California’s Carbon Cap And Former Secretary Of State George Shultz

June 25, 2010

The costs of California aggressive measures on climate change have been called devastating, catastrophic, job killers. A measure on November’s ballot would like to end them.

The emmission of carbon imposes a cost on society, says former Secretary of State George Shultz.

Opponents cite several studies, including a 2009 analysis by the California State University at Sacramento, which calculates implementation costs at $100 billion and expenses for each household at $3,857.

These dire predictions may be off the mark. Costs should be far less moderate, and despite all the yammering, state regulators appear ready to move ahead.

The California Air Resources Board still intends to begin working on a statewide cap and trade system later this year, says the board’s Assistant Executive Officer Kevin Kennedy. It also plans to impose responsibilities for anti-sprawl measures on local planning boards with the goal of reducing miles driven.

Giving cover to these efforts are several smarter studies of the state’s effort to promote renewable energy and cut greenhouse gases 15 percent by 2020. “It would be inaccurate to say, if these studies are right, that AB32 will kill the California economy,” says Lawrence Goulder, director of the environmental and energy policy analysis center at Stanford University.

Goulder said Friday at the Silicon Valley Energy Summit that three studies, including one by Charles River Associates, predict global warming regulations to:

*Reduce California’s gross state product by a modest .2 percent to 2.2 percent;

*Change incomes in the state in a range that will add $86 to salaries or cut them by $2,800;

*And increase jobs statewide by 10,000 or reduce them by as much as 485,000.

According to former secretary of state George Shultz, now a distinguished fellow at the Hoover Institute, greenhouse gases might be more intelligently viewed from the opposite angle.

“The emission of carbon imposes a cost on society,” he says. “That is a fact.” Regulations such as cap and trade or a carbon tax help level the playing field and assign a monetary value to innovation.

Leave a Comment » | news | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Global Warming Skepticism Linked To Cooler Temperatures, Not Stolen E-Mail

June 9, 2010

A new study of attitudes toward climate change confirms the number of global warming skeptics is on the rise.

But it traces this three-year trend to cooler temperatures in 2008 and not the controversy over e-mail stolen from East Anglia climate scientists.

The study by Stanford University and funded by the National Science Foundation mirrors the conclusions of recent Pew Research Center and Gallup surveys that show an increase in global warming disbelievers. However, it offers an explanation for the trend that the other surveys don’t.

Seventy-five percent of Americans say manmade sources are behind global warming and a similar majority supports government efforts to limit greenhouse gases and encourage the use of green products and energy

“Statistical analysis of our data revealed that this decline is attributable to perceptions of recent weather changes by the minority of Americans who have been skeptical about climate scientists,” Stanford Professor Jon Krosnick wrote Wednesday in The New York Times.

The study found that the number of people who believe in global warming dropped to 74 percent this year from 84 percent in 2007. Krosnick points out that 2008 was the coldest year since 2000 and that disbelievers were the ones most acutely aware of these declining global temperatures. (Scientists say year-to-year fluctuations have little bearing on long-term global warming theories.)

The Stanford research contrasts with the commonly held assumption that embarrassing e-mail hacked from computers at the University of East Anglia in Britain and the discovery of minor flaws in the influential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report were to blame for the changing attitudes. Conservatives have tried to make the most of the e-mail and minor flaws to undermine support for climate science.

However, only 9 percent of Americans contacted by Stanford this month knew of the e-mail and distrusted scientists as a result. Only 13 percent said flaws in the report changed their views.

Perhaps most encouraging is the study’s finding that a large majority of Americans continue to accept the scientific evidence of the planet’s warming. Seventy-four percent say temperatures are probably heating up and 75 percent are convinced manmade sources are substantially responsible.

As a result, 76 percent want the government to limit greenhouse gas emissions. While about three-quarters of Americans are against new taxes (including one on gasoline), more than 80 percent favor tax breaks to utilities, carmakers and appliance makers to make products that use less fossil fuel and generate electricity from renewable sources.

This, of course, is the welcome news.

2 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Ford Ahead Of Schedule With Strategy For Low Carbon Cars

June 8, 2010

Ford is relying on its EcoBoost engine and sharp reductions in vehicle bulk to meet its low carbon goals – putting electrification into the back seat for now

The carmaker will report next week that it could surpass its 2020 goal of cutting CO2 emissions from its new U.S. and European cars by 30 percent compared with 2006. The greater confidence will be highlighted in its annual Sustainability Report, which will be released June 15.

Up to now, the Dearborn manufacturer has maintained that it is on track to reach the goal.

Ford's economical EcoBoost engine is one leg of the carbon-reduction stategy. Weight loss is the other.

The greater-than-expected progress is the result of a two-pronged effort to push its economical EcoBoost engine into existing models and take hundreds of pounds out of next-generation designs, says John Viera, director of sustainable business practices.

Ford sent the EcoBoost into production last year and the engine could be available in more than a million vehicles annually by 2013. Its greater fuel efficiency comes from the use of high-pressure fuel injection, which sprays cylinders with a mist of gasoline. Fuel economy gains can be up to 20 percent. Performance improvements allow V6 motors to be used in place of V8s, and 4s instead of 6s.

Ford is accompanying the EcoBoost with more modest steps it calls “1 percent” enhancements. A six-speed transmission might be installed instead of a five-speed, or electric power-assist steering might be used to cut down on resistance.

Major overhauls of production vehicles are done every four to six years, and new designs will see a big focus on weight reduction.The initiative could take 250 to 750 pounds out of cars, major steps for an industry that rejoices at taking 10 pounds from a current model.

Some of the weight reduction will come from the use of different materials, particularly aluminum and high-strength steel. The consequence is that less energy will be needed to power cars, and engines can be downsized. So a 1.7 liter, four-cylinder motor can substitute for a 2.4 liter.

As to greater engine efficiencies from breakthroughs in internal-combustion design, technology gains are difficult to project at this time. “I don’t necessarily see that on the horizon,” says Viera.

Ford claims its 30 percent emissions cuts are necessary to blunt the environment impact of global warming. Cars and trucks contribute 20 percent of the world’s CO2 emissions, and if the danger line is 450 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, as some scientists believe, then the 30-percent target is what the company needs to do its part. The CO2 level is about 380 ppm today.

Vierra says the role of electric cars in climate change will be limited for the immediate future because of their comparatively small volumes. Electric cars and trucks will play a far more important role in the 2030 to 2040 timeframe, when the world will need to move away from fossil fuels for transportation, he says.

It is important to prepare for that shift today.

4 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

New York Times Op-Ed Blasts Carbon Capture

May 13, 2010

Carbon capture technologies are expensive, wasteful and woefully unprepared for the large volume of carbon that will need to buried, reused or otherwise discarded.

Carbon capture is energy intensive and the volume of the waste stream is equal to the world's daily oil production, says Robert Bryce

This according to a Op-Ed piece in The New York Times urging Senators to excise $2 billion in carbon capture research funding from John Kerry’s and Joseph Lieberman’s newly introduced climate bill.

The spending would come on top of $2.4 billion in Recovery Act money already being spent on capture and sequestration technologies. The theory, of course, is that these projects will remove carbon, a greenhouse gas, from the exhaust plumes of coal-fired power plants and reuse it, perhaps to enhance oil extraction at depleting wells.

But Robert Bryce, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, argues the effort may be a fool’s errand. For one, he writes carbon capture is an energy intensive process that could siphon away 28 percent of a plant’s output, cutting into fuel efficiency.

In addition, as much as 23,000 miles of new pipeline will need to be laid to transport the large carbon stream. That stream could amount to 8.2 million tons a day – or roughly the equivalent of the world’s daily oil production.

Capture and sequestration is not the Holy Grail of climate change fixes, he writes.

2 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

China Top US In Green Product Awareness

April 2, 2010

Consumers in emerging countries, including China, are more environmentally conscious than those in developed Western nations, a surprise observation that runs contrary to common wisdom.

The finding was the key takeaway in a recent Accenture survey of eight countries, including Germany, France, the United States and India. In all, the willingness to favor green products was greater in less developed economies.

Researchers said the difference appeared to be the result of the greater exposure to pollution and environmental degradation. In developing nations, such as India and China, the immediacy of air and water pollution is leading shoppers to select products with a smaller environmental impact.

“Consumers in difference places have a different perception of the harm to the environment that pollution can cause,” says Kumu Puri, managing director of the consultant’s consumer technology practice. “The numbers are so disparate.”

Overall, 84 percent of consumers in emerging countries said they would be willing to pay a premium for green consumer electronics – televisions, computers and cell phones. Only 34 percent of consumers in mature economies were willing to pay extra for electronic gear that uses less power or is easily recycled.

The highest level of environmental concern was found in China. Ninety-eight percent of consumers were willing to pay a premium. India was second with 84 percent, followed by Malaysia.

Only 43 percent of consumers were willing to shell out extra in the United States and 42 percent in Germany. Almost half of Japanese consumers (49 percent) said they would dig deeper into their wallets.

Puri said the findings uncovered a fundamental difference in green attitudes. What’s more, the difference in China may be a sign of a trend gaining steam. They survey was conducted online, meaning that only the most affluent consumers were able to take part. The rest of the nation may be getting ready to follow suit.

Accenture surveyed 16,000 consumers last fall for the research.

1 Comment | news | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Utility Beware: Only 4% Of Americans Know What A Smart Grid Is

March 23, 2010

Electric utilities have a monumental consumer education task in front of them.

Vendors such as GE and IBM form an alliance to reach the 79 percent of Americans who don't know what smart grids and smart meters are

Only 4 percent of Americans really know what smart grids are. An additional 17 percent say they are “somewhat familiar” with the term, but the remainder are basically in the dark, according to a survey sponsored by GE.

The survey points to a challenge that so far has not made the global-warming radar. Smart grids, of course, have several definitions. But one thing is for sure. They are critical energy-conservation and management tools in the fight for the planet’s health.

And before they can be used, utilities are going to need to teach people what they are.

By definition, smart grids have two roles. In the first, they are information conduits between consumers and utilities, providing energy-use data that will let people make smarter decisions about how and when to buy electricity. As daytime power becomes more expensive, the smart grid will help consumers shift use to off-peak hours.

They also have a backroom role, aiding utilities in managing a more complex power flow. Renewables such as solar and wind don’t produce power in steady streams. Managing the ups and downs will require a more intelligent infrastructure – and this will only increase as more consumers put solar on their roofs and sell unused power to the grid.

Unfortunately, much of this goes over the heads of average Americans. On Tuesday, a handful of industry vendors took a first step toward changing this. Companies such as GE, IBM, Silver Spring Networks, Control4 and the GridWise Alliance formed the Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative to promote consumer eduction.

The good news from the survey is that among those who do understand smart grids, 72 percent believe they will save them money and 63 percent believe they will create new energy jobs.

4 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Evidence Of Global Warming Strengthens, Say Energy Secretary Chu

March 9, 2010

Evidence of global warming continues to accumulate, says Energy Secretary Steven Chu, with dire warnings for those who ignore it.

"This is the smoking gun," says Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

New research reinforces the claim that human activities are behind the build up of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, Chu said during an address at Stanford University.

“This is the smoking gun,” he said. “The carbon in the atmosphere is due to humans.”

The new research examines the types of carbon in the atmosphere and compares the ratio of carbon-14, a rare form of carbon created in the upper atmosphere, to carbon-12, formed by the burning of fossil fuels. It offers unequivocal proof, he said

Chu warned that the dangers of business as usual could be considerable. During the last ice age, average global temperatures were 6 degrees Celsius cooler than today. And yet much of Europe and North America lay under sheets of ice.

If the world continues unimpeded to burn fossil fuels, temperatures could rise 3 to 6 degrees Celsius. “Six degrees represent a profound change,” he said.

To many, the dangers of climate change seem remote because changing temperatures are difficult to measure over a span of 20 to 30 years. In recent years, for instance, temperatures seem to have reached a plateau.

But scientists looking at a 150-year period observe a rise and steeper rises will come, Chu said. The impact of the increasing CO2 “won’t be fully felt for 100 years…cause the oceans have to warm up.”

The way to fight this rise, many experts say, is to limit the use of fossil fuels by putting a price on carbon. “We will live in a carbon constrained world,” Chu agreed. It may take five years to arrive; it may take 10. “It is coming,” he said.

5 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

The US Is In Danger Of Losing The Clean Tech Race, Says Energy Secretary Chu

March 8, 2010

The United States risks losing the race to a clean-tech economy if it fails to get serious about global warming, Energy Department Secretary Steven Chu said Monday.

Taking five years or longer to pass energy legislation will limit the nation’s ability to be a leader in the green-energy technologies of tomorrow, Chu said during an address at Stanford University.

American prosperity is at stake, said Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

“I think we will lose (and) end up purchasing equipment from abroad,” he said. “The future prosperity of the United States is at risk.”

Chu used the midday speech to renew his call for an energy bill from Congress. But he also highlighted the danger more motivated countries, particularly China, pose to a complacent country.

China is spending $9 billion a month to diversify its energy production, he noted. One advanced power line project by itself will cost $88 billion over the next decade as high-efficiency high-tension wires are strung 1,200 miles from east to west. The wires will transport energy to the coastal population centers with miniscule energy losses of as little as 5 percent.

In 1996, the U.S. was the leading manufacturer of solar panels. Now its market share is below 10 percent, Chu added. “We are falling behind in the clean-energy race.”

He argued that the importance of energy legislation can’t be overstated. A properly crafted bill will set a price on carbon and a cap on permitted emissions, giving companies the clarity to begin making investments. Even a modest bill can provide an important signal to the market, he said

That Obama Administration has made the goal of energy legislation a top priority. Chu hoped to push the effort along: “I would like to have it this year.”

But the nation needs more than legislation. The Recovery Act passed at the start of the Obama Administration set aside $80 billion for clean technology development. However, many of the grants and tax credits it included have been allocated.

More money will be needed, Chu said. “We still need tens of billions of dollars at a minimum a year. The Recovery Act was a start of that.”

Chu said the future prosperity of the country hangs in the balance. So does the U.S.’s first climate change counter punch, a long awaited first blow.

1 Comment | news | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Al Gore Responds To Climate Critics: You Can’t Wish It Away

February 28, 2010

Al Gore responded to climate critics on Sunday in a The NewYork Times op-ed piece entitled  “We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change.”

Minor mistakes in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report don't change its conclusions, says Al Gore

The former vice president and climate crusader took aim at naysayers who he said doggedly persist in trying to prove every major National Academy of Sciences report on global warming is hugely wrong.

“Unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” he wrote. Global warming disbelievers say the two mistakes – an incorrect projection for the melting of Himalayan glaciers and an overstatement of the amount of the Netherlands below sea level – undermine the report.

In addition, e-mail message stolen from the University of East Anglia in Britain hardly wish away the temperature records the university generates. Instead they show that “scientists besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics may not have adequately followed the requirements of the British freed of information law,” he said.

Despite these failings, the scientific consensus on global warming remains unchanged, with the world dumping 90 million tons of greenhouse gas pollution into the atmosphere everyday.

January may have seemed unusually cold in the United States, but globally it was the second hottest January in the past 130 years, Gore said.

Congress, instead of moving ahead with regulation, is paralyzed by the disbelievers, supported by businesses that depend on unrestrained pollution and news organization who “present showmen masquerading as political thinkers who package hatred and divisiveness as entertainment,” he wrote.

Gore went on to point out that the United States trails China in the race to develop smart electric grids, fast trains, solar power, wind energy, geothermal plants and therefore sources for new 21st Century jobs.

It is time, he added, to do the right thing.

3 Comments | news | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

Clean Energy Bloom Boxes Still Have A Dirty Side

February 24, 2010

In the gush of enthusiasm for Bloom Energy’s new energy box, one topic has received scant attention: its environmental impact.

Coca-Cola expected five Bloom boxes will help it cut the carbon footprint of an Odwalla plant by 35 percent.

The hype is that the new Bloom Energy Server is ready to save the world, to generate electricity without producing greenhouse gases. It is not quite that simple.

When most people think of fuel cells – Bloom hut-sized device is in fact a fuel cell – they think of hydrogen cells, which consume hydrogen and oxygen and produce heat and water. Very clean.

The Bloom Box is different. It requires oxygen and a fuel, such as natural gas, methane or biofuel. So while it generates electricity without combustion, it does produce the greenhouse gas CO2.

At a coming out event Wednesday morning, Bloom argued the box’s emissions were substantially less than those of a traditional power plant. Hence the claim of clean energy.

But it is a matter of degrees. Bloom says its new 100 kW box is 67 percent cleaner than a coal-fired plant, the dirtiest of the traditional electric plants. To drive home this point, it offered testimony from its first Fortune 500 customers.

Coca-Cola, for instance, has five boxes it intends to install at its Odwalla plant in California. The Energy Servers will run on biogas, generate 30 percent of the facility’s power and cut its carbon footprint by 35 percent. Coca was the most detailed.

Bank of America plans to use five Bloom boxes to run a call center in Southern California. The units will replace diesel generators and cut carbon emissions, though the company didn’t say exactly how much.

On its Web site, Bloom aims to be more specific. Customers will cut CO2 emissions by 40 percent to 100 percent, depending on the fuel they use, and virtually eliminate sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxide and other smog-forming emission. A biofuel would likely equate to the 100 percent claim, though it, too, would produce CO2.

Looked at another way, says Bloom, since the Energy Servers first appeared at customer sites in July 2008, they have generated more than 11 million kilowatt hours of electricity and reduced CO2 by about 14 million pounds.

That’s an important step. But alone it wouldn’t solve the climate crisis.

1 Comment | news | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Mark Boslet

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers