Cooler Planet

Home Depot may not be the largest retailer in the USA (Wal-Mart gets that notoriety) but it does have 1,973 stores across the country.   Moreover, those stores are located within 10-miles from more than 75% of US households.  That’s good news for recyclers and the energy-conscience because starting in July 2008 The Home Depot will take back defunct compact fluorescent light bulbs.

Customers can bring any expired and unbroken compact fluorescent lights (CFL) to their nearest Home Depot return’s desk.  The Home Depot will collect the used bulbs and a recycling company will properly recycle and dispose of the bulbs’ components.

The Home Depot’s offer to collect used CFLs from the public makes it the first (and of course) largest retailer to offer such a service.  In its press release announcing the service, Hope Depot said that it sold over 75 million CFLs in 2007, which translated into roughly $4.8 billion saved in energy costs and avoided 51.8 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions over the lifespan of the bulbs.  

Alaska is known for its natural gas and oil.  Now it wants to be known for its wind.

In May 2008, Governor Sarah Palin signed a bill that authorizes $250 million over the next five years toward renewable energy projects, namely wind.  A separate law authorizes $25 million to fund the installation of submarine cables that will connect a 50-megawatt wind power project on Fire Island in Cook Inlet to Anchorage’s international airport.

With her pen stroke, Governor Palin has made Alaska the second largest state (California is still first) to fund renewable energy development.  The state has big plans for its investment; according to the Alaska Journal it hopes to augment its energy mix and cut back on using the natural gas in its gas fields that are being depleted.

Clean Edge, a research and publishing company focused on renewable technologies and the non-profit organization Co-op America released a report that states the cost of electricity derived from solar power will be on par with electricity derived from fossil fuels by 2015.

The report predicts “as solar prices decline and the capital and fuel costs for coal, natural gas, and nuclear plants rise, the U.S. will reach a crossover point by around 2015.”   It also asserts that the U.S. can grow its overall contribution of electricity generated from the sun to 10 percent by 2025.  Currently, less than a tenth of one percent of total electricity comes from the sun.

The report’s authors cite the great leaps forward already made in solar installations.  In the past five years solar installations – both solar photovoltaic and concentrated solar – have expanded from 600 megawatts in 2003 to almost 3,000 megawatts in 2008, equivalent to three conventional power plants.

From a utility standpoint, solar offers distinct advantages over conventional fuel sources, such as coal and natural gas, making its competitive edge apparent within the next ten years:

• Once a solar installation is in place, utilities need minimal, if any, fossil fuel to operate the site, offsetting both the price of those resources and the cost to transport them to the site.
• Compared to nuclear, coal, and natural gas power plants, solar has low maintenance costs and provides carbon-credits, in a cap-and-trade carbon emissions economy.
• Solar-derived electricity has proven itself a cost-effective resource, particularly during periods of peak demand.

Similar to the recent report analyzing the wind power industry in the USA, government and market forces will have to continue to propel the industry forward.  However, reaching 10 percent solar capacity is within reach using current technology available today.  

Once again the sun is proving its worth.

Someone asked Cooler Planet to profile Amory Lovins.  Not an easy task given the prolific number of supporters and critics out there.  Here’s our humble attempt:

Amory Lovins is considered by many alternative-energy-enthusiasts one of our country’s leading spokesperson’s regarding energy efficiency.  His quirky style, practice-what-he-preaches approach, penchant for numbers, and compelling lectures and writings have earned Lovins numerous accolades.  Texas Instruments, Wal-Mart, and other corporate giants have enlisted Lovins and his Rocky Mountain Institute to analyze and devise strategies to maximize their energy efficiency and profitability.  Lovins is often asked to testify before Congress and weigh in on energy policy. 

Amory Lovins has long been a proponent of solar energy.  The sun powers Lovins’ home (which also served as the original Rocky Mountain Institute headquarters) in Colorado.  Passive solar design, the use of photovoltaic arrays and solar hot water panels generate enough energy to grow at least 28 banana crops and support other tropical vegetation.  Not bad for a building that has no centralized heating or cooling system and is located up high at 7,100 feet in the Rocky Mountains.  

Lovins’ opinion regarding energy policy is once again being sought.  His answers often seem prescient regardless to whether he said them in 1976 or 2008.  In 1976, Lovins published an article, Energy Strategy:  The Road Not Taken?, that laid out his vision and rationale for pursuing “a soft energy path.”  Lovins argued that developing soft energies, such as solar, wind, and geothermal and creating technologies that capitalize on truly using energy efficiently would create a strong and energy-independent USA.  Even then, Lovins disputed the pursuit of nuclear energy development as a costly and economically non-viable choice.  That article and the subsequent 1970s Energy Crisis catapulted Lovins into the energy policy spotlight.

Today Lovins continues to make his case.  On March 12, 2008, Lovins in his invited testimony to the US House of Representatives’ Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming explained that nuclear energy does not make sense from an economic perspective.  The plants are too costly to build and private markets are not interested in financing nuclear power because of the perceived financial risk.  Furthermore, true nuclear power emits less carbon dioxide once in operation, it is so expensive to install and maintain that its cost far exceed the expense to develop other alternative energy infrastructures such as wind, solar, geothermal, or biofuel.

For those of you interested in hearing Amory Lovins explain his positions, there is a great video clip on You Tube from a Charlie Rose interview with Lovins on November 28, 2006.  

There’s an adage advertisers refer to when explaining why advertisements and messages are repeated.  According to marketers, it takes at least 11 times before your audience “takes in” your message.   Lovins and his cohorts at the Rocky Mountain Institute have certainly talked about energy policy and energy efficiency more than 11 times; this time people are listening.  For as Lovins points out in his conversation with Charlie Rose, “what people are finally figuring out is that it doesn’t matter how low the price of oil goes, energy efficiency is still a great deal.”

NASA hopes to visit the sun in 2015.  The Agency announced that a team is developing a “solar probe plus,” officially called the Solar Probe+.  The unit will use retractable solar panels that can hide behind a heat shield when the star’s light becomes too intense.  The solar panels themselves will use liquid-cooled technology, a technology originally developed to cool computer chips.

In its press release, NASA explains that the Solar Probe+ will make it within 7 million kilometers of the sun.  That’s close enough to explore the sun and far enough away so that the equipment (hopefully) will not melt.   Scientists are designing a spacecraft that can withstand temperatures greater than 1400˚C.

Astronomers and physicists want to go there to try to figure out why the sun gets hotter the further one goes from its core, rather than cooler, as intuition would suggest.  They also want to try to learn what is behind solar wind.

Ah, the numerous wonders of our golden orb.

On Monday, June 16, USA Today published an article about rising electricity costs.  Rising prices for the raw material – such as coal and natural gas – and aging power plants that need upgrades contribute to spiking electric rates.   According to the newspaper, some ratepayers will see increases of nearly 30 percent in the coming year.

The seemingly never-ending news about increasing gasoline and electricity costs point to same trend.  Competing world demand for fuel effects the price of the resources we’ve come to rely on. 

In another, unrelated report published on Friday, June 13 the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency announced that China has now surpassed the United States in terms of carbon emissions.  China’s overall carbon dioxide emissions are estimated at 24 percent, whereas carbon dioxide emissions in the USA account for approximately 21 percent.  

Clearly, the United States is not the only country in the world seeking energy.  Demand from others contributes to rising raw energy prices as well.

Enter stage right:  alternative fuel.  We all know solar, wind, and tides will not solve all our energy needs, but they can certainly help mitigate some of these ever-looming impacts.

One has to wonder how much glum news it takes to break Congressional gridlock over extending tax credits for renewable energy . . .

The same day – Tuesday, June 10 – the US Senate stymied renewable energy tax credits, the City of San Francisco City Council passed some.  The San Francisco’s new Solar Energy Incentive Program ordinance passed by a vote of 8 to 3.  The program will offer residents $3,000-$6,000 toward the purchase of solar energy systems; businesses organizations can receive up to $10,000 for installing a solar photovoltaic system.  The City designated $3.5 million to fund the program for 10 years.  It also plans to pilot a $1.5 million, one-year program that will fund non-profit organizations and low-income housing developments that install solar photovoltaic arrays.

In announcing San Francisco’s groundbreaking legislation Mayor Gavin Newsom said that he hoped that within 10 years the program’s rebates could increase the number of solar panels in the city from roughly 750 to 15,000 and add 50-megawatts of power to the city’s electricity supply.

According to an article in San Francisco Business Times, a 3-kilowatt solar photovoltaic system costs roughly $30,000 in San Francisco (that includes the components and installation).  The City’s new solar energy incentives, plus the $2,000 federal tax credit (that hasn’t yet expired), and the State of California’s solar rebates can reduce a resident’s outright cost by as much as 40 percent.  For the remainder, residents can tap into banks that offer low-interest loans for solar installations.

San Francisco becomes the first municipality in the nation to offer such a large-scale rebate program to its residents.  Moreover, the City tied the higher residential incentives to “green collar jobs.”  Residents and businesses that hire an installer that employs graduates of San Francisco’s workforce development program are eligible for the highest rebates.

Although the Democrats and Republicans cannot yet find a way to extend credits for renewable energy, both want to make headlines as renewable energy supporters.  Perhaps that’s why both the upcoming Republican and Democratic conventions in Minneapolis-Saint Paul and Denver, respectively, will get part of their power from renewable energy.

Xcel Energy is one of the nation’s leading providers of renewable energy and the country’s largest provider of wind power.  It will use its facilities close to Denver and Minneapolis-Saint Paul to power each convention.  Most of the renewable power will come from wind.  Xcel Energy expects that power through its Windsource program will offset the estimated 3,000 megawatt-hours of energy both conventions will use.

Wind power for the Republican convention will come from an Xcel Energy facility on southwestern Minnesota’s Buffalo Ridge.  The Democratic convention will receive its wind energy from a wind farm near the Colorado-Wyoming border.  Xcel will also tap into the excess energy generated from solar photovoltaic arrays from its commercial customers.  In Denver, Xcel will use energy from the 10-kilowatt solar array on top of the Pepsi Center in Denver where their convention will be held.  In Minneapolis-Saint Paul, solar power will come from a 10-kilowatt installation at the High Bridge Generating Station in Saint Paul.

We’re sure that as the conventions near we’ll hear more from their planners on how much carbon emissions are offset through the alternative energy power sources.  

By the way the Democrats have announced other “green plans” for their convention; they hope to make their convention the greenest-ever.  Plans include recognizing delegates who offset their travel emissions; partnering with Native Energy for carbon emission offsets; and providing a fleet of bicycles for delegates to borrow for quick trips between hotels and the Pepsi Center.  Molson-Coors will donate $40,000 worth of E85, an ethanol-gasoline fuel blend made from waste beer lost during packaging or rejected for quality reasons from the company’s plant in Golden, Colorado.  The fuel will power the flex-fuel vehicles from General Motors used to shuttle delegates and supplies.   Convention planners also want to go paperless, challenging their staff to complete transactions, communications, and bookings electronically.

Not to be overshadowed, Republicans have “green plans” as well.  Republicans, too, hope to have the greenest convention their party has ever hosted.  And General Motors is the Official Vehicle Provider for the Republicans supplying over 300 hybrid fuel vans and cars for delegates and staff.  The Republican Convention will showcase an energy-efficient office, complete with recycled furnishings.  Planners have also directed staff and committees to reduce the amount of paper used in planning, printing, and booking reservations.

One would think that all the brouhaha about $4-a-gallon gas prices would get Congress to act on passing legislation addressing energy policy.  Perhaps they would, if this were not an election year.

That’s the current excuse as to why the bill to extend renewable energy tax credits was stymied in the Senate yesterday – June 10, 2008.  The bill fell 10 votes short of the amount it needed to make it to the floor for debate.  According to the New York Times, Democrats sensed that even asking Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, or ailing Senators Edward Kennedy and Robert Byrd back to vote would not change the outcome. (Note John McCain was not there either.) True the vote was 50–44 in favor and fell largely along party lines, but 10 votes is a significant gap. 

Perhaps the bill also perished because the Democrats tried to bring to the floor a different bill that would have created a windfall profits tax of 25% for the oil industry with the proceeds earmarked to fund new renewable energy initiatives.   Plans to fund the renewable energy tax credits came from closing a loophole that targets specific offshore corporations (essentially hedge-fund managers).  Taken together, the two bills gave Republicans the fodder they needed to decry any new taxes.

Who knows what will happen next.  There are still six months left before the end of the year.  Six months provides enough time in politics – to borrow a cliché – for anything to happen.

Someone asked Cooler Planet about Congressman Roscoe Bartlett’s stance on solar energy.  Here’s what we found out.

Roscoe G. Bartlett has a doctorate in human physiology and is an eight-term Republican Congressman representing the 6^th District in Maryland.  He is a Conservative Republican who is also a stalwart solar energy advocate. 

Before his successful bid for Congress in 1992, Bartlett had an illustrious career as a professor, research scientist, farmer, and land developer.  During the 1960s, Bartlett directed the Space Life Sciences research group at John Hopkins University’s Applied Physics Laboratory where the lab’s research contributed to NASA’s missions on Gemini, Mercury, and Apollo. 

That background must have contributed to his support of solar power.  According to Congressman Bartlett’s website, during his tenure as a consultant and land developer his company “built more than 100 homes in Frederick County, many of them solar powered.” 

Today, Bartlett seems to practice what he preaches.  He designed and built his solar-powered home.  And he was the first US Congressman to buy a Prius.  (In 2008, the Baltimore Sun wrote an article examining what type of cars Maryland’s elected officials drive and discovered that Roscoe Bartlett is one of only two that drives a hybrid – and that Bartlett’s Prius is his second one). 

Bartlett’s interest in solar and other forms of renewable energy comes from a pragmatic recognition that oil cannot indefinitely supply our collective “energy appetite.”  On his website Bartlett states, “Oil dependency is increasing at such a rapid rate that it will eventually pass current production and manufacturing capabilities. That is why I have been, and continue to be, a supporter of our renewable energy legislation and programs.”

Energy is definitely Bartlett’s “puppy.”  He firmly believes Hubbert’s Theory of Peak Oil; much of the impetus behind Bartlett’s energy policy stems from a solid belief that we are on the downward side of the supply bell-curve regarding oil. 

Similarly, Bartlett recognizes that climate change is real.  He has spoken eloquently in Congress about how carbon dioxide emissions impact our atmosphere.  On that basis, he supports nuclear power.  In a March 6, 2008 speech on the Congressional Floor, Bartlett spoke about the feasibility of alternative energy sources, including nuclear power.  Bartlett explained that from a carbon emissions standpoint, “nuclear, by the way, is even better.  After you have paid a carbon cost for building the nuclear power plant, then there is no carbon dioxide produced for the duration of that nuclear power plant.”

Bartlett often is the man behind recent renewable energy legislation.  In explaining why he introduced legislation to extend renewable energy credits Bartlett wrote:

 “Solar power has grown annually an average of 18 percent with the federal credit; it grew 57 percent alone in 2007.  Why dim this bright spot in our shaky economy?  An independent study by Navigant found that nationally, “112,000 jobs in the wind and solar industries (78,000 wind, 34,000 solar) and $19 billion in investment” are at risk over the next six to eight months if the renewable energy tax credits are allowed to expire.”

He does not support ethanol because he views subsidies towards its production as a negative impact on markets within the food supply chain.

Bartlett’s stand on renewable energy has provoked ire even among his supporters. Just last week – May 22, 2008 – Bartlett changed his long-term position against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and publically stated he will back drilling there.  Bartlett announced that he is co-sponsoring the American Energy Independence and Price Reduction Act because the bill specifies that all the revenue garnered from drilling leases in the refuge’s coastal strip will be earmarked for alternative and renewable energy programs. 

Bartlett acknowledged that his reversal stems from skyrocketing oil prices.  He recognizes that drilling in the ANWR will impact the wildlife there, but Bartlett in making his announcement said, “I have been to ANWR.  I am convinced that the environmental impact will be minimal.” 

Bartlett’s pro-solar stance and support of alternative energies does not necessarily make him an all-encompassing environmentalist.  Curiously, the League of Conservation Voters who publishes a Scorecard each year based on a Congressman or Senator’s voting record, gave Bartlett a 45% score in 2007 and he hasn’t ranked much higher in previous years. 

Bartlett’s votes regarding energy and the environment seem to reflect a strict position of his values – he is a devout Seventh Day Adventist who believes in stewardship of our land but not necessarily wide spread use of federal mandates unless the science supports the intended objectives.  Overall, however, Roscoe Bartlett’s impressive understanding of energy issues and policy has made him one our country’s most important advocates for advancing renewable energy.