So, having been blown away by the environmental impact of my daily aluminium can (or two) of soft drink, I thought I'd take a look at the costs of disposable foam cups.Thursday, July 8, 2010
Styrofoam cups (draft)
So, having been blown away by the environmental impact of my daily aluminium can (or two) of soft drink, I thought I'd take a look at the costs of disposable foam cups.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
footprint 2- car use
Looking at the carbon footprint calculator provided by the EPA in Victoria, I was surprised to discover that 
, despite my two cars having lowgreenhouse emissions ( 4.32 tonnes each), they had higher than average carbon dioxide emissions (51 kg) and about average nitorus oxide and hydrocarbon releases.
(you can check your own at http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/air/carecometer/default.asp)
the calculators themselves are interesting though- they only calculate certain things that they see as important. Older cars, for example, score poorly because they aren't as efficient- but the calculator doesn't take into account the energy used in creating the vehicle in the first place.
According to Wired magazine, for example, small second-hand cars are less bad than the alternatives when a car is required.
If a new Prius were placed head-to-head with a used car, would the Prius win? Don't bet on it. Making a Prius consumes 113 million BTUs [140 GJ], according to sustainability engineer Pablo Päster.... Buy a decade-old Toyota Tercel, which gets a respectable 35 mpg [6.7 l/100km], and the Prius will have to drive 100,000 miles (160 000 km) to catch up. Better yet, buy a three-cylinder, 49-horsepower 1994 Geo Metro XFi, one of the most fuel-efficient cars ever built. It gets the same average mileage as a 2008 Prius, so a new hybrid would never close the carbon gap.
---Matt Power, Wired, 19 May 2008
Using this logic, there's more environmental gain to be made by keeping a car roadworthy, rather than scrapping it and buying a new one. In fact, even an old inefficient car, destined for the scrapheap and using 13.4 litres/100km would be able to run for 80 000km before break even point. The key is to make the vehicle less disposable by treating it well, making it last and, I guess, taking it to be responsibly recycled when it finally gives up.
, despite my two cars having lowgreenhouse emissions ( 4.32 tonnes each), they had higher than average carbon dioxide emissions (51 kg) and about average nitorus oxide and hydrocarbon releases.(you can check your own at http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/air/carecometer/default.asp)
the calculators themselves are interesting though- they only calculate certain things that they see as important. Older cars, for example, score poorly because they aren't as efficient- but the calculator doesn't take into account the energy used in creating the vehicle in the first place.
According to Wired magazine, for example, small second-hand cars are less bad than the alternatives when a car is required.
If a new Prius were placed head-to-head with a used car, would the Prius win? Don't bet on it. Making a Prius consumes 113 million BTUs [140 GJ], according to sustainability engineer Pablo Päster.... Buy a decade-old Toyota Tercel, which gets a respectable 35 mpg [6.7 l/100km], and the Prius will have to drive 100,000 miles (160 000 km) to catch up. Better yet, buy a three-cylinder, 49-horsepower 1994 Geo Metro XFi, one of the most fuel-efficient cars ever built. It gets the same average mileage as a 2008 Prius, so a new hybrid would never close the carbon gap.
---Matt Power, Wired, 19 May 2008
Using this logic, there's more environmental gain to be made by keeping a car roadworthy, rather than scrapping it and buying a new one. In fact, even an old inefficient car, destined for the scrapheap and using 13.4 litres/100km would be able to run for 80 000km before break even point. The key is to make the vehicle less disposable by treating it well, making it last and, I guess, taking it to be responsibly recycled when it finally gives up.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Should I recycle?
If you've been following this blog, you'll know that
I've been thinking a lot about my personal energy use lately. I was fascinated to discover how much energy is burnt creating a simple aluminium can- lots of websites claim that you can run a TV for four hours on the energy saved by recycling one can. Since this is a bit of a vague measure, I prefer the quote that it is the energy equivalent of 1.9 litres of fuel. that means that, although I save a bit of energy by walking about a kilometre home, I save far more if I pick up a can on the way and recycle it. Or if I pick up the can, I can drive to and from work for the next two weeks (20 kilometres) and pretty much break even in terms of energy used.
I've been thinking a lot about my personal energy use lately. I was fascinated to discover how much energy is burnt creating a simple aluminium can- lots of websites claim that you can run a TV for four hours on the energy saved by recycling one can. Since this is a bit of a vague measure, I prefer the quote that it is the energy equivalent of 1.9 litres of fuel. that means that, although I save a bit of energy by walking about a kilometre home, I save far more if I pick up a can on the way and recycle it. Or if I pick up the can, I can drive to and from work for the next two weeks (20 kilometres) and pretty much break even in terms of energy used.Alternatively, I could say that I have undone two weeks walking by drinking from a can when I get home...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)