Greenpeace

Just read an article in the NY Times about the addition of a huge solar power plant adjacent to the nation's largest natural gas plant in Florida. The system will function as a "hybrid" model, supplying energy from both alternative and fossil-fuel powered sources.Evidently, this will be the world's second largest solar plant, and is scheduled to be completed by the end of this year.

My initial reaction is that this is an obvious step in the right direction. The cost of building the solar plant was greatly reduced by utilizing existing features connected to natural gas plant. Makes sense to build something like this in Florida- the sunshine state, but the sad reality is that the power produced by the alternative portion of the facility will be dwarfed by the capacity of the fossil fuel plant. The solar field is only a means of supplying supplemental energy, especially in times of great need- the hot summers (when sunshine is more abundant).

 On second thought, wouldn't it seem more logical to build an alternative facility that could surpass production of the natural gas plant? Seems like the dirty plant should act to supplement the energy produced by alternative methods. Maybe the solar field could stand to eventually replace the gas plant...

 At any rate, it is good to hear that more alternative plants are being produced, even if they are directly connected to a polluting facility. Seems like "baby steps" are the method of change... almost mirrors the auto industry slowly converting to hybrid models- even the prior gas guzzler models (cadillac escalade!)

Read more at the link below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/business/05solar.html?pagewanted=1&ref=technology

 

Ever wonder why your eyes are dry, you feel tired, dizzy, fatigued and display a lack of concentration in your work place? Though it might be easy to blame these feelings on your workload, the real cause may be found in the physical structure of your workplace. American's spend close to 90% of their lives indoors, and much of this time may be spent in environments that are incredibly polluted. Obviously there is a great concern for our air quality in general, however it seems as though little attention is given to the air you are surrounded with in your home or work environment.

Many offices offer poor air ventilation and circulation with little or no natural lighting. Dark, warm and stagnant environments are magnets for mold and mildew growth. Indoor spaces are also littered with chemicals and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that infiltrate and are circulated through the air via heating and cooling systems. Office buildings become vacuums of unhealthiness.

There are many harmful effects of being exposed to these sort of environments including short term health effects such as the aforementioned, however there may also be long term health risks including susceptibility to respiratory problems.

So what can be done? Most short term health effects are remedied by simply stepping out of the polluted spaces, into the great outdoors. The good news is that most actors causing air quality problems are an easy fix, and simple awareness is enough to make an improvement. Opening windows, replacing air filters, eliminating possible mold surfaces, working with natural cleansers and surfaces, and also introducing indoor plants into the workplace can all act to improve your indoor environment.With the introduction of green building practices, the nature of healthier indoor environments is created right from the start.

It is important to care for all environments, including the one you spend 8+ hours a day in! Healthier environments are shown to yield higher employee efficiency and who wouldn't be more productive knowing your days of general discomfort are over? Sounds like a win win.

for more info go to:

http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/sbs.html

As of last week there have been talks of a possible reintroduction of commercial whaling in order to help "protect" the whales... Sounds like a paradox, and it just might be.

Commercial whaling has been banned for nearly 30 years, however nations like Japan have justified their continued hunting by classifying it as part of a scientific research plan. It is thought that by legalizing commercial whaling, there would be a reduction in the number of whales hunted annually through stronger regulation.

It seems backwards to see any form of whaling legalized, even if it is monitored by the IWC. Japan seems to have abused the priviledge of whaling in the name of scientific research, so what evidence is there that the same wouldn't be true for the new protocol under legalized whaling? If anything, it seems like this proposal would only serve to justify whaling!

Haven't the whales suffered enough? Seems like the phasing out of whaling is long overdue, and something like this proposal would only stand to work against that.

A city being granted the privilege of hosting the Olympics is a great honor. In my opinion, what matters equally is how these same cities choose to utilize their venues post games. I remember learning in one of my History of Urban Planning classes the huge burden cities are faced with in trying to find the best fit for Olympic villages once the Olympics have ended. Stadiums in general are sort of a bittersweet facility to maintain. They allow for remarkable architectural and planning achievements, but what people don't often consider is their permanence. Most stadiums are severely underutilized when you think about it. Sports facilities, especially in the past, are built to host major events, but how often to these events happen? I would say a majority of the time, these facilities remain vacant.

My thinking is that these facilities need to be designed to allow for smaller events to take place while the more crowd drawing events are not in play. This is especially true for Olympic facilities that are only used to their maximum potential for a few weeks. Going green with the facilities, as Vancouver has done is definitely a start. From the articles I have found so far, it seems like Vancouver already has adaptive reuse in mind.

 

 "While going after LEED Gold certification is ambitious, the most innovative plan is to convert the athlete’s village to mixed-use development after the Olympics are over. The architects believe that very little changes will need to be made to the complex to transform it into livable and workable space. As is the case in many mixed-use projects, ground level space that is being used for dining, medical use and training during the games will transition to restaurants and shops. Naturally, the athlete’s accommodations will morph into 737 private residences. The village will offer a mix of low-income, market rate and luxury accommodations for sale. Over 90 percent of the 300 units that were released to the public have been sold. The village will be turned over to the city in April 2010".

-http://winterolympicgames.suite101.com/article.cfm/vancouver_plans_sustainable_olympic_village

there are so many great incentives for going solar with your home or business, it seems almost silly not to. Many of the rumors of high upfront costs are simply not true, and the pay-off in the long run is well worth it.

Also looking forward to the city's plan for a solar plant in the Sunset neighborhood atop a reservoir.

Check out this awesome map I found of solar projects in San Francisco! 

http://sf.solarmap.org/