An interesting projection of arctic vegetation changes was published recently. As you can imagine, if the arctic continues to warm, more trees will grow. The study expects up to 50% more trees in arctic regions by 2050. This would most likely lead to significant changes for the arctic climate and other areas of the world. One would tend to think that if more trees grow, then more sunlight will be absorbed (as compared to snow-covered tundra) and that this would lead to a positive feedback, leading to more warming. However, nature and the climate are complex and rarely follow a human script.

Could there be some negative consequences from more tree growth in the arctic over the next 4 decades? Yes. Could this lead to continued warming? Yes. Should we try hard to reduce our impact on the envrionment? Yes. However, we know that more warmth and “bad consequences” not a certainty because there was more vegetation, more warmth, and much less ice as little as 1600 years ago. Researchers studying the retreating ice in the Canadian arctic have found plant material under the ice which dates to as little as 1600 years ago. If wildlife, plant life, and the biosphere in general was able to survive much less ice in the arctic as little as 1600 years ago, maybe it will not be the “end of the world” this time around either, as more melting is expected.

Also, the proposed feedback mechanisms might not be as strong as some suspect. One of the commonly repeated themes of the arctic thaw is that “huge” amounts of carbon dioxide are going to be released from the permafrost and accelerate warming across the globe. This theme does have some scientific backing and makes intuitive sense, but nature doesn’t operate by human intuition. A recent paper claims that fungus in the soil around tree roots are what hold the most carbon in arctic regions. So not only would more trees be a carbon sink (as they grow) the fungus in the soil around the roots might sequester more carbon. I cannot say with any certainty how much carbon we are talking about here, or if there would be a significant effect on future theorized warming, but this finding once again challenges the thought that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and positive feedback loops are fait accompli.

Of course, discussing past climate events as a comparison with the current situation is a little like comparing apples to oranges. Well maybe not that much different, more like comparing a Granny Smith apple to a Fuji apple. Humans have changed the atmosphere to a degree so that adds an extra variable to the mix. A lot of AGW theorists expect a lot more carbon dioxide to enter the atmosphere in coming decades – often discussing it as fait accompli. But even here, as I have mentioned in the past, perhaps there is room for less negativity.

Drilling Into Shale For Nat Gas

The U.S. in the last few years is a great example. If you had looked at carbon dioxide emmission projections from 10 years ago, you would find most experts, in fact almost all experts, predicting a steep rise. What happened? Just the opposite. U.S. carbon dioxide emissions sank dramatically after 2007 and are now as low as back in the early 1990s. Can this trend continue? Sure it can, but it will take continued effort and continued use of less carbon intensive fuels like natural gas. Natural gas development and “fracking” have had a lot of negative press lately, but it has been a great bridge fuel. I am glad a few other people are now recognizing the environmental benefits as well.

The idea here is that natural gas can begin a trend of cleaner energy, while development of solar or other alternatives continue to develop. It is a slow process but more solar power is installed every year, solar panels have gotten cheaper, and solar panels continue to get more efficient. The solar industry has come far enough that some claim it is now a net energy producing industry! Here are some of the latest develoments:

In specialized solar cells there have been a couple of news records for efficiency. Swiss researchers have generated a world record 10.7% efficiency with a single junction polycrystalline solar cell. Yale scientists created a record 11% efficiency with carbon-nanotube-film-over-silicon cells. In the lab, materials science continues to produce possible future breakthroughs. The Neils Bohr Institute has shown that nanowires can concentrate sunilght up to 15 times normal intensity. Computer simulations at the University of Vienna have shown that single layer oxides could be used to make more effcient and ultra-thin solar panels in the future. Lastly, Uconn researchers are trying to develop what are called “solar rectennas”. These tiny devices could in theory harvest up to 70% of the incedent solar energy.

Of course, not all breakthroughs in the lab make it to commercial production, or they might not be a commercial success. That is the story with a lot of thin film solar businesses. About 10 years ago, these businesses were “hot” and proposed to make less efficient but cheaper solar panels. Unfortunately, business realities have forced many of them into bankruptcy. Crystalline silicon solar panels have dropped in price so much that thin films are not very cost competitive. The low solar panel prices have also forced one the world’s biggest producers  – Suntech - to go bankrupt. It is a story of over-supply. Subsidies from the Chinese government allowed Suntech to expand production – so much so that a glut developed and prices fell to a point where they couldn’t turn a profit. Some people are a bit concerned that cost pressures will slow down innovation in the industry while companies focus on cutting costs, but finding ways to cut cost and remain profitable is a form of innovation. Where real innovation is needed is in regulations and installation costs. The majority of the cost of going solar is in regulations and installation. The actual solar panels are dirt cheap as compared to a few years back. Cheap panels should be good news for developers of big solar projects and it seems like Brightsource is taking advantage – moving forward with building another plant (a solar thermal plant) in southern California.

Even in the event that alternatives a slow to come online, and theorized warming comes to pass, there is always the possibility of sequestering carbon dioxide or even taking  itout of the air. I have heard some people say it is a nearly impossible task, but some people are working on it. Here are a couple of recent articles on the subject: Scientists explore the miriad ways of removing carbon dioxide from the air. New fuel production process could use carbon dioxide from the air.

Have a fine Wednesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Change

Yesterday I made the case that natural gas is by far the best choice for a bridge fuel during the next few years while we continue to invent a cleaner energy future, after lamenting the fact of the solar industry’s current swoon. It is interesting to note that even though the economic foundation for widescale solar power adoption is shaky (propped up to a big degree by government subsidies) the solar story is still a bright on. Research into improving the efficiency and output of solar panels continues at a fast pace and it is likely that the price of panels will continue to fall in coming years. Even if natural gas is plentiful and cheaper than dirt, there are many reasons for the continued adoption of solar power for our increasingly electrified economic and transportation infrastructure.

Here are some recent stories that caught my eye:

At the University of Tokyo scientists have developed extremely thin solar cells - thinner than spider silk. Such cells, while not being as efficient as their crystalline brethren, could fins their way into many of our small modern day gadgets and sensors.

Other thin solar cell research ongoing at Rice and Tsinghua Universities has created a dye-sensitized solar cell that could theoretically be mass-produced at a fraction of the cost of current cells. This is great news, but the efficiency of these cells is quite low. High efficiency AND low cost is of course the “holy grail”.

Theoretically boosting the efficiency up to a whopping 40% is what is claimed in this recent article about Australian Scientist’s efforts to get more out of every photon. The article is a bit light on details which usually means it is a breakthrough that is years away from mass-production – if ever (in some cases).

The University of California at Berkeley is a bit better at describing their recent developments in an effort to boost the efficiency of solar cells. The key to their finding is that solar cells should emit light as easily as they absorb light in order to reach peak efficiency.

Heliatek Flexible Panels

In the arena of coating plastic or glass with solar cell material, Heliatek in Germany has developed a new technique similar to the technique used to make OLED flat screen display panels. The panels, which could possibly be used to make tinted electricity-generating windows, are rather expensive but they think they can develop a market.

Twin Creeks Solar continues to steam ahead with their vapor deposition method of producing thin solar cells. Their equipment should lower the cost of manufacturing solar cells thus keeping downward pressure on the end-user price. Remember that you read about Twin Creeks solar previously here in the blog.

Japan continues to push hard into renewable energy in order to replace the power they lost after the earth-quake and Fukushima nuclear disaster. Maybe their increased demand will blunt the loss of subsidies out of Europe (at least a little). One of their projects includes a floating solar power plant. I know they do not have a lot of space on the islands, but a floating solar power plant seems to be begging for damage from wind and waves. Hopefully Japan will have better luck with their renewable investments than here in the U.S. It is interesting to note that the U.S. now leads the world in renewable energy investments, but I wonder if we lead in renewable energy installation or even production in recent years due to the bankruptcy of several major government sponsored projects to the tune of billions of dollars.

In a not so revolutionary but still interesting development, Naked Energy of the UK plans to offer a combined solar power and solar water heating device. Heating water with solar power is one of the projects I have been interested in for my own house.

Taken all together, there is certainly still some progress in the solar industry, even as the government funding dries up.

Have a nice Thursday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Alternative Energy

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

It turns out my fears of frost were a little overblown, at least in Wausau. The official low in Wausau this morning was only 36. Many locations remained in the mid to upper 30s, while a few did record frost. Stevens Point dropped to 30, Wisconsin Dells bottomed out at 31, and Wisconsin Rapids hit 32. The temperature did not drop as far as expected across more of the area because there was a light wind during the night. If the wind had become calm, then we would have been close to record low temperatures.

It turns out I could have planted a few frost-tolerant things in my garden (like broccoli and cabbage) a few days ago, but I remind myself, it is only May 17th. As long as I get my garden in before the end of May, then the growing season is long enough to produce a good crop. Back when I was growing up, a general rule of thumb was to not plant warm weather plants like tomatoes, sweet corn, and peppers until Memorial Day weekend. Nowadays, with a bit warmer climate, and improved forecasting, we can usually plant a few days earlier in May and be reasonably confident that we will not lose plants to frost.

_____________________

Turning to a subject that I touch upon quite frequently, there is more good news on the alternative energy front. Despite worries over political and economic instability around the world, technology continues to advance and promise a cleaner greener future. My current front-runner for the most promising alternative energy – solar – made news multiple times since the last update:

• Sometimes improvements come from the most unexpected corners. A research team at MIT has used viruses to help create more efficient dye-sensitized solar cells. The viruses help align carbon nanotubes in the active layer of the solar cells. Using this method they have boosted the efficiency of this type of cell by a third.
• Another group from MIT has created a solar collection material that absorbs energy in the infrared and ultraviolet wavelengths while allowing most visible light to pass through. How could this be useful? It could go over a window, thus harvesting energy but not blocking “light” from getting through for natural interior illumination. The only problem with this technology is that it is organic, which typically has a much shorter useful lifespan than inorganic solar cells.
• Another fruitful area of research is using quantum dots to improve solar conversion efficiency. One team of scientists has found that charging the quantum dots during fabrication of solar cells could improve efficiency by 50%. The process is probably a few years away e mass manufacturing.
• Just today a headline proclaimed a new solar device that converts 95% of incoming solar radiation to useful energy. The invention will apparently use nano-antennae to capture many different wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The inventor says mass production is about 5 years away. I am not holding my breath on this one, because 95% conversion might not be theoretically possible given our current understanding of physics. Details in the article were scant, which makes it look more like a fundraising effort than a coming out party for new technology.

Have a fine Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew

Posted under Alternative Energy, Freeze, Technology

One of my best friends from years ago commented on yesterday’s blog post about solar industry ups-n-downs. He mentioned how electronic engineers were hopeful that future solar power production would help them find gainful employment. I am unsure if the solar industry has taken up all the slack from losses in the semi-conductor industry, but it has helped. The salient question was about installing a solar panel on a private residence and what percentage of the cost was the actual solar panel. I’ll reproduce my reply here so you don’t have to go searching:

“I’ll have to do a little research, but the last time I looked, the installation of a couple KW on my house would have cost about $16,000. The solar panels themselves would have been less than $4,000. I have seen quotes around the net that the typical installation runs about $9 per watt. Thin film solar panel producers claim they kick them out the door at $1 per watt, so it would seem the lion’s share of the price for a small installation (at a private residence) is still labor and extra parts (inverters and such). Federal and state governments offer rebates, so this usually brings down the cost by a few percent.”

I was wondering if anyone in the area has investigated solar panels for their house or had an actual installation. If so, could you please enlighten us and leave a comment regarding the current prices?

Staying on the topic of solar energy, it is good to see innovation and progress is still alive and well, although some press releases seem like more hype than reality. Yesterday, Oxford Photovoltaics claimed to have created a new type of printable solid-state dye-sensitized solar cell, that is made out of cheaper, non-toxic, non-corrosive materials and can be scaled to any size. That is quite an achievement (and a mouthful). The only thing missing is a quote on the efficiency of these new solar panels. I looked around but could not quickly  find a “tested” efficiency rating. If a press release is issued and they don’t mention the efficiency, that is a red flag in my book. I could could probably make a cheap solar cell out of dirt, but it wouldn’t be efficient enough to be useful.

As mentioned in yesterday’s post, China is the hotspot for solar cell production, due to low regulation and labor cost, but they also innovate. Renesola claims to have created one of the world’s highest efficiency multicrystalline solar cells – 17.5 percent. Most solar cells that achieve high efficiency are monocrystalline and are more expensive. If this claim is true, then the price per performance of solar panels should continue to improve in coming years. So far, no outside entities have confirmed the ReneSola claims.

As you well know, seeing advances like these on a day to day basis make me optimistic that we will be able to conquer future environmental problems due to the use of fossil fuels, whether it is traditional air/water/soil pollution or theoretical future warming of the climate. I have found that more people are becoming optimistic along with me. Check out this recent paper that claims the world could run on 100% renewable energy by 2030 - and this could be accomplished with TODAY’S technology. Just think what we might do with tomorrow’s tech.

On a related note, researchers have found that we could easily feed 9 billion people (with today’s technology) and house all of them as well. This comes as no surprise to me. Because of my job and blogging duties, I scratch the surface of many scientific disciplines. I think I can appreciate the advance of technology more than many people who are dedicated specialists. As the world (and scientists) becomes more connected through better communication and collaboration technology (and social media) I think more people will “see” the solutions that should be apparent. Large socio-economic problems might not be so intractable after all.

Have a fine Wednesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Change, Pollution, Technology

After a week of blogging about environmental doom-and-gloom predictions, it is about time to discuss some good news. After all, even though the economy is in a bad recession, and we are mostly stuck using dirty fossil fuels, progress is happening. This is something that is typically forgotten (at least in the recent past) by climate modellers and others predicting the future of the earth’s environment. Most people assume that progress is static or at most linear but this is not the case. If you think progress happens fast nowadays you are not alone. Ray Kurzweil has put forth a good argument that progress is exponential. New tools this year help make better tools next year. Technology builds upon itself. Some people think things are moving too fast – that new technology comes onto the scene before it is proven reasonably safe. In any case, assuming that we will still be driving cars burning gasoline in the year 2050, much less 2010, is a risky assumption. For perspective, less than 100 years ago hear in Wisconsin most farmers were plowing fields with horses.

So what is some of the good news lateely. With regard to alternative energy it seems solar power advances are coming at a steady pace, some in the lab but some out in the marketplace:

Local manufacturing icon 3M has developed a new flexible waterproof film to replace glasson solar panels. This is one of those seemingly minor advancements that adds up in the long run. The polymer film is lighter than glass and is flexible so solar panel manufacturing and shipping costs should go down a tad. Flexibility also helps keep installation costs down.

Other research has shown that layers nano-scale thin film materials can absorb up too 10 times more energy by trapping photons within the  layers for a longer period of time. This development is only “in the lab” at this time, so it might be a few years before we see it commercialized.

Even the upper limit on solar cell efficiency has been questioned by research using quantum dots to absorb sunlight. With quantum dots, the excess heat generated during the solar power process might be able to be turned into electricity.

Lastly, cheaper and better solar cells could be made by by using a new wet acid etching technique. The acid etches nano-sized pores into materials (such as silver shown in the article). These holes absorb nearly 100% of the sunlight that hits them. Almost none is reflected. If this can be commercialized for solar panels we could see a significant increase in the efficiency of solar panels.

There is a lot more, but it will have to wait until next week.

Have a good weekend! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Technology

Sometimes we get so involved in what weather has happened and what might happen that we forget to look back and see what did not happen. This past winter, what did not happen is a “bitterly cold” winter here in Wisconsin. If you remember back to last Fall the Farmer’s Almanac indicated “bitterly cold and dry” weather for our area (January through March). The “dry” part worked out but the “bitterly cold” most definitely did not. January and February were 2 to 3 degrees above normal and March is a whopping 8 degrees above normal through the first 23 days. In other parts of the country it was hit-and-miss as well. The mid Atlantic region did not have average temps and precipitation, it was above normal on both counts. It was not snowy in Montana, they had much less snow than normal in most of the state. California was not “dry”, they ended up with above normal precipitation in January and February. “Colder and wetter” around Texas did end up pretty accurate.

Something else that has not happened this March is the “tournament snowstorm”. Contrary to popular belief, it does not happen every year. Given that between high school wrestling, hockey, and basketball, the “tournament” season lasts most of March and covers all areas of the state, there is a good chance of a big snowstorm somewhere in the state every year, but it has not happened this year. There was only a little light snow around Madison and Milwaukee last weekend during the boys basketball tournament.

Alternative Energy News

If you are looking forward to retrofitting your home with solar panels or itching to buy a sleek new quiet electric car but are concerned about high prices, there might be some hope on the horizon. More companies are jumping into the arena and more competition almost always brings the price down and quality up. GE has announced it will soon be producing thin film solar panels, bringing competition the market leader First Solar. First Solar already has a fairly cheap product and a good manufacturing process and now they will have to continue on that trend in order to stay ahead of GE (once GE enters the market).

The long-awaited and oft-delayed electric car market has got another entrant – Chrysler/Fiat will produce an electric Fiat 500. The estimated retail price is $32,000 (not sure if that is before or after the $7,500 tax credit) and Chrysler says it will ramp up production to 56,000 per year by 2014. As you could have guessed, this is still too expensive for my budget. Cut the price in half and then give me the rebate – then we are talking! I was reading an article the other day about electric vehicle “myths”. One of the listed myths was that EVs are expensive. I don’t think it is a myth. I haven’t seen one car in the works that will cost under $20,000 and most are projected to sell between $30,000 and $50,000. I guess I’ll have to wait for an electric Tata Nano or just get a souped up Golf Cart for the time being.

Does anyone else have plans for solar panels or electric cars? Made any purchases recently? I’d love to hear how your experience has been. Please leave a comment or two.

Have a nice Wednesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Alternative Energy, Winter Weather