Converting New York State Entirely to Renewable Energy: What Would It Look Like?

New Hampshire, USA -- While the State of New York hashes out deep disagreement over how to deal with sugary megadrinks that contribute to obesity, maybe they can turn their attention to something a little less complicated — like mapping a full conversion to 100 percent renewable energy in less than 20 years.

Stanford Professor Mark Z. Jacobson previously co-authored studies in 2009 and 2011, outlining what it would take to shift completely to renewable energy at a global and national scale, respectively. In either case, such conversion would be a colossal undertaking in infrastructure, policy, finance, and partnerships.

But could it be more feasible to do it on a smaller scale — say, an individual state? Jacobson has now shrunk those analyses down to what it would take for the State of New York to shift its entire energy needs — transportation, electricity, heating and cooling — to renewable sources. Bottom line: It is all doable, with some important cost comparisons and behavioral shifts. "We think it's feasible to power the grid this way," Jacobson told RenewableEnergyWorld.com. "The assumption that you can't do it, is just an assumption."

The study, scheduled for upcoming publication in the journal Energy Policy, breaks down the specific mix of renewable energy ("wind, water and sunlight," or WWS) required to convert New York's all-purpose energy infrastructure. It uses 11 criteria to evaluate each technology: e.g. resource abundance, footprint and spacing, operating reliability, water consumption, emissions and pollution. Excluding mined natural gas, liquid biofuels, nuclear power, and carbon-capture coal (for reasons detailed in the full study), here's what they come up with as New York's renewables-only mix by 2030:

40 percent: Offshore wind (12,770 5-megawatt turbines)10 percent: Onshore wind (4,020 5-MW turbines)10 percent: Concentrated solar (387 100-MW CSP plants)10 percent: Utility-scale solar PV (828 50-MW plants)6 percent: Residential rooftop PV (5,000,000 5-kW systems)12 percent: Commercial/government rooftop PV (500,000 100-kW systems)5.5 percent: Hydro (7 1.3-GW hydroelectric power plants, most of which already exist)5 percent: Geothermal (36 100-MW plants)1 percent: Tidal (2,600 1-MW tidal turbines)0.5 percent: Wave energy (1,910 0.75-MW wave devices)
The end result, according to the study: power demand would be reduced by 37 percent, fuel costs would be zero, there would be a net increase in jobs, nearly all energy would be produced in-state, costs (and mortality) associated with pollution and emissions would decline significantly, and the 271 GW of installed power needed would be repaid within 17 years.

Such a transition won't happen easily or overnight, of course. Jacobson proposes some ~40 short-term policy options, including expanding the state's renewable portfolio standard (RPS), setting goals for offshore wind, establishing a green bank, implementing feed-in tariffs and net metering, more electric vehicles, etc. Another big part of the picture will be much more aggressive targets for energy efficiency, currently 15 percent less energy use by 2015. He also offers suggestions to smooth out variability of the renewable energy sources, by bundling them with hydro or stored CSP power, using demand-response management, oversizing the mix, and using energy storage. He cites two recent studies showing up to >99.8 percent of electricity could be produced using these "WWS" resources over multiple years.

The study wasn't funded from any group; it was requested and encouraged by people working on different types of energy proposals in New York State, Jacobson noted. He's subsequently put together a similar renewables roadmap for California, and is starting another one for Washington State. The model could be replicated for all 50 states, he says, with customized mixes of energy that take advantage of local resources, and with improvements to transmission systems and interconnections. And, of course, the commitment to make it happen.

View the original article here

Solar would be the bright lights in New York City

City could Bill of New York to come from more than the bright lights on Broadway. Big Apple is also increasingly with solar power, in particular from rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar shine.

Presented earlier this year, the city of New York City solar, a collaboration tool, an estimate of the solar-photovoltaic potential for the 1 million buildings in the five city boroughs are. The interactive map, hosted by the City University of New York (CUNY), based laser system on information of flights over the city by plane with an antenna equipped. The device, known as LiDAR for "image detection and ranging," information about the shape, angle, size and shade the roofs with the surface surveys of soil, buildings and trees collected. Analysis of the data showed that the city peak has a solar potential of 5,800 megawatts - more than 40% of the city electric demand at peak times, when all the roofs fully with solar have been equipped. About two-thirds of the city's structures are solar panels to the House.

CUNY's work at the NYC solar map was funded by the Energy Department in 2007 and the American recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009. For the complete story, see the energy blog.

View the original article here

A123 deal with China's Wanxiang would value the stock of $0.55 per share.

A123?s rallied Commons first about the deal, but since then again dropped. As I write this, the stock has fallen again to $0.48, to only a cent from yesterday's close. The lack of profit confused me, especially since A123?s liquidity problems are the main reason the he has acted on its current depressed to 37% of book value ($1.27 per share).
While regulatory and shareholder approvals have met must be, and some existing convertible bonds repurchased and retired, it seems likely to me that this deal go through. The Government has a track record of paranoia, if it is about the Chinese, regulators have to know that A123 is probably go without a major injection of liquidity is bankrupt and American investors not just on A123?s have been beating doors.

If the business is not blocked, I expect that Wanxiang make the entire investment. Finally, this investment for Wanxiang is almost certainly on the acquisition of A123?s technology and business contacts at a discount, not short-term cash flow. Weiding Lu, CEO which Wanxiang group, said:
A123 provides industry-leading technology for vehicle electrification and grid scale energy storage, as well as strong manufacturing and systems engineering capabilities in Michigan and Massachusetts. We think, that this important synergies with creates Wanxiang, which is involved in this area for 12 years and has strong R & D and this agreement is the first step towards a long-term agreement by which we plan to build on the foundation of manufacturing capacity in China, especially as we continue to expand our strategy of investing in the automotive and Cleantech in the United States, the A123 in the United States has established and help to extend capabilities of the company, both in the domestic and internationally that would create our believe that long-term value for customers, investors and other stakeholders of both companies.

Because I think Wanxiang making full investment, think I the price they are likely to numbers was a good short-term target for AONE. As long as the share price lower than Wanxiang, have an incentive to buy the shares on the open market rather than exercise their conversion option or warrants that should provide price support.
Read the details of the release, is $75 million of investment to a short-term bridging loan, which is not the acquisition of A123 stock resulted. The rest is $200 million in convertible bonds exist (the bearings can be) and $175 million, which can be invested with the exercise of warrants. An exercise of all control of 80% of the company would lead the warrants and the full conversion of the convertible bond of Wanxaing, or about 680 million shares, based had 170 million shares of A123 outstanding July of end of. To do the math and assuming that the initial $75 million bridge loan not used, to share, to acquire the 55 cents per share.

The current price of $0.48 makes a certain sense, but, if the deal is blocked, a stock that should make a beautiful floor under the share price, together with much potential upside signalled his interest in purchasing from A123 at $0.55 Wanxaing, are like the deal A123 new financial stability lead to existing opportunities and new possibilities in China to combat.
It may also be that the conversion price of the notes not the same as the exercise price of the warrants. If this is the case, then some of the expected note conversion or guarantee that exercise would have above happen $0.55 a share, and this in turn would increase the Wanxiang incentive to the share on the open market to buy.

Since I bought all those a little A123, I expect that gather as overcome the various obstacles for this business are. It is still a small investment, because there is still no guarantee that go through the business, and if for some reason, the business is not got, AONE almost certainly his film will continue.
UPDATE: after reading this article, I decided that Petersen is right, and every investment in A123 carefully watching bears. Since I was on vacation, I sold my shares at a small profit.

Disclosure: No.
Disclaimer: Past performance is not a guarantee or a reliable indicator of future results. This article contains the current opinions of the author and such opinions are non-binding. This article has been distributed for informational purposes only. Forecasts, estimates and certain information contained should not security, strategy or investment as investment advice or a recommendation for a particular product takes into account. Information contained herein is from sources reliable, but not guaranteed won were.

This article first appeared on Forbes.com blog green stocks and AltEnergy of the author, and was republished with permission.
View the original article here

Would Gordon Gekko Go Green?

Energy books tend to be either jargon-filled tomes or hand-wringing, end-of-the-world, please-just-shoot-me-now reprimands. So it was a relief to see that Brian Keane avoids both of these worn-out roads in his new book, “Green is Good: Save Money, Make Money, and Help Your Community Profit from Clean Energy.”

Keane expertly tells the clean energy story with humor and anecdotes likely to capture readers who want to learn more about energy efficiency and renewables, but have found few credible, consumer-friendly vehicles that teach them. I’ve never before seen solar power compared to Tony Bennett: not a rock star, like say, micro-hydropower, but “older, more reliable and almost certain to give a top notch performance every time.”

For those who know Keane, this engaging writing comes as little surprise. As president of SmartPower, a non-profit marketing firm, he’s the guy at energy conferences who can hold people’s attention — even during the low-blood sugar late-afternoon sessions — with his insight into how we think and behave as energy consumers.

Keane’s been in the thick of it for several years, working to sell the idea of green to sometimes skeptical politicians and an often snoring public. He takes us inside some of his intrepid efforts. The book provides an account, for example, of how he convinced two very different Connecticut mayors (think blue blood versus blue collar) to engage in a competition to see which city could get the most people to sign up for renewable energy. The mayors agreed to participate in the duel even under the terms that the loser would wear a t-shirt saying, “I wish I were the mayor of [name of losing city.]”

We get a clear picture of where we are today as energy consumers versus where we were 40 years ago in Keane’s comparison of his drafty 12-member childhood home in Massachusetts to his present energy efficient six-member Virginia house. You would think the smaller family, alone, would mean less energy use (“fewer bodies mean fewer eyeballs staring into the open refrigerator”). But no. Even with better insulation and Energy Star appliances, our homes now consume a lot more juice. Or here is another factoid from the book that puts our electricity appetite in perspective: College dorm rooms have more plug-in potential than the entire White House during Woodrow Wilson’s World War I presidency.

The book does not preach environmental religion; quite the contrary. Keane focuses on the relationship between green energy and capitalism. He advocates bringing “basic marketing principles to what often seems a holy cause.” In fact, Keane says “true believers” actually deter acceptance of clean energy by perpetuating the notion that going green requires adopting an alternative lifestyle (“wear hemp, eat only organic…”).

The title plays to the infamous line “Greed is Good” made by Gordon Gekko, the Michael Douglas character in the movie Wall Street. Keane portrays green as the flip side of Gekko’s destructive manipulation of capitalism; he takes us to a place where economic advantage and public good align. Rather than destroying the planet, here is where energy improves the environment using the good old-fashion profit motive. “Green is Good” offers an economic message that even Gekko might buy.

Published by Lyons Press, “Green is Good” is set for release in early October, and is now available for pre-purchase.

Elisa Wood is a long-time energy writer whose work is available at RealEnergyWriters.com

View the original article here