Business Sees Green in Going Green

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/BUSINESS/12/14/environment/index.html

This article discusses how companies now are slowly changing their vehicles from being environmentally harmful to environmentally safe. Other big industries are changing their methods to suit up to the "going green" idea for economic profits also. They have realized by "going green", they not only do it for the society, but also because they save money also.

Some interesting statements in this article are:
"The return on the company's investment appears to be high: Last year, GE's "Ecomagination" line of products generated $10 billion in revenues in 2005, and is on track to eclipse $20 billion by 2010."

"Companies are increasingly considering their environmental costs as a way to bolster their brand name and consumer confidence in their product."

"Paying attention to the environment saves money."

""The positive impact we see with our employees is eye-opening -- they are engaged, excited and generating real ideas on new technologies in areas we can improve (greenhouse gas emissions) and energy consumption," he says."

I find it interesting how in support of Daphnee's idea that "green" is becoming popular, that it is also becoming a win-win situation for companies. Not only do they get to help the environment, but they are also saving a lot of money also. But I have to wonder that if it was actually not a money-saving technique, would they have gone the environment-friendly path?

Additionally, this has become an example of the domino effect. As one company starts to acknowledge the importance of greenhouse gases and pollution and the effects of peak oil, other companies begin to operate the same way.

Also, I find it amazing how much effect the media has on the world's beliefs. Through magazines, newspapers, reports, and news stories on their television shows, now "green" has become an essential part of the time period we live in. Through the media "green" has become a part of our popular culture.

The New York Academy of Science

The other day me and my good friend Mathias Rabinovitch went to a presentation at the New York Academy of Science. There were 2 speakers each with their own little presentation.
The first speaker was an economist and spoke about the "McKinsey Report" which is a report that basically gives instructions on how our government can change us to a very green country with the little price of $3 trillion without having to change our lifestyle. This presentation examined how the government would only have to spend 3 trillion instead of 6 trillion dollars if they did this slow, incremental switch to a whole bunch of green energy producing techniques. The presentator used the term "we won't find a silver bullet" very often to describe how we were going to need to get our energy from a wide variety of sources. The presentations sometimes got complicated by going into economic intricacies but thats pretty much the main gist of the first presentation.
The second speaker was a scientist from Columbia University and he described his discoveries and this machine he made that made CO2 into something valuable. This presentation involved a whole lot of big words and chemistry terms that I was unfamiliar with so it was very difficult to follow, but what i got out of it was very interesting. This man found a way to take CO2 and turn it into a valuable substance. not only that but he was able to make this machine of his to convert the CO2 self sustainable. So he explained the process by which he did this with a bunch of charts and graphs and pictures. I am not sure how useful this invention of his is in terms of the product what it can be used for, but it was very interesting.
Me and Matt then went to the food gathering afterwards and after a little while of social awkwardness, people started talking to us and we got into some interesting discussions with people, that always ended up going to politics, but it was on overall a great experience and the building was absolutely amazing with a beautiful view of NYC.

http://www.nyas.org/events/eventDetail.asp?eventID=10429&date=3/19/2008%206:00:00%20PM

I posted a link with info about the presentation, I didn't read the website yet but it seems to sum up pretty much what was happening.Also if you want some like in depth notes talk to Matt because he copied some diagrams and took some really good notes of what was going on.

Vogue Magazine - The Green Issue May 2007

For my project, I recently decided to do it on how people are going "green" in the media. There is a big spotlight on going green now from go green bags to hybrid cars that are better for the environment. I found a whole issue on this on the vogue magazine website that was published spring of last year.

THE LINKS:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/green/

and an interesting article called "A Convenient Untruth" by Michael Shnayerson

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/05/skeptic200705

Another interesting thing that I found in Fortune Magazine was a list of major coporate companies that are trying to go green.

THE LINK:

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/fortune/0703/gallery.green_giants.fortune/index.html

Car Companies: On the race for the greenest car

I went the auto show the other day with my good friend Mathias Rabinovitch. One of the major things we could not help but notice was how every single car company was trying to prove how green they were and most of all how they were the greenest. It was almost like a competition, each car vendor trying to sell their "green"car, even Hummer tried to have a green car. When I saw this I was very happy, for this was showing that the public was interested in greener cars. I just think that this is interesting because it really shows us how car companies are now drastically improving their mileage, and engines, and even not using oil at all, I saw a car with written "plug in" in huge so i imagined that it was an electric car and there was a huge crowd around it. I think that this is showing us that in fact the oil companies might not have that much power over car companies anymore because i think demand is now overpowering the "bribes" oil companies have going towards car companies. So lets just hope that things continue this way and that car companies in the end might not be as bad as we thought.

Oil price's influence on economics is my most interesting topic

(The rally in energy prices gained momentum Friday, with retail gas prices rising further into record territory and diesel and heating oil futures setting records of their own amid concerns about strong global demand and tight supplies.At the pump, gas prices set records for the fourth straight day, rising 1.3 cents Friday to a national average price of $3.28 a gallon, according to AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. Average prices are nearing $4 in some parts of Hawaii.Light, sweet crude for April delivery fell 12 cents to settle at $110.21 on the Nymex Friday after rising earlier to within pennies of its latest trading record of $111, set Thursday.)
Recently, the oil price is increasing dramatically. It's almost $110 per barrel. The increasing of the oil price is my most interesting topic in the energy course cuz it's has huge impact on ecnomics and people's daily life. I really want to learn more about what are the major reason caused it and how to prevent it from increasing way to fast. When is it gonna stop? As time flew, isn't it possible for the price to reach $200 per barrel? I think oil is the most precious thing in our life besides water. After reading the article "how's life without oil", I am shocked to think about it and i am looking forward to learning more from you guys.

World Oil Production Statistics

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t14.xls

Today we discussed the WSJ article and current oil production levels. Here is a source, the Energy Information Administration, and their stats on world oil production. You may note that the world seemed to peak in May 2005, but it appears that if estimates are correct we actually surpassed that near the end of 2007.

These are estimates now, as BP has not yet relesaed the 2007 Energy Review.
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publications/statistical_energy_review_2007/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/spreadsheets/statistical_review_full_report_workbook_2007.xls

We should remeber that as prices climb, producers will be incentivized to produce more. With the climbing prices of oil, we may only see a drop in production only once they can no longer maintain current levels.

The World Has Plenty of Oil- Wall Street Journal Opinion piece

from march 4, 2008
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120459389654809159.html


Points to consider:
Who does/did Nannsen G. Saleri work for?
What figures does he use that we have other sources for?
What are his sources?

Should we draft a letter to the WSJ or Mr. Saleri himself for any reason?

What Will We Eat as the Oil Runs Out?

online at: http://globalpublicmedia.com/richard_heinbergs_museletter_what_will_we_eat_as_the_oil_runs_out

The article we had to read for tomorrow, written by Richard Heinberg, presents a variety of problems with fossil fuel dependency. He points out many things - some more obvious than others. Some things that are affected by our dependency are: climate, higher oil prices, increased demand for biofuels and the loss of fresh water supplies.

Although biofuel crops may seem to fix the problem of oil dependency, Heinberg points out that farmers are becoming more interested in growing crops to provide energy, rather than food - this does not help the inevitable situation of our growing population and increase demand for food.

His answer to this situation is generally organic farming. However, this requires the government to take initiative in helping people become first interested, then educated on this type of farming.

A few things to think about are:

1. "The U.S. is responsible for 70 percent of world maize exports, and countries such as Mexico, Japan, and Egypt that depend on American corn farmers use maize both as food for people and feed for animals." -- This quote is interesting because the U.S. is notorious for taking rather than giving. However, the one of the few things they give is being scrutinized for "impacting food availability in other nations both directly and indirectly, raising the price for tortillas in Mexico and disrupting the livestock and poultry industries in Europe and Africa."

2. What do you think about his scrutiny of biofuels?
Something to think about: Then, the writer goes on to say that global warming affects farmers a lot because it creates a climate chaos that can sometimes ruin a years worth of crops. To me, this would seem as a perfect opportunity to pump up the use of biofuels. Then he goes on to say that "soil erosion undermines food and water availability, as well as producing 30 percent of climate-changing greenhouse gases." Although this refutes my point, it is unclear where he got this information (there is no citation like in previous sections) and to what extent the percentage of climate-changing greenhouse gases is so easily measured. On the other hand, then why not focus more on improving farming techniques?

3. He points out that in order to improve the situation, more education in organic farming is needed. To what extent do you think the government is responsible in promoting organic farming? Are there any laws in effect or proposed within this article that you agree or disagree with?

4. The author then goes as far to say that "food policy must include population policy. We must encourage smaller families by means of economic incentives. . ." Who do you think he means by "we"? Do you agree with this quote? Why or why not.

Proven, Probable and Possible Oil Reserves

3 Types of oil reserves


Proven, probable and possible reserves are the three most common categories of reserves used in the oil industry. They are intended to represent the probability that a reserve exists based on the geologic and engineering data and interpretation for a given location, though many governments refuse to disclose verifying data to support their claims.


Proven Reserves - defined as oil and gas "Reasonably Certain" to be producible using current technology at current prices, with current commercial terms and government consent, also known in the industry as 1P. Some industry specialists refer to this as P90, i.e., ideally having a 90% certainty of being produced. Proven reserves are further subdivided into "Proven Developed" (PD) and "Proven Undeveloped" (PUD). PD reserves are reserves that can be produced with existing wells and perforations, or from additional reservoirs where minimal additional investment (operating expense) is required. PUD reserves require additional capital investment (drilling new wells, installing gas compression, etc.) to bring the oil and gas to the surface.


Probable Reserves - defined as oil and gas "Reasonably Probable" of being produced using current or likely technology at current prices, with current commercial terms and government consent. Some Industry specialists refer to this as P50, i.e., ideally having a 50% certainty of being produced. This is also known in the industry as 2P or Proven plus probable.


Possible Reserves - i.e., "having a chance of being developed under favourable circumstances". Some industry specialists refer to this as P10, i.e., ideally having a 10% certainty of being produced in the foreseeable future. This is also known in the industry as 3P or Proven plus probable plus possible.



Concerns over stated reserves

“ [World] reserves are confused and in fact inflated. Many of the so called reserves are in fact resources. They’re not delineated, they’re not accessible, they’re not available for production ”

------------------------------------------------------------------------
— Sadad Al-Husseini, former VP of Aramco, Oct. 2007; by Al-Husseini's estimate 300 billion of the world’s 1200 billion barrels of proved reserves should be recategorized as speculative resources.


One difficulty in forecasting the date of peak oil is the opacity surrounding the oil reserves classified as 'proven'. Many worrying signs concerning the depletion of 'proven reserves' have emerged in recent years.



This was best exemplified by the 2004 scandal surrounding the 'evaporation' of 20% of Shell's reserves.


For the most part, 'proven reserves' are stated by the oil companies, the producer states and the consumer states. All three have reasons to overstate their proven reserves:
-Oil companies may look to increase their potential worth.
-Producer countries are bestowed a stronger international stature
-Governments of consumer countries may seek a means to foster sentiments of security and stability within their economies and among consumers.


The Energy Watch Group (EWG) 2007 report shows total world Proved (P95) plus Probable (P50) reserves to be between 854 and 1255 Gb (30 to 40 years of supply if demand growth were to stop immediately). Major discrepancies arise from accuracy issues with OPEC's self-reported numbers. Besides the possibility that these nations have overstated their reserves for political reasons (during periods of no substantial discoveries), over 70 nations also follow a practice of not reducing their reserves to account for yearly production. 1255 Gb is therefore a best-case scenario. Analysts have suggested that each of the OPEC member nations also has economic incentives to exaggerate their reserves, due to the OPEC quota system, which allows greater output for countries with greater reserves.


The following chart shows suspicious jumps in stated reserves without associated discoveries, as well as the lack of depletion despite yearly production:





Kuwait, for example, was reported by a January 2006 issue of Petroleum Intelligence Weekly to have only 48 Gb in reserve, of which only 24 are "fully proven." This report was based on "leaks of confidential documents" from Kuwait, and has not been formally denied by the Kuwaiti authorities. Additionally, the reported 1.5 Gb of oil burned off by Iraqi soldiers in the first Gulf War are conspicuously missing from Kuwait's figures.

Daylight Savings

We discussed daylight savings time briefly in class last week and I know some of us were interested in learning more about it. This website provides a very thorough tutorial on the history of daylight savings, countries that participate, its purpose, and the effects it has had on energy consumption thus far. I found the history of each country's daylight savings policies the most interesting.

The tutorial is clear and concise, and raises some interesting questions about efforts being made to reduce energy consumption. Some questions I had after reading through the website are:
-How effective is daylight savings in practice? How much daylight are we really saving, and how does this translate into decreased power consumption?
-Is there more potential to conserve daylight in different regions of the globe? If so, how have those regions responded through enacting legislature dealing with daylight savings time policies?

Another interesting paradox I thought of when reading through the website was this: why was daylight savings enacted in the U.S. as early as it was when we had no real way to capture the power of the sun? How did daylight savings help conserve energy when we didn't have solar panels to capture the energy in the first place?

The website is kind of long, but you can jump around the pages to find the interesting parts. I strongly recommend it; it has some really cool information about the history of energy policy and daylight savings around the world.

The link to the website is:
http://webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/index.html

Who Killed The Electric Car?

The movie entitled Who killed The Electric Car describes the life of the electric car in America and more specifically in California.

The film starts off with a description of the Ford EV1, a revolutionary electric car that caught the attention of many consumers. Then out of no where, the company General Motors decides to get rid of all the EV1s in California (the car was originally started in California). General Motors would seize all the cars and destroy them. The reason for this was unknown. The movie goes on an investigation of who or what killed the electric car, taking into account a whole bunch of different factors some of which include Batteries, the consumers, the government, oil companies, car companies and the competition of Hydrogen cars. This movie ends up by detailing who they think killed the electric car and why.

It is a very interesting movie that really shows us how corrupt some of these corporations are and refuse to make progress for the sake of making money. I strongly recommended watching it.

Some questions to think about are why people are doing this and what interest are they gaining. This issue of the electric car can also be related to the more overarching problem of how those in power seem to have more of a priority for their own personal benefits than the benefits of society.

Solar Power - 1

A solar cell is a kind of semiconductor device that takes advantage of the photo-voltaic effect, in which electricity is produced when the semiconductor's PN junction is irradiated. When light strikes a solar cell, part of it is reflected, part of it is absorbed, and part of it passes through the cell.

The absorbed light excites the bound electrons into a higher energy state, making them free electrons. These free electrons move about in all directions within the crystal, leaving holes where the electrons used to be, and the holes also shift around the crystal. The electrons (-) collect in the N-layer, the holes (+) in the P-layer. When the outside circuit is closed, electricity flows.

Solar photovoltaic(Solar electrical panels) -

Advantages-
Sustainable It is a well proven technology. Well suited to providing power in home or single building applications. Meets peak demand.

Disadvantages-
While the panels are environmentally benign once they are built, the manufacturing process requires large amounts of energy.

One less common, expensive, but highly efficient type of solar panel, gallium arsenide, contains toxins that need to be disposed of carefully at the end of the life of the panel.

Solar energy is spread relatively thinly. If a photovoltaic generator is to produce much electricity it has to cover a large area. However, in the case of home electrical supplies the roof provides sufficient available space.

Does not produce much power when the sun isn't shining, and negligible power at night. An alternative power supply is needed for these periods.

Electricity generated by solar panels is quite expensive.

A solar photovoltaic panel must operate for a considerable time before it produces more power than was required in its manufacture. The US National Renewable Energy Labaratory states on its energy payback page that "Paybacks for multicrystalline modules are 4 years for systems using recent technology and 2 years for anticipated technology. For thin-film modules, paybacks are 3 years using recent technology, and just 1 year for anticipated thin-film technology".

Can be combined with small-scale wind-generated electricity or with mains power. Alternatively, batteries can be charged when more electricity is being generated than is being consumed. Excess electricity can be sold to the grid in some cases.

In the past photovoltaic panels have predominantly been based on silicon. It is possible that in future a larger proportion will use alternatives such as gallium arsenide (GaAs) or copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS). While these elements are much rarer than silicon, they can be used as a thin film; this makes the cost competative. One wonders if there pollution implications in their eventual disposal.

http://www.geocities.com/daveclarkecb/ElecGenProsCons.html#Solar%20photovoltaic


Maybe someone can post some stats on the cost or the growth of the solar industry and electric genration over the past 40 years.

AC Electric Generation

A system showing a fuel buring to heat water, causing the steam produced to turn the turbine, which connected to a generator creates usable energy in the form of AC- alternating current- electric.

Below is a close up of the generator itself. The steam turn the turbine connected to a coiled wire cylinder by a rod, the coils surrounded by magnets to create the electro magnetic field, which is send down the wire(or path of least resistance) to the electric grid.

It should be noted that all turbine production of electricity is in the form of AC. All household appliances and everything you plug into a regular outlet runs on AC power.

However, things that use batteries- cameras, phones, iPods, etc, will convert the AC power coming from the wall into DC power in order to charge the batteries.

There are only two methods to create DC- direct current- electric- from batteries and from solar PV(photovoltaic) panels. Please feel free to comment on the limits of either of those below.