+- +-


Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 39
Latest: robbrogers
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 7802
Total Topics: 220
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 48
(June 03, 2014, 03:09:30 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 17 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Message icon:

Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 17, 2017, 10:17:00 pm »

Global Warming Tipping Points and Renewable Energy Explosive Growth 

Peter Carter EGU 2017 Climate Emergency

Peter Carter 

Published on Jul 16, 2017

Peter Carter of the Climate Emergency Institute at the European Geoscience General

Assembly April 2017
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 03, 2017, 07:55:23 pm »

The 6 Countries Leading on Renewable Energy, But Could Improve on Incentives, Regulatory Support

September 1, 2017 By Jennifer Delony Associate Editor

Recently released heat maps from Sustainable Energy for All identify countries and regions where improvements would increase the share of renewables in the global energy mix to 36 percent of total final energy consumption by 2030.

More Data

Top 5 Countries Planning for Renewable Energy Expansion

United States
United Kingdom

Top 5 Countries in Incentives and Regulatory Support for Renewable Energy
United Kingdom

Top 3 Countries for Carbon Pricing and Monitoring
Republic of Korea

Source: Sustainable Energy for All

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 23, 2017, 10:33:22 pm »


Rocky Mountain Institute celebrated our 35th anniversary on August 3, 2017. RMI and special guests, friends, and supporters gathered to recognize 35 years of transforming global energy use at our award-winning Innovation Center, in Basalt, Colorado.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 14, 2017, 08:19:05 pm »

Energy Democracy In 4 Powerful Steps

August 14th, 2017 by John Farrell


There’s no question that the energy system is undergoing change. One need look no further than the 1 million solar rooftops in the US or — for the wonky — the source of new power capacity in the US over the past 15 years. In 2003, just 20% of new electric capacity came from renewable power plants. In the last eight years, it’s been at or over 60% almost every year. In the first three quarters of 2016, 16% of our new power capacity came from distributed solar alone (such as home rooftop solar arrays).

But few people realize that the change from fossil fuels to renewable sources is just a harbinger for a phase of massive disruption in energy markets. The disruption will remake how the energy system serves its users and offer unprecedented choices for customers. It may go further than choice.  As the energy system shifts away from the outdated utility monopoly model, the four Ds of energy democracy — distributed power, decentralization, democracy from ownership, and disruptive technology — have the potential to put those users in charge and allow them to reap the economic benefits.

Full MUST READ article on how Energy Democracy will come about!

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 08, 2017, 02:31:58 pm »

95 percent of Germans want more renewable energies 
Ninety-five percent of Germans say that increased use and expansion of renewable energy is important or very important, according to a representative survey by Kantar Emnid, commissioned by Renewable Energies Agency (AEE). It also found broad support (65 percent) for renewable energy installations in respondents’ direct neighbourhoods (5km radius), which increased further if they already had experience with such installations in their area.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 31, 2017, 06:38:04 pm »

On One Fine Day in May, 87% of Italy’s Electricity Came From Renewables

Posted on Jul 30, 2017

By Juan Cole / Informed Comment


* On one day in May, Italy met 87% of its electricity production needs from renewables. This statistic was a fluke, since ordinarily renewables supply less than a fifth of Italy’s electricity.  Still, that on especially bright and windy days renewables can perform at this level is a harbinger for the future.  There were no disruptions of the power lines.  With enough investment, Italy could get most of its electricity from renewables

Italy is attractive as a market for solar energy, in part because it is a sunny country and solar is a much cheaper alternative to oil, gas and coal.  Italy has high electricity rates, impelling a rush to renewables.  Solar energy production was up 22% in 2016, and installations continue.
Renewables like wind and solar are up to 17% of Italian electricity production.  (They only account for 10% of US electricity production).

An Italian firm also won the right to install solar panels in Bushehr, Iran.  Iran generates some electricity with petroleum, which is a loss since it could be sold on the world market.  It thus is interested in renewables.  Each kilowatt hour brought to Iran by solar equates with more money that can be made by selling the oil abroad instead of wasting it domestically.

If you want to see the future, you don’t look at existing power generation mixes, you look at source of new power. In 2016, 90% of new power generation in Europe was renewables.

Read more:   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 29, 2017, 12:40:13 pm »

“Drawdown” — The Definitive Guide To Combating Climate Change

July 29th, 2017 by Steve Hanley


Drawdown Surprises  :o

We here at CleanTechnica, we focus heavily on the electrification of the transportation sector. That is critically important, of course, but would you care to guess what the one area is that we as a people have total control over and that has the potential to keep more carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere than making every car and truck on the planet run on electricity?

#1 is something we have touched on here only briefly — refrigerant management. Read more about it on page 164. The authors estimate that this one area could keep nearly 90 gigatons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. Electric cars? About 4 gigatons.  :P

Here are the other 9 items on the Top 10 list and their carbon reduction potential:

Wind Turbines (Onshore) — 84.60 gigatons
Reduced Food Waste — 70.53 gigatons
Plant-rich diet — 66.11 gigatons
Tropical Forests — 61.23 gigatons
Educating Girls    — 59.60 gigatons
Family Planning — 59.60 gigatons
Solar Farms — 36.90 gigatons
Silvopasture — 31.19 gigatons
Rooftop Solar — 24.60 gigatons

There are 80 items on the list. Total cost if all were fully implemented? $27.4 trillion. That’s a lot of cash, right?

However will we pay for all that?
With savings, people — or deferred costs. The authors estimated total economic savings at just under $74 trillion.

Deferred Gratification 

The trick, of course, is that the costs come up front. The savings often come later. Human beings seem genetically incapable of making hard choices today that will have extraordinary benefits later. Deferred gratification could be the death knell for the capitalist model prevalent in most countries today.

Pie-in-the-sky projections about future savings are discounted.    Either they are treated as irrelevant or derided as #FakeNews. 

The world operates on what I like to call the Wimpy Theory. Wimpy was a character in Popeye cartoons (some of you may be old enough to remember watching cartoons on television on Saturday mornings). Wimpy had one line that he used all the time. It went like this: “I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a cheeseburger today.” It’s the “kick the can down the road” theory of global management and it will kill us all if we don’t stop — all except the lucky few who can escape to Mars aboard Elon Musk’s magic carpet.  ::)

Full article:


Agelbert NOTE: I have a couple of things to say.

First of all, the contents of this article should be required reading for everyone that can read, not just students.

The issue of Deferred Gratification is not new. t is called Common Sense and every religion out there advocates it. Only the SCAM called "greed is good" Capitalism actually labels deferred gratifcation as a "weakness". That explains why Capitalism has been so morally destructive to human society and environmentally disastrous to the biosphere.

Theresa Morris wrote an excellent Essay that fleshes out what we must do. The article here deals with nuts and bolts economic realities. Theresa goes further and explains specifically WHY we should opt for deferred gratification as a matter of ethics, not just survival. I added graphics to underline the importance of her essay and some comments at the end. But the work is hers and it deserves to be broadcast far and wide, just like the article here.

I am posting here two of the graphics I included in my comments on Theresa's Essay in order to explain to readers how TPTB, who are well aware of the dangers inherent in climate change (though they won't admit it), plan to make all the rest of us pay for what those actually DOING over 90%  (about ONE percent of the world population) of the damage are liable for (i.e. environmental damage through government policies subsidizing polluters actively and passively through mendacious happy talk propaganda born of corporate corruption).

IOW, those responsible for the damage plan to spread the cost to further enrich the oligarchic polluters that got us into this mess in the first place. The operative phrase is "Fragmentation of Agency". 

The "Agency" definition here is the responsibility for harm and the consequent responsibility to pay for mitigating said harm. 

"Fragmentation" refers to what percentage of all those with Agency in doing the harm are responsible to pay to mitigate and eventually repair said harm.

Since, according to the U.N., the richest 20% of the world's population uses 80% of the resources, the 'Fragmentation of Agency' pie chart for the damage done to the biosphere should look like this:

The fossil fuel industry, and almost half of the world’s 100 largest companies, want that 'Fragmentation of Agency' pie chart to look like is as follows:

The above graphic is how TPTB polluters will try to pass most of the buck away from themselves and onto we-the-people.

We either take to heart what this Cleantechnica article makes very clear and also adopt the common sense ethical recommendations of visionaries like Theresa Morris, or we are toast.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 22, 2017, 05:21:27 pm »

China Achieves 7.2-GW New Solar Capacity Milestone in 1Q17

July 20, 2017

By Liu Yuanyuan  Director of Operations solar
China has installed 7.21 GW of new solar capacity in the first quarter of 2017, achieving another renewable energy milestone with growth maintaining the same pace as during 1Q16. Of that total, 4.78 GW came from utility-scale solar, with the remaining 2.43 GW originating from distributed solar PV, bringing the country’s cumulative solar PV capacity up to almost 85 GW. The country generated 21.4 billion kWh of electricity during the quarter, up 80 percent over the same period of a year earlier, according to statistics from China’s National Energy Administration (NEA).

The lion’s share of new solar PV capacity was located in the central and eastern regions of the country, accounting for 6.39 GW or 89 percent of the total new capacity added. China’s key PV market is gradually transitioning from the country’s western and northern interior to the center and along the eastern coast, with the 2.43 GW of new distributed solar PV overwhelmingly located in just four provinces: Zhejiang, Shandong, Anhui and Jiangsu.

However, curtailment issues continued to plague various regions during the quarter. While abandonment figures for Ningxia and Gansu dropped by 10 percent and 19 percent respectively, Qinghai, Shaanxi, and Inner Mongolia all saw time outs due to a curtailment increase of 9 percent, 11 percent, and 8 percent respectively, with the amount of time that Xinjiang’s wind plants sat idle remaining at an astronomically high 39 percent.  :(

Following an in-depth analysis of the industry and the leading industry players, the China National Renewable Energy Centre predicted the country’s newly-added installed solar capacity for the first half of the year would reach 24 GW, including roughly 17 GW from utility-scale solar.

The remaining 7 GW came from distributed solar PV, nearly three times what was added during the same period in 2016. During the second half of the year, the distributed solar PV sector is expected to maintain rapid growth, with anticipated newly added installed capacity reaching more than 7 GW, driven by the country’s favorable policies to drive development of the sector. For the full year of 2017, the country’s total newly added installed solar capacity has a good chance of exceeding 40 GW, the center predicted.

But ambitious targets do not necessarily translate into results. To achieve those goals, China would need to overcome chronic problems in its energy sector. The sector remained hobbled by severe overcapacity. Slowing demand for electricity due to the economic downturn and the slashing of energy intensive industries has caused widespread under-utilization of existing power generation capacities which are seeing their lowest utilization hours since 1978. :o 

Yet, consolidation and restructuring across China’s solar PV sector is expected to lead to stability in terms of the sector’s further development.   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2017, 10:15:35 pm »

JULY 11, 2017 / 3:07 AM

Electricity investment overtakes oil, gas for first time ever in 2016: IEA 

PARIS (Reuters) - Investments in electricity surpassed those in oil and gas for the first time ever in 2016 on a spending splurge on renewable energy and power grids as the fall in crude prices led to deep cuts, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Tuesday.

Total energy investment fell for the second straight year by 12 percent to $1.7 trillion compared with 2015, the IEA said. Oil and gas investments plunged 26 percent to $650 billion, down by over a quarter in 2016, and electricity generation slipped 5 percent.

"This decline (in energy investment) is attributed to two reasons," IEA chief economist Laszlo Varro told journalists.

"The reaction of the oil and gas industry to the prolonged period of low oil prices which was a period of harsh investment cuts; and technological progress which is reducing investment costs in both renewable power and in oil and gas," he said.

Oil and gas investment is expected to rebound modestly by 3 percent in 2017, driven by a 53 percent upswing in U.S. shale, and spending in Russia and the Middle East, the IEA said in a report.

"The rapid ramp up of U.S. shale activities has triggered an increase of U.S. shale costs of 16 percent in 2017 after having almost halved from 2014-16," the report said.

The global electricity sector, however, was the largest recipient of energy investment in 2016 for the first time ever, overtaking oil, gas and coal combined, the report said.

"Robust investments in renewable energy and increased spending in electricity networks, made electricity the biggest area of capital investments," Varro said.

Electricity investment worldwide was $718 billion, lifted by higher spending in power grids which offset the fall in power generation investments.

"Investment in new renewables-based power capacity, at $297 billion, remained the largest area of electricity spending, despite falling back by 3 percent," the report said.

Although renewables investments was 3 percent lower than five years ago, capacity additions were 50 percent higher and expected output from this capacity about 35 percent higher, thanks to the fall in unit costs and technology improvements in solar PV and wind generation, the IEA said.

Investments in coal-fired electricity plants fell sharply. Sanctioning of new coal power plants fell to the lowest level in nearly 15 years, reflecting concerns about local air pollution, and emergence of overcapacity and competition from renewables, notably in China. Coal investments, however, grew in India.

"Coal investment is coming to an end. At the very least, it is coming to a pause," Varro said.

The IEA report said energy efficiency investments continued to expand in 2016, reaching $231 billion, with most of it going to the building sector globally.

Electric vehicles sales rose 38 percent in 2016 to 750,000 vehicles at $6 billion, and represented 10 percent of all transport efficiency spending. Some $6 billion was spent globally on electronic vehicle charging stations, the IEA said.

Spending on electricity networks and storage continued the steady rise of the past five years, reaching an all-time high of $277 billion in 2016, with 30 percent of the expansion driven by China’s spending in its distribution system, the report said.

China led the world in energy investments with 21 percent of global total share, the report said, driven by low-carbon electricity supply and networks projects.

Although oil and gas investments fell in the United States in 2016, its total energy investments rose 16 percent on the back of spending in renewables projects, the IEA report said.

Editing by Susan Thomas

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 22, 2017, 10:13:03 pm »

Renewables to Grab $7 Trillion of Global Power Investment, Says BNEF

June 15, 2017

By Kelvin Ross 
Renewables will account for almost three quarters of global investment in power generation between now and 2040, according to a new report from Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

In its New Energy Outlook 2017, Bloomberg estimates that $10.2 trillion will be spent on power generation technology in the next 22 years, with clean energy grabbing $7.4 trillion.

“This year’s report suggests that the greening of the world’s electricity system is unstoppable, thanks to rapidly falling costs for solar and wind power, and a growing role for batteries, including those in electric vehicles, in balancing supply and demand,” said Seb Henbest, lead author of the report.

Of the $7.4 trillion Bloomberg expects to be invested in new renewable energy plants by 2040, solar will account for $2.8 trillion, which will provide a 14-fold jump in capacity, while wind gets $3.3 trillion and sees a fourfold increase in capacity.

As a result, wind and solar will make up 48 percent of the world’s installed capacity and 34 percent of electricity generation by 2040, compared with just 12 and 5 percent now,” said Henbest.

The report states that the levelized cost of electricity from solar PV, which is now almost a quarter of what it was in 2009, is set to drop another 66 percent by 2040. “By then a dollar will buy 2.3 times as much solar energy than it does today. Solar is already at least as cheap as coal in Germany, Australia, the U.S., Spain and Italy,” said Henbest. “By 2021, it will be cheaper than coal in China, India, Mexico, the U.K. and Brazil as well.”

Meanwhile the report forecasts that offshore wind levelized costs will “slide a whopping 71 percent by 2040, helped by development experience, competition and reduced risk, and economies of scale resulting from larger projects and bigger turbines.” It predicts the cost of onshore wind will fall 47 percent in the same period, on top of the 30 percent drop of the past eight years, thanks to cheaper, more efficient turbines and streamlined operating and maintenance procedures.

In terms of countries leading the way in investment, China and India dominate, accounting for what Bloomberg calls “a $4 trillion opportunity for the energy sector.” The report states China will account for 28 percent and India 11 percent of all investment in power generation by 2040. Indeed, the Asia Pacific region sees almost as much investment in generation as the rest of the world combined. Of this, just under a third goes to wind and solar each, 18 percent to nuclear and 10 percent to coal and gas.

The report finds that the reach of renewables will be boosted by the rise of battery technology. “We expect the lithium-ion battery market for energy storage to be worth at least $239 billion between now and 2040,” said Henbest. “Utility-scale batteries increasingly compete with natural gas to provide system flexibility at times of peak demand. Small-scale batteries installed by households and businesses alongside PV systems will account for 57 percent of storage worldwide by 2040. We anticipate renewable energy reaching 74 percent penetration in Germany by 2040, 38 percent in the U.S., 55 percent in China and 49 percent in India.”

Electric vehicles are also predicted to play a role in bolstering electricity use and balancing the grid. In Europe and the U.S., Bloomberg estimates that EVs will account for 13 and 12 percent, respectively, of electricity generation by 2040. “Charging EVs flexibly, when renewables are generating and wholesale prices are low, will help the system adapt to intermittent solar and wind. The growth of EVs pushes the cost of lithium-ion batteries down 73 percent by 2030,” explained Henbest.

The sharp rise in renewables investment is of course predicted to impact on fossil fuel generation. “Coal-fired power collapses in Europe and the U.S.,  ;D” says the report. “Sluggish demand, cheap renewables and coal-to-gas fuel switching will slash coal use by 87 percent in Europe by 2040. In the US, coal use in power drops 45 percent as old plants are not replaced and others start burning cheaper gas. Coal generation in China grows by a fifth over the next decade but reaches a peak in 2026. Globally, we expect 369 GW of planned new coal plants to be cancelled, a third of which are in India, and for global demand for thermal coal in power to decline by 15 percent over 2016-40.”

And Bloomberg stresses that gas will be a transition fuel, “but not in the way most people think.”

The report states that gas-fired power will see $804 billion in new investment and 16 percent more capacity by 2040. “Gas plants will increasingly act as one of the flexible technologies needed to help meet peaks and provide system stability in an age of rising renewable generation, rather than as a replacement for baseload coal,” said Henbest. “In the Americas, however, where gas is plentiful and cheap, it plays a more central role, especially in the near term.”

Despite a pro-coal stance taken by U.S. President Donald Trump, the report indicates that “the economic realities over the next two decades will not favor U.S. coal-fired power, which is forecast to see a 51 percent reduction in generation by 2040. In its place, gas-fired electricity will rise 22 percent and renewables 169 percent.”


Kelvin Ross is Editor of Power Engineering International magazine and its associated publications – Middle East Energy and the Global Power Review. Previously, Kelvin was News Editor at UK online news site Energy Live News, Production Editor and Head of Design on daily international shipping newspaper Lloyd’s List, Deputy Editor for a group of weekly London newspapers and has worked as a freelance sub-editor on UK national newspapers.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 20, 2017, 04:46:42 pm »

Experts Conclude Shifting US Power Mix Does Not Endanger System Reliability  

June 20th, 2017 by Joshua S Hill


Back in April, Energy Secretary Rick Perry penned a memo (PDF), directing his Chief of Staff to “initiate a study to explore critical issues central to protecting the long-term reliability of the electric grid” and using the full resources of the Energy Department. Secretary Perry ordered the report to be completed 60 days from April 19, which means we’re now right on top of expecting the report to drop.

A month later, four national business groups representing US renewable energy interests submitted materials to the Energy Secretary in an attempt to inform him of the importance and value of renewable energy sources and their contribution to protecting electricity reliability in the United States.

The four groups — Advanced Energy Economy (AEE), American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), and Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) — each penned a separate report and expressed their regret that the Department of Energy had ignored calls for “an open and transparent process for the review of reliability and electricity markets.”

In the cover letter penned by the four groups, they write,

“It is in the spirit of common purpose that we express our disappointment that the Department has apparently chosen not to make this review — which as outlined in your memo has the potential to upend energy markets around the country — public and open to input from industry, grid operators, state regulators, and other key stakeholders.”

Shares of Total US Net Generation by Fuel: 2005 vs. 2016

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 20, 2017, 03:02:13 pm »


Renewables Transition: Just How Much?

 The US electric grid can reliably handle up to 80% renewable energy by 2030, according to new research that pushes back against claims from the Trump administration that renewables are a threat to the grid’s reliability. The study from over 20 researchers published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences also functions as a rebuttal to a 2015 paper claiming the US can reach a 100 percent renewable grid by 2055. Both studies argue for an aggressive increase in US energy use. Lead author of the PNAS study Chris Clack told the Washington Post that “a peer reviewed piece to highlight some of the mistakes [of the 2015 study]” was necessary to “have a broader discussion about what we really need to fight climate change.” Lead author of the 2015 paper, Stanford professor Mark Jacobsen, has pushed back aggressively against the new paper on Twitter and in the press. 

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 06, 2017, 10:45:40 pm »

Top 10 States Leading the Renewable Energy Revolution

05 June, 2017 By Ralph Cavanagh


California continues to lead the way on clean energy, but energy efficiency and renewables are gaining major ground across the country, a new ranking of states and cities shows. Six states now get at least a fifth of their power from non-hydro renewable sources such as wind and solar—further confirmation that regardless of the Trump administration's efforts to promote fossil-fuel interests, clean energy is making undeniable inroads.

The Golden State and Massachusetts lead the eighth annual U.S. Clean Tech Leadership Index from the research firm Clean Edge for a fifth year in a row, the latter bolstered by its strong record of energy efficiency and private investment in clean tech. Vermont, Oregon and New York round out the top five.

The ranking scores each state on the policies, capital (both financial and human), and technology each has deployed to scale up clean energy. California, of course, has long been a leader in all three areas, with more solar energy generation than any other state, 1.2 million electric and hybrid cars on the road and $9.5 billion in clean-tech venture capital funding over the past three years.

San Francisco, San Jose, Washington, DC, San Diego and Portland, Oregon, top the cities ranking, based on criteria including green buildings and transportation. "There are no weak spots in the City by the Bay's performance," the report said, highlighting San Francisco's strong adoption of clean vehicles and an increased commitment to measuring, reporting and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Washington rose two spots in the ranking this year in part on the strength of its building stock and public transit ridership.

The adoption of clean energy across the U.S. is a trend that supersedes politics. The top 10 list for renewable electricity generation as a share of the total is split evenly between red states and blue states, with Iowa showing large gains in wind since 2009 and Nevada adding geothermal power.

Overall, wind and solar accounted for 61 percent of the new electric capacity added in 2016, the report said. And while the clean energy sector helps the nation cut planet-warming carbon emissions and clear the air, it is also creating jobs, an indicator that Clean Edge added to its analysis this year for the first time.

In Vermont, which fell to third in the rankings overall, clean energy jobs accounted for the largest share of total jobs (four percent) compared to other states.

Full article with encouraging graphics:

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 26, 2017, 02:37:38 pm »

New Solar Projects In India Are Cheaper Than 92% Of All Thermal Power Plants In The Country  ;D

May 25th, 2017 by Saurabh Mahapatra


According to the data for 2014-15, there are 248 thermal power plants in India based on a variety of fuels including coal, lignite, imported coal, diesel and different forms of petroleum-based fuels. The new low of solar power tariffs — Rs 2.44/kWh — is less than the tariff of 227 of the 248 thermal power plants.

Most of the cheaper 21 thermal power plants are based on domestic coal while a few are based on lignite and one uses imported coal. Another thermal power plant that is not listed among the 248 is India’s largest thermal power plant, Sasan Ultra Mega Power Plant which has an installed capacity of 3,960 megawatts. This is also among the cheapest thermal power plants in India.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 25, 2017, 10:43:46 pm »

Is the Fossil Fuel Industry Actually Dying?

May 23, 2017

Thom talks about a piece speculating on the imminent death of the fossil fuel industry. It could happen sooner than we think! 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 25, 2017, 06:35:05 pm »

Joshua D. Rhodes, Ph.D. is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in The Webber Energy Group and the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. His current research is in the area of smart grid and the bulk electricity system, including spatial system-level applications and impacts of energy efficiency, resource planning, distributed generation, and storage. He is also interested in policy.

Are Solar and Wind Really Killing Coal, Nuclear and Grid Reliability? 


May 25, 2017

By Joshua D. Rhodes, Michael E. Webber, Thomas Deetjen and Todd Davidson

U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry in April requested a study to assess the effect of renewable energy policies on nuclear and coal-fired power plants.

Some energy analysts responded with confusion, as the subject has been extensively studied by grid operators and the Department of Energy’s own national labs. Others were more critical, saying the intent of the review is to favor the use of nuclear and coal over renewable sources.

So, are wind and solar killing coal and nuclear? Yes   ;D , but not by themselves and not for the reasons most people think. Are wind and solar killing grid reliability? No, not where the grid’s technology and regulations have been modernized. In those places, overall grid operation has improved, not worsened.

To understand why, we need to trace the path of electrons from the wall socket back to power generators and the markets and policies that dictate that flow. As energy scholars based in Texas — the national leader in wind — we’ve seen these dynamics play out over the past decade, including when Perry was governor.

Wrong Question 

There has been a lot of ink spilled on why coal is in trouble. A quick recap: Natural gas is plentiful and cheap. Our coal fleet is old and depreciated. Energy use in the U.S. has flatlined, so there’s less financial incentive to build big new power plants.

Part of Perry’s review  ;) is aimed at establishing how wind and solar, which are variable sources of power, are affecting so-called baseload sources — the power plants that provide the steady flow of electricity needed to meet the minimum demand.

Posing the question whether wind and solar are killing baseload generators, including coal plants, reveals an antiquated mindset about power markets that hasn’t been relevant in many places for at least a decade. It would be similar to asking in the late 1990s whether email was killing fax machines and snail mail. The answer would have been an unequivocal “yes” followed by cheers of “hallelujah” and “it’s about time” because both had bumped into the limits of their utility. How quickly 1990s consumers leaped to something faster, less impactful and cheaper than the older approach was a sign that they were ready for it.

Something similar is happening in today’s power markets, as customers again choose faster, less impactful, cheaper options — namely wind, solar and natural gas plants that quickly boost or cut their output — as opposed to clinging to the outdated, lumbering options developed decades before. Even the Department of Energy’s own analysis states that “many of the old paradigms that govern the (electricity) sector are also evolving.”

Wind and solar are making older generators less viable because their low, stable prices and emissions-free operation are desirable. And they aren’t hurting grid reliability the way critics had assumed because other innovations have happened simultaneously.

Texas Pioneer

Let’s use the case study of Texas to illustrate. Since Texas has its own grid, known as the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas or ERCOT, and has installed more wind capacity than the next three wind-leading states combined, the Texas experience shows what variable renewables like wind power do to the grid.

In competitive markets like ERCOT, companies that run power plants place bids into an auction to provide electricity at a certain time for a certain price. A bid stack is jargon for “a stack of bids” — or the collection of all these bids lined up in order by price — in auction-based markets (such as Texas).

Markets use bid stacks to make sure that the lowest-cost power plants are dispatched first and the most expensive power plants are dispatched last. This market-based system is designed to deliver the lowest-cost electricity to consumers while also keeping power plant owners from operating at a loss. Throughout the day, the market price for electricity (in $/MWh) changes as demand changes.

Full EYE OPENING article (though Palloy's eyes will continue to be tightly shut  :P) with irrefutable animated charts and hard data proving that Renewables make the Grid MORE RELIABLE , not less:


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 23, 2017, 08:29:08 pm »

22 May 2017 | Sören Amelang, Benjamin Wehrmann, Julian Wettengel   

Germany & China appeal to US on climate / Swiss vote for Energiewende

Germany, China call on US to remain in Paris Agreement

Germany and China reiterated their calls on the US administration to commit to international climate protection efforts and stay in the Paris Agreement at a climate conference in Berlin. Germany is currently trying “on all levels” to persuade the US administration to stay in the agreement, said environment minister Barbara Hendricks at a press conference ahead of the 8th Petersberg Climate Dialogue, held 22 – 23 May in Berlin. China's Special Representative on Climate Change Xie Zhenhua said that “no country, no people” could stop the global trend towards climate protection.
The Petersberg Climate Dialogue gives countries the opportunity to informally exchange experiences on international climate policy.

Follow the public segments of the Petersberg Climate Dialogue via livestream here and find the programme in English here.

G20 must promote climate protection

G20 countries must promote climate protection and the implementation of the Paris Agreement, said the Federation of German Industries (BDI), Germanwatch and Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) in a joint press release ahead of the 8th Petersberg Climate Dialogue. The meeting in Berlin today and tomorrow should provide the necessary tailwind for the G20 summit in Hamburg in July, they said. BDI deputy managing director Holger Lösch called on G20 governments to lay the groundwork for a CO₂ price at the Hamburg summit.

Swiss give green light for renewables and nuclear phase-out

A clear majority of voters in Switzerland have opted for a new energy law that aims to promote renewable energy, bans construction of new nuclear plants and fosters greater energy efficiency, Urs Geiser writes on swissinfo.ch. About 58 percent of Swiss voters in a referendum on Sunday backed the government’s Energy Strategy 2050 programme, which had been debated for six years, Geiser writes. Swiss energy Minister Doris Leuthard said the vote opened “a new chapter in Switzerland’s energy policy,” but there was “still a lot of work to do.”

Read the article in English here.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 19, 2017, 03:20:13 pm »

Renewable Energy Is Unstoppable, Declares Financial Times  :o  ;D

May 19th, 2017 by Steve Hanley


With more then 2.2 million readers a day, the Financial Times is the newspaper of record for economists, business leaders, and government policy makers worldwide. Think Progress claims FT, as it is known to its readers, is the “most important business read” and “the most credible publication in reporting financial and economic issues” for global professional investors, business leaders, and policy makers according to surveys.

On May 18, its lead story was entitled: The Big Green Bang: How Renewable Energy Became Unstoppable. It begins with a question, one that should leave fossil fuel industry leaders feeling glum — “Is the 21st century the last one for fossil fuels?” Before we start rejoicing, keep in mind there are still 83 years left to go in this century and the fossil fuel industry intends to extract and sell every molecule of fossil fuels it can find before the end times for oil, natural gas, and coal arrive. By the time 2101 gets here, the earth may have been unalterably changed to the point where human existence as we know it is no longer possible.

Bill McKibben, in his insightful book, Oil And Honey, makes the case clearly. The environment can withstand perhaps another 565 gigatons of carbon emissions before the environment tips over into unsustainability. After that, most of the species presently alive will simply disappear, the oceans will rise by an average of 12 feet, and global temperatures will increase to the point where traditional agriculture becomes impossible. Our children’s children may not roast to death but they very well might die of starvation.

McKibben then drops the other shoe. The world’s fossil fuel companies have reserves which, if consumed, will release 2,795 gigatons of carbon emissions into the world’s already overloaded ecosystem — five times more than the environment can possibly absorb. If the fossil fuel companies dropped nuclear bombs on society, they would be vilified as monsters. But 2,795 gigatons worth of carbon may be worse than a nuclear attack. Radiation begins to abate after a few hundred years. It may be a million years of more the earth is able to recover from the fossil fuel bomb the Koch Brothers and their ilk have in mind.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 09, 2017, 11:19:10 pm »

Top Five Reasons Fossil Fuel Companies Should Diversify into Renewables Now
And why one expert believes they need to step up the pace. 

May 8, 2017

By Jennifer Runyon 
Chief Editor


2. The transition to renewables is happening faster than expected.

Lovins pointed out the dramatic fall in renewable energy prices for electricity. Dong energy’s recent bid for offshore wind at the market price for electricity is just one of many examples he gave.

“The EU wind power price in 8-9 months last year fell by 43 percent,” he said.

Just as the transition from horse and buggies to automobiles took just over a decade (In only 13 years, the Easter Day parade in New York City went from one dominated by horses and buggies to one in which there we no horses of any kind to be seen), the transition to renewable energy could be much swifter than companies realize.  Lovins predicted that there will be more EVs on the road than internal combustion engines in 10 years.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 03, 2017, 04:49:31 pm »

California legislative leaders call for 100 percent renewable energy   

Greg Alvarez 
May 3, 2017
Yesterday, the leader of the California Senate, Kevin de Leon, proposed a bill that would transition California to 100 percent renewable retail electricity.

That would improve upon the state’s existing renewable energy standard, which calls for 50 percent renewables by 2030. Under the new legislation the state would hit that target five years early, and would achieve its 100 percent renewable goal by 2045.

I realized that the investor-owned utilities are going to hit 50 percent by the early-to-mid 2020s without breaking a sweat ,” de Leon said. “So, we should accelerate this process and demonstrate to the entire world that we can actually generate 100 percent of our electricity with clean energy and put people to work.” 

Danielle Osborn Mills, Director of AWEA’s California Caucus, praised the move:

“The wind industry stands ready to create jobs and provide affordable, reliable, clean energy to Californians. Wind energy is already a no-regrets alternative to fossil fuels, and it is a key component of a diverse, balanced, low-carbon grid. Accelerating our renewable energy targets to get to 50% renewables by 2026 can help Californians capture significant savings from the declining federal tax incentives for renewable energy, and will promote significant additional direct investment in California.

“This bill isn’t just about a long-term vision, it is about near-term action.  We cannot afford to delay.  SB 100 will ensure continued economic growth, improved environmental quality for all, and resilience in the face of uncertainty.” 


Agelbert NOTE: Trump and his fossil fuel based wrecking crew will, of course, try to sabotage these CommonFuckingSense efforts in California. My advice to them and all their buddies from the Kochtopus is to bring a sandwich.
We California Kitties understand the Fossil Fuel Industry MO in general and that of the Koch Brothers in particular. They've been at it for many years (see 2011 videos below). But NOW, at least in OUR state, it's OVER for them and their hired liars and crooks!

The Koch Brothers & Their Amazing Climate Change Denial Machine

Uploaded on Jun 13, 2011
A short animation detailing the effort of billionaires oil barons Charles & David Koch to undermine belief in climate change and prevent legislation that threatens their profits. By pouring money into bogus scientific studies and funding third parties such as Think Tanks and Front Groups (posing as everything from Seniors groups to Women's groups) the public is led to believe a genuine scientific debate is raging. In truth, as one climate denier candidly admits, those doubting the science are just a small, if brilliantly coordinated, minority.

The piece was made by Australian filmmaker Taki Oldham and incorporates footage from his 55 min. documentary The Billionaires' Tea Party (2011).
Attack of the Kochtopus! (Original)
Published on Mar 2, 2011
See more at http://www.zinasaunders.com

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 02, 2017, 08:14:28 pm »


There are now more than 9.4 million people working in the renewable energy sector  

ast updated on May 2nd, 2017  at 8:31 pm by Mihai Andrei

According to a new report released by an environment and energy consultancy, 9.4 million people globally work in renewable energy, more than at any other point in history.

Image via Pexels.

The report was released by Allen and York, and it states that 2.8 million people work in solar PV, 1.6 million in liquid biofuels, and 1 million in wind, reflecting a “5% increase in 2015 and confirms the strength of this relatively new industry.”

Despite Trump’s best efforts, the US is still one of the leaders in renewable energy, alongside China, Brazil, India, Japan, and Germany. This relatively new industry has been more effective in creating jobs than coal or oil in the United States, and previous research has suggested that in terms of job generation, the overall potential of the renewable energy sector is much higher than that of the fossil fuel industry. This is easily visible in existing figures, as more and more Americans work in and support renewables. The report states:

“Exciting developments across US solar and wind has seen a 6% increase in renewable energy employment in 2016, reaching a total of 769,000 people working across the industry. According to figures published by the US Department of Energy (US DOE), the solar workforce increased by 25% in 2016, while wind employment increased by 32%.Driven by plummeting costs and growing consumer appetite, the renewable energy sector in the US looks set to thrive, despite their climate-sceptic President.”

This is not limited to the US or a specific area of the world. In Morocco, for instance, the market could soon yield over half a million new jobs, mostly in the solar industry (something which Morocco is already famous for). Despite highly questionable leadership, one in five Australian homes use solar energy, China has already cemented their dominance in terms of renewable energy generation, and Europe as a whole is also taking strides in the right direction, though with a slightly different twist. Residential solar energy is growing in popularity, especially in Germany, where ambitious tariffs facilitated great development in rooftop solar. Despite a natural trend, the role of good governance is extremely important, in more than one way.

Interestingly, the report also underscores the significance of education for the future of renewables. As more and more jobs emerge and diversify, having well-educated, qualified professionals is vital. Referring to the UK specifically, the report states:

“Digital skills should be included in the government’s future definition of basic skills and a comprehensive programme of upskilling developed in partnership with industry and training providers to ensure that the UK workforce at all levels” the report states. “A much greater, targeted focus is needed on promoting STEM subjects and engineering careers to under-represented groups (including women, people from BAME communities and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds) to fully unlock the talent potential in the UK.”

No matter how you look at it, the future appears bright for renewable jobs. Renewable energy technologies are getting cheaper, installations are growing almost exponentially year after year. For such a new industry, the results are indeed stunning. Hopefully, the world will embrace it instead of clinging to the past.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 01, 2017, 06:09:21 pm »

Listen Up: Westinghouse Nuclear Energy Killed by Gas, Solar and Wind 

May 1, 2017

By The Energy Show on Renewable Energy World 

Video killed the radio star — just as natural gas, wind and solar are slowly but surely killing the nuclear power industry (we’re already saying good bye to coal). Unfortunately, the venerable Westinghouse Electric Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 29, 2017, dragged down by huge losses in their nuclear power plant construction business. But the story about the demise of Westinghouse is more nuanced, read on to find out how and why solar killed nuclear.

George Westinghouse founded the Westinghouse Electric Corporation in 1886. He teamed up with Nikola Tesla to develop and promote AC power, instead of the DC power infrastructure preferred by Thomas Edison. By using transformers to step up voltages for long distance power distribution and then step down voltages again for home use, the economics of AC power turned out to be much more favorable than DC power (the geeky reason is explained by Ohm’s Law and conductor sizes). To this day the world’s electrical system is still almost exclusively based on AC power. Over a 100-year period the Westinghouse Electric Corporation expanded into appliances, locomotives, entertainment — and even solar power (for many years Westinghouse held the record for solar cell efficiency).

Fast forward to the 1990s when the Westinghouse Electric Corporation came to the conclusion that their broadcasting subsidiary — the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) — had the potential to be more profitable than their manufacturing businesses. So they sold off all of their manufacturing operations, renamed the parent company as CBS, and licensed the Westinghouse name to leading companies in related market segments. Their nuclear business, which was named the Westinghouse Electric Company, eventually ended up as a subsidiary of Toshiba.

Toshiba expected to benefit from a renaissance in nuclear power, leveraging less expensive reactor designs and the need for carbon-free electricity. But three developments prevented this nuclear renaissance. First, the actual construction of these new reactor designs ended up being very expensive and time consuming. Second, nuclear power is still plagued by safety (Fukushima), nuclear waste and proliferation issues. And the final nail in the nuclear coffin is economic: electric power plants fueled by natural gas, solar and wind are much less expensive to build and operate, and can be constructed in several years — as opposed to several decades for a new nuclear plant. For more about the fate of the nuclear power industry and how solar killed nuclear energy, Listen Up to the Energy Show on Renewable Energy World.


Stupid me thought Nukes were DOA in Texas, with all the alternative energy that's already online, but apparently they are not:

Several energy companies are planning to build nuclear power plants to meet electricity demand in a way that is cost effective and protects air quality. In Texas, Exelon, Luminant and NRG Energy have filed license applications with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build at least five reactors in Victoria County, Glen Rose and Matagorda County. Plans for expansion in Matagorda were put on hold after the March 2011 earthquake in Japan caused a nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Nuclear Power plant, 155 miles north of Tokyo. Amarillo Power/UniStar is planning to build one additional reactor near Amarillo, but plans there have also hit delays. Upon completion, the plants could provide enough electricity to serve 6.8 million homes annually.



I sure am sorry to see this happening. I don't expect Rick Perry to do anything to stop it.

