Hazy Days: Five U.S. Industries and the Challenges Ahead

I would guess that it would be so little, and there is so much more available in common occurrences that any investigation would be a waste of time, energy, and manpower.

I wonder though, how much BTUs' are generated by the exothermic reaction of the two cements in the slurry with the 50% water. I'm sure that it contributes to the performance of the collective heat storage process. Reason being, the curing concrete used in hydroelectric dams had to be vented to prevent cracking of the structure via steam.
How much though? I don't know.
However, I am concerned that the exothermic reaction masks the true performance of collective heat storage. Additionally, the curing of the cement is a very slow process and takes decades to monitor. As a result of this slow curing, finding out the true performance would take a while.

While we sweat the high prices of oil products, there is a truth that most people are not aware. It is a truth spoken of in the early 1900s by a fellow named Nicola Tesla. He stated that there was so much energy flowing constantly around the planet that someday it would be free. Mr. Westinghouse realized that would be unwise to take that step financially, so Nicola was never able to prove that point. The same truth prevails today, except metering is already a problem solved, Mr Westinghouse. The next step is demand for cheaper energy by the majority. Until that happens, the oil companies will continue raising their prices completely ignoring the negative impacts on the planet. Money talks and bull ship walks. That is just the way it is.

But I can show you exactly how we could accomplish this naturally, within ten years. Twice what we would need, without selling one of our six cars. We have taken a big step in the right direction with wind turbines, but the last step needs to be taken to make wind turbines output energy when the wind does not blow. And we can do that, right now today. If there is anyone out there who wants to help bring a real high power solution to light, all you have to do is help me. I can show you how. dragmit@roadrunner.com

@Ron Tolmie
I reviewed the animation of Drake Landing Solar Community, very interesting!
The combination of different technologies make this endeavor very promising.
I recommend others go see this Borehole Thermal Energy Storage animation.

http://www.dlsc.ca/animation.htm

You're making me a beliver Ron.

These systems do not use ground heat. The heat is deliberately injected into the ground and the same amount is extracted in the opposite season. The boreholes must be spaced appropriately. Storage systems have a higher capacity per unit volume than GSHP's, a higher COP and use shallower boreholes. GSHP's are severely limited by the amount of natural heat in the ground.

@Ron Tolmie
Geothermal Heat Pumps do not store heat for a whole season. Instead, the pumps take advantage of differences between surface and ground temperatures. These diffenrences reduce the amount of energy necessary to heat or cool a space.

There is a practice that can greatly reduce our consumption of energy - store waste heat (or cold) for use in the opposite season. Most of the energy that is currently being wasted in buildings can be used twice, first to run our computers and other equipment and then again to heat the buildings in the winter.

It is not new For example, the Oshawa campus of the University of Ontario Institute of Technology has been using seasonal heat storage for nearly a decade. In the summer, the heat from the air conditioning systems is transferred into the ground and in the winter it is used to heat the buildings.

It is operating in large systems For example, the Enwave system in Toronto is being used to cool nearly 100 of Toronto's largest buildings. Single large buildings like the Centennial IKEA in Colorado are heated and cooled by storage systems, saving $400,000 per year in that case.

It works for small buildings too For the past three years a seasonal storage micro system has been used to heat and cool a home in Ontario. The method is generally applicable to all buildings.

It has unlimited energy capacity It doesn't matter how many buildings are being serviced or how densely they are packed, heat storage can handle any requirement.

It is highly accessible For large buildings the source of energy is the building itself. You need only a small amount of electricity to drive the heat pumps that heat and cool the buildings. For small buildings the heat balance can be achieved using heat from the air.

It reduces power consumption Even though the systems use heat pumps that are driven by electricity with proper design the annual power demand can be greatly reduced.

It is inexpensive You just need to drill some holes in the ground for a heat exchanger.

Phil "But corporate linked government has caused both problems." Ahhh ... here is the real stink in the renewable energy industry. When we take any money from the US government we basically fall prey to their demands. Like any whore in the market. Like Solyndra ... And the big companies buy the favor of these Government entities using our own money... more whores in the market. The entire renewable energy industry has been bought and paid for, and they are still on the street soliciting favor today... That addiction will be their downfall. Will the strength of the Human psyche prevail? I hope so, but only time will tell.

@Phil-Manke
Remember this, the government backing of companies such as Solyndra was intended to provide prevailing wage jobs and local profit in the places which would benfit from solar the most and thus shorten the payback period.
Borrowing a quote from you, the larger the corporation (China Solar) the more traitorous and cunning they are in their tactics of destruction (US Liquidity) and exploitation (Trade Imbalance).

@tsfutures
Despite the higher costs of local production, the benefits of buying local generates a higher revenue to expense ratio due to the higher recycling of cash to start the cycle all over again. Same holds true with the purchase of coal and natural gas for power generation because these products are primarily local in production and generate revenue as well. It is unfortunate that some of our trading partners have placed tariffs on our exports which bleeds the recycling of cash. Obviously, China sees this benefit because they are importing coal while selling solar to as many countries as possible. If Solar was so beneficial, you'd think that they would ramp up production and only produce it for themselves from the get go. Liqidity is key to paying down our debt.

So, gr2000,You believe that fewer installations at higher prices for everyone, or perhaps with govt subsidies is far preferable to "affordable by the masses" solar energy? Perhaps. But corporate linked government has caused both problems. Poor employment and wages as well as destructive and depleting "burn-tec" energy provision. Capitalism exists because of free access and unrestrained extraction and burning of resources and destruction of topsoil combined with leveraging of employment against market competition and exporting technology and business. The larger the corporation, the more traitorous and cunning they are in their tactics of destruction and exploitation. It is a simple, unbiased observation. The link with money laundering in wall street play-pens is the final straw that is calling for new order in government, not the elimination of government oversight that the right deems is so necessary.
The thought of China preventing others from access to their rare earths is not relavant at all. If you believe the USA or any country is above a similar tactic you have no idea of national responsibility to ones people. Our own government is immorally bought off, and the people have a great lesson to learn if real progress is to be made.
A viable SREC trading program in all states is one good way to move self funded solar energy into every space allowable and cause all solar markets to flourish while cost depleting the burn-tec carbon-conservatives out of business.

I think we have to think beyond payback periods. After all how much money has the US spent on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan what is the payback period on that. The spending on both I think is rather questionable. Yet when it comes to doing something whose benefits far out way the monetary ROI we baulk at investing the money.

If the settles of the US had the same attitude that is currently prevailing in the US the country would never have arrived at the position of greatness it achieved prior to the current situation.

This is a malaise that permeates the whole planet so the US is not alone. It affects all the western countries particularly. We all have to get of our knees and get on with the job of creating sustainable futures.

I am a person who wants humans to go to the stars but first we have to survive the current crisis.

@Phil-Manke
Let me clarify my point.
The presuppositon of quick and cheap installation contradicts the notion of abundant and sustainable employment. Combine this view with the the fact that China denied increased access to their rare earths (which we could have used to electrify our vehicles and weaned ourselves off of more petrol) thus trying to maximize their revenue at the expense of our own. This agressive economic approach threatens the liquidity of our markets.
You see Phil, the payback on residential solar power has too slow of a payback period due to small differences between utility expenses and solar financing. Not to mention the risk of loan default due to failure to sustain adequate employment.

@Garyrich2000; And we can only hope it is true.
When I must travel across the state and near cities, I see many new housing developments still being built, and there is no; no solar equipment on any homes or businesses visible. Our local education, government, builders, population, has a bit to learn before we need worry about saturation of solar markets to the point of testing the ease or lack of it in instalations. Right now, there many tec school and other trained people in the installation field waiting to get hired for the rush that isn't happening. The conservative "push-back" on solar is extended to many other areas of the economy also, with the tyranical keeping any sharing of "their wealth" with anyone limited to burn-tec, fuel purchasing, polluting ways. Our country is rapidly retreating into the dark and fearful past ever aided by conservative divisional tactics to keep the status quo. Corporate run government is a very bad thing. Untill and unless that changes, there will be no great job availability.

@Phil-Manke

Concerning, "The US could probably employ a great many in installing and maintaining all types of solar equipment for many decades, no matter where the equipment is made"

Many solar dealers would boast of how maintenance free and inexpensive/quick installation costs would be. That doesn't sound like sustainable employment for many.

I agree with Roberts' article, BUT, he misses the point that the conventional energy industries are spending millions of dollars worth of television and print media advertising right now that -- natural gas is plentiful, clean and job creating (aside from the millions of gallons of dirty water deposited below ground or in holding ponds), epa regulations should be delayed for coal or cost US jobs (aside that COPD is now the 3rd killer of people surpassing cancer), and the Canadian tar sands pipeline needs to go forward to create 2 million new jobs (in contrast to the only independent study that says 1,500 part time jobs). The point being, that just like the disinformation campaign on climate change, these industries want to confuse and misinform the public. We all need to see this now, and act on it locally or this disinformation will fill a vacuum of knowledge with the predictable consequences. Scott Sklar, The Stella Group, Ltd.

and why was hydroelectric power not even mentioned when it currently provides 7% to 8% of all electricity in the usa and could easily double within the next 20 to 25 years....and it is by far the least expensive form of renewable energy per kwh produced - coming in at a levelized cost of only 2 cents.

The latest suit targeting Chinese dumping will mean higher solar electric RE costs for the US public, and all for the few jobs and increased bottom line of a few major PV producers, aparently not many of whom are US national based. This is the nightmare of US protectionism and capitalist cronyism corruption. Everyone seems to have keen sight of some aspects of the problem while militant expertise enables us (the US) to take very exacting aim while shooting the national economy in the feet. More mistakes added to the early ones.

The US could probably employ a great many in installing and maintaining all types of solar equipment for many decades, no matter where the equipment is made. Most of our government remains resistant to any peaceful future policies, being so heavily invested in military, or attack solutions to perceived problems.
Yet, for those who are willing, one only needs to take a few steps to the left, and the whole insane machine goes roaring by (and perhaps, over a cliff).

This planet can not afford the prevailing attitudes in the US. When the US farts it still effects the rest of the world and unfortunately in Australia we like to think we are part of the US. Our government policies fall in to line with what the US dictates, a case of how high should we jump.

The issues involved are a global issues and should be resolved globally. China's position in the world is really indicating they are planning long term not from election to election as we do in the US and Australia.

This is not to say that in both the US and Australia there are not many people wanting get behind change just they do not have control of the power or the resources.

But never let it be said that we will not fight to create a positive sustainable futures.

We can do it

Ian Cleland
Toward Sustainable Futures
Sustainability is all about people

Gov. Perry's biggest gaff about the Department of Energy is that over 75 % of its budget is related to nuclear weapons. The DOE not the Military controls the making, maintenance, storage, decommissioning, facilities, etc. for the nuclear weapons program. The Military is only responsible for pushing the buttons that fires them. If he does not have that basic understanding of how the government works that is scary.

I support renewable energy. I support renewable enrgy subsities. As far a subsidies go I can live without them for renewable if they are eliminated for fossil fuels. Also fossil generators must be held responsible to clean up after themselves. How may unplugged wells in the Gulf of Mexico? Who cleans up the rubble from mountain top removal? You would not allow a contractor to leave that mess on your lawn after he repaired your house. He has to put it in a dumpster and haul it away. When was an open pit coal mine leveled out and repalnted correctly so that it can be a park or housing development. Hold everyone to the same standards and renewables will win.

Wasn't is George Bush who said the best defense is a great offense?

Traditional renewables received about 1/6th of the government "goodies" received to support fossils between 2002 and 2008. What is that figure now? Let's use it.

And how about the fact that we have fallen behind China on the road to the new energy economy ...

@ Wick10
I kind of agree with you wick, however there are some political forces which may kill those programs which seem highly subsidized but offer the potential to have a higher payback. For instance, Geothermal may have risks similar to the oil industry faces when trying to find new oil. Who is to say that those risks will not be mitigated with new understandings of where we should prospect for this energy source?
Additionally, some investments will not lower prices enough to accomodate new industries needed to sustain employment from those displaced. For instance, solar may offer new jobs in installation and a few maintenance jobs at a factory but once the panels are installed then there will be another jobs crisis and higher unemployment.
The power also has to be cheap enough to accomodate higher demand for water despite innovative conservation efforts. To comment further on the water issue, Hydropower may become more expensive due to siphoning demand away from turbines to support consumption. To deal with this consumption dilemma, other renewables may be necessary to supplant our reservoir levels to sustainable levels. Currently this hydration issue is not critical in places such as the Pacific Northewst because of the conservation efforts to keep the snow levels high up in the mountains. However, additional water will be needed via pumping desalinated water powered by other renewables. Moreover, the need to stay ahead of population growth with a robust system of water, energy, and job security is vital to our economy. What is less obvious is how other countries may be less than fair in avoiding the dumping of goods below cost just to run the competition out of business and monopolize the industry in their favor only.

I suspect that Solyndra may have been thrown under the bus when it comes to competitiveness. Being pro-union/pro-labor for the state of California, the now bankrupt solar company may have been denied access to the latest materials within a timely manner. If so, the question would be, who was involved with not giving equal access to the latest advances?

Great overview of the state of the various subsidies for renewables. Useful and interesting. Thanks. Passing this along.

This article is being less than forth-right as it mentions that all power projects are subsidized. To be truthful and open the Author should note the degree of subsidies each type of generating capability receives. Then the public can decide if they want a factor of 10, 30, 60 or 90 time subsidies for one kind of power over another kind. Only then can we truly evaluate and judge our favorite/expensive/required power source/product.