So often we hear about the futility of various efforts to curtail greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. We hear how little effect changing our habits in various ways will have. We hear how solar energy isn't the answer--not enough storage capacity. Wind energy is expensive to build and maintain. Geothermal energy isn't practical everywhere. Tidal power is expensive to maintain. People won't change their habits without strong legislation. There is no political will. And so on.
We hear how little things--like conservation measure including recycling, composting, turning off lights when not in use, line-drying clothing, etc. are all futile and have such a tiny effect as to be insignificant. We hear people refer to the environment in terms that work well for an economic or business model, but have no bearing in the reality of nature.
We hear how we can't just shift gears over night (despite knowing about climate change for several decades now). We hear from people who fear the shifts that must be made, for various reasons.
We are caught in a "you go first" childhood game, except the stakes are much higher. And some countries are bravely starting, such as Scotland with new clean energy investments. Unfortunately, North American countries are much more cowardly, preferring to let others take the lead.
Yes, the world is full of cynicism, which infects all areas of society. It is so very easy to lose heart and become overwhelmed by the enormity of it all. It is certainly easier to give up than to try!
But for a moment, let's put aside all the "glaring realities" and other cynical comments and consider the more positive possibilities. What if we all worked together on this? What if, instead of pitting ideas against each other and searching for one single Holy Grail of the energy issue, we made use of what we have, with the vision of investing in further research and development as we go?
When we put together all of our current technology, we have the capacity to exceed current energy demands. If we invest in research rather than sinking our money into a losing cause (aka oilsands and further oil subsidies), we can continue to expand our options in the renewable sector. We can invest in high-speed rail and better public transit options, with the joyful side-effect of job creation. We can give tax breaks to employers who encourage telecommuting. We can pass legislation requiring better vehicle fuel efficiency. We can enforce anti-idling laws. We can reshape our international trading practices to require less movement of materials.
We can vote, or rather, those of us old enough can. We can write letters, make phone calls and send emails.
No one solution is the magic bullet, but each piece is vital. We cannot afford to shun an action, however small it may seem, because it won't do it all. It is vital to remember that there are a lot of us. Within a 100 km radius of where I live, the human population is numbered in the millions. If just in this small area each person were to reduce their energy use by even just 5%, this would have an impact. Imagine if this idea spread!
But we are conditioned to a state of learned futility, not only in terms of the environment and politics, but in virtually every aspect of society, so we shrug off these facts because we feel insignificant. Many of us don't even vote anymore because we have lost faith in the system, because we feel overwhelmed by the sheer numbers, because we feel powerless to change things.
Whether your are the "99%" or the ""1%", whether you even know which or could care less, if you do nothing and give up without trying, you become the "0%"--you have no effect at all. This is a defeatist way in which to approach life. We can do better.
And this is exactly why we need even more to keep up our own efforts. We keep hearing about the economic recession, and many are affected deeply by it. But the biggest recession we face as a society is the lack of faith in ourselves. We have to do better, and we have to do so now.
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Monday, 5 March 2012
Wednesday, 23 March 2011
Thoughts on Nuclear Power
Due to concern about the reactors in Japan, there has been much talk about the fate of nuclear power in recent days. Is there a future for nuclear power?
I must admit that I am torn on the question. Nuclear power is not safe, at least not the way it is built, used and run by corporate and government entities around the world. But is there a way we could make it safe? In theory, it looks pretty good, but the reality is a little more complicated.
Nuclear power is cheap, until you take a closer look. First, there is the mining of uranium and other related minerals to consider. Then there is the building and maintaining of reactors, and most of us are aware of the shortcuts that have been taken in both of these, particularly in maintenance. I find it unbelievable to hear how the Mox fuels are being used, and how storage of spent fuel is designed close to the reactors. IMO, this is carelessness in the name of profit. This isn't only about Japan. By all accounts, the Japanese are dealing at least as well with this as any other country possibly could at this time.
If we were to incorporate every available safety precaution into the design of reactors, including the storage of spent fuel; and if we were to run the plants on a strict safety policy in which business models of "cost/benefit analysis" and "insurance risks" based purely on probabilities tallied against financial and political motivations were replaced with the calculation of risk to life and health as the only consideration, then perhaps there might be a place for nuclear power. However, the current realities show us that this simply isn't the case, and isn't likely to happen anytime in the near future. Nuclear power is cheap until there are accidents. And the cheapness of this source fails to take in some very real costs--even before disaster strikes. Government subsidies hide some of the costs. Uranium mining is costly in social, economic and especially environmental terms. The actual running of reactors, including maintenance, can become costly, particularly if public and employee safety is prioritized (as it should be). The lifespan of reactors is relatively short, although in many cases has been pushed beyond original design limits, again, due to economic and political concerns.
I have read conflicting reports about cancers and other radiation related illnesses in people living close to nuclear power plants; since I am no expert, I will leave that argument out for the time being. However, there is no doubt that there are safety concerns for the people who live near nuclear disaster zones, and also for the storage of spent fuel.
Spent fuel is often buried deep, however, geological disturbances happen, and are more likely to happen when the "safe" time frame reaches into the realm of tens of thousands of years or more. Moreover, this is costly disposal, and it is only a matter of time before those in charge start taking shortcuts (assuming of course, that that hasn't already happened).
One thing that generally does not enter into the discussion is the idea of cost/benefit analysis in terms of time. In a best-case scenario, with no further nuclear accidents, leaks, etc., there is still the issue of spent fuel. The half-life of spent fuel, and the resulting large time lag between its use and the time in which it can be safely handled by unprotected people means the problems associated with its radioactivity will exist far into the future and affect many generations. Its useful production time and power is relatively minuscule in comparison.
Several years back some researchers mistakenly thought they had found the modern holy grail: cold fusion. Unfortunately, they were mistaken. Perhaps it is time for a new "X Prize" in energy research. Until then, we would be wise to eliminate our subsidies to dirty energy including fossil fuels and invest instead in renewable energy technology and conservation research and incentives. We can't afford to complacently continue on our current path.
I must admit that I am torn on the question. Nuclear power is not safe, at least not the way it is built, used and run by corporate and government entities around the world. But is there a way we could make it safe? In theory, it looks pretty good, but the reality is a little more complicated.
Nuclear power is cheap, until you take a closer look. First, there is the mining of uranium and other related minerals to consider. Then there is the building and maintaining of reactors, and most of us are aware of the shortcuts that have been taken in both of these, particularly in maintenance. I find it unbelievable to hear how the Mox fuels are being used, and how storage of spent fuel is designed close to the reactors. IMO, this is carelessness in the name of profit. This isn't only about Japan. By all accounts, the Japanese are dealing at least as well with this as any other country possibly could at this time.
If we were to incorporate every available safety precaution into the design of reactors, including the storage of spent fuel; and if we were to run the plants on a strict safety policy in which business models of "cost/benefit analysis" and "insurance risks" based purely on probabilities tallied against financial and political motivations were replaced with the calculation of risk to life and health as the only consideration, then perhaps there might be a place for nuclear power. However, the current realities show us that this simply isn't the case, and isn't likely to happen anytime in the near future. Nuclear power is cheap until there are accidents. And the cheapness of this source fails to take in some very real costs--even before disaster strikes. Government subsidies hide some of the costs. Uranium mining is costly in social, economic and especially environmental terms. The actual running of reactors, including maintenance, can become costly, particularly if public and employee safety is prioritized (as it should be). The lifespan of reactors is relatively short, although in many cases has been pushed beyond original design limits, again, due to economic and political concerns.
I have read conflicting reports about cancers and other radiation related illnesses in people living close to nuclear power plants; since I am no expert, I will leave that argument out for the time being. However, there is no doubt that there are safety concerns for the people who live near nuclear disaster zones, and also for the storage of spent fuel.
Spent fuel is often buried deep, however, geological disturbances happen, and are more likely to happen when the "safe" time frame reaches into the realm of tens of thousands of years or more. Moreover, this is costly disposal, and it is only a matter of time before those in charge start taking shortcuts (assuming of course, that that hasn't already happened).
One thing that generally does not enter into the discussion is the idea of cost/benefit analysis in terms of time. In a best-case scenario, with no further nuclear accidents, leaks, etc., there is still the issue of spent fuel. The half-life of spent fuel, and the resulting large time lag between its use and the time in which it can be safely handled by unprotected people means the problems associated with its radioactivity will exist far into the future and affect many generations. Its useful production time and power is relatively minuscule in comparison.
Several years back some researchers mistakenly thought they had found the modern holy grail: cold fusion. Unfortunately, they were mistaken. Perhaps it is time for a new "X Prize" in energy research. Until then, we would be wise to eliminate our subsidies to dirty energy including fossil fuels and invest instead in renewable energy technology and conservation research and incentives. We can't afford to complacently continue on our current path.
Saturday, 22 May 2010
Oil: So Now What?
A month after yet another major oil mishap, politicians and the general public still seem to want to put the economy before life. There is little political or corporate will to change things for the better.
Are we really content to go on, business as usual, with our carbon consumptive, earth-destructive ways? Do people really believe that nature exists separately from us? Last time I checked, we are all living beings (well, I suspect some politicians might actually be androids, but that's a whole other post!), which makes us part of nature, nature being life on this planet.
Perhaps it is that mindset (of being something separate from nature) that has allowed us to become so consumptive/destructive.
I, for one, am not willing to continue this way. So what do I do? What might any of us do?
To start, try here: 6 quick ways to make a difference
I'm always looking for new ways to live a greener life.
Some steps our family has taken (and yes, they are baby steps, I'll admit it) are:
- reducing driving and dependency on the car (but I still drive a hybrid, so I'm not in the clear there yet!)
- planting fruits and vegetables on my property, and supplementing with locally grown organic food
- buying only items made on this continent from sources from this continent whenever possible (it can be difficult to even find out where the raw materials came from and where they have travelled)
- installing photovoltaics on the house (grid-feed system) and supplementing with Bullfrog power (renewable electricity)
- planting native trees and shrubs to maximize home energy efficiency
- always carrying reusable bags and bins when shopping and refusing plastic bags
- always using a reusable water bottle
- using a rainbarrel for gardening water, and also reclaiming grey water (dish water and shower/bath water) for gardening
- washing clothing in an Energy Star front loader machine with cold water and line-drying
- replacing all incandescent lights with compact flourescents and increasingly LED lights
- continuing our vegetarian lifestyle and trying to reduce our dairy intake as well
- refusing to buy over packaged items, especially snack foods and electronics
- donating used items instead of throwing them out
- buying used items whenever practical, esp. children's clothing, CD's, DVD's, books and sports equipment
- using green cleaning products (mainly baking soda and vinegar)
- avoid habitually eating in restaurants--saving that as a very occasional treat
- avoid fast food and especially anywhere that has a drive-thru window
- research investments and put my money where I believe it will do the most towards improving the world
- ensuring that our family retains a connection with nature and wilderness
- take the time to cook rather than rely on processed convenience foods
- teach the kids to ride and appreciate public transit, teaching them to safely ride their bikes
- telecommute and teleconference whenever possible
- buying less, putting off purchases until absolutely necessary (no fashion slavery here!)
- avoiding the use of cosmetics and other unnecessary (and unhealthy!) items
- using only recycled paper products, and using whiteboards for much of the "school work" (such as math) that isn't likely to become a keepsake
- using both sides of the paper, always
- air drying our hair after washing
- hand washing dishes, and when we do resort to using the dishwasher, turning off the drying option
- using libraries and rentals for things we will only be using occasionally (some toys, books, tools, etc.)
- using VOC-free paint when redecorating
- continuing to let politicians know that the environment is important to us with emails, letters, phone calls, petitions and letters to the editor of various newspapers
These are some ways we're starting to try and become greener. Some of them aren't practical for everyone. Going vegetarian if you live in the northern arctic would be more damaging than helpful as more of your food would need to be flown in. If you live in an apartment, you probably won't be putting solar panels on your roof anytime soon (although you might be able to convince your property owner to do so).
I'm sure there are many other excellent ideas out there. I invite you to share those here in the comments, or email them to me and I'll post them when I receive them. It is important to do all we can, and to share our ideas!
Are we really content to go on, business as usual, with our carbon consumptive, earth-destructive ways? Do people really believe that nature exists separately from us? Last time I checked, we are all living beings (well, I suspect some politicians might actually be androids, but that's a whole other post!), which makes us part of nature, nature being life on this planet.
Perhaps it is that mindset (of being something separate from nature) that has allowed us to become so consumptive/destructive.
I, for one, am not willing to continue this way. So what do I do? What might any of us do?
To start, try here: 6 quick ways to make a difference
I'm always looking for new ways to live a greener life.
Some steps our family has taken (and yes, they are baby steps, I'll admit it) are:
- reducing driving and dependency on the car (but I still drive a hybrid, so I'm not in the clear there yet!)
- planting fruits and vegetables on my property, and supplementing with locally grown organic food
- buying only items made on this continent from sources from this continent whenever possible (it can be difficult to even find out where the raw materials came from and where they have travelled)
- installing photovoltaics on the house (grid-feed system) and supplementing with Bullfrog power (renewable electricity)
- planting native trees and shrubs to maximize home energy efficiency
- always carrying reusable bags and bins when shopping and refusing plastic bags
- always using a reusable water bottle
- using a rainbarrel for gardening water, and also reclaiming grey water (dish water and shower/bath water) for gardening
- washing clothing in an Energy Star front loader machine with cold water and line-drying
- replacing all incandescent lights with compact flourescents and increasingly LED lights
- continuing our vegetarian lifestyle and trying to reduce our dairy intake as well
- refusing to buy over packaged items, especially snack foods and electronics
- donating used items instead of throwing them out
- buying used items whenever practical, esp. children's clothing, CD's, DVD's, books and sports equipment
- using green cleaning products (mainly baking soda and vinegar)
- avoid habitually eating in restaurants--saving that as a very occasional treat
- avoid fast food and especially anywhere that has a drive-thru window
- research investments and put my money where I believe it will do the most towards improving the world
- ensuring that our family retains a connection with nature and wilderness
- take the time to cook rather than rely on processed convenience foods
- teach the kids to ride and appreciate public transit, teaching them to safely ride their bikes
- telecommute and teleconference whenever possible
- buying less, putting off purchases until absolutely necessary (no fashion slavery here!)
- avoiding the use of cosmetics and other unnecessary (and unhealthy!) items
- using only recycled paper products, and using whiteboards for much of the "school work" (such as math) that isn't likely to become a keepsake
- using both sides of the paper, always
- air drying our hair after washing
- hand washing dishes, and when we do resort to using the dishwasher, turning off the drying option
- using libraries and rentals for things we will only be using occasionally (some toys, books, tools, etc.)
- using VOC-free paint when redecorating
- continuing to let politicians know that the environment is important to us with emails, letters, phone calls, petitions and letters to the editor of various newspapers
These are some ways we're starting to try and become greener. Some of them aren't practical for everyone. Going vegetarian if you live in the northern arctic would be more damaging than helpful as more of your food would need to be flown in. If you live in an apartment, you probably won't be putting solar panels on your roof anytime soon (although you might be able to convince your property owner to do so).
I'm sure there are many other excellent ideas out there. I invite you to share those here in the comments, or email them to me and I'll post them when I receive them. It is important to do all we can, and to share our ideas!
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Earth Hour
No doubt you know that tonight at 8:30 until 9:30 it is Earth Hour, in which people around the world are encouraged to turn off their electricity (as much as is possible) in order to show that they care about the planet. It is one way in which we can promote awareness of our dependence on electricity, and perhaps find a way to take it less for granted.
Cynics may say that it is too small a gesture to make any difference, and may even claim it is dangerous for people to light candles in their homes. Sadly, they miss the point.
Earth Hour is an opportunity to unglue ourselves from screen activity, see the stars clearer than usual, and reunite with out families. Aside from a small amount of energy savings, there are things to be gained here. We are increasingly becoming isolated by our use of gadgets and our departure from face-to-face communications. We are easily distracted by the shiny, loud and flashy aspects of our environment at the expense of meaningful listening, which is the most important part of communication.
So this year, instead of shrugging it off, it is my hope that people, including myself, will take the opportunity to reconnect with families and nature. Enjoy the quiet that comes with throwing the circuit breaker. If you are concerned about power surges, then wait a little longer to turn your power back on, and do it an item at a time. Remember, if the utilities could cope with the surges that came surrounding the Olympic hockey game, they will cope with this too.
We intend to go for a walk and hopefully do some stargazing. In Toronto, the Ontario Science Centre is bringing out telescopes for public use tonight.
Cynics may say that it is too small a gesture to make any difference, and may even claim it is dangerous for people to light candles in their homes. Sadly, they miss the point.
Earth Hour is an opportunity to unglue ourselves from screen activity, see the stars clearer than usual, and reunite with out families. Aside from a small amount of energy savings, there are things to be gained here. We are increasingly becoming isolated by our use of gadgets and our departure from face-to-face communications. We are easily distracted by the shiny, loud and flashy aspects of our environment at the expense of meaningful listening, which is the most important part of communication.
So this year, instead of shrugging it off, it is my hope that people, including myself, will take the opportunity to reconnect with families and nature. Enjoy the quiet that comes with throwing the circuit breaker. If you are concerned about power surges, then wait a little longer to turn your power back on, and do it an item at a time. Remember, if the utilities could cope with the surges that came surrounding the Olympic hockey game, they will cope with this too.
We intend to go for a walk and hopefully do some stargazing. In Toronto, the Ontario Science Centre is bringing out telescopes for public use tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)