Greenversations

About the author: Cara Peck is an Environmental Scientist in EPA Region 9. For the past three years she has worked on the recycling of organic materials, but is now working on reducing the climate change and energy implications from the Agriculture Industry.

I love food. At various points along the day, it is a safe bet that I’m thinking about what to eat for my next meal. This could be the product of growing up in Northern California where we have amazing food, or it could be because I love to cook and eating logically follows cooking. Whatever the reason, I’m a huge fan of food.

While many share my love of the culinary world, there is an ugly and harmful side to the delicacies we enjoy- food waste. Organic waste, which includes food, currently makes up 25% of what is going to landfills. In addition to a host of other problems, landfills emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas. In an effort to try to get this food waste out of landfills, I started researching the anaerobic digestion of food waste. Basically, in an atmosphere without oxygen, bacteria feed on the food waste, break it down, and produce biogas in the process. Amazingly, biogas is an energy source, so in the process of reducing waste, energy is produced!

To further explore this project, I managed a few projects that investigated using this technology at wastewater treatment facilities. Many wastewater treatment facilities already use anaerobic digesters to break down sewage sludge. In addition, most of these digesters have excess capacity for something like… food waste!

Here’s a snapshot of how the process works: food scraps are collected at nearby restaurants. Then are sent to a local wastewater treatment facility, processed and injected into the anaerobic digesters. The bacteria go to work, break down the waste and produce biogas. The biogas is captured and used on site to power the facility, or even sent back to the grid. The residual that is left after the bugs have done their job is reduced, making it much easier to truck to the compost facility. Upon further composting, the material can be used as a soil amendment to grow more food. It’s a true closed-loop, sustainable system.

This technology has national applicability and I’m excited to see it more widely adopted in an effort to reduce waste and to combat climate change.

Since I do love food so much, I must admit that there isn’t often much waste left on my plate. However, I feel a little better about my love affair with food knowing that the waste that is left is going to a higher use and not contributing to climate change.

About the Author: Dan Garofalo is the Environmental Sustainability Coordinator and a Senior Facilities Planner at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a founding member of the Delaware Valley Green Building Council and has served as the Chairman of the organization’s Board of Directors since 2008.The University of Pennsylvania led the Ivy League’s victory in this year’s Green Power Partnership College and University Green Power Challenge.

The University of Pennsylvania finds itself in an interesting position when it comes to energy consumption and management. Since Penn is currently unable to produce its own electricity, like the many colleges and universities that own steam and co-generation plants, purchasing Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) is one way for Penn to directly contribute to the development of clean energy sources while reducing its own carbon footprint.

Penn’s commitment to purchasing wind power RECs represents an investment in the future of renewable energy in America. More specifically, Penn’s initial commitment to purchase ten years of 40,000 megawatt hours of wind RECs from the Bear Creek Wind Farm near Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, allowed the renewable energy developer, Community Energy (community Energy has since been purchased by Iberdrola), to finance the entire wind farm operation and expansion. We’re proud to be recognized by EPA’s Green Power Partnership as a role model in alternative energy consumption and hope other institutions will follow our lead.

Earlier last year, I had a chance to visit a nearby wind farm, and I was able to examine first hand the type of operation that Penn was helping to fund. Staring up at the graceful swinging blades above me, it was immediately apparent that the money invested by the University was going towards an important component of our country’s renewable energy strategy. Clean power is a very real and pressing need in our environment.
The University is currently focused on connecting its external sustainability efforts, such as support of wind power, to the implementation of several campus-wide conservation and education initiatives. Penn’s Green Campus Partnership serves as the umbrella organization for Penn’s environmental efforts and includes the University’s Environmental Sustainability Advisory Committee , which will produce Penn’s Climate Action Plan in September 2009.

The Climate Action Plan will include many recommendations from student, staff, and faculty committees on sustainable academics, energy, recycling, waste reduction, and our campus buildings and landscape. As these recommendations are implemented over the next several years, Penn will be making a bigger and better impact on our environment, and on our future. Check out our website (www.upenn.edu/sustainability) for more information about Penn’s current sustainability initiatives, and stay tuned for the release of our Climate Action Plan in September!

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

About the author: Mary Ann Curran is a senior research chemical engineer in the Sustainable Technology Division at EPA’s National Risk Management Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. She leads the Agency’s Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Research program. She conducts research on LCA methodology and application, focusing on biofuels and nanotechnology.

Living and working in the heart of the corn belt, I am continually confronted with the promotion of corn ethanol as the green solution to gasoline. As a researcher in Life Cycle Assessment, however, I know there is a lot more to the story.

Although biofuel energy is renewable, there is some controversy that it is not sustainable due to the harvesting of biomass and the byproducts produced during combustion. With ever evolving technologies and choices in feedstock, biofuels can vary enormously in the type and intensity of environmental harm they may cause. Biofuels must be viewed in the proper perspective.

There is no single replacement to gasoline or diesel that will completely satisfy our need for transportation fuels or settle our concerns of global warming and dwindling oil supplies, but biofuels can make a significant contribution. It’s likely that solutions will be regional ones, depending on what biomass is locally available.

