There are many stinky things in the world today. From the bathroom to the kitchen there are things in everyday life that can cause a nose to curl. However, activated carbon can quickly eliminate odors in the home, office, or commercial building. While many products simply mask odors or cover them up, activated carbon can absorb the odor and eliminate it once and for all. There are many ways that activated carbon can be used within a building to remove odor. Whether the smell is a permanent or occasional odor, activated carbon can be used to eliminate it.
Air Filtration Systems
An air filtration system can be placed on the air supply to any building to help eliminate the odors in the building. If there is a central heat and air system in the building the air filtration system can be used in the circulation process. A free standing air purification system can also be used in bathrooms that are used by numerous employees. These systems are much more effective than other means of removing odors.
Odor Blocking Masks
For those who work or play in environments that are not appealing to their noses there are activated charcoal masks that can be worn. These masks work to block the smells from reaching the nose. As the smell passes through the mask it is sucked up against the carbon and held there, eliminating the smell. These masks are perfect for those who work with garbage, waste, or cleaning products.
Flatulence Elimination pads and Inserts
Flatulence is a problem for many people today. Because of a fast paced environment and fast food restraints many people experience this condition. Luckily, there are now flatulence pads that can be used to eliminate the odor that accompanies flatulence. These pads can be placed in a chair for those in an office. However, there are also flatulence pads that can be placed inside the undergarment to eliminate odors.
Odor Eliminators for Pets
Activated charcoal can also be used to eliminate the odor that accompanies pet ownership. There are many smells that can come from litter boxes, accidents on the floor, and messes made in the yard. However, activated carbon can be made in the form of a powder. This powder can be sprinkled into the litter box, on the carpet, or in the yard outside. For use on the carpet in can be sprinkled on and then vacuumed up However, in other places it can be left to continue working. It is perfectly safe to use around pets and will not cause any harm if they ingest it.
There are many uses fro activated carbon today. It is an excellent odor eliminator. While these are many of the uses for eliminating odors there are many more. Anywhere there is a smell or odor; activated carbon can be used to eliminate it. This product is a green option for cleaning, absorbing, and eliminating odor. Activated carbon also has many other uses including purification, detoxification and moisture absorption.
Carbon Resources Management Team has over 70 years of experience in the Activated Carbon and Activated Charcoal carbons industry. Our Sabre series® activated carbon products are the most diverse line of activated carbon products on the market.
Scientists Ask For (Copenhagen’s Spring) Higher CO2 Cuts
The International Scientific Congress on Climate Change was held in Copenhagen between 10th to 12th March and organised by the International Alliance of Research Universities (IARU): the conclusions will be published into a full synthesis report next June. Almost 1,600 scientific contributions of researchers from over 70 countries have been received, and more than 2,500 delegates attended the event.
Connie Hedegaard, Minister of Climate & Energy of Denmark said that we have “to avoid the unmanageable and manage the unavoidable” and she pointed to their example: this European country has become a net energy exporter in 30 years, creating a green growth as a stable solution of the 70s oil crisis. The messages of the congress are various. The risk that current trends of the climatic system will accelerate has a more defined and significant meaning: more probable abrupt and irreversible shifts, and we are already above the worst scenarios published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001. Thus the big problem is trying to at least slow down these trends if not reverse them. The experts tell us that fast regional and global mitigation strategies are needed and that the more we wait the more expensive and ambitious actions will have to be taken in the future. The fact that scientists have come to the point of saying that “Inaction is Inexcusable” means also that people who studied relentlessly for decades are frustrated by the inaction of governments, businesses and people: it is understandable given that their work has not been considered and used enough, if not at all, up to now. They are speaking louder and clearer now. The different roles of politicians and scientists have to be combined. It is time for leaders to rely firmly on science as a basis for tough and unavoidable decisions. A “societal transformation” is being asked for by a wide group of the most intelligent people on the planet including diffusion of sustainable behaviours, innovative leadership, removal of subsidies and reduction of “vested interests”. These are all very explicit messages to politicians and public alike: there is a lot of work to do between now and next December’s COP15.
In the final debate the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, summarised the six messages given by scientists as 6 keywords: Urgency (of the climate change challenge), Direction (long term target to be defined), Action (short term targets to be set), Fairness (to the poorest and most vulnerable), Opportunity (to originate large benefits), Governance (creation of a new global multilateral era). He stated firmly that “Business As Usual is dead” and asked his colleagues to follow Obama’s call for a Green New Deal, already asked for by public opinion and by many political parties in the world.
