Thursday, December 14, 2006

PRODUCT: Zelfo

I have been informed by Zelfo Technology that the below information is no longer relevant. In a recent email to me, Richard Hurding let me know that
"
Hello Jo

We are the owners of the Trade marked and Patented material Zelfo - as mentioned in your blog article on Zelfo.

Firstly I would like to thank you for running this article and for giving Zelfo a presence on your website.

Zelfo Technology are now concentrating on streamlining the manufacturing aspect of Zelfo and our product emphasis is no longer as shown in your article. From both your and Zelfo Technologys' side I believe it is important that we issue information that is current as it is of no benefit to either side to confuse the market. Therefore as Zelfo Technology are not ready to issue any press text or to show the latest range of Zelfo products, can I please ask that for now you remove all existing materials from your site.

Naturally as and when we are ready to issue any material that is relevant to you we will inform you immediately .

For you information, the microsite www.zelfo-technology.com is now live.

Many thanks for your assistance with this matter.

r

Richard Hurding
Zelfo Technology

http://www.zelfo-technology.com
"

Hopefully we will hear again from Zelfo in the future.

A kind of plastic made from plants! Here is what they say:

Zelfo is a solid wood-like and mouldable material made from natural fibres, recycled paper or other cellulose raw materials. Zelfo is a strong, light 'plastic from plants' produced by means of a sustainable process.

Sounds like a great alternative to plastic, and from the website's vibe I think they are sound in their environmental priciples.

Zelfo are the manufacturers of the materials, so if you have some amazing design for a chair or whatever they will mould it for you (more like mould 1000 for you...).I look forward to their upcoming products link.

Image: Peanut Chair by Fürst/Bartosch

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

TIPS: Big Questions

Sydeny Morning Herald weekend edition 9-10 December 2006
Published my answer
(with some other good ones in the paper, and alot more online)
to the question:

Is it better to tip the cold water out of the kettle and boil hot water (saving electricity) or re-boil the cold remains (saving water)?

Water from the hot water service is not good for drinking. Cold pre-boiled water re-boils faster than cold never-boiled water. Switch to a 100 per cent renewable energy provider and re-boil your kettle. Then you can save water and have a carbon-emission-free cup of tea.
Josephine Vaughan, Newcastle

You should boil an amount of water equal only to the quantity required at the time of use. You are then conserving water and saving electricity as the kettle doesn't have to boil water unnecessarily.
Dean Alger, Coogee

Unless your hot water is solar-heated, you waste energy resources by boiling hot water from the tap, as the water has been pre-heated by electricity or gas, and there are always energy losses in the waterheater-jug-cup system, albeit small. What you will gain is time, though not much. It's better to boil ordinary tap water, but not chilled water from the fridge, of course.
Peter R. Green, Marrickville

If you tip the cold water out of the kettle over the nearest pot-plant, then boil hot water, you can have your cake and eat it too.
J. Barrie Brown, Gordon

It's best just to boil the correct amount of water in the first place.
Sandy Parkinson, Hilton, WA

It is better to fill the kettle with only x cups of water when you make x cups of tea.
This means (a) you save water, (b) you save electricity, (c) the question becomes irrelevant.
Milton Wheeler, Harbord

Using the hot water tap for drinking isn't recommended. A hot water heater - which itself is less than sterile - often contains impurities such as lead from household plumbing that are concentrated in the heating process and also dissolve more rapidly in hot water, making drinking it a risky business. Better to save electricity elsewhere.
John Moir, Mollymook

Neither, if you want to make tea or coffee. Tip any water remaining in the kettle on a plant and boil water from the cold tap. Do not use water from the hot tap or remaining water because it is low in oxygen necessary to develop the flavour of the beverage. Hot tap water also contains far more dissolved minerals from your hot water system potentially harmful to health. Older houses and renovations sometimes retain lead pipes and lead soldering.
Paul Roberts, Lake Cathie

It is better to tip the unused boiling water straight into a thermos and then pour this water back into the kettle, when needed, and reboil. Save water and electricity.
Sandra Christie, Beacon Hill

It's best to put the cold water from the kettle on the garden plants, say: the Morning Glory; or the Red Hot Poker.
Steve Barrett, Glenbrook

Reboil the cold remains; boiling hot water doesn't save anything, as it has already been heated using electricity or gas. Even better is to only fill the kettle with the amount of water that you need each time; water freshly drawn from the cold cold tap and heated once only makes the best tea or coffee.
Conrad Henley-Calvert, Tarago

...

Here is the link to the relevant smh web page but knowing the smh site, they will probably have dropped the link by the time you want to access it. Then they might charge you, if you can ever find the relavant page again. YES! I do think the smh website is terrible!

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

REPORT: Ian Lowe's talk "Energy for a Sustainable Future"

Climate Action Newcastle hosted an inspiring talk last night by Emeritus Professor Ian Lowe AO, President of the Australian Conservation Foundation entitled "Energy for a Sustainable Future".

Prof.Lowe opened with the notion of planning for the future- for a sustainable future. Using the example of taking a family holiday, he explained how we don't usually pack our family and camping gear into the car and drive randomly on the road system until we run out of fuel, set up camp for 2 weeks, then hitch home.
We spend time planning our lives, so why not spend some time planning for the future of humanity, and chose the path to sustainability.
Our lives are full of choices, said the professor, so each time we have a choice, we can take the most sustainable one, which will lead us all to a sustainable future, to reduce climate change.

Presenting us with graphs and maps showing the effect of climate change on different regions of Australia, he showed that climate change is indeed occurring, at a rapid pace, with temperatures having increased by several degrees in some areas, and fallen in others. The intensity of rainfall has decreased all around our most populated areas, and increased in the uninhabited areas.
Reminding us of current climate related disasters, hurricanes, tsunami, bushfires etc, Prof.Lowe did use a bit of the old scare tactic to keep us listening.
Maybe we need the old scare once in a while. As the professor pointed out, scientists have been warning of Climate Change have been largely unheeded. Similar warnings from an economist however about the effect of climate change on the economy, media attention is gained, eg. The Stern report.
Different projections were shown for the future if we were to continue producing carbon emissions at our current level. In order to return CO2 emissions to a manageable level, the professor showed that we would have to make a reduction of 60%-90% by 2050 of our current emissions. This seemed extreme, but he went on to show how this is not a far-fetched notion.

The main way to reduce CO2 is through alternative energy systems. Prof.Lowe showed figures demonstrating attainableness of sustainable energy compared to alternative energy notions from the government and industry such as "clean" coal and nuclear. Government studies into Nuclear showed that 25 new nuclear reactors would take over 12 years to build, and only then reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 18%, producing expensive power and still no way to deal with that 760 million year radioactive waste disposal issue.
Compatively he showed renewable energy as cheaper than nuclear, faster to produce, greater greenhouse gas reductions, and reliable.
It was good to hear the facts from a scientific viewpoint. According to Ian Lowe we are running out of oil, and we will be paying over $3/L by 2010 (only 3 years away!)

So what did the learned professor suggest we do? The biggest impact on reducing climate change is to reduce CO2 emissions.
Transport is almost a third of CO2 release so we should be walking and riding our bikes and horses.
We should use public transport as much as possible, and encouraging sustainably fuelled (eg hydrogen) public transport.
repeatedly he discussed the importance to people/government/business/industry of finances. We need to understand how much we are spending every time we use power. How much does it cost us to turn on a light, watch the TV, get a cold beer out of the fridge? Receiving a bill every three months keeps us very separate from the actual impact of our actions.

The ACF has been meeting with the 6 largest companies in Australia to determine the effect of climate change on business. The "business leaders round table" found that climate change will significantly interrupt business in the future, and to undertake sustainability measures as part of regular business practice would only minimally interrupt business output for a short while. With immediate, significant change to CO2 emissions, (ie reducing CO2 emissions by 60-90% by 2050) we would have a higher GDP, higher employment, cheaper electricity, lower costs for energy and infrastructure than if we continue with our existing CO2 emission practices.

Other countries efforts to reduce climate change were explored. Iceland aims to be oil and gas free by 2010. Already 76% of that countries power is wind generated. Some of the reasons Iceland can achieve this are that they are an island nation , so they don't need to interface their alternative energy systems with other nations, they are a country with emphasis on scientific knowledge and recognised for their rigorous research and intellectual community, and they have a large land mass compared to population...sound familiarly like another country we know well?

The figures for other nations' uptake and targets of PhotoVoltaic cells on residential roofs were displayed. Compared to 1 million for the USA, Australia has a target of .... zero. The professors humorous approach throughout the talk made it very entertaining. How we laughed at the silliness of our ways! He reminded us about how we look back upon our past and can't believe the ways we did things in the olden days, how 200 years ago the abolition of slavery seemed ridiculous, how allowing all members of society to vote would cause chaos, how could coffee be anything but instant. He dared us to be visionary, utopian thinkers, so that in the future, our descendants would look back at our use over natural resources and titter at our foolish naivete.

Well done, Professor Ian Lowe. I was very inspired.