Cooler Planet

It’s fascinating to discover that the same day - that is, Monday, May 12 - John McCain delivered his speech in Oregon touting his stance on energy, the environment, and his support for nuclear power, the US Department of Energy held its own press event to announce the viability of wind power.

DOE’s report, “20% Wind Energy by 2030” addresses how the USA could harness wind energy and fulfill 20 percent of its electric power needs by 2030 if it made a concerted effort. 

To accomplish such a goal, the country would have to overcome hurdles such as improving its current transmission infrastructure and streamlining site and permit regulations.  Nevertheless, reaching 20 percent wind capacity is within reach using current technology available today. 

According to the DOE, the US currently leads the world in new wind installations and could potentially become the number one country capitalizing on wind by 2010.  That said, to grow its wind capacity by 2030, the US will have to increase its annual installations at least threefold from roughly 2,000 installations in 2006 to nearly 7,000 by 2017.

Perhaps the greatest challenge to overcome will be to ensure that transmission lines and grid are expanded to provide seamless connectivity.  Much of the best wind is located in places with low population densities.  To take full advantage of wind from these regions it must be efficiently transported to larger population centers.

The DOE report proudly asserts that, “supplying 20% of U.S. electricity from wind could reduce electric sector carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 825 million metric tons” (which is essentially 25%).   

The report did not compare the capacity of wind energy to other types of energy sources.  Thus it’s not possible to assess whether John McCain’s push for nuclear energy would have a better cost-benefit ratio than wind.  Certainly both energy types would require considerable infrastructure upgrades and improvements to permit and site guidelines.  Nuclear power has arguably steeper political obstacles than wind.  Wind is likely a more feasible strategy, politically.

It’s hard to know how the Bush Administration will react to the report.  The DOE’s Assistant Secretary Andy Karsner presented the report’s findings, yet made no mention of whether the current administration has plans or will approve measures to advance a wind energy infrastructure.  Hopefully the next administration will not let this report languish.

Here’s a link to DOE’s full report: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf

In 2003, solar photovoltaic panels were installed at the White House.   Two smaller solar thermal systems were also installed to heat water:  one for landscape maintenance personnel, the other for the presidential pool and spa.

The Reagan Administration had ordered a previous set of solar thermal panels removed in the 1980s (the Carter Administration had installed the first set).   

The Park Service, who oversees White House maintenance, decided to install a new set of solar panels on a maintenance building adjacent to the main house because as James Doherty, an architect with the National Park Service told Environmental Building News in 2003, “we are always looking for opportunities to promote renewable energy and sustainable design and we decided to take advantage of this next opportunity to pursue that mission at the White House.”

Although the White House has never revealed (for security reasons) how much energy each system generates, it acknowledges the system is modest and more a symbol of the Park Service’s commitment to renewable energy than an all-out power system.  The Bush Administration itself never really announced the project.  Instead the installation was completed “under the radar;” industry trade journals were the media that picked up the story. 

We, at Cooler Planet, decided to remind people of these national panels because we hope that the next Administration furthers these solar efforts – replete with lots of fanfare.