Seriously?
So, I was flipping through MacLeans last night, when I came across this article. On the face of it, it could be an interesting read, but as I started reading it I started getting horrified at how ridiculous most of it is. Was this a joke? Nope, apparently it was serious.
Allow me to explain...
1) Privately selling solar power back into the grid
Keeping in mind that Solar Cells are horribly expensive and inefficient, there is a claim that money is to be made. However, I can't help but feel like something's wrong.
It takes at least 10 or more year before you'd see a profit. However, since Solar Panel cells lose their efficiency over time, have a life expectancy of about 20 years, and they might suffer damage or failure costing you even more money to maintain than what you're pulling in. Or worse still, you might find yourself having to sell the house. The turnover just takes too long to be worth the cost.
Can you make money in Ontario by privately selling off solar power you generate yourself? Yes.
Can you make a profit on it? Not really.
Why can't you make a profit? Solar Panels are still outrageously expensive, and inefficient.
2) "Artificial Trees"
I can't be the only one who was thinking WTF is with these morons at this idea.
"Trees aren't great at sucking CO2 out of the air, let's make something better."
Could this lot be any more arrogant, and misguided. Trees need CO2 to drive their photosynthetic system to produce oxygen. And the reason they aren't "efficient" at it, is because they've evolved to leave enough CO2 in the atmosphere to produce a greenhouse effect that further drives their photosynthesis with the heat from the sunlight. There is nothing more efficient than them. Also by introducing something that sucks more CO2 than they do, what they've done is introduce something that is competing with Trees for CO2. When in direct competition with one another, the real tree will effectively starve from CO2 and not produce anymore oxygen. These fake trees will absorb CO2... but not produce any Oxygen as a byproduct. In short this is a horrific idea, and I hope that someone realizes how dangerous it is. Thankfully for the moment, it's super cost-prohibitive.
3) Above ground water troughs
Have these people completely forgotten that in the distant past, before the concept of storm drains and sewer systems had been invented, that the water would flow down troughs in streets? And that the reason underground water collection and sewers were invented was so that people wouldn't catch water-borne diseases and die young from it all being by virtue, contaminated? Hell, False Creek is one of the most water-contaminated areas in Vancouver. People used to swim there, but not any more because the water is so contaminated. How would making it flow above ground be any better? If anything it'd probably be worse.
4) Paint the town white
Daft, dumb, retarded idea. Oh god, black is bad because it absorbs light instead of reflecting it, and somehow this contributes to CO2 amounts in the air. WTF... W...T...F? Here's the thing, roads and tires are black for a very good reason. They absorb light, and in turn become heated from doing so. When they heat, they become sticky, being sticky icreases friction, which increases grip between the tire and the road. Painting the road white therefore means less heat in the road, meaning less friction, meaning less grip. It'd be a disaster.
Houses tend to have darker roofs because it helps a bit with the insulation. Keeping the attic warm during the winter, and cool during the summer. Which can be especially useful when snow's on the roof. A light colored roof would not have this property, and would thus be rather pointless. I'm not sure how the color black relates to CO2 amounts in the air, but I'm betting it's not worth the mayhem that would ensue on the roads for people on the road.
5) Hot Water without the Tank
I'm not entirely sure how this system works, but from the sounds of it, there are these devices that heat the water in the pipes that pass by them. But to me it sounds like these devices need to be constantly on all the time, which means they'd need quite a fair bit of power to run, and require significantly more maintenance than a tank would. At least with a hot water tank it's only on when it needs to be on and the water is there when you need it. But I can't see a situation where you'd need an unlimited amount of hot water at all times in a home at all for the price it costs. Not sure it does anything other than free up space somewhere in your house, unless the hot water tank is in a crawl space or basement, in which case it's out of the way anyways.
6) Take away the printer
Possibly the only ingenious practical idea in this article. If no printer is nearby, people won't spend the time it takes in the office to get to the printer unless they absolutely need to. Makes perfect sense since it'll also cut down on company costs as well. Smart idea.
7) Induction Stove
I like these things, if only for the nerd quotient attached to it. But, I'm not so sure it's here to stay yet as they're still fairly new. But I'd also think the Magnetic Wave crazies will come out of the woodwork when this becomes a bit more widespread. Needs to drop in price a little more to start becoming more practical.
8) The, "I can't believe I just read this" idea
According to the UN, about 40 per cent of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended-that’s a lot of babies spewing CO2 into the environment and consuming precious resources. So, of all the green technologies out there, birth control might be the most environmentally friendly.
I really don't have words to explain just how fucked up a person has to be to consider thinking this... nevermind publishing it. "Don't have kids, they will wreck the environment"?
"Be responsible, or everyone else suffers"? I just... ugh, I can't fathom how anyone could be so contemptable to people's kids, whether they were planned or not. That's just environmentalism gone off the deep end into the realm of immorality.
9) The Algae Solution
To be honest I barely understand what's going on here. Algae in clear external tubes on the outside of large buildings, using their photosynthetic behaviour, by pumping CO2 into those pipes produces a fuel that can used as a source of energy. On one hand, it's a neat idea, on the other, with all the methods in the article about eliminating CO2 including one on having a use for it is a bit contradictory. I am genuinely intrigued by this, because not only would excess algae have a use, instead of killing fish, it could also be used in this way by converting our excess CO2 into something usable for us. However, I can't imagine it being terribly efficient to build and maintain, since it needs a constant supply of sunlight, CO2, and a buyer for any excess fuel and energy produced. Good idea, but seems highly impractical.
10) Sharing
The last one makes me think they just put it in for laughs. But it's worded seriously, so I dunno. Save water by sharing a shower with your partner. Kind of amusing, as it seems like a bit of a no-brainer for married couples at first glance. But then I can't imagine couples sharing a shower all the time, every day. There are certain human habits in showering that should not involve another person sharing the time and space. Which begs the question, what kind of person would consider this a good idea? Probably someone who hasn't been married is what I'm thinking.
So the only good idea that seems realistic in this mess is to move the printer in the office as far away from employees as possible, to make printing things troublesome. *sigh*
Allow me to explain...
1) Privately selling solar power back into the grid
Keeping in mind that Solar Cells are horribly expensive and inefficient, there is a claim that money is to be made. However, I can't help but feel like something's wrong.
It takes at least 10 or more year before you'd see a profit. However, since Solar Panel cells lose their efficiency over time, have a life expectancy of about 20 years, and they might suffer damage or failure costing you even more money to maintain than what you're pulling in. Or worse still, you might find yourself having to sell the house. The turnover just takes too long to be worth the cost.
Can you make money in Ontario by privately selling off solar power you generate yourself? Yes.
Can you make a profit on it? Not really.
Why can't you make a profit? Solar Panels are still outrageously expensive, and inefficient.
2) "Artificial Trees"
I can't be the only one who was thinking WTF is with these morons at this idea.
"Trees aren't great at sucking CO2 out of the air, let's make something better."
Could this lot be any more arrogant, and misguided. Trees need CO2 to drive their photosynthetic system to produce oxygen. And the reason they aren't "efficient" at it, is because they've evolved to leave enough CO2 in the atmosphere to produce a greenhouse effect that further drives their photosynthesis with the heat from the sunlight. There is nothing more efficient than them. Also by introducing something that sucks more CO2 than they do, what they've done is introduce something that is competing with Trees for CO2. When in direct competition with one another, the real tree will effectively starve from CO2 and not produce anymore oxygen. These fake trees will absorb CO2... but not produce any Oxygen as a byproduct. In short this is a horrific idea, and I hope that someone realizes how dangerous it is. Thankfully for the moment, it's super cost-prohibitive.
3) Above ground water troughs
Have these people completely forgotten that in the distant past, before the concept of storm drains and sewer systems had been invented, that the water would flow down troughs in streets? And that the reason underground water collection and sewers were invented was so that people wouldn't catch water-borne diseases and die young from it all being by virtue, contaminated? Hell, False Creek is one of the most water-contaminated areas in Vancouver. People used to swim there, but not any more because the water is so contaminated. How would making it flow above ground be any better? If anything it'd probably be worse.
4) Paint the town white
Daft, dumb, retarded idea. Oh god, black is bad because it absorbs light instead of reflecting it, and somehow this contributes to CO2 amounts in the air. WTF... W...T...F? Here's the thing, roads and tires are black for a very good reason. They absorb light, and in turn become heated from doing so. When they heat, they become sticky, being sticky icreases friction, which increases grip between the tire and the road. Painting the road white therefore means less heat in the road, meaning less friction, meaning less grip. It'd be a disaster.
Houses tend to have darker roofs because it helps a bit with the insulation. Keeping the attic warm during the winter, and cool during the summer. Which can be especially useful when snow's on the roof. A light colored roof would not have this property, and would thus be rather pointless. I'm not sure how the color black relates to CO2 amounts in the air, but I'm betting it's not worth the mayhem that would ensue on the roads for people on the road.
5) Hot Water without the Tank
I'm not entirely sure how this system works, but from the sounds of it, there are these devices that heat the water in the pipes that pass by them. But to me it sounds like these devices need to be constantly on all the time, which means they'd need quite a fair bit of power to run, and require significantly more maintenance than a tank would. At least with a hot water tank it's only on when it needs to be on and the water is there when you need it. But I can't see a situation where you'd need an unlimited amount of hot water at all times in a home at all for the price it costs. Not sure it does anything other than free up space somewhere in your house, unless the hot water tank is in a crawl space or basement, in which case it's out of the way anyways.
6) Take away the printer
Possibly the only ingenious practical idea in this article. If no printer is nearby, people won't spend the time it takes in the office to get to the printer unless they absolutely need to. Makes perfect sense since it'll also cut down on company costs as well. Smart idea.
7) Induction Stove
I like these things, if only for the nerd quotient attached to it. But, I'm not so sure it's here to stay yet as they're still fairly new. But I'd also think the Magnetic Wave crazies will come out of the woodwork when this becomes a bit more widespread. Needs to drop in price a little more to start becoming more practical.
8) The, "I can't believe I just read this" idea
According to the UN, about 40 per cent of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended-that’s a lot of babies spewing CO2 into the environment and consuming precious resources. So, of all the green technologies out there, birth control might be the most environmentally friendly.
I really don't have words to explain just how fucked up a person has to be to consider thinking this... nevermind publishing it. "Don't have kids, they will wreck the environment"?
"Be responsible, or everyone else suffers"? I just... ugh, I can't fathom how anyone could be so contemptable to people's kids, whether they were planned or not. That's just environmentalism gone off the deep end into the realm of immorality.
9) The Algae Solution
To be honest I barely understand what's going on here. Algae in clear external tubes on the outside of large buildings, using their photosynthetic behaviour, by pumping CO2 into those pipes produces a fuel that can used as a source of energy. On one hand, it's a neat idea, on the other, with all the methods in the article about eliminating CO2 including one on having a use for it is a bit contradictory. I am genuinely intrigued by this, because not only would excess algae have a use, instead of killing fish, it could also be used in this way by converting our excess CO2 into something usable for us. However, I can't imagine it being terribly efficient to build and maintain, since it needs a constant supply of sunlight, CO2, and a buyer for any excess fuel and energy produced. Good idea, but seems highly impractical.
10) Sharing
The last one makes me think they just put it in for laughs. But it's worded seriously, so I dunno. Save water by sharing a shower with your partner. Kind of amusing, as it seems like a bit of a no-brainer for married couples at first glance. But then I can't imagine couples sharing a shower all the time, every day. There are certain human habits in showering that should not involve another person sharing the time and space. Which begs the question, what kind of person would consider this a good idea? Probably someone who hasn't been married is what I'm thinking.
So the only good idea that seems realistic in this mess is to move the printer in the office as far away from employees as possible, to make printing things troublesome. *sigh*