Tag Archives: Wind Power

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 →

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.



HOW WE WILL READ IN 100 YEARS

Google asked “How will we read in 100 years?”

Here’s what I think.

If we reinvent our economy to run on solar, geothermal, and kinetic energy, we will get our news and technical information electronically. We will still read classics on paper and mount on our walls images of loved ones and special places. If we don’t those left will struggle for survival.

There’s Something About Mary – And Keynes

 

There's Something About Mary

Back in 1931, John Maynard Keynes wrote:

“Assuming no important wars, and no important increase in population, the economic problem may be solved, or at least within sight of a solution, within a hundred years. This means that the economic problem is not – if we look into the future – the permanent problem of the human race.”  – John Maynard Keynes,  “Economic possibilities for our grand-children.’ In Essays in Persuasion, 1931.

Keynes wrote that wealth would grow because of compounded interest, and we would live off of the interest. This would fuel technical inventions and dramatically increase the standard of living for a stable, peace-loving world. He thought boredom would become the permanent problem of the human race.

We would become a world populated by dilettantes flitting from party to party; a world of people like Prince Charles and Paris Hilton, although most, presumably, would not be famous and very few could become king. While some would work a few hours per week, most would have a life of leisure. People would live like the physician played by Cameron Diaz in the 1998 film “There’s Something About Mary.” They would work more on “lifestyle” issues like their golf swing than their profession.

Four factors, Keynes wrote, would effect this transition:

  1. Power to control population,
  2. Determination to avoid wars and civil dissentions,
  3. Entrust to science that which is the domain of science,
  4. Compound interest.

Continue reading →

Coal Plant With Carbon Sequestration

Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet  SCS Energy, of Concord, Mass., wants to build a new coal plant in Linden, NJ.

18cleanmap According to Kate Galbraith, reporting in the NY Times, “A Plan for U. S. Emissions to Be Buried Under Sea“, 90% of the carbon dioxide will be captured, compressed, pumped thru a 24 inch diameter pipe, approximately 70 miles south-east, past Staten Island, New York, and Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties in New Jersey, to a point 25 or 30 miles east of Atlantic City, New Jersey,and injected by a well drilled a mile beneath the sandstone floor of the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic is about a half mile deep at that point.

Gailbraith reports that the plant could cost $5 billion if completed on time and on budget. And it will need $100 million a year in Federal Government subsidies, which amounts to another $4 billion over the plant’s 40 year operating life span.

The carbon sequestration is projected to use 25%  to 40% of the energy released from burning coal, so the 750 megawatt plant will be a 450 to 562.5 mw plant.  That’s $16 Billion to $20 Billion per gigawatt or $16 to $20 per watt, depending on the overhead costs, of sequestering the carbon.

Solar is roughly $6.50 per watt with no subsidies, no fuel costs, very low maintenance, and no loss in transmission. Offshore Wind is $3.00 per watt, with no fuel costs.

Continue reading →

Wind Energy Generating Capacity – Doubling Every 4 Years

According to WorldWatch, Vital Signs, 2007-2008, in 2006 we had 74.2 GW of installed wind capacity and 8.6 GW of installed solar worldwide, and 370 GW of installed nuclear capacity. If we double the capacity of Wind and Solar twice we’ll be at 331.2 GW. Double it again, we’re at 662.4 GW. By the 4th doubling, we’re at 1.325 terawatts.

Offshore Wind

According to the Global Wind Energy Council, installed wind power is doubling every 3 or 4 years – from 74 GW in at the end of 2006, to 120 GW in 12/08 to 322 in Dec. 2013. The rate will slow slightly – wind capacity will increase “a modest” 22% per year, which is modest compared to the increase of 28% per year over the last 10 years. Installed wind powered electric generating capacity will double in less than 4 years (see: Global wind energy markets will continue to boom, March 11, 2009), and quadruple within 7 years.

Republican Alternative Energy: Coal, Oil, & Nuclear Power

“The Republican Road to Recovery”  according to John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mike Pence, Thaddeus McCotter, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, John R. Carter, Pete Sessions, Kevin McCarthy, David Dreier, Roy Blunt, who signed it, “Keeps Energy and Fuel Costs Low.” It mentions wind and solar, but focuses on coal, oil, oil shale, offshore drilling, and nuclear power.

