I found this cool website while doing research for my final project
http://www.exponentialevolution.com/GuideToSustainability.html

I found it quite informative compared to what I already knew. For someone just starting this class I think this would help a lot. I particularly liked this quote "It is common for a new dome to reach a "critical mass" during construction, shift slightly, and lift any attached scaffolding from the ground" That sounds so cool that I want to go build one myself. Can you imagine what Space Mountain did then it was being built? Sooo cool!!

I came across this article the other day about how Vermont Colleges are aiming to be carbon neutral. I thought that this idea was great, but I wasn't sure how practical and easy it would be to make this switch. In the article I read, it spoke specifically about Green Mountain College. They will change their entire heating system that will be completed in January of 2010. They will change their current heating system, which is currently burning 260,000 gallons of number six oil per year. This heating system accounts for the 71% of the campus greenhouse gas emissions. With the new system which will be heated with wood pellets, they will use 4,900 lbs of wood chips to heat their campus. All the wood chips will come from a local source and will produced in an environmentally friendly way. The project will cost roughly 3.6 million dollars, which the college has recieved through grants and loans, but it will end up saving them $250,000 in heating costs per year. Hopefully this plan is successful and it sparks other colleges in Vermont to do the same. I had heard that all campuses were going to try to be carbon neutral, but this article was the only one I found that had a serious plan about how they were going to make it happen.

Today I read an article in the wall street journal about bailing out the electric car companies instead of the three American car manufactures this is a great idea that I’m all for I believe that if we are going to put money into the automotive department then it should be in alternative forms of transportation. As stated in class why should we bail a business that isn’t successful? I guess some believe that it is because we need to keep the American economy going. Well rather than adding fuel to the fire, and giving away more money that we don’t have, why can’t we take the fifteen billion dollars to start up a more efficient American car company? Why not model our cars like the pries and actually work on getting a stable alternative form of transportation up and running personally I like electric cars because they seem to cut down on air pollution. But the debate seems to be like the old chicken and the egg problem. People are unwilling to buy an electric car because there aren’t any electric charging stations and there aren’t any electric charging stations because people aren’t buying the electric cars. Why can’t we find a way to fix this problem?

Article: "Honesty About Ethanol"

I read an article that raises some interesting points that I haven’t heard before on the topic of ethanol. The main question is if there should be a increase in the production of ethanol from 7 to 36 billion gallons. There are a couple factors that need to be considered with this increase in ethanol and corn production that goes with it. The benefits of ethanol have been that it burns much cleaner than gas making it what has been thought to be carbon neutral. It also has the benefit of creating jobs and refineries in the United States and helping with the dependency on foreign oil.
There are studies still being conducted showing that ethanol might not be as environmentally friendly as we thought. The main problem is that we haven come up with an equation factoring in the carbon created by turning food to fuel in the Corn Belt. There will need to be much more land needed to be tilled and cleared for increased production of corn. Also other places in the world will have to start farming on what is now untouched land to make up for the loss of corn production for food. We could be creating more carbon in a worldly scale if the increase in land and the methods of harvesting and refining ethanol are all taken into consideration. The article mentions how hard it is to get real answers from the media concerning anything that consider with the Bush administration and foreign oil production. The government could be using ethanol as an excuse to cut and clear more rainforrests or other protected lands for profit. I have heard that there are much more efficient crops to harvest for biofuel such as wheatgrass. Maybe one of them could be an answer to the over farming and production of corn and the harm it has on the environment.

Endless Battle

last year in the United States there was over five million tires purchased. Less than three million can be accounted for. Today, United States only recycles ten percent of their tires. fifty percent are land filled, and the other forty percent are incinerated for electricity. The State of Vermont has on average, two hundred thousand tires stock piled each day. These humongous tire piles we have in California, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are a disgrace. In august of 99, there was a massive fire at a Ohio tire recycling facility. They had roughly twenty million tires in mountain form. Arson's set one of the piles ablaze as a joke, the fire spread to several other piles. The fire lasted five days, it burned five million tires. The harmful gasses and deep black smoke was released into our atmosphere. Reporters claim that the smoke was carried by the wind to nearly sixty miles away. The total clean up cost was more than thirty million dollars and endless effects on our country, good and bad. Had our government taken a stronger stand on landfill safety, this would have never happened. Not only does stockpiling pose as a fire hazard, it also pose as a disease breading ground. Recycling tires make for a profitable industry. I my eyes there should be a real controlled recycling facility in every state and stockpiling should be bane.

The book Cradle to Cradle is a bit difficult to get through. However, I found the last part of the book to be full of information that I had never heard of before. I found it comforting to see a giant corporation like (Ford motor corporation) finally take action and responsibility for environmental degradation that they have inflicted on an area through years of operation. Instead of abandoning the site this company has chosen to find alternative ways of cleanup. By doing this they have opened up new jobs in different fields of expertise. They are also allowing their employees to voice their own personal opinion and ideas on the matter of making the factory more suitable for the environment in which it exists. Collaboration of many is the way the Ford motor company has had success in the early stages of the so called "Green Revolution." The process that they have gone through has revitalized their factory" The Rouge" the biggest manufacturing plant in the world. I cannot imagine walking away from this facility only to find a new area and start all over again. Leaving behind an area not even suitable for indigenous flora and fauna. As I mentioned before this company has not abandoned this site like many companies do over and over again. Not just in the continental United States either. This happens on the global level. I find the problem to be disturbing as I am sure it is to most people.I feel the lack of knowledge is part of the problem. Information like this seems to get swept under the mat and disregarded as unimportant. It's not enticing news such as, an earthquake in China, or the presidential campaign, or the divorce between Madonna and her former husband. The fact is it really is important. Some of it may be ground breaking in the seemingly endless pursuit of sustainability. What if the public were to find out about these innovations that Ford has come up with to return the factory site back to the way it was before there was a River Rouge factory? Is it possible that more information to the public may sway the way they think and how they conduct their daily life to move closer to sustainability and embrace the Green Revolution? I think if this had made headline news the movement toward renewable and clean energy sources would be instilled in everyones mind. This might even bring noticeable awareness to the federal government so they would act on it and do something about it rather then offer up the same ideas to put a band aid fix on old technology. I agree with many of the ideas in this book. I honestly feel that these innovations should be easier for the public to notice them. Instead of a small section of the news paper that may be located in the back maybe it could take up a large section on the front page. bottom line quick easy access to the information because I had no idea what Ford has done to this point until I read this book.

Not so Cradle-to-Cradle

Cradle-to-Cradle has been, by far, the hardest environmental book I have read since I started getting interested in the topic a couple years ago.  This is kind of strange because I had chosen one of the Authors for a presentation, thinking this might be one of my favorite books.  Before even starting the book itself, I had started my research on William McDonough.  The man is very smart, with really creative ideas for sustainable architecture.  However, when starting the research, I didn't really see his ideas as too "out there" to understand.  This book, though, really kind of turns me off to moving toward sustainability and doing things to help the environment.  In just the beginning of the book, I felt as though the authors were attacking everything I have done to try to help out. Though I understand some of the things we have been doing aren't necessarily right, I still believe it is better than just sitting around doing nothing.  It is difficult to even really talk about this book, because its just frustrating to me. The authors make very good points about why being less bad is no good, but the way they try to get that message across just doesn't work for me.  It makes me wonder if other people reading this book might think we are doomed as well.  

The authors really bash those for recycling, in my opinion, and it makes me feel guilty for doing it now.  I don't think that is a good method of trying to help the environment, because many people might just feel that we have done so little and its not worth it to even try that little bit.  There are some major things we need to focus on, such as the topic of efficiency as the authors pointed out.  I got the impression that efficiency is almost a bad thing, but I believe we are just confused, more so, about what efficiency should really mean.  

Cradle-to-Cradle is a great in the sense that it is able to point out what we still really need to work on how to be more sustainable, but I just can't agree with the ways they try to convey their message.  After reading this book, I mostly feel guilty for what I have been trying to do to help the environment, and I feel more depressed about change happening since we are apparently just digging ourselves deeper into a non-sustainable world, as the authors point out. 

The points in this book are pretty great, and important for the public to realize, but I think the authors need to take a different approach in getting those points across to the reader.