Compact, Green Subdivisions May Benefit Greenhouse Gas Reduction - Green Building Help And Tips By E. Lee Reid

Concerns about vehicle use and carbon dioxide emission numbers and their possible implications for climate change issues are having an impact on the Greening of large residential developments, as reported in a late 2007study by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

Green development and building is the practice of increasing the efficiency of homes and other buildings as developers and builders utilize energy, water, and materials. Green development and building also enhances overall building impacts on human health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal; the complete building life cycle.

The compactness of a residential subdivision is defined as how close together the homes are built.

According to the Energy Information Administration, carbon dioxide has the largest impact on global warming of any of the monitored greenhouse gases. About 33 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are generated from the transportation sector, and among these, carbon dioxide emissions represents 95 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions from mobile transportation sources.

These concerns have prompted states such as California, Massachusetts and Washington to require that real estate developers quantify greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle-use in large residential projects they are planning. However, these states typically do not provide any guidance on how to perform the calculations, and there is currently no well-established, verifiable method for estimating carbon dioxide emissions or vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for households in a particular development.

The NAHB study estimates household gasoline consumption and associated carbon dioxide emissions using the 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), which is conducted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the Department of Transportation. Standard statistical methods were used to estimate gasoline consumption as a function of the geographic and household characteristics available in the NHTS data. Housing units per block group was used as a standard for the compactness of a residential subdivision (how close together the homes are built).

1.56 to 4.69 housing units per acre translates into about 0.21 to 0.64 acres per home, which is a fairly typical lot size for new construction. About 31 percent of single family detached homes completed in 2006 were built on lots falling into this size range. Nearly 80 percent are on a lot that was 0.64 acre or smaller. However, lot sizes will generally be smaller than acres per housing unit measured over a block group or subdivision. This is because a subdivision will also include roads and other public spaces.

Because carbon dioxide emissions are computed as a simple ratio of gasoline consumption, carbon dioxide emissions also decline as the subdivision becomes more compact.

According to the study, it was not possible to control for every conceivable factor with a possible impact on gasoline consumption in a statistical model based on the NHTS data. Characteristics such as nearby concentrated employment centers and their proximity to a particular subdivision, for example, would impact overall gasoline consumption.

The research shows little relationship between efficiency of vehicles owned, such as hybrids, and subdivision compactness. The exception is that residents in the least dense subdivisions tend to own less efficient vehicles. On the other hand, there is a clear relationship between subdivision compactness and the average speeds vehicles are driven. As the subdivision becomes more compact, the estimated results show that vehicles are driven fewer miles, but they tend to be driven slower which is a a less efficient speed. However, the congestion effect (less efficient driving speeds) is not strong enough to completely offset the effect of reduced emissions.

So, on balance, households in more compact developments still tend to use less gasoline and thus generate fewer carbon dioxide emissions.

Lee Reid is the founder and CEO of eLeeReid, Inc., a real estate, construction, hospitality, continuing education, and vacation ownership company. The Reid Team has successfully built and/or managed thousands of condos, homes, and commercial properties in North Carolina and Florida, as well as recent condo hotel conversions near Disney World. Reid holds a MBA degree from the University of Memphis and a Master in Hospitality Management certificate from Cornell University's world-renowned School of Hotel Administration. Reid is a Florida Class A unlimited certified General Contractor, Realtor, and Certified Commercial Investment Member (CCIM) candidate. His book, Marketing Made Easy! was published by the National Association of Home Builders. Visit with Lee and eLeeReid, Inc. by clicking any of the above links.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=E._Lee_Reid

Carbon Credits - Friend Or Foe? By Gary W Patterson

Climate change is an environmental issue that has become a global concern affecting all nations. To this end, countries worldwide are taking collaborative measures to mitigate the problem. For example, the Kyoto Protocol, which has been ratified by more than 100 countries (read: a dramatically lower number are formally bound) includes many regulations and initiatives whose objectives are to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One popular initiative that the Kyoto supports is carbon credits, also known as carbon offsets (which is actually a form of regulatory tax since someone has to pay a carbon tax to provide the credit part of the carbon credit system.)

Carbon credits are measured per metric ton of carbon dioxide emissions or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases. Typically, a government or an international body establishes a system that sets a limit, known as a cap, on the total amount of emissions from all participating countries. Participants are given equal allowances, or credits, based on the cap system. (There is a problem determining carbon caps because there is minimal agreement and integration among groups and regulatory bodies about implementation time frames and use of tax proceeds that creating carbon credits. This issue goes beyond the scope of this article.)

Participants (generally read Companies) are then organized into groups. If participants need to exceed the cap, they have to buy carbon credits from other groups who have unused credits, at a value set by the market. Simply put, carbon emissions are treated as commodities that can be traded between participants, while the total number of credits being traded in the market must not exceed the total cap.

Reward-Penalty System
The overall objective of carbon credits trading is to encourage companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Those that do not exceed their cap may sell their unused credits in the market or directly to other companies that have to exceed their cap. This implies that those that do not exceed their cap are rewarded by being able to sell their credits; while those that are not able to control their emissions are penalized and have to pay the price.

The Kyoto Protocol has created a system of trading caps among its signatory countries (a total of 181 countries, which include Russia, France, Germany, Canada, Norway, United Kingdom, India, to name just a few). Basically, the cap requires countries to reduce their emissions 5.2% below their 1990 baseline over the 2008 to 2012 period. The total amount of carbon credits to be allocated among countries is determined by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) projects, which allow for the creation of credits through emission-reduction projects.

In some countries, cap-and-trade systems patterned after the Kyoto Protocol are being employed alongside policies that aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the United States has several carbon measures in place, such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the Western Climate Initiative (WCI), the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), and an initiative provided for by the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 in California.

Proponent Viewpoint
Proponents point out that the world at large has to start somewhere to arrive at a system that begins to reduce greenhouse emissions. They argue that carbon credits offer the best intermediary solution until that time comes when a more definitive and viable system is put in place. They also praise the carbon credit process because it is governed by a global marketplace, as opposed to other more bureaucratic and self-serving schemes. Advocates say reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change should be a collective effort. Governments have responded by making carbon credit trading a more lucrative way of enticing industries to do their share in solving a global problem.

Opponent Viewpoint
Parties opposed to the carbon credit system argue that it is a counterproductive measure that unfairly penalizes consumers and businesses compared to using tax incentives or tax credits. Opponents also argue that a cap-and-trade system is another way for politicians and their governments to get more money for causes their lobbyists prefer and not necessarily do what is best for the country as a whole. They argue that alternative energy sources should be subsidized until technology and scale of application results in lower prices that makes renewable energy affordable. They believe that governments are exploiting the situation and plan to raise taxes for non energy purposes.

Most countries agree that there are environmental and health benefits to be gained in moving toward a greener business environment. Given this position, the conversion to some renewable energy policy is probably inevitable. The overwhelming concern, however, has to do with how these policies will be executed. The timing and total costs (direct and indirect) of the changes are not clear. At the root of this concern is the uncertainty about which groups will benefit and which groups will suffer. But one thing is certain: With congressional leadership favoring the acceleration of greener energy in a way that benefits their constituents and lobbyists, there will definitely be winners and losers.

What the carbon credit discussion points to is the urgency for business to begin planning NOW for the inevitability of a greener world. Those businesses that prepare for it will prosper; those that do not will suffer the consequences.

Bottom line? - Stop Profit Leaks. Apply this information to improve your profitability, re-engineer business models, and strengthen or gain competitive advantage in the marketplace. And apply the free Fiscal Test at http://fiscaldoctor.com/fiscaltest.html

From Gary W Patterson, http://www.FiscalDoctor.com Copyright 2008

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Gary_W_Patterson

LP Gas Conversions Melbourne - Things You Need To Know By Steve Karagiannis

The number of people having LP gas conversions for their cars in Melbourne, Australia has gone through the roof. And justifiably so say Melbourne’s 101 or so LP gas conversion business.

I'll get to why they think this is so in a moment, but for now, let's discuss the key terms.

What Is LP Gas?

LP Gas (which stands for "Liquefied Petroleum" Gas) is a gas that's produced when crude oil is turned into petrol. It's produced quite early in this process, so it's quick and theoretically costs less money for the oil companies to produce.

What Is LP Gas Conversion?

By default, most car manufacturers design and build car engines that run on petrol.
So LP Gas Conversion is a process that converts your car from using petrol to using this LP Gas.

What Benefit Is There To Car Owners?

If you read any of the advertisements in the Melbourne "Yellow Pages", converting your car from petrol to LP Gas can:

• Cut your fuel bill in half (one retailer claims that it is more than 50% cheaper than using petrol)
• Reduce engine wear (petrol can have a corrosive effect on your engine)
• Reduce green house gases and other harmful emissions.

Gas conversion businesses have been singing the praises of this fuel for many years, so why has there been such growth of late?

Cars run on LP Gas cost less to run than petrol based engines.

Crude oil is costing a lot more today than it did 5 years ago. Bloomberg.com reports crude oil price as $56.72 USD per barrel, although it has gone over $60 USD several times in recent memory. In Australia, this has meant that petrol prices have risen from around 80c/litre a few years ago to as high as $1.40 a litre several months ago.

Natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans have contributed to this high price but the biggest problem has been an overall imbalance in supply and demand. And
OPEC countries report that they're already churning out oil at near peak capacity.
This oil crisis has led to a hike in bowser prices.

Cars run on LP Gas produce less green house gas emissions than petrol based engines.

People are becoming more aware and more conscious of the impact of car CO2 emissions on global warming. Films such as the Oscar winning animated feature "Happy Feet" and Al Gore's Oscar winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" have contributed to this awareness.

In Australia, these films have created a wave of global warming discussions and TV coverage (channel 10 had the "Carbon Test"), a spill-over effect being people actively looking for products that reduce CO2 emissions.

So what's the good news?

Gas conversion companies report that LP Gas produces less greenhouse gas emissions than petrol based cars.

Conclusion

It may very well be that converting your car to LP Gas may help both your pocket and our environment. Shop around for either the lowest price or the best service.

Steve Karagiannis encourages Melbourne business owners to do their part to protect the environment by supporting LP Conversions. Steve also reveals fiendishly clever business growth secrets at his website http://MelbourneBusinessPortal.com , where he offers a free 10-day trial.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Steve_Karagiannis

The Benefits of Recycling By Michael Russell

Recycling is a priority in the United States. In fact, the United States recycles more than 24 percent of its waste. This is the highest percentage in the industrialized world. This is only appropriate considering the United States also produces the most amount of waste in the industrialized world. Recycling can bring out about economic and environmental benefits.

The recycling industry has made a vital contribution to job creation and economic development in the United States. In 2000, the recycling industry was responsible for more than 1.1 million jobs and a yearly payroll of $37 billion. For every 10,000 tons of waste that is recycled, 36 new jobs are created. If you were to incinerate the 10,000 tons of waste instead, only one job would be created. In addition, for every employee there is collecting items that can be recycled, there are 26 employees that turn these items into new products. There are as many employees in the recycling industry as there are in the automobile and truck manufacturing industry. Also recycling industry employees make more money than employees in other industries.

Recycling helps prevent global climate changes by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions can result from the manufacturing, use and disposal of products. Greenhouse gas emissions are a part of nature and they help create climates that sustain life on earth. If greenhouse gas emissions reach dangerous concentration levels, then you might see rising global temperatures, sea level changes and other climate changes. Recycling can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the following ways:

Manufacturing paper, plastics, glass and metal from recycled materials requires less energy than manufacturing these products from virgin materials because the recycled materials have already been processed. Also if you were to use virgin materials, you would have to spend additional energy extracting and transporting the virgin materials. For example, recycling aluminum cans saves 95 percent of the energy required to make new aluminum from virgin materials. Recycling steel and plastics would require 60 percent and 70 percent less energy, respectively, than making these products from raw materials. Recycling nearly any material will require less energy than producing the material from virgin materials. In 2005, recycling saved over 900 trillion BTUs, which is the same amount of energy used in 9 million households annually. This energy conservation results in less fossil fuels being burned. This means that less carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is released into the atmosphere. If 6 tons of glass and one ton of aluminum were recycled, then 1 ton and 13 tons of carbon dioxide, respectively, would not be released into the atmosphere.

Recycling also keeps materials out of landfills. This is important because materials in landfills can decompose and release methane gas. Methane gas is a greenhouse gas that is 20 to 30 times more dangerous to the environment than carbon dioxide. Municipal solid waste landfills are responsible for 34 percent of methane gas emissions attributed to Americans.

Waste combustion from incinerators can release greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. Recycling can reduce these emissions by keeping materials out of incinerators. In 2003, recycling kept 72 million tons of material from incinerators and landfills.

Trees help combat the global climate changes by absorbing carbon dioxide from the air and storing it in wood in a process called carbon sequestration. Continued efforts to recycle paper would allow more trees to continue to absorb carbon dioxide. If a ton of newspaper is recycled, 12 trees would be spared. Recycling one ton of office paper would save 24 trees.

Michael Russell Your Independent guide to Recycling Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_Russell

Carbon Emission Trading, the Basics Explained By Dwayne Strocen

The Kyoto Protocol is a UN-led international agreement reached in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan to address the problems of climate change and the reduction greenhouse gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol went into force on February 2005.

Signatory countries are committed to moving away from fossil fuel energy sources - oil, gas, and coal, to renewable sources of energy such as hydro, wind and solar power, and to less environmentally harmful ways of burning fossil fuels. Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are mainly generated by burning fossil fuels. Higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming and climate change.

The Protocol commits 38 industrialized countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2008-2012 to overall levels that are 5.2 percent below 1990 levels. Targets for greenhouse gas emissions reduction were established for each industrialized country. Developing countries including China and India were asked to set voluntary targets for greenhouse gas emissions.

The Canadian target for Kyoto is to reduce by 2012, greenhouse gas emissions by six percent below their 1990. The United States did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and in February 2002 introduced the Clean Skies and Global Climate Change initiatives, in which targets for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions are linked directly to GDP and the size of the U.S. economy.

Trading of carbon emissions is linked to a program called Cap-and-Trade. Understanding this concept is necessary to begin effective trading. A central authority (usually a government or international body) sets a limit or cap on the amount of emissions discharged into the atmosphere. Companies that exceed the cap may be subject to fine or regulatory sanction. Therefore, those who find they cannot meet the conditions of the cap will look to buy credits from those who pollute less.

Many older established companies are forced to spend considerable sums of money modernizing plants. In many instances this takes time, usually years to achieve. In contrast to new generation technologies which are not faced with up-grading facilities to comply with 1990 emission standards. Trading emission credits is a way for low emission companies such as wind farms to sell credits to benefit higher emitting companies. Cap-and-trade programs ultimately aid in being a net benefit to the host country by enabling it to meet it's commitment to the Kyoto Protocol Agreement.

From the very beginning, this first phase of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, or EU-ETS, was intended to be a learning period to work out the kinks and entice major greenhouse gas emitters on board.

On January 1, 2005, the EU-ETS came online with the cap-and-trade program covering approximately 12,000 installations including electricity production and some heavy industry. These 27 member countries of the European Union represents roughly 45 percent of total European CO2 emissions.

Now three years later, amid a flurry of expectations and public controversy, the European Union has credible results to back up its claim of success. Recently, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology analysis of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) affirms that despite rather unstable beginnings, the system has been an unprecedented success. More importantly, it opens the door for skeptical countries like the United States to follow suit.

The United States would have been required to reduce its emissions 7 percent below 1990 levels had it accepted ratification of Kyoto. Instead, U.S. emissions have now risen more than 16 percent between 1990 and 2005.

The Bush administration and Republican lawmakers opposed to emission caps have been touting the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which consists of Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and the United States. The aim of the initiative, which began in 2005, is to foster cooperation on ways to improve clean energy development and lower emissions without global mandates. But since the initiative started, the United States, India, and China have come under increased domestic pressure to move toward mandatory emission controls. California is among several U.S. states that have entered into partnerships or passed laws for controlling greenhouse gases ahead of the federal government, leading to a showdown with congressional lawmakers. Major U.S. cities have also instituted a host of policies designed to cut greenhouse gases.

Without the United States entering into a binding commitment, it is feared that several developing countries which have not yet signed plus some Kyoto signatories may be unwilling to agree to additional international commitments.

Dwayne Strocen is a registered Commodity Trading Advisor specializing in analyzing and hedging Market and Operational Risk using exchange traded and OTC derivatives. Website: http://www.genuineCTA.com.
View in depth information about Carbon Emissions and the benefits of hedging its risk.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dwayne_Strocen

How to Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHGs) Emissions With Refrigerant Gas Tracking By Daniel Stouffer

Carbon emissions reporting, measured as both direct and indirect emissions, requires detailed tracking, maintenance carbon emitting systems, and record keeping of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) sources. Direct carbon emission refers to the energy each individual consumes in the form of fossil fuels and electricity that we use for transportation, heating, cooling and lighting.

Carbon (CO2) Emissions Reporting: It's the law.

In many countries, carbon emissions are required by law to be reported across an organization's entire footprint; hence the common term now in widespread use Carbon Footprinting. Carbon data and detailed records of energy, fuel, and refrigerant gas consumption fall under regulatory compliance rules and must be reported in paper, and increasingly, electronic format.

Similar forms of mandatory monitoring, tracking, and reporting of air, water and soil pollutants fall under the Montreal Protocol (refrigerants gases), The U.S. Clean Air Act (many pollutants), and The Kyoto Protocol (6 GHG gases).

EPA and State Regulatory Compliance

Air, water and soil pollutants resulting from emissions that go beyond the property line or are in excess of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or state compliance regulations must be reported in order to maintain a safe and healthy environments. In addition, there is a very high likelihood that the United States will follow suite with many other countries to mandate economy wide carbon emission reporting. Submission of carbon emissions reports help identify main sources of GHG (greenhouse gases) and track the volume emitted into the atmosphere so that these volumes may be ratcheted down over time.

HCFC Refrigerants -- The cause of depleted Ozone and increases of GHG emissions.

This is the main basis and high-level background for carbon emissions reporting. Refrigerants gases add higher levels of carbon into the air due to the composition CFCs and HCFCs. The refrigerants used in commercial heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) or regular air conditioning (AC) units include Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFC), chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and perfluorocarbon (PFC).

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are a collection of commonly used refrigerant and aerosol gasses with a wide variety of other commercial applications. The common Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) in use today are hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). These substances are organic compounds which consist of clorine, fluorine, carbon and hydrogen and are controlled under the rules set forth in Section 608 of the US Clean Air Act.

The U.S. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documented that increased GHG emissions is the result of misuse of HCFC refrigerants. As a result of conclusion, the EPA has implemented protocols requiring owner or operators of refrigerant systems to accurately track their refrigerant usage. Refrigerants, referenced as fugitive emissions, make up one of the four main scopes of carbon emissions.

Carbon Emissions Protocols - Get to know these intimately (scope by scope).

The Climate Registry Protocol was written in preparation of mandatory monitoring and tracking or mobile (vehicle emissions), stationary (electricity production), and fugitive emissions (refrigerant gases). These possible sources of emissions are defined below as noted in The Climate Registry, the ISO standards, the EPA protocols, and the World Resource Institute requirements.

Mobile emissions are those which emanate from transport vehicles. Most commonly, these are emissions from the combustion of fuels in transportation sources and emissions from non-road equipment such as equipment used in construction, agriculture, and forestry.

Stationary emissions are those which come from a regular source but do not disperse over greater areas, rather remaining in concentrations in the specific source area. These are emissions from the combustion of fuels to produce electricity, steam, heat, or power using in a fixed location.

Fugitive emissions are those which may occur as a result of inefficient control equipment or control equipment that is obsolete. Examples include releases of sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) from electrical equipment, hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) releases during the use of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment, process equipment leaks, etc.

The EPA, ISO, World Resource Institute, and Climate Registry all have reporting protocols which outline, in a systematic way methods for collecting, calculating, and reporting carbon emissions. All protocols are available. There is not a single reporting protocol as of early 2009. The current carbon emission protocols being drafted, reviewed, and supported by businesses and various government agencies all dictate detailed reporting requirements. EPA rules put in place mandatory CO2 emissions reporting regulations. Companies must spend time getting to know the protocols to remain in compliance.

Critical Heads Up - Companies are facing a mind-bending challenge. They must understand the protocols, organize, collect, and report Greenhouse Gas emissions across their entire organization or face extra financial burden.

Where refrigerant gases prevail heavily in multiple sources, refrigerant reporting as well as refrigerant tracking will lead to a better phasing in of mandatory carbon reporting. Legal carbon emissions reporting pave the way for lasting reductions in carbon emissions and improved management of company assets. Measure reduction in CO2 emissions. The goal to keep focused upon is a cleaner environment through reduced use of harmful refrigerants and more efficiently managed companies.

To learn more effective refrigerant management tactics and the tools that support them, you can contact Daniel Stouffer, the Product Manager for Refrigerant Tracker. This web-based software makes it easy to monitor, manage, and report refrigerant gas usage. Stay in compliance with refrigerant management regulations. Visit Verisae's http://www.Refrigerant-Tracker.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Daniel_Stouffer

The Relationship Between Recycling and the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions By Martin Barwise

Greenhouse gas emissions are known to be directly related to the perceived heightened warming of the earth's oceans and near-surface air. But how does recycling help in cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions?

Recycling is used to refer to the reprocessing of previously manufactured products (such as plastic bottles) so that their core elements (in this case, the plastic substances that make up plastic bottles) can be used to make new products later on. It should be clarified that recycling is different from re-use, because the latter simply means that the previously manufactured product (such as a plastic bottle) will be used for other purposes aside from its original use (such as when a plastic bottle is cut in half and then converted into a plant container.)

When previously manufactured products are recycled, this helps in reducing the amount of energy used to produce new products (compared to "virgin production" where products that are manufactured from substances that were taken purely from the earth's environment – also known as raw materials.) One substance that has been quite damaging to the environment is plastic, because it does not degrade and become re-absorbed into the environment. There is also less waste that goes into disposal systems such as landfills when recycling is put into play.

When products are recycled, there is less need to look for raw materials from virgin sources. For example, aluminum is one substance which can be recycled over and over again without a decline in the quality of the substance. When plastic is recycled, up to 70% of energy is saved. If paper is the substance being recycled, up to 40% of energy is saved. When less energy is used to produce a product, that means less greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere, which helps reduce the impact on the environment through the greenhouse effect.

Energy is also saved because there is less of the virgin or raw materials that has to be sought after, there is less energy needed to transport these virgin materials from their original sources, and there is less energy to be expended trying to clean up the environment when pollutants like non-biodegradable aluminum and plastic containers are dumped into landfills.

Some criticize recycling since there is still a level of energy required to transport recyclables to recycling centers and recycling plants, and in the recycling process itself. However, the energy savings derived from recycling are considerable, and much less energy will be used to make new products from recyclables compared to the use of virgin materials for manufacturing new products. Another criticism is that recycling can become impractical because the cumulative costs for recycling a certain product may outweigh the environmental benefits derived from recycling.

Despite such criticisms, it is generally accepted nowadays that recycling does help the environment by significantly reducing demands on energy supplies, so that less greenhouse gases are emitted, and can be a cost-effective solution in certain cases.

Green Store UK sells eco friendly gifts and energy saving gadgets. We have various energy saving gadgets such as the Smart Adapter which is a remote control plug set which enables you to quickly and easily turn off electric items off standby.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Martin_Barwise