From the Monday, November 26, 2007, Business section of the Toronto Star, pages B, B4, an article about geothermal energy:
GETTING THE GEOTHERMAL BALL ROLLING
If everybody agrees the technology is great, why is nothing being done?
Tyler Hamilton
Energy Reporter
There was an informal lunch last week in the executive dining room of RBC Financial, organized by Corporate Knights editor Toby Heaps. The purpose of the small get-together was to discuss ways to spur the large-scale deployment of geo-exchange energy systems for the heating and cooling of building.
A number of stakeholders were represented, among them RBC, Manitoba Hydro and Hydro One, but commercial builder The Remington Group, geothermal utility start-up GeoXperts and carbon offset champion Zerofootprint also shared their views.
As discussion unfolded, one thing became clear: All saw the tremendous potential for mass deployment of geo-exchange technology, both as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario and as a way to save owners of buildings and homes a bundle of money over time.
Geo-exchange technology, also known as low-temperature geothermal, provides heating and cooling by taking advantage of constant temperatures two metres or more below the Earth's surface. It's renewable and free of greenhouse gas emissions, and while it requires electricity to operate, it considerably reduces the fossil fuels or power required to operate conventional heating and cooling systems.
"I think we're on to something, and I think it's the way of the future," said Richard Tripodi, vice-president of Remington's high-rise division.
Ron Dembo, founder and chief executive of Zerofootprint, said there are 140,000 new buildings being constructed in Canada each year and about 700,000 homes in Ontario still heated with electricity, making them prime candidates for geothermal.
Locally, hundreds of schools across the GTA have a mandate to be green and a need for energy savings - which could be in the order of 30 per cent a year if existing systems were enhanced with geothermal technology.
"They would do geothermal now if the ducks were lined up, and there's no good reason the ducks aren't lined up," said Dembo.
Commercial buildings in general are a massive opportunity. There are 395,000 commercial buildings across Canada that together account for about 15 percent of energy use nationwide, according to a report released Friday by Sustainable Development Technology Canada. We're talking schools and universities, office buildings, retail outlets, warehouses, hospitals and restaurants.
About 40 per cent of those buildings were built more than 35 years ago based on construction techniques, technologies and standards that would never pass muster today in terms of energy efficiency. More than two-thirds of the energy used in these buildings - largely electricity and natural gas - goes toward space heating, cooling and hot water.
If embracing geothermal is a no-brainer, then why isn't it happening? Why all the talk, all the agreement, but no action?
"It's because of institutional barriers," said Dembo, explaining that a combination of government bureaucracy and a lack of access to capital tend to block or discourage action.
You can add lack of political will, outdated building codes and standards and inertia to the list. Major stakeholders - property developers and financial institutions and governments - are also working in silos and not properly communicating their needs to each other.
"People continue to sell what they know. There's a huge knowledge gap here," said Dembo.
Ojan Jamkhou, vice-president of business development at RBC, and Nelson Switzer, the bank's senior manager of corporate environmental affairs, were hearing the message and agreeing. It was an important issue for RBC, they said. They want to play a role. They welcomed the opportunity.
Their response intrigued Tripodi. "It's a funny thing, you mention you are into this business but we don't know about it," he said, speaking on behalf of Remington and other developers in the market. "You have to educate builders."
The session ended with a challenge. Dembo proposed that RBC back a $100 million pilot project that would aim to retrofit 30 schools in Toronto with geothermal systems.
The point of the exercise would be to test a funding model that would provide easy and cheap access to retrofit capital and prove to the bank that it's a business opportunity that could be replicated and expanded into billion-dollar funds aimed at different sectors.
RBC accepted the challenge, "Let's make it happen," said David Moorcroft, senior vice-president of corporate communications at the bank. "That's the bottom line."
It was a short, insightful and productive session, the kind of constructive gathering that should be happening in offices across the country, and should be expanded to include ways of renewing our aging municipal infrastructure in sustainable ways.
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities announced last week that 79 per cent of our roads, bridges, water systems and vital infrastructure have exceeded their rated service life. Fixing them will come with a $123 billion price tag, the federation argued. It warned that "signs of collapse" are all around us and "catastrophic failures" are an ongoing risk.
Now, this seems like a gloomy, depressing report - if you choose to view it that way. But if we're forced to act, why not see it as a tremendous opportunity? If we have to replace this infrastructure, let's use the greenest and cleanest or technologies. Let's make what we refurbish and rebuild as efficient and sustainable as possible, and let's create local, high-paying jobs and markets in the process.
The economic upside isn't lost of the nation's top CEOs.
"Meeting the climate change challenge will impose significant costs on Canadians, but also offers huge opportunities," according to a policy directive released last month by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, representing a list of high-profile CEOs too long to mention.
"The key is to make the right decisions about what investments in the short term will produce the greatest returns both now and over the long haul, for Canada's economy and for the global environment."
What's needed, they said, was clear and consistent policy and quick action. There's no room anymore for dithering. No time for political games.
More of us should be issuing challenges to government and the private sectors. And like RBC, more power brokers of our economy need to be taking those challenges on.
Tyler Hamilton's Clean Break appears Mondays. You may email him at thamilt@thestar.ca
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Talking About Climate Change
From the Tuesday, December 18, 2007, Toronto Star, World section, page AA2, an article about last weekend's Bali climate change conference:
WILLINGNESS TO TALK CLIMATE CHANGE WHAT COUNTS
Richard Gwyn
World View
Last weekend's United Nations conference on climate change in Bali was a classic example of how shape and content change almost completely depending upon one perspective.
Whether the outcome should be regarded, as most environmental activists do, as a bitter disappointment, or, as the diplomats would have it, as an accomplishment, depends on whether you prefer viewing a bottle as half-empty or as half-full.
As both would seem the best answer - with, to show my own bias, a definite tilt toward the positive.
The principal argument made by the naysayers is exceedingly persuasive. No agreement was reached on binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
A proposal, pushed insistently by the European Union, for the rich nations to agree on a cut in emissions of up to 40 per cent (from 1990 levels) by 2020, was relegated to a mere footnote.
No one is therefore committed to doing anything different from today which, for several nations, most notably the U.S.and Canada, means doing precious little.
So, we'll keep on getting hotter while time continues to pass.
The yeasayers have a good case also, though. Despite coming close to a breakup several times, the assembly of 192 nations agreed eventually on a program of negotiations to achieve a binding pact by the end of 2009. An opportunity now exists to keep alive the Kyoto Protocol which otherwise will expire in 2012.
Agreeing to meet again to try to agree doesn't sound like a lot. It was, this time.
The last-minute U.S. concession - after other national delegates booed its delegates during one public session, an almost unprecedented act at such international gatherings - was real. It has signed on to a process whereby it has accepted to be everyone's favourite target for at least the next two years.
More significantly is the timing of this new schedule of negotiations. Its deadline, and a major part of the talks, will take place after George W. Bush has left office.
Almost any new U.S. president, let alone either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obana, is bound to be more open and conciliatory.
This is of course no guarantee of success. But the agreement to try to agree that was reached at Bali thus will be conducted in far more agreeable circumstances than those of today.
And there was another positive accomplishment at Bali, even though its substantive content was insubstantial.
Any global program to deal with climate change has to be global itself.
At the original Kyoto conference in 1997, this was ignored. The binding targets agreed on there (the ones Canada then proceeded to break), applied only to the wealthy, developed nations.
Back then, this seemed to be fair. The climate crisis has been caused virtually entirely by the developed world's extravagant use of fossil fuels.
We can no longer afford to look only in the rear-view mirror, though. Every week, China opens a new coal-fired plant. Even if all the rich nations closed down every plant and ordered every car to remain in the driveway, the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere would increase by 2070 to the tipping point of 450 parts per million.
At Bali, China and India hid behind the U.S. While it was being bashed, they could remain silent. The late U.S. concession, though, put the spotlight on these "late polluters" and other comparable if smaller ones such as Indonesia and Brazil.
No agreement was reached at Bali on how developing nations should be included in any global pact. But the argument that they have to play their part was expressed openly for the first time at an international climate change conference (including by Canadian Environment Minister John Baird).
There's merit to China's call for a transfer of anti-polluting technology from rich to poor. Obviously, the emission targets cannot be the same for all.
But either China and India and the others join the march or the U.S.and Canada, and others like Japan, will drop out, or at best straggle behind unwillingly. The global scale of the crisis is without precedent; so must be the response to it.
Richard Gwynn usually appears on Tuesdays. Email:gwyn@sympatico.ca
WILLINGNESS TO TALK CLIMATE CHANGE WHAT COUNTS
Richard Gwyn
World View
Last weekend's United Nations conference on climate change in Bali was a classic example of how shape and content change almost completely depending upon one perspective.
Whether the outcome should be regarded, as most environmental activists do, as a bitter disappointment, or, as the diplomats would have it, as an accomplishment, depends on whether you prefer viewing a bottle as half-empty or as half-full.
As both would seem the best answer - with, to show my own bias, a definite tilt toward the positive.
The principal argument made by the naysayers is exceedingly persuasive. No agreement was reached on binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
A proposal, pushed insistently by the European Union, for the rich nations to agree on a cut in emissions of up to 40 per cent (from 1990 levels) by 2020, was relegated to a mere footnote.
No one is therefore committed to doing anything different from today which, for several nations, most notably the U.S.and Canada, means doing precious little.
So, we'll keep on getting hotter while time continues to pass.
The yeasayers have a good case also, though. Despite coming close to a breakup several times, the assembly of 192 nations agreed eventually on a program of negotiations to achieve a binding pact by the end of 2009. An opportunity now exists to keep alive the Kyoto Protocol which otherwise will expire in 2012.
Agreeing to meet again to try to agree doesn't sound like a lot. It was, this time.
The last-minute U.S. concession - after other national delegates booed its delegates during one public session, an almost unprecedented act at such international gatherings - was real. It has signed on to a process whereby it has accepted to be everyone's favourite target for at least the next two years.
More significantly is the timing of this new schedule of negotiations. Its deadline, and a major part of the talks, will take place after George W. Bush has left office.
Almost any new U.S. president, let alone either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obana, is bound to be more open and conciliatory.
This is of course no guarantee of success. But the agreement to try to agree that was reached at Bali thus will be conducted in far more agreeable circumstances than those of today.
And there was another positive accomplishment at Bali, even though its substantive content was insubstantial.
Any global program to deal with climate change has to be global itself.
At the original Kyoto conference in 1997, this was ignored. The binding targets agreed on there (the ones Canada then proceeded to break), applied only to the wealthy, developed nations.
Back then, this seemed to be fair. The climate crisis has been caused virtually entirely by the developed world's extravagant use of fossil fuels.
We can no longer afford to look only in the rear-view mirror, though. Every week, China opens a new coal-fired plant. Even if all the rich nations closed down every plant and ordered every car to remain in the driveway, the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere would increase by 2070 to the tipping point of 450 parts per million.
At Bali, China and India hid behind the U.S. While it was being bashed, they could remain silent. The late U.S. concession, though, put the spotlight on these "late polluters" and other comparable if smaller ones such as Indonesia and Brazil.
No agreement was reached at Bali on how developing nations should be included in any global pact. But the argument that they have to play their part was expressed openly for the first time at an international climate change conference (including by Canadian Environment Minister John Baird).
There's merit to China's call for a transfer of anti-polluting technology from rich to poor. Obviously, the emission targets cannot be the same for all.
But either China and India and the others join the march or the U.S.and Canada, and others like Japan, will drop out, or at best straggle behind unwillingly. The global scale of the crisis is without precedent; so must be the response to it.
Richard Gwynn usually appears on Tuesdays. Email:gwyn@sympatico.ca
Monday, December 17, 2007
Green Housing Construction
From the Saturday, November 24, 2007, Toronto Star, New in Homes section, pages H, and H16, an article about green housing construction:
ECO-CONSTRUCTION
Lowrise bar hits new heights
Environmentalists argue there's still a long way to go, but a pair of subdivisions are on new turf for green building
Tracy Hanes
Toronto Star
The green building bar for lowrise subdivisions has just been raised.
Rodeo Fine Homes, a small custom builder, and Monarch, a division of the world's largest building company, have thrown down the green gauntlet with two projects in the GTA that they claim will represent firsts in Canada.
Rodeo's is the 34-house EcoLogic enclave in Newmarket and it aims to be the first all-LEED Platinum lowrise development. Monarch's is called Evergreen, a 196-unit LEED-H project on a former Scarborough brownfield.
Rodeo calls EcoLogic the "greenest housing development in Canada," while Monarch calls Evergreen "Canada's largest lowrise green residential community."
Both projects have also been developed in partnership - Rodeo with the Town of Newmarket and Monarch with the Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO) - as leading edge examples of green building for other builders and municipalities to follow.
And while such claims are often derided as more image than substance, at least one leader of a prominent eco-conscious group has some nice things to say about these "green" housing projects - even if it's somewhat qualified.
"On the whole, (developments like these) are good, but we get into quibbles," says Chris Winter, executive director of the Conservation Council of Ontario - a province-wide association of groups and individuals dedicated to a healthy environment.
"One major issue is if you're talking about climate change an energy efficiency as priorities, the housing industry is still building sprawl, putting houses where you have to drive to get a bag of milk. They haven't got the full concept yet."
Residents of Rodeo and Monarch's new subdivisions are unlikely to go on foot for much of their shopping, but both projects score better than most new lowrise sub-divisions in terms of transportation. A bus route passes the entrance of the EcoLogic development and major recreation facilities and green space are close by. Evergreen will be a fairly easy walk from the Scarborough GO station, a bus to the subway and within an existing neighbourhood.
So while some will argue that the green bar must be raised further still, there can be some agreement that these projects are part of a new era, a change in direction.
"The whole green industry is new and everyone is trying to stake out their turf," says Vincent Santamaura of RN Design, lead architect the EcoLogic project. "What is green anyway? What brand is the market going to recognize? For us, it's a whole new journey."
"There is too much information, too many programs and it is creating a tremendous amount of confusion," says Brad Carr, Monarch Corp's senior vice-president, low-rise. "But that doesn't discount the need to push the envelope," he says.
Santamaura adds that one of the key challenges will be convincing homebuyers that by spending a little more upfront for a LEED house, they are buying a portion of all the energy they are going to use over 20 years at current prices.
"You're pre-buying energy at today's dollar . . . that's a fundamental concept that's hard to get through everyone's head," Santamaura says.
He says over the 70-year life cycle of a building, the capital cost - the purchase price - typically represents only 5 per cent of what it will cost to operate the building.
"But people don't spend 70 years in a home - they are going to have to see that in 10 years they will have added value to their home," Santamaura says.
Lenard Hart, a consultant on EcoLogic and co-creator of the Energy Starfor Houses in Ontario program during his former job as business development manager for the EnerQuality Corp., says LEED offers better choices for consumers.
"For me, this LEED platinum project is so far beyond anything I have ever been involved with, R2000 or Energy Star, but it feels like we are truly beginning to transform the way homes are built," he says.
"LEED looks at more than just insulation levels and furnace efficiency. It changes the way you build, promotes recycling on site, soil erosion controls, recycled materials, advanced framing and many other environmental advances that other programs do not cover."
He says while public education is important, the EcoLogic site "is such a leadership project that we are really appealing to an elite segment of very green consumers who are already quite well informed."
One hurdle is distribution of the materials needed for LEED homes.
"The products are out there, but it's the channels and pricing that are the challenge," Hart says. "We had to develope new channels. Builders have a fairly small circle of suppliers and we went to them first and made them part of the process, but asked them to bring in what we needed. That's part ofthe social transformation."
EdoLogic project hopes to achieve LEED platinum status by reducing household water draw by 25 per cent and reducing water discharge (effluent and storm water runoff), solid waste, greenhouse gas produciton and energy consumption by 60 per cent over conventionally built homes.
The site was part of the 36-hectare Stickwood-Walker farm, purchased by the Town of Newmarket in January 2003. The town developed a land-use plan that included the Magna Centre recreation complex, green space and heritage reserves and 160 residential lots, says Jason Unger, assistant director of planning.
Of the 160 lots, Menkes bought 124 for $16.1 million in August 2005: the town set two lots aside for Habitat for Humanity homes and slated another 34 lots for an environmentally progressive subdivision, based on public consultantion. Menkes offered to buy the 34 lots for $3.7 million if a suitable environmental developer did not come forward.
But Rodeo responded to the town's request for proposals and in January 2006, bought the 34 lots for $3.2 million with the condition that the developer had to achieve the stringent water use, waste reduction and energy-saving goals set by the town.
Two model homes, which should be completed next spring, will be learning vehicles for trades and building inspectors about LEED. Prices have not yet been determined for the detached homes.
Santamaura says a company like Rodeo is perfectly suited to tackle such a project. For one, it is a small, custom home builder that has had experience "tinkering" with new products that custom homeowners want. As well, a small builder can easily educate staff and quickly make changes.
Santamaura says that in three decades of green building, "it has taken 15 years for us to understand the building envelope, then 15 years working on mechanical systems and HRVs (heat recovery ventilators) and knowing how to design them for the right type of space. The final step is LED lighting, which we are just understanding now.
"For all us diehard advocates (of green building) we've been quietly trying to apply them for years and it's really great to be able to put all the stuff we've learned into a development," says Santamaura, who started his green building career in the 1970s, designing a super-insulated custom home for a Newmarket client.
The $100-million Evergreen development in the Midland and St. Clair Aves. area, to consist of 196 brick old Ontario-style singles, semis and townshouses, will be built to LEED-H, or basic, certification. All homes will meet Energy Star standards, construction waste will be reduced significantly and rainwater collectors will recycle runoff. The homes are to be ready for first occupancy in late 2008.
The goal is to demonstrate a green residential community can be economically viable and marketable, Carr says.
Monarch had owned five hectares of the site since the late 1990s and the City of Toronto oowned much of the land surrounding it. Carr says it was virtually impossible to get approvals as a result, but then the land reverted to TEDCO, the city's principal redevelopment corporation.
TEDCO operates at arm's length from the city, its sole shareholder, and has a mandate to pursue opportunities with a variety of public- and private-sector partners to restore derelict and vacant lands. It agreed to sell five hectares to Monarch, with the condition it build an innovative green community, makring the first time TEDCO has worked with a residential builder.
TEDCO CEO Jeffrey Steiner says fair market value was received for the land and TEDCO did its due diligence by obtaining two value appraisals and testing the market by tendering other lands nearby by confirming prices.
He says as the two properties were intermingled, it made sense to sell to Monarch and to share services such as roads, storm water management ponds and more. These economy-of-scale savings will be reinvested in the green aspects of the development.
Carr says Monarch is striving for basic LEED certification, not silver, gold or platinum, because the builder feels it is more effective to "reduce energy use by 15 per cent on thousands of homes," rather than achieving more dramatic reducctions on a small number.
He says it's important that Evergreen not be a "one-off" but something that's economically viable and repeatable" that could be built without government subsidies.
"LEED is very paper-driven and is a prove-to-me auditable process," Steiner says. "It's not just about how you build, but what you put in and about leaving the smallest possible footprint."
Steiner says the Evergreen site will triple the number of LEED lowrise homes in North America and the projet's results and know-how will be shared with the housing industry, including the GTA's BILD (Building Industry and Land Development Association).
Carr says part of the mandate was to keep the homes affordable. He says that's why, for example, the homes will use conventional natural gas heating, cutting energy consumption with efficient two-stage furnaces and extra insulation.
Priced from the mid $300,000s to $500,000s, Carr admitsthat "clearly not everyone can afford that, but in the City of Toronto, unfortunately that's where affordability is."
The Conservation Council of Ontario's Winter says there will be a market for the EcoLogic and Evergreen homes, as a recent poll shows homeowners are investing their own money in conservation practices. Some of them will want turn-key energy-efficient houses and "LEED is a very reputable standard and it's doing a tremendous job putting forth standards the building industry can work with."
He says one of the difficulties in bringing LEED standards to entire develpments is that it will require changes to planning standards that have been around for 50 years.
ECO-CONSTRUCTION
Lowrise bar hits new heights
Environmentalists argue there's still a long way to go, but a pair of subdivisions are on new turf for green building
Tracy Hanes
Toronto Star
The green building bar for lowrise subdivisions has just been raised.
Rodeo Fine Homes, a small custom builder, and Monarch, a division of the world's largest building company, have thrown down the green gauntlet with two projects in the GTA that they claim will represent firsts in Canada.
Rodeo's is the 34-house EcoLogic enclave in Newmarket and it aims to be the first all-LEED Platinum lowrise development. Monarch's is called Evergreen, a 196-unit LEED-H project on a former Scarborough brownfield.
Rodeo calls EcoLogic the "greenest housing development in Canada," while Monarch calls Evergreen "Canada's largest lowrise green residential community."
Both projects have also been developed in partnership - Rodeo with the Town of Newmarket and Monarch with the Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO) - as leading edge examples of green building for other builders and municipalities to follow.
And while such claims are often derided as more image than substance, at least one leader of a prominent eco-conscious group has some nice things to say about these "green" housing projects - even if it's somewhat qualified.
"On the whole, (developments like these) are good, but we get into quibbles," says Chris Winter, executive director of the Conservation Council of Ontario - a province-wide association of groups and individuals dedicated to a healthy environment.
"One major issue is if you're talking about climate change an energy efficiency as priorities, the housing industry is still building sprawl, putting houses where you have to drive to get a bag of milk. They haven't got the full concept yet."
Residents of Rodeo and Monarch's new subdivisions are unlikely to go on foot for much of their shopping, but both projects score better than most new lowrise sub-divisions in terms of transportation. A bus route passes the entrance of the EcoLogic development and major recreation facilities and green space are close by. Evergreen will be a fairly easy walk from the Scarborough GO station, a bus to the subway and within an existing neighbourhood.
So while some will argue that the green bar must be raised further still, there can be some agreement that these projects are part of a new era, a change in direction.
"The whole green industry is new and everyone is trying to stake out their turf," says Vincent Santamaura of RN Design, lead architect the EcoLogic project. "What is green anyway? What brand is the market going to recognize? For us, it's a whole new journey."
"There is too much information, too many programs and it is creating a tremendous amount of confusion," says Brad Carr, Monarch Corp's senior vice-president, low-rise. "But that doesn't discount the need to push the envelope," he says.
Santamaura adds that one of the key challenges will be convincing homebuyers that by spending a little more upfront for a LEED house, they are buying a portion of all the energy they are going to use over 20 years at current prices.
"You're pre-buying energy at today's dollar . . . that's a fundamental concept that's hard to get through everyone's head," Santamaura says.
He says over the 70-year life cycle of a building, the capital cost - the purchase price - typically represents only 5 per cent of what it will cost to operate the building.
"But people don't spend 70 years in a home - they are going to have to see that in 10 years they will have added value to their home," Santamaura says.
Lenard Hart, a consultant on EcoLogic and co-creator of the Energy Starfor Houses in Ontario program during his former job as business development manager for the EnerQuality Corp., says LEED offers better choices for consumers.
"For me, this LEED platinum project is so far beyond anything I have ever been involved with, R2000 or Energy Star, but it feels like we are truly beginning to transform the way homes are built," he says.
"LEED looks at more than just insulation levels and furnace efficiency. It changes the way you build, promotes recycling on site, soil erosion controls, recycled materials, advanced framing and many other environmental advances that other programs do not cover."
He says while public education is important, the EcoLogic site "is such a leadership project that we are really appealing to an elite segment of very green consumers who are already quite well informed."
One hurdle is distribution of the materials needed for LEED homes.
"The products are out there, but it's the channels and pricing that are the challenge," Hart says. "We had to develope new channels. Builders have a fairly small circle of suppliers and we went to them first and made them part of the process, but asked them to bring in what we needed. That's part ofthe social transformation."
EdoLogic project hopes to achieve LEED platinum status by reducing household water draw by 25 per cent and reducing water discharge (effluent and storm water runoff), solid waste, greenhouse gas produciton and energy consumption by 60 per cent over conventionally built homes.
The site was part of the 36-hectare Stickwood-Walker farm, purchased by the Town of Newmarket in January 2003. The town developed a land-use plan that included the Magna Centre recreation complex, green space and heritage reserves and 160 residential lots, says Jason Unger, assistant director of planning.
Of the 160 lots, Menkes bought 124 for $16.1 million in August 2005: the town set two lots aside for Habitat for Humanity homes and slated another 34 lots for an environmentally progressive subdivision, based on public consultantion. Menkes offered to buy the 34 lots for $3.7 million if a suitable environmental developer did not come forward.
But Rodeo responded to the town's request for proposals and in January 2006, bought the 34 lots for $3.2 million with the condition that the developer had to achieve the stringent water use, waste reduction and energy-saving goals set by the town.
Two model homes, which should be completed next spring, will be learning vehicles for trades and building inspectors about LEED. Prices have not yet been determined for the detached homes.
Santamaura says a company like Rodeo is perfectly suited to tackle such a project. For one, it is a small, custom home builder that has had experience "tinkering" with new products that custom homeowners want. As well, a small builder can easily educate staff and quickly make changes.
Santamaura says that in three decades of green building, "it has taken 15 years for us to understand the building envelope, then 15 years working on mechanical systems and HRVs (heat recovery ventilators) and knowing how to design them for the right type of space. The final step is LED lighting, which we are just understanding now.
"For all us diehard advocates (of green building) we've been quietly trying to apply them for years and it's really great to be able to put all the stuff we've learned into a development," says Santamaura, who started his green building career in the 1970s, designing a super-insulated custom home for a Newmarket client.
The $100-million Evergreen development in the Midland and St. Clair Aves. area, to consist of 196 brick old Ontario-style singles, semis and townshouses, will be built to LEED-H, or basic, certification. All homes will meet Energy Star standards, construction waste will be reduced significantly and rainwater collectors will recycle runoff. The homes are to be ready for first occupancy in late 2008.
The goal is to demonstrate a green residential community can be economically viable and marketable, Carr says.
Monarch had owned five hectares of the site since the late 1990s and the City of Toronto oowned much of the land surrounding it. Carr says it was virtually impossible to get approvals as a result, but then the land reverted to TEDCO, the city's principal redevelopment corporation.
TEDCO operates at arm's length from the city, its sole shareholder, and has a mandate to pursue opportunities with a variety of public- and private-sector partners to restore derelict and vacant lands. It agreed to sell five hectares to Monarch, with the condition it build an innovative green community, makring the first time TEDCO has worked with a residential builder.
TEDCO CEO Jeffrey Steiner says fair market value was received for the land and TEDCO did its due diligence by obtaining two value appraisals and testing the market by tendering other lands nearby by confirming prices.
He says as the two properties were intermingled, it made sense to sell to Monarch and to share services such as roads, storm water management ponds and more. These economy-of-scale savings will be reinvested in the green aspects of the development.
Carr says Monarch is striving for basic LEED certification, not silver, gold or platinum, because the builder feels it is more effective to "reduce energy use by 15 per cent on thousands of homes," rather than achieving more dramatic reducctions on a small number.
He says it's important that Evergreen not be a "one-off" but something that's economically viable and repeatable" that could be built without government subsidies.
"LEED is very paper-driven and is a prove-to-me auditable process," Steiner says. "It's not just about how you build, but what you put in and about leaving the smallest possible footprint."
Steiner says the Evergreen site will triple the number of LEED lowrise homes in North America and the projet's results and know-how will be shared with the housing industry, including the GTA's BILD (Building Industry and Land Development Association).
Carr says part of the mandate was to keep the homes affordable. He says that's why, for example, the homes will use conventional natural gas heating, cutting energy consumption with efficient two-stage furnaces and extra insulation.
Priced from the mid $300,000s to $500,000s, Carr admitsthat "clearly not everyone can afford that, but in the City of Toronto, unfortunately that's where affordability is."
The Conservation Council of Ontario's Winter says there will be a market for the EcoLogic and Evergreen homes, as a recent poll shows homeowners are investing their own money in conservation practices. Some of them will want turn-key energy-efficient houses and "LEED is a very reputable standard and it's doing a tremendous job putting forth standards the building industry can work with."
He says one of the difficulties in bringing LEED standards to entire develpments is that it will require changes to planning standards that have been around for 50 years.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Bali Climate Change Agreement - Yippee!
I guess that Avaaz petition I signed (along with 100,000 Canadians) and the stern emails I sent John Baird, the Environment Minister, and Stephen Harper, Prime Minister, must have worked (ha, ha, ha), as Canadian (and U.S. and Russia) stopped blocking the progress of a UN agreement after pressure from other countries (oh, and me, of course).
From the David Suzuki website, the blog entry for today from one of the people at the conference from the David Suzuki Foundation, http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Bali_Blog/ :
BALI BLOG
A place for all things related to the UN climate change conference in Bali, Dec. 3-14.
December 15, 2007
Breakthrough in Bali
After long delays and all-night negotiations, political leaders at the UN climate conference in Bali finally hammered out a deal that will launch negotiations to put the world on a path towards deeper emission cuts after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.
It was a long, exhausting process that went 24 hours into overtime. But in the end, Canada and the U.S. bowed to pressure and agreed to stop blocking progress.
The two-week conference produced a "Bali road map," which could put the world on a path to deeper emissions cuts after 2012. The road map includes a range of emission reductions for developed countries of 25 to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.
The final hours of the negotiations were extremely dramatic and often emotional. During one stalemate, a clearly frustrated and disappointed Yvo de Boer, the UN's climate chief, broke down in tears and left the stage.
Talks were on the brink of falling apart after the U.S. stood firm in its position that a Bali road map must include a special exemption for weaker U.S. targets.
But a few hours later, after intense international pressure, the U.S. caved and agreed to move forward with the rest of the world.
Later in the afternoon, Canada stood alone with Russia in supporting an option for the Bali road map that ignored strong science. Country after country spoke out in favour of including the strong scientific language in the deal. Canada eventually backed down and changed its position so as not to block the overwhelming consensus.
Canadian environmental groups gave the deal a qualified welcome (read our news release here).
It's great that political leaders in Bali were able to come to an agreement on the need for deeper targets beyond 2012. Now it's time to start turning talk into action.
Posted by Sarah Marchildon at December 15, 2007
From the David Suzuki website, the blog entry for today from one of the people at the conference from the David Suzuki Foundation, http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Bali_Blog/ :
BALI BLOG
A place for all things related to the UN climate change conference in Bali, Dec. 3-14.
December 15, 2007
Breakthrough in Bali
After long delays and all-night negotiations, political leaders at the UN climate conference in Bali finally hammered out a deal that will launch negotiations to put the world on a path towards deeper emission cuts after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.
It was a long, exhausting process that went 24 hours into overtime. But in the end, Canada and the U.S. bowed to pressure and agreed to stop blocking progress.
The two-week conference produced a "Bali road map," which could put the world on a path to deeper emissions cuts after 2012. The road map includes a range of emission reductions for developed countries of 25 to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.
The final hours of the negotiations were extremely dramatic and often emotional. During one stalemate, a clearly frustrated and disappointed Yvo de Boer, the UN's climate chief, broke down in tears and left the stage.
Talks were on the brink of falling apart after the U.S. stood firm in its position that a Bali road map must include a special exemption for weaker U.S. targets.
But a few hours later, after intense international pressure, the U.S. caved and agreed to move forward with the rest of the world.
Later in the afternoon, Canada stood alone with Russia in supporting an option for the Bali road map that ignored strong science. Country after country spoke out in favour of including the strong scientific language in the deal. Canada eventually backed down and changed its position so as not to block the overwhelming consensus.
Canadian environmental groups gave the deal a qualified welcome (read our news release here).
It's great that political leaders in Bali were able to come to an agreement on the need for deeper targets beyond 2012. Now it's time to start turning talk into action.
Posted by Sarah Marchildon at December 15, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Voting and Australia: You Can Make A Difference
From AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org/blogs/environment/68939/, an article about Australian voters giving the boot to a conservative government who did not act on global warming. Let us hope that the Canadian and American governments, in their next elections, are similarly replaced with governments who will take climate change seriously.
GLOBAL WARMING CLAIMS ITS FIRST MAJOR POLITICAL VICTIM
Posted by Dr. Joseph Romm, HuffingtonPost.com at 3:35 PM on November 26, 2007.
Dr. Joseph Romm: Why Australia's conservative prime minister bit the dust.
This post, written by Dr. Joseph Romm, originally appeared on The Huffington Post
Global warming takes down its first major political victim:
"Conservative Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat Saturday at the hands of the left-leaning opposition, whose leader has promised to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming."
Why the stunning loss? A key reason was Howard's "head in the sand dust" response to the country's brutal once-in-a-thousand year drought. As the UK's Independent reported in April:
... few scientists dispute the part played by climate change, which is making Australia hotter and drier..... Until a few months ago, Mr Howard and his ministers pooh-poohed the climate-change doomsayers.
You can read about Howard's lame attempt to change his rhetoric on global warming here.
Now we are the last industrialized nation with a leader who refuses to take any serious action -- hopefully that dubious distinction will be corrected in next year's presidential election.
For Australians, the drought, called "the first climate change-driven disaster to strike a developed nation" was enough to change their views on global warming dramatically. Of course, Katrina could have been the first -- but we have no way of knowing for certain if climate changed caused that hurricane to become so deadly. Let's hope we don't need to suffer anything as brutal as what Australia is going through before we commit to serious action.
Originally posted here.
Dr. Joseph Romm is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, where he oversees the blog ClimateProgress.org.
GLOBAL WARMING CLAIMS ITS FIRST MAJOR POLITICAL VICTIM
Posted by Dr. Joseph Romm, HuffingtonPost.com at 3:35 PM on November 26, 2007.
Dr. Joseph Romm: Why Australia's conservative prime minister bit the dust.
This post, written by Dr. Joseph Romm, originally appeared on The Huffington Post
Global warming takes down its first major political victim:
"Conservative Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat Saturday at the hands of the left-leaning opposition, whose leader has promised to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming."
Why the stunning loss? A key reason was Howard's "head in the sand dust" response to the country's brutal once-in-a-thousand year drought. As the UK's Independent reported in April:
... few scientists dispute the part played by climate change, which is making Australia hotter and drier..... Until a few months ago, Mr Howard and his ministers pooh-poohed the climate-change doomsayers.
You can read about Howard's lame attempt to change his rhetoric on global warming here.
Now we are the last industrialized nation with a leader who refuses to take any serious action -- hopefully that dubious distinction will be corrected in next year's presidential election.
For Australians, the drought, called "the first climate change-driven disaster to strike a developed nation" was enough to change their views on global warming dramatically. Of course, Katrina could have been the first -- but we have no way of knowing for certain if climate changed caused that hurricane to become so deadly. Let's hope we don't need to suffer anything as brutal as what Australia is going through before we commit to serious action.
Originally posted here.
Dr. Joseph Romm is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, where he oversees the blog ClimateProgress.org.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Climate Change Warning
I just started reading a book about the dire consequences of climate change called, The Last Generation: How Nature Will Take Her Revenge for Climate Change by Fred Pearce.
Here's an excerpt from the book that I found appropos to what we've been doing to the earth:
"As Wally Broecker, one of the high priests of abrupt planetary processes, says, 'Climate is an angry beast, and we are poking it with sticks.'"
Here's an excerpt from the book that I found appropos to what we've been doing to the earth:
"As Wally Broecker, one of the high priests of abrupt planetary processes, says, 'Climate is an angry beast, and we are poking it with sticks.'"
Friday, December 7, 2007
Coal and Mining Industries
This is an article from Alternet: Headlines Newsletter, December 1, 2007, http://www.alternet.org/environment/69358/, about the coal industry.
How Much Money Do You Give to the Coal Industry?
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., HuffingtonPost.com. Posted November 30, 2007
Where does your energy come from and how dirty is it? A new website allows you to see your link to coal.
The GOP CNN/YouTube debate this week and the Democratic presidential debate on November 15 were jointly sponsored by a coal industry coalition comprised of mining, railroad and utility interests.
Their high profile civic involvement is designed to further confuse American voters about coal's true cost to our society. Many of the Republican candidates have endorsed massive new subsidies for King Coal and dutifully parrot industry talking points including earnest promises of cheap "clean coal." Given that climate change is the most urgent threat to our collective survival, it is shocking that no debate moderator has pressed the candidates to clearly state their positions on "clean coal."
In fact, there is no such thing as "clean coal." And coal is only "cheap" if one ignores its calamitous externalized costs. In addition to global warming, these include dead forests and sterilized lakes from acid rain, poisoned fisheries in 49 states and children with damaged brains and crippled health from mercury emissions, millions of asthma attacks and lost work days and thousands dead annually from ozone and particulates.
Coal's most catastrophic and permanent impacts are from mountaintop removal mining. If the American people could see what I have seen from the air and ground during my many trips to the coalfields of Kentucky and West Virginia: leveled mountains, devastated communities, wrecked economies and ruined lives, there would be a revolution in this country.
Well now you can visit coal country without ever having to leave your home. Every presidential candidate and every American ought to take a few seconds to visit an ingenious new website created by Appalachian Voices, that allows one to tour the obliterated landscapes of Appalachia.
And it's not just Arch Coal, Massey Coal and their corporate toadies in electoral politics who are culpable for the disaster. The amazing new website allows you to enter your zip code to learn how you're personally connected to the great crime of mountaintop removal. Using this website Americans from Maine to California can see these mountains and the communities that were sacrificed to power their home. The tool uses Google Maps and Google Earth as interfaces to a large database of power plants and mountaintop removal coal mines.
A November 15, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal highlighted the site as one of the most innovative, cutting-edge uses of these powerful tools. The site puts a human face on the issue by highlighting the stories of families living in the shadows of these mines.
Each day the coal barons from companies like Massey and Arch detonate 2500 tons of explosives -- the power of a Hiroshima bomb every week -- to blow away Appalachian mountain tops to reach the coal seams beneath. Colossal machines then plow the rock and debris into the adjacent river valleys and hollows, destroying forests and burying free-flowing mountain streams, flattening North America's most ancient mountain range.
According to the EPA, 1,200 miles of American rivers and streams have already been permanently interred and 470 of Appalachia's largest mountains have simply disappeared, leaving behind giant pits and barren moonscapes, some as large as Manhattan Island. I recently flew over one 18 square-mile pit -- Hobet 21 -- which you can now tour on Google Earth!
We are literally cutting down the historic landscapes where Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett roamed and that are so much the source of American's values, character and culture.
Mountaintop mining poisons water supplies, pollutes the air and destroys hundreds of miles of North America's most ancient and biologically diverse hardwood forests and permanently impoverishes local communities. Millions of dollars earned from this criminal enterprise land in the coffers of the politicians now jockeying to lead our country to a "new energy future." Mountaintop removal is one of the biggest environmental holocausts in human history. Wherever you live, you have a connection -- and a responsibility.
The effort to end mountaintop removal has been gaining steam over the past year. As of today, the leading Congressional plan to ban the practice has 118 co-sponsors-dozens more than last year, with over a year to go in the 110th Congress.
From Appalachia to the Western states of Wyoming and Utah, the strip miners have permanently destroyed some of the most beautiful country on Earth, leaving behind a legacy of misery and poverty. For too long Arch, Massey and their tame politicians have hidden their crimes in the remote poverty-stricken communities of Appalachia.
This new website finally exposes this national disgrace for every American to witness. Our aspiring presidential leaders at the very least should be asked to explain their position on this shameful and corrupt enterprise.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, and author of "Crimes Against Nature."
End Mountain Top Removal: http://www.ilovemountains.org/myconnection/#map%3E
How Much Money Do You Give to the Coal Industry?
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., HuffingtonPost.com. Posted November 30, 2007
Where does your energy come from and how dirty is it? A new website allows you to see your link to coal.
The GOP CNN/YouTube debate this week and the Democratic presidential debate on November 15 were jointly sponsored by a coal industry coalition comprised of mining, railroad and utility interests.
Their high profile civic involvement is designed to further confuse American voters about coal's true cost to our society. Many of the Republican candidates have endorsed massive new subsidies for King Coal and dutifully parrot industry talking points including earnest promises of cheap "clean coal." Given that climate change is the most urgent threat to our collective survival, it is shocking that no debate moderator has pressed the candidates to clearly state their positions on "clean coal."
In fact, there is no such thing as "clean coal." And coal is only "cheap" if one ignores its calamitous externalized costs. In addition to global warming, these include dead forests and sterilized lakes from acid rain, poisoned fisheries in 49 states and children with damaged brains and crippled health from mercury emissions, millions of asthma attacks and lost work days and thousands dead annually from ozone and particulates.
Coal's most catastrophic and permanent impacts are from mountaintop removal mining. If the American people could see what I have seen from the air and ground during my many trips to the coalfields of Kentucky and West Virginia: leveled mountains, devastated communities, wrecked economies and ruined lives, there would be a revolution in this country.
Well now you can visit coal country without ever having to leave your home. Every presidential candidate and every American ought to take a few seconds to visit an ingenious new website created by Appalachian Voices, that allows one to tour the obliterated landscapes of Appalachia.
And it's not just Arch Coal, Massey Coal and their corporate toadies in electoral politics who are culpable for the disaster. The amazing new website allows you to enter your zip code to learn how you're personally connected to the great crime of mountaintop removal. Using this website Americans from Maine to California can see these mountains and the communities that were sacrificed to power their home. The tool uses Google Maps and Google Earth as interfaces to a large database of power plants and mountaintop removal coal mines.
A November 15, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal highlighted the site as one of the most innovative, cutting-edge uses of these powerful tools. The site puts a human face on the issue by highlighting the stories of families living in the shadows of these mines.
Each day the coal barons from companies like Massey and Arch detonate 2500 tons of explosives -- the power of a Hiroshima bomb every week -- to blow away Appalachian mountain tops to reach the coal seams beneath. Colossal machines then plow the rock and debris into the adjacent river valleys and hollows, destroying forests and burying free-flowing mountain streams, flattening North America's most ancient mountain range.
According to the EPA, 1,200 miles of American rivers and streams have already been permanently interred and 470 of Appalachia's largest mountains have simply disappeared, leaving behind giant pits and barren moonscapes, some as large as Manhattan Island. I recently flew over one 18 square-mile pit -- Hobet 21 -- which you can now tour on Google Earth!
We are literally cutting down the historic landscapes where Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett roamed and that are so much the source of American's values, character and culture.
Mountaintop mining poisons water supplies, pollutes the air and destroys hundreds of miles of North America's most ancient and biologically diverse hardwood forests and permanently impoverishes local communities. Millions of dollars earned from this criminal enterprise land in the coffers of the politicians now jockeying to lead our country to a "new energy future." Mountaintop removal is one of the biggest environmental holocausts in human history. Wherever you live, you have a connection -- and a responsibility.
The effort to end mountaintop removal has been gaining steam over the past year. As of today, the leading Congressional plan to ban the practice has 118 co-sponsors-dozens more than last year, with over a year to go in the 110th Congress.
From Appalachia to the Western states of Wyoming and Utah, the strip miners have permanently destroyed some of the most beautiful country on Earth, leaving behind a legacy of misery and poverty. For too long Arch, Massey and their tame politicians have hidden their crimes in the remote poverty-stricken communities of Appalachia.
This new website finally exposes this national disgrace for every American to witness. Our aspiring presidential leaders at the very least should be asked to explain their position on this shameful and corrupt enterprise.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, and author of "Crimes Against Nature."
End Mountain Top Removal: http://www.ilovemountains.org/myconnection/#map%3E
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Eco Holiday Decorating
From Gaia.com, http://www.gaia.com/article/7188?from=conscious-consumer, here are five holiday eco decorating tips:
5 Holiday Eco Decorating Tips
by Jodi Helmer
Step away from that festive-looking flocked plastic wreath — and start opting for holiday decorations that really are green. You’ll feel even better giving green gifts this year if your present-opening happens amid halls decked in eco-friendly style.
Interior designer Cheryl Terrace says you’re in good company if you’re checking your list twice before buying that petroleum-based fake tree, mass-produced ornaments or energy-draining string of standard holiday lights.
“There’s a huge movement toward respecting the planet during the holidays,” says Terrace, founder of eco-friendly design firm Vital Design. “The focus is shifting from mass consumerism to creating a holiday that’s about gratitude, especially for the environment.”
That think-green buzz is making it easier than ever to choose eco-friendly holiday decorations. Here are a few tips to help you surround yourself with green this holiday.
1. Gotta get a tree? Keep it green …
Love that fresh pine scent making your house feel all wintry? Go ahead — a live tree is actually a relatively eco-friendly choice, so long as you’re conscious about where it goes once the holidays are over.
According to the National Christmas Tree Association, nearly all cut holiday trees are grown on tree farms — meaning their stock is replenished yearly and forests aren’t hurt by choosing a cut tree. And spent trees can be ground into woodchips and used to mulch your garden or prevent erosion at a local watershed. Check with your city government or go to earth911.org and enter your ZIP code to find out where to have your tree recycled.
Fake trees are a different story, requiring a significant amount of energy and petroleum-based materials to manufacture. Plus, artificial trees are often manufactured overseas and shipped thousands of miles before they reach our living rooms.
“Living trees are another option,” Terrace points out. “They can be kept in a pot during the holidays and planted in the garden afterward.” Local nurseries stock numerous varieties of evergreens. In the Northwest, the Original Living Christmas Tree Company rents live Christmas trees that are returned and replanted after the holidays.
Also check out green alternatives to eco-uncouth tree ornaments. Gaiam has a great selection of ornaments, garlands and other décor made with earth-friendly fabrics and fair trade materials.
2. String a smarter light string
Instead of buying more standard holiday lights to replace bad strings (or to try and keep outdoing your neighbor’s massive display), opt for energy-efficient light strings. When they’re made using light-emitting diode bulbs, or LEDs, they’re 90 percent more efficient than traditional holiday lights. LEDs also last longer – up to 10,000 hours compared with 5,000 hours for incandescent bulbs.
Look for LED holidays lights where regular lights are sold, or order from Gaiam.com and others including www.environmentallights.com and www.christmas-treasures.com.
Or save even more energy with solar-powered holiday lights, and set up a light display wherever you please without a tangle of extension cords all over your lawn. Gaiam.com offers strands of LED lights with solar panels — no outlet required. You can even get icicle lights and lighted wreaths powered by totally cute little solar panels. You’ll pay a little more up front for solar versions of holiday lights, but the savings on your power bill over the holiday season make up for that pretty quickly.
3. Keep practicing your R’s
You’ve heard it a million times, but Terrace says, “Those three little words ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ can have a huge impact during the holidays.”
Keep it simple: Choose décor items that come with minimal packaging to reduce waste. Wrap gifts in recycled paper or other eco-friendly gift wrap alternatives. And of course, reuse your decorations year after year. Tired of that same old garland? Throw a holiday-décor-swapping party with neighbors, family and friends.
Need a few ornaments to update your tree or to replace broken ornaments? Longing for cheery holiday dinnerware to entertain guests? Check out secondhand shops like Goodwill and the Salvation Army, where you’ll find aisles of gently used holiday décor. Buying secondhand saves cast-offs from the landfill, and you can use the savings to make a donation to a good cause.
Fair trade holiday décor is another way to give back to the world around you. Check out Gaiam’s collection, including beaded ornaments from India and knit stockings from Bosnia. Fair trade programs are designed to ensure that artisans receive a fair wage and to help create sustainable livelihoods.
“Every dollar you spend has power,” Terrace says. “You get to decide how to use that power. Choosing green and fair trade products speaks volumes.”
4. Send a tree-friendly card
Card trees weighed down with dozens of cards might be a yearly fixture in your holiday decorating scheme. But let’s face it, they’re not very green. Around 2.5 billion holiday cards are sold in the United States every year — enough to circle the planet 10 times! Sending digital holiday cards is a simple way to reduce your volume of holiday waste. Web sites like www.hallmark.com and www.photobucket.com offer holiday e-cards that can be personalized and sent to family and friends.
If you prefer the traditional snailmail holiday card route, choose cards made from recycled or sustainably produced paper, and soy-based ink. Try GirlyWhirly, Gaiam.com and Peaceful Valley Greetings, which offers several grow-a-note cards – cards that are embedded with wildflower seeds and can be planted after the holidays.
5. Borrow from nature
Think of how your great-grandma (or great-great grandma) decorated during the holidays — with natural evergreen boughs cut from the tree, handmade ornaments, and bowls of fruit, nuts or pine cones. With a backdrop of seasonal plants like poinsettias and cyclamen, they create a warm, welcoming feel — and they aren’t made of petroleum and chemicals.
Or opt for holiday decorations inspired by nature and made by hand, like fair trade and artisan-crafted ornaments and decorations from Gaiam’s One World fair trade and artisan-crafted collection — made by cooperatives in Nicaragua, Indonesia and other places around the world.
Check your decorating list twice this year, and put the planet front and center during the holidays.
Article Sourced from http://community.gaiam.com.
5 Holiday Eco Decorating Tips
by Jodi Helmer
Step away from that festive-looking flocked plastic wreath — and start opting for holiday decorations that really are green. You’ll feel even better giving green gifts this year if your present-opening happens amid halls decked in eco-friendly style.
Interior designer Cheryl Terrace says you’re in good company if you’re checking your list twice before buying that petroleum-based fake tree, mass-produced ornaments or energy-draining string of standard holiday lights.
“There’s a huge movement toward respecting the planet during the holidays,” says Terrace, founder of eco-friendly design firm Vital Design. “The focus is shifting from mass consumerism to creating a holiday that’s about gratitude, especially for the environment.”
That think-green buzz is making it easier than ever to choose eco-friendly holiday decorations. Here are a few tips to help you surround yourself with green this holiday.
1. Gotta get a tree? Keep it green …
Love that fresh pine scent making your house feel all wintry? Go ahead — a live tree is actually a relatively eco-friendly choice, so long as you’re conscious about where it goes once the holidays are over.
According to the National Christmas Tree Association, nearly all cut holiday trees are grown on tree farms — meaning their stock is replenished yearly and forests aren’t hurt by choosing a cut tree. And spent trees can be ground into woodchips and used to mulch your garden or prevent erosion at a local watershed. Check with your city government or go to earth911.org and enter your ZIP code to find out where to have your tree recycled.
Fake trees are a different story, requiring a significant amount of energy and petroleum-based materials to manufacture. Plus, artificial trees are often manufactured overseas and shipped thousands of miles before they reach our living rooms.
“Living trees are another option,” Terrace points out. “They can be kept in a pot during the holidays and planted in the garden afterward.” Local nurseries stock numerous varieties of evergreens. In the Northwest, the Original Living Christmas Tree Company rents live Christmas trees that are returned and replanted after the holidays.
Also check out green alternatives to eco-uncouth tree ornaments. Gaiam has a great selection of ornaments, garlands and other décor made with earth-friendly fabrics and fair trade materials.
2. String a smarter light string
Instead of buying more standard holiday lights to replace bad strings (or to try and keep outdoing your neighbor’s massive display), opt for energy-efficient light strings. When they’re made using light-emitting diode bulbs, or LEDs, they’re 90 percent more efficient than traditional holiday lights. LEDs also last longer – up to 10,000 hours compared with 5,000 hours for incandescent bulbs.
Look for LED holidays lights where regular lights are sold, or order from Gaiam.com and others including www.environmentallights.com and www.christmas-treasures.com.
Or save even more energy with solar-powered holiday lights, and set up a light display wherever you please without a tangle of extension cords all over your lawn. Gaiam.com offers strands of LED lights with solar panels — no outlet required. You can even get icicle lights and lighted wreaths powered by totally cute little solar panels. You’ll pay a little more up front for solar versions of holiday lights, but the savings on your power bill over the holiday season make up for that pretty quickly.
3. Keep practicing your R’s
You’ve heard it a million times, but Terrace says, “Those three little words ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ can have a huge impact during the holidays.”
Keep it simple: Choose décor items that come with minimal packaging to reduce waste. Wrap gifts in recycled paper or other eco-friendly gift wrap alternatives. And of course, reuse your decorations year after year. Tired of that same old garland? Throw a holiday-décor-swapping party with neighbors, family and friends.
Need a few ornaments to update your tree or to replace broken ornaments? Longing for cheery holiday dinnerware to entertain guests? Check out secondhand shops like Goodwill and the Salvation Army, where you’ll find aisles of gently used holiday décor. Buying secondhand saves cast-offs from the landfill, and you can use the savings to make a donation to a good cause.
Fair trade holiday décor is another way to give back to the world around you. Check out Gaiam’s collection, including beaded ornaments from India and knit stockings from Bosnia. Fair trade programs are designed to ensure that artisans receive a fair wage and to help create sustainable livelihoods.
“Every dollar you spend has power,” Terrace says. “You get to decide how to use that power. Choosing green and fair trade products speaks volumes.”
4. Send a tree-friendly card
Card trees weighed down with dozens of cards might be a yearly fixture in your holiday decorating scheme. But let’s face it, they’re not very green. Around 2.5 billion holiday cards are sold in the United States every year — enough to circle the planet 10 times! Sending digital holiday cards is a simple way to reduce your volume of holiday waste. Web sites like www.hallmark.com and www.photobucket.com offer holiday e-cards that can be personalized and sent to family and friends.
If you prefer the traditional snailmail holiday card route, choose cards made from recycled or sustainably produced paper, and soy-based ink. Try GirlyWhirly, Gaiam.com and Peaceful Valley Greetings, which offers several grow-a-note cards – cards that are embedded with wildflower seeds and can be planted after the holidays.
5. Borrow from nature
Think of how your great-grandma (or great-great grandma) decorated during the holidays — with natural evergreen boughs cut from the tree, handmade ornaments, and bowls of fruit, nuts or pine cones. With a backdrop of seasonal plants like poinsettias and cyclamen, they create a warm, welcoming feel — and they aren’t made of petroleum and chemicals.
Or opt for holiday decorations inspired by nature and made by hand, like fair trade and artisan-crafted ornaments and decorations from Gaiam’s One World fair trade and artisan-crafted collection — made by cooperatives in Nicaragua, Indonesia and other places around the world.
Check your decorating list twice this year, and put the planet front and center during the holidays.
Article Sourced from http://community.gaiam.com.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Communities in the Arctic Threatened by Rising Waters
Some communities are being threatened by the rising waters, because ice that has melted is no longer there to protect the land from the Arctic waves. From the Saturday, November 24, 2007, Ideas section of the Toronto Star, page ID5:
THREATENED
Five Arctic communities threatened by rising waters:
* Tuktoyaktuk
An Inuvialuit town of about 1,000 on the western Arctic coast of the Northwest Territories, it will be a future hub of oil and gas activity.
* Aklavik
A Gwich'in community of 740 located on the Peel channel of the Mackenzie Rover Delta that has no summer road access. Traditionally, the Gwich'in and Inuvialuit gathered here to trade with the Hudson's Bay Company post established in 1912.
* Shingle Point
Also known as Tapaq, the community sits on a sand split east of Tuktoyaktuk on the Yukon coast. It was once a thriving community before a series of epidemics forced the people to move elsewhere. It is now used as a seasonabl hunting camp.
* Kittigaaryuit
Situated at the mouth of the East Channel of the Mackenzie River, Kitigaaryuit (also spelled Kittigazuit) was the largest permanent Inuvialuit settlement before contact with Europeans. It is now a national historic site.
* Herschel Island
Also called Qukiqtaryuk, meaning "It is island," the island's Pauline Cove was a historic whaling port from 190 to 1910. It is in the Yukon just off the north coast in the Beaufort Sea near the mouth of the Firth River.
THREATENED
Five Arctic communities threatened by rising waters:
* Tuktoyaktuk
An Inuvialuit town of about 1,000 on the western Arctic coast of the Northwest Territories, it will be a future hub of oil and gas activity.
* Aklavik
A Gwich'in community of 740 located on the Peel channel of the Mackenzie Rover Delta that has no summer road access. Traditionally, the Gwich'in and Inuvialuit gathered here to trade with the Hudson's Bay Company post established in 1912.
* Shingle Point
Also known as Tapaq, the community sits on a sand split east of Tuktoyaktuk on the Yukon coast. It was once a thriving community before a series of epidemics forced the people to move elsewhere. It is now used as a seasonabl hunting camp.
* Kittigaaryuit
Situated at the mouth of the East Channel of the Mackenzie River, Kitigaaryuit (also spelled Kittigazuit) was the largest permanent Inuvialuit settlement before contact with Europeans. It is now a national historic site.
* Herschel Island
Also called Qukiqtaryuk, meaning "It is island," the island's Pauline Cove was a historic whaling port from 190 to 1910. It is in the Yukon just off the north coast in the Beaufort Sea near the mouth of the Firth River.
Save the Earth - Reduce Fossil Fuel Usage
From the Saturday, November 24, 2007, Ideas section of the Toronto Star, here is an article about global warming, the warning the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has issued and thoughts about what that would mean and what we need to do:
Global Warming
If you really love the planet, hate the oil
Cameron Smith
The latest report of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is explicit: If temperatures rise to the range of 1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius above what they were in 1999, up to nearly a third of all species on Earth will likely face in increased risk of extinction.
Think of it. One-third of all the different kinds of birds - likely gone. A third of all the various butterflies and wildflowers - gone. Red oak trees might survive, but maybe not the beach; birch trees but not ash; sugar maples but not the black spruce of the Boreal Forest - which would devastate the Boreal.
To prevent his happening, the IPCC says it will be necessary to stabilize carbon dioxide emissions witihin the next seven years, and then drive them down 59 to 85 per cent by 2050.
These are staggeringly ambitious targets, but as Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC says, "What we do in the next two or three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."
Despite setting its sight high, the report stresses repeatedly that the targets can be met. And they can be met at minuscule cost.
By 2050, global domestic product would be altered in the range of a 1 per cent gain to a 5.5 per cent decrease. "This corresponds to slowing average ... global GDP growth by less than 0.12 per cent (a year)," the report says.
It notes that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is "primarily due to fossil fuel use, with land-use changes providing another significant but smaller contribution."
And it highlights the scope of the problem the world faces. By 2030, it says, more than $20 trillion will be invested in energy plants that will have long lifetimes.
To ensure that these plants use low-carbon technologies - which means finding alternatives to coal and oil-fired stations - will require a large shift in investment patterns if energy-related CO2 emisisons are to return to 2005 levels by 2030.
However, on a calming note, the report adds, "The net additional investment required ranges from negligible to 5 to 10 per cent."
But it warns that part of the shift in investment will accompany "reduction of fossil fuel subsidies (and imposition of) taxes or carbon charges on fossil fuels." And "resistance by vested interests may make (this) difficult to implement."
The issue, then, is not whether global warming can be controlled. It is whether politicians will stand up to the oil and coal industries - the vested interests.
In the event politicians don't stand up to them, the report issues a stark warning:
If CO3 emissions are not cut back, it's unlikely that nature or civilization as we know it will have the ability to adapt. Against this background, there are a couple things I want to focus on in columns to come, because they bear on the IPCC report.
One is a new area of science that suggests plants have the ability to store knowledge and interpret information - and this is quite different from simply reacting in a blind, mechanistic way, according to what has been encoded in their DNA.
The concern is that global warming is adding to a number of other stresses, and together they may overwhelm this interpretative capacity, leading plants to act in ways injurious to themselves and to the insects that depend on them.
The second is a remarkable pilot project near Tillsonburg in south-western Ontario, where a farmer is being paid not to farm sections of his land that are key to improving local habitat.
It's an example of better land management, which the IPCC says will be invaluable in reducing global warming and it should be adopted by governments in Canada.
Cameron Smith can be reached at camsmith@kingston.net
Global Warming
If you really love the planet, hate the oil
Cameron Smith
The latest report of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is explicit: If temperatures rise to the range of 1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius above what they were in 1999, up to nearly a third of all species on Earth will likely face in increased risk of extinction.
Think of it. One-third of all the different kinds of birds - likely gone. A third of all the various butterflies and wildflowers - gone. Red oak trees might survive, but maybe not the beach; birch trees but not ash; sugar maples but not the black spruce of the Boreal Forest - which would devastate the Boreal.
To prevent his happening, the IPCC says it will be necessary to stabilize carbon dioxide emissions witihin the next seven years, and then drive them down 59 to 85 per cent by 2050.
These are staggeringly ambitious targets, but as Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC says, "What we do in the next two or three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."
Despite setting its sight high, the report stresses repeatedly that the targets can be met. And they can be met at minuscule cost.
By 2050, global domestic product would be altered in the range of a 1 per cent gain to a 5.5 per cent decrease. "This corresponds to slowing average ... global GDP growth by less than 0.12 per cent (a year)," the report says.
It notes that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is "primarily due to fossil fuel use, with land-use changes providing another significant but smaller contribution."
And it highlights the scope of the problem the world faces. By 2030, it says, more than $20 trillion will be invested in energy plants that will have long lifetimes.
To ensure that these plants use low-carbon technologies - which means finding alternatives to coal and oil-fired stations - will require a large shift in investment patterns if energy-related CO2 emisisons are to return to 2005 levels by 2030.
However, on a calming note, the report adds, "The net additional investment required ranges from negligible to 5 to 10 per cent."
But it warns that part of the shift in investment will accompany "reduction of fossil fuel subsidies (and imposition of) taxes or carbon charges on fossil fuels." And "resistance by vested interests may make (this) difficult to implement."
The issue, then, is not whether global warming can be controlled. It is whether politicians will stand up to the oil and coal industries - the vested interests.
In the event politicians don't stand up to them, the report issues a stark warning:
If CO3 emissions are not cut back, it's unlikely that nature or civilization as we know it will have the ability to adapt. Against this background, there are a couple things I want to focus on in columns to come, because they bear on the IPCC report.
One is a new area of science that suggests plants have the ability to store knowledge and interpret information - and this is quite different from simply reacting in a blind, mechanistic way, according to what has been encoded in their DNA.
The concern is that global warming is adding to a number of other stresses, and together they may overwhelm this interpretative capacity, leading plants to act in ways injurious to themselves and to the insects that depend on them.
The second is a remarkable pilot project near Tillsonburg in south-western Ontario, where a farmer is being paid not to farm sections of his land that are key to improving local habitat.
It's an example of better land management, which the IPCC says will be invaluable in reducing global warming and it should be adopted by governments in Canada.
Cameron Smith can be reached at camsmith@kingston.net
Monday, December 3, 2007
Green Cars at L.A. Auto Show
From the Saturday, November 17, 2007, page W41, Wheels section of the Toronto Star, an article about the L.A. Auto show and some of the green cars:
L.A. AUTO SHOW'S GREEN REVOLUTION
California embraces its enviro standards with slew of hybrids, fuel cell making debuts
John Leblanc
Special to the Star
Los Angeles - In the hierarchy of environmentally friendly motorized transportation, the fuel cell-powered vehicle, complete with a near-silent driving experience and the promise of zero emissions, is the panacea for the world's polluting cars, says experts.
Unfortunately, the high cost of production, poor hardwire packaging, and the lack of fuelling infrastructure means hydrogen fuel cell vehicles we've seen so far are of the experimental variety.
But those production excuses end next summer. That's when Honda's FCX Clarify hydrogen fuel cell sedan will be available to 1,000 California residents for a three-year lease at $600 a month.
Based on Honda's 2005 FCX concept, the mid-size sedan will return an EPA-certified 68 m.p.g., pass U.S. federal safety standards, start in -30C, have a 432 kilometre driving range between fill-ups, and can top out at 160 km/h, the Japanese automaker says. The FCX Clarity will also feature the first production application of lithium-ion battery technology.
In the long term, Honda also announced plans for its (still experimental) home filling station that converts natural gas into hydrogen and creates heat and electricity for your home.
Volkswagen showed up in the Golden State with its Space Up! Blue Plug-in Hybrid, with design elements reminiscent of the 1960s Microbus, though you won't be able to run down to your local dealer and get one next summer.
The third in a series of recent micro-car concepts, this version debuts VW's high-temperature fuel cell technology which claims to be lighter, more compact, and cheaper than lower-temperature systems, such as Honda's.
Contrary to Honda's progress, VW is pegging 2020 as a potential production date.
In the shorter term, some manufacturers realize that car buyers want greener solutions for large vehicles. General Motors, Chrysler and Porsche are all debuting guilt-free gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles not usually associated with being environmentally friendly.
GM claims its Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid, on sale next fall, will be the industry's most fuel-efficient full-size pickup truck with a 40 per cent increase in city fuel economy and an overall 25 per cent increase when compared with a gas-only model. The world's first hybrid pickup can also tow up to 2,767 kg.
With "Hybrid" boldly emblazoned on its flanks, the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid also makes its debut. It uses the same two-mode hybrid system as the Silverado (and the previously announced Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon Hybrids), consisting of a 300-volt battery pack with two motors matched to the standard 6.0 L V8 and electrically variable transmission. It's an impressive system - the Tahoe was recognized here for it by being named Green Car of the Year.
Porsche claims its pre-production Cayenne Hybrid can go where no other hybrid SUV can: deep into the off-road and fording rivers up to 50 cm deep.
With a reported 20 per cent fuel consumption reduction, the Cayenne's V6-based system will also show up in future Volkswagen and Audi products, including Porsche's forthcoming four-door Panamera sports sedan.
To back up claims of a 2,721 kg towing capacity, Chrysler hitched a water ski boat and a horse trailer respectively, to its Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango Hybrids that rolled out here and arrive in showrooms mid-2008.
The Aspen and Durango hybrids share the same two-mode system (developed jointly by Mercedes-Benz and BMW) with the GM vehicles, though Chrysler has added its multi-displacement system to its 5.7 L V8 to further increase fuel efficiency by shutting down four of the eight cylinders under light loads. Chrysler claims its hybrids reduce fuel consumption by 25 per cent in the city and 40 per cent overall.
Amidst these arguable oxymornic "green SUVs," Toyota, the company that brought the hybrid to the masses, rolled out a full-size SUV with no pretensions of helping the planet.
Toyota's eight passenger Sequoia SUV, heavily based on its full-size Tundra pickup, has a ride and handling that benefit from a new independent rear suspension. The standard engine is a 5.7 L V8 that makes 381 hp mated to a six-speed automatic transmission.
For those who don't need to carry eight passengers or to tow a cigarette boat daily, the L.A. Auto Show does have other new offerings.
Looking like a Korean Mustang, Hyundai is displacing a prototype of its rear-drive Genesis Coupe, on sale in production form in spring 2009.
Based on the impending Genesis mid-size sedan, preliminary specs indicate a 300 hp 3.8L V6 in the 2+2 coupe. To be sold as "the least expensive" 300 hp 3.8L V6 in the market, the sporty Hyundai will have to be cheaper than the current $33,999 Ford Mustang GT V8.
Claiming a "super evolution" of its avant-garde 2004 original, Nissan Murano five-passenger crossover.
The interior has been bumped up to near Infiniti levels of refinement, including push-button start, wood and aluminum trim, optional intelligent key, Bose Audio, DVD navigation 9.3-gig hard drive and iPod connectivity, Nissan's 265-hp 3.5L V6, mated to a CVT, is the sole drivetrain.
Despite the rumours, Audi did not show up with a production version of its Q5 luxury compact crossover. Instead, it continues to tease with a two-door, four-seat Cabriolet version of the previously seen Cross Coupe concept, a thinly disguised Q8.
More importantly, the Audi concept's 240 hp 3.0 L turbo diesel engine (with a reported 7.3 L/100 km fuel consumption) is a bellwether for a production powerplant.
With Cadillac's new CTS sedan squarely in its sights, Lincoln introduced its MKS mid-size sedan.
Based on the Volvo S80, the Lincoln's self-proclaimed "new flagship" initially will come with 370 hp 3.7 L V6 and either front- or all-wheel drive. A year later, a higher performance six will be available, which the company says will make the MKS "the most powerful and fuel-efficient all-wheel drive luxury sedan in the market."
Although Canadian pricing will be set closer to its launch next summer, U.S. pricing is aggressive at $37,985, about $4,0000 less than a comparable Cadillac.
L.A. AUTO SHOW'S GREEN REVOLUTION
California embraces its enviro standards with slew of hybrids, fuel cell making debuts
John Leblanc
Special to the Star
Los Angeles - In the hierarchy of environmentally friendly motorized transportation, the fuel cell-powered vehicle, complete with a near-silent driving experience and the promise of zero emissions, is the panacea for the world's polluting cars, says experts.
Unfortunately, the high cost of production, poor hardwire packaging, and the lack of fuelling infrastructure means hydrogen fuel cell vehicles we've seen so far are of the experimental variety.
But those production excuses end next summer. That's when Honda's FCX Clarify hydrogen fuel cell sedan will be available to 1,000 California residents for a three-year lease at $600 a month.
Based on Honda's 2005 FCX concept, the mid-size sedan will return an EPA-certified 68 m.p.g., pass U.S. federal safety standards, start in -30C, have a 432 kilometre driving range between fill-ups, and can top out at 160 km/h, the Japanese automaker says. The FCX Clarity will also feature the first production application of lithium-ion battery technology.
In the long term, Honda also announced plans for its (still experimental) home filling station that converts natural gas into hydrogen and creates heat and electricity for your home.
Volkswagen showed up in the Golden State with its Space Up! Blue Plug-in Hybrid, with design elements reminiscent of the 1960s Microbus, though you won't be able to run down to your local dealer and get one next summer.
The third in a series of recent micro-car concepts, this version debuts VW's high-temperature fuel cell technology which claims to be lighter, more compact, and cheaper than lower-temperature systems, such as Honda's.
Contrary to Honda's progress, VW is pegging 2020 as a potential production date.
In the shorter term, some manufacturers realize that car buyers want greener solutions for large vehicles. General Motors, Chrysler and Porsche are all debuting guilt-free gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles not usually associated with being environmentally friendly.
GM claims its Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid, on sale next fall, will be the industry's most fuel-efficient full-size pickup truck with a 40 per cent increase in city fuel economy and an overall 25 per cent increase when compared with a gas-only model. The world's first hybrid pickup can also tow up to 2,767 kg.
With "Hybrid" boldly emblazoned on its flanks, the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid also makes its debut. It uses the same two-mode hybrid system as the Silverado (and the previously announced Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon Hybrids), consisting of a 300-volt battery pack with two motors matched to the standard 6.0 L V8 and electrically variable transmission. It's an impressive system - the Tahoe was recognized here for it by being named Green Car of the Year.
Porsche claims its pre-production Cayenne Hybrid can go where no other hybrid SUV can: deep into the off-road and fording rivers up to 50 cm deep.
With a reported 20 per cent fuel consumption reduction, the Cayenne's V6-based system will also show up in future Volkswagen and Audi products, including Porsche's forthcoming four-door Panamera sports sedan.
To back up claims of a 2,721 kg towing capacity, Chrysler hitched a water ski boat and a horse trailer respectively, to its Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango Hybrids that rolled out here and arrive in showrooms mid-2008.
The Aspen and Durango hybrids share the same two-mode system (developed jointly by Mercedes-Benz and BMW) with the GM vehicles, though Chrysler has added its multi-displacement system to its 5.7 L V8 to further increase fuel efficiency by shutting down four of the eight cylinders under light loads. Chrysler claims its hybrids reduce fuel consumption by 25 per cent in the city and 40 per cent overall.
Amidst these arguable oxymornic "green SUVs," Toyota, the company that brought the hybrid to the masses, rolled out a full-size SUV with no pretensions of helping the planet.
Toyota's eight passenger Sequoia SUV, heavily based on its full-size Tundra pickup, has a ride and handling that benefit from a new independent rear suspension. The standard engine is a 5.7 L V8 that makes 381 hp mated to a six-speed automatic transmission.
For those who don't need to carry eight passengers or to tow a cigarette boat daily, the L.A. Auto Show does have other new offerings.
Looking like a Korean Mustang, Hyundai is displacing a prototype of its rear-drive Genesis Coupe, on sale in production form in spring 2009.
Based on the impending Genesis mid-size sedan, preliminary specs indicate a 300 hp 3.8L V6 in the 2+2 coupe. To be sold as "the least expensive" 300 hp 3.8L V6 in the market, the sporty Hyundai will have to be cheaper than the current $33,999 Ford Mustang GT V8.
Claiming a "super evolution" of its avant-garde 2004 original, Nissan Murano five-passenger crossover.
The interior has been bumped up to near Infiniti levels of refinement, including push-button start, wood and aluminum trim, optional intelligent key, Bose Audio, DVD navigation 9.3-gig hard drive and iPod connectivity, Nissan's 265-hp 3.5L V6, mated to a CVT, is the sole drivetrain.
Despite the rumours, Audi did not show up with a production version of its Q5 luxury compact crossover. Instead, it continues to tease with a two-door, four-seat Cabriolet version of the previously seen Cross Coupe concept, a thinly disguised Q8.
More importantly, the Audi concept's 240 hp 3.0 L turbo diesel engine (with a reported 7.3 L/100 km fuel consumption) is a bellwether for a production powerplant.
With Cadillac's new CTS sedan squarely in its sights, Lincoln introduced its MKS mid-size sedan.
Based on the Volvo S80, the Lincoln's self-proclaimed "new flagship" initially will come with 370 hp 3.7 L V6 and either front- or all-wheel drive. A year later, a higher performance six will be available, which the company says will make the MKS "the most powerful and fuel-efficient all-wheel drive luxury sedan in the market."
Although Canadian pricing will be set closer to its launch next summer, U.S. pricing is aggressive at $37,985, about $4,0000 less than a comparable Cadillac.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
UN: Global Warming Impacts Have Started; Act Now
From the Sunday, November 18, 2007, Climate Change, News, Climate section, page A7:
ACT NOW OR SEE 'UNRECOGNIZABLE' EARTH: UN
Top climate scientists say warming impacts have started;
U.S., China urged to take action
Peter Gorrie
Environment Reporter
Without urgent, aggressive steps to stop greenhouse gas emissions, climate change will cause devastating heat waves, floods, starvation and disease, says a report written by the world's top climate scientists and endorsed by 140 nations yesterday.
Environment Minister John Baird immediately welcomed the document, from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "Canada, like the rest of the world, needs to take immediate action," he said in a written statement.
But critics said the minister and the rest of the Conservative government still pay lip service to the problem while promoting a plan that would make it worse.
"The government is acting to protect industry and its shareholders instead of the planet and future generations," said John Bennett, of Ottawa-based ClimateforChange.
Impacts have already begun, declares a 23-page summary of thousands of pages of scientific evidence.
Without action, human activity could lead to "abrupt and irreversible changes" that make Earth unrecognizable.
As early as 2020, 75 million to 250 million people in Africa will suffer water shortages, while residents of Asia's megacities will be at great risk of river and coastal flooding.
The new report is the fourth and final statement this year from the panel - the roughly 2,000 scientists who assess research on the rapid increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.
It draws conclusions from the previous three documents and sets the stage for next month's UN conference in Bali, Indonesia, where governments are supposed to resolve how to set targets for emission cuts after 2012, when the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol ends.
Climate change imperils "the ost precious treasures of our planet," UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said in Valencia, Spain, where in five days of often-tense negotiations, governments haggled over the summary's wording.
Ban urged the Unied States and China - the two biggest greenhouse gas sources - to do more.
Panel reports, issued every five years for the past two decades, tend to be conservative.
This one, though, is stark and urgent.
"If there's no action before 2012, that's too late," said Rajendra Pachauri, a scientists and economist who heads the IPCC.
"What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."
Yvo de Boer, the UN's top climate change official, said what's new is the clarify of the scientific message, adding that, while the report isn't binding, "The politicians have no excuse not to act."
"The timing of this report couldn't be better," Baird said in his statement.
"Canada has been a leader in bringing the world together ... and we will continue that work in Bali."
But critics said his plan - which rejects absolute emission caps - would let Canada's greenhouse emissions grow with the economy.
The panel says emissions must fall at least 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 to prevent catastrophic impacts, Canada's target is a 20 per cent cut below 2006 levels by 2020 - which if achieved would still leave us slightly above our 1990 total.
But many say the Conservatives' proposals aren't capable of hitting even that weak target.
"The government is not acting on the science," said Matthew Bramley, of the Pembina Institute.
"They're trumpeting bogus targets as if they're meaningful," said gets as if they're meaningful," said Green Party Leader Elizabeth May.
"I'd believe John Baird if he came out with a plan that includes things like a carbon tax and a moratorium on growth in (Alberta's) tar sands."
With files from wire services
ACT NOW OR SEE 'UNRECOGNIZABLE' EARTH: UN
Top climate scientists say warming impacts have started;
U.S., China urged to take action
Peter Gorrie
Environment Reporter
Without urgent, aggressive steps to stop greenhouse gas emissions, climate change will cause devastating heat waves, floods, starvation and disease, says a report written by the world's top climate scientists and endorsed by 140 nations yesterday.
Environment Minister John Baird immediately welcomed the document, from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "Canada, like the rest of the world, needs to take immediate action," he said in a written statement.
But critics said the minister and the rest of the Conservative government still pay lip service to the problem while promoting a plan that would make it worse.
"The government is acting to protect industry and its shareholders instead of the planet and future generations," said John Bennett, of Ottawa-based ClimateforChange.
Impacts have already begun, declares a 23-page summary of thousands of pages of scientific evidence.
Without action, human activity could lead to "abrupt and irreversible changes" that make Earth unrecognizable.
As early as 2020, 75 million to 250 million people in Africa will suffer water shortages, while residents of Asia's megacities will be at great risk of river and coastal flooding.
The new report is the fourth and final statement this year from the panel - the roughly 2,000 scientists who assess research on the rapid increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere.
It draws conclusions from the previous three documents and sets the stage for next month's UN conference in Bali, Indonesia, where governments are supposed to resolve how to set targets for emission cuts after 2012, when the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol ends.
Climate change imperils "the ost precious treasures of our planet," UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said in Valencia, Spain, where in five days of often-tense negotiations, governments haggled over the summary's wording.
Ban urged the Unied States and China - the two biggest greenhouse gas sources - to do more.
Panel reports, issued every five years for the past two decades, tend to be conservative.
This one, though, is stark and urgent.
"If there's no action before 2012, that's too late," said Rajendra Pachauri, a scientists and economist who heads the IPCC.
"What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."
Yvo de Boer, the UN's top climate change official, said what's new is the clarify of the scientific message, adding that, while the report isn't binding, "The politicians have no excuse not to act."
"The timing of this report couldn't be better," Baird said in his statement.
"Canada has been a leader in bringing the world together ... and we will continue that work in Bali."
But critics said his plan - which rejects absolute emission caps - would let Canada's greenhouse emissions grow with the economy.
The panel says emissions must fall at least 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 to prevent catastrophic impacts, Canada's target is a 20 per cent cut below 2006 levels by 2020 - which if achieved would still leave us slightly above our 1990 total.
But many say the Conservatives' proposals aren't capable of hitting even that weak target.
"The government is not acting on the science," said Matthew Bramley, of the Pembina Institute.
"They're trumpeting bogus targets as if they're meaningful," said gets as if they're meaningful," said Green Party Leader Elizabeth May.
"I'd believe John Baird if he came out with a plan that includes things like a carbon tax and a moratorium on growth in (Alberta's) tar sands."
With files from wire services
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
