GreenEnergy4.us

Donate now to support our work.

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Get Grist in your inbox

Original post:

Marijuana is legal in Colorado, but rain barrels still are not

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, oven, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged according, although, article, land, living, news, owned-by-the, politics, solar, state, water, western | Comments Off

The world’s energy supply relies on water. Guess what we’re running low on?

by JeffreyCoy Posted on March 18, 2016

The world’s energy supply relies on water. Guess what we’re running low on?

By Suzanne Jacobson 18 Mar 2016comments Share

Not to make you do math on a Friday or anything, but here’s a simple word problem: If 98 percent of global power generation requires water, the U.N. predicts a 40 percent shortfall in global water supply by 2030, and the world’s population is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050, then approximately how screwed are we? Please present your answer in units of Stacey Dash accidentally driving on the freeway:

Now, before you grab a pencil and paper, some context: A new report from the World Energy Council says that we’re heading for a global water crisis, and we need to improve the resiliency of our energy infrastructure by, among other things: better understanding the water footprints of coal, gas, nuclear, hydropower, and other renewable energy sources and thus better understanding the risks of investing in certain types of future energy infrastructure.

Advertisement – Article continues below

The report points to a recent warning from the U.N. that dwindling water reserves might only be able to meet 60 percent of global water demand by 2030 — meaning that by the time today’s infants grow into pimply bags of hormones, the world could be a serious water crisis. And since power generation is second only to agriculture in global water consumption, that could translate into a serious energy crisis.

Just how serious became clear when researchers reported in a recent study published in Nature Climate Change that hydropower and thermoelectric power provide about 98 percent of the world’s electricity, and both rely heavily on water. That means, the researchers report, that more than 60 percent of the 24,515 hydropower plants they studied and more than 80 percent of the 1,427 thermoelectric power plants they studied could show reduced capacity between 2040 and 2069.

Still, some experts say that couching this as a global issue might not make sense. Kate Brauman, lead scientist for the Global Water Initiative at the University of Minnesota’s Institute on the Environment, for example, told Scientific American that she didn’t think we were facing a worldwide crisis:

“There are places where we’re using all or nearly all of our available water, but those are localized places on the globe,” she said. “So by the end of the day, to say something like, on a global scale, we’re using more water than we have or we’re running out of water” doesn’t paint the situation correctly.

Indeed, plenty of people are already mired in pretty serious water crises. Venezuela, for example, is about to enter a mandatory one-week vacation because a water shortage is making it hard for the country to meet energy demands. So for them and others around the world, this dire warning from the World Energy Council might elicit nothing more than a “So what else is new?”

And besides, Brauman pointed out, as cities grow and “densify” — which they are — they tend to improve their water efficiency by updating leaky infrastructure and lowering overall per capita water use.

What’s more, Scientific American reports, we don’t actually have a firm grasp on how much water we’re consuming, because a lot of what we think we’re consuming actually just goes right back into the water cycle:

For example, a power plant that uses water to cool its condensers might pull water from a river, run it through the plant and release that same water back into the river. The water leaving the plant is warmer, but it still re-enters the river.

Power plants account for almost 80 percent of withdrawals in the United States, but in terms of consumption, their impact is much smaller, said Jerad Bales, the chief scientist for water at the U.S. Geological Survey. Currently, we don’t have good information on consumptive use, said Bales.

“That’s a hard number to get,” he said.

So the World Energy Council is probably right — we should get a firmer grasp on the water footprints of our energy sources and plan accordingly. But as for how screwed we are? Maybe not even one Stacey Dash — at least not as a globe.

Please

Donate now to support our work.

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit site –

The world’s energy supply relies on water. Guess what we’re running low on?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged american, climate, environment, living, power, united, water, world-energy | Comments Off

Could you be Grist’s newest fellow?

by KelleDeBernales Posted on March 15, 2016

COME WORK WITH US

Could you be Grist’s newest fellow?

By Grist staffon 15 Mar 2016comments Share

Are you an early-career journalist, storyteller, or multimedia wizard who digs what we do? Then Grist wants you!

We are now accepting applications for the fall 2016 class of the Grist Fellowship.

Once again we’re inviting writers, editors, and online journalists of every stripe to come work with us for six months. You get to hone your journalistic chops at a national news outlet, deepen your knowledge of environmental issues, and experiment with storytelling. We get to teach you and learn from you and bring your work to our audience. You won’t get rich — but you will get paid.

You’ll work closely with our editors in Seattle on reporting and executing stories for Grist. Our primary subject areas are food, climate and energy, cities, science and technology, pop culture, and environmental justice. If your skills extend into realms like video, audio, and data visualization, all the better.

Our fellows have been up to some stellar work of late. Clayton Aldern brought you the brainy Climate on the Mind series while Raven Rakia explored the environmental quagmire that is Rikers Island. We’re proud of ’em.

For fellowships that begin in August 2016, please submit applications by May 2, 2016. Full application instructions here.

Good luck!

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Could you be Grist’s newest fellow?

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit link:

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged aldern, article, cities, climate, food, grist, island, justice, living, series | Comments Off

JPMorgan pulls out of coal. Kinda

by ZenaidaBecerra Posted on March 8, 2016

JPMorgan pulls out of coal. Kinda

By Katie Herzogon 8 Mar 2016comments Share

The death rattle of coal industry grew a little louder when JPMorgan Chase announced last week that the bank will no longer be directly financing new coal operations in the developed world. “We believe the financial services sector has an important role to play as governments implement policies to combat climate change, and that the trends toward more sustainable, low-carbon economies represent growing business opportunities,” said the bank in a statement.

JPMorgan joins a growing list of banks that have pledge to cut ties with coal, including Bank of America, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo. But before you start to think big banks are closet progressives, it’s best to keep in mind that even if they do cut ties that they are still following the money: Coal is a poor investment right now. Demand for coal in the U.S. has dropped 10 percent in the last three years, and it will drop off even more in the next 15, since replacing the power sector’s favorite fuel with renewable energy and natural gas is a key component of Obama’s Clean Power Plan. Right now, production is at a 30-year low, and coal companies are going bust left and right. At the State of the Union in January, the president called on the elimination federal subsidies for fossil fuels as well as an end to cheap leases on federal lands for oil and coal companies. So while JPMorgan’s plan to pull back from coal is good, it’s also smart.

The coal industry, of course, disagrees. Bloomberg Business reports that the the National Mining Association called JPMorgan’s changes “hardly a heroic gesture” given the market downturn. “The bank hedges its bets on financing projects in developing countries, because, not surprisingly, that’s where the growth is and will be,” said Luke Popovich in an e-mail to Bloomberg.

He’s got a point: JPMorgan isn’t divesting from fuel entirely. The bank will continue to finance coal projects in developing nations using ultra-supercritical technology, which have lower emissions and higher efficiency than conventional plants. So while this is a step in the right direction, it’s just that: A step.

“In order to have a chance at stabilizing the climate, we need financial institutions to follow these commitments on coal mining with further steps to end coal financing altogether,” said Ben Collins, senior campaigner at the Rainforest Action Network, an organization lobbying for coal divestment. “It’s time for the financial sector to step up and lead the just transition we need to a clean, renewable future.”

Clearly, we’re not there yet, but with JPMorgan’s announcement, the death of Big Coal looks even more inevitable.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

JPMorgan pulls out of coal. Kinda

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit site:

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged action, article, business, business & technology, climate, climate & energy, living, news, power, radius | Comments Off

TV coverage of climate change fell last year — but climate denial coverage increased

by DemetriGjs Posted on March 8, 2016

TV coverage of climate change fell last year — but climate denial coverage increased

By Melissa Croninon 8 Mar 2016comments Share

The medium by which most Americans get their news is sorely failing them in one very important category: climate news.

According to a report released Monday, big-name television networks — namely, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox — decreased the amount of airtime they devote to climate change by five percent from 2014 to 2015, despite public promises to cover the issue more. In 2015, climate-related issues took up just 146 minutes total of the network’s evening and Sunday news shows.

The problem isn’t just the lack of climate segments on television, either. It’s that what coverage there is is misleading. In 2015, the major networks aired a total of nine segments on Sunday and nightly shows that included climate science denial.

On the Sunday shows in particular, the number of segments featuring climate science denial increased from the previous year, from four segments in 2014 to six in 2015.

The numbers are especially significant when you consider the fact that television is the staple of the U.S. news diet — according to the American Press Institute, the TV is the device Americans use most frequently to get their news. Survey respondents preferred TV news over other sources, like smartphones or tablets.

But these days TV audiences are skewing older and older. In 2014, the median age of a broadcast or cable television viewer was 44.4 years old — a 6 percent increase from four years previous.

Advertisement – Article continues below

And TV viewers tend to be more conservative — 2013 Gallup poll found that Republicans are more likely than Democrats or independents to report that TV is their main source of news. Republicans most often chose Fox News when describing their main news source — the same network that, according to the Media Matters report, included climate denial or criticism of climate actions in nearly every segment it ran related to climate change.

Luckily, the younger generation may not actually be the audience for these segments. More and more, millennials are cutting the cord, leaving cable for streaming services instead. A 2015 survey found that one-fourth of respondents ages 18 to 29 have never had a broadcast TV subscription.

In other words, millennials may soon be too busy binging House of Cards to catch the latest idiocy on Fox news.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

TV coverage of climate change fell last year — but climate denial coverage increased

Get Grist in your inbox

Read this article:

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged american, americans, anchor, article, device, g & f, grist-special, living, radius, solar | Comments Off

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

by JaymeCarvosso Posted on March 4, 2016

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

By Katie Herzogon 4 Mar 2016comments Share

There’s goes Norway, making the rest of us look like lazy, gas-guzzling, emission-belching, planet-wrecking Neanderthals again.

The country announced last week that they will be investing 8 billion Kroner — or nearly $1 billion — in an extensive network of superhighways. For bikes.

The system, as CityLab reports, will include 10 two-lane bike roadways around Norway’s largest cities, designed for both in-city travel and long distance trips. While the new bike infrastructure will surely be good for growing strong lungs and tights buns in Norway, the investment is more about addressing climate change than encouraging exercise: The Norwegian government wants to increase the annual number of bike trips by up to 20 percent by 2030 as part of their plan to reduce the transportation sector’s carbon emissions by half.

There, is however, some resistance: Cycling is less common in Norway than it is in most of Scandinavia, not in small part due to the climate (frigid) and the landscape (mountainous), and some leaders say bikeways are a waste of good Kroner that should be spent rebuilding the nation’s road and rail systems. Besides, much of the country is pitch black and covered in ice for most of the year.

Regardless of the cost, Norway is making moves to invest in infrastructure for the future. The country’s massive fossil fuel industry has been hit by the global downturn in the price of crude oil, leading to a devaluation of their currency and an unbalanced economy. Since oil prices plummeted, fossil fuel employers in Norway have cut 30,000 jobs, and investment in the economy has dropped by a third. Norway, according to economists, must diversify their revenue sources to avoid collapse. And with the investment in biking, they’re diversifying their transit options, too.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Norway is building a billion-dollar bicycle superhighway

Get Grist in your inbox

View article:

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged article, bike, country, investment, kroner, living, norway, norwegian, Ona, series, work | Comments Off

Samantha Bee grills Texas legislator on abortion in hilarious, cringe-worthy clip

by CarsonVUPV Posted on March 2, 2016

Samantha Bee grills Texas legislator on abortion in hilarious, cringe-worthy clip

By Katie Herzogon 2 Mar 2016 4:54 pmcomments Share

Happy Texas Independence Day! Seems like the perfect time to celebrate all things Lone Star: chili con queso, Willie Nelson, and limiting women’s access to reproductive health care.

In advance of this oh-so-important holiday, Samantha Bee spoke with Texas state Rep. Dan Flynn (R) on Monday’s Full Frontal, the only late night satirical show hosted by a woman — and, coincidentally, the only late night show in which the host doesn’t get a desk.

Rep. Flynn is the co-author of HB2, the 2013 bill that closed nearly half of Texas’ abortion clinics and whose constitutionality is currently being debated in the Supreme Court. The bill required abortion clinics to perform cost-prohibitive upgrades to meet the standards of ambulatory care centers, which have, among other pretty arbitrary requirements: wide corridors, janitors’ closets of a specified size, separate locker rooms for men and women, and white walls. None of these standards are required for DIY abortions, by the way, which desperate Texan women are increasingly resorting to as their access to actual clinics is heavily limited.

It should come as a surprise to no one that Rep. Flynn doesn’t actually know anything about abortion other than the fact that he is against it. But rather than be honest about his opposition to abortion, Rep. Flynn and his cohort claim HB2 is all about preserving women’s health. “We’re not removing access to health care,” Flynn told Samantha Bee. “We’re improving it.” Because the real threat to women isn’t a lack of access to abortion, it’s lavender walls at the doctor’s office.

If the Supreme Court upholds or fails to rule on HB2, the second-largest state in the Union will be left with only 10 abortion clinics. Already, some women in the state must drive hundreds of miles to find a clinic — which often means they simply never go. And that’s exactly the point, as HB2 co-author Rep. Jason Isaac (R-Texas) told NPR:

“Hopefully,” Isaac said, “they’ll be more preventative and not get pregnant.” Women who live far from a clinic should realize, he said, that, “Hey, that might still be an option legally, but now I live 300 miles away from the nearest place — I should probably be more careful.”

Enjoy your independence, Texas — just kidding! You’re still, unfortunately, part of the United States. And as for women’s rights, well, you just don’t have a whole lot to celebrate.

For more on the connections between reproductive rights and the environment, watch this Grist classic:

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Samantha Bee grills Texas legislator on abortion in hilarious, cringe-worthy clip

Get Grist in your inbox

Read this article:

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, Jason, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged anchor, court, Independence, jason, lai, living, Ona, radius, samantha, state, texas, work | Comments Off

Meet Grist’s new executive editor — and awesome senior editors

by NolanGooch Posted on March 1, 2016

Scott Dodd, Rebecca Leber, and Matt Craft.

Meet Grist’s new executive editor — and awesome senior editors

By Grist staffon 1 Mar 2016 4:41 pmcomments Share

We’re thrilled to announce that, upholding a long tradition of convincing people to leave perfectly respectable jobs and cast their lot with our scrappy enterprise instead, we’ve added three top-notch editors to the Grist ranks this spring. We expect climate change to shut up and go away now — or at least to behave itself a little better.

Here comes the general: First and foremost, Scott Dodd is taking the helm as Grist’s executive editor. The award-winning journalist brings decades of experience as a reporter and editor, a strong leadership background, and a keen sense of humor to the role. And doughnuts. He brings doughnuts.

Among Dodd’s extraordinarily impressive accomplishments (it’s never too soon to kiss up to the new boss, right?), he landed a scoop about messy tar sands financial holdings that gained international attention and helped change the course of U.S. politics; he reported on everything from bioweapons to NASCAR in eight years at the Charlotte Observer; and he was part of a team that produced Pulitzer Prize-winning coverage of Hurricane Katrina for the Biloxi, Miss., Sun Herald. In addition to his work on the front lines of journalism and as editorial director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, Dodd has spent years dispensing wisdom at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

Dodd, who will oversee Grist’s 18-member editorial department and play an active role in shaping the organization’s future, did some kissing up of his own: “It’s a really exciting challenge,” he said. “Grist has been home to smart environmental writers and thinkers for over a decade, so that’s a tremendous legacy to build on. My job is to make it even more ambitious and essential. I want us to have greater impact and a sharper focus on what matters, while still keeping the edge and irreverence that makes everyone love reading it.”

Sounds good to us! “Scott’s energy and ideas will be a powerful addition to Grist,” Grist President Lori Schmall said. “Everyone who spoke with him during the interview process — from younger writers to seasoned editors — was very excited at the prospect of working with him. He has the leadership background and journalism chops to lead us into a new era as a media organization.”

Their skill with a quill is undeniable: In conjunction with Dodd’s arrival, Grist is pleased to announce the addition of News Editor Rebecca Leber and Senior Editor Matt Craft.

Leber, a former New Republic staff writer and ThinkProgress reporter who has won admiration from across the internet for her climate and politics reporting, will lead Grist’s daily news team. “Rebecca Leber has been making a name for herself with smart, detailed climate coverage for years now,” said Vox writer and former Grist columnist David Roberts. “It’s great to see her in a position to lead a team to the same level of excellence.”

Craft, who will guide the work of our feature writers and columnists, arrives at Grist from the Associated Press. He has deep experience finding ways to make opaque issues more palpable, and has covered the seeds of the Arab Spring in Egypt, oil spills in Louisiana, and everything in between. He also wrangled columnists for Forbes Magazine. While he loved editing billionaires, he says the thousandaires at Grist are more his speed.

With Dodd, Leber, and Craft on board, the Grist team is looking forward to finding even more ways to inform and inspire our monthly audience of 2 million and growing. We’ll experiment with new forms of storytelling and introduce new perspectives as we tackle issues ranging from oil spills to the oily presidential campaign in the year ahead.

“Don’t worry, Grist fans,” Dodd says. “I know how special this place is and what a wonderful opportunity I’ve been given. I won’t cock it up.” Dirty words disguised as British humor? Now we know we’ve found our guy.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Meet Grist’s new executive editor — and awesome senior editors

Get Grist in your inbox

Continue reading here:

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged british, business & technology, Everyone, grist, leber, living, news, radius, special | Comments Off

Americans spend 30 billion hours a year commuting. And it’s killing them

by KatrinZachary Posted on February 27, 2016

Americans spend 30 billion hours a year commuting. And it’s killing them

By Katie Herzogon 26 Feb 2016comments Share

Commuting can be one of the most frustrating parts of having a job — a dull, talk-radio-filled, coffee-fueled drive every morning with all the other schmucks on the road.

I experienced it once while living in North Carolina: an awful slog through traffic lights and sprawl that annoyed me so much that I moved. Now, my commute is on foot, an easy mile walk to downtown Seattle, and on a clear day, you can see Mt. Rainer. Rather than dread my commute, I enjoy it. But I am one of the lucky few.

According to a new study, the average American spends 26 minutes traveling to work each way, and for over 80 percent of Americans, that time is spent in a car, usually alone. And the worse part is, it’s only getting longer. The Washington Post reports that 26 minute is:

the longest it’s been since the Census began tracking this data in 1980. Back then the typical commute was only 21.7 minutes. The average American commute has gotten nearly 20 percent longer since then.

Advertisement

According to the Census, there were a little over 139 million workers commuting in 2014. At an average of 26 minutes each way to work, five days a week, 50 weeks a year, that works out to something like a total of 1.8 trillion minutes Americans spent commuting in 2014. Or, if you prefer, call it 29.6 billion hours, 1.2 billion days, or a collective 3.4 million years. With that amount of time, we could have built nearly 300 Wikipedias, or built the Great Pyramid of Giza 26 times — all in 2014 alone.

Instead, we spent those hours sitting in cars and waiting for the bus.

The Post concentrates on the negative effects on the commuter. People with longer commutes are more likely to suffer from obesity, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, back and neck pain, divorce, depression, and death, according the Post, as well as to be less politically engaged, more likely to be poor, miss work, and have other problems. There’s also issues of lost productivity, says the Post: Think of how many more apps we could invent with all those hours! But there’s another issue they didn’t mention. That’s right: climate change.

The vast majority of those nearly 30 billion hours spent commuting every year are by people alone in their gas-powered cars. The carbon footprint of that is just massive, and as commutes grow, it’ll only get worse. It’s a complex problem: Commutes are so long both because cities are so expensive and because mass transit in most American cities is so inadequate.

Take Seattle: If you can’t afford to live close to the city center (or if you’re not willing to live in a studio the size of a jail cell, as I do), you’ll have to contend with either driving yourself to work in the fourth worst traffic in the country, or relying on an often unreliable bus or train.

The current system isn’t working as the myriad of negative effects on both us and the planet show. But until we can figure out how to make cities more affordable and build robust transit systems and carpooling options, the answer may be simply to work from home when it’s possible. We might not be able to teleport yet, but for those who can, there’s always teleworking.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Americans spend 30 billion hours a year commuting. And it’s killing them

Get Grist in your inbox

View original article –

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged advertisement, alo, anchor, city, climate & energy, great, living, Ona, series, washington | Comments Off

New grocery store in Denmark sells only castoff foods

by AnaTripp5569051 Posted on February 25, 2016

New grocery store in Denmark sells only castoff foods

By Katie Herzogon 24 Feb 2016comments Share

The world wastes a shocking amount of food. By some estimates, a third of the food we produce each year gets tossed out, left to rot on the vine, or spoils en route to the consumer. It’s shameful.

Solutions to the food waste problem have been proposed around the world, from campaigns to embrace ugly produce in France to President Obama’s initiatives to reduce food waste in the U.S. by 50 percent. And now, some Danes have come up with their own novel solution: A grocery store that sells castoffs.

Wefood, a crowdfunded and volunteer-run store in Copenhagen that opened earlier this week, sells only surplus food, or the stuff conventional stores toss out. And it does it at 30 to 50 percent cheaper than regular stores.

“Wefood is the first supermarket of its kind in Denmark and perhaps the world as it is not just aimed at low-income shoppers but anyone who is concerned about the amount of food waste produced in this country,” Per Bjerre, who works for the nonprofit that launched the store, told the Independent. “Many people see this as a positive and politically correct way to approach the issue.”

Wefood contracts with one of Denmark’s largest supermarket chains for bread and other products, according to the Independent, and has agreements with other sellers for fruit, meat, and additional foods.

Could such a thing work in the U.S.? We certainly need it. Americans dump 50 percent more food today than we did in 1990, an average of 20 pounds of food per person each month. This isn’t just wasteful, it also harms the planet: Food left to rot in landfills is a source of the climate-warming gas methane, and if there’s one thing worse than food left to rot on the ground, it’s methane in the air.

Please

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?