tagged w/ Energy Policy
-
Lo sviluppo vorticoso delle rinnovabili impone un ripensamento dell’intero sistema energetico: dalle infrastrutture per la trasmissione e dispacciamento ad una maggiore razionalizzazione per il governo dei flussi di energia in entrata nelle reti elettriche.Lo sviluppo vorticoso delle rinnovabili impone un ripensamento dell’intero... more
-
-
America and Oil. It's like bacon and eggs, Batman and Robin. As the old song lyric went, you can't have one without the other. Once upon a time, it was also a surefire formula for national greatness and global preeminence. Now, it's a guarantee of a trip to hell in a hand basket. The Chinese know it. Does Washington?
America's rise to economic and military supremacy was fueled in no small measure by its control over the world's supply of oil. Oil powered the country's first giant corporations, ensured success in World War II, and underlay the great economic boom of the postwar period. Even in an era of nuclear weapons, it was the global deployment of oil-powered ships, helicopters, planes, tanks, and missiles that sustained America's superpower status during and after the Cold War. It should come as no surprise, then, that the country's current economic and military decline coincides with the relative decline of oil as a major source of energy.
If you want proof of that economic decline, just check out the way America's share of the world's gross domestic product has been steadily dropping, while its once-powerhouse economy now appears incapable of generating forward momentum. In its place, robust upstarts like China and India are posting annual growth rates of 8% to 10%. When combined with the growing technological prowess of those countries, the present figures are surely just precursors to a continuing erosion of America's global economic clout.
Militarily, the picture appears remarkably similar. Yes, a crack team of SEAL commandos did kill Osama bin Laden, but that single operation - greeted in the United States with a jubilation more appropriate to the ending of a major war - hardly made up for the military's lackluster performance in two recent wars against ragtag insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan.
If anything, almost a decade after the Taliban was overthrown, it has experienced a remarkable resurgence even facing the full might of the US , while the assorted insurgent forces in Iraq appear to be holding their own. Meanwhile, Iran - that bete noire of American power in the Middle East - seem as powerful as ever. Al Qaeda may be on the run, but as recent developments in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and unstable Pakistan suggest, the United States wields far less clout and influence in the region now than it did before it invaded Iraq in 2003.
If American power is in decline, so is the relative status of oil in the global energy equation. In the 2000 edition of its International Energy Outlook, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the US Department of Energy confidently foresaw ever-expanding oil production in Africa, Alaska, the Persian Gulf area, and the Gulf of Mexico, among other areas. It predicted, in fact, that world oil output would reach 97 million barrels per day in 2010 and a staggering 115 million barrels in 2020. EIA number-crunchers concluded as well that oil would long retain its position as the world's leading source of energy. Its 38% share of the global energy supply, they said, would remain unchanged.
What a difference a decade makes. By 2010, a new understanding about the natural limits of oil production had sunk in at the EIA and its experts were predicting a disappointingly modest petroleum future.
In that year, world oil output had reached just 82 million barrels per day, a stunning 15 million less than expected. Moreover, in the 2010 edition of its International Energy Outlook, the EIA was now projecting 2020 output at 85 million barrels per day, hardly more than the 2010 level and 30 million barrels below its projections of just a decade earlier, which were relegated to the dustbin of history. (Such projections, by the way, are for conventional, liquid petroleum and exclude "tough" and "dirty" sources that imply energy desperation - like Canadian tar sands, shale oil, and other "unconventional" fuels.)
The most recent EIA projections also show oil's share of the world total energy supply - far from remaining constant at 38% - had already dropped to 35% in 2010 and was projected to continue declining to 32% in 2020 and 30% in 2035. In its place, natural gas and renewable sources of energy are expected to assume ever more prominent roles.
So here's the question all of us should consider, in part because until now no one has: are the decline of the United States and the decline of oil connected? Careful analysis suggests that there are good reasons to believe they are.
From standard oil to the Carter Doctrine.........
Continue at:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/MI21Dj02.htmlAmerica and Oil. It's like bacon and eggs, Batman and Robin. As the old song... more
-
-
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES PROGRAM
Fletcher School Tufts University
Dr. Daniel I. FineResearch AssociateMining and Minerals Resources Institute, MIT
LUNCHEON LECTURETUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 201111:00AM – 1:00PMCABOT 703
“Shale Gas War: The Geopolitics of U.S.Self-Sufficiency”
Dr. Daniel Fine
is a Research Associate at the Mining and Minerals Resources Institute,MIT. Dr. Fine is also a current Policy Adviser on Non-Conventional Oil and Gas. He isco-editor of
Resource War in 3-D: Dependence, Diplomacy and Defense, and has contributed to Business Week , the Engineering and Mining Journal and theWashingtonTimes
. Dr. Fine participated in the Atlantic Council Workshop on Central Asian Policyand the Hudson Institute Russia-United States Relations Project. He has given testimonyon strategic natural resources before the U.S. Senate Committees on Foreign Affairs andthe Energy and Natural Resources. Dr. Fine was a member of the Domestic EnergyProduction Issue Team of the Center For The Study Of The Presidency and Congress“Strengthening America’s Future Initiative.” He has participated as a panelist on energy public policy at the Rocky Mountain Global New Energy Summit.
Register to attend this event at
http://www.danielfine.eventbrite.com
Business Casual Attire Required
http://www.scribd.com/doc/64842008/Shale-Gas-Wars-Flyer-9-20-11INTERNATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES PROGRAM
Fletcher School Tufts University
Dr. Daniel... more
-
-
Before the government approves a new industrial process in the UK it must have ensured that it won't harm either people or the environment. Mustn't it? That's what any sane person would expect. Any sane person would be wrong.
One year ago, a company called Cuadrilla Resources began drilling exploratory shafts into the rock at Preese Hall near Blackpool, in north-west England, to begin the UK's first experiments with extracting gas trapped in formations of shale. The process – called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking - involves pumping a mixture of water, sand and drilling fluids at high pressure into the rock, to split it apart and release the natural gas it contains. In June, Cuadrilla temporarily suspended its operations as a result of two small earthquakes in the area, which might have been caused by the fracking. The experiment is likely to resume soon. Cuadrilla has also started exploratory drilling at two other sites in the region.
Here are the issues that must be resolved if we are to be assured that fracking is a safe and responsible process.
1. Contamination
There are two issues here: the chemicals injected into the rocks and the contaminants released by the fracturing. Both have the potential to pollute water supplies.
The Tyndall Centre at the University of Manchester reviewed the impacts of fracking in the only country where it has so far been commercially exploited, the United States. It found that fracking poses "significant potential risks to human health and the environment."
"The fracturing and 'flowback' fluids … contain a number of hazardous substances that, should they contaminate groundwater, are likely to result in potentially severe impacts on drinking water quality and/or surface waters/wetland habitats."
Amazingly, fracking fluids in the US are exempt from regulation. Companies are allowed to treat the composition of the fluids as trade secrets. There is little information on what they contain and what risks they might present.
But, using data on the chemicals being stored by these companies, the Tyndall Centre has been able to identify at least some of the substances being injected into the rocks there. Of 260 chemicals, it finds that 58 give rise to concern. Some are known carcinogens, some are suspected carcinogens, some are toxic to people, some are toxic to aquatic life, some are mutagenic (which means they can cause genetic defects) and some have reproductive effects.
The fluids returning to the surface carry not only the chemicals injected into the rocks, but also those picked up in travelling through them. Among these, the Tyndall report shows, are heavy metals and radioactive materials.
Both the fracking fluids and the flowback fluids can contaminate water either through the cracks forced open in the rocks by the fracking process, or through drilling bores through aquifers. In the US this has happened repeatedly. The Tyndall Centre found that water supplies have been contaminated not only by the fracking chemicals and dissolved pollutants from the rocks, but also by gas bubbling out through the cracks.
The documentary Gasland shows people turning their taps on and setting light to the water. In some cases, gas bubbling up from underground fractures has caused explosions in the basements of people's homes.
Cuadrilla's bore passes through an aquifer before it reaches the shale formation. The company's chief executive told the Guardian: "You never have control. Fractures will always go into the path of least resistance."
2. Water use
Fracking requires the use of very high volumes of water. The Tyndall Centre report warns that it "could put considerable pressure on water supplies at the local level in the UK." All the zones in the catchment in which Cuadrilla's operations at Preese Hall take place are classified by the Environment Agency as "over licensed", "over abstracted" or "no water available".
3. Greenhouse gases
The natural gas produced by fracking is the same simple chemical (methane) as the gas extracted by conventional means. When it is burnt, a given volume produces the same quantity of carbon dioxide as conventional gas does. Even so, the impact of shale gas on the atmosphere could be much greater than the impact of the same volume of conventional gas. Here's why.
Methane is itself a powerful greenhouse gas. It does not persist in the atmosphere for as long as carbon dioxide, but during the first 20 years following its release, it is 56 times as effective at trapping heat.
More methane is likely to escape from the process of splitting rocks open than from drilling into conventional aquifers.
A paper published earlier this year in the journal Climatic Change found that methane emissions from shale gas fracking, "are at least 30% more than and perhaps more than twice as great as those from conventional gas." This, it says, boosts the climate changing impact of shale gas to such an extent that it is not just worse than conventional supplies, but worse even than coal, which is the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel. The paper found that, per unit of energy released, burning shale gas produces between 120% and 200% of the emissions produced by burning coal.
4. Raising fossil fuel reserves
Last month the Carbon Tracker Initiative worked out the proportion of current fossil fuel reserves that humanity can burn while keeping the chances of exceeding 2C of global warming to 20% or less. It found that current reserves contain roughly twice as much carbon as we can afford to release in the entire millennium.
Fossil fuel companies have already found far too much, in other words. It seems like madness to be prospecting for new reserves, especially new reserves with such a high potential to do harm, when we can't afford to use existing supplies.
So I asked the government some simple questions. The answers should stop anyone with a concern for human health or the environment in their tracks.
I asked to see the environmental impact assessment (EIA) for Cuadrilla's fracking operations, which it hopes to resume soon. Answer: there isn't one. The Department of Energy and Climate Change told me:
"The local planning authority has concluded that Cuadrilla's exploration activities do not fall within the criteria for EIA, and none has been performed."
I asked to see the Health Impact Assessment. This is what the government said:
"We are aware of no requirement on Cuadrilla to perform a health impact assessment, and we gather that they have not to date done so."
I asked to see the Life Cycle Analysis for the full impacts of extracting shale gas. The department told me:
"Government has not conducted a specific analysis of the size and variability of greenhouse gas emissions from the shale gas extraction process."
But, apparently disregarding the paper in Climatic Change, it produced the following guess:
"We would expect that shale gas should have a carbon footprint of the same order as natural gas from conventional onshore fields, and significantly lower than that of coal."
The government passed my questions about contamination to the Environment Agency (EA). I asked which chemicals have been licensed for underground injection by gas fracking operations in the UK.
It told me that the chemicals being used by Cuadrilla have been "assessed as 'non hazardous' under the Groundwater Directive".
But which chemicals are they? I had to press the agency for a list. It sent the following:
Hydrochoric acid; FR-40, which it calls "a blend of chemicals including Polyacrylamide"; Ucarcide, a bacteria-killing pesticide whose active substance is Glutaraldehyde; and Stimlube-W, which it simply described as "a polymer".
Further questions asked can be read at the linkBefore the government approves a new industrial process in the UK it must have ensured... more
-
-
pdy
-
added this
-
5 months ago
- |
-
Native American land – a total five percent of the land area of the United States – contains an estimated 10 percent of the nation’s energy resources, and yet almost all of the renewable sources of power on these lands are under-utilized, tribes and government officials agree.
http://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/energias/renovables/#slide_8Native American land – a total five percent of the land area of the United... more
-
-
-
HOBBS, N.M. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce says the U.S. nuclear energy industry doesn't have technological problems — it has "political problems."
The "United States developed the nuclear power field and then regulated it out of existence. We have built no new nuclear power plants in 30 years," Pearce said Wednesday, the first day of a two-day international nuclear energy conference in Hobbs.
The Republican New Mexico congressman said nuclear power is essential to the nation's energy future, and suggested that the Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan brought on by a devastating earthquake was an incident to build from, not run from.
"We should be analyzing exactly what went on, instead of saying 'no' to all nuclear," Pearce told the gathering, which is considering how to make nuclear energy a viable and essential piece of the world's energy portfolio.
Former U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, a longtime supporter of nuclear energy, thanked Lea and Eddy counties in southeastern New Mexico for being open to the nuclear industry. The counties are home to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, the federal government's underground nuclear waste repository; Urenco USA, which runs a uranium enrichment plant near Eunice; and International Isotopes, which proposes to provide uranium deconversion services for the plant.
Domenici said the area is unique because the people "don't run and hide when we hear the words 'nuclear' or 'radioactive.' We sit down to learn about the facts and myths, and make sure they are completely understood."
In the next year, the United States must find a way to finance some nuclear power plants and make a commitment to dispose of the nuclear waste now spread across the country, Domenici said.
___
Information from: Hobbs News-Sun, http://www.hobbsnews.comHOBBS, N.M. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce says the U.S. nuclear energy industry... more
-
-
Hobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues
N.M. Tech News Service
HOBBS – Nuclear energy, small-scale reactors and safety in the industry will take center stage next month at the 2011 national energy conference in Hobbs.
The Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference on Wednesday and Thursday, April 27 and 28, will focus on potential developments and implementation of small-scale reactors.
The conference features top leaders in nuclear technology, including Babcock & Wilcox, New Mexico Tech, URENCO USA, Washington TRU Solutions, Uranium Resources Inc., Energy Solutions and the U.S. Department of Energy.
The "uranium fuel cycle" begins with mining, continues with enrichment, followed by use in a reactor, and ends with processing and storage. Hobbs is in the center of the developing Eastern New Mexico Energy Corridor, which is involved in all aspects of the nuclear energy fuel cycle.
"Almost the entire cycle is contained in New Mexico, from mining to waste storage. This conference is an important step in bringing together key players in the area and continuing a dialogue about energy and our national policies," said Van Romero, Ph.D. and vice president of research at New Mexico Tech.
A new enrichment facility is now operational near Eunice, N.M. A deconversion plant is in the licensing stage in Lea County. Also located in the region are Waste Control Specialist LLC and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, near Carlsbad, which is a long-term storage facility funded by the Department of Energy. While not currently being mined, vast deposits of raw uranium ore exist in west-central New Mexico.
What's missing? The small-scale nuclear power plants.
"Communities in southeast New Mexico have expressed an interest in nuclear power," Romero said.
One area the conference will focus on is the commercial deployment of small nuclear reactors in eastern New Mexico. Representatives of Babcock & Wilcox will present their strategy to how to deploy a light-water reactor system to provide energy to communities in New Mexico.
Babcock & Wilcox is the leading international company in development and deployment of small-scale nuclear reactors. The company unveiled the B&W mPower reactor in 2009. The mPower reactor, with its scalable, modular design, has the capacity to provide 125 megawatts to 750 megawatts of electricity for a five-year operating cycle without refueling. The reactor is designed to produce clean, near-zero emission operations, according to the company website.
Following the Babcock & Wilcox presentation, Romero will lead a discussion on "Small Reactor Research and Readiness." Then, a representative from the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy will talk on the status and outlook for nuclear energy development.
The two-day conference is hosted by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, a division of New Mexico Tech, the Economic Development Corp. of Lea County and New Mexico Junior College.
Online registration is under way at www.energyplexnm.com or by calling 575-397-2039.
Read more: ABQJOURNAL BIZ: Hobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues http://www.abqjournal.com/biz/212143529029biz03-21-11.htm#ixzz1Jmt91Adv
Subscribe Now Albuquerque JournalHobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues
N.M. Tech News Service... more
-
-
Surprisingly, these influential and outspoken panellists, who you might expect would have opposing views on just about everything, seem to be having a candid, but surprisingly civil conversation about a very controversial subject: was it something in the water?Surprisingly, these influential and outspoken panellists, who you might expect would... more
-
-
A discussion of achieving the American Dream under difficult economic, social and environmental constraints, framed by the lyrics to Dylan's "All along the Watchtower"
Excerpt: “There must be some kind of way out of here,” said the Joker to the Thief.
“There’s too much confusion, I can’t get no relief.”
With these words, Bob Dylan starts his most performed song “All Along the Watchtower,” about the clash of values in America between those focused on what really matters and those focused on guarding the hierarchies of the “Castle.” I’ve been hearing Dylan’s song in my head these past weeks of struggle and liberation from dictatorships in the Middle East and North Africa. The Joker and the Thief represent archetypes of those who reveal hidden truths and a Robin Hood approach to justice, challenging conventional power and wealth. They are not concerned with the rewards of life in the castle. Their goal is to stop the domination of the castle over the surrounding wild lands where Nature abides — where one might “know what any of it is worth.”
Read more at : http://sustainabletompkins.org/signs-of-sustainability/tompkins-weekly-column/rebooting-the-american-dream-in-tompkins-county/A discussion of achieving the American Dream under difficult economic, social and... more
-
-
Speaking in Iowa Tuesday, Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi, said the United States should not shy away from nuclear power because of what happened in Japan.
“There are many people, including me, who believe that it behooves us to increase a reliance on nuclear power,” Politico reported Mr. Barbour saying. “We don’t know what happened in Japan. We need to study and learn and make sure that we continue to have safe reliable clean nuclear energy in the United States.”
The need for an increase in domestic nuclear power was certainly shared by Mr. Barbour’s likely rivals before the accident in Japan.
Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and a candidate for president in 2008, said in 2007 that Americans are embracing nuclear power as they learn how safe it is.
“There’s been a real bias against nuclear energy in the United States, going all the way back to Three Mile Island in 1979, but I think most of it is unfounded. I mean, we’ve been running nuclear submarines for 60 years without accidents,” he said in an interview in October of 2007.
“A lot of it is changing attitudes, educating the public that nuclear byproducts can be disposed of safely, because the first reaction people have is, our kids are going to glow in the dark if we put that stuff in our state. That’s not the case,” Mr. Huckabee said.
At the same conference, Tim Pawlenty, the former governor of Minnesota, told a group of bloggers that “I’m in favor of more nuclear energy.” That matches up with policies he pursued as governor. In 2008, Mr. Pawlenty called for repeal of his state’s moratorium on new nuclear power plants, according to Minnesota Public Radio.
Sarah Palin has long supported the idea of nuclear power. In September of 2008, campaigning with Senator John McCain of Arizona, Ms. Palin said that “in a McCain-Palin administration, we’re going to lay more pipelines … build more nuclear plants … create jobs with clean coal … and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal and other alternative sources.”
Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, has also embraced nuclear. In 2008, she was quoted as saying that a new nuclear power plant in her district would bring energy bills down for her constituents. She backed Mr. McCain’s plan for 45 new nuclear plants, saying “It’s a great idea. And the sooner the better.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/2012-republicans-embrace-nuclear-power-so-far/?hpSpeaking in Iowa Tuesday, Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi, said the United... more
-
-
HOBBS, N.M. March 2, 2011 – Nuclear energy and small-scale reactors will take center stage at the 2011 national energy conference in Hobbs. “The Uranium Fuel Cycle” conference on Wednesday and Thursday, April 27 and 28, will focus on potential developments and implementation of small-scale reactors.
The conference features top leaders in nuclear technology, including Babcock & Wilcox, New Mexico Tech, URENCO USA, Washington TRU Solutions, Uranium Resources Inc., Energy Solutions and the U.S. Department of Energy.
The “uranium fuel cycle” begins with mining, continues with enrichment, followed by use in a reactor, and ends with processing and storage. Hobbs is in the center of the developing Eastern New Mexico Energy Corridor, which is involved in all aspects of the nuclear energy fuel cycle.
Dr. Van Romero, Vice President of Research at New Mexico Tech, said New Mexico is well-positioned to be a leading voice in nuclear energy development.
“Almost the entire cycle is contained in New Mexico,” he said, “from mining to waste storage. This conference is an important step in bringing together key players in the area and continuing a dialog about energy and our national policies.”
A new enrichment facility is now operational near Eunice, N.M. A de-conversion plant is in the licensing stage in Lea County. Also located in the region are Waste Control Specialist LLC and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, near Carlsbad, which is a long-term storage facility funded by the Department of Energy. While not currently being mined, vast deposits of raw uranium ore exist in west-central New Mexico.
What’s missing? The small-scale nuclear power plants.
“Communities in southeast New Mexico have expressed an interest in nuclear power,” Romero said.
One area the conference will focus on is the commercial deployment of small nuclear reactors in eastern New Mexico. Representatives of Babcock & Wilcox will present their strategy to deploy a light-water reactor system to provide energy to communities in New Mexico.
Babcock & Wilcox is the leading international company in development and deployment of small-scale nuclear reactors. The company unveiled the B&W mPower™ reactor in 2009. The mPower reactor, with its scalable, modular design, has the capacity to provide 125 megawatts to 750 megawatts of electricity for a five-year operating cycle without refueling. The reactor is designed to produce clean, near-zero emission operations, according to the company website.
Babcock & Wilcox Canada has designed and manufactured nuclear power equipment for more than 40 years, providing nuclear heat exchangers, nuclear plant services and more than 200 nuclear steam generators to customers around the world.
Following the Babcock & Wilcox presentation, Romero will lead a discussion on “Small Reactor Research and Readiness.” Then, a representative from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy will talk on the status and outlook for nuclear energy development.
“Large nuclear reactors generate about a gigawatt of power,” Romero said. “These smaller reactors are safe and easy to operate and do not need a tremendous amount of infrastructure. Canada has been operating these small reactors for years.”
The two-day conference is hosted by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, a division of New Mexico Tech, the Economic Development Corp. of Lea County and New Mexico Junior College.
The “Uranium Fuel Cycle” conference will begin with a panel on “Uranium Mining Today: Geology and New Technology,” led by Dr. Peter Scholle of New Mexico Tech. Scholle is the State Geologist and the director of the N.M. Bureau of Geology. The conference will present improved methods for the mining of uranium. New technology that eliminates labor-intensive, high-risk activity prevalent in previous operations will be presented. Also, Uranium Resources Inc., a mining-company based in Texas, will present information about the latest technological developments in uranium mining. The company has several mines in Texas and has holdings in New Mexico that include 183,000 acres and 100 million pounds of in-place mineralized uranium holdings, according to the company’s website.
Also on the schedule for the conference is a panel discussion on uranium processing, featuring top executives from Urenco USA (uranium enrichment), International Isotopes (uranium tailing recovery), Waste Control Specialist LLC and WIPP (waste/storage).
The final panel, “Training and Education for the Future of Nuclear Energy,” will be led by Dr. Robert Rhodes, Vice President of New Mexico Junior College, with a presentation by Energy Solutions.
Online registration will open Monday, March 7, at www.energyplexnm.com or by calling (575) 397-2039. Conference information can be accessed at the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy website nmcep.nmt.edu.
– NMT –
By Thomas Guengerich/New Mexico TechHOBBS, N.M. March 2, 2011 – Nuclear energy and small-scale reactors will take... more
-
-
Anyone remember all the outrage when gas prices increased during the Bush Presidency? You know, George Bush the Oil man is pocketing the profits, Bush is allowing prices to increase for his big oil supporters. The attacks went on.
Now that we have a Democratic president, those attacks are not in the mainstream news on a daily basis , why? Today oil prices are the result of “world events”.
Once should keep in mind that under President Obama, domestic drilling is at a standstill and we have become more dependent, not less, on foreign oil due to the rig shutdowns in the Gulf and the bureaucratic process to get contracts to begin new exploration. The Obama Administration has even refused or renew existing production on coal and other natural resources.
http://www.ironmill.com/2011/03/04/gas-price-outrage-over-obamas-energy-policies-no-lets-compare-gas-prices-under-bush/Anyone remember all the outrage when gas prices increased during the Bush Presidency?... more
-
-
Santa Fe New Mexican November 8, 2010
By Dr. Daniel Fine
With the Republican Party’s newly won control of the House of Representatives, national energy policy could be rolled back to 2005, with all legislative advances under a Democratic Party majority at risk. Republicans could adopt a dual-track strategy that attacks energy regulation through budget reductions of the Environmental Protection Agency that de-fund efforts to impose carbon emissions on industrial infrastructure, at a minimum coal-burning utilities and the gas and oil complex of extraction and refining.
With a Republican House majority, no further loss of tax code advantages for the oil and gas industry is anticipated. While the Oceans Management remake of the Department of Interior’s Mineral Management Service can be indirectly restrained through the Interior Department budget, originating in the House of Representatives, its existence and mission as a regulatory enforcer of off-shore oil and gas development is beyond a roll-back. This is a permanent institutional change as a direct consequence of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
No consideration of carbon cap and trade is even remotely expected. In New Mexico, oddly enough, with a Republican majority in the House opposed to a federal cap-and-trade law, conditions for a state version will in theory become more favorable. However, the rejection by both candidates for governor of the current initiative should block local efforts to fill the federal void.
The new Republican majority could impose restrictive legislation on renewable energy strategic tax incentives which provide Treasury Department cash pay-outs of 30 percent of construction investment costs of solar energy and other renewables. This could be done in several committees holding hearings on the dependency of renewables manufacturing and capacity expansion on continued government support in conflict with market conditions of abundantly cheap natural gas as a price-setter and competitor.
Partial repeal of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 will be a target of the new Republican majority. Although approved by President George W. Bush, the mandate for 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022 could be subject to revision. There is currently popular resistance to the ethanol requirement of 10 percent from 5 percent per gallon of gasoline because of consumer issues with the risk to pre-2007 engines. A Republican majority could attempt to cap the requirement at 16.3 billion gallons, which is scheduled in 2013, freezing the 10 percent change and avoiding further consumer problems at the pump.
Sen. Jeff Bingaman, leading a Democratic Party majority in the Senate, will be compelled to defend both renewable energy and the moderate renewable portfolio standards (15 percent by 2021) he has proposed in the remnant of the current session of Congress. He could invoke a call to Republicans for a bipartisan consensus to recognize what has been done and avoid the bitter and costly fight to roll it back. Some Republicans might consider this opening as preparation in 2012 for the contest over the White House: a consensus position avoids the tag of anti-renewable energy and environment in that presidential campaign . A consensus framework would stabilize at least $275 billion in renewable energy research, investment, finance and development costs.
Some of this is carried on the books of major oil and gas companies. New Mexico research universities and national laboratories have established innovative technology capabilities along with student career commitments in renewable energy. Whatever the direction of the market, a Republican majority in the House of Representatives could discover national economic and energy security value of supporting renewable energy basic and applied research.
World green energy technology leadership has been taken by China. With the exception of final technical mastery in solar power, China is now the dominant low-cost developer, producer and exporter. A Republican majority in the House of Representatives could find itself defending renewable energy against China in much the same way as it rejected China’s bid to buy UNOCAL (oil and gas) five years ago — on national security and energy security grounds.
A roll-back to 2005 could revive the compromise that former Sen. Pete Domenici achieved that year under a strategy of energy diversity that emphasizes national energy output expansion from all sources without political discrimination. To roll-back to a fossil fuel policy preference would violate 2005.
Daniel I. Fine, Ph.D., is a research and energy policy associate for New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, New Mexico Tech.
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Opinion/My-View--Donald-M--Fine-Energy-policy-will-change-under-GOP-HouSanta Fe New Mexican November 8, 2010
By Dr. Daniel Fine
With the Republican... more
-
-
As a Chief Executive of an organisation that is in the business of changing energy users’ behaviour, I take this challenge very seriously. It is one of the most difficult tasks to understand, and motivate change in human behaviour and all its underlying drivers, motives, barriers and opportunitiesAs a Chief Executive of an organisation that is in the business of changing energy... more
-
-
A far-reaching federal program of research and analysis, funded by Congress and designed to help the nation anticipate and temper the mounting conflict between rising energy demand and diminishing supplies of fresh water, has been brought to a standstill by the Department of Energy, according to government researchers involved in the project.
The research program, known as the National Energy-Water Roadmap and ordered up by Congress as part of the 2005 Energy Security Act, was meant to provide lawmakers and the executive branch two studies of the impending collision between energy and water, and what to do about it.
The first, completed by a team of federal scientists in December 2006 and made public a month later, described the serious consequences the nation is already encountering as the United States encourages more energy production, the second largest user of water, but gives scant consideration to water supplies, which are in retreat in most regions of the country.
Meanwhile the second and final report that Congress commissioned, a comprehensive research agenda to better understand the nation’s energy-water choke points and begin developing real world solutions, has been held out of public view for more than four years.
22 Rewrites
Michael Hightower, an energy systems analyst at Sandia National Laboratories and a co-author of the report, said the first draft of the study on research needs was delivered to the Energy Department in July 2006. Energy Department reviewers have since called for 22 rewrites, the last of which was delivered in May 2009, Hightower said.
Since then the five-member team that co-authored the study has not had any communication about the report with the two primary reviewers, Samuel F. Baldwin, chief technology officer in the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and Nicholas B. Woodward in the DOE Office of Science.
“I don’t know why they are holding up the report,” said Hightower in an interview with Circle of Blue. “I can only conclude we don’t know how to write or they don’t like the report. I think we have done a nice job in collecting the data. Maybe the quality is in question.”
Neither Baldwin nor Woodward responded to email messages from Circle of Blue. Ebony Meeks, an assistant press secretary, offered this explanation by email and did not respond to follow-up questions: “When developing a comprehensive technological road map it is imperative that all the data is thoroughly reviewed for accuracy and concurred upon by the multiple participating programs. We plan to release the road map as soon as possible.”
The Energy Department’s decision to prevent the report’s public release could also prove embarrassing. A National Water-Energy Conference Without Key Research
The report’s release couldn’t come soon enough for the agency, and the nation. Over the last five weeks, in its Choke Point: U.S. series, Circle of Blue has thoroughly explored the ever more fierce contest between the nation’s insatiable demand for energy, and the tightening supplies of fresh water.
Among the primary conclusions reached in Choke Point: U.S. is that the nation has not yet recognized the significance of the collision between energy demand and water supply to the economy or the environment. The Road Map report was intended to be a vital step toward closing that information gap.
The Energy Department’s decision to prevent the report’s public release could also prove embarrassing. September 26 is the start of the four-day Water/Energy Sustainability Symposium in Pittsburgh, the second annual national conference co-hosted by the Energy Department to “highlight proven and innovative solutions to complex water/energy challenges.” The Pittsburgh conference is the second in a row that could occur without the principal national study that outlines the research priorities. Last year’s conference took place in Salt Lake City.
It is not at all clear why the Energy Department has apparently iced the Road Map. Calls last week to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which played an important role in securing funding for the Road Map, received no response.
But a number of clues are contained in a March 2007 Sandia National Laboratories paper that summarized the Road Map’s contents. The paper, prepared by Hightower and three colleagues—Ron Pate, Chris Cameron, and Wayne Einfeld—makes clear that any number of executives in the coal, nuclear, oil, solar thermal, and biofuels industries, and their allies in Congress, could be unhappy about the report’s conclusions. The Sandia paper essentially asserts that the United States quickly needs to reconsider and realign much of its energy production policy and water management practices in order to avoid dire shortages of water and potential shortfalls in energy. None of the big energy production or large water use sectors will be left untouched, the paper indicates.
“The U.S. energy infrastructure depends heavily on the availability of water, and there is cause for concern about the availability of that water as we look toward future demands on limited water resources,” the authors wrote. “As future demands for energy and water continue to increase, competition for water between the energy, domestic, agricultural, and industrial sectors could significantly impact the reliability and security of future energy production and electric power generation,” they added: “It may not be possible in many areas of the country to meet the country’s growing energy and water needs by following the current U.S. path of largely managing water and energy separately while making small improvements in freshwater supply and small changes in energy and water-use efficiency.”
For instance, the authors raised concerns about U.S. energy policy that is encouraging construction of more coal-fired and nuclear power plants, which use millions of gallons of water an hour, without consideration for where they would be built. The thermo-electric generating sector currently accounts for half of the 400 billion gallons of water withdrawn daily from the nation’s rivers and lakes, principally to cool the plants. The same power plants consume more than 3 billion gallons of water a day, principally through evaporation.
The Energy Information Administration, a unit of the Department of Energy, forecast a nearly 50 percent increase in the demand for electricity between 2005 and 2030. A portion will be filled with energy from the wind and solar photovoltaics, which use virtually no water. Most of the rest will come from new thermoelectric plants.
The Sandia authors noted that new technologies are needed to enable the plants to use coolants other than fresh water, including wastewater from municipal treatment systems, seawater, produced water from mining and drilling operations, and agricultural runoff. In addition, the authors said, U.S. policy encouraging the development of pollution control systems that capture climate-changing emissions and store it deep underground–so-called carbon capture and sequestration–increases water consumption at plants 40 percent to 90 percent.
cont.A far-reaching federal program of research and analysis, funded by Congress and... more
-
-
-
SAN FRANCISCO — The Obama administration is devoting $150 million in stimulus money for programs that help homeowners install solar panels and other energy improvements, which they pay for over time on their property tax bills.
At the same time, the two government-chartered agencies that buy and resell most home mortgages are threatening to derail the effort by warning that they might not accept loans for homes that take advantage of the special financing.SAN FRANCISCO — The Obama administration is devoting $150 million in stimulus... more
-
-
John Pemberton of Southern Company thinks the oil spill disaster in the Gulf may muddy the waters of Congress's environmental debate. Tell us what you think in the comments section below.John Pemberton of Southern Company thinks the oil spill disaster in the Gulf may muddy... more
-
-
By signing the Solar Bill of Rights, you can join thousands of other Americans in urging lawmakers in Washington to give the U.S. solar industry a fair competitive environment. Solar energy is a clean, reliable energy source that is creating tens of thousands of American jobs that can’t be exported. The solar industry is ready to power America now, but we need the right policies in place to deploy more solar, sooner. The eight rights below outline what our nation needs to create a policy environment that allows solar to compete on a level playing field with fossil fuel sources.
http://www.solarbillofrights.us/By signing the Solar Bill of Rights, you can join thousands of other Americans in... more
-
