MORE NEWS, 1-25: WORDS AND NEW ENERGY; NY TIMES GETS WIND FACTS WRONG; RECYCLING SOLAR PANELS; THE JOBS PICTURE

WORDS AND NEW ENERGY
The First Rule of Fighting Climate Change: Don't Talk About Climate Change
Kate Sheppard, January 22, 2010 (Mother Jones)

"Republican pollster Frank Luntz—the brains behind Newt Gingrich's 'Contract With America' and the man who coined politically potent phrases like the 'death tax' —wants to help environmentalists in their push for legislation to combat climate change. His advice? Stop talking about climate change…

"Luntz's report, The Language of a Clean Energy Economy, finds that the majority of the public across the political spectrum is convinced that global warming is happening and caused at least in part by humans. But, Luntz says, talking about the problem won't win support for the legislation that would solve it. Among both Democrats and Republicans polled by his firm, addressing climate change was the least important reason to support a cap-and-trade policy."

click to enlarge

"…Luntz suggests less talk of dying polar bears and more emphasis on how legislation will create jobs, make the planet healthier and decrease US dependence on foreign oil. Advocates should emphasize words like 'cleaner,' 'healthier,' and 'safer;' scrap 'green jobs' in favor of 'American jobs,' and ditch terms like 'sustainability' and 'carbon neutral' altogether…Luntz isn't the first public opinion expert to suggest this course of action—but until recently he was better known among environmentalists for furnishing the GOP with sophisticated strategies to kill any prospect of climate action during the Bush years. In 2002 Luntz authored an influential memo advising Republicans to green their public image while sowing public confusion about global warming…[by making the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue]…"

"Many Republicans still seem to be working from Luntz's playbook. But he acknowledged…that the effort to muddy the public discussion over the science of climate change had failed… Luntz warned that if Republicans continue to dispute climate science it could hurt them politically. Instead, he said, the GOP should be engaging in the debate over to solve America's energy problems."

click to enlarge

[Pollster Frank Luntz:] "It doesn't matter whether you call it climate change or global warming…The public believes it's happening, and they believe that humans are playing a part in it…You have to do something new, and you have to do it better…If you are representing the polices of the past, you will be kicked out."

"Now that Luntz has changed course on climate, is his advice to environmentalists any better than his former counsel to the GOP? As it happens, many advocates of climate legislation have already started moving in the direction that Luntz is proposing. The cap-and-trade bill that passed the House last year is titled the American Clean Energy and Security Act… the version currently circulating in the Senate version is called the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act…[and] President Barack Obama rarely talks about climate, focusing instead on jobs and economic growth. So far, though, all the positive spin hasn't made the hard task of passing legislation any easier."


NY TIMES GETS WIND FACTS WRONG
The New York Times gets it wrong on wind report
Chris Madison, 22 January 2010 (Into The Wind via the American Wind Energy Association)

"…This week the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), an institution funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, issued a comprehensive report assessing the feasibility of substantially increasing the use of wind energy in an area known as the Eastern Interconnection…a wide area of the northeastern United States…

"It’s a crucial question because states in the Midwest and Northeast [will likely follow the lead]…[and the] NREL study is a big deal because the complex network of utilities, power generators and transmission lines has been built over many years, and its operations can only be changed if it can be shown to be economical and cost-effective."

click to enlarge

"NREL took on the task of measuring whether it would be possible to generate 20% or even 30% of electricity needs using wind in the Eastern interconnection. The chief conclusions [were]…[1] The integration of 20 percent wind energy is technically feasible, but will require significant expansion of the transmission infrastructure and system operational changes in…[2] Without transmission enhancements, substantial curtailment of wind generation would be required…[3] The relative cost of aggressively expanding the existing transmission grid represents only a small portion of the total annualized costs…[4] Drawing wind energy from a larger geographic area makes it both less expensive and a more reliable energy source…[It] makes the aggregated wind power output more predictable and less variable…[5] Wind energy development is a highly cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions…[6] Carbon emissions are reduced by similar amounts in all scenarios, indicating that transmission helps to optimize the electrical system and does not result in coal power being shipped from the Midwest to New England States…[7] Reduced fossil fuel expenditures more than pay for the increased costs of additional transmission…

"…[S]omehow the New York Times…wrote: 'Regardless of where the windmills are built, the projected global warming benefits are modest: a drop of about 4.5 percent in emissions, at best. If no additional wind machines are built, carbon emissions will rise...And [wind] would have only a modest impact on cutting emissions linked to global warming, the study found.'"

click to enlarge

"These sentences misleadingly claim that wind would only reduce carbon dioxide emissions by about 5%. In fact, emissions would have been 28.5% higher in 2024 if today’s generation mix (about 2% wind) were used to meet growing electric demand, while achieving 20% wind can turn that massive 28.5% emissions increase into a 5% emissions reduction…[C]arbon emissions would be reduced 25.5% in the 20% wind scenario and a whopping 37% in the 30% wind scenario…[and contradictory to what the Times wrote]…the study found that coal generation declined by around 23% from the business-as-usual case to the 20% wind case, and by 35% in the 30% wind case…

"The Times also said the transmission expansion necessary to meet the increased 20% wind scenario 'would require spending about $93 billion in today’s dollars.' True, but as NREL noted in releasing the report, 'Reduced fossil fuel expenditures more than pay for the increased costs of additional transmission in all high wind scenarios.' In other words, the net economic cost, which is more relevant in terms of the economy and consumers, is zero, not $93 billion…[Perhaps most importantly, contrary to a Times claim, the] NREL study found that when wind turbines are spread out over a large area, the majority of the energy they produce can in fact be counted on to provide capacity…[and] grid operators across the country already count on wind turbines to provide capacity, and dozens of peer-reviewed studies in the U.S. and Europe have already established the fact that wind turbines provide significant capacity value."


RECYCLING SOLAR PANELS
PV CYCLE - Making PV module recycling a reality
January 2010 (European Photovoltaic Industry Association)

"After almost two years of hard work, the initial efforts of PV CYCLE have started to pay off. This month the take-back and recycling scheme for Photovoltaic (PV) modules has been rolled out in Germany. In this country, approximately 3,000 tons of end-of- life panels will be generated this year representing about 50% of the European total. The estimates for 2030 show that this figure will rise to 130,000 tons in Europe. The members of PV CYCLE have shown their commitment to protect the environment…

"The last few months of 2009 were particularly exciting for PV CYCLE. All the efforts put into the imminent launch of the scheme are paying off…Hellmann Logistics was selected to take care of the collection and transportation of end-of-life modules. In addition, soon the first agreement will be signed with one or more recycling plant(s) which can recycle the collected modules…"

click to enlarge

"PV CYCLE was set up in 2007 to bring together all major European PV producers and distributors…The members of PV CYCLE…mostly manufacturers and importers of PV modules…represent more than 85% of what has been put on the market in Europe. Their contributions will serve to finance the set up and implementation of the take-back and recycling scheme…To guarantee that end-of-life PV modules get adequately recycled, it is imperative that wholesalers, retailers, electrical installation contractors, system integrators, and project developers also get involved…

"…[A]bout 4.5 GW [of solar capacity] were already installed in Europe in 2008. This represents 18% of all the new installed electrical capacity. PV has become the fastest growing renewable energy technology…PV electricity could provide up to 12% by 2020…Therefore, it is vital to start thinking ahead and putting into place the necessary mechanisms to take care of the recycling of PV modules…By setting up PV CYCLE, the industry has also shown its voluntary determination to make solar energy “DoubleGreen” and take responsibility for its waste. The substantial reduction in component incineration in favour of an increased volume of recycled modules will also contribute to recovering precious raw materials and preserving the planet’s scarce natural resources…"

click to enlarge

"The system PV CYCLE has envisioned will be based on the creation of a network of collection points that will operate with a reverse logistics approach. Special containers will be permanently located across the country in distribution and retailing stores, installers’ facilities, storage and transfer stations. End-of-life PV modules will be taken to those disposal locations by either the owners or the installers right after they are dismantled. Where necessary, PV CYCLE will arrange the pickup and transportation. Temporary containers will also be placed at large construction, renovation and demolition project sites.

"In order for the whole system to operate efficiently, as many actors as possible in all stages of the value chain must become involved. The distribution and installation channels of photovoltaic modules are therefore crucial…[T]he replacement of modules will likely be done by the same companies that took care of the initial sale and installation and who can now contribute to their appropriate disposal…[The] scheme will be fully transparent…[An] independent monitoring committee will be created…[and] PV CYCLE will issue an annual public report…"


THE JOBS PICTURE
Clean-Tech Job Forecast 2010
Kevin Brown and Steve Kyryk, January 22, 2010 (Clean Edge)

"…Recession Took Toll on Global and Smaller Clean-Tech Companies Alike

"…Q4 2009 Marked the Initial Signs of a Clean-Tech Turn-Around, but Job Growth Will be Slow…Stimulus grants and awards from the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy (ARPA-E) last Fall set in motion renewed clean-tech job growth with hundreds of millions of dollars awarded to clean-tech companies leading to hires in both the private and public sectors…And as credit markets thaw and larger projects move forward, we expect a continued increase in hiring at larger energy companies in 2010."

click to enlarge

"Clean Tech is Attracting Top Quality Talent…[M]ore and more companies are looking for experienced engineers, managers, and other professionals…[S]mart grid companies are poaching high-level expertise from major information technology and software companies…

"…Growth Area: Water…Not confined to traditional water purification, we see exceptional growth potential among companies pursuing advanced materials (NanoH2O) and novel processes (Oasys Water) or utilizing synthetic biology to control the influx and efflux of water molecules through live cells (Danfoss)."

target="_blank"

"Growth Area: Smart Grid…Investors have shown a keen and almost unyielding focus on smart grid opportunities…

"…It's Time to Make a Decision on Carbon Policy…The only way to drive long-term clean-tech industry growth is with a clear and meaningful policy on carbon. Not a policy branded conservative or liberal with a bunch of hidden carve out dollars for pet projects; just a federally binding decision so companies, investors, and the rest of us know the rules of the game. Once the rules are set investors and entrepreneurs can go to work with greater confidence, resulting in millions of new jobs being created across the country."