The E.D.G.E. (An Experimental Dwelling for a Greener Environment) A "micro" house on a bluff.
Video of the E.D.G.E House by Mary Louise Schumacher of the Journal Sentinel
Saturday, July 24, 2010
The E.D.G.E. (An Experimental Dwelling for a Greener Environment) A "micro" house on a bluff.
The E.D.G.E. (An Experimental Dwelling for a Greener Environment) A "micro" house on a bluff.
Video of the E.D.G.E House by Mary Louise Schumacher of the Journal Sentinel
Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not. - Dr. Seuss (The Lorax)
Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not. - Dr. Seuss (The Lorax)
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Hip to be round
Circular homes also boast high energy efficiency. Because a round structure can offer the same interior square footage as a conventional home, but with a smaller wall area, there's less exterior space exposed to energy-sapping heat and cold. Hip to be round
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
BP, What a mess. Where is Sarah Palin now with her "Drill baby Drill" ?
A quote from Palin in Loveland, CO, October 20, 2008.
And whether Joe Biden approves it or not, we will develop clean coal technology and we will safely drill for the billions of barrels of oil that are warehoused underground, including our offshore sources. We will drill here and drill now. (Cheers, applause.) Drill, baby, drill. Drill, baby, drill."
And recently on Twitter Sarah Palin says: "Extreme Greenies: see now why we push 'drill,baby,drill' of known reserves & promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR? Now do you get it?"
Well Sarah, I'm an Extreme Greenie. I get it. We need to find something other than oil. Get it ?
And whether Joe Biden approves it or not, we will develop clean coal technology and we will safely drill for the billions of barrels of oil that are warehoused underground, including our offshore sources. We will drill here and drill now. (Cheers, applause.) Drill, baby, drill. Drill, baby, drill."
And recently on Twitter Sarah Palin says: "Extreme Greenies: see now why we push 'drill,baby,drill' of known reserves & promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR? Now do you get it?"
Well Sarah, I'm an Extreme Greenie. I get it. We need to find something other than oil. Get it ?
Friday, May 28, 2010
Why did BP start with dispersants rather than scim the oil into tankers ?
I was listening to CBC radio this morning and there was an interesting story about a similar spill in Saudi Arabia. In that case they were able to recover most of the oil by scimming the oil from the surface and pumping it into tankers. In the Gulf of Mexico BP decided to break the oil down with dispersants where a lot of the oil appears to be sinking to the bottom. If this oil sinks and covers the breeding grounds of many species I would say the environmental disaster has only begun. Why was BP so quick to use dispersants ? Were they afraid of how the oil slick would look from satellite images ? Is this a question of optics, of image, of appearances ? Were they allowed to destroy the environment below the surface so that the surface would appear unblemished ? Is this why the decision was made to use dispersants ? I know what happens to the oil on my paint brushes when I wash them with solvents. The oil coats the bottom of my brush-washing cup.
And now this: Thu May 27, 4:37 PM
By Jason Dearen,Matthew Brown, The Associated Press
NEW ORLEANS - Marine scientists have discovered a massive new plume of what they believe to be oil deep beneath the Gulf of Mexico, stretching 22 miles (35 kilometres) from the leaking wellhead northeast toward Mobile Bay, Alabama.
The discovery by researchers on the University of South Florida College of Marine Science's Weatherbird II vessel is the second significant undersea plume recorded since the Deepwater Horizon exploded on April 20.
The thick plume was detected just beneath the surface down to about 3,300 feet (1,000 metres), and is more than 6 miles (9.6 kilometres) wide, said David Hollander, associate professor of chemical oceanography at the school..... The researchers say they are worried these undersea plumes may are the result of the unprecedented use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil a mile undersea at the site of the leak.
Hollander said the oil they detected has dissolved into the water, and is no longer visible, leading to fears from researchers that the toxicity from the oil and dispersants could pose a big danger to fish larvae and creatures that filter the waters for food.
"There are two elements to it," Hollander said. "The plume reaching waters on the continental shelf could have a toxic effect on fish larvae, and we also may see a long term response as it cascades up the food web."
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100527/world/us_oil_spill_new_plume
And now this: Thu May 27, 4:37 PM
By Jason Dearen,Matthew Brown, The Associated Press
NEW ORLEANS - Marine scientists have discovered a massive new plume of what they believe to be oil deep beneath the Gulf of Mexico, stretching 22 miles (35 kilometres) from the leaking wellhead northeast toward Mobile Bay, Alabama.
The discovery by researchers on the University of South Florida College of Marine Science's Weatherbird II vessel is the second significant undersea plume recorded since the Deepwater Horizon exploded on April 20.
The thick plume was detected just beneath the surface down to about 3,300 feet (1,000 metres), and is more than 6 miles (9.6 kilometres) wide, said David Hollander, associate professor of chemical oceanography at the school..... The researchers say they are worried these undersea plumes may are the result of the unprecedented use of chemical dispersants to break up the oil a mile undersea at the site of the leak.
Hollander said the oil they detected has dissolved into the water, and is no longer visible, leading to fears from researchers that the toxicity from the oil and dispersants could pose a big danger to fish larvae and creatures that filter the waters for food.
"There are two elements to it," Hollander said. "The plume reaching waters on the continental shelf could have a toxic effect on fish larvae, and we also may see a long term response as it cascades up the food web."
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100527/world/us_oil_spill_new_plume
Why didn't BP start with Top Kill and entomb the well ?
I have been wondering a lot lately as we watch the "environmetal disaster" worsen in the Gulf.... why didn't BP or the US government entomb the well immediately in a concrete chamber. Why are they using mud ? Is it because they want to eventually gain access to this huge resevoir of oil? Just how big is this find? Is it enough to eventually fill the Gulf ? All of the methods so far seem to have been driven by economics or greed. How can BP get the oil to the surface, and sell the stuff. Sad.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
EPA asks BP to stop using Toxic Dispersant. BP won't comply, EPA changes its mind.
Update: "Concerned about the unprecedented amounts of dispersant in use, the EPA issued a directive last week instructing BP to seek less toxic alternatives. But the oil company responded that other chemicals had either not been tested on deep water spills or weren’t available in the quantities needed." http://onthescene.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/25/epa-to-bp-use-less-chemical-dispersant/
However, EPA Administrator Defends Response To Oil Spill, Use Of Dispersants: "Lisa Jackson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), says that scientists have given, and continue to give, careful consideration to the use of chemical dispersing agents on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
In recent days, some scientists have voiced concern about the use of one dispersant in particular: Corexit. They say that long-term effects of the chemical, especially in deep seas, are unknown." http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/05/epa_administrator_defends_admi.html
However, EPA Administrator Defends Response To Oil Spill, Use Of Dispersants: "Lisa Jackson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), says that scientists have given, and continue to give, careful consideration to the use of chemical dispersing agents on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
In recent days, some scientists have voiced concern about the use of one dispersant in particular: Corexit. They say that long-term effects of the chemical, especially in deep seas, are unknown." http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/05/epa_administrator_defends_admi.html
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
Dispersants being used in the Gulf of Mexico - BP Oil spill / MSDS on 2 Butoxyethanol
I don't think I'll be eating any fish that comes from the Gulf of Mexico (or Atlantic Ocean) for a while ….. Today they are saying the oil and dispersants may also enter the loop current that will take the toxic waste into the Florida keys and the Atlantic Ocean.
"Dispersants being dumped in large quantities into the Gulf of Mexico may cause central nervous system effects, nausea, vomiting, anesthetic or narcotic effects," and "repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol [an active ingredient] may cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver." - Countercurrents.org (see link below)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a link to the MSDS on 2-butoxyethanol http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-2_Butoxyethanol-9923187
Section 3: Hazards Identification
Potential Acute Health Effects:
Hazardous in case of skin contact (permeator), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation. Slightly
hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant). Severe over-exposure can result in death.
Potential Chronic Health Effects:
CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available.
MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast.
TERATOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available.
DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Not available.
The substance may be toxic to blood, kidneys, liver, central nervous system (CNS).
Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage. Repeated exposure to a
highly toxic material may produce general deterioration of health by an accumulation in one or many human
organs.
OSHA requires companies to make Material Safety Data Sheets, or MSDSs, available for any hazardous substances used in a workplace, and the ones for these dispersants both contain versions of a disturbing statement. 9500's states that "Component substances have a potential to bioconcentrate,"
This is not what you want to hear about toxins being dumped in the sea by the hundreds of thousands of gallons. The EPA defines bioconcentration as the "accumulation of a chemical in tissues of a fish or other organism to levels greater than in the surrounding medium." In other words, substances that bioconcentrate tend to move from water into fish, where they can do damage to the fish itself, as well as be passed on to predator fish -- and on up the food chain, to human eaters.
And just how toxic is this stuff? The data sheets for both products contain this shocker: "No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product" -- meaning testing their safety for humans.
This is jaw-dropping. According to Ronald Tjeerdema, chair of the Department of Environmental Toxicology at UC Davis' College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, who has been studying dispersants since the '90s, "The industry typically only stockpiles one or two of these things," and while Corexit 9527 has been the dispersant of choice for a long time, in recent years, Corexit 9500 has gained prominence. Yet Nalco has done no toxicity studies on these industry-dominating products now in heavy use in the Gulf?
They do appear to have toxic properties. Both data sheets include the warning "human health hazards: acute." The MSDS for Corexit 9527A states that "excessive exposure may cause central nervous system effects, nausea, vomiting, anesthetic or narcotic effects," and "repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol [an active ingredient] may cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver."
It adds: "Prolonged and/or repeated exposure through inhalation or extensive skin contact with EGBE [butoxyethanol] may result in damage to the blood and kidneys." http://www.countercurrents.org/philpott070510.htm
So, what's in the stuff? According to their data sheets, both 9500 and 9527 are composed of three potentially hazardous substances. They share two in common, organic sulfonic acid salt and propylene glycol. In addition to those two, Corexit 9500 contains something called "Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light," while Corexit 9527 contains 2-Butoxyethanol. Frustratingly, the sheets don't give exact information about how much of the substances are in the dispersants; instead they give ranges as a percentage of weight. For example, Corexit 9500 can be composed of anywhere from 10 to 30 percent petroleum distillates, while 2-Butoxyethanol makes up anywhere from 30 to 60 percent of 9527. (Countercurrent.org)
According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Butoxyethanol#Safety Safety
It is recommended that one use precautions when working with glycol ethers such as 2-butoxyethanol, as it is toxic. Employers are required by United States federal law to inform employees when they are working with these substances
Some animal studies indicate that it produces reproductive problems, such as reduced fertility, death of embryos and birth defects.People exposed to high levels of 2-butoxyethanol for several hours have reported nose and eye irritation, headaches, vomiting and a metallic taste in their mouths. In addition to inhaling 2-butoxyethanol vapor, research has shown that skin can also absorb 2-butoxyethanol vapor from the air, making skin a major pathway of exposure to this chemical. It has been linked to some autoimmune diseases such as chronic fatigue syndrome and autism and some forms of anemia.
2-Butoxyethanol is frequently found in popular cleaning products. It is difficult for consumers to know whether their favorite cleaner contains the chemical because manufacturers are not required to list it on the label.
This compound is on California's list of hazardous substances,though it was removed from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's list of hazardous air pollutants in 1994.
In recent years 2-butoxyethanol has come under increased scrutiny in Canada, and Environment and Health Canada has recommended that it be added to Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).
William Nazaroff, a professor of environmental engineering and chairman of the Energy and Resources Group at UC Berkeley, has argued that EGBE should have remained on the federal contaminants list, and concluded in a study that the use of some common household cleaning products containing EGBE could expose people to levels 12 times greater than California's one-hour guideline, especially when indoor use is considered.These products are not required to list it on the label when diluted to a certain point. The safety of the products is defended by the American Chemistry Council and the Soap and Detergent Association, industry trade groups.
Excessive human exposure:
Moderate respiratory exposure to 2-butoxyethanol often results in irritation of mucous membranes of the eyes, nose and throat. Heavy exposure via respiratory, dermal or oral routes can lead to hypotension, metabolic acidosis, hemolysis, pulmonary edema and coma. Blood or urine concentrations of 2-butoxyethanol or its major toxic metabolite, 2-butoxyacetic acid, may be measured using chromatographic techniques to monitor worker exposure or to confirm a diagnosis of poisoning in hospitalized patients. A biological exposure index of 200 mg 2-butoxyacetic acid per g creatinine has been established in an end-of-shift urine specimen for exposed U.S. employees. (Wikipedia)
Yikes !
"Dispersants being dumped in large quantities into the Gulf of Mexico may cause central nervous system effects, nausea, vomiting, anesthetic or narcotic effects," and "repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol [an active ingredient] may cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver." - Countercurrents.org (see link below)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is a link to the MSDS on 2-butoxyethanol http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-2_Butoxyethanol-9923187
Section 3: Hazards Identification
Potential Acute Health Effects:
Hazardous in case of skin contact (permeator), of eye contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation. Slightly
hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant). Severe over-exposure can result in death.
Potential Chronic Health Effects:
CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available.
MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast.
TERATOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available.
DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Not available.
The substance may be toxic to blood, kidneys, liver, central nervous system (CNS).
Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage. Repeated exposure to a
highly toxic material may produce general deterioration of health by an accumulation in one or many human
organs.
OSHA requires companies to make Material Safety Data Sheets, or MSDSs, available for any hazardous substances used in a workplace, and the ones for these dispersants both contain versions of a disturbing statement. 9500's states that "Component substances have a potential to bioconcentrate,"
This is not what you want to hear about toxins being dumped in the sea by the hundreds of thousands of gallons. The EPA defines bioconcentration as the "accumulation of a chemical in tissues of a fish or other organism to levels greater than in the surrounding medium." In other words, substances that bioconcentrate tend to move from water into fish, where they can do damage to the fish itself, as well as be passed on to predator fish -- and on up the food chain, to human eaters.
And just how toxic is this stuff? The data sheets for both products contain this shocker: "No toxicity studies have been conducted on this product" -- meaning testing their safety for humans.
This is jaw-dropping. According to Ronald Tjeerdema, chair of the Department of Environmental Toxicology at UC Davis' College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences, who has been studying dispersants since the '90s, "The industry typically only stockpiles one or two of these things," and while Corexit 9527 has been the dispersant of choice for a long time, in recent years, Corexit 9500 has gained prominence. Yet Nalco has done no toxicity studies on these industry-dominating products now in heavy use in the Gulf?
They do appear to have toxic properties. Both data sheets include the warning "human health hazards: acute." The MSDS for Corexit 9527A states that "excessive exposure may cause central nervous system effects, nausea, vomiting, anesthetic or narcotic effects," and "repeated or excessive exposure to butoxyethanol [an active ingredient] may cause injury to red blood cells (hemolysis), kidney or the liver."
It adds: "Prolonged and/or repeated exposure through inhalation or extensive skin contact with EGBE [butoxyethanol] may result in damage to the blood and kidneys." http://www.countercurrents.org/philpott070510.htm
So, what's in the stuff? According to their data sheets, both 9500 and 9527 are composed of three potentially hazardous substances. They share two in common, organic sulfonic acid salt and propylene glycol. In addition to those two, Corexit 9500 contains something called "Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light," while Corexit 9527 contains 2-Butoxyethanol. Frustratingly, the sheets don't give exact information about how much of the substances are in the dispersants; instead they give ranges as a percentage of weight. For example, Corexit 9500 can be composed of anywhere from 10 to 30 percent petroleum distillates, while 2-Butoxyethanol makes up anywhere from 30 to 60 percent of 9527. (Countercurrent.org)
According to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Butoxyethanol#Safety Safety
It is recommended that one use precautions when working with glycol ethers such as 2-butoxyethanol, as it is toxic. Employers are required by United States federal law to inform employees when they are working with these substances
Some animal studies indicate that it produces reproductive problems, such as reduced fertility, death of embryos and birth defects.People exposed to high levels of 2-butoxyethanol for several hours have reported nose and eye irritation, headaches, vomiting and a metallic taste in their mouths. In addition to inhaling 2-butoxyethanol vapor, research has shown that skin can also absorb 2-butoxyethanol vapor from the air, making skin a major pathway of exposure to this chemical. It has been linked to some autoimmune diseases such as chronic fatigue syndrome and autism and some forms of anemia.
2-Butoxyethanol is frequently found in popular cleaning products. It is difficult for consumers to know whether their favorite cleaner contains the chemical because manufacturers are not required to list it on the label.
This compound is on California's list of hazardous substances,though it was removed from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's list of hazardous air pollutants in 1994.
In recent years 2-butoxyethanol has come under increased scrutiny in Canada, and Environment and Health Canada has recommended that it be added to Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).
William Nazaroff, a professor of environmental engineering and chairman of the Energy and Resources Group at UC Berkeley, has argued that EGBE should have remained on the federal contaminants list, and concluded in a study that the use of some common household cleaning products containing EGBE could expose people to levels 12 times greater than California's one-hour guideline, especially when indoor use is considered.These products are not required to list it on the label when diluted to a certain point. The safety of the products is defended by the American Chemistry Council and the Soap and Detergent Association, industry trade groups.
Excessive human exposure:
Moderate respiratory exposure to 2-butoxyethanol often results in irritation of mucous membranes of the eyes, nose and throat. Heavy exposure via respiratory, dermal or oral routes can lead to hypotension, metabolic acidosis, hemolysis, pulmonary edema and coma. Blood or urine concentrations of 2-butoxyethanol or its major toxic metabolite, 2-butoxyacetic acid, may be measured using chromatographic techniques to monitor worker exposure or to confirm a diagnosis of poisoning in hospitalized patients. A biological exposure index of 200 mg 2-butoxyacetic acid per g creatinine has been established in an end-of-shift urine specimen for exposed U.S. employees. (Wikipedia)
Yikes !
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
The Seed Cathedral. UK Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010.
Thomas Heatherwick: “The Seed Cathedral sits in the center of the UK Pavilion’s site, 20 meters in height, formed from 60,000 slender transparent rods, each 7.5 meters long and each encasing one or more seeds at its tip. During the day, they act as optic fibers and draw daylight inwards to illuminate the interior. At night, light sources inside each rod allow the whole structure to glow. As the wind moves past, the building and its optic “hairs” gently move to create a dynamic effect ” Stunning !
Solar Air Heating System. How does it work ?
How Does the Solar Air Heating System Work?
Option A: Solar Air Heat via Wall Panel System
This solar air heat system creates a warm, soothing feeling by using air as the working fluid for absorbing and transferring solar energy.
- When installed on the wall, you can easily heat up a room and also transfer hot air to other rooms.
- If you mount the panel on the wall you will need to drill 2 holes in the wall. One will be for the inlet and other one for the outlet. Four screws hold the panel together.
- The air is supplied from the wall panel directly to the room you would like to heat up.
More Information
Option A: Solar Air Heat via Wall Panel System
This solar air heat system creates a warm, soothing feeling by using air as the working fluid for absorbing and transferring solar energy.
- When installed on the wall, you can easily heat up a room and also transfer hot air to other rooms.
- If you mount the panel on the wall you will need to drill 2 holes in the wall. One will be for the inlet and other one for the outlet. Four screws hold the panel together.
- The air is supplied from the wall panel directly to the room you would like to heat up.
More Information
Thursday, April 29, 2010
My Measure & Dimensions App. for iPhone
I want to get this one.... My Measures & Dimensions
My Measures is a powerful application for storing and sharing object dimensions.
A must have tool for all real estate agents, engineers, carpenters, architects, auction sellers, construction workers...
All you have to do is take a photo of an object you wish to store dimensions of. Then you add dimensions: arrows, angels and text. Now your measures are stored and you can see and share them anytime anywhere.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Earth Hour 2010 Saturday March 27th 8:30 PM
Lights out. Help heal the earth. Reduce your consumption. More information here ..... http://www.earthhour.org/Homepage.aspx
Friday, March 12, 2010
Solar Power for your iPhone. Novotek SolarSurge.
The SolarSurge, from NovoTek, uses the sun to charge an external supplemental battery enclosed in a case that surrounds the iPhone. According to the company, this is the first solar charging solution approved by Apple, and it works with the iPhone 3G, 3GS, and the iPod Touch. The charger is available on the company’s Web site; the iPhone version is $80, while the iPod Touch model is on sale for $53.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
