![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
News |
|
Limon Office Falcon Office Office Hours: |
March 2008
Manager's Message ~ According to Phillips Electronics North America estimates, the phase out would cut U.S. light bulb electricity use by 60 percent by 2020. The light bulb standard alone will cut Americans' electric bills up to $18 billion annually. “The amount of energy that's being saved by the light-bulb standard alone is more than has been achieved since 1986 for all appliances combined,” said Earl Jones, senior counsel for General Electric. Countries around the world are looking to save energy by banning incandescent light bulbs in favor of energy-saving alternatives. Last February, Australia was the first country to announce a ban of incandescent bulbs by 2010. Ireland recently announced their intentions of banning the old incandescent, making it the first country to take specific steps towards implementing a European Union pledge to switch to energy-efficient lighting by the end of the decade. Over the next 10 years, China , which makes 70 percent of the world's light bulbs, has agreed to phase out incandescent bulbs. For every 100-watt of light, a CFL only expends 23 watts. Ninety percent of the energy that an incandescent light bulb burns is wasted as heat. Yet, sales of CFLs amount to only 5 percent of the light bulb market. CFLs average about $3 a bulb compared with about 50 cents for a standard bulb; however, CFL prices have decreased dramatically within the last year. A CFL uses about 75 percent less energy and lasts approximately five years instead of a few months. According to WHO?? a household that invests $90 in changing 30 fixtures to CFLs would save $440 to $1,500 over the five-year life of the bulbs, depending on your usage and cost of electricity. Look at your utility bill and imagine a 12 percent discount to estimate your savings. (Is this over the five year period?) Turning a CFL on and off frequently shortens its life, which is why the government's Energy Star program says to leave them on for at least 15 minutes at a time. The bulbs also take a minute or so to reach their maximum brightness. If you have dimmable light fixtures, make sure to buy CFLs labeled “dimmable.” All CFLs that carry the government's Energy Star label are required to carry a two-year limited warranty, so contact the manufacturer if your bulb burns out prematurely. The Energy Star website has a good section with Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on CFLs at www.energystar.gov Another concern I have often heard about CFLs is that they contain mercury. Yes, they do contain mercury, but it is a very small amount that is sealed within the bulb. Most of us remember our mother using an old-fashioned mercury thermometer. That thermometer contained about 100 times the amount that is contained within a CFL. The amount within the bulb would just about fit on the tip of a ballpoint pin. (If a CFL breaks the best advice is not to use a vacuum to clean it up. You may want to contact your local trash collection to see if they have disposal instructions.) MVEA will recycle your bulbs if you bring them into either office. We have recycling bins located in the lobbies. Another option is to take your bulbs to a disposal site. El Paso County 's site is located at 3470 North Marksheffel Road in Colorado Springs , their phone number is 719-520-7878. They will only recycle bulbs from residences. Elbert County also has hazardous disposal services and their phone number is 303-621-3145. There are also several other recycle/disposal businesses in the Colorado Springs area, please consult the yellow pages of your phone book. MVEA is heavily involved in the promotion of the use of CFLS. We currently provide an opportunity for non-profit organizations to sell CFLs as fund-raisers. Over 13,000 bulbs have been distributed in this way. Recently, MVEA, along with Poudre Valley , KC Electric, United Power, Morgan County REA and Tri-State electric cooperatives operated an energy efficiency booth and handed out approximately 3,000 CFLs and energy efficiency brochures at the National Western Stock Show. It was a great opportunity for us to be able to answer questions about CFLs and the many changes to the original bulb that first hit the market. I would encourage you to start changing over to these energy saving bulbs. As with most changes we make in our lives, it may take some time to get used to them, but it is the future and will save you money and energy. 2008 Nominating Ad for June 12th MVEA Annual Meeting
Our second place winner of the MVEA Youth Tour Essay Contest is Astrid Jäger, a junior at Big Sandy High School. She will be attending the Colorado Electric Education Institute's Cooperative Youth Leadership Camp in Clark , Colorado. Astrid is a little different from the students that usually attend, as she is an exchange student from Stadthagen, Germany, located in the northwest corner of her country. Her temporary American parents are Holly and Todd Sielaff of Simla. Astrid is attending school in Colorado through the Council on International Educational Exchange. She is on the basketball, volleyball and track teams and is involved in the Student's Against Destructive Decision Making at Big Sandy. Astrid told us, “The opportunity to work with people from different areas of the country and learn more about how co-operative power companies work is really exciting. I also heard the mountains are beautiful in the summer.” We look forward to having Astrid as a part of our camp this year. It is an opportunity for our students to learn something about Germany while Astrid is learning about America . Congratulations to Astrid! Following is her winning essay and her thoughts on nuclear energy: Is nuclear power the answer to global warming? Global warming affects us all. No matter what country you live in, there are discussions and concerns about this subject. Of course, as with other complicated issues, there are opinions on both sides of this debate. Some people do not believe global warming is happening at all, but the majority of scientists assert it is occurring and the human race must act quickly and decisively to avoid certain disaster on a massive scale. So, how can we avoid global warming? Scientists talk about diverse answers and possibilities. All this is rather confusing for people who are not very familiar with these topics. To get to know the importance of this topic, we first have to think about the consequences to our lives and to the lives of our children and grandchildren. There are numerous effects. I want to reduce them to the most important in my eyes. Global warming would cause extreme weather such as increasingly powerful hurricanes, destructive storms, rain and drought. Furthermore, glacier retreat would cause a drastic rise of sea levels, which could led to flooding causing whole nations to disappear. Global warming could also affect general health as it could, for example, bring tropical disease to populations unaccustomed to these health concerns. Moreover, it could have a big economic impact considering growth and costs. With this information, it is evident global warming is worth thinking about because it would change our lives in many scary ways. With the purpose to find an answer to the question of global warming, you have to consider the reasons first. At this point the, “Is it our fault?” comes up in our minds. Scientists answer this question as follows: “Natural reasons will always affect global warming. However, human activi8ties are increasing significantly the concentrations of greenhouse gases (mainly CO2) in the atmosphere, resulting in global warming.” In addition, it is proven whenever the CO2 output increases, the temperature rises as well. Knowing this fact, politicians try to reduce the output of CO2. One of the possibilities, which are circulating at this time, is nuclear power. This introduces the leading question of my essay: “Is nuclear power the answer to global warming?” Nuclear power, as the world's largest source of emission-free energy, seems to be a good solution on the first glace. However, it involves the use of nuclear fission, which is the splitting of the nucleus of an atom into parts. The products of nuclear fission are radioactive and lead, consequently, to new problems. A heavy amount of energy is released, in the form of heat and gamma radiation, when an atom splits. The two atoms resulting from the fission later release beta radiation and gamma radiation of their own, as well. The most common isotopes accruing during nuclear fission are Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239. One of the consequential characteristics of the two isotopes is that they have a very long half-life. Pu-239, for example, is half reduced after 24,000 years. Therefore, the basic problem is the production of nuclear waste, which creates risks on the health and safety of people. Transport and storage are also issues discussed by scientists due to the fear of possible accidents. I think the arguments against nuclear power are very strong. Considering this, I would finally answer the question: “Is nuclear power the answer to global warming?” with a “no.” However, we have to do what it takes to find another possible solution. In my opinion, there is a lot we can do right now as an individual or as a nation. I am thinking of self-discipline and mindfulness of our daily life, such as reducing the use of cars and planes as much as possible. Besides that, I personally think wind and solar power are two effective possibilities to decrease the CO2 output. They can be used as heat or electricity supply, which does not produce any air or global warming pollution. Overall, I think we should start to address global warming and take it serious. We have to start doing something to protect our future. Nevertheless, a solution creating new risk is not efficient or helpful.
|
2007 News Archive |