Archive for the ‘Green Products’ Category

Detroit Area Coca-Cola Trucks To Be Hybrid Electric

Monday, October 20th, 2008

 

WXYZ news announced this morning that Detroit area Coca Cola trucks would soon be running on hybrid electric motors. The trucks were purchased earlier this year from Eaton Corp.

 

Eaton is an impressive corporation as far as transportation and the environment. There website states: “We create innovations in hybrid power and low emission vehicles as a leading provider of diesel-electric hybrid power systems for truck and bus applications on three continents. Eaton is also developing hydraulic hybrid power systems technologies for use in refuse trucks, delivery vehicles, buses and other applications. Eaton has a hybrid truck drivetrain center outside of Kalamazoo and is a Cleveland-based Corp.

http://www.eaton.com/EatonCom/Markets/Truck/index.htm.

 

Coca-Cola ordered 120 of the hybrid trucks, the largest North American commercial order from Eaton’s hybrid systems according to WWJ. Coke previewed these trucks when they purchased 20 of them last year. They evidently liked their performance.

The article below said that Coca-Cola did extensive tests and found that “Eaton’s hybrid-electric drivetrain equipped trucks decreased emissions by 32 percent and fuel consumption by up to 37 percent.” This kind of fuel savings could start a trend.

 

http://www.wwj.com/Coke-to-Buy-Hybrid-Delivery-Trucks-From-

Eaton/1729913

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carbonless Electricity from a Hydrogen Fueled Engine

Monday, September 22nd, 2008

 

Startech is an award winning environmental energy company that has devised an engine fueled by hydrogen that produces “green” electricity, meaning it leaves no carbon footprint. The electricity is meant for stationary facilities not cars, at least not currently.

 

Startech has a line of patented products like, “Startech Hydrogen, derived by [their] StarCell™ system from processing a wide variety of wastes in [their] Startech Plasma Converter.”

 

Get a load of this system!!!

 

The Plasma Converter System safely and economically destroys wastes, no matter how hazardous or lethal, and turns most into useful and valuable products. In doing so, the System protects the environment and helps to improve the Public Health and Safety. The System achieves closed-loop elemental recycling to safely and irreversibly destroy Municipal Solid Waste, organics and inorganics, solids, liquids and gases, hazardous and non-hazardous waste, industrial by-products and also items such as ‘e-waste,’ medical waste, chemical industry waste and other specialty wastes, while converting many of them into useful commodity products that can include metals and a synthesis-gas called Plasma Converted Gas (PCG).

 

I know a little about PEM’s, Polymer Electrolyte Membranes, that separate hydrogen from bio-fuels because I’m working on a product for patent, but Startech has one heck of a converter here that looks like it can transform just about anything prior to processing through the Star Cell for hydrogen extraction. 

 

This is the type of exciting new technology waiting to be unleashed that will not only bolster our energy supply but create jobs. This one converter will trigger all types of spin offs, and as more and more alternative sources for energy become available, prices will drop. That is if we ever get away from the stranglehold of fossil fuels.

 

Successes like Startech can and will create a whole new and dynamic industry, an industry that has not yet been monopolized. It’s a green industry that offers promise for a truly free market system at least among alternative energy sources, and a great way to dig ourselves out of the outrageous debt we’re about to face.

 

If ever we needed a brand new “Green Industrial Revolution” that offers many opportunities and that will boost the economy in a whole new way, it’s now and quickly. Think of new stocks available in brand new companies offering great promise for the future that we could all get behind.  I don’t know about anyone else but it’s time for new wealth for a new generation of pioneering Americans and a cleaner, brighter future for our world and everything in it.

http://world-wire.com/news/0809220001.html

 

Read Reviews Before Buying Hyped Up Fireplace Heaters

Monday, August 25th, 2008

 

 

In yesterday’s Free Press was a giant one-page ad about the Heat Surge Fireless Flame unit. It supposedly looks like a real fireplace that gives off instant heat with no chimney, no vents, no wood, and no smoke and runs on pennies of electricity no more than a coffee maker. The ad was a call for the public to call within 48 and qualify for a home heating bill relief instant rebate.

 

It looks like the heaters cost $250.00, but add the Amish mantle and it’s $500.00. The rebate kicks the price back down to $250.00. I wondered if they work. My 48 hours is running out. I’ve already got my methods for cheap winter heating bills, but if I can do more I will. This looked like the perfect way to get away from expensive gas bills in the winter for pennies of electricity. And I would like what looks like a small fireplace in my living room, or roll it into the bedroom, or whatever room. I felt like the pledge to go electric might not be that far off with inventions like this, until I read a review on MacCompanion. It was pretty comprehensive and disheartening.

 

Not worth the money. Read the review for yourself: http://www.maccompanion.com/macc/archives/February2008/Greenware/Roll.htm.

 

There is another electric heater, the Eden Pure, that’s touted to be like warm sunlight. Non-drying like furnace heat, the radiant heat from an Eden Pure warms the air without removing a lot of moisture. Baloney. It’s a heater too. It got an exceptionally bad review and ended up at the bottom of the list out of 20 heaters. http://www.wcpo.com/content/news/localshows/dontwasteyourmoney/story.aspx?content_id=7527da3d-ad3f-423a-933a-e5dcde00b12f. Shoot, I was enticed by the ads for this too.

 

It looks like there is no new miracle for home heating yet. Thank goodness for reviews and the Internet because the hype on some of this stuff can be costly to consumers.

Iran, Brazil, China, and Israel Lead the Charge for Alternatives to Gasoline

Thursday, July 31st, 2008

 

Unbelievable isn’t it? The Washington Post ran the article about Iran’s mandate to its “domestic automakers to make ‘dual-fuel’ cars that can run on both gasoline and natural gas, a crash program to convert used vehicles to run on natural gas, and a program to convert Iranian gas stations to serve both kinds of fuel. According to the International Association of Natural Gas Vehicles, more than 100 conversion centers have been built throughout the country: Iranians can drive in with their gasoline-only cars, pay a subsidized fee equivalent to $50 and collect their newly dual-fuelled cars several hours later.”

 

What a novel idea to switch the cars over AND create the filling stations, AND conversion centers at the SAME TIME.

 

Then there is Brazil who was no better off than we are now, importing 80 percent of its oil supply in the 70’s. Since then, Brazil has switched to its own oil, which is used to “insulate” the country’s economy from the pain of spiking oil prices. Even so, this year more sugar-based ethanol will be sold in the country than gasoline, which is the goal, to get off of gasoline altogether.

Meanwhile, China is moving toward methanol, which is made from wood grain alcohol. There are many methanol plants currently under construction. And China is set to produce flex fuel cars for that methanol. The nice thing about methanol as the article stated is that: “it can be made from natural gas, coal, industrial garbage and even recycled carbon dioxide captured from power stations’ smokestacks — an elegant way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

It looks like China whose smoggy environment is a source of concern for the Olympics has got plans to use up all that filth and fuel their cars with it. That’s really one up on us, and pretty much everyone else.

Finally, Israel is going to electric cars with “hundreds of thousands of recharging points planned to be erected throughout the country. Israeli motorists, the government hopes, will be able to swap their batteries in a matter of minutes at dedicated stations or recharge them at home or at work.” Hmm, stop at a station and swap out a battery—never thought of that.

The Washington Post went on to say that: “Policies such as ‘drill more’ and ‘drive smaller cars’ all keep us running on petroleum. At best, they buy us a few more years of complacency, while ensuring a much worse dependence down the road when America’s conventional oil reserves are even more depleted — whether or not we drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.”

Looks like Al Gore’s challenge to change within a decade isn’t ridiculous. We’ve just been fed another fat lie by political forces working with the oil industry about what we can and cannot do, and we fell for it again. We need a big dose of street smarts in this country, or a kick in the pants.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/03/AR2008070303250.html


 

 

 

 

  

Hybrid and Solar Power Boats

Monday, July 7th, 2008

 

There were a lot of small boaters out there this weekend. A small boat or pontoon is much more economical these days. There were more aluminum and pontoon boats than usual.  But regardless of high gas prices, the boats came and went. And my neighbor still got a lot of “look sees” from potential buyers interested in his small boat and large pontoon that are for sale.  I started to wonder if someone had invented a boat covered with photovoltaic cells yet and decided to look it up. Sure enough the Dutch have a speedboat like that called the Czeers MK-1. It even sounds fast. http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1693/

 

A solar panel is also used on the Whitley 2800 30 ft. luxury cruiser, but only to power all the high tech galley appliances, flat screen tv, and audio on board. The cruiser itself is not solar powered but uses twin diesel engines. The company is working on an all solar powered boat.

 

I want to know if used cooking oil can be used in a marine diesel engine? If not, why not if a diesel auto engine runs on the stuff?

 

Besides solar power for boats, which seems the most logical energy source to use, there is also a model that plugs in. A small, hybrid, fiberglass boat that can be recharged is available. Three hours of charge gets eight hours of battery time on its 20 hp engine by Yamaha. The boat also runs on gas, just in case I assume. I don’t know how much of a power draw the three hour charge is either.  

 

Lastly, a DIY solar powered pontoon boat (not a small one) was featured on Treehugger. It runs totally on solar panels or batteries, no gas, no emissions, and no noise.  Although I do like the sound of a fast boat, at least when I’m on it.  http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/12/the_loon_solar-.php

 

The Green Gold Rush is On

Thursday, July 3rd, 2008

The news suggested yesterday that skyrocketing gas prices may not be a bad thing. I’ve always believed higher pump prices could be the proverbial kick in the shorts for people to pay attention to what’s going on. It’s working. Demands for greater gas mileage and energy saving alternatives has been just the catalyst needed for a whole barage of ideas to burst forth to a tune of $448 billion dollars so far this year, DOUBLE that of last year already.

Venture capitalists are having a field day. There are even some pension plans racing to invest in a green market.  Some of the inventions are remarkable. There are already plastic bottles created from corn by-products so they are totally biodegradeable. And every thing and any thing is being sought after to accomplish either energy production or energy storage, right down to bacteria.

So it is true, out of something bad can come something very good.  

Solar Panels For Every Home

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008

 

I was watching Planet Green about solar energy, specifically residential solar panels, and found out answers to a lot of questions. An average 2000 sq. ft. home would need to use 24–3 X 5 ft. solar panels to supply 90 to 95 percent of all electricity to the home. The panels sit on a rail and install within hours. The current produced from the solar panels goes to an inverter box hooked to the home’s main electrical box. The inverter converts the direct current into the U.S. alternating current and that’s about it.

 

Now for the cost. Depending on the size of the house it would cost 15 to 25 thousand dollars for the solar panels. With federal rebates the cost is lowered to 12 to 20 thousand dollars. This is very affordable for many people, and for those that can’t afford to eat, let alone put panels on their roof, I don’t see why the U.S. doesn’t just supply the darn things.

 

I figure if there are 300 million people in the U.S., then there are more than likely 100 million homes. The average cost of 12 to 20 thousand dollars for solar panels is 16 thousand dollars. If the government can get trillions in debt over a made up war, and keep pork barrel spending in the millions, not to mention earmarks on bills that amount to millions, then why doesn’t Uncle Sam just bite the bullet and supply 100 million homes with solar panels? The total cost would be 1.6 billion dollars but over a 4 year time period, it would come to a paltry 400 million per year.

 

I say paltry because of all the stupid waste I’ve read about. If you read, you know. It’s as if there are two alternate worlds. One world is where our officials come from regarding the environment, which is totally disconnected from anything I’m watching on Planet Green lately. I’ve actually written to the offices of senators, the governor, and reps asking whether they have someone on the payroll to just watch all the latest innovations that are available because our leaders seem completely out of touch, and keep trying to feed us a bunch of bunk that we must drill for more gas, drill for more oil, fossil fuel, fossil fuel, fossil fuel. They’ve had their blinders on so long they fail to realize it’s the 21st century, and we’re able to watch and see for ourselves that there are an awful lot of alternatives out there besides the same ole, same ole. I think it’s criminal the way we are blatantly lied to.

 

Just yesterday I watched as Gerald Brown, Great Britain’s new prime minister, and President Bush agreed that 1000 new nuclear plants will be built world wide in order to meet energy demands. This is the big alternative we’re being fed now. But why? Furnishing homes with solar panels is so much cheaper, and immediate. There is no 5 years of building a nuke plant, with the end result being no reduction in energy costs at all. Instead of paying big oil, we pay the nuclear industry, and still end up with radioactive waste that doesn’t dissipate for 1000 years.

 

Evidently helping consumers deal with global warming is one thing. Helping consumers deal realistically with global warming once and for all by getting homes off the grid will never happen because big utilities won’t be able to get a piece of the action. Heaven forbid we affect the monopolies of America in such a way they would no longer be viable, and therefore unable to gouge us at every turn. We should be feeling more and more like pawns everyday. 

Watch Planet Green

Saturday, June 14th, 2008

Watch Planet Green on the Discovery Home Channel. There are a lot of myth busters on the show. You know myths that solar power is not a viable source of energy  in cloudy areas. Wellllll, in cloudy, rainy Seattle a couple just built a home using solar collector tubes to heat their water. It’s so simple an idea you wanna smack yourself in the forehead like a V8 commercial.

The tubes are made of glass that contain parallel rows of smaller glass tubes along which are metal fins. There is no air inside so that the fins do not corrode easily and the tubes last a long time. The fins heat up and in this case in Seattle on a rainy/cloudy day of less than 60 degrees, the heat inside the tube almost doubles to 113 degrees in minutes. The water flowing through these pipes is indeed hot!

The other night there was featured a 7,000 sq. ft. home in a colder state like S. Dakota, Montana, etc. The homeowner used solar panels that cost him $34,000, but provided 90% of the energy to his home even in the winter. The trick is to incline the panels enough so that the snow slides off, the same principle as a roof. In this case a foot of snow slid off the panels in short time after the sun came up.  

The price  of solar panels is not all that staggering, and what a return on investment, as well as a tax write-off. I rounded the $34,000 up to $35,000 and divided by the 7,000 sq. ft. equals $5.00 per sq. ft.

That’s pretty good if a person has a large, large gas/electric bill every month. I do not. So the $7500 investment won’t pay for itself as far as utility savings for me for a long time, but as a resale feature, and with the tax write-off, I might be able to recoup all of that investment at once. There are a lot of different angles to look at. Of course the conservation and environmental issues are always important. To be free of the grid is a very good thing.

This is a very cool channel to watch where we can actually see the opposite of what we thought was the truth. There are all sorts of solutions out there that aren’t that expensive like soft beautiful carpeting made of recycled plastic bottles, that does not stain, and is cheaper. Once you’re done with it, it gets recycled again. I wonder if it would deter fleas too?

Soon to come on this channel, Leonardo DiCaprio will host a series, which will detail the making of a model green community called “Greensburg” I believe. There are, however, community models for solar power somewhere near Southern California that are not only off the grid, but generate excess solar power.

What I can’t figure out is if there are communities baked by the sun that can generate a massive amount of excess power, why can’t we just realign our power source centers in these areas to supply enough power everywhere? Because it seems that of the homes and/or communities I read about as solar powered experiments there is always have an excess of power.  Islands habitats share both an abundance of sun and wind. Islands should be looking to immediately get off the grid via solar and wind power. I know Hawaii has passed legislation requiring all new homes have solar powered water heating systems, and they’ve had wind fields for quite a long time.

Check out the Discovery Home/Plant Green Channel. If you don’t get that subscription channel then goto: http://planetgreen.discovery.com/.

Plastics, Birth Defects, Baldness…

Sunday, May 18th, 2008

 

I read an article “More Problems With Plastics” in U.S. News and World Report, May 19, 2008, by Adam Voiland that will be very disturbing to males. It’s about chemicals called phthalates found in plastics. I’ve already reported and insinuated that we’re slowly poisoning ourselves with gender bending bisphenol A (BPA), another additive in plastics. Phthalates are endocrine disruptors, (interferes with hormones) like BPA, whose results are already seen in fish with both male and female reproductive organs, no organs, or a variety of mutations in between. BPA could soon affect birds and mammals, if it hasn’t already done so. Who knows? We’re lied to so much with scientific jargon relating to parts per million, trillion, and so goes the story of phthalates.

 

It takes me a long time to research scientific reports about industrial toxins because I have to look up every other word and then find out what the baseline is. Then I have to look at the industry that produces it and figure out how they are lying about it. It’s like every time I hear that water and air are so much cleaner than 30 years ago.  I want to scream. Thirty some years ago we were so awfully polluted, and I was here to see it, when beaches were closed not sporadically but regularly. Out of this pollution came the Clean Air and Water Acts where we began to clean up. So of course we’re cleaner than at our all time highest pollution levels. But how much cleaner? If we mean 2 parts per trillion less of any of a myriad of toxins in our air and water than in 1970, we can honestly make that claim, but it’s hardly ideal or healthy now is it?

 

So here we have an article that talks about birth defects from phthalates especially in male babies. One out of 300 baby boys, (scary numbers here) don’t have a urethra that emerges out of the tip of their penis. It ends up somewhere else underneath, midway down the shaft, or barely out of the scrotum. It’s called hypospadias and studies show that phthalates reproduce it in rodents. The article says, “Phthalates are used widely as softening agents in certain plastics,” PVC mostly, but also pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and all types of products. 

 

The article states that in 2005 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that “most Americans have traces of hormone-disrupting chemicals in their body.” Another advocacy group found “84 percent of American have at least six different phthalates in their urine.”  Scientists have been studying 3 of the most prevalent hormone disruptors that are also linked to “testicular cancer, reduced sperm quality, diminished penis size, and undescended testicles.” Told you it was a male nightmare.

 

Of course, and here is the lie, not everyone thinks the effects seen in animals justifies concern. Again, the excuse is that the doses the animals are given are higher than anything in humans. Risk to humans is minimal. Lives are weighed by parts per million/trillion. Nice, real nice. One in 300 babies has hypospadias, but nah, no big risk. That’s why many European countries have banned phthalates in certain toys. America is still in the consideration stage at this point; even though some companies stepped up to the plate and phthalate free products are showing up in stores. Now you know what that means.

 

I have to take the time here to point out one of my biggest complaints also. What’s the sense of experimenting on animals if someone ultimately uses the same tired excuse that it’s not the same for humans? It is why I am and have been adamantly against animal experimentation for a long time. It is an absolute myth that it is necessary. Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, NEAVS, and many professionals have been testifying about it for years. We’re in the 21st century now. There are superior methods. But research animals are a big racket and cheap. Don’t ever lose your cat or dog.

 

If you’re male and already in your 20’s or 30’s breathing a sigh of relief, think again. Or rather look to your hairline. As a licensed cosmetologist that had my own shop for almost 8 years, I paid close attention to the most successful products for baldness. Baldness is relative to some of the many hormones our body produces. An overabundance of a certain type chokes out the hair follicles. My husband’s father and grandfather on his mother’s side were bald, as were all of his uncles on both sides of the family. My husband is 55 with a full head of hair. Hmmm. Eating freshly cooked meals every night, not drinking tap water for almost 30 years, imbibing minimal pop or junk food, and growing our own fruits and vegetables is starting to really show results. It’s not just a cliché that we are what we eat, drink, and breathe. Believe it!

Great Lakes Compact Signed by Michigan Legislature But It’s Not a Done Deal Yet

Thursday, May 15th, 2008

 

Michigan’s House and Senate passed the Great Lakes Compact yesterday but it’s still not a done deal. Accompanying legislation about groundwater usage is still unsigned. It’s necessary before the Compact can head to the governor’s office for final approval. The House and Senate are wrangling over how much water can be taken from groundwater, streams, and inland lakes. The House wants to issue permits for users of more than 1 million gallons a day, and the Senate wants the ceiling at 2 million gallons a day. Of course the Senate leans toward business concerns and the House leans toward environmental concerns. Isn’t the whole idea of the compact to conserve our water by keeping it here? And our Senate still insists on excessive use of it?

I say we do away with bottled water all together for a big savings both in water and oil. According to  Environmental Graffiti’s website:

Three gallons of the wet stuff is required to produce one gallon of what you will happily pay a dollar for, largely because of the length and complexity of the various “purification” processes and the evaporation loss that takes place while the water is in the plant. This is quite an ugly statistic, when juxtaposed to the fact that less than one percent of the water on our planet is both accessible and potable.

Besides the extravagant amount of oil used to make the bottles and large volumes of water used in the bottling process, there are of course, several other considerations. Firstly, there are the transport costs - by the time you transport every bottle by rail or truck and keep it cool, you may as well have filled it one-fourth of the way with oil. Let’s also not forget the operating costs of the factories themselves and the profit the bottled water companies have to make for their shareholders. Therefore, purely from an economic standpoint, if you only drink bottled water, you’re a mug.

Beyond that, there is also an environmental impact from production. This in fact, is quite simple to calculate: every ton of PET plastic for the bottles produces 3 tons of carbon–adding 2.5 Million tons of carbon dioxide emissions to the 17 million barrels of oil.

We need to move ahead with this bill and only allow minimal water withdrawal, since we can see by the above the excessive use of water can be eliminated. Get a Pur or Brita water filter for your tap for Pete’s sake! Besides we now know plastic can leach bisphenol A, a hormone disruptor. We don’t want that now do we?

Because Michigan is surrounded by the Great Lakes, being one of the last two states to sign makes us look, well, not very environmentally green. And we are one of the last two because Wisconsin not only passed the Compact today, but it’s headed to Governor Doyle’s office for signature. We should have had this hammered out long ago.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/05/michigan_legislature_approves.html

http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/green-living/what-is-cost-of-bottled-water/1129

http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2008/5/15/