[geo] more on Arpa-E rejection letters
The tail end of this post discusses the Arpa-E rejection letters. I'll be posting an example on Monday. http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/how-many-ds-in-obamas-energy-pledge/ -- Andrew C. Revkin The New York Times / Environment 620 Eighth Ave., NY, NY 10018 Tel: 212-556-7326 Mob: 914-441-5556 Fax: 509-357-0965 http://www.nytimes.com/revkin --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups geoengineering group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[geo] Re: more on Arpa-E rejection letters
Coming from energy financing background, Gene's opinion is not well informed to the perspectives of fund managers, lenders and investors who strike for cautious investments and lending. As the recession drags on, all the technology based things and novelty products are off the radar and the investments and lending are now redirected towards conservative industries and technologies. One of the ways suggested is the quantitative easing to raise funds in technology projects and renewables. At the moment UK government is analysed as follows: GOVERNMENT FINDS ITSELF ALL AT SEA ON WIND POWER Minister's strategy - Vision of a vibrant industry looks plausible but may be little more than an aspiration, says Ed Crooks. As ministers have sounded the fanfare for hundreds of thousands of green jobs the demise of the Vestas wind turbine plant on the Isle of Wight has provided a mocking counterpoint. The closure of one factory with the loss of 600 jobs does not in itself say much about the success or failure of the government strategy. However, the decision by Vestas is an uncomfortable reminder that the vision of a vibrant industry growing up to meet the challenge of curring carbon dioxide emissions for Britain and the world is little more than an aspiration. ... The government's definition of green jobs is drawn very wide to catch as many occupations as possible, from dustmen to clean-tech venture capitalists. Manufacturing jobs such as the ones at Vestas are among the ones that are likely to strengthen the economy. ... Britain's emphasis on off-shore wind power - forced on the nation by the difficulty of securing planning permission for wind farms on land - may also be a handicap. The Financial Times, Thursday, 30. July 2009, p. 3. From the investor's point of view the most important point for a successful wind farm is the location, location, location... A good wind farm must have the following positive characteristics: (1.) sufficient strong winds, (2.) proximity of electric grid, (3.) relatively close to consumers (4.) easy servicing and maintenance access - rapid to access turbines and in all weather conditions, especially in winter and storms when electricity demand surges up (5.) low supportive infrastructure required, (6.) high voltage aerial cables, not underground or subsea cables. These are vital for the wind farms to produce the cheap green electricity that public expects and requires at affordable cost. They are not built for specification of engineers' complex toys. Thus, electricity is produced close to the point of consumption, not off-shore as to provide cheap and internationally competitive and affordable electricity for industry and consumers which does not require large infrastructure beside turbine, transmission losses, or other capital and maintenance requirement beside wind turbines. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NONE OF THIS CRITERIA IS MET BY OFF-SHORE TURBINES LOCATED FAR AWAY FROM COASTS. SUCH ELECTRICITY CAN NEVER BECOME THE CHOICE OF CONSUMER AND GOVERNMENT EITHER SUBSIDISES UNNECESSARILY EXPENSIVE ELECTRICITY FROM OFF-SHORE INSTALLATIONS OR PROVIDES THE REQUIRED FUNDING AND BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT FOR THE WIND FARMS TO PRODUCE ELECTRICITY NEAR COMMUNITIES WHERE ELECTRICITY IS USED. FOR THIS REASON, PRIVATE SECTOR IS UNABLE TO PROVIDE SOLUTION WITHOUT DEPLOYMENT MONIES HERE IN THE UK, AS WELL AS IN THE US AS CITED. I AM NOT SAYING ALL IS DONE BY GOVERNMENTS, BUT LIKE IN CASE OF VESTAS, IF PRIVATE SECTOR LACKS FUNDS, THE GOVERNMENT MUST STEP IN IF WE EVER WISH TO KEEP UP WITH THE TARGETS TO PRODUCE RENEWABLE ENERGY HERE AND ALSO SET UP A PROVEN AND VALID EXAMPLE FOR THE DEVELOPING WORLD WHICH HAS TO DECIDE BETWEEN EITHER COAL (i.e. INDIA, CHINA, INDONESIA) OR NUCLEAR (i.e. BRAZIL, IRAN, PAKISTAN). The sales pitch for the low carbon industrial strategy is plausible, The transition to an economy with much lower carbon dioxide emissions - the official commitment is a 34 percent reduction by 2020 and an 80 per cent cut by 2050 - will demand structural change. Many old jobs will disappear, and new ones will be created. Ibid. The Financial Times, Thursday, 30. July 2009, p. 3. As per above the Vesta's climate campaign is probably one of the best all-time climate campaigns highlighting misleading conceptual proclamations by the UK government and actual ground work taking us to achieve that goal by 2020. I believe the government goal should be 60% private / 40% public investment in renewable energy to keep both sectors growing their size at optimum rate given the current financial market conditions. At no time goverment proportion should fall below 1/3 as then the cyclical variations kick in and these start constraining the necessary growth of wind energy industry. Any argument? OK. Thus the deployment at certain war economy gearing is inevitable and of utmost necessity for goal
[geo] Re: Ceiling the Deal
Regarding the solar gain issue, in the northern states, the impact of solar heating during the winter is less due to a combination of sun angle and cloud cover. In the most extreme example for the U.S., the Fairbanks, Alaska metro area (APX pop. 100,000) would not benefit at all from white or lighter covered roofs or suffer any loss in heating from having them even though all the heating and AC is supplied via fossil energy. I'm not sure if there is any AC in Fairbanks, although temperatures do approach 90 degrees F in July sometimes. Residents of Seattle and parts of Oregon also saw temperatures over 100 degrees F this past week, but this is very unusual and you are correct, few homes in that part of the U.S. have AC. They just don't need it very often. I think the same analysis applies to Britain, especially with the large number of cloudy days. The article also makes an implied distinction between cities like NYC and Chicago and rural areas or cities like Minneapolis that get extremely cold in the winter, such cities although far enough north to require some additional heating during the winter if white roofs are used, are heat islands during the summer, less so this year due to the wayward path of the Polar Jet Stream. So applications of the white roof for commercial buildings strategy have to take into account a number of variables. Note also that the CO2 offsets were done on a state-by-state basis, so states like Washington and Oregon, which get much of their electricity from hydroelectric power would benefit less than states like New York and Pennsylvania which are more dependent on coal and natural gas. It would be interesting to see the same figure done including residential roofs and paved surfaces. I happened to go by the Sam's Club I mentioned in the article comments last Friday and noticed that the roof is now a gray color, somewhat worse than in March. Since most commercial building roofs are flat, the only way they can maintain their original white color or something close to it is to have them cleaned periodically. Residential roofs also lose some of the original lightness (not whiteness, since they are generally not white as the article notes), but do benefit from the rain and wind washing or blowing away dirt. I would like to see how many of the 3000 Sam's Club's roofs are really still white. If not, then their white roof program is a public relations success, but a global warming failure and the people in charge of calculating the energy savings need to roll back the numbers. - Original Message - From: Andrew Lockley To: agask...@nc.rr.com Cc: geoengineering@googlegroups.com Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 12:09 PM Subject: Re: [geo] Ceiling the Deal I'm confused. The diagram includes chilly Northern states. Don't they need all the solar gain they can get to cut winter heating bills? I can't imagine lots of people in Seattle having aircon. In Britain hardly any homes have it, and most commercial buildings don't either. A 2009/7/30 Alvia Gaskill agask...@nc.rr.com http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/science/earth/30degrees.html?_r=1 J. Emilio Flores for The New York Times A Wal-Mart store in Chino, Calif., has both a cool roof and solar panels to cut its energy use. Jim Wilson/The New York Times A white roof has helped cool Jon Waldrep’s Sacramento home By Degrees A Cool Shield This is one in a series of articles about stopgap measures that could limit global warming. July 30, 2009 By Degrees White Roofs Catch On as Energy Cost Cutters By FELICITY BARRINGER SAN FRANCISCO — Returning to their ranch-style house in Sacramento after a long summer workday, Jon and Kim Waldrep were routinely met by a wall of heat. “We’d come home in the summer, and the house would be 115 degrees, stifling,” said Mr. Waldrep, a regional manager for a national company. He or his wife would race to the thermostat and turn on the air-conditioning as their four small children, just picked up from day care, awaited relief. All that changed last month. “Now we come home on days when it’s over 100 degrees outside, and the house is at 80 degrees,” Mr. Waldrep said. Their solution was a new roof: a shiny plasticized white covering that experts say is not only an energy saver but also a way to help cool the planet. [But what's it going to look like 5 years from now? AG] Relying on the centuries-old principle that white objects absorb less heat than dark ones, homeowners like the Waldreps are in the vanguard of a movement embracing “cool roofs” as one of the most affordable weapons against climate change. [Exaggeration.This will affect climate change only on the margins. AG] Studies show that white roofs reduce air-conditioning costs by 20 percent or more in hot, sunny weather. Lower energy consumption
[geo] Re: The Storm
This movie turned out to be a two parter, the second one tonight at 9pm on NBC. Suffice to say the first one is two hours of my life I'm never going to get back and if you watched it on my recommendation, we both lost. Nevertheless, due to its relevance to geoengineering governance issues, I am prepared to sacrifice another 120 mins and finish the job. I'll have a wrap up on it and the History Channel program on Weather Warfare that aired recently, since they basically traverse the same animal waste covered ground. I even took notes during the movie to bring you up to date. The things I do for science! The Storm, made for $5 million or about 2 episodes of Discovery Project Earth which continues to air repeatedly on both the Science and Planet Green Channels along with Dan Kammen's Ecopolis, only slightly less frequently than Martin Bashir's interview with Michael Jackson on MSNBC, combines the ridiculous HAARP conspiracy theory with the past history or distorted history of weather manipulation by the military. Operation Rainbow is a secret project funded by the Pentagon in which a private company run by Mr. Tyrrell has developed some sort of energy beam that is used to alter weather on a local basis. The military brass want to use it as a tactical weapon, similar to the goals of the Owning the Weather concept paper the U.S. government considered for a while several years ago. Ground based satellite like dishes send pulses of energy (what kind?) into the ionosphere where they are bounced off satellites and sent back to the surface. This is somehow supposed to change the weather, but is never explained (because it can't!). In the initial test of the technology, the weather makers, two male geeks and an obnoxious woman cause it to rain in the Sudan, much to the delight of the starving refugees in Darfur, but the side effect is snow in the Mojave Desert. They then attempt to redirect the intensity and track of hurricane Edna (an all purpose technology it seems). But the hurricane test goes badly and the energy from the angry ionosphere leaks back to the surface, zapping the control center, killing some of the staff. The hurricane actually strengthens and heads towards Miami. It also starts raining in Los Angeles and keeps on raining, reminiscent of Blade Runner. The creator of the out of control androids in that film was also named Tyrrell. The Cable News Service, CNS whose logo looks suspiciously like that of CNN, learns of the incident and begins an investigation. They initially get nowhere with the staff, who are completely subservient to their evil corporate master, Mr. Tyrrell, played woodenly by Treat Williams. One of the weather maker geeks finally has an epiphany over the unintended consequences of the technology and quits, but his associate stays on and attempts to change the track of Edna. Meanwhile, the geek who quit (hereafter, the Geek) spills the beans to a CNS reporter, but her apartment has been bugged by Tyrrell and a hit team he sends kill the reporter and her boss and try to frame the Geek, who goes on the run, but is captured by the police. The Pentagon, at the request of Tyrrell orders him to be turned over to the FBI, against the wishes of a female detective who has been investigating the deaths at the control center. The effort to move the storm is unsuccessful and the attempt has created even more changes in weather around the globe with wild temperature swings of over 100 degrees in the U.S. and elsewhere. The explanation? Residual energy fields. In spite of all the destruction associated with the weather altering technology, the Pentagon is still interested in using it. They want a demonstration in Afghanistan. The General in charge, played ceramically (that's worse than wooden)by JAG's David James Elliott says the Joint Chiefs need more proof before they will fully fund Operation Rainbow. Both Tyrrell and the General dismiss the weather problems as unrelated to the technology. The energy beam is then used to create a dust storm outside of Kabul, to foil the evil Taliban who are shown driving around in their standard issue worn out Toyota pickup trucks (no cash for clunkers in SW Asia, apparently). A hurricane now forms off the coast of Peru as the perplexed head of the National Weather Bureau ponders what is causing all of the wacky weather. He also takes off from work during the crisis to try to reconnect with his ex- girlfriend, who is also a bartender. Before the Geek can be handed over to the FBI, military intelligence machine guns all of the FBI agents to death and takes him to a warehouse for questioning. If you ever wondered what all those warehouses were for, it's so people can be taken there for questioning. The electromagnetic interference caused by the weather weapon gets worse and the atmosphere can't be stabilized. Tyrrell tells the team to stop the Peru hurricane in order to
