PROF'S POSER - Tow or trail?

Here's a fun one.

On my daily jaunt to visit my Mum, I see quite a few tourist RV's plying the highways.

Some often have a little shuttle bug (usually a Smart) hanging off the back.

Very sensible to simply nose around the latest venue without a monster truck.

T'oher day I overtook two such behemoths, only one was connected to its baby by a tow bar, and the other had it on a trailer which was in turn hooked up to the Mother ship.

Which set me to pondering which would be better.

The latter obviously reduces wear and tear on the towee, especially tyres, but will impose a load on the tower rear.

The former might add more friction (4 wheels vs. 2) but maybe less load (weight of trailer + any down forces).

Not a clue. But keen to find out.

PROF'S POSER - Tap or...?

Nope, not about bottled water.

The other day I was cooking lunch for the boys and needed to clean the pan, which was coated in fat from the last fry-up.

Invested one kitchen towel in scooping the solids out and to the pin.

Then I needed to address the remains. A dob of Fairy Liquid and then I reached for the hot tap.

Now, hold on.

To get the water I needed, I say a minimum 'run' of about 1min. That's a lot of water down the drain anyway. And then the amount of hot water now left to cool in the pipes between boiler and tap.

Vs.... popping 1/2 a litre in the kettle. 250ml to cleana dn the rest to rinse.

I opted for the kettle. But I wonder is the 'leccy vs. gas source makes a difference.

PROF'S POSER - Long & slow or on, off and up?

First really nippy day of the year.

Well, this morning.

Now, with the sun... glorious.

Missus well happy at the 7am central heating kick-of and blissfully unaware that it goes off at 9am until 5pm, when it kicks in again until bedtime.

I noticed, at around 10am. Hence the jummy.

Thing is, am I doing the right thing?

As with the immerser, is it better to have it on all day, albeit 'ticking' over, or have two bursts to top and tail the day?

What is best for the overall thermal performance of a thick stone-walled building?

PROF'S POSER - Stone cold

Here's one for the thermodynamicists.

And/or anyone in one of the UK's many older homes, where certain insulation options are not exactly on the table. 3' thick stone walls and no gaps, for one.

After a not bad summer, with doors opened to the outside to air the place out, or opened to the conservatory to warm up the interior for most evenings, now we have hit September it's starting to get a wee bitty nippy.

Certainly for my Eastern blossom missus. And while her going around like a hood ornament for Dr. Zhivago is a fashion treat, the neighbours are talking.

My poser is (and a memory lurks that I might have done so before)... when is the right point at which to fire up the central heating?

Because one thing we have noticed, if empirically, is that if you leave it late and allow the cold to bite, the walls seem to keep it that way no matter what.

However, for good eco and plain money reasons, I don't want to be running the boiler until I have to.

POOH CORNER - Golden shower

Just, don't tell Seinfeld.

It’s official. Peeing in the shower is a good thing.

Of course, come a certain age try stopping.

I think I may need to add a Prof's Poser here... can we add yellow waters to our grey waters? I think they end up in the same waste water system.

Junkk - PLASTIC/BOTTLED WATER

This* came a while ago and was discussed here: DON'T LEAVE BOTTLED DRINKS IN CARS

I have now changed it from a Prof's Poser to a CATEGORY, as it is topical, ongoing and certainly contentious.

Note: new update added below

As you'll gather, there was some debate and obviously still some more to come. As I promised at the time, it's too important not to kee on top of. So I am. And share more in the ADDENDUM as they arrive (see end).

*With the really warm weather just around the corner [it came from Singapore], please read, if there's even a slight chance, and share with all the gal-pals.

Stop drinking that water left or stored in the car!! This is how Sheryl Crow got breast cancer. She was on the Ellen show and she said this same exact thing. So please be very careful, ladies. Drinking Bottled Water Kept in Car.... A friend whose mother recently got diagnosed with breast cancer. The doctor told her: women should not drink bottled water that has been left in a car.

The doctor said that the heat and the plastic of the bottle have certain chemicals that can lead to breast cancer. So please be careful! Do not drink that water bottle that has been left in a car. Pass this on to all the women in your life. This information is the kind we need to know and be aware and just might save us!!!! The heat causes toxins from the plastic to leak into the water and scientists have found these toxins in breast tissue. Use a stainless steel canteen or a glass bottle when you can!!!

I don't know. It seems credible, but also astounding if true, if only on a Food Standards basis. I guess it struck a chord as we have several in our car from ages ago (and I presume juice and fizzies are even worse for their corrosive actions).

Anyone? I am, of course, now off on a(nother) mission to find out.

