Not many think of internet companies like Google or Amazon as dirty, but much of the energy fueling these companies come from fossil fuels, according to How Dirty is Your Data: A Look at the Energy Choices that Power Cloud Computing. That's why Google is investing in a power purchase agreement (PPA) with NextEra wind energy. Under this PPA, Google has signed a 20 year energy contract to lock in electric prices. Last Year, Google purchased a PPA for 114 megawatts in Iowa, and this year they have purchased a PPA 100.8 MW in Oklahoma. These PPA's are in the same area where Google holds data centers.
This is definitely a practice of large companies like Google that I can get behind. If large corporations continue to invest in renewables, whether its for PR purposes or genuine it doesn't matter, then this will definitely help push better renewable technologies for the future. Currently, data centers consume 1.5-2 percent of the world's electricity and is growing by 12% a year. Moving away from fossil fuels to wind power will greatly effect the world's energy distribution in the near future. Microsoft has already started to do the same thing, and I would like to see more companies to do this as well.
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/26/idUS264144745920110426
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
Renewable Portfolio Standards may happen after all
It looks like those energy standards set by Congress have hope after all. According to the recently released report, Community Power: Decentralized Renewable Energy in California, the way to meet those standards for California is through focusing on decentralized renewable energy. For those of you that don't know, decentralized energy is basically energy that is generated at the point of use, as opposed to centralized energy which utilizes the grid to distribute power. Not only are these findings applicable in California, but according to the report, they are applicable to all states in the US.
One of the main benefits of decentralized renewable energy is that there is no longer a need for expensive, high-voltage transmission lines that take up to 10 years to put in place. This greatly reduces the cost of energy, as well as saving time in the engineering process to come up with more efficient renewable practices. The major beneficiary of decentralized energy is solar power. Decentralized production from photovoltaics has better economics than centralized solar thermal plants. The report shows that through rooftop solar alone, California can exceed its requirement of 33% renewables by 2020. Decentralized wind also has promising results as well, and this report states that the only way for the RPS goals to be met by the required dates are through decentralized energy. [1]
With all of these great benefits from decentralized renewable energy, there may be problems in terms of financing, at least in California. Apparently the state has been very lazy in terms of enforcing the standards on utilities. So, these utilities haven't been doing much to produce more renewable energy sources. Federal laws have also been established in support of large-scale centralized energy. This means that the money may not be there to focus on decentralized energy. In order to overcome these barriers, there has to be some legislation passed in support of these methods. Colorado, for example, has passed a “community solar gardens” law to encourage the development of solar power with multiple owners and to allow folks without sunny roofs to “go solar.”
Hopefully, the funding for decentralization happens so that we can actually meet these RPS goals set by the government. As you can tell from an earlier post of mine, I was very pessimistic of actually meeting these goals, but now it looks more promising.
One of the main benefits of decentralized renewable energy is that there is no longer a need for expensive, high-voltage transmission lines that take up to 10 years to put in place. This greatly reduces the cost of energy, as well as saving time in the engineering process to come up with more efficient renewable practices. The major beneficiary of decentralized energy is solar power. Decentralized production from photovoltaics has better economics than centralized solar thermal plants. The report shows that through rooftop solar alone, California can exceed its requirement of 33% renewables by 2020. Decentralized wind also has promising results as well, and this report states that the only way for the RPS goals to be met by the required dates are through decentralized energy. [1]
With all of these great benefits from decentralized renewable energy, there may be problems in terms of financing, at least in California. Apparently the state has been very lazy in terms of enforcing the standards on utilities. So, these utilities haven't been doing much to produce more renewable energy sources. Federal laws have also been established in support of large-scale centralized energy. This means that the money may not be there to focus on decentralized energy. In order to overcome these barriers, there has to be some legislation passed in support of these methods. Colorado, for example, has passed a “community solar gardens” law to encourage the development of solar power with multiple owners and to allow folks without sunny roofs to “go solar.”
Hopefully, the funding for decentralization happens so that we can actually meet these RPS goals set by the government. As you can tell from an earlier post of mine, I was very pessimistic of actually meeting these goals, but now it looks more promising.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Round 2. Fight!
So a couple posts ago I posted about industrial ecology and the economics around it, I now plan to look at a broader view of economics surrounding the environment and energy.
The first evaluation method is known as the economic evaluation method. This assumes that energy and environmental factors can be evaluated the same way that factors of production, goods and services are. Basically, this technique tries to put a price on natural resources, environmental and energy inputs, even on things like clean water, or pollution created from energy production. By assigning values to each of these inputs, we are able to include them into the economic models such as supply and demand curves. By looking at these economic models, one can apply the appropriate technique to get the model to the desired level, such as taxing companies that aren't "going green" or giving a subsidy to power plants that are using renewable forms of energy.
Then there's the ecological economics approach which understands that just looking at clean air, pollution, green energy, etc, in terms of just a price and quantity isn't always applicable or desirable. This method argues that the economic evaluation method doesn't take into account certain ecological concerns and things such as energy flows, carrying capacity, as well as ecological balance must be supplemented into the evaluation methods. This method usually calls for more drastic methods such as changing habits of people, or working more towards conservation techniques instead of just applying economic techniques such as taxes, or subsidies.
So thats some of the basics when it comes to economics with regards to energy and the environment. It seems a little boring to me, so I'm not sure if I'll right another one like I had planned to do. Anyway, to entertain you somewhat, here's what I was listening to while I wrote this post... along with the rest of Girl Talk's new album.
The first evaluation method is known as the economic evaluation method. This assumes that energy and environmental factors can be evaluated the same way that factors of production, goods and services are. Basically, this technique tries to put a price on natural resources, environmental and energy inputs, even on things like clean water, or pollution created from energy production. By assigning values to each of these inputs, we are able to include them into the economic models such as supply and demand curves. By looking at these economic models, one can apply the appropriate technique to get the model to the desired level, such as taxing companies that aren't "going green" or giving a subsidy to power plants that are using renewable forms of energy.
Then there's the ecological economics approach which understands that just looking at clean air, pollution, green energy, etc, in terms of just a price and quantity isn't always applicable or desirable. This method argues that the economic evaluation method doesn't take into account certain ecological concerns and things such as energy flows, carrying capacity, as well as ecological balance must be supplemented into the evaluation methods. This method usually calls for more drastic methods such as changing habits of people, or working more towards conservation techniques instead of just applying economic techniques such as taxes, or subsidies.
So thats some of the basics when it comes to economics with regards to energy and the environment. It seems a little boring to me, so I'm not sure if I'll right another one like I had planned to do. Anyway, to entertain you somewhat, here's what I was listening to while I wrote this post... along with the rest of Girl Talk's new album.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Update on Radiation Leak at Fukushima
A little bit of good news coming out of Japan, a radioactive leak that was dumping into the Pacific Ocean has been stopped according to the BBC. Chemical agents were were injected to solidify the soil at the source of the leak. That's basically where the good news ends though, because there is now a build-up of hydrogen in the No. 1 reactor. They're looking into pumping nitrogen into the reactor to stop the expansion of hydrogen but that has yet to be decided. Also, they have found that the fish in the ocean south of Fukushima to contain high levels of radioactive iodine, about twice the legal limit for vegetables.
Oh... and Fukushima had to be evacuated because of a 7.1 earthquake on April 7. Luckily there was no obvious damage. [1]
Oh... and Fukushima had to be evacuated because of a 7.1 earthquake on April 7. Luckily there was no obvious damage. [1]
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Industrial Ecology
Alright guys, after a bit of a hiatus, I'm about to start a series of posts focused on the economics of energy and "Going Green." As a reference, I'll be using the book, "Environmental and Natural Resource Economics," by Jonathan Harris. I would also recommend taking the class of the same name at Mines, or any other class related to environmental economics.
And here we go... Industrial Ecology
Right now, much of the US and other developed countries are focused on recycling because of the efficiency of it and the need for precious raw materials. Well, industrial ecology is essentially the large scale version of recycling. Instead of the straight-line approach to industry, where you go from raw materials, to production, to final product, to waste, industrial ecology takes advantage of a loop. Below is an example of industrial ecology in Kalundborg, Denmark.
The entire goal of industrial ecology is to turn the wastes produced in industry into inputs for another industrial process. As you can see in this city in Denmark, the excess steam produced from the coal power plant is distributed to the town to heat homes and also the oil refinery. The oil refinery utilizes this steam, and its excess gas is given to the power plant as well as the wallboard factory. This process of recycling wastes into inputs is utilized throughout the town. Unfortunately, not all cities are setup like Kalundborg, so this circular process of industrial ecology is not always possible.
However, we can learn from this example and implement recyclying methods such as dematerialization, materials substitution, remanufacturing, and waste mining. In order for these policies to be economically viable, the government must enforce policies such as taxes and subsidies. In the case of waste mining, which is the recovery of low-value byproducts and wastes for use as industrial raw materials, government policy must be used to internalize the costs of generating wastes (tax would be used here) or to encourage their reuse (subsidy). As you will see in future posts, the government plays a huge role in making "green" a reality.
And here we go... Industrial Ecology
Right now, much of the US and other developed countries are focused on recycling because of the efficiency of it and the need for precious raw materials. Well, industrial ecology is essentially the large scale version of recycling. Instead of the straight-line approach to industry, where you go from raw materials, to production, to final product, to waste, industrial ecology takes advantage of a loop. Below is an example of industrial ecology in Kalundborg, Denmark.
The entire goal of industrial ecology is to turn the wastes produced in industry into inputs for another industrial process. As you can see in this city in Denmark, the excess steam produced from the coal power plant is distributed to the town to heat homes and also the oil refinery. The oil refinery utilizes this steam, and its excess gas is given to the power plant as well as the wallboard factory. This process of recycling wastes into inputs is utilized throughout the town. Unfortunately, not all cities are setup like Kalundborg, so this circular process of industrial ecology is not always possible.
However, we can learn from this example and implement recyclying methods such as dematerialization, materials substitution, remanufacturing, and waste mining. In order for these policies to be economically viable, the government must enforce policies such as taxes and subsidies. In the case of waste mining, which is the recovery of low-value byproducts and wastes for use as industrial raw materials, government policy must be used to internalize the costs of generating wastes (tax would be used here) or to encourage their reuse (subsidy). As you will see in future posts, the government plays a huge role in making "green" a reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)