[The Vector] Small Wind Turbines Make Advances with Ordinary Americans

The EIA chart below shows the percentage of all energy and renewable energy categories produced and consumed in the U.S. Note which are the leading categories of renewables and the relationship to wind. Read More »

Is Wind Energy the Real Answer? – Guest Blogger Anil

In recent times, there has been a lot of attention being given to usage of green and clean energy. The governments of different nations are bent upon adoption of green and less polluting energy options. The International Energy Agency (IEA), the European Commission (EC) and other national governments back up the economic models of energy policy decisions. In the process, they tend to ignore the risks involved such as fuel price risk, supply risk and political risk.
Read More »

The Wilderness Society and Renewables

PhotobucketRecently, I spoke with Ben Beach, Senior Editor at the Wilderness Society. I reached out to Ben because I wanted to see how the organization was dealing with issue that public land (I presume some of it “wilderness”) is a good candidate for the generation of renewable energy, the form of solar thermal, wind farms, etc.

Ben pointed out that there are four categories of public land. 

National Forests
National Parks
Wildlife Refuges
Other land managed by the Bureau of Land Management

I’ve included links so readers can learn a bit more about each type.  The first of these is managed by the US Department of Agriculture; the others are handled by the Department of the Interior.

The Wilderness Society advocates for a rational balance of public land management, in which there are some areas (currently about 109 million acres) of true wilderness, not susceptible to any development (i.e., no roads providing access).  Ben’s point is that if you (as a camper, say) want to access otherwise pristine land by road, you have Yosemite, and the other national parks.

I must say that this seems fair to me in principle.  Of course, the devil is in the details; we can only hope that the forces of reason are working towards dealing with all this fairly.  In particular, as we’ve all noticed, when we fly across the country, we see that there are hundreds of times more land than we need to generate enough electricity for the entire continent.   If we can reduce and ultimately eliminate the consumption of fossil fuels by using some of that land — even if such use comes at a certain ecological costs, I think it’s obvious to everyone that this a deal worth making.

Offshore Wind Farms

PhotobucketIn this quite lucid and compelling video on offshore wind farms, The Sierra Club points out the numerous benefits of this technology. Until I watched it, I was unaware that turbines could be 12 miles offshore, and that the continental shelf off the eastern US was shallow enough such that the units could be anchored to the ocean floor that far from land. In my mind, this makes a compelling case. Of course, the issue is cost, which the video does not mention.

Sierra spokeperson Ivy Main, the renewable energy chair for the club’s Virginia chapter does an excellent job in contrasting this solution with dirty power sources like coal, but does so in a calm, measured, and professional tone.  She also points out that this idea does not require the transmission of large amount of power over thousands of miles, which, of course, is a requirement of the solution I favor, solar thermal. However, with high voltage direct current (HVDC), which I also favor, there is relatively little power loss in such a scenario.

Again, it is my fondest wish that we can somehow put politics aside, conduct a fair-minded study of all the options that are available to us as a nation, and make the right decision. There are, of course, numerous reasons that this is not happening — the most obvious of which, as I’ve covered many times, is the power of the interests that are working to prevent it.

But here’s another wrinkle: we seem to be working within the paradigm that a great number of different technologies are all going to be part of the long-term solution, and that anyone who holds a contrary position is an extremist. Frankly, I’ve never understood that. I liken this “macro” decision to the “micro” decision that I would make if I were going to take our farm off the grid. Would I have some array of wind turbines, solar panels, and geothermal heat pumps? Probably not. I’d do a study, and try to remove the biases of the salespeople.  Then I’d adopt the technology that made the most sense and implement it in sufficient quantity to fulfill my needs.

I really fail to see where this analogy breaks down. There must be a single best solution. It’s my hope that we can identify it and get it done.

Renewable Energy and the Obama Administration

PhotobucketAs I’m sure many readers have observed, I am normally cynical about the honesty of government. Even on Washington’s best day, I’d far rather see things happening in the private sector than in the public sector. Yet I have to say that I’m pleased with the Obama administration’s aggression in supporting renewable energy.

I have no insight into the workings of the selection process by which stimulus money is handed out. As far as fairness is concerned, I’m told that the process favors large companies over small ones, and I’m sure that I would find the details, if I were privy to them, just as unpalatable as the fine points of sausage-making. Yet I have to say that it’s a refreshing change from the days that oil-men ran the country and the DoE was forced to sit on its hands while essentially no progress was made in developing alternative energy sources, and the CO2 levels went through the roof.

From these recent annoucements from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Energy Secretary Stephen Chu, it is apparent that for some reason our boys in Washington favor wind and photovoltaics over solar thermal, hydrokinetics, and the others.  This concerns me greatly; one can only think that we’re entering a new realm of politics as usual. At least this time we’re wrangling over technologies that won’t kill us.