Planethopia » Earth

Two sides of renewable energy

brynh — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:27:18 +0000

Wind and solar energy, in particular, are touted as the energy sources of the future. But entrepreneurs have tried to harness both for centuries. Their limited utility and obstacles, documented since the 1800s, explain why wind and solar make up just a tiny portion of our energy supply today despite a quarter-century of highly preferential taxpayer and ratepayer subsidy.

The problem concerns the vicissitudes of weather, which makes wind and solar inherently unreliable and unsuitable for today’s energy-intensive economy.

Wind turbines produce at maximum capacity during a range of wind speeds — typically 50 to 90 kilometers per hour. At slower speeds, electrical output falls dramatically. If wind speeds fall by half, production decreases by a factor of eight.

Therefore, turbines scarcely produce at capacity. In fact, the annual output of a turbine averages just 20% to 30% of capacity. And about 10% to 15% of the time, turbines produce virtually no power at all.

Solar energy is equally dependent on weather — it doesn’t work at night without a storage device, and even during the day, cloud coverage can make the technology stall.

A general solar panel will produce 100 to 120 watts of energy per square meter. That’s during periods of direct sunlight, which is about five hours per day.

For the amount of energy that solar and wind produce, their start-up and ongoing operating costs are exorbitant.

Wind farms, for example, can only be built in a limited number of remote places. They are generally found in wide open, rural areas or offshore, where long-distance transmission adds costs for consumers.

In many regions, attractive areas have already been exploited, leaving only less favorable sites that require significant investment in transmission and additional infrastructure, including new substations and access roads.

Wind power facilities, depending on the ruggedness of location and other factors, cost between $2 million and $6 million per Megawatt of capacity.

The starting rate for power from the Cape Wind project, America’s first offshore wind project with 130 wind turbines, is set at 18.7 cents per kilowatt — almost double the average U.S. retail rate for electricity, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Alternative energy sources fail the cost, reliability, and scalability tests, says the founder of the Institute for Energy Research, Robert Bradley.

On the Cape Wind project we can see for example few pros and cons of construction of such alternative energy facility.

As mentioned, biggest disadvantage of project in the star is of course price which is estimated to $1 – $2 billion. Among others are possibilities to disrupt marine life and endanger birds in Cape Cod; probably alter or even ruin certain seaside spots.

Considering such huge price and other obstacles for wind farm in Cape Cod one may take in consideration fact that those wind turbines could provide three-quarters of the power to more than 200,000 residents and could already start generating power in 2012. It will also create green jobs in the area with no chance of the wind turbines polluting the water. The closest turbine to the shore would be 8 kilometers offshore so it won’t disrupt local people fishing or sightseeing.

With the example above, obviously there is almost no one project regarding green energy and current issues with fossil fuels that can be considered to have only advantages for us and future generations. However, we must insist to new technologies and new fuel sources, to be prepared for years that will come when fossil fuels and some other resources like water, food or wood will significantly deplete.

Ecotourism – fastest growing tourism sector

brynh — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:27:11 +0000

Ecotourism is one of the two fastest growing sectors of the tourism industry. Second one is ethnic tourism. Ethnic tours encounters visitors with the forms of native peoples, cultures and arts.

Ecological tourism or ecotourism depends on universal appeal of the wonders of nature and can be potentially a more prospective than ethnic tourism. The main advantage o ecotourism is preserving the environment and natural resources by ecotourists and all other friends of nature.

Demand is particularly extensive in the tropics and in biodiversity hot spots like the rainforests in Central and South America. Costa Rica, Venezuela and Belize are among countries that have successfully implemented ecotourism programs offering only limited access to some areas of wilderness.

In South Africa there is increaseing local involvement in safaris and expanding economic development in parks and wildlife habitat preserves. Nature reserves and games parks have become popular tourist destinations and ecotourism is the most rapidly expanding tourism category in South Africa.

Kenya is good example that provides model of development with its well established scientific community working in cooperation with tourism bureaus and management of eco parks.

Here is list of few popular ecotourism locations around the world:

Swaziland and Kenya in Africa are very popular spots for ecotourists offering variety of deserts, national parks (very popular is Serengeti national reserve), rain forests and lakes each with unique ecosystem and rich wildlife.

