home

Community Solar On The Rise | Earth Wise

April 14, 2023 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Community solar is a way for people who can’t put solar on their own roofs to still take advantage of its benefits. Whether they can’t afford to install their own panels, have too much shade on their roof, or don’t even own a home, community solar is another way to participate in green energy.

Community solar – also called “shared solar” or “solar gardens” – is a kind of development in which consumers can subscribe to a large solar installation in their area and receive credits on their monthly utility bills for their share of the solar electricity produced.

The large majority of community solar installations are in six states: Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York. After substantial growth in community solar in 2022, New York now is the national leader, thanks to initiatives by the state government and the nonprofit sector. Some programs focus on giving low-income households access to solar. As of last fall, New York had over 728 community solar projects online.

One should understand that electrons are indistinguishable. The power generated by a community solar installation is not piped directly to subscribers’ homes. It just goes into the grid. Subscribers get credit for their share of the power, but that is essentially a matter of bookkeeping, not physics.

The federal government now has $7 billion that can be used for community solar as part of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund within the Inflation Reduction Act enacted last August. The EPA plans to award up to 60 grants to assist projects deploying residential and community solar. Research firm Wood Mackenzie forecasts the community solar market will double by 2027.

**********

Web Links

Community Solar Is About to Get a Surge in Federal Funding. So What Is Community Solar?

Photo, posted November 18, 2008, courtesy of the Oregon Department of Transportation via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

Electric Cars And The Remote Road Test | Earth Wise

August 18, 2022 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

One reason many people are hesitant about switching to an electric car is range anxiety, the fear that their car’s battery will die on them in the middle of a trip. It is pretty much the same thing as running out of gas, but somehow it seems like more of a danger.

Perhaps this was true when charging stations were few and far between and electric cars couldn’t go very far on a charge, but these days, the average electric car can drive about 200 miles on a charge and there are charging stations all over the place.

A big difference between gas cars and electric cars is that many people can charge their cars at home and start every day with the equivalent of a full tank. With an electric car, there is little reason to use up all nearly all the charge before filling up the tank again.

The truth is that most people don’t drive all that much on the average day anyway. In the US, the average driver goes about 39 miles a day. In Europe, is it considerably less. Yes, there are some people who drive 200 miles a day, but they are few and far between.

Remote and regional Australia is a place where distances between essential services can be very large. But a new study from the Australian National University found that even under those trying conditions, the vast majority of residents, about 93%, can go about their business even with the lower-range electric vehicles available on the market without having to recharge en route.

Electric cars may not be practical for some drivers, but for most, they are already a great choice.

**********

Web Links

Electric vehicles pass the remote road test

Electric car range and 5 reasons why your range anxiety is unwarranted

Photo, posted May 21, 2022, courtesy of Ivan Radic via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

A Smart Window | Earth Wise

March 31, 2022 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Researchers at Oxford University have developed a new adaptable smart window technology that has the potential of reducing the energy usage of the average home by a third.

The technology uses a spectrally tunable low-emissivity coating that can control the amount of heat that comes into a room without affecting the quality of the light that enters.

The thermal energy from the sun’s infrared rays is absorbed by the glass and then is re-emitted as heat. That heat can either be used to warm the room using transparent electrical heaters embedded in the glass or can be reflected away to cool the room. The windows can change according to seasonal needs.

The researchers built a prototype using a material called an active chalcogenide-based phase change material. When it is cold, the infrared rays from the sunlight are harvested and used to heat the building. When it is warm, the new glass can switch state to reflect the heat and reduce the need for air conditioning. The active phase change material is adjustable so that the amount of heat absorbed or reflected can be tuned for precise temperature control. There is essentially no effect on visible light passing through the window. Current low-emissivity glass for windows can reduce heat transfer, but its properties cannot be altered according to seasonal needs.

The researchers estimate that using windows fitted with the new prototype glass – including the energy required to control the film – would save 20 to 34% in energy usage annually compared to double-glazed windows found in many modern homes.

A spinout company from Oxford called Bodle Technologies is collaborating with two existing industrial partners to develop the technology further.

**********

Web Links

New adaptable smart window coating could help heat or cool a home and save energy

Photo, posted April 26, 2008, courtesy of Lima Andruska via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Record Levels Of Deforestation In The Amazon | Earth Wise

March 25, 2022 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

The Amazon rainforest is the largest rainforest in the world, covering more than 2.5 million square miles. It’s home to 10% of all known species in the world. The Amazon rainforest’s biodiversity is so rich that scientists are still discovering new plant and animal species today.

The Amazon rainforest absorbs huge amounts of carbon dioxide from Earth’s atmosphere, making it a key part of mitigating climate change. The vast rainforest acts as what’s known as a carbon sink. Simply put, a carbon sink is anything that absorbs more carbon from the atmosphere than it releases. But as trees in the Amazon disappear, so does the ability of the rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide.

