Last week I spent some time with GM discussing their new HCCI technology. After taking their test vehicle, a Saturn Aura, for a test spin, I was very impressed with the heads up display (HUD) that kept track of whether the car was in HCCI or SI mode. Upon returning to the conference room, my first question for the GM techs was whether or not something indicating HCCI mode or gas mileage would show up on the production models of cars equipped with this technology.

I don’t know quite what I expected for an answer, but it certainly wasn’t the one I got. Paul Najt seemed to like the question, and came to the same conclusion that I’ve long had, which is that fuel economy can become like a game. Cars (like many hybrids) with fuel economy displays were mentioned, and some in the room even commented that they believed the knowledge would automatically make people try to get better fuel economy.

More after the break!

I agreed heartily, but I didn’t expect the final answer: “It’s ultimately a marketing decision.” While this makes sense, don’t you think that some control should be left in the hands of the engineers? I mean, GM is asking their people to design a fuel efficient engine to get people through this gas crunch and into the future while still being economically viable, but it’s not the engineers that get to decide if a $10 piece of electronics will be part of that effort?

While I was there I was also told by an engineer who’d recently moved to the US from Germany that in the US people sometimes drive cars that are plain “unnecessary.” Coming from Germany, he and his family were used to a market for much smaller cars, one that GM and its Opel brand is a part of. However, it seems that globally General Motors is in the business of selling what people want, and not necessarily what people need. This mentality is certainly understandable from a business perspective, but I implore GM to consider that if marketing research shows that people don’t want fuel economy displays, it’s because they don’t know how much the feedback could improve their gas mileage.

Seeing that this is one of the things that makes the Prius so popular, and something that other manufacturers are phasing in, I hope GM pushes on with it. Do you think they will, or are ye of little faith (as I sometimes, admittedly, am)?

TAKEN FROM www.ecomodder.com/blog

Photo Credits: deborah sherman photography

The Cafe Racer Truck Runs on 100% Recycled Coffee Grounds

A commenter on Ben’s wood-powered truck post pointed us to a similar car hack. The truck above is also powered by a wood gas generator, except this one runs on coffee grounds. The Cafe Racer is a 1975 GMC pickup that essentially burns up used coffee to create a combustible gas. The gas is filtered on its way to the engine and, Viola, a caffeine-powered truck.

It’s interesting to note that this and the last vehicle mentioned are promoting a specific fuel (wood and coffee grounds), since the onboard wood gas generators can gasify almost any type of combustible material.

Gasification is a non-selective method using heat and a controlled amount of oxygen to convert biomass into a flammable vapor. In addition to Coffee Grounds, the Cafe Racer could use wood chips, old tires, and municipal trash, almost anything—which, by the way, is the same technology Coskata is using to make cellulosic ethanol out of garbage.

As Wikipedia puts it, gasification “was an important and familiar 19th century technology” that was commonly used until petroleum took over around the close of WWII. Although popular at that time, wood gas conversions are a bit of a throw back, but you never know what could gain popularity as gas prices continue to rise. Additionally, wood gas generators aren’t restricted to vehicles, and have found use in heating, cooking, and electricity production.

So how can a wood gas generator power a truck?

The reason a wood gas generator can power cars and trucks is that the internal combustion engine is actually powered by vapor, not liquid. In a gasoline-powered engine, gasoline is vaporized before entering the combustion chamber. Diesel is a little different; it’s sprayed into the combustion chamber as fine droplets which burn as they vaporize. Either way, if you can put a clean combustible vapor into the engine, you’ve got power*.

(*Just to mention where this information is coming from, I thought I’d point out this interesting factoid: back in 1989, FEMA sponsored a series of “emergency technology assessments” that included a book on gasification conversions. The title of the book is “Construction of a Simplified Wood Gas Generator for Fueling Internal Combustion Engines in a Petroleum emergency.”)

Gasifying a solid material partially burns it, which preserves some of the energy that would normally be wasted in the gas (otherwise there wouldn’t be anything left for the engine to burn). The gas contains a mixture of carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen (H2), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N), and a small amount of methane (CH4).

The big question for wood gas use is (as usual), how do these systems compare to other petroleum alternatives in terms of environmental impact? The group behind Cafe Racer claims that it’s a carbon-negative demonstration vehicle, but they don’t substantiate that on their website. I wasn’t able to find much on the issue, except the risk of death from carbon monoxide poisoning in poorly designed systems, but my gut instinct tells me this isn’t the cleanest way to get around. If you know of a resource on the emissions of wood gas generators, please send it my way.

The important point here isn’t so much that you can run a truck on wood gas produced from waste materials (even though that’s pretty cool), but that this technology could play a major role in producing petroleum alternatives in the near future (more on that later).

If you enjoyed reading about this, check out these links, and see more pictures of the Cafe Racer below:

TAKEN FROM gas2.org

NEW YORK (Fortune) — Until recently, celebrity rocker Tommy Lee didn’t worry about the environment. He was too busy being one of his industry’s foremost rude boys. Now the Motley Crue drummer thinks it’s “really cool” to evangelize about how the earth is in trouble.

It’s especially cool if you can spread the word on your own cable television show. Lee and rapper Chris “Ludacris” Bridges are the stars of “Battleground Earth,” a reality show in which the two recording artists compete to see who is the more ardent protector of the planet. They take on challenges like recycling trash after an Oakland As game and cooking corn dogs to produce fuel their bio-diesel tour buses.

No, this is not MTV’s latest offering for teen guys who want to take a break from playing “Grand Theft Auto 4.”

“Battleground Earth” is the most widely publicized show on Planet Green, Discovery Communications’ environmentally-themed lifestyle and entertainment network debuting June 4. Discover has invested an estimated $50 million creating Planet Green shows like “Battleground Earth” and others hosted by “Entourage” star Adrian Grenier, gross-out comic Tom Green, and Food Network cuisine artist Emeril Lagasse.

The new network will be heavy on glitz and even a little tacky at times. But Discovery knows exactly what it is doing with Planet Green.

David Zaslav, Discovery’s CEO, hopes to take the company, based in Silver Spring, Md., public later this year. Discovery is coming off a great year. Rich Greenfield, an analyst at Pail Research, notes that revenues rose 12% last year while earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization - a widely used profit metric in the media industry - climbed 30%. But he also points out that two of Discovery’s ten networks - Discovery Channel and TLC - were responsible for much of this largesse.

If Discovery wants to keep growing like this, it needs to strengthen its weaker networks. One of the laggards happens to be Discovery Home, known (or perhaps not known) for its shows like “Licensed To Grill” and “Toolbelt Diva.” The company is jettisoning Discovery Home and re-branding the network as Planet Green. “Discovery Home was stuck at the starting gates,” Greenfield says. “This channel presents a significant opportunity.”

This is a natural step for Discovery. The Discovery Channel had a big hit last year with “Planet Earth,” a co-production with the BBC. This exquisitely-filmed series about the effects of global warming attracted an average of 5.1 million viewers on Sunday nights, a huge number by cable standards. Discovery took the show’s success as a sign that the country was ready for a 24-hour network devoted to the environment, albeit one with the lighter touch than its flagship channel.

“The Discovery Channel addresses the science, the reason a crisis is at hand,” says Eileen O’Neill, president of Planet Green. “Our network will inform, activate and inspire people though a very direct, entertaining approach.”

Planet Green isn’t likely to attract a huge audience. But that may not matter. Brad Adgate, senior vice president of research for Horizon Media, a New York-based ad agency, says advertisers are eager to reach people who care about the environment. “The type of viewers who turn into this network will probably be a little more upscale and well educated,” he says. “They’ll be a little more highbrow than the average TV viewer.”

