How to Get Started with Solar Power
The following guide will help you start exploring the possibility of going solar at your house. Let’s first get up to speed on solar electricity basics with a few key definitions:
PV Module: aka a solar panel, converts energy from the sun into direct current (DC) energy. PV Modules come in varying wattages and sizes. Typical PV modules used on home installations are 200 watts and about 14 square feet.
PV Array: A number of PV modules wired together. Using 5 x 200 watt PV modules creates a 1,000 watt PV array. Typical array sizes range from 2,000 to 5,000 watts and up.
Inverter: Converts DC electricity into alternating current (AC) electricity used around the house. A 3,000 watt inverter will output 3,000 watts of AC electricity given enough PV input. Typical inverter sizes range from 2,000 watts to 7,000 watts.
Grid-Tied Solar System: An electrical system comprised primarily of a roof or ground mounted PV array and inverter, which are connected to and interact with the utility grid. Other devices called over current protection devices or OCPD are used for safety. Energy from the PV array goes fist to household loads and any extra power is stored on the utility grid.
Kilowatt Hour (kwh): One kilowatt (1,000 watts) for 1 hour = 1 kilowatt hour. The utility company charges you by the number of kwh you use.
The three main factors that will determine your eventual grid-tied solar electric systems are daily energy requirements, available shade-free space, and project budget.
Daily Energy Requirements: The PV array will be generating most if not all the energy your home needs, so looking at your own usage is a good place to start. Look on your utility bill or call your utility company to find out your energy use in terms of kilowatt hours per day or kwh/day. It’s best to use the average kwh/day for the last 12 months to account for seasonal variations in energy consumption. While you’re talking to the utility company, ask them for their “interconnection agreement.” This is essentially the contract you’ll enter with them when you connect PVs to their grid. Once you know your average kwh/day usage you can plug this number into simple calculations to determine system size and cost.
Shade-Free Space Available: PV modules need direct sunlight to produce electricity. Even a little shade on the PV array will cause significant drops in power generation. The PV array needs to be in a location where it will receive direct sunlight between 10am and 3pm. The early morning and late afternoon hours don’t really count for solar production because the sun’s rays pass through too much atmospheric debris to be “strong” enough to produce much power.
Every location on Earth has an average “Peak Sun Hours” ranging from 4-6hrs, or the yearly average number of hours per day for good solar production. These peak sun hours occur between 10am and 3pm, so shading outside this time is less of a concern. Tools like solar pathfinders and sun charts can be used to find out if that big tree across the street will shade the PV array in December/January. You might have more shade-free space than necessary or it could be the limiting factor in your system’s size.
Project Budget: Solar electric systems are not cheap and usually cost more than expected. Modest systems start at around 5K but the majority fall in the 20K-40K range. There are federal and state incentives and rebates to take advantage of that will significantly decrease out of pocket costs. It may not be possible to produce 100% of the energy you use and many systems are supplemental, producing as much as space and/or budget allow.
The cost becomes more reasonable when looked at as a long term investment. After all, you are pre-paying for your electricity at a fixed rate for what could be the rest of your life and providing free energy for your kids and grandkids. People often complain about a long payback period, but isn’t any payback whatsoever a good thing no matter how long? What’s the payback on the last car you bought? A PV electric system is a risk free investment with a guaranteed payback.
Easy calculations for system size and cost:
If you know your average kwh/day or know how many kwh/day you would like to produce, a simple calculation will determine system size and cost.
System size in kilowatts (kw) = (kwh/day) / 5hrs (peak sun) x 1.43 (system losses)
Step 1: divide average kwh/day by number of hours of peak sun, or (kwh/ay)/5
Step 2: multiply by 1.43 to account for system losses due to friction, heat and other inefficiencies.
Example: What size system is needed to produce 20kwh/day?
20kwh/5h = 4kw
4kw x 1.43= 5.7kw
5.7kw = system size to produce 20kwh/day assuming 5 peak sun hours
System cost = system size x $7,000-$9,000
Step 1: multiply system size by $7 for competitive system cost installed
Step 2: multiply system size by $9 for conservative system cost installed
Example: How much would a 5.7kw system cost?
5.7kw x $7,000 = $40,040 = competitive system cost
5.7kw x $9,000 = $51,480 = conservative system cost
We used to see an average cost of a grid-tied system to be about $9,000 per kilowatt (array size) installed, but with a growing market, systems are being installed for as low as $7,000 per kilowatt in competitive areas. Keep in mind that these costs are before any incentives or rebates are taken into account.
Hopefully this helped introduce you to some of the basic considerations needed before purchasing a solar electric system. There is far too much information to cover in a short guide and anyone serious about greener living should get their hands on a copy of the Solar Living Sourcebook. This guide, now in its 13th edition, speaks from 30 years of experience in the renewable energy field, covering everything you’ll want to know about renewable energy technology and sustainable living (available at www.realgoods.com). If you have more questions you can call the technicians at Real Goods at 1-800-919-2400.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Why solar power can help us cycle round the world
In March 2007, acting on an ambitious whim, I found myself running the Marathon des Sables, a 151-mile (243km) six-day endurance race in the Sahara. The event, dubbed the “toughest footrace in the world” is notable not only for its searing temperatures but for its location in one of Earth’s most unhospitable environments. There could have been no more dramatic introduction to the vast potential of solar power.
It was neither the incredible heat, nor the desolate expanses of scorched earth that had left the greatest impression. Rather, it was the fact that, in the middle of nowhere and without seeing a plug socket for days, a tiny solar panel was all it took to charge my MP3 player.
I had been a keen environmentalist for some time, starting up a sustainable-living blog in 2004. Now though, I turned my attention to solar energy.
Investigations led me to the first solar-powered rickshaws operating in India. Always keen to seek out original challenges, I meandered onto the idea of taking one on a long distance journey. To my dismay, the rickshaw was not suitable for covering such distance.
But the idea of undertaking an adventure to demonstrate solar around the world had taken root. If I couldn’t do it on a rickshaw I would do it in another environmentally-friendly way: by bicycle.
I began to read about new flexible nanosolar panels, which would be ideal to power my technology in places far from a plug. In my research, I eventually found G24 Innovations, a Cardiff-based company specialising in dye-sensitised flexible thin-film solar technology. I gave them a call. “Of course we can make solar panniers. We can attach the panels to almost any fabric.” Really? Could I have a solar dress too?
Sadly, the dress was deemed impractical but I convinced my friends Iain and Jamie to accompany me on this solar-powered journey. Today, starting in London on EU Solar Day, we set off for a 12,000-mile tour of solar power around the world.
We are taking a satellite tracking device which, along with other communications equipment, will be powered using solar panels on our bike panniers. The independence of the solar kit will help us document the entire route – from Libyan sandstorms to ancient Iranian cities, 4000-metre passes in Kyrgyzstan to the lowest point of Death Valley – precisely and second by second.
Our route has been chosen to take us through North Africa and the Middle East in order to visit a concentrated solar plant and profile the work of the Trans-Mediterranean Renewable Energy Cooperation (TREC), a project to supply huge amounts of green energy from the Sahara. We’ll go past the Quidam basin, where the world’s biggest PV solar power station is being built, across the pacific by cargo ship (we are hoping to be carried by Nippon who have just launched the first solar-assisted freighter) and on to America’s solar heartland, the Nevada desert.
I hope the trip will demonstrate the potential of solar power in the run up to the Copenhagen climate summit this December. Follow us in real-time on The Solar Cycle Diaries, and wish us good luck with the weather.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Dragonflies face uncertain future
At least one in ten species of dragonfly and damselfly are threatened with extinction, according to the first world survey of their numbers.
The figure may be an underestimate as so little is known about many species.
However, the news is not all bad. The survey published in Biological Conservation is the first to assess the vulnerability of any insect group on a global scale.
And it suggests the extinction risk faced by insects has been exaggerated.
Viola Clausnitzer led an international team of conservation scientists from Germany, Australia, Japan, Russia and the UK among others. They reviewed the status of a random sample of 1500 of the 5680 dragonflies and damselflies known to science.
The team assessed the population and distribution of each species according to the Red List criteria set down by the World Conservation Union (IUCN).
They found that more than half of the species should be categorised as Least Concern, which means they likely remain widespread globally, or are not threatened even if they live in a restricted range.
But one in 10 species is threatened, meaning it is categorised as critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable.
“It’s fair to say that is an underestimate,” says Clausnitzer, as too little data exists to accurately assess the status of 35 per cent of the species.
Dragonflies and damselflies, which belong to the insect order known as the Odonata, are susceptible because the larvae of each species live in water. So pollution and changes to habitat, such as forest degradation, which affect water courses can have an impact.
Indeed, because of their sensitivity to water and habitat quality, dragonflies are frequently used to assess environmental health. With their striking colours and behaviour they can be used as indicator species. “If they disappear you’ve got something wrong with your habitat,” says Clausnitzer.
Those species most at risk tend to live in south east Asia and Australia.
In south east Asia, a large number of species are endemic to islands such as the Philippines or within Indonesia, and cannot escape detrimental impacts on their habitat.
In Australia, climate change is having an especially strong impact on freshwater systems.
The survey is the first to assess the global health of any order of insects. Compared to vertebrates, the dragonflies and damselflies are not doing badly.
“Amphibians are more threatened than dragonflies in general,” says Clausnitzer. Amphibians are being particularly afflicted by the deadly chytrid fungus. “Another difference is that adult dragonflies are more mobile. If one site is destroyed they still have the chance to fly to another site, which frogs don’t have.”
They also seem less to be less threatened than the mammals, but at a similar level of risk as birds.
“We were a bit surprised that the dragonflies are not that bad off,” says Clausnitzer.
“There is a big discussion going on about invertebrates and extinction rates in insects, and this discussion is not based on any real figures. It is all estimations,” she adds.
In general, conservationists have feared that a much higher proportion of insect species face extinction.
However, Clausnitzer cautions that much more research needs to be done to be sure, and different groups of insects might face very different challenges.
For instance, while the reliance of dragonflies and damselflies on water makes them susceptible, says Clausnitzer “dragonflies are the strongest fliers in the insect kingdom. So you might get a very different picture if you take less capable fliers.”
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Save Birds by Promoting Wind Energy
A new study shows that wind farms and nuclear power plants are substantially better for avian wildlife than fossil-fueled power stations.
One could be tempted to think, after reading the more than 600 studies about wind farms and the deaths of birds and bats read by this author the past year, that the evidence linking wind turbines with avian mortality is indisputable.
Birds, for instance, can directly crash into a turbine blade when they are fixated on perching or hunting and pass through its rotor plane; they can strike its support structure; they can hit part of its tower; or they can collide with its associated transmission and distribution lines.
We are told that these risks are exacerbated when turbines are placed on ridges and upwind slopes, built close to migration routes, or operated during periods of poor visibility such as fog, rain, and at night. Some species, such as bats, face additional risks from the rapid reduction in air pressure near turbine blades, which can cause internal hemorrhaging through a process known as barotraumas. Indirectly, wind farms can positively and negatively physically alter natural habitats, the quantity and quality of prey, and the availability of nesting sites.
Yet the deluge of studies making such claims, while useful and important, nonetheless suffers from three common problems. Studies rarely compare their results with studies of other wind farms to contextualize their estimates, instead relying on a narrow sample size. Most do not compare the possible avian deaths from wind electricity with other sources, and when they do, studies typically do not compare them to other energy sources. None have so far attempted to calculate the number of avian deaths per kWh from energy sources so that more meaningful comparisons might be made between different forms of electricity supply.
In an attempt to address some of these shortcomings, one new albeit preliminary study conducted by this author has compared the avian deaths per GWh from three electricity systems: wind farms, fossil-fueled power plants (coal, natural gas, and oil generators), and nuclear power plants.
Avian wildlife can perish not only by striking wind turbines in the ways described above, but by smashing into nuclear power plant cooling structures, transmission and distribution lines, and smokestacks at fossil-fuel fired power stations. Birds can starve to death in forests ravaged by acid rain, ingest hazardous and fatal doses of mercury, drink contaminated water at uranium mines and mills, or die in large numbers as climate change wreaks havoc on migration routes and degrades habitats.
For wind turbines, the risk appears to be greatest to birds striking towers or turbine blades and for bats suffering barotrauma. For fossil-fueled power stations, the most significant fatalities come from climate change, which is altering weather patterns and destroying habitats that birds depend on. For nuclear power plants, the risk is almost equally spread across hazardous pollution at uranium mine sites and collisions with draft cooling structures.
When these avian deaths are correlated with the units of electricity those power plants produce, some may find the results surprising. Based on real world operating experience of 339 wind turbines comprising six wind farms constituting 274 MW of installed capacity in the U.S., average avian mortality for wind appears to be about 0.269 fatalities per GWh.
Based on real world operating experience for two coal facilities as well as the indirect damages from mountain top removal coal mining in Appalachia, acid rain pollution on wood thrushes, mercury pollution, and anticipated impacts of climate change, average avian mortality for fossil fueled power stations appears to be about 5.18 fatalities per GWh.
Based on real world operating experience at four nuclear power plants and two uranium mines and mills, average avian mortality for nuclear systems is about 0.416 GWh.
In terms of birds killed per electricity produced, nuclear power is slightly worse but comparable to wind energy, but fossil-fueled facilities are about 17 times more dangerous to birds on a per kWh basis. In absolute terms, since wind turbines produced a relatively small amount of national electricity in the United States in 2006, they may have killed about 7,000 but fossil fueled stations killed 14.5 million and nuclear power plants 327,000.
Clearly, wind energy is not as bad for birds as many environmentalists make it out to be, and conventional resources are much more damaging to birds than is commonly believed.
Of course, a few caveats must be stated. Far more detailed, rigorous, and sophisticated analysis is called for that takes into account the complexities of the wind, fossil-fueled, and nuclear energy fuel cycles, and the sample size for many parts of this study is small.
Yet perhaps wind turbines seem to present a significant threat to birds because all of their environmental impacts are concentrated in one place, while those from conventional and nuclear fuel cycles are spread across space and time. Avian mortality and wind energy has consequently received far more attention and research than the avian deaths associated with coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear power generators, even though this study suggests that wind energy may be the least harmful to birds.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Melting ice could cause gravity shift
Northern hemisphere sea levels ‘will rise the most’ if Antarctic sheet disintegrates
The melting of one of the world’s largest ice sheets would alter the Earth’s field of gravity and even its rotation in space so much that it would cause sea levels along some coasts to rise faster than the global average, scientists said yesterday.
The rise in sea levels would be highest on the west and east coasts of North America where increases of 25 per cent more than the global average would cause catastrophic flooding in cities such as New York, Washington DC and San Francisco.
A study into how the West Antarctic Ice Sheet could respond to global warming has found its disintegration would change the focus of the planet’s gravitational field, so sea levels would rise disproportionately more around North America than in other parts of the world. If the ice sheet covering West Antarctica disappears, the loss of so much mass from the southern hemisphere would effectively make the pull of gravity stronger in the northern hemisphere, affecting the spin of the Earth and causing sea levels to rise higher here than in the south, where the mass of ice is currently located.
However, the scientists also estimated that the global average sea level would not rise as much as previously expected due to the ice sheet melting into the oceans.
This is because parts of the ice sheet are more stable than previously thought, and so would probably not slip into the sea even in a warmer world caused by man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, they found.
The West Antarctic Ice Sheet – one of the three great ice sheets of the world – is often referred to as the “sleeping giant” because it is believed to be inherently unstable, given much of its base rests on rock that is below sea level. This is thought to make it vulnerable to melting and relatively rapid disintegration, said Professor Jonathan Bamber of Bristol University.
“Unlike the world’s other major ice sheets – the East Antarctic Ice Sheet and the Greenland – the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is the only one with such an unstable configuration,” Professor Bamber said.
“There’s a vast body of research that’s looked at the likelihood of an ice sheet collapse and what implications such a catastrophic event would have for the globe. But all of these studies have assumed a five- or six-metre [16ft to 20ft] contribution to sea level rise. Our calculations show those estimates are much too large, even on a 1,000-year timescale,” he said.
A better approximation, according to a study published in the journal Science, is that the ice sheet would contribute about 11 feet (3.3 metres) to the global average sea level.
However, it is not known how fast the ice sheet might disappear if global temperatures continue to rise, although many scientists believe this would take at least 500 or even 1,000 years.
“The pattern of sea level rise is independent of how fast or how much of the ice sheet collapses. Even if it contributed only a metre of sea level rise over many years, sea levels along North America’s shorelines would still increase 25 per cent more than the global average,” said Professor Bamber.
With less mass at the South Pole, and more water in the oceans, the Earth’s gravity field would weaken in the southern hemisphere and strengthen in the northern hemisphere, causing water to pile up in the northern oceans, Professor Bamber said.
This redistribution of mass would also affect the Earth’s rotation, which in turn would cause water to build up along the North American continent and in the Indian Ocean, Professor Bamber added.
Why the sea isn’t as flat as you think
* Sea levels around the world vary widely on a daily basis because of tides caused by the gravitational influence of the Moon. They also vary from one region to another because of the variations in the Earth’s field of gravity, and the spin of the planet of its axis of rotation.
* Global average sea levels can vary over time because of the thermal expansion of the sea caused by global warming, as well as the effect of rising sea levels caused by melting ice sheets and glaciers. Local sea levels can also be affected by land sinking or rising. Land sinking is partly responsible for causing sea levels in the south east of England to rise.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Coke to launch bottle partly derived from plants
* Coke to test “plantbottle” in North America this year
* Says up to 30 pct of new bottle comes from plant material
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Coca-Cola Co said on Thursday it has developed a new plastic bottle that is partly made from sugar cane and molasses, raising the bar in the battle for the most environmentally friendly packaging.
Coke will test the new bottle in North America with Dasani bottled water and certain carbonated brands later this year. The test will expand to the vitaminwater brand in 2010.
Up to 30 percent of the new “plantbottle” will be made from a material derived from sugar cane and molasses, which is a by-product of sugar production, Coke said.
Plastic bottles are made from a non-renewable, petroleum-derived substance.
Many large food and drink makers are looking to make their packages smaller and more environmentally friendly, especially since retail giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc introduced a “packaging scorecard” to rate suppliers on their ability to cut waste and conserve resources by reducing packaging.
Rival beverage makers PepsiCo Inc and Nestle are also introducing lighter-weight bottles that use less plastic.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Australia to build world's largest solar energy plant: PM
SYDNEY (Reuters) – Australia plans to build the world’s largest solar power station with an output of 1000 megawatts in a A$1.4 billion (US$1.05 billion) investment, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said on Sunday.
The plant would have three times the generating capacity of the current biggest solar-powered electricity plant, which is in California, Rudd said during a tour of a power station.
Tender details will be announced later in the year, and successful bidders will be named in the first half of 2010. Rudd said the project was aimed at exploiting the country’s ample sunshine, which he called “Australia’s biggest natural resource.”
It was also aimed at helping the country become a leader in renewable, clean energy, he said.
“The government plans to invest with industry in the biggest solar generation plant in the world, three times the size of the world’s current biggest, which is in California,” Rudd said.
“Why are we doing this? We are doing it in order to support a clean energy future for Australia, we’re doing it to boost economic activity now and we’re doing it also to provide jobs and much needed opportunities for business as well.”
The project should eventually lead to a network of solar-powered stations across the country, Rudd said, with locations chosen to fit in with the existing electricity grid and ensure good access to sunshine.
“We don’t want to be clean energy followers worldwide, we want to be clean energy leaders worldwide.” Rudd said.
The A$1.4 billion dedicated to this project was part of a wider A$4.65 clean energy initiative by the government, he said.
Rudd also said Australia would become a full member of the International Renewable Energy Agency, which will have its first global meeting in June.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Komodo Dragons Kill With Venom, Researchers Find
Komodo dragons kill using a one-two punch of sharp teeth and a venomous bite, scientists have confirmed for the first time. The find dispels the common belief that toxic bacteria in the Komodos’ mouths are responsible for ultimately killing the dragons’ prey.
An animal that escapes a Komodo’s initial attack soon weakens and dies. The fierce carnivore tracks the wounded creature and dines at its leisure once the prey collapses.
Researchers have long thought that the Komodo dragon, native to Indonesia, kills via blood poisoning caused by the multiple strains of bacteria in the dragon’s saliva.
But “that whole bacteria stuff has been a scientific fairy tale,” said Bryan Fry, a venom researcher at the University of Melbourne in Australia.
Fry and colleagues studied the biochemistry of Komodo venom after they had the rare opportunity to examine two dragons from zoos that both had to be put down due to terminal illnesses.
The team found that the dragon’s venom rapidly decreases blood pressure, expedites blood loss, and sends a victim into shock, rendering it too weak to fight.
In the venom, some compounds that reduce blood pressure are as potent as those found in the word’s most venomous snake, western Australia’s inland Taipan.
Komodo Combo Attack
While his colleagues expressed surprise at the findings, Fry said he wasn’t so shocked.
His earlier research had shown that other lizard species—such as iguanas, legless lizards, and monitor lizards—are also venomous.
In fact, Fry estimates that close to a hundred of the more than 5,000 known lizard species use venom.
What is surprising, Fry said, is Komodo dragons’ elaborate venom-delivery system. “It’s the most complex duct system described in reptiles to date,” he said.
Snakes typically have a single venom duct that leads to their fangs. But Komodos have multiple ducts located between their teeth.
However, this means Komodo dragons don’t deliver their venom as efficiently as snakes, Fry said.
Rather than injecting venom directly via a forceful bite, the dragons use a specialized bite-and-pull motion to ooze the toxin into wounds during a sustained, frenzied attack.
The combination of venom and multiple lacerations from the lizards’ sharp, serrated teeth is what makes the dragons so deadly.
“They’re not like the cobra, where venom is the only game in town. Komodos have a combined arsenal,” Fry said.
The findings suggest that the Komodo’s ancient relative, the Megalania, used a similar venom-plus-wounding approach.
The giant lizard, which roamed Australia about 40,000 years ago, measured about 13 feet (4 meters) long.
Fry’s work, published in this week’s issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, could mean that the Megalania was the largest venomous animal to have ever lived.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Pollution Can Change Your DNA in 3 Days, Study Suggests
Breathing in polluted air may wreak havoc on our DNA, reprogramming genes in as few as three days and causing increased rates of cancer and other diseases. So says a new study that tracked DNA damage in 63 steel-foundry workers in Brescia, Italy, who, under their normal factory conditions, were exposed to particulate matter.
The same damage may occur in city dwellers exposed to normal air, the researchers say.
Particulate matter includes suspended, tiny bits of dust, metal, or soot in the air, which can lodge deep in the lungs. Exposure to the substance has been linked to respiratory diseases, lung cancer, and heart problems.
Scientists know little about how inhaling particulate matter can cause health problems, according to lead study author Andrea Baccarelli of the University of Milan.
But they did find that exposed workers’ DNA was damaged by a slowed rate of “methylation,” a biological process in which genes are organized into different chemical groups.
Fewer groups means that fewer genes are expressed—or made into proteins—a crucial process in the body’s regular maintenance.
Reduced-size gene groups like the ones observed in the new study have also been found in the blood DNA of lung
cancer patients.
Widespread Damage
In the study, the workers’ blood was sampled on the morning of the first day of their workweeks—before they were heavily exposed to the foundry’s air—and again a few days later.
Comparisons between the two samples revealed significant changes in the methylation of four genes that may suppress tumors, said Baccarelli, who presented his research May 17 at the International Conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego, California.
You might not have to be a steelworker to sustain this kind of genetic damage, Baccarelli added. It’s true that air near the steel foundry contains about ten times more particulate matter than ambient—or normal—air, and a larger fraction of foundry-air particles are metals.
But the team speculates that the same damage can occur in city dwellers—the effects, however, take weeks or months to show up.
For instance, Baccarelli has done previous research that shows elderly people in Boston had DNA damage from breathing in particulate matter.
But Baccarelli added that “our results need to be confirmed in air pollution studies before they can be extended to the general population.”
Take Your Vitamins?
John Heffner is professor of medicine at Oregon Health and Science University and a past president of the American Thoracic Society.
The new study strengthens the link between particulate inhalation and lung cancer, said Heffner, who did not participate in the research.
“Other investigators have shown that inhalation of particulate matter affects DNA through the methylation process,” he said.
“What these investigators have done is show that the genes affected are ones that are known to be related to the development of lung cancer.”
Related work by Baccarelli’s team also raises the possibility that methylation damage from particulate matter can be slowed or even reversed with folic acid, a vitamin naturally found in many foods.
The vitamin “may make methylation machineries more efficient,” lead study author Baccarelli said.
“We found that subjects with higher intakes of methyl nutrients were protected from some of the cardiac effects of particulate matter.”
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Now Government wants us to paint our houses white to cope with climate change heatwaves
Paint it white: Health chiefs say to stay cool we should adopt the same measures as homeowners in Mediterranean countries such as Greece
It’s a tried and tested way of keeping homes cool in Mediterranean countries.
But many might feel the latest official advice is just a little bit over the top for Britain, where summer downpours seem more common than heatwaves.
Health chiefs advised yesterday that homes should be painted white to reflect the heat.
All white: Homes in Bermuda are painted in limestone white
Carpets should also be replaced with tiles or wood, and metal blinds swapped for curtains with light linings, to keep rooms cool as temperatures rise.
The Department of Health’s Heatwave Plan for England, which is designed to counter the effects of climate change, reports that painting brickwork white will cost a homeowner around £3,750.
Changing flooring comes in at a touch over £2,000, while installing ceiling fans can cost £545.
Fortunately for homeowners hit by the recession, other advice, such as ‘natural ventilation’ through windows, will not cost a penny.
Those unsure of how to transform their home into a property that would not look out of place on the Greek Islands can ask for help.
Local council environmental health officers are willing to inspect homes and offer advice on dealing with excessive heat.
Other advice includes keeping out of the sun between 11am and 3pm, eating cold foods such as salad and fruit and checking on elderly relatives and neighbours.
The 39-page plan aims to help householders, hospitals and care homes prepare for heatwaves, which are predicted to become more common.
A severe heatwave – where temperatures hit 27c (80.6f) for at least nine days – could quickly kill thousands of Britons.
High temperatures can put strain on the heart, while smog can make breathing problems worse. Heat-stroke, in which the body’s thermostat fails, can also be fatal.
Sir Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, said: ‘In contrast to deaths associated with cold snaps in winter, the rise in mortality as a result of very warm weather follows very sharply – within one or two days of the temperature rising.
‘This means that by the time a heatwave starts, the window of opportunity for effective action is very short indeed and therefore proper preparedness is of the essence.’
Yvonne Doyle, regional director of public health for the South-East, said: ‘This year’s plan encourages everyone to take practical action before a heatwave strikes.
‘Keeping the home as cool as possible during hot weather and remembering the needs of friends, relatives and neighbours who could be at risk is essential.’
The Met Office has already predicted that the June to August period is odds-on to be ‘a barbecue summer’, but given the vagaries of the British climate it is keeping its options open.
Plenty more Cool Stuff
Recent Posts
Categories
Advertising
|
|