Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Re: Fume Hoods?

A commenter asked why the fuss about fume hoods? She also asked me to post my reply, and I'm just such an obliging person:

Why do I mention fume hoods? Because the Berkeley Hood would save billions of dollars and be a huge step in the push for energy conservation. We HAVE fume hoods all over the place in a science laboratory (hundreds in just our building alone), but they are products of antiquated technology and use comparatively WAY too much energy.

A simple analogy would be the Energy Star light bulbs. They emit comparable amounts of light yet only use 1/3 the energy of normal bulbs, which translates into HUGE energy savings. Taken straight from the .gov website:

"If every American home changed out just 5 high-use light fixtures or the bulbs in them with ones that have earned the ENERGY STAR, each family would save more than $60 every year in energy costs, and together we'd keep more than one trillion pounds of greenhouse gases out of our air – equal to the emissions of 8 million cars. That's a $6 billion energy savings for Americans, equivalent to the annual output of more than 21 power plants."

Conserving energy is as simple as swapping out your moribund light bulbs with their smiling, sanguine Energy Star counterparts (collectable Candy Filled Bulb not included). Actually, the Energy Star bulbs don't give off the "I'm-a-bulb-rapist" vibe, as our friend pictured here does.

No matter. We as a society urgently need to look into alternative ways to manage our energy consumption, and given a choice between using Energy Star brand appliances and Berkeley Hoods, or quenching our usage of said machines cold turkey, the pragmatic choice is clear.

No comments:

Post a Comment