A Few Light Days Ahead...

Traveling once again, this time back to Lake Charles for my twenty year high school reunion. Looking forward to it -- I freely admit I was a big dork in high school (I guess a little dork would be more appropriate -- check out that butt cut -- I'm second from the bottom!), but after all this time, it will be really interesting to see how people have changed and grown. I'm a bit apprehensive about seeing the remaining storm damage -- the past year has been rough on all of Southern Louisiana.

I'll get a few posts up, though. In the meantime, visit our friends...

JM-S

Green-e Creates Advisory Group to Further Certify Offsets

For marketers of carbon dioxide offsets, credibility is everything -- I've noted the potential for fraud inherent in green tags, as have others, so the industry has worked hard to create certification processes that ensure consumers' payments go to legitimate activities such as renewable power generation, tree planting, and forest preservation and restoration. One of the major certifiers of offsets, Green-e, has announced the formation of a new Advisory Group to create even stronger mechanisms for certifying green tags as legit:

The Green-e Program is developing this new certification standard to provide consumer protection and market support to the growing retail carbon reduction market and the growing number of consumers who recognize carbon as a main ingredient in greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. The Green-e Greenhouse Gas Advisory Group is providing important policy, scientific and market guidance to the development of the standard. The group represents many key environmental organizations, government agencies, businesses, and advocacy groups who work on climate change issues including: Interface Fabrics, Natural Resources Defense Council, TerraChoice, Vote Solar, and World Resources Institute. Climate change experts, Seth Baruch and Terry Surles will also participate.

Building on Green-e’s track record of developing consensus through stakeholder processes, this new standard will provide environmental and marketing criteria to carbon reduction products, resulting in increased consumer protection for the marketplace. “The voluntary retail market for carbon reductions provides an important pathway for individuals, businesses and institutions to reduce their greenhouse gas footprint and do something to combat climate change. This standard will provide a framework for the market to ensure consumers receive the high quality reductions they pay for, ” explained Jan Hamrin, Center for Resource Solutions president.

I suppose there will always be doubters about such products: I know the first time I ever showed an offset program to a friend, he gave me that "Boy, you're naive" grin... Certified green tags provide the most convenient and affordable way for average consumers to offset their carbon emissions, so kudos to Green-e for taking this extra step to show consumers that such products do what they promise.

Categories: greentags, offsets, CO2, certification, green-e, advisorygroup, us

Sustainable Building Course for Working Adults

As regular readers know, I'm a big fan of college and university programs that expose students to sustainability either through the classroom or through working projects and installations on campus (or a combination of both). Most of the programs I've featured, though, tend to focus on the "traditional" undergrad student -- the 18-21 year old full-time student. While that's definitely a positive development, an awful lot of college students these days aren't traditional: they're adults with families and full-time jobs working on degrees or picking up classes on a part-time schedule. So, I was happy to read about a program at Oregon's Mt. Hood Community College designed for these students. The Sustainable Building Advisor Certificate Program holds classes once a month on the weekends for nine months, and allows building industry professionals, city planners, architects and engineers the opportunity to study green building concepts with a healthy dose of "real-world" experience and professional guest speakers:

With field trips to underground green parking structures in the Pearl District, to the rain garden at the Oregon Convention Center, to the loading dock at The Port of Portland, students get a birds-eye view of many of the most progressive, innovative sustainable building practices out there.

[Lake Oswego, OR, director of community development Stephen] Lashbrook said the guest speakers were the gem of the class. "I took just pages and pages, notebooks full, of notes,"” he said. "And then we'd all ask tons of questions after the talk, and the information we came away with was just incredible."”

The cost of hiring any one of those guest speakers, whom Lashbrook called "“top Northwest experts in their fields," would have been unaffordable.

Instead, he got the benefit of their experience and expertise through Mt. Hood's program, and he is applying his knowledge to his job with the city of Lake Oswego.

Apparently, the program has been so popular that students drive and even fly from as far away as Oakland, CA, to train for sustainable building jobs. Hopefully, the word will get out to other types of institutions that cater to older students: sustainability isn't just for young idealistic college students, but also for professionals looking for practical solutions to environmental issues, and building practices that will save owners money for the life of the structure.

Categories: sustainability, greenbuilding, course, certification, communitycollege, mounthood, oregon

NREL Scientist Promotes Green Tax Plan

Over the years writing sustainablog, I've made innumerable references to idea of "green fees," or taxing products and services based on their environmental impact. My own ideas on the subject are nearly all based in Paul Hawken's discussions of the subject in The Ecology of Commerce and Natural Capitalism. This weekend, I discovered another voice and set of ideas on this subject: Chaz Teplin, a materials scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado, emailed me about his website, FairPriceEnergy.com. On the site, Chaz presents his ideas for a two new fees on energy that he would combine with a rebate program:

The first part of the plan is very simple. Two new fees, a security fee and a carbon fee, would be added to each energy purchase by consumers and businesses. Energy purchases would include gasoline, natural gas, and electricity. The security fee would be directly related to how that fuel or source of energy compromises our national security. Thus, for electricity produced from coal, which is produced domestically, there would be no security fee at all, while for gasoline and electricity produced from nuclear power plants, the fee would be quite high. The carbon fee would be similar -- there would be high carbon fees for energy sources that contribute large amounts of greenhouse gases or are dangerous to extract (e.g., coal, oil, natural gas), while cleaner technologies (e.g., nuclear, wind, and solar) would have no carbon fees at all.

The second part of the plan is to return all of the fees back to United States taxpayers. Every taxpayer who files an income tax return would receive an "“fee return"” equal to the total fees collected for the entire country during the year divided by the total number of US taxpayers. Thus, every individual US taxpayer would receive an equally-sized return. Corporations would not receive a fee return. In this way, individuals that use less energy than average, would pay less in fees than they get back in their fee return. Those who use more energy, however, would pay more into the system than they would get back.

The rebate portion is designed to address one of the biggest drawbacks to most "green fees" proposals: they'd hit the poor the hardest (as any kind of sales tax does). Chaz argues that since poorer people use less energy, they'd actually end up making money on this program. Additionally, this program would have the effect of raising the prices of products and services that consume more polluting fuels from unstable regions of the world -- essentially, manufacturers and service providers must internalize those costs that they've successfully externalized for decades. Consumers would have a double incentive to purchase the most efficient and/or cleanest products: 1) they'd cost less, and 2) less spent on the carbon and security taxes up front means a greater "return" on an individual's rebate (note: corporations wouldn't be eligible for the rebate).

I suppose the only thing I might question here would be the element of revenue neutrality, which most supporters of green taxes have included in their plans. That is, any implementing or raising of green taxes would be offset by a reduction in income and/or payroll taxes. Without that, any politician supporting such a concept opens themselves up to the charge of wanting to raise taxes. Revenue neutrality could certainly be incorporated into this plan, but I'm guessing that would have to mean a reduction of the rebate portion -- and I'm not sure this will fly without that element. Still, I think this is a really innovative idea that deserves attention. With more people becoming aware of both the environmental and security costs of our current energy supply, there's simply no better time to start a discussion like this. Take a look at Chaz's site, read through it (it's very concise), and sound off. Many of our leaders love to talk about harnessing the market to address environmental concerns, but Chaz has presented an idea for doing just that. Do any of our representatives have the guts to walk the talk and actually get behind a plan like this one?

Categories: energy, taxes, renewable, security, green, politics, us

Tod Brilliant, Celebrity Activist

But you say you haven't heard of Tod Brilliant? Well, neither had I until yesterday. Nonetheless, Tod has not let name recognition get in the way, and simply chose to declare himself a celebrity (damn -- wish I'd thought of that!). Now, you're probably thinking "another self-promoting as**ole pulling a stunt to get his name in the news," but in this case you'd be wrong. Rather, Brilliant's engaging in an experiment to study the nature of celebrity, and, particularly, why some folks like, let's say, Paris Hilton become famous for doing... well, nothing, while people like the Earth Policy Institute's Lester Brown devote their life to critical work while receiving little credit or attention outside the circle of others interested in that work. Brilliant plans to use his new-found status to promote Brown's work:

Brilliant's first post-fame project will promote the work of Earth Policy Institute and World Watch Institute founder Lester R. Brown. Specifically Brilliant will seek to deliver Brown's latest book, “Plan B 2.0: Rescuing a Planet in Stress and a Civilization in Trouble”, to anyone requesting a copy. Brilliant finds this book to be a realistic blueprint for battling many of the immediate global crises, including HIV/AIDS, poverty, food and water shortages, education and energy concerns.

While many (ok, probably not many yet) may write Brilliant's strategy off as bizarre, he has attracted one person's attention: Lester Brown. They will partner to distribute copies of Plan B 2.0, and to create a documentary film about it. You can follow the developments of this project on Tod's site, as well as read his growing collection of press releases -- celebrities have got to have those, after all...

As another celebrity activist, Bono, once said, "Fuc*in' brilliant..." He had no idea...

PS: Lester Brown's certainly a celebrity to treehuggers, so we're really glad to have him on board writing a biweekly column at Treehugger. Come take a look at his first offering...

Categories: celebrity, todbrilliant, lesterbrown, planb2.0, us

Do We Need to Promote the 'Fine Points' of Global Warming?

Very interesting post up at RealClimate today responding to a Zogby Poll released Monday. The poll showed that a sizable majority of Americans are connecting recent severe weather events, ranging from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to this summer's heat wave, to global warming. According to the Zogby release,

Nearly three of every four --– 74% -- are more convinced today that global warming is a reality than they were two years ago, the survey shows. Dramatically, it is a sentiment shared by a majority of Democrats, Republicans, and political independents. While many more Democrats believe in global warming (87%), 56% of Republicans concur. Among independents, 82% think we are experiencing the effects of global warming. These numbers indicate a shift in the momentum of global warming believers.

Asked what influence global warming has had on specific weather events, 65% said they believe it had an influence on this summer'’s heat wave that baked the U.S., and 68% said they think it was a factor in development of more intense hurricanes like Katrina. Similar numbers are seen for other weather phenomenon including droughts, wildfires and snowfall.

The kicker here is that this perception held by so many is, in strict scientific terms, inaccurate. RealClimate raises the question of whether scientists should worry about that:

This begs the question whether people's experience of severe weather has convinced them that climate change occurringing. Televangelist Pat Robertson, for instance, said very recently that it was the latest heat wave that finally convinced him. I think this is likely to be true for most of the public who are not following the issue very carefully (which is most of them of course!). The most significant single event in this context was probably Katrina, regardless of how much climate change can or can't be associated with Katrina the Hurricane (let alone Katrina the Disaster!).

I would guess that this is likely to be a very common way for public opinion to be formed across a whole number of issues. That is, when a dominant theme is very prevalent across a wide spectra of media, everyday occurrences or new information are often processed with that in mind, and given our extraordinary ability to see patterns in noisy data, we often end up associating the theme with our own experiences. Other examples surely abound in medical or political contexts.

Given that pattern, it is probably overly optimistic to expect scientists, who continually stress that single weather events can't in general be attributed to climate change but that changes in statistics might be, to have much success in conveying these finer points to the public directly. Instead, their skills are probably best used in clarifying these points to those (e.g. journalists, policy-makers) that set the dominant themes in the first place.

At a purely practical level, I think RC is probably right: most people simply aren't interested in the fine points, and draw their conclusions based primarily on their own experience. Of course, there are ethical considerations here: do we simply allow the average person to hold onto these connections if they point them towards the correct conclusion that global warming is real and is occurring? Does that end up giving ammunition to climate change skeptics? To further complicate matters, would those same skeptics have to acknowledge the facts of global warming in order to paint supporters of action on global warming as smarmy elitists who won't tell the truth?

I am tempted to say that it's better for an ill-informed public to come to the right conclusion through faulty understanding of the issues than to allow the waters to continue to be muddied by skeptics bought and paid for by the fossil fuels companies. If people are connecting severe weather to global warming, the skeptics now have to offer an alternative explanation, and this poll shows they're starting from behind. At the same time, I know no one likes feeling like they're being played for a fool -- are we taking that risk by not attempting to present a more accurate picture?

Categories: globalwarming, climatechange, science, public, perception, poll, zogby, us

Shopping Our Way to Sustainability?

In last week's Treehugger interview, green business guru Joel Makower claimed that the number one "eco-myth" floating around out there is that "we can shop our way to environmental health." The Associated Press' J.M. Hirsch (via ENN) considers the concept of green consumption, and notes that many concerned shoppers are likely to leave the market just as confused as they were when they came in:

Looking to green up your life?

You could commute in a hybrid, sip fair trade coffee, swaddle your tyke in organic cotton, spend vacations saving rain forests, bank your retirement on socially responsible investments, even power your home from a low-pollution utility.

But while all that green may leave you feeling good, does it really leave the world a better place? Or just thin your wallet?

The answer isn't always clear. Which isn't much help for the millions of Americans navigating the increasingly politicized world of eco-consumerism, where everyday decisions -- from which eggs go in your omelet to where you get your mortgage -- take on new and confusing dimensions.

Part of the problem is it isn't just the environment that's at stake. Green products and services, including organic foods and fashion, are among the fastest growing retail categories, putting tens of billions of dollars up for grabs.

Hoping for a cut, some companies engage in so-called greenwashing, in which products are marketed as eco-friendly, but don't live up to the hype, says Kristi Wiedemann, a researcher with Consumers Union, a nonprofit that evaluates products and services.

Combined with a lack of standards for some green-inspired labeling, including "environmentally friendly" and "natural," those empty promises make it challenging for consumers to know which products make a difference.

"The market is bombarded with these claims and consumers really have no way of knowing," says Wiedemann.

Other take a different approach: the Center for a New American Dream, for instance, promotes responsible consumerism, and believes that a swell of market demand for more sustainable products and services can result in big environmental changes. Hirsch points to a topic we've considered many times before here, Wal-Mart's recent sustainability initiatives, and notes that the giant retailer can have widespread effects on consumers' and suppliers' environmental footprint, but that questions still remain about some of the finer details of these plans (particularly large purchasing of organic foods). He notes that simply choosing a green product (or one that claims to be green) isn't enough, and that consumers have to engage in a high level of vigilance and still consider their roles as conspicuous consumers, not matter how earth-friendly the products they buy.

Hirsch's last points are ones that many of us who promote buying green, and believe it can have a large-scaled educational impact, often forget or ignore: we still have to address American-style consumption to really make a dent in our wasteful ways. Many of us probably do feel even more entitled to consume if we choose green products, and that creates a sort of treehugging version of the same old mindset: there's always going to be enough ________ (resources, energy, water, etc.) to maintain our lifestyle. Green products as currently produced are a step in the right direction. Until more of those products are designed by "cradle to cradle" standards where all elements of their lifecycles receive scrutiny, though, we're likely only making a small dent. That leaves those of us who pay attention to such things a bit stranded, but, fortunately, we do live in an age where consumers' voices seem to be reaching the board rooms: even greenwashing shows that, at some level, businesses are getting the hint. We can't settle for greenwashing or hyped claims of sustainability, though. As more corporations adopt "sustainable business" practices, we have to continue to hold their feet to the fire and not only demand the most ecologically-conscious practices, but demonstrate the profit potential of such practices by doing our own homework. It's easy to fall into complacency -- we all do it at some level -- but the rise of "green consciousness" in the developed world means we've been given a "teachable moment," not a chance to rest on our laurels.

OK, I'm ranting a bit (and I'm just as guilty as anyone of the faults mentioned) -- how do we gently and positively guide other consumers into making the most environmentally-conscious choices in their purchases, or into choosing not to purchase when appropriate?

Categories: green, sustainability, consumption, shopping, environmentalism, us

Despinning: Al Gore and Penn & Teller

Blogging on sustainability issues has gotten to be even more rewarding over the past year and a half as green consciousness seems to be awakening on a very large scale. Of course, with that greater consciousness comes renewed efforts to muddy the waters by people and organizations that see such developments as a threat. I ran across a couple of items today that show the lengths some are willing to go to undermine cleaner and greener ways of making progress:

• A number of other blogs and news outlets have taken note of the recent effort by Peter Schweizer of the Hoover Institute to brand Al Gore a hypocrite. Odiyya at The Conscious Earth lays out the facts behind Mr. Schweizer's claims. In case you're interested in Schweizer's motivation for publishing such false claims, take a look at his employer... Also take note how Schweizer engages in a typical ad hominem attack, never addressing Gore's argument in An Inconvenient Truth.
  
• And when Penn & Teller decide to call a show Bullshit!, they don't screw around. I've watched one or two episodes of the show via YouTube, and have been amazed at how brazenly they push a right-wing line on, well, everything... Richard Littlemore at DeSmog Blog takes them to task specifically for their show on global warming.
  

I haven't done as much political coverage lately -- it's not much fun these days -- but these kinds of efforts (which have even taken in a few lefties here and there) have to be addressed. What's that thing again about a liberal media...?

Categories: green, sustainability, environmentalism, algore, penn&teller, globalwarming, bullshit, spin, us

Brits Researching 'Footfall' Energy

This Wired article (via Hugg) is a few weeks old, but points to a really cool idea being researched in Great Britain: using vibrations from footsteps to generate electricity:

British engineers are converting street vibrations into electricity and predict a working prototype by Christmas capable of powering facility lights in the busiest areas of a city.

"We can harvest between 5 to 7 watts of energy per footstep that is currently being wasted into the ground," says Claire Price, director of The Facility Architects, the British firm heading up the Pacesetters Project. "And a passing train can generate very useful energy to run signaling or to power lights."

Like solar and wind proponents, vibration harvesters argue that abundant, clean energy is all around us and goes to waste. The challenge is how to store the power efficiently so it provides a continual output even if the vibrations from footsteps or passing trains temporarily taper off.

Price has charged Jim Gilbert, an engineering lecturer at the University of Hull, with developing the prototype system for capturing footfall. Gilbert is working with hydraulic-powered heel-strike generators, which he believes could be installed in the floors of busy public places like subway stations. Those stations typically capture the footfall of 20,000 commuters an hour during peak usage -- multiplied by 5 to 7 watts a person, that's more than enough to power a building's lights for the day.

Price, for instance, tried to develop a heel-strike generator for soldiers' boots -- the issues of dirt and water proved overwhelming. Putting the generators in the floor inside of buildings would eliminate many of those challenges, though. Price notes that such developments could save billions in costs related to digging and installation currently required for street lights and other such applications. Seems to me that, at least in urban areas (where I guess this would be most practical), this would also provide the most energy at times when its really needed -- the evening commute, for instance. Here in the US, couldn't you see such a generator working well at, say, the mall or grocery store on Saturdays? I'll definitely try to keep an eye on this one -- very intriguing!

Categories: alternative, energy, renewable, research, footsteps, vibrations, greatbritain

Green Guide Names Top Green Schools in the US

The Green Guide has published the results of its annual Green Schools survey, and the results show that a number of elementary, middle and high schools around the country are taking innovative steps in curriculum development, building construction and maintenance, and community involvement. The criteria set for the program involve not just the usual suspects of recycling programs and non-toxic cleaning products, but also LEED certification for buildings, campus green space, procurement and transportation policies, and electricity from renewable sources. In each case, schools seem to recognize that "going green" isn't simply about providing a healthier, cleaner environment for learning, but also teaching students about the natural world and their relationship to it. The top ten schools in terms of ranking (there are actually eleven) are:

1. Punahou School (private), Honolulu, HI
2. The Willow School (private), Gladstone, NJ
3. Desert Edge High School (public), Goodyear, AZ
4. East Clayton Elementary (public), Clayton, NC
5. Conserve School (private), Land O'Lakes, WI
6. Ross School (private), East Hampton, New York
7. Michael E. Capuano Early Childhood Center (public), Somerville, MA
8. Clackamas High School (public), Clackamas, OR (tied for 8th place)
9. Washburn Elementary School (public), Washburn, WI (tied for 8th place)
10. One World Montessori (private), San Jose, CA (tied for 10th place)
11. Sonoji Sakai Intermediate School (public), Bainbridge Island, Washington (tied for 10th place)

Congratulations to all of these schools, and the administrators, teachers, staff members and parents that contributed to creating green institutions for students! It's very good to see that schools around the US are taking the initiative to incorporate sustainable practices into almost every element of their environment.

Of course, a survey like this also shows us how far we have to go in terms of making schools places where the environments are most conducive to student learning and empowerment. One doesn't have to look too hard at this list to see the woeful lack of urban schools (two others did make the next tier), where students often have to settle for the least favorable settings in terms of environmental quality and opportunities for innovative programs. The Green Guide is doing a real service by promoting the successes of schools that have the funding and support to create sustainable spaces for education; we all have to start pushing for these kinds of environments for all students, though. This isn't just about treehuggers calling for environmental consciousness; rather, it's about creating the places and practices most supportive of kids in reaching their academic potential. Off the top of my head, I'm not aware of any foundations or organizations trying to replicate such models in districts lacking in money, knowledge or political will -- are any of you?

Via Hugg

Categories: schools, education, green, sustainable, rankings, survey, greenguide, us

Friedman Pushes Bold Renewable Plan in Texas

Yep, that's Friedman as in Kinky Friedman: musician, novelist and all-around eccentric. He's running for governor of Texas, and, according to the Houston Chronicle, is pushing a much more ambitious renewable energy plan for the Lone Star state than either Republican governor Rick Perry (I know -- hard to imagine), and Democratic challenger Chris Bell:

"Texas was once the world's leading energy producer," Friedman said in a written policy statement. "We have the resources to be self-sufficient. We have enormous solar, wind and biofuel capabilities. What we lack is leadership."

Friedman proposed increasing Texas' current "renewable portfolio standard" and committing to a plan to have Texas generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by the year 2020. He said the state's capacity to generate energy from wind, solar and biofuel sources is 400 times greater than the amount Texas is currently using.

"Renewable energy sources can be found in every corner of the Lone Star State. Why aren't we tapping into them?" he said.

I suppose it would be easy to dismiss Kinky's candidacy, but, of course, we all thought that about Jesse Ventura, too... As I read the rest of the article, it's pretty clear the Friedman has a strong grasp on the issues, and is pushing sensibly aggressive policy changes on energy production in Texas. Given the fact that TXU, the state's utility, is pushing for the construction of 11 new coal-fired power plants, none of which will use the latest technology for cleaning emissions, I'd say Texas needs more voices like Kinky's. I can't endorse him, as this is the first attention I've paid to the race, but given the positions I read about here, I sure wouldn't mind seeing him win. If any Texas readers want to chime in (I know you're out there), please do. Looks it will be an fun campaign to watch...

Categories: kinkyfriedman, campaign, politics, governor, renewable, energy, texas

sustainablog Readers' Poll

As you may have noticed in recent weeks and months, I'm not posting at the rate I once did. That's partly because I seem to have gotten a bit more long-winded over the past three years, but also because my time's a bit more limited these days (stupid job....). As such, I've decided to limit myself to one good post a day, rather than scrounging quickly for a second one that often ends up as little more than the rehash of the article/essay/news item itself. You know: the whole quality over quantity thing...

In order to make sure that each day's post gives you the kind of information, commentary and opinion you want to see at sustainablog, I'd like to ask a small favor: would you take just a minute to respond to the poll below? Let me know what kinds of posts you'd most like to see. I'll keep this post at the top for the next week to give everyone a chance to respond. Please make sure you scroll through all of the options (there are seven), and please don't answer more than once. Of course, you're always welcome to send me feedback.

Thanks so much! I value your opinion, and will keep your feedback in mind as we move forward.

JM-S




Categories: sustainablog, poll, readers

Monday Night Surfing

I'm off on another short trip tomorrow: covering Chicago's First Eco-Transportation Show for Treehugger. So I'll be MIA the next couple of days, and will keep it brief tonight, as I've still got to throw some things together. Still, there's never any rest for a green blogger, so here are a few things that have come across my radar:

• A professor in Brooklyn thinks that urban fish farming might be the answer to overfishing, and even collapse, of wild fish populations.
• A New Urbanist development just north of St. Louis in St. Charles county will feature an organic farm. A step forward, or sprawl disguised in nostalgia?
• They're displaying solar panels in Southern Sudan.
• The new face of the urban allotment gardener in Great Britain is young and likely female. (via Hugg)
• And it's Monday.... The Carnival of the Green stays in London for another week.

Have a good couple of days -- I'm sure I'll have great stories to tell when I get back. If you're a sustainablog reader in the Chicago area, come by the show (which is a part of this month's Green Drinks), say "Hi!" and raise a glass with me.

Categories: green, sustainable, blogs, carnival, fish, farming, solar, newurbanism, organic, urban, london, stlouis, sudan, brooklyn, britain, us

Chicken Poop to Power, Northeast Edition

Back in April, I took note of a plan in Georgia to build a power plant that used poultry poop as its feedstock. According to the Hartford Courant (via Alotta Errata), Connecticut's Kofkoff Egg Farm has plans for a similar power plant. While developing a large-scale source of renewable energy for the state certainly plays into the farm's motivation, the main driver behind this plan is a whole lot of chicken poop that the farm can no longer provide to other farmers who want to use it for fertilizer:

The problem for Kofkoff starts with the state's continuing shift away from agriculture.

The closure of farms - and their replacement with housing subdivisions - reduces the number of fields where Kofkoff can spread its manure. Dairy farms traditionally take chicken manure to fertilize fields for hay and corn.

At the same time, new federal regulations are placing limits on the amount of manure a farm can spread. The rules are meant to keep excess nutrients from ending up in lakes, rivers and bays. There, they can cause high amounts of algae growth, choking water habitats.

To comply with these regulations, dairy farms have to cut back on the amount of chicken waste they use, said Joseph Wettemann, a senior sanitary engineer for the state Department of Environmental Protection.

So with fewer places to put chicken manure, Kofkoff has to find new ways to dispose of its constant stream of waste.

"This manure-to-energy plant is our best shot right now," Wettemann said.

While the idealist in me still wants to point out the connection of this form of energy generation with factory farming (and, clearly, that's what Kofkoff does), it's hard not to see this as a win-win for the region's economic health and energy needs. The new plant will power up to 29,000 homes, and an important employer will stay afloat. And I definitely like the fact that Kofkoff, and other agribusinesses, are recognizing the potential of biomass energy production as a way of dealing with their waste stream -- it even creates another product, as the ash from the burning of the chicken poop and other biomass (mainly waste wood) can be used as an organic soil additive. I'd love to see a more sustainable approach to farming come out of this, too, but this is definitely a step in other right directions.

Categories: agriculture, farming, poultry, pooptopower, biomass, connecticut

Feline Pine: Compostable Cat Litter

As I think I've mentioned before, I've got a lot of cats: five of them right now (it was six at one point). Late last year, we switched from traditional clay cat litter to a recycled pine product, and love it -- it absorbs the smell much better than any of the other litters we've used, and doesn't expose the cats to clay dust. So, when the folks at Nature's Earth Products contacted me about taking a look at their Feline Pine product, I was more than happy to do so, as I'm already a convert to the type of product they sell.

One thing I learned from their literature (which hit me square between the eyes with a big "Duh!") was the compostability of the used litter. The concept is very similar to that underlying gDiapers -- you can't compost poop (that has to be flushed), but the litter that's broken down by urine can go straight to the compost pile. You'll need to get one of those two-piece litter boxes that allows you to shift out the used litter (which breaks down into a powder-like consistency). This also creates an easier cleaning process -- I've been scooping the litter, which is more difficult because it doesn't clump. I see, though, that Nature's Earth is now promoting a scoopable product, which ought to increase its market share...

Thanks to the folks at Nature's Earth for sharing their product, and the information accompanying it.

Categories: cats, litter, compost, recycled, pine, product, naturesearth, pets, green

Growing Biofuel Crops on Brownfields?

As many regular readers have likely noted, I've become pretty disenchanted by the current political rhetoric surrounding biofuels. I think ethanol and biodiesel can play a role in transforming our economy away from its dependence on fossil fuels, but by no means are they the silver bullet that some might have us think. I also became disenchanted with this article from GreenBiz the more I read (mainly because of the type of rhetoric mentioned above, and the news of more big vehicles from DaimlerChrysler), but the initial idea presented, experimenting with cultivation of crops destined for a refinery, is really interesting:

Growing crops for biofuels summons images of fuel alternatives springing from the rural heartland. But a Michigan State University partnership with DaimlerChrysler is looking at turning industrial brownfields green.

Kurt Thelen, MSU professor of crop and soil sciences, is leading the investigation to examine the possibility that some oilseed crops like soybeans, sunflower and canola, and other crops such as corn and switchgrass, can be grown on abandoned industrial sites for use in ethanol or biodiesel fuel production. Another partner is NextEnergy, a nonprofit organization that supports energy technology development.

The results of the work conducted here might sprout similar sites across the state and nation in areas that aren't desirable for commercial or residential uses. The results also will contribute crops for biofuel production and may help clean up contaminated soils.

"Right now, brownfields don't grow anything," Thelen said. "This may seem like a drop in the bucket, but we're looking at the possibilities of taking land that isn't productive and using it to both learn and produce."

Project scientists are experimenting with their ideas on a former industrial dump site in Oakland County, Michigan. A number of questions exist at this point, including 1) will crops grow on polluted sites, 2) if they will, will the plants absorb some of the pollution as they grow, and 3) will that absorbtion of pollution create crops that are useful for biofuels. I think it's safe to assume that no one's considering using anything produced on these lands for food crops, so why not, at the very least, try to use bioremediation to clean up these sites and perhaps create some biofuel? What I wonder (and I'm showing my nearly complete lack of knowledge about botany and chemistry) is whether compounds absorbed by plants would remain intact, to some degree, in the oils harvested from them. How would this affect the distillation process? Is there a risk of creating some kind of frankenfuel that would spout a whole new form of pollution (or spread around contaminants formerly confined to the brownfields)? I'm sure all of these questions have arisen, and will be addressed. Overall, I like the idea of trying to produce a more sustainable fuel source in a manner that also could clean up past environmental degradation -- whatever comes of this experiment, we certainly need more of that kind of thinking!

Via the World Business Council for Sustainable Development

Categories: biofuels, brownfields, bioremediation, daimlerchrysler, michigan

What's the Real Threat?

Alex Steffen has a must-read post up at WorldChaging today in which he responds to a Cato Institute article (yes, that Cato Institute) claiming that the threat of terrorism to any one individual (not just American individual, either) is so low that our current national "War on Terror" seems at best an overreaction and at worst a cynical attempt to manipulate the public's fears. As the paper notes, we've all got a better chance of drowning in our bathtubs or being struck by lightning. No real news there -- Michael Moore made the same point a number of years ago (yes, that Michael Moore). From this observation, Alex goes a step further and considers the costs of environmental degradation in terms of the human lives it's taken:

...much of what is insecure in our societies is also what is unsustainable about them.

Let me be even more blunt: sustainability is a national security priority. Perhaps the national security priority. If scientists are correct, far more people have already lost their lives from the direct and indirect effects of climate change than terrorism. The health effects of sprawl, car accidents, chemical spills, environmentally-influenced cancers: all of these things are probably bigger threats to the lives of average Americans than terrorism. Certainly preventable disease, unneccessary hunger, solvable poverty and environmental degredation already cause far more death and suffering in the world than any terrorists ever could.

And the things we need to do to alleviate these problems also tend to make us more secure and our systems more stable in the face of whatever terrorism might occur: see, for instance, the notion of passive survivability, which notes that green buildings are safer and more sustainable, sure, but they also protect their residents more effectively in an emergency, whether that emergency is an earthquake or a city paralyzed by a train station bombing. Similar points can be made, of course, about everything from better public health to green cars to building bright green cities -- these things bring us benefit now, they lessen the severity of the dangers facing us, and they will help make us less vulnerable to the things we fear.

We've already seen "energy conservation hawks" adapt the language of national security to address how we power ourselves in the United States: the phrase "energy security" is fairly common now. Why not also deal with massive threats like global warming with the same rhetoric? Of course, we run the risk (as we're often accused) of scaring people to the point of hopelessness. At the same time, the idea of a "security threat" seems to bring many Americans and others to their feet, ready for action. I'm not suggesting this cynically, as in "let's get people to do what we want them to do by scaring the hell out of them"; rather, let's make a concerted effort to show people literally the human costs that have been tallied through environmental destruction. Ultimately, I think this will underscore the message, heard most prominently in An Inconvenient Truth, that addressing global warming is a moral issue: if we owe it to our families and communities to protect them from terrorists who will likely never show up, how much greater is our obligation to take on threats that endanger every one of us, and have taken a much higher number of lives? We've got many of the tools and technologies we need -- we're lacking, however, in will. Maybe such arguments could create some...

Nick at TriplePundit has thoughts on this, also.

Categories: terrorism, threat, sustainability, environment, catoinstitute, nationalsecurity, us

Stick Figure Productions Looking for Green People

OK, so I'm already breaking my "one good post" rule, but thought some of you might be interested in this:

ARE YOU HELPING THE PLANET?

Do you have an exciting new product or activity that is helping our planet? Or do you know someone who does? Maybe this idea will change the world, or maybe it will only help one person. Either way we want to hear about it!

Stick Figure Productions and a digital cable channel are looking for people on the front lines of the green movement.

Tell us how you (or your friend) are helping the planet – even if it is only an idea right now – and we may be able to help you help the world!

Interested (or just curious) people should contact Mikaela Beardsley at Stick Figure Productions: mikaela@stickfigureproductions.com
(212) 277-3600.

Categories: television, green, people

UN and Botswana Bring Renewables to Rural Villages

Last night, I put a post up on Treehugger about a just-launched project in Nigeria to provide solar installations to 19 villages around the country that don't have electricity. Tonight, I find out that Botswana, in partnership with the UN's Development Programme, is doing the same thing in that country on a larger scale. From Renewable Energy Access:

The project aims at equipping some 65,000 households with solar-powered photovoltaic (PV) lighting instead of paraffin, by 2011, to help power more than 5,000 households that use domestic cooking gas as their source. The project will also facilitate the development of policy and institutional arrangements conducive to the integration and provision of off-grid renewable energy services within the country's electricity programs, while also creating awareness among the general public about the advantages of clean solar energy.

This renewable energy-based project is funded for a period of five years by UNDP's Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Government of Botswana to the tune of US$8.6 million, with Botswana Power Corporation (BPC) as the implanting partner.

Initially some 88 off-grid villages will benefit from this project using solar-powered heating systems and lighting appliances. Lessons learned will then be replicated throughout the country and integrated into the national electrical grid to promote renewable energy use nationwide.

"The program is envisaged to see Botswana make significant progress in the attainment of a number of the Millennium Development Goals," said UNDP Energy & Environment Unit Manager, Leonard Dikobe.

I'm really happy to see these developments, as local renewable installations seem to make so much sense in areas of the world still untouched by electricity. Countries in Africa and Southern Asia that have been run by unstable or corrupt governments often have unreliable power grids that have suffered from years of neglect and abuse, so the costs of simply bringing them up-to-date, much less expanding them, is probably prohibitive. Yet, there's no reason that people in remote areas who want electricity should have to wait for the grid to reach them when cheaper (and often more reliable) renewable installations can provide the power these people need to raise their quality of life. We've seen a number of instances of poorer countries experimenting with appropriate renewables -- let's hope we're seeing a trend!

Categories: renewable, energy, solar, electricity, rural, electrification, botswana, africa, unitednations

Carnival of the Green #39

It's Monday, and this week the Carnival of the Green returns home to CityHippy. The Carnival, however, was not written by our friend Al, but rather by his new nemesis, blog-squatter Heston Wunderkrantz. While Heston seems most concerned about promoting a new comic strip featuring himself, he also provides us with the usual round-up of some of the best posts from the Green Blogosphere for the past week. If you can stomach Heston's self-promotion (he's scattered the post with pictures of himself -- and he's not a pretty dude), you'll find community solar projects, Washington slugs, and Climate Porn (who knew?). Go take a look around, and feel free to tell Heston to "bugger off" (I think that's what the Brits say... correct me if I'm wrong).

Categories: green, sustainable, blogs, carnival, cityhippy

Environmental Lesson from Cuba

With Cuba being back in the news because of Fidel Castro's health and transfer of power to his brother, this article from National Geographic News about the island country's unique status as an environmental success story will likely raise some hackles. But there are lessons we can learn here, both in terms of the environmental policies implemented by the Castro regime almost from the beginning of its rule, as well as the ways that the country has adapted to tough economic circumstances following the fall of the Soviet Union.

Though Cuba is economically destitute, it has the richest biodiversity in the Caribbean. Resorts blanket many of its neighbors, but Cuba remains largely undeveloped, with large tracts of untouched rain forest and unspoiled reefs (map of Cuba).

The country has signed numerous international conservation treaties and set aside vast areas of land for government protection.

But others say Cuba's economic underdevelopment has played just as large a role.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union - its main financial benefactor - —Cuba has had to rely mostly on its own limited resources. It has embraced organic farming and low-energy agriculture because it can't afford to do anything else.

And once Castro is gone, the experts say, a boom in tourism and foreign investment could destroy Cuba's pristine landscapes.

While I'm certainly not going to lavish praise on Castro generally, or suggest that other countries follow the political and economic models created from his revolution, Cuba's status as one of the greenest countries in the Western Hemisphere does call into question the claim by many conservatives that the best way to ensure environmental protection is to promote Western-style economic development. Rather, let's hope the Cuban environmental legacy receives attention as the island almost inevitably opens up economically and politically. Cuba desperately needs economic opportunities and political freedom, but these positive developments don't have to come at the expense of degrading this nearly pristine ecological area. Cuba could become the model for truly sustainable development -- we've just got to make sure that the environmental costs are calculated as rapid change sets in...

Via digg

Categories: cuba, environment, sustainability, biodiversity, economics, politics, castro

Combating High Utility Bills with Green Buildings

Thanks to sustainablog reader Eric Benson for pointing me to this article from yesterday's Washington Post on the corporate world's embrace of green buildings as a cost-effective way to address skyrocketing utility prices. While the much-touted Bank of America headquarters in New York, currently under construction, gets a lot of ink here, writer Steven Mufson takes note of building projects around the East Coast, as well as efforts owners of existing buildings are taking to cut power use. In all of these cases, the businesses pay homage to environmental concerns, but also note the bottom-line case for building green:

"It's prudent on many levels," said Kathy Barnes, senior vice president for property management at Akridge, which has 18 commercial buildings in the Washington area. "We all have a civic responsibility." And, she added, "if we're not doing it, we're not going to be competitive in the marketplace."

Commercial buildings devour more than a third of the nation's electricity. During heat waves like the one this week, they often rely on auxiliary generators that are less efficient and more polluting than electricity on the grid.

While industrial use of electricity has flattened over the past decade, consumption by commercial buildings has risen about 4 percent a year, according to the Energy Information Administration. Energy-efficiency experts say that better construction techniques, new energy-saving devices and smarter management can reduce electricity consumption by 20 percent in older commercial buildings and up to 50 percent in new ones, vastly reducing air pollution and utility bills.

"We can do a lot," said Quilian Riano, who works with a group called Architecture 2030. By 2035, virtually all commercial buildings will be new or renovated. "Are they going to be energy hogs or are they going to be different?" he said.

The article notes that these company's aren't only concerned with operating costs, but also investor confidence:

"The corporate world is catching on real fast," Fox said. "They understand the financial benefit, but they also see this as the right corporate model. Stockholders are asking them what they are doing about climate change. When you get a blank stare from the CEO, that's a problem.

One thing that seems particularly important about this trend: buildings will be used for a long time. I bring that up only because some may criticize the bottom-line mentality, claiming that should energy prices dip, corporations won't have the same incentive to build green if we focus primarily on cost savings. That may be true for buildings not yet built, but these going up now will be used for a long time; additionally, they'll continue to save these companies money even with low energy prices, as the primary costs come up front. Furthermore, the likelihood of energy prices dropping significantly just doesn't seem realistic any more, as long as we're talking about energy creating from fossil fuel sources. I think we're seeing a real sea change here -- as prices for building green continue to fall in line with more traditional construction, we may see green buildings become the norm.

Via MSNBC

Categories: greenbuilding, business, energy, conservation, costs, US

New York Announces Plug-in Hybrid Conversion Program

From the state of New York via Green Car Congress, Gov. George Pataki and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno announced Tuesday that New York will commit $10 million to the conversion of state vehicles to plug-in hybrids, as well as the funding of an alternative fuels research center.

The $10 million plug-in hybrids program will facilitate the development and deployment of these advanced, high-mileage vehicles, which can achieve a fuel economy of up to 100 miles per gallon. Under this program, the 600 hybrid vehicles in the State fleet will be retrofitted to be plug-in hybrids. Once the StateÂ’s hybrid vehicles have been converted to plug-in hybrids, the program will be made available to private vehicle owners through a competitive process.

Plug-in hybrid vehicles can be plugged into the electric grid - such as a normal 120 volt household outlet - to boost mileage. This will allow the vehicles to operate on emissions-free battery power, reducing the amount of fuel utilized and significantly decreasing the release of harmful pollutants, including greenhouse gases. Since the utility grid has lower demand during overnight hours, the recharging of plug-ins would not add to the peak load.

The New York State Alternative Fuel Vehicle Research Laboratory, the first of its kind in the nation, will develop scientific data to formulate new programs to conserve energy, diversify our energy supplies, decrease our dependence on imported fuels, and protect our environment. The facility will conduct testing for advanced and emerging technologies such as fuel cell propulsion systems, alternative fuels, and greenhouse gas reduction technologies. Special focus will be on test systems to quantify all emissions from diesel buses and trucks, which will help to develop advanced control and retrofit technologies for these vehicles.

I think it's great that New York icommitteded to researching alternative fuels, but, right now, I think plug-in hybrids and fully electric cars may be the best bet we have for creating much more sustainable transportation (I owe that to the discussions I've participated in --or at least listened to -- on theWatt podcast). Right now, I still like plug-ins the best because they not only greatly reduce, or in some cases eliminate, the burning of gasoline on short trips, but also because they can also provide power to the grid (seems to me that this wouldn't make sense with a fully battery-run car). I'm also glad to see that the Empire State is continuing to take innovative steps towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and in providing evidence to automakers that much more efficient cars do have a market in the US.

Via Hugg

Categories: newyork, plug-in, hybrid, cars, alternativefuels, funding

Tomorrow...

Jan and I are celebrating our ninth anniversary, so I'll be taking the day off. Have a good day, and stop by our friends in the Sustainable Blogosphere.

JM-S

Sub Pop Receives Green-e Certification

Back in March, I took note of Sub Pop recording artist Kelley Stoltz, whose Below the Branches album received Green-e certification by purchasing "green tags" to offset the energy used to make the CD. Now the label itself, which became famous by recording the music of Nirvana, Mudhoney (the precursor of Pearl Jam) and other Seattle-area "grunge" musicians, is following suit by purchasing renewable energy credits from the Bonneville Environmental Foundation to offset 100% of its own energy use:

"I was made aware of the program by one of my co-workers. I was, quite frankly, shocked by how easy it is to support renewable energy. Green Tags are a simple way for anyone to choose wind energy, which, in turn, lowers dependence on burning fossils fuels for energy," said Jonathan Poneman, president of Sub Pop Records. "Green Tags fulfill an important commitment to both the planet and the Pacific Northwest, where Sub Pop is rooted." ...

"Sub Pop has been synonymous with helping talented new artists support their passion for creating music," said Patrick Nye, director of sales at Bonneville Environmental Foundation. "Now, Sub Pop Records is directing the same energy toward new, renewable sources of power."

Congratulations to Sub Pop for taking this step! This little label's started some major musical trends -- let's hope that "green recording" has the same impact on the industry.

Categories: music, recording, subpop, green-e, renewable, energy, offsets, seattle