Great Balls of Geothermal Fire!

Everyone knows that volcanoes have plenty of heat to spare, and normally we prefer that they keep it to themselves. Now, with energy prices rising, some communities are starting to reconsider their rumbling neighbors.

Geothermal energy relies on heat and water beneath the earth’s crust. Together they can create steam to turn a turbine. The trick is access: most of the earth’s heat is located miles beneath the crust. Even active volcanoes can hide their volitile energy under very hard igneous rock. Young volcanoes can have shallow magma reservoirs and sometimes they still have softer earthen crust. Just add water into this situation and you have potent potential for geothermal energy.

Volanoes are not the best geologic features for geothermal energy. Hot springs, like those found in Iceland or Yellowstone National Park, are the easiest to harness because the water is already on the surface. At Yellowstone the water is often already boiling at the surface, and higher temperatures beneath the crust drive some of the world’s most famous geysers.

One of the best places in the world to develop geothermal energy is Newberry Crater in Oregon. The site is emblematic of the issues facing many geothermal projects. Development has been stalled or abandoned over the years due to economic and environmental issues. Newberry Crater’s geology also makes it a remote, beautiful place. Developers must compete with recreational and ecological needs while trying to reach the nearest transmission lines. The economics of developing there have been tempting for years, but with today’s energy prices now the site is downright tantalizing. Davenport Power has already begun the first phases of planning and test drilling, but could face powerful opposition.

Some scientists claim that the United States has enough geothermal resources to provide 20% or more of the nation’s energy needs. More than a dozen states are known to own lucrative geothermal resources, and most of those states have already begun to develop them. The first geothermal power plant was built in Italy in 1904, and many European States are turning to untapped resources beneath their feet.

In August, Alaska will sell prospecting rights to Mount Spurr, one of several volcanoes located near Anchorage. It is estimated that Mount Spurr could generate “tens of hundreds of megawatts of energy”. Alaska may also sell similar prospecting rights to Mount Augustine, an explosive volcano located on its own uninhabited island. Authorities admit that Augustine poses “special safety challenges“. Both erupt relatively frequently.

An existing geothermal facility near Santa Rosa, California has been generating enough energy to power San Francisco for years. As one of the largest geothermal developments in the world, it illustrates the potential scale of geothermal. Like Iceland, some cities or nations could harvest a significant portion of their electricity from the ground.

No one has managed to “tap the (volcanoes of the) Rockies” just yet. Special safety challenges will require special safety innovations. Nevertheless, the potential return could be as enourmous as the forces of nature at work: clean, green, unlimited energy for the rest of this geologic era. Unlike solar and wind, geothermal generates a steady supply of energy 24 hours a day, everyday. Anything so abundant and predictable won’t go untapped for long.

Related Reading:

Geothermal is smart

What about Ground Source Heat Pumps?

Enhanced Geothermal Systems

Some Politicians like Gothermal

Image of a Japanese Volcano via w00kie on the Flickr Creative Commons. Images of Yellowstone Nationap Park are my own.

“Inslee’s legislation would require utilities — at the request of any new renewable energy facility owner — to enter into a 20-year fixed-rate power purchase agreement. Uniform national “renewable energy payment” rates would be set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at levels that would provide a 10% internal rate of return on investment for available commercialized technologies in regions constituting the top 30^th percentile of renewable energy resource potential in the U.S..”

In plain English, this means that if you install solar PV panels on your home, the utility has to buy the electricity you generate at a higher rate than retail, guaranteeing you a return on your investment. Extending this power purchase agreement for 20 years gives everyone — especially those who want to invest in renewables or start a small business installing solar panels — assurance of return on their investment.

In Germany this has motivated citizens and businesses to put up solar panels wherever they can, allowing Germany to get 14.2 percent of its energy from renewable sources. Though Inslee’s legislation has little hope of getting through this Congress (they are still stalling on renewing the existing solar energy tax credits), FITs will surely be in the news more as the election season heats up.

Related Posts:

40,000 Solar Jobs in a Cloudy Country

Atlantic City Convention Center Plans Largest Solar Roof in U.S.

Image Credit: Carol Gulyas

That would have been a great item to have in my storm kit a couple of weeks ago when we lost power for more than 24 hours because of a line of thunderstorms that knocked out power for us and a few hundred thousand fellow residents of the Washington DC metro area. I am looking forward to trying it out for my next backpacking trip; the cell weighs less than the half dozen AA batteries that I normally carry for a 4 day trek.

For those of you who wonder how to keep your iPhone or iTouch operating when not close to a wall plug, the company recommends using the 2 watt power management cable. Wait a minute - 2 watts - that sounds like it might work for a device like the Cherry Pal that Michelle Bennett wrote about yesterday. Wonder how long it would work in that kind of service? Hmmm.

Disclosure: I have been following Medis for several years and own stock in the company. A long time ago, I worked as the General Manager in a small factory making simple plastic products. The virtual Medis factory tour in their facility in Galway, Ireland fascinates me.

Photo credit - Medis Technologies

Related Posts
Fuel Cells You Can Carry on a Plane
Cheap Green Computer Runs on 2 Watts

Medis 24/7 fuel cell powered flashlight and charger kit on Ecofriend.org

The new thing, the reason that talk about CNG is growing, is that natural gas now costs about half as much per unit energy as gasoline and has an even greater cost advantage over diesel fuel.

With new software and lean-burning regimes available, CNG powered engines have improved their fuel economy to the point where they have reached essential parity with engines powered by the sister fossil fuels of gasoline and diesel. To compare fuel cost per mile, it is not a bad approximation to compare fuel costs per BTU, (or MMBTU, or therm).

I know, there are enough different units out there to cause some confusion, but if you want to do battle with the energy suppliers, you have to learn their language. Two thumb rules worth knowing - multiply the cost of natural gas in $/MMBTU by 6 and you will find out how much an oil equivalent barrel of natural gas costs. Multiply the cost of a gallon of diesel fuel by 7 and you will find out its cost in $/MMBTU.

One of my most frequently visited web sites is Bloomberg.com: Energy Prices where you can find the market prices for a number of different fuels. There you can find daily market prices (without taxes and retail mark ups) for natural gas, gasoline and distillate fuels (heating oil and diesel fuel are essentially the same composition.) Example: today, natural gas delivered to New York City gate (a trading hub) costs $13.92, the equivalent of $83.50 per barrel when converted to oil equivalent units. Diesel fuel costs $3.92 per gallon, the equivalent of $27.50 per MMBTU. Arm yourself with this information and you can see why people in decision making positions are looking hard at CNG again.

CNG vehicles have been around for a while, have good track records for safety and cleanliness, and have a growing pool of satisfied customers. The federal government also provides some generous subsidies for both individuals and fleet purchasers. Under the Energy Policy Act of 1992, natural gas qualifies as an alternative fuel, which gives it a certain tax status by providing EPAct credits.

Throw in those incentives, a shift in the market price to significantly favor natural gas and some long term marketing efforts by coalitions that include Sierra Club, NRDC, ExxonMobil, CleanAir.org, PowerCompare.org, Natural Gas Vehicle Association and Chesapeake Energy and you may soon see a lot more of those CNG vehicles on the road.

Of course, those who know me at all know that I have difficulty producing an energy related article without bringing up nuclear power, so here is the expected plug. In recent memory, natural gas has actually been far less expensive than it is today. In 2003, for example, an MIT study about energy futures assumed that the high price case would be $4.00 per MMBTU with about a 5% annual increase.

Using that prediction, gas should cost just $5.10 per MMBTU, not $13.92. The difference is that gas is now the “go to” electricity fuel. A little more than 20% of the electricity in the US is produced by burning natural gas - the quantity of gas consumed in power plants has increased by 30% since 2000.

When we begin building and operating new nuclear power plants, which run on abundant fuel that costs just $0.50 per MMBTU (including the waste storage fee), we will free up a lot of gas and drive down its market price. That will make room for a lot of domestically powered CNG vehicles and reduce the amount of oil that we need to import. (The reason I “shouted” the word OR in the title is that every BTU of gas can only be burned once. Every bit that burns in power plants cannot be burned in vehicle engines.)

That kind of talk makes it hard for aggressive nukes like me to build coalitions with other energy suppliers who are thoroughly enjoying their current market power, but how does it sound to you?

Photo credit - DC Metro CNG bus by Rod Adams under Creative Commons. (Taken in going home traffic on June 25, 2008)

Related posts

GM Backs Hydrogen Refueling Station Near LA
Natural Gas Cars: CNG Fuel Almost Free in Some Parts of the Country
The Cleanest Cars on Earth: Honda Civic GX and Other Natural Gas Vehicles (NGVs)

This past weekend I had the pleasure of spending nearly all of my waking hours at his campaign headquarters, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Merrill Center. It is one of only about 50 Leed Platinum Certified buildings in the world. Unlike certain former presidential candidates who talk green and act a bit differently, Captain Smith apparently practices as well as he preaches.

The Merrill Center’s entrance road is lined with “Vote John Smith for President” signs, there are banners hanging in the soaring lobby, and one of the campaign volunteers offered me brochures, buttons, and a tee shirt. I am wearing the tee shirt as I write, but it is really early in the morning so I am sure I do not want to share that visual with the world.

Of course, the campaign is all in good fun, but the message is important and the Bay Foundation takes its mission of education and environmental leadership very seriously. While at the Merrill Center, I had the good fortune of getting a tour of the building by Kim Coble, the Maryland Executive Director and a 15 year employee at the Foundation. It was fascinating to hear about all of the careful planning that enabled the building, which provides office space for about 90 workers, to use about 10% of the water and 30% of the electricity of the average building of its size.

The building occupies the footprint of the Bay Ridge Hotel, a place that had been a destination resort known as “Queen Resort of the Chesapeake” in the era before the automobile, but which had burned down in 1915. The local residents in Bay Ridge helped the Foundation acquire the property, partly as a way to avoid a more intensive development.

There are many green features in the building including rainwater collection systems, geothermal wells, solar photovoltaic panels, open air flows with high vent windows, lights with motion sensors, and a Clivus composting toilet system. (The Clivus system nearly always generates the most discussion during building tours.)

Aside: At least 10-15% of the 96 solar panels, installed in 2000, were no longer functioning. When viewed from below, you could see the open circuits and discontinuities that would prevent any electricity from flowing. Several of the Foundation employees confided that the panels are not very functional and provide only a small portion of the facility’s electricity. They are looking for improved ways to generate power.End Aside

More than half of the building materials originated less than 300 miles from the center’s Annapolis, Maryland location, many were made from recycled products, and the wood materials were either pressed from chips or harvested in a sustainable manner from sources like cork or bamboo. Kim was obviously very proud of the building and the example that it sets for others who are interested in living and working in a manner that is in harmony with the environment.

From my point of view, it is not hard to understand the passion that people like Kim bring to their work. As she said during the tour, one of the ways that the Foundation gets people to care about the Bay and its restoration is to get them out on the water and get them wet and dirty. She said that people who have been there love the Bay and are more likely to work to make it cleaner.

I can testify that is true. On the day before my tour, I had spent most of the day as a manual laborer on the Merrill Center beach, helping to set up and assist guests for a Chesapeake Bay Foundation fund raiser, the third annual “Bands in the Sand”. It was one of my many opportunities to get wet, get sweaty, get a bit sunburned and to realize just how important it is to work to balance the needs and desires of humans to live and play near the water with the need to minimize their impact.

Disclosure: I have been a Bay Foundation contributor for a number of years and my wife works for the Foundation.

Photo Credit: Captain John Smith near the Capitol Building - Nikki Davis courtesy of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation
“Bands in the Sand 2008″ Rod Adams under Creative Commons

Related posts

Atlantic City Convention Center Plans Largest Solar Roof in U.S.
Seven Ways to Save Energy by Saving Water
Germany Creates Boom in Geothermal Electricity

As vocal advocate for nuclear fission power I recognize that it has many associated questions, but I after 30 years of study, I have determined to my own satisfaction that most of the important questions have reasonably good answers. In contrast, I have not yet found reasonable answers for many of my questions related to other renewable energy sources. (Yes, I - perhaps controversially - classify fission as renewable, but that is a discussion for a different post.)

Solar photovoltaic (PV) cells are a popular and often discussed (see, for example Atlantic City Convention Center Plans Largest Solar Roof in U.S., 10% of U.S. Electricity From Solar by 2025, SF Passes Largest City Solar Program in U.S. (Finally), all of which were published within the past week) form of “renewable” or “green” energy, but a casual scratching of the surface knowledge that many people have about the technology reveals some troubling details.

Not only are the panels expensive sources of electricity, but they do not last as long as advertised, they do not provide as much energy as the nameplate capacity implies, they consume significant quantities of energy in their production, installation and transportation, and they often use some very nasty materials in their manufacturing process.

The longevity of a solar panel will vary greatly depending on where it is installed, but any customer should remember that they are buying a product that will inherently need to spend as much time as possible fully exposed to the sun and weather. Though there are no visibly moving parts in a solar PV panel, there are many parts of the system where continuous chemical and physical reactions take place that can eventually lead to system degradation and failure.

Take a good look at panels that have been installed for several years and you will notice discontinuities and shiny areas where the components have been damaged and where the power production is reduced. If you have any panels, might want keep a record of the current production so that you can see this effect - or perhaps you will not want to find out just how fast that long term investment is decaying.

The literature accompanying most solar panels provide customers with numbers related to their peak capacity - what I call “noon on a clear day at the Equator”. That quantity of power is only available when the sun is directly overhead, when the panel is perfectly clean and when there are no clouds shading the cells. The cleaning part is important, any panel owner that wants maximum performance needs to set up a routine for cleaning and clearing the panels of any debris.

Leaves and snow are particular nuisances for rooftop solar panels, but sand and bird droppings can be important in some areas as well. Not that the article was specifically discussing PV panels, but I recently read about the 4,000 gallon water tanker trucks that are part of the maintenance equipment at some desert solar power plants.

Some of the most energy efficient solar panels, in terms of both the energy required to produce the panel and the panel operating efficiency are made of a semiconductor material called CdTe (Cadmium Telluride). Companies that make CdTe cells like to brag about the quality of their products, but they have also recently had to warn their investors that they may not be able to sell their panels in the EU for much longer because of rules about using toxic heavy metals in electronics. What they have not made clear yet is what their long term liability is for the panels that they have already sold. What will happen in 5, 10 or 20 years when the panel output is no longer useful and the materials need disposal? Can they be recycled without releasing the heavy metals? Will their customers be able to return the panels to the original producer? Will they make the effort or simply take the systems to the dump like many consumers do with batteries made of similar materials? (Those are the kinds of questions that my former division officer was talking about.)

There are definitely answers to some of the questions that I have about solar PV, but that does not mean that the issues are fully solved. If you are in the market for solar PV systems, please ask the hard questions and realize that anyone who wants you to buy the systems without good answers is just a salesman who is not much different from any other salesman.

Photo credit - The Sun Works (photos to be shared)

First, keep in mind that the best way to find out about any job, including green ones, is through networking. Most job seekers find new opportunities through people they know - many positions never even make it to the job boards. So get out there and meet people! Keep in mind that the key to good networking isn’t finding people who can help you, it’s finding people that you can help. By providing the information and making the introductions they need, you’ll form relationships with people who want to help you in return.

I’ve found green networking events to be great for this. My favorite one here in LA is Green Business Networking, which I wrote about a while ago. I’ve met many a client there, and have made some friends, too. It’s pretty casual, but business focused - make sure to bring plenty of cards. It’s fine to let people know what sort of job you’re looking for (how else can they help you?) but avoid the mistake made by one attendee, who moved from person to person asking if anyone worked in solar, then moving on quickly if not. Manners, people!

Nationally, Green Drinks is the go-to networking event for green. it guarantees a casual way to meet others interested in environmental issues; thus, the crowd tends to be a mix of all sorts of greenies. With a meeting every Thursday in different locales around town, there’s sure to be one near you.

Another organization appears to be growing around the country: Eco Tuesday. With a bit more structure, the event includes a new guest speaker each month, followed by brief introductions from the entire group, and then open networking. Other organizations, like the Sustainable Business Council of LA, host events on a regular basis, which usually include plenty of time for networking.

Of course, scouring job boards also provides an opportunity to apply directly to open positions. There are many out there, but I tend to keep an eye on these:

• Grist
• Sustainable Industries
• Care2
• Environmental Career Center
• Business for Social Responsibility
• Net Impact
• Green Biz
• Green Dream Jobs
• Idealist
• And, of course, Green Options Media’s Green Options Jobs

If you have other sources, I’d love to hear about them. Happy hunting!

Image credit: Andy Welsh at Flickr under a Creative Commons license.

Solar energy currently generates .1% of the electricity used in the U.S. According to a study released today, this will change rapidly as the cost of electricity increases and the cost of solar energy drops.

The Utility Solar Assessment Study produced by Clean Edge and Co-op America finds that solar energy is already reaching cost parity with conventional sources in some areas of the U.S. where electric rates are highest. By 2015, this will be achieved in many more areas, including Boston, San Diego, and New York. By 2025, cost parity will be achieved throughout the U.S.

The implications of this are huge. The U.S. solar photovoltaic market now relies heavily on state incentives to lower the cost of solar energy. Many people utilize solar energy because it is “the right thing to do” or businesses like the positive publicity solar brings.

Unique Advantages of Solar Electricity

Solar energy does not have fuel costs, like power generated from coal, natural gas, oil, or nuclear energy. The maintenance costs of solar are relatively low , it can generate electricity at the point of use, and emits no carbon. Solar is ideally suited to produce peak electricity, when demand is highest on the power grid and utility companies pay the highest rates. This is also where there is the greatest growth in electricity demand.

“The daily and seasonal variation in grid load in the United States matches solar availability,” said John O’Donnell, executive vice president of Ausra. Solar effectively generates electricity when the rates and demand are the highest.

Action is Needed to Advance Widespread Use of Solar Energy

Solar Companies

Large-scale use of solar energy depends on prices dropping to $3 per peak watt of electricity by 2018, according to the study. This involves quickly implementing advanced technologies in a cost-effective manner. Solar technology needs to be easier to install, thus reducing installation costs and other installations barriers.

Utility Companies

Utilities have become more and more interested in solar energy. California is a great example, where many utilities have signed purchase agreements for solar plant output. The U.S. will also need trained workers, which is another opportunity for utilities to take the lead.

A large investment in solar energy is needed for 10% of U.S. electricity to be generated by solar energy by 2025. Utilities will need to invest between $26 and $33 billion per year, a pretty hefty sum. To put this number in perspective, utilities invested $70 billion in 2007 on new power plants and transmission and distribution centers.

Solar Regulation and Policy

There is currently a 30% commercial tax credit for solar energy, but it is set to expire at the end of the year. There are purchase agreements for 3.2 gigawatts of concentrated solar power during 2007, but these solar power plants cannot be constructed before the tax credit expires. A long-term extension of the renewable energy tax credit is needed for large-scale use of solar energy. Many states also have renewable portfolio standards, but a national renewable portfolio standard would also help strengthen the industry.

Related Posts on Solar Energy

Solar Thermal Electricity: Can it Replace Coal, Gas, and Oil?
Senate Coalition Introduces Clean Energy Tax Package
Solar Panels and the Quest for $1/Watt
Clean Energy Intro: Solar Businesses
4 Things to Consider Before Going Solar

Photo Credit: Solar Service Inc of Illinois

In May, 1918, Captain Moses Roberts, Steven Vail and some unnamed investors formed a company called the Savannah Steam Ship Company and began the work necessary to build a ship that could cross the oceans using coal and wood heat to create steam power to assist the sails. S. S. Savannah made a successful two way crossing but was a financial failure. Sailing ships continued to dominate the seas, but engineers kept improving coal and wood heated steam engines for railroads and inland river travel.

Within twenty-five years after Savannah’s initial voyage steam ships began crossing the Atlantic regularly and within seventy years steam essentially replaced sails in commerce. I can testify that sails have never disappeared - I live in one of the world’s most sail addicted towns - but anyone who has ever operated both sail and power vessels understands that as a business vessel, a sailboat is a great hobby.

Not surprisingly, when fuel prices increase rapidly, people focus their attention on ways to save money on fuel purchases. They seek to reduce their specific fuel consumption and to find cheaper sources of fuel. Both can require trade offs.

One of the easiest ways to reduce consumption is to slow down, but slowing down reduces productivity. I know that some environmentally minded people might scoff and say, “so what”, but if all of the ships on the ocean slowed down by 10%, we would need 10% more ships to carry the same quantity of goods. Each of those ships would require materials and energy to build, they would be a bit less profitable and some of the owners might be tempted to find other ways to save money, like buying cheaper fuel.

With the large engines used on ships, there are often a variety of available fuel options at different price points, but the lower priced fuel often comes with some real environmental baggage. There has been a lot of attention paid - finally - to the fact that ocean going ships are prodigious sources of sulfur emissions and other noxious pollutants since they often burn the dregs left over from refining - a fuel known as residual fuel. Based on studies that made a big splash at the end of 2007, ship emissions are now considered to the source of about 60,000 early deaths every year.

A friend of mine pointed me to a post on Treehugger.com titled Slower Shipping Could Reduce GHG Impact that discussed additional options for reducing fuel cost and environmental impact. In addition to slower speeds, the post and associated comments mention schemes that add sails to assist in propulsion. When fuel prices are high enough, such schemes can provide a positive return on investment by cutting several percentage points of off some large fuel bills. (An ocean going ship with a 70 MW power plant would burn about 90,000 gallons of fuel every day. When marine diesel fuel costs $5 per gallon, a 5% fuel savings is worth $22,500 per day.)

My recommendation is different. Let’s get rid of all of the emissions, switch to a fuel that costs about 2% of the cost per unit heat (50 cents per million BTU versus $25 per million BTU) as marine diesel fuel, and increase shipping speed so that ocean going ships can more readily compete with aircraft for time sensitive shipments. It is possible to achieve that amazing feat using technology that has been in use for more than 50 years, all we have to do is to follow the example of another pioneering financial failure named Savannah.

Nuclear powered ships are well proven, there are tens of thousands of people around the world who know how to operate, build and maintain them, and they offer capabilities that the world needs today. Because nuclear ship propulsion plants would be much smaller than the commercial nuclear power plants that are currently either under construction or being planned, they would not necessarily have to wait in the same supply chain lines for large components.

There was a time (1962-1972) when the United States produced about 100 ocean going nuclear plants in just a decade; such an industrial effort today would yield great benefits. Just think about all of the emissions that would not be released and all of the oil that would no longer be burned at sea. The effect on the market price for the rest of us would be the same as finding a new deposit capable of expanding production to about 5-8 million barrels of oil per day. That is at least 2-3 times as large as ANWAR.

Update posted June 20, 2008: A couple of days after posting this, Joe Stroud contacted me to share an updated photo of the N.S. Savannah that was taken in Baltimore, Maryland on May 23, 2008. The date was 50 years to the day after her keel was laid in 1958. Until last year, Savannah had been slowly deteriorating in the James River Fleet, but the Maritime Administration has invested some money to stabilize and repaint her. Though her reactor has not operated for more than 30 years, she is still a pretty ship.

Photo credits: Schooner under full sail and Annapolis Sailboat Show from Rod Adams under Creative Commons.
N. S. Savannah under power from US Government archives.
Savannah moored in Baltimore, MD on May 23, 2008 with permission from Joe Stroud.

This most recent spate of reviling the human race was sparked by an opinion piece by Elizabeth R. Sawin from the Sustainability Institute. Her title was enough to make me smile: “$4.00 per Gallon Gasoline and Climate Change Both Call for the Same Solution: Collective Investment in Clean Energy.” I smiled again when she opened with a question she was recently asked: “What do you have to say about global warming to the whole segment of Americans who are just waking up to energy issues with $4.00 per gallon gasoline?”

Needless to say, my revulsion of the human species, or at least a vast majority of them (I have a variety of revulsions, this one is environmentally based), seem to have only just realized that maybe, just maybe, it might be a good idea to have a look for something other than fossil fuels to power our transportation.

And the terms “climate change” or “global warming” do not even register.

I must admit to a certain measure of childish glee, when I see petrol prices rising as they are. You see, I do not drive a car, and at 24, I have no real desire to drive one either. No doubt by the end of 2008 my peer group will have bullied me in to getting my license, but apart from the sporadic 3am drive to the supermarket for a chicken, my feet and my bike are all I need (and maybe the occasional bus/train ticket).

So at a time when petrol prices are skyrocketing and the US Senate defeating the Climate Security Act, people are suitably concerned. But as I mentioned, it isn’t because of any fear of melting ice-caps or drowning polar bears – although I like to think that many at least feel they should care about such things, even if they don’t actively do so.

Now Sawin quickly antagonizes a great magnitude of people out there by using the term “scientific consensus” to describe what is happening to our environment; it’s never a good move. But I don’t even want to discuss that. The point I want to make is this: how come with fuel prices getting higher than Willie Nelson, people don’t want a cheaper alternative?

It would seem to me that, even though you may be 100% against the idea that man has decided to pollute Earth in to oblivion (guess where I stand), surely you would like to be paying a little less to get to work in the morning? (Another gleeful admission: I work from home!) Wouldn’t you like to pay a little less to keep warm in the winter and cool in the summer? (I got nothing for those two! I’m sufferin’ like the rest of you!)

So if there ever comes a time where there is a vote to be cast, calls to be made and politicians to be swayed, make sure you do your part: vote to bring in alternative energies, call your local whatever and let him know! Because even if you don’t feel the environment needs the helping hand, I can sure bet that your hip-pocket wouldn’t mind one.

GM is backing a hydrogen refueling station near Los Angeles. The station will be located at Clean Energy’s compressed natural gas (CNG) facility and should be operational by the fall (gas 2.0).

U.S. Representative Jay Inslee (D-WA) will introduce a national renewable energy feed-in tariff. Under the bill, utilities would be required to pay a set price to anyone supplying less than 20MW of renewable electricity to the grid. Inslee plans to introduce the bill in the next week or two. But requiring utilities to pay a mandated amount for renewable energy is “a new idea to D.C., and like a fine wine it’ll need time” (ecopolitology).

U.S. Department of Energy promises $30 million to build plug-in hybrid vehicles. “Among the trio of three-year projects, General Motors would seek to improve lithium-Ion battery packs and charging systems, integrating its research by 2011 within a test fleet” (Green Tech Blog).

The world’s energy leaders have launched an energy efficiency initiative. The International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation (IPEEC) will “support on-going work of the participating countries and relevant organizations, exchanging information of best practices, policies and measures and developing public-private partnership programs” (Renewable Energy World).

Related Posts:

“The Week in Cleantech News (5/12-5/16)”

Photo: Muenzer via flickr under a Creative Commons license

My contention is that such a discovery has already been made, and that there is a growing recognition of the potential for that basis to expand the boundaries of our growth, creativity and development. The uranium oxide fuel pellet - that tiny black cylinder shown in the photo next to one of my favorite coffee mugs - is made of material with incredible potential compared to the fossil fuels that supply the heat that we use for the vast majority of our controllable power. I like to think of these tiny pellets as equivalent to early stage transistors at the time when most of the system controllers, radios, televisions, and computers in the world depended on magnetic amplifiers or vacuum tubes.

For many of today’s youths, it is difficult to imagine a world without fantastic electrical gadgets that can store photos, play music, display moving pictures, make incredibly rapid computations, and even ensure that the morning cup of coffee is ready on time. None of those devices, however, would be possible if a few researchers in the 1940s and 1950s had not worked tirelessly to develop the transistor. That is the basic invention that allowed people like Gordon Moore to imagine a world of devices with rapidly expanding capabilities that seem limited only by human ingenuity and creativity.

After engineers and scientists had figured out the basic properties of the materials needed to produce transistors, there was still a lot of work left to do - in fact, that work continues today as legions of technicians, software coders, engineers, and scientists work to improve and refine transistors and the devices that use them while an even greater body of people thinks up new things to do with the devices and new ways to introduce them to larger markets.

As I compose this post, I am sitting in a home office full of creative products enabled by semiconductor based transistors. Without exaggeration, I would estimate that there are tens of millions of transistors within my immediate view that includes several digital cameras, a desktop computer, a laptop, printer, remote controlled fan, an analog to digital film converter, a cordless telephone, several iPods, a mobile telephone, a few obsolete computers, a wireless base station, and a cable modem. (Yes, I am a gadget geek and a pack rat. All of us have weaknesses.)

Getting back to that uranium oxide fuel pellet - actually the one that I have is actually a facsimile of a fuel pellet - the reason that I compare it to a transistor is that it packs thousands of times more power than the materials that it can replace. Even though our current early generation nuclear plants only use about 4-5% of the ultimate potential energy stored in the pellet, these tiny bits of high temperature material produce the energy equivalent of 149 gallons of fuel oil.

My current automobile is a VW Jetta TDI - turbo diesel injected - sedan that has a 12.7 gallon fuel tank and can travel about 580 miles on a single fill-up. I get terribly excited about the idea that one day, using physical principles that I already know and understand, I may be able to travel across the US two times (nearly 7,000 miles) and consume only the energy that will fit inside a pellet that is smaller than the tip of my finger.

I know this is possible - I have already spent a number of years on a 9,000 ton vessel powered by the same material and it managed to travel the world’s oceans for more than 14 years on a quantity of fuel that would fit beneath my office desk.

Oh yeah - you have all been conditioned to ask, “what about the waste?” That is the really good news. I chose to put the fuel pellet next to my coffee cup for a reason. That coffee cup is large enough to hold the remains that would be left over if I received all the energy I needed to live a full American lifestyle for my entire life. What I think is even more amazing is that a large portion of those remains would consist of rare materials with unique physical and chemical properties. In other words, they just might have value for creative people in future generations that need them to solve a problem that we have not yet even recognized as needing a solution.

One more thing - the phrase on the coffee cup is also important. It is one of my mantras since I have been trying my best to raise awareness of the revolutionary nature of atomic fission since about 1993.

Photo credits: Coffee cup and fuel pellet - by Rod Adams taken June 12, 2008. USS Von Steuben, SSBN 632 US Government file photo.

Related posts:
China Gears Up Civilian Nuclear Power
Another European Country With Plans for New Nuclear Power
Vietnam Continues to Advance Towards Nuclear Power
Teutonic tectonic shift on nuclear energy
TVA, Chattanooga Economic Choo Choo