The California Energy Commission passed a new policy this week that would require all TVs sold in the Golden State to meet specific energy-efficiency standards. The law is the first of its kind in the country and is projected to save the state over $1 billion in annual energy costs.
Beginning January 2011, new standards will take effect that prevent the sale of energy-sucking televisions with screen sizes 58" and smaller, requiring new models to consume 33% less electricity by 2011 and 49% less by 2013.
As the standard for television size has grown, so has the energy consumption of the appliances, increasing from 3-4% in the 90s to 8-10% in 2008. Without intervention, this number is expected to climb to 18% in 2023, according to the commission. The new standards will reduce energy consumption, thereby lowering energy bills. It will also help avoid the construction of a new power plant and reduce carbon dioxide gas emissions.
The regulations include both liquid-crystal display and plasma HD TVs and the old-fashioned cathode ray tube and rear-projection sets.
"The real winners of these new TV energy efficiencies are California consumers, who will be saving billions of dollars and conserving energy while preserving their choice to buy any size or type of TV," Energy Commission Chairman Karen Douglas said in a statement.
Some retail groups and trade associations aren't exactly fans of the new regulations, claiming it needlessly limits consumer freedom, and has potential to cause employee layoffs.
"Manufacturers are already making energy-efficient models, so imposing regulations is absolutely unnecessary, " said Jason Oxman, senior vice-president of industry affairs for the Consumer Electronics Association, which represents companies within the consumer technology industry.
The regulations don't require consumers to get rid of their current TV sets, and wouldn't prohibit them from buying less energy-efficient models online or across state borders (though we can't imagine why you would want an energy wasting model vs. a more eco-friendly option.)
Mariah Carey has always been known not just for her killer pipes, but for her incredibly diva-esque attitude towards fame. One cannot deny the woman is extremely talented, but her recent demands for an upcoming Christmas-lighting ceremony in London are a bit out of control, not to mention unfriendly to animals and the environment.
In preparation for the ceremony at Westfield shopping center, Mariah sent over a list of requests for the event, among them, 20 white kittens and 100 white doves to surround her on the podium. Really?
"We did manage to source the doves that we were going to release into the sky, but the kittens proved terribly difficult," claims a source. "In the end, it was made clear that due to health and safety, there was no way we could have the animals at Westfield. Pets are not allowed in Westfield - that rule would apply for everyone."
Aside from health and safety, we're pretty sure letting 100 white doves loose and putting 20 baby kittens in a crowded shopping center is breaking all kinds of animal rights and ethics principles!
Mariah has also requested to be showered with butterfly-shaped confetti on a pink podium while she's waving a magic wand. Confetti isn't the most planet-friendly decoration, but there are more important things to worry about, like the Rolls Royce that will be transporting Mariah, her 15 closest friends and 80 security guards to the event. What kind of gas is that going to waste?
"We have worked extremely hard to make sure that Mariah's event is fantastic. Even the model of car had to be changed six times to one that her people liked," continued the source.
We are big fans of whimsical and happy events celebrating the holidays, and believe Mariah does deserve to be honored as the fabulous musician she is, but this is a bit ridiculous. What do you think?
Though many of us rely on a vehicle to get us from place to place, more and more people are abandoning cars and opting for a more eco-friendly method of transportation, like biking, taking the bus, or even keeping their car and converting it to veggie oil. German automaker Audi is getting on board - kind of - and has launched a clean fuel vehicle, the A3 TDI.
While this is great and all, we can't help but notice their new commercial is just a bit hypocritical as it pokes fun at individuals who are trying to do their part to reduce emissions... see what we mean below:
Alright we will admit the dude on the Segway needs to get a clue, but we stand by our opinion that biking is still very cool, and yes - FUN, even if it isn't as glamorous as driving a pricey automobile.
What do you think of Audi's commercial, is it fair to bash eco-friendly people, just because they're not driving a super expensive car? Or do you think the commercial is all in good fun?
Timberland and Wyclef Jean have a simple question for you: what steps are YOU taking to save the environment? Think about it, because now you can earn 100 points for your Cause just by answering that question in the newest SocialVibe activity!
Our newest sponsor, Timberland, has partnered up with Grammy-winning artist and globally-honored humanitarian Wyclef to help raise awareness for his charity, Yele Haiti. Yele Haiti is a purely grassroots movement founded by Wyclef in 2005 that builds global awareness for Haiti while helping transform the country and improving the lives of Haitians through education, sports, the arts and the environment.
We've shared some of the great work they are doing before, like building schools for kids in need and such. The organization regularly provides community service programs like food distribution and mobilized emergency relief.
By completing the Timberland activity on SocialVibe and sharing it with your friends, you'll not only be bringing awareness to Yelei Haiti, but you'll be helping your chosen Cause as well.
If you were holding onto that inkling of hope that the nations of the world would come together next month in Copenhagen and finalize the much-needed treaty that puts a global plan of action in place to combat climate change, you're going to be disappointed. World leaders announced this weekend that the treaty will be definitely delayed, perhaps another whole year.
For the past several months, news about these leaders coming to an agreement to save our environment has been up and down, sometimes seeming very optimistic, at other times appearing to be a lost cause.
“There was an assessment by the leaders that it is unrealistic to expect a full internationally, legally binding agreement could be negotiated between now and Copenhagen, which starts in 22 days,” said Michael Froman, the deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs. “I don’t think the negotiations have proceeded in such a way that any of the leaders thought it was likely that we were going to achieve a final agreement in Copenhagen, and yet thought that it was important that Copenhagen be an important step forward, including with operational impact.”
Though they still plan to meet in Copenhagen, they'll be reaching much less "politically-binding" agreements, once again pushing these very important issues to the side. All parties agreed to come to an agreement (ha) in 2010.
What do you think about the delay? On one hand, we can understand the need to really sit down and work this through rather than patching together a rush job global climate treaty. On the other hand, this is one of the most pressing issues facing us as humans today. Guess all we can do now is hope for the best in 2010, and of course, do what we can in our daily lives to reduce our impact.
Diapers. Dirty diapers. Can you really think of anything more disgusting? Aside from the fact that they're filled with near-toxic waste from a baby, 8 oz diapers made from plastic account for over 23,000 TONS of waste per DAY (not per child, though some parents might argue their tot is capable of it). That's waste that isn't easily broken down, either. These millions of diapers are clogging our landfills, floating in our oceans, and dirtying up our planet.
What options to we have to rid ourselves of dirty diapers? Aside from cloth diapering, an increasingly popular trend in eco-friendly parenting, one potential use for these foul-smelling things is to turn them into energy via a special recycling plant.
Two UK organizations, Versus Energy and Knowaste, think they may have found the answer for our filthy problem and is building the first ever recycling plant to get 100% of its power from dirty diapers. Now, only 2% of the overall material in a disposed diaper has organic matter in it, which will fuel the plant, so the remaining 98% will be sorted, chopped up and redistributed into other products.
Organic waste accounts for only 2% of the materials in "pre-owned" disposable diapers. What happens to the other 98%? It will be dried, sterilized, and separated into reusable paper pulp and plastic. The end use of those materials has not yet been announced but based on Knowaste's past experience, roof tiles, shoe insoles, wallpaper, plastic "wood," and industrial thickeners are likely candidates.
This idea that your next "made from recycled materials" cup or plate could have been made with the remnants of a dirty diaper is kind of gross, but mostly awesome. What a brilliant idea!
I use the term "we" loosely, as the SocialVibe staff hasn't traveled to the moon anytime recently. Rather, a team of scientists announced in a news conference today that yes, they found water on the moon, and yes, there is a lot of it.
A team of NASA scientists have been monitoring the behavior and findings of Lcross, a satellite that slammed into the south pole of the moon in early October, leaving behind a crater that was 60-100 feet wide. The collision kicked up at least 24 gallons of ice water, buried beneath the surface in a cold region of the moon that doesn't have sun exposure.
Though many speculated there was good old H2O somewhere on the moon, it was widely believed for many years that the moon was just a dried up old hunk of moon rock, incapable of sustaining life.
“Indeed yes, we found water,” Anthony Colaprete, the principal investigator for NASA’s Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, said in a news conference.
So what does this mean? For you and I this very moment, not a lot. For future scientists and explorers who plan on setting up shop on the moon to further their studies, it means the world universe. Something as simple as the presence of water can provide a great deal of information in the history of our solar system.
Could one of the world's most unique and adorable creatures vanish in the next few decades? Researchers from the Australian Koala Foundation are beginning to think so, as numbers of koalas are rapidly on the decline. The current koala population is somewhere between 43,000 and 80,000, a stark contrast to the 100,000 individual koalas in 2003.
Dwindling habitats, drier than normal conditions and a shocking outbreak of chlamydia among the species are to blame, experts speculate.
An increase in development is causing destruction of koala habitat, and as the organization says in regard to koalas, 'no tree, no me.' Global warming may already be negatively effecting the species, as dry weather conditions are causing Eucalyptus leaves, the desired food of choice for koalas, to lack the nutritional punch they used to.
This isn't a geo-specific problem, either, as koala populations are down across all regions where the species live. Though preservation groups would like to add koalas to the threatened species list, such an act can't take place until mid-2010.
A world without koalas would be truly tragic. You can do your part to save this species and others by choosing WWF as your Cause on SocialVibe and earn as many points as possible by encouraging your friends to visit your profile and complete activities. With your help, we can make a difference!
