Dawn Light: Dancing with Cranes and Other Ways to Start the Day – Diane Ackerman
READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS
See the article here:
Dawn Light: Dancing with Cranes and Other Ways to Start the Day – Diane Ackerman
READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS
See the article here:
Dawn Light: Dancing with Cranes and Other Ways to Start the Day – Diane Ackerman
I recently saw an article going around about how much land we would need to power our country with solar energy, and I was blown away — to say it’s a small amount is selling it short. According to Elon Musk, we only need a couple of counties in Texas with a couple of thousand rooftops — or just 0.6 percent of our land — and we’d have renewable energy for the whole country.
I couldn’t get over how simple that sounds, so I did a bit more research into solar energy facts to find out why we aren’t doing this, like, yesterday.
First things first, Elon Musk isn’t wrong and isn’t oversimplifying a grossly difficult task, but he does gloss over the meaty problems of our current energy situation in this country. So what’s standing in our way of solar power for all?
My natural first question after reading the article is why aren’t we installing solar panels on everyone’s roof? The answer in a nutshell: permits. At this point in solar technology, you can’t just hop on down to Lowe’s and grab a couple to install yourself. The biggest problem that I came across in my research was lack of solar companies and lack of neighborhoods that were cleared to be able to have solar panels. In order for the solar panels to work, they need to be connected to a main battery and circuit system, and a lot of these are not set up for your average American.
If you do live in an area that is capable of solar energy, you need to get a consultation from a solar company. They give you your options based on square footage, and then you start the installation. Since solar panels are not cheap, you won’t start reaping the benefits until down the line. Your energy bill will be lower, and you will get a tax credit and write-off, but you’re also going to be paying off those panels. I think the aspect of not seeing the financial benefits of solar panels more quickly scares a lot of people away.
My next question was if roofs were our only option for solar panels — why not all the unused acres in this country? There are more and more solar fields being built every year, but it’s a slow process. One of the main aspects that I didn’t think about until I started googling all of this was the facilities. If you build a giant field, you’re going to need to hook it up to giant batteries, and the rest of the power system for that town, and subsequently the rest of the country. You’ll need to build facilities for the workers and roads to get all the equipment to and from the build site. You have to pay all the workers and hire multiple people to oversee the project.
Another very big concern is animal habitats and American Indian land. The government would have to purchase a plot of land to fit all these solar panels and facilities without ruining anything in the process. Based on the current situation in North Dakota, these types of things are not easy or quick. That’s so much time and effort that I feel like a lot of people wouldn’t vote for it because they see it as wasted money.
That brings me to my last question: Why does no one care!? I think the biggest problem is the talk of climate change in general. Too many people think it’s something they get to choose to believe in or not. Science has already proven it’s real, it’s here, and it’s getting really, really bad. Once more people acknowledge we need to take action now, we’ll start to come together a lot faster to help this process move along.
I truly believe your average American isn’t going to deeply care about a topic unless he or she gains something in return. If you’re reading this and are wondering about just that, let’s break it down.
There are three types of solar energy: photovoltaic, solar heating and cooling, and concentrating solar technology. Photovoltaic are the typical solar panels you see on roofs to produce electricity for homes and businesses. Solar heating and cooling are panels that do just that, heat and cool. They are used for things like hot water, space heating and cooling, and pool heating. Concentrating solar technology are the panels you usually see in giant fields off the freeway. These curved mirrored panels collect the sun’s energy and convert it for turbines or engines to create energy to store for a rainy day. Along with the federal investment tax credit, a lot of states and counties offer rebates or incentives as well.
Elon Musk has also created a battery wall to help Americans transition inside their homes. I’m hoping that this, combined with more awareness, will help us move faster toward the teeny tiny part of America that should be covered in solar panels.
If you want to help get solar energy more prevalent in your town or community, contact your local government and ask what they are doing to make this happen.
Now that you’ve learned a few solar energy facts, are you ready to make the switch to solar power? Here are 9 crucial steps to prepare your home.
Feature image courtesy of Shutterstock.com
Based in Music City USA — Nashville — Audrey Holmes is on a personal journey toward zero waste. She admits to watching otter videos on YouTube way too much and having an unhealthy obsession with matcha. Speaking of green, read all about her zero-waste journey on her blog,
We Could Power America with Relatively Few Solar Panels, So Why Aren’t We? – November 4, 2016
3 Ways To Eliminate Food Waste Before It Reaches The Compost – October 6, 2016
4 Creative Eco-friendly Transportation Options – August 19, 2016
When Recycling Gets You Arrested Instead of Rewarded
Can Wet Wipes Be Recycled?
Tesla’s New Solar Roof Is Pretty, But Is It Practical?
We Could Power America with Relatively Few Solar Panels, So Why Aren’t We?
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Pinterest
Google Plus
Copyright ©. 2016 Earth911. All Rights Reserved.
Sign up for our newsletter for exclusive updates on contests, new products, and more.
earth911
From –
We Could Power America with Relatively Few Solar Panels, So Why Aren’t We?
Sea, sand, history and climate forecasts are all part of a trip to the Dry Tortugas, an aquatic paradise at the edge of the Gulf of Mexico. See more here: West of Key West, an Under-the-Radar National Park ; ; ;
Link to original:
Scientists studying past and current climate conditions mull the challenges in making future warming matter today. Originally posted here: Can Future Global Warming Matter Today? ; ; ;
Continue reading –
A just-completed project off the coast of Rhode Island, though relatively tiny, is at the forefront of a sea-based transition to renewable energy. View article: America’s First Offshore Wind Farm May Power Up a New Industry ; ; ;
Continue reading here –
America’s First Offshore Wind Farm May Power Up a New Industry
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Cinemark, the country’s third-largest movie theater chain, is asking survivors of a 2012 mass shooting at an Aurora, Colorado, cineplex to reimburse it for nearly $700,000 in legal fees.
In 2012, survivors and family members of victims filed a lawsuit accusing Cinemark of failing to take proper security measures before the shooting, which left more than 12 people dead and 70 wounded. In May, a jury ruled against the plaintiffs after Cinemark argued it could not have predicted or prepared for the attack.
Colorado’s courts allow winners civil cases to recover their legal fees, and in June Cinemark filed a “bill of costs” for $699,187, according to the Denver Post. The company’s attorneys declined a request for comment by Mother Jones but have told a judge they need the money to cover expenses related to the lawsuit, like the costs of preserving evidence and retrieving records.
It’s not yet clear whether the survivors will pay the full amount—a judge must approve the final figure, and further appeals could affect Cinemark’s attempts to seek reimbursement. But that hasn’t tempered public outrage at the request, with some calling for a boycott of the movie theater chain on Twitter.
WTF @cinemark?!?! | #BoycottCinemark gains traction after theater chain requests $700K from Aurora shooting victims https://t.co/zrKTDgr0CL
— Pedro Rafael Rosado (@prrosado)
#BoycottCinemark for expecting victims of #Aurora to pay them $700,000 @cinemark you have forever lost my business https://t.co/EWZ3IDura4
— Jan Hobbs (@hobbs_jan13)
Go see #FindingDory but not at @Cinemark #BoycottCinemark pic.twitter.com/x6egYrougp
— (((Kavin #RiseUp))) (@stylistkavin)
they’re going to need that $700k for damage repair to their public image. #appalling#BoycottCinemark https://t.co/vWdAiaeItt
— David Wiegand (@WaitWhat_TV)
#BoycottCinemark because they want the VICTIMS of a TRAUMATIC MASS SHOOTING to pay them 700,000 dollars. https://t.co/2hJmpiwnP5
— antonio (@antoniodelotero)
A billion dollar company is seeking under .0002% of their revenue from Aurora Victims who have lost so much. Wow. @Cinemark #BoycottCinemark
— Dillon Quinn (@DillonJQuinn)
Follow this link:
Cinemark Is Asking Survivors of the Aurora Massacre to Pay $700,000 in Legal Fees
Posted 16 May 2016 in
Last week, certified mechanics, engine performance experts, and professional fishermen visited Capitol Hill to instruct lawmakers on the finer points of ethanol use in marine engines.
From left to right: Marc Rauch, Executive Vice President and Co-Publisher at the Auto Channel; Joel Hennen, President and Owner of Hennen’s Auto Service; Brian Sowers, Co-Host of Crappie Masters TV; & Keith Holmes, President and Owner of CK Motorsports
At a briefing hosted by Fuels America, the experts dispelled some of the oil industry’s favorite myths about modern engines and explained the importance of biofuels in protecting the environment, preserving America’s energy security, and providing a high-octane boost to race boats.
The event was timely, as the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is expected – sometime this month – to complete its review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed blending requirements for ethanol and advanced biofuels in 2017. Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, the EPA is obligated to ensure that America’s fuel mix continues to lower our dependence on oil, keep our air clean, and combat climate change. And that makes the RFS vital to boaters, racers, fishermen and mechanics around the country.
Keith Holmes provided his perspective as President and Owner of CK Motorsports in Nunica, Michigan and a Certified Mercury Marine Racing Technician. One of his slides helps illustrate the point that ethanol is an ideal fuel for race craft:
Holmes: “Ethanol burns cleaner and cooler. Since the introduction of E10, we find that many engine parts have a 25 to 50 percent longer lifespan. The National Boat Racing Association exclusively uses E10 for all their races.”
Brian Sowers tells lawmakers that Crappie Master Champions all use an ethanol blend in their tanks
Brian Sowers provided a sportsman’s perspective as Co-Host of Crappie Masters TV, covering the Crappie Masters All American Tournament Trail based in Clinton, Missouri: “I want to take my grandkids fishing someday. That means having clean water and clean air.”
Marc Rauch pours some ethanol into a shot glass, explaining why ethanol burns cleaner than gasoline
Marc Rauch, Executive Vice President and Co-Publisher at the Auto Channel, based in Louisville, Kentucky: “As an oxygen booster, ethanol replaces toxins like MTBE, which are notorious for contaminating water supplies. And it reduces CO2 emissions by 34 to 100 percent or more compared to gasoline.”
Finally, a fuel retailer from the shores of the Minnesota River and Prior Lake explained why his customers have embraced ethanol blends for marine applications.
Joel Hennen explains the labels that ensure consumers always get the ethanol blend that’s best for their engine
Joel Hennen, President and Owner Hennen’s Auto Service: “Companies like Kawasaki, Mercury Marine, OMC, Pleasurecraft, Tigershark, Tracker, Honda, and Yamaha all approve the use of E10 in their engines. The labels are clear, and whether customers have a flex fuel vehicle or a race boat, we make it easy to pick the most affordable option with the lowest emissions.”
Fuels
View original article:
America’s Boat and Engine Experts Teach Lawmakers about the Benefits of Ethanol
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Over the years, conservatives have invented a spectacular set of grievances against President Obama—teleprompters, whitey tapes, Bill Ayers, birth certificates, etc.—but in the category of just plain strange, none of them surpass the tale of the missing Churchill bust. Early in his presidency, someone noticed that a bust of Churchill that had adorned the Oval Office during W’s presidency was gone, and this became a cause célèbre, one that continues to this day. Why does Obama hate Churchill? Is it because of his Kenyan background? Because he hates anyone who showed toughness during a time of war? Because he wanted to snub the British?
The correct answer is, “Who cares?” Still, it’s true that the White House offered up something of a whirligig of responses when this first hit the fan, and that’s a little odd too. Why were they so sensitive about it?
That’s still a mystery. However, a few days ago Boris Johnson—basically the Donald Trump of London—brought up the Churchill bust yet again, and this time Obama decided to explain personally what happened:
It was, Mr. Obama said, his decision to return that Churchill to his native land, because he wanted to replace it with a bust of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
“There are only so many tables where you can put busts. Otherwise, it starts looking a little cluttered,” the president explained. “And I thought it was appropriate, and I suspect most people here in the United Kingdom might agree, that as the first African-American president, it might be appropriate to have a bust of Dr. Martin Luther King in my office.”
He added that the choice of Dr. King was “to remind me of all the hard work of a lot of people who would somehow allow me to have the privilege of holding this office.”
Bizarrely enough, then, it appears that conservatives were basically right (Obama actively chose to return the bust) and the White House pretty much lied about the whole thing. So score one for the conspiracy theorists.
What a weird affair. Why was the White House so hypersensitive about this? Did Obama really feel that he couldn’t afford to be seen favoring King over Churchill? I didn’t care much about this idiocy before, but now I kind of do. What was behind all the doubletalk?
View original:
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Yesterday, the New York Daily News put up a controversial cover that I thought was pretty good. Today, they are out with another cover that, I’ve got to say, is a bit much for me. It calls the alleged perpetrator of Wednesday’s massacre, Syed Farook, a terrorist (accurate!) and Robert Dear, Dylan Roof, Adam Lanza, and James Holmes terrorists (also accurate depending on your specific definition!), but then in the right hand corner it labels Wayne LaPierre, the head of the National Rifle Association, a terrorist.
Now, look, I’m not fan of the NRA, but they’re not a terrorist organization and I don’t think that term should be bandied about all willy-nilly. From 2001 to 2003, this shit happened all the time. Terrorists! Terrorists! Terrorist! Terrorists! It is not helpful. It stirs frenzy and panic in a population of people primed for frenzy and panic. We should use that term when it really makes sense, not just for political groups we disagree with.
But, on the other hand, just today Senate Republicans at the NRA’s behest voted to kill a law that would make it harder for terrorists, felons, and mentally ill people to buy guns. It’s also worth noting that most gun owners don’t even support the NRA’s radical agenda. So it’s not like I’m saying the NRA is a bunch of peachy keen cats deserving of sainthood or anything.
Relatedly, my colleague Julia Laurie spoke to a number of national news organizations about how and when they decide to call a “killer” a “terrorist.” Give it a read. Fascinating stuff.
Excerpt from –
The New York Daily News Just Doubled Down on Its Attack on the NRA