Category Archives: solar

The world’s energy report card just came out. We failed 3 subjects.

The world just got its energy report card … and at best, its grades are mixed.

Every year, the International Energy Agency releases a mammoth report detailing the world’s progress toward providing clean energy to all. This year’s report is 810 pages long, but here’s the take-home message: We’re improving in two areas (solar and offshore wind installation), but failing three subjects (transportation, equity, and overall progress).

PASS:

Solar photovoltaic panels

Solar power is “growing very strongly,” said IEA’s Executive Director Fatih Birol. With more government support that growth could accelerate: Birol pointed out that Africa generates less than 1 percent of the world’s solar power while boasting 40 percent of its solar potential. The IEA is projecting big increases in solar panels on the African continent. “I think energy developments in Africa are going to surprise many of the pessimists,” he said.

According to IEA data, solar capacity has already surpassed nuclear, and the agency projects that it will rapidly overtake wind, hydroelectric, coal, and gas. However, it’s important to remember that capacity is the amount of electricity any of these power sources could produce when running full out — something solar panels can only do in full sunlight.

Offshore wind

There’s a trillion-dollar industry waiting to be created with floating deep-sea platforms and skyscraper-sized turbines, according to the IEA. Ocean wind could easily supply all the world’s electricity, if price were no object. Realistic expense assumptions, however, still suggest rapid growth: Offshore wind turbines generate less than 1 percent of the world’s electricity, but cost reductions could allow that number to grow to more than 5 percent in the next 20 years.

Birol likened the potential to improvements in technology that had allowed fracking and solar prices to plummet. “Offshore wind has the potential to join their ranks in terms of steep cost reduction,” Birol said.

FAIL:

Transportation

The world is reducing emissions from cars by improving gas mileage and introducing electric vehicles. But those gains were swamped by an old villain, which Birol introduced ironically: “Ladies and gentlemen, our report shows that the star of the transformation in the automotive industry wasn’t electric cars, it was SUVs,” he said. Last month, the IEA reported that since 2010, the number of SUVs on the road has increased by 35 million — and the vehicle class is contributing more to climate change today than heavy industry.

Equity

Some 850 million people worldwide don’t have electricity, and many more — 2.6 billion — still rely on wood and dung for cooking, with disastrous consequences for both health and the environment. From Africa to South Asia, dozens of countries are doing important work to give people access to modern energy sources.

But to be successful in this mission, said Laura Cozzi, chief energy modeler for the IEA, “They will need cement, they will need steel, they will need electricity.” Cozzi said renewable energy is the most important lever in expanding access to electricity in Africa, but the world will also need to burn more fossil fuels to get the job done.

Overall progress

Even if countries fulfill their big energy ambitions, which IEA calls the world’s “stated policies,” it won’t be enough to drive down emissions and keep average global temperatures from warming more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). “For the moment, the momentum behind clean energy technologies is not enough to offset the effects of an expanding global economy and growing population,” said Tim Gould head of the World Energy Outlook at the IEA.

However, the IEA identified a suite of policies that could slow climate change: They call it the “sustainable development scenario.” (See the graph above.) Getting there is a tall order, requiring a doubling of the rate at which we’re building renewables while cranking up the pressure on energy efficiency, passing policies to force behavior change, and building massive carbon capture and sequestration plants.

Original link:  

The world’s energy report card just came out. We failed 3 subjects.

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The world’s energy report card just came out. We failed 3 subjects.

