Friday, April 30, 2010
10 Ways to Go Green and Save Green
10 things you can do today to help reduce your environmental impact, save money, and live a happier, healthier life.
1.Save energy to save money.
◦Set your thermostat a few degrees lower in the winter and a few degrees higher in the summer to save on heating and cooling costs.
◦Install compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) when your older incandescent bulbs burn out.
◦Unplug appliances when you're not using them. Or, use a "smart" power strip that senses when appliances are off and cuts "phantom" or "vampire" energy use.
◦Wash clothes in cold water whenever possible. As much as 85 percent of the energy used to machine-wash clothes goes to heating the water.
◦Use a drying rack or clothesline to save the energy otherwise used during machine drying.
2.Save water to save money.
◦Take shorter showers to reduce water use. This will lower your water and heating bills too.
◦Install a low-flow showerhead. They don't cost much, and the water and energy savings can quickly pay back your investment.
◦Make sure you have a faucet aerator on each faucet. These inexpensive appliances conserve heat and water, while keeping water pressure high.
◦Plant drought-tolerant native plants in your garden.
3.Less gas = more money (and better health!).
◦Walk or bike to work. This saves on gas and parking costs while improving your cardiovascular health and reducing your risk of obesity.
◦Consider telecommuting if you live far from your work. Or move closer. Even if this means paying more rent, it could save you money in the long term.
◦Lobby your local government to increase spending on sidewalks and bike lanes. With little cost, these improvements can pay huge dividends in bettering your health and reducing traffic.
4.Eat smart.
◦If you eat meat, add one meatless meal a week. Meat costs a lot at the store-and it's even more expensive when you consider the related environmental and health costs.
◦Buy locally raised, humane, and organic meat, eggs, and dairy whenever you can. Purchasing from local farmers keeps money in the local economy.
◦Watch videos about why local food and sustainable seafood are so great.
◦Whatever your diet, eat low on the food chain [pdf]. This is especially true for seafood.
5.Skip the bottled water.
◦Use a water filter to purify tap water instead of buying bottled water. Not only is bottled water expensive, but it generates large amounts of container waste.
◦Bring a reusable water bottle, preferably aluminum rather than plastic, with you when traveling or at work.
◦Check out this short article for the latest on bottled water trends.
6.Think before you buy.
◦Go online to find new or gently used secondhand products. Whether you've just moved or are looking to redecorate, consider a service like craigslist or FreeSharing to track down furniture, appliances, and other items cheaply or for free.
◦Check out garage sales, thrift stores, and consignment shops for clothing and other everyday items.
◦When making purchases, make sure you know what's "Good Stuff" and what isn't.
◦Watch a video about what happens when you buy things. Your purchases have a real impact, for better or worse.
7.Borrow instead of buying.
◦Borrow from libraries instead of buying personal books and movies. This saves money, not to mention the ink and paper that goes into printing new books.
◦Share power tools and other appliances. Get to know your neighbors while cutting down on the number of things cluttering your closet or garage.
8.Buy smart.
◦Buy in bulk. Purchasing food from bulk bins can save money and packaging.
◦Wear clothes that don't need to be dry-cleaned. This saves money and cuts down on toxic chemical use.
◦Invest in high-quality, long-lasting products. You might pay more now, but you'll be happy when you don't have to replace items as frequently (and this means less waste!).
9.Keep electronics out of the trash.
◦Keep your cell phones, computers, and other electronics as long as possible.
◦Donate or recycle them responsibly when the time comes. E-waste contains mercury and other toxics and is a growing environmental problem.
◦Recycle your cell phone.
◦Ask your local government to set up an electronics recycling and hazardous waste collection event.
10.Make your own cleaning supplies.
◦The big secret: you can make very effective, non-toxic cleaning products whenever you need them. All you need are a few simple ingredients like baking soda, vinegar, lemon, and soap.
◦Making your own cleaning products saves money, time, and packaging-not to mention your indoor air quality.
Read more:
http://www.worldwatch.org/resources/go_green_save_green
Thursday, April 29, 2010
UraniumFree Virginia and L.I.F.E., Inc: Needs Volunteers for Smith Mountain Lake
UraniumFree Virginia and L.I.F.E., Inc. Needs Volunteers for Smith Mountain Lake 2010 Business Expo please contact uraniumfreeVA@gmail.com or lifeva2009@gmail.com
We will be distributing informational brochures and flyers, answering your questions, and collecting signatures for the petition to the Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee requesting that the Subcommittee's socio-economic impact study of uranium mining include the Smith Mountain Lake area and the surrounding counties.
If you are available and would like to participate, volunteers are meeting at 11 am on Food Lion's parking log in Gretna.
Directions to Moneta: April 30 - SML Business Expo
The 7th Annual SML Business Expo will be held on Friday, April 30th, in Downtown Moneta. The exposition will be set up on the southwest side of Rt. 122 and Rt. 608 - across from Mayberry Hills. Hours are Noon to 6 p.m. exhibits: http://www.visitsmithmountainlake.com/events/events/april---sml-business-expo.html
Food Lion in Gretna: 100 Vaden Drive, Gretna, VA 24557-4160
More info:
http://uraniumfreevirginia.blogspot.com/2010/04/need-more-volunteers.html
http://lifeincva.blogspot.com/
Tobacco commission funds study on uranium mining
April 29, 2010
The prospect of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County is the subject of another study.
On Thursday in Roanoke, the Virginia Tobacco Commission agreed to pay $200,000 for another review. But critics are already questioning whether it's the right study, at the right time.
The commission uses money from the national tobacco settlement to promote economic development in the state's tobacco region. Members believe a closer look at the potential and the pitfalls of uranium mining is a good use of the commission's cash.
"It's not without controversy. We want to learn where communities have done it in the past, and both what the positive and negative impacts might be," said Sen. William Wampler.
Wampler says lawmakers and local officials will need more information to make an informed decision on uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.
Delegate Danny Marshall voted no.
"I think that what we need to look at first is to see what the other studies are going to do and then maybe we need to fill in the holes," said Marshall.
The biggest hole, says Pittsylvania County farmer Phillip Lovelace, is the lack of a site specific study on the hydrology of the Cole Hill property.
"Our water supply is very important. If we damage it, we've lost it all," said Lovelace.
The Tobacco Commission also took another vote that could address the concerns of Danville area residents who fear a new mega-industrial park there will end up as a uranium mine.
The tobacco commission narrowly approved a motion that says it will ask for its money back, at last count around $13 million, if the site is used for uranium mining.
Read more:
http://www.wdbj7.com/global/story.asp?s=12400126
View Video: http://www.wdbj7.com/global/Category.asp?c=168438&autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=4744310&flvUri=&partnerclipid=
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Virginia's energy demands could be nearly offset by efficiency, report says
By Cory Nealon
247-4760
April 27, 2010
The expected increase in demand for energy in Virginia during the next two decades could nearly be offset by energy efficiency technologies and practices, a new report claims.
Released by Duke University and Georgia Tech, the report examines the energy usage of 16 Southern states, focusing on residential, commercial and industrial buildings.
It found that Virginia's energy demand would increase 14 percent from 2010 to 2030.
Most of the increase — 12 percent — could be negated through energy efficiency, said Etan Gumerman, senior policy associate at Duke's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
"There are gains across the board to be had everywhere," he said.
The report calls for tougher building codes, appliances that consume less energy and programs that spur property owners into retrofitting their buildings. It also recommends utility upgrades and other improvements at industrial complexes.
Such initiatives are usually led by the federal government, Gumerman said.
The report comes as Virginia, which imports more energy than it produces, tries to expand its energy portfolio.
Gov. Bob McDonnell supports a range of initiatives, including offshore drilling and the construction of what would be Virginia's largest coal-fired power plant in Surry County.
The report was funded by the Energy Foundation, the Kresge Foundation and the Turner Foundation.
For more environment and science news visit the Daily Press blog, The Deadrise, at dailypress.com/deadrise
Read more:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_energy-efficiency_0427apr27,0,6274564,print.story
247-4760
April 27, 2010
The expected increase in demand for energy in Virginia during the next two decades could nearly be offset by energy efficiency technologies and practices, a new report claims.
Released by Duke University and Georgia Tech, the report examines the energy usage of 16 Southern states, focusing on residential, commercial and industrial buildings.
It found that Virginia's energy demand would increase 14 percent from 2010 to 2030.
Most of the increase — 12 percent — could be negated through energy efficiency, said Etan Gumerman, senior policy associate at Duke's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
"There are gains across the board to be had everywhere," he said.
The report calls for tougher building codes, appliances that consume less energy and programs that spur property owners into retrofitting their buildings. It also recommends utility upgrades and other improvements at industrial complexes.
Such initiatives are usually led by the federal government, Gumerman said.
The report comes as Virginia, which imports more energy than it produces, tries to expand its energy portfolio.
Gov. Bob McDonnell supports a range of initiatives, including offshore drilling and the construction of what would be Virginia's largest coal-fired power plant in Surry County.
The report was funded by the Energy Foundation, the Kresge Foundation and the Turner Foundation.
