Tagged: carbon emission RSS

  • zzeed 11:32 pm on Saturday, October 31, 09 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , carbon emission, , , , ,   

    An Inconvenient Truth 

    algore_mac

    I just watched An Inconvenient Truth. The documentary seemed very credible. Regardless of any dispute with its technicality (if you have any), I think what Al Gore brings is pretty decent. Essentially, the core principle for an everyday reminder is – do no waste or live wastefully. Resources are scarce. This is the #1 rule in Economics.

    I like the format in which the documentary is presented:

    First the convincing of
    1) Is it worth it? Yes. The biggest stakeholders are your children and your children’s children, and so on.
    2) Do you have what it takes? Yes. These are the things we already know… efficiency, green technology, alternative energy, etc.

    Any NO answer to the above renders the whole behavior-changing journey useless. And the biggest style of all was – “Here are my proofs and evidence – I invite you to prove me wrong.”

    Needless to say, Al Gore spends too much time on his Mac too. LOL.

    Links to the argument and the counter-argument:
    http://www.climatecrisis.net
    http://www.globalclimatescam.com

     
    • kakngah 10:49 am on Tuesday, November 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

      i have only ‘heard’ of al gore before, but after watching this, i have respect for him for the efforts he’s putting in for this cause..

      • zzeed 7:30 am on Saturday, November 7, 09 Permalink | Reply

        looks like he’s been doing it from the very beginning… like college time.

    • aliya 11:56 am on Tuesday, November 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

      he might have lost in the election to george-stupid-bush but i think he’s more popular now than bush..and certainly more useful!

      • zzeed 7:32 am on Saturday, November 7, 09 Permalink | Reply

        i have to agree! a million time more beneficial

    • IHSAN 5:22 pm on Tuesday, November 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

      “Here are my proofs and evidence – I invite you to prove me wrong”

      That’s the style of some verses in the Qur’an as well.

      BTW he’s in the Board of Directors at Apple. Of course he’s a Mac guy. I believe he’s one of the people who pushed Apple to be greener and eco-friendly with regards to the products.

      • zzeed 7:41 am on Saturday, November 7, 09 Permalink | Reply

        That’s what I initially wanted to write down. But I couldn’t locate the article I found that talked about the Qur’an style. Need to find that first.

        I know he’s one of the board members. Steve Jobs must have had plenty of one to one talks with Al Gore about being greener and greener (now that more folks set green eyes on apple)

  • zzeed 10:52 pm on Thursday, October 15, 09 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: carbon emission, , ,   

    Forbes’ Green Company of the Year 

    exxon_forbes

    Is Forbes for real? I thought Exxon doesn’t bend to Kyoto Protocol.

    I discovered a few others questioning it.

    1. Mary of Many Colors.
    2. Greenanswers.com
    3. MotherJones.com

    Some have even banned ExxonMobil’s ad:
    UK: Advertising watchdog bans ExxonMobil ad over green claims

     
  • zzeed 10:09 pm on Wednesday, September 30, 09 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: carbon emission, contracting,   

    Contracting and challenging the facts 

    I began the work for the day with contracting matters. Apparently a contract had almost ran out the approved value so it is my duty to identify, justify, and get ratification for a new contract value. Yes indeed, I am a qualified Contracting engineer. But I lack the depth of the laws and procurement part of the contracting. I’m just good at the surface. Those two roles are integral for a contract to be in place, but it’s not like I’ll jump over to the supply chain or the legal band soon, right?

    ***

    The energy-saving initiative at work posted this on the board the other day:

    If you turn off the PC overnight, you’ll save enough the carbon emission equivalent to power up 2 televisions for a year.

    If 10,000 PCs are turned off overnight, between us, we’ll save enough carbon emission equivalent to drive to the moon and back 4 times!

    I looked at the first and pondered, OK, that’s fine. 1 PC consumption for 12 standby hours could be the same electricity generation required for 2 TV set for a year. The PC must have been the power-hungriest Pentium 4, one of the most inefficient of the sorts with the cooling vent partially blocked or something. And the TV set must have been the most energy-efficient, award-winning Energy star compliant LED type, the ones about an inch thick, endorsed by by both WHO and the United Nation.

    But when I looked at the second – I found that a little hard to swallow. Maybe it’s just me.

    So I did a little fact-finding.

    Check your facts!

    According to Sightline institute (non-profit), CO2 emission for an average sedan is 1.10 lbs/ passenger-mile. Assume this is one passenger going to the moon and back so the emission equivalent is 1.10lbs/mile.

    carbon_emission

    Earth’s radius is 6367.5km. Moon’s radius is 1737.5km. The mean distance between center earth to center moon is 384,403km. So the distance between earth surface and moon surface is:

    Dmoon-earth = 384,403 km – 6367.5km – 1737.5 km = 376,298 km

    = 233,821 miles#

    So driving to the moon and back four times equals

    8 . Dmoon-earth = 8 x 233,821 miles      = 1,870,565 miles

    The carbon emission equivalent is then

    1.10lbs/mile x 1,870,565 miles                  = 2,057,621 lbs

    A Dell Optiplex GX620 on the other hand consumes 220W power at max, at about 88% efficiency (per Dell’s published technical book, Energy Star compliance). Assuming that without much activity by leaving the PC to standby overnight (fan, HD and minimum power to motherboard), the PC still operates at about half of 220W on the high side (a factor of 0.5)

    The estimated actual power rating is then:

    0.5 x 220W    = 110W

    According to the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, on average, electricity sources emit 1.297 lbs CO2 per kWh (0.0005883 metric tons CO2 per kWh). State CO2 emissions per kWh may vary greatly in accordance with the amount of clean energy in the energy supply (Vermont, Idaho: .03 lbs/kWh; North Dakota: 2.24 lbs/kWh).

    So if 10,000 of you turn off the PC for 12 hours until the morning, the resultant power consumption during that period would be:

    10,000 x 110W x 12 h                 = 13,200,000 Wh         = 13,200 kWh

    1.297lbs CO2 /kWh x 13,200    = 17,120 lbs!

    Even by using more conservative numbers, the result is

    10,000 x 0.220kW x 12 h x 2.24 lbs/kWh = 59,136 lbs!



    I ran through the above with a friend next door in case I missed out anything and submitted it to the energy-saving initiative team. In my e-mail, I asked, “So what are your sources for the figures? What is your basis?”

     
    • intan saleh 7:16 am on Saturday, October 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

      i’m always amazed by your dilligence to do such thing. i would have just tossed the note aside, saying how ridikulus that sounds and can’t be bothered. ahaha!

      i always turn/switch things off anyway.. if you haven’t noticed.

      good on you for emailing the team. pls let us know of their reply.

      • zzeed 8:10 pm on Saturday, October 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

        maybe it springs up from the engineering in me. would you really? turn/switch things off?… i haven’t noticed.

        they have not replied yet after 3 business days. i noticed that some of the huge bill boards that show efficiency suggestions have been taken out from their original place.

      • IHSAN 11:00 pm on Saturday, October 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

        Zidni is the sort of guy for these kinds of things… he keeps a record of fuel consumption rate for his Nissan, programmed an excel file to calculate the most bang for the buck mobile phone plan, etc. etc. I on the other hand wont be bothered to do it unless asked.

        Zid, if you work for the government, most definitely you will find that most of the numbers never add up. But I’m sure you’re well aware of this already ;)

      • zzeed 9:27 am on Sunday, October 4, 09 Permalink | Reply

        i just hope that information is more transparent… that’s all. Retailers, telcos, etc would publish all kinds of numbers to market their products and services. Who’s checking on behalf of customers? Regular users?

        Ahaha… even corporate marketers would skew some numbers, I imagine government would surely do adjustments here and there to suit the sentiments, like election, oil price change, etc.

  • zzeed 11:36 pm on Sunday, July 19, 09 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: carbon emission, , ,   

    Volume tanks comparison 

    On my way back to main land from Penang, looking towards Butterworth, I saw Shell and ESSO volume tanks.

    QUIZ: Which one is better maintained just by looking at the two pictures?

    shelltank

    essotank

     
    • BigMacky 9:21 pm on Friday, October 2, 09 Permalink | Reply

      I can’t really tell which is better maintained. They both looked the same. But I giggled looking at Hell Ess combined.

      • zzeed 9:30 pm on Saturday, October 3, 09 Permalink | Reply

        Actually the shell tanks would win by a small margin just by visual inspection. Look at the nasty spillover marks on the left esso tank: on the logo itself. But for the actual score… we need to seek help from corrosion inspectors.

        ahaha… at last someone noticed the hell and ess conundrum.

  • zzeed 11:35 pm on Thursday, May 1, 08 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: carbon emission, , ,   

    Greener ExxonMobil 

    Rockefellers want XOM to be greener. Apparently the giant has been lagging behind competitors in longer term investment of renewable resources.

    Greener ExxonMobil (as featured in Forbes.com)


    From toddalbert.com Via

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel