GroovyGreen.com – Start Today :: Save Tomorrow

To make the production of its hybrid Prius that much greener, Toyota has engineered  two new plant species that absorb harmful gases and help take heat out of the atmosphere. It’s a move straight out of science fiction, but it’s not the first time the automaker has played God to help lower its carbon footprint. The grass around its Tsutsumi plant in Toyota City, Japan was developed to grow shorter — requiring cutting only once per year, compared with three times for the previous species. From Drive.com.au,

The flowers, derivatives of the cherry sage plant and the gardenia, were specially developed for the grounds of Toyota’s Prius plant in Toyota City, Japan. The sage derivative’s leaves have unique characteristics that absorb harmful gases, while the gardenia’s leaves create water vapour in the air, reducing the surface temperature of the factory surrounds and, therefore, reducing the energy needed for cooling, in turn producing less carbon dioxide (CO2).

Other green initiatives at the plant include roof-mounted solar panels, photocatalytic paint on exterior walls, reflective solar tubes that provide interior light, bathroom lights that automatically turn off, and reduced air conditioning.

Image credit: Drive.com.au

You could directly poison children, blow the tops off of mountains, pollute our waterways with mercury and other toxic compounds or you could just join the Hawthorn Group and spin these very same practices! Kelly Campaigns recently came across a Hawthorn Group letter to friends and family. I’ll give you some of the highlights.

Even in a communication-saturated environment we achieved, even exceeded, our wildest expectations (and we believe those of our client!). Not only did we raise the awareness of the issue, but we got the major candidates on both sides of the aisle talking about the issue in the debates, at campaign rallies and in interviews…

The presidential campaign concluded with both candidates, their running mates and surrogates talking about and supporting clean coal technology. The issue was mentioned in all four general election debates. This was a 180-degree turn from earlier in the campaign when none of the candidates were focused on this issue…

We watched as our message was transmitted by shirts and hats waved by thousands of excited supporters from the stands of high school gyms, floors of hotel ballrooms and tables of crowded coffee shops. The pictures of our supporters were caught and broadcast by local and national media, including USA Today and Fox News. Soon our message was repeated back to us from the podium by the candidates themselves…

“…as election day nears, both candidates are competing over who will do more to support clean coal initiatives. For that, some credit belongs to [ACCCE President] Stephen Miller.”(Wall Street Journal, October 20, 2008)

Here are some images from the newsletter.  Captions are from the Hawthorn Group.  Comments on the left are mine.

Damn liberal media!

Change!

I wonder how many of those “young supporters” will develop asthma or like eating fish with a helping of mercury?

You can read the whole thing here:

Hawthorn Group Coal Lobby Newsletter (PDF)

And you can read more of their boasting here:

Desmogblog

But wait, there’s more! Here are some highlights from a leaked 2004 coal industry memo.

The Pataki proposal, called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), is in high gear. So far, Pennsylvania and Maryland have agreed not to formally participate in RGGI. The remaining northeastern states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Delaware and New Jersey) are committed to fashioning the program no later than April 2005.

In recent weeks, we have persuaded the RGGI participants to post the following pieces of CEED research on their web site for consumption by the states:

* A 2003 New Hope study showing reductions in greenhouse gases by the RGGI states would have an infinitesimal affect on global GHG concentrations.

* A 2003 Energy Ventures Analysis (EVA) study revealing negative economic results would flow to northeastern states that constrain CO2 emissions.

* A 2004 Energy Ventures Analysis report analyzing the affect of various cap and trade proposals, along with an output-based standard, on RGGI states as well as Pennsylvania and Maryland. EVA found that the economic consequences vary widely. We plan to use this research to sow discord among the RGGI states.

Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity.

Read the whole thing here:

2004 Coal Industry Strategy Letter To CEO of Peabody Energy

What amazes me is the self delusion present in these people, as if spreading misinformation, creating a “buzz” about mistruths and “sowing discord” is any different from doing the actual harm of coal fired power plants. Coal is the dirtiest of fossil fuels. Calling it “clean coal” and helping people believe this lie might be worse than actually burning the coal. I hope these people like heat because they have an eternity of it coming up.

We all know the effects that storm water runoff has on our local watersheds. When the rain water fills up the gutters along the street it carries with it pollutants right into streams, lakes and our oceans. These pollutants are extremely damaging to the wildlife and flora that make those watersheds home.

Abtech Industires a Scottsdale, AZ company has a solution to help fight the nonpoint pollution at the curb.

AbTech’s Smart Sponge®Plus technology, the only non-toxic, fully recyclable filtration system that destroys bacteria at the street level.

The presence of bacteria in stormwater is a serious problem and poses significant health risks that increasingly result in the contamination of water bodies. Water quality standards for bacteria count are very strictly monitored in most coastal areas and small increases in bacteria counts can trigger beach closures. Nearly 20,000 beach closings and advisories were reported in 2007 alone. The greatest opportunity to reduce this bacterial count is during rain events through the control and treatment of stormwater runoff. This can be achieved either expensively, utilizing heavy equipment, ultraviolet light or chlorine treatment (all of which may be cost prohibitive to most municipalities); or, inexpensively thru the introduction of filtration products such as AbTech’s Ultra-Urban®Filter with Smart Sponge®Plus located in stormwater drain entrances.

This product is being used in several municipalities around the US and is also ideal for use in large commercial situations like airports, marinas, etc. According to AbTech’s site their technology is being used in 36 different states.

Smart Sponge® fully encapsulates recovered oil, resulting in a substantially more effective response that prevents absorbed oil from leaching. It is also capable of removing low levels of oil from water, thereby successfully removing sheen. In addition, the Smart Sponge® remains buoyant in calm or agitated water, permitting it to remain in place until fully saturated and resulting in no wasted product. Once oil is absorbed, the Smart Sponge® transforms the pollutants into a stable solid for easy recycling, providing a closed-loop solution to water pollution.

This seems like a no brainer, install a filter at the collection point of the system and stop the contaminants from entering the system. They are expected to be replaced every 1-3 years depending on just how much of a filtering load they have had to deal with. The spent Smart Sponge has been used as a fuel in waste to energy facilities as well as a fuel in cement kilns.

Check out a Smart Sponge demo video here. And head over the AbTech site to read up on all the technical stuff here.

After screwing in “globe” shaped CFL’s into my new dining room light fixture, it occurred to me, “Why aren’t CFL manufactures required to seal their bulbs in a protective shield of plastic?”

The bulbs that I chose for my dining room were 60 W equivalent – but the typical spiral florescent bulb was shrouded in a plastic cover that makes for a more aesthetically pleasing shape.  Why not all compact florescent lightbulbs?  That way if one were to drop and break it, the mercury could be contained within the cover – and not disbursed in a fine gas throughout your room.

If one were worried about the light shining through, the cover could be clear plastic.  Waste heat given off by the bulbs is many times less than a incandescent bulb, and these “designer” CFLs prove that the plastic cover will not melt.

The cost would be minimal.  Injection molded plastic, while not the most eco-friendly material on the planet, is cheap and could be made with recyclable (or recycled) materials.

While a national safety law might require all manufacturers to contain mercury from broken bulbs, I have to ask the question, “why aren’t there any companies out there now, manufacturing and touting the increased safety of such a bulb?”  It seems like a great angle to me.

Somebody should get on that right now.  (Royalty payments can be made to steve@groovygreen.com)

The Sierra Club Blog – Compass (which you should be reading!) tipped me off to the following information about US oil production and exports during a time when Republican leaders are pushing for increased access for oil companies to off-shore and Alaskan oil fields.

US refined oil product exports soared in the first four months of the year, reaching 1.6 million barrels a day, according to this Reuters article.  February exports hit a record 1.8 million barrels a day.  (The average export amount is 1.2 million barrels a day.)  We’re literally shipping away our own gasoline and diesel fuel to other nations. 

The surge in exports appears to contradict the pleas from the U.S. oil industry and the Bush administration for Congress to open more offshore waters and Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.

“We can help alleviate shortages by drilling for oil and gas in our own country,” President Bush told reporters this week. “We have got the opportunity to find more crude oil here at home.”

“As a nation, we can have more control over our energy destiny by supplying more of the oil and natural gas we’ll be consuming from resources here at home,” Red Cavaney, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said in a letter last week to U.S. lawmakers.

But environmentalists and other opponents to expanding drilling areas could seize on the record exports to argue Congress should not open more acres if U.S. refineries are churning crude oil into petroleum products that are sent out of the American market.

“It doesn’t look good to say: ‘We need more oil.’ But then export the refined products that you’re getting. It doesn’t seem to be consistent,” 

The article goes on to say that the 1.6 million barrels a day of refined petroleum products is equal to 9% of domestic refining capacity, and half of the 3.2 million barrels worth of refined products imported into the US each day.

