•    Demonstrate the environmental impact of buildings and the benefits of green building.

•    Provide recommendations for implementation of a green building program for all residential and non-residential construction in the City of Dallas

The comprehensive plan states much relevant information.

•    300 billion square feet of buildings in the US are the single largest contributor to global warming in the country
•    48% of all energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in the US annually is from buildings
•    76% of all power plant generated electricity is used to operate buildings globally.
•    At the current rate of usage, the US is projected to need 1,300 to 1,900 new power plants over the next 20 years or 1 per week.

The last statistic is glaringly unrealistic, but highlights the severity of the dilemma.  So, Texans and all Americans need to change their energy consumption habits.  This is just one of the reasons the US Green Building Council developed its benchmark Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) certification program.  The Dallas City Council recognized the program’s merits back in January 2003 and made a more pronounced commitment with the 2007 report.

Not only are the LEED® certifications taking on energy efficiency, they help to assure employees of a healthy work environment.  Recently, not only public projects but also private developers have begun to realize the value of LEED® certification.  The program has expanded so much that now LEED® certifications carry value rewards because employees want to work in LEED® certified properties.

Both new and existing buildings can apply for LEED® certification.  The process is a win-win-win scenario whereby the building, the employees and the environment benefit.

Plenty of environmental clean-up is on the horizon for new President Barack Obama who is stepping into the toxic waste left behind by the Bush administration.

Bold strokes were taken by Obama, one of which is the capping of large giveaways of tax payer dough afforded to monolithic oil and gas companies.  Obama’s new budget suggests a limit for greenhouse emissions restricting some of the offenders from the free reign they have been rewarded with over the past decades.

Furthermore, Obama’s budget invades the Yucca Mountain territory where the Bush administration turned a blind eye to loosely applied regulations and restrictions regarding the dumping of toxic and nuclear waste in Nevada.  A number of issues regarding the transport, aging and disposal of nuclear waste remain unresolved in addition to the rights of Shoshone natives who are potential victims of radioactive waste the DOE plans to dump on their land.

To date, no one has specified how tons of nuclear waste is to be transported without leaving a trail of radioactive fumes throughout American air, or has anyone explained how the same toxic entrails will be permanently sealed and rendered harmless throughout the ages of relative peace or earthshaking quakes.

New Funding for Transportation Options
On a more positive note, Obama has proposed to increase the funds for lower-carbon emitting transportation options based on sustainable energy sources such as the Dallas plan to reform their entire city fleet over to electricity-based fuel alternatives.

While some are critical of Obama’s proposals and condemn his administration for omitting to address international issues that contribute to global warming, he should be commended for addressing the Americans’ own responsibility for contributions at home.  The United States is one of the foremost industrialized nations, yet it has some of more lax environmental policies for allowing greenhouse gas emissions in the world.  American deposits into the World Bank help to finance fossil fuel projects in developing countries because the US is reliant for 65 percent of its energy consumption on foreign oil.  Focusing on advancing our own technology to increase self-reliance on sustainable energy sources will go a long way toward capping global warming.

Let’s clean up our own backyard.  The neighborhood will benefit.

Batteries Use Less Energy?

Conversely, a battery does not use as much energy to cool it because it does not produce as much heat as gasoline. The process of converting battery power into useable force also requires less mechanical work, making it more energy-efficient.  If we apply a numerical value to each component of the battery-generated energy required to power a vehicle, the battery achieves a victorious seventy-two percent efficiency.

High-Five for Gasoline?
While it may seem as though battery power is a reliable alternative energy source, looking deeper into the source of battery-generated power gives us cause for skepticism. Electricity from battery power is a stored energy source, meaning that it had to be generated elsewhere.  Most power plants generate electricity with generators driven by heat engines fueled by chemical combustion or nuclear fission.  At times, kinetic energy from flowing water, moving wind, geothermal or photovoltaic sources (solar cells) is used as an alternative to or as a support for existing combustion methods.  Using sustainable energy sources to supply the charge and to contribute the stored battery power, raises the efficiency to around 65 percent.

Consider that most likely a combustion process was the generator of the stored battery power.  Combustion sources of power run at about 20 percent efficiency.  This decreases the overall efficiency of the battery to around 40 percent.  Unless you have an available source of sustainable energy such as a vast plain of Texas wind churning a multitude of turbines, the battery is only slightly more efficient than gasoline.

Taking into account the expense of the changes to the infrastructure required to convert from fossil fueled to battery-powered vehicles, is it really an affordable alternative for mere 15 percent gain in efficiency?

The American government, in collaboration with some private businesses and academic institutions, are laboring to develop and produce fuel cells because they have the potential to supply power for anything including toys, cars and entire buildings.

How does a fuel cell create energy?

A fuel cell takes stored chemical energy and converts it into electrical energy from whatever fuel you provide.  Methane or gasoline can be used, but in the pursuit of energy efficiency, hydrogen is the most popular choice.  To fuel a vehicle, the idea is to have a fuel cell that converts hydrogen and oxygen into water and produces electricity in the process.  The major chemical components inside a fuel cell are electrolytes, which prevent the chemicals from reacting against each other in ways we don’t want, and electrodes, which are the controlled impulses used to produce the desired chemical reaction.

Where can we get hydrogen?

Hydrogen works better than other chemicals for this type of fuel cell-generated energy, except that hydrogen is not readily available.  Unfortunately, hydrogen cannot be mined nor can it be harvested from somewhere or manufactured.  Fossils fuels are more easily obtained, but the conversion process required to turn gasoline into a hydrogen-rich source is complex and would take up a lot of space underneath the hood of the vehicle.  Currently, hydrogen is more expensive to generate than fossil fuel, so most people agree that this alternative is not ideal.

Are we making hydrogen fuel cells?

In 2003, President Bush instigated the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative (HFI).  This program is reinforced by the accompanying legislation called the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005).  Both of these movements are further buttressed by the Advanced Energy Initiative of 2006.  This mandate contains an intention to develop technology that will make hydrogen-based fuel cell production for vehicles a practical and affordable energy alternative by 2020. More than one billion dollars, so far, has been allocated to fuel cell research and development by the United States.

Generally, deciding that you’ll buy environmentally safe products ends at the decision; sometimes a firmer commitment is needed.  An EPA purchasing policy fulfills that needed commitment, as well as setting out standards for your company.

What is an EPA purchasing policy?
Also known as a Green purchasing policy, an EPA purchasing policy is a document that lays out what environmentally safe products your company will buy, from sustainable energy products to non-toxic pest controls.  For instance, you may decide to replace conventional paper with recycled paper.  Buying recycled paper from such-and-such a company would go into your policy.

Writing an EPA purchasing policy
A purchase policy can be as broad, or as specific, as your company needs it to be.  Here are some tips on writing your company’s EPA purchasing policy:

•    Start slow; set up test phases so any kinks can be worked out.
•    Buy the products in small amounts to make sure they meet your needs before buying them in bulk.
•    Before you establish your policy, do your research.  Make sure you know what products are available.
•    Define the reason for the policy, and what you plan to accomplish with it.  An example would be cutting back on air, land and water pollution.  Part of that might include installing a sustainable irrigation system the saves on water waste.

An EPA purchasing policy will help your business toe the environmental line, and grow the bottom line, with sustainable energy, water conservation and many other types of products.