously over-packaged, contained in complicated boxes,
attached to cardboard or plastic trays, wrapped in sticky plastic
and accompanied by a series of instruction pamphlets and
promotional paperwork."
The problem, says the editorial "is compounded if you happened to
order that inkjet cartridge from an online retailer; chances are
it was shipped in a cardboard box five or six times larger than
the already voluminous box encasing the little plastic cartridge,
and then further protected by crumpled paper, bubblewrap or
styrofoam peanuts."
"Responsible, environmentally-conscious consumers can only
do so much to keep all these boxes, containers, trays and whatnot
from filling landfills."
For Metro Vancouver and environs like nearly every city is facing
a waste management problem. There is rising in adjacent to an
environmentally-sensitive area of Burns Bog a landfill that is
beginning to look (and smell) like the first stages of New York
City's infamous and now-closed "temporary" Fresh Kills dump on
Staten Island. Barges, railcars and trucks leave this scenic part
of "Beautiful British Columbia" to be disposed of elsewhere.
Incineration is being debated as an option in a region where
thanks to traffic from urban sprawl plus the pollutants from
ships, trucks and trains along with that from factories air
quality is becoming problematic.
The editorial quite correctly recommends "manufacturers and
retailers to do their part and reduce the amount of packaging
material they use. Most of it we can do without."
What is needed to make that happen is leadership from the largest manufacturers and retailers e.g. BestBuy, Dell, HP, Staples, WalMart, for this bulk and waste costs them money too. Perhaps a LEED for packaging?
The other option is VAT or GST for waste i.e. disposal fees added to the prices. The more it costs to clean, destroy, recycle or transport or to clean up from the processing i.e. air and water pollution, solid waste disposal, the higher the costs. This is fair; why should these expenses, including resulting increased healthcare costs from tending to those who become ill from the effects be foisted onto taxpayers?
Either method--while the former is more preferable the latter will likely be the case knowing human nature--the net results will be developing greener packaging or a switch to virtual alternatives: cloud computing, doing away with printing and online-only reading.
Tags: environment, paperless, recycling Related tags: manufacturers retailers, british columbia, metro vancouver, little plastic, distributed metro, packaging
, environment, paperless, recycling
-
Power IT Down This Friday! - Aug 26,
2010
-
Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No,
Really? - May 18, 2010
-
To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste -
Apr 22, 2010
-
Mining Environmental and Social
Responsibility - Mar 11, 2010
-
Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia
(Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01,
2010
-
Backup Green and Philanthropic Promises with
Actions - Jan 11, 2010
-
E-Cycling Nortel Gear - Oct 02,
2009
-
The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading
Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25,
2009
-
Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One -
Aug 21, 2009
-
Beautiful Land, New Opportunities, Wasted
Space - Jun 15, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut Down On Packaging
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Power IT Down This Friday!
Friday August 27 is "Power IT Down" day. Organizers say "just by
turning off your computer, monitor and printer -- and any other
peripherals -- when you leave work for the day, you can help save
tens of thousands of costly kilowatt hours."
(There are also the knock-on benefits of reducing dangerous
emissions, slowing down climate change and minimizing
havoc-causing brownouts and blackouts.)
"Think saving a few kilowatt hours won't make a big difference?"
says the web site. "To demonstrate the benefits of Power IT Down
Day and how energy savings can be put to good use, its sponsors
will make a donation to the Wounded
Warrior Project. Last year, we donated $45,000!"
The Wounded Warrior Project's mission is, says that site to
"raise awareness and enlist the public's aid for the needs of
severely injured service men and women, help severely injured
service members aid and assist each other, and provide unique,
direct programs and services to meet the needs of severely
injured service members."
CDW's 2009 Energy Efficient IT Report backs up
the benefits of such efforts as Power IT Down day. It found that
organizations working to reduce energy consumption are realizing
tangible results:
* Through routine measures, such as training employees to shut down equipment when they leave for the day, 52 percent of organizations actively working to reduce energy consumption have reduced IT energy costs by one percent or more
* If the average organization surveyed were to take full advantage of energy-saving measures, IT professionals estimate they could save $1.5 million annually
The message is getting out. CDW says 59 percent of organizations are training employees to shut down equipment when they leave their offices for extended periods, versus just 43 percent in 2008.
The 2009 report identifies where energy efficiency ranks in IT decision-making priorities, improvements in IT energy efficiency and remaining challenges, as well as uncovers strategies that successfully reduce IT energy bills.
More invaluable data and insights are on their way; CDW is readying to release The 2010 Energy Efficient IT Report that will be out in just a few weeks.
Tags: energy conservation, energy consumption, energy reduction, environment, Power IT Down, Wounded Warrior Project Related tags: injured service, severely injured, reduce energy, service members, energy consumption, energy
, energy conservation, energy consumption, energy reduction, environment, Power IT Down, Wounded Warrior Project
-
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get
Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010
-
The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading
Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25,
2009
-
Green Ideas Overheard At ITEXPO West -
Sep 22, 2008
-
To Go Green, Go Dumb (as in computing) -
Jul 21, 2008
-
Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut
Down On Packaging - Aug 30, 2010
-
Steel Rails are Green - May 06,
2010
-
To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste -
Apr 22, 2010
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
Mining Environmental and Social
Responsibility - Mar 11, 2010
-
Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia
(Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01,
2010
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Power IT Down This Friday!
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles: Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars
Electric vehicles (EV) presently and will continue to suffer one
crippling flaw for most applications: the lack of range. Note the
words 'most applications' for there is an imaginative and
practical means of using them that is discussed later on.
A recent National Post 'Motor Mouth' article by David
Booth points out that the batteries required to move EVs generate
electrical energy far less efficiently than do gasoline or other
fuels. Gasoline produces about 6,000 watt-hours/pound
whereas the "most optimistic numbers" he has seen for advanced
lithium-ion batteries is 110 watt-hours/pound.
"That means good old- fashioned gasoline punches 54 times harder
for the same amount of weight, the fundamental reason electric
cars' ranges are so pitiful compared with those fossil fuelled,"
writes Booth.
Simply put: there is no way you can pack that much battery power
to match what gasoline, or even less efficient fuels like
compressed natural gas (used in fleet vehicles, like taxis) can
produce for your typical trips.
What about the vaunted greater efficiency of electric motors?
"In the electric vehicles' defence, electric motors transmit that
energy more efficiently to the road," says Booth. "Some electric
motors boast 90% efficiency, while internal-combustion engines
can transmit as little as 15% of their energy into vehicular
motivation. However, even being generous, that means EVs face a
nine- times deficit versus traditional cars."
And that doesn't take into account driving on hilly terrain. My
city is noted for just that. I sit on the city council's
transportation advisory committee and had my vote recorded
against the majority that supported endorsing allowing
small EV maintenance vehicles on local streets as they would have
to crawl up the grades, blocking traffic; they are not fitted
with the cumbersome flywheels or heavy gasoline engines that
would have given them the needed oomph.
