SalvaEco

We've been thrilled by the recent pick up in blog comments and discussions going on at Green Options: we're glad many of you feel comfortable participating in discussions here. Ninety-nine percent of those comment have been constructive, thoughtful and informed. The other one percent… well, we're making some changes to address spam (which has picked up also) and uncivil behavior.

After deleting a ton of spam yesterday, I asked our developers to turn on moderation for comments submitted by users not registered at GO. This does not mean that you won't be able to add your voice to the discussion without becoming a member; rather, it means that those comments will have to be approved before appearing on the site. The content team will be checking the moderation queue frequently, so it shouldn't be too long before your comment appears.

On the issue of civility: let's face it — people find it way too easy to be rude or obnoxious online. We're not speaking face-to-face; we probably haven't even met the person with whom we're having a conversation. From our perspective, though, knock-down, drag-out flame wars add nothing to a given debate, and certainly don't add any value to Green Options. So, feel free to engage in spirited argument, but, if an exchange devolves to name-calling, insults, obscenity directed at another user, etc., we will remove those comments (or, if we're feeling cheeky, we'll disemvowel them). We don't want to stifle discussion; rather, we want to encourage it. We believe that a community is built by people who treat each other with courtesy, even when they disagree. We want all GO users to know that they can offer their opinions and knowledge without being bullied, insulted or otherwise mistreated.

We value your participation at Green Options, and are always interested in your ideas for making the site the place you want to discuss sustainability and green living. Let us know if you have questions or concerns.

When you purchase carbon credits to offset your personal greenhouse gas emissions, do you really know where that money is going or how those credits are counted in the market? The Center for Resource Solutions (CRS) will make sure you do with their upcoming Green-e Certified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Product Certification Program.

CRS has been in the renewable energy certification and verification business for ten years. Their Green-e certification programs provide assurance to consumers that the businesses sporting the Green-e logo meet the program's requirements for renewable energy options. Now Green-e is expanding their certification guidelines to include Greenhouse Gas Reduction (GHG) products.

While most companies assure customers that money spent on GHG reduction products, like personal renewable energy credits, will go towards specific things like planting trees or funding wind farm projects, there are currently no standards or verification processes in place.

CRS hopes to fill this void with the Green-e GHG Product Certification Program, which will set product standards, develop a verification process and release consumer disclosure guidelines.

The details of the Green-e GHG program are still being finalized. CRS is working with a governance board, an advisory group and stakeholders in the development of the standard. While the governance board and the advisory group are made up of industry experts, and environmental organizaitons and businesses, anyone can be a stakeholder and give input on this process. All of the documents involved are downloadable at Green-e.org.

One important factor in this certification process is the issue of additionality, or making sure that GHG reduction products sold to customers are verified, that they aren't counted elsewhere and that money goes towards projects that would not have happened without the carbon market. Strict additionality standards will add credibility to the voluntary carbon market and ensure that your purchase really will make a difference.

Green-e analyst Lars Kvale stresses, however, that regardless of certification, consumers should not buy carbon credits in lieu of reducing their own green house gas emissions.

What we're trying to do with the certification program is to enable consumers to offset their emissions they can't reduce… For example, most environmentally minded folks still take airplane trips and you can't buy a ticket for a renewable powered airplane. That's just not possible right now.

So this is where folks are coming and saying, well if i can't do that, let me do what's the next best, which is to get a reduction somewhere else. Then on balance it will even out with the understanding that yes, it doesn't mean my airplane does not have any impact, it means I'm offsetting that impact. [This program will] enable that to work for consumers. It's not an instead of, but really in addition to energy efficiency and buying renewable energy.

Green-e has invited sellers of GHG reductions to participate, including the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and Gold Standard. The Green-e GHG Product Certification Program is expected to roll out this summer.

Illustration: Ilana Kohn

Filed under: Diesel, MPG

This week, President Bush gingerly took another step towards reducing some of the U.S.’s oil dependence by 2017. Bush directed his cabinet to get work done by the end of 2008 (so, in 18 months) on the president’s plan to cut U.S. gasoline use by 20 percent by 2017. What were some responses from around the green car web?

Some groups fawned over the announcement. The Energy Security Leadership Council (ESLC), a project of Securing America’s Future Energy (SAFE), welcomed the President’s announcement, saying it “advances effort to reduce oil dependence.” The Diesel Technology Forum, in their response to Bush’s call, said that with the many companies bringing diesel vehicles to the U.S. over the next few years (but not as many as we’d like to see), will meet “consumer demand for fuel economy and high performance.”

The Auto Alliance, which basically speaks for most major automakers, gave a slightly vague response. Dave McCurdy, Alliance president and CEO, said that, “Automakers support reforming and raising car fuel economy standards, consistent with the need to preserve jobs and consumer choice. Determining the right level for the future will require sound science and engineering, in an open process that involves everyone. Automakers support DOT and NHTSA continuing to set fuel economy standards, and we believe that NHTSA should begin a rulemaking now to implement the President’s plan. The Alliance pledges to work constructively with Congress and the administration to help reduce oil consumption and carbon dioxide, while at the same time preserving the diverse range of automobiles that consumers require today.”

That “preserving the diverse range” bit sounds to me like they’re not looking for the hard hand of the law to come down, even though they say they’ll “work constructively” with the lawmakers.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) took a firmer stance. The group said that Bush’s instructions to the EPA meant that Congress “must lock specific, mandatory goals in place.” David Friedman, UCS Clean Vehicles Program research director, said that, “If the president delivers what he’s promised, his proposal would take the nation a long way toward reducing its dependence on oil and cutting global warming pollution. But, given that the Supreme Court had to force the Bush administration to regulate greenhouse gases, Congress is going to have to enact guaranteed fuel economy improvements and low carbon fuel standards.”

Good old Grist says clearly that, “funneling a bunch of subsidies to Big Corn and Big Coal does not constitute a ‘response’ to the Supreme Court ruling, which was about the EPA regulating CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act.”

Related:

• Senator wants EPA to issue new regulations on CO2 emissions
• EPA Administrator in no rush to comply with CO2 regulation ruling
• Revised 2008 EPA mileage numbers may cause more vehicles to qualify as “gas guzzlers”

[Source: Reuters, Diesel Technology Forum, Securing America’s Future Energy, Union of Concerned Scientists, Auto Alliance, Grist]

 

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

---

BOLD MOVES: THE FUTURE OF FORD Step behind the curtain at Ford Motor. Experience the documentary first-hand.

Filed under: Etc.

With all of our eco-conscious viewers who are concerned with the environment, I am sure that a few of you have some questions regarding GE’s green technologies. Consider that GE makes jet engines and locomotives, along with a huge number of other products which cover the gamut of most everything each of us use each day. So, their CEO, Jeff Immelt, must have some interesting views regarding “the greening of America”. If you have a question you’d like to ask him, why not go ahead and do it? According to this YouTube video, said GE CEO will be answering questions submitted by YouTube users on ecomagination.com at 5 pm ET / 2 pm PT on Thursday, May 24.

[Source: YouTube via Ecorazzi]

 

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

---

BOLD MOVES: THE FUTURE OF FORD Step behind the curtain at Ford Motor. Experience the documentary first-hand.

Editor's note: This week, Ecotality blogger Doug Snodgrass points us to a resource for information on green cars. While the site Doug points to is British, most of the cars listed are widely available. This post was orginally published on May 16, 2007.

VCARS, a website to help Brits find new and used cars, has compiled a listing of "The Greenest Cars on Earth." The list contains real-world info that’s important to not only the green-minded, but also the consumer at large; CO2 emissions, MPG combined, engine type, transmission type, BHP/torque, weight, NCAP rating (European New Car Assessment Programme), top speed, 0-62 MPH, warranty info…

Cars are categorized by hybrid, electric, biofuel, and future green cars. The bonus here is that every auto is accompanied by a photo, tre-cool in the future green cars category.

Winner of the most interesting name? The Venturi Fetish (shown in photo).

Despite the creep of corporatism, LOHAS 11 concluded this week in Marina Del Rey and delivered on its promise of an agenda built around social change and soy everything. Few conferences boldly include kundalina yoga, meditation breaks and taebo on the agenda, but LOHAS does so with perhaps a bit of pretension but a whole lot of active, eager practitioners. As someone who has attended previous LOHAS sessions, this year did not feel unique, though perhaps a bit more mainstream. Panels ranged from a thoughtful exposition on Virgin Unite, Richard Branson’s CSR platform to developing sustainable cities, to employing biomimicry techniques with a dizzying smorgasbord of samples scattered in between the sessions. The usual suspects from Green Hollywood ranged about the event. Ed Begley Jr. promoted his new website, Fixing the Planet, while Mariel Hemmingway plied her thoughts in her own session. Perhaps the most interesting moment at LOHAS happened not at one of the events packed into the tight schedule, but at an event that took place in the evening at the home of Lawrence Bender. Lawrence is among the most indefatigable activists in Hollywood, laboring during the day to create content that aligns with his values like An… (more)

(Posted by Jonathan Greenblatt in Transforming Business at 7:01 PM)

Posted by Page (in Amsterdam)

Top photo: a wounded mother humpback whale in the Port of Sacramento. Bottom photo: The mother whale and her baby surface. (Click both photos to enlarge, and for source.)

Although Sacramento, California is landlocked, back in 1963, construction on a deep-water channel between San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River was completed, creating the Port of Sacramento. The port is a busy industrial area, with a railcar terminal, facilities to export rice and other grains, and deal with cargo such as fertilizer and cement.

All in all, it’s not a natural – or healthy – place for humpback whales. However, a mother humpback whale and her baby have manage to swim up the 90 mile long channel and into the port area. They have been in the port since about May 16, 2007. Biologists are trying to figure out how to get the whales out, for obvious reasons, not the least of which is:

The 14m female has a long and deep wound on her back in front of her dorsal fin that appeared to have occurred when she surfaced underneath a boat, said Frances Gulland, the Sausalito-based Marine Mammal Centre veterinarian who inspected the animals.

The whale’s 7m calf had a more severe wound on its right flank that may have been inflicted when the animal surfaced alongside its mother.

“The calf’s wound could have a long-term impact on that animal,” said Ms Gulland.

[Note: more current articles specify that a boat propeller probably caused the wounds.]

Biologists are trying to use recorded whale songs to lure the whales back to the ocean. You can see from this map that it’s not an easy or short journey.

Continue reading Meanwhile, in California……

Prema of Teddy Exports in India with her Floral TotesThe guarantee of a “fair wage in the local context” is one of the most often publicized of the fair trade criteria. Fair Trade attempts to empower disadvantaged producers in countries that often do not have adequate workers’ rights laws including a minimum wage. Fair trade guarantees at least the minimum wage even in countries that have a minimum wage law but do not enforce it. In countries that do not have a minimum wage the buyer of the product is still bound by the fair trade criteria to pay a fair wage in the local context.

For some products, such as coffee and bananas, a Fair Trade price is set by the Fair Trade Labeling Organizations. These minimum prices are always paid despite fluctuations in the market price and, of course, the market price is paid if it ever rises above the Fair Trade price. These prices also have a social premium included that producer cooperatives use to enhance infrastructure, provide social services and educate and train.

However, there is a large set of Fair Trade products that are not certified at the product level, mostly decorative arts and handcrafts. With these products Fair Trade, for pragmatic reasons, takes the approach of certifying wholesale importers and retail outlets who deal directly with artisan cooperatives. In this scenario the responsibility to pay a fair wage rests with the importer of the goods. So how does an importer know what a fair wage is "in the local context" of the producers? The primary and preferred mode is to simply talk with the producers to find out what they deem is a fair and living wage. There is some additional help in the form of an online fair wage calculator, created by World of Good Development, to help determine what a fair wage might be in any given local context.

I input the required information for Teddy Exports’ Floral Tote that we offer over at the shop (which we buy wholesale from direct importer World Finds, a model Fair Trade organization) into the calculator. I found that the women at Teddy making the Floral Totes are making roughly four times the minimum wage of 2.15 USD per day in India. This wage is in addition to the free health care, daily meal, child care and schooling each artisan is entitled to at Teddy. The wage is also two times the Acumen Fund poverty line for urban India. The tool simply aggregates all the freely available economic information necessary to determine a fair price for goods. But it makes the process of determining a fair price price more streamlined and accessible.

Paying a fair wage is the most basic of the Fair Trade criteria but is perhaps the most important. A mutually respectful trading relationship cannot exist without it.

This is the second in a series of posts discussing the Fair Trade criteria. Also check out Fair Trade: Transparency.

Filed under: Ethanol

We often discuss differences between cellulosic vs. corn ethanol, but when was the last time we thought about nuclear ethanol? Specifically, this is ethanol made in a plant that uses excess heat from a commercial nuclear power plant for distillation. Using the leftover heat means “virtually no energy component” to the ethanol production cost, and therefore the end result is an ethanol per-gallon price of under one dollar.

This set-up is the hope of Alternate Energy Holdings (AEHI), which is proposing a Idaho Energy Complex that will operate as described above. AEHI says that, compared to an average cost of about $2 per gallon for other ethanol-production techniques and the 51-cent per gallon federal tax credit, and you’ve got yourself a doozy of a double duty energy plant.

If AEHI thinks that those people who aren’t enamored with the current state of ethanol in America won’t have a problem with combining ethanol with nuclear energy, they should think again. While there’s certainly nothing wrong with capturing a source of energy (the excess heat) and making it useful, I can’t imaging a less popular form of “green” energy than nuclear ethanol.

[Source: Alternate Energy Holdings]

 

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

---

BOLD MOVES: THE FUTURE OF FORD Step behind the curtain at Ford Motor. Experience the documentary first-hand.

A seemingly simple alteration a wind turbine blade’s traditional shape could result in huge improvements in efficiency.

WhalePower Corporation out of Toronto, Canada has designed a turbine blade with rounded, teeth-like bumps along the leading edge. The company’s name is a nod to the humpback whale, whose flipper was the inspiration for the design.

The agility of the humpback whale is astonishing, given that they can be over 50 feet long, weigh nearly 80,000 pounds, yet move quickly and tightly in the water. One of the animal's advantages, according to scientists, is the unique row of bumps or “tubercles” along the leading edge of their flippers that dramatically increase the whale’s aerodynamic efficiency. Specifically, researchers found a 32 percent lower drag and 8 percent improvement in lift from a flipper with a serrated edge compared to a smooth one.

Businessman Stephen Dewar heard about the humpback research and contacted one of the scientists involved, Professor Frank Fish of West Chester University in Pennsylvania. After a few meetings, they enlisted the help of some local engineers and formed WhalePower, taking a cue from Mother Nature and modeling their blade design after the whale’s flipper.

WhalePower claims that their turbine design can capture more wind energy at much lower speeds than traditional designs. The channels created by the teeth at the blade's edge cause separate wind streams to accelerate across the surface of the blade in rotating flows. These “energy-packed” vortexes increase the lift force on the blade. For example, Dewar told the Toronto Star that this design produces the same power at 11 miles per hour that one would expect at 18 miles per hour. Furthermore, he claimed these channels prevent airflow from moving along the span of the blade and past the tip, which can create noise, instability and a loss of energy. By keeping the air flow nicely channeled, more wind is captured and noise is reduced.

Dewar sees this “biomimicry” design – the fusion of biology and engineering – reaching beyond wind power.

“’This changes the game,’ says Dewar, adding that any system using a fan or turbine could also benefit from the new design. This includes everything from better turbines for hydroelectric generation to residential ceiling fans that use less electricity. ‘If we've got what we think we've got, then the range of applications is staggering.’”

The Ontario Centres of Excellence and the Ontario Power Authority have contributed over $60,000 USD for early research and to encourage collaboration with a wind engineering group at the University of Western Ontario. The next and arguably most crucial step to commercial production is independent, third party verification of the blade’s performance.

Toronto Star
Wikipedia

Cross posted at Maria Energia