Archive

Daily Archives: 14/11/2011



O serviço será feito na parte convencional da unidade, onde não há radioatividade


(Fotografia: Wikimedia Commons)

São Paulo – A usina nuclear Angra 1 será desligada para reparo nesta sexta-feira, às 4 horas, após a identificação de um aquecimento acima do normal em uma bucha de um dos transformadores auxiliares, informou a empresa responsável pela operação da usina, a Eletronuclear, do grupo Eletrobras.

O serviço será feito na parte convencional da unidade, onde não há radioatividade, disse a empresa.

A previsão é de que a usina seja reconectada ao Sistema Interligado Nacional (SIN) às 18 horas do mesmo dia.

A usina nuclear Angra 1, em Angra dos Reis (RJ) ficou parada de meados de setembro a 19 de outubro, para a parada programada de reabastecimento de combustível e atividades periódicas de inspeção e manutenção.

Fonte: Exame / Reuters
Original: http://bit.ly/vSZ1Qc


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              




Trash trapped near the mouth of the Los Angeles River. (Photography: Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The installation of thousands of trash screens beneath nearly every storm drain that flows into the lower Los Angeles River has been completed, authorities announced Tuesday.

The project spans 16 cities and is expected to keep 840,000 pounds of debris — the equivalent of about 450 Volkswagen Beetles — from reaching the ocean each year, according to the Gateway Authority, a coalition of cities and public water agencies in southeastern L.A. County that undertook the project using $10 million in federal stimulus dollars.

The biggest winner from the project is Long Beach, where workers routinely have to scoop floating islands of plastic bottles, grocery bags and other debris flowing from dozens of communities upstream before it litters the city’s coastline.

By joining forces with its upstream neighbors, Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster said in a news release, “We leveraged resources and took a huge collective step forward to clean up our coastline on behalf of the entire region.”

In August 2010 crews began installing the stainless steel, full-capture trash devices inside nearly 12,000 catch basins. The simple mesh contraptions sit just below the drains where water from city streets flows into the storm-water system and can catch debris as small as a cigarette butt.

Another 5,400 drains in the most-littered areas also were outfitted with street-level retractable screens as a second layer of defense.

Described as the largest debris-capturing project in the nation, the project marks the most aggressive attack yet on river trash in the Los Angeles region.

Garbage that washes off streets and highways has long been identified as a major source of pollution that can mar coastal habitat and float thousands of miles away on ocean currents.

Author: Tony Barboza
Source: Los Angeles Times
Original: http://lat.ms/t18DLd


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              



Empresa SteriPEN vai lançar um purificador de água portátil cuja bateria se carrega graças a ligação USB. Trata-se de uma Pen para campistas que funciona por recurso a raios ultravioleta.


(Fotografia: SteriPEN Freedom)

Obter água potável é um desafio constante em certas partes do mundo, e pode também representar uma dor de cabeça para os que gostem de acampar ou trilhar caminhos mais inóspitos.

Mas a empresa SteriPEN, dedicada a produtos de purificação hídrica, prepara-se para modernizar a sua linha com a SteriPEN Freedom, o mais pequeno e portátil purificador de água atualmente disponível no mercado.


(Fotografia: SteriPEN Freedom)

Este aparelho baseia-se em raios ultravioleta e é recarregável graças a uma entrada USB. Consegue desinfetar meio litro de água em apenas 48 segundos e uma só carga da sua bateria chega para 40 utilizações, ou seja, por cada vez que carregar a SteriPEN Freedom deverá ser capaz de putificar 20 litros de água.

Os potenciais usos deste aparelho em áreas com falta de água potável são óbvios, no entanto a SteriPEN afirma que este novo produto é dirigido aos campistas, montanhistas e praticantes de outras atividades semelhantes.


(Fotografia: SteriPEN Classic)

Para desinfetar meio litro de água basta que inunde a luz ultravioleta do dispositivo na água em questão. Uma luz verde surgirá passados 48 segundos para indicar que a água já é potável. Se por outro lado quiser desinfetar um litro de água, basta que repita a operação.

A SteriPEN Freedom pode ser recarregada via USB, adaptador de ficha ou ainda com diversos carregadores solares compatíveis. A empresa afirma que o tempo de vida médio do aparelho o deve tornar eficaz para 8 mil doses deste tratamento.


(Fotografia: SteriPEN Classic)

Este produto segue a linha que a SteriPEN já tinha popularizado anteriormente, por exemplo, com o seu modelo SteriPEN Classic, um modelo menos portátil e que funcionava com quatro pilhas que tinham de ser trocadas a cada 200 utilizações.

Vai estar disponível ainda este outono (pelo menos no hemisfério norte) a um preço de 119,95 dólares (85,81 euros) e pode ser encomendada no site da SteriPEN.



Autor: Carlos Afonso Monteiro
Fonte: MOVIMENTO MILÉNIO: uma iniciativa EXPRESSO e MILLENNIUM BCP
Original: http://bit.ly/rOFps7


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              



International attempts at climate regulation have failed on a number of levels. With CO2 emissions rising much more than predicted between 2009 and 2010, the goal of capping global warming at a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius now seems elusive. But political interest in changing course has waned.


A polar bear in Canada: Global CO2 emissions are strengthening climate change — leading to rising water levels on the world’s seas. The natural habitats of many animal species are threatened as a result. (Photography: REUTERS)

When Germany’s top climate researcher meets with politicians and average citizens these days, he now starts from the very beginning. Then he delivers a lecture on why the scientific community is so sure that climate change even exists. He speaks of a “purely physical” effect caused by concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere that heat up the planet by a single degree Celsius. “What’s more,” says Jochem Marotzke, the head of the German Climate Consortium, “there is the affect of water vapor, which accounts for at least another degree.”


(Der Spiegel)

Next Friday, Marotzke will travel to Berlin once again for a preparatory meeting at the Environment Ministry ahead of the next World Climate Conference in Durban, South Africa, at the end of November. He almost sounds as if his audience of politicians and ministers had never heard of climate change, as though thousands of them hadn’t thronged together at more than a dozen World Climate Conferences over the last two decades.
Marotzke, also the director of the Hamburg-based Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, has no illusions about the current importance of climate policy. “The interest in Berlin and elsewhere has cooled off palpably,” he says. The topic counts as one that doesn’t necessarily need to be addressed, he adds, “because citizens are also turning away (and) no great pressure to act is placed on the politicians.”


A coal-fired power plant in Changchun, China: In 2010, carbon dioxide emissions reached a record high, according to the US Department of Energy. The figures are even higher than those in the pessimistic scenarios that experts presented four years ago. (Photography: AP)

Still, the widespread indifference stands in disturbing contrast to the grim facts. According to the latest calculations of the US Department of Energy, CO2 emissions are rising sharply. Some 512 million more tons of greenhouse gases were emitted from smoke stacks, exhaust pipes and agricultural land.

“That means we’re beyond the scenarios with which we’re calculating the further warming of the earth,” Marotzke says. “In light of these new figures, I can only hope that the feeling of fatigue evaporates.”


Smoke billows out of a chemical plant in northern China: The new figures underline one thing in particular — the continuous failure to reach binding international agreements on emission reduction. (Photography: DPA)

The new numbers show the extent to which international climate policy has failed. At the first “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the concentration of the greenhouse gas CO2 was at 360 parts per million (ppm). In the 20 years since, it has risen to 390 ppm — and there is no end in sight to the upward trend. Year after year, representatives from almost 200 countries negotiate over how much they’ll have to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. These are mega-events, but the results remain meager. Expectations for the 17th World Climate Conference in Durban are among the lowest they’ve ever been.

Nail in the Coffin

Another setback threatens to further damage prospects at the upcoming conference. The current CO2-reduction agreement for the classic industrial countries expire at the end of 2012 with the end of the Kyoto Protocol’s timeframe. But Russia, Canada and Japan have refused to agree to new requirements as long as China — the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases — and other developing nations aren’t included. Under these circumstances, Durban could be a nail in the coffin for the Kyoto Protocol, the only binding set of rules for climate protection.


An airplane lifts off at Berlin’s Tegel Airport in Jan. 2010: According to the report, in 2010, the world emitted a total of 512 tons more greenhouse gases than it did in 2009, which represents an increase of 6 percent. (Photography: AP)

The United States and other industrialized nations are demanding that China join the international community in obliging itself to reduce its emissions. But the Chinese government rejects the argument, countering that the country continues to be a developing nation and that the classic industrialized countries are responsible for the lion’s share of the additional carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere.

Likewise, the United States has always emerged as a formidable veto power against any overly ambitious efforts to protect the climate. Granted, in 1997, the Clinton administration agreed to the Kyoto Protocol in Japan that obliged industrialized nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emission by 5 percent between 2008 and 2012 based on 1990 levels. But then-Vice President Al Gore had hardly made it back to Washington before the Republicans on Capitol Hill ripped the agreement to shreds.


Workers repair electrical wires in India: According to the US Department of Energy, the increase in emissions can primarily be attributed to the booming economies in China and India. (Photography: AP)

To this day, the massive influence that the oil and automotive industries wield over US politicies keeps the United States from agreeing to any effective international climate treaty. In fact, advisers to US President Barack Obama have gone so far as to state that “clean energy has become a dirty word in Washington.”

The accelerated emissions levels will initially have no effects on the projection models of the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “There is already so much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that our climate-change estimates for the next 20 years will remain undisturbed by them,” Marotzke says. But, he adds, if the emissions levels continue to go up, the IPCC models will have to be adjusted. “In particular,” he says, “we will then have to recalculate how temperatures will change starting in 2035.”

The Sacred Two Degrees

Scientists hold one target sacred: Beginning in 2020, there can be no further increases in greenhouse-gas emissions. “Otherwise,” Marotzke says, “it is practically impossible for us to meet our goal of (limiting global warning to) 2 degrees (Celsius) by the end of the century.”


A glacier in southwest China: In October, Chinese researchers warned of the massive melting of glaciers in the region. They believe this could lead to water shortages and floods. (Photography: DPA)

In these efforts, there is one crucial figure: 1,000 gigatons. That represents the entire amount of carbon that mankind can still emit without surpassing the 2-degree goal. If average global temperatures rise by more than this amount, there will hardly be any way to impede drastic climate changes and processes that will be irreversible over the long term, such as the total melting of Greenland’s glaciers.

“From the point of view of the earth’s atmosphere, it doesn’t really matter when we discharge these 1,000 gigatons,” Marotzke says. “But the more we nibble off the cake now, the more we will have to go without later.” Likewise, what makes Marotzke particularly pessimistic is the depressing insight that any successes the industrialized countries have with their reduction measures will be negated practically overnight by the economic boom in newly industrializing countries, such as India and China.


A coral reef in Baja, Mexico: Increases in CO2 emissions also affect the oceans because their waters absorb the CO2 and become more acidic. The acid levels affect many forms of life and coral reefs, in particular. (Photography: AFP)

Under these circumstances, Marotzke believes we are “on a course of development with CO2 emissions that makes the 2-degrees goal more and more illusory.”

The Fatal Results of a Failure to Act

When he meets with ministry officials in Berlin next week, he will be sure to show them the illustration that shows how emissions in 2100 can only be 10 percent of what they were in 2000. But, even with these warnings, Marotzke believes that politicians are increasingly less willing to face up to the realities and take action.


A lobster boat in the northeastern US state of Maine: The United States and other industrialized nations are demanding that China join the international community in obliging itself to reduce its emissions. But the Chinese government rejects the argument, countering that the country continues to be a developing nation and that the classic industrialized countries are responsible for the lion’s share of the additional carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere. (Photography: AP)

In fact, he even has a certain degree of understanding for their predicament. “No state leader will independently mandate expensive reduction measures if he sees that the others won’t go along with them,” Marotzke says. Although he acknowledges their resistance to damaging their own economies, he still believes that “taken together, this reluctance will bring about fatal results.”

Indeed, if there is one thing that Marotzke is sure of, it is this: “The laws of nature will continue to function without remorse no matter what mankind does or allows.”


A coal-fired power plant in Mongolia: The report by the US Department of Energy claims that CO2 emissions resulting from the burning of coal rose by 8 percent in 2010. (Photography: Reuters)

Author: Gerald Traufetter and Christian Schwägerl
Source: Spiegel Online International
Original: http://bit.ly/rZx1vm


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              



(Fotografia: Divulgação)

São Paulo – A moda dos carros elétricos compactos para apenas duas pessoas pegou de vez. Depois do Renault Twizy, do Audi Urban Concept e do Volkswagen Nils, quem adere à onda de dois lugares é fabricante Opel. A marca alemã leva ao Salão de Frankfurt, que começou esta semana na Alemanha, o seu protótipo Opel RAK.

Idealizado para as disputadas ruas do futuro, o carro 100% elétrico é capaz de rodar 100 km com uma única carga e a atingir velocidade máxima de 120 km/h em menos de 13 segundos. Isso sem emitir um grama sequer de poluente.

Mais, o elétrico promete baixo consumo energético, que reflete em preços mais acessíveis. Segundo a marca, o RAK é capaz de percorrer 100 km ao custo de apenas 1,36 dólares. Este bom desempnho é garantido pelo peso do veículo, cerca de um terço mais leve que um compacto moderno tradicional.

Autor: Vanessa Barbosa
Fonte: Exame
Original: http://bit.ly/oVVP0f


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              


A clear and fair incentive to pollute less


Connie Hedegaard is EU Commissioner for Climate Action. Any opinions expressed are her own.

This week the U.S. House of Representatives passed a rather unusual bill directly addressed to Europe.

Through the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act H.R. 2594, America’s legislators want to tell American airlines not to respect an EU law.

This seems to me a rather unorthodox course of action, but here in the EU we are confident that in the end the United States will respect our legislation, just as the EU respects U.S. legislation and U.S. lawmakers’ authority in U.S. airports.

After all, there is nothing new or unusual in requiring airlines to meet certain rules which, given the global nature of the industry, have international ramifications.

As Congressmen who opposed the House bill pointed out, the United States itself requires international airlines to comply with a wide range of U.S. laws when it comes to passenger, baggage and cargo security in order to do business in the U.S. Other laws also require overseas ports to put in place certain security measures before cargo can be sent to the U.S.

If the U.S. wants to handle emissions from aviation differently, that is fine; our legislation clearly envisages that if a country outside the EU takes ‘equivalent measures’ to address aviation emissions then all incoming flights from that country can be exempted from the EU system.

We are ready to engage constructively with the U.S. and all other partners about such an approach. We also recognise and encourage agreeing to global measures to reduce GHG emissions from aviation. In the event of such agreement, we could adapt our legislation.

To us, what matters, is that aviation also contributes to fighting climate change.

Why is this important?

Our law addresses a major environmental issue of our times, namely the vertiginous growth in carbon emissions from aviation which is contributing to global warming and climate change. The global body for civil aviation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), estimates that emissions from the sector will increase by up to 88 percent between 2005 and 2020 and by up to 700 percent by 2050.

Such growth scenarios are completely at odds with the internationally agreed objective of holding global warming below 2C (3.6F) compared with the temperature in pre-industrial times. To respect that ceiling, all sectors will need to contribute.

Despite work and pressure from the EU, states in ICAO have not yet agreed on a global solution to limit aviation emissions. No one has fought harder than the EU to find a global solution- and we are still trying to reach agreement.

Faced with the urgent need to address climate change, the EU chose to go forward by bringing the aviation sector into our emissions trading system (ETS) while continuing to press for a global solution.

The EU ETS is a cap and trade system designed to keep emissions covered by the scheme within a pre-defined limit. It’s a pollution ceiling. While the EU ETS is moving towards making industrial installations buy their allowances, airlines will receive more than four in five of their allowances for free. For next year the figure will be 85 percent and for the period 2013-2020 it will be 82 percent.

