]]> http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2012/01/harvest-power-brings-sustainable-solutions-from-organic-waste/feed/ 0 http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2012/01/1380/ http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2012/01/1380/#comments Wed, 11 Jan 2012 22:43:21 +0000 grmeyers http://ourgreenstreetsblog.com/wordpress/2012/01/1380/

Most electronic devices contain toxic components and should not be sent to landfills.

Denver Recycles has announced an electronic devices recycling collection event called Eco-Rally. It is scheduled for Saturday, February 12.

For those who don’t reside near Denver, contact your recycling organization and inquire about events like this on the how and where of recycling electronics devices.

According to the announcement, “Denver residents may recycle their old electronic devices by scheduling an appointment to attend theEco-rally Electronic Recycling Collection Event.  Electronics recycling services will be offered at a educed price of $5 per vehicle (limit of 2 “screens” per vehicle, see below for more details).”

Denver Recycles writes that its Eco-rally serves as an electronics recycling, education and engagement initiative that addresses the “serious environmental concern of TVs and electronics in landfills.”

The recycling of electronic devices – once overlooked by people and companies – has grown significantly over the last decade. In fact, interest in the recycling of e-waste is growing worldwide due to concerns for protecting soil, water supplies, and people. Huge amounts of electronic toxins from computers, cell phones, and televisions get sent to landfills in the United States and overseas in poorer countries. The items that are tossed are known to leach poisonous chemicals into the soil and underground water supplies.

Here is the Eco-Rally drop-off information for Denver residents:

• LOCATION: Metech, 500 W. 53rd Pl., Denver
• APPOINTMENT TIMES: 8 AM to 4 PM
• FEE: $5 per vehicle, cash or check only.  Limit of 2 “screens” (televisions, monitors and/or laptops) per vehicle. Additional screens will cost an additional fee of $5 per screen.
• ITEMS ACCEPTED: Televisions, monitors, CPUs, laptops, printers, scanners, faxes, keyboards, mice, stereos, external hard drives and storage devices, cellular phones, telephones, DVRs, VCRs, digital cameras, video recorders, MP3 players, and some small appliances such as microwaves.
• ITEMS NOT ACCEPTED: Air conditioners, large appliances, vacuum cleaners, car batteries or household batteries (rechargeable batteries okay).

As for the practice of single-stream recycling, where all recyclables are put in the same container and sorted at a recycling centers like the one serving Denver, it is important to understand that certain items will not work with this practice.

Denver Recycles also posts information on five items that should never be put in a recycling cart or bin:

• NO FOOD OR LIQUIDS – Cans, bottles and other containers should be empty.  Containers don’t need to be spotless to recycle them, but a quick rinse can help to prevent any odor or pest problems from arising in your cart.
• NO TISSUES, NAPKINS OR PAPER TOWELS – These items are made from paper that has very short fibers (this makes them soft). Unfortunately these fibers are too short to recycle.
• NO STYROFOAM OF ANY KIND – Styrofoam, or polystyrene, is like no other plastic.  The available markets for reprocessing these materials are very limited.  There are a few companies that will take a limited supply of bulk packaging Styrofoam.
• NO COAT HANGERS – Neither metal nor plastic coat hangers are accepted in your purple cart.  Check with your local dry cleaner to see if they take back coat hangers for reuse or recycling.
• NO PLASTIC BAGS – Plastic bags are the worst thing you can put in your purple recycling cart. Plastic bags get caught in the equipment used to sort recyclable materials, and too many can cause the entire facility to shut down.  Most grocery stores accept plastic bags for recycling, or better yet reduce the amount of plastic bags by using reusable bags.

All recyclers should keep in mind that recycling practices such as these should be adhered to for all recycling locations. It is also important for information like this to be shared with many.

“I am issuing a challenge for the year 2010: Build out a 100 acre turnkey algae production facility (growing, harvesting and extraction) without any local, state or federal grant funds.”

