Bill Tauber the "Green Energy Coach™"

Specifically, the report noted that global temperatures were on a downward trend over the past 11 years, that scientists do not necessarily believe that storms will become more frequent or more intense due to global warming, and that the theory that temperatures will cause Greenland ice to rapidly melt has been "greatly diminished."

A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency's alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming.

The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin, pushed back on the prospect of regulating gases like carbon dioxide as a way to reduce global warming. Carlin's report argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined.

"He came out with the truth. They don't want the truth at the EPA," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic saying he's ordered an investigation. "We're going to expose it."

The controversy comes after the House of Representatives passed a landmark bill to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, one that Inhofe said will be "dead on arrival" in the Senate despite President Obama's energy adviser voicing confidence in the measure.

Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Darrell Issa, R-Calif., also wrote a letter last week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the agency to reopen its comment period on the finding. The EPA has since denied the request.

Citing the internal e-mails, the Republican congressmen wrote that the EPA was exhibiting an "agency culture set in a predetermined course."

"It documents at least one instance in which the public was denied access to significant scientific literature and raises substantial questions about what additional evidence may have been suppressed," they wrote.

In a written statement, Issa said the administration is "actively seeking to withhold new data in order to justify a political conclusion."

"I'm sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach," Sensenbrenner said in a statement, adding that the "repression" of Carlin's report casts doubt on the entire finding.

Carlin said he's concerned that he's seeing "science being decided at the presidential level."

"Now Mr. Obama is in effect directly or indirectly saying that CO2 causes global temperatures to rise and that we have to do something about it. ... That's normally a scientific judgment and he's in effect judging what the science says," he said. "We need to look at it harder."

The controversy is similar to one under the Bush administration -- only the administration was taking the opposite stance. In that case, scientist James Hansen claimed the administration was trying to keep him from speaking out and calling for reductions in greenhouse gases.

Progressive Lighting & Energy Solution encourage employees to shut off electronics when not in use and unplug devices to cut standby power use. The easiest way to do this has been to use a power strip that can be turned off when devices are not in use.

Sometimes it can be hard to switch off electronics because of hard to reach plugs, or power strips that are shared with devices that must stay on, like a Computer, Printer, router or other devices at work.  But with small to mid-size businesses creativity is important to shore up the bottom line.

Technology has the solution to this problem with “smart power strips” that make it even easier for you to cut standby power use and save money.

One device from Wattstopper uses an occupancy sensor to control power flow. Six of the 8 outlets of this power strip are controlled by an occupancy sensor, so they cut all power flow when there is no one in the room. The other 2 are “normal” outlets that can be used for devices that must stay on. This means that your printer, fax, computer, modems and other office equimpent, will always get “unplugged” without having to lift a finger.

Another smart strip available is fittingly called the “Smart Strip Power Strip.” This unit uses one device, usually a computer or fax, as the “control” device. When the control device is shut off, all peripherals (printer, etc) are also turned off.  With this unit as long as you remember to shut off that primary piece of equipment you will never leave the other devices on.

With more helpful technology like this it just keeps getting easier and easier to be energy smart around the office. Take some time around your office, warehouse or plant and think about how you can take action to use less energy and save money.

REMEMBER - SAVE ENERGY-SAVE MONEY-SAVE THE PLANET^TM

If you are a Los Angeles Department Water and Power Customer (L.A. DWP) customer, I have great news for you...How about a brand new Top of the Line Efficent Washing Machine, Delivered right to you front door, for less than $150? 

L.A. DWP has a rebate program for energy efficient Washing Machines that will pay you $300 to buy a new Washing Machine. If you use Gas to heat your water and are a Southern California Gas Company Customer you can get an extra $35 dollars back.

This past Monday I went online and found a qualifying Amana washing machine for sale on a major home improvement stores website for $450.00, including delivery! So add in the rebates and your cost for the Washing Machine is only $115!

How about a FREE refrigerator? This is another one L.A. Dept of Water & Power (L.A. DWP) but unlike the other programs I’ve talked about, this one does have some income restrictions, but I wanted to highlight it anyway because it is such a great program.

If you are a L.A. Dept. of Water & Power customer on their Low Income Rate program, you may qualify for a FREE replacement refrigerator. L.A. DWP will be mailing out letters to qualifting customers. Check their website for details.

Now for the rest of you in L.A. Dept. of Water & Power's service area that are thinking about a new refrigerator, there are programs for you too, You can get $100 for buying a new qualified Energy Star Refirgerator and recycling your old one.

Want some more freebies from L.A. DWP? How about some free shade trees for your yard? The L.A. DWP Trees for a Green LA Program in partnership with Million Trees LA has made it simple for Los Angeles City residents to receive FREE shade trees through the Trees for a Green LA program (TFGLA). Follow the simple steps on their website to enjoy the benefits of cool natural shade, energy efficiency, and clean air.

That’s the best energy savings of all!

The next thing I have for you is a FREE Energy and Water Saving Kit from Southern Caifornia Gas Company.

The kit includes three faucet aerators and a low-flow showerhead to help you save energy and water.Low-flow showerheads and faucet aerators are great ways to save energy and water. These devices allow air to enter into the water stream, maintaining a high-pressure flow while reducing water usage.

Let me tell you about the Cash for Clunkers program that our “I’ve got nothing else to do but come up with nutty ways to spend taxpayer money” federal politicians have come up with.

The Cash for Clunkers bill is getting closer to becoming law if Democratic lawmakers have their way. Lawmakers are proposing a “cash-for-clunkers” bill that would give consumers up to $4,500 to purchase a new fuel efficient car .

To qualify, consumers would have to trade in cars and trucks for a new fuel-efficient vehicle that delivers additional fuel savings of between 2 and 10 miles per gallon, depending on the type of vehicle purchased.

Consumers may trade in their old, gas-guzzling vehicles and receive vouchers worth up to $4,500 to help pay for new, more fuel-efficient cars and trucks. The program will be authorized for up to one year and provide for approximately 1 million new car or truck purchases.

Passenger car or minivan: If they get less than 18 mpg or less for city/highway combined qualifies. If the mileage of the new car is at least 4 mile per gallson (mpg) higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new car is at least 10 mpg higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

For trucks – New light trucks or SUVs with mileage of at least 18 mpg combined are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 2 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $3,500.  If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 5 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

That’s crazy – 2 mpg higher and you get $3,500 and 5 mgp you get $4,500?  ANY new car gives better mileage than cars older than 5 years old. 

IS THIS ANOTHER DEMOCRAT WAY OF GIVING MONEY AWAY TO THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY? - we all know we haven't given enough already.

Germany has devolved 250,000 new jobs in renewable energy, including nearly 50,000 wind power jobs in the last 5 years alone – remember Germany is only 25% the size of the U.S – that’s equivalent to a 1 Million jobs in the U.S. The government worked to promote a green culture thorough all levels of society. They started with simpler parts, like automating systems in office building to use less power. Financial incentives were given to people who retrofitted their homes with renewable sources. Police officers ticketed polluting cars that drove in emsssion-reduction zones.

Competitors challenged citizens to see who could save the most power. School children in the city of Heidelberg who devised and implemented successful plans received some of the money they saved to use in their classrooms.

The green jobs creation program costs the average German family $38 per year on its utility bill. The county lead Europe in develop and exporting green technology, generating $240 billion in annual revenue. And the German government continues to lead by example; its parliament building is set to run solely on green energy.

Did you ever wonder if all those energy efficient cars and machines and energy saving devices really save energy and are good for the environment? What I mean is....if building something, like an automobile that comes with big claims of saving energy and saving gas and not polluting the air with all those harmful bad gas emissions...are they REALLY providing a NET energy savings?

According to Honda’s website they claim the 2010 Honda Accord gets 22 MPG in the city and 31 on the highway

Let’s compare this to Honda’s Hybrid car. Their Honda Insight claims to have 40 MPG in the city and 43 MPG on the hwy. Sounds impressive.

DUST TO DUST CYCLE (to produce, distribute, drive, dispose of, etc.). The latest reasoning is that hybrids are not the answer. They are less energy-efficient than conventional vehicles if you look not just at the period when the hybrid is driven, but at their entire dust-to-dust lifecycle.

I found on line a study completed by CNW Research (Marketing/Research Firm) out of Oregon. The study involved collecting data pertaining to the energy cost per vehicle, from production to disposal. And they are translated into 'dollars per lifetime mile' for all new vehicles sold in the US in 2006. Essentially, this report confirms the amount of energy consumed over the lifetime of a vehicle and therefore the environmental impact.

The study shows that hybrids did not fare well in this report. Here are a few examples (showing energy cost per lifetime mile):

Here’s what the report showed:

Honda Accord Hybrid - $3.29 cost per mile to drive
Honda Accord (non-hybrid) - $2.18 to drive one mile

Toyota Prius - $3.24 cost per mile to drive
Toyota Camry (non-hybrid) - $1.95 to drive one mile

So it seems that the non-hybrid vehicles scored much better than their hybrid counterparts. It sort of makes sense when you take into account energy usage during production and distribution, fuel economy (small factor, so it seems), energy required to dismantle and dispose of the vehicle, etc., and consider that driving a hybrid may reduce greenhouse gases in the area you drive it, but essentially export pollution to other areas –like where the vehicle is built, shipped or disposed of.

COAL - Global coal use, mainly for power production in developing countries, grew by 4.9 percent per year between 2000 to 2006.  This is faster than the rate of growth for any other fossil fuel....and for any form of renewable energy. 

Overall, coal provides about 40% of world electricity, a share that has increased slightly over the last three decades despite the negative environmental consequences. China is by far the world's largest coal producer, accounting for nearly half of the world's supply.

Nuclear Power provies only 15% of world electricity and is restricted by environmentalist - now here's a contradiction - environmentalist want clean renewable energy but won't allow nuclear plants, the most efficient, clean and abundant energy,  to be built.  They seem to have nightmares of the movie "China Syndrome" coming true, I suppose.

Hyrdorelectric provides 16% of the world's electricity and Natural gas fuels 20% of the world's electricity.

Source:  Orange County Register Newspaper

Nearly everything you can plug into the wall has a label that says how much electricity it uses. It may be printed directly into the plastic or the metal. It's often located on the bottom or side of the device, or possibly where the power cord enters the device. If the device is powered with an AC/DC adapter, the electrical rating is usually listed on the adapter itself.

Now, if the label only gives the number of amps and not the number of watts, then just multiply the amps by 120 to get the number of watts. Most homes and businesses electricity is 120 volts. So if electric shaver that uses 8 amps uses 8 x 120 = 960 watts. Now if a device is powered by a transformer (one of those great big plugs), then the transformer has converted the electricity from AC to DC, so you need to multiply by the DC voltage. For example, if the device says "INPUT 9V, 0.5A", then that's 9 volts x 0.5 amps = 4.5 watts.

Remember - The amount of electricity listed on the label is the maximum amount that the appliance will ever use

You’ve been using Compact Fluorescent Lamps for over 100 years in your office, right now and in your kitchen at home – right now. Look up – see that fixture in the ceiling - it’s a 4’ long Fluorescent Lamp TUBE – the only difference is that it’s NOT compact – it’s full size. It’s exactly the same lamp just bigger. We put these tubes in the ceiling because they work better and cheaper than a large light bulb. Where is the outrage for that?

Want to see how a fluorescent lamps is made go to my website to see a short video on how they’re made – go to www.BillOnEnergy.com

Often I’m asked about the compact fluorescent lamps and what happens when it’s time to throw them away or if one drops and breaks on the floor – do they have a Environmental Emergency – well let me clear up some misunderstandings.

While the average CFL contains 4 mg of mercury — about enough to cover the tip of a ballpoint pen. That 4’ fluorescent lamp above your head right now – contains over 11 mg of mercury – 3 times the amount in a Compact Fluorescent.

For over 100 years we’ve been throwing away those 4’ tubes and I don’t remember any major mercury alerts going out in the news. When a large office building threw away hundreds at a time – where were the Mercury Police then?

There are more than 50 million mercury-containing thermostats in homes across the United States. Mercury has been used in thermostats since the 1950s.

A mercury-switch thermostat uses mercury in a sealed glass bulb. Each bulb contains approximately three grams of mercury, which is about the size of a dime. That’s 750 times as much as a Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL)

While it's essential to note that you’re required by law to properly dispose of a CFL but if you drop one – you don’t have to call the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY’S CLEAN UP SQUAD. Local Home Depots have a disposal bin or drop off place when it’s time to get rid of a bunch of them at one time.

A central authority (usually a government or international body) sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that can be emitted. Companies or other groups are issued emission permits and are required to hold an equivalent number of allowances (or credits) which represent the right to emit a specific amount. The total amount of allowances and credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Companies that need to increase their emission allowance must buy credits from those who pollute less. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade. In effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed. Thus, in theory, those that can easily reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the lowest possible cost to society.^[1]