Seeing Green

So, Earth Day is coming up tomorrow. Yippee.

Isn't every day Earth Day? You know, it's kind of like why celebrate Mother's Day or Father's Day when you should be celebrating your parents every day of your life?

Earth Day is a gimmick, and the environmentalists and business and industry have caught on that the best way to see green (money) is to appear to be green. Companies like Google and Yahoo will change their logos around to highlight just how green they are. Big deal even as they use tons of power to keep their computer operations going and have sited their overseas operations in places where the energy costs are cheapest because of loose (or no) environmental oversight.

My wife and I were watching one of those "green" DIY shows last night and we were laughing our asses off - and she's as green as they get - over what they wanted these families to do to go green. That is, when we both weren't critiquing what they were having these homeowners doing that actually caused more energy consumption.

One family owned a newer home that had recently remodeled baths and kitchen with newer appliances. They had this family buy all new appliances and the dual flush toilets. Sure, they will save fractionally more water going forward and the newer appliances will save some electricity over the model they previously had, but they could have accomplished the same thing - less power usage by simply turning off lights when leaving rooms, taking shorter showers, etc., without having to reconcile all those now disposed of toilets and appliances to the trash dumps. They replaced the low flush toilets that they already had with the dual flush toilets.

How green is that? What about the energy costs of making new items and the disposal costs? Somehow that doesn't get factored into the equation because there's money to be made by those pimping these supposed fixes. It's one thing to replace an older toilet that uses 3 gallons per flush with a dual flush system because the water savings will be significant, but what about the wasteful expenditure of power and water to install these new toilets?

Some of those things make sense when you've got old appliances or water hogging toilets, but to make switches simply because you want to go dual flush, you're kidding yourself.

The other house was older construction and had some serious issues. They had no insulation in their attic, and had windows that would not close. Those issues are more likely to be seen around the country and the fixes are more appropriate to what most people should do. That family will save serious money by blowing insulation into their attic, which previously had none. Repairing broken windows and sealing up windows and doors with improved gaskets will improve the insulation value and reduce drafts that can increase energy usage. Those are the kinds of fixes that will really make a difference and don't cost all that much - to say nothing of the immediate savings in energy costs.

They also went around replacing all their light bulbs with CFLs, and if you've been reading my blog for any length of time, you'd know that there are some issues with them - as some areas consider them to be hazardous materials when they break. They're also not meant for every lighting situation and other lighting solutions are on the horizon that promise more efficient and safer lighting.

Still, the things that can save people the most money don't involve actually spending more than $15 bucks. Replace shower heads with low flow ones (such as this one). You'll cut down on water usage, to say nothing of the energy needed to heat the hot water for those showers.

Even better - take shorter showers. I know, it's a tough thing to do, especially if you like your long hot showers, but for no money, you get to reduce your energy bills and water consumption.

For a little more money, you can add insulation to your home, which will not only make your home more comfortable year round, but it will add to resale value, improve air quality in your home, and reduce your energy costs - sometimes quite significantly in a short time to recoup your expenditures.

And if your name happens to be Al Gore or Leo DiCaprio, you could give up your second and third homes, your multiple vehicles, and private jet trips around the world crowing about how you need to save the environment by buying hybrid vehicles and browbeating folks to stop using gas and to stop emitting greenhouse gases (like carbon dioxide, the same stuff you exhale naturally with every breath). Just imagine how much energy would be saved each year if those two fools simply stopped flying around the world pushing their eco-pablum. But you knew that already, didn't you?

It's the same thing with biofuels. Supporters claim that they're good for the environment, and yet all that they've accomplished is reduced fuel mileage when blended with gasoline, more energy must be consumed to transport biofuel to market because they cannot be delivered via pipeline, and the destruction of the environment is actually hastened especially in the Third World as farmers attempt to cash in on selling crops that could be used to feed people to energy concerns to be transformed into fuel by cutting down forests at an increased rate. Higher food costs have resulted, and those least able to afford food price increases are suffering greatly. It's gotten to the point where even the UN and other international organizations are realizing the folly of imposing biofuels on the world.

To be clear, biofuels that are derived from waste matter are a completely separate issue and don't have the same food cost consequences though they still have issues of delivery to the marketplace. Using food stocks for fuel makes absolutely no sense, but companies like ADM see plenty of green - in the form of billions in subsidies to turn corn into ethanol. And they'll continue to get those subsidies until such time that governments realize that they've not only distorted the market for food, but energy markets as well - and not for the better.