Comments on: 5 Things Obama Administration Needs To Do To Remain A Renewable Energy Leader

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 21:42:00 +0000

Definitely. This is one we note a lot. Though, maybe more so in the past than recently.

By: logicsd

logicsd — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:02:00 +0000

Hey Zachary, I appreciate the international competition perspective in this article. Too many people are unmotivated by environmental arguments for an energy revolution, but they sure as hell don’t want to get smoked by other countries developing faster than them, or losing money and jobs to foreign renewable energy companies. I hope to keep seeing this message in the future !

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 23:09:00 +0000

i’m going to take that as a joke. solar and wind are cost competitive in many places now. they are only going to drop in price. we should be going ‘full steam ahead’ on deployment. thorium is essentially just an idea right now. if it really works as well as thorium cheerleaders claim, we’ll be lucky to have it in 10 years. thorium may be a long-term help, but the clear short-term answer is renewables. and my guess is that by the time thorium is ready, it simply won’t compete economically anyway. my 2c.

By: Edward Kerr

Edward Kerr — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:58:00 +0000

IF and I say If…all of these things mentioned could happen it would still fall way short of the only goal that matters.”SAVING OURSELVES FROM EXTINCTION”. Personally I fear that we have already passed the point where applying the breaks as hard as possible won’t stop the “ship of souls” from going over the cliff. The problem is global and the atmosphere respects no ideology, no religion, no insanity…nothing. The earth will react without any remorse to our insults. Our own actions will make the planet unlivable. Blame the “evil industries” all you like but we are all guilty…(in defense of the poor man though we have few viable options as individuals to abandon coal oil and NG on a personal level…the rich could but don’t seem to care)

But, if we (as a species) were to get serious and attack this problem with the urgency that it commands buy dumping all fossil fuels asap and pulling as much CO2 out of the atmosphere as possible (yes the technology exists) then we might have a fighting chance to see our progeny live into the future without this Sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.

You all know that it will require a lot more than PTC renewal or even the dropping of fossil subsidies or any other “bandage”. RADICAL SURGERY is the only answer and I don’t see anyone (or group) that has the power or stomach to make it happen.

We the People, here in the good old US of A, have had our experiment in self government stolen away by the “elite” from whom we wrestled it, so looking to congress to DO ANYTHING is pure folly. The president, having been reduced to a titular figurehead can do little regardless of his sentiments.

If you believe in a God perhaps now would be a good time to start praying with vigor, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

By: yellowroz

yellowroz — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 14:20:00 +0000

Clarification on the final point – USEPA already has the authority to regulate GHGs: “…On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), the Supreme Court found that greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act.” New CAFE standards stem from this authority, as does some coal-fired power plant rules being applied. Look at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/index.html for more.

By: Bill Leavens

Bill Leavens — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 14:10:00 +0000

Somewhere at the top of the list should be undertaking primary R&D on thorium fission for electrical power generation. Solar and wind are important, but for the near term, thorium nuclear appears to be the answer.

By: Spike Lewis

Spike Lewis — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 02:48:00 +0000

Forgot one. Obama could lead by example and put solar panels back on the White House — like his administration promised to do by Spring 2011.

By: Sean

Sean — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 22:35:00 +0000

like bob says, if you want it done, you need to go and lobby your senators and house representatives. call them, or better make it publicly known that you are organising a bunch of people on this issue and that it is important to a lot of people.

you don’t necessarily need to get through to them direct, just media coverage will do.

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:48:00 +0000

“Third, make sure that the Wind PTC gets renewed”

Force Congress to renew the wind PTC.

“Fourth, as part of a comprehensive package on electrical infrastructure, we need legislation that will help build transmission infrastructure”

Force Congress to create legislation that will build transmission.

“Fifth … new legislation that addresses the health impact of coal.”

Force Congress to create new legislation that addresses the health impact of coal.

Just a reminder, the president of the United States is not in control of Congress.

Voters are.

If we want those things done the best way to go about it is to pressure present representatives and senators. And start working to replace the pro-fossil fuel ones in 2014.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:14:00 +0000

The Royal Society did some calculations in their report of a few years ago and in it they said that if you could tap just 1/1000 of one percent of the energy that strikes the oceans surfaces you could replace all other forms of power 7 times over.

What they did not add and what I discovered is that it is possible to extract that energy and if done offers the possibility of being cheaper than coal or oil. It can be accomplished because of the existing limits on coal and nuclear plants connected to the electrical grid. They only supply the amount of power demanded by their customers and no more.

They adjust power output by the only control they have which is their fuel input. Capital cost and labor are largely fixed for them so to be efficient the constantly adjust their output to meet the demand.

The energy extraction source for the oceans is the great currents if you are able to extract energy from that source you have a base load dispatchable power plant with no fuel cost. That is a totally different economic model.

Traditional supply/demand curves for on grid power plants looks much like a bell shaped curve but if averaged it typically represents only 40 to 45% of the plants total capacity. If you operate a base load dispatchable renewable and pay off the labor and capital costs for with the 40 to 45% of the time you are on grid then anything other use you can get for the energy extracted can be near free.

This allows energy for hydrogen extraction and also for carbon dioxide extraction from the sea waters. Combine those under the right heat and pressure, add the right catalyst and you can make carbon free gas, diesel fuel jet fuel and other oil base product.

This is carbon neutral gasoline and it can be cost competitive with existing fossil base fuels. It can be cost competitive because you are running your capital at a rate of over 95% more than double the rate of existing on grid plants.

This is an area of renewable that has the least funding but perhaps the most potential.

By: Jeff King

Jeff King — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:53:00 +0000

Hopefully he can get this all accomplished over the heads of the do nothing House of representatives