4 smart thermostats that save money and energy

4 smart thermostats that save money and energy

By Katherine Gray, Tecca

Published on usatoday.com

Posted 3h 7m ago, updated 1d 21h ago

Link:http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/story/2012-05-06/smart-thermostats/54750056/1

Summary: 4 brand new types of thermostats have been invented to save the environment. One, seen in the picture to the left is called “The Nest” is new and improved to learn the energy and heating usage of your home and make a note in its system to help save money, and the environment. The thermostat raises or lowers its temperature or usage gauge when you leave, or when you are in the house. It works with any type of power source your home uses like solar, gas, geothermal, and heating oil. Its calibrating system notices if you are home or not and will control the amount of energy being used in your house. If you want more or less while you are not at home you can simple override the Nest’s orders from your smart phone or any internet source. By cutting down on heating and electricity use you are saving yourself some money and you are helping the environment by not wasting its fossil fuels and natural resources used for your home.  

Opinion: I think that this is a great tool to use because everyone has smart phones these days and I know that sometimes when you leave the house you forget to turn the lights off. This wastes up to 7 or 8 hours of electricity when no one is even home. This would be a good idea to use if you are not going to be home for a long time like if you are on vacation. Like in the summer I know that when we turn off the air right before we leave, it is saving energy, but when we get home it is super hot in the house. If we had this thermostat we would be able to turn on the air right before we got home, so we could still save energy, and not have to worry about the house being uncomfortable.

Questions:
1: What flaws does this thermostat have?

2: Is there any aspect of this idea you would change to make it better or more efficient?

3: Do you really think it would save energy from all energy sources like solar, gas, geothermal, and heating oil? Why or why not?

A new type of mining

Sources:
Title of article: "Mining for Heat"
Picture: http://tinyurl.com/28rjqua
Date & Publisher:  ScienceDaily May 2, 2012
Article Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120502112931.htm

Summary: Mining is obviousilly a very risky job. When too many things go worng, or the mine becomes usless it is left abandoned. Normally it just sits there useless and becomes a home for bats or another type of animal if there are any left around. Recentally scientests have come up with an idea of how to turn these abandoned mines into geothermal energy sources. The heat given off by the Earths mantle and their convection currents travel through the rock above and scientests have figured out that every kilometer of a typical deep underground mine could produce about 150 kw (Kilowatts) of heat. Thats enough to heat about 5 to 10 houses!! Scientests have also observed how the heat travles through water. Some abandoned mines are filled with water and then instead of the heat just being in the air, the heat is in the water. To figure out with way is better, scientests will be preforming certian tests in the near future on these and other heat extraction scenarios. Though they have figured out that while using the water method, people or a company would only be able to take the heat no more quickly than it could be replenished. Or else it would mess up the system. Also after extracting the heat from the water, the cold water would then be pumped back into the mine to be reused.  A number of communities in Canada and Europe have already started useing geothermal heat from abandoned mines, and scientests estimate that up to one million canandians could benifit from the geothermal energy. Or even a greater benifit to the people living in Great Britian. This heat source provides heat all year round if needed, and so the colder regions of the world are taking thought to this idea as an alternative energy source.

Opinion/Reflection: Once I read this article it opened my eyes to all the simple things around us that could be used as an energy source. I would of never guessed how people would turn a useless old abandoned mine into an all out source of energy. This shows how eager some people are to find alternitive energy sources as we start to run out of our fossil fules. Although this atricle did not explan the inpact that a energyplant or powerplant would have on the surrounding land if built next to a mine, but I assume that it would impact the environment in some way or another. Otherwise than that I see this as a great idea to replace other methods of creating energy. I hope the whole world soon sees this idea and can help chip in and make this plan work globaly instead of only in the cold regions of the world where it is being used now.

Questions:
1. Do you believe that this is a clean alternitave energy source compared to other methods? Why?
2. If this method becomes popular around the world, do you think it would be safe to be building mines right next to (basically right under) populated cities and or towns?
3. If you were incharge of a mining company, would you mine for metals or mine for heat? Explain your choice.
4. Do you think mining for heat would be easier if mined on land or in the ocean? Why?
5. Is this a renewable or nonrenewable source of energy?

Radioactive Fish!?

Radioactive Fish
http://lagunabeach.patch.com/articles/fish-off-laguna-beach-may-have-ingested-radioactive-kelp-after-fukushima-study-finds
                      If you think about going to California for vacation soon watch out for Laguna Beach! In Japan a failed nuclear reactor in Fukashima led radioactive leaks into the California Coast. Scientists also think that the fish might had eaten the kelp or each other which help spread the radiation. According to the scientists the cesium and iodine is spreading in the coast and it is probably in the fish and the kelp. Fortunately in South California the seaweed radiation
                      My reaction to this is not that surprised because of Japans nuclear disaster in 2011 but I am kind of sad since I eat fish sometimes. I hope that they can somehow clean up the radiation in the California Coast.

1. How do you think this is going to affect Fisherman
2. Do you think this will spread out to oceans?
3. From the rating of 1 - 10, 1 being the worst and 10 being the best  what would you choose and explain why.

 Diaper Power?!?

 A baby with potential energy. http://www.sassweb.ca/3bb3/crazy/bottoms-up-the-great-diaper-debate-gains-energy

                                                                  
            What do elders and babies have in common. They both have potential alternative energy. Diapers first introduced in the 1940's is now filling land fills. Disgusting right, but Canadian researchers have found a way to turn these diapers into oil and char that can be used for fuel. The process these Canadians use is called Pyrolysis where they put the diapers in a tank that gets heated to 400 degrees celsius! A Canadian company called Amec is using pyrolysis to make fuel. Canada isn't the only country doing this Japan is also getting into diaper power. Japan found out that in 2030 25% of the population will be older than 85. This means there will be a big need for adult diapers. Japan also doesn't have a lot of energy, so Japan's super faith company is researching using diapers for energy. Japan is taking a different approach than Canada. Japan is planning to pulverise the used diapers into pellets that contains 5,000 kcal that can be used to heat enrgy plants. When life gives you used diapers you make alternative energy.

           I looked up on the internet weird alternative energy, and this is what I find. I found this pretty funny, and saw it's relevance. I think this would be a great way to get energy it would cut down on trash, and help the enrgy crisis.

1. Why do you think there is energy in used diapers?

2. Do you think U.S.A should research diaper power? Why?

3. Would diaper power be renewable or nonrenewable? Why?

Barley Experiments

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120125091101.htm

Source: (website above) Title: "Barley adapts to climate change" Author: Elhuyar Fundazioa 
Date Published: Jan. 25, 2012

Summary: This article is about how environmental changes (specifically global warming) affect the growth patterns of barely, which is a plant that is similar to wheat. Recent expierments have studied the plant and have came to some conclusions. Throughout their experiment, they analysed how the barley grew under certian circumstances. They grew the same type of barley under to different conditions. One was grown in an environment with about the same amount of CO2  that is in our atmosphere today, and another in the same environment but with double the same amount of CO2 which represents what we expect to see in our atmosphere by the end of the century. Both setups were carried out thorugh a progressive imposition of drought. This effect on the plants would determine which setup was able to recover better from the lack of water. During the expirment facts were recored and it turned out that the plant that grew with double the amount of CO2 in the air recovered more efficientatlly. Scientests noted that because the plant was exposed to a larger amount of CO2, it closed the tiny holes in its leaves to a certian degree. Those holes let excess water and oxygen escape but because the plant partically closed the holes, it was able to use the water over a longer period of time. Without closing its holes, it would have evaporated off of the leaves. Even though a drought is harmfull to barley, its effect is much less when combined with an elevated amount of CO2. This does not happen all the time though in plants exposed a doubled amount of CO2. The scientests also speficied the importantance of the take in of carbon and nitrogen. If the take in level of these two are not balenced then this will throw off everything that happens to the barley. Otherwise than that the barley would do ok in an environment with a doubled amount of CO2. When water was introduced back to the two plants after the "drought" the barley with the doubled amount of CO2 recovered back to its normal state much faster than the barley with todays level of CO2. Overall, it was proven that as our earth starts to warm up and our CO2 levels start to increase, this would not negitiveally effect barely in any way. Researchers are now trying to figure out if this is a gene in the plant and if it can be copied or transfered to other plants to help them survive in an environment with very high levels of CO2. Even though global warming is a bad thing it is important that it does not impact our supplies of food too much. At least not to the point where we cant even grow them anymore.
Opinion: I thought this was pretty cool. I never knew that barley could withstand the increasing amounts of CO2 in our atmosphere. Let alone I think it kind of helps it. I love bread, especially with neutella and if theres no more barley to make bread then I would be pretty sad. Plus I never actually thought about how much global warming effects plants as it affects our oceans, animals, and weather. Global warming is a very bad thing that should be reversed or at least stoped but its also good that scientests are taking into consideration that we may hit that point in life when the earth gets so warm that our water levels may start to decrease enough that we start to see droughts were they never occured before. Overall, I found this very instreating and I hope that they figure out how to transfer that gene (if it is a gene) to other plants, incase we hit that point in our lifetime.
Questions:
1. Do you think that we as a human population will have to wait untill global warming starts majorly affecting our food supply to take action to prevent/reverse global warming?
2. What other problems could long periods of drought cause than just effecting barley and other food products?
3. In your opinion, is it a good or bad idea to see if plants are able to withstand high levels of CO2 and other gases that may increase if global warming continues? Why?
4. If we reach a point in our lifetime when global warming gets bad enough that it effects the growth pattern of barley, do you think the barely will react the same way that it did in the experiment? Why or why not?

More People Moving to Cities Census Shows

Original article is by Lisa Lambert, posted to reuters.com on 3/26/12. The article can be viewed here, http://tinyurl.com/covzdlj

Picture: The picture of the left is a bird’s eye view of New York, New York which is still the highest populated city in America according to the recent Census. Click here to view the picture, http://tinyurl.com/d3abpby

Summary: After the 2010 Census was recorded, officials noticed more people moving out of the suburbs and into the heavy populated cities. Now there is 80% of the population that lives in cities and urbanized areas. New York Currently has an estimated 18.4 million people living there.  California has a higher number of people living there with 35.4 million people, but considering its great size it was expected. 95% of the population is crowded into urban cities leaving more open space out in California. Other huge cities known like Chicago are seeing similar trends. These popular cities are becoming denser with each census taken and this issue is starting to worry people. 

Reflection: I do not really think that this is a problem because there are always other places to live. No one is really forced to live in these heavily populated cities. Once people realize that a place may be overpopulated, they won’t move there. There are plenty suburban or rural areas in America or all around the world, that people can live. It will become a problem when whole states, countries, or continents, get over populated and crowded like the urban cities listed above. I am actually happy where I live because I am not far from the beach, far from urban cities like Philadelphia or New York, and not far from rural areas. I recently went to New York for a day trip for the second time ever in my life since I was little and it made me realize how small and insignificant you really are in the world. Just a single person in such a huge city, with a large name, can be overwhelming. Then it makes you think if there were any more people in this world, how I would feel then. Over population could become a real issue in the near future and the limiting factors we learned in class, and the trip to New York made all of those worries a reality.

Questions: 

1: Why do you think more and more people are moving to highly populated cities? What are the dangers of this?

2: What are some limiting factors that could happen in those cities that could affect the population of the city or world as a whole?

3: What should we do to prevent or slow the overpopulation of those cities? Or should we leave it the way it is?

New Power System

httyp://www.macroevolution.net/power-system.html#.T3D2RNliLf0

Summary:
This picture is a molecular structure inside of a plant and biochemists working with researchers figured a way to use the molecular structure of a plant to transform it into power. This is also called as "Green Energy" One of the founders of this energy is called Bruce and he thinks that this way of using energy is more clean and inexpensive. Scientists get the photosynthesis by using a system called photosystem. This way is also more cheap and helpful to the environment and Bruce hopes that in the future everyone starts using this system.
Reflective:
I think that this system can be really useful in the future and that it's green friyendly. What I wonder is will this system harm the plants where your taking the energy away from? How exactly did the biochemists and researchers find this system did they just research about the molecules and see if it was compatible to transform into energy? I also think that this power system is legitimate because the article gives tons of information about this power system.
Questions:
1. What would you prefer? This Power System or our current Power System and back up your anwser
2. Do you think that this power system will be successful and if yes why?
3. Do you think that this power system is fake or real? If you say fake explain why.