Cut your consumption, cut CO2 emissions, save money, save energy and save our environment.

You can make your home or business more energy efficient by applying a number of simple energy efficiency tips. Not only will this cut your energy bill by up to 50%, but the planet will appreciate you reducing your CO2 emissions.

1. Turn down your Thermostat – save 10% on your energy bill.

Turning down your Thermostat by only 1 degree will shave approximately 10% off your energy bill. If it is too hot in the house, resist the temptation to open windows. Just turn the thermostat down and take some time to properly understand the settings on your heating system. When you go on holiday, turn the heating down to the minimum- enough so the pipes don’t freeze.

2. Switch off lights! As simple as that – save 10% on your energy bill.

Cut your consumption by switching off indoor and outdoor lights when not needed. It seems obvious, but the amount of energy wasted this way is colossal on a worldwide basis.

3. Replace your light bulbs – save 25% on your energy bill.

After Brussels declared back in March 2007 that old style incandescent filament bulbs would be phased out during 2009 (to help fight the battle against climate change), it would make sense to upgrade your lighting as soon as possible.

Incandescent old-style bulbs are inefficient because 95% of all energy used is converted into heat rather than light. They cost a bit more but last up to 15 times longer and will pay for themselves in about 6 months.

We recommend installing ENERGY STAR qualified compact fluorescent light bulb (CFL) or LED lighting. Phillips, Osram, Sylvania, General Electric or Greener Living energy efficient light bulbs are all good brands and switch on almost immediately (some new-style CFL bulbs can take a while to reach full brightness – annoying if you need light instantly so select carefully).

If you are a business, get rid of the outdated, inefficient T8 and T12 light tubes. These are costly in terms of energy usage and CO2 emissions. Replace them with high frequency T5 bulbs or LED bulbs. These don’t flicker when you first turn them on, save 70% on your energy bill (they use 4-6 Watts rather than 14 Watts) and have durability of up to 5,000 hours.

4. Switch off your appliances – save 5% off your energy bill.

It seems obvious, but flick the main cooker switch off when you are finished. Don’t leave Microwave ovens, Washing Machines and Dishwashers on standby. That will cut your energy bill by roughly 5% per year.

If you do buy new appliances, make sure you get A rated appliances which will save you money and the environment in the long run.

When you are using appliances such as your hob or oven, make sure you leave lids on pans as that cooks food faster and requires less energy. Microwaves also use less energy than ovens.

5. Switch off electronic equipment you’ve left on standby – save 10% on your energy bill.

Modern equipment, such as TV’s, DVD players, Digital TV Set Top Boxes, Internet modems, Personal Computers, Printers, Scanners and Phone Chargers amount to approximately 20% of an average household energy bill. About HALF (10%) of your energy bill comes from equipment left on stand-by or sleep mode losses – when the equipment is still connected to the grid but not in use.

6. Save energy and money using a Multi Plug Adapter.

Try plugging all of your multimedia equipment into a multi-plug adapter and then switching the whole adapter off at night with one switch. That will shut off all of that ‘standby’ power being consumed. Did you know that standby consumption of such equipment costs European citizens €15 billion yearly without really being aware of it? It currently takes 10 large 1GW power stations, producing 100 billion kWh per year to supply the ‘standby’ electricity needed.

7. Save energy and money correctly charging your mobile phone and laptop.

Mobile Phone – charge your mobile phone when you are awake so you can unplug it once it is full. Leaving it to charge overnight is wasteful as a phone typically only needs an hour to charge fully.

Laptop – to save energy and significantly prolong laptop battery life, make sure you plug it in as soon as the battery indicates it only has 5-10% remaining. When it is fully charged, unplug it straight away. This makes the battery work harder, thus preserving its life. A battery will last roughly half as long if you let it switch off due to running out of power and then leave it plugged in all the time when it is fully charged.

8. Invest in Cavity Wall Insulation and Roof Insulation.

You can buy Eco wool from many DIY stores which will insulate your roof and walls better. Up to 35% of your home’s heat escapes through the walls and up to 25% through the roof.  Alternatively contact your green energy supplier for advice and quotations where applicable.

9. Renewable Energy – Solar Thermal Panels and Wind Turbines.

Invest in Solar Thermal Panels on your roof as the hot water from these can be fed into your Boiler. This saves your boiler having to heat up cold water. The energy savings are substantial and Solar Panels will add to the energy efficiency rating of your home, as well as the value if you sell it. Fossil fuelled power is becoming increasingly expensive and Solar is now commercially viable.

Also consider looking into a domestic wind turbine although these work better in the country where they can be mounted in a position that gets a direct, uninterrupted wind flow – essential for efficiency and payback!

10. Energy Efficient Double Glazing.

It goes without saying that double glazing stops energy escaping from the house and makes a home quieter as well. If you haven’t had this installed, consider doing so as it will improve the energy efficiency of your home and will add value to it as well.

Make sure that you get lined curtains to cover your windows and draw them just before dusk to stop heat escaping. Try to keep curtains behind the radiators so that the radiators emit heat into the room. This stops the heat going behind the curtain towards the window.

Good luck with the above. If you need any advice or help, please contact at enquiries [at] ecoswitch [dot] com.

Please share your views and comments on how you save energy below. We’d love to hear from you and create a Top 20 or 30 energy efficiency tips to help others.

Posted under Uncategorized

With attendance free to all who can vouch for a professional or business interest in the conference, All-Energy ’09 is casting a wide net when it comes to potential suitors for their appeals.

Taking place on 20th and 21st of May 2009, at the Aberdeen Conference and Exhibition Centre, this year’s All-Energy ’09 Conference boasts a number of high profile speakers, and the conference is shaping up to be the largest All-Energy ’09 has seen; it is now in its ninth year.

Defining Objectives

As an introduction, the All-Energy ’09 conference will begin with discussion and debate from several government and ministerial bodies, including Ed Miliband, British Secretary of State for the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), and the Scottish Government Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism, Jim Mather.

In a conference that will look to discuss the challenges surrounding policy and implementation of clean and renewable energy, both Mather and Miliband are big names, and they will be joined in the opening day’s plenary session by notable personalities from non-British governments; helping to define the aims and outcomes of the conference will be Moon Sang Kwon, President of the Korea Institute of Marine Science Technology Promotion, and the Executive Chairman of the Qatar Science and Technology Park, Dr. Tidu Maini.

Key Discussion Areas

Over the two days speakers will discuss and assess the strengths and weaknesses of a number of alternative energy sources and harvesting techniques, including Wave and Tidal, Carbon Capture and Storage, Onshore and Offshore Wind, Biomass, and Nuclear Power.

Using case studies and key topical debates, speakers will inform audiences of the past successes and future potential of renewable energy, from the capability of wind power in Scotland itself, to the use of renewable energy in small communities.

The All-Energy ’09 conference will also entertain a number of theoretical and conceptual discussions on the future of power and energy in Britain and the world, with key discussions on subjects including ‘Planning for Marine Renewables – Environment. Friend or Foe?’, and Power Storage – ‘The Holy Grail ‘.

Presented and elaborated by key experts in these fields, such talks will look to raise awareness of the immense untapped potential in a number of renewable energy sources.

Practical Benefits

Fully aware of the dangers of conceptual discussion, though, the All-Energy ’09 conference has drafted a number of talks on implementation of renewable energy practices in communities at large.

On Thursday 21st May, for example, Dr. Elaine Booth will Chair a discussion titled ‘Especially for the Farming Community‘, which will look – with Dr. Booth alongside names such as Ian Cowe, Biomass Development Officer for Forestry Commission Scotland – at implementation of Biogas and Biomass on farmland, and financing of on-site Renewable Energy Projects.

A Conference Tipped for Success

With this year’s All-Energy ’09 Conference fielding a large number of experts from government, business and the academic community, the 2009 conference looks set for pertinent discussion of genuine opportunities for renewable energy and its subsidiaries.

It has already proven itself to be the biggest conference of its type yet; it seems that it might also prove to be the most successful.

If you wish to attend the All-Energy ’09 Conference, you will need to book tickets – you can do this at the All Energy conference 2009 website.

