URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Renewables
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 31--------------------------------------------------
       A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today:
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 10, 2013, 9:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today: Güssing, Austria
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-045.gif
       Laurie Guevara-​Stone
       Writer / Editor
       Bringing Economic Growth to a Dying Town
       A small town in Austria that had no significant industry or
       trade business is now thriving thanks to local renewable
       resources.
       Güssing (population: 4,000) sits in eastern Austria. In 1988 the
       region (population: 27,000) was one of the poorest districts in
       the country. It relied on agriculture, there was no
       transportation infrastructure, unemployment was high, and 70
       percent of those who did have work were commuting to Vienna, 100
       miles away. The town, where two-thirds of the working population
       was out of work and young people were moving away, was referred
       to as a dying town. Due to a lack of connections to the railway
       network and to the Austrian Autobahn (freeway) system, energy
       costs were extremely high. At the time the town of Güssing was
       said to be hardly able to afford its $8.1 million annual fossil
       fuel bill.
       Several of the town leaders realized that $8 million dollars
       going to pay for fuel oil (mostly for heating) and other fossil
       fuels (such as coal for electricity) from outside the region
       could stay in the local economy if they could produce their own
       energy. However, they realized if they wanted to be energy self
       sufficient the first step was reducing energy use. In 1990, the
       town implemented an energy efficiency program, retrofitting all
       public buildings with new insulation and replacing all
       streetlights with energy-efficient bulbs, reducing energy
       expenditure in buildings in the town center by almost 50
       percent.
       With greatly improved efficiency, the town then adopted a policy
       calling for the complete elimination of the use of fossil fuels
       in all public buildings, in an attempt to keep more money in the
       local economy.
       Heating with Local Resources
       There is not a lot of wind in Güssing, but biomass is
       abundant—the town is surrounded by 133 hectares (328 acres) of
       forest. Some local residents, realizing that wood in the forest
       was decomposing and not being used, started to run a district
       heating station for six homes. With the success of that project,
       more small district heating systems were built. The mayor, who
       was looking for a way to revitalize the town, took notice. In
       1996, the heating system was expanded to the whole town and was
       also generating electricity, all from renewable raw materials
       gathered from within a five-kilometer radius through sustainable
       forestry practices.
       Then, in 2001, with the help of the federal government, Güssing
       installed a biomass gasification plant, that runs off of wood
       chips from wood thinned from the forest and waste wood from a
       wooden flooring company. This was the first utility-scale power
       plant of its kind in the world. The plant uses steam to separate
       carbon and hydrogen, then recombines the molecules to make a
       form of natural gas which fuels the city’s power plant. It
       produces on average 2 megawatts of electricity and 4.5 megawatts
       of heat, more than enough energy for the town’s needs, while
       only consuming one-third of the biomass that grows every year.
       The town also has a plant that converts rapeseed to biodiesel,
       which is carried by all the fueling stations in the district.
       Becoming a Model Community
       In 2007 the New York Times reported Güssing was the first
       community in the European Union to cut carbon emissions by more
       than 90 percent, helping it attract a steady stream of
       scientists, politicians, and eco-tourists. One year later,
       Güssing built a research institute focusing on thermal and
       biological gasification and production of second-generation
       fuels. That same year a solar manufacturer started producing PV
       modules in Güssing, producing 850 megawatts of modules a year
       and employing 140 people. Several other photovoltaic and solar
       thermal companies have relocated to Güssing, installing new
       demonstration facilities in the district.
       The little town has become a net energy producer—generating more
       energy from renewables than it uses. Altogether, there are more
       than 30 power plants using renewable energy technologies within
       10 kilometers of the village. Now the goal is to take the
       lessons from the small town of Güssing and make the entire
       27,000-person district an energy-self-sufficient net producer.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-022.gif
       Currently around 400 people come to Güssing each week to visit
       the numerous demonstration plants. Even Austria’s favorite
       celebrity, former California governor, and renewable energy
       advocate Arnold Schwarzenegger visited Güssing in 2012. “Güssing
       has become a green island,” he said when he spoke at the Güssing
       renewable energy demonstration plant. “You have built your own
       district heating [system]. You are generating your own
       electricity. You are operating a biomass power plant, produce
       synthetic natural gas from wood and develop new fuels at the
       research lab. I have seen all of this with my own eyes. Everyone
       should follow your example. The whole world should become
       Güssing.”
       The town now has 60 new companies, 1,500 new jobs, and annual
       revenues of $17 million due to energy sales, all resulting from
       the growth of the renewable energy sector. The downtown has been
       rebuilt and young people picture themselves staying there in the
       future. And other areas are following Gussing’s lead. More than
       15 regions in Austria are now energy independent with regard to
       electricity, heating, and/or transportation. The town of Güssing
       has shown that not only is a high-renewables future possible,
       but also economically advantageous. Schwarzenegger must agree,
       because when he left he said, “I’ll be back.”
  HTML http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_10_08_high-renewables_tomorrow_today_gussing_austria
       #Post#: 58--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today:
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 14, 2013, 2:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Energy Patents Are Surging
       by Pete Danko
       
       The world of patents is a bit screwy these days, with trolls
       warping a system that was designed to encourage innovation by
       protecting and rewarding innovators. Still, it has to be seen as
       an encouraging sign for renewable energy that the number of
       patents issued in the broad field has skyrocketed of late.
       Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
       the Santa Fe Institute said that annual renewable-energy patents
       in the United States increased fivefold from the quarter-century
       preceding 2000 to the decade that followed, from fewer than 200
       per year to more than 1,000 annually by 2009.
       Fossil-fuel-related patents were also up, but just threefold,
       from 100 per year pre-2000 to 300 per year in 2009.
       Perhaps the most hopeful news in the study was the suggestions
       that increases in research funding can have a cumulative,
       long-lasting impact that can help keep innovation rolling along
       even through investment ups and downs.
  HTML http://www.earthtechling.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/patent-chart.jpg
       For instance, a large increase in energy research following the
       oil shocks of the 1970s and 1980s was followed by a steep
       dropoff, the researchers said. But report co-author Jessika
       Trancik, an assistant professor of engineering systems at MIT,
       said the effect of those investments has helped drive this
       current patent boom. From the study:
       We find that both market-driven investment and publicly-funded
       R&D act as base multipliers for each other in driving
       technological development at the global level. We also find that
       the effects of these investments persist over long periods of
       time, supporting the notion that technology-relevant knowledge
       is preserved.
       The two most prominent forms of renewable energy (excluding
       hydropower) have not surprisingly been getting a lot of the
       innovation focus. “(B)etween 2004 and 2009, the number of
       patents issued annually for solar energy increased by 13 percent
       per year, while those for wind energy increased 19 percent per
       year, on average; these growth rates approach or exceed the
       rates for technologies such as semiconductors and digital
       communications,” MIT said.
  HTML http://www.earthtechling.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/pv-patents.jpg
       But while growing markets can help bring about the investment
       necessary for innovations in these technologies, the researchers
       said markets alone won’t do the job.
       To the extent that markets for these technologies grow fast
       enough, economic opportunity drives an increase in patenting and
       knowledge creation. It is important to emphasize that the growth
       of markets for low-carbon energy technologies, which improve on
       an aspect of performance (carbon emissions) not commonly
       captured by market price (and therefore not visible to the
       consumer), has depended strongly on public policy. We also note
       that policies are likely needed to fund research and incentivize
       market growth further until these technologies become
       cost-competitive and can take off on their own.
       The paper, “Determinants of the Pace of Global Innovation in
       Energy Technologies,” was to published in the open-source, peer
       reviewed journal Plos One. A submitted version is available
       online as a PDF.
  HTML http://www.earthtechling.com/2013/10/renewable-energy-patents-are-surging/
       #Post#: 79--------------------------------------------------
       The Big Question: Can Countries Reach 100 Percent Renewable
       Energy? 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 17, 2013, 1:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Several countries, including Scotland and the Philippines, have
       recently announced impressive plans to obtain all of their power
       from renewable energy. With many countries setting their sights
       on much lower, incremental goals, these lofty aspirations have
       jarred the industry and sparked a debate.
       Renewable Energy World asked industry executives to share their
       thoughts and insights on this controversial question:
       What are the major barriers that countries face in order to
       reach 100 percent renewable energy — is this goal always
       achievable or desirable?
       We want to hear your opinion. Share your thoughts in the
       comments below.
       Kevin Smith
       Global Director, Renewable Energy, DNV KEMA
       Goals serve an important purpose to ensure effort achieves a
       larger objective. Yet there's a difference between ambition and
       goals. Ambition provides inspiration, a rationale for why we
       want to achieve an objective. Ambition is a stretch,
       transformational. Goals are practical, measureable actions
       necessary to achieve the ambition.
       Powering a country entirely with renewables can be
       inspirational, and may be achievable where the environment is
       blessed with abundant renewables that can be utilized safely,
       reliably and cost effectively — such as Iceland. But we should
       examine why we want to achieve a 100 percent renewables goal. Is
       this the best goal to achieve a larger ambition? Iceland isn't
       renewable-powered due to a specific goal. It's their best option
       given local conditions.
