Group items tagged

http://the-crown-management.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-state-of-nations-air-and-your-lungs.html In most places, the quality of air in America is better than ever. As China remains blanketed by an ever-thickening haze, we in the United States can be grateful of one thing: The air is getting cleaner in most parts. The American Lung Association reported in its State of the Air 2013 that 18 cities have lower dust pollution compared to previous years, while 16 had their lowest figures ever. Nevertheless, the improvement is not that widespread. About 25 million Americans live in conditions of harmful levels of ozone and particle pollution. Around 131 million people (42%) live with either type of unhealthful environment. California's busy and highly-populated metros rank badly in the rankings, consistently topping the five most-polluted metros by ozone, year-round and short-term particulate pollution. Bakersfield, the highest for particulates among 277 metros, fares worst of all although it has already improved. In general, 119 counties have levels of ozone that affect the health of citizens with "aggravated asthma, difficulty breathing, cardiovascular harm and lower birth weight". Particulate levels in 58 counties are such that they "increase risks of heart attacks, strokes and emergency room visits for asthma and cardiovascular disease". Cities, such as Salt Lake City and Fairbanks, Alaska, experience more frequent short-term spikes in pollution. Out of 25 cities that had the worst short-term problems, 14 recorded more poor days than in previous reports of the "State of the Air". According to the report, some cities experienced higher pollution arising from increased burning of wood and other fuels for heating during winter, especially with the use of highly-polluting indoor wood-stoves or outdoor wood-boilers. Of the cleanest cities, New Mexico proudly ranks third and fifth for least particulates (Santa Fe and Farmington), Wyoming has another (Cheyenne), then

By Kim Brinck & Susanne Wellington Hansen Again and again we hear the message that resources are scarce, and that we have to ensure that they are not lost in our waste. Explanations as to which resources we are talking about and how we avoid wasting them, however, are in short supply. Waste may contain many different resources depending on origin and prior use. The resources of waste may be considered a material resource, an energy resource or a nutrient resource, and typically a waste fraction will comprise a mixture of these in varying quantities. When evaluated from a materials and nutrients point of view, however, many waste fractions do not contain any significant recyclable resources without them first being subjected to thorough sorting and cleaning processes - processes which both economically and in terms of energy are very costly. At modern waste to energy facilities with combined heat and power production a highly efficient recovery of the most important resource of these waste fractions - energy - can be ensured. When material resources are recycled, an actual environmental benefit only occurs if it results in savings of virgin materials. Similarly, for it to be an environmental benefit, the recovery of energy has to supplant other energy production whereby the consumption of fuels and/or materials is spared. Despite global efforts to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels by developing alternative renewable energy production, the production of both power and district heating, will in the coming 20 years continue to be broadly based on the use of fossil fuels. This is why the utilisation of the energy resource present in waste both saves the consumption of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Even though many European countries are planning a conversion of their energy production from being fossil fuel based to being biofuel based, energy recovery from waste will continue to be an environmental benefit as it will save bio resources, w

During a region-wide blackout in 2011, the lights at the University of California, San Diego, stayed on. Thanks to its campus microgrid, UCSD has achieved near self-sufficiency in energy generation and distribution, lowered energy costs, made energy provision more reliable, and proven that computerized management can easily integrate new sources of energy-like solar panels-into a utility grid. "It's almost like plug and play. You decide what you want to feed in in terms of alternative energy sources, and as long as you put in this advanced micro-grid that can manage [energy] and modulate when you use it, it becomes a very effective tool," says Gary Matthews, vice chancellor for resource management and planning. The UC-San Diego microgrid has evolved over time. When the campus was under construction in the 1960s, university leaders decided to manage buildings as a system, rather than connecting them individually to the local power grid. About 12 years ago, the university added a cogeneration plant. Today, some 200 energy meters monitor energy in individual buildings, and a computerized management system allows facilities staff to fine-tune energy delivery depending on use patterns. Researchers and corporations are closely watching the electric grid, which has become a living demonstration of how to manage a diverse energy mix that includes solar panels, fuels cells and electric car charging stations. The microgrid saves hundreds of thousands of dollars each month, according to the university, and protects laboratory and hospital space from the threat of power outages. Although it's expensive to install an energy management system this comprehensive, utility companies nationwide are starting to invest in household 'smart' meters they hope will make energy delivery more responsive to demand. Group Related: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Crown-Eco-Management-4661507