A Promising Transition or The Death of Renewables

Last month's Atlantic featured a thoughtful analysis of natural gas and it's affect on the economy. The article discusses the unfortunate past, transitional present, and dubious future of energy:

Past:
Fuel: Coal --> Oil
Politics: In 1913, Winston Churchill pushed to convert Great Britain from coal to oil, a campaign which embedded the West within the heart of the Middle East. Dependence on foreign oil was born. In an effort to stabilize oil supply, Western leaders meddled in regional affairs, supporting welcoming leaders and ousting the rest. While our oil supply was being controlled, the economic and civic strength of these countries was compromised, causing destabilization that produced millions of disaffected middle easterners, some of whom have since lashed back at America.

Present:
Fuel: Oil --> Natural Gas
Politics: Natural gas is clearly a political win. Because America has a lot of it, the concern over foreign oil dependence may soon end. Not only that, but natural gas could play a role in economic recovery. The peak oil debate is no longer relevant. Improving technologies will likely lead to a nearly endless supply of fossil fuels, regardless of source or form. Reversely, cheap, bountiful natural gas makes renewable energy a lot less competitive.

Future:
Fuel: Natural Gas, Renewables, or Both
Politics: The question is, will natural gas become our main energy source or will it act as the gateway to a more sustainable future? Carbon emissions need to be all but eliminated in order to combat climate change, and settling on natural gas could be our undoing.


Some Background: Natural Gas and Fracking

Livestock are responsible for approximately 30% of US methane emissions.

Currently, natural gas is obtained through a process called fracking (hydraulic fracturing), which uses a horizontal drill and a high pressure slurry (water, chemicals, sand, etc) to extract methane from shale rock. I don't protest natural gas, nor do I advocate it. My only hope is that we don't suffer from the Trojan horse effect.

Pros:
1. It has the potential of eliminating our dependence on foreign oil. As stability in the Middle East becomes increasingly tenuous, this is essential.
2. Natural gas burns cleaner than oil and coal. CO2 emissions in the US have decreased 12% over the last 7 years, due in part to the natural gas boom.
3. Natural gas has an EROEI (energy return on energy invested) of 87, as compared to 4-7 for tar sands, and 12-18 for OPEC oil. Though these exact numbers may be debated, natural gas is typically the leader.
4. Natural gas is bountiful and cheap, which may aid US economic recovery.

Cons:
1. Despite some claims that methane leaks from fracking are minimal, actual field tests have not been completed. Some large, undiscovered leaks could lead to significant releases of methane, a far worse greenhouse gas than CO2.
2. The high pressure extraction liquids used in fracking could contaminate surrounding areas. While rules on concrete well casings have been established, the BLM (National Bureau of Land Management) is not requiring companies to post a complete list of chemicals if they are considered trade secrets. Furthermore, all chemical reporting does not  need to be completed until AFTER wells have been tapped.
3. There is not yet enough historical data to prove that methane won't leak through the fissures up into the soil, for which there are no protections in place.
  

The World is Going Electric - no wait - Just China

China is planning to invest $1.5 billion annually in electric vehicles, starting with trial taxi services in Shenzhen and Hangzhou. If all goes as planned, they'll have 500,000 electric vehicles throughout the country by 2015.

An electric taxi in Shenzhen, China

Although the cost of these vehicles is still extremely high - 80% more than its carbon counterparts, the government's unique approach to integrating electric car technologies into society may prove to be just what the industry needs. Their system exposes people to electric car technology without requiring them to make the initial investment. Instead, their 3 yuan fuel surcharge is waived, and trips in these taxis are actually cheaper, incentivizing ridership. Furthermore, these taxi services require the construction of charging stations, which provide necessary infrastructure for the expansion of individual electric vehicle usage.

Yet, it hasn't exactly been smooth sailing. Safety issues have plagued taxis in Hangzhou, and individual consumers still aren't buying electric vehicles.

That said, putting these vehicles on the road and collecting performance and user data will undoubtedly lead to greater testing and improvements. As a result, electric vehicles may become both safe and cost competitive.

Dishwashing: Man vs. Machine

I always held the general impression that using machines and being green were inherently incompatible. When it comes to the battle between dishwasher and man, my friends tend to agree: some said hand washing was definitely greener and some, one of which referenced the "heated dry" function, were torn. However, contrary to popular belief, manual labor, conveniently, may not be the answer.

Collin Dunn did a detailed comparison of EnergyStar dishwashers and hand washing. I've adapted some of his analysis in order to compare hand washing to conventional dishwashers. Water and energy use for hand washing was determined assuming [warm] water use equivalent to that in a dishwasher cycle. For example, 54 dishes (the typical capacity of a dishwasher) washed in 6 gallons of water (the typical amount of water consumed in a dishwasher) means that only 1.75 cups of water from the faucet can be used per dish. If fewer dishes need to be washed, say 27 dishes, then the equivalent water use would be 3.7 cups per dish.

These numbers may seem confusing. Reference Dunn's article for more detailed calculations.

Moral of the story? When you have a large number of dishes piled up, go for the dishwasher. It's usually more efficient in terms of water use. Because energy use is heavily dependent on your type of dishwasher and water heater, comparing the two is a crapshoot. If you turn off heated dry, the odds will probably strongly favor dishwashers. If you only have a few dishes and can't wait to fill up the dishwasher, hand wash them. Below are some ways you can make each method more efficient.

For dishwasher tips, go here. To learn more handwashing tips, try this site. Also, learn why pre-rinsing is bad.

There are also a bunch of studies that back up these findings (and may favor dishwashers even more). Here are a few:

Rodale.

R. Stamminger (2006) at UBonn. 

Masdar: "Source" of Hope in the Middle of the Desert?

Street Design in Masdar

Masdar, loosely meaning "source" in Arabic, is a city in Abu Dhabi that was formed in hopes of creating "the world's first zero-carbon city". While Masdar will probably never reach that status, the city's designers have some solid plans on how to make the city more sustainable. In order to decrease automotive traffic and increase walkability, the architects have employed traditional Arab design. Narrow streets surrounded by permeable walls limit direct sunlight while also allowing cool winds to circulate. A new twist on the traditional Arabic wind tower also helps distribute ambient air through the streets. The combination of these things is supposedly capable of reducing street temperature to 70F. Windows have angled shades so that buildings can be naturally lit with minimal heat gain. In order to reduce Masdar's energy footprint, they've enlisted an incredible amount of solar panels.

However, in order for Masdar to become energy efficient, residents will have to do the same things as the rest of us: change their behavior. A 50% reduction in energy use means everyone in Masdar needs to up their thermostat to 77F.

All You Need is an Angle

Seven Kansas towns were recently featured in the New York Times. It's interesting how in a farming region where climate change could be most devastating, less than half the population believes it actually exists. The questions is: how do you motivate these communities to become more sustainable when climate change isn't a motivating factor?

People at the Climate and Energy Project believe they've found a way, and it's through their "Take Charge" program. The recipe calls for one part foreign oil dependence fear and one part competition. Throw in a handful of non-profit money (around $150,000), and you get a bunch of motivated citizens. They installed new lightbulbs, implemented geothermal energy, weatherized their homes, and made plans for wind turbines. Two communities ended up reducing their overall energy use by 5% over the course of one year, which is actually quite impressive.

Weatherization, efficiency education, and citizen-led energy planning

The Climate and Energy Project just earned themselves a grant from the Kansas Energy Office to sponsor a competition in 2011 for 16 communities. Hopefully, they get similar results.