Archive for the ‘Tree Hugger’ Category
Wyoming: Upper Green River Valley/CC BY 1.0
Air pollution caused by fracking may contribute to acute and chronic health problems for people living near (within a half mile) of natural gas drilling sites, according to a new study from the Colorado School of Public Health. Air pollutants around the drilling sites were measured at five times federal standards, adding to the argument for a stricter requirement for how far gas wells should be drilled from residential areas.
The study, which was based on three years of monitoring at sites in western Colorado’s Garfield County, found potentially toxic petroleum hydrocarbons in the air near the gas wells, including benzene, a known carcinogen, ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene. Exposure to such chemicals have neurological and/or respiratory effects, according to the study.
The Denver Post quotes lead author of the study Lisa McKenzie saying, “We are seeing indications that oil and gas operations can release chemicals that can be harmful to residents.”
And she emphasized the significance of the study’s findings: “Our data show that it is important to include air pollution in the national dialogue on natural-gas development that has focused largely on water.”
Looking to the EPA for Help
While it’s true the national discussion about the environmental impacts of fracking has focused primarily on water, the EPA appears to be doing everything it can to avoid actually blaming water contamination on fracking operations. The agency said last week that it found no evidence linking fracking with contamination of groundwater in the small town of Dimock, Pennsylvania, where families had feared that drilling had polluted their wells.
But as ProPublica explains, that’s not the whole story—far from it:
what the agency didn’t say – at least, not publicly – is that the water samples contained dangerous quantities of methane gas, a finding that confirmed some of the agency’s initial concerns and the complaints raised by Dimock residents since 2009.
The test results also showed the group of wells contained dozens of other contaminants, including low levels of chemicals known to cause cancer and heavy metals that exceed the agency’s “trigger level” and could lead to illness if consumed over an extended period of time. The EPA’s assurances suggest that the substances detected do not violate specific drinking water standards, but no such standards exist for some of the contaminants and some experts said the agency should have acknowledged that they were detected at all.
Gasland director Josh Fox is not mincing words, either. In a statement, he and Water Defense said:
EPA withheld water test summaries from the press and the public when it made its announcement last week, even as they implied in a statement that Dimock’s water had been given a clean bill of health. Josh Fox and Water Defense procured the tests directly from six of the affected families, who are all in litigation with Cabot Oil and Gas. Five families who are also in litigation with Cabot have not yet received their test results from the EPA, although initial media reports implied that the 11 families who received test results were the same infamous 11 families in litigation. Five of the families who have thus far received their results are not currently suing Cabot.All six of the results obtained by Gasland/Water Defense contained at least one serious health concern, either from chemicals present or methane levels. In four of the six summaries obtained by Gasland/Water Defense, methane levels exceeded the 7 mg/l actionable threshold necessary for mitigation under Pennsylvania law—the standard previously cited by former Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner John Hanger to justify the construction of a water pipeline for the residents of Carter Road. One of the test results showed methane levels seven times the PA limit.
And chemist Ron Bishop, who reviewed the test summaries, concluded: “Any suggestion that water from these wells is safe for domestic use would be preliminary or inappropriate.”
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/fossil-fuels/study-finds-fracking-poses-air-pollution-health-risks-but-epa-still-denies-groundwater-impacts.html
© Bsq
Canada Blooms is a big promotional opportunity for landscape designers and contractors, as they outdo each other to make the jazziest booths. Robert Boltman and Alex Bartlett of BSQ. Landscape Design, known to TreeHugger readers for their shipping container office, tackle that other meme of the moment, pallet architecture, with their presentation this year.
© bsq
It is all very humorous and clever, with planters, water features, an observation tower and upside down umbrellas.
Emma Alter/CC BY 2.0
Robert Bolton mentioned that it is really just a display, that you couldn’t build outside with untreated pallets. These ones, filled with herbs, are lined so that there would be no contact between the herbs and the treated pallet wood.
Lloyd Alter/CC BY 2.0
Robert built a nice little office for himself into the base of the tower.
© Bsq
It really was the most spectacular booth in the show; see it at Canada Blooms until March 25.
Lloyd Alter/CC BY 2.0
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/garden-display-built-completely-used-pallets.html
Powerhouse Museum Collection/Public Domain
While some anti-environment extremists are painting bike paths as a communist plot, it’s been shown that well-planned, dense urban neighborhoods improve quality of life and increase property values.
That’s probably why new research from the Australian Heart Foundation shows a majority of parents want their kids to ride bikes to school. Sadly, that same research shows that less than 1 in 10 actually does—with 60% of parents driving their kids to school due to a lack of safe routes and proper training:
“Cycling to school is clearly something that children are able to do and parents want to encourage, but they re being let down by a lack of safe cycle paths,” said Dr Lyn Roberts, National CEO of the Heart Foundation.
“The number of children being driven to school has sadly reached a record high arriving at the school gates by car was rare in the 70s, but now it s the norm for 6 in 10 families. We re missing a huge opportunity to tackle childhood obesity, reduce carbon emissions and ease congestion on the roads.”
Once again we see how ridiculous arguments over environmentalism restricting personal freedom really are. The fact is that “freedom” includes freedom to walk, freedom from danger, and freedom to lead a healthy, active lifestyle. Sometimes protecting those freedoms requires collective action investment and, gasp, maybe even restricting the freedoms of motorists to do as they please.
Like it or not, we are in this together.
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/if-parents-want-kids-bike-school-why-are-so-few-doing-it.html
Lloyd Alter/CC BY 2.0
Every year they build a dream home at the National Home Show in Toronto, and it is often a modular prefabricated design. This makes a lot of sense; there isn’t a lot of time to put it together, the trades in the Convention Centre are really expensive when working overtime, and the house can be moved somewhere else when the show is over.
R House/Promo image
This year’s home is actually pretty interesting, making strong claims for being green. It recycles a lot of ideas in modern modular construction seen on TreeHugger before, (and unfortunately recycles its name from another prefab) but there are some interesting innovations in this home designed by Craig Crane with Robert Mitchell, and built by Michael Upshall of Pro-Built.
R House/Promo image
The plan reminds me of Michelle Kaufmann’s Breezehouse, now sold by Blu Homes, a design that cleverly puts all of the complex stuff in two modules and creates a wide open space between them that is enclosed on site.
R House/Promo image
It makes for a very dramatic space at relatively low cost. However its predecessors actually had front doors; in this house the only entry appears to be through the folding doors to the atrium (try that in a Lake Simcoe winter). The only alternative is the traditional suburban entrance, through the two car garage. I know it is a model home, but it reflects a suburban mentality that seems to contradict the intent of the design. Or does it?
R House/Promo image
The real innovation is in the structure, with a heavy timber frame made from glulam (laminated beams made from small bits of wood glued together, and interior panels made from my favourite material, Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) made by Structurlam from FSC certified wood. According to their environmental policy, “our products are manufactured with FSC certification. In addition, all of our products are engineered with low VOC, exterior grade adhesives which contain no added urea-formaldehyde.”
This gives a warm, quiet interior and gets rid of drywall.
Emma Alter/CC BY 2.0
Other green features claimed for the project:
The R-House values its form and ecological role and as intended as a narrative on regionalism, sustainable design, and contemporary building practices. The goal is to create a healthy, life-enhancing home in a modern, clean, and uncluttered composition. We are aiming for a carbon neutral home, devoid of fossil fuels and their associated emissions.
The green design philosophy is ‘net-zero’. Minimizing the ecological footprint in an attempt to create an ecologically benign home is our goal. The project deploys both passive and active green design strategies and green materials in creative and energy efficient ways in pursuit of a rigorous LEED gold certification.
