As a former active duty soldier, I can tell you first hand that most members of our armed services consider themselves to be "conservative". While it may seem like that leaning would put a hamper on any "green" efforts in the military, our men and women in uniform are also very practical. When you do what they do for a living, you have to put politics aside and get the job done. Which is why it's no surprise to me that the Department of Defense (DoD) is continuing its work on improving energy efficiency and developing renewable energy. The reasons are pretty simple: improve national security, reduce costs, and save lives.
You can find a good overview of the efforts the US military is taking in a piece published on Ecomagination (yes, the GE group). One of the items in there that astounded me was how much the DoD spends on energy in all its forms - $15 billion each year. In October of last year, a group of retired military brass published an Op-Ed in the Tampa Tribune reinforcing the issues related to DoD energy use and the need to invest in efficiency and renewable energy. Another telling statistic - one out of every 24 fuel convoys took casualties; between 2003 and 2007 it was estimated that over 3,000 military personnel were killed as a result of attacks on convoys.
While there have been some very high profile doubters of the Pentagon's work, the truth is that the military is figuring out how to put some of the US' best and brightest into action to develop renewable energy solutions that work on the battlefield. This article from Outsideonline.com talks about the deployment of solar panels and power cells to Afghanistan, where Marine units put them to the test with great success.
Regardless of what happens with energy policy in DC, the Pentagon is moving forward with their new energy plans. And when the military starts putting its dollars behind new industries, all sorts of great things start being developed and new jobs are created. As the military deploys new technologies, civilian versions won't be far behind, bringing energy efficiency savings to those of us at home.
Perhaps it's time to tell the politicians to step aside when it comes to energy policy. If we simply follow the example being set by some of the best leaders in the world, maybe we can start to change this nation for the better - improve national security and save lives; save money and put our citizens back to work; strengthen the US economy by leading the world in the markets of the future. Might seem lofty to some, but for our men and women in uniform it's just another day on the job.
1/22/12
What's New in 2012
Here it is, almost three weeks into the new year and I finally get back to posting. My goal for 2012 is to try and be more consistent in my posting. At the same time, I decided to try and focus on a few major themes for my posts:
Grist has a review of research that compared average trip mileage with the standard range of electric vehicles (EV) on the market today (about 40 miles is typical). The data suggests that the majority of single trips that Americans take in their cars is within the range of a standard EV. An interesting finding that seems to highlight the major perception issue of EVs, which is that their short range makes them impractical for most drivers.
This should be good news for the car companies as they expand the range of EVs. There is still much work to be done in terms of the charging infrastructure (where, electricity source, cost), and of teaching Americans where EVs make the most sense. In a rural area similar to the one I live in, an EV is likely impractical depending on how far out in the country one lives. In big cities, where charging infrastructure can be installed quickly and vehicle emissions can cause pollution issues, EVs are a more practical solution.
As usual, there is no silver bullet that can cure all our environmental problems in one quick hit. But, by reviewing our specific needs and selecting appropriate solutions using data rather than fear or inertia to drive our choices, we can begin to reshape our energy, transportation and infrastructure to reduce the impact on the world around us. The latest new green thing may not work for you or be what you need - but that idea that "everybody" makes fun of could be just what you've been looking for. So keep looking and keep trying - change may come slowly at first, but it adds up over time.
- DIY - reporting on projects I've completed, including what went well and what didn't; targets for 2012 include a report on the green shed roof, square foot gardening and hopefully a rain barrel or two
- Policy - reviews of major political policy in the US that have a significant impact on the environment; expect info on Keystone XL, energy subsidies, military research and transportation/infrastructure
- News & Gadgets - quick hits on articles of green interest; expect this to include advances in renewable energy, products for the home, and green gadgets
Grist has a review of research that compared average trip mileage with the standard range of electric vehicles (EV) on the market today (about 40 miles is typical). The data suggests that the majority of single trips that Americans take in their cars is within the range of a standard EV. An interesting finding that seems to highlight the major perception issue of EVs, which is that their short range makes them impractical for most drivers.
This should be good news for the car companies as they expand the range of EVs. There is still much work to be done in terms of the charging infrastructure (where, electricity source, cost), and of teaching Americans where EVs make the most sense. In a rural area similar to the one I live in, an EV is likely impractical depending on how far out in the country one lives. In big cities, where charging infrastructure can be installed quickly and vehicle emissions can cause pollution issues, EVs are a more practical solution.
As usual, there is no silver bullet that can cure all our environmental problems in one quick hit. But, by reviewing our specific needs and selecting appropriate solutions using data rather than fear or inertia to drive our choices, we can begin to reshape our energy, transportation and infrastructure to reduce the impact on the world around us. The latest new green thing may not work for you or be what you need - but that idea that "everybody" makes fun of could be just what you've been looking for. So keep looking and keep trying - change may come slowly at first, but it adds up over time.
11/12/11
New Nukes?
Among the environmental community, nuclear energy is a very touch subject. As with most forms of energy, it has pros and cons - no air emissions at the point of generation, but significant issues with fuel extraction and waste disposal. After a long time in the shadows, nuclear energy is back in the spotlight for both good and bad reasons (global warming and Fukashima). But many environmentalists are opposed to nuclear energy in its current form.
But what if there was a different way to harness the atom for power? Our current reactors use uranium fuel - that's been the standard for a long time, so all of the infrastructure for nuclear power is built around that fuel source, which makes it difficult to think about changing the way nuclear power is generated.
I recently read an article, and watched a video about nuclear energy based on a different fuel source - Thorium. While I'm certainly not an expert on nuclear energy, watching the video filled me with hope that there is another option out there for meeting our power needs.
As I've said before, there is no silver bullet for reducing the many environmental impacts that we have imposed on this world. And given that truth, we need to take a look at every potential opportunity that presents itself. I agree with Albert Einstein - "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
But what if there was a different way to harness the atom for power? Our current reactors use uranium fuel - that's been the standard for a long time, so all of the infrastructure for nuclear power is built around that fuel source, which makes it difficult to think about changing the way nuclear power is generated.
I recently read an article, and watched a video about nuclear energy based on a different fuel source - Thorium. While I'm certainly not an expert on nuclear energy, watching the video filled me with hope that there is another option out there for meeting our power needs.
As I've said before, there is no silver bullet for reducing the many environmental impacts that we have imposed on this world. And given that truth, we need to take a look at every potential opportunity that presents itself. I agree with Albert Einstein - "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
11/1/11
Counter Culture?
I recently read an article on the Fast Company web page about a new program from Patagonia. For those who don't know, Patagonia is a private company that manufactures outdoor clothing and gear. They are known for creating items that are both stylish and last a long time. And now they have taken a step which will likely seem odd to a lot of people.
Patagonia recently introduced their Common Threads Initiative - and on the face, it may not seem like a big deal. A lot of well known consumer product companies have environmental initiatives designed to reduce the impact of their products. But unlike many, this initiative starts where many companies won't go...
We design and sell things made to last and to be useful. But we ask our customers not to buy from us what you don’t need or can’t really use. Everything we make – everything anyone makes – costs the planet more life than it gives back. The biggest, first step we can all take to reduce our impact is to do more with what we have.
The text above is taken directly from the Patagonia Common Threads Initiative web page, and as you can see they are asking their customers to not buy stuff. Let that concept sink in for just a second - as a consumer, I am being challenged to ask myself "do I really need this" before I make a purchase. To most folks who work in the corporate/for profit world, this may seem outright crazy. But it is one of the key questions that I need to ask myself each day.
My impact on this world is determined largely by the stuff I buy, and how much I buy. If I take the time to question the necessity of each purchase, and to put my "old" stuff to better use, I can help reduce the impact that I have on this world. I can break the cycle of work-buy-toss and put my time and resources to better use, like improving the world around me and taking time to truly love my neighbor. And as I reward companies for taking these types of steps, I can help alter the culture of our economy. It all starts with "Reduce" and it starts with each one of us.
Patagonia recently introduced their Common Threads Initiative - and on the face, it may not seem like a big deal. A lot of well known consumer product companies have environmental initiatives designed to reduce the impact of their products. But unlike many, this initiative starts where many companies won't go...
We design and sell things made to last and to be useful. But we ask our customers not to buy from us what you don’t need or can’t really use. Everything we make – everything anyone makes – costs the planet more life than it gives back. The biggest, first step we can all take to reduce our impact is to do more with what we have.
The text above is taken directly from the Patagonia Common Threads Initiative web page, and as you can see they are asking their customers to not buy stuff. Let that concept sink in for just a second - as a consumer, I am being challenged to ask myself "do I really need this" before I make a purchase. To most folks who work in the corporate/for profit world, this may seem outright crazy. But it is one of the key questions that I need to ask myself each day.
My impact on this world is determined largely by the stuff I buy, and how much I buy. If I take the time to question the necessity of each purchase, and to put my "old" stuff to better use, I can help reduce the impact that I have on this world. I can break the cycle of work-buy-toss and put my time and resources to better use, like improving the world around me and taking time to truly love my neighbor. And as I reward companies for taking these types of steps, I can help alter the culture of our economy. It all starts with "Reduce" and it starts with each one of us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
