Hard Questions and Sustainable Solutions with Chris Nelder

Chris Nelder has been writing about the issues surrounding sustainability for over a decade and he makes a very important point that my blog also makes. It is that we have the solutions at hand. They are turning out to be cost effective. We can get on with it and solve our problems.

The fact remains that our leadership do not grasp solutions and lead their implementation. Instead they struggle to preserve position and avoid failure through real action. Much change has happened only in the face of crisis when the population itself is moving to a solution allowing the leader to merely jump in front.

This is the result of intellectual weakness among the leadership. It should be obvious to my readers that the best way to stimulate the economy out of its present malaise is to swiftly build out a national power grid and to supply finance guarantees for wind and geothermal in particular. We need them both and we need them now to supply the energy needed to supply power for the onslaught of electric cars. The arguments in favor of this course of action are compelling and easy.

Yet today our president is a man who cannot understand building wealth, or even be expected to understand compound interest particularly well let alone be handed a wrench to fix something. He must make decisions based on input from a flock of naturally risk adverse advisors. Reagan may not have known that star wars was twenty years early, but his advisors certainly told him, but he understood that the USA could afford an impossible mission while the USSR would be flummoxed.

The USA faces a building crisis in energy that is slowly taxing the American people into a poorer lifestyle. It must be fixed and it can be fixed. What are we waiting for? We are waiting for technically competent leadership. It is high time for show me because everyone is now confused as to where we are all headed. The leftist agenda has been allowed to float like a balloon but is naturally fading as the usual realities settle in.

We badly need to see the pragmatic side of this presidency.




Hard Questions and Sustainable Solutions

By Chris Nelder Friday, August 21st, 2009


The more I probe the hardest questions about the future of energy and our best shot at sustainability, the more I am convinced that the real questions are not about technology, but about human nature.

We have all the technology we need to make homes that produce their own energy. We know how to build high-efficiency rail and sailing ships. We know how to grow food organically and sustainably. We have the science to create economic systems that internalize all effects and operate in a beneficial manner. We've had the quantitative knowledge for decades that we would eventually go into resource and environmental overshoot.

We certainly have the technology to build an all-electric infrastructure entirely powered by renewables. We will crack the storage problem and all the other technical problems. I have no doubt that the technology also exists to build an all-nuclear solution, or even an all-hydrogen solution.

We have the technology to recycle all our water and reclaim all our waste. We could even control our population. . . if we had the will.

We also know what real sustainability means. I don't think I have ever seen it better put than by my friend Paul Hawken in his book, The Ecology of Commerce:

Sustainability is an economic state where the demands placed upon the environment by people and commerce can be met without reducing the capacity of the environment to provide for future generations. It can also be expressed in the simple terms of an economic golden rule for the restorative economy: Leave the world better than you found it, take no more than you need, try not to harm life or the environment, make amends if you do.

The real problem is we don't want to act that way. Virtually no business in existence meets that standard.
Technology and knowledge simply aren't the issue.

We don't want to think about having to put CO2 back in the ground after we burn fuels. We don't want to worry about the waste from our consumption. We don't like to hear about limits to anything we want to do. We don't want to rearrange our stuff, our lifestyles, so that they are truly sustainable. And we certainly don't like anybody telling us we can't have more kids.

In fact we don't even like to think about it. . . so when the subject comes up, we dismiss it with a flip comment like, "So I suppose you want us all to be living in caves and working by candlelight?"

The upwelling of emotions that this topic inspires — especially fear — usually makes a neutral and scientific discussion out of the question.

And from fear, most people leap to faith: faith in the perfect wisdom of free markets, faith in technology, faith in human ingenuity. No rational discussion needed.

Nor is this aspect of human nature a news flash. ‘Twas ever so. At the suggestion of a smart hedge fund manager buddy, I recently put Thucydides' history of the Peloponnesian War in my reading queue for clues on how humanity actually performs when presented with serious fiscal and resource challenges.

I know some very smart people who are fully armed with the data on resource depletion and peak oil, and who still choose to believe in a cornucopian future where humanity acts wisely, humanely, justly, and in concert with a view toward long-term planning, solving all of our problems without any serious hardship.

This time, they contend, it will be different. After all, aren't we entering the Age of Aquarius, when humanity finally embraces unity and understanding?

Well, forgive me for being skeptical. The degree of cooperation they envisage has no precedent whatsoever in human history, and there are thousands of examples to the contrary.

In fact I was a bit shocked today when I looked back on my first opus on sustainability ("Envisioning a Sustainable Future"), published in my online magazine Better World 13 years ago, and realized that all of the problems are the same now as they were then, only worse: population, energy, water, extinction, environmental destruction, flawed economic theory, global warming, and humanity's problem with long-term planning.

It gave me pause. A long pause. Are all my efforts, and those of my fellow agitators for sustainability, simply battling human nature? And if so, what good is it?

Tantalizing Technologies and Hard Questions

At this point, 13 years later, the questions are even less tangible: How will people respond to the coming changes? Can the political support for truly sustainable solutions be marshaled? Will the economy hold out long enough to accomplish the transformation? And how will declining energy supply impede our efforts?

Certainly, in theory, we could replace 220 million light ICE cars and trucks with electric models, and heavy transport trucks with a combination of biofuels, natural gas, and hydraulic storage technologies. The technology exists. But will we have the investment and primary energy supply to build them, if we simply let the market and politics guide us?

Consider "Cash for Clunkers." Using data and estimates from the New York Times, I calculate that the program pays off in nine years at $70 oil, and in five years at $120 oil. In terms of effective investment in the future, that's really not too bad. (The photovoltaic systems I designed and sold in my previous career typically paid off in more like 20 years, before incentives.)

Even so, Cash for Clunkers was reviled for swapping out over a quarter-million cars for more efficient ones at a mere cost of $1 billion. What are the chances we'll have the political support to do 220 million vehicles that way? Especially if oil gets more expensive and we start having shortages and more heavy industry failures when oil goes into decline a mere two years from now?

Sure, we can run airplanes on "renewable" synthetic diesel fuel made from green waste such as yard clippings, and early investors in such technologies will make a bundle. Rentech's (AMEX:

RTK) recent announcement that it had signed a deal to provide as much as 1.5 million gallons per year of the stuff to eight major airlines sent the stock soaring over 360% in two weeks.

But 1.5 million gallons per year is nothing, and thanks to the transport and handling cost of green waste, it doesn't scale. If it requires transporting massive amounts of the feedstock with diesel-powered trucks, it isn't sustainable either. Need we even discuss recycled fryer oil?

Similar problems bedevil the alcohol fuels and biofuels, including algae. There are many interesting approaches to both in the lab, but for a long list of reasons (including water availability and the net energy of the processes), they don't scale well. I don't see any of the biofuels making more than a 50% gain from their current paltry levels for a good many years yet — and then we'll be having so many other problems with energy, water, food, and the economy, that the long-term outlook gets very murky.

Sure, we can try to turn to Canada's tar sands and deepwater heavy oil as the good cheap stuff runs out, but a cursory look at their net energy tells us that doing so is an attempt to play the oil game into overtime, not an attempt to do something sustainable. Thinking otherwise is simply

denial.

A straightforward analysis of the data suggest that once we take peak oil, peak gas, and peak coal into account, there may not be enough time left to use cheap fossil fuels for the decades it would take to accomplish a transformation to true sustainability, let alone the human will to do it. And the experience of the last year gives me no confidence at all that the world can smoothly transit this

inflection point in economics.

Yet I want to foster inspiration, not desperation. For most people, hope is as essential to survival as food, water, and air. And there is hope — not for business as usual, but for a much better kind of business. Not for endless growth, but for a more sustainable future.

But I am not one for false hope. I have endeavored to bring a dose of realism to this column for three years now, and I will soldier on. The opportunities to create sustainable solutions and profit from them are probably greater now than they have ever been. It's our task to find them, promote them, invest in them. . . and beyond that, hope for the best.

Until next time,

Chris

Energy and Capital

More Green than Dirty Power installed 2007

This change cannot go unnoted. A big part of this is a direct result of the reality that the permitting process for coal fired facilities is both expensive and laborious. In the meantime a single windmill, with no waste management problems is easily permitted as shown by the sheer volume going up globally.

I am expecting the same rapid build out of geothermal power in Nevada. A major facility is going on line this September, and it was green fields project as little as a couple of years ago.

It a continental high power line is run from California through Nevada to the East Coast, Nevada could build out geothermal power plants just as fast as we could find markets for the power. This would just as clearly employ thousands of people throughout the state.

The importance is that alternative power has allowed massive amounts of capital to be deployed quickly and that this will easily survive the present difficulties. The risk in building one of these is negligible and it easily supports a two decade payout.

Windmill and geothermal plants have a huge number of potential sites and the land aspect is trivial and will remain so. The regulatory cost is likewise small. Expect that the next twenty years that these systems will take their place with a maximum market share of energy generation.


More Clean than Dirty Power Installed in 2007

Written by Hank Green

Monday, 26 January 2009

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2505/86/

For all we talk about solar and wind power, they still produce tiny amounts of the United States' (and the World's) electricity. But now we've finally got some numbers reflecting just how exciting renewables are. In 2007, the U.S. the majority of new power installed was wind power, and total production of coal-fired power actually shrunk!

A total of 8.6 gigawatts of new power were installed in 2007 with around 5 gigawatts of that coming from wind. Almost all of the rest of the power addition came from natural gas.

Two coal fired power plants went online in 2007 for a total addition of just over a gigawatt. However, reductions and retirements of coal fired power elsewhere actually resulted in a 200 MW decrease in coal-generated power during the year.

That's freaking awesome.

Sometimes it's hard to see long term when we're all focused so much on the day's big breakthrough. But it's important to note that 2007 was a breakthrough year even though no one noticed. We can't just shut down all the coal-fired power plants in America, but we can start installing clean power instead of dirty power.

The Department of Energy apparently takes a long time to get these reports together, they just released these 2007 numbers about a week ago. But, frankly, I'm already holding my breath for 2008's numbers. You can read the full report here.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sum.html

Wind Power For the American Yeoman

I grabbed this off Jerry Pournelle’s site and the link provided gives us a good update as to what is accruing at the small operator level. It is all quite encouraging. This will never be a major component of the energy equation but it can be very important on almost any farm operation.

The farm industry has a long history of using windmills to operate water wells in particular. When I grew up, they were ubiquous.

Technology has now advanced to make a number of strategies profitable. A simple efficient offset to grid power is a good start. It does not have to be running perfectly, it just needs to take over the farm load as often as possible. Because it is linked to the farm load directly, the incentive is in place to closely mange it.

The advent of grid acceptance of surplus power could eliminate the need for battery support, although it is simply not that easy. The industry is going there though. Ideally the farm will have a matching load like water pumping that makes it all easy.

It is clear that many designs are been experimented with and that modern fabrication methods are been deployed. Small vanes using foam core technology is many times stronger and lighter than historic methods. Combined with electronic control systems it becomes possible to have a very efficient system that is very robust and easily repaired.

This technology is not pushing the limits of material strength as the major systems are.

I am sure that there is now a market for fabricated wind vanes by themselves. The hardware and generator could also be almost off the shelf. All of this can be quite cheap and Mark is quite right. The Chinese have a huge internal market to feed and cannot be far behind on this.

This requires a low capital cost basis for it to be broadly adopted and likely the Chinese can meet that. After all, the water pumps were displaced by rural electrification.

At least this time around we are producing electric power. That also opens the market for many other applications. Fifty windmills mounted on the roof of a factory is a good idea if the cost is within a range similar to grid power. The space is clearly available and the load is also available to maximize efficiency.

The fact that so many amateurs are now doing it tells me that it is only a matter of time until such operations spring up almost everywhere that a wind can be found.

The farm that I grew up on was in Midwest Ontario. As the full heat of summer hit, we got a steady and persistent wind blowing from the west that likely was clipping along at fifteen miles an hour. It was the only reason that it was possible to do field work in the afternoon at the time of maximum heat. Using that particular energy source to carry the local residential air conditioning load would be a very good idea. A case of the best source of temporary energy surplus been paired with temporary maximum demand.

This must be largely true in the whole Midwest and just about other any area of continental weather.

This suggests that towns need to take advantage of local diurnal wind conditions in order to offset diurnal peak loads associated with air conditioning in particular. A city that practically goes off grid when the temperature is warmest is never going to have to apologize for their air conditioning load and the place will become very attractive to builders and new owners. It is also something that a town can implement.

Wind Power For The American Yeoman

Dear Jerry,

Here's a starting point for those too impatient to wait for Sam's Club to stock Chinese-made import wind turbines:

http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind.html

There's a wealth of information about it and examples of small'uns and middlin' size ones up to 5 Kw, all built with widely available materials and construction equipment.

Want something more aerodynamically efficient than hand carved wood blades, and more durable than injection molded plastic? Foam core composites aren't just for Stealth bombers any more. Burt Rutan pioneered the use of do it yourself composites in the early 1970s with his homebuilt experimental aircraft designs. Time marched on, techniques improved and costs dropped. Scaled Composites itself graduated to using multi-axis CNC machines to cut their foam.

The determined American Yeoman can follow Burt's lead in both places with suitable low cost equipment:

http://www.solsylva.com/

Best Wishes,

Mark


Wind power can be an excellent complement to a solar power system. Here in Colorado, when the sun isn't shining, the wind is usually blowing. Wind power is especially helpful here in the winter to capture both the ferocious and gentle mountain winds during the times of least sunlight and highest power use. In most locations (including here) wind is not suitable as the ONLY source of power--it simply fills in the gaps left by solar power quite nicely.

OPTIONS FOR GETTING STARTED IN WIND POWER

Build your own!

Building a wind generator from scratch is not THAT difficult of a project. You will need a shop with basic power and hand tools, and some degree of dedication. Large wind generators of 2000 Watts and up are a major project needing very strong construction, but smaller ones in the 700-1000 Watt, 8-11 foot range can be built fairly easily! In fact, we highly recommend that you tackle a smaller wind turbine before even thinking about building a large one. You'll need to be able to cut and weld steel, and a metal lathe can be handy (though you could hire a machine shop that turns brake rotors do do some small steps for you).

In most locations, GENTLE winds (5-15 mph) are the most common, and strong winds are much more rare. As you'll see by examining our latest machines, our philosophy about designing wind turbines is to make large, sturdy machines that produce good power in low wind speeds, and are able to survive high wind events while still producing maximum power. The power available in the wind goes up by a factor of 8 as the windspeed doubles.

Other critical factors are rotor size and tower height. The power a wind turbine can harvest goes up by at least a factor of 4 as you double the rotor size. And making a tower higher gets you above turbulence for better performance and substially increased power output. Putting a wind turbine on a short tower is like mounting solar panels in the shade!

Before you jump into building your own wind turbine or buying a commercial one, do your homework!

There are certain things that work and certain things that don't, and you can save hours and dollars by learning from other people's successes and mistakes. Some recommended reading:

DanF's series on Small Wind Turbine Basics, published in the Energy Self Sufficiency Newsletter:

Part 1 -- How wind turbines work, power available in the wind, swept area, average wind speed and what it really means. The basic essentials!

Part 2 -- High wind survival mechanisms, wind turbine types, drag vs. lift machines, HAWTs vs. VAWTs, tip speed ratio, blade design, and lots of cool pictures and diagrams.

Part 3 -- Choosing a site, good and bad site examples, anemometers, tower types, lightning protection, power regulaton, birds and bats.

Our article The Bottom Line About Wind Turbines is an essential introduction to wind power. It covers the basics of how wind comes to us, how much power different size wind turbines can make in different wind regimes, and has a very handy section on detecting wind turbine scams.

Otherpower.com's Wind Turbine User's Manual should also be considered essential reading, especially BEFORE you take the plunge and buy or build a wind turbine. It will fill you in on exactly what you are getting yourself into with wind power, including towers, installation, controllers, and troubleshooting. It can be downloaded for free from that page, and is available in printed form through our Online Store.

Wind power information from homebrew wind power guru Hugh Piggott's website. We've learned a BUNCH from Hugh.

Hugh Piggott's book Windpower Workshop is an indispensable reference for anyone that's thinking about building a wind turbine. His Axial Flux Alternator Windmill Plans are very detailed and highly recommended.

Homebrew wind power infomation from Ed Lenz's Windstuffnow.com, a highly informative website.

Read the Renewable energy FAQs on the Otherpower discussion board, and Search the Otherpower.com discussion board. It's highly active and populated by windpower experts and hobbyists worldwide. If you still can't find and answer, by all means please join the board and ask your question there!
Join the AWEA mailing list for more discussion with wind power experts worldwide.
Explore other wind power websites from worldwide on our Links page.