What do you think of this scenario for a Sci-Fi movie?
It’s 2507, and a small group of civilized, attractive, ethnically-diverse people are holed up over a coal mine in Antarctica, the very last fossil fuels on the Earth. They’re holding off barbarian hordes, and when their stronghold falls, it will be the end of civilization.
“Oh what will we do?” they ask their supercomputer. “Oh why didn’t mankind begin developing renewable energy resources back in the 21st century?”
The supercomputer suggests a plan: they will build a time machine, and use it to send a robot back in time. Being old movie buffs, they make the robot look exactly like Arnold Schwartznegger. The robot is built and sent back to 1990, and arrives in the high-security area of a government lab. At first, the guards think it’s an attack, but they hit the robot with everything they’ve got (lots of attractive explosions, etc.) and nothing can touch it. Eventually the robot convinces some scientists that it’s from the future.
The robot calls a secret conference of top scientists, politicians, and religious leaders. Basically, these guys:
The robot pleads for world leaders to begin developing renewable resources. “The people won’t go for it” says the governor of Texas, “we can’t make it happen.”
“Wait a minute” says James Hansen, one of the climate scientists. What if we faked the data, to make it look as if fossil fuels were destroying the Earth’s climate by making it too hot?”
“But we know that the Earth’s climate is just natural cycles” says Michael Mann, “we’ll never be able to get anyone to believe that the tiny contribution of human CO2 could possibly affect the whole world’s climate!”
But Naomi Oreskes says “We could fake all the refereed literature on climate. We have control of all the journals, we can just make up anything we like!”
Richard Lindzen says “But you have to have a little controversy, so it doesn’t look fake!”
And so the great global warming hoax is born. The world leaders enslave the common people of the world by depriving them of fossil fuels. But in the end, it’s worth it.
Back to 2507: The whole future changes. The barbarian hordes disappear, and our beautiful civilized human find themselves in a paradise of plentiful renewable resources.
Ruel the Midianite: the people need to be enslaved for dramatic tension—otherwise the ending is too happy. Maybe the time period could be made 1000 years (of tribulation followed by Earthly paradise)—always good to get in some pseudo-Biblical allusion.
The real Arnold is detained by security forces and sent to a Spa/Gym, and spends the rest of his life lifting. The robot replaces him, and nobody notices. The robot winds down his movie career with increasingly silly movies and then becomes Govenor of California. The people of California are the first to be enslaved.
The secret conference is actually held 5 years after the robot appears, so Bush is governor of Texas. Inhofe is not invited, by mistake, and eventually succumbs to apoplexy.
You have either read too much scifi…or my guess, not nearly enough. Read some Heinlein, I think one of his stories was ver similar to what you propose.
Help with renewable energy resources in France?
I’ve been set a task to find out about renewable energy in France. What do they use most, how long have they been using it for? Stuff like that. Thanks! 🙂
Use different search engines and different search criteria, each engine has a different algorythm that will produce more of fewer results.
France does use about 75 to 80 percent nuclear power to produce electricity. This has been a statistic that some pro nuclear groups use to try support how safe it is- but no mention of the protests and riots over the waste storage. When was the last time you heard about the fiasco over Germany’s own plans for nuclear waste disposal? And they have a vocal opposition to it as well, and you virtually never hear of it.
I am opposed to nuclear energy myself, Chernobyl saw to that. But short of a failure of equipment on that scale, the US “news media” is heavily filtered and censored, you would never hear of the smaller accidents that happen. And that is what the Pro-nuclear lobby groups are trying to capitalize on. It has been about a generation since that accident, so what else can we expect?
You might get some additional information indirectly, refocus on EU and European Union, those statistics might be more readily found, and would be broken down by member country. Also search the UN website as they sometimes collect that data. Http://www.un.org
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What are the real battle lines and angles between our energy security issues?
America has been facing a national security issue over energy for some time now. One group proposed a simple, seemingly harmless solution: Develop, deploy and implement alternative energies that would eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. As well as take a huge chunk out of our trade deficit and help the environment.
Another group wants to use our strategic reserves here at home(drill baby drill) to offset foreign dependency, reduce trade deficit and bust OPEC price controls.
Another group wanted to invade Iraq to privatize its oil industry(one the world’s largest) to maximize output and dump oil on the market to bust OPEC price controls. And thereby continue onto other OPEC price hawks like Iran and Venezuela.
My question is what are the REAL issues here? The third group’s motivation is obvious. Does the first group truly motivated by a desire to resolve our energy security issues and solve our trade deficit and environmental issues? Or is there also an internationalist angle of taking the biggest(and richest) oil consumer out of the game to give developing countries more access to oil? And to relieve developing oil producing countries of higher quotas to make their reserves more sustainable?
And what of the 2nd group? Is this really an alternative albeit temporary solution? Or is it just a bogus herring by the oil industry and investors to make a bunch of money by looting our strategic energy reserves which are set aside for real crisis?
Any insight would be helpful.
Matthew, this is a dynamite and insightful question. Please note that our strategic oil reserve is not the same as oil in the ground.
The real issue is that people don’t like change, or to feel like their livelihoods are being controlled by others. I think we should drill now as a short-term stop gap measure, even if that won’t produce flowing oil for several years; and continue to develop alternative energy sources; the most economically viable will win, and those who continue to develop better solutions will be the financial winners. We may see an evolution of technologies that will last for a long period of time.
How can industries change to reduce their environmental impact in relation to acid rain?
How can industries operate in more sustainable ways to reduce their environmental impact in relation to acid rain?
Best answer gets 10 points!
Two main things to concentrate on to reduce a companies Carbon Footprint or output-
1. Co2 output due to the manufacturing or transport process.
Review ways to reduce pollutants that are released into the air and either filter exhaust or limit and compound run time. For transportation, consolidation of shipments and lighting weights can help reduce pollutants and save money.
2. Reducing “grid” dependency.
Energy that is deprived from coal processing is a huge culprit! One simple solution is to replace the facility lighting to an energy efficient system. The reduction in carbon footprint reduction from energy efficiency, can actually be measured.
Then look into all energy savings, such as electronic downtime drain. Again-these changes, also reap big savings for this company as well- seems like a no brainer!
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Will more jobs will be gained than lost by transitioning the country away from fossil fuels?
Will more jobs will be gained than lost by transitioning the country away from fossil fuels and toward cleaner, renewable energy sources?
Some say this is America’s key to remaining number one, yet most Conservatives do not agree and continue to push oil as the number one source. Is it time to drastically change America’s thirst for oil?
No one is listening to Cons anyway. They are still stuck in the 19th century and everybody knows our dependance on oil is a national security issue and that for America to remain the dominate power in the world we had better get with the program and get off of our dependance on fossil fuels. Democrats now have the opportunity to pass legislation to do just that and I hope they act swiftly upon it, else China and others will soon pass us as number one. They are rapidly working on their own green energy and our probably ahead of us already!
What type of engineers work in the field of sustainable energy?
Im considering doing a Building Services and Sustainable Engineering degree, what kind of jobs do you think it will open up for me?
Will i be able to work with sustainable/renewable energies, such as solar panels, wind turbines etc? or would i need a different type of engineering course to do that?
Any more information on engineering would be more than helpfull, im not 100% sure whether i want to do an engineering degree or not.
From my own knowledge, jobs open for Sustainable Engineering degree are Electrical Engineer, Project Engineer, Project Admin., Project Manager etc.
Some consultancies provide solar installation courses, but I am not sure if it is what you want to do.
And sustainable engineering is a vast concept, you may need to choose your major orientation later, like wind energy, bioenergy, or solar…
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
zero carbon interview questions wanted
I want to write an article on zero carbon homes in the UK, whether the government target of 2016 will be met or not. I intend to interview professionals in the building and construction industry. I am currently arranging an appointment with RIBA environmental president and the current president.. However, my journalism skills are very weak at the moment. I was wondering whether if someone can give me any idea on questions to ask.
I have ideas as in their views on the scheme, what they intend to do to meet the target etc. but I need more questions. Also can someone tell me where I can find information on the German Passivhaus scheme. As in how they set the target, and how they met it etc.
Your help will be much appreciated.
U may look here for all tht u need regarding zero carbon homes:
all questions tht u want for zero carbon homes are here:
The energy efficient German / Austrian PassivHaus standard is recognised by the Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) as one design approach for dwellings that goes some considerable way towards the government’s ‘Zero Carbon’ target, as TRADA’s new Construction Briefing explains.
The PassivHaus standard is considered by the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) to be broadly equivalent to Code Level 4 in the CSH. It recognises that the principles underlying the PassivHaus approach have been driven by the simple desire to drastically reduce the demand for energy in buildings, yet they also achieve an enviable build quality that UK designers and housebuilders might well wish to study.
The following clear targets are set for each dwelling:
The building must not use more than 15kWh/m2/year in heating energy
The specific heat load for the heating source at the desired temperature must be less than 10W/m2
Air leakage levels at 50Pa must not exceed 0.6 times the house volume / hour (approx. 1m3/hr/m2 @ 50Pa)
Total primary energy consumption (heating, hot water and appliance electricity) must not exceed 120kWh/m2/year.
PassivHaus principles cover both new and upgraded buildings and have been broadened beyond dwellings to include educational and commercial buildings. Another major difference between PassivHaus and the CSH is that although the scheme is voluntary, it has grown in popularity particularly because funding mechanisms have been set up to make it commercially attractive to the developer and to give financial support for training to architects and others involved in the build process.
And in true German fashion, the scheme is carefully monitored at every stage. An architect trained in PassivHaus principles and practice designs the dwelling in accordance with all PassivHaus requirements. The design must be successfully appraised using the PHPP (Passive House Development Package). PHPP is a software program similar in concept to SAP2005, designed to consider many aspects of the dwelling’s energy performance at the same time. It seeks to achieve a much higher level of energy performance than that set out in Part L 2006, however, and concerns itself with a wider range of issues.
The PassivHaus Institut (PHI) double-checks the design calculations using PHPP. Products certified by PHI for the external envelope, windows and ventilation systems are then chosen by the architect / client. An air tightness test is carried out at an optimum time in the build process.
The architect is responsible for the Quality Control on site and specific checks must include the following:
Design of heat bridges – using bridge-free connection details or calculating the losses at heat bridges
Design of airtight connection details
Design of all heating, plumbing and electrical systems
Installation of heat free bridges
Installation of insulation layers which are continuous and without air pockets
Installation of joint details and service penetrations for air tightness
Adjustment of ventilation in normal service.
Although there is flexibility in the design of homes and the materials chosen, there are, however, a number of significant constraints in translating the PassivHaus design into a workable scheme for the UK, as the TRADA Construction Briefing explains.
Many within the UK construction industry would agree that we are not building to a sufficient quality to meet even current minimum standards within Part L for energy conservation. The important points about the PassivHaus standard in relation to quality are that:
The actual quality of the building is probably related more to what cannot be seen than by what we can see
The high quality of design and build are not just ‘nice to have’ but fundamentally necessary to achieving the low energy usage
The acid test to for the homeowner will not be whether it looks high quality but whether the quarterly energy bill is near to zero. This test is entirely objective and indisputable!
In short, we would need a very long awaited cultural revolution in design and site practice if we were to adopt the PassivHaus approach, as this would mean embracing the methodical and on-going training, auditing and testing on site which are necessary components of the PassivHaus process.
All ur answers regarding Passivhaus are here:
hope i’ve helped!gudluck!!
WHERE DID UNEP FAIL IN ITS STUDY OF GLOBAL WARMING & CLIMATE CHANGE?
UNEP & its scientists then blame transportation & industries as the primary source of pollution. And the world’s defense mechanisms are emission reduction, sustainable development, clean air act, ecological solid waste management act, mitigation & adaptation, etc. But these are subjective beliefs of wishful thinking, not realistic perception & objective reality of how nature works. This is because UNEP & its scientists undermined nature, failing to render better study before & after the treaty was conceived in 1997. Following are scientific grounds which would invalidate the treaty, among others, to wit:
1.Their study did not identify the stages as to how CO2 gas originated. The process of reverse transformation of gas from solid state (biology & physics) is necessary in order to determine the solid matter. Since the world claims that CO2 gas came from fossil fuels, then the origin is plants. To capture pure carbon, the appropriate method is to make natural gases work effectively (via organic matter cycling than carbon reduction).
2.Their study did not consider two classes of organisms. One that takes up CO2 & releases O2 (plants & forests) and the other that takes O2 & releases CO2 (man, animals, birds & sea creatures). If we devoid earth with plants & forests, the other organisms suffer.
3.Their study did not evaluate plants (biology) &/or reactants (chemistry) as possible means to reduce GHG. Concentrating on nature’s secondary process via photosynthesis and chemosynthesis, these will ultimately balance excessive GHG energy as waste gas from all emissions & respirations, conducive for mankind’s primary living.
4.Their study did not identify an abiotic environment which would best suit or gain control to store solid matter (instead of storing in gaseous state) with pure carbon & other carbon compounds (biology, chemistry & physics).
5.Their study did not consider the might of decay microorganisms to send off large volume of CO2 in the atmosphere. Microbes can pollute in billions of CO2 a DAY per gram in solid wastes (like molds growing in spoiled foods), far more than billions (or even trillions) of CO2 a YEAR in tons of burnt coal & oil from transportation & industries since decomposing (or CO2-emitting) microbes are dominant during extreme hot environment (at temperatures between 25-40 degrees Celsius) than beneficial photosynthetic microorganisms (at temperatures between 20-25 degrees Celsius).
6.Their study did not consider that warming has intensified not only due to emissions from transportation & industries but rather due to organic decay from massive desertification of land (losing its capability to photosynthesize).
7.Their study did not consider that if CO2 is higher (claimed at 350 ppm or more), then its leverage with O2 has been impaired, meaning O2 is lower or weaker. In other words, O2 has reached a point of shortage or loss (temporarily) below the standard science record of 20-21%.
8.Their study did not consider O2 as a neutralizer of elements & compounds, taking action with another, being the common denominator of solids, liquids & gases.
9.And finally, their study did not invest on the biological service of CO2 as food and biological necessity of O2 as ingredients to sustain growth & preserve life respectively.
This is a grave & serious fault of UNEP & its scientists, causing faulty analysis & reasoning. The worse of it, IPCC acted as accomplice by introducing its false science too to favor carbon emission reduction and cover up the fraud in science.
Not to be rude.. But have you or anyone else that will read this think about what the world has been doing since the last ice age?? The world has been getting warmer.. The earths temp. Will cycle and continue to do so.. Maybe humans contribute to the effects of the warming.. But the earth will continue to get warmer with or without us.. You would think that the human race would see this and adjust instead of trying to fight something that cannot be changed..who knows maybe overall man has prolonged the global warming effect that we are seeing now.. Or have we increased it??
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What decent jobs can you get with a certificate 4 in renewable energy?
Not istalling or maintaining solar systems, but other things?
Although it is difficult to predict the future in these uncertain economic times, there are already many green energy related jobs. Here is a short list:
• Solar Lab Technician
• Solar and PV Installer/Roofer
• Solar Fabrication Technician
• Marketer of Solar Technologies
• Financial Analysts
• Solar Operations Engineer
• Solar Appliances Installer
• Architect (designing solar friendly homes)
What are RECs,Renewable Energy Certificates?
We produce green energy and we will get RECs for each 1000 kWh of elec. produced. What are RECs and what are they worth in us dollars?
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), also known as Green tags, Renewable Energy Credits, Renewable Electricity Certificates, or Tradable Renewable Certificates (TRCs), are tradable, non-tangible energy commodities in the United States that represent proof that 1 megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity was generated from an eligible renewable energy resource (renewable electricity). Solar Renewable Energy Certificates (SRECs) are RECs that are specifically generated by solar energy.
These certificates can be sold and traded or bartered, and the owner of the REC can claim to have purchased renewable energy. According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Green Power Network, RECs represent the environmental attributes of the power produced from renewable energy projects and are sold separate from commodity electricity.
In states that have a REC program, a green energy provider (such as a wind farm) is credited with one REC for every 1,000 kWh or 1 MWh of electricity it produces (for reference, an average residential customer consumes about 800 kWh in a month). A certifying agency gives each REC a unique identification number to make sure it doesn’t get double-counted. The green energy is then fed into the electrical grid (by mandate), and the accompanying REC can then be sold on the open market.
Rices depend on many factors, such as the vintage year the RECs were generated, location of the facility, whether there is a tight supply/demand situation, whether the REC is used for RPS compliance, even the type of power created. Solar renewable energy certificates or SRECs, for example, tend to be more valuable in the 16 states that have set aside a portion of the RPS specifically for solar energy. This differentiation is intended to promote diversity in the renewable energy mix which in an undifferentiated, competitive REC market, favors the economics and scale achieved by wind farms. Current spot prices for SRECs in most states with solar portfolio standards can be viewed at SRECTrade. For example, prices in July, 2010 ranged from $255/SREC in Delaware to as high as $665/SREC in New Jersey.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Is it true that global warming only started in 2008?
Obama and Gore have been sending jets to leave chemtrails since 2008 just so they could make billions by putting taxpayer money towards their renewable energy companies.
Renewable energy is Joe cell, chemtrails started 1996.
Are you willing to pay an extra 30-40% on your electric bill if it’s 100% renewable energy?
I am moving to Dallas, and in Dallas they have like 20 different electric companies and some offer 100% renewable energy such as Green Mountain. I come to the conclusion that the cost is about 30-40% more than ones who don’t use renewable energy. Do you think paying the difference is worth it?
The question to answer is:
Can you afford to be so generous and are your ideals worth this sacrifice?
Answer that and you have your answer.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Would solar panels on the roof of every building solve our energy problems?
I know a few people around here who have used government grants to help install solar panels on their roofs. Given that this is the UK and sunshine is a rare commodity here, they still manage to produce more energy than they use, and actually get a small rebate each year from selling off excess electricity back to the National Grid (our national power infrastructure).
Are there reasons why this can’t be adopted globally? Are solar panels difficult to mass-produce (I imagine they use a few rare-earth elements in there somewhere) or is it just down to a lack of willpower to embrace sustainable energy? How well would the technology scale up from powering individual households to powering energy-hungry manufacturing industries?
I’m not expecting an answer to all those, but I’d like to hear opinions from anyone who might have some knowledge of how it works.
Right now, we don’t have a good large-scale energy storage technology, and we can’t run HGVs or aeroplanes or container ships on solar panels. (at least not the current big heavy ones)
Having a lot of solar panels feeding the grid requires a lot of gas-turbine power stations to make up the difference and respond to rapid fluctuations in demand and supply.
In principle, we might be able to generate hydrogen during the day and use fuel-cells at night, or
run aircraft on liquid hydrogen.
