Perpetual Innovation

Category: Environmental Responsibility

  • Inside the war on coal

    Inside the war on coal:

    Wow, this is a very thoughtful and well presented article on Coal.

    The real demise of coal is too fold: raising costs of trying to make coal a little cleaner (less dirty); and the increase of cheaper alternatives.

    Number 1 in all of this is the dirty cheap costs of NatGas which is a by-product of much oil production. We in the US flair about half of the NatGas we produce because it gets in the way of the valuable oil production process.

    NatGas is soooo much cleaner to burn and produces only half the CO2 emissions.

    As people and communities realize the real costs of burning (dirty) coal, the political will to back coal simply because it is cheap is seriously waning. As the externality costs start to mount, people are less inclined to have the plants in their back yard.

    But, the Sierra club can not take that much of the credit. Basic economics is ruling. The EPA wants cleaner coal, which makes it more expansive at the same time that NatGas, wind and solar are all getting better and cheaper.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Green, But Mostly White: The Lack Of Diversity In Enviro Movement, 5 parts – JustMeans

    Green, But Mostly White: The Lack Of Diversity In The Environmental Movement, Part 1 of 5—Future 500 | Justmeans:

    There are 5 parts to this series. It’s talking about who is evolved int the Environmental movement, and why there isn’t more diversity. And why that is starting to change?

    This is a very interesting 5 part series by several authors.

    Part 1: http://www.justmeans.com/blogs/green-but-mostly-white-the-lack-of-diversity-in-the-environmental-movement-part-1 by Danna Pfahl

    Part 2: http://www.justmeans.com/blogs/green-but-mostly-white-the-lack-of-diversity-in-the-environmental-movement-part-2-of-5-future by Marvin Smith

    Part 3: http://www.justmeans.com/blogs/green-but-mostly-white-the-lack-of-diversity-in-the-environmental-movement-part-3-of-5 by Shilpi Chhatray

    Part 4: http://3blmedia.com/News/Green-Mostly-White-Lack-Diversity-Environmental-Movement-Part-4-5-Future-500 by Brandon Steele

    Part 5: http://www.justmeans.com/blogs/green-but-mostly-white-the-lack-of-diversity-in-the-environmental-movement-part-5-of-5-future by Nick Sorrentio

    The last one, by Sorrentio, talks about engaging businesses to help address environmental issues. SustainZine has long promoted serious action by business (and all organizations) in areas where the payback is obvious and near-term. Conservation, as in reducing energy, improved logistics (so less shipping), and telecommuting (so no travel) are all areas that have rapid payback to business and to the environment. So not only area companies making money in doing this, they are helping out the environment in doing this. Plus, it can become a perpetuity of savings, if properly monitored and maintained.

    This is something we call in the triple bottom-line business, a win-win-win… and a perpetuity of savings.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • China Pollution Is Blanketing America’s West Coast – Business Insider

    China Pollution Is Blanketing America’s West Coast – Business Insider:

    Oh boy.

    We export raw materials and coal to China so they can make finished goods and export them back to us in the West/USA. They don’t have the safety worries that we do… Some of the externalities affect only China, but many affect us all, especially those countries and environments closer to the mainland of China.

    “Cities like Los Angeles received at least an extra day of smog a year from nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide from China’s export-dependent factories, it said.

    “We’ve outsourced our manufacturing and much of our pollution, but some of it is blowing back across the Pacific to haunt us,” co-author Steve Davis, a scientist at University of California Irvine, said.”

    Yuk! 🙁

    A good economist would argue that  products (say coal, especially the really dirty, high sulfur stuff) that produce negative externalities should be assessed a tax that roughly matches the costs of the externality. Using this logic, we would tax coal (especially high sulfur coal) that goes to a developing country, and tax them even more if they intend to burn the coal without scrubbers and such. This might not stop them from burning coal, but it would make other options more attractive that are cleaner (less negative externalities).

    Unfortunately, China has a LOT of coal in the country. They now burn more than half the world’s coal each year, so they do have to import it as well.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • As BP oil spill trial resumes, lying accusations bubble up – CBS News

    As BP oil spill trial resumes, lying accusations bubble up – CBS News:

    Everyone remembers the  massive Gulf oil spill starting April 20, 2010 and 87 days of spillage.

    As we all watched the pictures from the surface oil slick and the underwater cameras at the well head, it was a tale of two oil spills.

    BP: trickle … => Media: deluge
    BP: gallons … => Media: barrels

    BP: creek  => river

    But the truth is, no one anywhere believed the BP numbers.

    They really had no recovery plan. As this article said, they only had a plan to create a plan, if and when they needed a plan.

    Disaster recovery plans for businesses have details that have been well thought through. One page for a wellhead breach under water is not exactly a detailed plan.

    The dispersant (Corexit) works at the surface with sunlight and such. However about 45% of the Corexit was used at the well head, resulting in oil that was stuck in limbo half way to the surface. At the surface it can be removed and/or treated.

    More importantly, apparently, for BP was that at the surface it can more accurately be MEASURED.

    The difference between the 4.2m Barrels by Justice department experts and the 2.45mb by BP is almost half. Of course the BP numbers wrong. Is it more than 4.2mb, probably. Less, probably not.

    Additionally, however, the $1,100 penalty max per barrel (~42 gal/brl) would be essentially 4 times that ($4,300/brl) if BP is found negligent.

    That’s the difference between $18B in fines and about $2.7B (BP’s low-ball estimates and the lower fine).

    There really is, however, lots of blame to go around. The regulatory agency that rubber-stamped everything oil and mining related has now be disbanded in disgrace. The “plans” were the same for all oil drillers. Everyone was doing the same types of drilling, although maybe not quite the lax monitoring/procedures.

    AND the government had a limit on the exposure for drillers in a very cozy relationship with the oil companies. It was a paltry amount… with the official rationale of promoting drilling (and oil independence). Of course, that limitation was immediately revoked.

    Can you imagine if BP were a smaller player that simply went bankrupt? The good thing about a BIG company with deep pockets (pun) is that you can make ’em pay, and then keep making them pay.

    In the end, the oil industry is a far safer place because of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

    Here are some lessons learned (and used).

    ‘via Blog 

  • Earth Day Number 3 (of 4): Energy Efficiency (EE)

    Number 3. Energy
    Efficiency    . The savings for energy efficiency at home (and at the
    office, church, etc) can easily be 20% to 35% with a fractional investment.
    Ring up the local power company to schedule an energy audit. With very
    inexpensive fixes like duct tape, caulk, programmable thermostats, and timers, the
    utility savings can easily be $30 to $100 per month. (Payback in a couple
    months.)

    ToDo    : Buy a couple Compact Florescent
    Light (CFLs) bulbs and start to use them in place of the most frequently used
    incandescent light bulbs. CFLs (and LEDs) cost more but they will save $30 to
    $40 in electricity over the life of the bulb. (Save 5-15% on utilities, payback
    2 to 8 months.) Oh, make sure to buy the special versions if the light is
    adjustable on a rheostat.
    ToDo: Get (and program) a programmable thermostat. Adjusting
    the thermostat 1 degree warmer (and 1 colder in winter) can result in about a
    10% savings. 
    It makes you wonder. If your power
    company suddenly charged you an extra $1,000 or $2,000 per year, you would
    break out the shotgun and go have a talk with them about it. Right? (Well,
    maybe not the shotgun, but …) 
    But
    virtually everyone everywhere can take $1,000 to $4,000 off of their annual
    bill, starting within one month. AND, that savings would be realized for years.
    Forever, really, if you continue to pay attention to the WATTS.
    And we
    are all not doing this…. Why?