Deaths like these have brought concern to many environmentalists as well as the government. It is against federal law to kill any member of an endangered species, and wind farmers now face potential repercussions when the new guidelines are put in place. Recently, it’s been reported that Pattern Energy Group has abandoned plans to construct a new wind farm in Sacramento because of concerns about the bald eagle population.

These wildlife concerns are as fresh as a newly painted garage door as ecologist David Cottingham explains, “We haven’t really had too many wind turbines heretofore in the country, so we are learning about it as we go.” The number of wind farms has greatly grown in recent years. The precise number of bat deaths by wind turbines is not known, but some scientists have estimated that the numbers are in the thousands.

According to Ed Arnett, director of science and policy at Bat Conservation International, “Most biologists will tell you that over time and cumulatively, [bats] won’t be able to sustain these fatality rates.”  Arnett adds that continued research could help minimize wildlife deaths and that wind power doesn’t necessarily have to be severely compromised. Arnett even stipulates that as little as 1 percent of wind power could be lost if farmers focus on shutting down during “danger periods.”

How do you feel about the clash between wildlife and wind energy? Do you think the focus should shift to a less hazardous form of energy? Let us know in the comments!

The proposed energy plan would have four central deadlines. Under the new plan the government wants to see Denmark generate 52% of its energy from renewable sources, such as wind power, as early as 2020. This target alone would cut Denmark’s greenhouse gas emissions with 35% based on 1990 levels. By 2030 all coal-fired power plants in Denmark will be phased out and replaced by biomass and other renewable energy sources. And in 2035 the Danish government expects that all of the country’s power and heat will come from renewable energy sources. And if their plan is followed, the country’s entire energy supply could come from renewables in 2050.

Denmark’s climate minister, Martin Lidegaard, said that the new energy plan is designed to combat the climate crisis, the country’s current economic crisis and future resource crisis at the same time.

“We want to address all three crises at once. It doesn’t make any sense to solve the economic crisis if that affects the climate crisis and vice versa.”

According to estimates the energy plan will cost Denmark 5.6 billion crowns, or about $1 billion, in additional spending in 2020.

“The conclusion being it has a cost to make a green transformation, but it also has a cost not to do it. I think this will work out to be the best insurance Denmark has ever (bought),” Lidegaard said.

Denmark may already be a world leader when it comes to wind energy, which supplies the country with around 20% of its energy, but these targets will still be difficult to reach. Fossil fuels remain a large part of the country’s energy portfolio, accounting for approximately two thirds of the total production. Last year 44% of the energy generated in Denmark came from coal-powered plants.

But still faced with this I am confident that Denmark’s energy plan is very much achievable. Truthfully, it must be a success. And since neighboring country Sweden has lost the will to lead, Europe badly needs a new climate leader. And hopefully the new socialistic government in Denmark wants to take that on that role. Next year Denmark will take over the presidency of the European Union. It will be during these six months that we will see if Denmark is serious about promoting ambitious climate policies and targets for all of Europe.

A report released by the China Council of International Cooperation on Environment and Development included the influential opinions of over 200 experts (both international and domestic), and it ultimately concluded that China has the potential to create more than 9.5 million jobs over the next five years. The catch is that this would be contingent upon China replacing the current industry jobs that are less eco-friendly with jobs that focus on renewable technologies and green energy.

The aforementioned council has thus advised China’s government to move forward fiscally and to spend 5.8 trillion yuan toward green ventures. The council calculated that doing such would result in a green GDP boost of 8 trillion, and that the energy-saving processes would also save 1.4 trillion yuan. The current, dirty parts of the economy result in both a loss of jobs and GDP. Li Ganje, the vice minister of Environmental Protection, explains, “The industrial sector is still the prime energy consumer and a major cause of pollution, so greening the sector is key for China’s green transformation.”

The council’s report was not altogether positive; it also outlined the repercussions of the current environmental state, and says, “The blind pursuit of economic growth has now become a huge obstacle for China’s green growth.”  Achim Steiner, executive director of the UN’s Environment Program, commented with the release of the report, citing health repercussions: “They are paying a price first of all individually by premature deaths. . . . Respiratory diseases and premature deaths in the hundreds of thousands.”

Is China serious about making big changes, or are they too dependent on the current system? Join in the discussion in the comments below and/or share the piece.

The Chinese government announced this on the back of record investment in renewable technology in 2010 overtaking the U.S. for the first time in 2010 with an astounding $54.4Bn being invested in the renewable sector. This compares with the US at $34Bn and the UK about a tenth of that at $3.3Bn. $54.8Bn equates to about 56,000MW of installed hydro power, 44,000MW of installed wind capacity and 800MW of installed solar power. The BBC reported that a total of $211Bn was invested globally last year with a 32% growth rate in the renewable sector. Using my back of the envelope calculation, this equates to the renewable market doubling every two-and-a-bit years, a formidable growth.

China, it would seem, is a good place to invest in renewable technology. So good in fact, that back in June of this year the World Bank awarded China and seven other countries grants to be used directly in organising, implementing and developing climate change mitigation technologies.

This all sounds very promising but, as with nearly every bit of good news, there is an important addendum which highlights a more subdued reality. Last year China emitted 7.7Bn tonnes of carbon equivalent which is a 13.3% increase on last year’s total. Since 2000 China’s CO2 emissions have risen by 170.6% and have been closely related to the country’s Gross Domestic Product growth. This is why the huge investment in renewable technologies is so important, as it is the only way to break the link between carbon emissions and GDP growth. In a world where GDP growth is king, the Chinese government could be showing the way in sustainable energy production and low carbon emissions.

The coming few years are going to be very interesting.

The particular environmental requirements necessary to produce substantial outputs of energy are difficult to come by outside of tourist-popular coastal areas. While wind turbines are cleaner and make much better neighbors than coal and nuclear power plants, that does not mean that sight-seeing tourist attractions want 350 ft wind turbines popping up along misty mountain ridges where locals make their income from beautiful sunsets and the sights of colorful fall leaves and bursting spring buds. That’s why locations like Pasquotank County and Perquimans County in North Carolina are becoming prime real estate for wind energy investors like Atlantic Wind LLC. These rural locations are close enough to the coastal winds to produce 2 megawatts of electricity per tower, yet still rural and undeveloped enough to ask crops and grazing cattle to be neighborly to the huge towers instead of beach-going tourists or commuters in major cities.

Atlantic Wind LLC will pay farmers and other landowners $6,000 each year per turbine erected on their property, and they can still farm around the concrete bases of the turbines. There isn’t a crop that can match that return per acre, and in this case, they can still produce their crops in addition to their wind-generated income. The huge project planned for these rural/coastal areas could potentially produce 300 megawatts of clean, renewable electricity, increase landowner income, and power 50,000-60,000 homes.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, the United States produces about 2 percent of our total energy with 850 utility-scale wind farms much like the one proposed for NC. The turbines in the utility-scale wind farms produce enough electricity to power 10 million American homes, and Atlantic Wind LLC intends to contribute to that number in the near future.

Virginia has approved a 19 windmill farm for the beautiful mountains of Highland County, but construction has not yet begun. To entice the wind farmers to their areas, counties and states offer tax breaks, subsidies, and other financial “carrots” to bring attention to the wind potential of their areas. Atlantic Wind LLC will recoup one third of its $600 million dollar investment through the federal government. The company has already had its local tax bill reduced on a permanent basis from $25,000 per windmill down to $5,000 per turbine. The incentives turn out to be good for everyone though, and even with a 75% local tax reduction, Atlantic Wind will still be the county’s largest taxpayer by 300%. That’s 3x more tax revenue for the county, a boost in income for the landowners, and a reliable source of clean energy for the state.

With dollar signs in their eyes and clean energy in their hearts other states are lining up to invite the wind developers to check out their locations.

With the energy crisis ramping up under the summer heat, Japan has redoubled its emphasis on its “Cool Biz” campaign that has been in place since 2005 and is now renamed “Super Cool Biz” in acknowledgement of the increasing severity of the problem. Businesses are encouraged to keep thermostats set to 85F during the height of summer and to have workers shed their suits and dress shirts for khaki shorts and sandals. Offices are also encouraged to increase the telecommuting option for workers where possible, and to shift operations toward earlier morning hours.

Even with drastic energy-saving measures in place, the hopes for making severe cuts to energy consumption are not high. Japan already consumes less energy than the world average for each point of its GDP by 20% and less than the US by a whopping 30%. With shiny new cars parked behind every garage door waiting to drink the purchased oil Japan needs to make up its energy short falls, the choices aren’t getting any easier.

Everyone is cutting down to even the smallest expenditure. To do its part in conserving energy, the Ministry of Economy has even deactivated its automatic doors. As a country they’ve already improved energy efficiency by 37% in the last 30 years according to Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy. It’s not like the problem is merely curbing extravagant and wasteful uses of energy. They’re looking at having to curb perfectly practical uses of energy for only the absolutely vital ones like powering hospital equipment and food storage facilities.

In the midst of all of these energy saving strategies and campaigns remains the question of what to do next. With Japanese citizens still unconvinced of the ability of their local reactors to survive an earthquake or tsunami, proponents of renewable energy are making their voices heard. With some 200 volcanoes and 28,000 hot springs, it has been estimated that the country could supply over 80,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power to meet half of the country’s energy demand. With the topography and seashores of the coast, an additional 80,000 megawatts could possibly be produced with land-based windmills.

Prior to suffering the no confidence vote in July, Japan’s Prime Minister Kan had proposed a goal of powering 10 million Japanese homes with roof top photovoltaic panels by 2020. Now, Japan has set goals even beyond Kan’s proposal and aims to increase the total PVC panel output of the country from 3,500 megawatts in 2010 to 53,000 megawatts in 2030 and to power18 million Japanese homes by that year.

Japan’s nuclear proponents and those attached to the already existing nuclear infrastructure will not easily let go of nuclear possibilities, and with the heat of summer creeping in, it seems the main direction Japan turns for electricity will be decided in the coming months. The visions of an environmentally friendly 2030 are nice, but the sweat of the summer of 2011 may help worried citizens decide they don’t mind their local reactor so much after all.

Whether the reactors are restarted or not, the hopes for nuclear expansion have most likely been forever dashed in Japan, and whatever direction the country turns for meeting further power demand will most likely include a diversified portfolio of earth friendly technology.

Masayoshi Son, Japan’s wealthiest man, has started a research foundation for renewables backed by his own investment money, and so far the foundation has been honored to list 37 of the country’s 45 prefectures as founding members. The situation is ripe for leaps in innovation that could perhaps pave the way for the rest of the world to follow. As the temperature climbs, the whole world watches and waits to see what Japan’s next step will be, and if it’s one the rest of us could possibly follow.

“I soon came to the conclusion that neither international cooperation nor technological advancements would guarantee human societies to build and safely run nuclear reactors in all possible conditions on Earth (earthquakes, floods, droughts, tornadoes, wars, terrorism, climate change, tsunamis, pandemics, etc.). I am sadly reminded of this turning point in my life as I listen to the news about the earthquake, tsunami and extremely worrying nuclear crisis in Japan.”

Silvi warns that “there will definitely be worse accidents” if we continue with nuclear power:

“Why not consider Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima as warnings of greater catastrophes to come and avoid the inevitable by shutting them down, much like changing your diet and/or lifestyle after finding out that your cholesterol or blood pressure is elevated, rather than continuing down the same path until a heart attack or stroke strikes?”

According to Silvi the world could easily replace nuclear power simply by reducing our energy usage and introducing energy efficiency programs:

“Nuclear today only generates about 12 percent of the developed world’s electricity. By instituting an energy efficiency program,” Silvi suggests, “we could fill the gap caused by shutting them all down and put this malevolent genie back into the bottle.”

And the public in Italy seems to agree with Silvi’s anti-nuclear sentiments as they voted against new investments in nuclear energy in a recent referendum in the country. In Japan only 19 of the 54 country’s nuclear reactors are now operating. The others are offline for various reasons since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. At the same time the country’s wind farms are fully operational and were actually unscathed by the massive earthquake disaster. And people claim that nuclear is a stable energy source…

There is enormous potential in renewable energy that can meet our current and future needs. Here are a few facts worth knowing about wind power’s renewable energy:

• A single wind turbine can power over 300 homes if it is well designed. To start a turbine, the winds only need to reach fourteen miles per hour, so places with light wind such as the UK are able to use it with ease.
• Wind power was used as far back as 5000 BCE for ships, wind mills, and power pumps.
• Contrary to popular thought, wind power is not harmful to birds. A study by NASA has shown that windmills have no significant impact on birds.
• In 2008, enough wind power was generated in the U.S. to power the entire state of Colorado

While these facts are impressive, even more information is being discovered about wind power all the time. It seems only fitting that Google, a company that is based on information and technology, can start funding a project that will lead to more wind power findings. In the Atlantic Ocean, Google is investing $5 billion on a 350 mile stretch of land from New Jersey to Virginia to create a large scale wind farm. The strong winds that blow over the sea are ideal for a wind farm because of all the energy they can produce. It will be a pioneer effort to become the first U.S. offshore wind farm in full operation. Google is hoping to attract other companies to the project by investing a substantial 37.5 percent of the initial funds.

Google representatives are as excited about the project as the “green geeks.” The Director of Green Business Operations and Strategy at Google, Rick Needham, describes the project as a “superhighway” of energy. He stated that not being afraid to take risks has gotten the company to where it is today and that they hope that this will be a good example to other companies on what can be possible. The project is called the Atlantic Wind Connection. Once completed, the project will bring wind energy to an estimated 2 million homes.

Last year, Google invested in 20 years of wind energy and created a branch in the company called Google Energy. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Google is taking over everyone’s power bills. Rather, it means that the company is actively seeking alternative, greener, sources of energy to power its infrastructure in the future. Any excess energy the company might generate it plans to sell to back to the grid, so that everything from our home computers to our garage doors can be powered by clean energy.

The technology giant not only wants to be at the front line of efforts to go green, but also believes that this will be a good business practice for others to imitate. The company is liaised with Good Energies, a European and American investment company, as well as Marubeni, out of Japan.

We can hope that more efforts such as these can help bring the nation to energy independence and spark new hope for the people to know that they will have a safe place to work and live in the future.

The KWP officials said that the main purpose of their visit was to learn from China’s experience in the geothermal sector. CPC officials said that “China would like to enhance its exchanges with the DPRK in the field in order to jointly improve their capability to develop and utilize renewable energy.”

Share of combustible renewables and waste steadily increased between 1989 and 1996 after which its share has become stagnant. The country is also rich in hydro power resources which, according to available data constitutes about 50% of the total generation capacity.

Renewable energy would prove extremely helpful for North Korea’s economic growth as the country is heavily dependent on imported fuels. North Korea depends on oil imports from Russia, China and Iran.

When it comes to the question about energy priorities for America there is a strong consensus. A majority wants the US to invest in renewable energy sources such as wind, hydrogen and solar instead of expanding the oil, natural gas and coal sector.

“Nearly two-thirds of Americans (63%) say developing alternative sources such as wind, solar and hydrogen technology should be the more important priority for addressing America’s energy supply; 29% say expanding exploration and production of oil, coal and natural gas should be the more important priority.”

Some findings that didn’t really surprise anyone was the result that right-wing libertarians and conservatives doesn’t like environmental regulations while being more supportive of corporations. While 39% of the general public agree with the statement that “stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy” as many as 79% of libertarians agree on that.

“Staunch Conservatives and Libertarians are the only groups in which majorities say the U.S. has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment. In all other groups – including Main Street Republicans and the GOP-leaning Disaffecteds – most say that this country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment.”

The only ones who rather want to see more investments in the fossil fuel industry than the development of renewable energy sources are “staunch conservatives”. Libertarians also misses a majority agreement on this issue.

“Staunch Conservatives are the only group in which a majority says expanding oil, coal and natural gas should be the priority; fully 72% say this should be the focus, while just 15% would emphasize alternative energy sources.”

When it comes to the question of global warming you can still, unfortunately, see that it “remains a deeply partisan issue”. A majority of the public says there is evidence that the global temperature is rising and that the climate is changing.

“Overall, 58% of the public says there is solid evidence that the average temperature on earth has been getting warmer over the past few decades while 34% say there is no solid evidence of warming. Just over a third (36%) say this warming is mostly because of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, while 18% say it is mostly because of natural patterns in the earth’s environment.”

But what is more interesting, and satisfying to read, is that 71% of Americans believe the USA “should do whatever it takes to protect the environment”. And 59% believe strongly in that.