Climate at Bay

More on Schneider

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:30:00 +0000

TNR interviewed climate scientist Stephen Schneider, who I saw speak last week. Schneider wrote a paper in the 1970s about possible global cooling, which contained data that was later determined to be faulty. But the paper continues to be fodder for global warming deniers:

Q: Given your early mistake about global cooling, why should we believe that scientists are better now at figuring out climate change?
A: There’s always the possibility of error. There’s always the possibility you left something out. But what we now have is an accumulated preponderance of evidence and that’s why the confidence is so much higher now than it was then.
Q: And also continued uncertainty.
A: There is always uncertainty as well, but as scientists we’re always trying to move the needle toward more confidence. More confidence does not mean 100 percent confidence. The only thing the IPCC ever said it was 100 percent confident in was that it has been warming over the last 150 years. Some try to frame climate change by saying that as long as there remain open elements, it isn’t "proved." That’s a fraudulent frame. Nobody in this world--in medicine, investment banking, military security, environment--is ever 100 percent sure of anything in a complex system.
When I’m asked, "What is the probability that the Greenland ice sheet will melt if temperatures rise X degrees?," I speak in percentages. My very good friend and colleague Jim Hansen says, "One degree." I don’t think Jim knows that. I don’t think I know that. The problem is too complicated for us to know that, so I frame it as a risk management problem: One degree? 25 percent chance. Two degrees? 60 percent chance. Three degrees? 90 percent chance. Is that the truth? Of course not. That’s as honest as I can be based on my subjective reading of the evidence. However, just so you don’t think I’m an optimist relative to Jim, I also think there’s a 5 percent chance that it’s already too late.

Read the whole interview.

Dams and hydropower

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:52:00 +0000

The Governator signed a major water bill and not surprisingly, opinions were decidedly mixed. Described as the most significant water bill in 25 years the bill is hugely complex.

The bills moved by the Legislature are nothing if not complex, but they would essentially accomplish five key goals. The package would:

Do away with the long-troubled CalFed program and the Bay Delta Authority to establish a seven-member governing council to oversee both restoration of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, which supplies water to 23 million Californians, and future construction of levees, dams, canals or other water projects.
Mandate a 20 percent reduction in urban per capita water use by Dec. 31, 2020.
Begin the first-ever groundwater monitoring program in the state, wresting control of the process from local authorities.
Prevent illegal diversions and increase fines for those found stealing water.
Pursue funding for all of the above.

Many have pointed to unaddressed issues such as metering and measuring all uses (ag interests strongly oppose this as they get a flat rate for using 80% of California's water) and strong criticism for insufficient conservation measures, especially for southern California.

One of the winners are the dam builders and hydropower. Relatedly, the Hydropower Association has released a study on growth potential job demand in hydro.

Munro says job growth would come through projects that improve efficiency by allowing the industry to produce more electricity with the same amount of water.

More growth would come from adding generation capacity to dams and irrigation systems that currently don’t generate, expanding “pumped storage,” projects, and developing new types of generation, including tidal and wave energy.

According to the study, 3 percent of the country’s 80,000 dams generate electricity.

Most aren’t suited for power generation, but by harnessing those that are and exploiting only 15 percent of the potential new sources, the industry could add 60,000 new megawatts to the current installed capacity of 100,000 megawatts, the study says.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Smart thermostats: EcoFactor

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:27:00 +0000

The term "smart" may begin to rival "e", "i", and "dot" before long but as long as something real gets delivered with the "smart" that's probably fine. In this case, there may be something of value in Redwood City's thermostat fromEcoFactor. This is useful because people adjust their thermostat in inefficient ways - leaving them on when they're out, or unecessarily at night, etc. Even with timers on the thermostats there are opportunities for improvement.

Besides learning when homeowners tend to turn on their heat or air-conditioning, EcoFactor also monitors weather down to the zip code level. Every 60 seconds, its algorithms take that data and calculate how much electricity use can be reduced while keeping the occupants comfortable.
...
One thing EcoFactor might do is “pre-cool” a house by turning on the air-conditioner for a period of time. That way, the home is comfortable when the owners return from work, and they won’t be tempted to adjust the thermostat just as demand reaches its peak.

John Steinberg, EcoFactor’s chief executive, estimates that the company can cut consumers’ electricity bills by as much as 30 percent. He said that number was based on trials EcoFactor conducted in climates as diverse as Minneapolis and Adelaide, Australia.

If this kind of thermostat becomes standard it could yield significant savings. NY Times Green Inc. has the story.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

No Driver, No Brakes

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:05:00 +0000

I attended Climate One’s lecture series on Tuesday at the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco, which featured Stanford climatologist Stephen Schneider, who is an expert contributor to IPCC's assessment reports. He has studied climate for thirty-plus years. He is also the author of a new book Science as a Contact Sport: Inside the Battle to Save Earth's Climate.

Schneider spoke at a fast pace, which made for a very informative 50 minutes. His prevailing theme: climate-change solutions are a form of risk management. He likened these solutions to surgery – either you do something to prevent catastrophe because that’s what the odds tell you to do, or you don’t and see what happens.

"Climate is the study of a system, like the human body," he said. "What we are looking at is an array of multiple outcomes." And while scientists have varying opinions of these outcomes, the likelihood of catastrophe is too high to ignore, he said.

Another analogy he used was fire insurance. In California, there’s a one to two percent chance a house will burn down, he said. And according to the IPCC, there’s a much higher chance that the catastrophic impacts of climate change we so often hear about will happen. Yet about 20 attendees raised their hands when he asked who takes out fire insurance.

It’s just a matter of whether we are willing to take out the insurance on the planet, he said.

Cap-and-trade legislation is one form of insurance on the planet. But it’s one fraction of what’s needed, Schneider said. What needs to be talked about are funds for adaptation and equity for the poor populations that will be feeling the heavier brunt of climate change over the next few decades.

He lamented that climate science has been dumbed down to media-friendly sound bytes. Climate-change deniers are skilled at crafting their message for this formula. Scientists are not.

Another significant topic discussed was the planet’s so-called “tipping point,” when it will be too late.

It’s like a school bus going over a hill, he said. Parents and kids trust the school district to check the bus’ brakes and hire qualified, responsible drivers. In the case of climate, we know for sure there’s a tipping point. We just don’t know when we’ll hit it or if we've hit it already.

“We have no driver and no idea if the planet has brakes,” he said. In effect what humans are saying is, “we hope we’re lucky. […]And the problem with this tipping point is that we won’t know if we have crossed it for 50 years.”

Another SF Bay oil spill

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:05:00 +0000

We've heard this story before, in the SF Chronicle:

Friday's spill comes almost exactly two years after the devastating Cosco Busan spill, which dumped more than 50,000 gallons of bunker oil into the bay. Now there are renewed concerns about the estuary's fish, bird and sea mammals, not to mention the livelihoods of those who depend on the bay's bounty each year.

The estuary that defines so much of life in the Bay Area faces increasing ecological pressures from polluted urban runoff, the vagaries of climate change and the effects of more fresh water pumped out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The herring season - the bay's last commercial fishery - was canceled last month because of concerns about the health of the fish population.

...The areas of highest concern include Richardson Bay, Brooks Island off of Richmond, Keil Cove near Tiburon and the Emeryville Lagoon and mudflats.

The day will come when people will be incredulous when hearing this was a rather common occurrance.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

PG&E's ClimateSmart: offset romance over?

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:14:00 +0000

As is so often the case, The Onion provides insightful commentary above. Along with the recession, carbon offsets have lost their luster from the hype in 2006 and 2007.

And not without reason, as the Onion intimates, there are a huge number of problems though in fairness to some of the good players like NativeEnergy and TerraPass there are some good ones too.

In the case of PG&E's ClimateSmart however, their choice to invest in highly questionable forest offsets makes this program a poor choice. And it appears that the program is limping along.

ClimateSmart charges customers to have the carbon emissions footprint of their gas and electricity use calculated. A small fee — the average is less than $5 a month — is then added to their monthly bill. The revenue generated by ClimateSmart allows PG&E to buy carbon offsets from a variety of projects, including forest conservation efforts in the Santa Cruz Mountains.

...
But so far, only 30,000 customers — 0.6 percent — have enrolled. The largest concentration of ClimateSmart customers is in San Francisco. There are about 4,000 enrolled customers in Silicon Valley, including businesses like Fresh Choice, eBay, the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, IKEA and the San Jose Convention Center.

PG&E has asked the California Public Utilities Commission for permission to extend the program, which is set to expire at the end of the year, in hopes that it can increase enrollment.

But consumer advocates with TURN, The Utility Reform Network, say PG&E should just pull the plug.

...

TURN says that while only 30,000 PG&E customers have enrolled in ClimateSmart since it launched in 2007, all PG&E customers subsidize the costs of the program through the rates they pay. Since its launch, ClimateSmart has collected approximately $4.5 million in contributions from residential, commercial, and municipal customers. TURN argues that PG&E has allocated $12 million for marketing and advertising with little results.

PG&E buys the carbon offsets from a variety of projects, including forest conservation efforts and the capture of methane gas from dairy farms and landfills. One partner is the Lompico Headwaters Forest Project, which includes 425 acres of redwoods and Douglas firs in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The Sempervirens Fund, a land conservancy that manages the forest, sells carbon offsets to PG&E; the fund then uses the money to pay for its conservation efforts.

Perhaps the other shady operations will also stay away.

GOOD provides a worthwhile review of the issues, some key providers and standards.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Dueling models: Solyndra ramps up manufacturing

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:04:00 +0000

In the world of computer hardware the days of dueling core architectures has long gone (though RISC seems to have a new lease on life in phones). What began as the 8080 chip, now represented by CPUs from Intel and AMD, have pretty much taken over the vast majority of computer architecture. However, even though solar power has been around as long, the scale hasn't been there to drive commodification.

One of the fascinating things to watch is the new solar architectures that are emerging to challenge conventional photovoltaic. One of course is thin-film, now on the verge of going live. But there are a number of new variants looking to duel. One of those is Solyndra's take which utilizes a circular design to capture more sunlight effectively increasing the efficiency of the modules.

To some degree this may be a duel between high-efficiency models, like Solyndra, which offer more power generation vs. thin-film which will offer ease of installation (and probably lower cost).

The Mercury News covers Solyndra's ramp-up.

Solyndra extended a growth spurt by signing a deal to rent 506,000 square feet in Fremont, bringing hundreds of jobs to that city and marking the Bay Area's biggest lease this year.

...

The second factory being built for Solyndra will create thousands of jobs. A $535 million U.S. Department of Energy loan is providing the cash for construction of the new plant.

Solyndra says the new manufacturing complex, once all its phases are built, could eventually employ 2,000 people permanently. It would also produce 3,000 short-term construction jobs.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Solar shingles: competition ramps-up

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:31:00 +0000

Solar installation may be climbing but it's nothing compared to where the market is headed. As local firms Nanosolar and Miasole are racing to get their products to market the competition is not standing still. Dow is putting a stake in the ground - vying to be first to market with large scale production of solar shingles.

Dow Chemical has unveiled a residential roof shingle in the form of a solar panel designed to be integrated into asphalt-tiled roofs.

Jane Palmieri, managing director of Dow’s Solar Solutions unit, said the Powerhouse thin-film shingle slashes installation costs because it can be installed by a roofer who is already building or retrofitting a roof.

“As a roofer is nailing asphalt shingle on roof, wherever the array needs to be installed he just switches to solar shingle,” said Ms. Palmieri, who said the solar singles are similarly attached to the roof with nails.

“You don’t have to have a solar installation crew do the work or have an electrician on site,” she added. “The solar shingle can be handled like any other shingle – it can be palletized, dropped from a roof, walked on.”

An electrician is still needed to connect the completed array to an inverter and to a home’s electrical system, but unlike conventional solar panels that must be wired together, the solar shingles plug into each other to form the array.

Dow plans to begin test-marketing the solar shingle in mid-2010, initially targeting new-home construction. Ms. Palmieri said the market could be worth $5 billion by 2015 and noted that 90 percent of homes in the United States use asphalt shingles.

Dow designed the shingles, which will initially be manufactured at the company’s Midland, Mich., facility. Global Solar of Tucson, Ariz., is supplying the thin-film solar cells.

Thin film solar, while currently less efficient than conventional PV, should dramatically reduce installation costs, a significant issue with PV. There's been discussion of PV shingles for a while but this looks like the first serious commercial scale offering. Lots of other players are vying to jump in and combined with the new financing models and ramped up Chinese competition, PV may well be set to really take off.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Costs of solar installation: dropping but still more than Europe & Japan

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:49:00 +0000

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has its second edition of their report Tracking the Sun on the costs of solar installation. Todd Woody at Green Inc. (and Green Wombat) writes:

The report found that the installed cost of residential and commercial photovoltaic systems in the United States dropped 30 percent over all from 1998 to 2008. But prices had become relatively stagnant from 2005-7, as demand spiked and solar module makers ramped up production.

The global economic meltdown, however, along with a resulting oversupply of modules, led the cost of installing a solar system last year to fall from $7.80 a watt to $7.50 a watt, though the actual cost to homeowners actually increased slightly as state incentives for installing solar arrays fell faster than module prices.
...
And although California is by far the largest solar market in the United States with 81 percent of all installed photovoltaic systems, it isn’t the cheapest place to install small-scale solar.

That distinction goes to Arizona, where the installed cost of solar systems smaller than 10 kilowatts was $7.30 per watt compared to $8.20 in California.

The United States still has a way to go before matching European and Asian nations, both in terms of the number of solar systems and their cost.

The price of installing solar in Germany, for instance, is $6.10 a watt and $6.90 in Japan.

But the United States is catching up and is the third-largest solar market after Spain and Germany. In 2008, 5,948 megawatts of photovoltaic systems were installed worldwide, more than double the number from the previous year.

It's ridiculous of course that the US is third after two countries whose population is an order of magnitude smaller (Spain 40M, Germany 82M, US 300M). But such is the reality of how far behind the US is in areas it should be leading in.

The other interesting question is the impact forthcoming thin-film solar will have on costs. Locally, Nanosolar has been moving on production now with a new partnership with SunLink for mounting systems. However, the proximity between "production" and "shipping" remains vague.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

EV infrastructure: rush & confusion

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 05:57:00 +0000

Disruptive technologies not only change the landscape but frequently surface whole new questions that existing infrastructure and policies simply were not established to address. Energy is rife with this problem - despite the enormous benefits to be had, we must wade through a confusing morass as part of the birthing process.

Electric vehicles are coming and the utilities and Public Utilities Commission are trying to figure out the implications.

One of the biggest questions is whether to regulate Better Place, Coulomb Technologies and other companies that plan to sell electricity to drivers through a network of battery-charging stations.

California’s three big investor-owned utilities have split over the issue.

“The commission should establish its authority to regulate third-party providers of electricity for electric vehicles,” Christopher Warner, an attorney for Pacific Gas & Electric, wrote in a filing with the utilities commission. “Managing the increased electricity consumption and load attributable to electric vehicles in order to avoid adverse impacts on the safety and reliability of the electric grid may be one of the most difficult management challenges that electric utilities will face.”

Southern California Edison, meanwhile, urged the commission to move cautiously, calibrating any regulation to the specific business models of the companies.

San Diego Gas & Electric said the commission did not have the right to regulate companies like Better Place.

Load and time of use figure prominently in the discussions. And as Nissan and Coulomb Technologies rush to build out a fast charging network the Utility Reform Network is advocating a go-slow approach encouraging only 110 volt chargers. Nissan appears focused on 220 volts but Coulomb's chargers can do either 220 or 110. Lower voltage is fine for long charge periods like office or home chargers and this covers most driving needs but it will significantly constrain the incentive to setup a widespread synchronous charging network.

Better Place probably wants fast chargers too but is more flexible given its asynchronous battery-swap and offline charging model.

Clearly the regulatory approach will have significant impact on the business models.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Clean-tech: transition but also job opportunities

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 23:20:00 +0000

Clean-tech continue to show promise amidst the recovering economy in the latest Clean Edge report. Here is a quick summary and below information on pay in the fields.

Clean Edge, which has been tracking the growth of clean-tech markets for nearly a decade, reports that global revenues for solar photovoltaics, wind power, and biofuels expanded from $75.8 billion in 2007 to $115.9 billion in 2008. For the first time, one sector alone, wind, had revenues exceeding $50 billion. New global investments in energy technologies—including venture capital, project finance, public markets, and research and development—expanded by 4.7 percent from $148.4 billion in 2007 to $155.4 billion in 2008, according to research firm New Energy Finance.

Severely tightened credit markets also began to take their toll. In late 2008 and early 2009, the extent of constrained credit became apparent, with a range of clean-energy companies delaying plans, laying off staff, or scuttling projects entirely. While we expect to see continued growth for the sector in the mid- to long-term, we believe 2009 will be a year of refocus, consolidation, or retrenchment for many firms. At the same time, new government spending, regulation, and policies should help the sector weather the current economic crisis better than most other sectors. On balance, we believe clean energy and energy intelligence will be seen as a means to help economies around the world pull out of the current economic malaise.

Not surprisingly, the Bay Area grabs the top spot for clean-tech opportunities.
Finally, via Earth2Tech, notes on the pay data:

Clean Edge worked with PayScale, a publisher of work-compensation data, to conduct a survey to determine median salary and wage compensation for a range of cleantech jobs. See the report (available for free as a PDF download), for a more comprehensive overview, but a sampling of salaries include: energy auditor for green buildings ($48,500 median pay); mechanical engineer for electric vehicles ($63,600); and solar energy systems designer ($42,600). Interestingly, the highest median salary listed was for project developers of renewable energy ($106,000) and the lowest was for insulation workers ($36,100).

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

High speed rail weaves on routes

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:15:00 +0000

Causing the least disruption and trying to keep people happy is proving challenging all along the populated segments for high-speed rail, not surprisingly. It's a classic case of macro benefits and local disruption. In San Jose, residents are challenging the routes:

The California High Speed Rail Authority's preliminary proposal was to run the trains along the existing tracks from downtown's Diridon Station south toward the Tamien Station. But that route runs through the Gardner and North Willow Glen neighborhoods, where residents fear the increased rail traffic and accompanying noise. Neighbors also fear they could be forced to sell property adjacent to the tracks to accompany the new trains.

Willow Glen resident Larry Ames said the original proposal "would be very destructive to the northern Willow Glen area," where homes are right alongside the tracks. With high-speed rail eventually expected to run trains every 3 minutes, he said, "that would be maddeningly noisy."

The $45 billion bullet-train project, supported by bonds that state voters approved last year with Proposition 1A, is projected to run trains from San Francisco to Los Angeles in 2 hours and 40 minutes, beginning in 2020. The alternative routes will be evaluated as part of an environmental review expected to be completed in 2011.

One possible alternative suggested by the city is a narrower high-speed rail footprint with three rather than four tracks to accommodate express trains. But the rail authority last week also unveiled four other alternatives suggested by residents and local officials that would ease neighborhood concerns — though likely at a much steeper price.

Similarly, all along the peninsula cities including Menlo Park, Atherton and Palo Alto are also challenging the routes but opponent recently received a legal setback as a judge ruled in favor of the HSR Authority regarding the routing decision.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Videos From the Chamber Soap Opera

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:37:00 +0000

When it comes to climate change, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has really embarrassed itself. It has either lost or drawn rebuke from several of its members, including GE and Apple. Below are two of the best videos to come from this debacle.

and this one...

Apple leaves US Chamber of Commerce

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:54:00 +0000

In what is beginning to look like an exodus, Apple leaves the Chamber of Commerce citing the chamber's position on climate. Apple is making strides establishing its green cred.

More at NY Times Green Inc.

Hat-tip NRDC Switchboard.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Transformative wind

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:51:00 +0000

It's important to recognize that the benefits of the clean energy economy are universal. Here is the remarkable story of William Kamkwamba of Malawi who built a windmill based on a photograph, thereby transforming his village - and hopefully setting the stage to tranform rural Africa.

William's story in Wired.

William's website.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

State-wide carbon fees proceed

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 18:43:00 +0000

California's leadership continues in moving to the new clean energy economy. The state is proceeding with fees that will begin to shift incentives from old polluting technologies to energy from sources that never run out.

Despite industry objections and threats of lawsuits, California air regulators on Friday approved the nation's first statewide carbon fee on utilities, oil refineries and other polluting industries.

The money raised by the California Air Resources Board, which voted 9-0, is intended to pay for the bureaucratic expenses of carrying out the state's 2006 global warming law, which requires greenhouse gas emissions statewide to be reduced by 25 percent over the next decade.

...

The fee will be imposed at the end of 2010 and raise $63.1 million annually during its first three years. The amount will level off at $36.2 million in the fifth year.

Oil companies, manufacturers and utilities complained regulators had unfairly singled them out, leveling the fee on just 350 businesses in the state.
...
About 350 businesses in California that make, sell or import gasoline, diesel, natural gas and coal would be charged roughly 15 cents for every ton of carbon dioxide that they and their customers emit into the atmosphere.

The average refinery would pay about $4.7 million and the average cement plant would pay about $150,000 a year, said Jon Costantino, manager of the climate change planning section at the air board. Cement plants would be subject to the fee because the chemical process they use to make cement produces greenhouse gases.

The charge would drop to 9 cents per ton of carbon dioxide in 2014 because loans approved in past years by the Legislature to initially run the program would be paid.

Among the things that this fee will enable is a rampup in improved energy performance such as the work by the Public Utilities Commission. Improved energy performance will pay tiself back many times over with great benefit to the economy.

State regulators yesterday committed more than $3 billion over the next three years for programs aimed at getting people to use less energy by retrofitting 130,000 homes, training 15,000 workers and using smarter appliances.

The programs will be coordinated by California's four investor-owned utilities and paid for through electric and gas bills.

The initiatives, which are an expansion of efficiency efforts long in place in the state, mark a change in direction by moving away from rebates for devices such as light bulbs and instead making buildings more efficient.

“The focus is to shift priorities away from rebates for widgets to sustained energy savings in the built environment,” said Dian Grueneich, a member of the California Public Utilities Commission, which approved the programs yesterday.

By increasing efficiency, efforts in 2010 through 2012 should preclude the construction of three 500-megawatt power plants; save almost 7,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity and 150 million therms of natural gas; and keep 3 million tons of greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere, Grueneich said.

Serious Materials raises more funds

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:57:00 +0000

One of my favorites, Serious Materials continues to gain favor among investors with $60 million in Series C financing.

Serious Materials remains among the few companies taking real aim at the essential building components market with likely the best high performance windows and drywall in the business.

It's products are clearly leading edge. It's challenge has been making the difference apparent to customers since all the players claim to have efficient windows and the EnergyStar ratings don't go high enough to make the difference apparent. Talking about "R-value" won't get it very far and expecting customers to ask about that isn't likely.

High performance buildings and materials need to be made more apparent and there is increasing discussion about cities requiring buildings energy ratings at time of sale. That may be a step in the right direction.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

Pics From Up North

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:13:00 +0000

These pictures were taken by Fresno native Joshua Paul, a top travel photographer who recently crossed the Northwest Passage on a military icebreaking ship. The photos are part of his series, "The Arctic," which is on display at the Clark Oshin Gallery at The Icon in L.A. through Nov. 14.

Do you see the three bears?

Here's a picture taken at the Barrow Strait.

The ship works its way through Lancaster Sound.

(Photos courtesy Kathleen Clark & Nan Oshin, Clark Oshin Gallery.)

Updated: Carl Sagan - 'A Glorious Dawn' ft Stephen Hawking (Cosmos Remixed)

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:34:00 +0000

This is a non-sequitor but for me Cosmos was instrumental in helping me understand the world we live in - to the limited degree that I do. This is a clever and creative tribute to Sagan and Hawking:
What was so powerful about Cosmos was the bringing of wonder, creativity, science - and even compassion - together. It's a mix far too rare these days as we move through a period where ideology is trumping science at precisely the moment where we most need those great qualities that Sagan brought.

"...if we do not destroy ourselves... a still more glorious dawn awaits... our future depends powerfully on how well we understand this cosmos."

Watch the full series.

Updated: Cosmos is, apparently, the most watched series ever aired on PBS with 600 million viewers in 60 countries.

Rafael @www.climateatbay.net

BioFuelBox ramps up biodiesel

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:31:00 +0000

Biodiesel conjures images of a committed few who have done home conversions of their diesel Jetta or Mercedes, setting up some drums in their garage to filter and use the grease for the local fast food joint. There is however, a pretty big opportunity with biodiesel if it is scaled.

Heavy duty trucks burned more than 38 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2006.

One company at least is aiming big, the peculiarly named BioFuelBox in San Jose. Interestingly BioFuelBox aims a big part of their sourcing on wastewater treatment plants and offers a mobile "box" with which to run its process and profit share with the source.

Unlike the home conversions which generally use specialized filters, BioFuelBox claims the fuel can be used in completely unmodified diesel engines and is profitable with oil at $30/barrel (currently at $66/barrel).

Earth2Tech reports:

It’s an interesting move at a time when other biodiesel plants are being idled, shuttered and put up for sale. But BioFuelBox says its biodiesel is cost-competitive with diesel from petroleum, that it’s already bringing in revenue, and that it expects to have 10 factories up and running by the middle of 2011, with its first profits early in the same year.

...
While the company wouldn’t disclose details about its proprietary system, called Novostream, Reddy said it involves three steps to extract oil from watery contaminated waste streams, convert the oil into fuel and then purify the fuel so it meets ASTM standards. The whole process takes about 15 minutes, and BioFuelBox uses buffer tanks to store waste and even out the supply so its factory can run 24 hours a day, he said.

The factory in American Falls, Idaho, gets its supply of grease from a wastewater treatment plant, said Richard Reddy, vice president of marketing for the company, adding that the company then sells the fuel to an unnamed diesel retailer, which sells the fuel regionally. Future plants might also sell fuel to the grease supplier, if that supplier also runs diesel trucks, school buses, or farm equipment, he said.

The company reports a second plant under construction and the ability to handle a huge range of grease. Could be promising.

Rafael @ www.climateatbay.net

Farmer Market Fun

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:49:00 +0000

I think we're going to the San Mateo farmers' market tomorrow morning, which is at CSM. Below are some shots from the last time we went. The peaches were awesome! For complete lists of Bay Area farmers' markets, try here or here.

It gets busy, so we try to show up before 10 a.m.

Going Dutch

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:29:00 +0000

You may have read about or heard the news of plans to help the Bay Area absorb the reality of rising sea levels. Well, the answer might be with the Dutch. From the San Mateo Times:

How to plan for sea level rise, a still-abstract concept for many Californians, drew serious consideration from engineers, designers and urban planners from the Netherlands and the United States at a symposium Monday.

A group of government-sponsored Dutch experts presented a report with strategies to deal with sea level rise in San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta based on a year's worth of research in partnership with the Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission.

With 50 percent of the Netherlands below sea level, the Dutch have been perfecting flood protection for the past 600 years.

The inevitable effects of climate change in California, and how cities can adapt to them, are starting to get more attention from Bay Area planners. While no one knows exactly how sea level rise will play out 100 or 200 years from now, analysts agree that more severe and frequent floods are going to be a part of it.

Avoiding sea level rise is by now impossible. The Bay has risen 8 inches since the start of the 20th century, and scientists worldwide agree that the Bay Area in particular can expect to experience sea level rise of as much as 16 inches by midcentury and as much as 55 inches by 2100.

Extreme storms will increase annual risk of flooding from 1 percent to 100 percent if no actions are taken to protect the Bay Area shoreline, potentially endangering 270,000 residents.

And here's NPR's coverage.

Solazyme: video on algae fuel

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:46:00 +0000

Ok, this is a hype piece but it is true that algae based fuel is one of the promising strategies for biofuel - definitely more promising that use of hydrogen (challenged by the fact it is not a source but a transport, and the infrastructure, even within cars is complicated), and maybe moreso than cellulosic ethanol (the most visible alternative but not yet scaled).

A couple players are out there working on algae. Locally this includes Solazyme, Live Fuels, Aurora and Mighty Algae. Here's a .handy list.

The big hurdle on algae is developing the process at scale. It seems that getting the stuff to grow to produce oils just right is very tricky. Here's a more technical discussion of the challenges.

Appreciation for what is good

noreply@blogger.com (Jill) — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:44:00 +0000

I was walking along the Los Gatos Creek Trail this morning and seeing all the families out with their bikes and dogs and strollers and picnics.... Many people work hard to keep our parks open and accessible and preserving all the green life that consumes CO2.

Our elected officials and government staff hear a constant stream of requests - things that are not right, need fixing, or should be changed. Take a minute and send them a note of appreciation about something that is being done right! Appreciate the next park you visit and reflect on what it takes to keep these open and accessible. A simple TYVM keeps people energized and feeling supported.

Jill :)

Where fuel subsidies go

noreply@blogger.com (rafael) — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:42:00 +0000

New study confirms what most already knew - subsidies go mostly to the dirty fuels of the past not to 21st century energy sources. $70.2 billion went to traditional sources—such as coal and oil. Support for energy from sources that never run out totaled only $29 billion (but $16.8 is questionable corn ethanol). It really would be great if there were fair competition. Full report here.