Slashing California Greenhouse Gas Emissions

When talks of combating or mitigating anthropogenic climate change come up, the inevitable “well,even if it exists, how can we act without crippling our industries” question or statement comes up. It may sound pessimistic, but it’s a vital question that must be answered. Humanity has been pumping out massive amounts of greenhouse gases for the past 150 years, and we need to lower our output significantly by 2050 or so in order to make the impacts of climate change less severe. But given how inefficient and dirty the current global energy infrastructure is, people often ask, rightfully so, whether or not it’s unreasonable to expect massive carbon emissions cuts within the next 40 to 50 years.

Even thinking on the small scale, such as reducing emissions in California-a giant state in and of itself-may seem impossible at first. But, according to a team of researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and the San Francisco-based energy consulting firm Energy and Environmental Economics, it is.

Distilling the article, the three main ways that California can cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050 are as follows: the primary method will be energy efficiency (“The scientists found that the largest share of greenhouse gas reductions from energy efficiency comes from the building sector via improvements in building shell, HVAC systems, lighting, and appliances.”), the next two methods will be cleaner power generation (“Another 27 percent reduction in emissions comes from switching to electricity generation technologies that don't pour carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Renewable energy, nuclear power, and fossil fuel-powered generation coupled with carbon capture and storage technology each has the potential to be the chief electricity resource in California. “) and going from gas to electric for many items (“So they turned to cars, space and water heaters, and industrial processes that consume fuel and natural gas. They determined that most of these technologies had to be electrified, with electricity constituting 55 percent of end-use energy in 2050, compared to 15 percent today. Overall, this nets a 16-percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the final push needed to achieve an 80-percent reduction below 1990 levels.”).

The article is linked in full here: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-how-to-slashing-california-greenhouse-gas.html

Pictures from India (Pondicherry)

Purchasing the plants at the Pondicherry nursery

Bala introducing Adarsha and Apoorva to the international volunteers

Planting with the volunteers

More planting with the volunteers

More planting with the volunteers and school children

Bala, his wife, and child standing in front of the school

Adarsha and some of the international volunteers distributing apples to the children

Apoorva helping distribute sweets to the children

Bala and the schoolteachers, along with some of the students

Our return to India (Part 1)

Dear followers,

We’ve returned from India (actually, we returned on August 21st, but we’re still recovering from jetlag), and with us, we bring more (mostly good) news about Project Jatropha.

There were two major Project Jatropha-related...events that happened during this year’s India visit. One was the visiting of the farmers who have been taking part in Phase II of Project Jatropha, and the other was the expansion of the project to Pondicherry.

For those of you who don’t know (ie, most everyone who hasn’t lived in India), Pondicherry is in the state of Tamil Nadu. Up to this point, all of Project Jatropha’s work in India has been centered in the Mysore-Hunsur area, which is in the state of Karnataka. Tamil Nadu is also in south India, and is actually right next to Karnataka. However, the primary language spoken in Tamil Nadu is, unsurprisingly, Tamil, whereas Kannada is the main language spoken in Karnataka. The languages are not similar at all, and travel would become an issue since directions were always in Tamil (whether verbal or written). But eventually, we got to Pondicherry.

There, we met with Bala, a man who works with an NPO (non profit organization) called VET (Vallalar Educational Trust) there. Taken from their website, their goal is as follows: VET aims at Rural Welfare Reforms for the Indian Woman and Girl Child, Social welfare and Health Welfare. We assist women by forming self-help groups, leadership training, income generation programme, immunisation and family planning advice, and mother and child nutrition programmes.

Bala was an engineer who decided to come back to his home town in order to better it-he saw the state that the area was in, and realized that his talents, energy, and enthusiasm could better serve the people in his community. Bala was also quick to realize that one of the main areas to focus on was the children-because with them lay the hope of changing the future. Cliche? Arguably. True? Very much so. Many of these children are among the first in their families to receive a formal education of any sort-most of their parents are illiterate and only know how to sign their names. By helping give them an education, Bala was enabling them to have a future beyond being stuck in their current socioeconomic position.

First, we went to a local nursery, which had been established a few decades ago, to purchase plants. Bala, who had already bought plants there before, was able to obtain a discount, as we were helping the school rather than making a purchase directly for ourselves. All in all, the amount of money spent totaled less than 2000 rupees (which is around $50 US), and with it we bought around 20 plants of varying types (details will be uploaded onto our official website shortly). Then, we hired an autorickshaw to transport the plants to the school, which cost a few hundred rupees.

Once in the school site, we met up with the international volunteers. Upon seeing them, we exchanged names and our places of origin. Many of them were from Europe, with one person from China. The majority of people were from Holland or Spain, but there were people from France and Belgium as well. Turns out they were all part of an exchange program of sorts, whereby volunteers like them would come to India, spend time among the locals, and participate in various projects dedicated towards helping the impoverished.

Around 100 kids were in the school, which was a small institution. There was very little lighting, and it was really the perfect picture of an impoverished school that you might see in an ad asking for donations. The entire school consisted of three buildings. Books were there, but clearly more were needed; there were few (if any) blackboards and there were no desks or chairs for the students, who had to sit on the floor. Despite the hard work of the teachers, it was still a challenge to educate the children with what little resources that were available. Yet, we found out that despite the dire need of resources for schools such as this one, politicians have instead been giving out free televisions to households in order to buy their votes (and the recipients would be reminded to vote for the candidate with the numerous ads that would be shown, ironically enough). This frankly shameful lack of priorities among the local politicians was a perfect example of the lack of care for the rural folk that Bala has been addressing.

After introductions, the actual planting began. Bala handed out the plants to us (Apoorva, me, and the international volunteers), along with some of the students. We were instructed to take off our socks before entering the field as it had rained the day before, and it soon became apparent why-although the ground looked fine, I quickly sank a good 6 inches into it when I stepped anywhere. Fortunately, Bala had already had the holes dug prior to yesterday’s rainfall, so our lives were that much easier. Once we all were in position, the plants were gently placed into the holes, which were filled in with a combination of manure and soil. Done with planting, we all washed our hands and sat down to eat.

We ended the successful planting with lunch, which was a vegetable biriyani cooked in a giant pot. After eating, we found out that Bala had hired a cook who usually does the kind of cooking in weddings just to cater for us-we were flattered at this display, because doing so certainly would have cost a large sum of money (especially considering that Bala certainly needed the money far more than we did). Regardless, we thanked Bala for his generosity and ate heartily.

Afterward lunch, we decided upon distributing the fruits to the school, which we did with help from the international volunteers. We learned from the international volunteers that the favorite fruit of many schoolchildren was apples. And lucky for us, we had brought apples-enough for the whole school, students and teachers alike. The entire school was incredibly grateful for the plants and the fruit. Bala thanked us (even though he had done much of the work by choosing and readying the school, as well as making sure the pits were dug out beforehand), and we intend to continue our work in Pondicherry. In the future, we hope to introduce small amounts of Jatropha to the schools (perhaps as fences) as well as assorted fruit and ornamental plants.

The next blog post will talk about the revisiting of the Phase I and II sites of Project Jatropha, and what decisions transpired as a result.

~Adarsha

Land for Biofuels or Crops? The Debate Rumbles on

• 

• June 22, 2011, 12:51 PM GMT

AFP/Getty Images

Palm oil fruit – often seen as a biofuel.

Agriculture ministers for the world’s richest nations are meeting in Paris this week to debate the best ways to tackle unprecedented volatility in food prices.

But while farming officials for the Group of 20 nations may agree that markets need more transparency and predictability, opinion is still split over more controversial topics, including governments’ policies on diverting food crops to create biofuels.

A report commissioned by international agencies including the World Bank and the United Nations’ food body and the International Monetary Fund urged the G20 to “remove . . . policies that subsidize or mandate biofuels production or consumption”.

But opposition from countries such as the U.S. and Brazil, two of the world’s biggest users of first-generation ethanol created from corn and sugar for transport fuel, means such recommendations are not expected to be adopted by European governments.

“I suspect that there will continue to be differences among the G20 agricultural producers about how much they’re willing to commit to on biofuels,” said World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick.

Agriculture ministers are expected to announce plans to launch a global database of production and stocks of staple foodstuffs such as wheat, corn, rice and soya beans, similar to a system which already exists in oil markets. Observers hope this will reduce price volatility and allow governments to plan ahead to stop food shortages.

But for anti-biofuels campaigners, addressing the diversion of already stretched agricultural resources to create fuel is a key aspect of dampening food prices, which rose to record highs this year, according to the UN.

“As more food stocks go into gas tanks, not stomachs, you have higher prices,” said Sarah Best, Oxfam’s policy adviser of low carbon development. “The G20 has got to get a grip on the relationship between biofuels and food price volatility.”

She argues that scrapping mandates on biofuels blends, as are being imposed in the European Union, and blending subsidies, as exist in the U.S., will be key to ensuring food production rises by the 70% the UN projects will be necessary to feed a world population of more than 9 billion by 2050.

Yet the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, said in a report published last week they expect biofuels to absorb 13% of global coarse grain production, 15% of vegetable oil and some 30% of sugar by 2020—an increase in all cases from the previous decade.

Supporters of biofuels argue they can actually help to stimulate food production by boosting agricultural investment and will be key to meeting targets for cutting carbon emissions for the future.

They point to other problems like building up world food stocks and reining in speculation in commodities markets—issues which are also expected to be pushed to the sidelines this week—as more important for improving food security.

“It may be vogue for certain groups to blame biofuels for global hunger issues…but that doesn’t mean eliminating biofuels policies will somehow put more food on the plates in developing nations,” said Geoff Cooper, vice president for research and analysis of the Renewable Fuels Association.

Certainly, a vote by the U.S. senate last week to eliminate a 45-cents-per-gallon tax credit for blended biofuel and regular fuel and a 54-cents-per-gallon import tariff on ethanol, points to changing attitudes towards stimulating biofuels production in one of the world’s largest users.

Still, for campaigners who have been expecting robust targets to come out of this week’s meeting, the dropping of biofuels from the G20 agenda will be another sign of government inertia in the face of the most pressing humanitarian challenge of our time.

Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

www.djreprints.com

Germany to close nuclear power plants by 2022

Neckarwestheim nuclear plant in Germany - the country will shut all its nuclear reactors by 2022. Photograph: Michael Probst/AP

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/30/germany-pledges-nuclear-shutdown-2022

So, recently, Germany has decided to phase out nuclear power completely by 2022.

"As expected, the coalition wants to keep the eight oldest of Germany's 17 nuclear reactors permanently shut. Seven were closed temporarily in March, just after the earthquake and tsunami hit Fukushima. One has been off the grid for years.

Another six would be taken offline by 2021, environment minister Norbert Roettgen said early on Monday after late-night talks in the chancellor's office between leaders of the centre-right coalition.

The remaining three reactors, Germany's newest, would stay open until 2022 as a safety buffer to ensure no disruption to power supply, he said."

My thoughts?

While I do understand the fears behind nuclear power-nuclear waste is an issue, and nuclear power plants need to be updated in order to make sure they are safe-I feel that shutting down all nuclear power in Germany-especially if that means cancelling any future plans for other types of nuclear power, is a counterproductive move.

Although the Fukushima incident was large and dangerous, it must be kept in mind that the literal worst case scenario happened-and the facility nearly completely weathered it. The sea wall that was to protect against a tsunami was designed for waves that were 5 meters smaller than the massive 25 meter waves that hit the plants. And it was the tsunami that wreaked much of the havoc on the power plants.

There were many coal and oil plants that were wrecked by the tsunami which leaked poisonous material into the water and land. Yet, the outcry over them has been far more subdued.

Condemning an entire branch of power supply-one that despite its problems, has viable solutions (thorium based power plants, recycling and reuse of nuclear waste, updating all existing plants with modern nuclear security protocols)-is not the way to phase out fossil fuels or phase in renewables. We don't have to necessarily build more nuclear power plants-they're incredibly expensive and take several years to actually come online-but to eliminate existing ones only opens the way up for more fossil fuel usage, as the industries still have quite some power in Germany. Yes, renewables are being touted to fill the gap, but it should have been fossil fuel plants, rather than nuclear power plants, that were being replaced (once again, not instanteously). Rather, nuclear power plants should be made more safe and be more thoroughly scrutinized, but still play their role in power generation (among other things, such as desalination). It is the dirtiest of fossil fuel plants-coal-that needs to be examined first, and needs to be replaced first.

~Adarsha

Our Work on Global Youth Service Day!

Dear friends,

We did it! Finally, Cesar Chavez Middle School, Hayward CA, is officially the first participant school in Global Call to Youth in the Bay Area. We could not have chosen a better day as April 15th was Global Youth Service day. The weather was gorgeous. We reached the middle school at 3 PM. We had 13 enthusiastic youth volunteers from the school. Mr. Joshua Bennett, Head of the after school gardening program, was instrumental in making this venture a huge success. Tameeka Kelly, our GCY coordinator and advisor for Hayward area, also participated in planting.

We sincerely thank the volunteers, Alexis Guitierrez, Pablo Rios, Brian Barajas, Tristan Squires, Kamal Gill, Jasdip Sekhan, Gerrick Puenas, Carlos Perez, Yousuf Amir, Story Amir, Shiva Kumar. Roman Johnson and Edison Reyes for being a part of GCY.

After working hard for 2-3 hours, we all had a pizza party to celebrate the event. This marks the official beginning of our local work. We are always welcoming volunteers who can help us extend this to other schools in low income neighborhoods in the Bay.

Please help us by making tax deductible donations to Project Jatropha.
~Apoorva