Friday, January 15, 2016

Water Quality - our next big crisis



Here’s an interesting story of politics, economics, people, and the inalienable right to clean water.

The city of Flint, Michigan has budget problems.  To save $5m, they switch to water from the Flint River, long polluted by industrial discharge.
The water reacts with the old piping and infrastructure to release lead and other toxins, which appear far above acceptable health standards.  The EPA, the state, and the city all knew about this since the first part of last year, yet allowed the water to be sold to, and utilized by the residents.  Health problems appear!

City and state declare emergency; the National Guard is delivering bottled water for drinking to all the residents (I guess it’s ok to bath, wash clothes, and wash your car with tainted water), and have now asked the Federal Government for disaster assistance.  Meanwhile, residents are still being charged for their water.

On the larger playfield, Congress is adamant at overturning the current Obama clean water bills that would prevent these things from happening. 
Go figure.  What other species would willfully poison its own clean water supply? 











Thursday, January 7, 2016

SOLAR IN THE DAWN OF 2016




So much has happened with solar and wind in 2015:  Wind now has a US capacity of over 70,000MW, and solar, between commercial grade and rooftop applications, is around 20,000MW.  Almost all this new technology has been built in the last 10 years, compared to the 100,000MW of nuclear capacity slowly constructed since the 1960’s, now diminishing because it has run its course.  The growth of both solar and wind will escalate exponentially in the next couple of years due primarily to the Paris Climate Change agreements, the five year extension of the tax credits, and the leadership and investments by both business and individuals.  The potential is huge! 

Case in point…my $12,000 investment in the PV system on my roof, returned $524 in this first year.  That’s a 4.4% cash return…tax free.  I’ve mentioned this to a couple of solar installers I’ve run into, and their response has been “ Is that all?”  A lot of people in Humboldt County are getting 6-10% back.  The reason I’m so low is that I went for the most expensive, high-quality system available (could have done it for about $8000), and there are a few shading issues in my solar window during the winter-time.  As the economics of renewables become more commonly and realistically understood, and as prices continue to come down for whole systems, the reality of cost-effective, cleaner, and saner energy will become mainstream.  A new 128KW system going on the old Yakima building in Arcata will pay for itself in 5+ years (16% return), and will generate over $1m in profit over the next 20 years; plus provide clean electricity to the 35 businesses housed there.  No CO2 or other emissions, no long term wastes, no need for cooling water, no need to extract, refine, and transport fuel…on and on!
Economic sense?  A fiscal conservative’s panacea?  All this in foggy Humboldt County; what about San Diego, Arizona, Texas, Florida?  I should do better next year, since PG&E announced a 7.5% rate increase, which began a few days ago on January 1st, and another one coming in June.

Three major changes are occurring, which testify why we didn’t get here sooner.
The first is the technology itself.  Solar panels are just a small part of the total investment package.  Inverters, wiring, and mounting racks are getting cheaper as demand justifies the economies of scale.  And of course, labor is one of the biggest costs.  As the industry grows and learns, all of these costs are decreasing to where most renewables are more competitive than everything else except natural gas; but that all can change very rapidly with issues of water, fracking, pipelines, etc.  Funny how natural gas is wholesaling at what it was about 20 years ago (25 cents/therm); yet PG&E is charging me $1.25-1.50/therm…mainly to pay for the upgrades to the aging gas infrastructure.  One installer told me solar electric is cost-competitive today with propane for water heating…an efficient electric water heater is 97% efficient.  No need for bulky solar water heating panels on the roof…just add a few more PV panels!  And just wait until energy storage really hits the market in the next few years…  The potential to use renewables in appropriate applications is almost unlimited…just wait!

The second major development deals with who is leading the green energy revolution.  Major businesses…old and new…are realizing it is cheaper, and a better investment to produce their own power.  We hear about Apple, Google, Tesla,  Audi…a lot of major corporations taking it on themselves to build wind and solar systems to power their facilities.  But media silent, a lot of smaller businesses, and commercial and residential endeavors are seeing the benefits in today’s “investment” reality.  One no longer has to “be rich” to afford solar.  Today, you can buy systems outright, lease them for your roof, and invest in someone else’s “roof” and get a decent return.  All pretty much guaranteed, with little worry of market fluctuation, crashes, etc.  The technology is very stable…no moving parts!...and now modular, so if for some reason a single panel or inverter malfunctions, it is easily and simply replaced.  My system has a 25 year warranty!  The only thing I did all year was hose the panels down a couple of times, and scrubbed them once when I also did my windows in early summer.  As long as the sun shines, the money keeps rolling in!  We’re seeing a change in how the financial institutions, local governments, and the general public views solar…no longer a subset of wacko “enviros” wanting to save the earth; but a major moneymaking investment tool, with environmental benefits.

The third area of concern deals with politics, or whatever you want to call it.  The whole concept of Global Warming, Climate Change, Greenhouse…all of that has been crucial in the renewable energy picture.  How the fossil fuel industries, media, financial institutions, politicians and even the average ignorant person have portrayed the use of solar and wind has been very well manipulated by the powerful few.  As it has finally been exposed publicly, Exxon did most of the leading research on Climate Change back in the 70’s and ‘80’s, and spent the last 20 years colluding with others in the fossil fuel business interests,  spending tens of millions of dollars buying scientific “experts,” politicians, and the media in a brilliantly executed PR stunt of denial…the biggest hoax in human history!  Well, all this is changing; and the presidential campaign in 2016 will feature a major battle between “greed and the environment.”  It’s no longer a battle between “jobs vs. environment.”  It will be interesting.

Two of my favorite examples show the power of the media to misstate, skewer, and actually lie about issues.  The first is the interview on FOX News when Germany announced it had produced 74% of its electricity from renewables for one day.  The guest “expert” said the US could not achieve that because Germany gets more sun than the US.  I’ll leave you to calculate that!  Germany is at the same latitude as southeastern Alaska!  “Let’s move on to Benghazi” http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/02/07/fox_news_expert_on_solar_energy_germany_gets_a_lot_more_sun_than_we_do_video.html
Not soon after on another segment, they reported a new study from the Wyoming Institute of Technology (you’ve heard of that great institution?) saying that PV panels are horrible because they suck out more energy from the sun than what is naturally beaming down to earth!
Obviously some folks in North Carolina believed this, because they recently voted down a solar project in their community…save the sun’s energy for their kids and grandkids.
One last example is an editorial written in the Wall Street Journal just a few weeks ago.
A couple of great letters in response:
Mainstream media continues to downplay the positive gains and potentials renewables offer. A recent article about wind in the Economist was titled “Wisps of Hope!”

This year will see enormous battles as states, and their public and private utilities, try to figure out what to do with the huge increase in individual owned energy generating systems.  Loss of electricity sales, loss of revenue, increasing costs of upgrading and maintaining the grid and local transmission lines, etc., etc.  These are all serious problems, which will be dealt with…how fairly, nobody knows; but one can guess from past experience how the fight will unfold.  Just like the land-line vs. the mobile phone, on-line banking vs. real bank tellers, carmakers vs. horseshoers, and a multitude of other industry challenges, changes will occur in corporate boardrooms, finance and legislative chambers, and research labs and engineering firms to accommodate the future.  Solar is not going away…it is escalating exponentially, with new, cheaper equipment, big and small scale electricity storage, and the shift in understanding the reality of our ability to move to cleaner, safer, job creating, cost effective, and sustainable renewable technologies. 

Add to all of this the potentials in new energy efficiencies and new energy storage (I still think utility grade hydrogen-fuel cell technology will be with us in a few years), and we have such a positive and exciting energy future.

Happy New Year!


Sunday, January 3, 2016

Nuclear Power Entering 2016

As 2016 begins, one can conclude that 2015 was not a very good year for nuclear power, in spite of all the praises of a bright future because of the supposed benefits it offers to fossil CO2 reduction and combating climate change.  Ten key areas are identified with major stumbling blocks, excluding the ever present and increasing danger of terrorism and proliferation.

