There’s a very good lesson to be learned here. As excited as people are about bringing clean, renewable energy to their communities they should always perform due diligence when evaluating clean energy projects or vendors. In Minnesota you would need to have absolute assurance that a system exposed to the elements (which I would imagine could get extreme in Minnesota in the winter) will perform in all weather conditions.

1. Alternative Energy – Part 1
2. Alternative Energy – Part 2
3. Government’s Role
4. Learning About Energy

When I think about 2010 it seems to me that this will be a year of waiting in the clean energy space. That’s not to say that major projects such as wind and solar farms won’t be completed in 2010. Many projects will be completed but it won’t be the tipping point year for many of the newer and most promising technologies. The reasons for that would make sense to most anyone who knows a little bit about the clean energy space. Take the funding for example. Once the press releases are a day old the hard work on many of these projects begins. After all, you don’t get a check from the Department of Energy one day and start building batteries the next day. Matching funds to meet the government requirements need to be finalized. Planning needs to take place. People need to be hired. Contracts need to be negotiated and signed. Those are just a few things that typically take place before a project begins in earnest. It’s a lot of work and it takes time. The bigger the project, the longer the lead time. And there’s also the matter of projects or technologies that are underway but will not meet expectations.

What follows is a summary of some key clean energy technologies and how they are likely to fare in the current year.

Electric Vehicles - Both Nissan (the Leaf) and GM (the Chevy Volt) have promised to introduce their version of the electric automobile in 2010. The cars will be made available late in the year and in limited markets, primarily California. While there will be a lot of noise leading up to their respective launches most consumers won’t have access to buy one of these vehicles if they wanted to. Those that do live in the right markets probably won’t be able to afford the $30,000 – $40,000 price tag after Federal tax incentives. By the end of 2010 electric vehicles will still mostly be a curiosity. The ones that are on the road will definitely turn heads though.

Wind Power - Most onshore development will take place in the Upper Midwest. Northeast onshore development will be slowed by issues related to cost and location related opposition. Simply put, there are a lot more open spaces in the Upper Midwest. Land is cheaper there and developers are less likely to run into opposition due to “pollution” of the skyline. Offshore development off of the Northeast coast and in the Great Lakes will continue to be planned, discussed and debated. Cape Wind in Massachusetts will probably get the green light to move ahead by the Secretary of the Interior but either way construction will not start before the end of the year.

Biofuels - Ethanol is on the shelf as a source of fuel for motor vehicles. Notice that you’re not hearing anything about flex fuel vehicles anymore. The chart below shows the trends for web searches on the term “flex fuel vehicle”. Batteries are the next great hope. You’ll be hearing a lot more about “advanced biofuels” such as cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel.

Enhanced Geothermal - We’re still a long way off from a major breakthrough in harvesting energy from the heat within the earth. Conventional geothermal energy is a available in a small portion of the country. Enhanced geothermal promises to bring the technology to many other areas of the country. Unfortunately recent endeavors to prove the technology have not ended well. AltaRock Energy (funded in part by the DOE and Google) shut down their California project in 2009 due to drilling problems. They’ll take another crack (no pun intended) at it in 2010 with a demonstration project in Oregon.

Smart Grid - By the end of the year more electric customers than ever will have advanced meters installed in their homes. That number will still represent a very small portion of total electric consumers as most of the meters will be located in areas of Texas, California and Colorado. Many more smart meter projects are in the works due to 2009 funding commitments from the America Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) but those projects require a certain amount of lead time before meters start getting installed. Electric utilities are also dealing with issues related to financing in an environment when demand is reduced due to the recession and customers are wary of any innovations that might increase their electric bill. PG&E’s problems with their smart meter customers in Northern California are a notable development that will probably influence other utilities to choose their roll out timelines carefully, perhaps alotting more time for customer outreach before installing new meters over a wide area.

There is going to be a lot of activity in 2010. There’s no doubt about that. I don’t think we’ll see a lot of results though. At least not as much as many would hope for. Progress will be made but it won’t be obvious to the average consumer. In the years that follow 2010 we’ll start to see more of the fruits of the hard work and investment taking place today

“We want to have the ability to procure renewable energy to offset power usage of our operations,” said Niki Fenwick, a Google spokeswoman. Ms. Fenwick said that having access to more renewable energy could help the company fulfill its goal to become “carbon neutral.”

Well that’s what Ms. Fenwick said, but simply procuring renewable energy is probably not the end game here. Here’s why. In Google’s application they have applied to become a power marketer. That means they will be able to buy and sell electricity on the wholesale market. Okay, fine. But check out the following passage from the FERC  filing.

In addition to engaging in sales of electricity that are unregulated by the Commission, Applicant proposes to act as a power marketer, purchasing electricity and reselling it to wholesale customers. Applicant may also engage in other, non-jurisdictional, activities to facilitate efficient trade in the bulk power market, such as arranging services in related areas such as transmission and fuel supplies.

That section of the filing clearly indicates that Google Energy plans to do much more than just purchase renewable energy. They plan to sell energy too. Later on in Section III, Paragraph D of the filing you’ll find the following statement.

Applicant requests authority to sell specified ancillary services that the Commission has authorized market-based entities to sell in the markets operated by…

They go on to list almost all of the organized electricity markets in the U.S. as places where they would like to sell ancillary services. For those not in the know, ancillary services involves providing services, such as energy reserves for example, to the electric grid that help to maintain the stability and security of the grid. We don’t need to delve too much further into the details of that to know that it goes beyond merely providing for Google’s own energy needs.

There are many options for Google Energy with respect to electric market participation if their application is approved by the FERC. It’s true that Google Energy could simply purchase electricity to meet their own needs and do nothing more. But Google could do that without becoming a power marketer. The filed application indicates that Google has even larger aspirations than just purchasing power from the markets. We’ll just have to wait and see.

The consumer side of smart grid involves meters that collect data on usage frequently and then make that data available to the consumer so that they can either manually or automatically (depending on how smart their appliances are) alter their electric usage during times of peak demand. That altered behavior will theoretically reduce the need for expensive and peaking generation that consumers pay for every day but only runs a few hours a year. As a result the system realizes both environmental and economic benefits. It sounds great but before the consumer can alter their usage patterns they need to get access to the data. That’s where the need for cloud computing architecture enters the scenario.

In the world of smart grid utilities will be storing much more data about customer usage than they do now. Most utilities currently take one reading of an electric meter for an entire month. With smart meters in place utilities will be storing thousands of readings a month for each meter. That means utilities will need lots and lots of databases (data centers actually) and applications to access and analyze that data. Computing power is going to be a big deal but it isn’t nearly the sweet spot for utilities. It should come as no surprise that computing giants like IBM, Google, Oracle and Microsoft are lining up to service utilities as they transfer to smart grid technology. So the data storage issues should be sorted out. Don’t forget about the customer though.

In order for the customer to be involved they need access to the data being captured by the utility and they probably need it in real time for the whole scheme to be effective. Customers will need to know, “How much power am I using RIGHT NOW, not fifteen minutes ago.” If smart grid technology delivers on its promises the utility should know that but getting the data to customers in a user friendly manner will be a trickier proposition. That’s where cloud computing platforms enter the situation again. All this data is stored somewhere (out there) in the cloud and that means the customer should have access to that data anytime they have an internet connection. Google’s Gmail service is a great example of a cloud computing service. All the data sits in a data center somewhere and a person’s local computer or iPhone or Blackberry can access that email via a web browser or other specialized program. All the heavy lifting (catching the mail, filtering spam, storage, indexing for search) happens in the cloud. And so it will need to be with customer meter data. Perhaps people could get meter data updates via email. Why not?

Two very necessary functions that utilities are not so good at involve data access and interfaces. In the world of smart grid customers will need user friendly access to data. That doesn’t mean they will visit the utility website every so often and download a csv or pdf file. User friendly means that customers must have access on the platforms, devices and in the format of their choosing. At the computer? Yes. On the mobile phone? Yes. Automatically? Yes. Via text message? Yes. HTML? Text? Yes. Yes. What will customers do with the data? If you’re the utility it really isn’t any of your business. The customers have a right to the data. And that also means they have a right to choose the interface that serves up the data to them. So once open access has been granted the customer can make the choice of interface.

Utilities may choose to make interface options available to consumers. Both Google and Microsoft have been promoting products (Google Power Meter and Hohm respectively) that can serve as an interface for utility customer meter data. But consumers may want to use other interfaces. An iPhone application to display meter data is far from a far fetched idea. How about sharing meter consumption on the Facebook page or Twitter account? Why not? People share a lot of things that you wouldn’t expect them to these days. There are many, many possibilities. Utilities have a few options here. You can try to think of all the possibilities, code applications to meet the needs then release and support them. An interesting idea but not advisable. Or utilities could offer application programming interfaces (API) that allow developers access to meter data given the permission of the customer. Or utilities could just lock the data into their own system giving customers limited access.

If the utility proponents of smart grid want the idea to take off they better seriously consider the API option. Because if you want a technology to take off you need to get people behind it. People will get behind it if they have options for accessing and using their meter data. Remember, the data belongs to the customer as much as the utility. It’s likely that they (or some enterprising software developer) will find a better use for it than the utility will. If you’re looking for some simple examples of the API option see the Twitter API. It allows developers to write applications that access a Twitter users “updates” with the permission of the user. Now think of frequent meter readings as status “updates” that the customer may want to make available to some application for whatever use suits them. Consider the image below which shows the Twitter “connection” window. It shows what applications have been given access to the Twitter updates of a particular user.

Approved Twitter Applications

Why not have a dashboard like this available to a utility customer? There’s no good reason why the customer shouldn’t have these features. Cost might be raised as a potential issue. Remember that utilities are going to have to give access to this data anyway. Giving limited access may end up costing a lot more in the long run if the technologies of smart grid are not sufficiently utilized to offer the promised benefits. Limited access could have a public relations cost associated with it as well. Imagine consumer advocates saying, “There go the utilities again, promising transparency and access to data as a result of new technologies, then failing to follow through.” Cloud computing, with it’s (theoretically) infinitely expandable architecture helps to make it possible.

Smart grid and cloud computing need to go hand in hand in order for the customer focused aspects of smart grid to be successful. Cloud computing offers great opportunities for both the utilities and customers. The technology vendors are out there. The data centers are out there. The application developers are out there. The utility industry just needs to join the party and meet them halfway.

The dollars are flowing to companies large and small. Automotive start ups like Tesla Motors and Fisker Automotive, companies with little track record and no profits to speak of, have scored nearly $1 billion combined in guaranteed loans. Meanwhile established car companies like Ford and Nissan have been granted $5.9 billion and $1.6 billion respectively to further development of electric vehicles. That’s in addition to the government’s purchase of General Motors at a cost of tens of billions of dollars.

Outside the auto industry we’ve seen companies such as Solyndra, a solar power start up based in Silicon Valley that qualified earlier this year for a $535 million DOE loan guarantee. Prior to the loan guarantee Solyndra had been funded to the tune of $800 million in private venture capital financing. At the beginning of September the DOE also announced over $500 million in grants given mostly to large wind power developers. Since then many large utilities across the country have benefited from over $3 billion in smart grid stimulus awards. More recently the DOE has announced more than $600 million for energy storage projects.

If you look at the entire list of what has been funded so far you’ll see that no technology has been left behind. Electric vehicles, solar, wind, smart grid, geothermal, energy efficiency, energy storage  and carbon capture have all received funding. Thus one of the biggest obstacles to the development of new clean energy technologies has been removed. The collapse of the credit markets and oil prices dried up the investment pot. But the U.S. government has stepped in to fill the vacuum. So companies now have access to the capital they need to develop better batteries, construct manufacturing plants, research future technologies and much more.

With the financing obstacle removed for many companies, the only thing that’s left for companies to do now is to deliver on their promises. Electric car manufacturers have promised affordable vehicles that eliminate (or greatly reduce) the need for gasoline use in day-to-day transportation. Solar producers have promised gigawatts of solar facilities across the deserts of the southwest and rooftops across America. Wind power developers have promised clean, reliable, emission free electricity with very low impact to the environment. Smart grid companies have promised a new age of energy information technologies that will virtually eliminate blackouts and give consumers unprecedented control over their energy use and costs. Geothermal developers have promised a vast supply of emission free, uninterrupted baseload power from deep below the surface of the earth. On top of all the promises we’ve heard many times over the past decades there is also the promise of millions of “green jobs” as a result of a new clean energy economy.

The billions of dollars in play right now may only represent a down payment on future possibilities for clean energy development in the United States. Results are important though. If you have an investor who throws in a million dollars most of the time they want to see some progress before they commit more money. In this case the investors are the American people who’ve heard promises about the benefits of affordable electric vehicles and solar technology for decades. If public support for new energy investment erodes in 2010, politicians, especially ones up for re-election, will get the message and adjust their influence accordingly. That’s why it’s so important that clean energy companies show that they can produce the technologies they have promised, with the benefits that they have promised, at a cost that the majority of the public can afford.

On September 2nd of this year the New York Times published a story titled, Energy Company Calls Halt to Drilling Project. The main reason the project was halted was due to the fact that AltaRock was unable to drill a sufficient hole, only going down about 800 feet from their starting point of 3,200 feet. In order to move forward the NY Times story states that the drilling needed to reach 12,000 feet. Concerns about the project were already inflated at the time of the shutdown due to the fact that a similar effort in Switzerland had been blamed for an earthquake.

At the time of the original announcement we had our doubts about the viability of the project.

EGS may be indeed be a viable clean energy generation technology. It is also a very a risky and expensive technology that yields its share of negative environmental impacts.

Unfortunately it appears that our instincts were correct. There’s no such thing as a free lunch in power generation. If you want to extract power from the earth the earth makes you pay a heavy price. In this case the price seems to have been too high for AltaRock, their investors and the State of California. AltaRock Energy indicated in their official press release that they continue to seek out other enhanced geothermal projects.

We are continuing with the development of our EGS technology and are currently evaluating a number of alternative well locations, at the Geysers and elsewhere for demonstrating this technology.

You may remember that one time Google turned their home page black in order to help people conserve energy. The only problem with the approach was the fact that computer monitors use the same amount of energy to render a pixel regardless of the color. Google even admits that a black page background, “saves no energy.”

Google’s latest energy saving scheme is just as dubious. They have enlisted a herd of goats to handle the mowing of weeds and brush at Google headquarters. Google calls the goat initiative, “a low-carbon approach” to meeting their needs. Is it really a low-carbon approach?

Consider the fact that the goats need to be transported from their home ranch to Google and back. Our guess is that the truck transporting the goats to and fro runs on diesel fuel. How much fuels is used and how many harmful emissions are created will depend greatly on the travel distance between the home of the goats and Google HQ. At best we think it’s fair to say that it would end up being a wash.

Instead of enlisting goats that will also require care and feeding while onsite, Google should consider investing in the Hustler Zeon which is billed as, “The World’s First All-Electric Zero Turn Riding Mower.”

While this initiative appears to contain more noise than signal Google has made some laudable investments into alternative energy via Google.org with their RechargeIT and Power Meter programs.

