Archive for August 2010
Underestimate consumption overestimate Savings potential. . . Are You Guilty?
August 31, 2010 | 
Author Many of us believe the best effort we can make towards energy conservation is to use low-power light bulbs and recycle glass bottles, according to a study recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
We also severely underestimate the amount of energy we could save by switching to currently available alternative technologies.
Governments and environmental groups should do more to educate people as to the more effective contributions they can make to reduce their energy consumption, conclude the researchers.
Researchers at Columbia University recruited over 500 volunteers via web marketplace Craigslist and asked them to estimate the energy consumption of nine household devices, such as a washing machine, TV and air conditioner. They were also asked to estimate the energy savings they could make through adopting various behaviours, from using lower-wattage light bulbs and recycling glass to line-drying rather than tumble-drying clothes and driving a more fuel-efficient car.
The largest group, nearly 20 percent, cited turning off lights as the best approach to saving energy. Very few cited buying decisions that experts say would cut energy consumption dramatically, such as more efficient cars (cited by only 2.8 percent), more efficient appliances (cited by 3.2 percent) or insulating homes (cited by 2.1 percent).
Previous studies have concluded that households could reduce energy consumption some 30 percent by making such choices without waiting for new technologies, making big economic sacrifices or dramatically reducing their standard of living.
“When people think of themselves, they may tend to think of what they can do that is cheap and easy at the moment,” said Shahzeen Attari, lead author of the report and a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia University’s Earth Institute.
The survey shows that governments and environmental groups have failed to communicate more sophisticated messages about energy conservation and gone for easy green initiatives, such as recycling and focussing on lighting, concludes Attari.
More worryingly, it shows that we view green behaviour as small curtailments of current behaviour – doing less of the same things – rather than adopting new ways of doing things.
“But switching to efficient technologies generally allows you to maintain your behaviour and save a great deal more energy,” said Attari.
On average, the respondents to the survey underestimated their own energy use and overestimated the savings they could make by a factor of 2.8.
This shows a lack of understanding about the relative consumption of familiar household devices, for example, that a 3kW drier uses 30 times more energy than a 100W light bulb.
More environmentally aware respondents, and those with a better understanding of basic maths, were more accurate in their estimates, the survey found.
Take Trees for Granted? Are More Than a Source of Products or Carbon Storage Areas?
Copyright (c) 2010 Alison Withers
The conflict about what is best for the environment and the planet is the responsibility of all of us, not only of the commercial interests.
Commercial organisations exist to respond to the demands for their goods and services, although it is also true that in order to survive and grow they need to “create” new demands for new products.
We can’t any longer ignore the effects continuous growth are having on the earth’s atmosphere and environment and one of the biggest causes for concern is the loss of forests.
Trees and forests are important for a whole variety of reasons but two of the most significant are their effects on the air we breathe and the health of the soil we depend on for the food we need.
Not only do they produce the oxygen without which we could not exist but they also help clean the air. A mature leafy tree produces as much oxygen in a season as 10 people inhale in a year and trees intercept airborne particles, reducing heat, and absorbing such pollutants as carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide.
Trees remove this air pollution by lowering air temperature, through respiration, and by retaining particulates. They also lock up carbon dioxide, identified as a cause of global warming. To produce its food, a tree absorbs and locks away carbon dioxide in the wood, roots and leaves. A forest is a carbon storage area and can lock up as much carbon as it produces.
By either storing harmful pollutants or converting them to less harmful forms trees also help clean the soil. They also help fight soil erosion. Their roots bind the soil and their leaves break the force of wind and rain on soil, but they also act as wind breaks, which can also reduce the drying effect on soil and vegetation behind the windbreak and help keep precious topsoil in place. They can also help reduce flooding.
More than 25% of our modern medicines originate from tropical forest plants. Even so, we have only learned how to use 1% of these amazing plants. This could prove to be a rich source for the Biopesticides Developers currently working to produce less harmful low-chem agricultural products, such as biofungicides, biopesticides and yield enhancers, to replace the older generation of chemical based products that are increasingly being taken off the market amid growing concerns about harmful and unhealthy residues in our food.
Consider all this and the continued destruction of the rainforests in places like the Amazon basin and in Indonesia seems like sheer lunacy.
But there are so many tree-based products that we take for granted and can’t imagine living without – from building materials, furniture, paper, palm oil or the fruits and seeds thay produce.
While there are many organisations battling to protect the world’s fast-diminishing rainforests, and across Europe paper is now largely sourced from sustainable forests, there are equally powerful interests, like mining, logging, oil and gas companies whose activities are important to the Peruvian economy, resulting in attempts by the Government to expel the catholic missionary Paul McAuley, who campaigns on behalf of the Amazon Forest’s indigenous people and their local environment.
In Indonesia it’s the huge profits to be made from forest plantations for palm oil and paper that are threatening the rainforests.
It’s not all doom and gloom, however. In Africa there is evidence that a particular tree can increase maize yield as well as having an impact on climate change.
The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), recently highlighted some of its recent research, designed to increase maize production in Africa by up to four times by planting trees that act as organic fertilizers.
The tree that is the secret to higher maize yield, Faidherbia, has special nitrogen-fixing property and an unusual habit known a “reverse leaf phrenology”. Unlike other trees, Faidherbia sheds its leaves and goes dormant during the early rainy season.
Its leaves grow again only in the dry season, which makes it compatible with food crops because it does not compete with them for water, nutrients or light.
According to the Agroforestry Centre, Malawian farmers in Malawi say it is like “fertilizer factory in the field”, as it takes nitrogen from the air, fixes it in the leaves and subsequently incorporates it into the soil. In places where tree canopies were established maize yields increased by 280 per cent when compared with the zone outside the canopy.
In Zambia, too, unfertilized maize yields in the vicinity of Faidherbia trees averaged 4.1 tonnes per hectare, compared to 1.3 tonnes nearby but beyond the tree canopy. Plainly there’s more to trees than most of us imagine.
Posted in Climate Change | 
Tags: Areas, Carbon Accounting, Granted, more, Products, source, Storage, Take, Than, They, Trees | 
No Comments »
CRC Standards update
Firms looking to boost their standing in the government’s Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) league table will have a wider range of options to choose from after the Environment Agency yesterday extended the list of standards that qualify as so-called Early Action Metrics under the scheme.
Early Action Metrics are designed to recognise those organisations that have already taken measures to improve their energy efficiency and, as a result, might find it harder to deliver continued percentage cuts in their energy use. Under the rules of the CRC, the Environment Agency takes compliance with Early Action Metrics into account when compiling the league tables detailing participants’ energy performance, giving a higher rating to organisations that have already taken measures to enhance their efficiency.
To qualify for an Early Action Metric, organisations are required to voluntarily install automated meter-reading equipment and comply with an approved standard certifying that they have implemented carbon management policies and delivered cuts in emissions.
Initially, the only standard that qualified as an Early Action Metric was the Carbon Trust Standard, which requires firms to demonstrate that they have delivered year-on-year emission reductions.
However, the Carbon Trust Standard’s position as the only approved standard prompted protests in some quarters that the government-backed company could dominate what promises to be a lucrative market and, as a result, the Environment Agency has approved a number of rival standards as Early Action Metrics over the past few months.
New carbon management standards from CEMARS and BSI Kitemark have already been approved, while the Environment Agency announced yesterday that the recently launched Carbon Saver Standard has also qualified as an Early Action Metric.
Glenn Wilkinson, managing director of Carbon Saver, welcomed the decision, arguing that it meant organisations now had a “real choice” when looking at the market for approved carbon accreditation schemes.
Andrew Hitchings, CRC project executive at the Environment Agency, urged organisations that have taken steps to improve their energy efficiency in recent years to obtain an approved standard. “The Carbon Trust Standard and equivalent schemes allow organisations who are leading the way in environmental management to be rewarded for their early action,” he said. “CRC is an opportunity for organisations to show what they have already achieved in reducing emissions through early action and provides an incentive to achieve the further reductions which are necessary in the future.”
The news comes as the Carbon Trust yesterday released the results of a survey of 200 finance directors showing that nearly three quarters work for firms that do not currently measure their carbon footprint.
The survey found that 72 per cent of respondents believe businesses will eventually be legally (section 85 Climate change act 2008) required to measure their carbon footprint, while 76 per cent reckon they will be made to pay for the carbon they emit.
However, just under half of respondents have a target for reducing carbon emissions, while a further 16 per cent were unsure if their employer had a carbon target or not.
“The debate about whether or not carbon footprinting and payment will become mandatory for business appears to be over as far as finance heads are concerned, ” said Harry Morrison, general manager of the Carbon Trust Standard. “Yet only a minority have taken action so far and these early movers have a clear advantage. Building carbon management into the DNA of the business now not only ensures preparedness for future compliance requirements, but also brings immediate cost and efficiency benefits and a competitive edge.”
It’s not a question of IF mandatory reporting is introduced, but when, The Claimate Change Act already makes provision on the government to introduce legislation by 6th April 2012, via section 416 (4) of the companies act requiring mandatory emissions reporting, or explain to parliament why it hasn’t done so, it would take a further act of parliament to repeal this as it’s already law.
Plastic Carrier Bags
The UK’s leading supermarkets have once again missed a voluntary goal to halve the number of single use carrier bags handed out, despite cutting usage since last year, new figures have shown.
The government-backed Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) confirmed today that the total number of carrier bags issued by the UK’s leading supermarkets has fallen 41 per cent since figures were first recorded in 2006.
Moreover, the number of “single-use” carrier bags issued has fallen 43 per cent compared to 2006, representing a reduction of 4.6 billion single-use bags a year.
However, the figures suggest the supermarkets have for the second time fallen short of a voluntary target agreed with the government in 2008 to cut the number of single-use bags given to customers by 50 per cent by spring 2009 compared to a 2006 baseline.
Last year, supermarkets claimed to have “all but” hit the 50 per cent target, citing figures for the month of May showing that they had reduced the number of single use bags distributed by 48 per cent.
The performance drew plaudits from then Environment Secretary Hilary Benn who hailed it as evidence that the government’s voluntary approach to cutting plastic bag use was working.
But this year’s figures for May, which cover Asda, Cooperative Group, M& S, Sainsbury’s, Somerfield, Tesco and Waitrose, suggest that if anything the supermarkets’ performance is worsening.
WRAP reported that they had reduced the number of single use carrier bags given out by only 46 per cent compared to the 2006 base line, leaving them well short of the 50 per cent target.
British Retail Consortium director Stephen Robertson insisted that the supermarkets had done a good job, arguing that rising sales had made it harder for them to meet the target.
“This is a tremendous achievement by supermarkets, customers and staff, especially as between 2006 and 2009 the amount of goods sold by participating retailers grew by over six per cent,” he said. “The reduction in bag use is great news, but it’s the halving of the total weight of single-use carrier bags which shows retailers really scoring on the crucial issue of reducing environmental impact.”
However, the latest figures are likely to once again fuel calls for the government to introduce legislation to curb plastic bag use.
Going Green. No Matter Your Take the Choice is Clear
Global warming. Controversial to say the very least. Scientists on both sides have mountains of evidence to suggest that humans are either having a devastating impact on the earth’s climate or it’s just the natural climate change like any number of other climate changes the earth has gone through in its history. Whichever side you support going green can be more than just taking responsibility for the now; it can be taking responsibility for our future.
Carbon Reduction In Our Atmosphere
If you are of the belief that humans are the primary cause of climate change then you feel it is important to reduce your total carbon footprint. In fact you may already be taking the necessary steps to reduce your footprint.
If, however, you feel that humans are not the primary cause of Global Warming you should look at reducing your carbon footprint regardless and here’s why? Most green technology that is now coming online is more cost effective and efficient. For example by just switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs in a home the average US household saves over $150 per year. In this economy that kind of savings can really start to add up.
Changes You Can Make
The first thing most experts agree on when it comes time to “go green” is to start with your own home. Sure you can purchase tree credits and carbon offsets, but the first greatest impact you can make on your carbon footprint starts at home. And to those of you who feel that the process of global warming is not man made, realize that most of these methods actually reduce your energy use and dependence which actually reduces your monthly bills. It’s also helpful to look at this from the standpoint of by reducing now you leave a little bit more for the future at lower cost. The less energy we can take now the more we will have for the future. So save a little energy now and save a little money all at the same time.
Now some of the things that you can do:
- Change Your Light Bulbs to Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs. Saves energy and money.
- Add an insulating blanket to your hot water heater or convert to a tankless hot water heater.
- Put electronics on surge protectors and unplug them when not in use.
- Replace older appliances with new Energy Star compliant. Some even have rebates!
- If your car gets less than 25mpg it might be time to trade it in for a new hybrid.
- Try adjusting the thermostat to be a tad cooler in the winter and a tad warmer in the summer. The savings alone will make that extra sweater in the winter or the tank top in the summer worth it.
- Take reusable bags with you whenever you go shopping. You will save on plastic, which will reduce carbon. If you use to use paper you will reduce deforestation. It’s just good all the way around.
Whatever side you believe in, whether human caused or natural progression of the earth, going green transcends political views and becomes something that can help and affect everyone involved. Whether you are doing it to save the planet, or doing it to save some money, feel good and just do it.
Do you Live in a Green Environment ?
People today are becoming more concern about the environment and go green environmental services than the last century. Over the century, our environment has gone from green to transparent. Transparent meaning chemical use more and more taking the natural product and turning it to transparent with so many chemicals a person reading the label would hardly find the natural product.
Today and for years we eat, sleep, breath, walk, drive, work, play, wear, and see with chemicals. As we know, most foods today made with chemicals or made up with chemicals to make the fastest way to prepare food. The cooking equipment we use, to the coffee pot for morning coffee is chemical made.
We sleep on chemical pillows, sheets, blankets, comforters and yes, the pajamas are full of chemicals.
To find out more about good quality bedding for the sleeping and where to purchase the bedding, check out environmental green web directory, and go green environmental services.
Soaps and laundry aids. Use low suds soap and the more organic the better for everyone. Today going to the store and buying a shampoo could be a chore. A whole isle of chemical treatment for washing your hair waits anyone. Using good organic shampoo for hair will not only help the environment in addition, will help keeping your hair healthy. Look for the go green environmental services label on the packages to make sure this is environmental safe.
Start with replacing energy efficiency appliances in the home. Look at the green innovative lighting use light bulbs that give great light still help with efficiency and has the go green environmental services logo. Look at the fixtures in the home, the bathroom, kitchen, laundry area and other rooms. Some of the fixtures are simple to replace and low cost to help with saving for the larger replacement for going green.
Furniture has chemicals in the finishing’s, stains, fabric, and foam. Start with simple improvements with the furniture though out the home. Beds that are made of wood known to hold bugs and diseases replace with metal bed frames. Metal bed frames will not let bugs and diseases in bed in the metal. Metal is also easier to keep clean. Mattresses that have chemicals, that are unhealthy replace with good cotton filled and spring mattress. Some of the mattress for going green is fire resistant and stain resistant. Look for the go green environmental services logo before purchasing the mattress.
Are you thinking about remodeling a room, home perhaps thinking about building a new home? Construction companies are becoming more aware of the going green environment using products for energy efficiency and fewer chemicals to build a home.
Searching the internet is a good place to find tips and suggestions on how you today can start with turning your transparent environment back to green. Go green environmental Forum & Articles and environmental green web directory can help you get started today.
Tips On How To "Go Green" For A Start-Up Company
The following is a strategy to employ for being green and saving money in a startup, which would apply for small business as well …..
1. Create user accounts in google. Once you have user accounts for your employees, you can create team calendars with user name and pass word. You can IM, and share presentations online – cuts down on any server hosting.
2. Use DIMDIM software for meetings, sharing presentations. It is 100% free for up to 20 people in a meeting.
3. Buy a pen based screen for your monitor. Utilize this online software to write in MS Word, power point, share and discuss in white board during presentations, take notes – NO PAPER = Green. The cost is $80. Laptops cost $2000. Instead now you have a screen and associated electronic pen, that you can simply “attach” to any laptop and convert it into a pen computer.
4. With DIMDIM, Windows Live, and google, you do not have to print anything in paper.
5. Utilize screen capture softwares to copy a document, use pen based screen to sign documentation – no prints.
6. Utilize electronic scanner software to scan documents online.
7. Use 3rd party hosting sites for storage space of upto 2 GB.
8. Turn off Monitor policy – Turn off all monitors after end of the day. This would cut energy used.
9. ALWAYS hibernate your computer – this will not consume your battery.
10. If your business can install a biogas generator onsite, that could generate electricty from the employees waste generation. from cafeteria.
On comments on President Obama’s push to go green …. “we have to reduce CO2 emissions by 40% by 2050″.
There are 2 options for this (as of now)……
1. Clean coal 2. Alternate energy sources
1. Clean coal – If a solution is implemented, it will cut down emissions by 50% EASILY, and will create green energy instantaneously. About 80% of our energy needs can be met by coal, and it is an abundant resource. This will not only save money from corporations pockets, but also from consumers pockets.
Note Europe HAD to go solar or wind because they do not have other natural resources! Even it it costs millions to create clean coal, it is the Smart SYSTEMIC Solution. Which will create green energy for 60-80% of the US and the world, and the technology can be exported. It will result in people and companies saving money, and US meeting 40% cut down in emissions easily. The bulk of the expense can be born systemically through a carbon tax, and the money can be used for implementing and maintaining clean coal. Now dumping CO2 underground is not the only solution. The CO2 can be converted to natural gas through biological processing. Which inturn can be utilized for creating clean energy, and subsidized fertilizer. We can very easily meet a CO2 emission cut of 40% in the next 10 years. long before 2050
2. In addition to clean coal, there are other options like nuclear expensive to build. Albeit this will not meet all of the demand. It also creates another problem of nuclear waste. Solar, wind, and other energy alternatives should also be pursued for the remainder of the 50% CO2 emission cuts. But these are Expensive solutions that take money from consumers and corporations ….. compared to a 1% carbon tax. In addition, in this recession one cannot advocate the cap and trade policy in carbon emissions. Which will further create another financial bubble through carbon trading.
3. Alternate energy sources like solar, wind, nuclear, and natural gas are viable for going “energy independent”, and creating cost savings for businesses. But they need to be cost efficient for consumers and not hurt our wallets. It appears right now that the biggest bang for the buck, is clean coal. Clean coal doesn’t have to be putting CO2 underground. An alternate solution is to have a bio-refinery that takes in the CO2 and converts it into bio feed and oxygen. Oxygen can be released into the atmosphere, and bio feed can be exported or distributed as health foods, cheap nutritious fertilizer for farmers, and cheap export fertilizer.
The above strategy is not meant to be all inclusive …. but should at least give you some ideas for your start-up or small business going forward. Might even give you some ideas for opportunities to take advantage of the “go green” industry as it grows.
Energy Investment
* Corporate research, development and deployment (RD&D) into clean energy has continued to grow year on year, reaching a total of $10.5bn in 2007, up from $8.37bn in 2006. The figures show the EMEA (Europe Mid-East and Africa) region taking the largest share, with AMER (Americas) closely following and ASOC (Asia-Pacific) somewhat lagging behind.
* 57.6% of clean energy RD&D investment came from EMEA based companies, 33.8% from AMER and 8.6% from ASOC. Utility / energy companies and technology firms have the highest clean energy RD&D budgets in general, with the top 5 firms being GE, United Technologies, BP, E.ON and BASF in descending order.
* However, energy companies’ investment into clean energy RD&D still only accounts for around 2% of overall energy RD&D expenditure.
General Electric (GE) stands out among all the firms analysed (47 in total) with a RD&D budget for 2006 of $900m, which is 54% of global technology / industrial RD&D spending. Furthermore, GE has committed to increasing this budget under their ‘Ecomagination’ program to $1.5bn annually by 2010, which will be directed to the development of renewable energies, more efficient aircraft engines and less energy-intensive solutions to water purification and re-use.
Sector Breakdown and Analysis
Utility / Energy Sector
Spending by utilities on clean energy RD&D covered a wide variety of initiatives and developments: BP continued its research into solar, wind, hydrogen fuel cells, biofuels, combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) and natural gas, mostly through BP Alternative Energy, which was created in 2005 with an investment of $8bn over the period 2005-2015. BP aims to build two of the world’s first industrial –scale hydrogen power plants by 2015. Shell’s RD&D was in much the same vein, though with extra focus on biofuels, which now puts Shell as the world’s leading distributor of biofuels. Endesa and Enel were pushing forward carbon capture and sequestration, while RWE maintained research into increasing the efficiency of its coal-fired plants, being well aware of its status as “Europe’s largest emitter of CO2” due to its large use of coal reserves. EDF’s main RD&D interests lay in PV, solar thermal and biomass, along with electric vehicles, of which EDF has the world’s largest fleet. As with the other French utilities (Total, Suez, and Gaz de France) a large portion of electricity production comes from nuclear power – in fact 95% of EDF’s electricity generation does not emit any greenhouse gases. The primary area of RD&D for Suez was waste and water management and since the company merged with Gaz de France, a target has been set for 10% of electricity generation to come from renewable sources by 2012 (current level: 3%). In the US, Exxon Mobil was directing the majority of its clean energy RD&D to cogeneration facilities, which reduce the company’s CO2 footprint by 10.5m tonnes/yr. Chevron was developing biofuels and hydrogen fuel cells for transport, and renewables for power generation, whereas Exelon’s spending sought further advances in clean coal technology, solar cells and wind power. Pacific Gas and Electric Company continued research into solar technology, maintaining its position as the leading solar utility in the US.
Technology Sector
As stated earlier, GE was the clear leader in clean energy RD&D in 2006. The $900m budget was spent across multiple divisions, including renewables (wind, solar and biomass), fuel efficiency of aircraft engines, efficiency of power generation and less energy-intensive solutions to water purification and re-use. Airbus also worked on the fuel efficiency of aircraft engines, along with advanced production technologies to minimise energy and water consumption during the manufacturing process. The remaining firms in this sector followed suit, with United Technologies making a significant contribution of $700m to the total figure.
Automobile Sector
The top two clean energy developers in this sector were Toyota ($240m) and Honda ($220m), with Daimler and Volkswagen also standing out ($200m and $110m respectively). As would be expected, a large share of RD&D is on biodiesel, bioethanol, hybrids and cleaner conventional engines in a bid to reduce vehicle emissions in the short term. However, there is growing research in other areas: aerodynamic and lightweight vehicles, recyclability (Volkswagen has set a goal of developing cars with 95% recyclability at the end of life-cycle), and increased efficiency in the manufacturing process (Nissan has put in place a target of reducing CO2 emissions by 2050, on 2000 levels). Last but not least, fuel cell technology is seen as a long-term solution; one that requires further development to be marketable, but one that will also replace conventional fuels and even biofuels in the long run.
Chemical Sector
This emerged as a sector where clean energy RD&D facts and figures were less available and less clearly presented. Out of the chemical businesses examined in the research for this note, BASF was not only the clearest reporter but also by far the highest spender, with a total of $600m directed to clean energy RD&D (this accounted for one third of BASF’s total RD&D budget in 2006). BASF was heavily involved in the development of new materials for organic solar cells, innovative storage media for hydrogen and advanced technologies for improved insulation such as nanopore foams. Bayer continued to research super-lightweight plastics for improved energy efficiency in vehicles along with energy efficient building design. The same trend was seen for STMicroelectronics and Dow Chemical, which has also committed to a reduction in energy intensity by 25% over the period 2005-2015. DuPont had a slightly different approach which included the development of new biofuels and the design of high performance materials such as textiles from renewable sources. AIR Liquide had a different set of research criteria still, with much work carried out on clean coal, biomass, hydrogen fuel cell and gasification technologies. As is seen across all sectors, all the chemical firms were also furthering research into efficiency on their manufacturing operations with an overall aim of reducing emissions in the long-term.
Construction Sector
The cement industry accounts for 5% of all man-made CO2 emissions around the world so it would be reasonable to expect this sector to be engaged in emission reductions and climate change mitigation research. This proved to be the case, with transparent reporting throughout. Lafarge ($120m clean energy RD&D budget) was involved in creating advanced cements and cement substitutes which are less energy intensive and developing carbon capture / storage techniques. Heidelberg Cement ($100m) looked for ways of increasing the effective use of alternative raw materials and fuels in the production of cement, while also setting a target of reducing specific emissions by 15% over the period 1990-2010. This sort of commitment was common amongst construction companies: Holcim set itself a goal of reducing specific emissions by 20% from 1990-2010 and Cemex made a pledge to reduce its specific emissions by 25% by 2015 on 1990 levels. In the steel industry, Arcelor Mittal is coordinating the Ultra-Low CO2 Steelmaking Programme between 48 industrial firms. The programme develops cutting edge technologies and aims to cut CO2 emissions in the long-term by 50%.
Retail Sector
There is limited activity within this sector on clean energy RD&D, with only Tesco providing clear data ($144m). The company is developing gasification technology to turn food waste into power and is also involved in wind, solar, biomass and combined heat and power research. Further to this, Tesco is also the UK market leader in biofuels and is intending to spend $720m on low-carbon technologies over the period 2006-2010.
Easy Tips For Going Green
Going green is good for the environment and can save homes and businesses significant amounts of money over time.
Going green doesn’t need to cost a fortune either. A few well thought out changes can reap instant rewards. Here are our top tips for converting to a greener, cleaner lifestyle.
Improve your loft insulation
You can insulate your loft and save up to 25% of the heat you lose through your roof. This creates a warmer home and makes considerable savings on your heating bill.
Most DIY stores sell loft insulation and installing it is something that you can install yourself over a weekend.
Even better news is that there are also energy saving grants available to help cover some of the costs of insulating your home.
Install energy efficient light bulbs
The quality of energy efficient light bulbs nowadays is very good. The range and availability of energy efficient light bulbs is also better than it has ever been.
DIY, hardware stores and superstores all stock them, so there’s no excuse for not converting to these bulbs. Especially as they last longer than normal bulbs and use around five times less electricity.
They may be a bit more expensive than normal bulbs but you get back what you paid within a year on electricity savings.
Turn off your appliances
Not only does leaving your appliances on standby drain electricity resources, it also drains your cash.
Leaving a computer on standby overnight costs you around £50 per year. Other devices such as your TV and DVD player cost £35 upwards per year if you leave them permanently on standby.
So, before you go to bed remember to close down your PC and get into the habit of turning those other appliances off.
Devices with digital clocks or displays may need to be turned off at the plug in order to see these energy savings.
Turn down your heating thermostat
Turning down your heating thermostat by just 1 degree can cut your heating bill by up to 10%.
Ideally, homes and offices should have their heating set between 18 and 21 degrees. Having it set higher than this could indicate the need for improved insulation to stop heat escaping.
Switch to green energy
Many of the big energy suppliers are now offering their customers the option to switch to a green energy tariff.Where energy you use is matched with energy from renewable sources like wind farms and hydro-electric plants.
It’s worth contacting your supplier to find out how to switch and reduce your carbon footprint.
Generate your own electricity
The ultimate in going green is to generate your own energy. No matter where you live, the opportunities are there to generate power from the sun or perhaps from the power of the wind.
Solar power and wind turbines are a bigger step than changing your lightbulbs, but the rewards can be far bigger too. You might soon be selling green energy back to the national grid.