[China.org via Ecofriend via Inhabitat]

Toyota, who's Prius is easy on the environment to drive but horrible on it to make, has engineered a new type of flower to help shoulder some of the damage their factories are spitting out.

The sage derivative's leaves have unique characteristics that absorb harmful gases, while the gardenia's leaves create water vapour in the air, reducing the surface temperature of the factory surrounds and, therefore, reducing the energy needed for cooling, in turn producing less carbon dioxide (CO2).

Well, holy shit. That is pretty insane. [Drive via Treehugger]

Why rabbits? The fuzzy critters have actually become a bit of a pest in Sweden; wild and stray pet rabbits alike have ravaged city parks in Stockholm, forcing hunters to think out the population. With all those bunny bodies piling up, it makes sense to put them to good use. So the bodies are shipped to Konvex, a company that turns animal and vegetable oils into automotive and heating oils. But even the reproductively prolific rabbits don't provide sufficient power, so Stockholm supplements their bunny-based power with other animal corpses, including cats and horses.

Holy shit. Macabre? Yes. But also strangely sensible? Yes. I don't know what to think anymore. [Scientific American via io9]

Saving Energy
In the previous Prof. Dealzmodo article, I talked about upgrades like switching to CFLs and investigating options for eliminating wasteful standby power like eco-oriented powerstrips. These kinds of upgrades are affordable on most budgets—real no-brainers. However, if you want to go the extra mile and make upgrades that could increase the value of your home, here are some products to consider:

• Solar Power: Okay, let's get right to it. When people think "green," they think of solar panels. But according to the most recent data compiled by the Energy Information Administration, the average US home uses somewhere around 30 kilowatthours (kWh) of electricity per day. That translates into $1500 to $2000 a year on electricity bills. Generally, a 1kWh (1000 watt) system is recommended for every 1000 square feet of floor space (depending on where you live) and you can expect to pay around $8 to $10 per watt installed. Throw in an inverter or two to covert the sun's DC power into AC and a battery bank and you are talking $20000 or more for a complete system.

So it seems that if you don't live in a home for 20 years or more, you will not see a return on this investment. However, there is a strong chance that your local government and utility companies will offer incentives like tax breaks, discounts or up-front cash rebates to subsidize the cost of your system, provided your homeowners association approves of your plans.

As CNN points out, Texas-based Austin energy currently provides rebates of $3.75 per watt—so right away you could probably shave nearly $4000 off of the $10000 price tag of a 1kWH system. Texas also offers a tax exemption "of the amount of the appraised property value that arises from the installation or construction of a solar or wind-powered energy device."

On top of that the Federal Government offers substantial tax credits for installing photovoltaic systems. As far as home values are concerned, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that the value of a home rises $20 for every $1 in reduced monthly electricity bills.

Obviously, the effectiveness of a photovoltaic system depends on a number of factors like the amount of sunlight your location receives and the position of the panels in relationship to the position of the sun in the sky. But when you add up all of the possible incentives, and you figure out just how sunny it is where you live, the expense looks like it might be worth it.

• Wind Turbines: Harnessing wind power is often a great way to supplement an existing solar array and can generate a surprising amount of power if you live in a suitable climate. A small residential turbine rated between 5kWh and 15kWh generally costs somewhere between $6000 and $22000 installed. Again, there are local and federal incentives that can help to cut costs and recoup your expenses faster. The downside is that if you don't live in a very windy area, or can't get your neighbors to permit you to reach the height required to get a turbine really going, it's a non-option.

• Energy Star Appliances: This was mentioned in last week's article but it bears repeating. These devices use 10% to 50% less energy than their power-sucking counterparts, and you don't have to ask your homeowners association permission to install them (for the most part). Do a little math, and you find that the premium price of these appliances will be paid back in good time—plus the energy savings will be attractive to buyers if appliances are part of the deal when you eventually sell your house.

• Greenswitches: If you want a simple way to reduce the power consumption in your home, check out a company called GreenSwitch. By quickly re-wiring your home with single-control outlets, each outlet can be designated as green or standard as needed. All you need to do is flick a single switch and all of the electronics in the home that run on standby power—and plugged into green outlets—are turned off. A system like this can save 8% to 10% a year in energy bills and "costs between $500 and $1000 for an average home." That means it's paid off in three to five years. If the installation prices get cheaper, it will be a pretty fast money-saver.

• Argon-Filled Windows: Most double-paned windows are vacuum sealed, so there's nothing between them at all. But windows filled instead with argon or krypton gas are said to help insulate the interior of a home better, and block UV rays. Prices of the units and the money saved vary of course, but some sources claim that the results are dramatic. Finehomebuilding.com has provided a handy guide for anyone looking for more information.

• Solar and Gas-Powered Tankless Hot-Water Systems: Solar power isn't just for producing electricity. There are also systems that are devoted to producing hot water—a process that can generate as much as 25% of our utility bills. There are several different configurations involving one of three types of solar collectors and storage tanks. These systems can be either active systems with circulating pumps or passive systems without pumps. Setting up a basic system can run you around $7000 to $8000, but like traditional solar arrays, these installations are often subsidized by local utility companies and the federal government, and add value to a home. Keep in mind that in most cases a traditional water heater will be necessary to fill in the gaps from time to time because hot water cannot be stored indefinitely—or sold back to the utility company.

Speaking of more conventional water heaters, replacing your standard electric or gas heater with a tankless version can save as much as 50% on your hot water bill. The main point: If you're not using hot water, it's not using energy to keep water hot. The life expectancy is twice that of a conventional heater, it takes up a lot less space, and it produces hot water whenever you need it, with a near instant "recovery time"—no more having to deal with people hogging all the hot water by taking really long showers. Systems like this will cost over $1000 but, again, there are incentives in place. For example, if you purchase a tankless heater from Rinnai between Jan 1, 2009 and December 31st 2010 you will be eligible for a tax credit equal to 30% of the full purchase and installation price, up to $1500.

Saving Water
The water bill is another expense that can really bite you in the ass—especially if you live in arid climates or do a lot of yardwork. If you are looking to go beyond simple rain barrels, here are some wise investments for homeowners looking to reduce their water consumption:

• Low-Flow Toilets and Showerheads: Low-flow toilets have come a long way in recent years. Newer models can handle anything you and your butthole can dish out—all while using a modest 1.6 gallons per flush (about half of a standard toilet). Low-flow shower heads have also progressed to a point that they provide great water pressure with low consumption rates that range from 0.5 to 2.5 gallons per minute.

• Gray Water Systems: In a nutshell, a gray water system recycles the water used in showers, sinks and washing machines—but not your toilets—to irrigate your lawn. "Gray water" makes up as much as 80% of our residential wastewater—water we could be re-using to save money. A basic gray-water irrigation system can run as low as $500 to $2500 for an average home. Apparently, untreated water is fine for most irrigation needs, but there are also companies like Pontos out there that use a bioculture and UV light treatment to purify the water. It's just for yard use, though—you're not supposed to drink gray water.

• Efficient Irrigation Systems: I'm not a big lawn guy, but I am a big gadget guy, and speaking of yards, some of the lawn-watering systems out there these days are quite impressive. For example: Toro's TIS-612 Intelli-Sense controller uses pre-programmed information about your landscaping and collects daily weather information via satellite to determine how much water a specific plant should get and when. Units range from 6 to 24 sprinklers, with prices falling between $320 to $1000. A subscription to the WeatherTRAK Everywhere Data Service will cost you a measly $48 per year in additional costs. That's pretty affordable, but the kicker is that because the system is so customized, the makers claim you can save between 20% and 60% on your monthly water bills.

With all of the focus on reducing energy costs and dependence these days, green tech is poised to become one of the biggest draws in the housing market in the decades to come. You have to spend money to make money as they say, but government and utility company incentives combined with energy cost savings make many of these upgrades surprisingly doable and profitable over time. For information on the incentives available in your area, check out DSIRE.

Most importantly, if you're pondering any kind of green upgrade, don't spend a penny until you hear how many pennies are gonna come back your way. If the dealer is mum on the subject, tell him to take a hike, because these subsidies are real.

Prof. Dealzmodo is a regular section dedicated to helping budget-minded consumers learn how to shop smarter and get the best deals on their favorite gadgets. If you have any topics you would like to see covered, send your idea to tips@gizmodo.com, with "Professor Dealzmodo" in the subject line. [Image Credit: Florian Solar Products]

"This is basically a dynamo which is being driven as a result of friction between the ground and the blocks. The small yellowish blocks (these are covered by rubber in the real commercial product) rotate as you pull it. They are designed to rotate even on bumpy run even roads. We have tested it on moist lawns and have worked. It is very smooth so much that you basically don't feel any disturbance as you move along.

At normal walking speeds we have gotten more than 2 watts which is more than enough for running cell phones or radios. I envision that people will attach this to themselves and walk with it - or even attach it to an ox-cart, a skating board, bike, etc."

It seems absurd (and it certainly looks absurd), but harnessing wasted movement to generate electricity is an idea that has a lot of potential.

Dell's declaration of its carbon neutrality is based on a self-defined carbon footprint that includes emissions produced by its boilers, company-owned cars, air travel and electricity use. What it doesn't count, however, is anything related to actually making its computers. As the WSJ notes, that's none of the oil used by its part suppliers or the fuel used to ship its computers around the world. Dell itself admits that the carbon footprint of its suppliers and consumers are about 10 times the footprint Dell claims for itself. The WSJ estimates they're "only neutralizing about 5% of the greenhouse gases that go into the making and use of its products." Even then, most of Dell's neutrality comes from the fact that it buys environmental credits, not because of actual green practices, like powering its warehouses solely from green energy.

The consumers, and how they use Dell products, Dell shouldn't really have to count. But, anything that goes into making the computers up until the point they hit your door, on the other hand, should totally be on Dell. So calling themselves carbon neutral at this moment feels at least a little bit disingenuous, even if they are trying really hard to be green. That said, they still might be doing better than Apple, according to a different WSJ report.

Speaking of cow poop, since Dell is in Texas, they've actually got plenty of renewable energy around. [WSJ]

It's not nationwide (yet) and the 32-inch restriction on TVs is bogus. Other than that, way to be responsible, Best Buy! The key to getting people to recycle e-waste (or anything) is to make it convenient and free—if Wal-Mart started up a free, nationwide e-waste recycling program, we'd really be in business. And they should as a basic responsibility, given how much of it walks through their doors. I just hope Best Buy isn't using one of those super shady recycling outfits that poisons their workers. [CEPro]

Corgi isn't planning on stopping here either. When talke dto CEO Michael Cookson, he said it's "just the tip of the iceberg." Basically, they're looking at converting "anything to do with batteries" to fuel-cell power (I suggested toy robots), and plan on launching "a range of products" in the next year or so. Best of all, they'll all be using a universal charger—though he cautioned, the H2Go's hydrogen station might not be it. The US launch for H2Go will in Aug. or Sept. for $129.99 w/ the solar panel, or $99 without. [Giz@Toy Fair 2008]

It turns off gear that's good to go and supposedly does AC to DC power version like a Russian chess prodigy. Supposedly we'll see some green plug-compliant gear at CES, so you can be sure we'll check it out. [Green Plug]

The PS3's got green cred for a recycling program and Sony's toxic policy, while it and the "X-Box" (360?) take knocks for requiring their own power plants. The "X-Box" gets more red thrown on it for Microsoft's sluggish 2011 deadline for eliminating certain chemicals (PVCs and BFRs) from its wares. The Wii gets zeroes across the board again (for the same reasons as last time, nondisclosure) but nets a green point for a small energy footprint.

Sorry Greenpeace, but you aren't going to get kids' attention by using hackneyed versions of familiar game characters loaded up with a narrative that sounds like it was written by scabs for the writers strike hired for $1.50 in the bathroom of a truckstop and colored charts that don't really say anything about anything. And everyone knows form letters are worse than useless—if they were on paper, I'd have to give you an F for pointlessly wasting the life of a tree that would've been better used as firewood. [Clash of the Consoles]

The runner-up is HP, with 13 percent putting up more green for green goods. Overall, the survey makes sense—Mac ownership skews toward segments with more disposable income and that'd be more likely to have environmental concerns. A full 47 percent of US adults, on the other hand, just don't care about the environment. Does that mean they're Nintendo customers? [Forrester Research via Digital Trends via The Raw Feed]

The key to a good rating in this year's survey appears to going PVC plastic and BFR free and offering a solid takeback recycling program. Sony Ericsson and Samsung are both PVC-free and only use BFR in a few products, as well as maintain pretty good takeback programs. They both got a 7.7, though SE would've pulled further ahead with better publicity of its recycling program, and both got knocked for not doing the takeback deal in every country they sell products in.

To contrast, Microsoft's not going PVC-free until 2011, and they're not overly big on recycling e-waste. They got a 2.7, but aren't the bottom of the barrel. That would be Nintendo, the first "global brand" to net zeros across the board. But it's not because they're tossing old DSes into the mouths of baby seals or clubbing them with old Super Scopes. Basically they either won't give out any information about what's in its products or what they're planning greenwise, or simply have no set policy in place.

Given what happens to a lot of electronics taken back in third party drives, it seems reasonable to ask companies to take back their products to make sure they're properly recycled and disposed of, so they're not poisoning exploited workers or leeching nastiness into a dump somewhere. At least until there are better setups in place, since every new HDTV or Zune bought on Black Friday probably means an old one chunked in the trash. [Greenpeace via Kotaku]

Event sponsors often take the cheapest hired gun they can find and don't ask questions about what's going where and how. The "recyclers" then turn around and hawk the wares, handing off what they can't sell to export brokers. And if they get busted, they just say they were selling secondhand goods to poor countries that need them.

The article-concluding solution propagated by Green Earth hippies actually makes sense: Make companies take back their own goods for recycling. Some companies already do, like Apple and Dell, and it's the law in eight states. Besides the obvious benefits, the hippies argue it'll push them to develop products with fewer dangerous chemicals, since the stuff will be back in their hands. It's better than the hands of underpaid, underprotected workers trying to scratch out a living. [CNN/AP, Flickr]