For more environment and science news visit the Daily Press blog, The Deadrise, at dailypress.com/deadrise
Read more:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_energy-efficiency_0427apr27,0,6274564,print.story
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Lawmaker: Spending more for uranium socioeconomic study ‘not wise’
By John Crane
Published: April 27, 2010
If a Virginia Beach study finds uranium mining and milling detrimental to Lake Gaston, then a socioeconomic study of the industry would be pointless, said a member of the Virginia Tobacco Commission’s executive committee.
State Sen. Frank Ruff, R-15th District, who is the commission’s vice chairman, said he voted against funding up to $200,000 for a socioeconomic study of uranium mining and milling during a meeting on April 15 because it “wouldn’t be wise” to spend money on the study if uranium mining and milling could contaminate water downstream.
“There (are) so many questions out there that need to be answered,” Ruff said during a telephone interview Tuesday. “They need to be answered in a systematic, orderly process.”
The Virginia Tobacco Commission should wait until the fall, when Virginia Beach’s study results are expected, to decide whether to pay for a socioeconomic study, Ruff said.
Virginia Uranium Inc is indirectly paying for a separate, statewide study emphasizing the technical and scientific aspects of mining and milling.
The National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council are performing that study, which is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011.
Virginia Beach is studying what a proposed Pittsylvania County uranium mine and mill could do to its water supply — Lake Gaston — in the event of a weather-related disaster. The city is concerned about uranium mining and milling because Lake Gaston, a major source of its drinking water, is located downstream from Coles Hill, site of the proposed uranium mine and mill.
The Virginia Tobacco Commission will meet at 10 a.m. Thursday in Roanoke:
http://www.tic.virginia.gov/meetingsandminutes.shtml
Commission Chairman Terry Gilgore, R-1st District, said Tuesday that the full commission doesn’t need to vote on the funding because the committee’s vote authorizes the money be spent on it.
But Ruff said the full commission should vote on it because “it would suit the public’s interest.”
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/lawmaker_spending_more_for_uranium_socioeconomic_study_not_wise/20563/
Published: April 27, 2010
If a Virginia Beach study finds uranium mining and milling detrimental to Lake Gaston, then a socioeconomic study of the industry would be pointless, said a member of the Virginia Tobacco Commission’s executive committee.
State Sen. Frank Ruff, R-15th District, who is the commission’s vice chairman, said he voted against funding up to $200,000 for a socioeconomic study of uranium mining and milling during a meeting on April 15 because it “wouldn’t be wise” to spend money on the study if uranium mining and milling could contaminate water downstream.
“There (are) so many questions out there that need to be answered,” Ruff said during a telephone interview Tuesday. “They need to be answered in a systematic, orderly process.”
The Virginia Tobacco Commission should wait until the fall, when Virginia Beach’s study results are expected, to decide whether to pay for a socioeconomic study, Ruff said.
Virginia Uranium Inc is indirectly paying for a separate, statewide study emphasizing the technical and scientific aspects of mining and milling.
The National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council are performing that study, which is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011.
Virginia Beach is studying what a proposed Pittsylvania County uranium mine and mill could do to its water supply — Lake Gaston — in the event of a weather-related disaster. The city is concerned about uranium mining and milling because Lake Gaston, a major source of its drinking water, is located downstream from Coles Hill, site of the proposed uranium mine and mill.
The Virginia Tobacco Commission will meet at 10 a.m. Thursday in Roanoke:
http://www.tic.virginia.gov/meetingsandminutes.shtml
Commission Chairman Terry Gilgore, R-1st District, said Tuesday that the full commission doesn’t need to vote on the funding because the committee’s vote authorizes the money be spent on it.
But Ruff said the full commission should vote on it because “it would suit the public’s interest.”
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/lawmaker_spending_more_for_uranium_socioeconomic_study_not_wise/20563/
UraniumFree Virginia and L.I.F.E.: Need Volunteers
UraniumFree Virginia and L.I.F.E. will have 12 volunteers attending the Smith Mountain Lake 2010 Business Expo, distributing informational brochures and flyers, answering your questions.
We are slso collecting signatures for the petition to the Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee requesting that the Subcommittee's socio-economic impact study of uranium mining include the Smith Mountain Lake area and the surrounding counties.
We need more volunteers to participate in this action, as 4,000-5,000 people are expected to attend the Expo.
If you are available and would like to participate, volunteers are meeting at 11 am on Food Lion's parking lot in Gretna.
If you are driving from a different direction, please email to uraniumfreeVA@gmail.com for more details.
Thank you for your support in advance.
Read more:
http://uraniumfreevirginia.blogspot.com/2010/04/need-more-volunteers.html
We are slso collecting signatures for the petition to the Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee requesting that the Subcommittee's socio-economic impact study of uranium mining include the Smith Mountain Lake area and the surrounding counties.
We need more volunteers to participate in this action, as 4,000-5,000 people are expected to attend the Expo.
If you are available and would like to participate, volunteers are meeting at 11 am on Food Lion's parking lot in Gretna.
If you are driving from a different direction, please email to uraniumfreeVA@gmail.com for more details.
Thank you for your support in advance.
Read more:
http://uraniumfreevirginia.blogspot.com/2010/04/need-more-volunteers.html
Writer: Just who are VUI’s investors?
By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: April 25, 2010
Updated: April 26, 2010
To the editor:
According to Washington Post reporter Anita Kumar, as of January 2008, 31 people had invested in Virginia Uranium Inc., “several of whom live in the area.”
Some of the investors are known to the public; many are not. Investments of residents are not normally of concern. However, if residents are appointed to public committees and are allowed to determine policy that will positively affect their personal investments, there is a problem.
Uranium mining is prohibited in Virginia. Virginia will be forever changed if uranium mining, milling and resulting waste disposal from these processes occur. So too, will the bottom line for the investors in Virginia Uranium. They will directly financially benefit if uranium mining occurs.
Who are these investors? How many are in public positions enabling them to influence pro-mining policy? Do VUI investors sit on the Tobacco Indemnification Commission, the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission and other boards, commissions, bureaus and agencies that will decide Virginia’s fate regarding uranium mining and milling? Do you think they will fairly represent and protect you and your interests or have their personal investment as a priority? How many elected officials are currently making decisions based on the uranium industry’s promises?
It was recently learned that one of the local investors sits on the Tobacco Indemnification Commission and endorsed $200,000 for a Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s socioeconomic study. Is that appropriate?
He could have, and most likely should have, recused himself. The only purpose his vote served was to further erode public confidence in the uranium study process being pushed by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, which is already in the toilet in my opinion.
Politics, not science, will determine if uranium is mined in Virginia. I don’t believe there is any way uranium can be “safely” mined.
Why are we continuing with this expensive and divisive? I imagine that answer can be calculated in the billions of dollars.
KAREN B. MAUTE
Mount Cross
Danville, VA
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/writer_just_who_are_vuis_investors/20493/
Published: April 25, 2010
Updated: April 26, 2010
To the editor:
According to Washington Post reporter Anita Kumar, as of January 2008, 31 people had invested in Virginia Uranium Inc., “several of whom live in the area.”
Some of the investors are known to the public; many are not. Investments of residents are not normally of concern. However, if residents are appointed to public committees and are allowed to determine policy that will positively affect their personal investments, there is a problem.
Uranium mining is prohibited in Virginia. Virginia will be forever changed if uranium mining, milling and resulting waste disposal from these processes occur. So too, will the bottom line for the investors in Virginia Uranium. They will directly financially benefit if uranium mining occurs.
Who are these investors? How many are in public positions enabling them to influence pro-mining policy? Do VUI investors sit on the Tobacco Indemnification Commission, the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission and other boards, commissions, bureaus and agencies that will decide Virginia’s fate regarding uranium mining and milling? Do you think they will fairly represent and protect you and your interests or have their personal investment as a priority? How many elected officials are currently making decisions based on the uranium industry’s promises?
It was recently learned that one of the local investors sits on the Tobacco Indemnification Commission and endorsed $200,000 for a Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s socioeconomic study. Is that appropriate?
He could have, and most likely should have, recused himself. The only purpose his vote served was to further erode public confidence in the uranium study process being pushed by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, which is already in the toilet in my opinion.
Politics, not science, will determine if uranium is mined in Virginia. I don’t believe there is any way uranium can be “safely” mined.
Why are we continuing with this expensive and divisive? I imagine that answer can be calculated in the billions of dollars.
KAREN B. MAUTE
Mount Cross
Danville, VA
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/writer_just_who_are_vuis_investors/20493/
Four green myths debunked
12:00 AM CDT on Saturday, April 24, 2010
By RITA COOK / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News
What are some of the reasons you keep telling yourself you don't have time to go green? Do any of them sound familiar to you?
MYTH: Recycling wastes more energy than it saves.
According to Melinda Haggerty, sustainability communications coordinator for the city of Plano, this myth usually comes up when discussing the energy it takes to send trucks out to pick up recyclables. Haggerty says the truth, according to the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, is that recycling aluminum cans cuts energy use and greenhouse gases by 95 percent compared with the energy needed to make virgin aluminum.
In general, it is estimated that the energy used to manufacture new products from raw materials is at least 10 times more than the energy consumed by curbside collection, recycling and transportation of recycled goods to retailers.
MYTH: Natural cleaners don't disinfect.
Haggerty notes that according to Susan Sumner, head of the Food Science and Technology program at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, to wipe out Salmonella, Shigella and E. coli bacteria, just use a combination of household hydrogen peroxide and undiluted white or apple cider vinegar. These two ingredients are an effective, nontoxic disinfectant that can be wiped right off. Vinegar also can take care of mold in the bathroom; it kills 82 percent of mold strains.
MYTH: Going green is just too expensive overall.
You don't have to spend a lot of money on Energy Star appliances to save on energy bills. Josh McLerran, Cedar Hill public works, environmental projects coordinator, suggests switching your incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs). While the CFLs cost more initially, the return on investment is rather quick since the CFLs' life span is around 10 times longer and they use one-fourth of the energy used by incandescent bulbs.
"Other target areas for saving money are heating and cooling your home. In the summer, adjust the thermostat to 78 when no one is home. Keeping the thermostat at the same [lower] temperature throughout the day really does use more energy," he says.
MYTH: It would take several rain barrels to collect enough water for my garden.
This really depends on the size of the garden and watering methods. According to McLerran, "A 55- gallon rainwater barrel can go a long way if distributed by a hand watering can or through a drip irrigation system. Drip emitters, which are tied to the drip irrigation system, distribute the flow in terms of gallons per hour vs. gallons per minute, like traditional sprinkler systems."
Want more tips on how to live a greener lifestyle? Visit http://www.livegreeninplano.com/
Rita Cook is an Arlington freelance writer.
Read more:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/fea/home/stories/DN-nhm_green_0424gd.ART.State.Edition1.4cce359.html
By RITA COOK / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News
What are some of the reasons you keep telling yourself you don't have time to go green? Do any of them sound familiar to you?
MYTH: Recycling wastes more energy than it saves.
According to Melinda Haggerty, sustainability communications coordinator for the city of Plano, this myth usually comes up when discussing the energy it takes to send trucks out to pick up recyclables. Haggerty says the truth, according to the International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, is that recycling aluminum cans cuts energy use and greenhouse gases by 95 percent compared with the energy needed to make virgin aluminum.
In general, it is estimated that the energy used to manufacture new products from raw materials is at least 10 times more than the energy consumed by curbside collection, recycling and transportation of recycled goods to retailers.
MYTH: Natural cleaners don't disinfect.
Haggerty notes that according to Susan Sumner, head of the Food Science and Technology program at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, to wipe out Salmonella, Shigella and E. coli bacteria, just use a combination of household hydrogen peroxide and undiluted white or apple cider vinegar. These two ingredients are an effective, nontoxic disinfectant that can be wiped right off. Vinegar also can take care of mold in the bathroom; it kills 82 percent of mold strains.
MYTH: Going green is just too expensive overall.
You don't have to spend a lot of money on Energy Star appliances to save on energy bills. Josh McLerran, Cedar Hill public works, environmental projects coordinator, suggests switching your incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs). While the CFLs cost more initially, the return on investment is rather quick since the CFLs' life span is around 10 times longer and they use one-fourth of the energy used by incandescent bulbs.
"Other target areas for saving money are heating and cooling your home. In the summer, adjust the thermostat to 78 when no one is home. Keeping the thermostat at the same [lower] temperature throughout the day really does use more energy," he says.
MYTH: It would take several rain barrels to collect enough water for my garden.
This really depends on the size of the garden and watering methods. According to McLerran, "A 55- gallon rainwater barrel can go a long way if distributed by a hand watering can or through a drip irrigation system. Drip emitters, which are tied to the drip irrigation system, distribute the flow in terms of gallons per hour vs. gallons per minute, like traditional sprinkler systems."
Want more tips on how to live a greener lifestyle? Visit http://www.livegreeninplano.com/
Rita Cook is an Arlington freelance writer.
Read more:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/fea/home/stories/DN-nhm_green_0424gd.ART.State.Edition1.4cce359.html
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Official says hearing needed on uranium mining
Chatham, VA
By John Crane
Published: April 25, 2010
The chairman of Virginia’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee said Friday in an e-mail that his group will soon hold a public hearing — probably in Chatham —to determine the scope of the “socioeconomic study” of uranium mining and milling.
“It is my conviction that a public hearing on the study’s scope should be held in Chatham,” Delegate Lee Ware, chairman of the subcommittee, wrote in response to questions from the Danville Register & Bee. Ware’s subcommittee is part of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission.
As for other, separate studies about uranium mining and milling conducted by the Danville Regional Foundation and the city of Virginia Beach, Ware said he would like to know their outcomes.
“It is understandable that they may want to undertake their own review of this subject,” Ware said. “I welcome all serious studies of the ramifications of uranium mining and will be interested in their results.”
However, Ware said his job is to make sure the state’s studies — one analyzing uranium mining and milling’s technical aspects and the other addressing the socioeconomic ramifications — answer all relevant questions.
“My first focus will be to assure the clarity and the comprehensiveness of the studies being undertaken on behalf of the General Assembly,” Ware said.
Virginia Uranium Inc. seeks to mine and mill a 119-million pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. Virginia has had a moratorium on uranium mining and milling since 1982.
National Research Council is conducting a $1.4 million study — indirectly paid for by VUI — to determine whether uranium can be mined and milled safely in the commonwealth.
The Virginia Tobacco Commission’s Executive Committee voted April 15 to recommend the Tobacco Commission provide up to $200,000 for the Coal and Energy Commission to pay for the socioeconomic study.
“When we send out a request for proposals on the socioeconomic study, we will cast a wide net to find the proper research institute,” Ware wrote. “Obviously, we will look for a high-caliber (entity) in order to complement the scientific study now under way.”
The Danville Regional Foundation aims to conduct its own separate socioeconomic study on the Coles Hill project. It would be site specific and focus on a 50-mile radius around the project’s location.
Virginia Beach is undertaking a study examining the effects of uranium mining and milling at Coles Hill on the Lake Gaston water supply in the event of a major weather-related disaster.
Karl Stauber, president and CEO of the Danville Regional Foundation, said his foundation was asked to conduct a statewide study but declined because “we’re a regional foundation, not a statewide foundation.” The study’s results will be shared publicly, Stauber said.
“Our intent is to make this process as open and as transparent as possible,” he said.
Tom Leahy, director of public utilities for Virginia Beach, said the city is conducting a study of what its officials asked the subcommittee to analyze in the statewide technical study. The state didn’t include it, so Virginia Beach is doing its own study, Leahy said.
“As long as all the studies are done by people with strong ethical guidelines, the more studies, the merrier,” Leahy said.
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/article/official_says_hearing_needed_on_uranium_mining/20459/
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Uranium Facts
Volumes of greenhouse gases are emitted throughout the nuclear chain from mining, milling, transporting, building nuclear power plants and reprocessing uranium.
Uranium is the heaviest of all minerals. The percentage of uranium to ore is quite small in commercially mined uranium, averaging 0.3 % in Australia but as high as 15 % in Canada.
The ore is, therefore, milled to concentrate the uranium, resulting in a marketable product, uranium oxide (U3O8), also known as 'yellowcake'.[6]
Uranium isotopes remain radioactive for millions of years:[6] U238: (also known as depleted uranium) has a half-life (the time it takes for it to lose half its radioactivity) of 4.5 billion years, U235: 704 million years , U234: 245,000 years
Radon is a radioactive gas released from uranium decay.[6]
In Australia three kinds of mining process are used to extract uranium: underground (as currently used at Olympic Dam), surface (open pit, as used at Ranger), or acid solution/in-situ leach (as used at Beverley). Tunnel mining poses risks to both human health and environment. Besides the risk of collapse and poor or dangerous air quality in underground operations, uranium mines present a dangerous scenario for workers due to exposure to radon gas and uranium dust.[6]
After ore extraction, uranium must be separated from the other minerals in the matrix. This is done by crushing and leaching the rock using water and sulfuric acid. This process uses enormous amounts of water which is contaminated with acid, unwanted minerals and leftover uranium, and contains long lived decay products which continue to pose a risk to health and environment.
It is left on site in tailing dams, in an attempt to minimise dust and because there is no safe means of disposal. The sludge that tailing water covers is 85% as radioactive as the uranium extracted and it continues to release the deadly radon gas.[6]
Tailing dams all over the world have had leakage problems. There are many documented instances of increased exposure to radiation in people living downstream from these tailings damas through consuming contaminated water, fish and crops. Local wildlife, particularly water birds, have also been killed by drinking the tailings water.[6]
The health and environment effects are felt in many mining communities worldwide. Recent reports from China indicate that there are both serious health impacts on communities living near uranium mines and grave consequences for workers who speak out on the issue. Navajo homelands in the US are a notable example of former mining communities where residents now experience high lung cancer rates. Over half of the groundwater is contaminated by defunct uranium mines.[6]
Workers and the community are exposed to serious health risks at all stages of the nuclear chain from mining to transport, use and disposal of nuclear materials including waste.
Workers are at risk from radiation exposure through inhalation of radioactive dust or direct contamination from the mine. The permitted levels of radiation exposure considered 'safe' for workers and the public have dropped dramatically over the years as research indicates harmful effects still exist at much lower exposure levels than what was originally thought to be safe. It is now acknowledged that there is no safe level of radiation exposure that guarantees cancer will not be triggered.[6]
Globally, the nuclear industry has a history of developing uranium mines, nuclear tests, and waste dumps on indigenous people's lands against their wishes.
Read more:
http://www.greenkids.de/europas-atomerbe/index.php/Uranium_Mining#France
6.↑ 6.00 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.10 Treena Lenthall and Kim Stewart: http://www.roxstop-action.org/Booklet_16pp.pdf , November 17, 2009
Friday, April 23, 2010
Virginia Appliance Rebate Program Begins April 28th
News Flash - Home
Virginia Appliance Rebate Program Begins April 28th
Beginning Wednesday, April 28th at 11 AM, Virginia’s Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program will offer Virginians up to $300 on select ENERGY STAR qualified appliances.
The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) will be administering the program, which is intended to increase residential energy conservation in Virginia through the use of more efficient appliances.
The following ENERGY STAR rated appliances are eligible for the corresponding rebate amounts:
• Heat Pump - $300
• Gas Furnace - $250
• Tankless Gas Water Heater - $225
• Clothes Washer - $75
• Refrigerator - $60
• Storage Gas Water Heater - $35
To be eligible for an appliance rebate, the applicant must be a Virginia resident; the appliance must be replacing an existing appliance and must be purchased at a retail location in Virginia. The appliance rebates are limited to one rebate per household and each rebate must be reserved online prior to the appliance purchase.
The most recent energy efficiency rebate program was launched by the DMME in late March. $6.5 million in rebate funding was reserved in less than 24 hours.
Virginia’s allocation of rebate funding for the upcoming Appliance Rebate Program is $7.45 million. For more information on the Appliance Rebate Program, and to apply for an appliance rebate, visit the DMME's Appliance Rebate Website: http://www.dmme.virginia.gov/arra.shtml
Virginia Appliance Rebate Program Begins April 28th
Beginning Wednesday, April 28th at 11 AM, Virginia’s Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program will offer Virginians up to $300 on select ENERGY STAR qualified appliances.
The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) will be administering the program, which is intended to increase residential energy conservation in Virginia through the use of more efficient appliances.
The following ENERGY STAR rated appliances are eligible for the corresponding rebate amounts:
• Heat Pump - $300
• Gas Furnace - $250
• Tankless Gas Water Heater - $225
• Clothes Washer - $75
• Refrigerator - $60
• Storage Gas Water Heater - $35
To be eligible for an appliance rebate, the applicant must be a Virginia resident; the appliance must be replacing an existing appliance and must be purchased at a retail location in Virginia. The appliance rebates are limited to one rebate per household and each rebate must be reserved online prior to the appliance purchase.
The most recent energy efficiency rebate program was launched by the DMME in late March. $6.5 million in rebate funding was reserved in less than 24 hours.
Virginia’s allocation of rebate funding for the upcoming Appliance Rebate Program is $7.45 million. For more information on the Appliance Rebate Program, and to apply for an appliance rebate, visit the DMME's Appliance Rebate Website: http://www.dmme.virginia.gov/arra.shtml
Thursday, April 22, 2010
The First Earth Day in April 1970/Green Tips for Earth Day
First Earth Day
It may be hard to imagine that before 1970, a factory could spew black clouds of toxic into the air or dump tons of toxic waste into a nearby stream, and that was perfectly legal. They could not be taken to court to stop it.
How was that possible? Because there was no EPA, no Clean Air Act, no Clean Water Act. There were no legal or regulatory mechanisms to protect our environment.
In Spring 1970, Senator Gaylord Nelson created Earth Day as a way to “force this issue onto the national agenda.” 20 million Americans demonstrated in different U.S. cities, and it worked!
In December 1970, Congress authorized the creation of a new federal agency to tackle environmental issues, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency..
In 1970, President Richard Nixon and Congress established the U.S. EPA in response to the growing public demand for cleaner water, air and land. The EPA was tasked with the challenging goal of repairing the damage already done to the environment and to establish guidelines to help Americans in making a cleaner—and safer—environment a reality.
Green Tips
1. Organize a clean-up in your neighborhood. Beautification projects such as tree plantings are quick solutions to many common problems.
2. Conserve paper by using both sides of a page in your notebooks. Buy 100% post consumer recycled paper.
3. Organize to have healthy food served at in your school district and reduce the availability of junk food, sodas, and other unhealthy options.
4. Convince your school district or office building to choose reusable utensils, trays, and dishes in the cafeteria.
5. Collect used printer, fax, and copier cartridges to recycle.
6. Inquire about non-toxic cleaning products and buy them for your house. They clean as good –or better – as the toxic kind!
7. Replace inefficient incandescent light bulbs with efficient, Energy Star-approved CFLs or LEDs – reduce your carbon footprint by 450 pounds a year.
8. Car pool, use public transportation or drive a fuel efficient car – reduce your carbon footprint by 1 pound for every mile you do not drive.
9. Keep your tires properly inflated and get better gas mileage – reduce your carbon footprint 20 pounds for each gallon of gas saved.
10. Change your car's air filter regularly.
11. Move your heater thermostat down two degrees in winter and up two degrees in the summer – reduce your carbon footprint by 2,000 pounds
12. Use a low-flow showerhead because the less water you use, the less energy required to heat the water – reduce your carbon footprint 350 pounds a year
13. Buy local products with less packaging and recycle paper, plastic and glass – reduce your garbage by 10% and your carbon footprint by 1,200 pounds a year.
14. Buy organic food because the chemicals used in modern agriculture pollute the water supply, and require energy to produce.
15. Teleconference instead of traveling. For must-go trips, keep track of the miles driven and flown and buy "carbon offsets”.
16. Convince teachers to include the environment in their lesson plans. Get environmental ed curriculum at www.earthday.net.
17. Lobby your school board to incorporate green building practices.
18. Plant a tree as an effective way to reduce greenhouse gases.
19. On Earth Day, venture to a park, fly a kite, ride a bicycle, clean-up trash at a local stream or nature setting.
20. Make a Tire Swing. Have any old tires lying around? Objects that were destined for the garbage can be reused for entertainment.
21. Write a story with your kids of an imaginary trip through the jungle. Go to the library and research how deforestation and animal poaching are damaging the rainforest.
22. Use organic-cotton bags - or of any other sustainable fabric like hemp – for your shopping.
23. Change your paper bills to online one. If every adult in the US did this just once, we’d save almost 218 million paper sheets!
24. Run your dishwasher or washing machine only when they are full, and buy Energy-star appliances when it’s time to renovate. Your pocket will notice!
25. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. Living by the 3 “R’s” of environmentalism are the easiest, fastest – and cheapest! – way to go green.
Read more:
http://www.earthday.net/greentips
http://www.epa.gov/earthday/history.htm
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Tobacco commission agrees to fund socio-economic study on uranium mining
By TIM DAVIS/Star-Tribune Editor
Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:51 AM EDT
The Virginia Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission agreed Thursday to fund up to $200,000 for a study on the socio-economic impact of uranium mining.
The study, which is separate from the scientific study set to begin soon, will address the effects of uranium mining on businesses, schools and the community in Pittsylvania County, Danville and Halifax County, according to Del. Terry Kilgore, chairman of the tobacco commission.
Kilgore also is chairman of the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy. Its Uranium Mining Subcommittee applied for the tobacco money and will oversee the study.
Virginia Uranium Inc. announced plans three years ago to explore mining uranium at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham.
Discovered in the early 1980s, the uranium deposit is one of the largest in the United States and is worth an estimated $7 billion.
The Uranium Mining Subcommittee's chairman, Del. Lee Ware of Powhatan, said the next step will be to poll members to select a date for a meeting to discuss the framework for the study.
"The format and procedures will be precisely as were the format and procedures in crafting the scope of study for the technical study being conducted by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences," Ware said.
"The purpose of the socio-economic study is to determine not only the economic ramifications of uranium mining in the commonwealth, but also the 'socio' ramifications, both pro and con, and these socio matters will be those qualitative 'quality-of-life' elements that are somewhat difficult to quantify."
The subcommittee will seek proposals from universities and other qualified organizations for the study, which is expected to begin late this summer or early fall and take about 18 months.
Retired state Sen. Charles Hawkins of Chatham, chairman emeritus of the tobacco commission, said the socio-economic study is a good idea.
"There are legitimate questions that need to be answered, said Hawkins. "The only way to work through this is to have a study. Hopefully, this will move the process along."
The 31-member tobacco commission also includes Clarence Bryant III and Buddy Mayhew, both of Blairs, and Del. Danny Marshall of Danville.
"I think it's very important that the second phase - the socio-economic study- be done," said Mayhew, a retired tobacco farmer.
Mayhew underscored the independent nature of the study, noting it will produce a "fair and unbiased" report.
"Hopefully, the study will come back and everybody will depend on it to be honest and fair," he said.
"I think that's important because obviously you have people with strong feelings on both sides.
"Hopefully, there won't be any finger pointing. The tobacco commission doesn't have an ax to grind on this issue."
Mayhew is an investor in Virginia Uranium Inc.
He spoke with the tobacco commission's attorney before the meeting and was advised he did not have a conflict of interest since Virginia Uranium was not receiving any tobacco funding.
"I admitted up front to everybody I had an interest in it," he said.
Mayhew said he could have abstained from the discussion, but felt it was a local issue and other commission members wanted to hear his opinion.
"I felt like the group was looking to me to speak on it since I'm right here at it," he said.
Mayhew said although he has invested in the company, he doesn't believe uranium should be mined unless it can be done safely.
"We've said from day one, if it can't be done safely, forget it," he said.
"But if it can be done safely, thing of the economic benefit to this area. It would be a big boost."
Executive director Neal Noyes said the tobacco commission's only role in the study will be funding.
"We're not going to be involved in the design of the study," he said. "That will be up to the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy."
Noyes, however, said the commission hopes organizations conducting similar studies on uranium mining will share information.
Danville Regional Foundation is moving forward with plans for its own independent socio-economic study on uranium mining and milling.
President and chief executive officer Karl Stauber said the foundation hopes to sponsor an "independent and rigorous socio-economic examination" of the effects of the proposed uranium mine, mill, and long-term waste management on people, institutions and economies within 50 miles of Coles Hill.
The study will look at uranium mining's benefits and dangers, including its effect on property values, taxes and institutions.
According to Stauber, the foundation received information from eight organizations and invited three nationally respected groups to submit full proposals.
Proposals are expected in June and will include a 10- to 15-page abstract, which will be posted on the foundation's Web site for a 30-day public comment period.
"These comments will be used by the foundation as part of the input in the selection of the organization to conduct the study," said the president.
Proposals will be reviewed by an "independent, diverse panel," with approval expected in August and a final report in January 2012.
"The report will be widely shared with the public and interested groups," said Stauber.
Stauber hopes the foundation's work will build on a statewide scientific study of uranium mining by the National Research Council in Washington, D.C.
The National Research Council signed a contract with Virginia Tech for the $1.4 million study in February and expects to begin work this summer.
The technical study, which is being funded by Virginia Uranium through Virginia Tech, will take about a year and a half.
A final report is due Dec. 1, 2011.
tim.davis@chathamstartribune.com
434-432-2791
Read more:
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2010/04/21/chatham/news/news50.txt
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Process begins for socioeconomic study of uranium mining
Comment: John Crane was not at this meeting, which is a shame.
By John Crane
Published: April 15, 2010
The process has begun for the second part of a study focusing on the socioeconomic impacts of uranium mining and milling in Virginia.
The Virginia Tobacco Commission’s executive committee voted Thursday during its meeting in Roanoke to recommend the commission supply up to $200,000 to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee to pay an entity to perform the socioeconomic study.
“We want to make sure that there was independent funding so this would have validity,” Tobacco Commission Executive Committee Chairman Delegate Terry Kilgore said Thursday.
Thursday’s vote was not unanimous. State Sen. Frank Ruff, R-15th District, voted against the idea.
The committee’s vote came with the stipulation that the Tobacco Commission review other similar socioeconomic studies, including one by the Danville Regional Foundation, to prevent duplication of the other analyses and to fill their research gaps, said Delegate Danny Marshall, R-Danville, a committee member who voted for the move.
“We want to make sure we don’t have five studies doing the same thing,” Marshall said Thursday.
The National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council are performing that study, which is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011.
Virginia currently has a moratorium on uranium mining and milling.
Eloise Nenon, a mining opponent and founding member of Southside Concerned Citizens in Chatham, said the decision was “great” but added public participation in the study should be allowed. The study should also examine the threats uranium mining and milling could pose to the area’s history, agriculture, air, water and public health, Nenon said.
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/process_begins_for_socioeconomic_study_of_uranium_mining/20129/
By John Crane
Published: April 15, 2010
The process has begun for the second part of a study focusing on the socioeconomic impacts of uranium mining and milling in Virginia.
The Virginia Tobacco Commission’s executive committee voted Thursday during its meeting in Roanoke to recommend the commission supply up to $200,000 to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee to pay an entity to perform the socioeconomic study.
“We want to make sure that there was independent funding so this would have validity,” Tobacco Commission Executive Committee Chairman Delegate Terry Kilgore said Thursday.
Thursday’s vote was not unanimous. State Sen. Frank Ruff, R-15th District, voted against the idea.
The committee’s vote came with the stipulation that the Tobacco Commission review other similar socioeconomic studies, including one by the Danville Regional Foundation, to prevent duplication of the other analyses and to fill their research gaps, said Delegate Danny Marshall, R-Danville, a committee member who voted for the move.
“We want to make sure we don’t have five studies doing the same thing,” Marshall said Thursday.
The National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council are performing that study, which is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011.
Virginia currently has a moratorium on uranium mining and milling.
Eloise Nenon, a mining opponent and founding member of Southside Concerned Citizens in Chatham, said the decision was “great” but added public participation in the study should be allowed. The study should also examine the threats uranium mining and milling could pose to the area’s history, agriculture, air, water and public health, Nenon said.
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/process_begins_for_socioeconomic_study_of_uranium_mining/20129/
Monday, April 19, 2010
Water Conservation Tips
Water, water everywhere, but is it safe to drink? Water quality and conservation have become a major issue here in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
Citizens concerned with the water they are drinking can follow a few conservation methods to help keep their own personal impact down and preserve the Bay for future generations.
Outdoor and Gardening Tips
•Construct a rain barrel in your yard to collect precipitation. Use the water collected to water your garden or other plants in your yard in lieu of a hose.
•Plant low-moisture plants around that yard that require less watering
•Mulch your garden and around trees and shrubs in your yard. This helps keep good moisture in around the roots and anchors the plant in place.
Household Tips
•Use natural cleaners like baking soda and hot water instead of harsh chemicals.
•Run water dependent appliances only when necessary.
•Collect and reuse the water used to wash fresh fruits or veggies to water house plants.
Personal Usage Tips
•Drink water from the tap instead of bottled water. It reduces waste from the bottles and also reduces global impact on water sources.
•Cut back on your time in the shower.
•Keep a bucket in the shower to collect the water wasted as you wait for it to run hot. Just like with rinse water, this can be used to water indoor or outdoor plants around the house.
Reducing your own personal impact will help you now and others in the future.
Water resources are important to our survival and we need to start preserving and protecting them.
Start small around your home and then work out to a community effort. Challenge your friends and family to follow the tips above with you. Campaign for green changes in your local government and for green causes statewide or nationally.
Do your part in the fight to keep our water resources clean.
Read more:
http://vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,258,928,0,html/Water-Conservation-Tips
Citizens concerned with the water they are drinking can follow a few conservation methods to help keep their own personal impact down and preserve the Bay for future generations.
Outdoor and Gardening Tips
•Construct a rain barrel in your yard to collect precipitation. Use the water collected to water your garden or other plants in your yard in lieu of a hose.
•Plant low-moisture plants around that yard that require less watering
•Mulch your garden and around trees and shrubs in your yard. This helps keep good moisture in around the roots and anchors the plant in place.
Household Tips
•Use natural cleaners like baking soda and hot water instead of harsh chemicals.
•Run water dependent appliances only when necessary.
•Collect and reuse the water used to wash fresh fruits or veggies to water house plants.
Personal Usage Tips
•Drink water from the tap instead of bottled water. It reduces waste from the bottles and also reduces global impact on water sources.
•Cut back on your time in the shower.
•Keep a bucket in the shower to collect the water wasted as you wait for it to run hot. Just like with rinse water, this can be used to water indoor or outdoor plants around the house.
Reducing your own personal impact will help you now and others in the future.
Water resources are important to our survival and we need to start preserving and protecting them.
Start small around your home and then work out to a community effort. Challenge your friends and family to follow the tips above with you. Campaign for green changes in your local government and for green causes statewide or nationally.
Do your part in the fight to keep our water resources clean.
Read more:
http://vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,258,928,0,html/Water-Conservation-Tips
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Probabilistic Monitoring: Determining the quality of Virginia’s waters
June 2006
If Virginia’s streams and rivers were stretched end to end, they would circle the Earth twice. So determining the over- all quality of Virginia’s waters is a challenge, given their extent and the time and cost of water monitoring.
Unde-terred, DEQ’s Probabilistic Monitoring Program is tackling this task.
With support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DEQ has been working on this effort since 2000, funded in part by $589,000 in competitive grants from EPA. About 20 people from DEQ’s central and regional offices participate on the team.
Monitoring water quality
DEQ collects water quality information at each monitoring site at least twice, once in the spring and once in the fall.
The program has monitored chemical, biological and habi-tat conditions at 280 sites. Staff members use laboratory analysis of water and sediment samples to monitor chemi-cal parameters such as nutrients and metals.
They conduct biological tests by counting the number and type of insects in streambeds, for example, and study sediment size to as-sist in determining habitat conditions.
Read more:
http://www.deq.state.va.us/info/documents/GetTheFacts.ProbMon.pdf
If Virginia’s streams and rivers were stretched end to end, they would circle the Earth twice. So determining the over- all quality of Virginia’s waters is a challenge, given their extent and the time and cost of water monitoring.
Unde-terred, DEQ’s Probabilistic Monitoring Program is tackling this task.
With support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DEQ has been working on this effort since 2000, funded in part by $589,000 in competitive grants from EPA. About 20 people from DEQ’s central and regional offices participate on the team.
Monitoring water quality
DEQ collects water quality information at each monitoring site at least twice, once in the spring and once in the fall.
The program has monitored chemical, biological and habi-tat conditions at 280 sites. Staff members use laboratory analysis of water and sediment samples to monitor chemi-cal parameters such as nutrients and metals.
They conduct biological tests by counting the number and type of insects in streambeds, for example, and study sediment size to as-sist in determining habitat conditions.
Read more:
http://www.deq.state.va.us/info/documents/GetTheFacts.ProbMon.pdf
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Ways to Make Your Home More Energy Efficient
September 3, 2009
By Harvey M. Sachs, Ph.D.
The house is a system. You save money and improve performance when you take cost-effective measures that reduce building loads, and then install systems and appliances that are the right size to meet the reduced loads. In general, over-sizing worsens performance and increases costs.
The most effective strategy for improving household energy efficiency is to first target your home’s envelope—walls, attic, windows, and doors. Then improve the energy efficiency of systems, such as heating, cooling, lighting, and appliances. Finally, consider clean energy generation (solar, geothermal, and so on).
1. Make sure your walls and attic are well insulated. Effective insulation slows the rate that heat flows out of the house in winter or into the house in summer, so less energy is required to heat or cool the house.
2. Upgrade or replace windows. If your windows are old and leaky, it may be time to replace them with energy-efficient models or boost their efficiency with weatherstripping and storm windows.
3. Plant shade trees and shrubs around your house.If your house is older, with relatively poor insulation and windows, good landscaping (particularly deciduous trees) can save energy, especially if planted on the house’s west side.
4. Replace an older furnace with a high-efficiency system. If your furnace was built before 1992 and has a standing pilot, it probably wastes 35 percent of the fuel it uses, and it is probably near the end of its service life. In this case, in all but the warmest climates, ACEEE recommends early replacement with a condensing furnace with annual efficiency of at least 90 percent. This type of furnace wastes no more than 10 percent of the natural gas you buy, and may save you as much as 27 percent on your heating bill.
5. Improve the efficiency of your hot water system. Turn down the temperature of your water heater to the warm setting (120°F). Use low-flow fixtures for showers and baths.
6. Replace incandescent lightbulbs with compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs).CFLs can save three-quarters of the electricity used by incandescents. Most people don’t think about the fact that the electricity to run a lightbulb costs much more than the bulb itself. One of the new CFLs costs about two or three dollars, but it lasts 10,000 hours and uses only about 27 watts to generate as much light as a 100-watt incandescent bulb. During its life, it uses about $22 in electricity, so the total cost is about $25.
7. If you buy a new refrigerator, don’t leave the old one plugged in. In contrast, the new fridge, particularly if Energy Star rated, may cost only $30–60 per year to run because refrigerator efficiency has improved so much in the past three decades.
8. Schedule an energy audit for more expert advice on your home as a whole.Energy auditors and raters use specialized tools and skills to evaluate your home and recommend the most cost-effective measures to improve its comfort and efficiency.
Read more:
http://greenhomeguide.com/know-how/article/9-ways-to-make-your-home-more-energy-efficient
Friday, April 16, 2010
Earth Day is one week away! Do you have plans yet?
Earth Day 2010. Live it and share!
Here are some ways you can join the Earth-wide day of service and celebration.
Pick 5 for the Environment - International Earth Day Edition
Commit to at least 5 actions you'll take to protect the environment with Pick 5.
We've worked with the U.S. Department of State to expand the list of actions; now you can Pick 5 all over the Earth. One by one, five by five, our actions multiply to make the difference.
Find events and service activities on EPA's Earth Day site, then share the ‘before and after’ story on the Pick 5 Facebook fan page and pictures in the Pick 5 Flickr group.
Click link below to go to EPA: http://www.epa.gov/pick5/
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
How Green Is Virginia?
Earth Day's next Thursday, and thousands of Americans are celebrating by pledging to do at least one simple thing to help the environment. whether it's reusing shopping bags or writing to Congress.
As pledges come in from around the country, the Sierra Club's Earth Day map shows how green each state is compared with all the others (based on population).
Want to know how green Virginia is, click (or cut or past ) here to found out:
http://www.sierraclub.org/earthday/sweepstakes/default.aspx?s_src=110DNIED01
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Water & Uranium Mining
corysfilmstuff — April 13, 2010 — Contest entry I edited for www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice using Final Cut Pro.
Water & Uranium Mining
According to the Environmental Protection Agency's TENORM Report, "Water is perhaps the most significant means of dispersal of uranium and related [radioactive materials] in the environment from mines and mine wastes...Uranium is very soluble in acidic and alkaline waters and can be transported easily from a mine site." This is of great concern. If Virginia allows uranium mining, it would be the first state to do so in the United States in a climate where rainfall exceeds evaporation.
Contaminated Water
Water is used (and contaminated) in the milling process. In addition, rain falling on waste products from the mining and milling processes picks up radioactive and other toxic elements which can end up and remain in surface and ground waters for thousands of years. In the 1980s, Marline Uranium estimated that the waste pile from their proposed Virginia operation would cover 930 acres, 100 feet deep.
At the recently proposed Coles Hill uranium mining site in Pittsylvania County, there will be hundreds of acres of radioactive waste and millions of gallons of water contaminated in the mining and milling processes. To mine uranium safely, hundreds of millions of gallons of contaminated and radioactive water will have to be prevented from running into Virginia streams or leaching into the ground water. Virginia's most populous communities lie downstream of the uranium leases filed in the 1980s.
Virginia's Acute Rainfall Events
Not only does the Virginia Piedmont have greater annual rainfall than other uranium mining communities, it also has greater acute rainfall events. Two of the top five most intense 12-hour storms in the United States occurred in the Virginia Piedmont.
Twenty-seven inches of rain fell on Nelson County in 1969. Twenty-nine inches fell in Madison County in 1995. Significant flooding also happened in Pittsylvania County in 1996 during Hurricane Fran.
As noted by Elizabeth Haskell in her dissent to the recommendation of the Uranium Subcommittee/Uranium Administrative Group: "In Virginia's wet climate where water is discharged from the site and filters through tailings, the transmittal of radiation to people through streams and the groundwater is a major issue."
Conclusion
Such a risky experiment should not be conducted on Virginia.
Read more:
http://pecva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,391,1629,0,html/Water-amp-Uranium-Mining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6qle_ZrbxE
Monday, April 12, 2010
Stewardship Virginia: Building a Better Outdoors -Today, Tomorrow... Every Day
April 1 - May 31 and Sept. 1 - Oct. 31
Building a Better Outdoors -Today, Tomorrow... Every Day
Stewardship Virginia is a statewide initiative held twice annually to help citizens with projects that enhance and conserve Virginia's natural and cultural resources. Its focus is on projects that
•enhance water quality
•control invasive species
•improve recreational resources
•preserve historic and cultural resources
•conserve natural heritage resources
•educate people about recreational, historical, cultural, wildlife, forest and water resources
•improve wildlife habitat and tree cover
Interested? Then get involved!
Get the word out about Stewardship Virginia by mentioning it in your newsletter, posting flyers on bulletin boards or promoting it with paychecks or organizational mailings. Businesses can grant employees time off to help with an event. Business can also contribute directly to the campaign to help defray the costs of promotional material.
Stewardship Virginia... as simple as 1, 2, 3
1. Plan and conduct a volunteer project or event or join an existing one. Our resource guide makes it easy to get great ideas about projects and where to go to get started. Come up with your own unique projects, or call to speak with the project coordinator for ideas and guidance.
2. Complete a registration form and send it in. Your event will be added to our website, ensuring greater exposure.
3. Give volunteers a big "thank you" by handing out certificates signed by the governor. These will be sent to you after receiving your registration.
For more information on how to participate in or contribute to Stewardship Virginia, call 1-877-42-WATER. In Richmond call (804) 786-5056, fax (804) 371-0315 or email: bonnie.phillips@dcr.virginia.gov
Mailing Address:
Bonnie Phillips, DCR
203 Governor Street, 4th Floor
Richmond, VA 23219
Read more:
http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/stewardship/
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Virginia Conservation Network: Symposium on Uranium Mining
from VCN...Virginia Conservation Network.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010 at 3:08pm
On Thursday March 11th, VCN and several of our affiliate groups hosted a symposium on uranium mining.
Experts discussed the potential health impacts that could occur in Virginia if the purposed Coles Hill uranium deposits are mined in Pittsylviania County. Around 175 people attended the event.
There is currently a ban on uranium mining that has been in place in Virginia since the 1980's but Virginia Uranium, the company purposing the Coles Hill mine, wants this ban lifted. They claim this mining will be not only safe but also will stimulate the local economy.
Speakers at the symposium directly addressed these issues.
Paul Robinson, of the Southwest Research & Information Center, believes not only are the deposits much smaller, meaning less valuable, than Virginia Uranium claims, but they would also effect other aspects of Pittsylviania County's economy. Robinson believes that property values would drop and farmers would be unable to sell the crops they grow in the area.
The Health impacts of uranium mining was a major topic and Dr. Doug Brugge of Tufts University cited many studies showing the variety of horrible health impacts that can be transmitted from working directly in the mines or even just breathing air or drinking water from areas surrounding the mine.
Other experts told of their first hand experiences with uranium mining in Africa, Canada, and the Southwest United States.
South Central Virginia is not the only area that may be directly effect by this uranium mining.
Many expect Virginia Beach's water supply, Lake Gaston, may be contaminated and that is why the panel of experts traveled to Norfolk the following day to answer questions on that subject.
The experts that spoke at both of these events are not in favor of the proposed mining in Virginia and hope that their information will allow citizens and lawmakers to make their own informed opinions and decisions.
Click here to view footage of the experts:
http://vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,370,0,0,html/Uranium-Mining-Symposium
Nathan Lott
Executive Director
Read more:
http://ko-kr.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=383408580145&comments&ref=mf
Friday, April 9, 2010
EPA Launches Blog on Acid Rain
CONTACT:
Cathy Milbourn
milbourn.cathy@epa.gov
202-564-7849
202-564-4355
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 8, 2010
EPA Launches Blog on Acid Rain
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is hosting a month-long online discussion to expand the conversation on acid rain. Acid rain is a serious environmental problem that affects large parts of the United States and is particularly damaging to lakes, streams, and forests and the plants and animals that live in these ecosystems. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the pollutants that form acid rain, can cause serious respiratory illnesses and premature death.
Starting today, EPA is posting daily blogs to inform and engage the public in an interactive Web discussion. Topics will include an overview of acid rain and its effects, a description of the Acid Rain Program’s cap and trade policy, an explanation of how EPA monitors power plant emissions, and how air and water quality monitoring data are used to measure environmental improvements.
EPA established the Acid Rain Program 20 years ago under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and it requires major emission reductions of sulfur dioxide SO2 and nitrogen oxide NOx from the electric power industry. The program sets a permanent cap on the total amount of SO2 that may be emitted by electric generating units in the United States, and includes provisions for trading and banking allowances. Since the first year of the program in 1995, SO2 and NOx emissions have each been cut by more than 60 percent.
For the kickoff Greenversations blog: http://blog.epa.gov/blog/
For the rest of the blog series: http://blog.epa.gov/acidrain/
To follow the series on Facebook and Twitter: www.facebook.com/EPAairmarkets and www.twitter.com/EPAairmarkets
Read more:
http://blog.epa.gov/acidrain/
Thursday, April 8, 2010
7th Southwest Uranium Summit
This Seventh Generation Fund video production highlights important aspects of the 7th Southwest Uranium Summit.
Read more:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SevenGenFund
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Virginia Beach reveals uranium mining study panel
Flooding at Proposed Open Pit Uranium Mining, Milling and Tailings Pond
By John Crane
Published: April 6, 2010
Virginia Beach has revealed who will make up the panel of experts that will critique the city’s study of uranium mining and milling’s potential effects on its water supply.
The resort city will study what a proposed Pittsylvania County uranium mine and mill could do to its water supply in the event of a weather-related disaster.
The city is concerned about uranium mining and milling because Lake Gaston, a major source of Virginia Beach’s drinking water, is located downstream from Coles Hill, site of the proposed project.
Five experts will review the study expected to be complete in the fall, to make sure it will “stick to science, to the facts,” said Tom Leahy, Virginia Beach’s director of public utilities.
The five experts are:
Daniel Gillen, a retired Nuclear Regulatory Commission supervisor and senior executive service manager. His expertise is in uranium recovery facilities and mill tailings impoundments.
Scott Brooks, an expert in radionuclide contamination of water who works in the environmental sciences division at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tenn.
Marcelo H. Garcia, Chester and Helen Siess professor at the University of Illinois and an expert in sediment transport technology.
S. Rocky Durrans, environmental and water resources engineering professor at the University of Alabama. Durrans is an expert in statistical modeling of hydrologic and meteorologic extremes, including floods, droughts and extreme precipitation.
Gary Charles Schafran, professor and chair at Old Dominion University’s civil and environmental engineering department. Schafran is an expert in environmental engineering, water quality, aquatic chemistry, physicochemical treatment processes and water resources.
Virginia Beach’s study is being performed by Michael Baker Corp., an engineering firm, and will cost $437,000 and will be finished this fall. The city has $150 million invested in the Lake Gaston project, in addition to $200 million in indirect investment through an agreement with Norfolk. Lake Gaston water is pumped into one of Norfolk’s water supply lakes, where that city treats it and gives it back to Virginia Beach.
Patrick Wales, geologist and spokesman for Virginia Uranium Inc., said of the city’s study panel, “It sounds like they’re going about it in a comprehensive way.”
Virginia Beach’s study will assess the impacts of a major storm and flooding and estimate levels of contaminated sediment reaching Kerr Reservoir flowing into Lake Gaston, which supplies drinking water to Virginia Beach, and examine potential increase in background radiation in the reservoir. The results of Virginia Beach’s study will be given to the NAS.
Leahy pointed to a large-scale storm — one in Nelson County in 1969 — as an example of a catastrophic rain fall that could cause flooding. The storm caused 2,000 years worth of erosion in a single night, whereas NRC standards only require tailings confinement cells to resist erosion for 200 years, Leahy said. The study will consider the volume of sediment released, initial radioactivity level of milling tailings and the amount of tailings that will remain as sediment and how much will dissolve in the water.
Leahy said he would rather see the uranium mine “in someone else’s watershed,” but added that he’s not out to stymie VUI’s plans.
“I’m not trying to stop it, but I’m trying to get the facts out there,” he said.
The study will include computer-generated modeling of catastrophic rainfall events, Leahy said. It may include a second phase if its first part says mining and milling would be detrimental to Virginia Beach’s water supply. The second phase would examine the results in more detail and could run the study’s costs up to seven figures.
Virginia Beach passed a strongly-worded resolution in December 2008 opposing the lifting of the moratorium on uranium mining and milling without a study demonstrating that there would “be no significant release of radioactive sediments downstream under any circumstances.”
“From the resolution, it’s clear where they stand on the issue of uranium mining,” Wales said, adding that he will be interested in seeing the panel’s — and the study’s — conclusion.
William Kearney, spokesman with the NAS, said the academy could be interested in the results from the Virginia Beach study.
“If Virginia Beach’s review is relevant, they would welcome that input as well,” Kearney said.
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/virginia_beach_reveals_uranium_mining_study_panel/19782/
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
World Experts presentations on the Health And Socio-Economic Impacts Of Uranium Mining
World Experts presentations on the Health And Socio-Economic Impacts Of Uranium Mining
Douglas Brugge, Tufts University “Health Impacts of Uranium Mining”
•Presentation: Health Effects of Uranium Mining: New Research Findings
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/bruggeuraniumhealtheffects.pdf
Manuel Pino, Scottsdale Community College “History of Uranium Mining on Native Americans”
•Presentation: DINEH Health Surveys on Uranium Mining
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/pinojackpilemine.pdf
•Presentation: Jackpine Uranium Mine
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/pinodinehhealthsurveys.pdf
Paul Robinson, Southwest Research & Information Center “Global Overview and the Virginia Situation”
•Presentation: Uranium Markets and Techniques
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/robinsonuraniumarketsandtechniques.pdf
Rianne Teule, Greenpeace “Report on Niger Africa’s Experience with Uranium Mining”
•Presentation: Uranium Mining Case Study in Niger
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/teulenigercasestudy.pdf
Gordon Edwards, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility “The Canadian Experience with Uranium”
•Presentation: Uranium Mining: The Radioactive Legacy
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/edwardsuraniumhistoryandcanadianmining.pdf
Todd Benson, Piedmont Environmental Council "Overview of the Virginia Situation"
•Presentation: History of Uranium Mining in Virginia
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/bensonuraniumdepositsinva.pdf
Kay Slaughter, Southern Environmental Law Center "Legalities of Uranium Mining"
•Presentation: Uranium Mining Legal Primer in Virginia
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/slaughterlegalprimer.pdf
Read more:
Please click on the link :
http://www.vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,370,0,0,html/Uranium-Mining-Symposium
Douglas Brugge, Tufts University “Health Impacts of Uranium Mining”
•Presentation: Health Effects of Uranium Mining: New Research Findings
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/bruggeuraniumhealtheffects.pdf
Manuel Pino, Scottsdale Community College “History of Uranium Mining on Native Americans”
•Presentation: DINEH Health Surveys on Uranium Mining
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/pinojackpilemine.pdf
•Presentation: Jackpine Uranium Mine
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/pinodinehhealthsurveys.pdf
Paul Robinson, Southwest Research & Information Center “Global Overview and the Virginia Situation”
•Presentation: Uranium Markets and Techniques
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/robinsonuraniumarketsandtechniques.pdf
Rianne Teule, Greenpeace “Report on Niger Africa’s Experience with Uranium Mining”
•Presentation: Uranium Mining Case Study in Niger
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/teulenigercasestudy.pdf
Gordon Edwards, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility “The Canadian Experience with Uranium”
•Presentation: Uranium Mining: The Radioactive Legacy
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/edwardsuraniumhistoryandcanadianmining.pdf
Todd Benson, Piedmont Environmental Council "Overview of the Virginia Situation"
•Presentation: History of Uranium Mining in Virginia
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/bensonuraniumdepositsinva.pdf
Kay Slaughter, Southern Environmental Law Center "Legalities of Uranium Mining"
•Presentation: Uranium Mining Legal Primer in Virginia
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/slaughterlegalprimer.pdf
Read more:
Please click on the link :
http://www.vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,370,0,0,html/Uranium-Mining-Symposium
Monday, April 5, 2010
Lillian Franklin Lovelace: Loved her family and farm! She will be greatly missed!
Monday, April 5, 2010 1:30 PM EDT
GRETNA - Mrs. Lillian Franklin Lovelace, age 86, of Gretna died Easter Sunday, April 4, 2010, at Gretna Health & Rehab in Gretna.
Born April 21, 1923, in Pittsylvania County where she spent her entire life.
She lived on a farm growing tobacco and gardens. She loved working with flowers, canning, and candy making.
Mrs. Lovelace was a member of First Baptist Church of Gretna and attended Greenfield Baptist Church. She was an employee of Chatham Knitting Mills for several years and retired from Craddock Terry Shoe Corp after 16 years due to health problems.
Funeral services will be conducted 11:00 a.m. Tuesday, April 6, at Greenfield Baptist Church by Rev. R.G. Rowland and Rev. Barry Crumpton. Burial will follow in Gretna Burial Park.
The family suggests memorials be made to their favorite charity.
Colbert-Moran Funeral Home, Gretna, is assisting the family.
Read more:
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2010/04/05/chatham/obituaries/obit11.txt
Paul Robinson: “Global Overview and the Virginia Uranium Mining Situation”
•Presentation: Uranium Markets and Techniques
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/robinsonuraniumarketsandtechniques.pdf
VCNVAORG — March 31, 2010 — Paul Robinson provides an introduction to uranium mining
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the potential impacts to water quality from uranium mining.
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the costs of uranium and uranium mining
VCNVAORG — March 31, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses ways to learn more about uranium mining and ways to get involved.
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the shift from nuclear energy to renewable energy.
Read more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydQ_WqbOr7w
http://vcnva.org/anx/ass/library/52/robinsonuraniumarketsandtechniques.pdf
VCNVAORG — March 31, 2010 — Paul Robinson provides an introduction to uranium mining
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the potential impacts to water quality from uranium mining.
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the costs of uranium and uranium mining
VCNVAORG — March 31, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses ways to learn more about uranium mining and ways to get involved.
VCNVAORG — April 01, 2010 — Paul Robinson discusses the shift from nuclear energy to renewable energy.
Read more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydQ_WqbOr7w
Friday, April 2, 2010
Uranium Mining - Get the Facts
Uranium Mining - Get the Facts
For more than 20 years, a statewide moratorium has protected Virginians from the public health risks of uranium mining. Now a small group of investors wants the state to sanction their plans to mine and process uranium.
So what's the problem? No state with a climate and population density similar to Virginia’s has ever allowed the mining and milling of uranium. We can’t afford to experiment on Virginia. The risks to our rivers and drinking water are too great.
Virginia's History with Uranium Mining
•In the 1980s, uranium leases were filed on thousands of acres of land in Virginia.
•At that time, the Commonwealth of Virginia undertook an extensive study of uranium mining. It was costly, time consuming, and divisive.
•After the first year of study, the Virginia General Assembly, seeking to protect the public health and environment, banned uranium mining in Virginia. At the completion of the study, the General Assembly chose not to lift this moratorium.
•Proponents of uranium mining now want to lift the ban on uranium mining, arguing we should begin restudying the issue.
•While a study sounds harmless, the proponents have not demonstrated that uranium mining is any safer now than it was in the 80s—why should the Commonwealth reinvest time, money and energy to restudy a process already proven dangerous?
•Why should the Commonwealth risk the public’s health and the environment for an industry which has a shameful legacy in terms of human and environmental devastation?
•Virtually all uranium mining in the U.S. has occurred in sparsely populated regions of the arid West. Uranium mining in a more densely populated, higher-precipitation region such as Virginia presents an untested, new experiment for federal and state regulators.
•The Commonwealth should take no further action on a study or otherwise calculated to lift the moratorium on the mining and milling in Virginia until mining proponents provide reviewable information that demonstrates that mining and milling have been undertaken in at least five locations under conditions similar to Virginia's in such a manner that safeguards the environment, natural and historic resources, agricultural lands, and the health and well-being of citizens.
The Facts Speak For Themselves...
•The radioactive waste produced by a uranium mining and milling operation is stored on site for more than 1,000 years. Any leakage could contaminate waterways and wells.
•No uranium mining and milling operation has ever been licensed in the U.S. east of the Mississippi. The region’s wet climate and high population make it too risky.
•Uranium deposits exist throughout the Virginia Piedmont. Once the moratorium is lifted, additional mines will likely be proposed.
•The drinking water supply of Virginia Beach is downstream of the proposed mine in Southside. Other communities downstream of uranium deposits include Fredericksburg and Richmond.
•Uranium mined in Virginia would be sold on the global market to the highest bidder, with no guarantee that it would increase our energy independence.
•Investors seeking to mine uranium in Southside Virginia have planned to base their publicly traded company in Canada. There is no way to guarantee local control of such a company.
•Better, safer sources of uranium exist—including decommissioned Soviet warheads and reprocessed fuel—that are sufficient to supply U.S. power plants.
•The Virginia Energy Plan does not endorse uranium mining, but it does call for greater investments in energy efficiency as the key to energy independence.
What You Can Do
•Contact your state Senator and Delegate and ask them to oppose any attempts to lift the ban on uranium mining.
•Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper.
•Ask your local governing body or civic association to pass a resolution against uranium mining and to send a copy of the resolution to their state Senators and Delegates.
•Talk to your friends and neighbors about this serious issue and ask them to oppose any attempts to allow uranium mining in Virginia.
•Continue to visit this website for updates and check out the resources below.
Further Resources
•Piedmont Environmental Council
•Southern Environmental Law Center
•Sierra Club Virginia Chapter
•Southside Concerned Citizens
•U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risks from uranium
•Uranium Mining Powerpoint Presentation
•Uranium Mining VCN Position
Read more:
http://www.vcnva.org/anx/index.cfm/1,369,0,0,html/Uranium-Mining-Get-the-Facts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3iiPLWBti4&feature=channel
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Tobacco touted as future fuel
From: AP March 31, 2010 12:00AM
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA: Genetically modified tobacco could be used as biofuel to help solve the US energy crisis, researchers say.
The golden leaf is the latest in a series of possible biofuels such as switchgrass and algae to be floated as congress and US President Barack Obama stress the importance of securing alternative energy sources.
Tobacco would be beneficial because it would not affect a major food source, unlike other biofuels made from corn, soybeans and other crops.
The tobacco would not be burned to power vehicles, merely used to extract its oils and sugars.
Tobacco is an attractive "energy plant" because it can generate a large amount of oil and sugar more efficiently than other crops, said Vyacheslav Andrianov, a researcher at the Biotechnology Foundation Laboratories at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Read more:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/tobacco-touted-as-future-fuel/story-e6frg6so-1225847670557
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA: Genetically modified tobacco could be used as biofuel to help solve the US energy crisis, researchers say.
The golden leaf is the latest in a series of possible biofuels such as switchgrass and algae to be floated as congress and US President Barack Obama stress the importance of securing alternative energy sources.
Tobacco would be beneficial because it would not affect a major food source, unlike other biofuels made from corn, soybeans and other crops.
The tobacco would not be burned to power vehicles, merely used to extract its oils and sugars.
Tobacco is an attractive "energy plant" because it can generate a large amount of oil and sugar more efficiently than other crops, said Vyacheslav Andrianov, a researcher at the Biotechnology Foundation Laboratories at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Read more:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/tobacco-touted-as-future-fuel/story-e6frg6so-1225847670557
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




