The document says “Republicans want energy independence with increased development of all natural resources, including renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar.” It doesn’t mention “global warming.” It mentions the term “greenhouse gases” once, stating, incorrectly, that nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases. Mining, processing, and transporting nuclear fuel, and managing radioactive wastes, produces tremendous amounts of greenhouse gases.

It points out that “Senators Ted Kennedy and John Kerry … have long fought a renewable wind project in waters off of Massachusetts…. Cape Wind, would provide 75 percent of the electricity demand for Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket island. “

The document focuses on coal, oil, and nuclear power. These are not clean, renewable, sustainable energy sources.  Ultimately, therefore, it attempts to “greenwash” coal, oil, and nuclear power.

the Administration has already taken steps to hinder the leasing of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) which is estimated to hold at least 19 billion barrels of oil, and Democrats have long championed the prohibition on drilling in the Arctic Coastal Plain – which is estimated to hold 10.4 billion barrels of oil. Furthormore, Democrats continue to block the procurement of advanced alternative fuels from sources such as oil shale, tar sands, and coal-to-liquid technology. U.S. Oil shale alone could provide about 2.5 million barrels of oil per day.

Republicans also support opening the Arctic Coastal Plain to energy exploration and development.

And despite expert agreement that nuclear power is reliable, clean, and affordable without producing air pollution or greenhouse gases, Democrats continue to block its development.

Republicans realize that there are better solutions to restore freedom and security in our energy market.  Republicans recognize the importance of exploring for American oil and gas in an envionronmentally-sound manner and support immediately leasing oil and gas resources in the OCS through an an expedited and streamlined procedure.

Republicans support removing government barriers to new nuclear reactors as long as they meet strict security and safety criteria.

Americans realize that the future of energy is in alternative and renewable sources. In order to promote the development of renewable and alternative energy, Republicans support promoting the leasing of federal lands which contain alternative energy such as oil shale. … spurring a market by using fuels derived from oil shale, tar sands, and coal.

Nuclear Fusion in 10 or 20 Years

Thomas Friedman is right in “The Next Really Cool Thing” in The New York Times, March 15, 2009, when he concludes:

At the pace we’re going with the technologies we have, without some game-changers, climate change is going to have its way with us. Yes, we’ll still need coal for some time. But let’s make sure that we aren’t just chasing the fantasy that we can “clean up” coal, when our real future depends on birthing new technologies that can replace it.

Note that he pointed out ‘the fantasy that we can “clean up” coal.

Friedman also said:

“I don’t know if they can pull this off; some scientists are skeptical. Laboratory-scale nuclear fusion and energy gain is really hard…. we need to keep working on all forms of solar, geothermal and wind power. They work. And the more they get deployed, the more their costs will go down.”

Fusion may be the game changer. “Energy Gain” means we get more energy out than we put in. The prototype will cost $10 Billion – enough for 5 GW of wind capacity, and 1.53 GW of PV Solar. And fusion is at least 10 years away, maybe 20, maybe 50. We know how to build wind and solar. (On the other hand it takes 10 years to build a nuclear fission reactor.)

But pushing carbon below 350 ppm is a problem that can’t wait 10 years.  According to the World Watch Institute’s Vital Signs, 2007-2008, the 6.5 billion humans on the earth are using the natural resources of 1.25 earths.  This can’t go on.

Wind Power Is Low Cost Electricity

f

Gianluca Baratti, writing for Bloomberg Press notes “Because their fuel is free, wind turbines undercut traditional generators that burn coal, natural gas and oil.” I would point out that wind turbines Use No Fuel – there is no resource that is consumed when a turbine, spinning in the wind, generates power.

Feb. 6 (Bloomberg) — Spanish windmills owned by Iberdrola SA and Endesa SA may generate a record amount of electricity next week, slashing local power prices to three-year lows.

Spanish Windscape

Spanish Windscape, copyright (c) Bloomberg, 2009

An Atlantic Ocean storm is forecast to blow winds averaging 17.4 miles an hour across the peninsula. Lighter winds, at 13.6 miles an hour, were enough to set the previous record output three weeks earlier. The extra supply then cut power prices 11 percent.

“This will push the spot market lower next week,” Manuel Palomo, a Citigroup Global Markets analyst in Madrid, said about the storm. Palomo covers Spanish generators Iberdrola, Endesa and Acciona SA, which operate most of the country’s wind farms.

Spain and Germany, the world’s biggest wind-energy markets after the U.S., have changed the dynamics for wholesale power trading by forcing sellers to read weather reports. Because their fuel is free, wind turbines undercut traditional generators that burn coal, natural gas and oil.

Baratti can be reached via email to gbaratti “at” bloomberg.net.

The Bahamas, New Jersey, Recycling, & Clean Energy

People say “all politics is local.” People in The Bahamas, New Jersey, Europe and California have more or less the same solution – re-usable shopping bags – to the same problem – plastic bags in landfills. Personally, I favor charging for plastic bags, which rewards people for doing the right thing and penalizes them for doing the wrong thing. It seems fair, given that we are paying, in our taxes, for burying the plastic bags. I would also like to see more cellulose based plastics.

Another common problem is converting our electric grid to run on electricity generated from clean, sustainable systems. Based on our brief conversation, it seems that the U. S. has four advantages over the Bahamas: Net Metering, Economic Incentives, Rulings in the Supreme Court, and possibly, our President-Elect, Barack Obama.

Continue reading →

Statement at Marlboro Green Awareness

In Monmouth County, NJ, the Marlboro Republican Club, and the Manalapan Republican Club, are hosting  a Green Awareness Event, “An Event to Educate and Benefit our Environment” Tuesday, December 9, 2008 @ 7:00 PM, Marlboro Recreation Building – 1996 Recreation Way, Marlboro Township.  This is the statement I planned on making. I did not get a chance to speak.

However, I did get a chance to Listen.

  • Freeholder Barbara McMorrow, Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders, who told us what the Freeholders will be doing for Monmouth County.
  • Mayor Fred R. Profeta, Jr, Deputy Mayor for Environment, Maplewood, NJ, who told us what people are doing in Maplewood.
  • Madea Villere, NJ Sustainable State Institute, Rutgers University, who offered a clear, succinct definition of “Sustainability” – meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future – and told us what we can do in our communities.

I’d like to thank the Manalapan Republicans and the Marlboro Republicans for holding this event.

I’d am available to talk about Nuclear Power and Coal and then Solar and Wind.

Continue reading →

Alternative fuels safer, and the law

In April of 2007, the Supreme Court ruled the federal Environmental Protection Agency must regulate carbon emissions unless it presents scientific proof that greenhouse gases do not contribute to global climate change. On Nov. 13, the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board ruled it would do so. We need alternatives to fossil fuels and nuclear power, if for no other reason than to obey the law.

Traditional hydroelectric plants harness the energy in waterfalls. New designs harness the energy in tides, waves and ocean currents. Wind farms harness wind energy. Solar energy systems harness sunlight. Geothermal systems use heat from within the earth.

The sun will shine and the wind will blow regardless of the presence of solar panels and wind turbines. By harnessing a process rather than consuming a resource, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and other clean, renewable, sustainable technologies generate power without fuels, and without greenhouse gases, mercury, radioactive wastes, other pollutants and without the cost of fuel.

Saving the shore from global warming will help the economy. And it’s the law.

This was published as a letter to the editor in the Asbury Park Press, Friday, 12/5/2008.

ENERGY POLICY & PUBLIC HEALTH

There really is no such thing as “Clean Coal.” Mining coal destroys mountains, and often kills the miners.  Burning coal releases tons of carbon into the atmosphere and the oceans, and even if you could sequester the carbon, burning coal releases other pollutants, including mercury into the biosphere. The mercury makes its way into fish. This is why people, especially children and pregnant women, should not eat a lot of tuna or swordfish.  Wind, solar, geothermal, ocean current, and “negawatts,” on the other hand, really are clean energy.  Offshore wind turbines don’t release pollution. On the contrary, they create artificial reefs, which enhance fish habitat. This is also good for fishermen, the economy, etc.

Artist creates solar/wind powered "emergency respond

(Via Inhabitat) Which may, in fact, exceed FEMA’s exertions – despite the fact that, as Paul Villinski, a New York-based artist has demonstrated, it’s entirely possible to construct livable/usable emergency structures which rely on solar and wind power. From Bridget Steffen at Inhabitat, Solar Powered Mobile Emergency Response Studio:

Better yet, make sure you read the whole piece and see the images – the one above the jump, taken alone, doesn’t do it justice.NB: as of this writing – October 30th – Villinski’s bandwidth limit had been exceeded. Waiting and checking back later will, we think, be worth it.

Villinski – main site.

Emergency Response Studio.

Other coverage.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]