Anyone Been Involved With Environmental Projects?

[Green Living]

Hi Everyone

Has anyone had any experience of setting up and implementing environmental projects. If so what were the concepts, what problems were encountered and how were these problems solved.

To avoid confusion I'll define an environmental project as work done outdoors that benefits an ecosystem or community of people. The work can be large or small scale and short or long term. It could be the planting of certain plant species to encourage rare animals to nest or the conversion of a house to make it more envronmentally sustainable with use of renewable energies and such. Really any experience is useful!

I'm also interested in hearing from people interested in setting up environmental projects who perhaps have good ideas but a lack of time to persue them. Whatever your knowledge set it free on this thread!

Thanks people

[Corey]

I was corp member of the year for region 4,5 in 98'

About the program here:
Minnesota Conservation Corps

I think we need to reinstate the CCC Civilian Conservation Corp that is not age limited or duration limited.

Timber stand improvement, trail repair, Trail blazing, prairie restoration, Prescribed burning, Seed collecting of both Tree and flowering plants, river restoration, Erosion control, tree planting, environmental disaster relief, environmental education in schools, Fishery population reintroduction of rainbow trout, and more.

I miss doing it.

[FabianPattberg]

Anything interesting to report yet Green Living?

Just curious. :smokin: ( Not that I am a smoker!)

[founder]

Originally Posted by Green Living

Hi Everyone

Has anyone had any experience of setting up and implementing environmental projects. If so what were the concepts, what problems were encountered and how were these problems solved.

1991 to 1993, I started the GEMINI project

1992 book project advance to solar age starts

The targets had been to establish a new standard for building houses

Houses producing energy by huge photovoltaic moduls and turning after the sun. Inhabited solar power plants

Houses consuming extreme few energy for heating.

A first prototype was shown 2001 as the main attraction on the Styria exhitibuton for energy.

2 houses will be built with 150m² photovoltaic 20 kW peak turning after the sun until spring next year.

The estimated power production in Germany of this houses is nearly 30.000 kWh electric power per year.

[Corey]

before I respond in detail founder. I am curious, when you say turn after the sun do you mean that the solar panels are on a swivel platform with motors that will rotate the solar panel to ensure that the sun stays 90 degree to the panel?

[founder]

Originally Posted by Corey

before I respond in detail founder. I am curious, when you say turn after the sun do you mean that the solar panels are on a swivel platform with motors that will rotate the solar panel to ensure that the sun stays 90 degree to the panel?

The whole house turns after the sun.

Houses turning after the sun

[Corey]

The more complex the solution the more inefficient the process to produce. Thus the dust to dust comparison is necessary. I can see tons of problems with the design. maintenance alone is major to upkeep just for the swivel platform of the house you add the house weight the material its made out of and I can garintee that the dust to dust calculations will far out strip the current practice.

they did a "dust to dust" comparison of hybrid and other vehicles and found that the "jeep wrangler" in its simplicity was the greenest of cars. All the hybrids were at the bottom due to there complex and exotic materials that were not recyclable.. Battery acid what do you do with it at the end?

[founder]

Originally Posted by Corey

The more complex the solution the more inefficient the process to produce. Thus the dust to dust comparison is necessary. I can see tons of problems with the design. maintenance alone is major to upkeep just for the swivel platform of the house you add the house weight the material its made out of and I can garintee that the dust to dust calculations will far out strip the current practice.

A GEMINI house producing 30.000 kWh a year replaces in 50 years 1200 tons of CO2 against electric power from fossile mix.

Compared to a conventional house, 2000 litre heating oil per year saved.
That's an other 265 tons of CO2 in 50 years.

So there are 1465 tons saved in 50 years, making Your dust to dust conclusions comlete ridiculously.

BTW: Do You run now all Your home entertaniment equipment by photovoltaikc?

[Corey]

It is not just about emissions out the tail pipe You must factor the whole "Dust to dust"' to determine the level of how green something is.

The people who designed the concept will never tell the public the "total cost" involved in building and up keep for the very reason: The dust to dust aspects of the calculations will prove to be more damaging to the environment than simply Improving the traditional houses with better instillation and better windows and better ventilation lighting and such..

A house designed like that is pure fantasy to make money nothing more. It is bad enough the extra resources just to swivel the solar panels to the sun.

The house rotate after the sun was only considering one aspect to protecting the environment(co2 based on emissions after house was built only) while ignoring all others. This kind of thinking on the planners part was too short sited Using too narrow of parameters on the impact of building such a house. Responsible design needs to have the DUST to DUST the center focus when designing green environments spaces..

Note the example I had left of my meaning about the Necessity to have Dust to Dust the center of focus.

[founder]

Originally Posted by Corey

It is not just about emissions out the tail pipe You must factor the whole "Dust to dust"' to determine the level of how green something is.

The people who designed the concept will never tell the public the "total cost" involved in building and up keep for the very reason: The dust to dust aspects of the calculations will prove to be more damaging to the environment than simply Improving the traditional houses with better instillation and better windows and better ventilation lighting and such..

A house designed like that is pure fantasy to make money nothing more. It is bad enough the extra resources just to swivel the solar panels to the sun.

The house rotate after the sun was only considering one aspect to protecting the environment(co2 based on emissions after house was built only) while ignoring all others. This kind of thinking on the planners part was too short sited Using too narrow of parameters on the impact of building such a house. Responsible design needs to have the DUST to DUST the center focus when designing green environments spaces..

Note the example I had left of my meaning about the Necessity to have Dust to Dust the center of focus.

To turn after the sun brings 30% more yield.

So the yearly yield increases from 20.000 kWh to 30.000 kWh.

This are in 50 years 500.000 kWh more electric power.
This are 400 t less CO2 emission from fossile electric power.

That's a great bllance for the turning system.

It seems You have no imaginations about magnitudes.
You have no understanding of the subject and You post like a mislead computer software