Posted under Environmental News, Events, Press Releases, Renewable Energy

UNITED KINGDOM

The  British newspaper The Guardian featured an article today with the title  ’Switch to renewable energy could save £13bn a year’.  In the opening paragraphs, Ashley Seager quoted a study published yesterday:

Britain could save up to £12.6bn a year in imports of fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal by 2020 if it embarks on a large- scale programme of energy efficiency and renewable technologies including wind power and biomass, a study showed yesterday. The report, carried out by Edinburgh-based consultants Delta EE for the Renewable Energy Association (REA), is the first attempt to quantify the economic benefits to Britain of a move to energy efficiency and sustainability, rather than just the costs. The figure for savings is close to 1% of GDP at current levels. *

Peak Oil is already behind us and even more so for the North Sea Oil, the International Energy Agency has estimated that the UK is set to import 80% of its gas needs by 2020. This winter it was actually Britain’s gas that alleviated some of the problems for a Europe plagued by gas shortages following the Russia-Ukraine dispute. But who will step in to help Britain in 11 years time when our own reserves run out? Can we rely on imports or trust other countries to bail us out or is it not simpler to invest more heavily into sustainable, renewable technologies so we don’t need to rely so heavily on dwindling Fossil Fuels or other imports. Importing, by its very nature, isn’t eco friendly anyway! Just think of all those Carbon miles.

Although Britain has one of the most interesting utility company concepts in Ecotricity, it is as a country falling behind almost every other country in Europe when it comes to deploying renewable energy equipment. Philip Wolfe, who is the head of the REA, said,  ’We hear a lot about the cost of renewables, and not enough about the upsides. This report shows how investment in sustainable energy leads to huge and increasing savings for the UK economy through avoided fossil fuel imports.’*  In response to the REA’s report, the climate change spokesman of the Liberal Democrats Simon Hughes said, ‘There is an overwhelming tide of evidence to justify the twin track of energy efficiency and renewables and this adds to it. But there is only a trickle of response from this government.’*

As far as article titles go, we are grateful to be able to quote this one, adding a little twist, ‘[Eco]Switch to renewable energy could save £13bn a year.’ Having read that, there is not so much to be waiting around for. Perhaps the best way for an individual is to start EcoSwitching to one of the greenest electricity suppliers such as Good Energy, Ecotricity and Green Energy. To switch, you can do that right now, right here. With Ecotricity for example, they will now match you suppliers standard tariff on a 30% renewable energy tariff. If you go with a 100% Renewable Energy tariff, which we highly recommend, it will cost around £17 a year more for an average user, depending upon your postal code. It doesn’t cost much more to go 100% green these days – about £1.40 extra per month. Remember, switching to green electricity is the single biggest thing you can do to mitigate Climate Change – it will cut your emissions by a massive 33% per annum!

Current promotion for EcoSwitch Readers

If you switch using the Ecotricity link provided, Ecotricity will give you £25.00 off your bill at year end – which for most people works out cheaper than what you are paying now! If you switch to Good Energy, using the link provided, there is currently a promotion where you receive a £10.00 credit on your bill for each friend or family member that you subsequently refer. It can actually work out cheaper switching to a green provider.

At Eco Switch, we only work with the greenest suppliers and always try to give you added value through working closely with the ‘Green Three’, the new name we have coined for Ecotricity, Good Energy and Green Energy.

.

* Quotes from the article ‘Switch to renewable energy could save £13bn a year’ by Ashley Seager in the Guardian on the 21st of April 2009, read it here.

Posted under Environmental News, Gas & Electricity, Renewable Energy

UNITED KINGDOM

According to Lord Browne of Madingley, former head of BP, ‘Britain must revert to greater state control of energy markets to hit ambitious targets on renewable energy and climate change.’ So calling him Lord Browne Energy is perhaps unfair. Then again, it probably is not. For example, he said the recent decision by Shell to stop investments in wind, solar and hydro-electric power reflected a move ‘back to basics’ for oil and gas companies. He said he sees it as ‘a pure business decision. Oil companies have a tremendous number of things they’ve got to do in developing oil and gas. That’s where their expertise is and that’s probably where they’re focused,’ Browne said, apparently not seeing the conflict.

Shell pulled out of the British wind sector last year. It believes only biofuels, and carbon capture and storage make sense, alongside oil and gas. Warning signs that market mechanisms are failing to deliver the necessary growth in clean energy should come as no surprise. Browne said:

Competition has been the guiding star of UK energy policy since the 1980s and it worked well while there was a surplus of energy infrastructure capacity. But price competition is now failing to deliver the new, more diversified infrastructure that we urgently need to bolster energy security and meet our climate change targets. I remain convinced that the market is the most effective delivery unit available to society. But the market will need a new strategic direction and a new framework of rules, laid down by government. We must fundamentally rethink the objective of energy policy in this country.*

The EU asks of Britain to generate 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 with the bulk of this to be met by the electricity sector. There are proposals for thousands of offshore wind turbines off the UK coast and Lord Browne compared the current need for urgent investment and new infrastructure with efforts to develop North Sea oil and gas fields in the 1970s and 1980s, saying:

High oil prices provided a strong market pull. But governments also gave industry a helping hand, creating generous tax incentives and regulations, and helping to build strategic infrastructure. There’s even more cause for government intervention today. That’s because energy security and climate change mitigation are public goods. They would not otherwise be recognised by the free market.*

For anyone with a cynical view of the world of business in general and the motivation of oil companies in general, Shell’s retreat from renewables could be seen as a way of raising the stakes and negotiate the ‘government intervention’ Browne speaks of to their benefit. One option he suggested:

One option would be for the government to direct state-controlled banks to lend money for green infrastructure projects, as is being done in Ireland. Policymakers must be frank – the cost of supporting renewable energy will be borne by consumers who pay a little more for their delivered energy.*

More precisely, Lord Browne’s logical loops will have the government putting the money up front, consumers footing the bill at the other end and the big energy companies sitting back, avoiding risk and having a fresh market served on a plate to dig into. The smaller or unconventional operators on the other hand, will keep running into problems getting permits or similar setbacks. Ecotricity has already proved that green energy (from renewables) does not have to cost more than brown (coal, oil, gas) energy. (What is happening right now is that carbon offset fee of £50 per year should be added to every ‘Green’ energy tariff, something we will cover in an upcoming article.)

Wrapping it up, Lord Browne said ‘it is vital that environmental policy was at the heart of government’ and went on to say:

It’s essential that we do not compartmentalise climate change as an issue. Environmental integrity should be made a tangible part of other social priorities, such as economic prosperity and national security. This will require a new approach to policy across all levels of government and all government departments.*

There we have it then, straight from the top brass in the inner sanctum of the HQ of our energy future. We should all be well relieved. But, Browne’s ties to brown energy do not make statements with ‘essential’ and ‘environmental integrity’ and ‘priority’ in them very reassuring. There is a lot of manoeuvring to be done before the ship that is the energy future of the world is on the right course with the wind filling its sails. Former heads of oil giants are allies to be wary of.

.

* Article ‘State intervention vital if Britain is to meet its green energy targets, says former BP boss’ by Alan Rusbridger and David Adam in The Guardian on the 25th of March 2009, read it here,

Posted under Climate, Corporate, Environmental News, Gas & Electricity

ENERGY

For economic reasons, Shell will no longer be investing in renewable technologies such as wind, solar and hydro power , the oil company announced this Tuesday. Instead, it plans to invest more in biofuels which environmental groups blame for driving up food prices and deforestation.

Shell is the world’s largest buyer of crop-based biofuels and will now invest an unspecified amount in developing a new generat­ion of biofuels which do not use food-based crops and are less harmful to the environment. An even bigger problem with biofuels is not that it uses food-crops but that it often uses agricultural land in direct competition with them. And then we have the question of how clean they really are. As a transition technology it might have a role to play but as a long-term strategy the case for biofuels is weak at best. Friends of the Earth (FoE) has criticised Shell for turing away from renewables such as wind in favour of biofuels, saying:

Shell is backing the wrong horse when it comes to renewable energy – biofuels often lead to more emissions than the petrol and diesel they replace. [But at least they are] being a bit more honest about the fact they are a fossil fuel company. It has seen the limitations of the greenwash it was putting out a few years ago.*

The company said it would concentrate on developing other cleaner ways of using fossil fuels, such as carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. It hoped to use CCS to reduce emissions from Shell’s controversial and energy-intensive oil sands projects in northern Canada. So there we are, back to square one and a half. Carbon capture is all well and good in theory but it does not. The amounts of carbon that needs to be dealt with on a daily a daily basis is simply staggering.

Shell predicts that 80% of energy will come from fossil fuels and 20% from alternative energy sources by 2025 but spend only 1% of its budget on alternative technologies. The last five years $1.7bn of $150bn total investment has gone towards alternative energies, saying that many alternative technologies are simply not attractive investment opportunities. Linda Cook, Shell’s executive director of gas and power, said:

If there aren’t investment opportunities which compete with other projects we won’t put money into it. We are businessmen and women. If there were renewables [which made money] we would put money into it. It’s now looking like bio­fuels is one which is closest to what we do in Shell. Wind and solar are interesting [but] we may continue to struggle with other investment opportunities in the portfolio even with big subsidies in many markets. We do not expect material investment [in wind and solar] going forward.*

It is probably natural for a company such as Shell to reason like this, saying that biofuels fits its core business of providing fuels, logistics, trading and branding. It is only a pity that the core business has been pursued in a remarkably cynical way by Shell and its competitors, where the bottom line is short term money-making. They simply will not EcoSwitch their ways, will they?

.

Article S’hell dumps wind, solar and hydro power in favour of biofuels’ by Tim Webb in the Guardin on the 17th of March 2009, read it here

Posted under Companies, Corporate, Environmental News, Gas & Electricity, Renewable Energy

SCOTLAND

Tomorrow, the 6th of February, Dundee Sun City Conference of 2009 opens – with a mix of interesting speakers and workshops with networking opportunities. What is called ‘a fair and local conference dinner with eco-entertainment’ is held in the Scottish city of Dundee that in partnership with the association Solar Cities Scotland [SCS] has adopted the sun as the future of energy. Offered a Sustainable Action Grant of between £26,000 and £39,000 by the Scottish Government, SCS have created the Dundee Sun City project. SCS was established in 2003 to

1. advance the education of the public concerning renewable energy and energy efficiency through a programme of training, publishing, demonstration projects, seminars and any other means for providing public knowledge and information
2. encourage and participate in research and development in renewable energy for the public benefit.
3. conserve and protect the physical and natural environment through the promotion of sustainable energy practices.

These three points are all present in the Dundee conference which is part of  the ‘participative awareness-raising campaign’ to foster changes in habits and outlook while creating a collective responsibility towards energy efficiency and renewable energy. The result is an urban community ‘that aims to develop a strategic approach to maximise use of renewable energy technologies, in conjunction with improved building thermal performance and carbon emissions reductions from the built environment.’ Aha. Aiming to develop a strategic approach is nothing for the weak of will power. But in Scotland it seems to work. The UK’s first eco-store opened on Hope Street in Glasgow ages ago and in Dundee there is more than just round table discussions.

The public is encouraged to get involved and come up with ways in which they can reduce building energy use, developing an approach which can be adapted and promoted to other communities throughout Scotland. The campaign was publicly launched in April 2007. A problem with some of these initiatives is when they are too well made. One or two features of the Dundee Sun City website catch the eye. First is the online footprint calculator. 944 households have until today completed a full carbon footprint audit. Still far from the initial target of 5000, the numbers are valid. Annually, these almost one thousand homes total an estimated energy use of 34,971,042.90 kWh and emissions of 36,027.04 metric tonnes. The site also tracks the impact of renewables in the Dundee inner city area. 414,530.60 kWh have been generated from wind, solar, hydroelectric and through which only 172.35 tonnes per year were offset, approximately 5 houses worth. Which could have been pretty good. But the problem is that more than half, 87.8 tonnes, comes from Green energy tariffs. What have we learnt? That three years of government funded and highly targetted campaigning in a well-defined and local context seems not to have achieved very much at all. Or is something coming about?

Literally constructive and very much more to the point is this very interesting and welcome ingredient Dundee does add to the green building debate: the Sun City House. Where the clever twist is? It is not a new build. Instead it is a major refurbishment and remodelling of a poorly constructed and thermally inefficient janitors house built in the 1960s. It is intended to function as a ‘showroom for technologies, materials and methods of construction that can be retrofitted to existing housing stock, where the major challenge lies in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the domestic sector in the UK.’ We do not need the latest and most eco-friendly alternative of every category of our consumption checklist. We need to understand how we can adapt both our houses and our lifestyles to a changing world. This is one of the lessons that Dundee Sun City Conference 2009 has in store for its participants.

.

Visit the Dundee Sun City web site here.

See the Scottish Government’s page on Solar Cities Scotland here.

Leif Ahnland

Posted under Environmental News, Gas & Electricity, How To's & Guides

UNITED KINGDOM

Recently short-listed by the British government as one of five top priorities on the national renewable energy agenda, The Severn estuary barrage is truly a double-edged sword. On the one hand: covering up to 7% of the country’s energy needs with renewable energy. On the other hand: putting sensitive ecosystems at risk or even destroying them. Where wind farms often, if not always, run into opposition by the nearby residents who dislike the fact that their view is obstructed or fear other local disturbances, the issues concerning the barrage is not the usual Not-In-My-Backyard deal. The largest of the proposed tidal and wave power plant would be 10 miles (16km) long, spanning the Bristol channel between Breen Down in Somerset, England, and Lavernock Point in Wales.

A budgeted £16-20bn would have it criticised for the amount alone even in good times but of course even more so in view of the current economic situation. Proponents point to the fact that energy prices have risen violently over the last two years and are unlikely to stop doing so, arguing that the barrage will reach a break even point early on and after that it will be money in the bank. Well, if anyone wants them in the bank that is. The fact of the matter is it is almost definitely financially viable in the long run. Critics focus on the environmental impact, both in terms of building the enormous structure and for how it will affect bird-life, fish and biotopes ‘upstream’ of it.

The more exotic proposals for the design of the barrage include a 1km wide version with exclusive housing, very chic, very sea view and very, very 2006. If it will be green-lighted, it will probably be the more modest tidal power station with no extra topping.

Expect the next weeks to see pros and cons intensely debated as it presents a delicate choice between two evils. Building it will be heavily contested by everyone from conservationist taxpayer to birdwatcher whereas not building it will infuriate the other, more pro-action type of environmentalist.

.

Read more about the Severn estuary barrage here and here.

Posted under Environmental News, Gas & Electricity

Having been in the pipeline for a while and in preparation during the whole of 2008, a new international body to promote renewable energy was officially a reality as a large number of countries signed the up to the International Renewable Energy Agency statute in Bonn on the 26th of January.

More than 120 government delegations from across the world attended the conference and a total of 75 nations, a broad cross-section of developing and industrialized countries, signed the Agency’s statute. Many others expressed their strong commitment to Irena’s goals and their intention to join in the near future.*

55 of the member governments of the organisation are now committed to full membership. The goal for IRENA is to ‘help mobilise the huge potential of Renewable Energy’ to mitigate climate change, ensure an affordable energy supply and energy security while fostering human and economic development.

In pointing out that huge potential, the unit Current Global Primary Energy Consumption is used [GPEC]. An estimate in the IRENA presentation material states that renewable energy, if fully harnessed, amount to a theoretical 2032 GPEC. This is naturally impossible but hints at our possibility to cover our energy use through alternative energy sources. That we have over two thousand times of our current consumption at our disposal relies on 1800GPEC from solar radiation. Painfully aware of how difficult it is to effectively make use of solar energy, the 200GPEC of wind energy is possibly more inspiring and the point the IRENA is trying to make is that a combination of these two and the 20GPEC derived from biomass and 10 from geothermal could see us through.

At the moment China, Japan, the US and the UK, along with other major countries are not yet on board making the IRENA another hopeful but perhaps impotent move, where international initiatives are reduced promotion and policy making. A spokesperson for the UK’s new Department for Energy and Climate Change said, ‘We are certainly supportive and in interested in joining but we need to make sure that what we are joining has the right focus. There needs to be more focus o the deployment of renewables rather than just talking policy and issuing papers and there needs to be a wider membership.’ What is meant by wider membership is not entirely clear, an organisation where everyone is waiting for the others to join will have trouble growing and remain hampered and, surprise, prone to talking about policy making. This draws to mind the problems of getting the major polluters to sign and implement the Kyoto protocol. With everyone waiting for the Kyoto successor, the climate conference in Copenhagen in December, IRENA is at least a step away from talk about reductions and carbon offset and towards actually building up alternatives. Talk is cheap it is true enough. But a signature of commitment is at least something and the countries still looking on from the sidelines are not helping what could be an important actor in the work towards switching on a large scale.

The chairman of World Council for Renewable Energy, German member of parliament Hermann Sheer and initiator of IRENA, told the the Guardian:

IRENA is the single-most important step for a speedy global introduction of renewable energies. It will give an enormous push to the use of renewables around the globe.*

The organisation has at present a budget of €25million gathered through member subscription and will give financial, practical and technological support to member countries. Chad for example, with a constant supply of strong sunlight is to date almost entirely dependent on conventional fossil fuel energies. The country will benefit from IRENA funded installations.

75 nations have signed signed on [see listing below, obtained here.] Iran and Afghanistan are among them; Japan, China, India and the US are not, nor are the UK. One wonders why.

.

* Article by Kate Connolly and David Gow, ‘UK looks on from sidelines at green energy summit’ in The Guardian on 26 Jan 2009, p19

For an official pdf-format brochure on IRENA, click here.

For the IRENA website, click here.

Leif Ahnland

Founding Conference of the International Renewable Energy Agency IRENA

26 January 2009, Bonn, Germany

Signatory States

1 Afghanistan
2 Algeria
3 Argentina
4 Armenia
5 Austria
6 Bahrain
7 Benin
8 Bulgaria
9 Burkina Faso
10 Cape Verde
11 Central African Republic
12 Chad
13 Chile
14 Comoros
15 Côte d’Ivoire
16 Cyprus
17 Democratic Republic of the Congo
18 Denmark
19 Djibouti
20 Egypt
21 Eritrea
22 Ethiopia
23 Finland
24 France
25 Gambia
26 Germany
27 Ghana
28 Greece
29 Guatemala
30 Guinea-Bissau
31 Honduras
32 Iceland
33 Iran (Islamic Republic of)
34 Ireland
35 Israel
36 Italy
37 Jordan
38 Latvia
39 Liberia
40 Lithuania
41 Luxembourg
42 Madagascar
43 Mali
44 Mongolia
45 Montenegro
46 Morocco
47 Nepal
48 Netherlands
49 Nicaragua
50 Niger
51 Nigeria
52 Norway
53 Peru
54 Philippines
55 Poland
56 Portugal
57 Republic of Korea
58 Republic of Moldova
59 Romania
60 Sao Tome and Principe
61 Senegal
62 Serbia
63 Slovenia
64 Spain
65 Sweden
66 Syrian Arab Republic
67 Tajikistan
68 The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
69 Tunisia
70 Turkey
71 Uganda
72 United Arab Emirates
73 Uruguay
74 Yemen
75 Zambia

Posted under Cars & Transport, Environmental News, Gas & Electricity, How To's & Guides, Paid For Products, Renewable Energy

Entering the oval office as the new president in January 2009 cannot be a solely enjoyable experience. The ‘Yes, we can’ needs to become a full-bodied ‘Yes, we did it’ when the day comes to tick off the election campaign checklist four years from now. The pressure is on, both in the form of precedents and promises. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first 100 days in office are famous for, among other things, bringing forth the new deal. Barack Obama’s first 100 days will need something almost as massive but on so many more fronts. One thing that was definitely not on the agenda 1933 -apart from a controversial agricultural programme to enforce scarcity on commodities- was the environment.This time it is from day one along with a multitude large scale foreign policy overhauls and the immediately issued executive order to shut down Guantanam within a year, the environment is right up there. The $150bn investment (over the next 10 years) in renewable and alternative energies is hoped to create millions of jobs along the way. Coupled with the clearly stated intention to make the US a world leader in the global effort to combat climate change at the head of an international partnership, we are in for interesting times. Many are wary of the ambition in the light of the difficulties of bringing all the disparate issues in under the canopy of change.

Perhaps not all that surprising, the environmental issues were not what primarily caught the ears of the major US newspapers when they reviewed the Obama inaugural address. Where most made note of the fact that the speech in itself will not become a timeless hallmark of great rhetoric, all welcomed the seriousness with which he initiates his presidency. Here are excerpts from four editorials on January 21st, 2009.

Los Angeles Times: The inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th president spoke more eloquently about the promise of this country than anything he could have said Tuesday. But his inaugural address, though less poetic and less provocative than some of his speeches as a candidate effectively sounded the theme that the country can rebound from its current economic crisis [...] Those who complained that the address was not a speech for the ages may be correct; the compensation is that it was acutely attentive to the signs of the times.

New York Times: In his Inaugural Address, President Obama gave them the clarity and the respect for which all Americans have hungered. In about 20 minutes, he swept away eight years of President George Bush’s false choices and failed policies and promised to recommit to America’s most cherished ideals.

Washington Post: It was, for Americans, a day of joy, because with their first black president they took a giant step on a long path to overcoming the stain of slavery and discrimination. It was a moment of hope, because Mr. Obama sought to combine a sober acknowledgment of the perils the nation faces — the wars, the recession, the mounting debt and ebbing confidence — with an unflappable assurance that they can be overcome. The nation’s challenges “are serious and they are many,” he said. “They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America — they will be met.”

Dallas Morning News: As a candidate, Obama often stirred crowds into a frenzy of “Yes, we can.” As president, he was reverential, calling upon the citizenry to join him in the hard work of remaking America. President Obama’s inaugural address was steely, not showy – a hard-edged speech befitting a difficult time.

‘He is keeping it real’ as some might have said. By the way, the already mentioned agricultural programme from 1933 was ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in 1936 and dismantled. There is hopefully no such thing as a Not in My Back Yard amendment.

and

Posted under Environmental News

Make your own electricity! A great idea, especially when you look at your latest bill. Perhaps you can even feed it back to the grid, making them pay for electricity you produce. The People strikes back. It is also eco-friendly. Well, is it?

Micro generators fitted to a roof or wall mounted on private houses have found some buyers over the last few years, partially due to subsidies through the UK government’s Low Carbon Building Programme, and then some more in 2006 when DIY-chain B&Q launched a campaign, selling the Windsave 1000 (a 1kw mini wind turbine) for £1500. It was a package and included installation, feeding the electricity straight into the building’s standard ring mains supply for 230 Volt. Plug-and-play, the way we like it today. Since no batteries were involved it was a matter of use it or lose it, the electricity generated. These types of units are referred to as SWTGS (Small Wind Turbine Generator system). The idea of having your own SWTGS with a SSEG (Small Scale Embedded Generator) does sound sweet.

The trouble with this model -and many of its competitors- is that there is so much, well for want of a better word, trouble. It especially when they are put up in an urban setting. They are, first of all, not reaching the amounts of electricity that they claimed to produce. One example comes from Donnachadh McCarthy, famous for having the greenest home in England. He calculated that in its first 3 months, his turbine had powered one energy-saving bulb for around three hours a day and had created a total of 1.6 kWh. This equals more or less 20p worth of electricity. In three months. At that rate, for the Windsave 1000 to cover its 2006 sales price, it would take one thousand eight hundred years. Which means that there are only 1797 to go? The internet, on blogs and forums, is littered with similar stories. On the one hand the manufacturers claiming that it will cut your electricity bill by 30% which almost certainly it will not unless you live on a hill or in the middle of a large field with consistent, strong winds for it to produce 1000kWh per annum.

The Windsave 1000 nominally generates 1kW at 12 metres per second wind (27mph), and starts generating power as soon as the wind is over 4 metres per second. Turbulent wind and lower wind speeds result in far lower power outputs.

For it to produce enough energy to become carbon neutral, or whichever criteria fits best, it is probably not thousands of years but far of the map all the same. Small horizontally orientated wind powered generators in urban areas forced to use erratic winds simply does not work. Under these circumstances it will spend most of the time chasing the wind, not harnessing it.

We will be presenting different models in our new Eco Build directory. In the right conditions, the right wind turbine does a good job.

Posted under Eco Build, Gas & Electricity, Product Innovations, Renewable Energy