The chemical dispersant used in the Gulf includes propylene glycol, a common ingredient in beauty products, as well as dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, a detergent and common ingredient in laxatives. The dispersant also includes 2-butoxyethanol, used in the ink for inkjet printers.

As for chemicals used in natural gas drilling during the fracturing or “fracking” process, they include toluene, a toxic volatile organic compound used in nail polish, and xylene, a cleaning agent. Both of these chemicals are also used in paint thinners.

A third dangerous compound used in natural gas drilling is naphthalene,  used to make lubricant, insecticide, resin, solvents, and many other commercial and consumer products.

By noting how we already incorporate these chemicals into our lives, it is not my intent to minimize their use in our oceans and earth. On the contrary, what I mean to suggest is that we open our eyes to our complicit, systematic poisoning of our bodies and planet on a daily basis.

As I have learned in recent research for a comprehensive Green Living Checklist I am writing for AltFuels Now, beauty product manufacturers are not required to prove the safety of their products. As a result, ingredients associated with numerous health problems are common in everything from shampoo, to mouthwash, to moisturizer.

We’re not just hurting ourselves by using chemical-laden products. We’re hurting the entire world, as these chemicals ultimately make their way down the drain and into our rivers and streams. And no, sewage treatment plants do not effectively break down chemicals into safe, eco-friendly substances.

So beyond objecting to the chemicals fossil fuel companies are pouring all over the planet, object to the same in the products you buy for your home and body every day. Choose healthy, green alternatives instead.

Meredith Simonds Oil beauty products, BP, chemical dispersant, cleaning products, Green Living Checklist, Gulf Coast, natural gas drilling, oil spill

On Saturday, June 26, thousands will gather on beaches all over the world to protest offshore drilling and embrace clean energy instead.

Tomorrow marks the first worldwide Hands Across the Sand event, the largest anti-offshore drilling gathering in history. On Saturday, June 26, 2010, thousands are expected to gather on beaches all around the world to join hands in solidarity for clean energy.

Hands Across the Sand started in Florida on February 13, 2010. That’s when 1,000 Floridians gathered on beaches across the state to protest the proposition of offshore drilling along Florida’s coast.

In light of the BP oil spill in the Gulf Coast, it is hard to imagine a more appropriate time to take Hands Across the Sand worldwide. Hands Across the Sand Founder Dave Rauschkolb echoes this sentiment:

The Deepwater Horizon disaster is a wake up call.  Even as the Gulf disaster grows, British Petroleum and other oil companies continue to push for new offshore drilling anywhere oil might be found regardless of the risks they pose. The offshore oil industry is a dirty, dangerous business and no one industry should be able to place entire coastal economies and marine environments at risk.  

Where else in America is this allowed to happen?

America could be, should be the world leader in expanding cleaner energy sources yet our political process is paralyzed by oil money. It is time for our leaders to take bold, courageous steps and open the door to clean energy and renewables and free our country from its addiction to oil.

As stated in the organization’s official press release, the mission of Hands Across the Sand is ”to change our energy policy away from its dependence on fossil fuels and into the light of clean energy. The aim is to convince our leaders to abandon expanded offshore oil drilling and adopt policies that encourage clean and renewable energy sources.”

To participate, find a Hands Across the Sand gathering near you, including solidarity events in cities that are not near beaches. 

We’re gathering at 11 a.m. and joining hands at noon.

While you’re at the website looking for an event near you, take just a moment to send a letter to President Obama and your local representatives in Congress.

I just sent my letter and I’m attending the Hands Across the Sand event at Santa Monica pier.

Meredith Simonds Oil BP oil spill, clean energy, Deepwater Horizon, Florida, Gulf Coast, Hands Across the Sand, offshore drilling, President Obama

Why bring in dirty coal to provide 60 more megawatts of energy than SSVEC customers need now or even in 10 years time?

In a review of utilities nationwide, the Solar Electric Power Association (SEPA) named an Arizona utility the leader in transitioning to a solar-powered future. Yet based on the same utility’s new proposal to invest in a coal-fired transmission line, the SEPA  may want to rethink the clean energy designation.

In addition to its solar ambitions, the Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative (SSVEC) wants to build a 69,000-volt coal fire-powered transmission line in Southern Arizona.

Aside from the obvious question of why a seemingly green, forward-thinking utility company would want to set its customers back with an investment in new coal-fired energy, consider the question raised by this sobering fact:

The area that this new coal fire-powered transmission line would serve does not need the extra power!

Currently, said SSVEC customers are served by a 7 megawatt-capable power line. However, they only use about 5 megawatts of that. And here’s the real kicker. It’s estimated that by the year 2019, they will only need an additional 1.5 megawatts.

Why bring in dirty coal to provide 60 more megawatts of energy than SSVEC customers need now or even in 10 years time?

That’s precisely what concerned citizens intend to ask next week at a public hearing before the Arizona Corporation Commission, though many think they already know the answer to that.

It turns out the area is also home to an open-pit mine owned by Canadian mining company World Silver. They’re preparing it for mining now and some suspect a tie between this endeavor and SSVEC’s coal-fired ambitions.

Beyond the hazardous greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power, plans for this particular transmission line could:

• Destroy unique grassland habitats impacting dozens of threatened and endangered species
• Raze a nearly 200-year-old historic ranch
• Displace film and rural jobs

To learn more about coal-fired power motivations, check out Reckoning at Eagle Creek: The Secret Legacy of Coal in the Heartland , a book by Jeff Biggers whose in-depth article for The Huffington Post served as the source for this post.

Meredith Simonds Solar Arizona, coal, Jeff Biggers, SEPA, Solar, Solar Electric Power Association, SSVEC, Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative

Tesla is partnering with Toyota in the production of the Model S, a fully electric sedan priced below $50,000 and scheduled for availability in 2012.

A couple of weeks ago, a friend of mine posted to my Facebook page news of the Smart Car’s fully electric model available in 2012. I responded back that even this ideal alternative fuel feature couldn’t win me over to the Smart Car design, electric or not. I posted a link to the elite Tesla Roadster, noting that I would hold out for a model under $100,000. Way under.

Looks like I’m getting my wish.

Tesla is partnering with Toyota in the production of the Model S, a fully electric sedan priced below $50,000 and scheduled for availability in 2012.

Though the Tesla Roadster sells for a hundred grand, it has only sold 1,063 Roadsters since 2003. As a result, Tesla Motors is losing money, thus its foray into production of a model affordable enough to go mainstream.

In addition to a $465 million loan from the Department of Energy for the Model S production, Tesla is hoping to raise an additional $185 million through its intial public offering this year (IPO). Then after the IPO, Toyota has committed to investing $50 million into the Model S.

Beyond the $50 million incentive for partnering with Toyota, Tesla will be using one of its plants, utilizing the “Toyota Production System” that Toyota has successfully used to cut down on production waste.

The Model S will sell for $49,900, including a federal tax credit for $7,500. The features of this fully electric luxury car include:

• 300-mile range
• 45-minute QuickCharge
• 0-60 mph in 5.6 seconds
• Seats 7 people
• More cargo space than sedans
• 2X as efficient as hybrids
• 17 inch infotainment touchscreen

And you can use any electric outlet to charge the car.

Tesla is taking “reservations” for the Model S, with deliveries expected in 2012. As for the IPO, 11.1 million shares of Tesla stock are expected to go on sale later this year for between $14 and $16 each.

Meredith Simonds Solar 2012, alternative fuel, electric car, Model S, Tesla Motors, Tesla Roadster, Toyota

According to a new study by the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, biochar ultimately emits more greenhouse gases than coal. And that will do Massachusetts little good in its effort to reduce emissions 80 percent by 2050.

In March, I blogged about the benefits of biochar as a means of helping Haiti solve its deforestation problem. However, according to a new report inspired by Massachusetts’ biochar investment in the pursuit of alternative fuel, biomass evidently emits more CO2 emissions than coal.

Granted, in a country like Haiti where they’ve chopped down 98 percent of their trees to burn as fuel, primarily for cookstoves, the biochar alternative certainly seems a welcome one.

As noted in my blog post, Cooking Up a Solution to Haiti’s Deforestation: Biochar to the Rescue?:

“Biochar is the end-product created through the burning of biomass under oxygen-free conditions. Instead of relying on the logging of forests for fuel, the biochar creation process known as pyrolysis can utilize twigs, and plant and animal waste.

“Biochar [may be] the ideal solution for Haiti where they currently burn the equivalent of 30 million trees a year. In fact,this practice is the primary reason 98 percent of Haiti’s tree cover is gone, with just 100,000 acres of forest left!”

And in reference to its use in the United States:

“According to the Associated Press:

‘The USDA estimates biochar has the potential to replace about 25 percent of the annual oil consumption in this country. They say it especially seems promising as a soil amendment and to lock up greenhouse gases.’ ”

Yet according to a new study by the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, biochar ultimately emits more greenhouse gases than coal. And that will do Massachusetts little good in its effort to reduce emissions 80 percent by 2050.

Here’s what I don’t get.

If we’re going to seek alternatives to conventional fuel, why not invest in significantly cleaner energy sources, like solar? Instead, Massachusetts has invested a million dollars in the development of four proposed biomass plants. Fortunately, the state’s mandate calls for solar and wind investments too. Hopefully, Massachusetts will abandon its biomass pursuits, lesson learned for the rest of us.

Meredith Simonds Biofuels biochar, biomass, coal, deforestation, Haiti, Massachusetts

A solar power moon station like the one envisioned by Japan's Shimizu Corporation would generate enough clean energy to provide power to everyone on Earth, and then some!

For all the good solar panels do our planet in the pursuit of clean energy, they could be far more valauble to us if their installation were not limited to Earth. Japan’s Shimizu Corporation is exploring just that possibility with its $21 billion investment in a solar power station on the moon!

Though the solar panels we currently utilize do a fine job of generating clean energy, they are limited by the following facts:

1) Earth-based solar panels cannot collect power from the sun at night

2) Some of the solar-generated power collected on Earth inevitably bounces back into the atmosphere, unused

A solar station on the moon addresses both issues. As Treehugger explains:

“The general idea is: You build a massive ‘belt’ of solar cells around the Moon’s equator (that’s about 6,800 miles, or 11,000 kilometers).

“You convert that electricity to microwaves or lasers that you beam back to Earth from the near-side of the Moon (the side always closest to Earth) with a 20km-diameter antenna, and you convert those beams back to electricity at power stations using receiving rectennas. (A rectenna is a rectifying antenna, a special type of antenna that is used to directly convert microwave energy into DC electricity.)

“A guidance beacon will make sure that the beam is always going where it is supposed to go (and if not, the power will be instantly cut).”

All of the necessary construction would be carried out by robots - construction that would utilize as much material as possible collected from the moon’s ground. And all of this would be managed by a team of moon-stationed astronauts.

Best of all, a solar power moon station of this nature would generate enough clean energy to provide power to everyone on Earth, and then some!

The idealist in me loves this idea unconditionally, but the cynic in me cannot be silenced: What government bodies and/or companies outside of Japan are going to step in to stand in the way?

Related Reading: Solar Energy Articles

Meredith Simonds Solar clean energy, Japan, moon, Shimizu Corporation, Solar, solar energy, Solar Panels, solar station

Trees cut cooling costs by shading in the summer, and cut heating costs by acting as wind breaks in the winter.

World Environment Day (WED) was Saturday, June 5th. I was in Dallas so I checked out the local WED event at the J. Erik Jonsson Central Library where I learned all about the energy-saving, eco-friendly benefits of trees.

The event drew a modest crowd, but I was pleased to see a dozen or so people there for a presentation by a local Citizen Forester who is a member of the Urban Forest Advisory Committee for the City of Dallas.

Here’s what I learned, most of which is common knowledge that it’s just nice to be reminded of:

Trees act as filters, cleaning our air, water and soil. For example, over the course of one year, a tree can filter 60 pounds of pollution out of the air. And every ton of wood that a forest grows removes 1.47 tons of carbon dioxide from the air and emits a ton of oxygen.

As for their practical use for saving energy, trees:

1. Cool your home in the summertime. You’ll get the maximum shading benefits by planting trees on the south, east and west sides of your home. Deciduous trees can cut cooling costs by well over 15 percent. And if a tree shades your a/c unit, it can increase its efficiency by 10 percent.
2. Protect your home from wind in the wintertime. Trees act as wind breaks, actually reducing the infiltration of cold air by 50 percent!

Of course, the roots of trees help prevent soil runoff as well, which as it turns out is a big problem in Dallas and, of course, many other parts of the country.

So if you want to save on your own cooling and heating costs, while also filtering pollutants and protecting from soil runoff, plant trees in your yard, and encourage your family, friends and neighbors to do the same. Just be sure you do your research on picking the best tree for your yard.

Beyond planting trees for shade and wind breaks, check out more practical ways you can save energy at home.

Meredith Simonds Conservation, Environment Conservation, Eco-Friendly, energy-saving, shade trees, trees, wind breaks, World Environment Day

To help cut down on the demand for oil, we can cut down on your consumption of petroleum-based products.

Instead of fueling my feelings of powerlessness over the out-of-control Gulf Coast oil spill, I’m exploring answers to a question we’re all asking ourselves:

What can I do?

Specifically, aside from driving an alternative fuel vehicle, what can I do to help curb the dependence on oil that got us into this mess in the first place?

Well, consider this:

One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest is used to make other things we consume on a regular basis.

So we can do a lot simply by making petroleum-free choices instead.  Granted, some are items for which substitutes are difficult or impossible to find, like motor oil and tires, but below is a sampling of products for which we can easily find eco-friendly alternatives.

To help cut down on the demand for oil, we can cut down on your consumption of petroleum-based:

1) Plastics. Choose glass, metal or other non throw-away materials instead. And if you must choose plastic, look for corn-based and/or biodegradable alterantives, particuarly when it comes to trash bags and water bottles.

2) Inks. Limit your printing as much as possible, but when you must print do so on a soy-based ink printer. As for ink pens, choose refillable soy-based fountain pens.

3) Fabrics. Polyester, nylon and acrylic are all made from petroleum. Choose natural fabrics instead, such as cotton, linen, hemp and bamboo.

4) Beauty and cleaning products. From toothpaste to detergent, beauty and cleaning products are packed full of petroleum. Look for natural, biodegradable products instead. Beware though. There is a big difference between a biodegradable product and a product made with biodegradable ingredients. Those biodegradable ingredients are often coupled with petroleum.

5) Fertilizers. The only way to grow healthy plants that are good for you and the environment is to choose natural, biodegradable ingredients. So instead of using chemical fertilizers, use what you’ve already got – food waste that you can turn into nutrient-rich fertilizer for your flowers, fruits, veggies, lawn and household plants.

Beyond that, you may want to peruse this list of 144 petroleum-based products and explore other creative ways of making eco-friendly choices instead.

Meredith Simonds Oil alternative fuel vehicle, Gulf Coast oil spill, petroleum, petroleum products

Accurate information about the wind potential in each state is required for federal and state policy initiatives that will expand the use of wind energy in the United States. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and AWS Truewind have collaborated to produce the first comprehensive new state-level assessment of wind resource potential since 1993. The estimates are based on high-resolution maps of predicted mean annual wind speeds for the contiguous 48 states developed by AWS Truewind.

These maps, at spatial resolution of 200 meters and heights of 60 to 100 meters, were created with a mesoscale-microscale modeling technique and adjusted to reduce errors through a bias-correction procedure involving data from more than 1,000 measurement masts. NREL used the capacity factor maps to estimate the wind energy potential capacity in megawatts for each state by capacity factor ranges. The purpose of this presentation is to (1) inform state and federal policy makers, regulators, developers, and other stakeholders on the availability of the new wind potential information that may influence development, (2) inform the audience of how the new information was derived, and (3) educate the audience on how the information should be interpreted in developing state and federal policy initiatives.

See the Map and Read More

Kristy Wesh Wind Power wind energy potential, Wind Power, wind power map

Bill Gates and Senator Lindsey Graham share thoughts on how we are going to get our hands on economically viable alternative energy technologies - carbon pricing.

In consideration of what’s happening with the Gulf oil spill, it seems everyone is singing the praises of more agressively exploring alternative fuels, even President Obama and former President George W. Bush! Realistically though, Bill Gates – one of alternative fuels’ biggest supporters before the spill – says we’re decades away from technology advanced enough to completely replace fossil fuels.

Bill Gates is a major investor in TerraPower, a company creating the technology for turning nuclear waste into clean energy. It’s still in the research and development stage though, and critics wonder if it will ever be economically viable.

Gates too recognizes the challenge of economic viability, not only regarding his own nuclear energy embitions, but renewable energy as well. He says what we need to see is a bigger investment of capital behind renewable energy research. So where does the richest man in America suggest the money should come from? Putting a price on carbon.

Senator Lindsey Graham echoes Gates’ ideas regarding carbon pricing:

“We do need to price carbon to make nuclear power and wind and solar and some alternative technologies economically viable. On the transportation side, maybe you can reduce emissions without a cap. I don’t know. But you need to put a price on carbon in the power production area at a minimum to jump-start these other technologies.”

Graham is one of three senators originally behind the much-anticipated, hotly debated climate change bill. Of course, Graham is also the senator who infamously pulled his support of that bill because it wasn’t getting the priority he wanted to see from Congress. 

In fact, Graham is proposing a new energy bill – one that is restricted to an electric utility industry tax – and one he believes has a realistic chance of getting all the 60 votes required to pass. That said, the President’s support is reportedly still behind the original Kerry-Lieberman-Graham legislation.

Meredith Simonds Carbon Credits Bill Gates, carbon pricing, climate bill, fossil fuels, Oil, Senator Lindsey Graham, TerraPower