This past October, Toshiba’s Digital Products Division (TDPD), announced that its free recycling program is now accepts electronics that are not only Toshiba products. It’s goal by the end of 2010 is to recycle at least 12 million pounds of electronics. This is now one of the most comprehensive trade-in programs when it comes to e-waste. Toshiba’s program now is accepting e-waste which has no market value for recycling without requiring its consumers to purchase Toshiba products. Such items include cameras and camcorders, GPS’s, laptops, MP3 players, PDAs, projectors, servers, and Tablet PCs. Jeff Barney, the general manager and vice president of TDPD stated, “The growth of Toshiba’s free recycling program is a reflection of the company’s dedication to promoting responsible disposal of hazardous waste. Recycling items regardless of the manufacturer is a natural step for Toshiba, considering the value we place on environmental responsibility”. I agree here with Barney because Toshiba is leading the way and setting the right example for other electronic companies in the proper way to dispose of electronics that could pose threatening wastes. Toshiba offers its traders the option of used products for cash and no obligation to buy one of their products. This is a great way to recycle electronic parts because otherwise people would just be throwing them away and wasting valuable, expensive parts that may produce hazardous wastes.
Though Barack Obama faces problems of the on-going Iraq war, and one of the most historical financial times in our country’s history, his administration is concentrationg on going green. Obama is said to be the American president with the most clearly announced environmental goals of any in history. Experts think that the financial crisis is a plus for Obama since he is planning on creating millions of green jobs in order to jumpstart our failing economy.
Bob Belnick, director of government affairs for Nature Conservancy says of the Obama administration,”Right now it looks like environmental policy is a high priority. Climate change, the environment, and the health of the planet are interrelated with human welfare and the economy”. Among his main points in his presidency Obama claims to strive for green jobs and clean energy, and has recently stated that he desires to make the US a leader on climate change.
The main elements of the “new energy for America” plan are investing $150 billion over ten years to creat five million green jobs, increasing wind and solar power, putting a million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015, implementing a nationwide cap-and-trade program to slash carbon emissions by 80% by 2050, producing 25% of electricity from renewable resources by 2025, and increasing fuel efficiency standards by 4% a year, and implementing the Clean Air Act to push for higher air quality.
All of Obama’s goals seem lofty and visionary as of right now, I just hope that he can stick to his word because this is exactly what our country needs right now.
Currently, experts are saying that electric cars are going to be hard to sell in this global recession. But, a spokesman for Japan’s fourth-biggest automaker says to,”Erase your image of electric cars being like golf-carts”, meaning that they are much better than those. Electric cars are now becoming much closer to reality and their current Japanese makers are trying to polish their image. Spokesman Kai Inada of Mitsubishi explains,”It’s fast, powerful and smooth”.
These Japanese automakers are striving to develop these electric cars, trying to beat the US and European nations that have also announced plans to produce them within the next couple years.
The vision of such an electric car has been around for decades, but has its failures such as a limited battery life which makes them impractical for many purposes. But, since the breakthrough of long-lasting lithium-ion batteries, these zero-emission automobiles are about to be a big hit. Mitsubishi’s latest electronic car has the capacity to run 100 miles on one charge, which takes 14 hours when using a conventional 100 volt outlet on the wall, or 30 minutes to charge 80% of the battery using a special quick charger. With government aid, Mitsubishi Motors has a goal to sell its iMiEV less than 3 million yen or $42,123 as soon as 2010. Head of Mitsubishi’s public relations department Kazuhiro Yamana stated, “The price and the short mileage per charge are the two biggest challenges we must address”. Japan plans to start selling these vehicles by 2010 and the rest of the world plans to sell them by 2012.
I think that these electric cars are a major breakthrough in cutting carbon emissions. However, I agree with Kazuhiro Yamana about the price and charging capacity because consumers will not start buying these incredible vehicles until they are cheaper and more efficient with their charging capacity. Furthermore, I think that the charging capactiy will definately improve before 2010 and soon after that because we are obviously making such an advance with that technology with it have only come out recently, and now can power about 100 miles or more. This is a major breakthrough for the world and I would hope that when these cars are released people would buy them and recognize how much they could clean up our atmosphere.
Recently the automotive group of GM announced that they are planning to transition half of its major global manufacturing operations to be lanfill-free by 2010. As of present day there are 43 facilities with this cleaner status. Since they are trying to transition half of its operations, this means that over 80 of them will make such a transition within the next two and a half years. GM’s definition of being “lanfill-free” is making sure that all waste and garbage produced through the production process is recycled or reused. Therefore in these facilities 96% of waste is recycled or reused and more than 3% is converted to energy at waste-t0-energy facilities. So far, GM has recycled 630,000 tons of scrap metal, 8,000 tons of wood, 7,500 tons of cardboard and 1,200 tons of plastic in its facilities in 2008.
I think that this “landfill-free” status is a great idea for GM. I think that this a great idea because I think that it is a way to aid them improve their sales because if consumers are aware of how GM is attempting to create a cleaner environment for us, then they will have a higher incentive to buy their product. Thus, going green for GM could possible help them out of this difficult time.
Recently at MIT, new discoveries were made that give nuclear fusion power a stronger hope for the future, and makes it closer to becoming a reality, although it is still decades away from being usable. Fusion is the reaction that takes place on the sun and is believed to be the greatest energy source for the future because it produces no emissions, the fuel sources are basically abundant, and it produces little, short-lived, radioactive waste as opposed to fission which produces a lot of long-lived radioactive waste.
The reaction used on site at MIT is called the Alcator C-Mod reactor and has been used since 1993. This reactor has the highest magnetic field and highest plasma pressure out of all fusion reactors in the world.
The goal for producing a fusion plant is to build a plant that produces more power than it consumes, which has never been achieved, is how to propel an electrically charged gas, called hot plasma, around the inside of a donut-shaped reacter chamber. This process is important because it is imperative to keep the reactor from losing its heat of millions of degrees to the cooler vessel walls, but MIT scientists think that they have found a breakthrough.
Physicists Yijun Lin and principal research scientist John Rice have demonstrated a possible breakthrough by using radiofrequency waves to push the plasma around inside the vessel in order to prevent losing heat and also to prevent internal turbulence that can reduce the efficiency of fusion reactions. So far, this experiment indicates that this type of method works and is crucial to future fusion reactors.
Various other discoveries from this same Alcator C-Mod could also make fusion power pragmatic, and were presented by Dennis Whyte and Robert Granetz. This discovery prevents a runaway effect that could cause severe damage to reactor components. This problem contains “runaway electrons” that would possess enough energy that they could melt through the surrounding solid steel. This problem would not be dangerous to employees, but rather would be expensive to replace the machinery. Whyte and Granetz have also developed a high-powered extinguisher for these runaway beams of electrons, which would suddenly inject a blast of argon or neon gas into the reactor vessel that turns the plasma energy into light, which is then absorbed into the reactor walls, and eases the beam by makes the magnetic fields more disorganized. Whyte stated that, “This brilliant flash of light is the world’s brighest light- the equivalent of a billion-watt light bulb- though its in a place where nobody can directly see it”. If this system is used in the future, it could produce a trillion-watt light bulb, which is almost equal to the total electricity output of the United States.
I think that these discoveries made in the field of fusion power mark a major milestone in the United States’ technology. Fusion power was once seen as too far out of reach for anyone and everyone, but now it seems that fusion power could possibly be in reach for even my lifetime. The scientists mentioned in the above articles are solving major problems that could go wrong and cause more obstacles when running a fusion reactor, and these are the first obstacles they should be confronting before they finally tune it up. Also, I think that their discoveries are very important because if we used fusion reactors we would not have emissions or long time waste as with fission reactors, and it provides much much more energy output with less fuel, making it more efficient.
New targets in a climate bill in Scotland includes a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2030, and futhermore, by 80% by 2050. The bill is also targetting shipping and aviation emissions as well as all six different greenhouse gas emissions, not just carbon dioxide as people usually assume. Scotland has claimed that they have so far received over 25,000 messages of support for this bill from all parts of the world. Stewart Stevenson, the Scottish Climate Change Minister, stated, ” As a government we are determined to have carbon assessment at the heart of our decision-making. We are breaking new ground with our carbon assessment project which will ensure climate change impacts are considered in future budgets and spending decisions”. But, on the other hang, oppositions are presented that stated that there will be penalties and uproar if these cutback agreements are broken. Scottish Green MSP Patrick Henry said, ” I believe it can be the foundation for the most effective legislation yet delivered on climate change anywhere in the world, but it still needs a lot of work”.
I strongly agree with the last statement by Patrick Henry. Although the Scottish government has put forth this ambitious target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions of all sorts, that does not mean that they will actually follow through with it. But, on the other hand, I admire the government of Scotland for taking such an initiative of acting on their government and setting forth such ambitious goals for the rest of the world to follow because if one nation steps up and follows through on their word, then many other countries are bound to follow in their footsteps.
Recently, in Poznan, Poland 187 nations met to discuss the progess the world is having towards the Kyoto Protocol regarding curbing greenhouse gas emissions. When President-elect Barack Obama announced his goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020, Chinese and Indian delegates blatantly stated that that is inadequate to fight our dilemma of global warming. Many developing nations welcomed Obama’s ambitious goal, which is tougher than Bush’s, but also stated that cutting this amount of carbon emissions is not enough to avoid the dangerous global warming. Tsinghua University’s He Jianjun, of the Chinese delegation, said to reporters, “It’s more ambitious than President Bush but it is not enough to achieve urgent, long-term goal of greenhouse gas reductions”.
Presently, U.S. emissions are primarily from burning fossil fuels and are about 14% higher than they were at the 1990 level, and Bush’s plans have foreseen emissions rising and not peaking until 2025. This completely contradicts Obama’s short term goal of the 1990 levels, and also his long term goal of cutting emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
Since the United States is alone among industrialized nations in not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, 37 developing nations must cut emissions by 2012 in order to make the first move in avoiding more heatwaves, floods, droughts, and rising sea levels. Therefore, developing nations insist that industrialized nations should be more ambitious in settingn their reduced goals, such as 25 to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020.
This talk in Poland is reviewing the progess our world is making on the Kyoto Protocal, because it is the half-way stage for a two year push right now. The talks in Poland are pushing for a new U.N. treaty to overrule the Kyoto Protocol which is meant to be set in Copenhagen by the end of 2009. Furthermore, 43 small island nations demanded tougher goals for cuts this week since rising sea levels could take them out. Therefore, European Union leaders agreed to a goal to cut greenhouse gases by 20% by 2020 compared to 1990 levels.
Many figures around the world are praising Obama for his ambitious goals regarding greenhouse gas cuts and reducing carbon emissions. The head of U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, Yvo de Boer, praised his goal, but Eileen Claussen, head of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change and Strategies for the Global Environment, said,”I think this administration will not be willing to negotiate specific targets until it has numbers out of the Congress”. So, although many figures have faith in Obama’s “ambitious” goals, few still doubt his plans due to the financial crisis around the world.
I think that the U.N. needs to crack down on regulations and goals for reducing carbon emissions and cutting greenhouse gases. I think this becuase the U.N. is the only worldly power that could actually set rules and regulations to make countries across the world actually attempt and try to do something about this global warming crisis.
I recently read an article from www.enn.com which explained the fascinating subject of Beijing having regulations on which days you are allowed to drive your car. These regulations are determined by the last digit of their license plate numbers. The rules are very simple, if the last number of your license plate is a 1 or a 6, you cannot drive on Mondays. If the number ends in a 2 or a 7, you cannot drive on Tuesdays, and so on through Friday, but the weekends are free for everyone to drive their cars. Beijing introduced these new driving regulations on October 11 in order to reduce traffic and pollution, after temporarily adopting these restrictions during the Olympics and having a success, reducing transport times and pollution due to the amount of cars on the road being cut in half. This needed to be done in a city such as Beijing, because it has one of the worst air pollution and smog problems in the world. Since China is one of the leading carbon emitters, and growing exponentially, these driving regulations should be imperative to its citizens because they emit so much carbon dioxide pollution.
Although this restriction may help carbon emissions, it has caused a lot confusion among its citizens. Now, everyone’s banned days are moving back one day. Therefore, if you were previously banned on Mondays, you are now banned on Tuesdays, and so on. Since everyone is so confused, not as many people are staying off the roads as they are supposed to because people forget when they can and cannot drive.
I think that these restrictions on driving are a very good idea. I think that this is a good idea because it forces people to carpool and find alternative modes of transportation. But, although this idea of driving restrictions sounds like it could solve some carbon emission problems, I also believe that it is hopeless for a country such as the United States. Most Americans would also be confused on the days that they are allowed to drive, and many others would simply ignore the restriction if they have to get somewhere. Therefore, I think that this is a grand idea, but not promising for the future.
Although the economy is struggling right now, the article “Solar Power Industry a Bright Light Amid Economic Gloom” explains how the solar industry is actually booming. Many businesses and companies do not have enough products to meet their demands, while other parts of the economy require job cuts. The reason for this sudden shine in the solar business because the government extended federal investments tax credits on October 3 as part of the reconstructed financial bail out bill. Solar industries claim that this bill is crucial to their survival because it gives consumers and businesses 30% tax credit on investments in renewable energy products until 2016. It has also created 440,000 solar-industry jobs and release $325 billion in private investment in the industry. Once this tax credit extension passed, solar stocks jumped, although they had been rising for some time. According to to John Jacobs, executive vice president of the NASDAQ, the 12 solar power company stocks are up more than 150%. This success for the solar companies means that people will finally start to actually transition into renewable energy as they should. Despite these positive facts, there is still a bit of gloom for the solar companies. If the declining economy keeps businesses and consumers from getting money, the companies cannot install their solar projects. Also, there are still problems with the cost and efficiency of the technology, because solar power is still more expensive than oil, coal and gas, and more expensive and less efficient than competing renewable energy resources. The cost of solar power is much higher than wind power. Although solar power is more expensive than oil, coal, and gas, it makes up for this cost in the environment. People need to start taking this perspective, because although it will be hard on your pocket, solar power is not expensive on the environment down the road,thus, it is worth the extra money. Matt Cheney, the CEO of investment firm MMA Renewable Ventures stated that this tax credit is great, “…but its just the first step. There’s still a lot of work to do and lots of questions about the solar industry’s future”. I agree with Cheney, but I also think that this is a crucial and huge step for renewable energy industries. I feel this way because if there was a time to invest in renewable energy, it would be now since you have the 30% discount in your pocket.
Throughout the ‘Strange Days’ National Geographic episode, it described many ripple effects throughout the world. One of the ripple effects that interested me occurred in Yellowstone National Park. The highly turbid streams in the pristine Yellowstone National Park appeared much different in comparison to photos of the same streams photographed in 1954. Scientists proposed many possible reasons for this change from flourishing plants to eroding banks, removal of soil, widened streams, and loss of willow shoots. After looking over possible solutions such as global warming and fire scientists finally settled on the cause of the problem: a loss of predators in the area.
The loss of predators such as wolves, mountain lions and beavers does not seem like it would make a big difference on its habitat, but that is not the case whatsoever. Scientists pinned down this answer when they realized that the elk throughout the park experienced a tremendous boom in population due to the loss of their predator, the wolf. Since there was a boom in the elk population, there were more elk to feed on the willow shoots among the Lemar River and surrounding streams. Due to this excessive population, the vegetation around the streams soon diminished, thus, causing erosion around the streams because there were no plants to hold the soil in place. Also, the loss of the wolf population deprived other animals of food because when the wolf would kill an elk, it would serve nearly 100 other organisms due to the available food now. Therefore, when the wolves were removed from this ecosystem, many other organisms experienced the “ripple effect” since they loss a source of food.
We should most definitely care about ecosystem changes such as this for many reasons. First, losing such plants and animals in a natural setting demonstrate drastic changes in our world. This shows that we must help along our protected ecosystems because on their own they seem to diminish over time, just like the removal of wolves caused negative changes to Yellowstone National Park. But, by helping these ecosystems by putting predators back into their natural habitat, it most definitely could affect our human lives because these predators could migrate into our neighborhoods. This migration could greatly effect our safety, because dangerous wild animals would be on the loose. Therefore, the pros and cons list could go on and on for putting predators back into their environment. But, I think that we should place safe boundaries between human activity and the wilderness because it is pristine and one of the last ones left untouched, therefore, I think that we should try to keep it up and much as we can, even if that means we have to put predators back into our environment.
