# Interest group forums > Energy and Resource Conservation Forum >  The green label challenge

## Dave A

I got a request from Andy:



> I was hoping you might consider starting a dedicated energy saving / resource management / greening-up kinda forum.


I think it's an excellent suggestion and I'm all for it. The loadshedding forum was a great success while Eskom was having their "wet coal" problem, and Andy has already shown us his passion and ingenuity which would give the forum a great kick start I'm sure.

Here's the challenge though, what label should we use?

Up until recently I considered the term "green" as heading up a vast array of terms such as "sustainable development, environmentally friendly, eco-sensitive, conservation, energy efficient" and the like. It was something of a rude awakening to arrive at a conference in Barcelona with "green pest management" as a major item on the agenda and discover that there are serious problems with the "green" label.

The two main ones is that "green" has come to be associated with
a political movement with an ethos most modern urbanites regard as impractical, orexpensive products and services of inferior quality and with inferior results - even failure.
In many parts of the world "green" comes with some pretty negative baggage.

So I'm a fan of what Andy is proposing, but not a fan of applying the "green" label - and I'm at a loss for a suitable label that is going to imply the practical and successful innovations and discussions I'd hope to see in such an area.

Any suggestions or comments? *Help smiley goes here just as soon as I find one*

----------


## IanF

Dave
The paper industry uses "sustainable". Have a look at wikipedia  article. on sustainability.

----------


## daveob

How about : Smaller Footprints

Or : Going Green for the average Joe.

Or : Eco-Street

----------


## AndyD

I was also at a loss for the correct semantics, hence 'energy saving / resource management / greening-up'. 

Many of the descriptions which should be appropriate have been hyjacked for use by people and groups with their own alternative agendas which has rendered them useless......maybe this would make a good opening topic in itself.

I think the title of the forum will have a profound effect on the subject matter that gets posted in there so I would decide on the direction first then try extract an appropriate titlle. There's other things like SEO and generating appropriate search engine traffic to consider.

TFSA is a business oriented/biased forum so would a sub-forum primarily about technology be appropriate or should it have more of a business slant to it?

----------


## Dave A

:Hmmm:  TFSA *is* regionally focused.

Are we looking at discussion on this in a South African context or are you hoping for something more international, Andy? I appreciate the technology issues are essentially universal, but location may impact practical implimentation considerations.

When it comes to the business bias of TFSA, I see that as a possible advantage - the underlying ethos of the site (and from that quality/standards) is already well established.

----------


## wynn

So as this is the 'Forum SA' how about 'GreenSA' and put in a rider like I did in an earlier thread 'without going new age or supertech'

----------


## AndyD

> TFSA *is* regionally focused.
> 
> Are we looking at discussion on this in a South African context or are you hoping for something more international, Andy? I appreciate the technology issues are essentially universal, but location may impact practical implimentation considerations.
> 
> When it comes to the business bias of TFSA, I see that as a possible advantage - the underlying ethos of the site (and from that quality/standards) is already well established.


I would see it very much biased as regional content. The core technologies are well established and well documented all across the web. I think there's a lack of info on how these systems and products apply to South Africa, how effective they are, their payback times etc. I would like to hear peoples experiences and results of actual products that are available locally.

----------

Dave A (15-Sep-10)

----------


## wynn

Andy, that is a prettier photo but I prefer the old one :Big Grin: 

I agree and I have a rule of thumb table that I was given when I used to sell solar at the beginning of the 90's

In a single geyser enviroment, water heating accounted for 40% of your electricity consumption and solar reduced that by 60% so your electricity bill would be reduced by up to 24%

Now technology is not so advanced that this should not still prevail.

I know that evacuated tubes are supposed to be more efficient but I suspect that would only be the case in higher latitudes and where frost is extreme.
A normal flat panel would be suitable for most instalations in our lattitudes.
If frost is a consideration then you have to have a sealed system with frost resistant liquid (anti freeze) circulating and a heat exchange system in some type of manifold for the geyser to thermosyphon within the roof of the dwelling.

The problem is when you have to borrow money to have a system installed it takes a long time(5 to 7 years) to amortise and is probably false economy in the short and medium term, you will probably pay more for your installment than you are saving on electricity, long term however is definitely a good thing, especially if the increases we are to expect over the next 2 years are to continue.

The difference is when you have to replace or install a geyser then the cost is for the solar panel and installation only, the geyser component is probably covered by insurance and or is a cost of construction.

----------

AndyD (16-Sep-10)

----------


## AndyD

> Andy, that is a prettier photo but I prefer the old one


Lol, the photo is of my favorite rapper T.I.




> The problem is when you have to borrow money to have a system installed it takes a long time(5 to 7 years) to amortise and is probably false economy in the short and medium term, you will probably pay more for your installment than you are saving on electricity, long term however is definitely a good thing, especially if the increases we are to expect over the next 2 years are to continue.
> 
> The difference is when you have to replace or install a geyser then the cost is for the solar panel and installation only, the geyser component is probably covered by insurance and or is a cost of construction.


If the payback time is 5-7 years and the warranty on the item is 2-5 years depending on the make then this would be a big gambol on the reliability and longevity of the particular system you install especially given the short average life span of many products nowadays.

Hopefully a 'green' type forum would help people make a better informed decision about this kind of product.

----------


## IanF

"Eco-friendly is it worthwhile" 
How do copy writers get snappy phrases?

----------


## AndyD

I favour 'Energy and Resource Conservation in South Africa'.

----------


## adrianh

Here's a good one: "Save energy, money, time & the environment: Mechanize"

----------


## Dave A

Thanks for all the suggestions. As you can see, the forum is now set up and I've already transferred some of the existing threads that seem relevant.

Please feel free to suggest any improvements with the forum description, or list any other threads you feel I should move into this section.

----------

