Home › Blog › Page 1611

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

I was speaking earlier today with a friend whose current business life revolves around making sense of the auto OEMs’ embrace of electric vehicles. “If I were a cynic,” he began, “I wouldn’t see too much sincerity in what these folks are doing. I read what you wrote recently in the 2GreenEnergy blog about the BMW’s stalled electric vehicle plans, and it seems to echo what I see with the Mitsubishi i-MiEV, and the dozens of other players who claim that they’re running as fast as they can in this direction.”

My friend went on to make a couple of points:

1) There is nothing in it for the OEMs to rush into the EV space. From the standpoint of making and selling a profitable car, they all win from dragging this out as long as possible. The lifetime profit associated with a customer who purchases an EV is a small fraction compared to that of one who buys a gas-powered vehicle, since EVs last a relative eternity, and require virtually no maintenance and replacement parts.

2) From the standpoint of overall risk-management, the idea of the OEMs rushing to offer EVs is even more idiotic. Suppose you’re Mitsubishi, with the super-cool i-MiEV whose introduction into the US , for some reason (wink, wink) you keep postponing.  Why not put it off as long as possible? If Nissan wants to lead the way with its LEAF, fine. But what’s the incentive for you (or Ford, or anyone else) to be a leader here? Surely, you have no obligations to anyone but your shareholders; you’re not in the business for any other reason than immediate profits — and that means one word: delays.  Why not let the government, at the peril of those in charge, bring down the costs of batteries and charging infrastructure , and enter the market at your leisure?

I see my friend’s point here, and thus advise this spring’s graduates:  If you think you may want a job with the top auto OEMs so you can make the world a better place, you may want to look for work elsewhere.

Tagged with:

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

continued from earlier…

Success Stories

Take a look at the story of Denmark, highlighted in the report. In the late 1980s, Denmark decided it needed to reduce dependency on oil and address climate change concerns. It focused on wind and biomass. Today, 20% of electricity is produced from wind power and it has become a leading exporter of wind technology and expertise. Energy products and equipment accounted for more than 11% of Danish exports by 2009.

How did Denmark succeed?

  • Reliable and focused public support and planning, plus private commitment to the goals
  • Market mechanism such as feed-in tariffs and loan guarantees
  • Financial incentives for the public
  • Support of R&D

 

 The stories of India and China are also noted in the IEA report.

India now has the 5th largest installed wind energy capacity in the world (three times more than Denmark.) India also used stable policies and support mechanisms. India’s Electricity Act of 2003 encouraged distributors to buy power from renewable energy sources, and supported development through Suzlon, an Indian company with a large wind market share.

China has achieved three times the capacity of India in just five years. China is now on their 11th Five-Year Plan which is heavy on support for renewable energy and goals to reduce pollution and increase domestic energy security. Installed wind capacity exceeded its 2010 target by 320%.  Domestic policies require a certain amount of energy to be purchased from renewable sources, and there are market instruments and private support. It eliminated the bidding system in 2009 and replaced it with a fixed tariff approach.

Bad News

Despite the good new to be found, there is bad news, too: worldwide renewable electricity generation since 1990 grew an average of 2.7% per year, which is less than the 3% growth seen for total electricity generation. While 19.5% of global electricity in 1990 was produced from renewable sources, this share fell to 18.5% in 2008. This decrease is mainly the result of slow growth of the main renewable source, hydroelectric power, in OECD countries. Non‐hydro renewables will have to increase at double‐digit rates; wind power must see an annual average growth rate of 17% and solar power 22%. Coal has increased.

The report concludes that clear policies, government support and global cooperation are needed to continue the momentum towards stronger renewable energy worldwide.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

As more people become concerned about the depletion of non-sustainable energy sources such as fossil fuels, there are concerns about using these sources of energy for the long-term and throughout the course of the day as we currently do non-sustainable energy sources. Of course, we also have to look at the fact that the non-sustainable sources will eventually run out—that is their nature—and if we don’t have something to replace it, the world will virtually come to a stand still.

Definition and Sources of Green Energy

By its very definition “green energy” or sustainable energy is an energy source that has the ability to meet the needs of the present without worrying about whether future generations will have enough energy to meet their needs. That means the energy source is one that has the ability to replenish itself within the lifetime of a human and does no long-term damage to the environment. Unlike the fossil fuels that have provided power for centuries, sustainable energy sources are very stable and nothing humans do can influence those sources—at least over the long-term.

What are the sources of sustainable energy and how do they work? While that is probably not something the average person can understand, it is important to understand why they exist. The following identifies some of those sources and how they contribute to the concept of green energy.

  • Nuclear fusion on the sun is a process that produces biofuels, solar power, wind power, wave power and others. Because of the primary source these sustainable energy sources will continue to replenish itself for many years—and even centuries—into the future.
  • The moon produces tidal power and is likely to continue doing so for at least another two billion years.
  • The earth will continue to generate geothermal power since it is not likely to cool down in the foreseeable future.

Sustainable Energy in the Computer Age

Because of concerns about the future of non-sustainable energy sources and its damaging effects on the environment many business entities are beginning to invest in green energy. While the main concern for many owners and managers is one of financial concerns, they are also concerned about the effects on the environment as well. One of the current trends toward green energy is the use of sustainable energy to run computer servers in data centers. While this is certainly not the only use for green energy, it is a good place to start. If we can get business owners into the habit of running their computer centers on green energy, the rest will just be a short step away.

Brenda Coxe is a full-time freelance writer who enjoys writing about financial topics, travel, and non-technical medical topics such as the job of an ultrasound technician. She also enjoys reading, writing and spending time with her family.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

Following up on my report in The Vector on the OgilvyEarth report, “Mainstream Green: Moving Sustainability from Niche to Normal”, I found one section deserving of focus on its own.

In the study, the authors examined green behaviors of the general U.S. and China populations. As the two largest global consumers, actions in China and the U.S. have the most impact globally. The comparisons are fascinating – and somewhat discouraging.

(more…)
Tagged with: , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Politics

In a recent post I mentioned that one of the central problems with our dependence on oil (of which we have very little domestically) is that our borrowing $1 billion per day to buy it from foreign governments empowers our enemies.  In response, frequent commenter MarcoPolo writes:

Craig, I’m curious, what are those ‘enemy’ regimes you speak of?

I mean Chavez is a bit of a buffoon, and has no love for the US, but an active enemy? I am unaware that North Korea is oil rich. And since the US imports no oil from Iran, that leaves the four biggest US oil imports from Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and Nigeria.

Yes, well I can see your point with Canada!

Allies, Craig, the US imports from allies!

 

In response, I would just say what (ex-CIA Director) James Woolsey told me when I spoke with him last year:

Craig, read Larry Diamond’s book if you haven’t already. If you look at the 22 countries that count on two-thirds or more of their national income from oil — it’s fair to say all 22 of those countries are autocratic kingdoms or dictatorships.

And I haven’t compared that list with Freedom House’s list of the forty, basically – those that Freedom House calls “Not Free.” There are about 120 democracies in the world, I mean not perfect, but nonetheless regular elections and another 20 countries like Bahrain that are reasonably well and decently governed, even though not democratically so. And then you’ve got 40 really bad guys. And I’m pretty sure that list of 22 in Larry Diamond’s book is virtually all from the list of 40 bad guys — or “Not Free,” in Freedom House’s terms.

So it’s really a pretty decisive set of statistics, I think, and then if you look at other numbers, set out in places like Mort Halprin’s book  The Democracy Advantage, it’s pretty clear that basically democracies don’t fight each other. They occasionally get really pissed off, but they mainly choose up sides and argue about trade sanctions and stuff. It’s not impossible but it’s really hard, even going back into the 19th century, but certainly since 1945, finding democracies fighting each other. They just don’t.

So you’ve got oil locking some states that depend so heavily on it into autocracy and dictatorship and worse. And those are the folks who also fund the terrorists, who invade neighboring countries, etc. So there’s a large national security point here.

I guess what I’m saying is that a thriving oil market empowers the enemies of democracy, whether they are active and avowed enemies of the US or not. 

Tagged with: , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

Are you tracking the big numbers behind renewable energy?  If so, here’s an article on a United Nations report on clean energy that you’ll find quite meaningful.  Maybe “meaningful” is the wrong word to describe a report that is called the “Renewables Bible.”  Wow, high praise indeed; perhaps I too could benefit from a bit more aggressive labeling of my writing.  But seriously – the Bible? (more…)

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Fossil Fuels

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has recently released its “Clean Energy Progress Report.”  The IEA is an autonomous agency established in November 1974 with the mandate to promote energy security amongst its member countries through collective response to physical disruptions in oil supply, and provide authoritative research and analysis for reliable and affordable clean energy.

The report is both optimistic and pessimistic — as well as cautionary in tone. The past decade has seen the dramatic rise in renewable energy worldwide, led by wind and solar. Major car companies are adding electric and hybrid vehicles to their lines and promoting them. Public investment in research and development is strong. Energy efficiency is improving in many western countries, says the report, after recent modest gains. A growth in renewables producing electricity is clear in many areas.  Unfortunately, says the report, not all is good.

(more…)

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

It looks like Chevron’s situation in Ecuador is coming to a head.  In a couple of weeks, the oil giant will face a watershed event in the court case in which it’s been ordered to pay $9.5 billion to repair the damage it did (operating as Texaco) to the people and environment of this formerly pristine part of the Amazon jungle. Here’s a video made by Amazon Watch, a small but fierce non-profit that’s been working hard to focus world attention — and bring justice — to this horrific matter.

In my mind, what makes this all the more disgusting is where it happened, and why it happened there.  We’re talking about a company whose leaders premeditated to commit an atrocity in a part of the world populated with men, women and children in whom “civilization” simply has no interest.  The people of the entire region are invisible; they hold no currency; they do not matter.  If they had perpetrated the same thing in the US, the executives responsible would have been making license plates for the next 15 – 20 years — and they knew it.  We have clear laws in place  — and a judicial system that does manage to lock up an occasional CEO or two for gross violations.  So the folks in charge thought they would make some money by destroying a remote part of the world, and its forgotten people — all with total impunity. 

And even though decades of jurisprudence finally produced a crystal-clear guilty verdict, they just might pull it off.  Chevron has deployed many hundreds of the world’s finest and best-paid litigators to the case, and have vowed to fight this to the bitter end.  Besides, they must be heartened by the success that ExxonMobil enjoyed in dragging out its payments on the Valdez oil spill in Alaska for more than 25 years before agreeing to pay a small portion — over a quarter of a century later.   No fewer than 8000 beneficiaries of the ExxonMobil restitution died while they were waiting for their money to come in.  I have to imagine that Chevron finds this travesty most encouraging. 

Sorry to have to bring you news like this.  And it’s not all that good for me either, as I routinely take considerable flack when I present stuff of this kind. 

But I do it anyway.

Tagged with: , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Politics

I just conducted another in a series of radio shows that I bang out weekly under the name Clean Energy Radio.

One of our “charters” is untangling the issue: If we all know that clean energy is vitally important, if it’s important to our bodily health, our financial health as a nation and to us as consumers and to the health of our planet, then why, exactly, is it so slow to make it to the scene?

My guest today was David Cobb, 2004 Green Party presidential candidate, now national spokesperson for Move To Amend, whose purpose is to create a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood.

Readers who think I’m too far to the left politically may be dismayed that I had David on the show in the first place, but they will certainly be pleased to know that I asked tough questions:

  • Are you telling us that corporations are evil – or even that the majority of the those running them are bad people?
  • Their task is to make money for shareholders; I’m not sure I would call that “noble” in and of itself, but it’s certainly not “bad,” is it?
  • If a person has the right of free speech, then why doesn’t that right belong to a group of people?
  • Do you really need a constitutional amendment? What’s the matter with simply another Supreme Court judgement that refines this?
  • I can hear the passion in your voice, and that’s refreshing, given the torpor and apathy of the world. But realistically, does Move To Amend have a chance?

Interesting stuff, I believe. I’ll post a link to the show when it’s available.

　

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Fossil Fuels

Natural Gas is controversial.

Some say it is a fossil fuel with all of the inherent issues involved, and that in obtaining gas through the ‘fracking’ process, groundwater can be polluted if care isn’t taken.  Others say natural gas is plentiful in the U.S., that it burns comparatively cleaner than other fossil fuels and is less carbon-intensive. It works well in concert with renewable energy and could serve as a bridge between renewables and dirtier fossil fuels.  If one of the goals of the U.S. is to reduce imports, create jobs and become more energy secure, natural gas may have its place in the story.

The Task Force on Ensuring Stable Natural Gas Markets at the Bipartisan Policy Center  published a report on the issues. Of course, the report is somewhat biased towards natural gas though both political parties have agreed on the findings and recommendations. That says something in today’s climate. Near the end of the report, the author say,

“At a time when political and economic conditions have paralyzed much of the national-level energy policy debate, the fact that a group as diverse as the Task Force could reach consensus on these measures suggests that here is at least one important area – natural gas markets – where progress is well within reach.”

(more…)

Tagged with: ,