Happy 500th Birthday

Today my reusable nylon bag which I was given for Christmas two years ago has reached it's 500th birthday...that means I have not used new 500 bags which means a lot of saved CO₂e.   

To explain about why using reusable bags is so important I have reproduced a section of the book Facing up to Global Warming.  The thing that really annoys me is when I am offered a paper bag they always double or triple up the bags in case it rips.  Do we really need fancy thick paper bags with ribbons and metal rivets when we buy clothing or luxury goods?  Of course not.  So hopefully this will answer some important questions about bag use and why we should all used reusable bags.

Plastic v paper bags

Globally between 500 -1000 billion standard supermarket high density polyethylene (HDPE) bags are  used each year with 6 billion handed out free to shoppers just in UK during 2012.  The problem of these bags is really the major litter problem that they pose as well as being a major threat to wildlife.  In terms of their carbon footprint this is significant due to the large numbers used.  The transparent ultra thin lightweight HDPE bags (just 0.025 mm thickness) that you use to put loose vegetables in have a footprint of 3g CO₂e each.  The standard printed lightweight supermarket HDPE bag is equivalent to 10g CO₂e each. The thicker reusable supermarket HDPE bag can vary between 100-280 g CO₂e in their manufactured footprint. So for those worried about their footprint, what are the alternatives to the standard supermarket HDPE bag? 

Well interestingly the standard printed lightweight supermarket HDPE bag contains 35% less CO₂e than the equivalent sized paper bag.  When paper bags are used for groceries then you are often given two bags one inside the other to give the bag sufficient strength, so an equivalent paper bag may have six times more embedded CO₂e than the plastic version to give it the same strength. A standard reusable HDPE bag contains 10-28 times more CO₂e than the standard printed lightweight supermarket HDPE bag, while cotton or canvas bags contain on average 171 times more CO₂e.  This means that you would need to reuse your plastic or canvas bag in excess of 20 or 170 times respectively in order to gain an emissions advantage over using the thinner bags just once. A study by the Environment Agency in the UK found that canvas bags are used on average only 51 times with composting the best disposal, making them potentially far less climate friendly than the plastic bags in terms of overall carbon emissions. To put the standard supermarket HDPE bag into perspective, then it contains only one thousandth of the CO₂e than food inside the bag.

What to do with plastic bags?  Interesting there are three options. Burning or incineration releases toxins and 100% of the embedded CO₂e is released, although some heat is generated.  If we recycle the bags then up to 50% of the embedded CO₂e is lost in the process.  In contrast, burying the bag in a landfill ensures the embedded CO₂e is stored permanently with virtually no CO₂e released to the atmosphere.  Difficult decisions eh?

In Ireland the standard supermarket HDPE bags have a levy of 15 cent each on them so that they are virtually never used by customers.  Before the levy was introduced the countryside was littered with the bags, and now such bags are virtually never seen as litter items, except unfortunately containing dog poo, but that is another story.  Transparent ultra thin bags are still given out free in supermarkets.  In contrast, China banned both the standard and ultra thin HDPE bags and called people to use baskets or cloth sacks instead to reduce environmental pollution, including marine litter.  This ban, introduced in 2008 saves 35 million barrels of oil a year in their manufacture.  Ironically China has been the largest manufacture and exporters of such bags to the rest of the world.

So perhaps in terms of emissions the best option if you need a plastic shopping bag is to use a reusable HDPE bag and make sure you use it at least 20 times for a thick plastic bag or 35 times for a woven plastic bag otherwise you will have emitted more CO₂e than if you had used disposable bags.  I called the standard lightweight supermarket HDPE bag disposable because we tend to consider them as a single use item.  In fact they can be used again and again if you are careful, which is putting the investment in reusable bags under pressure.  Lightweight supermarket HDPE bags have loads of different uses so it is important that they are reused as many times as possible, finally using the bag to wrap contaminated unrecyclable waste for disposal to landfill. 

We all have cupboards full of reusable bags…the trick is to actually use them carefully to ensure that they have long lives. The challenge is how many times can you use them beyond their breakeven point?

 

More information: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/plastic-fantastic-carrier-bags-not-ecovillains-after-all-2220129.html

Paper is  hard to reuse so ALWAYS RECYCLE to save CO2e emissions

What about paper bags?  Using them certainly feels that you are caring for the environment being a natural product. The paper industry is very energy intensive so that the carbon footprint for all paper is quite high ranging from 12g CO₂e for a lightweight recycled bag to in excess of 80g CO₂e  for a virgin paper (e.g. clothing) bag excluding the non-paper handles.  Virgin paper releases between 2.5-3.0 kg CO₂e per kg of paper manufactured compared to 1.25-1.50 kg CO₂e per kg of recycled paper.  Of course the embedded CO₂e in the paper is released when paper is either burnt, landfilled or composted which is equivalent to 500g CO₂e per kg paper on top of the emissions from its manufacture.  So only use paper bags when necessary and ensure that they are full.

Plastic bags, paper bags, and recyclable bags…what do we do? The golden rule is to avoid plastic and paper bags whenever possible.  If you buy reusable bags put a date on them and ensure that you use them well over the breakeven point in terms of emissions. I know it looks awful but rips and holes can be repaired with sticky tap. I would recommend that you invest in long life alternatives (e.g. rucksack, stacking trays for the car).  I brought a high quality canvas bag from Oxfam ten years ago which I have used everyday not only for shopping but for work.  Of course neither my wife nor my daughters will be seen out with me when I am carrying it, but it has proven exceptionally climate friendly.  So you need to find a compromise. 

Having a strategy in place for carrying goods without disposable bags is a surprisingly effective way of minimizing CO2e emissions over a lifetime

 

A guide to driving your car more sustainably and save money

On average travel represents a staggering 56% of our primary (personal) footprint in Ireland.  Car ownership is rapidly increasing throughout the EU reaching an estimated 252 million in 2015/6.  This is equivalent of 600 million tonnes of CO2 e being emitted by European drivers each year, which is only a small portion of the 1.8 billion cars worldwide.

Manufacture’s fuel efficiency data and fuel types are discussed explaining the difference between real and lab based emission values. Comparison with other transport modes are made using carpooling as an example of how drivers can make car usage more efficient than public transport where it is limited or not available.  The booklet explains practical ways in which we can all drive more sustainably as well as exploring the problem of emissions arising from the  manufacture and disposal of vehicle which is currently ignored in our footprint analysis.  Buying a car is discussed and studies have shown that you don’t need to buy a new electric vehicle (EV) or hybrid to drive with minimum impact.  Emissions from EVs are compared to standard fuels indicating that the selection of the most appropriate vehicle type can save you a lot of money over the lifetime of the vehicle, and that EVs and Hybrids are not always a good choice for drivers with selection dependent on length and frequency of journey, whether urban or rural, or used for commuting.

Driving sustainably results in drivers reducing their fuel consumption by 10-50% saving without actually driving less distance of using the car less frequently.  This represents significant financial savings as well as reducing emissions, pollution and increasing driver safety.

This means that an easily achieved 10% reduction in fuel consumption which all drivers can achieve, without reducing the frequency or distance driven, would save 10 million tonnes of CO₂e within the EU each year, equivalent to 7.9 million tonnes in the UK or 0.42 million tonnes of CO₂e in Ireland where car ownership is around 2,000,000.  So for every 10% reduction in fuel usage each car would on average be saving 0.234 or 0.213 tonnes of CO₂e per annum in the UK and Ireland respectively from their primary footprint.  With a 20-30% reduction possible for the average driver then driving sustainably can make a significant different to greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change as well as making our air cleaner and driving safer.

Driving Sustainably:  A guide to reducing your carbon footprint is written by Nick Gray and is the first guide to reducing your carbon footprint in the Tigroney Sustainable Planet Series published by Tigroney Press. Available as a free e-book (ISBN 978-1-912290-20-8) download at: http://hdl.handle.net/2262/85300 or https://bit.ly/2QrWnFe

Energy saving in public buildings

The Friends of the Earth have suggested that massive cuts in emissions as well as financial savings could be made by adopting more rigorous energy saving in schools, hospitals and other public offices.  It especially highlights buildings that are heated when empty during weekends and leaving computers switched on when not in use.  It estimates that it could save the state 1.75 billion euro over 10 years and  calls for  retrofitting such buildings with better insulation, reducing dependence on air conditioning and using low carbon heating systems. However, small changes can make a difference. A school in Clara in County Clare was able to reduce its electricity usage by 70% by simple actions such as lowering the heating setting on the central heating, using  time switches for heating rooms that were not used all the time, turning off the boiler at night and weekends, and encouraging staff and pupils to close doors and turn off lights.  Plans are already in place by the Government to reduce electricity use in over 10,000 buildings run by central and local government under the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan. It is claimed that the plan has already reduce energy usage by 33%  across the public sector.

More information: Friends of the Earth (2013) ‘Cuts that don’t hurt’. Friends of the Earth , Dublin. 

More information: The Second National Energy Plan launched in February 2013. 

Nick Gray

The Self-Powered House

 With sustainability becoming the latest buzzword to infiltrate itself into our workplace, education system and media, isn’t it about time we took a serious look at in our homes? The increasing emphasis on our need to provide a cleaner, more green future for our children has lead to advancements in technology that have made renewable energy sources readily available for household installment.

Despite the technology being available and an apparent thirst for more sustainable solutions towards energy, we only see these techniques employed on the governmental scale and rarely on the individual household scale. Why is this? Is it cost, practicality, maintenance or some other reason?

Micro Wind Turbines

Wind turbines are generators that are installed on the top of a mast that harness energy from prevailing winds. As expected as wind speeds increase the amount of energy generated also increases. This mans that appropriate wind speeds are required for this renewable energy technique. The lowest wind speeds needed to generate energy is a reliable 3m/s (6.7mph) wind with the maximum wind speed being 15m/s (33mph).

Any energy created by the wind turbine will be consumed initially by the household property. If the household is unable to consume all of the energy then the excess energy created will be spilled back into the grid. The household will then be paid for each kWh exported to the grid.

Costs

The price for your excess energy can vary but currently in Ireland the rate is 19c/kWh for the first 3000 units and then 9c/kWh thereafter. There is currently no tax relief for wind turbines but a scheme maybe introduced soon.

The cost for the smallest 1kw tower is €5,334 rising to €22,643 for the much larger and productive 5kw tower. There is also cheaper DIY and special offers to be found on wind turbines. It is of course important to remember that once the unit is installed the energy is free.

More information on costs can be found at: http://www.windturbines.ie

Maintenance

The working life of the best quality wind turbines is 20 with annual maintenance check-ups. However, due to the nature of the generation damage can occur after the first strong storm.

The average time needed for an investment in an average size turbine is between 10-12 years, there are however, many factor affecting this such as maintenance, damage, power production and demand.

Solar Panels

Another common and accessible alternative to wind turbines is solar panels. Traditional household solar panels will be attached to the residents south-facing roof. There are A 6m² solar panel can produce the energy equivalent of a 3kW immersion heater running for 2.5 hours each day, even in Irelands overcast climate. Solar panels work off radiation emitted from the sun and so can still generate power despite overcast skies. This allows Irelands climate to be as productive as Paris and 70% of the Mediterranean coast.

The two main types of solar panel instillation are those of photovoltaic panels and active solar water heaters. The solar water heaters reduce energy bills and carbon footprints along with producing a constant supply of hot water. The photovoltaic panels are like the wind turbines and provide a source of electricity directly to the house and connected to the grid for spill over. The payment for the spill over energy is the same as mentioned above.  

Costs

The costs of solar panels vary from product to product due to size, quality, power generation and lifespan. At the lower end of the scale a 20 tube water heating system would currently cost €3,300 and photovoltaic systems starting from €3,910.

There are currently government schemes in place to assist with the instillation of solar panels in Ireland calculated at €250 per m² installed up to a maximum of €1800.

More information can be found at: www.eirgreen.com

Looking Forward

These two renewable energy schemes on scratch the surface of systems available at the household level today. Hopefully with increased awareness of these systems and continued government grants we will see a marked increase in the uptake of systems such as these.

Charlie Blakemore

Living sustainably without hot water

Last week an electrical fault in my flat left me without hot water for a few days. At first, I shrugged it off as a cold shower was unpleasant, and didn’t leave me feeling as clean as I would after a hot one, but this lefty me increasingly annoyed. As the week went on, however, my attitude changed. Washing the dishes with cold-water was difficult and time-consuming. So too was the work-around  boiling water manually as both my kettle and microwave are quite small. They were inadequate substitutes for a broken water heater designed for 4 people.

I noticed though that without my heater, I was consuming much less water. Showers were uncomfortable and quick and the water used washing dishes was kept to a bare minimum, because of the time that would be used getting more. Then, in the middle of the week, the electrician called and fixed the heater. I had hot water again, more than I could ever want.

After that, however, I began to think, in terms of water/carbon footprints, embedded emissions, etc. What had been the difference, in those terms, between the days without my heater and any average day in my life? The difference seemed staggering, the average shower uses 3.5 litres per minute, and with cold water I’d gone from 5 minute to 1 minute showers. The amount saved, 15 litres, was already one third of the water poverty threshold. In the bigger picture, this was negligible; not even 10% of the daily average per capita usage in Ireland. But this was where I could exert control over my water usage, and begin to approximate sustainable levels of consumption. I can’t really know the specific environmental footprints of everything I consume, and while I have time to boil the kettle, I don’t have time to do an in-depth investigation of every different brand of bread.

In the broader picture, the change I effect in my own habits is marginal: most of the (unsustainable amount) of water I use is embedded in the products I use - 1,000 litres used in the production of a carton of milk, 1,300 litres in the production of a loaf of bread etc. Maybe my gesture is partially an evasion. The real problems we face with water are ones of distribution. It doesn’t matter if I use 120 litres or 180. What matters at this moment is that I will have access to this amount regardless. Of course I cannot change this on my own, but through my approximations of sustainable living, a proportion of the finite amount of usable water on the planet (my savings counted for roughly a third of what a person needs at minimum every day) is “freed up”. If this was done on a broad scale, it would be half the battle in constructing a global society that manages, distributes, and uses water sustainably.

Cathal Murphy

Today is Earth Day

It’s hard to believe that it has come around again…another 12 months and for many of us not a lot has changed…or has it?  More and more people at taking personal and community action to do something about reducing carbon emissions  and increasing biocapacity… so let’s join the other 1 billion people who are doing something and start to deal with global warming. Link to Earthday.org or their blog.

This year everyone is invited to download a photo  to help  personalize the massive challenge climate change. They say every picture tells a story…what does yours say about how has climate change impacted you? Or what are you doing to be part of the solution?  

Nick Gray

Image: vectordesignideas.com

Next Generation Video Conferencing



Halo Conference Room (image)



Multi-national companies (MNC) account for a large share of anthropogenic carbon emissions. One of the biggest costs associated with these companies both in terms of monetary and carbon costs is due to air travel. Many companies such as Hewlett Packard (HP) have begun “offsetting” their carbon emissions from air travel by donating money to offsetting companies which in turn plant trees and fund sustainability projects. This offsetting strategy is not a long-term solution. Whilst the number of flights is increasing exponentially and with it the carbon emissions, the amount of space available for forestry development and other offsetting measures is decreasing. There are also business related problems with this strategy. MNC’s are primarily interested in making money and any voluntary solution which costs companies money is not going to be widely adopted and successful.

It is out of this desire to save money and time that “telepresence” projects such as Halo which is developed by HP have arisen. Telepresence projects are business-speak for next generation video conferencing technology. The aim of this technology is to re-create a conference board room as accurately as possible. Business people have often claimed the delay and unrealistic nature of normal video conferencing requires that any meeting requiring more than one to one communication be conducted in person. This can mean lengthy flights. Thousands of people travel thousands of miles every day for business meetings be it from New York to Singapore or London to Tokyo. It is with this problem in mind that HP and Dreamwork’s have developed and started installing Halo rooms in their branches around the world including in their buildings in Leixlip here in Ireland. The benefits of the technology include an identical room in both locations to simulate both parties being in one larger room and more importantly a dedicated connection which ensures no time delay exists. Users of the facilities including heads of major companies have said they quickly forgot the people they were speaking with were on the other side of the world.

It is this new immersive experience which gives Halo and other telepresence projects the potential to make a large dent in the 30% of air travel which is accounted for by business trips. It will of course be impossible to remove all business related air travel but with aviation expected to account for between 5-15% of carbon emissions by 2050, new technologies and a different mentality towards air travel in general is desperately required.

Niall Mortimer

Friendly microbes powering our lives: One bacterium at a time!

Bacteria: disease, illness and infection. These are the first words that come to mind when we think of our microorganism friends. Would you ever think of planetary space exploration, energy fuel cells or Greenhouse gas capture systems? These are knew avenues of cutting edge research that both industry and academic institutes are researching.  As a Microbiologist, these intrinsically diverse, complex and remarkable adaptable organisms fascinate me. From Volcanoes to ice, stratospheric clouds to oceanic depth, bacteria are found basically on all corners of the globe. We see them as pathogens, yet without them we could not survive. The smallest living organisms on Earth could become key to addressing some of the world’s biggest energy challenges.

Bacteria Power: Nature’s “badass” in world of energy production

Source

Bacteria by nature are ferocious consumers of raw materials. But unlike us, they consume the waste we produce. The first law of thermodynamics states that energy is neither created or destroyed but is converted from one form to another. So, it’s obvious to use bacteria to produce our energy from waste? Sounds too good to be true I know, slightly science fiction. But in reality the process is already happening. Microbial fuel cells (MFC) are gathering recognition as viable means of producing electricity. Unlike conventional fuel cells that rely on hydrogen gas as a fuel source, the microbial fuel cell can handle a variety of water-based organic fuels such as sewage waste. By capturing the ions that bacterium leave behind when they eat, and then running the ions through a resistor to convert them to electricity, we can in essence generate our own power supply from simply biology. Researchers Biodesign Institute in Arizona, USA, are using these organisms a viable means to make electricity. "There is a lot of biomass out there that we look at simply as energy stored in the wrong place," said Bruce Rittmann, director of the center. "We can take this waste, keeping it in its normal liquid form, but allowing the bacteria to convert the energy value to our society's most useful form, electricity. They get food while we get electricity."

These simply yet novel ideas haven’t gone unnoticed by the “Big Industries”. Energy companies and Brewing Multinationals are at the forefront of MFC research. In May 2007, the University of Queensland, Australia, completed its prototype MFC, as a cooperative effort with Foster's Brewing. The prototype converts brewery wastewater into carbon dioxide, clean water, and electricity, which is estimated to produce 2 kilowatts of power. While it is a negligible amount of power, the production of clean water is of utmost importance to Australia, for which drought is a constant threat. Large-scale models are being developed with the hope of generating more energy capacity.

Bacteria powered personal devices: Science fiction or fact?

Great and all as this sounds, is there any chance that someday a bacteria will be used as an energy source in our iPhones? In 2012, a paper published in the prestigious  Nature Nanotechnology showed a MFC, manipulated with a bacteriophage (Virus that is harmless to humans but infects bacteria) produced up to 6 nanoamps of current and 400 millivolts of potential, which is about a quarter of a AAA battery's voltage. That's also enough to be used to operate a small liquid-crystal display. In their Nature paper, the scientists write that harmless virus-based piezoelectric materials potentially "offer a simple and environmentally friendly approach to piezoelectric energy generation."

  

Ultimate Sustainable Organisms

Microbial fuel cells are all natural. Energy generation and conservation are prevalent in all our lives. So are microbes, so why not combine the two and invest in a new means of sustainable energy production. Though, as a commercial entity it is years away from replacing conventional lithium batteries and fossil fuels. But as a model, they operate at natural temperatures using simple naturally occurring microorganisms to convert waste into energy. It's the ultimate sustainable energy system.

Karen Ward

Is cooking up insects for dinner an answer to increasing food shortages?

 Would you eat a seasoned and fried cricket or locust? Most of us would recoil at the thought. However, after a bit of research into enantiomophagy (the consumption of insects as food) it dawned on me how common it is around the globe to consume insects as a cheap and adequate source of protein and nutrients. Some of the most popular insects are mealworms, crickets, locusts and various beetle grubs, particulary so in developing regions of of Latin America, Africa, Asia and Oceania.

I believe that the worlds population today consumes and produces too much meat, especially beef. The raising of livestock is slowly but surely destroying our planet’s biodiversity and natural beauty. Animal livestock is the largest anthropogenic user of land and apart from the animal cruelty that takes place, apart from the destruction of native forests to grow animal feed crops, and apart from its contribution to global climate change, it saddens me to think of the volume of meat which is wasted by us in the Western world, while 870 million people worldwide still do not have enough to eat.

The consumption of edible insect species as a food source has been suggested by many scientists and others alike as a more sustainable way of eating. Professor Arnold van Huis, an entomologist at Wageningen University in the Netherlands and the author of the UN paper, says eating insects has advantages. "There is a meat crisis," he said. "The world population will grow from six billion now to nine billion by 2050 and we know people are consuming more meat. Twenty years ago the average was 20kg, it is now 50kg, and will be 80kg in 20 years. If we continue like this we will need another Earth.” Van Huis is an enthusiast for eating insects. "Most of the world already eats insects," he points out. "It is only in the western world that we don't. Psychologically we have a problem with it. I don't know why, as we eat shrimps, which are very comparable."

So why is enantiomophagy a more sustainable way to eat? In analyses of particular edible insect species, it was found that ectothermic insects can have an energy input to protein ratio as much as 12 times that of endothermic vertebrates. Livestock also contribute hugely to the production of greenhouse gases whereas insects produce very little in comparison despite a higher relative growth rate. In relation to another environmentally damaging practice, some people argue that the use of harmful pesticides is economically damaging and insufficient due to the fact that the insects killed by this practice can contain up to 75% protein, while the crop being protected by their destruction often contain no more than 14%. This strikes me as a typical example of a human activity which doesnt make any sense economically.

I realize that it could also be of some concern that if insects became globally more popular as food, their populations may decline, a common outcome of human exploitation, such as with the decline of fish in the sea or threat to the survival of the honey bee. It cannot be denied however that farming insects would be a lot more sustainable than farming cattle or pigs.

An interest in entomophagy is slowly growing in the developed world in parts of the US and Europe. It seems that its novelty is catching peoples attention and time will tell as to whether it will take a stronger, more permanent hold or if the novelty will simply wear off.

A good website  ia all that is required to find out which restaurants are currently offering insects on their menus and if you’re feeling brave, it also has some recipies for people to try out. 1,462 insect species worldwide are currently recorded as edible. So why not give it a go?

Danae Wollan

Meatless Mondays: The Difference a Day Can Make

As increasing attention is given to climate change each year, researchers across various disciplines are coming to a common conclusion: our individual lifestyle choices have a direct - and quite profound - impact on the environment. Specifically, climate change researchers are emphasizing the extent to which the food we eat contributes to our individual carbon footprints.

According to the United Nations, the meat industry alone produces about 1/5 of all man-made greenhouse gas emissions across the planet (1). This stifling number is more than the CO2 emissions from transportation – that is: cars, busses, trains, and planes – combined.  As a response to these daunting statistics, Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has advised that people begin to take action by limiting their consumption of meat as a step towards reducing emissions and protecting the planet from the imminent global warming (2).

But is this feasible? Can we really expect people – especially in meat-loving countries like the US and across the EU – to reduce their meat consumption? The answer is yes, and it is a phenomenon that has already infiltrated societies across the globe. The way in which thousands of people are consciously reducing their carbon footprint is by going vegetarian – but for just one day each week. This idea of a “meatless Monday”, as it is commonly referred to in the US, is part of a public awareness campaign in which individuals pledge to go one day a week without consuming meat. Councilwoman Jan Perry, who helped promote the meatless Monday initiative in L.A., explains that by going meatless one day each week, “you can reduce your carbon footprint by over eight pounds per day…save half a gallon of gasoline per day; reduce your saturated fat intake by 15 percent (per meatless meal); and reduce your risk of heart disease by 19 percent,” (3).  So not only does Meatless Monday help the environment, but it is also presents numerous health benefits.  

While the concept of Meatless Mondays began in the US, the idea of going meatless one day a week is occurring in various countries. Meat-free days have taken off in Ghent, Belgium, where the entire city now goes vegetarian each Thursday. Similarly, in the UK, Brazil, and Australia meatless days are gaining increasing popularity.

Meatless Monday’s are a simple step towards living a more sustainable lifestyle. So why not give it a try? Not only is eating vegetarian better for your health and the health of the environment, it is also a fun way to step out of your comfort zone. Whether it means trying a new recipe or ordering something you never have when out at a restaurant, going veg can be fun and exciting – plus, it’s only one day of the week!

Emily Collette

(1) http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/07/food.foodanddrink

(2) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7600005.stm

(3) http://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2012/11/meatless-mondays-as-a-program-for-environmental-stability-and-public-health

Turn off that tap!

Although the concept of water conservation seems a daunting and impossible task, as the Tesco motto states- “every little helps”. With fresh water supply contributing to only 3% of total global water resources, the idea of domestic water conservation by individuals can make a significant difference. And with the introduction of water charges in Ireland next year, never has there been a better time to use our water more wisely- especially since these charges could result in an annual household charge of €370 (euro). On a survey carried out by world water day, 9 out of 10 Irish people were oblivious to how much water they consume - extraordinarily this number has been estimated at over 150 litres a day. So how can one person expend so much?
Ponder these points:

·         One bath can use up to 50 litres of water

·         A toilet that is flushed 5-6 times a day uses 40 litres of water

·         8 litres of water is wasted each minute a tap is left on

·         A dishwasher uses around 18 litres of water per wash

·         A washing machine uses over 20 litres of water per wash

From the above findings, provided by water use it wisely, it is apparent that everyday processes can cause this incredible accumulation of water wastage. As a result I decided to spend a day attempting to minimize my water usage to around 50 litres. Straight away I knew this task was going to be difficult and that I would have to utilise my water sensibly. To begin, I normally spend at least 6 minutes in the shower so I quickly realised if I was to stay within my limit I would have to face the day without my morning shower- a terrifying thought. Also I knew by flushing the toilet 5-6 times a day I would nearly reach my target so there would have to be great consideration into how to reduce this-much to my roommates despair. Here is my account of the day:

·         Breakfast- porridge made with a cup of water and tea = 0.2 litres

·         Drinking water- 3 litres

·         Brushing teeth with tap off = 2 litres

·         Washing hands throughout the day = 2 litres

·         Flushing toilet 3 times (it was a challenge) = 24 litres

·         Dinner- boiled rice with grilled chicken = 1.2 litres

·         Dishwasher put on at end of day= 18 litres

Total consumption = 50.5 litres

While water conservation cannot happen without consideration, it is not an impossible task. I was successfully able to decrease my water usage to around 50 litres. Although this may not be feasible everyday (a shower is essential now and again, clothes need to be washed ect.), it shows that huge cut backs are possible. I found a few simple solutions can reduce water consumption particularly in individuals. By minimizing shower time to two or three minute (which none of us want to do) you can save up to 60 litres per shower. By installing water-efficient dual flush toilet you can reduce water use by 2 litres per flush (on a full flush) and by 4 litres per flush (on a reduced flush). Another aspect that I had not considered before this was turning off the tap while brushing your teeth- such a simple task that can limit water wastage to 2 litres a day. Granting that reducing water usage to less than 50 litres a day is a very hard task, there is still a lot to be said for the amount we can save- so come on… turn off that tap!

Shauna Quinn

Review: Fundamentals of Sustainable Development by Niko Roorda

There is an ever increasingly large number  of books on the market dealing with sustainable development, so any new book has to offer something new.  Fundamentals of Sustainable Development By Niko Roorda published under the  Earthscan imprint by Routledge (2012) offers just that in a very innovative way.  It goes against the trend of specialization within the area of sustainable development, which often creates inaccessible and  to my mind overly confusingly complex views, but gives a fresh approach to understanding the problems and to some extent the solutions to the crisis facing us today. Roorda describes the crisis in the develop world as the triple crunch  (i.e. climate change, economic crisis and oil depletion), which illustrates his no nonsense approach.

The book is broken down into two parts. Part I is called SWOT analysis (i.e. strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) which explores the global situation. This is made up of four chapters: 1. Sustainable development: an introduction; 2.  Flaws in the fabric: people and nature; 3. Flaws in the fabric: people and society,; and 4. Sources of vigour, this later chapter dealing with global strengths.  Part II is Solution Strategies and  explores some of the ways in which sustainability can be achieved through a further four chapters : 5. Here and there; 6. Now and later; 7. Climate and energy; and 8. Sustainable business practices.  Based on case studies and littered with other examples and colour images  this is a fascinating book  and is as complete a text as I think could have been achieved.  It has numerous student questions which, with the support of an equally innovative and exciting website (www.routledge.com/cw/roorda), makes this text very interactive.

The book really is interdisciplinary, and while challenging in places is truly accessible to readers of all backgrounds.   The presentation of the book is excellent and the format makes this a very attractive paperback, and at 350 pages, it is not too big for students (and lecturers) to carry around. This is a colourful and intriguing textbook which I highly recommend.  It is the sort of book you wish you had written yourself, but Niko Roorda has done just that and in the process added a remarkable edition to the sustainability library.

Nick Gray
@nickgraytcd