Archive for the ‘PV & Earth Sustainability’ Category
Great piece from Tom Friedman this past Sunday on why a natural gas embargo on Ukraine and by extension Europe by Russia would be good thing for renewable energy and energy efficiency growth. Some excerpts:
“Because such an oil & gas shock, though disruptive in the short run, could have the same long-term impact as the 1973 Arab oil embargo — only more so. That 1973 embargo led to the first auto mileage standards in America and propelled the solar, wind and energy efficiency industries. A Putin embargo today would be even more valuable because it would happen at a time when the solar, wind, natural gas and energy efficiency industries are all poised to take off and scale.”
” . . . . Solar cells, for example, have dropped in cost by more than 80 percent in the last five years. This trend is underway, if a bit less dramatically, for wind, batteries, solid state lighting, new window technologies, vehicle drive trains, grid management, and more. What this means is that clean energy is moving from boutique to mainstream, and that opens up a wealth of opportunities.”
A gas embargo by Putin would also reinforce the message of the United Nations’ latest climate report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which warned with greater confidence than ever that human-created carbon emissions are steadily melting more ice, creating more dangerous sea level rise, stressing ecosystems around the globe and creating more ocean acidification, from oceans absorbing more C02 . . .”
“We are closer to both irreversible dangers on climate and scale solutions on clean tech than people realize. Just a little leadership now by America — or a little scare by Putin — would make a big difference.”Share this:
“Imagine fuel without fear. No climate change. No oil spills, no dead coalminers, no dirty air . . . .
. . . . no devastated lands, no lost wildlife. No energy poverty. No oil-fed wars, tyrannies, or terrorists. No leaking nuclear wastes or spreading nuclear weapons. Nothing to run out. Nothing to cut off. Nothing to worry about. Just energy abundance, benign and affordable, for all, forever.
That richer, fairer, cooler, safer world is possible, practical, even profitable-because saving and replacing fossil fuels now works better and costs no more than buying and burning them.”
This is the lead in from the book “Reinventing Fire – Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era” by Amory Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute. Mr. Lovins is a noted and award winning physicist and leading authority on energy. With this book, he provides a compelling road map for transitioning the energy mix in transportation, industry, residential and commercial buildings profitably and with great societal and economic gain. He demonstrates that it’s not just dreaming but its already happening with technology, business models large amounts of willing finance capital already established. As a global society we just need the political and economic will to make it happen. A great read. A TED talk by Amory Lovins on this book can be found here.Share this:
Employment change and family transitions in the last 18 months limited my time for blogging on the industry. Thanks to everyone who sent inquiries regarding my publication schedule and your questions and suggestions for future posts.
For 2014, I plan to spend more time on the subject of sustainability and the interaction point with energy generally and solar energy specifically.
2013 was clearly a large indicator of things to come. Super Storm Sandy, the decline and near extinction of the Monarch butterfly, the North Atlantic cod fishery collapse, Typhon Haiyan, extensive Australian drought and on and on. As a species, we humans are overunning the earth’s ability to support the systems that support our way of life. We are in massive ecological overshoot to the point of needing another 50% of earth’s renewable and non-renweable resources to meet our rapcious needs. Overshoot meaning when a population exceeds the long term carrying capacity of its environment.
From a great piece by Haley Smith Kingsland of the Global Footprint Network in Huffpo: “Most Americans might be surprised to discover that it would take the ecosystems of 1.9 United States to regenerate the ecological resources U.S. residents use annually. Were Italy’s residents to use ecological resources produced solely within their country’s borders at their current rate, they would need 4 Italys. Japan’s residents demand the ecological resources of 7.1 Japans. It would take 1.8 Indias to support India. Egypt uses the ecological resources of 2.4 Egypts, and China the resources of 2.5 Chinas.”
The pace at which this overshoot problem is accelerationg is alarming as it exceeds even the least conservative modeling projections by the acedemic and scientific communities. How do we reign this in with all the competing nationalistic, econonmic and even religious factions?Share this:
I had the opportunity to attend the US Department of Energy’s inaugural lecture series “Energy AllStars, What’s Our Energy Future” in Washington DC on January 19. Dr. Steven Chu, outgoing Secretary of DOE gave another one of his adroit and compelling presentations, which started with a comparison of how technology solved an environmental problem caused by transportation in the late 1800’s – namely that major American urban centers like New York and Detroit were being fouled with 3 – 4 million pounds of horse manure and 40,000 gallons of urine per day by horse drawn carriages. A technology transition—the rise of the automobile—solved this problem in less than 30 years.He went on to show how the dire issues facing us as a result of climate change and its cost to insurance companies and taxpayers presents another technological and economic solution transition opportunity: this time with clean energy and energy efficiency. Dr. Chu’s presentation is one that the President Obama should give to the nation.
As compelling as Secretary Chu’s presentation was, the one that followed, by the energic and former Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, really got my attention. She outlined her experience of being powerless, despite valiant efforts, to stop manufacturing flight from Michigan and the resulting collapse of the middle class. But the Governor then outlined her Clean Energy Jobs Race to the Top proposition that is modeled on the highly successful Department of Education’s Race to the Top program. This program leveraged $4.5B in American Reconstruction & Reinvestment Act (aka stimulus package) funding by making competitive grants to state governments that instituted education reform and showed progress in many categories of improved education statistics. It’s a successful program that has received bipartisan accolades.
As Governor Granholm outlined, the beauty of this program is that it becomes non-partisan – who would say no to funds that are being offered on a structured basis that provides real value to each state? It respects the states and federalism while it builds on the leadership already demonstrated by many states on climate change, clean energy, and energy efficiency.
Her Clean Energy Jobs Race to the Top program would be on an opt-in basis working with a funding level similar to the Department of Education program. The price for entry would be to establish both demand side and supply side strategies. These include enacting a state level clean energy standard of something like 80% by 2035, establishing innovation centers via industry and education partnerships, and producing technology and clean energy that is indigenous to each region. Each state would do an analysis of its strengths and weaknesses and hone in on a strategy that would leverage their region’s unique capabilities. The overall goal is to show how many jobs can be created.
With the government stimulus program over, the question is how to fund a program like this given the current sad state of Capitol Hill. Governor Granholm posited 2 ideas that would be difficult but could be achieved. One is to leverage philanthropic foundations such at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google and others, where they provide capital that can then be matched by other private and government sources. The second, and I think the most interesting, is to repatriate some of the large amount of corporate money now offshored in tax havens with a program that would have low tax basis for investing in the program, resulting in enormous business opportunities that would benefit all of US industry.
Clearly there are many questions and challenges to this proposition but the basic framework she provided is clever, could have legs and create massive change with little money spent. To paraphrase the Governor, “Truly, we have an obligation as a nation to fix the problem of the hollowing out the middle class and to achieve energy independence by creating clean energy jobs.”Share this:
Gem of a video here showing the progress of PV solar energy proliferation in Germany. (runs fast, so freeze frame to digest statistics) Now 21% of the energy mix, renewable energy in Germany has provided 380,000 jobs and a road map for other countries to follow. Over the last 12 years of successful policy implementation, PV solar energy (near 10% of German energy) has eliminated the energy peak in Germany which is reducing costs and environmental degradation considerably while increasing energy security.
Germany is demonstrating that a large number of distributed renewable inputs from solar and wind can be integrated successfully into the grid infrastructure without stability or reliability issues. This is a common misconception about intermittent generation sources that, after 12 years of operation, the German market has proved otherwise.
Germany is also demonstrating that the distributed generation model works and is real threat to established utilities working in the standard centralized model used the world over. While its easy to be in the solar energy and say that we may
have the utilities on the run in the near future as distributed generation makes in roads, that one side “we win” mentality is a no win proposition. It would be prudent for utilities and the renewable industry and government to work together on policy and a road map that takes into account the enormous past and current investment of the utilities in existing infrastructure while following an economic and technological road map that leads to a smooth and profitable transition to a distributed generation model for all stakeholders.
Some interesting snippets from Energy Rebellion, the producer of the video:
. . . . . . . solar gold rush that lead to investments around the globe was mainly driven by demand in Germany up until recently. The first effects of this rush is prices for PV-solar systems have fallen by up to 70% and continue to decline.
. . . . . . . today industry experts claim that photovoltaic & multi-kWh energy storage will become the cheapest source of electricity even in OECD countries within the next 10 years. This will lead to a very fast structural change of the entire world economy.
. . . . . . . . large scale market development has just started, but with 24.5 GW of PV-Solar capacity installed on more than 1 million roofs in Germany, the first signs of this new industrial revolution can already be observed. For example even during the dark & windy winter month of January, PV-solar produced up to 7 GW or 10% of peak-load demand in Germany. When a deadly cold wave brought the fossil & nuclear dominated energy system of France close to collapse, German PV-solar kept many gas & oil fired power plants offline, which significantly lowered the spot-prices at the European Energy Exchange.
A good piece in the New York times today answers the question by starting with “. . . . now that nearly every other nation accepts climate change as a pressing problem, America has turned agnostic on the issue.” Every other nation in the world is experiencing significant climate change effects, recognize the urgency of the situation and have CO2 reduction programs in place.
China and India in particular, as a result of disastrous and escalating weather calamities over the last 20 years, are taking action as they are financially pressed to keep rebuilding after each episode. As Bill McKibben wrote in Eaarth, we are fast approaching a point where even the most developed economies won’t have the financial resources to keep rebuilding. A recent example was the squabbling on Capitol Hill about providing FEMA enough budget to clean up after TS Lee and hurricane Irene on the heels of the most expensive weather disaster season in the history of the United States.
As Bill Clinton said, “It makes us look like a joke” when asked about both Democrats and Republicans non-action and denial on the global warming issue.
My wife and I have been working on making our daily lives more sustainable every year. With the world in ecological overshoot and the effects of over-population
and resource depletion showing up day–to-day (climate change-induced weather events, food price spikes, environmental pollution, energy cost hikes, etc.), we have been instituting lifestyle changes some of which include:
- buying carbon offsets when traveling;
- supporting companies that have true sustainability practices;
- buying local food from sustainable agriculture;
- increasing our home’s energy efficiency – new windows, insulation, lighting motion detectors, low flow shower heads, CFL light bulbs, a new high efficiency gas burner, cellulose attic insulation, purchasing a clean energy blend that is mostly wind from our local utility and many other efficiency upgrades (our home is in the woods otherwise we would have a PV system also);
- and driving a hybrid.
The car is a 2006 Ford Escape Hybrid with a license plate that reads “CO2LESS” (we buy carbon offsets for the gas engine use). Anyone that knows me knows that having vanity plates is not something I would normally do, but I feel strongly about the immediacy of sustainability issues we are facing as a global society, especially C02 emissions-induced climate change.
Imagine my dismay as I was approached recently in a Washington D.C. parking lot by a man who pointed at my license plate proclaiming, ‘You liberal elites are killing our country. There is no such thing as climate change and this is a strategy you people are using to corner wealth from the American taxpayer! “
I was too stunned to reply, and he wasn’t the least bit interested in a rebuttal.
According to Wikipedia the term Liberal Elite is a “political phrase to describe affluent, politically liberal-leaning people. It is commonly used with the pejorative implication that the people who claim to support the rights of the working class are themselves members of the upper class, or upper middle class, and are therefore out of touch with the real needs of the people they claim to support and protect . . . . As a polemical term it has been used to refer to political positions as diverse as secularism, environmentalism, feminism, and other positions associated with the left.”
This definition is not at all a fit with my history in any sense.
Labels and discord like this do nothing to solve the very real climate change problem, which is a result of burning fossil fuel and making bad land use decisions (deforestation, biological decomposition, and over-farming) worldwide. The myriad effects of climate change on populations have no class distinctions. The resulting disruptions to farming, depletion of water resources, and reduction of quality of life is already exceeding expectations in many developing nations where poverty is the norm and coping with rapidly changing climate patterns is exacerbating survival living. With the U.S. accounting for a large portion of cumulative atmospheric C02 over the last 100 years, we are clearly all “elites” in the minds of people in emerging nations as they struggle for basic survival in this new ecological overshoot era.
My work in the solar energy industry overlaps regularly with sustainability and climate change thought leaders, and as a result, I have a good understanding of the complex and often conflicting facts. These facts are often brushed aside and obfuscated with generalities by the minority of climate change and environmental deniers. Beyond the detailed knowledge I have attained over the last 15 years, I rely on a few simple premises:
- We use science every day to support our shared and safe human existence.
- For every action there is a reaction (equal and opposite).
- The C02 accumulation graph at left (click to enlarge) coincides with the discovery and burning of fossil fuels.
- Detailed science and research shows no prior warming in such a condensed period.
Climate change is happening right now. It can be viewed with fear and paralysis, or it can viewed as a great economic opportunity for all. We have the technologies, science and knowledge (if not the political and economic will power at the moment) to create sustainability solutions, and entirely new industries, as the global population continues to increase.
As many scientists around the globe have said, to do nothing is unacceptable, as the risk of being wrong is too great. If supporting the science and industry that can slow down and eventually reverse man made climate change makes me a Liberal Elitist in the minds of others then so be it!
Climate change resources:
The U.S. EPA Climate Change site presents an easily grasped, balanced presentation of the issue.
Information Visualization has a great “for and against” visualization of the climate change camps.
Carbon War Room is working on solving the problem industry by industry, by seizing on the economic opportunity: “Over 50% of the climate change challenge can be addressed today – and profitably – by existing technologies, under existing policy.”Share this:
A recent industry survey by Applied Materials confirms the acceleration of grid parity as the price of silicon and modules continues to drop. A great graphic set from their survey conclusions blog post can be found here.
Also, Shayle Kann at Greentech Media has a great piece about grid parity and the pitfalls in how the term is used and cloudy expectations about achieving parity at both retail and wholesale pricing levels.Share this:
Numerous solar industry analyst forecasts and media articles herald the U.S. as the next big market opportunity for global PV solar energy suppliers. Many offshore PV industry
companies have been setting up distribution and facilities across the country to position themselves for this growth opportunity.
At a recent Wall Street alternative energy conference, progressive utility CEO David Crane , a strong solar energy supporter, gave his view about government support for renewable energy. The federal government is too paralyzed to produce any meaningful support policy via either climate change or energy legislation, says Crane, but the renewables business will move forward strongly on the strength of state level legislation.
While the state-by-state paradigm has been credited with slow but steady solar energy growth in the U.S., the mid-term elections of 2010 resulted in new legislators in various states who have been reversing support mechanisms for clean energy and climate change mitigation.
The most recent example is New Jersey Governor Christie’s recent reduction in the state renewable portfolio standard (RPS) target (30% by 2021 now 22.5%) and language that may remove enforcement teeth for meeting the threshold by making it voluntary for utilities. (An RPS is a requirement for utilities to produce or buy and sell a certain percentage of renewable energy to their customers.) He also withdrew New Jersey from the highly successful Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, an alliance of nine North East and mid-Atlantic states.
Seven other states have quietly reduced their RPS mandate and diminished or eliminated penalties for non-compliance by the utilities in the last few months.
Governor Christie and other detractors of RPS mandates routinely cite escalating costs to ratepayers (utility customers) for their lack of support. Christie believes the RPS is an “unreasonable transference of wealth from ratepayers at large to solar developers.” But an extensive Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory RPS report in 2010 and more recent studies show that the “cost is a fraction of a percent.” Tiny by anyone’s standard.
The trade off, producing more clean energy which reduces health care costs and environmental damage costs (compared to burning fossil fuel) while creating a high number of quality jobs (17 jobs per $1M spent vs. 5 jobs per $1M spent in oil & gas sector) in a new economic ecosystem, for that small cost, would seem like excellent bang for the dollar spent. Am I missing something here?
The chart above shows the projected amount of installed capacity (in yellow at top) if current RPS programs are kept in place. Approximately 6 million tons of C02 would be displaced annually if achieved, along with elimination of large amounts of ground level particulate pollution.
With the rapid reduction in the installed cost of PV systems, declining RPS programs may become less important in regions where high utility cost and other factors line up to make winning project proposals that are close to retail cost grid parity (including only the federal ITC incentive) in the very near future.
Recent, high frequency, global extreme weather events are affecting crop yields and increasing negative feedback loops, not to mention causing significant loss of human life. I am deeply concerned about the near term, current generation effects of climate change. With C02 levels now approaching 400 parts per million (350 ppm is the generally agreed tipping point) these decisions and others like it are reckless and irresponsible in my opinion.Share this: