September 12th, 2013 · Comments Off on Energy COOL: Triple Bottom Line Opportunity for the 99%?
Since diving into the deep end when it comes to energy issues, almost every day sees new fascinating concepts, approaches, and technologies. Fascinating … exciting … even hope inspiring at times. And, as well, as the passion builds, so many of these are truly Energy COOL. While most of these are technology, some are more about process and structuring along with philosophy … Boston’s CERO provides a microcosm example of a movement seems ready to sweep the nation …
Very simply, the CERO team plan to target making good from some basic American wastefulness: there is one-half pound of organic waste for every restaurant meal (on average) across this country. A 2005 study put this at about 50,000,000 pounds of food waste … each and every day of the year.
As to CERO’s philosophy, the headline on the website:
CERO is all about creating good green jobs and supporting local business in a solid neighborhood economy.
Our bottom line – People, Planet and Prosperity!
CERO is a startup disposal and recycling business in the Boston area. Organized as a bi-lingual and multi-cultural worker-owned cooperative, the members are local people with experience in hauling and recycling, and the business will serve local restaurants with a source-separation disposal system that will include composting and waste vegetable oil collection, in addition to recycling and trash removal.
That 1/2 lb per meal of organic waste will go into composting, to provide rich soil for the food for future meals, rather than going into landfills.
“Cero” is the Spanish word for “Zero”, and the idea is to help local restaurants and other businesses to achieve a target of Zero Waste, while providing good jobs in communities that need them.
CERO targets cutting total waste from partner restaurants by 70% in its first year.
Just like too many home owners, CERO is caught in the challenge where there are $billions for Wall Street while $0s for Main Street.
In a deal with potential investors, CERO has made a deal to show that it can raise money from a broader public before the bigger funders come to the table. Thus, this IndieGoGo effort to raise a symbolic $15,000. Success here and there is confidence that the funding will come in with the capital to purchase trucks and equipment.
Since diving into the deep end when it comes to energy issues, almost every day sees new fascinating concepts, approaches, and technologies. Fascinating … exciting … even hope inspiring at times. And, as well, as the passion builds, so many of these are trulyEnergy COOL. The fifth annual DC Renewable Technology conference provided multiple opportunities for learning and excitement.
Yesterday afternoon, a session entitled “Small Hydro Projects Present Big Opportunity” had me leaning forward with interest. Around the planet, micro and small hydropower represents a significant opportunity space toward clean energy production development masked by large hydropower projects. (Another reason todamn those dams?) While Molly Hill Patten’s articulate discussion of the challenges and triumphs toward making the Bowerstock Mills & Power Company‘s small hydropower project a reality fascinated me and merits future discussion, two presentations truly represented Energy COOL opportunities in the small / micro hydro world that create value streams from water that is currently flowing unexploited:
Natel Energy opens the door to generating electricity from small gravity drops, from 5 to 20 feet.
Lucid Energy has targeted generating electricity leveraging waste energy within municipal water pipes.
These two firms, alone, offer paths for a 10-20 percent increase in hydropower production and conceivably open the door for doubling hydropower production in the United States.
Natel and Lucid, combined, could enable shutting down a hundred coal-fired power plants across the United States … and many times this number more around the world.
Thinking about that … well … simply … wow …
Power from cool, clear water …
Follow me after the fold for a quick look at these two Energy COOL firms and technologies.
September 9th, 2013 · Comments Off on Weather, climate, patterns, how our lying eyes deceive us. Soccer dad version …
It is all too easy for our lying eyes to deceive us as large-scale patterns, trends, and otherwise are difficult to recognize in the face of the immediate. And, individual memory can be such a difficult thing.
The Washington, DC, area has had an unusually cool past several months. As a ‘native’, I refer to the insufferable August weather as “90/90” as so much of the time is above 90 degrees F and above 90 percent humidity. E.g., unbearably hot, muggy, sticky … A typical August and early September might have many Washington area residents spending just a few minutes a day as they rush from their air conditioned homes, to their air conditioned cars, to their air-conditioned offices, stores, restaurants, … Such weather has been the (rare) exception rather than the rule.
As we watched our sons play soccer, yesterday, in beautifully comfortable conditions, a fellow soccer dad said: “This really is beautiful weather … we haven’t had many hot days this year … When I grew up in the area, in Falls Church, Virginia, I remember that we had tens of days of 100 degree weather each year and this just isn’t happening.” I refrained from saying that I, too, remembered walking 12 miles to school with snow above my shoulders … I did comment that 2012 had set hot weather records and that there was a really ugly stretch of heat earlier this year, but really couldn’t do much more than that. Iit isn’t as if I had meteorological records at my finger tips on the sidelines.
This morning, I sent him a note:
Re 100 degree days, our memories perhaps can play tricks. … Here is a Washington Post graph on 100 degree days 1872 to 2012 :
Note that DC had 12 days 100 and above in all of the 1950s and 3 in the 1960s. We’ve already had more 100 degree days in 2011-2013 than occurred in either of those decades.
What we see, ourselves, can deceive us as to larger patterns and developments. What we see, what happens in our gardens, what we experience is ‘evidence’ and ‘data’ but it is far from all-encompassing and conclusive. And, well, our (dutifully) selective (faulty, even …) memories can make this problem far more serious.
Solar panels cover my rooftop and generate about 80% of my household’s electricity use. My house, of course, has numerous other “energy cool” elements (solar light tubes, high-efficiency fireplace insert, insulated whole-house fan, efficient appliances, etc …) but those solar panels generate 99% of the initial questioning about the house and my home’s energy issues. While frustrating, in a way, since solar pv is far less cost (and environmentally) effective than energy efficiency investments, there is a (legitimate) positive spin on this: the solar panels serve as a gateway to opening conversations about home energy use and enables education.
So too is the case for solar panels on and around educational facilities. If we care solely about EROEI (energy return on energy invested), there are many (MANY) things to do before putting up on solar panels. If, however, we care broadly about EROI (Educational Return On Investment), then the solar panels begin to make sense as part of an educational energy investment.
In the typical school system, the instructional and infrastructure staffs are barely on speaking terms short of communication about ‘the water fountain is broken and needs fixing’. These staffs interact but it is a very functional interaction — the infrastructure (facilities) staff is a service with the responsibility of making sure the building is working and hear (loudly and quickly) when there is a problem.
This gap misses a major opportunity space to improve the educational process and solar panels are a poster child of that opportunity.
There are drives for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education. When working on STEM programs, educators look for “systems” to study. (FAR TOO) Rarely due these educators think about the very building they reside (work) in as what it is: a rather complex system-of-systems, with heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, electricity, with a variety of building materials, that has complex interactions of impacts from the sound and air quality, temperature, lighting, pollution loads, and otherwise. When elementary school science teachers ask me for good ideas for field trips, my typical response: “Have you visited your own school?”
Solar panels provide a gateway opportunity for building and energy system integration into the classroom. And, that ‘gateway opportunity’ is what makes this a truly viable opportunity — not on ROI nor necessarily EROEI terms, but on EROI.
When it comes to financial return on investment (ROI), in many communities around the world, putting up solar panels has a direct financial return (putting aside tax benefits and otherwise) counted in a few decades. Solar power, without some external financial support, is fast gaining ground but it simply isn’t the winner in a straight financial shoot-out in much of the developed world’s electricity markets at this time. Yes, solar beats oil-based fuel and is tremendous for addressing peak urban air conditioning demand, but (without pollution charges) it doesn’t (yet) price out natural gas or hydropower or, sigh, coal.
And, as discussed above, when it comes to EROEI, much better to invest in insulation, energy control systems, more efficient HVAC systems, skylights, and a rash of other energy efficiency which will have a greater bang for the buck on EROEI.
However, when it comes to EROI, solar electricity might be the most stellar opportunity in the educational energy marketspace.
Visibility
Solar panels are highly visible. Students, teachers, parents, the community will be aware of them.
The school lobby could have a visual display — constantly updated — as to electricity production (current, cumulative over various periods (day, month, year, lifetime) and this would also be available via the web.
The solar panels will spark discussion about energy issues … as it does with my home.
Ease of integration into the educational curriculum
The reporting systems make the data easily available to teachers and students for use in the educational system.
A solar electricity system is incredibly easy to integrate into the educational environment. For example …
Kindergarteners could learn seasons and whether there is more solar electricity / more sun in winter or summer.
Elementary school students could use it for learning arithmatic, how to do distribution plots, and other development of basic math scales.
Middle Schoolers could calculate the distribution curves of solar electricity generation across time of day and across seasons, with analysis about variability and predictability. This could include, for example, taking multiple weather reporting services predictions and analyzing which correlated best with predicting actual electricity output.
Advanced High School students could analyze life-cycle costs per solar kilowatt hour — in dollar, energy, and environmental impact terms — and do comparative analysis for other electricity generation and energy efficiency options.
Electricity production
Oh, by the way, remember that those solar panels are generating electricity — which has a value even if that value is a fraction of the educational value for the school system.
In my area, each watt of solar costs roughly $4 to put on a roof (down from $6 way back in 2010 … e.g., the price is rapidly falling). A $50,000 investment would, therefore, put a roughly 12.5 kilowatt solar pv system on the roof. That system would produce in the range of 16 megawatts per year of electricity. As the school system pays a discounted electricity price of about $80 per megawatt, that would mean $1280 of electricity value per year or just under 40 years of straight payoff for putting solar on the roof (assuming away any tax or other benefits from the equation). Hmmm, this doesn’t sound good in ROI or EROI terms.
However, as yourself: How much does a school system pay for textbooks? How much should the school system assess the educational value of those rooftop panels, which will be there 25 years or longer? A 1000 student elementary school might have over 4000 students over that time period. Will the average student — through addition classes and otherwise — gain $50 of value through those panels? If that number is anything close to reasonable, the EROI (educational return on investment) is something like 4 to 1 the system’s costs, even without considering the value of the electricity generation.
the Northern California animal sanctuary Animal Place will airlift—yes, you read that right: airlift—1,150 elderly laying hens from Hayward, California, to Elmira, New York, in an Embraer 120 turbo-prop.
The price? $50,000.
And, that is the “cost” focus from Mother Jones, with the authors noting that “obviously, this isn’t the most efficient way to spend your chicken-helping money” providing alternative “chicken-friendly” options for using the $50,000 such as “You could buy flocks of chicks for 2,500 farmers in the developing world through the charity Heifer International.”
How about a different impact as to “cost”? What is the societal cost from this “rescue”? Of course, there is the opportunity cost as to the alternative (better) uses for the money (such as those Heifer chicks …), but what about true costs? One shorthand, to capture a portion of those costs would be the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) from the movement of these chickens.
Thus, the question: how many gallons of fuel will be burnt by the aircraft carrying the 1150 hens?
With well to blade calculations, a gallon of fuel burnt by an aircraft produces roughly 25 pounds of CO2.
Thus,
2121.2 divided by 0.94 = 2400.63 gallons of fuel
2400 gallons x 25 lbs of CO2 = 60,000 pounds or 30 tons of carbon dioxide emissions.
Thus, without considering all of the other energy uses (driving around to pick up / deliver the chickens; flying the empty aircraft to Hayward, etc …), this “rescue mission” will create 30 tons of carbon dioxide emissions (along with other pollution).
While debate exists over the exact number, the SCC might range from $33 per ton to well over $1000. In an highly optimistic case, which truly discounts many climate costs, we are thus talking about this hen rescue creating a cost from about $1000 on society (including costs, through climate chaos, on animals — chickens and otherwise) to something on the north side of $30,000. If we take that second number, this tells us that not only is Animal Place willing to spend over $40 per hen just on the transport costs but is willing to impose costs of over $25 per hen on society — just from the fuel burned by the aircraft one way. Those are, well, simply unacceptable costs …
Comments Off on The Social Cost of Carbon For A Chicken RescueTags:Energy
September 2nd, 2013 · Comments Off on Oceans Acidifying at Fastest Rate in 300,000,000 years. Don’t Worry, Be Happy?
This is a guest post from a scientist who feels like FishOutOfWater when looking at America’s discourse over science issues, most notably climate change …
We may be slipping into one of the greatest mass extinctions in the history of the earth, but just how worried should we be?
The world’s oceans are turning acidic at what’s likely the fastest pace in 300 million years. Scientists tend to think this is a troubling development. But just how worried should we be, exactly?
Dear Brad Plumer:
It’s a troubling development when your cat persistently coughs up fur balls on your bed when you’re sleeping.
It’s a troubling development when your car starts vibrating every time it hits 60 mph.
When the chemistry of the ocean is reverting towards a primordial condition when it emitted poisonous sulfurous gases, it is not a troubling development. It is the beginning of a fucking catastrophe of unimaginable proportions.
September 2nd, 2013 · Comments Off on Green Schools to Improve Educational Performance … and save money … and …
To America’s School Boards,
What if I could you offer you a reliable path to …
Improve Educational Results
Improve Student, Teacher, and Staff morale
Improve Student, Teacher, and Staff health
Create Jobs in the Local Economy
Improve Economic Performance in the near-, mid-, and long-term
Save money …
Intrigued?
You should be.
And, the great news:
A path exists to do all this.
This is the simple reality of the benefits that come from serious (aggressive, even) efforts to green the school environment.
Take the time to understand why greening should be core to your leadership … You have the opportunity to foster better educational performance, improve your community’s economy, help clean up the environment, save money … and to be heroes.
August 29th, 2013 · Comments Off on Oil (spill) Industry Good for Paper Towel Industry?
When there are spills in the kitchen, most Americans run for the paper towels. “Bounty: the thicker, quicker picker-upper” and all that. In the face of what is reported to be an “oil spill in New Bedford Harbor” that is “one of the largest … seen in New England,” it looks as if the response crews saw those ads.
Crews throwing absorbent pads into the water to soak up the oil in New Bedford
An MIT economist publishes a paper explaining that key economic modeling of climate change is wrong primarily because the models do not account for the risk of catastrophic climate chaos, but essentially have linear analysis that fosters a greatly understated accounting of the risks that climate chaos will devastate not just human prospects in the decades/centuries to come but the economy.
The climate risk downplaying and dismissing Institute for Energy Research (IER) leverages this study in support of its generalized opposition to any and all climate mitigation and investments to move toward a clean energy future. IER’s perspective: since the modeling is questionable, we should totally discount it and not include it to support any decision-making.
Huh …
A fair read of the paper suggests something far different: be careful of taking the results from these models as perfectly accurate because they are almost certainly wrong by being too optimistic about plausible risks and plausible outcomes. And, thus, the results could be used as a low threshold for consideration even as we should seek to develop better modeling approaches to assessing economic costs and economic risks from linearly developing climate change and from potential catastrophic climate chaos.
July 9th, 2013 · Comments Off on “Snarky” Professor’s take on humor in climate communication
As part of the American Geophysical Union (AGU), self-described “snarky” Professor Laurel Whitney gave the following presentation about leveraging humor in climate communication.
Professor Whitney’s DeSmogBlog’s bio provides a window on her self-deprecating alternative approach to communications. Rather than emphasizing that she teaches “climate change issues” or such to university students,
she gets to depress aspiring freshman about how the world is riding a flaming rollercoaster towards ecological disaster
And, she evidently was scratching her head in confusion listening to climate-denial talking as she looks back on her education and attendance of (well, too many?) academic conferences:
Laurel takes the newfangled attack on scientific integrity quite personally as she doesn’t ever remember taking a class on How to Make Up and Manipulate Your Data 101 or How to Get Rich Off of Government Research Contracts 110 while attaining her multiple science degrees
Professor Whitney’s discussion is interesting and, as is she generally, insightful. As I watched, one subtext indicated the necessity of actually paying attention to her — while climate change is certainly a serious (extremely, terrifyingly, overwhelmingly, etc … serious) issue, there does not seem to have been a single laugh from the the AGU session’s attendees. Perhaps Professor Whitney might wish to add another message to those attendees and other climate scientists — lighten up a little bit, it might help get people to pay more attention to climate change and the necessity for action.
UPDATE: A tweet from “Snarky” Professor Whitney:
@A_Siegel@science Thanks for the review- audience was chuckling quite a bit, but weren’t mic’ed so couldn’t hear it online.
