Home › Blog › Page 1707

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Politics

I must say that I’m disappointed in this list of clean energy projects that the Obama Administration is funding with its stimulus money under ARPA-E. I use the word disappointed, a considerable understatement, insofar as I promised some of my colleagues that I wouldn’t make a big scene on this issue.

The list seems to contain very little that we were hoping for, and were told that it would feature, i.e., transformative technologies in replacing fossil fuels that would offer near-term results in the real world.

What we see in huge supply are:

Biofuels. This is a poor idea that doesn’t scale well. Even if it were a good way to go, there is no way to create biofuels in sufficient volume to make a meaningful difference in replacing oil. And, as I’ve often asked, why continue to burn hydrocarbons? If we’re going to clean up our processes of generating and consuming energy, why not choose processes that don’t release CO2 and other noxious compounds?

Clean Coal. The processes of sequestering the offending outputs of burning coal are expensive, and riddled with technical issues. Can’t someone stand up to the coal industry and say no to this incredible waste of money and time?

Projects given to government laboratories and universities. Both are known for glacier-like progress through intractable bureaucracies.

What we see little of are the technologies that actually replace fossil fuels and offer the promise of clean energy, like hydrokinetics, solar thermal, geothermal, etc. As I point out in my upcoming book on renewables, there are many fantastic ideas that are already proven within these arenas, the progress of which could be greatly accelerated with funding.

Those of you with naughty kids know what I mean with the term disappointed. Sometimes the best response to misbehavior is not anger; it’s an appeal to a sense of shame. Of course, that implies the possibility of a sense of shame; there are those who say that the corruption in the process is so complete that the perpetrators are incapable of that emotion. I won’t take a stand on that; I simply repeat: Guys, I’m really disappointed in you.

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

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

PhotobucketOccasionally readers take me to task for glossing over the important concepts of the day, leaving people to research for themselves the terms that I bandy about as if they were household words. Ocean acidification is a good example. Yet I am by no means an expert on this, and so I can do little more than to point readers to any of the hundreds of articles that have been written on the subject. Here, e.g., is the Wikipedia treatment.

In essence, rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere causes more CO2 to be absorbed into the oceans, which in turn causes a complicated set of (mostly) unwanted chemical reactions, most directly the formation of carbonic acid. This affects the survival of calcifying organisms, damaging corals, shellfish, and many other lifeforms that maintain the delicate balance that is the ocean ecosystem.

What makes this phenomenon of particular importance is the fact that it is not disputed. As discussed in my upcoming book on renewables, Big Oil is working hard to obfuscate the global warming issue. However, there is no doubt whatsoever that rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere are causing long-term environmental damage. Thus ocean acidification renders moot any controversy that the oil companies are working so hard to generate about global warming.

Tagged with: ,

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

PhotobucketThe 2009 “Business of Plugging In” conference also featured a great deal of discussion on the readiness of the utilities to support EVs. Although some people were horribly cautionary and indicated that this was a major impediment, a few key speakers cleared the matter up nicely:

EV’s are generally charged at off-peak periods when the power is usually discarded anyway. (Approximately half the electrical energy generated each day is wasted because it is not used and cannot be stored cost-effectively.) The opportunity to sell power that is otherwise thrown away provides additional revenue for the utilities at very little cost, which is, of course, a help rather than a hindrance.

Most people initially will charge at 110 volts and 15 amps.  This is the power of a hair dryer, and will put very little strain on the grid.  Only over time will a sizeable percentage of people upgrade to more robust chargers that will shorten the time necessary to charge their cars.  But one astute person asked, “If you start charging your car at 11 PM, how important is it to you that’s it’s fully charged by 1 AM?”  This slow migration to fast charging will provide ample time for the utilities to prepare.

Most of the audience came away with the (fortunately correct) idea that there is a natural fit between the development of the EV, the grid, and the increasing adoption/demand rate of EVs that we see from the consumer.  None can proceed without the other two.  Yet there seems to be a unforced harmony between the growth of each one. 

And here’s another piece of good news from the conference.  One elderly corporate speaker said to a standing-room-only break-out session of about 400 people, “We had EV conferences like this one a few years ago, and we were lucky to have 10 people in the room.  Take a second and look around.”

Tagged with: ,

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

PhotobucketConsidering all the writing I’ve done on the EV adoption curve over the past 18 months or so, I was interested in the immense amount of discussion on the subject at the “Business of Plugging In” conference in Detroit earlier this week. Here are a few comments, for what they’re worth.

I noted a great deal of speculation about “range anxiety,” i.e., dread of running out of charge away from home or a charging station. There is no doubt in my mind that, until opportunity charging can be made fast, convenient and ubiquitous — a process that will certainly require many decades — there will be some people who will cling fast to their gasoline-powered cars (at least until the demand for gas goes so low that it is no longer supplied).  Having said that, the EV owners I’ve spoken with say that they got over this anxiety fairly quickly. You simply have to take a moment and plan ahead to ensure you’re not taking a chance of running out of charge. They say that it’s not altogether different than driving with gasoline; you need to be aware of what that needle reads and plan accordingly.

Another point that I found valuable was the reminder that the communications industry had estimated an approximate 2% penetration of cell phones. They had somehow missed the fact that once people have them, use them, and tell their friends about them, there is a very direct route to everyone’s wanting one.

The case here, I believe, will closely parallel cell phones.  EV technology costs are falling, performance is improving, wars in the Middle East are raging, and CO2 levels are rising.  I really don’t know what could happen to make this migration happen any faster.

Tagged with: , ,

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

PhotobucketAnother benefit of attending the “Business of Plugging In” conference was the opportunity to reconnct with old friends, and to conduct interviews so as to keep my book on renewables moving forward.  Brian Wynne, president of the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) in Washington DC was good enough to spend an hour with me after his excellent job in moderating a panel discussion on EV migration.  

In the interview, he helped me to understand many of the complications that our democracy adds to the puzzle of renewables and electric transportation, mainly, the need for politicians to show short terms results (according to election cycles) — in an environment that needs sustained, long-term commitments.

Tagged with: ,

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

I marvel at how different the 2009 “Business of Plugging In” conference was in comparison to a number of the other shows I’ve attended recently on renewable energy and electric transportation. Perhaps most obvious was the attention on job creation and a return to prosperity, and how economic issues far outweighed discussion about the environment. There was virtually no mention of global warming, and remarkably little discussion of the consequences of US dependency on foreign oil. Of course, to be fair, the show was about (as its name suggests) the business side of the equation. And it’s hard to lose track of the idea that we were in Michigan, the state with the nation’s highest unemployment rate.

What we did hear a lot over the past few days are what I would call “disingenous self-serving platitudes,” which I refer to as DSPs. One that came up a great deal was the idea that the OEMs, policy makers, utilities, and small businesses are collaborating to make the world a better place for car consumers. Oh please. I find that truly nauseating — not because I wouldn’t dearly like to see it, but because the precise opposite is true. Most of these people are busily but quietly building proprietary standards to lock out competitors and lock in profits — at the expense of what might have otherwise been a smooth and robust adoption curve. A frank admission of this obvious fact would have been really refreshing.

There were dozens of other minor examples that I won’t bore you with; as I mentioned yesterday, almost every speaker had some sort of private business agenda that he/she aggressively pressed down upon the audience. But there were real real doozies as well, a short list of which includes:

DSP #1: Toyota said it will bring along plug-in hybrid technology “soon,” a move that is hailed immediately by the moderator as “bold and courageous.”

The Truth: That company could have, and most people would say should have introduced this technology years and years ago. But, already perceived as being green, the company was under no pressure to do so, and chose to milk the profits out of its current technology platform until it was forced to move along.

DSP #2: GM represented itself as strong, focused, and committed to the plug-in market.

The Truth: Every man, woman, and child in the US was forced to buy GM stock at dozens of times its actual fair market value, because of the company’s astonishing lack of focus and commitment to building cars people wanted.  Here’s an article on AutoBlogGreen that goes into more detail.

DSP #3: The governor of the State of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, proudly announced that Michigan has received about 60% of the total DoE stimulus money aimed at advanced car batteries, explaining that Michigan had effectively made the case that it was committed to a green automotive future.

The Truth: Could she possibly have been serious in this totally outrageous statement? Isn’t this the home of the most vigorous opposition to CAFE standards? Aren’t two of the three Michigan-based OEMs bankrupt precisely because they refused to build environmentally friendly cars that Americans wanted? This was so offensive that I found myself chuckling — softly but audibly. (You should have seen the glares from a few of those within earshot.)

PhotobucketAt a certain point, it looked as if it was going to be a solid three days of misleading self-congratulations, arrogance, and gleeful ignorance. But then Ray Lane of venture capital giant Kleiner Perkins took the stage with an approach that was honest, and diametrically opposed to most of those who had come before, or who would follow. I had the opportunity to thank him for his candor after his talk.

He told the audience that investment in innovation in the renewables space is an absolute imperative, and that, despite the rhetoric, he sees little sincere commitment. He pointed out that the US has made such investment in Internet technology, and has seen the results in terms of dominating that industry with Google, Mircosoft, Oracle, Cisco, etc. However, he showed us that we’ve done very little in renewable energy, and that almost all the top players in solar, wind, geothermal, hydrokinetics, etc., are outside the US.

He’s certainly right: the time for politics and glib language is over. We need to look the issue honestly in the face, knock off the deceit, and deliver technology that people honestly want. There is a ready and willing customer base who can’t wait to start buying, I can assure you.

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

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

As the name suggests, “The Business of Plugging In” conference in Detroit this week was about business — the profit motive — and there is nothing wrong with that. Yet, though there is widespread agreement that the world should migrate to electric vehicles, there is considerable disagreement as to exactly how this should happen and who should profit as a result. There are a great number of directly competitive strategies in terms of products, business models, and charging infrastructures…..and guess what happens when you put their representatives on a stage in the hopes of calmly and dispassionately discussing these issues? Can you say “rabid dogs?”

I’m kidding; it’s all been fairly professional here, but generally, this is a forum for the presentation of ideas that serve the speaker’s ultimate profit-making agenda, so one hears some pretty wild, and, in my way of thinking, unsubstantiated ideas.

George Patacki, Governor of New York from 1995 – 2006, moderated the opening panel, and made what I thought was the single most important point of the day on Tuesday: we live in a country that has wind energy in the plains, solar energy in the southwest, and geothermal in the mountains — but no infrastructure — physical or regulative — to enable our nation to provide all this wonderful capacity to consumers. He’s supporting legislature that will bypass the boundaries of the literally 2000 local and regional utilities and upgrade the grid at a national level and make possible the sharing of renewable energy.

More on this soon.

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

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Electric Vehicles

PhotobucketMy partner at EV World and good friend Bill Moore and I convene in Detroit this week for the “Business of Plugging In” show, which  runs through Wednesday. Upon my return, I’ll deliver a full report on who’s doing what. For now, I can tell you that the show has been sold out for quite a while, and that the interest in this subject is at an all-time high.

Driven by technology breakthroughs in batteries and ultracapacitors, aggressive policy-making at the federal and state levels, and, of course, the formation for capital enabling thousands of businesses to enter the supply chain at all levels, there is no doubt that electric transportation is coming in a big way, and that it will not be derailed this time.

It won’t be long until consumers all over the world join the early adopters in saying, “No plug? No deal.”

Tagged with: , ,

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Biomass

Stephen Lacey does a wonderful job in his podcasts for Renewable Energy World, and, I think, covers a multitude of subjects comprehensively and fairly. This week, he pointed out that feed-in tariffs (incentives for utility customers to put renewable energy back onto the grid) have been effective around the globe in spurring on the development of a great number of different technologies. He went on to note that biomass thermal is a viable, commercially ready technology, and deserves same set of incentives that are according to solar, wind, etc.

The federal government abandoned algae-based biofuels in the mid-1990s, but seems to have come around on the issue. The Department of Defense recently gave Solazyme several multi-million dollar contracts to supply jet fuel. Solazyme grows algae in the dark, feeding it with a variety of biomass stocks, and converting the sugars to oil.

The company claims that this process is 1000 times more efficient than growing algae in sunlight. But isn’t it hard to really fall in love with renewable energy technologies that wind up burning hydrocarbons? If we’re going to do this, isn’t it better to concentrate our efforts on technologies like solar, wind, geothermal, etc. that don’t involve carbon emissions? I really don’t see where the passion for biomass comes from.

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

by Craig ShieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

For some reason, I have come across a great number of reports recently of people claiming to have solved the riddles of the universe. As I’ve written elsewhere, I try to review all such suggestions with an appropriate mixture of respect and skepticism. I want to be enlightened enough to listen to ideas and appreciate them honestly, but not gullible enough to believe utter gibberish.  I also appreciate that pseudoscientific garbage can be the product either of crackpots (who, by definition, believe in their stories) or charlatans, who, again by definition, do not).

As long as the subject matter isn’t health-related or represents business fraud, claims like these represent no real danger to society beyond wasting people’s time, and thus I believe people have the right to make such statements.  But I also think that society has the right—if not the obligation—to write these people off as nuts.

If you’re interested in pursuing this line of reasoning yourself — or even if you’re just looking for a good example of what I mean — you can go to YouTube and listen to some of the talks of Marko Rodin; he seems to be a text book example. I’m sorry if I’m being too harsh or brief, but he does not make any sense to me whatsoever; this seems like complete tripe, and thus, to me, he’s firmly rooted into the crackpot/charlatan category (though I’m not sure which).

On the other hand, take David Wilcock, who dispassionately and intelligently discusses the 2012 phenomenon (end of the Mayan calendar) , visitation from extra-terrestrials, crop circles, etc.  Personally, I don’t find people like this and their attempts to unravel great mysteries to be crackpots at all.  I think we need some explanation of these gigantic and incredibly complicated phenomena other than a few drunken Englishmen stumbling home through the wheat fields from the pub Saturday night.

At this point, you may be wondering what this could possibly have to do with renewable energy.  Well, it seems possible to me – I might even say probable — that cutting-edge physics – the stuff that defies our intuition and that blasts our existing paradigms of exploration to bits – will someday make revolutionary contributions to energy — and I think we have to be alert to and accepting of them.  Further, I’m prepared for the fact that some of these new principles will strike all of us as quite bizarre.

So let’s talk about some of these aspects of modern physics.  What about zero point energy (which clearly does exist) btw? Regardless of how cold you get a substance, it still has energy, due to the Heisenburg uncertainly principle. If the particle stopped completely, you’d now exactly where it was, and that can’t happen. So there is always some kinetic energy involved with every particle in the universe. But no one has presented a credible explanation of how that energy is in any way available to harvest as useful work. Will it happen some day? I’m not sure, but it most certainly will not be soon.

What about quantum entanglement? Certain pairs of particles – whether they’re separated by an Angstrom or a galaxy – transmit information to and from one another instantly. Does this have ramifications for energy? Some say it’s possible. Most of the people I find most credible simply don’t see it.

What about cold fusion? As I’ve wrote in my Three Brass Tacks reports, I think there is credible evidence both that cold fusion exists, and that it has a reasonable trajectory for actual utility here several decades hence. But it will take a huge investment of resources that I see as unlikely in the realities of today’s world.

Having said all this, from what sources are breakthoughs most likely to issue?  From the Ph.D.s in the great universities, or from people who have no formal training in the subject?  To me, this study of paradigm-shattering is an interesting one.  People working too close to a subject tend to think in narrow and traditional ways, cut off from creative, new ideas.  As I like to say, they tend to “breathe their own exhaust.”  But people who really have no understanding of the subject are hard-pressed to ask themselves meaningful questions and pursue a breakthrough in a way that makes sense.

And the neat thing about scientific exploration is that a lot of it happens by accident, where some genius finds a previously unseen correlation between two subjects that had appeared to be completely unrelated. Thus it’s possible that the secret to an infinite supply of useful energy will come from someone who had set out to mix a better martini.

Personally, my money remains on existing, idiot-simple technology that we’ve known about virtually forever (e.g., solar thermal) and are just now coming across the imperative – as well as breakthroughs in materials science – to make feasible.  In any case, I try to keep an open mind — and I urge you to do the same.

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