Water leakage is a significant problem in the developing and developed world alike. When water is pumped into the system, being transported from a water treatment plant to your home, a percentage of it is lost due to cracked or corroded service pipes or aging distribution pipes. In the City of Lagos, Nigeria, a significant amount of the water pumped into the distribution system is lost to leaks, theft or non-payment. There are debates about how much water is lost, but ostensibly, it is as much as 85%. Other water supply systems face similar challenges particularly when it comes to leaks. When water systems leak, not only is water wasted and lost, but energy is wasted because it takes energy to move water in and around our cities.
Tokyo, by contrast, has one of the most efficient water systems in the world. Through efficient approaches of detecting and repairing leaks, the city has reduced the amount of water wasted in the past ten years from 150 million cubic meters of water to 68 million cubic meters of water.
From a technological perspective, Tokyo uses a computerized system that calculates and gathers whole information on leakages by computer such as the causes, details of each repair work, the cost for repairs. Such progress on water leak reduction can be seen as a climate change adaptation strategy. Climate change brings with it a number of uncertainties around water supply. In general, it is expected that as climate change unfolds, there will be more demand for water and hence more pressure on water infrastructure systems. With Tokyo's pro-active approach to water management such as repairing water leaks annually, their water infrastructure is already becoming more efficient and will be more resilient to climate change impacts in the future.
Read more here.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Saturday, May 21, 2011
The Food Crisis: 18 different perpectives
The Report on Business magazine, published by the Globe and Mail, features an article with a number of statements from experts responding to the question of "how do we feed seven billion people—and counting?" 18 experts (alas, all men and not a single woman) in the area of agricultural sciences, food systems, economics and population/demography provide their opinions on different strategies/directions we can pursue to alleviate the food crisis. There are a number of ideas -- some more compelling and realistic than others -- that can mobilize change and action in the policies we implement with regards to the costs of food, international trade, crop diversity, taxation, better engaging with farmers and more.
The one commentary that resonated with me was Finn Poschmann's column on killing ethanol subsidies. Finn writes:
"Ethanol, we think, has been a measurable shock to the system in the last half of the recent decade. In the 1990s, U.S. farmers had about 75 million acres in different kinds of wheat. By the end of the decade, that was starting to collapse. By 2010, the area was down to under 54 million acres in wheat. So you’ve taken something like 20 million acres of production out of wheat. Where has it gone? Lentils, barley and other things that are popular. But also to corn: In the U.S. market in the 1990s, you were typically cruising at 75 to 80 million acres planted in corn. After 2007, you were over 85 to 90 million acres".
Corn based ethanol is a highly contentious topic that I try to avoid engaging in. However, on a practical level, it is problematic because the subsidization of corn growth for ethanol production limits the supply of corn being used for food consumption as more and more gas stations across the U.S. offer it in the form of blended fuel (E85). This pushes up the price of corn and becomes incredibly problematic for places or markets that are dependent on relatively affordable corn prices (i.e. Mexico and its tortilla food market) thereby becoming more economically burdensome for corn consumers.
There are a whole range of bio-fuel options that exist around the world. While I am not advocating for every single one, in principle, it would be wise to consider fuels (e.g. cellulosic fuel) that do not drastically affect or alter the prices of crops.
You can read the 18 different perspectives here.
The one commentary that resonated with me was Finn Poschmann's column on killing ethanol subsidies. Finn writes:
"Ethanol, we think, has been a measurable shock to the system in the last half of the recent decade. In the 1990s, U.S. farmers had about 75 million acres in different kinds of wheat. By the end of the decade, that was starting to collapse. By 2010, the area was down to under 54 million acres in wheat. So you’ve taken something like 20 million acres of production out of wheat. Where has it gone? Lentils, barley and other things that are popular. But also to corn: In the U.S. market in the 1990s, you were typically cruising at 75 to 80 million acres planted in corn. After 2007, you were over 85 to 90 million acres".
Corn based ethanol is a highly contentious topic that I try to avoid engaging in. However, on a practical level, it is problematic because the subsidization of corn growth for ethanol production limits the supply of corn being used for food consumption as more and more gas stations across the U.S. offer it in the form of blended fuel (E85). This pushes up the price of corn and becomes incredibly problematic for places or markets that are dependent on relatively affordable corn prices (i.e. Mexico and its tortilla food market) thereby becoming more economically burdensome for corn consumers.
There are a whole range of bio-fuel options that exist around the world. While I am not advocating for every single one, in principle, it would be wise to consider fuels (e.g. cellulosic fuel) that do not drastically affect or alter the prices of crops.
You can read the 18 different perspectives here.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Follow us on Twitter
Dear esteemed readers and followers,
We now have a twitter account. Given the ubiquity, popularity and widespread interest in twitter and blogging these days, we figured that a Twitter account would be cool.
Check us out here:
http://twitter.com/#!/EnviroBoys
We now have a twitter account. Given the ubiquity, popularity and widespread interest in twitter and blogging these days, we figured that a Twitter account would be cool.
Check us out here:
http://twitter.com/#!/EnviroBoys
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Electric Trolley Buses in Winnipeg
Image credit: http://bc.transport-action.ca/images/TL_2007_NFI_E60LF_2533.jpg
A recent visit to Vancouver had me riding public transit nearly every day. Much of Vancouver's bus system is actually an electric trolley bus system, where normal looking buses are powered by overhead wires delivering electricity. Tim, somewhat of a growing expert in these things, told me this has a lot to do with the abundance of cheap and 'green' electricity available to Vancouver from British Columbia's massive hydroelectric resources. Which got me thinking: could this work in Winnipeg?
Winnipeg is by far the largest centre in Manitoba, a province that generates nearly every kilowatt from hydroelectric resources. Like in B.C., a government monopoly, Manitoba Hydro, owns and operates the electricity system, keeping prices low and even generating more electricity than is needed in the province. It is a low-emissions and plentiful resource. Nearly all the public transit in the city is made up of buses and receives moderately popular ridership, particularly in those parts of the population -- a significant number in Winnipeg -- with lower incomes. And as oil and gas prices continue to climb, why not take advantage of the plentiful hydro resource?
Some of it might be explained by looking at Winnipeg's public transit history. Like many cities in North America, its public transit system emerged at the end of the 19th century primarily made up of horse-drawn carriages. Spurred on by the loss of its horse fleet to a fire and the inevitable progress of technology, the city began incorporating electric streetcars (trolleys) into the system, a network that would look somewhat similar to the trolley bus system described earlier. This would eventually be scrapped in the 1960s when cost overruns and competition gave way to taxis, cars and bus service, which Winnipeg has largely relied on ever since. The infrastructure of overhead wires was removed and little remains of the old trolley system.
Winnipeg has benefited from the evolution of other cities' transit systems. Throughout the 1980s, Winnipeg snagged 50 diesel-powered buses from Calgary and Edmonton as the cities expanded their light rail systems. More recently, the city has upgraded its fleet and flirted with the expansion to diesel-electric hybrid buses. With an already large and upgraded fleet, it would seem unwise to invest immediately into an electric trolley bus system.
History aside, how viable might a system like this even be in Winnipeg? The city is painfully cold in the winters and receives considerable snowfall. The former is not as much of a problem, but snowfall has a tendency to knock off the connection between the buses and the wires above. More importantly, heavy snowfall might force buses to reroute and detours can be exceptionally long when you're dependent on an overhead wire. Electric trolley buses, too, are known as particularly advantageous in hilly cities -- like Vancouver and San Francisco -- because of the high torque in electric motors, but in a city which's highest point is a landfill, this isn't quite as much of an issue. And it ain't cheap to install a complex infrastructure of overhead cables.
The city's most recent transit developments also help to explain the situation. In an effort to significantly expand and modernize its transit system, the city has begun construction of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, connecting major corridors throughout the city. BRT systems usually have roads exclusively used by buses for high speed service, frequent service and when having to join regular traffic, transit priority signals and diamond lanes give them a boost. Anyone familiar with Ottawa or Miami's public transit would have an idea as to how this works. It is an expensive ordeal, and in a city whose budget is not outrageously affluent -- a light rail proposal fell by the wayside because of cost -- any new infrastructure, regardless of future savings, could be a real pain in the ass.
With the information above, it is sensible why the electric trolley bus system hasn't taken off in Winnipeg. But with Manitoba's electricity resources at hand, there must be ways to incorporate it into the public transit system. Sure, a full fledged system around the city might be unnecessary, costly and problematic, but the installation of trolley bus systems would make sense on straightforward and popular routes, like the express routes across the city and especially the new BRT routes. The new buses travelling those roads may very well be diesel-electric hybrids, but a simple network of cables overtop these straightforward transitways could pay off in spades in the future.
Monday, May 9, 2011
A Green Mortgage
Looking at buying a home? Even the banks can see the benefits of going green and are happy to reward you for it.
In March of 2011, the Bank of Montreal (BMO) began offering a mortgage plan that provides a relatively low lending rate to homeowners whose homes are 'green'. Provided your home meets the necessary criteria -- primarily having ENERGY STAR rated products and several other high efficiency units -- you can receive a lending rate several points lower than the typical mortgage. For example, the current rate on a low five year fixed mortgage from BMO is 4.14%, while the green mortgage comes in at 3.89%, which could save homeowners thousands of dollars over the five year period.
BMO isn't the only Canadian bank in on this. TD also has a similar discounted rate, while RBC and CIBC offer rebates from certain home inspections and energy upgrades.
It's nice to see the private sector starting to pick up some of the slack left behind by the federal government -- ahem, the Harper Government. After years as a success under Liberal and Conservative governments, the ecoEnergy home retrofit program (formerly EnerGuide) was discontinued in March, 2011. The programs had provided Canadian home and business owners with significant rebates for energy-related upgrades, upwards of $10,000 when paired with matching provincial rebates. Given the Conservative environmental platform, its vow to cut the deficit and its new majority government, it seems highly unlikely that any similar program will return anytime soon.
Home retrofits are some of the most economical changes people can make to decrease their environmental impact on the world. Things like weather stripping, insulation and new furnaces can often pay for themselves in energy savings in less than five years. Unfortunately, the high upfront cost can prohibit a lot of homeowners from making such investments, so every little bit helps.
Of course, given the current state of the Canadian economy and the hit the mortgage market took in the last few years, it has become increasingly difficult to get your hands on a mortgage. And given the strict criteria for the plan, this will likely benefit the affluent before the poor. But hey, you have to start somewhere.
In March of 2011, the Bank of Montreal (BMO) began offering a mortgage plan that provides a relatively low lending rate to homeowners whose homes are 'green'. Provided your home meets the necessary criteria -- primarily having ENERGY STAR rated products and several other high efficiency units -- you can receive a lending rate several points lower than the typical mortgage. For example, the current rate on a low five year fixed mortgage from BMO is 4.14%, while the green mortgage comes in at 3.89%, which could save homeowners thousands of dollars over the five year period.
BMO isn't the only Canadian bank in on this. TD also has a similar discounted rate, while RBC and CIBC offer rebates from certain home inspections and energy upgrades.
It's nice to see the private sector starting to pick up some of the slack left behind by the federal government -- ahem, the Harper Government. After years as a success under Liberal and Conservative governments, the ecoEnergy home retrofit program (formerly EnerGuide) was discontinued in March, 2011. The programs had provided Canadian home and business owners with significant rebates for energy-related upgrades, upwards of $10,000 when paired with matching provincial rebates. Given the Conservative environmental platform, its vow to cut the deficit and its new majority government, it seems highly unlikely that any similar program will return anytime soon.
Home retrofits are some of the most economical changes people can make to decrease their environmental impact on the world. Things like weather stripping, insulation and new furnaces can often pay for themselves in energy savings in less than five years. Unfortunately, the high upfront cost can prohibit a lot of homeowners from making such investments, so every little bit helps.
Of course, given the current state of the Canadian economy and the hit the mortgage market took in the last few years, it has become increasingly difficult to get your hands on a mortgage. And given the strict criteria for the plan, this will likely benefit the affluent before the poor. But hey, you have to start somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)