Showing posts with label renewable energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label renewable energy. Show all posts

Monday, 30 June 2008

U.S. Government Freezes Solar Energy Projects

Excerpts from Friday's New York Times article...

“The problem is that this is a very young industry, and the majority of us that are involved are young, struggling, hungry companies,” said Lee Wallach of Solel, a solar power company based in California that has filed numerous applications to build on public land and was considering filing more in the next two years. “This is a setback.”

Craig Cox, the executive director of the Interwest Energy Alliance, a renewable energy trade group, said he worried that the freeze would “throw a monkey wrench” into the solar energy industry at precisely the wrong time.

Galvanized by the national demand for clean energy development, solar companies have filed more than 130 proposals with the Bureau of Land Management since 2005. They center on the companies’ desires to lease public land to build solar plants and then sell the energy to utilities.

According to the bureau, the applications, which cover more than one million acres, are for projects that have the potential to power more than 20 million homes.

Read the rest of the New York Times article

Tuesday, 19 February 2008

Movement in Montana?

Pictured: St. Mary Lake in Glacier National Park

I remember being excited by the symbolism of 2004's election of Democrat Brian Schweitzer as Montana's first Democratic Governor since 1988, but haven't thought about him since. Recently I have been listening to Time.com's podcast series where they interview a big name from the Environment scene each week.

The podcast for January 17th was an interview with Mr. Schweitzer, who actually sounds like he has a good understanding of the issues facing us and the potential for growth over the next 20 years, although I read some less exciting things on Wikipedia about mining more coal (which he seems to refute in the Podcast).

"I believe this is the greatest imperative of our generation and maybe larger than that."

“The entire world has recognized this imperative and if American industry and the public sector recognize this and we create a tax code that incentivizes innovation in energy production and consumption we will create the greatest economic engine in the history of this country, selling these technologies all over the world.”
Anyway, the Times.com's article on Montana's growing green movement is worth a read, and there are some interesting news items and videos on the Governor's website as well.

Monday, 11 February 2008

Texan Environmentalism

Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center -- Texas

I found quite a few interesting articles on the NPR.com about Texans moving towards renewable energy projects in a massive way.

While the
Preface to Lester Brown's Plan B 3.0 mentions a massive wind power expansion of 23,000 MW capacity (equal to the output of 23,000 coal plants), what he doesn't mention explicitly is that the driving force behind the Texan interest in wind power has very little to do with averting disastrous global climate change. In fact, according to this article from NPR.com, the state government's Republican leaders don't even believe in global warming -- an opinion shared by many Texans themselves.

What is happening in Texas is the greatest example of the environment benefiting from human greed and our incredible ability to pursue our own self-interests. Texans are building wind power because it makes them money, and that's it! While I think
this article takes a more romantic view on the matter, it does a great job of describing how the West Texas town of Roscoe has gotten behind wind power in hopes of saving their debilitated economy. While the majors of many Texas cities are pushing environmental policies in the face of failing state leadership, I think the road most Americans will travel towards sustainability will originate from their pocketbooks and not their hearts.

For this reason, the story of Roscoe is a hopeful one, because it didn't take a plague of locusts to happen. All it took was one person who noticed renewable energy is worth more than failing cotton crops.

UPDATE: West Texas's 63 MW Snyder Wind Project is now home to the world's tallest wind turbines. Read about it at METAEFFICIENT.


Sunday, 10 February 2008

Plan B 3.0

Preface from Lester Brown's Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing To Save Civilization.

When Elizabeth Kolbert was interviewing energy analyst Amory Lovins for a profile piece in the New Yorker, she asked him about thinking outside the box. Lovins responded, “There is no box.” There is no box. That is the spirit embodied in Plan B.

Perhaps the most revealing difference between Plan B 2.0 and Plan B 3.0 is the change of the subtitle from “Rescuing a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble” to simply “Mobilizing to Save Civilization.” The new subtitle better reflects both the scale of the challenge we face and the wartime speed of the response it calls for.

Our world is changing fast. When Plan B 2.0 went to press two years ago, the data on ice melting were worrying. Now they are scary.

Two years ago, we knew there were a number of failing states. Now we know that number is increasing each year. Failing states are an early sign of a failing civilization.

Two years ago there was early evidence that the potential for expanding oil production was much less than officially projected. Now, we know that peak oil could be on our doorstep. Two years ago oil was $50 a barrel. As of this writing in late 2007, it is over $90 a barrel.

In Plan B 2.0, we speculated that if we continued to build ethanol distilleries to convert grain into fuel for cars, the price of grain would move up toward its oil-equivalent value. Now that the United States has enough distilleries to convert one fifth of its grain crop into fuel for cars, this is exactly what is happening. Corn prices have nearly doubled. Wheat prices have more than doubled.

Two years ago, we reported that in five of the last six years world grain production had fallen short of consumption. Now, it has done so in seven of the past eight years, and world grain stocks are dropping toward all-time lows.

As the backlog of unresolved problems grows, including continuing rapid population growth, spreading water shortages, shrinking forests, eroding soils, and grasslands turning to desert, weaker governments are breaking down under the mounting stress. If we cannot reverse the trends that are driving states to failure, we will not be able to stop the growth in their numbers.

Some of the newly emerging trends—such as the coming decline in world oil production, the new stresses from global warming, and rising food prices—could push even some of the stronger states to the breaking point.

On the economic front, China has now overtaken the United States in consumption of most basic resources. By 2030, when its income per person is projected to match that in the United States today, China will be consuming twice as much paper as the world currently produces. If in 2030 the country’s 1.46 billion people have three cars for every four people, U.S. style, China will have 1.1 billion cars. And it will be consuming 98 million barrels of oil per day, well above current world production.

The western economic model—the fossil-fuel-based, automobile-centered, throwaway economy—is not going to work for China. If it doesn’t work for China, it won’t work for India or the other 3 billion people in developing countries who are also dreaming the American dream. And in an increasingly integrated world economy, where we all depend on the same grain, oil, and steel, it will not work for industrial countries either.

The challenge for our generation is to build a new economy, one that is powered largely by renewable sources of energy, that has a highly diversified transport system, and that reuses and recycles everything. And to do it with unprecedented speed.

Continuing with business as usual (Plan A), which is destroying the economy’s eco-supports and setting the stage for dangerous climate change, is no longer a viable option. It is time for Plan B.

There are four overriding goals in Plan B 3.0: stabilizing climate, stabilizing population, eradicating poverty, and restoring the earth’s ecosystems. At the heart of the climate-stabilizing initiative is a detailed plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent by 2020 in order to hold the global temperature rise to a minimum. The climate initiative has three components: raising energy efficiency, developing renewable sources of energy, and expanding the earth’s forest cover both by banning deforestation and by planting billions of trees to sequester carbon.

We are in a race between tipping points in nature and our political systems. Can we phase out coal-fired power plants before the melting of the Greenland ice sheet becomes irreversible? Can we gather the political will to halt deforestation in the Amazon before its growing vulnerability to fire takes it to the point of no return? Can we help countries stabilize population before they become failing states?

The United States appears to be approaching a political tipping point as opposition builds to the construction of new coalfired power plants. A fast-spreading nationwide campaign has led several states, including California, Texas, Florida, Kansas, and Minnesota, to refuse construction permits or otherwise restrict construction.

With this movement gaining momentum, it may be only a matter of time before it expands to embrace the phasing out of existing coal-fired power plants. The question is, Will this happen soon enough to avoid dangerous climate change?

In Plan B 2.0, we talked about the enormous potential of renewable sources of energy, especially wind power. Since then we’ve seen proposed projects to generate electricity from such resources on a scale never seen with fossil fuel power plants. For example, the state of Texas is coordinating a vast expansion of wind farms that will yield up to 23,000 megawatts of new electrical generating capacity, an amount equal to 23 coal-fired power plants.

Two years ago, the notion of plug-in gas-electric hybrid cars was little more than a concept. Today five leading automobile manufacturers are moving to market with plug-in hybrids, with the first ones expected in 2010.

We have the technologies to restructure the world energy economy and stabilize climate. The challenge now is to build the political will to do so. Saving civilization is not a spectator sport. Each of us has a leading role to play.

When we published the original Plan B four years ago, we noticed that some 600 individuals ordered a copy of the book and then came back and ordered 5, 10, 20 or 50 copies for distribution to friends, colleagues, and political and opinion leaders. With Plan B 2.0, this number jumped to more than 1,500 individuals and organizations that were bulk buying and distributing the book.

We call these distributors our Plan B Team. Ted Turner, who distributed some 3,600 copies to heads of state, cabinet members, Fortune 500 CEOs, the U.S. Congress, and the world’s 672 other billionaires, was designated Plan B team captain.

This book can be downloaded without charge from our Web site. Permission for reprinting or excerpting portions of the manuscript can be obtained from Reah Janise Kauffman at Earth Policy Institute.

And finally, there is not anything sacred about Plan B. It is our best effort to lay out an alternative to business as usual, one that we hope will help save our civilization. If anyone can come up with a better plan, we will welcome it. The world needs the best plan possible.

Lester R. Brown
October 2007

Thursday, 7 February 2008

Precinct Caucus and the Environment

So that no one has an excuse not to get involved, I've looked up some information about Saturday's Democratic Precinct Caucus...

For one, if you have no idea what a "Precinct Caucus" is (I didn't), you should start out at the Washington State Democrat Party's
FAQ.

For two, you can look up where you should go to vote
here.

And if you're really excited about change and being a part of it, you can sign up to volunteer by going to
this page and filling out the form. For example, maybe after the 2004 Election, you felt particularly motivated to get involved. Well this is your chance!

So you know what a Precinct Caucus is, and you know where to go on Saturday, but whom do you vote for? Well there are lots of issues, but for me the question of where we get our energy after we run out of oil, and how we combat climate change are the most important issues. If you're like most Americans, you evidently care mostly about the economy. Well here's
a great argument for why voting for a President should not be about the economy (hint: they don't have any control over it).

Obama has this outline page entitled "
Energy & Environment." I think this is a great way to organize policy, but I haven't read much yet. Hilary has organized her outline page under the title "Energy Independence & Global Warming" which I have to say is a less inspired viewpoint. I think tying our interests in averting global warming to our fear/hatred of Islamic extremists is a particularly Republican way to frame things. In the end, she may be right. Global Warming has been in newspapers regularly for 10 years with very little public interest, so it might take fear to bring this issue to the fore. That said, I think there are a few arguments against this practice.

For one, I think Americans are at a fatigue point with the whole Iraq War, so linking this "new issue" with one that they have been beaten over the head with for 5 years might not get them all that excited or motivated about your issue. For two, I think it's best to focus on one message and one motive for changing our energy infrastructure, and both Clinton and Obama have already figured out a way to connect the all-important economy issue to the challenge of mitigating climate change -- they just need to stick to it!

The message is this: We need to become a renewable energy-based society because this is energy produced in America by Americans. New research, building new power plants, creating new energy infrastructure, modifying homes for efficiency and sustainability, and microgeneration (producing your own power) are all areas that will require new jobs that cannot be outsourced. And that's just the start. If we phase out oil and coal use, all automobiles will need to be replaced or upgraded, mass transit systems will need to be built, and electronics will need to be re-engineered to reduce plastics (and heavy metals). It's a lot of hard work, but it's all highly paid hard work, and this is what drives economies. Al Gore knows this and is working with massive venture capital firm
KPCB to support companies working towards green solutions.

China has also come to this realization and are beginning to build some creative solutions including
an entire city built from the ground up to be completely self-sustaining. The issue can be shaped as friendly competition with the Chinese for who can do the best by being the greenest. It's selfish capitalism turned on its head, but it needs to be pushed by the government.


Free trade and capitalism alone have a very bad track record of bringing about societal change. If it weren't for the government, automakers wouldn't have put seatbelts in cars, and if Congress hadn’t mandated CAFE standards in 1975, the fuel economy of most cars would still be at Ford Model T levels (some say they still are!). This might explain why fuel economy has increased only marginally over the last 25 years -- the time period in which computers, the internet, cellular/mobile phones were all invented and popularized to the point that children in Sub-Saharan Africa are now provided with laptops connected to wireless internet through mobile networks.