They ARE melting

The IPCC blunder aside, glaciers are melting and melting fast and melting due to climate change! Every other day some study throws up new evidence. Now, a U.S. Geological Survey report says that many of Asia’s glaciers are retreating as a result of climate change.

This retreat impacts water supplies to millions of people, increases the likelihood of outburst floods that threaten life and property in nearby areas, and contributes to sea-level rise.

The U.S. Geological Survey collaborated with 39 international scientists on “the status of glaciers throughout all of Asia, including Russia, China, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan.

The time period for retreat also differs among each glacier. In Bhutan, 66 glaciers have decreased 8.1 percent over the last 30 years. Rapid changes in the Himalaya is shown in India by the 12 percent retreat of Chhota Shigri Glacier during the last 13 years, as well as retreat of the Gangotri Glacier since 1780, with 12 percent shrinkage of the main stem in the last 16 years.

Some of the well-known climate deniers are turning believers. Ironically, by the time we have a substantial group of converts, things may get too difficult to tackle.

Lightning by the tail

Like solar panels collect the sun's energy, can we collect the electricity surrounding us in the atmosphere? Some people like Brazilian researcher Fernando Galembeck think it is possible. He calls it 'hygroelectricity'.

Nikola Tesla knew that the interaction between air and water in the atmosphere generated an electrical charge, but he was unable to fulfill his vision of capturing electrical energy from the air. Scientists once believed that water droplets in the atmosphere were electrically neutral, and remained so even after coming into contact with the electrical charges on dust particles and droplets of other liquids. But new evidence suggested that water in the atmosphere really does pick up an electrical charge.

Using very small particles of silica and aluminum phosphate to mimic the electrical charge gathering ability of water droplets, Galembeck's research team has developed an early stage device that successfully gathers and transfers the electrical energy that surrounds us.

Yes it is too early to bring out the collectors! But well, there is hope we can some day seize the lightning!

Solar storm of 2012

Most of us love catastrophes, especially of cosmic scale. Solar storms have been promising the same every now and then. It now turns out the much-awaited 2012 calamity could be one of the sun's doing.

Astronomers are predicting that a massive solar storm, much bigger in potential than the one that caused spectacular light shows on Earth earlier this month, is to strike our planet in 2012 with a force of 100 million hydrogen bombs. The findings are published in the most recent issue of Australasian Science.

Similar storms back in 1859 and 1921 caused worldwide chaos, wiping out telegraph wires on a massive scale. The 2012 storm has the potential to be even more disruptive."The general consensus among general astronomers (and certainly solar astronomers) is that this coming Solar maximum (2012 but possibly later into 2013) will be the most violent in 100 years," News.com.au quoted astronomy lecturer and columnist Dave Reneke as saying.

Dr Richard Fisher, director of NASA's Heliophysics division, told Reneke the super storm would hit like "a bolt of lightning", causing catastrophic consequences for the world's health, emergency services and national security unless precautions are taken.

NASA said that a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences found that if a similar storm occurred today, it could cause "1 to 2 trillion dollars in damages to society's high-tech infrastructure and require four to 10 years for complete recovery".

As the sun enters a new phase called Solar Cycle 24, it has every potential of knocking off the earth's power grid. What can we do to make sure the system does nto collapse? Any smart ideas?

Wartime speed

The use of renewable sources of energy in Europe continues to grow at a brisk pace and energy efficiency also is improving, significantly reducing reliance on coal and natural gas, according to a new report. Renewable energy sources now account for nearly as much electricity production as natural gas, which supplies 19.3 percent of the continent’s electricity.

In the US too, wind and solar are blossoming. Texas now has 9,700 megawatts of wind generating capacity online, 370 more in the construction stage, and a huge amount in the development stage. When all of these wind farms are completed, Texas will have 53,000 megawatts of wind generating capacity -- the equivalent of 53 coal-fired power plants. In South Dakota, a wind-rich, sparsely populated state, development has begun on a vast 5,050-megawatt wind farm (1 megawatt of wind capacity supplies 300 U.S. homes) that when completed will produce nearly five times as much electricity as the 810,000 people living in the state need.

Portugal, Spain, Turkey, China, Indonesia, renewables are being seized upon. the world is on the right path it would seem, but is enough being done amidst all the claims? Can we replace fossil fuel plants by renewables by 2020? In a bid to keep carbon dioxide levels to below 400ppm? Can we do it all in time?

Lester Brown of the Earth Institute believes it can be done. New technologies can spread like wildfire once established he says, pointing to mobile phones and computers. Once cumulative mobile phone sales reached 1 million units in 1986, the stage was set for explosive growth, and the number of cell phone subscribers doubled in each of the next three years. Over the next 12 years the number doubled every two years. By 2001 there were 961 million cell phones -- nearly a 1,000-fold increase in just 15 years. And now there are more than 4 billion cell phone subscribers worldwide.

Installations of solar cells are doubling every two years, and the annual growth in wind generating capacity is not far behind, he writes. The urgency of the climate scenario is an extra booster for renewables, Brown believes.

Is he being overly optmistic? When half the world is still in denial mode about seriousness of the situation, will the speed pick up, or succumb to political pressures?

Big vs Strong

The Chinese government has ordered the closure of 2,087 aging steel and cement mills and other factories in an aggressive push to improve the country’s energy efficiency. The closings — which target “backward” facilities that produce steel, coke, paper, and other products — are part of a drive to reduce energy consumption per unit of economic output by 20 percent this year compared to 2005.

Chinese leaders have become increasingly concerned about reliance on imported oil and gas and growing air and water pollution. According to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the factory closings are intended to “realize a transformation of industry from being big to being strong.”

Whether that is also a recognition of the mistake behind Three Gorges dam cannot be decided! The dam, which is an engineering marvel, has been in the midst of problems and controversies since it was completed in 2009. Thousands of tons of garbage washed down by recent torrential rain has been threatening to jam the locks of the Dam. More than 3,000 tons of trash was being collected at the dam every day, but there was still not enough manpower to clean it all up. The trash is around two feet deep, and in some parts so compacted people can walk on it.

The Three Gorges Dam is the world's largest hydropower project, and was built partly to tame flooding along the Yangtze, which killed over 4,000 people in 1998 and countless more over the centuries. Enormously expensive and disruptive, the dam has cost over 254 billion yuan ($37.5 billion) and forced the relocation of 1.3 million people to make way for the reservoir. Towns, fields and historical and archaeological sites have been submerged.

Coupling the dam's 32 main generators with 2 smaller generators (50 MW each) to power the plant itself, the total electric generating capacity of the dam will eventually reach 22.5 GW. From completion through September 2009 the dam has generated 348.4 TWh of electricity, covering more than one third of its cost. Not only the power considerations make it attractive, but at full power, Three Gorges reduces coal consumption by 31 million tonnes per year, avoiding 100 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.

Is Big the way to be, or Strong? Is it better to go for massive projects that in one go deliver big chunks of power and carbon benefits, or opt for many, small projects that do not affect the environment or people?

Hungry, and growing...

Which technology will feed 9 billion people in 2050? Have your pick - whether it be genetic engineering or synthetic manufacture of meat, things may not be so smooth. Yet, with no more land available then, having to increase food production by 70 percent in four decades is not insurmountable! That is what scientists say in a set of 21 papers published by the Royal Society.

In fact, what is now causing a problem could well be a beneficial factor, they say! Yes, carbon. A team of scientists at Rothamsted, the UK's largest agricultural research centre, suggests that extra carbon dioxide in the air from global warming, along with better fertilisers and chemicals to protect arable crops, could hugely increase yields and reduce water consumption. (But the very same carbon dioxide is causing temperatures to soar and cause droughts, which we are told have a long-terms effect on plant growth.)

However some others think the solutions will not be easy. With 18 percent reduction in water availability for food production, it's anybody's guess why. Desalination may seem easy till one looks at the energy expended, especially for the amounts we are looking at.

Reducing food wastage, better storage, artificial meat and nanotechnology are among the many ideas mooted as saviours of the population. Any other ideas?

'Certified' green!

Every now and then a building raises its proud mane over the rest, claiming to be a green building. This fad has caught up to such an extent as to muddle the green concept. What exactly is a green building? In simple terms, one that is environmental friendly and built sustainably. Often these vital issues are not adhered to. Environment friendly also should mean friendly to its occupants. Many are not! As to sustainable, often materials used are costly or complicated and energy intensive in manufacture. Their impact is not lasting. Etc etc.

Which is why architects at TED do not think much of most green buildings. They suggest that the buildings should include expected urban growth in their design so that they can evolve.

Health of occupants is often ignored. For instance, LEED certification which has emerged as the green standard of approval for new buildings in the US, ignores factors relating to human health, particularly the use of potentially toxic building materials.

In its objective to encourage saving energy by making buildings more airtight, Leeds has had the effect of more effectively trapping the gases emitted by the unprecedented number of chemicals used in today’s building materials and furnishings. It places no weight on human health factors in deciding whether a building meets its environmental and social goals. Air quality has to be a deciding factor in the considerations, or else occupants will be turning green at the gills!

All the more reason why the body sets the standards must be a neutral body with no 'vested' interests, right? In India, the IGBC rating (backed by CII) does mention air quality and health of occupants. So also does GRIHA from MNRE and Teri. The former is more closely tailored on the western concpet of per capita energy consumption, while the latter goes by climate in India and does not promote glass and air-conditioning equipment. Would be interesting to see how the health standards are monitored.

Now or tomorrow?

Which is the better option when considering in solar technology? Wait for technology advances to reduce the cost or invest now? New technology while advancing also takes time to get into production. Meanwhile, the rebats and incentives in the market for renewables could well be withdrawn at a future date.

Also, the new technologes will take time to appear in the market everywhere. What holds for Europe or China may not be same for India. Political pressures may well start sending prices upwards.

Already we are witnessing power outages and load sheddings. Perhaps it is time citizens take things into their hands and go beyond what governments are willing to do. Take the bold step into alternatives. Opt for small units that cater to a part of your power needs. Be self-reliant in every small way possible, power and water-ways!

For instance, many cities in the US have been opting for ways to reduce emissions: ·Reno, Nev., replaced 2,076 light bulbs on its famous Reno Arch with LED bulbs. Reno also installed wind turbines on the roof of its City Hall.
·Long Beach, Calif., has solar-powered pay stations at three downtown parking lots, and its city trash cans come with solar-powered trash compacters and recycling bins.
·Springfield, Ill., is testing the power of peer pressure by sending residents power bills that compare their household energy usage either to their neighbors or to the city average. Lower energy users get smiley faces; higher-than-average users get a frowny face.
·In Boston, the Massachusetts Port Authority put 20 small-scale wind turbines at Logan Airport.
·Dallas, Texas, purchases a whopping 40 percent of its power from renewable sources, mostly wind.

As Kabir said, while it is generally agreed that the drop is a part of the ocean, what is often not realised is that the ocean is also a part of the drop.

Care to write in your thoughts?

Catch the light, trap the heat

A new type of device that uses both heat and light from the sun should be more efficient than conventional solar cells, which convert only the light into electricity.

The device relies on a physical principle discovered and demonstrated by researchers at Stanford University. In their prototype, the energy in sunlight excites electrons in an electrode, and heat from the sun coaxes the excited electrons to jump across a vacuum into another electrode, generating an electrical current. The device could be designed to send waste heat to a steam engine and convert 50 percent of the energy in sunlight into electricity--a huge improvement over conventional solar cells.

The most common silicon solar cells convert about 15 percent of the energy in sunlight into electricity. More than half of the incoming solar energy is lost as heat. That's because the active materials in solar cells can interact with only a particular band of the solar spectrum; photons below a certain energy level simply heat up the cell.

Stanford's Nicholas Melosh was inspired by highly efficient cogeneration systems that use the expansion of burning gas to drive a turbine and the heat from the combustion to power a steam engine. But thermal energy converters don't pair well with conventional solar devices. Solar cells, by contrast, get less efficient as they heat up.

The breakthrough came when the Stanford researchers realized that the light in solar radiation could enhance energy conversion in a different type of device, called a thermionic energy converter, that's conventionally driven solely by heat.

Alarm bells sounded again

The International Energy Agency (IEA) is forecasting world oil demand will set a new record next year when is smashes through 2008’s pre-recession high – and warned that the “era of cheap oil is over.”

According to the IEA’s latest Oil Market Report, published August 11, global demand will reach 86.6 million barrels per day in 2010, and then 87.9 million barrels per day in 2011, assuming a continuing global economic recovery. This means demand is set to pass the all-time high of 86.9 million barrels per day established in 2008 before the global economic downturn.

Opec's spare capacity, was as low as 2 million barrels a day in July 2008 when price peaked. Opec claims to have a 6.6 mb capacity but IEA warns this could fall to around 3 mb a day by 2015. No wonder IEA's Fatih Birol said recently again, “The era of cheap oil is over. Each barrel oil that will come to market in the future will be much more difficult to produce and therefore more expensive. We all - governments, industry and consumers - should carefully choose the type of car we want to buy in the future and should be prepared for oil prices being much higher than several years ago.”

The market power of a few Mid east iol producing nations will increase largely and economy of oil buying nations will be affected. As Birol has said, even if demand remained steady, the world would have to find the equivalent of four Saudi Arabias to maintain production, and six Saudi Arabias if it is to keep up with the expected increase in demand between now and 2030.

As Opec becomes the sole operator, its spare capacity will play a big role and if as IEA says, that is going to decrease, well then... economic chaos will start building up.

Better that nations start decreasing reliance on oil. Easier said than done but, tough times demand tough decisions, right?

Climate waves

For many of us in India, it seems ludicrous that a 37 deg C temperature (normal for summer) amounts to a heat wave. But heat wave it is in Russia which has not known these kinds of temperatures. The daily mortality rate in Moscow has doubled and morgues are overflowing amid an acrid smog caused by the worst heat wave in Russia's thousand-year history. Over 15,000 are feared dead so far! The heat wave began on June 27.

The smog from the peat and forest fires burning in the countryside around 60 miles outside the city has choked Moscow for days, seeping into apartments, offices, and even the metro, causing thousands to flee.

Over 15,000 likely dead in Russia, 17 nations comprising 19% of Earth's total land area set extreme heat records this year, July was "sixth straight record warm month in the tropical Atlantic".

More and more climate scientists are crediting global warming with this heat wave. University of Texas climate scientist Michael Tobis is says that “the Russian heat wave of 2010 is the first disaster unequivocally attributable to anthropogenic climate change”.

How much more real can it get? How much more urgent that more nations join Portugal in its determined effort to phase out fossil fuels?

If they can do it, why not others?

Renewable energy is plentiful. It is clean. It is blah, blah... we have heard the mantras many times. It's good but well, too costly for us!

What would you say to hear that Portugal draws upto 45 percent of its power from renewable energy?! That was the target set four years ago when renewables comprised 17 percent. They have as good as achieved the target set for 2010. By 2014 the renewable energy program will allow Portugal to fully close at least two conventional power plants and reduce the operation of others.

The new power plants, mostly wind and hydro, will add a small percentage to ratepayers bills but within a decade that initial investment expense should be gone, and ongoing rates will be much lower, due to the fuel-free nature of renewable energy. As a result the nation’s electricity rates should drop within ten to fifteen years and then remain low.

In 1990, the base year for the Kyoto accord that Europe signed, Portugal had a simple agrarian economy. Today wind, hydro, tidal and solar are surging ahead. A thriving wind industry, created from scratch in the formerly agrarian society, is not only supplying the nation, along with hydro power, but now exporting wind farms to less developed nations such as the USA!

It was not easy. To force Portugal’s energy transition, the government restructured and privatized former state energy utilities to create a grid better suited to renewable power sources. To lure private companies into Portugal’s new market, the government gave them contracts locking in a stable price for 15 years — a subsidy that varied by technology and was initially high but decreased with each new contract round.

In short - good policy and visionary leadership has paid off!

CRC deadline approaching

Electricity from waste heat is an area that needs to be studied. Some US companies who have got into the business with steel mills in Indiana calculate that this captured heat has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by upt 12 percent! This electricity supplied works out cheaper than conventional electricity.

Not only steel mills, many other industries flare away the excess fuel. What an opportunity there.

Tightening the belt, making your processes more efficient and reducing waste is the easiest way to cut emissions. No wonder UK Energy and Climate Change Minister Greg Barker is urging businesses to register now for the Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme (CRC).Only 1229 organisations have signed up to the scheme out of an estimated 3000-4000 that are eligible, with just 50 days left until the end of the registration period.

The CRC, which officially kicked off in April this year, requires large public and private sector organisations that use more than 6000 MWh of electricity a year to register with the scheme and start monitoring and recording their energy use.

Organisations that consume less than 6000 MWh but have half-hourly meter readings still have to register with the scheme as an ‘information declarer’, confirming their consumption is below the threshold.

The scheme has the potential to help organisations make significant savings on their energy bills. The London Fire Brigade, for example, which has already signed up to the CTC has saved £260,000 in the last year since it put energy efficiency measures into place.

Unless backed by such regulations, big promises about energy efficiency end up as just hot air!

Solar jai ho

The Indian Parliament building, Sansad Bhavan, will soon sport solar PV systems, solar heaters and a biomass plant to promote renewable energy. On behalf of the Parliament, the Punjab Energy Development Agency has invited bids for installing 80 kW solar PV system.

The power system would not only provide battery back up for the Parliament building but more than 50 percent of the generated power would be fed to the grid. The government hopes to play a role model in the solar energy revolution it hopes will follow the solar mission of having installed capacity to 20,000 MW in the next 12 years.

Solar PV systems are costlier than solar thermal systems and there are no incentives for the domestic consumer to install solar PV systems. Perhaps it will follow. The Parliament system should serve as a demonstration of the feed-in tariff mechanism, which the government eventually wants to incorporate in the 20,000 MW solar PV capacity.

Power evacuation from independent sources can be tricky due to the constraints of maintaining a definite frequency of supply. Some distribution companies are offering domestic consumers subsidies for installing solar panels on rooftops. However, this scheme has not taken off too well. It is hoped that feed-in-tariff will encourage participation.

But some technical and financial-related problems regarding feed-in tariff remain unsolved. Should the power generated be fed directly into the grid or should it be pooled locally and then fed to the grid to meet the required parameters of power transmission? What should the consumers be paid for: the total power generated from the solar panels or the amount of power fed to grid?

What a waste!

Efficiency is the name of the game, wherever energy is involved. Coal plants are on an average only 30 percent efficient. And when it comes to vehicles and the technology, internal combustion engine still only uses 15% of the energy it receives from oil.

About 17% is wasted in idling. Braking wastes 5.8%. Friction between wheels, bearings loses 4.2%, air resistance 2.6% and stereo, A/C and power windows use 2.2%.

Electric vehicles are about 90% efficient in their use of electricity, but if you live in a state that is largely coal-powered (then the electricity itself is inefficiently produced.

Solar power on the roof would seem to be the best option for powering an electric car. Any reason why this has not taken off?

Heavy metal, heavy energy

Desert lands and wastelands are a favourite destination for renewable energy projects like solar, wind and biofuels. But often the question we fail to ask is, if these regions are really dead and waste? And if not, can we tamper with the ecosystems at work?

For example, Doors of Perception (a unique international conference on sustainable designs for future) wonders if windmills are really green?

Once topsoil and plant life have been disrupted for the placement of solar arrays, wind farms, power plants, transmission lines and CO2 scrubbers, restoration would be cost-prohibitive, if not technically impossible - and in any case can take 100 years or more. widespread desert construction, even of projects aimed at environmental mitigation, "would devastate the very organisms and ecosystems best able to adjust to a warming world".

Remember, these vast arrays and farms also mean huge amount of materials deployed. In wind farms, the compartments at the top of each tower, that contain the generator, hub and gearbox, each weigh 15,000 kilos upwards (30,000 to 45,000 pounds)!

Other components of a utility-scale wind farm include underground power transmission systems, control and maintenance facilities, and substations that connect farms with the utility power grid. That's a lot of embodied energy. Yes.

Are we looking at the material costs and energy expended to build all those equipment we will need if we are to replace all the fossil fuel plants??

Can we cut emissions by half?

From IPCC's predictions of emissions in the future given present trends, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg have now gone one step further. They have developed a new model that specifies the maximum volumes of carbon dioxide that humans may emit to remain below the critical threshold for climate warming of two degrees Celsius.

According to the model, admissible carbon dioxide emissions will increase from approximately seven billion tonnes of carbon in the year 2000 to a maximum value of around ten billion tonnes in 2015.

In order to achieve the long-term stabilisation of the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, the emissions will then have to be reduced by 56 percent by the year 2050 and approach zero towards the end of this century. Although, based on these calculations, global warming would remain under the two-degree threshold until 2100, further warming may be expected in the long term.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere caused by the combustion of fossil fuels (gas, oil) has increased by around 35 percent since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. If carbon dioxide emissions and, as a result, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations continue to increase unchecked, a drastic increase in the global temperature can be expected before the end of this century. As a result of that, food production and water availability will be affected. How many more studies will we need before our governments decide to take some extreme measures called for?

Forests of the wild

Restoring damaged rainforest is a more effective way of capturing carbon than cultivating industrial, single-species tree plantations, according to a new study.

After testing three types of plantations in northeastern Australia, researchers found that restored forests were more densely wooded than monoculture plantations, had larger trees, and captured 106 tons of CO2 per hectare, compared with 62 tons stored in timber plantations.

While timber plantations are a cheap source of abundant wood and rubber, some ecologists say they are little more than “green deserts” that lack biodiversity.

Softwood monoculture plantations are grown for industrial purposes and are used as a cheap and abundant source of resources such as timber and rubber.

The research also suggests that restoration plantings store more carbon over time. However, as restoration projects are more expensive then monoculture plantations it is unlikely that carbon markets will favour restoration.

Waste heat capture boosts solar

Solar keeps pushing ahead, and that's good news.

Rooftop solar panels use silicon to convert light into electricity. But their efficiency declines rapidly at higher temperatures. An either/or choice presents itself — but Stanford researchers found that a cesium coating allowed semiconducting materials to convert both light and heat into energy.

They dubbed the process PETE, for photon enhanced thermionic emission. And, PETE devices could be cheaply and easily incorporated into existing solar collection systems.

Also. PETE devices require only a small amount of semiconducting material, making them cheap. The hope is to design devices that can easily be bolted on to existing solar collection systems, so that conversion would also be low-cost. When used with the heat-conversion process, PETE devices could reach 60 percent efficiency. Isn't that something?