ADDENDUM -

Grist - More info

Food Navigator -Back to tap: bottled water's enviro-woes - An industry view

Times - Number of genital defects on rise - Just when you thought it was safe to drink the bottled water. Another media scare story with as much on one side to say 'Yay' as there is on the other to say 'Nay'. I'd err on caution & limit the number of reuses, but don't get to freaked yet.

ENN - Polycarbonate Bottles unsafe for hot liquids - I'd say avoid the things if you can

Grist - Use the Force: Lukewarm - And certainly with hot liquids!

Daily Mail - We throw away ten billion bottles a year; we have GOT to think again, says environment minister - The DM... who'd have thunk?

PRW - Bottled water industry faces growing eco pressures

Indy - Should restaurateurs charge for tap water?

Times - AA Gill at Waterhouse - an odd, but interesting take in a food review

BeverageDaily - 'Ethical' water brands may boost flagging UK sales

Grist - Flex and Effects - plastic bottles and BPA - not sure that 'stop using a fundamental aspect of modern life, that is still legal and approved, is quite the kick-off to start with. This seesm to be the new mantra for the shop fresh/local brigade, who are worthy but seem to have a lot more money and time on their hands than most.

Plastics News - Are industry-funded studies biased?

Plastics News - Consumerist on degradable water bottles

FoodProductionDaily - Regulator confirms safety of BPA for use in food packaging

Gaurdian - We have a drinking problem, and it makes oil seem cheap - 'Come on: more of it is being sold than beer - you and I know that can't be right.' An interesting statement; even ignoring the health implications I wonder hwo many litres of water are consumed 'making' a pint of beer vs. a pint of water?

Foodanddrink - Which? survey adds to bottled water woes

Guardian - Packaging chemical linked to greater risk of diseases - Again, caution all round. Don't take risks, but also don't freak out.

Indy - Bottled water sales starting to run dry

BBC - NEW - Australia town bans bottled water - It will be interesting to see if this evolves in the same way as the plastic bag campaign. Our family doesn't use much, if any, as in this country the alternative is cheaper and just as good. That said, there always seems to be a bottle lurking in the car or bought around town to walk with. So I wonder if this might be a Planet Ban-it that will end up distracting from more pressing issues. That a small town in Oz gets the full UK media treatment seems... odd. I concede many of the arguments against, but in the global society (some not blessed with quality on tap) this might be a 'careful what you wish for'. Frankly I'd prefer a town to ban paying water utility bonus payments until he vast waste through leaks is addressed.

PROF'S POSER - Cans of worms?

I have certainly wondered this myself, so the question is worth sharing:

Green and confused: tin cans

The answer, however, does not start well. I frankly don't worry too much about some poor schmoe with their bottle of Fairy Liquid and scrubbing brush.

What my eye then alights upon is this: 'Also relatively clean tins make recycling easier and cheaper'. Ah.

Which follows: 'all tins that go for recycling pass through a washing, heating and crunching process which eliminates contamination from food and other products,'

Er... enviROI? What about the cumulative costs (to public pocket and planet) of all those individual sinks using water and/or heated at that? Versus a single, industrial system?

I don't know, so this Prof's Poser remains.

I do however note the conclusion: Recycling companies report that some people put their used tins in the dishwasher: that’s a bit extreme and a waste of energy. A good rinse should be enough.

Indeed. Of course, as one who has kept all his cans for years (well, the ones that slot into each other... I have a plan), I can confirm a wee splash of well-directed water as soon as the can is emptied and the food debris still soft, works a treat with all bar Stagg's chilli.

PROF'S POSER - Heat and rust

Ok, best I could do.

And wrong from the off, as aluminium doesn't rust.

However it does frame this Prof's Poser, which is essentially an enviROI-based one pondering energy consumption.

Over the weekend I was making an oven-heated meal. And it dawned on me that I was popping a sheet of foil in the glass dish.

Now the picture shows it all becomes moot pretty quickly anyway as the foil ripped, but I was wondering which was more energy efficient, and hence 'better': cook in foil and incur the costs of that resource being used and disposed of (there's a limit to how food caked it can be to [put out to] recycle), OR just use the glass and end up with a few pints of boiling water being required.

PROF'S POSER - Of mice and mending

Actually, this is more of a (and inspires another acronym in the process...) 'WIBNI'.

That's 'Wouldn't It Be Nice If..'

Today my trusty wireless keyboard conked. And being a Mac user, going to back-up (never throwing anything away has its uses) is proving a trail, as I really miss the scroll wheel and especially the right click button.

Anyway, a bunch of surfing and a chat with their tech guys suggests it has gone to the great WEEE pile in the sky, especially as its several years post warranty.

The WIBNI bit is that while the keyboard is no more, the mouse and all the charger/wireless gubbins is not.

It just seems a pity that I could not find a soul that has a dead mouse but still pukka keyboard and come to an arrangement. Even if it is just a central place to pool our respective working bits to recombine one operational unit.

Though I guess the frequencies would need to be matched.

A sort of 'Join 'Em Up JunkkYard' or 'Fix it FreeCycle'

PROF'S POSER - Dial 'S' for 'Sun'

Nothing like tapping into the best brains out there.

Sp sorry if this is another question without an answer, as yet.

This weekend I bought a solar security lamp combo.

Where it was needed rather determined where it went and, despite a 5m cable, my choices were limited.

However, I did manage, a great risk to life and limb, to get it pretty high up, to make the most of the daytime sunlight. And, despite the picture, the panel is pretty much clear exposure all day.

However, I faced it due South. And near vertical. Now I have noticed, on a nice day like today, it is missing out on any solar impact until mid-morning, though if the sun stays out it will keep it pretty much until dusk.

My question is whether this is the most sensible orientation? Two real issues. When is the sun mostly 'out', and when is it at its most solarific?

I know that data will exist, and can determine the optimum year-round setting, as I don't want to go up there again. Scaaaaareee!

In passing, I will advise that I am working on a self powered device to help panels auto-track the heat of the sun, which I'll share when complete.

Prof's Poser - Polystyrene cups

Inspired by a post here.

'One of my pet peeves is how many coffee cups are wasted. Why don’t more people use a thermos type or reusable coffee mug?'

I don’t know the answer, but I bet someone does.

As with all things eco, one needs to look at the enviROI. And also bear in mind whether your eco concern is waste, Co2, or a mixture of both.

It can be interesting sometimes to find out the energy used in, say, cleaning a reuseable vs. the cradle to grave of a disposable.

Sad to say, IF these things are a necessary evil, I am stumped as to possible reuses for now, however I then wonder about recycling.

This is not often optimal green-wise or anything like cost-effective, but these wee efforts tend to be used and disposed of in vast numbers by big offices.

Maybe there could be an argument for a dedicated in-house separated collection and purchase of a shredder to create virgin media bags of the stuff someone might be happy to collect and/or pay for to turn back into new ones?

If there isn’t already.

Or… just lob it all in the black plastic bin liner like usual.

PROF'S POSER - Back story

Prompted by a post in a very good Gizmo site I frequent, Red Ferret, the issue of Fridge coil cooling has come up.

I was just wondering what, if anything, could be done to help improve this aspect of what is an unavoidable 24/7 energy draining system.

PROFS POSER - Idle talk saves planets

This is the 'inspiration':

Stuck at a level crossing? Turn off the engine or pay £20 fine

Thing is, if you are not in Prius or snazzy Beemer, when is the right time to switch off, and even if there is one (there must be, like for flourescent bulbs) how can it be assessed in advance (ever switched off in a jam afater 5 minutes, only to find that's when it moves off?).

Thing is, I have an old wife nagging that says starting ans stoping uses 'more' (over a period tba) than shutting down.

PROF'S POSER - Don't chill, man?

For once the question is answered as posed (well, presuming the answer(s) provided by the author below are universally agreed).

Is it better to buy canned or frozen food?

I had actually thought fresh was best, but allowing this option to be a given (or...is it? If an NZ lamb can have a better enviROI than near home... as I have heard it suggested).

The points on freezing being an ongoing energy draw are well taken (which is why we have decommissioned one big effort to no more than an insulated larder in fvaour of a wee one to keep the ice cream and a few other, er, 'essentials'), and the recycling aspect of cans is 'interesting' (another PP on the ground to ground cycle of steel/alumimium per gram of food vs. a plastic sack). As to chilled, well, today I fear I (other 3 not too keen) might well enjoy a salad sideplate with lunch, and mostly for coneveince, but also with a hat-tip to waste (too many soggy, smelly, leaves ejected if not used that day), it may well be an option I still consider.

PROF'S POSER - Where's an actuary when you need one?

The other day these bits of paper arrived.

At first I was going to bin them, but then I had a read, and as a consequence of that called up the sender.

You see, our washing machine is at last 10 years old. Still doing a sterling job, bar a few hiccups year on year that have been resolved.

Thing is, I don't recall ever seeing such an insurance before, so they must n=know what they are doing.

The deal is not cheap, coming in at well over £100 a year. But the up side is tempting. They either fix it if...when it dies, or give us a new one.

Now, my main aim is environmental (no, really) in that I like the notion of repair if at all possible (lord knows what the enviROI on a call-out is), but I was also wondering about the numbers.

Being that a new one is around £2-300, does it make any sense to take out such a policy at this stage?

PROF's POSER - Killer Cure?

Carbon capture, but where’s the polluter?

A little science is a dangerous thing. Which is why I lack the certitude of many in the climate arena, and usually content myself with simply asking often daft or at least possibly naive questions. If they are really daft then I get politely put back on track. If they are daft like a fox then it's fun seeing the experts get busy.

I was at school doing Physics, Chemistry and Biology when Isambard K Brunel was in short stovepipes. I did 2/3 of a vet degree but dropped out when it was clear I would not be meeting the lady who played James Herriot's missus in the TV series, and then went on to a Civ. Eng degree I was mainly granted on the strict understanding I didn't try an build anything. So detail is not my strong suit. However I still often have a fair grasp of the bigger pictures.

Some notions may yet go astray. I have merely wondered what might happen if we suck the energy out of all the wind that blows ashore before it gets to where it used to. And while I appreciate the vastness of the earth, I do still concern myself as to the possible consequences of sucking a bunch of heat from down there to up and out on top. I guess all pale to the as yet unconfirmed consequences of sucking bazillions of litres of oil up as well over the last several decades. I have seen the 'Crack in the Earth', you know. Mind you, many of my doubts on nuclear are based on Space 1999.

Anyhoo, this latest wheeze has promoted my next 'but what about...'.

I'm going to plump for the scientific term osmosis. I know it's usually associated with fluids and movements of short distances in liquids, but basically I thinking that basically Nature likes balance, just as it abhors a vacuum. Hence you have a bunch of stuff in one place and less in another, so it will migrate.

Now, ignoring the vastness of our Earth, and even in the form of its wafer thin crust coating and micro-bubble of atmosphere, assuming these calumpter-calumpter machines do what they say on the tin, is there not a slight danger that if they don't suck at sucking, pretty soon there will be less Co2 overall globally to be sure, but won't here also be some very odd pockets where there is an extremely low concentration, namely in a gradient to the hemisphere centered on these things.

So, and just asking here, bearing in mind that some C02 is still part of the old natural balance, is there not a danger that there might be large areas where the plant life is gasping a bit and ends up prevented from its millenia-long task of Co2 scrubbing... and O2 emitting?

PROF'S POSER - Recycling old photos

From a question to the site as to whether old photos could be recycled:

I didn't know, though I had some fair ideas.

No toxins as far as I am aware, but some possible heavy metals (Silver? Though that might just be in the negative. There might even be value to it, though not to you. But a recycler might find some). Not enough I wouldn't have thought to upset a kerbside paper recycler.... How wrong can I be!

Times - Can I recycle old photographs?

Assuming they know better, and by your question I'm guessing you care enough to err on the side of caution, here's the skinny: No. Much like wrapping paper and the Yellow Pages, photographs cause problems at paper mills. In this case it is the chemicals used in the paper and the thin layer of polythene that coats a photo to stop it going wrinkly when it dries. These are classified as contaminants and clog up the recycling process.

Hence, for reuses, you could do worse than some here: How can I reuse or recycle … old photos? (nice site)

Just... make sure you are prepared to let them go! I'd suggest keeping the negatives!

Interestingly, and in the spirit of archiving our past, I did stumble across this from a council:
Recycling - Family papers or photographs

Might be worth asking your local?

PROF'S POSER - Soap Stars

The following query was submitted to the Junkk website:

'I work for a company that produce toiletries and guest amenities for hotels around the world! I had an enquiry from a customer today as to whether we have anything organised in regards to half-used soaps, she used to work at a hotel that gave there used soaps to charity but we are struggling to find any where that can help us and we are very interested, do you have any ideas??'

This... is a call for a Prof's Poser!

So far, from me:

'Short answer... none (A scope on the site didn't do that great:( . Medium answer... yet. Longer answer... to come, hopefully.

As an initial thought... have you guys thought of taking them back when you deliver new ones and then 'recycling' them as an 'eco' range?

I am sure there are hygiene, health and safety and consumer resistance issues (though what soap is originally made of might put some off) but let's try and think laterally. Maybe dog grooming salons: The Rex Salon Luxury Grooming Bar?

Depending on how you charge, the PR might it worth doing just as a CSR 'loss leader'.

Let's see what else folk might have to suggest.'

PROF'S POSER - Book 'im Dano!

This is inspired by a PR piece I read (online) about saving the planet with some eco-books: Dorling Kindersley turns back on gloss for green book range

These go under 'Better than nothing... but...'

Nice little bit of CSR PR , but 'a' range of 'a number of titles'.

Hmnn.

Any numbers on what % of total this is?

And, in devil's advocacy mode, what in the great scheme of things is the actual enviROI- impact of the usual non-ultra 'green' stock/ink, etc vs. the other stuff still involved, namely shipping, etc.

One presumes even non-recycled stock is from managed forests, etc. I have often wondered if these might not be argued as having a carbon sink value that in some way might equate to the processes involved in recycling.

My 'poser' is the last part. Though I am keen to find out more about the totality of the paper industry impact, and what's doing the most in terms of enviROI-, and what can be done to pump up the enviROI+.

I personally love reading paper bound in a form I can look at in my hands. I'd just liek to be sure that waht I do enage with is really that bad... or good.. as is bing made out.

PROF's POSER - Solar, so long...?

Just watched a series of BBC Brekky slots on solar.

Here's a pretty bald statement: 'It's not going to save your bank balance so you'll just be doing it to save the planet'. That'll have them rushing to sign up at B&Q, for sure.

In fact, in a later piece with two commentators, a chap from the Green Alliance (Pro) and a Prof. James Woudhuysen (less so) the knives were pretty much out for any financial sense involved in advocating the things... at least as good ROIs. The GA guy at least was flying the flag for 'better than nothing', at least in an enviro sense.

So in mitigation the talk turned to subsidies.

It was a pity not to have a government spokesperson present (who are scarcer than hen's teeth on anything these days, as it is all pretty much falling down around them and the bunker boys seem to have decided that absence makes the voter grow forgetful) to actually discuss why the support to help such microgeneration is so woeful.

I had to disagree with the good Prof. on one point, where he said that what we do at home doesn't matter at it all takes place at the power stations. True, but if we are not drawing from the power stations then we are surely acting in some mitigation on an individual level where the big boys seem to be failing at every turn on the big stuff?

But there is still one area that still troubles me. And I can't yet get a handle on it from guys paid, a lot, to deal in this area of expertise.

That is the enviROI. What if the planet doesn't get saved either? I don't know, but before committing to what seems a poor financial choice for sure, I'd certainly like to be more certain it is helping the kids' futures if I choose to take the hit for other reasons.

The point was made that these things currently only pay back over a few decades... but that is also their lifespan. What are the consequences in pure eco terms of their being made, shipped, installed, operated, maintained and then being disposed of, when weighed against the obvious benefits of their producing 'free', clean, solar energy through their lifespans?

Is solar heating sensible on any measure in the UK?

ADDENDUM:

Following Dave's suggestion of where I should go in the comments section, OK, I should clarify, and hence have added the key word heating in the last sentence above.

Because here I am referring to the major rooftop installations that are touted, and were featured in the slot, to heat your water and/or home.

My Solarventi dehumidification system does a pretty good job and today, despite it being chilly, is whirring away in the sun, at least for the last few hours, and with luck, a few hours more. I recall we sat down and figured out beforehand the pros and cons based on the purchase costs and operational logistics in comparison, in this case, to an electric dehumidifier running essentially 24/7, 365/365.

I believe we assessed a payback period of around 3 years, which is way within the lifespan of the unit, and therefore a worthy investment simply on cost grounds. I actually think we may need to extend the time period to account for our rather dire national delivery of sun, and the simple problems of getting it on panel when it shines around trees and neighbours' houses (especially when the angle is lower in the winter months). But even so I consider it well worth it. In addition, thanks to the relative lack of moving parts (though many other solar installations are relatively free as well) the maintenance is essentially zero and the lifespan hence very long.

Hence I am pretty confident that both the ROI and enviROI are in the + column.

But this is my point. Especially with stonking great outlays required on the major efforts, the lack of government support and very vague guidance, householders need to get to these figures quickly, easily and with confidence that they are doing right, if not by their pockets but also by the future, too. Do these exist, and if so where?

If our national broadcaster, who is by no means shy when it comes to green advocacy and often none too challenging to all the considerations pro and con, can pretty much damn 'solar' in all its forms in such a piece with the faint praise of 'only being good for the planet', and tar all beneficial aspects with the near certainty of being a financial negative (probably inaccurately, even for some solar rooftop systems - the Germans seem to be doing OK), it seems clear to me that where these things are worthwhile we need clear means to find out and reply upon.

Hence as this is a Prof's Poser I'd welcome information that can be shared to counter this view.