Introduction

Over the past decade concern has grown over the environmental consequences of fossil fuels, this has influenced the recent interest in biofuels (Hill et al. 2006).  Ambitious  policies that promote biofuel use and production have not only been set by the EU, but by the USA and China as well (Soimakallio and Koponen, 2011). Biofuels are produced from processed food crops, other plants or animal products and agricultural or organic wastes. Crops grown specifically for energy uses rather than food or feedstock’s, are known as second generation biofuels, these are in development and not currently available for commercial use (Rowe et al. 2009). First generations biofuels are produced from processed food or feed crops, these are used today. Have brought conflict over growing crops for food, growing crops for fuel and protecting the environment.

What advantages are there to using biofuels?

Europe has few crude oil reserves and is highly reliant on imports to obtain fuel, 98% of transport in the EU is entirely dependent on fossil fuels (IPCC, 2011). Rising oil prices improve the cost competitiveness of biofuels helping them enter the market, providing a viable alternative for oil (Hill et al. 2006). European leaders see domestic biofuels as a more secure and sustainable option, providing incentives for more biofuel usage.

The aim of biofuel usage is to help combat climate change by reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that are currently released with the burning of fossil fuels by increasing its share of renewable energy (Banse et al. 2011). The majority of biofuels reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 30% when compared to fossil fuels combustion (Scharlemann and Laurence, 2008). When biofuels are blended with petroleum fuel or diesel they can improve air quality, especially in urban regions, as they generally bring a reduction in sulphur, particulates and carbon monoxide (Worldwatch Institute, 2006).

Liquid biofuels are important as they can be substituted immediately into the majority of transport vehicles. Meaning greenhouse gas savings can be achieved with little monetary investment or time developing new transportation infrastructure, making them a popular choice for governments.

Biofuels have the potential to provide environmental benefits, if they are planted on barren land where the soil has low carbon content, they can sequester carbon into the soil, effectively becoming a carbon sink. Moreover, if planted on this type of land they could increase biodiversity and protect watersheds, as they offer a more diverse and natural environment than other agricultural systems (Karta, 2006).

This is great: So what are the disadvantages?

The burning of biofuels can emit less CO₂ than combustion of fossil fuel, the growth and production stage of biofuels needs to be taken into account. Have you considered your personal carbon footprint? Low yielding energy crops, such as corn ethanol, can have heavy inputs of fossil fuel energy during intensive farming and manufacture and can in some cases increase the environmental impact. CO₂ is not the only greenhouse gas emitted during this process, N₂O is also released, affecting the net greenhouse gas balance (UNEP, 2009).

Increase biofuel usage will subsequently lead to the demand for land needed to cultivate biofuel crops (Harvey, 2011). Clearing native ecosystems is sometimes the most profitable method of obtaining land, causing detrimental effects to water, soils and the regional climate (Tilman et al. 2009).  An increase in ecosystem destruction rates will lead to a rise in biodiversity lost.

If biofuel production continues using the same intense methods of farming as have been used over the past century, it will increase the use of chemicals such as nitrogen, phosphorus and pesticides (Hill et al. 2006). These can enter habitats and aquifers, affecting the surrounding ecosystem, causing issues such as eutrophication. Current farming methods use a lot of water in the irrigation and processing of the crops. Biofuels compete with food crops for land space, this competition drives the prices of food up making it difficult to feed the world poor.

Conclusions

Global population has recently exceeded 7 billion (BBC, 2011), and is still increasing. Demand for energy is rising, and sources suggest that we are reaching our level of peak oil, implying that our reliance on fossil fuels cannot continue (IPCC, 2007). I believe biofuels can be used as a short term substitute. However they should not be considered as a long term alternative to fossil fuels, as it is not sustainable. The development of second generation biofuels, if produced sustainably could provide part of an alternative to fossil fuels, as they produce biofuels from waste products and energy grown crops. Yet they should not be completely relied on, as the impacts of growing the amount of biomass needed to replace fossil fuels would be too harmful to the environment.

If you are interested in finding out about the part other alternative energy sources, such as solar power, have to play in the future of energy supply have a look around the website.

References

Banse et al. (2011) Impact of  EU biofuel policies on world agricultural production and land use. Biomass and Bioenergy (35) 2385-2390.

BBC (2011) Population seven billion: UN sets out challeneges, (Online). Avaliable: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15459643 . [Accessed: 24/11/2011]

Harvey, M. and Pilgrim, S. (2011) The new competition for land: Food, energy and climate change. Food Policy (32) S40-S51.

Hill, Jason, et al. (2006), ‘Environmental, economic and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (30), 11206-10.

IPCC (2011) Special Report on Renewable Energy Soureces and Climaate Change Mitigation: Bioenergy. International Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.

IPCC (2007) Mitigation of Climate Change. Chapter 4.3.1.3. Petroleum Fuels. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change.

Karta, S. (2006) Environmental effects of Bioenergy. Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenages, brief 4 of 12.

Rowe, Rebecca, Street, Nathaniel, and Taylor, Gail (2009), ‘Identifing potential environmental impacts of large-scale deployment of dedicated bioenergy crops in the UK’, Renewable and sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 271-90.

Scharlemann, J. and Laurence, W. (2008) How green are biofuels? Science, 319, 43-44.

Soimakallio, Sampo and Koponen, Kati (2011), ‘How to ensure greenhouse gas emission reductions by increasing the use of biofuels? – suitability of the European Union sustainability criteria’, Biomass and Bioenergy, 35, 3504-13.

Tilman, David, et al. (2009), ‘Benefical Biofuels – The Food, Energy and Environment Trilemma’, Science, 325, 270-71.

UNEP (2009) Assessing biofuels, United Nations Environmental Programme.

Worldwatch Institute (2006) Biofuels for transportation

These summer-long bans are more and more common due to the lack of rainfall in recent years, which led to a record number of droughts and half-full reservoirs.

Also, population density is very high in this region and some parts of England are so dry, that even Sydney’s annual rainfall is double than that of London [1].  According to some statistics, these bans could save up to 900 litres of water per hour. [4]

When hosepipe bans are in place, residents mustn’t wash their cars, windows, water plants, and they shouldn’t fill paddling pools or ponds, nor cleaning paths and patios – using the hosepipe. Exemptions are offered for the disabled, and water companies may have slightly differing rules from each other. Fines can reach up to £1000 if caught breaking the regulations. [2]

But do hosepipe bans really help?

While surely many people think twice before opening taps when a hosepipe ban is ordered and may feel threatened by the potential fine, it’s down to the neighbours to notify the authorities – as water companies don’t have the money or resources for this. [3]

Also, using buckets for either home car washes or filling pools is not forbidden [4], which may mean that great amount of water is still used but it’s less likely to be wasted by leaving the hosepipe on.

Water saving is an important issue for the future of the UK, especially in the South East. This is one reason why water companies are rolling out water meter systems in this area. Paying for the exact amount of water used could not only lower current bills but can also help in conserving water, so there may not be a need for hosepipe bans in the future.

[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/11/drought-weather-government-respond?INTCMP=SRCH

[2] http://www.southeastwater.co.uk/pls/apex/f?p=101:536:395290072945196

[3] http://www.hosepipeban.org.uk/2012/04/06/the-great-hosepipe-ban-swindle/

[4] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/04/hosepipe-ban?intcmp=239

The Thames Gateway [2] in Beckton treats the water of the Thames and the sea to supply water to Londoners, providing some great results so far during the test phase. In the plant salty and fresh water from the tidal river is mixed and salt is filtered out via reverse osmosis, applying high pressure on water, which is thus squeezed through fine membranes.

Compared to an average of fifty per cent, efficiency of the plant is at 85 per cent, which means that 85 per cent of all water entering the facility can be returned as drinking water.  [2]

Furthermore, the water is so clean after the treatment that it even has to be artificially altered to provide the same taste as what people are used to.

It can supply 400,000 households, which means about one million people could start drinking seawater thanks to this plant. [2]

The plant is mainly to be used during long-term drought [3], which is very timely, as hosepipe bans in the South East have become more and more frequent. Just recently water companies announced a new ban with fines of thousands of pounds for simply washing the car at home.

Drawbacks of desalination plants include that the process itself is very expensive as well as energy intensive [1] [4] but new methods are being tested and trialled on how these can be reduced.

However, regardless of how many new technologies emerge, improving how we save water at home is still the key solution.

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9141282/Drought-first-desalination-opens-in-mainland-Britain-as-water-bosses-warn-of-price-rises.html

[2] http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xchg/corp/hs.xsl/9942.htm

[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/28/water-desalination-plant-beckton-london

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination

]]> https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/desalination-in-the-uk/feed/ 0 https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/would-you-rather-an-economic-or-an-environmental-crisis/ https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/would-you-rather-an-economic-or-an-environmental-crisis/#comments Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:23:21 +0000 http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/?p=397 Continue reading →]]> The More Important Crisis

Have you been following the current economic doom and gloom? If you haven’t then I don’t blame you!

The topic of the sovereign debt crisis which has engrossed Europe has been a rather gloomy one. With it came a new language which nonchalantly arose into fruition, for the very reason that it has bandied about amongst television and newspapers for almost too long. Terms such as “haircuts”, “bond yields”, stock market “rallies”, and even nicknames such as “Merkozy” became common vernacular. Speculation on who would default, involuntarily, also would ensue: Who will it be? Greece, Portugal or Spain? And how would we rectify this?

But, of the many areas affected – to date, and for within the foreseeable future – one area stands out in particular – the environment. Because, within the heat of it all: the figures, the graphs, and the stock market rallies; it is easy to forget the connections and implications our economic decisions make; particularly, when we are so concerned about avoiding a double dip recession, and when sovereigns around us are at the near point of collapse.

It was thus enlightening to note that Ban Ki-Moon, UN Secretary General, did not forget the opportunities that could arise of investing in environmental and sustainable measures. He opined that economics was tied to the environment as a, “global ecological suicide pact” [1]. And rightly so! It isn’t all about the money! For, it was the impact of poor decision making, poor regulation, and the opportunity of lucrative gains which caused this downturn anyway.

Therefore, in order to revitalise the economy – in addition to correcting past areas of financial vulnerability – some have described the economic downturn as an investment opportunity to finally tackle global warming and climate change. This article will describe the positives and pitfalls of the economic downturn on the environment. And it will address how we can better use and understand the environment to achieve short term economic and long-term sustainability.

Taking Advantage of the Downturn

Prior to the current financial crisis, proponents argued that the economic downturn could actually be used as an advantage for governments to achieve environmental targets. This is because, as the preconditions of the environment are tied to resource and consumption; it goes saying that a lack of demand in industry and manufacturing would result in lower emissions.

As well as a lack of demand in output, there will also be a lack of demand in services. Consumers will be thriftier; driving less, flying less, and willing to pay more attention to energy conservation within the home – overall, consumers will aim to consume less.

A scarcity of finance from lenders and a fall in consumer demand both domestic and abroad would also mean that organisations would look to reduce costs, and therefore, could achieve this by becoming more efficient; thus, complimenting the aim of reducing emissions around the globe. Waste for instance, becomes an important issue – see below, retailer’s initiatives, bullets 1 and 2.

1. Tesco and Marks & Spencer’s, are trialling new packaging that will keep fruits and vegetables fresh for longer – in order to reduce food waste [2].
2. Sainsbury’s are encouraging consumers to freeze food differently – up to the use by date – instead of, on the date of purchase – to reduce pre-mature food disposal [3].

While, a global contraction in economic activity is not exactly a long-term strategy, the challenge is to seize on this downturn to de-emphasize manufacturing in order to favour cleaner economic activity – re-energising the economy in a more sustainable light. So that once a rise in production and activity does ensue, it is less at the environments expense.

The Downside

On the other hand, an economic downturn may not present an entirely positive situation either.

Due to pressure on both private and public organisations and existing governments to spend less money, green initiatives and investments may not be so forthcoming. It is a conundrum, especially as environmental-economics continues to stress that nurturing sustainable methods is better in the long term for the economy. But instead, because of the immediate lack of finance available to firms, investments in clean technology and other initiatives may have to take the backbench; especially in cases where the only way to improve efficiency is the complete replacement of old systems – this is especially applicable to small firms with low funds: they may have no choice in the matter, regardless. A report from the Carbon Trust and Siemens supports this: It indicates that firms would struggle to find access to finance energy efficient investments within the 2012 year; despite the resulting cost savings that would help cover repayments [4].

In an attempt at cost savings, firms may look to take shortcuts, or may outright choose the unsustainable option. For example, by preferring cheaper less eco-friendly produce; taking advantage of cheap labour markets (imports and exports increase emissions); cutting green promotions which do not draw in finance (e.g. bullet 1); or simply, by disregarding the environmental choice altogether – even reneging on previous promises (bullet 2).

1. Tesco, weighing up whether to phase out carbon footprint labels: due to the high cost and time consuming nature of the process – this saw not much uptake from other retailers [5].
2. Government perhaps reneging on climate goals altogether? In the pursuit of shale gas [6].

If consumer demand and confidence is already low, and governments do not have confidence either – lack of investment and incentive will mean that research and development within the environmental industries will also start to suffer.

The Pivotal Point

The financial crisis and climate change share fundamental characteristics. Both are a consequence of speculative and narrow interests superseding the common interest, both evolved dramatically over the current decade and both have global implications. Both are also about risk and how it is priced and managed—and both have high consequences when risk management goes wrong.

As European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso stated, within 2008 – at the time when the economic downturn was in its beginnings – the troubles affecting the world economy should not be allowed to distract from more serious risks posed by climate change: “One thing we have learned from the financial crisis is that, if we ignore risk building up in the system, it is much harder to manage that risk. We must recognize it early and tackle it.”

In order to use the environment as an investment advantage: we must take into account environmental externalities within investment assets e.g. the price of carbon, or the price of choosing the alternatives (e.g. the above aforementioned, The Downside, examples) – so that the true value of the assets may be accounted for – and this way, governments and investors could then understand how the long term value of the assets changes over time; perhaps leading to better resource-allocation decisions by governments and businesses alike.

As former US President Al Gore, reminds us: investors who fail to realise the cost of environmental externalities could be making the same mistake as financiers who failed to realise the true value of sub-prime mortgages [7]. This is important, because, while the worst impacts of the financial crises are likely to pass within just a few years, the impacts of climate change could be felt for centuries. It is this long-term influence that needs to be understood better – although, some may feel that, perhaps, it’s already too late.

“Essentially nothing has changed in 20 years. We are not remotely on a course to be sustainable [8].”

[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/28/ban-ki-moon-economic-model-environment

[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/07/tesco-new-packaging-food-waste

[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/10/sainsbury-food-freezing-advice-waste

[4] http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2135568/report-warns-firms-refused-green-loans

[5] http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2142302/tesco-drop-carbon-footprint-labels

[6] http://www.energyefficiencynews.com/uk/i/4663/

[7] http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2152990/gore-ignoring-carbon-risks-repeat-sub-prime-mortgage-crisis

[8] http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21465-earth-summit-is-doomed-to-fail-say-leading-ecologists.html

Governments and public bodies – like your council, local health bodies, national Government etc – all aspire toward empowering and involving service users in their decision making models. Perhaps you have been asked to participate in anything from focus groups to an evaluation survey. To explore the varying levels of participation we shall introduce the ground-breaking work of Sherry Arnstein. In 1969 Sherry Arnstein created what is known as “Arnstein’s Ladder of Participation”. Arnstein’s ladder presents 8 different degrees of empowerment, from dismissive manipulation to full citizen control. The ladder forms the basis of many, if not the majority, of efforts to involve people within decision making. Of course other issues also affect the influence of participation practices; the genuine intent, commitment, facilities and scope to influence decision making varies between each situation. This article shall introduce the 8 “rungs” to Arnstein’s ladder.

Manipulation

The lowest rung of the ladder. This is the least empowering form of participation. It involves power holders simply leading participants to assume they have been involved and engineering their support. It is an elaborate illusion to effectively educate and alter an individual into dropping protest. The flow of communication is likely to be very one way; top-down with power-holders setting the agenda, controlling the stage and being the heaviest of talkers within the “dialogue”. An example may be public presentations where speakers discuss an issue or proposal but allow little if any feedback or interaction for the audience to voice concerns.

Therapy

Described bluntly by Arnstein as “dishonest and arrogant”, such collaborations between power holders and participants are described as “therapeutic” when the former acts solely with the intention of soothing or “curing” concerns or protests via discussion and not action; in short, it is the “sweet-talking” and charm approach. Participants can be involved in a wide range of intensive activities under the illusion that they are participating in the power structure, when in reality, they are simply being involved in group therapy to alter their feeling and judgements of the issue, and not tackling the cause of the protest itself.

Informing

Sharing information with participants is a critical cornerstone of true and honest participation. The fault – and manipulation by power holders – occurs when this dialogue of information is one way; from power holders who are informing and dictating to the participants with, as Arnstein shows, no channel for feedback, evaluation or contribution. In this respect, information can easily be manipulated, altered or chosen selectively to sway and appease participants. Examples in current day include leaflets, household guides, articles and televised information – where changes are being presented to society, but there is little if any scope to respond, contribute or influence the final outcome. This echoes the aspect of manipulation in that power holders are attempting to win over participants. However in this situation they do so by informing residents; to talk residents around to what is on offer, not – as is the case in manipulation – to directly target issues of contention and talk the residents out of their protests.

Consultation

The fourth level of participation in Arnstein’s ladder. This is where individuals are indeed involved, but only upon a façade, or empty basis. For examples; Arnstein suggests that people involved within this rung are deduced as being nothing more than statistics for effect i.e; surveys encapsulate this thinking wherein time is spent answering questions however it is then unknown to what extent the results influence the outcome. Was the survey just a “ticked box” for power-holders to state they did involve participants or does it truly influence the outcome?

Placation

The fifth rung. This is where power holders grant the participants a low level of controlled influence. Placation can, for example, involve a focus group leading to discussions, however the extent to which comments and suggestions are taken onboard are still subject to the decisions of power-holders. Citizens may feel, at this stage, they have participated extensively…but not profited from the exchanges. Whilst, on the other side, power holders can argue they have engaged with participants and heard the concerns. How power holders then respond to these concerns is the real measurement of influence.

Partnership

Agreed roles and responsibilities with power is the critical defining aspect of partnership. Having negotiated responsibilities and powers, power holders and participants hold definitive and clear powers. Each are each able to dictate and direct the direction of policies, employ or dismiss specialists or experts and finally, obtain control of finances to operate effectively. For example; independent schools, local libraries, some Doctors practices etc.

Delegated Power

Through negotiations, participants adopt control of a wider range of responsibilities. This requires power-holders to acknowledge and accept the fairness, rights and perhaps even specialist knowledge, skills or experiences of participants to enable a successful and fruitful transition of power for the sake of the overall outcome. Overall, it is a model of partnership. Whilst perhaps not of equal influence, each group must work collaboratively with the other to ensure the success of the overall project.

Citizen Control

Finally, the top tier of Arnstein’s ladder. Full governance of projects or issues grants citizens the opportunity to arrange projects and operate in a manner befitting to their needs without external influence. This illustrates absolute control wherein citizens have full power over initiatives. They can dictate and direct the course of the project, employ or dismiss desired specialists and strive towards agreed goals out with any external influence.

Arnstein’s ladder remains, to this day, a pillar for any academic or political intent seeking to promote wider participation. Whilst various authors strive to build upon its work or evolve the ideas into a more modern society [1] and [2], the structure and fabric remains. Having looked at each stage, perhaps examples have emerged in your mind or when you may have been manipulated? Informed? Or perhaps held full control of an initiative? It is important to now be aware of each degree of involvement and to critique efforts of authorities who preach of sufficient participation…just how involved were their “participants” really?

Sherry R. Arnstein (1969): A Ladder Of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35:4, 216-224

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01944366908977225

[1] http://www.engage.hscni.net/library/The%20Snakes%20and%20Ladders%20of%20User%20Involvement.pdf

[2] http://oro.open.ac.uk/8589/1/Path_paper_Collins_Ison.pdf

Sustainable Urban Development

Sustainable urban planning and development is an extremely important part of the global response to climate change; it is required because over half of the world’s population lives in cities, which are responsible for more than 70% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

The aim of Masdar City is to build one of the most sustainable cities in the world in a commercially viable way, while ensuring it is an attractive place to live. Building sustainability in a ‘commercially viable way’ is important if other cities are going to catch on and implement similar technologies and systems.

The essential factors that were considered for Masdar, and those that need to be considered for other sustainable urban developments, are shown below:

The Masdar City Master Plan

The design of Masdar is extremely complex and I will outline only some of the key concepts.

Masdar City was designed by Foster + Partners, a high profile architectural firm. The project blends high-tech design with the architecture and urban planning of traditional Arab cities.

Norman Foster, the founder and chairman of the firm, started with an in-depth study of old Arab settlements in order to understand how these communities coped with living in a region where the air can feel as hot as 150 degrees.

His research concluded that:

• Settlements were often built on high ground to take advantage of the stronger winds.
• Tall, hollow ‘wind towers’ were used to funnel cool air down to street level.
• Streets were narrow to accelerate airflow and built at an angle to maximise shade.

With this in mind, Masdar City is designed to be a perfect square, approximately one mile on each side and raised on a 23 foot high base to capture the desert breezes. It will have narrow streets, designed to maximise the shading of windows and walkways, and will also use wind towers to cool the streets. It is believed that by combining these approaches, Masdar City could feel roughly 70 degrees cooler, which would cut the amount of electricity used to run the city by half. 90% of the power used will be solar, while the rest is expected to be generated by incinerating waste – producing much less carbon than if it were sent straight to landfill.

Artist impression – Aerial view of Masdar City.

Wind tower used to funnel cool air down to street level.

However, of greater interest is how Masdar City is going to deal with transport, and in particular, what they will do with the car. Traditional cars are banned from entering Masdar, being replaced with a network of driverless electric cars that will operate underneath the city. A user will be able to step into a car, choose a destination within the city on an LCD screen and the car will then automatically pull out onto the road, silently, and drive itself!

When reaching their destination, users will be encouraged to use the stairs (as elevators are located discreetly out of sight) to get to the breezy streets of Masdar, where the only way to get around is on foot.

Driverless electric car station, located underneath the streets of Masdar.

Residential buildings are specifically designed to block direct sunlight from entering the rooms and so that the interiors aren’t visible from the outside. They are also designed so that views to the outside are angled, so that you can’t look directly into the windows of facing buildings.

Typical exterior of buildings in Masdar City.

Finally, the perimeter of the city will be camouflaged by an array of vegetation and almost all of the heavy-duty service functions (such as a 54-acre photovoltaic field, incineration plant and water treatment plant) will be located outside the city.

Too Good to be True?

Every aspect of Masdar City has been designed to be as sustainable as possible, with the overall aim of being a ‘carbon-neutral’ city. However, there are a few concerns over whether this is possible. For example, where will food come from? Will it be imported, carrying a high carbon footprint, or will it be grown locally? Additionally, if it is carbon-neutral, does this include the carbon footprint of construction?

Furthermore, critics suggest that the design of Masdar City reflects the gated-community mentality that has been spreading around the world in recent decades, believing that this community will be completely cut off from the rest of the world.

With these issues in mind, I still believe that the design and implementation of Masdar City is both exceptional and inspiring, and I hope people open their eyes to this feat of technological brilliance!

References:

All material was taken from the Masdar City website:

http://www.masdarcity.ae/en/

Please refer to this website for more information on how sustainable practices were implemented into the design of Masdar

Cineworld, which operates over 75 cinemas across the United Kingdom, has admitted that the success of 3D has led to a problem of disposal of the amount of glasses.  Odeon cinemas have instated plans to give customers who re-use their glasses a type of discount.  Meanwhile, Vue Cinemas, has introduced large recycling bins in its Cinemas, where glasses are taken to be cleaned and repackaged, while damaged ones are recycled.  Imax, the Canadian high-definition cinema corporation has claimed that their glasses can be washed up to 500 times.  While it should be seen as a positive step that cinemas across provide recycling facilities for their glasses, further investigation shows that glasses are in fact only used three to four times.  The majority of the glasses are damaged and sent off to be turned into plastic pellets [2].

Traditionally, 3D glasses are made from fossil fuel-based plastics and are non biodegradable, which means that if sent to landfill it will take 450-500 years before they degrade [3].  Furthermore, CO₂ emissions for the production of the 10 million plastic glasses associated with films like Alice in Wonderland is equivalent to emissions generated by burning 50,000 gallons of gasoline or 917 barrels of oil [4].

There is no reason why the 3D experience should not and could not be more eco-friendly.  One company named Cereplast has found an answer to keeping waste low by creating the world’s first biodegradable and compostable 3D glasses.  The glasses are made with plant-based plastics and Ingeo® Poly-lactic acid, also known as PLA plastic.  If discarded at a compost site they will degrade fully in the span of 6 months, leaving no chemical residues or toxicity in the soil.  In fact it has been estimated that 10 million pairs of glasses made from Ceresplast would be the equivalent of reducing CO₂ emissions associated with the production of 3D glasses by 728 metric tonnes of CO₂ [5]. 

In the creation of the product, Ceresplast has teamed up with a company called Oculus3D which makes 3D film projection technology.  Marty Shindler, co-founder and CEO of Las Vegas-based Oculus3 has said in a statement that: “By using Cereplast’s resins in our 3D biodegradable and compostable glasses we can now help the entertainment industry reduce its carbon footprint and provide movie theatres with smarter choices for both affordable 3D systems and compatible 3D eyewear.” [6].  There is therefore little excuse for cinemas not to invest in these glasses as both Hollywood and the 3D projection technology industries have started collaborating in making the film industry more green.

In conclusion, issues around 3D glasses have shown that the glasses are dirty in production, the effects and efficiency of recycling programmes at cinemas are deceiving to the consumer and cinemas, however, naturally degradable glasses now do exist.  Enjoy the film.

[1] http://www.enviro-live.com/news/science-technology/how-environmentally-friendly-are-3d-glasses-.html

[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/10/3d-glasses

[3] http://indiefilm3d.com/stereoscopic-3d-glasses-can-and-should-be-eco-friendly

[4] http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/03/25/biodegradablecompostable-3d-glasses-to-hit-theaters-this-summer/

[5] http://www.oculus3d.com/Eco%20Friendly%20Eyewear.pdf

[6] http://www.greenrightnow.com/weareaustin/2010/03/16/eco-friendly-3d-glasses-headed-for-a-theater-near-you/

]]> https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/the-3ds-of-glasses-dirty-deceiving-degradable/feed/ 0 https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/paris-electric-autolib-hire-scheme/ https://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/paris-electric-autolib-hire-scheme/#comments Sat, 15 Oct 2011 20:25:35 +0000 http://www.energysavingwarehouse.co.uk/learning-portal/?p=343 Continue reading →]]> Earlier this year I wrote about the plans that Boris Johnson has for turning London into one of the main centres for electric cars. There are currently only 150 charging points for electric cars in London but by 2013 Boris Johnson wishes to increase this with a further 1,159 charging points. This is a significant and welcome increase, but Paris has gone one step further.

The first weekend in October has seen the launch of Paris’ bubble-shaped electric car scheme, known as Autolib. The £202m project [1] was devised by the city’s mayor Bertrand Delanoe and is modelled on the very successful Velib scheme. As reported earlier this year, there were concerns that the new bubble car scheme may be halted in its tracks by a legal challenge from car rental firms, including Avis and Hertz, who argued that city hall had organised unfair and publically subsided competition [2]. However, the scheme has now been launched, starting with just 66 cars and 33 rental stations [1]. By December 2011, the scheme will operate fully and by the end of 2012 there are expected to be more than 1,000 stations and 3,000 cars. Electric cars can reduce your carbon footprint and reduce the amount of energy you are consuming.

The Autolib scheme works very much like the Velib scheme, as customers can pick up one of the electric cars at stations around the city to use for short journeys and deposit it at any of the battery points [1]. The cars can travel up to 250km before they need to be recharged [3]. All the customer needs to use one is of course a driving license. The cars can take up to four people and are powered by a lithium-metal polymer battery [1].

Car manufacturers are researching the enthusiasm that could be generated around the use of electric cars, and the concept of renting one for a short period of time. As Morald Chibout, General Manager of Autolib said, “We want to persuade people to shift from the concept of owning a car to that of using a car.” It is hoped that the new Autolib scheme will illustrate to people that what matters is not necessarily owning a car but having access to one when they need it. Judging by the success of the Velib scheme, Autolib should do very well and take Paris into a new era of electronic cars and sustainable transport.

References

[1] The Guardian (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/30/paris-bubble-car-scheme-launches

[2] The Independent (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/carhire-giants-in-uturn-over-electric-fleet-2295517.html

[3] The BBC (2011) [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15134136

This article intends to:

• Explain how the peer review process works.
• Highlight the importance of the peer review process.
• Access the critical impact, the outcomes of peer review processes has on informative decision making.

How does the Peer Review process work?

Firstly, the peer review process can be categorised by the type of the activity, or the field of profession in which the article occurs. As the name indicates, peer review is the process of self-regulation by qualified individuals within the relevant field. Depending on the field, sometimes the peer review process is anonymous, or sometimes it may be open. As mentioned earlier, often where it is open, referees are able to give commentary advice for overall article improvement. These commentators may be acknowledged by the original author/s in the acknowledgement section of the article.

Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards, improve performance and provide credibility. As already mentioned, peer review is used to determine an academic paper’s suitability for publication. This process encourages authors to meet the accepted standards of their discipline and prevents the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, and personal views. Publications that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals [1].

• Anonymous Peer Review: Also called blind review, is a system of prepublication peer review of scientific articles or papers for journals or academic conferences by reviewers who are known to the journal editor or conference organizer but whose names are not given to the article’s author. The reviewers do not know the author’s identity, as any identifying information is stripped from the document before review [1].
• Open Peer Review: Describes a scientific literature concept and process, central to which is the various transparency and disclosure of the identities of those reviewing scientific publications. The concept thus represents a departure from, and an alternative to, the incumbent anonymous peer review process, in which non-disclosure of these identities toward the public – and toward the authors of the work under review – is default practice. [1].

Importance of Peer Review

1. Allocation of Funding

Peer review is very important for the allocation of funding. Where research is deemed to be important for society, peer review is turned to. Peer review thus determines:

• Whether or not, new research projects should be funded.
• Or, whether or not, already funded projects should continue to be funded.

The quality of the research is assessed, and the importance of the research is assessed. In the UK specifically, peer review is used as a part of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). Results are used to direct the distribution of public funds (£5 billion following the 2001 RAE) to each institute [2]. The higher the quality of research produced by the university, the higher the status of the university in terms of prestige and university rank.

2. Science into the Public Domain

The most important aspect of peer review, which we would like to highlight here, is that, peer review influences what science enters into the public domain. The journal in which an article is published, and the impact of the article, is often determined by, the prestige the journal has. The more prestigious the journal, the greater the likely impact of the publication.

One recent media example sheds light on such a case. An article with controversial contents was able to enter the public domain due to entrance via a well known journal. The article, written by Roy Spencer and Danny Braswell, was published in Remote Sensing. The paper purported to show that the Earth’s atmosphere is more efficient at releasing energy into space than is programmed into the computer models used to forecast climate change. The conclusion stated that there was no way of knowing that man-made gases are responsible for climate change [3].

Naturally, the article and its proposed claims were soon picked up by the media and the contents of the article were soon projected in not just the academic sphere, but the un-academic sphere as well – more specifically by, Fox News and Forbes Magazine [3].

Spencer maintained that the satellite observations showed that atmospheric temperatures were cooling rather than warming – until later where it was shown that the satellites in question suffered from “orbital drift”.

The reason why this paper managed to enter the public domain was that the editorial team, unintentionally, selected three reviewers who shared the same climate sceptic notions as that of the authors. The referees, and the authors, ignored the scientific arguments of many other opponents in order to get the article published [3]. This case highlights one of the many flaws of peer review [see 2, preserving the status quo – in this case, a group which excluded non-sceptics].

The editor-in-chief responsible, Professor Wolfgang Wagner, resigned from his post as he acknowledged that the journal was “fundamentally flawed and therefore wrongly accepted by the journal [4].”

Although the above example highlights a negative example, peer review is commonly regarded as the best available system for accessing the quality of science. As mentioned by the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, it is not perfect. However, increased efforts are being made to improve the efficiency and transparency of the peer review process [2].

Informative Decision Making

As peer review processes allow information to enter the public domain. Peer review also subsequently, has the potential to change collective action, and influence, collective decision. The above example, which although showed a flaw in the peer review system (an enclosed academic elite), nevertheless, also showed how other academics were able to dig out the errors and flaws to the paper. This is very important, as large collective bodies often rely on the work of scientists to lead developmental change, aid in the proposal of new policies, and command responsive action to fight common problems of social concern. Such examples include the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPPC), or even much smaller bodies such as the Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). All of which have the power to influence governmental policy and action. Thus, peer review inherently, has the potential to influence us. Whether or not, we read news or magazine articles (as in the example above); or, whether or not, governmental, or local council action, may force us to engage or participate in collective action – such as having to put your rubbish into the bin, or face a fine. Peer review is thus, a critical aspect of society. Which when you think about it, may have an influence, on almost everything that you may do.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

[2] http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/pn182.pdf

[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/02/journal-editor-resigns-climate-sceptic-paper

[4] http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/9/2002/pdf

The Space Station

The ISS itself is a great case study on how to use alternative energy.

It operates with twenty solar arrays [1] of a total length of 73 metres [2], and it uses various Sun tracking systems throughout a day. Each solar array wing has two arrays and there are 32,800 solar cells on each, providing the same amount of power as thirty average houses would require on Earth. [3] US President, Barack Obama even congratulated the astronauts in 2009 for installing solar panels, a very important step in the field of renewable energy research. [5]

As water is very expensive to send to the space station, the water filtration system has been developed to convert wastewater into clean drinking water [1] from sweat, urine or even respiration. [4] Astronauts also don’t use flowing water for hand washes but wet cloths, which are significantly more water-efficient than running the tap.  [6]

The insulation used on the station has to withstand both extreme heat and cold, thus it has to be very flexible and efficient, which could become a valuable solution for home insulation on Earth too.  [1] The company Hy-Tech Thermal Solutions already offers a paint, which significantly improves house insulation and which was developed from NASA’s thermal research projects. [7]

Also, NASA’s Research Centres have been involved with the improvement of various solutions for the smooth running of the ISS, one of them being the research of fuel cells, a promising future solution for vehicles. [8]

Experiments

Astronauts at the ISS regularly conduct experiments, which have already given several technology innovations to the world. Such experiments also include potential developments in the alternative and renewable energy sector.

One of the well-known experiments was the research on whether microgravity can make Jatropha curcas plant cells grow faster to produce biofuel, named National Lab Pathfinder-Cells 3. [9]

Another example is the experiment MISSE-5 (Materials International Space Station Experiment – 5 (MISSE-5)), in the frame of which the Forward Technology Solar Cell Experiment (FTSCE) investigated the durability and the electrical output of 39 advanced solar cell samples that could be used on future space exploration vehicles. [10]

Also, a hydrogen experiment resulted in the weakest flame ever, which could be very beneficial for the development of cleaner burning cars. [4]

Space solar power

The large solar arrays of the ISS generated great interest in researching the potential of space solar power.

It could provide the largest source for solar energy on a very long term, and with wireless power transmission solutions it may be used for electricity networks or transportation systems on Earth.

Besides the main challenge, that it’s rather expensive to develop and the dangers of space debris to the device, it has numerous advantages. These include no emissions, no competition for water or food and it’s not reduced by cloud cover or affected by the time of the day, so it could be used virtually anywhere on Earth. [11]

Just as space exploration has led to several innovations, the International Space Station may hold the key to new potential solutions for alternative energy development on Earth.

[1] The International Space Station: Our Green and Clean Eyes in the Sky! Living in Space Equals Living Better on Earth!, 16 August 2011, http://christiantechandscience.blogspot.com/2011/08/international-space-station-our-green.html

[2] International Space Station, Facts and Figures, http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/onthestation/facts_and_figures.html

[3] International Space Station, Spread Your Wings, It’s Time to Fly, http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/behindscenes/truss_segment.html

[4] NASA, Spinoffs, Learn more about the benefits of space, http://www.nasa.gov/offices/ipp/centers/jsc/spinoff/index.html

[5] Information Week, K. C. Jones, 24 March 2009, President Highlights Renewable Energy In Call To Space, http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/info-management/229207196

[6] NASA Science News, Water on the Space Station, http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast02nov_1/

[7] NASA, Spinoffs, Home Insulation With the Stroke of a Brush, http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff2003/er_4.html

[8] NASA, Glenn Research Centre, Fuel Cells: A Better Energy Source for Earth and Space, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/fuel_cells.html

[9] NASA, Alternative Energy Crops in Space, 5 March, 2010, http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/jatropha_prt.htm

[10] NASA, International Space Station Experiments, Materials International Space Station Experiment – 5 (MISSE-5), http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/MISSE-5.html

[11] National Space Society, Space Solar Power, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/index.htm