The Oil Drum: Australia/New Zealand

This might have been a story of how a couple of MIT scientists happened upon a breakthrough discovery in the electrolysis of water; but they didn't (and so it isn't). This might also have been a story about an informed media which correctly and skeptically reports on such scientific discoveries -- in the midst of a public relations barrage from a leading university -- but nobody really expects such journalistic vigilance anymore. Instead, this story will try to examine what (if anything) was discovered, and how this news affects the landscape of the looming energy crisis. In addition, given that a number of encouraging research reports have surfaced suggesting a seamless transition to a hydrogen economy, I will revisit the fundamental challenge posed by moving to alternate liquid fuels: getting used to the idea of diffuse energy. (Some names have been omitted to protect the less guilty).

I have given a lot of thought to the issue of opening up new areas for drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). My position has always been to leave that oil in place for a very rainy day. I wanted to see major conservation efforts in place before we considered tapping that oil. Opening those areas when oil was $20 a barrel would have meant that much of it would have been used frivolously.

Now that oil is over $100 - and in my opinion will be much higher in 5 or 10 years (T. Boone Pickens predicts $300/bbl in 10 years) - we will have tightened our belts a good deal by the time any of this oil could actually reach the market. Therefore, I think now is the time for Congressional hearings on opening up these areas. Let's have an open debate on the issue. However, if these areas are opened for drilling, I have a compromise that should be very attractive to those in opposition.

This is a transcript of a speech by Richard K. Lester, MIT professor of nuclear science and engineering and director of the Industrial Performance Center, who spoke on 14 JUL 2008 at the annual meeting of the National Governors Association. The prepared version of Lester's speech is below the fold.

Lester is a co-author of recent MIT reports on the future of nuclear energy and coal energy, and he has published widely on the management and control of nuclear technology. He is currently leading the Energy Innovation Pathways Project, an interdisciplinary MIT assessment of the capabilities of the U.S. energy innovation system.

I found the speech interesting, so I thought I would bring it to you. A quote that particularly caught my eye is the following: "And so, to conclude, it is long past time for serious federal leadership on energy innovation. But it is also time to move beyond the Manhattan/Apollo Project metaphor. A better metaphor might be a domestic Marshall Plan for energy innovation. The original Manhattan project involved a relatively small number of people working in secret. The original Marshall Plan took everyone, working together, to rebuild the broken European economy."

Channel 7's "Sunrise" program is repeating their campaign from a few years ago to get the government to continue funding solar panels for everyone. You can sign the petition here.

Back in 2006, Sunrise proved that people power does work. When the Government was planning to ditch the rebate on solar panels, Sunrise viewers spoke up. Well since then, Australia has taken a backward step.

The new Government now means tests the rebate. If this plan stays, the rebate that makes solar panels affordable will only be available to households earning less than 100-thousand dollars a year.

Now, we're calling on the Government to scrap the means test. This is not a baby bonus - this is a valid incentive for ALL Australians to do something about global warming.

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, CALL ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SCRAP THE MEANS TEST ON THE SOLAR PANEL REBATE.

This is a guest post from Andy Hunt (solar_bud on The Oil Drum). It's an inspiring account of what can be done today with a modest property to live efficiently and maintain a degree of energy security.

Vital Statistics

Our house was built around 1900. It is an end-terrace house with 2 bedrooms, located in an inner-city area in Bury, Lancashire, UK. Our household comprises me and my partner, with no children, and we live in the property all year round. No planning restrictions are in effect in our area.

Wood burning stove with back boiler.

The Guardian has an interesting article on the rapid build-out of renewable energy generation in Portugal. The country seems to be determined to become free of dependency on fossil fuels as soon as possible, with the country's energy minister also sagely pointing out "When you have a programme like this there is no need for nuclear power. Wind and water are our nuclear power".

The country currently has Europe's largest solar power plant, is constructing Europe's largest wind farm and is on the leading edge of research into wave and tidal power. The obvious question is - if Portugal can do this, why can't we ? This applies more to Australia than New Zealand obviously...

This is a guest post by Dr. Thomas Hinderling. Dr. Hinderling is the CEO of CSEM Centre Suisse d'Electronique et de Microtechnique SA. One of CSEM's most exciting projects concerns the design of a new class of large scale concentrating solar power systems, called Solar Islands ¹. This article introduces the solar island design to the readers of TOD ².

The Liberal Party has markedly changed its tune on solar power since it got kicked out of office, with shadow environment minister Greg Hunt calling for a national feed in tariff for solar power and declaring he "has a vision of Australia becoming a solar continent" at the Climate Action Network Australia Conference in Sydney.

Hunt went on to say ""giant dishes, large fields of mirrors, these are one of the forms of power stations of the future" and "an important part of Australia's future energy" - all of which indicates he is on board with the vision of large scale solar thermal power.

Below is 4th in a series of installments by Professor Charles Hall of the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry and his students attempting to update the 'balloon graph' of EROI x Scale for fossil and renewable energy sources with help from theoildrum.com readership. Todays post deals with solar energy, specifically: Hydropower, Passive Solar, Photovoltaic, and Wind energy. Next will be Geothermal and Wave energy systems.

While we spend a lot of time talking about traditional energy sources based on depleting resources that are extracted from the ground, I think its important to remember that the fastest growing sources of energy are solar and wind, and that these will never run out. As M King Hubbert put it regarding solar power in particular :

The biggest source of energy on this earth, now or ever, is solar. I used to think it was so diffuse as to be impractical. But I’ve changed my mind. It’s not impractical…This technology exists right now. So if we just convert the technology and research and facilities of the oil and gas industries, the chemical industry and the electrical power industry—we could do it tomorrow. All we’ve got to do is throw our weight into it.

Both Stuart Staniford's recent "Powering Civilization to 2050" post and (to a lesser extent) Scientific American's "Solar Grand Plan" concentrated on using photovoltaic solar cells to provide the bulk of our energy needs. While both thin film and traditional silicon based PV cells seem to set new efficiency records every couple of months (a CIGS cell recently reached 19.9% efficiency in lab tests, and multi-crystalline silicon PV cells recently reached 19.5% efficiency), the most promising mechanism for large scale solar power generation seems to be solar thermal power (often referred to as concentrating solar power, or CSP).