Costa Rica in Central America is one of the most visited tourist location in America and it is practically synonymous for ecotourism with huge rainforest areas in the countryside, mountain ranges and volcanoes. Large variety of creatures live in national parks and surrounding areas including Monkeys, crocodiles, sloths and poison dart frogs.

Southeast Asia – Thailand and Indonesia are one of the hottest destinations in Asian region, mostly popular for its rainforests, mountain peaks and beautiful natural beaches on its coasts. In recent period more and more tourists are attracted to visit Nepal, Laos and Cambodia offering the same variety of natural sites and interesting wildlife in mountain regions like Nepal’s Mount Everest.

Europe – continent that offer some kind of different attractions to ecotourists like medieval historical sites across the continent, interesting countryside village life, hiking and cycling through the preserved nature and forests. Norwegian fjords are very exciting to see and experience its preserved nature, fresh air, clean water and beautiful waterfalls.

Eco-friendly travel ideas

brynh — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:56:52 +0000

Eco-friendly travel ideas

According to the Google maps flight emission calculator, a direct flight from Denver Colorado to Jacksonville Florida (1,445 miles) produces 1.173 tons of CO2 emissions. That breaks down to 564lbs per-person. This is a relatively short distance compared to intercontinental flight miles, but it illustrates the small part we all play in the 700 million tons of carbon dioxide produced by the worlds 16,000 commercial airlines every year.

Here are a few ideas that eco-conscious travelers have found to decrease these appalling numbers and the impact of global warming. Here are a few ideas on how to do this:

Take a nature trip

Backpacking, camping, and other nature trips are environmentally friendly ways to lessen your carbon footprint on the earth while simultaneously increasing our appreciation for what it has to offer us recreationally. National parks offer a wide variety of mountains, beaches, and other natural entertainment parks that make their man-made counterparts pale in comparison.

Biking tours are another eco-friendly vacation idea. Whether it is the arid beauty of the deserts of New Mexico, the majestic cliffs of the Rockies, or the azure waters of the Hawaiian Islands, a bike tour is a healthy and enjoyable way to spend a vacation that leaves behind a nearly non-existent carbon footprint.

Regardless of which vacation you choose, there are additional steps that can be taken to minimize carbon emissions and pollutants that enter into the environment.

Take a train, bus or car instead of flying

Since planes have such high carbon dioxide emission and fuel consumption, taking trains or buses to your hiking or camping vacation destination is the greenest form of transportation that can be used that leaves a minimal carbon footprint.

Assuming a car has four people in it, the amount of CO2 waste per person for the same Denver to Jacksonville trip would be 421.5lbs per-passenger. It would be 564.70lbs per-passenger in a train, and 303.48lbs if the passenger took a bus.

When flying book direct flights

Since taking off and landing uses the most amount of fuel during a flight, if there is no other recourse than flying, direct flights are much greener than layovers.

Pack light and eco-friendly

Taking only the essentials and filling re-usable containers is important, especially when traveling on public transportation, because it makes it easier to get around and less likely that plastic and other environmentally harmful materials enter the eco-system.

Adjust heating, air and unplug electronics

According to Department of Energy estimates vampire energy (also called standby power) consumed by electronics that are turned off, or left on standby, account for an estimated five percent of total electronic consumption in the U.S.

Unplugging electronics before leaving the house avoids this unnecessary energy waste and has the added benefit of lengthening the overall life of electronics.

Nature trips, public transportation, direct flights, eco-friendly packing, and unplugging electronics are some of the best ways to make sure that you leave as few carbon footprints as possible on your next vacation.

Sponsored article by California RV Parks and Montana RV

Tsunami explained

brynh — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:25:36 +0000

The word Tsunami comes from Japan where it has been a frequent phenomen and originally meant a wave in harbor. Before there was a clear understanding of the tsunami phenomenon, Japanese fishermen would often return home from sea trip and observe their harbor aread devastated by water. They have experienced nothing while sailing on the open sea so they described tsunami phenomenon as a wave in harbor.

Tsunami is a catastrophic ocean wave, mostly caused by a submarine earthquake less than 50 kilometers under the seafloor with a magnitude greater than 6.5 on Richter scale. Near the source of submarine earthquakes, the seafloor is “permanently” uplifted and down-dropped, pushing the water up and down. The potential energy from pushing water is transformed to kinetic energy seen as the tsunami wave.

Even if a wave is 15 meters high (not likely in tsunamis) it makes a little difference in a hundred meters deep water but, as it comes into shallow water, the wave rises much higher and strikes the shore with very devastating force. In deep water wavelengths are enormous (100km to 200km) and wave heights are pretty small, less than 1 meter but as the waves approach the continental coasts, shallow water reduces the speed of the waves shortening the wavelengths and amplifying wave amplitudes up to 30 meters in just 10 to 15 minutes what is very fast transition. Tsunamis can be also caused by landslides or volcanic eruptions.

Most of tsunamis don’t result in giant destructive waves but some, such as the 2004 Indian Ocean event, are very devastating, both for structures and inhabitants. Offshore earthquake near Indonesian Island of Sumatra caused deadly tsunami that killed more than 230,000 people in 14 different countries, mostly in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India and Thailand. Earthquake that caused tsunamis was the third largest earthquakes recorded in human history, with magnitude of between 9.1 and 9.3 on Richter scale.

Most of the earthquakes causing dangerous waves and tsunamis are happening on the edges of tectonic plates in areas like Alaska, California, South America and Indonesia.

Serengeti National Park in danger

brynh — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 19:09:37 +0000

The Serengeti region is located mostly in Tanzania and a little bit in Kenya. This region within 30,000 km2 consists of Serengeti National Park and few game reserves. Those lands are mostly for wildlife tourism and hunting purposes. Over 90,000 tourists visit the National Park yearly what is very large number, even for such beautiful but remote place.

The Serengeti ecosystem is one of the oldest on planet thus is very important and valuable. Through the history, Serengeti was mainly determined and influentied by local well known tribe of Massai, fire, huge animals like elephants and other wildbeests. This ecosystem is well known for it’s great migration when almost 2 million wildebeests travel from the hills toward the south chasing rains and then, in April back to the north. This circular migration is shown on picture below.

Among the most interested animals in Serenget area are lions, leopards, rhinos, buffalos and today endangered elephants. Serengeti national Park is made up mainly of grassland and woodland, planins and marshes. One of the most common plant species in Serengeti are sausage tree with it’s about 1 meters long poisonous fruits; umbrella tree that has come to represent african continent and strangle fig that climbs on the nearest large tree and then strangles it.

Two months ago, plans to build highway through Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park are announced and that’s very unfortunate because that will endanger wildlife in Park. Highway construction is expected to begin in year 2012. Scientists have shown with computer simulations that if the animals’ access to the Mara river in Kenya is blocked their number will fall to less than 300,000.

Thus, scientists have proposed different route that will be just 50 kilometers longer utilizing existing road network but could preserve UNESCO World Heritage Site. Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park is one of the world’s great natural wonders so time will show what is better for animals and nature here in Africa.

Below you can see more pictures from Serengeti National Park.

Capturing carbon dioxide from air

brynh — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 12:17:13 +0000

Fossil fuels are to play significant as an energy source, even in 21^st century but now we must pay attention on carbon dioxide accumulation in air and try to prevent it, as much as we can. Current rates of fossil fuel consumption introduce an amount of carbon into the land mass that over 100 years would match the size of entire biomass. It is necessary to deal not only with CO₂ emission from power plants, but from all sources in an industry.

A source of carbon dioxide that is particularly difficult to manage is the transportation sector. A transition to electric or hydrogen fueled vehicles is in principle possible but would take a long time to accomplish.

A unit mass of fuel results in roughly three mass units of gaseous CO₂ that would need to be temporarily stored at the source and later shipped to a disposal site. Capturing CO₂ on board of an airplane is simply not possible because of the mass involved; in a car it would be prohibitively expensive; and even in a home it would not be practicable, as it would require a huge infrastructure for removal and transport of CO₂ to a disposal site.

Carbon dioxide capture from air is certainly possible. Plants during photosynthesis routinely accomplish this task. Chemical processes also can capture CO₂.

A collector capturing CO₂ from a natural airflow is akin to a windmill. In one case one extracts CO₂out of the airflow, in the other case one extracts kinetic energy. The first task in developing CO₂ capture from air would be to define an optimal design. Candidates include filter banks standing in the airflow like snow fences, designs that resembles leaves on a tree, or systems akin to cooling towers that actively move the air.

To illustrate this with an example: some years ago, a wind energy technology was suggested that could operate in a dry climate. Inside a large tower, water is pumped to the top, where it cools the air by evaporation. The cold air, being denser, would cause a downdraft inside the convection tower. The potential energy of the air falling down is eight times larger than the potential energy of the water that has to be pumped up. The air flows through the lightweight tower structure and escapes at the bottom where its kinetic energy is harnessed by a number of wind turbines. This effort had grown from preliminary designs to a consortium that was planning on building such a tower in the Negev desert. For such a tower to be economically viable it would cost maybe $3,000 per kW. Such a cost does not appear unreasonable but in the end, these towers were not built. The point here is only to show how much more efficient such a tower would be at extracting CO₂ rather than kinetic energy.

Calcium hydroxide is an obvious candidate for a sorbent, but it is likely that there are better choices. For one, the binding energy of the carbonation reaction of calcium hydroxide or calcium oxide is far larger than would be required on thermodynamic grounds. A good sorbent should not escape in large quantities from the capturing system, and it should be environmentally benign. It needs to be either extremely cheap, or can withstand many recycle loops.

Results of the analysis suggest that the collection of CO₂ directly from air is feasible. Collecting CO₂ from air is far more efficient than collecting wind energy.

Why do we need plastic bags recycling

brynh — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 21:31:22 +0000

The bags landfills pollute ecosystems taking too long to completely decompose and kill animals that mistake the bags for food. When produced, plastic bags they’ll accumulate and persist on our planet for up to 1,000 years. Only in the U.S. 100 billion plastic shopping bags are used annually (12 million barrels of oil is required to make that many plastic bags).

The industry describes itself as a leader in sustainability arguing that rather recycle or reuse plastic bags that banning or charging for them. It is interesting point of view but, what about all those bags accumulated through all those years aroung the world. Every single piece of plastic ever manufactured on this planet is still out there. It is not in use but somewhere on landfills contaminating our rivers and oceans.

It is a clear that we need to reuse and ofcourse recycle old plastic bags but how to stop or for beginning just slow it’s production? Many people claim that problem with reusing bags is in durability – bags are reusable fora a short period before they tear apart. If plastic industry really places emphasis on reusing and recycling plastic bags, why they are still producing more and more bags distributing them through stores? Each high quality reusable bag used has the potential to eliminate an average of 1,000 plastic bags over its lifetime.

Sustainability involves seeing a bigger picture of the issue, and the bigger picture here is that plastic bags are no good for the well-being of the planet and its populations.

In recent years, many states, California particularly, have pushed the use of paper over plastic. It is not so simple but something must be done. Creating paper bags involves habitat destruction because of the logging that takes place. It also requires a great deal of fossil fuel for the machines that perform the task, not to mention the chemical and energy needs to make the paper and then distribute it around the country.

Plastic bags, on the other hand, are a byproduct of the oil-refining process. They often come from coal-burning plants. Recycling plastic bags is possible, but it not effective assuming that it takes work and is essentially a re-melting process. At the end we can say that recycling paper bags results in a comparable product to the original but plastic bags lose their viability in the recycling process.

The simple act of saying NO to plastic bags is something every global citizen can do.

Biodiversity on Earth

Haiti’s endangered forests

brynh — Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:30:46 +0000

After Haiti’s devastating earthquake, an ecological disaster has been unfolding elsewhere across the country. Mountain forests of Haiti’s Massif de la Hotte region have been more critically endangered species than anywhere else on earth, according to Alliance for zero extinction. That mountain area has 42 birds, reptiles, plants, amphibians and mammals that are very endangered today. It is interesting that 13 species of frog on the verge of extinction live only in those forests. It is very concerning fact that only 3% of Haiti’s original forests remain and today they are disappearing at a rate of 10% every five years.

The Massif de la Hotte region suffered further strain after January’s earthquake when refugees from the capital Port-au-Prince doubled the size of the local population.

Birdlife International society from and Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust recently secured $450,000 from the UK government to work with Haitian non-governmental organizations (NGOs), helping local communities find alternative income without destroying the forest. They explain it as protecting the environment immediately comes down to helping local people with their livelihoods, because they are the same people who are impacting the environment. Organizations are helping to reduce the impact on the forest include piping fresh water from natural springs into villages, which saves people from having to cut down trees to reach the springs. The NGOs have also established tree nurseries, growing trees for reforestation and giving employment to local people.

Other initiatives include establishing fast-growing wood for fuel around villages, setting up chicken farming cooperatives and reopening the area’s only school, which closed down in 2000 because of lack of funding.

There are two endangered species of mammal that are found only on the island: a solenodon, which is like a giant shrew, and a hutia, like a long-legged guinea pig living in trees.

Today there is only hope that all those NGOs and other helping organizations will provide enough funds and works to help locals not to endanger forests and animals at so quick rate.

Argentinian lake maybe holds secret of life on Earth

brynh — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:13:47 +0000

Argentina’s remote lake in northwestern territories may have clues on how life got started on Earth and how life could survive on Mars or other planets, not just in our solar system. Researchers have found millions of super bacteria thriving inside Lake Diamante in the center of a giant volcanic crater, more than 4500 meters above sea level.

The bacteria’s habitat is similar to primitive earth, before living organisms began wrapping a protective atmosphere of oxygen around our planet so the oxygen concentration in lake itself is pretty low. Those primitive earth’s conditions include high alkaline and arsenic level what in other words mean – they could shed light on life beyond Earth.

Scientists believe if bacteria can survive here it could also survive somewhere like Mars or similar planets. So-called extremophiles have been found also in other parts of the world and it is widely used in industrial processes line in detergent manufacturing. Bacteria that break down lipid have significant commercial value.

Maria Farias, member of team that discovered the life forms in Lake Diamante said that these bacteria called polyextermophiles are exceptional as they flourish in the harshest of circumstances.

Diamante lake contains levels of arsenic 20,000 times higher than the level regarded as safe for drinking water. Water temperature is also often below freezing but because it is so salty (five times saltier than sea water) ice never forms.

The bacteria’s DNA mutates in order to survive low oxygen levels and high ultra-violet radiation at such high altitudes what is very interesting for researchers. Farias and her team now want to produce metagenome of the bacteria to study it and maybe find some usable applications for new antioxidants or enzymes that could be derived from the bacteria.

Hiking through Amazonian rainforest

brynh — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:29:29 +0000

Brittish explorer named Ed Stafford finished his 6500km long journey along the Amazon River in little more than two years. Ed started his journey at Camana, Peru on April 2, 2008 and ended it yesterday in Brazil, at Maruda Beach. He started walking alone but after four months of travel was joined by Peruvian forest worker Gadiel Sanchez Rivera, called Cho among the friends. Cho just intended to guide Ed through dangerous forest area in Peru but stayed to the end of the expedition.

This great adventure lasted for 859 days through three countries, but mostly through Brazilian mainland.

Ed said:

“At first it was terrifying but it’s changed in our eyes during the expedition and a place that was once mysterious and dangerous to us is now a place where we feel safe. We’ve never had more relaxed evenings than when we sit in the middle of the jungle alone around the campfire. It’s not a scary place for us now; it’s beautiful; we’ve fallen in love with it and it feels like home.”

It’s the kind of fortitude that Stafford has summoned time and again since setting out from the Amazon’s River source to raise international attention about rain-forest destruction and to help raise funds to combat it. Along this epic journey, two companions encountered a lot of danger like mosquitoes, scorpions, anaconda, pit vipers and electric eels.

The greatest pleasures of the journey, Stafford said, have been the warmth of the Brazilian people, with village children frequently welcoming him and Sanchez to new towns and their parents offering home-cooked meals.

Stafford never visited Amazon before this expedition but as he said his quest for saving Amazonian region won’t end with this effort. After the successful end of Amazon expedition Stafford took flight to England to take some rest till his next journey.