The building is designed to generate its own energy from renewable sources, harvest rain water, manage its own waste, and promote occupant health and well being. A living wall and water feature in the courtyard create a self-sustaining interior ecosystem.
The courtyard roof is orientated to harvest solar energy from the south and south-west. The highpoint faces north-east to minimize heat gains and glare while maximizing consistent north light for daylighting in the courtyard.
Lloyd Alter/CC BY 2.0
Nice intentions, but kind of all falls apart for me in the vast kitchen and living area, and the statement on the website:
The R-House looks to become a factor in the luxury custom home and infill markets as well as the adult lifestyle markets by considering developments in prefabrication and energy conservation….Our intent is to create unique, modern, and sustainable boutique villages that offer an appealing an age-in-place lifestyle. Our approach responds to the baby boomer trend of not settling for the basics, unlike previous generations. The architecture will be cool green, presented as a modern design aesthetic with clean lines and bright interiors connected with nature.
Is this our vision of a sustainable green future- building boomer “boutique villages” in the exurbs where everything you need is a half hour drive to Barrie, Ontario, already a monster suburban bedroom community?
Emma Alter/CC BY 2.0
Our business model utilizes this concept house as the basis for developing sustainable custom homes and boutique communities. We are currently engaged with South-central Ontario land developers in who are looking to construct lifestyle communities built around the r-house concept.
In the end, all the green walls and claims for net zero energy don’t mean a thing when what we have is a big detached house on a big lot with a two car garage facing the street in a new exurb, probably built on some of the best farmland in Ontario. It is more of the same with a green roof on top. The more I saw in the house the more I liked; the more I read about the point of it all, the less I did. It’s just green sprawl.
Read for yourself at R-House
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/modular-design/r-house-modular-prefab-displayed-canadas-national-home-show.html
An Honorable German via Flickr/CC BY 2.0
Some of the most powerful voices in support of clean energy come not from starry-eyed entrepreneurs of solar start-ups or environmental advocacy groups—but from the U.S. military. Often at odds with the political conservatives who claim to have their interests at heart, the Army, the Air Force, and the Navy have all taken major steps to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels and to expand the application of cleaner technologies.
Most recently, Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the U.S. Navy, announced the purchase at least 1 Gigawatt of renewable power. And yesterday, in a sobering interview at the Bloomberg New Energy Finance Summit, Mabus ticked off the myriad reasons the military is investing heavily in clean energy.
“We’re getting more efficient,” he announced upfront, “mainly because of the price spikes petroleum is subject to.”
When conflict broke out in Libya last year, oil prices jumped, Mabus said, and they’re rising again now. These kind of unpredictable shocks put an acute strain on the military’s operating budget. “It’s the shocks. We can’t budget for that. We don’t have anywhere else to get that money.” There’s nothing they can do but shoulder the cost, because oil is a globally traded commodity. And it means other programs suffer.
“So we train less, we invest less,” he said. “We’re making a choice between paying for fuel” or bettering the Navy. Which is why the Navy, along with other arms of the military, are now among the world’s biggest investors in clean energy.
Mabus discussed the “great green fleet” which will make its debut this July. It features a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and a nuclear submarine, and all the aircraft and the surface fleet will run on a 50/50 blend of biofuels.
“We’ve already bought this,” Mabus says. “It might be the largest purchase of biofuels ever.” But it doesn’t end there.
“We’re doing solar, we’re doing wind, we’re doing geothermal,” Mabus said. “We’re doing wave power. We’re doing it to become more efficient. Mainly to be better war-fighters.”
The fact that this is agenda-free cold calculus often seems to escape critics of clean energy—the military is doubling down on clean energy because it helps them cut costs, save lives, and prevent future conflict. Period. There’s no vision of a hand-holding, pollution-free world involved here; there’s a vision of a U.S. military kicking as much ass as possible. To wit:
“The marines have embraced this more than every other service, because it saves lives,” Mabus says. “For every 50 fuel convoys in Afghanistan, we lose a life.” Using solar arrays instead of generators “saves them 700 pounds of battery load—and they don’t have to be resupplied. This makes us so much better at what we do, it allows us to better protect the country. We are doing this for national security, for energy security—and to be better war fighters.”
There isn’t a whiff of ideological grandstanding to be found in Mabus’s frank proclamations: “I’m agnostic on stuff like peak oil. I’m looking for a steady alternative to oil. I know that we don’t have enough oil in the United States to meet our needs.”
Mabus also took a moment to politely push back against critics of the Navy’s clean energy policies, and those who have shown skepticism at its embrace of clean technology.
“These policies are becoming part of the culture. The Navy has always been at the forefront of energy technology. We went from sail to coal,” he said. “We pioneered nuclear power. Every single time we did it, there were naysayers. every single time they were wrong.”
Near the end of the talk, the moderator asked Mabus about the risks of investing in clean energy, and he replied bluntly.
“The biggest risk is if we don’t. We would never let the countries we buy fossil fuels from build our ships, but we let them control what they run on.”
And he sees a similar urgency in the need to develop homegrown clean energy tech, and to manufacture it here.
“The risk of not acting, the risk of waiting while other countries beat us in the alternative fuel game—I don’t want to trade one form of foreign energy for another. I don’t want to trade oil overseas for biofuels or solar panels overseas. We don’t want to fall behind in this emerging technology. We don’t want to trade one form of dependence for another.”
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/clean-energy-saves-lives-makes-us-better-war-fighters-secretary-us-navy.html
Air BnB/Screen capture
I recently wrote that the biggest barrier to sharing may be ourselves, but as the collaborative consumption revolution continues to make big bucks, it’s becoming increasingly evident that this barrier is slipping away as we use technology to reinvent age-old systems of bartering and peer-to-peer business transactions.
Nevertheless, this new way of looking at business requires a fundamental rethink of some basic assumptions that most of us have grown up with. TriplePundit has an excellent summary of the challenges you must overcome if you want to be the next Air BnB:
Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you know that “collaborative consumption” is all the rage. Whether it’s peer-to-peer marketplaces for housing, transportation, services, or old clothing — the idea of using technology to facilitate economic transactions between two individuals (rather than between consumers and companies) is coming into its own.
The Airbnb of Anything: The Growth of P2P Markets featured leaders in this fast-growing industry talking about their challenges, and what they’ve learned along the way. The key takeaway? If you want to be successful in this space, you need to solve two problems: fear and inventory.
The first problem, fear, is probably what everyone thinks about when they consider barriers to collaborative consumption. I mean, who in their right mind would let a stranger take their car for a day or crash on their couch? But the building of online reputations and community-based policing of norms has shown that this is much less of a challenge than you might think.
The second challenge, inventory, is probably more burdensome. If you want to build a peer-to-peer car sharing service, how do you get enough providers and users to build momentum and get things going? This is the problem we encountered with my own neighborhood tool share scheme, with way more people willing to lend than needing to borrow. Despite my declaration that it’s OK to be a freeloader, the idea fizzled out as it began to feel like “Sami’s personal begging list”.
Luckily, there are solutions to all these problems. Check out the Triple Pundit post on the challenges of collaborative consumption to learn how industry veterans have overcome some of these biggest barriers.
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/green-jobs/want-create-next-air-bnb-heres-whats-stopping-you.html
Paul Wheaton/Video screen capture
From modular refugee housing through an innovative reclaimed garden display to a 600 Sq. Foot recycled office warehouse, shipping pallets can be a darned useful construction material. They can even be used to build a vertical garden on your home balcony.
The community of Vashon Island, Wa. has put reclaimed shipping pallets to work eliminating even more trash—they built a 200 square foot storage shed which operates as the “No Trash Bash Stash House”. This community “lending library” allows neighbors to borrow plates, glasses, forks, knives, linens, cookware and just about anything else they might need to throw a party that would otherwise involve purchasing disposables.
Paul Wheaton/Video screen capture
As Karen Biondo of La Biondo Farm and Kitchen explains, the shed was constructed almost entirely from free and reclaimed materials like old fencing, pallets and other resources. It is now used as both a farm stand, and a storage space for the party stash. Neighbors are asked to make a small, optional donation, and can borrow from the communal hoard whenever they need to. I get the impression that folks on Vashon Island like to throw a party or two.
Thanks as always to Paul Wheaton of Permies.com for another wonderful video.
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/culture/neighbors-build-100-reclaimed-shed-stash-reusable-plates-each-others-parties.html
Marco Paköeningrat /CC BY-SA 2.0
Starbucks has released its 2011 shareholder report, within which are some interesting metrics on their progress towards sustainability goals first outlined in 2008.
The report covers coffee sourcing, the amount of money invested in coffee farming communities via farmer loans, hours of community service volunteered by employees, LEED certification, recycling, energy consumption and sourcing, the amount of reusable cups used, as well as a variety of other factors.
Heading the report is the goal of having 100% of Starbucks coffee be “ethically sourced” by 2015. That means, for Starbucks, meeting their CAFE Practices standards. In 2011, 86% of all coffee purchased met this criteria, an increase of two percentage points over 2010.
Starbucks’ VP of global responsibility Ben Packard on the differences between Fair Trade and Starbucks’ own ethical sourcing standards:
The idea of supporting small producers, we have absolutely the same thing in mind as the Fair Trade movement. The challenge we found, in looking at all the certification schemes, was that none of them addressed the breadth of types of farms that we buy from.
On a consumer basis Fair Trade is very important in Europe, as a consumer purchasing criteria. It’s not as relevant [in the United States]. We continue to offer one of our major coffees, Italian roast, as Fair Trade certified. So we’re offering something that’s brewed more often.
But the CAFE Practices piece suits a broader aspect. We buy from big farms; we buy from small farms organized into co-ops; we buy from small farms who are organized into Producer Support Organizations—they’re not co-operatives but they are export organizations.
Nevertheless, Packard points out, Starbucks is one of the top purchases of Fair Trade coffee in the speciality coffee market.
A bit further down is an issue which TreeHugger has covered before: Starbucks efforts to have more front-of-store recycling. After a pilot program two years ago in New York City—from which Packard says Starbucks learned a lot of valuable lessons, such as making sure the bins are right in front of people, clearly labeled—in 2011 Starbucks has expanded the program to over 1000 stores in the US and Canada. That adds up to front-of-store recycling in 18% of US and Canada locations, which Starbucks considered to be on track to hit 100% of stores by 2015.
As far as expanding reusable cups, Starbucks has revised their goal. Previously the target was 25% of beverages in reusable cups by 2015. Now it is 5% of beverages “in personal tumblers” by 2015. Currently 2% of Starbucks’ beverages were served into reusable cups of some sort.
I asked Packard why more stores in the US don’t offer in-store customers beverages in reusable cups by default (at least those I’ve been to in Europe offer you a ceramic mug if you’re staying).
“It’s speed of service, and 80% of people are leaving the store. That’s it. That’s the dimension you compete on,” he replied; and then touted the discount that Starbucks’ offers for bringing your own mug.
What we realized is that the piece we can measure—and probably innovate how we communicate it—is that we’re providing a discount to consumers, for over 15 years now, which is the 10 cent discount [for bringing your own mug]. It is an incentive, but probably isn’t the biggest reason why people do that.
Overall the report paints a rosy picture of Starbucks’ sustainability efforts. One target (“engage a total of 50,000 young people to innovate and take action in their communities by 2015″) has been achieved. The target on reusable cups has been modified (downward). All other metrics are on-track to be reached, by Starbucks’ assessment:
- Hours of community service by Starbucks employees doubled in 2011, reaching over 442,000 hours, on the way to 1 million hours by 2015.
- 75% of new stores are built to LEED certification (the exact level isn’t disclosed).
- Energy use in Starbucks stores was down 7.5% over 2010 levels, on the way to a 25% reduction in 2015 (from 2008 levels).
- In 2011, a hair over 50% of Starbucks electricity worldwide came from renewable sources, purchased via renewable energy credits, on track to 100% by 2015.
- Though water consumption increased in 2011 slightly from 2010 (due to changes in behind-the-bar washing procedures), Starbucks says it is still on track to reduce water consumption 25% from 2008 levels by 2015.
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/starbucks-2011-sustainability-report-rosy-picture-green-progress.html
Photo: Kelly Rossiter/CC BY 2.0
I’ve made a lot of different recipes for cauliflower soup in my time, and I’ve also roasted cauliflower as a side dish, but I’ve never roasted the it before I added it to the soup pot. Just like the wonderful recipe for baked potato soup, the roasting of the vegetable adds a whole other dimension to the soup. The flavour is a bit more intense, and with the cauliflower, a bit nutty tasting.
Roasting the vegetable first adds a bit to the cooking time, but the reward is worth the little bit of extra effort. This is a very filling soup, and if you add a bit of crusty bread and a green salad, you would have a nice, light supper. I had some of the soup the next day for lunch and I ate it cold, which was also very nice. So depending on what kind of day you are having in this crazy weather, you can heat it up for a warming soup, or eat it outside in the sunshine.
This recipe is from the website Closet Cooking.
Roasted Cauliflower Soup with Aged Cheddar
1 small head cauliflower, cut into florets
2 tablespoons oil
salt and pepper to taste
1 tablespoon oil
1 medium onion, diced
2 cloves garlic, chopped
1 tablespoon thyme, chopped
3 cups vegetable broth
1 1/2 cups aged white cheddar, shredded
1 cup milk or cream
salt and pepper to taste
1. Toss the cauliflower florets in the oil along with the salt and pepper and arrange them in a single layer on a large baking sheet. Roast the cauliflower in a preheated 400F oven until lightly golden brown, about 20-30 minutes.
2. Heat the oil in a large sauce pan over medium heat. Add the onion and saute until tender, about 5-7 minutes. Add the garlic and thyme and saute until fragrant, about a minute.
3. Add the broth and cauliflower, bring to a boil, reduce the heat and simmer, covered, for 20 minutes. Puree the soup until it reaches your desired consistency with an immersion blender.
4. Mix in the cheese, let it melt and season with salt and pepper. Mix in the milk and remove from heat.
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/easy-vegetarian-recipes/weekday-vegetarian-roasted-cauliflower-soup-aged-cheddar.html
© Nissan Austria
Northern EV Fans Take Note!
The Nissan LEAF electric car will get an update at the end of this year, and while I can’t say I care much about the addition of leather seats or of a darker interior, the new, more efficient heater is a great addition. Cold weather is indeed a major foe for electric cars, and the LEAF is no exception. It takes a lot of energy to run a heater, and batteries tend not to perform as well in cold weather, so it’s a double whammy that reduces the driving range of the LEAF in cold weather.
© Lloyd Alter
But according to Mark Perry, director of product and advanced planning for Nissan Americas, the updated LEAF will have a “much, much more efficient” heater that will dramatically extend the Leaf’s range in cold weather. “You may not see much change on the EPA rating, but in cold-weather conditions you may see 20 to 25 miles of improvements,” Perry said. That’s huge and should make quite a real-world difference for northern LEAF owners!
For more on the LEAF’s performance in cold weather, check out Alex’s post on the subject.
Via Detroit News
See also: Nissan LEAF 2.0 to Have Wireless Charging Capability, Longer Range, Cheaper Price!
Article source: http://www.treehugger.com/cars/2013-nissan-leaf-get-20-25-extra-miles-cold-weather-thanks-new-heater.html