Research is needed to look for better biomass feedstocks and better ways to convert them to bioethanol and biodiesel. Efficiency and decreased demand through conservation must also be part of the solution. Whatever choices we make, they are sure to have far-reaching effects. The global discourse that will certainly continue should not lead us to a biofuel solution that in the end is more environmentally harmful than sucking crude oil out of the ground and cooking it.

I recently ventured far outside my native Ohio to attend the World Biofuels Markets Conference held in Brussels. The Conference started with a presentation by Sir Bob Geldof (most well-known for co-organizing the 1985 Live Aid concert). Sir Bob cautioned that in our enthusiasm surrounding the potential for expanding the world’s use of biofuels, we need to proceed in a smart way “with the competing criteria for sustainability brought into the mix.” I like that.

To learn more about biofuels, I recommend listening to a presentation by Dr. Steve A Kay, UCSD, recorded on November 3, 2008, entitled Biofuels: Hype or Hope.

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

For each month in 2009, the Year of Science—we will pose a question related to science. Please let us know your thoughts as comments, and feel free to respond to earlier comments, or post new ideas.

The Year of Science theme for April is Energy Resources.

Do you know what energy resource you get your electricity from? Have you looked into switching to a “green” alternative?

About the author: Rob Lawrence joined EPA in 1990 and is Senior Policy Advisor on Energy Issues in the Dallas, TX regional office. As an economist, he works to insure that both supply and demand components are addressed as the Region develops its Clean Energy and Climate Change Strategy.

With the recent change to set clocks forward a couple of weeks ago, now would be a great time to think about your personal power usage.

As you went around changing those clocks, especially the electrically powered ones, did it seem that you had more and more to do this year? One of the biggest uses of electrical power in your home or office is also very discretionary.

If you have a school-age child at home (or you can do it yourself), have them draw a map of your residence, mark every electrical outlet and inventory its use. What is plugged in 24 hours a day? Ask if those lights and appliances are necessary to be “standing by” for use? For example, in my kitchen, the coffee maker and the microwave are next to one another. Both come with clock features and when plugged in are both using power 24 hours a day. Unless you have your coffee maker come on before you wake up, does it need to be plugged in all day? Does anyone need the microwave to come on at certain time or do you really need to have it run for a set number of minutes? Unplug it when not in use.

And not all of these energy users have clocks. Why does an electric toothbrush need to be plugged in 24 hours when it is only going to be used a couple of times a day? Consider plugging it in for charging when you get into the shower or during the nightly news and then unplugging it after each use.

Don’t get me started on all of the chargers for personal and work cell phones, Blackberries/PDAs, cameras, and iPod/MP3 players that are plugged into the grid, but never seem to be charging any device. Do you have a television and DVD player in a guest bedroom waiting to be used? Unplug until the guest arrives.

Reduce your electrical power demand. Reduce your home electricity bill. Reduce your personal carbon footprint.

Each week we ask a question related to the environment. Please let us know your thoughts as comments. Feel free to respond to earlier comments or post new ideas. Previous questions.

On the evening of Saturday March 28, millions around the world turned off their lights for an hour to demonstrate their awareness of the need to conserve energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Why did or didn’t you observe Earth Hour?

En español: Cada semana hacemos una pregunta relacionada al medio ambiente. Por favor comparta con nosotros sus pensamientos y comentarios. Siéntase en libertad de responder a comentarios anteriores o plantear nuevas ideas. Preguntas previas.

En la noche del sábado, 28 de marzo, millones de personas alrededor del mundo apagaron las luces por una hora para demostrar su concienciación sobre la necesidad de conservar energía y reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero.

¿Por qué observó o no observo la Hora del Planeta Tierra?

About the Author: Bill Clugston joined EPA’s Administrative Systems Division in 1991. Later, in 1994 he moved to the Region 10 Seattle office as a Computer Specialist in the Information Resources Unit. He develops software for Region 10 and occasionally develops an EPA national application.

Before joining EPA, I resolved to do my part on climate change by reducing my production of greenhouse gases. My family made all of the obvious changes – changing from incandescent lights to compact fluorescent lights, better weatherproofing, and changing to newer Energy Star appliances, but could we do more? I was familiar with photovoltaic power generation on my backyard observatory and my recreational vehicle, but neither of those systems reduced our household CO2 footprint. At this point, I investigated a grid-tie solar power system.

While experienced with electrical circuitry, I am not a certified electrician and I am definitely not qualified to connect power-generating devices into the power grid! Therefore, I went in search of a qualified solar installer. Fortunately, the time of my decision, coincided with the Solar Homes Tour making it convenient to ask other solar power system owners their recommendation for a solar installer. After selecting a solar contractor, he came by to do a site assessment to determine the location for the panels and to discuss my requirements. We decided on a 2-kilowatt power system composed of ten 200-watt panels and ten micro-inverters. The micro-inverters are a recent innovation in the solar power industry. The micro-inverters convert the direct current from the panels to 230-volt alternating current at each panel instead of tying all of the panels together into a single inverter. The one inverter per panel allows enhanced production when parts of the array are shaded and reduces the wire size required to carry power from the array to the power grid. System decisions completed, we paid the installer 80% down to order the system.

Before ordering the system, I removed one potential obstacle, our homeowners association. Our HOA turned out to be no obstacle at all! In fact, they were supportive of the project. The lesson learned here was send detailed information to your homeowners association. In the meantime, the system finally arrived in Washington State after surviving snowstorms on the way from California. System installation required two days and after a sign-off by the electrical inspector, the system was on the power grid. In case the readers of this post question how practical solar is in rainy Seattle, since system installation in late January 2009 total production is 25kwh of electricity and 42 pounds of carbon offset — not bad power production for a city known more for its mildew than its sunshine!

About the author: Kelly Leovic manages EPA’s Environmental and Community Outreach Program in Research Triangle Park. Kelly has worked at EPA for 21 years and has three children, one of whom needs regular reminders to “turn the lights off when you leave the room.”

“Raise your hand if you recycle,” I said to 15 students at Lowes Grove Middle School in Durham, NC. It was my first apprenticeship class at Citizen Schools, a national program that partners with middle schools to expand the learning day for low-income children.

The goal of my 10-week Environmental Awareness Apprenticeship was to guide the students in developing an environmental project. No hands were raised in response to my recycling question, so I launched into my “Trash Talk” lesson which, in addition to REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE, includes a trash sort activity. The students sorted through bags of “trash” to discover what could be reused, composted, or recycled. They quickly applied their new knowledge of the three R’s and were on their way to environmental awareness.

As the apprenticeship progressed, we learned about water pollution, conservation, and energy. (A few students even admitted taking over 1 hour showers, so we had a little talk about that one!) One day we used Watts meters to measure and compare the energy use of regular light bulbs and compact fluorescents. Equating energy use to money piqued their interest, and the students decided to do their project on measuring the energy use of various school equipment.

My “apprentices” used a Watts meter to measure computers, printers, microwaves, pencil sharpeners, and projectors during use and when they were turned off but plugged in. Next, the students calculated the estimated annual cost of using the equipment based on 9.86 cents per Kilowatt/hour and multiplied this by the number of each and estimated time used.
 
What suprised us the most was that, based on estimated usage time, the 37 printers at the school actually use more energy when they are plugged in but turned off ($117 annually) than when they are in use ($75 annually). This is because some appliances, e.g., think of a microwave clock, still consume energy just by being plugged in.

I truly enjoyed teaching these kids because they didn’t begin with much environmental knowledge, so I felt I could make a difference in their behaviors and choices. Being a Citizen Teacher also gave me the opportunity to work with the same group of students throughout the semester and to get to know them individually. One of the highlights for the students was their field trip to our EPA Building where they could see EPA’s energy conservation efforts in practice.

In addition to learning about ways to conserve energy at school, the students had an opportunity to “teach” their Principal about what they learned, presenting their results and recommendations for school energy savings at a staff meeting. This is one visit to the Principal’s office that I can feel good about!

Epilogue: On December 9, the students presented their recommendations to over 200 attendees at the Citizen Schools final program. The Principal, the Superintendent of Schools, and a State Senator were there and are excited about implementing the energy saving tips from our middle school citizens.

About the author: Rob Lawrence joined EPA in 1990 and is Senior Policy Advisor on Energy Issues in the Dallas, TX regional office. As an economist, he works to insure that both supply and demand components are addressed as the Region develops its Clean Energy and Climate Change Strategy.

I want to relate an exciting initiative upon which EPA Region 6 has embarked. We are working with state and federal agencies, land owners, renewable energy financiers and developers to advocate the use of previously contaminated sites as potential locations for renewable energy production. Together with the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources and the New Mexico Environment departments, Region 6 hosted the conference - Brown to Green: Make the Connection to Renewable Energy.

What might be a previously contaminated site? It could be a Brownfields designated property, a former military installation, a closed municipal landfill or a previously worked mining site. Really, almost any industrial facility could be prepared for a renewable energy use.

What are the merits of these types of sites? In most cases, the properties are less expensive to acquire than a greenfield development. The basic infrastructure – power grid access, water availability and highway arteries are nearby. In some cases, the costs associated in developing a greenfield site, including adding transmission lines could run into the millions of dollars. From an economic standpoint, reuse of a property means that it will be returned to local and state tax rolls for future assessments. And by using a previously developed property, acres of undisturbed lands will remain in their virgin state.

What type of renewable energy is applicable to these sites? As with most real estate developments, the answer to that question is “Location, Location, Location!” EPA and the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory have mapped the thousands of locations of closed facilities and cross-referenced them with solar and wind capabilities. In the near future, geothermal production capabilities will be added. To get an idea of the potential for properties in your state, and see the state financial incentives for renewable energy, check out: http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland/ for more information.

What has EPA done to facilitate this initiative? For the last 6 months, I have led a group working with the City of Houston to assess the regulatory, technical and economic considerations for the development of a 10 MWatt solar farm on a portion of the closed Holmes Road Landfill. With the abundance of sunshine in the Houston area year-round, it would be feasible to use about 100 acres of the 300 acres at the closed landfill for a solar farm. The City is examining its contract options and hopes to make a decision in early 2009 about using the site.