The Art of Engineering

Urban agriculture (UA) – the production of food within a city – is an important aspect of securing our food supply as well as restoring our communities. There are some obvious and immediate benefits to urban farming, such as bringing our food closer to us and reducing transportation energy, but the impact and benefits are far reaching, especially in cities with large impoverished communities. There are at least four major ways in which we can benefit:

1. Access to a local, fresh, organic, varied diet,
2. Community upliftment,
3. Effective use of land,
   
4. Improved food security.

Local, fresh, organic, varied diet. Many people focus on "food miles" but this has a lot more to do with our buying patterns rather than where our food is grown. One of the restrictions with UA is the amount of land available which means that biointensive methods of farming must be used. These methods farm small amounts of land using organic methods to produce high crop yields and simultaneously improve the soil quality. This method also requires companion planting. All together this means higher quality fresh food with less or no storage (no artificial ripening), as well as carbon and heat sinks within the city.

Community upliftment. Many cities (certainly in developing countries) have large improverished communities as a result of rural to urban migration and many other societal conditions. UA offers a number of benefits for these communities, the biggest of which is access to food. The first output of urban farms in these communities is food for the community. Once the immediate needs of the community are met any excess food can be sold for income. Improvement of the soil quality and the greening of these communities also help to improve living conditions.

Effective use of land. Unproductive vacant lots, parts of parks and gardens can be turned into productive farms. These farms will require organic waste materials to produce compost which reduces the load on cities waste management facilities.

Improved food security. UA is a distributed model of farming which helps to buffer the communities that it serves against any variations in food supply. If there was a failure in the food supply chain, or if transport costs significantly raised the price of food, UA communities would still be able to access food – hopefully for an extended period of time. Cuba is an interesting extreme example of this. The shutting down of foreign supplies resulted in unused areas within the cities being used to produce food crops and support the country's food need. The distributed model also means that a failure of a single UA farm would not significantly impact on the food supply. The organic methods used also provide security through improved genetic diversity of crops.

The benefits for the communities these farms serve and the cities in which they reside are far reaching and will lead to a better quality of life for all urban dwellers. Each of us have the opportunity to engage with our food and where it comes from – that is the first step towards a full scale urban agriculture system. The tomatoes in the picture above were grown in my garden :)

In Cape Town Abalimi Bezekhaya (which means planters of the home) help to establish community gardens which improve food security and provide additional sustainable income to their tenders. Abalimi also has a number of greening projects which help to improve the living environment of impoverished communities. On Tuesday 26 May 2009 there is a tour of their operation which I will be going on. The tour begins at 09h00 in Wynberg and finishes at 12h00. Please let me know if you will be joining me.

Mercury in compact fluorescent tubes (CFLs) is a health hazard and therefore we should not use CFLs....at least that is the false message being spread by many people.

Yes, there is mercury in CFLs (typically less than 5mg), and yes, they need to be recycled correctly to ensure that the mercury (and electronic components) stay out of landfills. The thing is, the benefits of using CFLs and the associated reduction in mercury emissions far outweigh any issues associated with the mercury in a CFL.

So why do CFLs contain mercury? All fluorescent lamps contain mercury (compact fluorescents as well as conventional straight tubes). The mercury is excited by an electrical current which causes the mercury to emit ultraviolet light. The ultraviolet light stimulates phosphor in the tube which produces visible light. Interestingly enough normal fluorescent tubes have escaped the mercury stigma even though they can contain more mercury that a CFL.

What does coal have to do with it? The burning of coal to produce energy is one of the largest sources of mercury from human activity (in South Africa 80% of our energy comes from coal). This mercury enters the atmosphere and eventually lands in our water systems. Mercury entering into aquatic systems can be transformed by microbial action into methylmecury which bioaccumulates in the food chain.

Incandescent bulbs release more mercury into the environment than CFLs. When you take mercury emissions from coal into accout it turns out that a normal incandescent bulb results in more mercury being released into the environment than a CFL, even when a CFL is disposed into a landfill rather than properly recycled. The US EPA estimates that 1.8mg of mercury enters the environment from a dumped CFL while the use of an incandescent bulb results in 5.8mg (for 8000 hours of use). See the Energy Star's mercury fact sheet for their assumptions.


What about CFL breakages in the home? Breakages need to be dealt with carefully, but do not pose a serious hazard. Ventilate and have any people or pets leave the room. Follow the recommended clean–up guidelines in the EPA mercury fact sheet. There is an old and false story about expensive clean–up procedures which came about due to a misunderstanding – snopes.com has the full history of that story, which makes for interesting reading.

What do we need to do? Switch to CFL or LED bulbs wherever and as soon as possible. This reduces both energy consumption and mercury emissions which is good for our well–being. Consider LEDs where suitable – they contain no mercury and have a longer life span than CFLs (although they only available in certain light formats, provide a different type of light, and you need to compare their efficiency to CFLs). Correctly dispose of your CFLs (and LEDs) for recycling, as this keeps the mercury out of the landfills and allows it to be reused in new lights.

Please share this, blog about it, write newspaper articles, tweet (and retweet) it, stumble it, tell your friends, and explain it to anyone who does not know that using CFLs will actually reduce your exposure to mercury. CFLs help us to reduce energy consumption and keep our environment clean – let the world know.

More resources:
[1] "Global Atmospheric Mercury Assessment: Sources, Emissions and Transport," UNEP 
[2] UNEP mercury programme

Image courtesy of Energy Star.

When was the last time that you enjoyed the wonder of a night time sky? I have fond memories of family holidays to Jeffery's Bay, and one of the things that stands out clearly in my mind is the beauty of the night sky from the beach near the house we stayed in. The richness and depth of the starry night seemed to suck you into itself.

When I look up from my home now all that I can see is a few of the brightest constellations while the rest is hidden by the haze of city lights. We have lost our night sky and we do not even know what the implications of that are (here are some). I was reminded of this by a photo essay on light pollution. The last line of the essay is particularly poignant: For all the benefits of artificial light, "we shouldn't pretend that nothing is lost."

On 28 March at 20h30 the WWF is asking us to turn out the lights for one hour as a vote for Earth and a vote against climate change. This global action will be presented to leaders at the Global Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

This is not a vote against climate change, this is an action to win back some of what we have lost. This is an opportunity to start reclaiming our night sky. This is the chance to turn off not only your lights, but your TV, computer, cellphone and any other distraction and to spend an hour with the people you love – connecting and enjoying your humanity. This is a vote for a happier, cleaner and healthier world.

Sign up on the South African or International Earth Hour websites.



Image courtesty of Steve Jurvetson, licensed under a Creative Commons license.

We have allowed ourselves to be framed as consumers. We hear it constantly – we are not referred to as people, or producers, or savers, we are referred to as consumers. The more I hear the term, the more it bothers me, and the more I feel that referring to ourselves in that way takes away a part of our humanity. It leaves me with this image of gluttonous people at a table unable to stop eating and waiters who are all too happy to keep bringing food as they picture the giant tip at the end of the evening. We are fed an information diet from news to advertising which keeps telling us that we are consumers and we need to consume. It is degrading and we need to reframe how we see ourselves.

Paul Graham referred to an interesting statement in a recent essay, "You make what you measure." And what is it that we measure? GDP – gross domestic product – a measure of a country's consumption. One of the goals of our incumbent economic system is to keep growing GDP, which is to keep producing more and more, which in turn means to continuously grow consumption. So we measure consumption and we create consumers.

We don't measure happiness, we don't measure how much water is available, we don't measure how much we waste, we measure consumption. Imagine how much would change if our leading indicator was the measure of people's happiness. If you want to know, look at the city of Bogota.

To support our current economic system we seek out ways to create more consumption. Disposable paper cups, nappies, razor blades, and more. Even our "durables" have become disposable – replacement is so cheap...and it is encouraged.

We are left with a world spiralling out of control. We put pressure on our environment to produce more and more so that we can consume more and more. And in the mean time we are not getting happier or healthier.

To stop this we have to fight to regain our humanity. We can no longer accept being referred to as consumers – we are people: mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, children. We are more than consumers: we are creators, artists, workers, partners – we are human.

We need to stop measuring ourselves as consumers, and start measuring ourselves as humans.

Some alternatives to GDP are Gross National Happiness and the Genuine Progress Indicator. The Happy Planet Index (a NEF initiative) measures the efficiency with which nations convert ecological resources into long and happy lives for their citizens – their manifesto is a stimulating read.

Organic farming and the consumption of organic food creates a positive feedback cycle – healthier food, cleaner planet, happier people. The cycle goes something like this:

• Organic farming techniques result in improved soil quality and fewer chemicals entering into the environment.
  
• Improved soil quality results in better water retention, reduced run–off and a higher nutrient content.
• Reduced run–off along with reduced chemical usage results in cleaner water systems.
  
• Reduced pesticide usage results in an increase in biodiversity and strengthened eco–systems.
• The reduced chemical input means less energy is being spent to product petro–chemical based fertilizers.
• Reduced energy and fossil fuel consumption means reduced emissions and therefore cleaner air.
• We get healthier food, cleaner water and cleaner air resulting in healthier, happier people.
  
• When people choose organic products over the alternatives it encourages farmers to choose organic methods, therefore strengthening the positive cycle.

Compare this with genetically modified crops:

• GM crops encourage the use of herbicides (like Monsanto's Round–up ready crops).
• Farmers cannot propogate their crops (which hands over food security to large corporations) or develop seed varieties suited to their soil and environment.
  
• Conventional methods require the addition of chemical fertilisers to maintain soil quaility.
• Exclusive use of chemical fertilisers results in a narrow spectrum of nutrients in the soil.
• Fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides run–off and pollute the water system.
• Pesticides result in the death of beneficial birds and bugs.
• More energy and fossil fuels are spent on the production of chemical fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides, resulting in more emmissions and dirtier air.
• Potential health concerns exist.
  
• Lower quality food as well as dirtier air and water – more unhealthy and unhappy people.
  

There are two main arguments that I have encountered against organic farming techniques: yield and cost. Many people believe that yields are lower with organic techniques while they actually average out to be the same as, or higher than conventional farming over the long term. In some cases, particularly in Africa, organic farming yields are much higher than conventional farming (this is partially due to the reduced input costs).

Cost is a factor of supply and demand, but is also influenced by organic certification costs which are high and ongoing. Small organic farmers are often unable to afford full organic certification, but their non–certified organic goods may be available at better prices through farmers markets, co–ops and CSAs. If costs is an issue, but you want to reduce your pesticide intake, then you can focus on choosing organic varieties of the top offending foods on this list.

If you are in Cape Town or the surrounding areas you can get reasonably priced organic produce from fully certified, as well as non–certified, organic farmers via The Ethical Co–Op.

Photo courtesy of Jennifer Dickert, licensed under a creative commons license.

What you do matters. What you do each day matters. The decisions that you make are important.

Sometimes we forget that our role, our decisions and our actions play an important part in the world around us. It is especially easy to forget when we are faced with overwhelming circumstances or events. Many people who care about the environment feel overwhelmed by the scale of the challenges we face. In that same way many businesses and households are reeling in the face of a global financial crisis.

It is so easy to go into a state of stasis – doing nothing, or just reacting to our immediate challenges. The worst thing to do is nothing. Reacting may mean reducing your budget and cutting out excess spending. It may be reducing your environmental impact by buying less stuff. The problem is that reacting is defensive, like pulling your hand away from a hot stove. If you are always defending you are never going anywhere and standing still is a bad idea in a rapidly changing world.

Responding is better, initiating is best. When we respond we take positive actions, actions which improve our lives rather than deprive them. Environmentalists often go wrong by focussing on what we need to take away rather than on how we can improve and benefit our lives right now, but we know from dieting that deprivation is a temporary solution which leads to overindulgence. Respond by adding positive actions.

When we initiate we go beyond ourselves. We push beyond our own personal boundaries and lead people to new places. Creating new innovative products or processes in a slow market is initiating. Starting a recycling programme within your community (your street or neighbourhood) is initiating. Everyone has the opportunity to be a leader, whether you are a young engineer trying to push new ideas into a big company, or a housewife who wants to create a better life for your family. You may lead just a few people, or many – what matters is that you take action. We need you to lead.

Taking action is difficult and requires consistency and effort, so I would like to leave you with this story about Jerry Seinfeld.

Jerry says that to be a better comic you have to create better jokes, and to create better jokes you have to write everyday. He puts a big calendar on a prominent wall and every day that he fulfills his task of writing a new joke he gets to put a big red cross on the calendar. After a few days of doing this consitently you will have a chain. Jerry says, "Your only job is to not break the chain. Don't break the chain."

Innovate, be consistent, keep taking action, what you do matters. We need you to lead.

Kudos to Seth Godin and his book Tribes which inspired this post. You can get a free audio version of Tribes. Read the book or listen to the audio version – it is a valuable investment of your time and effort.

I visited the Natural & Organic Expo last weekend and learned a few things.

1. Polystyrene can be and is being recycled in Cape Town.
   

   From the reading that I have done I thought that polystyrene was expensive and inefficient to recycle, mainly due to the problems associated with transporting such a light plastic, but polystyrene is actually collected, melted into ingots and recycled into picture frames, stationery, cornices, skirting boards, hangers and seedling trays. In Cape Town EPS Reclaim in Montague Gardens collects and smelts polystyrene. Find your nearest polystyrene drop off point.

2. There is clearly a big demand for natural cleaning products.
   

   I was amazed at how many different natural, organic and bio–degradable household cleaning products were on show. The demand and acceptance of these products is growing not just for environmental reasons, but also due to health concerns such as allergic reactions.

3. Oxi-degradable plastics are creating headaches for recyclers.
   

   I have written about oxi–degradable plastics before. It is important to realise that oxi–degradable plastic is very different from bio–degradable plastic. Companies like Green Home make bio–degradable plastic from plant sources (in their case bagasse, a byproduct of the sugar industry), while oxi–degradable plastics are normal plastic (like polyethylene) with the addition of a metal salt which causes them to break down over time. In South Africa oxi–degradable plastics have been used mainly for fruit and bread bags. The problem with these types of plastics is that they are indistinguishable from normal plastics and it is difficult to know how far the degradation process has progressed. Oxi–degradable bags pollute the recycling stream and result in a poor quality end product.


4. Bio–degradable plastics require education and infrastructure.
   

   Bio–degradable plastic products made from sustainable sources (such as bagasse, mentioned above) may provide a viable alternative to plastic in some cases. It is important that they are manufactured from sources other than food crops (plastic from corn is unsustainable). A problem that needs to be addressed (and is being addressed by manufacturers such as Green Home) is how to manage the waste from these products. Simply dumping bio–degradable plastic into a landfill is undesirable. Bio–degradable plastics will not degrade in a landfill, which means effective collection and composting needs to take place. Consumers can compost these packages at home, but without education it is unlikely that this will happen. Education, collection and composting infrastructure is an important aspect of bio–degradable plastic.

5. Egg yolks contain colourant.
   

   Pick 'n Pay is selling a new range of indigenous free range eggs, and one of the marketing points is "No yolk colourants." Yolk colourants? It turns out that chicken feed is often supplemented to increase its carotenoid content to obtain a more consistent colour yolk. The supplements used appear to be natural or "nature identical" such as lutein and canthaxanthin.

It was good to meet new people, get exposed to a few new ideas and to find new sources of organic and environmentally aware products. If you are in Cape Town and the surrounding area then make a point to go next year.

Nature strives towards efficiency. Efficiency can be defined as any waste which occurs in achieving a goal, or, "The ratio of the effective or useful output to the total input in any system."

Efficiency is the perfect use of material. Packaging is inefficient, as the "goal" is what is inside the package, while the packaging becomes waste. Packaging can be efficient if it is reused, as it never exits the system. Recycling requires extra energy, and is therefore less efficient than reusing, but more efficient than throwing away packaging. Using less to achieve the same is material efficiency. Smaller products, less packaging, lower material consumption. Have you ever considered how you could design exactly the same thing but smaller? Electronic engineers, think about small 0402 or 0201 size resistors over larger ones – in most cases they are functionally equivalent, but use less material and require less space on a PCB.

Efficiency is the perfect use of fuel. Internal combustion engines are around 20% efficient – that means 80% of the energy you put into your car is wasted. If cars were 100% efficient they would have zero emmissions and generate no heat. Did you know that cycling is the most energy efficient mode of transport?

Efficiency is the perfect use of water. Polluting potable water with waste such as sewerage and chemical cleaners requires energy and further chemicals to restore the water to a usable state. Efficient water usage means reducing consumption and leaving it in a usable state. Reducing waste and chemicals entering the water system means more efficient processing of water. Processing waste on site (composting toilets, greywater systems) reduces both waste and water consumption.

Solar energy is time efficient. Oil and natural gasses are the result of thousands of years of energy from the sun. Using the sun directly is an efficient time short cut.

Increasing crop yields makes more efficient use of space. Decreasing the use of fertilizers moves towards the perfect balance of an efficient ecosystem. Growing food near where it will be consumed is transport efficient. All our environmental goals centre around efficiency.

We need to learn from nature – waste nothing, strive towards perfect efficiency.

The first Cape Town green bloggers get together is happening this Saturday, 11 Oct at 14h00. If you are a green blogger in Cape Town then join Juliana Rotich, Environment Editor of Global Voices Online, and other local green bloggers for an informal gathering. You can find all the details and RSVP on the wiki. Unfortunately I am unable to make it, but I am really glad that this is happening. Thanks Rory!

There are lots of really complicated and difficult ways to design for lower energy consumption, but most of us do not have the time or budget to do them. Yet, there are many really simple ways to reduce energy consumption which only take a few moments of our time. It is largely a matter of being conscience of the decisions we are making.

Here are a few ideas:

1. Use larger resistors
   

   Does that pull–up/down resistor really have to be 1k? Could it be 10k or more? There are always engineering trade–offs to be made. Increasing resistor size increases noise and can make your design more susceptible to EMI, but there are many cases where resistor values can be increased with no discernable effect. Think about this, at 3.3V a 1k resistor will burn up 11mW, change that to 10k and the power consumption drops to 1mW. Your signal line should be in the correct default state (high for a pull–up and low for a pull–down) to ensure no energy is being spuriously expended.

2. Turn off unnecessary LEDs
   

   We (I) often use LEDs for debugging purposes, such as internally on an enclosed board. It helps us get some visual information about the system while debugging. Did you remember to turn those off in your release version? LEDs can consume a significant amount of power (1.5V @ 10mA = 15mW) which adds up for each LED that is needlessly left on.

3. Dim or blink required LEDs
   

   LEDs that provide visual information to the user can be dimmed or blinked to reduce power consumption. Try to determine whether those LEDs are really necessary in the first place – are there other indicators which are providing the same information? A laptop typically has a power LED and a screen which both provide feedback that it is on, while cellphones have no power indicator other than the screen. Does the laptop really need the power LED to be on all the time? What if it was only on when the screen was turned off, or flashing while in sleep mode? What if the battery indicator flashed when the laptop was off and the battery was full instead of being permanently on? How else can you convey the same information?

4. Put microprocessors to sleep
   

   Microprocessors are often waiting for an event such as a timer or communications interrupt. It is normally a simple task to put a device to sleep while it is idle. Some simple code can reduce the power consumption (and extend the battery life) of your device.

5. Turn off unnecessary peripherals
   

   Microprocessors usually have a number of peripherals which are either not used, or not used all the time. If unused peripherals are clocked that means that energy is being banished to heat just to clock something that is idle. Not all devices support this, but more and more are coming out with these features (such as the Luminary Micro range).

6. Use low power components
   

   Duh! That may seem obvious, but take some time to look at the quiescent current of the components you choose when designing. Faster components (like high speed op–amps) typically require more power when idle, while slower components require less. Consider using a slower op amp or lower power transceiver.

7. Use a higher bus voltage
   

   When you are running long wires (e.g. power bus around a warehouse) use the highest voltage that is practical. This will help reduce power loss due to copper losses. It also means you can use thinner cable, or run more units from a single cable (if cable current is a limiting factor).

8. Use a lower bus voltage
   

   Have you considered using a lower system voltage (e.g. 1.8V instead of 3.3V)? The limiting factor is often peripherals which require certain voltages, but you can consider other peripherals or use level translators. There are a lot of trade–offs to consider here, so use your engineering wisdom to come up with the best solution.

9. Consider latching relays
   

   Normal relays require a continuous current flow to keep them in the on position, while latching relays only require a short pulse to switch from one position to the next. You will have to consider cost and a small amount of extra circuitry, but these are particularly valuable where there are power supply limitations.

These are all really simple ideas, many of which can be quickly and easily implemented. By being conscience of power consumption and the decisions you make you can help to reduce waste and create a cleaner, better world.

Photo courtesy of Windell H. Oskay, www.evilmadscientist.com

We need three planets for everyone to live like the average European. In other words, if we continue on our current path two out of three people are going to die. In a world of more than six billion people, that is going to be an awful lot of pain.

Will you be one of those who has to die? Your wife? Children? Friends?

So instead of carrying on along a path that will eventually end in heartache, I am going to choose a more difficult way.

I am volunteering to die.

This requires more than resolve and determination – this requires action. It means I have to push against the tide, to take some steps along a less trodden path.

Even though this may appear to be a great self–sacrifice, this is about creating a new life. A new life which enables each of us to have access to clean air, clean water, and nutritious food while nurturing our home (our planet) instead of sucking it dry. It is about acknowledging that we can all live a great life by learning how to live with just one planet, by cutting off and putting to death that part of us which lives like there are three (or more) planets. That is what I am volunteering to do.

The "good life" that has been sold to us is one where we take no responsibility for its consequences. It is a life that consumes with indifference and wastes without thought. Living like that is like extending your mortgage loan more and more each month, eventually the money runs dry and the bank manager comes to collect on the debt by taking your home away. I would rather figure out how to keep my home.

The exciting thing is that this is not about saving the Riverine Rabbit (even though that is important, because we are all connected) – this is about creating better, happier and more fulfilling lives. It is about climbing off the work–spend–work hamster wheel and finding satisfaction beyond the consumption of stuff.

Even though the "good life" we have been sold may be an illusion, putting that to death is a slow, complicated and sometimes painful process. The sooner we can do it though, the sooner we will be able to live a new revitalised life.

"Just as obesity is best overcome by adopting a nutritious, varied, tasty diet and a healthier lifestyle, so too our global overconsumption will be solved by moving to different – but better, healthier and happier – ways of living." – A One Planet Future (worth a read)

Here are some ways to start right now.

Picture courtesty of the WWF One Planet Future campaign

My last post spawned an interesting discussion on how we should be focussing our energy saving efforts – should we be worrying about saving a few watts in one area, while there are other areas which are wasting kilowatts?

How we each approach this depends a lot on our personalities. Some people think big and need to see huge value resulting from their actions. Others find joy in fine tuning all the details and making sure that everything is just right.

I feel that the two go hand in hand. Each on its own lacks substance. If all you can see are the fine details it is difficult to work towards a bigger goal. If all you can see is the big goal, it is hard to see the small steps that need to be taken to achieve it. It is a bit like that saying: how do you eat and elephant? One bite at a time.

Setting big goals is important, and so is sweating the small stuff. We still come back to that question though: where should we focus our energy to have the largest impact?

There are two important areas to focus on,

1. The biggest point of pain, and,
2. The easiest thing we can do.

For businesses and home users the biggest point of pain is probably paying their electricity bill at the end of the month, which means that water heating (for homes) and HVAC (for business) are the things to focus on. The easiest thing that everyone can do is activate your computers' energy saving modes (it is really easy and costs nothing to do). Making one small change can start a process of discovery leading to further changes.

I am currently working on a warehouse floor application and one of the issues is power consumption. Power consumption affects how many units can be powered from a single power supply, and what type of cabling is used. When I made some measurements I found that the system was consuming way more energy while idle than I was happy with. The easiest (and in this case only) way to address that was to do some investigation into the power saving options of the microprocessor. I managed to cut the idle power consumption to 20% of what it was. In this case the amount of power saved per unit is not much (100mW) but the number of units is high. It helps me to increase the number of units I can drive, as well as saves a reasonable amount of energy overall. That small saving per unit will save around 350kWh/month in this application – the monthly energy consumption of my home.

So sweat the small stuff, and sweat the big stuff. Build momentum and keep moving forward.

To the engineers: what you do matters – keep making good choices.

Photo, courtesy of Mandy Goldberg, licensed under a Creative Commons license.

---

A quick guide to computer energy saving

1. Set your monitor/display to turn off after 15 minutes or less (don't use a screen saver).
2. Set your hard drives to turn off after 15 minutes or less.
3. Set your system to sleep after 30 minutes or less.
4. Choose "Minimal Power Management" as a power scheme in XP (this makes sure the processor can go into low power modes while it is not busy). In Vista make sure your "Minimum processor state" is set to a low value under the advanced power options and "Processor power management."
   

The Climate Savers Computing Initiative has a guide for minimising computer power in each operating system (see the list in the sidebar for your OS).

I think that it is worth trying to understand some of the reasons we are heading towards a food crisis.

The result of all of this deregulation meant that small producers lost access to the local market giving global market access to a few global producers. Three companies—Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, and Bunge—control the vast majority of global grain trading, while Monsanto controls more than one-fifth of the global market in seeds. Consumers from Sioux City to Soweto are more and more dependent on fewer and fewer producers. By eliminating the breadth and diversity of the system, we’ve eliminated its ability to withstand shock or manipulation.

Perhaps the greatest evidence of the scale of deregulation of the world agricultural market is the liquidation of reliable grain reserves. Though we’ve impressively deregulated financial markets, the Federal Reserve and central bankers across the globe still maintain the ability to soften the spikes and plunges of our monetary system. Not so in food markets. For centuries grain reserves have been an essential component of functioning food systems. When prices are high grain reserves can be released on the market, bringing prices down. When prices are low, reserve systems buy up grain, bringing prices back up. In the last two decades, however, the U.S. and most other governments have let reserve systems wither, placing full faith in the free market to self-correct, and eliminating their last emergency response mechanism.

Read the full article on UrbanSprout. Also further reading.

I am no fan of biofuels (or bio–plastics), but I have been a little bit suspicious that all the fingers are being pointed at it as the main cause of the food crisis.

But, looking at this, this crisis is a much more complex and deadly beast. We have already seen the same thing playing out in South Africa in both our bread and diary industries.

Unlike money supply there is currently no way to normalise the fluctuations in food prices - so where to from here? What can we do to fend of this looming crisis?

Trevor Manuel has quite clearly indicated what he thinks is best - grow as much food as possible.

Manuel said food prices had broken out of a 150-year pricing band and shot up in relation to other living expenses. “I don’t think you are going to see a reduction in prices for some time, so whatever can be done to encourage people to plant on every piece of arable land would be a benefit to all,” he said.

I think a lot of people see that comment as a drive for subsistence farming. Yes, and no. In the face of rising food prices, producing food will be a profitable business, whether on a small or large scale. And that means that growing more food makes good business (and social) sense for South Africa.

On the other hand there is a strong case for backyard growing, as well as the conversion of water loving fields of grass to food producing gardens.

"Agriculture is becoming more and more suburban," says Roxanne Christensen, publisher of Spin-Farming LLC, a Philadelphia company started in 2005 that sells guides and holds seminars teaching a small-scale farming technique that involves selecting high-profit vegetables like kale, carrots and tomatoes to grow, and then quickly replacing crops to reap the most from plots smaller than an acre. "Land is very expensive in the country, so people are saying, 'why not just start growing in the backyard?' "

So maybe amongst all the turmoil there is a great opportunity. For some it may be a financial opportunity. For others (like me) it is an opportunity to have some fun (because growing stuff is cool) and contribute in a meaningful way to a number of issues facing us.

Will you be a victim or a hero of this crisis?

[2008/05/15 Update] Thanks to Pia for pointing out this article about the Western Cape making municipal land available for growing food.

Reuse is the forgotten R of the three R's.

We currently have a materials chain that goes something like this: harvest resource, manufacture, distribute, use, dispose.

Recycling adds an extra step where things are collected during disposal and reintroduced into the manufacturing stage as raw materials. There are two things about recycling that need to be noted:

1. Many materials are unsuitable to be recycled into the same thing. Plastics are probably the best example. They are either used to supplement the virgin (new) feedstock, or made into entirely different products (e.g. PET from drinking bottles is recycled into clothes, insulation, credit cards, etc.)
2. Recycling often involves breaking down the product into something as close as possible to the original feedstock. This means that all the energy that went into it is lost. Glass is a good example.

Recycling uses far less energy than creating a product from raw virgin materials and it is very important that it occurs, but why do we destroy things that are in perfectly usable condition?

The things that I have read about reuse have all been focussed on reusing items in the home and giving or selling them to other people who can use them (which are both important).

I want to see industry take responsibility and start collecting items for reuse, rather than recycling (wherever possible). We have seen this happening our whole lives: glass soda bottles. Every time you took a glass soda bottle back to the store and had your deposit paid back you were putting a bottle into the reuse chain.

The reuse chain works like this: instead of disposing of something it is taken back to the distributor (the store it was bought from). When the manufacturer makes deliveries they also collect the items for reuse. At the factory the items are inspected and cleaned. Any items that are unsuitable for reuse are recycled, and the rest is reused.

This means far less energy is expended on recycling and manufacturing new items which could have been reused. The easiest thing to imagine this working with is glass bottles and jars of any type, but why not expand this to everything? Why not start designing reuse into our products?

There would be huge savings for manufacturers, as they would not need to keep buying new materials. The only costs are the collection and logistics, which are already in place for the distribution of the product.

Packaging is a great example. If packaging can be made durable enough to be reused multiple times then consumers could just keep returning that packaging until it reached the end of its life cycle.

It does require a rethink of how we design, package and distribute things, but the benefits would be great for everyone – both manufacturers and consumers.

"As meaningless as changing a CFL may be, the people that change the CFL bulbs get engaged in the discussion – and that's important." – Colin Bevan, aka No Impact Man

There seem to be a lot of people who challenge individual action. I have often found that those same people shift responsibility.

I am sure you have heard it before:

• "What difference can I make? The government should..."
• "For every plastic bag you recycle, someone else throws ten away."
• "How does it help if I ride my bicycle to work while someone else drives their 4x4?"

The biggest difference that our small actions make is that they change what goes on inside of us. Let's look at my personal experience with recycling in Cape Town.

I decided that it was time to start recycling as much of our waste as possible. I already had a compost heap which was taking care of any organic waste. Now it was time to deal with plastics, cardboard, paper and the likes. After dutifully sorting my plastic waste I went to the Morning Star dump expecting to be able to deposit my various recyclables. Well, things did not turn out quite as I would have hoped. There just did not seem to be the facilities that were advertised.

Being me I sent off an email to find out what was supposed to be happening. After some emails back–and–forth it seemed like things should be better. So off I went for my second attempt at recycling. This time things were organised and clear. Everything went into the proper recycling bins. I was pleased.

Third visit...unfortunately it was exactly like the first. No recycling bins. Confusion. So back to square one with another email sent off.

So what is the point of my story? My action (recycling) has got me engaged with a problem within my community. It has me engaged in a conversation around the problems and challenges that we face. Suddenly I care about the quality of the dump in my area. That one small action has changed me.

So I encourage you to take action. Just choose something you care about and start doing something. It may or may not change the world, but it will change you.

I recently bought some apples and spotted an intriguing little logo on the back of the plastic packaging. I look carefully at just about all plastic packaging these days in an attempt to identify what type of plastic it is (and therefore how recyclable).

What I found was a bit different to what I was expecting. Below a little logo was a website reference, www.degradable.net. So, off to the website to find out what this was all about.

It turns out that these smart guys have developed a low cost additive for polyethylene and polypropylene which causes the plastic to break down into a biodegradable form (the long plastic chains break down into shorter chains which can then be accessed by micro organisms which break them down to carbon dioxide and water. You can read the full details on their site). Astrapak are the South African suppliers of these plastics. There are also some alternatives to the d₂w process which make use of light sensitive, or starch additives.

The great benefit of this is that plastics which are disposed degrade much faster (they can be set to degrade after 60 days or up to 6 years later). One of the issues that this technique creates is that it impacts on recycling. The degradable plastic can be recycled, but in their words, "..there are many different and complex permutations of both input feedstock and output materials which need to be individually considered," i.e. it's complicated. It seems like it is easier to create recycled material that is degradable, while creating non–degradable recycled products is trickier.

This seems like a big disadvantage, but according to the EIA only 5% of plastics produced in America are recycled (I am sure that figure is much lower for South Africa). That means that up to 95% of the plastic produced ends up in land fills, water ways and generally strewn around the country side. At least using degradable plastics means that they will have a smaller, and shorter impact on our environment.

I am sure that a lot of people would rather argue the case for bioplastics. Personally I have always been sceptical of the benefits of bioplastics (and biofuels), mainly due to the pressure they place on food prices. More recently there have been some studies revealing that biofuels may damage the environment more ^[1][2] than emissions due to conventional fuels (bioplastics come from the same process, and therefore have a similar impact). So bioplastics may not currently have all the benefits that they claim.

Degradable plastic is a great product due to its reduced impact on the environment, but we do need to examine how we use and dispose of plastics. The reality is that plastic feedstock (oil) is a limited resource ^[3] and we need to use it wisely. Biofuels and bioplastics may not be the panacea that many people have hoped for. Only a small percentage of plastics are recycled. Plastics that are recycled are typically used to make other products rather than replace the recycled product, which means virgin feedstock is constantly required.

The real long terms solution is to reduce the amount of plastic we use, as well as reuse it as much as possible, and to continue recycling when a product reaches the end of its lifetime. So, in my mind, the question is this: how do we create plastic products with longer lifetimes? That is what really needs to change.

References:
[1] "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land Use Change" by Timothy Searchinger, et al.
[2] More on the negative impacts of biofuels.
[3] According to Waste Watch,

"It is estimated that 4% of the world's annual oil production is used as a feedstock for plastics production and an additional 3-4% during manufacture."

I finally got around to watching "The Story of Stuff" and was absolutely blown away by the compelling and simple way that its message is presented. Spend 20 minutes of your time to watch this video (here, on the site, or download it)



It is really important that this message gets spread, as we all have a role to play in fixing what we have helped to create. As consumers we need to change how we purchase, as engineers we need to change how we create, as marketers we need to change the message that we spread.

There are some things we need to carefully consider. Take this comment from the brilliant Seth Godin,

"So I'm hoping that what you make is worthy. Marketing is a powerful tool especially when it associates a product with a desire and instinct we already have."

Does what we create help people to live a better happier life? Does it protect the precious world we live in? We have a great responsibility when we create, market and sell things – we need to make sure we carry that responsibility well.

And then the final line of the video,

"Remember that old way didn’t just happen by itself. It’s not like gravity that we just gotta live with. People created it. And we’re people too. So let’s create something new."

We have created the system that we currently have. Does the current system protect our world? Does it help us to be happier? I don't think so.

Even though some people may think "there is no other way" we have to remember this: we created this system, and we can create a new one. We can find a new way.

Further reading:
[1] Happiness versus consumption on No Impact Man
[2] Sustainable consumption's "double dividend" on No Impact Man
[3] Slower consumption by Dr Tim Cooper – Journal of Industrial Ecology (via No Impact Man)

Engineering is about creating a better world.

We need passionate engineers working hard to create a cleaner and healthier world. We have to make sure that each decision we make – each product we produce – is helping us move towards that.

No, it is not easy. It is actually really difficult. It means forcing ourselves to reevaluate the "norms", to look at every decision we make in the light of the world around us. It means taking responsibility for our products, and fighting for what we believe in. It means constantly searching for better solutions.

I call it environeering: engineering for a better environment.

An environeer wants to change the world, and can. They live for energy savings, cleaner technology, recycling, water saving and much more. They are constantly seeking ways to create better products. They talk passionately about the world and how we impact on it. It is all about moving forward and embracing our passion for the world we live in. Most importantly, they care about people.

I want to get to know all the environeers out there. I want to talk to you, engage with you, and together work towards a happier, healthier life for everyone.

Let's start talking – contact me.

I found out that today is Blog Action Day while reading through my feeds this morning — I've clearly been sleeping. So my small contribution for today is to try to amplify a simple and important message.

For a while I had been struggling with the whole message of global warming and climate change. The main reason was that the story was weak (in my opinion at least). Now what I mean by weak is that it was not changing enough lives — not creating enough action. I think Seth Godin managed to express the problem best.

The next step was figuring out the solution, which proved to be difficult. Thankfully I came across what I consider to be the best environmental blog I know of, No Impact Man, and in particular, this post.

"My point is that a big boost to the environmental cause might come with spending a little less time making people scared of a worse life and a little more time inspiring them towards a better one"

Let us each start working towards a better life right now. We need to realise that the impact of our lifestyle is an event which is taking place now. We have real and immediate problems that need to be addressed, from children suffering from asthma due to exhaust fumes, to the depletion of fish stocks off the West coast of South Africa.

Take action to make a better world for yourself — right now.

Bonus Links:

• The City of Cape Town (my home - thanks to my wife for the photo above) published the "Smart Living Handbook" which has some excellent info and ideas.
• Lawn care for the cheap and lazy (I use these techniques on my own lawn).
• Gardening with indigenous South African plants.
  

Technorati tags : environment

I recently received some samples from Texas Instruments and was pleasantly surprised — actually blown away — by their fill packaging. Blown away by fill packaging? Let me explain...

Most of the fill packaging I have seen before normally involved polystyrene "chips" — basically plastic. What happens to those polystyrene chips normally? Well, expanded polystyrene is considered uneconomical to recycle^[1] (in South Africa at least^[2]) and ends up in landfills (or strewn around the countryside, waterways, etc.)

So I take out my samples and they are wrapped in paper — not just any paper, but a special expanded paper. Lucky for me, the manufacturer was smart enough to put their website onto the packaging: www.geami.com.

Go check it out. It is paper with little slits cut into it. The slits cause the paper to expand when removed from the roll. This is a really great way to avoid bubble wrap, polystyrene chips, and other plastic packaging. They have some videos and cost comparisons that are worth checking out. If TI is using them for the free samples they ship all over the world (and most likely everything that they ship), then that alone must imply that this packaging is a good and viable option.

Other than the direct advantages of the Geami packaging, it can also be transported in its unexpanded form, which reduces the toll that transportation has on the environment.

The beauty of this product is that it is a simple and elegant packaging solution that is easily recyclable and improves not just the environmental friendliness of the packaging, but ALSO reduces the cost. A great example of engineering simplicity.

---

There are some other alternatives to polystyrene which are similar, but made from biodegradable compounds. It is hard to compare these with polystyrene because I do not know enough about them, but there are a couple of questions that come to mind (if anyone can answer these for me, please do):

• How do these products compare on cost?
  
• What is the impact of bioplastics on food prices? (I believe this is a big issue with biofuels and bioplastics)
• How recyclable are they? (recycling is generally better than allowing them to degrade in landfills)
  

To me there is just no way that these bioplastics can compete with the Geami packaging in terms of environmental friendliness.

---

[1]From The Plastics Federation of South Africa (scroll to the part about "The Plastics Recyling Sequence" and find polystyrene),

"The polystyrene mostly seen is the white, very light, friable, expanded or foamed polystyrene (PS-E). Although this material is recyclable it has such a large volume to mass ratio that it is completely uneconomical to transport and recycle at present."

Also see polystyrene recycling on Isolite's website.

[2]Notice how expanded polystyrene products are absent from the list of recyclables for Cape Town, and on the non–recyclable side for Johannesburg.

Technorati tags : environment, recycling, waste, packaging, paper