It’s good to see the world of nuclear power showing concern about seismic activity that may endanger their reactors – especially in California, where we’ve been known to have a temblor or two. Elsewhere in the news, Japan is shutting down its last nuke this weekend. Perhaps we really are making the transition from a Type Zero to a Type One civilization, in the parlance of physicist Michio Kaku (the video linked here is quite good).
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHyef2Wio4Q]In April’s webinar we delved into the subject of aeroponics, a cutting-edge technology for growing produce in a carefully orchestrated mixture of air, water, and minerals.
The relevance to renewable energy? As energy becomes scarcer and as our climate changes as a result of our use of fossil fuels, the possibility of growing shortages of both potable water and food looms in the not-too-distant future. Aeroponics offers the capability of growing large quantities of nutritious, organic produce with a minimum of resources.
Since they get the brunt of the sun, snow and rain, roofs will need to be changed after a number of years. While there are plenty of materials out there for a new roof, most of them are not sustainable. However, since the green and sustainable movement has increased in popularity, there have been a number of sustainable options popping up. Some use normal materials, like shingles, while others use unconventional materials like vines and roots.
Shingles
Almost everyone is used to shingle roofs. Shingles are among the most common roofing material because they are affordable, and they last about 20 years before they need to be replaced. However, shingles are rarely sustainable in their normal form. (more…)
Here is the archived webinar from April 2012, in which I interview Rafael Quesada, CEO of Tower Harvest, on the subject of aeroponics. The company offers a low-cost way of growing organic produce in urban areas and other “food deserts.”
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHyef2Wio4Q]
It’s the 543rd birthday of Machiavelli who, according to the Writer’s Almanac, wrote that:
morality was irrelevant when it came to running a state, and that leaders should be willing to perform evil acts when it became necessary to hold onto their power.
Wow. Good thing we don’t have any of that garbage in our present day affairs, isn’t it? Wink, wink.
The reader who sent me the article yesterday on which my post Restraining Those Who Wish To Profit at the Expense of the Rights of Others was based comments:
I notice in your response that you used the word “corruption” to describe the corporate polluters. That might be too strong a word to use in general. (more…)
Frequent commenter Larry Lemmert writes:
Have you ever heard the term “clear and present danger”? … When the danger rises to an indisputable level that affects the wellbeing of everyone, we will become united and save the planet.
Larry: I’ve read dozens of your posts here, and I can see that you obviously have a keen intellect. So, given all this, you don’t think there’s a “clear and present danger” associated with the issues that surround our continued dependence on fossil fuels? (more…)
A reader sent me this very clever article that was published in 1969 by Garret Hardin called “The Tragedy of the Commons” with a note that read, “Here’s something that I think might resonate with you.”
I respond:
Wow, that was terrific; I very much agree with the analysis. Thanks very much.
I don’t think there’s much debate that people abuse “the commons” — and for the precise reasons presented so well in the article. The problem is what to do about that.
E.g., how do we go about internalizing the externalities of fossil fuels? (more…)
I like to maintain a level head when it comes to nuclear, and not overplay the danger issue. Having said that, when I come across an article like this piece on Fukushima, I have to say that I feel a certain sense of outrage. The editorial staff of the Washington Post calls the event “scary but non-catastrophic.” I know I sometimes publish stuff that I wish I hadn’t, but this really is a shockingly poor choice of words.
Here’s a good source for updates on the Fukushima disaster.
Here’s an article that gets to a couple of important points that are illustrative of where we are and where we’re going in clean energy.
• Financing solar photovoltaics. There is no doubt that homeowners would be more likely to invest in solar if the PV on their roofs could be integrated in their mortgage, just like their plumbing, HVAC, or electrical system.
• Integrating electric vehicles. My friend Paul Scott has enough PV on his roof that his Nissan LEAF very rarely has to plug in to the grid; thus the carbon footprint of his transportation is limited to the manufacturing of the vehicle (and the PV) itself. Not bad! Obviously, he’s an early adopter, but this concept is likely to go mainstream over the coming years.