Moreover, re-energizing EVs are just as inefficient compared with
filling up the tank even with the latest technology. GE has come out with GE WattStation that it
says on average decreases electric vehicle charging time from
12-18 hours to as little as four to eight hours compared to
standard charging "level 1", assuming a full-cycle charge for a
24 kWh battery.
In contrast it takes me about 5 to 7 minutes including payment
time to fill up my-recreational/occasional-trip-only (I work from
home) Subaru Forester.
For that reason EVs are limited to about 80 miles-90 miles per
day. This may seem a lot but not when the typical urban or more
accurately sprawl-to-sprawl commutes run in the range of 20 miles
or 30 miles or more: less in stop-and-go traffic as well on
grades. The real crippler though is the personal trips e.g.
picking up/dropping off kids, food shopping, stopping by the
hardware store, going out for lunch, meeting the gang after work,
or having to take Aunt Millie to the airport.
So does that relegate EVs to the realm of jetpacks and other cool
if ultimately impractical means of getting around?
No, because there is a way to use them that minimizes their
downsides i.e. range and charging time and maximizes their
benefits: zero-direct-emission mobility and that is as a
bidirectional "station cars".
In this app EVs would bring commuters from their suburban homes
to bus, ferry or train park-and-ride lots in the AM, take those
coming off these modes that are going to suburban workplaces or
other destinations e.g. conference centers, institutions, back to
the transit terminals in the PM, and finally transport commuters
on their last legs back to their domiciles.
Next-(ahem)-gen chargers like GE's WattStation would be installed
at residences, offices, institutions, which would permit morning,
evening and work-time errand journeys. EVs can be deployed
single-occupancy or better yet in shared-ride
configurations.
As with vanpools, those who drive get to use EVs on weekends.
This for all practical purposes would favor the suburban
residents but there are many instances where both can benefit
i.e. trip to the city on the train for a ball game, ride out to
the country to a resort or beach or see some friends, depending
on the frequency of transit service.
This use of EVs will help to not only reduce emissions in general
but it affordably manages the air-killing matter of reaching
suburban destinations that are at present impractical i.e. very
costly to reach by mass transit because they are laid out to
exclusively favor auto access. It also maximizes the use of this
investment. Recharging at home and work gives the range needed
for both sets of users' personal trips, which makes
EVs practical for them.
So how do you employ EVs in this fashion? In much the same
fashion as vanpools, with the use of computerized booking, plus
with new-gen password vehicle access and starting. Transit
agencies either independently or preferably (as they are
cash-strapped) in partnership with the power companies would buy
them and the chargers at fleet rates and in turn charge drivers,
much like car renting or leasing. The renters/lessors and their
employers would pay for the power to juice up their vehicles.
This is a multi-win application of this technology. Commuters
will not have to own (and gas up) a second vehicle, thereby
saving them thousands of dollars a year. Transit agencies will
not have to extend routes to office parks or can conserve
resources by pulling back poor performing ones if EVs are used
instead while the ridership and revenue on bus,
ferry or train reverse commute runs will grow because there will
now be a viable option for such commuters. There will be fewer
vehicles-miles travelled and resulting less pollution and
congestion and accidents.
Yes, the markets that EVs can be used in this fashion are
limited, but they are the ones with the biggest pollution and
sprawl problems and with long transit spines e.g. Atlanta,
Boston, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, L-A basin, New York
/Tri-State, Philly, San Francisco Bay area (including Silicon
Valley), Seattle/Bellevue, Washington, D.C and in Canada:
Montreal and Toronto.
How about it? Who wants to climb aboard?
Tags: automotive, electric vehicles, mass transit, station cars Related tags: electric vehicles, electric motors, transit agencies, ferry train, miles miles, electric
, automotive, electric vehicles, mass transit, station cars
-
Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No,
Really? - May 18, 2010
-
Why EVs (etc.) are NG - Jan 15,
2009
-
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The
Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010
-
Green Campus Project - Apr 08,
2010
-
Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One -
Aug 21, 2009
-
Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps -
Apr 22, 2009
-
Green Jobs? - Jan 19, 2009
-
Subaru: the truly green automaker - Nov
25, 2008
-
Goodbye, GM, Chrysler, Hello Green
Alternatives - Nov 17, 2008
-
America voted 'green' - Nov 11,
2008
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles: Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars
Comments on this Entry:
(mark miglio on Oct 31, 2010 3:12 PM)
The power/pounds argument is not valid, as I see it. Suggestion: Filling stations could become facilities to quickly switch out depleted batteries with previously charged batteries.
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient.
Nearly every firm, agency and especially nonprofits subscribes if not reads to the notion of doing more with less as the key to productivity, profits or achieving other desired results.
So why not take this sensible, proven concept to energy? And in the process slice the U.S. deficit, chop healthcare and other high costs, kickstart the economy and breathe and live easier?
That's the argument made by David Goldstein, who is co-director of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC's) energy program and a MacArthur Genius Award grant winner in 2002 for his work on energy efficiency, in his new book, Invisible Energy: Strategies to Rescue the Economy and Save the Planet in which he challenges the assumption that we are powerless to our addiction to oil and other dirty fuels.
Goldstein's book, says the NRDC argues that by using energy more
efficiently, "we can cut our energy demand, improve quality of
life, cut global warming pollution, and reduce pressure to drill
for oil in sensitive ecosystems like the Gulf. And in the
process, we will be taking one of the few steps available to
stimulate the economy while cutting the federal deficit."
"Goldstein emphasizes that we don't need the oil in the Gulf (or
in other sensitive areas). He says the United States could do
everything we are doing today - and in the foreseeable future -
using currently available technologies to save more than $10
trillion over the next 40 years, reducing our demand for energy
to perhaps 30 percent of what it is today."
"He also cites the failure to pursue strong energy efficiency
policies since the 1970s as a primary cause for our global
today's economic troubles, which can be remedied with energy
efficiency policies that would pay off long-term dividends."
In a recent blog Goldstein writes: "Energy
efficiency is one of the strongest tools we have at our disposal
to recover from the recession. It can address all of the major
problems that led to the Great Recession and that continue to
hold back recovery: from the fear of inflation that [Paul]
Krugman warns about to the trade deficit, high unemployment, and
government deficits. Yet the policies that could work are not
seen by policymakers to be of sufficient importance to implement
with the needed urgency, and the economy continues to drift."
One of the underlying causes of the downturn that Goldstein
correctly identifies is sprawl in that the transportation and
energy costs of this development form has not been assessed in
the total costs of house prices. If it were then consumers and
lenders would have made more sensible and financially sound
decisions. Alas in the talk about mortgage changes these factors
have been left out.
He points out: "For mortgage lending, we have made almost no
progress on incorporating energy and transportation costs into
underwriting. When lenders evaluate or not whether borrowers can
reliably make payments on a median mortgage of about $150,000 (or
80% of a median house price of about $180,000) they continue to
ignore the 30-year commitment to pay some $300,000 in
transportation expenses for a house located in suburban sprawl,
and another $75,000 in utility costs."
"While these cost obligations are not contractual commitments,
they are in practice real issues that affect whether or not the
borrower can make their payments. Think about it. If you are in
financial distress in Chicago in the winter, and you can't pay
both your mortgage and your heating bill, which will you pay
first? If you live in sprawl and need your car to drive to work,
or look for a job, which bill will you pay first, your auto loan
and gas or your mortgage?"
Goldstein if anything is understating the case, for supporting
urban sprawl: commercial and residential is one reason why local
and state taxes are so high that also adds to homeowners'
financial distress, and why cash-strapped governments are cutting
back essential services. It costs far more to provide and
maintain roads, sewer/water, emergency response, transit, schools
(including pupil and employee transportation) to low-density
sprawling developments than it does to compact, efficient or
smart walkable neighborhoods.
Why do local and state governments, knowing this, still encourage sprawl? Just check out who contributes to election campaigns...one more reason there should be limits on them (full disclosure: I am on the executive of a Canadian political party and have been a candidate in a local government election in which I did not take any money from developers)
This blogger has argued that to get moving greener--in more ways than one--we need to end all subsidies to energy and environmental waste. That also includes slicing mortgage subsidies. If you can afford a dream house, including the full costs, that's great. If you can't, well you can't. There's nothing wrong with settling for a smaller place or for renting.
Home ownership is such a shibboleth that it has blinded society to the hard costs it incurs. Yes it is nice to own your own home--you can within limits do what you want with it--something that provided your kids want it you can pass on to them. As investment it is hoary at best. Owning one limits flexibility in case circumstances change i.e. careers, life events e.g. marriage, kids, divorce, deaths. I've owned homes and I've rented and there are pros and cons to both. The bottom line is why should all of us have to subsidize the choice of living in sprawl?
The hard fact is though that for now there are millions of Americans (and many Canadian) that are stuck in homes, just trying to make ends met, and couldn't move out if they wanted to because what they would get in return would put them underwater.
Here's where teleworking can help: for we have also subsidized office-based employment and the energy it wastes both in buildings and in commuting at taxpayers' and the economy's expense, resulting as this blog has pointed out in huge healthcare costs.
Shifting the work to the worker saves them $4,000 to $5,000 in work-related employment costs than they can use to pay bills. They can also write off some of their house costs namely utilities for their workspaces. And they can sell one of their cars and rent out the garage to generate more cash. Doing so in turn also generates some $20,000 per employee/per year in net benefits to employers in the way of facilities costs and productivity gains. Meanwhile taxes can be lowered through less commuting resulting in minimizing road wear-and-tear, transit costs, and in emergency services.
And we get to breathe easier.
Something to think about as you relax at home, or return home
from your 4th of July or extended (for those who are playing
hookey) Canada Day holidays.
P.S. Be part of the solution. Walk, bike, take mass transit and
carpool with others when you travel this holiday
Tags: energy conservation, energy efficient, energy reduction, Natural Resources Defense Council, sprawl, telework Related tags: energy efficiency, local state, financial distress, efficiency policies, energy, costs
, energy conservation, energy efficient, energy reduction, Natural
Resources Defense Council, sprawl, telework
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading
Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25,
2009
-
Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In
The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009
-
Going Green All the Way In Ontario - Feb
12, 2009
-
Power IT Down This Friday! - Aug 26,
2010
-
Steel Rails are Green - May 06,
2010
-
Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia
(Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01,
2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
Going Green Advice From DMG Consulting -
Sep 16, 2009
-
CDW Report: Energy Efficient IT Yield Savings,
Yet Millions Are Still Wasted (and Environment Harmed) -
Sep 09, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get Efficient.
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives)
With excellent timing, following U.S. President Barack Obama's taking BP to the woodshed for what may have been a preventable Gulf of Mexico oil drilling disaster the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) issued a release asking people to ride mass transit on June 17, the 5th annual National Dump the Pump Day.
"Sponsored by APTA which is partnering with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Sierra Club this year, the National Dump the Pump Day is a public awareness day that highlights the benefits of public transportation, two of which are saving money and promoting energy independence."
"This year offers more than an opportunity for people to save money by using public transit," said APTA President William Millar. "Given the Gulf spill crisis, Americans can also make a statement in support of public transit and its ability to help our country reduce its reliance on oil.
"U.S. public transit ridership saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline annually," Millar said. "America needs to be energy independent and public transportation plays a critical role in our country attaining energy independence."
"Representatives from the NRDC and the Sierra Club agree that public transportation is part of the solution for helping our country reduce its reliance on oil.
"Preventing future national tragedies like the Gulf spill requires moving America beyond oil, and Dump the Pump Day reminds us that public transportation options such as trains and buses are important tools for driving down our dangerous dependence," said Deron Lovaas, NRDC Federal Transportation Policy Director.
"Taking transit this Thursday and every day after is something we all can do in response to the BP oil disaster," said Ann Mesnikoff, the Sierra Club's Green Transportation Campaign Director. "Public transportation is key to ending our dependence on oil and reducing our global warming pollution."
"Besides helping our country reduce its dependence on oil, people
can also help improve their bank balances. The average
household spends 18 cents of every dollar on transportation and
94 percent of this goes to buying, maintaining, and operating
cars - the largest expenditure after housing. In addition,
according to the monthly APTA Transit Savings Report, which
tracks savings for public transit users, the national average
savings per year is more than $9,000 for an individual in a
two-person household who downsizes from two cars to one
car. "
"More than 120 public transportation systems are participating in
National Dump the Pump Day activities this year. Some
public transit systems are offering free or reduced rides;
holding contests with giveaways such as free transit passes; and
spreading the word through social media. Proclamations have
been issued, including one from Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson."
The irony is that despite the rhetoric from the President about the need to move away from oil dependency, and in the face of stimulus-driven investments in new bus and rail transit system expansions APTA members are having to cut back transit services because of shrinking state/local government resources to fill the financing gaps. IOW there is and will be fewer trains, buses and ferries to ride.
Almost every day there are announcements of service reductions. Here are just two of many examples:
"Caltrain will cut service in October, raise fares in January"--San Mateo County Times
Time to match the rhetoric with action, folks, on reducing oil
dependency and pollution. Provide transit systems with stable
operating income sources while putting pressure on the labor
unions to get real on wage demands and give a little to so that
their members can continue to work by serving the
public. Supply incentives to firms and nonprofits alike to
shift their work to employees' homes and business travel from
in-person to conferencing.
And at the same time end the massive indirect subsidies to auto
use and air travel by making the environmental damage, illnesses
and emergency services costs incurred user-pay in fair portion by
the oil companies, employers who by corporate decisions such as
locating away from transit routes, motorists and air
travellers and to those who buy and lease on greenfield i.e.
urban sprawl lands.
Tags: air travel, APTA, automobile, BP,
Dump the Pump, mass transit, oil spills, telework Related tags: public transportation, public transit, country reduce, trains buses, energy independence, transit
, air travel, automobile, APTA, BP,
Dump the Pump, mass transit, oil spills, telework
-
Truly Going Green in Air Travel - Jun 03,
2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps -
Apr 22, 2009
-
SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or
Web/Videoconference - Sep 27, 2010
-
A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles:
Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars - Jul 21,
2010
-
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get
Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010
-
Cars, Sprawl Are Killing Us: American Public
Health Association - May 24, 2010
-
The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds -
Apr 19, 2010
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19,
2010
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The Alternatives)
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Truly Going Green in Air Travel
I used to like flying but no longer. I now loathe even the thought of getting on a plane.
A once-great experience has been turned into, well, the most appropriately named commercial aircraft is the "Airbus", which speaks volumes for it. Namely cramming as many bodies to a hairline above the pain thresholds of most humans into a huge of hunk of material and transport them via their conveyance from Point A to Point B.
And that's without taking security into account--whose strict and now degrading and often tokenistic measures and procedures are lousy substitutes from lazy and incompetent intelligence. It is easier to force passengers to virtually strip than to gather, analyze, and most importantly act on potential threats. And yes I was there in New York City on 9-11-01 where I witnessed the attacks on the World Trade Center. And I have in my files a New York Times op-ed from July 10, 2001 written by Larry Johnson, a former State Department counterterrorism expert titled "The Declining Terrorist Threat."
On top of that, flying, like driving, wastes an awful lot of energy, eats up Earth-regenerating greenspace for massive runways and facilities and is not surprisingly a significant source of air pollution that leads to serious and deadly, and costly illnesses. Rail, buses (the highway variety), and web and videoconferencing requires fewer resources and spews less in return.
Even so, flying is a necessary evil. So I applaud efforts by the airlines, their suppliers and airports to take steps to minimize their substantial environmental footprints. I recently toured the Boeing plant in Everett, Washington that is rolling out the 787 Dreamliner with my father whom at the beginning of his career worked for Rolls Royce aero engines. He did his U.K. National Service i.e. conscription in the RAF as an aircraft mechanic, working on then-state-of-the-art turbojet engines built into Gloster Meteors and DeHavilland Vampires as well as their piston predecessors that had kept Britain free from Nazi rule in the bravely-piloted airframes of Spitfires, Hurricanes and Typhoons.
The Dreamliner is green technology in more ways than one. It will use 20 percent less fuel for comparable missions than presently similarly sized airplane. Advanced engine technologies -from General Electric and yes, my father's old company (I saw his smile and pride as he checked over a model of one of its turbofans)--will account for eight percent of the savings. Moreover, the Dreamliner's kit-built global manufacturing and assembly--in what is the world's largest building--is amazingly efficient compared to the old-fashioned piece-by-piece construction and is well worth the visit just for the facility.
Less impressed I am with voluntary carbon offset programs like the one between Air Canada and Zerofootprint. Both firms announced an expansion of it that includes a landfill gas recovery project in Ontario that takes the methane from rotting garbage and distributes it to a nearby plant that produces recycled content paper, along with a tire recycling program in Quebec.
While laudable the problem with such programs is that they "do good to atone for doing evil". Which in one cynical sense is better than just doing evil, but the programs they support should have been funded in the first place.
Instead Air Canada should be doing more to shrink the environmental footprint it and the other air carriers create. Re-equipping their fleets with new efficient airliners like the Dreamliner for medium-long haul flights is one step. Lobbying governments for proven-effective European-styled airport-high-speed-rail (HSR) ground spokes to minimize short-haul flights (which are the big polluters and runway eaters) is another.
Canada is pathetically behind even laggard U.S. on that count. Only one airport (YVR, in Vancouver, B.C.) has a rail rapid transit link. Yet there are airports in Edmonton, Alberta, Montreal, Quebec and Toronto, Ontario that lie in a jet-fuel-whiffing range of existing HSR-candidate railroad tracks that have had intercity rail (Edmonton) or presently have higher-speed passenger train services (Montreal and Toronto, including commuter rail). There is a rail spur three rapid transit stops from the YVR terminal building that can bring travelers directly to/from the fast-growing Fraser Valley communities.
(Canada's air carriers should also tell the federal government to dump the long-proposed Pickering airport east of Toronto, a project so controversial in its environmental impacts and long out-of-date that not even Mark Holland, the Member of Parliament representing the area wants it.)
Still another step is to recycle the garbage used by passengers. The airlines are saving fuel and reducing emissions by getting rid of onboard food services. The offset is the take-on food trash. How about joint programs with the airport authorities and the concessions to use lightweight recyclable/reusable cutlery and packaging? There's a win-win (rail operators e.g. Amtrak in the U.S. and VIA in Canada should do likewise).
Here's another source of emissions that the airport authorities can mandate: low-emission/zero-emission airporter shuttle vans such as by buying and leasing them to operators to get rid of the smelly fuel-belching clunkers that prowl the terminals.
The airlines could also take a hint from JetBlue and go virtual i.e. home-based agents with their contact centers. Why waste money and energy and crap up the air in the process by providing facilities and requiring staff to commute to them?
In this fashion travel is only kept to when it is truly needed. Which is really the way to go green.
Tags: air travel, aircraft, Boeing, buses, carbon offsets, contact center, high-speed rail, recycle, telework Related tags: rapid transit, airport authorities, canada should, airport, canada, programs
, aircraft, air travel, Boeing, buses, carbon offsets, contact center, high-speed rail, recycle, telework,
-
SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or
Web/Videoconference - Sep 27, 2010
-
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The
Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
Going Green Advice From DMG Consulting -
Sep 16, 2009
-
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get
Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010
-
The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds -
Apr 19, 2010
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19,
2010
-
Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia
(Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01,
2010
-
To Go Green, Make Videoconferencing
Affordable - Oct 13, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Truly Going Green in Air Travel
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Cars, Sprawl Are Killing Us: American Public Health Association
If there is any doubt that locating in car-oriented poor-transit served office parks and residing in likewise-vehicle-dependent low-density suburbs are injurious to our health--and one reason why healthcare costs are so high--a new report by the American Public Health Association, "The Hidden Health Costs of Transportation," should quell them.
The report's data indicates that if organizations truly want to make a difference in their costs, environment and quality of life that they need to get out of the "parks" altogether. For no matter how "green" the buildings in energy efficiency the dirt from the pollution and other even more deadly and expensive impacts on public health from car dependence resulting from their locations far outweigh the benefits.
This comprehensive study, prepared for the APHA by UrbanDesign 4Health examines all impacts and their staggering costs in 2008 dollars from transportation and land use that is shaped by and which shapes transportation choices. These include accidents, air pollution and obesity including administrative expenses (such as billing and contact centers) and where appropriate lost productivity and wages, property damage, travel delays and costs due to pain, suffering and lost quality of life and premature death.
The toll from cars in poor air quality alone range from $50 billion to $80 billion per year. Yet even that high amount is overshadowed by the costs of accidents that reach about $180 billion annually.
(Keep in mind that hybrids and zero emission vehicles also create pollution from extracting, refining and distributing petroleum products, in highway construction and maintenance, and in emergency vehicles responding to accidents. Like the one my paramedic stepson works out of, scraping motorists and truckers out of their vehicles and hauling them to the ER. Then again thanks to car commuters he has a great job and future.)
Then there is obesity. Car dependence: driving and driving others makes us and them fat because we're not exercising, leading to a vast range of horrible ailments including diabetes and heart disease, and ca-chinging up to $142 billion per year.
(This is more good news from my stepson and his young family; more bad news for everyone else and society as a whole.)
The physical toll is head-shaking. Traffic crashes causes over 40,000 deaths annually, say the report. Some 35 million people live within 300 feet of a major roadway, and are at higher risk of respiratory illness due to exposure to traffic-related air pollution. At the same time about one-third of adults are estimated to be obese and another third are overweight "due in part to sedentary lifestyles and the lack of opportunity for everyday physical activity."
Add these factors together and they are responsible for over nine percent of the U.S's fast-rising healthcare bill: from $2.4 trillion in 2008 to $3.1 trillion in 2012, and $4.3 trillion by 2016.
"The consequences of inactivity, obesity, exposure to air pollution, and traffic crashes in the U.S. are staggering when viewed in terms of cost," says the report. "Tragically, these costs are also largely preventable. "
To enable such prevention requires a serious adjustment in transportation financing and decisions. The APHA report says that much more work is needed in the area of health evaluation and cost assessment in transportation policy. There also needs to be investments in healthier transportation. It recommends a few key policy changes to achieve these objectives, among them:
* Encourage federal planning, funding practices, and decisionmaking to include health impacts, costs and benefits
* Support development of healthy communities, active transport and incentives for transportation investments that support health
* Promote measurement and evaluation of health, safety and equity in planning and development processes
* Fund research to evaluate health impacts and costs of transportation and land use actions
That means more bus, rail and ferry transit and sidewalks and bike paths as opposed to arterials and freeways and more traditional pedestrian-friendly compact development and fewer subdivisions. The report outlines several illustrative examples.
"Our country depends on a robust transportation system that
facilitates easy, safe commutes and promotes physical activity in
order to reduce the burden of death and disease and improve
health outcomes of all communities," said Georges C. Benjamin,
MD, FACP, FACEP (E), executive director of the American Public
Health Association.
With companies picking up the tab for health insurance there are
steps that they can take to do their share i.e. "think globally,
act locally", which benefits the bottom line while shrinking
those on their employees' physiques:
* Shrink the office by deploying telecommuting and encouraging employees to use the time saved to work out every day
* Move to offices and sites on high-transit-served corridors
* Dump the gym. They cost money, pose liability and potential harassment issues and lower-ranked staff especially (such as contact center agents) want to get the Hades out of there when their shift ends; when they clock out their time is theirs.
Instead if you own/lease employee parking then charge employees for it while level the playing field with alternative modes by paying for bike racks and transit passes
* Support transit investments and urge polluter-pay programs
By solid actions recommended by the APHA report and individual
corporate practices and advocacy together we could achieve a
greener, cleaner, healthier and safer environment.
Tags: accidents, air pollution, automobile, emissions, land use, public health, telecommute, transit-oriented development Related tags:
public health, american public, health association, costs transportation, health impacts, health
, accidents, air pollution, automobile, emissions, land use, public health, telecommute, transit-oriented development
-
Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One -
Aug 21, 2009
-
Another Great Reason To Truly (No Sprawl) Go
Green: Your Health and Healthcare - Aug 29, 2008
-
To go green, avoid greenfields for offices and
homes - Jul 28, 2008
-
To Go Green, Go Dumb (as in computing) -
Jul 21, 2008
-
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The
Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010
-
To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste -
Apr 22, 2010
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading
Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25,
2009
-
Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In
The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Cars, Sprawl Are Killing Us: American Public Health Association
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No, Really?
The wealthy have the means to become the earliest adopters of the latest and greatest home and office green tech devices, methods and solutions. Yet it appears that too many of them are acting otherwise when it comes to mobility, if Canada's elite are any indication.
A Canwest New Service article printed last Friday in The Province revealed, citing new Statistics Canada figures, that "wealthy Canadians were the worst polluting drivers in 2007. While the rich, defined as having annual incomes of $100,000+ were responsible for spewing out the most air pollution per person, at 5,737 kilograms or 12,621 lbs in 2007.
"'People in this income group were more likely to own vehicles that use more fuel, such as trucks and SUVs,'" the article cites the report.
Along with that StatsCan reported an increase of new 466,472 vehicles on the road in 2007 compared with 2006, with more than half the additional fleet made up of (you guessed it) SUVs, trucks and vans.
Disturbingly if not surprisingly the same report said that
individual vehicle pollution was up by one-third in 2007 compared
to 15 years or so earlier. So much for fuel effiencies...
And if you add that up to additional driving, road
wear-and-tear and resulting maintenance costs which also lead to
higher pollution, it appears that any green gains in
automotive technology--like the building of roads to alleviate
traffic congestion--are eventually wiped out by
the users.
One example that I hope doesn't go this way is increased
recycling in car construction. The same issue of the paper
reports in a story "Working toward the Earth-friendly car" that
more manufacturers want to use additional recyclable components,
besides the long-recycled aluminum, copper, iron and steel that
are the stuff of junkyards, shredders, dirty old railroad gondola
cars and melt shops.
"Typically, the plastics being used by manufacturers have been
reinforced with materials such as glass, carbon or polyethylene
fibres combined with petroleum-based resins," says the story.
"Now, however, researchers are finding those materials can be
replaced with bioplastics and fibres derived from plants without
sacrificing critical requirements such as strength and
durability. And, with oil prices continuing to rise, these green
alternatives are cost effective, too."
The article pointed to a European study which "predicts that by
2020, bio-based plastics could replace up to 90 per cent of the
total amount of petroleum-derived plastics consumed globally in
2007.
"The auto industry consumes an average of about 135 kilograms
(297 lbs) of plastic in every car it builds, so it's no surprise
automakers are looking down this road with enthusiasm, especially
with the current push to make components either recyclable or
biodegradable."
The piece cites Deborah Mielewski, technical leader of plastics
research in Ford Motor Company's materials research and advanced
engineering department, says the dream is to see those 135 kg of
petroleum-based plastics "replaced by what we can grow. It just
makes sense."
Ford is already using natural fiber-based plastic in its Ford
Flex crossover. This reportedly industry-first production-line
application uses plastic reinforced with environmentally friendly
wheat straw to create the Flex's third-row interior storage bins.
Using the wheat straw as a bio-filler, this application alone,
says the Province story " is reducing petroleum usage by more
than 9,000 kg (19,800 lbs) per year and cutting CO2 emissions by
more than 13,600 kg (29,920 lbs.) annually. It also has better
dimensional integrity than non-reinforced plastic and weighs up
to 10 per cent less than plastic reinforced with talc or
glass.
The story adds that applications already under consideration by
the Ford team include centre console bins and trays, interior air
register and door trim panel components and armrest liners.
One would hope that these materials would make fully electric
vehicles more viable with the wealthy being the early and
fashion-leading adopters, thereby creating the market for more
affordable and practical mass market versions to sell
to the hoi polloi.
Then again, if the experience of SUVs and trucks are any
indication--and I've written about automotive metals in the 1990s
when these vehicles started to become popular people movers in
the 'burbs'--the savings will go into bulkier, feature-loaded
craft that take up more road space and leaving us in the same
choking mess or probably worse than we're now in...
Tags: automotive, electric vehicles, fuel economy, pollution, recycling Related tags: plastic reinforced, petroleum based, wheat straw, based plastics, plastics, plastic
, automotive, electric vehicles, fuel economy, pollution, recycling,
-
A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles:
Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars - Jul 21,
2010
-
Why EVs (etc.) are NG - Jan 15,
2009
-
Canadian Newspaper Has It Right: To Go Green Cut
Down On Packaging - Aug 30, 2010
-
To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste -
Apr 22, 2010
-
Green Campus Project - Apr 08,
2010
-
Backup Green and Philanthropic Promises with
Actions - Jan 11, 2010
-
Now If Only Lexmark Made More Of Its Cartridges
Refill-Friendly... - Apr 24, 2009
-
The Next Steps In Cellphone (and Electronics)
Recycling: Redesign, Refocus on Software - Jan 22,
2009
-
Subaru: the truly green automaker - Nov
25, 2008
-
Goodbye, GM, Chrysler, Hello Green
Alternatives - Nov 17, 2008
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No, Really?
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Steel Rails are Green
A new report from the BlueGreen Alliance and the Economic Policy Institute, Full Speed Ahead: Creating Green Jobs Through Freight Rail Expansion, confirms what rail and many environment advocates and industry sources have been pointing out for years: rails are green and in more ways than one. So instead of ripping out railroad tracks in favor of highways: the dominant government policy for the past 90 years, governments should instead enable investing money into freight rail.
Shipping goods on trains in whole or in part of intermodal (ship/truck-rail) movements uses less energy and land, emits fewer pollutants at greater labor productivity than all-truck for medium to high volumes of freight over likewise distance: short distance heavy movements, such as aggregates are also more efficiently carried on trains. On a per-ton basis, trucking uses on average four times the energy to transport freight versus rail, says the report. That means rail jobs are green jobs.
Moreover, encouraging freight rail through investment in it will
also enable green passenger rail. Most of Amtrak's routes and a
good chunk of U.S. commuter rail operations are on tracks that
are owned by freight railroads. Therefore more freight rail and
green jobs means more passenger rail, thereby generating even
more green employment.
The BlueGreen Alliance and the Economic Policy
Institute's study according to their release says "that the expansion of
freight rail in the U.S. can create approximately 7,800 green
jobs for every $1 billion of capital invested. If this is
expanded to include re-spending by freight rail and supporting
industry employees, between 12,300 and 26,600 American jobs would
be created or sustained per $1 billion invested."
"Over the past two centuries, rail has helped the United States
become the world's leading economic power," said David Foster,
Executive Director of the BlueGreen Alliance. "As we enter the
new clean energy economy, now is not the time to abandon such a
profitable, clean and promising industry. It's a winning
situation for everyone - thousands of green jobs are created and
we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil."
"This report affirms the tremendous public benefits that are
generated both by freight rail's inherent fuel efficiency and the
industry's commitment to reinvesting in the nation's rail
network," said Edward R. Hamberger, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Association of American Railroads.
Freight rail jobs are green jobs, states the report, "which are
crucial to reducing carbon and saving energy in the
transportation sector. Over the past three decades, the industry
has nearly doubled the amount of goods it has shipped without
increasing fuel consumption, creating a fraction of the pollution
of other modes of transportation. It cites for example, TTX
Company, which is profiled in the report, has found ways to
prevent more than 2.5 billion empty miles per year, and save more
than 167 million gallons of fuel annually."
To make an expanded freight rail system happens the report
recommends that governments consider investment incentives, such
as rail capital and shortline tax credits and public-private
partnerships (P3s) between freight railroads and passenger rail
with government paying only for public benefits, and railroads
paying for the business benefits they gain from improvements to
the rail network.
(A P3 was used to finance Metro Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada's very successfully Canada Line rapid transit, which opened last year
from Vancouver International Airport a.k.a. YVR and Richmond into
downtown Vancouver: in time for the 2010 Winter Olympics)
"Freight rail represents a significant opportunity to create
good, green jobs while making our transportation system more
efficient and sustainable and also helping passenger
rail," said Carl Pope, Executive Chairman of the Sierra
Club. "This report shows that expanding freight rail will meet
our goals of creating good jobs while helping to reduce our
dependence on oil."
What is also needed are incentives to encourage rail
electrification, which is virtually nonexistent for freight and
only exists in the Northeast with a couple of exceptions in the
Chicago area and that is only for passenger. Electric traction
has the enormous benefit of being able to return much of the
power used through regenerative braking i.e. turning the electric
motors under nearly every locomotive into generators as well as
relying on cleaner energy sources such as hydro and modern
natural-gas fire generating plants.
But hey you have to start slow before you can move fast. If
lawmakers adopt the recommendations in this report to expand
freight rail first then we can talk about electrification later.
Tags: Amtrak, BlueGreen Alliance, energy efficient, energy reduction, freight rail, green jobs, green transportation, rail Related tags: bluegreen alliance, policy institute, public benefits, alliance economic, economic policy, freight
, Amtrak, BlueGreen Alliance, energy efficient, energy reduction, freight rail, green jobs, green transportation, rail
-
Green Transportation: Upcoming Pacific Northwest
Intercity/Regional Rail Conference - May 18,
2009
-
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get
Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010
-
CDW Report: Energy Efficient IT Yield Savings,
Yet Millions Are Still Wasted (and Environment Harmed) -
Sep 09, 2009
-
Going Green All the Way In Ontario - Feb
12, 2009
-
APC's new Data Center Carbon Calculator -
Aug 11, 2008
-
To Go Green, Go Dumb (as in computing) -
Jul 21, 2008
-
Power IT Down This Friday! - Aug 26,
2010
-
The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds -
Apr 19, 2010
-
The "Green Cloud"? - Apr 06, 2010
-
Desiring Streetcars - Jan 26,
2010
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Steel Rails are Green
Comments on this Entry:
(Sarah on May 12, 2010 7:18 PM)
In Austin, TX, the city repurposed old and unused rails for a commuter train. Sounds nice, but they apparently still went way over budget and the train only transports something like 1000 people. Austin is a very green-conscious city, but we're sadly moving the way of highway-based cities like Houston.
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste
In some ways Earth Day/Earth Week reminds me of Sunday and in the
Christmas season in the Christian faith. These are the times when
we try to do good unto others and to think about how to be a
better person.
Yet alas all too likely too many of us go out to do the opposite
but to varying degrees afterward. Why? Because unless the evil
acts are criminal the only punishment we feel are in our
consciences, and the degree by which happens depends on how much
of a sociopath that each of us are.
Yet unlike with religious days of observance there is a real hell, a stiff and ultimate price to pay by ignoring the environment. One example of this chilling fact is the Canadian Medical Association's 2008 report No Breathing Room: National Illness Costs of Air Pollution that revealed that many as 21,000 Canadians will have died prematurely that year alone from air pollution, with some 3,000 from acute, short-term exposure. That number will escalate to almost 90,000 by 2031. The financial costs? A staggering $8 billion in 2008, leaping to having accumulated over $250 billion by 2031.
And that's in Canada: a country with 34 million residents or 1/9th the U.S's 309 million population. Do the math from the above statistics and you begin to wonder how come we are killing each other this way and at what cost?
Scarier still, those figures are for airborne pollutants alone. There are then illnesses and deaths, at enormous costs from fouled water and solid waste. Urban sprawl is an insidious contributor to all three. It promotes high auto use and autos are both directly through burning fuels and indirectly via road construction and maintenance and from fuel extraction, refining and transportation big air, water and land pollution sources. Human and pet liquid and solid waste, garbage (like e-waste) and lawn fertilizer and pesticides make for toxic stews. Factor on top of these impacts the climate-changing heat islands, fouling freshwater sources (and requiring dangerous chlorine for purification) added erosion and flooding and the costs of pollution literally shoot into the sky.
The environment, to use the famous quote of economists "ain't a free lunch." Unfortunately right now there are few mechanisms that make polluters pay for the meal. Nothing to prod someone from thinking twice about building and buying sprawling offices and houses on wetlands, served by hulking SUVs, chucking out enormous amounts of trash yet whose acts require the rest of us to pay for the damage--including with our lives and that of our loved ones.
If we truly want to make Earth Day and Earth Week significant--and actionable--then we need to devise polluter (and sprawler)-pay laws and offset that by lower general taxes resulting from less expense-creating waste, i.e. enabling the power of the marketplace to efficiently allocate resources. The more you crap up the air, land and water the bigger the bill. If you want to reduce the costs then find new solutions that enable you to do just that. Can it be any fairer?
Yes, there will be higher costs, such as gas prices and house and lease prices will go up, but roads, office parks and single-family housing has been subsidized for years, at the expense of more efficient rail, city center offices and multifamily homes, thereby distorting the real estate and transportation marketplaces. So why should the rest of us have to fork over our money, directly and indirectly, leading to injuries and premature and painful deaths, for others to "enjoy" these choices?
We can no longer afford to treat Earth Day/Earth Week like an article of faith: if we hope to have a future for ourselves and for future generations.
Tags: Earth Day, environment, healthcare, land use, pollution, sprawl, transportation Related tags: solid waste, costs, earth, waste, pollution, water
, Earth Day, environment, healthcare, land use, pollution, sprawl, transportation
-
Earth Day Message: Take Meaningful Steps -
Apr 22, 2009
-
Another Great Reason To Truly (No Sprawl) Go
Green: Your Health and Healthcare - Aug 29, 2008
-
The Marketplace Is The Answer For A Green
Planet...And Tech - Apr 01, 2010
-
Here's How to Help Keep British Columbia
(Properly) Green After The Winter Olympics - Mar 01,
2010
-
The Ultimate Cash For Clunkers: Trading
Traditional Offices For Home Offices - Sep 25,
2009
-
Commuting A Pain In More Ways Than One -
Aug 21, 2009
-
The Dark Side of Housing/Commercial Building
Starts - Jul 08, 2009
-
Beautiful Land, New Opportunities, Wasted
Space - Jun 15, 2009
-
Wanted: A 'GreenDex - Apr 14,
2009
-
Why EVs (etc.) are NG - Jan 15,
2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: To Go Green, Spend Green When You Waste
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds
Tags: air travel, Cisco, Iceland volcano, rail, Tandberg, video conferencing Related tags: european commission, telepresence technology, travel, videoconferencing, european, especially
, air travel, Cisco Iceland volcano, rail, Tandberg video conferencing
-
Tandberg's FlyFree program - Mar 19,
2010
-
SkyRider Gives One Reason To Skype Or
Web/Videoconference - Sep 27, 2010
-
To Go Green (In More Ways than One) Go
Virtual...and Bus and Rail - Dec 31, 2009
-
To Go Green, Make Videoconferencing
Affordable - Oct 13, 2009
-
Codian - Sep 07, 2007
-
Dump BP, Dump the Pump (But Enable The
Alternatives) - Jun 16, 2010
-
Truly Going Green in Air Travel - Jun 03,
2010
-
Steel Rails are Green - May 06,
2010
-
Contributing Sources of Weird Weather? Look In
The Mirror - Jul 31, 2009
-
Tandberg Data Offers Recycling Rebate
Program - Apr 16, 2008
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: The Green Side of The Iceland Ash Clouds
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Green Power Costs
I love contrarians because they make think. One great example
comes by way of Margaret Wente's recent column in the Globe and
Mail on the Province of Ontario's announcement of $8 billion
worth of green energy initiatives (i.e. subsidies) on top of $7
billion already promised. Among her points:
* The province will pay solar
producers "around 80 cents a kilowatt hour for the power they
sell back to the grid. That's about 15 times more than the
current spot price that consumers now pay for power. The
difference will eventually show up on their electricity bills. In
solar terms, Toronto is not exactly Southern California. Even
there, nobody has figured out how to make solar power
cheap."
* "Green-energy advocates say the extra
cost is worth it. Renewable energy will reduce our use of fossil
fuels, cut down on greenhouse-gas emissions, and bolster the
economy by kicking off a new era of green jobs.
"Don't bet your solar panel on it. Renewables simply can't
produce the large volumes of reliable energy that our economy
needs.
"These energy sources are so intermittent and unreliable that you
have to have backup power at all times," says Prof. Trebilcock
(Michael Trebilcock, a professor of law and economics at the
University of Toronto). "For every wind farm we build, we'll have
to have a coal or gas-fired power station waiting in the wings to
take over when it's 20 below. I think we'll get next to nothing
on carbon dioxide abatement."
* "George Monbiot, the environmental
firebrand in Britain, which has just introduced its own subsidy
scheme" says that "Germany has spent €1.2-billion on solar roofs.