Mr. Cohen’s greeting to all for the beginning of 2010 is well worth reading, especially by all who want to see alternative fuels gain more solid footing on the American (and world) energy charts.

The accounting of his challenge ias worth the read:

“When this (American oil production) all started in 1859, nobody had all of the answers. 150 years later, the oil industry is still looking for answers. A 100 acre turn-key commercial-scale algae production facility will allow algae producers to look at real commercial algae production and operations as well as economies of scale issues. It will give algae researchers a much better understanding of commercial-scale algae production issues to work on as opposed to small raceway ponds and desk-top lab photobioreactors. It is, at this point, useless to continue to fund algae research without seriously funding commercial-scale algae production farms. As some have already learned, intellectual properties have no practical use if there is not an industry to use them. In order to create any value in existing algae technologies, we must have commercial-scale algae production facilities that can use them!

“Commercial-scale algae production is key to our industry and is one solution that helps to reduce dependence on foreign oil, to create new jobs and reduce CO2 emissions. The NAA challenges the algae industry to build a 100 acre commercial-scale algae production plant without any local, state or federal grants – this will be the true test of algae production farming and algaepreneurism at its finest!

“I would like to see the first 50 acres of production with proven benchmarked results – totally designed, developed and put into production without a single dollar of government money. The next 50 acres can be improved by making minor changes based on what was learned from the first 50 acres. I know it can be done, and you know it can be done – it´s time to do it!”

The entire document can be read at the association’s website .

In the December 3 issue of Nature, Gert Jan Kramer and Martin Haigh point to this reality in their article, “No quick switch to low-carbon energy.”

In the first of two pieces on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, the two writers analyze historic growth in energy systems in explaining why deploying alternative technologies will be a long haul that could span multiple decades.

Below is a summary of their content, plus highlights of facts all should consider.

* There are physical limits to the rate at which new technologies can be deployed * Governments need to design policies targeted at specific technologies to accelerate deployment
* More action is required on demand side to increase efficiency and curtail consumption.”
“To combat climate change, the world’s entire energy system needs a major overhaul before the middle of the century. But can we build new energy supplies that quickly? …… Because the scale of the energy system is so huge, it takes time to build the human and industrial capacity to achieve substantial deployment.”

Source: Nature.com

As Jan Kramer and Haigh clearly show, time is not our ally in this case.

“There have been high-profile proposals to ‘repower’ the world in a decade, loosely based on the way innovative consumer goods such as mobile phones or iPods conquer their markets. Unlike with consumer goods, we believe that there are robust empirical ‘laws’ that limit the build rate of new and existing energy technologies and thereby the potential to deliver much of the hoped-for transformation by 2050. To accelerate deployment, policy-makers need to tailor their policies to specific technologies in ways that recognize the stage of development.”

The two writers then produce an eye-opening historical perspective concerning how long it actually takes for changes of this magnitude to occur.

“In the twentieth century, it took 30 years for energy technologies that were available in principle to grow exponentially and become widely available. This reaching ‘materiality’ can be defined as delivering about 1% of the world’s energy mix. After that, the growth becomes linear until the technology captures its final market share. This pattern is remarkably consistent across energy technologies and the two growth phases can be seen as the ‘laws of energy deployment.’ Policy-makers concerned about carbon dioxide emissions will want to accelerate the first phase, making energy technologies ‘material’ within one decade instead of three. But we see two fundamental reasons why the exponential growth in the early, pre-material phase will be hard to beat.”

This article is worth reading, especially when seeing how ill-understood is the reality of emitting too much carbon dioxide. We hope the negotiating table has been well-sprinkled with some of these reality salts. Worldwide commitments by those attending, including President Obama, need to be taking place now, not two or three decades from this time.

BioLyle's two-DVD set is available for $39.95

Lyle Rudensey, in Seattle, was kind enough to send a copy of his two-DVD set, “BioLyle’s Biodiesel Workshop,” for us to review. For anybody interested in knowing about biodiesel, whether as a hobby or part of a cooperative effort, watching this video set is a great way to get started. But be prepared to spend some time with it, as the running length tallies up to 224 minutes.

I am happy to add that the viewer’s time will be well-spent. Lyle Rudensey takes viewers into the classroom for an in-depth lesson concerning everything from the chemistry to the tools required for manufacture, then into his garage for a ’seeing-is-believing’ demonstration that covers all of the steps involved, from collection and filtering, to titration, processing, storing, and cleaning.

On the Utah Biodiesel Supply website, Graydon Blair writes that Rudensey “has taught literally hundreds of people how to make their own Biodiesel through his hands-on Biodiesel workshops in the Seattle, WA area. His relaxed teaching style combined with his incredible knowledge of the Biodiesel production process makes for an incredible experience that students come away from raving about. Not only does he make the whole process incredibly easy to learn, but you’ll come away knowing so much more about why Biodiesel works, why anyone can make it, and how you can get started on a budget!“

Lyle Rudensey showing biodiesel manufacture in his garage Source: http://biolyle.com

Rudensey has been making all of his own fuel for his car and home heating stove since 2003. His experience and expertise show quite well.

I add here his passion for this work has a contagious effect. I don’t even own a diesel vehicle, but found myself ready to get one after watching his videos, just so I could fill the tank with biodiesel and drive down the road without stinking up the neighborhood.

For those interested in this set of DVDs, they can be purchased at these locations: http://biolyle.com, Utah Biodiesel Supply, and the Green Streets Outlet. The price is $39.95, plus shipping.

Other comprehensive video information about biodiesel can be found at the Utah Biodiesel Supply website.

One potential large supplier of such captured CO2 might be coal-fired electrical power generating plants.  The impact could be  significant, said Carbon Sciences CEO, Byron Elton. “We strongly believe we are developing the most efficient and viable renewable fuel technology in the world. We estimate tat that with less than half of the the CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants, we can produce 30 percent of the world’s fuel supply.”

The conversion of captured CO2 to liquified fuels Source: Carbon Sciences

CutCO2.org estimated in 2006 that more than 9.3 billion tons of CO2 were being emitted and unsequestered each year from coal-fired power plants. Today, with growing worldwide demand to take action to reduce global CO2 emissions. One solution: capture CO2 and sequester it, storing its deep underground or in the ocean.

Byron Elton, Carbon Sciences CEO

“We happen to think sequestration is not a very good idea,” said Elton in an interview. “What do you do with it?”

Mr. Elton sees two significant challenges facing this planet’s population: energy and climate. With the world population growing by staggering multiples, the demand for energy is increasing by a factor equivalent to population growth.

“We have extraordinary problems in terms of climate; we’ve got to do something different. We’re doing irreparable damage to the world in which we live. All fuel starts with CO2. Is there a way to provide significant amounts of liquid portable fuel without destroying the planet? We think there is.”

look at their videos on Greensulate, an incredibly exciting non-synthetic product!

“We are creating cost competitive alternatives to synthetics like foams and plastics. We believe you can achieve sustainability without sacrificing performance or affordability.”

More power to Greensulate! GRM

Biomass gas will soon power this Xcel Energy Wisconsin plant, not coal.

Xcel Energy plans to install biomass gasification technology at its Bay Front Power Plant in Ashland, Wis.

Following all state regulatory approvals, engineering and design work is expected to begin in 2010, and the unit could be operational by late 2012. The company first announced its plans last October. Meanwhile, it has filed an application for a Certificate of Authority with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.

30 kt/yr Gasification Plant, Italy Darwin Business Partners, Netherlands

When completed, the project will convert the plant’s remaining coal-fired unit to biomass gasification technology, allowing it to use 100 percent biomass in all three boilers. The company says it will use waste wood as its primary source of biomass and expects the plant to be the largest biomass plant in the Midwest.

The $58 million project is expected to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxides and particulate matters by 60 percent, 80 percent and 80 percent respectively. The total generation output of the plant is not expected to change significantly as a result of the project.