Arkansas Solar Installation

Archive for July, 2009

Gadgets of Solar

Sea Levels Rise

It is no new scientific fact that there is a slow steady increase of temperature; we’ve been studying and recording changes for a few decades. For some reason people are only now starting to take notice of how desperate the situation is.

Due to the increased temperature, sea levels are on the rise. It now is easier for boats full of scientists to access the Northwest Passage for research due to the polar icecaps melting . Areas that were once almost unreachable are now becoming navigational and the search for precious gems, gold, and oil is on! There is no end to mans greed.It makes sense that when the sea levels rise the ground surfaces slowly disappear. We will lose our agriculture farmlands. There may not be enough food needed to sustain ourselves, let alone other countries that we already support. Many farmers will lose their farms and their lifestyle.

Should sea levels on the rise be a worry about freshwater? Our drinking water is not a luxury it is a necessity and is as important for people, plants, and animals. The possible damage to freshwater due to rising sea levels should be a major worry to all of us.

For hundreds of years polar bears have been the king of the Arctic ice and roamed over vast areas of icy tundra. But with the icecaps melting away, and the distance between ice flows becoming greater, many polar bears have drowned from exhaustion before reaching shore. It also makes hunting their primary source of food, the seal, more difficult. Dying of hunger is now a probable fate for many of them.

The total extinction of many of the world’s beloved land animals may be just around the bend due to rising sea levels.

Show some concern about the environment and save money at the same time by searching for eco friendly products from sites like http://www.EnergySavingProject.com.

The author is a specialist in environment, energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Water’s Role in Global Warming

Last week, we introduced you to the Resource Matrix, which is everywhere, it is all around us. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

We showed you how economics leads to people maximizing their benefits in “win-lose” propositions: you want diamonds and gold for nothing and they want to give you useless junk for a king’s ransom. And how we’ve been hypnotized in believing what they want is also what we want.

But the scales have been falling from our eyes, we’re beginning to see the truth, and the power has been shifting away from the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd:

• Do-gooders have increased our awareness and worked to change deals from “win-lose” to “win-win”
• There is no “free lunch:” finite energy resources will run out; actions have consequences, and the consequences of our actions are already visible, rather scary, and quite irreversible; and that the “I want your goodies for nothing” crowd hasn’t been telling the truth

We now realize we’re all in this together: we have greater awareness of our actions and the desire to change, and have ways to change.

Hallelujah and Praise the Collective!

Today, we introduce the resource called water, its parallels with fossil fuels, and its role in global warming.

None of this is to dismiss or diminish the contribution of fossil fuels in global warming. Hey, just like the Special Olympics, if you participate, you get a medal. We just think that gold-medal winner Fossil Fuels has stolen the spotlight, letting silver-medalist Water Use keep us hypnotized in believing that water is a free lunch, and that nature will clear up polluted waters while getting away with breaking the rules.

Water, water, everywhere,
not a drop to drink.

According to our friends at How Stuff Works, who I wrote about sarcastically for their oxymoronic clean coal article in discussing how true public relations stuff really works, gives us this data:

• 98% of the planet’s water is in the oceans. It’s salt water – we can’t drink it or irrigate our crops with it.
• 2% is usable. Of that 2%:
  • 80% is locked up in polar ice caps and glaciers
  • 18% is underground in aquifers and wells
  • 1.8% is in lakes and rivers
  • 0.2% is elsewhere: either floating in the air as clouds and water vapor, locked up in plants and animals (and your body), and in foods and beverages.

Okay, so 20% of the usable water (only 0.4% of all water on Earth) is accessible, right?

Well . . . no. Many of the aquifers, wells, lakes, and rivers have been sucked dry like a once-juicy fly carcass in a spider’s web. (The 18% and 1.8% you see above is like the money in the Social Security Fund: there actually is nothing there.)

And many of those water sources that do still have a drop to drink are worse than the ocean’s salt water. Drink salt water and you’ll need to yawn into a bucket. Drink this water and you’ll kick the bucket.

And I know you aren’t asking this burning question:

“So . . . global warming to release fresh water from ice caps and glaciers is a good thing, no?”

Percentage this, percentage that.
Talk my language, will you?

I know I’m pulling the disgusting old government trick: drowning you in an ocean of water statistics.

So let’s make it plain and simple:

You bring in $10,000 a month. You’re also living high on the hog and doing your personal best to outshine every bling-bling Hip Hopster Musical Artist in materially conspicuous consumption:

• $9800 goes to the McMansion mortgage and gold-plated Rolls Royce lease
• $160.00 goes to investments in clothing and accessories
• $0.40 has been lost in the sofa cushions
• $39.60 a month is for everything else: food, phone and electric bills, income taxes, and all the other non-essentials: Don’t spend it all in one place!

Aquifers and wells and lakes and rivers:
Dry or polluted, oh my!

Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it:

We can all save water in the home. But as laudable as it is to take a shower rather than a bath and turn off the faucet while brushing our teeth, we shouldn’t get hold of the idea that regular domestic water use is what is really emptying the world’s rivers. Manufacturing goods … consumes a certain amount, but that’s not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar. (emphasis mine.) (Fred Pearce, When the Rivers Run Dry, Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. p 3)

Here are a few numbers he gives:

• to grow a pound of rice: 250 to 650 gallons of water
• to grow a pound of wheat: 130 gallons
• to produce a quart of milk: 500 to 1000 gallons
• to produce a pound of cheese: 650 gallons
• to produce a 1/4 pound of burger: 3000 gallons

He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms:

• 1 ton (265 gallons) for drinking
• 50 to 100 tons (13,250 to 26,500 gallons) around the house
• 1500 to 2000 tons (397,500 to 530,000 gallons) for food and clothing

—————————————–

sidebar:
How Many Gallons to Produce One Pound of Beef?
Lies, damned lies, and statistics

US Beef industry’s Cattlemen’s Association: 441 gallons
Fred Pearce: 12,000 gallons
Water Footprint Network: 1854 gallons (calculations: 15500 litres of water per kg; 4079 gallons per kg; 1854 gallons per pound)

In an industrial beef production system, it takes an average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef.

The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing.

This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing).

Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water on average.

—————————————–

Where does all that water come from?
From virtually everywhere

If it comes from imported goods (Thai rice or Egyptian cotton), the water comes from those countries.

When the water is collected from rivers or pumped from underground, as it is in much of the world, it’s:

• increasingly expensive
• increasingly likely to deprive someone of water (nothing to drink)
• increasingly likely to empty rivers and underground water reserves

And when the rivers are running low, as they are more frequently, there is less water to grow anything at all.

The water used in growing and producing goods around the world is known as “virtual water” and the trade of these goods is known as “virtual water transfers.”

And who’s the biggest water exporting Mouseketeer of them all? The United States.

When you drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of the region, virtually taking a share of the Costa Rican rains. The same is true within a national and regional boundaries. The Colorado River is drained so Californians can eat their Big Macs and have friends over for a Sunday afternoon barbecue.

In the same way that your use of fossil fuel is measured as a “carbon footprint,” your water use, actual and through virtual water transfer, is measured as a “water footprint.”

How big is my water footprint?
I’ll show you mine if you show me yours

Arjen Y. Hoekstra, professor at the University of Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the water-footprint concept in 2002. It “shows water use related to consumption within a nation, while the traditional indicator shows water use in relation to production within a nation.” (Hoekstra and Chapagain, Globalization of Water, Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2008, p. 3)

With Hoekstra and Chapagain’s water footprint calculator (waterfootprint.org), you select your country, input food, domestic water use, and industrial goods consumption, press a button, and you get your:

• total water footprint for the year
• bar charts for the three components
• bar charts for individual food categories

For example, you’re in the US, eat only 1 pound of cereal a week (.4545 kg) and have a low-fat, low-sugar diet, use a low-flow showerhead, use a no-flush eco-toilet, and never run the tap while brushing your teeth. Two extremes:

• You’re the hippiest of the hip: making $10,000 a year: Your water footprint: 245 cubic meters (65,170 gallons)
• You’re the hippiest of the Yuppies: making $120,000: Your water footprint: 2979 cubic meters (792,414 gallons). Difference due to your income’s effect on industrial production.

Three notes on the calculations, because Professor Hoekstra is European and lives in the social welfare country that started birthing hippies in Amsterdam decades before they showed up in the US at Woodstock:

1. You input kilograms for food:
   • 1 kilogram = 2.2 pounds = 35.2 ounces
   • 1 ounce = 0.028 kilograms. 1 pound = 0.454545 kilograms
2. Your water footprint is in cubic meters per year:
   • 1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet = 266 gallons
3. The higher your income, the greater your water footprint, even if you don’t personally consume anything: you’re a capitalist pig supporting the Establishment Regime, I guess

So how is Cinnamon’s capitalist water footprint? Answer: 650 cubic meters (172,900 gallons)

I showed you mine. Now you show me yours:

Get the naked truth: Calculate your waterfootprint now:

Water’s running out:
I get the fossil fuel analogy so far.
And what about climate change?

We return to Fred Pearce’s book to find an example, of which he has oceans:

China’s Yellow River: The fifth longest in the world, it begins high in the mountains of eastern Tibet and journeys more than 3000 miles. Almost half a billion people depend on it for drinking and crop irrigation, and it’s made China the world’s largest wheat producer and second largest corn producer. Yet more than half of the lakes it feeds have disappeared over the last 20 years, and a third of pastures have turned to desert. This desertification generates huge dust storms that choke lungs in Beijing, close schools in Koreas, dust cars in Japan, and rain dust on mountains across the Pacific and Western Canada.

State irrigation projects along the Yellow River soak up the majority of its water – the total official allocations are greater than the actual flow.

The resulting drought could be an early warning sign of global warming.

Much of the declines in moisture reaching rivers is in line with prediction of climate researchers. So how does this global warming happen?

Higher air temperatures from desertification increase evaporation from oceans and intensify the water cycle. This increases atmospheric water vapor – 8 to 10% more than today. This increases global rainfall, but the rain is being redistributed: middle latitudes (read: the US) are becoming drier. Higher temperatures increase evaporation on land, meaning soil dries out faster, meaning less rainfall is reaching rivers.

The higher temperatures melt glaciers and snowpacks. At first, this leads to unpredecented floods. After the glaciers disappear, meltwaters that feed rivers disappear. The combined decreasing rainfall and increasing evaporation will lower moisture by 40% in the southern and western states.

The Sierra Nevada snowpack could diminish by 70 to 80 percent over the next 50 years. And some of the world’s most productive agricultural regions could dry up.

Global climate is becoming more extreme: the dry areas become drier, and the wet areas become wetter. And more areas are becoming dry deserts. Loss of habitat and agricultural lands. It’s a vicious cycle.

So what can you do?
Navigating through the Resource Matrix

As Fred Pearce points out, your drinking and bathing account for 0.05% of your total water consumption. Your food and clothing weigh in at 95.00%, although I find his 12,000 gallons needed to produce a pound of burger rather wild.

As Professor Arjen Y. Joekstra shows with his Water Footprint Calculator, your consumption of meats accounts for a lot, as does your guilt by association of being in an industrialized country.

The obvious solution: eat fewer e-coli burgers from your neighborhood Salt and Fat Slop Bucket restaurant.

The wiser solution: like your choices in energy use, become more aware of the resources needed to produce anything and the consequences. Such as luxurious cotton grown in the Egyptian desert.

Next article in the water efficiency series:
How an illiterate, lice-infested, foul-mouthed
peasant on some other side of the globe affects you

We continue going with the flow of water, when we show the parallel between the current hot Oil Wars and in the future cold Water Wars.

And all of this is for one purpose:

To help you see the Resource Matrix, everywhere, all around you.

Thanks for letting us keep you updated . . .

To your green, brighter future,

Cinnamon Alvarez,
A19

And now I would like to offer you free access to powerful info on energy efficiency that’s easy to read and cuts through all this “green” information clutter — so you can literally start making positive changes today.

You can access it now by going to: http://www.a19.com/pub/articles/

From Cinnamon Alvarez: Founder, A19 — woman-owned green manufacturer of hand-made ceramic lighting fixtures

GLOBAL'S WARMING

Technology Environment News 12-14-07 of Dekalb Academy

Gasification Sees a New Dawn

If you search for gasification and terms like “wood stove” on video sharing sites these days you will see demonstrations of wood being burnt in little stoves which seem to something almost miraculous and quite different from our idea of wood as a fuel. These little boilers light rapidly, produce no detectable smoke after the initial lighting and firing, and burn very hot.

So what is the technique which is being used, and how might it help us all in weaning society off fossil fuels?

What you have seen is a method of gasification. It differs from combustion in that it uses just 20% to 30% of the air or oxygen necessary for complete fuel combustion. During gasification, the amount of air supplied to the gasifier is carefully controlled with the effect that only a small part of the fuel burns completely. Trials of this process have illustrated that up to 70% of the energy value of the fue used can be recovered as what is known as synthesis gas, or syngas. This producer gas can also be used for various applications similar to natural gas.

This is a part of the magic, and not one really shown in the YouTube type videos, but it makes this method even more useful. This is due to the fact that syngas can be put to useful work, in both drying the feed fuel prior to gasification and after collection and storage it can be used as a fossil fuel replacement, and renewable energy source. When a gasification plant also includes Combined Heat and Power (CHP) and/or electricity export from the site, the gains are even more impressive.

Gasification in addition promises to be the most efficient long-term solution for capturing carbon while utilizing these valuable feedstocks, and storing the CO2 for very long priods, to reduce or halt global warming.

Gasification of wood and wood-type residues and waste in fixed bed or fluidised bed gasifiers with subsequent burning of the gas for heat production is has become state of the art with designers of thes systems working hard to gain the absolute maximum efficiency out of these systems.

These wood gasifiers which are located primarily in the Scandinavian countries are used almost entirely for space heating heat generation. Gasification of biomass is the renewable fuel system preferred by many, and can be defined as the thermal conversion of solid biomass to gaseous fuel.

Gasification has been around for over a hundred years, but the benefits of biochar are only now being discovered. Furthermore, it is still a wide-open field.

Before electric lighting was available in cities there were street lamps fuelled by gasified coal. It is easy to forget that the process has been reliably used on a commercial scale worldwide for more than 50 years in the refining, fertilizer, and chemical industries, and for more than 35 years in the electric power industry. More than 75 companies involved in the development, licensing, and use of these technologies as well as engineering, construction, equipment manufacturing and production of synthesis gas by gasification from coal, petroleum coke, heavy oils and other hydrocarbons.

Gasification has been proven to be a viable technology for CO2 capture and reducing SOx, NOx, particulate matter, and mercury emissions from coal and petcoke-fired power plants, synthetic fuels production, and chemical facilities.

Plants in this category have been capturing carbon dioxide for several decades in chemical plants in China and the United States. It also has potential contributions to make to both transportation and electrical power energy markets. With ongoing concerns about the price and availability of oil, populous countries like the U.S. gasification has proven to be in high demand and quite successful. However, it can also be used in conjunction with gas engines and gas turbines to obtain a higher conversion efficiency than conventional fossil-fuel electric power generation. Gasification can help meet renewable energy targets, address concerns about global warming, and contribute to meeting global environmental targets.

Steve has built a great web site where there is a lot more information about gasification. This is a hot subject indeed for this technology which has become an essential read for all those in alternative energy and interested in taking action to reduce the impact of climate change.

Green Roof

Is Australia’s Emission Trading System Going to Work Effectively

In Australia the government are introducing an emission trading or cap and trade scheme.  There are major concerns about the level of reduction the government wants to sign up to and also whether it will actually work.

As Australians we do need to take action about carbon reduction.  We are both the most vulnerable continent for feeling the effects of global warming and also we are the worst greenhouse emitters per head than any other country on the planet.  We emit even more than the USA and Canada who are our nearest competitors for this wooden spoon.  This is at least in part due to our huge coal industry.

The head of the Australia Institute’s Think Tank says that the Federal Government’s emissions trading scheme will have too many permits and will not reduce carbon emissions.

The Australia Institute’s executive director, Dr Richard Denniss, said the scheme’s flaws related to the 5 to 15 per cent emissions reduction targets, which he described as ”ridiculously low”, and he said there would be too many permits.  Dr Dennis said that “We won’t achieve the policy goal, which is to reduce emissions.”

Dr Denniss told the Senate that ”[If] we pass this legislation, we’ve got it for the next 10 years. And anyone that’s got a good idea a year later, it’s not going to help. This legislation is designed to not be tinkered with.”

Professor Clive Hamilton, from the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, said the proposed scheme had damaged Australia’s reputation. A reduction target of at least 25 per cent needed to be set if the Government wanted credibility on the world stage.   Australia would be better off taking no policy than the proposed model to the December climate change talks in Copenhagen, he said.

”It not only lowers the ambition of the world community but also excludes Australia from being a forceful player in negotiating … a strong international agreement.”

It is hard to see how exempting large emitters ignoring the 1.9 million small to medium businesses is going to help us reduce our carbon footprint. These same small businesses are currently suffering from financial stress, the business owners and managers are overworked and simply don’t feel able to handle anything new. Many don’t really understand what global warming is about or why it matters. 

We urgently need unambiguous communication so that small to medium businesses accept the reality of the need for change and also how easy it can be to make significant reductions with minimal time input and save money at the same time.

We also need to help low income households reduce their carbon footprint with more efficient heating and cooling and effective public transport.  We should NOT be giving them even more cash hand outs as “compensation” as currently promised by the government.  All households need to come on board and stop wasting power.

We need a clear message that going green applies to all of us, is easy and saves money – just “go for a grumpy walk and just turn it off”.  If every small business and householder just went around each office and home and did this it would be relatively easy for every one to reduce their carbon emissions and their power bill by 15-20%. At present we are told it will be difficult and it only applies to big business.  Such a wrong message – we all need to pull together.

A Brief given to the Victorian Government advises that the state should only bother with green measures if they are more cost-effective than alternatives.  They have been told to rethink programs such as subsidies for solar farms and hybrid car fleets because these will not contribute to any additional emission cuts under the federal scheme.

The Greens have concerns about the cost of emission permits being reduced by the actions of households, councils and governments, hence reducing industry’s incentive to cut emissions. This is more than simply an economic debate. Individuals and households should also be reducing their emissions. Achieving sustainability is a grassroots exercise that involves the entire community, and Australians are becoming aware of the need to remake the economy and society. The momentum must not be lost.

An additional concern is whether the legislation and also the international agreements reached in Copenhagen will be flexible enough to take account of emerging technology.  At present this does not appear to be the case.  Senator Wong, the Minister for Climate Change, rejected spending on biochar, a form of carbon capture in soil research because that is not listed in the protocol.  Thankfully some soil carbon storage research will now be funded in the agriculture budget but that begs the requirement for the legislation to be flexible and allow for new and future technology.

If the ETS cannot deliver real carbon reductions it is really a form of “greenwash” saying we signed Kyoto and have done something before the next election. The big problem is that the government looks ahead 3 years to the next election, Big Biz CEO’s also look to the short term of their contracts and bonuses.  Who looks ahead for our children?

Jean Cannon is an energy management and sustainable business consultant. If you would like more information about how to go green in your home or business and increase your business profits why don’t you go to http://www.itiseasytobegreen.com and download a chapter of my book of almost the same name and find out how to reduce your carbon footprint.

Climate Modeling Proves Global Warming, a Global Warming Alarmist Recently Noted

Many folks have taken to Global Warming, which by definition means the planet is warming due to CO2 from man-made emissions. If the planet were warming from any other source, it would be by definition called climate change. Unfortunately for the Global Warming evangelists the planet may not be warming, in fact, as of late the solar minimum is at a record low, and the planet is cooling.

Still, the believers in this doom and gloom scenario say that Climate Computer Modeling proves it. Oh, really, because as it stands humans wrote those computer models and the algorithms that generate these futurist prediction. In fact, one of the biggest issues with the climate modeling is they keep re-adjusting them to get the desired resultant. There is something seriously fishy about that.

Personally, I do not like pollution, land, sea or air, or even all that space debris up there. That’s just proof of inefficiency, which is not worthy of human potential or intellect. But, computer modeling is only as good as the program and data. Garbage in = garbage out.

If reduction of pollution, let’s say CO2 is the goal then let’s dump the scientific pretendism and get real; let’s just say that the human race has agreed to reduce greenhouse gases on the planet caused from mankind and then start doing it. But to hold this Global Warming doomsday theory out as real is really not helping anyone. In fact, we are liable to change our entire civilization’s infrastructure for no reason whatsoever.

Because the reality is that the Earth’s atmosphere and ambient surface temperatures heat up and cool in cycles and they have for billions of years, and there is nothing that mankind presently can do about that. Think on it.

Lance Winslow – Lance Winslow’s Bio. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; http://www.WorldThinkTank.net/.

2008- Granny Arrested/Greenest car

---

How Solar Power Powers Your Home | Go Solar Power For Homes

Ever wondered, How does solar power work to power you home? There are two main types of solar power, solar thermal and photovoltaic. Solar thermal is a.

---

Solar Power Training â?? What You Need to Know About Solar Power

Article By James Copper We’ve all been hearing about solar power and solar energy for the past few years. In an effort to help our environment, many are trying to use solar power in simple small ways they can afford.

---

Solar-power system can provide 300mw power for national grid …

Nearly 300 megawatts of power can easily be generated from solar energy to feed the hungry national grid if solar-power systems are installed on rooftops of 20000 multistoried buildings in Dhaka, experts say. …

---

Serious Solar Power On The Way

One hundred gigawatts . That’s power, baby. That’s how much the Department of the Interior wants to set up using federal funds. Using a possible 24 site locations, that would supply up to 30% of the electrical needs of the United States …

---

Bureau of Land Management to Designate Solar Power Fast Track …

photo: Tony via flick Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar has just announced that the Bureau of Land Management will designate some 24 sites in six western states as Solar Energy Study Areas; and will establish new solar power permitting.

How Can Technology Help the Environment?

How can technology help improve the environment? Are we promoting a more singular existence, where individualism is the force that is driving us along? We are now living in a world that is in an accelerated mode of change and innovation. Is this rate of change detrimental to our existence? Think about this for a moment. On the one hand we have improvements in all areas of our lives some are greater than others. On the other hand we are looking at the effects of the harmful destruction of our planet earth.

The first computers started to emerge around the 1940’s, now we have computer processors in a lot of the electronic equipment we use every day. We even have computers that can fit in your hand that have more power than the first computers.The first Television and television transmission appeared in 1925 and now we are watching gigantic flat screens, some as big as buildings and others screens as small as wrist watches. In the past 80 years the medical field has also grown in leaps and bounds in the areas of IVF, genetic research, cloning, stem cell research, along with the progress in the prevention, cure and management of various diseases. Other fields such as astronomy, environmental science, weapons/warfare and engineering have also had their fair share of extraordinary development achievements.

Looking at the issues of Global warming and human environment interaction we are currently facing within our natural environment. Should we really be in a race to ruin the land where we live? We cannot keep up with the current technology, just look at all the equipment you have taken to the recycle tip in just the last 12-24 months. Consider how many Televisions, Videos, DVD players, Computers, Laptops, Hi-fi’s and Home entertainment systems you have changed or bought recently, the list is endless. When an improvement is made to a product it can sometimes make the original product obsolete. Satellite Navigation equipment a new and easily available product for everyone. Even if you only use it once a year it is believed to be a must have product. Mobile phones is another product every man and his dog has one these days. How often do you change your mobile phone for the latest model? Can you ever imagine being without a mobile phone? How did we ever cope without them? The raw materials used to make a phone cannot be recycled easily. 

I believe as we get to understand one part(s) of our lives we seem to lose sight of others parts that are equally as important. What can be done to slow down the rate of change or how do we as a nation become more aware of the effects of the rate of change has on our environment.

If we could not have a new television or other new product until the old one had been recycled properly we would help the environment tremendously. Today if we implemented this many products or versions of products would be missed because of the speed at which technology changes. Like the latest flat screen with super clear picture quality. It seem that every other week we get the next new and improved product. Just look at washing power or washing up liquid advertisements.

Just some food for thought more to come soon.

Take advantage of more free valuable content at this website: http://computerbass.com/

You will find something of interest…

---

Feds Hope To Have 13 New Solar Power Plants On Public Lands By …

Colorado solar power study area map Essentially, the plan would streamline the entire development process; coordinate zoning and environmental studies, and; prioritize the processing of the projects. The new plan will tap resources made …

---

The Rural Blog: Boom in wind and solar power requires new lines …

An old source of controversy in rural areas, high-voltage power lines, has a new impetus: the need to run lines from major electric-consuming areas to the usually remote and less populated areas that are sources of wind and solar power. …

---

Solar Energy Advantages And Disadvantages Uncovered | Home Solar Power

One of the most important considerations when you are thinking of setting up your very own solar power system is the return on investment. Be warned that the initial investment can be fairly high by most standards, even though most …

---

Solar Power Buzz: Jobs In Solar: PV Systems Project Manager …

skip to main | skip to sidebar. Solar Power Buzz. Thursday, July 2, 2009. Jobs In Solar: PV Systems Project Manager (Bedford, MA ). Reply to: job-kybym-1245876427@craigslist.org … New Solar Power Video Showcase Here! Blog Archive …

---

How To Make Do It Yourself Solar Power System To Save On Electricity

How To Make Do It Yourself Solar Power System To Save On Electricity. Learn how make Do It Yourself solar power system to generate free supply of electricity from the sun. Save 80% of your electrical bills and build a green and healthy …