Sunlight-Tracking Polymer, Inspired by Sunflowers, Could Maximize Solar Power

The SunBOTS bend toward light source and could help solar cells capture more direct sunlight all day long

Link to original: 

Sunlight-Tracking Polymer, Inspired by Sunflowers, Could Maximize Solar Power

Posted in FF, GE, Smith's, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on Sunlight-Tracking Polymer, Inspired by Sunflowers, Could Maximize Solar Power

A Beginner’s Guide to Constructing the Universe – Michael S. Schneider

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

A Beginner’s Guide to Constructing the Universe

The Mathematical Archetypes of Nature, Art, and Science

Michael S. Schneider

Genre: Physics

Price: $1.99

Publish Date: April 1, 2014

Publisher: Harper

Seller: HARPERCOLLINS PUBLISHERS


The Universe May Be a Mystery, But It's No Secret Michael Schneider leads us on a spectacular, lavishly illustrated journey along the numbers one through ten to explore the mathematical principles made visible in flowers, shells, crystals, plants, and the human body, expressed in the symbolic language of folk sayings and fairy tales, myth and religion, art and architecture. This is a new view of mathematics, not the one we learned at school but a comprehensive guide to the patterns that recur through the universe and underlie human affairs. A Beginner's Guide to Constructing, the Universe shows you: Why cans, pizza, and manhole covers are round.Why one and two weren't considered numbers by the ancient Greeks. Why squares show up so often in goddess art and board games. What property makes the spiral the most widespread shape in nature, from embryos and hair curls to hurricanes and galaxies. How the human body shares the design of a bean plant and the solar system. How a snowflake is like Stonehenge, and a beehive like a calendar. How our ten fingers hold the secrets of both a lobster and a cathedral. And much more.

Continue reading here:  

A Beginner’s Guide to Constructing the Universe – Michael S. Schneider

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Beginner’s Guide to Constructing the Universe – Michael S. Schneider

Here’s why Twitter’s political ad ban gives Big Oil a free pass

If you’re fortunate enough not to have a Twitter account, then you might have missed the news that the website’s CEO, Jack Dorsey, took the unprecedented step of banning political ads last week. In a Twitter thread (what else?), Dorsey explained the logic behind the move, which sets the social network apart from major competitors like Facebook, which has not banned much of anything, including neo-Nazis, in the name of “free speech.” “We believe political message reach should be earned, not bought,” he wrote.

Twitter’s decision, which will take effect on November 22, was hailed as a win for democracy and civic discourse. In a tweet, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York called the move a “good call,” adding, “if a company cannot or does not wish to run basic fact-checking on paid political advertising, then they should not run paid political ads at all.”

But there’s a significant downside to Twitter’s decision. Ads that “advocate for or against legislative issues of national importance,” like immigration, health care, and, yes, climate change, are on the chopping block. And when it comes to the issue of climate change, Twitter’s new policy gives oil and gas companies a leg up, and the folks who want to regulate those companies a kneecapping.

In recent years, Big Oil has finally wiped the smog off its glasses and read the writing on the wall: the public knows that a shortlist of multinational corporations are responsible for the lion’s share of the world’s planet-heating emissions. So those corporations shifted tactics lickity-split. Instead of denying that climate change exists, fossil fuel companies want you, and government regulators, to think that they’ve changed their oily ways. ExxonMobil says it’s investing heavily in developing a clean biofuel from algae. Shell produced several climate change manifestos with hopeful titles like “the Sky scenario” that it says have the potential to stop climate change. Chevron is saving turtles in the Philippines.

The problem is that these great initiatives are just a tiny sliver of what Big Oil actually does, which is — you guessed it! — dig up and sell oil. Algae biofuel is Exxon’s hobby (read: marketing ploy), oil is its day job. But it wants you, the consumer, to think that its top scientists are in the lab day and night working tirelessly to save the planet. Meanwhile, in Congress, these same companies are spending hundreds of millions every year to lobby against any kind of climate regulation that will hurt their bottom lines.

Twitter’s new policy allows ExxonMobil to keep filling up your newsfeed with ads about a biofuel that isn’t going to be commercially viable for at least another decade. But it bans a politician from buying ad space to tell you that, if elected, they plan to go after Big Oil.

