Can We Get an Energy Plan, Please?

By Stephen Lacey, Editor
April 13, 2011   |   21 Comments
American politicians act like children when it comes to crafting energy policy, says former Shell President John Hofmeister. And it needs to stop.

Do you like this podcast?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

Dear Listeners -- While the written companion article for each episode of the Inside Renewable Energy podcast remains below, the associated audio files have necessarily been removed. We apologize for the inconvenience, and appreciate the support you gave to our podcast production.

Thank you,
RenewableEnergyWorld.com

21 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 21
April 13, 2011
Everyone else in the world is preparing for $20 a gallon gas (it is over $11 in France already), but the US is still in denial. Likely culprit is the O&G industry, who stand to make even more money than they are already by their misinformation campaigns. If it weren't such dirty money, I'd buy some Exxon stock.
Comment
2 of 21
April 13, 2011
Like most of our political problems in the US, the need for public campaign financing cannot be ignored. As long as policy is based on sponsors for election campaigns, there will be little thought for the overall good of the economy. The advantages of cleaner, fuel free electricity production are self explanatory. The current energy policy is more about protectionism for vested interests and market shares than about the health of the economy. The issues of health care and environmental degradation, food production and competitiveness are all influenced by our energy choices. Politicians will have to be forced to do the jobs they are being paid for by removing all the conflicts of interest that create the mess we have now.
Comment
3 of 21
April 13, 2011
The pessimism around the potential for creating a national energy policy/plan has grown more vocal, especially at some of the recent solar summits in the last month.

If we are going to fight to convince policymakers to support solar, we need to fight on their terms, using their tools and terminology to convince them that solar has the solutions to all the hot button issues that matter to policy makers- from jobs, stable energy prices, and revitalization of local economies and urban centers- not investment exit strategies, not being green, and not the usual solar tech talk or green fluff.

We need $$$. SEIA barely spent 1M on lobbying last year. (http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2010/12/top-25-u-s-energy-lobbyists-of-2010) It needs millions more dollars to engage market research and focus groups and create effective campaigns on behalf of the solar industry. The oil and gas lobbies way outspent our lobby last year. Top Oil/Gas lobby spent over 16M. And there were many others. See Stephen's article from December linked above.

"There is no smart grid without smart policies," Brian Steele, PG&E (at the SolarTech Leadership Summit)
Comment
4 of 21
April 14, 2011
From the article here,Hofmeister stated:

"Both sides have taken out their fiddles, and they're fiddling...while Rome burns," says John Hofmeister, the former President of Shell Oil, founder of Americans for Affordable Energy and author of the book, Why We Hate the Oil Companies.

"I see every evidence that these folks are going to stumble and bumble, and fight one another like kindergarten children...That's not good enough. We need to do better," he says.

This is an article we need to heed. Hofmeister is being way too nice. The US Federal Government is in a failed-governance posture from which it can not recover as shown by the financial wreck it was to have regulated & avoided, the pollution of the environment it was to have regulated, the infrastructure(energy-roads-air-rail)it was to have regulated. No need to say more.

The Federal Government and its political system is not a self correcting institution because of all of the imbedded self serving (greedy) self centered biases/PACs it suffers from. It is terminally ill. Let is die off. The quicker the better.

Now the question is how do we, those of us not in these Federally related institutions take charge of our future?

First we ignore the Federally embedded groups. Shun them. If one recognizes them you empower them. Just shut them out.
It is a great waste of time to deal with them. Stay within the law, but ignore them.

Proceed by developing open working groups of problem solvers.
In the energy world this means that all of us, "ALL" that THINK, get involved in the complex issues that face us.

We have in the form of a social net-work the "Renewable Energy World blog." Go one more step herein & get organized into THINKING Renewable Energy Enterprise(TREEs)working groups.

Communications "social net-works" are today's governance!

Let's explore this immediately herein. What do you all think?

I am a wind/solar RD&T field engineer, I feel a great need here, especially after dealing with DOE.
Comment
5 of 21
April 14, 2011
WindSolar has it about right. Congress can not/will not/does not want to deal with any of our current crises, of which climate change and peak oil are some of the most important. It appears any progress will be up to the states and cities, many of which are taking strong and useful action, e.g., aiming to meet Kyoto goals etc. Hopefully other nations will recognize how absolutely dis-functional our national government is and act to combat its lousy actions.
Comment
6 of 21
April 14, 2011
Creating an energy agency like the Federal Reserve sounds like a pretty bad idea. The Federal Reserve doesn't exactly have a clean record of taking care of our financial security, giving the systemic stripping of the regulations that ultimately resulted in an economic melt down. That kind of agency is hugely vulnerable to special interests, more than Congress already is.

The States should take more leadership in determining our energy policy -- let the States compete with each other. The role of the federal government should be to get out of the way, streamline the process of permitting and interconnection as much as possible, and shift subsidies away from fossil fuels to renewable energy. No big announcement and "energy plan" necessary -- just do it.
Comment
7 of 21
April 14, 2011
Just what we need, the leftist central planners in DC creating a new five year plan. The idea of Washington picking the winners and losers in energy markets is complete nonsense.

The free market and innovation are readily capable of getting out of this mess, if the politicians buying votes would just go away. One more election ought to do finish the job.
Comment
8 of 21
April 14, 2011
Dear Mr. Stephen Lacey, It is not a big problem to get a new power plant for saving the earth from the polutions and consuption of O&G sorces, if researchs could be more concintreated on renewable and alternative energy, like wind, water and soler, which can give more energies with zero gas emissions, and develope a dynamic power generations.
Comment
9 of 21
April 15, 2011
From 1850 to 1950 there were over 10,000 rural wind mills operating in the US. Most pumped water. Those that generated electricity did to 12VDC batteries. The 12VDC systems are still around, but in vehicle/camper/UV related systems. Commercially available.

Wind & solar(PV) are basically DC systems. For the sake of efficiency it is best to go DC and best to keep service lines very short.

Large AC grids (like our standard power girds here in the US) can and do loose 10% to 30% of their power over distance.

The closer the wind-solar energy source is to its use the better! Like in your own yard! That is best.

There are approximately 120 million homes in the US. If each had even a limited capability to generate its own electricity savings would be huge.

The wind & solar Renewable Energy model of an "independent distributive-energy system" is by function more than 10% efficient than any large gridded system.

Self owned Renewable Energy systems have a calculated Return On Investment(ROI). At some point one would out right own this system. CONSIDER:in the current power consumer model one never owns anything! And the costs is ever rising!

The down side of any Renewable Energy (RE) system is that they are mostly pulsed, i.e., depends on when there is wind and when there is sun. In order to smooth RE-power out one needs energy storage:of some kind.

Most electrical storage is done USING batteries. Determine voltage,loads, battery cycles and to what depths these cycle-oscillations occur. Many battery types:Zinc, lead acid, lithium, lithium-air, etc. Thorough research needs to be done here because batteries always require care.

Stay DC or want to go via inverter to 120V AC? Solid state inverter efficiencies are good.

Other energy storage systems employ water(like the Niagra Falls system), pressurizing a gas/air and/or heat, to name a few.

The WindMillers'Gazette out of Rio Vista, Texas is a great informative publication to start with. Cheap too.
Comment
10 of 21
April 15, 2011
No need for pessimism on the ever growing energy hunger of U.S and the rest of the world. A positive visioned website is sited. sounds interesting.

www.sustechinitiatives.com

S.Udhayamarthandan
Comment
11 of 21
April 15, 2011
To windsolar, et. al., It seems like you would have the will to engineer "the best system" for most, but I feel that is another illusion of control. If what we want is energy production, we must have the government out of the engineering business, but instead simply monitoring production. The building codes of the country have evolved to mandate sensible installations that must provide stable function over time. I would propose the same be done with energy production. The government regulating bodies should oversee safe installations and get out of the "Equipment gold standard" type of enforcement like SRCC has set up. This only serves to give higher prices for technology and benefits to certain large manufactories that "buy in". If RE installations were simply inspected for function and safety, much more would be gained in the way of ingenuity, and less direction to the teat of government and 501 C-3 credit schemes that those who are situated to satisfy the paper pile they require make use of.
In the case of solar heating of water, SRCC systems mandate certain equipment and NABCEP certifies installers. Neither guarantees satisfasction, but an expensive installation and an income stream for installers. This leaves out many self installed systems that entail owner savings or unusual design from being elegible for credits, and pays commercial competition to remove inovation from the marketplace. This is completely anti-development and
anti-inovation. If systems were rated by production based on monitoring by many competent devices already on the market or incorporated into internationally certified pumping stations, the main variable would be durability, and that is what the competition in the market place sorts out best.. If we merely had simple ways to determine production, as most PV inverters already do for electrical production, the solar thermal field would be far better situated to providing the majority of heating needs this country spends it's money on.
No image available
Comment
12 of 21
Anonymous
April 15, 2011
Comment #6 rings true to me. Everyone has under-lying assumptions and such a institution would tend to settle on consistent assumptions. It would appear that one of Mr. Hofmeister's assumptions is that we will continue to rely on a centralized productions system. This greatly affects the nature of your infrastructure. Some people are focusing on distributed facilities. Many renewables work best in a distributed infrastructure model; particularly biomass and solar but also wind, wave and even low energy (Hyerson type) nuclear benefit from a physically distributed infrastructure model. Our transportation fuel distribution system needs to reflect that of dairy distribution - locally made and locally consumed. Every part of the country has the ability to produce biofuels from some source. The political infrastructure presently may be another thing as licensing models are designed for a 'one off' approach rather than multiple 'modules'. Distributed models are important for CHP (combined heat power) as most thermal heat needs match up with smaller generation capacity. CHP installations are a major approach toward total efficiency. Improved efficiency is at the top of the list for a modern energy paradigm. It is my belief that the bigger question is not the source of our power, but the struggle between our present distribution model and a distributed one. Bill Brandon
Comment
13 of 21
April 15, 2011
Phil & Anonymous, I am a Industrial/aero field engineer and have worked in more than four-dozen countries world wide.

The sun provides approximately 1,300 watts of energy per square meter/yard:when it is shining. That is a lot of power. If we had on our homes a 5 to 10 Kw PV system (with adjunct storage) we'd be close to getting off the grid. I think we all need to get off the grid as soon as we can.

Let the traditional grid power our industrial base.

I do not think any government incentives are needed for the private RE Enterprise. Only the big operators like that incentive/grant money because they need not face a positive ROI requirement.

PV prices are dropping almost monthly now. New optical and photovoltaic technologies indicate very large efficiency gains.

Last year in the NW they ran a test in that cloudy area and compared wind -vs-PV systems. This created a great discussion on how do you do that comparison? In the end they gave each one, $24,000 and said do your best.

After one year they reported their power production. To our surprise solar in this rainy area, out performed wind 4 to 1. Solar/PV panels see photons even if we humans do not. Chuckle.

I do real-field Research Development & Test on wind turbines (mostly advanced Savonius). I quaried to some of the solar RD&T labs(MIT, Berkley, UCLA and Stanford) and found out many improvements are in the making.

This led me to 2+ years developing advanced compound safe-Savonius systems. Which led to battery RD&T, which led me to the maritime world as boats/ships/yachts all use extensive wind-to-battery systems. This led me to working with a large catamaran design building company in Key West:Multihull Technologies Inc. over the past few years. I learned tons there.

I feel the Renewable Energy world is going to be one of the most complex, variable enterprises ever addressed. You all are right:no one answer fits all, and in some cases does not fit anything. Chuckle. Old engineer, Ron
Comment
14 of 21
April 17, 2011
Three new developments in the Renewable Energy World:

1. Solar (VP) technologies are really getting much more efficient and the price per/watt produced is decreasing greatly.
2. California is intelligently leading the nation how to afford the change over to Renewable Energy through its 33% RE mandate and the adjunct-free-enterprise companies figuring out how to fiance this through RE leasing and other self go programs.
3. We are seeing advanced compound savonius and compound Darrieus stand-alone residential systems coming into the market at affordable costs than prior.

Let us all keep at this. We can, with out the giant
inefficient bureaucracies do independent-off-grid RE systems.
Comment
15 of 21
April 17, 2011
Dave-fisher, In the last two years of hard-over aerodynamic and fluid flow tests of blunt airfoils in low Reynolds numbers, turbulent flow we are just short of announcing to all that the prior windmill power analysis (Betz limit) on VAWTs (Savonius & Darrieus) was two dimensional and therefor only partly valid.

We have gone into full 3 dimensional flow analysis, time dependent and found that a number of factors that were not first apparent, but are now,can be mofied in such a way as to increase efficiencies and broaden the velocity spectrum that makes a VAWT (Vetical axis wind turbine) run.

The Advanced compound Savonius runs(generates, due to its higher torque capabilities) at lower and higher speeds than comparable HAWTs (horizontal axis wind turbines). So to speak its run-window in greater, even if its efficiency be a bit lower.

We do not find the VAWT of the ACS efficiency to be lower. So into the Patents IP world now.

Dr.J-L Menet of France leads the academic-math-fluid dynamics analysis.
Comment
16 of 21
April 17, 2011
Dave-fisher, In the last two years of hard-over aerodynamic and fluid flow tests of blunt airfoils in low Reynolds numbers, turbulent flow we are just short of announcing to all that the prior windmill power analysis (Betz limit) on VAWTs (Savonius & Darrieus) was two dimensional and therefor only partly valid.

We have gone into full 3 dimensional flow analysis, time dependent and found that a number of factors that were not first apparent, but are now,can be mofied in such a way as to increase efficiencies and broaden the velocity spectrum that makes a VAWT (Vetical axis wind turbine) run.

The Advanced compound Savonius runs(generates, due to its higher torque capabilities) at lower and higher speeds than comparable HAWTs (horizontal axis wind turbines). So to speak its run-window in greater, even if its efficiency be a bit lower.

We do not find the VAWT of the ACS efficiency to be lower. So into the Patents IP world now.

Dr.J-L Menet of France leads the academic-math-fluid dynamics analysis.
Comment
17 of 21
April 19, 2011
It's sad that we see such pettiness in Congress. What we need is a larger than life narrative. I suggest the Great Transition from Industrial Society to Green Earth-Sharing Society. The way to achieve this is to remove taxes on jobs and capital investment and to replace public revenue with a user fee on all natural resources and public commons.

This would entail fees on mineral extraction, pollution, and location value. Also, an Earth-Dividend would be given to everyone as their Earth-Share. Thus, those who use a lot of resource pay more and those who use fewer resources get a bonus.
Comment
18 of 21
April 20, 2011
CNN is running a week long coverage of the oil spill recovery that has not has not happened. Despite assurances from government spokespersons that the oil "just disappeared". And a $120 million ad campaign from BP that all is well--"like it never even happened".

Only about 20% of the funds to compensate victims of has been distributed----and all the victims tell stories of long delays, red tape and rude and insulting behavior by Ken Feinstein and his offices over compensation requests. While Ken Feinstein and his office get paid $1.5 million dollars a week($75 million per year). No wonder there are delays and denials.

There are no changes in laws or regulations governing safety or environmental damage made.

10 new permits were just approved for deep water drilling.

A terrorist, tried and convicted of bombing the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 280+ Americans and also Scots on the ground---under the direct orders and support of Mouamar Ghaddafi is released from prison on humanitarian reasons because he has "cancer" and is going to die in a few days. As soon as he sets foot on Libya, he makes a miraculous recovery.

When his own people rise up against him, and he starts slaughtering them---the US and NATO begins bombing Ghaddafi's army. Then, the US and NATO say that they can't stop Ghaddafi's army and they are not going to put ground troops in to protect civilians.

This should tell you something about your value as human being and your voice in the government.
Comment
19 of 21
April 21, 2011
Since it has become obvious that the federal government has been completely bought out by the vested interest groups---I have decided that I'll just have to come up with an energy plan of my own.

I plan to get out of town.

Germany is looking pretty good. I love Germany, especially the Black Forest, Bavaria and the Alps, and you have Switzerland and Austria next door. And Germany has plenty of CNG filing stations for the motor home. And there are plenty of Deutscher Schafferhunds und Weimaraners for Dixie and Riga to play with. Spain sounds pretty good too---and my Spanish is much better than my German. Maybe I'll be a snow bird and spend the summers in the Black Forest and Alps, and the winters on the Costa del Sol---no tar there.


Brazil is sounding pretty good too. And there's The Andes right close by in Argentina and Chile.
No image available
Comment
20 of 21
Anonymous
May 30, 2011
Good heavens, 14 year terms -- and comparing an 'energy board' to the Fed? Are you kidding? Do you realize how weak our economy is? The real problem is the distortion of money in politics -- duh. Case in point: SEIA spent $1M lobbying last year, while nukes spent about $80M, and the electric utility industry spent $191M.

Duh.
No image available
Comment
21 of 21
Anonymous
May 30, 2011
Gee, Mr. Hofmeister -- guess you've never heard of 'regulatory capture' eh? I am stunned by the blatant self-interest of Mr. H. -- as if he isn't rich enough and hasn't already done enough damage to the U.S. economy and the environment.
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

Stephen Lacey

View Stephen Lacey's Profile
About: I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, wh... more »

Advertise With Us

Renewable Energy World Africa Solmetric Corporation Natural Power The Stella Group, Ltd. FC Business Intelligence DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability Solar Network International
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
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 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