Comments Caroline has made

  • In your dreams

    "Ottawa could start displaying some leadership and initiate a national program for Canada."

    Don't hold your breath waiting for that, please Eric. So far, "Ottawa", i.e. the  Federal Government of Canada, has been about as active as a stuck rock in the whole question of "green" issues. The only thing they have achieved is obstruction. Most Canadian provinces are working madly in all directions in spite of the Feds.

    But we might have an election in the Fall.... On What happens with a new president? posted 1 year, 3 months ago 3 Responses

  • Very Interesting

    2800 sq ft is BIG house! In many parts of the world, that's way too big for four people. However, if you feel you need it, I suppose that's good.

    Thanks for the article-may it inspire others to work in their own environments to produce something as effective.On The hybrid solar home, part 2 posted 1 year, 3 months ago 28 Responses

  • Interesting comment, jbailo.

    "It's a much better architecture to continue sprawl and to move jobs to where people want to live rather than snake high cost, high maintenance rail around the county."

    Just how would you go about persuading big business (especially resource and raw-materials based Big Bisiness)to move into places where people want to live? It's my experience of  that where people live is irrelevant to big business most of the time- they have other concerns such as the cost of extracting and shipping raw materials, finished goods, etc.

    Rail has always suffered in comparison to other modes of transport. If you look at moving people, a road network is far more flexible for short trips. For long trips, air is faster. North America has relatively slow-moving trains, which doesn't help Amtrak. High-speed trains in areas like Europe and Asia fare far better as people-movers becasue distances are shorter and travel times much reduced. For moving anything other than people, however, rail is relatively cheap. It's also a heck of a lot "greener" than air.  It's only real competitor is water transport. Seen any canal barges lately? The horse-drawn kind, I mean.On Amtrak struggles to meet demand as ridership soars posted 1 year, 3 months ago 2 Responses

  • The WSJ article

    From the article, it seems that many of the people who are rich enough to get these designer gardens ARE actually digging them themselves, and if they are  not then at least the produce is going to employees, friends and dinner party guests. A part of me wishes that some of them expressed an interest in giving the produce to the poor, or to soup kitchens, but I suppose I cannot have everything. It's certainly a better use of land than acres and acres of ornamental lawn.

    I'm just jealous that my own little patch isn't anything as wonderful as these!I am getting older and more arthritic yearly, and sometimes just like to imagine having somebody garden for me... On The WSJ reports on lavish second-home gardens posted 1 year, 4 months ago 8 Responses

  • more on that small drawback....

    Well, I love reading the Guardian because it's always so optimistic about these things! However, the New Scientist article is a bit more balanced, and it does look like there are some drawbacks. The coatings presently last only three months, for example.

    The overall impression I've got it that this might be a good thing for solar cells, but  perhaps not so viable for retrofitting a domestic house. And anyone who relies at least partly on passive solar to heat their house in winter will probably have to re-think. Still, it's swings and roundabouts, like most technologies, and for some areas of the world like Sub-Saharan Africa this could be a godsend.  On Your windows could collect solar energy, says study posted 1 year, 4 months ago 7 Responses

  • One (small) drawback

    If these coatings are light-absorbing, doesn't that mean that less light actually enters the building? I can see that being a drawback in current residential buildings, especially in high latitudes. As someone who values my natural daylight, I think I'd begrudge losing any more sunlight and having to supplement with artificial.

    Which doesn't mean that it's a bad idea all-round, of course.  On Your windows could collect solar energy, says study posted 1 year, 4 months ago 7 Responses

  • Hey, wait a minute....

    People, we are talking Britain here, where "undeveloped land", "Liberal" and "eco-imperialist" do not have the same connotations as they do in the rest of the world. So be careful what you are saying, please. For example- "undeveloped land" means land that doesn't have working houses and factories on it. It might be currently derelict, currently farmland under agribusiness, protected landscape of historic or ecological value, or any other number of things. What it it doesn't mean is "pristine virgin nature". Britain has been a series of managed landscapes since Roman Times, and calling it "natural" is a bit of a misnomer.

    That's a fascinating article and the BBC link from it gives a wealth of back-up information on a thorny subject.

    What comes out of the whole thing:

    1. Britain's very dense population needs more living space.
    2. Proposals for accomodating this population have got as far as some fairly concrete plans.
    3. These plans are now in the public sphere, and the pros and cons are being discussed.
    4. Some parts of some of the proposals are deemed wrong by some people, sometimes a lot of people, so they are protesting loudly, but not violently. A very British habit it is, that.

    This is the democratic process at work. The government will listen- they have to, or they will be booted out- and compromises will be made. Not all these many proposals will come to pass, and all will have to be modified to some degree or other.

    Personally, I find this article hope-inspiring. At least the British government and the British people, are taking the problem seriously, which is more than you can say for some other parts of the world.On Protesters demonstrate against British eco-towns posted 1 year, 5 months ago 5 Responses

  • The very changable Lake Chad

    Scary, isn't it? Enough to make anyone believe in global warming!

    However, Chad isn't a poster-lake for global warming because it's an oddity. There have been times when it's been absolutely huge, and times when it's been tiny. If you believe Wikipedia(and I do, sometimes, but not this time, particularly)it almost dried up completely in about 1908. One reason why it keeps expanding and contracting is because it's very, very shallow (would you believe 10 feet deep max?)So, unlike Lake Erie, which everyone seems to want to compare it to, the exact shoreline wanders about an awful lot, and always has.

    Yes, desertification is happening. Yes, over-grazing is happening. Yes, water is being extracted. And yes, it's a human disaster in the making, given the political, economic and social state of the surrounding countries (four of them). Poor Africa. Again.I mean that sincerely.

    But, the IPCC's reports don't mention Lake Chad speicifically. Could that be because in the case of this very volatile lake, it is impossible to separate the shrinkage due to a) global warming; and, b)over-use by mankind, from the natural variations it demonstrates? I would venture to think so.On Lake Chad now one-tenth of its 1972 size posted 1 year, 5 months ago 1 Response