Their total contribution to the country's electricity supply was
0.4 per cent. Their total contribution to carbon savings is zero.
"
Ms Wente and Mr. Monbiot may be right. The "green" costs don't include the vast amount of land needed for solar panels--unless you build one on every existing rooftop--to produce the same energy as a compact natural-gas-fired steam or supplemental combined heat-power gas-turbine generator. Then there's the land and costs for transmission and distribution systems to connect them to grids.
The answer to green power lies with most every other environmental issue: add in all the attributable direct and indirect costs including land consumption, pollution and health costs into the energy bills, and factor in peak-period-pricing and both users and generators and distributors will get smarter, and cleaner.
Tags: energy, green energy, green technology, solar power, wind energy Related tags: green power, green energy, total contribution, power, energy, green
, energy, green energy, green technology, solar power, wind energy
-
Keeping the Desert Green By Banning Solar
Plants, Wind Farms - Dec 22, 2009
-
Making Solar More Reliable - Dec 14,
2009
-
Is Wind Energy Green or Greenwash? - Nov
02, 2009
-
Green and Sustainable Telecoms Strategy -
Aug 10, 2009
-
Fantasy Island 100 Percent Renewable and Giving
Back - Jan 25, 2010
-
Shrink your 'Water Footprint' - Nov 16,
2009
-
Eco-Sustainability through Unified Physical
Infrastructures - Oct 26, 2009
-
Smart Data Centers: Not a One-Size Fits All
Solution - Sep 29, 2009
-
Five Five Keys to Selecting Effective Green
Technologies From Verismic - Aug 11, 2009
-
Virtualization Green and Saves Money -
Jun 25, 2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Green Power Costs
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Green Campus Project
Interested? Vote now, daily, until April 30, 2010.
For more information and voting go to : http://www.refresheverything.com/greencampus
Tags: electric bikes, electric vehicles, Green Campus Project, Pepsi Refresh Project Related tags: campus project, green campus, electric transportation, advertising marketing, university minnesota, project
, electric vehicles, electric bikes, Green Campus Project, Pepsi Refresh Project
-
A Practical Way To Use Electric Vehicles:
Commute/Reverse Commute Station Cars - Jul 21,
2010
-
Wealthy Biggest Driving Polluters? No,
Really? - May 18, 2010
-
Why EVs (etc.) are NG - Jan 15,
2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: Green Campus Project
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
The "Green Cloud"?
In my family the expression "green cloud" means the release and
lingering of foul-smelling flatulence. Greenpeace appears to have
a similar opinion of cloud computing as it is being applied by
some companies.
Last week, TMCnet editor Kelly McGuire wrote a great story on a report by Greenpeace
on saying that cloud-computing-driving data centers could be
dirtying up the air by relying on electricity from coal-fired
plants.
Greenpeace has a point: the way coal is extracted and burned in electricity generation is not exactly clean. Yet then again there are few sources that are--yes that includes Canada's infamous tar sands-- if one looks at the options, and at the total amount of environmental damages such as from transportation and distribution that all choices incur.
Then there is the other side of the coin, which is where
premise-installed computers get their power from,
considering that the electrical systems are on a grid. The real
interesting question is which method: cloud or premises computing
is more efficient and greener including the making, shipping, and
recycling computers.
Kelly's article says the Greenpeace report's analysts said
the last thing the environment needs is more cloud
infrastructure to be built in places where it increases demand
for dirty coal-fired power.
Yet with the growing size of these data centers and the relative
affordability and scalability of clean-burning natural gas-fired
generators (the heat they produce can also be captured for hot
water), would it be more environmentally and financially viable
for the large data firms to go into the generating business,
selling off excess as clean power to the grid and relying on the
grid as backup?
With public resistance to large fossil-fueled plants, dams,
and nuclear power stations and their consequences
including ugly transmission and distribution systems i.e. NIMBYs,
which some say is not exactly helping to maintain the reliability
of the electrical grid that they use, such onsite power may be
the way to go.
Tags: cloud computing, coal, data center, electric power, energy efficient, natural gas Related tags: cloud computing, green cloud, powered backup, fired plants, diesel powered, power
, cloud computing, coal, data center, electric power, energy efficient, natural gas
-
Full Cost Analysis Needed on Green Power -
Feb 18, 2010
-
Comparing (green) apples-to-apples - Dec
19, 2008
-
Greening The Data Center - Nov 24,
2008
-
APC's new Data Center Carbon Calculator -
Aug 11, 2008
-
IT Execs to Gather in Orlando for Green
Enterprise Computer Event - Apr 02, 2008
-
Revive The Economy. Save The Planet. Get
Efficient. - Jul 02, 2010
-
Steel Rails are Green - May 06,
2010
-
Green Box: Green tech survey and patents -
Jan 18, 2010
-
Making Solar More Reliable - Dec 14,
2009
-
Shrink your 'Water Footprint' - Nov 16,
2009
- TrackBacks | Comments | Tag with del.icio.us | Green Blog Home | Permalink: The "Green Cloud"?
Comments on this Entry:
(Aaron on Apr 6, 2010 1:09 PM)
I have an idea: why doesn't Greenpeace take their $100 million (plus) funding and spend it setting up new, alternative sources of power instead of just whining about it?
I mean, how much biodiesel do they waste sailing around hounding Japanese whalers and posting comments about hunting down AGW skeptics and doing lame studies like this that nobody really cares about?
Put your money where your mouth is, Greenpeace, and try actually doing something other than bitching and moaning.
(Mary (Make Sustainable Choices) on Apr 8, 2010 5:29 PM)
Greenpeace has made a very good point, as initiatives of the kind "the heat they produce can also be captured for hot water" are really the exeception and ususally only implemented in countries "green" by definition (example Finland); and the point is that (blaim human nature and love for $$$ if you want) these corporations promoting cloud computing will mlost probably choose to locate data centers where it makes the most business sense for them, even if that means using “dirty”, fossil power from coal-fired plants. How to solve that one?
(Green Technology on May 30, 2010 11:53 AM)
I think that their efforts are still not enough to reduce the harm of using coal.
(Yukon Palmer on Aug 18, 2010 4:14 PM)
Keep in mind that data centers typically use diesel powered backup generators. A local data center (in San Diego,CA) was forced off the local energy grid by the provider for about 8 days last year for 8 hours at a time. During this time period, they were running entirely on the diesel powered backup generators.
The energy provider's necessity to conserve power forced the data center to emit excessive pollution.
Sponsored by the Call
Center Outsourcing Community & the Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
Visitor Rating: 8.5 (10) (Rate)
 |
|
Story Clicks: 156
Feed Views: 155
Lenses (Add|?)
Comments (Log in to add)
Feed Details
Date Approved: 11/07/2009
By: Anonymous
Search FeedAgg.com
3600 mp8368 serv 3.1533 seconds to generate.