Subscribe to feed

Posts Tagged ‘greenhouse gas emissions’

Global warming is one of the “hottest” issues nowadays. The current climate change is the worst yet to happen. Global warming is an overall increase in world temperature which is attributed to the increasing number of greenhouse gases trapped in the atmosphere. Searching an alternative energy source is considered a way of reducing the toxic emissions.

Greenhouse gases can be produced both by natural and industrial processes. The most abundant greenhouse gases on earth’s atmosphere are water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone and CFCs.

There are several sources of greenhouse gases. Burning of fossil fuels and deforestation lead to higher concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Without the trees and plants to take in the carbon dioxide emitted by burning fossil fuels, natural gas and petroleum products, all of the CO2 emitted stays in the atmosphere.

Also the use of CFCs or chlorofluorocarbons in refrigeration systems and in fire suppression systems and other manufacturing processes also increase the greenhouse content of our atmosphere. While the use of non-organic fertilizers in agriculture also lead to higher nitrous oxide concentrations, another greenhouse gas.

In the United States, greenhouse gas emissions mainly come from the use of fossil fuels as energy source. Approximately 82 percent of the greenhouse gas emission in the United States in 2006 came from the combustion of coal, natural gas and petroleum (United States Energy Information Administration). Meanwhile in Asia, Chine is expected to increase its emission of greenhouse gas because of the construction of old-fashioned power plants in its internal provinces. Currently, the carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere are the highest in 150,000 years. The 1990s was most likely the warmest decade in history, while 1998 was the warmest year (Greenpeace).

Not controlling the greenhouse gas being emitted by human activity can increase climate change the next hundred years that will be much faster than anything known and recorded in history. There are necessary steps to be undertaken to control the toxic emission that will soon be killing us.

To minimize the consumption of oil, petroleum and other fossil fuel, we should use energy efficiently. Energy that we use should be generated from renewable energy source, which would mean harnessing the natural energy from the sun, winds, crops, tides and waves.

Green energy is another term used to describe sources of energy that are considered to be environmentally friendly, which is also similar to the renewable sources of energy.

There are numerous ways of generating electricity and energy from renewable and natural sources that generate clean and safe energy. Wind, sun, and heat can generate electricity for less price and less carbon emission than those of coal and even gas.

Shifting the world’s attention to alternative fuel source other than relying on fossil fuel is among the solutions in resolving the drastic climate change. Greenpeace cited that with renewable energy and using it smartly, can deliver half of the world’s energy needs by 2050. Greenpeace also cited that it is feasible to reduce carbon dioxide emission to almost 50 percent within the next 43 years.

Governments are taking steps to use and tap alternative energy sources as main source of energy. The European Union leaders made an agreement in March 2007 to ensure that 20 percent of their nation’s energy should come from renewable fuels by 2020. This is part of their effort to cut carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gas. There are even governments offering incentives to their residents who are using green energy.

Alternative energy source may not be the only way to reduce the greenhouse emission that human activity produce. There are simple ways in which we can do to contribute in reducing toxic gas emission and mitigate global warming.

Have a look at www.greenenergygroups.com

Lucas Price – http://thedownloadshub.com/

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/warming-up-alternative-energy-source-and-global-warming-1431928.html

The individual market for carbon offsets is growing and San Francisco airport (SFO) has just done their part to make carbon offsets more available to the common traveler with their new Climate Passport kiosks.

First, what are carbon offsets?

Carbon offsets are monetary units that go towards funding projects to make up for the environmental damage done from carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.  Basically, the purchase of one carbon offset represents the effort to offset the damage caused by one metric ton of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gas.  The money could go to projects such as wind farms, hydroelectric dams, destruction of landfill methane, or reforestation projects.  

It has been common for large corporations and governments to buy carbon offsets in efforts to meet the caps from the amount of carbon dioxide they are permitted to emit.  However, there is also a smaller individual market for carbon offsets of which SFO is trying to take advantage. SFO is the first airport to provide these carbon offset kiosks where one can voluntarily buy carbon offsets to compensate for the carbon dioxide their part in a flight will emit.   

How to purchase a carbon offset at SFO.

To purchase carbon offsets at SFO, you can visit one of three of their Climate Passport kiosk, enter your flight information, and let the kiosk calculate the pounds of carbon dioxide you are responsible for from your particular flight.  Then if you decide you want to fund a project to offset the damage done by your flight, you can purchase the amount of carbon offsets a $13.50 per ton needed to cover your portion.  For instance, if you have a round-trip from SFO to New York’s JFK, it will cost $23.42 to cover your part, hardly more than cheap SFO airport parking.  

Where is your money going?

Carbon offsets purchased at The Climate Passport kiosks at SFO will fund local projects—currently, a reforestation project in Mendocino County and to a bio-diesel fueling project in San Francisco.

Who’s to say what the future holds for the individual market for carbon offsets, but at least SFO is making their kiosks available and convenient for those travelers who would like to do their part to undo the carbon footprint they have create during their travels.

Ryan Frank is a 23 year writer and blogger living in San Diego, CA.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/new-kiosks-at-sfo-sells-carbon-offsets-1416519.html

In news out of Oregon, it appears that the state’s biggest solar energy project, now about 25 percent on its way to completion, will be negatively impacted by House Bill 2472, which proposes reducing or restricting the state’s Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC), offered by the Oregon Department of Energy.

As initially drafted, the BETC provides 50 percent of eligible project costs for high-efficiency combined heat and power generation, renewable energy resource generation, and renewable energy resource equipment manufacturing facilities, credited over five years at 10 percent per year.

The BETC also provides a pass-through option which allows a project owner to transfer 35 percent of the credit to a partner for a lump-sum cash payment. Project owners may be public entities, non-profits, or businesses facing a tax liability, for example.

Now, HB 2472 proposes to cap the total amount of money the state can issue under the BETC in a given year, and Daniel Eisenbeis of the League of Oregon Cities is not happy. Nor is Northwest Renewable Project’s spokesperson Suzanne Leta Liou, who sees the bill as leading to fewer renewable energy projects in the state, and about 1,700 fewer jobs.

Another unintended consequence of 2472 will be to increase greenhouse gas emissions, or GHGs, since the BETC as originally operated actually reduced GHG emissions during 2007 and 2008 to half the emissions normally produced at the state’s Boardman coal-fired power plant.

The Boardman plant, located in Morrow County near Kennewick, a few miles south of the Washington State border, is the state’s only major coal plant and also the largest stationary source of GHGs. Operated by Portland General Electric (PGE), it has been a thorn in the side of environmentalists for the last three decades. Opened in 1977, it continues to evade emission’s restrictions, and now PGE wants ratepayers to spend $500 million to “fix” a plant that will likely be shut down, in the face of global warming, in a matter of years.

What, then, is the Oregon legislature thinking by introducing HB 2472? Some say the bill is being driven by the state’s financial woes. Oregon is the nation’s largest producer of lumber used in the building trades, and with the crash of the housing bubble in 2008, the building industry has been in freefall.

But 2472 isn’t the only environmental measure losing ground in Oregon. Senate Bill 80, cap-and-trade, and HB 2940 (weakening the 2007 renewable energy standard) are both “anti-green” measures, and both are favored handily to win in the current economic climate.

As of June 15, HB 2472 was still in committee, but, if it passes, the one million-kilowatt Multnomah County solar project will likely also go down in flames, as backers pull out for lack of BETC incentives.

One million kilowatts down the drain, yet the Boardman plant continues operating. It’s enough to make an enviro cry, and that’s just what Leslie Carlson over at BlueOregon is doing.

As Carlson notes, with billions going to subsidize Big Oil over the past three decades, it seems a shame we can’t “Spend a little money through BETC to promote energy that doesn’t require soldiers or catastrophic climate change.”

Amen, Leslie. Budget cuts may be blowback from the current recession, but cutting clean, completely renewable solar energy hardly seems the place to start.

(ArticlesBase ID #1235631)

Cooler Planet is a leading solar resource for connecting consumers and commercial entities with local solar Installers. Cooler Planet’s solar energy resource page contains articles and tools about solar panels to help with your solar project.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/antisolar-favor-in-oregon-1235631.html