Two good news stories, energy efficiency, and solar thermal....
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-24-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those, the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
Perhaps the second most important long range solution is to create and deploy an extremely large list of effective technologies, products, and services that are much more energy efficient than what we have now.
And, since the politicians seem too grid-locked and road-blocked by other politicians to be as effective as some of us had hoped, building massive amounts of new renewable energy generation and massive amounts of new renewable energy generation and creating and deploying an extremely large list of effective technologies, products, and services that are much more energy efficient than what we have now -- without any more government or political help than is already available is critical.
The really good news is that this is beginning to happen in part thanks to the venture capital community.
And the two stories in today’s post are great examples of progress in these two areas.
1. Bloom Energy recently rolled back the curtain on their technology and product. They now are getting into production with a commercial product that can make electricity from natural gas or methane and perhaps other fuels onsite and cost effectively enough to save enough in reduced bills from grid distributed energy in 7 to 8 years to pay for their system.
It would be nice if that could be lowered to 2 to 4 years in the future; and it may be.
The key is using a fuel cell that does not require hydrogen or platinum or dangerous acids to work but which works as well or better as fuel cells that do. They apparently have such a technology that works.
See http://www.bloomenergy.com for more details.
Also, their initial product for the commercial market produces enough power for 100 homes. But the technology IS adaptable to make fuel cells of perhaps a three hundredth that size that will be sold for various sizes of homes and much smaller businesses. And, since their email list sign up leaves a place to check if you have an interest in a residential system, they likely do have in mind making those.
That means that a well to do homeowner in an area that burns coal for electricity will soon be able to afford to stop relying on that power which will help increase the economy while avoiding the need for more coal fired plants.
Apparently, that is already true for businesses or soon will be as Bloom Energy rolls out their commercial product and increases production.
Even better, in areas like the Silicon Valley where the reliability of the supply of electricity is important and for which, despite the threat of earthquakes that disrupt both natural gas and electricity, most outages of electric power are from airplanes hitting power towers or wind storms taking out power lines or summer blackouts from excess demand overloading the grid – while at EVERY ONE of those times, natural gas continues uninterrupted.
So even if a business didn’t set up for all of their power needs to come from solar, wind, and Bloom’s fuel cells, they could have enough from some Bloom’s fuel cells alone if they were set up properly to keep the critical things running at slightly reduced levels when the grid provided electricity goes down.
2. The second story is that we are possibly beginning to enter a time when enough solar thermal is installed in the appropriate places to add huge amounts of renewable energy to our overall supplies.
By combining all the appropriate sites in the Southwestern and Western United States and close to all of the Northern two thirds of Mexico, most of the country, and the power lines to transport it, solar thermal electricity could provide all the electricity now used by Canada, the United States, and Mexico.
Further, as Mexico is developed, the problem of its citizens fleeing North to the United States for jobs will mostly disappear.
But this won’t happen until we begin to build large scale solar thermal plants the size of existing plants to make electricity by burning natural gas or coal.
The news is that this quite possibly will happen soon.
Yesterday, 2-24-2010, there were a multitude of news stories saying that the U.S. Department of Energy has conditionally awarded $1.37 billion in loan guarantees to BrightSource Energy of Oakland, California.
If the permits from the US Bureau of Land Management and the State of California are issued in time, these funds will enable BrightSource Energy to build a 400 megawatt solar power facility in three parts in the Mojave Desert in Southern California. This is comparable to a small to medium sized plant burning natural gas or coal.
In addition, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison have agreed to buy the power once it is online.
The money that will be provided to BrightSource Energy is part of the Department of Energy's Title XVII loan guarantee program.
The bad news is that while some environmentalists see the value of renewable energy replacing fossil fuels with the resulting air pollution in Ozone, particulates, acid rain, etc and helping reduce global warming, some are worried about the animals in the Mojave desert that might be impacted by this project; & they are trying to block it.
There are two solutions to this.
The immediate one is to go ahead and permit three sites where this impact is likely to be the least and work with BrightSource Energy to pioneer ways to build their plants while eliminating or lessening such impacts.
To get the solar thermal available and that we so badly need, I sincerely hope that happens and happens in time for this project to be funded.
The second one is to begin to work towards constructing solar thermal plants in Mexico. Some of the best sites are just South of their border with the United States; and some of the electricity can be exported to and sold to companies in the United States in addition to making new jobs possible in Mexico.
They have a larger incentive, fewer restrictions, AND a good bit more solar thermal potential than the United States!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Solar electricity IS getting more affordable....
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-17-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those, the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
Nanosolar and First Solar already have thin film solar collectors that produce electricity at relatively low cost.
Calisolar Inc of Sunnyvale has a technology to make competitively efficient solar photovoltaic cells from “metallurgical” silicon, a far cheaper and less refined form of silicon.
Then, just today I found out there is a new technology that may make even less expensive thin film solar cells that can be printed in large rolls at low cost similar to what Nanosolar does.
In fact, the materials are cheap enough and the amount of silicon is so much reduced that these thin film solar cells may be even more cost effective than those made now by Nanosolar and First Solar – presuming the technology and be successfully scaled up to large scale manufacturing and production.
Since Nanosolar and First Solar already can make electricity almost as cost efficiently as coal which still has not had its true environmental impact costs added to it, this new technology could really make a big jump in solar produced electricity economically doable soon by making solar electricity cost less than electricity created by burning coal.
Online science news outfit LiveScience.com had a story they published yesterday, Tuesday, Feb 16, 2010 which they titled”
“Cheap Solar Cell Could Be Incorporated Into Clothing”
That seems to be true and is an interesting thought to anyone who has had the batteries on their cell phone run low at an inconvenient time
But the real news in the first sentence in the story.:
“A new solar cell can produce the same amount of energy as the best conventional solar panels while using less expensive material.”
Since this new kind of thin film solar is so flexible and stands up to rough handling so well, it could even cost less to install in addition to being cheaper than other solar cells!
They predict that you can mistreat it badly “even perforate it, shoot holes in it with a gun, and it'd still operate, whereas normal crystalline silicon would just shatter like glass," said researcher Harry Atwater, an applied physicist from CalTech.
Harry Atwater and his colleagues use only one percent of crystalline silicon, which they grow as rods.
Each rod is about the width of a human hair. Then they arrange the rods vertically like a miniature forest.
Incoming light bounces back and forth between rods until it gets absorbed. They add particles of alumina which scatter light so the rods absorb more to help ensure this happens. They then embed everything in a layer of transparent silicone rubber, which makes the overall thin film solar end- result flexible.
They apparently tested their new thin films as absorbing up to 85 % of the usable sunlight, comparable to what conventional solar cells achieve.
The solar energy converted to electricity in the thin film also tested to be about 95 %, not only comparable to the highest quality solar cells but mostly above that of other thin film solar cells.
Perhaps best of all, Atwater foresees this kind of thin film solar will be cheaper than conventional solar cells "not only because we've reduced the amount of crystalline silicon used, but the way we make it bypasses two or three expensive and energy-consuming steps."
Since it uses far less energy to make it, this new kind of thin film solar should be far cheaper to set up production for AND to then produce.
Atwater also believes this kind of thin film solar material can be made roll to roll just like printing a newspaper and very similar to Nanosolar does.
This technology isn’t live yet but very well may be soon because Atwater also said, "We're actively pursuing commercialization opportunities at the moment."
Atwater and his colleagues covered their work online February 14, 2010 in the journal “Nature Materials. “ The original story was titled: “Cheap Solar Cell Could Be Incorporated Into Clothing.” This article may have more details.
And those interested in helping commercialize this new technology can likely contact the licensing office at CalTech (California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, CA) or Harry Atwater there or both depending on how it’s being handled.
The wheels are turning and in the right direction. Soon solar electricity will cost less to generate than by burning coal or natural gas. Once that begins to happen, the market place will begin to do the job for us politicians unable to agree have not quite been able to do.
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-17-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those, the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
Nanosolar and First Solar already have thin film solar collectors that produce electricity at relatively low cost.
Calisolar Inc of Sunnyvale has a technology to make competitively efficient solar photovoltaic cells from “metallurgical” silicon, a far cheaper and less refined form of silicon.
Then, just today I found out there is a new technology that may make even less expensive thin film solar cells that can be printed in large rolls at low cost similar to what Nanosolar does.
In fact, the materials are cheap enough and the amount of silicon is so much reduced that these thin film solar cells may be even more cost effective than those made now by Nanosolar and First Solar – presuming the technology and be successfully scaled up to large scale manufacturing and production.
Since Nanosolar and First Solar already can make electricity almost as cost efficiently as coal which still has not had its true environmental impact costs added to it, this new technology could really make a big jump in solar produced electricity economically doable soon by making solar electricity cost less than electricity created by burning coal.
Online science news outfit LiveScience.com had a story they published yesterday, Tuesday, Feb 16, 2010 which they titled”
“Cheap Solar Cell Could Be Incorporated Into Clothing”
That seems to be true and is an interesting thought to anyone who has had the batteries on their cell phone run low at an inconvenient time
But the real news in the first sentence in the story.:
“A new solar cell can produce the same amount of energy as the best conventional solar panels while using less expensive material.”
Since this new kind of thin film solar is so flexible and stands up to rough handling so well, it could even cost less to install in addition to being cheaper than other solar cells!
They predict that you can mistreat it badly “even perforate it, shoot holes in it with a gun, and it'd still operate, whereas normal crystalline silicon would just shatter like glass," said researcher Harry Atwater, an applied physicist from CalTech.
Harry Atwater and his colleagues use only one percent of crystalline silicon, which they grow as rods.
Each rod is about the width of a human hair. Then they arrange the rods vertically like a miniature forest.
Incoming light bounces back and forth between rods until it gets absorbed. They add particles of alumina which scatter light so the rods absorb more to help ensure this happens. They then embed everything in a layer of transparent silicone rubber, which makes the overall thin film solar end- result flexible.
They apparently tested their new thin films as absorbing up to 85 % of the usable sunlight, comparable to what conventional solar cells achieve.
The solar energy converted to electricity in the thin film also tested to be about 95 %, not only comparable to the highest quality solar cells but mostly above that of other thin film solar cells.
Perhaps best of all, Atwater foresees this kind of thin film solar will be cheaper than conventional solar cells "not only because we've reduced the amount of crystalline silicon used, but the way we make it bypasses two or three expensive and energy-consuming steps."
Since it uses far less energy to make it, this new kind of thin film solar should be far cheaper to set up production for AND to then produce.
Atwater also believes this kind of thin film solar material can be made roll to roll just like printing a newspaper and very similar to Nanosolar does.
This technology isn’t live yet but very well may be soon because Atwater also said, "We're actively pursuing commercialization opportunities at the moment."
Atwater and his colleagues covered their work online February 14, 2010 in the journal “Nature Materials. “ The original story was titled: “Cheap Solar Cell Could Be Incorporated Into Clothing.” This article may have more details.
And those interested in helping commercialize this new technology can likely contact the licensing office at CalTech (California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, CA) or Harry Atwater there or both depending on how it’s being handled.
The wheels are turning and in the right direction. Soon solar electricity will cost less to generate than by burning coal or natural gas. Once that begins to happen, the market place will begin to do the job for us politicians unable to agree have not quite been able to do.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
A Republican who wants action on clean energy makes sense....
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-10-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those, the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina recently said the following.
This is an excerpt of his remarks to Business Advocacy Day for Jobs, Climate & New Energy Leadership in Washington DC recently.:
"Every day we wait in this nation China is going to eat our lunch. The Chinese don't need 60 votes. I guess they just need 1 guy’s vote over there - and that guy's voted.
He has decided to do two things:
First, kind of play footsie with us on emissions control stuff -- but go like gangbusters when it comes to producing alternative energy.
The solar and wind and battery-powered cars” (industry) “is an amazing thing to watch. And we're stuck in neutral here.
So my message to you - you're up here to advocate - advocate. Let the Congress know that you want a comprehensive approach to two serious problems.
You don't have to believe that Iowa is going to become beachfront property to want to clean up carbon.
It is not about polar bears to me, it's about jobs. I like the polar bears as much as anyone else but I want to create jobs.
If just a fraction of what is being predicted about global warming is true, that's enough to motivate us all. But if the worst thing you did - as Tony Blair would say - is you provided a cleaner environment, I don't think you'd go down in history in a bad way.
The key in my view to those who believe we should address carbon pollution is to make sure that the energy initiatives that will get us there are done in a package.
If you break this apart you'll have a watered down solution on both fronts.
Health care was big - it was controversial - I didn't like the bill - but that doesn't mean you can't do other hard problems.
If lesson from health care is let's not do anything hard, then why don't we all go home, which might be good for the country by the way.
But if we go home, China won't.
The world is moving, pollution is growing, we've got a chance to get ahead and lead. If we wait too long and if we try to take half measures as the preferred route on all these hard problems they just get worse.
My challenge to you and to myself is to not let this moment pass. This is the best opportunity I've seen in my political lifetime for a Republican and Democrat to do something bold and meaningful.
Why did I get involved in this? I ask myself that a lot. I saw an opportunity. I've become convinced that carbon pollution is a bad thing, not a good thing, and it can be dealt with, and we can create jobs.
This is the time, this is the Congress, and this is the moment. So if we retreat and try to just go to the energy only approach which will never yield the legislative results that I want on energy independence, then we just made the problem worse.
What Congress is going to come up here and do all these hard things?
Who are these people in the future? Because we constantly count on them. I don't know who they are. I've yet to find them.
So I guess it falls to me and you. So let's do it.
The time to act on a comprehensive bill is now."
I just hope his fellow Republicans, or at least enough them, follow his lead.
And, I hope the Democrats are willing to add the other solutions to clean energy and to energy independence some of those Republicans support in order to get the compromise bill passed that Democrat John Kerry and Republican Lindsay Graham have proposed that does both a good job on renewable energy and includes those things.
If we do both, we will make strong progress on increasing our real and our effective energy supply. That will create jobs all over our economy and help prevent inflation and energy shortages that would slow our economy. We will also improve our energy independence.
And, even though, it will include some offshore drilling for oil, it will do so much more good to decrease CO2 release that the smaller increase from burning that new oil supply is, in my mind, very clearly justified.
So, whoever your Senators are, please ask them to support and vote for Senator Kerry and Graham’s bill.
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-10-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those, the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina recently said the following.
This is an excerpt of his remarks to Business Advocacy Day for Jobs, Climate & New Energy Leadership in Washington DC recently.:
"Every day we wait in this nation China is going to eat our lunch. The Chinese don't need 60 votes. I guess they just need 1 guy’s vote over there - and that guy's voted.
He has decided to do two things:
First, kind of play footsie with us on emissions control stuff -- but go like gangbusters when it comes to producing alternative energy.
The solar and wind and battery-powered cars” (industry) “is an amazing thing to watch. And we're stuck in neutral here.
So my message to you - you're up here to advocate - advocate. Let the Congress know that you want a comprehensive approach to two serious problems.
You don't have to believe that Iowa is going to become beachfront property to want to clean up carbon.
It is not about polar bears to me, it's about jobs. I like the polar bears as much as anyone else but I want to create jobs.
If just a fraction of what is being predicted about global warming is true, that's enough to motivate us all. But if the worst thing you did - as Tony Blair would say - is you provided a cleaner environment, I don't think you'd go down in history in a bad way.
The key in my view to those who believe we should address carbon pollution is to make sure that the energy initiatives that will get us there are done in a package.
If you break this apart you'll have a watered down solution on both fronts.
Health care was big - it was controversial - I didn't like the bill - but that doesn't mean you can't do other hard problems.
If lesson from health care is let's not do anything hard, then why don't we all go home, which might be good for the country by the way.
But if we go home, China won't.
The world is moving, pollution is growing, we've got a chance to get ahead and lead. If we wait too long and if we try to take half measures as the preferred route on all these hard problems they just get worse.
My challenge to you and to myself is to not let this moment pass. This is the best opportunity I've seen in my political lifetime for a Republican and Democrat to do something bold and meaningful.
Why did I get involved in this? I ask myself that a lot. I saw an opportunity. I've become convinced that carbon pollution is a bad thing, not a good thing, and it can be dealt with, and we can create jobs.
This is the time, this is the Congress, and this is the moment. So if we retreat and try to just go to the energy only approach which will never yield the legislative results that I want on energy independence, then we just made the problem worse.
What Congress is going to come up here and do all these hard things?
Who are these people in the future? Because we constantly count on them. I don't know who they are. I've yet to find them.
So I guess it falls to me and you. So let's do it.
The time to act on a comprehensive bill is now."
I just hope his fellow Republicans, or at least enough them, follow his lead.
And, I hope the Democrats are willing to add the other solutions to clean energy and to energy independence some of those Republicans support in order to get the compromise bill passed that Democrat John Kerry and Republican Lindsay Graham have proposed that does both a good job on renewable energy and includes those things.
If we do both, we will make strong progress on increasing our real and our effective energy supply. That will create jobs all over our economy and help prevent inflation and energy shortages that would slow our economy. We will also improve our energy independence.
And, even though, it will include some offshore drilling for oil, it will do so much more good to decrease CO2 release that the smaller increase from burning that new oil supply is, in my mind, very clearly justified.
So, whoever your Senators are, please ask them to support and vote for Senator Kerry and Graham’s bill.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
China is doing very well in Renewable Energy....
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-3-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
The San Jose Mercury and the New York Times both recently ran articles detailing that China, despite being far too dependent on coal with 80% of its electricity generation still, has become a power in renewable energy and is growing and developing very rapidly.
To be sure, China has coal problems. The trains between its Western region that has coal and its Eastern region that has the majority of people and industry sometimes are stalled by heavy snow storms; by itself their burning of coal is a major threat to global warming; & their air is seriously polluted by massive burning of coal with insufficient removal of pollutants from the exhaust.
But at the rate they are going, they may soon be able to run their economy on renewable energy.
China’s national government is putting $100 billion a year into green technology research. And, in China, their provincial and local governments are also heavily backing clean tech companies. They have mandated that by 2020 the percentage of their energy from renewable sources WILL go from 7 % today to 15% then. This is not a hoped for target only as it has been so far in the United States.
Chinese cities are offering land and tax incentives to clean technology companies to locate plants there. And, even more importantly, government owned banks are making credit available to clean tech companies instead of cancelling it as banks in the United States recently did. And, they are even offering this credit at lower rates than their competitors in the United States and Europe can get.
These policies are beginning to be effective. According to John Doerr and John Denniston from the venture firm Kleiner Perkins, only five of the world’s top 30 companies in solar, wind, and next-generation batteries are based in the United States.
Apparently most of the other 25 are based in China.
(I do wish they would do an article on these 30 companies to detail what each one does and why it’s listed in the top 30 and where it’s located.)
The New York Times reports in its story that China invested about $440 billion into clean energy last year & is also investing heavily in nuclear power.
The United States does have clean tech companies, particularly here in the Silicon Valley, with some very important technology that may be superior to what is available elsewhere; but in terms of large scale rollouts and real progress in building lots of new renewable energy, the United States IS behind and may even be falling farther behind.
Meanwhile there is good news too some of it here in the United States.
China’s other good news besides building massive amounts of both renewable energy and nuclear that at least doesn’t release CO2 or particulate pollution is that China is getting serious about implementing ways to make its use of coal much cleaner.
Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican from South Carolina has been working on a win win deal to do both more nuclear and domestic oil drilling offshore that Republicans favor more and a massive increase in our domestic renewable energy production that more Democrats favor.
The very good news here is that this may actually get a bill through the overly partisan U.S. Congress that will begin to make the progress we need in building much more renewable energy.
The even better news is in this quote from Senator Graham.
“Six months ago my biggest worry was that an emissions deal would make American business less competitive compared to China. Now my concern is that every day that we delay trying to find a price for carbon is a day that China uses to dominate the green economy.”
If other Republicans begin to really understand that our energy independence and economic strength heavily depend now on a massive increase in our renewable energy production and companies, we may finally see some action.
Best of all, if this compromise bill manages to pass both the Senate & the House, from his recent comments, it looks like President Obama will support it and sign it.
I also liked this quote from the NY Times article, “In the energy sector alone, the deployment of new technologies, like wind and solar power, has the potential to support 20 million jobs by 2030 and trillions of dollars in revenue, analysts estimate.”
So, between the jobs and money from this build up in renewable energy, both the private investors & companies and the political leaders in the United States are beginning to make plans to be part of a clean technology economy.
I also liked a comment by one man in the NY Times article who pointed out that in addition to trying to be included in this massive new opportunity, the United States and Europe can also co-operate with these Chinese companies to bring about this change even faster.
Today's post: Wednesday, 2-3-2010
We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.
At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both.
And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.
Further, it’s extremely clear that the most supported and economically beneficial solution to add energy that does not use oil nor burn fossil fuels to release more CO2 into air that already has too much is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy production, particularly those that generate electricity & to dramatically increase energy efficiency and reduce the amount of energy that is now wasted.
And, of those the more important long range solution is to build massive amounts of new renewable energy generation.
Today’s post:
The San Jose Mercury and the New York Times both recently ran articles detailing that China, despite being far too dependent on coal with 80% of its electricity generation still, has become a power in renewable energy and is growing and developing very rapidly.
To be sure, China has coal problems. The trains between its Western region that has coal and its Eastern region that has the majority of people and industry sometimes are stalled by heavy snow storms; by itself their burning of coal is a major threat to global warming; & their air is seriously polluted by massive burning of coal with insufficient removal of pollutants from the exhaust.
But at the rate they are going, they may soon be able to run their economy on renewable energy.
China’s national government is putting $100 billion a year into green technology research. And, in China, their provincial and local governments are also heavily backing clean tech companies. They have mandated that by 2020 the percentage of their energy from renewable sources WILL go from 7 % today to 15% then. This is not a hoped for target only as it has been so far in the United States.
Chinese cities are offering land and tax incentives to clean technology companies to locate plants there. And, even more importantly, government owned banks are making credit available to clean tech companies instead of cancelling it as banks in the United States recently did. And, they are even offering this credit at lower rates than their competitors in the United States and Europe can get.
These policies are beginning to be effective. According to John Doerr and John Denniston from the venture firm Kleiner Perkins, only five of the world’s top 30 companies in solar, wind, and next-generation batteries are based in the United States.
Apparently most of the other 25 are based in China.
(I do wish they would do an article on these 30 companies to detail what each one does and why it’s listed in the top 30 and where it’s located.)
The New York Times reports in its story that China invested about $440 billion into clean energy last year & is also investing heavily in nuclear power.
The United States does have clean tech companies, particularly here in the Silicon Valley, with some very important technology that may be superior to what is available elsewhere; but in terms of large scale rollouts and real progress in building lots of new renewable energy, the United States IS behind and may even be falling farther behind.
Meanwhile there is good news too some of it here in the United States.
China’s other good news besides building massive amounts of both renewable energy and nuclear that at least doesn’t release CO2 or particulate pollution is that China is getting serious about implementing ways to make its use of coal much cleaner.
Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican from South Carolina has been working on a win win deal to do both more nuclear and domestic oil drilling offshore that Republicans favor more and a massive increase in our domestic renewable energy production that more Democrats favor.
The very good news here is that this may actually get a bill through the overly partisan U.S. Congress that will begin to make the progress we need in building much more renewable energy.
The even better news is in this quote from Senator Graham.
“Six months ago my biggest worry was that an emissions deal would make American business less competitive compared to China. Now my concern is that every day that we delay trying to find a price for carbon is a day that China uses to dominate the green economy.”
If other Republicans begin to really understand that our energy independence and economic strength heavily depend now on a massive increase in our renewable energy production and companies, we may finally see some action.
Best of all, if this compromise bill manages to pass both the Senate & the House, from his recent comments, it looks like President Obama will support it and sign it.
I also liked this quote from the NY Times article, “In the energy sector alone, the deployment of new technologies, like wind and solar power, has the potential to support 20 million jobs by 2030 and trillions of dollars in revenue, analysts estimate.”
So, between the jobs and money from this build up in renewable energy, both the private investors & companies and the political leaders in the United States are beginning to make plans to be part of a clean technology economy.
I also liked a comment by one man in the NY Times article who pointed out that in addition to trying to be included in this massive new opportunity, the United States and Europe can also co-operate with these Chinese companies to bring about this change even faster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)