Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage
Energy Inefficient
Editorial, New York Times
… The plain truth is that the United States is an inefficient user of energy. For each dollar of economic product, the United States spews more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than 75 of 107 countries tracked in the indicators of the International Energy Agency. Those doing better include not only cutting-edge nations like Japan but low-tech countries like Thailand and Mexico.
True, energy efficiency has improved, especially in states like California. But American drivers, households and businesses still use more energy than those in most other rich countries to do the same thing.
… Per-capita carbon dioxide emissions by households in the United States and Canada are the highest in the world — in part because of bigger homes. And the energy efficiency of electricity production from fossil fuels is lower in the United States than in most rich countries and some poor ones, mainly because of the higher share of coal in the mix.
Transportation tells the same story. The United States uses the most energy per passenger mile among the 18 rich economies surveyed by the energy agency.
… A quantum jump in energy efficiency will still require political leadership. Cheap energy has kept America from making the necessary investments. Yet they must be made; neither the country nor the atmosphere can wait for high tech to ride to the rescue.
(18 January 2009)
The benefits of an intercontinental energy grid
Stewart Taggart, ScienceAlert (Australia)
Imagine an Asian electricity grid anchored by China at one end and Australia on the other. The grid would carry and distribute hemispheric solar, geothermal, wind and wave energy. The vision is big. But so’s the problem of climate change.
Start by looking at Asia’s energy status quo. Fossil fuels dominate. Renewable energy development is sporadic. National grids aren’t interconnected. Carbon costs aren’t applied. Vision is lacking.
Now, apply sensible economic and technological rationalisation. What pops out is a networked Asian electricity backbone in which efficiency, price and environmental-friendliness count. A regional grid would offer a frictionless exchange of kilowatthours akin to the frictionless exchange of electrons the Internet has brought.
Stewart Taggart is a solar industry executive. He is also administrator of DESERTEC-USA and DESERTEC-Australia. DESERTEC advocates the development of large scale solar power capacity in desert regions.
(1X January 2009)
Apparently a selection from a larger report at DESERTEC. (“Australia advocates developing large-scale solar, geothermal, wind and wave energy projects in interior Australia.”)
Missing the Bottom Line
Hans Noeldner, Entropic Journal (blog)
On 14 January 2009 the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) issued a press release titled “Energy Efficiency Programs Can Realistically Reduce Growth in Electricity Consumption by 22%, According to EPRI”:
Shortly thereafter GreenBiz.com posted a synopsis of the EPRI press release titled “Growth in Energy Use Could Drop 22 Percent by 2030 Under Right Conditions: Report”:
http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2009/01/15/energy-use
After reading both the press release and synopsis it struck me they failed to highlight that even with the efficiency programs, US electrical consumption is projected to increase significantly between now and 2030 – a highly inconvenient truth if one considers 80% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 to be a high priority. Closer examination shows that neither press release nor synopsis listed bottom line numbers – a spin tactic which is endemic in Washington. The fact that EPRI did this should not surprise anyone; one naturally expects an industry trade organization to be an industry shrill. But perhaps we should be less tolerant of “greenwashing” from a “greenwhatever.com” group. My letter to the editor of GreenBiz.com follows. Note that I CC:d the editor of the EPRI website as well:
————–
Dear Editor:
I would like to offer a friendly critique regarding the GreeBiz.com news posting “Growth in Energy Use Could Drop 22 Percent by 2030 Under Right Conditions: Report”:
http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2009/01/15/energy-use
Titles like this one tend to be confusing – and it is no coincidence that politicians very often use similar language to describe absolute increases in spending (or debt) as decreases in the projected rate of increase in spending (or deficit). Casual readers might well conclude from this title that the efficiency programs could reduce consumption itself by 22%.
(18 January 2009)
Hans Noeldner is a regular contributor to Energy Bulletin.
