PV solar panels to charge a deep cycle battery for electrical 12v useage 'green'?

Hybrid cars that don't last much over 4 years on average unless you spend 4 or 5 thousand bucks to replace the batteries considered 'green'?

Which brings the question, hybrid cars that can't payback the more expensive price in gas savings considered 'green'?

The high price of 'water' storage containers if you don't have access to used or free ones considered 'green'? How does a rain barrel make sense if the container is a couple hundred dollars vs a smaller container for free?

The high price of 'water' storage containers make sense for thermal mass in anything other than a huge building? green?

Yeah, I know, each case must be qualified.

~tom

Why not? The peelings and cores and spoiled fruit/vegetables and the like would be produced anyway; why not put them to good use by returning them to the Earth the same way nature would?

PV solar panels to charge a deep cycle battery for electrical 12v useage 'green'?

Here is where it starts to get slippery. Admittedly, I haven't spent much time lately keeping up on advances in PV technology. What I know from earlier study is that many of the chemicals used to manufacture PV panels are highly toxic and have essentially no half-life. And, of course, there is the energy and material used in manufacturing the panels. There should be a way to determine the carbon footprint of manufacturing PV panels and to compare that to the carbon saved by using them.

Hybrid cars that don't last much over 4 years on average unless you spend 4 or 5 thousand bucks to replace the batteries considered 'green'?

Which brings the question, hybrid cars that can't payback the more expensive price in gas savings considered 'green'?

Speaking personally, I believe hybrid-drive auto technology as it exists now will be a blip in automotive history. It just does not make sense to me, on a carbon-footprint basis, to equip a fairly-short-lived item with two motors and the extra weight brought on by systems like regenerative brakes -- and to continue to burn a non-renewable resource anyway. Many people buying hybrids now are doing so to have a recognized sign of their commitment to visibly-green living. Many of those people would be just as well off in a small modern turbodiesel or even in a gasoline-engine mileage champ, like a Toyota Corolla (41 mpg highway).

I'm not sure where your estimate of 4-5 years comes from. Just about any car purchased today should be good for at least ten years if it receives the recommended care. Toyota and Honda hybrids have been on the road for more than 4-5 years now, without reports of massive battery failures. And Toyota warrants the batteries in their hybrids for ten years.

That said, however, there will come a time when the battery in a hybrid needs to be replaced. Perhaps at that point storage technology will have advanced to permit the use of something longer-lasting. Or perhaps people will remove the battery pack and modify the engine computer to allow use of the car as an underpowered gasoline-only vehicle. Or people will spend thousands of dollars and joules replacing battery packs and/or reconditioning them. It could be a real mess. But I think it's really a bit early to tell.

The high price of 'water' storage containers if you don't have access to used or free ones considered 'green'? How does a rain barrel make sense if the container is a couple hundred dollars vs a smaller container for free?

Maybe it doesn't make economic sense, but, then, as things are accounted for now, some "green" activities just don't. Sometimes they're just the right thing to do. However, I can't understand why someone wouldn't just wait until low-cost or free containers were available.

Ouch, that hurt. Let them eat cake, somehow comes to mind.
Noble, but out of touch with the masses. But you are pc, I suppose. If you have it, at least spend it in the right way. The problem though is the billions upon billions that scratch a living that must have a profit (economic sense), so to speak of doing something green. Tell an Indian or Chinese or a poor American to pay more to be green? And we're back to the main problem of the day.

As Steve o put it, "Sometimes they're just the right thing to do." I too was and am caught up in the green thing to do. Each of those random questions were in fact things that I am doing, and more. In early 2000, my wife and I were among the first Honda Insight buyers. Steve, the reason that you don't see masses of battery stories on the Prius or the Insight is because there weren't very many sold in 2000 and those are just now 6-7 years old. Many of those however, if they don't yet have their batteries replaced (or junked if the cost of 4-5k didn't make economic sense)have seen their battery performance degraded. Both Honda and Toyota will wait until the batteries completely fail before they will consider replacing. Meanwhile, the cars mpg gets worse and worse as the batteries hold less and less of a charge. And further, the two carmakers will let that degradation last forever if they can get away without replacing them. The computer code has to be just right. I was lucky with that code and complete battery failure. But now that brings up the question of:

Will those extra batteries in the dump be worth the gas savings? Unless gasoline becomes 6 or 7 dollars a gallon, you can't even payback the extra cost of a hybrid vs buying a convential car unless you drive a million miles. Green?

You can probably tell by my tone that it must make sense for me to be green loyal. For example, it makes me quite ill to hear of someone buying greens and browns to put in their $300.00 compost bin.

The cost of the solar pv panels and the marine deep cycle batteries for some power to my shed was cheaper than hiring an electrician to run the lines with a city permit to boot. Plus I didn't want to be taxed for the darn shed.

To take another view of green in my way is to become less dependant of government and some corporate controls. I could then agree more with Merrygardens justifying paying more for green by saying that I'd pay more to have less taxes. That makes sense and cents!

I'd love to see more of making green sense. CF's? radiant barriers? solar chimneys? yeah, let's rock and roll (but paint them flat black) !!!
~tom

Can I do this with everything? No. I was recently looking for some organic cotton clothing. Can I afford to pay $70 for a t-shirt? No way. Can I afford to convert my house to solar energy? Don't think so, not at this point. So that will have to wait. But I can afford the laundry detergent, or the shampoo, etc. I am willing to use my dollars to make my position known, and hope for progress.

As far as folks buying $300 compost bins, well, not everyone is handy to build their own, not everyone lives in the country where they can have open piles, and frankly, if it gets people composting, then that's great. Often people will start out doing something one way, and learn more about it and improve upon their methods. It's a start.

Good thread, btw. Thought-provoking and discussion-provoking, which is always a good thing!

:)
Dee

and I thought the Prius batterys were guarenteed for 100,000 miles? and why would you send the old battery to the dump?

Reduce consumption, buy Re-useable, Recycle everything

Bill

The problem here is that the "free" market often does not take a long view. Especially in the U.S., the next 90 day period (financial quarter) is king; what happens after that is "off the books". Most Americans have learned to budget their lives the same way, which is why upward blips in interest rates cause the gnashing of teeth by those who barely bought their way into a house using "creative financing". Or why I just read a newspaper article about a woman decrying the increasing cost of gasoline as she fills up her new SUV, purchased because -- well, now she has two kids, and what else can you do? *rolls eyes*

So, left alone, I don't think you'll see many advances in green products or services. Now when the government gets involved to make a market -- as Australia has in outlawing incandescent bulbs and some U.S. states have in mandating that a percentage of ethanol or biodiesel be added to on-the-road fuel -- there is a built-in large-scale demand and a recognition of the fact that the initial cost of doing this may be high, but the costs are lower in the future.

At my day job, someone computed that, if we replaced all the computer CRT displays with LCD displays, we'd save money in less than two years just on the saved electricity. But because buying an LCD is a capital expense and feeding amps to an existing CRT is just an "expense", most people still have CRTs at their desks. Electricity would have to become much more expensive before replacement became a no-brainer (and then on whom do you foist all of those inefficient CRTs?) Or the behavior would have to be mandated.

Until it somehow becomes innate to people to consider the long-term costs of ownership of an item -- or unless the accounting world makes the true price of products more visible -- we can expect people to continue making the decisions they have. Government policy will have to be used to guide that behavior. I don't see that role diminishing anytime soon -- no matter how badly our current set of bureaucrats try to mess it up.

I much prefer the use of capitalism to make change than mandates from government. Yes, a government could outlaw incandescent lights and force the market to only sell CF's or LED's. But the market still has to 'sell' them in a free society. If you want just less consumption, why don't you have the government put a ban on nitrogen fertiziler or tax petroleum to the point that its products are so expensive only the rich could afford them?

``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

Consumerism is a product of labor. If we produce products cheaply, "they" (consumers) will come. Government does not produce anything. We need capitalism and consumerism in order to produce products and we need reason and education and common sense to produce change. And the bloody price better be right!
~Tom

"Or why I just read a newspaper article about a woman decrying the increasing cost of gasoline as she fills up her new SUV, purchased because -- well, now she has two kids, and what else can you do? *rolls eyes* "

As for the above quote, why do we need to haul our kids all over God's creation for every afterschool activity imaginable. I've got 3 of my own that I haul around in a Chevy cavalier. And those kids have to earn whatever activies they want to participate in (grades come first, attitude second) We live in a rural area where thankfully thieir activites are only about a quarter of a mile away. I often allow them to bike to practice. Then I walk up to meet them. I suppose the suv is a safety issue (if you were involved in an accident> Or maybe because carseats take up too much room.

But it amazes me how many people come here to ride the ATV trails, travelling from miles away. They need to pay for gas to drive several miles to get up here, in their SUV that they use to haul the trailer loaded with all they need for the weekend, plus a 4 wheeler or two that needs gas to tear up our forests for one fun filled weekend. It really burns me up that the money generated for this activity is more important than the environmental impact it has on our planet. BTW: I'm speaking of a NATIONAL forest.

Somehow people in the rest of the world manage to raise kids without buying vehicles so big they won't fit down city streets in many of the great cities of the world. I think part of it is that Americans. carry around more stuff nowadays (the playpen, the exersaucer, the boppy, the toys,...) and because they can (when gasoline is historically and artificially cheap, why bother conserving, right?).

I think chauffeuring duties depends on the age of the kids and where you live. In a rural area, kids are less likely to encounter traffic and, FTM, people that I would just as soon they avoided while they were young and inexperienced. I live just outside the downtown of a medium-sized urban area. While I would have no problem letting my kids walk to another house in our immediate neighborhood, I would be wary of them crossing the main street, with its limited traffic lights or of their riding bikes (especially in the winter, when the non-snow-emergency streets tend to have permafrost for the duration of the winter). The elementary school is in the neighborhood across that main street, too, so there is a logistics issue. It doesn't help that we collectively have decided we'd rather put a few bucks a month into our pockets for lattes or credit-card interest rather than fund buses to school (including late buses). :-(