Archive for the 'Climate Change' Category

BIG IDEA: Highway Wind Turbines

As I was driving up the 427 on my way to work this morning I started thinking about the two wind turbines that Zeller’s has installed at their Cloverdale Mall store – and more specifically why there aren’t more small scale installations. The two turbines at Zeller’s seem to always be spinning, which means they are always generating clean, free energy.

As I continued my drive up the highway I realized that the skyline is already littered with towers suitable for small turbines – the light standards. Imagine a little wind turbine integrated into every light standard along the highway, capable of providing enough electricity to power that light. And if we went through a wind drought the lights would be powered by the grid. Remember that a turbine generates electricity all day and night, as long as there is wind.

Put a cylinder turbine on top of, or integrated into the tower of each standard – a turbine like this one:

Band Travels On Bicycles And Uses Bikes To Generate Electricity For All Performances!

Drink Outside the Box

Published: August 17, 2008

ITALY’S Agriculture Ministry announced this month that some wines that receive the government’s quality assurance label may now be sold in boxes. That’s right, Italian wine is going green, and for some connoisseurs, the sky might as well be falling.

But the sky isn’t falling. Wine in a box makes sense environmentally and economically. Indeed, vintners in the United States would be wise to embrace the trend that is slowly gaining acceptance worldwide.

Wine in a box has been around for more than 30 years — though with varying quality. The Australians were among the first to popularize it. And hardly a fridge in the south of France, especially this time of year, is complete without a box of rosé. Here in America, by contrast, boxed wine has had trouble escaping a down-market image. But now that wine producers are talking about reducing their carbon footprint — that is, the amount of carbon dioxide emitted in the transportation of wine — selling the beverage in alternative, lighter packaging instead of heavier glass seems like the right thing to do.

More than 90 percent of American wine production occurs on the West Coast, but because the majority of consumers live east of the Mississippi, a large part of carbon-dioxide emissions associated with wine comes from simply trucking it from the vineyard to tables on the East Coast. A standard wine bottle holds 750 milliliters of wine and generates about 5.2 pounds of carbon-dioxide emissions when it travels from a vineyard in California to a store in New York. A 3-liter box generates about half the emissions per 750 milliliters. Switching to wine in a box for the 97 percent of wines that are made to be consumed within a year would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about two million tons, or the equivalent of retiring 400,000 cars.

But here’s another reason to sell wine in a box. America will soon become the largest wine market in the world. In recent years, we overtook Italy, and France is now in our sights. (This is total consumption, not per person; we are still well behind by the latter measure.) As Americans drink more wine, we will be drinking it not only on special occasions like dates and weddings, but also on Monday nights with pizza. That’s a lot of wine — and potentially a big carbon footprint.

Although some sommeliers may scoff at wine from a plastic spigot, boxes are perfect for table wines that don’t need to age, which is to say, all but a relative handful of the top wines from around the world. What’s more, boxed wine is superior to glass bottle storage in resolving that age-old problem of not being able to finish a bottle in one sitting. Once open, a box preserves wine for about four weeks compared with only a day or two for a bottle. Boxed wine may be short on charm, but it is long on practicality.

Which leads to a final reason for boxed wine: it’s so much more economical. Having an affordable glass of wine may be the best way to keep our 15-year bull market for wine consumption running. It also would help keep per-glass prices of wine from rising as the dollar falls.

The main obstacle to a smaller carbon footprint for wine is the frequently abysmal quality of wine put in boxes. But that’s an easy fix: raise the quality.

In the past few years, the boxed wine sold in America has shown some signs of improvement. There’s been wine in a stylish cardboard tube made by a top winemaker in Burgundy. There’s a good, old-vine grenache from the Pyrenees sold in a box. A succulent unoaked malbec from organically grown grapes in Argentina is now available in the United States thanks to the 1-liter TetraPak, which is also being used by three renegade Californians who have a line of wines that are sold in 250-milliliter packages — about the size of juice boxes, but without straws. And then, of course, there’s the news from Italy.

Producers everywhere need to deliver better wine in a box — and make it snappy. Perhaps they will if consumers start to demand that everyday wines that don’t need to age in a bottle be sold in a box. If you’re sorry about the change, squeeze off another well-preserved, affordable, low-carbon serving of boxed wine and mull it over.

Tyler Colman is the author of “Wine Politics: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink,” and he blogs at DrVino.com.

Lakeshore Local

Somehow I missed this issue during the last election, but I think it is a good one that needs to be explored further. The idea is that we run low-cost commuter service from South Etobicoke to Union Station on existing tracks and rights-of-way. I’ve oft lamented that it takes Leah nearly an hour to get to her office, yet we are only 12 km away! This new service, could definitely reduce her transit time, and reduce congestion on the roads.It’s quick, easy, benefits the residents of Toronto and won’t cost a lot. There must be a major drawback but I have not found it yet.

My Plan For Transit in Toronto

Gardiner at NightWe live in a 25 storey condo overlooking six lanes of highway. There is a constant stream of vehicles filling it and spewing exhaust, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The morning rush “hour” starts before 6am, and ends sometime after 9am and runs in both directions – into and out of the city! Politicians continually chime on about how they are trying to improve transit, and trying to reduce congestion, but they never do anything about it. “Do or do not, there is no try.”

We live approximately 11km from Leah’s office. Leah takes the TTC to work each day. Her trek takes approximately 60 minutes each way. There is a stop in front of her office, and one right next door to our building. Almost door-to-door service, but at a cost of $98 a month, and two hours out of each day, it’s barely worth it!

It is 17km to my office. I drive and it takes me 12 minutes assuming that traffic is not too slow. My job requires me to drive around during the day, so transit is not an option; however last summer we hired on an intern who stayed in the office all day. He took transit to and from the office each day for the first month. His trek to work also took him about an hour each way, and he lives just around the corner from us. (After receiving his first paycheque he purchased a bicycle and rode to work most days for the rest of the summer.)
We have friends who live in the ‘burbs (aka Oakville). She works downtown and takes the GO Train to and from her office most days. According to the GO Train schedule, this trip of nearly 50km takes 40 – 45 minutes on the train, plus 15 minutes of travel to and from the station to home/office.

With ever increasing housing costs in the city of Toronto, where is the incentive for someone to work and live in Toronto? Addtionally, where is the incentive for people living so close to their jobs to take transit instead of driving?

Cycling in Toronto

I got up early this morning and went for a bike ride. (I have secret aspirations of riding in Le Tour De France.) I was amazed that during the course of my 35 minute ride I only passed 1 other “serious” cyclist and 2 casual riders. My route took me along the waterfront – parallel to the main routes into the city for car and train traffic.

I bring this up as it speaks to the fact that our governments do not support cycling, or cyclists. I can ride from my home to the heart of downtown Toronto in about the same amount of time it takes me to drive (during the non-rush hours. It’s much faster to bike than drive during rush hours) and get a parking space. By riding I have reduced my impact on the environment, removed one car from the already congested highways/roads, and improved my physical health. As well, I did not have to pay for my car, my gas, or parking!

So why aren’t more people doing this?

Because the government do not support cycling and cyclists! Because there are not enough bike friendly routes, or safe places to store bicycles in the city. And, of course, because people are lazy.

The goverment (Federal, Provincial and Municipal) need to create incentives (ie. tax credits/rebates like the ones they have for transit riders) for people who ride their bicycles to work and offer incentives to employers who provide bike lockers and change rooms for cyclists. But government involvement is only part of the solution. Riders need to petition their management to make cycling a viable alternative for their employees.

Is speeding worth it?

What does the average driver gain from driving faster than the speed limit? Even on really long journeys you only gain minutes – but the toll on your car, pocketbook and the environment is increased dramatically.

Last week at the office we were discussing how many kilometres we get on a tank of gas; I drive the speed limit, and use cruise control all the time. My partner always drives at 120 vs my 100 on the highway. I am getting 60% better fuel economy than him!!!!

It seems to annoy some other drivers that I would dare go the speed limit, but at the end of the day, the wear and tear on my car is reduced, the amount of fuel I consume is reduced, and I get to my destination in nearly the same amount of time as the speeder.

My Beef(s) with the Live Earth Concert

A touring rock show creates tonnes of pollution. The electricity to power the show, and manufacture all of the item that are sold/consumed at the show. All of the attendees driving to the show, sitting in the cars, idling while they get into and out of the venue, the vehicles required to get all of the gear to/from the venue, etc, etc. (Live Earth said that they will use revenue from ticket sales to do their best to offset the carbon impact of the concerts.)

Top it all off that this was a TV event, reaching an estimated two billion viewers – sitting in their air conditioned homes, watching their inefficient, energy consuming TVs.

I understand that we need to get the message out, but is this the best way? I don’t have the answer. Yet.

PS: Rihanna, you should really think about your song choices – don’t sing a song called “Shut Up and Drive” at an event for climate change.

Flick Off, and other well-intentioned ideas about climate change

If people talk about a campaign, does that mean it is a success? I don’t think so, especially when all the talk is about the fact that FLICK OFF looks an awful lot like FUCK OFF, and not that people need to use less energy.

I was at the Acura dealership last week having the oil changed, etc. While I waited, an older gentleman sat down in the chair next to me. CP24 was on the TV and a story about climate issues was on. Some how we got to talking about climate change, and what each person can do to make a difference. He was very passionate about fixing this problem, but somewhat uneducated about how to do it. This man was well-spoken and knew all kinds of things about the situation we’ve created for ourselves, and what proposals/programs the governments of the world were working on; however he did not know what he, as just one man, could really do. This is a problem. A big one.

FLICK OFFHe was familiar with the Flick Off campaign, but solely because of the t-shirts. The website, while flashy, is light on content… or at least the content, if it is there, is buried under mountains of clichés.

If the population of North America had the wit and the wisdom to convert clichés into routines, we wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place! “Close the door, you’re letting out all the heat!” “Close the door, you’re letting in the heat!” “Turn off the lights when you leave the room!” Etc, etc. These are all common sayings that most of us heard regularly as we were growing up. But it seems as though the lessons learned as children were not really learned at all.