How To Save Energy Through Conservation

Haven't Subscribed to
This Series ?
Every week or so we'll e-mail to you notice of the next conservation suggestion, as well as what new articles on alternative energy and the climate threat we've published on the website. Just send us your e-mail address by clicking here .

♦ THERE'S MUCH MORE TO KNOW ♦
For articles about alternate sources of energy and what's being done (or not done) to make them a reality, be sure to visit the other pages of PlanetWatch by clicking the topics below:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

WHAT WE CAN DO #1:
There Are Light Bulbs and "Light Bulbs"

We hear entreaties from all sides to change as many light bulbs as possible from incandescent to compact fluorescent (CFLs). Many of us have done that, and are thereby presumably reducing energy consumption modestly. Those who waited until now will be pleased to learn that, unlike a year ago, CFLs are available in more tints and brightnesses, as well as in forms that work with dimmers and various informal lampshades. So, let's keep up the good work and add to this trend.
     But this article is about a different kind of "light bulb". This Click to continue

WHAT WE CAN DO #5:
There Are Light Bulbs and "Light Bulbs"

  Click to return to beginning
one goes off over your head, at least in a cartoon, when you suddenly get a good energy-saving idea. Most of us are trying every day to raise our awareness of how we waste energy. This awareness has been neither necessary nor commonplace for most of the last century in the United States, and, as a result, we have found incredibly effective ways to waste energy. What follows are a few examples that have come to our attention recently. We hope they stimulate some changes among our members, and that many of you will e-mail us about your energy "light bulbs" so we can pass them on to the rest of the members.
Hot Towel Rails      Many new or refurbished houses include in the master bathroom a chrome-plated metal rack that keeps your bath towel warm and dry....ready for use. These devices were first popular in the UK, where central heating was uncommon, and they were often heated just before use by running hot water through them on the way to the tub, as it filled. They became popular in the USA in the last 25 years, but (guess what) we did not use hot water to heat them; instead we used continuous electrical power and a heating element, running all the time.
     At our house, we calculated how much energy was used for this and were amazed to learn that we were paying roughly $1.20 a day or $438 per year, at 10 cents per KWH, per hot towel rail, just for the pleasure of a warm towel. Even if cost were not a problem, that is clearly an irresponsible use of energy. So, we stopped using them and feel better about it.
     Our house, remodeled 15 years ago, did not even have a switch to turn the towel rails on and off when we were away! And we recall not being particularly concerned about that, since it was such a minor item.
     My, how things have changed.
Tank or Tankless?      America is unique in many ways, some good, some not. One way in which we differ from the rest of the "developed world" is how we heat and store hot water in our homes. Almost all the rest of the developed world uses tankless hot water heaters to make hot water, using gas on demand, rather than maintaining a large tank of water, already heated by either gas or electricity, in case someone takes a shower or does the laundry. It is easily shown that the tankless Japanese/European approach is more economical, even when the cost of refitting the house is figured in. And it certainly uses less energy in the process.
     Houses not connected to a continuous supply of natural gas sometimes have fewer choices, but even propane, delivered by tank truck, makes good sense in many cases, depending on local electricity rates.
     Electric hot water tanks need to be replaced about every 10 or 15 years, in any event. So, when replacement time comes, if not before, please ask your plumber about the tankless approach. We did it in our house, and are pleased with the result. Even the hot water circulator works, so that waiting endlessly for hot water is not a problem.
     The new hot water heater takes up about 90% less space to boot.
Filling Prescriptions      Here's one that may appeal to many of you "Baby Boomers". At our house, we are reluctantly getting used to taking a few prescription drugs every day. Insurance rules force us to refill our "scrips" fairly close to the end of the last fill, which often calls for making single-purpose trips to the pharmacy, which in our case is several miles away (the local pharmacy having failed in the face of "big box" nationwide chains). The net effect is that we make perhaps two or three ten mile round trips to the pharmacy per month, or perhaps as much as 1500 miles per year, just for this single purpose.
     As an alternative, there are reputable online pharmacies that will fill 90 days of supply four times a year and deliver the pills to your door. This could cut down as much as 15 or 20 percent of the driving of one large and growing subset of our population. The savings in wasted hydrocarbon fuels could be significant.
     We are still working on this one. Not yet implemented.
Commutation      Americans commute largely by car, largely alone, largely during rush hour, largely in stop-and-go traffic and generally five days a week. They drive about 12.5 miles each way. Think about how much better it would be if there were 20-25% fewer cars. Traffic flow would be better. Time on the road would decline, saving fuel. Fewer accidents, injuries and fatalities.
     How can this be accomplished? How about some combination of the following?
     1. Four day work week with ten hour days; 20% less cars on the road and less pressure at normal rush hour.
     2. Greatly expanded carpooling.
     3. Reduced speeds.
     4. Less aggressive driving.
     5. Smaller, more efficient cars.
     Doing the math reveals that upwards of one third of the fuel currently used by car commuters can be saved, almost immediately. Maybe it will take gasoline at $5 a gallon to ensure that these changes occur. But wouldn't it be nice if we did it anyway? Would we not be better off to be less beholden to oil-exporting countries?
      At PlanetWatch, we think so.      - Douglas Ayer

  FOR WHAT WE CAN DO #6 AND BEYOND, CLICK HERE

WHAT WE CAN DO #2:
How Big Is Your Paper Trail?

Still reading a newspaper? Their prolonged decline in the U.S. is viewed as a calamity, but if newspapers can successfully convert to economically viable newssites, it might not be such a bad thing. The manufacture of paper – and this includes paper for magazines, catalogs, copiers, etc., as well — emits the fourth highest level of CO2 of all industries. Only the chemical industry, petroleum and coal products, and primary metals are worse offenders.
     Breaking down wood fiber to pulp requires a lot of energy. But it doesn’t stop there. Giant logs are cut and trucked to paper mills; rolls of paper weighing tons are carted to printing plants; fleets of trucks deliver to newsstands; and gas-burning vehicles may even take the newspapers and magazines to your front door. (Congratulations if your town still has enterprising paperboys on bicycles.)
     And if you do not have an active recycling program in your community, those same tons must be transported to landfills, because of the 62 million newspapers printed daily, we throw away 44 million.
     And then there are the trees, nature’s allies in our quest to sequester CO2. Vanity Fair told us a year ago that it takes 17 trees to make a ton of newsprint and that each edition of the Sunday New York Times chews up 62,860 trees.
     So, think about switching to reading your newspaper online.
     Then there are those magazines that pile up unread. Consider canceling subscriptions to those you do not regularly read with any thoroughness.
     Next, those unwanted catalogues that stuff the mailbox. When each arrives, make it your practice to call its 800 number and ask them to discontinue. Or, for a modest fee, an outfit like Shield of Green will do it for you, with some of their fee going to a mix of environmental and relief organizations.
     You’re not putting people out of work by saying “stop”. Unwanted catalogs are those you have no interest buying from. You’re saving trees and doing catalogers a favor by saving their money.      - Stephen Wilson

WHAT WE CAN DO #3:
Plastic Bags: Ban, Recycle or Tote?

Plastic bags, like plastic bottles, are ubiquitous. Unfortunately, they are too much part of the scenery, since the majority of used bags end up in landfills, or worse, in public parks, forests and on beaches, where they are a constant threat to nature’s creatures. Breaking down into small pieces, they are readily consumed by curious animals, birds and fish. Every year thousands of sea turtles, whales and sea mammals die from Click to continue

WHAT WE CAN DO #5:
Step Off the Gas

In 2007, against stout opposition even at that late date, Congress finally passed an energy bill that mandated a 40% improvement in auto mileage efficiency.
      But that is phased in across a dozen years, and does nothing for all the cars, pickups, SUVs and trucks already on the road. So to stem the tsunami of dollars flowing to other countries, it’s up to us to take action now. We’ve got to make ourselves more efficient even if our engines are not.
      How? Drive less. Stop jumping in the car for short errands, and start planning ahead. Begin with food. To cut back on costly gasoline consumption, use your word processing software to develop checklists of all standard items you buy – a list for your supermarket, another for Costco, or for Wal-Mart, as examples. Photocopy and pressure-clip them into pads – but just a few copies at first, because you will find yourself perfecting the lists as you go along. You’ll know you’re hooked on this scheme the day you re-sequence the list by store aisle -- produce, then dairy, then frozen, etc.
      What we are leading to is that grail of a once-a-week food trip, with none of those wasteful little side-trips scattered through the week. That way we’re not moving a ton and a half of vehicle down to road to pick up a pound of butter.
      So the next step is to begin planning the household menu a week at a time – and to tick off on the shopping lists the ingredients and quantities you’ll need. It follows that, whenever you run low or out of an item, you will find it becomes a habit to checkmark it on the list or write it in.
      The same methods hold true for other needs. In this household we write down needed items on a pale photocopy of the local map, so when headed to NextVillage, we remember to get that item we wrote down in that corner of the map weeks ago.
      Now you are ready for the road.
      Follow this plan and you will find that you save another commodity that you may value even more than gas – your time. Quite a lot of it. And irritation – you don’t run out of things anymore. And serenity – you’re not always wondering what to do about dinner.
      A few weeks ago at Costco a woman dragged her husband over to me and, in a thick Russian accent, said, “Look! Look what this person has. A list! And it’s printed!” So don’t be surprised if your intelligent approach to life attracts a following.
        - Stephen Wilson

WHAT WE CAN DO #3:
Plastic Bags: Ban, Recycle or Tote?

  Click to return to beginning
ingesting discarded plastic bags, six-pack containers and water bottles.
Staggering Waste...      Since 500 billion to a trillion plastic bags are consumed globally each year and over 390 billion of them are consumed annually in the United States alone, our landfills are overflowing and our public spaces littered with pieces of non-biodegradable plastic that will take thousands of years to decompose. Since plastic is also an oil-based product, their extensive use contributes to the demand for and price of petroleum. It has been estimated that our annual use of plastic bags requires 12 billion barrels of oil to manufacture.
...And Almost None Are Recycled      While some states or communities provide opportunities for recycling plastic bags, only 3% are actually recycled. Even in California, which passed a law that bars communities from imposing fees on plastic bags, but requires all grocery and drug stores to accept plastic bags for recycling or to offer reusable bags for sale, only a small percentage are recycled. The American Chemical Association argues that the most responsible approach would be to recycle plastic bags, but those bags are now shipped to Asia, where they are made into new bags, plastic film, pipes or crates, consuming fossil fuels and emitting tons of greenhouse gasses in the process.
     Some cities, like San Francisco, have issued a ban on plastic bags for grocery stores, drug stores or large retail outlets, requiring stores to provide more expensive bags made from vegetable materials, or paper bags, or encouraging customers to bring their own recycled or tote bags. Relying on paper bags, however, creates another problem, since paper bags are made from trees, which absorb carbon dioxide, one of the factors in climate change. The mayor of Seattle has proposed that, beginning next year, shoppers be charged a 20-cent “green fee” for each bag. When Ireland imposed a $.33 fee for the use of plastic, consumer use of plastic bags dropped by 94% within weeks.
     At the very least, we should think about our contribution to this waste and begin to recycle or re-use plastic bags so they do not wind up in landfills.
Give This a Try      The irony is that people are content to use plastic bags. They hold little and are inclined to spill their contents in the parking lot. Many supermarket chains now sell for a trifling amount — typically $1.00 each — handsome, sturdy canvas bags. If yours doesn’t, drop by another chain. Not only to they hold more, but the amortized cost of the ten we bought a good six months ago is now down to pennies per weekly food trip, and they show no sign of wear.
     By purchasing canvas or cloth bags and saying ‘no’ to plastic, you can help to reduce the amount of waste and make a contribution to solving an environmental problem with minimal effort. And you will make a statement to fellow shoppers on the line, hopefully encouraging others to follow your example.
     One thing: after unloading, don’t forget to put your tote bags back in your car for the next shopping trip.
     Do the right thing:  BYOBags.      - Tony White

WHAT WE CAN DO #4:
A Fresh Look at Summer Comfort...

..."Or how to cool your house for less money and be more comfortable while limiting carbon emissions".
     More attention is paid to CO2 created by the driving habits of Americans than to the carbon impact of heating and cooling our houses. Many are surprised to learn that the latter total is considered to be bigger than the former. But it seems so "do-able" to get a more efficient car and/or drive less, compared to modifying our houses for greater efficiency.
     But there are a good many steps one can take to reduce household emissions; here we discuss how to air condition to save energy and reduce carbon dioxide. First, we discuss the effect of dew point on comfort, and then suggest some smart moves to make.
Dew Point?      Many readers already know that dew point is the temperature at which the water vapor in a given volume of air produces relative humidity of 100%. Two air masses at the same temperature can have very different dew points, and will produce surprising differences in human comfort. For example, if the temperature is 78 degrees and the dew point is 58 degrees, almost everyone feels quite comfortable because there is adequate "evaporative cooling" (meaning that your perspiration dries and cools you). But, a temperature of 72 degrees with a dew point of 70 degrees will make most people feel uncomfortably warm, so they will often set the air conditioning down to 68 degrees and even then sometimes put on a sweater because it feels chilly and damp.
     So what? The problem is that thermostats measure temperature, not comfort, and they cause air conditioners to keep cooling your house only until the set temperature is reached. That sounds OK, except that HVAC companies almost invariably recommend and install roughly twice the necessary "tonnage" of air conditioning equipment, both for new construction and for re-fitting. They do this partly to be sure the house can be kept cool on the worst day of the summer, and (of course) to sell more equipment. The net effect is that there is almost always too much AC "muscle", so the house gets cool long before the air has a chance to dry out, which would have made the residents feel comfortable at higher temperatures.What's To Be Done About It?      When you are selecting new air conditioning gear, always insist on having about half the tonnage that the industry recommends. Or have two small units, with the ability to run one alone. Next, buy one or two dew point meters. You can find them on the web and will offset their cost with the money you are about to save.
     As soon as the temperature gets above 75, check the dew point outside, and if it is above 64, turn on the air conditioner so that it will start to remove moisture from the air. Let it run on a low setting for quite some time as it takes a while to extract the water vapor. A second dew point meter inside, which is less necessary, lets you know how you are doing.
     Ultimately, you can stabilize the air in the house at a low dew point (below 60) and then the temperature can be several degrees warmer without human discomfort. And you save money while reducing GHG's. Our house, in the summer, is often the same temperature as the outside, somewhere in the mid to high 70's, but the relative humidity is 30 or 40 percentage points lower, and it is really comfortable.
     And our air conditioner runs a lot less than it would if we tried to keep it cooler.
     Think of it this way. A too-big AC running 50% of the time and drawing 3000 watts consumes 36 kilowatt hours per day, keeps the house cold and damp and costs over $5 per day. On the other hand a "too-small" AC running even 80% of the time draws 1000 watts, consumes 19 kwh per day, keeps the house warm, but comfortably dry, and costs more like $2.65 per day while saving nearly half the GHG emissions.The net effect is that you can keep your house more comfortable than before by running less cooling for longer periods. And, if you put the capital you saved by not overpowering the AC into more efficient equipment (which does cost more), you can save more than a third of the power for the same tonnage.
     It is a triple win situation. You are more comfortable, you spend less and the environment is improved.
     The United States suffers from several examples of this kind of mindless energy waste; it stems from our energy being so cheap that it almost seemed free. And we failed to recognize early that the carbon dioxide being dumped into the atmosphere was damaging the climate. If we had paid "dumping fees" for that a long time ago, we would be better off today.
   - Douglas Ayer