No, I haven’t forgotten you! I was on vacation in Iceland, and had very limited access to Internet.

I’ve known for years that Iceland is a geothermal paradise, but to see it in person was quite amazing. Everywhere we went, there were geothermal hotsprings. Everywhere, there were geothermally heated municipal swimming pools and hot tubs (one of the few bargains in a rather expensive country). We visited a geothermal power plant that contained an energy museum. We enjoyed hot, hot showers, as hot as our solar-heated system at home (we saw almost no solar in Iceland, in part because usually they don’t have too much sun, and in part because geothermal is readily available and produces much steadier power).
We cooked eggs in a geothermal spring, and tasted bread that had been baked in the ground, overnight.

One surprise for me was how much geothermal power is used to create steam and spin turbines to generate electricity; I’d expected most of it to be heating water for direct use rather than spinning turbines, because that cuts down on efficiency.

But efficiency and conservation aren’t such big concerns in Iceland. We were rather surprised that conserving water or electricity didn’t seem to be a value. People just ran the water or left lights on.

But that can change with education and a values shift. Meanwhile, Iceland can truly claim to have one of the greenest power grids in the world.

In a country with only 318,452 inhabitants as of January 2011 and approximately 116,000 households, this tiny country has the capacity to supply much of Europe’s energy needs. In fact, plans are afoot to build deep-sea cables that will export as much as 5 billion kilowatt-hours of clean, renewable electricity to the rest of Europe—enough to power 1.25 million homes.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

The word “greenwashing” is only a few years old; the practice, unfortunately, goes back much longer.

This morning, for some reason, I woke up thinking about a loaf of bread I saw in the supermarket some time in the early 1980s. This line of bakery products was very clearly marketed to the customer who wanted natural foods, and even back then, that included me. The packaging copy was all about wholesome whole grains, natural growing practices, and such–until I got to the ingredients list.

And there I saw the deal-killer: “calcium propionate added to discourage mold.” Back it went from my hands to the shelf!

I was so deeply offended to see this very common bread additive in a bread marketed as wholesome and natural that I can still recall the exact wording. In fact, I remember telling several friends how corny and false this company was, trying to disguise its use of chemicals by saying “discourage” instead of the more typical, and harsher sounding, “retard mold.”

And that got me thinking about another early greenwashing offender: nuclear power. As a child in the 1960s, and one who was impressed by the promise of technology, I was enchanted by the idea of clean energy that would be “too cheap to meter,” as one prominent nuclear bureaucrat famously put it.

This enchantment didn’t stop me from getting involved in a local group that was questioning the wisdom of a proposed nuke two miles from New York City, but back then, all we knew about was thermal pollution. Thank goodness the utility abandoned that plan!

Two years later, I chose as a college research topic the pros and cons of nuclear power, and started reading in depth. Turns out, thermal pollution is the least of nuclear’s problems. Factor in these:

  • Potential for catastrophic accidents that could make Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island look like a romp in the park
  • Deeply subsidized limited-liability insurance that means if there is a catastrophe, private citizens aren’t going to collect on their losses without a massive infusion of billions of dollars of government money (this is a US law, the Price-Anderson Act, but many other countries have similar provisions)
  • A long and sordid history of literally hundreds of small accidents that could have become big very easily–this link with pictures and descriptions of the nine worst shows that five of the nine were AFTER Chernobyl
  • A 250,000-year pollution problem in the need to isolate extremely deadly wastes from the environment for a quarter of a million years (think about how few artifacts remain from even 5000 years ago, and almost nothing of human origin exists from even 30,000 years ago)
  • Huge inefficiencies that lead one analyst, John Berger, to conclude that nuclear–counting the entire fuel cycle–had actually consumed five times as much energy as it produced, so all this risk is for NO benefit (I have the full citation in my book, Nuclear Lessons)

And you wonder how any environmentalist (and several very prominent ones have) can endorse this terrible, deeply flawed, and very UN-green technology.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

New England Environmental, Inc.’s new headquarters in Amherst, MA just became only the fifth property in Massachusetts (and the first in Western Massachusetts) to achieve LEED Platinum Certification.

I toured this facility several months ago during a Chamber of Commerce event, and saw features such as

  • Pavers that allow water to drain off driveways and parking areas
  • The 40KW photovoltaic array, providing solar electric power
  • Wonderful use of natural light
  • Waterless urinals

The green design features of this design are expected to save the company $21,000 a year, according to today’s Daily Hampshire Gazette (warning: typically, Gazette links are only open to subscribers).

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I just love this! While one of Los Angeles’ major freeways was closed (the so-called “carmageddon”), and Jet Blue offered $4 airfares for the 40-mile jaunt between Burbank and Long Beach, a group of cyclists

 issu[ed] a modern-day John Henry challenge: on their bikes, they would beat the plane to the other side of the city.

And they did. The cyclists, part of a group called Wolfpack Hustle, made the ride in an hour and thirty-five minutes. Another member of the group drove to the airport, arrived the requisite hour early, waited in the security line, boarded the plane, landed, and took a cab (which apparently got lost) to the finish line—arriving more than an hour after the cyclists, and after a challenger who made the trip by public transit and walking, and another who rollerbladed it.

That’s right: On Sunday, an airplane got its butt kicked by bicycles, metro rail, and a pair of rollerblades.

Score two for self-propelled transportation (bikes AND inline skates), and another for land-based mass transit. I thought it was pretty cool that when I was a high school student in the Bronx, I could easily beat the bus coming back from school on my five-mile bike ride, and took about the same time on the way there (uphill). But this, I have to say, is so much cooler. 🙂

(Thanks to Eric Eustache  (@E_volution on Twitter) for sharing this terrific article.)


Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

For more than 30 years, one of the arguments I’ve made against nuclear power is the chilling effect on our freedom.

Now, it seems that Japan may have passed a law heading down that slippery slope. Or not—I am not so far convinced that the claims are accurate.

A blogger for the UK Progressive put up a rambling, jumbled article claiming that Japan has passed a law giving sweeping powers to shut down bloggers, people who post videos on Youtube, etc. when they’re critical of the government and/or TEPCO.

I did a bit of Googling and found dozens of other blogs basing their story on that same article, which I consider unreliable. But I did find this in the Tokyo Times, which seems to be a genuine news organization that fact-checks and posts corrections. The Tokyo Times article says the Computer Network Monitoring Law was passed on June 17.

It also says that during March and April, even before the law was passed, government agents sent 41

“letters of request” to internet providers, telecom companies, cable TV stations and others to take measures in order to respond to illegal information, including erasing any information from the Internet that can be seen as harmful to morality and public order.

However, this article links back to coverage in the Examiner which again ties back to the original, untrustworthy blog post. I certainly am not going to pore over all 6000 citations to see whether this story is legitimate. But it’s certainly worth keeping an eye on.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Here’s one for the Encyclopedia Idiotica: Entergy, owner of the sorely troubled Vermont Yankee nuclear plant (with a history of safety issues going back at least to 1974 when the plant was quite new),

Cooling tower failure, Vermont Yankee
Vermont Yankee cooling tower fails, 2008. Photo by ISC ALC, Creative Commons license

just spent $50 million on new fuel and committed another $42 million to installing that fuel, knowing full well that the state will consider any operation beyond March, 2012 illegal. And this doesn’t count $100 million in post-Fukushma upgrades that will be required in the next few years.

The issue of whether Vermont Yankee will be bound by state law and forced to shut down March 21, 2012 will be adjudicated in court this September: a lawsuit brought on by Entergy’s attempt to torpedo its 2006 agreement to abide by the state’s decision, once it became obvious that the vote was not going Entergy’s way.

Add to this a few other factors:

  • Vermont Yankee is one of 23 reactors in the US that use essentially the same design as Fukushima; it’s not out of the question that the federal government could unilaterally shut all those plants down.
  • The year-long Associated Press study on nuclear power safety showed glaring holes in the entire industry; a new citizen action network, like the one of the late 70s, could revitalize the safe energy/no nukes movement and bring enormous pressure to close all the nuclear plants in the US.
  • In New England, opposition to nuclear power is already deeply entrenched and fairly well organized. It was New England’s Clamshell Alliance, after all, that gave birth to the national nuclear shutdown movement of the 1970s and 1980s. Even if Entergy manages to win in court, it’s obvious that any attempt to keep the plant running will be met with massive citizen opposition including very public protests and civil disobedience. This will inevitably make keeping the plant open a very expensive and slow operation.

And I’ll bet that Entergy will raise an argument on the order of “you can’t make us shut down, we just spent $92 million to refuel.” Since the company knew full well that this money could be completely wasted and went ahead anyway, I hope that Judge Murtha not only refuses to consider that line of “reasoning,” but makes sure the entire cost is borne not by innocent taxpayers and ratepayers of Vermont, not even by stockhoders who had nothing to do with this decision, but by the members of the Board of Directors who voted to squander this money, and to the executives that pushed for this vote.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Once upon a time, not all that long ago, my area of Western Massachusetts grew wheat, barley, and other grains. Until recently, though, in my lifetime, farms around here basically grew no grains other than corn. Maybe a bit of amaranth as a decorative flower.

In the past five years or so, that’s begun to change, thanks in large measure to two local artisan bakers and a few craft beer brewers who have created demand for local grain.

Today, I stumbled on an announcement in my local paper about a two-day conference (today and tomorrow) on growing, processing, and marketing a variety of local grains. I’m not a farmer and won’t be attending. But as someone who thinks local community food self-sufficiency is going to be a very important issue in the coming years, I think that’s pretty darned cool.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

If you’re thinking of solarizing your home, starting to compost, building with straw bales or other eco-friendly materials, collecting and reusing rainwater, or just learning about new green technologies you can easily make a part of your life, this weekend’s SolarFest in Tinmouth, Vermont may be very well worth the trip.

If past gatherings are any indication, this will be an informative, enjoyable festival, with lots of hands-on workshops, vendors offering a wide range of solutions for both do-it-yourselfers and have-it-dones (many at surprisingly low price points)—and some pretty good music, too. It’s a New England back-to-the-lander’s dream.

Tjhis years workshops are once again divided into these five tracks:  Renewable Energy, Green Building, Sustainable Agriculture, Thriving Locally, and (for kids and teens) The Solar Generation.

Within these categories, choose from such options as The Ecological House New England and How to Design a Zero-Carbon, Net-Zero-Energy Home (both in the Green Building track), separate seminars on raising chickens, goats, worms, and mushrooms (Sustainable Agriculture), increasing local food production and repairing your own bike (Thriving Locally).

The festival is an easy drive from Western Massachusetts, Albany, and much of Vermont and New Hampshire—and not too outrageously far away from New York City and Boston. Camping on-site.

For the second year in a row, I’ll be presenting. My session, “Green And Profitable: Harnessing the Marketing Advantages of Going Green,” will be in the Thriving Locally tent, sunday at 12:30, with a book signing immediately following at Northshire Books’s booth. Please stop by and say hello.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

In the UK Guardian, George Monbiot once again holds out nuclear as our salvation to the very real problem of climate change.

And I again disagree with his illogical conclusion. Here’s what I posted on the comment page:

George, what crazy logic you show! I wish I were going to be around Wednesday morning to debate you, but it will be 4 a.m. my time.

You cannot simply wave a magic wand and wish the problems of aging, badly designed nuclear plants away. That Daini did not have a meltdown while its neighbors at Dai’ichi had several is no argument that nuclear is safe. I am old enough to remember how the plants of the early 1970s were the new, safe generation–but these are the plants that failed not only at Dai’ichi, but at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl–and that in a very scary long-term study by the Associated Press (conducted over a year) that many of these (US) plants are literally rotting away, while regulators relax safety standards because the plants can’t meet them! 23 nuclear plants in the US alone use the same faulty design as Dai’ichi.  Chernobyl alone has caused a shocking 1 million deaths and $500,000,000,000 in property damage.

Oh, and then there are the dozens of near-miss–accidents that could have been catastrophic but by luck were fairly minor. From 1952 to 2009, there were at least 99 accidents causing loss of life or at least USD $50,000 in property damage, and that does not count the Fukushima accidents in 2010 and 2011.

Add in the many other problems: reliability, safety, waste storage, routine and nonroutine radiation releases, risk of terrorism–and subtract the enormous amount of energy and expense it takes to mine uranium, process it into nuclear fuel, transport it great distances, run it through the reactors (a very power-intensive process right there), and then keep the waste cooled and “safe” indefinitely. Now factor in the very long cycle of building a nuclear plant and getting it online, the completely unproven technologies of future reactors that we’re asked to embrace, and a host of other factors. Then consider how we could meet those energy needs easily and cleanly with deep conservation, solar, wind, small hydro, geothermal, etc. Why on earth would we want to risk all for so little benefit through a new nuclear programme?

Links to three of the four parts of the AP report are on my blog, at https://greenandprofitable.com/latest-ap-nuke-safety-report-population-growth-not-factored-in/ and https://greenandprofitable.com/nuclear-safety-procedures-are-absolutely-unacceptable/.

I did some research on newer nuclear plant designs recently, as I was adding a new introduction for the forthcoming rereleased Japanese edition of my book on nuclear power. And I can tell you I was NOT reassured that these newer designs are safer. The “generation 4” are just as unproven as the old ones, and they won’t come on line until 2040 anyway–far too late to address the climate change issue. Meanwhile, the ones currently in planning stages are Generation 2 and Generation 3–technology that the backers of Gen 4 reactors have already acknowledged is not adequately safe. WHY are we doing this?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Guest Blog by Paul Rogat Loeb

Following the weather is beginning to feel like revisiting the Biblical plagues. Tornadoes rip through Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma-even Massachusetts. A million acres burn in Texas wildfires. The Army Corps of Engineers floods 135,000 acres of farmland and three million acres of bayou country to save Memphis and New Orleans. Earlier in the past year, a 2,000-mile storm dumped near-record snow from Texas to Maine, a fifth of Pakistan flooded, fires made Moscow’s air nearly unbreathable, and drought devastated China’s wheat crop.  You’d think we’d suspect something’s grievously wrong.
But media coverage rarely connects the unfolding cataclysms with the global climate change that fuels them. We can’t guarantee that any specific disaster is caused by our warming atmosphere. The links are delayed and diffuse. But considered together, the escalating floods, droughts, tornadoes, and hurricanes <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=warning-flooding-ahead>fit all the predicted models. So do the extreme snowfalls and ice storms, as our heated atmosphere carries more water vapor.  So why deem them isolated acts of God-instead of urgent warnings to change our course?
Scientists are more certain than ever, from the National Academy of Science and its counterparts in every other country to such “radical groups” as the American Chemical Society and American Statistical Society. But the media has buried their voices, giving near-equal “point/counterpoint” credence to a handful of deniers promoted by Exxon, the coal companies and the Koch brothers. Fox News’s managing editor <https://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46409.html>even prohibited any reporting on global climate change that didn’t immediately then question the overwhelming scientific consensus. The escalating disasters dominate the news, but stripped of context. We’re given no perspective to reflect on their likely root causes.
Meanwhile, leading Republicans who once acknowledged the need to act, like <https://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-will-steger-climate-change>Tim Pawlenty, disavow their previous stands like sinners begging forgiveness.  A Tea Party Congress insists that they know better than do all the world’s scientists, dismissing decades of meticulous research as Ivory Tower elitism. Even Obama has fallen largely silent, as if he can’t afford an honest discussion.
As a result, too many Americans still don’t know what to believe. We can’t see, smell or taste the core emissions that create climate change. The industrial processes that create the crisis are so familiar we don’t even question them, no more than the air that we breathe. And if we’re not getting hammered by the weather, the world still seems normal, particularly on a lovely summer day. Plus we’re told that in the current economic crisis we can’t afford even to think about climate change or any other urgent environmental issue, even though the technologies that provide the necessary alternatives are precisely those our country will need to compete economically. Add in a culture of overload and distraction, and it’s easy to retreat into denial or self-defeating resignation.  It’s as if <https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/28/gallups-public-opinion-on-global-warming-dead-last/>half our population was diagnosed with life-threatening but treatable cancer-visited the world’s leading medical centers to confirm it–and then decided instead to heed forwarded emails that assure them that they can freely ignore the counsel of the doctors and simply do nothing.
The antidote to denial and the forces that promote it is courage. And as Egypt and Tunisia remind us, courage is contagious. We need to act and speak out in every conceivable way, and demand that our leaders do the same.  We need to engage new allies, like religious evangelicals who’ve recently spoken out to defend “God’s creation,” from best-selling minister Rick Warren to highly conservative organizations like the Christian Coalition. We need to work with labor activists who link this ultimate issue with the renewal of American jobs. A recent <https://www.bluegreenalliance.org/about_us/organizations>BlueGreen Alliance conference, for instance, brought together leaders of major unions like the United Steel Workers, SEIU, Communications Workers of America, United Auto Workers, Laborers’ International, and American Federation of Teachers, with environmental groups like the Sierra Club, National Resource Defense Council, National Wildlife Federation and Union of Concerned Scientists, all speaking about the need to invest in an economy where both ordinary workers and the planet are respected.  We need to join with these allies and others to voice our outrage at those risking our common future for greed. We need to find creative ways to do this until America’s political climate comes to grips with the changing climate of the earth. Here’s hoping the mounting disasters will finally teach us to turn off The Weather Channel and begin taking action.
Paul Loeb is author of Soul of a Citizen, with 130,000 copies in print including a newly updated second edition. He’s also the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen’s Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association. See <a ahref=”https://www.paulloeb.org/”>www.paulloeb.org</a>  To receive Paul’s articles directly please email <a href=”mailto:sympa@npogroups.org”>sympa@npogroups.org</a>  with the subject line:  subscribe paulloeb-articles

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail