Tag Archives: manufacturing

Are Electric Cars Really Greener?

by FerminHammonds4 Posted on May 24, 2018

Electric cars are kind of a divisive issue. Those who drive electric vehicles often wax poetic about how much better they are for the environment while others, like the author of this Politico piece, like to point out all the ways that electric cars aren’t as green as they are made out to be.

What’s the truth about electric cars? It’s complicated.

Let’s talk about batteries.

On the one hand, the battery for electric cars is an environmental issue in its own right.

The rare, lightweight metals used in the batteries and throughout the cars often come from?not so eco mines?that are hugely environmentally polluting. Plus, as few as 5 percent of the lithium batteries used in electric vehicles actually get recycled (in the EU), which means they just sit in landfills and leach toxins into the environment. However,?Tesla claims to have a battery recycling plan that is actually cost-effective for both manufacturers and?recycling plants, which could improve the battery issue.

And while the manufacturing of electric cars produces more carbon emissions than manufacturing a gas-powered car, one look at Musk’s solar-powered Gigafactory puts that argument to rest.

Electric vehicle production may be secretly more dirty than you’d expect, it’s something that innovative companies like Tesla are working?to?tackle. When it comes to?of fueling electric vehicles, though, they’re as green as you make them.

The way you charge your electric car matters.

According to the author of Politico?s recent piece, increasing the number of electric vehicles on the road will actually increase pollution. The idea is that new models of internal combustion vehicles are actually extraordinarily efficient, which is true.

?Today?s vehicles emit only about 1% of the pollution than they did in the 1960s, and new innovations continue to improve those engines? efficiency and cleanliness,? according to author Jonathan Lesser.

When comparing that sort of low?emissions pollution with the pollution caused by traditionally-powered electric vehicles, yes. A new gas-powered car is probably greener than a new, grid-powered electric car right now. But that only factors in electric vehicles charged through the grid.

Solar power, one of the cleanest and most independent forms of renewable electricity, needs to be taken into?serious consideration. The author relies on a projection regarding?the increase of renewables pumped into the grid, which may hit 30 percent by 2030–not enough to keep things clean for electric cars. But that bleak outlook only takes into account our existing infrastructure.

We need to ditch fossil fuels.

When considering the environmental cleanliness of new gas cars versus electric cars, one big factor that needs to be taken into consideration is the importance of getting our planet off of a dependence on fossil fuels.

While less-polluting gas cars are wonderful, they are still gas cars. They will always only be powered by oil and gas. An electric car, on the other hand, can be powered just as easily by?wind or solar as by fossil fuels, if the infrastructure were?there to support it.

And that’s why we need more electric cars. Sure, as they currently exist?they may not be as pristine and clean as we like to believe, depending on how you fuel them. But the renewable energy infrastructure will not grow around them unless there is a demand.

We need people driving clean electric cars to push towns, cities, and states to enact widespread projects to provide clean sustainable energy for the surge in electrically powered vehicles. That’s how we will begin to cut off our dependence on polluting fossil fuels.

Solar is the future (and the present) for electric charging.

I have always associated electric cars with solar charging. The vast majority of electric car charging stations I see?are solar powered. Even?certain grocery stores?have implemented free solar charging stations to reward?environmentally-conscious customers while they shop.

While I?can’t speak for the whole country, buying an expensive electric vehicle like a Tesla only makes financial sense if the electricity is very affordable–as it is at many?solar charging stations, including long term use of a personal solar station at home.

Granted, not everyone will exclusively use solar to power their cars. With the rise in popularity of luxury electric vehicles, it is natural that those who are less eco-minded but desire to indulge?their wealth will?buy a fancy electric car and not discriminate between renewable charging stations and fossil fuels. But that?doesn?t mean electric cars are actually worse for the environment. It means we need to make it easier for the indiscriminate to cleanly charge them.

Our infrastructure needs to grow and evolve in tandem with our vehicles. An electric car is a move towards cleaner energy. It should be charged that way, too.

Related on Care2

Keyless Cars are Killing People
The Dos and Don’ts of Washing Your Produce
Is Eco Toilet Paper Worth the Extra Cost?

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View the original here:  

Are Electric Cars Really Greener?

Posted in alo, bigo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, solar power, sustainable energy, Uncategorized, Vicks | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Are Electric Cars Really Greener?

American Media Suffering From Desperate Lack of Pro-Trump Voices

by GustavoE07 Posted on December 9, 2016

Mother Jones

It turns out that a lack of manufacturing jobs is not America’s only problem. There’s also a lack of columnists willing to defend Donald Trump:

As they discovered during the long campaign season, the nation’s newspapers and major digital news sites — the dreaded mainstream media — are facing a shortage of people able, or more likely willing, to write opinion columns supportive of the president-elect. Major newspapers, from The Washington Post to the New York Times, have struggled to find and publish pro-Trump columns for months. So have regional ones, such as the Des Moines Register and Arizona Republic, which have a long history of supporting Republican candidates.

Here’s the problem: these folks are not looking for writers who will defend particular Trump policies from time to time. They want columnists who will regularly defend all Trump policies. And here’s the catch: they want people who are non-insane.

That’s hard. But perhaps it’s a business opportunity for me. I could do this, I think, if I put my mind to it, but for obvious reasons of self-respect and the loss of all friends and family, the pay would have to be very high. So the question is, just how desperate is the media for a seemingly rational pro-Trump voice? Are they willing to pool their efforts to make me a highly-paid syndicated columnist who defends Trump no matter what he does?

Let’s see how serious they are. Show me the money, people.

Continue reading here: 

American Media Suffering From Desperate Lack of Pro-Trump Voices

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on American Media Suffering From Desperate Lack of Pro-Trump Voices

How America’s Gun Manufacturers Are Quietly Getting Richer Off Taxpayers

by SelmaMccombs Posted on January 28, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In January 2013, a month after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the state of New York passed gun control legislation that included a ban on the retail sale of assault weapons. Soon after, Remington Outdoor Company, the maker of the Bushmaster assault rifle used in the massacre, announced it would lay off workers at its 200-year-old factory in Ilion and move production to Huntsville, Alabama. Then CEO George Kollitides explained in a letter to New York officials that the move was brought on by “state policies affecting use of our products.”

The gun lobby crowed about political payback: “We hope that sends a very strong message,” remarked then National Rifle Association’s president, Jim Porter, on an NRA radio show. What Porter didn’t mention was what Alabama had done to sweeten the deal: By relocating to Huntsville, Remington, a $1 billion firearms conglomerate owned by the Manhattan private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, would receive state and local grants, tax breaks, and other incentives worth approximately $69 million—the equivalent of getting about $14 from every resident of Alabama.

Since 2003, state and local governments from Alabama to Tennessee have given more than $120 million worth of taxpayer funds to at least seven major firearms companies, according to research by Mother Jones. Most of those subsidies—nearly $100 million—have been pledged just over the past three years by states seeking to lure gun producers from the Northeast, where new firearm regulations have angered industry leaders.

“I’ve had CEOs in New England tell me that the offers from states’ economic development teams are so extraordinary that they could essentially move their factories for free,” Larry Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Federation, told Guns & Ammo. “In some cases they’ve received these offers almost daily over extended periods of time.”

After Maryland passed stringent new gun regulations in 2013, Beretta announced it would shutter its factory there and relocate to a state that has shown “consistent, strong support for Second Amendment rights,” as its attorney, Jeff Reh, put it at the time. But politics wasn’t the only factor in Beretta’s move. The city of Gallatin, Tennessee, eventually won the new factory after it offered Beretta $14.4 million in state and local subsidies. “The level of community support was better,” a Beretta spokesman acknowledged in the Charlotte Business Journal, explaining why that city had lost its bid for the plant.

Southern states have long relied on financial and regulatory incentives to attract manufacturers from more industrialized parts of the country. “I think Remington is doing what Mercedes did for us in the automobile business—it opens the door to opportunity,” Porter told the Birmingham Business Journal. Yet Porter suggested gun companies would enjoy an exceptional welcome: “You will have the support of the administration, you will have the support of the population—everybody in the state is going to be lining up to work for Remington.”

Major politicians have gone the extra mile to attract gun companies. In wooing the Beretta factory, Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam flew to Italy and met with the Beretta family in a posh wine country villa. Haslam later invited Franco Gussalli Beretta, the head of the company’s American subsidiary, to the governor’s mansion for dinner. Nobody in Tennessee seemed to object to the deal’s $14.4 million price tag. “We believe that our brand as the state of Tennessee has taken on new luster because Beretta has chosen to locate here,” Haslan said at the groundbreaking ceremony, “and we are forever grateful.”

Another incentive for gun companies to relocate south has been lax labor laws. In an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader, a Sturm Ruger spokesman admitted the company built a new plant in North Carolina instead of expanding an existing one in Newport, New Hampshire, because it wanted to set up shop in a right-to-work state. Similarly, Remington’s move from New York to Alabama, another right-to-work state, decimated the New York plant’s trade union.

Some Northeastern states have also funneled tax dollars to the firearms industry. Between 2009 and 2014, New York-based Kimber Manufacturing received nearly $1 million in tax abatements and state and local grants—money meant to ensure the company would keep cranking out upwards of 150,000 handguns a year with its factory in Yonkers. Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts have also offered incentives to attract or retain gun manufacturers. But most such enticements are now in the South.

Here are the seven gun companies that have received state and local subsidies in recent years:

Remington Arms, Madison, North Carolina
Move: Owned by a New York private equity fund, Remington in 2014 laid off more than 100 workers at its 200-year-old unionized factory in Ilion, New York (the site of its original headquarters) and opened a new nonunion factory in Huntsville, Alabama.
Subsidy: $68.9 million in cash, worker training, tax abatements, real estate, and construction work from state and local governments. The company also received nearly $12 million in grants, tax credits, and other benefits from New York, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Oklahoma in exchange for training workers and expanding or retaining factories.

Sturm Ruger, Southport, Connecticut
Move: In 2014, the nation’s largest gun company opened a new factory in Mayodan, North Carolina, instead of expanding an existing factory in New Hampshire.
Subsidy: $15.5 million in state tax breaks, employee training, infrastructure construction, and other incentives. The company has also received $150,288 in training subsidies from New Hampshire.

Berretta USA, Accokeek, Maryland
Move: The Italian gun maker last year closed its Maryland plant and moved all US production to a massive factory in Gallatin, Tennessee.
Subsidy: The company will receive $10.41 million in state-funded building improvements and job training grants. The town of Gallatin also kicked in land and tax abatements worth nearly $4 million.

Smith & Wesson, Springfield, Massachusetts.
Move: Publicly traded Smith & Wesson announced in 2010 that it would move its hunting rifle division from New Hampshire to Springfield, Massachusetts.
Subsidy: $6.6 million in state and local tax breaks. The company has also received $158,791 in worker-training subsidies from Massachusetts.

Colt’s Manufacturing, Hartford, Connecticut
Move: In 2011 Florida Gov. Rick Scott announced a deal in which the 180-year-old gun company would open a factory in Kissimmee, saying it showed the state was “a defender of our right to bear arms.” But then Colt walked away from the project for unknown reasons. The company declared bankruptcy last year.
Subsidy: $1.66 million in state and local incentives. Government officials are now trying to claw back the money.

O.F. Mossberg & Sons, North Haven, Connecticut.
Move: The world’s largest manufacturer of pump-action shotguns has gradually shifted manufacturing from Connecticut to a factory in Eagle Pass, Texas. In 2014, it added 116,000 square feet to the factory, which now accounts for 90 percent of its production.
Subsidy: A $300,000 grant in 2014 from the taxpayer-funded Texas Enterprise Fund.

Kimber Manufacturing, Elmsford, New York
Move: America’s largest manufacturer of 1911 pistols hasn’t moved out of New York—at least not yet. In 2012 the company warned that the state’s NY SAFE gun control law might “cause it to reconsider its current expansion.”
Subsidy: In 2009, Kimber received a $700,000 state grant to expand its manufacturing capacity in Yonkers. In 2012 and 2013, it received nearly $300,000 in local tax credits.

Link: 

How America’s Gun Manufacturers Are Quietly Getting Richer Off Taxpayers

Posted in Anchor, ATTRA, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Northeastern, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How America’s Gun Manufacturers Are Quietly Getting Richer Off Taxpayers

If You Want Good Workers, You Need to Pay Market Wages

by WillieSchulthei Posted on September 12, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Today the Wall Street Journal is running yet another article about the inability of manufacturing companies to attract good employees. And Dean Baker is annoyed:

If employers can’t get enough workers then we would expect to see wages rising in manufacturing.

They aren’t. Over the last year the average hourly wage rose by just 2.1 percent, only a little higher than the inflation rate and slightly less than the average for all workers. This follows several years where wages in manufacturing rose less than the economy-wide average….If an employer wants to hire people she can get them away from competitors by offering a higher wage. It seems that employers in the manufacturing sector may need this simple lesson in market economic to solve their skills shortage problem.

The chart on the right shows what Baker is talking about. It’s a slightly different series than the one he uses in his post, but it makes the same point. Manufacturing wages are rising more slowly than in the rest of the economy. If manufacturing companies are really desperate for qualified workers, they have a funny way of showing it.

Now, it’s possible that what they really mean is that they don’t think they can be competitive if they have to pay higher wages. So they want lots of well-qualified employees to work for below-market wages. And who knows? That’s possible. But if that’s really the problem, then apprentice programs and skills training aren’t likely to solve it.

See original article:

If You Want Good Workers, You Need to Pay Market Wages

Posted in ATTRA, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on If You Want Good Workers, You Need to Pay Market Wages

Tomatoes as Car Parts?

by EldonSZEQcnevc Posted on June 13, 2014

Read the article:  

Tomatoes as Car Parts?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tomatoes as Car Parts?

United Auto Workers submits comment in support of the Renewable Fuel Standard

by Posted on January 28, 2014

back

United Auto Workers submits comment in support of the Renewable Fuel Standard

Posted 28 January 2014 in

National

Joining thousands of consumers, farmers and environmental advocates, UAW has submitted its comment to the EPA, urging the agency to reconsider its planned cuts to renewable fuel in 2014. Speaking on behalf of its more than 300,000 members, the union warned that “this proposed rule could not only raise prices at the pump and deter investment in biofuels and biofuel infrastructure, but hurt rural economies and jeopardize valuable American manufacturing jobs.”

From their comment:

Once-struggling rural American communities have grown and become economically independent because of the success of the biofuel industry. However, under this proposed rule, it is predicted that gas prices could increase 5.7 cents a gallon, affecting all workers and their families. Corn prices are expected to drop $0.19 per bushel, below the cost of production, leading to idle ethanol production and significant job loss in the agricultural implement sector.

Our manufacturing sector is viable and strong, particularly in the biofuels and renewable fuels industry. A significant reduction in renewable volume obligations under this proposed rule could destabilize the renewable fuel industry and send the wrong message to investors. As an ardent proponent of the Administration’s light-duty fuel efficiency standards, we at the UAW support growth in the next generation biofuels. Continuing to build our biofuels industry will keep America globally competitive, create even more jobs, improve the environment, and boost economic demand.

We respectfully request that the EPA revise this proposal, ensuring that it is consistent with targets outlined in the 2007 law. Without a revised proposal, the EPA’s proposed rule would impose significant burdens and losses on rural American workers and the economies of their communities.

Click here to read the UAW’s full comment.

Today is the last day to submit comments to the EPA on the Renewable Fuel Standard. Stand with us to protect the only policy that’s helping us end our addiction to oil!

 

 

 

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
See more here – 

United Auto Workers submits comment in support of the Renewable Fuel Standard

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on United Auto Workers submits comment in support of the Renewable Fuel Standard

Wooden Windows Possess A Number Of Benefits

by Andrew Brentford Posted on March 26, 2013

There are a few things that homeowners should learn when thinking about window replacements. There are several advantages to replacing old frames with wooden windows. For years, the number one choice for home window construction and replacement has been wood. The wood frame is constructed of fir, cypress, pine, cedar, redwood, and mahogany. A wood window will improve the homes value, is more energy efficient, can be painted the color the siding, and they do not develop condensation as aluminum will.

Folks can select the material they want the frames to be made from as well as a variety of styles that will enhance the appearance of the home. Since wood frames are very energy efficient they save homeowners quite a bit of money on monthly utility bills. The wood frame is great during the winter or summer months and is often the first choice when changing a homes interior design.

For most people buying a home is the biggest investment they will make. Because it is such a big purchase folks want everything to be perfect right down to the color. When using sash windows it is easy to match them to the siding color on the house. Using wood frames allows homeowners to paint the exterior of the house any color they want.

When a homeowner makes improvements to the home the value and appeal improves. Also, the homes integrity is preserved when improvements are made. Wood frames are quite durable and not likely to crack and break which will lower the expense of maintaining and repairing. Wood frames are perfect for recycling, echo friendly, and very cost efficient.

Once the right contractor is found that can install frames using custom manufacturing, it is a good idea to find out if they handle restorations. You may choose to restore and repair the existing window frames to their original condition. It is less expensive to repair the frames instead of replacing them. Make sure to select the company that considers the environmental effects of the materials they use. Choose the contractor that uses echo friendly materials.

Usually the wooden frames are constructed from natural and renewable materials. These frames resist condensation when they are triple and double glazed. Installing a higher quality window increases the likelihood it will be around for over a century. It should be noted that this is possible only when well maintained regularly with finish or fresh paint.

Although the aluminum frame may be recyclable and less expensive than wood, it is not a good choice if you are looking for energy efficient windows. Fiberglass is stronger and more costly, and offers some ecological concern. Aluminum and fiberglass develop condensation and thought to be second rate materials for windows.

Many people have a budget that does not allow for replacing all windows in the home. An alternative is to purchase salvaged frames which are very economical. It is best to avoid very old wooden windows because they are very often painted with lead paint and are less energy efficient.

While hunting for the best wooden windows, London homeowners should check for services online. You can learn more about The Wooden Window Workshop at http://www.sashwindowrepairs-london.co.uk/restoration-of-sash-windows.html today.

Posted in eco-friendly | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wooden Windows Possess A Number Of Benefits