Archive for June, 2009

PostHeaderIcon Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day

Grass Root Efforts: Promote Earth Day

What is Earth Day?

While you have probably heard the words “Earth Day”, did you know there are two observations of Earth Day? The United Nations celebrates on the equinox; hundreds of countries celebrate Earth Day annually on April 22nd. Both events were birthed in 1969, with grassroots efforts, a focus on environmental awareness, and celebration of Earth.

Events to Leading to Earth Day

Prior to 1970, conservatism was an idea held by a minority of people. The notion that natural resources would become devastated to the point of extinction did not enter our collective thought. Pollution, from our buildings, cars, and behavior, was a normal industry by-product. The idea of being the world’s steward was lumped in a mindset of ‘a hippie thing’ and not understood by mainstream America. Two previous events tilted our environmental awareness: a book and a picture.

In 1962, marine biologist Rachel Carson published Silent Spring. The book talked about the commonly used, toxic pesticides used in agriculture and daily life. The title referred to the consequences of the devastating pesticides: a world without birds. Surprisingly, Silent Spring became a hit. Americans cared, and they wanted the facts.

In 1968, the world saw the entire Earth for the first time. Apollo astronauts photographed the planet on their flight home from the moon. The Earth looked beautiful with its swirls of blues and whites. The photo provided a startling awareness: people saw Earth as vulnerable and needing human care.

Earth Day is Born

In 1969, John McConnell promoted Earth Day as a global celebration of Earth’s gifts. The equinox seemed fitting time, as it was the mid-point of spring and autumn across the hemispheres. A peace activist, McConnell first presented his Earth Day idea to an audience at the UNESCO Conference on the Environment. He wanted Earth Day to be a global holiday, where the world celebrates Earth’s wonders and gifts.

On March 21, 1970, cities across the globe celebrated Earth Day. McConnell created an Earth Day proclamation that called upon people to take action against crises of the world, such as famine, war, and poverty. The proclamation also stated that participants would celebrate an international Earth Day to create a single community and embrace Earth’s gifts. The proclamation was endorsed by well-known people and leaders around the world: astronaut Buzz Aldrin, anthropologist Margaret Mead, inventor-scientist Buckminister Fuller, Japanese environmental scientist, Y. Fukushima, American senators, U.N. President S.O. Adebo, and UN Secretary-General Thant.

In April of 1970, the world celebrated another Earth Day event. The April 22nd event also began as a way to spread awareness of environmental issues. American Senator and conservationist, Gaylord Nelson, had actively toured the U.S. in the mid 1960’s with an environmental awareness agenda. Wanting the U.S. government to take an active role in environmental concerns, Nelson presented the idea for a national conservationist tour to President Kennedy, who supported the idea. While President Kennedy’s tour did not turn environmental issues into mainstream conversations, it was a beginning in changing America’s role in environmental issues. Nelson was inspired by college campuses’ widespread Vietnam protests, or teach-ins. He thought a nationwide conservationist teach-in would get more Americans involved in environmental issues.

Nelson presented his Earth Day idea to other government officials and news organizations. He promoted Earth Day to senators, governors, mayors, and college campuses’ newspaper editors. In November 1969, he formally announced a nationwide, environmental teach-in, called Earth Day, would be held in the spring of 1970. As the event became headline news, the public reacted enthusiastically. Nelson first handled Earth Day public relations from his senate office, but with the public’s overwhelming interest, the office moved into its own organization. Founder of Common Cause John Gardner helped with a temporary office, and college students helped field the office. Nelson appointed Dennis Hayes as coordinator of activities.

Approximately 20 million people celebrated the first Earth Day. In America, participation was high in schools, which ten thousand grade schools and high schools, two thousand colleges participating. Amazing numbers, considering the event started as a grassroots movement.

Government Actions

The strength of the Earth Day movement was clear to legislatures. Following Earth Day’s success, the U.S. government passed laws that targeted cleaner living. In 1970, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was established. The Clean Air Act followed with a focus on reducing air pollution, with the Clean Water Act doing likewise for water clean-up in 1972. The U.S. also passed the Endangered Species Act to protect animals from extinction.

Mainstream Americans talked about recycling and conservation. In the 1980’s, many people recycled within their neighborhood recycling programs. People’s awareness of their ecological responsibility became part of their lives and actions. Children learned the importance of taking care of their environment; they were taught to care for the earth and its animals. The iconic Smokey Bear (originated in the mid 1940’s) featured poster slogans, like “If not you, who?” and “Only you can prevent forest fires. We can’t.” Americans seemed to step-up to their roles as Earth trustees.

In the 1990’s, recycling programs reduced overall waste by twenty percent. With people and government taking responsibility, companies followed suit. Manufacturers looked at ways to reduce toxic by-products and appear environmentally responsible to their customers. Their marketing campaigns highlighted eco-friendly actions, like reducing environmental waste.


Even with progressive responsibility, people did not celebrate Earth Day as they had in the beginning year. Celebrations were still held, but they weren’t as widely attended or announced. In 1990, the original Earth Day coordinator, Dennis Hayes, organized a worldwide Earth Day. For the thirtieth anniversary of Earth Day, Hayes planned for a global celebration, with participation from countries around the world. The event was observed by 200,000 people across the globe. The movement continued with recognition that environmental issues impacted the world and spurred the international community to work as a unit and combat its shared problems. In 1992, leaders at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recognized their joint responsibility and planned for future projects on sustainable living.

Earth Day Birthday

In 2009, visionary Simon Ford led a grassroots effort on the internet. This global community focused on a renewed urgency about environmental issues. Their first major campaign focused on worldwide environmental crises, the responsibility of mankind to solve them, and a project to unite participants across the world. The event, Earth Day Birthday, formed, as a global event to celebrate Mother Nature’s gifts.

Successful Earth Day events in the past came from grassroots efforts in spreading environmental awareness. Earth Day Birthday joins online social networks with real world actions. Earth Day event organizers and participants find each other on the web. Supporters are spreading the word on environmental issues and taking action in their own communities. Earth Day Birthday provides the 20th century, grassroots effort in reaching eco-friendly people and making an impact on the planet.

For more information about Earth Day Birthday, this site provides Earth Day Birthday campaign details:

Jennifer Akers is a freelance writer, book reviewer, and editor. She writes about family, education, business, and social marketing. Her eco-friendly passions started with an interest in making a difference in the planet and joining Earth day Birthday. To find out more about her freelance writing life, please visit:

Detroit Auto Show, WTOL News

PostHeaderIcon Water Efficiency The Resource Matrix Part 2 of 4

Water Efficiency The Resource Matrix Part 2 of 4

Last week, we introduced you to the Resource Matrix, which is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

We showed you how economics leads to people maximizing their benefits in “win-lose” propositions: you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom. And how we’ve been hypnotized in believing what they want is also what we want.

But the scales have been falling from our eyes, we’re beginning to see the truth, and the power has been shifting away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd:

  • Do-gooders have increased our awareness and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win”
  • There is no “free lunch:” finite energy resources will run out; actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible; and that the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth

We now realize we’re all in this together: we have greater awareness of our actions and the desire to change, and have ways to change.

Hallelujah and Praise the Collective!

Today, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.

None of this is to dismiss or diminish the contribution of fossil fuels in global warming. Hey, just like the Special Olympics, if you participate, you get a medal. We just think that gold-medal winner Fossil Fuels has stolen the spotlight, letting silver-medalist Water Use keep us hypnotized in believing that water is a free lunch, and that nature will clear up polluted waters while getting away with breaking the rules.

Water, water, everywhere,
not a drop to drink.

According to our friends at How Stuff Works, who I wrote about sarcastically for their oxymoronic clean coal article in discussing how true public relations stuff really works, gives us this data:

  • 98% of the planet’s water is in the oceans. It’s salt water – we can’t drink it or irrigate our crops with it.
  • 2% is usable. Of that 2%:
    • 80% is locked up in polar ice caps and glaciers
    • 18% is underground in aquifers and wells
    • 1.8% is in lakes and rivers
    • 0.2% is elsewhere: either floating in the air as clouds and water vapor, locked up in plants and animals (and your body), and in foods and beverages.

Okay, so 20% of the usable water (only 0.4% of all water on Earth) is accessible, right?

Well . . . no. Many of the aquifers, wells, lakes, and rivers have been sucked dry like a once-juicy fly carcass in a spider’s web. (The 18% and 1.8% you see above is like the money in the Social Security Fund: there actually is nothing there.)

And many of those water sources that do still have a drop to drink are worse than the ocean’s salt water. Drink salt water and you’ll need to yawn into a bucket. Drink this water and you’ll kick the bucket.

And I know you aren’t asking this burning question:

“So . . . global warming to release fresh water from ice caps and glaciers is a good thing, no?”

Percentage this, percentage that.
Talk my language, will you?

I know I’m pulling the disgusting old government trick: drowning you in an ocean of water statistics.

So let’s make it plain and simple:

You bring in $10,000 a month. You’re also living high on the hog and doing your personal best to outshine every bling-bling Hip Hopster Musical Artist in materially conspicuous consumption:

  • $9800 goes to the McMansion mortgage and gold-plated Rolls Royce lease
  • $160.00 goes to investments in clothing and accessories
  • $0.40 has been lost in the sofa cushions
  • $39.60 a month is for everything else: food, phone and electric bills, income taxes, and all the other non-essentials: Don’t spend it all in one place!

Aquifers and wells and lakes and rivers:
Dry or polluted, oh my!

Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it:

We can all save water in the home. But as laudable as it is to take a shower rather than a bath and turn off the faucet while brushing our teeth, we shouldn’t get hold of the idea that regular domestic water use is what is really emptying the world’s rivers. Manufacturing goods … consumes a certain amount, but that’s not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar. (emphasis mine.) (Fred Pearce, When the Rivers Run Dry, Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. p 3)

Here are a few numbers he gives:

  • to grow a pound of rice: 250 to 650 gallons of water
  • to grow a pound of wheat: 130 gallons
  • to produce a quart of milk: 500 to 1000 gallons
  • to produce a pound of cheese: 650 gallons
  • to produce a 1/4 pound of burger: 3000 gallons

He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms:

  • 1 ton (265 gallons) for drinking
  • 50 to 100 tons (13,250 to 26,500 gallons) around the house
  • 1500 to 2000 tons (397,500 to 530,000 gallons) for food and clothing


How Many Gallons to Produce One Pound of Beef?
Lies, damned lies, and statistics

US Beef industry’s Cattlemen’s Association: 441 gallons
Fred Pearce: 12,000 gallons
Water Footprint Network: 1854 gallons (calculations: 15500 litres of water per kg; 4079 gallons per kg; 1854 gallons per pound)

In an industrial beef production system, it takes an average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef.

The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing.

This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing).

Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water on average.


Where does all that water come from?
From virtually everywhere

If it comes from imported goods (Thai rice or Egyptian cotton), the water comes from those countries.

When the water is collected from rivers or pumped from underground, as it is in much of the world, it’s:

  • increasingly expensive
  • increasingly likely to deprive someone of water (nothing to drink)
  • increasingly likely to empty rivers and underground water reserves

And when the rivers are running low, as they are more frequently, there is less water to grow anything at all.

The water used in growing and producing goods around the world is known as “virtual water” and the trade of these goods is known as “virtual water transfers.”

And who’s the biggest water exporting Mouseketeer of them all? The United States.

When you drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of the region, virtually taking a share of the Costa Rican rains. The same is true within a national and regional boundaries. The Colorado River is drained so Californians can eat their Big Macs and have friends over for a Sunday afternoon barbecue.

In the same way that your use of fossil fuel is measured as a “carbon footprint,” your water use, actual and through virtual water transfer, is measured as a “water footprint.”

How big is my water footprint?
I’ll show you mine if you show me yours

Arjen Y. Hoekstra, professor at the University of Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the water-footprint concept in 2002. It “shows water use related to consumption within a nation, while the traditional indicator shows water use in relation to production within a nation.” (Hoekstra and Chapagain, Globalization of Water, Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008, p. 3)

With Hoekstra and Chapagain’s water footprint calculator (, you select your country, input food, domestic water use, and industrial goods consumption, press a button, and you get your:

  • total water footprint for the year
  • bar charts for the three components
  • bar charts for individual food categories

For example, you’re in the US, eat only 1 pound of cereal a week (.4545 kg) and have a low-fat, low-sugar diet, use a low-flow showerhead, use a no-flush eco-toilet, and never run the tap while brushing your teeth. Two extremes:

  • You’re the hippiest of the hip: making $10,000 a year: Your water footprint: 245 cubic meters (65,170 gallons)
  • You’re the hippiest of the Yuppies: making $120,000: Your water footprint: 2979 cubic meters (792,414 gallons). Difference due to your income’s effect on industrial production.

Three notes on the calculations, because Professor Hoekstra is European and lives in the social welfare country that started birthing hippies in Amsterdam decades before they showed up in the US at Woodstock:

  1. You input kilograms for food:
    • 1 kilogram = 2.2 pounds = 35.2 ounces
    • 1 ounce = 0.028 kilograms. 1 pound = 0.454545 kilograms
  2. Your water footprint is in cubic meters per year:
    • 1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet = 266 gallons
  3. The higher your income, the greater your water footprint, even if you don’t personally consume anything: you’re a capitalist pig supporting the Establishment Regime, I guess

So how is Cinnamon’s capitalist water footprint? Answer: 650 cubic meters (172,900 gallons)

I showed you mine. Now you show me yours:

Get the naked truth: Calculate your waterfootprint now:

Water’s running out:
I get the fossil fuel analogy so far.
And what about climate change?

We return to Fred Pearce’s book to find an example, of which he has oceans:

China’s Yellow River: The fifth longest in the world, it begins high in the mountains of eastern Tibet and journeys more than 3000 miles. Almost half a billion people depend on it for drinking and crop irrigation, and it’s made China the world’s largest wheat producer and second largest corn producer. Yet more than half of the lakes it feeds have disappeared over the last 20 years, and a third of pastures have turned to desert. This desertification generates huge dust storms that choke lungs in Beijing, close schools in Koreas, dust cars in Japan, and rain dust on mountains across the Pacific and Western Canada.

State irrigation projects along the Yellow River soak up the majority of its water – the total official allocations are greater than the actual flow.

The resulting drought could be an early warning sign of global warming.

Much of the declines in moisture reaching rivers is in line with prediction of climate researchers. So how does this global warming happen?

Higher air temperatures from desertification increase evaporation from oceans and intensify the water cycle. This increases atmospheric water vapor – 8 to 10% more than today. This increases global rainfall, but the rain is being redistributed: middle latitudes (read: the US) are becoming drier. Higher temperatures increase evaporation on land, meaning soil dries out faster, meaning less rainfall is reaching rivers.

The higher temperatures melt glaciers and snowpacks. At first, this leads to unpredecented floods. After the glaciers disappear, meltwaters that feed rivers disappear. The combined decreasing rainfall and increasing evaporation will lower moisture by 40% in the southern and western states.

The Sierra Nevada snowpack could diminish by 70 to 80 percent over the next 50 years. And some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions could dry up.

Global climate is becoming more extreme: the dry areas become drier, and the wet areas become wetter. And more areas are becoming dry deserts. Loss of habitat and agricultural lands. It’s a vicious cycle.

So what can you do?
Navigating through the Resource Matrix

As Fred Pearce points out, your drinking and bathing account for 0.05% of your total water consumption. Your food and clothing weigh in at 95.00%, although I find his 12,000 gallons needed to produce a pound of burger rather wild.

As Professor Arjen Y. Joekstra shows with his Water Footprint Calculator, your consumption of meats accounts for a lot, as does your guilt by association of being in an industrialized country.

The obvious solution: eat fewer e-coli burgers from your neighborhood Salt and Fat Slop Bucket restaurant.

The wiser solution: like your choices in energy use, become more aware of the resources needed to produce anything and the consequences. Such as luxurious cotton grown in the Egyptian desert.

Next article in the water efficiency series:
How an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed
peasant on some other side of the globe affects you

We continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.

And all of this is for one purpose:

To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.

Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .

To your green, brighter future,

Cinnamon Alvarez,

And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.

You can access it now by going to:

From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures

Kelley Blue Book Interviews Todd Suckow

PostHeaderIcon Benefits For Municipal Waste Management with Plasma Gasification

Benefits For Municipal Waste Management with Plasma Gasification

Plasma Gasification Plant (PGP) projects are being developed by at least five gas plasma technology companies, and there are real benefits to be obtained from this technology for the destruction of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).

There is some debate still whether the process has been demonstrated to be a vaible technology which can be reliably operated by our waste management companies at reasonable cost and in compliance with all emissions regulations. However, the consensus seems to be largely in acceptance now that the technology is largely proven and inherently cleaner than incineration.

Although, gasification is used as a power generating technology, and gas plasma plants do provide a power feed-in to the local power grid, it should be realised by all that the purpose of selecting plasma gasification is currently that of achieving maximum waste mass destruction. The intent of the PGP is primarily to provide an efficent and clean method of dispoing of large quantities of residual MSW. Plasma gasification, although it does produce energy from waste is not primarliy an Energy from Waste (EfW) or Waste to Energy technology. There are other better proven, more efficient, and potentially always also cheaper ways to produce Energy from Waste, such as incineration.

PGPs suffer a high sacrificial load from the use of power at the electrodes to generate the plasma, and energy is also expended before the MSW reaches the plasma zone in the gasifier in chopping up and ensuring that the particle size of the waste is quite small. For this reason they do expend a large proportion of the power generated just in maintaining their own internal power demand.

However, as a waste destruction method producing an inert residue without creating at the same time high levels of toxic gaseous emissions the gas plasma process excels according to reports made to date. It has every reason to be cleaner as well because the reactions which take place in the plasma state take place so quickly and completely that the toxic organic chemicals produced in other combustion processes simply don’t get a change to be produced.

For a waste management process PGP therefore holds a very good prospect of adoption, as it is a process which is very efficient at diverting waste away from landfill, and thus scores highly among local authority waste disposal engineers who are constantly seeking to comply with regulations to reduce the amount of organic waste sent to landfill.

The PGP process however, also holds another merit and that is that it is being viewed more favourably by the public than incineration, and one main reason for that would be its clean emissions record when compared with incinerators historically.

Throughout Europe the requirement for BMW to be reduced by ever larger percentages necessitates the use of new technology to achieve this high rate of waste diversion, even after high recycling has also been achieved.

Look out for a plasma gasification plant appearing in a district near you soon, and look favourably upon it!

Steve has built a great web site where there are a lot more facts about gasification. This is a hot subject indeed for this technology which has become an essential read for all those who appreciate renewable energy issues and are interested in taking action to reduce the impact of climate change.Article Source:


ARRLWeb: ARRL NEWS: The K7RA Solar Update

Two new sunspots appeared last week, numbered 1022 and 1023, and both were Solar Cycle 24 spots, with 1022 lasting through June 23 and 1023 until June 24. On June 24, geomagnetic indices were unsettled. Sunspot numbers for June 18-24 …

CAD CAM News: Dassault Systèmes part of the Solar Impulse project

PA) today announced, it was proud to be a part of the Solar Impulse project. For the past few years, Solar Impulse SA has been using Dassault Systèmes software solutions to create an airplane that makes this dream a reality. …

Greentech Media: Solar, Smart Grid Advocates: Thanks for Passing …

The House passed the legislation that contains provisions that could spur growth in solar and smart grid deployment. But homebuilders and some environmental groups aren’t pleased. The controversial bill faces a tough fight in the Senate …

bookofjoe: Solar Powered LED Hat

Solar Powered LED Hat. Wear it during the day, push the button and you’ve got two strong LEDs when darkness falls. Up to 5 hours of full power operation from a fully charged cap â?? even longer in “Dim” or “Flashing” modes. …

What Does Big Solar Want? What Doesn't It Want? | Marc Gunther on …

Rarely does an industry come to Washington and hold a press conference to talk about why it wants to be given a leg up over the competition. But that’s what the solar power industry did this week.



Can Paper Bags Substitute Plastic Bags?

Bags hold an important place in our lives. They are sometimes referred to as the best personal carriers. They are made of various stuffs like cotton, synthetic, leather and so. But when it comes to general usage like for shopping, the names of two types of bags viz. plastic made and paper made bags come to our intellect. Both are fine, but the question is, which one is the best suited to our requirements. Lets discuss the peculiarities related with the two.

You might be thinking that paper bags are not as durable as those made of plastic. Also, we see that the latter are more commonly used than the former one. But, do you know plastic is a stuff which is really hazardous to the environment. It takes thousands of year to decompose. If burnt, it emits poisonous gases which again pollutes the environment. If buried in the ground, it makes the soil infertile. If thrown in the sea, it pollutes the sea water and proves to be a threat for the life of the sea creatures. One can imagine, how hazardous is plastic to our planet.

This perilous nature of plastic had forced the governments of many cities of the world to put a ban on the use of poly-bags, which are a major source of plastic pollution. Few cities of the world in which these polythene carriers are either completely or partially banned include San Francisco, New York, Texas, Germany, Dhaka, China, Kenya and Ireland to name a few. Even the government of Delhi had issued guidelines against the use of polythene. However, later on the government changed its decision to completely ban the polythene, due to some reasons. Government suggested the manufacturers to set up the recycling units on the basis of “polluter pays principles”. But the government has not completely given up the plan to ban these polythene carriers, it is in the pipeline.

In this context, paper bags are the best option. No doubt, they are unconventional, but they are eco-friendly and easy to recycle. Nowadays, there are various types of paper made bags available in the market. They are not only good looking, but also have ample of space to carry goods and are quite durable. The handmade paper bags available nowadays are designed to suit specific requirements which include carrying gifts, carrying wine, shopping etc. There is a separate bag to serve each purpose. Although, multipurpose bags are also made from paper. They are proving to be the best substitute for plastic or polythene carriers in the modern context.

Now, as we have told you every significant fact related to plastic and paper bags, It’s upon you which one to choose. The hazardous and non-disposable polythene, or the environment friendly and elegant paper bags.

For more information on paper bags, paper baskets, miscellaneous paper products and other handicraft items, you may visit the following sites:

PostHeaderIcon A Carbon Footprint is Impacted by Fugitive Refrigerant Gas Emissions

A Carbon Footprint is Impacted by Fugitive Refrigerant Gas Emissions

The United States and a host of other foreign countries are focusing on fugitive emission tracking for certain industries. The goal is to identify the amount of substances that are emitted into the atmosphere when a refrigerant gas leak occurs. This will give government officials at the EPA a better understanding of the amount of greenhouse gases harming the environment each year and contributing to global warming due to the ineffective management of refrigerant gases.

Fugitive emission takes place when an unexpected leak of a hazardous substance occurs in a system and the discharge is not contained in a vent, stack, or duct. This may be caused by a component failure, poor servicing, or a breakdown in some industrial process. When a system containing refrigerant leaks, these high global warming potential substances cause damage to the atmosphere. Certain refrigerant gases are not broken down in the atmosphere and end up entering the stratosphere and destroying the protective ozone layer over time.

Across the U.S. economy, refrigerant gases or fugitive emissions equal over 300K tons of carbon dioxide each year. Other countries have similar or worse outputs. Many environmental regulations, such as The Montreal and Kyoto Protocols, exist to reduce the escape of harmful substances, like refrigerants, into the atmosphere over time. There are additional goals to reduce the potential for global warming in the near future and to improve air quality in the long term by reducing the emissions refrigerant gases.

A select few refrigerant gases have multiple detrimental effects on the environment. Not only are they ozone depleting substances but they are also chemicals with a high global warming potential (GWP) which places them into the category of greenhouse gases which lead to global climate change. For many reasons, it is important to effectively monitor, track, and report refrigerant gas usage.

The EPA has finalized its rules pertaining to any fugitive emission occurrence, whether through evaporation or a leak. The regulations apply to several industries, including existing and newly constructed facilities with systems using refrigerant gas in their workplace heating and cooling systems. Other industries are industrial chemical manufacturing, electric services, pulp and paper mills, and petroleum refinancing.

Tracking fugitive refrigerant gases is required by facilities owning or operating HVAC-R systems or by manufacturers who produce them. The EPA has identified a number of dangerous compounds, among them chloroflurocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, methyl bromide, halons, methyl chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride.

A particular concern for fugitive emission problems is with refrigerant gas, because it contains chloroflurocarbons and hydrofluorocarbons, two primary contributors to the weakening of the ozone layer and the increase in greenhouse gas volumes. Furthermore, refrigerant gas is used across many industries in refrigeration and cooling units, ventilation and air conditioning systems, and fire protection systems.

When a fugitive emission occurs, businesses are required to track the refrigerant leak rates and report annul refrigerant usage it to the EPA. One of the primary emissions scopes, fugitive refrigerant gas emissions are an integral part of an organizations carbon management requirements. Of the utmost importance is the determination of the HVAC-R system that is leaking and the capturing of the service event detail related to fixing the leak. Systems containing refrigerant gases must be inspected by EPA certified technicians and all service events must be logged when refrigerants are handled.

The new fugitive emission regulations provide a more standardized approach to thresholds identified by the U.S. Clean Air Act at the direction of the EPA. These include continuous monitoring, tracking of leaks, and reporting of leak repair, and containment.

Web applications and specialized tools can increase an organization’s efficiencies related to HVAC-R system maintenance, improve accuracy of refrigerant inventories thus saving money, and turn manual processes into a centralized, automated work flow. Development firms who specialize in the area. They ensure compliance and reduce the likelihood of substantial fines.

Daniel Stouffer, Product Manager at Verisae, has more information about fugitive emissions management. Refrigerant Tracker makes it easy to monitor, manage, and report refrigerant gas usage across multiple locations. Learn more at:

Solar Manufacturing Ships High Temperature Sintering Furnace …

Solar Manufacturing announced it has completed the shipment of a high temperature sintering vacuum furnace in the design, development and production of spec.

Transparent Electronics: A Solar Energy Breakthrough

Not even in our wildest dreams have we anticipated that while are simply looking out the window enjoying outside view windows can simultaneously produce energy.

Paleo-Future – Paleo-Future Blog – Chrysler VP Predicts Solar …

Mr. Zeder predicted that in the years ahead solar-powered cars would be feasible and that the expanding knowledge of nuclear and solar energy would bring more abundant power to people everywhere. The full text of the strip appears below … | USAF opposes Nevada solar project

On a vacant piece of land near Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, the promise of solar energy has collided into the demands of military training. And a solar project that would have featured a vast field of mirrors, a molten-salt storage …

Oakland North » Rockridge Residents Contemplate Going Solar

After two short power point presentations, Eric Nyman of Berkeley-based Sun Light and Power and Evan Raymond of Renewable Artistry (both of whom install photovoltaic solar energy panels on roofs as well as solar thermal equipment) …