Clean energy gets gnarly, dude  

Business 2.0 has a look at one of the 4 big energy sources of the future - ocean energy, saying "Forget wind and solar -- the next wave in clean tech is just offshore" (forgetting wind and solar is a bad idea of course - they will both be bigger contributors than ocena power when we've moved to all clean energy sources - ocean power will be the next rung down, along with geothermal).

Surf this: The potential market for wave energy -- electricity generated by offshore turbines -- is worth a staggering $1 trillion worldwide, according to the World Energy Council, a nonprofit research organization. In the United States alone, wave technology could supply 6.5 percent of the nation's energy. No wonder, then, that startups are rushing to stake claims before someone else drops in on the best waves.

So far, most of the action is taking place overseas, where government incentives and greenhouse gas limits are creating oceans of opportunity. Take the Aguçadoura pilot project in Portugal. This fall, Ocean Power Delivery of Edinburgh, Scotland, will begin sending electricity to 1,500 homes on Portugal's north coast from a wave farm floating three miles offshore.

The project combines OPD's advanced Pelamis technology (see diagram) with a regulatory insider -- in this case, the local utility -- all funded by private investors. The project is expected to eventually power 15,000 households. "The ocean offers a massive energy resource that's virtually untapped," says Max Carcas, OPD's business development director.

U.S. energy experts agree. "The natural processes of the ocean produce a denser, more concentrated form of energy than either wind or solar," says Roger Bedard of the Electric Power Research Institute, a Palo Alto-based nonprofit. And unlike solar energy, wave power is there 24/7 [BG - this guy obviously doesn't surf - waves are as intermittent as the winds - not surprisingly as they are mostly caused by the winds].

So far the market's front-runner is OPD, which has a second commercial project in the works off Scotland's Orkney Islands. It has also scored $22.5 million from a consortium led by GE Energy Financial Services. "OPD is clearly a leading innovator in the field," says James Kim of GE Technology Lending, which also worked on the deal.

It's no accident that OPD located its initial projects in Portugal and the United Kingdom. Both nations have taken the lead in harnessing power from the ocean to comply with the Kyoto Accord's limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Government incentives -- such as paying higher rates for renewable energy -- have jump-started wave energy projects across Europe.

The BBC has an article on a new energy storage innovation - "The Paper Battery".

Flexible paper batteries could meet the energy demands of the next generation of gadgets, says a team of researchers. They have produced a sample slightly larger than a postage stamp that can release about 2.3 volts, enough to illuminate a small light. But the ambition is to produce reams of paper that could one day power a car.

Professor Robert Linhardt, of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, said the paper battery was a glimpse into the future of power storage. The team behind the versatile paper, which stores energy like a conventional battery, says it can also double as a capacitor capable of releasing sudden energy bursts for high-power applications. While a conventional battery contains a number of separate components, the paper battery integrates all of the battery components in a single structure, making it more energy efficient.

The research appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). "Think of all the disadvantages of an old TV set with tubes," said Professor Linhardt, from the New York-based institute, who co-authored a report into the technology. "The warm up time, power loss, component malfunction; you don't get those problems with integrated devices. When you transfer power from one component to another you lose energy. But you lose less energy in an integrated device."

The battery contains carbon nanotubes, each about one millionth of a centimetre thick, which act as an electrode. The nanotubes are embedded in a sheet of paper soaked in ionic liquid electrolytes, which conduct the electricity. The flexible battery can function even if it is rolled up, folded or cut.

Although the power output is currently modest, Professor Linhardt said that increasing the output should be easy. "If we stack 500 sheets together in a ream, that's 500 times the voltage. If we rip the paper in half we cut power by 50%. So we can control the power and voltage issue."

Because the battery consists mainly of paper and carbon, it could be used to power pacemakers within the body where conventional batteries pose a toxic threat.

Outside Magazine has a report on the Rocky Mountain Institute's 25th anniversary bash - "Bill Clinton and Sustainability at the Amory Love-In".

"Amory, you've lost a lot of battles. But you're winning the war." That's how Bill Clinton closed up his remarks last night at the Rocky Mountain Institute’s 25th anniversary celebration in Aspen, Colorado—or as I have come to think about it, the Amory Love-In. Lovins, the sustainability guru who founded the Rocky Mountain Institute and whose book Natural Capitalism earned him countless disciples in business and government has gathered a fairly incredible group of luminaries to look at “The Convenient Truth,” looking for “profitable business-led climate solutions.”

Among them: Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard, former New York governor George Pataki, Interface carpet visionary Ray Anderson, Wal-Mart owner Rob Walton, former CIA chief James Woolsey, the New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, Sustainable South Bronx activist Majora Carter, venture capitalist Bill Joy, inventor Dean Kamen, Coca-Cola environmental head Jeff Seabright, and of course President Clinton. (Whose people hadn't yet released a photo when I posted this—apologies.)

“Amory is relentlessly optimistic,” Clinton said, "ruthlessly devoted to facts, committed to being in the solutions business not the complaints business, and doing it in a way that creates good economics.”

Clinton and Lovins, it turns out, go back to Oxford University in the 1970s. Lovins recalled getting a call from Clinton at the White House. “Amory,” he said, “I’m gonna give a speech on climate change in two days. “What should it be?” Clinton became the first head of state, he reminded us, to articulate Amory’s vision and he quickly started tossing stats around— climate, economics, business, profits, etc—like he had founded RMI himself. Lovins, Clinton said, got RMI to help green up the White House and now Bill is trying to take that on the road with his foundation, helping 40 cities on five continents—including Philly and New Orleans in the United States—do energy retrofits on their biggest buildings.

Grist has an article on John Butler from "The John Butler Trio" - "The Butler Did It" - "Aussie guitarist John Butler on nukes, dickheads, and common sense". Many years ago I used to listen to John busking on James Street in Northbridge on hot summer nights - he was far and away the best busker I ever saw...

For the record, John Butler hates the word "environmentalism." Actually, he's sick of all the "-isms." The Australian jam-band musician is more interested in the interconnectedness of problems, in why humans do the things we do. "Lack of love, or hope, or opportunity," he says, "are the core problems that end up, down the road, becoming environmental or human-rights issues."

Known for his outspoken political beliefs and signature dreads, Butler -- who was born in California and moved down under at 11 with his family -- has a way with audiences that goes back to his days as a busker on the streets of Western Australia. Now most of his performances are on a stage in front of thousands of people, gaining him a platform for the issues that matter to him: banning nukes, fighting AIDS, curbing climate change. At the Live Earth concert in Sydney last month, Butler took the opportunity to do just that, making T-shirts emblazoned with "Say no to nuclear energy" and encouraging fans to think about renewables.

Butler's green leaning isn't just an act. The John Butler Trio's most recent U.S. tour was greened by Clif Bar's GreenNotes program. His messages have made their way into album inserts (printed on recycled paper) and lyrics. His website even includes a forum for debate about the environment and global politics.

The video for Butler's most recent single, "Better Than," an upbeat song set to a relaxed, rootsy beat, closes with this quote: "Art changes people ... people change the world." It's a notion he truly seems to live by.

I got the chance to chat with Butler post-Live Earth during a brief stop in the U.S. (he called from a parking lot in Hollywood) before the band finished up its Grand National tour in Australia. Our conversation echoed his musical style, laid-back and thoughtful, as it meandered from the obligatory questions about green touring to reflections on human psychology.

question You recently returned from Australia, where you played Live Earth. What was that like?

answer It was good. It was really good actually. The theme of the day was awareness, but it was so much more about action. So we thought we'd put the fifth pledge into action -- put pressure on your leaders to support renewable energy.

We decided to bring up the nuclear issue, because we have 40 percent of the world's uranium in [Australia], and we're being heavily lobbied by all the people from the uranium industry, nuclear industry, and even the government's gotten behind it. ... In the name of this concert and in the name of the fifth pledge and in the name of, actually, common sense, we were out there putting pressure on our leaders to support real renewables, rather than going down the nuclear path.

Everybody wore these T-shirts that said, "Say no to nuclear energy." I had a speech in the middle of it and got about 40,000 people all saying they wanted a nuclear-free Australia and a nuclear-free world. To me, it was a success on that front, when you put something into action. A few people were a little bit confused, like, why would you say no to nuclear energy when it's the bridge to renewable -- and I'd say well that's just bullshit, you know? So many people are getting fooled in Australia and all around the world, [saying] let's go to a green energy like nuclear energy ... it's like going from the coal fry-pan into the nuclear fire, you know?

They wanted us to take action, so we figured rather than celebrating doomsday, we'd have an action. ...

question So you were talking about individual actions making a difference. What are you doing as an individual?

answer Every day we go on stage is an action for us, and a way of adding to positive change on this planet. And it's also the buses on biodiesel, the recycling at home, choosing to buy green energy as opposed to regular types of energy. Those are the things anyone can do. Those are the things I've been doing for a long time -- it's just the right thing to do.

question Are you planning to continue this in your future tours -- offering the green tickets and the biodiesel, and all that?

answer At the moment I think we're just going to do it while it's cool, and then when it dies out, we'll just go back to being dickheads. [Laughs.]

I mean, yeah, of course. Once we started it, it was just the way to be done. And if you can do it, why wouldn't you? These things are about common sense. This is not a right-wing debate, it's not a left-wing debate, it's not an environmental debate, it's a human-being issue, a human issue. It's the same when you see an old lady coming to a door, you open it up for her because that's just the right thing to do. You treat people with respect -- not because it's the fad, or because it's going to make you look good -- because it's the right thing to do.

question You've mentioned a bunch of different issues that you support. Do you include any of this in your music? Do you mention it when you're on stage, or in your lyrics?

answer We put a brochure [about renewable energy] in our latest CD, and that's direct action as far as I'm concerned. That's 100,000 people getting information that they don't have to find from some site -- it's on their lap.

Nowadays ... I'm more interested in looking at why we consume, and the way we consume. Why we always think the grass is greener on the other side. Why we always want one more flat-screen TV, and why we want a better nose, and all those things that end up making us destroy ourselves and each other. Why do individuals who run corporations that make billions of dollars in profit still want to make that little bit more off cutting out working conditions in their factories?

You can complain about it 'til the dogs come home; there's always going to be dickheads. I'm more interested in why dickheads choose to be dickheads. And it's usually not an evil thing; it gets back to being hit as a child or not loved enough, or being insecure. I find that really interesting. Because that's where we're going to really solve the problems, when people love themselves and are willing to be awake, rather than escaping.

That's going to make some real big change in this world -- when it's not a Republican issue, when it's not a Democratic issue, when it's not an environmental issue, or a human-rights issue -- when it's actually about human beings loving themselves, loving each other, respecting themselves, and then, in due course, respecting other people, and other things. That's the common denominator for me; when you peel all the layers off the onion, that seems to be the core issue.

I gave you way too much there! [Laughs.] I didn't answer the question.

question No, that was great. I've actually interviewed a lot of musicians, but nobody ever talks about [the] why.

answer It gets boring talking about pointing the finger. It doesn't really do any good. Yeah, there's something wrong, and people have been saying "there's something wrong" for fucking thousands of years. And we're still in this situation because we haven't really dealt with the issue -- which is us, you know? Us.

US ambitions to block the Iran-India gas pipeline look like they will be as successful as most of their other diplomatic efforts in recent years as the prospective partners consider bringing Gazprom in to provide technical expertise and enough Russian skin in the game to provide protection against outside intervention.

India's ambassador to Russia said Monday it could secure extra safety guarantees if Russian gas giant Gazprom participated in the project to build a natural gas pipeline to link Iran, Pakistan and India. Gazprom has been considering joining the $7.5 billion project for more than a year to transport Iranian gas through Pakistan to India, RIA Novosti reported.

Kanwal Sibal, the Indian ambassador to Russia, said though the project had at first raised India's concerns over safety issues, Gazprom's abundant experience in the field could ease all concerns. The 1,430-mile pipeline would have a capacity to transport 21.1 billion cubic meters of gas annually. If the project does materialize, it could come on stream in 2011. However, Sibal said disputes over pricing and transit duties had yet to be settled. ...

India's ONGC Videsh Ltd. is looking to acquire a 20-percent stake in Iran's Yadavaran field, which has an estimated capacity of 60,000 barrels of oil per day. "Exercising our option we have asked Iran to consider giving OVL a 20 percent stake in the project. The fate of the 5 million-ton liquefied natural gas deal, which was inked between India and Iran in 2005, is linked to the development of these fields," company officials were cited as saying in local news reports.

Under a 2005 memorandum of understanding, Iran agreed to give Indian firms a 100-percent stake in the Jufeyr project along with a 10-percent stake in the Yadavaran project. "However, if OVL is unable to get 100 percent participating interest in Jufeyr field then there was an option that Iran would offer 20 percent in Yadavaran project," India's Business Line cited an official as saying. In addition to India, China has also expressed an interest in the Yadavaran project, according to media reports.

The departure of the 21st century's version of Rasputin, Karl Rove, from the White House has resulted in a tidal wave of scorn and invective - and that's just from Reagan era Republicans like Doug Bandow in The Australian - "He will not be missed".

Rove's candidate is one of the most unpopular presidents in US history, viewed as an arrogant dissembler and incompetent. The Republican Party lost control of Congress last year and, with the US mired in an increasingly unpopular war, 2008 has the makings of a Democratic year. If the Democratic Party blows its opportunity - a frequent occurrence, actually - it will be a result of the opposition party's folly, not Rove's genius.

Unfortunately, Rove's short-term political victories have generated long-term political costs. For instance, Rove has helped corrupt the political process, debasing public debate and polarising a divided electorate. Most shameful has been the Republicans' campaign to smear any opponent of any aspect of the Bush agenda as unpatriotic and perhaps even treasonous. ...

Of course, Rove is not alone to blame. US politics has turned increasingly into a blue team-red team game, in which one does anything possible to destroy the other side and protect one's own. Nevertheless, Rove was instrumental in decisions such as relying on a narrow partisan majority to pass legislation and demonising Democratic candidates for any divergence from the Bush agenda. The atmosphere on Capitol Hill is poisonous, while activists on the Right and the Left are similarly divided. There is no chance for bipartisan legislation to reform, say, social security.

The policy wreckage is even greater. On Iraq, the administration has been wrong in essentially every claim it made about the justification for preventive war and every prediction it made about the course of the occupation. But the war is not just a trillion-dollar boondoggle that has resulted in tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths. The administration shifted resources from the unresolved Afghanistan conflict, giving Osama bin Laden and the Taliban time to regroup. Moreover, Iraq has become a cause celebre among jihadists, creating a host of new terrorists and turning much of Iraq into a jihadist training camp.

Related is the succession of decisions that have undermined the civil liberties of Americans. From the USA Patriot Act to the recent amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the administration has sought to greatly expand federal authority while abandoning accountability. Conservatives who view Rove as a hero may rue his role in leaving these powers for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to exercise. ...

There's more: the wreck of the US's image abroad through the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. The federal Government attempting to intervene in a tragic intra-family dispute over the care of brain-damaged Terri Schiavo. The routine violation of the rights of states despite traditional Republican fealty to the principle of federalism. ... Rove was involved in everything in the Bush administration. While he may not be chargeable for every policy failure, he helped shape and sell most policies emanating from the administration. Moreover, Rove helped create the administration. It is harder to imagine Bush without Rove than Rove without Bush. Rove's most important legacy to the US may be having helped elect one of the worst presidents in recent history. He won't be missed.

Links :

* BLDGBLOG - Liberation Hydrology: Miami 2017
* Groovy Green - $30,000 Electric Car By 2009. And It’s Not The Volt
* ABC - Iraq's deputy oil minister kidnapped
* UPI - Int'l union backs Iraq's oil workers
* Reuters - Asia demand for W.Africa oil rebounds to 1.3 mln bpd
* New York Times - China, Filling a Void, Drills for Riches in Chad
* The Australian - AGL raises its power profile. Steady progress on vertical integration in the local power market.
* The Australian - Bury CO2 in sea bed off Sydney. And today's stupid and expensive idea is...
* The Australian - Coal may be left under city water. Yet another way for coal mines to dry up rivers - possibly avoided.
* The Age - BHP steps on new gas in remote WA field
* WSJ Energy Roundup - Dubai on Ice
* AP - Swedish PM targets US over climate change
* The Independent - Wolfowitz 'tried to censor World Bank on climate change'
* The Guardian - Hundreds expected at 'climate camp'
* Business Week - Energy: Europe's Escape Routes from Moscow
* UPI - Palm oil demand puts orangutans at risk
* Der Spiegel - Biofuel Boom Threatens Gummy Bears
* Charlie Stross - Unpacking the Zeitgeist
* Green Man Review - Charles Stross, Halting State. Charlie's new book compared to The Shockwave Rider.
* Kontraband - Question Everything
* Matthew Rothschild - You Have No Rights. Bush is now a "medieval king".

It’s totally fear. That’s all he does. He’s a giant fear-monger, and that’s why he repeats al-Qaida’s name constantly. That’s why he resuscitated the name of Osama bin Laden, a name that didn’t want to slip past his lips for about three years there when it was so embarrassing to him that he hadn’t caught Osama bin Laden yet. But now it’s useful for him because he inculcates fear, and if people are so fearful, they will surrender their rights to him. He also loves this image that he uses constantly—and he used it last week again—that before 9/11 we were protected by the oceans, almost womb-like I think he wants us to think. Protected by the oceans. Well, we weren’t protected by the oceans in the War of 1812. We weren’t protected by the oceans on Pearl Harbor Day. We weren’t protected by the oceans on any single day of the Cold War when the Russians could launch an ICBM with nuclear weapons on top of them to destroy this country. So this is just a fake idea that we were safe before 9/11 and now we are imperiled in a way we’ve never been imperiled before. The Russians, the Soviets, could have incinerated this entire country. They still could. Al-Qaida can’t incinerate this country. Al-Qaida can attack and inflict some serious damage here, but they cannot destroy this country. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney can destroy our democracy, and they are in the process of destroying our democracy right now.