After the final debate with the panel of scientists an impatient Rasmussen asked for clear words on the CO2 emission target to be set in the new treaty. Prof. Daniel Kammen, Obama’s Senior Policy Advisor, stated that an entire new industrial revolution is needed to cut 1990’s CO2 emissions by 80% in 2050 and Prof. Stefan Rahmstorf agreed on this point. The feeling was that the other panelists didn’t mind… At this point the Prime Minister concluded that the ambition for COP15 can be this -80% long-term objective following the precautionary principle to avoid worse impacts (than the ones presented in 2007 IPCC report) already hypothesized by new works. Overall a more direct communication between scientists and policy makers took place in this huge meeting: now it’s time for delegations to study and prepare the ground for brave steps forward to be made by the international community in Copenhagen’s crucial Conference of the Parties #15. Will we be able to navigate better our “ship” in the solar system during the over 200 rotations it will make before then?
Written by Luca Marazzi on behalf of Responding to Climate Change.
For further information on Climate Change please visit the Responding to Climate Change website - http://www.rtcc.org
*Next event: Copenhagen, 24-26 May 2009. World Business Summit on Climate Change
In my four-article series on water use (The Resource Matrix), I took you on a journey to reveal the layers of The Resource Matrix in order to help you understand how water will be a highly contested commodity tomorrow, possibly as much as oil is fought over today.
You learned about your water footprint and a website where you can calculate it, virtual water and virtual water transfers, whereby choices here affect water availability elsewhere, to the point of some people not having enough water to drink in order to produce inexpensive dyed cotton, along with insane choices such as growing crops in the desert.
You learned that on average it takes 1854 to 3000 gallons to produce one pound of beef.
Yep, it’s it’s been a great journey through the sidetrip city of the Resource Matrix.
Today, we’ve found the on-ramp to the Green Lighting Interstate and are driving to take a look at water use in generating electricity.
For a simple reason. It takes a lot of water to produce electricity.
How much? 5% of all US water? 10%? Can’t be as high as 25%?
Electricity and water?
I thought the issue was fossil fuels and greenhouse gases
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated water use in the United States in 2000.
Their grand total: 408 billion gallons per day withdrawn for all uses.
The number 1 spot, weighing in at 48%, was thermoelectric power.
Irrigation earned the runner-up prize at 34%.
The 195 billion gallons need to come from somewhere, and actions have consequences. Environmental ones, as in 40 million fish in the Great Lakes killed each year due to being trapped against water intake devices. That’s a lot of Friday night fish dinners.
How much water is used in generating electricity?
Large fossil fuel and nuclear plants require incredible quantities of water for cooling and ongoing maintenance.
Water for thermoelectric power is used in generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators. It uses 48% of all water in the US.
According to the Pace Energy and Climate Center, the amount of water used for power plant cooling varies by each specific power plant’s electricity generating technology and size. Nuclear reactors require the most water for cooling, and baseload fossil fuel power plants come in second.
The Salem Nuclear Generating Station alone takes 3 billion gallons a day from the Delaware Bay, according to the Pace Energy and Climate Center.
Nationally:
Steam electric generating plants across the nation draw in more than 200 billion gallons per day.
Nuclear and fossil fuel power plants drink over 185 billion gallons of water per day.
Geothermal power plants add another 2 billion or so gallons a day.
Most renewable energy technologies require little or no water for cooling.
These numbers are starting to sound like the same ones the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank use.
Imagine watching your favorite science program where astronomers explain that the universe is 78 billion light-years wide (78 billion units of 5,878,630,000,000 miles). There is absolutely nothing in our experience to help us wrap our mind around it.
How much is 3 billion gallons per day?
The Delaware Bay feeds Salem Nuclear Generating Station 3 billion gallons a day.
Imagine this rectangle: a football field with end zones (360 feet long x 160 feet wide). Then add to it walls on each side of the rectangle to create a container to hold the 3 billion gallons you pour into it.
How high do you need to make those walls to contain 3 billion gallons? 6915 feet high. Or 1.3 miles.
Maybe 6915 feet high is still hard to imagine. So how deep do you cover the field in order to feed the Salem plant every minute? Answer: 5 feet deep. Every minute.
48% of all water use: We’re Number One!
How much is 195 billion gallons per day?
Using the USGS figure for 2000, thermoelectric power nationwide used 195 billion gallons a day, or 48% of all water used in the US. My guess is the water use has grown since then.
How high are the walls on our football field now? 449,475 feet or 85 miles high. We’re back to US Treasury and astronomy numbers again.
So, let’s get a higher-level view to help us.
Lake Erie holds 116 cubic miles of water.
Nationally, thermoelectric power uses 195 billion gallons a day - or 64.2 cubic miles a year.
We drain Lake Erie every 22 months.
But the water used is returned to its source.
So what’s the issue about water use?
Power generation returns 98% of the water back to its source (bay, lake, river, ocean).
It’s the environmental consequences.
The Pace Energy and Climate Center explains it neatly:
Withdrawal of large volumes of surface water for either power plant cooling or hydropower generation can kill fish, larvae and other organisms trapped against intake structures (impinged), or swept up (entrained) in the flow through the different sections of a power plant.
Examples include:
The Salem Nuclear Generating Station is responsible for an annual 11 percent reduction in weakfish and 31 percent reduction in bay anchovy.
At the Indian Point 2 and 3 reactors on the Hudson River, the number of fish impinged totaled over 1.5 million fish in 1987.
The 90 power plants using once-through-cooling on the Great Lakes kill in excess of 40 million fish per year due to impingement. (Once-through cooling needs a continual flow of new water, and uses 30 to 50 times that of a closed cycle system. Closed cycles cool down water from steam then reuse it.)
The diversion of water out of the river removes water for healthy in-stream ecosystems:
Stretches below dams are often completely de-watered.
Fluctuations in water flow from peaking operations create a “tidal effect,” disrupting the downstream riparian community that supports its unique ecosystem.
A dam’s impoundment slows water flows, which hinders natural downstream migration of many fish species.
By slowing river flows, dams also allow silt to collect on river and reservoir bottoms and bury fish spawning habitat. Silt trapped above dams accumulates heavy metals and other pollutants. Disrupting the natural flow of sediments in rivers also leads to erosion of riverbeds downstream of the dam and increases risks of floods.
The impoundment of water by hydropower facilities fundamentally reshapes the physical habitat from a riverine to an artificial pond community.
This often eliminates native populations of fish and other wildlife.
Dams also impede the upstream and downstream movement of fish and other wildlife, and prevent the flow of plants and nutrients. This impact is most significant on migratory fish, which are born in the river and must migrate downstream early in life to the ocean and then migrate upstream again to lay their eggs (or “spawn”).
As mentioned above, withdrawal of water into turbines can also impinge or entrain significant numbers of fish.
The cleanest kilowatt is the one never used:
Back to those compact fluorescent lamps and LEDs
PowerScorecard.org explains the solution:
By re-directing electricity dollars to support environmentally benign energy resources, consumers are empowered, in states that offer supply choice, to influence the existing generating resources that are deployed to meet demand.
They can also support the construction of new and cleaner electricity resources that will be built to meet overall growth in demand in the future. By supporting these power options, consumers can minimize many water use and consumption impacts. Still, directing your dollars to cleaner power products in no way helps remediate damages that already have occurred. Consumers can stop the construction of new hydropower facilities or alter conditions of siting and operation, but they cannot undo previous environmental degradation that occurred at existing hydropower facilities.
In short, reduce your use of electricity.
More Info:
We used several sources for this article, including the PowerScorecard.org website, which is produced by the Pace Energy and Climate Center, which is part of the Pace University School of Law’s Center for Environmental Legal Studies, Pace University, White Plains, New York.
Ratings of Electric Power Choices for some service areas.
More info on electricity and the environment:
Technologies
Climate change
Acid rain
Ozone depletion
Water use (our article today)
Water quality
Land: on-site and off-site impacts
Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .
To your green, brighter future,
Cinnamon Alvarez,
A19
And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.
Silicon Valley is known for both innovation and hype. Recently, this pool of innovation has extended beyond bandwidth to the protection the environment. Google and Yahoo, the search engine giants, are both headquartered in the Valley and have been making headlines by greening their offices, reducing energy consumption, and carbon trading. The PR motivations are obvious, but are the green benefits really there? To set apart the hype from reality, we have analyzed the green value of both Google and Yahoo’s headquarter facilities.
We looked at the ecological services provided by green landscape features such as trees and open space (i.e. grass). Grass and trees are pervious surfaces, meaning they allow water to permeate into the ground. Roofs, sidewalks, patios, and asphalt parking lots are examples of impervious surfaces, where rainwater drains into the public storm drains. Heavy metals, oil, and other pollutants are carried off parking lots in rainwater, which often lead directly to open water habitats, where fish, birds, and reptiles live.
In terms of ecological services, trees and grass have been proven to:
1. Remove and store carbon from the atmosphere,
2. Remove certain airborne pollutants,
3. Permits rainwater to seep into the ground as opposed to draining into the stormdrains, and
4. Remove certain waterborne pollutants.
Here is a look at how green Google and Yahoo really are and how the measure up against each other.
Google Green Report
Google’s headquarters, the Googleplex, covers 44 acres, nearly 50% of which is grass or tree canopy. This is an impressive paved to open space ratio. The grass and trees on the Googleplex remove roughly 2 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.04 tons per year per acre. In addition, 530 lbs. of air pollution are removed per year (e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter), or 12 lbs. per year per acre. It was assumed that the parking lot of the Googleplex is asphalt, and not a type of porous pavement, so the cost of managing rainfall runoff from the Googleplex is $4,474 per year, or $103 per year per acre. The abundance of grass and tree canopy on the Googleplex go a long way to offset the water quality impacts of the paved surfaces (mainly the parking lot). On average, the grass and trees reduce water pollution by 6%, as opposed to the entire property being paved.
Yahoo Green Report
The Yahoo headquarters, Yahooplex, covers 28 acres, a third of which is grass or tree canopy. This is a classic ratio of paved to open space for large office complexes in California. So far, par for the course. The Yahooplex removes 0.36 tons of carbon from the atmosphere per year, or 0.01 tons per year per acre. 114 lbs. of air pollutants are removed per year, or 4 lbs. per year per acre. In terms of rainfall, the cost associated with runoff is $9,219 per year, or $331 per year per acre. The grass and tree canopy help offset the paved areas with a 2.3% reduction in water pollution as opposed to the entire property being paved.
The final green analysis?
Google kicks Yahoo’s butt, largely due to the forethought, or luxury, of the Googleplex having 50% of its property surface providing green services. The good news for both Google and Yahoo is that over time, as trees grow, so will the tree’s canopy and mass, thus storing more carbon and removing more air pollutants.
Green next steps for both Google and Yahoo is to:
Install porous parking surfaces, allowing up to 80% of rainwater to seep into the ground,
Install green roofs, absorbing rainwater while reducing cooling costs and energy consumption, and
Planting larger trees on the south and west sides of the buildings to reduce cooling costs and energy consumption.
While we crunched the hard numbers to settle the Google vs. Yahoo green debate, this report illuminates the great opportunity that awaits these two Silicon Valley giants to harness the ecological services of green surfaces.
Chris Erichsen is a GIS Mapping consultant with the Erichsen Group, GIS and Mapping in northern California. He has over 10 yrs of GIS experience and helps many industries around the world apply GIS mapping technology. Learn more examples of GIS mapping capabilities.
Our world is facing a huge crisis today in the form of global warming. Though most recognize that it is a bomb ticking away and awaiting to explode, few of us actually make an effort to change this dangerous trend. Lots of research and methods are being discovered and discussed but very few concrete steps have been taken yet. The major culprit is the industries that contribute maximum carbon dioxide and other dangerous gases to the environment. Although it is imperative that each of us do something to reduce our carbon footprint on earth, the industries and huge factories in the developing worlds should be forced to take up real concrete methods of curtailing pollution.
With rising population, the world has to increase production of materials and goods for all. This obviously calls for more and more industries in the world, which will only add more emitting pollutants to the atmosphere. The world needs to come together to work out solutions that can both save the environment and maintain economic development.
The problem of global warming represents a serious threat to the entire world. We are running out of time as warned by many scientists around the globe. People have created this problem by greatly increasing the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; and people working together will be the only way to stop it.
As President Obama makes an effort to introduce and promote green enterprises and industries, he will face a startling fact. Most pollution is created by China and the developing world. So no matter how much the developed world reduces their carbon emission, countries like China will compensate it with more pollutants. The per capita emission has increased six times today thanks to industrial projects which do not follow minimum environmental laws and directives.
It is imperative that Chinese President Hu Jintao and the other world leaders start to outline a plan now that will be followed by most countries, particularly China, in going green in their business practices.
However, the problem facing the world is that if we tackle this problem from a micro level, we come face to face with industrialists who are trying very hard to make their business a success and increase profit. There is nothing wrong in that because more profit would mean greater investment and a stronger economy. But most of these factory/industrial owners do not take into account the bad effects of pollution due to the emissions and discharges from their units.
Scientists across the globe are insisting that the environmental costs should also be included in the production costs. But, unfortunately, the busy industrialists do not have time to take into account the social and environmental responsibilities of the company; and, hence, little to no effort is made by them to alter the situation. Forcing the overworked staff to look into ways to follow the green norms is not cost effective in the long run.
A better way to tackle the problem is to hire a Green Consultant. The Green Consultant would look into individual business practices and suggest concrete methods to reduce pollution and reduce wastage and improper use of resources. For a nominal fee the consultant would work throughout the year to move the business toward a successful GCI Green Building certification. However, because businesses differ in nature, region, demands, budget, etc., it would make sense that one approach for all may not work well.
Consult the Green Business League website to learn more about the consultant and their expertise.
So How You Do’ing? In the spirit of recycling, I thought I would use those famous words from Friends character Joey. I have shared with you in other articles ideas that my family are using to cut our carbon footprint on this precious Earth that we call home.
Reducing is always a challenge, because it goes in the face of our societal values of having more and doing more, but it is the highest form of recycling.
Re-using is something that has been natural for me through out my life. It may be challenging at times to creatively transform old household items into new uses, but this has become one of the staples of our family’s efforts to be more environmentally friendly…and save money.
Recycling has become the catch phrase for the 3 R’s, but is strictly speaking altering one thing into another. It is important that we recycle as much as we possibly can, because making consumables from recycled goods is always cheaper and better for the environment than making them from raw materials. But we should recognise too that recycling should only be used after we have reduced and re-used. For our children and their futures, we must use all the arsenal of tools embodied in the 3 R’s: reducing wherever we can, re-using everything that we possibly can, and recycling every item that our councils and recycling centres will accept.
Today I am wanted to look at those things that my family could do better:
1) Reducing excess packaging. I think this might be the most challenging to tackle; partly because a great deal of it is beyond our control. We are, I admit, large consumers of electronics (blame techie husband). Have you ever noticed how much packaging goes into one tiny piece of plastic? A memory stick that is one inch by two will most often come in a plastic (non-recyclable) package with a large cardboard inset and an information packet. I recognise that this is an anti-theft device, but aren’t there other alternatives? What about putting such items behind the counter? The other side of that is that the packaging contributes to the cost of that piece of plastic and metal. Of course, this is an issue that will require a concreted effort from consumer and most likely government intervention to address. What I can do for now is to choose to purchase my fruit and vegetables loose. I am also hoping this will cut down on both spending and waste by purchasing only what we need.
2) I am going to remember to use those little switches on the power plugs. As I mentioned, being American we do not have such things. It has been hard for me change a lifetime of habits. But with my husband’s help, I am going to use these magic little buttons more often.
3) We are going to replace all batteries with rechargeable ones. About half of our batteries are rechargeable; mostly the ones in our keyboards and mousse. But over the coming weeks, we will replace all batteries with rechargeable ones…since these are particularly toxic waste in our landfills.
4) I am going to use less water when washing dishes. I have this habit of running the water to rinse dishes as I go. The new plan is to wash everything and sit it on the counter until I am done. Then use the same pan to rinse the dishes in cold water.
5) I am going to have a spring clean out. I may be doing pretty well at re-using but I could help others to do better by donating all the stuff I am not using to Freecycle, the Islington Swap Xchange, or my local Mind shop. This will make my husband very happy as he has been complaining about my daughter’s toys for a while now.
So what can you do better? Remember though this is not about being perfect, but the little things that we can realistically do and continue to do. The things that may seem so small that you don’t think they will make a difference: things that if we all did would make a huge difference. I invite you all to share your list with me.
Terri O’Neale is the mother of six; ranging in age from 3 to 22. She has been both a working and stay-at-home mother at various times in her life. She was also a single mother for almost five years, before re-marrying the love of her life at the age of forty. Obviously, she has a life-time of training in raising a family on a tight budget. In addition to these real life experiences, she possesses a bachelors degree in health education and a minored in environmental management in her masters programme.
Terri feels strongly that this is one of the most challenging times in history for the family, but she also believes that families with the will and resolve to address the pressing issues of saving money, becoming greener, leading healthier lifestyles and spending more time with one another can endure these challenging times and come out victorious in the end.
Through Frugal Family articles, blogs, videos and social networking, she helps modern families rediscover some lost art forms such as cooking, sewing, and gardening. The goal is not to go back in time or become fanatical, but to help all families find simple and effective ways that fit into their lifestyle to make moderate changes with huge impacts. For more information, check out her blog http://frugalfam.wordpress.com/.
Going green always starts with good intentions, but the massive amount of green terms can sometimes be overwhelming. Here’s some of the common green terms you’ll hear and what they mean.
Organic
The term organic can often be used very broadly, but typically refers to products that have only organic components, produced without pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, or fertilizers or other harmful chemicals. Look for: USDA Certified Organic
Sustainable
Products or materials that are described as being sustainable contain materials that do not deplete the Earth of its resources and is easily replenished. There are many common types of materials that are considered sustainable:
Bamboo - Bamboo is a fast-growing and renewable resource that can be used to make fabrics, flooring, furniture and other products.
Jute - Jute is a long and shiny vegetable plant fiber that can be woven into a strong thread or twine. It is commonly used to create cloth or used within carpets, and rugs.
Hemp - Hemp is a fast-growing plant that is most commonly used for its strong fibers to create cloth used in bags and clothing. It can grow organically and also be used to create oils for cosmetic products as well as be used in food.
Sustainable Wool - There are many types of sustainable animal wools such as alpaca fibers or merino wool that can be used to create strong fibers commonly used in clothing.
Energy-Efficient
Products that are energy-efficient are design to consume less energy when operating without sacrificing performance, reducing long-term environmental and cost impacts. Energy-efficient products can range from appliances to light bulbs as well as contain different levels of efficiency. Look for: Energy Star Qualified, EPEAT Rated
Post-Consumer Recycled
Once a product has completely served its purpose, what remains are post-consumer materials that would otherwise be disposed as waste but are instead recycled. This would include products such as old packaging, glass bottles, aluminum cans, and plastics. When you recycle from your home these products become post-consumer recycled.
How is this different vs recycled? Regular recycled materials can contain a combination of materials, often coming a scraps or other by-products as a result of manufacturing. This could include both pre-consumer and post-consumer waste.
Recyclable
A recyclable product means that it can be recycled and be used to create future products. Polypropylene #5 is a common plastic to look for in products which is one of the most easily recyclable plastics.
Look for: Polypropylene #5
Reusable
Reusable products mean that a product can be used multiple times before the product is discarded or recycled. Some common reusable products are shopping bags, water bottles and tableware.
Fair Trade
Fair Trade is a social movement that promotes certain standards of sustainability practices and empowering producers in developing nations. Fair trade supports fair prices, fair labor conditions, community development and environmental sustainability.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
VOCs are organic chemical compounds that have high vapor pressure and easily evaporate at room temperature. VOCs can be released from many household items such as paints, flooring, upholstery, and cleaners. These VOCs are not only air pollutants but have also been known to cause health effects as well.
Look for: Low-VOC, Zero-VOC
Bisphenol A (BPA)
BPA is an organic compound that is used in the creation of many plastics and resins. Most commonly you will find BPA used polycarbonate bottles. While there is some controversy about the effects of BPA, some research has raised serious health concerns about the usage of BPA. Look for: BPA-free
Biodegradable
Biodegradable means that a substance can be naturally decomposed by biological processes. If a product is biodegradable, this means that it can be disposed of with no negative environmental impacts.
Solar-Powered
Solar powered products are powered using energy from the sun. Solar power can be used in a range of products from small household gadgets to entire home heating systems.
Now you’re ready to start shopping for green products!
