The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > How one small business cut its energy use and costs > Comments

How one small business cut its energy use and costs : Comments

By Tom Bowman, published 20/10/2010

How significant would it be if small businesses increased their energy efficiency and reduced their emissions?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
I am sure that Mr Bowman's company does a great deal of good, in the area of creating exhibitions for corporations, museums, and event organizers and suchlike.

But it did occur to me while reading the article that there must be hundreds, if not thousands, of businesses out there who load up the atmosphere with carbon or whatever, but whose actual product is irrelevant.

Like providing outerwear for dogs.

http://www.urbanpup.com.au/

Or gift-boxed Swarovsky Crystal Handcuffs

http://www.luxurygiftsforwomen.com.au/productlist.aspx?brandid=9&categoryid=4

Bear with me here.

I'm not taking a stand against luxury items per se. Heaven forfend. I'm simply pointing out that saving the planet is not just about buying energy efficient air-conditioners when the old one carks it.

I'm just saying that self-important articles like this are just playing around the edges of the problem. If indeed it turns out there is one.

For all I know, creating exhibitions for corporations, museums, and event organizers is one of life's essentials.

Along with keeping Fido warm.

But while we happily create new opportunities to consume energy with truly-ruly important stuff like Yves Saint-Laurent's $450 power adapter...

http://thegloss.com/odds-and-ends/why-yes-this-is-a-450-ysl-power-adapter/

...I think we may be missing the bigger picture.

Just a little.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 21 October 2010 3:30:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OK Tom, thanks for coming back.

I strongly object to articles like yours, glorifying things like Hybrids, In the article you hint that you now know that a modern turbo common rail diesel run rings around these hybrids in the economy stakes, & in every other performance requirement, including economy, carbon foot print, cost to manufacture. & complication.

Those still praising them are responsible for encouraging our government to give millions of our money to a car manufacturer to subsidise a Hybrid Camry built in Oz. This of course shores up a few fool green votes, at a stupendous cost per vote. I note you are still talking them up, despite this knowledge, & comparing it to an SUV, hardly cricket, is it mate?

Our politicians are stupid enough without others helping them. Fortunately most Ozzies are not too stupid, & the things are only being bought by environment departments of governments, but it is still a major waste of our money.

The odd private citizen is conned. One of my neighbours called me a di#k head when I tried to explain why he shouldn't buy one. He has since apologized, now he has found his new hybrid Camry burns 20% more fuel, in our country district, [no traffic jams out here], than his old standard Camry.

There was no other result possible in a town & district with just one set of traffic lights, & all open road cruising.

Continued.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 21 October 2010 6:29:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now you qualify your purchase of all the new office equipment, with the fact that the old stuff was shot, worn out, finished.

Well, in that case you don't have to be a dark of shade green, or any other colour, to buy the most efficient equipment you can afford. You don't even have to be a thrifty Scotsman, just sensible.

It is not surprising that quite often the company who makes their gear more efficient, actually makes a better product, at the same time, so what else would you buy?

Just avoid anything that has recently been made to comply with some new government mandated efficiency requirement. Go buy a second hand one in this case, government involvement in any product always leads to a stuffed up product. It usually takes years to sort out the mess these mandates leave behind.

So Tom, thanks for the heads up on your business, I'm glad you are doing well. May I suggest you don't open an Oz branch any time soon, we have enough people feeding us this type of information, thanks.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 21 October 2010 6:50:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen: we did a lot of research before buying our Prius and we looked for a diesel. Diesels are inherently more energy efficient than gasoline engines, as you say. One of my employees just bought one and gets fantastic mileage. But time was not our friend when we bought our Prius: all of the manufacturers were working cleaner models to comply with California's particulate pollution laws, so there were no diesels for sale.

I am not making an argument for one vehicle technology over another. Comparing the Prius to an SUV is entirely legitimate in this article because that is the trade we actually made. If we traded a Civic for a Prius, I would have made that comparison instead.

I agree that replacing worn out gear with new models that work better is just plain sensible. In fact, that's the whole point, isn't it? In the U.S., many business owners think energy efficiency requires sacrifice. I'm trying to show them that it doesn't. I am not looking for praise; I am offering evidence to correct a misperception. Businesses can slash energy demand and carbon pollution by making sensible decisions.
Posted by Bowman, Thursday, 21 October 2010 9:13:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have a small timber milling business, as I've said before. This is an energy-intensive business, no matter which way it is run. It also produces a large waste stream, consisting of timber offcuts, bark and sawdust, which is highly energetic and can be used to power generation plant as well as direct heating. One of the best ways to do this is via gasification of the wood, with the gas then used to power an engine - either Otto or Diesel cycle, although Otto cycle works better with a pure woodgas stream. A turbine works even better.

Some of the energy firms are using gasification of municipal waste and coal seam gasification already, so I thought "this'll be easy". Not so. Brisbane City Council has regulations relating to boilers, open fires, combustion stoves, incinerators, furnaces, barbecues, but nothing related to forced-draugth gasifiers. They could offer me no guidance at all as to how to make my (very small) project compliant with their regs, cost-effectively or otherwise and were not interested in doing so.

So I don't gasify my wood waste, I dump it or I burn it on the bbq, and I pay over $1000 each month to a company that makes its power by burning coal (although, of course, it's not in MY backyard...).

Great job, Brisbane City Council.
Posted by Antiseptic, Friday, 22 October 2010 7:11:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy