Category Archives: Energy

Resources for solar cooking

This post will be updated as we gather more resources, and and attempt to make it more comprehensive and practical. – JS

There are, roughly, speaking, five types of solar cooking devices:

parabolic solar cooker

Practical plans

Instructables.com – another reminder of the brilliance of the Instructables concept and execution, searching the site with the search terms “solar oven” yielded dozens of plans of varying type and sophistication.

How to make a really hot solar cooker in concrete – by GreatHub

DIY Plans from Solar Cooking.org (most in at least two languages)

How to Make a Pizza Box Solar Oven from Solar Now

Continue reading

Zero Race begins today in Switzerland

The Zero Race, a competition between automobiles powered by sustainable energy sources, begins today in Switzerland. There are, we regret to report, only four teams, none from the United States.  The ZeroTracer is the Swiss entry; the Power Plaza Team is from South Korea; Team Trev is from Adelaide, Australia and the Vectrix Team is from Berlin. Additional details about the race, including route, which is intended to take 80 days, are taken from the Zero-Race website:

The Zero Tracer from Team Orlikon (Switzerland)

The Zero Race will start in Geneva (Switzerland) on 16. August 2010, and continue eastwards for a total distance of about 30 000 km. The event is planned to be completed in 80 days (excluding maritime crossings) across 16 countries with stops in approximately 150 major cities en route.

Zero Race will visit places of all sizes, such as major cities including Bruxelles, Berlin, Vienna, Kiev, Moscow, Astana, Shanghai, Vancouver, San Francisco, Austin and Madrid.

The Zero Race will visit the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Cancun at the end of November and end it will finish in Geneva at the end of January 2011.

In each Zero Race stop along the route, there will be press conferences and events.

Crisis (Mis) Management and the Gulf Oil Spill

 

What BP and the Government Could Have Done and Should Be Doing (updated 10/7/10)

The handling of the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe is a textbook study of how not to manage a crisis. The government and the Obama Administration seems to have understated the problem and ceded responsibility to BP, which seems to have acted to protect the Macondo oil field rather than the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf Coast.

Continue reading

Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon

Ships trying to Extinguish the Flames

Ships trying to Extinguish the Flames at the Deepwater Horizon Rig

The unfolding disaster at the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico, which promises to be an environmental catastrophe, (click here) the recent disasters at the Upper Big Branch coal mine in West Virginia, and the Kingston, Tennessee fly ash retention pond demonstrate that fossil fuels are dirty and dangerous.  Safety and environmental protection are expensive and cannot be guaranteed. The oil will adversely effect fisheries in the Gulf for years. If the oil gets into the Gulf Stream, it will curl around Florida and flow up the coast hitting Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virgina, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and if it flows around the Long Island Sound, Connecticut – all the original 13 states, then Maine and the Atlantic Provinces of Canada.

Rather than harnessing the Gulf Stream to push pollution from the Gulf of Mexico up the Atlantic coast of the United States, we should harness the Gulf Stream for clean renewable energy. (Here’s how.)

Solar and wind, which harness natural processes rather than consume natural resources, provide power without fuels, and without waste: with no arsenic, carbon dioxide, lead, mercury, methane, and other toxins, greenhouse gases or radioactive waste. These systems enable us to meet our needs and allow future generations to meet their needs – and flourish.

Rather than clinging to the dirty and hazardous infrastructure of the past, we must build the clean, renewable, and sustainable infrastructure of the future.

Cape Wind and the Staten Island Ferry solar array and the thousands of other solar and wind projects here in the U. S. and elsewhere on the globe are, to paraphrase Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong, “small steps … yet giant leaps for mankind.”

This post is the First Installment of a series that will follow the unfolding catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.

The index is below:

  1. Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon, May 3, 2010.
  2. Drill Baby Drill or Drill Baby Oops, May 7, 2010.
  3. The Magnitude of the Spill, May 15, 2010.
  4. One Month After The Spill BP Siphoning 3,000 Barrels Per Day, May 20, 2010.
  5. Deep Water Horizon – The Chernobyl of Deepwater Drilling?, June 2, 2010.
  6. The Deepwater Horizon: 40,000 Barrels Per Day or 70,000, June 13, 2010.
  7. The Deepwater Horizon After the Macondo Well Explosion, June 19, 2010.
  8. Deepwater Horizon – Bombs and Hurricanes, July 1, 2010.
  9. Like a Bad High School Math Problem, July 14, 2010.
  10. Crisis Management and the Gulf Oil Spill, July 16, 2010.
  11. The Deepwater Horizon: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, October 7, 2010.

Earth Day For the Future

Earth from Space, Courtesy NASA

In 100 years our descendants will not be burning coal, oil, natural gas or using nuclear fission.  They might be using terrestrial nuclear fusion.  They will be using solar, wind, geothermal, marine current hydro, tidal energy systems – clean, renewable, sustainable energy systems. No fuel: No Waste. No mines, mills, wells, spills. No arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium, thorium – no fly ash to be contained or to leak.

We have started.  California and New Jersey lead the U. S. Germany and Spain lead Europe. Boeing and Richard Branson’s Virgin Atlantic want to build aircraft that run on biodiesel.  We need to move forward in a big way – to 100% clean energy in 10 years, to retrain coal miners and oil rig operators to build and run solar arrays and wind turbines, and dig deep geothermal systems.

Smarter Sensors Start Going to Work – Bits Blog – NYTimes.com

Steve Lohr reports on tne Times’ Bits Blog that  Royal Dutch Shell is using high-tech sensor arrays in searchinh got  oil. It’s certainly a good thing if risks associated with oil exploration and and acquisition are lowered. But it’s hard not to be cynical about the face oil companies present to the public.

In the last couple of years, the research laboratories at companies like Hewlett-Packard and Intel have been working on the next generation of digital sensors. They are smarter, smaller, consume less energy, and they can communicate wirelessly.

Their promise, writ large, is to help link the digital world of computing to the physical world as never before. The payoff would be to bring data-rich measurement, more intelligence and higher levels of optimization to all sorts of fields – including energy, traffic management, food distribution and health care. Lots of companies are working on parts of the broad vision, and I. that oB.M.’s “Smarter Planet” advertising campaign is the probably clearest articulation of the vision.

Royal Dutch Shell and Hewlett-Packard are announcing on Monday a step toward the mainstream use of next-generation sensor technology. The application – on-land oil and gas exploration – points toward the potential gains from advanced sensing systems.

No dollar figure is attached to the multiyear agreement, and Shell isn’t saying where it plans to first try this high-tech prospecting. But the oil company says the vastly more detailed seismic data collection and analysis should help it pinpoint new oil and gas reserves in difficult areas like under salt formations in the Middle East and deep pockets of natural gas in the North America.

Sensors are only one tool among the set of technologies needed in any number of industries. To make complex physical systems smarter also requires advances in storage, networking, data mining and analytics software. Still, the sensors are the vital measurement, data-harvesting and communications technology in the physical world – the digital eyes, ears and nose out there. The sensors may be an ingredient, but an essential one – just as the microprocessor may not be everything in computing, but it is the gateway technology that makes everything else possible.

In seismic prospecting for oil, big “thumper trucks” pound the ground to make sound waves that above-ground sensors then monitor. Today, 10,000 or 20,000 sensors, connected by wires, might be spread over an area 25 miles by 25 miles. With the Shell-H.P. sensing system, hundreds of thousands, up to a million, wireless sensors – about 3 inches by 4 inches – can be spread across a similar area. Each sensor, listening to the underground seismic echoes, is a data channel.

“If you can increase the number of data channels, the better you are able to listen,” explained Wim Walk, a geophysical scientist for Shell.

Hundreds of times more data will be generated with the new system. The raw data will be collected, mined and analyzed to create pictures of the geological formations and petroleum finds deep in the Earth.

Using the new technology, scientists say, opens the door to new levels of clarity – as in the difference between watching “Avatar” in 3-D or a regular theater screen.

via Smarter Sensors Start Going to Work – Bits Blog – NYTimes.com.

Barack Obama, a Systems Thinker in the White House

President Barack Obama.

President Barack Obama.

In his State of the Union Address <video, transcript Englsh, en español>, President Obama said “The best anti-poverty program is a world classeducation

.” He described a positive, or reinforcing, feedback loop. Education enables people to accomplish more, earn more, and better educate their children, who also accomplish more and earn more. It is one of the most important differences between the populations of New Jersey and West Virginia. This is described in detail in Thinking in Systems, by Donella Meadows<link>, (C) 2008, published by Chelsea Green<link>, ISBN 978-1-60358-055-7.

The President also asked for a better health care plan. I can answer that in five words: “Single Payer; Medicare For All” <linkjust approved by the California Senate. Medicare works for my octogenarian father. Health Insurance Care doesn’t work for a 20-something friend of mine. He just graduated from college. He has no job and therefore no medical insurance. If he was a full-time student he’d be covered on his parents’ insurance. A simple reform would cover recent graduates until they find a job that pays a living wage and provides health insurance benefits. Another would be by expanding Medicare to cover all citizens. This is much easier said than done. Our medical care system cannot adequately care for approximately 50 million people – one out of six. This can’t be changed overnight – we need to train more doctors and nurses, and build more hospitals, but it must be changed.

Image showing mountain strip mined for coal.

Mountain strip mined for coal. Chris Dorst, Charleston, WV Gazette.

Energy is another set of systems problems. No one who has seen a once pristine valley after strip mining or “mountain-top removal”  uses the term “Clean Coal.” Countries like Denmark, Ireland, Israel, Japan, and Sweden built their economies with education not extraction of natural resources. As the President alluded to, conservation and clean, renewable energy technologies – solar, wind, geothermal, hydro – can be implemented faster, at a lower cost, and with fewer negative economic externalities than traditional fuel intensive resource based technologies like fossil fuel and nuclear power. This suggests another of the differences between New Jersey and West Virginia – the “Blessings of Education” versus the “Resource Curse” <link> from which economies built on extraction of natural resources suffer.

Arklow at Sunset

Arklow Bank Wind Park, off Arklow Bay, Ireland. Image courtesy Oneworld.net, UK.

The President needs economic advisors who start think in terms of ecological economics <link1 / link2>, of metrics like the Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI <link>, rather than Gross Domestic Product, GDP <link>. Simply put, ecological economics is neoclassical economics with a better understanding of the long term and of costs. Spending one dollar – or one trillion dollars – to clean up a mess is not as good as allocating those resources to build factories, houses, libraries, museums – the infrastructure, culture, and community of a nation.

God, Keynes, and Clean Energy

Columbia University

Columbia University

NY. Jan. 25. Mark Fulton, “Climate Change Strategist” Deutsche BankAsset Management, spoke at Cary Krosinsky’s class in Sustainable Investing at the CERC, the Center for Environmental Research and Conservation, Earth Institute, Columbia University.

Krosinsky, Vice President of Trucost, recently co-edited and wrote the book Sustainable Investing: The Art of Long Term Performance with Nick Robins of HSBC. He is an Advisory Board member of the Association of Climate Change Officers (ACCO) and founder director of InvestorWatch. Trucost has built and maintains the world’s largest database of carbon emissions and other environmental impacts as generated by the world’s largest public and private companies. Their data and expertise is used by leading global fund managers and asset owners to manage carbon risk. Continue reading

Copenhagen, India, China, the US, and GAIA

I’m beginning to think that Copenhagen was what it had to be, what it could only be. It fulfilled its Buddha-nature. Thus, I don’t consider it a failure. Nor do I consider it a success. It was what it was, what it could have been, what it had to be:

A gathering of emissaries from the 64 corners of the earth.

Courtesy of NASA

Earth From Space, Copyright NASA

Isaac Asimov observed in Foundation (ISBN: 978-0553293357) that “diplomacy, is the art of speaking for a long time without saying anything.” Most of the diplomats in Copenhagen had multiple agendas. Unfortunately for billions of the world’s poorest, the public agendas of sustainability and the abstract “Gaia Hypothesis” were distant fourth and fifth behind the private agendas of power, money, and influence.

The inconvenient truth is that much of Bangla Desh, California, Louisiana, Southern Florida will disappear, submerged, like the mythical Atlantis. China will continue to build 2 coal plants per week. And people will die.

But disregarding this notion, a Chinese diplomat Continue reading

Copenhagen, Climate Change, China, and Dessert

Sea IceEarlier today one of my friends handed me a copy of some satire published in the New York Post, a tabloid in the tradition of the London rags, on the subject of “Climate-Gate.”  At about the same time, Roger Saillant, co-author of Vapor Trails, who heads the Fowler Center for Sustainable Value at Case Western Reserve University pointed me to Elizabeth May’s post on the hacked computers and stolen e-mails at East Anglia University. Ms. May leads Canada’s Green Party.

Patrick Michaels, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which is really a public relations arm of Exxon Mobil, was once a scientist at the University of Virginia.  He is famous for giving testimony attacking Dr. James Hansen to the U.S. Senate. However, when interviewed by Elizabeth May on Canada’s CBC Sunday Morning’s “Kyoto on Trial” in 2002, Michaels admitted to redrawing Hansen’s graph to make it wrong. Michaels, who has traded the scientific method for Stanislavsky’s acting method, admitted to perjury in his testimony before the United States Senate.

The graph shows the amount of sea ice from July thru November from 1979 to 2000, then in 2005, 7, 8, and July thru Sept., 2009. It is from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, Boulder Colorado (here) published Oct. 6, 2009. The dark gray line shows Arctic sea ice from 1979 to 2000. The gray band shows 2 standard deviations from the mean. The colorful lines show that Arctic sea ice is at or well below two standard deviations from the mean levels of 1979 to 2000.  Clearly there is less ice in the Arctic then there used to be. Continue reading

Myth and Science on Global Warming

Seven Answers to Climate Contrarian Nonsense

This article presents and debunks myths about climate change.

Evidence for human interference with Earth’s climate continues to accumulate

By John Rennie, Scientific American, November 30, 2009

“On November 18, U.S. Sen. James R. Inhofe (R–Okla.) took the floor of the Senate and proclaimed 2009 to be “The Year of the Skeptic.” Had the senator’s speech marked a new commitment to dispassionate, rational inquiry, a respect for scientific thought and a well-grounded doubt in ghosts, astrology, creationism and homeopathy, it might have been cause for cheer. But Inhofe had a more narrow definition of skeptic in mind: he meant “standing up and exposing … the costs and the hysteria behind global warming alarmism.”

Continue reading

Jobs, National Security, Energy, Environment, Economy

Architecting a Clean, Secure, Sustainable, Non-Carbon and Non-Nuclear Energy Future

Middelgrunden, Denmark, near Copenhagen

Middelgrunden, Denmark, near Copenhagen

  • 100 Gigawatts offshore wind. $300 Billion.
  • 100 GW land based wind. $200 Billion.
  • 50 GW solar. $325 Billion.
  • 250 GW Clean, renewable, sustainable Energy.  $825 Billion.
  • Save the World: Priceless Continue reading

Massachusetts to pay higher prices for consumer-produced solar, wind energy

Marketplace reported last night that “Massachusetts has launched a program that rows of panelslets home and business owners who generate their own power sell it back to the electric compan” at retail prices, increasing the incentives for the installation of solar and wind energy-producing equipment, and additional incentives for conservation (i.e. additional conservation, which brings net consumption towards zero brings a household closer not just to a zero bill, but payment from utility companies).

Program pays top dollar for extra power, reported by Mitchell Hartman. From the transcript:

[Massachusetts] State Energy Secretary Ian Bowles.

IAN BOWLES: Starting now, if you own solar panels on your home, or you have a small-scale wind turbine, and you want to sell extra power back to the grid, you’ll now be able to do that at a very advantageous rate.

California will do the same thing starting in January and lots of other states are working on similar programs. Massachusetts now leads the pack, because it’s making utilities pay retail rates for the electricity customers generate.

TERRY TAMMINEN: So it really encourages you to become a renewable energy entrepreneur.

California energy consultant Terry Tamminen says these policies encourage alternatives to fossil fuels. But can a bunch of windmills and rooftop solar panels really make a difference?

TAMMINEN: Boston may not be noted for its sunshine, but neither is Germany, and yet Germany is the second-largest user and producer of solar energy in the world.

For years, Germany has been paying customers a premium for the renewable power they generate. Tamminen says that’s largely why it’s jumped ahead.

Mitchell Hartman, Program pays top dollar for extra power.

Via Marketplace, a production of American Public Media.



UnClean Coal

Industry Week reports a prototype carbon sequestration plant at the American Electric Mountaineer facility in New Haven, W. Virginia (full Article here). Let’s look further, and let’s look at the numbers. The article states: “the pilot facility captures and stores around 20 megawatts of carbon dioxide from West Virginia’s Mountaineer plant. The unit can handle only a fraction of Mountaineer’s 1,300 megawatt capacity”

I suppose it is reasonable to assume that they mean they have essentially created a 20 mw power plant inside the main 1,300 mw plant, and they can sequester the carbon for this 20 mw subplant.  That’s great. A 20 mw sub-plant in a 1,300 mw plant is 1.5385% of the total.  That’s like taking a Hummer that get’s 10 miles to the gallon, and tuning the engine and keeping the tires properly inflated so it gets another 812 feet 3.94 inches, for a total of 10.15385 miles to the gallon. You can do that. But you can’t do it and claim to be driving an efficient vehicle or conserving energy in a meaningful way.

My first question is “What’s a megawatt of carbon dioxide?” Carbon dioxide is measured in cubic feet, ounces, or metric tons. Megawatts don’t apply to quantities of solids, liquids, or gases; watts, kilowatts, and megawatts measure capacity to produce power. Watt-hours, kilowatt-hours, and megawatt-hours are measures of power.  If they don’t know what they’re talking about that doesn’t give me much confidence that they know what they’re doing.

The article goes on to say “Alstom aims to have a full-scale commercial carbon capture and storage (CCS) facility operational by 2015.” It says says “We have a prototype.” That means that by the end 2015 – six years from now – they hope to be successful. Six years is a long time to keep a project on schedule. Phrased another way, six years is a long time for nothing to go wrong.

The article also states “burying the captured carbon dioxide 7200 feet underground.” That’s roughly 1.36364 miles underground. I have some questions:

  1. How much will it cost to run, in terms of 1) money and 2) energy to put the carbon dioxide down there, and keep it down there?
  2. How much does it cost to build?
  3. How long can we pump carbon dioxide down there? If the coal plant has a 30 year life expectancy, then don’t we will need to pump carbon dioxide 1.36364 miles down for 30 years?
  4. What happens if something goes wrong at 7200 feet? Or 5280 feet underground? Or even 528 feet underground? If something goes wrong close to the surface I expect we’ll see a geyser of ice cold carbon dioxide.

T. Boone Pickens says land based wind costs about $2.0 Billion per gigawatt of capacity.  Pickens has been called many things, but he’s never been called an environmentalist.

Solar is about $6.5 Billion per gigawatt, when you’re talking 100 to 500 kw systems in New Jersey.

According to Kevin Riddell, in the New York Times, (click here for article) this 20 MW carbon sequestration subsystem will cost “well over $100 million.”

American Electric Power is spending $73 million on the capture and storage effort, which includes half the cost of the factory. Alstom, the manufacturer of the new equipment, paid for the other half of the factory, hoping to develop expertise that will win it a worldwide market. Alstom would not say what it spent, but public figures indicate that the two companies are jointly spending well over $100 million.

If “half the cost” of the facility is $73 million, then the other half is also $73 million. That “well over $100 million” adds up to about $146 million. For a 20 mw facility, that’s $7.3 million per mw. Utility scale Solar is $6.5 billion per mw.  Solar costs less than coal, and that’s before you factor in the costs of fuel, mining, and cleaning up the mess.

Economics: NeoClassical v Ecological

2009 Lamborghini Gallardo LP560 Spyder

2009 Lamborghini Gallardo LP560 Spyder

“All this matters because economists thought, wrote, and prescribed as if nature did not.”

J. R. McNeill, Something New Under the Sun.

“Global Warming is nonsense. Greenhouse gases mean growth, far as I can see. The Earth is one big resource, to exploit and consume, for the grand old party.”

L. J. Furman, Sunbathing In Siberia

Economics, according to Daly and Farley, in Ecological Economics, ISBN 1-55963-312-3, is “the science of allocation of scarce resources among alternative ends,” or  “what we want and what we have to give up to get it.”

Since the Great Depression economics has been about growth. Neo-Classical Economists measure the health of an economy by the growth of Gross Domestic Product, GDP, the sum of the goods an services produced in the market.

Ecological Economists think that the purpose of the economy is not simply to maximize and keep increasing the value of goods and services that are passed around. According to Robert Costanza, Director of the Gund Institute and Professor of Ecological Economics, University of Vermont, “The purpose of the economy should be to provide for the sustainable well-being of people.” Ecological Economics distinguishes growth from development. Growth, an increase in throughput, can waste resources. Development, a qualitative change for the better, results in realization of potential. Ecological Economists distinguish between costs and benefits, and subtract costs.  Rather than the Gross Domestic Product, GDP, Ecological Economists focus on the Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI,and distinguish economic goods from what Donella Meadows calls “economic bads.

Continue reading