Yes, the nuke pukes are busy doing what they do in Texas. Yes, the nuclear waste problem is the gift that keeps giving for those who want to pollute poor neighborhoods and make the public pay for it based on "national security". This has been their M.O. for over half a century. None of that nuclear power stuff was EVER cost effective at producing energy, never mind the radionuclide pollution, Uranium mine pollution (still mostly NOT addressed because the hundreds of abandoned mines are in Native American lands) and other "externalized" costs we-the-people are STUCK with for about 100,000 years, more or less.   

It's over for them, Eddie. You will have die hard bastards trying to make wind and solar "illegal" or "too polluting" LOL! in order to keep nuclear white elephants alive. But I'm confident that Renewable Energy has a strange bedfellow ally here called the frackers. The frackers have ZERO intention of allowing the nuclear power people to make a comeback. Consequently, it's all out rug pulling time for nuclear power.

Here's the deal, Eddie. There is only ONE reason nuclear power reactors currently get subsidized over and over and over despite them not making any sense economically: Nuclear Submarines and nuclear weapons! That's right. As strange as it sounds, the M.I.C. has a welfare program for nuclear submarine commanders and Universities that teach nuclear physics.

Yep, the university nuclear physics studies are funded by we-the-people BECAUSE TPTB want to maintain a current level of people (when the old nuke puke farts retire) that understand nuclear physics so that our subs and carriers and BOMBS are kept up to date.

Recently, that came out in England. The ONLY reason they are trying to build the Hinkley nuclear power white elephant (which FORCES the English to pay electricity rates for the next FORTY YEARS ABOVE, FAR ABOVE!, what it NOW costs to get juice from wind and solar) is because they want JOBS for their submarine crews and a REASON for people to study to make nuclear bombs and other nuclear fun and games stuff. Scotland has been trying to give England the finger on nukes for over a decade (unsuccessfully - England won't pull their submarine bases out). So Texas is sort of in the same bind that Scotland is.

Texans are creative. Especially when they have to fossil fuelers helping them be creative, if ya know what I mean.    They'll figure something out that makes economic sense eventually. For now, if your utility tries to sweet talk you into the same crapola they are doing in Georgia (the utility building the nukes that apparently will never open CAN, and DOES, charge CURRENT customers monthly fees for losses on the construction of the nukes WITHOUT ANY TIME LIMIT),  I suggest you politely remind them that for profit corporations are not supposed to stiff people for losses that their customers did not incur.  ;)

We are DONE with nukes in Vermont. I hope you Texans can soon stop those money pit disasters soon as well.

Moving right along , here's an article that pretty well covers the sorry ass political situation in this country. I think you and I can find common ground in this article:

Here’s Why We Shouldn’t Laugh at Donald Trump’s 100-Day Faceplant

Jon Schwarz

April 29 2017, 11:52 a.m.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: May 01, 2017, 01:12:01 pm »

Listen Up: Westinghouse Nuclear Energy Killed by Gas, Solar and Wind 

May 1, 2017

By The Energy Show on Renewable Energy World 

Video killed the radio star — just as natural gas, wind and solar are slowly but surely killing the nuclear power industry (we’re already saying good bye to coal). Unfortunately, the venerable Westinghouse Electric Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 29, 2017, dragged down by huge losses in their nuclear power plant construction business. But the story about the demise of Westinghouse is more nuanced, read on to find out how and why solar killed nuclear.

George Westinghouse founded the Westinghouse Electric Corporation in 1886. He teamed up with Nikola Tesla to develop and promote AC power, instead of the DC power infrastructure preferred by Thomas Edison. By using transformers to step up voltages for long distance power distribution and then step down voltages again for home use, the economics of AC power turned out to be much more favorable than DC power (the geeky reason is explained by Ohm’s Law and conductor sizes). To this day the world’s electrical system is still almost exclusively based on AC power. Over a 100-year period the Westinghouse Electric Corporation expanded into appliances, locomotives, entertainment — and even solar power (for many years Westinghouse held the record for solar cell efficiency).

Fast forward to the 1990s when the Westinghouse Electric Corporation came to the conclusion that their broadcasting subsidiary — the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) — had the potential to be more profitable than their manufacturing businesses. So they sold off all of their manufacturing operations, renamed the parent company as CBS, and licensed the Westinghouse name to leading companies in related market segments. Their nuclear business, which was named the Westinghouse Electric Company, eventually ended up as a subsidiary of Toshiba.

Toshiba expected to benefit from a renaissance in nuclear power, leveraging less expensive reactor designs and the need for carbon-free electricity. But three developments prevented this nuclear renaissance. First, the actual construction of these new reactor designs ended up being very expensive and time consuming. Second, nuclear power is still plagued by safety (Fukushima), nuclear waste and proliferation issues. And the final nail in the nuclear coffin is economic: electric power plants fueled by natural gas, solar and wind are much less expensive to build and operate, and can be constructed in several years — as opposed to several decades for a new nuclear plant. For more about the fate of the nuclear power industry and how solar killed nuclear energy, Listen Up to the Energy Show on Renewable Energy World.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 17, 2017, 05:14:04 pm »

Big Announcements on Renewable Energy

InsideClimate News April 17, 2017 | Rona Fried | Renewables & Efficiency

Thanks to continuing declines in solar and wind costs, the world added record amounts of renewable energy last year at the lowest prices ever , according to the United Nations.  55% of all new power came from renewables – one of the reasons emissions were flat in 2016 for the third year in a row.

Electricity from renewables rose 9% (139 gigawatts), while the cost to install all that dropped 23%.

Renewables now provide 11.3% of the world’s electricity, preventing 1.7 gigatons of carbon emissions a year.

“More for less” was the story of renewable energy in 2016. Global investment in renewables (excluding large hydro) fell by 23% to $241.6 billion, the lowest total since 2013, but there was record installation of renewable power capacity worldwide in 2016,” says the report.

Key Findings:

◾Investment in renewables was roughly double that of fossil fuels for the fifth consecutive year.

◾Costs to install solar PV, onshore wind and offshore wind were down 10%

◾Record investments in offshore wind, up 53% to $25.9 billion in Europe and China

◾Solar and wind prices reached record lows at power auctions – prices “that would have seemed inconceivably low only a few years ago.”

In 2017, about 85 gigawatts (GW) of solar will be added around the world, more than double that of 2014, and China is expected to add 30 GW of that. The US, China, Japan and India will dominate the market in 2017, with India overtaking Japan as the third-largest market, according to GTM Research.

For the first time, offshore wind will be built without any subsidies, as DONG Energy won an auction to build two offshore wind farms in Germany’s North Sea at super-low prices. The price to construct offshore wind farms is down 46% in the last five years – 22% in 2016 alone- reports Bloomberg.

China’s emissions WENT DOWN for the first time last year, dropping 1% even as the economy grew 6.7%, says the International Energy Agency.  The US had the biggest drop in emissions at 3%.

US Renewables

Thanks to energy efficiency and renewables, US carbon emissions are 14% lower than 2005 levels – we are back to 1992 levels.  ;D

Wind and solar are increasingly the lowest-cost resources getting connected to the grid, changing the investment calculus for utilities and dominating new capacity builds. Electricity demand nationwide continues to fall, even as millions more square feet of buildings are constructed. And in states across the country, distributed solar is decimating load growth,” says GTM Research.

56 GW of coal plants could close in the Midwest because the average cost of wind is $10/ megawatt-hour cheaper, according to Moody’s Investor Services.

San Diego slid past Los Angeles in 2016 as the most active solar market. Installations rose 60% to 303 megawatts (MW) – enough to power 76,000 homes. LA is in second place, followed by Honolulu and San Jose.  The top 20 cities have nearly 2 GW of solar PV installed – about as much as the entire US at the end of 2010, says Shining Cities 2017: How Smart Local Policies are Expanding Solar Power in America.

California got 13% of its electricity from solar in 2016, according to the US Energy Information Agency.

Read our article, US Solar Grows 95% in 2016, In Best Year Ever.

Big Announcements

Chicago‘s mayor announced that all government buildings will run on 100% renewable energy by 2025, the most aggressive goal of any US city to date. For perspective, those buildings consume as much energy as 295,000 households. Two of the dirtiest coal plants in the country are also closing.

Florida is finally about to be a solar leader!  ;D Utility Florida Power & Light plans to install an incredible 2.7 GW of solar across the state in the next seven years – enough to power 420,000 homes. After it closes a second coal-fired power plant, solar will be the primary electricity source after natural gas.

New York State committed to 2.6 GW of offshore wind – the first major installation in the US. By 2030, wind will supply energy for 1.25 million homes.

Facebook announced it’s building another 100% wind-powered data center, this time in Nebraska on 144 acres – at least two 450,000 square-foot buildings.

The world’s largest beer-maker, Anheuser-Busch, announced it will run completely on renewables by 2025

It joins 90 other companies and 25 U.S. cities – large and small – that have made this commitment. Cities range from Madison, Wisconsin to Abita Springs, Louisiana. Pueblo, Colorado is doing it to bring electric rates DOWN and get more reliable energy and Georgetown, Texas says wind and solar power are more predictable and lack the volatile prices of oil and gas – a contract signed today sets prices for the next 25 years.

Tesla’s Nevada Gigafactory started manufacturing in January, bringing back battery production to the US, in addition to making the Model 3 electric car.

By 2018, the Gigafactory, which is a third complete, will double the world’s production capacity for lithium-ion batteries and employ 6,500 people. Besides building batteries for its vehicles – which could soon include trucks – Tesla is making batteries for homes and as back ups to the electric grid. 95% of components will be made in the US, including the enormous 70 MW solar array on the roof!


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 30, 2017, 02:45:46 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: The Renewable Energy percentage for 2016 is much higher than 2014 (above chart) and continues to grow month by month.

Der Tagesspiegel Online

We should lower the electricity tax

Germany’s electricity tax is no longer justified in its current form and should be lowered, Hubertus Heil, deputy chairman of the Social Democrats’ (SPD) parliamentary group, said in an interview with Der Tagesspiegel.

The tax was introduced by the SPD and the Green Party at the beginning of the century to support clean energy generation, Heil explained.

“But if power becomes more and more green, it doesn't make sense to tax this green power,” he said.


Despite Trump  , more and more countries continue to ratify the Paris Agreement   

Mihai Andrei March 27, 2017

Despite blatant climate change denial from the newly elected US administration, more and more countries understand the urgency of the issue and ratifying the Paris agreement. So far, 139 countries responsible for 82% of the world’s emissions have ratified the pact.

In 2015, world leaders gathered in Paris and decided on an international agreement to curb out carbon dioxide emissions and limit global warming. The agreement signed through a UN framework deals with greenhouse gases emissions mitigation, adaptation, and finance, starting in the year 2020. The agreement entered into force after it was ratified by 55 countries covering over 55% of global emissions.

The US was a key player in the Paris discussions, with then secretary of state John Kerry being one of the most active negotiators and supporters of the pact. But recently, the US did a U-turn and Trump has vowed to destroy Obama’s environmental legacy. Thankfully, countries aren’t falling for that. In the Trump era, 34 countries have formally joined the Paris Agreement. Out of the biggest 25 polluters, just three haven’t ratified the agreement: Russia, Iran, and Turkey.

Just stop and think about this for a moment that the Trump administration wants to pull the US out from the Paris agreement, and is taking steps in this direction.

Out of all the big countries, just Russia (the world’s largest natural gas producer, whose economy is directly tied to fossil fuel companies), Iran (one of the world’s largest oil producers), and Turkey, which is pretty much a dictatorship at this point, have not ratified the Paris agreement — and the US wants to join that list. But there is still hope.

Just last week, the Philippines formally joined the Paris Agreement, after the country’s leader initially called the deal “stupid.” Apparently, after coming into power he understood just how vulnerable his country is to climate change, just like most countries on the globe, and changed his mind. There is a lesson to be learned here, that even stubborn leaders can change their minds when presented with the reality of global warming, and even if Trump decides not to change his mind… the rest of the world is still moving in the right direction. China is taking concrete steps to tackle climate change, becoming the biggest investor in both wind and solar energy, Europe is well underway to achieve their climate goals, and overall, the world seems to be taking much-needed steps towards a sustainable future. Sure, you could argue that it’s not nearly enough, that ambitions are not matched by actions, but for the first time in human history, we have an international framework to tackle global warming — and sticking to it is crucial.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 23, 2017, 07:27:20 pm »

21 Mar 2017 

Countries Join Forces to Accelerate Global Energy Transition


Berlin, Germany, 21 March 2017 — Ministers and representatives from frontrunner countries in energy transition met on the sidelines of the Berlin Energy Transition dialogue to discuss the urgency for the world to move onto a trajectory of sustainable low carbon economic growth while meeting increasing global energy demand and addressing climate change. They also emphasized that the technologies and business models to do so are available today.

At the meeting, ministers and high-level representatives from China, Denmark, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Morocco, and the United Arab Emirates, agreed to work together to establish an Energy Transition Coalition in the course of this year for accelerating the transition to a sustainable energy future. The Coalition will assemble countries leading in developing long term energy transition strategies to foster investments in a low carbon energy sector. Ensuring increased investor certainty for low carbon economic growth by developing energy transition strategies will be at the heart of the Energy Transition Coalition.

“Few people would have imagined the scale and pace of the energy transition which we are witnessing today. Renewable energy deployment has considerably expanded thanks to reduced costs and record new investments in power generation from renewables. Energy efficiency is picking up and we see important synergies emerging with renewable energy. Many countries are proving that the ongoing energy transition in fact has multiple positive social, economic and environmental impacts,” said International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Director-General Adnan Z Amin. “By working together, we can hasten the transition to a sustainable energy future,” he added.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 16, 2017, 05:37:00 pm »

As Donald Trump prepares to make his first major rollback of Barack Obama’s climate policies, corporations employing more than 1.85 million people are warning such moves put “American prosperity at risk”.

Businesses urge Trump to rethink climate bonfire

Published on 15/03/2017, 2:48pm


The letter said a low carbon economy could be “cost-effective” if policies supported energy efficiency and the transition of the energy system.

“Failure to build a low-carbon economy puts American prosperity at risk. But the right action now will create jobs and boost US competitiveness. We pledge to do our part, in our own operations and beyond, to realise the Paris Agreement’s commitment of a global economy that limits global temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius,” it said.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 12, 2017, 02:33:19 pm »

Mar. 10, 2017 04:35PM EST

Elon Musk Tweets Offer to Fix Australia's Energy Crisis in 100 Days  :o

Lorraine Chow


Tesla boss and prolific tweeter Elon Musk has made an audacious bet to solve South Australia's energy woes by building a 100-megawatt battery storage farm. If the system is not operational in 100 days, the AUD$33 million (USD$25 million) technology will be provided for free.  :o  ;D

It all started on Thursday when Atlassian CEO and Australian billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes tweeted an article to Musk that cited a similar offer from Lyndon Rive, who heads Tesla's battery division.

Rive said he would "commit" to installing the 100-300 megawatt hours of batteries to help stop South Australia's recent string of blackouts.

"We don't have 300MWh sitting there ready to go but I'll make sure there are," he said

Cannon-Brookes then tweeted to Musk asking him if he could really make this happen if the funds were available and the politics were sorted out. Incredibly, Musk didn't just cement the offer, he wagered that Tesla could do it in less than 100 days or else the whole installation would be given free of charge.

"That serious enough for you?" Musk added.   


Agelbert NOTE: Fossil Fuel Industry PRIVATE REACTION to the above: QUICK! Get our bought and paid for front man in the White House to get our bought and paid for friends in Congress to pass a law increasing "subsidies" for fossil fuels/"National Security" ;), to be "funded", OF COURSE, with a TAX on all new Renewable Energy infrastructure a US Corporation sets up anywhere in the WORLD, not just the USA.   That way, we can make sure those Australians don't get out of line.   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 07, 2017, 01:20:35 pm »

Want Middle Class Manufacturing Jobs? Look to Wind & Solar


Corporations love wind and solar. Besides, getting clean energy (they live on this planet too), they get stable, low-cost electricity.  Making fossil fuels dominant again will not only raise prices, but make them much more volatile as we have seen in the past.

The average American is spending the Least Ever on energy
, less than 4% of total annual household spending, thanks to great gains in energy efficiency (i.e. cars use much less gas; appliances use much less electricity), more renewables on the grid and low gas prices, says the 2017 Sustainable Energy in America Factbook,

◾Retail electric prices fell 2.2% in 2016; the average person pays 3.9% less per kilowatt-hour than in 2007.

◾Renewable energy is at record levels, with costs for wind and solar continuing to fall.  In some states, like Iowa, wind is the cheapest form of electricity.

◾Incredibly, energy consumption is falling even with economic growth. GDP is up 12% since 2007, while energy consumption is down 4%.  ;D

◾Natural gas prices are near or at record lows.

Because of these trends, the US beats China, India, Mexico and Japan for energy costs related to manufacturing. It’s one of the things that’s been attracting manufacturers back to the US.

And with all this, economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions are at the lowest levels in 25 years. 

Read our article, Remember, Energy Efficiency & Renewables Mean Lower Electric Bills

Tell me again? Why is TRUMP bringing back a fossil-fuel based economy?   ??? 


The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing, human health depleteing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!   
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 06, 2017, 07:17:45 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: It's good to know that others out there (see below) support the idea of a WWII style effort to transition to 100% Renewable Energy in order to lessen the damage from Catastrophic Climate Change. I started a petition to that effect about three years ago but it didn't catch on too well.  :( However I did get nearly 400 signatures from people all over the world, so I hope that, in some small way, I helped get the ball rolling, so to speak, on the necessity for a wartime effort to do the right thing on behalf of future generations.

This is a summary of Delina's proposal:

Laurence L Delina 

Visiting Fellow at Harvard Kennedy School during the Spring of 2013 and Spring of 2016

Postdoctoral Associate at Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future at Boston University
Rachel Carson Fellow at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich (email)


Delina, L. & Diesendorf, M., 2013. Is wartime mobilisation a suitable policy model for rapid national climate mitigation?. Energy Policy , 58 , pp. 371-380. Copy at http://j.mp/Zf4x2h

2013_delinadiesendorf-article-is-wartime-mobilisation-a-suitable-policy-model-for-rapid-national-climate-mitigation.pdf 288 KB

Is wartime mobilisation a suitable policy model for rapid national climate mitigation? 


Climate science suggests that, to have a high probability of limiting global warming to an average temperature increase of 2degC, global greenhouse gas emissions must peak by 2020 and be reduced to close to zero by 2040. However, the current trend is heading towards at least 4degC by 2100 and little effective action is being taken.

This paper commences the process of developing contingency plans for a scenario in which a sudden major global climate impact galvanises governments to implement emergency climate mitigation targets and programs. Climate activists assert that rapid mitigation is feasible, invoking the scale and scope of wartime mobilisation strategies.

This paper draws upon historical accounts of social, technological and economic restructurings in several countries during World War 2 in order to investigate potential applications of wartime experience to radical, rigorous and rapid climate mitigation strategies.

We focus on the energy sector, the biggest single contributor to global climate change, in developed and rapidly developing countries. We find that, while wartime experience suggests some potential strategies for rapid climate mitigation in the areas of finance and labour, it also has severe limitations, resulting from its lack of democratic processes.

link to article

Preprint: http://bit.ly/18VA2FD

Presented at the Earth System Governance 2013 Tokyo Conference: http://bit.ly/18Em3Bt

Presented at the Tyndall Conference on Radical Emissions Reduction at the Royal Society, 2013: http://bit.ly/1bXL2mj
Last updated on 11/18/2016


Agelbert NOTE: I posted the following in June of 2014. It evidences that we CAN do the above, if we had a government that actually cared about future generations.

June 03, 2014, 02:17:04 am

It's time for Americans in the Service of Future Generations to GET WITH THE PROGRAM! We did it with the massive, industrial scale building of Liberty Ships in WWII. We can do it again with the massive, industrial scale building of Liberty Renewable Energy Machines.

Country of Origin: United States of America
Manufacturers: Alabama Dry Dock Co, Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyards Inc, California Shipbuilding Corp, Delta Shipbuilding Co, J A Jones Construction Co (Brunswick), J A Jones Construction Co (Panama City), Kaiser Co, Marinship Corp, New England Shipbuilding Corp, North Carolina Shipbuilding Co, Oregon Shipbuilding Corp, Permanente Metals Co, St Johns River Shipbuilding Co, Southeastern Shipbuilding Corp, Todd Houston Shipbuilding Corp, Walsh-Kaiser Co.

Major Variants: General cargo, tanker, collier, (modifications also boxed aircraft transport, tank transport,
hospital ship, troopship).

Role: Cargo transport, troop transport, hospital ship, repair ship.
Operated by: United States of America, Great Britain, (small quantity also Norway, Belgium, Soviet Union, France, Greece, Netherlands and other nations).

First Laid Down: 30th April 1941
Last Completed: 30th October 1945

Units: 2,711 ships laid down, 2,710 entered service.

Despite being initially labelled an 'ugly duckling' by the newspapers, and intended to be expendable if necessary, the ships eventually caught the imagination of the public. They proved to be easy to build, reliable and versatile, exceeding even the most optimistic expectations for their overall contribution to the war effort.

It was a project on a massive scale, undertaken with great speed and efficiency. The first Liberty ship (the Patrick Henry) was launched on 27 September 1941 (and completed on 30 December 1941), which was an incredible feat considering that just seven months previously neither shipyard nor workforce existed to build her.   

Average Liberty Ship deadweight = 12,500 metric tons. (33,875,000 metric tons of ships built!).

Convert short tons to metric tons by multiplying the number of short tons by 0.907184

On the GE 1.5-megawatt model the total weight is 164 tons. The corresponding weights for the Vestas V90 are 75, 40, and 152, total 267 tons, and for the Gamesa G87 72, 42, and 220, total 334 tons.

164 x 0.907184 =  148.8 metric tons 

33,875,000 divided by 148.8 =  227,655  wind turbines X 1.5 MW =  341,482 MW = .3415 TW x 20% capacity factor = 68.3 x 24 hours X 365 days = 598.3 TWh/year.

2012 wind power production   United States 140.9 TWh  26.4 % of world total wind power.

1 TWhour per year = 1,000,000 MW / 8765.8 hours in a year) 114 megawatts per hour.

USA total annual electric consumption = 3,886,400,000 MWh = 3,886,400 = GWh = 3,886 TWh.

3886.4 / 598.3 =  20 to 40% of US electrical demand just from Wind Turbines in less than five years of Liberty Ship scale manufacturing wind turbine tonnage.

Liberty Ship scale manufacturing wind turbine tonnage can provide  25 to 40% of US electrical demand  in less than five years. Double that in ten years and add in Solar Panels, Geothermal, Tide and Undersea Current and we have MORE than 100% Renewable Energy!    

WE can use the excess to bioremediate the environmental damage done in the last 100 years.  WE can rid ourselves of Planet Polluting Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Poison Plants in a decade and win the Climate Victory for Future Generations! We can set an example for all the nations on the Earth of the Proper Path to a Viable and Vibrant Bounty filled, harmonious Biosphere.

Let's GET IT DONE! Our children and grandchildren are counting on us!


May 25, 2014, 03:46:49 pm

We can do this AGAIN, THIS TIME for renewable energy harvesting machines and sustainable technology. 

+-Recent Topics

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
Today at 11:04:16 pm

Wind Power by AGelbert
Today at 07:35:49 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
Today at 07:06:23 pm

Homebody Handy Hints by AGelbert
September 18, 2017, 11:16:31 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
September 18, 2017, 11:12:18 pm

Future Earth by AGelbert
September 18, 2017, 07:14:08 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
September 17, 2017, 10:17:00 pm

Majestic and sometimes Spectacular Scenery by AGelbert
September 17, 2017, 07:52:46 pm

Non-routine News by AGelbert
September 17, 2017, 07:22:28 pm

Money by AGelbert
September 17, 2017, 02:55:55 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial