Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

When Will Renewable Energy Companies Overtake Traditional Energy Companies?

By Jennifer Kho, Contributor
January 8, 2010   |   28 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
In other words, the next BP of renewables could be BP.
28 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 28
January 8, 2010
This is a lot of perspective to chew on, thanks Jennifer!
Sure points to why we need to install both GW plants in the desert and a million solar roofs. See this article in the SF Chronicle on the big vs. small solar issue:http://tinyurl.com/ybre2u5

Your article gives credence to those who suggest radical partnerships and dramatic changes in policy, like the need for meaningful feed-in-tariffs.

-- What about mandates for retiring a coal-fired kW every time a clean kW is installed?
-- And I know it's taboo among many, but what about partnerships with the nuclear industry?
--every natural gas fired turbine should include a 30MW PV plant to enhance its capacity

The Solar Bill of Rights is a good start, too.
No image available
Comment
2 of 28
Anonymous
January 9, 2010
If Solar starts at 0.01% and doubles every year it would take 13.29 years to reach 100.00% of the electricity supply.

100.00% = 0.01% * 2**x

Solving for x, the number of years until it reaches 100%

x = log base 2 (100.00 / 0.01)
x = log base 2 (10000)
x = 13.287712379549
Comment
3 of 28
January 9, 2010
You should be doing the exponents on the actual energy numbers not a percentage... it is misleading to do that... but everyone knows if you take a penny and double it for 30 days you are a millionaire, I.E. 1KK fold increase min.. 20 days or years if you wish yields an increase of 524K.!!! I would have to run the numbers but if you took the CURRENT solar produced electricity world wide and multiplied it by half a million times, just off the top of my head, I would have to think that is going to be a pretty big number...

.....Bill
Comment
4 of 28
January 9, 2010
The combination of distributed generation, cap and tarde policy initiatives, and a strong national renewable portfolio standard are vital to our nation's energy security and independence.
As it is with any Democracy the smaller the voices involved the smaller the likelihood of these things will come to pass. Let us all give a big voice to RE and not just to ourselves but to those who need convicing the most...our Congress !!!
Comment
5 of 28
January 9, 2010
How can you make a comparison between renewable energy and a finite source energy such as oil without addressing the peak and decline of that energy source? If we reach peak oil in 5 or 50 years this will have a different impact on the growth of the renewable industry.

Also what is the history of growth of oil companies? Most of the major oil companies originated in the late nineteenth century and early decades of the twentieth century. They have had 100 years to get where they are. How old is Q-Cells or First Solar?

It might have been more instructive to compare the size of the sectors.
Comment
6 of 28
January 12, 2010
This is an interesting article . . . Oil is a commodity whose use over time should decrease (probably already peaked in US in 2007). However, at the same time its value will increase as it becomes more and more scarce. So whose to say that Exxon's revenue will decrease vs. increase over the next 20-30 years even if the volume of oil it produces is reduced?

Surprisingly, the oil industry is not very vertically integrated. There are few instances in the industry where a production asset ties directly to a refining asset and then directly into marketing assets.

