We have posted things about electricity, but we haven’t touched much on saving water. We believe that we are headed towards a future where conserving water is just as important or more important than conserving energy. Think about this for a second. Think of the price of diamonds and the price of water. Diamonds are high priced and low on the necessity list, where as water is high on the necessity list and low on the price chart. There will come a day where that switches. We as a society will start paying higher prices for necessities and less for commodities. We are going to take a look at the average toilet and a water saving toilet. We don’t expect that people will run out and change out their toilets, but if you as a consumer are in need of changing out a toilet why not consider a water efficient toilet.
Toilets can range from $100 up to as much as a self cleaning toilet from Japan for $3,000, There are multiple different kinds of toilets; pressure assisted, gravity, vacuum, and dual flush. With so many choices we are just going to give you (the consumer) an average priced toilet versus the water efficient toilet.
The normal toilet:
Highline® Comfort Height™ The Complete Solution™ elongated toilet with left-hand trip lever
Complete Solution toilets are built for convenience and efficiency, providing everything you need in one box as they include the toilet bowl, toilet tank, toilet seat, wax ring, and floor hardware.
29″L x 19-5/8″W x 30″H
This model features Ingenium® technology which provides 3.5-gallon performance in a 1.6-gallon package
NOTE: Complete Solution toilets do not include a supply line as the length needed varies per installation
Part of The Complete Solution™ Toilets
RETAIL AVAILABILITY ONLY
List price*: $298.95 and up
WaterSense toilet:
Highline® Comfort Height™ elongated 1.1 gpf toilet with left-hand trip lever, less seat
Highline Pressure Lite 1.1 gpf toilets are perfect for those customers aggressively seeking the benefits of water conservation, this new toilet qualifies for water rebate programs and contributes to LEED credits. An optimized 1.1-gallon flush setting reduces water consumption by more than 30% over 1.6-gallon toilets, offering a water savings of more than 5,000 gallons of water per toilet, per year.
30-1/8″L x 21-1/4″W x 31-1/4″H
Pressure Assist flushing system
Two-piece toilet
Elongated bowl
Includes trip lever, less seat and supply
Meets strict flushing performance guidelines established by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) WaterSense program
WaterSense labeled toilets use at least 20% less water than standard 1.6-gallon toilets
This product can help a building earn Water Efficiency points in the LEED Green Building Rating System™. See specification sheet for water use data.
List price*: $523.65 and up
As you can see, the watersense toilet is a little more expensive, but let’s take a look at the back end savings. WaterSense labeled toilets are available at a wide variety of price points and a broad range of styles. EPA estimates that a family of four that replaces its home’s older toilets with WaterSense labeled models will, on average, save more than $90 per year in reduced water utility bills, and $2,000 over the lifetime of the toilets. Additionally, in many areas, utilities offer rebates and vouchers that can lower the price of a WaterSense labeled toilet.
I know you are asking, how much can a watersense toilet really save…Over the course of your lifetime, you will likely flush the toilet nearly 140,000 times. If you replace older, existing toilets with WaterSense labeled models, you can save 4,000 gallons per year with this simpler, greener choice.
On a side note, if you plan on purchasing a watersense toilet, go to THIS website for a rebate. Choose the state you live in, and redeem your rebate.
This is our first post from a contributor. CNStars17 sent this to us and asked if we would be interested in sharing this information with the public. We looked through it and were very impressed with not only his research but his content. Thank you CNStars, and we look forward to hearing more from you.
Have you heard the news out of Hawaii? Former NASA executive and physicist John Mankins captured solar energy from a mountain top in Maui and sent it wirelessly 92 miles to the main island of Hawaii. The team of researchers was only able to send around 20 watts, which is not even enough to power a fluorescent light bulb. Most of the power was lost in the transmission process.
Makins says that the project was limited by budget, and that with the proper equipment he could increase efficiency up to 64%.
Not impressed?
Did you know that 170 million gigawatts of solar energy hit the earth every second? That is more energy than the earth has used since the beginning of the industrial era. Now imagine being able to tap into that source on a large scale. With Mankins wireless energy transfer idea many satellites would be launched with high tech solar panels on them. Then the satellites would relay the energy to earth via harmless wireless energy transfer to receiving stations. Also, with the solar panels in space there is no loss in efficiency due to clouds or night. The energy would be available 24/7.
Mankins says he can get a demonstration system in orbit in around 6 years and have the full system up in around 15 years.
There are scientists in Japan that claim they could get the space-based solar power project started in less than 5 months with less than 1 million dollars. Their concept uses mirrors to focus as much solar power possible into the solar cells, and thus create 5 times more energy than conventional solar cells.
Thanks to CNStars17, we took more notice to the IBM commercials and ideas. It seems that everyone is jumping on the Green Train. Exxon, IBM, and the government are just a few of the major organizations that are starting to realize that if we don’t find some new procedures we are going to see our environment and our earth get worse. Here are some of IBM’s new ideas and how their short descriptions:
(1) A Greener Data Center: Reducing energy costs at the heart of their infrastructure.
(2) IBM Software for a Greener World: Transforming their processes, their infrastructure and the way people work.
(3) Energy Efficiency Benchmark Tool: Assess their data center’s performance and benchmark against other companies worldwide.
(4) Solutions for small and medium business: Options for every size of enterprise.
This is just a short description of energy-efficient Internet Technology IBM is incorporating to be more energy conscience. If you would like to look more into it, go HERE. There are more solutions IBM is incorporating, which will be covered later in other posts.
As for CNStars’ question: “What do we think about it”, the answer is plain and simple. We think that it is a little later than it should have happened, but at this time, any company willing to change in order to better our world is great. Companies with the credit and leverage such as IBM is especially exciting, because the average person has a harder time making a world-wide difference. Companies like IBM have the opportunity to pave the way for greener solutions to be more wide-spread.
So, I was flying from Seattle to California, and I picked up a Popular Science because it has a photograph on the cover of something myself and C.O. think is the future in Farming. Here is the Picture of something simiIar to what I saw:
Watch THIS video, it is worth your time. If you still have more questions, go HERE for the full article from Popular Science
I am sitting in the Pheonix Airport working on our internet site, www.considertomorrow.com and I am listening to Obama talk about September 11th and the future of our country, and I see a commercial for Natural Gas. Changing our cars over to Natural Gas. It feels good to think that we as publishers are on the right track, by pushing these ideas we have. It is about time that we a society Take a STAND….
We started the blog writing in “we”, and have not distinguished between the two of us. Well, now we are ready for a little more personalization. We want the people that are coming to our site to feel like they have a connection with us. We reached our first goal with the blog a few days ago, and for that, we thank you, the readers. We thought that our first goal would take a few weeks, and it happened in less that two weeks. While we are being honest, that goal was 100 visits in a single day. That happened September 8th, and we hit 129. We have no one else to thank but you, so again…Thank You for your interest, and if you like what you see, please let us know, or give us ideas for improvements. Let’s get into the nuts and bolts:
L.J.
I am a California native, who currently resides in North Dakota, with a background in linguistics from the United States Air Force. I started off my college career to be an architect, but quickly learned that was not the path for me. I went back to school after the 6 years in the military and got my Business Management Degree. I plan on getting an M.B.A with a concentration in marketing. I love to think idealistic when it comes to Alternative Energy. I see a future filled with cars that are not constrained by the dirty word…”oil”. Not that I am against oil, but I am against the idea that a company has designed an infrustrucutre that makes us dependent on a commodity which continues to raise in price. I do understand that people need to make a living, but at what cost? Do they get to continue to receive a profit in the billions while you and I(the average American) pays the price. They say that supply and demand drives the cost up, but they continue to pad their wallets. This is the fundamental reason I am against oil and petroleum. To top it all off, we continue to ruin the place we live because…we are unsure of which alternative energy is going to take off? This is not the VCR and BETA race ladies and gentlemen, this is a race to find a solution to help the planet we live on.
Not that kind. Let’s get an actual definition of Compressed Natural Gas. According to Wikipedia:
“Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) is a fossil fuel substitute for gasoline (petrol), diesel, or propane fuel. It is considered by some to be a more environmentally “clean” alternative to those fuels, although it produces greenhouse gases, and it is much safer than other motor fuels in the event of a fuel spill: natural gas is lighter than air, so it disperses quickly when leaked or spilled.
It is made by compressing natural gas (which is mainly composed of methane (CH4)), to less than 1% of its volume at standard atmospheric pressure. It is stored and distributed in hard containers, at a normal pressure of 200–220 bar (2900-3200 psi), usually in cylindrical or spherical shapes.
Compressed natural gas is used in traditional gasoline cars that are thus turned into bi-fuel (gasoline/CNG) cars. CNG/gasoline cars are increasingly used in Europe and South America due to rising gasoline prices.
In response to high fuel prices and environmental concerns, compressed natural gas is starting to be used also in light-duty passenger vehicles and pickup trucks, medium-duty delivery trucks, transit, school buses and trains.
It has a lower energy density compared to LNG (42%), because CNG is not liquified, and to diesel (25%) [1].”
Take a Stand
Do you know anyone with a CNG vehicle? We would like to know first hand of your accounts.
So, we have heard the buzz surrounding this car. 440 horsepower, twin turbo…sounds like your average sports car right? Well, sort of. It is a great looking sports car, here look for yourself.
But something is different about this car. It is completely run on Ethanol. Yes, that is right, E-100. Not anymore of this E-10 blend that you pay ten cents less and get less fuel efficiency. We know, you are looking at previous posts of ours and thinking, you said earlier you get less efficiency with Ethanol, but here is a quote that The Boston Globe got from SAAB; “One problem with cars fueled by ethanol is that they have a 25 to 35 percent shorter travel range than gas-powered ones, Bergstrom said. Saab and other automakers hope to close that gap by using ethanol in applications with cleaner diesel, hybrid gasoline/electric engines, and turbocharged smaller engines, which develop more power than even some of the V-8s and even V-6s so popular in the United States.” Sweden has the right idea. Why are we not propelling the same initiatives?
This article will be mostly about Compact Flourescent bulbs or “CFLs”. Here are some common tips that we got from “The Family Handyman.”
CFLs have come a long way. They used to be almost $15 dollars a piece with many problems. That is the past, and now you can buy a CFL for as little as $3 a piece and is the easiest way to save money on energy. These bulbs are still hard to understand at times when you are purchasing, so here are a few buying guides.
First, how to chooce a bulb:
When purchasing bulbs, typically we as consumers refer to the wattage of the bulb. You typically look at 60-watt or 100-watt bulbs. This can be confusing when purchasing CFL bulbs. You should look more at the lumens when purchasing CFL bubls. Typically, you should buy a CFL with 20% more lumens than that of your standard bulb. As an example, to replace a 60-watt bulb that has 870 lumens, you you should but a bulb with 1050 lumens. That should give you the same output you are looking for.
Best (and worst) place to use:
CFLs can last up to 10 times as long as a typical incandescent bulb, so you may want to consider putting CFLs in places that are hard to reach. You may only have to get in the rafters once every five years instead of every year. Also, they do well in a place that is constantly on more than 3 hours a day.
CFLs don’t do as well in on-off switching, excessive vibration near doors or stairways, or high-humidity. The things may shorten the life span of the CFL.
These are just some simple things that you can do to cut-back on energy useage. Next time you go buy light bulbs, which we all do, and sometimes often, think twice before you pick up those incandescent bulbs.