Our legislation applies to all airlines taking off from or landing in the EU, whatever their nationality. We have made the fair choice of applying a measure to all airlines and therefore avoid creating unacceptable distortion of competition.

Being in the ETS means that airlines will need to have emission allowances that cover the emissions along the entire route of flights to and from the EU.

This approach is specifically provided for in ICAO’s Guidance on Emissions Trading, which considers the alternative – delimitation based on national airspace – as “impracticable.”

ICAO recognised as far back as 2004 that market-based measures have a role to play in tackling aviation emissions, that among such measures emissions trading is preferable to taxes and charges, and that emissions trading for international aviation was better implemented by including aviation in States’ own trading systems than by creating a new, single ICAO system.

In other words: our system gives airlines a clear incentive to become more efficient and pollute less.

That is in everybody’s interest.

And where airlines do need to buy additional allowances through government auctions, the auction revenues will be used to tackle climate change in the EU and third countries. To ensure transparency, the EU Member States will publish reports on how they spend the revenues.

How much will our system add to the cost of a ticket? Any increase will be modest at most. They will largely depend on whether the airlines decide to pass on the market value of the 85 percent allowances they get for free. Costs can thus range between $1.40 and $8.60 a ticket each way on a transatlantic or other long-haul flight at current carbon prices.

Let’s take the example of a one-way flight from New York to London. The estimated CO2 emissions per passenger would be around 385 kilograms. The value of the allowances that need to be surrendered would be $5.40 per passenger at current carbon prices but, given the high level of free allowances to airlines, the actual cost for the airlines would be only around $1 to $2 – which can hardly be an insurmountable issue for them.

Europe’s legislation is a key contribution to global climate action. We encourage others to join in our efforts.

Author: Connie Hedegaard
Photography: B Mathur / REUTERS
Source: Reuters
Original: http://reut.rs/rUfp7G


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              



A primeira etapa da usina no Marrocos custará US$ 822 milhões e produzirá 150 megawatts em seus quase 12 quilômetros quadrados


Segundo os cientistas da Desertec, toda a incidência solar dos desertos seria suficiente para abastecer o mundo inteiro em apenas seis horas. (Fotografia: Wikimedia Commons)

São Paulo – O Desertec é um projeto criado há dois anos, que prevê a construção de usinas solares em áreas de grande incidência solar, como o deserto do Saara e outras áreas do Oriente Médio e Europa. A primeira usina será construída no Marrocos, a partir de 2012.

A planta de energia solar concentrada (CSP) terá capacidade para produzir até 500 megawatts de energia. Somente a primeira fase do projeto contará com investimento de US$ 2,8 bilhões, o cálculo total previsto é de meio trilhão de dólares.

O Desertec é um projeto ambicioso, que se for concluído será capaz de suprir a necessidade energética de até 20% de toda a Europa em 2050. Além disso, essa energia poderia ser utilizada por países orientais e africanos. Diversas empresas europeias já demonstraram interesse em apoiar financeiramente esta ideia.

A unidade do Marrocos deve levar de dois a quatro anos para ser concluída. Após a primeira etapa, que custará US$ 822 milhões, ela já poderá produzir 150 megawatts em seus quase 12 quilômetros quadrados. Todo esse potencial energético deve ser usado pela União Europeia em seu compromisso com a redução dos gases de efeito estufa e em seu objetivo de que no futuro ao menos 20% de toda a energia consumida no continente seja proveniente de fontes renováveis.

Segundo os cientistas da Desertec, toda a incidência solar dos desertos seria suficiente para abastecer o mundo inteiro em apenas seis horas. Se apenas, 0,3% desta área desértica for coberta com painéis solares já seria possível satisfazer toda a demanda de energia da Europa.

Fonte: Exame / CicloVivo
Original: http://bit.ly/tKGqgd


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS:
              



Who will foot the bill for green development in poor countries?


Sunshine and leverage

AMID the wreckage of the 2009 Copenhagen climate summit, an agreement that rich countries would, by 2020, furnish developing ones with $100 billion a year to help them mitigate and adapt to global warming looked like a rare achievement. This commitment will also be a big talking point at the next annual UN summit, due to start in Durban on November 28th. With almost no hope of a big new pact, many expect progress on the formation of a global Green Climate Fund to be one of its few successes. Yet there is huge uncertainty about how developed countries will deliver on their promise, including what role the fund will play.

The good news is that there is already a surprisingly large flow of climate finance—as investment into warming abatement and resilience measures is called. According to the first big study of the issue, by Climate Policy Initiative (CPI), a think-tank, at least $97 billion a year is going to developing countries, mostly from private lenders in rich countries. They contributed around $55 billion, with another $39 billion drawn from public budgets and capital markets by multilateral and bilateral development banks. Western taxpayers provided at least $21 billion of the latter amount. Less than $3 billion flowed from Western carbon markets (to offset emissions) and as philanthropy (see chart).

This does not mean the rich world is close to fulfilling its promise at Copenhagen. That accord referred to “new and additional” money, and it is obvious that most of last year’s investment would have happened in any event. It is also unclear what sorts of funding should count towards the totals that were pledged. The Copenhagen Accord refers to both public and private sources of capital. Yet many developing countries and NGOs argue that it should be aid money, delivered from public budgets, and with no strings attached. A more coherent view is that it should be money used to cover the “incremental costs” of low-carbon developments. This is a term in the growing lexicon of climate finance that refers to the additional cost of low-carbon investments—building a wind farm, say, compared with lower-cost alternatives such as coal-fired power stations. By contrast the CPI study, which uses broad definitions of climate-related schemes—to include railways as well as renewable energy and forestry, for example—captures the total sums invested.

Its findings are nonetheless striking. The figure of $97 billion, caveats admitted, is much bigger than most people, the study’s authors included, would have expected. Andrew Steer, the World Bank’s special envoy for climate change, attributes this partly to an exaggerated impression of paralysis created by the UN process. “The world of action on climate change is a long, long way ahead of the world of negotiation,” he says. Most progress has been made on measures to mitigate warming, such as renewable energy, which account for $93 billion of CPI’s total estimate. Last year about $200 billion was invested in renewable energy, low-carbon transport and energy efficiency in developing countries—more than a third of the global total.

The magnitude of the private sector’s contribution to climate finance suggests an obvious lesson for the Green Fund. It needs to be designed in such a way as to encourage much more of the same. And with the global investment industry sitting on over $100 trillion of assets, this would be true even if Western governments had $100 billion to spare from their budgets, which they do not.

The ability of development banks to obtain large amounts of private capital through borrowing also suggests how this might be done. The loans they dispense are further multiplied when it comes to individual projects, because their funding encourages additional private investment. According to the World Bank, loans issued at market rates by multilateral lenders are typically leveraged with private capital by a factor of three to six, and soft loans and grants by a factor of eight to ten.

This suggests the promised $100 billion a year could, if loosely defined, be raised with a relatively small contribution from Western taxpayers. According to a proposal by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, a research firm, it might consist of $30 billion of equity, some of which could be provided by developing-country investors, which would then be used to raise $70 billion of cheap debt, $50 billion of which would come from private lenders. Having thus brought down the cost of capital, the “incremental costs” of renewable-energy projects over the standard sort would be relatively low. These could be covered by between $5 billion and $10 billion a year from public budgets, philanthropy and new sources of cash, such as taxes on bunker fuels or carbon markets.

This plan would not impress most developing countries. Yet it would at least be feasible, fiscally and politically, for rich ones. Limiting the role of the new fund would reduce a risk of it getting bogged down by disagreements between its many owners. It would also put more onus on developing countries to become more attractive recipients of investment, green or otherwise. Liberalising financial sectors and scrapping wasteful fuel subsidies would be good ways to begin.

Source: The Economist
Original: http://econ.st/uTt6nF


FOLLOW US / SIGA-NOS: