Tag Archives: Wind Power

Earthquake, Tsunami, and Energy Policy

Tokyo Electric Power Co.

First in a series on the systems dynamics of nuclear power in the light of the ongoing catastrophe at Fukushima.

Radioactive waste and melt downs are intrinsic properties of nuclear power. Before / After Gallery.

Current Assessment: 3/27/11 3:00 PM. 10,668 dead, 16,574 missing. Radiation levels spike, drop. (Gather). Silver lining in the cloud – radioactive substances will wind up in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and trigger mutations in bacteria and plankton, creating “Plasticovores” – critters that chow down on plastic.

Eighth Assessment: 3/24/11 11:30 PM. 10,035 dead. 17,443 missing. Market Watch. Earlier in the day AP, Courtesy of the Star, Bloomberg. reported slightly lower numbers.  We have seen a natural disaster of earthquake, tsunami, and aftershocks. While the the damage is tremendous, it could have been much worse. There are 10,035 tragedies, and 17,443 people are missing. It seems likely that many of them will never be found.  Yet The nuclear plants have not yet undergone a full meltdown. This speaks volumes about American and Japanese engineering. The nuclear plants were built pretty well. Yet it also suggests that it is not prudent to build nuclear power plants in earthquake zones. Radioactive waste and meltdown are not intrinsic properties of solar, wind, geothermal, and conservation.

Continue reading →

Offshore Wind Energy – Mitigating climate change

Offshore Wind Energy: Its potential to mitigate climate change

Offshore Wind Turbine, sunrise.

Sunrise

(For Webinar Click Here) New England Faculty Colloquium: Climate Change, Policy, and Energy Solutions Wednesday, March 2, 2011 – 2:30 pm

James Manwell, U Mass Amherst, Director, Wind Energy Center, (Press Release: Renewable Energy Research Laboratory)

Wind power in the United States has grown from 1,800 MW in 1990 to 35,000 MW by the end 2009. And off-shore wind farms are planned from Virginia to Massachusetts.  The costs have dropped ten-fold.  Electricity from wind is now less expensive than electricity from coal and nuclear – with none of the environmental costs.

Wind and solar are the opposite of fossil fuels and nuclear. With fossil fuels and nuclear it is easy to regulate the electricity the plant produces, but the wastes can be a problem.  With wind and solar there is no waste, but we can not regulate the output. Or rather, we can easily turn it down, but we can’t turn it up.  If we are to shift to a clean, sustainable energy paradigm we need to develop a more flexible grid and other technologies for a combined cycle system. The  Wind Energy Center at University of Massachusetts, Amherst, is, in their words, “responding to the need for superior, cutting edge research solutions to these issues.”

Wind Power and Noise

How Loud Is A Wind Turbine? Our friends at Treehugger re-published this graphic from GE, which builds wind turbines.

Graphic showing wind turbine noise

If a wind turbine spins in a forest do you hear it?

If you’re standing next to a utility scale wind turbine, then you’ll hear it. At 300 meters, which is as close to residences as we can build them, they are about as loud as a refrigerator. People report that a set of wind turbines – they tend to be built in sets – produce noise and subsonic vibrations, which can be irritating. But what should we do? PV solar modules are silent. However, they don’t produce power at night.  Coal produces tons of toxic waste, from arsenic to zinc, including cadmium, mercury, lead, uranium, thorium – actually producing more radioactive waste than nuclear power.  And coal produces carbon dioxide. Mining coal and uranium is dirty. We are converting mountains of natural beauty into mountains of toxic waste. (see Coal Tattoo, or I Love Mountains)

So how loud is a wind turbine? And if wind power is too loud, how should we turn on the lights?

Renewable Energy, The Wall St. Journal, Faux News

George Gilder, writing in the Wall Street Journal, 11/18/10, in California’s Destructive Green Jobs Lobby complained of the defeat of the repeal of the “Global Warming Solutions Act.”

“Economic sanity lost out in what may have been the most important election on Nov. 2—and, no, I’m not talking about the gubernatorial or senate races. … This was the California referendum to repeal Assembly Bill 32, the so-called Global Warming Solutions Act, which ratchets the state’s economy back to 1990 levels of greenhouse gases by 2020. That’s a 30% drop followed by a mandated 80% overall drop by 2050. Together with a $500 billion public-pension overhang, the new energy cap dooms the state to bankruptcy.”

Gilder also wrote: “California officials acknowledged last Thursday that the state faces $20 billion deficits every year from now to 2016.” That’s $120 Billion over the next 6 years. This is a state of 37 million people (US Census). It should be able to borrow that money at 4% or 5% – which is $3083 per capita. Borrowed at 5% interest over 20 years, it’s $20.35 per person per month – which does not seem to be enough to push someone into bankruptcy.

Continue reading →

Google announces Biggest OffShore Wind Project

Schematic Map of Atlantic Wind Connection

Schematic Map of Atlantic Wind Connection

Google is putting its money where its mouth is. Back in early September, 2008, Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt said, “We have a total failure of political leadership, at least in the U. S., and perhaps the world.” He then called for 100% of U. S. power to come from green energy in 20 years – with 500,000 wind energy jobs. (See “Google’s Eric Schmidt Details Energy Plan, Chides Lack of Leadership,” by By Katie Fehrenbacher, Sep. 9, 2008, on Gigacom.) Schmidt combined Al Gore’s call for 100% clean electricity in 10 years with Intel CEO Andy Grove’s call for millions of plug-in hybrid cars.  (I would like to add that they should be plug-in hybrid biofuel, with the fuel coming from sewage and factory farm waste, not food crops.)

Recently, 10/12/10,  Erick Schonfeld at GreenTech (onTechCrunch) wrote Google Backs Biggest U.S. Offshore Wind Project:

Arklow Bank Wind Farm

Arklow Bank Wind Farm. Copyright (C) 2005, GE. Used with permission.

“Using its cash to kickstart renewable energy businesses, Google is now backing the largest U.S. offshore wind farm project to date. The Atlantic Wind Connection is a proposed string of offshore wind turbines that will stretch 350 miles off the Atlantic coast from Virginia to New Jersey. Once completed, the project will produce 6,000 megawatts of power, which is equivalent to 60 percent of all the wind power built in the U.S. last year. The wind project will serve nearly 2 million homes. Continue reading →

The Deepwater Horizon After the Macondo Well Explosion

An Iceberg

First conclusion of a series that began after Earth Day and includes Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon, Drill Baby Drill or Drill Baby Oops, Magnitude, Part 1, One Month After, The Chernobyl of Fossil Fuel?, and Magnitude, Part 2. )

As I wrote on Earth Day, “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 carbon or fly ash to be contained, sequestered, 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.”

Otherwise the Deepwater Horizon Explosion at the Macondo oil field, the oil spills in Ecuador and Nigeria, the coal ash floods like the TVA Kingston Steam Plant, coal mine disasters like at Upper Big Branch, spills like the Exxon Valdez, and events like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl will be ‘”Business as Usual.”

A friend of mine who works for BP, and who would like to work for BP Solar, tells me that most BP staff don’t go to work thinking “How can I destroy the earth today.“ They are, she says “focused on obtaining and selling oil.”  Few consider themselves environmentalists. Many see this as business as usual. “Oil spills happen,” they say. They are “focused on getting petrochemicals to market.”

The Macondo oil field that was tapped by the Deepwater Horizon could have contained 1 Billion Barrels of crude. It could have been one of the largest oil discoveries in the world .” (Click here for CBS and here for Times of London). The well could gush oil for YEARS and could have met US needs in 2007 – 21 Million Barrels per Day – for 47 days (here).

This volume of crude oil – 1 Billion Barrels – could explain the explosion. The equipment was built to operate at 20,000 PSI and withstand 60,000 PSI. It the pressures exceeded the limits, then the equipment could have failed. Simple. And Catastrophic. When you consider the pressures under 5000 feet of ocean, and the pressure of 1 Billion Barrels of oil, when you have engineers scratching their head saying “I don’t know, I never saw anything like this. What do You think we should do?”  One the thing to do is run like hell.

An Orca

An Orca

As was noted earlier in the series, like the iceberg pictured above and the Orca pictured at left, this is a singularity.  But it has precedents.

  • TVA Kingston: 1.2 Billion Gallons of toxic coal ash sludge, upstream of Kingston, Tennessee, 12/22/08.
  • Chevron Texaco: (alleged) 18 Billion Gallons (428.6 million barrels) of Oil Process Waste, Rainforests of Ecuador, 1964 to 1990.
  • Oil Fires of Kuwait: 6 Million Barrels per Day, up to 6 Months, 1991.
  • Exxon Valdez: 250,000 Barrels, Prince William Sound, 1989.
  • The Niger Delta, in Nigeria, 250,000 Barrels per year for the last 50 years (click here), “Big oil spills are no longer news in this vast, tropical land….has endured the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez spill every year for 50 years by some estimates…. Perhaps no place on earth has been as battered by oil, “
Flares in the Jungle

Flares in the Jungle

The TVA coal ash flood (here, here, here), the Upper Big Branch Mine accident (here, here), and the Deepwater Horizon at Macondo may be the “Trifecta” of American Fossil Fuel Disasters.  But, like the problems in Ecuador (here) and Nigeria (here), these are “Systems Problems” – built into the system. The only way to eliminate them is to change the system.

This is what precisely what some people are trying to do. Students and faculty in the Marlboro MBA in Managing for Sustainability at the Marlboro College Graduate Center in Brattleboro, Vermont. They think about “Changing the Climate of Business.” And they may be are on to something, as are like minded people at the Presidio, the Fowler Center for Sustainable Value, at Case Western, and Columbia University’s Earth Institute.

Here’s an idea that will enable BP to make things right, change their image, and even make money. Suppose BP Solar built new factories in Florida and Louisiana, and hire former petrochemical and seafood workers – and churned out 25,000 to 50,000 PhotoVoltaic solar modules and 1,250 to 2,500 inverters per day. This would be 5 to 10 megawatts per day, 160 to 300 mw per month, 600 mw to 1.2 gigawatts per year.

According to my back of the envelope calculations, we need about 50 gw of solar in this country, along with 200 gw of wind, and 50 to 100 gw of other CRS (Clean, Renewable, Sustainable) generating capacity, so this is a drop in the bucket. But this is real change. It’s defining moment, substantive, shake the cobwebs out of the attic, hurricane force, Dorothy we’re not in Kansas anymore, paradigm shifting change.

BP Solar, or Massey Energy, or Akeena, Evergreen, First Solar, Sunpower, could do the same thing in West Virginia – build factories to manufacture PV Solar Modules and Solar Hot Water Panels, and hire local people to work in the factories.

It is change we can wrap our arms around, change we can celebrate. As President Obama might say, “change we can believe in. ”

—

This was planned as the Final Post in this series on the Deepwater Horizon / Macondo oil well disaster which began after Earth Day. Other posts include:

  1. Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon,
  2. Drill Baby Drill or Drill Baby Oops,
  3. The Magnitude of the Spill,
  4. One Month After,
  5. The Chernobyl of Fossil Fuels?, and
  6. Magnitude, Part 2.

However, I will continue to offer my thoughts and analysis once or twice per month as the oil continues to gush forth into the Gulf of Mexico.

Deepwater Horizon: 40,000 Barrels Per Day or 70,000?

Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico Sunday, June 13, 2010. Oil continues to flow from the wellhead some 5,000 feet below the surface. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

The Deepwater Horizon spill. Sunday, June 13, 2010, AP Photo/Dave Martin

Part 6 in a Series that began after Earth Day (1 Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon, 2 Drill Baby Drill or Drill Baby Oops, 3 The Magnitude, 4 One Month After, 5 Like Chernobyl?)

Last month I wrote on Popoular Logistics “BP and the government say … 5,000 barrels per day is reaching the surface and most of the oil – 80%  to 90% – is below the surface. So I think it’s on the order of 25,000 to 50,000 barrels per day.” (click here)

This was a “back of the envelope” reflection of NPR’s analysis, reported May 14 (click here) that the spill was 70,000 barrels per day, with a margin of error of 14,000 barrels – so maybe as low as 56,000 Barrels per Day and maybe as much as 84,000 Barrels per Day.

In their article “Deepwater Horizon round up: it’s worse than you think (again) – June 11, 2010,” Nature.com noted “At the end of May the official estimate was raised again to between 12,000 and 19,000 barrels day. Now the Flow Rate Technical Group has produced a bevy of new estimates ranging from 25,000 to 40,000. Crucially, legal liability established for a spill can be linked to its size.” (click here) and here for the Flow Rate Technical Group.

It looks like I’m in good company. But I’d prefer to be wrong.

I also note that this is “business as usual” for BP and other fossil fuel companies, and compared it to the accident at the Kingston Steam Plant, 12/22/08, the Upper Big Branch Mine, 4/5/10, the Exxon Valdez, and Chevron-Texaco’s alleged dumping of 18 BILLION Gallons

of oil process waste in Ecuador between 1964 and 1990  (click here).

It is obvious to me that we MUST move to a post-carbon economy.

  • 100 gigawatts – offshore wind, $300 Billion
  • 100 gigawatts – land based wind $200 Billion
  • 50 gigawatts – solar $200 Billion (price is going down)
  • 50 gigawatts – marine current – $200 Billion.
  • Clean Energy Infrastructure: $900 Billion.
  • Save the World: Priceless.

Emergency phone numbers.

* Report oiled shoreline or request volunteer information: (866) 448-5816
* Submit alternative response technology, services or products: (281) 366-5511
* Submit your vessel for the Vessel of Opportunity Program: (281) 366-5511
* Submit a claim for damages: (800) 440-0858
* Report oiled wildlife: (866) 557-1401
* Medical support hotline:  (888) 623-0287

The Series, following “Earth Day for the Future”

(Here)

  1. Fossil Fuels and a Walk on the Moon (Here)
  2. Drill Baby, Drill – or Drill Baby, Oops (Here)
  3. The Magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon Spill (Here)
  4. One Month After The Spill BP Siphoning 3,000 Barrels Per Day (Here)
  5. Deepwater Horizon – the Chernobyl of Deep Water Drilling? (Here)
  6. Deepwater Horizon: 40,000 Barrels Per Day or 70,000? (Here)

Drill Baby, Drill – or Drill Baby, Oops

Second in a series  (1, 2) that began on “Earth Day” (0).

“In order to make Policy, you have to be good at Politics.”

– Deborah Stone, “Policy Paradox”

President Obama

President Obama, Official Photo

I like and respect President Obama. I think he’s a well educated lawyer and law school professor, with a good grasp of the Constitution, and the realities of Chicago machine politics and Inside-The-Beltway politics. He understands Stone. He’s also a moderate liberal. However, his economic advisors – Tim Geithner and Larry Sommers – only know what’s good for Wall Street, so every answer is “what’s good for Wall Street.” They don’t appear to know anything about ecological economics.  Obama needs to listen to Herman Daly, Robert Costanza, Paul Krugman, Robin Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, and others with a long term view and a better understanding of what neoclassical economists call “externalities.”

Perhaps worse, his energy secretary, Steven Chu, is focused on carbon sequestration, nuclear power, and what we might as well call “Drill Baby, Opps.” 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.

Vermont Yankee – Leaks Cesium

The latest news about Vermont Yankee – The leak of Cesium-137 is not a new leak.  From VermontBiz.com (click here) or the Burlington Free Press (here).

“In a statement issued yesterday, Vermont Yankee said that recent news reports have focused less on the tritium resolution and more on the other isotopes found in the soil at the plant. Despite the recent media coverage, Vermont Yankee said the presence of Cesium-137 and other radionuclides found in the soil at the plant is not new news. During the first week of March, the company shared soil sample results with the Vermont Department of Health indicating the existence of cesium in the soil.”

What’s worse than a nuclear power plant that leaks radioactive tritium?  A nuclear power plant that leaks radioactive cesium. The good news  that it’s not a new leak. Vermont Yankee ” has not had a fuel defect that could leak Cesium-137 since 2001.” Exactly how is this reassuring?

It’s “not dangerous” according to the NRC and the people who either lied or didn’t know about the tritium leaks.

In an unscientific web-based poll (here) WPTZ a Vermont television station affiliated with NBC, 5,487 or 53% of the responders said Vermont Yankee should be shut down now (3,387 / 33%) or when it scheduled to shut down in 2012 (2,100 / 20%). The question was “Do you think Vermont Yankee should continue operations beyond its scheduled shut down in 2012?

” The question was answered affirmatively by 4,506, or 44%.

The Vermont Dept. of Health provided a summary, here of tritium contamination, here.

While nuclear power provides a tremendous amount of power from a small amount of material, it is very expensive when done right. And when done wrong we have disasters like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and business as usual like Vermont Yankee, Indian Point, Oyster Creek – the list of accidents is long for each operating nuclear power plant.

The economic externalities of nuclear and coal are very expensive in terms of health effects to people and the environment. As I’ve addressed elsewhere in this blog, solar, wind, and other renewable sources are safe and inexpensive, and the economic externalities are beneficial.

The only good news is that Vermont, in the spirit of Ethan Allen, is pointing the U. S. in the direction we need to go, vis a vis nuclear power.

Sustainability and Carbon Sequestration

Abstract. By burning fossil fuels we have put 3.6 trillion tons of Carbon Dioxide, CO2 in the atmosphere1 in the last 200 years – most in the last 60. This has changed the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from 270 parts per Million, ppm, to 390 ppm, an increase of approximately 31%. This increase of atmospheric CO2 is resulting in changing precipitation and rising temperatures, from the equator to the poles.

The typical modern reductionist approach is to simplify the problem to develop a solution:

“Burning coal, oil, and natural gas puts CO2 into the atmosphere. All we need to do to solve the problem is modify the machines so they burn fossil fuel without releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. How do we do that? We should capture the carbon dioxide, and the arsenic, mercury, other heavy metals, radionucleotides, etc, and store it somewhere.”

But we need to remember that we are burning coal, oil, and natural gas for a reason: to generate heat, hot water, electricity and transportation. There are alternative energy technologies, including nuclear, solar, and wind.

Coal with Carbon Sequestration is estimated to cost $10 to $15 Billion per gigawatt, without considering the costs of mining, processing and transporting the coal, cleaning up after mining, and isolating the arsenicals, mercury, and radionucleotides released from burning coal.  Solar is estimated to cost $6.5 Billion per gigawatt – with no fuel and no wastes. Wind $2 to $3 Billion per gigawatt – with no fuel and no wastes.

We at Popular Logistics think, feel and believe that we need to replace coal with solar and wind immediately.

Continue reading →

NREL: "30% Wind Power by 2024"

Arklow Bank Wind Farm

Arklow Bank Wind Farm, photo Courtesy GE Power

NREL, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a branch of the Department of Energy, released the findings of the “Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study, (Summary) that said:

“wind energy could provide 20 to 30 percent of the eastern half of the country’s energy needs by 2024: here’s how … “

Rush Holt, the Democrat who represents the 12th Congressional District of New Jersey, described the study in an e-mail to his constituents. Holt wrote:

“Achieving this goal would require a substantial investment both onshore and offshore.  The production of wind energy is increasing rapidly. According to the American Wind Energy Association, last year energy production increased by more than 9,000 megawatts, bringing America’s total wind power generating capacity to 35,000 megawatts, enough to power 2.4 million homes. Little of this wind energy, however, is being produced in the Northeast.”

Rush Holt, D, NJ-12

Rush Holt, D, NJ-12

“If we are to take advantage of wind power – particularly offshore wind – then we would need to begin to install turbines in windy places in the East and begin to develop rapidly our capacity to manufacture turbines in the United States. Just miles off New Jersey’s shore, the ocean breeze blows reliably at up to 20 miles an hour, the same rate as in the Great Plains. Last year the Department of the Interior conducted a survey of the resources that could be recovered from the Outer Continental Shelf.  It found that responsibly developing offshore wind could provide 1,000 gigawatts of electricity, enough to power the electricity use of 60 percent of cities on the East Coast and replace 3,000 medium-sized coal powered power plants.  New Jersey has been at the forefront of this effort, as I discussed with the Secretary of the Interior last year in New Jersey. One private venture has committed to build a $1 billion, 345 megawatt wind farm in the ocean off Atlantic City, and two other projects have been approved by the Department of the Interior.  Congress should encourage more investment to ensure we take advantage of this resource and help fuel the transition to a sustainable energy future.”

At Popular Logistics we believe that we can achieve 100% clean energy by 2020. However, we will be happy to see 30% wind power for the eastern half of the country, coupled with 30% wind power for the western half of the country, 30% solar, and the balance from hydro, geothermal, and conservation, by 2024.

Holt, a PhD physicist, was Assistant Director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory before running for Congress. He understands energy. We hope his colleagues in the Congress, and the White House, listen.

Energy and Green Business – Green Inc. Blog – NYTimes.com

Siemens Wind Farm

Siemens Wind Farm, Courtesy Siemens.

Lars Kroldrup reports, on the Green Inc. blog at the Times, that Siemens has announced its intention to expand in the United States market. From Siemens Touts Growth in Renewables and the Value of the American Market:

Since acquiring the Danish wind turbine company Bonus Energy in 2004, the German industrial giant Siemens AG, has become one of the larger players in the wind power game with roughly 7 percent of the market.

Still, with rivals like GE Energy and Vestas controlling roughly 18 percent and 19 percent of the market, respectively, Siemens suggested at a financial presentation in Copenhagen on Monday that it’s looking to climb the rankings — and that it sees the fledgling American wind power market as a way to do that.

“We want to be one of the leading companies on the American market,” Andreas Nauen, the chief executive of Siemens Wind Power, told Green Inc. on Monday. “We are on our way, and would like to play an important role. The U.S. market is, and will be in the future, an important market to us.”

According to Siemens, over the next 20 years, the percentage of global power generation arising from renewable sources will grow from less than 5 percent now to about 17 percent by 2030. About half of that, the company said, will come from wind power.

Just 15 years from now, the company expects the global wind energy market to be worth nearly $300 billion, compared to a little over $40 billion today.

Much of that growth, the company is betting, will be in North America, the company estimated. “We have recieved big orders in both the United States and Canada,” Mr. Nauen said.

Of course, just how much the United States will benefit economically from any wind power expansion by foreign companies entering the market — particularly as it relates to the creation of manufacturing jobs — is a matter of some debate.

Read Mr. Kroldrup’s complete piece here: Siemens Touts Growth in Renewables and the Value of the American Market.

Via Green Inc.

Nuclear Fusion: Cleaner Energy – Tomorrow

The Levitated Dipole Experiment (LDX) reactor is housed inside a 16-foot-diameter steel structure in a building on the MIT campus that also houses MIT’s other fusion reactor, a tokamak called Alcator C-mod.

The Levitated Dipole Experiment (LDX) reactor, Photo courtesy of the LDX team

A team of scientists led by Jay Kesner at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center and Michael Mauel at the Columbia University Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science announced the “first significant results” from the Levitated Dipole Experiment, LDX. (Click here for the MIT news release). Continue reading →

Nuclear Power Development Costs Skyrocket

This is not exactly “news.” Nuclear power plant  construction is synonymous with cost overruns.

(This is a “systems problem.” Anytime you have a 10 to 15 year project in the $Billion range you will find several reinforcing feedback mechanisms that increase the cost and few, if any, balancing feedback mechanisms that keep the costs at a steady state. A brief delay or a minor increase in inflation will cost $Millions.)

Radioactive SymbolCosts of the proposed nuclear plants in San Antonio, TX, have skyrocketed, even tho construction has not yet begun. Originally forecast at $2 Billion per gigawatt (gw) of capacity, roughly the cost of wind power, it is now clear that they will cost between $4.5 Billion and $6.5 Billion per gw of capacity – $12.1 billion to $17.5 billion for the reactors. Continue reading →