By Michelle Dunlop, Herald Writer
It wasn't supposed to happen so quickly.
But the development of aviation biofuels has occurred at a speed that has surprised everyone.
Just a few years ago, aviation biofuel looked to be decades away. But with outside pressure building on the aviation industry to reduce its carbon footprint, the Boeing Co. and others in the industry banded together to accelerate research, said Mary Armstrong, Boeing's vice president of environment, health and safety.
“We can't electrify an airplane the way we can a car,” she said.
That means the industry always will be dependent on some form of fuel — petroleum or plant-based. The aviation industry represents only about 2 percent of the world's carbon emissions. Still, Armstrong said, the industry is stepping up to do its part.
A few additional factors have helped kick biofuels research into high gear, including the availability of petroleum-based fuel and its price, said Darrin Morgan, who directs Boeing's biofuels strategy. And, of course, there's the concern about climate change linked to carbon dioxide emissions.
Boeing officials have been clear: The company isn't getting into the biofuels business. Instead, the company is doing what it can to support biofuels development and production.
Early on, the industry was concerned about whether biofuels would meet the technical requirements of jet fuel. That has been resolved, Morgan said.
“Biofuels are not only as good as petroleum-based jet fuel but are better,” he said.
And biofuels are about 80 percent cleaner in terms of carbon emissions than petroleum-based fuel.
The challenge now is finding affordable and available sources. The economic downturn over the past few years hasn't helped matters. Companies don't have the capital to invest in getting new biofuel production started.
“That's why government support is needed now,” Morgan said.
The industry is working with second-generation biofuel sources: algae; camelina, a member of the mustard family; and jatropha, a non-edible plant that produces a high-oil-yielding nut. The sources don't compete with the food supply like much of the first generation biofuels, such as corn.
“One of the issues around (biofuels) sustainability is water use,” Morgan said.
That's why the industry also is looking at biofuels derived from halophytes, a saltwater plant.
Morgan doesn't believe the industry will rely on just one type of biofuel. The industry believes it will gain regulatory authority to use biofuels in commercial flights by 2011. Several test flights using different forms of biofuels in various aircraft have been conducted already.
The challenge will be introducing aviation biofuels on a large scale. It likely could still take years before 50 percent of flights are powered by biofuel.
Still, Morgan says the toughest percent of biofuels being incorporated in commercial aviation will be the first percent.
Monday, 21 June 2010
Peter Loscher believes green technology is key to Siemens' future
As thousands of gallons of oil wash up on the shores of Louisiana this weekend, one man might be forgiven for thinking it's not all as bad as it seems.
By Jonathan Sibun
Published: 9:48PM BST 20 Jun 2010
Amid the hysteria of Amercia's worst environmental disaster on record, Siemens chief executive Peter Löscher will likely be looking at the longer game.
Löscher is far too guarded to say it, but green technology companies will be waiting with keen expectation to see the results of the Deepwater Horizon spill. As the backlash against big oil builds, there will be winners.
Siemens is already in Barack Obama's good books. The US President visited the German company's new wind turbine facility in Fort Madison, Iowa, in late April and gave employees the kind of Churchillian fillip that company bosses dream of.
"What the employees of Siemens are involved with is helping stake America's claim on a clean energy future," said Obama, praising "a generation [that] chose in a time of crisis to place its bet on the future. A generation that stepped forward to meet the challenges of our time."
The US, Obama claimed, could realistically dream of generating a fifth of its energy from wind by 2020. The prediction was music to Löscher's ears.
For many people in the UK, Siemens remains a foreign concept but the Munich headquartered company is Europe's biggest conglomerate and Löscher one of the most important figures in global industry.
The group employs more than 400,000 people in 190 countries. It generated annual revenues of €77bn (£64bn) in 2009, operates across the fields of healthcare, energy and industry and either runs or has developed anything from the Heathrow Express to London's congestion charging zone.
As we meet in the environmentally-minded offices of Siemens' UK headquarters in Frimley, Surrey, Löscher cannot match Obama's rhetoric but the 52-year-old Austrian is glad to take up the US president's theme.
Löscher is in the UK to talk about Siemens' £30m environmental "pavilion" project in east London and the company's plans to spend £80m on an offshore wind turbine factory on the east coast of Britain.
The pavilion is all about showcasing sustainable urban infrastructure technologies – a typically weighty term for redesigning cities on the back of green initiatives. The topic might be dry, but it's also among the biggest growth stories out there, Löscher claims.
"2007 was the first year when the majority of the global population was living in cities, consuming 75pc of the world's energy and accounting for 80pc of CO2 emissions," he says. "Between now and 2030 the world will need at least 50pc more power than is available today. That can't happen by just burning coal."
The barrage of data is typical of Löscher, little surprise perhaps given how important green technology is to Siemens. The company claims a "green" portfolio generating €23bn in sales and growing at double digit pace last year.
Löscher points out that Siemens spent €1bn on green research and development spending in the heart of the recession. The global downturn, it seems, is little more than a nuisance in the bigger picture.
"We can spend a lot of time talking about how we manage our way through the crisis but it's all rather benign and short-sighted compared to the real challenges that mankind is facing. What does an ageing global population mean as we move from 6.5bn to 9bn people?" he asks rhetorically.
The answer, he claims, is all about successful energy use, waste disposal, the development of efficient buildings and transport, water usage. The list goes on.
And the age of austerity is doing little to put him off his stride. Löscher seems relaxed about the potential impact of the financial crisis and government spending cuts in dampening investment in the technologies that will be necessary to cope with such demographic trends.
In the UK, the previous government's commitment to allocate £60m in port infrastructure grants to help develop wind farms offshore has been put under review by the Coalition.
Löscher and his UK chief executive, Andreas Goss, believe the review will do little to stem the tide or Siemens' wind turbine building plans. "Port infrastructure will be needed on the east coast somewhere. The review is only that, a review of spending. We feel it will still yield the right outcome," Goss says. "If you want to put thousands of turbines out at sea, you may want to have a port that makes that possible."
Löscher's positive outlook also comes from his confidence that the troubles facing Europe will produce fundamental change for the better.
"When you look back into the history of Europe, the biggest changes have always happened in conjunction with a crisis. I have no doubt that this crisis will again be seen as a moment when change for the better takes place," he says. "I am hopeful we will see further economic integration of the single European market. We have the tools in place but putting the growth and stability pact back at the centre of the agenda is important. This will be seen as a defining moment where Europe lived up to its responsibility."
He points out that the euro has had its ups and downs in the past and suggests that Greece is relatively immaterial in the wider scheme of things. "Greece has the GDP of one of the smaller federal states in Germany and as far as the euro is concerned, I can't relate to that debate either," he says. "We started the euro at 97 euro cents, it moved up but it also moved down to 83 and nobody was talking about the crisis of the euro. And from a competitiveness agenda, on a short-term basis [a falling currency] is sometimes helpful."
Löscher has been through enough crises in recent years to recognise a real challenge when it comes along. The first Siemens boss from outside the company in its 162-year history, the former General Electric and Merck executive joined in the wake of what must rank as one of the worst bribery scandals in corporate history.
Siemens was forced to pay a record $1.34bn (£906m) in fines for paying bribes and kickbacks to secure contracts worldwide. Investigations found 4,238 illegal payments amid a culture of "broad-based corruption".
Löscher was hired to clean the company up and he went about the task with impressive zeal, clearing out more than half of Siemens' top 100 executives and overhauling compliance standards.
Three years later it is a subject he wants to put in the past, saying only that it was "a difficult moment in the company's history" and that he has "fundamentally repositioned the company".
As chief executive of the new Siemens, Löscher is clearly keen to make sure he and the company are whiter than white. Holding eye contact with steely intent throughout our conversation and avoiding any comments that could be seen as even mildly controversial, Löscher cannot be accused of not taking his job seriously.
But given Siemens' improving corporate reputation and record operating results last year, isn't it time he relaxed a little? "I relax every weekend with my family. I relax in the Alps when I'm skiing," says the former Austrian ski instructor, before showing a flicker of passion, albeit of the objective teutonic variety. "I love to escape to lakes, mountains, the sea. This generates emotions."
If Siemens and other green technologists fail in their mission, relaxation might be in short supply in years to come.
Peter Löscher, chief executive, Siemens
Lives Munich, Germany
Family Spanish wife and three children
Hobbies Skiing
Career Kienbaum und Partner, Hoechst Group, Aventis Pharma, General Electric, Merck, Siemens
By Jonathan Sibun
Published: 9:48PM BST 20 Jun 2010
Amid the hysteria of Amercia's worst environmental disaster on record, Siemens chief executive Peter Löscher will likely be looking at the longer game.
Löscher is far too guarded to say it, but green technology companies will be waiting with keen expectation to see the results of the Deepwater Horizon spill. As the backlash against big oil builds, there will be winners.
Siemens is already in Barack Obama's good books. The US President visited the German company's new wind turbine facility in Fort Madison, Iowa, in late April and gave employees the kind of Churchillian fillip that company bosses dream of.
"What the employees of Siemens are involved with is helping stake America's claim on a clean energy future," said Obama, praising "a generation [that] chose in a time of crisis to place its bet on the future. A generation that stepped forward to meet the challenges of our time."
The US, Obama claimed, could realistically dream of generating a fifth of its energy from wind by 2020. The prediction was music to Löscher's ears.
For many people in the UK, Siemens remains a foreign concept but the Munich headquartered company is Europe's biggest conglomerate and Löscher one of the most important figures in global industry.
The group employs more than 400,000 people in 190 countries. It generated annual revenues of €77bn (£64bn) in 2009, operates across the fields of healthcare, energy and industry and either runs or has developed anything from the Heathrow Express to London's congestion charging zone.
As we meet in the environmentally-minded offices of Siemens' UK headquarters in Frimley, Surrey, Löscher cannot match Obama's rhetoric but the 52-year-old Austrian is glad to take up the US president's theme.
Löscher is in the UK to talk about Siemens' £30m environmental "pavilion" project in east London and the company's plans to spend £80m on an offshore wind turbine factory on the east coast of Britain.
The pavilion is all about showcasing sustainable urban infrastructure technologies – a typically weighty term for redesigning cities on the back of green initiatives. The topic might be dry, but it's also among the biggest growth stories out there, Löscher claims.
"2007 was the first year when the majority of the global population was living in cities, consuming 75pc of the world's energy and accounting for 80pc of CO2 emissions," he says. "Between now and 2030 the world will need at least 50pc more power than is available today. That can't happen by just burning coal."
The barrage of data is typical of Löscher, little surprise perhaps given how important green technology is to Siemens. The company claims a "green" portfolio generating €23bn in sales and growing at double digit pace last year.
Löscher points out that Siemens spent €1bn on green research and development spending in the heart of the recession. The global downturn, it seems, is little more than a nuisance in the bigger picture.
"We can spend a lot of time talking about how we manage our way through the crisis but it's all rather benign and short-sighted compared to the real challenges that mankind is facing. What does an ageing global population mean as we move from 6.5bn to 9bn people?" he asks rhetorically.
The answer, he claims, is all about successful energy use, waste disposal, the development of efficient buildings and transport, water usage. The list goes on.
And the age of austerity is doing little to put him off his stride. Löscher seems relaxed about the potential impact of the financial crisis and government spending cuts in dampening investment in the technologies that will be necessary to cope with such demographic trends.
In the UK, the previous government's commitment to allocate £60m in port infrastructure grants to help develop wind farms offshore has been put under review by the Coalition.
Löscher and his UK chief executive, Andreas Goss, believe the review will do little to stem the tide or Siemens' wind turbine building plans. "Port infrastructure will be needed on the east coast somewhere. The review is only that, a review of spending. We feel it will still yield the right outcome," Goss says. "If you want to put thousands of turbines out at sea, you may want to have a port that makes that possible."
Löscher's positive outlook also comes from his confidence that the troubles facing Europe will produce fundamental change for the better.
"When you look back into the history of Europe, the biggest changes have always happened in conjunction with a crisis. I have no doubt that this crisis will again be seen as a moment when change for the better takes place," he says. "I am hopeful we will see further economic integration of the single European market. We have the tools in place but putting the growth and stability pact back at the centre of the agenda is important. This will be seen as a defining moment where Europe lived up to its responsibility."
He points out that the euro has had its ups and downs in the past and suggests that Greece is relatively immaterial in the wider scheme of things. "Greece has the GDP of one of the smaller federal states in Germany and as far as the euro is concerned, I can't relate to that debate either," he says. "We started the euro at 97 euro cents, it moved up but it also moved down to 83 and nobody was talking about the crisis of the euro. And from a competitiveness agenda, on a short-term basis [a falling currency] is sometimes helpful."
Löscher has been through enough crises in recent years to recognise a real challenge when it comes along. The first Siemens boss from outside the company in its 162-year history, the former General Electric and Merck executive joined in the wake of what must rank as one of the worst bribery scandals in corporate history.
Siemens was forced to pay a record $1.34bn (£906m) in fines for paying bribes and kickbacks to secure contracts worldwide. Investigations found 4,238 illegal payments amid a culture of "broad-based corruption".
Löscher was hired to clean the company up and he went about the task with impressive zeal, clearing out more than half of Siemens' top 100 executives and overhauling compliance standards.
Three years later it is a subject he wants to put in the past, saying only that it was "a difficult moment in the company's history" and that he has "fundamentally repositioned the company".
As chief executive of the new Siemens, Löscher is clearly keen to make sure he and the company are whiter than white. Holding eye contact with steely intent throughout our conversation and avoiding any comments that could be seen as even mildly controversial, Löscher cannot be accused of not taking his job seriously.
But given Siemens' improving corporate reputation and record operating results last year, isn't it time he relaxed a little? "I relax every weekend with my family. I relax in the Alps when I'm skiing," says the former Austrian ski instructor, before showing a flicker of passion, albeit of the objective teutonic variety. "I love to escape to lakes, mountains, the sea. This generates emotions."
If Siemens and other green technologists fail in their mission, relaxation might be in short supply in years to come.
Peter Löscher, chief executive, Siemens
Lives Munich, Germany
Family Spanish wife and three children
Hobbies Skiing
Career Kienbaum und Partner, Hoechst Group, Aventis Pharma, General Electric, Merck, Siemens
Iron to be dumped at sea to reduce global warming
Thousands of tonnes of iron will be dumped at sea in an attempt to cut global warming by sucking carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it has been reported.
Published: 7:30AM BST 21 Jun 2010
The iron will lay vast amounts of phytoplankton, which absorbs CO2 as the grow, The Times reported.
When the phytoplankton die it sinks to the bottom of the ocean, storing away the carbon for more than 50 years, the paper added.
Greenhouse gases raise temperatures onlineThe National Oceanography Centre at the University of Southampton is planning a five-year trial which will cost £70m.
Aircraft would spray iron sulphate liquid over almost 4,000 miles of the Southern Ocean, The Times claimed.
It is thought that if successful the project could remove almost a billion tonnes of carbon a year from the atmosphere – 12 per cent of total CO2 emissions produced by humans.
Proponents say the cost could be met by businesses to offset their carbon emissions, the paper added.
Scientists, however, have admitted that fertilising the ocean with hundreds of tonnes of iron could have a negative impact on marine life because the dying phytoplankton would cause a reduction in oxygen.
The trial needs to be approved by the UN London Convention, which regulates the dumping of substances at sea, The Times noted.
Published: 7:30AM BST 21 Jun 2010
The iron will lay vast amounts of phytoplankton, which absorbs CO2 as the grow, The Times reported.
When the phytoplankton die it sinks to the bottom of the ocean, storing away the carbon for more than 50 years, the paper added.
Greenhouse gases raise temperatures onlineThe National Oceanography Centre at the University of Southampton is planning a five-year trial which will cost £70m.
Aircraft would spray iron sulphate liquid over almost 4,000 miles of the Southern Ocean, The Times claimed.
It is thought that if successful the project could remove almost a billion tonnes of carbon a year from the atmosphere – 12 per cent of total CO2 emissions produced by humans.
Proponents say the cost could be met by businesses to offset their carbon emissions, the paper added.
Scientists, however, have admitted that fertilising the ocean with hundreds of tonnes of iron could have a negative impact on marine life because the dying phytoplankton would cause a reduction in oxygen.
The trial needs to be approved by the UN London Convention, which regulates the dumping of substances at sea, The Times noted.
Plan to pump water into Dead Sea makes environmentalists see red
Activists unite with industrialists to oppose World Bank study into project to transport water from Red Sea
Harriet Sherwood in Sedom guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 June 2010 22.09 BST
In a plastic-lined hole in a spit of sand stretching out into the Dead Sea, something is growing in the water.
Floating on top of the greenish pool – a mixture of 70% water from the Dead Sea and 30% water from the Red Sea – is a white scum of algae.
This is Pool No 9, dated March 2003. Next to it is Pool No 8, with exactly the same proportions of Dead Sea and Red Sea waters, created a year ago. Here the colour of the water is red.
No one knows why the two pools are different, but both environmentalists and industrialists are worried.
The reason behind the experimental mixing pools at the Dead Sea Works industrial complex, located at the southern end of the lowest point on land, is an ambitious and controversial proposal to build a conduit to pump water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea in order to revitalise the latter's shrinking dimensions.
It attracts hordes of tourists wanting to float in its waters and bathe in its restorative mud. But the level of the Dead Sea has dropped 25m in the past 50 years and it is continuing to recede at the rate of a metre a year.
North of the Dead Sea Works is Ein Gedi, a historic oasis where a luxury spa was originally built on the sea's edge. Now, guests have to be transported one and a half kilometres to reach the sea. Further north, an abandoned restaurant, built on what was Lido Beach, is marooned inland. Where once the sea lapped almost at the feet of diners, there is now a vast expanse of rock and sand.
The gradual disappearance of the Dead Sea has alarmed environmentalists, industrialists and tourist authorities for years. It has been caused mainly by three countries – Israel, Jordan and Syria – diverting an astonishing 98% of its source, the once-surging Jordan river, to provide water for their citizens. (Another impact has been to deny much-needed water to Palestinian communities and businesses in the West Bank). Industry is also to blame: the waters of the Dead Sea have been pumped into evaporation ponds to allow the extraction of minerals.
Now the World Bank is conducting a study into the feasibility of taking water through tunnels, pipes and canals from the Red Sea to replenish the Dead Sea. Public hearings into the "Red-Dead Conduit" are being held this week.
The plan, estimated to cost around $15bn (£10bn), is enthusiastically backed by the Israeli and Jordanian governments. But both environmentalists and industry – usually in fierce opposition to one another – are deeply concerned about the consequences.
The Dead Sea Works, which extracts potash, bromine, magnesium and salt from the unique waters, has been experimentally mixing the seas for several years. It doesn't like what it has seen.
"No one can answer for sure what the response of nature to the mixing will be," Dr Joseph Lati, in charge of the experiment, says cautiously. "We have to go very carefully with this project until we know more about the biological and chemical effects. There might be micro-impacts that we don't know about until they hit us."
The red colour of Pool No 8 is due to the blooming of bacteria, he explains. The algae indicates that the mixing on a large scale would encourage the growth of living organisms in a sea with no life.
The World Bank study is considering a number of options, all of which involve massive construction in ecologically delicate areas of desert between the two seas. That in itself would be disruptive to biodiversity and costly, but the inclusion of two stretches of canal under one of the options would attract further development along their banks.
Both the Dead Sea Works and a coalition of environmentalists led by Friends of the Earth Middle East fear the study is being rushed and alternatives are not being properly considered.
The governments behind the plan are pushing the study towards "certain results", claims Gidon Bromberg, Israeli director of Friends of the Earth Middle East. "They are paying lip service to alternative options. The public consultations are a box-ticking exercise."
The World Bank says nothing has been decided. "This is a big idea to address a big problem, namely the dying of the Dead Sea," says Alex McPhail. "We are still in the middle of a comprehensive and integrated evaluation of the proposed project."
Bromberg is critical of the Dead Sea Works, despite its anxieties over the conduit scheme. "We have a common interest in not destroying the Dead Sea. But we know where our interests diverge."
The company is only concerned with its commercial interests, he claims, and whether a change in the chemical composition of Dead Sea waters would impact on its mineral extraction business – which has been a big contributor to the problem.
Bromberg says the conduit plan ignores the root cause of the dwindling Dead Sea. If Israel, Jordan and Syria halved the amount of water they diverted from the Jordan river, the Dead Sea would stabilise, he says. That would require ending the free supply of water to agriculture and asking some fundamental questions: "Do we need to grow bananas in the middle of the desert? Do we need to flush our toilets with clean drinking water?"
The Dead Sea will never completely disappear, says Bromberg. Fresh water continues to seep into the sea from the earth below it, and as the sea continues to drop the rate of evaporation is slowing. "At some point the amount of water coming in will equal the evaporation," says Bromberg, leading to the sea's stabilisation. The solution, according to Noam Goldstein of Dead Sea Works, lies at the other end of the Dead Sea: "The best solution is for the Jordan river to flow again – this is what nature intended."
Harriet Sherwood in Sedom guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 June 2010 22.09 BST
In a plastic-lined hole in a spit of sand stretching out into the Dead Sea, something is growing in the water.
Floating on top of the greenish pool – a mixture of 70% water from the Dead Sea and 30% water from the Red Sea – is a white scum of algae.
This is Pool No 9, dated March 2003. Next to it is Pool No 8, with exactly the same proportions of Dead Sea and Red Sea waters, created a year ago. Here the colour of the water is red.
No one knows why the two pools are different, but both environmentalists and industrialists are worried.
The reason behind the experimental mixing pools at the Dead Sea Works industrial complex, located at the southern end of the lowest point on land, is an ambitious and controversial proposal to build a conduit to pump water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea in order to revitalise the latter's shrinking dimensions.
It attracts hordes of tourists wanting to float in its waters and bathe in its restorative mud. But the level of the Dead Sea has dropped 25m in the past 50 years and it is continuing to recede at the rate of a metre a year.
North of the Dead Sea Works is Ein Gedi, a historic oasis where a luxury spa was originally built on the sea's edge. Now, guests have to be transported one and a half kilometres to reach the sea. Further north, an abandoned restaurant, built on what was Lido Beach, is marooned inland. Where once the sea lapped almost at the feet of diners, there is now a vast expanse of rock and sand.
The gradual disappearance of the Dead Sea has alarmed environmentalists, industrialists and tourist authorities for years. It has been caused mainly by three countries – Israel, Jordan and Syria – diverting an astonishing 98% of its source, the once-surging Jordan river, to provide water for their citizens. (Another impact has been to deny much-needed water to Palestinian communities and businesses in the West Bank). Industry is also to blame: the waters of the Dead Sea have been pumped into evaporation ponds to allow the extraction of minerals.
Now the World Bank is conducting a study into the feasibility of taking water through tunnels, pipes and canals from the Red Sea to replenish the Dead Sea. Public hearings into the "Red-Dead Conduit" are being held this week.
The plan, estimated to cost around $15bn (£10bn), is enthusiastically backed by the Israeli and Jordanian governments. But both environmentalists and industry – usually in fierce opposition to one another – are deeply concerned about the consequences.
The Dead Sea Works, which extracts potash, bromine, magnesium and salt from the unique waters, has been experimentally mixing the seas for several years. It doesn't like what it has seen.
"No one can answer for sure what the response of nature to the mixing will be," Dr Joseph Lati, in charge of the experiment, says cautiously. "We have to go very carefully with this project until we know more about the biological and chemical effects. There might be micro-impacts that we don't know about until they hit us."
The red colour of Pool No 8 is due to the blooming of bacteria, he explains. The algae indicates that the mixing on a large scale would encourage the growth of living organisms in a sea with no life.
The World Bank study is considering a number of options, all of which involve massive construction in ecologically delicate areas of desert between the two seas. That in itself would be disruptive to biodiversity and costly, but the inclusion of two stretches of canal under one of the options would attract further development along their banks.
Both the Dead Sea Works and a coalition of environmentalists led by Friends of the Earth Middle East fear the study is being rushed and alternatives are not being properly considered.
The governments behind the plan are pushing the study towards "certain results", claims Gidon Bromberg, Israeli director of Friends of the Earth Middle East. "They are paying lip service to alternative options. The public consultations are a box-ticking exercise."
The World Bank says nothing has been decided. "This is a big idea to address a big problem, namely the dying of the Dead Sea," says Alex McPhail. "We are still in the middle of a comprehensive and integrated evaluation of the proposed project."
Bromberg is critical of the Dead Sea Works, despite its anxieties over the conduit scheme. "We have a common interest in not destroying the Dead Sea. But we know where our interests diverge."
The company is only concerned with its commercial interests, he claims, and whether a change in the chemical composition of Dead Sea waters would impact on its mineral extraction business – which has been a big contributor to the problem.
Bromberg says the conduit plan ignores the root cause of the dwindling Dead Sea. If Israel, Jordan and Syria halved the amount of water they diverted from the Jordan river, the Dead Sea would stabilise, he says. That would require ending the free supply of water to agriculture and asking some fundamental questions: "Do we need to grow bananas in the middle of the desert? Do we need to flush our toilets with clean drinking water?"
The Dead Sea will never completely disappear, says Bromberg. Fresh water continues to seep into the sea from the earth below it, and as the sea continues to drop the rate of evaporation is slowing. "At some point the amount of water coming in will equal the evaporation," says Bromberg, leading to the sea's stabilisation. The solution, according to Noam Goldstein of Dead Sea Works, lies at the other end of the Dead Sea: "The best solution is for the Jordan river to flow again – this is what nature intended."
10:10 campaigners push to keep summer time all year round
Parliament today hears evidence from Cambridge academic Dr Elizabeth Garnsey that not putting clocks back will save carbon emissions and lives
Felicity Carus and Peter Walker The Guardian, Monday 21 June 2010
As the UK wakes up to the longest day of the year today, campaigners are calling for more sunshine in our lives – by urging the government to keep British Summer Time (BST) all year round.
Maintaining daylight saving time would save energy and 450,000 tonnes of carbon a year, according to new research, and reduce road accidents, saving the NHS £200m annually.
The Lighter Later initiative, which is being coordinated by the 10:10 climate change campaign, would see a permanent shift to daylight saving time. Under the proposals, the clocks would not revert to Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) this autumn, but from next year, the clocks would continue in the same pattern of "spring forward, fall back", shifting an hour of daylight from the morning to the evening through the year.
Dr Elizabeth Garnsey, from the University of Cambridge, will present her study from the peer-reviewed journal, Energy Policy, at a parliamentary launch today.
Garnsey found that winter demand peaked at sunset and then around 5.30pm, when people were returning from work. The increased energy demand is met by reserve energy generation, such as oil, which is expensive and polluting.
Daily demand in the UK would be reduced by at least 0.3% if daylight saving time were continued after October, her study found.
This would amount to 450,000 tonnes of carbon saved annually, or the equivalent of taking 200,000 cars off the road.
"We need better alignment with the way people spend their time," Dr Garnsey said. "At 4.30am on 21 June most people will still be asleep – that's an average of three hours' wasted daylight."
Garnsey said that, compared with other measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency and renewable technology, changing the clocks would be extremely cheap.
She said: "Advancing the clocks would be a one-off administrative change and would save energy in all succeeding years. Many ways of reducing carbon emissions inevitably need investment in new infrastructure, none of which are required to advance the clocks."
More than 11,000 people have signed Lighter Later's petition to the prime minister, David Cameron, urging the coalition government to support the introduction of a trial in 2011. The Labour party and Tories backed the move before the last general election.
Garnsey and Lighter Later, which is also supported by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) and the Tourism Alliance, say that the change would lower fuel bills, increase tourism and reduce crime and obesity – and save lives as evening visibility improves during rush hour. In a related report, Garnsey includes estimates that up to 450 serious injuries and 104 deaths annually could be prevented by abolishing GMT, potentially saving the NHS £200m a year.
"Traffic is heavier for longer in the early evening than in the morning. Consequently an hour of light at evening rush hour reduces risk for more drivers and pedestrians than an hour of light during the shorter morning rush hour, when there are fewer road users than at the end of the working day."
She also addressed concerns over an increased risk to children on the way to school in Scotland. The concerns were raised during a previous trial when the country stuck to GMT+1 all year round.
"In the trial period between 1968 and 1971, it was reported in Hansard that there was a net reduction of deaths on the roads of 3% in England and 8.6% in Scotland. But folk memory has become shaped by tragic accidents that happened in the morning. The media didn't report the reduction in the afternoon and never corrected it."
She added that no one had made the case for keeping GMT as it was. "GMT was not set to save electricity or prevent accidents. It's sundial technology and policy inertia is the only thing preventing this change."
Eugenie Harvey, director of 10:10 UK, said: "In the UK we love our long summer days. Lighter evenings make us happier, healthier and safer. After today the nights will start drawing in again."
Benefits:
• Conservative estimate of 450,000 tonnes of C02 saved annually
• In Britain 450 serious injuries and 104 deaths annually could be prevented on the roads, saving the NHS £200m a year in treatment costs
• Decrease in crime and greater safety for the elderly
• Average of 55 minutes increase in extra daylight for outdoor activities
• £1bn boost to economy as sightseeing opportunities increase for tourists
• Improved conditions for trade with Europe as clocks synchronise
• Improved safety and productivity on construction sites
• Darker morning for those in far north of UK counterbalanced by more light in early evening – peak period on roads and for energy use
Felicity Carus and Peter Walker The Guardian, Monday 21 June 2010
As the UK wakes up to the longest day of the year today, campaigners are calling for more sunshine in our lives – by urging the government to keep British Summer Time (BST) all year round.
Maintaining daylight saving time would save energy and 450,000 tonnes of carbon a year, according to new research, and reduce road accidents, saving the NHS £200m annually.
The Lighter Later initiative, which is being coordinated by the 10:10 climate change campaign, would see a permanent shift to daylight saving time. Under the proposals, the clocks would not revert to Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) this autumn, but from next year, the clocks would continue in the same pattern of "spring forward, fall back", shifting an hour of daylight from the morning to the evening through the year.
Dr Elizabeth Garnsey, from the University of Cambridge, will present her study from the peer-reviewed journal, Energy Policy, at a parliamentary launch today.
Garnsey found that winter demand peaked at sunset and then around 5.30pm, when people were returning from work. The increased energy demand is met by reserve energy generation, such as oil, which is expensive and polluting.
Daily demand in the UK would be reduced by at least 0.3% if daylight saving time were continued after October, her study found.
This would amount to 450,000 tonnes of carbon saved annually, or the equivalent of taking 200,000 cars off the road.
"We need better alignment with the way people spend their time," Dr Garnsey said. "At 4.30am on 21 June most people will still be asleep – that's an average of three hours' wasted daylight."
Garnsey said that, compared with other measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency and renewable technology, changing the clocks would be extremely cheap.
She said: "Advancing the clocks would be a one-off administrative change and would save energy in all succeeding years. Many ways of reducing carbon emissions inevitably need investment in new infrastructure, none of which are required to advance the clocks."
More than 11,000 people have signed Lighter Later's petition to the prime minister, David Cameron, urging the coalition government to support the introduction of a trial in 2011. The Labour party and Tories backed the move before the last general election.
Garnsey and Lighter Later, which is also supported by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) and the Tourism Alliance, say that the change would lower fuel bills, increase tourism and reduce crime and obesity – and save lives as evening visibility improves during rush hour. In a related report, Garnsey includes estimates that up to 450 serious injuries and 104 deaths annually could be prevented by abolishing GMT, potentially saving the NHS £200m a year.
"Traffic is heavier for longer in the early evening than in the morning. Consequently an hour of light at evening rush hour reduces risk for more drivers and pedestrians than an hour of light during the shorter morning rush hour, when there are fewer road users than at the end of the working day."
She also addressed concerns over an increased risk to children on the way to school in Scotland. The concerns were raised during a previous trial when the country stuck to GMT+1 all year round.
"In the trial period between 1968 and 1971, it was reported in Hansard that there was a net reduction of deaths on the roads of 3% in England and 8.6% in Scotland. But folk memory has become shaped by tragic accidents that happened in the morning. The media didn't report the reduction in the afternoon and never corrected it."
She added that no one had made the case for keeping GMT as it was. "GMT was not set to save electricity or prevent accidents. It's sundial technology and policy inertia is the only thing preventing this change."
Eugenie Harvey, director of 10:10 UK, said: "In the UK we love our long summer days. Lighter evenings make us happier, healthier and safer. After today the nights will start drawing in again."
Benefits:
• Conservative estimate of 450,000 tonnes of C02 saved annually
• In Britain 450 serious injuries and 104 deaths annually could be prevented on the roads, saving the NHS £200m a year in treatment costs
• Decrease in crime and greater safety for the elderly
• Average of 55 minutes increase in extra daylight for outdoor activities
• £1bn boost to economy as sightseeing opportunities increase for tourists
• Improved conditions for trade with Europe as clocks synchronise
• Improved safety and productivity on construction sites
• Darker morning for those in far north of UK counterbalanced by more light in early evening – peak period on roads and for energy use
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
