A song of fire and ice

So it seems that yet another form of unconventional fossil fuels looms on the horizon, with the potential to be promoted by governments as the latest solution to our energy crisis, while at the same time destroying fragile environments through its extraction. The culprit this time is a form of gas known as ‘fire ice’, which is locked into the form of ice crystals under the Atlantic ocean, at the point where the seabed changes from shallow to deep. By lowering the pressure on these crystals, or upping the temperature, one cubic metre of fire ice can break down into 160 cubic metres of gas.

The amount of energy contained within fire ice deposits is thus huge – there is potentially more energy available from fire ice than from the rest of the world’s oil, coal, and natural gas supplies combined. And yet, with that energy comes a problem we have been trying to escape for decades now – carbon. There may also be as much carbon in the fire ice deposits as there is in every other organic carbon store in the entire world. Releasing this carbon into the atmosphere by using fire ice for energy would be an unmitigated disaster, completely destroying any attempts at sustainability and making an era of massive climate change a certainty.

The fire ice is also very difficult to extract due to its location far offshore. This means more money will be required to exploit it, and it also increases the dangers – both to those humans doing the extraction, and to the ecosystems of plants and animals that live in the Atlantic and would suffer from this extreme industrial process taking place in their homes. But none of this will likely stop governments and corporations from doing their best to exploit these large reserves of fossil fuel energy.

And that fact shows the madness of our current energy system. Even when fossil fuels are difficult, dangerous, and expensive to extract, we will prioritize them over cheaper, safer, and easier options – like renewable energy based on the bountiful systems the planet has dropped in our laps, wind, tides, the sun, and more. If we insist on digging things out of the ground in order to keep our economy running, then we are getting to the stage where even nuclear power is beginning to look like a better option than fossil fuels (although obviously it would still be a distant second to true renewables) – it is at least carbon free, and while we might complain that it is highly polluting and dangerous to human health, so are fossil fuels, with over 4,000 people a year estimated to be dying from air pollution in London alone.

Rather than creating a new dependence on fire ice or other forms of unconventional fossil fuels like fracked gas or tar sands oil, we need to be exploring how to put into place the radical change to our energy system that is necessary if we are going to live sustainable lives free from the worst impacts of climate change. It seems that a big shock to the system may be necessary before we really start to see any change, unfortunately. In the meantime, NRGLab will continue its own research into new technologies that make our energy use more efficient, more environmental, and – most importantly – cheaper for ordinary people. When people finally have access to cheap and clean electricity, we hope that it will prove to be the shock that is needed to kickstart a new era.

Atlantic ocean,bountiful systems, carbon free, clean electricity, climate change, coal, current energy system, destroying fragile environments,destroying sustainability, ecosystems of plants, energy crisis, energy from fire ice, expensive to extract, exploit fire ice, fire ice gas, form of unconventional fossil fuels, fossil fuel, fracked gas, ice crystals, industrial process, lowering the pressure, natural gas, nrglab, nuclear power, oil, organic carbon store, radical change to energy system, releasing carbon into atmosphere,renewable energy, research into new technologies, reserves of fossil fuel energy, solution to energy crisis, tar sands oil, true renewable, unconventional fossil fuel, upping the temperature

U.S. almost energy rich: but for how long?

The United States energy industry is evolving quickly (but not congress’s ability to come to an agreement concerning climate change). The global price of oil per barrel is $70 higher compared to back in 2004. As a result, even though the U.S.’s domestic oil production has risen over the past two years (from 5.5 million barrels a day to 7.5 million), their annual bill for importing oil has skyrocketed to $365 billion.

Why?

All signs points to wasteful consumption habits. Americans simply take too much for granted. Companies focus more on profits than manufacturing conversion efficiencies, or utility bills, or energy alternatives.

The shale gas bubble in the U.S. has caused the domestic price of gas to drop from $10 per million cubic feet in 2010 to less than $4 million today. If car manufactures were to replace their gasoline and diesel engines with ones that ran on compressed gas, Americans could be paying as little as $0.50 cents a gallon. Imagine that!

Conventional power providers now fear that their coal-fired and nuclear plants are fast becoming extinct. Worse yet – their former customers might even become competitors, generating electricity for sale from new technology like the SH-Box by NRGLab – a portable generator capable of producing electricity for as little as $0.03 per kWh.

The U.S. government has barely addressed this impending energy revolution. Neither the Obama administration nor opposing Republicans have presented a clear-cut plan for how best to utilize the country’s newfound abundance of energy resources. A comprehensive reform of current energy policies must be conducted, while new policies that revitalize middle-class jobs must be passed.

But without a plan, will the U.S. allow this potentially world-changing opportunity to slip through their economic fingers?

While the rest of the world sits idly by and waits, NRGLab is striving towards a greener future with an array of innovative energy projects. From the aforementioned SH-Box, to the SV-Turbine for the gasification of agricultural waste, NRGLab is prepared to face the diverse problems we’ll surely face in the future.

For more information, visit nrglab.asia.


energy rich, shale gas bubble, energy industry, price of oil, climate change, diesel engines, NRGLab, SH-box, sv-turbine

2012 – Top 10 hottest year in recorded history!

According to four different independent studies, last year was among the 10 hottest years on record. Two countries, Argentina and the United States, experienced their hottest years EVER!

And you thought we were making progress on the global warming front. Not enough progress, it appears.

Let’s take a look at some of 2012’s not-so-stellar highlights:

The ice caps continued to melt at a frightening rate, roughly twice that of lower latitudes. Why? Well, ocean heat, for starters. Heat contained in the upper 2,000 feet of the ocean remained near record highs in 2012. The biggest increases from last year occurred between depths of 2,300 and 6,600 feet.

After a 30-year stretch of increasing sea surface temperatures, the global average in 2012 was among the 11 warmest on record. This is due, in part, to the prevalence of superstorms plaguing the 21st century and disrupting ocean currents.

Meanwhile, the sea itself reached a record high level. Globally, levels have been steadily rising at an average rate of 3.2 ± 0.4 mm per year since 1990. So unless we take drastic action, 2013's sea levels will be higher still. A new record.

Continuing a trend that started back in 2004, ocean selenic concentrations were up in areas of high evaporation, including the central tropical North Pacific, suggesting that evaporation is escalating in drier environments. That's less and less drinking water that will be available in the future.

Greenhouse gases, including methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide, continued to climb following a slight dip associated with 2011’s economic downturn. Increased efficiency standards have proven fruitless so far, so until we learn to curb overall consumption habits, government regulations will never succeed.

Last year, a total of 84 tropical cyclones ravaged various parts of planet Earth. Sound like a lot? It’s not. In fact, it’s just about average. But what the numbers don’t reflect is that these storms are growing more severe. They’re lasting longer. Traveling further. Causing more damage and ruining more lives.

Hopefully, by scrutinizing our environmental record, we can ensure 2013 doesn't negatively contribute to the history books!

Join NRGLab in the energy revolution.

An economic time bomb lurks under the icecaps

According to a joint-study conducted by a group of polar scientist and economists, the melting icecaps could prompt an “economic time bomb” to go off, costing the global economy TRILLIONS of dollars.

The common theory for the last two decades has been that melting icecaps would result in an economic “boom” of another kind. Companies would finally be able to exploit untapped reservoirs of natural gas and crude oil which had been trapped underneath thick sheaths of ice for centuries.

The Arctic ice, which melts and refreezes on an annual basis, is shrinking at an unheralded rate. Last year, “it collapsed to under 3.5m sqkm by mid-September, just 40% of its usual extent in the 1970s”. And since the ice is also becoming less thick, some scientists predict the Arctic Ocean will be largely free of summer ice by the end of the decade.

The growing concern is that, as the icecaps melt, the warming of the sea water will trigger offshore permafrost to release greater quantities of methane. “A giant reservoir of the greenhouse gas, in the form of gas hydrates on the East Siberian Arctic Shelf (ESAS), could be emitted, either slowly or catastrophically fast over a shorter time frame,” the researchers claim. “And that could result in “a $60 TRILLION global price tag.”

"This massive methane boost will have major implications for global economies and societies. Much of those costs would be borne by developing countries in the form of extreme weather, flooding and impacts on health and agricultural production," says Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University, one of the authors of the study.

The poorer economies of Africa, Asia, and South America are expected to be impacted the most by all this. But since we live in a global economy, like a stone cast into a pond – the ripple effects can stretch across oceans.

"Neither the World Economic Forum nor the International Monetary Fund currently recognize the economic danger of Arctic change. [They must] pay much more attention to this invisible time-bomb. The impacts of just one [giant "pulse" of methane] approaches the $70-tn value of the world economy in 2012,” says Professor Gail Whiteman of the Rotterdam School of Management, another author involved in the study.

Shipping companies are preparing to deploy a record number of vessels across the north of Russia later this year in order to tap into the natural gas and oil preserves. The new Northern Sea Route uses the Bering Strait between Siberia and Alaska and is only passable a few months out of the year with an icebreaker. This shorted trip slashes travel costs up to 40%!

It’s only a matter of time until one of the drilling operations opens up a massive pocket of methane gas and releases the “pulse” scientists are waiting for.

NRGLab would prefer if we didn’t have to trek all the way up to the artic for a fuel that could wind up costing us TRILLIONS in oversight. That’s why we’ve developed a number of alternative energy programs that are not only cost-effective, but renewable and reliable as well. For more information on NRGLab, visit nrglab.asia.

Disagreement over global warming? 97% of scientists say, “No.”

Although the public seems to think experts are divided on the issue, 97% of scientists agree that global warming is, in fact, a man-made disaster. However, the public’s misconception is making it more difficult for elected representatives to enact necessary policy changes.

"There’s a strong scientific agreement about the cause of climate change, despite public perceptions to the contrary," said Professor John Cook of the University of Queensland, Australia. "There’s a gaping chasm between the actual consensus and the public perception. When people understand that scientists agree on global warming, they're more likely to support policies that take action on it."

Did you know that the planet’s average surface temperature has risen by 0.8 degree Celsius, or 1.4F, since the Industrial Revolution? That may not sound like much, but consider that today, all 19 of Earth’s glacial regions are melting, the effects are irrefutable.

Experts from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia studied thousands of peer journals dating back to the 1990s, and what they found was a wide – much wider than anticipated – acceptance of man’s role in global warming. This was the largest effort to gauge the scientific community’s opinion on the topic.

Professor Mark Richardson of the University of Reading, England, says that "if people disagree with what we've found, we want to know.”

Surveys performed in over 90 countries show widespread belief that experts are in disagreement about whether climate change is man-made, or simply part of a fluctuating environment. Last October, the U.S. Pew Research Center found that only 45% of Americans answered "Yes" when asked: "Do scientists agree Earth is getting warmer because of human activity?"

The level of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has reached 400 parts per million, the highest it’s been since the dinosaurs! Droughts, floods, and rising sea levels are expected to ravage our very way of life. Is the government doing enough to protect us?

NRGLab has your back. My developing clean, renewable sources of energy and improving upon existing methods of fuel production, we’re working to eliminate carbon-emissions from the equation altogether. Want to know more? Visit nrglab.asia for more info on our innovative SH-Box and gasification techniques.

Europe fighting a losing battle against climate change

Europe has been at the forefront of the fight against global warming for decades now, going so far as to criticize the rest of the developed world – the United States especially – for not following their lead. Recently, however, the European Union has been victimized be inauspicious governing and ineffective legislation, and now find themselves fighting a losing battle.

One proposal under consideration would place a ‘carbon cap’ across the continent, allowing companies to save and trade their surplus of allotted pollution. This would grant companies an additional stream of revenue in hopes that, with that additional revenue, the company will invest in green-renovations for their manufacturing and corporate facilities.

But, as author John Steinbeck once wrote: “The best laid plans of mice and men, often go awry…”

The E.U. didn’t present a fully-fleshed out proposal. They allowed the demand for carbon permits dry up, and then voted down a rushed, patch-work relief plan. Any hope for continental-congruency in the plight against climate change has all but disappeared. Instead, individual regions will be responsible for drafting their own energy policies and passing their own legislation – an act of delegated democracy that has proven itself futile in the past. Most analysts place the blame on incompetent politicians hovering on the fence, too afraid to lose what little power they’ve been entrusted with. Their inability to present long-term solutions has set the entire union back who knows how far.

For example, Germany has suddenly closed several of its carbon-free nuclear power plants in an ‘all-or-nothing’ gamble on renewable energy. Though well-intentioned, the move has forced the country’s remaining power providers to burn more coal to pick up the slack.

Spain’s economy has suffered due to investments in ill-conceived energy projects. France continues to syphon through coal while (wisely) refusing to explore domestic fracking operations. This has contributed to creeping levels of carbon emissions across Europe, while countries like the United States have been able to reduce their overall CO2 levels.

The U.S.’s progress is due, partially, to an increased emphasis on vehicle fuel efficiency, a willingness to open power-plants near residential areas, and a curious courtship with natural gas. Hopefully the country will learn from Europe’s mistakes and enforce a strict, extensive cap on carbon emissions.

NRGLab offers a variety of solutions to today’s energy problems. Innovative techniques of extracting oil from agricultural waste and shale. A low-cost renewable generator called the SH-Box. Learn more by visiting nrglab.asia, and see which solution best suits your energy needs.

Earth Day 2013: shouldn't it be EVERY day?

Tomorrow, 192 countries around the world will be celebrating Earth Day, a day where we join together to debate possible solutions to global warming while promoting positive examples of community action.

The Earth Day Network will be spotlighting a recycling drive, a special NASA exhibit, as well as a rural farmer’s market. The theme of Earth Day 2013 is “the face of climate change,” said Bryan Buchanan, a spokesperson for the network. They’ll be televising inspirational stories and photos submitted online by users who want to ensure their voices and efforts are given the platform they deserve.

Global warming “has real consequences for real people,” said Buchanan. “We want to bring this massive problem down to size. It makes everyone who’s doing their little part feel connected to the bigger environmental movement.”

Amongst the photographs featured, one should expect a portfolio’s-worth of snapshots from Hurricane Sandy and the heroic relief efforts that followed. The storm, which ravaged the east coast of the United States, was simply one in a distributing new trend of “superstorms” resulting from the melting icecaps and variations in ocean currents.

Another issue expected to be addressed is deforestation. Groups such as The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management need public support to continue to defend our forests. From the Amazonian rain-forest to the Californian redwoods, trees absorb carbon dioxide out of our atmosphere. Carbon levels are already out of control. Cutting down more trees will only escalate the rate of global warming. Not to mention, protecting our forests means protecting the ecosystems on which we rely. The wildlife. The water. All aspects of life are interconnected, and it’s up to us to shepherd the network.

Unfortunately, due to the global economic crisis, governments are beginning to sacrifice the environment in order to stimulate job creation and consumer spending. The state of Oregon, for example, was once lush with beautiful prehistoric forests. Today, thanks to over-logging and inadequate re-planting, the land is dying – both physically and fiscally.

Local communities, even the government, should take it upon themselves to create stable streams of revenue that do not require stripping the Earth of its natural resources. I think we can all agree – a livable planet is equally important, if not more so, than one’s livelihood.

So tomorrow, consider it your responsibility to do the research. Read about recycling drives sponsored by your local community. Learn more about politicians’ stances on green energy. Visit nrglab.asia and check out the SH-Box, a carbon-free electrical generator capable of bringing power to the third world. But first and foremost, consider what you can do on a day-to-day basis to help make the Earth a better place. Because EVERY day should be Earth Day. Not just April 22nd.

Little to no progress made on cleaning up energy, according to research

This week, the Clean Energy Ministerial, an organization of representatives from countries responsible for 80% of today’s carbon emissions, will meet in New Delhi to share environmental experiences and encourage the transition to a more stable, globalized energy infrastructure.

However, according to one representative who will be in attendance, Maria van der Hoeven, executive director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), renewable energy has been shelved in favor of temporarily stimulating national economies. “The average unit of energy produced today is basically as dirty as it was 20 years ago,” she claims.

Modern power plants are the worst polluters of all. Usually dependent upon coal, the dirtiest of all fossil fuels, these power plants emit astronomical amounts of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. In order to track these levels, the IEA has relied on a system of evaluation called the Energy Sector Carbon Intensity Index (ESCII). The ESCII calculates the average amount of carbon emissions expected in the production of an individual unit of energy. In 2010, the index calculated that, in order to produce energy from one metric ton of oil, 2.37 metric tons of carbon dioxide would be given off – or nearly the exact same number registered back in 1990!

Can you think of any other industry that’s experienced stagnant quality or production costs and actually survived amidst the free-market? Didn’t think so. Hence the reason Apple, Nike, and all of your favorite brands compete for the top designers and then outsource production to manufacturers where laborers have never heard of a “minimum wage.”

The important of developing alternative energy sources has been stressed amongst the media, environmentalist, and politicians alike for decades now. Yet, as van der Hoeven points out, the “growth of coal-fired power is actually outpacing the increase in generation from non-fossil energy sources.”

Why? Because sticking with what’s already in place is usually the easiest option -- not necessarily the right one.

 
Even countries making “honest” attempts to curb their carbon emissions eventually succumb to greed. The United States, for example, is burning less coal than in the past, but is selling their stockpile of unused coal to facilities over in Asia. One way or the other, the stuff is getting burned. It’s polluting our air and waterways. And the problem is only getting worse. Since we consume roughly 50% more energy compared to a decade ago, and yet the ratio of carbon output to energy production hasn’t improved, that means we’re pumping cataclysmic amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

At our current pace, van der Hoeven thinks “the world is on track to have global temperatures rise by 6 degrees Celsius,” or 10.8 degrees Fahrenheit, by the year 2100. If that happens, most scientists agree – we’re done for. (In fact, they estimate that if surface temperatures rise more than 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, the world as we know it will cease to exist.)

“The overall lack of progress should serve as a wake-up call,” warns van der Hoeven. “We cannot afford another 20 years of listlessness. We need a rapid expansion in low-carbon energy technologies if we are to avoid a potentially catastrophic warming of the planet.”

NRGLab couldn’t agree more. That’s why we developed the SH-Box, a generator that produces electricity with absolutely ZERO carbon emissions. Not only is it a clean and renewable source of energy, the SH-Box is also a penny-saver, generating electricity for as little as $0.03 per kWh. That’s four times less than your current energy provider is probably charging you!

Want to know more? Check out the SH-Box and NRGLab’s other green initiatives at nrglab.asia.com.

Prepared to adapt to climate change?

The United States recently conducted its first nation-wide survey on the public’s preparedness for, and perception of, climate change. Turns out a majority of people don’t care to spend their tax dollars to rebuild and protect the shoreline homes of others. “Big surprise,” says no one.

The survey was conducted by Stanford University and found that only a third of people supported residential relocation away from hazardous beach areas or erecting walls to protect against flooding. The cost of such redevelopment is estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. (After the devastation of Hurricane Sandy, the state of New Jersey received a $10 billion bailout!)

According to Stanford political science professor and director of the survey, Jon Korsnick, his is the first nation-wide poll aimed at gauging public opinion on society’s readiness to adapt to global warming.

The survey was comprised of 1,174 people, and was conducted online by GFK Custom Research. 62% of people favored heightening building codes to make new developments stormproof. However, 60% believed those individuals living on the coast should be responsible for fitting the bill, as opposed to levying a nation-wide income tax. In terms of specific solutions, about 80% said disaster relief should come from local property taxes. 47% believed the government should ban people from rebuilding their damaged homes and should be forced to relocate.
 
“(This) reflects the public’s fatalistic sense that it’s more realistic to just give up the beach than to try to save it when other storms in the future will just wash it away again,” said Korsnick. Why build a wall when the warmer the planet gets, the higher the waves will crash?

There are three main ways to protect coastlines against today’s climate-induced super storms. You can ‘hold the line’ with physical barriers, replenish the beach and add sand dunes, or simply move away from the beach altogether. As previously mentioned, most people seem to prefer the latter option.

Trillions of tourist dollars are at stake. People’s coastal lives are at stake. Should the government be able to tell a person where to live? Or do we, as citizens of a collective, have a social obligation to do what’s best for everyone, and chose where we live responsibly?

Whether people will have to give up their beautiful beach-fronts or not remains to be seen. In the meantime, while we debate how to protect ourselves against the damage we’ve already done, an equally important debate should be waged on our plans for the future of energy.

NRGLab wants to be a large part of the discussion. Better yet, they want to be a part of the solution. By developing a system of low-cost, carbon-free electricity production, NRGLab hopes to free us from our dependency on dirty oil. Eliminating carbon emissions will diminish the threat of super storms. Taxpayers won’t be stuck with the bill, either. Learn how affordable it can be to own an SH-box at nrglab.asia.

To view the study conducted by Stanford, visit: http://stanford.io/16kTvK.

Carbon out of control

According to a study published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), carbon emissions have increased by nearly three-million ppm (parts per million) since this time last year -- the second largest spike in over fifty years.  'Parts per million' equates to the number of carbon particles relative to oxygen in the atmosphere -- meaning the air we breathe is slowly becoming less breathable.

"So what?" you ask. "It's just air..."

Well, the increase also means "the prospects of keeping climate change below that 1.9-degree goal are fading away," said Pieter Tans, one NOAA's scientists, who operates out of their Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory. Current levels are 41% higher than the pre-industrial period. Since then, the global temperature has risen 0.7 degrees Celsius.

John Reilly, co-director of the Science and Policy of Global Change, estimates that temperatures will rise another 1.3 and 2.3 degrees Celsius between now and 2050. Were will the world be then?

Food production will become unstable because of unpredictable weather patterns. Super-storms will cease to be 'super' -- they'll be the norm. The oceans will rise. More UV rays will pierce the atmosphere, meaning more cases of skin cancer. High insurance rates. Leading to medical reform. And higher taxes.

The effects of global warming stretch far beyond the environment, which should concern people in the first place. But for those out there who have trouble looking twenty-five, fifty years into the future, just ask yourself why your energy bills and taxes have steadily increased during the same period the Earth has gotten warmer.

Everything is connected. This isn't just a philosophical principle: it's an aspect of our everyday lives. We've identified the source of this spike in carbon emissions: fossil fuels. However, as sophisticated countries like Singapore and Germany work towards alternative energy sources, addressing consumption concerns, developing countries, in a struggle to play catch-up with the rest of the world, are burning more oil than ever.

Again (and not to stress the point too far), but the climate crisis we're currently faced with can't be solved by any one nation. It's going to require a collaborative effort -- public, private, and federal partnerships coming together to face the harsh reality of what reckless oil consumption has done to our world.

By introducing the SH-box to market, NRGLab aims to bring global warming to a stand-still. Keeping the increase below 1.9 degrees Celsius will allow the world to focus on solving many of the other fundamental problems facing us today. Like war. Religious intolerance. Educational reform. Global warming is only the beginning.

Big business addresses climate change?

Late last week, the U.S. Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE) gave their recommendations to President Obama regarding climate change. According to the BCSE, investing in green-energy will not only stimulate the tech industry, but could pull the entire economy out of the hole Americans currently find themselves in. Thank goodness for the sequester then, which, if left unresolved, will result in billions of federal spending cuts, leaving little to no room for green-energy investing. Hooray, for split Congresses.

In a letter from the Bicameral Task Force on Climate Change to the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) “the window to prevent catastrophic climate change is rapidly closing.” The Task Force requested suggestions on how federal agencies could cut down on their carbon emissions. In reply, the BCSE released a factbook entitled 'Sustainable Energy in America', in which they identified economic-based legislation as the “optimal policy.” They also recommended the following measures:

1. Allow existing power plants to achieve target emission rates.

2. Use an output-based approach to setting emissions standards for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) of greenhouse gases.

3. The Department of Energy should implement efficiency measures, including appliance and equipment standards, manufactured housing efficiency standards, and previously announced programs for commercial buildings.

4.The federal government should follow through on commitments made in the White House Executive Order 13514, including making greater use of federal performance contracting, aggregating procurements within federal agencies, between federal agencies, and leveraged with state and local government procurements, and clarify that Combined Heat and Power (CHP) qualifies under this executive order.

5.Federal agencies should support efforts to strengthen the smart grid, especially distributed generation at disaster centers, hospitals, etc., and should implement and update climate change adaptation plans to improve resilience.

6.Congress should continue to support research, development and deployment of homegrown and clean energy sources.

These actions could significantly cut into America's carbon emissions, and would set a positive example for the rest of the world to follow. As previously quoted, “the window to prevent catastrophic climate change is rapidly closing.” We have passed the development period. It' time for implementation. It's time for change. It's time for the SH-box and other innovative green initiatives to finally get the recognition, and the funding, they deserve and need to save the world.

Drifting winds & the air we breathe

Not convinced that air pollution is a global issue? Did you read our last post about China and think, “That’s another continent far, far away. How could anything they do possible affect me?”

Well, according to a study recently published in the Science Journal, dust particles blown thousands of miles from Asia and Africa have been discovered in California’s water supply. The increase in dust in the atmosphere has been linked to an increase in rain and snowfall in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, as well. The study took place over a two-year period, during which researchers collected samples of the atmosphere over the mountain range. What they found was startling.

“There was this sort of magical switch. The days with dust you see one thing, and the days without dust you see a different thing,” said Kim Prather, an atmospheric chemist who coauthored the study.

So, this has to be proof positive to the nonbelievers out there. Traces of PM2.5 in Beijing will, given enough time, make their way across the globe and into our air and drinking water. This is why the world needs to be watching China’s annual legislative hearing carefully. In fact, every country should be keeping a watchful eye on one another. Perhaps then, through sheer paranoia, the world will be motivated to work towards a united clean up effort.

“The fact that something happening on another continent, in terms of dust generation, could influence precipitation patterns in the U.S — that’s a challenging problem,” said Marty Ralph, the study’s coauthor and a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

How did they know the dust was from China, you ask? Well, all airborne particles carry with them a chemical fingerprint, which allows scientists like Prather and Ralph to track their movement from anywhere, to anywhere, in the world.

Again, this is why they call it ‘global’ warming. The environmental crisis we’re currently facing, which includes issues from gas fracking to carbon emissions, melting ice caps to outdated energy infrastructures, may seem abstract at times, but that’s only because it’s such a wide-spread problem with complex sociopolitical implications. But complexity is no excuse to give up. We must never forget that one person can make a difference. With vision, determination, and informed judgement, we can leave this world a better place than the one we inherited.

Because every person, regardless of race, religion or political affiliation, enjoys breathing.

Forward on Climate Rally -- Feb. 17th

On Februrary 17th, the Forward on Climate Rally will be held in Washington D.C. People are expected to gather to urge President Obama to address climate change; a promise he made during his inaugural speech when he first took office five years ago. The rally is being organized by the Sierra Club, 350.org, the Hip Hop Caucus and a few dedicated environmentalists.

The Rally’s message focuses on minimizing the environmental footprint the United States is currently leaving on the planet. If the President continues to support the nation’s outdated and obsolete infrastructure, and we continue to depend upon coal mines, oil pipelines, and hazardous fracking operations, the US will be left on the wrong side of history as the rest of the world moves towards renewable, clean energy. (Politicians like to use the term ‘clean coal’ but, lets face it, that’s like saying ‘jumbo shrimp’ — a bit bigger, and better, sure, but still coal at the core.)

It’s time congress puts aside their moral differences on social issues like gun control and abortion and focus on something we can all agree on: we need clean air to breathe, for instance. The U.S. energy policy must reflect what the rest of the world already knows — we need to decrease carbon emissions. Plain and simple. Legislation on tax breaks only rewards corporations with lawyers clever enough to find the loopholes. Climate change isn’t something that can be negotiated, or treated like a stock option. It has to be dealt with seriously; scrutinized from every angle. No bad ideas. All suggestions welcome.

I know what you might be asking: who cares if there’s a little more carbon in the air? I hear cows, and their methane gas emissions (farts) have also contributed to global warming.

The latter happens to be true, but that doesn’t mean that man-made carbon emissions haven’t already taken their toll. Just look at the super-storms that have ravaged the U.S. over the last several years. The droughts. The floods. Scientists have linked these so-called ‘natural’ disasters to elevated levels of carbon in our atmosphere.

How can we undo the damage? Only with time and by changing our energy habits. We need new sources of affordable and efficient energy — not more nuclear power plants, or drills. We don’t need to open more coal mines. What we need is the SH-box by NRGLab.

The SH-Box produces clean electricity from patented crystal technology for pennies per watt. What’s holding NRGLab back? A lack of global government response and cooperation. It’s time for America to take a stand, and the Forward on Climate Rally might just be that motivating voice, screaming, “Get up off your butt, already!”

If you live near Washington D.C., or have the ability to take off of work and make the commute, I encourage you to join the Sierra Club February 17th. Let your voice be heard. Tell President Obama you’re ready for the change you were promised. And while you’re at it, you might tell him to look into NRGLab, and the way we’re approaching energy reform.