The drones are flying out of Ilulissat, half way up Greenland’s west coast, for three weeks through the end of this month. Scientists studying the rapidly vanishing Greenland ice sheet need to fill gaps in their data that was collected through satellite imagery.

Read more of this story »

Continental Airlines, Boeing, and GE Aviation have scheduled a biofuel test flight for early 2009, citing the desire to identify sustainable fuel alternatives for the aviation industry. Continental may be the first US carrier to do so and, in the words of president and CEO of GE aviation, is “taking an important step in advancing the use of sustainable biofuels in aviation.”

The three companies are working together to identify a non-food based, second-generation biofuel that won’t significantly impact forests or water resources. No details on the fuel are available, but it will have to be production ready in quantities sufficient to power the test-flight and mix seamlessly with kerosene aviation fuel (Jet-A).

Read more of this story »

Boeing announced in January they would test an alternative fuel in one engine of a 747, but did not disclose what that fuel would be. They did, however, talk a great deal about an algae-derived fuel, without being specific.

Airbus, meanwhile, said it used a liquid fuel processed from gas (Gas to Liquids - GTL), mixed with regular jet fuel in the number one engine. The flight, from Filton, UK to Toulouse, France, took three hours. The plane is powered by four Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines, and said to be the most fuel efficient in the air today.

Boeing, meanwhile had planned their test in late February, as explained in this story: Algae-Based Biofuel to Power Virgin Atlantic 747 Jet?, filed on Jan. 15.

Swiss hotel owner and environmentalist Walter Knutti has become tired of the noise and concerned by unnecessary emissions from military aircraft on training flights from the nearby airbase of Meiringen. Taking action, Knutti has collected enough signatures to force the issue to a popular vote - under the Swiss system of direct democracy voters have a right to challenge parliamentary laws or pass constitutional amendments by collecting a minimum number of signatures to force a ballot.

Under Knutti’s initiative, Swiss voters will decide next month if military jets should be banned from tourism zones.

Read more of this story »

One British strategic communications firm argued that the airline industry essentially needs a PR makeover. Steve Dunne of the Brighter Group went so far as to say that the industry risks sliding into a reputation akin to that of cigarette manufacturers in the U.S.: "The aviation industry is just not representing itself properly or effectively to put the lobbying efforts of the eco-warriors into some kind of perspective."

I’m not convinced the risk is that dramatic — at least here in the U.S. While there are certainly efficiency measures airlines should be considering — such as being towed to a starting point on the runway instead of burning fuel to get there – advocating a total ban on air travel as some do (or even very high taxes) is a losing cause (by the way, I want to hear a convincing argument as to why flying on a commercial plane isn’t public transportation, like taking the bus).

But the pollution problems for the industry could take off: The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that while the CO2 emissions per passenger kilometer have decreased, the increased number of passengers overall has negated that efficiency. Furthermore, the World Wildlife Fund predicts airlines to make up 15 percent of all global CO2 emissions by 2041.

So while the airlines may not be likened to cigarette manufacturers yet, they should consider some reputation management now. And there are good things happening: The International Air Transport Association says they saved 6 million tons of CO2 by shortening routes worldwide. Virgin’s Richard Branson just announced that he’s planning a 747 biofuel test flight for early next year, and Northwest put together a taskforce of employees and managers that came up with ways to cut inefficient fuel use by 31 million gallons per year. To keep up with the increasing number of passengers and the increasing concern about global warming (including carbon regulation), however, the airlines industry will have to continue decreasing their contribution to the problem and keep telling the public about it. Telling their side of the story — while performing real, meaningful leadership — will keep their reputation from taking a nose dive.

Cross posted on Maria Energia

International Herald Tribune

Whether you desire to buy trees to help the environment for personal reasons, for investment purposes or you simply refer others to buy trees through our Affiliate Program,  PanAm BioFuels has made the process so simple that everyone can find a way to participate in it.

1) Purchase Trees for Investment

Jatropha trees can be bought directly from Pan-Am Biofuels for only $4 each in lots ranging from 250 trees for $1000 to 25,000 trees for $100,000.  Though delivery is possible for larger volumes, we will believe most people will take advantage of our Contract Farming Program where we will actually plant your trees on our plantations. 

With our Contract Farming Program we do all the work from planting to harvest to sale of the oil.  The only fee for all of this is a 10% fee from profits.  Then 90% of the profits are passed on to you, the tree owner.  All you have to do is purchase your trees in lots for only $4/each.

If you have priced trees at your local nursery you will see most prices range from $10 to $25. So now you may be thinking…

"How can you produce, plant and sell these trees at only $4 each?"

There are several reasons, including, but not limited to,

• Because the cost of living as well as labor is much cheaper in Central America where our nurseries are located.
• The efficiencies and economies of scale we enjoy by the huge volume of trees our nursery outputs allow us to save a tremendous amount of money passing the savings on to you.
• Our nursery is in close proximity to our Jatropha Tree plantation in Costa Rica where our Contract Farming Program is being implemented so there are minimal transportation expenses.

"So how much money do I stand to earn by buying your Jatropha Trees? What is the return on my investment?" 

Your trees can potentially bring  as much as 45% PER YEAR calculated  from your original investment once the trees start producing within 3-4 years.   Jatropha trees start bearing seeds the second year and reach maximum production at about 4 years.  You can review the full details and Financial Projections once you register and login.

Pan-Am Biofuels has truly created a unique situation and opportunity for the average person to take advantage of.

Now you can participate in an industry that has produced the wealthiest individuals and corporations in the world. The only difference is, instead of drilling for oil and destroying the environment, you will be growing oil and restoring the environment by owning oil producing Jatrpha Trees

2) Sell trees for Commissions as an Affiliate

We will pay you to refer customers! Pan-Am Biofuels has created a lucrative opportunity for webmasters,  business owners and individuals alike. By becoming an Affiliate you can help promote our Jatropha tree project, earn commissions and at the same time you’ll be doing your part to better our environment.  Learn more about how our Affiliate Program works.

GO and ENN news articles have reported on Ecuador’s high-minded decision to leave its largest oil reserve untapped. The unexploited oil fields lie in Yasuni National Park, home to at least two indigenous tribes. Drilling them would add a pretty penny to the country’s purse. However, under the YasunÌ-ITT Initiative, President Rafael Correa has vowed to leave the oil in the ground. The initiative also sets the lofty goals of developing greater renewable energy, building greater mass transit, and stimulating eco-tourism.

How can the average person reading this article encourage Ecuador to do the right thing by the Earth and its indigenous people? Is it enough to say "good job, well done?" With the rest of the world fumbling to look busy over addressing climate change, it is our opportunity and perhaps our obligation to stand up and support Ecuador for its brave move.

Ecuador hopes to receive some compensation from other governments for the unexploited oil due to the benign effect on the global climate of leaving it in the ground. But for the average person in a country that exports 420,600 barrels of oil a day, President Correa’s decision may seem like a risky one. Ecuador’s official unemployment is 10.6% and an estimated 47% are underemployed, estimates the CIA World Factbook.

41 year-old Maritza Salazar owns a stationary store in Guayaquil, Ecuador’s largest city. She is one of a long list of Ecuadoran entrepreneurs requesting a loan through the micro-financing organization, Kiva.org. For vendors like Mrs. Salazar, national oil revenues may be less important if she’s able to fund the growth of her non-oil-dependent business. By funding businesses like Mrs. Salazar’s, the average person from anywhere in the world can make substantive progress in alleviating Ecuador’s dependence on oil and encouraging its transition into one of the world’s leading environmentally friendly nations.

Another green option that may appeal to the lover of travel is to visit Ecuador and make use of its rich eco-tourism opportunities. Tourism is the Ecuador’s fourth most valuable source of revenue. Eco-tourism is a great way to get the memorable experiences that tourists often look for when traveling to Ecuador, including visiting indigenous tribes, experiencing local customs and tasting regional foods, horseback riding, animal-watching, and setting out on guided hikes through the unbelievably beautiful scenery of virgin rainforest. Take this opportune moment to visit the land that eco-tourism company, Global Exchange, calls "a bastion of cultural and biological diversity… home to one of the most successful and peaceful indigenous movements in the Americas." See the list of resources below for some ways to take advantage of Ecuador’s eco-tourism industry.

The decision not to drill in Ecuador’s Yasuni National Park will benefit the entire world, by protecting an ecological heritage and indigenous lands as well as effectively preventing 436 million tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. Ecuador must know that its decision was a good one, and here’s where you and I have the opportunity to step in. As usual, if you have other ideas about how to encourage Ecuador’s exciting, ecologically minded move, please leave them here below in the comment and discussion area.

Resources:

Kiva.org

Ecuador | Iloveecotourism.com

Adventure Ecotourism in Ecuador | Piedra Blanca

Ecuador | Global Exchange

Department of Tourism | Ecuador National Website

Ecuador Adventures | OARS

Ecotourism and Ecuador | Ecuador Tierra Viva Travel Company

Rio Muchacho Organic Farm | Guacamayo Tours

Ecuador and the Galapagos Islands | Lonely Planet

References:

Ecuador to Leave Oil – And Revenue – In the Ground | GO

Gutsy Ecuador proposes to put a lid on oil | Environmental News Network (ENN)

Introduction to Ecuador’s Economy | Ecuador Ministry of Tourism

Ecuador | The United States Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook

Virgin Atlantic recognises how important it is for all companies to understand the impact of the products they use, both on the environment and on the people producing them. So, we’re proud to support Fairtrade, which guarantees farmers a fair price for their product, and are really pleased that our passengers will benefit from a comprehensive range of Fairtrade teas and coffees onboard our flights.

Virgin Atlantic made the decision to offer Fair Trade as a part of their business sustainability strategy. Serving Fair Trade is part of the step to provide more "ethical, environmental and sustainable products." The airline is also putting their fleet on a diet, creating leaner planes that require less fuel. They have begun replacing older planes with the new Dreamliner, which burns 27% less fuel. The new Boeing plane was unveiled earlier this summer and it’s composition is high in carbon fiber rather than the traditional aluminum, reducing it’s weight and therefore fuel requirements. Virgin Atlantic continues to search better ways to fly, with a 3 billion investment from Virgin’s transportation profits to find renewable energy initiatives and using biofuels in flight. Last year Virgin unveiled a plan to build a starting grid at airports. This holding area would be close to the runway and consist of several parking bays. The result would mean the plane could be towed closer to the runway before take-off and thereby reduce the time the massive engines idle.

Of course, a large portion of responsible travel is on the traveller’s shoulders. There are many options, from limiting our travel to finding alternate forms such as train transport, which emits 1/3 of the carbon as its equivalent flight. Yet for those unavoidable times we must take to the skies, there are now flights in which you can sip your coffee in comfort knowing it was not made at another’s expense.

A booming airline industry might be great for the economy, but it’s wreaking increasing havoc with the environment. Aviation today spews out only 3 percent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, but the segment is expanding fast — faster, in fact, than any improvements in efficiency are likely to keep pace with. According to the Christian Science Monitor,

"Efficiency is only set to improve at 1 or 2 percent per year at best, while the number of passenger kilometers is growing at 5 or 6 percent," says Peter Lockley, head of policy development at the Aviation Environment Federation, a British think tank. "So emissions are going up steadily in the gap between the two."

For some, the answer is to stop flying now, cold turkey. To halt an entire industry dead in its tracks, though, is sure to risk massive, global economic damage. So what other options are there?

The best idea would seem to be a carbon tax on air travel that is hiked incrementally over the next decade or two to the point that flying is increasingly discouraged … and enough funding is raised to support research and development for more sustainable travel alternatives. It’s a better solution than continuing with business as usual, which appears certain to ramp up greenhouse gas emissions to unacceptable levels in the very near future.

The British government has vowed to reduce green house gas emissions, but at the same time it supports plans to expand the country’s 21 airports. Heathrow already sports four terminals and two runways. A fifth terminal is scheduled to open in March 2008, and there is talk of adding a third runway in the near future.

According to the BBC, the traffic through Heathrow reaches around 470,000 flights carrying 67.7 million passengers a year. Although aviation currently accounts for only 7% of the UK’s carbon emissions, that figure is due to rise as Heathrow and other airports are enlarged.

Protestors congregated at the Camp for Climate Action, an eco-village which, starting today, will host a series of lectures and workshops throughout the week. The program includes sessions entitled "Zero Carbon Britain," "Faith and the Environment - an Islamic Perspective," and "Compositing Capitalism," as well as what sound like practical inductions, such as "Energy Recovery in Buildings", "Climate Change Speaker Training" and "Building an Effective Campaign".

There will be a build-up of activism leading to Sunday’s 24 hours of civil disobedience and "mass action against corporate climate criminals," as the Camp for Climate Action website puts it. However, a spokeswoman for the Camp ensured the BBC that airline passengers would not be the focus of the demonstrations. About 1,800 police officers have been called in to monitor the event.

During this week, which is one of the busiest of the year, some 1.5 million travelers are expected at Heathrow.

BBC News
Camp for Climate Action
Euronews

When Ron Hochstetler graduated from Purdue with a degree in aviation technology, he didn’t know how different his path would be from the other graduates of his class. Though trained to work with the helicopters and jets that we today associate air travel, Ron became fascinated with a different type of craft. An aircraft that "belongs in the sky."

Now, twenty years later, Ron is one of the world’s leading experts in "lighter than air" technology. It’s an industry that many believe died with the Hindenburg. But Ron makes his case…the golden age of airships may be yet to come. And we’re happy to have him as this week’s EcoGeek of the Week.

EcoGeek: How does someone go about becoming an internationally recognized airship expert?

Ron Hochstetler: When I graduated from college I saw lots of people going into major technical fields where pretty much everything had already been developed and the technologies they’d be working on were very mature. Not much room for a new guy to make a new mark. But then I read an article about a little company in Britain (Airship Industries) that wanted to build modern technology airships. I figured here was a part of aviation that was cool, was still pretty much unexploited, and was made up of such a small cadre of people that just about any contributions I could make would have some significance. The short answer is: if you pick a small pond a lot of the splashes you make will be big ones.

EG: In as brief a list as possible, what kind of advantages does airship travel hold over traditional air travel?

RH: The best word picture I can give you is to refer back to where we left off, with the Hindenburg. It could carry a whopping 100 tons of payload and people at a top speed of 83 mph (cruise was closer to 65 mph). Yet it was powered by only four diesel engines each with a maximum of about 1,200 hp., so for less than the horsepower of one engine on a four engine C-130 turboprop cargo plane (that only carries 20 tons) the Hindenburg could fly from Southern Germany all the way to the US in about 72 hours. The transport airship exchanges time for fuel, and yields space. What I mean is that with airship you can travel to your destination consuming a fraction of the fuel required by a jet aircraft of the same payload capacity, but at a slower airspeed. Your airship cruising speed is about one-tenth of the jet’s speed, but because you’re traveling slower than the jet, your airship cabin area can be quite spacious and give you an air travel experience that is actually comfortable. The airship could be outfitted with broadband access to the Internet, satellite phone communications, and all the media entertainment you can imagine. You could have wide open sightseeing windows, sit down dinners, or full sleeping quarters where you can stretch out in a real bed. And this would not just be for the First Class crowd: the airship has the extravagance of space, and can offer plenty to every passenger.

EG: Could travel by airship be more efficient than automobile or train travel? What about barge shipping?

RH: Barges and ships are among the most fuel efficient ways to ship anything. In countries where you have efficient ground transportation systems, the airship is not going to be competitive. Where the airship can compete is with short-distance air transport, or with ground transportation in those places where the ground transport system is poor to non-existent. Here, I’m talking about passenger transport; if you switch to considering the airship for its cargo hauling capabilities, the news gets even better. If the stuff you what to haul won’t fit into your aircraft, your ground transport vehicles, or over your highways and railways, and you’re not in a real hurry to ship it, then the cargo airship begins to make economic and fuel efficient sense. If designed properly, an airship can do vertical load transfers. That means you can hover over the stuff you want to pick up, lift it up to the airship by an internal hoist, and then motor off to where you want to put your stuff back on the earth. This type of cargo airship would be used more like a “flying forklift,” and would be utilized to move outsized or heavy things around a city, construction site, or around a region where there are insufficient bridges or roads. This type of airship could really change the way modern society moves its stuff because it doesn’t depend on highways, railroads, bridges (that sometimes crash), or airports. You have almost complete freedom to move just about anything, just about anywhere, just about any time, provided you’re not in a hurry.

EG: What do you think are the biggest obstacles facing the airship industry?

RH: The technology is available today to build airships with payloads of up to approximately 90 tons lift. With an R&D program focused on certain key enabling airship technologies, it should be possible to build airships up to the range of around 350 tons lift. The problem is that we need good business and engineering leadership to craft the airship development programs that can build the modern airships that society will use. The airship industry has no shortage of enthusiasts, visionaries, and passionate dreamers, but it’s almost barren of the steely-eyed business people who have the professionalism and expertise to first build the solid enterprise that can build the airships. I guess it’s just easier for these people to get an MBA and go manage an IT start-up or a Fortune 500 company. The airship market is there, and the technology is in our hands, but where do we find the business architects who have the courage to take on this great challenge?

The other obstacle (if you can call it that) is the scale of the airship. The bigger the airship, the more efficient and useful it is, and the more challenging to construct. Eventually, the sheer size of the craft begins to tax the engineers as they devise ways to manufacture and join the increasingly large (and lightweight) structures that make up the ships.

EG: Are there any particularly exciting advances in airships that might make the technology more feasible in the near future?

RH: The new high strength fabrics, light weight aircraft composite materials, and computer-aided design tools have revolutionized airship design. Modern computer simulation and modeling also allow us to better navigate around inclement weather conditions. In the old days, the pilots of the big airships had to take their best guess at where the bad weather was. Now we can minutely plan every flight route to minimize the impact of headwinds, and actually take advantage of the weather to lower our airship fuel consumption by 20% to 50%, depending on the particular journey.

The other interesting change has been the advances in hydrogen powered systems. The airship has some very unique qualities that enable it to probably be the most fuel efficient (and environmentally friendly) air transport system possible. The large surface area of the airship causes the high aerodynamic drag that limits its airspeed, but that surface area can be used to carry thousands of square feet of solar cells to provide electric power for the ship’s propulsive needs. The non-flammable helium inside the ship also provides a perfect environment in which to store hydrogen fuel containers that can provide hydrogen not as a lifting gas (as was used in the Hindenburg), but as a fuel for either a fuel cell propulsion system or simply to burn in conventional internal combustion propulsion engines. These technologies could be used to produce “zero emissions” transport airships with the ability to carry hundreds of tons of cargo or people over distances of hundreds or even thousands of miles.

EG: Are there applications that airship travel is particularly suited for?

RH: Slightly more than half of all passenger jet aircraft travel is over distances of approximately 400 miles or less. Airship passenger travel gets more competitive with jet travel as the overall trip distance decreases (and as jet fuel becomes more expensive). But you have to factor in the “total trip” time, which includes travel to the airport, parking the car, going through security, boarding the plane, waiting for clearance to take off, etc… The amount of time spent at either end of your journey (whether by jet or airship or whatever) remains the same regardless of how long the trip itself is. So, if you can use the airship’s ability to do a vertical landing in or near the locations you really want to get to or from, then you have a good shot at reducing the total point-to-point travel time enough to make the airship quite acceptable for short distance air travel.

EG: You’re obviously captivated and excited by this technology…how did you catch the bug, and why do you think you’ve stuck with it for so long?

RH: I got interested in airships when the Goodyear blimp came to Purdue University for a football game. The ship was moored out at the University airport where I was taking most of my aviation classes. My parents had come down to visit me that weekend, so we all went out to see the ship after dark. The ship was surrounded by a ring of ground lights which made it shine silvery against the night sky. The door of the ship was open, and my dad and I could barely see inside because the ground crew had ballasted the ship to be slightly light so her tail was high and her landing gear was about a foot off of the ground. My mother wanted to see inside the ship, so she grabbed the hand rail that runs along the side of the gondola and pulled the airship down to the ground! At that moment I knew this aircraft was something completely different from the airplanes and helicopters I’d been training on. I saw that this was an aircraft that actually belonged in the sky, and I decided I belonged with the airships! I have no regrets after more than 20 years in this business. I also have great optimism that the airship’s golden age has not passed, but is truly upon us. The conjunction of soaring fuel costs and increasing concern about aviation’s contribution of GHGs to the environment is causing mainstream decision makers to reconsider the qualities of the airship. I’m convinced that the modern airship is part of the solution set for dealing with global warming, in addition to providing an affordable and sustainable air transportation option to the developed and developing countries.

EcoGeek of the Week is a syndicated column from EcoGeek.org. If you would like to syndicate the column, or suggest an EcoGeek to be featured, please contact our editor at editor@ecogeek.org.

This is certainly a positive step towards reducing our environmental impact, but it is important that we do not accept this as the final solution. Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, a non-partisan US group, told the BBC that the 787 was a "major step forward," but not the sole solution to aviation emissions. Air travel for a family of four flying from the USA to Europe would produce approximately the same amount of carbon as the sum of their domestic energy use in an entire year, and this will continue to rise. "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that by 2050 emissions from aircraft could be responsible for up to 15 percent of total global warming produced by human activities."

As travellers, our current objective should be an approach on multiple fronts. Consumers should applaud this technical advancement in jet production, but also call for even more advancements from competitors to create a race towards travel that does not harm the environment. The amount of travel each person undertakes should also be limited as much as possible; when it's unavoidable, travelers shoud consider purchasing carbon offsets. Consumers should also consider train transportation when possible, as travel by rail emits one third of the carbon as an equivalent flight.

More trains trips, less plane trips, and a Jaguar and Land Rover that run on cooking oil have sliced his footprint. He also farms organically, and gets electricity from renewable sources at his Highgrove estate.

Charles and his wife, Camilla, have promised to cut emissions even further. Future plans include converting the royal train to biodiesel fuel (Europe’s first biodiesel-powered passenger train – Virgin Trains – left the station earlier this month, a project of Virgin’s Sir Richard Branson).

Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, praised the prince’s leadership:

"The fact that he reduced his carbon emissions by 9 percent in the last year alone highlights the potential for making rapid cuts in the nation's contribution to climate change.”

Others are more critical. Charles took heat a few months ago when he flew to New York to receive an environmental award. The prince’s principal private secretary, Sir Michael Peat, explained that Charles uses carbon offsets like funding tree planting or renewable energy projects to balance out the travel. “We’re doing it the best way we can at the moment,” he noted.

CNN

If you're flying or driving to your vacation destination offset those CO2 emissions your trip generates by purchasing carbon credits.

First you'll need to calculate how much you'll need to buy. There are a number of carbon calculators out there, but if you're looking to figure out your emissions for a single trip check out TerraPass or Carbonfund.org. Unlike other carbon calculators that help you find your yearly carbon footprint, these two sites offer simple per trip calculators. After a couple of clicks, you'll find out the approximate CO2 emissions of your trip and can then easily purchase credits. UK based climatmundi is good for international, country hoppers.

Some airlines are already getting into the travel offset realm, like Scandinavian Airline SAS, and travel website Expedia which recently partnered with TerraPass to give customers the option of offsetting their travel at the time of checkout.

Why offset? Global warming of course! In her post, Introduction to Carbon Credits, GO's Maria Surma Manka sums it up pretty well:

Carbon dioxide (CO2) – a major contributor to global warming – is emitted when we drive, when we fly, or when we flip the light switch (if the electricity comes from fossil fuels, which most of it does). We’re moving slowly toward a renewable energy system, but not fast enough for a lot of us. So one way to cut through the bureaucratic mess holding back 60 mpg vehicles and lots of clean electricity is to become carbon neutral yourself…

One can invest in an organization, activity, or event that reduces the carbon dioxide spewing into the atmosphere. Carbon credits range from tree planting (trees absorb or “breathe” carbon dioxide) to donating to an organization that develops solar ovens in Africa that don’t need to burn wood (and release carbon) to cook food.

And remember you can win wind credits to offset your daily CO2 emissions by suggesting a Tip o' the Day.

Amy says: I just took a trip to Seattle from NYC. According to the TerraPass calculator my 4,807 mile flight was equal to 1,874 lbs of CO2. For $9.95 I was able to offset my trip. The $9.95 covers 2,500 lbs of CO2 - so the extra should cover my transport to and from the airports.

More from Maria Surma Manka on Carbon Credits:

Introduction to Carbon Credits

Options for Calculating Your Carbon Offsets

The Green Options Interview: Eric Carlson of Carbonfund.org

The Green Options Interview: Erik Blachford, CEO of TerraPass

More from GO:

Renewable Energy Credits (REC)

Leave No Trace - And No Carbon Footprint - When Backpacking

Eco-Travel

What, you might ask, is ’synfuel’? As noted previously, ’synfuel’ is a synthetic fuel most commonly made from coal or natural gas. Ok, master of the obvious I know, but let me provide a little more detail: coal, natural gas, or in some cases, biomass, can be converted into a mixture of gases through a process known as gasification. Gasification is basically burning something (at >400 C) in the presence of a limited amount of oxygen to produce a specific mixture of gases, namely carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), and hydrogen (H2).

Ok, stay with me here, and don’t forget about the carbon dioxide that’s produced during gasification - that’s important.

This gaseous mixture of CO, CO2, and H2 is the precursor to making synthetic liquid diesel fuel (synfuel), via another production method known as the ‘Fischer Tropsch‘ process. The reaction uses a catalyst to convert carbon monoxide and hydrogen into hydrocarbon chains, which composes the basic structure of diesel fuel. This is a historically important process: German researchers Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch developed the reaction in 1923, and it provided Nazi Germany with as much as 124,000 barrels of synthetic diesel per day during WWII (1).

To recap:

Coal =(gasification)=> CO + H2 + CO2
CO + H2 =(Fischer Tropsch)=> synthetic diesel + CO2

Now, keep that in mind as we jump back to the Air Force, which plans on testing synthetic diesel in a 50/50 blend with regular jet fuel:

“The acquisition of these 315,000 gallons of synthetic fuel this year is one more step toward meeting the Air Force goal of testing and certifying the entire fleet for use of the fuel by 2010. Additional acquisitions of synthetic fuel will be made for testing and certification over the next three years. The ultimate goal of the Air Force is to acquire 50 percent of its [Continental United States] fuel by 2016 from domestic sources producing a synthetic fuel-blend and using carbon capture and sequestration technology,” said William C. Anderson, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment & Logistics.”

Boeing’s prediction seems right on the money: The short-term fuel replacement, at least for the Air Force, will be synthetic diesel. Whether or not that’s a good idea is hazier. Synfuel actually burns a bit cleaner than regular fuel, because it doesn’t contain the sulfur and aromatics contained in diesel. But there’s one major problem, if you remember the chemical equation above. The standard conversion of coal to synthetic fuel nearly doubles life-cycle emissions of the fuel it replaces. If synthetic diesel from coal was widely implemented for air travel, it would double the greenhouse gas emissions for that form of travel.

Fortunately, according the the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), this problem could be mitigated or even overcome by the use of biomass as a feedstock, instead of coal. NREL states in one report that synfuel from biomass can be ‘largely carbon neutral’. (3)

While a transition to synthetic aviation fuel seems inevitable, it must once again be highlighted that the sustainability of alternative fuels depends entirely on their source materials and production methods. Nevertheless, welcome to the future of aviation…

Southwest Nebraska News: Synfuel Contract Awarded by Defense Department (June 11, 2007)
(1) U.S. DOE: The Early Days of Coal Research
(2) U.S. DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: Catalytic Conversion
(3) NREL: Improving the technical, environmental and social performance of wind energy systems using biomass-based energy storage
(4) Clean Diesel from Coal A novel catalytic method could let you fill up your tank with coal-derived diesel, cutting U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

So I spoke with Genesys’ Executive Vice President of Global Marketing, Denise Persson, on May 30th.

Green Options: Why is Genesys Conferencing focusing so many resources on efficiency?

Denise Persson: It all started about five years ago. As a European company, we are more environmentally conscious. I’m Swedish, and in Sweden we recycle every single thing. We would never dream of throwing a piece of paper in the trash. So this direction for the company was very natural for a lot of us. We wanted to do all that we could to make it more efficient and more responsible in terms of climate change.

GO: Tell me more about this global certification program and how Genesys is involved.

DP: The Environmental Management Systems is a certification process that we are working towards for all of our European, North American, and Asian-Pacific offices. We are focusing on energy savings and waste reduction, like computers that turn off automatically, recycling programs, and efficient lighting. We even make sure our cleaning company recycles.

GO: Does Genesys participate in any green power programs?

DP: No we do not – we don’t own our building. However we make sure that we are as efficient as possible in other areas.

GO: Let’s face it, energy efficiency isn’t sexy – how did you sell this initiative to your shareholders or management?

DP: It’s really amazing; we didn’t have to “sell” anything. We are seeing more and more RFPs [requests for proposals] from customers that ask about environmental management plans. In fact, our customers are hearing questions about efficiency from their customers. So we want to implement even more telecommuting options so our customers can reduce their carbon footprints. It’s a very bottom-up initiative and a reason we went for the Environmental Management Systems certification.

GO: What other energy-related measures is Genesys working on?

DP: So far we’ve developed a cost calculator on our website that includes the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions customers save by using our web conferencing services instead of flying to meeting locations. Our customers love that tool.

We’re also doing a lot of surveys of customers' needs. Our next major step is certification by the end of this year, and we also want to educate more of our customers. We want to help them figure out how to implement even more telecommuting practices that cut down on pollution, time, and cost.

I’m so excited about these initiatives. I’m very proud of my organization because we’re doing everything we can on this issue. It’s wonderful to be able to combine something that’s important to me with my job. It’s so important to work for a global company that takes this [climate change] problem seriously.

Genesys Conferencing
ISO 14000/14001 Environmental Management Guide
Office of the Federal Environmental Executive

Last month, in an 8-page document plainly titled “Alternative Fuels for Commercial Aircraft”, Boeing presented their estimation of the alternative fuel sources that could ‘relieve worldwide pressure on crude-oil derived fuels’ and drive air travel to carbon neutrality.

The biofuel debate has largely glossed over the ‘friendly skies’ while high fuel prices continue to take their toll on the industry. No biofuel we have yet can step up to the plate. Ethanol collects water and corrodes the engine and lines while biodiesel freezes up in cold weather (ie: cruising altitude). Don’t forget pilots’ general resistance to change and a life and death dependency on reliable fuel, and aviation biofuels don’t have a leg to stand on.

“There are a lot of questions to be answered and one of them, frankly, that has been answered so far is that ethanol is probably not suitable for airplanes,” Boeing Commercial Airplanes environmental strategy managing director Bill Glover said during a Star Alliance conference in Copenhagen.
“That would require changes to the airplane - (ethanol) doesn’t have the energy content and it has some other properties that are incompatible with the systems in the airplane.
“But we can, it looks like, develop something that is more like a biodiesel that has some promise.”

This isn’t going to happen right away though, and Boeing sees possibilities for 3 different time tables: near, mid-range, and long-term. In the near term, a ‘drop-in’ fuel is needed - something to replace regular fuel as quickly as possible. Boeing thinks this might be a blend of kerosene and synthetic diesel produced via Fischer-Tropsch process (I had to look it up too). Though this could alleviate some dependence on crude, synthetic diesel is still nonrenewable and without CO2 sequestration (mentioned as a possibility in the report) it can actually double net CO2 emissions (being typically manufactured from coal or natural gas) .

In the mid-term (10-50 years), Boeing suggests biofuels will make up a much larger percentage of jet fuel in blends with synthetic diesel or Jet-A (standard Jet fuel). The significant barriers to this are well-known: lack of farmland for contemporaryfeedstocks (soybeans, etc) and competition for food, fuel gelling problems, poorer heat stability in the engine, and questionable suitability for storage.

But the long term is where things get really exciting, and Boeing is extremely optimistic about the potential of algae:

With the potential for algae of providing 10,000 gal/acre/year, some 85 billion gallons of bio-jet could be produced on a landmass equivalent to the size of the US state of Maryland. Moreover, if these bio-jet fuels were fully compatible with legacy aircraft, it would be sufficient to supply the present world’s fleet with 100 percent of their fuel needs (fig. 13) as well into the future.”

Yes, Boeing actually said that: 100% of world aviation fuel needs. Details are sparse at this point, and it’s unclear what this algae bio-jetfuel will be, but Boeing seems satisfied by the prospect and appears sincerely concerned about global warming. The take home message was that:

Long-term solutions will need to dramatically reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. Therefore, alternate fuels with low to zero carbon content, such as liquid hydrogen or liquid methane, might be used.

Liquid fuels like these could be the next step, potentially produced by nuclear or preferably, solar power.

It’s good to hear some noise coming from the aviation industry, and perhaps algae won’t take 50 years to become the fuel source of the future.

Latest update on Algae Biodiesel: Algae Biodiesel: First Industrial Algae Plants Go Online

For more on this topic, see also: Algae Biodiesel May Soon Be Reality

Alternate Fuels for use in Commercial Aircraft
Algae May become the Aircraft Fuel of the Future (May 25)

The Lazy Environmentalist

These innovators make it easy for us to integrate environmental awareness into our lives. They understand that while so many of us are concerned about the environment, we don't always have the time, energy, or inclination to do something about it.

I only wish this was written in a less-than-serious voice. In my mind, if you don't have the "time, energy, or inclination" to do something about the environment, than you can hardly classify yourself as an environmentalist. You are looking to alleviate guilt for your conspicuous consumption, a culture of consumption that is devastating our planet. It's exactly the "culture of convenience" that's waging all-out war on our resources. Consider this passage from the chapter on cars:

There really is something for everyone–even those who drive Hummers, the most colossal of all urban assault vehicles…By offsetting the carbon dioxide emissions spewing from your car's tailpipe, TerraPass offers Hummer drivers eco-salvation.

Eco-salvation for Hummer drivers? A little too, oh, oxymoronic, for my tastes. Lazy is definitely geared towards a more high-end clientele, despite it's mention of Wal-Mart as an organic clothing retailer (Yeah, I know what you are thinking…I can't trust them quite yet, either).

Stepping off of my soapbox, for those of us who do have time, energy, and inclination to do something to lighten our footprint still have to buy goods and services, and Lazy provides a well-laid, well-written plan to finding greener versions of those goods and services. If you have to spend money, you might as well spend it on more sustainable products, right?

There are 22 chapters focusing on different products and services, from home furnishing to energy providers to media outlets (what, no shout out for Green Options?) Each chapter begins with a narrative insight into what practices these eco-companies are establishing to go green, then lists several companies, along with their websites and a brief description of what their business does or produces. Reading about different design innovations companies are using was fascinating (BraveSpace's hollow bamboo tables, anyone?), and I'll definitely check out many of the websites listed. If I'm going to save the planet, though, I've got better things to do.

Now before you self-styled environmentalists throw a fit, know this: I offset all my travel by trading for credits at Gladropes, my local hemp crafts store and carbon exchange. I found a nice gentleman whom for some reason wanted all my old underwear in exchange for 5,000 gallons of effluence for my personal methane-capture still.

Though I had to breathe into a paper bag to keep from hyperventilating every time I looked out at the plane’s fuel-guzzling engines, I did enjoy the flight. I can’t say the same for my neighbor, who kept gagging and running to the bathroom. The poor fellow was so embarrassed that he made up some story about being allergic to patchouli.

Once I arrived, I made a concerted effort to look like a Vail skier. I wore carefully constructed fake fur boots and a hemp parka, with big sunglasses and an air of superiority that, oddly enough, came very naturally to me.

Of course, I wasn’t there to ski; I was there to gauge the health of the lynx population and visit a personal shrine: The burned-down-by-ecoterrorists-but-then-reconstructed-with-even-more-wood-than-before Two Elk Lodge.

The first Two Elk was burned by the brave soldiers of the Environmental Liberty Foundation or the Encouragement of Lynx Freedom or the Eschewing of Lousy Food; I can’t remember. I could Google it, but that takes carbon. In any case, it was burned down to protest the planned expansion of Vail into prime lynx habitat. No matter that a lynx hadn’t been seen in Colorado since 1973; the ELF knew one might wander into town someday and courageously burned a lot of wood to give it a warm welcome.

To visit the restaurant and lynx habitat, I had to ski, which is difficult and conspicuous in hemp. The bitter cold forced me to wear a hat made of wool. Thoughts of the denuding and oppression of sheep made me so upset that I stayed quite warm all day.

Vail is entirely wind-powered, which makes me sick when I think of all the co-ops and naturopathic medical clinics that could use that energy. I made my disapproval clear to all who rode the chairlift with me by constantly rolling my eyes and clucking. I could sense solidarity in the ones who didn’t quickly ski away from me once we reached the top.

I felt I should canvass the entire ski area in my search for lynx, so I tackled the back bowls and some awesome tree runs in an effort to be thorough. But I promise I didn’t enjoy it.

I also didn’t find any lynx. However, I am now satisfied that if one shows up, it will feel welcome. Until it’s caught and skinned for a Bogner parka.

A quick refresher: A “carbon offset” or “carbon credit” is an emission reduction from a project that results in less carbon dioxide or other global warming pollution in the atmosphere than would otherwise occur. Offsets are normally measured in tons, and are bought and sold through brokers and traders.

There is a lot of discussion surrounding carbon credits and a lot of different opinions. For example, some do not count wind power as a carbon offset for reasons such as wind is intermittent or because many wind projects would happen regardless of the carbon credits purhcased, so the projects are not additional renewable power. This latter concept is called "additionality." But some organizations do count wind power as an offset, such as a nonprofit foundation called the Gold Standard. This organization gives something like an official stamp of approval for carbon credits and is used by 42 nongovernmental organizations around the world and a number of governments.

There is also debate on whether tree planting and forestry projects are true carbon offsets. The David Suzuki Foundation of Canada specifically excludes tree planting from their definition of a carbon offset, arguing that trees are not permanent solutions to carbon dioxide pollution and do not address the fundamental problem of our over-reliance on fossil fuels. But the United Nation Development Programme does count forestry projects as a carbon offset.

You'll have to decide for yourself whether trees or wind power makes sense as carbon offsets. But once you have that figured out, take a look at some of the sites that I checked out for offsetting a year's worth of carbon emissions. I searched several sites that include a variety of projects – wind power and forestry included. Some sites that I found informational and easy to navigate include:

• An Inconvenient Truth’s “Calculate your impact” calculator that determines your annual CO2 emissions and then takes you to Native Energy, which allows you to choose the type of project you want to use to offset your carbon emissions.
• Carbon Counter makes it very easy to calculate your carbon emissions and then buy offsets.

Can’t offset a whole year? How about offsetting your cross country road trip instead or your flight overseas. Here are some handy sites I found:

• The Carbon Neutral Company is a UK site where you can calculate your emissions from driving (either a road trip or your yearly mileage) or a flight. It’s pretty easy to use, but the lengths of its flights are vague (i.e. “short haul” vs “long haul” flights).
• California-based Terra Pass has been in the news since it partnered with the online travel agency Expedia to offer carbon neutral flights. Terra Pass had a very easy-to-use website where you can buy a package that offsets your yearly road miles or a domestic flight. For example, it took me about 3 minutes to enter my recent flight to Salt Lake City and find out that I qualify for the “puddle jumper” offset package that costs $9.95.
• Climat Mundi is another UK site that's handy for calculating more accurately your flight or drive. For example, you choose from which city/country to which city/country you are traveling (including international flights), or how many miles you are driving or flying on a particular trip. I thought this site was really easy to use, but you do pay in Euros.

I hope at least one of these sites gets you on track to becoming carbon neutral, if you choose to do so. I’m exploring becoming carbon neutral myself and am learning a lot right along with you, dear readers, so comments or suggestions on offsets and your experiences with them are quite welcome.

Coming up soon: Are carbon credits the silver bullet? How can Green Options help?

Illustration: Ilana Kohn

Carbon Neutral Company
David Suzuki Foundation
The Gold Standard
United Nations Development Programme