Posts
2008 was a tremendous year for renewable energy in the United States with the wind industry leading the way. Take a look at the numbers (source American Wind Energy Association):
- 8,358 megawatts of new generating capacity installed
- Investment of US $17 billion
- New wind projects accounted for about 42% of the entire new power-producing capacity added nationally
- New wind projects will avoid 44 million tons of carbon emissions, the equivalent of taking over 7 million cars off of the road.
All of this occurred with George W. Bush in office.
Now, think about all the changes the Obama administration has made and intends to make regarding renewable energy and the energy grid. Think about the dollars set aside in the economic stimulus plan. Think about the extension of federal tax incentives. Think about the new regulatory regime that is now in place (hint: it is run by folks who believe in global warming). Think about the fact that people, companies, and institutions worldwide will be looking for places to invest. Think about all of the predictions and projections for increased energy demand. Think about the fact that a number of oil analysts and researchers have indicated that oil supply is decreasing. Think about the new efficiency regulations that will be coming to the car industry. Think about the creation of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) that 75 countries have joined. Think about cap and trade regimes and carbon taxes.
Now, try and tell us that renewable energy investments are going to decrease. Tell us that the cheap price of oil will negate investments in renewable energy technologies and carbon mitigation strategies. Tell us that clean-coal is the real answer when there isn't a single clean-coal facility in operation. Tell us that because it is so cold in the United States there is no global warming and forget about the fact that climate change is the name of the game and increasingly severe weather systems and storms are one of the primary indicators of climate change and oh by the way Australia is in the midst of a record heat wave. Lie to us. Forget the facts. Ignore the truths. It is fine with us because we aren't as stupid as you think. You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
Investments in renewable energy are going to increase.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
Electric Vehicles, Carbon Taxes, and Exxon Mobil
There was a lot going on this week in the industry plus NO MORE GEORGE W. BUSH!
Electric vehicles were the big highlight of the Detroit Auto Show and recieved considerable media coverage. It was a funny coincidence that Detroit was the site of so much technological innovation. Of course, on closer inspection there is really no surprise because almost all of the big news coming out of the show had nothing to do with the Big 3. Which of course leads to another point; how are these companies still called the Big 3? The Big 3 of what? Failure? Tragedy? Stupidity? At any rate, it is way to easy to pile on GM, Ford, and Chrysler. GM may have have something with the Chevy Volt, although it remains behind foreign and U.S. competitors (check out Tesla). Ford is doing ok with its standard offerings and Chrysler...well they're still hanging around somehow. Thanks Secretary Paulson!
There was also major news in the carbon mitigation world. Exxon Mobil announced it was in favor of a Carbon Tax! Obviously, a good deal of skepticism is in order whenever Exxon announces anything that might be good for the environment. But, the Exxon announcement is a big deal for a number of reasons.
1) The Exxon announcement is a signal of the regime change occuring in the US. No more Bush is a transformative event for the energy industry.
2) Congress may revisit the Carbon Tax vs. Cap and Trade System debate. There is a lot to talk about here and we plan to get more in-depth. For now, lets just say that a National Carbon Tax holds great merit and that there is a surprising amount of support for a Carbon Tax from an unlikely group that typically loves trade.
Electric vehicles were the big highlight of the Detroit Auto Show and recieved considerable media coverage. It was a funny coincidence that Detroit was the site of so much technological innovation. Of course, on closer inspection there is really no surprise because almost all of the big news coming out of the show had nothing to do with the Big 3. Which of course leads to another point; how are these companies still called the Big 3? The Big 3 of what? Failure? Tragedy? Stupidity? At any rate, it is way to easy to pile on GM, Ford, and Chrysler. GM may have have something with the Chevy Volt, although it remains behind foreign and U.S. competitors (check out Tesla). Ford is doing ok with its standard offerings and Chrysler...well they're still hanging around somehow. Thanks Secretary Paulson!
There was also major news in the carbon mitigation world. Exxon Mobil announced it was in favor of a Carbon Tax! Obviously, a good deal of skepticism is in order whenever Exxon announces anything that might be good for the environment. But, the Exxon announcement is a big deal for a number of reasons.
1) The Exxon announcement is a signal of the regime change occuring in the US. No more Bush is a transformative event for the energy industry.
2) Congress may revisit the Carbon Tax vs. Cap and Trade System debate. There is a lot to talk about here and we plan to get more in-depth. For now, lets just say that a National Carbon Tax holds great merit and that there is a surprising amount of support for a Carbon Tax from an unlikely group that typically loves trade.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
CCS: Digging your way out of a hole
CNET reporter Martin LaMonica reported today that Edison Electric Institute (EEI), the industry association for U.S. utilities, in anticipation for upcoming climate change legislation, supports adopting a number of clean technology solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% from today's output by 2050.
Among the rollout of new efficiency goals and renewables, as well as electric vehicles and utilizing a smarter grid, EEI is uttering, in the same breath, support for carbon sequestration, aka carbon capture and storage (CCS) aka SHOOTING MILLIONS TONS OF CO2 UNDER OUR TOWNS AND OUR OCEANS in old emptied oil caverns.
While coal remains the cheapest and most accessible fuel source in the US, it remains the dirtiest. New technologies that utilize filtration and cogeneration must continue to make coal burning more viable; we can't give up on it altogether just yet. But with new DOE chief Steven Chu going back on his claim that coal is his "worst nightmare," has this crazy scheme to store liquified carbon in the earth really become part of the mainstream discourse?
CCS is frightening by itself. But the unanimous buy-in from American energy gurus is scarier. This is not a "technology" where throwing money at R&D will vet out its flaws. Using CCS is like sweeping the mess under the rug. It is unproven, irresponsible and potentially catastrophic. If, say, an earthquake were to hit near a cavern of 100,000 tons of stored CO2, can you imagine the bubble of toxic fumes that would emerge out of the water?
If CCS is really being articulated as such a vital component to America's future energy porfolio, I say let's play ball and go one step further. Let's add one more element to Barack Obama's wishes to combine NASA with the Department of Defense, and merge them with the DOE, so that we can launch carbon missles into Iraq and shoot the rest of it into space!
Among the rollout of new efficiency goals and renewables, as well as electric vehicles and utilizing a smarter grid, EEI is uttering, in the same breath, support for carbon sequestration, aka carbon capture and storage (CCS) aka SHOOTING MILLIONS TONS OF CO2 UNDER OUR TOWNS AND OUR OCEANS in old emptied oil caverns.
While coal remains the cheapest and most accessible fuel source in the US, it remains the dirtiest. New technologies that utilize filtration and cogeneration must continue to make coal burning more viable; we can't give up on it altogether just yet. But with new DOE chief Steven Chu going back on his claim that coal is his "worst nightmare," has this crazy scheme to store liquified carbon in the earth really become part of the mainstream discourse?
CCS is frightening by itself. But the unanimous buy-in from American energy gurus is scarier. This is not a "technology" where throwing money at R&D will vet out its flaws. Using CCS is like sweeping the mess under the rug. It is unproven, irresponsible and potentially catastrophic. If, say, an earthquake were to hit near a cavern of 100,000 tons of stored CO2, can you imagine the bubble of toxic fumes that would emerge out of the water?
If CCS is really being articulated as such a vital component to America's future energy porfolio, I say let's play ball and go one step further. Let's add one more element to Barack Obama's wishes to combine NASA with the Department of Defense, and merge them with the DOE, so that we can launch carbon missles into Iraq and shoot the rest of it into space!
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Eco-Warfare
Before he rides off into the sunlight, George Bush has the chance to rectify some mistakes--please give this video your full attention. Military R&D of renewable and energy efficient technologies will play a key role in transitioning to a low carbon economy.
Welcome
Welcome to The Energy Posse.
We plan to offer fresh and unique perspectives on the 21st century's energy challenges. With a blend of industry insights and humor, we will tap in to an emerging marketplace of ideas.
Please join us in our adventure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)