Displaced Tortoises for Solar in Mojave Roils Environmentalists

Construction of such large-scale green-energy projects has splintered environmental groups. When concern over global warming was at a peak, national organizations such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council threw their support behind industrial-scale wind and solar installations on public land. Now some smaller conservationist groups object to what they consider an environmentally destructive gold rush.

"Of course we need to do solar, but it should go on rooftops or in appropriate places, not the pristine desert," says April Sall, director of the Wildlands Conservancy in Oak Glen, California, operator of the state's largest nonprofit preservation system. "We need to tackle warming — but not forget that there are other things at stake."

Priorities Clash

The Mojave solar project embodies the clash of environmental priorities. The $2.2 billion installation being built by closely held BrightSource Energy Inc. of Oakland, California, is designed to power 140,000 homes without emitting greenhouse gases. But it threatens the tortoises. That's why the Western Watersheds Project conservationist group of Hailey, Idaho, sued to stop it in a Los Angeles U.S. court. (For an interactive graphic of the project, click here.)

The 120-year-old Sierra Club, which calls itself "America's largest and most influential" environmental group, also lobbied for changes to the project's design to protect the tortoises. Yet the 1.4 million-member organization chose not to try to block the plant, says Barbara Boyle, a Sierra green energy specialist.

"Ultimately, we need to jump-start renewables to combat climate change, and large-scale solar has to play a big part in that," Boyle says. However, as it became clear the project was rooting out many more tortoises than projected and as some California chapters urged action, the organization joined a coalition that sued the Department of the Interior in March to block another long-planned Mojave solar project that it says threatens wildlife.

Climate Change

Similar disputes are playing out elsewhere and show a growing concern among green groups and willingness to block large-scale solar and wind projects when the cost to wildlife and habitat seem to outweigh the benefits of fighting climate change. A surge in supplies of cheap, clean-burning natural gas has also begun to undercut demand for more costly green energy.

The green backlash against sacrificing habitat and wildlife to curb global warming parallels polls finding that the public rates climate change low on a menu of environmental problems and has doubts whether it can be fixed. In a March Gallup survey, the issue ranked last among seven environmental concerns, with just 30 percent saying they worried about it "a great deal."

A Washington Post-Stanford University poll in July found that while most Americans believe the earth is warming, 60 percent said little could be done to stop it, and more than 70 percent opposed energy taxes to address it.

Lethal Blades

Near the northern Florida Everglades, the Audubon Society has fought a 200-megawatt wind farm on 10,000 acres (3,900 hectares) of private sugar land, saying its 475-foot tall turbines and spinning blades will form a death corridor for migratory birds and the endangered snail-eating Florida Kite. The project, proposed by closely held Wind Capital Group LLC of St. Louis, was approved by the Palm Beach County Commission and could produce energy for 60,000 homes, the company says. It still needs state and federal permits.

In the southern Sierra Nevada of California, Defenders of Wildlife sued in federal court to block the proposed North Sky River wind-power project. It would be built by NextEra Energy Inc., based in Juno Beach, Florida, next to an existing wind farm where turbine blades killed eight golden eagles this year.

The American Bird Conservancy accused the U.S. government in a lawsuit in Washington of suppressing information about the threat that wind energy projects pose to migratory birds and other wildlife. The government denied the allegation.

26 Projects

Including the Mojave project that is relocating desert tortoises, the Interior Department has accelerated construction approval for 26 large-scale solar plants on public lands since 2009, including nine that it cleared in August. The Obama administration has steered $9 billion in stimulus funds from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to 23,000 solar and large-scale wind installations, according to the Department of Energy.

Conservationist and Native American groups sued to halt five other Mojave solar projects. The organizations argue that federal and state authorities conducted inadequate environmental reviews and failed to consult with tribes on sacred sites. The Bureau of Land Management, the solar companies and the state deny the allegations.

Dozens more solar plants could arise across the American desert West. A July BLM plan allocates 285,000 public acres to 17 solar zones. An additional 19 million acres — an area almost the size of West Virginia — may be approved for solar projects. The goal is to produce 23,700 megawatts, enough to power 7 million homes, according to the BLM. Solar power now provides less than 1 percent of U.S. electricity, amounting to 5,700 megawatts, or enough for about 1 million households.

Abandoned Mines

Conservationists say it is wrongheaded to rip up the public desert and destroy wildlife habitat when millions of already-degraded acres are available. The Environmental Protection Agency last year identified 80,000 to 250,000 abandoned mine sites that could be used for solar and other renewable energy projects, according to Janine Blaeloch, director of the Seattle-based Western Lands Project, a watchdog group.

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/displaced-tortoises-for-solar-in-mojave-roils-environmentalists?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

08.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Cost Cutting: Is QBotix the BOS Innovation Solar Needs?

Watch Bokhari discuss the QBotix technology at Solar Power International, along with an animated demonstration, in the video below:

Balance of systems (BOS) accounts for about 50 percent of the installed cost of a solar system. A traditional tracking system, whether single or double axis, consists of a pair of motors installed on many trackers in the system. This creates many failure points throughout the system, which can be very difficult to maintain and ultimately reduces efficiency. 

The QBotix system consists of 200 trackers, which equal about 300 kilowatts (kW), and two robots, one primary and one backup, which travel on a steel monorail to each tracker. The monorails also contain two charging points for the robots. A robot travels along the rail every 40 minutes to adjust each tracker individually throughout the day. The steel rail also carries the system's wiring, which eliminates the need for trenching.

Because QBotix is streamlined with a robot, the entire system uses less steel – a major price driver for tracking systems. According to Bokhari, the QBotix system is roughly half the cost of double-axis trackers and the same cost as single-axis. "And because of that price parity of the single-axis trackers, we are able to achieve an LOC reduction of up to 20 percent compared to fixed systems," explained Bokhari. 

The robot itself is made of water- and dust-resistant components. "You can put [the robot] under a high-pressure water hose for 30 minutes and no waste will get in," explained Bokhari. "Or you can put it in a high-pressure chamber with very fine talcum power and nothing will get in." 

The system is also weather-resistant. The steel system is designed to withstand high wind loads for the life of the project, about 20 to 25 years, while the robot can withstand temperatures as low as -30 degrees Celsius and as high as 60 degrees Celsius. 

The robot collects performance and reliability data that allows it to optimize the performance of each tracker, and ultimately the entire system. It also contains built-in GPS sensors, memory capabilities and wireless communications. "It is almost like a doctor going from patient to patient that is able to assess the critical data from every patient," said Bokhari. 

As for maintenance, if the robot malfunctions the backup immediately takes its place, which means there is no tracking loss. The robots are also easily replaceable, which does not require skilled labor. "The robot is like a black box traveling on the rail, so it can easily be swapped out just like a spare tire," said Bokhari.

The system comes preassembled and can be used with any standard foundation and solar panel. And because it is much lower to the ground heavy machinery is not necessary for installation. It can be installed on ungraded land, sloped land, curved land, which, according to Bokhari, is not possible with other systems.

So is QBotix what the solar industry needs to move forward? Can it truly lower system costs enough for people to notice?

Bokhari said the target market is distributed generation, and then move on to utility-scale. "We will start with deployments going up to a few megawatts. Because our system is modular we can easily put together a larger system," said Bokhari. "After that, our customers can use our system as they start building larger power plants."

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/cost-cutting-is-qbotix-the-bos-innovation-solar-needs?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

07.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Green Tech States Are Not Necessarily Democratic

Most people would expect blue Democratic states to be eager to embrace clean tech and green jobs, the authors assert, with red Republican states resolutely declining to join in the action. However, according to the report, in the 10 states where clean tech jobs are growing the most quickly, only two can be considered traditionally Democratic – Hawaii and New York. Many of the remaining states are decisively Republican, including North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Alaska. Additionally, among Top 10 states where green jobs make up the biggest percentage of the labor force, only three – Washington, Oregon and Vermont – are Democratic.

"What's more, many of the governors working the hardest to bring clean tech jobs to their home states are not only Republican, but are usually regarded as leaders of their party," according to the report. This demonstrates that clean tech and green jobs are only contentious inside Washington D.C., the authors conclude. "Outside of the capital, where governors (and mayors) are more concerned with creating jobs than scoring debate points, there is no controversy about the impact of clean tech." 

"(Clean tech) is almost universally appreciated as the important engine for job development and economic growth that it is," the authors say. "Disregarding the partisan bickering in Washington, these local officials are using clean tech to bring high-quality jobs to their states, in the process reviving communities and winning the support of local voters in both parties."

Zooming out even further, the report reveals that seven of the top 17 states with the most rapid growth in the clean tech sector are considered swing states for the 2012 presidential election. "Numbers like these suggest we are entering an era in which politicians who unfairly criticize or otherwise ignore clean tech run the risk of alienating a bedrock constituency: job holders, most of whom vote," the authors say.

A copy of the report is available here.

Lead image: Divided flag via Shutterstock

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/green-tech-states-are-not-necessarily-democratic?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

07.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

The Demonization of Clean Tech: The Five Biggest Myths

As a longtime analyst at clean-tech research firm Clean Edge and contributor to the recently published book Clean Tech Nation (coauthored by Clean Edge colleagues Ron Pernick and Clint Wilder), I should be on the front lines defending the clean-tech moniker. But given the noticeable intensifying of false debates surrounding clean tech in the last year, it's worth taking a moment to examine ways in which the industry's far-reaching identity has opened the door to some misplaced antagonism.

#1: Energy Sources as Sports Teams

Unless you are employed in a particular sector of the energy industry, as long as the car runs, the lights are bright, the showers hot, and the beer cold, it makes little sense as a consumer to root for one specific energy source against another, as if they were sports teams. Solar power isn't the Miami Heat, and – as much as T. Boone Pickens would like you to believe it – natural gas isn't the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Of course, it's imperative to evaluate energy sources based on availability, affordability, and environmental impact. But blind support of identifiers like traditional energy, alternative energy, renewables, or clean energy – which aggregate many dissimilar resources and technologies – can quickly create an "us versus them" culture. And that's exactly what seems to be playing out on the national political stage in this election season. When the failure of one longshot solar startup (that shall not be named) can be used to demonize all aspects of a multi-hundred billion dollar industry, perhaps the umbrella is too large.    

#2: The Misrepresented History (and Current Reality) of Energy Subsidies

Government has always played an important role in energy innovation. Nuclear power plants are offshoots of nuclear submarines, which themselves are derivative of atomic bombs developed by the Manhattan Project – the ultimate embodiment of government-funded R&D. Less understood is that today's shale gas boom also owes much to government involvement, as recent technological advances are fruits of decades of public-private research and commercialization efforts, as the Breakthrough Institute detailed well in a recent report. 

Unabashedly ignoring this history, The Wall Street Journal's editorial team recently used a snapshot of 2010 federal subsidies to argue that renewables don't merit government support because right now "wind and solar get the most taxpayer help for the least production" – an argument that only makes sense if 2010 was the lone year subsidies were ever available. Surprisingly, the universe did exist prior to January 1, 2010, so we don't have to rely on such disingenuous analysis. A report by DBL Investors' Nancy Pfund and Yale University graduate student Ben Healey, which looked into the historical role of U.S. federal energy subsidies, found that annual federal support for oil, gas, and nuclear has averaged 22 times the amount of subsidies available to renewables.

This extreme imbalance is one reason why Clean Tech Nation's Seven-Point Action Plan suggests phasing out all energy subsidies over the next decade. We know that's a controversial proposal, but let's debate the future of subsidies based on facts, not myths.

#3: The False Promise of Energy Independence

"Lobsters are cheap in Maine because storing and shipping live lobster is hard, but globally traded commodities aren't like that," says Slate's Matthew Yglesias in what might be the most effectively concise dismissal to date of the U.S. energy independence delusion. 

Yes, U.S. reliance on foreign oil has fallen amidst an Obama-era domestic production boom – allowing for fewer direct imports from petro-dictator nations. But unlike lobsters, oil is easily stored, shipped, and traded across borders, so America's oil fate will forever be linked to conditions defined by the global free market.

And if American energy "independence" was truly a top concern, vehicle electrification would be priority number one, as 99 percent of U.S. electricity is derived from domestically-generated electrons. Yet instead of being hailed as uber-patriotic "DEVs" (domestic energy vehicles), electric vehicles continue to fight perceptions of simply being expensive eco-toys.

#4: There is No Such Thing as a Green Job

Granted, this is a tricky one, as definitions vary widely – so claiming a direct link between these jobs and a remedy for the economy often does little more than fuel opposition to all industries involved when the nation's labor market proves stubbornly sluggish. Opponents can claim, for example, that it takes fewer than 30 workers to maintain a 250 MW wind farm that powers 75,000 households. But as a recent NRDC report finds, that same wind farm will actually create 1,079 jobs over the lifetime of the project, mostly during manufacturing and construction.  

There are plenty of wind turbine technicians, increasing masses of solar installers, and armies of workers at the world's largest industrial conglomerates working on products to beef up the electric grid, boost vehicle efficiency, and convert waste into resources. As demand for clean-tech products and services grows, an expanding workforce will obviously be an economic boon.

#5: The Climate Change "Debate"

When even Koch brothers-funded researchers conclude that the world is warming and humans are to blame, it's time to stop arguing the science and start focusing on solutions. But this doesn't seem to be the trajectory of things. Climate change continues to be politically toxic, and demand for clean tech – the market's answer to a changing climate – is being severely hamstrung as a result.    

In place of real climate action, U.S. leadership on both sides of the aisle is clinging to an "all of the above" energy approach. But until the current subsidy outlay changes, in no way will this translate into a level playing field. 

Ultimately, clean tech – or green tech, or advanced energy, or whatever you choose to call it – will win out. The realities of a resource-constrained world and changing climate are just too powerful to ignore. But as clean tech moves forward, it's increasingly important to understand the steadfast opposition – and its myth-making operation – facing this innovative sector that dares challenge the status quo. 

Lead image: Myth via Shutterstock

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/the-demonization-of-clean-tech-the-five-biggest-myths?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

06.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Securing Skills for a Successful Offshore Wind Industry

Skills – Where Are We Now?

At the moment we are facing a significant skills gap in the industry and this needs to be addressed to reach the positive employment figures which are possible. There are two levels to this skills gap — firstly, the professional level including project managers and engineers, and secondly the operational level which consists of staff including vessel crew members and electricians. Over the next number of years we will see the ratio of operational to professional workers grow as we begin to move from the design and build phases to the operational phase.

This skills gap has been widening over the past three years but unfortunately has yet to be addressed successfully by the industry. New wind farms will bring with them new engineering challenges and it is paramount that the industry is prepared for this. When work on these projects begins there will be a need for a huge amount of skilled offshore workers and preparation needs to begin for this now.

An Outdated Approach To Training?

The 2009 Renewable Energy Directive set targets for EU Member States to reach. The UK, for instance, is expected to achieve 15% of its consumption from renewable sources by 2020 – this compares to 3% in 2009. This has meant that the past few years has seen an increase in offshore wind production and this will continue to grow, which, in turn, will lead to an increase in investment and job opportunities within the industry in the coming years.

The skills gap can partly be attributed to the fact that, even though it is a rapidly growing sector, there is no industry standard for offshore training. There exists an offshore health and safety standard but outside of this there are different opinions in terms of what each company interprets as an adequate technical standard. SMEs may not be able to afford to offer training to potential employees, which makes it difficult to recruit suitable workers. Even larger companies which can afford to provide such training could benefit from a common training standard and the time and money they invest in bringing new recruits up to standard could be used to expand other parts of the business.

SMEs are the lifeblood of the renewables industry and in the past they may have had to poach offshore workers from the oil and gas industry in order to get the skills they need. This might have been a successful tactic when jobs in the oil industry were scarce. But as new opportunities within oil and gas become more available, this has created a growing problem for SMEs. As a result, smaller companies may be tempted to employ workers who may not be up to the desired level and rely on them gaining training and experience on the job.

Closing the Gap

There are in fact many skilled workers who may be unaware that their initial career has given them the basis to successfully train to work in the renewables industry. Construction workers and fishermen are among those who may have skills that can be readily transferred to working on offshore renewables projects.

Many of these workers can be trained to utilise their qualifications or transferable skills for the offshore industry while maintaining high standards; in turn they can help any renewables developer — large or small — develop a competent, professional and well-trained workforce.

Specialist training offers the opportunity to prepare for a life working offshore and enables the transition of technical skills to be more applicable to the needs of the offshore industry. In addition an understanding of the necessary health and safety training and instruction should be provided.

But this is not enough for the future; for us to encourage the sheer numbers of skilled workers the industry will need we must start at the beginning, working with colleges and universities. Even though work is currently being undertaken to provide courses and degrees dealing with renewable energy, there is very limited focus on the challenges faced in the offshore industry. We, as an industry, need to work more closely with higher education institutions, encouraging them to include offshore training on their courses. Industry can provide access to the tools they need, including access to physical wind turbines and other offshore technology, and also to people who already work in the industry who can give first-hand insight. There is simply no point in having highly educated engineers or project managers with degrees in renewable energy if they can't apply this knowledge in an offshore working environment.

When training staff for working offshore in renewables it is important to have a finger on the pulse of the industry and a current working knowledge of the issues involved. You need to be aware of the challenges new recruits will face in order to help them prepare fully for the experience. This allows identification of what the industry needs.

It is going to take a united stance from companies — both large and small — to address the significant skills gap facing the renewables industry and acknowledge the clear business benefits of creating industry standards. While the value to SMEs is clear to see, larger companies also have much to gain financially by recruiting workers who could, theoretically, be offshore on their first day in the job.

What Can Be Done Now?

While we may need to wait for an industry standard to come about, companies can still address the barrier that is lack of experience. This is an obstacle that companies can ease if they start working on offshore projects collaboratively.

Acceptance of there being a skills gap within individual companies will also help to ensure the smooth running of projects. Projects may begin slowly in the first instance as agreements and permissions are granted, but once these initial stages have been passed things can move more a lot more quickly. Bearing this in mind, companies need to plan well ahead — look at what they are bidding for, what they are winning or likely to win and, once this has been taken into consideration, make sure that the necessary skills are in place to carry out each task.

What the Future Holds...

Once companies, both large and small, start to work together, mutual benefits will begin to become apparent — from cost and time savings for the larger companies, to new business opportunities for SMEs. We need to develop a more open-minded approach to the industry, helping us to become more aware and wiser to the skills and staff available to the industry. At this point we will realise how an industry standard in practical renewables training can really benefit offshore renewables as a whole.

Sizeable commercial opportunities for developers and operators are available offshore; at the same time new engineering challenges will be introduced which will require different ways of thinking, and new and innovative ways of working offshore. This will, of course, require an expanded workforce with the skills to meet these challenges. There will be a moment of realisation when the sheer scale of the skills gap becomes apparent — but by thinking and acting more collaboratively the industry can demonstrate its maturity, its resilience — and its ability to adapt for the future.

David Martin is Director of the Offshore Marine Academy. 

Lead image: Offshore wind via Shutterstock

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/securing-skills-for-offshore-wind?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

06.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Worldwide PV Equipment Market Squeeze Continues

After declining in the first quarter to its lowest level since the start of the data program, second quarter worldwide completed orders actually increased slightly, up two percent quarter-on-quarter. However, the reported billings of $706 million were only 35 percent of the billings reported in the same quarter a year ago.

Excluding a one-time large order reported in the previous quarter, worldwide bookings declined again, this time 20 percent for the quarter to $235 million, reaching their lowest level since the first quarter of 2010. At 0.33, the book-to-bill ratio stayed below parity for the fifth consecutive quarter.

"It's still bad news, the 7^th inning of the downturn," says Aaron Chew, senior alternative energy / solar power analyst at Maxim Group LLC in New York.  He agreed with SEMI's conclusion that the extremely challenging environment for PV equipment suppliers worldwide is likely to persist due to low booking activities from PV manufacturers, coupled with no near-term signs of recovery. "I see no turnaround in demand for equipment guys for the rest of the year, at least until mid-2013," he said.

Further depressing the outlook for PV equipment manufacturers, he said, is the emergence of a big secondary market for equipment.  "All of the companies that failed are being shut down and liquidated. About 40 cell and wafer companies shut down in China. Their equipment is getting auctioned off at 50 cents on the dollar, so guys like Yingli can ramp up for half the cost.  The bad news for equipment guys temporarily is that they have to compete with that," Chew said.

With huge overcapacity since March 2011, PV prices have dropped approximately 65% in the last year, reducing manufacturers' margins.  But the dour pricing situation could quite likely become the market's salvation, Chew said. "It's a bad time in solar because no one is making any money, but the flip side is that it makes solar more and more competitive with fossil fuels, and demand is fine," he said. "We never thought about solar in markets that are now becoming mainstream, like Chile, Japan, and China. Germany and Italy will feel the pain in shifting from subsidized to unsubsidized markets, but the slack will be picked up by China, Japan and even the US."

As a result, he expects the global solar industry to supply approximately 30 GW of demand this year, 50 GW in 2 to 3 years and 100 GW by the end of the decade. Responding to such increases in demand will require new manufacturing equipment.

"It sounds crazy today because there is such overcapacity weighing on solar, but by mid-2013, a new investment cycle may be starting. I think people may be surprised by the end of next year when we could be at 40GW of demand, and people will need to reinvest in equipment," Chew said.

SEMI's worldwide PV equipment billings and bookings data is gathered jointly with the German Engineering Federation (VDMA) from about 50 global equipment companies that provide primary data on a quarterly basis. 

Lead image: Money squeeze via Shutterstock

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/worldwide-pv-equipment-market-squeeze-continues?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

12.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Studies Cite Increased Demand for Wind Power, Other Renewables

According to the Global Consumer Wind Study 2012 (GCWS), the desire for more renewable energy options was voiced by 85 percent of survey respondents, with 49 percent saying they'd have no problem digging deeper into their pockets to support companies committed to renewable energy in the product manufacturing process. Even more encouraging, those numbers spiked considerably when consumers were asked specifically about wind power, with 62 percent indicating that if given a choice, they would consciously choose to buy products manufactured using wind over traditional forms of power generation.

These statistics bode well for the efforts of WindMade, a nonprofit whose primary function is the identification of companies and products that rely on wind power for at least 25 percent of their overall electricity generation. The organization's ultimate goal is not only to give eco-conscious consumers the information necessary to vote with their wallets, but also to generate interest for an industry whose potential still vastly exceeds its demand.

"One of the important challenges the [wind power] industry is facing in many markets around the world is public acceptance," writes Angelika Pullen, Communications Director for WindMade. "Our objective is to help address this problem by creating a tool for that majority of the public that is supportive of wind power, to identify and favor those brands and companies that are using wind energy." 

But public acceptance is one thing — actual corporate espousal of renewable energy is another. And in an era where social and ecological consciousness ranks high in the area of mass appeal, new evidence has come to light that tells us not all private companies are riding the aforementioned fence over whether to pursue renewable alternatives. An increasing number are leading the charge, as evidenced by the second of the two studies, the Corporate Renewable Energy Index Report 2012 (CREX).

According to the results of the report, global corporate investment in renewables has surpassed investment for fossil fuel generation by a significant margin. In 2011, corporations around the globe spent $237 billion investing in renewable energy, eclipsing the $223 billion spent chasing fossil fuel power generation. The CREX is an index that ranks companies by their level of investment in renewable energies. The report also found that 40 percent of renewable energy purchases made in 2011 were made by companies for the purpose of on-site power generation, showing a marked increase from previous years.

The GCWS survey was conducted by TNS Gallup, and the CREX report was prepared by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Lead image: Demand chart via Shutterstock

20 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/studies-cite-increased-demand-for-wind-power-other-renewables?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

12.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Blackstone to Buy Vivint for $2B and Support Its Expansion in Solar and Beyond

When the deal closes, which should come before the end of the year, it will give Blackstone control over 50 percent of the company, reported the New York Times. The rest of the company is owned by the management, according to Reuters.

Vivint built its reputation as one of the country's largest residential security service provider in the country. It then added the sales of equipment and services for homeowners to automate and control their thermostats, lighting and small appliances remotely. The company entered the solar business last year and in October announced a $75 million fund from U.S. Bankcorp to finance residential solar installations and sell leases to homeowners. Instead of paying for the equipment and labor of installing a solar energy system upfront, Vivint's customers pay a monthly fee over 20 years. This financing model has become popular not only because it removes the high upfront cost, but it also is supposed to lead to lower monthly utility bills.

Founded in 1999 as Apax Alarm Security Solutions, the company changed its name to Vivint last year to reflect its ambition to move beyond the home security market, Vivint's co-founder and CEO, Todd Pedersen, told me last year. The company's name is a mesh of "Vive," or "to live," and "intelligent."

Pedersen said back then that Vivint became a big home automation company because it figured out how to market and install equipment efficiently. He believed the same strategy will work just as well in the solar business. He was so confident that he predicted Vivint would become the largest residential solar company in the U.S. this year.

Having Blackstone as an investor should help Pedersen realize his vision. Blackstone apparently outbid two other private equity groups to win the deal to buy the majority stake in Vivint. Vivint is counting on a significant financial support from Blackstone that will enable the company to develop "innovative new technologies, products and services designed to expand the company's influence beyond the home environment into the automobile, the workplace, areas of recreation and other core spheres of human activity." This may indicate that Vivint is eyeing other energy management services, including perhaps electric car charging, which could be centralized and remotely controlled by Vivint and its customers.

Blackstone's interest in Vivint reflects this investor sentiment that the retail service segment of the solar market is so much more attractive than the manufacturing sector, which has seen many factory closures and bankruptcies.  The market has experienced an oversupply of solar panels since the start of 2011, and that has benefited installers and their investors as well as consumers. Prices for solar panel systems owned by investors rather than consumers have dropped in California, for example, though that decline doesn't necessarily mean homeowners also are paying lower monthly fees on their leases. 

19 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/blackstone-to-buy-vivint-and-support-its-expansion-in-solar-and-beyond?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

10.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Siemens to Cut 615 US Wind Energy Jobs as New Orders Dry Up

"The industry is facing a significant drop in new orders, and this has an unfortunate consequence on employment in this segment of the power industry," Munich-based Siemens said today in a message to employees that was obtained by Bloomberg.

The cuts account for more than a third of the workforce that Siemens has built up in its U.S. wind-energy business, an operation that helped the company to national prominence after President Barack Obama visited a facility in Iowa in 2010. Siemens said that it has invested $100 million to establish its U.S. wind-power subsidiary over the past 5 years.

The reductions are a setback for Loescher's attempt at bolstering the company's portfolio of so-called green products that are environmentally friendly. Siemens is in the process of realigning its business after having to curtail its earnings forecast twice this year, and the company will present the results of its revamp to management next month.

Copyright 2012 Bloomberg

Lead image: Job cuts via Shutterstock

19 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/siemens-to-cut-615-us-wind-energy-jobs-as-new-orders-dry-up?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

07.30 | 0 komentar | Read More

Is the EU Abandoning Biofuels?

At present, biofuels represent 4.5% of the EU's transportation fuel consumption, with essentially all of this coming from food crops – so, essentially, food crop-based fuels would be capped at not much above existing levels – not much room for growth.

Long-time coming or new trend? Threat or opportunity? Those are the questions being asked around the EU today — and across the globe amongst EU trading partners and fuel developers.

Here are the knowns and unknowns. The questions come down to five.

1. Will this proposal become law?

We believe this is a "yes", but with modifications to carefully define crop-based feedstock. After all, you can eat algae – and petroleum comes, ultimately, from food-based feedstocks, just produced over millions of years instead of minutes or seconds. Simply banning any fuel made in any way related to a crop, or biomass that can be grown as a crop, could lead to a ban on all transportation fuels, including natural gas-fuel vehicles or electric cars powered by coal, gas-based power. The devil is in the detail, as Mies van den Rohe was wont to observe.

2. What is the impact on EU biofuels targets, pegged by statute at 10 percent by 2020?

The targets are law, and law as hard to unwind as it is to pass in the first place. We think the targets will not be altered – but, rather, we'll see fuzzy math employed. There's already a proposal to quadruple count algae-based biofuels. That means you could meet the EU 2020 target with half the fuel produced today, if algae was employed as a feedstock. Future shortfalls will simply be addressed by amping up the bonus on advanced biofuels. Quintuple, sextuple counting? It could start to look at 1923-style German inflation before it is all over.

3. What's the impact for advanced biofuels, utilizing non-food feedstocks?

First of all, let's refer to #2 – depends on the extent to which the EU doubles, triples, or quadruples the value of advanced biofuels – and the extent to which the EU will tolerate non-food feedstocks grown, for example, on the same land once used for food-crops.

At some stage, someone might take the point of view that replacing an acre of, for example, 160-bushel per acre of corn, which would provide nearly 500 gallons of fuel and 1.3 tons of animal feed with a 40 bushel per acre non-food crop, which provides 120 gallons of fuel and some inedible lignin, is not exactly the goal of policy.

Long-term, algae looms as a major beneficiary, if hybid systems as developed by the likes of BioProcess Algae make the grade – or solar fuels of the type produced by Joule. In the nearer term, highyield energy crops that can be grown on marginal land – that is, not currently in production (i.e. made marginal by food crop economics, not by the ability of the land to support agriculture) – well, the impact could be material.

One other matter we will hope to discover – the extent to which aviation biofuels – not just road transport – will count in the overall calculations.

At Raymond James, energy analyst Pavel Molchanov writes, "There is no question that the new policy would meaningfully support adoption of energy crops. This can be segmented into two separate trends. First, we would expect to see actual cultivation of energy crops in EU members with large agricultural sectors (such as France and Poland). Second, in countries where population density or other factors result in small agricultural sectors, imports of energy crops (from, say, Brazil or North America) would be the realistic solution."

4. What's the impact for food crops?

It's not all bad – look for a shift from biofuels to higher-value biobased products and renewable chemicals, which are generally unsubsidized and un-mandated anyway, and offer good returns on investment for selected crops, such as maize.

5. What's the impact for biofuels producers and their existing plants?

To the extent that they can support different feedstocks, such as renewable sugars made from waste, or waste-based fats, oils and greases, not much of a change. For others, look for bolt-on technologies like we see with corn ethanol plants in the uS, that foster a switch from producing fuel ethanol to the production of isobutanol or n-butanol for the chemicals markets.

The bottom line.

It won't be business as usual – far from it – but the technologies and feedstock options have been sufficiently advanced over the past 5 years that the impact will be far from dire. It's payback time for all the far-sighted developers that fostered alternative technologies and feedstocks.

This article was originally published on Biofuels Digest and was republished with permission.

Lead image: Biofuels via Shutterstock

19 Sep, 2012

-
Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/09/is-the-eu-abandoning-biofuels?cmpid=rss
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com

07.30 | 0 komentar | Read More