PUC commissioners approved a plan for restructuring Southeastern Pennsylvania’s electric industry in a landmark case decision on Thursday, December 11, 1997.
The decision, made on a 3 to 2 vote of the commissioners, promises a 15% savings to customers who shop and permits PECO to recover $5 billion. Under the plan, PECO starting January 1999, will give residential customers who shop for electricity a credit of 5.2 cents per kilowatt hour. One third of PECO’s customers will be eligible to start shopping 1/1/99 with another third the following day and the remainder beginning January 1, 2000.
The outcome which was called “an easy decision to appeal” by PECO officials seemed to be a compromise which left all parties unhappy. The parameters for the PUC decision were established in three competing restructuring plans; the Philadelphia Electric Company’s self-christened “Pennsylvania Plan”, Enron’s “Choice Plan”, and the Environmentalist’s ”Better Choice Plan”.
The contentious portions of PECO Energy’s plan included the level of compensation requested for expected losses from its monopoly based investment decisions and the treatment of so-called default customers who do not chose an electric supplier. To Enron’s credit, their Choice Plan reawakened local public debate about the future of our electric industry, the size of offered rate discounts, and the handling of so-called default customers (those not choosing a supplier). It also cast a new light on a negotiated “public” settlement agreement with PECO over the level of stranded cost allowed and other key elements of introducing competition.
The Environmentalist’s, which include the Philadelphia Solar Energy Association (PSEA), developed a plan that promised a more
environmentally friendly electric industry. The proposal would assign customers who decide not to choose an electric supplier to a supplier
according to criteria which promote a healthier, safer, and economy boosting electric industry. Local environmental organizations
offered the Better Choice Planto the PUC as an alternative that goes beyond the submitted plans and settlement agreements to insure the
promised benefits of a competitive market.
A broad coalition of Philadelphia area environmental non-profit organizations established standing before the Public Utility Commission by filing an intervention in PECO’s request for stranded costs. The primary issues for the environmental coalition include nuclear decommissioning, universal service, consumer education, fair competition, and renewable energy development. Concern remains about the environmental effects of the generation mix employed to serve our electric needs and the public’s ability to effectively and positively influence that mix with their choices.
PSEA members are working to ensure that renewable energy sources are not disadvantaged by the new rules for electric competition. Many believe that our best hope for building a healthier electric industry lies in the unfetered ability of individual customers to generate their own electricity using renewable technologies such as rooftop photovoltaics. We are working to remove the institutional barriers to net metering which would enable
self-generation to become cost effective.
THE LANDMARK PENNSYLVANIA DECISION
Consumers Aided in Search for Solar Energy
The Colorado Consumer’s Guide to Buying a Solar Electric System provides basic information about the who, what and why of financing, purchasing and installing photovoltaic (solar electric) systems in Colorado. It also includes information about financial incentives such as the Solar Rebate Program, tax credits for businesses and net metering. Net metering means that extra electricity produced by a photovoltaic system is sold back to the utility at the same rate as power is purchased from the utility. “People need easy to follow guidelines for purchasing and installing solar energy systems, and this new booklet answers that need,” said NREL engineer John Thornton, who helped write the booklet.
The Borrower’s Guide to Financing Solar Energy Systems provides information for lenders and consumers about nationwide financing programs for photovoltaic systems and solar thermal systems, which heat indoor air and water. In addition to traditional sources for home mortgage funds, several government organizations offer programs for financing solar energy systems and energy efficiency improvements.
The guide’s glossary includes information about energy saving performance contracts through which energy service companies absorb the cost of more efficient energy systems in exchange for a share of the savings. It also describes energy efficient mortgages, which give special consideration to borrowers who purchase or refinance homes that are or will be energy efficient.
Spectrolab Terrestrial Concentrator Solar Cell Achieves Unparalelled Solar Energy Conversion
Using concentrated sunlight, these photovoltaic (PV) cells can convert 36.9 percent of the sun’s energy to electricity, a technology capability that
could dramatically reduce the cost of generating electricity from solar energy.
Spectrolab’s achievement is a necessary step to achieve one of the U.S. Department of Energy’s major PV initiative goals, to develop solar modules
that convert more than 33 percent of the sun’s energy into electricity as targeted in the High Performance PV Project.
“The modified cell design better suits the terrestrial solar spectrum and opens the path for higher performance terrestrial concentrators” said David
Lillington, president of Spectrolab. “And because the terrestrial cell we have developed is similar to our conventional space cells, it can be
implemented in production, and manufactured in very high volumes with minimal impact to production flow.”
Spectrolab uses these state-of-the-art solar cells in concentrator modules of various sizes and power-generating capabilities. Several modules are
already being tested throughout the world by PV concentrator system manufacturers.
A significant advantage of concentrator systems is that fewer solar cells are required to achieve a specific power output, thus replacing large areas
of semiconductor materials with relatively inexpensive optics that provide optical concentration. The slightly higher cost of multijunction cells is
offset by the use of fewer cells. Due to the higher efficiency of multijunction cells used in the concentrator modules, only a small fraction
of the cell area is required to generate the same power output compared to crystalline silicon or thin-film flat-plate modules.
The terrestrial solar cell is a modified version of Spectrolab’s Improved Triple Junction (ITJ) space solar cell.
“There is considerable synergy between space and terrestrial cells, and improvements in space cells are expected to drive efficiency improvements
for terrestrial cells. During the last few years, multijunction solar cells have doubled the power output of large commercial satellites, and
substantially improved their revenue-generating capability. We believe that further optimization of the improved terrestrial concentrator cells will
yield the potential to surpass 40 percent conversion efficiency,” said Dr. Nasser Karam, Spectrolab vice president for Advanced Technology.
Terrestrial solar cells will also be the driving force to reduce the cost of materials used in space and terrestrial applications. This will add to the
economic attractiveness of multijunction solar cell technology both for high power space satellites and large terrestrial systems.
The terrestrial concentrator cell, measuring approximately one-quarter of a square centimeter in area, was fabricated and tested at Spectrolab and then
re-measured at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), located in Golden, Colorado. NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy’s premier laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficient research, development and deployment. Development of the device technology embodied in the record efficiency multijunction cell was funded in part by NREL, in part by the Air
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and by Spectrolab.
Spectrolab, founded in 1956, has been supplying solar cells and panels to the space industry for 40 years. Spectrolab is headquartered in Sylmar,
Calif., a suburb of Los Angeles. It also is a leading supplier of searchlights and solar simulators. With its heritage mirroring the history of flight. It is the largest manufacturer of satellites, commercial jetliners and military aircraft. The company is also a global market leader in missile defense, human space flight and launch services.
Molecular Assemblies Created to Convert Water to Hydrogen
Wonder where the fuel will come from for tomorrow’s hydrogen-powered vehicles? Virginia Tech researchers are developing catalysts that will convert water to hydrogen gas.
The research will be presented at the 228th American Chemical Society National Meeting in Philadelphia August 22-26, 2004
Supramolecular complexes created by Karen Brewer’s group at Virginia Tech convert light energy (solar energy) into a fuel that can be transported, stored, and dispensed, such as hydrogen gas.
The process has been called artificial photosynthesis, says Brewer, associate professor of chemistry. “Light energy is converted to chemical energy. Solar light is of sufficient energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen gas, but this does not happen on its own; we need a catalysts to make this reaction occur.”
One major challenge is to use light to bring together the multiple electrons needed for fuel production reactions. Electrons are the negatively charged particles that surround an atom’s nucleus, allowing atoms to react and form bonds.
Previous research has focused on collecting electrons using light energy. The Brewer group has gone the next step and created molecular machines that use light to bring electrons together (photoinitiated electron collection) then deliver the electrons to the fuel precursor, in this case, water, to produce hydrogen.
Vast New Energy Source Almost Here: Solar Hydrogen Fuel Dream
Will Soon Be A Reality, Australian Scientists Predict
Australian scientists predict that a revolutionary new way to harness the power of the sun to extract clean and almost unlimited energy supplies from water will be a reality within seven years.
Using special titanium oxide ceramics that harvest sunlight and split water to produce hydrogen fuel, the researchers say it will then be a simple engineering exercise to make an energy-harvesting device with no moving parts and emitting no greenhouse gases or pollutants.
It would be the cheapest, cleanest and most abundant energy source ever developed: the main by-products would be oxygen and water.
“This is potentially huge, with a market the size of all the existing markets for coal, oil and gas combined,” says Professor Janusz Nowotny, who with Professor Chris Sorrell is leading a solar hydrogen research project at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Centre for Materials and Energy Conversion. The team is thought to be the most advanced in developing the cheap, light- sensitive materials that will be the basis of the technology.
A Solution to Global Warming (Denver Post — Guest Commentary)
Global warming is occurring at an unprecedented rate and is starting to have adverse consequences, such as increased frequency and severity of droughts, heat waves and floods. The World Health Organization estimates that global warming is already killing 150,000 people a year. Here in Colorado, rising temperatures and changes in precipitation are hurting farmers, ranchers and Colorado’s ski industry.
Most of the carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere comes from burning coal, oil and natural gas, the so-called fossil fuels. The United States, with less than 5 percent of the world’s population, is responsible for 27 percent of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions. The federal government under President Bush has failed to take significant action to reduce U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. This policy must change if the world is going to limit global warming to acceptable levels.
Taking meaningful action to limit global warming does not require a massive expansion of nuclear power plants, or new government subsidies to facilitate this. The nuclear power industry received more than $140 billion of U.S. taxpayer subsidies during the past 50 years. It is now a mature industry that should stand (or fall) on its own.
In spite of the hefty subsidies, no U.S. utility has ordered a new nuclear power plant in over 25 years. Among the reasons for this: nuclear power is not economically competitive; nuclear energy lacks public support; highly radioactive nuclear waste still cannot be safely disposed of over the long term; and safety concerns remain. Given these wide- ranging problems, a nuclear power revival does not look promising.
So, if nuclear energy is not the cure to our planetary “fever,” what is? How can we reduce our use of fossil fuels and carbon dioxide emissions while maintaining our economic health and high standards of living? The best response today is to improve our energy efficiency, i.e., using less energy for a given level of service, and expand energy production from renewable sources such as wind power, solar energy and biofuels.
U.S. energy intensity (energy consumption per unit of GDP) declined 46 percent over the past 30 years. Most of this reduction was due to real energy-efficiency improvements: increases in the fuel efficiency of cars, appliances, lighting, buildings, industries, etc. Large additional increases in energy efficiency are technically and economically feasible. Raising energy-efficiency standards as well as expanding federal, state and local energy-efficiency programs will do far more to reduce carbon dioxide emissions than new subsidies for the nuclear energy industry. And stimulating greater energy efficiency saves money while cutting pollutant emissions.
The U.S. gets only 6 percent of its energy from renewable energy sources today. But wind power and solar energy are the fastest-growing
energy sources in the world. Wind power has become cost competitive with other electricity options in regions with good wind speeds. Solar
energy technologies are rapidly advancing and are becoming more economical every year. If U.S. energy policy emphasized increased use
of renewable energy as well as energy- efficiency improvement, the U.S. could obtain more than 15 percent of its energy from renewable
sources by 2020 and even more over the long run.
These are not theoretical solutions. European countries that are taking the global warming threat seriously are not building new nuclear power plants. Instead they are focusing on improving energy efficiency and increasing renewable energy production. Denmark and Germany are the world’s leaders in wind power production. The European Union has set a goal of getting more than 20 percent of its electricity from all renewable sources by 2010. And 14 U.S. states – including Arizona, California and Texas – have established renewable energy requirements for their utilities.
The next U.S. president should make energy-efficiency improvement and renewable energy development the cornerstones of our national energy
strategy. This will reduce carbon dioxide emissions more than new subsidies aimed at reviving the nuclear power industry. It will also lower energy bills, lower oil imports, and support more jobs than an energy strategy centered on building new nuclear power plants.
U.S. citizens seem to have this figured out: Energy efficiency and renewable energy, not nuclear power, are the energy sources most favored by the public. When will our political leaders get it?
TED TURNER JOINS SOLAR ENERGY MARKET
‘Our future depends on changing the way we use energy,’ Turner said. ‘We`ve got to move away from fossil fuels and develop long-term energy solutions that work. Using clean energy technologies, such as solar power, is the right thing to do, and it represents a tremendous business
opportunity.’
Turner will join forces with Dome-Tech Solar, in Branchburg, N.J., to create DT Solar.
‘Our core goal is to reduce our customer`s energy bills and provide them a high return investment. We do all this while improving their operations and reducing their impact on the environment,’ Dome-Tech, which also includes Dome-Tech Commissioning Services, Dome-Tech Field Engineering, Dome-
Tech Energy Advisors, FM3 Group and Dome-Tech Energy Solutions, said in its mission statement.
According to a company release, DT Solar will concentrate on the United States` largest solar energy market, California.
The state offers comprehensive tax incentives and enthusiastic support from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who last year introduced the Million Solar Roofs initiative there.
California businesses to get help installing solar
Mid-size commercial buildings in California now have a resource to help with the upfront cost of installing a solar energy system.
Solar Power Partners, ‘a developer, owner and operator of a distributed network of commercial solar energy facilities,’ according to Renewable Energy Access, launched SPP LLC1, a power purchase agreement program.
‘The (power purchase agreement) ensures energy rates remain lower than the local utility and insulates the user from volatile energy prices over the term of the agreement. The maintenance and operating costs are covered while building owners pay only for the electricity that is consumed,’ the
news outlet reported.
The high upfront cost of installing a solar energy system is what prohibits many commercial and residential customers from making the switch.
Tax incentive plans and rebate programs in about a dozen states ensure that customers will see a return on their investment within five to 10 years. President George W. Bush`s Solar America Initiative also includes federally- funded incentives to go solar.
Suntech Power reports progress on new technology
Suntech Power, based in Wuxi, China, announced its ‘semiconductor finger’ technology has reached 18 percent efficiency and the commercial adaptation of the project is progressing on schedule.
The technology, ‘co-developed and owned together with the University of New South Wales in Australia, overcomes the major limitation of the traditional screen printing process that is the industry standard,’ according to the industry publication, Solarbuzz.
‘Heavily doped semiconductor strips are built into the (photovoltaic) cell surface which more efficiently collects the generated electrical charge without requiring the surface dead layer found in conventional screen printed cells. This technology also potentially enables the company to reduce the number of traditional lines of metal contact strips on the top surface of the PV cell thereby reducing shading from the sun to enable the PV cell to generate even
greater watts of electricity,’ Solarbuzz said.
‘We are very pleased with our semiconductor finger technology which has increased the average conversion efficiencies of our best monocrystalline PV cells to 18 percent — well above the industry average of 14 percent to 15 percent. At the same time, we have maintained the lowest cost production base relative to our peers,’ Suntech Chairman and CEO Zhengrong Shi said via a statement.
Spanish company signs Algerian agreement
Spanish solar firm Abener last week signed a contract for a solar thermal electric-combined cycle hybrid plant in the Sahara Desert country of Algeria, which will produce 25 megawatts of electricity using a 1,937,503 square-foot field of parabolic collectors.
Abener will operate the plant for 25 years.
Algeria, located on the north coast of Africa, launched an incentive plan for producing solar thermal energy in March 2004, making it the first country outside the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to do so.
‘This way, in 2010 they will cover 5 percent of their electric production with (renewable) sources and aiming to become, to a larger extent, one of the suppliers of green energy to Europe by means of several projects of submarine electric interconnection that are now under consideration,’
according to Solarbuzz.
‘It is worthy to point out that the exploitation of the 1 percent of the Sahara surface with solar thermal electric plants could provide the whole planet with electric energy,’ the publication continued.
Post-petroleum World?
Of course is takes energy to cast metal parts, wind stator coils, etc, but in the absence of major storms it should last many years, long enough to more than repay its production energy.
I’ve been a) using the assumption without much comment, and b) assuming that it’s actually an overgeneralization. That is, some specific case or case model (maybe even an “average” or “normal” case in some sense, ie, not clever choice of case to make the point) can be shown to be a net
energy loss, and this has been generalized more than it should be. Same for biofuels.
But even with (b) above, (a) is reasonable, because even if it can be made to pay (and I think it can even if it isn’t currently) it’s less viable than other ways. Rather like, I wouldn’t push hydroelectric power as a total solution, even though you more than break even.
Modelling Atmospheric Solar Energy Absorption
An atmospheric general circulation model , which assimilates data from daily observations of temperature, humidity, wind, and sea-level air pressure, was compared with a set of observations that combines satellite and ground-based measurements of solar flux. The comparison reveals that the model underestimates by 25-30 watts per square meter the amount of solar energy absorbed by Earth’s atmosphere. Contrary to some recent reports, Clouds have little or no overall effect on atmospheic absorption, a consistent feature of both the observations and the model. Of several variables considered, water vapor appears to be the dominant influence on atmospheric absorption.
The introduction appears to offer a good, concise insight into the current perception about the disposition of solar energy within Earth’s climate system.
1. The top of the atmosphere global average solar incident energy is 342 W m^-2
2. Approximately 30% ( 102 W m^-2 ) is reflected back to space, and the remaining 240 W m^-2 is absorbed by the atmosphere and surface.
3. Comparison of a Global Circulation Model with observations at 720 surface sites showed that the model overestimates by 10 – 15 W m^-2
the global average solar flux absorbed by the surface.
4. Another comparision of four other models with observations at 93 surface sites also showed surface overestimates of 9 – 18 W m^-2
5. The global mean solar flux absorbed in the atmosphere in four GCMs ranges from 56 – 68 W m^-2, which are considerably smaller than
98 W m^-2 derived empirically from surface observations at ~1000 sites.
6. Satellite-based estimates of surface flux ( using radiative transfer codes to describe atmospheric absorption ) range between 65 – 83 W m^-2, and the higher figure has been validated against surface observations. The use of such codes is really modelling, so comparing those results with the above GCM results would effectively be just a comparison of models.
7. Clouds have been suggested as contributing 25 W m^-2 additional absorption that is not accounted for in the models, however such a
strong absorbance by clouds is inconsistent with the observed reflectance of clouds.
Having laid the foundation, the author then goes on to describe in boring detail how he selected the observational data sets, the spatial
grid points over the globe ( unevenly, with 8 in southern hemisphere and 23 points between the equator and 30 degrees north, hence the
observations are weighted towards northern temperate continents ). The observations were compared to the output from the GEOS-1 model,
and, without filters, the model underestimated the absorbed solar flux in the atmosphere by 25 – 30 W m^-2, when compared to observations.
To ascertain the effect of clouds, two independent measurements of cloud fraction were then also incorporated, and the resulst showed that the
25 – 30 W m^-2 discrepancy was independant of either measure of cloud cover. Whilst checking for undesirable correlations hidden in the
dataset, additional variables that might affect atmospheric absorption were also evaluated. It was found that the treatment of total column
water vapour in the model could explain much of the discrepancy between model and observations, as the discrepancy increased with increasing
water vapour.
Provided the above difference is real ( and the author acknowledges it could still be an artifact of the dataset selected ), it is possible
that the additional energy absorbed in the atmosphere would result in less evaporation from the surface and correspondingly less
precipitation. The modelling of energy transfers from the tropics could perhaps be affected in both atmospheric and ocean circulation models
by the difference.
Decentralized Solar Energy Production Can Supply the World’s Energy Needs
“Solar power has two big advantages over fossil fuels. The first is in the fact that it is renewable; it is never going to run out. The second is its effect on the environment.
While the burning of fossil fuels introduces many harmful pollutants into the atmosphere and contributes to environmental problems like global warming and acid rain, solar energy is completely non-polluting. While many acres of land must be destroyed to feed a fossil fuel energy plant its required fuel, the only land that must be destroyed for a solar energy plant is the land that it stands on. Indeed, if a solar energy system were incorporated into every business and dwelling, no land would have to be destroyed in the name of energy. This ability to decentralize solar energy is something that fossil fuel burning cannot match.
As the primary element of construction of solar panels, silicon, is the second most common element on the planet, there is very little environmental disturbance caused by the creation of solar panels. In fact, solar energy only causes environmental disruption if it is centralized and produced on a gigantic scale. Solar power certainly can be produced on a gigantic scale, too.
Among the renewable resources, only in solar power do we find the potential for an energy source capable of supplying more energy than is used.5
Suppose that of the 4.5×1017 kWh per annum that is used by the earth to evaporate water from the oceans we were to acquire just 0.1% or 4.5×1014 kWh per annum. Dividing by the hours in the year gives a continuous yield of 2.90×1010 kW. This would supply 2.4 kW to 12.1 billion people.6
This translates to roughly the amount of energy used today by the average American available to over twelve billion people. Since this is greater than the estimated carrying capacity of the Earth, this would be enough energy to supply the entire planet regardless of the population.
Unfortunately, at this scale, the production of solar energy would have some unpredictable negative environmental effects. If all the solar collectors were placed in one or just a few areas, they would probably have large effects on the local environment, and possibly have large effects on the world environment. Everything from changes in local rain conditions to another Ice Age has been predicted as a result of producing solar energy on this scale. The problem lies in the change of temperature and humidity near a solar panel; if the energy producing panels are kept non-centralized, they should not create the same local, mass temperature change that could have such bad effects on the
environment.”
“Of all the energy sources available, solar has perhaps the most promise. Numerically, it is capable of producing the raw power required to satisfy the entire planet’s energy needs. Environmentally, it is one of the least destructive of all the sources of energy. Practically, it
can be adjusted to power nearly everything except transportation with very little adjustment, and even transportation with some modest modifications to the current general system of travel. Clearly, solar energy is a resource of the future.”