Neighbors around the Altona wind park reported hearing loud explosions before the turbine apparently snapped in half around 10 a.m. and then caught fire.

Helen Morales, who lives near the fallen Fisher Way turbine, didn’t hear anything, but earlier saw the blades on one turbine “spinning at a high rate of speed” and noted that the air appeared “cloudy” around it.

The 97.5 megawatt facility is run by Noble Environmental Power of Connecticut.  Noble released a pair of statements on Friday commenting on the incident. The first statement confirmed the collapse and subsequent fire while also indicating that there were no injuries. The second statement provided an update on the situation and indicated that the collapsed turbine was manufactured by General Electric.

The facility is currently closed and Noble has indicated that an investigation will take several months.

In recent months the installed capacity of wind in New York state has grown to over 1000 megawatts. The Altona wind farm represents a little less than ten percent of the total installed wind capacity in New York State. The outage is likely to affect the wind farm owner a lot more than it will the state electric grid. Like many renewable power companies Noble has cut back on spending in recent months and implemented staff reductions as the credit markets have frozen up.

This incident is likely to raise questions about wind turbine installation and maintenance procedures. Wind power has been exploding in the U.S. over the last few years. And even though the technology is widely used around the world there is still a lot to learn about it. Hopefully wind turbine manufacturers and plant operators will take a cue from this incident and review their procedures to ensure that turbines are manufactured, installed and operated with the highest standards of safety and durability in mind.

Consider the Aptera electric vehicle (pictured at left) which is made in California by Aptera Motors. With three wheels and just enough room for two passengers this vehicle has more in common with a motor cycle than a car. But with an expected price tag between $20,000 and $40,000 the Aptera sure does have a car-like price tag.

Then there’s the Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) which is made by a Chrysler subsidiary called Global Electric Motorcars or GEM. The GEM e4 (pictured at right) is touted as, “…perfect for visiting family and friends or just recreational driving.” Unfortunately it’s only perfect if your family lives on the same block as you do. That’s because the top speed of the vehicle is  25 miles per hour and it has no doors. The vehicle is essentially a golf cart. But at a base price of over $11,000 the GEM e4 will set you back more than most used cars in very good condition.

If you’re part of the champagne and caviar set you have the option of going fully electric in a way that makes few compromises. The Tesla Roadster all electric vehicle made by Tesla Motors looks and performs like a sports car. It also has an impressive range of over 200 miles per charge. But the price tag of the Tesla Roadster is north of $100,000 and the production schedule only allows for about twenty vehicles each month. And with a 1,000 person waiting list you’d probably have to wait four to five years to get one even if you had the money to burn on this hot rod.

There’s no doubt that the idea of a fully electric car is hot right now. The problem is that the economically accessible electric vehicles aren’t really cars. And the electric cars that are real cars are not economically feasible for 99.5% of the population. The future promises many additional entrants into the space like the way over hyped Chevrolet Volt.

The Volt (pictured at right) promises a forty mile all electric range with a gasoline engine as a backup. The vehicle is set to roll of the assembly line towards the end of 2010 and have a price tag of about $40,000. There’s no guarantee that General Motors will get all of the current issues with the vehicle (like battery life for instance) resolved so the launched could be further delayed and the price could increase as well.

Chinese automaker BYD is getting into the act too, with a plug-in hybrid that has similar technology to the Chevy Volt. Last month The Wall Street Journal highlighted BYD’s efforts to build and market an electric vehicle that will eventually find its way to the United States.

These vehicles are only a few notable examples of the many alternative automobiles that we’re likely to see introduced in the next few years. Other contenders typically suffer from the same problems as the ones mentioned in this post. Most are not economical due to the prohibitive cost of installing huge battery packs. Those same battery packs also tend reduce the rear seating and cargo space availability for these vehicles,  which assists in cutting back on the practicality as well.

Many feel that mass production of electric cars will lead to lower cost battery packs. Those economies of scale may manifest themselves. But it’s also possible that mass demand for lithium battery packs could change the economics of lithium. A shortage of lithium could actually cause electric vehicle prices to rise even as demand increases.

Not everyone is betting that the plug is the answer to greatly reducing America’s dependence on gasoline as a transportation fuel. Companies like Honda and General Motors continue to invest money developing hydrogen powered vehicles lick the Chevy Equinox and the Honda FCX Clarity. Unfortunately, Hydrogen vehicles are incredibly expensive to produce and suffer from the lack of a hydrogen distribution infrastructure. The New York Times detailed the story of a New York Legislator who drove a Chevy Equinox to Washington D.C. but needed two additional Chevy Tahoe Hybrid SUVs in order to make it there.

Some really big dreamers are looking to solar to power the car of the future. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has  a solar energy vehicle team. And one man from Canada has engaged in a lifelong quest to evangelized solar powered cars. Since last June Marcelo Da Luz has traveled the U.S. and has set the world record for the traveling distance of a solar vehicle.  Unfortunately Mr. Da Luz’ quest is not a gasoline free one. A gas guzzling support van has followed him every step of the way.

A web based service called CO2stats is a great case in point for illustrating both of those issues. The owner, Alex Wissner-Gross Ph.D.appears to be a very smart guy. Dr. Gross and his service hit the news recently via reports of a study he conducted that measured the “carbon footprint” of Google searches.

CO2stats, which is run out of a Boston apartment (source) sells “green certified site” badges. CO2stats is also offering to make websites “carbon neutral.” How does one make a website carbon neutral? You pay them of course and they’ll do it for you by purchasing, “…the appropriate amount of audited renewable energy from wind and solar farms.” (source) Anyone who knows anything about energy knows that no amount of credit purchases can “offset” the burning of a fossil fuel or the release of emissions into the atmosphere. You just can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

This company also claims to be able to know, “…what type of energy is being used to power the networks that are connecting your visitors’ computers with your servers.” Let me be one of the first to call that claim highly suspect. You can create a model to speculate on what type of power is being generated based on the location of the server and the fuel diversity profile of the region, if available. But no one can really know what percentage of fuel is powering a particular computer at any given time. So perhaps the “team” at CO2stats has some sort of a model. How accurate is that model?

What is really instructive to me when scanning the value proposition contained on the CO2stats website are the claims that they can assist with growing your business. The site exclaims, “Your subscription includes free advertising on one of the web’s largest green ad networks, spanning thousands of sites.” Could we see a comprehensive list of those sites please? CO2stats also claims that the presence of their special “green” badge will increase the amount of time that visitors stay on the website. All this leads me to wonder. Is there anything that CO2stats can’t do for a business? Click the huge SIGN UP NOW button, enter your credit card and find out.

Excuse me for being skeptical and a bit cheeky. I’m of the opinion that enterprises like CO2stats are merely marketing exercises, selling carbon offsets that are of dubious value to both the holder and the environment. Purchasing a carbon offset is tantamount to buying a get out of jail free card in the game Monopoly. And who knows what type of “green” extortion could occur the (hopefully not near) future? It’s possible that “environmental” groups could start charging companies that don’t have the approved “green” symbol on their websites with crimes against the earth.

The clean energy movement needs real solutions to difficult problems. It doesn’t need rhetoric designed to make people feel guilty about using their computers, having children, starting a business or doing anything else that uses energy. The clean energy movement certainly doesn’t need get out of jail free cards either. My hope is that in 2009 more people look beyond the hype and the marketing to realize that the long term energy problems can’t be solved by paying someone to allow you to post a certified “green” badge on your website.

Pickens delays world’s biggest wind farm project

T Boone Pickens, a renowned Texan oilman who is raising the capital for the wind farm, told a US television station today that the twofold problem was slowing down his ambitious plan. Pickens, who made a fortune from the oil industry but has been converted to renewable energy as a means of ending US dependence on foreign oil, announced the original plan for the wind farm last year and construction was supposed to start in 2010.

Chrysler Launches New Hybrids, then Cancels Production

In a sign of these strange economic times, Chrysler LLC is simultaneously preparing to launch its first hybrid vehicles and to shut down their production. Chrysler announced that it will close the Newark Assembly Plant in Newark, Delaware, at the end of this year, a move that will bring an end to the Dodge Durango and Chrysler Aspen in all their forms, including the new hybrids.

Evergreen Solar files suit against Lehman Bros.

Evergreen Solar Inc., a Marlborough manufacturer of solar power panels, said today it has filed suit against Barclays and Lehman Brothers in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases. Evergreen Solar said it is demanding the immediate return of Evergreen stock shares loaned to Lehman Brothers in July as Evergreen Solar seeks to challenge Barclay’s ownership claim to shares transferred during Lehman Brothers bankruptcy proceedings.

FPL Group to cut spending, wind power growth

FPL Group, the largest operator of wind-power generation in the United States, said on Monday it would slash its 2009 spending because of the economic slump, reducing its wind turbine additions. The company said it would cut 2009 planned capital expenditures nearly 25 percent to $5.3 billion and add 1,100 megawatts in new wind-power generation rather than the 1,500 megawatts it originally had planned.

More items on the news page. Follow all of the clean energy news that I pick up around the web by bookmarking my link account at http://delicious.com/cleanenergydigest.

The chief reason given for the rejection was related to viability of the project. According to the story, “The commission noted that a prototype buoy deployed by Finavera off the Oregon coast in 2007 sank before its six-week test period was concluded.”

The buoy in question sank in November of 2007 just one day before it was to be removed from the ocean.

Popular Mechanics reports, “Dubbed the Mini E, it will be available for lease in three states—California, New York and New Jersey—and only to those companies and individuals participating in the 500-unit pilot program. A 204-hp electric motor resides under the hood and powers the front wheels, a single-speed gearbox provides motive power and a 35 kilowatt-hour lithium-ion battery pack supplies the juice. Unfortunately, the battery pack takes the space normally occupied by the rear seats, so this Mini is just a twofer.”

It all sounds great, but there is a problem with small, stylish electric cars that must be considered. While these vehicles are likely to excite young, urban dwellers with a decent amount of disposable income, this same demographic is also less likely to have access to an outlet to plug into the car for charging.

Generation Y urban dwellers are more likely to live in an apartment building with a parking garage than a 3-bedroom house with a private garage. Adding electric in a shared building garage (or outdoor parking lot) requires the buy-in of building management and/or apartment owners. As a former condominium and co-op owner in the New York City area I speak from experience when I say, “Good luck with that.” It is very hard to get building boards to agree on basic building upgrades let alone ones that will require tens our thousands of dollars in electrical system upgrades.

Given the lack of available charging infrastructure in and around major cities, it stands to reason that sales of plug-in electric vehicles will fare much better in the suburbs where vehicle emissions due to traffic congestion is a much smaller issue.

The problem is clear. Plug-in electric vehicles are most needed in areas that tend to have more vehicle congestion, higher emissions and higher gas prices. But people living in those same areas also have much less access to a reliable charging infrastructure. A solution to this problem will likely make the difference between plug-in electric cars as novelty, second vehicles for the suburbs and plug-ins as the standard for urban private transportation.

Wind-farm Workers Laid Off

Noble Environmental Power has stopped work at its Bellmont and Chateaugay wind-energy projects and laid off its workers. And it appears the bankruptcy of one of its major financial backers may have played a part. “Due to conditions in the financial markets, Noble Environmental Power has had to scale back its development plans for 2009,” Noble Chief Executive Officer Walter Howard said in a written statement.

Tesla Motors Hits Brakes Amid Credit Crisis

Citing “extraordinary times,” Tesla Motors, maker of the battery-powered, $109,000 Roadster, said Wednesday that difficult market conditions were forcing it to delay production of its next-generation vehicle, close two offices, lay off an unspecified number of employees and replace its chief executive.

Like all power projects, clean energy projects rely on investment capital. Investment capital is in short supply right now and is likely to be in short supply for the foreseeable future.

The latest Energy In Brief posting by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) is very instructive on the topic of U.S. government subsidies for energy. I consider it recommended reading for anyone who wants to understand the level of government investment and how it effects energy production in the U.S.

In total, renewable energies were subsidized to the tune of $4.8 billion in 2007. That number put renewable subsidies ahead of any other type of energy source by over $2 billion.

There is detail on the amount of subsidies per unit of production as well. Wind producers were paid $23.37 per megawatt hour. Solar producers were paid $24.34 per megawatt hour. Biomass and Geothermal were subsidized at a very paltry rate of $.89 and $.92 per megawatt hour respectively.

The posting covers all types of subsidized energy and also includes comparatively generous subsidies for refined coal ($2.37 billion) and natural gas ($2.149 billion). Because coal and natural gas are so heavily relied upon for electric generation the cost per megawatt hour for either of them is very low. Natural Gas is subsidized at $.25 per megawatt hour and Coal is subsidized at $.44 per megawatt hour.

The wind industry was the largest beneficiary among renewable industries having received $666 million in production credits in 2007.

On ethanol, “Obama supports continued subsidization of corn-based ethanol production, despite the inflation in food prices that the switch to growing fuel instead of food is causing.”

On nuclear power, “Nuclear plants are dauntingly expensive–estimates of their cost seems to double every six months–and new nuclear plants cannot compete with existing coal- and gas-fired generation.”

On wind and solar, “Neither is the favorite of many environmental groups. Wind machines spoil their views, as the Kennedys argue from their Hyannisport waterfront compound…And solar installations take up huge swathes of land–almost 20 square miles in the case of one being built to service a tiny portion of the
electricity consumed in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco area.”

On electric vehicles, “McCain would offer a taxpayer-funded prize of $300 million, and the infrastructure to service them. But the Arizona senator has given no indication of the government subsidies he has in mind to fund the replacement of your once-friendly gas stations with battery-charging substitutes.”

On cap and trade, “Neither concedes that consumers will end up paying the bill, or that the system has been a fiasco when tried in Europe…”

I think that the aforementioned points (and others in the article) do indeed address the real challenges facing the development of clean (or cleaner) energy technologies. It’s certainly not all about money. Throwing $150 billion at the cleantech industry guarantees nothing. And even if the investment (from government or otherwise) exists to develop new technologies there are many political and legal issues that could prevent those technologies from being deployed.

While conventional geothermal technology relies on underground caverns that are filled with water or steam to produce energy, EGS technology injects water into dry holes, thus greatly expanding the number of possible sites that may yield power.

A 2005 study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) assessed the possibility of wider EGS development. The MIT study concluded that, “The potential of EGS in evolving U.S. energy markets is large and warrants a comprehensive research and demonstration effort to move this technology to commercial viability”.

The Director of Climate and Energy Initiatives for Google.org says that, “EGS could be the ‘killer app’ of the energy world.” The challenges in developing meaningful production of energy from both standard geothermal and EGS are many though.

The MIT report notes that, “…the main constraint is creating sufficient connectivity within the injection and production well system in the stimulated region of the EGS reservoir to allow for high per well production rates without reducing reservoir life by rapid cooling.” So when you inject water into a dry hole that is hot, the rocks in the hole will get cooler over time. No one seems to know exactly how fast the rocks will cool. This fact raises the possibility that repeated drilling will be necessary in order to continue to exploit the geothermal resources in a particular location.

The impact of the drilling related to EGS is likely to be an issue that limits future development. According the Department of Energy, “Drilling a well and testing the temperature deep underground is the only way to be sure a geothermal reservoir really exists.” So in order to find your resource lots experimental drilling will have to occur. And the holes drilled are thousands of feet deep which means significant time and cost is involved.

The need to inject water presents another potential problem for EGS developers. Where will the water be pumped in from? How much water is needed to maintain production? These questions will be of great concern to the municipalities that govern the lands used in the production of this power.

EGS may be indeed be a viable clean energy generation technology. It is also a very a risky and expensive technology that yields its share of negative environmental impacts.

GM set to bring Volt electric car to Europe “General Motors is planning to rebadge its Chevrolet Volt electric car as an Opel and bring it to Europe as part of the US carmaker’s plans to expand the model range of its highly anticipated new vehicle.”

First Tidal Power Generator “This summer, the first commercial electrical generator to draw power from the ocean tide began supplying Northern Ireland with energy.”

Juhl Wind plans three new wind farms in Minnesota “Juhl Wind has signed agreements for three new wind farm projects in Minnesota.”

GM to install solar panels at Baltimore plant “General Motors Corp. said Thursday it will install solar panels on the roof of its transmission assembly plant in White Marsh, Md., allowing the automaker to displace 20 percent of the power that it buys from a local utility.”

Fresh Kills, New Yorks Next Wind Farm? “Having spent decades persuading the city to close the giant Fresh Kills landfill, Staten Island officials are now arguing that the vast site would be the perfect home for the energy-creating windmills that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has proposed as a way to make New York City more sustainable.”

More items on the news page. Follow all of the clean energy news that I pick up around the web by bookmarking my link account at http://delicious.com/cleanenergydigest.

“Mr. Bloomberg said he would ask private companies and investors to study how windmills can be built across the city, with the aim of weaning it off the nation’s overtaxed power grid, which has produced several crippling blackouts in New York over the last decade.”

Rooftop wind installations are on the rise across the country but in some cases they don’t really pay off in the area of carbon reductions. And although a variety of designs for rooftop wind turbines exist, standard commercial wind turbines are still the most proven and efficient wind generation technology.

In addition to efficiency issues there are plenty of potential pitfalls ahead in the quest to bring commercial grade wind power to New York City. Safety will be one concern. If the city attempts to maximize their output by using a standard commercial turbine they will have to consider the potential impact of ice throw during the winter months. The visual footprint of proposed turbines is likely to attract great scrutiny as well.

Mayor Bloomberg also mentioned offshore wind planning in addition to urban installations. There’s no doubt that the potential is there to generate large amounts of clean electricity not too far from the coast of southeastern New York. The process to site such wind will likely be onerous (see Cape Wind) as questions about economics, impact to ocean based industries and environmental concerns are explored.

It is clear that we are in a very strong hype cycle with respect to the development of electric cars. Expectations are high and so are the stakes. After all, the company that can perfect a production model electric car probably stands to turn the industry on its head and make tons of money in the process. But a word of caution needs to be sounded as well. Most of the vehicles making the headlines these days are unlikely to find their way into the driveway of an average person anytime soon.

Chevy Volt

General Motors is banking on the Chevy Volt to change the game in the auto industry while turning the fortunes of their company. The promise is that the Volt will go forty miles on a full charge and cost between $30,000 and $40,000. The first models are scheduled to roll off the assembly line in late 2010. GM says the Volt has been designed but the battery pack has not been perfected as of yet. GM engineers have the great challenge of installing a battery pack that can last for at least ten years of use. That’s no easy task. And the proposed price tag (which will likely move higher) is at least $10,000 above what an average person can spend to buy a vehicle.

Telsa Roadster

The Tesla Roadster is a real life production electric car. The Roadster is an all electric, two seat sports car with a price tag over $100,000. The price tag alone makes this vehicle an impractical choice for more than 99% of the American population. It’s also worth noting that Tesla has very little in the way of track record when it comes to mass producing and servicing automobiles. To date only nine cars have been delivered to owners. If the current production rate continues the 1,000 person wait list of celebrities and millionaires will be filled in about 100 years.

Saturn Sky Conversion

For $25,000 Amp Motorworks will convert a Saturn Sky gasoline powered sports car to an all electric vehicle. First you have to buy the Sky for about $27,000 and then you hand the vehicle over to Amp for the conversion. So you’re looking at least $52,000 in costs to get an all electric Sky. Once the vehicle is converted it is highly likely that the manufacturer warranty will be null and void. Amp Motorworks is currently taking orders but none of the conversions have been delivered yet.

Gem Electric Cars

Global Electric Motorcars (a division of Chrysler) is marketing a line of “low-speed” electric vehicles. For about $10,000 you can own one of these vehicles which are currently being manufactured and sold. The catch involved with these vehicles is two-fold. First, the GEM is nothing close to a car, actually resembling a golf cart. Second, the low-speed feature means you will only get up to twenty-five miles per hour. It’s likely that safety related issues will limit this vehicle to gated communities and similarly traffic controlled areas.

A Growing Field of Choices

The number of electric vehicle choices will definitely grow in the coming years. Just about every major auto maker has one at some level of design or development. I also think it is safe to state that we are at least five years away from an electric automobile that can be mass produced while also being economical and practical enough for the average consumer in the U.S. to purchase.

It’s election season in the U.S. and talk of energy plans is all the rage. And while wind gets its fair share of press perhaps politicians should look offshore for something more than drilling.

The United States has thousands of miles of coastline that is rated either excellent, outstanding or superb for wind power potential by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). There seem to be plenty of potential sites off the coast of Northeast and Southern California cities that could benefit from clean, cost effective wind power.

The political and financial resources required to site wind farms off of U.S. shores have proven themselves to be quite substantial. The Cape Wind project off the coast of Massachusetts is seven years in the making and counting. Meanwhile production costs have skyrocketed due to the rise in commodity prices. As a result the price of building an offshore wind farm may be too much to pay.

The economics may change soon as regional cap and trade schemes (RGGI for instance) and strict state Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) take effect. Gathering the required political capital is not likely to become an easier task. Coastal states like their coastlines to remain pristine. Then again, one should look to some of the photos coming out of Beijing to see what the skies over American cities could look like if we continue to rely so heavily on fossil fuel powered generation.

The United States is now the world leader in land based wind power production. One wonders what it will take for the U.S. to break the proverbial ice and leverage the energy assets that are within a few miles of our shores?

T Boone Pickens has made natural gas targeted for transportation use the center of his plan to wean America off of foreign energy sources. And a new study commissioned by the natural gas lobbying group American Clean Skies Foundation indicates that the United States has access to significantly more natural gas reserves than previously reported by government agencies.

It appears that many people are beginning to realize that the United States has to tackle a number of complex, inter-related problems with respect to our energy future. We need access to cleaner sources of energy. We need energy that is economically feasible. We need energy that is reliable. We need energy is native to our country.

Cleaner Sources of Energy

You can’t get much cleaner than wind and solar. These techologies emit zero harmful emissions. Unfortunately the wind and the sun provide varying levels of reliability in different parts of the country. So as reliance on wind and solar increases, there needs to be a certain amount of technology available to provide a backup. Energy storage technology could be the answer one day, but the technologies are not in a place where they can reliably provide mass energy delivery on demand in all the places where we might need it.

In some parts of the country natural gas fired power plants are providing (or are planned to provide) the backup energy needed in order to make adoption of renewable, but intermittent technologies feasible. Natural gas emits significantly less carbon dioxide than a coal plant. Natural gas is a fossil fuel though and as such does emit carbon as a result of generation. Still, many people prefer natural gas over coal or even nuclear, which releases zero emissions.

Economically Feasible Energy

Reliance on energy imported from unstable, foreign governments can get very expensive. We’re seeing that situation now. The increase in the price of oil has made every other source of fuel more expensive too. Native energy is always going to be less costly than foreign energy. And while we shouldn’t be encouraging people to use as much as they want, we are now seeing how tough times can get for American industry in an environment where the cost of energy can spiral so high, so fast.

Natural gas addresses the need for a near-term source of energy that is economically feasible. The cost is cheaper than oil and gas because this resource is plentiful in North America. That’s not to say that natural gas is not a volatile commodity. Natural gas is volatile due to the flexible nature (used in power generation, home heating and transportation) of the commodity and increasing worldwide demand. Increased exploration and a gradual reduction in demand as cleaner technologies are adopted could mitigate these economic concerns.

Reliable Energy

The 2003 NorthEast blackout showed many people how important reliable energy is to our society. When the lights go out on a 90 degree day, people want those lights (and air conditioners, and elevators, etc.) to return to life very quickly. So as the clean power system of the future is constructed reliability cannot be ignored. Cleaner technologies tend to be less reliable due to the nature of the power source (like the wind and sun) or because the technologies need to mature enough (like fuel cells) to perform more reliably.

Natural gas technology is very mature. As a result, natural gas fired power generators can be counted on to start quick and deliver adequate amounts of power when needed. Newer natural gas technologies like combined cycle make natural gas power generation even more efficient.

Domestic Energy

The United States needs energy sources that are native to our continent. Foreign sources of energy become increasingly questionable due to the volatile nature of the countries controlling the resources. Wind, solar and nuclear power all fit the bill as native sources of energy. All of these sources are emission free and economical in the long run. There are issues with safety (in the case of nuclear), reliability and maturity of the industries. Even though the U.S. aims to greatly increase output of all available clean energy sources there will still be a demand for energy.

Natural gas seems to qualify as the next best source of energy that is available domestically. Natural gas is cleaner than coal and deliverable via pipeline which serves to cut down on overall cost. Natural gas is also flexible enough for use in transportation, which in turn could contribute to reduction in demand for gasoline.

A Bridge To The Future?

For all of the reasons mentioned above I believe that natural gas will play a strong role in facilitating the clean energy future of the United States. The impact of natural gas is not a foregone conclusion though. Domestic exploration and production must increase. Investment in technologies that make natural gas cleaner, more economical and more flexible must increase. If the proper investments are made the U.S. will have a cleaner, more robust and more secure energy portfolio for many years to come.