Round 2, Match 2! Reducing and Reusing tag team Wildlife Conservation!
Reducing/Reusing
Reducing and Reusing (R/R) are back again and ready for action!
Green Pride (16/20)
This one's really tricky because it covers such a broad range of different activities. R/R can be as simple as a child turning an old egg carton into a flower planter or it can be as complex as a graduate student preparing a thesis that could reduce the energy use of a hospital by several hundred megawatt-hours per year. For the sake of this blog, I'm going to shoot for something in the middle, and base it off a homeowner that just got a utility bill and seen the results of all the conservation efforts she's put in over the past month.
People are pretty proud to cut back or reuse. I can imagine people bragging at parties how they were able to cut their water bill in half with a new shower head or how they were able to build a golf cart from parts they salvaged from a junk yard. So, yeah. People are pretty proud of R/R.
Green Guilt (4/20)
Sorry humanity. I understand how you are. Everything else just seems to be a bit more important. "Oh, I meant to build that picnic table of wood we salvaged from the neighbor's shed, but I've just been too busy now that I have lung cancer." Right, like lung cancer has ever been a good excuse to get out of doing things.
Reader Comments (0/10)
I couldn't decide either. Maybe next time!
Wildlife Conservation
Wildlife Conservation is probably more important than Wetland Conservation but people don't realize that. Let's do an example. Let's say we didn't figure out that DDT killed baby bald eagles until it was too late. All the bald eagles are now dead. Aw, that's a shame. Most people would be thinking about whether the US should replace it as the official bird or to honor its memory by leaving it. But what they should be worried about is what's going to happen to all those mice that the birds are now not eating. Those mice will be eating all of our crops and carrying diseases that may or may not decimate the human race. I guess eagles are pretty important after all, right?
Green Pride (17/20)
Everyone loves a good story that talks about how some bug or bird or type of tree was saved by some group's conservation efforts. Yay for saving wildlife! These stories make everyone feel proud that their society is on the right track and is doing the right thing for once. And we can all sleep well at night!
(Does anyone else have a weird sense of deja vu? Oh, right, that's what I wrote for yesterday's Pride about Wetland Conservation. But really, most people don't see the difference)
Green Guilt (5/20)
I don't really see any need to change the score for this section either. People won't be guilty if they didn't see a need for it in the first place. Let me tell you a story of the Baiji. They were a species of dolphin that used to live in the fresh water rivers of China. Well, you know how good China is at keeping their rivers clean, right? So, anyway, these dolphins are now extinct as of 2006-ish due to pollution and overfishing and building dams and who knows what else. They probably eat dolphins in China... Gross...
Anyway, my point is that I'm sure you've never heard of the Baiji, even though the first aquatic mammal to go extinct in more than 50 years should be a big news story. But it's not because people like to advertise their successes (bald eagles) and hide their failures (Baiji). And everyone can sleep well at night because they don't want to know these things.
Reader Comments (0/10)
They're worth double now, so make sure you comment!
Time to tally the scores!
Reducing and Reusing: 20
Wildlife Conservation: 22
For some reason, I can't get the colors to change, but Wildlife Conservation did win. Just think, one comment could have tied the whole thing! But now Reducing and Reusing is gone forever, just like the Baiji.
Come on back on Friday and see how (1) Bikes and (5) Trains do against one another.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Tournament Round 2, Match 1 - (1) Recycling vs. (4) Wetland Conservation
Hooray! The beginning of Round 2 of the Tournament! Things are getting pretty serious now! To kick things off, Recycling and Wetland Conservation are going head-to-head in a winner-take-all death match!
Recycling
Well, Recycling, it's great to see you again! Welcome back! Now that we have a little more time, let's learn some more about you. Recycling really started taking off during the 1980's in the US as people started looking for cheaper ways to keep up with the increasing global demand for plastic and aluminum and paper. One of the greatest challenges to Recycling is getting all of the things gathered up and shipped to the processing plant. But as landfill space is becoming harder to come by and Recycling supply chains become more efficient, Recycling is becoming ever more popular.
Green Pride (10/20)
I'm only going to say this once: these ratings are based on the average person's feelings about environmental issues, not my feelings. If I were rating them by my views, all the ideas would have 20 points from Pride and 20 for Guilt and we'd be at a stalemate unless someone (Chris) commented. So yeah, these are what I feel the average person feels.
Recycling, while a big deal 20 or so years ago, has become sort of commonplace these days. Most people see Recycling as some sort of a chore or task, similar to taking out the garbage. Yes, it's probably true that people feel some pride when they hear about how much material they or their city or country or business recycles. But their Recycling practices have become more or less something that people do. This probably also depends on whether the person has curbside Recycling or drop off points, but I don't see it varying too much.
Green Guilt (17/20)
I can't tell you how many times I've called someone out on not Recycling. And when I do that, 9 times out of 10, the person apologizes and feels pretty bad about it. 1 out of 10 people are jerks about it and tell me to mind my own business at which point we usually get into an argument about how he or she is destroying the Earth and how I want my children to not have to wear breathing masks when they go outside to play and how I want my grandchildren not to be born with 5 legs or some crazy mutation like that.
Basically what I'm saying is that almost everyone knows that they should Recycle, but some people don't know how to or are lazy about it.
Reader Comments (2/10)
First 2 pointer!
Wetland Conservation
Wetland Conservation (WC) is back again after taking out LEED Certification in the first round. So let's learn a little bit more about WC. WC is something that's been practiced around the world for centuries but should probably be practiced much more than it is. For example, Lake Superior hit its lowest recorded levels ever in 2007 and the Nile River has been notoriously over developed and diverted in recent years. This isn't just having a harmful effect on wildlife (which I'll mention tomorrow), but people will soon run out of fresh water and that will lead to wars and other horrible things that we all agree we want to avoid.
Green Pride (17/20)
Everyone loves a good story that talks about how some frog or bird or type of grass was saved by some group's conservation efforts. Yay for saving water! These stories make everyone feel proud that their society is on the right track and is doing the right thing for once. And we can all sleep well at night!
Green Guilt (5/20)
Well, we can't really sleep all that well. We're living with our parents and we've got a curfew even though we're almost 30 years old and our girlfriend is pressuring us to get married and move out and build a new home that we can't afford. And land for sale is limited in Florida, so let's just drain off a little bit of the Everglades. Nobody will miss one little house-sized bit of the Everglades, right?
Wrong! Birds and alligators and fish that live in that house-sized bit care. Nobody thinks twice about draining wetlands when it benefits them. And that's how we have gotten into the situation we're in now where we need to be more aggressive with our WC.
Reader Comments (0/10)
They're worth double now, so make sure you comment!
Time to tally the scores!
Recycling: 29
Wetland Conservation: 22
Well, there you have it. Recycling will continue on to the Regional Semi-Finals. Make sure you come back tomorrow to see how (2) Reducing/Reusing fares against (6) Wildlife Conservation.
Recycling
Well, Recycling, it's great to see you again! Welcome back! Now that we have a little more time, let's learn some more about you. Recycling really started taking off during the 1980's in the US as people started looking for cheaper ways to keep up with the increasing global demand for plastic and aluminum and paper. One of the greatest challenges to Recycling is getting all of the things gathered up and shipped to the processing plant. But as landfill space is becoming harder to come by and Recycling supply chains become more efficient, Recycling is becoming ever more popular.
Green Pride (10/20)
I'm only going to say this once: these ratings are based on the average person's feelings about environmental issues, not my feelings. If I were rating them by my views, all the ideas would have 20 points from Pride and 20 for Guilt and we'd be at a stalemate unless someone (Chris) commented. So yeah, these are what I feel the average person feels.
Recycling, while a big deal 20 or so years ago, has become sort of commonplace these days. Most people see Recycling as some sort of a chore or task, similar to taking out the garbage. Yes, it's probably true that people feel some pride when they hear about how much material they or their city or country or business recycles. But their Recycling practices have become more or less something that people do. This probably also depends on whether the person has curbside Recycling or drop off points, but I don't see it varying too much.
Green Guilt (17/20)
I can't tell you how many times I've called someone out on not Recycling. And when I do that, 9 times out of 10, the person apologizes and feels pretty bad about it. 1 out of 10 people are jerks about it and tell me to mind my own business at which point we usually get into an argument about how he or she is destroying the Earth and how I want my children to not have to wear breathing masks when they go outside to play and how I want my grandchildren not to be born with 5 legs or some crazy mutation like that.
Basically what I'm saying is that almost everyone knows that they should Recycle, but some people don't know how to or are lazy about it.
Reader Comments (2/10)
First 2 pointer!
Wetland Conservation
Wetland Conservation (WC) is back again after taking out LEED Certification in the first round. So let's learn a little bit more about WC. WC is something that's been practiced around the world for centuries but should probably be practiced much more than it is. For example, Lake Superior hit its lowest recorded levels ever in 2007 and the Nile River has been notoriously over developed and diverted in recent years. This isn't just having a harmful effect on wildlife (which I'll mention tomorrow), but people will soon run out of fresh water and that will lead to wars and other horrible things that we all agree we want to avoid.
Green Pride (17/20)
Everyone loves a good story that talks about how some frog or bird or type of grass was saved by some group's conservation efforts. Yay for saving water! These stories make everyone feel proud that their society is on the right track and is doing the right thing for once. And we can all sleep well at night!
Green Guilt (5/20)
Well, we can't really sleep all that well. We're living with our parents and we've got a curfew even though we're almost 30 years old and our girlfriend is pressuring us to get married and move out and build a new home that we can't afford. And land for sale is limited in Florida, so let's just drain off a little bit of the Everglades. Nobody will miss one little house-sized bit of the Everglades, right?
Wrong! Birds and alligators and fish that live in that house-sized bit care. Nobody thinks twice about draining wetlands when it benefits them. And that's how we have gotten into the situation we're in now where we need to be more aggressive with our WC.
Reader Comments (0/10)
They're worth double now, so make sure you comment!
Time to tally the scores!
Recycling: 29
Wetland Conservation: 22
Well, there you have it. Recycling will continue on to the Regional Semi-Finals. Make sure you come back tomorrow to see how (2) Reducing/Reusing fares against (6) Wildlife Conservation.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 16 - (2) Canvas Bags vs. (7) Carbon Credits
Much like the United States' 2010 World Cup team's season, the first round of the Tournament is at an end! I'm so excited! (about both the Tournament and the US losing. Now I don't have to pretend I care about soccer anymore!)
Canvas Bags
You've all seen them all over the place. Every grocery store and superstore and every bookstore and hardware store and (probably) every adult media store is carrying these reusable bags that you see by the check out counter. Why are they so popular and what was wrong with plastic grocery bags?
Impact on the Environment (10/15):
It turns out everything was wrong with those plastic grocery bags. They ended up in the oceans where sea turtles thought they were jellyfish and choked on them. The ended up in landfills where they would take 100,000 or more years to break down. They ended up in babies' cribs where babies choked on them. So yeah, they're pretty bag - I mean bad. But let's not err on the side of too many Canvas Bags. Otherwise we'll have too many of those and I can see them taking just as long to break down in landfills. And you can't recycled Canvas Bags as easy as you can plastic ones.
Practicality (8/10):
The least practical part of using reusable bags is just remembering to actually bring them to the store. I always forget, which is why I starting leaving them in my car. But then I brought them into my apartment and I always forget to bring them back out to my car. Stupid memory...
Sustainability (9/10):
With the aid of government-imposed taxes on plastic bags or corporate incentives to use Canvas Bags, I see plastic bags becoming very much obsolete within a decade.
Awesomeness (6/10):
They are sort of awesome. I mean, you get to show off your own distinct style by bringing whatever bag matches your personality. And let's face it, gross brown and pasty white plastic bags don't really match too many outfits.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Carbon Credits
Carbon Credits, while similar to their tournament counterparts, the Carbon Offsets, are somewhat different. Carbon Credits (CC) are for companies or individuals that someday plan on polluting and want to buy the rights to pollute under a system of exchanges where companies that don't plan on polluting much sell their rights to pollute to the less Green company. It's complicated, but it makes sense if you understand it.
Impact on the Environment (7/15):
Ultimately, this system of buying Carbon Credits will regulate how much pollution is created by the industrial and commercial sectors. And it will cut down on the emissions from these companies, which is good. But it will come at the cost of more stringent regulations which will force companies to do business overseas where there are less environmental standards. Good for the US, bad for poor countries in Africa that have to deal with even more pollution.
Practicality (5/10):
This will mostly drive businesses out of developed countries and into less developed ones. While it is good to develop the economies of those countries, it's not good if it comes at the cost of economic collapse for the developed countries.
Sustainability (3/10):
The only way that this will take a hold long term is if all countries adopt them. And with the amount of corruption in some countries, there's no way that regulators will ever put up with standards in some countries.
Awesomeness (1/10):
Snoooooooooooooze.
User Input (0/5):
Comment away!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Canvas Bags: 33
Carbon Credits: 16
Yeah, I think just about everyone saw that coming... Check back in on Tuesday to see the exciting first match of the second round! Recycling is going to go head to head with Wetland Conservation!
Canvas Bags
You've all seen them all over the place. Every grocery store and superstore and every bookstore and hardware store and (probably) every adult media store is carrying these reusable bags that you see by the check out counter. Why are they so popular and what was wrong with plastic grocery bags?
Impact on the Environment (10/15):
It turns out everything was wrong with those plastic grocery bags. They ended up in the oceans where sea turtles thought they were jellyfish and choked on them. The ended up in landfills where they would take 100,000 or more years to break down. They ended up in babies' cribs where babies choked on them. So yeah, they're pretty bag - I mean bad. But let's not err on the side of too many Canvas Bags. Otherwise we'll have too many of those and I can see them taking just as long to break down in landfills. And you can't recycled Canvas Bags as easy as you can plastic ones.
Practicality (8/10):
The least practical part of using reusable bags is just remembering to actually bring them to the store. I always forget, which is why I starting leaving them in my car. But then I brought them into my apartment and I always forget to bring them back out to my car. Stupid memory...
Sustainability (9/10):
With the aid of government-imposed taxes on plastic bags or corporate incentives to use Canvas Bags, I see plastic bags becoming very much obsolete within a decade.
Awesomeness (6/10):
They are sort of awesome. I mean, you get to show off your own distinct style by bringing whatever bag matches your personality. And let's face it, gross brown and pasty white plastic bags don't really match too many outfits.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Carbon Credits
Carbon Credits, while similar to their tournament counterparts, the Carbon Offsets, are somewhat different. Carbon Credits (CC) are for companies or individuals that someday plan on polluting and want to buy the rights to pollute under a system of exchanges where companies that don't plan on polluting much sell their rights to pollute to the less Green company. It's complicated, but it makes sense if you understand it.
Impact on the Environment (7/15):
Ultimately, this system of buying Carbon Credits will regulate how much pollution is created by the industrial and commercial sectors. And it will cut down on the emissions from these companies, which is good. But it will come at the cost of more stringent regulations which will force companies to do business overseas where there are less environmental standards. Good for the US, bad for poor countries in Africa that have to deal with even more pollution.
Practicality (5/10):
This will mostly drive businesses out of developed countries and into less developed ones. While it is good to develop the economies of those countries, it's not good if it comes at the cost of economic collapse for the developed countries.
Sustainability (3/10):
The only way that this will take a hold long term is if all countries adopt them. And with the amount of corruption in some countries, there's no way that regulators will ever put up with standards in some countries.
Awesomeness (1/10):
Snoooooooooooooze.
User Input (0/5):
Comment away!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Canvas Bags: 33
Carbon Credits: 16
Yeah, I think just about everyone saw that coming... Check back in on Tuesday to see the exciting first match of the second round! Recycling is going to go head to head with Wetland Conservation!
Friday, June 25, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 15 - (3) Recycled Products vs. (6) Rechargeable Batteries
Time for (3) Recycled Products to take on (6) Rechargeable Batteries!
Recycled Products
There couldn't be a better match up! (I'm lying) Both of these embodies a vital way to cut down on the amount of waste going into landfills, but in totally different ways. Who will be more important?
Impact on the Environment (11/15):
Without Recycled Products (RP), there would be no Recycling. What else would we use Recycling for? The whole Recycling system would collapse if people and businesses stop buying RP. And that would mean a whole lot more going into landfills and a whole lot being mined from the earth.
Practicality (7/10):
The Pros: RP can be cheaper than virgin materials and can lead to shorter supply chains.
The Cons: Buying anything, even RP, when you don't need them is wasteful and can be worse off than not buying things at all.
Sustainability (9/10):
I had to give this the same rating as for Recycling itself because let's face it, you can't have one without the other.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Okay, I was going to give this a lower rating, but then I started thinking about my t-shirt that is made out of recycled Coke bottles and I realized buying RP can be pretty awesome, just not as awesome as Recycling itself.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Rechargeable Batteries
Impact on the Environment (11/15):
While it's true, Rechargeable Batteries (RB) don't seem to have a huge positive impact on the environment because batteries are a relatively small part of the solid waste we throw away, let's look a little deeper. Batteries, when thrown away, leak horrible, gross chemicals that can get into the earth and kill of plants and animal life. Aaand, when you use RB, you cut down on how much of those gross chemicals that need to be mined out of the earth. So RB are a lot better than they seem.
Practicality (10/10):
Just pay the extra couple of bucks. It's worth it. I guarantee it.
Sustainability (8/10):
Honestly, non-rechargeable batteries wouldn't even be sold in stores any more if people just got to the point where they stopped living "disposable lives." There's no differences between RB and non-RB other than lower initial costs and higher long term costs associated with non-RB.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Meh. You don't even see the batteries once you put them into the... whatever it is you put them in. And I don't have any t-shirts about RB.
User Input (0/5):
Comment away!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Recycled Products: 34
Rechargeable Batteries: 32
Oh, Rechargeable Batteries. So close, yet so far. Come back tomorrow to see if (2) Canvas Bags and (7) Carbon Credits can come this close!
Recycled Products
There couldn't be a better match up! (I'm lying) Both of these embodies a vital way to cut down on the amount of waste going into landfills, but in totally different ways. Who will be more important?
Impact on the Environment (11/15):
Without Recycled Products (RP), there would be no Recycling. What else would we use Recycling for? The whole Recycling system would collapse if people and businesses stop buying RP. And that would mean a whole lot more going into landfills and a whole lot being mined from the earth.
Practicality (7/10):
The Pros: RP can be cheaper than virgin materials and can lead to shorter supply chains.
The Cons: Buying anything, even RP, when you don't need them is wasteful and can be worse off than not buying things at all.
Sustainability (9/10):
I had to give this the same rating as for Recycling itself because let's face it, you can't have one without the other.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Okay, I was going to give this a lower rating, but then I started thinking about my t-shirt that is made out of recycled Coke bottles and I realized buying RP can be pretty awesome, just not as awesome as Recycling itself.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Rechargeable Batteries
Impact on the Environment (11/15):
While it's true, Rechargeable Batteries (RB) don't seem to have a huge positive impact on the environment because batteries are a relatively small part of the solid waste we throw away, let's look a little deeper. Batteries, when thrown away, leak horrible, gross chemicals that can get into the earth and kill of plants and animal life. Aaand, when you use RB, you cut down on how much of those gross chemicals that need to be mined out of the earth. So RB are a lot better than they seem.
Practicality (10/10):
Just pay the extra couple of bucks. It's worth it. I guarantee it.
Sustainability (8/10):
Honestly, non-rechargeable batteries wouldn't even be sold in stores any more if people just got to the point where they stopped living "disposable lives." There's no differences between RB and non-RB other than lower initial costs and higher long term costs associated with non-RB.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Meh. You don't even see the batteries once you put them into the... whatever it is you put them in. And I don't have any t-shirts about RB.
User Input (0/5):
Comment away!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Recycled Products: 34
Rechargeable Batteries: 32
Oh, Rechargeable Batteries. So close, yet so far. Come back tomorrow to see if (2) Canvas Bags and (7) Carbon Credits can come this close!
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 14 - (4) Insulation vs. (5) High Efficiency Toilets
Time for (4) Insulation to take on (5) High Efficiency Toilets!
Insulation
Ah, Insulation. It's really nothing new or revolutionary, but it is pretty important in the Global War on Global Warming.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Having proper Insulation is like flossing, it's really good to have, but it seems like not enough people actually do it. Insulation keeps energy bills down and reduces the need for natural gas or coal. That's good, I suppose, but there is the issue of what to do with Insulation when it's done being used. It doesn't really break down all that easy, so it's hard to landfill.
Practicality (9/10):
Every home should have enough Insulation. The only issue is for older homes where the Insulation has worn down or never put in in the first place.
Sustainability (8/10):
There's no reason why Insulation shouldn't be around for as long as houses exist. Even if Global Warming warms up the planet, we'll need Insulation for the extra A/C that we'll need in our homes.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Who, other than the good people at Owens Corning, really even cares about Insulation?
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
High Efficiency Toilets
HET are much like LEL from yesterday, except with water instead of electricity.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
HET last for a looooong time. Well, all toilets do, but if you think about all the water that can be saved over the life of a toilet, it's mind boggling. If your toilet uses even one gallon less of water for every flush, that comes out to maybe 10 gallons per day or 3650 gallons per year. If a toilet lasts for 50 years, that's 182,500 gallons over the life of the toilet. I'd say that's significant.
Practicality (8/10):
Sure, they're more expensive than regular toilets, but as technology improves and economies of scale take over, the prices come down and HET becomes more of a viable option. That and once we start having droughts, water's going to be pretty darn expensive.
Sustainability (8/10):
Like I mentioned with the LEL, HET is a technology that will keep advancing. What's high efficiency now will be obsolete within 15 or 20 years. Within my lifetime, it's likely that waterfree toilets could become popular.
Awesomeness (7/10):
You know how much I love toilets and bathrooms and such. Just go back and read my old Green Tips and you'll see that. I mention toilets much more often than Insulation.
User Input (1/5):
Ohhhh, I finally get how this is like the World Cup. With a score of 1-0, HET takes it in the awesomeness category!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Insulation: 29
High Efficiency Toilets: 36
Well, there you have it, toilets always seem to come out on top. Come on back on Friday to learn which is better: (3) Recycled Products or (6) Rechargeable Batteries. And make sure to comment about which one you prefer!
Insulation
Ah, Insulation. It's really nothing new or revolutionary, but it is pretty important in the Global War on Global Warming.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Having proper Insulation is like flossing, it's really good to have, but it seems like not enough people actually do it. Insulation keeps energy bills down and reduces the need for natural gas or coal. That's good, I suppose, but there is the issue of what to do with Insulation when it's done being used. It doesn't really break down all that easy, so it's hard to landfill.
Practicality (9/10):
Every home should have enough Insulation. The only issue is for older homes where the Insulation has worn down or never put in in the first place.
Sustainability (8/10):
There's no reason why Insulation shouldn't be around for as long as houses exist. Even if Global Warming warms up the planet, we'll need Insulation for the extra A/C that we'll need in our homes.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Who, other than the good people at Owens Corning, really even cares about Insulation?
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
High Efficiency Toilets
HET are much like LEL from yesterday, except with water instead of electricity.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
HET last for a looooong time. Well, all toilets do, but if you think about all the water that can be saved over the life of a toilet, it's mind boggling. If your toilet uses even one gallon less of water for every flush, that comes out to maybe 10 gallons per day or 3650 gallons per year. If a toilet lasts for 50 years, that's 182,500 gallons over the life of the toilet. I'd say that's significant.
Practicality (8/10):
Sure, they're more expensive than regular toilets, but as technology improves and economies of scale take over, the prices come down and HET becomes more of a viable option. That and once we start having droughts, water's going to be pretty darn expensive.
Sustainability (8/10):
Like I mentioned with the LEL, HET is a technology that will keep advancing. What's high efficiency now will be obsolete within 15 or 20 years. Within my lifetime, it's likely that waterfree toilets could become popular.
Awesomeness (7/10):
You know how much I love toilets and bathrooms and such. Just go back and read my old Green Tips and you'll see that. I mention toilets much more often than Insulation.
User Input (1/5):
Ohhhh, I finally get how this is like the World Cup. With a score of 1-0, HET takes it in the awesomeness category!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Insulation: 29
High Efficiency Toilets: 36
Well, there you have it, toilets always seem to come out on top. Come on back on Friday to learn which is better: (3) Recycled Products or (6) Rechargeable Batteries. And make sure to comment about which one you prefer!
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 13 - (1) Low Energy Lighting vs (8) Organic Food
(1) Low Energy Lighting and (8) Organic Food!
Low Energy Lighting
Low Energy Lighting (LEL for short) is not any specific technology or brand but the next generation of commercial and residential lighting. This could be anything from those spirally light bulbs to the really expensive LEDs you see in rich people's houses.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
LEL is a really good solution because it goes after the problem in an entirely different way. Alternative energy technologies approach the problem as "we're going to run out of fossil fuels eventually, let's abandon ship before it gets too bad." LEL on the other hand is more like "we're going to run out of fossil fuels eventually, let's patch up the ship as much as we can so it will be a lot longer until we sink." And while reducing our energy consumption will only delay the inevitable, it sure beats freezing to death and sinking to the bottom of the ocean while hanging on to a door until for help arrives.
Practicality (10/10):
Look, light bulbs are going to burn out eventually, and when they do, just buy the more-expensive-now-but-cheaper-in-the-long-run high efficiency ones.
Sustainability (10/10):
LEL is a concept that will only continue to evolve as technology improves. What's low energy now will be high energy compared with what will be popular 10 years from now. As long as people continue to choose the more environmentally friendly option, things will only continue to improve.
Awesomeness (5/10):
While I know that I'm a huge nerd and think these are awesome, most people don't care one way or another about high efficiency lighting. It's okay, I won't hold it against you... much...
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Organic Food
Oh, Organic Food. How I have longed to talk about you in here. This is the most misunderstood and deceptive Green idea, even more misunderstood than nuclear power. Some people will disagree with me, but I look at things very practically (ironically enough) and Organic Food doesn't stack up.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Organic Food is good for the environment. Somewhat good, that is. It's great the pesticides aren't getting into our waterways or getting into the food we eat. And I know that I don't want to eat pesticides. But the picture isn't all sunshine and rainbows. Follow me to the next paragraph and I'll explain further.
Practicality (2/10):
The truth about Organic Food is that it just doesn't work on a large scale. One of the benefits of genetically modified food is increased yields. Increased yields means more people can be fed with less resources. One of the reasons that wealthy countries can stay wealthy and healthy is that they use crops that produce better yields. If everyone in the world switched to Organic Food, pests populations would explode and consume all of our food, which would cause starvation and droughts across the world. That may sound a bit grim, but when farmland is being destroyed by climate change already, we need all the help we can get in terms of growing more for less.
Sustainability (5/10):
Organic Food really has been around a very long time (as long as plants have been on this planet) so they'll always be around in some form. But as for their popularity among humans, right now they're a luxury. One that will quickly be cast aside if things start going downhill in terms of climate change.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Organic Food, while not awesome in my book, is a really fun thing to rub in people's faces if you feel like getting all ecotistical (Dang! I just made that word up, but I checked and someone already said it first) to your friends.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, nothing here either.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Low Energy Lighting: 38
Organic Food: 23
Eat it, Organic Food! For everyone else that didn't lose to Low Energy Lighting, check it out tomorrow when (4) Insulation and (5) High Efficiency Toilets face off.
Low Energy Lighting
Low Energy Lighting (LEL for short) is not any specific technology or brand but the next generation of commercial and residential lighting. This could be anything from those spirally light bulbs to the really expensive LEDs you see in rich people's houses.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
LEL is a really good solution because it goes after the problem in an entirely different way. Alternative energy technologies approach the problem as "we're going to run out of fossil fuels eventually, let's abandon ship before it gets too bad." LEL on the other hand is more like "we're going to run out of fossil fuels eventually, let's patch up the ship as much as we can so it will be a lot longer until we sink." And while reducing our energy consumption will only delay the inevitable, it sure beats freezing to death and sinking to the bottom of the ocean while hanging on to a door until for help arrives.
Practicality (10/10):
Look, light bulbs are going to burn out eventually, and when they do, just buy the more-expensive-now-but-cheaper-in-the-long-run high efficiency ones.
Sustainability (10/10):
LEL is a concept that will only continue to evolve as technology improves. What's low energy now will be high energy compared with what will be popular 10 years from now. As long as people continue to choose the more environmentally friendly option, things will only continue to improve.
Awesomeness (5/10):
While I know that I'm a huge nerd and think these are awesome, most people don't care one way or another about high efficiency lighting. It's okay, I won't hold it against you... much...
User Input (0/5):
Nope, don't see anything here.
Organic Food
Oh, Organic Food. How I have longed to talk about you in here. This is the most misunderstood and deceptive Green idea, even more misunderstood than nuclear power. Some people will disagree with me, but I look at things very practically (ironically enough) and Organic Food doesn't stack up.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Organic Food is good for the environment. Somewhat good, that is. It's great the pesticides aren't getting into our waterways or getting into the food we eat. And I know that I don't want to eat pesticides. But the picture isn't all sunshine and rainbows. Follow me to the next paragraph and I'll explain further.
Practicality (2/10):
The truth about Organic Food is that it just doesn't work on a large scale. One of the benefits of genetically modified food is increased yields. Increased yields means more people can be fed with less resources. One of the reasons that wealthy countries can stay wealthy and healthy is that they use crops that produce better yields. If everyone in the world switched to Organic Food, pests populations would explode and consume all of our food, which would cause starvation and droughts across the world. That may sound a bit grim, but when farmland is being destroyed by climate change already, we need all the help we can get in terms of growing more for less.
Sustainability (5/10):
Organic Food really has been around a very long time (as long as plants have been on this planet) so they'll always be around in some form. But as for their popularity among humans, right now they're a luxury. One that will quickly be cast aside if things start going downhill in terms of climate change.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Organic Food, while not awesome in my book, is a really fun thing to rub in people's faces if you feel like getting all ecotistical (Dang! I just made that word up, but I checked and someone already said it first) to your friends.
User Input (0/5):
Nope, nothing here either.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Low Energy Lighting: 38
Organic Food: 23
Eat it, Organic Food! For everyone else that didn't lose to Low Energy Lighting, check it out tomorrow when (4) Insulation and (5) High Efficiency Toilets face off.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 12 - (2) Solar Power vs. (7) Nuclear Power
Time to wrap up the first round of the Green Energy Region! (2) Solar Power vs. (7) Nuclear Power!
Solar Power
Solar Power, like Wind Power, Hydroelectric Power, and American Gladiators, is an concept that has been around for several thousand years but only recently found a new popularity as technology has advanced. Solar Power typically means photovoltaic solar panels and that's what I am referring to with most of the entry.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Solar Power is very good in that it doesn't create any carbon emissions when it's being operated. Yes, it takes up a lot of space, yes, it uses metal and other rare earth metals, yes it can only be used when the sun is out. Almost the same concerns as wind power.
Practicality (7/10):
Ignoring all the concerns listed above, Solar Power also has a huge problem in that it's very very inefficient. Solar panels only use about 10% of the energy that the sun puts out. That's really not that great.
Sustainability (9/10):
Yaddah, yaddah, yaddah all the same things as Wind Power and Hydroelectric. Solar panels are really easy to maintain.
Awesomeness (8/10):
Solar Power is pretty awesome. I don't know how anyone can look across a huge solar array and not be impressed.
User Input (1/5):
1 point, take it or leave it!
Nuclear Power
Ah, Nuclear Power. I don't know any concept that is as controversial as Nuclear Power is. No other alternative energy has been turned into a weapon (as far as I know. I've never heard of a solar powered laser beam or anything).
Impact on the Environment (5/15):
Nuclear Power releases less carbon emissions than fossil fuels. That's not being disputed. Even when you don't consider the issue of what to do with the spent nuclear fuel rods, Nuclear Power isn't great for the environment in the long run. I don't want anyone to have misconceptions. Nuclear Power is NOT renewable. People in Africa are mining uranium (which will eventually run out, just like fossil fuels) and then it has to be processed (like gasoline and coal). And don't even get me started on the issue of meltdowns. Oh, and what about the nuclear waste that will last for 100,000 years stored in barrels that will last 10,000 years?
Practicality (7/10):
Nuclear Power is good if we keep going at the levels we're using uranium, but anyone who thinks that Nuclear Power is the solution to our energy crises is delusional. And if well developed countries like the USA and the USSR can have issues in terms of near or more than near meltdowns, how many problems do you think countries like Haiti and Afghanistan would have?
Sustainability (5/10):
Like I mentioned before, we're eventually going to run out of uranium. It's true that we'll probably run out at some point and yes, we'll probably find some other substance that will work in our reactors, but unless we develop miniature suns that create almost limitless energy (think Spider-Man 2 and yes, people are working on that technology. People that are hopefully not evil geniuses that will have mechanical arms fused to their backs), Nuclear Power doesn't have a very long future.
Awesomeness (10/10):
Look at the 1950's and 60's and all the really bad horror movies that came out. Really really tacky and fodder for Mystery Science Theater 3000, but you have to admit that they're sort of awesome. By sort of I mean a lot.
User Input (0/5):
I don't blame you, I was rooting for the other one, too.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Solar Power: 38
Nuclear Power: 27
Sorry, Nuclear Power. Don't go all Iran on me just because you didn't win. For everyone else, check it out next time when I delve into (1) Low Energy Lighting vs. (8) Organic Food.
Solar Power
Solar Power, like Wind Power, Hydroelectric Power, and American Gladiators, is an concept that has been around for several thousand years but only recently found a new popularity as technology has advanced. Solar Power typically means photovoltaic solar panels and that's what I am referring to with most of the entry.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Solar Power is very good in that it doesn't create any carbon emissions when it's being operated. Yes, it takes up a lot of space, yes, it uses metal and other rare earth metals, yes it can only be used when the sun is out. Almost the same concerns as wind power.
Practicality (7/10):
Ignoring all the concerns listed above, Solar Power also has a huge problem in that it's very very inefficient. Solar panels only use about 10% of the energy that the sun puts out. That's really not that great.
Sustainability (9/10):
Yaddah, yaddah, yaddah all the same things as Wind Power and Hydroelectric. Solar panels are really easy to maintain.
Awesomeness (8/10):
Solar Power is pretty awesome. I don't know how anyone can look across a huge solar array and not be impressed.
User Input (1/5):
1 point, take it or leave it!
Nuclear Power
Ah, Nuclear Power. I don't know any concept that is as controversial as Nuclear Power is. No other alternative energy has been turned into a weapon (as far as I know. I've never heard of a solar powered laser beam or anything).
Impact on the Environment (5/15):
Nuclear Power releases less carbon emissions than fossil fuels. That's not being disputed. Even when you don't consider the issue of what to do with the spent nuclear fuel rods, Nuclear Power isn't great for the environment in the long run. I don't want anyone to have misconceptions. Nuclear Power is NOT renewable. People in Africa are mining uranium (which will eventually run out, just like fossil fuels) and then it has to be processed (like gasoline and coal). And don't even get me started on the issue of meltdowns. Oh, and what about the nuclear waste that will last for 100,000 years stored in barrels that will last 10,000 years?
Practicality (7/10):
Nuclear Power is good if we keep going at the levels we're using uranium, but anyone who thinks that Nuclear Power is the solution to our energy crises is delusional. And if well developed countries like the USA and the USSR can have issues in terms of near or more than near meltdowns, how many problems do you think countries like Haiti and Afghanistan would have?
Sustainability (5/10):
Like I mentioned before, we're eventually going to run out of uranium. It's true that we'll probably run out at some point and yes, we'll probably find some other substance that will work in our reactors, but unless we develop miniature suns that create almost limitless energy (think Spider-Man 2 and yes, people are working on that technology. People that are hopefully not evil geniuses that will have mechanical arms fused to their backs), Nuclear Power doesn't have a very long future.
Awesomeness (10/10):
Look at the 1950's and 60's and all the really bad horror movies that came out. Really really tacky and fodder for Mystery Science Theater 3000, but you have to admit that they're sort of awesome. By sort of I mean a lot.
User Input (0/5):
I don't blame you, I was rooting for the other one, too.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Solar Power: 38
Nuclear Power: 27
Sorry, Nuclear Power. Don't go all Iran on me just because you didn't win. For everyone else, check it out next time when I delve into (1) Low Energy Lighting vs. (8) Organic Food.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 11 - (3) Waste to Energy vs. (6) Geothermal Energy
(3) Waste to Energy vs. (6) Geothermal Energy. It's like the World Cup! In ways I don't really know...
Waste to Energy
Waste to Energy is fun. There's two major ways to do it. First, the gases released from landfills can be captured and sent to companies that want to use that gas to power boilers or generators. The other way is for waste to be sent straight into a furnace that generates steam which creates electricity. A third way is to put waste into your DeLorean's fusion generator, but that's not very popular and happens mostly in Back to the Future.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
It's good, it really is. Making waste useful for something other than taking up space is great. And it can reduce the amount of natural gas we have to mine out of the ground. But the downside is you're still burning things and that creates carbon emissions. Good, but not perfect.
Practicality (9/10):
I mean, I don't see what's impractical about this. The garbage is already being gathered up to be put in landfills. Why not add a few steps to make it useful for something? And the landfill gases are being burned off a lot of the time now anyway, so it doesn't make sense to let it go to waste.
Sustainability (9/10):
We will ALWAYS have garbage. In some form or another, garbage is going to be around until (really after) humans die out or get raptured off to heaven (or hell if you don't recycle. God's watching you). If we put these W2E systems in place now, they'll be good for something like 30 years after the landfills are closed. And if we make things break down even easier, that could last even longer.
Awesomeness (5/10):
Wow, burning garbage. That's... um... great. I'm pretty sure people have been doing that in developing countries hundreds or thousands of years before they were even called 'developing countries.' Nothing too exciting here.
User Input (1/5):
I was tempted not to give points for this one because the puns were so bad, but rules are rules.
Geothermal Energy
Geothermal Energy is what the name implies, energy from the heat in the earth. Mostly it's used for heating buildings, but there are ways to make energy from steam generation. To oversimplify how this works, tubes filled with water are put deep underground and as the water flows through the earth, it heats up and is piped up to the surface where that heat is utilized.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Geothermal Energy is so useful that most buildings with geothermal wells don't even need to rely on fossil fuels to heat them at all. And operating these wells don't release any carbon emissions, which is great! There are some concerns about what taking heat out of the ground will do to the composition of the earth, but it hasn't seemed to do too much damage so far.
Practicality (8/10):
Geothermal Energy is much like other alternative energy sources: installing it is the hardest part. Once the system is in the ground, it's nice and reliable and consistent. There are some concerns about where you can dig and the possibility of striking some unknown cave system that will collapse or awakening mole people that will burst forth from the earth and kill us all. Other than that, it's a pretty decent system.
Sustainability (7/10):
A lot of people will probably say that it's a safe and secure system. For now and the next 20 to 30 years, yes, it is a good safe system. The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (my nickname: Great Gulf Oil Spill or G-GOS) is making me concerned about what happens when these pipes rupture. We could have steam explosions right underneath a large metropolitan area. And how do we measure or even fix these pipes which are thousands of feet under the ground?
Awesomeness (7/10):
I mean, it is an awesome concept. I'll give it that. But you can't see anything except for a pipe that comes out of the ground. Snoooooze.
User Input (0/5):
I don't blame you, I was rooting for the other one, too.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Waste to Energy: 37
Geothermal Energy: 35
Yikes! The closest one yet in this tournament! And just think if that comment hadn't been left! W2E would have won by 1 point! Tomorrow (maybe Sunday) I'll be taking a look at (2) Solar Power vs. (7) Nuclear Power.
As I promised yesterday, here are the rules for the next round of the tournament. I obviously have to re-rate everything on a different scale, because otherwise you'd already know that Recycling [35] would beat Wetland Conservation [31].
There will be three criteria for ideas to get points. 20 points for how good (environmentally speaking) the average person feels when they use or take advantage of the product or idea. 20 points for how guilty they feel for not using the product or idea. And 10 points for user comments. Each comment comes out to 2 points, with a max of 5 comments per idea. Sounds good? Good!
Waste to Energy
Waste to Energy is fun. There's two major ways to do it. First, the gases released from landfills can be captured and sent to companies that want to use that gas to power boilers or generators. The other way is for waste to be sent straight into a furnace that generates steam which creates electricity. A third way is to put waste into your DeLorean's fusion generator, but that's not very popular and happens mostly in Back to the Future.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
It's good, it really is. Making waste useful for something other than taking up space is great. And it can reduce the amount of natural gas we have to mine out of the ground. But the downside is you're still burning things and that creates carbon emissions. Good, but not perfect.
Practicality (9/10):
I mean, I don't see what's impractical about this. The garbage is already being gathered up to be put in landfills. Why not add a few steps to make it useful for something? And the landfill gases are being burned off a lot of the time now anyway, so it doesn't make sense to let it go to waste.
Sustainability (9/10):
We will ALWAYS have garbage. In some form or another, garbage is going to be around until (really after) humans die out or get raptured off to heaven (or hell if you don't recycle. God's watching you). If we put these W2E systems in place now, they'll be good for something like 30 years after the landfills are closed. And if we make things break down even easier, that could last even longer.
Awesomeness (5/10):
Wow, burning garbage. That's... um... great. I'm pretty sure people have been doing that in developing countries hundreds or thousands of years before they were even called 'developing countries.' Nothing too exciting here.
User Input (1/5):
I was tempted not to give points for this one because the puns were so bad, but rules are rules.
Geothermal Energy
Geothermal Energy is what the name implies, energy from the heat in the earth. Mostly it's used for heating buildings, but there are ways to make energy from steam generation. To oversimplify how this works, tubes filled with water are put deep underground and as the water flows through the earth, it heats up and is piped up to the surface where that heat is utilized.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Geothermal Energy is so useful that most buildings with geothermal wells don't even need to rely on fossil fuels to heat them at all. And operating these wells don't release any carbon emissions, which is great! There are some concerns about what taking heat out of the ground will do to the composition of the earth, but it hasn't seemed to do too much damage so far.
Practicality (8/10):
Geothermal Energy is much like other alternative energy sources: installing it is the hardest part. Once the system is in the ground, it's nice and reliable and consistent. There are some concerns about where you can dig and the possibility of striking some unknown cave system that will collapse or awakening mole people that will burst forth from the earth and kill us all. Other than that, it's a pretty decent system.
Sustainability (7/10):
A lot of people will probably say that it's a safe and secure system. For now and the next 20 to 30 years, yes, it is a good safe system. The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (my nickname: Great Gulf Oil Spill or G-GOS) is making me concerned about what happens when these pipes rupture. We could have steam explosions right underneath a large metropolitan area. And how do we measure or even fix these pipes which are thousands of feet under the ground?
Awesomeness (7/10):
I mean, it is an awesome concept. I'll give it that. But you can't see anything except for a pipe that comes out of the ground. Snoooooze.
User Input (0/5):
I don't blame you, I was rooting for the other one, too.
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Waste to Energy: 37
Geothermal Energy: 35
Yikes! The closest one yet in this tournament! And just think if that comment hadn't been left! W2E would have won by 1 point! Tomorrow (maybe Sunday) I'll be taking a look at (2) Solar Power vs. (7) Nuclear Power.
As I promised yesterday, here are the rules for the next round of the tournament. I obviously have to re-rate everything on a different scale, because otherwise you'd already know that Recycling [35] would beat Wetland Conservation [31].
There will be three criteria for ideas to get points. 20 points for how good (environmentally speaking) the average person feels when they use or take advantage of the product or idea. 20 points for how guilty they feel for not using the product or idea. And 10 points for user comments. Each comment comes out to 2 points, with a max of 5 comments per idea. Sounds good? Good!
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 10 - (4) Hydroelectric Power vs. (5) Offshore Wind
Ooooo, a Thursday post. How unusual! (4) Hydroelectric Power vs. (5) Offshore Wind
Hydroelectric Power
Everyone knows what Hydroelectric Power (HP) is, even if they don't know it's called that. Think of the Hoover Dam and you have a pretty big picture of it.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
HP is alternative energy, so it should be really good for the environment, right? Wrong! Yes, it does drastically cut back on the amount of carbon emissions in the air, but you also have to build a big dam that blocks off a section of a river. This causes flooding and displaced cities and whole sections of the river that fish can't live in and people can't boat down. Yes, you can have HP that doesn't need to block the whole river, but most of the time you don't end up seeing that.
Practicality (7/10):
HP is somewhat practical. Yes, people live near rivers a lot of the time, so it makes sense to have HP close to where people live, but you have to realize that these people need the river for their livelihoods, like fishing and transporting things by boat.
Sustainability (10/10):
This funny thing about modern alternative energy is that the ideas behind them have been around for thousands of years. HP (in the form of water wheels) has been used much the same as wind power. And dams last a long long time. The Hoover Dam has been around for 75 years and is still working. How many people do you know that have been working for 75 years?.
Awesomeness (7/10):
I have to admit, I've never been to the Hoover Dam. But I have been to smaller HP dams around Cleveland and they were awesome, just to a lesser degree.
User Input (0/5):
You probably knew that your favorite was going to win, so you chose not to comment. I admire your confidence!
Offshore Wind
Offshore Wind (OW) is pretty much the same as yesterday's wind power, but on the water. Pretty simple, right?
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
I'll give this one extra point over wind power just because you don't need to take up valuable farm land or forest land to have OW farms.
Practicality (5/10):
Just to balance things out, I'll give this two less points than onshore wind power because it's insanely hard to sink the pylons into the bottom of the ocean. I've heard there's only one or two ships in the world that have the ability to carry the giant metal things out there and that have the stability to be able to drive them in straight and go deep enough. And don't even get me started on putting cables all across the ocean floor.
Sustainability (9/10):
I have to give this a 9 just because the salty water will corrode the OW turbines much faster than their onshore counterparts. They'll still be around longer than you and I will be, though. Unless of course the whale uprising takes place sooner than I expect, of course.
Awesomeness (9/10):
Wind Power Awesomeness = Offshore Wind Power Awesomeness.
User Input (1/5):
Now I know how politicians feel because I was lobbied to endorse Offshore Wind Power!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Hydroelectric Power: 33
Offshore Wind: 37
Upset!!!!!!! Not a huge one, but still a (5) beat a (4). Come back tomorrow and see if (6) Geothermal can take out (3) Waste to Energy. Oh, and tomorrow I'll explain the rules for the second round of the Tournament!
Hydroelectric Power
Everyone knows what Hydroelectric Power (HP) is, even if they don't know it's called that. Think of the Hoover Dam and you have a pretty big picture of it.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
HP is alternative energy, so it should be really good for the environment, right? Wrong! Yes, it does drastically cut back on the amount of carbon emissions in the air, but you also have to build a big dam that blocks off a section of a river. This causes flooding and displaced cities and whole sections of the river that fish can't live in and people can't boat down. Yes, you can have HP that doesn't need to block the whole river, but most of the time you don't end up seeing that.
Practicality (7/10):
HP is somewhat practical. Yes, people live near rivers a lot of the time, so it makes sense to have HP close to where people live, but you have to realize that these people need the river for their livelihoods, like fishing and transporting things by boat.
Sustainability (10/10):
This funny thing about modern alternative energy is that the ideas behind them have been around for thousands of years. HP (in the form of water wheels) has been used much the same as wind power. And dams last a long long time. The Hoover Dam has been around for 75 years and is still working. How many people do you know that have been working for 75 years?.
Awesomeness (7/10):
I have to admit, I've never been to the Hoover Dam. But I have been to smaller HP dams around Cleveland and they were awesome, just to a lesser degree.
User Input (0/5):
You probably knew that your favorite was going to win, so you chose not to comment. I admire your confidence!
Offshore Wind
Offshore Wind (OW) is pretty much the same as yesterday's wind power, but on the water. Pretty simple, right?
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
I'll give this one extra point over wind power just because you don't need to take up valuable farm land or forest land to have OW farms.
Practicality (5/10):
Just to balance things out, I'll give this two less points than onshore wind power because it's insanely hard to sink the pylons into the bottom of the ocean. I've heard there's only one or two ships in the world that have the ability to carry the giant metal things out there and that have the stability to be able to drive them in straight and go deep enough. And don't even get me started on putting cables all across the ocean floor.
Sustainability (9/10):
I have to give this a 9 just because the salty water will corrode the OW turbines much faster than their onshore counterparts. They'll still be around longer than you and I will be, though. Unless of course the whale uprising takes place sooner than I expect, of course.
Awesomeness (9/10):
Wind Power Awesomeness = Offshore Wind Power Awesomeness.
User Input (1/5):
Now I know how politicians feel because I was lobbied to endorse Offshore Wind Power!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Hydroelectric Power: 33
Offshore Wind: 37
Upset!!!!!!! Not a huge one, but still a (5) beat a (4). Come back tomorrow and see if (6) Geothermal can take out (3) Waste to Energy. Oh, and tomorrow I'll explain the rules for the second round of the Tournament!
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 9 - (1) Wind Power vs. (8) Tidal Power
Yay! Time to start the Green Energy Region! (1) Wind Power vs. (8) Tidal Power! Go!
Wind Power
Wind Power is interesting. It's been around for a long time. Much longer than almost everything else in this Tournament. People have been using windmills to grind grains or work textile factories. It wasn't until the past 100 years or so that people started using Wind Power for electricity. Now wind farms are popping up everywhere. Everywhere not near people, of course.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
Wind Power, for the most part, is fairly neutral for the environment. Yes, you need a bunch of metal for the turbines and yes, you need space to put the turbines and yes, you might kill some birds in the process, but think about it this way: if we put too much carbon in the air from burning fossil fuels, a lot of birds will die from increased temperatures and we'll need more space for farming because all of our farms will dry up and, well, we're either going to have to dig metal out of the ground or dig coal out of the ground. Take your pick.
Practicality (7/10):
Wind Power is very easy to produce. That's not the issue. There really isn't a place on earth that doesn't have some wind. The bad news is that the best wind sources are in places far away from people, like mountainy areas and oceans. So the issue then is transmission of energy. And what about when it isn't windy? Luckily, technology has gotten pretty good in terms of being able to build these things so offshore wind is becoming more popular. In fact, Lake Erie, right by Cleveland, is going to be getting the world's first fresh water wind farm in a few years!
Sustainability (10/10):
The first wind powered machine was made by the Greeks in the 1st century AD. I doubt anything that's been around 2000(ish) years will become obsolete any time soon. Wind turbines, when their bearings are replaced every so often, will last for quite some time.
Awesomeness (9/10):
I don't know why people complain about wind farms blocking their view of beaches and such. I think they look pretty awesome.
User Input (0/5):
You probably knew that your favorite was going to win, so you chose not to comment. I admire your confidence!
Tidal Power
Tidal Power is interesting in the fact that it's been around almost as long as Wind Power, but it is hardly ever used these days. Tidal Power refers to harnessing the forces the tides exert as they flow in and out each day. It's much more complicated than that, involving fluid mechanics, but I chose not to read the Wikipedia article about it so I won't be able to explain it fully.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Tidal Power has probably even less of an impact on the environment than Wind Power. These tidal turbines do not disrupt fish for the most part and they're not eyesores. The bad thing is that they're not efficient at all. It takes a whole lot more Tidal Power to generate the same energy as Wind Power. So you're really not saving as much fossil fuels as you'd think.
Practicality (6/10):
Like I mentioned before, these aren't that efficient, so until technology improves, these aren't worth the cost of putting them out there. They are very predictable, which is a bonus to Tidal Power.
Sustainability (9/10):
This is very similar to Wind Power. As long as people make sure to maintain these tidal turbines and scrape the barnacles off every so often, these will be around for quite some time.
Awesomeness (5/10):
Be honest with me, have you even heard of Tidal Power before this? It's a cool theory, but it just doesn't have the awesome factor that other alternative energies have.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Wind Power: 38
Tidal Power: 33
I have to say, considering Tidal Power was an 8 seed, it put up a pretty good fight! It just needed a little more awesomeness and it would've been the upset of the century. Tune in TOMORROW for a special unprecedented Thursday posting! I want to squeeze in 4 Tournament matches in this week (Wed, Thurs, Fri, Sat (or Sun)) so I can get through one Region a week. Tomorrow is (4) Hydroelectric vs. (5) Offshore Wind. Comment away!!
Wind Power
Wind Power is interesting. It's been around for a long time. Much longer than almost everything else in this Tournament. People have been using windmills to grind grains or work textile factories. It wasn't until the past 100 years or so that people started using Wind Power for electricity. Now wind farms are popping up everywhere. Everywhere not near people, of course.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
Wind Power, for the most part, is fairly neutral for the environment. Yes, you need a bunch of metal for the turbines and yes, you need space to put the turbines and yes, you might kill some birds in the process, but think about it this way: if we put too much carbon in the air from burning fossil fuels, a lot of birds will die from increased temperatures and we'll need more space for farming because all of our farms will dry up and, well, we're either going to have to dig metal out of the ground or dig coal out of the ground. Take your pick.
Practicality (7/10):
Wind Power is very easy to produce. That's not the issue. There really isn't a place on earth that doesn't have some wind. The bad news is that the best wind sources are in places far away from people, like mountainy areas and oceans. So the issue then is transmission of energy. And what about when it isn't windy? Luckily, technology has gotten pretty good in terms of being able to build these things so offshore wind is becoming more popular. In fact, Lake Erie, right by Cleveland, is going to be getting the world's first fresh water wind farm in a few years!
Sustainability (10/10):
The first wind powered machine was made by the Greeks in the 1st century AD. I doubt anything that's been around 2000(ish) years will become obsolete any time soon. Wind turbines, when their bearings are replaced every so often, will last for quite some time.
Awesomeness (9/10):
I don't know why people complain about wind farms blocking their view of beaches and such. I think they look pretty awesome.
User Input (0/5):
You probably knew that your favorite was going to win, so you chose not to comment. I admire your confidence!
Tidal Power
Tidal Power is interesting in the fact that it's been around almost as long as Wind Power, but it is hardly ever used these days. Tidal Power refers to harnessing the forces the tides exert as they flow in and out each day. It's much more complicated than that, involving fluid mechanics, but I chose not to read the Wikipedia article about it so I won't be able to explain it fully.
Impact on the Environment (13/15):
Tidal Power has probably even less of an impact on the environment than Wind Power. These tidal turbines do not disrupt fish for the most part and they're not eyesores. The bad thing is that they're not efficient at all. It takes a whole lot more Tidal Power to generate the same energy as Wind Power. So you're really not saving as much fossil fuels as you'd think.
Practicality (6/10):
Like I mentioned before, these aren't that efficient, so until technology improves, these aren't worth the cost of putting them out there. They are very predictable, which is a bonus to Tidal Power.
Sustainability (9/10):
This is very similar to Wind Power. As long as people make sure to maintain these tidal turbines and scrape the barnacles off every so often, these will be around for quite some time.
Awesomeness (5/10):
Be honest with me, have you even heard of Tidal Power before this? It's a cool theory, but it just doesn't have the awesome factor that other alternative energies have.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Wind Power: 38
Tidal Power: 33
I have to say, considering Tidal Power was an 8 seed, it put up a pretty good fight! It just needed a little more awesomeness and it would've been the upset of the century. Tune in TOMORROW for a special unprecedented Thursday posting! I want to squeeze in 4 Tournament matches in this week (Wed, Thurs, Fri, Sat (or Sun)) so I can get through one Region a week. Tomorrow is (4) Hydroelectric vs. (5) Offshore Wind. Comment away!!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Green Tip #100!
Hooray! The 100th Green Tip! In honor of such a momentous occasion, I'm going to share with you an extremely special Green Tip. One that will change your life forever and reduce your carbon footprint to next to nothing! So here we go, Green Tip #100 is:
ah...
well, you should...
...have...
...something or other...
...but give up doing...
Oh, who am I kidding? I'm out of ideas for Green Tips. But I know just the solution. I need to flush out my system by giving you 50 Tips that are just a little too practical or too bizarre to write an entire entry about. These tend to build up in my brain like plaque in someone's arteries and get in the way of all the good impractical ideas. Here we go, have fun!
- Stop flossing, it wastes string - Drink water, not soda - Stop buying more canvas grocery bags and use the ones you have - Don't drive at night, save your headlights - Stop washing your clothes - Get a smaller TV - Learn how to sew - Eat more carrots - Turn off the reading lights - Live on a mountain, get a bike - Learn how to hang glide - Learn how to ride a horse - Buy extremely local, only buy from your neighbors - Reduce everything in your life - Reuse everything in your life - Recycle everything in your life - Be a workaholic, live at work - Stowaway - Stop reading blogs, start reading books - Chalk graffiti, not spray paint - Eat local and organic, steal from a farm - Teach your baby not to poop to save diapers - Don't buy SUVs - or pickup trucks - or vans - or midsized cars - or compact cars - or any cars - Running a marathon is great, walking it would save energy - Tofu needs lots of salt - Underachieve - Stoptypingspacespeoplewillunderstand - Stp typng vwls s wll - Dbthfthstgthr - Don't vacation, daydream - Live on the moon, no atmosphere to pollute! - Go into a coma - Cryogenically freeze yourself - Learn how to photosynthesize - Inject green ink into your skin - Replace your limbs with highly efficient robot arms and legs - Ditch your printer, get a box of crayons - Don't watch movies, daydream - Dig out all of the bottles and cans out of your neighbors' garbage and take them to Michigan to recycle but get pulled over by the cops for speeding and keep insulting the police officer until you get arrested and spend the rest of your life in jail to avoid wasting gas on a morning commute! - Don't watch TV, daydream - Cut off your foot to save socks and shoes - Don't have a social life, daydream - Stop a couple short of 50 to save laptop batteries.
I guess now would be a good time to tell you that I'll be changing the format of this blog sometime in the near future. I haven't finalized the details, but I'll be switching to 4 Tournament matches per week on Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday (or Sunday). Once the Tournament is over, I'll go back to Green Tips of some sort.
ah...
well, you should...
...have...
...something or other...
...but give up doing...
Oh, who am I kidding? I'm out of ideas for Green Tips. But I know just the solution. I need to flush out my system by giving you 50 Tips that are just a little too practical or too bizarre to write an entire entry about. These tend to build up in my brain like plaque in someone's arteries and get in the way of all the good impractical ideas. Here we go, have fun!
- Stop flossing, it wastes string - Drink water, not soda - Stop buying more canvas grocery bags and use the ones you have - Don't drive at night, save your headlights - Stop washing your clothes - Get a smaller TV - Learn how to sew - Eat more carrots - Turn off the reading lights - Live on a mountain, get a bike - Learn how to hang glide - Learn how to ride a horse - Buy extremely local, only buy from your neighbors - Reduce everything in your life - Reuse everything in your life - Recycle everything in your life - Be a workaholic, live at work - Stowaway - Stop reading blogs, start reading books - Chalk graffiti, not spray paint - Eat local and organic, steal from a farm - Teach your baby not to poop to save diapers - Don't buy SUVs - or pickup trucks - or vans - or midsized cars - or compact cars - or any cars - Running a marathon is great, walking it would save energy - Tofu needs lots of salt - Underachieve - Stoptypingspacespeoplewillunderstand - Stp typng vwls s wll - Dbthfthstgthr - Don't vacation, daydream - Live on the moon, no atmosphere to pollute! - Go into a coma - Cryogenically freeze yourself - Learn how to photosynthesize - Inject green ink into your skin - Replace your limbs with highly efficient robot arms and legs - Ditch your printer, get a box of crayons - Don't watch movies, daydream - Dig out all of the bottles and cans out of your neighbors' garbage and take them to Michigan to recycle but get pulled over by the cops for speeding and keep insulting the police officer until you get arrested and spend the rest of your life in jail to avoid wasting gas on a morning commute! - Don't watch TV, daydream - Cut off your foot to save socks and shoes - Don't have a social life, daydream - Stop a couple short of 50 to save laptop batteries.
I guess now would be a good time to tell you that I'll be changing the format of this blog sometime in the near future. I haven't finalized the details, but I'll be switching to 4 Tournament matches per week on Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday (or Sunday). Once the Tournament is over, I'll go back to Green Tips of some sort.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 8 - (2) Electric Vehicles vs. (7) Carbon Offsets
In a battle for the ages (not really), (2) Electric Vehicles takes on (7) Carbon Offsets. Two ideas will enter and only one will exit! Who will it be?!
Electric Vehicles
Don't be mistaken. I mentioned last time that Hybrid Vehicles referred to Electric Hybrids. Electric Hybrids and Electric Vehicles are not the same; they're not even in the same ballpark. Electric Vehicles run purely on electricity. None of that gasoline crap. True, many of them have gasoline backups in case the battery runs out, but for the first 40 or so miles, it's all electric.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Half of you probably think that number is too high, half too low. The half that think it's too low are probably less informed about Electric Cars. Yes, it's awesome that Electric Vehicles have no carbon emissions when they're using their batteries, so you'd think that the impact on the environment would be extremely low (with a high score). But electricity has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is largely coal and natural gas (which emit carbon emissions). So you think that Electric Vehicles would be neutral for the environment compared to regular cars. Right now, probably. But in the future, as we go to more alternative energy, we can take advantage of reduced carbon emissions from the electric grid.
Practicality (8/10):
While Electric Vehicles have had a long and spotty history, we're almost at the point where technology is good enough that they could catch on in a more mainstream way. Scientists have created batteries that last long enough to get most people to work and back, so as long as you don't want to go roadtripping, Electric Vehicles may be a good fit for you.
Sustainability (7/10):
Ultimately, we'd have to find something better than cars (Trains maybe?). Environmental concerns aside, our infrastructure is almost at a breaking point. Roads are overly crowded and becoming more and more costly to repair. (Asphalt - not good for the environment by the way). But for now, Electric Vehicles are a very good option.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Anyone who can make glorified golf carts be main draws at car shows across the country deserves a medal. A medal for awesomeness.
User Input (1/5):
Electric Vehicles, FTW!
Carbon Offsets
Carbon Offsets (CO) are pretty simple. You fly somewhere in a plane and you pay a certain amount that goes towards alternative energies or carbon capture or some such thing. It's not a great system, but it is a way to reduce the guilt you feel from burning dinosaur remains.
Impact on the Environment (??/15):
It's really really hard to say what kind of impact CO have on the environment. The problem is that you don't really know where that money is going. Are people really using that money to directly buy solar panels and wind turbines? Do those solar panels really reduce carbon emissions by as much as you emitted? How much money is going towards administrative costs? Are you being ripped off by the companies that are selling these? It's just too hard to tell.
Practicality (7/10):
I mean, really. If we knew that there was a good system in place for this whole thing, this would be a great way to increase funding for alternative energy technologies. And it's extremely easy to do. Lots of airline companies have options on their websites that tacks on the CO costs directly when you're booking your flight.
Sustainability (3/10):
Anything that doesn't have a visible thing that they can hand people when they buy them will not sell well for long. People need to see something tangible when they're buying it, so I don't see CO being popular for all that long.
Awesomeness (1/10):
When I first hear about these I guess it sounded somewhat awesome. But the more I thought about it, the more this idea seemed to fall into the category of naming stars after people or buying land on the moon. This is just a lazy way for people to think they're being better for the environment because they payed a little extra.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Electric Vehicles: 32
Carbon Offsets: 11-26
Even at its best, Carbon Offsets falls short at 26. And that concludes the Green Travel Region, Round 1! Tune in Wednesday to kick off the Green Energy Region when (1) Wind Power takes on (8) Tidal Power!
Electric Vehicles
Don't be mistaken. I mentioned last time that Hybrid Vehicles referred to Electric Hybrids. Electric Hybrids and Electric Vehicles are not the same; they're not even in the same ballpark. Electric Vehicles run purely on electricity. None of that gasoline crap. True, many of them have gasoline backups in case the battery runs out, but for the first 40 or so miles, it's all electric.
Impact on the Environment (9/15):
Half of you probably think that number is too high, half too low. The half that think it's too low are probably less informed about Electric Cars. Yes, it's awesome that Electric Vehicles have no carbon emissions when they're using their batteries, so you'd think that the impact on the environment would be extremely low (with a high score). But electricity has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is largely coal and natural gas (which emit carbon emissions). So you think that Electric Vehicles would be neutral for the environment compared to regular cars. Right now, probably. But in the future, as we go to more alternative energy, we can take advantage of reduced carbon emissions from the electric grid.
Practicality (8/10):
While Electric Vehicles have had a long and spotty history, we're almost at the point where technology is good enough that they could catch on in a more mainstream way. Scientists have created batteries that last long enough to get most people to work and back, so as long as you don't want to go roadtripping, Electric Vehicles may be a good fit for you.
Sustainability (7/10):
Ultimately, we'd have to find something better than cars (Trains maybe?). Environmental concerns aside, our infrastructure is almost at a breaking point. Roads are overly crowded and becoming more and more costly to repair. (Asphalt - not good for the environment by the way). But for now, Electric Vehicles are a very good option.
Awesomeness (7/10):
Anyone who can make glorified golf carts be main draws at car shows across the country deserves a medal. A medal for awesomeness.
User Input (1/5):
Electric Vehicles, FTW!
Carbon Offsets
Carbon Offsets (CO) are pretty simple. You fly somewhere in a plane and you pay a certain amount that goes towards alternative energies or carbon capture or some such thing. It's not a great system, but it is a way to reduce the guilt you feel from burning dinosaur remains.
Impact on the Environment (??/15):
It's really really hard to say what kind of impact CO have on the environment. The problem is that you don't really know where that money is going. Are people really using that money to directly buy solar panels and wind turbines? Do those solar panels really reduce carbon emissions by as much as you emitted? How much money is going towards administrative costs? Are you being ripped off by the companies that are selling these? It's just too hard to tell.
Practicality (7/10):
I mean, really. If we knew that there was a good system in place for this whole thing, this would be a great way to increase funding for alternative energy technologies. And it's extremely easy to do. Lots of airline companies have options on their websites that tacks on the CO costs directly when you're booking your flight.
Sustainability (3/10):
Anything that doesn't have a visible thing that they can hand people when they buy them will not sell well for long. People need to see something tangible when they're buying it, so I don't see CO being popular for all that long.
Awesomeness (1/10):
When I first hear about these I guess it sounded somewhat awesome. But the more I thought about it, the more this idea seemed to fall into the category of naming stars after people or buying land on the moon. This is just a lazy way for people to think they're being better for the environment because they payed a little extra.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Electric Vehicles: 32
Carbon Offsets: 11-26
Even at its best, Carbon Offsets falls short at 26. And that concludes the Green Travel Region, Round 1! Tune in Wednesday to kick off the Green Energy Region when (1) Wind Power takes on (8) Tidal Power!
Friday, June 11, 2010
Green Tip #99: Three Birds With One Stone
So this Green Tip will be dedicated to a friend of mine who, ironically enough, won't be able to read this because he'll be in another country where he may or may not have access to the Internet. That other country, which shall remain nameless to protect the identity of those who live there (totally unnecessary), happens to be on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean from the USA.
So anyway, after I drove my friend to the airport, I started thinking about oceans and I thought back to the good ole' days before the Atlantic Ocean existed. Ah, yes, I remember it like it was just 130 millions years ago. Times were much simpler back then. Animals didn't have to worry about crossing an ocean to visit their relatives. We didn't have to worry about things like ocean currents reversing because of Greenland melting. There was no such thing as the Great Atlantic Garbage Patch. Good times... Good times...
But wait! Couldn't go go back to those days of Pangea? If we can send a man to the moon, surely we can push continents closer together! I mean, could you imagine if England and New England were finally reunited? It would cut down on so much gas if we could drive 'across the pond' (or lack thereof) instead of having to fly. Also, the GAGP would end up being smushed into a big plastic blob wedged between the two continents. And thirdly, pushing continents together would make Greenland be pushed north into the Arctic Circle, which would keep it cool enough that it wouldn't melt!
Now, how you're going to manage to get continents back together isn't really my concern. Now if someone wants a really fun challenge, you can create a blog about how to put my crazy ideas into practice. It would be difficult, but it could be pretty rewarding!
So anyway, after I drove my friend to the airport, I started thinking about oceans and I thought back to the good ole' days before the Atlantic Ocean existed. Ah, yes, I remember it like it was just 130 millions years ago. Times were much simpler back then. Animals didn't have to worry about crossing an ocean to visit their relatives. We didn't have to worry about things like ocean currents reversing because of Greenland melting. There was no such thing as the Great Atlantic Garbage Patch. Good times... Good times...
But wait! Couldn't go go back to those days of Pangea? If we can send a man to the moon, surely we can push continents closer together! I mean, could you imagine if England and New England were finally reunited? It would cut down on so much gas if we could drive 'across the pond' (or lack thereof) instead of having to fly. Also, the GAGP would end up being smushed into a big plastic blob wedged between the two continents. And thirdly, pushing continents together would make Greenland be pushed north into the Arctic Circle, which would keep it cool enough that it wouldn't melt!Now, how you're going to manage to get continents back together isn't really my concern. Now if someone wants a really fun challenge, you can create a blog about how to put my crazy ideas into practice. It would be difficult, but it could be pretty rewarding!
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 7 - (3) Hybrid Vehicles vs. (6) Walking
(3) Hybrid Vehicles and (6) Walking. Go!
Hybrid Vehicles
While I didn't specify it, I am referring to specifically Electric-Hybrid Vehicles. There are also Hydraulic Hybrids, but the electric ones are by far the most popular, so we'll go with that. Hybrids work by charging a battery whenever the brakes are applied. Thus, starting and stopping a lot is somewhat good for your fuel efficiency. The funny thing is this "new" technology has been around for around 100 years. How about that?
Impact on the Environment (8/15):
I mean yeah, it does increase the fuel efficiency of cars without drivers changing their driving habits. But ultimately, it's only something that will slow down our dependence on foreign oil. Even if we all switch to Hybrids, we're still going to need a lot of oil. Oil that, when burned, releases carbon emissions. This will only slow the inevitable, not stop it.
Practicality (10/10):
When Hybrids were becoming popular again a few years back, the cost of the additional Hybridity (don't question my vocabulary) usually didn't offset the savings from using less gas. At least not for quite a few years. Then two things happened, gas prices went way up and the cost of making Hybrids went down as the technology matured further. This made Hybrids very very popular. It may come to the point when Hybrids are the standard for all cars and non-Hybrids are the exception. Sort of like manual cars versus automatic.
Sustainability (7/10):
Like I mentioned in the last paragraph, Hybrid technology is so innocuous (as in nobody would notice too much if all cars were Hybrids) that it may become the standard for all cars. This would be a good thing, because there would be little to no resistance to everyone switching to Hybrids.
Awesomeness (6/10):
Hybrids are a really savvy marketing technique because they have such an evocative connotation. Buying Hybrids is the way that lazy people can show that they care about the environment without doing anything strenuous like recycling or Walking to work.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Walking
When I say Walking, I mean Walking to something that you normally drive (or ride your bike) to, thus saving gas (or wasting time).
Impact on the Environment (15/15):
If we took all the cars off the road, we'd be set. As in, done. Our environmental problems would be over. Carbon levels in the atmosphere would drop back to normal levels and climate change would slow down. The polar bears would be saved. The coral reefs would grow back. Al Gore would have to find a new line of work.
Practicality (1/10):
There are very very few cases when you can justify Walking everywhere you go. Unless of course you go to college, but you know from Green Tip #72 that's not the best idea. Even living in a big city, you still have to take the bus or taxis. And what about moving? Are you really going to carry that couch all the way across town or to another state?
Sustainability (5/10):
Well, people will always need to Walk a little bit around the house or to the mailbox. But it's a gamble if people will be Walking more or less to places. It depends a lot on if people continue to expand outwards to the suburbs or if people in the suburbs move back into the city that has been abandoned by the people who moved to the suburbs in the first place.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Okay, so at first it would be pretty awesome. Never paying for gas? Sounds awesome! Ha! Wait until winter. Or when it's raining. Or late at night. Okay, I think you get the point. Walking everywhere would get pretty darn un-awesome.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Hybrids: 31
Walking: 24
Hybrids will move on to face another foe. Who will it be? Find out Saturday when (2) Electric Vehicles takes on (7) Carbon Offsets.
Hybrid Vehicles
While I didn't specify it, I am referring to specifically Electric-Hybrid Vehicles. There are also Hydraulic Hybrids, but the electric ones are by far the most popular, so we'll go with that. Hybrids work by charging a battery whenever the brakes are applied. Thus, starting and stopping a lot is somewhat good for your fuel efficiency. The funny thing is this "new" technology has been around for around 100 years. How about that?
Impact on the Environment (8/15):
I mean yeah, it does increase the fuel efficiency of cars without drivers changing their driving habits. But ultimately, it's only something that will slow down our dependence on foreign oil. Even if we all switch to Hybrids, we're still going to need a lot of oil. Oil that, when burned, releases carbon emissions. This will only slow the inevitable, not stop it.
Practicality (10/10):
When Hybrids were becoming popular again a few years back, the cost of the additional Hybridity (don't question my vocabulary) usually didn't offset the savings from using less gas. At least not for quite a few years. Then two things happened, gas prices went way up and the cost of making Hybrids went down as the technology matured further. This made Hybrids very very popular. It may come to the point when Hybrids are the standard for all cars and non-Hybrids are the exception. Sort of like manual cars versus automatic.
Sustainability (7/10):
Like I mentioned in the last paragraph, Hybrid technology is so innocuous (as in nobody would notice too much if all cars were Hybrids) that it may become the standard for all cars. This would be a good thing, because there would be little to no resistance to everyone switching to Hybrids.
Awesomeness (6/10):
Hybrids are a really savvy marketing technique because they have such an evocative connotation. Buying Hybrids is the way that lazy people can show that they care about the environment without doing anything strenuous like recycling or Walking to work.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Walking
When I say Walking, I mean Walking to something that you normally drive (or ride your bike) to, thus saving gas (or wasting time).
Impact on the Environment (15/15):
If we took all the cars off the road, we'd be set. As in, done. Our environmental problems would be over. Carbon levels in the atmosphere would drop back to normal levels and climate change would slow down. The polar bears would be saved. The coral reefs would grow back. Al Gore would have to find a new line of work.
Practicality (1/10):
There are very very few cases when you can justify Walking everywhere you go. Unless of course you go to college, but you know from Green Tip #72 that's not the best idea. Even living in a big city, you still have to take the bus or taxis. And what about moving? Are you really going to carry that couch all the way across town or to another state?
Sustainability (5/10):
Well, people will always need to Walk a little bit around the house or to the mailbox. But it's a gamble if people will be Walking more or less to places. It depends a lot on if people continue to expand outwards to the suburbs or if people in the suburbs move back into the city that has been abandoned by the people who moved to the suburbs in the first place.
Awesomeness (3/10):
Okay, so at first it would be pretty awesome. Never paying for gas? Sounds awesome! Ha! Wait until winter. Or when it's raining. Or late at night. Okay, I think you get the point. Walking everywhere would get pretty darn un-awesome.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Hybrids: 31
Walking: 24
Hybrids will move on to face another foe. Who will it be? Find out Saturday when (2) Electric Vehicles takes on (7) Carbon Offsets.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Green Tip #98: Banana Bread
Mmmmmm.... Don't you just love the smell of banana bread muffins baking in the oven? I can't even begin to describe how much I love the taste of the warm, luscious banana-y goodness topped with cinnamon and brown sugar. Well, I could begin to describe it, but I wouldn't be able to complete the description because it's very difficult to describe tastes and smells and then you'd be left with half a description of banana bread muffins and I just hate to leave you hanging like that. So I'll just let you make some yourself and you won't need me to describe it for you.
Hm? What's that? You're wondering where this is going and how it relates to Green Tip #98? Well I'll tell you! (Of course I will, I'd be a jerk to just say "Make banana bread" and assume that you can figure out what the environmental message behind it all is).
So, bananas are weird. Not the fact that they're shaped so unnaturally or the fact that bananas don't really have seeds which is weird for fruits. No, I mean they're all backwards in terms of when you can and can't use them. Let me give you an example. Let's say I wanted to make apple pie. Mmmmmm.... apple pie. I can't even begin to describe- Okay, sorry, I'm getting lost in my own head again. You can't go wrong with apple pie, right? Especially if you use perfectly ripe apples. Freshly picked, right off the apple tree. Sounds delicious, right?
Now let's think about banana bread. You go to the store to get bananas and you pick up the perfect bunch of bananas: nice and firm, mostly yellow with just a tiny hint of green and no spots or bruises at all. You take them home and... wait a week until they get gross and black and squishy because you can't very well make banana bread from firm yellow bananas. What gives? How come bananas are still useful after they've gone bad but other fruits you have to throw away.
Strawberries and blueberries start getting moldy, potatoes grow those nasty root things, lettuce withers and turns black, grapes get all squishy and sour and you have to throw them all away, adding more volume to the landfills (or kitchen walls). In fact, I can't think of another food other than bananas that are still useful for eating after they go bad.
So Green Tip #98 has two parts (depending on your level of tolerance of mold). First, you could only eat bananas (when they're ripe) and banana bread (when they're 'mature'). This will save a lot of produce from being thrown away. Alternatively, you can find recipes for [whatever moldy food you have] bread that can make use of your rotten food. (Don't worry, the mold spores will die in the intense heat of the oven. Maybe...)
So, if you've still got an appetite after that, march on out to your kitchen and fish that moldy bag of lettuce out of your garbage, because you're having lettuce bread for breakfast tomorrow!!
Hm? What's that? You're wondering where this is going and how it relates to Green Tip #98? Well I'll tell you! (Of course I will, I'd be a jerk to just say "Make banana bread" and assume that you can figure out what the environmental message behind it all is).
So, bananas are weird. Not the fact that they're shaped so unnaturally or the fact that bananas don't really have seeds which is weird for fruits. No, I mean they're all backwards in terms of when you can and can't use them. Let me give you an example. Let's say I wanted to make apple pie. Mmmmmm.... apple pie. I can't even begin to describe- Okay, sorry, I'm getting lost in my own head again. You can't go wrong with apple pie, right? Especially if you use perfectly ripe apples. Freshly picked, right off the apple tree. Sounds delicious, right?
Now let's think about banana bread. You go to the store to get bananas and you pick up the perfect bunch of bananas: nice and firm, mostly yellow with just a tiny hint of green and no spots or bruises at all. You take them home and... wait a week until they get gross and black and squishy because you can't very well make banana bread from firm yellow bananas. What gives? How come bananas are still useful after they've gone bad but other fruits you have to throw away.
Strawberries and blueberries start getting moldy, potatoes grow those nasty root things, lettuce withers and turns black, grapes get all squishy and sour and you have to throw them all away, adding more volume to the landfills (or kitchen walls). In fact, I can't think of another food other than bananas that are still useful for eating after they go bad.
So Green Tip #98 has two parts (depending on your level of tolerance of mold). First, you could only eat bananas (when they're ripe) and banana bread (when they're 'mature'). This will save a lot of produce from being thrown away. Alternatively, you can find recipes for [whatever moldy food you have] bread that can make use of your rotten food. (Don't worry, the mold spores will die in the intense heat of the oven. Maybe...)
So, if you've still got an appetite after that, march on out to your kitchen and fish that moldy bag of lettuce out of your garbage, because you're having lettuce bread for breakfast tomorrow!!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 6 - (4) Biofuels vs. (5) Trains
Hey all, sorry about the super late post. I had some... er... super important things to take care of this weekend. You wouldn't understand. No more wasting time! Let's see how (4) Biofuels and (5) Trains stack up!
Biofuels
Biofuels, wow such a huge topic that one paragraph won't be enough. But I'll try. Biofuels are anythings that fuel vehicles that are made from plant or animal matter. Theoretically, they are renewable, but that assumes that you plant more of the crop. Common examples are gasoline made from algae and ethanol made from corn.
Impact on the Environment (7/15):
I really want to give this one higher marks. Because anything that can reduce our dependence on foreign oil and potentially burn cleaner would be a great idea. But here's the catch. As we chop down all that abundant corn growing in our backyards, that's that much less corn for us to feed to livestock and eat ourselves. That drives up prices and forces us to use more land for farms (which I've mentioned in the Wildlife Conservation is a bad thing). On top of that, ethanol still releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases when it's burned.
Practicality (9/10):
Biofuels are very practical. We won't need to change much about our cars. We don't need to change much about our gas pipelines. We're already growing corn and other crops like switchgrass. In fact, up to 10% of gas you get now contains corn-based ethanol.
Sustainability (5/10):
Even if we switched half of the gasoline we use to corn-based ethanol, we won't have enough corn in this country for that, let alone feeding livestock. So this won't solve our oil crisis. The good news is that scientists are working on non-corn based alternatives to making ethanol. Things like sugar cane (widely used now in Brazil) and algae (we're never going to run out of ocean (unless the Great Pacific Garbage Patch has its way)).
Awesomeness (4/10):
I mean, really, you don't even see the gas you put in your car now, so you wouldn't notice if it suddenly looked like corn-based fuel. Even if it was glowing green because it was made from algae, you still wouldn't notice. Go on with your lives, people, nothing to see here.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Trains
Even three year old kids know what Trains are. I don't think that I need to go over this one.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
Getting more Trains on the road instead of trucks will save a lot of gas because Trains don't stop for red lights and traffic and all that junk. And with high speed Trains becoming more popular, people can travel from one city to another just as quick as air travel but without the gas guzzling airplanes.
Practicality (4/10):
Trains. Hm... The problem is that you can't get rid of trucks altogether. I mean, could you imagine a FedEx Train showing up outside your house to deliver packages? Trains are so limited in where they can go and they take a whole lot of effort to load and unload and everything like that. The good news is that Trains have been around so long that the technology is very mature and people have figured out pretty well how to make Trains.
Sustainability (5/10):
Trains should last for a very very long time. If the rails are kept up pretty well and the Trains are maintained, the rail system should last for quite a long time. A lot of the rail lines that exist in this country have been around since before the Civil War, so 150 years means that Trains weren't just some fad. But there has to be a reason a lot of the rail lines have been shut down in the past 20 years, especially in the Midwest. The killer - Interstate system. Stupid Interstate System...
Awesomeness (8/10):
Trains are pretty darn awesome. I mean, what boy in this country didn't have some kind of Train that they played with when they were kids? Unless of course they run through your backyard, everyone loves trains.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Biofuels: 25
Trains: 29
Way to go, Trains! Do you think that you can stand up to (1) Bikes? Well, yes, literally, I think a Train could take out a whole fleet of Bikes, but the ability to crush one another isn't a category in this Tournament. This round anyway....
Biofuels
Biofuels, wow such a huge topic that one paragraph won't be enough. But I'll try. Biofuels are anythings that fuel vehicles that are made from plant or animal matter. Theoretically, they are renewable, but that assumes that you plant more of the crop. Common examples are gasoline made from algae and ethanol made from corn.
Impact on the Environment (7/15):
I really want to give this one higher marks. Because anything that can reduce our dependence on foreign oil and potentially burn cleaner would be a great idea. But here's the catch. As we chop down all that abundant corn growing in our backyards, that's that much less corn for us to feed to livestock and eat ourselves. That drives up prices and forces us to use more land for farms (which I've mentioned in the Wildlife Conservation is a bad thing). On top of that, ethanol still releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases when it's burned.
Practicality (9/10):
Biofuels are very practical. We won't need to change much about our cars. We don't need to change much about our gas pipelines. We're already growing corn and other crops like switchgrass. In fact, up to 10% of gas you get now contains corn-based ethanol.
Sustainability (5/10):
Even if we switched half of the gasoline we use to corn-based ethanol, we won't have enough corn in this country for that, let alone feeding livestock. So this won't solve our oil crisis. The good news is that scientists are working on non-corn based alternatives to making ethanol. Things like sugar cane (widely used now in Brazil) and algae (we're never going to run out of ocean (unless the Great Pacific Garbage Patch has its way)).
Awesomeness (4/10):
I mean, really, you don't even see the gas you put in your car now, so you wouldn't notice if it suddenly looked like corn-based fuel. Even if it was glowing green because it was made from algae, you still wouldn't notice. Go on with your lives, people, nothing to see here.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Trains
Even three year old kids know what Trains are. I don't think that I need to go over this one.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
Getting more Trains on the road instead of trucks will save a lot of gas because Trains don't stop for red lights and traffic and all that junk. And with high speed Trains becoming more popular, people can travel from one city to another just as quick as air travel but without the gas guzzling airplanes.
Practicality (4/10):
Trains. Hm... The problem is that you can't get rid of trucks altogether. I mean, could you imagine a FedEx Train showing up outside your house to deliver packages? Trains are so limited in where they can go and they take a whole lot of effort to load and unload and everything like that. The good news is that Trains have been around so long that the technology is very mature and people have figured out pretty well how to make Trains.
Sustainability (5/10):
Trains should last for a very very long time. If the rails are kept up pretty well and the Trains are maintained, the rail system should last for quite a long time. A lot of the rail lines that exist in this country have been around since before the Civil War, so 150 years means that Trains weren't just some fad. But there has to be a reason a lot of the rail lines have been shut down in the past 20 years, especially in the Midwest. The killer - Interstate system. Stupid Interstate System...
Awesomeness (8/10):
Trains are pretty darn awesome. I mean, what boy in this country didn't have some kind of Train that they played with when they were kids? Unless of course they run through your backyard, everyone loves trains.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Biofuels: 25
Trains: 29
Way to go, Trains! Do you think that you can stand up to (1) Bikes? Well, yes, literally, I think a Train could take out a whole fleet of Bikes, but the ability to crush one another isn't a category in this Tournament. This round anyway....
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Friday, June 4, 2010
Green Tip #97: Be Less Vain
Hey Ugly Faces! How has your week been going? Probably not too great because everyone's been commenting about how grotesque you are. And I can see why they'd say that, after all, your face is pretty hideous.
Okay, that may have been a bit harsh, but you'll understand why I said those nasty things after I explain Green Tip #97 to you. Have you ever seen those vanity mirrors? You know, the ones that have really bright lights surrounding them so you can see your face better in order to put on makeup or see if that mole hair is getting any longer so you know if you need to worry about skin cancer.
Well, there is one major difference between vanity mirrors and regular mirrors. Regular mirrors don't use any electricity! Well, no electricity to use anyway. So if your self esteem is so low that you don't need to see your ugly faces with any detail, you won't be using as much electricity!
But wait, let's take it one step further! If you are so repulsed by your own face (as you should be), you don't even need any mirrors at all, saving you glass and metal. And if you don't have a mirror, you certainly won't bother with things like makeup and face washes, so that will keep chemicals from getting into the environment!
Well, it looks like I finally found a way for you to be useful to society and the environment! It's about time that someone found a use for you, you hideous monster. I just have one more question: was your mother an Asian Carp?
Okay, that may have been a bit harsh, but you'll understand why I said those nasty things after I explain Green Tip #97 to you. Have you ever seen those vanity mirrors? You know, the ones that have really bright lights surrounding them so you can see your face better in order to put on makeup or see if that mole hair is getting any longer so you know if you need to worry about skin cancer.
Well, there is one major difference between vanity mirrors and regular mirrors. Regular mirrors don't use any electricity! Well, no electricity to use anyway. So if your self esteem is so low that you don't need to see your ugly faces with any detail, you won't be using as much electricity!
But wait, let's take it one step further! If you are so repulsed by your own face (as you should be), you don't even need any mirrors at all, saving you glass and metal. And if you don't have a mirror, you certainly won't bother with things like makeup and face washes, so that will keep chemicals from getting into the environment!
Well, it looks like I finally found a way for you to be useful to society and the environment! It's about time that someone found a use for you, you hideous monster. I just have one more question: was your mother an Asian Carp?
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Tournament Round 1, Match 5 - (1) Bikes vs. (8) Buses
Well, everyone should already know what this one's about (partly because of the title, also because I talked about it yesterday). This is redundant, but it's time for the match up between (1) Bikes vs. (8) Buses!
Bikes
Bikes, invented sometime before I was born so therefore during a time I don't really know or care about, have taken hold mostly for recreational purposes or for people in bigger cities. If you need me to explain more, I applaud your ability to use a computer.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
As a t-shirt that I own says (it always comes down to the t-shirts, doesn't it?), Bikes get infinity miles per gallon of gas. That of course assumes you aren't drinking gasoline before you ride your Bike (I'd recommend E85. It's made from corn!), but you get the point. If everyone rode their Bikes everywhere, it would save a whole lot of gas, but people would have to take a whole lot of trips when moving. Just don't eat too much more when making those extra trips and Bikes and Biking is great for the environment.
Practicality (4/10):
Like I mentioned in the last paragraph, things like moving and long road trips can be more than a little difficult if you rely only on Bikes. That's why Biking is mainly used for recreational purposes.
Sustainability (9/10):
Bikes last a LOOOOOOONG time. Much fewer moving parts and things exploding inside them (how do you think gasoline engines work?) means Bikes will be around longer than cars. You buy a Bike and it can last for 20 or more years if you keep up with the maintenance. And no oil changes? I like the sound of that.
Awesomeness (9/10):
In my professional opinion, you can't be a true eco-hippie without having a Bike in your garage (or in your cave if you're taking the eco-hippie thing way too far). And how about this excuse: "I'm sorry, I can't go to my in-laws for Christmas because I don't own a car and it's too cold to ride my Bike." That'll get you out of so many things you don't want to go to!
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Buses
I'd say Buses were pretty well explained yesterday. Check it out if you're curious.
Impact on the Environment (8/15):
Buses, unlike Bikes, do feature things exploding inside their engines (hopefully just gasoline and not bombs like in the movie Speed), so they will naturally be less environmentally friendly. They do, however, use less gas per person than cars and trucks, so they are at least somewhat good for the environment.
Practicality (Either 4 (empty) or 7 (crowded) / 10):
The problem with Buses is that I've heard they're actually worse in terms of gas mileage per person than cars if they are underused. So people need to start riding the Bus much more often which would make Buses more crowded and really, who likes a crowded Bus? That just drops the awesomeness score down to 0.
Sustainability (3/10):
Buses require a lot of upkeep. Especially because they are part of a public service, if a Bus breaks down for whatever reason, there are a whole lot of passengers that will end up being horribly irate. There is also the potential for lawsuits if the Bus crashes, so who wants to deal with that mess?
Awesomeness (3 (empty) or 0 (crowded)/10):
Have you ever been on an empty Bus? It's nice, you get to stretch your feet out and relax. But even still, you can't relax too much because who knows who's sat in that seat before you and how often they clean the seats. Oh, and the fact that it stops every quarter of a mile can get a bit tedious. Now combine that with having to stand way too close to someone who you wonder where they've been before they got on that Bus and how often they clean themselves.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Bikes: 34
Buses: 18
This shouldn't come as too much of a surprise to anyone. Check it out next time when (4) Biofuels and (5) Trains go head to head!
Bikes
Bikes, invented sometime before I was born so therefore during a time I don't really know or care about, have taken hold mostly for recreational purposes or for people in bigger cities. If you need me to explain more, I applaud your ability to use a computer.
Impact on the Environment (12/15):
As a t-shirt that I own says (it always comes down to the t-shirts, doesn't it?), Bikes get infinity miles per gallon of gas. That of course assumes you aren't drinking gasoline before you ride your Bike (I'd recommend E85. It's made from corn!), but you get the point. If everyone rode their Bikes everywhere, it would save a whole lot of gas, but people would have to take a whole lot of trips when moving. Just don't eat too much more when making those extra trips and Bikes and Biking is great for the environment.
Practicality (4/10):
Like I mentioned in the last paragraph, things like moving and long road trips can be more than a little difficult if you rely only on Bikes. That's why Biking is mainly used for recreational purposes.
Sustainability (9/10):
Bikes last a LOOOOOOONG time. Much fewer moving parts and things exploding inside them (how do you think gasoline engines work?) means Bikes will be around longer than cars. You buy a Bike and it can last for 20 or more years if you keep up with the maintenance. And no oil changes? I like the sound of that.
Awesomeness (9/10):
In my professional opinion, you can't be a true eco-hippie without having a Bike in your garage (or in your cave if you're taking the eco-hippie thing way too far). And how about this excuse: "I'm sorry, I can't go to my in-laws for Christmas because I don't own a car and it's too cold to ride my Bike." That'll get you out of so many things you don't want to go to!
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Buses
I'd say Buses were pretty well explained yesterday. Check it out if you're curious.
Impact on the Environment (8/15):
Buses, unlike Bikes, do feature things exploding inside their engines (hopefully just gasoline and not bombs like in the movie Speed), so they will naturally be less environmentally friendly. They do, however, use less gas per person than cars and trucks, so they are at least somewhat good for the environment.
Practicality (Either 4 (empty) or 7 (crowded) / 10):
The problem with Buses is that I've heard they're actually worse in terms of gas mileage per person than cars if they are underused. So people need to start riding the Bus much more often which would make Buses more crowded and really, who likes a crowded Bus? That just drops the awesomeness score down to 0.
Sustainability (3/10):
Buses require a lot of upkeep. Especially because they are part of a public service, if a Bus breaks down for whatever reason, there are a whole lot of passengers that will end up being horribly irate. There is also the potential for lawsuits if the Bus crashes, so who wants to deal with that mess?
Awesomeness (3 (empty) or 0 (crowded)/10):
Have you ever been on an empty Bus? It's nice, you get to stretch your feet out and relax. But even still, you can't relax too much because who knows who's sat in that seat before you and how often they clean the seats. Oh, and the fact that it stops every quarter of a mile can get a bit tedious. Now combine that with having to stand way too close to someone who you wonder where they've been before they got on that Bus and how often they clean themselves.
User Input (0/5):
Get those comments in, everyone!
Alright, let's tally those scores!
Bikes: 34
Buses: 18
This shouldn't come as too much of a surprise to anyone. Check it out next time when (4) Biofuels and (5) Trains go head to head!
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Not a Green Tip #3: Apologies
For those of you that were aghast to find that I was actually going to apologize for something, let me just reassure you that, like the politicians I dissed in the first match up of the Tournament, I'm going to turn it around at the end and make it something positive. You'll see; it'll be epic!
I'd actually like to make an apology that is twofold. And the second of those two folds is, complexly enough, also twofold. (You're my new best friend if you get what I'm referencing! Don't bother Googling it unless you want to learn how to fold shirts.) Without further ado, here it comes.
My first apology comes from a mistake I made just recently when I was discussing the awesomeness of Energy Star Ratings during its head-to-head (most worthless link ever. Just scroll down!) against Reducing and Reusing in the Tournament. I stated, and I paraphrase, "And upon the date of my spying some cotton-based article of adornment, I shalt feel the most unusual occurrence beginning to develop upon my countenance. For I will find myself gazing upon the emblem which had hitherto eluded my cunning and worldly experiences. It shalt be none other than the Energy Star logo, and as far as I can conjecture, no man nor personage of the fairer sex has yet seen this as of this present hour." Basically, I've never seen an Energy Star t-shirt.
Until now.
Okay, so that's a stretch. You could have a shirt made with any sorts of logos, including the Energy Star one, but the fact of the matter is that it could theoretically exist out there. But looking back at the scores, Energy Star would have to score a perfect 10 in awesomeness in order to simply tie Reducing and Reusing. And I don't know about you, but all the t-shirts in the world can't help out Energy Star that much in awesomeness.
So, moving on to my next (twofold) apology. A while back, when I was discussing Disney World, I insulted non-Disney World buses calling them, and I quote directly, "somewhat frightening sometimes with homeless people and drunkards." Now, I don't want to apologize to bus owners or bus passengers, don't misunderstand me. I still feel that inner city buses are terrifying. No, I want to apologize to drunkards and homeless people.
Drunkards and the homeless get way too much blame for all of society's ills. Sure, they sometimes smell like vomit and urine, but still I feel like I don't have any right to insult them like that. Mainly because they're probably following my advice.
You see, WAAAAAY back in the early days of the Impractical Green Resource, I wrote a quaint little Green Tip called Green Tip #13 that was aimed at people that were struggling with the Recession. I argued that people who were poor and out of work were better for the environment. I also went so far as to say that you need to lose your home before you can be truly Green. So next time I see a homeless person, I'll be sure to thank them for the sacrifices they've made for the environment. You should too!
Continuing on, I also need to apologize to drunkards, who are clearly just following the advice I gave in Green Tip #79. I posted that on March 19, 2010, so I was clearly aiming it at the people who believe that St. Patrick was such a good saint that his holiday should be celebrated for at least three days in a row. In other words, alcoholics! Yes, the drunkards you see on the bus are most likely there because they got drunk to avoid the temptation of driving their gas-guzzling SUVs. Great job, guys (in a gender-neutral way)!
So with all this talk about the buses, you're sure to see them in a whole new light, won't you? In fact, you're probably dying to know more about buses and their impact on the environment, right? Well great!!! Check out the IGR tomorrow for the match-up between Biking and Buses!
(Wasn't that epic? Turning an apology into a self promotion? Seriously, Marcy Kaptur, just hand over the keys to the US Congress seat because I'm already such a darn good politician.)
I'd actually like to make an apology that is twofold. And the second of those two folds is, complexly enough, also twofold. (You're my new best friend if you get what I'm referencing! Don't bother Googling it unless you want to learn how to fold shirts.) Without further ado, here it comes.
My first apology comes from a mistake I made just recently when I was discussing the awesomeness of Energy Star Ratings during its head-to-head (most worthless link ever. Just scroll down!) against Reducing and Reusing in the Tournament. I stated, and I paraphrase, "And upon the date of my spying some cotton-based article of adornment, I shalt feel the most unusual occurrence beginning to develop upon my countenance. For I will find myself gazing upon the emblem which had hitherto eluded my cunning and worldly experiences. It shalt be none other than the Energy Star logo, and as far as I can conjecture, no man nor personage of the fairer sex has yet seen this as of this present hour." Basically, I've never seen an Energy Star t-shirt.
Until now.
Okay, so that's a stretch. You could have a shirt made with any sorts of logos, including the Energy Star one, but the fact of the matter is that it could theoretically exist out there. But looking back at the scores, Energy Star would have to score a perfect 10 in awesomeness in order to simply tie Reducing and Reusing. And I don't know about you, but all the t-shirts in the world can't help out Energy Star that much in awesomeness.
So, moving on to my next (twofold) apology. A while back, when I was discussing Disney World, I insulted non-Disney World buses calling them, and I quote directly, "somewhat frightening sometimes with homeless people and drunkards." Now, I don't want to apologize to bus owners or bus passengers, don't misunderstand me. I still feel that inner city buses are terrifying. No, I want to apologize to drunkards and homeless people.
Drunkards and the homeless get way too much blame for all of society's ills. Sure, they sometimes smell like vomit and urine, but still I feel like I don't have any right to insult them like that. Mainly because they're probably following my advice.
You see, WAAAAAY back in the early days of the Impractical Green Resource, I wrote a quaint little Green Tip called Green Tip #13 that was aimed at people that were struggling with the Recession. I argued that people who were poor and out of work were better for the environment. I also went so far as to say that you need to lose your home before you can be truly Green. So next time I see a homeless person, I'll be sure to thank them for the sacrifices they've made for the environment. You should too!
Continuing on, I also need to apologize to drunkards, who are clearly just following the advice I gave in Green Tip #79. I posted that on March 19, 2010, so I was clearly aiming it at the people who believe that St. Patrick was such a good saint that his holiday should be celebrated for at least three days in a row. In other words, alcoholics! Yes, the drunkards you see on the bus are most likely there because they got drunk to avoid the temptation of driving their gas-guzzling SUVs. Great job, guys (in a gender-neutral way)!
So with all this talk about the buses, you're sure to see them in a whole new light, won't you? In fact, you're probably dying to know more about buses and their impact on the environment, right? Well great!!! Check out the IGR tomorrow for the match-up between Biking and Buses!
(Wasn't that epic? Turning an apology into a self promotion? Seriously, Marcy Kaptur, just hand over the keys to the US Congress seat because I'm already such a darn good politician.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)