It IS about the economy but facts count too.....
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-27-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
It IS about the economy but facts count too.....
I once was extremely opposed to the Presidential candidacy of Democrat John Edwards since some of his economic policies if he became President would have truly horrible consequences if he actually did as he said he would.
His comments showed he simply didn’t understand economic facts. Following his policies would have been much like standing on the beach watching after warnings were posted for a large Tsunami later that day just because you thought you could control or ignore facts you didn’t like. As writer Robert Heinlein once put it, the actually possible events would have happened anyway. Ouch! No way was John Edwards qualified to be President of the United States.
Unfortunately, now, it’s many of the current Republicans that are willing to pretend away facts they don’t like.
There are two problems with that. It looks increasingly as if gasoline price will double from here by 2010. That’s about $8 or $9 a gallon or more!
If we try to pretend this isn’t so and pass laws to cause us to continue to use gasoline and diesel fuel for transport, our economy is in grave danger. Similarly, if we do NOT pass laws to increase mileage standards for vehicles using oil and move to alternatives other than oil for transport, the facts will begin to kill our economy.
In addition to peak oil, China plans to add nearly as many vehicles by 2020 as now exist in Europe.
Shai Agassi, the founder of Better Place, an electric-car company, said this and it was reported yesterday by TIME magazine.:
"Within less than this decade the No. 1 selling car in the world will be the electric car," he says. "It's the biggest financial opportunity the world has ever seen…..."
He added. "I'll put it this way: We have people from China here."
The TIME article said this: “The People's Republic has been busy creating a bourgeoisie, and the middle class does like to drive. Beijing's next five-year plan foresees at least 170 million new vehicles, or perhaps twice that, according to Agassi.
The lower estimate alone is as many cars as there are in Germany, France, Spain, Italy and Britain combined.
The 8 million barrels of oil that would be required every day to fuel them is about as much as the U.S. imports every day.
"Do you know what the price of oil will be in five years if they're not using electric cars?" Agassi asks.”
If that happens or even comes close to it, gasoline and diesel prices will go up. They may go up by more than double the current prices in fact.
A separate TIME article on China & its incentive to go to electric cars said this:
"China, like the U.S., also has worries about dependency on foreign oil -- half of its oil comes from abroad; and it's only likely to get worse. China's oil consumption is expected to rise from 7.6 million barrels a day in 2007 to 11.6 million barrels a day by 2020."
Second, we do need to protect our economy from relying on oil while its prices go up enough to stall out our economy.
But the scientists also have found clear and increasing evidence that to save our climate and possibly our ability to grow food and keep some of our coastal cities, we also need to dramatically switch away from much of our use of natural gas and close to all our use of coal. Or we need to find a cost effective way to turn the CO2 produced into Oxygen and Carbon compounds. Cutting back in several ways AND adding cost effective CO2 removal systems is likely best.
The current Republicans who think their wish this isn’t so will prevent the consequences are wrong. If they fail to act to help prevent the disasters we are headed for, their actions are not based on fact.
Unfortunately if they continue to do this in our Congress, the actually possible will happen anyway. And, the survivors will think of them in years to come as many people think of Hitler now. Their beliefs were not based on facts – so their actions had horrible consequences
Also, though many of the economic principles Republicans believe in are sound, as this becomes evident, Republicans will return to being a weak and minority party if they continue to act like ignorant fools. Facts do count. And, pretending or even believing otherwise is not a good idea! The facts always win the argument. As our past California Governor put it, they will return to “losing at the Box office.”
On a more positive note,:
Thermal solar power from the Southwest United States and Mexico, when developed, can come close to producing all the electricity we now use or more. BrightSource Energy, a thermal solar company, has filed for a $250 million dollar ipo. This will enable them to help begin the process of harvesting this potential source of renewable energy on a moderately large scale.
Miasole, a less known Silicon Valley thin film solar photovoltaic company, has just done a deal with Intel which already looks likely to enable them to use similar technology and methods to lower the cost of making these thin film solar panels and radically increase the volume they make. That means that larger photovoltaic solar plants in cool but sunny places and small photovoltaic solar systems all over the world will be more cost effective soon. That means we will build a lot more of them. This will also help.
So, even if the politicians fail to act enough or fast enough, some businesses are working out deals that may protect us anyway.
We just need ten times as much in a quarter of the time it’s taking to avoid real economic problems.
So, every kind of energy efficiency improvement we can put into use, will help us to overcome this. We’ll need a huge amount of them as things stand now!
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Earth Day is this Friday, 4-22-2011....
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-20-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Earth Day is this Friday, 4-22-2011....
Earth Day is intended to inspire awareness and appreciation for the Earth's natural environment. Earth Day was founded in the United States and was first celebrated on April 22, 1970. In 2009, the United Nations designated April 22 International Mother Earth Day. (I found this information on Wikipedia.)
We live on earth. The sights we see, the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat all depend on the earth and on its weather and climate being safe for these things we need or enjoy.
Why have a day each year to set aside to remember this and appreciate what the earth does for us?
Why not remember it every day and be glad to have these things from Earth every day?
Because if they are not managed well, getting energy and raw materials for our economy and making things and then getting rid of used or worn out or obsolete things can damage every part of what make the earth valuable.
It’s easier and cheaper and takes less management skill to do these things in ways that harm the earth and those things that make our Earth so valuable for us.
If you do things on a very small scale a bit away from where you live, this is less critical. And, if you do things that are not very harmful that’s also the case.
Our economic efforts began when both of these things tended to be true.
When our economic efforts begin to be on a truly huge scale and generate toxins and poisons if not very carefully managed, management of them must be greatly more skilled and attended to in order to protect the earth and our use and enjoyment of it.
When energy acquisition and use and mining and manufacturing begin to make our air be harmful to breathe or putrid to look upon or cause disruptive climate change and severe weather events that cost more than it would cost to prevent these things, the managements involved have failed in their responsibilities.
Since it’s possible to make money and products without this management failure and to make money solving these problems, that is truly tragic.
Since this kind of management failure is still too often the case, it is good to take a day once each year to remember what is at stake.
That’s why we have Earth Day.
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-20-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Earth Day is this Friday, 4-22-2011....
Earth Day is intended to inspire awareness and appreciation for the Earth's natural environment. Earth Day was founded in the United States and was first celebrated on April 22, 1970. In 2009, the United Nations designated April 22 International Mother Earth Day. (I found this information on Wikipedia.)
We live on earth. The sights we see, the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat all depend on the earth and on its weather and climate being safe for these things we need or enjoy.
Why have a day each year to set aside to remember this and appreciate what the earth does for us?
Why not remember it every day and be glad to have these things from Earth every day?
Because if they are not managed well, getting energy and raw materials for our economy and making things and then getting rid of used or worn out or obsolete things can damage every part of what make the earth valuable.
It’s easier and cheaper and takes less management skill to do these things in ways that harm the earth and those things that make our Earth so valuable for us.
If you do things on a very small scale a bit away from where you live, this is less critical. And, if you do things that are not very harmful that’s also the case.
Our economic efforts began when both of these things tended to be true.
When our economic efforts begin to be on a truly huge scale and generate toxins and poisons if not very carefully managed, management of them must be greatly more skilled and attended to in order to protect the earth and our use and enjoyment of it.
When energy acquisition and use and mining and manufacturing begin to make our air be harmful to breathe or putrid to look upon or cause disruptive climate change and severe weather events that cost more than it would cost to prevent these things, the managements involved have failed in their responsibilities.
Since it’s possible to make money and products without this management failure and to make money solving these problems, that is truly tragic.
Since this kind of management failure is still too often the case, it is good to take a day once each year to remember what is at stake.
That’s why we have Earth Day.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Why California’s good news is so badly needed....
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-13-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Why California’s good news is so badly needed....
Tuesday, 4-12, yesterday, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a mandate that requires the state's utilities to get 33 % of their electricity from renewable sources like geothermal, wind, small scale hydro power, and solar by 2020.
In 2009, California generated 14 % of its electricity from renewable sources. Last year it was likely closer to 15 to 17 % & the largest California utilities were closer to 17 to 19%.
This was done at an event announcing a Department of Energy $1.2 billion conditional loan guarantee for SunPower and NRG Solar to build a 250-megawatt photovoltaic power plant in San Luis Obispo County.
And, this past Monday, BrightSource Energy closed financing for an even larger thermal solar power plant in Southern California near Ivanpah that included $1.6 billion from a DOE loan guarantee, a $168 million equity investment from Google, and a $200 million venture capital round.
Even better, this project is one of several they are committed to build in Southern California and the rest of the Southwestern United States.
Hopefully this will now be followed up by the utilities helping their commercial and residential customers install onsite photovoltaic solar and similar wind, small hydro, and geothermal plants as well reach the mandated level of 33%.
And, there is the potential, in California at least, of increasing energy efficiency and tripling that amount of renewable energy although population an economic growth will like mean that will be 60 to 75% of California’s energy at that time.
But this progress is very badly needed!
1. Because transport in California and the rest of the United States is so dependent on gasoline and diesel fuel now, the run up in oil prices recently has the potential to derail the economic recovery. An analytic essay by UPI says it has already created a 5 percent cut in discretionary income and shows signs of worse soon. Their article went on to say that since such a large percentage of the oil comes from outside the United States that money will create jobs elsewhere – NOT here. That decrease in consumer demand and job creation they say has the potential to derail the economic recovery or keep it very weak.
When we have far more clean sources of generation of electricity than now and the majority of miles driven in our cars and trucks comes from electricity, we not only will have far less impact from the coming doubling of oil prices otherwise, not only will it derail our economy less on the demand side, far less of our money will leave the country for foreign oil so more jobs can be created here.
Even better, once that happens, electric powered vehicles will cost less per mile to drive and will quickly go to an even larger percentage of our transport.
2. We open this blog with the idea that we need to cut fossil fuel use by 2050 by 80 % while actually growing our economy. In the book, Hot: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth by Mark Hertsgaard, he says that because we are unlikely to get to 100% in time, we also will need to decide what part of our coastal cities we can afford to save from rising sea levels and plan ahead now how we will save the part we can afford to save.
We also will need to think through now how we can save enough farm output to feed ourselves.
So, this good news from California, though 20 to 40 years too late, is extremely good news indeed.
The more of this kind of thing we do and the faster we do it, the less we will have to plan how to lose our economic assets and food production and do it safely.
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-13-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Why California’s good news is so badly needed....
Tuesday, 4-12, yesterday, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a mandate that requires the state's utilities to get 33 % of their electricity from renewable sources like geothermal, wind, small scale hydro power, and solar by 2020.
In 2009, California generated 14 % of its electricity from renewable sources. Last year it was likely closer to 15 to 17 % & the largest California utilities were closer to 17 to 19%.
This was done at an event announcing a Department of Energy $1.2 billion conditional loan guarantee for SunPower and NRG Solar to build a 250-megawatt photovoltaic power plant in San Luis Obispo County.
And, this past Monday, BrightSource Energy closed financing for an even larger thermal solar power plant in Southern California near Ivanpah that included $1.6 billion from a DOE loan guarantee, a $168 million equity investment from Google, and a $200 million venture capital round.
Even better, this project is one of several they are committed to build in Southern California and the rest of the Southwestern United States.
Hopefully this will now be followed up by the utilities helping their commercial and residential customers install onsite photovoltaic solar and similar wind, small hydro, and geothermal plants as well reach the mandated level of 33%.
And, there is the potential, in California at least, of increasing energy efficiency and tripling that amount of renewable energy although population an economic growth will like mean that will be 60 to 75% of California’s energy at that time.
But this progress is very badly needed!
1. Because transport in California and the rest of the United States is so dependent on gasoline and diesel fuel now, the run up in oil prices recently has the potential to derail the economic recovery. An analytic essay by UPI says it has already created a 5 percent cut in discretionary income and shows signs of worse soon. Their article went on to say that since such a large percentage of the oil comes from outside the United States that money will create jobs elsewhere – NOT here. That decrease in consumer demand and job creation they say has the potential to derail the economic recovery or keep it very weak.
When we have far more clean sources of generation of electricity than now and the majority of miles driven in our cars and trucks comes from electricity, we not only will have far less impact from the coming doubling of oil prices otherwise, not only will it derail our economy less on the demand side, far less of our money will leave the country for foreign oil so more jobs can be created here.
Even better, once that happens, electric powered vehicles will cost less per mile to drive and will quickly go to an even larger percentage of our transport.
2. We open this blog with the idea that we need to cut fossil fuel use by 2050 by 80 % while actually growing our economy. In the book, Hot: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth by Mark Hertsgaard, he says that because we are unlikely to get to 100% in time, we also will need to decide what part of our coastal cities we can afford to save from rising sea levels and plan ahead now how we will save the part we can afford to save.
We also will need to think through now how we can save enough farm output to feed ourselves.
So, this good news from California, though 20 to 40 years too late, is extremely good news indeed.
The more of this kind of thing we do and the faster we do it, the less we will have to plan how to lose our economic assets and food production and do it safely.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Manhattan project or Moon shot approach to clean energy solutions....
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-6-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Manhattan project or Moon shot approach to clean energy solutions....
This week’s post is about what conceptual approach is needed to get to clean energy solutions in time to prevent catastrophic problems from warming or severe economic disruption from that or fossil fuels becoming too scarce and expensive before we have enough alternatives in use.
Tom Friedman and others have suggested that we use the Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon as a conceptual model to get enough clean energy solutions in place soon enough. The Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon were things ignited the public imagination or get very serious government funding or both and got successful results. They also got successful results in the shortest possible time.
They do inspire the imagination; suggest speed of execution is essential, and by implication suggest a successful result.
But the massive size, multiple aspect, and complexity of the energy situation needs a comparable model to emulate that had these characteristics I think.
The Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon had complexities but not at the very multiple level of complexity that the energy crisis does.
However, there WAS a historical event that compared well with the energy crisis. It had multiple aspects and locations and kinds of stakeholders just as the energy crisis does.
That was the focused effort of the United States and its allies to win World War II. It was also successful. But even better, it had several models of the components of that success that also may be helpful.
Yes, it may have won the war to have had the Manhattan project. And, it certainly shortened the war and saved hundreds of thousands of deaths of the Japanese people and the soldiers and other military forces of the United States that an invasion would have produced.
But a review of the progress of the war shows that the war was close to irrevocably won by that time.
It was the strategies that won the war in Europe and were winning in the Pacific war until that time that truly won the war.
These included having the key interest groups work together and support each other at least to some degree. And, it included multiple and massive efforts to deploy effective technologies and make small but real improvements on the fly and multiple sources of innovation and in virtually every area needed at the same time. And a real spirit of public support across our society supported that and helped us win the war.
So, I think what we need is a world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources.
The good news first is that we are beginning to have part of this in place. We are beginning to have the needed, “multiple and massive efforts to deploy effective technologies and make small but real improvements on the fly and have multiple sources of innovation and in virtually every area needed at the same time.”
Here are just a couple of examples.
For example, if a safe and doable way to supply vehicles with hydrogen was developed. We could use wind, solar, geothermal, or nuclear power located close enough to water – lakes, rivers, oceans, etc to use the electricity from those sources to provide the hydrogen and release back into the air some the oxygen we’ve already used and the oxygen the fuels cells in the vehicles powered then use by turning the water into hydrogen and oxygen. (These renewable sources near oceans could desalt the water and use just part of that to produce hydrogen.)
Now it seems we may have that technology. This time I seem to have lost my notes on who developed it; but I saw a recent story that explained that there is a new way to store and deliver hydrogen by encapsulating hydrides from which hydrogen can be extracted for fuel cells and which uses nanotechnology. These encapsulated hydrides can be safely stored, transported, and even piped into vehicle fuel tanks much as gasoline and diesel fuel is now.
Another technology we have posted on before is by the Swedish company that now has an office in Sunnyvale, California in the silicon valley, GLO AB.
They use nanotechnology to make manufacturing LED lights something like a fifth as expensive as the manufacturing of LED lights now requires.
Now, I’ve replaced most of the incandescent bulbs we use for lighting with compact fluorescents which use only 25% of the energy of the incandescent bulbs they replaced. But so far, despite their far greater safety to me and my family and using only an eighth of the electricity of incandescent bulbs & half that of compact fluorescents I’ve only replaced two of the compact fluorescents with KED bulbs.
The reason is that I had to pay over a hundred dollars for just those two LED bulbs!
If they only cost a fifth as much. I would have replaced 10 compact fluorescents for the same money. And with only a bit over $10 each, by now I’d have replaced several more compact fluorescents with LED bulbs.
And, at that price level, utilities facing the need for electricity for electric cars or rising prices for electricity from fossil fuels could make LED bulbs available to their customers for ALL their lights at no charge to their customers and still be money ahead themselves.
There are literally hundreds or thousands of such efforts now in every part of energy savings and energy efficiency and clean energy production. Even nuclear may stay around though with much better and more reliable safety features. And, the venture capital firms are beginning to put some serious money into expanding the companies that are successfully deploying those technologies according to a story this week here in the Silicon Valley.
What we are so far missing is the spirit and energy and mulitple buy-in from all kinds of people that the United States, England, and Russia had during World War II.
We need more leaders with that vision and who know how to sell it to all of the stakeholders involved, not just some of them.
I’m out of time today but will list some potential ideas to solve that problem next time.
Until then I challenge you to commit yourself personally to do what you can for the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources.
What can you already do in your home or at work?
How can you help get support from everyone for the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources?
Even a single new LED light or more replacing a single energy using device with a more energy efficient one will help.
Even getting one other person to also commit to winning the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources -- will help.
Today's post: Wednesday, 4-6-2010
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. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 3 years from now.
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.
Today’s post:
Manhattan project or Moon shot approach to clean energy solutions....
This week’s post is about what conceptual approach is needed to get to clean energy solutions in time to prevent catastrophic problems from warming or severe economic disruption from that or fossil fuels becoming too scarce and expensive before we have enough alternatives in use.
Tom Friedman and others have suggested that we use the Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon as a conceptual model to get enough clean energy solutions in place soon enough. The Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon were things ignited the public imagination or get very serious government funding or both and got successful results. They also got successful results in the shortest possible time.
They do inspire the imagination; suggest speed of execution is essential, and by implication suggest a successful result.
But the massive size, multiple aspect, and complexity of the energy situation needs a comparable model to emulate that had these characteristics I think.
The Manhattan project or the race to get a man on the moon had complexities but not at the very multiple level of complexity that the energy crisis does.
However, there WAS a historical event that compared well with the energy crisis. It had multiple aspects and locations and kinds of stakeholders just as the energy crisis does.
That was the focused effort of the United States and its allies to win World War II. It was also successful. But even better, it had several models of the components of that success that also may be helpful.
Yes, it may have won the war to have had the Manhattan project. And, it certainly shortened the war and saved hundreds of thousands of deaths of the Japanese people and the soldiers and other military forces of the United States that an invasion would have produced.
But a review of the progress of the war shows that the war was close to irrevocably won by that time.
It was the strategies that won the war in Europe and were winning in the Pacific war until that time that truly won the war.
These included having the key interest groups work together and support each other at least to some degree. And, it included multiple and massive efforts to deploy effective technologies and make small but real improvements on the fly and multiple sources of innovation and in virtually every area needed at the same time. And a real spirit of public support across our society supported that and helped us win the war.
So, I think what we need is a world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources.
The good news first is that we are beginning to have part of this in place. We are beginning to have the needed, “multiple and massive efforts to deploy effective technologies and make small but real improvements on the fly and have multiple sources of innovation and in virtually every area needed at the same time.”
Here are just a couple of examples.
For example, if a safe and doable way to supply vehicles with hydrogen was developed. We could use wind, solar, geothermal, or nuclear power located close enough to water – lakes, rivers, oceans, etc to use the electricity from those sources to provide the hydrogen and release back into the air some the oxygen we’ve already used and the oxygen the fuels cells in the vehicles powered then use by turning the water into hydrogen and oxygen. (These renewable sources near oceans could desalt the water and use just part of that to produce hydrogen.)
Now it seems we may have that technology. This time I seem to have lost my notes on who developed it; but I saw a recent story that explained that there is a new way to store and deliver hydrogen by encapsulating hydrides from which hydrogen can be extracted for fuel cells and which uses nanotechnology. These encapsulated hydrides can be safely stored, transported, and even piped into vehicle fuel tanks much as gasoline and diesel fuel is now.
Another technology we have posted on before is by the Swedish company that now has an office in Sunnyvale, California in the silicon valley, GLO AB.
They use nanotechnology to make manufacturing LED lights something like a fifth as expensive as the manufacturing of LED lights now requires.
Now, I’ve replaced most of the incandescent bulbs we use for lighting with compact fluorescents which use only 25% of the energy of the incandescent bulbs they replaced. But so far, despite their far greater safety to me and my family and using only an eighth of the electricity of incandescent bulbs & half that of compact fluorescents I’ve only replaced two of the compact fluorescents with KED bulbs.
The reason is that I had to pay over a hundred dollars for just those two LED bulbs!
If they only cost a fifth as much. I would have replaced 10 compact fluorescents for the same money. And with only a bit over $10 each, by now I’d have replaced several more compact fluorescents with LED bulbs.
And, at that price level, utilities facing the need for electricity for electric cars or rising prices for electricity from fossil fuels could make LED bulbs available to their customers for ALL their lights at no charge to their customers and still be money ahead themselves.
There are literally hundreds or thousands of such efforts now in every part of energy savings and energy efficiency and clean energy production. Even nuclear may stay around though with much better and more reliable safety features. And, the venture capital firms are beginning to put some serious money into expanding the companies that are successfully deploying those technologies according to a story this week here in the Silicon Valley.
What we are so far missing is the spirit and energy and mulitple buy-in from all kinds of people that the United States, England, and Russia had during World War II.
We need more leaders with that vision and who know how to sell it to all of the stakeholders involved, not just some of them.
I’m out of time today but will list some potential ideas to solve that problem next time.
Until then I challenge you to commit yourself personally to do what you can for the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources.
What can you already do in your home or at work?
How can you help get support from everyone for the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources?
Even a single new LED light or more replacing a single energy using device with a more energy efficient one will help.
Even getting one other person to also commit to winning the world wide all out war level campaign to convert the world to a very energy efficient economy powered by clean and sustainable energy sources -- will help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)