Thousands of people participating in Earth Hour will switch of their lights.

Tomorrow, at 8.30pm, thousands of people across the UK and maybe a billion across the world will take part in Earth Hour.

It’ll look impressive, no doubt. The big switch-off will make the news. But so what? We know that just one hour, even on this global scale, won’t in itself save energy or reduce emissions in any significant way. This is a giant photo opportunity – eye-catching and symbolic, yes – but how can it really make a difference? More importantly, why would a science-based organisation like WWF believe this is worth the effort?

I think there are many reasons, but there are three worth focusing on.

Firstly, climate change is a threat truly global in its nature. It demands global attention, commitment and action. In December last year, as the climate talks in Copenhagen came to a stuttering finish, many in the UK felt disappointed and disillusioned. But talking to my colleagues working in areas of the world already feeling the effects of climate change, emotions ran much higher. Anger and disbelief best describes what nations like the Maldives, Bangladesh and Tanzania felt on seeing the failure of world leaders to take collective responsibility. They are seeing the effects of climate change now. It is, for countries in their position, no theory for debate or distant possibility.

As I write, more than 125 countries have confirmed their participation in Earth Hour, almost 40 more than in 2009, including 56 national capitals and eight of the 10 most populated metropolises on the planet. “Earth Hour” has appeared more than 30m times online in the past 24 hours and is currently one of the top 10 trending topics on Twitter. While the UK and the US (two major global emitters) may have seen an increase in sceptical noise on climate change in recent months, I feel confident that globally, this is no waning movement.

Secondly, politicians here in the UK need a mandate to act. Unlike elsewhere in the world, our main political parties all understand the threat of climate change and say that they are committed, albeit with different policies and approaches, to dealing with the problem. However, Copenhagen largely failed and leaders need us, the voters, to keep up a demand for action.

This close to a general election, there’s no better time to make a big, bold, collective statement that as a public, we expect leadership from our next government, whatever its hue. Schools, cathedrals, large companies, small businesses, pubs, clubs, councils all add up to a pretty comprehensive slice of our population and just this week, under pressure from Earth Hour participants, supporters and many committed MPs, the Palace of Westminster and 10 Downing Street joined the Senedd in Cardiff and the Scottish parliament in Holyrood and signed up to switch off. In the US, 31 state governors are supporting Earth Hour. The people who matter do notice.

Lastly, Earth Hour is for me a brilliant analogy for how we can get to a solution. Climate change will demand big, global ambition from world leaders – the “landmarks” of our political landscape. Just as lights go off at Christ the Redeemer, the Empire State Building and the Forbidden City, we need Presidents Lula da Silva, Obama and Hu Jintao and many others to work together in order to get a binding commitment to reduce emissions.

A low-carbon future will demand small changes from all of us at home, like the families taking part in Earth Hour, perhaps eating their dinner by candlelight. Better insulation, more efficient heating, using public transport and the products we choose to consume can all have impact on the energy we use and reduce our personal impact on our environment.

Earth Hour is not about a world without light, power and the great human achievements that keep us warm and safe. It is absolutely a celebration of their positive role; we want a bright future in which the lights stay on, drawing on forms of energy and innovative technologies that have a lesser impact on people and nature around the world. As the 10:10 campaign has shown alongside Earth Hour, collective action can have an impact.

We know that a single hour, once a year is not enough. But also we know that there is no greater, global call to action available at the flick of a switch. We firmly believe Earth hour is worth it.

Source: Guardian

What will you do by candle-light during Earth Hour?

This Saturday night, hundreds of millions of people will turn their lights off in a symbolic gesture for WWF’s Earth Hour. Setting aside the question of why they’re at home on Saturday night, I wonder if those millions have actually considered what they’re going to do while the lights off, aside from firing up another light in the shape of the telly or another screen?

Some participants, like Malcolm Handoll in Orkney, clearly have commendable ideas already, such as “games, candlelit dinners, chatting with friends around a fire, a walk in the park”. But as a public service for anyone who’s signed up without a plan, here are some suggestions on things to do in the dark.

One bright suggestion from the environmentguardian.co.uk team is making shadow puppets on the wall with a torch. I recommend a cracking book I received at Christmas on this art, Hand shadows to be thrown upon a wall, a Ronseal slither of a title written by a chap called Henry Bursill in 1860 to entertain his kids. Hours of fun – or ten minutes, at least.

Other ideas from Guardian towers included looking at the stars – hopefully easier with Earth Hour’s temporary drop in light pollution – meditating, going for a run, doing press-ups or, like Malcolm, having a candlelit dinner. My own suggestions are heading to the high ground in a city to watch the lights go out in a kind of inverse Fireworks night, getting a boardgame out (Scrabble on a table still beats the iPhone version), or going to bed early for sleep and sex (Care2 suggests tantric, but is an hour really long enough for that?).

You could also be very retro and go in for a bout of storytelling, as some people recall doing during the 1970′s power cuts, or take WWF up on its idea of a candlelit quiz on animals, green living and other topics. Elsewhere on the web, Suitably Desparing’s blogger is weighing up listening to a wind-up radio against seeing Edinburgh’s landmarks, while Vancouver’s magazine Granville has a good roundup of ideas from last year, including the obvious one I’ve missed so far – making music.

That’s the limit of my imagination, social circle and web trawling; what are your, probably better, ideas for things to do in the dark this weekend?

Source: Guardian

Green algae known as Cladophora

A new biodegradable battery made of cellulose promises to offer thin, flexible, lightweight, inexpensive and environmentally-friendly batteries made without metal parts.

The battery is made from green algae known as Cladophora, found along freshwater beaches around the world.

The key to the battery’s success is its large surface area. Made from algae-derived cellulose with 100 times the surface area of the cellulose found in sheets of notebook paper, the battery can manage far more conducting polymer than in previous incarnations.

That means better recharge, hold and discharge capabilities.

Source: Smart Planet

Al Gore

I am a fan of Al Gore. I do not doubt global warming.  But the wrong arguments have been made on renewables all along.  The current Climate Bill is, in fact, a jobs bill.

Whatever you think of climate change the fact is we’re subsidizing a market sector in hydrocarbons that is not growing, and not producing jobs.

Our Department of Energy still pays for oil and gas research. Corporate taxes are kept low in states with heavy concentrations of hydrocarbons. Energy companies still enjoy accelerated depreciation.

This despite decades of enormous profit, and increased efficiencies which mean that oil, gas and coal don’t really create many jobs. And the cost of using hydrocarbons, pollution and habitat damage, are never accounted for at all.

In contrast, our economic rivals are passing all sorts of incentives for renewable development. China now leads in solar cell production. Germans have used market incentives to construct nearly 24,000 megawatts of wind power.

Energy for the Sun, from the wind, and from the tides is a growth industry. It increases the self-sufficiency of any country that uses these resources. It creates thousands of new jobs. So Germany’s economy is recovering and China’s is back to rocketing along, while we deal with unemployment over 10%.

Source: Smart Planet

The New Green Economy

For a while, things were looking gloomy. The founders of Washington, D.C.‘s Mount Pleasant Solar Cooperative had their hearts in the right place; they even had their paperwork in the right place. But they hit snag after snag as they tried to fulfill the dream of converting their neighborhood to solar power: Contractors who didn’t want to sell solar panels in bulk. Confusion over the role of the regional utility. And the inevitable red tape of local politics.

Eventually the group’s persistence paid off, and this month they’re celebrating their fiftieth neighborhood solar installation. We caught up with co-founder and president Anya Schoolman to find out how it all happened, what’s next, and what advice she’d give to other communities who want to follow the sun.

Q. Can you explain what the Mount Pleasant Solar Cooperative is, and how and when it formed?

A. The Mt. Pleasant Solar cooperative emerged from dinner table conversation I had with my son Walter, then 12, and his friend Diego. They had seen “An Inconvenient Truth” and they wanted to know, if the Earth was going to overheat in their lifetime, “Is, um, anybody, you know … going to do anything about it?” The next question was, “Why don’t we get solar power in our neighborhood.” So we decided we would try to do something.

