Energy Bill Moves Forward, Leaving Much Behind.

As U.S. politicians finalized changes for a compromised version of the energy bill that had passed the Senate, key positive aspects of the bill have been removed, much to my disappointment. The revised bill is more supportive of the production of fossil fuel production than its predecessor in its elimination of the plan to have 10 percent of U.S. electricity generated by renewable sources by 2020, as well as the proposed reduction of U.S. oil consumption by 1 million barrels per day. Ethanol use, which was pushed upwards in the Senate bill to expectations for production levels of 8 billion gallons, was reduced to 7.5 billion gallons in the new bill. I am disappointed to say the least, coming down from the highs I was feeling after the the Senate's version was passed that put renewables in the spotlight as a viable energy alternative and potential solution to the nation's energy prices, need for resource independence and the overall protection of our environment. I believe that Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota said it best is his statement, "We have a relentless addiction to oil. We need to address it."

Breaking Old Habits

I recently read a piece on how the renewable community is praising efforts by General Electric for their focus and investment towards a 'Green' future and how the opposite attention has been granted to Exxon for their $100 million commitment to alternative energy research. GE has earned their reaction as a company who has worked consistently towards improving the quality of life for consumers, so it is a short jump to the renewable energy arena for them in the minds of the 'average Joe’. Exxon, whose recent actions indicate that they are certainly contributing to a healthier future, appears to be having a tougher time gaining the trust of environmentalists. While I am not convinced that a leopard can change its spots, I do believe that every little bit helps; especially when that 'little bit' translates into millions of dollars towards research for the development of alternative solutions to meet the increasing energy demands. Coming down hard on fossil fuel companies when they are not participating in the alternative energy cause is one thing, but faulting them when they DO participate seems illogical and counterproductive.

Solar's Rise Leads Industry Into Silicon Shortages

After fighting for credibility, investor and consumer attention, environmental protection, and overall market growth, the solar industry faces another battle as it deals with the ongoing shortage of silicon. Solar is on the rise seeing an increase in demand last year for new installations between 25-30%. The majority of the recent boom in solar technology has taken place internationally, with German and Japan leading the charge with a combined rate of 69% of worlwide installations in 2004 with the United States coming in at 9%.

So where's the problem? The problem is in the lack of the industry's key ingredient -Silicon. The majority of today's solar PV market uses silicon as the base material but silicon is a shared material. Itis utilized by both the computer and the solar industry, with resulting supply constraints from shortages in the amount of sand and quartz being converted into silicon, forcing prices to continue to rise and supplies to run short. Compounding the problem is solar's use of second quality silicon, basically using what the computer industry rejects, therefore solar PV manufacturing is reliant upon another industry's waste stream. According to SolarBuzz, despite a 62% increase worlwide in installations during 2004, the worldwide supply position for silicon feedstock is insufficient to meet anticipated levels of demand.

Unfortunately for the industry, Solar PV companies have little choice but to wait out the current shortages and hope that silicon manufacturers expand their capacities sooner rather than later. Another potential solution is in the development and marketability of non-silicon based solar cells, bypassing the silicon dependencey altogether. One thing is for sure, the solar industry cannot continue along its current path, changes in either the process or supply stream need to evolve to meet the demands of this growing market to ensure that the solar industry's future remains bright.

Big Names, Even Bigger Promises

Have giant corporations developed a conscience? Has social responsibility and environmental awareness replaced the priorities of profits and growth for major industry players? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. There is good news however, as it appears that big business may finally be on the right track.

Two examples of this potential shift in corporate thinking are Ford and General Electric. In a recent article by Clint Wilder, Contributing Editor of Clean Edge Inc., a San Francisco based research and consulting firm, Is Ford Finally Coming Clean on Hybrids?, he recaps Ford’s message at the Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS) conference in Los Angeles. At the conference, Ford’s proclamation on being environmentally responsible was backed by figures for ramped up production of their hybrid and low emission vehicles. According to Mr. Wilder, “Ford plans to significantly ramp up Escape hybrid production from this year’s 20,000 units, with four more hybrid models coming in the next three years -- the Mercury Mariner, Mazda Tribute, Ford Fusion, and Mercury Milan. And it has a 100,000-unit production target for the partial-zero emissions (PZEV) Ford Focus.”

General Electric is also doing their part for the environment. In an article Seeing the light - Corporations drawn to socially responsible dollars by Thomas Kostigen, MarketWatch, G.E. plans to increase its investment in environmentally friendly technologies to $1.5 billion by 2010, which is double their current level. Is this all for the good of mankind? Not exactly, it of course has to make sense financially otherwise the practicality of a shift in corporate thinking is unlikely. Fortunately it appears that there is money in supporting the environment, as Kostigen reports, G.E. hopes to earn approximately $20 billion in sales by 2010 in environmentally cleaner products.

It would appear that going green has become trendy and with trends comes big smiles on the faces of corporate leaders, let’s just hope it doesn’t go out of style.

Reacting To The Push For Nuclear

As President Bush pushes for the development of nuclear reactors in the United States to help establish energy independence, many industry professionals remain uncertain. Costs of construction, an unattractive financial history, lack of a solution for nuclear waste, and the risk of nuclear accidents has many in doubt about the viability of the resurgence of the nuclear energy market. It does appear clear that if this industry is to get moving once again then it would need government assistance, which according to some should be in the form of risk insurance, financial aid and loan guarantees to help companies get through the lengthy and complicated building process.

The President's proposal has environmental groups on both sides of the nuclear argument up in arms. James Lovelock, one of the world's most prominent environmentalists, believes that the world is more threatened by risks brought about from global warming than the risks posed by nuclear power plants. While Lovelock would prefer to see renewable energy technologies such as wind and solar power take over, these cannot produce enough energy at this point in time to be realistic alternatives. Nuclear energy, according to Lovelock, is the best alternative to global warming problems caused by burning fuels such as coal and oil.

On the flip side, environmentalists such as Dave Kraft, a founding member of the Nuclear Energy Information Service, raises the point that current nuclear facilities are not able to effectively deal with exisiting threats associated with nuclear energy production. If threats still exist today, then it is difficult to have confidence that new entrants to this industry will be able to protect society from the risks associated with nuclear energy. Kraft cites plant safety violations, which range from accidental discharge of radioactive gas, to the Department of Energy's issuance of operating permits in spite of obvious structural deterioration, as current examples of the industry's inability to deal with nuclear production problems. To read more about both sides of this argument:
Click Here

Nuclear Industry's Perspective:
Click Here

A Big Moment for Small Business

The President spoke yesterday at the Small Business Administration's National Small Business Week's Conference and spent considerable time discussing the country's focus on reducing U.S. dependence on foreign energy. The President discussed the importance of technology in the creation and development of alternative energy sources such as hydrogen, ethanol, wind and solar; development of which will help to lead us away from our current fossil feul path. While he acknowledges the need to steer away from fossil fuels, he also reminded the audience of his request for $2 billion from congress over 10 years for his coal initiative, and his hope for oil and natural gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It is clear that we need to become energy independent, but in doing so we must ensure that the domestic landscape does not suffer as a result.

For Full Report of the President's Remarks Click Below:

U.S. Energy Bill Has Many Fuming

What better way to start this blog than with a discussion of the U.S. energy bill, which was recently approved by a vote in the House of Representatives 249-193. Three key issues stand out from this bill and have groups all over the United States involved in heated discussions.

Conservation groups are up in arms with the proposed authorization to allow oil drilling along the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. If the bill passes with this in place it would reverse the set of protections initiated in 1991 by George H.W. Bush and lift the moratorium on new ocean drilling which had been extended in 1998 by President Clinton through to 2012.

At a time when oil and gas companies are earning record profits, the U.S. energy bill grants producers of oil, gas, nuclear, coal and electric utilities approximately $8 billion in tax breaks and financial incentives.

The third controversial element of the bill is seen in the proposed protection for the makers of methyl tertiary-butly ether (MTBE) from lawsuits associated with water contamination leaving thousands of communities with MTBE contamination problems without recourse.

Whether or not the U.S. energy bill and its controversial provisions will pass Senate is yet to be seen, but if the uproar it has caused so far is any indication, I'd say significant revisions are forthcoming.

For Additional Information on the U.S. Energy Bill Review:
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/2531.html