Solar Windows

We all think of solar panels as being large, bulky and expensive things attached to roofs or lined up in vast 'arrays' in deserts.

Wouldn't it be nice if they could be more discreet and cheap?!

Well, it seems we're beginning to get there: Flexible sheets of solar cells which can be fixed to windows have been possible for a year or two now. But these have been inefficient and short lived compared with standard solar panels. Now though, it seems a technique has been found by a Swiss inventor which should get round these problems and make them cheap (See here).

It opens up the possibility of house and office windows being covered with these completely transparent sheets for little cost whilst cutting electric bills considerably.

Since the technique has already gone into mass production, it shouldn't be too long before it'll be coming to a window near you.

Taking One For The Team

Note to Self: Another drawback to cycling to work is birds crapping on you as you pass below....

Washington Talks Tough Over Oil Spill

Last month I spoke about the possibility that the U.S. may look again at it's addiction to oil in the wake of the Gulf oil spill.

Well, amazingly, the President is attempting to rally support for a "new future" of clean energy. Simultaneously, bosses from the 5 biggest oil companies are being subjected to intense questioning by the U.S. Congress regarding safety!

It's touch and go whether all this will result in a sea-change in America's relationship with fossil fuels but it gives us all a bit of hope to cling to.

Biofuels

Know what a biofuel is? What if I said that you've got some in your petrol tank at the moment? Still none the wiser?

Basically, biofuels are fuels that are, in some way, derived from a plant or animal source. For example, they can process corn, soya, or palm oil into a form that can run your car.

So what, you might ask.

Well, on the face of it, biofuels could be the answer to a lot of problems.

For the oil companies, it could be the future: a cheap and renewable replacement for crude oil which is getting increasingly more expensive to find and exploit.

For the rest of us, it's potentially a low (theoretically zero) carbon alternative to oil.

However, there are drawbacks:

• Firstly, at a time when we're trying to increase the food supply as our population grows, crops once grown for food are being diverted for fuel as the latter is more lucrative. If crops continue to be hijacked like this, it will force up food prices.

• Secondly, forests are being cleared at a frightening rate to provide land for biofuel crops, so increasing the carbon footprint of this supposedly low carbon fuel.

• Thirdly, the crops take a fair bit of processing before they can be used for fuel. As a result, some biofuels have a bigger footprint than fossil fuels!

As a result of all this, the EU is now looking to stop the use of these higher carbon versions.

This should encourage the use of so-called second generation biofuels, ones which do not use food crops, but use stuff like waste and the stalks of crops. This should reduce the footprint and the impact on food supplies.

Beyond these, there are third generation biofuels which are created from algae grown in vats.

These more advanced techniques are quite exciting for the future. But there's a problem for these and all biofuels. How do you manufacture enough of it to satisfy the massive wordwide demand? There are an estimated 600 million cars out there and up to a million planes for a start.

I can't see that happening myself.

Anyone for Biodiversity?

We humans have been using animals and plants as a natural resource since we first evolved. No bad thing: We need them for food, shelter, clothing, and medicine amongst other things.

As long as we use them sustainably, then I see no problem there (Apologies to any vegetarians, who probably have a very different view!).

So what about the ones we're not using? Should we care about them?

I'd say, yes. For a start, we need as much vegetation as possible, especially forests, in order to absorb all the carbon emissions we produce. These trees and plants don't exist in isolation either. They are part of complex ecosystems. Remove any part of an ecosystem and it may collapse. Afterall, plants often depend on animals for fertilisation and the distribution of seed.

Another point: We're so good at exploiting this natural resource, we're discovering new uses all the time. So it doesn't make sense to let it be whittled away. Who's to say there's not a cure for cancer out there? Every extinction that takes place out there could mean the loss of just such a 'miracle' cure.

I could go on but you can see what I'm saying here: We need to preserve biodiversity (i.e. the range of animals and plants) for very practical reasons.

Unfortunately, we've not had too good a record on this lately. We are now losing species at an alarming rate. However, it seems that things are looking up, with the announcement that a new UN scientific panel for biodiversity is to be set up to give 'best advice' on the issue to governments. You can read more about it here.

Hopefully, it'll help us to stabilise things before they get out of hand. Ultimately, it's in all our interests.

Major Vegetation Shifts Worldwide

As climate change takes hold, the world's climatic regions will change their positions. Hot climates will expand from the Tropics, temperate climates will extend towards the poles and up mountainsides, and arctic climates will contract.

As most, if not all, animals and plants are sensitive to climatic conditions, they will naturally tend to migrate or come under pressure as these regions change.

I've been aware for a while now of various reports that the world's plants were even now in the process of extending/contracting their range. Now, numerous studies from around the world have been pulled together to form a global picture of what's actually going on (See here for a summary).

It makes quite worrying reading: Basically, changes do seem to be happening, further underlining the belief that climate change is already here.

Sea Level Rise Prediction

A polar science conference is going on in Oslo, Norway at the moment.

It will cover a whole range of subjects to do with the Arctic and Antarctic regions from penguin studies to climate change.

One comment of note so far was from Professor Tim Naish, Director of the Antarctic Research Centre at the Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand. He said that scientists were "...converging on agreeing a sea level rise of 1m by the end of the century." Which is double the figure in a recent UN report. Naish even thought the prediction could go as high as 2 metres.

For the 150 million people currently living within a metre above sea-level, that's bad news.

Hello John, got a new Motor?!

I've been giving some thought to what sort of car I'll buy next. Probably not going to happen for a while yet but it's always good to plan these things.

Given an unlimited budget I'd be holding out for a Nissan Leaf (An electric car going on sale in 2011. See my earlier posting on it) at £23k....actually, given a really unlimited budget, I'd go for a Tesla Roadster (still an electric car but what a car! See inset) at around £80k.

Sadly, I'm not loaded and I certainly won't be buying a new car. No sooner have they handed you the keys to your new toy but it's depreciated by £3000! I'd far sooner get a 3 year old car. It's like a new car but often well below half the new price!

But what sort of car? Well, hopefully one that's a bit greener than my Nissan Primera at 177 g/km CO2 emissions. Probably a Peugeot 407 1.6 HDi. Same size, 27% less emissions, and double the mpg. Why not a Toyota Prius? Because I don't have an unlimited budget and those beasties cost £9K second-hand still.

Hydrogen Fueled Cars

Ever heard of the Honda FCX Clarity? No, me neither until about 2 weeks ago.

It's a car which runs off hydrogen and it's only emission is...water. A concept car surely? No, this is apparently a fully formed car based on technology that's as well developed as that for electric cars.

Not only that, but it seems the car is good to drive too.

One drawback though, as this article points out, Honda have no plans to sell in the UK because we won't build the infrastructure (e.g. fuelling points) until there's sufficient demand. But, of course, there can be no demand until people can actually run the things!

Let's hope the new government decides to take another look at this one.

P.S. One slight concern I've got about the technology which doesn't seem to get mentioned anywhere, is that the hydrogen that fuels these cars is produced by breaking down water. Trouble is, water is likely to be a scarce commodity in many countries in the near future. Will this fuel actually be sustainable?!

Rechargeable Wii Remotes

I can't stand devices that use up loads of batteries. It's not just the expense of all those Duracells, but the endless waste, whether they're recycled or not.

For that reason, we try to use rechargeables wherever possible. And that's why I decided to get some rechargeable Wii remotes to replace our normal one.

Bad idea. Rechargeables just don't seem to hold a charge for any appreciable period. My impression is that they're useless after just 2 weeks left lying about. I'm not sure if this can be extended by removing the battery pack from the Wii while it's not in use but if it does then that's just poor design. A rechargeable remote should not drain the batteries while it's not in use. Or am I being naiive?

Anyway, the end result is that we can't just fire up the Wii when we like because, more often than not, the remotes won't work. So much for spontaneity.

Frankly, these things are only workable if you use them every week. So I think we'll be returning to the normal remotes very soon.