Will it be an energy war we see next, or a water war? Any guesses?
A professor and author of Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy, Michael Klare predicts an energy war lasting 30 years. He sees it as a succeed-or-perish contest among the major forms of energy, the corporations which supply them, and the countries that run on them. The question will be: Which will dominate the world's energy supply in the second half of the 21st century?
Why 30 years?? Because he believes that's how long it will take for experimental energy systems like hydrogen power, cellulosic ethanol, wave power, algae fuel, and advanced nuclear reactors to make it from the laboratory to full-scale industrial development.
This will be a war because the future profitability, or even survival, of many of the world's most powerful and wealthy corporations will be at risk and because the acquisition of adequate supplies of energy is as basic a matter of national security as can be imagined, struggles over oil and natural gas, will trigger armed violence.
The existing energy portfolio will just not suffice as demands increase. Meeting the 40 percent increase required given the demand from new and old quarters will only trigger the energy war.
According to BP, the world consumed 13.2 billion tons of oil-equivalent from all sources in 2010: 33.6 percent from oil, 29.6 percent from coal, 23.8 percent from natural gas, 6.5 percent from hydroelectricity, 5.2 percent from nuclear energy, and a mere 1.3 percent from all renewable forms of energy. Together, fossil fuels -- oil, coal, and gas -- supplied 10.4 billion tons, or 87 percent of the total.
Whether natural gas can be the transition fuel or more, whether renewables will go up beyond 4-5 percent globally, many things will decide how the 'war' will turn out. Whether we can appease our fuel thirst, or tweak technology further more, whether we can turn to local, distributed generation, all these will decide the winners and losers.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Let's move it!
More inspiring news on transport from across the world. German researchers have found that just five cars in a thousand communicating with one another is all it takes to reduce congestion. German officials prepare to roll out a vehicle-to-vehicle communication to alleviate traffic congestion and a growing number of automakers explore the technology.
This involves a vehicle-to-vehicle telematics system that sends data from in-car sensors to local traffic control centers over 802.11p WLAN, reserved for intelligent transportation networks. Data from the V2V network would be analyzed by local authorities and sent to motorists through navigation systems, text messages and radio traffic reports.
There are multiple disincentives to driving in European cities, including limits on parking, congestion pricing, restrictions on cars in center cities, and decent public transit and bike infrastructure. Europe recognises that globally, emissions from transportation continue a relentless rise, with half of them coming from personal cars, and the EU has committed to cut down its emissions.
Zurich's planners take it a step ahead - to tame traffic, shorten the green-light periods and lengthen the red with the goal that pedestrians wait no more than 20 seconds to cross! Now can you imagine such a move in our Indian cities, and what would ensue? Decibel levels up as horns blare all around! And talk about disincentives to private vehicles, it will take a long long time. the market is booming, with India and China racing close to the US.
This involves a vehicle-to-vehicle telematics system that sends data from in-car sensors to local traffic control centers over 802.11p WLAN, reserved for intelligent transportation networks. Data from the V2V network would be analyzed by local authorities and sent to motorists through navigation systems, text messages and radio traffic reports.
There are multiple disincentives to driving in European cities, including limits on parking, congestion pricing, restrictions on cars in center cities, and decent public transit and bike infrastructure. Europe recognises that globally, emissions from transportation continue a relentless rise, with half of them coming from personal cars, and the EU has committed to cut down its emissions.
Zurich's planners take it a step ahead - to tame traffic, shorten the green-light periods and lengthen the red with the goal that pedestrians wait no more than 20 seconds to cross! Now can you imagine such a move in our Indian cities, and what would ensue? Decibel levels up as horns blare all around! And talk about disincentives to private vehicles, it will take a long long time. the market is booming, with India and China racing close to the US.
Monday, June 27, 2011
800 million, and still growing
An alien watching planet earth would see much the same activity we humans see around an anthill. With 800 million cars on the road zooming on the roads at any time, we do give a view of a frenetic civilisation running around most of the time!
According to experts, the time is not far away when all this zooming will come to a screeching halt. And no, we are not talking of peak oil here. But of gridlock. And who best to imagine such a situation than one who has 'contributed' in many ways to this? Bill Ford, the great grand child of Henry Ford, has an impressive talk on TED where he suggests some solutions to avoid traffic jams.
The number of automobiles will touch 4 bn by 2050. Even today the average Beijing-ite spends 5 hrs for the daily commute! China, a developing nation that has the second largest growth in automobiles, recently saw a traffic jam that took 11 days to clear!
Even if all the 4 bn vehicles are 'clean' traffic jams will remain jams. Imagine the state of ambulances caught in this mess. More deaths on the road, for sure.
As Bill sees it, the soultion is not in building more roads but in smart vehicle networks where cars 'talk' to each other and help divert vehicles and reduce jams. Not only this, various smart moves will be required if people need to be on the move towards progress and development. Of course, public transport will play a big role too with various modes playing in symphony.
Any smart ideas?
According to experts, the time is not far away when all this zooming will come to a screeching halt. And no, we are not talking of peak oil here. But of gridlock. And who best to imagine such a situation than one who has 'contributed' in many ways to this? Bill Ford, the great grand child of Henry Ford, has an impressive talk on TED where he suggests some solutions to avoid traffic jams.
The number of automobiles will touch 4 bn by 2050. Even today the average Beijing-ite spends 5 hrs for the daily commute! China, a developing nation that has the second largest growth in automobiles, recently saw a traffic jam that took 11 days to clear!
Even if all the 4 bn vehicles are 'clean' traffic jams will remain jams. Imagine the state of ambulances caught in this mess. More deaths on the road, for sure.
As Bill sees it, the soultion is not in building more roads but in smart vehicle networks where cars 'talk' to each other and help divert vehicles and reduce jams. Not only this, various smart moves will be required if people need to be on the move towards progress and development. Of course, public transport will play a big role too with various modes playing in symphony.
Any smart ideas?
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Marine life at risk
Was just last week the world celebrated Ocean Day. Now comes a study noting the peril facing our oceans. Warming waters, ocean acidification, the spread of oxygen-free dead zones, habitat loss, and overfishing are pushing the world’s oceans toward a phase of mass extinctions not seen in millions of years
In a report sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Oceans (IPSO), the scientists said that the rates of coral loss, fish stock depletion, open-water “dead zones,” and toxic algae blooms have surpassed even the worst-case projections of just four years ago.
And these trends could portend significantly wider disruptions on the world’s marine ecosystems; all five mass extinctions in the planet’s history — the most recent of which occurred 55 million years ago — were preceded by similar ocean conditions, scientists say.
The group called on states, regional bodies and the UN to establish programs to better conserve ocean ecosystems — particularly in the largely unprotected high seas that make up most of the planet’s oceans — and to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions driving ocean acidification and rising sea temperatures.
It means that not only on land but also in water which covers a major part of our planet, humans have managed to cause considerable damage. Oceans play a far more greater role in stabilising climate, and when we tamper with their ecology, we can expect the worst. For it doesn't take the bootstrap theory of particle physics to understand the interconnectedness of things here on earth!
In a report sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Oceans (IPSO), the scientists said that the rates of coral loss, fish stock depletion, open-water “dead zones,” and toxic algae blooms have surpassed even the worst-case projections of just four years ago.
And these trends could portend significantly wider disruptions on the world’s marine ecosystems; all five mass extinctions in the planet’s history — the most recent of which occurred 55 million years ago — were preceded by similar ocean conditions, scientists say.
The group called on states, regional bodies and the UN to establish programs to better conserve ocean ecosystems — particularly in the largely unprotected high seas that make up most of the planet’s oceans — and to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions driving ocean acidification and rising sea temperatures.
It means that not only on land but also in water which covers a major part of our planet, humans have managed to cause considerable damage. Oceans play a far more greater role in stabilising climate, and when we tamper with their ecology, we can expect the worst. For it doesn't take the bootstrap theory of particle physics to understand the interconnectedness of things here on earth!
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Give us more!
Peak oil could happen anytime between 2012 and 2017, confessed the IEA at various times recently, and more recently its chief Fatih Birol even said that peak oil has perhaps passed us by in 2006! Which means we are now in the decline region of the bell curve.
But is that scaring anyone? None. As governments continue to be in denial, the demand for oil has skyrocketed in 2010. Itncreased 2.7 million barrels per day to a new record high of 87.4 mbd -- however, increases in global oil production fell short of that by 900,000 barrels per day.
This means rising supply isn't keeping pace with rising demand. Exactly what the peak oil researchers have been saying. But again, no one wants to hear the scary truth.
The new oil production rankings now have Russia leading the world (10.27 mbd) and Saudi Arabia in second (10 mbd). The US produces 7.5 mpd (and consumes a bit under three times that). China is now in fifth place, seeing the largest increase in production, with a bit over 4 million barrels per day.
But is that scaring anyone? None. As governments continue to be in denial, the demand for oil has skyrocketed in 2010. Itncreased 2.7 million barrels per day to a new record high of 87.4 mbd -- however, increases in global oil production fell short of that by 900,000 barrels per day.
This means rising supply isn't keeping pace with rising demand. Exactly what the peak oil researchers have been saying. But again, no one wants to hear the scary truth.
The new oil production rankings now have Russia leading the world (10.27 mbd) and Saudi Arabia in second (10 mbd). The US produces 7.5 mpd (and consumes a bit under three times that). China is now in fifth place, seeing the largest increase in production, with a bit over 4 million barrels per day.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Ode to the sun, caution on the waste
It was to be expected that we would have a Solar Day too. Looking at solar energy, the news is good, as the sector is making fast progress in both the developed and developing worlds. In a place like Bangladesh where a majority are still in the dark, the solar PV has brought more than a glint in the lives of the poor, according to the World Bank. In the US, the industry has witnessed a stupendous growth.
And yet, there are the detractors who say 'don't forget the cost'. This totally erroneous comparison with coal-based power is simply because of subsidies as a result of which the cost does nto reflect environmental, social or health costs of fossil fuels. If these externalities into objective account and remove all the subsidies to conventional power plants the true cost can be as high
as Rs. 25.00 per unit as per some experts.
But there is a side we must stay tuned in to, and that is the toxics part. To prevent an e-waste crisis from solar panels, like the releasing of tellurium and indium into the environment, it becomes necessary to recycle to our best. The PV materials that can be recycled are glass, silicon wafers, silver, indium, tin, moly, nickel, zinc, copper, aluminum, zinc, plastics, CdTe filter cake, and CIGS filter cake.
The question is if making such a recycling mandatory a good idea, or will it add to the costs fro manufacturers and deter the growth? What do you think?
And yet, there are the detractors who say 'don't forget the cost'. This totally erroneous comparison with coal-based power is simply because of subsidies as a result of which the cost does nto reflect environmental, social or health costs of fossil fuels. If these externalities into objective account and remove all the subsidies to conventional power plants the true cost can be as high
as Rs. 25.00 per unit as per some experts.
But there is a side we must stay tuned in to, and that is the toxics part. To prevent an e-waste crisis from solar panels, like the releasing of tellurium and indium into the environment, it becomes necessary to recycle to our best. The PV materials that can be recycled are glass, silicon wafers, silver, indium, tin, moly, nickel, zinc, copper, aluminum, zinc, plastics, CdTe filter cake, and CIGS filter cake.
The question is if making such a recycling mandatory a good idea, or will it add to the costs fro manufacturers and deter the growth? What do you think?
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Renewed doubts
Some more cud to chew on - an expert challenges how cheap renewable energy will be if deployed on a large scale!
True, sunlight and wind are free and naturally replenished, BUT converting them into large quantities of electricity requires vast amounts of natural resources — most notably, land.
The author takes the case of California where the state has the new mandate to source one-third of its demand from renewables. This means of the 52,000 megawatts required, about 17,000 megawatts must come from solar and wind.
Projects like the $2 billion Ivanpah solar plant, which is now under construction in the Mojave Desert in southern California, will provide 370 megawatts of solar generation capacity, but will need 3,600 acres — about five and a half square miles.
To have 8,500 megawatts of solar capacity, California would need at least 23 projects the size of Ivanpah, covering about 129 square miles, an area more than five times as large as Manhattan.
Wind energy projects require even more land. The Roscoe wind farm in Texas, which has a capacity of 781.5 megawatts, covers about 154 square miles. Again, to have 8,500 megawatts of wind generation capacity, California would likely need to set aside an area equivalent to more than 70 Manhattans.
Not to forget the massive quantities of steel required for wind projects. The production and transportation of steel are both expensive and energy-intensive, and installing a single wind turbine requires about 200 tons of it. Many turbines have capacities of 3 or 4 megawatts, so you can assume that each megawatt of wind capacity requires roughly 50 tons of steel.
Where will the steel come from? What source but fossil fuels to power their production? He goes on to ask if the world is rushing from one crisis to another, in the name of reducing emissions?
There is no denying these arguments, but one would tend to think that the answer lies in going lower on the scale. From massive grid-connected power to small community based off-grid power that uses the locally available resource. That emissions are soaring and will soon start producing results more direct than what we now see, is clear. Simply because we do not link the floods and droughts to them, we are largely abel to ignore the climate! But not for long. The consensus among scientists is chilling.
We must shift, even if the shift is in small steps. Coal and oil will soon run out.
True, sunlight and wind are free and naturally replenished, BUT converting them into large quantities of electricity requires vast amounts of natural resources — most notably, land.
The author takes the case of California where the state has the new mandate to source one-third of its demand from renewables. This means of the 52,000 megawatts required, about 17,000 megawatts must come from solar and wind.
Projects like the $2 billion Ivanpah solar plant, which is now under construction in the Mojave Desert in southern California, will provide 370 megawatts of solar generation capacity, but will need 3,600 acres — about five and a half square miles.
To have 8,500 megawatts of solar capacity, California would need at least 23 projects the size of Ivanpah, covering about 129 square miles, an area more than five times as large as Manhattan.
Wind energy projects require even more land. The Roscoe wind farm in Texas, which has a capacity of 781.5 megawatts, covers about 154 square miles. Again, to have 8,500 megawatts of wind generation capacity, California would likely need to set aside an area equivalent to more than 70 Manhattans.
Not to forget the massive quantities of steel required for wind projects. The production and transportation of steel are both expensive and energy-intensive, and installing a single wind turbine requires about 200 tons of it. Many turbines have capacities of 3 or 4 megawatts, so you can assume that each megawatt of wind capacity requires roughly 50 tons of steel.
Where will the steel come from? What source but fossil fuels to power their production? He goes on to ask if the world is rushing from one crisis to another, in the name of reducing emissions?
There is no denying these arguments, but one would tend to think that the answer lies in going lower on the scale. From massive grid-connected power to small community based off-grid power that uses the locally available resource. That emissions are soaring and will soon start producing results more direct than what we now see, is clear. Simply because we do not link the floods and droughts to them, we are largely abel to ignore the climate! But not for long. The consensus among scientists is chilling.
We must shift, even if the shift is in small steps. Coal and oil will soon run out.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
City pangs
Cities are already responsible for more than 80 percent of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions. By 2030, the world will have almost 5 billion city residents -- about 60 percent of the world's population.
So, it makes sense for cities to get smart and learn to build housing and transportation systems, ensure food and energy supplies, and deal with waste in a sustainable manner that cuts greenhouse-gas emissions.
Perhaps as a first step cities must know their emissions and have policies to lower these. At a recent meet, the attention was on C40's collaboration with International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) -- Local Governments for Sustainability -- to develop a standard for measuring city greenhouse-gas emissions.
ICLEI draws upon the expertise of World resources Institute in this regard. WRI has begun developing a city-level emissions accounting framework tailored for China. WRI's city framework will measure both direct and indirect emissions. This means that emissions from goods and services produced and consumed by city residents would be included in a city's emissions assessment.
Then there are the BRT systems which lowers commuting time and also reduces emissions! A step ahead, inspired by IPCC's recent report that renewable energy could provide 80 percent of the world's energy by 2050, how about distributed on-site solar that sees solar panels on individual homes? To make the installation and financing easy, WRI has been looking at collaborative solar financing for a group or community.
Surely, there are many ways cities can lead the way in becoming climate champions. All it takes is some innovative thinking and a visionary leadership.
So, it makes sense for cities to get smart and learn to build housing and transportation systems, ensure food and energy supplies, and deal with waste in a sustainable manner that cuts greenhouse-gas emissions.
Perhaps as a first step cities must know their emissions and have policies to lower these. At a recent meet, the attention was on C40's collaboration with International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) -- Local Governments for Sustainability -- to develop a standard for measuring city greenhouse-gas emissions.
ICLEI draws upon the expertise of World resources Institute in this regard. WRI has begun developing a city-level emissions accounting framework tailored for China. WRI's city framework will measure both direct and indirect emissions. This means that emissions from goods and services produced and consumed by city residents would be included in a city's emissions assessment.
Then there are the BRT systems which lowers commuting time and also reduces emissions! A step ahead, inspired by IPCC's recent report that renewable energy could provide 80 percent of the world's energy by 2050, how about distributed on-site solar that sees solar panels on individual homes? To make the installation and financing easy, WRI has been looking at collaborative solar financing for a group or community.
Surely, there are many ways cities can lead the way in becoming climate champions. All it takes is some innovative thinking and a visionary leadership.
Save and grow
The present paradigm of intensive crop production cannot meet the challenges of the new millennium, says a new report from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
In its "policymaker's guide" for developing-world agriculture called "Save and Grow" FAO begins thus: The Green Revolution in agriculture, which swept much of the developing world during the 1960s, saved an estimated one billion people from famine. Thanks to high-yielding crop varieties, irrigation, agrochemicals and modern management techniques, farmers in developing countries increased food production from 800 million tonnes to more than 2.2 billion tonnes between 1961 and 2000. Intensive crop production helped to reduce the number of undernourished, drive rural development and prevent the destruction of natural ecosystems to make way for extensive farming.
Those achievements came at a cost. In many countries, decades of intensive cropping have degraded fertile land and depleted groundwater, provoked pest upsurges, eroded biodiversity, and polluted air, soil and water. As the world population rises to a projected 9.2 billion in 2050, we have no option but to further intensify crop production.
But the yield growth rate of major cereals is declining, and farmers face a series of unprecedented, intersecting challenges: increasing competition for land and water, rising fuel and fertilizer prices, and the impact of climate change.
So what must farmers do? They must preserve the natural resources at their disposal in order to increase their productivity. Reduced tillage to save soil, crop rotations to save nutrients, and improved seeds to save water. And all this by traditional methods!
In opposition is the Global Harvest Initiative (GHI, a coalition of biotech and agribusiness companies that intends to fight against the agro-ecological techniques recommended by the FAO; it seems to think the FAO's approach is anti-technological. GHI believes the answers we need are beyond the knowledge of today's farmers and scientists.
Given the degradation wrought by industrial agriculture which saw use of chemicals and lavish irrigation, it perhaps seems a wise choice to save what little is left in our soils and groundwater. Sometimes, technology can have adverse effects. Can we afford to try another experiment on our soild and diversity? Not necessary a return to the cattle and plough but a minimum use of external inputs may be the answer.
In its "policymaker's guide" for developing-world agriculture called "Save and Grow" FAO begins thus: The Green Revolution in agriculture, which swept much of the developing world during the 1960s, saved an estimated one billion people from famine. Thanks to high-yielding crop varieties, irrigation, agrochemicals and modern management techniques, farmers in developing countries increased food production from 800 million tonnes to more than 2.2 billion tonnes between 1961 and 2000. Intensive crop production helped to reduce the number of undernourished, drive rural development and prevent the destruction of natural ecosystems to make way for extensive farming.
Those achievements came at a cost. In many countries, decades of intensive cropping have degraded fertile land and depleted groundwater, provoked pest upsurges, eroded biodiversity, and polluted air, soil and water. As the world population rises to a projected 9.2 billion in 2050, we have no option but to further intensify crop production.
But the yield growth rate of major cereals is declining, and farmers face a series of unprecedented, intersecting challenges: increasing competition for land and water, rising fuel and fertilizer prices, and the impact of climate change.
So what must farmers do? They must preserve the natural resources at their disposal in order to increase their productivity. Reduced tillage to save soil, crop rotations to save nutrients, and improved seeds to save water. And all this by traditional methods!
In opposition is the Global Harvest Initiative (GHI, a coalition of biotech and agribusiness companies that intends to fight against the agro-ecological techniques recommended by the FAO; it seems to think the FAO's approach is anti-technological. GHI believes the answers we need are beyond the knowledge of today's farmers and scientists.
Given the degradation wrought by industrial agriculture which saw use of chemicals and lavish irrigation, it perhaps seems a wise choice to save what little is left in our soils and groundwater. Sometimes, technology can have adverse effects. Can we afford to try another experiment on our soild and diversity? Not necessary a return to the cattle and plough but a minimum use of external inputs may be the answer.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Soiled soils
The planet's soils are under greater threat than ever before, at a time when we need to draw on their vital role to support life more than ever, warns an expert from the University of Sheffield in the journal Nature.
In some parts of the world, losses due to erosion are greatly outstripping the natural rate of soil formation; and the intensity of human activity is impacting the ability of soil to produce food, store carbon from the atmosphere, filter contamination from water supplies and maintain necessary biodiversity.
Because of growing demand for food, intensification of agriculture alone will put a huge strain on soils over the next few decades, and climate change adds to the challenge. Not only are nutrients being stripped away, but chemicals ocntinue to be added vigorously.
It becomes evident that what we need are rigorous forecasting methods to quantify and best utilise soil's natural capital, to assess options for maintaining or extending it, and to determine how the declines can be reversed. And we need these things well within a decade, as the team says.
Makes one wonder is there any part of the eco-system we 'wise wise humans' (homo sapiens sapiens) have left intact!
In some parts of the world, losses due to erosion are greatly outstripping the natural rate of soil formation; and the intensity of human activity is impacting the ability of soil to produce food, store carbon from the atmosphere, filter contamination from water supplies and maintain necessary biodiversity.
Because of growing demand for food, intensification of agriculture alone will put a huge strain on soils over the next few decades, and climate change adds to the challenge. Not only are nutrients being stripped away, but chemicals ocntinue to be added vigorously.
It becomes evident that what we need are rigorous forecasting methods to quantify and best utilise soil's natural capital, to assess options for maintaining or extending it, and to determine how the declines can be reversed. And we need these things well within a decade, as the team says.
Makes one wonder is there any part of the eco-system we 'wise wise humans' (homo sapiens sapiens) have left intact!
Leading the way
Two Indian and one Pakistan firms are the finalists from the Asian region for the world's leading green energy prize-The Ashden Awards for Sustainable Energy 2011.
Abellon CleanEnergy Ltd, Gujarat won the prize for fuelling Gujarat's industries with biomass pellets made from crop residues that replace the high carbon, polluting fuels currently used by industry and give 8,500 local farmers a market for their waste product. Abellon currently produces 65,000 tonnes of biomass pellets a year, avoiding around 110,000 tonnes of CO2.
Husk Power Systems, Bihar for connecting remote villages in Bihar to a clean, reliable electricity supply, which provides better light, harnesses a widespread waste product and costs less than alternatives. Husk Power's 65 plants gasify rice husks and other biomass waste to supply electricity to around 180,000 people and, by replacing kerosene, they cut greenhouse emissions by over 8,000 tonnes of CO2 a year.
Access to affordable clean energy is often seen as a fundamental right and yet almost a quarter of the world's population - over 1.4 billion people - live without access to electricity, and worldwide around 2.5 billion people still rely on wood and charcoal for cooking. The Ashden finalists go to prove that it is possible to meet the energy needs of the poor in a way that improves lives, without affecting economic growth adversely, cuts CO2 emissions and saves trees.
There are numerous solutions. Often it is simply lethargy that sees us sticking to the beaten track!
Abellon CleanEnergy Ltd, Gujarat won the prize for fuelling Gujarat's industries with biomass pellets made from crop residues that replace the high carbon, polluting fuels currently used by industry and give 8,500 local farmers a market for their waste product. Abellon currently produces 65,000 tonnes of biomass pellets a year, avoiding around 110,000 tonnes of CO2.
Husk Power Systems, Bihar for connecting remote villages in Bihar to a clean, reliable electricity supply, which provides better light, harnesses a widespread waste product and costs less than alternatives. Husk Power's 65 plants gasify rice husks and other biomass waste to supply electricity to around 180,000 people and, by replacing kerosene, they cut greenhouse emissions by over 8,000 tonnes of CO2 a year.
Access to affordable clean energy is often seen as a fundamental right and yet almost a quarter of the world's population - over 1.4 billion people - live without access to electricity, and worldwide around 2.5 billion people still rely on wood and charcoal for cooking. The Ashden finalists go to prove that it is possible to meet the energy needs of the poor in a way that improves lives, without affecting economic growth adversely, cuts CO2 emissions and saves trees.
There are numerous solutions. Often it is simply lethargy that sees us sticking to the beaten track!
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Glitter of gas
The International Energy Agency (IEA) on Monday released a special report exploring the potential for a “golden age” of gas. The new report, part of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2011 series, examines the key factors that could result in a more prominent role for natural gas in the global energy mix, and the implications for other fuels, energy security and climate change.
The report, titled, “Are We Entering a Golden Age of Gas?” presents a scenario in which global use of gas rises by more than 50% from 2010 levels and accounts for more than a quarter of global energy demand by 2035. However, the report also strikes a cautious note on the climate benefits of such an expansion, noting that an increased share of gas in the global energy mix is far from enough on its own to put the world on a carbon emissions path consistent with a global temperature rise of no more than 2 degrees Celsius.
Global natural gas resources are vast, widely dispersed geographically and can help improve energy security. All major geographical regions have recoverable natural gas resources equal to at least 75 years of current consumption. However, timely and successful development of these resources depends on a complex set of factors, including government policy choices, technological capability and market conditions.
Natural gas is a particularly attractive fuel for countries and regions that are urbanising and seeking to satisfy rapid growth in energy demand, such as China, India and the Middle East. These countries and regions will largely determine the extent to which natural gas use expands over the next 25 years.
When replacing other fossil fuels, natural gas can lead to lower emissions of greenhouse gases and local pollutants. However, the high gas scenario shows carbon emissions consistent with a long-term temperature rise of over 3.5°C. A path towards 2°C would still require a greater shift to low-carbon energy sources. Ultimately, in a finite planet we must learn to restrain our wants, and that goes for energy too!
The report, titled, “Are We Entering a Golden Age of Gas?” presents a scenario in which global use of gas rises by more than 50% from 2010 levels and accounts for more than a quarter of global energy demand by 2035. However, the report also strikes a cautious note on the climate benefits of such an expansion, noting that an increased share of gas in the global energy mix is far from enough on its own to put the world on a carbon emissions path consistent with a global temperature rise of no more than 2 degrees Celsius.
Global natural gas resources are vast, widely dispersed geographically and can help improve energy security. All major geographical regions have recoverable natural gas resources equal to at least 75 years of current consumption. However, timely and successful development of these resources depends on a complex set of factors, including government policy choices, technological capability and market conditions.
Natural gas is a particularly attractive fuel for countries and regions that are urbanising and seeking to satisfy rapid growth in energy demand, such as China, India and the Middle East. These countries and regions will largely determine the extent to which natural gas use expands over the next 25 years.
When replacing other fossil fuels, natural gas can lead to lower emissions of greenhouse gases and local pollutants. However, the high gas scenario shows carbon emissions consistent with a long-term temperature rise of over 3.5°C. A path towards 2°C would still require a greater shift to low-carbon energy sources. Ultimately, in a finite planet we must learn to restrain our wants, and that goes for energy too!
Monday, June 6, 2011
Mother Earth in a fix...
Here's another sombre thought: as world population goes north, the immediate need will be for more food. Which means agriculture. Which brings with it associated greenhouse gas emissions.
Humans are cultivating almost 40 percent of the land surface of the earth, and nearly a third of all the greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the planet comes from agriculture and forestry. Not all of this is due to the transport factor.
Nitrogen fertilizer, is one large source of emissions, and not only because it requires natural gas to produce. After it is spread on fields, a portion of it turns into a potent greenhouse gas, N2O that escapes into the atmosphere. Part of the nitrogen is also washed down to our rivers.
But by far the biggest contribution from agriculture is owing ot the forests replaced as land is cleared for farming. Recent changes in land use have accounted for some 25 percent of the carbon dioxide being emitted on the planet, and the bulk of those changes are driven by agriculture.
Blame it on population or blame it on the Green revolution, we have a big problem. The Green Revolution varieties were 'ecological weaklings', as an expert puts it. They had shallow roots, short stems and couldn’t compete with the weeds and needed lots of care. What is now needed is to develop varieties with deeper root systems that can survive on less water and fertilizer. Either conventional breeding or the newer genetic engineering may help, but everything comes with its own uncertainties!
This will be the biggest challenge of the coming decades - how to provide food sustainably, without damaging the environment or running out of resources? All else comes after food.
Humans are cultivating almost 40 percent of the land surface of the earth, and nearly a third of all the greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the planet comes from agriculture and forestry. Not all of this is due to the transport factor.
Nitrogen fertilizer, is one large source of emissions, and not only because it requires natural gas to produce. After it is spread on fields, a portion of it turns into a potent greenhouse gas, N2O that escapes into the atmosphere. Part of the nitrogen is also washed down to our rivers.
But by far the biggest contribution from agriculture is owing ot the forests replaced as land is cleared for farming. Recent changes in land use have accounted for some 25 percent of the carbon dioxide being emitted on the planet, and the bulk of those changes are driven by agriculture.
Blame it on population or blame it on the Green revolution, we have a big problem. The Green Revolution varieties were 'ecological weaklings', as an expert puts it. They had shallow roots, short stems and couldn’t compete with the weeds and needed lots of care. What is now needed is to develop varieties with deeper root systems that can survive on less water and fertilizer. Either conventional breeding or the newer genetic engineering may help, but everything comes with its own uncertainties!
This will be the biggest challenge of the coming decades - how to provide food sustainably, without damaging the environment or running out of resources? All else comes after food.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
How green was my home, once upon a time
Yet another Environment Day comes and goes. This time the theme was forests. There is no need to reiterate the role of forests in sustaining life on the planet. But let us see what is happening there.
While rate of forest loss is claimed to have reduced in this last decade, there is no place for complacency. Most surveys include plantations that can hardly compete with natural forests in the diversity they hold. In Indonesia, for instance, forests have been decimated for cultivation of palm oil crops, and an expected 70 percent increase in the demand for food worldwide by 2050 will add an enormous strain on the remaining tropical forests.
Estimates from the International Energy Agency (IEA)show a record rise in carbon emissions from energy last year. If that pattern were to continue, the world would be on course for at least 3C to 4C of warming, according to scientific advice.
Extreme weather events triggered by climate change threaten to disrupt crop production and drive up global food prices over the next decade, a top UN climate official says. According to climate projections, extreme heat waves will become more common and more intense.
Lack of land use planning in cities is leading to increasing carbon footprints. For instance in Bangalore, according to a study by Energy and Wetland Research Centre and the Centre for Ecological Sciences attached to the Indian Institute of Science, increasing use of electricity by high-rise buildings in Bangalore that rely on wrong architecture, lack of a proper public transport system, depleting green cover and mismanagement of the City’s waste is leading the city to a rising carbon footprint.
While open dumping of waste has contributed to the release of green house gases like methane which is 21 times more than GHG potential of CO2, decrease in vegetation has also led to the increase in carbon emission as the city’s vegetation has declined to 12 per cent (in 2010) from 71 per cent (in 1973).
The human race now consumes nearly 60 billion metric tons of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and plant materials, such as crop plants and trees for timber or paper. We need to remember this is limited even as our population continues to skyrocket unlimited.
If only we can learn to consume a little less, waste even lesser, things would be manageable. But are we willing to?
Friday, June 3, 2011
It's Code Green!
Here's how coders can join the save-energy campaign! If you can afford one error every 100,000 operations or so, you can already save a lot of energy. Up to even 90 percent!
A University of Washington project sees a role for programmers to reduce the energy appetite of the ones and zeroes in the code itself. Researchers have created a system, called EnerJ, that reduces energy consumption in simulations by up to 50 percent, and has the potential to cut energy by as much as 90 percent.
The basic idea is to take advantage of processes that can survive tiny errors that happen when, say, voltage is decreased or correctness checks are relaxed. Some examples of possible applications are streaming audio and video, games and real-time image recognition for augmented-reality applications on mobile devices.
Some experts believe we are approaching a limit on the number of transistors that can run on a single microchip. The so-called "dark silicon problem" says that as we boost computer speeds by cramming more transistors onto each chip, there may no longer be any way to supply enough power to the chip to run all the transistors.
The UW team's approach would work like a dimmer switch, letting some transistors run at a lower voltage. Approximate tasks could run on the dimmer regions of the chip. Today's computers could also use EnerJ with a purely software-based approach. For example, the computer could round off numbers or skip some extra accuracy checks on the approximate part of the code to save energy.
For sure, we need to cut the energy flab in every which way possible. In every walk of life, in every area.
A University of Washington project sees a role for programmers to reduce the energy appetite of the ones and zeroes in the code itself. Researchers have created a system, called EnerJ, that reduces energy consumption in simulations by up to 50 percent, and has the potential to cut energy by as much as 90 percent.
The basic idea is to take advantage of processes that can survive tiny errors that happen when, say, voltage is decreased or correctness checks are relaxed. Some examples of possible applications are streaming audio and video, games and real-time image recognition for augmented-reality applications on mobile devices.
Some experts believe we are approaching a limit on the number of transistors that can run on a single microchip. The so-called "dark silicon problem" says that as we boost computer speeds by cramming more transistors onto each chip, there may no longer be any way to supply enough power to the chip to run all the transistors.
The UW team's approach would work like a dimmer switch, letting some transistors run at a lower voltage. Approximate tasks could run on the dimmer regions of the chip. Today's computers could also use EnerJ with a purely software-based approach. For example, the computer could round off numbers or skip some extra accuracy checks on the approximate part of the code to save energy.
For sure, we need to cut the energy flab in every which way possible. In every walk of life, in every area.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Another warning gong sounded
More severe hurricanes are predicted to hit the US soon. Meanwhile, in China 2.3 million face the worst drought ever. Forests continue to disappear. Estimates from the International Energy Agency (IEA), this week have showed a record rise in carbon emissions from energy last year. No wonder the UN's climate chief has come out saying the world should agree to limit global warming to just 1.5C instead of the current target of 2C.
Last December at a UN climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, all countries reached a consensus on a 2C target, the first time the world's governments had set a target limit on climate change. A campaign for a 1.5C target by some developing countries was one of the factors that nearly wrecked the Copenhagen summit.
The UN chief says reaching 2C of warming would have a devastating impact, such as sea-level rises that could overwhelm low-lying islands and some coastal nations, and levels of warming in sub-Saharan Africa that could severely damage agriculture.
Current emissions pledges from both developed and developing countries represent only 60% of what is needed to stay below 2C. If the current pattern were to continue, the world would be on course for at least 3C to 4C of warming. Care to think of what disasters will follow?
Last December at a UN climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, all countries reached a consensus on a 2C target, the first time the world's governments had set a target limit on climate change. A campaign for a 1.5C target by some developing countries was one of the factors that nearly wrecked the Copenhagen summit.
The UN chief says reaching 2C of warming would have a devastating impact, such as sea-level rises that could overwhelm low-lying islands and some coastal nations, and levels of warming in sub-Saharan Africa that could severely damage agriculture.
Current emissions pledges from both developed and developing countries represent only 60% of what is needed to stay below 2C. If the current pattern were to continue, the world would be on course for at least 3C to 4C of warming. Care to think of what disasters will follow?
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Two steps back, four ahead
Two contrasting news this week. First, there is a developed nation that has decided to stop in its track and take a different road. Second, a developing nation takes a potentially damaging step to show what energy desperate states will do.
If Germany has taken the decision to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022, Brazil has decided to go with its massive mega dam.
Over the course of 12 years, Germany will phase out all of its 17 nuclear facilities, which currently provide 23 percent of its electricity. Chancellor Angela Merkel plans to compensate for the nuclear plant shutdowns by reducing electricity consumption by 10 percent by 2020 and, in the same period, more than double the share of renewable energies to 35 percent.
Renewables, mostly wind and solar, currently account for about 13 percent of Germany’s power. Depending on the wind and weather, they provide 17 to 27 GWs to the country’s grid. Will the shutdown affect the nation's growth? Maybe, considering some of its major products like cars and machines. Maybe not, considering it has many of the world's solar and wind companies!
Brazil meanwhile feels the 11,200-megawatt Belo Monte project, due to start producing electricity in 2015, is crucial to provide power to Brazil's fast-growing economy. It will be the world's third biggest hydroelectric dam after China's Three Gorges and Itaipu on the border of Brazil and Paraguay.
The 3.75-mile dam will displace 30,000 river dwellers, partially dry up a 62-mile stretch of the Xingu river, and flood large areas of forest and grass land.
In a world increasingly proving that decentralisation and clean energy is the solution, we have the positive and negative tales! Which will see more followers, any guesses?
If Germany has taken the decision to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022, Brazil has decided to go with its massive mega dam.
Over the course of 12 years, Germany will phase out all of its 17 nuclear facilities, which currently provide 23 percent of its electricity. Chancellor Angela Merkel plans to compensate for the nuclear plant shutdowns by reducing electricity consumption by 10 percent by 2020 and, in the same period, more than double the share of renewable energies to 35 percent.
Renewables, mostly wind and solar, currently account for about 13 percent of Germany’s power. Depending on the wind and weather, they provide 17 to 27 GWs to the country’s grid. Will the shutdown affect the nation's growth? Maybe, considering some of its major products like cars and machines. Maybe not, considering it has many of the world's solar and wind companies!
Brazil meanwhile feels the 11,200-megawatt Belo Monte project, due to start producing electricity in 2015, is crucial to provide power to Brazil's fast-growing economy. It will be the world's third biggest hydroelectric dam after China's Three Gorges and Itaipu on the border of Brazil and Paraguay.
The 3.75-mile dam will displace 30,000 river dwellers, partially dry up a 62-mile stretch of the Xingu river, and flood large areas of forest and grass land.
In a world increasingly proving that decentralisation and clean energy is the solution, we have the positive and negative tales! Which will see more followers, any guesses?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
