Archives For environment

0

Climate Bill Through the Eyes of Utilities

I came across a great article on the energy blog Master Resource (of which I have become a regular reader) by Robert Peltier that focuses on some of the intricacies that may result from an eventual passage of H.R. 2454. Peltier notes on how remarks of opposition from the energy industry have been few and far between so far in the discussion of Waxman-Markey and that perhaps, for some, their end of the deal is not quite that bad. One could think the large energy providers will need to shoulder a great deal of burden towards reducing our carbon footprint, but the key of how newly distributed carbon allowances actually get doled out brings a great deal to bear on how how utilities will be affected. The give and take of Capitol Hill negotiating may have left some hands far from empty. Three of Peltier’s seven points include:

  • Given that existing plants will be given new allowances for free, new plants face a considerable barrier to entry in the marketplace having to purchase new allowances in order to gain a permit to build. Existing owners and operators could cement their place on the high ground for years to come.
  • Nuclear providers could end up with amazing benefit given that allowances are doled out in response to the percentage of national generation. Since nuclear provides nearly 20% of our nation’s power they could wind up with 20% of the carbon allowances that are unneeded and could be resold. As Peltier puts it, “For utilities with a lot of nuclear generation, these allowances are a gift.”
  • Original distributions of allowances to older coal plants could encourage them to remain open given that the allowances could be worth more than the plants themselves. As long as a utility provider can keep the plant open (and continue to be spewing carbon) long enough for allowances to be doled out, they will be handed a nice, tax-payer sponsored retirement plan.

I encourage the reading of the entire article.

Even staunch environmentalists like Joe Romm consider this a flawed bill and it is wrought with concessions and exceptions that help make its passage plausible, but in the end it may be worth it. Though large nuclear owners do not need any extra money, rewarding their low-carbon model is not exactly counter-productive (besides the fact that they produce some of the most hazardous material known to mankind.) If entry into the energy market for high carbon producers is more expensive, that seems fine as well. We should be discouraging carbon-intensive models for power. Giving allowances to coal plants on the verge of decommissioning is a more difficult one to swallow given that coal is already responsible for pollution in the country that has either been suffered or needs to be repaired. The notion of buying out the problem leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, but how much can we expect from American legislators.

Peltier does a great job in giving an overview of the issue. Being an advocate for sustainability reform is one thing, but being an educated advocate raises the likelihood of making notable progress. Though some of the contributors and frequent readers of Master Resource may not share my position of the severity of a more sustainable economy, their knowledge of the energy markets is thorough and often provide much-needed points to ground the aspirations of new technologies and bold, but sometimes half-baked, claims.

Political 
0

Corporate Green Efforts Yield Mixed Results

Recycled Paper

In an international landscape, many claim that sustainable measures in the U.S. lose their steam if the industrial economies of China and India are not on board. Similarly, within the U.S., efforts of individual citizens need to be paired with corporations doing their part to change the course of business to greener ends. A recent study suggests that some large corporations are beginning to alter their daily operations to align themselves with greener options of stocking their paper products. According to the Green Grades report of twelve companies, conducted jointly by the Dogwood Alliance and Forest Ethics, corporate powerhouses like Fed-Ex and Office Depot are on the path to a more sustainable paper trail while others still have a long way to go.

The Green Grades study looked at six areas of sustainable paper usage including FSC certified products, avoiding paper from endangered forests and recycling policies. Fed-Ex stood at the head of the class, earning an “A-“ from the study for excelling in responsible sourcing of materials and using FSC certified products. They are not a bad company to be leading the pack as not only one of the largest shipping companies by the owners and operators of one of the largest copy-center chains as well. Followed by Staples, Office Depot and OfficeMax, some of the bellwethers seem to be catching on.

On the other hand, not every company can join Bank of America  and its One Bryant Park as the epitome of environmental reform. Some companies have yet to even scratch the surface. I was surprised by some of the laggards. Amazon.com and Costco received failing grades, followed closely by the “D+” rankings of Target and Wal-Mart, all apparently suffering from sourcing their paper products from endangered forests and questionable suppliers.

There is a lot to be said for targeting paper products as a component of our waste stream. According to the EPA, in 2007 paper and paperboard comprise a third of our waste— 83 million tons. The negative effects of the paper industry are also relatively immediate and encompassing. Illegal logging in both Asia and South America lead the destruction of rain forests and risk removing entire ecosystems of life around the planet, not to mention the tremendous carbon sinks that old growth trees provide.

But the largest waste source is also one of the easiest to fix. Sustainable forestry is growing in popularity as organizations like the Forest Stewardship Council gain exposure and notoriety. As digital media continues to advance, numerous extraneous paper habits can be replaced with a bit of foresight and focus. For the material that has to still be printed, paper is also one of the easiest products to recycle.

I was not surprised at the deficiencies in recycling which comprised the lower marks of even the highest ranking companies. Years ago, a discussion I had with Tom Rhoads of the Onondaga Country Resource Recovery Agency in Syracuse, New York, he told me that when it came to recycling many residents were already on board, earning Syracuse one of the highest recycling rates in the state. But it was the businesses that were notoriously hard to convince. Here in Manhattan the field is much the same.

It is markedly easy for a slightly educated consumer to contribute to more sustainable paper purchasing. Whether it is essentials like paper plates, toilet paper and paper towels or supplies like printer paper, purchasing FSC certified or recycled content is a small added price to pay (perhaps an extra dollar) while the effects are far reaching. The more responsible materials we can purchase, the more that the rise in demand will shift jobs from older corners of the industry to their more responsible counterparts until a new standard is fully implemented and better practices are commonplace. Less consumption and waste all lead to fewer landfills, lower costs of removal, more efficient manufacturing and healthier ecosystems to reduce the carbon pressure on the environment.

Economic 
5

Sustainable by Proxy: New Avenue for Greening the Economy

Vote GraphicThey are hidden amongst the mail, often getting tossed aside for the Economist, Business Week or the new IKEA catalog. “Proxy Information Enclosed” often lays printed across the front as a faint reminder to the stock purchase that was made days to months ago. These often-ignored ballots of corporate policy could offer a new alternative to government intervention for spreading sustainability through the upper echelon of our corporate landscape.

For those like me, proxy statements often get a quick look at best. A glance almost always reveals that I have never heard of any of those running for board positions, nor know enough to vote for or against any of the resolutions. However, a new trend is forming that has investors of public companies using proxy resolutions to drive upper management towards sustainability planning. While this has been slowly happening over the course of the past few years, the change in the game is that it is starting to work.

A blog post by Marc Gunther points to a proxy vote for utility company IdaCorp, based in Boise, Idaho, where investors drew together a 51.2% majority in favor of the company adopting greenhouse gas emission targets—despite the resistance from the company’s management. The win could mark a new trend of American equity owners forcing sustainability up through individual companies.

Of the conservatives that I often pair words with, one of the greatest oppositions to the green lobby is not that they disagree with the need to address climate change, but that they dislike the method of using government intervention to “restrict choices” of citizens to only those considered to be more sustainable. Right-wingers would rather see a free market option that facilitates the opportunity to change lifestyle rather than mandating it. Gathering support for green-goal investing could create a new way to incite change within the framework of capitalism that our country has come to rely on so heavily.

Some could argue that individual investors would be muscled around by larger institutional investing groups, keeping them from achieving results—especially on larger companies that are responsible for more considerable portions of waste production, pollution and energy use. But IdaCorp’s example shows that individuals are joined by non-profits and new funds, adding strength to proxy movements.

Groups like Ceres help coordinate efforts to promote change within company policy. Ceres states its mission as “Integrating sustainability into capital markets for the health of the planet and its people” and operates as a network of environmental organizations, public interest groups and an investor network that collectively manage over $7 billion in assets. That is a number that can be a substantial presence in a larger range of companies. According to Ceres:

A record 68 climate-related shareholder resolutions were filed by investors this year, of which 31 were withdrawn after the companies agreed to positive climate-related commitments.

For conservatives, this should be a win-win. On one hand, it promotes Americans to reinvest their money back into our own businesses, helping to bolster an economy that is in dire need of it. It also acts on a case-by-case basis as the result of nothing more than investors exercising their rights as owners of a company—potentially downplaying the amount of effort needed from Capitol Hill. If the support for green efforts is as strong as polls like Zogby International’s recent inquiry is saying, then private investing dollars could help battle inefficiency and accountability from the private sector side.

Strength in the movement could not have happened at a better time. With many people believing that the worst of the recession is behind us, long term trends in the market are likely bullish, prompting more people to stay invested in companies that have a better chance of turning a profit. Conversely, if this kind of success had happened three years ago, the effort could have faced a devastating setback by numerous investors working to change companies only to see their assets cut in half.

Economic 
4

U.S. Renewable Power Reaches 11%

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) the U.S. is making strides on its goals to bolster its renewable power portfolio. In their recently released Electric Power Monthly, an overview of our country’s sources and usage, the EIA reports that renewable energy, including hyrdoelectric sources, have jumped to 11.1% of our total production. Of the individual sources, wind power posted the largest gain with a 34.8% increase. Hydroelectric power increased 18.4% The news is complimented nicely by a slide of 13.9% in coal power production, leaving it as producing 46.1% of our total power needs. The rise of cleaner energy sources has positive timing with the Waxman-Markey bill that recently passed through the House and is now being ravaged on the floor of the Senate.

Renewable Energy Production

However, the news does bear some caveats. The EIA said that total consumption by the nation declined 4.6%, undoubtedly linked to the recession and decreases in industrial and manufacturing draws. The same reason was used to explain the notable decreased in coal power with more factories producing less and thus using less energy. As a result, a recovery in the economy could add some strength back to coal’s share of the pie.

Nevertheless, the footnotes do not diminish the weight of the opportunity. Keep in mind that these figures come without money coming from stimulus funding or anything related to the Waxman-Markey bill, should it survive its journey through Congress. Moreover, it could be a blessing that more coal plants are running idle when jobs are tight and investments are low, leaving the possibility of having cleaner options to choose from when we have the reason to turn more switches back on. With all hope, we may be able to replace, or at least deter the new construction of, coal plants by buoying the power supply with new investment in green power. The more dollars that can be diverted to sustainable power creation is more jobs that the industry can tote creating as well as working to lower the prices of technology and its resulting kilowatt hours.

Infrastructural 
2

A New Life for Aging Infrastructure

Visions and promises for the “new standard” are becoming a daily attraction. Enough people have realized that for an advanced society many of our vital networks are often outmoded prompting plenty of innovators to work on replacement parts. Energy production, transportation, waste disposal, utility conveyance; all show signs of promising upgrades over the next half-century towards the endgame of efficiency. But for all the thought devoted to the new infrastructure systems, what should we be doing with the old ones?

Sustainable societal innovation is a two-sided coin. Defining a better standard should be paired with ways to allocate our existing landscape for new uses rather than simply calling it trash. Over the past century trillions of dollars have been used to construct the vast, national networks that we rely on implicitly. All of that is now latent value that should not be squandered. Like anything other byproduct of our economy these systems hold possibilities for new lives and uses along side their replacements.

Not long ago I sat in a conference room at the Green Buildings New York exposition listening to an engineer talk about improving efficiency through water reclamation and reuse. His name was Edward Clerico and he worked for Alliance Environmental as part of their team specializing on water efficiency—coincidentally, he is reportedly participating in efficiency work for One Bryant Park. From behind a wooden podium with a grainy microphone carrying his voice over worn carpet and faded ceiling tiles, he spoke with excitement about the growing trends of onsite water treatment and reuse. He pointed out that if more people take advantage of things like greywater systems and green roofs then our demand for water (and its disposal) may drop to the point that our infrastructure may no longer be completely necessary. Reservoirs, aqueducts and huge pipelines guiding water to major cities could wind up as over-built, archaic achievements of a different age. Could these things have another use in the face of drastic improvements of water efficiency? It occurred to me the design problem extended far beyond simply water.

With all hope, the future of distributing power will only hold a pale comparison to our current methods. Technologies like Smart Grid systems or completely decentralized systems can begin to shape how our new power grid could work. New steps in transporting power like high voltage superconducting lines could remove high tension wires and the scars that they cast across our landscapes. There must be countless uses for the metal of those giant towers while the land beneath them can return back to the forests, plains and wetlands that they disturbed upon construction.

coal plantPower production is another scenario where some of the oldest methods of generation are also the least sustainable—namely coal. Some of our oldest coal plants have already seen their 50th birthdays and are prime targets for retirement. Being one who completely supports ridding our country of coal-fired power, I am often asked what happens to the jobs and facilities at existing plants. Not a problem, we can still use them! Complete conversions of coal plants to accept new feedstocks, namely biomass, is already underway. Cleveland.com recently posted an article describing how FirstEnergy Corp released its plans to convert a 54-year-old plant on the Ohio River to burn grass and wood cubes to produce 312 megawatts of power, leaving it as one of the largest biomass plants in the country. The retooling of the plant purportedly saves 105 local jobs.

highline 1Perhaps my favorite candidate for infrastructural reuse is our road and railway systems. In response to the industrial boom, the first half of the twentieth century brought tens of thousands of miles of paved highways and metal track carving through cities across the country. The eventual decline of industrial production and shipping in the U.S. evaporated the necessity for many rail lines, so too providing an opportunity of reuse for these aging strips of land. The first section of The Highline opened only last week in Manhattan providing the first realization of a project that has been pursued by local residents for years. The elevated tracks snaking through the city’s west side that once carried freight trains up and down an industrialized Manhattan coastline now support a growing garden and a unique urban park. Having personally experienced the Highline since it’s opening, I can attest to its outstanding realization of an amazing urban project. Likewise, retired grade-level track beds are becoming perfect locations for bike and running trails, generating ties through existing communities. The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy is one of the movement’s strongest proponents.

Strides in mass transit could help bring about the same opportunities for our aging highways and viaducts. The Toronto Sun reported on the results of a conceptual design for the city’s Gardenier Expressway. Grown from the same seeds at the vision for the Highline, the “Green Ribbon”, designed by Les Klein of Quadrangle Architects, proposes to reclaim the elevated roadway for use as gardened parks and bicycle paths. The hypothetical model includes small wind and solar arrays to create power for the lighting systems of the gardenway. With an estimated price of $500-600 million (which is likely low), it is far from modest, but the figure becomes more plausible when one considers the estimated cost of $300 million just to tear it down.

The benefits to reuse are clear. Massive waste streams would be averted as well as the pollution and energy that is wasted on demolition. New visions mean more work, and work means jobs—which everyone loves. And new infrastructural archetypes can indirectly contribute to energy production, food growth and water management while still providing public amenities. All we need is a broader view of opportunity. Solely devoting focus to what we can create can raise the risk of forgetting what it is we already have.

Highline Photo Credit: David Berkowitz

Power Plant Photo Credit: Cleveland.com

Urban Planning 
11

Tax Greenfields, Subsidize Infill

suburban sprawlA number of government sponsored initiatives are targeting sustainable technologies that want to provide an easy fix to climate change (renewable energy, fuel cells, energy efficient home upgrades.) But when it comes to sustainable progress, if we are going to delve into the policy game then we should be including measures that actually change the way we are doing things, not merely advance the technology that allows us to do things the same. As a result, I would suggest taxing the development of greenfield sites and, conversely, offering incentives to redeveloping existing buildings or property near town and city centers.

Sprawl is a familiar term in design and planning used to describe our common pattern of expansion and construction over the past half century. As the impressive nature of high-rise steel faded in the 1950’s, Americans were less concerned with making gleaming spires of progress and turned instead to cheap tracks of untarnished land. We saw the rise of the residential development and the suburban office park—blemishes on our built environment that result from a top priority of low-cost, speedy construction. Under the proposed plan, developers of such plots would be taxed, effectively making their construction more expensive.

Perhaps the biggest challenge is the fact that fighting against greenfield development is fighting against decades of cultural norm. In a paper titled Greenfield Development Without Sprawl the Urban Land Institute’s Jim Heid writes:

“From the start, greenfield development has promised ordinary Americans a way to enjoy the best of city and country, and remarkably often this mix of utopia and pragmatism has delivered.”