Of course, we’re the US, and we believe in the INVISIBLE HAND…

“The fact is that the (United States) participates in global markets for both crude and refined products, and there are any number of variables that impact supply and prices in those markets,” said Bill Holbrook, spokesman for the National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association.

The White House said it was against requiring U.S. oil products to stay at home.

“Forbidding exports of U.S. petroleum reduces the incentive for domestic suppliers to produce, and could potentially lead to higher prices if U.S. production or refining declined,” said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel.

If I were a independent trucker, I’d be a little pissed to find out that we’re exporting up to 9% of our diesel refining capacity, and then paying the Saudi’s or other nation to import twice that amount.

What’s the kicker in all of this?  20 years from now, during peak production from off shore drilling, we’d be producing 200,000 barrels of oil a day (according to the EIA – warning .pdf)  This would continue to be a fraction of the amount of oil products that we would export.  Compass sums it up nicely:

And how much of that new production would stay here domestically and actually go to lowering gas prices? Oil Companies may claim that they want to produce energy for America, but as last weeks profits numbers proved, they really only care about one thing. Their own bottom lines.

We need real solution to our energy crisis, not handouts to oil companies who will send our American oil overseas.

Img via John at wikipedia

From Submedia TV

Kyle at GreenwithaGun has an idea for a new currency tied to the carbon you emit.

From the article:

I have decided to create a new currency, the Carbon. You can spend it and earn it, but cannot exchange it between people, because it’s a transaction between you and the Earth. The symbol for the carbon currency is ¢. In earlier times, currencies were physical commodities, or their value was tied to them. For example, the British Pound was called a “pound” because it was set as equivalent to a pound of silver, and around an ounce of gold. This made it easy to know what you could get for a pound, and what it was really worth. So I have set ¢1.00 as worth 1.00kg of carbon dioxide equivalent in greenhouse terms. 1kg methane, for example is worth about ¢23, since it has a greater effect on the climate than does carbon dioxide

It sounds like an interesting idea. Obviously there isn’t real meat to it politically, but we can make the move informally. All change starts by people making change doesn’t it? Does anyone know McCain or Obama’s e-mail addresses?

Let me know what you think. Good idea or idea from a madman?

Image courtesy of True Health.org

Supporters of coal love to end their tired campaigns to secure its place as America’s future #1 source of energy by declaring “there’s hundreds of years” of reserves left. While the outlook may not be as dire as the one related to oil, it’s certainly nothing to bet on. According to Cleantechnica, new research out of CalTech suggests that world coal reserves are grossly overstated and could be substantially exhausted this century. From the article,

In the last 20 years, official coal reserves have fallen by 170 billion tons. To put this number in perspective, global coal consumption in 2007 was 6 billion tons. Reserves figures are dropping far more quickly than actual extraction. The European Commission’s Institute for Energy in 2000 estimated global supplies of coal to last 277 years. In 2007, that number was lowered to 155 years.

But don’t go thinking you can relax — according to The National Academy of Sciences Report on Coal from June 2007, those numbers are based upon “methods that have not been reviewed or revised since their inception in 1974, and much of the input data were compiled in the early 1970’s.” Shit. The article goes on to say that some countries such as Vietnam and China have not revised their figures for decades – even with the fact that billions of tons of coal have been removed since then. Not to mention the fact that a new coal plant goes up in China almost at a rate of one a week to serve demand in a growing industrialized economy.

All of this culminates in a new number — 2025 — as the date for peak coal. That’s quite a bit different from what lobbyists will have you believe. Not to mention that to get to most of it in the U.S., we’ll have to screw the Adirondacks in the process. No thank you. I think I’ll continue the push for this country to plug into something else.

via cleantechnica

We recently brought you a picture of the CO2 pollution put forth in America. Now we have a You Tube video that show that map, and many more, to display our country’s CO2 usage.

Video courtesy of The Daily Green.

Curious about how your part of the country looks in terms of carbon output circ 2002? A group of scientists recently completed a CO2 emissions inventory for that year of the United States plotted down to 100-square-kilometer chunks. From Wired,

“The work, known as The Vulcan Project, has already yielded a significant discovery: Previous CO2 estimates that used population as a proxy for emissions overestimated the Northeast’s greenhouse-gas generation, while underestimating the coal-heavy Southeast’s contribution.”

Pretty amazing — and it’s not too difficult to see where the major city centers are on this map. From Boston to NYC to Washington, D.C. CO2 emissions are particularly nasty — and as one would expect, so is the quality of the air. Makes you want to ride a bike to the center of the country just to take a deep breath.

via Wired