Our neighborhood consists mostly of rowhouses with flat roofs. We thought if we got enough neighbors together who wanted to adopt solar arrays, some solar contractor would offer us big discounts. We got the neighbors together and quickly learned it was going to be a lot more complicated than we originally thought. So we set out to to educate ourselves about all aspects of solar and to share that knowledge with as many people as possible. That’s where the “cooperative” concept really proved valuable. Read more at http://www.grist.org

Source: The New Green Economy

The New Green Economy

For over half a century now, linear product life cycles have dominated the marketplace and come to define the value sets that characterize modern economics.  The average consumer has unwittingly invested untold amounts of time, energy, and income to ensure that the Materials Economy remains a driving force throughout cultures around the world.  Product marketing incessantly bombards consumers in an effort to dupe them into believing that happiness and peace of mind are to be found in the latest product trends.

An April 2009 article published on The New Green Economy, entitled Transforming the Materials Economy, examined the outright unsustainability of the Materials Economy.  The article aimed to promulgate the devastating impact that linear product life cycles have had on the both natural and built environments, as well as the bleak future they may lay ahead if these cycles are not radically modified to mirror the circular life cycles as found in the natural world.

Source: The New Green Economy

Copenhagen

From what I can tell, not a few companies are a tad upset about political developments over the past week that suggest major world leaders are basically ready to renege on their promise to work toward halving global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

I mean, here they are (at least some businesses) busting their own business models to figure out how to live up to the industrial end of the bargain while the politicians are defaulting to be political all over again heading into COP-15, the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen from Dec. 7 to Dec. 18.

Source: Smart Planet

Solar roof tiles

What is the true cost of solar power? The answer to this question may determine whether or not you decide to install solar panels on your home or business. In fact, in the current economy, everyone is worried about investments, and whether they make sense long term.

How does the cost of solar power factor in?

In order to accurately determine solar energy cost, you’ll need to consider a range of factors. Get your pencil out… you should write these down:

1. Current utility bills, averaged on a monthly basis
2. Projected future utility bills, over your estimated years of ownership of the property
3. Amount you may save annually in electricity bills
4. State and provincial solar energy tax rebates and other incentives, such as no money down
5. Type of solar panel system you want to install: PV Panels or Solar roof shingles
6. Other potential energy savings, through energy efficient bulbs, shutting off lights, adjusting thermostats
7. Other potential energy retrofitting measures, including windows, insulation, Energy Star appliances, etc.

When you consider the fact that solar power is free, once you install the panels, it may be worth it to consider converting now.

Case in point

Let’s say that your solar panel system will cost you R20,000.  Now, consider that your monthly electricity bills average R600 a month, which is R7,200 a year. That alone would be about a 3-year return on investment, but wait! What about the increase in value of your home? If you can save the entire R7,200 a year, multiply that figure by 20 which is the typical loan period you get R144,000.   That’s right: R144,000 in additional property value!

Eskom tarif hike

Now, add in the rising electricity rates that you won’t have to worry about. Oh, and the cost of continued global warming – you are doing your part you know… priceless!

You see, it just takes some focused arithmetic to determine the true cost of solar power. Think beyond your initial investment/outlay, and I’ll bet you will soon see that solar energy is the way to go, without requiring you to break the bank.
Source: Solar Panel | Green Power

The bank has just received the approval to disburse N$6 million, in a revolving credit guarantee scheme to solar energy technicians and rural communities in search of solar financing.
Source: New Era

An earlier report, Livestock’s Long Shadow – Environmental Issues and Options, released in 2006 by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), took an in-depth look at the impact the world’s livestock had on the environment.

Based on a simple model of the carbon cycle, the report concluded that annual emissions from cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, camels, pigs and poultry were 18 percent, “The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport.” Dr. Henning Steinfeld, senior author of the Long Shadow report and FAO official said that livestock is “one of the most significant contributors to today’s most serious environmental problems” and urged immediate action.
Source / more: Simply Green