A Practical Use for Waste Methane

A direct method of converting methane into useful chemical compounds could reduce the release of the potent greenhouse gas at isolated oil fields.

By Prachi Patel-Predd

Burning solution: Natural gas is routinely burned at isolated oil fields and refineries. A simple new way to convert methane, the major component of natural gas, into useful chemical compounds that could be easily transportable might help reduce emissions of the potent greenhouse gas.

About 100 billion cubic meters of natural gas are burned off or simply vented at remote oil rigs and refineries that are not connected by pipelines. The practice wastes a precious fuel and pumps methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. Technologies for compressing or liquefying natural gas in order to transport it are expensive and only make sense at large oil fields. So, researchers have been looking for viable technologies to convert the natural gas found at small, isolated oil fields into compounds that are easier to transport and distribute.

A new breakthrough by chemists at the Munich University of Technology, in Germany, and Dow Chemical, in Midland, MI, could lead to a technology for turning methane, the main component of natural gas, into easily transportable and valuable chemicals. Because of its simplicity, the new chemistry could be employed at natural-gas reserves that are in remote locations with no infrastructure to transfer the gas to markets. About half of the world's known natural-gas reserves of 170 trillion cubic meters are in such deposits, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

Specifically, the researchers found a simple way to convert methane into methyl chloride, which can easily be converted into petrochemicals such as ethylene or propylene, used to make plastics. Ethylene and propylene, says Johannes Lercher, a chemistry professor at the Munich University of Technology, are far easier to transport than methane is.

The current process for making methyl chloride takes a lot of energy and involves multiple steps, including first converting methane into a combination of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. In an online paper in the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the Munich and Dow researchers demonstrate a straightforward technique that uses much less energy. They show that mixing methane, hydrogen chloride, and oxygen in the presence of a lanthanum catalyst yields methyl chloride. "Capital and complexity frequently go hand in hand," says Mark Jones, a plastics and hydrocarbons researcher at Dow. "The general trend is that reducing processing steps is good."

The technique could have one drawback, though: it uses chlorine, a toxic gas. The researchers' plan includes recycling the hydrogen chloride and repeatedly using it for the reaction. "In the vision we're playing with, the chlorine would not ever get on a boat," says Eric Strangland, a chemistry and catalysis researcher at Dow and a coauthor of the paper.

However, companies that are not used to handling chlorine might initially be intimidated by the technique, says Bert Weckhuysen, a chemistry professor at Utrecht University, in the Netherlands. "Dow has a long experience with chloride chemistry, so working with chloride streams is not a big deal [for them]," Weckhuysen says. "Others companies could, at least in the beginning, be scared off due to the requirement of being able to work with chloride compounds. It requires infrastructure."

The process will also face competition. New gas-to-liquids technology, which converts natural gas into synthetic liquid fuels, is starting to become popular as an alternative to liquefied natural gas, and it's garnering the attention of oil giants like Exxon and Shell. It has not yet been widely used, though, because it's expensive to implement: it requires a lot of energy and large facilities. Weckhuysen says that if Dow could develop an affordable commercial process based on it new reaction, it could compete with gas-to-liquids technology.

Another competitor, Gas Reaction Technologies, based in Santa Barbara, CA, is commercializing a technology to directly convert natural gas into liquid fuels and chemicals. The process is very similar to the new Dow process, except it uses bromine instead of chlorine. Gas Reaction Technologies, which is working with several partners, including Cargill, expects to have facilities going within three to five years, says Eric McFarland, the company's CEO.

Nuclear Energy for the Developing World

New reactor technologies offer poorer nations cheap, safe, efficient power. Sanctions designed to prevent the proliferation of weapons impede their use. What would a better policy look like?

By Mark Williams

Heavy water: Cutaway of the ESBWR, which probably represents the ultimate in what can be done to achieve simplicity of design in a water-cooled reactor; window at right depicts the reactor’s circulatory system.

Atambir Rao, a nuclear engineer who spent nearly two decades as program manager for General Electric's next-generation nuclear-reactor design, believes that the countries that are most in need of nuclear power are developing countries like his birthplace, India. Rao says, "Today, the biggest challenge for nuclear is the stranglehold the developed nations have put on it with sanctions."

The reactor project whose development Rao led was the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR), one of the generation-III nuclear-reactor designs that incorporate the improved fuel technology and passive safety systems--whereby the reactor automatically shuts down safely in any emergency without operator action or electronic feedback--that have been developed over the past quarter century. In 2007, with multitudes in India and China approaching lifestyles comparable to those in the developed nations, and with planetary climate change from carbon-dioxide emissions increasingly manifest, it's worth stressing that nuclear power remains the sole existing energy technology that's both proven and zero carbon. The critical question for the technology's future is whether the forbiddingly high capital costs and lengthy construction times attached to it in the past still apply.

In fact, gen-III reactors like the ESBWR do seem to possess the relative cheapness and ease of construction necessary for nuclear power to potentially establish itself as the primary electrical generation technology for national grids, both in the developed world and in countries like China and India. Per Peterson, UC Berkeley professor of nuclear engineering and part of the team responsible for the ESBWR, says that the design represents a reduction in capital costs of 25 to 40 percent. "In terms of competing with coal-burning plants, that's significant," he says. "If you can displace coal with less expensive options, then it becomes a different future." Peterson adds a couple of qualifiers: "Over the last year, costs have risen for all the energy technologies due to rising commodity costs. So both coal and nuclear cost estimates have been growing. On the other hand, I think we've now reached the tipping point on climate-change legislation. If we get carbon controls, there's no question the equation changes." In other words, carbon controls would go some way toward building into the use of fossil-fuel-burning power plants the externalities, or hidden costs, currently not included in consumers' utility bills or paid for by the power companies.

Today, reactor design has more than a half-century of art behind it, so gen-III reactors resemble their 1970s-era generation-II predecessors, much as a Toyota Prius hybrid resembles a vintage 1972 Pontiac, with the progressive trend being toward radical simplification that eliminates the batteries of complex mechanisms built into the earlier designs. The ESBWR replaces previous reactors' complex systems for residual heat removal with a design that uses no pumps or emergency generators--in fact, it possesses no moving parts at all, except for the neutron-absorbing control rods that are pulled partway out from its core so that nuclear fission can proceed. That fission reaction boils the water in the ESBWR's core, which becomes steam that gets carried away to large tubes in which it rises, releases its energy to turbines, and then condenses so that gravity causes it to flow back down to the core as water again. In short, the ESBWR runs wholly on natural circulatory forces. Rao says, "It could not be simpler. The control rods get pulled out, water comes in, and steam goes out, carrying heat that gets turned into electricity."

Further read... Nuclear Energy for the Developing World

Will Cellulosic Ethanol Take Off?

Fuel from grass and wood chips could be big in the next 10 years--if the government helps.

By Kevin Bullis

ALCOHOL FUEL: Celunol, based in Cambridge, MA, tests its cellulosic-ethanol process in this pilot-scale plant, which converts biomass such as switchgrass into ethanol. Biomass is stored and handled in the building to the right. From there it’s fed into the four black tanks in the center, which contain enzymes for breaking down cellulose and other complex carbohydrates to form simple sugars that can be fermented in the “beer” tank below. There, the liquid produced has the same alcohol concentration as beer. Next, the beer is distilled in the tall column left of center before being stored in ethanol tanks at left. Celunol started construction on a much larger cellulosic-ethanol plant this month.

Credit: Courtesy of Celunol Corp.

Cellulosic ethanol, a fuel produced from the stalks and stems of plants (rather than only from sugars and starches, as with corn ethanol), is starting to take root in the United States. This month, Celunol, based in Cambridge, MA, broke ground on an ethanol plant in Louisiana that will be able to produce 1.4 million gallons of the fuel each year starting in 2008. Other companies are moving forward as well with plans to build plants.

But experts from industry and environmental groups say that without loan guarantees and other incentives, the nascent industry will fail to emerge from the current demonstration phase to produce commercial-scale quantities of ethanol. And without that, it may be impossible to meet President Bush's ambitious goal of producing 35 billion gallons of renewable fuels a year by 2017.

Cellulosic ethanol is attractive because the feedstock, which includes wheat straw, corn stover, grass, and wood chips, is cheap and abundant. Converting it into ethanol requires less fossil fuel, so it can have a bigger effect than corn ethanol on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. Also, an acre of grasses or other crops grown specifically to make ethanol could produce more than two times the number of gallons of ethanol as an acre of corn, in part because the whole plant can be used instead of just the grain. That's good news because many experts estimate that corn-ethanol producers will run out of land, in part because of competing demand for corn-based food, limiting the total production to about 15 billion gallons of fuel. (Already, corn-ethanol plants--existing and planned, combined--have a capacity of about 11 billion gallons.) The greater productivity of cellulosic sources should eventually allow them to produce as much as 150 billion gallons of ethanol by 2050, according to a report by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC). That's the equivalent of more than two-thirds of the current gasoline consumption in the United States.

But it will take some time to reach these levels of production. Even producing enough cellulosic ethanol to meet the president's 35-billion-gallon goal will be difficult. That will require that roughly 15 billion gallons would come from non-corn-grain sources such as cellulosic ethanol (about 5 billion gallons might come from biodiesel culled from oils in crops such as soybeans). And reaching 15 billion gallons by 2017 will be a challenge. Currently, according to the ethanol industry's list of producers in the United States, none of the ethanol comes from cellulosic biomass.

Cellulosic-ethanol companies are hopeful that they can meet this goal. Colin South, the president of Mascoma Corporation, also based in Cambridge, says that if all goes well, cellulosic ethanol could supply half of the 35-billion-gallon goal by 2017. But so far Mascoma has only announced plans to build a demonstration facility with a capacity of about half a million gallons of fuel per year. That facility should be ready in 18 months, South says. But as is the case with the new Celunol plant, the facility's primary purpose would be to demonstrate that the company's technology can work at a large scale; it will not always operate at full capacity, as the system is used to test new cost-saving technologies.

Record-Low Production Cost for Nuclear Power

Record-Low Production Costs, Near-Record Output Mark Stellar Year for U.S. Nuclear Power Plants
Nuclear Energy Institute, February 20, 2007

U.S. nuclear power plants in 2006 supplied the second-highest amount of electricity in the industry’s history while achieving record-low production costs, according to preliminary figures released today by the Nuclear Energy Institute. ...

The industry’s average production costs—encompassing expenses for uranium fuel and operations and maintenance—were an all-time low of 1.66 cents/kwh in 2006, according to preliminary figures. Average production costs have been below 2 cents/kwh for the past eight years, making nuclear power plants highly cost competitive with other electricity sources ...

Even when expenses for taxes, decommissioning and yearly capital additions are added to production costs to yield a total electricity cost, nuclear-generated electricity typically clears the market for less than 2.5 cents/kwh. By comparison, production costs alone for natural gas-fired power plants averaged 7.5 cents/kwh in 2005, according to Global Energy Decisions data.

The industry’s average capacity factor—a measure of efficiency—was 89.9 percent last year, according to preliminary figures. ...

$3.00/watt, Lowest Price PV Modules

Aten Solar Promises Lowest Cost Per Watt for PV Modules
Press Release from Aten Solar, Bradley Beach, NJ, February 23, 2007

In January 2007, Aten Solar Corp, ... announced the commercial sale of their 42 watt a-si [amorphous silicon] modules for $3.00/watt. According to the March pricing survey's conducting by solarbuzz.com and ecobusinesslinks.com, these are the lowest PV modules on the market today. Despite the low initial power yields, thin-film photovoltaic products are becoming highly regarded for their better temperature coefficients resulting in a greater percentage of rated power production at higher ambient temperatures, produce more power on cloudy days in low light conditions, and do not experience broken connections due to inter-cell contact failure. ...

From their website:

Aten Solar ATPV-42 Solar Modules Description: 42 Watt Amorphous Silicon Solar Module

In lots of 1,Your Price: $120.00 [42 watts, equals $2.86 per watt]
In lots of 32, Your price: $4032 [1344 watts, equals $3.00 per watt]

View Details

Their descrioption of Amorphous Silicon solar cells

"Thin-film amorphous Silicon (a-Si) solar cells are gaining momentum in the market place. Amorphous Silicon cells use layers of a-Si only a few micrometers thick, attached to an inexpensive backing such as glass, flexible plastic, or stainless steel. This means that they use less than 1% of the raw material (silicon) compared standard crystalline Silicon (c-Si) cells, leading to a significant cost saving. Production of these cells is therefore less subject to the high prices of silicon caused by recent shortages. The flexible backing allows them to be formed to fit applications, allows for the bending inherent when used in building materials, such as roofing, and prevents breakage during shipping and handling at the installation site."

"Amorphous solar cells absorbs light more efficiently than c-Si, but they do not convert sunlight quite as efficiently, they require considerably less energy to produce, and are superior to crystalline cells in terms of the time required to recover the energy cost of manufacture. Amorphous materials, by definition, lack a crystalline structure and can be created by melting and then rapid cooling a crystalline substance as is done with a plasma vapor deposition process."

"Amorphous silicon is gradually degraded, by exposure to light, by a phenomena called the Staebler-Wronski Effect (SWE). SWE effects the power output of a-Si modules by as much as 10%. This light induced degradation is reduced by depositing the layers of the cell using high hydrogen dilution and by making combinations (alloys) of different types of cells. Because of SWE, a-Si cells are rated in the stabilized condition, which occurs after about 100 hours exposure to light."

Who are they?

"Aten Solar is a leading value added marketer of complete environmental and sustainable products. Engineers from the solar thermal heating, conventional heating, ventilation and air conditioning industries have come together to create a company called Aten Solar to meet the demand for solar energy solutions globally. The company's purpose is to provide a unique product mix of renewable products that was compelling for buyers amidst increasing energy prices. We carry other leading name brands like GE Solar, Kaneka Solar, Xantrex, Magnetek, Fronius, Techno-Solis, SolCol & Thermo Shield isolative in door and outdoor paints."

"Our global organization has over 20 years experience with solar thermal heating projects in the United States and overseas. The objective of Aten Solar is to be a significant facilitator of the growing solar energy industry within the United States, Canada, Europe and abroad. Aten Solar maintains a distribution warehouse in Bradley Beach, NJ and Northern California which provides a close proximity to New York/Philadelphia, San Francisco/Portland air and sea ports, respectively. We currently retain an office in Spain to support our European operations."

Corncob Derived Briquettes for Lower Pressure Natural Gas Storage

Using corncob waste as a starting material, researchers at University of Missouri-Columbia (MU) and Midwest Research Institute (MRI) in Kansas City have created carbon briquettes with complex nanopores capable of storing natural gas at an unprecedented density of 180 times their own volume and at one seventh the pressure of conventional natural gas tanks. The technology has been incorporated into a test bed installed on a pickup truck used regularly by the Kansas City Office of Environmental Quality.

"We are very excited about this breakthrough because it may lead to a flat and compact tank that would fit under the floor of a passenger car, similar to current gasoline tanks," said principal project leader Peter Pfeifer of MU. "Such a technology would make natural gas a widely attractive alternative fuel for everyone."

According to Pfeifer, the absence of such a flatbed tank has been the principal reason why natural gas, which costs significantly less than gasoline and diesel and burns more cleanly, is not yet widely used as a fuel for vehicles.

Standard natural gas storage systems use high-pressure natural gas that has been compressed to a pressure of 3600 pounds per square inch and bulky tanks that can take up the space of an entire car trunk. The carbon briquettes contain networks of pores and channels that can hold methane at a high density without the cost of extreme compression, ultimately storing the fuel at a pressure of only 500 pounds per square inch, the pressure found in natural gas pipelines.

The low pressure of 500 pounds per square inch is central for crafting the tank into any desired shape, so ultimately, fuel storage tanks could be thin-walled, slim, rectangular structures affixed to the underside of the car, not taking up room in the vehicle.

In addition to efforts to commercialize the technology, the researchers are now focusing on the next generation briquette, one that will store more natural gas and cost less to produce. Pfeifer believes this next generation of briquette might even hold promise for storing hydrogen.

Adapted from a NSF press release

Although our supplies of natural gas are limited, syngas, with very similar properties, can be produced by gasification of many feedstocks ranging from biomass to coal. If natural gas could be easily stored for use in vehicles it would eliminate the necessity and cost of liquefying the gas before using it as a fuel. Sounds like this project is fairly far along, so we may be able to see some use of it within a few years.

Hot Advance for Thermoelectrics

Cheap organic molecules could more efficiently convert waste heat into electricity.

By Kevin Bullis



By trapping organic molecules between a gold surface and the ultrafine gold tip of a scanning tunneling microscope, researchers have shown that the molecules could be used to generate electricity.

Inside fossil-fuel and nuclear-power plants, as well as in cars and trucks, the lion's share of energy in fuel is wasted as heat rather than converted into electricity or mechanical power. But the search for a practical material that can convert at least some of this waste heat into electricity has been long and frustrating.

Researchers have long known that some inorganic semiconductors can do this. Indeed, deep-space probes have been powered by using such materials. But these inorganic materials are costly and difficult to make, and have low efficiencies. Now, new research shows that certain organic molecules produce voltage when exposed to heat. Ultimately, they could be much cheaper and thus more practical to implement.

"This is the first demonstration that you can use organic molecules in this kind of energy generation," says Rachel Segalman, professor of chemical engineering at the University of California, Berkeley, who with her colleagues reported new measurements last week in Science Express. "That's really significant because they are so inexpensive and abundant," she says.

Experts had previously theorized that some organic molecules could have the qualities necessary to generate electricity from heat. But until now, they lacked experimental proof, which the Berkeley researchers were able to provide by isolating and measuring the properties of just a few molecules of organic substances called benzene dithiols at a time.

These were "very difficult experiments," says Brian Sales, a senior research scientist at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, who was not involved with the work. The researchers trapped a few molecules between a sheet of gold and the ultrafine gold tip of a scanning tunneling microscope, which is so sharp it can end in a single atom. They heated up the gold surface and measured, via the microscope tip, the voltage that was created. "These are the type of difficult experiments that get nanotechnology past the 'picture' stage [and] into the realm of real science," Sales says.

The experiments showed that the organic molecules have the three qualities that make for good thermoelectric materials. The first is the ability to create a voltage. But this works best when the materials have two other qualities: they do not conduct heat, but they do conduct electrons. That way, applying heat, rather than just raising the temperature of the material, actually drives electrons, creating a current.

Organic materials are appealing because they cost much less than thermoelectric inorganic materials: even if they are inefficient, they might still be economical. "These molecules are dirt cheap," Majumdar says. "If the efficiency is low, that's fine. You're throwing that heat away anyway."

Burned by the sun

Feb 22nd 2007
From The Economist print edition

Can biofuels save Europe, or the planet?

WHEN all else fails, agree on biofuels. That has been the reassuring mantra of European Union energy policy, plagued by disagreements on unbundling over-mighty power firms, haggles over carbon trading and worries about dependence on Russian gas. But a forthcoming report from the EU's own environment agency argues that the beloved biofuels—ethanol, rapeseed biodiesel and the like—have big drawbacks.

Last week EU energy ministers endorsed a European Commission proposal that biofuels should make up a mandatory 10% of the EU's fuel consumption by 2020; the current voluntary target is 5.75% by 2012. European heads of government are likely to back that deal at a summit next month in Germany.

Despite this apparent enthusiasm, most EU members will struggle to meet even the existing target. Only Sweden and Germany fulfilled an earlier goal of 2% renewable-fuel use by 2005. The main problem is that biofuels are expensive. According to KBC Peel Hunt, a stockbroking firm in London, diesel made from rapeseed costs roughly €0.3 ($0.39) a litre more than the ordinary sort, despite benefiting from various agricultural subsidies. British biofuel firms are struggling to sell their output even with a tax rebate of 20p ($0.39) per litre. The government, naturally, is reluctant to erode its lucrative fuel-tax revenues by increasing the rebate.

Several countries are trying to pass on the cost of adopting biofuels to motorists. Germany, the most biofuelled nation in Europe, has replaced a tax break with a straightforward legal obligation for refiners to blend a certain proportion of biofuels into their wares. From next year, Britain will do the same, and fine firms 15p a litre if they do not meet the required level. But French firms, which are already subject to a similar policy, often find it cheaper to pay the fine than to bother with high-minded greenery.

Worse, biofuels can generate as much pollution as the fossil fuels they are replacing, depending on how they are made. If electricity from coal is used to convert wheat into ethanol, say, the benefits in terms of emissions of carbon dioxide are negligible. By the same token, if rapeseed is grown using lots of fertiliser made from natural gas, then the resulting biodiesel brings relatively little reduction in emissions or fuel imports. Yet blenders and consumers have no means of distinguishing good biofuel from bad.

Biofuels from poor but sunny countries, where crops yield much more energy and costs are lower, tend to be both cheaper and more environmentally friendly. But protectionist European farmers dislike them. The EU imposes a stiff tariff on Brazilian ethanol; its specifications for biodiesel favour expensive local rapeseed oil over cheap imported palm oil.

In any case, destructive farming practices in exporting countries sometimes do more damage to the environment than burning oil or gas. Last year a Dutch study found that draining Indonesian swamps to make way for oil-palm plantations resulted in 33 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions for each tonne of palm oil produced, by speeding up the decomposition of the peaty soil. Yet burning a tonne of palm oil instead of fossil fuel saves only three tonnes of emissions. Faced with these findings, the Dutch government has apologised for promoting palm oil, and several Dutch firms have vowed to stop using it.

Instead of trying to turn crops into fuel for transport, Europe would do better to burn them for power, says Peder Jensen, of the European Environment Agency. That would save the energy used in the conversion process. It would also generate more energy, since power plants are more efficient than car engines. On February 26th the agency will produce a report that underlines such arguments. But there is no guarantee that Europe's leaders will read it before their summit.

CO2 Capture with E. coli

Tyler Hamilton of Clean Break has an article in Technology Review about a Canadian company called CO2 Solution (CDNX: CST.V), who has developed a bioreactor for capturing CO2 from the exhaust from power plants and industrial facilities.

The bioreactor contains packing that has an enzyme, extracted from genetically engineered E. coli, attached to it, that can absorb CO2 and convert it into bicarbonate, which is an environmentally safe product. Water flows counter current to the CO2 rich gas, the bicarbonate-rich solution is then removed.

The bicarbonate ions can be extracted for making everything from baking powder (sodium bicarbonate) to calcium carbonate (limestone) or the CO2 can be taken out of the solution and sequestered.

%2

Pulverized Coal vs IGCC

Two recent newspaper articles discuss the arguments as to whether pulverized coal or IGCC power plants are the better coal fired power plants to build, in the context of suitability to control greenhouse gas emissions.

A February 21 article in the New York Times sums up the arguments as follows:

Environmentalists are worried, but they put their faith in a technology that gasifies the coal before burning. Such plants are designed, they say, to be more adaptable to separating the carbon and storing it underground.

Most utility officials counter that the gasification approach is more expensive and less reliable, but they say there is no need to worry because their tried-and-true method, known as pulverized coal, can also be equipped later with hardware to capture the global warming gas.

The NYT reports that a study, to be released soon by MIT, indicates that it is not clear which technology will allow for the easiest carbon capture, because so much engineering work remains to be done.

Bruce H. Braine, the vice president for strategic policy analysis at American Electric Power, which plans to build two gasification plants said there is demonstrable evidence that separating carbon from gasified coal would work better than at a pulverized coal plant; “we think it’s the right thing to do to move the I.G.C.C. technology forward.

The February 16 issue of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram had article that pitted off statements made by or in behalf of TXU and NRG Energy. TXU Corp.'s plans to build 11 pulverized coal-fired power plants in Texas and NRG Energy proposes to build a coal-gasification plant in South Texas.

The rival technologies presented their opposing arguments at the Cambridge Research Associates conference in Houston. Each side claimed that its technology will more efficiently protect residents from pollution.

Tim Curran, president of Alstom USA of Windsor, Conn., whose company is three to five years away from developing carbon capture technology for pulverized coal plants, said that pulverized coal is superior because America's existing power-generating fleet can retrofitted instead of building brand-new generating plants. He called the promises of coal-gasification "hype."

David Crane of NRG Energy conceded that gasification is 20% more expensive than traditional pulverized coal technology, but called other arguments against it "myths."

Crane said that gasification is more expensive because each plant is custom-built. As more gasification plants are built, he said, gasification would enjoy the same cookie-cutter design advantages and construction efficiencies that traditional pulverized-coal plants enjoy.

ASES: Aggressive Plan Could Control GHG Emissions

The American Solar Energy Society (ASES) has published a report, Tackling Climate Change in the U.S.: Potential Carbon Emissions Reductions from Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by 2030, which enumerates, based on NASA's assessment that we need to limit the additional average world temperature rise due to greenhouse gases to 1˚C above the year-2000 level, the results of their studies of how energy efficiency and the use of renewables could achieve this goal. Estimates are that industrialized nations must reduce emissions about 60% to 80% below today’s values by mid-century.

The results of these studies show that renewable energy has the potential to provide approximately 40% of the U.S. electric energy need projected for 2030 by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). After we reduce the EIA electricity projection by taking advantage of energy efficiency measures, renewables could provide about 50% of the remaining 2030 U.S. electric need.

The following table summarizes the potential carbon reduction contributions from the various areas. (Energy efficiency contributions in the buildings, transportation, and industry sectors are combined into one number) (in MtC/yr in 2030).

Energy efficiency 688
Concentrating solar power 63
Photovoltaics 63
Wind 181
Biofuels 58
Biomass 75
Geothermal 83

New Transmission Line to Bring Wind Energy to all of Texas

Airtricity backed consortia to energise Texas with 4,200MW of wind energy via new $1.5 billion transmission loop
Airtricity press release, February 19, 2007

A consortia backed by Airtricity [an Irish renewable energy company developing wind farms] today announced its commitment to the construction of a ground-breaking electricity transmission ‘loop’ in the Texas Panhandle Plains region. The ‘Panhandle Loop’ will be a revolutionary 800-mile transmission project bringing 4,200MW of wind energy to the Texas Panhandle. ...

The scale of this project is unprecedented ... the 345k V loop will enable the entire state of Texas to benefit from wind generated energy ... by 2010. ... [In addition to the wind energy] the loop will result in the investment of over $10 billion in new generating capacity, including 2,000MW of gas-fired power and 1,800MW of coal-fired power. ...

This is an example of the size of transmission projects required to bring the benefits of wind power to populated areas. The resulting construction of fossil fueled power plants is surprising -- is this an indication of the amount of back-up power required for the wind plants or just an indication of the need for more power in the region? I suspect the later.

Do as I say—or as I do?

Feb 15th 2007
From The Economist print edition

The debate over climate change has opened a cultural rift in Europe about politicians' personal behaviour

Peter Schrank

THE European Commission's recent proposals to limit car pollution, and the climate-change debate in general, are revealing a cultural divide in Europe: nothing less than a continental rift over what really constitutes political leadership.

The northern view (for want of a better term that embraces the Swedish and the Dutch) is that the responsibility to set a good example is part of a politician's job. If a new leader decides to change his party's policy to make it greener, as David Cameron did with Britain's Conservatives, it is incumbent on him to be seen going to work on a bicycle (even if a car is following with all his papers). Equally, if the European Commission wants to legislate to reduce car emissions, the commissioner responsible must promise to swap his gas-guzzling Mercedes for a puny Toyota Prius—even if that offends Germany's mighty car lobby. He and the commission must, after all, set an example.

This holds even though the environment commissioner himself is Greek, not Swedish or Dutch. He is supposed to take on the ethical and moral characteristics of his portfolio. He inherits, as it were, the view from Europe's Protestant north that personal behaviour is central to political leadership.

In contrast, the southern (or Mediterranean) view is that public authorities should make and enforce the law, but not otherwise nag on about personal behaviour. Hence, the French left has always rejected criticism of champagne socialism (gauche-caviar) on the ground that what matters are the policies, not the lifestyles, of Socialist leaders. Italians similarly shrug off the personal shenanigans of politicians that would surely precipitate resignations in shame north of the Alps.

This is not purely a southern phenomenon. A perfect example came recently from Britain. When the prime minister, Tony Blair, was asked if he was willing to forgo long-haul travel to reduce his carbon footprint, he explicitly contrasted personal behaviour with the framework of public policy, and argued for the supremacy of the latter. “I personally think”, he said, coming over all Mediterranean, “[it is] a bit impractical actually to expect people to do that [ie, give up exotic holidays]. I think that what we need to do is to look at how you make air travel more energy-efficient, how you develop the new fuels that will allow us to burn less energy.” Public authorities should set the rules that shape consumers' choices but, within the law, consumers should be free to do whatever they like. The southern view is less concerned about leading by example.

Well, reply northerners, that's not surprising, for they're all crooks. And it is true that, in general, standards of public probity are higher the farther north you go. Yet it would be wrong to conclude that all politicians would lead by example if only the climate in which they operated were like Sweden's. Different attitudes to personal morality in politics are rooted in social and even religious differences, which may soon become starker.

This debate is really about a broader question: how much do leaders owe voters, beyond their best political judgment? Southerners (and Mr Blair) may answer: not much. Northerners think that leaders must not only say the right things, but do them as well. Or, as a Conservative environmental spokesman put it, speaking of Mr Blair, “he can expect nothing at all from the electorate unless he himself does what he knows is right.”

Climate change is a tough case because it covers two distinct forms of behaviour: legal v illegal (dumping toxic waste, killing whales) and ethical v unethical (not wasting food or energy). Northern Europeans say that this is precisely why the power of example matters, for they see legal and ethical behaviour as part of a continuum. Southerners reply that social pressure is more effective than political pressure at influencing unethical behaviour, and that politicians ought to restrict themselves to law-making, where they will have more impact than they ever could as individual consumers.

For God and morality

These differences also have religious roots that are not easy to pull up. It is no coincidence that a map of north and south follows the contours of Protestant and Catholic Europe. Protestantism's fundamental insight is that the relationship between the believer and God matters above all. Catholics, in contrast, hold that the relationship between believer and church is almost as important, and that the church, with its dogmas and rituals, acts as intermediary between its members and God. There may be a connection between these beliefs and the mindsets which hold, in one part of Europe, that what matters is the personal example of politicians and, in another, that it is the laws they pass.

More immediately, the living memory of dictatorship weighs upon half of Europe and separates it from the rest. The president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, who is Portuguese, talks of chafing as a boy under the Salazar regime, when he was not permitted to buy the records and books he wanted. When countries of “old Europe” were gung-ho to say governments should make a lot of noise about a common European culture, it was the young Hungarian culture minister who said, no, we shouldn't do that: propagating official culture was something the communists did.

Both communist and fascist governments not only passed restrictive laws, but also sought to dictate what was acceptable within the law. The implicit thinking was, to borrow a slogan from T.H.White's novel “The Sword in the Stone”, that “Whatever is Not Forbidden is Compulsory”. People who had to endure claims of this sort might be forgiven for taking a jaundiced view of politicians who nag voters about private behaviour that is perfectly legal.

Germany Counting on Wind Energy to Reduce Foreign Energy Reliance

Germany Putting More Wind Into Energy
Julio Godoy, IPS, Feb 15

Germany is blowing more wind into energy with the setting up of new offshore facilities. Germany already has the world's largest installed capacity for wind energy.

By the end of this year, German researchers will have installed a new facility in the North Sea, some 80 km west of the island of Sylt. The experimental facility will provide crucial data on conditions a wind turbine must satisfy to function efficiently on the high seas. ...

Germany has an installed wind energy capacity of 20.6 megawatts, that comes from 18,685 wind turbines installed on the mainland. This represented 5.7 percent of all electricity generated in the country last year. ...

Research on offshore wind turbines is becoming essential for further development of wind energy, given the scarcity of sites for mainland turbines. Besides, offshore wind facilities are estimated to provide 40 percent more energy than similar installations on land. ...

About 40 German offshore projects are being planned, with about half awaiting environmental approval by the German government. They are expected to be functional by 2030, and provide up to 25,000 megawatts of electricity. ...

German development of wind energy is driven heavily by moves to cut its reliance on foreign sources for energy. Germany imports all of its uranium for its nuclear power plants, and more than 83 percent of its natural gas.

Electric Utilities Back CO2 Caps

A trade group of electricity suppliers representing about one-third of US power generation, The Electric Power Supply Association, has joined a growing list of corporate groups calling for federal caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

The announcement by the Electric Power Supply Association is a sign that much of the US industry is concluding; that they see it as inevitable that they will get hit with an emissions cap whether it wants one or not.

The group includes some utilities that generate much of their power from coal, which among the fossil fuels commonly used to generate electricity is the dirtiest in terms of global-warming emissions. Carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, is produced when fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas are burned.

The group's president, John Shelk, says the reason they're endorsing CO2 regs is simple — predictability. Any power plants built in the near future that are being planned for now will be around for literally decades — as long as 50 years. So it's important to know ahead of time what the rules will be governing those power plants, including the rules on greenhouse gas emissions.

In a related action, The Edison Electric Institute is seeking federal action to cut greenhouse gases. They says such measures should promote development of cost-effective "climate-friendly" technologies. It has called on the government to include long-term public funding for research on controlling emissions. The Institute has long opposed mandatory limits on carbon, a key greenhouse gas. The principles the group adopted last week reversed that policy.

"This is a watershed day for the industry to take a like this," said Jim Rogers, chief executive of Duke Energy Corp. and chairman of the Edison Electric Institute "It reflects our industry's concern about this issue, and we need to act together to get this right."

This may mean that we have reached a tipping point on control of global emissions in the US., the initiative coming, in part, by industry. This is not necessarily a sign that industry is so much in favor of emission controls, but they need consistant rules inacted ealier rather than later so they can proceed with their plans. And it doesn't hurt their image any. These actions indicate that the electric industry is not as opposed to control of global warming emissions as some believe. They would like congress to act, so they can plan on building plants that will be competitive in the future. They may not endorse the most strict measures, but at least are acknowledging a need to reduce emissions. This is the reason that some are building IGCC plants, the ones that don't are likely to be forced to implement expensive retrofits.

Hydrogen Made by Methanol Electrolysis Process Saves Energy

Water electrolysis for large scale hydrogen production is unattractive because of its high electricity consumption. But hydrogen produced by electrolysis of methanol as proposed by Prof. Shen, from Advanced Energy Materials Research laboratory of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China uses only 1/3 electricity consumption of water electrolysis.

The principle of the electrolysis of methanol is as follows. Methanol is oxidized via dehydration at the anode, the resulting H+ ions diffusing through a proton exchange membrane (PEM) to the cathode chamber where they are reduced to hydrogen gas.

A promising advantage is that the standard potential is only 0.02 V vs NHE for methanol oxidation compared to 1.23 V for water electrolysis. Additionally the hydrogen generated comes from the methanol as well as from the water, the overall reaction being CH3OH + H2O = 3H2 + CO2.

This process offers potential for lower distributed hydrogen production costs and reducing the infrastructure required for hydrogen distribution. It is too early to assign any costs to the process. Obviously, the cost of the methanol would deduct from other savings.

Source: Fuel Cell Works

Energy Outlook, Feb. 6, 2006

EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook
February 6, Release (Next Update: March 6, 2007)

Highlights

• The unseasonably warm temperatures in the United States and throughout most of the northern hemisphere through early January reduced the demand for heating fuels, leading to an easing of petroleum and natural gas prices. Between mid-December 2006 and January 18, 2007, the spot price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil fell by about $12 per barrel to a low of $50.51 per barrel. The Henry Hub natural gas spot price fell from $8.67 per thousand cubic feet (mcf) on December 1 to a low of $5.56 per mcf on January 2. The turn to colder weather in the second half of January contributed to increasing crude oil and natural gas prices. In February 2007 the WTI crude oil price is expected to average $56.00 per barrel, and the Henry Hub natural gas price is projected to average $7.35 per mcf.

• We have lowered our price projection for WTI crude oil from our last Outlook. WTI crude oil, which averaged $66.00 per barrel in 2006, is projected to average about $59.50 per barrel in 2007 and $62.50 per barrel in 2008. The Henry Hub natural gas price, which averaged $6.90 per mcf in 2006, is projected to average $7.10 mcf in 2007 and $7.60 in 2008.
• Total U.S. petroleum product consumption is projected to increase in 2007 and 2008 by 1.4 percent and 1.5 percent, respectively. Lower projected prices in 2007, combined with projections for moderate economic growth and the assumption of normal weather, are the primary reasons for increased growth in consumption.
• Projections of U.S. heating fuel expenditures for the 2006-07 winter season have declined over the last two Outlooks, reflecting relatively warm winter weather from November through the middle of January. Average household heating fuel expenditures are projected to be $862 this winter compared to $948 last winter. ... more

http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo

White House Claims US Doing Better Than EU on Reducing GHG

White House: US Cuts Emissions Better than Europe
Planet Ark, Reuters News Service, Feb. 8, 2006

The White House said on Wednesday the United States had done better at reducing carbon emissions than Europe, where US President George W. Bush's stance on global warming has been sharply criticized. ...

Figures from the International Energy Agency indicated that from 2000 to 2004, US carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion grew by 1.7 percent, while in the European Union such emissions grew by 5 percent. ...

In response, US officials played down the country's contribution to climate change, although the United States is responsible for one-quarter of the world's carbon dioxide emissions and uses one-quarter of the world's crude oil.

Senators Blast Bodeman for Failing to Implement Loan Guarantees

Senators Criticize Energy Secretary: Loan Guarantee Program Lagging
Michael Coleman, Albuquerque Journal, N.M., Feb 8

Sens. Jeff Bingaman and Pete Domenici gave U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman a bipartisan blasting at a Senate hearing Wednesday for failing to implement loan guarantees to stimulate clean energy technologies

Bingaman, Democratic chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and Domenici, the panel's top Republican, said the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided for federal loan guarantees, but the DOE hasn't put them to use.

Bodman said DOE has been hamstrung by tight budgets, and that it doesn't want to "rush" to get the program in place. ...

This has been one of my biggest complaints about the DOE program, it is really holding up development of cellulosic ethanol by not building demonstration plants. I am glad that someone in power is trying to do something about it. Finding the money to do this is a simple matter of placing less emphasis on hydrogen and nuclear and more on clean energy technologies. They don't seem to be willing to take risks. One of the main reasons for government assistance is to provide aid when normal financing is unavailable because of risk. If we have to wait until the processes are commercial what is the point. Just look at some of my recent posts on cellulosic ethanol to see that companies are starting to build plants on their own (or investors) bucks. The better technologies are probably being used by the companies that are building, while the companies with less developed technologies are waiting for government support.

Study Says Yucca Mountain Too Costly

Nevada Study Shows Yucca Mountain Project Will Cost Much More Than Storing Nuclear Waste at Existing Reactor Sites
CARSON CITY, Nev., Feb 08, 2007 -- BUSINESS WIRE

A study released this week by the state of Nevada contradicts cost estimates from the U.S. Department of Energy and suggests the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository would actually cost billions more than storing the waste at existing nuclear reactor sites.

The analysis shows that (using that same 3 percent discount rate) it would cost $13.3 billion today to pay for the costs of dry storage at all 100 U.S. reactor sites - "for all perpetuity." Conversely, based on the same conditions, he found that it would cost $38.3 billion to build the Yucca repository by DOE's target date of 2025. The additional cost to store spent fuel until the repository is completed in 2025 is estimated at $5.8 billion.

Economists Favor Rasing Taxes On Fossil Fuels

Is It Time for a New Tax on Energy?
By Phil Izzo, Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2007

Economists Say Government Should Foster Alternatives – But Not How Bush Proposes

The government should encourage development of alternatives to fossil fuels, economists said in a WSJ.com survey. But most say the best way to do that isn't in President Bush's energy proposals: a new tax on fossil fuels.

Forty of 47 economists who answered the question said the government should help champion alternative fuels. Economists generally are in favor of free-market solutions, but there are times when you need to intervene," said David Wyss at Standard & Poor's Corp. "We're already in the danger zone" because of the outlook for oil supplies and concerns about climate change, he said.

A majority of the economists said a tax on fossil fuels would be the most economically sound way to encourage alternatives. ...

This may be the popular view of economists, but would the public like it. This approach is used in Brazil and parts of Europe. What do you think?

UK Wind & Gas Project: First of Kind

On Feb. 8 Eclipse Energy UK plc (‘Eclipse’) announced that it has been granted consent to construct and operate a unique dual energy scheme, the Ormonde offshore wind farm and to generate and export electricity from the adjacent Ormonde Gas Fields development by the UK Government. This completes the series of principal permissions necessary to construct the world’s first co-development of offshore gas and wind energy, in the East Irish Sea offshore from Lancaster.

When constructed Ormonde is expected to have the ability to provide up to 200MW of electricity from its gas turbines fueled by two natural gas fields and dedicated offshore wind farm of 30 turbines. The Ormonde project will be able to supply the equivalent of three-quarters of Cumbria’s domestic load generating enough electricity to power over 155,000 homes, the equivalent of which 71,000 would be powered by renewable energy, it will also save up to 286,000 tons of CO2 per year. The project anticipates first energy in 2009.

Ormonde Project Facts
	Wind	Natural Gas
Revenue Split	80%	20%
Installed Capacity	108MW	93MW
Generated Electricity	59%	41%

The Ormonde Project is a global first, integrating gas-fired power generation from end-of-life or ‘fallow’ gas fields utilized as a commercial catalyst in order to develop and generate renewable energy from an offshore wind power generation scheme.

Energy Minister Lord Truscott said:

"We are now starting to see a real flow of approvals for energy projects in UK waters. The London Array and Thanet schemes in the Thames Estuary went through in December and the good progress continues in 2007."

Commenting on the license award, Ian Hatton, Managing Director of Eclipse said,

"Eclipse is delighted to have gained consent for the world's 1st hybrid energy generation facility.

"We have combined both North Sea oil and gas experience and business models to provide a commercial catalyst to enable us to harness the energy from offshore natural gas fields and wind power, this is a global first.

"Over the next few years the UK's natural gas reserves will become depleted and we will become increasingly dependent upon imported energy. It is therefore vital that we explore the opportunities for producing energy from renewable sources and that we maximize recovery of the nation's indigenous energy.

"We believe that wind power can play a key role by producing electricity from a clean, free, abundant and inexhaustible resource. We expect Ormonde to be the first of a series of similar projects where offshore wind energy is developed using the hybrid concept. Our project is dominated by wind power but will also generate electricity from two small gas fields, Ormonde North and Ormonde South.

Eclipse Energy Company Limited is a new British independent energy company that recognizes sustainability as a key issue for the future of the UK's offshore energy industry in the 21st Century. The business was founded in February 1999 with the objective of developing, owning and operating low-carbon, sustainable upstream energy projects. The Company has developed an innovative concept for the hybrid production of electricity from offshore natural gas and wind resources. The Company’s first development is the Ormonde Project.

Offshore wind is getting a better start in the UK than in the US, although after years of haggling the Cape Wind project, off Cape Cod, MA in view of the Kennedy compound, now has a better chance of getting approved with a favorable Supreme Court ruling and the departure of Governor Romney. Eclipse's hybrid concept of combining wind and gas generation overcomes the intermittency of wind power, while utilizing gas from fallow gas fields that otherwise would be uneconomical to operate.

World's First Cellulosic Ethanol Plant

Adapted from Celunol launches commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plant in Japan by C. Scott Miller, BIOconversion Blog, Jan. 21, 2007

BioEthanol Japan, on January 16, became the world’s first company to produce cellulosic ethanol from wood construction waste on a commercial basis.

The plant in Osaka Prefecture has an annual capacity of 1.4 million liters (about 370,000 US gallons). In 2008, it plans to boost production to 4 million liters (1 million US gallons).

BioEthanol Japan was established in 2004 by five companies, including construction firm Taisei Corp., trading house Marubeni Corp., Daiei Inter Nature System, and beermaker Sapporo Breweries Ltd. Marubeni is supplying the process technology, which it has licensed from US-based Celunol, to BioEthanol Japan

The technology is based on the metabolic engineering of microorganisms, a set of genetically engineered strains of Escherichia coli bacteria that can ferment both C6 (hexose) and C5 (pentose) sugars present in cellulosic biomass into ethanol, which are essentially all of the sugars found in cellulosic biomass.

This plant is about one-fourth the size of the plant that Celunol is building in Jennings. It should provide some additional data that will help in the operation of the Jennings plant. I missed this announcement when it came out and am posting it because of its importance. This places the Celunol technology near the top of the technology heap, along with that of Iogen and Abengoa Biorefinery. Iogen just received some financing from the Canadian government to help in upgrading its demonstration plant. It will be a race to see if Celunol gets it US plant in operation before Abengoa Refinery gets its similar sized plant in operation in Spain. I have a feeling that the Celunol technology is a little better, beacause it can currently handle wood chips and the other two operate on straw. That says nothing about the cost of the three processes.

Celunol to Start-up First US Cellulosic Ethanol Plant in Summer 2007

Celunol is a leader in the effort to commercialize the production of cellulosic ethanol. The Company’s technology achieves high ethanol yields from cellulosic biomass at costs competitive with conventional ethanol processes using sugar and starch crops as feedstocks.

The company operates the Jennings pilot facility, on a 140-acre company-owned site in Jennings LA, designed to produce up to 50,000 gallons of ethanol per year. Celunol commenced operation of its newly expanded pilot facility in November 2006.

It is building a 1.4 million gallon demonstration facility to produce ethanol from sugarcane bagasse and wood, targeted for completion in mid 2007. This will be the first commercial scale cellulosic ethanol plant in the United States. Later, the Company is planning a commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol facility at the site.

Celunol’s technology enables almost complete conversion of all the sugars found in cellulosic biomass. This efficiency advantage, combined with the low input cost of cellulosic biomass, results in superior economics in the production of ethanol.

Celunol’s biomass ethanol technology offers numerous marketplace advantages:

• Feedstocks costs will be lower, and less volatile, than corn.
• Cellulosic ethanol facilities can be fueled by lignin waste streams derived from the process itself, avoiding the high and volatile price of natural gas as a boiler fuel for steam and electricity.
• Plants can be located outside traditional ethanol manufacturing areas and near end-use markets, creating a transportation cost advantage.
• Plants handling agricultural or urban wastes, pulp and paper sludge, etc. can simultaneously meet acute waste remediation needs, earn tipping fees, and yield valuable products.

Cellulose contains glucose, the same type of sugar—a six-carbon (C6) sugar—that is found in cornstarch and that can be fermented to ethanol using conventional yeasts. However, hemicellulose contains mainly non-glucose sugars—five-carbon (C5) sugars. Conventional yeasts cannot ferment most non-glucose sugars to ethanol with commercially acceptable yields.

Celunol's technology is based on the metabolic engineering of microorganisms. Its key element is a set of genetically engineered strains of Escherichia coli bacteria that are capable of fermenting, into ethanol, essentially all of the sugars released from many types of cellulosic biomass. This trait enables Celunol to achieve the required efficiency to make the process commercially feasible.

Celunol will use SunOpta's patented pre-treatment equipment and technology in the Jennings facility. SunOpta’s pretreatment and hydrolysis technology will prepare sugar cane bagasse and possibly hard wood waste for conversion into ethanol.

Carlos Riva, President and Chief Executive Officer of Celunol, noted the advantages of acquiring the SunOpta technology, "Incorporating SunOpta's biomass pretreatment system into our proprietary process will further enhance the operating efficiencies of our Jennings facility, and will advance the rapid commercialization of Celunol's cellulosic ethanol technology.

"The demonstration system is planned to be on-site in Jennings the first week in February 2007. Another six to eight weeks after that they’ll be operational,” said Murray Burke, vice president and general manager of SunOpta's BioProcessing Group, meaning a U.S. commercial demonstration plant will be producing ethanol from lignocellulosic materials.

The company has also licensed its technology to Marubeni Corp., a Japanese conglomerate, which has recently started up, the worlds first commercial cellulosic ethanol facility in Osaka, Japan that employs wood waste as a feedstock. The Osaka Project utilizes wood waste as feedstock in producing up to 1.3 million liters of cellulosic ethanol annually. A second phase, planned for completion in 2008, will increase production to 4 million liters per year.

Celunol, formerly BC International, was renamed last year, with four new venture capitalists on board, the company is well-backed financially. One such investor is Vinod Khosla, founder of Sun Microsystems. Other investors include Braemar Energy Ventures, Charles River Ventures and Rho Capital Partners.

Celunol Corporation, a privately held, technology driven company, moved its headquarters to Cambridge, Massachusetts in January 2007. It is leveraging its patented and proprietary biotechnical processes to commercialize the production of cellulosic ethanol—a convenient, environmentally friendly fuel—from a wide array of low-cost, domestically abundant biomass feedstocks.

Celunol's "wet" biomass conversion process http://bioconversion.blogspot.com/2006/08/celunols-wet-biomass-conversion.

The Presidents Budget Request on Energy

The following items, FYI, are take directly from the Presidents budget request (slide 23 & 24):

The Advanced Energy Initiative (AEI):

The AEI is accelerating breakthroughs in how we power our homes, cars, and businesses and will help the U.S. to diversify its sources of energy, reduce dependency on oil and increase our energy security.

• Coal Research Initiative: $385 million to complete the President’s commitment to invest $2 billion over 10 years – three years ahead of schedule— to develop technologies to reduce air emissions while providing domestically secure, cost-efficient electricity from America’s huge coal reserve.

o FutureGen Project: $108 million towards construction of a nearly emissions-free coal plant that captures and stores carbon dioxide rather than releasing it into the atmosphere.

• Solar America Initiative: $148 million toward the goal of making solar technology cost competitive with conventional electricity by 2025.

• Biofuels Initiative: $179 million to research the production of cellulosic ethanol from corn and to make other organic materials available as a competitive energy alternative by 2012.

• Hydrogen Fuel Initiative: $309 million will complete the President’s five-year, $1.2 billion commitment to support the development of commercially viable hydrogen technologies and fuel cell vehicles by 2020.

• Nuclear Power 2010: $114 million—more than double the funding in the 2007 Budget—toward this $1.1 billion government/ private sector partnership to license new reactors and for private industry to obtain licenses for new designs that could result in new power plants ordered by 2009 and operating by 2014.

• Global Nuclear Energy Partnership: $395 million to continue strong support for engineering and design of advanced reactors and new nuclear waste recycling approaches with the potential to reduce the toxicity and volume of nuclear waste that requires disposal in a permanent repository. Solving the nuclear waste issue paves the way for expanding the safe use of nuclear power around the world and at home, promotes nuclear nonproliferation, and resolves nuclear waste disposal issues through an international framework.

• Advanced Battery Research: $42 million to accelerate research on advanced battery technologies for "plug-in" hybrid vehicles that can be recharged at night.

Accelerating deployment of advanced coal technology:

EPAct 2005 authorizes the allocation of $1.65 billion in tax credits to foster more than $9 billion in private investments to construct highly efficient and low emission coal power facilities. $1 billion in tax credits were awarded in 2006

Accelerating scientific progress through the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI):

ACI is designed to support basic research and world-leading facilities in the physical sciences to enable future breakthroughs and provide economic security benefits.

• Department of Energy's Office of Science: $4.4 billion, to strengthen research and cutting edge facilities, such as new bio-energy research centers; increase contributions toward a major international fusion energy program; expand supercomputing facilities and related research; and support design and construction activities for world-leading light sources.

o $160 million for the United States’ contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor.

Renewable Energy Access also has a post on this subject, they have dug a little deeper in the budget than I have, so it may be worth a read.

Update 12:23 am Feb. 7, 2007: For those interested in more details for the DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy FY 2008 “Budget-in-Brief” and “Budget Request Presentation” they can be found at:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/ba/pdfs/FY08_budget_brief.pdf
http://www.eere.energy.gov/ba/pdfs/FY08_budget_request.pdf

The Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee plans a full committee hearing
on the FY 2008 budget proposal for the Department of Energy in 7 February.

While this is a budget request, it is somewhat indicative what might be passed by congress. While I am a big supporter of biofuels, a greater amount for biofuels than solar is not warranted. What is needed is action on demonstration plants for cellulosic biofuels, which was included in last years appropriations (REA found that the amount of loan guarantees would be increased from $4 billion to $9 billion, which I assume includes amounts for IGCC and nuclear plants as well as cellulosic biofuels). Solar, along with wind which is developed to the point that it does not need government funding for research (REA says there is still $40 million in the budget), promises to be the major source of renewable energy in the future. Wave power should have some research at this point.

I support aid for the construction of the first few new generation nuclear plants, but much too much money is being requested for more research, except for the amount to be used to develop better waste disposal technologies. The amount for hydrogen research is also too high compared to what is being requested for biofuels and renewable energy.

Industry is doing pretty well on battery development, but to the extent that the government can help that effort, I don't have any problem with them getting involved.

The fact sheets do not give enough detail to know exactly where the money is going so it is hard to make specific comments or recommendations. That said, I would like to see money removed from the nuclear and hydrogen budgets and transferred to biofuels, solar and a wave research program. I don't see the biofuels amount being reduced, in fact funds should be added for a butanol program. Solar deserves more money than biofuels though. As long as the money is for research and building demonstration projects and not for continuing subsidies, the government has a role to play in providing money that private industry does not have the resources to provide.

UN Report on Global Warming

Let There Be Dark, Or At Least Fewer Watts

Richard T. Stuebi, Cleantech Blog, Feb. 5 2007

Last week, as virtually everyone with an interest in energy and the environment knows, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gathered in Paris to release the first report of their Fourth Assessment. (see article) The report presents the accumulated evidence of physical change that has already occurred in the climate, and what is expected to or might occur by the end of the 21st Century.

If someone were to read this report and continue thinking that climate change is a hoax, then that person is either unable to read or unable to think. ...

Oil from Algae Could Ease Energy Woes

Algae-Based Fuels Set to Bloom

Kevin Bullis, MIT Technology Review, Feb. 5, 2007

Relatively high oil prices, advances in technology, and the Bush administration's increased emphasis on renewable fuels are attracting new interest in a potentially rich source of biofuels: algae. ...

Kathe Andrews-Cramer, ... at Sandia National Laboratories [says] ... "We could replace certainly all of our diesel fuel with algal-derived oils, and possibly replace a lot more than that."

Raw algae can be processed to make biocrude ... at existing oil refineries to make just about anything that can be made from crude oil. ...

The use of algae for liquid fuels has been studied extensively in the past, including ... a program at ...NREL that ran for nearly a decade. At the time, the results were not encouraging. ... enough has changed that NREL researchers expect to restart the program within the next six months to a year.

The cheapest way to grow algae is in open ponds. But open ponds full of nutrients invite other species to take over, competing with the algae and cutting down production. LiveFuels ... hopes to create algal ecosystems that resist such invaders by ensuring that all the nutrients are converted to forms the algae can easily use.

GreenFuel's John Lewnard, ... says the company thinks it can reach competitive prices without carbon taxes.

Bucking a trend

Feb 1st 2007 | BOGOTÁ
From The Economist print edition

A rare welcome for foreign oil companies

OTHER Andean countries, such as Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia, have all put the squeeze on foreign oil companies, with measures ranging from tough new contracts to outright expropriation. But Colombia is putting out the welcome mat.

Colombia shares much of Venezuela's geology. But its oil output is smaller; the last big oil find was by BP at Cusiana in the 1980s. Having been a modest oil exporter for two decades, it faces becoming a net importer unless new discoveries are made. That prospect has prompted President Álvaro Uribe's government to intensify its predecessor's wooing of foreign oil companies. Colombia now offers “among the best fiscal terms in the world”, says William Drennan of Exxon Mobil. These include a sliding scale of royalties varying with production and longer contract terms.

A flurry of investment in exploration to the tune of $1.5 billion a year is starting to produce results. In 2006, for the first time in years, net oil reserves increased slightly, to 1.51 billion barrels. A decade ago, industry analysts expected Colombia to become a net oil importer by 2007. Now that date has been pushed back to 2011, according to a study by Arthur D. Little, a consultancy. If current levels of investment are maintained, Colombia should maintain its oil self-sufficiency at least until 2015, says Armando Zamora, the director of the National Hydrocarbons Agency.

More than a dozen foreign companies are now looking for oil in Colombia. At the same time, Ecopetrol, the state-owned oil company, is operating in a more commercial fashion. It plans to offer 20% of its shares (worth perhaps $3 billion) to private investors. It has joined forces with Petrobras, a like-minded state oil firm, to explore a small field in Brazil.

Having got itself back on the oil map, Colombia hopes to be able to strike a harder bargain. Later this year it will auction contracts to explore offshore in the Caribbean. They will go to the companies that offer the government the biggest production share. Now all that is needed is another Cusiana.

Nuclear Power on the Move

TVA maps new plan to meet energy demand

Dave Flessner, The Chattanooga Times Free Press, January 28, 2007 via MSNBC

To meet the growing energy needs of the Tennessee Valley, TVA estimates it will need the equivalent of a new nuclear power plant every two years. ...

The U.S. Department of Energy picked TVA's Bellefonte site in Hollywood, Ala., for the new AP-1000...

The two new reactors proposed at Bellefonte are among 31 new units being considered nationwide by utility groups ...

By October, TVA and its NuStart partners are due to submit their application to the NRC for a new type of pressurized water reactor -- a Westinghouse AP-1000 design -- at the Bellefonte nuclear plant site. Regulators will have three years to review and sign off on the plans before construction begins. ...

If the license application for the AP-1000 is submitted this year and construction is under way by 2012, any private owners of Bellefonte or similar next-generation plants could qualify for up to $125 million a year in federal subsidies ...

Just an update on what is going on with next-generation nuclear plants, the time frame and subsidies. My position remains the same, that only four of the next-generation plants should be built until the technology is demonstrated. In the meantime conservation, battery based vehicles, wind power, solar troughs and IGCC plants and CTL plants with carbon capture should be the basis of our energy policy. In 3-5 years thin-film PV should be ready for prime tme and become a primary source of renewable energy.

Sharp Increases Efficiency ot Thin Fillm Cells

Sharp Develops Mass-Production Technology for Triple-Junction Thin-Film Solar Cells

Dramatic Improvement in Conversion Efficiency, Mass Production to Begin in 2007

Sharp press release, Jan 24, 2007

Sharp Corporation has successfully developed mass-production technology for stacked triple-junction thin-film solar cells by turning a conventional two-active-layer structure (amorphous silicon plus microcrystalline silicon) into a triple-junction structure with amorphous silicon (two active layers) and microcrystalline silicon (single active layer). This new architecture boosts cell conversion efficiency from 11% to 13% and module conversion efficiency from 8.6% to 10%. Mass production is slated to begin in May 2007 at Sharp’s Katsuragi Plant in Nara Prefecture. ...

Normally, the shift from a two-layer structure to a three-layer structure would demand an increase in production equipment, but these newly developed thin-film solar cells can be fabricated on the same equipment as conventional tandem (two-layer) cells. Consequently, the shift to multiple active layers enables increases in conversion efficiencies and thus a lower price per watt without the need for expensive, large-scale equipment. ...

In a separate press release they announced that they were doubling the capacity of their UK facility to 22o MW.

Thus the efficiency and cost of PV solar is being incrementally reduced by the worlds largest producer of solar cells. This probably indicates that they will eventually shift more of their production to thin-films cells.

Crude suggestion

Feb 1st 2007
From The Economist print edition

There may be an ominous link between oil and bond prices

WHEN stockmarkets fall precipitately, the story makes the nightly television news bulletins. But sudden moves in bond prices rarely attract anything like as much attention, even though the fixed-income market plays a vital economic role, setting the borrowing rate for governments, companies and homeowners.

So people can be excused for not noticing the recent tumble in American bond prices, which had driven yields sharply higher before a slight recovery on January 31st. On that day, the ten-year Treasury bond was yielding 4.83%, almost half a percentage point above its level at the beginning of December (see chart). The 30-year yield, until a decade ago the world's benchmark, was close to 5%.

The obvious cause for the change in mood is the American economy and the policy stance of the Federal Reserve. At the start of December most people thought the Fed would cut interest rates in the first half of 2007, in response to an economic slowdown. But recent data have been stronger than expected, causing most economists to push back their expectations of rate cuts.

However, the bond market is a lot more complex than you might think from the simple mantra of “rate rises bad, rate cuts good”. For a start, bonds can operate as a kind of negative-feedback system; when yields rise, so do mortgage rates (particularly in America, where loan rates are linked to bond yields). Higher rates damage the housing market, and thus the broader economy, a development that can send bond yields back down.

Then there is the complex relation between bonds and oil prices. In the 1970s higher crude prices simply meant rising inflation, which was bad for bonds. Nowadays, thanks in part to sounder monetary stewardship, the relationship has reversed; higher oil prices mean a weaker economy, which is good for bonds.

The oil-bond nexus has acted as a thermostat for the global economy. Higher crude prices restrict demand, cooling the economy down. But the resulting lower bond yields then boost consumer confidence, heating the economy up again. And, as in recent months, falling oil prices (good for consumers) have been accompanied by rising bond yields (bad).

The linkage goes further. When oil prices rise, money flows into the coffers of the producers. Some believe this has helped push bond yields down, because the petrodollars are invested in American Treasuries, much as Asian countries invest their surplus savings.

But pinning down a direct correlation is tricky. Barclays Capital points to a clear connection between oil prices and holdings of Treasury bonds by the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). But an IMF study* has found few links between oil prices and ten-year Treasury yields, and a paper** by Raman Toloui of PIMCO, the fund management group, suggests an indirect relationship at best. He shows how oil exporters have recently been amassing reserves faster than Asian governments have—last year, he estimates that they generated some $500 billion of reserves, against $284 billion in Asia. Much of this surplus ends up in central banks, or in government outfits like the Kuwait Investment Authority. Mr Toloui reckons that every $10 rise in the price of crude brings oil exporters an extra $90 billion-100 billion a year. Their assets add up to at least $1.5 trillion.

It is not possible to get accurate data on where all this money has been invested. But Mr Toloui reckons that some 40% can be pinned down. The vast bulk (two-thirds) is invested in bank deposits and short-term securities. Only 3% is put into long-dated American Treasuries.

So that would not, at first sight, seem to suggest that oil money has been driving bond yields up and down. Consequently, there should be little reason to fear that lower oil prices will remove a big buyer from the Treasury-bond market.

However, it may be that oil money flows into Treasuries via an indirect route, for example through fund managers acting on the oil nations' behalf. And even if an OPEC country invests its reserves in, say, Japan, that only gives the Japanese more money with which to finance the American current-account deficit.

Americans may, therefore, have just cause for some concern about their bond markets. The oil exporters do not appear to be as keen to buy dollars as do Asian central banks—which want to control their exchange rates to ensure their exports remain competitive. And even Asian nations, such as China, are talking about finding new ways of investing reserves.

In the long run, this could mean that Americans would have to pay more to finance their current-account deficit—a bearish sign. The recent rise in bond yields could be a first step in that reckoning.

On Russian Energy

This entry is my answer on the Economist article "Loveless Brothers ", the biggest lesson is that Russia wants to sell its gas at market prices to all consumers, irrespective of their political relations with Russia. This is a business issue and should not be politicised, for instance by suggesting that Russia is punishing its “former vassals”.

The lessons for east Europeans are: learn to live without Russian subsidies, and don't blackmail Russia with threats of disruption to Russian energy supplies. The best way to stop these threats is to route energy directly from Russia to Europe. For example, Nord Stream will eventually pipe gas from Russia to Germany beneath the Baltic Sea. Projects like this should be supported as they benefit energy stability; eliminating the intermediaries between suppliers and consumers is normal business practice after all.

ASES Has Answer to Global Warming

This entry is an answer to Jay Draiman's comments on my Silicon Valley and Green Technology entry below.

Calvin Jones of Climate Change Action refers readers to a report: Tackling Climate Change in the U.S. According to the report, the American Solar Energy Society (ASES) has the answer to the question: What can we do about global warming? The answer: Deploy clean energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies now!

According to Jones the key findings of their report are:

1) Efficiency can stabilise energy consumption up to 2030.
2) Under these circumstances ever greater penertration of renewable energy can lead to significant decarbonisation and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

In qauntitative terms, emissions reductions from the energy system of 40% by 2030 are shown to be entirely feasible.