Exxon’s efforts may not appear overtly political, but they absolutely are. Trying to hoodwink voters and regulators so that the government doesn’t hold polluters accountable is fundamentally at odds with Dorsey’s vision of earning reach instead of buying it. Has Big Oil earned the right to clog our newsfeeds with pictures of green gunk that’s ostensibly going to save the earth? Certainly not.

Twitter has put us in a tough spot. Yes, it’s good that, pretty soon, politicians and dark-money-fueled super-PACs won’t be able to force whatever nonsense they want onto the public. But the new ban will also tilt the online playing field in favor of companies that want to keep burning fossil fuels and against the politicians and groups that want to legislate them out of existence. Which is all to say that regulating civic discourse on social media is a gargantuan task and one that’s nearly impossible to do right. If you came here looking for an answer to this ethical dilemma, I’m sorry to disappoint. Go tweet @jack.

Continued here: 

Here’s why Twitter’s political ad ban gives Big Oil a free pass

Posted in Accent, alo, Casio, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Pines, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s why Twitter’s political ad ban gives Big Oil a free pass

These hacked streets signs are the scariest thing you’ll see this Halloween

Gather ‘round, monsters, goblins, and ghouls. It’s Halloween, and we have spooky news from one of the scariest places in the world (if you’re terrified of tall buildings, pretty people, and loneliness).

A haunted hacker has been taking over New York City Department of Transportation electronic road signs to send messages to New Yorkers from the other side. The first supernatural transmissions arrived earlier this month and included such eerily true statements as “cars are death machines” and “cars melt glaciers.”

Now, for Halloween, the trickster has some new messages for commuters: “Forget poison candy” / “cars are the real danger.”

The sprite responsible for these spine-chilling messages has been dubbed Bikesy — the NYC bike-advocate version of Banksy (don’t yell at me, I didn’t come up with the nickname). Bikesy also left a “Happy Halloween” message on Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn this morning, along with a warning: “Don’t be creepy” / “Leave the car at home.”

OK, fine. Whoever is hacking into road signs is most likely a transportation nerd with tech skills and some free time, not a tormented spirit from beyond. But you know what is super scary? Cars!

Some 40,000 Americans died in car crashes last year, according to an estimate by the National Safety Council. Cars killed 111 New Yorkers in the first six months of 2019 alone. That means vehicles are way deadlier than guns, which killed 61 people in the city during the same period, according to NYPD data. So far this year, 25 cyclists have been killed by vehicles in the Big Apple, more than double the number of cyclists that were killed by cars in the entirety of 2018.

And Halloween is a particularly dangerous time for people trying to share the street with cars. Research shows it’s the deadliest day of the year for child pedestrians, who are three times more likely to be killed by a car on this day. For kids between 4 and 8 years old, the risk is 10 times higher. Not to mention the fact that gas-powered vehicles are a major contributor to climate change and air pollution, both of which come with their own major health risks.

How’s that for a scary story? The moral is clear: if you don’t want to be cursed for all eternity, listen to Bikesy and leave the car at home tonight.

Continued here – 

These hacked streets signs are the scariest thing you’ll see this Halloween

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These hacked streets signs are the scariest thing you’ll see this Halloween

New study helps regions find their renewable energy soul mates

The climate crisis is an intricate and multifaceted problem, but by now most of us understand the essence of the thing: emissions bad, renewables good. A new study from Harvard’s Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment puts a fresh twist on that well-worn equation. Turns out, it’s not enough to grab a handful of renewable energy projects from a clean energy grab-bag and scatter them across the United States like wildflower seeds. Where you put new renewable energy infrastructure is even more important than what kind of renewable you’re dealing with.

By looking at a number of variables in 10 regions across the U.S. and the costs and operational requirements of three types of renewables — utility-scale solar, rooftop solar, and wind power — the study’s authors were able to figure out which region stands to gain the most from which kind of renewable. Kind of like OkCupid but for geography and renewable energy compatibility. The researchers took into account the amount of existing dirty fossil fuel developments in those regions, because implementing renewable energy would replace those power plants and result in more emissions reductions. Here’s what they found:

The Upper Midwest, Lower Midwest, Rocky Mountains, Northwest, and Great Lakes regions stand to experience the greatest reductions in CO2 by replacing coal with clean energy. In terms of public health, the Great Lakes and Upper Midwest regions, followed by the Lower Midwest, saw the greatest hypothetical benefits.
In the Upper Midwest, the economic and health benefits of installing 3,000 megawatts of wind energy top $2.2 trillion, the highest out of any region.
Solar is highly compatible with the Great Lakes and Mid-Atlantic regions, where it would produce $113 of economic and health benefit per megawatt-hour of electricity produced.
California and the Southwest generally stand to gain the least from renewables, in part because those regions don’t have a lot of dirty fossil fuels to displace.
Northeasterners, don’t fret! Some oil can be displaced by renewables in that region, and the Northeast also could gain some powerful public health benefits per ton of CO2 displaced, since it’s so densely populated.

Something that surprised the study’s lead author, Jonathan Buonocore, was that the benefits of renewables outweigh the benefits of carbon capture and sequestration. That technology — which is still in development — has been touted as something of a hail Mary for the fossil fuel industry, as it can be used in tandem with dirty energy developments to bring down emissions. But installing renewables literally anywhere in the country was more cost-effective than doing direct air carbon capture, Buonocore told Grist. Installing carbon capture technology on a coal plant, where it can stash away carbon before it’s released into the atmosphere, was about as cost-effective as installing renewables in many places in the U.S. — but that’s only when you’re comparing purely economic benefits. “When you include health, that changes dramatically,” he said. “For a lot of these different regions, if you include health the renewables look much more cost effective than installing carbon capture and coal.”

Buonocore hopes the study will help policymakers make informed decisions about where to put new energy developments, and to take health into account more often. “This is really important to be ideally included in evaluations of all climate policies,” he said. You hear that, politicians? A public health analysis a day keeps the climate catastrophe away.

Original article:  

New study helps regions find their renewable energy soul mates

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, GE, LG, Northeastern, ONA, PUR, solar, Thermos, Uncategorized, wind energy, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on New study helps regions find their renewable energy soul mates

Going Green Shouldn’t Cost Green: 5 Business-Savvy Strategies

Share this idea!

Pin0
Facebook0

0shares

No longer is climate change a fringe issue. These days, it’s a business one. Worldwide, eight in 10 consumers say it’s “extremely” or “very” important that companies implement programs to help the environment. Like it or not, today’s consumers expect businesses to lead the charge on environmental causes.

Fortunately, your company doesn’t have to choose between saving money and saving the Earth. In addition to the marketing boost that environmental action might net you, many of the best ways to protect the planet also benefit your user experience, your recruiting game, and your operations budget.

Simple Business-Savvy Sustainability

1. Digitize to make consumer data more accessible.

With respect to sustainability and your user experience, digital account access is the table stakes. Whether you’re a hospital, bank, or retail brand, there’s no reason you should prefer paper billing. Not only does online management minimize printing and disposal costs, it reduces waste and the CO2 impact of mail delivery.

What’s the step-up strategy? Strengthen your user experience by turning write-in information into online tools.

Until recently, for example, consumers who wanted to know their auto insurance score had to request mailed copies from researchers like Lexis Nexis. By letting consumers look up their score for free online auto insurance, companies are differentiating themselves while doing good for the environment.

2. Incentivize working from home.

If you’re looking for another way to differentiate yourself, this time with workers, turn to remote work. Not only is the benefit free to offer, but it’s in high demand: Eighty-five percent of millennials say they’d prefer to telecommute all the time. Given that reducing the number of miles driven is one of the best things an individual can do to reduce their carbon footprint, why not take the win-win?

What if your company requires physical work? Consider investing in a small fleet of loaner bikes that employees can use to commute, go out to lunch, or run a quick errand. If several employees have electric cars, it could also be worthwhile to invest in an electric vehicle charging station. Alternatively, some companies give workers a monetary incentive for leaving their cars at home. For example, Clif Bar offers a reward program that pays employees when they commute by walking, biking, taking public transit, and other eco-friendly alternatives to driving their car alone.

Swapping business trips for video conferences saves your business time and money — and reduces your environmental impact. Image: Adobe Stock

 

3. Think twice about business trips.

Commuting isn’t the only type of travel associated with work, and it certainly isn’t the one that company leaders have the most control over. Although some types of business travel, such as site surveys and investor meetings, are non-negotiable, most are optional. Not only is online conferencing more environmentally friendly, but it also saves companies hundreds to thousands of dollars per eliminated trip.

Always ask before you book travel: would a video conference work just as well?

If travel isn’t necessary, take a mitigation approach. Swap short flights for car trips. Greenhouse gas emissions from flying have increased more than 80 percent just since 1990. Better yet, take a bus or train.

To understand just how much your company’s transportation habits cost the environment, check out the University of California-Berkeley’s carbon emissions calculator.

4. Minimize disposable office products.

Whatever your workplace’s carbon footprint, it could almost certainly be less. Swap paper towels for washable fabric ones. Encourage employees to use reusable mugs and water bottles by eliminating disposable cups. Buy a set of cheap silverware in place of plastic cutlery. None of these changes will make or break your budget, but the environmental benefits increase as more employees participate.

Remember that your office can be the place employees, partners, and customers learn to think of the planet first. That’s a reputation win, too.

On average, Americans produce 4.4 pounds of trash every day. Much of that waste happens at home, but the office environment matters as well. Full-time team members spend half their waking hours at work, there’s no reason they shouldn’t have sustainable options to choose from when eating lunch, deciding to print or not, or using the restroom. Small changes add up to big differences in CO2 emissions.

5. Make utility money go further.

Every time someone turns up your office’s air conditioning or flips on a light, it costs money. You don’t have to sweat in the heat (or work in the dark), but you also don’t have to settle for steep utility bills.

If you’re not ready to put solar panels on the roof, start small. As they burn out, switch your incandescent light bulbs to energy-efficient LEDs. Use expanding foam sealant to fill cracks. Invest in a smart, programmable thermostat. Even asking employees to unplug their devices before they leave can put a dent in your utility expenses: Keeping electronics plugged in when they’re asleep costs consumers upwards of $19 billion per year.

Consumers have made it clear: Creating a healthier, cleaner world should be every company’s charge. Encourage your employees to reduce their emissions, but don’t use that as an excuse to avoid making company-level changes. We all live on the same planet; it’s up to all of us to protect it.

You Might Also Like…

8 Ways Your Business Can Help Save the Environment

The workforce is getting younger as millennials take over jobs …Drew HendricksJune 11, 2018

Are Family-Owned Businesses Kinder to the Earth?

Who doesn’t like the idea of a family-owned business? There’s …Larry AltonMay 22, 2018

Is Working from Home Really More Sustainable?

Working from home is more common than ever before, but …Larry AltonMarch 13, 2018

earth911

Taken from:  

Going Green Shouldn’t Cost Green: 5 Business-Savvy Strategies

Posted in alo, ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, Thermos, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Going Green Shouldn’t Cost Green: 5 Business-Savvy Strategies

The dark money protecting the ‘worst energy policy in the country’

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

This summer, Ohio’s beleaguered nuclear and coal plants got a major gift in the promise of a big bailout. Now, the fight over that promise has escalated into one of the most dramatic and bizarre showdowns of the 2020 election cycle.

It all started back in July, when the Ohio state legislature passed a law — called HB6 — that, starting next year, will charge consumers new fees to rescue four struggling power plants. Those charges will eventually add up to a $1 billion bailout for the utility FirstEnergy Solutions’ two nuclear plants, while handing a lifeline to two 1950s-era coal plants owned by another utility, the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation.

Because of the law, Ohio is the first state to reverse its renewable energy standards and efficiency targets, all while funneling more money to coal — a move that has clean energy advocates fuming. Leah Stokes, an environmental political science professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara, called it the “worst energy policy in the country.”

But this it isn’t your typical environmentalists-vs.-fossil-fuel-industry fight. The side opposing the bailout has clean-energy advocates working alongside the natural gas industry. And though the supporters of the bailout include some of the usual suspects — FirstEnergy, coal-reliant American Electric Power, and Duke Energy, and the coal baron and Trump donor Robert Murray — they have also marshaled a mysterious string of deep-pocketed advocacy groups.

A bit of history: The fight dates back to at least 2014, when FirstEnergy pitched a bailout to Ohio’s utility regulator. FirstEnergy went bankrupt in 2018, around the same time it was urging the Trump administration to use emergency powers to save nuclear and coal. (The Department of Energy considered that proposal, but ultimately it went nowhere.) By early 2019, though, FirstEnergy saw a window of opportunity in the Ohio legislature and spent $1 million lobbying on the bailout law. According to an analysis by the Columbus Dispatch, it contributed almost $1 million to state candidates in the 2018 cycle, including $25,000 to help elect Larry Householder as the new speaker of Ohio’s House.

As soon as the law was passed in July, opponents formed a coalition called Ohioans Against Corporate Bailouts. The group, which aims to gather the 265,774 signatures required to get the referendum on the ballot in the 2020 election, hasn’t yet disclosed its funding, but observers suspect that it mostly comes from the renewable energy industry and natural gas companies.

In response, the law’s supporters have waged an unprecedented “all-out deceptive effort to prevent the issue from getting on the ballot,” says Dave Anderson who has tracked developments for the watchdog think tank Energy and Policy Institute.

In addition to FirstEnergy, a number of shadowy groups have materialized to oppose the referendum. Here’s a quick rundown of the major players:

Protect Ohio Clean Energy Jobs bought $10,000 in ads to target Facebook users, directing them to remove their signatures from the petition supporting the referendum. In the ads, it claims that repealing the law would “kill Ohio clean energy jobs.”
Generation Now, a group that does not disclose its donors, hired the petition firm FieldWorks, which has traditionally worked with Democratic clients. The referendum campaign claims that FieldWorks staff have harassed and allegedly paid off their workers, and firms allegedly deploying “petition blockers” to discourage people from signing onto the referendum. In one case, a confrontation between Fieldworks employees and petition workers escalated to the point where the police were called. Generation Now has rejected those allegations as “vague and unsubstantiated.” Generation Now spokesperson Curtis Steiner added that “Fieldworks has been operating in a very professional manner.” He noted that the employee associated with the incident was dismissed.
Ohioans for Energy Security has flooded local networks with a 60-second ad in which a narrator warns viewers that signing the referendum petition would help the Chinese government, as it’s “quietly invading our American electric grid.”

Thousands of Ohioans received mailers from the same group warning, “Don’t give your personal information to the Chinese Government! Don’t sign their petition attacking House Bill 6!”

The claim, based on the fact that some gas plants received funding from the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, has been roundly debunked. The ads neglect to mention the funding from other major global banks, or that FirstEnergy has loans from the same bank. “We have pretty strong regulation of utilities that would prevent foreign governments from controlling them,” David Dollar, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told the Cincinnati Enquirer.

“These ads are some of the most bizarre and xenophobic I’ve ever seen in relation to energy, electricity, and climate,” says Director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign Mary Anne Hitt.

While the groups opposing the referendum don’t disclose their funding, the Energy and Policy Institute has found links between several of them and FirstEnergy. For example, Protect Ohio Clean Energy Jobs appears to share an address with two lobbyists that FirstEnergy hired to pass HB6.

The Dayton Daily News recently reported that Ohio Attorney General David Yost is investigating some of these allegations of harassment and intimidation. His investigation includes a charge that the opposition has tried to buy off firms working with the referendum for as much as $100,000, which would be considered a felony under state law.

FirstEnergy has neither denied nor confirmed its role in the campaign to scuttle the referendum, instead maintaining that the referendum is unconstitutional and “inherently misleading and confusing to Ohio voters.”

Gene Pierce, a spokesperson for the referendum’s main support group, Ohioans Against Corporate Bailouts, admits that the efforts by the law’s supporters have slowed the signature-collecting process and “driven up the price to hire people.” The referendum has only recently launched a website and an ad campaign that fight back.

If the referendum fails, the outlook for Ohio’s clean-energy advocates could be bleak. The state is the third-biggest consumer of coal in the country. Nuclear power, which provides 15 percent of the state’s electricity, is the state’s biggest source of carbon-free energy. In 2018, the state got a measly 2.5 percent of its power from solar, wind, and biomass — making it one of the lowest users of renewable energy in the country.

Beyond the coal plants the new law helps directly, FirstEnergy has hinted that the extra money from the bailout may help it reverse its plan to close down one of its coal plants. The true cost of the bailout could be higher as coal becomes more unprofitable. All told, “there’s more money in the Ohio law to bail out dirty old coal plants than to support carbon-free nuclear power,”Stokes says.

Sierra Club’s Mary Anne Hitt echoed those concerns. She called the effort to uphold the bailout “one of the most extreme and also aggressive efforts like this that I have ever seen.” She added, “Unfortunately, it’s regular Ohioans who end up paying the price.”

Originally posted here – 

The dark money protecting the ‘worst energy policy in the country’

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The dark money protecting the ‘worst energy policy in the country’

What’s driving California’s emissions? You guessed it: Cars.

California received plenty of praise back in 2016 when it hit its target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions four years ahead of time. But the Golden State’s progress has slowed, according to a report out Tuesday from a nonpartisan research center. California is now on track to hit its 2030 goal in 2061. Three whole decades late.

The biggest problem: California’s beloved cars.

“This is a sobering report,” said F. Noel Perry, a California investor who founded the center behind the report, Next 10. “We are at a very important point: California is going to need major policy breakthroughs and deep structural changes if we’re going to meet our climate goals.”

What happened? Over the last three years, California has reduced emissions at a rate of only 1.15 percent. At that pace, it would take a century for the state to zero-out carbon emissions. But a law ex-Governor Jerry Brown signed in 2016, requires the state to reach zero emissions by 2050. Since falling behind, the state would need to step up emissions reductions to 4.51 percent every year, according to the report.

Next 10

Next 10’s report, the California Green Innovation Index, shows that the state has plucked most of the low-hanging fruit, mainly by cleaning up electricity production. California’s next challenge is the tougher job of eliminating climate pollutants from transportation, industry, and homes, and offices. And, yes, all of those cars.

Passenger vehicles alone produce nearly a third of California’s emissions, more than all of the electric plants, livestock, and oil refineries in the state put together. Vehicle ownership has reached an all-time high, as has the total miles that Californians are driving. Moreover, “even in climate conscious California we’ve seen a consumer preference shift to favor SUVs and light trucks,” said Adam Fowler of Beacon Economics, which prepared this report for Next 10.

Next 10

Since early 2017, more than half the new passenger vehicles Californians bought were SUVs and trucks.

Another big, related problem is housing. California’s economy is booming, but cities haven’t built the homes needed by all the new workers. That’s forcing more people into suburbs far from public transportation. The report found that the percentage of people choosing public transit “declined substantially throughout most of California between 2008 and 2018.” Failure to build housing is doubly bad because new buildings are much more efficient in terms of insulation,climate control, and energy efficiency. Every new home even gets solar panels.

“This is one of the gnarliest challenges,” Perry said. “How do we reduce commute times and how do we build denser housing?”

It’s not all bad news. California continues to prove it’s possible to cut carbon emissions while the economy expands. From 2016 to 2017, California’s economy per capita grew 3.1 percent while each person’s emissions decreased.

And the authors said that the state still deserves a lot of credit. “California policies have made appliances more efficient, renewable energy cheaper, and given cars better gas mileage all across the country,” Perry said.

See more here: 

What’s driving California’s emissions? You guessed it: Cars.

Posted in Accent, alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What’s driving California’s emissions? You guessed it: Cars.

Q&A: How Can I Monitor My Solar Power System?

Share this idea!

Pin0
Facebook0

0shares

In the early days of solar-powered electricity, solar system owners installed panels but received little information on how the system was performing. The system’s solar inverter might have a read-out of real-time system production, but it was hard to get any details. If you were away from the system during the day, it was tough to know how it performed.

It is helpful to have answers to some basic questions about the performance of your solar power system. Are all of the solar panels producing the same amount of power? How much energy is the system producing over a month or year? Are any issues hindering power production? It used to be very difficult to know, and lack of information also made the warranties less valuable.

If your panels weren’t producing as much power as expected, how would you know?

Welcome to Solar System Monitoring

Now, many solar systems come with monitoring capabilities. This allows home and business owners to analyze solar panel output, with both real-time and historical data.

In many cases, information on each solar panel’s output is available, making it easy to pinpoint and troubleshoot problems. Monitoring helps determine if the equipment is running properly, allowing solar technicians to identify and troubleshoot issues.

There are a variety of solar monitoring systems, and most are associated with solar inverters. Common brands of solar inverters include Fronius, SolarEdge, SMA America, Enphase Energy, and Tigo Energy. Each of these companies typically offers proprietary monitoring software that integrates with their inverters.

Another option is a plug-in that adds monitoring capabilities to your existing solar system. Sense, for example, makes a solar monitoring tool that plugs into a Wi-Fi network to track solar power production and your energy use.

Doesn’t my power bill show how my solar system performed?

No, utility bills are not an accurate way to calculate total solar energy production.

Most electric utilities do compensate their customers for surplus solar energy. This means that there will be a credit line on your bill for solar energy that is fed to the power grid. This number quantifies surplus power from your solar system, not total energy production.

For example, if your refrigerator and air conditioner are running in your home, the solar electricity will power these devices first. Then, the surplus electricity goes to the grid. The utility bill only shows the surplus and won’t reveal how much electricity the appliances were using. This is why monitoring your solar system is crucial. It calculates total solar system production and not merely what is fed to the power grid.

How can I access solar monitoring data?

Data access varies a bit by the platform, but most have apps and online portals to access the data. This means that you can view real-time and historical data with just a few clicks.

Most solar systems that are installed today have monitoring capabilities. Some portals also allow you to sign up to receive alerts if the solar system isn’t performing correctly.

Solar monitoring is a great way to identify production issues early on, such as faulty wires or solar panel issues. Real-time data makes it easier to identify problems quickly before they cause a significant decrease in solar energy production.

You Might Also Like…

Can Growth in Sustainable Energy Reduce Natural Resources Overspend?

Globally, we are consuming resources faster than the Earth can …Sarah LozanovaSeptember 30, 2019

How to Compare Solar Energy Bids & Select a Solar Installer

More home and business owners are installing solar panels than …Sarah LozanovaSeptember 2, 2019

Earth911 Conscious-Shopping Guide: Best Solar Panels

Technological advances have transformed the solar energy industry in recent …Sarah LozanovaMay 14, 2019

earth911

Source: 

Q&A: How Can I Monitor My Solar Power System?

Posted in ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, solar power, sustainable energy, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Q&A: How Can I Monitor My Solar Power System?