Archive for the ‘CO2 Emissions’ Category

DTE’s Latest Award

Wednesday, September 24th, 2008

 

The Clean Corporate Citizen (C3) program, established under Administrative Rules R324.1501 to R324.1511, allows regulated establishments that have demonstrated environmental stewardship and a strong environmental ethic through their operations in Michigan to be recognized as Clean Corporate Citizens. The C3 program is built on the concept that these Michigan facilities can be relied upon to carry out their environmental protection responsibilities without rigorous oversight, and should enjoy greater permitting flexibility than those that have not demonstrated that level of environmental awareness. Clean Corporate Citizens who voluntarily participate in this program will receive public recognition and are entitled to certain regulatory benefits, including expedited permits. http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3307_3666_4134—,00.html

 

While I’m happy that DTE is looking into investing in environmentally sound alternatives in the future, and this attempt to clean up AROUND Monroe’s coalburner is great progress, the Clean Corporate Citizen’s award is a little out of place here. What about the mercury? What about the CO2? Has DTE turned our coalburner into a carbon capture plant, because unless all three things are addressed with this award, than clean is a subjective word?

 

The award comes from Michigan’s DEQ whose budget has recently been slashed again. http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/?p=414. The same DEQ that warns they will have fewer regulators looking out for Michigan’s wetlands, rivers, and streams, and will not likely to be able to respond to pollution spills.

 

If you read about the Clean Corporate Citizen program above it says, “regulated establishments that had a strong environmental ethic THROUGH their operations in Michigan…”  Come on, DTE just recently installed scrubbers that DO NOT address CO2 and or the resultant mercury emissions. It’s the second largest burner in the country.

 

I especially like the part above that says: “should enjoy greater permitting flexibility than those that have not demonstrated that level of environmental awareness.”  DTE is now a Clean Corporate Citizen who can enjoy EXPEDITED permits says the Dept. of Environmental Quality that no longer has the funds to regulate what happens to much of our state’s surface waters. The same surface waters of which 25% do not fall under the Great Lakes Compact protection either, thanks to Michigan’s senate.

 

Lovely.

 

 

Twelve States Sue EPA

Tuesday, August 26th, 2008

 

 

The lawsuit is the latest attack on the EPA for not regulating emissions again. This time it’s emissions from oil refineries. The New York Times article stated that 15% of all CO2 emissions comes from oil refineries. The other states are

 

New York atty. Andrew Cuomo leads the current fight, claiming it’s another example of the Bush Administration’s “do-nothing policy” regarding global warming.

 

Last year the Supreme Court ruled that it was the duty of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas under the Clean Air Act. The NY Times article said, “Since then, the agency’s director has said it is the job of Congress to regulate them.” Don’t you love it?

 

The EPA is like Teflon. Nothing sticks. They’ve been sued to set standards for power plant emissions and recently by California to regulate emissions from autos.

 

As far as the EPA turning out any standards for any of the above, so far nada.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/us/26epa.html?_r=1&ref=environment&oref=slogin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

  

Carpooling Saves Unbelievable Amount of Gas

Monday, July 21st, 2008

I heard these facts on the news this morning. Carpooling with just one extra person in each driver’s car would save the U.S. 32 millions gallons of gas per day.

Baby Boomers remember all the stuff from the 70’s. I don’t know why those same coping mechanisms aren’t automatically kicking in now anyway. It’s a no brainer. Can’t afford gas money and insurance, take on a rider. I picked my girlfriend up in Dearborn Hts. everyday from Flat Rock to travel to Farmington Hills.  She paid me gas money. Sharing the driving was not an option. She had an old station wagon with no heat. She actually drove it a short distance in the winter and had to scrape the inside of her windows! I had a old Ford Grenada with heat but no A/C.

The economy was horrible in 1974 too. There was a war, and an oil crunch. Unemployment lines were horrible. This is how we coped. Everyone seemed to have more than one job, and second hand furniture to include crates for end tables and the ever lovin tapestries on the walls, ceiling, as throws, and bedcovers. Being picky about a roomate wasn’t an option. It was about survival. So of course we carpooled, usually in ratty can’t-believe-it’s-still-running cars. And vans, well they could really haul a bunch of people around.

Now it’s like pulling teeth to get people to carpool. People comment that they love their cars. They really enjoy driving alone. I hope they like them well enough because if things get worse for the economy and housing, plenty of people will be calling his/her car ”Home” as many have admittedly done.  

Ford Considers Metro Transportation of the Future

Tuesday, June 24th, 2008

 

Ford Motor Company is really reinventing itself. Ford is not just concentrating on delivering cars with greater mpg and lower emissions, but transportation in general for growing population centers.

 

Ford, in partnership with U of M, has been studying congested cities worldwide, tracking growing populations, and the migrations of these populations in order to offer solutions for metropolitan traffic. Their answer is a network of hubs within big metro cities that suffer the most traffic congestion. According to an article on world-wire:

  • By 2015, about two-thirds of the world will be living in urban areas, which will exacerbate traffic congestion and present major challenges to basic transportation and personal mobility.
  • “Ford Urban Mobility Networks” is a pilot program that is exploring how to coordinate a variety of transportation options and provide vital real-time information to individuals living in densely populated urban centers.
  • The program is the result of Ford’s ongoing collaborations with University of Michigan’s Sustainable Mobility and Accessibility Research and Transformation (SMART) initiative.

Ford’s Urban Mobility Network considers all types of transportation, buses, trains, taxis, car-share fleets, mopeds and bicycles. All or some of these modes of transportation transfer at the hubs. The hub idea looks to me like a way to converge and disperse smaller packs of people all over simultaneously, rather than allowing everyone to herd along in one big jam pile of traffic until individuals peel themselves out of the pack as they near his/her destination.

 

Well good luck with this one if our populations grow out of control that badly. The article said some 35 cities worldwide would have populations of over 10 million. In honor of George Carlin’s death, and his wonderful truths, I think he would say something like “wouldn’t a better solution be a little abstinence so we don’t have population explosions? I mean if we have to really gear up for all these people that are going to be born, wouldn’t it be a lot easier to forgo that big growth and just maintain for awhile. Afterall, population is something we can control.

 

And I would add,  if we can’t control our garbage, can’t sustain ourselves comfortably, can’t help ourselves let alone someone else, why are we still procreating like it’s 2,000 years ago?

 

Before I digress farther, the article is a good read to get a idea of what our transportation future might be: http://world-wire.com/news/0806110002.html.

 

Canada Sued for Breach of Kyoto Treaty

Thursday, June 19th, 2008

I love this. Canadian citizens as part of an environmental group called Friends of Canada are suing their country for breech of the Kyoto Treaty. Out of 180 countries that signed the Kyoto Protocol, Canada is the first to be brought to court for neglecting its legal commitment to fight global warming.

Canada’s government is conservative right now and evidently playing to big business polluters. Sounds like the U.S. As the chief exec of Friends of Earth stated: ‘While other industrialized countries actively work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change, our government has offered pollution holidays for emitters for decades to come.’

So Canadians are taking their country to court over the environment. I wonder if they’re going to get specific and if it will affect Canada’s drilling for oil in the Great Lakes? The Friends of Canada exec said: ‘This government has broken the law [] and, as Canadian citizens, we have both a moral and legal imperative to insist on enforcement of our own laws on climate action.’

Geez, I wish Bush would have signed the Kyoto Treaty. He slid away from it with a promise to enforce our own environmental laws. We see what happened there.

This is going to be pretty interesting. It’s setting a precedent for one, and it could force the Canadian government to come up with detailed plans on how they plan to lower their emissions six percent below 1990 levels. This is legally binding but Canada says it cannot meet that goal. It seems to me the more a government monkeys around and stalls on actively and earnestly trying to produce alternative sources for energy the more impossible it is to meet specific goals that will curb catastrophic events down the line.

Mother Nature certainly isn’t going to wait around for us to figure out how to conserve. Look at the floods in corn country. It kinda puts a damper on massive ethanol production. We’re still not getting who is in charge here. The environment trumps just about everything. We absolutely need the cooperation of weather for so many things. Maybe gas prices are high to truck food to us, but without the cooperation of the climate, there simply won’t be any food to truck. There isn’t much we can do about Mother Nature. We can’t shoot missiles at her. We can’t blow her up. We can’t place embargos on her. There isn’t much we can do to Mother Nature except abuse or nurture her. If we decide to nurture, we make our own paradise where we live in harmony with our world and everything in it. Or we can continue the abuse until MN kills us out of self defense.

