Archive for the ‘Public Utilities’ Category

Where Does Our Water Go?

Tuesday, August 18th, 2009

fig01-stackedbar.gif

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) found that the thermoelectric generating industry is the largest user of the nation’s water resources, accounting for nearly half (48%) of total water use in the US (this includes both fresh and saline water) [1]. Agriculture (including livestock) is second at 35%, the public water supply is third at 11%, followed by the industrial sector at 5% (four other categories consume around ~1% each).

Agriculture is the largest user of fresh water, accounting for 41% of all freshwater withdrawals in the US (thermoelectric is second accounting for 39%). Salinated water (salt water) cannot be used in agriculture because crops do not tolerate high salinity content and livestock that consume water with high salt content can become sick (e.g., develop digestive disorders) [2].

In terms of the public water supply (which is treated water), the residential sector is the largest user at (56%), followed by commercial (17%), and industrial (15%) [3]. Officially, public water supply is, “water withdrawn by public and private water suppliers that furnish water to at least 25 people or have a minimum of 15 connections.” So, note that this does not include private wells (e.g., homes in rural areas).

publicsupplywateruse.png

[1] USGS, Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2000, USGS Circular 1268, March 2003
[2] The Energy Lab, Produced Water Management Technology Descriptions
[3] USGS Geological Survey report by Solley et al., 1995

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

Why Wasting Water Is So Damn Cheap

Monday, August 10th, 2009

oakland.png

In the July/August 2009 issue of Mother Jones magazine there is an article entitled Why Wasting Water Is So Damn Cheap. It walks through the East Bay’s struggle with drought and its attempts to reduce consumption by ordering most of its residential customers to slash their water use by nearly one-fifth—regardless of how much they were previously using. One problem with this, as the article points out, is it unfairly targets users who were already conservative. Some highlights from the article (my headings):

Tiered Pricing

Composed of dense coastal cities, such as Berkeley and Oakland, as well as sprawling inland suburbs, San Francisco’s East Bay is one of the state’s most balkanized water districts. Typically, 25 percent of the East Bay’s inhabitants suck down 60 percent of its residential water. For this, they are charged as much as 50 percent more per gallon than the most efficient users. During the recent drought they were asked to use 20 percent less and got a rate increase along with everyone else.

Breaking the addiction to cheap water can be tough. Less than half of California’s water districts use tiered pricing. During the last big drought, in 1991, when EBMUD hiked its rates for customers who used more than 250 gallons per day, irate homeowners refused to pay their bills and four inland suburbs sued. The utility relented. “One part of the district was subsidizing another, and fundamentally that’s not fair,” says John Coleman, vice president of the EBMUD board, sounding like a ticked-off conservationist—except that he’s defending the users who couldn’t bear to see their lawns die.

There is No Water Shortage

“There is no water shortage,” says David Zetland, a water policy researcher at the University of California-Berkeley. “We’re just doing the worst job in the world trying to allocate it. If you go down to a bar and Corona costs 12 cents a bottle, you’re gonna run out of Corona. And that’s the problem with water: It’s just too damn cheap to care about.” Even in Southern California’s Irvine Ranch Water District, which sells water to its most frugal customers at below cost but slaps an additional 840 percent charge on the biggest users, 200 gallons at the top rate still cost less than a Frappuccino.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

The Cloud Needs Water, Lots of Water

Monday, August 3rd, 2009

As computing shifts from the desktop to the cloud, large-scale data centers are rapidly growing to meet capacity. And, as it turns out, these data centers are not just huge energy consumers but also huge water consumers. Data centers generate massive amounts of heat and they use water to help keep things cool. So much water, in fact, that it can exceed the capacity of local utilities. From Data Center Knowledge:

The enormous volume of water required to cool high-density cloud computing server farms is making water management a growing priority for data center operators. A 15-megawatt data center can use up to 360,000 gallons of water a day, according to James Hamilton, a data center designer and researcher at Amazon.com.

“Water is tomorrow’s big problem,” Hamilton said. “No one talks about water. The water consumption (in data centers) is super embarrassing. It just doesn’t feel responsible. We need designs that stop using water.”

Move Towards Water Efficiency

So, what are the big cloud computing companies (Microsoft, Google, and Amazon) doing about this? Again, from Data Center Knowledge:

Microsoft and Google are trying new approaches that use recycled water and nearby rivers and canals to cool their massive data centers, which is influencing where these facilities are located.

Microsoft says it picked San Antonio for one of its new data centers because the local water company could provide large amounts of recycled water, meaning the project would have less impact on the city’s drinking water supply. “One of the unique features of the San Antonio area is their great recycled water systems,” said Debra Chrapaty, Microsoft’s corporate vice president for Global Foundation Services. “As part of our commitment to the environment, we’re using approximately 8 million gallons of water (per month) from this system for our data center cooling needs.”

Google’s new data center in Belgium is located next to an industrial canal for cooling, while other providers are incorporating wells and captured rain water into their cooling systems.

Google’s Water Cooling System in Belgium

On April 1, 2009, Google hosted the “Efficient Data Centers Summit” in Mountain View, CA. At the summit, they debuted this video walking through the design of their own water treatment facility in Belgium.

The movie above was pulled from this talk at the summit:


Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

Drinking Effluence: From Sewage to Potable Water

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

In the winter of 2008, Orange County, CA turned on the world’s largest, most modern reclamation plant — a facility that can turn 70 million gallons of treated sewage into drinking water every day. The Los Angeles Times reports that the new purification system at the Orange County Water District headquarters cost about $490 million and includes a labyrinth of pipes that extend across 20 acres. The plant took over four years to build.

From Sewage to Kitchen Faucet?

Does the sewage get treated and then end up directly in the public water supply? Not exactly, according to the New York Times:

The finished product, which district managers say exceeds drinking water standards, will not flow directly into kitchen and bathroom taps; state regulations forbid that. Instead it will be injected underground, with half of it helping to form a barrier against seawater intruding on groundwater sources and the other half gradually filtering into aquifers that supply 2.3 million people, about three-quarters of the county. The recycling project will produce much more potable water and at a higher quality than did the mid-1970s-era plant it replaces.

Only about a dozen water agencies in the United States, and several more abroad, recycle treated sewage to replenish drinking water supplies, though none here steer the water directly into household taps. They typically spray or inject the water into the ground and allow it to percolate down to aquifers.

Namibia’s capital, Windhoek, among the most arid places in Africa, is believed to be the only place in the world that practices “direct potable reuse” on a large-scale, with recycled water going directly into the tap water distribution system, said James Crook, a water industry consultant who has studied the issue.

How Does it Work?

The process works by employing filters, screens, chemicals and ultraviolet light and mother nature herself–the passage of time underground. Again, from the New York Times:

The Groundwater Replenishment System, as the $481 million plant here is known, is a labyrinth of tubing and tanks that sucks in treated sewer water the color of dark beer from a sanitation plant next door, and first runs it through microfilters to remove solids. The water then undergoes reverse osmosis, forcing it through thin, porous membranes at high pressure, before it is further cleansed with peroxide and ultraviolet light to break down any remaining pharmaceuticals and carcinogens.

The result, Mr. Markus said, “is as pure as distilled water” and about the same cost as buying water from wholesalers.

Recycled water, also called reclaimed or gray water, has been used for decades in agriculture, landscaping and by industrial plants.

Cost

With drought and growing populations, cities are looking for creative ways to either create new water sources or reduce demand through conservation. Many coastal cities are looking at the benefits of desalinization plants; however, large-scale desalination typically uses extremely large amounts of energy as well as specialized, expensive infrastructure, making it very costly compared to the use of fresh water from rivers or groundwater. Is reclamation more cost effective? From the NY Times:

Although originally estimated at $10 million for the pilot study in San Diego, water department officials said the figure would be refined, and the total cost of the project might be hundreds of millions of dollars. Although the Council wants to offset the cost with government grants and other sources, Mr. Sanders predicted it would add to already escalating water bills.

“It is one of the most expensive kinds of water you can create,” said Fred Sainz, a spokesman for the mayor. “It is a large investment for a very small return.”

San Diego, which imports about 85 percent of its water because of a lack of aquifers, asked residents this year to curtail water use.

Related Articles

From Sewage, Added Water for Drinking, New York Times, Nov 27, 2007
From Toilet to Tap, Discover Magazine, May 23, 2008
Sewage becomes Drinking Water at CA Facility, LA Times, Jan 11, 2008

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

Texas Suffering from Worst Drought in 50 Years

Tuesday, July 28th, 2009

The movie above shows drought conditions from Jan 2007 to May 2009 and comes from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s US Drought monitor, which tracks US drought conditions.

Texas is currently facing its worst drought in over 50 years. In late April, the USDA designated 70 Texas counties as primary natural-disaster areas because of drought, above-normal temperatures and associated wildfires. The state’s worst drought made the record books for its longevity, spanning a seven-year period during the 1950s but this drought is more notable for its intensity.

Public Water Supply Impact

Texas aquifers and reservoirs are dropping to record low levels, threatening the public water supply in many of Texas’ biggest cities including Austin, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. In Central Texas, Lake Travis and Lake Buchanan, which provide drinking water to more than a million people (including residents of Austin) are down 54% and 49% in volume. According to this AP article:

Lake Travis is more empty than full, down 54 percent. All but one of the 12 boating ramps are closed because they no longer reach the water, and the last may go soon. The receding waters have even revealed old stolen cars shoved into the lake years ago, authorities said.

San Antonio, which relies on the Edwards Aquifer for its water, is enduring its driest 23-month period since weather data was recorded starting in 1885, according to the National Weather Service. The aquifer’s been hovering just above 640 feet deep, and if it dips below that the city will issue its harshest watering restrictions yet.

Water Use Restrictions

The AP is reporting that many cities are taking water usage enforcement seriously:

A total of 30 off-duty officers and other employees are working overtime to patrol the city looking for people illegally watering. Since April, about 1,500 people have been cited and ordered to pay fines ranging from $50 to over $1,000. Residents also are encouraged to rat out water scofflaws on the 24-hour Water Waste Hot Line.

Liberty Hill’s Web site urges its 1,400 or so residents in all-red letters to stop using unnecessary water with this plea: “If we follow these strict guidelines, we may have drinking water.” The town’s shortage eased some with the arrival this week of 35,000 gallons a day from a nearby water system, but residents are still worried. McLeod, from Liberty City, hopes his little town can hang on till then. “I don’t know how we can,” he said. “I try not to look too far ahead.”

Agricultural Impact

According to this Wall Street Journal article:

“Summed up in one word: devastating,” Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples said. Nearly 80 of Texas’ 254 counties are in “extreme” or “exceptional” drought, the worst possible levels on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s index.

Meteorologists predict relief will come after September, when an El Niño weather pattern of warming currents in the eastern Pacific Ocean is expected to bring up to six months of above-average rainfall. But by then, farmers and ranchers will have suffered serious economic losses as the drought scorches crops and cattle pastures. Researchers at the AgriLife Extension Service at Texas A&M University say damages are expected to exceed the $4.1 billion in crop and livestock losses the state experienced during a 2006 drought.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

Hara, Software Solution to Manage & Track Natural Resources

Thursday, June 4th, 2009

hara.png

Hara has developed a corporate application that can track natural resource inputs-fossil fuels, water, electricity, industrial chemicals, mercury, fuel consumed in travel-and waste products and then provide recommendations to optimize operations, according to CEO Amit Chatterjee. The primary target customers will be municipalities, large energy consumers, and companies with extensive supply chain networks.

From Greentech Media:

Coca-Cola has tested out the software in over 12 locations and is now “in the process of full deployment,” he said. It’s a somewhat unusual victory: it can often take years to land a name account in enterprise software.

The city of Palo Alto has also been using the software. It expects to save $2.2 million in energy and $400,000 in waste and wastewater treatment costs annually. The software effectively paid for itself in three months. Kleiner, Perkins put $6 million into the company.

The software in many ways seemed targeted at tying together various loose ends in the green software market. A raft of companies have released dashboards in the past few years that track direct and indirect emissions or carbon credits while others have examined output from alternative energy sources.

The idea behind Hara is to give a comprehensive view of the “organizational metabolism,” Chatterjee said. If a company is mostly concerned about reducing energy costs, or water consumption, the remedial recommendations will be skewed toward the desired result or a blend of goals.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

What’s Green Worth? Homeowners Spend $30 Billion on their Yards

Tuesday, April 28th, 2009

waterlawn.png

The city of Seattle, WA sees a 40-50% increase in water usage during the summer months primarily due to lawn and gardening. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, roughly 1/3rd of all residential water usage goes towards outdoor irrigation. Two summers ago, Ben Casselman wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal about the lengths people go in the US to keep their lawns green and the strategies employed by water utilities to try to encourage conservation (e.g., Las Vegas pays people to convert their grass lawns to the more natural and sustainable desert landscape).

A few highlights from the article (with my headings):

Keeping it Green

There are 58 million lawns in the U.S., more than one for every two households, and homeowners spent $29 billion last year on their yards, up 9.4% from 2002, according to the National Gardening Association. The average American family of four uses about 400 gallons of water per day, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, with roughly one-third going to maintaining a green lawn and lush garden. In total, Americans drench their lawns with some seven billion gallons of water per day, and by some estimates, as much as half of that is wasted — dumped onto sidewalks by poorly aimed sprinklers, blown away as mist from overpressurized spray nozzles and poured into gutters as runoff from over-saturated grass.

Restricting Water Usage

Watering restrictions aren’t new, but they’re getting tougher, and experts say this summer’s are the strictest yet. In the Southeast, which is suffering from a severe drought, some Alabama and Georgia homeowners are facing outright bans on outdoor watering while some South Florida counties have their first-ever once-a-week watering restrictions. In some areas of Minnesota and Ohio, a combination of dry conditions and development have prompted regulations. In the Southwest, where water shortages are nothing new, officials are taking bolder steps — raising water rates, charging premiums to heavy users and offering rebates to people who install more efficient irrigation systems. Denver has imposed fines on homeowners who waste water by letting it run into the street. Las Vegas has banned front lawns on new developments.

A number of cities have come up with a novel solution: building reclamation systems that clean sewer water and pipe it to residents for irrigation. In Cary, N.C., where this method is in use, residents are advised not to allow their pets to drink the water or to let their children play in it.

What’s Green Worth

For lawn tenders and landscapers who promise water solutions, business is good. Joe Wheeler, owner of Rainfilters of Texas, which sells rainwater-capture systems that range from $2,500 to $25,000, says business has doubled this year. Chris Spain, chief executive of HydroPoint Data Systems in Petaluma, Calif., which makes high-tech irrigation systems, says sales more than doubled last year from 2005.

Blair LaCorte, a partner in a private-equity firm, installed a $500 weather station on the roof of his home in Marin County, Calif., to help regulate his water use. If a sprinkler head breaks, his computerized irrigation system will automatically shoot an email to his gardener. Jude and Bud Thurston live at the Superstition Mountain golf club in Southern Arizona, where the typical rainfall is 12 inches a year, the average temperature in July is 104 degrees and local water policies are some of the nation’s toughest. But by planting drought-tolerant Bermuda grass, installing a new $25,000 irrigation system and borrowing data from their golf club’s weather station, the Thurstons say they have a grassy lawn, a grassy driveway and even a grassy play area for Black Ice

Some people don’t care about fines. In Eden Prairie, Minn., where more than 800 people have received citations this year, city officials have noticed a pattern. Habitual offenders tend to live in wealthier neighborhoods, where a $300 fine “is well below the threshold of what it’s worth to have a green lawn,” says City Manager Scott Neal. One homeowner in Palm Beach, Fla., recently used 11.7 million gallons of water in 12 months — running up a $33,629 water bill, according to public records.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

Energy vs. Water

Monday, April 27th, 2009

energyvswater.JPG

A fantastic article from Scientific American exploring the intrinsic relationships between water and energy in modern society. The article was written by Michael E. Webber, an assistant professor in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Texas, Austin and the associate director of the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy. A few highlights from the article (my headings):

Water and Energy

Water and energy are the two most fundamental ingredients of modern civilization. Without water, people die. Without energy, we cannot grow food, run computers, or power homes, schools or offices. As the world’s population grows in number and affluence, the demands for both resources are increasing faster than ever.

Woefully underappreciated, however, is the reality that each of these precious commodities might soon cripple our use of the other. We consume massive quantities of water to generate energy, and we consume massive quantities of energy to deliver clean water. Many people are concerned about the perils of peak oil—running out of cheap oil. A few are voicing concerns about peak water. But almost no one is addressing the tension between the two: water restrictions are hampering solutions for generating more energy, and energy problems, particularly rising prices, are curtailing efforts to supply more clean water.

The Cost of Storing, Treating and Delivering Water

The earth holds about eight million cubic miles of freshwater—tens of thousands of times more than humans’ annual consumption. Unfortunately, most of it is imprisoned in underground reservoirs and in permanent ice and snow cover; relatively little is stored in easily accessible and replenishable lakes and rivers.

Furthermore, the available water is often not clean or not located close to population centers. Phoenix gets a large share of its freshwater via a 336-mile aqueduct from, of course, the Colorado River. Municipal supplies are also often contaminated by industry, agriculture and wastewater effluents. According to the World Health Organization, approximately 2.4 billion people live in highly water-stressed areas. Two primary solutions—shipping in water over long distances or cleaning nearby but dirty supplies—both require large amounts of energy, which is soaring in price.

We use a lot of energy to move and treat water, sometimes across vast distances. The California Aqueduct, which transports snowmelt across two mountain ranges to the thirsty coastal cities, is the biggest electricity consumer in the state. As convenient resources become tapped out, provi­ders must dig deeper and reach farther. Countries that have large populations but isolated water sources are considering daunting megaprojects. China, for example, wants to transport water from three river basins in the water-rich south over thousands of miles to the water-poor north, consuming vast energy supplies. Old-guard investors such as T. Boone Pickens who made their billions from oil and natural gas are now putting their money into water, including one project to pipe it across Texas. Cities such as El Paso are also trying to develop desalination plants positioned above salty aquifers, which require remarkable amounts of energy—and money.

In addition, local municipalities have to clean incoming water and treat outgoing water, which together consume about 3 percent of the nation’s electricity. Health standards typically get stricter with time, too, so the degree of energy that needs to be spent per gallon will only increase.

Water and Power Generation

Nationwide, the two greatest users of freshwater are agriculture and power plants. Thermal power plants—those that consume coal, oil, natural gas or uranium—generate more than 90 percent of U.S. electricity, and they are water hogs. The sheer amount required to cool the plants impacts the available supply to everyone else. And although a considerable portion of the water is eventually returned to the source (some evaporates), when it is emitted it is at a different temperature and has a different biological content than the source, threatening the environment. Whether this effluent should be processed is contentious; the Supreme Court is set to hear a consolidation of cases about the Environmental Protection Agency’s requirements that power plants retrofit their systems to minimize impact on local water supplies and aquatic life.

Cars and Water

Plug-in vehicles are particularly appealing because it is easier to manage the emissions from 1,500 power plants than from hundreds of millions of tailpipes. The electrical infrastructure is already in place. But the power sector swallows water. Compared with producing gasoline for a car, generating electricity for a plug-in hybrid-electric or all-electric vehicle withdraws 10 times as much water and consumes up to three times as much water per mile, according to studies done at the University of Texas at Austin.

Biofuels are worse. Recent analyses indicate that the entire production cycle—from growing irrigated crops on a farm to pumping biofuel into a car—can consume 20 or more times as much water for every mile traveled than the production of gasoline. When scaling up to the 2.7 trillion miles that U.S. passenger vehicles travel a year, water could well become a limiting factor. Municipalities are already fighting over water supplies with the booming biofuels industry: citizens in the Illinois towns of Champaign and Urbana recently opposed a local ethanol plant’s petition to withdraw two million gallons a day from the local aquifer to produce 100 million gallons of ethanol a year. Resistance will grow as ranchers’ wells run dry.

Warning: There is No Replacement for Water

Regardless of which energy source the U.S., or the world, might favor, water is ultimately more important than oil because it is more immediately crucial for life, and there is no substitute. And it seems we are approaching an era of peak water—the lack of cheap water. The situation should already be considered a crisis, but the public has not grasped the urgency.

The public has indeed become more open-minded about the risks of peak oil, which vary from the dire (mass starvation and resource wars) to the blasé (markets bring forth new technologies that save the day). Supply shortages and skyrocketing prices have ratcheted up confidence in the claims of the “peakers.” Policy levers and market forces are being deployed to find a substitute for affordable oil.

What will it take for us to make the leap for water and, better yet, to consider both issues as one? When the projections for declining oil production are overlaid with the increasing demand for water, the risks become severe. Because water is increasingly energy-intensive to produce, we will likely be relying on fossil fuels for pumping water from deeper aquifers or for moving it through longer pipelines. Any peak in oil production could force a peak in water production. Peak oil might cause some human suffering, but peak water would have more extreme consequences: millions already die every year from limited access to freshwater, and the number could grow by an order of magnitude.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt

PG&E Smart Meter Anecdote

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

PG&E SmartMeter

On July 20th, 2006, Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s $1.7 billion SmartMeter proposal received unanimous approval by the California Public Utilities Commission. In the fall of that year, PG&E began the installation of 9.3 million SmartMeter devices for its 5.1 million electricity and 4.2 million gas customers and plans to finish system-wide in 2011.

Alexis Madrigal, from Wired, got his PG&E SmartMeter installed in October of this year and writes about his discussion with the PG&E SmartMeter installer:

Though he installed the meter yesterday, it wouldn’t do anything special for PG&E or me until the transmitters went in to create the network through which my meter would communicate with the world. And the transmitters wouldn’t be in for a couple of years.

But, surely, after the transmitters went in, I’d be able to track every kilowatt hour of my energy usage? Nope, Dave said. Special web apps for understanding my power user profile like I’d seen from Tendril or Greenbox? Not that he’s heard of. The best I was going to get was daily energy usage reports. That’s low resolution data, like your Toyota Prius telling you your gas mileage over the course of a week. The feedback loop just wouldn’t be strong enough to change wasteful behaviors.

In fact, the primary purpose for these smart meters, Dave told me, was to simplify billing issues for PG&E.

“Meter readers are under intense time pressure,” Fong said. “They are literally running from meter to meter.”

Taking too long earns meter readers demerits, and so do mistakes. If meter readers accidentally charge you for $350 of gas instead of $35, it causes major headaches. The new smart meters will eliminate the meter readers and the pesky problems humans introduce.

But will the new meters do anything to change the energy usage patterns that have Americans using five times more energy than the world average? Anecdotally, it sure doesn’t sound like it.

Share with the World:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Technorati
  • email
  • Netvibes
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt