I suppose it could be said of every age in human history that there was “great promise and peril” involved with all we could imagine to do and build. I wonder if today’s dichotomy is more extreme. I have often heard it said that we are currently in a Schrodinger economy that seems both alive (growing) and dead (drowning in debt) at the same times. The Lifeboat Foundation has certainly found plenty of perils to worry about in the near future. In the case of the environment, as I mentioned yesterday, we are either headed for mass starvation, death, and world-wide calamity or an abundant future with clean energy, depending on which lens you are peering through on any particular day.

I mentioned the great progress in battery and electric vehicle technology yesterday, but these will do no good unless we have a clean source of energy to “fill them up”. Wind power is an option, but it is limited, and comes with some drawbacks. Biofuels might be a good bridge fuel (to the future), but are they really that much better than natural gas (another “bridge” fuel) when everything is considered (land use, infrastructure development, etc). About the best biofuel story I have seen recently is this lab result which created liquid fuel from carbon dioxide and electricity supplied by solar panels. Who knows if this could be scaled up for industrial production, but if we could take carbon dioxide out of the air and make fuel out of it, that would be ideal from an AGW perspective – if we continue to use liquid hydrocarbons to power the economy many decades into the future.

Then there is nuclear energy, which has taken a beating since the Fukushima disaster in Japan. Japan has of course shut down nearly all of its reactors, Germany has promised to retire all of theirs, and funding is drying up for the construction of newer safer fission reactors. As far a pollution and AGW is concerned, the phasing out of nuclear power right now will probably lead to the use of more fossil fuels, not more renewable energy sources, because our Schrodinger economy is not good enough to pay for the expensive alternatives. Two new modular reactors are being considered in the U.S. but they are mired in regulatory approval and will not come online perhaps until 2020. There is still hope for nuclear fusion reactors as new computer simulations have shown some promise, but these will be quite expensive to build and are probably years away.

One of the cheaper and cleaner alternative options we have right now is solar power. The price has fallen dramatically in the last 5 years from about $4 per watt down to $1 per watt and there are many signs it will continue to get cheaper. The price drop is due in part to technological innovation but also due to an oversupply on the market. Chinese solar panel manufacturers are running full steam ahead flooding the market - with the help of government support. This has led to a burgeoning trade war between the U.S. and China and the implementation of tarrifs.

Blythe Solar Power Plant Goes Bankrupt

I know the reasoning behind tariffs, and perhaps this will help U.S. manufacturers survive, but the end result is usually bad. Tariffs (economic warfare) often lead to real physical war. They also raise the price on the taxed items. Perhaps we should just buy up all the cheap solar panels while they are on the market instead. Maybe our solar power plant projects in the U.S. would not be going bankrupt (after recieving billions in loans from the government) if we managed our purchases better. Solar would also likely benefit from a more intelligent power grid and the use of information technology to save on installation costs.

Outside of all the current technological “fixes” we could implement to the world from potential future peril (like AGW) there are also more mundane measures that would help. If it is too difficult to stop emitting carbon dioxide, maybe we could focus on methane instead, as less of the gas floating around the atmosphere would lead to a significant reduction in possible future warming of the atmosphere. Then there are more radical futuristic ideas like engineering our bodies to be less energy intensive. Although instead of re-engineering the human body, it would be much easier to stop having so many kids.

I’ll leave you with one last positive data point to consider for today: extreme poverty around the world has decreased dramatically in the last couple of decades. The percentage of people living on the equivalent of less than $1 per day has dropped from 42% in 1981 to just 14% today.  Now why would this be a positive thing for the environment? Becoming wealthier usually means increased usage of resources, doesn’t it? Typically, yes. However, wealthy people usually choose to reduce pollution as we have seen almost all metrics of pollution decline in recent decades in the developed nations of the world. When people have greater food and energy security, they do not focus as much on day-to-day living and instead on the future world where they will live. Most people choose an un-polluted future world. Also, with the price of traditional fossil fuels continuing to rise, it is likely the new prosperity will lead to the use of alternative energy sources.

Have a pleasant Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Change, Technology

During the course of analyzing the future of air pollution, technology, and alternative energy I often highlight some of the companies that are creating the future. Some are hits and some are misses. Successful or not, I like to follow-up on the latest developments. One trend as of late is that the biggest “misses” are the government supported start-up companies. Most people are aware of the Solyndra scandal and the half billion tax-payer loan that went down the drain, now Ener1 has also filed for bankruptcy (after receiving a 118 million dollar “stimulus” grant). Ener1 was in the business of making batteries for electric cars. I mentioned this company in the weather blog back in 2008. At the time company leaders were hoping to cut the cost of lithium-ion batteries in half. The cost of lithium-ion batteries has come down quite a bit in the last 4 years but apparently it did not help out Ener1. All is not lost though, a Russian billionaire is investing some money in the bankrupt company to see if it can be revived. Here is a more in depth financial look at Ener1 and other U.S based battery companies, some political analysis from Reason, and a more sarcastic take on government support of business in general. I understand the stated reasons and justifications behind using tax-payer money to speculate in new industries, but nothing can replace the free market’s pressure to produce winners. Government grants are “free” money for those who receive them. When a business is started with private capital in the free market, there is more pressure to succeed. If you don’t succeed, you lose “your” money, your friend’s money, or your investor’s money.  That is a big deal. People and companies with their own money on the line typically work smarter and harder to succeed.

MIT-designed CityCar

From a miss (Ener1) to a potential hit on another future trend – electric vehicles. So many future designs and EV dreams have passed before my eyes and the pages of this blog  in the past few years that you might be swayed into believing that everyone is driving one by now. While that is not the case, some cars have made it onto the market including one that I didn’t think would succeed, or at least not make it from concept to commercial product. It is the MIT-designed “CityCar” (not to be confused with the T.27 city car). A commercial version was recently unveiled in Europe. Now we will see if there is a market for this tiny electric car that “folds up” to fit into tight parking spaces. Basically, if you like the Smart Car and think it is cute, then you will probably love the CityCar. I would buy one and drive it around town (keeping a gas car for longer drives on the freeway). The only barrier will likely be price. A couple years ago I was amazed at how expensive the Smart Four 2 was for being so small and only getting 40 mpg. Most electrics are rather pricey and this story announcing its availability does not give a price.

And since we are on the topic of businesses and products succeeding or failing, I might as well mention the iconic American company Kodak. They recently filed for bankruptcy. After reorganization they are planning to dip their toes into thin film solar panel production. Some people think that their old photographic film business could be transformed into solar panel production. I suppose it is a possibility but the solar market is already ultra-competitive. There has been a lot of commentary about Kodak’s demise because it used to be a giant among U.S. companies. A lot of people blame the management for not seeing the future of digital photography, but that wasn’t the main problem. In fact, Kodak invented digital photography and manufactured good digital cameras. The main problem was that the film business was so much larger and more profitable. Even if Kodak aggressively pursued digital photography and digital cameras and completely dominated the market, they still would have had to shed most of their workforce and their stock price would still be a tiny fraction of what it was during the 1970s and 1980s. The digital picture business is vary low margin compared to film. There just was not a lot of money to be made there – not enough to support a company the size of Kodak.

Have a nice Friday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Alternative Energy, Technology

Tony mentioned the August recap yesterday and I will add a little to that today. It turns out that it was the second month in a row (and only the second month this year) with above normal temperatures. In this case (August) the average temp was about 1.5 degrees above normal. It was never really hot during the month but consistently a little warmer than normal.

As Tony noted yesterday, precipitation was well above normal, but it might not have seemed that way because the last coupe of weeks have been somewhat dry. The lion’s share of the rain, a bit over 4 inches, feel in the first week, including a record rainfall of 2.43 inches on August 6th – the only daily record for the month. I was glad to see that we made it through the most critical part of the growing season with adequate rainfall. The crops in most of the area are maturing well and even if we did not see another drop of rain this year, we will still have food on the table. Here are the official stats for Wausau as compared to normal:

Average High: 79.1  (normal: 77.7)

Average Low: 58.6  (normal 57.0)

Precipitation: 5.36″  (normal 4.16″)

Highest Temp: 85 on the 6th and the 19th

Lowest Temp: 51 on the 28th

Besides the record rainfall on the 6th of the month, the most significant event was the Clark county tornado on the 23rd. As far as interesting trends in the numbers, there were not many. The average high for the month was 79.1 so it is mildly interesting that we hit 79 on 6 different days but that was not the most common number of the month. We had a high temp of 81 on 7 different days.

Back to the precipitation trend. It is a good thing that the growing season is about over because it does not look like there will be much chance of rain for the next couple of weeks. The highest chance of heavier rainfall will be tomorrow morning (maybe a quarter to half inch in a few a spots if storms form), otherwise no major storm systems are foreseen, only minor fronts and chances of widely scattered showers. This will no doubt cause the abnormally dry conditions in a couple parts of the state to expand a bit. The latest US Drought Monitor indicates the abnormally dry category has already spread a bit since last week. I suspect that central Wisconsin will be in this category by late next week – if no heavy rain falls tomorrow morning.

Unfortunately, the deep south and southwestern U.S. is still suffering under exceptional drought. The good news is that a tropical system is forming in the gulf of Mexico and it could move toward Louisiana and far southeast Texas by this weekend, and it will probably stick around for a few days. This would be just what the doctor ordered for some of these areas – a tropical system that could bring a lot of rain, all the while not getting strong enough to cause damage.

_________________________________

In alternative energy news there was a depressing development yesterday. It was something I foreshadowed in the blog last week. It just goes to show you that this blog is worth checking out for current trends. The news is that solar panel manufacturer Solyndra declared bankruptcy yesterday. Here is another article about the demise of Solyndra with a good comment discussion. It is unfortunate, but typical for a U.S. government supported business venture. Tax-payers spent 535 million on Solyndra. I am quite aware of the argument that alternative energy sources will be hard to develop on a mass scale without some sort-of federal government support, but I don’t buy it. First of all, there are enough state programs and enough early adopters to keep things moving forward. Second of all, the price of traditional fossil fuels remains high which makes the alternatives more attractive. Thirdly, entrepreneurs operating in what is left of the free market are much more adept at delivering what people truly need than what the federal government thinks they need. A good sign is that some bigger companies think they need more alternative energy and are willing to spend some money. Volkswagen in Germany recently announced that it would make a big investment into alternative energy sources.

Of course, a lot of basic research is essentially publicly funded through Universities (maybe not the optimal method of progress, but it has worked reasonably well for the last half century or so) and that is where we find a little more positive news this week.

Fuel cell technology caught the eye of many when the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville announced that they have “discovered” a method to produce hydrogen from water and sunlight – that’s it. I put discovered in quotes because the researchers did not actually build the device. They used computer simulations to predict how water would react with a special semi-conductor material (a metal alloy) when exposed to light. The results of their numerical simulation showed hydrogen would be produced. Now the most critical step it to actually make the product – which in most cases takes years, if not decades.

If and when the hydrogen is being produced with this new special alloy, researchers at the University of Southern California may have come up with the best way to store it (given current materials and technology). They propose to use ammonia borane. It is the first material proposed for hydrogen storage that is air stable and re-usable.

As you know, I am not big on fuel cells and hydrogen as the dominant competition to traditional fossil fuels, but I am certainly not against people pursuing this avenue, as there are some useful applications – storing energy from wind and solar power plants being one of them. Perhaps some modes of transportation could benefit. A University in England has manufactured and is testing a barge that runs on hydrogen fuel cells. It is not the “ultimate” solution for shipping but at least it proves it can be done.

Have a nice Thursday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Alternative Energy, Drought, Monthly Recap, Technology

Regular readers of the weather blog know that I follow alternative energy developments quite closely. It is an important topic which is intimately linked with anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Solar power in particular seems to have a bright future (based on current trends). It is the most scalable and has the most room for improvement (based on our current understanding of physics). However, this does not mean that it will be completely clear sailing into a cleaner greener future. Economics also plays a role and it is economics that is producing some difficult times for American and “Western” solar manufacturing companies.

As it turns out, solar panel manufacturing is succumbing to the same price pressure as other types of manufacturing. In order to save cost, plants in the U.S. are shutting down while plants in China ramp up. Due to cheap labor (some activists claim “slave” labor), solar panel manufacturers in China have a big edge. How bad has it been? I noticed several solar companies I have profiled here in the blog are in poor shape or shutting down altogether:

Solyndra got a government loan and a visit from President Obama but still had to shut down one of its plants, and is only hanging on by a thread (according to some reports).

SpectraWatt is reportedly shutting down operations in New York. This is surprising since it was a spin-off from Intel and had good financial backing at the start.

Evergreen Solar is not going bankrupt, but it is shutting down its Massachusetts plant in favor of its operations in China and Michigan.

The good news is that two of the U.S. “stars” in solar panel manufacturing are still doing well by most accounts. Nanosolar is expanding its production plant in San Joseand Firstsolar (Arizona) continues to be one of the world leaders in price per watt. I suspect these companies are doing well because of highly automated manufacturing processes (less labor cost).

Whether due to cheap labor in China or highly automated manufacturing in the west, solar panel prices continue to decline every year. The main obstacle left for me personally is the installation cost. The actual panels are now within my price range, but to have them mounted on my roof and install all the supporting equipment is still quite expensive.

Have a good Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Change, Technology