Archive for September, 2010

Chunks: A(nother) New Approach to Energy Policy?
By Alex Trembath. Cross-posted at Energetics.

In a recent interview with Rolling Stone, President Obama addressed the failed climate/energy attempt of this summer, promising to move forward with a reinvigorated agenda in 2011. However, any such action will likely bear little resemblance to previous attempts. Mr. Obama conceded that “we may have to end up having to do it in chunks, as opposed to some sort of comprehensive legislation.” If this is indeed going to be the form of a new course of action on climate/energy for Mr. Obama, commentators are beginning to wonder exactly what those “chunks” will be.

Never mind the fact that the most recent attempts at energy reform have been piece-meal to begin with–that’s more or less inevitable with so many regulations, markets, fuels, interest groups and players at stake. Before its total dismantling, the American Power Act (formerly Kerry-Graham-Lieberman) was a hodge-podge of cap-and-trade, tax incentives and subsidies for renewables and clean coal technology, loan guarantees for next-generation nuclear power production, and a slew of regulatory reforms to preempt state action of GHGs and promote energy efficiency. Of course that bill never came close to a floor vote in the Senate, but my point stands: a “comprehensive” bill would have to be built one brick at a time anyway, so maybe Obama’s explicit “chunks” approach will get the job done.

So what’s on the table this time around? And, more importantly, what can pass a divided Congress?

Glenn Hurowitz at Grist proposes his favorite chunks in his “Peanut Butter Plan.” He advocates a combination of tax credits for carbon capture; regulations to reduce black carbon pollution; intensifying regulations banning HFCs; and international finance to help LDCs adapt to climate change. Hurowitz refers to these four as “low-hanging fruit” solutions, and believes that if combined properly they could achieve greater emissions reductions than more comprehensive legislation.

Andrew Revkin kick-started a similar discussion over at DotEarth, putting forward a couple of his favorite policy chunks to replace a larger bill. He credits Hurowitz’s list, and adds making the R&D tax credit permanent and the RE-ENERGYSE program to the list. If anything, Mr. Revkin’s recommendations are more comprehensive than “chunky,” as he puts it. Rather than approaching certain piece-meal aspects of climate/energy one at a time, Revkin’s suggestions create policy infrastructure for energy innovation and energy education at large. Instead of writing different legislation for solar, wind, CCS, nuclear, EE, carbon finance, and emissions regulations (to name a few), funding for innovation and education create the foundations of a workable and flexible industrial policy on energy.

I’m a fan of piece-meal, and I’m a fan of big picture. But the problems will arise, as usual, with the politics. As Senator Jay Rockefeller said, “We [the Senate] tend not to be very good at chunks, but then you could argue that we tend not to be very good at big things either.” Bonus points for honesty. However, a recent piece in Politico might forecast some political leeway for the President as he moves forward with a chunks approach. The article cites Senators Brown (R-MA), Alexander (R-TN), and Snowe (R-ME) as potential allies on a chunky approach, in addition to Democrats like Rockefeller, John Kerry and Dick Durbin.

A quick aside on the politics. Much has been said that, if Republicans have been so unwilling to cooperate thusfar with the Obama Administration, what makes us think that the chances for climate/energy legislation will be higher in 2011, when Republicans will certainly have more seats in both Houses? To the naysayers, I offer my cautious optimism that Republicans will accept their increased share in political power as an opportunity to shake off the still trenchant “Party of No” vision that many voters have adopted for them. Beating Democrats in Midterms is one thing; beating a still reasonably popular President in 2012 without a legitimate Republican frontrunner will take more than straight obstruction. Time will tell.

But I digress. What would I add to the chunky climate agenda? Well, I appreciate the efforts of individual members of Congress to promote clean coal, nuclear, renewables, energy efficiency, biofuels and other fuel-focused policies. However, I would add my name Mr. Revkin’s endorsement of research and innovation before partitioning climate/energy policy into too many segments. In addition to increasing cleantech R&D funding to at least $15 billion annually and re-investing in science and engineering education, we should expand the scope of DoE’s ARPA-E, the Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy, and create public private partnerships with similar goals of targeting and funding specific energy technology projects for demonstration and deployment.

Like extending the research tax credit and RE-ENERGYSE, these proposals are less chunky and have received proportionately lower attention in Congress. However, policy and business leaders from the Brookings Institution and the Information Technology and Innovation Council to the American Energy Innovation Council and the Breakthrough Institute have all advocated similar approaches to our energy challenges. I’ve consistently added my voice to these calls to actions here and with Americans for Energy Leadership, who have done excellent work on the RE-ENERGYSE proposal in particular.

At the end of the day, we need a strong energy agenda, one way or another. But looking past the chunks, we must keep pushing for a policy infrastructure built on education, research and innovation, without which such piece-meal approaches may not be able to form an effective climate/energy agenda.



Visit the original post at: Energy News

Obama to throw full weight of presidency behind clean energy policy in 2011: Rolling Stone interview

I highly encourage you to read this insightful Rolling Stone interview with President Obama, who covers off a range of topics including energy policy. The interviewer asked two questions related to energy. In a nutshell, Obama says he’s disappointed things haven’t moved faster but plans to throw the full weight of his presidency behind energy policy in 2011. Questions excerpted below:

Question: James Hansen, the NASA scientist who is perhaps the most respected authority on global warming, says that climate change is the predominant moral issue of the 21st century, comparable to slavery faced by Lincoln and the response to Nazism faced by Churchill. Do you agree with that statement?

Obama:  What I would agree with is that climate change has the potential to have devastating effects on people around the globe, and we’ve got to do something about it. In order to do something about it, we’re going to have to mobilize domestically, and we’re going to have to mobilize internationally.

During the past two years, we’ve not made as much progress as I wanted to make when I was sworn into office. It is very hard to make progress on these issues in the midst of a huge economic crisis, because the natural inclination around the world is to say, “You know what? That may be a huge problem, but right now what’s a really big problem is 10 percent unemployment,” or “What’s a really big problem is that our businesses can’t get loans.” That diverted attention from what I consider to be an urgent priority. The House of Representatives made an attempt to deal with the issue in a serious way. It wasn’t perfect, but it was serious. We could not get 60 votes for a comparable approach in the Senate.

One of my top priorities next year is to have an energy policy that begins to address all facets of our overreliance on fossil fuels. We may end up having to do it in chunks, as opposed to some sort of comprehensive omnibus legislation. But we’re going to stay on this because it is good for our economy, it’s good for our national security, and, ultimately, it’s good for our environment.

Understand, though, that even in the absence of legislation, we took steps over the past two years that have made a significant difference. I will give you one example, and this is an example where sometimes I think the progressive community just pockets whatever we do, takes it for granted, and then asks, “Well, why didn’t you get this done?”

We instituted the first increase in fuel-efficiency standards in this country in 30 years. It used to be that California would have some very rigorous rule, and then other states would have much weaker ones. Now we’ve got one rule. Not only that, it used to be that trucks weren’t covered, and there were all kinds of loopholes — that’s how SUVs were out there getting eight miles a gallon. Now everybody’s regulated — not only cars, but trucks. We did this with the agreement of the auto industry, which had never agreed to it before, we did it with the auto workers, who had never agreed to it before. We are taking the equivalent of millions of cars off the road, when it comes to the amount of greenhouse gases that are produced.

Is it enough? Absolutely not. The progress that we’re making on renewable energy, the progress that we’re making on retrofitting buildings and making sure that we are reducing electricity use — all those things, cumulatively, if we stay on it over the next several years, will allow us to meet the target that I set, which would be around a 17 percent reduction in our greenhouse gases.

But we’re going to have to do a lot more than that. When I talk to [Energy Secretary] Steven Chu, who, by the way, was an unsung hero in the Gulf oil spill — this guy went down and helped design the way to plug that hole with BP engineers — nobody’s a bigger champion for the cause of reducing climate change than he is. When I ask him how we are going to solve this problem internationally, what he’ll tell you is that we can get about a third of this done through efficiencies and existing technologies, we can get an additional chunk through some sort of pricing in carbon, but ultimately we’re going to need some technological breakthroughs. So the investments we’re making in research and development around clean energy are also going to be important if we’re going to be able to get all the way there. Am I satisfied with what we’ve gotten done? Absolutely not.

Question: Do you see a point at which you’re going to throw the whole weight of the presidency behind this, like you did on health care or financial reform?

Obama: Yes. Not only can I foresee it, but I am committed to making sure that we get an energy policy that makes sense for the country and that helps us grow at the same time as it deals with climate change in a serious way. I am just as committed to getting immigration reform done.

I’ve been here two years, guys. And one of the things that I just try to remember is that if we have accomplished 70 percent of what we committed to in the campaign, historic legislation, and we’ve got 30 percent of it undone — well, that’s what the next two years is for, or maybe the next six.

Share/Save/Bookmark


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Europe Weekly: Wind, LEDs, smart grid, and EVs attract new funds
A busy week for VC deals sees seven rounds close, while a group of Dutch corporations and investors form a new early-stage cleantech fund.


Visit the original post at: Energy News

John Allemang at Globe and Mail also celebrates a Canada that benefits from the suffering of others

Obviously Globe and Mail feature writer John Allemang was trying to have fun with this piece — though I’m not sure anyone found it funny — and intended to be controversial. He’s not a climate-change denier, though he could be a denier of human-caused climate change — it’s unclear. What is clear is that he’s joining a club of navel-gazing Canadians who are climate-change embracers, a group of folks who see (quite inaccurately, I should say) their own position in the world and their own fortune rising at the expense of others. Climate change will make Canada warmer, they say. It will open up economic opportunities, including oil and gas exploration and tourism in the north. As Hollywood dries up and burns the movie industry will relocate to Vancouver and Toronto. Disney has opened polar bear parks in the north. Ontario’s wine industry is thriving. We’re getting rich by selling water to the thirsty U.S. southwest. What’s there to complain about?

“ Canada in 2050 isn’t utopia – not yet, though we’re working on it. With that said, I think you’d find it  pretty incredible,” he writes. “There are no votes in despair, no profits in pessimism. The future, sad to report, turns out to be happy-faced. And remember what they say, or what they will say once you start coming to terms with your good luck: The 21st century belongs to Canada.”

Right. Thanks for the pep talk, John. Now can we get back to reality?

I took issue with this approach when the Sun’s Lorrie Goldstein wrote a column that reviewed, with a kind of glee, the conclusions of a new book by UCLA professor Laurence Smith. You can read my responses to Goldstein’s column here. He mentioned the same things: how climate change will open up the north and its abundance of natural resources, including oil and minerals; how Canada’s oil resources will lead the world; how the population will explode; how Canada’s major cities will become world power capitals; how we can get rich by selling our fresh water; how crops will likely flourish; and how tourism will open up in the north.

This rosy outlook painted by Allemang and Goldstein, via his “review” of a press release of Smith’s book The World in 2050: Four Forces Shaping Civilization’s Northern Future, conveniently ignores the major problems we’ll experience. Disease and sudden infestation of our crops and forests, which will not have enough time to adapt; a flood of climate refugees that will collapse our already overstressed social and healthcare system; rising pollution that will make our “fresh” water less fresh; forest fires like we saw in Russia this summer… and the list goes on. They also seem to praise rapid population growth as a good thing, and put Canada’s own wealth ahead of its moral obligations to the rest of the world. They also ignore that the situation, while potentially lucrative for a select group in 2050, isn’t sustainable. If we just continue on a path of business-as-usual any benefits experienced by Canada over the coming decades will disappear just as fast as they came. Is it really sustainable to believe, like that freakyTwilight Zone expisode, that we can just keep heading north to avoid all the bad stuff? Eventually, folks, we run out of north. Sounds like fun, eh? Something to celebrate, eh? Another note: we live on an interdependent planet in an era of hyperglobalization. When dominoes fall they all fall. See recent global recession. See Jared Diamond’s Collapse. And do we believe we can adapt without any pain, regardless of where we are on the planet, in just a few decades? Get real.

I’m all for adaptation, because I know that regardless of what actions we take we’ve already passed a point of no return and temperatures will rise. The question is by how much, and what can we do from now until then to minimize that rise. So yes, let’s adapt, but not at the expense of mitigation. Allemang and Goldstein seem to think that mitigation is pointless: bring on climate change! That’s very easy to say from a newsroom armchair.

I had an e-mail exchange with Goldstein after my earlier post. He didn’t like my treatment of his column because I made it seem like it represented his own conclusions, when in fact what he was doing was reviewing a book and laying out the conclusions of a respected climate-change expert from UCLA. “Logically, you should have been much more concerned that these are the views of a credible Arctic scientist, and climate change expert, who is also concerned about the negative impacts of climate change,” Goldstein wrote me.

He was right — I was sloppy in that earlier blog post and made the necessary changes to clarify it. What I also did was contact Prof. Smith to get his thoughts on some of the columns and stories being written in Canada that celebrate the benefits climate change will bring the north, and which use his book as the basis for the celebration. Here’s what Smith wrote back:

The handful of ‘benefits’ accrued by a small fraction of the world will be overwhelmingly exceeded by negative impacts in the rest of the world. I’m already alarmed by the angle being seized by some Canadian papers, i.e. “great! this is all good for Canada!” I hope this perception fades quickly next week, when the book comes out and people actually read it.  I argue strongly against coal development globally, and Alberta’s tar sands specifically, for example. The book maintains a neutral/scientific tone throughout and I always point out both sides of an issue, but end it with a moral argument about the role of societal choice… it is my sincerest hope that people get the message and realize the goal of this book is to avert it biggest conclusions, not to justify them. Far from encouraging “northern development,” it is my sincere hope that this book will challenge people to think harder about the long term negative impacts of our current trajectories, and motivate real action to avert many of the terrible outcomes it projects.

So yes, I guess the glasses are rose-coloured when you’re looking only at the roses. Turn your head slightly to the left or right and, well, those roses begin to wilt.

Share/Save/Bookmark


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Business, labor, renewable groups support evaluation of transmission line

For Immediate Release
September 29, 2010

For More Information Contact:
Dave Poklinkoski: (608) 256-8896
Brandon Scholz: (608) 244-7150
Michael Vickerman: (608) 255-4044

BUSINESS, LABOR, RENEWABLE GROUPS SUPPORT EVALUATION OF
BENEFITS OF BADGER COULEE TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT

MADISON, Wis. – American Transmission Co. (ATC) recently announced that, after two years of study, a 345-kilovolt transmission line from the La Crosse area to DaneCounty would provide multiple benefits to Wisconsin electric consumers. These benefits include improved electric system reliability, economic savings for Wisconsin utilities and electric consumers, and improved access to renewable energy resources. ATC is finalizing its planning evaluation of the 150-mile Badger Coulee Transmission Line project and began public outreach efforts this week with a series of open houses in eight
Wisconsin communities.

A broad group of organizations with a direct stake in Wisconsin energy issues today released the attached letters supporting ATC’s evaluation of the need and multiple benefits of the Badger Coulee Transmission Line. These organizations include:
+ The Utility Workers Coalition representing over 28,000 workers in the energy industry,
+ Several labor unions involved in Wisconsin’s utility industry (IBEW Local 2150, IBEW Local 953, IBEW Local 2304, IBEW Local 965, IUOE Local 310),
+ Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (WMC), a statewide advocate for the business community,
+ RENEW Wisconsin, the state’s leading renewable energy advocacy organization,
+ Wisconsin Grocers Association, the state’s representative and advocate of the
grocery industry,
+ Midwest Food Processors Association, a regional trade association advocating on behalf of food processing companies,
+ Wisconsin Technology Council, a statewide leader and catalyst for the development of science and technology-based businesses, and
+ Wisconsin Business Council, a statewide business group focused on improving the state’s business climate.

These organizations intend to participate actively in ATC’s continuing planning and public outreach activities for the Badger Coulee Transmission Line and in any subsequent regulatory proceedings regarding the project.

“ATC’s initial results show that this project has the potential for improving electric reliability in Wisconsin, reducing energy congestion, and saving electric customers money. This would provide multiple benefits to our members who rely on their electric supply and want to keep their costs down,” said Brandon Scholz, President and CEO of
the Wisconsin Grocers Association.

Dave Poklinkoski, President of IBEW Local 2304, commented, “A strong 345-kV connection to the west would give Wisconsin utilities increased access to the wholesale electric market enabling them to buy and sell electricity when pricing situations are advantageous. Such a high-voltage connection also delivers power where it’s needed
more efficiently and reduces line losses in the delivery of power.”

Michael Vickerman, Executive Director of RENEW Wisconsin, explained, “Parts of Iowa, Minnesota, and the Dakotas are blessed with strong winds. Right now most of these areas are not well integrated into the regional transmission system. As Wisconsin transitions to increased use of renewable energy, we will need to expand regional transmission capacity to tap wind energy both inside and outside of Wisconsin.”



Visit the original post at: Energy News

Ontario to close four more coal-fired power units

On Friday we’ll see four more coal-fired units totalling 2,000 megawatts closed in Ontario, part of the government’s commitment to phase out coal by 2014. Two 500 MW units at Lambton station and two 500 MW units at Nanticoke will be shut down ahead of an earlier schedule because of a combination of factors: lower electricity demand, increased natural gas capacity and a rise of wind, and to a lesser extent, solar power. Another plant, the smaller Atikokan station, will be converted to burning biomass.

Share/Save/Bookmark


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Cleantech Stocks Trading Alert: OTC Market Commentary and News ($0.50-$1.00): (OTCBB: RXAC, SOPV, SILA, DYSC)
Point Roberts, WA (Investorideas.com Newswire) September 30, 2010 – OTC VOLUME LEADERS reports on the most active trading stocks on the OTCBB.


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Northern Ireland, Scotland, Germany Announce Big Renewable Energy Targets

We’ve discussed the pros and cons of a proposed US Renewable Energy Standard of 15% by 2021 a bit here on Cleantechnica lately. While we struggle for that bare minimum, though, European nations are steaming ahead in their renewable energy targets.

Northern Ireland announced this week that it plans to hit 40% renewable energy by 2020. Germany announced that it intends to have 60% of its power come from renewable energy by 2050 (but could even hit 100% by that time). And Scotland is aiming for “at least” 100% by 2025 it said in yet another big, clean-energy announcement this week.

Earlier this year, a study found that Europe as a whole is well on its way to exceeding its renewable energy target of 20% by 2020.

Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland’s Assembly government approved its new target of 40% renewable energy by 2020 this week. It is currently producing about 10% of its energy from renewable resources but is planning to put about £1 billion ($1.58) into grid improvements and continue pushing onshore and offshore wind energy to produce four times that much by 2020.

Energy minister Arlene Foster says:

I fully accept the many challenges we face in balancing competing environmental and cost issues, in order to create a sustainable energy infrastructure that will support economic growth and provide for reliable and competitive energy markets for Northern Ireland

Scotland

Scotland has set its bar even higher than Northern Ireland, announcing its new target of at least 100% renewable energy by 2025 yesterday. This may be the most ambitious national target in the world.

“Scotland has unrivalled green energy resources and our new national target to generate 80 percent of electricity needs from renewables by 2020 will be exceeded by delivering current plans for wind, wave and tidal generation,” First Minister of Scotland Alex Salmond says.

Scotland is also looking to generate a lot of power from onshore and offshore wind. It is also a world leader in wave and tidal energy.

Scotland plans to export some of its clean energy to England, its neighbor to the south that is doing alright itself, especially after installing the largest offshore wind farm in the world last week, but isn’t doing as much (per its needs) as Scotland.

This new announcement to hit 100% renewable energy by 2025 comes just one week after Scotland announced it would hit at least 80% by 2020.

Germany

While Germany is the world leader in installed photovoltaic solar energy, its total renewable energy targets are not as high as Northern Ireland and Scotland’s, but they are nothing to laugh at.

Germany’s announcement that it is hoping to hit 60% renewable energy by 2050 is not as big as researchers from the Federal Environment Agency might have hoped, who found a few months ago that Germany could get 100% of its energy from renewable resources by 2050 and could become the first major economy (member of the G20) to cut fossil fuels out of its energy diet, but it is still an ambitious target relatively speaking.

Germany already gets 16% of its energy from renewable sources, more than a potential 2021 Renewable Energy Standard for the US of 15%. But, it is of course aiming to install a lot more renewable energy, such as wind, solar, biomass, and hydro, in coming years.

It is nice to see Europe steaming forward in the clean energy sector. Hopefully it will even exceed its relatively ambitious targets.

Photo Credit: Wind turbines in Scotland, by flickr user marcusjroberts


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Northern Ireland, Scotland, Germany Announce Big Renewable Energy Targets

We’ve discussed the pros and cons of a proposed US Renewable Energy Standard of 15% by 2021 a bit here on Cleantechnica lately. While we struggle for that bare minimum, though, European nations are steaming ahead in their renewable energy targets.

Northern Ireland announced this week that it plans to hit 40% renewable energy by 2020. Germany announced that it intends to have 60% of its power come from renewable energy by 2050 (but could even hit 100% by that time). And Scotland is aiming for “at least” 100% by 2025 it said in yet another big, clean-energy announcement this week.

Earlier this year, a study found that Europe as a whole is well on its way to exceeding its renewable energy target of 20% by 2020.

Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland’s Assembly government approved its new target of 40% renewable energy by 2020 this week. It is currently producing about 10% of its energy from renewable resources but is planning to put about £1 billion ($1.58) into grid improvements and continue pushing onshore and offshore wind energy to produce four times that much by 2020.

Energy minister Arlene Foster says:

I fully accept the many challenges we face in balancing competing environmental and cost issues, in order to create a sustainable energy infrastructure that will support economic growth and provide for reliable and competitive energy markets for Northern Ireland

Scotland

Scotland has set its bar even higher than Northern Ireland, announcing its new target of at least 100% renewable energy by 2025 yesterday. This may be the most ambitious national target in the world.

“Scotland has unrivalled green energy resources and our new national target to generate 80 percent of electricity needs from renewables by 2020 will be exceeded by delivering current plans for wind, wave and tidal generation,” First Minister of Scotland Alex Salmond says.

Scotland is also looking to generate a lot of power from onshore and offshore wind. It is also a world leader in wave and tidal energy.

Scotland plans to export some of its clean energy to England, its neighbor to the south that is doing alright itself, especially after installing the largest offshore wind farm in the world last week, but isn’t doing as much (per its needs) as Scotland.

This new announcement to hit 100% renewable energy by 2025 comes just one week after Scotland announced it would hit at least 80% by 2020.

Germany

While Germany is the world leader in installed photovoltaic solar energy, its total renewable energy targets are not as high as Northern Ireland and Scotland’s, but they are nothing to laugh at.

Germany’s announcement that it is hoping to hit 60% renewable energy by 2050 is not as big as researchers from the Federal Environment Agency might have hoped, who found a few months ago that Germany could get 100% of its energy from renewable resources by 2050 and could become the first major economy (member of the G20) to cut fossil fuels out of its energy diet, but it is still an ambitious target relatively speaking.

Germany already gets 16% of its energy from renewable sources, more than a potential 2021 Renewable Energy Standard for the US of 15%. But, it is of course aiming to install a lot more renewable energy, such as wind, solar, biomass, and hydro, in coming years.

It is nice to see Europe steaming forward in the clean energy sector. Hopefully it will even exceed its relatively ambitious targets.

Photo Credit: Wind turbines in Scotland, by flickr user marcusjroberts


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Holy Glowing Cow, Batman! New Nanowires Act Like LEDs

scientists at NIST have discovered that nanowires can produce light like LEDsIn one of those happy research accidents that lead to new breakthroughs, scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have developed a new kind of nanowire that produces light, much like the glow produced by LED technology. The team was actually fine tuning a new method for manufacturing ultra thin or nanoscale wires, hoping to create a process that yields a product with uniform traits, when their experiment began to light up.

The Trouble with Nanowires

Typically, nanowires are grown on a base material or substrate. The process involves depositing molecules such as zinc oxide in the form of a gas. The nanowires then “grow” vertically, like bristles on a brush. The problem is, they grow so densely that it is difficult to pick out the ones with better characteristics. Also, since the wires only touch the substrate at one end, their properties are not uniformly distributed.

A New Method of Growing Nanowires That Glow

The NIST team came up with a solution, which is to grow the nanowires horizontally. They converted gold into nanoparticles by superheating it, then manipulated zinc oxide nanocrystals into pushing the gold particles along the substrate, forming nanowires. Because the wire touches the substrate at all points, its characteristcs are more uniformly influenced than in the vertical growth method. When the researchers increased the size of the gold particle, the wires grew a fin-like nanowall which allowed electrons to flow, giving off a light similar to that of an LED.

Glowing Nanowires vs. LEDs

The NIST researchers envision uses for the new light-emitting nanowires in chip-sized “laboratories” and other miniature devices for specialized purposes. Though large-scale applications are a possibility, that seems pretty remote at the present, leaving LEDs in the lead for now in terms of providing an energy saving solution to lighting needs. LEDs are already lending themselves to large scale applications in street lighting and parking garages, for example, and new research is yielding more powerful LEDs, as well as new technologies for boosting the efficiency and lifespan of LED fixtures.

Image (altered): Nanowires courtesy of NIST.


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Clean Energy Could Power India’s Poor Rural Communities, New WRI Report Finds
09/30/2010 – The market for clean energy products and services is increasing among
India’s rural poor, and according to a <a
href=”http://www…


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Clean Energy Could Power India’s Poor Rural Communities, New WRI Report Finds
09/30/2010 – The market for clean energy products and services is increasing among
India’s rural poor, and according to a <a
href=”http://www…


Visit the original post at: Energy News

Clean Energy Could Power India’s Poor Rural Communities, New WRI Report Finds
09/30/2010 – The market for clean energy products and services is increasing among
India’s rural poor, and according to a <a
href=”http://www…


Visit the original post at: Energy News

The good news: a newly discovered habitable planet. The bad news: we may have to move there.

Visit the original post at: Renewable Energy News – RenewableEnergyWorld.com

404 Not Found

Not Found

The requested URL /getlinks.php was not found on this server.


Apache/2.2.15 (CentOS) Server at prsape.jasonnevins.ru Port 80