In Houston, LEED Schools Get More Than an E For Effort
We send our children to school every day and ask them to learn. They are, after all, the future of our world; and so we ask them to learn about right and wrong, learn about the world, and learn how to take care of each other. But do we want them to learn how to take care of the world, too?
That is what LEED Green Building schools in Houston and around the nation are doing. They are teaching the children, through example, what it means truly to earn an A for awareness of the environment’s needs. They stand for the future of America as a benchmark of creation care.
LEED Green Building schools are K-12 schools that are tailor-made to produce an environment safe and healthy for children, comfortable for teachers, cost-effective for the taxpayers, and easy on the environment. By addressing the uniqueness of school spaces and children’s health issues, LEED for Schools provides a unique, comprehensive tool for schools that wish to build green with measurable results. The rating system addresses issues such as classroom acoustics, daylight and views, mold prevention, and environmental site assessment.
In addition, Green schools cost less to operate, freeing up resources to truly improve students’ education. Their carefully planned acoustics and abundant daylight make it easier and more comfortable for students to learn. Their clean indoor air cuts down sick days and gives our children a head start for a healthy, prosperous future. And their innovative design provides a wealth of hands-on learning opportunities.
No longer must they learn through books about environmental safety and/or green projects around the world. Instead, they can learn hands-on at school – through observation and through practice.
Houston has taken the lead around the nation in building green schools. The Houston chapter is dedicated to showing school district leaders how the LEED FOR SCHOOLS process can benefit them. Other leading organizations in the area are also committed. Earlier this year, the Houston-Galveston Area Council joined with the Houston chapter to produce a year-long symposia to educate the public and educators about the facts and costs for LEED FOR SCHOOLS.
They ideally will have all their schools “Go Green” over the course of the next 10 years.
Other cities are following their lead. Salt Lake City, Grand Rapids and Seattle are all among the top cities with at least three green schools. And more are being built monthly. Both students and parents, teachers and administrators see the need and the benefits for green schools, and are lobbying for all school to change their ways.
For students and teachers, green schools mean reduced incidence of asthma, decreased absenteeism, improved academic performance and increased teacher satisfaction. For parents, green schools offer the confidence that comes with knowing their children spend their days in an environment that is both healthy and conducive to learning.
Green Schools get more than an E for effort. They are the bright and healthy future for our children.
Copyright 2009 - 2010 theLEED.com and Green Efficient. Article may be reproduced, unchanged, as long as it retains author information and linking.
Rick Walker is the CEO of Green Efficient. GreenEfficient is the leader in the LEED building maintenance and operations market. Primarily serving Texas, their LEED Accredited Professionals (LEED-APS) manage commercial facilities using their integrated services portfolio of LEED-compliant janitorial services, Integrated Pest Management services, HVAC maintenance, lawn care services, purchasing oversight, occupant training and USGBC submittal services. Offices in Houston, Austin, Dallas and Corpus Christi enable the most active Texas LEED construction markets to be covered by their specialty services. For information on LEED, green building and sustainable products, visit their blog: theLEED
LEED: In Houston Schools Get More Than an E For Effort
We send our children to school every day and ask them to learn. They are, after all, the future of our world; and so we ask them to learn about right and wrong, learn about the world, and learn how to take care of each other. But do we want them to learn how to take care of the world, too?
That is what LEED Green Building schools in Houston and around the nation are doing. They are teaching the children, through example, what it means truly to earn an A for awareness of the environment’s needs. They stand for the future of America as a benchmark of creation care.
LEED Green Building schools are K-12 schools that are tailor-made to produce an environment safe and healthy for children, comfortable for teachers, cost-effective for the taxpayers, and easy on the environment. By addressing the uniqueness of school spaces and children’s health issues, LEED for Schools provides a unique, comprehensive tool for schools that wish to build green with measurable results. The rating system addresses issues such as classroom acoustics, daylight and views, mold prevention, and environmental site assessment.
In addition, Green schools cost less to operate, freeing up resources to truly improve students’ education. Their carefully planned acoustics and abundant daylight make it easier and more comfortable for students to learn. Their clean indoor air cuts down sick days and gives our children a head start for a healthy, prosperous future. And their innovative design provides a wealth of hands-on learning opportunities.
No longer must they learn through books about environmental safety and/or green projects around the world. Instead, they can learn hands-on at school – through observation and through practice.
Houston has taken the lead around the nation in building green schools. The Houston chapter is dedicated to showing school district leaders how the LEED FOR SCHOOLS process can benefit them. Other leading organizations in the area are also committed. Earlier this year, the Houston-Galveston Area Council joined with the Houston chapter to produce a year-long symposia to educate the public and educators about the facts and costs for LEED FOR SCHOOLS.
They ideally will have all their schools “Go Green” over the course of the next 10 years.
Other cities are following their lead. Salt Lake City, Grand Rapids and Seattle are all among the top cities with at least three green schools. And more are being built monthly. Both students and parents, teachers and administrators see the need and the benefits for green schools, and are lobbying for all school to change their ways.
For students and teachers, green schools mean reduced incidence of asthma, decreased absenteeism, improved academic performance and increased teacher satisfaction. For parents, green schools offer the confidence that comes with knowing their children spend their days in an environment that is both healthy and conducive to learning.
Green Schools get more than an E for effort. They are the bright and healthy future for our children.
Copyright 2009 - 2010 theLEED.com and Green Efficient. Article may be reproduced, unchanged, as long as it retains author information and linking.
Rick Walker is the CEO of Green Efficient. GreenEfficient is the leader in the LEED building maintenance and operations market. Primarily serving Texas, their LEED Accredited Professionals (LEED-APS) manage commercial facilities using their integrated services portfolio of LEED-compliant janitorial services, Integrated Pest Management services, HVAC maintenance, lawn care services, purchasing oversight, occupant training and USGBC submittal services. Offices in Houston, Austin, Dallas and Corpus Christi enable the most active Texas LEED construction markets to be covered by their specialty services. For information on LEED, green building and sustainable products, visit their blog: theLEED
Throughout the history of our planet it has endured a constantly changing climate. It endured an ice age and has also experienced long periods of heat. But over the last two hundred years, give or take, the temperature of our planet has been steadily increasing. This change in the climate on earth is known as global warming, and global warming is the direct result of the industrial revolution.
Because of the industrial revolution, people are constantly burning fossil fuels such as oil and coal. But by burning these fuels dangerous greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) are then released into the earth’s atmosphere. These gases block heat rising from the earth from being able to escape into space. The same basic function that glass panels on greenhouses have, hence the name. Our burning of fossil fuels causes more than three quarters of all carbon dioxide emissions. Power plants and other stationary sources contribute more than half of that amount.
Along with increasing CO2 emissions, deforestation is on the increase as well. This is disastrous, because trees recycle CO2 and release oxygen back into the atmosphere. Because of the rise in deforestation levels the fossil fuels we burn are seriously jeopardizing our planet. We know that global warming is the cause of glaciers getting smaller and for the rise in sea levels. Plants and animals show clear and undeniable signs that they are affected in many different ways. Earth is experiencing longer seasons which results in rivers and lakes freezing later than usual and melting sooner. Without a doubt, global warming causes many changes and affects our planet in many ways but can it also cause a tsunami?
Nobody will ever forget the utter destruction, grief and loss left behind after the huge tsunami that hit parts of Asia on December 26th, 2004. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed, injured and traumatized. The areas it hit were left completely destroyed.
Generally speaking a tsunami is made up of a series of waves. More often than not the first one is the mildest. Prior to the arrival of the first wave, the shoreline recedes dramatically and often leaves the ocean floor exposed. They mostly occur where the water is shallow but they can also occur around coastal areas. In deep water a tsunami appears as a big wave and nothing more. In shallow water this is not the case. The wave can reach as high as one hundred metres, although, in all honesty, this is not at all common.
We know that tsunami’s can be caused by an earthquake, but this is not the only cause. They can also be caused through volcanic eruptions and landslides. Another cause is if a large amount of water is somehow displaced, such as when meteors happen to fall into large bodies of water. Tsunami’s are caused by events that can be, and are, affected by global warming, however global warming itself does not directly trigger the formation of a tsunami. Basically, it is an indirect cause.
One thing is certain, global warming is not a myth as some suggest. The planet is displaying clear signs that we dare not ignore.
For more global warming articles and daily news why not visit http://www.globalwarmingnewsblog.com - a site dedicated to information about climate change: effects, issues, causes, solutions, opinion and more.