Community Alternatives to high energy costs and safer methods of power to be showcased at 11th annual National Solar Tour, Sat. Oct. 7

 

http://knox.villagesoup.com/Community/story.cfm?storyID=79253

By Dr. Judith Schmidt

 

(Sep 30): The central Maine tour includes 30 homes and businesses in Washington, Waldoboro, Appleton, Hope, Union, Whitefield, Nobleboro, Bristol, Belfast, Waldo, Brooks, Palermo, Hallowell, Hartford, Sumner, Skowhegan, Starks and Industry

 

Open 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (note: 2 homes differ) Free, no registration.

 

To access full details of the Central Maine Tour including directions, plus links to other MESEA Tours in Maine, & ones across the country, go to www.midcoast.com/~jgs. Visit your neighbors & discover the relief, comfort, & savings that Renewable Energy & sustainability bring.

 

Highlights include:

 

A conservation Fish Farm, a Bed & Breakfast and Conference Center, other businesses, large and medium size homes, small and even very small homes.

 

Large wind turbine powers, small wind turbines, PV panels, solar hot water systems and radiant floor heat, passive solar gain, along with re-used building materials. All demonstrating what can be environmentally friendly. You will find an assortment of systems, each one rewarding to the owners, many of whom produce their own food, have livestock, keep honey bees.

 

Soaring energy and fuel costs are affecting millions of Americans. But for a fast growing segment of the population, energy efficiency and solar and wind power are helping to beat the increases in energy prices. Tours will be offered in 43 states, all are part of the American Solar Energy Societies 11th National Solar Tour, They will showcase long used systems and continuing advances in energy efficient construction, new products and renewable energy technologies, (food products, too!)

 

Some of the homeowners opening their doors to the public have relied on alternative energy sources for many years. Others have recently added new energy technologies, having first learned about them while attending past solar tours.

 

_________________________

 

Index Of Maine Solar Home Tours

 

 

Report Promotes Wind Power In Utah

 

http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_272231040.html

clock Sep 29, 2006 9:07 pm US/Mountain

 

SALT LAKE CITY - Wind power could be a new cash crop for farmers and ranchers in Utah, say researchers who were awarded a federal grant to promote small, independent wind farms.

 

Utah State University business professors Edwin Stafford and Cathy Hartman released the second of two reports Friday. The first was a general summary of the economic benefits of small-scale wind farms. The second was an examination of hypothetical wind farms in Tooele and Box Elder counties.

 

Analysis of the Economic Impact on Tooele County, Utah, from the Development of Wind Power Plants

 

Of the two, Box Elder County has more potential for wind power, according to a survey by the U.S. Department of Energy, which found most of Utah's wind power is along inaccessible high mountain ranges.

 

Tooele County's best sites are rated marginal or fair – and the best sites are high along the Oquirrh mountain range, far from high-voltage power lines. Wind developers say proximity to existing power lines is one of the most important considerations for choosing a site.

 

Box Elder County has areas rated good and excellent for wind power, although they aren't near any high-voltage power lines, either.

 

Stafford's team was awarded $500,000 in July 2005 by the Department of Energy to promote wind power in Utah, where it has yet to take off. He sought to appeal to the state's entrepreneurial spirit and de-emphasize wind power's environmental benefits, which don't resonate well in conservative Utah.

 

Utah ranks 26th in the nation for wind energy potential, according to a 1991 Pacific Northwest Laboratory report, yet the state has developed very little of that. Utah gets about 95 percent of its electricity from burning coal.

 

Utah's installed wind power capacity is less than 1 megawatt, from two turbines at Camp Williams, a National Guard base 26 miles south of Salt Lake City.

 

A megawatt is enough to power about 300 houses at any given time.

 

Tracy Livingston of Wasatch Wind is planning Utah's first commercial wind park. The 18.9-megawatt project at the mouth of Spanish Fork, south of Provo, is scheduled to be completed by December 2007.

 

Other states with equivalent wind potential have developed much more of it. Stafford found that Washington state, which ranks 24th in the nation for wind energy potential, had developed 390 megawatts of wind capacity to Utah's 0.885 megawatts.

