'The Zoetrope': A Do-It-Yourself Wind Turbine

I found this article online the other day and thought to share, very interesting peice.

From EarthTechling's Caleb Denison:

If you live in an area that sees a fair amount of wind and you'd like to reduce your utility bill by harnessing some of that wind power, a wind turbine might be a good idea. The trouble with most commercially made home wind turbines, though, is that they're fairly expensive, extremely tall and, if you have neighbors, they might not appreciate the new addition to the neighborhood.

Washington state resident Mike Marohn commissioned an inventive alternative. It's called The Zoetrope and it's a vertical-axis wind turbine made out of easily attainable parts and, according to this article, it can be assembled by just about anyone.

Applied Sciences, which did the work, notes that the intention of this product was to provide supplemental water heating. The result is this wind turbine made of materials that you can find at Home Depot and online. Applied Sciences provides what you need to know to build one yourself, including some videos of the turbine and its parts in action and some other valuable resources that will help hopefully get the turbine connected to your home and operating.

During testing, the turbine was witnessed outputting approximately 150-200 watts of power in a windy period with gusts reaching up to 20 MPH. Under its current design, the actual average output is difficult to gauge. This is because certain parts in this turbine were tailored to withstand gusts of up to 60 MPH, conditions which are common here in the Northwest and likely to burn out more sensitive parts.

To encourage others to get involved in the development process, Applied Sciences decided to make the design of The Zoetrope "open source" so that anyone interested and industrious enough can help to refine the design and/or customize it for use in different geographical areas with differing wind conditions. The idea is appealing simply as a interesting science project, but the potential to save money and generate renewable energy in the backyard is rather compelling.

An End to Nuclear Power in Vermont?

With the biggest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl continuing on in Japan, there is an understandable amount of concern raising over whether or not nuclear power plants are worth the risk of something going wrong. While efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee are nothing new, long-time activists have a renewed vigor to at least have the plant properly checked out. A tsunami is not exactly a threat, but other occurrences such as a flood, terrorist attack, or human error could expose similar flaws in the design of Vermont Yankee as that of Fukushima. It is particularly worrisome due to the age of Vermont Yankee. Since it has been around for more than thirty-seven years now, it has about three times more nuclear waste on the top floor than Fukushima. If something were to go wrong, the consequences could very well be devastating.

This article (scroll down to "An End to Nuclear Power in Vermont?") also tells of the three accidents that have occurred at Vermont Yankee over just the last six years, as well as some of the lies that the owners have been documented as saying. There has been a fire, cooling tower collapse, and a tritium leak all within that time period. On top of that, Entergy claimed that there was no chance of underground pipes attached to the plant containing radioactive material, when in fact there was, and just three months after this claim was made a pipe burst and strontium, caesium, tritium and maganese, and cobalt 60 were all leaked. It seems very obvious that the Vermont Yankee has not been seriously examined and that the owners are just assuming that nothing will go wrong. The Vermont Yankee website makes a point to claim of how "safe, clean and reliable" the plant is, but how trustworthy is that considering all that has happened within just the last few years?

It isn't an exactly similar situation, but I recently read an article on an elementary school in the city of Okawa, Japan that was hit hard by the tsunami. The teachers and students knew exactly what they were supposed to do when the city's alarm went off, but they all just assumed that nothing would actually happen to them. One teacher spoke up and encouraged that they should all head to the top of a hill nearby, but only one child listened to what he had to say and went with him. They are just about the only members of the school who survived the tsunami. It is very much in our societal human nature to feel like bad things only happen to other people and will never happen to us, but unfortunately there is no way of actually knowing what is going to happen, so why take the risk? What has happened and continues to happen in Japan is heart-breaking and was unpredictable, so why allow Vermont Yankee to cross their fingers and just hope that nothing goes wrong?

The Vermont State Senate voted overwhelmingly to deny the company the permission it needs to operate after Entergy's license expires in one year from now. Entergy, however, plans to take on the challenge to renew their licence and have the plant continue to operate in the same manor anyways. It is really quite discouraging how much power big companies have, and that they tend to not be too concerned of the hazards of their productions. Most large companies seem to be focused on making as much money as they can with very little regard for how it's currently affecting consumers and the environment or could do so in the future. If Entergy/the NRC were to win that battle, I would find it extremely disturbing that a company has more power than the state government, but I think (or hope) that just wont happen.

There are definitely some good aspects to Vermont Yankee. It provides a large portion of Vermont's power as well as a large number of jobs. So if Vermont Yankee did get shut down, I'm wondering what exactly the plan would be to provide all of the power that it does? Also, what would they do with the thirty year supply of nuclear waste? That is quite a lot to just store in barrels somewhere, and there are other harmful situations that it could lead to if a disaster occurred near the storage site. Maybe the plant will just be examined for potentially flawed design, but while that is better than completely disregarding what the plant is doing, I don't know if there is a fool-proof way to make a nuclear power plant harmless. Really, a full fledged nuclear disaster leading to deadly radiation flowing through the air basically sounds like one of the most terrifying things that could happen, since we all know that radiation has the power to cause a vast array of horrific side effects. I am not sure what the best way to handle Vermont Yankee is, but I am thankful that it is such a huge controversy and hope that measures will be taken to improve it and remove untrustworthy people from owning it.

The Future of Space: Mining!

Space is open for business. After over 100years of extracting natural resources from earth, it looks as though the Planet cannot manage to sustain. Many people have put thought into how best to solve this problem, and many people have concluded that the Moon may hold the answer. Helium-3 is a dust ejected from the sun and brought to the moon from solar winds, since the moon has no atmosphere to reject such particles. Helium-3 happens to be a very potent form of energy, one which scientists say could sustain our energy needs here on Earth for thousands of years. Many companies have begun cost analyses to begin transporting the resources back home from depths in space, including the moon and mars. There is propositions to make the moon safe for mining crews and livable, and no this just isn’t a pipe dream from some rich business men, this is coming, it may already be here. NASA has started a program called the “Constellation program” whose main goal is to have a human outpost on the moon by 2020. This reversion into pillaging for natural resources will likely be carried out on other celestial bodies. One Russian company is built around the idea of fulfilling their goal to procure the helium-3 deposits from the moon and becoming filthy rich off of the product. The downside of such operations to the moon is the pollution that the exhibitions cause.

Say a lunar rocket explodes in space, the material left behind from the explosion will become an inanimate object and stay floating, obstructing what’s behind it for generations to come. This is because of the lack of gravitational pull, the same force of nature that allows our satellites to roam free. All of the materials we leave in space are there forever, there is no natural cycle to their decomposition in an oxygen free, atmosphere free environment. This presents a very problematic case for the scientists and businessmen, who must realize that any debris left in space will be there forever, and could potentially forever inhibit our exhibitions in space in the first place. This permanent problem could change our course for the rest of eternity, more so then our pollution of Earth, which has natural cycles of disposing of harmful waste and debris.

Although this sounds like an exotic idea, I suggest you listen to the TED talk given by Burt Rutan (which I have included in this post) and imagine ways in which we can and will one day venture and utilize space to our needs to sustain on Earth. I have also included in this post a very comprehensive BBC documentary entitled “Moon for Sale” which talks about the growing interest in space commodities.

TED Talk with Burt Rutan

BBC Documentary "Moon for Sale"

Solar Energy - Viablilty as Alternative Energy

For as long as most can remember, we've heard about solar panels and their ability to capture the sun's rays as harnessable energy. Many support its expansion because of this clean, zero-emission concept, but is it the whole truth? Is solar energy an effiicient, harnessable source of energy that could one day replace fossil fuels? And if so, why hasnt a push been made to harness this power source?

The process of directly converting sunlight into electrical energy is known as photovoitiacs. This is often done by exposing certain materials, such as silicon, to sunlight. These materials reactively release electrons that are able to be harnessed as electrical energies. Layers of these materials are wired together on the surface of the panels, and contained in protective shielding to prevent damage from the elements and outside sources.

Technically known as Photovaitaic Arrays, the efficiency of most panels, even with the latest advancements in the technology, is around 19% for consumer-available versions, with around 27% for more advance, commercial panels. Other issues factor in as well, ranging from maintainence, costly additions to optimize production, to simpler things such as power loss in shading. Trackers that follow the movement of the sun and tilt the panel appropraitely are often very expensive, and when even small sections of the panel fall out of direct light, the power output drops sharply from the electrons backtracking the unused circuits.

But how much power does that actually produce, aside from the obvious deficiencies? And would that still meet our needs? For the last few decades, the estimated rate of consumption in the US has been steady at around 98,443 kwh (Kilowatthours) per year per person. This is roughly three to four times that of the rest of the world, which makes it a good focus group.

A standard solar panel in the United states can generally expect to harness about 1 kwh/m^2/day (kilowatthour per square foot per day) in favorable conditions. Taking into account the average usage of energy per person, every person would require approximately 270 kwh/day, or a minimun of 270 square feet per person. This is not accounting for unfavorable conditions where a surplus would be necessary, so an approximate double (by my opinion) would viably be needed for each person, equivalent to 540 square feet of solar panel coverage. For the entirety of the United States population, this would require 167,951,085,120 square feet to provide and compensate. That is more than half the size of Vermont!

Another barring to the use of solar energy is the very high cost of the panels as compared to normal hydrocarbon fuels. A typical array costs about $95 per square foot, when factored into the amount needed per person, would add up to around $25,000, before maintainance and upkeep. All together, it would cost $15,955,353,086,400 to construct the array that would be needed to support the Unites States population, more than the current total national deficit.

All in all, while solar energy is hailed as a clean, alternative form of energy, it is largely outside of a single citizen's ability to implement in their home, and well above the ability of the government to endorse.

The lichen microcosm

Lichen is a fascinating example of successful symbiotic relationships between a fungus and algae. It is also a perfect illustration for endosymbiotic theory, a theory Lynn Margulis greatly contributed to. In this mutualistic relationship, both fungus and algae benefit: fungus obtains energy from the algae that conduct the photosynthesis process while algae are provided with a "home." From an evolutionary perspective, Margulis would argue that lichen is an adaptation that is the result of symbiogenesis (the merging of organisms into new collectives) rather than genetic mutation.
While lichen is made of a fungus and algae, it also provides a habitat for hundreds of bacteria and functions like a micro-ecosystem. Like Margulis, the mycologists interviewed find the micro-ecosystems to be very similar to the eco-systems of the Earth.
While lichen is one of the first organisms to grow in the course of primary succession and requires minimal resources, it appears to be vulnerable to human-made pollution. In Cambridge (MA) lichen has almost disapperead from the old cemeteries. I think lichen disappearance is a clear sign that our urban environment is not fit for human beings either. I also wonder what the evolutionary response to human pollution could possibly be, that is, how microorganisms might be able to cooperate and recombine for increased resilience...

Listen to the story on Lichen from Living on Earth!

A Vision For Sustainable Restaurants

Arthur Potts Dawson, founder and owner of multiple green businesses gives us some insight into his sustainable visions for restaurants. Because the restaurant industry is undoubtedly the most wasteful industry in the world, Dawson has opened a handful of restaurants that exclusively employ green practices. For example, the first restaurant he opened is constructed of floors and chairs that are not only recyclable, but that are made from recycled materials. Furthermore, the entire restaurant is powered by sustainable energy- wind power. Perhaps one of his most brilliant ideas, although not part of the physical design of sustainability, is that he created a menu in which the customers are free to choose their portion size. Finally, in the restaurant there is some form of a dehydrating apparatus that breaks down and turns food into inner material that can be stored and composted at a later time.
Dawson’s most recent business enterprise is a project that is extremely necessary in order to foster sustainable practices in the average person’s life. It is called “The People’s Supermarket” and is a non-profit social cooperative project that was created to serve as a food bridge between urban settings and the rural communities in which their food is grown and harvested. Dawson’s goal is to make this the most “sustainable supermarket in the world” by committing to a zero food waste policy. Although Dawson has spent the majority of his work in the realm of sustainable restaurant practices, he understands the importance of launching something like “The People’s Supermarket” because it transfers that restaurant model of sustainable awareness and participation into the very core of our communities. Generally speaking, the working class probably won’t seek out to eat at a green restaurant, but with something like “The People’s Supermarket” everyone, on some level is able to make informed decisions when going to purchase food.
Within his work in the restaurant business, Dawson’s initiative that gives customers the choice in determining their portion sizes is truly revolutionary. In an industry that accumulates so much waste, reshaping the customer’s relationship to food, and giving them a role of responsibility in the restaurant is crucial if we as a society are going to adapt to more sustainable methods concerning food. As Dawson states, it is not about eliminating waste, it’s about minimizing it.”

Canopy Living in Costa Rica

Costa Rica is a special place. The dense Rainforest climate and untainted landscapes provide visitors and residents alike with a pure and uninhabited experience. Over the past 100 years, vast deforestation and environmental mishaps have forever altered how many places in this region function and thrive, Costa Rica is trying to change this. As a country, Costa Rica has made a commitment to becoming a sustainable and environmentally viable place to live, learn and love.

Many social programs and initiatives have taken place to bring the country to a stable and sustainable level, my favorite of which is within Canopy studies. I watched a TED talk given by Nalini Nadkarni about the topic of Canopies. Nalini is an advocate, author and educator who spent her life devoted to the appreciation and understanding of our need and use of trees and more specifically, Canopy growth. I focused not only on her talk, but on a community named Finca Bellavista on the island. Finca is a tree house community which is built within the canopies of Costa Rica. They are commited to being 100% self sufficient and off the grid, all while having a very comfortable and enjoyable living experience. They use zip lines as transportation, rainwater as hydration and nature as it’s cradle. I have posted a promotional video that Finca Bellavista has posted for our viewing pleasure.

Community Waste Management Environmental Educational Socio-Green(Up)Building Activism!




In Grenades Guatemala, elementary students learned about green building, the environment, waste management, and build themselves a school in the process all with the help of Laura Kutner. While serving in the Peace Corps Kutner was helping out at one of the local elementary schools. She was asked to help raise funds for the completion of two classrooms that had already been framed. She obliged and noticed the frame was the width of the plastic soda bottle in her hand and thought immediately of a fellow volunteer who was constructing building blocks out of plastic bottles stuffed with inorganic trash called Eco-Bricks. She thought this building method might be a cost efficient approach to finishing the classrooms.
With the help of neighboring students and littering citizens, the elementary school collected 8000 Eco-Bricks. At about one pound per Eco-Brick, that's 8000 pounds of garbage picked up off the ground and put into a wall, a wall that is even more flexible in earthquake territory than cement blocks.

Kutner knows that its not just the new classrooms that are important, nor the six new "bottle schools" recently built that are important but it's the underlying educational aspect of the project that is important as she states here: "The real long-term goal of these projects is the educational aspect to it, because this is not a long-term solution to trash management in any way, but just the educational aspect in learning how long it takes trash to decompose and what you can do with trash, and how much we produce. We produce enough trash to build buildings with it. And also, bringing communities together...it's in every sense of the word, a win-win."

I said it before and I'll say it again, us humans are good are creating waste, now we need to be creative with our waste. Waste management and recycling are going to be crucial survival skills for future generations. This building method and grassroots community organizing helps teach students to be conscience of their environment and more aware of their effect on it, while producing a positive outcome for themselves and their community. In an area where there was no conventional system set in place to recycle, the people created a way to recycle. This instills in the students the very essence of recycling at its most basic form. This is also a testament the volunteers of the Peace Corps, who can make the best of what they are given, a notion that is at heart, sustainability.


Link to Podcast: http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=11-P13-00006#feature6
Link to Bottle Schools website: http://hugitforward.com/