Blog Archive for October, 2011
Military ‘just throwing away fuel,’ official says
The U.S. military uses a lot of energy, and it wants to cut back — to save money, but more importantly, to save lives. The Department of Defense is the single largest consumer of energy in the United States, spending $15 billion alone last year, 75 percent of which was fuel for operations.
In an interview with EnergyNOW, Sharon Burke, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs, says that fuel isn’t necessarily being used wisely.
Not only are soldiers guarding supply lines vulnerable to attack, she says, spending money on oil can indirectly benefit regimes that oppose us.
“No matter where you buy your fuel … it’s priced on a global market, so every gallon you buy is a dollar in Iran’s pocket.”
And while Burke doesn’t say it directly, she hints that questions about ongoing supply may be factoring into military strategy as well.
“We haven’t to date looked at our energy supply for our military forces as anything other than an assumption. It’s just, ‘it’ll be there when we need it.’ So as a result, we use more than we need to.”
While the Defense Department’s effort to use less fossil fuels will result in lives and money saved, it will also mean big business for cleantech companies, including several in the Midwest. Tomorrow, Midwest Energy News correspondent Frank Jossi brings you a look at the local impact of the military’s green movement.
A new direction for Midwest Energy News
Dan Haugen, stellar reporter and all-around nice guy.
When Midwest Energy News launched back in March 2010, it was an aggregation-only news portal. And while the region’s news organizations generally do a good job reporting on energy issues, it didn’t take long to realize that there’s a need for deeper, broader and more thorough coverage.
In December, we started this blog, and in January, we published our first piece of enterprise reporting. In the months that followed, we’ve become as much a destination for this original work as for our daily headline roundup.
Starting next week, we’re expanding our reporting capabilities. Dan Haugen, a Minneapolis freelancer and frequent contributor to Midwest Energy News, will begin our first Energy Journalism Fellowship. Dan will be producing regular features as well as offering regular insight and analysis. He’s a top-notch reporter and we’re grateful to have his help.
Dan will write about issues throughout the region, but over time and as funding allows, we hope to contract with additional reporters to cover individual states, as well as write about specific subject areas.
Midwest Energy News‘ original journalism is funded entirely by foundations and individual donations (every little bit helps!). You can read more about us here.
And while we’ll be focusing more on original work (and eventually redesigning the site), the daily aggregated report will still be a priority, and we’ll continue sending out the email digest at 11 a.m. sharp each day.
If you like what we do, here are some ways you can help out:
- Pitch a story! Send ideas to Dan or to me.
- Give us money! Seriously, every dollar helps.
- Tell your friends! Encourage people to sign up for our daily email digest, or follow on Facebook or Twitter.
And, as always, thanks for reading.
The Daily Show and the War on Science
Most readers of this site are probably aware of the recent skeptic-funded Berkeley study that confirmed, once again, that the earth is warming. And most are probably aware that this study received practically zero media attention.
What story could possibly be more important? Watch:
But that’s not the best part. The Daily Show takes it a step further, with this spot-on mockery of conservative demonization of scientists:
Aasif Mandvi’s interview with GOP strategist Noelli Nikpour defies parody.
Algae biofuels: Green gold for the Midwest?
Algae farms, like this one in Texas, could become a more common sight in the Midwest.
MINNEAPOLIS — Algae seems an unlikely hero in the green energy arena. To most people it’s an aquatic plant life they avoid when swimming and look away from in disgust when viewing it from a boat or on a walk.
Yet to hear the advocates and entrepreneurs at the Algae Biomass Summit this week in Minneapolis, the green stuff could indeed be an important part of the nation’s energy mix. Sponsored by the Algal Biomass Organization, the four-day conference drew nearly 800 people to a downtown hotel to a deep dive into every aspect of algae production, research and commercialization.
There are a few things to know about the algae industry. One is that companies grow the algae in controlled environments through a complex and varied methodology that has little to do with what is seen in lakes and oceans. Just as corn is a crop, so is algae intended for biofuels and other products.
Second, there’s a touch of magic connected to its potential in that algae requires a lot of carbon dioxide to grow. Emissions captured from power plants and other industrial sources could become the feedstock of the algae industry.
Third, real money is being spent by investors and the federal government on algae commercialization. In fact, hundreds of millions of dollars.
And the Midwest has great potential in this area.
While much of the research activity is in California –- industry leaders Solazyme and Sapphire Energy are there -– the Midwest has several promising home-grown firms as well as plants serving clients outside the region. Solazyme just opened a plant in Peoria, Illinois, to grow and process algae.
Great Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. has an ethanol plant in Shenandoah, Iowa, attached to bioreactors built by BioProcess Algae. The ethanol plant supplies CO2 to the bioreactors, which produces feeds for fish farms and livestock. The initial plan was to produce fuel, but the money is in other products –- for now.
Phycal, Inc. does laboratory testing in St. Louis and has a pilot project next to its Highland Heights, Ohio, facility. Its first algae farm, however, will be in Hawaii.
Meanwhile, the University of Minnesota had several researchers who spoke at the conference on panels and attendees got a chance to visit the St. Anthony Falls Laboratory on the Mississippi River. The lab has experimental bioreactors located on the river.
The algal organization is based in Minnesota, and the co-chair of the conference was Todd Taylor, a leading expert in the field and attorney at Fredrikson & Byron, PA.
As the algae industry grows what could emerge is a new cash crop not only for the Midwest, but the entire country, and another source of fuel and plant-based products.
Turns out, algae isn’t so bad after all.
Photo by AgriLife via Creative Commons
Did pumpkins prompt a special session?
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman’s call for a special session on the Keystone XL pipeline came as a bit of a surprise yesterday, since the last we heard was that the speaker of the state legislature was backing down from the idea, concerned about legal action.
The progressive group Bold Nebraska, which has been campaigning aggressively against the pipeline, says its pumpkin-carving event over the weekend helped turn the governor around.
On Saturday, the group called for volunteers to spell out the message “91 leaks and 0 regulations are scary, call a special session Gov. Heineman” with individual jack o’lanterns carved for each letter.
(You may have noticed the title frame of the video says “August 22,” but I’m pretty sure no one was wearing flannel shirts and jackets in Lincoln in August.)
Heineman, a Republican, has in the past been resistant to the idea of calling a special session to establish state regulatory authority over pipelines, saying as recently as September that the issue should be handled via the federal permitting process. Earlier this month, Heineman openly advocated a state effort to reroute the pipeline.
So, did the pumpkins finally move the governor to call legislators back to Lincoln? It’s impossible to say. But it’s pretty clever.
The state of electric cars
With an electric car company at the center of a new hyped-up media “scandal,” it’s good to have a little perspective. Coincidentally, EnergyNOW’s program this week looks at the current state of the EV industry.
While remarkable progress has been made in bringing electric cars to market in recent years, as anyone who follows the industry knows, it’s not all sunshine and roses. While major automakers have made big announcements of new electric models, sales have fallen short of expectations. And several startups have gone out of business, for example: Green Vehicles, which went bankrupt 7 months after receiving $535,000 in support from the city of Salinas, California.
And, of course, EVs are expensive, drawing complaints that government money is being spent to produce cars for rich people. It’s a fair point, but one that disregards the history government has in incubating new technologies so they can be brought to scale.
“Our vision is to drive down the price of electric vehicles and the technology that makes them possible — relentlessly,” says Tesla co-founder J.B. Straubel.
Straubel says the environment for start-ups is only getting tougher, because so many of the big automakers are getting into the EV business.
For instance, Mitsubishi, which is putting 1,000 electric cars on the streets of Normal, Illinois, where its North American headquarters is located.
The Mistubishi i, incidentally, retails for under $30,000, and comes in closer to $21,000 after tax credits.
Report: Minnesota top state in region for efficiency
Three Midwest states are among the most-improved in this year’s rankings from the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, while Minnesota leads the region.
The report ranks the states according to six policy metrics, including incentives, building codes, transportation policies, and efficiency standards. Individual state rankings are on the map below:
Meanwhile, the full report (PDF) has a breakdown of each state’s score.
Michigan’s ranking improved more than any other state, thanks in large part to an aggressive appliance buy-back program, according to the Detroit Free Press. Illinois’ jump was the second largest, followed by Nebraska.
Wisconsin, meanwhile, dropped five places in part because of efforts to roll back funding for the state’s Focus on Energy program, reports Thomas Content of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
And North Dakota, once again, ranks dead last.
Colbert takes on ‘job-killing’ EPA
“I have always – and this is well known – I have always despised the jack-booted Birkenstocks at the EPA, ever since it was created by that bleeding-heart liberal, Richard Nixon.”
And later in the segment, former EPA administrator Carol Browner defends the idea that clean air and water are good for the economy:
Politico defends media’s Solyndra fixation
Politico offers up a defense today in response to critics who say the media is overhyping Solyndra and ignoring Keystone XL.
It’s tempting to get bogged down by Darren Samuelsohn’s occasional word choices that seem to reflect a thinly-veiled contempt for environmental activists. They’re “desperately trying to change the narrative,” “working to throw the White House and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton under the bus,” “bemoaning the ‘out of proportion’ Solyndra coverage,” and “hyping” emails that show a potential conflict of interest between the State Department and TransCanada.
Oh, those environmentalists. What a bunch of conniving whiners!
But that’s a minor point. While few people dispute that Solyndra is an important story, what’s most important to note about the Politico piece is that there’s no analysis — none — defending why Solyndra deserves the volume of attention it’s getting.
Well, other than perhaps this:
House Republicans have shown that their hearings and subpoena power on Solyndra generate headlines…
In other words, the “scandal” is getting the attention it’s getting because the people perpetrating it are just better at manipulating the media cycle. As opposed to environmental activists, whose efforts to manipulate the media cycle are underhanded and whiny, as we learned earlier. Journalists, evidently, must just helplessly play along in all of this.
As if that alone isn’t maddening enough, consider this tidbit that comes later:
House Republicans have made it clear they plan to use Solyndra as a weapon to kill Obama’s energy policies.
Let’s be perfectly clear about something. Headlines don’t just “generate” spontaneously. They’re written by journalists who have made a judgment (or whose bosses have made a judgment) that something is important. At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work.
So Politico, and other news outlets, have made a decision to elevate the GOP’s Solyndra hearings, even though they’re well aware that it’s a political tactic to dismantle public policy that might otherwise stand on its own merit.
Is that journalism? Or is it activism? Or just allowing your coverage to be carried along wherever the political winds take you?
Or, as Grist’s David Roberts suggests, is this just a function of reporters’ “propensity to cover ‘what’s new, novel and interesting’.”
“The corruption that goes on in Washington, D.C., around fossil fuels and the fossil-fuel industry every day makes anything done around Solyndra pale in comparison,” Roberts said. “But the corruption is so routine it becomes invisible. … That’s the imbalance that I think frustrates people.”
I personally don’t find the Solyndra vs. Keystone XL framing particularly persuasive. It’s true that this website leans heavily toward the latter, because it’s an issue that more directly impacts the Midwest (and for what it’s worth, those stories tend to generate less traffic than other issues we cover). But Keystone XL and Solyndra are so different it’s hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison.
What’s more compelling is the analysis done by Media Matters (also mentioned in the Politico article) which compared Solyndra coverage to a corruption case at the Minerals Management Service and another story about military contracting fraud that resulted in a much larger loss of public money.
The chart below says it all:
Now, let’s go back to this idea that news outlets that are playing up Solyndra are carrying water for Republicans. Isn’t it interesting, then, that the TV network that tends to carry the most water for Republicans on other issues is also the most disproportionately focused on Solyndra?
Quite a coincidence, isn’t it?
Politico deserves some credit for having the courage to take on the issue in the first place. But I’m not so sure they haven’t succeeded in making the critics’ case for them.
If we can’t stop warming, can we cool the planet?
To put it mildly, reducing carbon emissions to fend off the worst effects of climate change has been easier said than done. So, if things get desperate, will it be any easier to try to reverse that impact through geoengineering?
That’s the topic of a segment on this week’s EnergyNOW program:
It should come as no surprise that there’s a bit of a debate over this. The short version is that, on one hand, if we’ve passed the point where we can stabilize the climate through emission cuts alone, we need to consider drastic measures (like pumping particulates into the atmosphere to mimic the cooling effect of a volcano). On the other hand, we can’t rely on untested, last-ditch solutions, and if we do, who gets to control the thermostat? As one critic says, we’re already engaged, unintentionally, in a massive, uncontrolled experiment with the atmosphere. Why would we start another one on purpose?
These geoengineering ideas are not as distant and far-fetched as they seem. One technique, involving a high-altitude balloon and a 12-mile-long hose, is set to undergo testing in the UK this month.
Nor is this a new scientific debate. As Marc Gunther points out in an expansive piece on the subject in Fortune magazine, the first White House report recommending a serious look at geoengineering was back in 1965. And geoengineering technology is attracting a lot of capital — Bill Gates alone has pumped more than $4 million into research.
Technology to alter the earth’s climate is no longer the stuff of science fiction. It’s getting perilously close to reality. Will our policymakers be ready for it?
