Is anything that you use once and then throw into a landfill for all of time green? I was sitting on my couch last night, watching TV, and staring at the 4 remotes on my coffee table (yes four- I've never been able to figure out that whole "program your cable remote to do everything" thing). Now, rechargeable batteries have been around for ages, but let's get real, they just don't last nearly as long as our guilty pleasure; disposables!
Fuji has a new solution...sort of. They are branding it as EnviroMAX, but is it really all that better for the environment? True, it is made free of mercury, cadmium, and some other particularly nasty substances, but you still use it and throw it away. Touting that "there is nothing inside a Fuji EnviroMAX that will harm the environment if it is disposed through normal waste systems" is great, but isn't the whole point of going green and environmentally responsible to reduce the amount and volume of things that we "dispose of?" Less garbage, less landfills, less environmental impact.
I admit, it's a valiant attempt, and I will probably buy them as opposed to my standard copper tops, but let's call it what it really is. Kudos to Fuji for making it less bad to use disposables, but what about other alternatives? I for one am truly excited by companies like Powercast Corporation and the Wireless Power Consortium, organizations that are looking to eliminate batteries all together. Wireless power for smaller devices? No batteries for my four remotes? Nikola Tesla would be proud.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Nikola Tesla - Dream or Reality?
It might be obvious that someone who works for a company called TeslaVision might write about Nikola Tesla. Tesla, the namesake of our company, is arguably one of the most brilliant & interesting scientific minds to have ever lived. And yet, most people do not know who he was beyond the science class Tesla Coil toy. Are Einstein, Da Vinci, and Isaac Newton really more noteworthy than the founder of light, radar, and...the internet?
Yes the internet, sorry Al Gore. I am not naive enough to say that Tesla actually invented the internet (there were no computers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries), but the concepts he described fully outline a wireless age, describing to his largest backer, J.P. Morgan, "When wireless is fully applied, the earth will be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts." Sounds like the internet to me. Tesla even went so far as to build a device he called the "Teleautomaton," which allowed him to wirelessly control a boat on the water.
Beyond that, Nikola Tesla believed that wireless power is how the world will eventually run - no more clunky plugs and outlets. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is only now beginning to be able to achieve some of the things Nikola Tesla envisioned, and began to build. Shouldn't this winner of the "War of Currents" receive a little more respect? In an age where we are all concerned with more environmentally friendly approaches to energy and are driven by greater technological advances perhaps we should review Mr. Tesla's theories more closely and give him the respect he is due.
Yes the internet, sorry Al Gore. I am not naive enough to say that Tesla actually invented the internet (there were no computers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries), but the concepts he described fully outline a wireless age, describing to his largest backer, J.P. Morgan, "When wireless is fully applied, the earth will be converted into a huge brain, capable of response in every one of its parts." Sounds like the internet to me. Tesla even went so far as to build a device he called the "Teleautomaton," which allowed him to wirelessly control a boat on the water.
Beyond that, Nikola Tesla believed that wireless power is how the world will eventually run - no more clunky plugs and outlets. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology is only now beginning to be able to achieve some of the things Nikola Tesla envisioned, and began to build. Shouldn't this winner of the "War of Currents" receive a little more respect? In an age where we are all concerned with more environmentally friendly approaches to energy and are driven by greater technological advances perhaps we should review Mr. Tesla's theories more closely and give him the respect he is due.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Clean Energy Revolution?
I read a great article from TIME this week. It detailed how, although we have been a recent world leader in energy advances in some areas (wind-power), as a country we are just not doing enough when it comes to the fight for green energy. The science is not where it needs to be at this point in many areas. According to the experts, that means we need to aggressively invest in new research. The article compares our $125 billion (in today's dollar) investment in the 60's to get us to the moon, to President Obama's pledge for $150 billion for energy related research moneys over the next ten years.
The pledge is a step in the right direction; however, countries like China and South Korea seem far more committed to the battle for green energy than the United States. China is reportedly spending over $600 billion over the next decade, and South Korea is investing cost to 2% of its GDP - $85 billion over 5 years. Both of these countries appear to have stepped up to the plate with greater fervor than the United States. Apparently, they recognize the environmental need and more likely the economic benefit that such an approach will yield.
Unfortunately, missing from this article were focus on energy efficiency and curbing consumption. While producing cleaner electricity is a goal we as a country MUST take seriously, if we continue our current consumption levels of over 11,000 kilowatt hours per household per year, we will be in trouble. We need an overhaul of our green energy policy, and in addition to investment in new technologies, it should be solidly founded with energy efficiency & consumption curbing programs.
The pledge is a step in the right direction; however, countries like China and South Korea seem far more committed to the battle for green energy than the United States. China is reportedly spending over $600 billion over the next decade, and South Korea is investing cost to 2% of its GDP - $85 billion over 5 years. Both of these countries appear to have stepped up to the plate with greater fervor than the United States. Apparently, they recognize the environmental need and more likely the economic benefit that such an approach will yield.
Unfortunately, missing from this article were focus on energy efficiency and curbing consumption. While producing cleaner electricity is a goal we as a country MUST take seriously, if we continue our current consumption levels of over 11,000 kilowatt hours per household per year, we will be in trouble. We need an overhaul of our green energy policy, and in addition to investment in new technologies, it should be solidly founded with energy efficiency & consumption curbing programs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
