Milwaukee Brews Drug Free Tap Water: With Ozone

As mentioned earlier in this blog, amounts of prescription drug residues in some drinking water supplies are no reason to go for the bottled water, and that off-the-shelf technologies are capable of removing most unwanted drug residues from municipal effluents and tap water, respectively. Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes a good case study.

Pain relievers, antibiotics and other prescription drugs, caffeine and a chemical created inside the bodies of smokers are among the chemicals found in recent tests of Milwaukee's sewage and water from the city's...read on (From treehugger)

EPA Strengthens Smog Standards to Better Protect Human Health and the Environment

Woohoo!

From EPA  (Washington, D.C. – March 12, 2008) EPA today met its requirements of the Clean Air Act by signing the most stringent 8-hour standard ever for ozone, revising the standards for the first time in more than a decade. The agency based the changes on the most recent scientific evidence about the effects of ozone, the primary component of smog.

"America's air is cleaner today than it was a generation ago. By meeting the requirement of the Clean Air Act and strengthening the national standard for ozone, EPA is keeping our clean air progress moving forward," said EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson.

The new primary 8-hour standard is 0.075 parts per million (ppm) and the new secondary standard is set at a form and level identical to the primary standard. The previous primary and secondary standards were identical 8-hour standards, set at 0.08 ppm. Because ozone is measured out to three decimal places, the standard effectively became 0.084 ppm: areas with ozone levels as high as 0.084 ppm were considered as meeting the 0.08 ppm standard, because of rounding.

In announcing the new ozone standard Administrator Johnson also announced that he will be sending Congress four principles to guide legislative changes to the Clean Air Act.

"The Clean Air Act is not a relic to be displayed in the Smithsonian, but a living document that must be modernized to continue realizing results. So while the standards I signed today may be strict, we have a responsibility to overhaul and enhance the Clean Air Act to ensure it translates from paper promises into cleaner air," Johnson concluded.

The four principles outlined by the Administrator recommend that the Clean Air Act and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

1. must protect the public health and improve the overall well-being of our citizens;
2. should allow decision-makers to consider benefits, costs, risk tradeoffs, and feasibility in making decisions about how to clean the air;
3. should provide greater accountability and effective enforcement to ensure not only paper requirements but also air quality requirements are met, especially in areas with the furthest to go in meeting our standards;
4. should allow the schedule for addressing NAAQS standards to be driven by the available science and the prioritization of health and environmental concerns, taking into account the multi-pollutant nature of air pollution.

More details on the revised standards: www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/actions.html
More on the AQI and to see daily air quality forecasts www.airnow.gov

Biodiesel: coming soon to a stream near you?

That's the message from a an article in Tuesday's New York Times.

According to industry dogma, biodiesel is "nontoxic, biodegradable and suitable for sensitive environments," The Times reports.

Not so fast. According to a Canadian scientist, quoted in the article:

[A]s with most organic materials, oil and glycerin deplete the oxygen content of water very quickly, and that will suffocate fish and other organisms. And for birds, a vegetable oil spill is just as deadly as a crude oil spill.

In other news, a study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences warned that increased corn ethanol production will likely "worsen" the massive "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico -- where fertilizer runoff from the Midwest accumulates every year, feeding an algae bloom that blots out sea life underneath.

By Tom Philpott (From the Grist mill)

---

Haase Comments:

I am not sure where the NYT is getting this information... MSDS sheets lab data and DOT, EPA and the DNR will ALL confirm that ALL biofuels have similar hazardous and toxic characteristics to both people and the environment regardless that they are naturally derived.

Noone industrial manufacturer of these fuels would call them "non-toxic" or "non-hazardous" because they have to follow DOT, EPA and OSHA classification standards. Under these government protection standards,  ethanol and bio-diesel have toxic, fire and aquatic life risk.

We need to remind people petroleum based fuels are from organic bio life that has just and a few million more years to cook.

But these are just facts and data....

NYT - "Health Report Raises Dispute Over Great Lakes Pollution"

"Top federal health officials said Wednesday that they had asked the Institute of Medicine, the government's premier medical adviser, to referee a dispute over a report suggesting that pollution in the Great Lakes region may have serious health consequences for people who live there, including infant mortality and breast cancer. 'It's a good way to get a really high-quality and completely objective scientific review,' said Dr. Henry Falk, who oversees environmental health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But Dr. Christopher T. De Rosa, a federal toxicology official who was a co-author of the report, said the Bush administration had suppressed it 'because it implies injury.' He bemoaned the decision to ask for a review from the Institute of Medicine, which is part of the National Academy of Sciences." A House committee is investigating whether the Bush administration suppressed the report. Read as Gardiner Harris reports for the New York Times March 13, 2008.

Cabron storage - up in smoke

Green' storage in forests may be going up in smoke.A new study finds that Calif. wildfires emit more greenhouse gases than previously believed, largely through the post-fire decay of dead wood, raising questions about how effective Calif. forests are at slowing global warming.

Smoke blocks the sun during the Angora fire in South Lake Tahoe last year. A new study found that four major California wildfires are responsible for the release of 38 million tons of greenhouse gases, far more than the 2 million tons the state estimates that fires produce on average each year.

Angora blaze at Lake Tahoe last year – are responsible for the release of 38 million tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, far more than the 2 million tons the state estimates that fires produce on average each year.

"Up until now, we have not fully appreciated the magnitude of the impact of wildfires on climate change," Bonnicksen said. "This is a very important part of the problem."

Last fall, a separate study by the National Center for Atmospheric Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder, estimated that wildfires nationwide release about 290 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere – 4 percent to 6 percent of fossil fuel burning emissions.

The center also estimated that in one week alone, last year's Southern California wildfires emitted 7.9 million tons of CO 2.

Bonnicksen said. "I'm a scientist. I really don't care what they say," he said. "What I care about is the underlying facts. I want society to make informed choices."

Read more from source here

Is vinegar the secret ingredient for biofuels?

To make ethanol, you want to make vinegar first, according to ZeaChem.

The biofuel start-up, which has moved from Colorado to Silicon Valley, says it has come up with a method of making cellulosic ethanol that results in close to 40 percent more fuel per ton of wood chips than competing processes. By 2010 or so, the company hopes to be producing ethanol commercially for 80 cents a gallon at wholesale. That could translate to anywhere from $1.10 to $1.50 at the pump, depending on a host of factors.

Read the full story at News.com.

From Laura B. wmrc.uiuc.edu

$2.5 Million for Brownfields Environmental Job Training

EPA News - epa.gov (Washington, D.C. - March 6, 2008) Thirteen communities in 10 states will share more than $2.5 million in job training grants geared toward cleaning up contaminated properties and turning them into productive community assets. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under its Brownfields Initiative, is awarding grants of up to $200,000 each to non-profit organizations, local governments, a university, and a tribe. The grants will teach environmental assessment and cleanup job skills to individuals living in low-income areas near brownfields sites in Alabama, California, Louisiana, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Washington.

"Through brownfields job training grants, EPA is literally putting both people and property back to work," said EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson. "By teaching people the skills to revitalize their own neighborhoods, EPA is improving lives and livelihoods in communities across the nation."

EPA's brownfields assistance has attracted more than $9.9 billion in private investment and helped attract more than 45,000 jobs.

Information on March 2008 grant recipients: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/jt0308/jt0308.htm

Information on Brownfields job training grants: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/job.htm

 

Cogeneration At Home: Ceramic Fuel Cells And Bloom Energy

By Big Gav peakenergy:

 

The Engineer-Poet recently had a post on The Cogeneration Stopgap at the Oil Drum, which looked at how the combination of cogeneration (generating combined heat and power - CHP - using natural gas) and heat pumps could be used to heat North American homes much more efficiently and extend the life of North America's dwindling natural gas reserves for a period of time while houses are retrofitted to make them more energy efficient and natural gas use is replaced with electricity. The only example of cogeneration technology touched on in the article was from Climate Energy, whose CHP unit is made by Honda.

An Australian company working in this area called Ceramic Fuel Cells were in the news recently after landing a $240 million deal with Dutch energy company Nuon to supply 50,000 CHP units by 2014. The company still needs to meet a number of commercial requirements set by Nuon - in particular improving the durability of the cells from two years to four.

The company is hoping that production will begin by June 2009 in a new €12.4 million factory in Heinsberg, Germany, which aims to produce 10,000 2 kW units per year. The cells are expected to emit 60% less carbon dioxide than traditional combustion generators. The company is also partnering with Britain's Powergen, Germany's EWE and Gaz de France.

Ceramic Fuel Cells
Ceramic's fuel cells have been under development for several years, listing on the ASX in 2004 and the AIM shortly after. The company specialises in solid oxide fuel cells, which convert natural gas (and presumably biogas) into power and heat without burning the fuel. The cells convert about 50 per cent of the energy in the fuel to electricity - traditional gas-fired power stations manage around 30 per cent - with another 35 per cent of the potential energy captured as heat from the catalytic process.

The company doesn't have any plans to market units in Australia in the foreseeable future, preferring to concentrate on the European market due to higher energy prices, specific CHP rebates in Germany, feed-in tariffs and possible carbon credits for trading on the EU emissions trading scheme (set up under the Kyoto protocol).

 

CHP in Britain
Reuters reported that boilers containing Ceramic's units could be sold in Britain in 2010 if utility company Powergen orders units this year. The article estimates that fuel cell units for home units will be priced between 1,500 and 2,000 pounds and that larger units priced at over 3,000 pounds will be operated by utility companies. The same report goes on to speculate that because utilities will save so much money by producing electricity using CHP (which they believe is twice as efficient as centralised generation and sending power through the grid), that they expect utilities will eventually start giving next-generation boilers to customers for free, with the units having a 4-5 year payback period.

Powergen has also previously looked at a different micro-CHP approach using Stirling Engines attached to water boilers. I can't tell what happened to this plan, though the company is assume was the prospective supplier - Disenco - is still marketing a CHP product (although full production isn't due to begin until this year, which may explain the absence of progress).

Another British CHP company called Ceres Power received an order for 37,500 units from British Gas owner Centrica in January, for delivery from 2011. These units are smaller but cheaper than Ceramic's units. Carbon Commentary have looked at this unit and claimed the main challenge facing CHP vendors in the UK is a the lack of feed-in tariffs - which would presumably affect Ceramic as much as Ceres.

Bloom Energy
Another company that has received a lot of attention in the fuel cell market is US company Bloom Energy, who are also developing solid oxide fuel cells (though there is some legal argument underway about who actually developed the technology in this case). Bloom Energy

The company is investigating using natural gas and ethanol as fuel for the cells, and most reports speculate the cells will be able to generate 100 kw of power (the company's web site says absolutely nothing). One report from Business 2.0 claims the company is aiming to sell units for around US$10,000.

Bloom is backed by a number of high profile investors, including the omnipresent Kleiner Perkins Caulfield Byers, and has raised US$100 million in funding. According to Vinod Khosla, the company is currently building a "massive" facility in Mumbai, India.

One possible application for Bloom's fuel cells is in data centres, with the cells used to eliminate the need for uninterruptible power supplies (UPS's) and thus (in some cases) the need for additional disaster recovery (DR) facilities.

Japan
Japan has also seen trials of hydrogen fuel cells for CHP, with the hydrogen coming from reformed natural gas. The cells are leased for 1 million yen (US$9,500) for a 10-year period from Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Toyota, Honda and Toshiba are all also working on fuel cells, usually as part of efforts to develop fuel cell vehicles.

The Japanese Government is spending 2.4 billion yen (US$310 million) per year on fuel cell development and plans for 10 million homes (25% of Japanese households) to be powered by fuel cells by 2020

DOE Cleanup program facing deep cuts in 2009

A bleak funding picture across the country

Nationally, the news isn't much better. Chemical & Engineering News reports this week that cleanup of nuclear weapons sites across the country is underfunded, but DOE is cutting the program. According to the magazine,

"An audit shows that the cost to clean up extensive radioactive and hazardous waste contamination is likely to be as high as $305 billion, more than $50 billion higher than the Administration's earlier estimate. It also may take until 2062 to finish the job—more than 20 years longer than original estimates. Yet this year's cleanup budget proposal is $5.5 billion, the lowest level in the last 15 years for the huge cleanup program."

DOE officials acknowledge that the cuts for 2009 mean the department will not be able to meet cleanup milestones in Idaho and elsewhere. Assistant Energy Secretary James Rispoli said recently in a presentation that funding levels requested for 2009 mean that DOE "would not meet some of the milestones and obligations contained in all of the environmental agreements that have been negotiated over many years with regulators . . . regardless of the approach that is chosen and its associated level of funding."

 

Read more by By Dan on Idaho Cleanup Project

China's emissions growth 2-4 times greater than expected

China's carbon dioxide emissions are growing far faster than anticipated according to according to a new analysis by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, San Diego. The study, published in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, estimates China will see an 11 percent annual growth rate in CO2 emissions between 2004 and 2010, two to four times the 2.5 to 5 percent growth rate estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Read more from mongabay

Consumers urged to scrutinize 'eco-friendly claims'

Some are for real, but some are 'greenwashing'

 

AS INTEREST IN GREEN ISSUES reaches a white-hot pitch, government and industry are jumping on the sustainability bandwagon — touting "natural," "biodegradable" and "environmentally friendly" practices and products.

Often the claims are true. But sometimes, more money and energy is expended on trumpeting eco-friendly practices than in actually making those commitments a reality — a practice known as greenwashing.

Is the color green a cover-up, or is it a transparent window for environmentally friendly activities?

It's no wonder that many are jumping on the bandwagon. Going green can add to the credibility of local governments, reflecting their commitment to stewardship of the environment and citizens' interests.

As far as businesses are concerned, the growing market for purchasing decisions based on the environmental and social impact of products and manufacturers hit $209 billion in the U.S. in 2005, according to the Pennsylvania-based Natural Marketing Institute.

But inflated or false claims have become such a concern that the Federal Trade Commission, which regulates advertising claims, began a series of hearings in January into green marketing, concerned over the "heightened potential for deception," according to Deborah Platt Majoras, its chairwoman.

A greenwashing controversy hit Oakland-based Clorox, maker of its signature bleach and other cleaning products, in late 2007 and early 2008.

Clorox acquired eco-friendly

 

DOE falls Billions behind in cleanups...

Cleanup of nuclear weapons sites is behind schedule and over budget, audit shows, but DOE cuts program

OPTIMISTIC MILESTONES in cleaning up the nuclear weapons complex cannot be met, the Department of Energy recently announced. With much fanfare, the Bush Administration set milestones just a few years ago. Now, DOE must begin renegotiating agreements reached with states to reflect new and more accurate costs and schedules revealed last year in a program-wide audit, says Assistant Secretary James A. Rispoli, who manages the agency's cleanup program.

The audit shows that the cost to clean up extensive radioactive and hazardous waste contamination is likely to be as high as $305 billion, more than $50 billion higher than the Administration's earlier estimate. It also may take until 2062 to finish the job—more than 20 years longer than original estimates. Yet this year's cleanup budget proposal is $5.5 billion, the lowest level in the last 15 years for the huge cleanup program.

Former energy secretary Spencer Abraham set the earlier milestones in 2002 as part of his "accelerated cleanup plan." The plan was based on a top-to-bottom review of the overall cleanup program, Abraham said at the time.

In 2002, Abraham said: "When I became energy secretary, a little more than a year ago today, I was presented with the old plan for cleaning up our sites, which called for a timetable of some 70 years to complete and at a cost of $300 billion. That is not good enough for me, and I doubt it is good enough for anyone who lives near these sites."

Abraham then announced his new plan to cut the program by at least $50 billion and to complete cleanups at nearly all sites by 2035. His plan required state and local officials where the contaminated sites are located to agree to accelerate cleanups and in return the state would receive adequate funding. At the time, some local officials called the plan "blackmail" and complained that cleanup standards would be lowered in return for receiving funds for the cleanup. But they went along and revised their cleanup plans (C&EN, March 25, 2002, page 12).

 

Read more from source

What AL, Oprah and Arnold have in common - footprints?

LA TIMES - Like many of the Californians he represents, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger now spends more than three hours commuting because he lives so far from the office. But his ride is a private jet. After flirting briefly with buying a Sacramento abode for his family, then living alone for a while in a 2,000-square-foot hotel penthouse across from the Capitol, the governor has decided to stay nearly every night at his Brentwood mansion. The commute costs hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, which aides say the governor pays for himself. Some environmentalists say the trips expand his carbon footprint enough to undermine his image as a crusader against global warming, despite the pollution credits he buys to offset the damageevan.halper@latimes.com

 

 

Devices holds real promise for alt energy storage

US utilities are increasingly investing in super-sized batteries and other forms of energy storage to reduce their dependence on slow, dirty backup plants, put off building new substations, and to store power from wind farms and other growing but volatile sources of renewable energy.

Columbus, Ohio-based AEP, which delivers electricity to more than 5 million customers in 11 states, installed a one- megawatt (MW) battery in West Virginia nearly two years ago, allowing it to delay construction of a new substation and other infrastructure. Six additional MW of storage will be added this year, and the company plans to have 1,000 MW of storage capacity on its system in the next decade.

In AEP's territory, one megawatt supplies enough power for about 800 homes. Right now, the company is using the technology to help distribute power and delay making more expensive upgrades to its system, such as installing a substation.

Large-format storage devices hold so much promise for utilities because they can be charged overnight, when power is cheap and readily available, and can be tapped during the day when demand outpaces supply. And unlike generators or power plants, storage devices can be accessed almost immediately without emitting harmful greenhouse gases.

"Big generators have a hard time changing speed very quickly," said Bill Capp, chief executive of Beacon Power Corp , which makes flywheels that can store energy and relieve pressure on power grids. "We can do it very fast."

Storage will become even more important as wind becomes a greater contributor to the nation's energy supply because power can be stored when the wind is blowing fiercely and then accessed when there is little or no wind at all.

"The more wind power that's deployed, the less predictable or stable the grid becomes," Capp said.

Such systems could help avert what happened last month when Texas was forced to cut service to industrial customers because the wind suddenly stopped blowing.

CHEAPER THAN GRID UPGRADE

"It's a tremendous growth opportunity," said Craig Irwin, who follows the energy storage market for Merriman Curhan Ford. "Utilities want to improve efficiency, and they can get that by spending on advanced storage technologies, versus an upgrade to the grid which can be very expensive."

Some batteries also can be moved if, after several years in one spot, a utility decides to replace it with a bigger investment in infrastructure.

Irwin added that more utilities would snap up batteries as the cost of the technology continues to comes down.

According to Altair Nanotechnologies Inc, the cost of one of its batteries is about half that of building a peaker plant, a natural gas-fired facility that is run only when there is high demand. Altair Nanotechnologies recently delivered a $1 million, 2 MW battery system to an AES Corp utility in Indiana, and expects to see more such orders.

By comparison, the cost of a new substation can range from a few hundred dollars to a couple of thousand dollars per kilowatt, an AEP spokeswoman said.

Other players in the industry include ZBB Energy Corp , of Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, which makes zinc-bromine batteries being used by California utility PG&E Corp, and Canada's VRB Power Systems, which makes vanadium-based batteries.

One risk to the storage makers, however, is the utility industry's push to use plug-in hybrid cars as a source of storage. The idea is that hybrids would charge overnight and allow utilities to draw that power down during the day.
Read more here  

 

VIA- REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

 

Steal this site... seriously! "ALL posts must go"

Next month this blog will be completely redone so "ALL posts must go"

 

Please download content all will.... if you a need full site archive I can also email it in a zip format.

 

After five years blogging, it is time for change:

"It is our responsibilities, not ourselves, that we should take seriously."

 

This Week's Speaker...Steven Huyser-Honig

This Week's Speaker... at the greatlakestownhall

From the first time Steven Huyser-Honig vacationed along the Lake Michigan shore as a small boy, he's been captivated by the beauty of the Great Lakes. Beaches and dunes, lighthouses and breakwaters, farms and orchards, forests and streams, small towns and big cities—all are essential to the character of this timeless region.

As a self-taught photographer, Steve's been extremely fortunate to be able to turn his passion into his profession. It began when his wife, Joan, a writer, needed illustrations to accompany her freelance articles. Soon they were collaborating as travel journalists. They loved the challenge of communicating a place's singular beauty and people in photographs and words.

When family life dictated they spend their time closer to home, they formed Huyser-Honig Creative Services (http://www.hhcreatives.com) and focused on telling the stories of nonprofit organizations. Their lives have been greatly enriched by close association with so many people doing so much good.

In recent years Steve has once again been able to travel and photograph extensively in the Great Lakes. He formed Great Lakes Editions (http://www.greatlakeseditions.com) to share his love for the beauty of this region…and his dedication to preserving it for future generations.

To do his part to inform public opinion, Steve authors a blog on Great Lakes environmental issues: http://www.greatlakesforall.com. As a lighthouse enthusiast, Steve authors a blog on international lighthouse news: http://www.lighthouseforever.com.

All the water in the world. All the air in the world.

Left: All the water in the world (1.4087 billion cubic kilometres of it) including sea water, ice, lakes, rivers, ground water, clouds, etc. Right: All the air in the atmosphere (5140 trillion tonnes of it) gathered into a ball at sea-level density. Shown on the same scale as the Earth.

 

Thanks  for the link Dan!

Opening Statement: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Oversight: Security of Our Nation's Nuclear Plants

.... It is our job today, as Members of this Committee, to ensure that the NRC remains a strong and independent regulator, true to its mission of protecting public health and safety, and promoting the common defense and security. 

Some excerpts:

The NRC cannot condone, and this Committee cannot ignore, security guards sleeping on duty in violation of procedures. 

 There are reports that NRC staff recommended an additional $22 million for new reactor licensing that was NOT included in the final budget request and that the shortfall will lead to delays of 8 months or more in reviewing applications filed in FY'09.  If this is true, then I am very concerned to hear that the NRC may already be jeopardizing its ability to conduct thorough reviews in a timely fashion by setting the stage for a funding shortfall. In contrast, the requested budget increase for reactor oversight -- a process that even GAO has found to be logical and well-structured -- is $16.1 million, over 5 times the increase for new reactor licensing.  Testimony from our October hearing certainly didn't indicate program shortcomings requiring a strong funding increase as a remedy. 

I'm concerned by this disparity and I'm eager to understand the basis for it.

Read more from senate.gov

Watermotor - Simple Mechanical Drive

From  Steve Spence green-trust.org

Most of the common machines used in workshops, industry, and farms are driven by motors of only .5 - 5 horsepower. The Watermotor will produce this amount of power at an extremely low cost and with a minimum of ecological disruption.

High energy efficiency means that the quantity of water necessary for operation and cost of installation is greatly reduced, while on the other hand the number of actual locations where waterpower on this scale is available increases exponentially. In effect, every small fast-flowing stream becomes an important local energy resource, perhaps in many cases the only practical one available. In the world's hilly and mountainous areas there are often few roads and even fewer electric power-lines. While frequently rich in small scale water-power resources, the people are poor.

The Watermotor is a practical means of utilizing one of the easiest to use and most efficient sources of natural energy.

http://www.watermotor.net

 

U.S. may import 20,000 tons of nuclear waste

GRIST - Know how the U.S. hasn't even figured out a long-term solution for its own nuclear waste? Perhaps importing 20,000 tons of radioactive material from Italy might not be the best idea. Not to mention that we don't want to do the Italians any favors until they decriminalize crotch-grabbing.

NSF Publishes Roadmap for Hydrocarbon Biofuels

Read via greencarcongress.com

The report—Breaking the Chemical and Engineering Barriers to Lignocellulosic Biofuels: Next Generation Hydrocarbon Biorefineries—is one of the outcomes of a workshop on the topic held last June with more than 70 leading biofuels scientists and engineers. The workshop was sponsored by NSF, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the American Chemical Society; it was chaired by George W. Huber, University of Massachusetts-Amherst. The report identifies the basic research needs and opportunities in catalytic chemistry and materials science that underpin biomass conversion and fuel utilization, with a focus on new, emerging and scientifically challenging areas that have the potential for significant impact. The report illuminates the principal technological barriers and the underlying scientific limitations associated with efficient processing of biomass resources into finished fuels. The limiting factor to biofuels production is simply that low-cost processing technologies to efficiently convert a large fraction of the lignocellulosic biomass energy into liquid fuels do not yet exist. —"Breaking the Chemical and Engineering Barriers..." The report focuses on six primary areas: Selective thermal processing of lignocellulosic biomass to produce liquid fuels (bio-oils) in distributed biorefineries. Utilization of petroleum refining technology for conversion of biomass-derived oxygenates within existing petroleum refineries. Hydrocarbon production by liquid phase processing of sugars to a heretofore "sleeping giant" intermediate, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), followed by HMF conversion to "green" diesel and jet fuel. Process intensification for diesel and gasoline production from synthesis gas (CO and H2) by Fisher-Tropsch synthesis (FTS), which dramatically decreases the economically viable size compared to traditional FTS processes with petroleum derived feedstocks. Conceptual design of biorefining processes in conjunction with experimental studies at the beginning of research projects to allow rapid development of commercial biofuel technologies. Design of recyclable, highly active and selective heterogeneous catalysts for biofuel production using advanced nanotechnology, synthesis methods and quantum chemical calculations. Resources NSF (2008) Breaking the Chemical and Engineering Barriers to Lignocellulosic Biofuels: Next Generation Hydrocarbon Biorefineries. Ed. George W. Huber, University of Massachusetts Amherst. National Science Foundation. Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems Division. Washington DC

Environmental Graffiti: The 5 Most Environmentally Friendly Presidents in U.S. History

Here is the "Environmental Graffiti" list of the top 5 Most Environmentally Friendly Presidents:

5. Abraham Lincoln

4. Teddy Roosevelt

3. Franklin Delano Roosevelt

2. Richard Nixon

1. Jimmy Carter?

I'm sure not everyone will agree with them, so leave your own lists in the comments section at Environmental Graffiti: The 5 Most Environmentally Friendly Presidents in U.S. History

 

Clinton's efforts on ethanol overlap her husband's interests.

Surprised?

NY Times:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has worked to provide incentives and investment opportunities for ethanol. Her actions intersect with Mr. Clinton's philanthropic and profit-making endeavors. Read here nytimes.com

 

As do her nuclear efforts... (Dahhh!) It's called politics for a reason. 

See: "Clinton goes nuke and so will Hillary"

CORN fuel up to 423 times more carbon emissions than fossil fuels?

Recent reports, though, have led to a growing concern that ethanol might simply be a faster way of digging an environmental grave.

According to a piece in Science magazine, experts from Princeton and the Nature Conservancy have focused on serious problems associated with the rising use of ethanol. First and foremost, they said, clearing the vast tracts of land necessary for growing corn can result in anywhere from 17 times to 423 times more carbon emissions annually than are saved by burning biofuels rather than fossil fuels.

There are some caveats to these objections: For instance, the exact emissions numbers are by no means agreed upon, and cellulosic ethanol could be made from switchgrass or other plants, which can grow almost anywhere and would not increase the price of corn.

The more that ethanol supporters claim to have answers, though, the more skeptics seem to have questions. Water use has become a political hot potato in the western United States, which has been hit not only by drought but by water-rights disputes; one undeniable fact is that ethanol production soaks up massive amounts of water. One example: In Colorado, the North Fork of the heavily drained Republican River has shortened by 10 miles in just 20 years, and unchecked irrigation has drained the major aquifers in the area to dangerously low levels. The water table for the area sits 100 feet lower than it did 30 years ago, according to Newsweek.

Even Virgin Group chairman Richard Branson has turned around on his previous ethanol enthusiasm, recently telling the BBC that he "regrets his investment in biofuels on environmental and economic grounds" after investing nearly $400 million in the field two years ago.

Biofuels Might Prove Worse Than CO2 (The Sunday Independent)
Ethanol Boom Saps Water (Newsweek)

Read more from the source "The Dark Side of Ethanol"

nuclear power will be economically obsolete in next decade

QUOTE: We need to build 2,000, 3,000 nuclear reactors for it to take on the kind of role that coal has today.

WHO: Dr. Makhijani,

...if we cast ourselves forward to 2050 or 2060 and we've made, as a nation, as a world, significant investments in nuclear power, what's wrong with that?
In order to make a significant impact on climate we have to build 2,000, 3,000 nuclear reactors for it to take on the kind of role that coal has today. Probably more, considering the growth in China and India. That means one nuclear reactor every six days or so. That means we have to build two or three uranium enrichment plants every year.

First of all, nuclear is the lazy answer. It fits into the structure we've got. It's the way we've always done things. We've got 95-percent centralized electricity and a nuclear — you can just plop in a nuclear plant in place of an old coal plant and you're done. If you're a stockholder, it looks very easy … Even so, Wall Street is not eager to finance it. Nuclear companies want 100-percent loan guarantees.

One of the problems with nuclear is water. I think that has not been adequately considered. Last year, a nuclear reactor was shut down in Tennessee because of lack of water during a drought. I think the South Texas Project has not that well considered the implications of large-scale water use for its new power plants in the context of what might happen if we have severe drought. They're planning to use 100 cubic-feet per second, that could be a significant proportion of the Colorado River at low-flow times.

 

Read more by Greg Harman here"Parking lots are the answer " 

2008 Brownfields Conference is fast approaching.

The National Brownfields Conference is the largest, most comprehensive conference focused on cleaning up and redeveloping abandoned, underutilized, and potentially contaminated properties in the nation. There is no better deal in the redevelopment marketplace than Brownfields 2008. Why?? Because registration is free, and by signing up you gain access to more than 130 educational and learning opportunities, outstanding plenary sessions, 200 exhibitors, scores of networking events, special training sessions, film screenings, book signings, and much, much more. Please check out the website at http://www.brownfields2008.org 

 
There are plenty of ways that individuals and organizations can take advantage of all the educational and networking opportunities that Brownfields 2008 will present. Whether you're a newcomer to the world of economic and environmental redevelopment or a seasoned professional looking to make new connections and increase your business, Brownfields 2008 offers something for you.

For information on US EPA's Brownfields Program, visit: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/

U.S. squeezes more GDP out of each drop of energy than the U.K., Japan, or European average.

Is America the environmental leader or the laggard?

Of course it's the leader. The problem is, it's also richer. That means that per-capita emissions of carbon dioxide are going to be higher in the U.S., with its spacious homes, big air conditioners, and long commutes.

But that doesn't mean the U.S. is necessarily an energy spendthrift, argues Hayward, a long-time foil of Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The U.S. squeezes more GDP out of each drop of energy than the U.K., France, Germany, Japan, or the European average.

And here lies the main paradox of the misperception on this issue: it is precisely because the United States is highly energy efficient that we are able to afford and consume more energy than European nations on a per-capita basis. One obvious implication of this analysis is that the United States cannot currently achieve European-level greenhouse gas emissions unless it reduces American output and lowers the nation's standard of living.

For Hayward, the "untold and underappreciated" story is America's constant improvement in energy-efficiency. He offers up a comparison with 1910, when greenhouse gas emissions were at the level many cap-and-trade advocates long to return to. Back then, per-capita income (in 2007 dollars) was $5,964" a bit short of paying for a Prius.

Since then, he says, the economy has grown twenty-fold, emissions six-fold, and per-capita emissions barely doubled. The efficiency drive isn't over, either: "It is likely that the United States is the only industrialized nation whose greenhouse gas emissions fell in 2006 (2006 emissions data for other nations are not yet available)."

Read more By Keith Johnson America: The Efficient, Green Giant?

Bottom-trawling, single most destructive human action for the world's oceans

Bottom-trawling: How it works

The delegation from New Zealand, whose fishermen are responsible for 90% of bottom-trawling in the South Pacific high seas, said the restrictions would "severely constrain" its fishing vessels.

"Because of the cost implications of the necessary research and assessment and observer requirements, it may even have the effect of putting an end to bottom-trawling," it said.

The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, an alliance of leading environmental and conservation groups, welcomed the agreement.

Because of the cost implications of the necessary research and assessment and observer requirements, [the agreement] may even have the effect of putting an end to bottom-trawling New Zealand delegation Sea fish 'gone in 50 years'

In addition to the weighted nets and rollers which crush coral reefs, bottom-trawling targets slow-growing species of fish, such as orange roughy, which take decades to reach breeding age.

Such species are especially vulnerable to overfishing because the population replenishes itself very slowly.

Last November, leading scientists warned there would be no sea fish left in 50 years if current practices continued.

Read more VIA BBC News

 

Link via treehugger.com

Shell's 1959 Opel T-1 376.59 mpg Car

Yep, as I have documented before 100-300 mpg has been possible for decades with "regular" on "regular" gas.

 

Quoted: "Here's a car that was 20 years old at the time of the contest that was the project of a couple of guys in a garage," he said. "You can't tell me we can't do better than this with cars today." Read about Shells 376 MPG Opel here

 

Furthermore it has been possible with "bio-diesel" for nearly a century... read about it here at HybridHype

And the award goes tooo...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATSDR Charged With Suppressing Report on Great Lakes Toxic Risks

"CHICAGO -- The lead author and peer reviewers of a government report raising the possibility of public health threats from industrial contamination throughout the Great Lakes region are charging that the report is being suppressed because of the questions it raises. The author also alleges that he was demoted because of the report. Chris De Rosa, former director of the division of toxicology and environmental medicine at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), charges that the report he wrote was a significant factor in his reassignment to a non-supervisory 'special assistant' position last year. The House Committee on Science and Technology is investigating De Rosa's reassignment, in light of allegations that it was related to the Great Lakes report and his push to publicize the possibility of a cancer risk from formaldehyde fumes in Federal Emergency Management Agency trailers housing victims of Hurricane Katrina." Kari Lydersen reports for the Washington Post Feb. 18, 2008. The story was originally reported Feb. 7, 2008 by Sheila Kaplan of the Center for Public Integrity.

 

Read it at: washingtonpost

Happy Presidents Day! Green US president history factoids

Little-known green factoids about US presidents throughout history

Presidents come in many different shades of green, much like the dollar-bill green, sometimes puke green in times of national emergency. But never mind that. Let's enjoy these choice factoids:

George Washington—first president, 1789-1797
•    Washington was the only president ever to be elected unanimously. No campaign trail to speak of—imagine the carbon savings! The cancelled FOX and CNN election specials alone probably could have powered every home in the nation!
•    Also, showing extreme patience and willpower, Washington had his men row him across the Delaware. Not once did he rev up the outboard engine.
•    As a boy, little George (of the famous cherry tree anecdote) did not chop down his father's prized cherry tree with his new hatchet. Rather, he merely hacked off all its bark and left it to die a slow and painful death.

Thomas Jefferson—third president, 1801-1809
•    During his second term, Jefferson attempted an embargo on American shipping. His reasoning was more to do with international trade than with reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but still. Unfortunately, the embargo "worked badly and was unpopular."
•    Jefferson was also known for reducing vampire power drainage by diligently unplugging his cell phone charger each morning.

James Madison—fourth president, 1809-1817
•    A mere 5 feet 4 inches, 100 pounds, James Madison was the shortest American president.
•    He took up very little space.
•    [Martin Van Buren, 5 feet 6 inches, didn't take up much space either.]

James Monroe—fifth president, 1758-1831
•    Monroe loved the outdoors so much, he was the first president to be inaugurated… outdoors.
•    Maybe that's where Middlebury got the sporting idea to have their midyear graduates collect their diplomas on skis.

John Quincy Adams—sixth president, 1825-1829
•    Adams, son of just-president John Adams, was the first president to practice patriotic recycling by reusing his father's name in the White House.
•    Also, records all but prove that he never once left his laptop computer on overnight.

Andrew Jackson—seventh president, 1829-1837
•    Andrew Jackson was the first president to ride on a train.
•    It probably wasn't Amtrak though, because if you think $90 is highway robbery today that was like so much money in those days, like billions.

Abraham Lincoln—sixteenth president, 1861-1865
•    That old trendsetter Abe lived off the grid in a log cabin way before that sort of thing was cool.

Ulysses S. Grant—eighteenth president, 1869-1877
•    A man about town, Grant resisted the urge to splash out on a flashy red Jaguar, and instead humbly went about his business via horse and buggy.
•    His noble commitment to low-carbon transport cost him dearly: Once caught buggy-speeding in the streets of DC, poor chap, he was fined $20 and forced to return on foot to the White House.

William McKinley—twenty-fifth president, 1897-1901
•    At the turn of the century, ladies' hats were often decorated with plumes from over-hunted birds. McKinley apparently either thought the hats were ugly or opposed plume hunting—the Lacey Act of 1900 banned the practice of shipping illegally-killed birds from one state to another. Plume hunters weren't psyched.

Theodore Roosevelt—twenty-sixth president, 1901-1909
•    PETA predecessor Theodore Roosevelt was an avid birder and kept a "small zoo" in his room at Harvard, "consisting of lobsters, snakes, and a huge tortoise."
•    Perhaps inspired by his reptilian roommates, Roosevelt went on to establish 194 million acres of national forests and parks as well as the first National Bird Preserve.
•    He also established the Forest Service. And a few other trifles like, um, the Grand Canyon National Monument and 17 other national monuments.
•    Often hailed as the conservation president, Teddy was also the first to take a public ride in an electric car.

William H. Taft—twenty-seventh president, 1909-1913
•    Committed to locally-sourced milk and dairy, Taft bought Pauline Wayne (a cow) from a senator in Wisconsin, and kept her at the White House for two years.

Woodrow Wilson—twenty-eighth president, 1913-1921
•    During World War I, Wilson decided he should save money on lawn-upkeep at the White House. His green solution was to bring a flock of sheep in to graze the presidential lawn. Money raised from their wool went to bolster the Red Cross war efforts.
•    He also outlawed dumping anthracite coal and its refuse into streams and established mining regulations on federal lands.

Calvin Coolidge—thirtieth president, 1923-1929
•    Calvin Coolidge did very little, and spoke even less, conserving both energy and clean air. Governmental records note that he had a "talent for effectively doing nothing."

Harry Truman—thirty-third president, 1945-1953
•    Taking a one-man, grass-roots approach to paper reduction, Truman read every single book in his hometown library.
•    Taking a slightly less grass-roots approach to Japan during World War II, Truman dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Lyndon Johnson—thirty-sixth president, 1963-1969
•    Apparently a fan of the scenic drive, Johnson introduced the Highway Beautification Act of 1965.
•    Lyndon also worked on Clean Air legislation, Water Pollution Control legislation, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and the Wilderness Act.

Richard Nixon—thirty-seventh president, 1969-1974
•    Dirty Dick got himself into some hot water, but he also cleaned a few things up. You know that little organization called the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)? He started it—no big deal.
•    Oh, and he signed the Endangered Species Act into law, created the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 1970 Clean Air Act, the 1972 Clean Water Act, and the 1973 Endangered Species Act.

Jimmy Carter—thirty-ninth president, 1977-1981
•    Jimmy and his wife Rosalynn had four children (read: probably drove a gargantuan SUV), so it's not a huge surprise that he worked to improve car fuel efficiency.
•    Carter also protected 103-million acres in Alaska by expanding the National Parks system.
•    And we all owe a big thanks to old Carter for passing legislation throughout the US. (Find a Superfund site are near you).

George H.W. Bush—forty-first president, 1989-1993
•    Bush really liked breathing clean air, but didn't so much like breathing toxic, dirty air. So in 1990, he amended the Clean Air Act, in hopes of making air… cleaner.

Bill Clinton—forty-second president, 1993-2001
•    Instead of wasting electricity on a big fancy home audio system, Bill played his own saxophone. It was charming and soulful.
•    Also, he created 17 new national monuments (4.6 million acres in total), took a whack at ratifying Kyoto, and declared road building illegal in 60 million acres of national forest.

George W. Bush—forty-forth president, 2001-current
•    Acting on his commitment to conserving resources, George Bush Jr. sent troops into war without armor.
•    He also dubbed 140,000 square miles of ocean near the Hawaiian Islands a marine reserve in June 2006. No, really, he did. Not joking. Look.

So kids, you have a rich green heritage to live up to. Remember: ask not what your country can recycle for you, but what you can recycle for your country.

From: (By Tobin Hack) plentymag.com Nicole Scarmeas contributed research.

Energy crisis making way for 'nuclear renaissance'

Houston Chronicle: Like it or not, the nukes are coming. Driven by soaring energy demands, the high cost of gas and oil and worries about global warming, an expansion of peaceful nuclear power increasingly appears to be inevitable. "I believe very strongly that new nuclear plants will be built in the U.S. in the coming decades to address problems with respect to higher energy demand, high prices and global warming," said Sudarshan Loyalka, a professor of nuclear engineering at the ... Link (VIA-ecologicalinternet.org)

 

Filed under "I Told You So"

EPA to Improve the Safety Testing of Household Chemicals

NIH Collaborates with EPA to Improve the Safety Testing of Chemicals

New Strategy Aims to Reduce Reliance on Animal Testing

Testing the safety of chemicals ranging from pesticides to household cleaners will benefit from new technologies and a plan for collaboration, according to federal scientists from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who today announced a new toxicity testing agreement. The concept behind this agreement is highlighted in the Feb. 15, 2008 issue of the journal Science (http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/releases/2008/docs/transtox-aaas.pdf)   (321K).

"I launched the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research five years ago to create collaborations between institutes and centers on big projects that none of them could do alone. But I never envisioned a trans-agency collaboration testing for environmental toxins," said NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni, M.D. "This research collaboration has the potential to make crucial discoveries that will protect the public health by identifying and understanding chemical toxicants to which people are exposed."

Read full at NIH

A lot of hot air from WI green politics

Who said it trying to sway the "green" vote?

 

In a speech on Wednesday at a GM auto plant in Wisconsin,  promising to boost green jobs, help the middle class, dole out tax cuts, negotiate worker and environmental protections in upcoming free-trade agreements, and, in order to fund much of this, end the war in Iraq.

Decades of trade deals like NAFTA and China have been signed with plenty of protections for corporations and their profits, but none for our environment or our workers who've seen factories shut their doors and millions of jobs disappear; workers whose right to organize and unionize has been under assault for the last eight years ...

[Lobbyists have] been allowed to write an energy policy that's keeping us addicted to oil when there are families choosing between gas and groceries ...

[When I am president, infrastructure repairs in the country] will be determined not by politics, but by what will maximize our safety and homeland security; what will keep our environment clean and our economy strong ...

When I am president, I will not sign another trade agreement unless it has protections for our environment and protections for American workers ..

I believe that we can create millions of ... jobs around a clean, renewable energy future ...

 

WHO? Barack Obama.... i.e. Jimmy Carter the 2nd.

WHY? People want to hear all of this regardless if he can or will do anything.

Possible or even plausible dreams and hope, he is really pulling in the "green" voters on hope of change.

Earth to voters - Hope, dreams and a army of magical unicorns are not a real answer without a plan and support by congress ;-(