California Grid Operator Asks Geothermal to Help Feed the Duck

California’s 33-percent-renewables-by-2020 mandate is becoming a reality, and the state’s electricity system operator wants the geothermal industry to help keep the grid stable as more generation comes from variable resources.

By 2020, due largely to solar, a graph of the change caused by variable renewables in the state’s grid ramping up will look like a duck, California Independent System Operator VP Karen Edson told industry leaders at the Geothermal Energy Association National Geothermal Summit.

Instead of the present maximum ramp in demand from 19,000 megawatts to 25,000 megawatts, Edson said, the ISO could need the capability to ramp from 11,000 megawatts to 25,000 megawatts by 2020.  

The biggest needs will come in what Edson called the "shoulder months," when excess wind and hydro create overcapacity and early sunsets cause solar generation to drop off before peak evening demand periods end.

“I know it is easier to turn things on and let them run, and there are complications about how you manage your steam,” Edson said. “But to the extent you can help with that upward ramp and that downward ramp, it could be of great value.”

According to the most recent California Public Utilities Commission report, the state’s investor-owned utilities have built or contracted for their mandated renewables requirements, Edson said,  and procurement for geothermal is predicted to fall faster and further than that for wind or solar. “The 2011 ISO interconnection queue had about 1,300 megawatts of geothermal,” she said. “Today we are down to 144 megawatts.”

"But geothermal has the ability to move in response to conditions and provide system operators with flexibility,” Edson said. “This industry needs to rethink its baseload generation model.”

“Building a geothermal project so that it can offer flexibility and ancillary services does not impose a significant cost, nor does it prevent a facility from being used as baseload when needed,” according to Paul Thomsen, Ormat Technologies Policy and Business Director. What is needed, he said, is to restructure procurement incentives.

“We know it is about the economics,” Edson told the geothermal leaders. The ISO has advocated for a flexibility requirement as part of California’s resource adequacy program. And its market mechanisms are designed to drive the investor-owned utilities and other load-serving entities (LSEs) toward procuring more geothermal.

The ISO wants the cost of flexibility to be allocated to LSEs based on their resource mix. “We have a number of utilities that are not contributing to the duck,” Edson explained. But requiring those LSEs with large variable generation portfolios to procure flexible generation should drive the growth of geothermal.

“We have negative pricing in our market. We will pay you to reduce your level or stop producing. If you want to hold for the ramp, the ISO would be happy to see that kind of flexibility coming from this industry.”

By 2015, she said, the flexibility geothermal potentially offers will be “essential for us.”

Edson acknowledged that for geothermal facility operators, it is a complicated question of opportunity costs. Having the ability to ramp up means holding back generation -- and that means foregoing revenue.  

“We have mechanisms through our market systems,” Edson said. “I want you to examine those opportunities and think hard about providing more capability to the system.”

“The challenge for geothermal developers,” Thomsen noted, “is to extract enough value from the capacity, ancillary services, and flexibility attributes to compensate for the decline in energy attribute revenues.”

Connect:

Authored by:

Herman Trabish

Herman K. Trabish, D.C., was a Doctor of Chiropractic in private practice for two decades but finally realized his strategy to fix the planet one person at a time was moving too slowly. An accidental encounter with Daniel Yergin's The Prize led to a protracted study of the bloody, fiery history of oil and then to Trabish's Oil In Their Blood "trilogy" (http://www.oilintheirblood.com), a pair ...

See complete profile

Read More

Energy: The Oxygen of Africa's Growth and Development

Historically people associate the sound of Africa as the roar of the lion; but in reality, it’s been the roar of the diesel generator. Herds of these archaic beasts are on the prowl. Their habitat includes cities, towns, factories, mines, businesses and big farms â€" anywhere where power is required and isn’t available or reliable.

When I started in the development arena and specifically in the renewable energy space nearly 15 years ago, energy issues simply didn’t feature. Conservationists and environmentalists alerted us to the dangers of deforestation and climate change and to the importance of preservation of African habitats. Electricity grids only served largely urban areas and commercial enterprises while modern energy options (outside of South African townships) were unavailable to the poor. There were few alternatives to firewood, charcoal, kerosene or candles â€" what I call the four fuels of poverty.

Energy poverty, or energy injustice, at that time was simply known as life. Everyday challenges largely went unnoticed from women walking long distances to collect firewood, inhaling wood smoke from cooking or kerosene fumes from roughhewn tin lamps. Respiratory illnesses, children ingesting kerosene believing it to be clean water, and burns and deaths from fires weren’t on health radar screens in any scale. Productivity went down when the sun did. Few development organizations factored energy poverty into ensuring the efficacy of their programs.

It didn’t take me much time to realize that as long as the poor were dependent on non-renewable energy sources, they couldn’t raise themselves out of poverty. When you’re spending between 10-40% of meager incomes on inefficient and harmful fuels you just can’t get ahead.

This is changing fast.

A long overdue global consensus is emerging. Led mainly by the UN, who by declaring 2012 the Year of Sustainable Energy for All, aimed at ensuring universal access by 2030, recognizes the importance of sustainable energy access for all the world’s people, for the global economy, as well as for the preservation of our planet. This initiative is helping to kick-start innovation at all levels of energy service and delivery right across Africa.

Over the years I’ve witnessed an expanded energy agenda at the World Economic Forum (WEF), too. Traditionally the WEF discussed energy issues in the context of global risks, oil shocks, the need for regional collaboration, improving grid infrastructure and supply efficiency, policy and regulatory frameworks, developing financial instruments, and deregulation, but not as an enabler of development. Access to modern energy sources is critical to lifting people out of poverty and fuelling growth, however, that connection hasn’t always been understood.

Take South Africa and Nigeria â€" Africa’s two economic powerhouses. Nigeria has more than three times the population, but South Africa generates 40 times more power. With electricity reaching 53% of Africa’s population in urban areas and only 8% in rural, many more models are needed that are affordable and appropriate. A solar light, a cell phone charger, and an improved cookstove are a good start, but aren’t nearly enough. Grid electricity as is still too expensive to reach far-flung communities and, unless subsidized, remains unaffordable for the poor.

That’s where social entrepreneurs are testing new off-grid models and fit-for-purpose products and services that create livelihoods, prolong productive hours, improve educational outcomes, irrigate agriculture, extend communication access and unlock market opportunities. Consumers have a greater chance of entering and staying a part of the new knowledge economy.

I attended my first WEF on Africa in Durban in 2003 and have participated in every Africa forum since, including last week’s meeting in Cape Town, titled Delivering on Africa’s Promise. This year energy discussions extended further to include the ‘last mile’ consumer and the understanding that energy is the oxygen of both economic growth and sustainable development. Nothing else can so swiftly raise living standards and improve health.

It was reported recently that South Africa is now the world’s fastest growing renewable energy market. With its energy needs far outstripping supply from its largely coal-based power grid, additional sources of generation are urgently needed. As this trend moves across the continent, the chugging of the diesel generator will morph into the silence of the solar panel bringing unprecedented growth and development enabling our African lions to challenge the Asian tigers.

Photo Credit: Africa Energy/shutterstock

Connect:

Authored by:

Kristine Pearson

Kristine Pearson, Chief Executive, Lifeline Energy, United Kingdom; social entrepreneur, Schwab Fellow of the World Economic Forum.

Lifeline Energy addresses energy poverty for poor and vulnerable women and children through the distribution of solar and wind-up prime radios, MP3-enabled lifeplayers, lights and energy sources. Since its inception in 1999, the organization distributed over ...

See complete profile

Read More

D-Day Legacy Threatened By Wind Turbines Off Normandy Coast?

Is the D-Day Legacy In Peril From 75 Wind Turbines Off the Normandy Coast?

A proposed 450 MW offshore wind farm in the waters off the D-day landing beaches at Courseulles-sur-Mer off the Normandy Coast has sparked an understandably emotional response from many veterans of World War II. The debate is intensified by the fact that the 70th anniversary of the landing is next year and many veterans are now in their 90′s. The following is from Offshore wind farm off the coast of Courseulles-sur-Mer PUBLIC DEBATE NEWSLETTER N°1 [PDF]:

British troops and naval beach parties on Sword Beach in Normandy on D-Day, 6 June 1944. This is photograph B 5116 from the collections of the Imperial War Museums. | Photo Credit: Knight (Capt), No 5 Army Film & Photographic Unit | Wikipedia Commons

The Project in Figures

• The wind farm will be constructed at least 6 miles off the coast of Courseulles-sur-Mer
• Its total area will be 12 acres
• 75 wind turbines with a height of 570 feet (mast + blades), separated from each other by a distance of around 1/2 mile
• They will be connected to the national grid by under-sea and underground cables
• The total cost will be 1.8 billion Euros

Who Can Get Involved?

The public debate process is open to all and continues until 20 July, 2013. The location of the project off the D-day landing beaches fully justifies the participation of any British, Canadian and American nationals who may have concerns.

All individuals and organizations have the right to ask questions and give their opinions with equal rights to speak.

The documents produced by the SCPD and the contracting authority are available to everyone on the website www.debatpublic-eolien-en-mer-courseulles.org.

Author’s Note: The website is published in French. If your computer won’t translate it to English, I’ve included a link to the Offshore wind farm off the coast of Courseulles-sur-Mer PUBLIC DEBATE NEWSLETTER N°1 [PDF] that is written in English.

The wind project’s planned footprint has already been reduced by 35% to lower the visual impact from the historic landing beaches. Developer Eolien Maritime France says it is “willing to respect the D-day memorial sites and wants to be involved with local initiatives to continue to keep the memory of the D-day landings alive”.

Author’s Closing Note: The offshore wind farm is projected to have a generating capacity of 450 MW when fully operational. It will include 75 wind turbines, each with a capacity of 6 MW. These tall sentinels will be visible from the shoreline even though they are between 6 and 10 miles from the Calvados coast, near Courseulles-sur-Mer.

Amber Archangel (17 Posts)

Amber Archangel is an artist, painter, writer, interior designer, graphic designer, constant student of many studies and founder of 1Sun4All.com. Living with respect for the environment close at hand, the food chain, natural remedies for healing, the earth, people and animals is a life-long expression and commitment. As half of a home-building team, she helped design and build harmonious, sustainable and net-zero homes that incorporate clean air systems, passive and active solar energy as well as rainwater collection systems. Archangel is fond of private aviation, would love to fly in the solar airplane and install a wind turbine in her yard. She is a peaceful, courageous soul who believes that clean energy is helping our economy and helping our world; she enjoys contributing to this effort.

Read More

100 Percent Renewable Energy And Beyond

While many countries still discuss whether or not a 100% renewable energy system â€" or “just” a 100% renewable electricity supply â€" is even theoretically possible, Germans seem no longer bothered by such unscientific doubts. To make matters “worse,” some of them (including myself) are even convinced that a transition to a 100% renewable energy system can and should be accomplished within only a few decades’ time.

Some people might find this different perception of the problems we face to overcome the energy crisis of the 21^st century so puzzling that they would rather choose to believe that the Germans have simply gone mad. Luckily, nothing could be further from the truth, and I’ve got a few nice examples that might explain the German mindset.

Think Big In Small Pieces

The German push towards a renewable future is often portrayed through the tunnel vision of the author’s worldview and the common themes of the political debates in her or his home country. Quite often, this kind of quality journalism turns a “minimum price law based on technology costs â€" in combination with guaranteed market access for all investors”(Feed in Tariff) into “generous, (tax-funded) subsidies”. Another popular myth among so called “professional journalists” is that what is happening in Germany is due to on some kind of “big government” program. Obviously, this domestic narrative-driven reporting is not very interested in looking at important details that could explain the big picture.

One of the most important details being missed by most of those common limited observations is the fact that the renewable energy success of the last decade was mainly driven by some pioneering regions, counties, and municipalities. Those local communities moved forward with conviction, while many others have remained dormant willingly or hindered by state governments that blocked investments by passing arbitrary anti-renewable regulations in favor of conventional power companies.

Luckily, some state elections and the spread of knowledge about the positive effects of renewable energy deployment for local economies have removed a lot of the brake blocks of the past. So, what can be accomplished within a decade if local initiatives get the opportunity to shape their energy future without obstruction?

Germany Top 3 Renewable Counties

To showcase what we know about what is at least possible, here are the top 3 out of 295 Landkreise (Counties / administrative districts) in terms of the renewable share in their regional power mix. Most of their success is based on investments during the last 10â€"15 years based on technology that is now outdated.

#3 â€" Renewable Landkreis

#2 â€" Renewable Landkreis

#1 â€" Renewable Landkreis

This is Possible Everywhere

Those three counties are obviously just the tip of the renewable energyberg. The list of 100â€"200% renewable counties is longer, and the still rather long list of counties below 10% will get shorter in the coming years.

Here’s what we know: The advances of renewable energy technology and the growing understanding among local governments/business leaders creates a very fertile basis for a new wave of rapid renewable energy growth.

The newest generation of low-wind optimized wind turbines and the improved wind powerâ€"related land-use regulations in many German inland states offer great, previously underestimated potential for the cheapest renewable energy source.

13.8% of the land-area = the provisional technical & environmental potential â€" actual realizable potential is lower.

At the same time, the German solar industry and its remaining 80,000â€"100,000 employees are working tirelessly to emancipate themselves from the cost-covering feed-in tariff by diversifying their portfolio, offering smart energy solutions and building new alliances with other established German industries (storage, energy and micro grid management systems, etc).

That these further growth potentials will be unlocked is not mere wishful thinking on my part. Many regions across Germany have already declared their own 100% renewable electricity and even 100% renewable energy ambitions. They organize, hold conferences, and share their experiences in order to develop their individual road maps. Additionally, more and more regional utilities, and even some of the “former” nuclear and coal giants, have begun to transform their business models from primitive energy providers to modern managers of energy flows.

To add yet another piece to the utterly under-reported big picture, I want to encourage you to combine all these individual developments with the knowledge that solar and wind are now cheaper than the electricity rate for households, commercial customers, and in many cases even industrial customers â€" causing 30% of all German businesses to plan investments in renewable capacities.

If you do combine all the puzzle pieces, I am sure that you’ll see that we are only at the beginning of the energy revolution here in Germany, and producing enough renewable energy is definitely not the problem â€" all those outdated 20^th century devices that still consume fossil fuels are!

Connect:

Authored by:

Thomas Gerke

I am a close observer of the renewable energy revolution in my home country Germany and around the world. As a full-blooded enthusiast, I spend a lot of my spare time reading about the technological, political, social and cultural developments that drive the renewable energy revolution and their benefits to society.   I studied media & computer science at university and work as a freelance ...

See complete profile

Read More

2014 Honda Accord Hybrid Achieves 49 MPG In City, Beating All Hybrids On The Market

This article first appeared on EV Obsession.

The 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid has achieved 49 MPG city, 45 MPG highway, and 47 MPG combined fuel efficiency.

The city rating of 49 MPG is impressive, as it exceeds that of all other hybrids on the market.

Notably, this is not the 2014 Honda Accord Plug-In Hybrid (PHEV), which has ability to plug in and use electric power and has achieved a 115 MPG rating in electric mode, according to the EPA.

The Honda Accord Hybrid is equipped with a powerful 124 kW (166 HP) electric propulsion system as well as the all-new 2.0-liter DOHC i-VTEC Atkinson-cycle 4-cylinder engine. Even though the conventional hybrid doesn’t have the ability to plug in, this new two-motor hybrid powertrain does allow it to drive in electric-only mode.

“The two-motor SPORT HYBRID Intelligent Multi Mode Drive powertrain in the Accord Hybrid allows the vehicle to move through three different driving modes â€" EV Drive, Hybrid Drive and Engine Drive â€" to optimize fuel efficiency,” the Honda press release notes.

Does this mean that the Accord drivers will achieve even better fuel economy than stated because they may actually want to use electric mode?

Below is Honda’s full press release with more details.

Honda Expands Accord Lineup this Fall with 2014 Accord Hybrid Featuring Class-Leading MPG Ratings and Exclusive Styling

06/19/2013 â€" TORRANCE, Calif.

• Class-leading 49 mpg EPA city fuel economy rating¹Â anticipated
• Accord Hybrid shares Accord Sedan’s sophisticated design highlighted with exclusive hybrid styling accents
• Honda’s first hybrid to be assembled²Â in Marysville, Ohio
• Accord Hybrid to go on-sale nationwide in October 2013

The first official photos of the U.S. version of the all-new 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid set to hit dealerships nationwide this October are now available on the Honda consumer site. The Accord Hybrid features the same sophisticated styling found on the Accord Sedan plus unique hybrid badging and blue-accented grille and light lenses, LED daytime running lights, a unique wheel design and a decklid spoiler.

The 2014 Accord Hybrid will use Honda’s new two-motor hybrid powertrain, much of which is shared with the Accord Plug-In that went on sale in January. The two-motor SPORT HYBRID Intelligent Multi Mode Drive powertrain in the Accord Hybrid allows the vehicle to move through three different driving modes â€" EV Drive, Hybrid Drive and Engine Drive â€" to optimize fuel efficiency.

In ‘EV Drive’, the Accord Hybrid uses the lithium-ion battery to run in electric-only mode at lower speeds and in medium to high speed cruising, ‘Engine Drive’ sends the engine power directly to the front wheels. In ‘Hybrid Drive,’ the powerful 124-kilowatt (kW) electric motor and the all-new 2.0-liter DOHC i-VTEC Atkinson-cycle 4-cylinder engine blend together for powerful acceleration while allowing for efficient driving in  stop-and-go traffic situations. The Accord Hybrid is anticipated to obtain a class-leading mid-size sedan EPA fuel economy¹Â rating of 49/45/47 mpg (city/highway/combined).

Inside, the Accord Hybrid’s well-appointed and intuitive layout provides the driver with instant fuel economy and energy flow information for efficient driving performance. Along with innovative new features such as Honda’s LaneWatch™ blind-spot display, an industry-first that debuted on the Accord last fall, other available features on the 2014 Accord Hybrid include Lane Departure Warning (LDW) and Forward Collision Warning (FCW), an 8-inch color i-MID display, perforated leather-trimmed seating surfaces, cloud-based HondaLink™ featuring Aha™ compatibility, seven-speaker audio system withBluetooth® streaming audio, Pandora® interface and XM® Radio, and a multi-angle rearview camera with guidelines.

The 2014 Accord Hybrid features the same next-generation Advanced Compatibility Engineering™ (ACE™) body structure as the 2013 Accord, along with Honda’s new SmartVent™ front-side airbags. Like the 2013 Accord, the 2014 Accord Hybrid is expected to earn top safety ratings including an NCAP 5-Star Overall Vehicle Score and a TOP SAFETY PICK+ rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

The 2014 Honda Accord Hybrid will be the first Honda hybrid vehicle assembled in Ohio and the second built in the U.S. The Accord Hybrid joins the diverse Accord lineup, which includes the four-cylinder and V-6 powered Accord Sedan, sportyAccord Coupe and the advanced Accord Plug-In, which has the highest EPA MPGe rating of any mid-size hybrid sedan in America at 115 MPGe.

¹Â Preliminary mileage ratings determined by Honda. Final EPA mileage ratings not available at the time of printing. Use for comparison purposes only. Your actual mileage will vary depending on how you drive and maintain your vehicle.

²Â Honda cars are built using domestic and globally sourced parts.

Nicholas Brown (371 Posts)

I have a keen interest in physics-intensive topics such as electricity generation, refrigeration and air conditioning technology, energy storage, geography, and much more. My website is: Kompulsa.

Read More

Can a Second Global Carbon Market Emerge?

At the very end of May Carbon Expo was held in Barcelona. It was an excellent event, overall attendance was good and there were still quite a few exhibitors at the Expo hoping for life in the project mechanism market of the current “global carbon market”. But this is an area of trade that is clearly struggling. 

The conference also offered an opportunity for the World Bank to release a new review of carbon market activity, which showed that there is at least quite a lot, even if price development is far from the levels required to ever make any discernible difference to global emissions.

 

 

Carbon Expo consists of many events, plenary panels and side meetings and through these one of the subjects that attracted plenty of attention is the ongoing desire to see a global carbon market take shape. This seems like a rather odd desire since we have had something along these lines for the past decade under the Kyoto Protocol, but nobody really wanted to discuss that, even though it is clearly the approach that makes the most sense, is most robust in terms of compliance and has all the necessary bits and pieces actually up and running. Equally, it is withering on the vine. 

The desired alternative to a Kyoto style global market has yet to be specified, but it builds on the reality of the World Bank report which shows that there are lots of carbon market systems in various stages of development, implementation or operation and that if they could somehow be linked together a global market would coalesce. This follows from the excitement around the proposed link between the EU and Australian Emission Trading Systems.

Both the EU and Australia have called their proposed linkup a bilateral arrangement. That may well be the case, but it would have been an order of magnitude more difficult were it not for the fact that both systems were designed under the Kyoto Protocol framework, recognized the same types of offsets, counted carbon the same way etc. I discussed this back in September last year after the linkup was first announced.

So here we are in a world that has started once down the pathway towards a global carbon market, built all the required institutions and instruments necessary to run it, balked at using them but perversely still wants the market to develop. As such, discussions continue on how a global market might catalyze, with four models now in the picture. They are:

1. The creation of an international compliance unit and a standard set of offset mechanisms. This is effectively a spinoff of the Kyoto Protocol, using the CDM, but creating a new international unit to replace the AAU (the KP “glue”). Such a unit would underpin national ETSs that voluntarily opt-in to the global market. An international registry would exist to keep track of the market and manage national compliance.
2. A set of “exchange rates” evolve between national compliance units and project mechanisms, akin to currency exchange rates. This then supposedly solves the problem of different levels of national ambition, quality of offset projects and so on. The problem here is that CO2 is more like a fixed commodity type instrument, whereas currency (where exchange rates exist) is not a commodity but effectively a security (like a company share). The value of a security is set by the value of the whole that it represents (e.g. a company, a country). By contrast, a tonne of CO2 will always be a tonne of CO2.
3. Bilateral arrangements continue and linkages simply evolve over time. The challenge comes when A links with B then B talks to C but A doesn’t want to link with C. Also, some very different designs may never be suitable for linking.
4. International Measurement / Reporting / and Verification rules are expanded to cover the necessary requirements for linking. This is effectively like (1) above, but without the international unit or internationally regulated compliance.

The most robust approach exists in (1), but this is currently looking like the least likely outcome â€" many nations seem to be opposed to such an approach, at least for now. The opposition appears to extend from the idea of the UN managing national sovereignty in any form, such as evaluating national programmes and allocating international units against them, even though this is positioned as a voluntary opt-in process.

The exchange rate approach has instant appeal, simply because it allows the market to decide. But so far, I have not seen an explanation as to how it might actually work.

Evolution through bilateral agreement appears to be the most likely path forward, so the question remains if there is any role for the UNFCCC in such an approach. Perhaps it’s role is limited to maintaining offset mechanisms such as the CDM.

This remains a nascent discussion, with much thinking to be done.

Read More

Climbing Up GE’s Brilliant Wind Energy Turbine

With the launch of the first three GE brilliant wind turbines approaching, the world’s leading turbine manufacturer invited media to its test center to see its machine in operation and take a look at the inner workings.

GE's (NYSE:GE) engineering continues to move competitively toward the same two broad objectives as leading international manufacturers like Vestas and Siemens:  Achieving a better automated response by the turbine’s multiple onboard computer systems to data from its network of sensors, and allowing remote operations centers to wirelessly control variables the automated systems can’t manage, like wind changes, grid conditions and lightning strikes.

Three of GE’s 1.5-megawatt, 80-meter-tall brilliant turbines with 120-meter rotors will be installed by Invenergy at a Texas wind project by the end of this year. The new height, rotor length and data analytics will allow the turbine to achieve a 52 percent capacity factor in moderate, Class 3 winds of speeds of 7.5 meters per second, according to GE Wind Product General Manager Keith Longtin.

The brilliant turbine will also integrate 50 kilowatt-hours of battery storage, situated in a cabinet on a nearby ground pad, into the turbine’s intelligent operating system. Although a single turbine’s storage may not be a marketable quantity of electricity, Longtin acknowledged, a project’s combined storage could provide any one of three valuable functions, which GE calls “apps.”

The Invenergy turbines’ storage will be used for the first of the apps, labeled "predictable power" by GE. Stored, dispatchable electricity, Longtin explained, increases a wind project’s capability to meet contractual obligations. That makes it more competitive with other generation sources.

Second, stored electricity can be sold into grid operators’ frequency regulation markets to smooth the variations that can disrupt service.

Third, batteries give wind projects the ramp control they need to feed power into the grid at the required 10 megawatts per minute. Wind-generated electricity can then be stored when the wind is blowing but there is no demand for power, and then sold when the energy market is buying.

Each app, Longtin said, provides wind project operators with a potential new revenue stream. Together, he added, GE’s proprietary calculations show they can cut the cost of integrating wind into the grid by as much as 30 percent.

The estimated cost of integrating wind and other renewables into the transmission system is $1 to $7 per megawatt-hour, Longtin said, citing widely accepted numbers. “That translates to at least $400,000 to $500,000 annually for a 100-megawatt wind project. We believe we can do better than that.”

One key to savings, Longtin said, is the turbine-based battery storage. Integrating storage into the turbine’s existing converter and power electronics eliminates extraneous costs of inverters and other power conditioning hardware associated with large-scale add-on storage.

Also key is the brilliant turbine’s ability to assimilate and use data, especially GE’s proprietary five-minute to fifteen-minute weather condition forecasts, which, Longtin said, have advantages to forecasts supplied by industry leaders like AWS Truewind and 3Tier.

The batteries for the prototype brilliant turbine at the Tehachapi, California test center are GE Durathon sodium nickel chloride batteries. But the company is “battery-agnostic,” Longtin insisted.

Different applications require different types and amounts of storage, he explained. Frequency regulation requires a quicker responding “power” battery. Ramp control can be done with an “energy” battery with more storage capability. The point, Longtin said, “is that we have a customizable solution.”

“We are linking big data with big machines,” GE Renewable Energy VP Anne McEntee recently told GTM. “We collect 400 data points in a turbine. That is tens of thousands of data points in a wind farm.”

Greentech Media (GTM) produces industry-leading news, research, and conferences in the business-to-business greentech market. Our coverage areas include solar, smart grid, energy efficiency, wind, and other non-incumbent energy markets. For more information, visit: greentechmedia.com , follow us on twitter: @greentechmedia, or like us on Facebook: facebook.com/greentechmedia.

Connect:

Authored by:

Herman Trabish

Herman K. Trabish, D.C., was a Doctor of Chiropractic in private practice for two decades but finally realized his strategy to fix the planet one person at a time was moving too slowly. An accidental encounter with Daniel Yergin's The Prize led to a protracted study of the bloody, fiery history of oil and then to Trabish's Oil In Their Blood "trilogy" (http://www.oilintheirblood.com), a pair ...

See complete profile

Read More

Are Nuclear Energy Costs Higher Than They Should Be?

Nuclear energy in the United States and Europe is far more expensive that it should be. There is plenty of blame to spread; nuclear professionals have to accept some of the responsibility. If you want to do something about the high cost of nuclear energy, it might be best to start with taking the actions that are within your own power to change.

If your biggest objection to nuclear energy is cost, the most constructive thing you can do is to help implement effective cost reduction strategies that do not sacrifice quality.

In my day job, I am doing everything I can think of to encourage people to recognize that a cost-aware approach is compatible with a strong nuclear safety culture. I also try to share something I realized rather slowly myself; time is expensive.

As I learned in the trenches of numerous federal budget cycles, money that is frittered away on trivial matters is not available to use as a tool for solving more consequential matters. Recognizing the difference between a trivial matter and a small issue that has the potential to grow into a major concern is not always easy, but it is a skill worth developing.

In my “hobby job” as a writer who tries to share insights gained, often from painful experience, I will continue to encourage others to engage in critical thinking about the costs associated with nuclear energy. We should think about the aspects of the technology that deserve attention and investment, but also recognize that other areas are ripe for streamlined processes, reduced oversight redundancy, and less attention.

There are many physical characteristics of nuclear energy that give it the potential to beat its competitors in the market. However, even superior technology can be subdued by confusing and contradictory rules; slow decision-making that can increase costs and short-term employment; comfortable, but inefficient work habits; extra barriers that are advantageous for competitors; reluctance to challenge established energy sources; and ineffective marketing that keeps production rates below economic levels.

I also feel compelled to continue pointing out that some of nuclear energy’s excessive costs have been externally opposed by an unholy alliance of people that prefer high energy prices. Some like high prices because they discourage consumption; others like high prices because they improve profits.

That loose and unorganized alliance of people share a common interest in doing everything they can think of to hamper nuclear electricity production, shutter existing facilities, and add cost to every step of the design, license and build process. Most of these actions require no coordination and all of them are enabled by excessive fear of small amounts of radiation.

There are places in the world that have learned that nuclear power can be affordable, safe, and reliable. If Americans and Europeans do not learn from that experience, we are destined for serious economic and social consequences. Here is an eye-opening exchange from the comment section of a recent Atomic Insights post that I thought deserved a promotion to the front page.

Matt: It has become clear to me that the USA has a systemic, entrenched anti-nuclear ‘rot’ in its corridors of power. I am unconvinced that it’s just an effective fossil fuel industry lobby, but rather an active but subtle and dedicated anti-nuclear conclave.

This can only be broken by an all-out pro-nuclear revolution. It will take a dramatic change of heart from key, high-profile, respected people with lot’s of cash and iron will â€" much like how the anti-nuclear movement started.

The only way to effect a change of heart like that is national recognition that fossil fuels are a clear and present threat to the American way of life, and that renewables won’t fix it, and that nuclear is the only solution.

Sadly, I can’t see it happening.

Steve: As I’ve said before, the only way it will happen is when the USA sees proof that this course of action is a mistake, i.e. when a geopolitical challenger such as China or Russia start reaping the economic benefits of large-scale deployment of next gen nuclear technology at our expense. The benefits of cheap, abundant power are manifold. Energy is an economic enabler, the master resource. Nations that realize this will capture economic advantage in an age of ever more costly fossil fuels. It was no accident that the USA stood over the world when Texas was the Saudi Arabia of the 1940s and 50s. Cheap energy matters â€" a lot.

Once we start eating their dust, clinging to past glories while wheezing on dirty and ever more costly fossil fuels, only then a “critical mass” of opinion to change nuclear policy will happen. If I were to invest in the Nuclear Age of the 21st Century, and invest in the future, it sadly would have to be OUTSIDE of the US for now. The ruling class of the US is too far wedded to what made it powerful in the past and rich today, a history written in oil.

For now, it will be more nonsense from the likes of Amory Lovins and Al Gore. All talk of wind and sun and negawatts, utterly useless “solutions”, so much snake oil being sold as the fix that doesn’t stand a chance as a cure. Talk that sounds good, feels good, but in the end signifies nothing. The reality will be more fossil fuels get burned as shareholders get rich and the planet burns while the band plays on.

The post Nuclear costs are higher than they should be â€" many people like it that way appeared first on Atomic Insights.

Photo Credit: Nuclear Energy Cost/shutterstock

Connect:

Authored by:

Rod Adams

Rod Adams gained his nuclear knowledge as a submarine engineer officer and as the founder of a company that tried to develop a market for small, modular reactors from 1993-1999. He began publishing Atomic Insights in 1995 and began producing The Atomic Show Podcast in March 2006. He now works for B&W mPower, but his posts on the Internet reflect his personal views and not necessarily the ...

See complete profile

Read More

17 Tesla Battery Swap Videos (Including Q&A With Elon Musk)

I think we just lucked out. A reader has passed along a bunch of videos from the Tesla Model S battery swap demo and the follow-up Q&A session with Elon Musk. There are a lot of interesting answers in the Q&A videos that I haven’t seen or heard elsewhere (and some that we have already seen or heard). Check them all out below!

The big electric car news of the week was surely the Tesla Model S battery pack swap demo that I wrote about yesterday. Tesla Motors had been hinting about it for weeks… or years, depending on how you count. But I don’t think anyone anticipated that the battery swap would take just 90 seconds. (Okay, fine, some Tesla enthusiasts probably had the idea….)

As some people noted, it would have been nice if the demo gave us a better view of the actually swap… couldn’t really see much of that.

Also, Tesla CEO and Chairman Elon Musk somehow didn’t have a script for what to say while the swap was happening and while their Audi guy (Javier) was filling up his gas tank in LA. (Say wha?) As some of our commenters noted, he could have used that time to give us more details about the battery swapping that was going on. Not really sure why that wasn’t planned better….

However, a lot of interesting details and comments were provided in the Q&A, which we’ve got videos of below. And a 90-second battery swap â€" even at $60 to $80 â€" is likely to appeal to a number of time-sensitive Tesla Model S drivers who value their time at more than $120 or $160 per hour. So, I think it’s pretty exciting to see that Tesla is now going to offer this option.

One of our readers who was at the event has shared a bunch of videos from the demo and Q&A on YouTube. Check them out.

This first video includes the intro to the video shared yesterday (not part of that Tesla video). There’s some really good and funny stuff in here from Elon.

These next three are videos of segments of the event that were included in the video we shared yesterday.

And the next 13 are videos of the Q&A session that followed the demo:

Interestingly, that answer above gives us more information than we reported yesterday. Yesterday, we noted that the driver could get his battery pack back on his return trip or could keep the new battery pack and pay Tesla the difference between its value and the older battery pack’s value. However, here, Elon adds that there’s also the option of having Tesla deliver your old pack back to you wherever you are! You just pay for the transport cost of that.

http://youtu.be/OjfGinkRm8Q

Interesting to hear in the video above that the price of a battery swap will vary by location based on the price of gasoline in that area. Interesting idea.

So, he indicates in the video above that these battery swap stations are likely to be available starting in the 4th quarter.

As I think has been pretty clear for awhile, Elon notes Tesla is “fundamentally production limited,” not demand limited. In other words, it’s producing all the cars it can in order to supply them to customers who have ordered them. And that should be the case through the end of the year. Nothing new, but apparently some people aren’t aware of that.

For those of you interested in ARB issues â€" in particular, the possibility of battery swapping not qualifying for such credits â€" hopefully the rumination and Elon’s points above are useful to you.

Better Place was “better at marketing than they were at engineering.” Ouch….

I love that Elon is open to selling the battery swapping technology only if “they make it as convenient as we do.” In other words, no screwing up or highjacking the customer convenience solution! Musk is a clear EV pioneer who wants to help the world to change in a positive way.

Interesting stuff. Your thoughts?

Zachary Shahan (2375 Posts)

I'm the director of CleanTechnica, the most popular clean energy website in the world, and Planetsave, a leading green and science news site. I've been covering green news of various sorts since 2008, and I've been especially focused on solar energy, electric vehicles, bicycling, and wind energy for the past few years. You can also find my work on Scientific American, Reuters, Think Progress, GE's ecomagination site, several sites in the Important Media network, & many other places. To connect on some of your favorite social networks, go to zacharyshahan.com or click on some of the links below.

Read More

New UC-Davis Net Zero Sustainable Winery Will Turn Water Into Wine Into Chalk

The newly opened Jess S. Jackson Sustainable Winery Building at the University of California, Davis includes a full lineup of futuristic green tech bells and whistles, and the one that has us most intrigued is a system for sequestering carbon dioxide from all the fermentation that is going to take place within its walls. The system will be installed within the next few years and once completed, it will convert carbon dioxide into calcium carbonate, more commonly known as chalk. Hey, don’t you need a sea urchin for that?

Converting Carbon Dioxide Into Chalk

If that sea urchin/calcium carbonate thing rings a bell, you may recall that earlier this year a research team at Newcastle University uncovered the secret behind the sea urchin’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide into its exoskeleton, which could lead to an inexpensive method for carbon sequestration from factory emissions or, for that matter, from wineries.

In the course of a detailed study of the carbonic acid reaction (the reaction of carbon dioxide with water), the team took a look at the exoskeletens of sea urchin larvae and discovered high levels of nickel. When the team added a nickel catalyst to their carbonic acid test the result was “complete removal” of carbon dioxide.

The discovery is significant because previous attempts at calcium carbonate conversion have involved an enzyme that is very finicky and delicate, resulting in a very expensive process.

Nickel, on the other hand, is a cheap, hardy catalyst that works efficiently in acid conditions and can be re-used many times.

The Sustainable Winery Of The Future

Our sister site PlanetSave.com has been keeping tabs on eco-friendly wines, and the new Jess S. Jackson building provides a glimpse of the direction in which things are heading.

The $4 million project was mainly funded through a $3 million pledge from the owners of Jackson Family Wines (parent company of Kendall-Jackson). The last time we checked in on the company, it was the force behind the development of a new water reclamation system for wineries that recycles both waste water and heat, so the new building is a real legacy project that will have a lasting impact on the entire industry.

Barbara Banke, wife of the late Jess Jackson, noted that “the opportunity to develop, build and share best practices in energy conservation, water management and other world-class sustainability standards was something we were honored to help bring to fruition.”

When the building is fully outfitted, it is expected to achieve Net Zero Energy certification under the Living Building Challenge, making it the first building at a university to obtain that designation (and only the second building in California, to boot).

One highlight of the winery’s equipment is of course water reclamation, given the copious amount of water involved in wine making. The main feature will be a system for capturing and filtering rainwater for use in cleaning fermentors and barrels. About 90 percent of the waste water from cleaning will be recaptured and re-used as many as ten times more.

It’s worth noting, by the way, that UC-Davis is also tackling the water reclamation issue on behalf of the state’s olive industry as well.

A carbon dioxide-to-chalk conversion system is also included in future plans (no word yet on whether or not sea urchins will be involved), along with a solar-powered icemaker that will produce chilled water and generate hydrogen gas for use in a fuel cell.

https://plus.google.com/102291313118764969093/posts

// ]]>

As for the building itself, it includes a number of passive climate control features such as super-insulation (R-59.5 for the walls and R-76 for the roof), deep porches for extra protection against summer heat, a planned rock bed for heat retention in cool weather, and natural ventilation.

Keeping the building’s sought-after Net Zero status in mind, the roof is also generously sized, allowing more space for photovoltaic arrays.

Other major construction elements include the use of carbon-sequestering cement blocks with a 90 percent cement replacement mix for the slab and foundations.

Follow me on Twitter and Google+.

Tina Casey (988 Posts)

Tina Casey specializes in military and corporate sustainability, advanced technology, emerging materials, biofuels, and water and wastewater issues. Tina’s articles are reposted frequently on Reuters, Scientific American, and many other sites. You can also follow her on Twitter @TinaMCasey and Google+.

Read More

Pandora's Promise, Nuclear Energy Documentary, Asks: What Are You Wrong About?

The new documentary film Pandora's Promise landed in theaters last Friday and is already sparking debate and prompting a renewed look at the role of nuclear energy in confronting global climate change and the other energy challenges of the 21st century. (Click here to view a round-up of the film's reviews).

In a video #EnergyChat Wednedsay, I interviewed award-winning filmmaker Robert Stone as well as Michael Shellenberger, one of the films protagonists, and the president and co-founder of the Breakthrough Institute, an independent, progressive think tank known for its often unorthodox views on energy, climate change, and other issues. (Full disclosure: I worked at the Breakthrough Institute from 2008 to 2012). You can view our full interview below or on Youtube here.

At its heart, Pandora’s Promise poses a controversial questions: does nuclear power, the one energy technology we often fear most, have the potential to save our planet from a climate catastrophe, while providing the energy needed to lift billions of people in the developing world out of poverty?

To make its case, the film, which I viewed at a screening in Cambridge recently, focuses on the personal stories of five long-time environmentalists who each began their journeys as anti-nuclear or nuclear skeptics only to find themselves challenging their prior beliefs and reevaluating their positions on nuclear energy as they engaged more with the risks posed by various energy technologies and the global energy challenges faced this century.

It’s a conversion process Stone fervently hopes the film itself will spark in its audience, as Pandora's Promise attempts to confront several of the most common reasons nuclear power is so-often feared and viscerally opposed.

Stone, who was nominated for the Academy Award for his 1988 documentary Radio Bikini about the devastating impacts of nuclear testing in the South Pacific, took his own long road to making this pro-nuclear documentary.

"I am and always will be anti-nuclear weapons," Stone explains, "and my abhorence of nuclear weapons sort of got kind of carried over into abhorence of nuclear power. But I didn't really think much beyond that."

That all changed later in life as Stone confronted the new energy challenges of the 21st century.

"The inspiration to make the film ultimately came out of being a dad and becoming increasingly alarmed about climate change," Stone told me.

He became motivated to make a film challenging people to rethink their positions on nuclear power out of a sense that the conventional approaches to climate change championed by most environmental groups and climate campaigners were well intentioned but nevertheless falling far short.

"The three main pillars upon which the environmental movement had pinned any ability to combat [climate change] were failing," Stone told me. According to the filmmaker, those three pillars were "the idea that energy efficiency would somehow reduce overall demand; the idea that we were going to raise the price on energy through a carbon tax or some kind of global agreement on reducing CO2 emissions; and the idea that wind and solar power alone are going to somehow displace fossil fuels."

"All those things have failed over the last 25 years," Stone argues, "so I, like a lot of other environmentalists, am starting to think outside the box. That led us to re-evaluating nuclear power."

The film tries to confront head-on several of the key fears regarding nuclear energy, from the nearly-permanent nature of nuclear waste to the health impacts of radiation and risks of meltdowns.

One of the most striking parts of the film documents the trip Stone took to the site of the multiple reactor meltdowns experienced at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant following the tragic March 15, 2011 Tohuku earthquake and tsunami.

Stone, along with Mark Lynas, a British environmental activist and author and one of the films other protagonists, entered the exclusion zone within which residents have still not been allowed to return. The duo tour a ghost land that still shows signs of the tsunami's devastation armed with geiger counters and clad in protective suits. It's gripping stuff, and it highlights how even those who support nuclear power's role in our energy future remain shaken by the events at Fukushima.

Robert Stone (left) and Mark Lynas with the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in the background.

"I think the movie did a good job of showing that anybody who doesn't rethink being pro-nuclear after Fukushima is either not thinking or not feeling, because it was a terrible experience and still is a huge problem," said Michael Shellenberger.

"For us [at the Breakthrough Institute]," Shellenberger explained, the Fukushima disaster "has been a motivation to think seriously about what innovation looks like for nuclear."

"If we're going to say that we need to make solar and wind cheap and scalable and we need cheap backup storage," Shellenberger said, "then we need to have innovation for nuclear as well. High on that list is safety--higher I think than the waste issue, which is largely overblown."

According to Shellenberger, the new generation of reactors being constructed now all have improved safety features designed to severely mitigate the risks of the kind of "loss of coolant" accident that doomed the Fukushima Daiichi reactors, which were all built in the 1960s and 70s.

For example, the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors under construction in Georgia and China and the Areva European Pressurized Water Reactor being built in Finland and France incorporate "passive safety" features, such as gravity-fed water reservoirs, that can cool the reactors for up to three days even in the event of a total loss of coolant system power. Those features would have almost certainly prevented the reactor meltdowns at Fukushima.

The film also looks at more advanced nuclear reactor designs, including the integral fast reactor, a breeder reactor tested for years at Argonne National Laboratory-West (now Idaho National Lab), pictured at right.

We discussed much more in the interview, including what is the most challenging obstacle to convincing people to change their minds about nuclear; why pro-renewables and pro-nuclear advocates so often end up at loggerheads; which civil society organizations, new or old, are most likely to carry the pro-nuclear standard; and what the filmmaker and environmental advocate hope to achieve after the film's theatric run.

According to Stone, the film has so far been very persuasive with audiences, including environmentalists, who are "very concerned about climate change and realizing that things are really trending the wrong way."

"Coal remains the most widely used source of energy, the fastest growing source of energy, and CO2 emissions are higher than they have been in all of human history [ed. note: indeed quite a bit longer than that!] and they are accelerating," Stone says.

"We need some new thinking," he argues.

Indeed, challenging you to think anew is what the film is all about.

According to Stone, one of the films other protagonists, Whole Earth Catalog and Long Now Foundation founder Stewart Brand told him that "he wakes up every morning and asks, 'What am I wrong about?'"

"I think that's a great way to approach this issue" of nuclear energy and its role in confronting our 21st century energy challenges, says Stone.

So do you dare ask yourself: what are you wrong about?

If so, catch Pandora's Promise now in theaters in these select cities. The film will also air on CNN in November and appear in iTunes, Netflix, DVD and everywhere else in December.

And as always, continue the conversation in the comments below. Have you challenged your assumptions about the role of nuclear power in our energy future? Share your stories below or tweet @EnergyCollectiv on Twitter using the #EnergyChat tag. 

Read More

Wind Farm Energy Innovation in the UK

Community ownership of renewable energy is still an alien concept to most people in the UK. Media reports are invariably negative whenever the two words ‘community’ and ‘wind’ appear in the same sentence. And yet, there are a small number of individuals who are determined to show that it doesn’t need to be this way. Jack Heslop*, site manager of Baywind Energy Cooperative, is one such individual. Baywind was established by a group of concerned locals in Cumbria, Northwest England back in 1996. I spoke with Mr. Heslop in his car as we sought shelter on the windswept Harlock Hill, one of two sites owned by Baywind. “There are 1,300 people invested in this scheme. Empty field, wind turbines, 15-17 year ago, people thought we were crazy. Wind turbines, what’s all that about? But these people put their money into it because they believed…because they knew climate change was coming. Even then”. The concept has since expanded under the umbrella of Energy4All, a not-for-profit social enterprise created by Baywind in 2002, which now represents seven renewable energy coops throughout the UK from its nearby base in Barrow-on-Furness. Even if you aren’t passionate about saving the planet, it still makes sense to invest in community energy. Baywind’s model has proven that it can make a steady return over the years â€" around 10% for the last financial year alone. “That’s because we’ve got a good wind farm manager, you see, that keeps the wind turbines going”, he says laughing to himself.

Baywind are currently in the process of repowering their site at Harlock Hill replacing the five wind turbines with a similar number of larger, more efficient models. This will quadruple the maximum output to 11.5 MW, enough to power 6,400 households. But they are facing hurdles every step of the way. “This site falls between two authorities. One half is South Lakelands and the other half is Barrow. We were turned down by South Lakeland because of the visual [impact]”. When I met with Mr. Heslop in May 2013, Barrow Council had yet to vote but they have since approved the application. This paves the way for Baywind’s partner, Infinergy, to appeal the planning decision of South Lakeland Council. “If this wind farm goes ahead there’ll be £35,000 going in to the local community to do what they like with it. We’ll have nothing to do with the way it’s given out”. He later adds, “Personally I’d rather see the money go into a fuel poverty fund to help people pay their bills”.

Fuel poverty is indeed a very real issue in these harsh economic times but too often the blame is laid at the door of the wind industry. “I do believe that all energy gets subsidized, doesn’t it?” he questions hesitantly. “Over the years, no one worried about where their electricity came from. They don’t see it. But all of a sudden…I need to have a windfarm next to me or a generating station of any sort next to me. It makes them think”. This attitude towards energy is strikingly similar to many people’s outlook towards food, and in particular, meat. Consumers want to be able to pick up a freshly cut steak in a local supermarket and not worry about where it came from, if the animals were reared in a humane way. They put all of their misplaced trust in the retailer and the supply chain, until the next scandal comes along, that is.

One of the most unexpected impressions that struck me during my visit to Cumbria is just what a hilly landscape it is. Sometimes I found that I simply couldn’t find the wind turbine (or the access road) that I had caught a glimpse of earlier, especially when I really wanted to find it. You’ve heard of the elusive storm chasers in the US? Well, welcome to the unlikely world of the wind chaser. So what about concerns over the visual impact on landscape in Cumbria? “You’ve got to protect the landscape, but come on, what’s natural around here?” he says inquiringly. “It’s all evolved over the years. It’s not natural. It’s been mined [referring to the nearby slate quarry], there used to be a forest on it. Everything changes. This is a working landscape. Telephone towers over there, two of them either side of us”, pointing through the car window.

Recent proposals by the UK government to give local councils greater powers to reject wind developments in their jurisdictions whilst also requiring greater contributions to community benefit funds will not empower a fair representation of local communities. No doubt, local communities need to see more direct benefits from wind, and any other infrastructure developments (road, rail, power stations) for that matter. But some perceive the community fund to be a bribe and it rarely appeases the vocal minority who are fearful (whether justified or not) of local house prices being negatively impacted. Up to 20% of Denmark’s energy needs are currently met by wind, of which 80% is met by 2,100 community-owned wind farms. These are communities that have a real stake and a long-term return through the shared ownership of wind farms in their locality.

But it’s not all doom and gloom. “One of the nicest things I do on this wind farm… we’ve had every school in the area come here”, he announces proudly. “We’ve had planners, we’ve had bankers, we’ve had coach-loads from Japan, Italy and Australia. They’ve all come here because it’s a community owned wind farm and I’ve never had one person that didn’t like it”. So what about the future for community-owned energy? “I think it’s always going to be challenging. It’s just that risk money…if you don’t get your planning, you lose your money”, he replied shaking his head. If it’s already taken two or three years since first applying to replace five community-owned turbines that have already stood in a field for 15 years, what hope is there for any new developments?

This article is part of a series exploring wind power in the landscape. Tilting at windmills is an ongoing photo project that has so far travelled to East Anglia and Cumbria in England. Colin Cafferty is a documentary photographer based in London who focuses on energy, sustainability and environmental issues.

Useful links â€"

http://www.baywind.co.uk/

http://www.energy4all.co.uk

http://www.climatechangecafe.com

*All views expressed by Mr. Heslop in this article are his own and do not represent the official stance of Baywind Energy Cooperative or Energy4All in any way.

Read More