Autonomous Vehicle Consultant

In a recent article entitled, “Drill here, sell there, pay more,” Representative Ed Markey, wrote, “For the first time in 62 years, since Harry Truman was president, the United States was a net exporter of oil products. An estimated $88 billion worth of gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other petroleum products was sent to overseas markets last year.”

Exported diesel fuel also includes home heating oil that has been exported in greater quantities for the past several years. I wrote about this matter in my blog of October 18, 2011. That post noted, “Oil companies are making profits from exported distillate fuels and federal subsidies, while state and city government are vainly attempting to provide heating oil assistance to financially stressed families. Although oil companies are free to sell products to whomever, nevertheless they are not entitled to totally unnecessary subsidies. Some portion of those subsidies could be diverted to poor families for home heating oil payment assistance, while the remaining subsidies could support renewable energy R&D, especially to decrease the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) generated from solar PV and off shore wind.”

Representative Markey concluded, “An energy agenda that places oil above all is not helping Americans find work or achieve energy security. As we build America’s clean-energy future, we also must also ensure that our domestic oil and natural-gas resources stay here in America.”

In a blog post of December 4, 2011, I wrote, “Thirty percent of New England’s electricity generation is from nuclear plants (ISO Regional System Plan 2011). Three out of five of these five plants are past their design life time. All use mostly imported uranium, and exercise questionable safety by storing greater numbers of densely packed, spent fuel rods at the plants. Nuclear power plants have a finite lifetime. Replacing a decommissioned plant with another will be extremely expensive and time consuming. For example, an AP1000 nuclear power plant (Generation III+) built by Westinghouse will cost between $5B to $7B per reactor and be operational 60 months from receipt of order.

Those comments were reinforced with an article in the Boston Globe (February 9, 2012), “Officials question safety of Seabrook power:”

“Citing safety concerns, a growing chorus of local politicians is urging the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to halt the relicensing  process for Seabrook Station until a long-term solution is implemented to address concrete degradation at the plant.”

“Concrete surrounding an electric control tunnel at the nuclear power plant has lost almost 22 percent of its strength and is showing signs of an alkali-silica (ASR) reaction because of more than a decade of ground-water infiltration, according to an NRC inspection report released in May 2011.”

“The degradation was discovered during a below-grade inspection of the accessible portion of the foundation, including the tunnel, a safety structure with vital electric cables that support the cooling system used when the reactor is shut down.”

How many more Fukushima-Chernobyl wakeup calls are needed to put safety concerns ahead of profit motives?

In a blog post of February 4, 2012, I wrote, “In spite of extensive incentives from U.S. federal and state governments…, renewable energy consumption of solar and wind from 2006 to 2010 has been underwhelming at best.”

That observation was confirmed in a recent article in the Boston Globe (January 31, 2012), “Green electricity finds few customers in Mass:”

“Five years after NStar became the first Massachusetts utility to allow customers to buy electricity supplied by a wind farm, its Green program has failed to catch on. Less than 1 percent of the company’s nearly 900,000 customers have enrolled.”

“The dismal response resembles lackluster participation in similar renewable energy programs offered by other utilities, worrying state officials as they push toward a goal of generating 20 percent of electricity from renewable energy by 2020.”

“The NStar program has faltered because of the recession and falling fossil fuel prices, which resulted in a greater surcharge for wind energy. Environmental activists are frustrated and question whether utilities have done enough to publicize the programs.”

Electricity from renewable energy makes sense from environmental impact and domestic accessibly perspectives. However, cost to the consumer is more important. 

Note: There are 11 government agencies that support the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. Solicitations from these agencies are published several times during the year and contain dozens of problem topics. For example, many topics from the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE) have a keen interest in energy efficiency and renewable energy, some of which may overlap the issues raised in this post. Small businesses, sometimes teamed with universities, may submit proposals in response to these topics and possibly receive awards for technology/process development.

Russia reduced westward flows of natural gas through pipelines across the Ukraine last week citing greater domestic demand because of the extreme cold. Gazprom, owned by the Russian government, provides about 25 percent of Europe’s gas. In contrast, U.S. home heating oil prices are climbing due to export demands. In this case, Russia takes care of their domestic needs first, the United States does not.

Nationalizing U.S. energy assets offers the potential for affordable domestic energy prices by controlling supply and demand, especially during periods of hardship. It is noteworthy that 94 percent of the world’s oil assets are in the hands of national oil companies (Statoil of Norway, Petrobras of Brazil, etc.), and not the international oil companies (e.g. BP, ExxonMobil, Shell, etc).

In spite of extensive incentives from U.S. federal and state governments (See  below), renewable energy consumption of solar and wind from 2006 to 2010 has been underwhelming at best. There are two pie charts below, one for 2006 and the other for 2010 regarding U.S. renewable energy consumption. During the period from 2006 to 2010, the size of the pie expanded from 6,659 quadrillion Btu to 8,049 quadrillion Btu. However, there was no percentage increase in solar energy during this interval (i.e., flat at 1 percent), while the wind percentage rose from 4 percent to 11 percent. It is troubling to note that U.S. renewable energy production has remained at approximately 8 percent of the total energy production from 2006 to 2010.

In contrast, “The share of electricity produced from renewable energy in Germany has increased from 6.3 percent of the national total in 2000 to over 20 percent in the first half of 2011.” (See below). In percentage increases, Germany’s solar increased by 6X,  and wind by 4X compared to the United States.

Germany plans to replace its 17 nuclear power plants with renewable energy sources in 10 years. When, if ever, will the United States be able to replace even one of its 104 aging, risk-laden nuclear power plants with renewable energy sources?

U.S. Renewable Energy Consumption from 2006 -2010

German Renewable Energy Consumption in 2009

U.S. RENEWABLE ENERGY INCENTIVES

“States offer a variety of grant programs to encourage the use and development of renewables and energy efficiency. Most programs offer support for a broad range of technologies, while a few programs focus on promoting a single technology, such as photovoltaic (PV) systems. Grants are available primarily to the commercial, industrial, utility, education and/or government sectors. Most grant programs are designed to pay down the cost of eligible systems or equipment. Others focus on research and development, or support project commercialization. In recent years, the federal government has offered grants for renewables and energy efficiency projects for end-users. Grants are usually competitive.”   A total of 27 incentive programs are listed below:

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES (11)

• Green Building Incentives
• Industry Recruitment/Support
• Leasing Programs
• Loan Programs
• PACE Financing
• Performance-Based Incentives
• Personal Tax Incentives
• Property Tax Incentives
• Rebate Programs
• Sales Tax Incentives
• Utility Rate Discounts

RULES, REGULATIONS & POLICIES (16)

• Appliance/Equipment Efficiency Standards
• Building Energy Codes
• Contractor Licensing
• Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS)
• Energy Standards for Public Buildings
• Equipment Certification Requirements
• Generation Disclosure
• Green Power Purchasing Policies
• Interconnection Standards
• Line Extension Analysis
• Mandatory Utility Green Power Option
• Net Metering
• Public Benefit Funds
• Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS)
• Solar & Wind Access Policies
• Solar & Wind Permitting Standards