Walgreens: Leading In Corporate LEED Establishments

You see the term "LEED Certified" thrown around a lot. More times than not, you will see this term describing a new office building being constructed out of cleaner materials and utilizing more efficient means of energy consumption.

This is great and I hope the practice only continues to grow, but when it comes down to it, it goes unnoticed. For the most part, the only people noticing these LEED certified changes are the people working within the office building, and even then they don't really see the results until they look at their energy bill.

The transparency of these changes is a mixed blessing:

• It is good because people have this idea that more efficiency means sacrificing aesthetic value and functionality, so when they don't notice a difference between LEED certified and traditional buildings it proves that there are no sacrifices being mad.

• It is bad because when people don't notice the changes taking place, it makes it more difficult to transfer these clean practices to people's homes.

This is where Walgreens is doing such a nice job "educating" the general public. Walgreens has been rolling out LEED certified stores in Illinois and is planning to expand their sustainable fleet to other states in the near future. Here is what their store in Chicago has to offer:

The Logan Square Walgreens, nestled in an urban area right off the Kennedy Expressway, features a “green roof” with plants growing on it. The roof also has a white coating to help reduce heating and cooling costs. The store will save nearly 34,000 gallons of water a year with efficient water fixtures. During construction, 85 percent of waste was diverted from landfills. The site was a brownfield which was cleaned up and redeveloped for this project. Coolers, freezers and exterior signs all use LED lights, reducing energy use by 50 percent over fluorescent lighting. The store will save enough electricity to power more than five homes a year. In addition, there is special parking for hybrid vehicles, bike racks and nearby public transportation.

This is great for many environmental reasons, and I don't think I have to hold your hand and explain exactly what those are. What truly is great about this is that hundreds of people walk through this Walgreens every day, and each one is getting a hands on experience of what efficiency can look like.

The store also showcases many different informational signs telling the shoppers about all the different aspects of this green store. This is definitely something that a LEED certified business park can't offer to the general public.

Finally, this just makes good business sense. The most glaring benefits are the water and electricity savings that the store is enjoying:

• 34,000 gallons of water saved.
• Cutting enough electricity from their bill to power more than 5 homes a year.

These are real savings that Walgreens can take to the bank.

Also, did you catch the part about the LED lighting?

          You think that their informational signs will praise their lighting?

                    Want to bet that Walgreens will start selling more LED bulbs this year?

I hope more companies follow Walgreens lead and start pursuing these sustainable business practices more aggressively.

Energy Efficiency In The Big Apple

Since the beginning of this blog’s run, I have talked a lot about alternative energy and all the promising things it has to offer. It is an area that is constantly seeing new growth, and I hope to work within one day (hire me).

However, many of the big changes in alternative energy are still off in the distance meaning that in order to make an impact on energy consumption and carbon emissions people will have to attack on different avenues.

One of these avenues is energy efficiency.

By creating more efficient energy consuming products and implementing more efficient means of using these products, energy consumption can be greatly reduced without actually have to sacrifice functionality.

A very large-scale example of efficiency can be seen with the renovations being planned for the Empire State Building in New York City:

The New York Times gushes:

Owners of the New York City landmark announced on Monday that they will be beginning a renovation this summer expected to reduce the skyscraper’s energy use by 38 percent a year by 2013, at an annual savings of $4.4 million. The retrofit project will add $20 million to the $500 million building makeover already under way that aims to attract larger corporate occupants at higher rents.

The main areas of focus for these renovations will be the lighting, heating, and water systems that haven’t really changed since the buildings original construction in 1931.

A Google Image Search revealed that there were large gorillas climbing the ESB in the old days... different times.

The NY Times makes an interesting statement saying that “While the energy-saving improvements will be substantial, no one visiting the building is very likely to notice them — most involve slight changes or will be hidden in the building’s innards.”

This is wonderful because many people believe that these projects sacrifice aesthetic value. This simply is not that case, and hopefully other cities will see the Empire State Building’s example and decide to make the investment to save millions of dollars on energy bills annually.

Energy Prices Predicted To Remain Relatively Stable

I'd like to wrap the week of with an article The New York Times published about the Department of Energy's new report on the future of energy prices up until 2035:

The information released on Thursday was based on what the government calls a reference case, or estimate; its report in March will also include a low case and a high case. Among the major changes from last year, it projected that the price of a kilowatt-hour of electricity in 2035 will be 9.2 cents; last year it estimated that would be 10.3 cents. The price in 2009 was 9.8 cents.

Lower electricity prices are important because as they decline, the economic argument for building nuclear reactors, wind machines or solar cells gets weaker, as does the economic argument for more energy-efficient appliances.

I do suggest that you go over an read the entire article, because there is a lot of good information outside of this small section I stole.  While my first reaction to this article was to throw up on my keyboard, there are a lot of things that this article does not address.

Though the NY Times is not-so-subtly hinting that alternative energy companies are screwed, this simply is not the case.  While future prices of energy don't look that threatening, this doesn't mean that there won't be a market for alternative energy and energy efficiency.

Many other countries outside of the United States (yes, the US is still in fact part of the rest of world) are still pursuing alternative energy at an aggressive rate.  China is a great example of this as they have become the #1 target for alternative energy investment.  Call me crazy, but I believe America would do well to try and compete within the international marketplace.

Also, lets face it, these predictions don't mean crap.  Yes they are formulated by highly educated people who would probably beat me at Scrabble, but that doesn't mean that they have a crystal ball that they can see the future in.

Mustaches! I see mustaches in my crystal ball!

Here is are two facts that are undeniable:

1. Natural resources such as oil, coal, and natural gas are finite
2. Even in more efficient manners, burning these resources produce large amounts of carbon emissions

I know that economic forces pretty much dictate anything and everything that occurs, but it does seem relatively backwards that we are still investing as much money and time into these industries that are clearly going to fail at some point.  Yes, it is near impossible to estimate the exact amount of these resources left, but this should scare the shit out of investors, not place them at ease.

Ultimately, I hope that America still provides friendly economic policies for these emerging alternative energy and energy efficiency companies, because in the long run they will be what keeps the US competitive in the world marketplace.

Solar In Northern States Will Make Sense...Someday

Clearly I am on a solar kick, probably because it is just so damn sexy.

That and I recently talked some friends' ears off about the power grid and why we need more efficient means of distribution for alternative energy to work, so I'm just going to save that discussion (rant) for another day.

Today I was sitting around noticing how miserably cold it is outside and how happy I am that my radiant heaters are now fixed so they don't sound like espresso machines anymore.  Then a really broken line of thought broke out of my head:

Cold made me think of radiant heat
  Radiant heat made me think of microwaves;
    Microwaves made me think of food;
      Food made me think of a sandwich;
        Eating a sandwich made me sleepy;
          Being sleepy made me angry at the microwave for making me hungry;
            Thinking of the microwave somehow made me think of solar power.

Weird? Yes... But here we are.

At first I thought how it is too bad, by living in Chicago, solar power wouldn't make too much sense due to the lower levels of sun exposure during the fall and winter months.

However, after thinking more about it, solar would make a ton of sense for Chicago during the summer.  The single biggest line item on most people's electric bill is their air conditioner running during the brutally hot Chicago summer months.

It would be wonderful if solar got cheap enough where you could have a small panel to provide the electricity for an air conditioner without the traditional fear of a huge electric bill at the end of the month.

We aren't there yet, but peaking around the corner*, I do believe it is realistic that within the next 5 to 10 years solar power will have a low enough price tag that it could actually make sense to have some panels that you are really only using for a few months out of the year.



*..."peaking around the corner" made me think of this owl.

How Cities Should Be Designed: Argonne National Laboratory

Before I start, I would first like to apologize for the lack of posts over the past few days.  I realize that about 100 people visit this blog on a daily basis, which is way more than I would have thought a blog of mine would get, so I should have probably tried harder to keep the posts coming.

On the other hand, I want to finish strong in school and my final papers seemed like a better use of my time, so a thousand apologies for not taking the time out of my schedule to write overly-sarcastic material and posting comics on Sunday - deal with it.

In any event, I came across this article posted about Argonne National Laboratory winning a federal award for energy savings a few days ago and I am just now going to get around to it:

Instead of bringing in outside consultants, Argonne reduced costs by using its own team of engineers and maintenance mechanics to identify projects to save energy. When the projects save money, Argonne reinvests those funds in additional projects. In 2009, Argonne ran 14 in-house projects that together saved nine megawatt-hours of power—enough to power 6,000 households.

Whoa whoa whoa. Wait a minute. You are telling me that people are saving money and THEN reinvesting the savings to pursue further savings and increased revenues? Get out of here.

The lab also installed outdoor light poles powered by small wind turbines and solar panels; the lights run entirely off the grid, and their battery packs can store enough energy to power the light for three days without sun or wind.

This is the really awesome part of what Argonne has done, and I hope to see more of this in the future in cities and towns.  Every day we drive, walk, and bike past hundreds of street lights which are all extracting energy from the power grid, but we never think twice about the money that this costs the taxpayer.

Imagine if Chicago replaced their street lighting with wind powered lighting systems.  The long-term savings would be huge; there are just no two ways about it.

Obviously there would be an upfront cost to installing these new systems, but you can say that about any new project geared towards infrastructure.  If we let initial investment costs deter us from pursuing new projects, there would never be any progress.

And for those that are really upset about not having a Sunday Comic, here is an awesome picture of two veterinarians dressed in panda costumes so that they can care for a baby panda:

It's Always Solar In Philadelphia

I wrote this article a few days ago, but I refused to post it until after the Bears played the Eagles because I didn't want to jinx Chicago.  As it would turn out, the Bears didn't need my help and made Michael Vick look stupid all Sunday:

Go Bears!

Even though the Eagles couldn't figure out how to stay ahead of the Bears in Sunday's game, Philadelphia has found a way to jump way ahead of the rest of the NFL (as well as many other institutions) by investing heavily in alternative energy:

The Eagles have contracted with Orlando FL-based SolarBlue, a renewable energy and energy conservation company, to install approximately 80 20-foot spiral-shaped wind turbines on the top rim of the stadium, affix 2,500 solar panels on the stadium’s façade, build a 7.6 megawatt onsite dual-fuel cogeneration plant and implement sophisticated monitoring and switching technology to operate the system.

This is an amazing idea for stadiums, and I will not be surprised if we see many other franchises adopting these energy platforms at their own stadiums.

7.6 MW is more than enough to power the entire stadium allowing the Eagles to be free from playing hefty energy costs down the line.  Also, there will be an excess of energy left over that the stadium won't be able to use allowing Philadelphia to sell this energy back into the grid and actually make a profit (they are estimating ~4 MW).

The idea of selling excess energy back into the grid is nothing new.  The reason that Philadelphia's situation is so unique is that during the offseason the Philadelphia Eagles will be using barely any of this energy.  This will allow them to sell almost all of the 7.6 MW back into the grid enabling them to make money all year round off their stadium.

With all the wind that shoots around Soldier Field in Chicago, this seems like an obvious investment that will happen sooner than later.





Go Bears!

The "Energy Internet": The Next Big Boom

Underlying all my ranting about alternative energy and energy efficiency is the 'Smart Grid.'

Luckily, this was Dayaway Career's Energy IQ term for today, which saves me the trouble of writing up my own definition and instead just stealing theirs!

Smart Grid - is a form of electricity network utilizing digital technology. A smart grid delivers electricity from suppliers to consumers using two-way digital communications to control appliances at consumers' homes; this saves energy, reduces costs and increases reliability and transparency. It overlays the ordinary electrical grid with an information and net metering system, that includes smart meters.

I would feel bad for blatantly taking their material, but they got their definition from Wikipedia.  For all we know the Wikipedia definition was written by a 5 year old, and my moral compass tells me that stealing from children is permissible.

Social ambiguities aside, the development of a national smart grid is not only necessary, it is just a matter of time.  In order for any of the other developments in the sustainable marketplace to really make an impact, they are going to have to work together:

• Electric cars communicating with wind turbine's to determine when it is cheapest to charge their batteries
• Excess energy produced from a home's solar panels being sold back into the energy market
• Appliances turning on and off in accordance to aggregated energy usage
• Avoiding and preventing power outages that cause million's of dollars being lost

These are just a few examples of how a smart grid will benefit America (emphasis on the few).  Make no mistake, a national smart grid will cost a mind-numbingly huge number.  However, if America is going to even think about staying competitive with other countries (all of which are also pursuing the digital smart grid), then we will need to invest.

Like other huge infrastructure projects, such as the internet or the highway system before it, a smart grid will definitely offset the initial cost of development with untold benefits down the road.  This is why you are seeing around $350 billion spent on these projects annually.

So 5 years from now when you are charging your electric car, managing your appliances from some website, and making money from your solar panels, remember that Colin Brownell guy wasn't just making things up back in 2010.

Climate Change Is Real, Dummy

This is the only time I am going to write an article on this because I personally find the topic of climate change to be a no-brainer and it has honestly been boring to talk about since 2007.

But apparently this new wave of politicians are attempting to make the topic of climate change sexy and trying to bring it back.  (YEP!)

Shhhhhh... Be quiet, climate change.  The politicians are talking.

Like I mentioned in a previous post, there is a good chunk of politicians that don't believe in the science of climate change and now are trying to challenge everything that apparently 97% of the scientific community accept as fact (holy fuck, that is greater percentage than most dentists agree on what type of toothbrush you should use).

Do these politicians believe that there is no scientific proof of climate change? Probably not, but they do recognize that by challenging these findings, they are stalling the government backing of many green energy and sustainable projects - many of which they believe are wastes of money...(Editors Note: WHAT?!)

The reason that it will hold up many of these projects is that the constituents that these politicians represent believe that many of these projects were necessary solely because of the threat of climate change, and by smearing the science of these findings, the constituents will no longer be as enthusiastic about investing into new technologies and energy sources.

American voters need to recognize the potential that these new technologies and sources have in terms of generating money and the potential costs of continuing down the path that we have been on.

By focusing on money, I'm not saying that climate change is no longer an important driving issue behind these sustainable practices...because it definitely is.  However, if politicians are going to attack climate change, then voters need to recognize that politicians are also attacking potential job markets as well as setting up the nation for higher energy costs down the road.

Reader Email: High-Speed Rail v. Road Maintenance

This blog has only been live since October 23, but within that time, I have gotten more comments and site-traffic than I ever thought I would in a short two week period (yes, 15 comments isn't earth-shattering, but it is still great to know people are interested).

Building upon this trend of community participation, I got an email last night from some a reader going by the name of Jon with a pointed question about the true benefits of high-speed rail systems:

Jon writes:

In your weekly review, you talk about these high-speed rail systems damaging the growth of our nation's infrastructure.  I know that in Wisconsin they are talking about taking the money and diverting it to improving the roads instead.  Don't you think that in a world where most people own a car, money would be better suited to be [spent]* on the roads that these car owners are using?

This is a great point which I am sure that many people do think about when they hear about the $800+ that is planned to be spent on these rail systems.  In the short-term, it is mind-numbing to think that this money is going to be focused on one particular project.  However, I believe that in the long-run the state of Wisconsin (along with any other state that implemented these rail-systems) will actually make and save money from high-speed rail.

They will make money because Wisconsin is a beautiful state with many scenic areas to visit (if you haven't been to Northern Wisconsin, you are missing out) and you also have a sports rivalry between Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Illinois.  By having highly efficient rail systems leading into Wisconsin, you could then make the prospect of heading to Wisconsin for the weekend even more appealing to tourists and sports fans which would end up pumping even more money into the state.

Who doesn't want to see this guy?

Wisconsin would also save money because they wouldn't have to spend so much money constantly maintaining their roadways.  Traffic from tourism takes a large toll on roadways which places a large demand on maintaining the roads.  By having a rail-system in place, you would reduce the need for people to drive their cars on the roads which in turn lowers the demand to constantly be resurfacing your roadways.

Finally, I know most people have a hard time caring about it because right now there is no real cost to it, but by reducing the level of cars on the roads you are reducing the level of pollution being emitted by traffic.  To put it in perspective, Wisconsin is such a beautiful state when it comes to trees, wildlife, and waterways - all of this is damaged by an increased level of traffic-pollutants.  This is just another thing that high-speed rail would help mitigate.

These are the most prominent reasons for why I think that spending money on high-speed rail is a smarter investment than continually dumping money into the financial-vampire that is road maintenance.

Thanks for writing in, it definitely took me by surprise and I really do appreciate the level of interest that has been show in this blog.  I encourage others to feel free to write me an email if they ever have any comments - and if you don't feel like doing that, then go ahead and just write something in the 'Comments' section below each post.

Also, don't forget to follow Sustainabili-City's Twitter and if you have an account with Google (who doesn't?) then go ahead and click the 'Followers' section on the right-side of this page!


*Corrected a spelling error.

Weekly Review - November 5, 2010

Every Friday I take a break from covering individual topics and instead highlight the most notable stories from the previous week in an attempt to give you some talking points for the weekend.

Tesla & Panasonic

• The What
• Tesla, the cutting-edge electric car manufacturer, has partnered with Panasonic to pursue more energy-efficient and powerful batteries for their cars.

• Why You Care
• Panasonic has already been working with Toyota on the Prius to make their fleet of hybrids as efficient as possible, and Toyota has already been working with Tesla to advance the industry – so it only makes sense that Tesla and Panasonic begin to work together.

• Batteries have always been one of the biggest points that has held back electric car development due to range anxiety. Even though many (all) of my readers can’t exactly afford the Tesla Roadster, it is encouraging to see such prominent companies attempting to tackle these issues because it will ultimately benefit the entire industry.

Proposition 23 Defeated

• The What
• Prop. 23 was a proposal to suspend the important Global Warming law established in California that essentially demands a higher level of air pollution control.

• Why You Care
• This is an important victory because Prop. 23 was heavily funded by many out of state heavy-hitters (mainly oil-companies). By defeating such a heavily funded campaign by the oil industry, this is setting an example that others states can adopt more stringent air quality standards leading to the establishment of more efficient energy sources and practices.

Election Stuff

• The What
• There was an election this week? First I have heard about it.

• Why You Care
• People have a tendency to overreact to election results, no matter what they are. I talked earlier this week about how people need to not live and die on these results because I do believe that it is a healthier to believe that the last two years were worthless and the next two are hopeless...with that said, it is disappointing to hear about so many plans to unravel the positive environmental actions that have been in the works, such as high-speed rail systems.

High-speed Rail Under Attack

• The What
• High-speed rail is one of the more promising energy-efficient and environmentally friendly forms of public transportation that has been proposed in America in a long time. Up until now, there have been great strides towards making this a reality.

• Why You Care
• Europe has been enjoying these systems for a long time now, and it is about time that America started to catch up. However, almost immediately after the elections took place this past Wednesday, there is talk in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Florida about halting the development of these systems.  This is an incredibly shortsighted attempt by politicians to flex their political muscles and will do nothing but stunt America’s growth. Here are just a few things that will suffer:

• Infrastructure
• Energy Security
• Environmental Health
• Job Creation
• Tourism
• Innovation

Sustainabili-City Posts

Finally, here are the posts that you might have missed from the past week:

• Sustainable Products Require Certain Adjustments
• Range Anxiety Presents Opportunities - Not Limitations
• Don't Live Or Die On Election Results
• Disney Setting A Good Example With Energy Efficiency

Thanks to those that have been commenting! Have a good weekend!

Disney Setting A Good Example With Energy Efficiency

CP, an incredibly good-looking* reader, sent in a message the other day highlighting Disney’s effort to make their theme parks more energy efficient and sustainable environments. These suggestions range from making sure that the lights are turned off when you are leaving the room to keeping the thermostat at a reasonable level.

Found on the inside door of hotel suites.

These are all just simple energy saving tips that anyone can do. What is so important about Disney posting these signs in every room is that it is instilling these sustainable habits into children at a young age...and apparently 20-somethings. If there is one thing that Disney is good at, it is trying to plant (sometimes creepy) messages and lessons into people’s minds.

Another important factor with these messages is that being more energy efficient just makes good business sense. To put it into perspective, if college dorms in University of North Carolina can save more than $950,000 on their energy bill, then expand that idea on a scale as large as Disney World’s campus.

I’m not a mathematician (as many of you will painfully become aware of as you continue to read this blog), but it doesn’t take a genius to see the millions of dollars Disney can save if these energy saving tactics are followed.

With all that saved money, you can just imagine the possibilities for Disney:

• Invest in solar panels to further reduce their energy footprint.
• Invest in smart grid technologies to more accurately monitor their energy distribution.
• Make the ‘Small World’ ride even more obnoxious!
• Two Words: Aussie Disney (you heard it hear first)

The point of all this is that Disney is setting a wonderful example for other businesses across America as well as the rest of the world. By saving money on your energy consumption, you can direct that money elsewhere to improve your business model and enjoy a fatter bottom-line.

All of this stuff has a pesky side-effect of being beneficial to the environment as well, but you would have to be a hippie to care about that kind of thing…right?

*Editors Note: Levels of hotness may be exaggerated** in order to protect feelings.








**Seriously though. Smoking hot.

"Range Anxiety" Presents Opportunities - Not Limitations

This past Friday during Sustainabili-City's Weekly Review, I briefly talked about range anxiety and how it can adversely affect sales of electric cars.

For those that don’t know what range anxiety is, a brief explanation is that electric cars have approximately a 40-50 mile driving range before the car needs to be charged again. This has been striking fear at the heart of potential electric car consumers, and on the surface it is understandable.

Is the Tesla expensive? Yes.
Awesome? Definitely.
Worth it? Maybe not (yet).

The numbers vary depending on the source, but the average American drives between 30 and 40 miles per day. This means that at the initial level of technology these cars are being released at, the battery capacity is just bordering on the limit of a day of driving (not true for the Nissan Leaf which boasts 100 miles of battery capacity).

However, I believe that as you begin to dig deeper into the issues, range anxiety becomes less of an issue for the following reasons:

• I would argue that range limitations present at the release of these electric cars will actually lead to more innovation. These innovations will range from ‘charging stations’ that mimic gas stations to the newer concept of charging your car as you drive in special lanes which is being demonstrated by HaloIPT.

• The fuel cell industry is one of the most dynamic technology industries today, and as electric cars are introduced into the marketplace, competition to develop a more efficient and longer lasting battery cell will grow and the electric car’s driving range will benefit.

• Many of these electric vehicles that are going to be released contain a small gas engine in the event that you do run through all of their battery’s capacity, which would either enable you to make it home (or an ‘electric station’) where you can then recharge your vehicle.

• At running the risk of repeating what I said yesterday, sometimes sustainable products require us to change our consumption behavior.  If the biggest problem with electric cars is that people need to be more responsible when planning their driving routes to the grocery store or work, then I say that is a small price to pay when trying to reduce our country's dependency on oil.

It is easy to just hear the term ‘range anxiety’ and decide that you aren’t going to make the transition to a (cleaner, smarter, cooler) electric car.  However, I believe after taking the bullet points above into consideration these concerns of ‘range anxiety’ are mitigated and consumers shouldn’t let these things deter from making the transition.

Also, aside from the obvious clean benefits of driving an electric car, other clean industries will benefit from the release of electric cars:

• Solar
• Wind
• Fuel Cell
• Smart Grid

                              ...but more on that later.

Sustainable Products Require Certain Adjustments

The original title of this post was 'Sustainable Products Require Certain Sacrifices,' but I decided to change 'Sacrifices' to 'Adjustments' because people generally hate the concept of sacrificing comfort. I also changed the title because what I am going to be talking about in this article should never be viewed as an earth-shattering sacrifice.

Recently, SunChips decided to discontinue their compostable bag in the United States due to "consumer pressure."  By consumer pressure, of course I mean a facebook page - what else could I mean?  In a world where a movie about a website is being considered for an Academy Award, I wouldn't expect anything less from web-based petition movements that are most likely started by some stoned-coed.

At least Canada still seems to be sane by releasing a public service announcement talking about why the bags may be noisier than their petroleum-based counterparts.

I like to believe that market-based forces are the best solution for many of our environmental problems, but this is a fantastic example of how the market can be resoundingly backwards.  I have a hard time believing that SunChips was spiraling into the red because their bags were noisy - the more likely reason is that SunChips (PepsiCo.) was just worried about negative press.

They should have realized by now that America has a relatively short attention span when it comes to these types of stories and they should have stuck it out in the pursuit of doing the right thing while also setting an example for other companies.

As our population continues to grow so will our levels of consumption - which ultimately increases our amount of waste.  It is unlikely that we are going to reduce our intake over night, so the more logical move is to move to more sustainable products that have a minimal impact on the environment - such as these chip bags.

Yes, there will be tradeoffs and adjustments when using these products, but if noise level is our biggest concern when using these products then people need to just deal with it.

Sunday Comics

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal
(http://www.smbc-comics.com/)

At one point while living in my first apartment in Chicago, I actually thought about doing this.  Then I realized I had no idea where to begin and ordered a pizza.

Copy and Paste

Not often will I blatantly quote the New York Times, but it is Thursday and I have turned almost all of my attention towards my costume for Halloween this weekend - so...

Plagiarism on!

Updating and expanding the electrical grid to accommodate new sources of energy will be the biggest challenge, and will require partnerships among states, federal authorities, the utilities and private investors. The Google project could be crucial to delivering wind power to Eastern cities, but major investments will also be needed in the West and Southwest. President Obama recently declared that no industry has greater potential to create jobs than clean energy. He is right. But it is never going to happen unless the administration and Congress do a lot more to push it ahead.

The entire article can be found here at the NY Times' website, but essentially it talks about how America needs to pick it up when it comes to alternative energy programs.

I will hammer this point forever.  You don't have to be a hippie or some idealist to see the benefits in alternative energy and energy efficiency along with other sustainable movements.

These things create jobs.
                 Jobs create money.
                            Money buys things.
                                    Things being bought sustain other jobs...and so it goes.

I can go on a huge rant about national security and environmental benefits that stem from these things, but I'll save that for another day.

Try to tell me that pursuing these technologies and practices are not the rational next move.

D.I.Y.D: Using Outlet Timers To Shut Down Power Vampires

Most of the time you are going to find me talking about developments that will eventually impact your lives. Despite the (hopefully) exciting nature of these developments, the vast majority of readers won’t experience the full benefits for some time.

That is where these D.I.Y.D (Do It Yourself, Damnit) posts come into play. I will regularly post things you can do in your daily lives that will save you money and help you lead a more sustainable lifestyle.

One of the most common suggestions made when talking about methods to reduce your energy consumption around the house is to connect your energy hungry appliances (televisions, entertainment systems, etc) to a surge protector and turn the protector off when you are not using the appliances.

While this is a great suggestion and does provide a noticeable level of relief on your electric bill, it can become somewhat of a hassle. This is especially noticeable when you have a large entertainment system or computer system that is constantly draining power, but to unplug it when you aren’t using it means you would have to move a large desk (or in some college student’s cases, an elaborate systems of milk crates).

To help make it easier to stick to this plan, go out and buy an outlet timer and plug your surge protector into it. These allow you to set certain times during the week where the timer will switch off the surge protector for you.

An example of this would be that you have your outlet timer switch everything off during the hours you are at work and at night while you sleep. Timers are relatively cheap and eliminate the ‘I can’t believe I forgot to switch off my entertainment system…again’ moments.

You may ask, “But dude, what if I am playing Halo: Reach on Xbox at 3 AM and the timer shuts off my system. Won’t that lose all my progress?”

To this concern I respond, “Well, person who still says ‘dude,’ I would be more concerned about playing video games at 3 AM, go to bed.”

Yes, it is convenient to have your entertainment system supplied with power all the time because you can turn it on at will, but these are also some of the largest unnecessary drains on power found in households.

By introducing a little discipline to your life, an outlet timer becomes a small and effective step towards making your home more energy efficient, and will make the wait for new energy technologies to become available less strenuous (while also developing some good habits along the way).

Green ($) Technology

There is a great article over at Grist talking about the progress that has been taking place in America at the state level regarding alternative energy and efficiency initiatives.

I encourage everyone to read the entire article here, but the main point of the article is that despite all the positive movement, the clean-energy sector is at risk of being crippled by certain politicians running for governor of their respective states.

I know, I'm shocked as well.

My favorite excerpt is:

"Of the 37 Republicans running for governor this fall, 22 reject the science of climate change..."

I'm going to go ahead and ignore the part of my brain that is screaming at people ignoring simple scientific trends and current events and instead present another argument:  Alternative Energy presents an opportunity to make and save (a lot of) money.

Are you kidding me?!?!?!!

Money is good.  This is something that most people can agree upon no matter what their political views are.  So, even if you don't believe that the climate is going to shift due to our continually increasing carbon emissions (duh*), it would be politically irresponsible to ignore the opportunity to create jobs and make money off of these technologies.

Job creation is one of the biggest issues today and alternative energy has the potential to help mitigate this issue.  To simply dismiss these technologies due to political reasons is short-sighted and backwards.

There are countless examples of alternative energy and sustainable living programs popping up all over the country (many of which I am listing on Sustainabili-city's Twitter page), politicians just need to wake up and realize the money making potential of these programs.

Oh yeah, and while the money is being made and saved, there is a side-effect of making the world a cleaner place...if living in a clean environment is your sort of thing.



*I rarely say 'duh,' which should give you an indicator of how I feel about climate change.