1.    New Reactors.  The great nuclear renaissance proposed in the early 2000's is not happening, and may never happen, due primarily to COSTS.  The twin Vogle reactors in Georgia are now 26% complete, 4 years behind schedule, and have jumped from an uncompetitive original price of $14 billion to $21b.  Good chance that they may never be completed and come on line.  The reactors in South Carolina are not faring any better, even with the massive subsidies from the Federal Government. There are no proposed new construction starts in the US in the foreseeable future.
2.    Fukushima.  Almost five years after the devastation of the 4 reactors, things look worse than ever.  The lead nuclear engineer says "there is no textbook" for the cleanup they are facing.  Literally, they don't know what to do or how to do it.  Meanwhile, enormous amounts of radioactive water is either being released into the ocean or stored in some now leaking tanks; and huge bags of contaminated soil are piling up with no place for properly disposal.  Over 7000 workers are exposed daily to higher than accepted radiation levels, and specialized equipment being manufactured (such as the robots) are failing due to the extremely high radiation in the working areas.  150,000 people are refugees from their homes, and thousands of acres will remain uninhabitable for hundreds of years.  The costs are now running into the hundreds of billions of dollars, with no end to the escalation.  You don't see much of this in the mainstream media, because Japan does not want to jeopardize the enormous amount of money already invested in Tokyo for the 2020 Olympics…they need those tourist dollars.  They have restarted three out of 54 reactors, and may start a few more, but the future looks pretty grim for the industry, their economy, and the environment.
3.    Decommissioning.  More reactors are being shut down than are being built here in the US, as well as worldwide.  The cost of dismantling a plant is projected to be $1-4-? billion dollars, for work that won't take place for 40-60 years in the future.  The recent big scramble has been to re-license the old nukes to run for an additional 20+ years.  A big gamble, in terms of the cost of replacing parts, and expecting this 50+ year old technology to continue to operate safely and cost effectively. I anticipate 3-4 closures in his next year.
4.    Small Modular Reactors.  The dream of small, cheap and safe modular reactors continues to suck research subsidy dollars, in spite of the fact that even if approved and licensed 10+ years from now, they will not be cheap because of all the other infrastructure that needs to be in place.  The same is true of the MOX reactors, reprocessing spent fuel for plutonium reactors, and thorium as an alternative safer fuel.  Not cost effective!
5.    High Level Waste.  The industry and some in Congress are still trying to open Yucca Mountain as a permanent repository, even though it does not meet the required geologic and environmental conditions set by law for safe storage for 10,000 years.  In the meantime, there is talk about putting the fuel rods in dry casks, and shipping them to a "temporary" site…such as south Texas.  10,000 casks, as many shipments, canisters concentrated together in a central place…and the $100+ billion to do this?  We'll see.  Remember, there is no solution to the high level waste disposal other than keeping it on site or in small reservations, and monitoring it and managing it forever.
6.    Low Level Waste.  The burial and disposal of lower radioactively contaminated products exemplifies the fact that we really don't know what we are technologically doing.  A recent fire at the closed Beatty site in Nevada, the leakage at the West Valley dump in N.Y., and the current fire near the dump in St. Louis all threaten the release of radiation into the air, and more importantly, in out aquifers.  The WIPP plant is New Mexico, designed to contain radioactivity for thousands of years has leaked after just seven years.  New sites in Texas, Idaho, and Utah are set up as prime targets for catastrophes in the future.  Hanford continues to defy cleanup cost estimates, timetables, technological ability.
7.    Radiation Standards.  New studies are confirming that there is no safe threshold for radiation exposure, and that any radiation poses health risk.  Recent revelations of increased childhood leukemia for children living near nuclear power plants, and major health issues with military personnel exposed to radiation counters the "official" proclamations that there is no danger from the various manmade radioactive pathways our nuclear industry exposes us to.  Japan has raised "acceptable" limits for its workers (mainly poor unemployed homeless), and the industry in the US is trying to do the same. 
8.    Military/Civilian Connections.  The optimistic scheme of taking nuclear material from old nuclear weapons and reconfiguring it into commercial reactor fuel has failed, mainly because of cost.  The MOX fuel program in S.C. has swelled to $47.5b, and is 15 years behind schedule, and will soon be abandoned.  The same is true in South Carolina, and at Hanford, where the vitrification plant (process to glassify liquid radioactive sludges from reprocessing) is 17 years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.  Other old military sites in Pittsburgh, Piketon, and Paducah are having newly discovered technical operational and cleanup problems, demanding hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. 
9.    International.  As China continues to optimistically propose and build new reactors, the western nuclear industry of the US, France, and UK continues to push and promote projects in the U.K., South Africa, Saudi Arabia, and a host of poorer naïve countries. We are seeing most of these being delayed into the future, and in a lot of cases, actually cancelled.  The same problems of cost and technology here plague the world, and most reactors can only be proposed and built with huge government subsidies.  They are not cost effective in a free capitalistic system.  Huge subsidies!
10.     Fusion.  There has been a lot of hype this year about fusion power…unlimited power using the technology that powers the sun replicated here on earth.  We are many, many years from this, if ever.  Achieving a sustainable fusion reaction, harvesting the millions of degrees of heat, and transforming that into useable electricity is quite the engineering challenge.  Better to just let the sun do it on its own.

It is interesting in this time of instant accessible information and communication, the public is still being duped by the mass media, which is controlled by the huge industrial complex that owns our energy resources.  Just like the tobacco industries lied to us about the health risks of smoking, Exxon and the rest of the fossil fuel industries as well as the nuclear industries have manipulated and lied to us about climate change, and the denial of the vast potential of clean, cheap, sustainable, and environmentally beneficial renewable energy, which we are seeing exponentially take off today.  The world is slowly realizing that we do have the technology today to provide useable energy that will also give us cleaner air, cleaner water, less land disruption, more jobs and self reliance, and the opportunity to strive for a more just planet.  I believe 2016 will be a remarkable year of change…most of it I hope to be good!

A few very interesting sources of information:

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2525488/nuclear_power_stations_cause_childhood_leukemia_and_heres_the_proof.html

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hanford-waste-20150826-story.html

http://www.daily-jeff.com/latest%20headlines/2015/09/13/feds-halt-uranium-enrichment-project-at-ohio-plant

http://safeenergy.org/2015/08/03/vogtle-at-65-billion-and-counting/

http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/metro/2015-04-22/cost-estimate-mox-facility-savannah-river-site-swells-475-billion

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8565020/Nuclear-fuel-has-melted-through-base-of-Fukushima-plant.html

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22122015/exxon-mobil-oil-industry-peers-knew-about-climate-change-dangers-1970s-american-petroleum-institute-api-shell-chevron-texaco