Energy – Page 2 – Kristen Baumlier

Category: Energy

The New Look of Solar Panels: SMIT’s Tensile Solar Structures

Posted on January 5, 2012January 5, 2012 by Kbaumlier

SMIT is a brother and sister design team, Samuel and Teresita Cochran, who have been working with architectural designer Benjamin Wheeler Howes to develop new innovative solar applications.

Their new design called Tensile Solar Structures are lightweight, modular systems that produce solar power and have a new look.

Usually the use of large solar photovoltaic panels are considered to be an eyesore, and a necessary evil of clean energy. Providing solar with a new look, Tensile Solar Structures are light, have a patterned appearance, and look like a piece of modern sculpture.

Tensile Solar is inspired by the intersection of fabric architecture, modern composite materials, and thin film photovoltaic technology.

The panels are supported by posts and high tensile stainless steel cables at their edges, Tensile Solar Saddle structures are free standing canopies and awnings. They span areas up to 850 s.f. and can deliver up to 3 kw of power.

Possible uses for the solar panels could be a shade cover in a backyard, a cover for a parking lot, or in other locations. The designs are patented, and both preconfigured and custom structures are available.

Image Source:
www.tensilesolar.com

Links:

www.tensilesolar.com

A Gas Shortage? Gas Bag Vehicles

Posted on December 24, 2011December 19, 2011 by Kbaumlier

During World War I and II, there was a limited supply of gasoline. One alternative to cars running on gasoline was the gas bag vehicle. Cars and buses were converted to being fueled by uncompressed gas, which was stored on the roof of the vehicle in a balloon tank.

These gas bag vehicles were built in France, the Netherlands, Germany and England and were an improvised solution to the gasoline shortage. The fuel in the balloons were powered by what was called “town gas” or “street gas,” which is a by-product of turning coal into coke (which is used to make iron.) The tanks were either hard or soft bag-like structures, put on the top of cars and buses. The tanks were large, since more gas was needed to get adequate mileage.

With the gas bag vehicles, it was easy to tell how much fuel was left since the gas bag would deflate as the car was driven. One risk of using the vehicles was the risk of fire, and obstacles that were overhead. Drivers had to know the heights of bridges before driving underneath. The vehicles could only go 30 mph, so that the fuel tank would stay secure on top of the vehicle.

Gas bag buses could still be seen in China in the 1990s, mostly in the area of Chongqing where the vehicles were used as a cheap public transportation option.

Today gas bag buses are not in use – but are interesting examples of how rising energy prices can drive energy technology innovation.

Links:

Gas Bag Motor Cars

Gas Bag Buses

Light: a “supernatural” short film about energy waste

Posted on December 21, 2011December 21, 2011 by Kbaumlier

“Light” is a short film directed by David Parker that is intended to bring awareness to energy waste. In the piece, we see lights that are dripping and oozing which parallel the way in which we waste our natural resources without much thought. The film is a poetic piece which provides eerie images of lights in the urban environment.

The film was shot during 2 nights in Los Angeles by two friends driving around the city with a camera exploring the architecture and abandoned landscapes.

In the future, the film will be projected in selected US cities in vacant storefront windows and onto walls in alleys as a moving piece of public art.

David Parker is part of the team Sunday/Paper whose goal is to create evocative, beautifully crafted images, that showcase stories that are thoughtful and compelling. “Light” was directed by David Parker with effects and production done by a team of support from places including the Mill and MassMarket NY.

Links:

Light – the film on Vimeo

David Parker and Sunday/Paper

Future Power Sources – From Plants?

Posted on December 11, 2011December 11, 2011 by Kbaumlier

When we think of biofuel – corn usually comes to mind. There are many other plants that have qualities that make them possible future sources of fuels. Some of these plants include castor bean, barley, mustard, sugarcane, switchgrass, tobacco, sorghum, algae, sunflowers, and peanuts.

The original 1970s appeal of biofuels was the opportunity during the oil crisis to move away from dependence on oil from other countries. Later, it was seen as an opportunity to fight global warming – a way to make gas from plants, and with no emissions of carbon dioxide.

Today, the most common biofuel sources in the U.S. are corn, which is fermented into ethanol and blended into gasoline, and soybeans, which are converted to biodiesel. The ethanol, which stores less energy per gallon, tends to absorb water and is corrosive – people only use it if they are forced to or if it is cheap.

In Brazil, however, the price of ethanol got low enough for people to use it after the 1970s oil crisis, thanks to highly productive sugar plantations and distilleries in the country. Today Brazil is a biofuel superpower. The ethanol made from sugar is more efficient, and less harmful on the environment than American ethanol distilleries, often fueled by coal.

In has been reported that today’s biofuel policies are not solving the climate or fuel crises but are instead contributing to food insecurity and inflation. Oxfam calculates that rich country biofuel policies have dragged more than 30 million people into poverty, according to evidence that biofuels have already contributed up to 30% to the global rise in food prices.

“Biofuel policies are actually helping to accelerate climate change and deepen poverty and hunger. Rich countries’ demands for more biofuels in their transport fuels are causing spiraling production and food inflation,” said report author, Oxfam’s biofuel policy adviser Rob Bailey. “If the fuel value for a crop exceeds its food value, then it will be used for fuel instead. Thanks to generous subsidies and tax breaks, that is exactly what is happening. Grain reserves are now at an all-time low.”

The biofuels being grown today are not an effective answer to climate change, Oxfam says. Instead, biofuels are taking over agricultural land and forcing farming to expand into lands that are important carbon sinks, like forests and wetlands. This triggers the release of carbon from soil and vegetation that will take decades to repay.

Today’s biofuel policies are not solving the climate or fuel crises but are instead contributing to food insecurity and inflation. Another problem seen with the corn ethanol is that the biofuel use contributes to a 30% global rise to food prices, and contributes to the food crisis in some countries in the world.

Another issue is that biofuels are causing agricultural land to expand, into lands that are “carbon sinks,” like forests and wetlands. This triggers the release of carbon from soil and vegetation that will take decades to repay.

Is Biofuels in our future? The European Union currently has a mandatory 10 percent goal for transportation fuels such as biofuels, electricity and hydrogen is included in the renewable energy increase by 2020.

The directive offers incentives for more sustainable biofuels by allowing second-generation biofuels to be double-credited in the 10 percent target. Second-generation biofuels don’t compete with food or feed production, and include wastes, residues, nonfood biomass such as algae, wood residues or paper waste.

Links:

Oxfam’s report “Another Inconvenient Truth”

The Future of Fracking and the Environment – Look to Pennsylvania

Posted on November 3, 2011November 3, 2011 by Kbaumlier

I’ll admit –when I hear the word fracking – I get confused about what it is exactly, ad what its real impact is on the environment. Last night I attended The Promise and Peril of Energy from Shale Formations, at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, and leaned about the current state of fracking in PA, and what this can mean for Ohio and other states.

The keynote speaker was Nels Johnson from the international organization, the Nature Conservancy, who spoke about energy use and the impact on land use, habitat, and water n Pennsylvania – and what can be learned from this. Johnson led a research project to explore the land use and habitat impacts of fracking, natural gas, wind and other energy sources.

Ok – what is fracking exactly, and why is it increasingly being discussed and debated? Fracking is a slang term for “hydraulic fracturing” which refers to the procedure of creating fractures in rocks and rock formations by injecting fluid into cracks to force them further open. The larger fissures allow more oil and gas to flow out of the formation and into the well, where it can be extracted. This method of extraction has existed since the late 1940’s.

Directional drilling – when a drilling is done in an angle that is not vertical – has been done since the 1930s. In 2003, these two methods were combined – using water and horizontal drilling – and has resulted in fracking – where many oil and gas wells attaining a state of economic viability, due to the level of extraction that can be reached.

Johnson began his talk by stating that, “Major shifts in energy production have started and will likely accelerate even without national energy or climate legislation.” His introduction went on to describe how the Appalachian Basin is an epicenter for several forms of energy development including the Marcellus Shale natural gas, wind, wood biomass, etc.

“All energy has consequences,” Johnson said, “and Pennsylvania is only in its early stages of impact.” He went on to talk about how the Marcellus shale natural gas formation, which is in PA and OH, is the 2^nd largest reserve in the world, which was just recently discovered. The Utica formation – which is a deeper formation under the Marcellus shale formation – is thought to be even bigger than Marcellus – and includes other states such as NY,NJ, WV, and some other states.

“The impact of the extraction of gas from this affects water withdrawal, water quality, air quality, land-use and the natural habitat,” Johnson explained. Johnson and his team of a dozen researchers did a study that used informed scenarios (not predictions he emphasized) of energy development that would occur in 20 years, based on continuing current trends and patterns of energy development.

His team projected over 60-100 million acres will get shifted to energy development of shale natural gas, wind, wood biomass, and other forms in the U.S. (which is twice the size of the state of PA.)

Johnson’s organization is especially interested in the environmental impact of energy extraction. In his presentation, Johnson talked about how the spatial impact of an energy source affects not just the land used for the energy use- but also the area around the site. Approximately 3 acres around the edge of a site are changed due to changes in humidity, light, and other factors that affect the forests and natural regions. Today there are 250 horizontal fracking wells in PA – and his team determined that in 20 years 60,000 new wells would be drilled by 2030.

Johnson talked about the importance of determining indicator species – wildlife that can are sensitive to water quality, temperature, etc. This is helpful in helping determining the affect of energy development on the environment. Similar to a canary in a coalmine idea – it is important to find a wildlife species to help measure the health and welfare of the natural environment. In PA, the brook trout is a good species indicator to see what the impact is on natural wildlife.

The team project that there will be more land clearing for pipelines. Analysis forecasts that 10,000 to 20,000 miles of new pipeline will be built in PA in the next 20 years, clearing 60,000-150,000 acres of natural habitat. This will affect both agriculture and natural areas.

“Gas development will happen and it is going to be big,” Johnson stated. The last part of his presentation stressed the importance of finding ways to mitigate the impacts of gas development and energy extraction.

He suggested that this can be done by looking at states like PA, which was one of the first states to be impacted by fracking and other new forms of energy extraction. He said, “The good, bad, and the ugly can be learned by looking at PA.” He stressed the importance of mapping areas that are of high conservation value- and that these should be linked to high scrutiny with permits and land use.

Johnson concluded by talking about how energy extraction affects areas not just for a few years, but for a long time. He stressed the importance of planning and establishing baselines before the drilling and extraction is underway. He stated that education about this is important, especially to to help landowners make informed choices. If we know what we want – we can work to try to mitigate the impacts of energy production.

I had to leave before the rest of the panel talked about Ohio – but I left with a better understanding of fracking, and the future of energy use.

The Pennsylvania Energy Impacts Assessment that Johnson presented can be viewed on the Nature Conservancy website.

Links:

Pennsylvania Energy Report – by Johnson and his Team

Map of the Existing and Projected Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Wells in PA

Interactive Map of the PA Energy Impacts Asessment

Nature Conservancy Website – http://www.nature.org/

The promise and peril of Ohio and PA’s fracking for gas Event – GreenCityBlueLake