Archive for the ‘Energy use’ Category
May 14th, 2009
Obama’s 2010 Budget to Increase EPA Funding by 34 Percent
Stumble it!
Written by Amanda Wills, courtesy of Earth911
The Obama administration announced its proposed budget for the fiscal year 2010 which includes a significant boost in funding for the EPA. The $10.5 billion funding will be a 34 percent increase from 2009’s $7.8 billion in funding.
“It takes significant strides to ensure that our air, land, and water are safe and clean,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in her May 7 speech. “And it significantly improves accountability and transparency, ensuring fiscal responsibility at a time when every dollar counts.”
So what’s the EPA’s plan for the extra money? According to Jackson, $3.9 billion will go toward improving the nation’s water and wastewater infrastructure. Jackson says the funding represents a Obama’s dedication to improving the environment.
“EPA’s new budget reflects the President’s commitment to growing a clean energy economy while protecting human health and the environment,” Jackson said.
EPA’s other plans include $475 million for the Great Lakes Initiative, $17 million for creating a greenhouse gas registry and $1.3 billion to clean up eligible hazardous waste sites, which is part of the Superfund site initiative.
Beginning in 2011, the government will reinstate the Superfund tax on businesses, generating $1 billion a year in revenue.
The new budget will also create jobs. The EPA plans to have enough money to hire 30 additional enforcement staff members in its Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program.
“We see remarkable opportunities to create green jobs,” Jackson said. “We see new growth in communities that are cleaner, healthier places to live, work and invest. And we see new innovations that will protect our planet for the generations to come. EPA has been given extraordinary support, and a revitalized mission. We’re ready to get to work.”
This article was reproduced with the kind permission of Earth 911. For more news and information visit http://earth911.com/.
Popularity: 3% [?]
May 13th, 2009
Thinking About a Home Wind Turbine? Not So Fast …
Residential wind turbines are an appealing option for renewable energy at home. Per rated unit of output they seem to be cost-effective, somewhat less than solar PV panels. Each successive new product is more attractive than its predecessors, with many as suitable for a sculpture garden as for your rooftop. And, there’s something primal and satisfying about the thought of a spinning turbine in the yard, perhaps harkening back to the pinwheels of our youth. We’ve written previously about some of the most compelling residential-sized options that combine these benefits.
But before you put one at the top of your green dream list, make sure you read this article by Alex Wilson of Building Green. Mr. Wilson is one of the true giants in the green building field, and he’s literally written the book on how to design and build a functional green home (and a good book it is - we highly recommend it!).
What he has found after talking to many testers, developers and manufacturers is that building-integrated wind turbines fall far short of their stated promise. Why? He points out a number of factors that result in poor wind turbine performance:
- Buildings cause turbulence, and wind turbines don’t like turbulence. Wind turbines are generally designed to face directly into a laminar (i.e. smooth) flow of wind. Predicted performance statistics are developed under these ideal conditions. But buildings and accompanying structures redirect wind, causing it to separate into streams that “confuse” wind turbines. This turbulence causes turbines to perform at less than their rated levels even if the building accelerates actual wind speed.
- Turbines can be noisy and cause vibrations. Although vertical axis wind turbines are significantly better, even today’s latest wind turbines can create significant noise and vibrations. Part of this comes from the turbine itself, but another component is the oscillations (and associated resonance) that the turbines create in building structures.
- Actual performance is often much less than predicted performance. For a variety of reasons, small wind turbines mounted on buildings almost never produce as much energy as predicted. Mr. Wilson cites a conversation with Ron Stimmel, an executive from the American Wind Energy Association (the industry trade group), in which Mr. Stimmel says that he’s never seen a small building-mounted wind turbine that achieves the expected performance. In many cases, actual performance was only 5-10% of predicted performance, and some systems generated less electricity than their control electronics used! This all leads to …
- High cost relative to other renewable energy sources. At face value wind turbines seem to be less expensive than PV and other forms of renewable energy (when you look at $ / watt of capacity). But when you factor in the higher cost of mounting a turbine on a building combined with the poor performance mentioned above, solar PV ends up being a more economical choice.
We’re sure that technological advances will continue, and that innovative wind turbine manufacturers will develop better turbines for buildings in the future. But until then, proceed with caution. As much as you might want a wind turbine spinning away on your San Francisco (or Boston) home, they’re probably still best suited for a ranch in Montana!
Popularity: 2% [?]
May 8th, 2009
The Volvo ReCharge: A Different Kind of Hybrid
Written by Christopher DeMorro, courtesy of Gas2.O
Sometimes when looking forward, you have to look back to really get inspired.
110 years ago electric cars were at their peak, representing over a quarter of all cars on the road in America, but Henry Ford and the mass-production gas motor changed all that. And while most of us have gotten used to the idea of an engine under the hood, a transmission, and sometimes a driveshaft as integral to our cars, Volvo is taking a nod from the first electric carriages and putting their motors where they are most needed: the wheels. The Volvo ReCharge is a plug-in hybrid concept that relys on four indepedant electric motors, one in each wheel, to move and power the C30-based concept.
The ReCharge concept is said to get 60 miles on electric power, and a small petrol engine sooths range anxiety. Volvo is also known for some of the world’s safest cars, and true to form the ReCharge boasts numerous safety advantages over its petrol-powered cousin. There is no driveshaft or transmission, which means a solid firewall and flat floors and increased energy efficiency. Should one motor fail, the other three can compensate for their fallen comrade and keep you moving. Also, there are no brakepads, but rather the motors do the stopping, which also serves to restore some lost energy via regenerative braking.
Volvo was in talks with the Swedish government for small-scale fleet testing of the ReCharge, which is said to be the basis for an upcoming 2012 production car from Volvo, though not much has been heard of the ReCharge since it debuted at the 2007 Frankfurt auto show.
Click here to see a video of the ReCharge concept car.
Popularity: 3% [?]
April 26th, 2009
The Podcar: A Cross between a Taxi and a Personal Bus
Written byAmiel Blajchman, courtesy of Gas2.0
Masdar City, located within Abu Dhabi, is introducing personal rapid transit “podcars”. Basically, a cross between the convenience of grabbing a cab and a public bus; the podcars will be a component of Masdar City’s public transportation system.
As part of Masdar City’s car-free design; these podcars will be part of a network of electric taxis without drivers (!). The first of these podcars (also known as personal rapid transit - PRT) are set to debut this year.
According to Luca Guala, a planner at the consulting firm Systematica that designed the PRT network, it will:
Initially, the system will be very simple, with only a couple of stations. During this period, the system will function kind of like an elevator – you press a button and go to the third floor. Think of it as a horizontal lift. Later on it will be more sophisticated, and passengers will be able to get within 100 meters of any destination.
Since it is a prototype system, PRT is currently expensive to build. But, doesn’t it just scream “vision of the future”?
Image: Flyway Gotgatan via Flickr’s Media Commons
Popularity: 10% [?]
April 24th, 2009
Berkeley Considering Requiring Home Energy Improvements
The City of Berkeley is always progressive (perhaps that why some call it Berzerkeley). They are taking a very strong stance on limiting their city’s contribution to global warming. In November 2006, Berkeley voters marked their concern regarding climate challenge by overwhelmingly endorsing a ballot that set a bold but simple mandate: reduce the community’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050. The ballot measure passed with 81 percent of the vote. The measure directed the Mayor to develop a Climate Action Plan to reach that target.
City staff have drafted a 145-page Climate Action Plan which includes several proposals for home-owners to make energy-efficiency improvements to their houses. The plan covers such broad topics as advocating trash reduction, growing vegetables at home, and making energy upgrades to homes. You can read the chapter on Building Energy Use Strategies here.
This past Tuesday evening, things got pretty exciting at the Berkeley City Council meeting. Public comment on the proposed requirement for home owners to have energy audits performed on their homes and then make upgrades (e.g., insulation, caulking, etc.) was quite harsh. Understandably many citizens are not able to spend cash on home upgrades– especially in this economic climate. The Council voted to delay a vote and will meet again on May 5.
What do you think of the idea of cities requiring their citizens to improve the energy-efficiency of their homes? We admit we really like the idea of requiring home energy audits– they are relatively inexpensive and provide a plan that homeowners can follow to save energy and money. Some of the upgrades proposed will be inexpensive (window caulking, furnace filter changing, insulating hot water heaters, etc.) and some are more expensive (e.g., solar panels, tankless water heaters, etc.) We think homeowners should have the right to choose what changes they want to make to their homes — but that requiring them to at least know how they rate on efficiency and to learn what their options are is a great idea.
Popularity: 4% [?]
