<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Energy efficiency, part 4]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by LGT http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:37:53 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/1 I wish California's "efficiency" plans

... worked for wildfires, too!

http://feww.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/california-fires-not ...

]]> I wish California's "efficiency" plans

... worked for wildfires, too!

http://feww.wordpress.com/2008/07/31/california-fires-not ...

]]> Comment #2 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:02:54 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/2 Mandates -- they work

The lesson:  intelligent mandates work efficiently and effectively.

We don't need a "Cap and Trade" law for skyshine so that developers who want to stick in more streetlights can buy "dark sky" credits from developers who choose not to.

The 5% Project

]]> Mandates -- they work

The lesson:  intelligent mandates work efficiently and effectively.

We don't need a "Cap and Trade" law for skyshine so that developers who want to stick in more streetlights can buy "dark sky" credits from developers who choose not to.

The 5% Project

]]> Comment #3 by David Bradish http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:41:37 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/3 I'm a big fan of EE but...

you're leaving out an important piece of California's history. In order to achieve the efficiency gains CA has made, CA has basically kicked out all the energy intensive industries from the state, has some of the highest electricity prices, and imports 20 percent of its electricity. Check out this piece by Max Schulz at the City Journal. Here are some highlights:

California's proud claim to have kept per-capita energy consumption flat while growing its economy is less impressive than it seems. The state has some of the highest energy prices in the country--nearly twice the national average, a 2002 Milken Institute study found--largely because of regulations and government mandates to use expensive renewable sources of power. As a result, heavy manufacturing and other energy-intensive industries have been fleeing the Golden State in droves for lower-cost locales. Twenty years ago or so, you could count eight automobile factories in California; today, there's just one, and it's the same story with other industries, from chemicals to aerospace. Yet Californians still enjoy the fruits of those manufacturing industries--driving cars built in the Midwest and the South, importing chemicals and resins and paints and plastics produced elsewhere, and flying on jumbo jets manufactured in places like Everett, Washington. California can pretend to have controlled energy consumption, but it has just displaced it.

...

It's hard to claim credibly that California illuminates the world when it has trouble illuminating itself. Further, California's particular path makes sense only if the rest of the country refuses to follow it. The state's lawmakers and regulators have enacted policies that for several decades have allowed Californians to feel good, even smug, about their environmental credentials. Yet California's economic prosperity has relied on the fact that other states have built power plants and established sensible regulatory regimes that don't force businesses to flee.

...

California is certainly within its rights to set policies for itself and to live with the consequences. But everyone can't do what California does. Someone needs to build power plants and oil refineries. Someone needs to manufacture the cars, trucks, airplanes, and other pieces of heavy equipment that enrich Americans' lives, till our fields, and grow our economy. Someone needs to produce the plastics and chemicals that undergird our prosperity. Those things require energy, and lots of it--growing amounts of it. All the wisdom of Athens and all the power of Sparta won't change that fact.

]]> I'm a big fan of EE but...

you're leaving out an important piece of California's history. In order to achieve the efficiency gains CA has made, CA has basically kicked out all the energy intensive industries from the state, has some of the highest electricity prices, and imports 20 percent of its electricity. Check out this piece by Max Schulz at the City Journal. Here are some highlights:

California's proud claim to have kept per-capita energy consumption flat while growing its economy is less impressive than it seems. The state has some of the highest energy prices in the country--nearly twice the national average, a 2002 Milken Institute study found--largely because of regulations and government mandates to use expensive renewable sources of power. As a result, heavy manufacturing and other energy-intensive industries have been fleeing the Golden State in droves for lower-cost locales. Twenty years ago or so, you could count eight automobile factories in California; today, there's just one, and it's the same story with other industries, from chemicals to aerospace. Yet Californians still enjoy the fruits of those manufacturing industries--driving cars built in the Midwest and the South, importing chemicals and resins and paints and plastics produced elsewhere, and flying on jumbo jets manufactured in places like Everett, Washington. California can pretend to have controlled energy consumption, but it has just displaced it.

...

It's hard to claim credibly that California illuminates the world when it has trouble illuminating itself. Further, California's particular path makes sense only if the rest of the country refuses to follow it. The state's lawmakers and regulators have enacted policies that for several decades have allowed Californians to feel good, even smug, about their environmental credentials. Yet California's economic prosperity has relied on the fact that other states have built power plants and established sensible regulatory regimes that don't force businesses to flee.

...

California is certainly within its rights to set policies for itself and to live with the consequences. But everyone can't do what California does. Someone needs to build power plants and oil refineries. Someone needs to manufacture the cars, trucks, airplanes, and other pieces of heavy equipment that enrich Americans' lives, till our fields, and grow our economy. Someone needs to produce the plastics and chemicals that undergird our prosperity. Those things require energy, and lots of it--growing amounts of it. All the wisdom of Athens and all the power of Sparta won't change that fact.

]]> Comment #4 by Millstone http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Wed, 30 Jul 2008 23:48:43 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/4 Well I think one thing is for sure . . .

I suppose CA doesn't really need these natural gas plants after all. If supply is as tight as it is made out to be, it is no wonder people are using less, they are getting clubbed over the head with prices.

You are likely justified in extolling the benefits of the energy efficiency programs specifically. But as David Bradish has posted above me and I have posted in your last few posts about CA, there is a lot more at work here than just effective EE policy.

Following CA on EE might be a good idea, but unless you want to sell people on electricity price increases that will go far beyond what is already expected, I don't think their energy policy is on the whole that fantastic. Nor even feasible for many parts of the country, see renewable energy resource maps for a clue why.

]]> Well I think one thing is for sure . . .

I suppose CA doesn't really need these natural gas plants after all. If supply is as tight as it is made out to be, it is no wonder people are using less, they are getting clubbed over the head with prices.

You are likely justified in extolling the benefits of the energy efficiency programs specifically. But as David Bradish has posted above me and I have posted in your last few posts about CA, there is a lot more at work here than just effective EE policy.

Following CA on EE might be a good idea, but unless you want to sell people on electricity price increases that will go far beyond what is already expected, I don't think their energy policy is on the whole that fantastic. Nor even feasible for many parts of the country, see renewable energy resource maps for a clue why.

]]> Comment #5 by Delay And Deny http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:15:03 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/5 MIT researchers split water to store solar energy


http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10002704-54.html?tag=cn ...

The key to plentiful solar power is water, says Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Daniel Nocera.

Nocera and his MIT colleague, Matthew Kanan, on Thursday will publish a technical paper that describes what they claim is a breakthrough in solar energy storage.

The key to MIT's discovery is a catalyst made from abundant materials that can make oxygen gas by passing an electrical current through water more effectively than previous methods.  (Credit: MIT)

The idea is to use the energy from solar photovoltaic panels (or another electricity source) to crack water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen gas. Those gases would be stored and used later in a fuel cell to make electricity when the sun is not shining.

The concept is a closed-loop system: running the hydrogen and water through the fuel cell creates water, which can be captured and used again.

The hope is that within 10 years, a cost-effective system that combines clean energy generation with storage can be engineered and available cheaply to people around the world.


]]> MIT researchers split water to store solar energy


http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10002704-54.html?tag=cn ...

The key to plentiful solar power is water, says Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Daniel Nocera.

Nocera and his MIT colleague, Matthew Kanan, on Thursday will publish a technical paper that describes what they claim is a breakthrough in solar energy storage.

The key to MIT's discovery is a catalyst made from abundant materials that can make oxygen gas by passing an electrical current through water more effectively than previous methods.  (Credit: MIT)

The idea is to use the energy from solar photovoltaic panels (or another electricity source) to crack water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen gas. Those gases would be stored and used later in a fuel cell to make electricity when the sun is not shining.

The concept is a closed-loop system: running the hydrogen and water through the fuel cell creates water, which can be captured and used again.

The hope is that within 10 years, a cost-effective system that combines clean energy generation with storage can be engineered and available cheaply to people around the world.


]]> Comment #6 by David Bradish http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:50:58 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/6 Some questions

the hit job by a conservative think tank is analytically unimpressive.

Are you saying that there's not one ounce of truth in the article? So I guess anything that comes from a conservative group is wrong. It's sad to read that politics trumps facts in this debate.

the illegal actions of companies like Enron.

Page 8 of this article (pdf) says you greatly respected Enron. Interesting. Obviously your opinion has changed though.

deregulation led most utilities to scale back their energy efficiency programs

You sure it wasn't because the EE programs were fraudulent as well? Here's page 8 from the same article I linked to above:

EES, in fact, was one of Enron's fraud-rife divisions, with the estimated savings in energy and customer costs consisting mainly of speculation and accounting tricks. EES's contracts were liabilities parading as assets.

...

Saving energy profitably, above and beyond what private companies had been doing prior to outsourcing, was skinny on profits relative to risk, it turned out.

The link above is from a liberal arts college. Does that meet your standards?

]]> Some questions

the hit job by a conservative think tank is analytically unimpressive.

Are you saying that there's not one ounce of truth in the article? So I guess anything that comes from a conservative group is wrong. It's sad to read that politics trumps facts in this debate.

the illegal actions of companies like Enron.

Page 8 of this article (pdf) says you greatly respected Enron. Interesting. Obviously your opinion has changed though.

deregulation led most utilities to scale back their energy efficiency programs

You sure it wasn't because the EE programs were fraudulent as well? Here's page 8 from the same article I linked to above:

EES, in fact, was one of Enron's fraud-rife divisions, with the estimated savings in energy and customer costs consisting mainly of speculation and accounting tricks. EES's contracts were liabilities parading as assets.

...

Saving energy profitably, above and beyond what private companies had been doing prior to outsourcing, was skinny on profits relative to risk, it turned out.

The link above is from a liberal arts college. Does that meet your standards?

]]> Comment #7 by Millstone http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Thu, 31 Jul 2008 06:19:23 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/7 It is losing jobs somewhat faster.

A quick check of at the Bureau of Labor Statistics revealed that from 1990-2007 the manufacturing jobs sector looked like this (in thousands of jobs):

US: 17,695 down to 13,884 or about 79% of 1990 jobs retained.

CA: 1,937 down to 1,452 or about 75% of 1990 jobs retained.

If the US as a whole retained the same percentage as California we would have lost another 411,000 manufacturing jobs.

You make a good point about Silicon Valley but I would argue that it is more evidence of the uniqueness of CA's situation. Just like their fairly desirable renewable energy profile CA is now home to some unique industries like Hollywood and Silicon Valley.

I am also left to wonder how much of an impact simply being subject to the brown-outs as a result of the Enron fiascoe had?

I'm not sure this is quanitified but anyone who has a parent or grandparent who grew up either during the depression or one of the WWs knows them to typically be more frugal than the latter generations.

But that doesn't mean I think we all need to experience a few years of brown-outs although if we don't build anymore coal, natural gas or nuclear power plants I bet thats what we'll get.

]]> It is losing jobs somewhat faster.

A quick check of at the Bureau of Labor Statistics revealed that from 1990-2007 the manufacturing jobs sector looked like this (in thousands of jobs):

US: 17,695 down to 13,884 or about 79% of 1990 jobs retained.

CA: 1,937 down to 1,452 or about 75% of 1990 jobs retained.

If the US as a whole retained the same percentage as California we would have lost another 411,000 manufacturing jobs.

You make a good point about Silicon Valley but I would argue that it is more evidence of the uniqueness of CA's situation. Just like their fairly desirable renewable energy profile CA is now home to some unique industries like Hollywood and Silicon Valley.

I am also left to wonder how much of an impact simply being subject to the brown-outs as a result of the Enron fiascoe had?

I'm not sure this is quanitified but anyone who has a parent or grandparent who grew up either during the depression or one of the WWs knows them to typically be more frugal than the latter generations.

But that doesn't mean I think we all need to experience a few years of brown-outs although if we don't build anymore coal, natural gas or nuclear power plants I bet thats what we'll get.

]]> Comment #8 by Jonas http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/ Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:39:45 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/i-wish-they-all-could-be-californias-plans/8 Jabailo, is that efficient?

Jabailo, do you really think that splitting water in to hydrogen and using that gas in a hyper-costly fuel cell, is efficient?

I don't think so. It costs way too much. And that means we would not be spending money on renewables that work. We better spend that money today, in order to mitigate climate change, because the longer we wait, the less efficient we will be at solving the climate crisis and the costlier it will be.

Energy efficiency, the efficiency of an investment and the efficiency of solving climate change are all intertwined.

It's too easy to say that you have found a highly 'energy efficient' technology, which is however extremely inefficient as an investment, which in turn becomes an inefficient way to tackle climate change.

]]> Jabailo, is that efficient?

Jabailo, do you really think that splitting water in to hydrogen and using that gas in a hyper-costly fuel cell, is efficient?

I don't think so. It costs way too much. And that means we would not be spending money on renewables that work. We better spend that money today, in order to mitigate climate change, because the longer we wait, the less efficient we will be at solving the climate crisis and the costlier it will be.

Energy efficiency, the efficiency of an investment and the efficiency of solving climate change are all intertwined.

It's too easy to say that you have found a highly 'energy efficient' technology, which is however extremely inefficient as an investment, which in turn becomes an inefficient way to tackle climate change.

]]>