Read more: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2008/2008-06-18-02.asp

 

 

 

White House Blocks EPA From Posting New Health Assessments of Hazardous Chemicals

Monday, June 16th, 2008

 

My 85-year-old mother asked me why there aren’t as many stars at night? I told her; to begin with, it has to be a clear night to see a bunch of stars. She said it seems when she was young there were a lot of starry nights. She’s intently watching the skies over Monroe to see if we have any clear nights, and how many stars are visible.

 

She thinks there aren’t as many clear nights because of pollution. My mother also remarked that some of her friend’s children were down from northern Michigan for a visit and it was quite noticeable to them that our skies are different, not as clear, even in the daytime.

 

I’m still wondering when the EPA is going to release reports about all types of things in our air, water, and land mass. It’s the same old stall or obstruction used by the Bush Administration against the environment for 8 years. I witnessed the put-off again on the news today when President Bush, during his talks in Britain with Gerald Brown, said that the U.S. would embrace environmentalism when China and India agree to the same pact or “whatever the U.S. does just won’t be affective.”

 

What a crock. First of all the U.S. only has 300 million citizens compared to both China and India with over one billion citizens each, yet the U.S. holds its own creating one quarter of earth’s total pollution. I think we could make quite a big dent in cleaning up the environment without China and India along for the ride. Has this administration ever heard the term, leading by example? Besides India is making huge strides by using their pollution for methane production to fuel their cooking and lighting needs. Bio Tech India has both a portable and permanent models of residential bio mass digesters. Just feed the digester food scraps and it produces methane gas to burn. Bio Tech India is also working on incorporating human waste into the works. India is already using the cow dung from its sacred cows for methane and energy production. Just think of all the fuel we could get from doggy parks, and litter boxes.

 

So it’s the same old song and dance from Bush. I really didn’t expect much more from his regime, but then I read an article on ENS website that congress is wondering about the big stall on reports about clean air, water, and land too, and what it’s costing us health wise.  It seems Congress “questioned the health effects of a new White House policy that delays the completion and release of chemical assessments into a public database maintained by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.”

 

There it is, the purposeful stall from the Bush regime that delays the release of assessments that inevitably affect our health in a bad way, but no doubt help some big polluter down the line. I’m starting to feel like a Polar Bear more and more all the time.

 

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2008/2008-06-12-093.asp

 

 

Microbes Are Climate Engineers

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

 

I can’t pass up reading the Science Daily website. There are so many articles lately about microbes, that they are the real engineers for climate control. As one article stated: “Microbes will continue as climate engineers long after humans have burned that final barrel of oil. Whether they help us to avoid dangerous climate change in the 21st century or push us even faster towards it depends on just how well we understand them.”

 

Well it seems science understands them better and better every day and hopes to use the enzymes produced by microbes to break down all sorts of material in a “closed, integrated system that produces edible products, flowers, and biodiesel with little waste.” Sugar cane and hibiscus flowers are key to this closed system.

 

Scientists plan on using the enzymes from microbes to break down the sugarcane/hibiscus biomass to sugars, and ferment them to ethanol. I have to LOL here because this product is basically the same as that pure grain alcohol that we can get out of the hills of Tennessee, namely WHITE LIGHTENING. Every drink this stuff? I think a person could hallucinate on it. I know the ring from the pint jar it comes in can be lit easily and burns for a while. But I digress.

 

After the biomass is fermented the carbon dioxide produced during the fermentation is trapped. It’s then fed to micro algae (more microbes) in ponds. Once this micro algae goes to work a type of polymer is produced that could be refined further into jet fuel. The spent micro algae is then harvested and used as fertilizer for the sugar cane and hibiscus flowers again. That’s quite an efficient loop.

 

I say they get on with this microbe research because the Bush/Cheney regime is about to ruin more of our country than invading enemies would ever do. Right now, Halliburton is ruining parts of Utah, Colorado, and other places in search for natural gas, when methane is right under our nose, get it, methane—nose? Ditto for oil. Halliburton’s trucks are already corroding prehistoric drawings that stretch across the rocks in Nine Mile Canyon.  No one knows or cares because everything is either overshadowed by the economy, Iraq, and the election. Let’s just say the Bush/Cheney administration is having a field day in its final months in office to the detriment of irretrievable artifacts, land, and animals in our national parks and areas around them.  

 

I would love to see these guys just deflate like a balloon and buzz off into the atmosphere but that would just be adding some really defiled waste into our air.

 

Remember that what the powers that be tell you about not having enough alternative sources of energy to replace oil and natural gas is a lie. There is probably enough methane alone to blow us sky high. That’s a lot of energy laying around they like us to believe is waste, because it’s cheap and works just as well as natural gas because—it is.

 

Read more about microbes at Science Daily: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080604141014.htm. 

The Bicycle is Back Big Time

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

 

I wrote about riding bikes to save on gas and get in shape before, but the biking business is really taking off now with high gas prices. I participated in a survey by an environmental group that listed all types of things that can help ease global warming and the bicycle was number one by 34 percent. Prophylactics were second at 19%, but I digress.

 

It seems the bicycling trend is really picking up. There has been a 100 percent rise in cycling since 1985. There are 3.2 million people that bicycle to work at least once a week. Burning one gallon of gas equals 20 lbs. of CO2 released into the atmosphere.  I would guesstimate the average car used to get about 20 mpg. My old car does anyway. If the average distance to work is 5 miles one way, then two days of biking by just one bicyclist to and from work would equal one gallon of gas and save 20 lbs. of CO2 from being released into the atmosphere. One day would save 10 lbs. of CO2 per bicyclist. Never underestimate the power of one. Never say your individual actions don’t account for much, because other people are doing that same action too. 

 

One bicyclist times 3.2 million bicyclists cycling an average 10 miles round trip for work saves 32 million lbs. of CO2 from entering the atmosphere IN ONE DAY!  The results are pretty staggering, not to mention those American bicyclists are getting in shape at the same time. It’s healthy for the individual, and healthy for the earth.

 

My husband just said if work was just a little closer he would bike. We used to bike together. It’s unbelievable how far a person can bike quite easily. I know I did plenty of biking in my day. I used to stash my bike in the trunk of my car and drive my car to get serviced. I’d simply take the bike out and ride it home until the car service called to pick up my car. It was about 5 miles one way. 5 miles on a ten speed is a breeze. I think we are just conditioned to catching a ride everywhere, instead of peddling ourselves. We would do it more if we just thought about it. Well, we have to own a bike too.

 

Read more statistics about biking in America: http://www.solutions-site.org/artman/publish/article_395.shtml.

 

Worse Things Increasing in the Air Than CO2

Monday, June 2nd, 2008

 

When we think of greenhouse gases we immediately think of CO2 emissions. But there are others on the list that are far worse and growing at a greater rate. CO2 just stands out because it is the most prevalent and can last in the atmosphere for 100 years or more.

 

On the Hinkle Charitable Foundation website for the environment there are some pretty interesting facts about global warming presented in a series of reports. Burning fossil fuels for energy is the main source of atmospheric greenhouse gases. We pretty much know that. The third report explained a measurement called the Global Warming Potential (GWP) that includes both a gas’s ability to trap solar heat and how long the gas persists in the atmosphere. I learned there are a lot worse gases than CO2 that are man made like perfluoromethane, an etchant and cleaning agent. It’s presence in the atmosphere is increasing at a much faster rate than CO2.  Not good.

 

Mother Nature certainly isn’t putting cleaning agents into the atmosphere, or sulfurhexafluoride, another dangerous greenhouse gas used in the electric industry as a dialectric medium for high voltage circuit breakers and other electrical equipment. We produce 8000 tons of this stuff to use every year.

 

Now get these numbers. If CO2 has a one hundred year GWP of one, and stays in the atmosphere one hundred years, how bad is perfluoromethane with a GWP of five thousand seven hundred, and lasts over fifty thousand years. And sulfurhexafluoride is outright evil with a GWP of twenty two thousand two hundred and stays in the atmosphere three thousand two hundred years.

 

As usual these gases are measured in parts per thousand. Again our lives are measured in parts per thousand. How many ppts have accumulated in the atmosphere over the years? This stuff never goes away. We’re messing with more than a few generations here.

 

Read more and look at the charts: http://www.thehcf.org/emaila3.html

 

Consider a few challenges for the environment: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/10/pure_waste_challenge_cfl.php