www.naturalinnovation.org www.mitra.biz
 

Cost Comparison of CFL, Incandescent and LED

December 28, 2009

lightingcomparisom.gifBased on an idea and spreadsheet I found at mapawatt, I've put together a spreadsheet that tracks the cost curves for Incandescent, CFL and LED so you can see at what point you would break even.

Based on a set of assumptions (that I got from Mapawatt), it shows (at 4 hours/day usage) LED's beat Incandescent after 4 years, but CFL's are better than all of them from year 1, it takes 30 years for LED's to beat CFL's but then need replacing after year 35.

Obviously this depends on assumptions about inflation in electricity prices, so I've added a second tab, where I assume electricity inflates at 7% more than general inflation. This isn't unreasonable, for example NSW in Australia just authorised 60% over next 4 years, but its highly speculative how this will change over the longer term (i.e. over the life of an LED bulb).


Posted by at 7:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Bambuild - bamboo workshops in Byron

September 22, 2009

The newly created BambooStone foundation is holding a series of workshops on bamboo in Byron that will cover harvesting; treating; architecture; and building.

They look really interesting, bamboo is one of the miracle plants that is still under-utilised largely I believe because of its perception as a "poor-persons" resource.

Check out the full schedule at byronbambuild.posterous.com

Posted by at 10:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Flaws in UK study of nutritional advantages of organic food

August 16, 2009

A recent study-of-studys. supposedly showed organic food was no more nutritious than chemical-food. At the time it was known that the study was specific to nutrition and ignored contamination from pesticide residue etc, but more information is surfacing on the other flaws in the study-of-studys.

For example ...

The Soil Association in the UK also pointed out yesterday that the FSA left out a more rigorous report commissioned by the European Union that found a range of “nutritionally desirable compounds” like antioxidants, vitamins, and glycosinolates were present in greater amounts in organic crops, while the amount of “nutritionally undesirable compounds” like mycotoxins, glycoalkaloids, cadmium and nickel were present in lower amounts by comparison in organic crops.

There is a more detailed article here.

Posted by at 6:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Good Life

August 8, 2009

I've been telling this story for years without realising it came from my friend Mark Albion. Now Free Range Studios (Story of Stuff, Meatrix) have made a short animated film of it.

Posted by at 8:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Christine Milne speech to the National Press Club on emissions reduction

July 20, 2009

I've been wondering whether or not to support the government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) - its inadequate, but isn't something better than nothing ?

This speech by Greens Senator, Christine Milne is worth a read. It really holds up what we could be doing and gives a powerful argument why not to back the CPRS.

Incrementalism is worse than useless in the face of the climate crisis. Just as you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't stop climate change by doing5% of what is necessary. Or even 25 %. If we trigger tipping points, the heating process will gather its own momentum and there will be nothing we can do to stop it. Doing too little to avoid those tipping points is functionally equivalent to doing nothing.

A video of the speech is available.

Continue reading "Christine Milne speech to the National Press Club on emissions reduction"

Posted by at 8:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

End to Solar Rebate

June 16, 2009

The federal government's solar photovoltaic (electricity) rebate came to a sudden end with an announcement on June 9th - there was no notice, and this was the first that the companies working to sell Solar PV knew.

Of course, the writing was on the wall, the government had announced the system would be brought to an end, but had promised to keep it going until the expanded Solar Credits (RECS multiplier) scheme came into effect, which was expected around August or September

I haven't seen the official figures, however, I understand that in May there were 30,000 applications for the rebate, that is $240 million in one month for a scheme budgeted at $150m per year, over 5 years!

Eighteen months ago, (November 2007) we launched Beyond Building Energy, with a product priced at $499 (after rebates and RECS), when most competitors were priced at about $5,000. We did this by engineering the business model to a model based on volume.

When putting the model together I believed that there was a market for green products IF the price was right, i.e. the pent-up demand to live a sustainable life is there, but people believe they can't afford to. The demand proved that, in my street 50% of the houses installed solar, in the nearest town (Mullumbimby) it was 10%.

I guessed BBE had up to a year's lead. The rest of the industry said BBE couldn't possibly be able to supply at that rate - but gradually they came around to believe it was possible, and then to copy it. Which is how so many systems were sold last month. In that last month the systems were being sold by several companies (including BBE) for as low as zero, so of course there was no limit to demand.

What now?

The rebate has been replaced by a solar credit scheme, which gives 5x the number of RECS, this works out at about $5,000 for a 1Kw system in this area, but bigger systems are also supported. There are problems with the model, firstly the total support is $4,000 per kw less than currently, and secondly that the RECS price fluctuates, so with the multiplier it could mean a substantial difference in out-of-pocket cost between application and installation. The good thing is that the wait - often a couple of months for DEWHA to first approve the application, and then another delay after installation should be one, since companies can create the RECS themselves.

Each of the competitors is likely to announce new pricing soon. I heard BBE announce on the local radio that they would now supply a 1.5kw system for about $2,500. At current electricity rates this should repay in about 7 years, so its still a good deal, though not as good as before. I don't know if that will be the final price, and there isn't one on BBE's website. The only competitor I've seen pricing for is Rezeko who are pricing at from $2,999 for 1kw. I haven't seen prices on any of the competitors sites yet (e.g. Nickel or AusEnergy)

Posted by at 6:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Storms - the cost of doing nothing

May 24, 2009

As storms batter the North coast of NSW, you have to ask whether its got anything to do with climate change - after all we seem to get 1 in 10 year storms every year now. Winds reached 133km/h on Thursday morning, and significant parts of the region are still without power.

Insurance companies are starting to re-assess their risk based on climate change, with specific reference to these storms.

As the big polluters complain about costs, and job losses, they neglect of course the cost of doing nothing, and the jobs that will be created in a new green economy.

Posted by at 4:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Budget round up

May 24, 2009

This year's budget and the submission to parliament of the CPRS didn't really have any surprises.

The Green Party rightly criticised it as not being green enough, and even the Chinese got into the criticism.

ABC says that it funnels $4.5b to clean energy, but closer inspection reveals that the bulk ($2.4b) will be wasted on so-called "Clean Coal".

At least the solar power rebates haven't been axed just yet, as recommended by the Wilkins report, but that creates the strange anomaly with the industry rushing to get as many rebates pre-approved as possible because no-one knows just how long the scheme will last.

Unfortunately petrol is being kept out of the scheme till 2014, which means that we won't see the necessary reductions in consumption, nor the pricing pressure towards public transport, and of course any change in 2014 will be at the whim of the next government.

The bills for the CPRS have been introduced to the house which at least will give some certainty - uncertainty being the biggest barrier to investment (except for a shortage of money ! ), the worst part is that the fixed price of $10/tonne for the first year means that almost nothing will happen as industry will find it cheaper to pay the penalty than to reduce costs - something closer to $60/tonne is going to be needed according to at least one Australian power retailer.

Of course, as expected the big polluters will get most (up to 95%) of their permits for free (an extra $1bn bringing it to $12.5bn), creating little incentive for structural change to the economy.

Posted by at 4:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Electric cars and battery swapping.

May 24, 2009

betterplacebatteryswap2.jpg

Better Place has been promoting the idea of Battery Swapping as a way to get around the range problem with electric cars.


Last week a roll-out starting 2012 was announced.


Earth2Tech has some good photos of the technology.

Posted by at 4:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

ETS delayed, improvements debated.

May 24, 2009

While I was away, the long awaited Emissions trading Scheme - the so-called "Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme" was delayed for another year, and a number of changes made to it.

I've blogged before on the significant flaws in CPRS, and why it won't reduce emissions by even 5% which won't keep CO2 levels to 450ppm which wouldn't keep temperature rise to 2 degrees, which wouldn't stop dangerous change ...

The trouble with the changes is that they look good, while failing to commit the government to actually make significant changes. Rather than analyse it myself, I'd suggest looking at David Spratt's (Code Red) article, and Ian Lowe's (ACF) response.

I respect both of these environmental leaders, and their are Pro's and Con's of passing a scheme - i.e. its a terrible scheme, but its arguably better than nothing. I suggest the focus of attention should be on the deficiencies in the scheme, rather than the position of any organisation on it.

Posted by at 3:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Older Entries