King Corn, 1st in Environmental Film Series

Posted on by
2

corn extending into the sky by *MarS Several Boston/Cambridge groups have collectively organized an open-ended Environmental Film series, the kick-off of which was this past Tuesday, at Cambridge’s Main Library. The second film in the series, Kilowatt Ours, will be shown on July 29th in the same location: Bottom floor (L2), Cambridge Main Library, 449 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02138-4191 at 6:30pm. Another (yet to be selected) film will be shown on August 19th, so save this date!

The first documentary “King Corn” was shown at 6:30 and light refreshments were served afterward.

This film follows two young men who, after finding corn molecules in strands of their hair,  trace their genealogical footsteps back to their Iowan homeland and learn that the land their ancestors once farmed is covered in corn. Not just corn, but a variety of corn that can’t even be eaten.

To fully understand today’s agriculture system, the two guys arrange to purchase and register one acre of land, on which they go through all of the expected farming measures to create maximum yield. While their 31,000 seeds are growing into full-sized high-yield cornstock, these gentlemen explore what happens to the starchy corn they are now growing once it leaves their farm.  The corn is used several ways, none of them direct human consumption. Cows on beef farms are fed with it, some of it is exported or used for ethanol, and a vast amount of it goes into becoming a sweetener—high fructose corn syrup. They go on to find that the corn in their hair came not necessarily (and certainly not solely) from eating actual corn, but from everything else they were consuming, including products like beef, bread, soda, chicken, french fries, and spaghetti sauces. This is a timely film that takes a hard look at the farming industry in the US today, the use of our bread basket for something we can’t eat, the beef industry, and the ubiquity of corn syrup in today’s society, among other significant topics.

Some eye-opening facts mentioned in this film:

  • The type of corn grown all over Iowa today is bred to be starchy, and to tolerate close planting- resulting in almost 10,000 pounds of corn being produced on each acre, and none of it edible.
  • More than half of the corn crop goes into feed for animals, mainly cows (i.e. beef farms).

    From the movie:

    • The meat that we eat in this day and age is produced in a feed lot.
    • It’s grain-fed meat, and we produce a characteristically obese animal, animals whose muscle tissue looks more like fat tissue than it does lean meat in wild animals.
    • …if you look at a T-bone steak from a grain-fed cow, it may have as much as 9 grams of saturated fat; whereas a comparable steak from a grass-fed animal would have 1.3 grams of saturated fat.
  • Meat cows that are not butchered within two years on this diet will die from the acidosis the corn causes.
  • 70% of the antiobiotics used in the U.S. are those given to livestock- a large portion of which are for beef to fight off the acidosis.
  • The corn a farmer produces cannot sustain him- he will always come out with a deficit when comparing produce value to the cost of production. The reason they stay afloat (if they do) is because of government subsidies.
  • The over-production of corn in the U.S. is looked on by some as a plus- an asset. The roots of this lie with the history of farming, and the portion of income it used to take to feed a family.
  • Corn syrup is in everything from kool-aid (as expected) to spaghetti sauces and breads (for “browning qualities”–less expected). [Challenge yourself to find items in your home that do NOT have corn syrup- you will be surprised- only two portions of our after-film refreshments did not have corn syrup!]

As you may have grasped, I highly recommend seeing this documentary, and sharing it with everyone you know. The film is not only highly informative in an easy to comprehend way, but it has got a strong vein of humor woven throughout the eye-opening footage. Here’s the trailer:

Entire City of Boston to be Scanned for “Energy Gushers”

Posted on by
1

IR scan of a local home
Big news coming out of Boston this week. Last Friday, the Wattzy team had the opportunity to join Mayor Tom Menino and MIT Projessor Sanjay Sarma for an historic announcement – the entire City of Boston is to be scanned in infrared.

Infrared scanning is nothing new in the world of single-family homes, as any energy efficiency pro can tell you. Utilities like NStar even offer home infrared scans at free or discounted cost. They are highly effective at identifying areas of home heating inefficiency. Although commercial services have offered wide-area aerial scans for some time, this will be the first complete street-level scan of a major city.

If any place can use a city-wide scan, it certainly is Boston. Our housing stock is some of the oldest in the country, which means a huge opportunity for energy savings. The Boston Climate Action Leadership Committee estimates that Boston business and residents “could save more than $2 billion over 10 years” through basic weatherization.

It was no coincidence that this historic event took place at the offices of Next Step Living, a leading Boston-based contractor that provides energy efficiency services directly to homeowners.

Contractors like Next Step Living “are the energy drillers of the clean-tech era,” said MIT Professor Sanjay Sarma. “Instead of the Gulf, they are drilling for energy savings in our homes. This infrared technology is for prospecting.” Professor Sarma is widely credited as the technology visionary behind the foundation of the commercial RFID industry.

Continuing with the “Drill, Baby! Drill!” theme, Galen Nelson, the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s green tech business manager said, “The American home is often referred to as the Saudi Arabia of energy efficiency. There’s so much to be capped.”

In addition to developing the infrared technology to scan every square foot of Boston from the aircraft and street level, Professor Sarma isn’t afraid to put his money where his mouth is. He displayed an infrared image of his home pulsating with red highlights from excessive heat loss. A still version is show above.

“An Energy Gusher,” Professor Sarma said, “and a huge opportunity.”

We at Wattzy certainly agree! The opportunity to save with energy efficiency can indeed be huge.

That’s why Wattzy provides Professor Sarma and all residents of the City of Boston with an easy way to estimate and track their savings from energy efficiency projects.

Painting The Roof of Our World White

Posted on by
3

St Albans city center - from the roof of the Abbey by chris5aw When we consider the many actions we may take to fight global warming and become more responsible citizens of earth, do we often think of our roofs?  At most, green roofs are the topic of impassioned discussion, but other alterations aren’t mentioned or considered.

The discussion of altering roofs first became a heated (ha) topic in the U.S. when the U.S. Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, a Nobel prize-winning scientist, brought the concept of white roofs to the table in 2009. He proposed that, though it may seem a silly action to suggest, if we could make all of the roofs and dark paved surfaces white, we would be able to save emissions equal to taking all the cars off of the roads for eleven years.

Using white surfaces to fight warming works because the white roofs reflect the Sun’s rays before they are absorbed; after absorption the rays are only emitted by the receiving material (e.g. a black roof, black pavement, etc.) as heat (long-wave radiation or infrared), which has a hard time getting back out through the atmosphere. The shortwave (UV) rays that the sun sends in are much more capable of penetrating the atmosphere, in both directions. As a result, the white roofs effectively send the heat back out the way it came, before it’s turned into heat!

Keith Oleson, a National Center for Atmospheric Research scientist, performed a study released in January of this year that found that white surfaces could reduce the urban heat island as much as 33% in some cities.

This concept continues to be relevant; a study came out last month that suggests that urban areas are warming at accelerated rates when compared to rural areas. The study also found that areas that have the highest potential for increased urban heat island effects, have the most potential for increased populations within the next 50 years, meaning more people in smaller spaces, including many without access to air conditioning. While daytime temperatures may warm equally, the nights in urban areas are expected to grow much warmer, resulting in a smaller difference between day and night temperatures as global warming accelerates; city residents will say goodbye to the relief of a cool night after a sweltering sunny day. Since this is expected to be a significant and near-future impact, several actions were suggested within the study, including usage of green spaces, strategic architecture, and white roofs.

Additionally, the aspect of home heating comes into play. Dr. Chu insisted that the white roofs not only reflect sunlight to keep homes cool in the summer, but that they would actually reflect heat back into homes in the winter, effectively reducing costs (and emissions) in both seasons. This was disputed by Keith Oleson, who suggests that in winter, the effects of white roofs would be the same, cooling by reflection. This conclusion illustrates the point that the world is not uniform; white roofs may be a perfect tactic for urban areas in locations that do not experience cold, but perhaps a less ideal choice for locations with less-than-mild winter months.

Here’s a video of Secretary Chu’s explanation that is posted on the US Department of Energy’s official YouTube page (also a great source for high quality video of the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico, presently…).

Burning breakfasts for bus fuel

Posted on by
1

Biofuels by Peter Hoey for the Sierra Club

Although the specifics may have since changed, this chart from Bio Hope, Bio Hype in the September 2007 issue of the Sierra Club’s magazine provides a nice overview of the major biofuel options.

What about moving Beyond the Corn Field: Balancing Fuel, Food and Biodiversity? After all, if there’s one thing that thing that our reliance on fossilized sunlight has taught us, it’s that that there should be room for every fuel that makes ecological (and economic) sense. Indeed, there are a number of exotic fuel feedstocks you are probably not yet familiar with. Indeed, on Earth Day the Navy tested a bio-blend jet fuel made from 50% German sesame seed oil. What of the much touted cellulosic ethanol? An alternative to the use of sugary food crops, or the relatively low-yield plant-based oils. In February University of Wisconsin researchers published a paper with details about a mechanism for efficiently converting an intermediate product that may be derived from sugar or cellulose into a high-grade liquid fuel.

Despite these and other advancements, more evidence is coming to light that biofuels are not without ecological costs including biodiversity as linked above, and soil degradation. In the end, it will be a balancing act, with conservation and efficiency offering the highest yield.

While not specifically about biofuels, the agri-business exposé King Corn is being shown at the Main Library next Tuesday evening; it has its detractors though.

Ultimate Re-Use: Storage Container Buildings

Posted on by
Reply

A new type of architecture has been infiltrating the traditional world for years; homes, condominiums, offices, and all other manner of buildings are being built from industrial storage containers that we would normally see on the back of an 18-wheeler or a shipping barge. The containers are easily stacked, and work quite well for the inhabitants once they are properly insulated, and turned into homes.

These new structures are subtly environmentally-friendly, in the most obvious way. We are all familiar with the chant “Reduce, re-use, recycle,” and this type of construction is a legitimate way of re-using the excess industrial storage containers that are finished with their initial use.

Shipping container architecture has been around for several years, but this topic presently comes to light again because the American firm Lot-EK, once again, takes it to a new level.

Their soon-to-be constructed Anyang Public Art Project (APAP) Open Art school in Korea has made news, and that’s not surprising at all upon taking a look. This is a project meant to engage the local community with its open structure, including an amphitheater layout, leading down to the river it is set along. The building will feature offices, open galleries, open meeting space, as well as work space for researchers; as has been the trend with these buildings, the non-traditional shape takes nothing away from the functionality of the new structure. These structures are a method of waste-management that results in beautification and functionality wherever they are planted: The ultimate re-use!

Need to Know: It’s not impossible to ween ourselves off of coal & oil

Posted on by
Reply

Need to Know PBS’ new weekly news magazine—Need to Know—has been covering some interesting stories. The fifth episode aired last week, and included the piece below on the Danish isle of Samso’s effective elimination of fossil fuels within the past decade. FYI: rapeseed is what most of the planet calls canola, and the Danish subsidies for wind appear to be less than those in the U.S. 1.

They’ve also had some compelling coverage of the gulf spoil including Big Oil’s Chernobyl and A chance encounter on the Gulf Coast with a BP engineer

1. Wind is subsidized at 30% of capital cost in Denmark. Ignoring any state incentives, there is a 2.2¢/kWh federal tax-credit. At typical costs and an average operating capacity of 50%, this amounts to a subsidy of up to: 2.2¢/kWh × 10yr × 8,760 hr/yr × 50% × 2.5MW × 1,000 kW/MW ÷ 100¢/$ = $2.4 million / $3.5 million = 68% (not accounting for erosion by inflation)

U.S. Climate Change Belief: Rising?

Posted on by
Reply

3D Character and Question Mark by 姒儿喵喵 Just last December, polls had the US’s belief in Global Warming down 8%, and 9% fewer people believed its anthropogenic (man-made) origins. The same trend had been measured by various polls several months prior, as well.

There was plenty of speculation as to the reason for this, some pointing to the unusually extreme snowstorms (which are, if anything, only an indication of Climate Change, by the by), “Climate Gate” or the Republican discontent with a new Democratic president. While, since the release of those poll results scientists have shaken their heads in disappointment and wonder, no concrete reason for the downturn in public understanding  was ever identified.

A  study released June 8th by researchers at Yale and George Mason Universities suggests that public concern for global warming (and the resulting climate change) is finally on an up-sweep:

“Since January, public belief that global warming is happening rose four points, to 61 percent, while belief that it is caused mostly by human activities rose three points, to 50 percent. The number of Americans who worry about global warming rose three points, to 53 percent. And the number of Americans who said that the issue is personally important to them rose five points, to 63 percent.”

One can only imagine how many environmentally minded citizens and scientists heaved relieved sighs across the country, having heard this news, thinking “Phew, thank you, there is still hope for our people, after all.” I know this was my initial thought.

Further confirmation of the public’s understanding comes from a Stanford poll completed June 7th; it indicates that trust in climate scientists is high, up three points to 71% trusting moderately or highly. It’s important to note that their results show a 5 point drop (from 2008 to 2009) in public belief in the fact that global warming is occurring, but the scientists maintain positivity in that the majority of the U.S. understands that global warming is happening.

Jon Krosnik, the scientist in charge of the Stanford-AP poll regarding public opinions of environment and energy. They have been conducting annual pools since 2006 with the same questions, and suggest in a new study that wording is key and can change the results of a study dramatically. Krosnik and his fellow authors were unabashed in naming names of problematic polls from otherwise esteemed institutions, and some feathers have unquestionably been ruffled. While Mr. Krosnik remains certain that our country’s concern for Climate Change has only been underestimated by most pollsters, others maintain that “waning belief in global warming and fading concern about its effects are consistent findings.”

How are we to know whose findings to believe? For now, let us move forth with the conclusion that we ought to err on the side of caution when it comes to poll wording.  Possibly more importantly, remember that polls are simply surveys of samples, and the future is in our own hands.

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Leaks On

Posted on by
2

http://www.flickr.com/photos/uscgd8/4542937668/ On April 20th, 2010, in the open ocean 42 miles southeast of Venice, Louisiana, a 560-million-dollar deep-water oil rig licensed to BP, experienced an explosion. Eleven workers were killed and 17 were injured in the explosion, with the other 98 on board exiting safely unharmed. After the initial explosion, the rig burned and two days later sank to the bottom of the ocean.

A few days after this shocking event made headlines, the resulting oil spill became apparent. Oil from the rig’s well immediately began to spew forth into the water column through a damaged well-head, forming a 5-mile long oil slick on the ocean’s surface in short time. Within two weeks, BP had tried and failed to use the well’s blowout protection, President Obama declared dedication of any and all available US resources to the purpose of resolving  the spread of this spill, BP stated that it would take all financial responsibility for legitimate claims and the cleanup of the spill, and began the two-month project of drilling a relief well.

In the following month, a fishing ban was extended to 19% of the Gulf of Mexico’s waters, all new drilling projects in the area were suspended, and several different remedial attempts were made, some simply failing and others actually increasing the oil’s flux into the ocean. The rate of the spill that began 51 days ago has not yet been determined, due to several factors including communication barriers between BP and external scientists, but the official government estimate is between 12 and 19 thousand barrels per day.

Although it was once thought that the spill could be contained offshore, the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico has now reached over 120 miles of coastline. Tar balls are washing up on shore, animals are being covered in oil with a plethora of horrifying effects. It is not clear what the effect of the toxic oil dispersants being used will be on the delicate marine and coastal wildlife. Though it sounds extreme, it has been discussed that there is serious potential for this oil spill to be considered ecocide, or to reach that level in the coming months or years. I won’t link you to the videos of oil-covered struggling or already-deceased wildlife—seek them out at your own risk (of heartbreak).

As these negative events continue to affect the shorelines, locals are concerned. The fishing ban is necessary, but is just a concrete representation of the loss of money on the part of the fishing industry. The coasts are soaked in oil, animals are dying, and the tourism business is not looking good, either. “My concern is after everything is cleaned up, if they can clean it all up, and they leave, what is our business going to be like?” said Dudley Gaspard, owner of the Sand Dollar Marina and Hotel on hard-hit Grand Isle, Louisiana. While all of these local businesses are concerned, so are the oil drilling workers who operate in the Gulf. The six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling that has been imposed has the potential to eliminate as many as 20,000 jobs, according to some; the ban on shallow water drilling has been lifted. BP’s stock value has dropped dramatically, as would be expected during a crisis such as this.

On June 4th, a partially successful capturing system was put into place. BP has lowered a cap over the leaking well, sucking some of the leaking oil up through a mile-long pipe it is connected through. There are vents in the dome-shaped cap that allow some oil to escape, and oil is also billowing out from below the hood. While this is not a large step forward, it is a step: some oil is being captured. BP’s most recent estimates suggest they were able to capture 10,500 barrels of oil in 24 hours using this method, and they expect they will soon be able to use an additional containment system to increase this control. They have even made preparations for the event of a hurricane.

Here is a video of the underwater spill in action:

There is some murmur that this oil spill may be the push that the U.S. needs to secure clean energy and energy efficiency legislation. Thus far, concrete statements have only been made about the wish to change legislation revolving around oil drilling. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, after meeting with several committee heads, told reporters a wide range of legislation was being considered, including oil leasing reform, liability reform, ensuring worker safety and the “integrity of the certification process” when oil companies want to start a new offshore drilling project.

Large corporations making large investments in renewable energy

Posted on by
3

Money doesn't grow on tree ! But investing in them is the best way to capture the Carbon by pfala 21st century green initiatives are sparking life in today’s economy. Particularly, there have been a few major investments in renewable energy technologies that have positively influenced the stock market. In recent news, ProLogis, a distribution warehouse provider has made a tremendous investment in solar rooftop implementation in Southern California totaling 11.1 megawatts But what impact is this type of investment really having on our planet and economy?

The master agreement between Southern California Edison (SCE) and ProLogis has positively influenced the company’s stock. The company is able to provide such power through the direct installation of over 4 square kilometers (1.6 square miles) of rooftop panels that will effectively power the entire facility. The project is considered to be “multi-phase,” and will be a progressive installations beginning with nearly ¼ square kilometers. ProLogis currently maintains solar projects on 32 buildings throughout France, Germany, Japan, Spain and the United States.

With large size and and flat roof structure of facilities such as Prologis’, installation of solar power is a natural solution to powering the facility, and obtaining added value from the structure. Vice President of renewable energy for ProLogis states “Our partnership with SCE works well for both parties—we have flat, available roof space and local construction management expertise in place to support the growth of SCE’s renewable energy program.” This is one such example of how electric companies are working with larger organizations to promote sustainability and renewable energy. FedEx is another, earlier adopter of similar systems.

Online service giant Google recently made their biggest renewable energy investment in history. With projects beginning back in 2007, Google has pursued sustainability and renewable energy efforts as wise business investments and as a natural extension of their unofficial motto “Don’t be evil.” On May 3rd a press release went out stating Google’s 38.8 million dollar investment in two North Dakota wind farms. “On Friday we made our first direct investment in a utility-scale renewable energy project—two wind farms that generate 169.5 megawatts of power, enough to power more than 55,000 homes.” Rick Needeham, (Google’s Green Business Operations Manager), wrote within that Google is greatly interested in discovering new opportunities to invest in renewable energy projects that really ”push the envelope.” With enough energy to power nearly 55,000 homes, Google is making a tremendous impact on sustainability for our planet.

With Google’s acquisition of wind turbines in North Dakota, they are able to produce nearly 170 MW of power. Combined, this is a whopping 194.6 MW of clean energy, driven to both business and residential. With lessened maintenance costs and new job openings, these investments are major players in the welfare of our economy as well. It’s with efforts from both energy and non-energy groups that we begin to see hope for the future of our planet.

Edited by Jerrad Pierce