Undoubtedly, building on the edges is building cheaper. The land often goes for a song. Labor is less expensive. Access to sites is easier and building codes are less stringent. But the cheaper choice for builders can be more expensive for municipalities (and we know where their budgets comes from.) Sprawling development is notoriously inefficient; each an oasis of occupancy connected by thin veins of pavement that make car travel a considerable portion of daily life. May it be plains, farmland or forests, virgin land is mindlessly swallowed for the sake of inexpensive elbow room. Greenfield development can mean funding for new power lines, new sewers and new roads for a relatively small group of new citizens. It expands the coverage areas for maintenance crews, emergency vehicles and mail delivery that can drastically offset the incremental rise in tax revenue. All of this is only clearer in our current economic crisis where municipalities are being pushed closer to Chapter 9 (municipal bankruptcy) as budgets cannot meet costs of daily routine. Suddenly the cheap route can get pretty expensive. Taxing this kind of sprawling development may help curb its growth in the country.

Most importantly of all, there is no need for greenfield building. We have loads of existing space in close proximity to transportation and infrastructure. Moreover, the timing could not be better for instigating a switch. The Wall Street Journal reported that the recession has prompted a jump in vacancy rates around the country even as rental rates are falling. The article reports that the average vacancy rate in the top 79 markets in the U.S. rose to 7.2%.

On the other side of the tax lie subsidies to shift new construction and home ownership to areas with an existing populace. New homes and offices can benefit from utilities and services that residents have already paid. In addition to possibly being cheaper than new construction, reusing existing structures drastically reduces waste from demolition and construction and negates the need for the production of new virgin materials. All of it points to lower carbon footprints and lighter lifecycle costs. Subsidizing infill development could help take the edge off of the costs needed to upgrade existing properties and make buyers think twice about their location. Remember, the goal is not for less development, merely shifting it for a smarter solution. Reinforcing our town and urban centers would support a critical mass of residents that breeds efficiency where fewer services could reach more instead of wasting more taxpayer dollars on diluted redundancy.

At a local level, some places have taken an initial step of intervention. The WSJ’s Jim Carlton highlights how the city of Arcata, California purchased a 175 acre redwood forest for $2.05 million in order to curtail development. These kinds of efforts affect where developers will put new buildings which will, in turn, affect how suburbanites live. Carlton goes on to say that some experts believe that 10% of the country’s existing forests will likely be developed by 2030. While only a first step, it does demonstrate how development patterns can be guided in the responsible direction.

As I have said before, I believe sustainability is a concept that encompasses more than a technological fix. It is an understanding of balance and stasis that has to be experienced as way to live rather than inventions that supplement wastefulness. If we are going to use the government as a tool to help make sustainable decisions (I think we are already there) then we should be doing something to address the roots of the problem. This kind of legislation would create no less development, no fewer jobs and, when combined with the municipal money it would save through efficient building and planning, may largely pay for itself.

Photo Credit: http://www.plannersweb.com/sprawl/place-nj.html

Political 
1

Green Buildings NY: Highlights

On Tuesday I trekked over to the Javits Center on the West Side to spend the day at the Green Buildings NY expo. Overall it was an interesting collection of professionals and products that focused on managing and fitting buildings for sustainability. I had the chance to talk to a number of people and sit in on some conference sessions. Here are some of the highlights that the expo had to offer:

Efficiency through Water Reuse

AllianceEnvironmental_LogoI find it fascinating how seasoned professionals of any industry can create a presentation to highlight all of its environmental short comings. Edward Clerico of Alliance Environmental LLC painted a bleak picture of our water infrastructure. In his efforts to promote on-site filtration and reuse, he began in saying that our system of water supply and disposal uses 8 quads (that’s quadrillion BTUs) of energy every year. At the same time he pointed to how far on-site filtration systems have become and how greywater could become increasingly common. Uses such as site irrigation, cooling tower make-up and laundry washing can help buildings like the Solaire and One Bryant Park cut their water usage and discharge in half.

Green Demolitions

Based out of New England, Green Demolitions offers free demolition and removal of kitchens and bathrooms so that they can be completely reclaimed and resold for use in new projects. The prospective client can enjoy a sizable tax deduction instead of a hefty contractor bill for the removal. Speaking with John Green, manager of their Bethel, NY store, I learned the company donates all of its projects to Recovery Unlimited—a non profit dedicated to helping with substance abuse. Consumers can regularly spend 50%-80% less for a new kitchens, bathrooms or appliances. Their cause has lead them to not only provide a charitable source of income, but divert tons of material from landfills as they promote reuse.

Greenpatch Pavement

Greenpatch is one of the players exploring the new realm of cold asphalt pavement. Hearing “green” and “asphalt” next to each other was surprising to me, but the product specializing in filling potholes and repairing roads has numerous sustainable benefits. Not only does the asphalt require no heat to be applied (which saves a generous amount of energy) but it can also be manufactured at lower temperatures (which saves even more.) Its mix contains 40% recycled asphalt and no petroleum solvents. Unlike other cold-patch products, Greenpatch contains zero Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that normally can leech into the ground or off-gas into the air. Even their packaging is recyclable. Overall, it was an impressive product.

JM Insulation

int_head_logoJohns Manville is a producer of many building products, one of them being fiberglass insulation. Again, normally the term causes environmentalists or green building proponents to roll their eyes and turn back towards soy-based, blow-in alternatives. But these guys are making an attempt to give fiberglass a better name. Their insulation uses 25% recycled glass with 20% being post-consumer glass (more than any other manufacturer.) They actually claim that fiberglass insulation is the largest secondary market for recycled glass. Their new line has removed all formaldehyde, a common ingredient in bonding agents, from their insulation to help with indoor air quality.

Retro-Commissioning

Allan Skodowski gave an enlightening talk on the importance of retro-commissioning. Any building seeking LEED certification is familiar with commissioning, a process that tests the designed systems of a building to make sure they function as intended and with peak efficiency. But Skodowski, who helps commission buildings for Transwestern, says that existing buildings should also be commissioned to ensure their systems are not falling into lethargy and negligence. As technologies improve and systems wear down, most buildings can run at around 78% of average energy costs through commissioning—a number that can drop to 60% with dedicated, consistent study.

Architectural 
1

Biopolymers: Emerging Plastics

With the growing media focus on energy and carbon it is easy to lose sight of all the things that contribute to our energy usage and our carbon footprints. The strict focus on small parts of our economy’s environmental challenges only emulates how prone we are to isolating concepts and events rather than continually viewing our actions as an interconnected whole. Waste production is another prime place for progress that is not so far away from carbon caps and the renewable energy debate. The collection, sorting, compacting, dumping and even recycling of waste all uses energy so to strip down its girth is a boon to our greater goals. When it comes to waste, plastics stand out as a prime target for reorganization and an answer that quickly comes to mind is biopolymers—naturally based plastic compounds. Continue Reading…

Economic 
7

Sustainability Needs Educated Consumers

I repeatedly suggest that one of the largest barriers to a more sustainable economy is ignorance. Most people are simply not aware of the problems, let alone the solutions, and as such the pitch for a different lifestyle (call is environmentally sound, ecologically efficient or simply “green”) can be a tough sell. So if the problem is a lack of education who is responsible for fixing it? We are quick to point fingers at tech companies, developers, car manufacturers—the producers of “stuff” that we consume to keep our economy afloat. But at the end of the day we cannot pile all of the onus on entities and organizations to force information onto us, we too have a responsibility to seek it out for ourselves. Continue Reading…

Economic 
3

The Sahara Forest Project

With a growing population raising the need for food, water and energy efficiency of spatial utilization is paramount. Our cities should be denser and farmland managed with greater care. But what if we could take some of the harshest land on the planet and use it to supplement these needs at a low cost? Three firms have proposed a method to use the Sahara Desert as the next prime ground for creating fresh food, fresh water and clean energy. Despite the fact that the project has been around for over a year, it exemplifies the kind of coordination and synergy that Intercon promotes and the direction our society should be moving towards.

via exploration-architecture.com

The center of the project begins in collaboration. I find it no coincidence that innovative thinking is the result of numerous minds from different, but interconnected, fields working together. Shaping the vision are the firms Exploration Architecture, Seawater Greenhouse Limited and Max Fordham & Partners—architects, water specialists and environmental engineers respectively. Like all areas of study, each of these three offer a vintage of expertise that bears opportunities for interconnection with others.

This triumvirate based their innovative offensive in the face of a slow-moving but devastating dilemma: the growing of the world’s deserts. With all of the issues that the planet has on its plate right now (war, recession, healthcare, global warming) the issue of desertification is not on the radar screen of many, but its existence is very real. The miles of flat, arid landscapes with their unyielding temperatures and unforgiving sandy soils expand their borders every year, swallowing more fertile land and stripping it of its moisture. Up until now we have accepted this occurrence as a problem beyond our ability to address.

But then again, maybe we can. Using an interconnected combination of Concentrated Solar Power fields and Seawater Greenhouses the system can theoretically function indefinitely with nearly no influx of new energy or resources.

Sahara Forest Diagram

How it Works:

To begin, seawater is drawn into each greenhouse complex and dripped over evaporators to be turned into vapor, creating a warm, humid environment poised for growing plants. More water suspended in the air reduces the amount of fresh water needed for direct irrigation. When the air is cycled through the greenhouse to bring more carbon dioxide to the plants, the humid air is released back into the atmosphere and adds moisture to the local environment. The design team proposes that with enough acreage, it may contribute enough added moisture to induce local rainfall.

The evaporators find their necessary power from Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) arrays stretched out across the landscape. Using mirrors to focus sunlight and heat liquid for steam production, CSP is viewed by many as the most viable source of renewable energy in the near term. It can be twice as efficient as photovoltaic panels in energy production as it uses the sun’s energy to create power. The system also produces a great deal of waste heat.

By themselves, these two systems are impressive technologies with a great deal of potential, but linked and integrated together, their possibilities rise exponentially. The excess heat of the CSP facilities can be captured through cogeneration and used for the desalination of more saltwater. The project team estimates that onsite power can desalinate 40 million cubic meters of water for terawatt-hour of harvested solar power—that is over 10.5 billion gallons. Strips of greenhouses can be arranged to shield the CSP mirror arrays and reduce dust and sand collection that lowers their efficiency. Three new export streams can emerge from each project location, all of which are in extreme demand around the globe: clean power, fresh water, fresh food.

Cyclical Progress:

As with any good system built on ecological underpinnings, its function begets its own continued success. Theoretically, as the installations grow in size and number more sand is replaced with greenhouses or planted fields. Moisture content in the air will continue to rise while the ground temperature of more acres will continue to fall. The expansion of deserts could be reversed to eventually re-vegetate some of the world’s harshest climates turning them into net producers of vital resources.

While the project is an impressive map for a regenerative, progressive model, I think that the possibilities go even further.

  • Plant waste from greenhouses is rich in nutrients and can be composted to produce a base for naturally fertilizing future crops or spread over surrounding area to instigate new native plant growth.
  • Another possibility is taking a page from the city of  Kalundborg’s playbook and using the wealth of heated salt water for fish farming. This could produce yet another food crop and another organic waste stream that can be used to create organic fertilizers.
  • So much desalination will also produce a great deal of salt, which draws us back to CSP. One of the reasons CSP seems so promising is the opportunity for power storage with heated salt solutions being one of the frontrunners. Eventually, excess power could be sold day and night to surrounding townships.

So what’s the catch? Well how much it costs to build solar greenhouses, CSP arrays and the labor to manage them all has to factor in somehow and chart a realistic time frame for expansion. There is also the fact that the Sahara is the world’s largest desert (3.3 million square miles) and constitutes nearly a quarter of Africa. Such statistics begs the question of how many facilities would have to be created before the stated goal of local climate alteration was actually achieved. The number could be staggering.

While I give the project a great deal of respect, we always have to remember that all of our operations and endeavors are subordinate to a much larger system. Even if the project does succeed, I have to ask what affect would a green Sahara have on the rest of the world’s ecosystems? Would rainfall in the Sahara prompt drier spells somewhere else? Could wind patterns or coastal currents change as a result of cooler regional temperatures? As interested as I am about the finer details that all seem to point towards success, I would also be curious about an analysis of the possibilities for global weather repercussions. Even the best of intentions do not occur in a vacuum.

Photo Credit: www.exploration-architecture.com

Infrastructural