       Ambition should focus on countries doing their utmost to address
       global warming for current and future generations with one (of
       many) goals being the lowest carbon emission system possible
       while ensuring reliability, safety, and cost efficiency. Power
       supply diversity that takes advantage of local resources and
       regional/cross-border transmission grids is a proven method for
       ensuring system objectives are met. 100 percent supply solutions
       fail to adequately acknowledge the technical, societal, and
       costs risks associated with an absolute goal - regardless of the
       generating technology.
       Achieving the final incremental percentages of any goal (speed
       records, altitude records) is usually difficult, high risk, and
       impractical given alternatives. Plus, 100 percent renewable
       goals can quickly become politicized, resulting in delays,
       distractions or flawed policy that impedes progress toward our
       ultimate ambition.
       As a dedicated, renewable energy professional, I'd like as much
       zero carbon emitting, renewable generation brought online as
       possible while ensuring a robust, secure, reliable, and cost
       effective system for society and our economies. Thus, 100
       percent renewable goals will not be the best solution. But we
       should accept various goals that support the higher ambition.
       As global segment director for renewable energy services, Mr.
       Smith develops and implements the global renewable energy
       business strategy for DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability. He is a
       veteran of the wind industry with 14 years of service performing
       a wide range of engineering, advisory and project management
       activities.
       Dr. Geoffrey Kinsey
       Director of Photovoltaic Technologies, Fraunhofer Center for
       Sustainable Energy Systems (CSE)
       Fossil fuels are exhaustible. Therefore, a transition to an
       economy that runs on sustainable energy sources is both
       necessary and inevitable. However, a near-term focus on "100
       percent renewables" runs the risk of attracting more criticism
       than support. An approach that focuses on high penetration
       (greater than 50 percent) of renewables will provide a more
       effective path to a sustainable energy future.
       Thanks to the technological progress and cost reduction that has
       occurred over the last decade, renewables are now reaching grid
       parity in more and more areas around the world. In tandem,
       on-going technology developments in energy efficiency pay for
       themselves and reduce the load that must be carried by
       renewables.
       Managing energy usage and large swings in supply through
       automated demand response will be essential — particularly in
       buildings, which drive peak electric demand. The advent of
       low-cost smart electronics in the last decade offers a means of
       enabling the necessary energy management.
       High penetration of renewables will also require investments in
       both grid storage and transmission to re-distribute power across
       time zones and to smooth out supply intermittency.
       Pumped-storage hydroelectricity remains the most cost-effective
       storage method, though the arrival of low-cost electric vehicles
       adds the potential for substantial storage via vehicle-to-grid
       architectures.
       The remaining challenge is to create the regulatory framework,
       standards, and incentives to enable economies to make dramatic
       shifts in their energy mix and invest the capital that is
       required. While the necessary investment is substantial, the
       benefits include economic development and job creation.
       Dr. Geoffrey Kinsey is the director of photovoltaic technologies
       at the Boston-based Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable Energy
       Systems (CSE), a leading provider of contract research and
       development services to the U.S. renewable energy industry.
       John Deasey
       Renewables Sales Manager, Trelleborg Offshore and Construction
       Within the petroleum industry, energy sources such as oil, gas,
       coal and nuclear are still the main players, and while I doubt
       it would be feasible to replace these entirely with renewable
       energy, there is certainly a place for this type of natural
       resource.
       The industrial-scale wind farms that are being installed off the
       UK coast clearly indicate that renewables can be a major power
       source. However, it is unlikely that they would be able to
       replace the current enormous capacity coming from fossil
       sources. Although wind farms — particularly offshore — have
       their place as part of a healthy energy mix and are a
       significant new development in the energy sector (even after
       years of challenges, installation issues, insurance claims and
       legal wrangling).
       The wave and tidal sector, however, is lagging behind offshore
       wind. Many projects are delayed as companies re-structure,
       re-design and struggle to find the balance between design ideas
       and commercial reality. This sector is facing a tough time with
       just one or two serious designs coming to market that offer
       decent potential. This issue, plus the associated power output
       costs, suggests that we are many years from commercial
       wave-tidal plants that can operate and produce sizeable power.
       The main barriers to renewable energy are really cost and
       commercial scalability, notwithstanding the legal ramifications
       of objectors — both political and environmental. Wind power is
       advancing, but when you consider the EU targets of 20 percent
       renewables by 2020, the 100 percent targets of countries such as
       Scotland and the Philippines tend to look like well-meant
       pipedreams.
       John has 23 years of sales experience, six of them specializing
       in renewable energy. During his ten months at Trelleborg, John
       has grown and developed the company's renewables offering in
       line with wind, wave and tidal opportunities in this growing
       sector.
       Tony Clifford
       CEO, Standard Solar
       A decade ago I doubt if any national leaders would have
       considered it even a remote possibility that their country could
       be powered 100 percent by renewables. The fact that some
       countries have now publicly set near-term goals to do just that
       is nothing short of amazing. It is truly an indication of how
       quickly solar, wind and other renewables have advanced in the
       past several years.
       Many countries have the renewable resources to meet 100 percent
       of their energy needs. Scotland has abundant sources of hydro,
       wind and wave power. The Philippines have excellent solar,
       geothermal, hydro and biomass potential. However, the barriers
       to attaining such large-scale utilization of renewables remain
       daunting.
       Getting to 100 percent renewables faces technical, economic and
       political challenges. Technically the development of a truly
       smart grid and the integration of storage and micro-grids into
       that smart grid are substantial challenges. On the policy side,
       one must ask if getting to 100 percent renewables quickly is the
       best use of the financial resources of a country like the
       Philippines or Scotland. Also, the political will to accomplish
       such a challenging goal must exist.
       Getting to 100 percent renewables is certainly a laudable goal,
       but political leaders should plot a course that makes economic
       sense. Go for the low-hanging fruit first — efficiency and
       hydropower are great initial steps.
       Target renewables into the most cost-effective locations first,
       such as those without an extensive grid, create micro-grids and
       utilize energy storage. Build towards 100 percent renewables
       gradually, allowing for technical advancements and cost
       reductions that will be driven by global markets.
       Actually reaching 100 percent renewables is not really the
       point. Renewables are a domestic energy source. Getting to 60 or
       70 percent renewables would have a dramatic economic effect —
       not to mention significant positive impact on the environment
       and global warming.
       Since 2007 Tony Clifford has led Standard Solar's rapid growth
       into a nationally known PV developer/ EPC. He is an elected
       board member of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA),
       serves on SEIA's Executive Committee and also served as the
       president of the regional chapter of SEIA, MDV-SEIA, from 2009
       to 2012.
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/10/the-big-question-can-countries-reach-100-percent-renewable-energy?page=all
       [move]Agelbert's response to this overly conservative analysis.
       ;D [/move]
       In the year 1900, what would these gentlemen have opined about
       the possibility of getting the USA to 100% fossil fuel use for
       homes, transportation and industry by 1920 through massive
       government subsidies (both direct and indirect by the building
       of a massive highway network and giant electric grid)?
       Yes, friends, that took only TWO DECADES! True, the population
       was smaller but the USA and several other developed countries in
       the world were also much less capable of large industrial
       ventures then they are today.
       Number of Auto friendly roads:
       1900 = ZERO (except a few that were that way by chance in major
       cities)
       1920 = 36,000 miles (still a drop in the 3 million mile "bucket"
       but nevertheless a huge expansion from 1900. The expansion
       accelerated with a highway building law in 1916). Rockefeller
       did not pay a red cent to make these roads that helped make him
       rich; [I]WE-THE-PEOPLE DID![/I]1
       So, we could engage at the national level in massive
       infrastructure costs that help make big oil rich but we can't do
       the same for a massive Renewable energy transition that will
       provide ALL of Homo sapiens with a sustainable civilization???
       I believe these experts will be pleasantly surprised with the
       pace of renewable energy replacement of dirty and polluting
       energy sources within the next two decades. The overwhelming
       mindset up to the year 2000 was basically that fossil fuels are
       "IT" as to being the only cost effective way to run a
       civilization. The overwhelming mindset NOW is that our fossil
       fuel powered civilization is unsustainable.
       This sea change in mindset is the most important engine for
       rapid change, just as embracing the automobile and heavy
       industry modernity was in the decades from 1900 to 1920.
       Historic proof that manufacturing all the renewable energy
       machines and infrastructure needed to transition to a 100%
       Renewable Energy world economy can be achieved in two decades or
       less
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/historic-proof-that-manufacturing-all-the-renewable-energy-machines-and-infrastructure-needed-to-transition-to-a-100-renewable-energy-world-economy-can-be-achieved-in-two-decades-or-less-the-mass-produced-liberty-ships-of-wwii<br
       />
       
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/wind-power/
       1.
  HTML http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug02/carney/paving.html
       #Post#: 80--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today:
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 17, 2013, 3:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       My response to this article:
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/10/the-big-question-can-countries-reach-100-percent-renewable-energy
       In the year 1900, what would these gentlemen have opined about
       the possibility of getting the USA to 100% fossil fuel use for
       homes, transportation and industry by 1920 through massive
       government subsidies (both direct and indirect by the building
       of a massive highway network and giant electric grid)?
       Yes, friends, that took only TWO DECADES! True, the population
       was smaller but the USA and several other developed countries in
       the world were also much less capable of large industrial
       ventures then they are today.
       NUMBER of AUTO FRIENDLY ROADS in the USA:
       1900 = ZERO (except a few that were that way by chance in major
       cities)
       1920 = 36,000 miles (still a drop in the 3 million mile "bucket"
       but nevertheless a huge expansion from 1900. The expansion
       accelerated with a highway building law in 1916). Rockefeller
       did not pay a red cent to make these roads that helped make him
       rich; [i]WE-THE-PEOPLE DID![/I] *
       Electrification of the cities went just as fast for the benefit
       of fossil fuel powered utilities (which were NOT private at the
       time so we-the-people AGAIN shouldered most of the costs).
       NOTE:Rural electrification only came later when the massive
       renewable energy dam building (over 1,500 dams) project of the
       1930s (paid for by we-the-people) pushed renewable energy
       penetration of the rapidly expanding electricity grid up to over
       30% - a level we have yet to regain in our present day, much
       larger, grid.
       So, we could engage at the national level in massive
       infrastructure costs that helped make big oil rich but we can't
       do the same for a massive Renewable energy transition that will
       provide ALL of Homo sapiens with a sustainable civilization?
       ???
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
       I believe these experts will be pleasantly surprised with the
       pace of renewable energy replacement of dirty and polluting
       energy sources within the next two decades. The overwhelming
       mindset up to the year 2000 was basically that fossil fuels are
       "IT" as to being the only cost effective way to run a
       civilization. The overwhelming mindset NOW is that our fossil
       fuel powered civilization is unsustainable.
       This sea change in mindset is the most important engine for
       rapid change, just as embracing the automobile and heavy
       industry modernity was in the decades from 1900 to 1920.
       Historic proof that manufacturing all the renewable energy
       machines and infrastructure needed to transition to a 100%
       Renewable Energy world economy can be achieved in two decades or
       less
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/historic-proof-that-manufacturing-all-the-renewable-energy-machines-and-infrastructure-needed-to-transition-to-a-100-renewable-energy-world-economy-can-be-achieved-in-two-decades-or-less-the-mass-produced-liberty-ships-of-wwii<br
       />
       
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/wind-power/
       *
  HTML http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug02/carney/paving.htmlower/
       #Post#: 133--------------------------------------------------
       The relationship of the Mesquite Tree with Saguaro cactus
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 21, 2013, 2:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Solar Decathlon 2013: Arizona State/New Mexico
  HTML http://lowenddslr.com/img/sabino-canyon-nursery-tree-led.jpg
       Learning from the relationship of the Mesquite Tree with Saguaro
       cactus to design a SHADE (Solar Homes Adapting for Desert
       Equilibrium) house
       The SHADE (Solar Homes Adapting for Desert Equilibrium) house
       from the combined team of Arizona State U. and The U. of New
       Mexico, inspired by the desert and majestic Saguaro cactus,
       features independent configurable modules, a prominent solar
       canopy, and multiple patios with microclimates for an
       indoor-outdoor lifestyle.
       Features include phase-change materials throughout the house
       with a capillary radiant system for passive heating and cooling,
       and a thermal battery that concentrates low temperatures at
       night and thaws ice to cool the space during the day.
       Video here
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/video/view/solar-decathlon-2013-arizona-statenew-mexico?cmpid=WNL-Friday-October11-2013
       #Post#: 146--------------------------------------------------
       3 Reasons Germans are Going Renewable 'At All Costs' 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: October 23, 2013, 12:38 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       3 Reasons Germans are Going Renewable 'At All Costs'
       John Farrell
       October 23, 2013
       Germany is racing past 20 percent renewable energy on its
       electricity grid, but news stories stridently warn that this new
       wind and solar power is costing "billions." But often left out
       (or buried far from the lede) is the overwhelming popularity of
       the country's relentless focus on energy change (energiewende).
       How can a supposedly expensive effort to clean up the energy
       supply be so popular?
       1. It's about the cost, not the price
       Most news stories focus on the cost of electricity in Germany,
       which has some of the highest rates per kilowatt-hour in the
       world.  But they don't note that the average German electricity
       bill – about $100 a month – is the same as for most Americans.
       Germans are much more efficient users of energy than most, so
       they can afford higher rates without having higher bills.  (Note
       to self: check out options for energy efficiency).
       2. It's about vision
       Germany doesn't just have an incremental approach to renewable
       energy, but a commitment supported by 84 percent of residents to
       get to 100% renewable energy "as quickly as possible."  A few
       U.S. states have renewable energy visions (e.g. 33% by 2020, 25%
       by 2025) that approach Germany's, but they're mired in the
       notion that despite enormous savings to society in terms of
       health and environmental benefits, renewable energy shouldn't
       cost any more today than conventional, dirty energy on the
       utility bill.  Germans have taken the long view (about energy
       security, price volatility, etc).
       3. It's about ownership
       I lied in #1.  Support for Germany's renewable energy quest
       isn't about cost of energy, but about the opportunity to own a
       slice of the energy system.     Millions of Germans are building
       their retirement nest egg by individually or collectively owning
       a share of wind and solar power plants supplying clean energy to
       their communities. Nearly half of the country's 63,000 megawatts
       of wind and solar power is owned locally, and these energy
       owners care as much about the persistence of renewable energy
       they own as they do about the energy bill they pay. Not only do
       these German energy owners reduce their own net cost of energy,
       every dollar diverted from a distant multinational utility
       company multiplies throughout their local economy.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-231013131117.png
       Ownership of Germany's Renewable Energy CapacityJohn Farrell,
       ILSR
       [/I]
       Not only does local ownership flip the notion of energy costs as
       consumers become producers, it also flips the notion of
       political ownership. Three-quarters of Germans want to maintain
       a focus on "citizen-managed, decentralized renewable energy."
       The tunnel vision on cost so prevalent in the press reflects the
       perspective of incumbent utilities, whose market share declines
       as their former customers produce their own power. It's a story
       that plays out in the U.S., when debates over new power plants
       focus narrowly on the cost per kilowatt-hour rather than how an
       individual or community can retain more of their energy dollar.
       It may seem that Germany is going renewable "at all costs," but
       only if we are resigned to being energy consumers.  Because
       their and our energy transition is a once-in-a-lifetime
       opportunity to take charge of our energy future.  [i]That's
       priceless.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/3-reasons-germans-are-going-renewable-at-all-costs#comment-127427
       #Post#: 244--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today:
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: November 2, 2013, 1:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today: Samsø, Denmark
       On a small island off the coast of Denmark, a group of potato
       farmers have turned into power brokers, owning the wind turbines
       that have made their island a net energy producer. In less than
       ten years, Samsø went from producing 11 tonnes of carbon dioxide
       per person per year, one of the highest carbon emissions per
       capita in Europe, to just 4.4 tonnes (the U.S. is at 17.6), and
       has proven that running on 100 percent renewable electricity is
       possible.
  HTML http://us.cdn2.123rf.com/168nwm/lenm/lenm1201/lenm120100200/12107060-illustration-of-a-smiley-giving-a-thumbs-up.jpg<br
       />
       Full story here:
  HTML http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_10_23_a_high-renewables_tomorrow_today_samso_denmark
       #Post#: 268--------------------------------------------------
       Shocked into Pursuing Renewables: What Will Jolt Us Next? 
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: November 6, 2013, 2:01 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Shocked into Pursuing Renewables: What Will Jolt Us Next?
       Elisa Wood, Contributing Editor
       November 06, 2013
       Virginia, U.S.A. -- Historical events have a way of jolting us –
       again and again and again – into the reminder that energy plays
       a big role in our well-being.
       October marked two such events for the U.S. It was the one-year
       anniversary of Superstorm Sandy, the massive storm that knocked
       out power for days to millions in the Northeast. And it was the
       40th anniversary of the oil embargo, the first time America
       experienced oil as a weapon used against it. In the time
       between, we’ve seen other altering experiences — Three Mile
       Island, natural gas price spikes of the 1990s, Enron, the
       Northeast Blackout, Fukushima, to name a few.  We often stagger
       away with new resolve to secure a cleaner or more independent
       energy supply; to redouble renewable energy efforts.
       Are there circumstances percolating now that will spill over and
       alter our energy future? What will give us the next jolt?
       William Prindle, vice president at ICF International, sees it
       coming from today’s euphoria over natural gas, what he calls the
       collective “fracking delusions.”
       “Especially in North America, but in many other regions of the
       world, hydraulic fracturing technology is pushing oil and gas
       production to levels not in any forecaster’s range even ten
       years ago,” he said. “The fracking boom is driving prices down
       for natural gas, and to some extent oil, and creating in some
       quarters a sense of ‘problem solved — game over’ when it comes
       to energy policy.”
  HTML http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/stock/thumb_smiley-sign0105.gif
       Such nonchalance carries risk.  It can lead to a turning away
       from renewables and energy efficiency and “let the worthy
       policies of the last 40 years wither,”
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
       he warned.
       Natural Gas Loses Momentum?
       In truth, today’s hoopla over natural gas might mask important
       market realties, according to Jigar Shah, author of the new
       book, ‘Creating Climate Wealth: Unlocking the Impact Economy’
       and former CEO and founder of SunEdison. While many see these as
       glory days for natural gas, Shah says the industry may be about
       to enter its waning stage after a four-decade run as America’s
       defining fuel.
       Shah defines four stages to the growth of an industry: 1)
       Pioneering: the industry first forms and technology is deployed.
       2)  Growth: Many companies enter the market with widespread
       acceptance of the product or service. 3)  Maturation: Marked by
       company consolidation either through merger or attrition, the
       stage Shah puts natural gas in now.
       The fourth stage is decline. “This is where a market runs its
       course — the predictions on when this will happen for natural
       gas vary, but most agree the momentum is largely gone,” he said.
       Natural gas is inexpensive today, but the industry requires
       higher prices for profitability, Shah says “Almost every expert
       in the country puts a profitable natural gas industry at a price
       of at least $5.50/MCF.  At that price, coal, wind, and solar is
       cheaper than new natural gas.  This price will happen in the
       next five years and when that happens natural gas will forever
       be labeled a volatile fuel that can be hedged and therefore has
       no place as a mainstay in the electricity industry.”
       What does this mean for renewable energy?
       “All the while, renewable energy will be underappreciated and
       under the radar screen until like in Germany the incumbents are
       staring death squarely in the face.  It is in that moment that
       people will realize that natural gas is not a bridge fuel of the
       future, but instead has already played the role of bridge fuel
       for the past 25 years,” Shah said.
       The Sharp Tack
       Fossil fuels have a history of economy-rattling price
       volatility. Price spikes often cause national and international
       soul-searching about energy resource balance. Stephen Cowell,
       chairman and CEO of Conservation Services Group, points to what
       happened between 2005 and 2008 when gasoline prices doubled.
       “The rise in fuel price was the sharp tack that burst the
       bubble, causing a credit crisis and severe recession among other
       effects. From 2003 to 2008 the rise in energy costs was the only
       substantial change to the economy, and it pushed American
       homeowners on a tight budget over the edge. This situation
       ignited the sub-prime mortgage crisis,” Cowell said.
       Appreciation of renewables often heightens when fossil fuel
       prices rise. So it’s little surprise that in 2008, alone, wind
       energy installations increased by 50 percent and the U.S.
       surpassed Germany as the leader in wind capacity.
       This year brings a far more depressing story for the wind
       industry, largely because Congress has not renewed the federal
       production tax credit that is set to expire at the end of
       December.  The U.S. installed only 1.6 MW of wind in the first
       half of this year, according to the American Wind Energy
       Association.
       “Our behavior toward energy makes it appear that we are not
       taking renewable energy seriously. And that’s scary,”
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
       Cowell said.
       We are failing, Cowell explained, to fully consider the
       repercussions of what he calls the fossil fuel cliff.
       “The physical market structure for energy is fragile and prone
       to disruption, and this can have catastrophic effects. If the
       rest of the world catches up and starts consuming as much fossil
       fuel as the U.S. we will hit the fossil fuel cliff in 50-100
       years,” he said. “That is a species-threatening reality. We’ll
       no longer have the ability to transport food and half of the
       human population will starve. The recent debt crisis may be a
       serious issue for future generations, but the fossil fuel cliff
       threatens our very survival.”
       This is a big worry and a direction energy could take. But are
       there points of hope as well?
       Prindle points to the rise in new energy management technologies
       and better energy analytics. “We are seeing intelligence (or at
       least the hope of it!) creeping into our devices, from GE’s
       smart appliances to the Nest thermostat, to remotely
       controllable lighting circuits. Meanwhile, cities and states are
       beginning to mandate energy performance data disclosure for
       larger buildings, and utilities are beginning to provide
       enhanced energy usage data to customers.”
       These intelligent devices bring greater visibility and increase
       energy efficiency, opening a door for greater appreciation and
       adoption of renewable energy.
  HTML http://www.smile-day.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Smiley-Thumbs-Up2.jpg<br
       />
       “I think that the biggest relevant historical event of the last
       40 years has been the emergence of the energy efficiency
       resource across the entire U.S.
       economy,”
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-anime-047.gif
       said Ralph Cavanagh, co-director of the energy program at the
       Natural Resources Defense Council. “Ultimately, it exceeded the
       contribution of all other resources combined in meeting the
       energy needs of a growing US economy.  It helped make renewable
       energy more consequential (by cutting sharply the quantity of
       fossil fuels that needs to be displaced), and it drove
       improvements in energy security and reliability that make us far
       less vulnerable today to volatile fossil fuel prices.”
       Of course, it is often hard to see a pivotal event until it’s
       behind us.  Some are hard to predict, like natural disasters.
       And technology is changing so fast, we are not always sure what
       questions to even ask about the future. But if history tells us
       anything, renewable energy will be one of the answers.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/11/shocked-into-pursuing-renewables-what-will-jolt-us-next
       #Post#: 286--------------------------------------------------
       What IS sustainability in Business?
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: November 9, 2013, 1:02 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9-Khm_ghHA&feature=player_embedded<br
       />
       This video covers SO MANY BASES it is mind boggling!
       The concepts and proofs presented here show the way to a
       sustainable future by carefully tracking those pioneers that
       have influenced some businesses (e.g. 3M) to switch the
       predatory capitalist mindset of quick profits and high toxic
       waste and externalisms to long term gratification and the
       biosphere as the STARTING POINT for business profitability
       through truly SUSTAINABLE practices.
       Did you know that in our linear processes economy, fully 90% of
       the energy used to manufacture and market a product is LOST TO
       WASTE!!? ???
  HTML http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2009/347/2/6/WTF_Smiley_face_by_IveWasHere.jpg
       Consider what that means to the global energy use if MOST of
       that waste was ELIMINATED?
  HTML http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Spiele/smilie_game_017.gif
       
       PLUS --->
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gif
       RIGHT! MUCH LESS ENERGY USE with the SAME amount of services
       while eliminating most pollution and toxins.
       All this flies in the face of "greed is good" and REQUIRES
       cooperation, collaboration and acute respect for the biosphere
       as a NECESSITY in order to have a TRULY PROFITABLE BUSINESS
       VENTURE!
       This video makes a laughing stock out of the LIBERTARIAN, TOP
       PREDATOR BALONEY that has practically destroyed the biosphere
       and made businesses continually shoot themselves in the foot!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
       How can this be, you may ask?   ???  Well one of the key
       components of the inefficiency of our current system is that
       MOST of the ENERGY spent to create products goes into mining raw
       materials where the LEAST humans are employed.
       Conversely, a SMALL percentage of the total ENERGY spent is on
       manufacturing the finished product, where MOST humans are
       employed.
       We need to STOP using so much energy in mining and extraction by
       making products that, when they wear out, go back to the
       factory, NOT THE GARBAGE CAN and LAND FILL WASTE SITE! The
       factory THEN can use this product designed for recycling to
       refurbish it and sell it again and again!
       This does THREE things.
       1. It reduces high energy mining and extraction.
       2  Creates more human employment.  :
       3. Preserves the biosphere for future generations.
  HTML http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-060.gif
       More people have jobs, less energy is wasted and less pollution
       hits the biosphere. If we make it, THIS IS HOW WE ARE GOING TO
       DO IT!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif
       
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/128fs318181.gif
       #Post#: 482--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today:
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: December 2, 2013, 1:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       City-Owned Texas Utility Already Serves 40% Renewable Energy
       Is having local control of a utility the key to ramping up
       renewable energy?
       In 2011, Boulder citizens voted to have their city take over the
       electric utility, joining 1 in 7 Americans served by municipal
       electric utilities. Their feasibility study suggests they can
       more than double renewable energy on their system to over 50%,
       slashing greenhouse gas emissions. A study in Santa Fe, NM,
       suggests a similar increase (to 45% clean energy) is possible,
       while reducing electricity costs. Other cities, like
       Minneapolis, MN, are also studying the option.
       Many of these communities are inspired by examples like Denton,
       TX, a municipal utility that already gets 40% of its power from
       renewable energy. The presentation to the Boulder city council
       is from Mike Grim, the head of the Denton city utility.
       Vimeo video at link:
  HTML http://cleantechnica.com/2013/12/02/city-owned-texas-utility-already-serves-40-renewable-energy/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IM-cleantechnica+%28CleanTechnica%29
       [COLOR=PURPLE]Agelbert COMMENT: Excellent! The money savings is
       in Renewable Energy harvested near the user, the more
       distributed, the greater the energy efficiency per collected
       kilowatt.
       Smart people follow the Renewable Energy Money. Dumb people talk
       nonsense about "gross output" of nuclear power plants while they
       studiously ignore massive transmission losses and really massive
       energy costs of baby sitting "used" fuel rod assemblies for at
       least a century. A fuel rod assemby lasts, get this, about 6 to
       8 years, period. Anyone that tells you they are "carbon neutral"
       is a liar.
       A MW of solar or wind power collected near the user is worth
       [I]much,[/I] much more than a MW of fossil fuel or nuclear power
       from a centralized power plant hundreds of miles from the user.
       But that doesn't stop clever intelli-morons from trying to wow
       ignorant people about the[I] "massive concentration of energy
       (poisonous energy)" [/I] you can get from the
       [I]"non-intermittent" (LOL!)"[/I] nuclear and fossil fuel
       centralized, poisonous, water hogging and water polluting, rate
       rigging, investor favoring, "privatized"  power corporations.
       [url=
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php]Renewable<br
       />Revolution
  HTML http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/465/465823jzy0y15obs.gif
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 9
   DIR Next Page