Deforestation of the Amazon rainforest remains a major problem. According to satellite data from the Brazilian government, the number of trees cut down in the Brazilian Amazon in January far exceeded deforestation figures for the same month last year. Approximately 166 square miles of land was deforested in January alone, which is five times greater than what was lost in January, 2021.

Cattle ranching – both for beef and for leather – remains the leading cause of deforestation in the Amazon rainforest. Trees in the Amazon are also cut down for their wood, as well as to clear the land in order to grow food crops, such as soy, sugar, and oil palm.

Many companies have pledged to achieve “net zero” deforestation in their supply chains over the years, but most have not lived up to the commitment.

Deforestation is not only a major driver of climate change, but it’s also the leading cause of species extinction. Preserving the Amazon rainforest is vital.

**********

Web Links

Amazon deforestation: Record high destruction of trees in January

Greenpeace calls on fast food giants to take a stand against Bolsonaro’s Amazon destruction

Hundreds of Companies Promised to Help Save Forests. Did They?

Photo, posted July 14, 2018, courtesy of Alexander Gerst via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Animals And Wildfires | Earth Wise

December 8, 2021 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

More than a century of fire suppression strategies coupled with climate change has led to wildfires that are much larger and more frequent than those of the past. A question that arises is what happens to the animals in a region when a massive wildfire sweeps through the landscape?

For the most part, we don’t have much information on what animals do when the flames are burning or in the immediate days after the fire has ended. By chance, a group of researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the University of Washington had the opportunity to get that kind of information.

The researchers had been studying a group of black-tailed deer where the 2018 Mendocino Complex Fire occurred. That megafire torched more than 450,000 acres in Northern California, including the site where the researchers were studying the movements and feeding patterns of the deer.

The researchers had to evacuate the area during the fire, but their cameras, tracking collars, and other equipment continued to function. They learned that of the 18 deer studied, all survived. Deer that had to flee the flames returned home, even though many areas were completely burned and devoid of vegetation to eat. In fact, most of the deer returned within hours of the fire’s end while trees were still smoldering. The researchers continue to monitor the deer to look at the long-term effects of the fire.

The researchers speculate that loyalty to home is a tactic that likely helped the species survive past wildfires. Smaller fires encourage new vegetation growth, a tasty treat for deer. Whether the strategy will pay off as fires get more intense and more frequent remains to be seen.

**********

Web Links

After California’s 3rd-largest wildfire, deer returned home while trees were ‘still smoldering’

Photo, posted July 17, 2017, courtesy of C Watts via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Residential Gardens And Pollinators | Earth Wise

April 2, 2021 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

A new study led by the University of Bristol in the UK measured for the first time how much nectar is produced in urban areas to gauge the role of residential gardens in providing nutrients for pollinators. They discovered that home gardens accounted for the vast majority of the crucial nutrients for pollinators; in fact, some 85% on average.

The study found that gardens generated a daily average of about a teaspoon of the unique sugar-rich liquid found in flowers which pollinators drink for energy. A teaspoon sounds like very little, but it is enough to feed thousands of bees.

The research examined nectar production in four major UK towns and cities and measured nectar production in nearly 200 species of plants. The results were that the nectar supply in urban landscapes is more diverse than in farmland and nature reserves. In addition, gardens are critical because they produce the most nectar per unit area of land and actually cover the largest area of land in the cities studied. In those cities, nearly a third of the land comprised domestic gardens, which is six times the area of parks and 40 times the area of small green allotments.

The upshot of the research is that home gardeners have a huge role to play in pollinator conservation. Without domestic gardens, there would be far less food for pollinators that include bees, wasps, butterflies, moths, flies, and beetles. Thus, it is important for home gardeners to keep planting nectar-rich flowers, mow lawns less often to let dandelions, clovers, and daisies flourish, avoid harmful pesticides, and avoid covering gardens in paving, decking, or artificial turf.

**********

Web Links

Pioneering research reveals gardens are secret powerhouse for pollinators

Photo, posted June 23, 2018, courtesy of Wolfferl via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Street Trees And Depression | Earth Wise

February 25, 2021 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

**According to a study published in the journal Jama Network Open last fall, the COVID-19 pandemic has tripled the rate of depression in U.S. adults in all demographic groups.**

Previous studies have demonstrated that greenspaces in urban areas can have a positive effect on those people experiencing mental ill health. But most of those studies used self-reporting measures, which makes it difficult to compare results and draw conclusions.

As a result, an interdisciplinary research team from three research organizations in Germany tried to improve upon the work by involving an objective indicator: prescriptions of antidepressants. To figure out whether greenspaces – in this case street trees – could positively influence mental health, the researchers focused on how the number of street trees and their proximity to homes correlated to the number of prescribed antidepressants.

After analyzing data from nearly 10,000 people living in Leipzig, Germany, and combining the findings with data on city street trees, researchers were able to identify an association between antidepressant prescriptions and the number of street trees. The results were controlled for other factors known to be associated with depression, such as employment, gender, age, and body weight.

Having more trees within 100 meters of the home was associated with a reduced risk of being prescribed antidepressants. The association was especially strong for groups of people deprived of street trees.

Street trees in urban cities can not only serve as a nature-based solution for good mental health, but they can also contribute to climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation.

**********

Web Links

Street trees close to the home may reduce the risk of depression

Photo, posted August 17, 2011, courtesy of Aleksandr Zykov via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Shutting Down Pollution | Earth Wise

April 8, 2020 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

With much of the country shut down as the coronavirus forces people to stay at home, there has naturally been a drastic reduction of traffic on roads and highways. And with that decrease, there has been a dramatic reduction in pollution as well.

A satellite that detects emissions in the atmosphere linked to cars and trucks has observed huge declines in pollution in major metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles, Seattle, New York, Chicago, and Atlanta.

Los Angeles is infamous for its rush-hour traffic but that has pretty much ceased to exist. Similar changes can be seen in the San Francisco Bay Area, where nearly 7 million residents have been ordered to shelter in place. New York City is less dependent on car travel than in other metro areas, but the shutdown of office buildings, schools, and restaurants has nonetheless resulted in a substantial reduction of traffic on the streets of the city.

While this sudden decline in air pollution over U.S. cities has some near-term health benefits, those benefits are likely to be fairly minor in the big picture. When the coronavirus outbreak subsides and people are allowed to leave their homes and go back to their normal lives, air pollution will most certainly rebound to previous levels. In any event, studies have shown that long-term exposure to air pollution has a larger impact on public health than any transient events.

Having much cleaner air for a while is certainly a good thing, but this shutdown is not a sustainable way to reduce air pollution and the long-term effects of the coronavirus crisis will certainly not be positive.

**********

Web Links

Traffic and Pollution Plummet as U.S. Cities Shut Down for Coronavirus

Photo, posted March 15, 2020, courtesy of Tom Collins via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Meal Kits And The Environment

June 11, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Meal kit services have become extremely popular in recent years. These are companies that deliver a box of pre-portioned ingredients and a chef-created recipe to your door to make home-cooked meals easy and practical for busy people. Leading companies like Blue Apron, HelloFresh, and Plated have been joined by dozens of others competing in the meal kit market. As of last year, annual sales for these things were over $3 billion and growing at more than a 20% annual rate.

A major rap against meal kits has been their environmental impact, mostly centered around the amount of packaging waste they generate. While there is most certainly lots of packaging waste associated with meal kits, it turns out that their overall carbon footprint is actually rather good compared with conventional ways to make homecooked meals.

A study from the University of Michigan looked at the cradle-to-grave impact of meal kits, taking into account every major step in the lifetime of the food ingredients and the packaging – agricultural production, packaging production, distribution, supply chain losses, consumption, and waste generation.

Surprisingly, meal kits have a much lower overall carbon footprint than the same meals made from ingredients purchased at the grocery store – even including their packaging. The main reason is that pre-portioned ingredients and a streamlined supply chain lower overall food losses and waste for meal kits compared to store-bought meals. Pre-portioning simply results in fewer ingredients that end up being wasted. Meal kits also have radically different supply chain structures than foods sold in supermarkets.

Whether the economics and culinary aspects of meals kits are advantageous for many people is an open question, but apparently from an environmental perspective, they are just fine.

**********

Web Links

Climate change has worsened global economic inequality

Photo, posted June 11, 2018, courtesy of Marco Verch via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Reducing Polar Bear Attacks

April 8, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

The increasing reduction of sea ice in the Arctic is changing the behavior of polar bears. Because they are spending more time on land, they are interacting with people much more frequently, occasionally with deadly results.

A study, published in 2017, looked at 144 years’ worth of polar bear attacks on humans in the Arctic. Between 1960 and 2009, there were a reported 47 attacks by polar bears on people – between 7 and 12 per decade. Between 2010 and 2014, as sea ice reached record lows, there were 15 attacks, a record for a four-year period. Since 2000, 88% of attacks have occurred between July and December, when sea ice is at its lowest level of the year.

Last July, a young male polar bear attacked and killed a man who was berry picking with his children. A month later, a mother polar bear attacked and killed an Inuit hunter and injured two others. This was the first known fatal attack by a mother polar bear.

As a result, Inuit communities in the Nunavut region are asking for higher legal polar bear harvest quotas, arguing that bear populations have increased to a dangerous level.

These recent human fatalities have also provided an impetus for developing new non-lethal conflict-resolution tools than can be used in northern communities before more people as well as bears are killed.

There are now polar bear patrol teams tasked with driving bears away from settlements. There is a bear hotline and electric fencing around sled dog compounds.

The changing face of the Arctic is creating growing stress on the polar bear population and on the people who make their home in that region.

**********