The surface of the Earth receives an amount of solar energy equivalent to roughly 10 000 times the worlds energy demand. Of course there isn’t always sunlight, but the solar panels can store the energy, and they are getting better and better at it. A solar panel converts one sixth of the sunlight into electrical energy. Although they also are getting able to turn more and more of the sunlight into energy, they are already so efficient that space isn’t much of an issue anymore. The area of solar cells needed to supply a family with electricity is usually much smaller than the roof of their house. And when including the land required for mining and excavation of coal, CPS-plants (power-plants that rely on solar energy) are more space-efficient than power-plants fueled by coal. Solar power is roughly fifty times as space-efficient as growing crops for bio fuels. And that’s just with the technology that currently is commercialized.

(more…)

Humble Oil, who is today more known as Exxon, pretty much nailed it back in the 60’s with this advertisement from a 1962 edition of Life Magazine. Oh, the grim irony. It’s also available in full view on Google Books.

A Picture is Worth…
- Car, bus or bicycle?
- Albatross Carcass
- The Global Distribution of Water
- Gasoline Consumption Per Day
- Why Offshore Drilling Won’t Help

The Times Online are reporting that France have been forced to close down a third of its nuclear power stations this summer due to heatwaves:

“France is being forced to import electricity from Britain to cope with a summer heatwave that has helped to put a third of its nuclear power stations out of action.

With temperatures across much of France surging above 30C this week, EDF’s reactors are generating the lowest level of electricity in six years, forcing the state-owned utility to turn to Britain for additional capacity.

Fourteen of France’s 19 nuclear power stations are located inland and use river water rather than seawater for cooling. When water temperatures rise, EDF is forced to shut down the reactors to prevent their casings from exceeding 50C.”

It seems thirsty nukes can’t take the heat and that climate change puts nuclear energy into hot water. A question we must all ask our self: as the planet is warming up, is nuclear really a smart move?

Vattenfall, Europe’s third-largest energy company which is wholly owned by the Swedish Government, has been announced as the winner in the Climate Greenwash Award 2009 at a ceremony in Copenhagen.

“Vattenfall, which won with 39% of the vote (about 2000 votes cast), was nominated for “its mastery of spin on climate change, portraying itself as a climate champion while lobbying to continue business as usual, using coal, nuclear power, and pseudo-solutions such as agrofuels and carbon capture and storage (CCS).”

The energy company also played a key role in setting up the World Business Summit on Climate Change through the Combat Climate Change – a lobby group established by Vattenfall to promote the “climate-friendly technologies” such as carbon capture and storage and nuclear power, which are the company’s preferred options for tackling climate change.”

Climate Greenwash Awards Coordinator Kenneth Haar congratulated Vattenfall for their hard (read: dirty) work which resulted in their first place. Haar also gave a special mention the Danish Government for giving these dirty corporations easy access to the climate talks:

(more…)

Energy Bulletin has an interesting interview with Michael C. Ruppert, author of “A Presidential Energy Policy: Twenty-five Points Addressing the Siamese Twins of Energy and Money”, about peak oil and the end of cheap oil.

“Peak Oil is not just the end of globalization. I was saying clearly that globalization was dead five years ago. It was obvious. But Peak Oil is potentially the end of the human race and that outcome is perhaps just a few years away unless the human race essentially throws every ideological sacred cow out the window and starts with a fresh piece of paper.

[…]The collapse of industrial civilization within the next five to ten years (perhaps sooner) is inevitable. It is the degree of collapse, what is destroyed in the collapse, how many people will have to die in the collapse, and what will survive the collapse that I and many others are fighting for now. That is what every human being should be concerned about and nothing less. Pursuing options while not rapidly disengaging from the current economic paradigm of infinite growth is the only real issue confronting the entire species. To not do that will be literally to consign unborn generations and those under 40 to death or a living hell.”

Read the whole interview over at Energy Bulletin.

Also watch George Monbiot interviewing Fatih Birol, International Energy Authority’s chief economist, about the new startling and worrying prediction for the date of peak oil.

New findings from Dr Anthony Patt of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Africa shows that the proposed supergrid that could power all of Europe with renewable energy only would need around £50 billion of government funded money to become a reality.

The £50 billion government investment would, according to Patt, convince private companies that the supergrid idea is both “feasible” and “attractive”, the Guardian reports.

“In the long term, such a plan, combined with strings of windfarms along the north Africa coast, could “supply Europe with all the energy it needs”.

He said technological advances combined with falling costs have made it realistic to consider north Africa as Europe’s main source of imported energy.

“The sun is very strong there and it’s very reliable. There is starting to be a growing number of cost estimates of both wind and concentrated solar power for North Africa….that start to compare favourably with alternative technologies. The cost of moving [electricity] long distances has really come down.”

(more…)

A recently published report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace shows that nuclear power cannot solve climate change due to time and safety limits.

“After several decades of disappointing growth, nuclear energy seems poised for a comeback. Talk of a “nuclear renaissance” includes perhaps a doubling or tripling of nuclear capacity by 2050, spreading nuclear power to new markets in the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and developing new kinds of reactors and fuel-reprocessing techniques. But the reality of nuclear energy’s future is more complicated. Without major changes in government policies and aggressive financial support, nuclear power is actually likely to account for a declining percentage of global electricity generation.”

According to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2008 nuclear power’s share of worldwide electricity generation is expected to drop from 15% in 2006 to 10% in 2030.

The report, titled “Nuclear Energy: Rebirth or Resuscitation?“, comes to the conclusion that states interested in nuclear energy should be aware of the costs and risks involved in nuclear energy, as well as the time it takes to construct a nuclear plant.

(more…)

Sweden might be the host for Europe’s largest wind farm if the Swedish government approves the proposed plans. The wind farm will be located in Markbygden near Piteå in northern Sweden and will have a total of 1,101 wind turbines.

“This would be Europe’s, if not the world’s, biggest wind farm,” Caj Noren, a spokesman for the board, told AFP. Construction could begin in two-and-a-half years and would be completed after about a decade, Noren said.

Once constructed the wind farm will produce between 8 to 12 terawatt hours per year and would alone meet Sweden’s national wind power target to reach 10 terawatt hours by 2015. The wind farm is expected to cost about 55 billion Swedish Kronor (around $6.9 billion or €4.5 billion) to construct.

The Swedish right-wing government recently announced that they will reverse a nearly 30-year-old ban on building nuclear power plants. Its madness when we can get cheap, clean renewable energy and at the same time create thousands of new jobs from wind farms like this one.

New research from the Helsinki University of Technology’s Advanced Energy Systems in Espoo, Finland, shows that with the help from global cooperation and investment renewable energy will “exceed all previous estimates.”

According to the new findings renewable energy technologies like wind and photovoltaics could supply 40% of the world’s electricity by 2050. But this could only become a reality if the renewable technology is backed up by adequate financial and political support. If not, the renewable share is likely to hover somewhere below 15 percent.

“Our findings demonstrate that with global political support and financial investment, previous notions that the potential for renewables was in some way limited to a negligible fraction of world demand were wrong,” Peter Lund from the Helsinki University of Technology’s Advanced Energy Systems said. “If we prioritize and recognize the value of renewable energy technologies, their potential to supply us with the energy we need is tremendous.”

Previous projections have put the renewable share at only 12% by 2030.

Also read: 10% of U.S. Energy Now Comes From Renewable Energy Sources

In an interview with the Guardian last week Al Gore talked about the climate negotiations in Copenhagen this year, the European carbon market, climate change deniers, smart grids and nuclear energy.

The most surprising comment from Gore was about nuclear energy and its role in fighting climate change. According to Gore nuclear energy is not the answer to our problems because it’s dirty, too expensive, unsafe and that it poses a threat to world peace.

“I’m not a reflexive opponent of nuclear. I used to be enthusiastic about it, but I’m now sceptical about it. There’s a few reasons. Let’s assume for the moment that we will solve the problem of long-term storage of radioactive waste. Let’s assume also that we’ll figure out how to standardise their design as [each plant] is currently unique and that enhances the risk of operator accidents. Let’s assume we can solve the terrorism threat to nuclear reactors. That still leaves a couple of very difficult problems.

(more…)