It's probably also a mistake to underestimate Big Oil's potential to shift it's might from oil to natural gas production and distribution. Natural gas deposits across the world and LNG facilities could carry Big Oil through this century in a fairly strong position.
No image available
Comment
7 of 28
Anonymous
January 13, 2010
We're decades away from the overtake. FF is still abundant and cheap, even with PO upon us. A very small minority understands and cares about protecting the environment. The few that do still wear nylon outfits made in China and transported to the local retailer. All FF, of course.
And at the pace population and standard of living grow, RE will never be enough.
The overtake will occur during the last phases of or after a massive global catastrophe of a scale never seen by mankind. It will not come from installing one PV panel at the time.
Comment
8 of 28
January 13, 2010
anonymous, be optimistic. The fact that you and a lot of other people are aware of this is already part of the solution. I recently saw a documentary about population evolution in the 20th century. 85% of countries now have a replacement rate of two kids or less per family, Bangladesh and Africa still being the exception. Tuberculosis is regaining in strength, being immune to ALL available drug cocktails, due to constant genetic mutations. Peak oil is a fact now, the USA CEO of Toyota has said so publicly in Detroit yesterday. The short term road transportation solution is plug-in hybrid cars & trucks, as the Chinese made BYD car having a 60 miles battery power range, allowing 95% of the global population just to drive on electrical power on a daily basis. You will be able to use algae oil or cellullosic derived bio-fuels to run a small piston engine on this car to keep the battery charged to 30%, if you drive takes longer than 60 miles. Airplanes are running on kerosene. Qatar is turning his massive natural gas reserves into airplane compatible liquid fuels, this fuel has already been tested on an Airbus 340 with success. The European Union has issued a law demanding that all new building being built after 2020 be energy neutral, meaning they consume not more than the RE power they can produce on their own. This law mandates also the building of passive housing for private owners, meaning you do not need extra heating in the winter or cooling in the summer to stay comfortable in your home (a feet of external rockwool home insulation is needed but heck . . .). The E.U. is footing a €10 billion bill to research Nuclear Fusion, hoping to gain expertise to step change our fuel supply from FF to Fusion Energy by the 22th century, if RE is not able to get it done alone. We still have enough FF to get us to 2050, after that only coal will remain. By 2050 another Bill Gates may have found the solution to this problem.
Comment
9 of 28
January 13, 2010
http://gm-volt.com/chevy-volt-reasons-for-use-and-cost-of-operation/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7992180.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8000964.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7609495.stm

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123172034731572313.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://www.byd.com/showroom.php?car=f3dm

http://www.brightautomotive.com/vehicles

http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/27/how-charging-of-the-battery-works-in-the-chevy-volt/
Comment
10 of 28
January 13, 2010
It all comes down to every-day decisions. Conservation, employ renewables in your home, company or industry, buy carbon offsets for travel, etc. It will require a combination on all fronts to combat this transition. It is a battle. However, in the end, fossil fuels will lose - because they're finite... end of argument. And, it may happen within some of our lifetimes, and just as easily end for me the moment my bicycle is hit by an SUV. Regardless, humans will anticipate and inherit change.

My primary concern with the renewable discussion, is baseload. I see a lot of activity in the battery scenario for EV's and even medium scale renewables. Have the environmental impacts been studied first ? Have we looked completely at available supply for the masses of humanity ? I expect no, not completely. Even so, there is so much to consider with regard to consumption, or a reduction thereof. What about renewable (solar, wind) powered skimmers that siphon water, downstream of hydro dams, replacing a portion of that water back into the reservoir... is that crazy ?

If you spend the time reviewing available fossil fuel stores (IEA), the numbers roll down to less than a hundred years of availability (I estimate 72 years). This is based on the 2004 energy census and considering the rate at which developing nations are increasing their energy demands, and while human population continues its exponential growth...

Reality ? We have a lot to do in a very short time. However, necessity is the mother of invention - so I trust that today's engineering students will grow to become the mothers of those inventions. By then, I'll be content to observe it all... while riding on my bike, of course...
Comment
11 of 28
January 13, 2010
One thing that will help is when solar electricity gets a lot cheaper than anything else, and it pays (quickly) to put solar on your roof. And build big solar parks that make sense economically.
No image available
Comment
12 of 28
Anonymous
January 13, 2010
ab, even if we kick the FF weening into high gear and buy ourselves another 100 of cheap FF while we find a solution, there's no RE that we power 9B+ with the forseable trend of desired standard of living. Just look at BRIC.

And good luck not deteorating the environment further in the search of a miracle.

It's not lack of optmism; it's reality.

All the best,

M
Comment
13 of 28
January 13, 2010
Unfortunately the large energy companies and others will take over most of the smaller companies as the whole alternative energy boom takes off. They will have the capital available to expand much faster than the smaller companies.
If governments are powerful enough they will insist on feed-in tarrifs that are benificial to home owners and businesses, thus financing the growth of the domestic and business market.
The capitalist system is run by very clever people. The main problem is that the poor of the world will still be ignored, while the wealthy will prosper, unless democratic governments cooperate worldwide to ensure that the living standards of the poor are raised.
Comment
14 of 28
January 16, 2010
Renewable companies will overtake traditional energy when there is grid parity and that can occur in the short term with either legislation or regulation.

Even in 2009 renewable stock offered great returns. To help investors see the value of renewable investments The Green Market has tracked the progress of renewable stock in 5 sectors. In January last year, The Green Market posted the stocks contained in 5 sustainable portfolios.

The Green Market's wind stock includes Western Wind Energy which grew 246% in 2009. When averaged as a whole, The Green Market's wind portfolio gained 110% in 2009. For a review of 2009 and future prospects go to:

http://thegreenmarket.blogspot.com/2010/01/wind-stock-review-and-future-prospects.html

The Green Market's solar stocks outperformed the market indices by over 50 percent in the first half of last year. Green Market stock like Canadian Solar (CSIQ) soared in 2009. For a six month period between March and August CSIQ was up 269 percent. On average, The Green Market's solar stock portfolio gained 64% in 2009. For a review of 2009 and future prospects go to:

http://thegreenmarket.blogspot.com/2010/01/solar-stock-review-and-future-prospects.html
Comment
15 of 28
January 16, 2010
Another way to ask this question is, when will peak oil and climate collapse sufficiently scare people to act, both in terms of lifestyle, industry but unfortunately also politically. This energy switching project no longer looks much like the technical problem it was 30 years ago but much more like an information and political repression issue... even as much in the free USA as it is in authoritarian nations around the world though. Sadly are we watching China position itself to lead renewables which were American innovations in the 70s?

To compliment Anonymous (above), I have calculated in an Excel spreadsheet that if PV and wind (even without solar water, radical EE improvements etc.) were to grow at 40 percent per year, the entire projected global electrical demand of around 25 TW assuming (2 % growth from today's 15TW) could be covered by solar and wind renewables by 2025. This is only 15 years from now, and from the time I set up my spreadsheet we are essentially on target globally despite constant disinformation on climate, the financial crisis, a lack of US interest and leadership and near total disbelief in peak oil. When these latent inevitabiliteis come alive in the global consciousness and even more important our intergenerational conscience, overtaking the hydrocarbon markets look like a piece of cake for renewables to me.

Like I often said 30 years ago, solar will happen not with the help of governments but in spite of governments. If peaking oil is a fact, governments will not be able to get out of the way in time or have the guts to credit themselves for the reemerging solar age. Energy prices ("spiking" because of peak oil?) have been driving solar growth and if the industry would just work harder to make aesthetic improvements so that more PV building claddings appeal to home consumers, this growth could only accelerate further.

Incidentally, the lowest hanging "solar fruit" water pre-heating is not even a part of my spreadsheet.
No image available
Comment
16 of 28
Anonymous
January 16, 2010
George, a good resource to understand the limits of RE in relation to the current and foreseeable standards of living is David MacKay's "Without The Hot Air" (www.withouthotair.com). It's free!

In a nutshell, even if covered the planet with RE technologies, we'd still not have enough to power 9B+ Homo colossuses at European standards, much less at American standards, which is twice the Europeans'. And we need to feed all those people too. So something's gotta give.

Most people think recycling Starbuck cups, driving a Prius, and turning off the light in the closet is doing its share. The situation is dire, few get it, there's no technofix just around the corner.
Comment
17 of 28
January 19, 2010
anonymous, please do not spread lies. If everyone was forced to build a 'passive house', he would consume zero energy to heat or cool his house, since the energy given off by fridges and cooking equipment and incoming sun rays would be enough to keep it comfortable (please read about this, also google 'MASDAR CITY' now being built in Abu Dhabi). House heating or cooling represent 40% of western countries energy needs. The house electricity could be 100% supplied by renewable energy without any problem, as I now have had since 6 years (google Ecopower cvba). The E.U. is actually NOW solving this RE electricity supply issue, now standing at 10%, and by 2020 being 20% of our total electricity supply, mainly by investing in 100 000 MW of offshore wind turbines parks and 30 000 MW in pumped up hydro storage
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/03/european-unites-renewable-energy-supergrid
http://featured.matternetwork.com/2009/12/china-requires-utilities-buy-all.cfm
Thus we can continue to live in our house without requiring any fossil fuels, if we continue this investment strategy and all change our building codes to force everyone to built passive housing.
Car and truck transportation is now slowly going to also electrify, as Chinese, Japanese, US and European car manufacturer are investing in such plug-in hybrid technologies (see my links posted here up, coal electricity can be replaced by RE sourced electricity).
The bio-fuel industry is on track to provide bio fuels in replacement of fossil fuels, India has now issues a law demanding that 20% of it's car transportation fuels be supplied by bio fuels by 2020.
Comment
18 of 28
January 19, 2010
I have read a lot of documents about bacteria being genetically modified to supply bio-fuels directly as waste streams, consuming CO2 and sun rays to get the job done for an economic price equaling $100 per barrel of oil.

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/blog2/2009/12/11/fuel-from-thin-air-redux-no-biomass-no-extraction-no-kidding/

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/blog2/2009/12/15/the-who-what-and-when-of-cellulosic-ethanol-commercialization/

The Who, What and When of Cellulosic Ethanol Commercialization
The old saying is that "cellulosic ethanol is always and forever five years away." If that's true, then it's time to party like its 2014, because commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol is just now upon us.
…………
Overall cost, however, is more encouraging. Projected production costs per gallon range as low as $1 per gallon (Coskata) – and generally speaking, cellulosic ethanol is expected to be competitive on per gallon cost with $60-$100 oil. However, gasoline engines are not generally designed around ethanol's attributes – lower BTUs, higher octane — E85 ethanol generally delivers 20-25 percent lower mileage in a flex-fuel engine. Ethanol injection engines deliver up to 15 percent higher mileage than standard gasoline engines, but they are not yet available in production models. Overall, ethanol will have to come to the market at $1.95 per gallon or less to be competitive with $100 oil; at today's prices (around $75-$80 oil), ethanol production costs will have to come in at around $1.50 per gallon to be competitive on a miles per dollar basis.

http://www.solazyme.com/

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/blog2/2009/12/11/valero-signs-5-year-deal-with-mission-newenergy-for-up-to-600-million-gallons-of-jatropha-palm-biodiesel/

SO : we can stay in decent housing without any fossil fuel requirements, our electricity can be supplied for 100 % from RE resources, and our transportation fuels can be converted to bio-fuels or electricity.
Comment
19 of 28
January 19, 2010
Concerning your point 'how to feed 9 billion plus people', well, I agree that we have a problem. The problem that we have is how to implement on a massive scale what the Israelis are doing in the south of their Negev sand rock desert, to supply the nearby Sharm-el-sheik tourist resorts with desert grown tomatoes, cucumbers and an array of other vegetables.

The israeli are pumping very salty Red Sea water into reverse osmosis membrane water treatment plants, the output is desalinated clean water that is pumped into day water tanks, that feed by gravity the water during the colder nights towards hydroponic vegetables green houses, to avoid extensive water evaporation, whole being powered by PV panels built next to the water treatment plant.
No image available
Comment
20 of 28
Anonymous
January 19, 2010
AB, it's like we're back in the 1300s, I'm telling you the Earth is round and you're saying I'm spreading lies. Where are you manners? :)

Turning a household passive it's easy, as you did it. Making 9B+ projected people wanting no less than an European lifestyle if not a US lifestyle, totally passive, that's another story. I mean air travel, swimming pools, shopping malls, iPhones, micro breweries, burger joints, the works. Yeah, right!

There's simply not enough RE to power that lifestyle. Period. There's enough RE to power a modest lifestyle for 9B people, but if only you and me do it, that's not even the tip of the tip of the iceberg. As you aptly put, "if..."

The reason some of us enjoy such extravagant lifestyle is because we're tapping on an enormous energy storage: fossil fuels. When it's gone, I want to see those water pipes in Israel being forged by RE, being installed and maintained by RE, actually the ore being extracted by RE too would be pretty nice to see. I am not saying it's impossible, the Egyptians built much bigger projects without fossil fuels, but I think the term for those workers were slaves.

Cheers,

M.
Comment
21 of 28
January 19, 2010
Anonymous, please don't be offended if someone else does not share your very pessimistic vision. Are you working for Exxon ? And are you that sure everyone would want to live like the USA ? I certainly won't, and I have been in your country.

There is ample RE to get it all done. The sun rays are supplying us in one hour what the whole world consumes in one YEAR.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/12/this-year-in-clean-energy-what-a-ride?cmpid=WNL-Wednesday-December23-2009

The immediate future looks bullish. Sklar's choice for the two best clean energy reports in 2009 are as follows:

1. The Institute for Local Self reliance's "States Energy Self Reliance Report," which said that "all 36 states with either renewable energy goals or renewable energy mandates could meet them by relying on in-state renewable fuels. Sixty-four percent could be self-sufficient in electricity from in-state renewables; another 14 percent could generate 75 percent of their electricity from homegrown fuels." The report also said that "the nation may be able to achieve a significant degree of energy independence by harnessing the most decentralized of all renewable resources: solar energy. More than 40 states plus the DC could generate 25 percent of their electricity just with rooftop PV." In fact, these data may be conservative. The report does not, for example, estimate the potential for ground photovoltaic arrays — although it does estimate the amount of land needed in each state to be self-sufficient relying on solar — even though common sense suggests that this should dwarf the rooftop potential.
Comment
22 of 28
January 19, 2010
2. The philanthropic arm of search giant, Google, in 2009 released a plan to move the U.S. to a clean-energy future, entitled, The Google vision. In 2030, electricity will be generated not from coal or oil but from wind, solar and geothermal power. Energy demand will be two-thirds what it is now, thanks to stringent energy-efficiency measures. Ninety percent of new vehicle sales will be plug-in hybrids. Carbon dioxide emissions will be down 48 percent. Getting there will cost $4.4 trillion, according to the Google plan — but will recoup $5.4 trillion in savings. The Clean Energy 2030 plan would require ambitious national policies, a huge boost to renewables, increased transmission capacity, a smart electricity grid and much higher fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles.

AND THIRD : fossil crude oil can easily be replaced by bio-crude oil, allowing us to fabricate pipes from vegetable sourced oil, bending metal requires energy that can be supplied by electricity, that can be harvested from what we have in abundance : sun rays, wind, wave power, hydro electric dams and so on.
Comment
23 of 28
January 19, 2010
Of course, it all requires that we move now to a new RE future. If you are dumb to wait till all FF are gone, then of course you will be screwed. I decided to do something about it. I am clearly not alone here. Maybe you also should get out of your soap box and start investing in this RE stuff, maybe you will understand that it all can be done, but that it also requires to get off you lazy bum.

By the way, I was born from european expatriate parents in black Africa, I lived my first 18 year there while my my father was running a big technical school. We lived very well there, harvesting our own garden grown banana's, mango's and many other fruits. It only required to plant them and wait. I never understood why you needed all those gyzmo's and Wall marts to be happy, although a solar panel connected to a string of car batteries was necessary to keep our meat fridge powered.
Comment
24 of 28
January 19, 2010
http://e360.yale.edu/content/digest.msp?id=2171

03 Dec 2009: Renewable Energy Investments Will Soar to $200 Billion Worldwide in 2010
Global investments in alternative energy projects will rise nearly 50 percent in 2010, climbing from $130 billion this year to $200 billion next year. In a survey of the green energy market, Bloomberg News reports that despite the dim prospects of forging a climate treaty in Copenhagen this month, companies and governments are moving rapidly ahead to build wind power farms, large solar arrays, and other green energy projects. Thanks in large part to state-funded economic stimulus programs, government spending on green energy will more than double in 2010 to about $60 billion, according to the report. Analysts said that with China, the European Union (EU), and individual U.S. states aggressively adopting regulations and incentives promoting green energy, the field will continue to rapidly develop even if a global climate treaty is not signed. "Country by country, state by state, regulations will continue to spur demand independent of what might happen in Copenhagen," said one U.S. clean technology analyst. Major renewable energy projects are now underway
Comment
25 of 28
January 19, 2010
http://www.grist.org/article/2010-01-17-when-it-comes-to-energy-mark-jacobson-thinks-big

Our Wind, Water and Sun (WWS) plan is also ambitious. To complete the change to a sustainable energy society we'll need 3.8 million wind turbines, 90,000 solar plants and many geothermal, tidal and rooftop photovoltaic installations around the world.

But it has some advantages beyond the most important one, which is to stop global warming. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that by 2030 the U.S. will need 2.8 trillion watts (or terawatts, TW, of energy), and the world will need 16.9TW. If only WWS sources are used, the U.S. energy need drops to 1.8TW. The projected world total declines to 11.5TW.

The key is to keep your eye on the ball. Don't let distractions get in the way of your focus on the best strategy (or in the case of climate change, the best solutions). Also, don't be intimidated by your opponent (or special interests). They will always try to knock you down. Finally, give it your best effort. Even if you lose in the end, you should always be able to say you gave 100%.
No image available
Comment
26 of 28
Anonymous
January 19, 2010
AB, I don't work for Exxon, I'm actually a treehugger RE developer.

It's not a matter of vision or taste, as in you find strawberry milk shake better than vanilla and I do the other way around. The earth is round, not flat. Period. There isn't enough RE to power 9B+ at European lifestyle. Period. We could probably power 9B+ at Moroccan lifestyle, but Moroccans don't want it. They want flatscreens TV, designer jeans, scuba diving, iPhones, Alaskan crab, etc. Moroccans aren't fools!

Please take a pill. :)

Cheers,

M.
Comment
27 of 28
January 26, 2010
Anonymous: Thanks for source. I find no disagreement with your 9B+ at European lifestyles comment. In fact, the EU's Desertec project graphically demonstrates this as the EU even now appears to need to practice what looks like "renewables hegemony" across Northern Africa (despite their relative efficient use of energy and low population growth rates) just to maintain themselves. China too, as their "agro-hegemony" policies (actually "people fuel" extraction policies and/or "virtual" water i policies) hides the impact of climate and aquifer depletion problems become survival policies through purchases and leases arable lands in Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, Latin America and wherever... ???.

Yes, it is obvious "something has to give", but since American politicians have blocked conservation and radical EE and RE for 30 years and ignored a host of other sustainability issues, it looks to me that a better question to ask is "who is asking whom to give up what, and when must it be given?" China's $2.4 B USD currency stash, its huge reservoir of young engineers and focused energy-resource planners have given them unparalleled advantages in answering this question. This is especially true since the US and much of the EU appear helpless in facing the problems inherent in our post-Cold War energy, fiscal and trade policies.

American apathy over the Robert's Supreme Court decision can only amplify our incapacity to turn this catastrophic "energy-climate moment" around and onto an imaginable sustainable path. Thus, my rephrasing of Antonymous' implied question (something has to give) to "who is asking whom to give up what, and when must it be given?" is not just a geopolitical one, or a trans-generational one, but a critical current US political question which asks "where those who preach for 'corporate religiosity' place the US Constitution and the inter-generational environment and climate rights of future generations."
Comment
28 of 28
July 22, 2010
What I am wondering about these figures is if the experts have included the vast improvements in alternative energy technologies that will happen in the same time frames that these figures are for. Lets take solar energy for instance, right now as we speak the efficiency just plain sucks. But you cannot tell me MIT will not figure out how to drastically improve and implement changes in the next decade. There is a real need to implement alternative energies now as stated in alternative sources of energy. We are simply running out of our main sources of generating energy, simple as that. I know that figuring something in like new technologies would be difficult, or impossible, but it would be nice to know if they had tried to, or if these figures are for the industry as they are now.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Jennifer Kho

View Jennifer Kho's Profile
About: Jennifer Kho is a freelance reporter and editor based in Oakland, Calif. Aside from RenewableEnergyWorld.com, her stories have appeared in The New York Times' G... more »

Advertise With Us

Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC) Asia Solar Expo KACO new energy, Inc. Intertek Solar FlexRack Solmetric Corporation Green Power Conferences
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters