NEMA Currents : renewable energy

Congressional Unveiling of Major Energy Savings and Carbon Reduction...

Hansen, Dain — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:22:00 GMT

Do you want to save 4.48-7.95 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon annually (equivalent to removing approximately between 3-5.4 million automobiles annually)?

Do you want to save 25 to 42 Terawatt hours (billion kWh) per year (equivalent to 3 to 6 nuclear power plants or 6 to 10 coal-fired plants)?

Do you want to drive innovation and spur technology?

If you do, see NEMA’s newly unveiled consensus agreement outdoor lighting standard.

Today, Senator Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, Senator Pryor, Representative Harman, Representative Upton, NEMA’s President and CEO Evan Gaddis, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy and the National Resources Defense Council announced a consensus agreement for federal outdoor lighting standards. For the first time ever, pole-mounted outdoor lighting will have federally mandated efficiency standards.

For many months, NEMA has led negotiations with manufacturers, energy advocates, utilities, lighting designers and others to develop thoughtful and thoroughly vetting consensus standards. As you can see from the statistics mentioned, this agreement will have a monumental impact on energy savings, carbon reduction and technological innovation.

World’s Largest Pedestrian Bridge Soaks up Rays

goodwina — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:47:00 GMT

A few days ago, The Kurilpa Bridge in Brisbane officially opened, and it’s been referred to as the “largest pedestrian and cycle bridge.” It’s 470 meters long, and around 36,500 people will use the bridge each week. It features a programmable LED lighting system that can be adjusted for different effects and events.

What’s really cool, though, is that the bridge has 84 solar panels that can fully power the bridge in most lighting configurations, and provide 75% of the needed power for the fully lit mode. Excess power can be returned to the grid. The panels will average 100 kWh for daily output and 38 MWh for yearly output.

A Queensland government page has some amazing high-quality photos from several angles (scroll to the bottom for my favorites). Inhabitat.com mentions that the design is reminiscent of knitting needles, and I agree.

Even the Wind Farms are Bigger in Texas

goodwina — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:08:00 GMT

The turbines started turning on the world’s largest wind farm yesterday in Texas. According to an article from the AP, the 627 turbines cover 100,000 acres over four counties, with a record-setting capacity of 781.5 megawatts. I didn’t realize that Texas is #1 in wind generation in the U.S. (go here to check out a map showing wind generation by state). Interestingly, the land also functions as cotton fields.

The Dallas Morning News reported that a lack of transmission lines makes it impractical to build more wind farms in West Texas, but that $5 billion of new lines will help deliver generated electricity to the rest of the state. Reuters mentioned that the lines would allow wind developers to double the amount of wind power generated in Texas, and that the turbines were manufactured by units of GE, Mitsubishi, and Siemens.

Stimulus, Clean Energy, and Democracy

Silcox, Clark — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 19:25:00 GMT

In my last blog I mentioned Tom Friedman's suggestion that clean energy policy might benefit from a less than democratic policy-making process. My own opinion was that we did not need to throw out the Constitution for one issue, but within our constitutional framework the legislature could structure the public debate proceedings --- in rulemakings and in the courts --- so that bureaucratic and litigation delay was not the devil we forgot to deal with.

Friedman, in both his New York Times opinion pieces as well as his book, Flat, Hot and Crowded, is a huge cheerleader for the proposition that the United States can become the economic leader in the clean energy game with the right sort of domestic policies and restore some manufacturing to the United States and out-compete China Manufacturing. Two recent articles hint that we may already be slipping in the race, because China does not have to deal with the type of delay that is characteristic of the United States. A July 23rd article from Bloomberg News on green power investments in China includes these comments:

“In China, there’s a rapid follow-through from planning to construction whereas in Western markets -- the U.S. -- more time has to elapse as governments contend with local planning and possible opposition from citizen organizations,” said Alessandro Migliorini, an analyst at Helvea SA in Geneva.

"Meanwhile, the U.S. and Europe 'have become a little conservative about deploying some of the new technologies in electrical engineering for a while, like increasing voltages,' Peter Terwiesch, ABB’s chief technology officer, said in an interview. By contrast, the Chinese have 'actually had to evolve their grid very significantly and in many areas defined levels of requirements we haven’t seen anywhere else.'"

China apparently knows how to "stimulate," and this may have a lot to do with its command and control economic structure, which relies on a competitive market to quickly satisfy its commands. The Bloomberg article reports:

"Backed by a 4 trillion-yuan ($585 billion) economic stimulus package, the most populous country on Earth is targeting a 21 percent increase in spending on power transmission this year. Siemens AG, Alstom SA and General Electric Co. are also among those finding Chinese buyers for their most-advanced equipment.

“'The Chinese always want to buy the best,' ABB Chief Executive Officer Joe Hogan said in an interview. 'They force us to push the envelope on the technology.'

"Clean sources of energy will be used to generate about 35 percent of China’s electricity by 2020, according to Liu Zhenya, the head of State Grid Corp. of China, the nation’s biggest electricity provider. Currently the country’s 1.3 billion people get about 80 percent of their power from coal-fired plants."

Today's New York Times reports that China is outcompeting the United States in the solar marketplace. And the Chinese may be coming to a factory near you here in the United States. The Times reports, "Backed by lavish government support, the Chinese are preparing to build plants to assemble their products in the United States to bypass protectionist legislation. As Japanese automakers did decades ago, Chinese solar companies are encouraging their United States executives to join industry trade groups to tamp down anti-Chinese sentiment before it takes root."

So while we debate, regulate, and sue, others are moving forward and the Chinese will mute our criticism that they are the largest source of carbon emissions on the planet, even if they still are by 2020.

Let's Not Slip on the BANANA Appeal

Silcox, Clark — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:55:00 GMT

BANANA. The acronym, not the fruit. Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. I first saw the acronym in Tom Friedman's tome to clean energy development, Hot, Flat, and Crowded (2008). Friedman's reaction to the BANANAs:

As a democracy, we in America have increasingly become that kind of Banana republic. We need more nuclear power, no one wants the waste stored near them. We think wind turbines could provide a huge boost to our power grid, but please don't put any off Hyannis Port, Massachusetts, where they might mar my view of the ocean. Solar - yes, solar is the answer but don't even think about running the high-voltage transmission line you need to get solar energy from where it can be generated at scale in the deserts of Arizona all the way over to Los Angeles.

Friedman's examples of frustration with those who thwart the development of clean energy go on and on. Recent headlines justify his concern. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that Teserra Solar's plan to install 34,000 solar panels in the Mojave Desert is facing a challenge during the licensing stage, including a proposal from Senator Feinstein to turn the desert into a national monument so that no renewable development can take place there. New proposed non-carbon emitting nuclear facilities are being opposed both in the licensing stage and in the courts after agency approval in Michigan, Tennessee, and Florida. Many other license applications are pending at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and probably face a similar fate. Friedman bemoans, "[B]ecause of the risk of lawsuits and delays, it is probably going to take at a minimum government loan guarantees to relaunch America's nuclear industry."

Friedman's message: "If we are going to summon the will, focus, and authority to push through a real green revolution, we will need a president who isn't afraid to do whatever it takes to lead it." Ah, but there's the rub, because for Friedman, the transformative battle to reduce greenhouse gases is akin to a war - which leads him to suggest parallels to another "war" President, Abraham Lincoln, a role model invoked by President Obama from time to time, who suspended the laws of habeas corpus during the Civil War.

I don't believe we want or need to go that far. But if this economic transformation of our economy is so important, the leadership that Friedman summons is going to have to announce some priorities and that leadership will have to ruffle the BANANA advocates. We don't need to suspend legal rights. But we can limit and expedite the licensing and judicial review processes. We can also adjust the standard of judicial review. We have done this before when the need arises. Legislation can fast-track decision-makers and fast-track legal review so that the case is in and out of the courts in a matter of months rather than years. And if one judicial circuit gets backed up with these priority appeals, a panel can reassign them to another circuit that is not backed up.

The proposed clean energy legislation does not address this systemic problem, probably for political reasons, and it is worth asking whether the Congressional Budget Office reasonably factored in the BANANA-effect delay in estimating the costs and benefits of the clean energy legislation? As the Senate proceeds to consider clean energy legislation, will it show the courage to solve the split personality toward environmental benefits that stands as a barrier to transformation? Let's not slip this one up on the BANANA appeal.

A Little Ol' Transmission Fable

Hsieh, Eric — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:26:00 GMT

At a meeting of western states on the subject of renewable transmission, one state official lamented that the major obstacle to new lines, in some specific cases, was the federal government itself, with disparate agencies creating multiple hurdles. I found the comment non-intuitive. Isn’t transmission siting primarily restricted by disagreements between states on cost recovery and a NIMBY mentality? Since the comment was made in an off-the-record setting, I filed it and moved on until substantial supporting evidence emerged. Now, after reviewing an EPA letter to the Tehachapi project, I understand the state official’s comment. For certain classes of lines – those that have all necessary state-level approvals – the Federal government can act as an unintended barrier.

The Tehachapi project is designed to carry renewable energy, mostly from wind turbines, from the Tehachapi Valley to Southern California. The project has received regulatory rate approval from FERC and the CPUC. However, the latest trip-up comes from the EPA itself. Among other comments, the EPA requests that the developers maximize the use of helicopter construction in order to minimize the habitat damage caused by road construction. While the suggestion is understandable, implementation will raise costs. The EPA then goes on to say that because the South Coast Air Basin is in a non-attainment status for air pollutants, the helicopter construction should take place in fall and winter to minimize ozone formation.

In deference to the little old lady who swallowed a fly, this project thus sets up a cascade of mitigations. Build wind generation to reduce CO2 emissions. Build transmission to get the wind to reduce CO2. Use helicopters to avoid damaging the forest to build the transmission to get the wind to reduce CO2. Restrict operations to avoid emitting particulates but use helicopters to build the transmission to get the wind to reduce CO2.

The irony here is that the layers of regulations designed to protect the environment are hindering the very projects we need to minimize environmental impact. If there is any truth to the children’s tale, we need to break the cycle of circular environmental restrictions to achieve our environmental objectives. As policymakers examine how to expedite transmission construction, the federal government may be as valid a starting point as the states.

Fact Versus Fiction on Energy Storage Systems

Schweitzer, Eric — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:45:00 GMT

Often, important emerging technologies get caught up in misconstrued facts and misunderstandings of capacities and roles in an already technology-driven and confusing world. An example of this can be found in a recent op-ed in the Washington Post, "Getting Real on Wind and Solar" by James Schlesinger and Robert Hirsch. It's great they included a reference to energy storage systems (ESS) as a necessary component of the smart grid architecture for renewable energy. And they're right that the wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine -- so having a stockpile of energy that can be tapped into on demand, and especially during high demand or "peak demand" hours, is very important to ensuring adequate energy is always available. But their main thesis that renewable energy can't be pursued without adding coal-based utility resources or without using hydroelectric dams as energy storage tanks is wrong.

Using today's readily available technologies, ESS can run without the support of a hydroelectric dam or a coal based utility. The NEMA Energy Storage Council includes companies that produce flow cell batteries, flywheel generators, batteries (lithium ion, lead acid, lead carbon, sodium sulphur, zinc bromine, vanadium redox, etc), thermal systems, concentrated solar panels; even Plug-in Hybrid Electrical Vehicles that show great potential as a distributed mass ESS. The list goes on and on and it will continue to grow as existing and emerging technologies vie for the top spot. While stationary (flywheel, flow cells, etc.) ESS does require a larger footprint in terms of space requirements and can be used in some cases as "spinning reserves" for hydroelectric dams; their value must not be unappreciated or misrepresented. Both stationary and mobile ESS (Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicles) provide a vastly untapped revolutionary resource with the ability to alleviate our present and rapidly growing energy crisis and ensure a future success towards building a "smart grid." ESS can provide solutions to current grid capacity issues, residential/ commercial/ industrial/ military back-up generation, load leveling, frequency response just to name a few."

It's important that NEMA continue to serve the role of advocate during these organizational periods where stakeholders grapple with the feat of learning where to go to for accurate and timely information.

NEMA and "Net Zero Energy" High Performance Green Buildings

Moldoveanu, Andrei — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:01:00 GMT

In April 2008 the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) of the Executive Office of the President of the United States held a Workshop on "Net Zero Energy" High Performance Green Buildings. The scope was to define the R&D activities that could decrease use of natural resources and improve indoor environments while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants from the building sector. NEMA participated in the workshop, and its suggestions for areas that need to be researched and developed to achieve the net-zero energy building goal were included in the final report.The specific items proposed were: (1) Integrate distributed generation and on-site renewable resources into the electrical power grid. (2) Develop energy storage technologies. NEMA has established a Smart Grid Advisory Panel, a High Performance Buildings Council, and an Energy Storage Council to support standardization work needed to implement the necessary infrastructure for this massive endeavor.

SEMI Gets It!

leibowitzm — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:21:00 GMT

Recently, the Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI) released an article announcing the publication of a white paper prepared by its SEMI PV Group. This group supports SEMI members "serving the crystalline and thin film photovoltaic (PV) supply chains." In describing the "Perfect Industry," the paper rightly looks to standards (along with materials and process innovation and productivity improvements) as a means for accelerated cost reductions, identifies efffective international standards as a requirement for enabling innovation, and cites how standards contribute to economic growth and competitiveness.

SEMI is to be commended for their vision of how standards bring benefit to an industry. With an official working relationship with IEC TC 113 already in place, the SEMI PV group should work with TC 113 Working Group 3 to develop international performance assessment standards for their industry.

Nanotech Start-ups: Can Other People Build It?

leibowitzm — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:57:00 GMT

I read an excellent article from the October 3, 2008 edition of the N.Y. Times Magazine about the world of budding renewable energy companies and the role and function of venture capital companies in supporting them in their efforts to commercialize products. The article provided four basic questions, the answers of which determine largely whether a small start-up company survives; “Can it be built? How hard is it to build it? And if you can build it, can other people build it just as well?”...and..."Will anyone buy it?”

On the question of whether other people can build it, that ability, in the nanotechnology world depends on whether standards exist that one can build it to. In the case of electrical and electronic products that function on the nanoscale, international standards for characterizing the electrical attributes of nanotube, rods, particles and other structures are key to providing the customer a uniform way of evaluating nanomaterials from mulitple suppliers as that material interacts in an end product. And standard methods for assessing reliability and consistency in the manufacturing process are essential to mass production.

It is through IEC TC 113 that these standards are developed, and it is the U.S. Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to TC 113 that creates a favorable business model for U.S. nano-electrotechnical firms in the international arena. But the TAG will only be successful if U.S. manufacturing and research organizations in the field get involved.