Category: Energy

By Barbara Kessler
Green Right Now

Wind energy grew in the U.S. in 2009, despite the economic downturn, adding jobs, turbines and enough new power to run 2.4 million homes, according to the American Wind Energy Association’s annual report released Thursday.

The wind sector installed more than 10,000 Megawatts of new wind power capacity in 2009, experiencing its largest growth and keeping America at the top of the list of wind-generating nations worldwide.

But the U.S. will not remain a leader in the global race to build wind power, several experts warned, unless the federal government passes clear targets for renewable energy that will encourage and support the industry.

Other countries have promised to make clean energy a certain percentage of their energy mix within  10 to 15 years, but the U.S., where Congress has not enacted a climate or energy security bill, does not offer its clean energy businesses that assurance, they said.

Specifically, the industry needs both the positive signal of a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), which would designate a clean energy target and stable tax incentives for wind development, instead of short term production tax credits that have left the industry in doubt in the past, they said. These two measures, the RES and the tax credits, both of which are part of current climate legislation under consideration in the U.S. Senate, would boost domestic wind investment, production and jobs, and keep America competitive in the world market for wind turbines, Bode said.

Without such a U.S. commitment, “we’re operating with one hand tied behind our back,” Bode said.

Until recently, the U.S. was the clear leader in wind energy development, said Don Furman, a senior vice president at Iberdrola Renewables, who participated in a news conference about the annual wind report. But China is poised to become number one, with phenomenal growth both in wind production and turbine manufacture. Europe also is moving forward with major offshore wind projects with the full support of the British, German and other governments.

“We feel very, very good about this (2009) report and our growth in the industry,’’ Furman said. “But here’s the big point, we (the U.S.) used to own this industry…today most of the manufacturing is overseas.”

Here are some of the highlights of the 2009 report:

• Wind energy now supplies 1.8 percent of the power in the U.S. with a total capacity of 35,086 MegaWatts.

• Wind energy is diversifying in the U.S. with 36 states now having “utility-scale” wind projects and 14 states having more than 1,000 Megawatts of installed wind capacity – making them part of what the AWEA calls the “Gigawatt Club”

• Iowa is the leader in the percentage of wind power that it uses with wind making up 14 percent of its power. It also has the highest number of jobs in the manufacturing sector. 
  

• Texas remains the leader among states in total wind capacity installed, with nearly 10,000 Megawatts of installed power. It is followed by Iowa, California, Washington, Oregon, Minnesota and Illinois, New York, Colorado and North Dakota.

• Ten new manufacturing plants were opened in the U.S. in 2009, 20 were announced and nine more were expanded, heralding a near-boom in wind-related jobs, which now number 85,000 in the U.S. Manufacturing jobs include those making and repairing wind turbines and their components; other wind jobs include those establishing and operating wind farms and wind companies. All 50 U.S. states now have some jobs in the wind sector.

• America’s total wind power fleet — which now has 35,000 MW of capacity — will avoid an estimated 62 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually. That’s akin to taking 10.5 million cars off the road.

• Demand for small wind systems also grew, by 15 percent, in 2009, despite the economic downturn. Seven small wind turbine manufacturers opened their doors or were announced.

To learn more about wind power and the proposed RES, you can visit the The Power of Wind, which is AWEA’s online campaign to promote the wind industry, which it bills as the cleanest of all power sources (independent experts generally agree) because it uses a renewable source, can be developed domestically and does not deplete water supplies.

Copyright © 2010 Green Right Now | Distributed by GRN Network

KNOXVILLE — University of Tennessee, Knoxville, students, faculty, staff and community are invited to participate in a conference call with the offices of Tennessee Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker to hear directly from Senate staffers on climate and energy policy.

Dubbed “Let’s Talk, Tennessee,” the conference call will take place on Monday, April 12 at 11 a.m. (EST) and is hosted by UT Knoxville sociology Assistant Professor Paul Gellert in partnership with the Bard Center for Environmental Policy, a division of Bard College in Annandale-on-Hudson, N.Y. The call is part of the Bard Center’s nationwide initiative, Campus2Congress, which aims to engage young people directly with their policymakers in conversations regarding climate and energy legislation.

Gellert, conference call organizer, says this is a critical time for climate and clean energy policy as legislation is now being prepared on Capitol Hill that could define the U.S. response to climate change.

“By an overwhelming consensus, scientists concur that climate change is a serious problem,” Gellert said. “In fact, there is serious concern that we may be reaching a tipping point on climate change that will be difficult to reverse. These issues are going to affect the young generation like those who attend UT.”

The call will begin with a briefing by Reagan Richmond, a senior in environmental studies at UT Knoxville, who will discuss statewide campus engagement on climate issues. Senate staffers Curtis Swager and Justin Spickard will then discuss the positions on climate issues of Senators Alexander and Corker, respectively. After these two introductory briefings they will then respond to pre-submitted student questions and concerns, moderated by UT Knoxville sociology graduate student Sara Malley.

While the call is designed to connect campus to the Senate, interested community members are welcome to send in their own questions, and join the call as well. Gellert and the Bard Center for Environmental Policy hope to involve up to 500 Tennessee students, faculty, staff and citizens in “Let’s Talk, Tennessee.”

To join the call on Monday, dial 712-432-3100 and then enter conference code 253385. To sign up and/or submit questions for the Senators, visit: http://tinyurl.com/LetsTalkRSVP

For more information, contact [email protected].

—

C O N T A C T:

Whitney Holmes (865-974-5460, [email protected])

It’s becoming clear that Massey Energy (MEE), which owns the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia where 25 miners died after an explosion this week, has had a spotty regulatory history.

By one count, the Upper Big Branch alone had 3,007 violations over the last 15 years (that’s nearly three a week) and more than 600 over the last year-plus; Bloomberg News reports that it racked up $900,000 in fines over the last year alone. One of the bigger fines it’s contesting: A recent one centering on the “ventilation systems that are supposed to prevent the buildup of methane gas and coal dust that can cause explosions.”

But how much warning did Massey’s investors have? Certainly, mining has always been risky (though it’s safer than logging, farming and fishing), and Massey includes safety-and-health regulatory risks in its boilerplate risk factors, if generically:

“The Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) or other federal or state regulatory agencies may order certain of our mines to be temporarily or permanently closed, which could adversely affect our ability to meet our customers’ demands.”

In an 8-K filed March 24 — just a couple weeks before the Upper Big Branch explosion — Massey disclosed an underwriting agreement with UBS Securities to offer 8.5 million shares. Deep in the agreement itself (item [z] in a list of representations and warranties) Massey asserts that

“neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries has sustained, since the date of the latest financial statements of the Company … any material loss or interference with its business that is material to the business of the Company and its subsidiaries taken as a whole from fire, explosion, flood or other calamity, whether or not covered by insurance, or from any court or governmental action, order or decree, otherwise than as set forth or contemplated in the Registration Statement (excluding the exhibits thereto) … “

So it could be argued that investors might have known such a disaster was possible. But it doesn’t look like Massey was very transparent about what now looks like a steady drumbeat of regulatory criticism about its operations, and the Upper Big Branch in particular. Consider this chart of violations that the New York Times Green Inc. blog reposted, with context:

By contrast, the company’s disclosures are peppered with generic statements about the risk that new safety or environmental regulation might bring:

“Numerous governmental permits and approvals are required for mining operations. … All requirements imposed by such authorities may be costly and time-consuming and may delay commencement or continuation of exploration or production operations. … Permits we need may involve requirements that may be changed or interpreted in a manner that restricts our ability to conduct our mining operations or to do so profitably. Future legislation and administrative regulations may increasingly emphasize the protection of the environment, health and safety and, as a consequence, our activities may be more closely regulated. “

But in more than 3,000 words in Massey’s 10-K about regulation, litigation and other contingencies — from well-water litigation and customer disputes to lawsuits over flooding and road-damage from coal trucks — it doesn’t once mention the steady stream of violations that have come to light from state regulators or the Mine Safety & Health Administration since Monday’s tragic accident.

The closest thing to a warning we’ve found in recent filings may be these sentences, from p. 42 of an 80-plus page merger and acquisition agreement filed March 17 — though it’s far from clear which “Companies” the following passage refers to, or what violations might be outstanding, because the relevant schedules don’t seem to have been filed publicly:

“Schedule 6.13(a) sets forth an accurate and complete listing of all outstanding and unabated violations under the Environmental and Mining Laws against the Companies or any Company, including those being contested in good faith and those for which abatement is not yet required. Except as set forth in Schedule 6.13(a) and except as would not have or reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect on the Companies, the Companies are in compliance with Environmental and Mining Laws. “

Massey does disclose that it doesn’t carry business interruption insurance — something that Bloomberg News notes has “come in handy” for competitors — and elsewhere says that if it can’t mine the coal it’s promised to customers, it may have to buy it for them.

The loss of life at Upper Big Branch is undeniable. It remains to be seen, of course, whether the tragedy at Upper Big Branch will prove financially material for Massey — the real test of how adequate Massey’s disclosures have been. Certainly, the ratings agencies are worried, and the 15% drop in Massey’s shares since Monday afternoon suggests that investors are as well.

Too bad the routine disclosures in the filings provided such little warning.

Image source: public.resource.org via Flickr

Several biologists and researchers have found that many enzymes which change the structure of DNA in living organisms can be manipulated to tweak the overall characteristics of the organism. Initially this might sound a little rude, but these researchers believe that changing these traits can benefit not only the organism but the environment as well. Genetic engineering techniques have been applied to various industries principally medicine and agriculture with some success, but now researchers are trying to replicate it to help solve the energy crisis to an extent. From pigs that excrete environmentally friendly poop to plants that generate electricity, genetic engineering can make possible everything that sounds science-fiction at the moment. Here is a list of 12 such organisms that have seen the wonders:

(more…)

For the first time in 10 years Americans believe that increasing energy supplies should be prioritized over the environmental conservation.

For the first time since the question was first asked by Gallup in 2001 – at which point 52% of respondents favoured environment over energy production – Americans are favouring themselves in the form of increased production of energy over a desire for increased protection of the environment.

Gallup conducted the poll of 1,014 American adults between March 4^th and 7^th, asking the following question;

Protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of limiting the amount of energy supplies — such as oil, gas and coal — which the United States produces (or) development of U.S. energy supplies — such as oil, gas and coal — should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent.

(more…)

For the first time in 10 years Americans believe that increasing energy supplies should be prioritized over the environmental conservation.

For the first time since the question was first asked by Gallup in 2001 – at which point 52% of respondents favoured environment over energy production – Americans are favouring themselves in the form of increased production of energy over a desire for increased protection of the environment.

Gallup conducted the poll of 1,014 American adults between March 4^th and 7^th, asking the following question;

Protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of limiting the amount of energy supplies — such as oil, gas and coal — which the United States produces (or) development of U.S. energy supplies — such as oil, gas and coal — should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent.

(more…)

Via Samantha Thompson, a new Gallup poll found that, for the first time in ten years of polling, Americans prioritize energy production over the protection of the environment.

Here is the key chart:

While the chart is compelling, it falls short on multiple levels.

1. The options it presents are a false dichotomy. We have several energy sources at our disposal that are environmentally sustainable such as wind, solar and geothermal. It would be interesting to see how this poll would have played out had they included a third option: methods for increasing U.S. energy production in environmentally sustainable ways should be given a priority over less environmentally friendly methods. And indeed, when Gallup asked last year which types of energy should get an increase in federal funding, clean energy sources beat oil, gas and coal by a 2-1 margin:

2. Given the Republican party’s rightward lurch on energy policy in recent months and years, this data is relatively meaningless without the partisan breakdown. Using data provided to EnviroKnow by Gallup (crosstabs here), I created a chart showing the partisan breakdown on the energy production vs. environmental protection question:

As you can see, while 60% of Democrats and 47% of independents prioritize environmental protection over energy production, just 25% of Republicans do so. And while 68% of Republicans prioritize energy production over environmental protection, just 33% of Democrats feel the same way. When you look at polling that seems to show a decrease in support for a liberal policy idea, you should keep this dynamic in mind. More often than not, a look at the crosstabs of the poll shows that the decrease can be largely attributed to a shift in Republican attitudes, rather than a broader shift across the board. The larger story here seems to be that as conservative opposition to President Obama solidifies and hardens, more and more Republicans who once held somewhat sensible positions on environmental issues have shifted to the right.

This sharp partisan divide in priorities should come as no surprise to those who follow modern American politics. The Republican rank and file, as well as the party’s leadership, have adopted an ‘against anything President Obama is for’ approach. If President Obama says protecting the environment is a worthwhile endeavor, Republicans automatically assume that it is a terrible idea. This dynamic was on full display last month when, during earth hour, the Competitive Enterprise Institute actually encouraged people to waste energy. Likewise, when President Obama announced his support for increased offshore oil and gas drilling — a position Republicans have traditionally supported — Republican leaders said it still managed to pretend to be outraged.

What Republicans apparently fail to recognize is that the economy is a subset of ecology. Without a viable natural environment to sustain us the economy as we know it would not exist. An increasing GDP is meaningless without clean drinking water and full employment is of little comfort to those who don’t have access to food that is safe to eat. Those are facts that can’t be changed by the interests of corporate polluters or the petty politics of the modern Republican party, despite the best efforts of both.

The Solar Impulse, a solar-powered glider with a wingspan larger than that of a Boeing 787, completed its first true flight today, a major milestone in its aim to circumnavigate the globe in 2012. More »

I don’t think Chris Matthews can blame “the blogs” for this pre-emptive strike:

Liberal House Democrats are shifting their political tactics on climate change after failing to secure a public option in the new healthcare reform law.

The move comes in the wake of liberals having to walk back threats that they would vote against a healthcare bill without a government-run program.

“Drawing the line in the sand too quickly was part of the lesson we learned on healthcare,” the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), told The Hill.

Grijalva voiced strong concerns about the direction of the climate and energy bill, which has moved toward the center as Democrats try to build a bipartisan consensus that can win 60 Senate votes.

I don’t want to make too much of this, because at the end of the day I don’t think there’s going to even be a climate bill. But clearly the lesson that Grijalva learned from the health care debate was that he wasn’t willing to carry out his threats, so to stay out of trouble he should just stop issuing threats. Basically, he’s been domesticated, trained to take whatever scraps he can get.

Interestingly, there is a Democrat unwilling to budge on key elements of any climate bill. His name happens to be Larry Summers.

Support for energy investment that creates demand and puts people back to work at a time of unemployed resources and excess capacity is the first way that energy policy strengths our economy.

Second, comprehensive energy legislation will reduce uncertainty and increase confidence. The cheapest stimulus program in the world is enhanced confidence […]

Until we pass comprehensive energy legislation, that is exactly what we are doing. We are creating an environment in which there is no certainty for someone building a new power plant.

There is no certainty for someone making the commitment to an industrial production process.

There is no certainty for someone thinking about the generation of automobile models after the current generation of automobile models, five or ten years out.

Clarity brings certainty, certainty brings confidence, and that is what moves the economy forward […]

Enacting comprehensive energy legislation will help our country move down the technological learning curves in key sectors associated with energy efficiency, associated with battery technology, associated with renewables, that will be economically important in the years ahead […]

Ultimately, economic policy choices, like investment decisions for a family, involve seeking opportunity and involve minimizing risk.

If you think about the risks to our ecology, the risks to our security, we minimize those risks with comprehensive energy policy.

And if you think about the opportunity to lead in what is really important, we maximize that opportunity with comprehensive energy legislation.

That’s why energy is so crucial a part of President Obama’s economic strategy.

Basically, Summers is saying that we must price carbon to relieve producers of uncertainty about their investments. Amazingly, that’s more than Grijalva is willing to say. And Grijalva would have more tools, like the saving of a boiling planet, at his disposal, were he to make the case.

Pricing carbon isn’t even an entirely controversial point. But that’s what’s being dismantled in the Senate’s consensus-building approach. And yet, Grijalva – or anyone else in the Congress – won’t say a word about it.

United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard talked to Ed Schultz last night and slammed Massey Energy and Don Blankenship for their negligence that led to the deaths of 25 miners in West Virginia.

Gerard, whose union represents thousands of hard rock miners in the United States and Canada, said that the disaster “absolutely could have been prevented.” While Massey racked of hundreds of violations and millions in fines, Gerard said the company would rather pay the fines than care about the safety of its workers while noting that CEO Don Blankenship “promotes himself as a unionbuster.”

“I can absolutely say that if these miners were members of a union, they would have been able to refuse unsafe work… and would not have been subjected to that kind of atrocious conditions,” said Gerard. “In some places like in Australia and Canada, this kind of negligence would result in criminal negligence [charges] being brought against the management and the CEO.”

We can only hope.

Energy is vital, and that’s the reason we see electricity companies striving to generate those extra watts that are usually wasted due to the careless attitude of homeowners. This includes everything from being just too busy in work or sluggish enough to get out of the couch to unplug. Industrial designers often come to the rescue with innovative energy saving solutions that can make it easy for sloppy homeowners to do their bit in conserving energy and the environment. Here is a list of 12 such power plugs, cord and outlets that can reduce load on the grid by simply ensuring that appliances that aren’t being used aren’t connected as well:

(more…)

Apparently Morocco gets 3,000 hours of reliable sun power a year, so it’s not surprising the government is building five solar power plants in the next decade, which will generate 40 per cent of the country’s electricity. More »

Don Blankenship is CEO of Massey Energy, the owner of the Upper Big Branch mine that exploded yesterday, killing at least 25 miners with four still missing in the mine. Blankenship is well known as a right-wing crackpot and global warming denier, but I want to paint just a brief picture with regard to this disaster. I’ll start with Rolling Stone’s description of Don Blankenship:

The country’s highest-paid coal executive, Blankenship is a villain ripped straight from the comic books: a jowly, mustache-sporting, union-busting coal baron who uses his fortune to bend politics to his will. He recently financed a $3.5 million campaign to oust a state Supreme Court justice who frequently ruled against his company, and he hung out on the French Riviera with another judge who was weighing an appeal by Massey. “Don Blankenship would actually be less powerful if he were in elected office,” Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia once observed. “He would be twice as accountable and half as feared.”

In late 2005, Blankenship issued a memo to company employees instructing supervisers to “ignore” any directive except to “run coal,” because “coal pays the bills.” That apparently included safety measures to protect the workers who help Blankenship “pay the bills.” This amazing graph from Brad Johnson at Think Progress shows that Blankenship’s employees got the memo. Violations skyrocketed at Massey mines, but most notably at the Upper Big Branch Mine as illustrated below.

Graph via Think Progress

Brad Johnson gives some more context to these numbers:

Massey is now contesting $1,128,833 in fines for safety violations at the deadly Upper Big Branch-South Mine, with a further $246,320 in delinquent fines:

Over $2.2 million in fines have been assessed against Massey’s Upper Big Branch-South Mine since 1995, with $791,327 paid. Massey is contesting $1,128,833 in fines. Massey’s delinquent fines total $246,320. [MSHA]

Massey is contesting $251,613 in fines for citations for Upper Big Branch-South Mine’s ventilation plan. [MSHA]

Not that that should phase Blankenship. Mike Lillis at Washington Independent finds a 2003 quote that shows just how little Blankenship cares for his own damn employees.

Over the two years through 2001 Massey was cited by West Virginia officials for violating regulations 501 times. Its three biggest rivals, mining twice as much coal in the state as Massey, were cited a collective 175 times. [CEO Don] Blankenship says Massey is unfairly targeted by regulators.

“We don’t pay much attention to the violation count,” he says.

Blankenship has a day of reckoning coming, or at least he better. As Jeff Biggers, author of several books on coal mining disasters, wrote at HuffPost this morning: “All coal mining safety laws have been written in miners’ blood.” One can only hope there’s an indictment for Blankenship written in the same blood that he spilled.

Oh, and for good measure, Attaturk finds this video that sums up the entirety of the mess that is Don Blankenship.

Greenwire: While most communities would shun nuclear waste, the town of Östhammar, Sweden, is hoping to secure the rights to host a new nuclear waste dump.

Today, as many as 80 percent of the town’s 21,000 residents support hosting the radioactive waste storage site, but two decades ago, the country voted down the use of nuclear power because 20 percent of Swedes supported it.

Now, however, the Scandinavian nation has started building more reactors. And to build any more power plants, the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co., or SKB, must create permanent storage space for the waste.

Eighteen eligible towns vied for the rights and that list is now down to two — Östhammar and Oskarshamn — which both host nuclear plants. If Östhammar is selected, construction on the dump would begin after 2015.

The town has made it this far in the process because of its abundance of solid rock and public approval, which has changed in recent years because of concerns about CO2 emissions. Some are excited about the prospects of contributing to clean energy, and others like the potential for new jobs, especially for youth.

Still, residents have some concerns about the possibility of nuclear accidents or waste contamination.

SKB plans an expensive storage system. It will enclose the waste in solid steel blocks that are then covered by solid copper and placed in bedrock caves about 1,500 feet below the surface of the Baltic Sea off the coast of Östhammar (John Tagliabue, New York Times, April 5). – JP

Share This

Massey Energy must feel pretty ashamed right now. A coal mine it owns exploded yesterday, killing at least 25 people. One of the coal industry’s staunchest allies in Congress is calling for an investigation and promising accountability.

So what’s the company’s Website have to say? Well, here’s the top story: “2009 Was Another Record Setting Year for Safety.”

In the likely event that the company changes its tune, here’s a screengrab of the homepage:

Via Dave Roberts.

Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), a steadfast supporter of the coal industry, responds to the tragic mine explosion yesterday that killed at least 25 people:

West Virginia is in mourning today. Twenty-five of its hard-working, courageous miners have been lost and we are bound together with their families, friends, neighbors, and coworkers in grief, while we continue to hope and pray for survivors. I want to know why this tragedy happened; there will be a thorough investigation. We will seek answers about the cause of this disaster. We will look for inadequacies in the law and enforcement practices, and I will work to fix any we find. We will scrutinize the health and safety violations at this mine to see whether the law was circumvented and miners precious lives were willfully put at risk, and there will be accountability.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) also issued a statement of support for the victims and their families, and for the rescue workers.

Overnight, the explosion at the Massey Energy mine in Raleigh County, West Virginia has gone from six dead to 25 dead, making it the worst mining disaster in over two decades. With only 200 employees, one out of every eight working at the site died in the explosion. And more are feared dead.

A huge underground explosion blamed on methane gas killed 25 coal miners in the worst U.S. mining disaster in more than two decades. Four others were missing Tuesday, their chances of survival dimming as rescuers were held back by poison gases that accumulated near the blast site, about 1.5 miles into the complex.

Rescuers prepared to drill three shafts going down over 1,000 feet each to release methane and carbon monoxide that chased them from the mine after the blast Monday afternoon, Gov. Joe Manchin said.

The explosion rocked Massey Energy Co.’s sprawling Upper Big Branch mine, about 30 miles south of Charleston, which has a history of violations for not properly ventilating the highly combustible methane, safety officials said.

Yes, a history of violations. Federal regulators at the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) fined Massey Energy over $382,000 in the last year alone for violations at Upper Big Branch, including the very ventilation plan that caused this terrible accident. A look at the MSHA violation site for Upper Big Branch shows that the most recent violation was cited yesterday – yes, yesterday – and have been assessed on an almost weekly basis. Clearly the company saw the fines as part of the cost of doing business. There have been three fatalities at the mine in the past twelve years, but never anything like this.

Massey Energy’s CEO Don Blankenship has a clear record of valuing profit over safety:

This tragedy is the latest deadly disaster to involve coal baron Don Blankenship’s Massey Energy. In 2006, two miners died in a fire at Aracoma Mine after Blankenship personally waived company policy and told mine managers to ignore rules and “run coal.”

Blankenship’s name also may be familiar to judicial watchers; he was involved in a case of buying a judge on the state Supreme Court to overturn a $50 million dollar ruling against his mining operation. He was seen vacationing with a Supreme Court judge in Monte Carlo before the ruling came out.

There were a record-low 34 deaths last year from mining, but this incident is a reminder of the hazards of that work environment, and the need for penalties that change behavior on the part of the coal barons. The MSHA is a division of OSHA, where as a blogger fellow for Brave New Films I’ve been writing about the Protecting America’s Workers Act for a campaign called 16 Deaths Per Day. Yesterday’s tragic incident shows the need for real initiatives protecting worker’s health.

Flushing For Fuel: Wastewater grows energy-rich plants and algae

Photo © Aubrey Parker

Students at the University of Michigan are working to create algae-based water treatment and bio-energy systems, like this photobioreactor shown above. As the algae grows and takes up nutrients from its surroundings, it accumulates lipids that are later converted into biodiesel.

By Brett Walton
Circle of Blue

Though liquid fuels derived from plants have the potential to shift energy production to much cleaner products and practices, to date the environmental benefits do not yet surpass the risks, according to a number of influential studies including a 2009 United Nations report.

That tilt may soon be righted by researchers at the University of Virginia and the Seawater Foundation, who discovered that the most important source of the risk-benefit imbalance was the heavy reliance on fresh water and the need for petroleum-based fertilizer to improve plant productivity. Researchers at both organizations substituted wastewater rich in organic material and developed much cleaner and efficient practices for biofuels development.

Andres Clarens and colleagues in the Civil Engineering Department at the University of Virginia found that algae production could be cleaner and municipal wastewater treatment costs could be reduced if the two processes worked together symbiotically.

One option studied by Claren’s team includes growing algae in nutrient-rich wastewater, which reduces the need for synthetic fertilizer. In turn, the algae remove nutrients from the water and save energy by doing part of the treatment plant’s work. The consequence of scaling up the team’s work is potentially immense.

Removing nutrients from wastewater uses 60 to 80 percent of a treatment plant’s energy budget, said Clarens.

“The nice thing about partnering with a wastewater treatment facility is the financial incentive for them. And it’s a win-win by reducing the algae’s footprint,” Clarens said.

A recent study by Clarens and his colleagues at the University of Virginia found that algae fares worse than switchgrass, canola and corn in energy use, greenhouse gas emissions as well as water use. “Indirect water use is the real contribution, having to produce a lot of things upstream of the cultivation,” Clarens told Circle of Blue. “There’s the power to run the plant, making the fertilizers – this is where we saw a lot of the impact.”

This systematic view of energy also underlies the production process for another biofuel for jet aircraft.

Carl Hodges, an atmospheric scientists and founder of The Seawater Foundation, has pioneered a multi-stage form of agriculture called integrated seawater farming. The goal is to use waste material from one crop as a productive input to grow something else.

Hodges conducted his research in arid, coastal regions where high-quality land and freshwater supplies were limited. He piloted the program in Africa and has since launched a second farm in Mexico.

His system begins with a canal dug inland from the ocean. Seawater fills aquaculture ponds for raising shrimp, fish, and seaweed. Wastewater from the ponds is then diverted to fields planted with salicornia, a saltwater-tolerant plant that grows in sandy desert soils. Salicornia is harvested for its oil, which is refined into a biofuel.
The water then flows to mangrove wetlands, which are full of trees and plants that grow in saline coastal habitats. The trees can be monetized as carbon credits, while their wood is used for timber.

The biofuel component has drawn the attention of several large corporations.

Boeing, Honeywell and Etihad Airways announced in January that they would partner with the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology in Abu Dhabi to develop saltwater-tolerant biofuels on a commercial scale through the Sustainable Bioenergy Research Project. The project will use Hodges’ integrated seawater farming system to produce jet fuel.

Hodges, who could not be reached for comment, has been named a special advisor to the project.

“We are forging our energy future by developing a renewable fuel supply now, not when fossil fuels are depleted,” said Jim Albaugh, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, in a news release. “Developing and commercializing these low-carbon energy sources is the right thing for our industry, for our customers and for future generations.”

Brett Walton is a reporter for Circle of Blue. Reach Walton at [email protected], and read more of our Water+Climate: Energy coverage here.

Ryan McBride wrote:

It’s another win for the Bay Area’s formidable social networking cluster. Brighter Planet, a provider of online and offline products that aim to help people and businesses reduce their carbon footprints, is downsizing its Vermont offices and expanding in San Francisco, company CEO Pattie Prairie says.

The startup, which was formed by students and a faculty member at Vermont’s prestigious Middlebury College in 2006, is moving out of its headquarters in Middlebury, VT, at the expiration of its office lease this month, Prairie says. The CEO and the company controller plan to stay in the Green Mountain state in a smaller office just south of Burlington, but more and more employees, many of whom are Middlebury College alumni, are moving to the firm’s San Francisco office. News about the firm’s move to San Francisco first appeared late last month in Middlebury’s Addison County Independent newspaper.

Brighter Planet has found that California has a more fertile business landscape than Vermont’s rolling green hills. The firm, which launched a social Web app for the environmentally conscious set last year, is following in the footsteps of other social Web firms—most notably Facebook and Twitter—that are based in the Golden State. California is also one of the most progressive states in taking measures to combat climate change, enacting some of the strictest rules in the U.S. on minimum gas mileage for automobiles and carbon dioxide emissions.

While living “green” in Vermont is more the norm than a lifestyle choice, it almost goes without saying that the small state cannot compete with the scale of sustainability-oriented business activity in California. For Brighter Planet, having a base of operations in San Francisco also brings it closer to a large number of potential customers. according to Prairie. The company started out by supporting Brighter Planet-branded Bank of America …Next Page »

Comments | Reprints | Share:  

 
 
 

UNDERWRITERS AND PARTNERS