Here’s a sign that Discovery is on the right track with Planet Green. The new network’s website has already attracted blue-chip sponsors like Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500), Proctor & Gamble (PG, Fortune 500), Caterpillar (CAT, Fortune 500) and General Motors (GM, Fortune 500).

Never mind that much of what Planet Green will offer - reality shows, cooking shows, home improvement fare - is available elsewhere on cable television. The network’s pre-launch success suggests that big advertisers are happy to write checks if this kind of programming has a green message. They may even be willing to underwrite Tommy Lee’s corn dog cooking contest. No wonder he’s joined the green movement.

TAKEN FROM money.cnn.com

Human-caused climate change has impacted a wide range of Earth’s natural systems, from permafrost thawing to plants blooming earlier across Europe to lakes declining in productivity in Africa.

Cynthia Rosenzweig of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Science in New York and scientists at 10 other institutions have linked physical and biological impacts since 1970 with rises in temperatures during that period, including changes to physical systems, such as glaciers shrinking, permafrost melting, and lakes and rivers warming. Impacts also included changes to biological systems, such as leaves unfolding and flowers blooming earlier in the spring, birds arriving earlier during migration periods, and ranges of plant and animal species moving toward the poles and higher in elevation. In aquatic environments such as oceans, lakes, and rivers, plankton and fish are shifting from cold-adapted to warm-adapted communities.

“This is the first study to link global temperature data sets, climate model results, and observed changes in a broad range of physical and biological systems to show the link between humans, climate, and impacts,” said Rosenzweig, lead author of the study.

Rosenzweig and colleagues also found that the link between human-caused climate change and observed impacts on Earth holds true at the scale of individual continents, particularly in North America, Europe, and Asia.

Photograph of a forest When permafrost melts, the layer of loose soil deepens and trees lose their foundations and tip over. Similar impacts across Earth are likely due to human-caused climate change.

To arrive at the link, the authors built and analyzed a database of more than 29,000 data series pertaining to observed impacts on Earth’s natural systems, collected from about 80 studies each with at least 20 years of records between 1970 and 2004.

The team conducted a “joint attribution” study in which they showed, first, that at the global scale, about 90 percent of observed changes in diverse physical and biological systems are consistent with warming. Other driving forces, such as land use change from forest to agriculture, were ruled out as having significant influence on the observed impacts.

Next, the scientists conducted statistical tests and found that the spatial patterns of observed impacts closely match temperature trends across the globe, to a degree beyond what can be attributed to natural variability. So, the team concluded that observed global-scale impacts are very likely due to human-caused warming.

“Humans are influencing climate through increasing greenhouse gas emissions and the warming is causing impacts on physical and biological systems that are now attributable at the global scale and in North America, Europe, and Asia,” said Rosenzweig.

An unexpected consequence of rising temperatures may be its effect on long-dead prehistoric life.

For thousands of years animal waste, and other organic matter left behind on the Arctic tundra, have been sealed off from the environment by permafrost. Now climate change is melting the permafrost and freeing mass quantities of prehistoric “ooze” from its state of suspended animation.

Russian scientist, Sergei Zimov, has been studying climate change in Russia’s Arctic for 30 years now. He is worried that as this organic matter becomes exposed to the air it will drastically accelerate global warming predictions even beyond some of the most pessimistic forecasts.

“This will lead to a type of global warming which will be impossible to stop,” he said.

According to Zimov, when the organic matter left behind by mammoths and other wildlife is exposed to the air by the thawing permafrost, microbes that have been dormant for thousands of years will spring back into action. They’ll begin once again to emit carbon dioxide and methane gas as a by-product. Zimov says thought the microbes are tiny, they will start emitting these gases in enormous quantities simply because there will be a lot of them.

Yakutia is a region in the north-eastern corner of Siberia, where a belt of permafrost contains the mammoth-era soil. It covers an area roughly the size of France and Germany combined. There is even more of it elsewhere in Siberia.

“The deposits of organic matter in these soils are so gigantic that they dwarf global oil reserves,” Zimov said. U.S. government statistics show mankind emits about 7 billion tons of carbon a year.”Permafrost areas hold 500 billion tons of carbon, which can fast turn into greenhouse gases,” Zimov added. “If you don’t stop emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere … the Kyoto Protocol (an international pact aimed at reducing greenhouse emissions) will seem like childish prattle.”

On other continents, including Africa, South America, and Australia, documentation of observed changes in physical and biological systems is still sparse despite warming trends attributable to human causes. The authors concluded that environmental systems on these continents need additional research, especially in tropical and subtropical areas where there is a lack of impact data and published studies.

The study, published May 15 in the journal Nature, concludes that human-caused warming is resulting in a broad range of impacts across the globe.

TAKEN FROM www.dailygalaxy.com

This rainwater harvesting vertical terrace is the brilliant idea of Ontario College of Art and Design Student Michael Tampilic and has been entered in the Rocket 2008 Industrial Design Graduation Show and Competition. The terrace connects up with a downspout from your house and stores water in a large tank to continuously water the plants over long periods of time. It does this by using cotton wicks to transport the stored water by capillary action. Not only is this great for saving water in a desert environment like most of us in Arizona live in, but it looks awesome and you don’t have to worry about watering.

Vert is a rain terrace: a rainwater harvester and vertical garden. This project establishes sustainable water practices through the harvesting of rain, and brings the advantages of a living wall to the backyard through vertical gardening. Vert alleviates a homes reliance on public utility systems while beautifying unused vertical space.

TAKEN FROM azsustainably.com

DEFENCE contractors are preparing to cull hundreds of kangaroos at a Canberra site in another about-face, after the federal government refused to foot the bill to move them.

After moving in March to kill the kangaroos at the former naval station for environmental reasons, Defence stopped the cull to further study moving the animals interstate in the face of protest actions.

Defence spokesman Brigadier Andrew Nikolic today said the department had thoroughly examined the proposal but found it would be to costly.

“The federal government has withdrawn its support for a translocation research project as it does not consider it to be a cost-effective use of taxpayers money,” Brig Nikolic said in a statement.

Defence estimated the cost of relocation at $3.5 million.

Eight police officers were on site today barricading the entrance, where hundreds of protesters are expected to arrive tomorrow.

Six animal welfare protesters gathered there today and said they will stay until the matter is resolved.

Protester Tigga Williams fears the cull will become a “bloodbath”.

“The kangaroos are going to be breaking their necks and legs on the fences as they try to escape because you just can’t get a kangaroo to go where you want it,” Ms Williams told AAP.

“As soon as this begins they will panic and it will turn into a bloodbath.”

An ACT park ranger’s vehicle was seen entering the site carrying equipment including including hessian bags and a sharps disposal unit.

Hessian-covered fencing has been erected to pen the animals and about five large freezer boxes have been put on the site.

The Defence Department said contractors hired to conduct the cull would be tranquillising the kangaroos and then giving them lethal injections.

Animal Liberation ACT head Bernard Brennan said the protesters were prepared to do anything stop the cull from going ahead.

“We will start up our vigil and keep an eye on the place and we will just have to do whatever it takes to stop the cull.”

Wildcare vice president Greg Tarlinton said he was very surprised by Defence’s decision.

“We have been trying to assist Defence to put this translocation into place they adopted it but now they have backflipped,” he said.

Mr Tarlinton said Defence made the decision because culling the animals was easier than translocating them.

“There is very little difference cost-wise one way or another. This is not about the cost, culling is just the easier option,” he told AAP.

“I also think that there is a lot of pressure coming from the ACT government to go ahead with the cull.”

An ACT government report released earlier this year recommended the cull to protect lowland native grasslands and threatened species.

Brig Nikolic said the ACT government and Defence agreed that the kangaroo population at the site was overabundant and unsustainable.

He said at last count in December 2007, there were about 590 kangaroos at the site. About 400 will be culled.

“Defence is committed to sustainable environmental management, protecting endangered ecological communities and threatened species and humanely managing over-abundant species,” he said.

The planned cull had drawn international condemnation by animal activists including British group Viva!, which has the support of celebrity rock stars Sir Paul McCartney and Chrissie Hynde.

TAKEN FROM www.theaustralian.news.com

What has happened over the past couple of decades that has landed the mighty polar bear on the “threatened” list under the Endangered Species Act? Scientists believe that at least two-thirds of the world’s polar bears will be gone within 40 years. The U.S. Geological Survey has confirmed that the biggest concern for the bears’ future is the shrinking Arctic sea ice, which is quickly reducing the size of the bear’s habitat. Heightened controversy over the status of the polar bear is tied to the fact that this is the first time a species has been considered for listing specifically because its habitat is threatened by global warming.

“This decision is a watershed event because it has forced the Bush administration to acknowledge global warming’s brutal impacts,” said Kassie Siegel, climate program director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

But some say the decision is just lip service and ignores the real issues. Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Massachusetts, Chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming told CNN in that “After years of delay, the Bush administration was forced to face the reality that global warming has endangered the polar bear and that the polar bear needs to be placed on the Endangered Species Act. But the administration has also simultaneously announced a rule aimed at allowing oil and gas drilling in the Arctic to continue unchecked even in the face of the polar bear’s threatened extinction. Essentially, the administration is giving a gift to Big Oil, and short shrift to the polar bear.”

There are currently around 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears now in the Arctic wild. The polar bear population had actually been recovering since the late 1960’s thanks in part to another protective law, the Marine Mammal Protection Act. However, the “best scientific data available” from the U.S. Geological Survey and other organizations, indicates that bears’ luck is about to run out. They are now having an increasingly difficult time, which will only worsen. They are a species that is “likely to become endangered of extinction within the foreseeable future” due to the worrisome trends with Arctic ice. Overall, scientists believe the future is not a bright one for the bears.

In announcing the new threatened listing, Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne, seemed to be feeling a little threatened himself. He was very quick to point out that the decision should not be “misused” to regulate global climate change. Kempthorne also quoted US President Bush on the matter trying to reemphasize the fact that the burgeoning oil and natural gas development in the region should not be blamed.

“Listing the polar bear as threatened can reduce avoidable losses of polar bears. But it should not open the door to use of the Endangered Species Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, power plants, and other sources,” said Kempthorne. “That would be a wholly inappropriate use of the ESA law. The ESA is not the right tool to set U.S. climate policy.”

Kempthorne’s wording seemed to reflect concessions common to the overall climate debate. Beliefs about global warming seem to be largely split two ways. The vast majority of scientists believe the accumulated evidence indicating that global warming will have dire consequences to Earth’s diverse biology, but big industrial companies and lobbyists, along with a small minority of scientists, say it’s either nothing to worry about or it’s something we can’t do anything about either way.

Critics say that oil companies and industrial lobbyists are too quick to downplay human involvement in climate change say that they are primarily motivated by greed and that there stance is both short-sighted and dangerous. A “lets wait and see” attitude doesn’t cut it for many scientists who believe that without immediate and considerable action to stem the effects of man-made climate changes, it could quickly become too late.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) comprised of climate experts from around the globe, the Arctic Sea could be ice-free in the summer by as early as 2040, and that winter ice depth may shrink drastically. The IPCC also predicted that once global oil production peaks between 2008 and 2018 there will be a global recession. Once “Hubbert’s” Peak is reached, global oil production will begin an irreversible decline, possibly triggering a global recession, food shortages and conflict between nations over dwindling oil supplies, the IPCC predicted last summer.

But for now it’s the Arctic that is really feeling the heat. According to a recent PBS report “there’s no doubt the Arctic is warming. In fact, this extreme region has warmed faster than any other on earth, with the Arctic temperature increasing three to five times faster than the Earth as a whole over the past 100 years. Climate models predict that the Arctic will become an additional 7 to 12 degrees Fahrenheit warmer during the next century…With the Arctic experiencing the most rapid and severe climate change on Earth, the plants and animals that have evolved to survive in this extreme habitat come increasingly under threat. Like the canary in the coalmine, the Arctic can serve as our early warning sign of impending climate change. Observing the tumultuous change its inhabitants are experiencing can be a lesson to us about the changes in store for the rest of the world.”

TAKEN FROM www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog

“We’ve seen a whole slew of gigantic, volcano shaped, city-in-a-building towers, each promising to be the largest building in the world. First it was the wacky X-Seed design for Tokyo, and then even Norman Foster got into the game with his proposal for the massive ‘Crystal Island’ development in Moscow.

“Well now, architect Eugene Tsui is taking the gigantic volcano tower concept to a whole new eco level, by taking design inspiration from the natural world. His new design for the Ultima Tower – a 2-mile high Mt Doom-esque structure - borrows design principles from trees and other living ystem to reduce its energy footprint. We are always intrigued by architecture that uses biomimicry – the borrowing of principles from nature’s designs - and Tsui’s concept for this towering, ultra-dense urban development has certainly captured our attention with its thought-provoking design. (((Also, it looks completely insane… or at least it makes Frank Lloyd Wright’s nuclear-powered “Mile-High” look like a piker.)))

“Population growth rates and rural-urban migration are creating a trend of chaotic urbanization that brings environmental, economic and social challenges. Within the next 7 years, 22 megacities across the globe are expected to have populations that exceed 10 million people, according to the UN. The Ultima Tower is an innovative green design concept proposed to resourcefully use earth’s surface and allow sustainable distribution of resources within a dense urban setting.

“Designed to withstand natural calamities, (((good idea))) Ultima Tower is highly stable and aerodynamic. Rather than spreading horizontally the structure rises vertically from a base with a 7,000 foot diameter - inspired in part by the termite’s nest structures of Africa, the highest structure created by any living organism…”

(((After that it just gets weirder. Though it’s interesting to see that finally, in 2008, the world’s most ferociously ambitious architectural notions are green.)))

taken from blog.wired.com

It’s not quite a glass-domed city yet, but St. Petersberg has taken the first steps towards that goal. British architecture firm Wilkinson Eyre, best known for the design of the Gateshead Millenium Bridge in Newcastle, unveiled a bold new plan to revamp the old market of St. Petersburg, Russia by putting it entirely under glass. Over the next few years they’ll be putting a giant sheet of reinforced glass over Aprasin Dvor, a shopping district. A matching glass bridge will span the river. We’ve got some interesting facts about the project.

Here are some deets:
- A glazed crystalline glass tensegrity roof reflects weather conditions but keeps pedestrians dry.
- A new building on the Fontanka River will replace the decaying 60s Publishing House.
- A lightweight tensegrity footbridge will be built over the river. It’ll look like a shiny cloud. Images by Wilkinson Eyre

TAKEN FROM io9.com

At a first glance the Schimmel Pegasus Piano doesn’t look like a piano. With those beautifully sculpted curves this piano looks more like a futuristic spaceship. The Piano has over 200 strings with a key assembly of 10000 pieces with a fully adjustable hydraulic lid. Now you can have your own Schimmel Pegasus Piano because there’s one for sale until March 15th, only 14 were made ten years ago for people like Eddie Murphy, Lenny Kravitz, and Prince. The pianist’s touch determines the speed and energy of the hammer contacting and energizing the strings. The pianist’s touch determines the speed and energy of the hammer contacting and energizing the strings. Details in workmanship and material are paramount if the pianist is to enjoy playing the instrument and experience rich, expanded dynamic sonority. Schimmel keyboard/action systems are examples of exclusive workmanship, regulated to discriminating standards and ideally matched to the strung back assemblies. they are asking only $110,000, and their highest bit is currently at $100,000.

TAKEN FROM /freshome.com