Could sea power solve the energy crisis?

The Telegraph 8 Jan 08;

As Gordon Brown steers Britain towards a nuclear future, Dominic Michaelis, Alex Michaelis and Trevor Cooper-Chadwick suggest we turn to the oceans instead.

The French inventor Georges Claude is largely forgotten today; if he is remembered at all, it is as the creator of the neon lamp. Yet one of his projects from the 1920s could resolve the global energy crisis - by harnessing the power of the oceans.

It may sound like science fiction, but Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) is an idea whose time has come. It is based on the work of Jacques-Arsène d'Arsonval, a 19th-century French physicist who thought of using the sea as a giant solar-energy collector.

The theory is very simple: OTEC extracts energy from the difference in temperature between the surface of the sea (up to 29C in the tropics) and the waters a kilometre down, which are typically a chilly 5C. This powers a "heat engine": think of a refrigerator in reverse, in which a temperature difference creates electricity.

Claude's efforts to develop a practical version of d'Arsonval's concept had to be abandoned due to poor weather and a lack of funds.

But a modern equivalent would meet much of the world's energy needs, without generating polluting clouds of carbon and sulphur dioxide. It could also produce vast quantities of desalinated water to be shipped to parched areas of the world such as Africa.

There are two basic versions of the technology. The first operates in a "closed cycle", using warm surface water to heat ammonia, which boils at a low temperature. This expands into vapour, driving a turbine that produces electricity. Cold water from the depths is used to cool the ammonia, returning it to its liquid state so the process can start again.

The "open cycle" version offers the added benefit of producing drinking water as a by-product.

Warm seawater is introduced into a vacuum chamber, in which it will boil more easily, leaving behind salt and generating steam to turn a turbine. Once it has left the turbine, the steam enters a condensing chamber cooled by water from the depths, in which large quantities of desalinated water are produced - 1.2 million litres for every megawatt of energy.

A 250MW plant (a sixth of the capacity of the new coal-fired power station that has just won planning permission in Kent) could produce 300 million litres of drinking water a day, enough to fill a supertanker. Using electrolysis, it would also be possible to produce hydrogen fuel.

Such a vision is far removed from the first OTEC plant, constructed by Claude in 1930 in Matanzas Bay, Cuba, where the sea plunges to great depths close to the shore. After several failures - including the loss of two of the pipes used to suck up cold water from the sea - Claude produced 22,000 watts of electricity from this early prototype.

This is a very small amount, enough to heat five well insulated houses. But it confirmed that his calculations worked, and that both electricity and drinking water could be produced by the sea.

When a later version was installed on a converted boat in Brazil, Claude found a use for this desalinated water: he froze it to make ice, a valuable commodity at the time. The boat, however, was damaged in a storm and the project abandoned.

Similar difficulties have beset the many subsequent attempts to turn principle into practice, but with oil at $100 a barrel, and with pressure growing to arrest the effects of climate change, the conditions are right for OTEC to make a comeback.
advertisement

In fact, there is no need to stop at OTEC as the sole technology. If you are going to build an offshore platform, it makes sense to harness its space to create an "energy island" - a facility that uses a variety of alternative energies, such as wind, wave and solar, to generate enough power to pump the huge quantities of water from the sea and run the vacuum pumps of the OTEC plant.

Not only would these "islands" be self-sufficient, but several could be linked to generate energy outputs of around 1,000MW, rivalling the output of a typical nuclear plant. The cost, according to our models, would be roughly double that of a nuclear power station.

This might seem expensive, but an OTEC plant would not involve the waste-treatment or astronomical decommissioning costs of a nuclear facility. Also, it would offset its expense through the sale of the desalinated water.

This is in addition to the other advantages: carbon-free energy production and no generation of heat. In fact, the plants would cool the seas and oceans by the same amount as the energy extracted from them.

The energy islands would mainly be built from reinforced concrete, using corrosion-resistant metals, but they would come in different sizes and with different functions: some would be simple energy-generating platforms, while others would be larger installations, linked to the land by cable, along which the electricity could be distributed (this would involve superconductors, materials that lose all resistance to electricity when cooled, minimising energy loss in transmission).

And energy generation would not be their only function. Larger islands could support fish farms that used the plankton pumped up along with the cold seawater, as well as pods for heliports, greenhouses, accommodation and maintenance areas, facilities for producing sea salt and harbours and mooring for supertankers.

These tankers would collect the desalinated water or the hydrogen produced by electrolysis, which could both be shipped to energy- and water-scarce parts of the world, just as natural gas is piped from Siberia to Western Europe.

These hydrogen fuel cells could soon be used to power cars, trucks, boats, factories and aircraft, helping to establish a clean hydrogen economy. A model for this is Iceland, where hydrogen for fuel cells is being generated by electrolysis using cheap geothermal energy. On this basis, Iceland expects to become emissions-free by 2020.

We also have a clear idea where to build these powerful islands. For the system to function, the gap between the surface and the depths must be at least 20C.

Maps of the oceans show which waters contain the necessary temperature gradients -and China, India and Brazil, the three countries projected to have the greatest economic and population growth this century, and therefore the most pressing energy requirements, all have OTEC potential.

In April in New York, international agencies, national and state governments, environmental groups and industry associations are sponsoring the most substantive global conference on renewable marine power for years.

Here is one fact that should help delegates to focus minds on what is possible: 50,000 energy islands could meet the all world's energy requirement while providing two tons of fresh water per person per day for its six billion inhabitants. That would be a legacy of which Georges Claude could be proud.

• Dominic Michaelis is an architect and engineer. He and his architect son Alex are developing the energy island concept with Trevor Cooper-Chadwick of Southampton University.

Read more!

Imported from China, UK Builds Recyclable Hotel

PlanetArk 9 Jan 08;

LONDON - A British hotel chain is building what is says is the first recyclable hotel constructed from pre-built, container-like crates imported from China, stacked on each other and bolted together.

Budget hotel operator Travelodge said on Tuesday the steel modules could be dismantled if necessary at the end of the 120-room hotel's life and moved elsewhere -- and that the model could ultimately be used to build temporary hotels for sporting events or festivals.

The modules were imported from China with bathrooms already installed, with windows fitted and furnishings and decorations added once the containers have been put together.

But for future hotels, the firm hopes even the furnishing and decoration could be done in China.

"It could facilitate the creation of hotels on a temporary basis at times of peak demand in certain locations -- such as festivals or sporting events," the firm's director of property and development Paul Harvey said.

"A temporary structure to fill such a need would differ to the design of a permanent hotel but it could be built in as little as 12 weeks and removed quickly at the end of the event when the need is gone."

Travelodge says using the Chinese-built modules is 25 percent faster and 10 percent cheaper, making it a core part of their strategy to become the largest hotel operator in London by the 2012 Olympics.

The recyclable hotel, being built in the west London district of Uxbridge, is due to open in June. Rooms will cost just 19 pounds (US$38) a night.

The firm hopes to open a similarly built hotel near London's Heathrow airport by the end of the year.

The firms behind the modular design -- Verbus Systems, a joint-venture between consulting engineers Buro Happold and constructor George & Harding -- say the modular system could also be used for student accommodation and urban housing.

"(It) is the first major advance in construction technology for 100 years, since the introduction of the steel frame," said Verbus chairman Colin Harding. (Writing by Peter Apps, Editing by Dominic Evans)

Read more!

China Launches Surprise Crackdown on Plastic Bags

Guo Shipeng and Emma Graham-Harrison, PlanetArk 9 Jan 08;

BEIJING - China launched a surprise crackdown on plastic bags on Tuesday, banning production of ultra-thin bags and forbidding its supermarkets and shops from handing out free carriers from June 1.

China uses too many of the bags and fails to dispose of them properly, wasting valuable oil and littering the country, China's cabinet, the State Council, said in a notice posted on the central government Web site (www.gov.cn).

"Our country consumes huge amounts of plastic bags every year. While providing convenience to consumers, they have also caused serious pollution, and waste of energy and resources, because of excessive use and inadequate recycling," it said.

Worries about pollution are growing among ordinary citizens, as years of breakneck growth take their toll on the country's air and water, but the new ban may not be universally welcomed.

Late last year the southern boom town of Shenzhen sparked a public controversy by unveiling draft regulations to ban free plastic bags in its shops.

Shopkeepers fretted that customers might be turned away and some people accused the government of making residents shoulder the costs of environmental protection.

Part of the new rules seem similar to the Shenzhen plan, stating that from June shops, supermarkets and sales outlets would be forbidden to offer free plastic bags and all carriers must be clearly marked with their prices.

"We should encourage people to return to carrying cloth bags, using baskets for their vegetables," the notice said.

In addition the manufacture, sale and use of bags under 0.025 mm thick is banned from the same date, with fines and confiscation of goods and profits for firms that flout the rules.

The cabinet also said finance authorities should consider adjusting taxes to discourage the production and sale of plastic bags and encourage the recycling industry.

Rubbish collectors were urged to separate plastic for reprocessing and cut the amount burnt or buried.

The move brings China in line with a growing international trend to cut back use of plastic bags. From Ireland to Uganda and South Africa governments have experimented with heavy taxes, outright bans or eliminating the thinnest bags.

In some countries where the central government has not acted communities ranging from San Francisco to a small British town have taken unilateral action to outlaw the carriers.

Chinese people use up to 3 billion plastic bags a day and the country has to refine 5 million tonnes (37 million barrels) of crude oil every year to make plastics used for packaging, according to a report on the Web site of China Trade News (www.chinatradenews.com.cn).

Shoppers in China will have to pay for plastic bags: govt
Yahoo News 8 Jan 08;

Shoppers in China will have to pay for plastic bags at supermarkets and other retail stores as part of a nationwide crackdown on the environmentally damaging items, the government has announced.

The production, sale and use of plastic shopping bags thinner than 0.025 millimetres (0.001 inches) will also be banned completely, the State Council, or cabinet, said in a statement posted on its website late Tuesday.

"Plastic shopping bags, due to reasons such as excessive use and inefficient recycling, have caused serious energy and resources waste and environment pollution," the statement said.

"The super thin bags (those thinner than 0.025 mm) have especially become a main source of plastic pollution as they are easy to break and thus disposed of carelessly."

The new rules will take effect starting June 1, the cabinet said, although it did not provide details on how much shoppers will have to pay for the bags.

The statement said companies would be urged to produce bags that are more endurable and recyclable, while consumers will be encouraged to use plastic shopping bags more sensibly.

In China, the overuse of plastic bags is a major problem.

In the booming southern city of Shenzhen, at least 1.75 billion plastic bags are used each year, according to previous data released by local authorities and published by the official Xinhua news agency.

Shenzhen's environmental protection department said the bags were posing a huge environmental problem, as they generally did not decompose for 200 years, while some never would at all, Xinhua reported.

Ahead of the national directive, Shenzhen announced in November it was considering placing fees on the use of plastic bags, with fines of up to 50,000 yuan (6,800 dollars) for retailers that gave them away for free.

However whether the national crackdown will be implemented remains in doubt, since local authorities are infamous in China for ignoring directives from the central government that aim to curb pollution among many other issues.

Read more!

Green gold and ethical jewellery

Briton finds ethical jewellery good as gold
David Brough Yahoo News 9 Jan 08;

"Customers don't realize that one wedding ring weighs 10 grammes and causes three tonnes of toxic waste," says Greg Valerio, whose company aims to follow fair trade coffee with ethical gold jewellery.

A silver-haired anti-poverty and human rights campaigner, he is at the forefront of a fast-growing global market for gold and platinum jewellery which seeks to soothe consumers' consciences and protect miners from danger and exploitation.

His jewellery shop in the southern English city of Chichester has formed a partnership with miners in a cooperative in Choco, an underdeveloped region in northeast Colombia, called the Green Gold ("Oro Verde") project.

Together they are working with the Fairtrade Foundation -- which backs farmers and workers from poor countries to develop their communities through fairer terms of trade. They aim to extend Fairtrade's successful labeling to gold.

"Green gold" jewellery is a niche in a fast-growing wider market for ethical goods, ranging from day-to-day foodstuffs like tea, coffee and chocolate to designer fashions and travel.

Analysts say global sales of ethical gold jewellery are probably less than one percent of the total $56 billion gold jewellery market based on figures from London-based consultancy GFMS -- and the Fairtrade label is a year or so away.

Although the ethical product is priced at a premium and gold is at record highs, the market has been ballooning. Among a plethora of online offers are companies including one called greenKarat that argues industrial mining methods damage the land and endanger ecosystems, so recycled gold would be better for society.

British fashion designer Katharine Hamnett includes a link to Valerio's outlet, called Cred, on her Web site. He said ethics were a strong selling point in the jewellery trade: a woman would not want to receive a gift that was tarnished by exploitation.

Nor do some men want to give them. A customer of Valerio's store, Stephen McIlhenny, 27-year-old deputy manager of an outdoor activities centre in Devon, said he ordered a bespoke white gold engagement ring with a round diamond in November for 800 pounds ($1,600).

"I wanted my engagement ring to have put labor and materials to good use rather than wrecking things," he said by telephone. "I wanted my fiancee to know that the gift was very special and did not put people through hardship."

PAY PREMIUM

The "Oro Verde" miners receive an income premium of roughly 10 percent over their peers in Colombia for their work, said Valerio, who has dual British and Canadian nationality and also helped found the independent, global Association for Responsible Mining (ARM).

With donors including the charity Oxfam, the ARM aims to expand the Green Gold initiative to develop a framework for responsible artisanal and small-scale mining and meet growing consumer demand for sustainable jewellery and minerals.

Mine owners in many parts of the world regularly flout safety regulations to meet demand that seems insatiable -- gold has been in a bull market for seven years and on Tuesday prices were probing fresh all-time highs above $880 an ounce.

In South Africa, the world's top platinum producer, more than 200 workers were killed in 2007, prompting a nationwide strike over safety that hit output. The National Union of Mineworkers has threatened more action as it urges the government to prosecute mining companies for the deaths.

The Fairtrade Foundation, which coordinates Fairtrade labeling in 20 countries including Britain, is working with the ARM to explore how to develop the concept of ethical gold.

"If we get a positive board decision to proceed with Fairtrade labeled gold, then depending on the outcome of the pilot studies to date, it would be likely that the first certified gold will be available during 2009," said Fairtrade Foundation policy and producer relations officer Chris Davis.

"It is a partnership that seeks to bring our knowledge of Fairtrade standards and practice together with ARM's knowledge of artisanal small-scale mining," said Davis, who has visited the Choco cooperative, as well as mines in Bolivia and Peru.

"BLOOD DIAMOND" BOOST

Valerio started his store in 2004 and says it is one of the first jewelers in the world to sell ethical gold and platinum jewellery.

"We were helped by 'Blood Diamond'," he said, referring both to the Leonardo DiCaprio movie and to international efforts to stem the flow of conflict diamonds -- rough diamonds used by rebel groups to finance wars, featured in that film.

The Kimberley Process, a joint government, industry and civil society initiative introduced in 2003, sought to help curb decades of devastating conflicts in countries such as Angola, Ivory Coast, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sierra Leone.

Since Cred started marketing ethical gold and platinum jewellery, its sales have grown fast, with online orders flowing in from around the world, notably the United States, Valerio said.

"Bearing in mind that our certified gold sales at the end of 2004 were zero pounds, we have just posted over 200,000 ($400,000) (in sales) at the end of 2007," he added.

Cred's wedding or engagement rings typically cost about 10 percent more than average prices but are about 15 percent below the top luxury brands such as Tiffany.

A bespoke Cred 18-carat gold wedding ring might cost from 195 to 800 pounds ($390 to $1,600) depending on its size and design -- the cheapest engagement ring one could expect to buy in a standard British store would cost about 80 pounds ($160).

"I think the idea of 'fair trade' jewellery will spread," said Cred customer McIlhenny. "Whenever I talk to my friends about my fiancee's 'fair trade' ring, they all really like the idea."

Andrew Wade, a consumer goods analyst with Seymour Pierce, a London-based investment bank and stockbrokers, is less certain: "It is difficult to know how the end-consumer will respond to higher-priced ethical jewellery," he said.

However keen the demand may be, the health of the global economy will ultimately drive sales: jewelers face the double challenge of soaring gold prices and a downturn in consumer confidence in Europe and the United States.

"But it makes sense to be in a business in a growing area," Wade added.

(Reporting by David Brough; Editing by Sara Ledwith)

Read more!

Grass biofuels 'cut CO2 by 94%'

BBC News 9 Jan 08;

Producing biofuels from a fast-growing grass delivers vast savings of carbon dioxide emissions compared with petrol, a large-scale study has suggested.

A team of US researchers also found that switchgrass-derived ethanol produced 540% more energy than was required to manufacture the fuel.

One acre (0.4 hectares) of the grassland could, on average, deliver 320 barrels of bioethanol, they added.

Their paper appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The five-year study, involving 10 farms ranging in size from three to nine hectares, was described as the largest study of its kind by the paper's authors.

Co-author Ken Vogel of the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agriculture Research Service, based at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, said that all previous energy analyses had been based on data from research plots and estimated inputs.

Last year, a team of scientists had also examined the energy gains from ethanol produced from switchgrass, but their model suggested that the net gain was in the region of 343%, which was considerably less that the USDA team's findings.

"A lot of their information was based on small plot data and also estimates of what would be needed in the agronomic production of biofuels," Dr Vogel explained.

"We had on-farm trials, so we had all the data from the farmers on all the inputs needed to produce the crops.

"We were able to take this information and put it into this model and able to come up with a very real-world estimate."

The energy inputs required to produce the crops included nitrogen fertiliser, herbicides, diesel and seed production.

However, he added that as there were no large-scale biorefineries in operation, the team did have to estimate how much bioethanol such a plant would be able to produce in order to calculate the net energy gain.

"Right now, the Department of Energy is co-funding the construction of six biorefineries in the US. These plants will be completed around 2010, and will be above the pilot plant scale."

Although the process to produce ethanol from switchgrass was more complex than using food crops such as wheat or corn, the so-called "second generation" biofuel could produce much higher energy yields per tonne because it utilised the whole plant rather than just the seeds.

Carbon cuts

The team also calculated that the production and consumption of switchgrass-derived ethanol cut CO2 emissions by about 94% when compared with an equivalent volume of petrol.

Burning biofuels releases carbon dioxide, but growing the plants absorbs a comparable amount of the gas from the atmosphere.

However, the energy inputs used during the growing and processing of the crops means the fuel is rarely "carbon neutral".

"Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of ethanol from switchgrass, using only the displacement method, showed 88% less GHG emissions than conventional ethanol," the researchers wrote.

"The use of... biomass residue for energy at a... biorefinery is the main reason why switchgrass and human-made prairies have theoretically lower GHG emissions than biofuels from annual (food) crops, where processing is currently derived from fossil fuels."

A number of organisations, including the UN, have expressed concern that biofuels could do more harm than good.

The criticisms of the technology include taking large areas of arable land out of food production, inflating crop prices and limited carbon emission savings.

"In contrast to most European countries, the US has quite a bit of land that is being held outside of (food) production at the moment," Dr Vogel told BBC News.

"We are looking at the use of switchgrass on marginal cropland The intent is to have energy crops being grown on marginal cropland, so it would not be in competition with food crops on our best land.

He also added that there were other factors within the process of producing the biofuel that limited its financial and environmental feasibility.

"Because there is going to be a lot of tonnage of material shipped to the biorefinery, there is going to be some economics involved."

In order to maximise the carbon reductions, he said: "A biorefinery will have a feedstock supply radius of about 25 to 50 miles, so the feedstock of any biorefinery needs to be localised."

As the switchgrass had to be sourced within the local area, Dr Vogel said it was important that the land delivered a high yield of grass in order to meet the refinery's demands.

Annual rainfall was a key factor affecting the delivery of the necessary yields.

Study: Prairie grass can produce ethanol
Josh Funk, Associated Press Yahoo News 9 Jan 08;

New research shows that prairie grasses grown using only moderate amounts of fertilizer on marginal land can produce significant amounts of ethanol.

The five-year study of switch grass done by the University of Nebraska and the USDA's Agricultural Research Service was published this week by the National Academy of Sciences.

Researcher Ken Vogel said he estimates that an acre of switch grass would produce an average of 300 gallons of ethanol based on the study of grass grown on marginal land on farms in Nebraska, South Dakota and North Dakota.

An acre of corn grown in those same states produces about 350 gallons of ethanol on average.

Renewable Fuels Association spokesman Matt Hartwig said this latest study adds to the evidence supporting the development of cellulosic ethanol.

"It underscores that cellulosic ethanol production is not only feasible, it is essential," said Hartwig, whose group represents ethanol producers.

Nebraska Ethanol Board Projects Manager Steve Sorum said the industry is excited about the prospects for cellulosic ethanol because the feedstocks for it, such as switch grass, are cheaper to grow. Plus some of the byproducts created in the process can be burned to generate electricity.

Sorum said the key will be developing an economic way to break down the cell walls of cellulose-based fuel sources.

Both cellulosic and grain-based ethanol will likely play a role in meeting the new federal standard for biofuel use. The energy bill Congress passed last month requires a massive increase in the production of ethanol to 36 billion gallons a year by 2022.

The energy bill will emphasize cellulosic ethanol, made from such feedstock as switch grass and wood chips, after 2015 when about two-thirds of the nation's ethanol is supposed to come from such non-corn sources.

Hartwig said there is general agreement that 15 billion gallons a year is about the most ethanol that can be produced from grain with current technology without hurting grain markets. So he said it's important to develop other sources for the renewable fuel.

Vogel said comparing the amount of ethanol produced by corn with the amount that could be produced by switch grass is a bit unfair because the method of converting switch grass to fuel is still being perfected.

Last year, the Department of Energy announced plans to invest $385 million in six ethanol refineries across the country to jump-start ethanol production from cellulose-based sources, a process that has not yet been proven commercially viable.

But Vogel and the other researchers did develop an estimate of how much energy switch grass would produce based on current conversion rates. Switch grass produces more than five times as much energy than the energy that's consumed by growing the crop and converting it to ethanol, according to the report.

Vogel said this switch grass research is the most extensive to date. Vogel is a U.S. Department of Agriculture geneticist and a University of Nebraska-Lincoln professor.

Read more!

Plastic bottles: The (Possible) Perils of Being Thirsty While Being Green

Alina Tugend, The New York Times 5 Jan 08;

I HAVE the usual New Year’s resolutions — exercise more, lose weight, be a nicer person. I also hope to find out if I am inadvertently poisoning my children.

My fear has to do with reusing what are known as “single use” plastic water bottles, like Poland Spring. I buy them not because I distrust New York tap water, but because they are easy to carry around in the car and to various kids’ sporting events. And if one is lost, as it invariably is, no biggie.

We refill them with tap water and use them a number of times before recycling. I was, I sanctimoniously thought, doing my green part.

But by trying to save the earth, am I hurting my family’s health? I had heard it wasn’t a good idea to refill these single-use bottles because the plastic leaches dangerous chemicals. But is that enough of a risk to make me change my ways? What if I stop using plastic bottles and then drink less water? Is that a good trade-off?

It is the old conundrum about risk versus benefits.

Here is what I found out: most plastics are stamped with a number from 1 to 7 at the bottom — these numbers are used to indicate how to recycle or dispose of the plastic.

The type of plastic bottle that typically holds water, soda and juice is made from polyethylene terephthalate, a petroleum-based material also known as PET that is labeled No. 1.

The trouble with reusing those plastic bottles is that each time they are washed and refilled they become a little more scratched and crinkly, which can lead them to degrade. That can cause a trace metal called antimony to leach out, said Frederick S. vom Saal, a professor of biology at the University of Missouri who has studied plastics for years.

“We have to assume that along with that metal, others are almost certainly leaching out as well, but we don’t know what they are and we don’t know what to look for because manufacturers won’t tell us what else is in the bottles,” Professor vom Saal said.

One inaccuracy that I came across repeatedly is that a chemical called phthalates, which can interfere with male hormones, poses a danger from such water bottles.

Lynn R. Goldman, professor of environmental health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said the truth was that it leached in barely discernible amounts.

Perhaps more worrisome is that because the bottles — with their small openings — are harder to wash out than the wide-mouth hiking and sports bottles, they can house bacteria.

At this point, I do not feel terribly anxious about reusing the bottles several times — that is usually all we can do before we lose them or they crumple beyond recognition.

But perhaps a better alternative — in terms of health and the environment — is to use the hard plastic bottles made with polycarbonate plastic, often known by the brand Nalgene. It has the numeral 7 stamped at the bottom and is the same type of material used to make some baby bottles, the lining of tin cans and other products. I have some of those around the house. They are just too big to fit into our car cup holders so I retired them to the basement.

Time to dig them out?

Not quite. Environmental groups and some scientists have raised concern that such plastic can leach bisphenol A, an endocrine-disrupting chemical.

It is a big enough issue that last year, the National Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction convened a 12-member expert panel to examine studies related to the chemical.

At the same time, another government-financed group, made up of about 40 scientists with expertise in bisphenol A, reviewed more than 700 relevant studies.

Here is where it gets a little tricky. The first group concluded that most people’s exposure to the chemical was well below the Environmental Protection Agency’s standard.

Nonetheless, the panel expressed “some concern” that the chemical could cause behavioral and neurological problems in developing fetuses and young children. For more information, go to www. niehs.nih.gov.

More studies are being done on certain aspects of the chemical, said Michael D. Shelby, director of the center, and a final brief will be issued this summer.

But Professor vom Saal, the lead author of the scientists’ report, said their findings were far less benign. “There is a very high level of concern about the potential harm caused by bisphenol A in animals,” he said, including potential for diabetes, cancer and obesity. “The prediction by this panel is that we can expect similar harm in people.”

And industry has its own view. Steven Hentges, executive director of the polycarbonate/BPA global group of the American Chemistry Council, dismissed fears about bisphenol A and said that no country had banned or restricted the chemical’s use. “No government body has found reason to be alarmed,” he said. On its Web site, Nalgene reaches the same conclusion.

So forget about those bottles? The reality is that bisphenol A is present in many types of material, from resins used to coat the interior surface of most food and beverage cans to some children’s toys.

There is a danger in focusing exclusively on bottles rather than looking at the need for government regulation of the widespread use of these chemicals, Professor Goldman said.

But choosing what water container you use can give you a slight sense of control. And Professor vom Saal noted that the range of exposure among people varied widely. So exchanging that polycarbonate water bottle for one made of glass or stainless steel may be a good idea.

Forget glass for obvious reasons (“Mom, I just sliced my finger”). A search of available stainless steel bottles showed they run around $16 and up — a safer but pricey alternative given that no matter how hard we try, we are bound to leave them scattered on various fields.

“If I was to use plastic, I would stay with No. 2 and No. 5,” Professor vom Saal said. No. 2 is high-density polyethylene; No. 5 is polypropylene. Both are used in margarine tubs and yogurt containers for example.

But, he warned, do not heat anything in any type of plastic in the microwave.

If you do use these hard No. 7 plastic bottles, the Green Guide, published by the National Geographic Society, advises you to avoid washing them in a dishwasher or with harsh detergent to limit wear and tear.

I have no doubt that some readers think it is ridiculous to worry about such risks, while others will immediately toss out their plastic bottles. I am still on the fence.

So, in a frenzy of indecision, I decided to look elsewhere in an attempt to be environmentally good. What about those plastic bags we use for sandwiches and snacks — is there a way to cut down on them?

One friend suggested wax paper, another foil.

“The big trade-off is between manufacturing and disposability,” said Seth Bauer, editorial director for the Green Guide and thegreenguide.com. “Plastic is manufactured incredibly efficiently and uses a lot less energy, while wax paper has a fairly intensive manufacturing process.”

Mining aluminum is also bad for the environment, he noted, and uses a great deal of energy.

Plastic bags can be rinsed out, if they do not hold meat, and reused, but wax paper is better than plastic when it comes to disposal.

There is also a Web site, www.reusablebags.com, which offers a product called “Wrap-N-Mat” with a Velcro closure that you can wash and use repeatedly at $6.95 a pop.

I might try good old-fashioned Tupperware. I started searching on the Web for cute ones shaped like sandwiches and then realized I had plenty of containers in my cupboard that would do the job just fine.

Stop buying and use what we have in the house? Now that would be an innovative resolution.

Read more!

The village falling into the sea

The Independent 7 Jan 08;

The problem of erosion intensified in the early 1990s when a developer was given permission by the local council to build sea defences along the coast. The Arnolds refused to sell their land to the developer, meaning that their property was the only one not protected.

Skipsea is disappearing fast. It sits on the fastest-eroding coastline in Europe and every year the sea swallows another chunk of land. Mark Hughes visits the people living on the edge

The sign as you enter Skipsea is an immediate indication that something is wrong. "Danger," it reads. "Enter at your own risk." Just ahead, there is a huge hole in the middle of the road, blocking your path.

The village of Skipsea sits, precariously, on Yorkshire's East Riding coastline – the fastest eroding coastline in Europe.

As 2008 begins, many of the villagers have a common new year's resolution: to leave their doomed village before their homes are washed into the sea. Official figures estimate that this coastline loses an average of 18 inches a year. The council estimates that 13 homes in the village will disappear in the next five years, with a further 78 likely to be lost by 2058.

But, worryingly, the residents of Skipsea, which has a population of just 600, say these estimates are far too optimistic.

With 2007 being the worst year in recent memory, 2008 is generally regarded as make or break for those closest to the ever-receding cliff-face.

For Josephine and Colin Arnold this will almost certainly be the year they are forced to leave their home of 19 years.

The couple moved to their 11-room farmhouse in May 1988 to set up a business in the village, which is a popular tourist destination.

They bought the house with an acre of land and opened a restaurant, a campsite, a caravan park and a holiday cottage.

But in just 19 years the land behind their home, which once stretched back 100 feet, has shrunk to six feet.

The land where the campsite, the caravans and cottage once stood is gone, washed away by the sea. Last year's frequent storms forced them to start demolishing their home, reducing the 11-room farmhouse, where they housed the restaurant, to to just six rooms.

A 20-foot drop has replaced the space where their kitchen, dining room, living room and two bedrooms used to be. And a wall of tyres sits at the end of the driveway to stop cars driving off the edge of the cliff. They have lost their home and their business. They now live in a renovated caravan and make their living selling doughnuts from the back of a van.

"It's been terrible," said Mrs Arnold. "We never expected the coast to disappear so quickly. It's now got to the point that another big tide will wash away the rest of the house and possibly the caravan too.

"When we moved here we hoped that we could make enough money to be able to move away but we didn't make the money quickly enough and we became stuck here. There comes a time when you just have to accept that it is too dangerous to live here any more. It's at the stage where I dread any bad weather, I panic when I see rain now because it could mean a storm and that's bad news."

The couple say that the problem of erosion intensified in the early 1990s when a developer was given permission by the local council to build sea defences along the coast.

The Arnolds refused to sell their land to the developer, meaning that their property was the only one not protected.

Mrs Arnold, 56, added: "In our opinion the defences were never going to work and that's why we didn't sell the land. And we were right because they have since fallen down. But when they were built it was a disaster for us.

"The experts say that about one foot falls off the cliffs every year, but when those defences went up we sat and watched about 18 feet wash away in 20 minutes. Because we were the only ones without a sea defence all the water was channelled towards our house."

The couple – who share their home with their daughter Katie, 30, and Mrs Arnold's brother Alan Lead and his wife Cindy – are now waiting to hear from the council what type of compensation they will be entitled to.

A meeting to discuss the matter is scheduled for March and Mr Arnold, 62, hopes that they will finally be able to start planning for the future.

He said: "At first we didn't like to think about moving away because this has been our home for a long time. But we have accepted that it's inevitable and we are ready to move, but we need somewhere to go.

It's not like a normal house sale where we can sell our house and move on; who is going to buy a house that will be gone in a few years? We need the council to give us compensation or land as soon as possible so we can move away from here."

A short walk from the Arnolds' home, on Southfield Lane, takes you to Green Lane. You can't take a car between the houses because there is a huge hole in the middle of the road – another consequence of coastal erosion.

Walking down mud track towards Green Lane gives you the feeling that the houses there have already been condemned. The sign as you enter the street reads: "Danger coastal erosion. Enter at your own risk."

Residents of Green Lane have to use the back doors of their houses, as access at the front is hampered by the road closure.

The row of houses on the street hasn't always been right on the edge of the cliff face. Before 1980 another row sat in front of them. Those houses have since been washed away.

Valerie Robinson, 65, knows it won't be long before she, like those in the 1980s, is forced to leave her home.

"Our houses are about 100 feet away from the edge but it's getting closer every year. I've lived here for the past 14 years and more of the coast has washed away in the past two years than ever before. I can only see it getting worse," she said.

"I remember when I used to sit out in the garden and tourists would be envious of our houses. They would tell me that if they won the pools they'd move here. No one is saying that any more. No one wants to live here now. When I bought the place I was told by the estate agent that it would be here for 45 years. That was in 1993 and I don't give it another five years before these houses are gone.

"We've accepted that we will have to leave soon. We are just hoping we get some good news in March with regards to the compensation and then we can think about leaving."

Mrs Robinson's daughter Wendy lives two doors down. She says she is one of the lucky ones because she rents her property and isn't faced with losing her only asset – the prospect her mother faces.

Wendy, 36, said: "It's become a dangerous place to live. I have a 12-year-old daughter and I'm forever warning her not to play out on the front. It's a frightening thought what could happen. Only last week an old man was blown over the edge. I only rent, so I'm lucky in that sense, but if the council offered me another house tomorrow I would take it. It used to be lovely living here, 'Millionaires' Row' they used to call it. It's disgusting now and we just want to get out.

"We feel like we have been forgotten about. We are right on the coast, our houses about to fall into the sea, and it seems like no one cares."

Michael Kitchen, a neighbour, echoes her sentiments. Mr Kitchen, 65, has been visiting the village for 50 years and has lived there for the past 12.

He said: "We first started becoming really concerned about coastal erosion in November 2006 and since then I've written letters to everyone: the council, Defra, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, the list goes on.

"It's the same story though. They say they are discussing it, but no one seems interested in protecting this coastline. It's been more than 20 years since the last row of houses went into the sea and since then we have all been waiting for ours to be next.

"I've been on a deferred list for a council house for the past six years. Every year they ask me if I would like them to find me a new house and every year I say no. This year I'm going to say yes.

"The way this coastline is eroding, the next lot of houses will go a lot quicker than we all first thought. We've to make other plans.

"When the last lot of houses went in the 1980s it was just a handful of people that lost their homes. This time we are talking about a small community that is going to disappear.

"This erosion won't stop at our house. It will eat into the village and before you know it Skipsea will be gone."

Read more!

Australian bay and dredging

Baywatch reveals swarms of unknown life
Andrea Petrie, The Age 9 Jan 08;

CLOSE to 20 minutes after leaving the Queenscliff boat harbour yesterday, those aboard the Maureen M got a memorable introduction to the marine delights of Port Phillip Bay.

Up to 60 dolphins in pods varying in numbers put on an impressive display as the 27 people swam among them while being towed by ropes behind the boat.

Before long they were snorkelling around Popes Eye, the world's smallest man-made marine national park, where they watched some of the bay's 5000 marine species — 90% of which cannot be found anywhere else — swim beneath them.

Then it was off to Chinaman's Hat, a wooden structure within sight of the bay's Mud Island bird sanctuary, where they swam with seals.

As opponents of the Port Phillip Bay dredging project await a decision on their High Court challenge tomorrow, those aboard yesterday's Sea All Dolphin Swims trip said the experience had given them a better understanding of what was at stake if dredging went ahead.

"I think it's a real concern because if the fish aren't here, the other wildlife aren't going to hang around," said Berndan Dalmau, 38, of Baxter.

Hugh Skinner, 8, from Mulgrave, hoped to return to the bay to see the "big and colourful" fish and seals again.

His brother Ty, 6, said "it would be a shame if something happened and they all swam away from here".

Snorkelling instructor Sally Renzenbrink, 24, said she had concerns for the bay's marine life if dredging went ahead.

"There's more biodiversity here than in the Great Barrier Reef so it would be devastating if that was jeopardised," she said.

"The bay is so healthy at the minute because it is so shallow, which encourages kelp, seaweed and seagrass, which in turns encourages marine life and makes it a great breeding ground for a lot of fish. That attracts dolphins, and we're lucky enough to have about 120 dolphins that are unique to Port Phillip Bay."

An environment report last month found the water quality in the bay was better than it had been for several decades.

This was in part due to the drought, which cut the amount of polluted stormwater flowing into the bay, but also to the long-term effect of ending scallop dredging about 20 years ago, according to the Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority.

The report said the Port Phillip Heads Marine National Park was in excellent health.

Read more!

Climate change, overfishing blamed for corals' demise

Juliet Eilperin, The Washington Post South Florida Sun-Sentinel 7 Jan 08;

Climate change and overfishing, rather than pollution, are primarily responsible for killing off coral reefs in the Caribbean, according to a new study.

The paper, by researchers from the Wildlife Conservation Society, Columbia University and the University of Maryland, examined the effects of two of the most common pollutants: phosphorus and nitrogen.

They concluded that nitrogen is the more damaging of the two, but its effects are mostly felt after a reef is dead or dying, because it stimulates the growth of microscopic green algae that break down the calcium carbonate skeleton of the coral.

The team concluded that the massive die-offs of Caribbean corals in recent decades stemmed mostly from warming ocean temperatures and declines in fish and invertebrates that protect reefs by feeding on the algae.

In an e-mail, Wildlife Conservation Society senior conservation zoologist Tim McClanahan said the study helps explain why coral reefs are struggling across the globe.

``Pollution has been seen as one of the major culprits in the loss of coral reefs around the world, but our study indicates that it cannot explain the widespread changes we are seeing, which leave climate change and overfishing as the major culprits,'' wrote McClanahan, lead author of the paper in the December issue of Marine Pollution Bulletin. ``This helps us further pinpoint the causes of coral loss, but neither climate change or fishing are easy problems to solve.''

Pollution still matters, he added, because once global warming or overfishing damages corals, ``their skeleton will erode away faster in the presence of pollution.''

Read more!

Green woes greets India's new "People's Car"

Jonathan Allen, Reuters 8 Jan 08;

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India's "People's Car" has yet to be unveiled and the advertising campaign has not even begun, but some Indians are already raving about Tata Motor's new $2,500 car -- despite the fears of environmentalists.

"I am really excited and definitely buying the cheapest car in the world as soon as they launch it," said Arindam Sapui, a rice trader in Burdwan, a small town in West Bengal in eastern India.

This is exactly the kind of unbridled enthusiasm that environmentalists have been dreading as they predict a plague of ever-cheaper cars and ever-swelling clouds of climate-changing fumes.

Tata will unveil its 100,000 rupee car on Thursday.

Selling for less than half price of the current cheapest car in the market, it hopes it will tap into the growing ranks of India's middle class -- rather like the Volkswagen Beetle did in Germany or the Mini in England.

Sapui currently zips between villages for work on a scooter, and was thinking about upgrading to a more powerful motorbike.

"But my wife said the 1-lakh car would be cheaper and much safer," he said, using the word for 100,000 in the Indian counting system.

Several more-established middle class consumers who already owned one car also said it would make for an affordable second car for a spouse, son or daughter.

COMMUTER WORRIES

But environmentalists may be relieved that some people interviewed in New Delhi and Mumbai were more muted.

Some echoed fears that car sales will rocket as more people become able to afford them. They were not thinking of gas emissions so much as the horror of the commute to the office in cities where roads are jammed and public transport is miserable.

"I don't think the car should be launched at all," said Kishan Aswani, 75, who commutes for an hour each weekday to his south Mumbai office.

"There is already a lot of traffic on the roads. Traveling by train is impossible, you simply cannot get in or move out."

Tata Motors says a lot of these fears are unfounded. It says the car will meet emission standards and that car sales are already growing fast without the help of the People's Car.

"Given the rate at which the entire industry will grow, even if we market it very heavily, it will still be a miniscule percentage of the cars entering the roads," a company spokesman said.

He added that although the company is targeting first-time buyers, it was also expecting a large portion of sales to come from people trading in their old car as well as from people already considering buying a second-hand car.

WIDESPREAD POVERTY

Widespread poverty is another limiting factor.

For people like Anil, a 22-year-old rickshaw driver in Delhi, even the world's cheapest car still seems ludicrously expensive.

"No money," he said, rubbing his fingers and pouting. He earns almost exactly the national average income, and so the People's Car amounts to more than three years' earnings.

Likewise, Rakesh Kumar, a taxi driver, pointed out that only scooters and motorbikes could fit down the tight alleys that thread through the slums where he and tens of millions of other urban Indians live.

But as millions more people join the estimated 50 million strong middle class in the coming years, cars remain an important marker of status.

"It's the same dream anywhere in the world," said Jyoti Anand, a used-car salesman in Delhi. "You want a good home, a good car, and a beautiful wife."

Baliram Thakur, a taxi driver, was also thinking of his wife when he said he planned to make a booking right away. Then someone told him the cheapest model came without air-conditioning, and his resolve wavered.

"No AC?" he said, taken aback. "The wife will get hot, and she won't like that."

(Additional reporting by Bappa Majumdar in Kolkata and Swati Pandey in Mumbai; Editing by Alistair Scrutton and Alex Richardson)

Read more!

Roger Payne sounds alarm on polluted oceans

Billy Baker, Globe Boston.com 7 Jan 08;

If we don't do something about ocean pollution, I think there's a very good chance that humanity will lose access to fish from the sea

The first gift the whales gave Roger Payne was their song, which he in turn spread to the ears of the world.

He's planning to do the same with their final gift to him, the data locked inside the skin and blubber samples he gathered from 986 sperm whales on a 5 1/2-year, round-the-world journey.

His discovery, with a partner in the late 1960s, that humpback whales sing songs provided an ethereal soundtrack for the animal conservation movement, But the final gift is not going to be music to the ears. Because sitting inside those biopsy samples is the first overall baseline assessment of pollution in the world's oceans.

"What we've analyzed so far," Payne said, "is shocking. It's well beyond any degree of pollutants that I thought would exist."

Payne, 72, the founder and president of the Lincoln-based Ocean Alliance, is getting ready for his Al Gore moment. Once all the samples have been analyzed - the nonprofit conservation advocacy group needs about $1 million dollars in additional funding to complete the job - Payne is going to make it his mission to spread another inconvenient truth.

"If we don't do something about ocean pollution," Payne said from the study of his hillside home in South Woodstock, Vt., "I think there's a very good chance that humanity will lose access to fish from the sea. And because seafood is the principal source of protein for over a billion people, you could easily argue that this is the largest public health crisis in the world."

Yet the success of Gore and others in sounding the alarm on climate change has overshadowed many of the other potential disasters facing the planet. "Every time someone says 'the environment,' they think global warming," Payne said. Ocean pollution "is not even on people's radar." He wants to change that. It's time, he says, to go from "save the whales" to "saved by the whales."

Payne's journey to become one of the world's leading conservationists - in November, he accepted the Dawkins Prize for Animal Conservation and Welfare from Oxford University in England, and he was recently named a finalist for the 2008 Indianapolis Prize, the world's largest monetary award for animal conservation - began with a love for the sound of the wild world.

As a Harvard undergraduate, Payne worked with Donald Griffin, a professor who discovered animal echolocation - a biological sonar used by some mammals - by studying how bats navigate. At Cornell, Payne wrote his PhD dissertation on how owls can locate mice in total darkness based solely on hearing them move, and he did similar work on moths as a postdoc at Tufts.

By the mid-1960s, Payne had become increasingly concerned with the decimation of the wild world. Because his specialty was animal acoustics, he decided to focus on a threatened species for which sound was important - whales - though he had never even seen one. That's when he says he "lucked out like crazy."

In 1967, Payne traveled to Bermuda because he had heard that humpback whales regularly passed by its islands, and he happened to meet a man named Frank Watlington who was working for the US Navy using underwater microphones called hydrophones to listen for Russian submarines. Every now and then, Watlington would hear unusual sounds - the Navy classified them as "unidentified biologics" - and guessed that they might be whales.

Payne and another researcher named Scott McVay confirmed that not only were the sounds Watlington recorded coming from humpback whales, but the noises were in fact songs.

"We began listening and I thought, my god, these animals are repeating themselves, and it was the most beautiful thing I'd ever heard from the wild world," Payne said. "Back then, whaling was killing 33,000 whales a year, and it occurred to me that if we could get the music of the humpback whales into the ears of the world, we could stop the slaughter."

Payne released the album "Songs of the Humpback Whales," which became a hit. But the threats to whales are minor, he says, compared with the dangers of synthetic contaminants - "things with highly forgettable names like polychlorinated biphenyl and endocrine disrupting chemicals" - which he and his crew set out to document during a five-plus year journey aboard the Odyssey that ended in 2005. The concentrations of these manmade chemicals build up in animals high up the food chain, fish such as swordfish that are most often eaten by humans.

To study the level of this contamination at the top of the food chain, Payne and his team chose the sperm whale because males of the species are found in all oceans, while the females stay near the equator. By circling the equator, Payne and the Odyssey team let the males, which return there for breeding, bring them a global sample from places you can't go in a boat.

Can Payne really break through, to do for the oceans what Gore and company did for the atmosphere? Tom Eisner, a Cornell professor who has known Payne for 50 years, said he can think of no better communicator for the task.

"He's a fantastic speaker," Eisner said of Payne, who has teamed up in recent years with his wife, actress Lisa Harrow, for even more dramatic oomph during his presentations.

"But he's bright enough to know that to make an impact in conservation you can't rely on a sound bite anymore, like 'Save the whales.' People demand evidence now. And it was a stroke of genius for him to go out and get that evidence, using an animal he's already helped make a symbol for the plight of our times."

Read more!

Warships sunk for artificial reefs may pose PCB hazard

But diving fans say there's little to worry about
CanWest News Service 8 Jan 08;

"You have to be very cautious because you never know what you might discover in five or 10 years time that you hadn't taken into account. Once you [sink] a ship, it's never coming back up again,"

An environmental group is worried that Canadian navy ships that were sunk as artificial reefs may pose an environmental threat because they contain PCB-contaminated wiring.

One of the scuttled vessels, the former HMCS Saguenay, has been sitting on the ocean floor outside Lunenberg, N.S., for more than 13 years. This type of warship was built in the 1950s and 60s and PCBs -- that have been linked to cancer -- were then not known to be harmful.

The man behind the sinking of the Saguenay denied a media report that this ship and others scuttled off the B.C. coast may contain PCBs because they were not stripped of all of their wires.

"Anything that was considered a hazard had been removed," said Richard Welsford of the Nova Scotia Artificial Reef Association.

Welsford thinks no one should be worried about the PCBs and said that very little wire is left in the Saguenay.

But Nova Scotia's Ecology Action Centre still fears that the PCBs or other toxic substances, such as paint, could harm marine life.

"There are no ecological benefits to sinking ships," said the centre's Mark Butler. "They only do it for tourism and diving purposes.

"You have to be very cautious because you never know what you might discover in five or 10 years time that you hadn't taken into account. Once you [sink] a ship, it's never coming back up again," he added.

Butler said he is relieved that the navy has decided to strip two decommissioned warships, HMCS Gatineau and HMCS Terra Nova, of all wiring before they are sunk as artificial reefs.

Michael Ryan, the head of the association that plans to buy the Terra Nova, said the navy had notified him that the ship would be sold wire-free and PCB-free. It is reported that the work will cost about $1 million per ship.

Read more!