www.everythingsgonegreen.co.uk

So we’ve had Google Chrome, Google Buzz, Google Wave, Google Labs, Google Docs, Google Mail and now Google Wind Farms.

OK, not really, that last one we made up, but it might as well be real seeing as Google, the search giant, has invested $38.8 million in a wind farm (approximately £25.3 million). Apparently this is the first time that Google has made a “direct investment in a utility-scale renewable energy project”.

It also seems that Google has taken a long time to act in directly investing in clean energy since we reported, way back in 2007, on Google’s Renewable Energy Goal. Back then the philanthropic arm of the behemoth, Google.org, was talking up its RE<C project: Renewable Energy cheaper than Coal.

Now considering the carbon footprint of a Google search, which was quoted as being a wild stab between 0.2g and 7g for every search, it’s about time Big G did something to clean up its own act. Back in January 2009 there were an estimated 200 million searches daily on the Internet, so if that was all on Google we can only estimate between 40,000 and  1.4 million metric tonnes of carbon emitted daily in the process of  powering the machines that power search.

So this investment by Google, albeit late, is very welcome. The wind farm, developed by Next era Energy Resources is purported to develop  around 169.5 megawatts of power or enough to power 55,000 homes (Is that American homes or British homes? Remember that per capita electricity consumption in the US is around 1460 watts per person when compared to 667 watts per person in the UK  but is an almighty 3152 watts per person in Iceland whilst the world average consumption is 297 watts per person. Source. But that’s a whole topic for discussion on another day)

We’d be interested if anybody’s done the maths to work out just how many Google rack servers this wind farm in North Carolina will power, so if you have any idea we’d be really pleased to hear from you.

Today a contractor turned up on behalf of South East Water and installed a water meter at my request. It was a pretty quick and easy job and the water meter was actually installed at the point in the public highway (the footpath at the end of my drive actually) where the water pipes into my property rather than in the house as I had suspected (I was concerned it would be yet another  a big ugly box just like the gas and electric meters that take up space inside an understairs cupboard in the hallway)

I have to admit, the main reason for getting a water meter installed was a financial one. Currently I occupy a 3-bedroomed semi-detached house on my own whilst my better half and daughter spend an extended period of time abroad. The local council reduce my council tax rates for single occupancy but the water company do not. The annual bill for water is approximately £320 and that is based on the rateable value of the property.

Somewhere down the line you can only assume that the water companies have estimated the average use and cost of water supply, drainage and sewerage for a typical 3-bed semi with X amount of people living there. In my case that doesn’t apply so it makes pefect sense to be metered – So, presumably, the cost of my water bills should  come down.

Now here’s the green bit…

Because this is a green-thinking household there is a bath in the house but showers are more than 99% of the time. A shower uses a third of the volume of water that a bath does (plus it’s quicker to take a shower than run a bath, as we all know) OK, there is a Turner Monsoon pump fitted to boost the water pressure of the shower (and it uses electricity) but that’s because the water pressure is really pathetic in the bathroom and it’s virtually unusable without a boost. Continuing to have showers rather than baths will keep the water consumption down. Winner.

Then there’s the fact that  a low-flush toilet was installed in the bathroom, the only WC in the house. Not only does it use less water to flush than the previous Armitage Shanks cistern from 1964 but it has a dual-flush that uses less water (depending on whether you flush number 1s or number 2s ). Winner #2.

Also, by not driving a car, partly out of green choice, partly for health & fitness and partly for financial reasons, the cars don’t get washed. Winner #3.

And then there’s the water butt in the garden. Because the local council had a great deal on a compost bin we saved enough money to have a water butt purchased & delivered for the same cost as had we just had the composting bin on its own. Winner #4.

So it looks like this could be a win-win situation – Not only does this household save water but it saves money too. If you’re green and you haven’t got a water meter installed then it might be time to consider doing so. I’ll keep you posted as to how long it is before the water company start reducing our water bills – you know what these big companies are like when it comes to letting go of your cash…

Footnote: I just had a look at the volumetric water meter manufacturer’s website. Being a marketing guy myself I wasn’t totally enamoured at the language used for the V210 meter:

V200 and V210 volumetric meters are designed to maximise revenue collection.

Now I know the website is not consumer-focused but when they stumble across the term “maximise revenue collection” it doesn’t sound fair does it? Maybe I should suggest to the manufacturer that they use the term “optimise revenue collection” – that would be far more agreeable, don’t you think?

I’m currently staying in Germany, the land of recycling, where they’ve had recycling machines for years, so it’s nice to see that we’re catching up in England and the county of Lancashire has now its first reverse vending machine.

Blackpool and The Fylde College has installed Lancashire’s first Reverse Vending Recycling Machine at their new University Centre. Students and staff are being encouraged to recycle more bottles & cans. Every can or bottle that is placed in the machine is a unit worth 5 pence and vouchers are issued to spend in the new Grads Café Canteen in the Central Hub.

The innovative reverse vending machine not only compacts and saves recyclable materials but also monitors and records the types of units deposited, allowing the data to be viewed online so that the college can review the success of the vending initiative.

Ruth Paisley, Vice Principal of Resources & Planning at Blackpool & The Fylde College commented:

“We’re really pleased to be leading the way environmentally with innovative new ideas and a commitment to reducing our impact on the environment.

“We were one of few projects committed to achieving a post-construction BREEAM ‘Excellent’ merit, meaning we have stuck to our plans and not compromised on environmental impact in order to cut costs.

“I’m sure the ReVend machine will also give students and staff even more of an incentive to recycle their waste.”

It would be great to see this initiative extended to other schools & colleges and even better to see reverse vending machines in every high street in Britain, so let’s hope this is the first of many. If you’re interested in reverse vending machines then pay a visit to the Reverse Vending Corporation.

A report today from Britain’s Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has tipped “Cleantech and renewables… to become two of the most important sectors of the economy.”

The encouraging news comes from a survey of British business leaders who have also tipped technology and media to be growth sectors in the UK over the next decade.

43% of the business leaders questioned considered that cleantech will grow at the fastest pace by 2020, followed by science & technology (20%) then media & entertainment (15%).

Whilst the UK government is mainly interested in the economic aspect that new growth areas will have on the country, in order to pull us out of recession and keep us competitive in the world marketplace, it’s very encouraging for the population at large; if Britain is to see growth in cleantech & renewables then there will be investment in green research and green jobs will be created. Although why the Vestas wind turbine plant in the Isle of Wight was allowed to close with a loss of around 700 jobs still remains a mystery (and a crying shame) when Number 10 are touting the benefits of a green future for this country.

The government have also recently launched their iawards competition for British companies to compete in, demonstrating their skills and innovations. Aswell as combating aspects such as terrorism and an ageing population, the green aspects of the iawards include

Preserving finite natural resources in the face of population growth and climate change

So let’s hope that the government puts its money where its mouth is and pushes the green agenda so that we can go to Cop 15, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (7-18 December 2009) with a genuinely green direction that can contribute to cutting carbon emissions. 80% by 2030? Let’s hope so!

Friends, Britons, countrymen… lend me your ears.

Today, Friday 10th July 2009, is supposedly Green Britain Day. The concept has been thought up by French nuclear energy giants EDF.

However, as has been said , this whole concept is a complete sham because:

1. EDF are French not British.
2. EDF are not green because they are the world’s biggest corporate producer of nuclear waste.
3. The green union flag has been stolen from British wind-power generators Ecotricity.

So really it’s not Green Britain Day but rather Greenwash Day. Do not be fooled by the company that:

1. Has Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s brother, Andrew Brown, as their Media Director (funny that, aye?)
2. Has spent a reported £50 million in advertising revenue on the campaign.
3. Brought Britain’s nuclear energy generator, British Energy, for some £25 billion.

Dale Vince, CEO of Ecotricity, is right in saying that this could be the biggest greenwash in corporate history, so shame on EDF for these bully-boy tactics.

Have you seen those green union flags doing the rounds? On the 10th June this tweet came from @ecotricity on twitter:

The Green Britain flag you may have seen on the TV etc is not ours! EDF the French nuclear power company has stolen it!

The very next day I spotted one of the green union flags in the nearby town of Aldershot on a billboard in the High Street. This street advertising was part of a campaign which has been gathering momentum both online and on TV with what seems like a huge campaign.

EDF, or Electricité de France, seem to be pumping millions of pounds into their campaign of the first Green Britain Day on Friday 10th July. They’re also the official sponsors of the 2012 Olympics in London. So apart from sponsoring a huge international event with one of the worst logos ever designed they’ve stolen someone else’s rather good imagery.

Ecotricity have been using the green union flag for a number of years now and it has become synonymous with their brand – they are British and they are green, so to have a French nuclear company effectively “trade off” the brand that has been created by Ecotricity over the years seems a little shady to say the least. Ecotricity may be a smaller company and less well known, they also spend less on their advertising because they have an organic reputation and they spend more money on generating clean, renewable energy rather than wasting money in the advertising game.

So it’s no wonder that Ecotricity’s CEO Dale Vince is rather annoyed with EDF, calling it The Green Union Hi Jack. Take a look at Dale’s blog to see how the Ecotricity vans have been branded and EDF have copied them.

To add injury to insult, EDF are also the world’s third largest nuclear polluter, beaten only by the USA and Canada, so EDF are then by definition the world’s largest corporate nuclear polluter. They burn lots of coal too.

So apart from the blatant plagiarism, the “trading off” another company’s image & credentials, EDF could be pulling off one of the greatest acts of Greenwash and the British public need to know that they’re being lied to, which is a shame really as the EDF campaign is in partnership with the much-loved Eden Project. There is a Green Britain facebook campaign that people can join.

The threat of legal action against EDF remains a real possibility after they were apparently asked to desist from using the green union flag that Ecotricity had commissioned and used for a number of years. EDF are understood to be “disappointed” by Ecotricity’s stance, although whether this came from EDF’s Media Director, who just happens to be the brother of illustrious PM Gordon Brown, is not known.

We’ll keep you posted.

I was in Oxfordshire the other week taking a look at the Uffington Horse, a huge prehistoric horse figure marked on a hillside in chalk, when I looked down from the ancient slopes and spotted three wind turbines.

Being in Farnborough, Hampshire, we don’t have any wind turbines down here, although there is one powering a business park about 10-15 miles away at Reading in Berkshire. So you can imagine my delight at knowing I was not far from seeing my first wind turbines close-up. What’s more, I was wearing my favourite Mono Turbine t-shirt, so it was almost as if I was destined to see these great pieces of engineering.

I drove a little way from the Uffington Horse in search of the wind generators and found them in a field which was nicely marked with an informative sign. I was standing before Westmill Windfarm and took a stroll nearer to satisfy my curiosity.

No, these windfarms are not noisy. The periodic “swoosh” as the blade spins past was all I could hear with the faint hum of the equipment at the base of the tower. The main tower was 50 metres high and the blades are 30 metres in length, so when the blades are pointing straight up the whole setup is 80 metres or approximately 240 feet high. That’s impressive.

It was genuinely awe inspiring to see these wind turbines and I think it would be even more impressive to see a huge windfarm, but we’ll have to wait for that one

The first time I saw the Eden Project was probably in or just after the first year after it opened, 2001. Once a quarry, or more accurately, a china clay pit, this big hole in the ground has been radically transformed into the incredible place that is the Eden Project with its trademark biodomes.

Back then it was just being populated; the domes were there with their own environments but the “pit” was a sparsely-planted. Now it has grown to maturity and what a splendid place the Eden Project is.

Apart from the biodomes there’s a couple of new features. There wasn’t a bridge there last time, nor the ice-skating rink (although the building might have been there) and then there’s The Core, a really interesting building, looking like the shell of a horse chestnut and housing some great interactive features for the kids & the adults too.

Then there’s WEEE man. Made out of all manner of rubbish, WEEE man is a giant sculpture comprising everything from washing machine drums to computer mice, a microwave oven, an old Flymo mower… WEEE man was built to promote understanding of the European Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive.

So what do we now do with waste electrical/electronic equipment? We reduce, reuse, recycle and make great big towering scultptures out of it.

The biodomes (or biomes) are as I remember them. I visited the warm temperate dome first and explored olive groves, cork trees & vineyards of the Mediterranean, South African finebos and California. This is a fun biome, full of plants & sculptures, and a few British birds flitting around.

My favourite though I saved ’til last. I took off my gore-tex alpine jacket, fleece & merino fleece (yes, it was a cold day in southwest England) and strolled into the tropical biome. Wow. It was hot & humid and totally awesome. It really was like being in another world in there and I stayed in this particular biome for a good couple of hours.

The tropical biome is by far the biggest dome and houses a rainforest. It’s hot in there and damp, there are banana plants, spices, palms, sugar cane, rice, rubber, bamboo… you name it, this is an incredible space. When it’s quiet and the kids behave it’s really idyllic in there.

But most of all the Eden Project is totally educational. It gives you an insight into faraway places, the plants, the lives of the people and their livelihoods. I’m inspired to go see a real rainforest now.

If you pay for your day ticket and sign up for “gift aid” (giving away the tax to the charity, the Eden Project is a charity BTW) then they will give you a year’s entry for free. The snowdrops are out and the daffodils are starting to spring forth, so I might try and pop back when spring is in full flow and then again in the summertime.

If you haven’t been, go see the Eden Project, it’s highly recommended for the kids and for the grown-ups

A couple of days ago we brought you a story from The Times that “revealed” the CO₂ emissions of a Google search by Harvard University Physicist Alex Wissner-Gross.

With The Times quoting the 7g/search and, later in the day, Google responding with their 0.2g/search figure we suspected that something was very wrong here. It was a bit like a debate over something costing £7 when it was actually on sale for 20p (Or $7 when it was priced at 20c for our American guests) So we naturally and logically reserved judgement, promising to report back to you if we had any further developments.

According to TechNewsWorld, Wissner-Gross was a little upset by The Times for a number of good reasons.

Firstly, Wissner-Gross says he never mentions Google in his report. The Times seems to have over egged this point for some reason and Wissner-Gross believes that, for some reason, somebody had an axe to grind with Google.

Secondly, the report does not single out ANY search engine or company for their energy use and emissions. The report is generic in that it calculates that it takes 20 milligrams of CO2 per second to view a webpage.

The Times then used the analogy of the boiling kettle to illustrate the comparative energy use and we followed on that flow to compare the claim vs. the counter-claim. Wissner-Gross says he has

“no idea where they [The Times] got those statistics.”

If you read the TechNewsWorld story, a spokesman for Google says that Larry Page & Sergei Brin, the founders and heads of Google, are very passionate about the environment. He quotes numerous initiatives by Google to cut emissions and states the business case that cutting energy use for an organisation such as Google obviously cuts costs too, and that’s all good for the bottom line.

So the question still remains unanswered as to why The Times name-dropped Google for their alleged energy consumption and why those claims were “accredited” to the Harvard scientist. As Wissner-Gross closes his interview with TNW:

The short answer is, it’s a really easy way to sell papers. Google is a very successful company and it’s a very easy way to get readership by making grandiose claims about them.