CNT Fall 2010 Update

Hello fellow CNTers,

I hope that everyone has had an enjoyable (and not too stressful) semester so far. I’m writing with an update on the progress of our work from this past spring and summer. The complete GHG emissions report, which was reviewed by the Chancellor’s Cabinet, was submitted to the Presidents’ Climate Commitment website on 9/15. Since then, Dr. Hale and the Chancellor have been reviewing various options for the most effective way to bring our work to the rest of the campus community. One exciting possibility is that we may do a presentation during a visit to campus of the DNR Secretary!

Andi and I (along with Professors Boulter, Pierson, and Hale) want to open up this opportunity to any members of CNT 2010 who want to participate; it is a wonderful opportunity to “show off” our research and writing, and to begin to make the case for our recommendations. (It is also a nice way to add something to your developing resumes!)

We will be working on the final presentation and an updated PowerPoint in the very near future; if you are interested in helping with any part of this process, please contact me via email as soon as possible.

Laura

CNT10 is Running Again!

Hello, fellow CNT10ers-

The Summer CNTeam met this morning, bright and early, to discuss our summer plans and go over the past reports. We will keep running posts to keep you updated throughout the summer.

If you have any additions to your Data or Legacy documents - or suggestions that have crept into your mind after speaking with the Chancellor, please let Laura or me know via blog comment or UWEC email (Andi: krunnfae; Laura: headrill).

Keep it green,

Summer CNT10

"Water Adds New Constraint to Power"

I just saw this article on NY Times (click the title for a link) and thought it was very relevant to our class.

We've talked a lot about how different kinds of power generation create different amounts of carbon. We've also discussed how one of the major problems of climate change will be water shortages. Those two debates are more connected than I thought - most types of power plants (including thermal solar) use water as a coolant. There are different ways to do this of course, with different considerations. Some methods put warm water back into rivers and lakes, which can kill wildlife, and other types let it evaporate, which doesn't kill the wildlife but wastes the water. It's a really interesting debate - and yet another wrinkle to an already complex issue of trying to generate power. At the same time, however, California has successfully put regulations in place that are encouraging new power plants to put in less water-consuming cooling systems. It remains to be seen how this issue will finally play out, but I'm looking forward to seeing where people go from here.

PowerPoint Presentation

Hi, folks-

I edited the Transportation section of the PowerPoint and altered the background color to a light beige. Feel free to change it back, etc. (Still on W Drive - Final Presentation_Draft2)

Also, if you have any more recommendations or suggestions for the Transportation section, please let me/us know via email or blog.

Just thought I'd let you know...

Thanks,

Andi

eCO2 Emissions

Post the eCO2 emissions for your section here!

Electricity is responsible for 13,278.2 metric tons of eCO2.

Please note that this uses our estimates of the months yet to come. We are going to use this number for now, but it will end up changing sometime this summer when we have all the correct data.

Energy Education Initiatives Stalled

Here's the opening from a NYT "Dot Earth" blog post--click on the title above to read the whole post at "Dot Earth":

"While the political fight over the now-vivid  environmental threat attending offshore oil drilling plays out, it remains clear that the country’s lawmakers are not remotely engaged in the  multi-pronged energy quest that would be required to move the world toward a non-polluting, yet prosperous future.
One vital prong is education. So far, Congress — even with Democrats in control — has refused to support President Obama’s repeated call for a modest investment in education initiatives that could help produce the skilled workforce required to undertake a sustained push on advancing and disseminating promising energy technologies. Last year, Congress largely rebuffed Obama’s request for $115 million for the program, called  Regaining our Energy Science and Engineering Edge. He’s trying again, this time seeking $74 million in the 2011 budget."

Elizabeth Kolbert

Thanks to all for an excellent discussion this morning.  We ran out of time to discuss the "Afterword" for the (late) 2009 paperback edition, so if you have some further thoughts--or thoughts you just didn't get a chance to express this morning--please add them here.  And perhaps you've been thinking about our overall discussion, and realize you have some things you'd like to add.  Here's the opportunity!

Click on Kolbert's name to see an interesting interview with her from 2006.

Rachel Carson

I'd like to hear your initial reactions to Rachel Carson's Silent Spring.  You may choose to respond with any thoughts you had about your parents'/grandparents' lives during the time the documentary covers (say, immediately post WWII to 1963).  You may also post on any specific things from the documentary that provoked a response in you.  Let's stay focused on Carson/her book for now.

PS: If you're curious about children's books on Rachel Carson, try this Amazon.com link; it goes to one specific book, but then also shows other related books.

Heifer International Building

I went on the Civil Rights Pilgrimage over spring break and one of our stops was the Heifer International Building, one of the most sustainable buildings I've ever seen in my life. I've been meaning to upload these pictures for a little while. Basically they built the building extremely narrow so that natural light could be use to light the majority of the building. Similarly, the LED lights used to light the areas of the building that do not receive enough natural light sense how much light is in the room and become correspondingly more or less dim to save energy. They also collect rainwater to use in toilets, etc. where they don't need actual city water to save water resources. They have their heating vents in the floor to allow for more efficient heating and cooling. The carpeting is recycled and made in squares so that if any needs to be replaced it can be replaced one square at a time to save money and resources. These are just a few of the things I remember from the building and I actually submitted a few for the new Davies Center, but I thought some of it was really cool and you guys might be interested.

Nuclear option?

While I realize this maybe a sensitive topic to some, I was recently introduced to a new and inovative method using nuclear power on a small scale, like for a community or in our case, a university. The company is called Hyperion Power Generation.........

"Founded in 2007, Hyperion Power Generation Inc. is a privately held company that was formed to commercialize a small modular nuclear reactor designed by Los Alamos National Laboratory (“LANL”) scientists leveraging forty years of technological advancement. The reactor, known as the Hyperion Power Module (“HPM”), was designed to fill a previously unmet need for a transportable power source that is safe, clean, sustainable, and cost-efficient."

I believe we often tend to immediately dismiss nuclear power as too costly and unsafe but I would like you all to consider the idea, even if briefly. Check out their website I linked and particularly the tabs "Why Nuclear?" and "Quick Facts Sheet".

Just for some balence, I also suggest you visit Nature.com and read "Nuclear Energy: Assessing the Emissions" where Kurt Kleiner reports on whether nuclear power deserves its reputation as a low-carbon energy source.

This could be an alternative to our coal fired heating plant and would most likely, vastly reduce our UW-Eau Claire carbon footprint.

I am very interested in your thoughts.

Of Cardboard and Cow Farts

Hey, everyone!

I was just bopping around on the internet and found this article on a green design contest. The link is in the title. The article itself is about a year old, but I had never heard of the winning designs. It's short, interesting, and applicable to our class. I hope you enjoy it!

For Robyn and Isaac especially!

We were wondering exactly how you calculated the offset for the Waste-to-Energy program. It says "To calculate the offset of Veolia Environmental services Waste-to-Energy program, figures for the campus' tons of garbage were collected and were first input into the CACPCCC as if the waste were disposed of into a landfill instead of through the program...This value was then again put into the CACPCCC to generate carbon emissions generated within the Waste-to-Energy program." As far as inputing these goes, can you perform a calculation in solely one area of the calculator without having any other data in there? Thanks!

Transportation Survey Comments

I just watched my boyfriend take our survey, and we found a few things that confused us. I am not sure if these need/can be changed, but I just wanted to make everyone aware. Hopefully other people will add their thoughts here too. Anyway, we thought that it would be helpful to say how much parking permits currently cost when asking how raising the price would impact the survey taker. Also, my boyfriend said that there already is an electronic ride board. Are we trying to find out if people are aware of it? Or, are we asking if we want another kind of electronic system?

Hope that helps!

Spring Break and Beyond

Happy Friday,

Just a reminder that Mission Advertise starts a week from this Sunday night and will continue Monday morning. Amanda and I will need help putting up table tents (one per table), posters (we have a list of places), tying up the banner, placing lawn signs (campus mall and south side of Davies), and chalking! Amanda and I will be doing the display case, as well.

We have everything reserved from April 5-7 (Monday-Wednesday) of next week, so they need to go up quickly to get the word out as much as possible. We can continue chalking throughout, and the Axis TV's (Davies) will have information up throughout as well. In addition, I am meeting with the Spectator this morning to try to convince them to run an article-line with Green/Carbon Footprint information and a follow-up of our study.

Back to things you can help with: We will provide all of the materials needed - all we need is you to show up! Please email me with your availability and if you have a specific job that you'd like to do.

Thanks, and enjoy spring break! (Remember to track your miles to your destination!)

Andi

The discussion continues...

I’ve included below two of the questions that we didn’t get to the other day. Please find some time over the next two weeks to post some of your thoughts and responses to these two questions. I’ll try to keep up, but if I don’t respond right away, look for me to do so over break. I look forward to your thoughts...

1) Climate change “skeptics” (their word; my word choice is “deniers”) often claim that the science of climate change is not being carried out appropriately. To begin a discussion of the true “scientific method”, please take a look at http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01. It’s a simple website, probably intended for an audience younger than you, but its content is right on target. Thoughts, comments? How does this differ from what you learned in primary school; how does it differ from what you believed before you read it? How do computer models of the global climate “fit” into the scientific process described in the website above?

2) In a nice synergy of accident, Elizabeth Kolbert contributed the segment at the end of Chapter 2 of Schmidt & Wolfe: Picturing the Science. Read that segment (pp. 70-71) and think about the way climate change is portrayed in the media, both locally (i.e. the Spectator) and nationally (USA Today, perhaps or even the Web); maybe even Google some articles to get a feel for it. Also read (or re-read) the segment at the end of Chapter 6 of Schmidt and Wolfe: Picturing the Science by Naomi Oreskes (pp.153-155). What are your thoughts on the reporting of climate change; is it generally “fair and balanced”? What does that phrase even mean in the context of reporting an inherently scientific story, but one with enormous socioeconomic implications? What sources do you trust; which do you exclude?

An Idea for Our Report

Hey everyone,

As the heating team met today after class, the idea came up to include a quote from the heating plant supervisor Jim Franklin. I bring this up to the whole class because I was wondering if for consistency, we would all like to include at least one quote in our respective sections. It could make our writing more personal as it did when Kolbert added her characters. Ours would be on a smaller scale, but I think it's something we should consider and decide on.

Also, maybe we would like to discuss consistency with photos as well. Would everyone be willing to commit to providing at least one photo for their section? We could use it at the beginning of each section with the heading, perhaps.

Finally, I have a separate question regarding the electricity team. This might be over your heads, but I hear every now and then that a lot of electronics take energy when they're plugged in even if they're turned off. I personally use a power bar for most of my electronics, and I turn it off every night. I'm curious to know if that makes any difference in my carbon footprint, and if so, could we promote the use of power bars for the campus especially with the student body living in the dorms?

Letter: Global warming evidence exists

When you have a minute or two, read Dr. Crispin Pierce's letter to the Spectator.  I've included a link to the on-line edition (which I hope will work-it's an awfully long URL).

Survey to be Opened on Later Date

Hello again, my fellow CNTers-

The Transportation Team (along with Dr. H and Robyn) met this morning for a bit of review work. While editing the survey, we came to the conclusion that with our potential participants already being swamped with surveys and midterms, our difficulty preparing multiple incentives, and the delay in finalizing our "year," we would be better off moving the survey to a later date.

The survey will now be sent out after spring break.

This means that we have a longer time to do test-runs of our survey for clarity and content, and a few more weeks to find incentives. If you have any ideas, suggestions, or incentive-connections, please contact me or another member of the Transportation Team right away and we will take care of it.

In addition, we have decided to use the 2009-2010 fiscal year for our data collection.

While this includes estimations, "Choice 3: July 1, 2009 - June 31, 2010" was by far the most popular choice of our classmates, as shown on our Timeline blog comments. This means that each of the teams using University-recorded data will need to view the data for May and June of previous years in order to estimate the carbon output for May and June 2010 (based on trend). The Transportation Team will be using the June and July 2009 transportation data as June and July 2010 in order to keep our data as accurate as possible. Though the estimations will result in a small drop of data-integrity and reliability, the vast majority of the class believed this to be our best option for the sake of relevance and clarity.

Until Friday,

Andi

Transportation Survey, Rough Draft 4

Hello, CNTers -

The external reviewer has replied and given us many constructive suggestions. I went through the survey and made the changes that I thought were appropriate and have emailed the Transportation Team with the edited version of our survey.
(In case you wanted an update on how it's going!)

Also, the Transportation Team is working hard on finding incentives for the survey. If you know of any ideas or have any great connections, please contact me at: krunnfae@uwec.edu so that we can finalize our prizes.

I will see you all on Friday,
Andi

It's All About Timing (elevated from a comment to a post by Dr H)

Because this is an important issue, and I'm afraid Andi's thoughtful summarizing of the situation will be missed where it is, I'm copying/pasting/posting it here to get your attention.  The rest of this is all from Andi.  (also, don't miss Lynn's post right below this one, which I don't want you to miss because it is so COOL!)

I agree with Elizabeth - we should quickly come to a decision; until we do, our survey and data-collecting are at a stand-still. I also agree with Isaac in that we absolutely cannot use data from two separate years. The transportation and University-usage data must be from the same year or our results will be more skewed than they would be from estimating one or the other. We have three year choices: July 1, 2008 - June 31, 2009 June 1, 2009 - May 31, 2010 July 1, 2009 - June 31, 2010 Below, I've commented on what I see as pro's and con's for each. Please let me know what you think, and let's make a decision.