 

Utah's landowners could benefit from royalties on wind development, says Stafford and Hartman's 32-page report.

 

``In recent years, farmers and ranchers have found it increasingly difficult to earn a living from traditional crops and cattle, causing them to search for 'off-farm' resources of income, Hartman said. ``Wind turbines use only a small footprint of land; farmers and ranchers can continue their agricultural operations.

 

Their calculations show that a small-scale wind project in Box Elder County would generate $377,000 in annual property taxes, with about $248,000 of that going to local schools.

 

 

David Suzuki: of John Howard, Kyoto, wind power and downloading the future

 

http://www.abc.net.au/southwestvic/stories/s1737971.htm

Tuesday, 12 September 2006

 

Presenter: Steve Martin

 

Researcher: Ruth Beran photo of David Suzuki David Suzuki

 

The ever-passionate David Suzuki discusses contemporary economic and environmental issues on the eve of his visit to Ballarat.

 

Since the 1970s, Canadian-born geneticist Dr David Suzuki has been travelling the world trying to educate people about environmental issues, either as an educator or the voice and face of radio and television documentaries.

 

He's coming to the University of Ballarat to give a public lecture, and if the agenda in the nation's media this morning is anything to go by, he will get a receptive audience. With newspapers, tv and radio all giving coverage to the issue of windfarms, the Kyoto Protocol and the Al Gore film opening in Australia this week, and an announcement that the Victorian State Government will give away 180,000 water saving shower heads, does he feel we're getting somewhere in getting environmental issues thought about and discussed in the mainstream?

 

"I'm delighted that it's coming back on to the radar screen, but I'm very disturbed that coming here over the years, I've seen the Howard Government really antagonistic towards the Kyoto Protocol. Taking a position, I wonder whether most Ausralians understand that when Russia ratified the Kyoto Protocol, that protocol became international law. Now, by saying they weren't going to abide by the protocol or even sign it, the United States declared a long time ago under the Bush Administration that it was going to be an international outlaw, but I'm shocked that Australians will accept this position - that is, to ape the Americans and say 'we're not going to be bound by this'," says Dr Suzuki.

 

Mr Howard can punt and know that it's going to be later successions of government that will pay the price of his inactivity

 

"I always think of Australians as a country that really believes in international law, and becoming a responsible member for the global community of nations, so to see Australia take this position is completely mystifying to me, and to amplify my concerns, every scientific body has said that global warming is a far greater threat to our security than any terrorist act, yet we're not making any committment to dealing with this. Part of the problem is we've got governments whipping up public frenzy about terrorism, which is a great way to avoid these more long term problems; you know, the issue of global warming is one that is going to take generations and generations to deal with the consequences and do something about. So Mr Howard can punt and know that it's going to be later successions of government that will pay the price of his inactivity."

 

Has he had anyone adequately explain to him the Australian attitude towards the Kyoto Protocol and global warming yet?

 

"No... it's like in Canada or the United States, the huge power of the lobbying forces of the private sector. You've got enormous interests in coal, as well; I've been given information there's a very strong anti-wind lobby - that lobby is being funded by the nuclear industry, which loves to say 'yes, climate change is happening, but the only possible solution is nuclear energy'," he replies. "What makes it so sad to me - to me, Australia is my second adopted country - to come here and have to hunt very very hard to find a solar panel anywhere; you know, Canadians would die for the kind of sun you have raining down on this country every day. To see a so-called leader avoiding this as an area of enormous economic opportunity - next to wind, solar energy is the fastest growing sector in the energy portfolio - why a government like this would avoid committing huge amounts of money for the opportunity solar energy presents is completely mystifying to me."

 

There are no sounds of compromise or retiring diplomacy in Dr David Suzuki's voice; if anything, he's far more passionate this morning, a 70 year old veteran of battling ignorance and entrenched attitudes, who's travelled the world and sought to educate and agitate for a more sustainable society.

 

"When you look at countries like Germany and Denmark, which have made significant decreases in their energy demand because of windpower, and are reaping billions of dolalrs in export of this resource, I think Australia is completely out to lunch in what should be your leading area of science and technology. It's a tragedy," he says.

 

Does he he think it's the fear of economic impact that is preventing Australia from moving into sustainable energy industries? Economic growth and success seems to be the prevailing argument from Australia's senior Government figures when discussing why Australia won't sign Koyoto Protocol and move away from fossil fuels.

 

"There are two things I have to say about that. One is, it is a totally bogus argument that implementing Kyoto is going to destroy the economy, which I've heard Mr Howard actually asy. This is absolutely bogus. The reason it's bogus is that the bulk of the action needed to meet Kyoto will be by becoming more efficient, that is, getting more work out of less energy. This is going to save vast amounts of money and allow your products to be that much more competitive, because the energy that's being used at a time of escalating energy prices is going to make you more compwetitive. This kind of kneejerk response is a neanderthal response, simply justifying the outlaw position of this government," says Suzuki.

 

I think Australia is completely out to lunch in what should be your leading area of science and technology. It's a tragedy

 

"The second point I would make is if we continue to use the economy as our bottom line excuse, it would appear to me we're in deep trouble, because the economy doesn't internalise a lot of the costs that we download to future generations. The corruption of the economic system we deal with, is that in Vancouver it's cheaper for restaurants to serve lamb that comes from Australia than it does to serve lamb that comes... 40 miles away. Now you tell me how this makes any ecological sense; the only thing is the economic system has externalised all the greenhouse gases and all of the ecological cost of that kind of shipping, and makes it economically feasible. This is just nuts. We have to really re-look at the economic paradigm that we bought into. But at the same time we have to stop listening to the bogus arguments..."

 

"Before the American Civil War, southern plantation owners used exactly the same argument for why slavery shouldn't be banned. It was going to ruin the economy of the southern plantations. Well, some things you have to do because they're right, and as Al Gore has said in his short visit to Australia, this is really a moral issue. Do we take action today for the sake not only of our grandchildren, but our grandchildren's great-grandchildren and future generations. It's a moral imperative, and we have a responsibility to act now.

 

What of the argument that Australia is a small country in terms of population; compared to the USA and its practices, does the impact of the individual in this country really have any impact compared to the massive energy use of the average American?

 

"That's always the argument, and a rationalisation - why should I bother, when not only am I insignificant compared to other people, but I'm insignificant compared to what the nasty industries are doing. Well, I agree. Each of us is insignificant. If you do what my Foundation recommends, that is, leave the car at home one day a week , what difference does it make? But if you add up hundreds and hundreds of thousands of insignificant people, guess what? It adds up to something very, very signficant. Each of us can continue to be a part of ther problem because we feel insignificant and don't feel we want to do anything, or we can become part of the solution by beginning to do our little acts, no matter how insignificant they may be, on the faith that if enough of us do it, we can becomea very powerful force.

 

"Industry has got to do its share, and too often industry is allowed a disproportionate share of pollution and energy use. They've got to take up their responsibility, and in order to do that we need stronger governments that are willing to set targets and use taxation creatively; we're just not doing that now. Canada uses the same kinds of arguments... we're only 30 million people, we're less than .5 per cent of the total global population, why should Canadians care when we're such a small percentage of it. Well, it turns out canadians produce on average more than four times as much greenhouse gas per capita than most of the average of the world. We are hyper-polluters... but I can tell you this: why should China or India or Indonesia or Brazil, the developing world, pay any attention to Kyoto or the demand to reduce greenhouse gas emissions if the countries that have already created the problem... are not willing to do anything to reduce? They can point to Australia and Canada, however small we are, and say 'they're not going to do anything, so why should a country like China? Why should we pay any attention to these targets?' And they're absolutely right. Yes, Australia and Canada are minor players, but we stand as an example to the developing world.

 

...we have resources that are the envy of the rest of the world, and yet free trade threatens our economic existence...

 

About 20 years ago he claimed in his book Metamorphosis that if Australia and Canada were cut off from the rest of the world and forced to become self-sufficient, we could survive with very little impact on our lifestyles. Does he think that theory still holds?

 

"Absolutely. This was an exercise that was suggested by an eminent economist in the United States, Kenneth Balding... a good way of assessing how well off you are is, imagine the rest of the world disappears overnight, and all that's left is your country and 200 miles of ocean around it. What would happen? A country like... China would be in deep trouble... they are so resource poor and dependent on exports to other countries they would be thrown into absolute poverty," he replies.

 

"Now take Australia and Canada; do we lack trained people to produce anything - computers, cars - of course not. We're well educated, we have resources that are the envy of the rest of the world, and yet free trade threatens our economic existence, because if we don't sign on we'll become an economic basket case. As Balding puts it, there's something fundamentally wrong with looking at it that way when we're such a rich country. Why should we be threatened with destruction when we are a very fortunate pair of nations?

 

How much longer can that theory hold for, given the state of industrial development and exploitation of our nation's respective natural resources?

 

"Well, the problem of course, is that much of what gives us our true biological wealth is being stressed. The reason that I bought into a small apartment in Port Douglas is I feel madly in love with the Barrier Reef, 20 years ago. But now, when I go back I am absolutely stunned by the changes I can see, compared to when I was here 20 years ago... right before our eyes things are degrading, we continue to clearfell your ancient forests, and as you know, this is not a heavily forested continent," he says.

 

"Water continues to be a huge issue, and is getting worse, while we're farming here - what - water intensive crops like rice and wheat? This is just nuts... plus pig farms are coming in because of the insatiable appetite for China for pork... if we continue along this path we are going to have a stressful future, as our wealth degrades.

 

Suzuki's grasp of the hard realities and analysis of the facts extends to his own career as an activist and educator; how much progress does he think think he's made over the past 30 years?

 

"None. We're going backwards. Of course we never have the control - what would things have been like if there weren't the Australian Conservation Foundation, and Greenpeace, Wilderness Committee - we just don't know if it would have been infinitely worse if we hadn't been here," he replies. "But certainly since I've been involved, and I was really catalysed by the publication of Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring in 1962, we've been going backwards. We had a huge growth of the environmental movement after Rachel carson's book. After all, in 1962 there wasn't a minister for the environment in any government on the planet, so we've certainly increased in our awareness of the impact we're having on the environment. But that all peaked in 1988 and we've been going backwards ever since.

 

You don't have to believe the Suzukis or the Greenpeaces of the world. All you have to do is talk to your elders.

 

"The corporate community has become very, very clever - they're using the techniques of the environmental community - they're greenwashing themselves, spending billions of dollars in PR and false advertising, and being very successful at sewing confusion on the part of the public. The fossil fuel industry is fostering a few so-called nay-sayers or skeptics about climate change; even though the vast majority of climatologists are calling for urgent action now, this handful of fossil fuel-payed speakerswa re creating in the public min the sense that the scientists haven't settled it yet, they're still debating, so it's not something we have to worry about now..."

 

Does he worry that people still consider his message to imply that Suzuki wants everyone running around in cheesecloth sacks, living wholefoods existences without our modern luxuries?

 

"Well, if they want to think that, that's their business. You don't have to believe the Suzukis or the Greenpeaces of the world. All you have to do is talk to your elders. Talk to someone who's lived in Ballarat or Brisbane or Adelaide for the last 80 years - ask 'what was it like when you were a kid?'

 

"Americans... had an expression - 'They're plenty more where that came from' - that's what Americans have always said. Now, the fish have disappeared, and the birds have gone; they said 'Oh Well there's always plenty more where that came from'. There isn 't plenty mroe where that came from. We filled up the planet. Humans are now the most numerous mammal on the planet. There's more of us than all of the rabbit and rats and mice - we filled it up. Americans say 'Well that's the price of progress' - I don't think it's progress to use up what should have been the rightful legacy of future generations.

 

"It becomes easy to say 'Oh, that Suzuki, he's a nutcase, he's hugging trees, he wants us all to go back to living in caves and living off the land' - which, of course is not what anyone is saying; meanwhile we're involved in an orgy of consumption... if we're regarded as nuttos that want to return us to the caveman days, well I'm afraid folks, that I don't apologise for what I'm saying. I don't think we need all this stuff, and I don't think we're any happier today, even though we're consuming beyond anything we could have imagined 40 years ago."

 

Related Links: Some of these links may be to sites outside the ABC and as such the ABC has no editorial control over such sites.

 

David Suzuki Foundation http://www.davidsuzuki.org/

 

 

 

 

SA solar research eclipses rest of the world

 

 

http://tinyurl.com/h3822 (Independent Online)

Willem Steenkamp February 11 2006 at 12:50PM

 

In a scientific breakthrough that has stunned the world, a team of South African scientists has developed a revolutionary new, highly efficient solar power technology that will enable homes to obtain all their electricity from the sun.

 

This means high electricity bills and frequent power failures could soon be a thing of the past.

 

The unique South African-developed solar panels will make it possible for houses to become completely self-sufficient for energy supplies.

 

The panels are able to generate enough energy to run stoves, geysers, lights, TVs, fridges, computers - in short all the mod-cons of the modern house.

 

Nothing else comes close to the effectiveness of the SA invention The new technology should be available in South Africa within a year and through a special converter, energy can be fed directly into the wiring of existing houses. New powerful storage units will allow energy storage to meet demands even in winter. The panels are so efficient they can operate through a Cape Town winter. while direct sunlight is ideal for high-energy generation, other daytime light also generates energy via the panels.

 

A team of scientists led by University of Johannesburg (formerly Rand Afrikaans University) scientist Professor Vivian Alberts achieved the breakthrough after 10 years of research. The South African technology has now been patented across the world.

 

One of the world leaders in solar energy, German company IFE Solar Systems, has invested more than R500-million in the South African invention and is set to manufacture 500 000 of the panels before the end of the year at a new plant in Germany.

 

Production will start next month and the factory will run 24 hours a day, producing more than 1 000 panels a day to meet expected demand.

 

Another large German solar company is negotiating with the South African inventors for rights to the technology, while a South African consortium of businesses are keen to build local factories.

 

The new, highly efficient and cheap alloy solar panel is much more efficient than the costly old silicone solar panels.

 

International experts have admitted that nothing else comes close to the effectiveness of the South African invention.

 

The South African solar panels consist of a thin layer of a unique metal alloy that converts light into energy. The photo-responsive alloy can operate on virtually all flexible surfaces, which means it could in future find a host of other applications.

 

Alberts said the new panels are approximately five microns thick (a human hair is 20 microns thick) while the older silicon panels are 350 microns thick. the cost of the South African technology is a fraction of the less effective silicone solar panels.

 

Alberts said in Switzerland it was already compulsory for all new houses to include solar technology to lessen energy demands on national grids.

 

"And that was the older, less effective technology. With our hours of sunlight, we will on average generate twice as much energy than, for instance, European countries."

 

While South African scientists developed and patented the new, super-effective alloy solar panels, other companies have developed new, super-efficient storage batteries and special converters to change the energy into the power source of a particular country (220 volts in South Africa).

 

Eskom spokesperson Carin de Villiers said any new power supply that lessened the load on Eskom was to be welcomed.

 

She said Eskom was also doing its own research on solar energy.

 

"In fact, we are currently investigating building what will probably be the largest solar power plant, in the Northern Cape - a 100-megawatt facility."

 

She added that Eskom was also researching wind and fuel-cell technology as alternative energy sources.

 

================================

 

http://tinyurl.com/oweu9

 

Fortwo EV: Smart car goes electric

 

DaimlerChrysler today [2006/07/12] announced that an all-electric version of the Smart Fortwo will be available in the near future. The automaker will first run a market trial for the car over in Britain. Initially, it will be leased to select corporate customers. If all goes well, we may see the car offered in other markets, including here in North America. The Fortwo EV offers even better in-town performance than its gasoline powered stablemate, with 0-30 mph in 6.5 seconds. The Smart EV also sets a new benchmark in the electric vehicle sector; it has 30kW output and a top speed of 70 mph. Smart will begin selling its cars in the United States in 2008. It's not known if the 'EV' model will be ready for mass sale by that time, though it remains a distinct possibility.

 

Gallery:

http://tinyurl.com/o9798


Page Information

  • Changed 1 year ago [show history]
  • View page source
  • You're not logged in
  • No tags yet learn more

Wiki Information

Recent PBwiki Blog Posts