Thinking of changing my major from International Business?
I am currently enrolled in college and am thinking of changing my major from International Business, to Global Marketing or Global Finance. Which major offers better pay, working conditions, etc? . I would like to get into sustainable energy, but I do not think I have the math aptitude for engineering. Which of these degrees is in more demand these days?
I believe International Business is in demand itself but Finance in general is in high demand so long as you’re from a good school or one that’s well-connected.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What are some creative uncommon, creative renewable energy sources?
for my science class exam, I must assemble a portfolio of 4 types of renewable energy technologies, it cannot be solar or wind. I must explain whether the technologies are feasible or not. I must explain the pros & cons of utilizing this type of energy, whether it be environmental, economic, social or political. I can only find wind and solar and we’re not allowed to use those. I know of like cranks and generators but I still need more. So can anyone give me any other good ideas for renewable energy technologies?……….. I have until friday.
A hundred mile long cable attached to a satellite assembled to allow the cable to drag through the Earth’s magnetic field would produces massive amount of energy that could be turned in micro waves, beamed to a receiver on the ground and distributed over the already established grid. A series of small wind turbines arrayed alongside freeways would be turned by the wind energy produced by moving traffic. Using underwater ocean currents to turn turbines is a proven technology and a future use of matter/anti matter interchange is technically feasible as that technology is developed. The best way to improve the energy picture is to use far less of it. We really don’t need all night/every night advertising lights….all that does is burn up massive quantities of fossil fuels for no reason. Of course folks that sell fossil fuels would lose money, and electric companies that sell electricity would lose money as well…but that’s another factor that you might consider bringing up in the discussion.
Is a renewable energy tech. a person who would fix the windmills and such?
I am looking to go into renewable energy, I want to be the person who goes out and fix the windmills and such, what is the name of that career path?
Its called a Wind Tech. It is supposed to be a fast growing occupation with good compensation like a $75,000 a year salary and a company truck.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What would environmentally sustainable transportation look like?
What would environmentally sustainable transportation look like?
Seems like Global Warming might be real. Cars and Planes are two sources of Carbon Emissions that might have a technological solution.
What would an Ecologically Appropriate Transportation System look like?
If, after the Moon Landing in 1969, NASA (or similar gov agency), had spent an equal amount of time, money, and passion to build a clean air transit system; what would it look like?
There’s a lot of ways to have environmentally sustainable transportation. Given our current installed base of gasoline and diesel vehicles, the logical solution would be to synthesize gasoline and diesel from bio-mass waste and utilize the existing distribution networks and existing vehicles. The DoD does this with the Diversified Energy Hydromax gasifier and the Velocys Micro Channel Fischer Tropsche reactor to produce diesel and jet fuel from the waste generated at military installations. This is technology dating back to the 19th century so it doesn’t take a NASA Apollo effort to achieve environmental sustainability (Don’t get me started on the Apollo killing off 1950’s era Project Orion issue). However this does not sell more cars.
Just as with tail fins and the concept of model years, the introduction of new vehicle categories such as the Hybrid, Fuel Cell and before that the SUV, Mini-van, and station wagon lineages prompts the public to replace their vehicles earlier than would be justified on purely utilitarian and environmental considerations. This has driven the economic growth, generous employment and population redistribution that we have seen in the last century and arguably isn’t sustainable.
The question should be is economic sustainability even possible given our current expectations of continued economic growth? Can our expectations be changed? Unfortunately, the free market suffers from the parable of the commons and periodic economic collapse is inevitable in such a system.
What are potential sources of energy, to harvest?
I’ve heard of sustainable dance floors which harvest energy from dancers, they have them in gyms, and bridges too now..
But are there any other sustainability solutions for the environment?
sound energy? maybe from typing on your computer… I DUNNO?
The most exciting is biomass, which will lower the price of gasoline, along with other petrochemicals.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Would the person who discovers a way to efficiently power cars using renewable energy become richest person?
Would the person who discovers a way to efficiently power cars just like petrol using endless renewable energy without using fossil fuels and causing pollution become the richest person on earth?
also, is science a job career to take, like physics, biology, chemistry etc? it sounds fun and interesting.
I mean a way to power cars using renewable energy just as efficiently as petrol….electric cars dont really work at the moment imo..
Possibly quite wealthy but telecommunications and computers will always be a more valuable industries than transportation.
So maybe the third richest.
As pornography and robotics have not yet conjoined I still suspect that the person who invents the first realistic sex robot will actually be the richest.
So maybe the fourth richest.
Is getting a job in renewable energy a worthwhile career move in Australia ?
At the moment I’m a fully qualified panel beater in Scotland , I’m looking to move to Australia in the next 2 years and I’m also looking at a career change , my friend is out there at the moment and told me about renewable energy. I’ve done a search on google , I cant seem to find any straight answers , any info is appreciated thanks
I’ve been thinking about this also. I live in a different country than you but what I’ve found was that the government is putting more and more money into producing alternative sources of energy. Australia has a giant coast line and tidal energy is becoming more popular.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What technologies are we lacking for manned deep space exploration?
Other than the energy requirements and possibly artificial gravity if we build a large spaceship that’s big enough to be self sustainable for the humans on board, what other technologies would we need to master before we can even consider sending people out into deep space?
If you can think of more than a few, can you write a list. 🙂
Nonsense = we have had the technology since the 1950’s .. What we lack is the political will ..
How can UK families become more energy efficient in the future?
are there any ways of becoming more energy efficient for families in the future?
what are the causes of so much energy usage?
what are the effects of it?
I believe neighbourhood communities could be the answer. Families alone find it expensive or impractical to become more energy efficient, however the combined skills, knowledge, capital and resources within a neighbourhood could overcome this.
Utilising a community to transform a neighbourhood can generate so many more benefits. With the use of technology communities could provide their own energy, grow/farm the majority of their own foods, provide social care for the elderly and young. Create infra structure to enable community activities and develop towards being self sustainable.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What can you do with an Associates in Applied Science?
I will be graduating in the Spring of 2013 with an Associates in Applied Science after changing my major from Radiology to Environmental Science/Renewable & Sustainable Energy. My first intent with this degree was to obtain my bachelors. I contacted a few Universities around the country and each made it clear that the gap between a technical renewable degree is quite different from the more engineer-geared bachelors programs. My future has pretty much vanished. Advice? Thanks.
The term “applied science” has come to be used to mean that a particular program is NOT college but rather a vocational certificate. It sounds like you have learned this the hard way. Many schools offer vocational certificates that they refer to as an associates “degree” in applied science. The student is mislead into thinking they are getting a college degree. I hope the school told you that this was not a true college degree.
College level associates degrees are generally just 2 yr. Liberal arts degrees geared towards meeting the gen ed requirements for transfer to a 4 year university. There is a major difference between the college level program and the vocational program you were in. Thus, the vocational credits will not count as college and will not transfer.
The bottom line here is that you have two choices. You can settle for your vocational certificate that was mislabled as a “degree”, or you can pursue a true college degree by taking college level courses. It likely means that you are essentially starting over, this time taking college classes rather than vocational classes. The job prospects and employment outlook is much better for those with a bachelors degree rather than a vocational certificate. This is especially true in the field of environmental science. It sounds like you just made a wrong turn in choosing a non-college program, but you can correct that by switching to college level next semester.
what education/certificates do I need to become a solar pv designer?
I want to be involved with solar pv design or R&D. Getting my msee doesn’t seem possible having a bs in environmental science. Are there any other certificates that I could get that would make me attractive to employers for these sorts of positions? Basically, how can I be involved with the solar industry without being a construction worker, salesman, or having an engineering degree?
There’s a few options for you.
San Juan College in NM has a Renewable Energy program, but there may be a waiting list for it. Http://www.sjc.cc.nm.us/pages/4003.asp “The Renewable Energy Program gives the student a solid foundation in the fundamental design/installation techniques required to work with renewable technologies. The concentration in Photovoltaic System Design and Installation is offered as an A.A.S. Degree and or a one-year certificate.”
Many Community Colleges are starting to offer renewable energy programs, you should check out what may be available near you.
IREC is an organization that certifies schools in renewable energy programs, you can see a list of ISPQ certified schools, including some online courses at: http://www.irecusa.org/index.php?id=91
There are several 1 or 2 week classes that can cover the basics to get you started in the industry without years of school. Some are listed in the IREC link above. The AltE Store has some IREC certified classes in Massachusetts that range from 1 – 5 days. Http://www.altestore.com/classes/
We also have some free videos teaching the basics at http://www.altestore.com/store/Books-Classes-Educational-Videos/Educational-Videos/c1138/
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Does Egypt support financial aid for other countries as well as sustainable energy?
I’m attending my first Model U.N. conference in a few weeks and I’m unsure of how to research my country’s position on a topic. I was put into the UNDP (U.N. Development Program) and our two topics are financial aid to developing countries and sustainable energy. If someone could provide some information on Egypt’s position on these two issues, or better yet, with links to some detailed websites, I would be grateful. I am looking forward to the conference but just need a helping hand to get started with my research.
Egypt is too busy implementing Sharia law and exterminating Christians to do anything else.
How do i get started in an alternative/sustainable energy (biomass/bioenergy) business/awarness?
I am a current college student (Junior) in Austin, Texas and i am presently study Petroleum engineering but i intend to swtitch to Sustainable energy developement for my Masters program. I need people or someone to partner with or who can help me/us get started. I will like to get started as soon as possible rather than wait untill i graduate? I am very into the alternative energy movement and i need peole like myself to work with. For anyone who just want to help by pitching me random ideas here on yahoo,i will send you $20 dollars via PayPal or else contact me direct to discuss the possibility of working together on the project. I am very open to relacting anywhere that will best suite the chance of success.
With a background in petroleum engineering I’d have thought a good place to start would be with the petro-chemical companies. Many of these are diversifying into alternative and renewable energy sources and as they expand into these areas it would seem likely that they’re going to need people with the relevant skills.
If you can secure a placement with one of these companies and learn something of their core business it would stand you in good stead for a subsequent career opening.
A possibility would be to gain a few years experience with a major company then look at establishing your own business, perhaps with your original employer outsourcing contracts to your new business.
Good luck, hope it all works out for you.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Where can I find information on Hydroelectric Power?
I’m doing a persuasive research paper on why Hydroelectric Power is a better energy resource than any other alternative resources. I have a few web sites I’ve found with good information but still need more because the paper is 8+ pages. I’ll probably check out a few books at the library as well but as far as at-home research goes…
What are some good, reliable web sites I can find information on Hydroelectric Power?
You might have some of these websites already…
Here are some books that you could try to get.
Hydroelectric Power – by Josepha Sherman
The Economics of Hydroelectric Power – by Brian K. Edwards
Micro Hydroelectric Power Stations – by Lucien Monition, M. Le Nir, J. Roux
Good luck! I hope that the information helps!
What are the future ideas of green energy?
I want to know that what is the future of green like tidal energy etc
Well, get ready to face the truth, even if you don’t like it.
We have had over 10 years of studies showing that wind is a bust. Its only 30% efficient and that doesn’t even count all the transmission line medical issues, etc, etc.
Read them for yourself from all over the world
INDUSTRIAL WIND FARMING is NOT GREEN ENERGY – UK
Report doubts future of wind power – Germany Study
26 February 2005
Wind farms criticized as costly an inefficient in report by renewable energy group – UK
06 October, 2008
Small Wind Sucks, Test Finds
July 29, 2009
Wind Turbines Leave Clouds and Energy Inefficiency in Their Wake
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-01/wind-turbines-leave-clouds-and-energy-inefficiency-their-wake – UK
INEFFICIENT WINDFARMS ‘RAISE COST OF ENERGY’ – UK
February 3,2011 – operated at only 24 per cent of their capacity
Lack of wind hits wind energy production – Netherlands
28 February 2011
Lack of wind saw Scottish land-based turbines idle for four-fifths of 2010
Solar is good, but still have the transmission line issues. They are also expensive, but technology is changing to create better panels that produce more voltage per square inch.
Tidal ? Your kidding, right ? First you have to section off a piece of beachfront property just to anchor them out. You’ll need transmission lines to them. Good luck if you live in an area with frequent storms and hurricanes. Beachfront property is the most expensive and beach communities usually don’t like to waste the real estate. The power derived from these are limited so far.
An underwater tidal generator would be a better idea, but its only being experimented with.
Once you look at how much power a city uses, you’ll come to realize that the only way we have to create that power we need in the quantity we need it is Nuclear, coal and / or oil. NOT saying give up on green technologies, but coal plants have come a LONG way and don’t produce the Acid Rain we saw back in the 70’s and 80’s. Especially the new ones and they can utilized carbon sinking systems too. Nuclear is only scarey due to the recent events in Japan, but it has a safe record through history.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What do you think of Sustainable Development? Do you really understand what it is?
It will have a huge impact on your life. I would like to tell you about it but its better if you do the research yourself. Its pretty unbelievable when you think about how the government will control every aspect of our lives.
No, I’m talking about life altering laws that tell you where to live, what you may eat. You will no longer drive and will live in an urban area with many restrictions on your activities. In fact, you will be raising food collectively. I’m talking about major life changes.
I’ve read some on it Bek and every time I do I get a migraine. It’s amazing how much energy these busybodies have. Of course the main ones pushing it don’t plan on living under it. Kinda like Moore and Ted Kennedy and ‘universal healthcare’.. No standing in lines for them..that’s for the peasants.
If individuals want to get together and raise food collectively..hey more power to them. It’s the Central Planning by bureaucrats who live under a separate set of rules that I reject. That’s just putting a happy face on something similar to the old Soviet system. To get this SD plan implemented they’d have to trash what’s left of our constitution…..
Oh never mind..now I get it. )
With reference to climate change and sustainable development what is the futuristic house?
What construction materials are likely to be used and in what architectural styles and what would be the issues involved in their winning, productin and use.
One of these:
HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.
HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.
HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.
HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as “the Texas White House,” it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
You be the judge…
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Who else thinks that all the immaturity and greed among utility companies will serve to promote green energy?
The more big, wealthy gas and oil companies make their services a nuisance with disruptions and price hikes the more the world will turn to alternative supplies of clean, abundant, renewable energy. They are bringing about their own demise with their retarded thinking. Good! Keep it up you shits!
There is no evil per se in the energy business. The problem is, profit and loss alone drives things the way they are, and the environmental costs are, at present. External to the energy companies’ balance sheets, so they have an economic incentive to damage the environment, which historically they have done. Anything that is free gets overused by profit-motivated enterprises, including any environmental resource (air, dump sites, extraction sites, etc.) Utility companies are highly regulated at the State level, and the regulatory bodies are often elected, so the power of the ballot box can be used to get them in line. “Energy companies” (oil, coal, and gas producers) respond primarily to market conditions (collectively, all of us who buy energy) and to regulation (which they fight in the political arena because compliance costs money.)
Energy law must be national or international to be effective, and we, humanity, have barely gotten to the State and Province level for putting these externalities back on the company balance sheets. Furthermore, regulations must be administered by civil servants, so all that elected officials need to do to protect the status quo is to fund too few and appoint managers who are pro-industry.
Green energy will be embraced by the private sector when there is a competitive amount of money to be made in it. In the meantime, individuals can promote legislation that makes the externalities internal, so that green is more profitable, and can take advantage of existing rules that allow homeowners to generate their own power and requires utility companies to buy it.
Demonizing the opposition does not facilitate a solution. In the end, it is what is done, not what is intended, that matters.
Why should we have renewable energy sources?
I am writing an essay and I need the answer to this question I want to write about it but I want to know the reason why we need renewable energy sources so I can state it in my essay.
Renewable energy are the demand of this age. In past, energy were derived from burning of wood and other biomass sources. And then from coal, natural gas and petroleum products. But as these source of energy unlike wood and biomass products require hundreds and thousands of year to produce, they cannot be replenished and their source is getting depleted at faster rate with rise in population. Thus, energy crisis in future can be predicted even when the world is getting more and more energy dependent if we continue to rely only on the these sources of energy.
Another point is, not every country has got crude oil and coal reserves. Their economy is dependent on other countries as their energy cost can be huge which the other country can manipulate, much like middle east controlling oil – supply and prices which went above $140 per barrel (as of now is above $ 40/barrel). This makes a country less dependent on other country for their energy demand if they can use renewable energy available in their country. Energy from biomass is available everywhere, so is the solar energy(less in high latitude), In the region of higher altitude, wind energy can be harnessed, and energy can be harnessed from ocean, river and other water (larger) bodies and from earth (called Geothermal energy).
Another very important advantage is they are clean source of energy. They don’t cause air pollution either while producing energy from them (like energy from coal) or using them (like using gasoline). With the rise of issue of global warming and cutting out green house gas emission, it becomes more and more increasing important to use them instead of more polluting sources of energy.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What do you think of this story? What would your response to it be?
This story was made in1977.
The Nightmare Life Without Fuel
Americans are so used to limitless energy supplies that they can hardly imagine what life might be like when the fuel really starts to run out. So TIME asked Science Writer Isaac Asimov for his vision of an energy-poor society that might exist at the end of the 20th century. The following portrait, Asimov noted, “need not prove to be accurate. It is a picture of the worst, of waste continuing, of oil running out, of nothing in its place, of world population continuing to rise. But then, that could happen, couldn’t it?”
So it’s 1997, and it’s raining, and you’ll have to walk to work again. The subways are crowded, and any given train breaks down one morning out of five. The buses are gone, and on a day like today the bicycles slosh and slide. Besides, you have only a mile and a half to go, and you have boots, raincoat and rain hat. And it’s not a very cold rain, so why not?
Lucky you have a job in demolition too. It’s steady work.
Slow and dirty, but steady. The fading structures of a decaying city are the great mineral mines and hardware shops of the nation. Break them down and re-use the parts. Coal is too difficult to dig up and transport to give us energy in the amounts we need, nuclear fission is judged to be too dangerous, the technical breakthrough toward nuclear fusion that we hoped for never took place, and solar batteries are too expensive to maintain on the earth’s surface in sufficient quantity.
Anyone older than ten can remember automobiles. They dwindled. At first the price of gasoline climbed—way up. Finally only the well-to-do drove, and that was too clear an indication that they were filthy rich, so any automobile that dared show itself on a city street was overturned and burned. Rationing was introduced to “equalize sacrifice,” but every three months the ration was reduced. The cars just vanished and became part of the metal resource.
There are many advantages, if you want to look for them. Our 1997 newspapers continually point them out. The air is cleaner and there seem to be fewer colds. Against most predictions, the crime rate has dropped. With the police car too expensive (and too easy a target), policemen are back on their beats. More important, the streets are full. Legs are king in the cities of 1997, and people walk everywhere far into the night. Even the parks are full, and there is mutual protection in crowds.
If the weather isn’t too cold, people sit out front. If it is hot, the open air is the only air conditioning they get. And at least the street lights still burn. Indoors, electricity is scarce, and few people can afford to keep lights burning after supper.
As for the winter—well, it is inconvenient to be cold, with most of what furnace fuel is allowed hoarded for the dawn; but sweaters are popular indoor wear and showers are not an everyday luxury. Lukewarm sponge baths will do, and if the air is not always very fragrant in the human vicinity, the automobile fumes are gone.
There is some consolation in the city that it is worse in the suburbs. The suburbs were born with the auto, lived with the auto, and are dying with the auto. One way out for the suburbanites is to form associations that assign turns to the procurement and distribution of food. Pushcarts creak from house to house along the posh suburban roads, and every bad snowstorm is a disaster. It isn’t easy to hoard enough food to last till the roads are open. There is not much in the way of refrigeration except for the snowbanks, and then the dogs must be fought off.
What energy is left cannot be directed into personal comfort. The nation must survive until new energy sources are found, so it is the railroads and subways that are receiving major attention. The railroads must move the coal that is the immediate hope, and the subways can best move the people.
And then, of course, energy must be conserved for agriculture. The great car factories make trucks and farm machinery almost exclusively. We can huddle together when there is a lack of warmth, fan ourselves should there be no cooling breezes, sleep or make love at such times as there is a lack of light—but nothing will for long ameliorate a lack of food. The American population isn’t going up much any more, but the food supply must be kept high even though the prices and difficulty of distribution force each American to eat less. Food is needed for export so that we can pay for some trickle of oil and for other resources.
The rest of the world, of course, is not as lucky as we are.
Some cynics say that it is the knowledge of this that helps keep America from despair. They’re starving out there, because earth’s population has continued to go up. The population on earth is 5.5 billion, and outside the United States and Europe, not more than one in five has enough to eat at any given time.
All the statistics point to a rapidly declining rate of population increase, but that is coming about chiefly through a high infant mortality; the first and most helpless victims of starvation are babies, after their mothers have gone dry. A strong current of American opinion, as reflected in the newspapers (some of which still produce their daily eight pages of bad news), holds that it is just as well. It serves to reduce the population, doesn’t it?
Others point out that it’s more than just starvation. There are those who manage to survive on barely enough to keep the body working, and that proves to be not enough for the brain. It is estimated that there are now nearly 2 billion people in the world who are alive but who are permanently braindamaged by undernutrition, and the number is growing year by year. It has already occurred to some that it would be “realistic” to wipe them out quietly and rid the earth of an encumbering menace. The American newspapers of 1997 do not report that this is actually being done anywhere, but some travelers bring back horror tales.
At least the armies are gone—no one can afford to keep those expensive, energy-gobbling monstrosities. Some soldiers in uniform and with rifles are present in almost every still functioning nation, but only the United States and the Soviet Union can maintain a few tanks, planes and ships—which they dare not move for fear of biting into limited fuel reserves.
Energy continues to decline, and machines must be replaced by human muscle and beasts of burden. People are working longer hours and there is less leisure; but then, with electric lighting restricted, television for only three hours a night, movies three evenings a week, new books few and printed in small editions, what is there to do with leisure? Work, sleep and eating are the great trinity of 1997, and only the first two are guaranteed.
Where will it end? It must end in a return to the days before 1800, to the days before the fossil fuels powered a vast machine industry and technology. It must end in subsistence farming and in a world population reduced by starvation, disease and violence to less than a billion.
And what can we do to prevent all this now?
Now? Almost nothing.
If we had started 20 years ago, that might have been another matter. If we had only started 50 years ago, it would have been easy.
I think it is a very mild projection i would have thought i might be much worse .
The aspects of a global nuclear war or the full effects of Global warming have not been included.
Such as rising seas ,which could displace millions of people ,moving them further in land ,to fight it out with the residents already there causing wide spread public violence.
Also global food and potable water shortage ,and we have since come up with many alternatives to producing power ,why did he leave out solar or wind power.
But then this story was from 1977,and even so Asimov is a master at imagining future happenings
I wonder what he would see today ,it will be a different story.
The solution to a world devoid of energy is to think backwards and improve upon it .This is what Permaculture is all about sustainable ideas from the past (only in the past can prove of sustainability be found )
So my response is teach the people about PERMACULTURE a way of life using ingenuity and innovation with limited technology or dependence on Government energy sources,derived from a collection of sustainable ideas from around the world coupled to present level of knowledge
ideally suited for those who want to get back to the country and build a auto sufficient situation for themselves and the family or a community .
People plant rather for the quality of life and to feed their families, than for the market ,so the motivation and the manner are totally different from ordinary agriculture .
Although the basic concept of Permaculture also applies to Organic and sustainable farming,
Utilizing soil management ,and mulching
The utilization of space is more concentrated ,thinking in cubic and vertical terms instead or merely horizontal on the plain ,
Having many principle to follow such as utilizing all resources and following and enhancing energy flows ,
for example the ditch around the house catches the rain water and leads it through the chicken house where it cleans and picks up the manure to deposit it in the vegetable patch
Permaculture means permanent agriculture
a concept put forward by Bill Mollison in the 60`s
Which offers practical solutions for energy systems ,infrastructure ,intelligent design in housing,
animal shelter ,water systems and sustainable agricultural practices.
With the world and it`s history as it`s source
From the chinampas of Mexico to the terraced gardens of the Andes.
From the dessert wadis to the steppes of Russia.
Covering all climatic conditions temporal, dessert, humid and dry tropics.
With chapters on soil ,Water harvesting and land design,Bio diversity
Earth working ,Spirals in nature,Trees and water ,utilizing energy flows,
Strategy for an alternative nation
including gardening tips,bio-gas,companion planting and ideas for structures ,how to cool down houses in hot climates ,how to warm up houses in cold climates with out using technology but rather by design.
The Permaculture designers manual by Bill Mollison,which cost about 40 dollars.
And is the best all round book you can get,on Environmental design,.(tagiari publishing, firstname.lastname@example.org)
Some other writers that are on the Internet are
Masanobu Fukuaka has written ,
The Road Back to Nature
The Natural Way of Farming
and Bill Molisson.
There is a Permaculture Institute in Australia
there is also a Dry land strategy Institute in North America
Links to previous relevant answers
organic pest control
growing your own
the rippling effect
choosing a site
alternative solutions to Urban sprawl
Power Wastage Question?
If you leave a power charger in the power socket and have the switch switched on, will it waste power even though nothing’s plugged in at the other end?
For example, you have a phone charger cord plugged in and switched on, but no phone is attached, is power wasted?
No… i don’t think you understand. There is no electrical device plugged in. Just a cord
the charger doesn’t get hot
Almost every electronic device uses some electricity just by being plugged in. In fact, phone chargers often come up in articles about saving energy and such.
David MacKay, a professor at the University of Cambridge, to the rescue. Dr. MacKay has published an online tome “Sustainable Energy – Without the Hot Air” (free PDF download here) which relies on Kilowatt-Hours to quantify these decisions. It’s incredibly comprehensive – 409 pages – and provides the apples-to-apples that points you in the right direction.
Case in point – cell phone chargers. David performs some tests and concludes that these chargers use maybe 0.01-0.05 kWh per day; over a year, that’s the equivalent of a skipping a single bath (5 kWh per pop), or driving 6 minutes less annually (average driver being 40 kWh per day). David makes the point that all else being equal, you should of course unplug the charger. On balance though, better to go stinky for one day or lose a convenience store run. :: Without Hot Air
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What is the difference between conservation and recycling?
All resources are finite inclusive of renewable resources in the larger meaning of conservation of mass and energy.
Hi, Conservation and Recycling are a similar and different.
The easy definition of Conservation is just the “wise use” of any resource such as timber, water, farmland, wildlife, or just about any renewable and non-renewable resources.
Recyling, on the other hand, is putting something to use, that has already had one useful purpose and is nolonger needed for its original intended purpose. Examples are the recycling of aluminum cans, doors, folding chair and window frames.
The difference you asked for is that Conservation may be an overall term that covers just about use you make of the environement, while Recycling is use one aspect of conserving our resources.
Good Question: Both are great concepts and highly important, even essential, in good environmental stewardship.
What makes a resource renewable or nonrenewable?
What are examples of renewable and nonrenewable resource?
A resource that will never be depleted by using it up is renewable.
Wind hydro, trees, farm crops appear to be renewable.
Things we get out of mine or well, other than water, are non-renewable.
Fresh water is an important resource that appears to always regenerate itself. But fresh water right here is not quite as renewable. Some times we do run out of fresh water here even when there is a major flood of it somewhere else.
Geothermal energy is often wrongly classified as renewable. The amount of available geothermal energy may be very large, but it is finite.
Solar energy is renewable within the lifetime of earth even if the sun may be snuffed out. Its being snuffed out is not a result of our overuse.
Wind is classified as renewable even though it runs out, because it is not running out from use, and wait a few months and the wind will blow again.
While farm crops may be a renewable resource they depend on non-renewable resources, the minerals plants need come from the soil or are mined, manufactured. So, we can run out of those nutrients. Or put another way, the nutrients can be allowed to escape to the oceans. We can even run out of soil itself as it erodes and flows to the oceans.
When a resource is dependent on non-renewable resources we might treat that as a non-renewable. But classic definitions do regard plants and geothermal as renewable.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What business can i start in south india with Rs.1 lakh?
I’m a mechatronics engineering graduate who wishes to start my own business venture in india. I am willing to invest Rs.1,00,000-1,50,000. I wish to get a profit of Rs.50-70,000 per month within 2-3months after starting the business. Is it possible to start a renewable energy based company on these terms? I am ready to put in a lot of hard work. I hope to get some genuine suggestions from everyone here. Thanks in advance
Starting a business is big step is life and it is even bigger than marriage decision especially when you are new to this!
You may get many genuine advice. But tell me one thing, if everyone could do business just like you mentioned with 1 Lakh ( let us consider 10 Lakh) and get monthly profile of 50K then no one would be answering here. Everyone could be happy to work hard to get more profit 🙂
Be realistic about business. Do not play with numbers. Play with ideas.
Bottom line : Answer to your question – There are many small ventures working in energy sector. One of my friend work in solar energy sector in Bangalore. It took him almost 2 years to build network and get customers. Atleast for one year he was running business in loss.
Remember, its a venture, full of adventures. If you can handle it, think about it. Without profit business wont work and without planning nothing works. Meet experts, get into start-up group.
why are environmentalists voting no on CA prop 7?
i’ve read that groups like the sierra club and the environment defense fund oppose prop 7. i don’t understand — doesn’t it increase renewable energy? what’s wrong with this bill?
i support environmental causes but i want to know what the facts are before tuesday. any insight would be appreciated.
What it does is insist that ONLY huge companies can provide clean energy, which will put out of business all the little companies that have been developing and implementing clean energy all this time.
It also sets inflated energy rates, costing everyone MORE for cheaper energy.
I bet League of Women Voters has good stuff on this.
You could also go to NRDC and Sierra Club web sites; I bet they lay our their reasoning there.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
What is a voltage inverter and converter?
please can you tell me what they are…i am doing this for my design tech project sustainable energy A level
An Inverter is a device which inputs battery level DC (usually 12V, large scale systems may be 24 or 48 volts) and outputs domestic mains voltage/current. Cheap ones output a coarsely simulated AC, better ones provide a wave which more closely resembles sinusoidal AC.
A converter, generally, is a device which changes the input of the device to a different output.
In power, it usually means voltage, which may be a transformer for AC power, or a switch mode converter for DC.
Can a UK Government (Labour or Tory) really invest in creating green jobs and pulling us out of recession?
Or will the money get spent on expensive weapons systems instead?
The Atlantic weather front breaks on this country. If Europe has successful wind energy programs then why can’t we. 40% of the net wind energy throughout Europe is in the UK.
We’re also surrounded by the sea which means we have massive potential for wave energy devices and tidal turbines but, this technology is less developed than wind energy.
Then we are also not utilising our own rubbish enough. We are running out of landfill and are burying a great potential energy source. Incineration, although not everyone favourite can generate vast amounts of electricity.
Then there’s cows. We have a very sustainable farming industry (providing the government is there to support it). Using anaerobic digesters we can produce quite a bit of energy also.
There are many materials out there that can make our homes more efficient. Further research and the backing to get companies off the ground to produce these materials can make huge savings in energy usage.
There are many potential methods to really kick start a green economy it just needs a government to get behind the idea and crack on with it.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers