Group items tagged

The new mantra in energy circles is "national smart grid." In the New York Times, Al Gore insists the new president should give the highest priority to "the planning and construction of a unified national smart grid." President Barack Obama, responding to a question by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, declares that one of "the most important infrastructure projects that we need is a whole new electricity grid ... a smart grid." We lump together the two words, "national" and "smart" as if they were joined at the hip, but in fact each describes and enables a very different electricity future. The word "national" in these discussions refers to the construction of tens of thousands of miles of new national ultra-high-voltage transmission lines, an initiative that would further separate power plants from consumers, and those who make the electricity decisions from those who feel the impact of those decisions.

Congress is planning to direct at least $10 billion in economic stimulus funding to an Energy Department loan guarantee program that hasn't backed any projects since it began in 2005. The new money is intended to generate $100 billion in loans for renewable energy and transmission projects, according to Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat. Congress previously approved at least $38.5 billion for clean-energy loan guarantees, and not a single project was funded.

Just what does it take before a revolutionary discovery is accepted by the world's scientific community? That's the question raised by renewed claims by a US-based company to have found a radically new source of energy. According to BlackLight Power (BLP) of New Jersey, prototypes of its latest power generators have just been successfully tested by a team of independent experts. As the generators are environmentally-friendly and produce energy at less than a quarter the cost of conventional sources, one might expect scientists to be hailing this breakthrough. But there's one small problem: the supposed source of the power defies conventional theories about the nature of atoms.

THE graphs climbing across these pages (see graph in detail, or explore the data) are a stark reminder of the crisis facing our planet. Consumption of resources is rising rapidly, biodiversity is plummeting and just about every measure shows humans affecting Earth on a vast scale. Most of us accept the need for a more sustainable way to live, by reducing carbon emissions, developing renewable technology and increasing energy efficiency. But are these efforts to save the planet doomed? A growing band of experts are looking at figures like these and arguing that personal carbon virtue and collective environmentalism are futile as long as our economic system is built on the assumption of growth. The science tells us that if we are serious about saving Earth, we must reshape our economy.

With research, development and implementation of alternative and renewable energy sources pushed to the front-burner, attention has naturally turned to nuclear power. But if nuclear power is to become more of a player in our energy future, the problem of where to dispose of nuclear waste must be addressed and solutions found.

Last week I attended a discussion entitled After the Election: Where is Cleantech Headed Now? hosted by TiE(The Indus Entrepreneurs) at their Silicon Valley headquarters. The event was moderated by Andrew Chung ofLightspeed Venture Partners with presentations by Chris Flavin of Worldwatch Institute and Dr. Dick Swanson, founder of SunPower. Needless to say, the room was full of some very smart, visionary people with a singular focus on exploring the state of the energy sector and the potential of renewable energy to bring solutions to a beleaguered economy and stressed environment (one might say to civilization and the natural systems that support it).

Just days before a scheduled Board of Supervisors' vote Tuesday on a "clean energy" plan, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. submitted a brief summary of its proposal to join with local governments to boost use of renewable energy. The PG&E summary, which contained few details, was submitted to the county on Friday in advance of supervisors' decision on whether to join a Marin County joint powers authority that would compete with PG&E for Marin customers. Supporters of the Marin Clean Energy initiative say the authority would match PG&E's rates while substantially reducing use of nonrenewable, "dirty" energy required to meet Marin County's energy needs.

Part of the change Americans just voted for in overwhelming numbers was to move away from the failed energy philosophy of "drill, baby, drill" to a more farsighted strategy, emphasized by Barack Obama, based on clean, renewable energy and efficiency. Yet on the very day that we raised our voices for change, the Bush administration dragged us in the opposite direction. The Bureau of Land Management cynically chose November 4 to announce a last-minute plan to lease huge swaths of majestic wilderness in eastern Utah for oil and gas extraction one month before President-elect Obama takes office.

A subsidy represents a transfer of Federal Government resources to the buyer or seller of a good or service that has the effect of reducing the price paid, increasing the price received, or reducing the cost of production of the good or service. Put simply, the Federal Government promotes targeted energy outcomes, such as production of a specific fuel or promotion of conservation and energy efficiency by energy consumers through incentives such as tax credits, grants, and low interest loans.

The federal government is in bed with the coal industry. A prime example is the $2 million spent in advertising at both the Democratic and Republican conventions by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE). Founded this year, the ACCCE combined the Center for Energy and Economic Development and Americans for Balanced Energy Choices. Already the ACCCE has spent $4.7 million on lobbying, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis.

On NBC's Meet The Press this morning, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman criticized the chanting of "drill, drill, drill" and "drill, baby, drill" at the Republican National Convention last week, saying that's just what Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela and Nigeria want to hear Americans focusing on. "They'd be up there leading the chant. They would be saying, 'this is great, America isn't sitting there saying, invent, invent, invent new renewable energy,'" said Friedman. Friedman added that he isn't opposed to offshore drilling, but we shouldn't be "making that the center focus":

President Bush on Saturday blamed the Democratic-led Congress for the high cost of gasoline and renewed his call for expanded offshore drilling to increase U.S. oil supplies.

"I have observed that in all other countries, including in America, people are complaining about how prices of [gasoline] are going up," Denmark's prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, told me. "The cure is not to reduce the price, but, on the contrary, to raise it even higher to break our addiction to oil. We are going to introduce a new tax reform in the direction of even higher taxation on energy and the revenue generated on that will be used to cut taxes on personal income - so we will improve incentives to work and improve incentives to save energy and develop renewable energy."

A stadium-size sinkhole that formed in south Texas's oil country this month is renewing questions about the effects of billions of barrels of saltwater injected into the ground each year as a byproduct of oil and gas drilling.

I have known the New York Times energy reporter, Matt Wald, for 15 years, and generally think he is pretty good. But he has published perhaps the most flawed, inaccurate, and indefensible article in his career. Wald's piece could also be a poster child for award-winning journalist Eric Pooley's searing critique of the media's coverage of climate economics (see How the press bungles its coverage of climate economics - "The media's decision to play the stenographer role helped opponents of climate action stifle progress").

Coal River Vally, WV, has become home to a civil disobedience campaign against Massy Energy company in an attempt to halt their destructive mountaintop renewal coal mining practices. Kay Sexton, with her regular run down of environmental protests, has been examining the "imperatives and complexities" of protests that are unique to the environmentalist movement. Here's another data point to add into the discussion. I've mentioned before that I don't always think that the environmental movement benefits from protests. Channeling the Greenpeace mentality of chaining people to trees often seems to generate bad press more then it advances a cause. But, there are times when even my cynical take on the efficacy of protest has to be subverted by out-and-out necessity.

"We know the right thing to do," President Obama said about renewable energy at his press conference Tuesday. "We've known the right choice for a generation. The time has come to make that choice and act on what we know.…We have achieved more in two months for a clean energy economy than we have done in perhaps 30 years." Thirty years. Let's see, that would be 1979, right? Hmmm… wasn't that the year -- yes, that was when Jimmy Carter finally got his Grand Energy Plan through Congress, setting us the road to corn ethanol, the Synthetic Fuels Corporation and a host of other harebrained schemes.

Electric grids are getting smarter in an IBM lab in Texas as the promise of billions of US economic stimulus dollars fuels a drive to make power delivery more efficient and greener. A chunk of stimulus cash aimed at promoting a "smart grid" designed to foster renewable energy generation and let people and utilities better manage electricity use has IBM in alliances with a growing host of startups. "Smart grid was starting to get hotter, but post-stimulus it is dead center at IBM and in the venture community we deal with," said Drew Clark, director of strategy at IBM's venture capital group.

This week's Graphs of the Week come from the US Dept. of Energy's energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program, and they address a pretty basic fact of American transportation: The mix of cars vs. light trucks in new vehicle sales, and who's driving them. ("Light trucks" is a term of art meaning pickup trucks, minivans, and SUVs. Add your own rude comment here about how "light" some SUVs are.)

U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced significant progress that will help expedite development of a nationwide "smart" electric power grid. A Smart Grid would replace the current, outdated system and employ real-time, two-way communication technologies to allow users to connect directly with power suppliers. The development of the grid will create jobs and spur the development of innovative products that can be exported. Once implemented, the Smart Grid is expected to save consumers money and reduce America's dependence on foreign oil by improving efficiency and spurring the use of renewable energy sources. Before it can be constructed, however, there needs to be agreement on standards for the devices that will connect the grid. After chairing a meeting of industry leaders at the White House, Locke and Chu announced the first set of standards that are needed for the interoperability and security of the Smart Grid and $10 million in Recovery Act funds provided by the Energy Department to the National Institute of Standards and Technology to support the development of interoperability standards.