In the balance

In the current hype about global warming. Many issues are getting rolled into one and some are getting overlooked. Global warming is one side-effect of non-sustainable resource use. Of course it is a huge issue and needs to be dealt with, but there are many issues that are all interconnected and I think it's important to keep in mind all of the challenges, not just the popular ones.

Environmental public health is another huge concern. This was bigger back in the 70's when Earth Day started, and is still important despite fading from the headlines. Biodiversity loss is another concern, but unlike the first two issues, is harder to make an economic case for. Although, I believe biodiversity is important, there is not a straight line from biodiversity to our continued survival. Resource usage and waste are issues that go well beyond global warming and energy use. Water is going to be a big issue in the future. The American dream includes a big lawn, even in places where the water has to travel hundreds of miles to get there. Food is also going to be a problem as more farmland gets turned residential (or even into energy crops).

These issues are all inter-related and good solutions will help alleviate many of these problems at once. However, we have to be mindful of solutions to one problem that make others worse. Currently, there is concern that diverting corn to auto fuel is a waste of good food. This is probably true since corn is a relatively poor source of ethanol. The reason it's popular is that the technology is ready to go. Cellulosic ethanol should be much more efficiently produced once we figure it out. But do we use corn in the meantime to get the infrastructure up and running or do we use the funds currently going to corn to fund research in to better technologies. And in either case, how do we make sure that food doesn't get diverted from those who can't pay as much? This will also lead to more monoculture agriculture, which impacts biodiversity.

There is a lot to think about when trying to save the planet, but in the end any action is good. We just need to make the extra effort to find good solutions.

Trader Joe's veggies

TJs is one of the things that will ease the transition to life in New England. In the winter, (and fall and spring) when good local produce is hard to come by, they will still have their great frozen goods. Another post will discuss the trade offs involved in getting good produce. Local is always good, but setting up a climate controlled greenhouse to grow strawberries in Massachusetts in winter will possibly use more energy than growing them in Chile and shipping them en masse. New Zealand makes this argument about their sheep. The third option is to freeze or can local produce in season. Canned is likely the best option from an energy standpoint, but it doesn't taste as good. Freezing takes energy to maintain, but not only do folks like TJs do it better than I can, but their (I'm guessing here) large scale freezers are probably more efficient than the little thing above my fridge.

On a slightly related note, I've always thought it was odd that TJs wrapped all their fresh veggies in so much plastic. It seems like such a waste and put a ding in my glowing image of them. I just noticed the other day that the plastic is made from corn and is compostable. Cool. I am definitely setting up a compost heap in the new place. I want to take and old oil drum and turn it into a rotating composter.

technorati tags:personal-sustainability

DIY soda water

M saw in the Berkeley Parents Network advice emails a thread about making your own soda water to reduce the number of plastic bottles. I will definitely have to look into this once we've moved. It sounds like you buy CO2 cartridges and a special bottle. I'm guessing the cartridges are re-usable.

In looking for ways to green my life, I'm trying to start with the worst offenders. The first thing to minimize the non-recyclable and non-compostable trash. Soda bottles are recyclable, so they would be lower priority, but if this also saves us money (this stuff adds up and we are addicted to it), then it may be an early move. I'll post the details when I have a plan.

technorati tags:personal-sustainability

Compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) use much less energy than incandescent bulbs to make a similar amount of light. These bulbs are touted as an easy way to reduce energy consumption and quickly put a dent in greenhouse gas emissions. They have some well known problems: they warm up slowly, give lower quality light, are more expensive, and contain mercury. None of these are show stoppers. The latest bulbs warm up in seconds and they are getting cheaper. They also last longer. Recycling bulbs properly (mostly) mitigates the dangers of the mercury. These are all reasonable sacrifices for saving the planet.

Many governments are considering laws to ban incandescent bulbs. This is just plain ridiculous. While well intentioned, this is not the way to go about solving our problems. Even if CFLs were the perfect replacement for incandescents, it would be a questionable move. However the issue is not that clear cut. When you look at it more closely.

First, the higher cost corresponds to the increased resources and energy required to make these bulbs. Second, people are not recycling these bulbs consistently. I just recently found out that I needed to. (Of course, none have burnt out since then). Third, these bulbs are more sensitive to conditions and are not well suited to some uses (outdoor, refrigerators, ...). Again, I'm not sure these reasons are show stoppers either, but they certainly suggest that an outright ban on incandescents might be unwise.

The argument is also made that CFL bulbs must be left on continuously to achieve the lifetimes touted by manufacturers. I'm not sure I buy this for two reasons. First, I have seen no data and the argument seems to only appear when people are making the case for keeping incandescents. Second, I'd bet incandescents have the same problem.

Don't get me wrong. I think incandescent bulbs should get phased out. However, I think in the long term, LEDs will provide the answer. Even more efficient and longer lasting than CFLs, they also give a better quality of light. I want to build one of these.

For now, though, I don't have an answer. I'll try to do some research on CFLs before we move into the new place. I don't want to go buy a house full of CFLs to find out I wasted my money, but I don't want to waste energy on incandescents because I bought into the establishment FUD. I'll look into it and post more later.

Alternative Engery is not Sutainability

Last month, the journal Science devoted an entire issue to "Sustainability and Energy." The issue's opening essay begins with:

Perhaps the greatest challenge in realizing a sustainable future is energy consumption.

The rest of the issue deals with alternative energy sources (mostly solar, bio-, and nuclear) and carbon sequestration. These are an important part of sustainability and climate change in particular, but these energy sources are all finite. Unlike fossil fuels, solar energy won't run out, but there is a maximum that can be collected, whether through photovoltaics or bio-fuels.

Energy consumption must be reduced. If not, then, when oil does run out, no amount of fancy engineering will be able to fill the gap with solar. Nuclear would then be necessary. The only true solution is to find lower energy ways to operate. This will and must take many different forms. From more efficient machines to better distribution of resources to fewer luxuries.

Factory Heating

A couple weeks ago, Living on Earth covered the ongoing restoration and reuse of an enormous old factory building in Lawrence, MA. Sounds like Lawrence faced, on a larger scale, a similar situation to the one Hopedale is in now. The old mill in Lawrence is being, re-used as office space. I worked in a restored red-brick mill in Cambridge a few years back. It was a really nice space to be in. These buildings generally have large windows and lots of red brick. In the hands of a good architect, it's hard to go wrong aesthetically.

What's important in restoring these buildings is to try to preserve the sense of community that still exists in these towns. Turning the Draper building into office space just moves Hopedale closer to being another suburb of Boston, albeit with nice architecture. To be fair, architecture can give life to an otherwise boring place, but the town has much more going for them in terms of history and local culture.

The Lawrence mill is having a huge geothermal heating and cooling system installed. This is an extremely efficient way to climate control a space and efficiency is critical for a gigantic old building. The LOE coverage does not draw a clear line between this kind of geothermal installation and one that would actually generate electricity. he one in Lawrence still requires an electric pump to transfer the heat. The distinction is the same as between solar water heaters and photovoltaic solar panels. in both cases the former reduces overall energy costs, but does not produce usable power. They are also generally cheaper. When I was growing up in Texas, the electric company was advertising heat pumps, which I gathered were just smaller versions of what's going in at the Lawrence mill. I'm a bit surprised that such a system is still newsworthy.

Energy use should be significant portion of any plan to restore the Draper Building. Poorly implemented, it could be a huge energy hog. It's a large, old building. Done well, it could be an example of good design. I would argue for some sort of green certification. Maybe a green roof could be used to reduce heating/cooling costs. The dam that creates the Hopedale Pond is on one wall of the factory (it's an old mill), and could be used to power the pumps in a geothermal heating/cooling system.

Ending Trash

WorldChanging pointed me to a Fortune Magazine article on trash. Garbage is a big problem when thinking about sustainability. If you create waste that is not recycled or reused, then your processes are not sustainable. It seems some cities and businesses are making great strides towards reducing the amount of waste that ends up in landfills. There is apparently a company in Tennessee that turns plastic hangers from WalMart into resin pellets that get used by manufacturers to make molded plastics. Paper recycled in San Francisco becomes packaging for goods made in China.

This is something everyone should think about. Every community and business should figure out how to keep their waste and byproducts from ending up in landfills and other dumps. If your town doesn't have compost service, start your own and lobby your local leaders. Also important is that the infrastructure is built up so that using recycled materials is more economical than digging them out of the earth. It may make sense to throw some incentives in (although I am generally very wary of incentives). It's also important to consider your trash when buying things. Try to avoid styrofoam when possible. Look out for plastics that are difficult to recycle.

I've started watching what we throw away here. A huge part of our garbage is food scraps. Berkeley is finally starting a composting program next year. We'll be gone before then, but I plan to set my own bin up when we move into our new place. Plastics that Berkeley doesn't recycle are probably next. I try to be careful what we purchase, but it's hard to always be vigilant. If we were charged by weight or volume for our garbage, I'm sure I'd think more about it.