Since I seem to be in the mood to reprint other peoples words today, here's another:
Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times foreign affairs columnist, Thomas Friedman, went all out today in the Times' opinion section, passionately defending the importance, and of all things, machoism, of being green and a sustainable energy future.
If you are regularly an internet ready of the Times (as I am), you'll sadly find the article (which appears on page A23 of the hardcopy version) locked up behind their 'Times Select' subscription. Fortunately, I've got a hardcopy right here and I'll excerpt some of the best parts below the fold:
The following is from "The New Red, White and Blue" by Thomas Friedman, which appears in the January 6th edition of the Times [any typos are my own as I'm retyping this, I apologize]:
"As we enter 2006, we find ourselves in trouble, at home and abroad. We are in trouble because we are led by defeatists - wimps, actually.
What's so disturbing about President Bush and Dick Cheney is that they talk tough about the necessity of invading Iraq, torturing terror suspects and engaging in domestic spying - all to defend our way of life and promote democracy around the globe.
But when it comes to what is actually the most important issue in U.S. foreign and domestic policy today - making ourselves energy efficient and independent, and environmentally green - they ridicule it as something only liberals, tree-huggers and sissies believe is possible or necessary
Sorry, but being green, focusing the nation on greater energy efficiency and conservation, is not some girlie-man issue. It is actually the most tough-minded, geostrategic, pro-growth and patriotic thing we can do. Living green is not for sissies. Sticking with oil, and basically saying that a country that can double the speed of microchips every 18 months is somehow incapable of innovating its way to energy independence - that is for sissies, defeatists and people who are ready to see American values eroded at home and abroad.
Living green is not just a "personal virtue," as Mr. Cheney says. It's a national security imperative.
The biggest threat to America and its values today is not communism, authoritarianism or Islamism. Its petrolism. Petrolism is my term for the corrupting, antidemocratic governing practices - in oil states from Russia to Nigeria to Iran - that result from a long run of $60-a-barrel oil. ....
... there's a huge difference between what these bad regimes can do with $20-a-barrel oil compared to $60-a-barrel oil. It is no accident that the reform era in Russia under Boris Yeltzin, and in Iran under Mohammad Khatami, coincided with low oil prices. When prices soared again, petrolist authoritarians in both societies reasserted themselves.
We need a persident and a Congress with the guts not just to invade Iraq, but to impose a gasoline tax and inspire conservation at home. That takes a real energy policy with longterm incentives for renewable energies - wind, solar, biofuels - rather than the welfare-for-oil-companies-and-special-interests that masqueraded last year as an energy bill.
Enough of this Bush-Cheney nonsense that conservation, energy efficiency and environmentalism are some hobby we can't afford. I can't think of anything more cowardly or un-American. Real patriots, real advocates of spreading democracy around the world, live green.
Green is the new red, white and blue.
Amen Thomas.
It's high time that energy efficiency, conservation and renewables ceased to be a fringe-issue for greenies, tree-huggers and enviros.
A sustainable energy future is about a sustainable economy, about creating high-paying jobs in innovation and technology, about clean skies and healthy cities, about national security, about avoiding quagmires like Iraq.
Sometimes I feel like renewables, efficiency and conservation make so much sense, it just makes me sick that more isn't being done...
Anyways, it's great to see an article like this in a mainstream and widely read- albeit liberally-biased - newspaper.
Friday, January 06, 2006
Thomas Friedman on a Sustainable Energy Future - 'Green is the New Red White and Blue!'
News From My Backyard: Peak Oil Author Richard Heinberg Comes to Eugene - EugeneWeekly Has Interview
Peak Oil author and educator, Richard Heinberg is coming to my hometown of Eugene, OR next week to deliver a lecture entitled, "Peak Oil: Challenges and Opportunities at the End of Cheap Petroleum." The talk will be at 7 pm Tuesday, Jan. 10 at the Eugene Hilton in downtown Eugene and is being sponsored by the Eugene Water and Electric Board and the Lane Transit District. Tickets are unfortunately not free however and will set you back five bucks.
Heinberg teaches courses on energy and sustainability at the New College of California, and is the author of The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies and Power Down: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World (which I coincidentally just purchased a used copy of).
The local EugeneWeekly paper also carried a Q & A interview with Heinberg today. The interview is below the fold:
The following is from the January 5th issue of the EugeneWeekly and is by Kera Abraham:What's new in the peak oil conversation?
There's a discussion going on about whether the global oil production peak might have happened in the fourth quarter of 2005. There is more production capacity that will be coming online in the next few years, but will that be enough to offset declines from existing fields? We're seeing some of the world's largest oil fields going into decline, and if those decline rates are substantial, we can say that the world's oil is at peak right now.
What do you want the public to understand about peak oil?
This is a huge turning point for humanity. We need a real group effort to turn away from fossil fuels deliberately, collectively and in a coordinated way. Right now I'm working on the Oil Depletion Protocol, which was proposed by Colin Campbell, the founder of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil. The essence of it is, the oil-importing countries would agree to reduce their oil imports each year by the world depletion rate, which is about 2.6 percent.
How does climate change relate to peak oil?
Both oil depletion and climate change are consequences of our dependence on fossil fuels. So far, most [international] agreements have been to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide emissions. The Oil Depletion Protocol starts from a different premise: that we will have to reduce our oil usage simply because there isn't enough of the stuff. So it's not a question of whether we're going to do it; it's how we are going to do it. Are we going to do it in a cooperative way, or are we just going to let the market take care of it? The former strategy will result in the most survivable outcome. The consequences of the latter would be catastrophic. We'd see extreme competition for remaining oil supplies that would probably turn very ugly — oil wars, terrorism and global economic collapse.
Is it effective to examine one issue, climate change or peak oil, without the other?
In my view, climate change is the trump issue because we're not talking about the global economy; we're talking about the survival of millions of species. But climate change is theoretical and vague, and I think the problem of peak oil gets people's attention because it hits them in their pocketbooks. The Oil Depletion Protocol has something to offer the Kyoto Protocol, because it's a way of getting both the heavy users and the producing nations on board under the same terms. And Kyoto has something to offer the Oil Depletion Protocol, because if we all reduce our oil usage cooperatively and simultaneously, the temptation of many nations will be to substitute coal for oil, which would have a disastrous effect on the global climate. We need to have both protocols in place at the same time: the Oil Depletion Protocol and a strengthened version of Kyoto.
Can alternative auto fuels like biodiesel help wean us off oil?
They could be helpful on a small scale, but we have to understand that biofuels require agricultural production, and so ultimately they're going to be competing for land with food production. I think that for emergency vehicles and farm equipment, on a small scale, it's a good idea. But I see a real danger here: If transportation fuels become so expensive that it's a better money-maker for farmers to grow fuel than it is to grow food, then we could have millions of people starving so that a few thousand people can drive their SUVs.
Would the U.S. be able to maintain its superpower status if we decreased our oil use?
I don't think so, ultimately, but should one nation in the world be setting the terms of negotiation for everyone else? Of course, that's a different kind of discussion. That's not just physics; that's politics.
Can we talk about peak oil without getting political?
Ultimately, no. And that's what the Oil Depletion Protocol does: It puts all nations on the same footing by asking all nations to reduce their fossil fuel consumption by the same percentage. Over time, that reduces the inequality between nations. Because right now, America's economic and military prowess is really based upon the fact that we are able to use vastly more fossil fuels than any other country. If you take away that fossil fuel subsidy gradually, over time you end up with a very different world.
Can a globalized economy operate without fossil fuels?
I think the answer is probably no, but if the answer is yes, then not to the same degree that we see globalization occurring today. Transportation will become more expensive as fossil fuels become more scarce, so we'll have to look at re-localizing economic activity wherever we can. The main focus of our strategy should be reducing demand. That means re-designing our cities so that people can use public transportation, bicycles and other human-powered vehicles. And it means re-shaping our food systems so that there's less reliance on fossil fuels. Just about every aspect of modern life needs to be re-thought so that we use less. But realistically, even the cities that are furthest ahead on this are just starting.
Do you think that the Bush administration understandsthe concept of peak oil?
Absolutely. There's no doubt about that. When Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, he made a speech to the Petroleum Institute back in 1999, and he said that the world would have a very difficult time supplying enough petroleum to meet demand by the year 2010. So it's clear that he understands the situation. The CIA has been studying peak oil since the 1970s, and we have clear documentary evidence about that.
Has peak oil driven the U.S.'s involvement in the Middle East?
Unquestionably. As soon as the U.S.'s oil production peaked in 1970, it was clear that this country would become more and more dependent on oil imports, or we would have to wean ourselves off oil. President Jimmy Carter advised us to reduce our dependence on oil, but we chose the other path, and we've increased our dependency on oil imports ever since then. That carries a geo-political cost; it means that we have to ensure the availability of those supplies. And so since 1970, the U.S. has shown greater and greater interest in the political affairs of the Middle East.
How do you respond to people who don't take peak oil seriously?
I think we need to focus primarily on policy-makers, and not try to get all of the folks who are at home watching television, eating pizza and drinking beer to sit up and start talking about peak oil. We need to get city councils, county boards of supervisors, people at the state level, and also prime ministers and presidents to look at this situation seriously, because they're responsible for other people's lives. We could see Hurricane Katrina coming for days and hundreds of miles away. Peak oil is the same thing; we can see it coming. The question is, are we going to do anything about it?
What kinds of questions should the leaders of Eugene be asking about peak oil?
Where does your water come from? Where does your food come from? How reliant on fossil fuels are you? All of the basic services that are provided for us by municipalities are energy-dependent. How do you keep emergency vehicles running if you can't afford fuel? You folks in Eugene should be working with your local power utility to start making some good choices about where your energy is going to come from. There's no free lunch here. Every energy source has economic and environmental implications. We have to study those and find our way through the thicket of tradeoffs as best we can.
Sadly Heinberg gives no mention of cellulosic biofuels or waste-to-biofuels processes in response to prompt on biofuels. It's probably good for Eugene readers to hear cautionary words about the maximum potential of biodiesel however, as I'm sure many are under the misconception that slapping a 'Powered by Biodiesel' sticker on the back of their diesel Volkswagen and filling up with B20 every once in a while may actually be a solution to peak oil.
His final statement about every energy source havings its environmental and economic costs and tradeoffs is right on and something everyone needs to keep in mind - with energy, its always a question of finding the least bad alternative.
I'll likely attend the talk next week and will perhaps write up a summary afterward. Stay tuned...
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
SUVs Not Safer than Cars for Children, New Research Shows
New research from The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia shows that children riding in SUVs have similar injury risks to children who ride in passenger cars, according to a post yesterday from Green Car Congress.
The study, published yesterday in the journal Pediatrics, found that an SUV’s increased risk of rolling over during a crash offset the safety benefits associated with larger, heavier-weight vehicles.
Dennis Durbin, MD, co-author of the report explains: "SUVs are becoming more popular as family vehicles because they can accommodate multiple child safety seats and their larger size may lead parents to believe SUVs are safer than passenger cars. However, people who use an SUV as their family vehicle should know that SUVs do not provide superior protection for child occupants and that age- and size-appropriate restraints and rear seating for children under 13 years are critically important because of the increased risk of a rollover crash."
The study, part of an on-going research collaboration of Children’s Hospital and State Farm Insurance Companies, examined crashes reported to State Farm involving 3,933 child occupants between the ages of 0 and 15 years who were in either SUVs or passenger cars that were model year 1998 or newer, according to GCC.
Rollover contributes significantly to risk of injury in both vehicle types but occurred twice as frequently in SUVs, the report shows. Children involved in rollover crashes were also three times more likely to be injured than children in non-rollovers.
Children who were not properly restrained in a car seat, booster seat or seatbelt during an SUV rollover were at a 25-fold greater risk for injury as compared to appropriately restrained children. Nearly half of the unrestrained children in these crashes (41%) suffered a serious injury versus only three percent of appropriately restrained children in SUVs. Overall, injury risk for appropriately restrained children in passenger cars is less than 2%.
In the 2005 Partners for Child Passenger Safety Fact and Trend Report, Children’s Hospital reported that SUVs in child-involved State Farm crashes increased from 15% in 1999 to 26% in 2004, while the percentage of passenger cars decreased from a high of 54% in 1999 to 43% in 2004. There was no or little growth in the percentage of minivans in the study population - 24 percent in 2004.
According to GCC, previous Children’s Hospital research has shown that, within each vehicle classification, larger heavier vehicles are generally safer. For instance, of all passenger car classifications, large and luxury cars feature lower child injury risk than mid-size or small passenger cars. Among SUVs, mid-size and small SUVs had similar injury risks, which were two times higher than large SUVs.
Compact extended-cab pickup trucks present a unique risk to children - child occupants in the rear row of compact extended cab pick-ups face a five-fold increased risk of injury in a crash as compared to rear-seated children in all other vehicle types.
Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS) is a research collaboration between the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and State Farm. As of February 2005, PCPS has created a database containing information on more than 377,000 crashes involving more than 557,000 children from birth through age 15 years. It is the world’s largest study of children in motor vehicle crashes.
This doesn't come as striking news to me but may to many parents out there who think they are protecting their children by buying SUVs. Folks, if you really want a safe family car, buy an old Volvo wagon - built like tanks and made to last, you won't have to worry about roll-overs in a 1984 Volvo!
Hybrid Sales Top 205,000 in 2005 - Auto Execs Expect Big Gains for Hybrids in Future As Well
Two posts from Green Car Congress today highlight the strong sales performance of hybrid-electric vehicles.
In the first, GCC reports that sales of hybrids in the US topped 205,749 in 2005, closing out the year with strong December results of 18,238 total units sold. Hybrids thus made up 1.2% of both the 1,477,697 total light duty vehicles sold in the US last month, as well as the total 16,950,679 vehicles sold throughout the year.
Prius sales dominated the hybrid market this year, with sales cresting the 100,000 mark last month with 107,897 cars sold for the year, 52% of the total hybrid market. In 2004, Toyota only sold half as many Prius hybrids - 53,991 - representing 64% of the total market.
Detailed sales figures for all hybrid models can be found in the GCC article.
The second article discusses KPMG's annual Global Auto Executive Survey. According to article, auto executives surveyed by KPMG predict that hybrids as well as low-cost, small cars will make the biggest gains in market share over the next few years.
Eighty-eight percent of auto executives worldwide believe that hybrids will increase market share, according to the survey. That number rises to 100% for North American auto executives, apparently the first time the KPMG survey has ever encountered a 100% response.
Graphic: the chart above indicates the percentage of auto executives surveyed expecting a type of vehicle to increase market share over the next few years
The survey goes on to say: "With fuel prices high and likely to stay there, if not increase (although prices have fallen in the past three months), one North American VM [vehicle manufacturer] executive said, “We will expect US$100 per barrel in the future.” It is not surprising that the two categories of vehicles respondents think most likely to gain market share are hybrids (up this year from 74 percent to 88 percent) and a new category for 2005, low-cost cars (79 percent)."
Interestingly, the survey revealed some sharp regional differences. While executives around the world did concur on the growth in hybrids and low-cost cars, crossovers SUVs which are touted by many automakers as a major growth area in North America rank much lower in Asia and Europe.
Larger SUVs, which are losing favor in North America [finally!] - only 6% of North American execs projecting growth in this category - are actually projected for strong growth in Asia and Europe.
Graphic: Regional differences in survey responses
GCC has more trends from the surveys here, but notable amongst them is that executives now think fuel efficiency is the second most-important consumer buying criterion. [That's good news to me! (The GCC article does not mention the #1 consumer buying criterion ... it's likely performance though which often contradicts the fuel efficiency criteria).]
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
New Toyota Yaris Subcompacts Coming to U.S. in 2006
The newly designed 2007 Toyota Yaris subcompact cars will make its U.S. debut this year when it arrives in showrooms this spring in four-door Sedan and three-door Liftback configurations, according to an official Toyota press release dated December 26th.
First launched in Europe in 1999, the Yaris has since earned European "Car of the Year" and Japanese "Car of the Year" honors in 2000 making it the first time one vehicle captured both honors in the same year. It has also become Toyota's best-selling model in the European market where it accounts for 25% of all Toyota sales in the region and is very popular in Japanese markets as well. Toyota has targeted the newly redesigned model for sales of at least 10,000 units per month in Japan where it sells as the Vitz and features Toyota's 'Intelligent Idling Stop System' and a continuously variable transmission (CVT).
The Yaris/Vitz is the third-highest volume production Toyota model behind Corolla and Camry, with more than 2.5 million units sold in the past five years, according to Green Car Congress.
For the U.S. subcompact market, the new Yaris will replace the unsuccseful Echo sedan. U.S. sales of the Echo were anemic prompting Toyota to pull the plug on the model. Now, with the U.S. market seemingly more concerned with fuel economy, Toyota has hopes that the Yaris will be more popular than their failed predescessors (by the way, the name Echo is officially retired and the new U.S. models will feature the same name as their European counterparts).
The new Yaris made their debut this fall at the Frankfurt IAA auto show (GCC report here) and are slightly roomier than their predecessors. The American version will (intially, at least) feature a larger engine than their European and Japanese counterparts, the same 1.5-liter, 16-valve inline four cylinder engine that's used in the American Scion xA and xB models. Equipped with variable valve timing (VVT-i), this engine makes 106 hp at 6,000 rpm and 103 pound-feet (lb-ft) of torque at 4,200 rpm.
A preliminary EPA fuel economy rating pegs both the sedan and the liftback at 34 city/40 highway for the five-speed manual and 34 city/39 highway for models equipped with the four-speed automatic putting the Yaris among the most fuel efficient in the U.S. subcompact segment. All Yaris models with an automatic transmission will be equipped with uphill/downhill shift logic to help reduce the frequency of gear shifting caused by the operation of the accelerator pedal during winding uphill and downhill driving, according to the press release.
Both the sedan and lifback will have a coefficient of drag of just 0.29 allowing them to slip through the air with relative ease, promising a quieter ride and greater fuel economy at freeway speeds.
Toyota is confident that Yaris will be EPA-certified as an Ultra-Low Emission vehicle (ULEV II).
In Europe, the Yaris will come standard with a smaller 1.3-liter, four cylinder VVT-i gasoline engine carried over from the current range with 87 hp (65 kW) at 6,000 rpm and 89 lb-ft (121 Nm) of torque at 4,200 rpm.
A diesel model will also be available in Europe featuring the latest version of the 1.4-liter D-4D 90 diesel which now develops 90 hp (68 kW) at 3,600 rpm and 140 lb-ft (190 Nm) of torque from 1,800 to 3,600 rpm. The D-4D can quickly accelerate the Yaris to 60 mph (100 km/h) in 10.7 seconds, making it the fastest car in the segment amongst those equipped with 1.3—1.5 liter diesel engines, according to GCC.
New to the European Yaris range is the advanced 1.0-liter, three cylinder VVT-i gasoline engine which made it debut in the Toyota AYGO city car, and replaces the older 1.0-liter powerplant option. The new 1.0-liter engine weighs just 148 pounds (67 kgs) yet delivers 60 hp (45 kW) at 6,000 rpm and 68.5 lb-ft (93 Nm) of torque.
As mentioned above, the Japanese version sells as the Vitz and is available with all three (1.0, 1.3 or 1.5 liter) gasoline options, and features CVT as well as Toyota's idle stop-start system. It should thus get significantly better gas mileage (especially in the city) than either the European or American versions. GCC reports that the Vitz gets 60 mpg with the 1.0 liter engine and, according to Toyota, has the best gasoline fuel consumption in Japan, excluding minivehicles and hybrids.
According to the press release, the Yaris liftback will be available in only one trim, while the sedan will offer two trims, adding a sport-themed Yaris S.
It's a shame that the U.S. model won't be available either with a smaller engine or with the CVT and idle start-stop system of its European and Japanese counterparts. With better tuning for fuel efficiency and a smaller engine, not to mention the addition of CVT and an idle stop system, the subcompact Yaris could be getting significantly better fuel economy, as is evidenced by the Japanese Vitz.
I hope that U.S. sales of the new Yaris are much better than for the Echo as that would hopefully prompt Toyota to begin offering more options in subsequent years. I would love to see U.S. consumers warming up to something like the Vitz. It would do a lot of good for our countries energy security, pollution, greenhouse gas emissions etc. if we saw more small, high efficiency cars like the Vitz on U.S. roads...
Resources:
Monday, January 02, 2006
News From My Backyard: Oregon Governor Kulongoski Speeks Out on Climate Change
Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski spoke out on climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and their potential effects on the Pacific Northwest's environment and economy in a speech delivered to the state Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) in Portland on December 22nd.
Kulongoski called upon the Commission to "create a strategic plan for how the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) can develop and expand existing programs to combat global warming and improve air quality."
Highlighting the critical nature of climate change, the governor reminded the Commission, "Our regional scientists and economists have continued to warn us that climate change poses perhaps the most significant threat to Oregon’s economy, environment and our quality of life over the coming years and decades."
To affirm this statement, Kulongoski refered to an unspecified study by "a group of Pacific Northwest economists." The study reportedly found that "the effects of global warming will have adverse effects on [Oregon's] economy in at least eight key sectors if we don’t make this issue a priority today."
According to the governor, these sectors include: Drinking Water; Agriculture; Forestry; Snow-Based Recreation; Coastal Tourism, Recreation and Infrastructure; Power Generation; Salmon Recovery; and Public Health which Kulongoski singled out as being "perhaps the most important."
As the governor points out in his speech, climate change has been a priority for his administration and he previously announced the adoption of state-wide greenhouse gas emission reductions last spring. The targets, based upon recommendations from his Advisory Group on Global Warming, call for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to levels 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 75 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Kulongoski went on to say: "As you know, carbon dioxide accounts for the lion’s share of our greenhouse gases – and transportation alone accounts for nearly 40 percent of total carbon emissions in Oregon.
Looking at the largest sources of carbon emissions, and the most effective ways to reduce those emissions, my Advisory Group recommended that we adopt stricter vehicle emissions standards – and I hope that you share my commitment to moving forward on this critical part of our strategy to curb global warming and improve air quality.
It is projected that if we adopt stricter emissions standards for cars and small trucks beginning with model year 2009, we can reduce carbon emissions by 13-18 percent over the next 15 years and up to 30 percent over the next 25 years. Whereas if we do nothing, our trend of increasing emissions will continue at approximately 1.6 percent per year.
Beyond the reduction in carbon emissions, stricter standards will help provide the benefits of better fuel efficiency and longer lasting emission systems in our cars – in addition to cleaner air and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. And contrary to what opponents say, consumer choice will be expanded not diminished.
Furthermore, adopting new standards will also help us create new economic opportunities. Oregon already has one of the highest per capita uses of hybrids in the country and a small niche of electric car manufacturers. New standards would increase demand for these advanced technology cars, which in turn would attract and support emerging new industries in the fields of technology and innovation."
Kulongoski has previously committed to enacting the stricter California vehicle emissions standards which will include standards for greenhouse gases for vehicles beginning with model year 2009.
The governor also used the speech to highlight two existing air quality programs that he believes should be expanded - the Air Toxics Program which the governor touted as "a model nationally for reducing air toxics emissions from industry and vehicles and the many small sources of emissions that collectively cause more health risks than industry," as well as the Oregon Clean Diesel Initiative, "which targets the reduction of emissions from Oregon’s most significant air toxic – diesel fuel combustion products."
The governor pointed to an initiative he began last year to install anti-idling technologies at Oregon truck stops (which curb the practice of overnight idling and reduce diesel consumption and emissions) as an example of the many techniques and technologies that can reduce diesel use.
Biodiesel's potential environmental and economic benefits were also mentioned with the governor reaffirming that "expanding this industry remains a priority of mine as we look to innovative ways to grow our economy in partnership with protecting our environment."
Obliquely refering to past conflicts with the Republican-controlled state legislature over tighter emissions standards and other policies to combat climate change, the governor said, "This last session proved that our work is cut out for us in engaging the legislature in a real solutions-oriented debate about the cause and effects of global warming."
However, Kulongoski said he would continue a dialogue with the legislature and also pointed out that he was "committed to doing what we can through administrative action within existing statutory authorities – so that we begin to make meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and continue to improve Oregon’s air quality" without having to wrangle with the legislature.
The governor pledged to "continue to work with the Legislature to increase understanding of the need for Oregon to act now, and act decisively, to combat global warming" and proceeded to call upon the EQC to:
Governor Kulongoski concluded by saying: "Oregon’s airshed and climate do not belong to any one generation. They belong to every generation – past, present and future.
The challenge before us is to balance the economic, environmental and social values that are dividends we earn from living in a place with some of the world’s most magnificent natural resources. This is our collective job – and I have no doubt that you [the EQC] and I are both up to the challenge."
[A hat tip to Green Car Congress]
Sunday, January 01, 2006
Things to Watch in 2006 - Trends, Predictions and Premonitions
In honor of the new year, I thought I would point out a few things I think we all should keep our eyes on in 2006. If nothing else, this ought to provide some entertaining reading a year from now as 2006 comes to a close...
-> First off, China will continue to be extremely interesting to watch. Their attempt to continue a breakneck development pace while avoiding the environmental destruction and degradation that has accompanied their past development could be considered the largest and certainly one of the most crucial sustainability expirements in the world. (India will be interesting to keep an eye on as well, for similar reasons). 
China's economic development demands an ever increasing supply of energy and how they meet this demand will have global implications. China could become a world leader in renewable power and alternative fuel technologies, pushing the development of wind and clean coal (gasification) technologies in particular - both resources are plentiful in China - driving down global prices and encouraging innovation in the process.
Or, China could rely more and more on cheap coal-fired steam plants for the bulk of this new power and oil to fuel a rapidly growing personal transport fleet, a scenario that could go a long way towards undermining any emissions reductions made by Kyoto signatory countries and accelerating global climate change, oil depletion and global resource conflict.
Which path China takes remains to be seen and 2006 will be full of indications as to where China is headed - and as the gang at WorldChanging aptly put it, "As China goes, so goes the future." Let's hope China continues to change its color from red to green...
-> Also exciting to watch this year will be concentrating solar power (CSP). CSP refers to solar power technologies that concentrate incident solar radiation onto a smaller area. Some place photovoltaics (usually of high efficiencies) at the concentration area while others use the heat to create steam and run a turbine or instead run a Stirling engine.
These technologies rely on lenses and mirrors to do the concentrating and recent advancements in production techniques and materials, particulalry the development of cheap plastic fresnel lenses, have driven the costs of CSP down to a very competitive level, both compared to regular photovoltaics as well as traditional power generation sources and other renewables like wind.
Large scale CSP technologies, including Stirling Energy Systems' (SES) dish-stirling solar collectors (see picture above), International Automated Systems, Inc's solar thermal concentrator and Solargenix Energy's parabolic trough generators will be featured in several large solar farms to be built this year. All of the above technologies do not use any silicon thus avoiding the supply shortages and high materials prices that plague silicon-dependent photovoltaics (PVs) and claim that they will produce electricity at rates far lower than PVs.
Look for these large scale CSP technologies (and probably others in the works) to drive a major expansion of solar power in the U.S. and the world. For example, SoCal Edison has contracted with SES to build a 500 MW dish-stirling plant near Victorville, California which alone would more than double total installed U.S. solar capacity and would be the largest solar farm in the world. SES has also contracted with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) for a 300-900 MW dish solar facility to be located in the Mojave Desert of CA. SES also claims that they will be able to produce their dish-stirling units at a cost competitive with conventional fuel technologies like natural gas (i.e. $50,000 per 25 kw unit or $2.00/Watt), even without subsidies.
A couple of small-scale (i.e. suitable for distributed generation) CSP technologies are nearing commercialization as well and offer prices significantly cheaper then PVs. Australian Green and Gold Energy, for example, is bringing its Sunball rooftop solar concentrator (see picture) to market this year (Deliveries to Australian customers begin in February and export orders in July of 2006) and are offering their units at the competitive price of $3.33/Watt (traditional PVs cost around $4.00/Watt these days).
Energy Innovations is also working on a rooftop solar concentrator, the Sunflower 250 and according to their website, they plan to ship the solar concentrators in volume during 2006. Both technologies use lenses (the Sunball) or mirrors (the Sunflower) and two-axis tracking to concentrate solar radiation onto a small high-efficiency PV cell.
Whereas traditional PVs have been handicapped by their reliance on large quanitites of high-grade silicon, CSP technologies are beginning to exhibit the same kind of economies of scale and continual decrease in price that made wind power a competitive and rapidly expanding power source. It is my hope that 2006 is the year that CSP techs bring solar into the ranks of truly competitive power sources.
-> I would expect to see some interesting new policy proposals on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions from several Kyoto-signatory countries struggling to meet their reduction targets this year. Several EU nations as well as Canada (and likely others) are not on track to meet their Kyoto targets and they will have to adopt some tough measures to get back on track to fulfill their commitments.
Let's hope 2006 will see these countries renewing their commitment to combatting global warming with some serious policies to reduce their emissions, particulalry from the transportation sector. I think that Kyoto signatories are starting to realize that its going to take a bit more effort than they may have thought to meet their targets...
-> On a local level, I hope to see Oregon join California, Washington and much of the Northeast this year by moving forward on adopting California's stricter tailpipe emissions standards (that also include standards for GHG emissions). OR Governor Ted Kulongoski has made it a priority to take steps to combat global warming including the adoption of the CA standards and has instructed the state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to write a California-type emissions standard for Oregon.
I hope that 2006 will finally see Kulongoski fulfill his promises and enact the new standards. Incidentally, Washington passed legislation to adopt the CA standards but only after OR does so. If OR adopts the standards, it would thus create a region spanning the entire Pacific coast of the U.S. committed to reducing tailpipe GHG emissions.
-> I expect to see sales of hybrid cars continue to skyrocket in 2006, driven largely by the upcoming release of the 2007 Toyota Camry hybrid. The Camry is an extremely popular model - it has been the best-selling car in America for seven of the past eight years - and I would expect the new hybrid version to boost hybrid sales substantially.
Furthermore, the price premium for hybrid cars should begin to fall as technologies develop, supply chains mature and economies of scale are realized. Honda has pledged to reduce the price difference between its regular and hybrid Civics models by a third in the next 5 years, for example, and Toyota also indicated that it aims to increase hybrid production by 60% in 2006 and cut costs and prices to make them more affordable. Toyota president Katsuaki Watanabe has said he aims to halve the premium in price of hybrids over conventional vehicles as soon as possible.
-> Biodiesel use, which was projected to triple in the U.S. during 2005, will likely continue to rapidly increase in 2006. With its expanded use will hopefully come a strong debate over the sources and sustainability of biodiesel feedstocks. If we are not careful, growing feedstocks for biodiesel could become a major environmental disaster as vast tracts of rainforests in developing countries like Brazil and Malaysia are slashed and burned to make way for soybean, canola, rapeseed or oil palm plantations to meet the growing thirst for biodiesel.
I hope to see a productive discussion of this potentially disasterous scenario during the coming year as well as legislation and policies from developed countries to make sure that their supplies of biodiesel come from sustainable and ideally domestically produced feedstocks. 
-> While 2005 was one of the hottest years on record, I don't expect 2006 to go off without giving it a run for the title. With the 10 hottest years on record all having occurred since 1990 (see graphic), the trend seems too strong to expect 2006 to be significantly cooler than other years in the past decade.
I also would not expect the 2006 hurricane season to be much calmer than this year's as high sea surface temps in the Gulf of Mexico will likely continue, fueling more strong storms. Let's hope that we will be a bit more prepared this year when the storms of 2006 make landfall.
-> Look for the fight over the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to continue in 2006. If the past is any indicication, I don't imagine drilling proponents will give up on this issue simply because they've been continually defeated for the past decade ... that would be far to sane.
-> And as with this year, keep your eyes on the headlines over at Green Car Congress for the latest developments in alternative transportation technologies. There'll be plenty of fun surprises in store for us in 2006... (Perhaps a commercial plug-in hybrid model? A guy can wish right?)
-> Oh, and if everything goes right, I just might earn my undergraduate degree during 2006. Here's hoping this one at least turns out to be true.
Well, that's all my crystal ball and tea leaves will give me for now. I hope we're all still here in another 365 days to look back at this post and see just where the year has led us. A healthy and happy 2006 to all of you. Cheers...
Happy New Year!
I'd like to wish everyone a happy new year as we welcome in 2006. May this year bring us closer to the sustainable energy future we desire.
On another note, I've returned from a brief holiday absence and will resume my normal posting schedule here at WattHead - i.e. whenever I have time to post amidst my real life time constraints.
Also, my winter quarter starts next week and I will be beginning work on my undergraduate honors thesis which will explore alternative transport fuel options so look for more posts on what I find during my research in the months to come. If anyone has some good research leads, particularly on hydrogen, cellulosic biofuels, EVs and plug-ins, please don't hesitate to share them with me - just post a comment here or send me an email - jjenkin1[at]uoregon.edu.
Happy 2006 folks!
