Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science. Show all posts

Monday, November 2, 2009

Climate Change and what I am doing to help

Scientist across the planet have many theories to explain “Climate Change”, ranging from the believable to the fringe and ridiculous, however there is generally agreement amongst nearly all experts that world wide energy consumption must be drastically reduced, that CO2 emissions must be reduced back down to 1980 levels.

All of us have a CO2 footprint; I give my Belsize home as an example. I have the usual "utility" machines, "multi-media" systems, computer systems and gadgets found in most homes.

I have now signed up to the 2012 Carbon Challenge as part of the 2020 schemes being offered by utility companies.
As part of this Carbon Challenge I have committed to reduce my energy consumption by 20% annually. I estimate that I have already reduced this even further over the past years with the following advice that I make available to you here.

Many years ago aware of the dire problems that we will face with unchecked “Global Warming” I made a conscious effort to reduce my total home energy consumption, by "smart" shopping, that is buying electrical "utility units" for example washing machines that conform to the highest standards of efficiency and have the lowest energy and water consumption available. Insuring that any "multi-media" equipment has a "smart" standby which means that no units consumes more than 3 to 5 watts in standby, most units burn 10 to 15 watts.

Changing ALL the lighting bulbs to be energy efficient, for example the front room ceiling lighting pendants have 5 candle bulbs, which used to consume 5x60 watts = 300W (to put this another way that is nearly 1/3 of KW).
I have now changed these to a special candle bulb replacement using only 11W so in total it uses 55W and offers nearly same light levels and saving 245W.

Every room has a high efficiency low energy bulbs the largest that I would use would be 23W and that would service an entire room! I avoid use of multiple lamps that although looking great consume vast amount of energy.
The last idea is the “smartest” and cost NOTHING to implement, I was considering to patient the idea but instead share it with you all! When you leave any room for an extended period, switch the multi-media systems to standby and turn off the lights. You will be amazed how much energy you will reduce by doing this. Fact. My young Daughter DOES this NOW and she reminds me if I should forget!
We need to teach all the future generations that this is the way forward to reduce waste wherever possible.

Through these efficiencies savings I estimate that I have reduced around 20 to 30% of the total energy home electrical consumption.

Now I except that to do all the steps that I have outlined will cost money in the short run, smart machines are not cheap, but are cheaper to run long term.

Just as this approach is helping to reduce the CO2 footprint of my Belsize home by around 20 - 30% it is also saving me money over the annual electricity costs. I estimate that the "smart" utility machines have paid back in only 2 to 3 years of use and are in profit now that is profit in my pocket and profit to the Planet.

The NASA Scientist Dr James Hansen was reported in The Associated Press Jun. 24, 2008 in this article;

“WASHINGTON — Exactly 20 years after warning America about global warming, a top NASA scientist said the situation has gotten so bad that the world's only hope is drastic action.
James Hansen told Congress on Monday that the world has long passed the "dangerous level" for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and needs to get back to 1988 levels. He said Earth's atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises.
"We're toast if we don't get on a very different path," Hansen, director of the Goddard Institute of Space Sciences who is sometimes called the godfather of global warming science, told The Associated Press. "This is the last chance."
Hansen brought global warming home to the public in June 1988 during a Washington heat wave, telling a Senate hearing that global warming was already here. To mark the anniversary, he testified before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming where he was called a prophet, and addressed a luncheon at the National Press Club where he was called a hero by former Sen. Tim Wirth, D-Colo., who headed the 1988 hearing.
To cut emissions, Hansen said coal-fired power plants that don't capture carbon dioxide emissions shouldn't be used in the United States after 2025, and should be eliminated in the rest of the world by 2030. That carbon capture technology is still being developed and not yet cost efficient for power plants.
Burning fossil fuels like coal is the chief cause of man-made greenhouse gases. Hansen said the Earth's atmosphere has got to get back to a level of 350 parts of carbon dioxide per million. Last month, it was 10 percent higher: 386.7 parts per million.”


Remember that this article I have selected is already out of date last month was 18 months ago and CO2 has already exceeded the 386.7 parts per million.

As a closing comment from me in my leafy Belsize location, I say this, we ALL can make a difference, whilst the scientist talk and may at times disagree with various intellectual arguments and nuance, the fact remains that with the continuing population explosion and “super rapid” economic growth of China and the world demand for more and more production that energy consumption is set to increase and the cost of energy also will continue to increase.

Perhaps in the final analysis it will come down to the simple fact of can we afford NOT to reduce now.

So remember to Switch off that light!

Author: Nigel Rumble

Friday, April 17, 2009

DNA pioneer concerned about national database

The pioneer of genetic fingerprinting, Professor Sir Alec Jeffries, has said that the Government is risking public support for the national DNA database by holding innocent people’s records.

Professor Jeffries told the Guardian,

“I have significant concerns there [about the size of the database]. That database is currently populated by an unknown number of entirely innocent people. It is not possible to get an accurate number but it appears to be hundreds of thousands.

“My view is very clear that if you have been convicted of a crime then you owe it to society to be retained on that database for catching in the future should you reoffend. But the retention of entirely innocent people is a whole different issue. There is a sort of presumption here that if they haven’t committed any crime now, then they will in the future.”

Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary said,

“It demonstrates how out of touch the Government is with public opinion when the inventor of genetic fingerprinting has to tell them how unfair the DNA database is.

“It is unacceptable for the state to store the DNA of innocent people. The European Court agrees, Professor Jeffreys agrees and the public agrees. The Government must bring forward concrete proposals to remove the DNA of those that have done nothing wrong.

“Professor Jeffreys is also right to point out that the DNA database is not the flawless crime-fighting tool ministers would have us believe.”

Please help the campaign to protect innocent people’s DNA by signing this petition at: http://ourcampaign.org.uk/dna

Produced by Home Office Watch Friday, April 17th, 2009

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Is carbon offsetting ever ok?

In Cllr Alexis Rowell's Blog Monday, 29 December 2008 he asks the question is carbon offsetting ever ok?

He writes: "The current edition of the Ecologist has an article castigating carbon offsetting Carbon Offsetting: forgive my carbon sin?. I have a lot of sympathy with the sentiments expressed. The price of carbon used in the offsetting business is far too low, because the market price of carbon is far too low, and investing in trees on the other side of the world, trees which might be chopped down one day, has never seemed to me to be a very sensible way to deal with the carbon problem."

I agree that the price of carbon is set too low to make carbon offsetting less attractive, I know from experience in dealing with blue chip companies tasked with reducing the company carbon footprint, carbon offsetting is "currently" very attractive to many organisations precisely because it is cheaper than directly dealing with the problem of carbon reduction.

Therefore, I would not directly advocate using carbon offsetting as it currently stands as a control method of dealing with climate change. However, if the carbon offsetting "cost" was increased to the point of being more expensive than "implementing" energy reducing solutions, I feel confidant that this would achieve a better outcome for the planet.

Author: Nigel Rumble

Sunday, December 7, 2008

Dioxins in "our" food supply chain

Animal feed is one of the most prevalent causes of ingested dioxins. Farmed salmon feed on contaminated pellets with high concentrations of dioxins many years ago. This continues to be a problem also for most seawater fisheries taking fish from the sea, which in many locations around the world have high concentrations of dioxins.

I disagree with the lead story quote from the referred BBC News story that, a Food safety expert Professor Hugh Pennington who told the BBC the health risk was very, very low. He said: "You have to have a lot of these compounds. You have to eat a lot of them, enormous amounts to have any visible effect." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7769391.stm

In an isolated incident such as this it would probably be true, but the Professor is not taking into account the constant exposure to dioxins in our food chain, mostly as a result of contaminated animal feed. In point of fact we do consume considerably more dioxins than “official” reports suggests. It is sustained “life time” exposure to dioxins that carries greatest risks.

Read for further information about dioxins:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/medical_notes/358889.stm

Author: Nigel Rumble 7th December 2008