Dehumidification + Cooling: A better mousetrap

For those of us in North America, indoor air cooling is the least of our worries right now, but the International Air-Conditioning Expo is taking place in Dallas this week and there is some news worth sharing.   Faithful blog readers will know that I have a bit of a problematic relationship with air conditioning, on the basis of the electrical consumption, the disconnect with the outdoors, and quite often, the noise.   However, my original beef was as a result of working with the  ICF industry, where the insulation often took care of the sensible load (the temperature),  leaving mostly the latent load (the humidity) to deal with.   Modern AC systems were NOT designed for this application.  More often than not, the AC system was oversized, would short cycle or hardly turn on at all, the house would be moist and cool, homeowners would leave for a vacation, come home to mold, and  - I would get the phone call from a frustrated homeowner.  All I wanted was a good dehumidifying system, with a bit of cooling. 

Finally, there seems to be a solution on the market, at least for commercial construction. Advantix Systems has developed a liquid dessicant system that first pulls the excess moisture out of the air, and then cools it to the right temperature.  This is considerably more efficient that traditional AC technology, which is based on the principle of cooling air to the dewpoint in order to draw off the condensed moisture.  This overcooled air is then re-heated to a more comfortable temperature.  The Advantix technology pulls air through a strong brine solution which absorbs the excess moisture. This brine water-filter also serves to clean the air of particulates larger than 5 microns, which covers most mold spores, pollen, and dust, but not smoke or insecticide.   For the engineering type, the  Advantix website has a detailed  schematic diagram, and for the rest of us, there is a very nifty video explaining the basic science of absorption and diffusion.  The website also provide the calculations behind their energy saving claims, and a mention of “competitive pricing.”  A few of the case studies offered projected savings,  which will hopefully be updated with actual performance numbers and payback periods as these figures become available.  Overall, I appreciate the transparency of information on the website.

This technology was initially developed to manage the air conditions of ice-skating.  The company is relatively new on American shores, but the USA President, Ms. Hannah Granade was named “Most Creative People in Business” in 2012 by Fast Company.  Certainly, Advantix is a company worth watching, and we can only hope that they will scale their product to residential size in the near future.

Concrete for Coral Reefs – Regenerative Sustainability

In honor of the First International Conference on Concrete Sustainability, taking place in Tokyo this coming May, I thought I would present a post on the opportunity for concrete in a regenerative sustainability capacity.  Rather than focusing on doing less harm, I wondered if there were opportunities for concrete to repair harm done, and contribute to the restoration of our resources.

 

There seems to be an opportunity for concrete in the restoration of coral reefs.  Coral reefs have been damaged by human contact from destructive fishing practices, off-shore industry platforms, and even the very divers who are admiring the reefs.  Their growth is further thwarted by pollution from drainage water and oceanic temperature shifts from climate change.  The economic impact is not only the loss of marine biodiversity, fish stocks and  the local communities who rely on fishing for food and their livelihoods, but also the protection from storm waves.  Despite the quantifiable damage, the responsibility for both protection and conservation is not directly correlated, as reefs are open commons, and thus lacking clear ownership.   This problem of market based strategies for linking climate concerns with economic stakeholders is a recurring and increasingly critical theme that is worth noting and will be taken up in later postings.  Today, we will deal with the technology of reef restoration, and the contributions of the concrete industry.

The goal is the restoration of reefs, with both the objective of providing habitat for marine life and protection for the coastal areas.   This is not to be confused with dikes or concrete breaks, which may also provide the role of protecting the land from the rising ocean levels, such as in Holland.    While the principal function of the artificial reef materials is structural, not just any material will do.  For example, some of the original approaches of sinking old ships or other large equipment which had reached the end of its useful life runs the risk of introducing pollutants or materials that can disrupt the chemistry of the surrounding waters.   From this perspective, concrete has emerged as an ideal material, not only for making the framework strong and resistant to the elements, but also due to its low acidity which favors accelerated coral growth.     

Often the immediate concern is for protection from storm surges, and past solutions have been to create a physical barrier, such as a sea wall.   These have been made of rock, sunken ships, or any heavy material, and are effective in breaking the waves.   However, they don’t provide much of a substrate to encourage a biological restoration.  This was the approach taken by Wayfarer Environmental Technologies, who developed the Oysterbreak system, precast concrete rings, measuring 5 feet in diameter which link and stack to create an engineered base for the restoration of an ecosystem.    Wayfarer provides the molds for the precast rings, and a proprietary organic mix for the “Oystercrete” to encourage the oysters to attach to the ring. The rings can be poured on site, positioned in the water using an airboat with a crane boom or barges.   Both the design of the interlocking rings and the weight of the precast help keep the rings in place.  The hollow rings use less material, reducing the initial cost of manufacture and placement, but “grows” additional material through the accumulation of oysters and other biological matter, thus improving in value over time.

On a smaller scale, the Reef Balls are also made of precast concrete, but are more directed toward the restoration of coral reef because they mimic the limestone boulders to which the organisms attach.  The Reef Ball Foundation has been developed as a non-profit to rehabilitate marine reefs around the world, and has made its technology scalable to work with any sized project. Concrete has also been especially well suited to provide the “potting material” for coral “nurseries,” where coral is harvested and then transplanted to other areas.   However, make no mistake.  There is no quick fix to restoring coral reefs.  It can only be grown and propagated through the painstaking efforts of hundreds of “gardeners.”     But in this effort, concrete is part of the regenerative solution.

Faith in Our Future?

On Monday, in the USA, President Obama was sworn in for a second term.  Aside from political commentary (and discussions about Michelle Obama's new haircut), there were some other perspectives that are worth noting.  First of all, that this is the 57^th time that this has happened, all without a military coup.   Something about this political system seems to work, for it survives civil wars, adapts to constitutional changes, and keeps this union of states knitted together as a nation.  
 

The inaugural speech was full of faith in our future, and a call to address issues of climate change, women’s rights and gun control. While this may seem self-evident to many of our European cousins, American pundits still consider this to be leaning “far left.”   There is still debate in American politics about the science of climate change.  Take, for example, the chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology – a body with jurisdiction over many laboratories, NASA, the National Science Foundation, and the National Weather Service.  The current chair, as well as previous chair, hail from the great oil republic of Texas, and are vocal in their doubts about the role of humans in climate change.  And thanks to the “Citizens United” ruling, which effectively opened up the election to legalized bribery as corporations could freely donate to political candidates, these congressmen enjoyed the hearty endorsement and deep pockets of the oil industry.

President Obama did temper the vote of confidence in our future with a reminder that individual freedoms are not self-executing, and are based on collective actions. He called on the people to respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that to not do so would betray the responsibility to future generations.    While I have grave doubts over the political will of Congress to endorse this change, I look instead to leaders among the states and municipalities.  For example, in this same election, California passed two Propositions that close tax loopholes, and has designated that the recovered  revenue will be spend on clean energy and energy efficiency projects in public buildings.  Earlier this month, the governor proposed a plan to funnel some of the funds to energy efficiency projects for schools.   Individual states, such as Vermont, have created a culture of builders that challenge each other on best practice in energy efficiency.   Even towns, such as Austin, somehow manage to push through strong energy efficiency mandates for city buildings, despite the political climate of the state politicos. 

The moral of this story?  While the circus master may not be able to convince some of the more stubborn elephants to move very fast, it might be more efficient to support the activities of the smaller, more nimble political animals to get this show on the road.

Bike Kitchens and Repair Café

It never fails.  The greatest ideas are the simplest.  The most elegant solutions fix the core problem without creating any new problems. And so it was with the problem of the disconnect between broken stuff and people’s needs for working, functioning items.   The core issue is really one of labor.  Our disposable society is geared toward throwing away things.  The infrastructure for repair parts and labor is not supported, nor is it economical, given the low cost of replacement goods.  But oh- the waste.

The solution is really quite straightforward.  Bring together people who have skills and talent, add some tools and materials, and create a forum where people can come together to re-use and recycle their broken goods.  One such concept is the Repair Café, an idea started in Holland by Martine Postma.  It could be as simple as a flyer and a get-together at someone’s basement.  Finding a permanent spot in a community center would provide a location for people to donate tools, or set up specialized work centers.   It might be that each meeting is pre-designated to a certain type of repair.  For example, one week may be woodworking – chairs with broken legs,  broken drawers,  wobbly tables.   The flyer might call for donations of wood, tools, paint, supplies for woodworking.   In fact, the meeting might move around and be convened in locations with the particular tools.   I’m thinking of a Habitat program in the next town over that could be a great location for woodworking projects.   

While this concept started in Holland and has spread throughout Europe( London), there are also Repair Cafes which have started up in the US – (Palo Alto, Durham, NC). It also provided a unifying concept for groups like the West Seattle Fixers, whose motto is “Fixing the World” – I might add:  “one repair at a time,” or the Fixers Collective NYC,  “Working together to fix the things in our lives.”   While all of these focus on fixing “things,”  it also helps build community, empowers people to learn skills and gain confidence in their self-reliance.  In fact, the Fixers Collective describes themselves as a social experiment.

Tools for community use - UBC

A similar concept is the Bike Kitchen.  There are several hundred of these bicycle cooperatives throughout the world. These groups typically have an educational focus, teaching others how to fix bikes. They may also seek donations of old broken bikes that can be repaired to help provide people living in poverty with a basic form of transportation.  

The question often arises if these free services compete with commercial repair services.  It would appear that there is no conflict.  First of all, old fashioned “repair” shops are hard to find as the cost of labor increases the cost of repairs beyond a viable market point.  Free labor is really the only way.  These workshops help tap into skills that many of the older generation had developed, and offers them an opportunity to contribute back to society and pass along the skills to the younger generation. From and environmental standpoint, the activity of repairing items reconnects people with the value of goods and extending an item's useful service life as a way of reducing material consumption.

And so I will hang on to the few things I have that just need a small repair.  A very wonderful little rice cooker, that just needs a new thermocouple (or something...).  A rug, that needs a bit of time and a crochet hook.  Maybe I could organize a repair café ..   

Resilience Revisited

During this holiday gift-giving, which is intentionally kept to a minimum within my immediate friends and family, there was a bit of a recurring theme of preparedness – or survivalism.    There was a Tom Brown’s Field Guide to City and Suburban Survival,  an emergency space blanket, and a key fob what clever weave of cording around some survival tools.  For comparison, I pulled out my old survival kit from a wilderness survival course – put together so many moons ago in college.   Fortunately, the only occasion I’ve had for emergency use was for the bouillon – to replace salts lost in a desert hike, and the matches for a fire after a surprise storm.  But the need for survival is the same – only the setting has changed from wilderness to the urban jungle.   “Le plus ça change, le plus c’est la meme chose.”

Is it winter that is prompting us to tuck in and prepare?    I spent much of last week setting up my little indoor farm and preparedness supplies.   Stocking up on water, rice and beans, seaweed and mushrooms.  My “greens” sprouter is now going full force, the sauerkraut is brewing  and I just figured out how to get the long grain Basmati to sprout for GAMA rice.  It’s a nifty no-rinse method using thick hemp sprouting bags and an old cooler for a controlled temperature environment.  More on that another time, but I have a way of eating rice even with no power and limited water.   Outside, the compost pile has been established, and I’m thinking of getting the worm farm started.    The knitting needles have appeared, the darning yarn, and sewing machine.   What is this, if not a crazed reaction to far too much book study time?   Is it just winter?   Or is there something more primeaval?

Martin Holladay comments on a shared nostalgia for the hippie building heyday, and I tend to agree that all of these actions are reflective of a concern about resilience and passive survivability.   So, too, was my treatise on thorium. It is a recognition of the vulnerability of our human existence and the desire to create some sense of independence, some ability to take care of oneself.   For some of us, the pleasure is in the creating of solutions and we are eager and open for radical ideas, fringe elements, innovative thinkers.  For others, it is the security of a carefully researched plan or the assurance of a “green building” program.   But I believe our generation is only too well aware that major climate changes are upon us, that political uncertainly is real, and that we really can’t predict out too far in the future.  We understand the need for resilience, the need to wean ourselves from dependencies, the need to regroup into smaller clusters.   There is a change afoot, and I am cautiously optimistic for this new age of Aquarius.

Thorium Alternative for Nuclear Energy

In the US news media, it seems much of the discussion about fuel sources quickly becomes politically entrenched and degenerates into party bickering.  Where is the science?  Are there not alternatives to natural gas fracking, nuclear reactors, or coal powered plants?  Even solar and wind becomes environmentally intrusive, carving up the landscapes. What are the alternatives?

One very interesting option is the radioactive metal thorium -named after the Norse god of thunder. The history of thorium research reads a bit like a dark Nordic murder mystery.  Discovered in 1828 by Swedish chemist Jons Jakob Berzeliusd, research on the use of thorium as a fuel for nuclear energy production was carried at the US Dept. of Energy Oak Ridge Labs, which was created in the 1940s to support the Manhattan Project - the first atomic bomb.  But during the 17 year directorship of Dr. Alvin Weinberg, the lab also focused on peace-time applications of nuclear energy, such as for desalination projects.   In 1965, his researchers built and operated a 8 megawatt  prototype Molten Salt Reactor (MSR), in which thorium can be used.  

But Weinberg’s advocacy of the MSR met opposition with proponents of uranium based breeder reactors during Nixon’s administration.  Uranium yielded plutonium waste that could be used for the arms build-up during the Cold War.  Weinberg’s resulting termination effectively ended research on the MSRs, including a project to build a 6200 megawatt  MSR plant.  The year was 1973 - the year Arab states cut off oil supplies to the West.  It was a great wake-up call for the world to wean itself off fuel dependencies.  But the political focus in the US was on war, not on peacetime energy survival. 

There was a brief return to testing of thorium itself during the Carter Administration, in the 1970’s, when Admiral Rickover and Dr. Alvin Radkowsky successfully replaced the enriched uranium core of a breeder reactor with a thorium based core in the USA's first commercial power plant.  This process requires plutonium to achieve criticality, and the Clinton Administration backed this technology to destroy excess Russian military plutonium in the 1990’s. Again, a war-time concern over the invation of Georgia prompted the Bush administration to stop this effort in 2008.

Why does any of this matter?  One of the most looming issues is  safety.  Watch Kirk Sorensen’s TED Talk for a full explanation, but the danger in the current water-cooled nuclear reactors is the need for very high pressure (over 70 atmospheres of pressure).  When power is lost in a disaster, the super-heated water flashes into steam, expands quickly, and melts the reactor equipment. Hence, the need for the large containment domes.  Instead, the MSR does not have to operate at high pressure.  In the event of a power failure, the liquid salts flow into an overflow cooling tank, and the plant shuts itself down. Zero risk of meltdown.

Thorium is plentiful. In fact, there is a supply of 3200 metric tons stored in Nevada, which  could produce enough energy for the US for 3 years.  There are known supplies in China, India and many other countries.  It is easily mined and processed, with 4,000 times less waste than uranium.  Nearly all of the thorium fuel is consumed (99%), vs. only about .5% of uranium, with 200 times the output.  It also has a higher rate of conversion to electricity (50% vs 30%)making it far more efficient  requiring much less fuel, and producing 1,000 times less nuclear waste, with a far shorter stabilization requirement (10 yrs vs. 10,000).  Nor is the waste from the thorium reactors suitable for weapons.  

Where does this technology stand today?   Well, the Chinese visited ORNL to learn about the Thorium core in a breeding reactor, and are building a test reactor with a scheduled completion of 2017 to 2020. After Fukushima, the Japanese have stepped up efforts on the alternative thorium reactors and might consider the molten salt reactor.  Norway is ready to test burning thorium fuel in a conventional test reactor owned by Norway’s government with help from U.S.-based nuclear giant Westinghouse.  Aker Solutions has developed an accelerator driven reactor using thorium, based on Nobel Prize winner Rubbia's work.   India is actively pursuing thorium replacement cores. And the US?   Apparently the DOE is collaboraing with the Chinese.  But the pursuit of the molten salt reactors is left to the private sector.  Kirk Sorenson, who unearthed the old Oak Ridge Lab work and has become a proponent of thorium, has launched the company Flibe Energy to develop smaller scale molten salt reactors for distributed energy generation. 

To review, there was a successful prototype of MSR built in 1965, which was successful, and pointed to the remaining technical issues to be addressed.  Testing during the last 40 years would have served in good stead.  Unfortunately, this is not testing which can be accelerated, so we are unable to make up for previous decisions with lots of technology dollars. I think this is a very good argument for retaining diversity, set-based design, multiple experiments.  There is no one right way, no “red” way, and no “blue” way. 

We can blame the politics of wars for cutting off the research on Thorium in the past, but what about now?   In 2011, the Weinberg Foundation has been established in London, to honor the pioneering efforts by Dr. Weinberg, and to promote  international cooperation, shared data and testing.   Their website is full of useful resources.   While I have had grave reservations over nuclear, the molten salt reactors with thorium present an entirely different set of variables, and could indeed be significant component of our energy solution.   Let's hope we don't miss this second opportunity.

A different world cannot be created by in-different people

New Year is traditionally the time for resolutions, goals to change that are invariably abandoned in a month or two.   Fitness centers know this – and offer promos for gym memberships, knowing fully well that attendance will taper off.   We see this same behavior in corporations – with new ideas, new programs.  They come, and they go.   The question is – what makes the successful ones stick?
 

My guess is that it has to do with the vision of the change.  Do you really think you can achieve it?  Is it you – will you feel comfortable in that skin?  Dr. Carol Dweck, in her book “Mindset, the Psychology of Success,”   proposes that some people have a growth mindset, while others are of a fixed mindset.   Read these questions, and see whether you agree or disagree.  Where it says “X”  think of something you want to change – an ability or a personal quality.  For example, intelligence, artistic ability, ability to maintain a good weight, ability to really work as a team.   Be honest.

1. Your ( X)  is something very basic about you that you can’t change very much.

2. No matter how much (X) you have, you can always change it quite a bit.
3. You can learn new things, but you can’t really change (X) about yourself.
4. You can always substantially change how much (x)  you are.
 

If you answered "yes" to Question 1 and 3, this points to a fixed mindsets, and 2 and 4 are growth mindsets.   If you are like me, there were some abilities where I felt perfectly capable of growth, and others that I really wanted to be of a growth mindset – but had to honestly admit that I had set up barriers and couldn’t honestly envision myself with the new qualities.  So if we can’t even envision ourselves as really changing as a result of the new resolutions we implement, then our fixed mindset will chase us right back into the corner.  

This is very significant when trying to make changes in companies.  Perhaps the first goal is to help everyone gain a growth mindset on that particular issue.   Group work and innovative design thinking can help unlock potential ideas and might help gain individual and group buy-in.   Small accomplishments can develop trust and belief that can be built upon.   Permanent “sticky” change can’t really be top-down, it has to “grow.”   We know these things, and yet we continue to manage with inspirational campaigns, or cheerleadership.  

Above all, the mindset will become a growth mindset if we care enough about the target goal.  This is the real motivation for change.   So envision the seemingly impossible, and then tie it back to each person.   What’s in it for them, why should they care?   If a clear link can be determined between the personal goals and the common vision, then the change will grow from within.  It will not need rules, games, motivational gimmicks.  It will just need nurturing, acknowledgement, and celebration.    Let the change begin!