The US is no longer the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases; but not because we’ve reduced them.  We’ve been overtaken by China.  India is now third in total emissions.  US emissions continued to increase by a record amount in 2010.

Putting a cap on greenhouse gases has not yet achieved consensus nationally.  However, ten states in the northeast are reporting success in their program which penalizes electricity generating companies that do not meet GHG reduction targets.  The initiative is also showing net economic benefits for the region.

The northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) has now completed its first three year period.  If electricity generators (over 25 megawatts) cannot meet the mandatory cap on GHG emissions they are required to purchase allowances.  This money is distributed back to participating states where it can be used to build energy efficiency strategies, renewable energy programs, provide help to low-income rate payers or other purposes.  The results have been 1) reduced GHG 2) higher electricity rates and 3) increased overall economic activity.  Greenhouse gas emissions are expected to be 10% lower by 2018 and rate payers are expected to be paying less because energy efficiency measures and renewable energy will reduce their need for service.  Electric generators will gradually lose revenues.  You can read an independent report about the Initiative here.

British Colombia and Australia are now taxing heat trapping molecules and the California cap and trade program will become effective in 2012.  These policies are expected to bolster total economic activity fostering energy efficiency and renewable energy businesses while carbon-based businesses gradually lose market share.

Surprisingly, when discussing global warming, some people are still putting their trust in a few politicians rather than the dedicated scientists who are actually studying the phenomenon.  Climate change deniers are like texting drivers or cigarette smokers who say the risks down the road “will never happen to me.”

Sam Kendall

I doubt that the congressman took the time to discuss this idea with public officials and businessmen in Highlands, Indian River and Hillsborough counties or with the researchers at U of F who are developing advanced fuel conversion technologies.  The ethanol rule is proving to be an example of how state government can stimulate innovation, entrepreneurialism and jobs without spending any money.  Dumping the rule now would be unconscionable.

In Vero Beach, an ethanol plant is scheduled to open in the summer of 2012 that will use organic waste material as a feedstock.  Company officials estimate that 380 construction and operation employees will be needed.  Two new cellulosic ethanol plants should be operational in Highlands County by 2013.  These plants will use varieties of energy cane, grasses and sorghum as feedstock.  In addition to construction and operation employees, local farmers will be growing the energy crops.  South Florida Community College is planning classes to train students either how to grow and harvest the feedstock or how to process it.  Pending permits, construction could start before the end of this year on a corn ethanol plant in Gibsonton.  The plant is said to be capable of producing 200 million gallons a year using a variety of corn not grown for human consumption.  Again, local farmers will get the contracts.

Many economists point to low demand as the reason the economy isn’t strengthening.  The Florida ethanol mandate creates demand in the energy sector or our economy, a significant market.  Furthermore, these ethanol entrepreneurs are beginning to move away from corn as the primary raw material.  Mr. Gaetz expressed concern that corn ethanol is now being imported into Florida from other states.  Growing a variety of ethanol feedstocks right here in Florida will provide new or additional markets for farmers and contribute to price stability.  Many renewable energy advocates agree that corn is not the ideal feedstock for ethanol.  However, unlike oil, when demand increases, you can grow more of it.

Without consistent government policy, businessmen are reluctant to make investment commitments. The Florida ethanol mandate has provided the confidence necessary to begin a new industry that can grow and provide major benefits for Florida.  If you dump the rule, businessmen will dump you.

Sam Kendall

Energy use in the key economic sectors; Outer continental shelf energy development off Florida; Electricity generation and new nuclear power plants in Florida; Energy efficiency and conservation in Florida; Alternative and renewable energy production and use in Florida.

The hearings are apparently open to the public, however a RSVP is required to attend.  Please email Natalie Joubert at njoubert@consumerenergyalliance.org or call her at 202-778-2103 to make your reservation.  The Hotel is located at 9939 Universal Boulevard, Orlando, FL 32819.

The Audubon notice did not include any explanation why an oil and gas lobbying group was chosen to host these hearings and make recommendations to the Senate President.  It would appear imperative that renewable energy, clean energy, energy efficiency and natural resource conservation advocates plan to attend, including those supporting solar energy, offshore wind energy, ocean energy, biomass, ethanol, biodiesel, electric vehicles including trains and that smart growth, professional planners should also attend.

Sam Kendall

So what does it mean when our political leaders release statements either reversing previous positions on global warming or stating new positions of disbelief?  Are they asking us to disregard the advice of our most respected scientists?  Should we believe predictions about climate change from people who have devoted their careers to science or people who have devoted their careers to public service?

Do carbon dioxide and methane molecules hold heat?  I have yet to hear or read anyone say they don’t.  Even the politicians won’t deny this.  Are we increasing the amount of these molecules in the atmosphere?  The International Energy Agency just released estimates of 2010 global carbon dioxide emissions: 30.6 billion tonnes.  This was the largest ever single year increase in CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels.  Carbon dioxide is entering the atmosphere at a faster rate than world economies are recovering from recession.

Should a plan to address global warming be part of the national discussion?  Or should we disregard the advice from the peer-reviewed experts at NAS and AAAS?

In the June, 2011 issue of Solar Today Magazine, Chuck Kutscher, past chair of the American Solar Energy Association, argues that global warming is the most urgent reason for moving rapidly to renewable energy.  It is more urgent than any jobs that might be created and more important than energy security.  “If we don’t openly accept the problem of climate change, we won’t deploy clean energy in the fastest and most efficient way needed to address it,” says Kutscher.

Watch the video lecture below where Mr. Kutscher explains how arguments against global warming do not look at the whole picture.  For example, some GW deniers say that some glaciers are actually expanding while others are retreating.  Kutscher says it’s true that a few glaciers are expanding.  But these glaciers are thinner.  He says the real test is whether glaciers are losing mass and they all are.  At the present rate, all glaciers will be gone from Glacier National Park in Montana by 2025.  A new study also attributes the thinning snow pack in the Rocky Mountains to global warming.  Over 70 million people in the western US depend on water from the rivers fed by this snow pack.  “It is a scientific fact that by suddenly releasing into the atmosphere carbon that nature took millions of years to sequester in the earth, we are dangerously and dramatically changing our planet,” Kutscher emphasizes.

Chuck Kutscher lecture on global warming (1 hr)

Loss of plant and animal species will also be part of changing climate conditions.  The warmer oceans are creating problems for animals such as the polar bears.  They depend on sea ice to hunt seals, breed and sometimes den.  But the water in the Arctic is warming rapidly and the bears habitat is melting out from under them.  However, it is also true that some species will increase their populations as ocean warming continues.  The temperature in the Atlantic Ocean is now much more hospitable for jellyfish.  This can be easily verified on your next trip to the beach.

Stockvault - Jellyfish

Sam Kendall

He set up a three-year base period of kilowatt hours purchased monthly from Progress Energy before the installation and compared that to his kwh purchases every month since the installation.  In the base period he purchased an average of 1,688 kwh monthly.  In the three years including ’08, ’09 and 2010 his monthly purchase averaged 373 kwh, about 78 percent less.  Go Figure!  During March, April and May of this year his Progress Energy bill was $34, $19 and $14 respectively.  The cooling load during the summer boosts up his usage and he says he averages $50 to $55 a month over the year.  Quite a savings from the days when he was paying over $200 a month!

In the beginning days of solar photovoltaic homes it was necessary to include electrical storage for nighttime and cloudy days.  This meant the cost of the system was higher because you had to include batteries.  When it became possible to interconnect a system into the local utility grid it was no longer necessary to buy batteries.  The grid acts as an electrical storage system.  Great savings, but still one significant drawback.  When the grid blacks out, say because of a hurricane, PV systems must shut down, too.  The reason is the electronics in your home could be damaged because the power of the sun fluctuates as it moves across the sky during the day.  Your home requires continuous, uninterrupted power.  Nevertheless, most PV owners today are satisfied to rely on the grid.

The Wagners made the additional investment to protect against grid failure.  By keeping eight, 12-volt batteries continuously charged by the solar system, they can keep the refrigerator, computer and some lights running in the event of an emergency.

It’s already been tested, David says, and it works great.  He was on the computer one evening and walked out into the next room to find most lights out and the grid down.  He said the switch to battery backup was instantaneous and he didn’t even know it had happened.  Another back-up option solar homeowners might try would be a diesel generator.  That would typically cost less than batteries and biodiesel is now available in some Florida locations.

David and Alice have incorporated more than energy savings into their lifestyle.  They have also reduced water consumption.  In the front yard they have cut back on the amount of grass that might need irrigation and they are planting a native plant/butterfly garden.  Once these plants become established they’ll survive on rainwater.

David says in the back of his mind he sees an expanded PV system and an electric car in the garage.  Stop by and let him tell you about that during the next Tour of Solar Homes.

Sam Kendall

As I mentioned, the utility scale projects out there are huge.  Consider that a 1000 megawatt concentrating solar thermal plant requires about 6000 acres for all the mirrors, tubes and boiler and a similar megawatt photovoltaic plant needs more than 12,000 acres of land to accommodate the big numbers of modestly powered solar arrays.  In contrast, a 1000 megawatt coal or nuclear plant takes up only 640 acres.  In California, they have a desert large enough to accommodate the big solar plants but environmentalists are objecting because specialized habitat for desert tortoises and other creatures is being disturbed.  Now utilities are applying to build on public lands.  Space for these solar plants is becoming a contentious issue.

Despite predictions by some climate scientists that droughts in Florida will be more severe in the future, we still have no deserts here.  Utilities will have to locate their solar farms on “green space.”  The FPL Desoto 25 megawatt PV plant is located on 180 acres.  If that plant would be expanded to just 300 megawatts, the size of a typical coal plant, the PV panels would cover 2160 acres of land.  An acre is about the size of a football field.  The plant is already fenced off to keep out all wildlife except birds.  Can we expect these  solar farms will ever be made compatible with biodiversity and wildlife?  If FPL decided to build a 300 megawatt PV plant where would they build it?  Will Florida utilities also apply to build on public lands when all their disturbed land is taken?

Solar installations distributed over a wide range of commercial and residential rooftops and backyards along with small power production facilities of 1-5 megawatts feeding the grid would provide balance to utility scale systems that might range from 25-40 MW constructed on already disturbed lands and in highway right-of-ways.  An energy plan that distributes power in this way would balance the need for clean energy with the need to retain green space on private and public lands.  It would avoid conflicts with expanding agricultural lands for bio crops.  But the legislation in Tallahassee getting the most attention now favors only utility scale solar installations.  Legislators and utility officials may eventually regret this approach if the Florida environmental community follows the lead of the California protesters.

   California Solar Farm

Sam Kendall

We started walking around the house and I noticed it was oriented east and west.  This indicated to me that her panels would be tilted up toward the south on the east side of the roof at the back.  First we saw Tom on a ladder cleaning out rain gutters and by his greeting we took it that he wasn’t happy about his assignment.  Then we were struck by the sight of the solar array, not on the roof, but right in the middle of the back yard!

Boni said with the east/west orientation it was just more practical to put the system on the ground.  By doing this she avoided tilting panels off the slope.  Ground mounting has the additional advantages of easier cleaning and if you ever need to replace the roof or shingles you won’t have to take down the PV system.  Of course, ground mounting isn’t practical in many locations.

This is a 4700 watt system with twenty panels.  You can see that it would make a good sail in a hurricane.  Her solar company made sure the array won’t lift off the ground by anchoring it to six foot deep concrete pylons.  A trench was dug to take the electricity around to the meter.  At the end of the first year there was a ninety dollar credit on the Progress Energy bill.  In other words, she and Tom are now living in a net zero energy home.  Congratulations!

Three companies offered bids on the system and it turned out that the company that had previously installed solar hot water got the contract.  Boni said she was fortunate last year to have a good income from teaching so she will be liable for enough tax to benefit from the thirty percent federal credit.  She was one of the unfortunate solar pioneers let down by the expiration of the state incentive funding.  Still, I don’t think the false promise from the state would have been enough to affect Boni’s determination to have solar.  She’s upset about the Gulf oil spill and the terrible nuclear accident in Japan and says events like these should get more people doing the right thing.  I hope she’s right.

Spanish Bayonet in the front yard.

Gopher Tortoise in the back yard.

Pat, whose son is presently living in Japan, is from Ontario, where a feed-in tariff is moving renewable energy into the marketplace.  She was in full agreement with Boni on the need to transition society away from the energy systems that threaten both human and environmental health.  But she thinks backyards are for gardens and wildlife and wondered whether the ground mount would meet aesthetic standards in some communities.  My opinion was just the opposite.  To me, the solar system was the focal point of the home; the central support system for a sustainable household.

Boni said in the future she may surround the system with some landscaping.  But right now, she’s satisfied to hose off the panels during spring cleaning and enjoy the free sunshine.

Sam Kendall

We can’t see the gases in the atmosphere.  It’s mostly inert nitrogen and thankfully the rest is oxygen.  There are some minor gases, too.  Some of these minor gases like carbon dioxide and methane have been there forever.  Others, like the gases DuPont made for refrigeration, are new.  Because these minor gases are so few, a change in their concentration can have a significant effect on total atmospheric function and balance.  For instance, it was discovered that the DuPont gases were causing a hole in the protective ozone layer.  That fact was of course denied by the company until independent scientists proved it to public officials.  Then DuPont made another refrigeration gas and this one holds heat.  Still, none of this can be seen by our eyes and so for some it’s hard to accept.

Just as large rocks and boulders can hold heat from the sun, any large molecule with three or more atoms can absorb infrared radiation emitted by the Earth.  And as your winter coat keeps you warm, the increasing concentration of these molecules won’t let the Earth cool itself and that destabilizes the atmosphere.  The molecules include: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfurhexoflouride (SF6), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).  At the present time, carbon dioxide is the dominant minor gas in the atmosphere and with methane, the two are increasing rapidly.

Through the last million years of cooling and warming, ice core samples show that atmospheric carbon dioxide rose and fell between the limits of 180 and 300 parts per million (ppm).  Back then it took at least a thousand years for a 30 ppm change to occur.  Today, measurements show that carbon dioxide has increased from 260 to nearly 390 ppm in the short period from 1850 to 2010, a mere 160 years.  Even more startling, an increase of 30 ppm has been observed in just the last 18 years.  With these rates of emissions, we are almost certain to pass 400 ppm in this decade and 500 ppm is clearly possible within fifty more years.

This year’s snow and freezes have been welcomed by global warming skeptics.  But as global warming matures we can expect to see unexplained bumps along the road.  The hard knocks that support the theory are water scarcity across Asia, Africa and Latin America while at the same time, global rainfall and fire-igniting, lightning strikes increase; record setting events such as tropical storm Faye crossing Florida four times; permanent drought spreading in Australia and the American Southwest; more jellyfish in warmer oceans; more weather-related disasters around the world; phytoplankton, the oxygen-producing foundation of the marine food web, dramatically reduced by acidic, warmer water.  And some climate scientists now say human-induced, higher Arctic temperatures and sea ice melt alter the northern jet stream forcing more cold air down toward the southern United States.

Carbon dioxide molecules have an extremely long life in the atmosphere.  They can outlive man by a hundred years and more.  That means the effects we’re watching now will still be here in fifty years.  And as humans continue to trash more CO2 into the thin atmosphere surrounding the Earth, we must wonder which forms of life won’t be able to survive.

Sam Kendall

The Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, 111th Congress, Final Report.

Thoughts of a Citizen, Scientist and Grandpa on Climate Change, Eric P. Grimsrud, iUniverse, Inc., 2009.

Was Big Oil manipulating prices?  Maybe.  But what we see is Big Oil now having to share this dwindling resource with a much larger audience, namely, the rest of the world.  In Saudi Arabia, formerly our largest supplier, the expanding middle class is buying and driving automobiles and feels entitled to burn their own oil.  We all know that China and India are trying to copy the American dream with a car for everyone.  Expanding middle classes in countries around the world are now competing for the oil the US depends on.  The result: higher gasoline and diesel prices in the US.  Another result, God forbid: drilling in Arctic waters.

The recession dropped oil to $35 a barrel in 2009, but it hasn’t taken long for the price to rebound.  After all, the American economy depends on oil for commerce.  Economic recovery equals oil consumption equals higher gasoline prices.  By December of 2010, oil had already passed $90 a barrel.  Rubin predicts that it will keep going up to probably $120 by this summer.  Can we have a double dip recession?  Of course, we can.  Can we do worse than that?  What will happen to the economy when oil reaches $150 per barrel?

The recovery from this stubborn downturn is taking longer because more people now understand the cause.  We have to break our bond to oil.  This means gearing up a brand new energy infrastructure.  It means building plants to produce sustainable biofuels and building cars capable of running on these fuels.  It means building electric cars and solar panel factories and wind turbine factories to provide clean and sustainable electricity to charge the EVs.  It means eliminating the inefficiencies in public transportation and building fast rail systems designed for people and not just freight.  Creating the new energy infrastructure is taking time and money, not to mention facing political and regulatory barriers.  We are all going to have to suffer some inconveniences and price swings as new fuels make  their way into the marketplace.  The work force will have to embrace retraining to move employment back to normal levels.

The good news is that new government standards for biofuel production have created new business opportunities.  According to an article in Florida Trend, the Energy and Security Act of 2007 means that 270 million gallons of ethanol is needed in Florida every year.  There are currently no plants producing here.  Scanning Florida newspapers over the last three months, I have found seventeen new companies planning, or already investing in, alternatives to oil.  Others may be out there.  Some of these will come on line in 2011.  Thanks to the determination of Congressman John Mica, Central Florida will soon have a commuter rail system and with Senator Bill Nelson the two successfully pressed for Tampa-Orlando, federal high speed rail money.  We citizens shouldn’t be tempted to go back to the old ways either.  Auto manufacturers are providing flex-fuel, electric, hybrid and higher efficiency vehicles and we all need to make the effort to stay out of the low-mileage, guzzlers of the past.  The time line for success of the transition to sustainable fuels depends on how willingly our society will support these new businesses and vehicles.  This is the beginning of the end of the volatile, oil dependency culture.

Sam Kendall

Alternative Fuel Companies

Southeastern Renewable Fuels, Hendry County, sweet sorghum to ethanol; Clean Fuel Lakeland, Polk County, biodiesel; Highlands Envirofuels, Highlands County, sweet sorghum to ethanol; Agri-Source Fuels, Dade City, biodiesel; Vercipia Ethanol, Highlands County, cellulosic ethanol; Vision/FL, Osceola County, sweet sorghum to ethanol; INEOS Bio, Vero Beach, ethanol from waste; Mad Dog Mulching, Tampa, corn ethanol; Algenol Biofuels, Lee County, algae to ethanol; U of F testing facility, Taylor County, cellulosic ethanol; Wise Gas, Fort Lauderdale, compressed natural gas; Coskata, Hendry County, sugar cane to ethanol; Smart Fuels, Lake County, biodiesel; Energy One, Lake Wales, corn ethanol; LS9, California advanced fuel company with demonstration facility in Florida; Alternative Fuels America, Gainesville, biodiesel; Integrated Energy Partners, Santa Rosa County, biodiesel.

Jeff Rubin BLOG

Florida Trend: Profile on Energy in Florida

The concept of Renewable Energy Certificates is not easy to grasp because it is a monetary value representing the intangible, “good” characteristics of solar energy.  How do you put a price on that?  Photovoltaic (PV) is still the highest priced clean energy and coal is still the lowest priced dirty energy.  What is the value of eliminating sulfur dioxide and heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the atmosphere?  The New Jersey SREC attempts to “monetize” the clean aspects of solar.  Every time a registered PV system produces 1,000 kilowatt-hours (one megawatt-hour) of electricity it is automatically awarded one SREC.  Because it is based on actual production of electricity rather than the rated capacity number of a system, it is also called a production subsidy.

First the state had to mandate a renewable energy standard (RES), a requirement that utilities include renewable energy as some percentage of their supply.  New Jersey’s legislators voted to require each utility to provide 22.5% renewable energy by 2021.  This clean energy may come from a variety of sources such as wind power, hydropower, biomass and PV.  This is the reason a wind farm developer has applied for permits to install hundreds of megawatt-sized turbines off Atlantic City’s shore.

In order to insure that the business of PV manufacturing and installation becomes part of the NJ economy, the state dedicated a percentage of the RES just to solar PV.  They said that solar PV must provide 2.12% of the RES.  If a utility fails to meet this solar “carve-out” (e.g. 2.12%), then it must purchase SRECs.  Otherwise, the utility must pay a fine.  They softened the word fine by calling it a “Solar Alternative Compliance Payment” (SACP).

Let’s say the SACP (fine) is $600.  If the utility doesn’t have enough kilowatt-hours of PV production to meet the solar carve-out, it will have to buy SRECs to make up the difference.  If there are SRECs available for purchase in the online market, they may be cheaper.  The utility may be able to buy SRECs for only $500.  SRECs won’t ever be sold for more than the price of an SACP.  If there are a lot of SRECs the price may be less than $500.  The owner of a registered SREC is allowed to sell every 1,000 kilowatt-hours produced for a period up to 15 years.

SRECs won’t pay the entire cost of a solar system, but they certainly are helping many homeowners and businesspeople in NJ transition to clean energy right on their own rooftops.  Ohio, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia (DC) also have SREC programs.  Florida policy-makers should look closely at the NJ program for adaptation in this state.

Next Era Energy (FPL) is to be congratulated for their utility-scale solar facilities, but ratepayers have been helping fund their big projects.  Unfortunately, other utilities in the state have not followed their lead in building solar.  A Florida SREC program could be designed to balance utility solar projects with private solar installations.  A competition between centralized solar power stations owned by utilities versus utility-subsidized, distributed generation owned by homeowners and businesses, would accelerate the growth of solar industry in Florida, creating more jobs and quieting the sucking sound of money leaving the state, chasing coal deposits.  Why should a smaller state with only moderate solar insolation trump the sunshine state?

Sam Kendall

Interview with Brad Bowery, CEO SRECtrade

NJ SREC Program – DSIRE

NJ Cleanenergy.com