The Difference Between Energy Efficiency And Energy Conservation – Big difference

I have said it before and I will say it again Energy Efficiency sucks because it implies that we can keep doing what we have been doing if we just use less energy. WRONG. The growth model of capitalism and the growth model of religious dominance were always doomed to failure because they were at the heart delusional. The Earth is finite and we ain’t moving to another planet anytime soon if ever. Oh wait, first I must say:

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

The point has also been made that what we save in the residential market will only get “used” in the industrial market anyway. What we need is a whole new society design…That will take nearly cataclysmic events to produce.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/why-energy-efficiency-means-higher-consumption/article1419515/

Jeff Rubin's Smaller World

A blog about how weaning our economy off oil means some fundamental changes in the way we live, and other things

Wednesday, January 6, 2010 6:12 AM

Why energy efficiency means higher consumption

Jeff Rubin

Buddy, my furnace repairman, tells me it’s time to buy a new furnace. And I’d better act quickly if I still want to order the old mid-efficiency model. In the New Year, I have to buy a high-efficiency one, which, of course, costs twice as much.

Welcome to the brave new world of energy scarcity—it’s not only smaller, but also more costly. As energy prices continue to climb, you can expect to pay more, not less, for all the new energy-efficient cars and devices for your home.

But don’t count on actually saving any energy.

Efficiency may be the holy grail of the economist, but it’s a total head fake for the conservationist. And while one is being used to promote the other, the two concepts are as different as day and night.

The fact that the high-efficiency furnace generates more heat for a given amount of fuel burnt doesn’t necessarily mean I will end up with any fuel savings. As the cost of my heating falls, might it just allow me to set my thermostat higher? If so, my energy savings go right up the chimney.

That’s just where all the energy savings in the auto industry have gone over the last four decades — up the tailpipe, actually. Despite all the efficiency gains mandated by rising CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards, your average North American car consumes just as much fuel today as it did back in the early 1970s. Sure, the engine is 30 per cent more efficient, but now it’s hauling around an SUV that’s driven about a third more per year than a vehicle was back then.

And it’s no different in your home. Don’t be fooled by the fact that even today’s kettle has to meet some government-mandated energy-efficiency standard. Your house consumes a lot more energy than your parents’ did.

:}

So How Do All The Climate Liars Get To Copenhegan – Is someone paying their way

No one bothers to ask themselves, “how does a parellel anti-global warming conference get set up in Copenhagen”? We know how the pro-climate people got there. The world’s environmental organizations sent them. Some of them live there or are close enough to drive. The Government people got there on their countries dime as did the UN people. But how did the aptly named Lord Mockton get there? The answer is easy – The Carbon Industry sent them:

http://motherjones.com/special-reports/2009/12/dirty-dozen-climate-change-denial

Assignment 2020, Climate Change, Copenhagen Climate Talks, Corporations, Environment, Top Stories

In 2006, according to the Pew Research Center, 77 percent of Americans saw “solid evidence” for global warming. By this fall, that figure had dropped to 57 percent—and just 36 percent said they believed that humans are to blame. That’s good news for climate change skeptics and deniers, who have spent years trying to perpetuate the illusion that the reality of climate change is up for debate. Never mind that the scientific consensus is firmly on the side of global warming—for anyone seeking an alternate view, there’s an entire parallel universe where junk science and bogus statistics ricochet through an echo chamber of kooky blogs, “nonpartisan” institutes, and fake “green” and “citizen” groups that are often acting on behalf of the oil and coal industry.

With Copenhagen kicking off and the overblown “Climategate” scandal making headlines, the deniers have even more fodder for their campaign to kill serious action to slow climate change.

Here’s a guide to the dozen loudest components of the climate disinformation machine.

:}

This is one of the most comprehensive articles I have seen and I urge everyone to read the whole thing. These pricks think they can BURN us off the planet. I hope they are wrong.

:}

Jeremy Rifkin Writes A Book For Every Crisis – He usually gets some things right

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

For instance his stand against genetically altered food only makes sense in the context of the chemical and seed companies attempts to patent biology or biological sources. All our food is genetically altered. It has been for thousands of years. Frankly I prefer the genetic altering we can see, so to speak as opposed to the genetic altering that went on before which was mainly guessing.

http://tnjn.com/2009/nov/18/the-dawn-of-the-third-industri/

TNJN

TNJN Twitter
TNJN Facebook Fanpage

The news web site of the School of Journalism and Electronic Media | University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Home | News | Sports | Sci/Tech | Opinion | Arts and Culture

The dawn of the Third Industrial Revolution

published: November 18 2009 10:13 AM updated:: November 21 2009 05:59 PM

“The most hated man in science” said that it may be too late to save civilization.

Civilization is on the cusp of the Third Industrial Revolution and “our Second Industrial Revolution is on life support,” according to Jeremy Rifkin, president and founder of the Foundation on Economic Trends said.

We are in emergency mode.  Our dependence on non-renewable resources for energy is breaking the economic system we rely on, he said.

The National Journal named Rifkin as one of the most influential people in shaping federal policy.  He has written 17 books on the impact scientific and technological changes have on the environment, the economy and society.

Rifkin co-authored an article in the European Energy Review December 2008 issue, which says that we are facing a triple threat when it comes to the structure of our economy.  “The global credit crisis, the global energy crisis, and the global climate change crisis are interwoven and feed off of each other.”

“We need a new economic vision,” Rifkin said.  New energy, coming from renewable resources, combined with advancement in communication technology is needed for an effective energy revolution to take place.  Rethinking distribution of energy is the solution to the energy crisis, according to Rifkin.

Making a smooth transition from the Second Industrial Revolution into the Third depends on the construction of four pillars, Rifkin said.  The first pillar is creating dependable forms of renewable energy.  The second pillar is turning buildings into miniature power plants, which can be done by installing solar panels on rooftops.  The third pillar is hydrogen storage.  “Hydrogen is the universal medium that ‘stores’ all forms of renewable energy,” and allows for easy transport.  The fourth, and final pillar is the reconfiguration of the power grid.   By changing the way energy is produced and distributed, businesses and homeowners can create and share energy with each other.

:}

Course then there is the other view.

:}

http://www.activistcash.com/biography.cfm/bid/1342

Jeremy Rifkin

Biography

Jeremy Rifkin, the founder and president of the Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET), is the intellectual guru of the neo-Luddites, especially as their anti-technology principles apply to food. He is the author of 16 books, most of them littered with errors and false predictions. A professional scaremonger who has been called “the most hated man in science” by TIME magazine, Rifkin nonetheless has a wide following and genuine influence on public policy debates. National Journal magazine named Rifkin one of the 150 people in the U.S. that have the most influence in shaping federal government policy for his “skillfully manipulated legal and bureaucratic procedures to slow the pace of biotechnology.”

Rifkin’s international campaigns against beef consumption and genetically enhanced crops are motivated by his anti-technology philosophy. Rifkin disparages efficiency, promotes “empathy” with nature, and thinks human beings were better off in less advanced centuries. Always prone to exaggeration, Rifkin wrote in his book Beyond Beef that giving up steaks and burgers “is a revolutionary act” that heralds “a new chapter in the unfolding of human consciousness.”

Background

Founder and president, Foundation on Economic Trends; former advisory board member, EarthSave International; national council member, Farm Animal Reform Movement.

Associated Organizations and Foundations

EarthSave International Organization: EarthSave International
Position: Advisory Board Member
EarthSave began in 1988 as a pet project of John Robbins, one-time heir to the Baskin-Robbins ice cream fortune. His book Diet for a New America had…
find out more »
Logo not available Organization: Farm Animal Reform Movement
Position: National Council Member
Farm Animal Reform Movement (FARM) is on the outer fringes of the animal-rights universe. Its membership adheres to a strict vegan diet, and its…
find out more »
Logo not available Organization: Foundation on Economic Trends
Position: Founder
The Foundation on Economic Trends (FOET) is a platform for the neo-Luddite intellectual guru Jeremy Rifkin. Lacking scientific or technical…
find out more »

:}

I got this request today so I will just put it up:

Hi,

Since you have some information about inventing on your site, I wanted to mention http://www.FreePatentsOnline.com and http://www.SumoBrain.com.

They are great, free resources for inventors and intellectual property research.  Far faster and more complete than the US PTO, and they provide patents in PDF format.

If you have a spot on your web site, a link would be great.

Sincerely,
James

:}

Ameren Illinois – A Utilitiy That Just Keeps Takin And A Takin

After Tim Landis, Adriana Colindres is my favorite write for the SJ-R. But here is her story from another paper. I personally find these stories revolting because we in Riverton were without power for 4 hours. There wasn’t a cloud in the sky. No car crashes. No catastrophic incident like a shut down plant or a coal strike. When our local grocer (who has huge coolers thus a huge stake in the issue) asked what had happen he was told that there was squirrel damage at the local substation. These guys can’t beat squirrels but they want our money.

http://www.galesburg.com/news/x837456249/Ameren-seeks-fee-to-make-up-for-uncollectible-bills

Ameren seeks fee to make up for uncollectible bills


advertisement

GateHouse News Service

Posted Sep 09, 2009 @ 06:37 AM


SPRINGFIELD —

AmerenCIPS, AmerenCILCO and AmerenIP are asking the state’s utility regulator for permission to impose a fee on customers that would cover unpaid bills left behind by other customers.

The three companies, jointly called the Ameren Illinois Utilities, filed paperwork last week with the Illinois Commerce Commission. It’s not clear yet when the ICC will decide on the matter, or how much the fee might be.

The fee, which would appear on monthly bills, would make up for what are known as “uncollectibles” — the unpaid bills that remain after a customer’s utilities are shut off due to non-payment…..

…….

Ameren also has other business still pending before the Illinois Commerce Commission: a proposed $226 million delivery rate hike for electricity and natural gas customers. The ICC is expected to decide on that next spring.

On Tuesday, the ICC announced three public hearings in connection with the rate case.

The hearings are scheduled for Sept. 29 in hearing room A of the ICC offices, 527 E. Capitol Ave., Springfield; Oct. 5 in the Kenneth Hall Regional Office Building, 1100 Eastport Plaza, Collinsville; and Oct. 27 in the Pekin City Council Chambers, 111 S. Capitol St., Pekin.

The Ameren Illinois Utilities provide electricity to about 1.2 million customers throughout the southern two-thirds of the state. They serve more than 800,000 natural gas customers in the same areas.

:’}

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/08/03/daily50.html

Ameren seeks $185 million in stimulus

St. Louis Business Journal – by Kelsey Volkmann

Ameren’s Missouri and Illinois utilities applied this week for $185 million in stimulus money for infrastructure upgrades, smart grid projects and electric vehicles.

AmerenUE applied for $140 million in stimulus funding, and Ameren Illinois Utilities applied for $45 million.

AmerenUE’s application includes the following funding requests for a 50 percent federal match:

• $125 million in projects for modernizing the company’s Missouri delivery system.

• $15 million for an operating system that would synthesize and provide data to help better manage AmerenUE’s response to service disruptions.

• Matching funds to purchase two plug-in electric trouble trucks.

Of the total $787 billion federal stimulus package, about $43 billion is targeted for energy projects and energy efficiency. About $4.5 billion of that is targeted to support research and development of the nation’s smart grid, which delivers electricity from suppliers to consumers using digital technology.

Ameren Illinois Utilities seeks $45 million in stimulus to fund smart grid projects to improve electric service reliability. Its smart grid project will cost $83 million, of which $75 million is eligible for a 50 percent federal match of $37.5 million, the utility said.

Ameren Illinois Utilities also said it is requesting $7.5 million for a $15 million advanced distribution management system, a foundation for the smart grid project that will provide a common interface to monitor, control and manage the electrical distribution system and electrical devices.

Ameren Illinois Utilities said it plans to ask the Illinois Commerce Commission to allow the utility to add a charge to customer bills to recover AIU’s portion of the project costs.

St. Louis-based Ameren Corp. (NYSE: AEE) serves 2.4 million electric customers and 1 million natural gas customers in a 64,000-square-mile area of Missouri and Illinois

:}

http://www.themaneater.com/stories/2009/8/25/ameren-seeks-gas-price-hike-cities-around-columbia/

Ameren seeks electricity price hike in cities around Columbia

Communities around Columbia might see an increase next year.

Published Aug. 25, 2009

Correction appended

AmerenUE, the state’s largest utility company, has asked regulators for permission to raise its electric rates by as much as 18 percent, but the increase will not affect Columbia.

Ameren spokesman Mike Cleary said the increase would not directly affect MU students because the company does not provide electrical services to Columbia, only natural gas. Rates might go up in surrounding communities such as Ashland, Rocheport, Boonville and Moberly.

The company estimated the $402 million proposal would amount to an increase of about 50 cents per day for the average family. Its request comes as it is also asking for $185 million from the federal stimulus package to modernize its delivery systems. This is the company’s third request for a rate increase since 2007.

Cleary said the increase, if approved, would mostly be used to pay for reliability improvements such as reinforcing pipelines and electrical poles, and to make up for increasing delivery costs of fuel.

“We’ve just got to put everything into perspective,” Cleary said. “The reason for this increase is reliability. That’s our No. 1 priority because it’s the thing our customers have been asking us to improve the most.”

Cleary said raising rates in a down economy might affect consumers. He said Ameren has a number of programs for customers to get assistance paying bills so they will not lose service. Those programs include the ability to make minimum payments and budget billing to help eliminate sudden seasonal spikes in a family’s utility bills.

“The message we’re trying to get across is: If you’re having trouble paying the bills, call us early and don’t wait until you get a cut-off notice,” he said.

Ruth Ehresman, director of Health and Budgetary Policy for the Missouri Budget Project, said even with such programs, low-income families hit hardest by the economic crisis would face even more difficulties.

“We do know that many low-income families struggle to pay their utility bills already and a rate increase will always be problematic,” Ehresman said. “We’re always concerned when low-income families’ ability to provide basic resources is made more difficult.”

:}

I wish there something more to add, but considering their level of service and customer satisfaction ratings…what more is there to say?

:}

Making Drugs Illegal Is Not Just Stupid It Is A Serious Mistake

I like to make a distinction between naturally occurring mind altering substances and man made drugs. Naturally occurring substances should be totally legal and drugs should be regulated. But for the purposes of this discussion, think for a minute how quickly our world would be transformed if we took all of the money we spend on the “war on drugs” and spent it on alternative energy and environmental issues. If we took all of the money spent on:

eradication

criminal and military foreign drug assistance

border patrol

law enforcement

criminal prosecution

department of corrections

state and federal bureaucracies

We would save Billions of $$$ every year to spend on getting off the carbon economy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_drug_trade

Not to mention the  taxes we could raise:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQlk01sxO_E

How many marginalized lives could be restored:

http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/62

How much suffering could be reduced:

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/debate/myths/myths8.htm

http://www.amazon.com/Illegal-Drugs-Complete-History-Chemistry/dp/0452285054

:}

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/30/drugs-elephants-and-american-prisons/

The Great Debate

 

« Previous Post

Next Post »

07:38 April 30th, 2009

Drugs, elephants and American prisons

By: Bernd Debusmann

Tags: General, , , , , , , , ,

Bernd Debusmann - Great Debate–Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own–

Are the 305 million people living in the United States the most evil in the world? Is this the reason why the U.S., with 5 percent of the world’s population, has 25 percent of the world’s prisoners and an incarceration rate five times as high as the rest of the world?

Or is it a matter of a criminal justice system that has gone dramatically wrong, swamping the prison system with drug offenders?

That rhetorical question, asked on the floor of the U.S. Senate by Virginia Senator Jim Webb, fits into what looks like an accelerating shift in public sentiment on the way that a long parade of administrations has been dealing with illegal drugs.

Advocates of drug reform sensed a change in the public mood even before Webb, a Democrat who served as secretary of the Navy under Republican Ronald Reagan, introduced a bill last month to set up a blue-ribbon commission of “the greatest minds” in the country to review the criminal justice system and recommend reforms within 18 months.

No aspect of the system, according to Webb, should escape scrutiny, least of all “the elephant in the bedroom in many discussions … the sharp increase in drug incarceration over the past three decades. In 1980, we had 41,000 drug offenders in prison; today we have more than 500,000, an increase of 1,200 percent.”

:}

The Atmosphere’s Going To Hell In A Handbasket – OK so we know it won’t fit

in a handbasket. I don’t even know what that means or its origins:

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-goi1.htm

I have a hunch it was an allusion to being beheaded where the head would have landed in a basket myself but:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hell-in-a-handbasket.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_hell_in_a_handbasket

But I digress…Of course I digress because the prospects of us humans having screwed up our atmosphere so much that it may cease to support most mammalian life is just to gross and disgusting to contemplate.

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jun/30-state-of-the-climate-and-science

Environment / Global Warming

The State of the Climate—and of Climate Science

Four scientists discuss where the climate is and where it’s going.

by photography by Timothy Archibald

From the June 2009 issue, published online June 30, 2009

Robin Bell, Ken Caldera, Bill Easterling, Stephen Schneider

In the list of world challenges, global warming might be at once the most alarming and the most controversial. According to some predictions, climate change caused by human activity could cause mass extinction in the oceans, redraw the planet’s coastlines, and ravage world food supplies. At the same time, a significant portion of the American public questions whether global warming will really cause any major harm; many still doubt that human-driven warming is happening at all. How can we settle the debate? And can we intervene in the process or find ways to adapt to the new conditions? In conjunction with the National Science Foundation and the San Francisco Exploratorium, DISCOVER brought together four experts to discuss the reality and meaning of climate change. In a highly nuanced exchange of ideas, these researchers weighed the various scenarios and laid out a road map for navigating the warmer world to come. The conversation was moderated by DISCOVER’s editor in chief, Corey S. Powell.

POWELL: One question I hear all the time is whether the current change in climate is truly extraordinary. Even if humans are contributing to global warming, isn’t this just like the natural variations that have happened many times in the past?

Robin Bell: A little background first. I spend a lot of time studying the ice sheets at the bottom of the planet—how they form and how they collapse. The poles are like the planet’s air conditioner. When things are working well, the poles keep the planet nice and cool and we don’t think about it. When things stop working, the poles can start to melt and there’s a puddle on the floor. Today both poles are getting warmer; in Greenland and Antarctica you can see the surface of the ice dropping, and you can see there’s less mass when you measure the ice from space. The process has been ongoing, but it looks like it’s happening faster than it was. We know the ice sheets have come and gone in the past. Why is this any different? One of the most compelling reasons is that in the past the ice sheets from the two poles didn’t move together—one would lead and the other would follow. This time, both the north and south are spewing ice into the global ocean, accelerating at the same time.

:}

Please read more if you dare.

:}

George Will And Robert Murray Defend The Carbon Economy With Lies

The State Journal Register is just the same old Republican Rag that wants to shine Big Coals boots to stay in business. They ran 3 Right Wing Pundits today and 2 of them Commented on the Green Economy. One who says it won’t work and the other who says that Cap and Trade will destroy the US Economy. The first one, George Will:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/03/24/LI2005032402294.html

Who admits in the very article that the report he cites is the product of,  a right wing radical libertarian economist, was published by a right wing think tank that opposes any change in energy policy besides “Drill here, Drill now” and that has neither been replicated nor peer reviewed. BUT none the less it is TRUE to point out that Spain has an unemployment rate of 18% (which is disputed by many) and that every green electricity production job costs  700,000 to 1.5 million $$$ counting subsidies and green corruption.

The unemployment figures are probably 3 to 4 % lower then he reports and at 12-14 % where the United States will end up by September or October BECAUSE we are in the greatest economic downturn since the GREAT Depression (though no one can tell me what was so great about it) that was caused by rightwing attacks on our financial sector, our housing sector and on labor (car manufacturers). These are his wealthy buddies yah know. He then tosses off another “source”, a report by rightwing Missourian, Kitt Bond who may or may not know anything about economics which comes to a similar conclusion, “Oil good when cheap – Wind and Solar bad” and concludes that a failed policy in EDUCATION will have the same results in ENERGY policy. Did George have a cup of coffee today? It is always tough when your biases show like your butt crack.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784623/George-Will-Reality-of-green-spending-not-promising 

George Will: Reality of green spending not promising

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:02 AM


WASHINGTON — The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating “green jobs” in “alternative energy” even though Spain’s unemployment rate is 18.1 percent — more than double the European Union average — partly because of spending on such jobs?Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report which, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration’s green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it.Calzada says Spain’s torrential spending — no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources — on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada’s report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies — wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital. (European media regularly report “eco-corruption” leaving a “footprint of sleaze” — gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs from elsewhere in Spain’s economy.:}

Normally I would not even dein this kind of obvious “paid to play” kind of Drivel, because if I wrote a blog for everytime George Will was wrong or lying I would never get anything done, but when the SJ-R follows that with an attack on Cap and Trade (the industries OWN proposed solution) written by known liar and coal mine owner Robert Murray that is just way over the line. Please note their web site:

http://www.murrayenergy.net/ 

These people are proud that they are longwall miners and mountain TOP destroyers and even ash producers. To wit:

Murray is the largest privately owned coal company in America
Murrary Energy CorporationProducing approximately 30 million annual tons of bituminous coal that provides affordable energy to households and businesses across the country. We have eight (8) underground and surface mining operations, plus 40 subsidiary and support companies. Transporting coal via truck, rail and waterways, we operate the second largest fleet of longwall mining units in the country. With a support team of 3,000 hard-working, dedicated, and talented employees in six (6) states, Murray Energy Corporation provides efficient, safe, and affordable high-quality coal to the country’s leading electric producers, domestically and abroad.

Energy, Efficiency, Effective leadership . . .
Celebrating 20 years of building America’s energy future, and utilizing the industry’s most modern mining technologies today to enhance safety, improve productivity and reduce costs. We credit our employees and talents of the team assembled to provide this reliable, low-cost energy source. Murray is transforming America’s most abundant natural energy resource into electricity, powering America’s future. Murray Energy’s team, from the CEO to the coal miner, along with their effective managers use state-of-art technology and engineering principles, all to the production of energy..

Commitment . . .
Is the driving force behind Murray Energy producing and delivering to get the most reliable and affordable energy supplied to our customers. From our leadership and management, to our workforce, commitment is the center of our focus to produce every ton of coal safely, efficiently, and to provide the most affordable energy for the benefit of all Americans and the Country

:}

And he says:

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784635/Robert-Murray-Waxman-Markey-bill-will-destroy-U-S-coal-industry

Robert Murray: Waxman-Markey bill will destroy U.S. coal industry

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:04 AM


Perhaps the most destructive legislation in our country’s history will be voted on, maybe as soon as next week, in the U.S. House of Representatives — the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill. It is a misguided attempt to address climate change.It will have adverse and lingering consequences for every American.It will raise the cost of electricity in our homes, the fuel for our cars, and the energy that produces our manufacturing jobs, with little or no environmental benefit.Further, independent experts estimate that it will cost Americans more than $2 trillion in just over eight years. All Americans in the Midwest, South and Rocky Mountain regions will be drastically affected because the climate change legislation will destroy the nation’s coal industry and the low-cost electricity it has provided to these regions for generations. Wealth will be transferred away from almost every state to the West Coast and New England.The most abundant and by far least expensive energy source in our country for generating electricity is coal. America’s coal reserves rival the energy potential of Saudi Arabian oil.

:}

Nowhere does he cite actual sources or anything else. No one at the SJ-R calls him on it or points out that “Cap and Trade” was very effective at getting rid of sulfur dioxide.  If coal were not such a nasty energy source we would not be getting rid of it. WHAT doesn’t he understand about “Leave it in the ground”?

:}

The Day After Memorial Day – In all fairness to the Energy Conglomerates

The US Military is the largest single user of carbon based energy in the World. When you toss in the other worlds militaries, if we just cut the militaries of the world to patrolling borders global warming would backup by decades. Not only that but the Energy Companies are pushed around by the military big time. No military and the pirates take tankers…No Iraq war no Iraqui oil…No defense against China they suck all the world’s resources up like a vacuum cleaner…Do I feel sorry for the Energy Companies or the Military? No they deserve each other I just don’t think we deserve them. GO AWAY.

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/29925

I am not going to reprint the total article here…this guy did a lot of work on graphs and charts and things but it is interesting and he is not the only person to report on this. It is important to note that the Energy Bulletin has been adopted by the Post Carbon Institute (http://www.postcarbon.org/). Wonder when that happened?

Published May 20 2007 by Energy Bulletin
Archived May 21 2007

US military energy consumption- facts and figures

by Sohbet Karbuz

As the saying goes, facts are many but the truth is one. The truth is that the U.S. military is the single largest consumer of energy in the world. But as a wise man once said, don’t confuse facts with reality. The reality is that even U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) does not know precisely where and how much energy it consumes. This is my Fact Zero.

Below I give some facts and figures on U.S. military oil consumption based mostly on official statistics.[1] If you want to reproduce them make sure you read every footnote even if you need to put on your glasses. Also read the footnotes in this article.

FACT 1: The DoD’s total primary energy consumption in Fiscal Year 2006 was 1100 trillion Btu. It corresponds to only 1% of total energy consumption in USA. For those of you who think that this is not much then read the next sentence.

Nigeria, with a population of more than 140 million, consumes as much energy as the U.S. military.

The DoD per capita[2] energy consumption (524 trillion Btu) is 10 times more than per capita energy consumption in China, or 30 times more than that of Africa.

Total final energy consumption (called site delivered energy by DoD) of the DoD was 844 trillion Btu in FY2006FACT 2: Defense Energy Support Center (DESC) sold $13 billion of energy to DoD services in FY2006. More than half of it was to Air Force.

FACT 3: Oil accounts for more than three-fourths of DoD’s total site delivered energy consumption. Oil is followed by electricity (slightly more than 10%) and natural gas (nearly 10%). In terms of fuel types, jet fuel (JP-8)[3] accounts for more than 50% of total DoD energy consumption, and nearly 60% of its mobility[4] fuel.

FACT 4: Nearly three quarters of DoD site delivered energy is consumed by vehicles (or for mobility if you like). Only one quarter is consumed in buildings and facilities.[5]FACT 5: DoD consumed 97 million gasoline gallon equivalent in its non-tactical vehicles and for that it spent 238 million dollars.

FACT 6: In 2006, its oil consumption was down to 117 million barrels (or 320 thousand barrels per day),[10] despite increasing activity in Iraq and Afghanistan.

FACT 7: In 2006, for example, DESC reports in its Factbook that it sold 131 million barrels of oil (or 358 kbd) to DoD but DoD Federal Energy Management Report states that DoD consumed 117 million barrels (or 320 kbd).[12]

FACT 8: According to 2007 CIA World Fact Book there are only 35 countries in the world consuming more oil than DoD.

FACT 9: There exist no official estimates. Let me know if you see or hear one. According to my most pessimist estimates it is about 150 thousand barrels per day FACT 10: Whatever the true figure oil consumed by the U.S. military does not show up in world oil demand. See for more explanation under item #425 in October 2004 issue of ASPO Newsletter.

:}

For more of this incredibly insightful and well written article please go to the above website and see it..Even the Military is aware that it is seen as a BIG FAT energy PIG, but it is also aware that NO OIL = NO WAR

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/addressing-the-militarys-energy-efficiency/

Addressing the Military’s Energy Inefficiency

 

Report

The folks who gave the world the Hummer, the poster child of fuel inefficiency, want to spawn a new generation of eco-friendly military equipment with cross-over potential in the “civilian sector,” say a group of retired American military officers who released a sharply worded report on Monday calling on the Department of Defense to reduce its “carbon bootprint.”

“The American military gave you the Humvee, and now we’re taking it back,” said retired Adm. John Nathman, the former vice chief of naval operations and an adviser to President Obama, in a conference call on Monday. “You’re going to see some fairly dramatic movement by the Department of Defense in terms of public visibility.”

The report, “Powering America’s Defense,” was published by CNA Analysis and Solutions, a research group based in Alexandria, Va., that issued a previous study on defense and energy security in 2007.

In the new study’s preface, 12 retired military officers lay out the case for weaning the military — and the country — off oil:

Many of our overseas deployments were de?ned, in part, by the strategic decision to ensure the free ?ow of oil, to the U.S. and to our allies. Many of the troops we commanded were aided by air cover from high-thrust delivery systems that only an energy-intense society can provide. Many of these same troops were often burdened and imperiled by battle?eld systems that were energy-inef?cient. Some of the attacks on our troops and on American civilians have been supported by funds from the sale of oil. Our nation’s energy choices have saved lives; they have also cost lives.

As we consider America’s current energy posture, we do so from a singular perspective: We gauge our energy choices solely by their impact on America’s national security. Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish us harm, and weakens our economy; our dependency and inef?cient use of oil also puts our troops at risk.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking minority member chairman Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican, told The Associated Press that he strongly agreed “with the stark conclusions” of the report, whose authors point out that fluctuating oil prices, dependence on foreign resources and an ailing electricity grid imperil national security both at home and abroad.

“Climate change is a threat multiplier,” said Vice Adm. Dennis V. McGinn, a retired officer and former commander of the Third Fleet.

Defense officials have previously described the American military as likely the world’s largest consumer of petroleum products, with an annual outlay in excess of $13 billion.

Each $1 per barrel increase in oil prices translates into $130 million of extra cost.

Calls for the military to address its environmental performance are not new. But in the past year or so, energy efficiency seems have become more of a priority, from a new solar wall installation at Fort Drum to the purchase of a large electric vehicle fleet for military bases.

:}

After all is said and done, are we safer with all this energy consumption? I think not:

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/05/19-9

US Energy Use a National Security Threat: Study

WASHINGTON – US dependence on fossil fuels and a vulnerable electric grid pose a perilous threat to the country’s national security, retired military officers warned Monday in a report.

The threat requires urgent action and the Defense Department should lead the way in transforming America’s energy use by aggressively pursuing efficiency measures and renewable sources, said the report by CNA, a nonprofit research group.

“Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish us harm, and weakens our economy,” it said.

“The market for fossil fuels will be shaped by finite supplies and increasing demand. Continuing our heavy reliance on these fuels is a security risk,” said the report titled “Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security.”

The authors, top ranked retired officers from the US Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, also point to the strained domestic electricity network as a possible hazard for US military bases.

“Our domestic electrical system is also a current and significant risk to our national security: many of our large military installations rely on power from a fragile electrical grid that is vulnerable to malicious attacks or interruptions caused by natural disasters,” it said.

:}

Why Is Exelon Going Solar – Could it be that the Nuclear business is about to go South?

I find it interesting that Three Mile Island just refuses to go away. 30 years later all the damage that happened and the deaths (yes deaths) make Nuclear’s future in the North and West bleak. But those hicks (sorry) in the South well that is another matter. But first: The Improbable :-0

http://www.suntimes.com/business/1540009,CST-FIN-solar23.article

Exelon to build largest U.S. urban solar power

plant on Chicago’s South Side

ComEd parent looks to stimulus money for 10-megawatt photovoltaic building near 120th and Peoria in West Pullman

April 23, 2009

ComEd parent Exelon Corp. plans to build the nation’s largest urban solar power plant on the city’s South Side by year’s end.

A view of a 39-acre plot on the South Side that will be covered in solar panels by Exelon.
(Scott Stewart/Sun-Times)

The planned 10-megawatt solar photovoltaic building would be at an industrial site near 120th and Peoria in the West Pullman neighborhood, Chicago-headquartered Exelon said Wednesday.

The plant’s 32,800 solar panels would convert the sun’s rays into enough electricity to meet the annual energy requirements of 1,200 to 1,500 homes. It would eliminate about 31.2 million pounds of greenhouse gas emissions a year, the equivalent of taking more than 2,500 cars off the road or planting more than 3,200 acres of forest, Exelon said.

“This is exactly the type of shovel-ready, community-benefitting project that the Obama administration is touting,” said Thomas O’Neill, senior vice president for new business development at the company’s Exelon Generation.

:}

Did I mention that Mike Madigan might be looking at allowing the major utillities to get back into generation?

 

Madigan: Electric dereg law may need overhaul

Overhaul might protect consumers, House speaker says

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Apr 15, 2009 @ 11:40 PM

Last update Apr 16, 2009 @ 06:36 AM

The 1997 law that restructured Illinois’ electric industry has failed to live up to its promise, and it may be time to consider an overhaul to protect consumers from volatile power prices, says House Speaker Michael Madigan.

Madigan, a Chicago Democrat, has filed a legislative resolution calling on the Illinois Power Agency to study whether to let utility companies regain the authority to run their own power-generating plants.

Such a move would reverse a key part of the 1997 law often referred to as “electric deregulation.” Under that law, utility companies such as Ameren Illinois and Commonwealth Edison stopped generating electricity and became power-delivery companies only. The companies’ power-generating arms were spun off into separate, unregulated entities.

The thinking at the time was that consumers would benefit because they’d be able to shop for power as they shop for other goods and services, looking for the best deal and saving money. But competition never developed in the residential market, and residential customers have seen their bills increase.

:}

That Mike he is always thinking of us. But this is what they are probably more worried about:

http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A393821

 

New revelations about Three Mile Island

disaster raise doubts over nuclear plant safety

The truth behind the meltdown

22 APR 2009  •  by Sue Sturgis

Editor’s note: This story originally appeared in Facing South, the online magazine of the Institute for Southern Studies.



Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg, Pa.
Photo courtesy of Dept. of Health and Human Services

It was April Fool’s Day, 1979—30 years ago this month—when Randall Thompson first set foot inside the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pa. Just four days earlier, in the early morning hours of March 28, a relatively minor problem in the plant’s Unit 2 reactor sparked a series of mishaps that led to the meltdown of almost half the uranium fuel and uncontrolled releases of radiation into the air and surrounding Susquehanna River.It was the single worst disaster ever to befall the U.S. nuclear power industry, and Thompson was hired as a health physics technician to go inside the plant and find out how dangerous the situation was. He spent 28 days monitoring radiation releases.

Today, his story about what he witnessed at Three Mile Island is being brought to the public in detail for the first time; and his version of what happened during that time, supported by a growing body of other scientific evidence, contradicts the official U.S. government story that the Three Mile Island accident posed no threat to the public.

“What happened at TMI was a whole lot worse than what has been reported,” Thompson told Facing South. “Hundreds of times worse.”

:}

All of these articles gooooooooooo on and on about the radioactive iodine that was released being huge, that the total amount of released material was larger yet (nobody mentions it but a lot of it went into the river) and that approximately 450 people died. So I am just going to stitch some articles together. You can read the whole thing if you want:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/04/03-9

That it happened on April Fools day means that there is a god.

:}

Anomalies abound

That a lot of people died because of what happened at Three Mile Island, as the Thompsons claim, is definitely not part of the official story. In fact, the commercial nuclear power industry and the government insist that despite the meltdown of almost half of the uranium fuel at TMI, there were only minimal releases of radiation to the environment that harmed no one.

For example, the Nuclear Energy Institute, the lobbying group for the U.S. nuclear industry, declares on its website that there have been “no public health or safety consequences from the TMI-2 accident.” The government’s position is the same, reflected in a fact sheet distributed today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency charged with overseeing the U.S. nuclear power industry: TMI, it says, “led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community.” [The watchdog group Three Mile Island Alert offers their take on the NRC factsheet here.]

Those upbeat claims are based on the findings of the Kemeny Commission, a panel assembled by President Jimmy Carter in April 1979 to investigate the TMI disaster. Using release figures presented by Metropolitan Edison and the NRC, the commission calculated that in the month following the disaster there were releases of up to 13 million curies of so-called “noble gases” — considered relatively harmless — but only 13 to 17 curies of iodine-131, a radioactive form of the element that at even moderate exposures causes thyroid cancer. (A curie is a measure of radioactivity, with 1 curie equal to the activity of one gram of radium. For help understanding these and other terms, see the glossary at the end of this piece.)

But the official story that there were no health impacts from the disaster doesn’t jibe with the experiences of people living near TMI. On the contrary, their stories suggest that area residents actually suffered exposure to levels of radiation high enough to cause acute effects — far more than the industry and the government has acknowledged.

Some of their disturbing experiences were collected in the book Three Mile Island: The People’s Testament, which is based on interviews with 250 area residents done between 1979 and 1988 by Katagiri Mitsuru and Aileen M. Smith.

It includes the story of Jean Trimmer, a farmer who lived in Lisburn, Pa. about 10 miles west of TMI. On the evening of March 30, 1979, Trimmer stepped outside on her front porch to fetch her cat when she was hit with a blast of heat and rain. Soon after, her skin became red and itchy as if badly sunburned, a condition known as erythema. About three weeks later, her hair turned white and began falling out. Not long after, she reported, her left kidney “just dried up and disappeared” — an occurrence so strange that her case was presented to a symposium of doctors at the nearby Hershey Medical Center. All of those symptoms are consistent with high-dose radiation exposure.

:}

But this has been going on for years…please ignore the nutball survivalist website. It is difficult to get Ken Briggs testimony online. Don’t forget we had Jimmie “the nuke” Carter as President>>>

Nuclear Power Plant Hazard Issues

Are you prepared for a nuclear power plant disaster?

3 March 2001, V3    by Kevin Briggs, Director, USDPI

Observations about the Three Mile Island Nuclear Disaster

“Friday, Saturday, and Sunday were hectic days in the emergency preparedness offices of the counties close to Three Mile Island. Officials labored first to prepare 10-mile evacuation plans and then ones covering areas out to 20 miles from the plant. {USDPI comment:  State and local governments, with support from the Federal government and utilities, currently develop plans that include a “plume emergency planning zone” with a radius of only 10 miles from each nuclear power plant. However, government officials recognize that in a catastrophic incident, a 20 mile evacuation radius akin to what was needed with the Chernobyl disaster may be more appropriate.} The Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency recommended Friday morning that 10-mile plans be readied. The three counties closest to the nuclear plant already had plans to evacuate their residents — a total of about 25,000 living within 5 miles of the Island. A 10-mile evacuation had never been contemplated. For Kevin Molloy in Dauphin County, extending the evacuation zone meant the involvement of several hospitals — something he had not confronted earlier. There were no hospitals within 5 miles. Late Friday night, PEMA told county officials to develop 20-mile plans. Suddenly, six counties were involved in planning for the evacuation of 650,000 people, 13 hospitals, and a prison.”

:}

I quote this to say what should have happened immediately. Not 1 day later when the State was notified and not 3 days later when the Feds had been notified. By that time they knew that a good chunk of New York and Pennsylvania were involved so they DID NOTHING.

The damage was done pretty much in the first several hours of the crisis. There is this from 1979 and it is nasty:

http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2008/11/five-versions-of-truth-for-three-mile.html

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/SFchp18.html

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/index.html
Deaths after Three Mile Island accident (end of March 1979):

US Center for Health Statistics for Pennsylvania in May 1979. A SUMMARY

US Center for Health Statistics for Pennsylvania in May 1979 showed the following (per thousand live births): 147 infant deaths in February, 141 in March, 166 in April, 198 in May. At the same time the number of births had declined from 13,589 in March 1979 to 13,201 in May. For the United States as whole the rate of infant deaths per 1000 live births had declined 11 percent between March and May 1979…., “the Pennsylvania figures for March and May representing an increase of 57 deaths, which was more than three times the statistically expected normal fluctuation of about +/- 16, and thus unlikely to occur purely by chance in less than one in a thousand instances.”

The US Vital Statistics for Upstate New York in 1979. A SUMMARY

The US Vital Statistics for Upstate New York in 1979 (north, northwest, and northeast of Harrisburg some 100 to 200 miles away and in the direction the wind was blowing when the heaviest releases of radiation were occurring.) According to these studies of wind direction the expectation was that “The figures for the rest of the state outside of New York City should have gone up, while New York City should either have shown no change or an actual decline….the numbers showed: Between March and May, infant deaths outside New York City climbed an amazing 52 percent, by 63 deaths, from 121 to 184. For New York City during the same period the number declined from 166 to 129. Again, these changes were many times as large as normal fluctuations, and the number of births changed relatively little, or by less than 10 percent.

What about the data for Harrisburg? A SUMMARY.

“only Tokuhata had the data for the 5-mile and 10-mile zones around the plant, and there was no way that I would be able to obtain them…Warren L. Prelesnik, executive vice-president in charge of administration Harrisburg Hospital provided a list of the monthly infant deaths, fetal deaths, stillbirths, and live births in the Harrisburg Hospital for the previous two years. In February, March, and April of 1979, there had only been 1 infant death per month. But for each of the two months of May and June, there were 4. Effectively, since the number of births had not only remained nearly the same but had actually declined slightly, this was more than a fourfold increase in the mortality rate, or of the right magnitude required to fit the observed 50 percent rise in the more distant area of upstate New York. From an average of 5.7 per 1000 live births in the three months of February, March, and April — before the releases could have had an appreciable effect — the newborn mortality rate had risen to 24.1 for May and 26.0 for June, an unprecedented summer peak that did not occur the previous year. In fact, for May and June of 1978, there had been a total of only 3 infant deaths, while for the same period in 1979 after the accident, there had been 8.As some of my colleagues with whom I discussed these findings agreed, by themselves the Harrisburg Hospital numbers were of course small, and only marginally significant, representing only about one-third of all the births and deaths in Harrisburg. But taken together with the vastly more significant and independent numbers for all of Pennsylvania, upstate New York, New York City, New Jersey, Maryland, and Ohio, there was now a much greater degree of certainty: It would have been much too much of a coincidence — perhaps less than one in a million — for all these different numbers to show the pattern they did.

The time and cause of death due to radiation. What can be expected. SUMMARY

One of the remaining important questions that had to be checked, however, was the time and cause of death? if the excess deaths were connected with the radioactive iodine released from the plant, then they should be associated with underweight births or immaturity, since damage to the fetal thyroid would slow down the normal rapid growth and development of the baby in the last few months before birth. The development of the lungs, which have to be ready to begin breathing at the moment of birth, is one of the most critical phases of late fetal development. Any developmental slowdown would be most life-threatening if it led to the inability of the tiny air sacs in the lungs to inflate and start supplying the blood with oxygen. Failure of the lungs to function properly would therefore lead to immediate symptoms of respiratory distress, and if efforts to treat the baby should not succeed, it would die in a matter of minutes, hours, or days of respiratory insufficiency or hyaline membrane disease. Thus, one would not expect to find as large an increase in spontaneous miscarriages well before birth as newborn deaths within a short time after birth, since the lungs did not need to start functioning until the baby was born. Also, there should be no significant increase in gross congenital malformations a few months after the accident, since by the time the baby in the mother’s womb had reached the sixth or seventh month of development, all the major organs had already fully developed. Thus, only some six to seven months after the accident would one expect some increase in serious physical malformations, since these infants would have been exposed to radiation in the first three months of development of critical-organ formation.

data from the Harrisburg Hospital supported these expectations

State of Pennsylvania Health Department had discovered a rise in hypothyroidism among newborn babies in areas where the radioactive gases from Three Mile Island had been carried by the winds.

:}

Now aren’t you glad you know? More tomorrow on Nukes in the South.

:}

What Does Spain Know That The US Doesn’t – Not only do they lead the world in solar

They lead in the US as well.

http://ecoworldly.com/2009/04/07/spain-leads-the-world-in-new-solar-energy-development/

Spain Leads the World in New Solar Energy Development

Published on April 7th, 2009

2 Comments

Posted in About Energy, In Europe

According to a newly released draft of a report by the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21), Spain now leads the world in added photovoltaic capacity.

Solar Energy Panels

Although Germany is still the leading nation in total grid-connected solar photovoltaic capacity, this news now means Spain has surged into second place there. The report comes as an embarrassment for a floundering Japan, who used to lead the world, but now has fallen to third place in total capacity and forth place in added capacity.

Spain added 1.7 million kilowatts of capacity in 2008, followed by Germany at 1.5 million kilowatts. The United States lagged behind in a distant third place at 300,000 kilowatts, followed by Japan with only 240,000 kilowatts. The news is disappointing for Japan, but it should be equally as distressing for the United States, which continues to show only slow improvements year.

:}

This is why. They give awards for being sustainable!

http://www.managenergy.net/products/R1574.htm

Good Practice Case Study: Sustainable Energy Solutions in Barcelona – Spain

Case Study (45 KB PDF)

Imma Mayol i Beltran receives the ManagEnergy Local Energy Action Award 2007 from Alfonso González Finat In 2007, Barcelona won the ManagEnergy Local Energy Action Award for their committment to Sustainable Energy Solutions in Barcelona.The Award was presented to Imma Mayol i Beltran, Vice-Mayor of Barcelona and President of Agència d’Energia de Barcelona, Spain during the plenary session of the ManagEnergy Annual Conference Award by Alfonso González Finat, Conference Chair [left].
Link to website for Directorate-General for Energy and Transport

link to presentation

ManagEnergy Local Energy Action Award 2007

Feb 2007   ( 14min 0sec )    

Link to website for Directorate-General for Energy and Transport

link to presentation of Imma Mayol

Barcelona – sustainable energy city

Feb 2007   ( 9min 0sec )    

Imma Mayol
Deputy Mayor and Chairman of Sustainability, Barcelona

Summary

The goals of Barcelona City Council’s Plan for Energy Improvement in Barcelona (2002-2010) are to increase the use of renewable energy (especially solar energy), reduce the use of non-renewable energy sources and lower the emissions produced by energy consumption in order to meet Barcelona City Council’s international protection commitments. This integrated plan includes a quantification of the energy used and emissions produced in the city and provide scope for municipal action to promote an environmentally sustainable city, reducing air pollution and the consumption of fossil fuels in the process. As part of its plan a Solar Thermal Ordinance has been introduced. The aim of the ordinance is to regulate, through local legislation, the implementation of low-temperature systems for collecting and using active solar energy for the production of hot water for buildings. New buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment are required to use solar energy to supply 60% of their running hot water requirements. Since its enforcement licenses for the installation of a total of 14,028 square meters of solar panels have been requested with annual savings of 11,222 Megawatt hours and a corresponding reduction in eCO2 emissions of 1,973 tonnes per year.

Results

The strategies named promotion policies and demonstration projects have been present in the city for several years, with different examples such as the installation of solar systems in schools, sports centres (solar thermal installation in the Olympics Swimming Pool ) or in some other public buildings (solar photovoltaic installation in the Town Hall building).

Concerning legal instruments, Barcelona is the first European city to have a Solar thermal ordinance. According to this bylaw all new buildings and buildings undergoing major refurbishment are obligated to use solar energy to supply 60% of their running hot water requirements. This solar ordinance was approved by the Barcelona City Council in July 1999 and entered into force in August 2000. This new policy has brought Barcelona to multiply per more than 10 the surface of solar thermal square metres (licenses requested), moving from 1,1 sqm /1.000 inhabitants (in 2000) to 13 sqm/1.000 inhabitants [as of march 2004, the licenses requested for the installation of solar panels made up a total of: 19.543 sqm of solar panels (before: 1650 sqm)]. We are happy to see these results and specially to see that more than 20 Spanish cities are now “replicating” this initiative taking Barcelona as a model.

The Barcelona Energy Improvement Plan (PMEB), a 10 year plan adopted in 2002, and the Barcelona Energy Agency, are two major management instruments that ensure the commitment of the City to further promote these energy measures in a planned and structured manner. The Barcelona Energy Improvement Plan proposes a series of measures and 55 projects for local action up to the year 2010, these being centred on energy savings and in the use of renewable energies.

The municipal action promoting a sustainable energy city also works towards the integration of sustainable energy measures in urban developments, an example of this integration are thesustainable energy measures in the Forum Barcelona 2004 area. The major Sustainable Energy measures in the Forum 2004 area are the following:

  • Urban solar FV power station (10.700 sqm, 1,3 MWpic)
  • District heating & cooling system, and
  • Energy efficient buildings.

Keywords

To find similar reports, click on a keyword below:
Buildings : Cooling : District Heating : Energy Efficiency : Heat/Heating : Local Government : ManagEnergy : New Buildings : Planning issues : Refurbishment of Buildings : Regional Government : Regulatory framework : Renewable Energy Sources & Systems : Schools & Colleges : Solar Thermal : Sustainable Communities : Sustainable Energy

:}

http://www.technologyreview.com/microsites/spain/solar/index.aspx

Solar Energy in Spain

Spain forges ahead with plans to build concentrating solar power plants, establishing the country and Spanish companies as world leaders in the emerging field. At the same time, the number of installed photovoltaic systems is growing exponentially, and researchers continue to explore new ways to promote and improve solar power. This is the seventh in an eight-part series highlighting new technologies in Spain and is produced by Technology Review, Inc.’s custom-publishing division in partnership with the Trade Commission of Spain.

From the road to the Solúcar solar plant outside Seville, drivers can see what appear to be glowing white rays emanating from a tower, piercing the dry air, and alighting upon the upturned faces of the tilted mirror panels below. Appearances, though, are deceiving: those upturned mirrors are actually tracking the sun and radiating its power onto a blindingly white square at the top of the tower, creating the equivalent of the power of 600 suns, which is used to vaporize water into steam to power a turbine.

This tower plant uses concentrated solar technology – otherwise known as solar thermal power – with a central receiver. It’s the first commercial central receiver system in the world.

Spanish companies and research centers are taking the lead in the recent revival of concentrated solar power, as expanses of mirrors are being assembled around the country for concentrated solar plants. At the same time, Spanish companies are also investing in huge photovoltaic fields, as companies dramatically increase production of PV panels and investigate the next generation of PV. Spain is already fourth in the world in its use of solar power, and second in Europe behind Germany, with more than 120 MW in about 8300 installations of PV. Within only the past ten years, the number of companies working in solar energy has leapt from a couple dozen to a few hundred.

Power from the Sun’s Heat
Southern Spain, a region known the world over for its abundant sun and scarce rain, provides an ideal landscape for solar thermal power. The tower outside Seville, built and operated by Solúcar, an Abengoa company, is the first of a number of solar thermal plants and will provide about 10 MW of power. The company SENER is completing Andasol 1, the first parabolic trough plant in Europe, a 50 MW system outside Granada that will begin operation in the summer of 2008.

Solar thermal power, also known as concentrating solar, works by utilizing the heat of the sun (unlike PV panels, which work on the principle of the movement of electrons between layers when the sun strikes the materials).

:}

At one level this is great. At a personal level it sucks.