A grocery store in Albany, NY became one of the first to have electricity generated from a fuel cell. A fuel cell works like a battery that combines hydrogen and oxygen to create electricity. It is different than a battery however because it supplies power as long as it is supplied with hydrogen and oxygen. It can also heat buildings and water. Fuel cells are beneficial because they produce much less pollution than power plants. This store is using a 400-kilowatt PureCell fuel cell made by U.T.C. Power. It supplies about 90% of the store's electrixity in thr winter by heating. And it should suuply about half of the electricty in the winter.
For vice president Benny Smith of the Golub corporation which owns this store says that this was the best option. The company began investing in fuel cells in 2007 when electricity prices rose in the Northeast. Fuel cells not only efficiently supply electricity but they give a positive cash flow. Plus, during blackouts the fuel cell will constantly supply eletricity so people can keep shopping and bringing in more money.
After seeing the many positive outcomes of using a fuel cell to power an entire building, I definitely think more buildings should adopt this idea. It could drastically help reduce the carbon emissions contributing to global warming. Plus, even though it may have a high initial cost, in the long run it will end up costing less. Electricity prices will continue to rise and buildings with fuel cells will be able to avoid this problem.
Woody, Todd. (2010 January 28) Albany Grocery Powered by a Fuel Cell. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Wind Power On The Rise
Last year, the amount of wind power grew tremendously. Currently, almost 2% of electricity comes directly from wind turbines. With help from the stimulus package, the wind industry grew at an unbelievably fast pace. Almost as much energy was created from wind as from natural gas last year. This use of renewable resources will decrease the amount of emissions contributing to global warming.
Other natios are considering wind energy as well. America is currently slightly behind Europe which gets 5% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020. And, China plans to invest about $14.6 billion to wind power. Both countries have passed mandates requiring a certain amount of electricty coming from renewable sources. The US is working on this as well with 29 states adopting this standard. Also, the US plans to continue this wind power growth.
After reading this article and learning about it in class, I personally think wind is the best enery alternative. This natural phenomenon should be taken advantage of and used. Other resources are being depleted and some are very harmful to the environment. But on the contrary, wind will probably never stop blowing and does not harm the environment. Even though some think wind farms would ruin the "natural beauty" of the land, the result is completely worth it.
Mouawad, Jad. (2010 January 26) Wind Power Has Another Banner YEar. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Other natios are considering wind energy as well. America is currently slightly behind Europe which gets 5% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020. And, China plans to invest about $14.6 billion to wind power. Both countries have passed mandates requiring a certain amount of electricty coming from renewable sources. The US is working on this as well with 29 states adopting this standard. Also, the US plans to continue this wind power growth.
After reading this article and learning about it in class, I personally think wind is the best enery alternative. This natural phenomenon should be taken advantage of and used. Other resources are being depleted and some are very harmful to the environment. But on the contrary, wind will probably never stop blowing and does not harm the environment. Even though some think wind farms would ruin the "natural beauty" of the land, the result is completely worth it.
Mouawad, Jad. (2010 January 26) Wind Power Has Another Banner YEar. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Heating Oil Polluting Air
New York City is undoubtedly polluted from street cars, buses and taxis but is dramatically affected by heating oil. No. 6 heating oil is mostly the source of air pollution, the cheapest but worst type in the boilers. Also used is No. 4 heavy oil which is also cheap and hardly less polluting. City officials including Mayor Bloomberg and health commissioner Dr. Thomas Farley are working to regulate these oils. A recent survey of air quality done almost 2 weeks ago show the most pollutants around buildings burning No. 4 or No. 6 oils. Along with this survey, the Environmental Defense Fund concluded that these buildings, just 1% of all the buildings in the city, create 87% of the soot pollution from heating oil.
Some building owners are fighting these new regulations while others are becoming even more green. To replace the dirty oil burners and to switch heating systems could cost up to $100,000. And on top of that, the cleaner oil costs more money than the dirty oils; up to 60 cents less a gallon. However, some buildings are converting and even going one step further. A building in Greenwich Village is currently converting to natural gas while installing 2 roods with absorbant vegetation and energy-efficient windows.
If people are going to run large buildings, they should run them right. The environment faces enough stress as it is. Any solutions to try to make the air quality better should be used to matter the cost. It will ultimately do more good in the long run. Polluted air causes irritated lungs, asthma, emphysema and increases the risk of a heart attack. All these conditions could be decreased and maybe eliminated by simply paying 60 cents more a gallon for cleaner burning oils.
Navarro, Mireya (2010 January 1). Studies Find Heavy Heating Oil Has Severe Effect on Air Quality. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Some building owners are fighting these new regulations while others are becoming even more green. To replace the dirty oil burners and to switch heating systems could cost up to $100,000. And on top of that, the cleaner oil costs more money than the dirty oils; up to 60 cents less a gallon. However, some buildings are converting and even going one step further. A building in Greenwich Village is currently converting to natural gas while installing 2 roods with absorbant vegetation and energy-efficient windows.
If people are going to run large buildings, they should run them right. The environment faces enough stress as it is. Any solutions to try to make the air quality better should be used to matter the cost. It will ultimately do more good in the long run. Polluted air causes irritated lungs, asthma, emphysema and increases the risk of a heart attack. All these conditions could be decreased and maybe eliminated by simply paying 60 cents more a gallon for cleaner burning oils.
Navarro, Mireya (2010 January 1). Studies Find Heavy Heating Oil Has Severe Effect on Air Quality. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Birds vs. Planes
As shown by Captain Sullenberger's flight in last January, the amount of birds at airports is unsafe. Kennedy International Airport in particular has increased bird populations because it was built on wetlands. The wildlife there interferes with the planes. Sea gulls especially invade Kennedy, leaving their clam shells on the runway. Laura C. Francoeur, the chief wildlife biologist for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and other wildlife supervisors patrol the runways using shotguns to try to get them out of the sky.
According to Francoeur, many new techniques are being used to keep the birds away. The ones mentioned include pyrotechnics, traps, birds of prey, clippers, laser, helikite, noise, cabbie control and yankee ingenuity. Some scare the birds away and others strategically keep them from coming. For example, pyrotechnics look like guns but are simply noisemakers with screeching and banging sounds. And, a helikite is used to scare smaller birds. This part balloon, part kite floats in the air to represent a predatory bird. On the other hand, clippers are used for grass on the runway to maintain a 6 to 10 inch height. If the grass is too long, small mammals appear which attract raptors. If the grass is too short, birds sit and watch for predators, especially sea gulls.
In this situation, I can understand why they need to keep the birds away from airplanes. Aside from being harmed themselves, humans could potentially be harmed as shown in last January. However, it is ultimately Kennedy Airpoirt's fault for the amount of birds in the area. They build the airport directly on a natural habitat for birds. Where did they expect them to go? They should certainly not be harmed or killed for trying to find a place to live. If they were so concerned about keeping the birds away, they should have reconsidered their location.
Wilson, Michael. (2010, January 3) Working to Separate Big and Small Fliers. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
According to Francoeur, many new techniques are being used to keep the birds away. The ones mentioned include pyrotechnics, traps, birds of prey, clippers, laser, helikite, noise, cabbie control and yankee ingenuity. Some scare the birds away and others strategically keep them from coming. For example, pyrotechnics look like guns but are simply noisemakers with screeching and banging sounds. And, a helikite is used to scare smaller birds. This part balloon, part kite floats in the air to represent a predatory bird. On the other hand, clippers are used for grass on the runway to maintain a 6 to 10 inch height. If the grass is too long, small mammals appear which attract raptors. If the grass is too short, birds sit and watch for predators, especially sea gulls.
In this situation, I can understand why they need to keep the birds away from airplanes. Aside from being harmed themselves, humans could potentially be harmed as shown in last January. However, it is ultimately Kennedy Airpoirt's fault for the amount of birds in the area. They build the airport directly on a natural habitat for birds. Where did they expect them to go? They should certainly not be harmed or killed for trying to find a place to live. If they were so concerned about keeping the birds away, they should have reconsidered their location.
Wilson, Michael. (2010, January 3) Working to Separate Big and Small Fliers. The New York Times. Retrived from http://www.nytimes.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)