Charge iPods through body movements or simply in the wind

Sorry, the technology isn’t there right now, but it’s conceivable – by using nanowires. All we’ll have to do is to move around or simply expose them to a light force, like a breeze or even water. Nanowires are extremely flexible and given their width is 1/5,000th of the diameter of a human hair, it doesn’t take much to bend them. These particular nano generators would contain zinc oxide which, when bent or stretched, produces small amounts of energy. So no more batteries in future, yippee! BUT: it’ll take a while to develop a generator with an adequate output of voltage and power.

[Via Alternative Energy]

Related articles by Zemanta

• Piezoelectric Nanowires Could Power Future Gadgets Using Blood Flow [Nanotech] (i.gizmodo.com)
• A light breeze, a beating heart could power mobile gadgets: research (cbc.ca)
• Flowing Blood Could Power iPods and Cell Phones (textually.org)
• Hamsters Get Nanotechnology Now But We Could Be Wating for Ten Years (wired.com)
• Piezoelectric nanowires could lead to blood-powered iPods, cellphones (engadget.com)
• The next not-so-big thing: nanogenerators (sciam.com)

Interview with marine biologist Boris Worm on overfishing, aquaculture and other ecological problems and solutions

NaturalNews‘ editor Mike Adams interviewed well-known marine biologist Boris Worm on almost everything one can think of when it comes to the ecological threats to our oceans: from overfishing and aquaculture to the effects of climate change and pollution on the marine environment and the enormous amounts of trash floating on ocean surfaces. But it’s not all doom and gloom: Worm also talks about organisations that for example work on saving sharks or actions consumers can take to save our ocenas, like using seafood choice cards in the US; he also mentions a range of good websites such as Marine Photobank or Seafood Choices Alliance. And all that on top of many links the interview transcript provides. Another good job by Mike Adams!

Monsanto cannot be trusted in relation to the HR 875 bill

So far I had published two posts on activists’ concerns about the HR 875 bill destroying organic agriculture in America: one with an activist video calling for efforts to reject the bill and another with a post by nonny mouse on Crooks & Liars, distancing him/herself (?) from comments he/she (?) had made earlier in support of the concerns against Monsanto. At the time I was quite skeptical myself of the claim that HR 875 will destroy organic growing the States (despite my perception of Monsanto being pure evil), but now I’m getting more and more convinced that the bill indeed has the potential to destroy the organic industry in America or at least do irrepairable damage to it.

After all: for years Monsanto has been successful in destroying the livelihood of individual organic farmers first by knowingly encouraging the risk that their crops will be contaminated by the company’s genetically modified pollen carried by the wind and insects (rendering their crops worthless as ‘organic’ crops), and then suing those farmers for using GM seeds when they replanted them next season.

This is by far not the only case of unethical behaviour on Monsanto’s side; the list, too long to write about here, includes the company’s direct involvement in the development of the first nuclear weapons, being the main producer for Agent Orange and DDT, lieing about the dangers of pesticides and artificial sweeteners (which it also produced), lieing about the effects of the weed killer Roundup, damaging the health of its employees and of residents in and around its production facilities, bribing government officials, stealing seeds in developing countries and then slapping patents on them and wanting to charge the local farmers in those countries for using them despite them and their ancestors having cared for them for thousands of years (biopiracy), suppressing findings of the serious adverse health effects of its GM products on rats, manufacturing bovine growth hormones that produce cancer in women and children, having produced a legacy in polluting the environment – all in all having a very long record of fraud, cover-up, bribery, deceit, and disdain for the public interest.

Having read the article below on the HR 875 bill by Stephen Lendman, I now come to the conclusion that activists’ concerns in the US about the future of their organic industry are indeed valid. Monsanto cannot be trusted, and I think that it is highly probable that the company has indeed sponsored the legislation.

Read also:

• No HARMonization Against Health Freedom

Related articles by Zemanta

• Food, Lies, Monsanto – And The Food Safety Working Group (friendseat.com)
• Hormone Free Milk in Schools (chefann.com)

Wanna have a green kitchen? Start with these 10 items

Blisstree does not only have a nice name, but also quite a few good ideas – like these ones below for a green kitchen. I was happy to realise that we can cover 50% of the list, but at the same time it also raises my guilt in some quarters 😉 .

1. Decent vegetarian cookbook: A diet with less meat is important if your goal is green living. Meat can take a toll on the environment and your body. You don’t need to go totally vegetarian or vegan, but you should incorporate a few meatless meals a week (read how the planet will benefit).
2. Ice pop molds: This is especially a must if you have kids, but even if not they come in handy. Ice pops molds allow you to use up leftovers (smoothies, yogurt, fruits, etc), and cut down on store bought dessert waste.
3. Silicone: Silicone items rock because they last forever and are reusable and non-toxic. Some ideas for starters include silicone muffin cups and silicone baking sheets which cut out paper cups and foil waste.
4. Reusable coffee filter: If you’re still using paper filters – why? There are way better options on the market. Reusable coffee filters last for years, save you money, and cut out waste.
5. Stack o’ cleaning cloths: Using paper towels comes at a huge eco-cost when you could use reusable cloths instead. Cloths last for years and don’t fill your trash bin.
6. A dishwasher: One major recent study (among others) shows that dishwashers use less energy, water, and soap than hand washing.
7. Organics: You don’t need to hard core pack your shelves with organics. That’s excessive and a waste of money. That said, there are some foods you should always buy organic including the newest dirty dozen.
8. Tap water or a filter: If your goal is green, forget buying bottled water. Drink tap water or filtered.
9. A dedicated home recycling area: All homes need an organized recycling center, and the kitchen is the perfect place to create one. It’s handy and handy means you’ll recycle like you should.
10. Your BIG green kitchen step – purchase green and safe dishes: This is bigger, because you may need to sort out the toxic from the non-toxic dishes you already have, and then set aside a budget to purchase more sustainable options. However, bear in mind, that change can occur slowly. Switching out your dishes doesn’t need to happen in one swift weekend.

Photo: Flickr – youngster

Organics are doing better in the UK than expected during the current financial crisis

Photo: http://www.organicsbydesign.com/

I’m not sure what the situation is in Australia, but when I look at the business our local food coop is doing, I could imagine we have a similar situation here like the one in the UK, which the BusinessGreen post below is commenting on:

Sales of organic products slowed last year according to the latest figures from the Soil Association, but still fared significantly better than anticipated by some analysts who had predicted that organic and green consumer products would be particularly badly hit by the recession.

Far from collapsing, UK sales of organic products increased 1.7 per cent last year to just over £2bn, according to data from the Soil Association, the body responsible for certifying goods as organic.

The Soil Association’s annual market report admitted that the increase in revenue was partly the result of food price inflation, which masked a decrease in sales by volume. But a spokeswoman for the organisation said that consumer demand for organic products had held up far better than expected by some analysts who had predicted sales could fall by as much as 30 per cent as a result of the economic crisis.

“There has been a slowdown in sales by volume, and it is difficult to predict what will happen in 2009,” she said. “But some supermarkets have reported that they have seen sales stabilise in the first few months of this year and there is evidence that there is a sizeable core of consumers who remain fully committed to buying organic products.”

The report, which will be largely welcomed by producers of both organic and green consumer products, suggested that for many consumers, interest in environmentally sustainable products is proving surprisingly resistant to the economic slowdown.

A survey of organic shoppers carried out by the Soil Association found that while 15 per cent expected to spend less on organic products, 36 per cent intended to spend more. “There is a core of consumers who are in no mood to ditch their commitment to organic products,” the report said. “They are far more likely to cut their spending on eating out, leisure activities and holidays than to reduce what they spend on organic food.”

However, across the entire organic sector the figures showed a mixed picture, with Tesco reporting that sales fell almost 10 per cent last year, while Asda saw organic sales increase 25 per cent, albeit from a lower starting point.

Similarly, sales of organic poultry, dairy, textiles and health and beauty products all enjoyed significant increases in sales, while the more established organic fruit and veg sector saw a sizeable sales decline.

Peter Melchett, Soil Association policy director, said that while the sector was suffering along with the rest of the retail industry, the figures suggested there is an “underlying resilience” in the organic market, which suggests it will ” grow again once the economy picks up”.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Organic industry reports better than expected sales (lightbulbs.org)

GM and Segway conjure up PUMA, a mobility pod

G.M.’s P.U.M.A. prototype in Manhattan.

The New York Times reported of a venture that makes sense: GM and Segway got together to develop prototypes of a vehicle that could revolutionise transport: the P.U.M.A. (short for the rather mouthful description Personal Urban Mobility and Accessibility vehicle, a term that must have been invented by an engineer). First good thing: the Puma prototype cost “only one half of one percent of G.M’s typical engineering budget” for a year, which shows that transport modes development does not have to break the bank, especially at a time where GM actually is facing the fate of being broken. Secondly, the Puma would also not cost the Earth: it’s small (low material needs for production), it’s electric (no greenhouse gases) and it doesn’t need highways and extensive road networks. As a kind of self-service rikshaw, it’s ideal for use in hourly rental services like Zipcar, City Car Share or I-Go , which means it has the potential to become one of these paradigm shifts needed to transform our car society into a mobility one.

The Puma is a larger, two-passenger, sit-down version of the Segway PT, with two gyroscopically balanced wheels. The prototype has minimal bodywork (which really could stay that way), even though podlike enclosures are imagined for production (Jim Motavalli from the NYT pointed out that it looks a bit like computer mice on wheels). It is powered by lithium-ion batteries and has a 35-mile range and 35 m.p.h. top speed. A three-hour charge costs 35 cents. It is, in essence, a neighborhood electric vehicle, or NEV.

There could be more futuristic options available with the Puma. Larry Burns, G.M.’s vice president for research and development and strategic planning, said that Puma vehicles would be designed to tap into the two-way communications made possible by G.M.’s OnStar technology, which has six million North American subscribers. The vision is expansive: using “vehicle to vehicle,” or V2V, communications, these “100 percent digital” devices would communicate with one another over a quarter-mile range to prevent collisions, eventually allowing what G.M. calls “autonomous driving and parking.”

There’s more: the pods would also be equipped to communicate with the smart grid of the future (as is the Aptera EV, another podlike electric vehicle that is due to be introduced in Spring), returning electricity to utilities during times of peak demand. That’s not V2V, it’s V2G — vehicle to grid.

The problem though with NEVs is that the public isn’t ready for them, which of course is partly due to the car industry not being ready to move away from the good old car, and governments and the oil lobby not wanting to change their thinking about tranport. So it’s no surprise, that Ford abandoned its NEV when it sold the Norwegian company that made it, Think Nordic, at the end of 2002. Fewer than 6,000 vehicles were sold in the United States that year. Chrysler still sells Global Electric Motorcars vehicles, which have had some success but mainly in gated communities. Let’s hope the Puma will have a brighter future.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Wheels: G.M. Conjures a People-Moving Pod (wheels.blogs.nytimes.com)
• GM and Segway Look Ahead…To An Electric Rickshaw? (blogs.thecarconnection.com)
• GM sees an electric, 2-wheel future (money.cnn.com)
• GM and Segway create new vehicle (news.bbc.co.uk)
• GM, Segway Team Up To Build Urban Vehicle (cbsnews.com)