LATIN AMERICAN WINDS

Siemens Turns Sights On Latin America For Wind Turbines
Laurence Iliff, November 20, 2009 (Dow Jones Newswires via Wall Street Journal)

"Siemens AG…is moving into the Latin American market for wind-energy turbines - beginning in Mexico - as it seeks a place among the world's top suppliers for wind-driven renewable energy…

"Latin America has little installed wind-energy capacity even as global growth in the sector hit 30% a year at the start of the decade before slowing to 24% from 2004 to 2007…It has slowed further in recent years due to the debt crisis…[T]op wind turbine manufacturers see a recovery around the corner and an eventual boom, as governments provide incentives to meet international commitments for clean, renewable energy."

click to enlarge

"Currently, Siemens wind turbines have a global installed capacity of 9,600 megawatts, with about two-thirds of that in Europe and the rest in the U.S., Canada and elsewhere…[making it] fifth or sixth in the world for wind turbine manufacturers…Unlike its competitors…Siemens isn't making its Mexico debut in windy Oaxaca state…[It] will install 70 of its new 2.3-megawatt turbines [worth $270 million]…with the private Mexican energy producer Grupo Soluciones en Energias Renovables SOE, or GSEER-SOE… [at] the Los Vergeles wind farm [along the Gulf Coast] in the Mexico-Texas border state of Tamaulipas…scheduled [to open] this month…

"…[P]roximity to the Gulf offers wind speed of about eight meters per second, allowing the turbines to operate around 40% of capacity…less than Oaxaca, but [adequate]…[GSEER-SOE and Siemens have] an agreement with the 43 municipalities in Tamaulipas to provide energy for government installations such as schools and hospitals…Before deciding on Siemens, [GSEER-SOE] did a series of studies on how wind turbines from the biggest global companies would perform as part of the project…Siemens' size and financial stability…helped…GSEER-SOE to obtain financing."

click to enlarge

"…Mexico had just 88 megawatts of installed wind-energy capacity in 2008 but will have another 300 megawatts this year…[and] could develop up to 3,800 megawatts of capacity by 2014…[though the] wind energy market…is going through a tough time due mostly to financing issues…The financial statements of two wind turbine giants shows global suppliers are facing a mixed bag of demand…Denmark's Vestas reported an 11% [third quarter 2009] increase in turbine sales…Spain's Gamesa reported a 16% fall…

"Siemens Wind Power Americas…is preparing for an upcoming energy auction in Brazil to assign several wind projects…[and studying the market in] Chile…[with Mexico, those nations] make up the "economic engines" of Latin America…and Siemens is betting that its wind turbines will be increasingly fueling them."

NEW SOLAR POWER PLANT MONEY FOR SPAIN

Abengoa secures E.ON as partner for solar plants
Peter Dinkloh, Tom Kaeckenhoff and Jonathan Gleave (w/Will Waterman), November 25, 2009 (Reuters)

"Spanish renewable energy company Abengoa will team up with German utility E.ON to build two solar mirror plants in southern Spain, benefiting from E.ON's cash and large grid expertise.

"E.ON will pay half of the overall investment of 550 million euros ($828 million) for the two plants, which have a capacity of 50 megawatts each, giving Seville-based Abengoa access to the finance power of the world's largest utility by sales…"

Abengoa specializes in solar power tower technology (click to enlarge)

"Spain has not yet released a list of solar mirror plants included in its new renewables register, which grants subsidies on normal electricity prices of about 27 eurocents per kilowatt hour, but the companies are confident the plants will be included…

"Abengoa, which has already started building the two plants in Ecija, close to Seville, and plans to start producing power in 2011 and 2012, respectively…"

click to enlarge

"Both companies plan to extend the partnership to further develop solar power in Spain and will study future projects on a case-by-case basis.

"The plants use the sun to generate steam that powers turbines, a technology called solar-thermal as opposed to solar cells…"

NORWAY’S OCEAN OSMOSIS PLAY

Power of osmosis used to deliver eco-friendly energy; A Norwegian firm is testing a renewable and emission-free source of energy that harnesses the power of water through osmosis
Gwladys Fouche, 25 November 2009 (UK Guardian)

"The world's first test plant to harness osmotic power, a new emission-free source of energy, opened…in Norway. Nestled amid pine-covered hills on the banks of the Oslo fjord, 60km south of the Norwegian capital, the facility will exploit the energy produced when fresh water meets seawater.

"Statkraft, the Norwegian energy firm behind the test plant, says osmotic power could produce up to 1,600–1,700 terawatt hours worldwide – the equivalent of half of the energy generated in the EU today…"

click thru for a complete Statkraft presentation

"Statkraft says osmotic power would be especially suited for generating electricity for large cities…[situated where large rivers flow into the sea and therefore not needing new transmission]…[A] commercial [25 megawatt] plant would be…[the size of a football field]…[An] osmotic plant could [however] have the same environmental impact [on biodiversity] as a hydropower facility…[so the right site is crucial]…

"The new technology is based on the principle of osmosis, the diffusion of water through a semi-permeable membrane, which is how plants draw water from the soil…[F]resh water and salt water is guided into separate chambers, divided by an artificial membrane. When the fresh and seawater meet on either side of the membrane, the fresh water is drawn towards the seawater. The flow puts pressure on the seawater side, and that pressure can be used to drive a turbine, producing electricity."

click thru for a complete Statkraft presentation

"The two-storey, tennis-court-size [pilot] plant, situated next to a pulp mill, will generate little power…There is no river at the site…so Statkraft will use the water from a nearby lake piped by the pulp mill…The company hopes to launch the first commercial plant between 2015 and 2020 – if everything goes to plan.

"The challenges are many. First is the price…[S]ince it is a new technology, osmotic power is expensive to run…Another challenge is technical. The key to the technology is the membrane, but Statkraft says it needs to be made five times more efficient than it is today. Yet another issue is developing the business, with Statkraft looking to find business partners, such as membrane manufacturers and utility companies…[Other companies and NASA are] looking into osmotic power…"

GREEN BROTHER IN KENYA

Nigeria set for 'Green Big Brother' show
Chris Wade, November 26, 2009 (BBC News)

"Nigeria's most celebrated environmental campaigner is about to launch a reality TV show to highlight the dangers of global warming for Africans.

"At almost 72 years of age…with three crossings of the barren wastes of the Sahara desert already behind him, Newton Jibunoh is preparing for the most ambitious desert adventure of his life…For his final trek across the desert, planned for the new year, he will be taking a band of 15 young men and women from Nigeria and neighbouring Niger with him."

Newton Jibunoh talks about climate change and Africa. From newdawnvideos via YouTube

"And he will select his travelling companions from an initial group of 50 as part of a reality TV show to be broadcast in both countries…The show, called Desert Warriors, will be set in the ancient Tuareg settlement of Agadez - the last town in northern Niger before civilisation gives way to the sand…There, candidates will be put through a series of tough physical and mental endurance exercises, extreme driving tests and group tasks…Like Big Brother, which has been phenomenally popular across the continent, the viewing public will be able to vote for the "warrior" they would most like to see make the final 15…

"After more than 40 years spent travelling the world explaining the dangers posed by global warming, and in particular the worsening problem of desertification in the Sahara region, Mr Jibunoh says his greatest concern remains the lack of awareness among Africans of the gravity of the situation…The show is his way of spreading the word to a new generation of African environmentalists… [It will] run through early December and will eventually be distributed across a wide swath of the sub-region, potentially reaching many millions of African homes…"

click to enlarge

"…[The] big problem that Mr Jibunoh says he wants to tackle is the perception amongst many Africans that global warming is the preserve of Western charities and wealthy Africans, and has no bearing on their everyday lives…A straw-poll of residents in the capital, Abuja, seems to bear out his point…[T]he irony of this situation is that it is the ordinary citizens of Lagos, Niamey or Abuja who stand to be hit the hardest…

"Mr. Jibunoh says he knows his own time is running out…But he says that Desert Warriors is all about passing the torch to the environmental activists of tomorrow and showing young people across Africa that this is a fight worth carrying on after he is gone…"

W/HYDROPOWER DROUGHTED, KENYA GOES GEOTHERMAL

Kenya looks to geothermal power, drought hits dams
George Obulutsa, November 23, 2009 (Reuters)

"Kenya needs $1.02 billion in the next three years to tap its geothermal power potential, seen as an answer to over-reliance on drought-hit hydroelectric power, Energy Minister Kiraitu Murungi said…

"Drought has slashed capacity at Kenya's main dams, forcing shutdowns and leading to reliance on costly diesel-powered generators, which in turn have pushed up energy bills...East Africa's biggest economy has relied on hydro energy to provide up to 90 percent of its electricity requirements. The country produces about 1,300 MW of power…[but] needs to add another 1,800 megawatts (MW) in new power generation to its grid to meet growing demand…"

From a KenGen presentation (click to enlarge)

"About 200 MW comes from geothermal sources now, although the government estimates it has the potential to produce 7,000 MW. The government aims to raise production by 2,000 MW by 2014…Kenya's Geothermal Development Company (GDC) [expects to] need at least 12 rigs by 2010-11 for the drilling of 72 wells each year and the acquisition of at least 100 well head generators over the next three years…and [with] main power producer KenGen, [has] secured funds and awarded a tender for two rigs and [are] seeking money for another two…

"…[T]he main obstacle in investing in geothermal [is] the high costs involved…[It] costs $6.2-$6.5 million to drill a well and a well-head generator costs between $7 million and $8 million…[but] Kenya [needs] to ramp up power production to meet growing demand…"

From a KenGen presentation (click to enlarge)

"The country is [also] seeking to expand generation of electricity from other renewable sources. This includes a 300 MW wind farm in northeastern Kenya due to be commissioned by 2012.

"KenGen is already setting up wind turbines to produce 5.1 MW…[with plans to increase this by another 30 MW. The government says wind power has the potential to produce 2,000 MW in Kenya…[Kenya] has spent 630 million shillings in Kenya's dry areas on solar power for hospitals, schools and health centres in the last four years and has set aside 500 million shillings more in the 2009/10 budget…The country also has the potential to produce more than 300 MW from sugarcane by-products, but only one sugar producing company has been feeding 23 MW to the grid."

Tick Tick Tick

The Copenhagen conference opens a week from Monday. World leaders have already admitted they won’t reach a binding agreement strong enough to meet the challenge and have begun spinning the inadequate non-commitments on which they are likely to agree. It’s time to remind them of why they should be more ambitious and work harder. From time4climatejustice via YouTube

We Are All Connected

Some truly great scientists (Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynmann and Neil deGrasse Tyson) have some thoughts to share like: "The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it but the way those atoms are put together…" and like: "You've gotta stop and think about it!" and like: "There is much to be learned…" From melodysheep via YouTube

Climate Crock Of The Week

Despite the silly claims of climate change deniers, the problem isn’t water vapor. Water vapor is a feedback, not a forcing. That’s been known since the 1950s. Here’s the lowdown on what’s really going on high up in the atmosphere. From greenman3610 via YouTube

THE COPENHAGEN DEAL

Greenhouse-Gas Pledges by China, U.S. May Drive UN Climate Deal
Alex Morales, November 27, 2009 (Bloomberg News)

"Pledges by China and the U.S. to set numerical targets for their greenhouse-gas emissions through 2020 may improve chances for a global climate agreement at negotiations next month in Copenhagen.

"China…[said it] will cut output of carbon dioxide per unit of gross domestic product by 40 percent to 45 percent from 2005….[T]he U.S. said it will propose a direct CO2 reduction in the same period of about 17 percent, provided the cut lines up with a new domestic climate law…"


click to enlarge

"The announcements mean the two biggest emitters of industrial pollutants blamed for climate change have spelled out their intentions to lower discharges, driving forward the United Nations-led [Dec. 7-18] negotiations… Yvo de Boer, the top United Nations climate official…[and the] European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, welcomed the goals while urging both nations to go further…[because neither] proposal is as strong as the EU plan to cut emissions by 20 percent from 1990 through 2020.

"The U.S. move depends on Congress passing climate- protection legislation…China’s [voluntary] targets don’t mean emissions will fall, only that their growth should slow. The nation’s economy has more than quadrupled since 2000 to $4.3 trillion, and if that world’s fastest pace continues the country’s carbon pollution will also increase….China has balked in climate negotiations at taking on legally binding commitments…[as part of] a framework for an accord to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012…De Boer has called on all developed countries to commit to legally binding emissions reductions…[and for developing countries to] say what actions they’re taking, without defining absolute reduction targets…"

If there is good news in this, it is that many experts believe a better treaty can be negotiated next year. The bad news is that there aren't many next years left for this good earth as we know it. (click to enlarge)

"Negotiations leading up to the summit have been stymied as richer nations and developing countries disagreed on issues such as emissions-reduction targets and how much financial help industrialized nations should provide to poorer ones…China and India have said industrialized countries must be willing to cut their carbon output 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020 if they expect poorer nations to agree to long-term reduction goals…

"The U.S. pledge is contingent on a deal in Copenhagen…That pledge amounts to a reduction of about 5 percent from 1990 levels. The EU has said it’ll cut emissions by 20 percent over three decades and that it’ll ramp that up to a 30 percent reduction if an ambitious global deal is reached…The White House said the U.S. intends to reduce emissions by 30 percent from 2005 levels in 2025 and a 42 percent cut by 2030. Legislation backed by Obama to cut greenhouse gases and establish a market for the trading of pollution allowances…[is] stalled in the Senate…[which is why] the UN’s de Boer [recently] said a legally binding deal won’t be possible in Copenhagen, and a political agreement must be reached that over the following year can be translated into a treaty."

THE FORCES OF RUIN, OUT TO RUIN THE COPENHAGEN DEAL

Toward a Stalemate in Copenhagen; How Industry Pressures and National Agendas Dim Prospects for a Climate Treaty
Marianne Lavelle, November 4, 2009 (Center for Public Integrity)

[The only way to fully appreciate Marianne Lavelle’s fine investigative reporting on lobbying and climate change is to click thru to the Center for Public Integrity and take the time to digest the whole piece, but here are some highlights.]

"…Around the world the story is the much same. Wherever nations have taken the first modest steps to stave off a looming environmental calamity for future generations, they’ve triggered a backlash from powers rooted in the economy of the past. Opponents of climate action may have different methods as they pressure different capitals, but the message is consistent: Be afraid that a cherished way of life may be lost. Be afraid that a better standard of living will never be had…"

click to enlarge

"Those fears will be center stage as negotiators from 192 nations gather in Copenhagen this December to forge one of the most challenging multi-national agreements ever. The daunting task: to reduce the pollution that the scientific consensus says has imperiled the planet — emissions from the burning of oil, coal, and gas that have fueled all economic development since the Industrial Revolution…

"…It was in anticipation of Copenhagen that the leaders of the developed countries known as the Group of Eight (or G8) pledged at their July meeting in Italy to work to keep temperatures from rising more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) over pre-industrial levels. Beyond that threshold lie grave dangers for civilization…The G8 agreed that emissions should be cut 80 percent or more below 1990 levels by 2050, in line with IPCC targets, but the world leaders declined to name any short-term goals…In fact, none of the emissions reduction targets for Copenhagen announced so far by wealthy countries meets the 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 that the IPCC said would be necessary to achieve stabilization…"

click thru for the interactive map

"This climate deadlock is nearly always framed as the clash between the national interests of wealthy countries that want to maintain their standard of living and the national interests of developing countries that need to lift millions out of poverty. But the arguments of the rich and poor nations actually have the same underpinning — that cheap fossil-fueled energy and other carbon-intensive activities like deforestation are keys to economic success. And all of those governments — no matter how far north or south — are feeling the pressure of the interests that have mobilized to keep this conviction alive…

"The principle that developing countries shouldn’t have binding treaty obligations is dearly held by businesses that have the ear of government in those nations…Those themes are echoed by representatives of the so-called BINGOs, the Business and Industry Non-Governmental Organizations, that attend the negotiating sessions all over the world and have been a permanent presence in the United Nations’ efforts on climate change for more than 20 years. These climate uber-lobbyists aren’t there to make a hard-sell pitch, but to get to know the key players who congregate around the treaty talks, to ease their way into more specific policy discussions back home, where the real decisions are made…"

ENERGY STORAGE GETS HOT, 1

FirstTEnergy Acquires Rights To Norton Energy Storage Project
November 23, 2009 (FirstEnergy)

"FirstEnergy Generation Corp… has purchased the rights to develop a compressed-air electric generating plant on a 92-acre site in Norton, Ohio, from CAES Development Company, LLC. The transaction includes rights to a 600-acre underground cavern, formerly operated as a limestone mine, that is ideal for energy storage technology."

[Anthony J. Alexander, President/CEO, FirstEnergy:] “The compressed-air technology envisioned at this site would essentially operate like a large battery, storing energy at night for use during the day when it is needed…Because many renewable energy sources – such as wind – are intermittent, they don’t always produce power when electricity demand is high. The energy storage aspects of this project would provide a way to harness renewable energy to be used when customers need it…”

click to enlarge

[Ohio Governor Ted Strickland:] “This project has the potential to create hundreds of construction jobs and provide support for the development of a vibrant renewable energy business – and additional ‘green energy’ jobs – in Ohio…This is an example of how we can leverage technology and our natural resources to grow our economy and ensure our energy future.”

"…[Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES)] involves compressing air in an underground cavern or other chamber during the evening – when electricity demand is lower – and releasing it during the day, when the need for electricity is greater…[CAES could be key in integrating large-scale intermittent New Energies onto the nation’s grid system]…"

click to enlarge

"…[A]n initial phase could involve installing two to four units capable of generating a minimum of 268 megawatts (MW) of electricity. With 9.6 million cubic meters of storage, the Norton Energy Storage Project has the potential to be expanded to up to 2,700 MW of capacity…

"…Currently, there are two commercial-scale compressed air electric generating facilities: a 110 MW plant in McIntosh, Ala., operated by PowerSouth Cooperative that began service in 1991; and a 290 MW facility in Bremen, Germany, that has been in operation since 1978. While there are other compressed-air projects under development, none is expected to be comparable in size and scope to the Norton facility…FirstEnergy [the 5th biggest investor owned electric utility in the U.S.] currently has more than 800 MW of renewable capacity…By the end of 2012…[it] could be more than 1,000 MW…"

ENERGY STORAGE GETS HOT, 2

Duke Energy Receives $22 Million Federal Grant for Wind Power Storage
November 24, 2009 (PR Newswire)

"Duke Energy…intends to match a $22 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to design, build and install large-scale batteries to store wind energy at one of its wind farms in Texas.

"The batteries at Duke Energy's Notrees Windpower Project…will store excess wind energy and discharge it whenever demand for electricity is highest - not just when wind turbine blades are turning."

click to enlarge

"The prevailing technology used at wind and solar farms throughout the world allows electricity to be produced only when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. The intent of the Notrees grant is to demonstrate how energy storage can help overcome this [intermittency] issue…[and] help reduce greenhouse gas emissions…"

click to enlarge

"This project represents one of the nation's first demonstrations of energy storage at a utility-scale wind farm. The 95 wind turbines in operation at Duke Energy's Notrees site can generate 151 megawatts (MW) of clean, renewable electricity. In April 2009, Walmart began purchasing energy directly from the Notrees project to power up to 15 percent of its stores and facilities in Texas…The total value of the 20-MW energy storage project at Duke Energy's Notrees site is $43.6 million.

"The DOE grant was made possible by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009… federal stimulus program…Duke Energy will work with the Energy Reliability Council of Texas to understand the project's implications and establish requirements for its implementation…The Electric Power Research Institute will provide advisory services…"

ENERGY STORAGE GETS HOT, 3

Lithium-Ion Battery Maker EnerDel Enters Utility Energy Storage Market, Will Supply New DOE-Backed Smart Grid Program; Partnership with Smart Grid Leader Will Smooth Integration of Renewable Resources in Pacific Northwest
November 25, 2009 (PR Newswire)

"Advanced lithium-ion battery maker EnerDel will enter the utility-scale energy storage market, supplying batteries for a major new [US Department of Energy] smart grid program…. EnerDel will build the batteries for five one-megawatt power systems that will be used by Portland General Electric (PGE) - a pioneer in smart grid technology deployment -- to help manage peak demand and smooth the variations in power from renewable sources like wind and solar."

[Cyrus Ashtiani, Chief Technology Officer, EnerDel:] "Energy storage is a key component of the smart grid, as well as a crucial tool for enhancing both the reliability and the availability of renewable but often intermittent energy sources like wind and solar…We expect this sector to be a major growth area for the battery industry. This program is a breakthrough opportunity for EnerDel to prove the capabilities of our systems in partnership with one of the most innovative electric utilities in the country."

click to enlarge

"Each of the five EnerDel battery systems will store enough energy to power roughly 400 average American homes simultaneously for up to an hour at a time utilizing the same core chemistry as the EnerDel batteries designed for the emerging new generation of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. The new systems will be used in concert with a variety of both hardware and software solutions to improve system reliability during peak demand loads."

click to enlarge

"The PGE project will be built in Salem, OR, where it will serve both residential and commercial customers. Equipment will be installed at 15 sites over the next two years, after which developers will spend two to three years testing system performance under wide variety of geographic and meteorological conditions. It is one of 16 announced by DOE, which is providing half the $178 million funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the federal stimulus package…The balance will come from utilities and other participants…

"EnerDel is part of Ener1…[which] has one of the most advanced lithium-ion battery manufacturing facilities in the world, and the only one of its kind in the United States…"

A Word Of Thanks

Before sitting down to stuffing (as a verb AND a noun), NewEnergyNews has, for the 1st time, a few expressions of gratitude to go with its 4th annual Thanksgiving post.

To begin, enormous heartfelt thanks to the 2 sponsors who have stuck with the page through this tough recession:

- First, The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). If the U.S. government was run as effectively as AWEA, victory in the fight against global climate change would be in the bag and the nation would not much longer be dependent on foreign or dirty energy.

- And second, One World Direct. Their motto is “We Deliver Your Brand” and that’s what they have done for NewEnergyNews, making it possible for this page to champion a New Energy economy and a cleaner brighter future for everybody’s kids

click to enlarge

Now to individuals. There are no doubt omissions from the following list, not by intention but due to the usual worries, distractions, brain cells left behind and a likely incipient dementia. Nevertheless, here are some very special folks who have helped NewEnergyNews over the years and cannot be acknowledged enough:

- Designer extraordinaire Phillip Garcia, who continues to be instrumental in the look of the page, despite the impossible things asked of him.

- Hazel Henderson, Rosalinda Sanquiche and Ethical Markets Media, who for a long time helped buoy the fortunes and spirits of the page. If only everybody did business the way they do.

- John Rabe, of Off Ramp at NPR-affiliate KPCC (89.3FM), for the opportunity to demonstrate NewEnergyNews’ media savvy. And Julian.

click to enlarge

- RenewableEnergyWorld, one of the world’s leading New Energy media outlets, for affirming the value of NewEnergyNews by bringing it aboard as a regular blogger.

- Others in the media who have also acknowledged the page, including the Wall Street Journal and Mother Earth News.

- AnneB and the tireless heroes of the NoNewCoalPlants Group. “Never, never, never, never, never give up.”

- The greatest readers and the most loyal patients any doctor with an obsessive/compulsive fixation on New Energy and a diagnosable addiction to writing could ever wish for.

- Gorgeous, the Landlord, who has for too long carried an unfair share of the burden but can now, happily, free herself for newer, more wonderful things.

click to enlarge

- The brotherhood, especially Peter and Michael, the Akbar boys, especially RayBootCamp, the folks at both Kitchens and Kaiser, the Santa Clarita Horsewomen and their men, SpaceMan1, UniversalChris, Vinnie, Plynn and her Art Center Men and the North Country Firefighter, all of whom have shown loyalty, buoyed spirits and offered solace.

- Finally, Lil’ Sister NFM and Frenchie. This page does not suffer from a lack of high quality readers but if the U.S. electorate was up to the standards set by those two, this nation would be ready to handle even the tough challenges it now faces.

Deepest gratitude to you all and so many others from the bottom of NewEnergyNews’ old and weary heart.

Now bring on December!

For The Cause

OK, there MAY be a better way to educate the public about the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (about 390 ppm) and what it needs to be (no more than 350 ppm) and how to get it all the way down (demand political action), but IF there IS a better way to get that message out, NewEnergyNews – having spent literally THOUSANDS of hours doing research about climate change and New Energy – has never seen it. And finding a vivacious way to get a vital message out is a reason to be grateful. From Studio4a via YouTube

If You See Somebody Today You’d Like To Hit With A Turkey, Don’t

There are lots of great Christmas movies, but is there a Thanksgiving movie better than Home For The Holidays? And this cast! BTW - directed by Jodie Foster. From bestofrdj via YouTube

NUCLEAR ENERGY IS SIMPLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE (& NEW ENERGY IS THE BEST BUY)

Generating Failure; How Building Nuclear Power Plants Would Set America Back in the Race Against Global Warming
Travis Madsen, Tony Dutzik, Bernadette Del Chiaro and Rob Sargent, November 2009 (Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center)

SUMMARY
Expert evidence continues to accrue relegating nuclear energy to the category of “yesterday’s answer.” There is a move afoot in Congress to dramatically up spending for new nuclear energy projects. Bad idea. Look at the evidence. Don’t do it.

Generating Failure; How Building Nuclear Power Plants Would Set America Back in the Race Against Global Warming concludes that it makes no sense for the federal government to fund new nuclear projects that are prohibitively expensive, would be a burden on the environment and introduce a series of potentially irresolvable contaminating hazards. Directing the subsidies and policy preferences to the New Energies will deliver more affordable emissions-free power sooner with no serious irresolvable environmental consequences and no radioactive problems left for future generations to resolve.

A recently introduced Senate bill would spend $20 billion over the next 20 years for ~100 new nuclear reactors to double existing U.S. nuclear generation capacity. It would also put U.S. taxpayers on the hook for an additional $100 billion in loan guarantees aimed at the historically unreliable nuclear industry. The result, the “Generating Failure” report demonstrates, would be a hampered U.S. effort against global climate change.

click to enlarge

For the same capital required to build 100 new nuclear reactors, the U.S. could cut twice the greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) by building New Energy (NE) and Energy Efficiency (EE). Given the GhG-cutting the U.S. needs to do, tying up $600 billion in up-front capital for 6, 8 or even 10 years in new nuclear reactors would be foolhardy.

Per dollar of cost, EE and several New Energies are far more efficient at cutting GhGs than new nuclear, others soon will be – and the costs of the New Energies will fall farther while the costs for new nuclear reactors are expected to rise.

click to enlarge

COMMENTARY
First important point: “Generating Failure” begins with a simple assumption about global climate change: The need for action is pressing. Action is urgently needed to cut GhGs. The sooner action is taken, the more choice and flexibility there will be in the kinds of workable action.

The Science: A 1 trillion metric ton cut in GhGs offers a 75% chance of keeping average global temperature rise to 3.6 degrees F or less above the pre-industrial level. To do this, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says GhGs must be cut 25%-to-40% below 1990 levels by 2020.

Where the easy solution is: The easiest big place to cut GhGs is at power plants. It is possible to cut U.S. power plant GhGs to a tight budget of 34 billion metric tons by 2050.

click to enlarge

Next important point: It takes too long to build new nuclear reactors. By the time a new fleet of new reactors could come on line, the fight against global climate change would be nearly lost.

Because: No new reactors are now under construction (despite blessings and benefits bestowed by the 2005 energy bill). No new nuclear energy could be available before (optimistically) 2016, probably 2018.

Because: The newest technology is being built in Finland and is 3 years behind schedule due to quality control failures (not something easily overlooked in a plant that uses radioactive fuel).

click to enlarge

Because: The U.S. nuclear industry is not up to speed. It lacks people, experience and manufacturing infrastructure.

Because: If the U.S. nuclear fleet COULD be doubled by 2030,it would only cut emissions 12% and the U.S. would burn its 40-year budget of 34 billion metric tons of GhGs in 15 years.

Third important point: New Energy (NE) and Energy Efficiency (EE) go to work cutting GhGs almost immediately.

In states like California with advanced EE policies, emissions are already being cut 1%-to-2% per year. The wind industry is building the equal of 3 new nuclear plants every year, is just getting started and expects to provide as much of U.S. power in 2030 as nuclear despite inconsistent and sometimes disdainful policies.

click to enlarge

For the same capital it would require to build 100 new nuclear reactors, the U.S. could cut twice the GhGs building NE and EE – though that would not be enough GhG-cutting to beat climate change.

That brings up the fourth important point: Given the 40% of GhG-cutting the U.S. needs to do, tying money up in building new nuclear reactors is a terrible idea.

Every new reactor ties up $600 billion in up-front capital ($250 billion to $1 trillion) for 6, 8 or even 10 years. That is money that cannot be invested in NE and EE. Power from a new reactor costs, over its lifetime, 12-to-20 cents per kilowatt-hour (or more).

click to enlarge

In contrast, spending on EE pays back (several times over) in reduced utility bills. The cost of electricity per kilowatt-hour from new NE projects is less than or comparable to new nuclear – but while the cost of nuclear-generated electricity is going up, the cost of NE-generated electricity continues to come down.

Per dollar of cost, EE and biomass with combined heat and power are 5 times more efficient at cutting GhGs than new nuclear. Combined heat and power is 3 times more efficient.

By 2018, land-based wind will be twice as efficient and offshore wind will be 30% more efficient WITHOUT production tax credit subsidies.

click to enlarge

Some studies show thin film solar photovoltaic (PV)-generated electricity to be presently comparable to nuclear. By 2018 (or sooner), solar PV will certainly be comparable in cost.

Concluding important point: New nuclear power is not needed.

Much is made of the variability of NE and the “base-load” value of nuclear power by those who do not understand how NE variability is managed by grid operators and by those who do not understand what a terrible waste nuclear power plants create because they can only run at 2 speeds: Maximum and off.

click to enlarge

There are a lot of grid options, such as biomass, geothermal, stored NE and ramped up EE, that are available as full-time as nuclear. Other types of NE, like wind and PV solar, are 80%-to-90% predictable so that properly equipped grid operators can plan to use them without disruptions or complications.

Over-reliance on base-load power like nuclear reactors is potentially more disruptive because outages are unplanned and quickly become uncontrollably massive. This results in huge extra costs in economic productivity and human loss.

The inability to tune down a nuclear reactor’s output means its generation during off-peak periods is wasted.

click to enlarge

Recommendations:
(1) Global climate change is best addressed by GhG cuts and the most efficient and cost effective way to cut GhGs is through NE and EE.
(2) Politicians should resist nuclear industry lobbying for more subsidies. Despite $140 billion in loan guarantees and liability protections in the last 50 years, the nuclear industry continues to flounder. The numbers for nuclear energy prove that further federal investment would be throwing good money after bad.
(3) The nation’s GhGs must be cut at least 35%-to-40% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050. To do this, political leaders must put a price on GhGs to make emitters pay for using the atmosphere.
(4) The U.S. should, along with the international community, prepare to act to alleviate the unavoidable impacts of climate change.
(5) There should be a national Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) requiring a 15% reduction in energy consumption by 2020 and a national Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) requiring regulated utilities to obtain 25% of their power from New Energy sources by 2025.
(6) New appliance standards and building codes should aim to cut building energy use 50% by 2020 and get all new building to net zero energy use by 2030.
(7) Spending should be directed not to new nuclear reactors but to new transmission and modern high voltage “smart” transmission that more effectively and efficiently carries and services NE and EE technologies.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- From the report’s introduction: …”The report focuses on the need for solutions that deliver rapid and substantial progress in reducing America’s emissions of global warming pollution within the next 10 to 20 years; cut pollution in a cost effective way compared to other strategies; and maintain reliable electricity service. By these measures, nuclear power simply isn’t up to the job. Putting aside the unresolved problem of how to safely dispose of nuclear waste, the environmental impacts of mining and processing uranium, the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation, and the potential consequences of an accident or terrorist attack at a nuclear power plant, the nuclear industry simply cannot build new reactors fast enough to deliver the progress we need on a time scale that will make enough of a difference…”

click to enlarge

- From the report’s introduction: “…[N]ew nuclear reactors are far more expensive than other forms of emission free electricity. Investing in a new generation of nuclear reactors would actually delay needed progress and divert critical investment dollars away from better solutions. Despite billions in government subsidies made available through the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and a streamlined permitting process at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, no new nuclear reactors are yet under construction. Looking at the state of the industry in 2009, nuclear industry experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology warn that without more government action to support the technology, “nuclear power will diminish as a practical and timely option for” reducing the odds of catastrophic global warming…”

click to enlarge

- From the report’s Executive Summary: “Far from being a solution to global warming, nuclear power will actually set America back in the race to reduce pollution. Nuclear power is too slow and too expensive to make enough of a difference in the next two decades. Moreover, nuclear power is not necessary to provide clean, carbon-free electricity for the long haul. The up-front capital investment required to build 100 new nuclear reactors could prevent twice as much pollution over the next 20 years if invested in energy efficiency and clean, renewable energy instead. Taking into account the ongoing costs of running the nuclear plants, a clean energy path would deliver as much as five times more progress for the money.”

MORE NEWS, 11-25: HOUSES W/O UTILITY BILLS; HEARTLAND WIND FROM ENEL, WINDSTREAM; THE SUCCESS OF NET METERING; UTILITIES AND SOLAR POWER PLANTS

HOUSES W/O UTILITY BILLS
Port Washington homes could lack utility bills
Tom Dayton, November 23, 2009 (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)

"Developer Mike Speas acknowledges that the nine "green" houses he plans to build in Port Washington could lack some features, such as attached garages or granite kitchen countertops…[or] monthly heating and electricity bills.

"The homes will include geothermal systems, which absorb heat from beneath the ground as a substitute for conventional furnaces. The building frames will use heavily insulated panels, instead of studs, to provide a higher level of insulation…the larger windows [will face] south, to absorb more sunlight. And the roofs will have solar panels for hot water heaters, with additional room to allow homeowners to install solar panels to provide electricity."

click to enlarge

"The proposed nine-lot subdivision, called the Terraces at Mineral Springs [and planned for a 5.7-acre parcel on S. Division St., on the city's south edge], just won conceptual approval from the Port Washington Plan Commission…Speas plans to build homes of about 1,200 square feet, with three bedrooms and two bathrooms, and sell them for about $200,000.

"The heavy insulation, solar panels and geothermal systems, which are reversed during the summer to cool the house, cost "a ton of money" compared with conventional home building techniques…To keep the price around $200,000, he might not include the detached garage, which the homeowner could build later…[and not finish] the basement [or include] photovoltaic solar panels…"

click to enlarge

"But home buyers who decide to install the photovoltaic panels will be generating their own electricity. Among other things, that solar power will run the geothermal system to provide cooling and heating…It's that energy savings - not necessarily a "green consciousness" - that Speas says will help sell the homes…

"[T]he houses will have an aesthetic appeal, Speas said, with a traditional arts-and-crafts bungalow design that blends with the city's older homes…But energy-producing houses are often aimed at wealthy buyers…[whereas the] Port Washington homes will target more middle-class families who make an investment on the front end that will be repaid through lower energy costs…Rebates from the state's Focus on Energy program, along with federal tax credits for buying and installing solar panels, can help reduce those upfront costs…"


HEARTLAND WIND FROM ENEL, WINDSTREAM
Enel unit to develop 4,000 MW US wind projects
November 24, 2009 (Reuters via Forbes)
and
Wind turbine maker plans southern Indiana plant
November 23, 2009 (AP via Chicago Tribune)

"Italy's biggest renewable energy company, Enel Green Power [plans] to develop more than 4,000 megawatt of wind projects in the United States after buying a minority stake in Minnesota-based Geronimo Wind Energy.

"Under a strategic partnership agreement, Enel Green Power [the green energy arm of Italy's biggest utility] will inject capital to develop the project pipeline and also have the priority right to buy, own and operate wind projects developed by Geronimo…It did not say how much it paid for the stake or how much it planned to invest in developing new US wind projects…

"…[Enel reportedly plans]several small-size acquisitions in wind power generation by the end of this year, targeting small companies with assets and project pipelines…Enel Green Power, with over 4,500 MW of installed solar, wind and other renewable energy capacity around the world, has been boosting its U.S. clean energy portfolio. It has a similar investment in TradeWind Energy based near Lenexa, Kansas."

click thru to learn more about ENEL

"WindStream Technologies Inc. said…its [planned development and production facility for small-scale wind turbines in Indiana] could have more than 260 workers by 2012. The company is now based in California and plans to begin hiring as facility and equipment upgrades are made at the site in the Purdue Research Park of Southeast Indiana.

"WindStream says its TurboMills are designed to capture wind energy in urban areas. The devices are intended as a low-cost way to supplement a customer's electricity needs.

"The Indiana Economic Development Corp. offered WindStream up to $1.5 million in performance-based tax credits for the project."


THE SUCCESS OF NET METERING
Grading the Net-Metering Program, One State at a Time; A consortium of U.S. net-metering advocates have graded each state for its net metering and grid interconnection policies to see who’s naughty or nice
Ucilla Wang, November 24, 2009 (Greentech Media)

"A group of net-metering advocates in the United States has released a report grading each state's policies on allowing residents and businesses to get compensated for feeding excessive electricity from their renewable energy systems to the electric grid.

"…[Freeing the Grid, from the Network for New Energy Choices, Vote Solar, the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, the Solar Alliance and the North Carolina Solar Center,] gave 15 states an "A" or "B" for making it relatively easy and affordable to connect their solar, wind or other types of systems to the grid…[I]n 2007, only one state got the high mark…[Also, the new] report gave 27 states an "A" or "B" for net-metering rules that allow residents to get credit for sending unused electricity to the grid. That's also a big jump from 2007, when 13 states won that recognition…"

click to enlarge

"…[M]any states with mandates for their utilities to boost their offerings of renewable electricity also have incentives in place to entice consumers to install renewable energy systems. Net-metering policies exist in 42 states and Washington, D.C…California, which has been ahead of other states in adopting policies and subsidies that are friendly to renewable energy, has scored well…Texas, the big wind energy producing state, has no net-metering program…States that flunked in…[net metering or interconnection] included Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Wyoming, Utah and Minnesota.

"Net-metering policies are meant to promote generating solar, wind or biomass electricity where it's consumed. Solar energy system owners could export extra electricity to the grid and get credits on their bills that are equivalent to the retail price…But writing and deploying effective net-metering programs is far from simple. And whether they are cost effective is subject to debate."

click to enlarge

"In California, a legislative effort to raise the cap for net-metering customers prompted utilities to question whether net metering benefits a small group of people at the expense of those who can't afford or choose not to install solar. Utilities typically recoup the cost of the programs…[with] rate hikes…to their overall customer base…The California Public Utilities Commission is due to release a report in January that will examine this and other issues…Efforts to raise the net-metering cap in California didn't succeed…

"…[In the report] good interconnection standards refer to rules that clearly spell out the technical and legal mandates. They also do not impose expensive fees or add costs by requiring devices such as redundant disconnect switches, which the report said adds to the cost of installing solar without providing the intended safety assurances…Good net-metering rules should make it easy for consumers to earn credits from their utilities for feeding excessive electricity to grid…[and] advocates want states to forego restrictions on the size of solar energy systems or the types of customers…"


UTILITIES AND SOLAR POWER PLANTS
Hedging bets: Why the utilities can’t afford to ignore CSP
Rikki Stancich, 23 November 2009 (CSP Today)

"CSPToday: …[W]hat policies need to be in place to support the continuing development of CSP in the US?..."

[Dr Fred Morse, Chair, Utility-Scale Solar Power Division/U.S. Solar Energy Industries Association, and co-Chair, Western Governors’ Association Solar Task Force, and senior US operations advisor, Abengoa Solar Inc, and former Executive Director of the White House Assessment of Solar Energy as a National Energy Resource and senior executive in charge of solar R&D and market development, U.S. Department of Energy:] "…[A] variety…including financial incentives, siting & permitting, transmission planning, and a cap on greenhouse gas emissions…[T]he most important is access to long-term, low-interest financing, which is what built our hydro resources many decades ago, to the long-term benefit of the country…[N]o public land has been approved for solar project development, despite a long history of fossil fuel development…[so] SEIA is working with the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies to ensure there is a clear and thorough review process…Transmission is another key issue…Finally, setting a price on carbon will be important for utilities and consumers to realize the long-term value of solar and other clean, renewable energy resources."

click to enlarge

"CSP Today: What is likely to kick-start project financing in the US? Does the loan guarantee program hold any promise for CSP?…[Morse:] There was a meltdown in the financial markets…But when you speak about a CSP plant in the hundreds of megawatts, you are talking about US$1 billion…So the U.S. Congress included a federal loan guarantee in the stimulus bill…[M]ost CSP developers believe this federal loan guarantee program is one of the keys to getting CSP projects built in the U.S.

"CSP Today: What challenges exist in the US, in terms of transmission, and what solutions are emerging?…[Morse:] Our power grid is out-dated and requires new lines to connect solar-rich areas to growing population centers…Just as our highway system was constructed through a national planning effort, we need to plan for our transmission needs on a regional and interconnection-wide basis…[S]preading the costs of new transmission across an entire interconnection or region will make it much easier to finance…Finally, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should have back-stop authority to approve the siting of new transmission…"

click to enlarge

"CSP Today: Is thermal storage likely to become a pre-requisite in US CSP projects?…[Morse:] Thermal storage is profoundly valuable to the utilities…Abengoa Solar's project in Arizona does incorporate thermal storage. But it would not have been selected without it; the utility (Arizona Public Service) required it…[A] solar resource during the daytime is of little value to the utility in terms of managing peak loads. They need energy during the morning and evening peaks…Thermal energy storage allows a CSP plant to meet that demand.

"CSP Today: What is the ceiling for CSP in the US? What will its overall share of the electricity generated be and how central will it be to energy strategy?…[Morse:] Today, there are about 8,000 MW of CSP projects with signed PPAs. That means the utilities who signed those PPAs accepted the price for electricity generated by those CSP plants…[I]f CSP is already competitive enough to get PPAs for 8,000 megawatts signed, I believe that CSP will continue to capture a growing part of the future electricity demand in the Southwest and, with adequate new transmission, begin to meet electricity demand across the United States..."

ASIA, THE U.S. AND THE NEW ENERGY RACE

Asia Beats U.S. 3-1: Major New Report on US vs. Asian Competitiveness in Clean Energy Technology
November 18, 2009 (Breakthrough Institute)

SUMMARY
Asian powers are winning the competition to dominate New Energy, a 21st century version of the Space Race in which the U.S. beat the USSR to the moon. And the governments of China, Japan and South Korea are aggressively outspending the U.S. on research, development and deployment by at least 3-to-1 to extend their superiority while the U.S. stumbles over policy inaction and fades.

Even if the best proposals now working their way through Congress become law, the U.S. will invest no more than $172 billion in the next 5 years while China alone will invest $397 billion.

Those are the findings of Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant: Asian Nations Set to Dominate the Clean Energy Race By Out-Investing the United States, by Breakthrough Institute and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. It presents 5 core findings:

click to enlarge

(1) The U.S. is already losing the new Space Race-like competition and the 3-to-1 Asian spending advantage planned for the next 5 years will set them up to lure trillions in private sector investments. The U.S. may grab some joint venture fruits of their growth but the Asian powerhouses will reap the largest bounty in jobs, tax revenues, and indirect benefits.
(2) The government spending for New Energy research, development and deployment (RD&D) in Asia will generate economies of scale, learning-by-doing, and innovations that will spawn new infrastructure and new economic leverage.
(3) If the U.S. allows the New Energy “spending gap” to continue, it will lose the equivalent of a new Space Race and become a New Energy importer which will, in turn, hamper its short-term economic recovery and its long-term competitiveness.
(4) The present House and Senate energy and climate bills are inadequate to get the U.S. back into the Race, lacking funding for RD&D to match the rising Asian New Energy powers.
(5) If the U.S. hopes to remain competitive, it must not rely on the private sector and “small, indirect and uncoordinated incentives” but must commit to “large, direct and coordinated” federal investment.

click to enlarge

COMMENTARY
The Asian government investment has spanned a spectrum from RD&D, private innovation, scaling up manufacturing capacity, and building infrastrucuture and domestic markets. Where governments spend, the private sector sees less risk. Confidence grows and economies of scale emerge.

U.S. energy and climate policy has been inadequately aggressive to attract private scaling up.

Global private New Energy (NE) and Energy Efficiency (EE) investment is estimated to be $450 billion per year by 2012 and $600 billion by 2020. Without a commitment from the federal government, the U.S. will not reap the largest share of the benefits of that explosion of spending and building.

click to enlarge

Instead, Asia’s New Energy “tigers” will extend their “first-mover advantage.”

In 2009, the first Chinese-manufactured wind turbines will be transported for use in a U.S. wind project, a $1.5 billion installation. Though U.S. installed wind capacity is growing, most of its turbines are manufactured outside the country.

Plans for new U.S. high-speed rail projects will require Asian hardware because there are no domestic manufacturers. China, Japan and South Korea all have more new nuclear plant-building capacity. The U.S. builds less than 10% of its solar cells. And it is behind and falling back in battery electric vehicle (BEV) technology.

click to enlarge

To now, the U.S. has attracted the largest part of private sector investment in NE and EE but a shift toward investment in Asia is ongoing. From 2000 to 2008, $52 billion in private capital went into U.S. NE and EE and $41 billion went to China. But China’s share increased each year and it passed the U.S. in 2008. On the basis of incentives and policies, a recent Deutsche Bank study rated China and Japan "low-risk" places to invest in NE and EE and it rated the U.S. a "moderate risk" place.

China, South Korea and Japan will invest a total of $509 billion in NE and EE from 2009 to 2013, the largest part coming in China. The U.S. will invest $172 billion in the same period.

South Korea’s “Green New Deal” will invest $46 billion, 1% of its GDP, in the 2009 to 2013 period, with a focus on solar, LED lighting, nuclear, and hybrid car technologies.

click to enlarge

Japan will have $33 billion in targeted incentives, focusing on the deployment of solar, hybrid-electric vehicles, and EE technologies. It already has plans for an additional $30 billion in NE and EE spending from 2013 to 2018.

The Asian strategy is to support start-up companies with low-interest loans, RD&D to favored whole industries, government procurement to generate markets, and subsidies to drive the buying of NE and EE technologies.

Asian spending sets deployment as its goal. By 2012, China, Japan, and South Korea intend to produce 1.6 million BEVs per year. North America is expected to be producing 267,000 BEVs that year.

click to enlarge

Japan reportedly has a plan to boost its installed solar capacity 20 times over by 2020 and has committed to obtaining 20% of its power from New Energy sources by 2020. Feed-in tariffs guaranteeing above-power-market returns is driving rapid deployment of wind and solar.

China has committed to obtaining 15%-to-18% of its power from New Energy sources by 2020 but its growing momentum suggests it will get to 20% by then.

With these strategies and policies, Asia will create economies of scale, learn-by-doing experience, supply chain efficiencies and market power advantages that will solidify their leverage. This will make it possible for them to resolve technology obstacles, streamline production and product performance and cut prices. The result will be a structural competitive advantage.

click to enlarge

Pending Congressional legislation is entirely inadequate to the challenge and will not recapture NE and EE private investment before 2020. It sets greenhouse gas emissions prices too low and its RD&D funding is too low.

The goal of federal investment should be to break down the barriers to private investment. Those barriers include: (1) High capital costs; (2) Uncertainty and risk; (3) A lack of enabling infrastructure like transmission and New Energy storage; (4) Low public RD&D funding; (5) Inadequate protections for intellectual property and spillover risks leading to low private RD&D spending; (6) Competitive disadvantages for New Energy in established energy markets giving default advantages to the Old Energies.

The result: The energy sector defeats innovation and remains dependent on century-old technologies.

click to enlarge

Government incentives can work. There are many examples of past U.S. public sector investments that spawned private sector investment and ended up creating new economic blessings: Agriculture, railroads, radio, the Internet, aerospace, IT and pharmaceuticals, as well as the invention of nuclear, wind, and solar energy technologies.

Denmark became the leader in wind technology when government subsidies guaranteed a market for wind energy-generated electricity in the 1980s and 1990s. As result, Denmark’s Vestas is the world’s top wind turbine manufacturer.

The U.S. has been behind before and caught up. Europe led in aerospace technology until sustained federal military-related funding of innovation and deployment in aviation technology turned the U.S. into a civil and military aviation leader.

click to enlarge

The USSR’s Sputnik was the first satellite to orbit the earth but President Kennedy set U.S. sites higher and 12 years later U.S. astronauts were the first to walk on the moon – as tbe result of direct federal investment in innovation and technology.

What is necessary now is a real public commitment. Because of the building advantage in Asia, the U.S. needs more than a price on emissions, New Energy standards and other indirect incentives. They are necessary but no longer sufficient.

Only an aggressive, direct and targeted effort to strengthen research and innovation, manufacturing capacity, and domestic markets will get the U.S. back in the New Energy Race.

click to enlarge

The report suggests 3 key necessities for the U.S:

(1) A significant increase in New Energy innovation in the form of major and sustained spending on RD&D. If this does not happen, the next generation of NE and EE will be invented and commercialized in Europe and Asia where spending, policies and roadmaps are in place while the U.S. lags in all 3.

(2) A focus on developing innovative manufacturing processes and investing in them to build economies of scale in manufacturing. The U.S. NE and EE manufacturing sector is seriously disadvantaged. Only a special focus on providing secure low-cost financing, incentives and technical assistance for retooling can make it competitive and bring the tax revenues, jobs, and supply chain of related industries and businesses back to the domestic economy.

(3) Targeted public policy and spending aimed at accelerating NE and EE deployment and creating markets for it. Only accurately targeted polices can effectively and quickly bring down the price and spread adoption widely.

click to enlarge

Finally, to be very specific, policies must be targeted to provide:

(1) Meaningful technology-specific production incentives;

(2) Concrete and large-scale promises of government procurement; and

(3) Permanent and long-term lines of credit in the form of

-(a) low-cost financing and

-(b) credit guarantees.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
From the report: “Nations that establish an early lead in key industries can more easily retain that advantage at a lower cost over the long-term. Direct government investments by Asia’s clean tech tigers will help them form industry clusters, like Silicon Valley in the United States, where investors, manufacturers, suppliers and others can establish dense networks of relationships that can provide cost and innovation advantages…In order to avoid ceding "rst-mover advantage to Asia’s clean tech tigers, U.S. support for the nation’s already lagging domestic industries must be robust. Unfortunately, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the climate and energy bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June 2009 is not sufficiently aggressive to significantly increase the deployment of renewable and other low-carbon energy generation technologies or advanced vehicle technologies, particularly in the near-term.”

click to enlarge

From the report: “…ACESA directs relatively little public funding to support research and development, commercialization and production of clean energy technologies within the United States. Furthermore, the legislation is unlikely to trigger significant private investments in clean energy development and deployment before 2020, if not much later, largely because carbon prices established by the bill’s cap and trade program are projected to remain relatively low…Renewable energy deployment standards contained in ACESA are also insufficient to require additional deployment beyond business-as-usual projections…”
From the report: “Dollar for dollar, the direct and targeted public investments of China, Japan, and South Korea are likely to attract substantial private investment to clean energy industries in each country, perhaps more so than the market-based and indirect policies of the United States…As trillions of dollars are invested in the global clean energy sector over the next decade… investors will invest more in those countries that offer support for infrastructure, R&D, a trained workforce, guaranteed government purchases, deployment incentives, lower tax burdens, and other incentives…”

click to enlarge

From the report: “The United States has consistently been a leader in inventing new technologies and creating new industries and economic opportunities. It remains one of the most innovative economies in the world, and is home to the world’s best research institutions and most entrepreneurial workforce. The challenge will be for the United States to aggressively build on these strengths with robust public policy and government investment capable of establishing leadership in clean technology development, manufacturing, and deployment, and to do so before China, Japan and South Korea fully establish and cement their emerging competitive advantages.”

MORE NEWS, 11-24: CONGRESS POSTPONES CLIMATE CHANGE; $4 BIL FOR U.S. WIND JOBS; NEW ENERGY POLISHES RUST; COAL AND THE DAMAGE DONE

CONGRESS POSTPONES CLIMATE CHANGE
No Climate Bill This Year, Senators Say; Key Senators have told the Wall Street Journal that a climate and energy bill containing controversial carbon cap-and-trade provisions won’t get passed this year
Jeff St. John, November 18, 2009 (Greentech Media)

"The U.S. Senate will postpone until next year its debate on energy and climate legislation, along with its controversial plan to cap greenhouse gas emissions…Key Senators, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.)…[said] the climate and energy bill will have to wait while the Senate tackles bills aimed at reforming the nation's health insurance system and financial market regulation.

"The proposed cap-and-trade legislation has drawn harsh opposition from Republican lawmakers and industry groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute that say it will increase energy costs and harm the economy…[T]he House passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act…includes a cap-and-trade system aimed at cutting the nation's greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent by 2020…[and a proposed] Senate bill…which would seek to cut those emissions by 20 percent by 2020…passed…the Senate environment panel…"

click to enlarge

"Republicans have asked for more support for nuclear power and offshore oil drilling…Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Jim Webb (D-Va.) proposed a bill, the Clean Energy Act of 2009, that would offer about $20 billion over the next decades, much of it to support nuclear power…[A] delay until next year leaves the Obama Administration bereft of legislation it hoped to present in December at a United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen to craft an agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol…

"The Environmental Protection Agency has moved on its own to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, but has yet to formulate standards for enforcement...The EPA program is expected to cover 70 percent of the nation's total emissions, including power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of greenhouse gases a year… But the EPA may well face years of legal battles over regulating greenhouse gases, which could lead the agency to look to Congress to pass a bill…"

click to enlarge

"In the meantime, questions remain over the competing renewable electricity standards contained in the House and Senate energy and climate bills…The Senate bill would require 9 percent of the nation's power to come from renewable resources and 6 percent from efficiency gains by 2021…[but may] adopt the more aggressive measures in the House bill, which calls for 12 percent of the nation's power to come from renewables and 8 percent from efficiency by 2020.

"These renewable energy mandates, as well as provisions in the House energy and climate bill to give new federal authority to site transmission lines, could be taken up separately from cap-and-trade rules…[A]n energy bill without cap-and-trade could pass by May 2010, but [experts doubt] the likelihood of greenhouse gas limits being put into law during an election year…"


$4 BIL FOR U.S. WIND JOBS
EDP Renovaveis Plans To Spend $4B On US Wind Power
Bernd Radowitz, November 19, 2009 (Dow Jones Newswires via Wall Street Journal)

"Portugal's EDP Renovaveis SA…plans to spend $4 billion through 2012 to build new wind farms in the U.S., one of the world's fastest-growing markets for renewable energy… EDPR said it aims to add more than 2 gigawatts in new wind power generation capacity…

"The investment is in line with expectations… for the company's U.S. investments, and should help the company to reach its target to install between close to 1.4 GW per year in new electricity generating capacity per year globally…The company has earlier said it plans to add about half of its new wind power generation capacity in the U.S…"

click to enlarge

"EDPR, together with Iberian peers Iberdrola Renovables SA…is already among the top renewable energy utilities in the U.S.. The only U.S.-based company that rivals the Iberian companies in the U.S. market in size is Next Era Energy Resources LLC, a unit of FPL Group Inc. (FPL).

"EDPR…plans to build on the new 800 megawatts of capacity already installed or under construction in the U.S. market. EDPR's U.S. unit Horizon Wind Energy has a presence in 21 states and operates more than 2,500 MW of wind energy capacity."

click to enlarge

"The rapid growth in the U.S. comes in large part due to grants for renewable energy given via U.S. Treasury and the Department of Energy's 1603 Program…

"The U.S. is currently the world's most dynamic market for renewable energy…Other growth markets, such as China, aren't as easy to enter for foreign companies due to protectionism and unclear rules…To ensure more companies can maker longer term investments in the renewables sector in the U.S., however, more needs to be done…[an EDP spokesperson] said…A renewable electricity standard [is needed]…"


NEW ENERGY POLISHES RUST
Solar energy industry brings a ray of hope to the Rust Belt; Areas hard-hit by the U.S. automakers' slump are pitching themselves to green technology firms. Workers and machines that used to crank out cars are now making parts for solar and wind power plants.
Todd Woody, November 23, 2009 (LA Times)

"…In years past, Sunbelt governors recruited Midwestern [rustbelt] businesses to set up shop in their states, dangling tax breaks and the lure of a union-free workforce…Now the tables have turned as solar start-ups, wind turbine companies and electric carmakers from California and the Southwest migrate to the nation's industrial heartland. They're looking to tap its manufacturing might and legions of skilled workers, hit hard by the near-collapse of the United States auto industry and eager for work.

"For all of green tech's futuristic sheen, solar power plants and wind farms are made of much of the same stuff as automobiles: machine-stamped steel, glass and gearboxes…That has renewable energy companies hitting the highway for Detroit and Northeastern industrial states, driven in part by the federal stimulus package's incentives and buy-American mandates…Fisker Automotive [of Southern California], for example, will manufacture its next plug-in electric hybrid car at a defunct General Motors assembly plant in Wilmington, Del…"

click to enlarge

"…Stirling Energy Systems, which is building two massive solar power plants in Southern California, has signed deals with two automotive companies to make components for its giant solar dishes…Stirling's 40-by-38-foot SunCatcher resembles a mirrored satellite dish. The SunCatcher's mirrors focus the sun on a Stirling engine that sits on an arm that extends from the center of the dish. The heat causes hydrogen gas in the engine to expand, which drives pistons that generate electricity…[The mirror frame is stamped metal just like a car frame]…

"Stirling signed an agreement with Tower Automotive to manufacture the dishes' structural components and assemble the mirror facets. The Livonia, Mich., company makes vehicle body parts and other components for the major carmakers but has seen auto orders slow with the downturn… Tower can use its existing machinery, with some modifications, and workforce to make SunCatcher components…[and] Stirling avoids the capital costs of setting up its own factories and gets to tap Tower's manufacturing know-how to bring down its costs, which will be a key competitive advantage…"

click to enlarge

"…[Stirling has] spent $30 million to $40 million in the Detroit area over the last year… hired 40 to 50 people from the automotive industry…[and] outsourced the manufacturing of specialized tools to companies in Ohio, Illinois and Indiana…About 25,000 SunCatchers will roll off the assembly line annually once production ramps up…

"…[A]vailable manufacturing muscle [also] attracted Skyline Solar, a Silicon Valley solar power plant builder…[to] a Troy, Mich., subsidiary of automotive giant Magna International to make the long metal arrays that hold its photovoltaic panels…[Ohio economic development officials] said Michigan was [their] biggest competitor for solar manufacturing projects…[but Ohio] secured one of the biggest solar companies, First Solar of Tempe, Ariz., to produce photovoltaic modules…[W]ind turbines are already made in Ohio, and Rolls-Royce recently announced it would consolidate its fuel cell operations in the Buckeye State…"


COAL AND THE DAMAGE DONE
Coal Pollution Damages Human Health at Every Stage of Coal Life Cycle, Reports Physicians for Social Responsibility
November 18, 2009 (Physicians for Social Responsibility)

"...[Coal's Assault on Human Health, from Physicians for Social Responsibility,] takes a new look at the devastating impacts of coal on the human body. By examining the impact of coal pollution on the major organ systems of the human body, the report concludes that coal contributes to four of the top five causes of mortality in the U.S. and is responsible for increasing the incidence of major diseases already affecting large portions of the U.S. population...

"…Coal combustion releases mercury, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and dozens of other substances known to be hazardous to human health. This report looks at the cumulative harm inflicted…on three major body organ systems…[and] considers coal's contribution to global warming, and the health implications… [I]n this way, the totality of coal's impact on health becomes clear. Coal pollutants affect all major body organ systems and contribute to four of the five leading causes of mortality in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory diseases."

click to enlarge

"...[1] Respiratory Effects…[include] asthma, lung disease and lung cancer, and adversely affect normal lung development in children….[2] Cardiovascular Effects…lead to cardiovascular disease, such as arterial occlusion (artery blockages, leading to heart attacks) and infarct formation…leading to permanent heart damage…[and] cardiac arrhythmias and congestive heart failure. Exposure to chronic air pollution over many years increases cardiovascular mortality…[3] Nervous System Effects: Studies show a correlation between coal-related air pollutants and stroke….[and] loss of intellectual capacity, primarily through mercury…[B]etween 317,000 and 631,000 children are born in the U.S. each year with blood mercury levels high enough to reduce IQ scores and cause lifelong loss of intelligence.

"Global Warming: Even people who do not develop illnesses from coal pollutants will find their health and wellbeing impacted…The discharge of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere associated with burning coal is a major contributor to global warming and [leads to] adverse effects on health and wellbeing worldwide, such as heat stroke, malaria, declining food production, scarce water supplies, social conflict and starvation."

click to enlarge

"…[T]he report [also] pinpoints negative health consequences at each step of the coal life cycle. Coal mining leads U.S. industries in fatal injuries and is associated with chronic health problems among miners…[C]ommunities near coal mines may be adversely affected by mining operations due to the effects of blasting, washing, leakage from "slurry ponds," the collapse of abandoned mines, damage done to streams and waterways, and the dispersal of dust from coal trucks during transportation. Slurry injected underground can release arsenic, barium, lead and manganese into nearby wells, contaminating local drinking water supplies. The storage of post-combustion wastes from coal plants also threatens human health. There are 584 coal ash dump sites in the U.S, and toxic residues have migrated into water supplies at dozens of sites. While every stage of the coal life cycle impacts human health, the combustion phase exacts the greatest toll…

"…PSR issued five policy recommendations:…[1] Cut emissions of carbon dioxide as deeply and as swiftly as possible…to 350 parts per million, through 1)…legislation that establishes hard caps on global warming pollution coming from coal power plants, and 2) strict enforcement of the Clean Air Act…[2] Reduce fossil fuel power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides…[3] Establish a standard, based on Maximum Achievable Control Technology, for mercury and other hazardous air pollutant emissions from electrical generation…[4] End all new construction of coal-fired power plants…[5] Develop the capacity to generate electricity from clean, safe, renewable sources so that existing coal-fired power plants may be phased out…"

GREEN BUILDINGS RISING

New AIA study reports "green" buildings are on the rise
November 20, 2009 (San Francisco Examiner)

SUMMARY
Downtown: That’s where the fight to turn back global climate change is. The bad guys are the Jets and the Sharks and Officer Krupke (that's a Westside Story reference) and the Crips and the Bloods (back to reality)and the cops and the robbers and the Mayor and the City Council and you and me and the guy on the corner.

And guess what: The people of the U.S., led by smart local politicians, are getting busy doing what has to be done because it’s just as good for their pocketbooks as it is for their climate.

The widespread and rising development of green buildings in greening cities is documented in Local Leaders in Sustainability – Green Building Policy in a Changing Economic Environment, the latest report from the American Institute of Architects (AIA),

For all the effort and clamor about stopping deforestation – and it’s certainly important to stop it – deforestation accounts for only 17% of the world’s GhGs. 40% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) come from buildings.

click to enlarge

The short answer to global climate change is not something exotic and out of reach. It’s insulation, weather stripping, efficient windows and doors, energy-saving appliances and equipment, habits that conserve heating and cooling energy and electricity, adding solar panels and small wind and using temperature-moderating geothermal and mass transit and other obvious innovations.

While the economic downturn has slowed the growth of the New Energies and the construction industries because of slowed access to big capital, leaders in the cities of the nation have turned to Energy Efficiency and distributed small-scale New Energy like never before because it is so good for the bottom line. The costs of a green building are greater than those of traditional construction but a green building easily recoups the costs in its lifecycle and building green generates, jobs, tax revenues and supply chain business opportunities.

The ultimate goal of AIA’s report is to establish guidelines that lead to a way of life in which the concept of “building green” no longer exists because BEST building is green building.

click to enlarge

COMMENTARY
Statistics show clearly that the design and construction sectors of the economy have been hurt badly by the recession. Nevertheless, community leaders and policy implementers are continuing sustainable design projects. Construction has suffered “devastating” effecs but sustainable building design is maintaining, and in some cases improving, market share.

First, some key definitions (as used in the AIA study):
(1) Green Building Program - Legal or regulatory mamandate or incentive for the construction of green public, residential, and/or commercial buildings.
(2) Sustainability - Meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
(3) Sustainable Design - One that includes (a) avoiding the depletion of energy, water, and raw material resources, (b) preventing environmental degradation caused by facility and infrastructure development and (c) creating livable, comfortable, and safe environments that facilitate productivity.
(4) Green - A sub-set of sustainability focused on the lifecycle environmental impacts of materials, as in “Reduce, Recycle, Reuse.”
(5) Life Cycle Analysis - Assessment of the total environmental impact and business costs/benefits, from raw materials through manufacturing, packaging, shipping, installation and performance, to the final resource recovery.
(6) The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) rating system - LEED was created by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), uses life cylce analysis of the design, construction, and operation of high-performance green buildings to certify their level of sustainability.

click to enlarge

Major findings of the AIA study:
(1) There are 138 cities of over 50,000 people with green building programs, better than 1 in 5. That is 50% more (46) than at the time of the last (2007) AIA study.
(2) Over 53 million people live in U.S. cities with green building programs and 24 of the 25 most populous U.S. metro regions have a green building policy.
(3) 21% of surveyed cities have a green building program. The 2007 survey found such programs in only 14% of the surveyed cities. If cities under 50,000 were included, the authors believe the 21% figure would be higher.
(4) Regional distribution of green building programs:
(a) Green building is everywhere;
(b) The western region has the most green building programs (56 cities in 6 states, 41% of all green building programs);
(c) The mountain region ranks second, with 24% of U.S. green building programs and 24% of the U.S. population that have green building programs;
(d) The eastern U.S. has 75% more cities (49) such programs than it had in 2007;
(e) The central U.S. only has 21 green building programs but the AIA study found growth and innovation even in that region.
(f) The survey found that across the country cities have virtually unanimously refrained from cutting back on their green building programs in the face of the economic downturn but are, instead, integrating green building policies into their economic recovery and development plans.

click to enlarge

The goal of a green building program is to provide the opportunity in each unique community to create livable, sustainable lifestyles. The uniqueness of the programs is demonstrated by the report’s case studies, which show examples of diverse, holistic green community trends and practices in:
(1) Los Angeles;
(2) Boston;
(3) Grand Rapids, Mich.;
(4) Philadelphia; and
(5) Nashville.

click to enlarge

These case studies also show how city leaders are keeping their innovative programs going in hard economic times, in pursuit of green jobs and success in the budding New Energy economy.

The AIA study finds little doubt the U.S. Department of Energy’s $3.2 billion Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Funding, part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) directed specifically at localities, has helped to sustain the momentum of green building. But the fundamental impulse, according to AIA, comes from the simple fact that green building makes good sense.

The AIA study makes 10 broad recommendations for policymakers and community leaders, 6 of which were part of previous AIA reports and continue to be applicable and 4 of which are based on findings in the new study:
(1) Green building programs should be inclusive, bringing in the design and construction communities and aiming to create universally applicable green buildings standards.
(2) Architects should be regarded as a valuable resource.
(3) A Director of Sustainability within the Office of the Mayor is a wise expense for a community developing a green building program because someone is needed to coordinate multiple facets and move the process.
(4) Training and rating municipal employees in green building issues from the initial review to the occupancy permit creates expertise and facilitates excellent programs.
(5) Simplicity and consistency are vital to the success of a green building program, though politics might dictate more complexity.

click to enlarge

(6) Adding green zoning, green city planning, green city purchasing, hybrid vehicle fleets and streamlined solar permitting to the green building program adds to its momentum, popularity and acceptance.
(7) Green jobs programs and green business certification programs do the same and add players to the building program. (The relationship between green building programs and the development of green businesses is elaborated on in the “cities/trends” section of the report.)
(8) Cities should expand their programs to the metropolitan region because competition between a region’s municipalities leads to policy innovation and better programs. It also grows the programs up to the regional scale and involves the broader design and construction communities and the general public.
(9) Remove outdated legal obstacles, streamline zoning, update codes and allow for mixed-use development, greywater systems and new types of construction.
(10) The greatest effect of a green building comes when it becomes part of a green community.

click to enlarge

How city leaders see green, sustainable:
(1) As an investment in a healthier and environmentally friendly community of the future;
(2) As an opportunity to create green collar jobs locally;
(3) As a means of cutting local energy and water consumption and expense; and
(4) As a way to build better buildings and more livable, appealing communities.

The growth of green buildings programs between the time of the 2007 study and this 2009 study indicates the moment is ripe and U.S. city leaders are already leading the transition. The excuse that green building it too expensive is no longer applicable, freeing citizens and community leaders to imagine a better way.

click to enlarge

Advantages of green buildings in urban areas:
(1) They reinforce the natural efficiency of high-density walkable and mass transit-friendly neighborhoods;
(2) They incline city-planners to include nature into buildings in the form of natural lighting, green, living roofs and other natural features instead of relegating it to parks and suburbs.

Advantages of green buildings in suburban areas:
(1) Stimulates planning toward mass transit-oriented and smart-growth thinking that includes walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods;
(2) Stimulates creative people in the design and construction sectors to think in terms of Energy Efficiency.

click to enlarge

Going forward, cities should strengthen existing green building programs and set higher targets for greenhouse gas emissions. This will be facilitated by building rating systems based on “greenness” that lead to neighborhood designs that augment and enhance “greenness.”

Examples of such rating systems include:
(1) The STAR Community Index (ICLEI), a consensus-based measurement and rating instrument that evaluates livability and sustainability.
(2) The International Green Construction Code from the International Code Council, the first-of-a-kind code framework for commercial buildings, will be a major step toward zero-emissions buildings.

click to enlarge

City leaders all over the country have promulgated and protected green building programs because all over they country they see the same thing: That green building programs are a key element in the hope that comes when citizens make a commitment to the nation’s New Energy and Energy Efficiency future.

City leaders are learning that their own ambitions benefit when they lead their cities’ citizens into the benefits of the New Energy economy and the transformation that will redeem the world from the ravages of global climate change, one building, one neighborhood, one community, one city, one region and, ultimately, one country at a time.

click to enlarge

As the nation, through its buildings and neighborhoods and communities and cities, takes on this challenge, the knowledge, resources, and ability to transform the world grows. Buildings, which are the biggest source of climate change-inducing emissions, will become the means of turning the tide and spawning the New Energy century.

Perhaps the most important single observation in the report is that its goal – to eliminate the concept of “green building” by advocating for policies that turn it into “best building” – is in the process of rapidly becoming a reality.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- From the report’s conclusion: “Over the past two years green building has continued to thrive, and we foresee that this effort will only continue to grow, particularly as communities integrate sustainable practices into economic development goals. Architects will influence the future built environment, and by pushing for green buildings, there is an opportunity to design healthy, environmentally sound buildings, which will better serve citizens of America and the world.”
- From the report’s recommendations: “…Green buildings do not exist in a vacuum. In order to truly curb carbon emissions and preserve open spaces and create livable communities, sustainability efforts must incorporate the whole built environment…Ultimately, green building practices are a piece in the larger puzzle that is a green community…”

click to enlarge

- From the report’s recommendations: “…when one city chooses to push ahead and lead on green building locally, a cascading effect tends to happen where the other surrounding communities also want to achieve better results. This leads to a virtuous cycle of improving and strengthened green building standards…”

click to enlarge

- From the report’s recommendations: “…The future is green, and cities that are on
the leading edge can capitalize on innovative policies and incubate new businesses in the clean technology industry…”
- From the report: “One of the most important observations to be gained from this research is that an effective policy is one that encourages private developers to consider sustainable features and explore the cost-effectiveness of efficient design as a matter of course…[in] the entire streetscape, leading to more vibrant and livable communities…[T]he future looks bright for sustainable design. The ultimate goal is for the concept of “building green” to no longer exist, and instead have green design integrated into all buildings. This day is soon approaching, and the AIA is advocating for policies to make this green future a reality.”

MORE NEWS, 11-23: CHINA VS. U.S. IN NEW ENERGY; GREENPEACE LIKES EU SMART GRID; GAS DRILLING POISONS WATER; NUKES DON’T STAND UP TO REASON

CHINA VS. U.S. IN NEW ENERGY
The New Arms Race
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., November 19, 2009 (Huffington Post)

"…[T]he Obama administration acknowledged this week that it would not return from Copenhagen with any groundbreaking commitment to control green house gases…Congress is backsliding on the administration's wise commitment to impose a rational price on carbon…[and the] U.S. Chamber of Commerce, always willing to put its obsequious scraping to Big Oil and King Coal ahead of its duty to our country, has battled every effort to accelerate America's transition to a market-based de-carbonized economy.

"The Chamber has continued to argue, idiotically, that energy efficiency and independence will somehow put America at a competitive disadvantage with the Chinese. Meanwhile, the Chinese have shrewdly and strategically positioned themselves to steal America's once substantial lead in renewable power. China will soon make us as dependent on Chinese green technology for the next century as we have been on Saudi oil during the last."

click to enlarge

"…[T]he Chinese are treating the energy technology competition if it were an arms race…spending as much or more on greentech as it does on its military, hundreds of billions of dollars annually on renewable energy and grid infrastructure improvements…[It] will effectively erode America's greentech industry leadership and secure China's dominance. China's economic stimulus package, targeted 38% of spending on greentech, as compared to a miserly 12% of the U.S. stimulus program. By 2013, greentech will account for 15 percent of the Chinese GDP. While the United States is projected to roughly triple its wind generation by 2020, China will increase its capacity twelvefold…[T]he United States is projected to increase its installed solar generation a modest 33% by 2020 [and]…China's solar generation is projected to increase 20,000%.

"…Chinese solar panel manufacturers now far outnumber American ones…Chinese companies are now flooding the American market with cheap Chinese solar panels and devastating the American manufacturing sector that was gearing up to create tens of thousands of U.S. jobs for our own ailing economy…BP Solar, Evergreen, and General Electric have already announced the closing of American-based solar panel factories and outsourcing, primarily to China. America's leading solar manufacturer, Applied Materials, has opened the largest non-government solar energy research facility in the world in China…The largest solar panel installation in the United States is a 70,000 panel, 14.2 megawatt array on Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. The array provides more than 25% of the base's power needs, and saves the Pentagon a million dollars annually in energy costs, but the panels' manufacturer was China's Suntech Power Holdings…"

click to enlarge

"Last year, America achieved a milestone, building more wind power generation than all new oil and coal generation combined. We have led the world in wind installations for several years, and the wind industry already accounts for more American jobs than coal mining…Yet today, of the five leading wind turbine manufacturers, only one is American…China is clobbering us…China is likewise poised to take away our lead in batteries and electric cars, and has already pulled far ahead of America in automobile fuel efficiency.

"Capitol Hill Republicans will soon recognize that the arms race of the 21st century is already in progress with a totalitarian nation that they not long ago called "Red China." But America will not win with more warheads and better rockets. We can only prevail with robust investment in and support of U.S.-based greentech innovation."


GREENPEACE LIKES EU SMART GRID
Greenpeace says Europe smart power grid affordable
Vera Eckert (w/ James Jukwey), November 20, 2009 (Reuters)

"Revving up European power transmission networks to transport 90 percent of renewable energy by the year 2050 could be achieved at affordable sums, pressure group Greenpeace said in a study…

"European policymakers dream of getting away from fossil fuels but even if these were replaced with wind or solar generation systems, sceptics say the bloc's decades-old grid systems would effectively hamper shipping the volatile power."

Part of the Supergrid will carry North Sea and Baltic Sea wind all over the continent. (click to enlarge)

"Greenpeace said the cost of strenghtening cross-border lines and building new interconnections to create so-called smart or supergrids [209 billion euros, or $310.9 billion] would be small [0.15 cents per kilowatt-hour over 40 years, or euros (40 cents) per month] if it was spread over 40 years and split between hundreds of million of Europeans…

"…[T]here is also concern that over reliance on wind or solar could leave consumers short of power when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine…The Greenpeace study compared 30 years of weather data with European annual demand curves and concluded that there is only a 0.4 percent -- or 12 hours a year -- chance that high demand correlates with low solar and wind generation."

Another part of EU transmission will deliver North African sun. (click to enlarge)

"Apart from wind and solar, [the Greenpeace study] also mentioned chances to exploit geothermal and ocean energy, and biomass…

"The 209 billion sum was broken down into 100 billion for 11 new connections inside Europe, 90 billion euros for new lines to capture Sahara desert solar power, 16 billion for upgrades of direct-current high voltage lines between European countries and 3 billion for alternating-current ones."


GAS DRILLING POISONS WATER
Natural Gas Drilling Poses Toxic Threat to Illinois’s Drinking Water
Max Muller, November 4, 2009 (Environment Illinois)

"Toxic chemicals used in natural gas drilling could pose a threat to water quality near Illinois’s 733 gas wells according to [Toxic Chemicals on Tap: How Natural Gas Drilling Threatens Drinking Water]…by Environment Illinois…The report…details the multiple ways chemicals employed in gas drilling could endanger clean water in Illinois…

"To extract natural gas, drillers often inject a toxic mix of fluids into the ground to create fractures which allow natural gas to flow to the surface. This process can force toxic substances already underground into drinking water. Some of the pollutant laden fluids drillers inject remain underground, and can also end up contaminating water supplies."

click to enlarge

"The fluids recovered by drillers can contaminate water as well. The recovered fluids are frequently stored in open-air pits, which have the potential to leak or flood, and can overwhelm local water treatment facilities. Also, the amount of water needed for the process- often millions of gallons- may drain local watersheds. In some cases, it has caused streams to run dry.

"Due in part to a 2005 exemption to the Safe Drinking Water Act, the EPA cannot fully regulate gas drilling. Moreover, the federal government does not require drillers to publicly disclose the fluids they use in some of their processes and only 5 states out of 32 states with gas drilling require public disclosure…Illinois does not require drillers to disclose the fluids they use…"

click to enlarge

"Environment Illinois asks that drillers be required to disclose the chemicals they use, as well as where and how much they use them. The group also calls for gas drillers to replace toxic chemicals with safer alternatives…[and says] a variety of regulations and improvements are necessary: improved monitoring in order to better catch gas or chemical leakage, improved disposal methods for recovered drilling fluids, and assurance that drillers are not operating in locations that may lead to the contamination of drinking water.

"This report comes as pressure to expand natural gas drilling builds. Some are hoping for natural gas to increase its share of our energy mix, but natural gas still emits a significant amount of global warming pollution…"


NUKES DON’T STAND UP TO REASON
Nukes battling a green headwind?
Tim Wheeler, November 18, 2009 (Baltimore Sun)

"Aiming to head off a budding bipartisan move in Congress to boost nuclear power, environmentalists took to the streets - and the Internet - to dismiss atom-splitting as too slow and costly to help fight climate change.

"Environment Maryland released a new report…arguing that it would take a decade or more and cost upwards of $600 billion to build 100 more nuclear plants, as some have advocated to ease planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. The group argues that the time and money could be better spent promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy such as wind and solar…"

click to enlarge

"…[Generating Failure; How Building Nuclear Power Plants Would Set America Back in the Race Against Global Warming comes as two senators, Republican Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Democrat Jim Webb of Virginia, introduce a bill that would funnel federal funds and loan guarantees into reviving the nuclear power industry as well as promoting renweable energy…"

click to enlarge

"To highlight their objections, Environment Maryland and other activists staged a press conference outside the downtown Baltimore headquarters of Constellation Energy, which has applied for a permit to build a new, third reactor at Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant…[N]ot all environmentalists oppose nuclear power. Locally, the Maryland Conservation Council has endorsed Constellation's bid…The group is concerned about industrial-scale wind and solar projects gobbling up land and wildlife habitat, and argues that nuclear power is safe and least expensive…

"By coincidence, wind energy advocates were huddled nearby…conferring on how to boost the prospects for turbines atop mountains and offshore in the Mid-Atlantic region. They have issues to overcome as well, including public resistance in some locales, and… [the lack of adequate transmission]…[Already an issue]in some western areas…[it is] likely to be a concern in the East as well as more turbines get built."