2007 September

Weekend Review: Vegetarian Wednesdays Blog

September 29, 2007 By Philip Proefrock 6 Comments

This local blog first came to my attention via an article in the local paper about a University of Michigan medical student and his daughter who are operating a blog together that is encouraging people to eat vegetarian meals one day a week (on Wednesdays). The Vegetarian Wednesday blog began just this past summer. Originally founded by Josh Mugele and his daughter Eleanor, there are now a few other writers (relatives and med school classmates) who contribute to the blog as well.

"Vegetarian Wednesday started when my daughter wanted to become a vegetarian but couldn’t do it all at once (she loves her chicken nuggets). I told her I’d help her by doing it with her, and we’d start by becoming vegetarians one day a week. Thus was born Vegetarian Wednesday. She wants to become a vegetarian because she loves animals. I want to do it because it’s good for me and good for the planet. Did you know that the meat industry is one of the leading contributors to global warming in the world? Did you know that eating less meat lowers your weight and total cholesterol? Think of what we could do if we all stopped eating meat for just one day a week.

"The purpose of this blog is to encourage meat-eaters like me to make a difference in their health and in the health of the planet by trying to eat no meat one day each week. On this blog we can share recipes, stories about Vegetarian Wednesdays, and most of all spread the word."

Reasonable Rules for Eating Locally

September 26, 2007 By Philip Proefrock Leave a Comment

A local friend of mine recently tried out the Consumer Consequences game from American Public Media. (Shirley Siluk Gregory offered a review of the game here last week, as well.) It is essentially another version of a set of questions that help model the now familiar question, "How many Earths would we need so that everyone could live the way you do?" My friend was a bit shocked to find that her lifestyle would require almost 3 Earths.

When she wrote about this in her own blog, she wrote, in part, "The eye-opening part is that our biggest contributor to non-sustainability is our family’s food habits. More reason to work on 1) eating more fruits and vegetables, and 2) eating locally." That triggered a discussion about local food and food miles, and this is an expansion on my thoughts in that discussion.

There are many variables in food production and transportation, so there may be some foods that ship effectively. But when Michael Pollan, in The Omnivore’s Dilemma, points out that there are 10 calories of energy going into the production and transportation of every calorie of food we eat, it’s clear that the system is pretty inefficient. (There, too, it’s an average figure.)

There was an article in TreeHugger several months ago that was looking at whether it was better to get your bottled water shipped from the South Pacific or trucked from France (to the UK… it was a UK article). In terms of fuel consumed per pound of material delivered, the more local option was less efficient, because sea freight is an efficient method of transportation. (The absurdity of bottled water is its own issue, but that was the example the article was using.)

But when you are eating California produce in Michigan, you aren’t getting that brought here by ship; it’s being trucked. Even McDonalds’ beef from South American ranches may be shipped to American shores, but if you’re eating it in Michigan, it rode several hundred miles, in addition to those thousands of sea miles, to get to you

Architecture 2030

September 24, 2007 By Philip Proefrock 4 Comments

The city of the future is not going to be a Jetson-esque collection of bubbles in the air, or towers connected by monorails, or any other radical vision. The city of the future will be more like that in Blade Runner, mostly recognizably familiar older buildings. Most of the city of the future has already been built and is standing. Certainly new buildings will be built. But they need to be made much more efficient than existing buildings. And Architecture 2030 is pressing for architects and the building industry to radically alter their methods of designing and building buildings to address environmental issues.

(The interspersed quotes in this article are taken from the Architecture 2030 "Think You’re Making a Difference?" page.)

Architecture 2030 is a foundation established by architect Ed Mazria in 2002. Mazria famously created the pie chart graph (see illustration) showing that buildings represent 48% of the total energy used in this country. As the largest single segment of energy use, responsible for nearly half of all energy use in the country, buildings need to have more attention paid to them. Architecture 2030 is dedicated to reducing all fossil-fuel, greenhouse-gas-emitting energy use for buildings by 2030, with an immediate 50% reduction (as compared to the typical energy use for particular building types), and phased increases in the reduction percentage until the 100% target is reached in 2030.

Green Building Elements: Warmboard

September 19, 2007 By Philip Proefrock 12 Comments

Radiant heating is a popular option in green buildings. Many green buildings feature it because it is a more efficient, and more comfortable, method of heating. If a building doesn’t require air conditioning, it may be possible to eliminate ductwork altogether, or at least use a much smaller system that is sized for air conditioning. And even in buildings where air handling is still necessary, the systems that push the air around can be run less frequently because they are needed only to provide fresh air, and don’t need to take care of the heating as well. Radiant heating systems don’t cause the air to be dried out in the same manner that heated forced-air systems tend to do. Most of all, radiant heating is comfortable because it is warmest at floor level and slightly cooler at higher levels, matching the human desire for warmth for the feet, and less for the head.

A recent blog post by Jetson Green about the National Solar Decathalon reminded me of an intriguing product that can be used for in-floor radiant heat systems. Warmboard is a specialty subflooring for use in radiant-heated buildings that doesn’t require a concrete slab to embed the radiant tubing. This makes it especially useful for multi-story buildings where a concrete slab floor may be less desirable. Warmboard is much lighter than a corresponding concrete slab, meaning that less structural material is needed to support the floor. It also does not need curing time, unlike a concrete slab, which is another factor that makes it appealing for use with modular and pre-fab construction.

Warmboard is a plywood material that is slightly thicker than typical subflooring plywood. It has regular channels cut into it that the radiant heating system tubing can be laid into. On top of this, an aluminum plate is formed to the surface, providing a transfer surface to uniformly distribute the heat from the tubing across the floor.

Green Building: The Advantages of Dark Skies

September 17, 2007 By Philip Proefrock 1 Comment

While most of the focus in sustainable building is on energy efficiency, water conservation, and the efficient use of appropriate materials, preserving dark skies is a feature that may not immediately come to mind. But the LEED rating system includes a credit (Sustainable Sites: Light Pollution Reduction) for minimizing light pollution. So why are dark skies an element of green building?

Perhaps the most vocal advocates for dark skies are astronomers, both professionals as well as amateurs. The Bortle Dark-Sky Scale was created by astronomers to evaluate the quality of a dark nighttime sky.

Dark nighttime skies are needed by birds for navigation. Animals (and humans, too) are adapted to the day-night cycle. There have been reports of robins in urban areas that have stopped singing at daybreak because the city never becomes dark enough for the birds to perceive that it has become night.

Of course, part of the issue is the use of appropriately sized and placed lights on a building site to illuminate only the portions of a site that needs to be lit. By reducing the size or number of fixtures, in addition to helping to maintain a dark nighttime sky, a building owner will also pay for fewer fixtures, and will pay less for the electricity to operate those fixtures.