Showing posts with label carbon neutral. Show all posts
Showing posts with label carbon neutral. Show all posts

Monday, January 30, 2012

Not All Biofuels Are The Same!

From Damian Carrington's Environmental Blog at The Guardian -

Leaked data: Palm biodiesel as dirty as fuel from tar sands

There are good biofuels and bad biofuels and the worst are as filthy as the foulest fossil fuels. But the good biofuels are essential to tackling climate change


There are good biofuels and bad biofuels: the trick is telling one from the other. That's particularly difficult when trying to take account of the natural forests and wetlands that can destroyed in the drive to grow some biofuel crops. But we're getting closer, it seems, and palm oil and soy beans now appear utterly unsupportable as a source of biodiesel.

The new data comes from a leak obtained by EurActiv from the European Commission. The EC is considering what level of carbon emissions each type of biofuel causes once burned, after everything - including "indirect land-use change" - is taken into account.

It is obvious that for a biofuel to be useful in cutting the emissions driving global warming it needs to have a smaller carbon footprint than regular fuel from crude oil. So I have added the numbers for crude oil and oil from the highly-polluting tar sands for reference in the table below. The leaked biofuel numbers are, I'm told similar to several recent studies, and therefore credible.

Here's the data (the units are grams of carbon dioxide per megajoule energy of energy).

Biofuels graphic

So palm oil and soy bean biodiesel is just a touch less polluting than fuel from tar sands: that's pretty damning. Maize and sugar do better than crude oil but still cause significant carbon emissions.

The better news comes from the second generation fuels (2G), particularly when the are "non-land using", i.e. when they use only waste such as straw. Factories doing this are setting up now in, for example, Italy. The "land-using" fuels are made from non-food crops, such as jatropha, but that can bring its own problems, as I saw for myself in Tanzania.

The EU's scheme for certifying biofuels as sustainable requires them to emit 35% less CO2 than regular fuel, increasing to 60% by 2018, making palm oil, soy bean, rapeseed and sunflower looking all but dead.

Palm oil biodiesel also received another blow on Friday, with the US Environmental Protection Agency suggesting it fails to meet the US requirement of emitting at least 20% less carbon than diesel from crude oil.

Robbie Blake, biofuels campaigner, at Friends of the Earth Europe, told me: "It's getting quite indisputable that the use of soy or palm oil to fuel our cars is even dirtier than conventional fossil fuels. Forests in Asia and South America are being destroyed by the expansion of plantations to meet the European market. It's a delusion for politicians to think that biodiesel will solve climate change."

The European Union's target for 10% of all transport fuels to be biofuels by 2020 has been described as "unethical" because the production of some types violates human rights and damages the environment. But the same researchers described do nothing to find alternative to the fossil fuels that currently power transport as "immoral".

So the difficult task of distinguishing good and bad biofuels remains essential, as does the research of even more promising technologies, such as algae and seaweed.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/jan/27/biofuels-biodiesel-ethanol-palm-oil

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Aiming 4 Zero

Feature: Absolute Zero

Despite the downturn, home builders take lead role in energy and water efficiency.

Source: BIG BUILDER Magazine
Publication date: 2011-07-01

By Steve Doyle and Cary Lowe



Photo: Courtesy Toll Brothers
SOLAR STRATEGY: Toll Brothers is making solar panels available on homes in several of its communities, including Vista del Verde in Yorba Linda, Calif. The solar panels don't add extra dollars to the sales price since they are owned by a third party and leased to the homeowners.


In most endeavors, striving for a score of zero is a fool's errand.

In green home building, however, it is the gold standard. The trick is to keep it from becoming fool's gold.

Despite the housing downturn and its drag on home builders, real progress has been made toward achieving the goal of building homes that consume no net energy. Unquestionably, some of this progress has been forced by the government. Still, the home building industry, battered as it has been, is taking a leading role in the movement toward reducing consumption of energy and water resources. It is realistic to expect that, over the next few years, energy use in new homes will approach zero, and water use will drop to a level one could call insignificant.

Using California as a case study, consider how far the industry has come. Homes built in the last few years use 25 percent less energy, and generate 25 percent less greenhouse gas emissions, than those built just 20 years ago. This results from relatively simple improvements in building materials, construction techniques, insulation, and appliances.

Similarly, recently constructed homes use one-third less water indoors than those built in the mid-1970s, simply due to installation of more efficient fixtures. These are production homes, using standard features. The numbers are even more impressive for homes which incorporate custom, high-efficiency features, and photovoltaic or other onsite power generation facilities.

New homes in California account for a growth of only about 1 percent of the total housing stock in a given year during strong economic times—and only a third of that during the current recession. About 60 percent of homes statewide predate any meaningful energy conservation requirements, and more than 80 percent predate water-conservation standards. Achieving significant improvements in energy and water efficiency in the residential stock would require retrofitting large numbers of those older homes. That will happen over time, driven by the utility cost savings associated with such efficiencies.

Meanwhile, new housing stock begins to demonstrate the efficiencies that can be achieved and, over time, R&D in new-home building will gradually make them more affordable.

Much of this improvement in home efficiency has been driven by changes in the California Building Standards Code, contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. What began as a set of standards and requirements related to safety and structural integrity has evolved to address environmental issues of concern to the state and its residents. This has focused most heavily on achieving greater energy efficiency.

The need for space heating and cooling has been dramatically reduced by more efficient air-conditioning units, improved wall and attic insulation, heat-resistant windows, better sealing of ductwork, and passive energy design systems. Energy use related to domestic water has been reduced through more efficient water heaters, recirculating hot water systems, and insulated pipes. Electrical demand has been further reduced by installation of more efficient lighting fixtures and domestic appliances. (On the other hand, increasing consumer desire for the newest and best in electronic gadgetry continually adds to the per-person demand for electrical power.)

In recent years, as water supply has become an increasingly critical consideration in connection with new development, Title 24 has focused on water conservation as well, setting standards for more efficient plumbing fixtures and water-using appliances.

Photo: Brookfield Homes
Energy conservation:-Tight ducts (less than 6% leakage) -Radiant barrier roof sheathing-Tankless water heaters-R-30 or 38 ceiling insulation-Low-E windowsRenewable energy: -Photovoltaic solar panels (optional)Water conservation: -WaterSense bath faucets-Low-flow showerheads-Tankless water heaters-Insulated hot water loop lines-Water-sensitive landscaping-Dual-flush toilets (optional)


Photo: Brookfield Homes
How LowCan You Go? Houses in Brookfield Homes' Rockrose community extend 35 percent above California's energy-efficiency standards. The eco-savvy homes focus on energy efficiency, water conservation, indoor air quality, as well as other environmentally friendly features. As part of Brookfield's focus on water conservation and environmentally friendly features, its Rockrose community showcases native and drought-tolerant plants. The builder also engages prospective home buyers with its sales office displays that tell its eco-savvy story.



This trend toward increasing conservation and efficiency requirements was accelerated by enactment of A.B. 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act, in 2006. With about 22 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in California attributable to residential and commercial buildings, clamping down further on energy consumption is vital to meeting the emissions reduction standards of A.B. 32.

That has been a prime driver behind the California Green Building Standards Code, now incorporated into Title 24. As part of a broad array of environmentally friendly building requirements, the new code includes requirements for accurate sizing of heating and cooling systems, sealing and insulation of ductwork, and sealing of openings between conditioned and unconditioned space. It also includes changes for plumbing fixtures that will result in a 20 percent reduction in potable water use, as well as weather or moisture-based outdoor irrigation controllers.

In addition to satisfying environmental regulatory requirements, these kinds of features will produce substantial cost savings for homeowners. The average California household consumes about 5,900 kilowatt hours per year. Based on typical utility rates, reducing their electrical consumption by one-third would result in an annual savings of about $375. Because electrical rates are tiered, with higher per-unit costs for higher levels of consumption, a household using 10,000 kilowatt hours per year would save nearly $1,000 annually.

Similarly, a typical new single-family home consumes about 59,000 gallons of indoor potable water and about 115,000 gallons for outdoor irrigation annually. Reducing the indoor use by 20 percent pursuant to the new code, combined with an achievable reduction of 40 percent in outdoor irrigation, would save about $300 annually. Again, because of tiered water rates, the savings would be much greater for homes with more fixtures and more landscaping.

Some home builders are taking the quest for efficiency significantly further. Brookfield Homes' Rockrose community in Carlsbad, Calif., is incorporating standard features that reduce energy consumption by 35 percent below Title 24 requirements. These features include radiant barrier roofs, more thermal-resistant windows, quality installation of insulation, insulated and tightly sealed ductwork, tankless water heaters, and highefficiency furnaces. Photovoltaic solar panels are available as an option.

Water consumption is reduced further by the use of dual-flush toilets, looped and insulated hot water lines, high-efficiency irrigation controllers, and drought-resistant landscaping.

Other builders are trying different approaches.

Toll Brothers is introducing a variety of energy-saving options but is focusing particularly on renewable energy generation. The company is making photovoltaic solar panels available on homes in several projects, including in the Vista del Verde community in Yorba Linda, Calif., at no increase in sales price, by having the panels owned by a third party and leased to homeowners, who then receive lower-cost electricity. Toll similarly is making available geothermal heating and cooling systems in projects such as the Hills at Southpoint in Durham, N.C. KB Home is installing solar panels as a standard feature in several new projects. Pacific Housing is taking this a step further in a Sacramento project, installing a battery storage system as a backup to rooftop solar panels.

Surprisingly, these kinds of features are not significantly impacting housing affordability. Taking into consideration all rebates and tax credits available, construction costs in the Brookfield project are only increased by $1.50 per square foot on a net basis, allowing it to remain one of the most affordable new housing developments in San Diego County. This project also benefits from the moderate, coastal Southern California climate; such energy efficiency improvements would cost considerably more in the warmer inland climate zones.

In Phoenix and other markets, Meritage Homes has been able to include an array of energy-saving features, including solar energy, while keeping sales prices under $230,000 for a 3,000-squarefoot home, by incorporating these elements into their standard design rather than adding them as options. Moreover, as an optional upgrade, they are offering sufficient additional solar panels to eliminate electrical service costs.

As these kinds of offerings become more commonplace in the home building industry, the question will be how far such efficiency can be taken, particularly by production builders. The goal of many developers, consumers, and environmentalists is to be able to produce homes that are net zero with regard to resource impacts, i.e., homes with on-site features that reduce consumption to zero, through some combination of efficiency and renewable energy generation.

To achieve such net zero results with regard to energy will require taking significant additional steps in most cases. These might include thicker exterior walls, heat-resistant roof tiles, higherefficiency heating and cooling equipment, conditioned attic space, passive heating and ventilation features, fewer and better insulated windows, strategic orientation of the structure, and planting of deciduous trees. In all likelihood, it also will require installation of on-site energy generation facilities, particularly photovoltaic solar, geothermal, solar water heating, and/or wind turbines. This is all readily doable now, but at a cost of $40,000 to 50,000 for a typical new detached home.

Photo: Courtesy KB Homes
KB Home is another builder installing solar panels as a standard feature in several of its new projects, including Newbury at the Enclave in Eastvale, Calif.

At the same time, an energy savings greater than that available from a full range of green building features can be obtained by simply locating homes in walkable communities or transit-oriented locations, as energy use and greenhouse gas emissions associated with vehicular transportation typically exceed those of the house itself. Such locational considerations will be increasing in significance in California, in particular, as the state implements not only the mandates of A.B. 32 but also other statutory requirements for reduction of vehiclerelated environmental impacts.

Bringing water consumption down to net zero is more challenging. Significant reductions can be achieved by using the lowest-flow fixtures indoors, planting the most drought-resistant landscaping, and using both collected stormwater and domestic gray water for irrigation. However, in the absence of onsite water treatment capability, net zero will not be achievable.

Individual zero-energy custom homes are popping up, especially in areas with temperate climates, and a handful of zero-energy subdivisions are being built. These homes typically also receive LEED certifications and come with a certain cachet of environmental consciousness.

It is reasonable to ask, however, whether achieving zero-energy status and near-zero water status is a particularly worthwhile goal.

Noted new urbanist architect Andres Duany has taken the lead in criticizing LEED and other similar programs for requiring large expenditures to meet extreme standards, when nearly the same level of environmental gain can be achieved at far less cost. Achieving that last increment comes with a highly disproportionate price tag. Just as a given level of energy reduction can be achieved through retrofitting older homes at one-eighth the cost of achieving the same reduction in already more-efficient new homes, the cost of taking a standard new home to a zero net energy level could instead pay for signifi- cant energy reductions in several new homes. Furthermore, new urban, infill, and transitoriented developments already substantially reduce their energy use footprint simply by virtue of their locations, and therefore should be viewed as effectively below net zero compared with new homes in locations that generate high vehicle miles traveled.

Zero net energy is a lofty goal, and its application to even a small percentage of new homes serves as a proving ground for new technologies and new design methods, some of which can be applied to production homes. It is not, however, a feasible or practical approach for all new housing. Nor should it be.

We can accomplish far more in the way of reducing our energy and water use by applying more cost-effective methods on a larger scale, to both new housing and the existing housing stock. This will take political courage, however, because new homes do not have a political constituency, while existing homes certainly do.

Until conservation and efficiency become real goals for the general public throughout the country, new housing alone will bear the financial burden, to the detriment of both housing affordability and environmental goals.

BB Steve Doyle is president of Brookfield Homes, San Diego. Cary Lowe is a San Diego land use lawyer and planning consultant.






http://www.bigbuilderonline.com/Industry-news.asp?articleID=1603853&cid=NWBD110712002

Friday, April 2, 2010

Home Wind Power

New, interesting wind turbines - from SF Chronicle:



Taking tiny steps toward capturing the power of wind

San Francisco startup offers small turbines as one way to offset the cost of electricity

Sunday, June 24, 2007


On many afternoons, the wind saws so strongly through Chris Beaudoin's neighborhood above the Castro district that he can lean directly into it and not fall over. So, after 20 years of watching the trees whip and bundling up in thick sweaters to walk the dogs, he's buying a residential wind energy system he hopes will cut his power bill by 30 percent.

The heart of this system will be two graceful turbines that look like oversize Ikea lamps. They are the brainchild of Todd Pelman, a marine and energy engineer by training and a resident of another of San Francisco's notoriously windy neighborhoods. His new Bernal Heights business, Blue Green Pacific, seeks to capitalize not only on San Francisco's wind, but on its other plentiful natural resources -- open-minded residents like Beaudoin and the desire to be one of the greenest cities around.

Whether Pelman's "micro-wind" project is successful may also depend on something else San Francisco has in abundance -- red tape and high costs.

"When you're doing something like this, you continually doubt," Pelman said. "But I know a lot of successes in our marketplace have been just that -- disruptive technology or trying to create demand for something that doesn't quite exist."

Pelman, a 34-year-old with thick, black sideburns who looks more like a lead guitarist than an engineer, spends a lot of time in the garage. Not ripping power chords, but monitoring the performance of the first and only working Blue Green Pacific wind turbine. Installed on his roof, the prototype's name is Maggie, after the youngest child from "The Simpsons." The production model, which Pelman is working on now, will be Lisa, the next-oldest Simpson.

The road to the turbine-topped yellow house on Roscoe Street began in Germany, where Pelman worked as an engineer on consumer products. Knowing he and his wife would be moving to the blustery neighborhood above the Interstate 280 gulch, he started shopping for a wind turbine in a part of the world known for its use of renewable resources. But, after finding few options, he decided to build his own.

Rather than the typical, horizontal-axis, windmill-style turbines most people think of -- the Altamont Pass wind farm is a prime example -- Pelman's steel, aluminum and plastic machine has a vertical axis and no sharp blades.

It looks as though someone has sliced a hollow cylinder from top to bottom and twisted the two pieces around a pole, reminiscent of the double-helix of a DNA strand.

The 7-foot-tall turbine and generator on the roof capture the power and send it to an inverter that converts direct current to alternating current. From there, it feeds into the electrical panel, where it helps offset power supplied by PG&E.

If Pelman can reach his efficiency targets, a one-turbine system could contribute about 10 percent of a typical home's annual energy needs, or about 300 to 600 kilowatt hours per year. Adding more turbines -- Beaudoin is scheduled to have two -- increases the energy output.

It also increases the price, particularly for startup technology that requires expensive manufacturing in a high-cost place of business. Pelman estimates he will have sunk $200,000 of his own money into the project by the time he starts production, he hopes within the next year. The target price for a one-turbine system is $5,000 (not including state and federal rebates that could knock about $1,500 off the price).

Beaudoin will pay about $18,000 for his system. However, he will receive technological updates down the line, and his unit will provide Pelman and San Francisco with valuable data about the viability and scale of the system. Armed with that information, Pelman anticipates that he can raise money from Silicon Valley, where alternative-energy technology is the latest thing.

"A solar unit to take care of all my electrical needs would be about $75,000," said Beaudoin, a flight attendant whose work brings him to countries where wind and solar energy sources are the norm. "I figured why not experiment with wind and see where it goes? I think there's more flexibility there, and although it doesn't generate as much, you don't know where it will go."

"We have to start stepping up to the plate on this micro-scale," he added. "This resource that we use is finite."

For the average household, a $5,000 system would pay for itself in eight to 11 years, depending on the price of conventional energy, Pelman said.

San Francisco officials are publicizing their push to harness as much wind and sun -- and even tidal -- power as possible in a bid to reduce carbon emissions and become known as the most eco-friendly city in the United States.

Last week, Mayor Gavin Newsom announced the third city-supported study of tidal power in two years and the Board of Supervisors approved measures requiring that 51 percent of San Francisco's power come from renewable sources by 2017. Next year, the city's Public Utilities Commission plans to break ground on a 12-story headquarters using wind and solar power to satisfy nearly all of its energy needs.

But while solar has been used in urban and suburban environments for decades, wind power is less proven.

Renewable energy designer Reinhold Ziegler, who is working on the PUC building and who helped develop the Altamont Pass project, argues that in cities, wind power may be better suited for commercial buildings, which reach higher into dependable wind streams and have more surface area for turbines.

"There's so much turbulence and obstruction in San Francisco, it's unclear how these (residential turbines) will work," Ziegler said.

Clearly, wind turbines won't work in every neighborhood. In fact, Pelman received a call from a would-be customer in the Mission District, but there wasn't enough wind to make it feasible.

"There's not going to be hundreds of megawatts of small wind coming out of San Francisco," said Johanna Partin, renewable energy program manager for San Francisco's Department of Environment. "But if it does become affordable for building owners and allow them to offset their entire electricity usage, it's a good thing."

San Francisco's topography, which helps create the gusts and microclimates Pelman and others so covet, also creates its well-known views. That means clearing planning and building hurdles and overcoming any neighborhood opposition.

Pelman worked closely for more than a year with his neighbors, his city supervisor and planning officials to win approval for his turbine in Bernal Heights, which has among the strictest rules on height requirements.

Although Pelman points to the "visual noise" of satellite dishes, chimneys, vents and antennas, it is clear that until specific codes governing turbines are written, wind turbines and their impacts will have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

Pelman and the Audubon Society are also monitoring his turbine to see whether it kills any birds (there have been none so far). Pelman said the vertical axis and opaque appearance of his turbine are safer for birds than traditional turbines.

Building a business, building a market, building community support are just some of the challenges Pelman faces.

He acknowledges the rise and fall of the renewable- energy revolution after the 1970s oil crisis. But his sense as a businessman, a power engineer and a consumer tell him that this time, it's different.

"There's certainly the possibility that it's a trendy thing, especially if energy prices stay low and go dormant," he said.

"But the reality is it's undeniable that the way we conventionally make and use electricity and our relationship with energy are not sustainable. In the end we have no choice," he said.

"I know our efforts have an impact in opening this market up. The extent of that impact will have to be determined, but we have to try."

E-mail Kelly Zito at kzito@sfchronicle.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/24/BUG3OQK6MJ1.DTL

This article appeared on page C - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle


Todd Pelman shows how the turbine on his roof works. His ... KURT ROGERS / THE CHRONICLE

Todd Pelman shows how the turbine on his roof works. His startup, Blue Green Pacific, makes the units for individual homes. Chronicle photo by Kurt Rogers

Generating energy from your rooftop. Chronicle graphic

Generating energy from your rooftop. Chronicle graphic

Friday, November 6, 2009

Green House Event - Somewhat Hype

This is a good example of what can be done if you have money but to me this is basically a gimmick when they say carbon neutral. Gimmicks got us into this mess trhough and it will probably take a few gimmicks to get us through it. Green wash hype none the less - this house has nothing on what was going on at the Mall in the Solar Decathlon.

A Green Scheme
House Built and Designed With the Planet In Mind Shows 'Eco' Can Be Beautiful

By Jura Koncius
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 8, 2009

Yes, the exterior siding is made from recycled materials, the roof of recycled metal and the floors of reclaimed wood. And there are dual-flush toilets (that will each save 6,000 gallons of water annually) in the five bathrooms of the CharityWorks GreenHouse opening Saturday in McLean.

But beyond the usual building blocks of green living, 18 local design firms have made the area's first carbon-neutral show house a stylish delight, using Earth-friendly furnishings such as sleek kitchen countertops made of crunched-up landfill materials, burnt-bamboo architectural molding, milk paint and a pair of shed antlers used as curtain tiebacks.

A team of builders, architects and designers created an upscale yet cozy Craftsman-style family home that will be open to the public for three weeks. It's a green trophy house, expected to use 80 percent less energy than a comparable new one, that's overflowing with ideas for an increasingly eco-aware population.

The brainchild of developer West Group and Green Spur, a Falls Church builder of energy-efficient projects, it was conceived as a model home of sustainable living. Builders took apart a worn-out 1960s brick ranch house (recycling virtually all the building materials elsewhere) and used the corner lot to erect a two-level, 4,000-square-foot house with four bedrooms, a spa and a lap pool. It also has a geothermal heating and cooling system, two green roofs and a "smart home" system that informs the homeowner via iPhone of how much energy is being consumed.

"A lot of people think that a green house has to be some sort of exotic spaceship," says Ralph Cunningham, a principal at Cunningham/Quill Architects, the D.C. firm that designed the home. "This house is an embassy for the green movement because it's in a fairly typical suburban setting and is full of basic solutions."

To bring the green-is-the-new-black message of the house to a broad audience, the organizers decided to turn the project into a show house. They asked local designers to participate and chose CharityWorks, which raises money for community organizations, as the beneficiary.

Designers received 10 pages of guidelines for shaping spaces that would enhance the "health, safety and welfare" of the home's future occupants. They were asked to use sustainable products and reuse, reduce and recycle. And they were cautioned to choose ecologically sound woods and paints with low levels of volatile organic compounds. The project called for energy-efficient appliances and fabrics colored with no harmful dyes or chlorine bleach. Extra points were given for using antiques or repurposed pieces with no shipping involved.

The result is a functional house that is full of surprises. Designers had to dig to find the greenest solutions. They reused curtains, scouted mattresses with vegan batting and uncovered hemp rugs. There's even a virtual golf room with a High Definition Golf simulator of iconic golf courses around the world such as Pinehurst No. 2, Troon North and Casa de Campo: Golfers never have to leave the house to play (thus saving energy), though this version will set you back $58,000.

"The main message of this show house is you don't have to sacrifice comfort or luxury to live a carbon-neutral existence," says Barry Dixon, who chaired the house's design committee. Dixon also decorated the large, open kitchen and family room space, creating a pantry full of honey and jam put up at his Warrenton farm (a nod to eating locally).

Participants took up the cause with newfound relish. "It was challenging and was a learning process for me," says D.C. designer Gary Lovejoy, who did the library. "It convinced me that this is the direction that everything should be going: recycled and natural."

"Green is a learning curve on the residential side," says Washington's Victoria Neale, who did the dining room in lime and olive. "You have to ask a lot of questions, because the first thing [manufacturers] say is, 'No, I don't have anything green.' "

According to Bethesda designer Skip Sroka, who created the home office, doing a green project costs about 10 to 15 percent more, but he hopes costs will lower as eco-consciousness is raised. Sroka said the experience was different from any show house he has participated in. "Remember when we just used to say about a room, 'Isn't it beautiful?' Now we can say, 'Isn't it biodegradable, recyclable, sustainable -- and beautiful?' "

If You Go

The CharityWorks GreenHouse is at 1310 Calder Rd., McLean, and will be open Saturday through Oct. 30. Hours are Tuesday through Friday 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., Saturday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Sunday noon to 5 p.m. Tickets are $25 online and $30 at the door.

The house is within walking distance of downtown McLean. Visitors traveling by car should use the official parking lot at 1320 Old Chain Bridge Rd. and take the free shuttle. There is no on-site parking. For more information, call 703-286-0758 or visit http://www.charityworksgreenhouse.com.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/07/AR2009100700850.html