Feed aggregator

Wind Turbine Manufacturing in Canada Industry Market Research Report...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 18:12

Provincial incentives to encourage renewable energy will help buoy revenue. For this reason, industry research firm IBISWorld has added a report on the Wind Turbine Manufacturing industry to its...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12253145.htm

Categories: Environment

ASI DATAMYTE Selected by CIO Review for 20 Most Promising...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 18:12

Annual list showcases the 20 Most Promising Manufacturing Technology Solution Providers. ASI DATAMYTE makes it to CIO Review’s top Manufacturing Technology Solution Providers list for its...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12254676.htm

Categories: Environment

The Mill Welcomes Hamilton’s First Craft Brewery in 80 Years

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 18:12

It is now nearing a century since the last breweries of Hamilton, Ohio shut their doors, and it is within this remarkable legacy that The Hamilton Mill is extremely proud to reintroduce the first...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12248391.htm

Categories: Environment

This proposed pipeline would be even bigger than Keystone XL

Grist.org - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 18:10

Meet Energy East: It will be 2,858-miles long, putting it right up there with some of the longest pipelines in the world. It would pump about a third more crude than Keystone XL was intended to. It’ll be bigger than the Druzhba pipeline, which carries oil 2,500 miles from Southeast Russia to the rest of Europe.

“Bigger” is the point. There’s no sense in extracting crude from Canada’s tar sands if you can’t sell it in extreme bulk, and a big part of selling it is figuring out how to get it to people. The fight against Keystone XL complicated plans to sell it to the U.S., so the crude had to be moved through preexisting channels instead.

Canada’s other big pipeline hope, the Northern Gateway, would pipe crude from the Alberta tar sands out to the energy markets in Asia. But it was first stalled by protests from Canada’s First Nations (which were ignored), and then kneecapped in a surprise ruling by the Canadian Supreme Court that gave First Nations living on the land the pipeline was going through the right to veto it. That has proved harder to ignore.

With the Asian and the U.S. markets sidelined, Canada is now aiming for Europe. TransCanada announced this week that it is close to submitting its federal application for its Energy East proposal: $12 billion dollars of pipeline, all set to pump Alberta crude to the refineries and export terminals of Quebec and New Brunswick. Execs hope to have the pipeline approved by early 2016.

If it’s built, it will be the longest pipeline in North America, and the third largest in the world. Boosters say that unlike those other loser pipelines, Energy East is actually going to get built, because in a way it’s already been approved: It’s a massive retrofit and expansion of a natural gas pipeline that was already there to begin with.

Will it work? The practice of retrofitting an old pipeline instead of building a new one has already been used with some success, as in the case of Enbridge’s Line 9B reversal project. But wait, that’s also been delayed — probably not forever, but delayed nonetheless.

Tar sands crude is still making it to market; one analysis of recent Energy Department data claims that U.S. oil imports have soared 60 percent since TransCanada first applied to build Keystone. Producers have just moved it into the country using alternative channels, especially oil-by-rail.

Meanwhile, Energy East has other problems. There’s the matter of Arthur Irving, the billionaire who controls the refinery and much of the port at the pipeline’s terminus in St. John, New Brunswick. TransCanada was so nervous about being gouged by Irving that the company considered ending the pipeline several miles inland, though the two have since reached an agreement.

More uncertain is the business of Quebec: The pipeline will have to pass through the province in order to reach the coast, and Quebec is not a fan of tar sands. The province passed a fracking moratorium two years ago, despite being sued for the decision under NAFTA. A Quebec judge already temporarily shut down TransCanada’s exploratory work at the site of the proposed export terminal so that beluga whales could leave the area and migrate further south.

How much sway do whales hold with Quebec in the long-term? Is Energy East just another pipe dream? We’re about to find out.

Filed under: Article, Business & Technology, Climate & Energy
Categories: Environment

This ambassador for black politicians argues that solar drags down African Americans

Grist.org - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 17:38

This week, I’ve been writing about the National Policy Alliance’s controversial resolution on “net metering” policies. The resolution states that people who put solar panels on their roofs, and then feed the excess electricity back into the grid, “unfairly profit” and shift extra costs to low-income black households. Both contentions are highly debatable, but this organization’s resolution matters for a few reasons:

  • NPA concluded that solar producers should be charged fees for the electricity they produce. These conclusions were ghost-written by the pro-coal utility group Edison Electric Institute, which opposes “distributed production” of solar power, and ALEC, an organization notorious for promoting policies such as “Stand Your Ground” and restrictive voter ID laws that have been harmful to black communities.
  • By making it more expensive for individuals to generate solar, these organizations are slowing down the transition to a more just and democratic energy system where everyone can benefit from clean power, as opposed to continuing to suffocate under coal-based energy,
  • Finally, the alliance consists of Congress members, mayors, state legislators, and other elected officials who, under this collective, are prepared to send these conclusions to the White House.

With all that at stake, I reached out to NPA’s executive director, Linda Haithcox, to gather more insight on how the group arrived at this resolution. Haithcox is the former executive director of the National Organization of Black County Officials. Edison Electric was a consistent top sponsor for NOBCO’s annual conferences — it was a “platinum sponsor” for this year’s conference; the American Coalition For Clean Coal Electricity was a gold sponsor. Edison has also helped sponsor the Annual Legislative Conferences of the Congressional Black Caucus, a member organization of NPA. Haithcox also participated in the 2010 Business, Labor, and Minority Roundtable put on by CASEnergy, a coalition of nuclear energy supporters.

When I spoke with Haithcox, I had two main questions: Why was a private utility shareholder group like Edison given the privilege to set policies for an organization that’s predominantly made of black elected officials? And why was NPA helping Edison obstruct solar policies that would help make communities healthier? She answered these questions in a phone interview earlier this week before I posted the first two stories in my series on the net-metering controversy. I reached out to her again, after those stories were published, so that she could provide further clarification about NPA’s net-metering position. I’ve received only one response, which arrived around 9:00 p.m. on Oct. 14:

“I do not want my name mentioned in your article please. Please clarify that this is YOUR interpretation of the NPA’s position. I don’t think you have total picture on what our position and/or thinking is on this matter.”

Haithcox’s request to rescind her name came only after she had already consented to our earlier interview. I included a quote from that interview in my first story in the series. Below is the rest of our interview, which is edited only for length and clarity. I felt it was necessary to publish it so that readers could have clarification about the total picture and NPA’s position on net metering from its own leadership.

Q. How are NPA resolutions created?

A. The NPA membership consists of the presidents and chairs of all the major black elected organizations, of which there are [10]. Typically, a resolution occurs when one of our members brings one to the table, though occasionally they’re brought by representatives of some of NPA’s supporting organizations. Whoever is offering it, it has to be motioned by one of our co-chairs and seconded by one of our core members. There are officially 10 votes from our member organizations, but two of them — the Congressional Black Caucus and the National Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials — have foundation arms, and so we sometimes have the presidents or chairs of those foundations vote at the table. At most, there are 12 votes for our resolutions.

Q. How often do you vote on resolutions?

A. Twice a year we have in-person meetings where we vote on the submitted resolutions — one in the spring and the other in September, usually during the annual Congressional Black Caucus Legislative Conference. We also have a biennial conference when we also pass resolutions.

Q. Do you have to be a member organization to submit a resolution?

A. We have partnering organizations, and from time to time we have those organizations come to the table and talk about issues that affect African-American communities. If if we agree with those issues, then sometimes those become proposed resolutions for us to vote on.

Q. I saw that Edison Electric Institute submitted one of the resolutions you passed.

A. Yes, Edison has been a long-time friend of many of our members for years — for some, going back literally 20, 30 years, so they’re not new to any of us. We’ve had two or three resolutions from Edison.

Q. So really anyone can submit a resolution then?

A. No, not just anybody, but definitely people who we know and that we have mutual interests with, those who certainly have the support of our African-American elected officials and who have the larger support of black communities. We don’t let just anyone walk in and present to us, but for those we do allow to the table, the resolution needs to make sense for African-American communities and reflect their needs. They need to have a positive impact on African-American communities and be something that our member organizations have determined important to their constituents.

Q. And so your latest resolution on net metering — the members voted that this was a bad thing for African Americans of low income?

A. On solar panels, the main issue is that those who have the funds to put up solar energy panels feel they do not need to pay for the costs of the grid. They feel they should be able to sell their energy back to the utility companies … but realistically everyone is still on the grid whether they accept it or not. The fact they feel they should not have to pay for the grid puts the burden of the remaining costs on those who need the most assistance.

Q. But are you taking into account the costs that utility companies get to avoid, thanks to those people who are generating solar energy for the grid, not to mention the decrease in carbon pollution due to less energy generated from coal?

A. They’re still on the grid. Everyone today has cellphones and flat screen TVs and all kinds of new appliances that need to be charged. That’s the reality. I don’t care if you live in the Sahara Desert or Detroit. So therefore to charge those flat screens and computers and other equipment, you have to have power. You produce power from the grid. Because we all have these devices and because the demand on electricity is greater now than it ever was in history, everything costs more. Flat screen TVs cost four times more than those 500-pound TV (consoles) everyone had at some point. But there is a price we have to pay for all that — I don’t want to call them luxuries — but for all those new devices we all have gotten comfortable with. So if someone is using solar energy, which I think is great, it is highly unlikely they will never require or need the grid.

So the argument that they should not have to pay for it, and that they in fact should profit from their individual energy production — I’m sure the answer to that question should come from the trade industry to determine, as to whether or not the production of an individual solar system is going to be so great that they should get to profit from it. I would argue — me personally, not speaking for NPA — that the power industry has to improve itself, period. Everybody knows that. Our country is growing with new devices and new demands on electricity, but the grid has not grown to where it has to be to accommodate for all of that. The question then is who’s paying for it in the meanwhile? The struggling waitress in Wichita, Kansas? She can’t afford for her electricity bill to increase.

Q. But again, are you considering the decrease in carbon pollution that helps bring health benefits to those same low-income communities?

A. This country has been functioning on coal forever. I’m not justifying it, I’m just saying: I remember the days when the coal man came to our houses and dumped a bunch of coal in the basement to help heat our homes, and I’m from Chicago. I give credit to whatever industry is out there, whether it’s nuclear, natural gas, coal, solar — I give credit to any entity that recognizes that there is a problem and they need to change and improve things to do better. But everything costs. You think there wasn’t a cost when cars began improving their fuel emissions? At some point things will change in every industry. So if this is the bite that coal has to take in order for us to create cleaner energy, and to help the people in the mountains of Pennsylvania come out of the coal mines, then that’s a good thing. Is it going to cost? Yes. The question becomes how do you pay for it so that disadvantaged, poor people are not overwhelmed?

Q. Were other reports, with information and conclusions that run counter to Edison’s, considered before NPA voted to adopt Edison’s resolution?

A. That was all part of our discussion, but that does not need to be in the resolution or in any other open forum. There’s always questions asked from our members before voting and I’m sure there was other data considered. If another organization opposes [Edison’s resolution], we welcome them to come present to us, especially for an issue that is as critical and as important as energy.

Filed under: Article, Business & Technology, Cities, Climate & Energy, Politics
Categories: Environment

Here’s why fracking won’t solve climate change

Grist.org - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 16:42

For President Obama, fracking is a key weapon against global warming. Abundant natural gas, he said in his State of the Union address this year, is a “bridge fuel” to ubiquitous renewable energy — the key to securing economic growth “with less of the carbon pollution that causes climate change.”

Not everyone agrees. In fact, the debate over whether natural gas is the antidote to our deadly addiction to coal, or a faux climate change solution that will stall the clean energy revolution, is one of the most hotly contested environmental questions of the day. It has produced a host of recent studies examining complex questions about global energy markets and the specific chemistry of various greenhouse gases. The latest volley in that debate is out today in a new paper in Nature.

Rolling together a suite of models that project energy use, economic activity, and climate systems through to 2050, the study finds that natural gas is essentially useless as a climate solution unless it is buttressed by new policies that discourage carbon pollution and promote investment in renewable energy.

In other words, fracking alone won’t save us.

“In the absence of policies that help natural gas play a positive role, you won’t make things much better,” said Jae Edmonds, chief scientist at the Joint Global Change Research Institute and one of the study’s lead authors. “It’s kind of a wash.”

The study compares two constructed scenarios: “conventional” gas, in which the fracking boom never happens and the world produces shale gas only on the level it can with older technologies; and “abundant” gas, where gas supplies shoot up and the cost drops as fracking technology developed in the U.S. spreads across the globe. Our actual reality is somewhere in between those two extremes, Edmonds admits; the idea is to set up a “bounding exercise” to see what a fully realized global shale revolution would really look like, compared to a baseline where it doesn’t happen at all.

The other key assumption that (fingers crossed!) doesn’t quite match reality is that there will be no new climate policies — a national or global price on carbon, for example, or new incentives for renewable energy — introduced between now and 2050.

When the models run, they simulate fluctuations in supply and demand for coal, oil, gas, and “low-carbon” (including wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, biomass, and nuclear power). That energy mix translates into global greenhouse gas emissions, which translate into global warming (climate “forcing,” in science jargon). The study includes five separate models, each designed by different independent teams of scientists, that measure the same thing but are tweaked and calibrated differently. The specific outcomes vary, but all five models tell the same story: By 2050, global temperatures rise beyond the internationally agreed-upon limit of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) in both the “conventional” and “abundant” scenarios. In other words, simply using more natural gas, even as it displaces far dirtier coal, has an almost negligible effect on climate change.

There are two reasons for that: First, cheap gas also takes market share away from clean energy. Even though gas’s carbon footprint is about half that of coal, it’s obviously not as low as sources like wind, solar, or nuclear, and is therefore never an adequate permanent substitute for them. Second, the combination of cheap gas and no new energy efficiency policies means total energy consumption goes up. Together, these two effects offset any carbon savings that result from a move away from coal.

You can see the results of the five models below — each has its own vertical column. The blue line is “abundant” gas; the red line is “conventional” (the gray shading represents the range of possible outcomes reported in existing peer-reviewed literature). The first horizontal row shows global natural gas consumption. As you might expect, having more cheap natural gas means the world uses more of it. The increased consumption comes in part because natural gas replaces more expensive fuels (by 2050, it replaces 18 percent of coal and 17 percent of low-carbon sources). Gas consumption also increases in this scenario because total energy use increases.

But in the subsequent rows, the blue and red lines lie close together, suggesting the difference between the scenarios — and thus the impact of widespread natural gas — is small. The second row shows global carbon emissions; the third shows “radiative forcing,” which is scientists’ metric for the greenhouse effect; and the fourth shows temperature change.

Interestingly, the researchers reached the same conclusion when they recalibrated their models for both high and low levels of fugitive emissions of methane, the potent greenhouse gas that is known to leak from nearly every stage of the natural gas production process and that is often cited as an argument against fracking’s supposed climate benefits. In other words, the study suggests that methane is a bit of red herring: It’s not the main reason fracking doesn’t work as a climate solution. By the same token, fixing the methane problem won’t make natural gas work as a “bridge.”

So what’s the upshot? Is it time to give up Obama’s dream of fracking our way to a stable climate? Not exactly. For one thing, as energy analyst Alex Trembath of The Breakthrough Institute points out, the models make a number of assumptions (most importantly, that technological advances will halve the cost of extracting natural gas by 2050) that are basically impossible to predict with any certainty.

“It’s exactly as realistic as any projection over 40 years,” he says. “Which is to say, not very instructive.”

Still, the study is useful in that it adds fresh data illustrating a flaw in the “all-of-the-above” approach to energy — a flaw that many scientists and energy analysts have long pointed out. Without a policy framework that explicitly charts the course to abundant low-carbon energy, merely flooding the market with natural gas is no better, from a climate perspective, than continuing to rely on coal.

Of course, there are other benefits to cutting our coal consumption. Outdoor air pollution, to which coal-fired power plants are a leading contributor, caused nearly 4 million deaths worldwide in 2012. Natural gas plants work better than coal as a backup to renewable power, because they can be fired up much more quickly when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing. And regardless of the source, abundant, inexpensive energy is a boon to the 19 percent of the global population that today lives without electricity.

For that reason, University of Chicago geophysicist Ray Pierrehumbert argues that anti-fracking activists should focus their energy on climate policies — he suggests taxing natural gas and using the revenues to support renewables. What he doesn’t want to see is a ban on fracking, which, he says, “would just mean more coal.”

This story was produced as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Filed under: Climate & Energy
Categories: Environment

Save the climate, pay a farmer

Grist.org - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 16:25

If you just pay attention to the headlines — politicians squabble as we speed toward stupidly expensive and painful climate change; pestilence and war spreads! — it’s easy to start feeling depressed. If you want to find stories to lift the apocalyptic mood, you have to be willing to read past those headlines, past the epic battles, until you get to the regular people making one reasonable change at a time.

I hear about people making big changes in farming at least once a week. Agriculture is an enormous emitter of greenhouse gases. If farmers have the right incentives, however, they can cut those emissions radically, and even take in more than they produce.

Here’s an example: This December, the California Air Resources Board will vote on whether rice farmers can receive credits for practices that cut the methane released by flooded fields. If all goes well, it will be the first cropping practice to enter into California’s official carbon market. There are already protocols for livestock on the carbon markets — like methane digesters for poop gas — but now we are moving into the realm of horticulture, which leads us to that vast carbon sink, the soil. Horticulture is key, because it’s plants that mediate the interaction between earth and sky.

There are other practices in the regulatory pipeline that would allow farmers to make a little money by slashing emissions:

  1. Nutrient efficiency, so that farmers don’t fertilize too much and release nitrous oxide.
  2. Grassland preservation, to reward those who don’t plow up prairie to plant crops.
  3. Application of compost to rangeland, to kickstart carbon-sucking soil microbes.

Robert Parkhurst is the climate markets guy for the Environmental Defense Fund, which has been working hard to get farmers to be part of the solution. For a lot of these approaches, he said, farmers already have the right incentive. Rice farmers cut methane by reducing the amount of time their fields are flooded; that can lead to water savings, and less money and energy spent on running pumps. When farmers are giving their fields precisely the right amount of nutrients at precisely the right time, they save money on fertilizer. But these practices require some trial and error — perhaps a few years of experimentation to really make them work.

“It helps so much if you can offer farmers a little money,” Parkhurst said. “You just need that little push to get them over the hump.”

There’s work going forward on other crops — almonds, and corn — but rice is the leader, in large part because California rice farmers wanted to be on the cutting edge.

“Agriculture is the ground zero of climate change,” he said. “They are right there, feeling the impact, and having to adapt. And the rice growers have stepped up and said they want to be part of the solution.”

I’ll be the first to admit that this doesn’t feel completely satisfying: It’s not the Hollywood success story, where the music swells as the critical documents are exposed, and the benchwarmer catches the touchdown pass, and we get to watch the baddies hoisted by their own petard. But there’s something better than a Hollywood success story: a real-life success story. This is the way the world changes — with people fixing the problems within their reach, one by one.

Filed under: Article, Climate & Energy, Food, Politics
Categories: Environment

Tarpon Bay Partners, LLC Agrees to Purchase Up to $15 Million of...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Oxford City FC enters into a material definite agreement with Tarpon Bay Partners, LLC.

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12249221.htm

Categories: Environment

NC Solar Farm Partnerships Often Yield Investors Double Digit Returns

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Innovative Solar Systems, LLC has just formed strategic partnerships with tax credit off takers that could yield the company’s debt equity investors and sponsors double digit returns on ISS’s current...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12254439.htm

Categories: Environment

Turks and Caicos Joins the Caribbean's Renewable Energy Race

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Richard Branson's Carbon War Room and Rocky Mountain Institute Support Island's Commitment to Advance Renewable Energy

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12238914.htm

Categories: Environment

SWS Environmental Services Exhibiting at University of Illinois at...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

SWS Environmental Services (SWSES), a leading environmental services company will be exhibiting at the 16th Annual Railroad Environment Conference.

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/SWSEnvironmentalServices/RailroadEnvironmentConf/prweb12252240.htm

Categories: Environment

Dividend Solar Adds Christopher Doyle as Chief Marketing Officer

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Solar Quality Assurance Leader to Accelerate Dividend Solar’s Nationwide Expansion

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12252306.htm

Categories: Environment

Admirals Bank to Unveil New Solar Loan Products and Services at Solar...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Admirals Bank, a national leader in residential solar and renewable energy financing, is announcing the addition of two new residential loan products to its suite of innovative financing options: The...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12252737.htm

Categories: Environment

World’s First Net-Zero Exhibit Space to be Unveiled at Greenbuild 2014

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Hanley Wood, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and EMerge Alliance announced today that the world’s first Net Zero Zone will be unveiled at the...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/Greenbuild2014/NetZeroZone/prweb12253112.htm

Categories: Environment

Larson Electronics releases a 600 watt High Intensity LED Skid Mount...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Industrial lighting specialist Larson Electronics has announced the release of a 600 watt skid mount five stage electric light mast. This tower features a rotating boom that allows for 360° of...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/larsonelectronics/ledlightmast/prweb12253464.htm

Categories: Environment

8minutenergy Renewables Signs EPC Agreement with Gehrlicher Solar...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Nation's Leading Independent Solar PV Developer to Begin Construction on Three Projects

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12253507.htm

Categories: Environment

Leading Online Supplier Sweet Dressy Now Offers New Long Evening...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Recently, SweetDressy.com (Sweet Dressy), a leading online supplier of wedding dresses and women’s special occasion outfits, has announced its new range of 2014 long evening dresses.

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12254154.htm

Categories: Environment

DuPont Announces Safety and Sustainability Awards Expanded Globally...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Complete Entries Must Be Received by Feb. 27, 2015

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/dupont-sustainable-solns/2015-awards-safety/prweb12254242.htm

Categories: Environment

Beautiful Princess Sleeveless Wedding Dresses For 2014 From Dylan...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Recently, Dylan Queen, a distinguished special occasion gown supplier, has updated its product line with a new range of princess sleeveless wedding dresses. Moreover, the company has decided to launch...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12254253.htm

Categories: Environment

High Quality Bamboo Veneers Announced By Outstanding Online Supplier...

PR Web - Thu, 10/16/2014 - 15:12

Recently, BambooIndustry.com, an outstanding online supplier in the bamboo industry, has announced its range of bamboo veneers for worldwide people. Moreover, the company has announced that all these...

(PRWeb October 16, 2014)

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12254287.htm

Categories: Environment