Image Source: Graphic / MIT School of Architecture and Planning

You’ve probably never considered crowds to be a renewable source of energy. Lucky for us, two smarty-pants grad students at MIT’s School of Architecture and Planning are trying to figure it out.

James Graham and Thaddeus Jusczyk envision harvesting the mechanical energy from human movement – like commuters in a train station or fans at a rock concert – for electricity. This “crowd farm” would be a responsive sub-flooring system and made up of blocks that depress slightly when people step on them. When the blocks slip against each other they would generate power through the principle of the dynamo, a device that converts the energy of motion into that of an electric current.

Crowds of people at a train station aren’t going to be enough to power the train itself: Graham and Jusczyk explain that thousands of people would be needed to make up the 28,527 steps needed to power a moving train for one second. But for smaller, very energy-efficient devices, the students’ idea could lead to something bigger: Their test case included a prototype stool that used the act of sitting to generate power. The weight of the body on the seat causes a flywheel to spin, which powers a dynamo that lights four LEDs (super-efficient lightbulbs).

The architecture students ultimately want an energy supply that’s integrated into a new sort of building system, one that harnesses the active power of humans to power a cleaner, more efficient lifestyle in the 21st century.

MIT News

Last week, the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee passed the Green Jobs Act of 2007 (HR 2847) by a vote of 26-18. Originally introduced by Congresswoman Hilda L. Solis (D-CA) and John Tierney (D-MA), the Green Jobs Act would authorize up to $125 million in funding to establish national and state job training programs for about 35,000 U.S. workers. These jobs training would help to address the shortages in green industries such as solar panel installation, building weatherization, and wind turbine maintenance.

Congresswoman Solis explained why the bill is important:

"… I know that we can achieve the goals of becoming energy independent and reducing our global warming emissions. But the strength of our nation’s economy depends on the availability of a highly skilled and well-trained work force. This legislation is an opportunity to advance not only the energy security of our nation, but also the economic security of our families.”

During committee deliberation, Democrats defeated a Republican amendment to include coal-to-liquid technologies. Fuel from liquid coal produces more than double the amount of global warming pollution as petroleum-based fuels and doesn't help to solve the climate change problem.

The Green Jobs Act is part of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “Energy Independence Day” plan. Other parts of the plan include bills that would set new energy-efficiency standards for home appliances, require more efficient lighting, promote green buildings in the public and private sectors, provide long-term incentives for companies to invest in renewable energy, and spend $3.5 billion over five years to improve how the U.S. grows and produces biofuels.

Congresswoman Solis
Gristmill, via Topix
Tri-Valley Herald
Washington Post
The Green Options Interview: Van Jones

Although California ranks second in total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that cause global warming, the U.S.’s most populous state is also one of the lowest emitters on a per-capita basis.

That’s right; the average Californian emits fewer CO2 emissions than people in all other states except Idaho, Vermont, and Rhode Island. According an Associated Press analysis of 2003 data (the latest U.S. Department of Energy numbers available), Californians are responsible for about 24,000 pounds of CO2 per person per year. In comparison, Wyoming emits 276,000 pounds per capita annually.

True, California has less heavy industry that many other states, and mild weather means residents aren’t blasting the heat or air conditioning as often as others. But although Californians drive just as far, live in homes just as big, and have just as many gadgets, the analysis found that policies put in place in the last 30 years have made the Golden State more efficient than almost any other.

Since the oil embargo of the 1970s, lawmakers have barred utilities from buying power from highly polluting plants, required more renewable energy, and have enacted energy-efficiency standards for new homes and buildings. The state has considered banning traditional incandescent light bulbs and creating fuel efficiency standards for automobiles, although the latter idea has been tied up in the courts. Last year, California became the first to require a statewide cap on climate change emissions, cutting them 25 percent by 2020.

Claudia Chandler, assistant director of the California Energy Commission, told the AP that these energy efficiency measures have eliminated the need to build 20 large power plants. Other estimates have shown that the average California family spends about $800 a year less on energy than it would have without these efficiency improvements.

Associated Press, via the Daily Breeze
Washington Post

Mayors from the planet’s largest cities gathered in New York last week to discuss how global warming is impacting their cities now, how it may in the future, and what immediate action needs to be taken to slow it.

The “C40 Large Cities Climate Summit” has partnered with the Clinton Climate Initiative to tackle climate change now, rather than waiting for action from national governments. At the Summit, mayors shared best practices, identified collaborative projects, and planned for future action together. The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, explained why:

"The fight to tackle climate change will be won or lost in cities…We are not going to simply talk about what we could do, while the window of opportunity for preventing catastrophic climate change disappears. Every city here today is a leader in at least one aspect of the fight to tackle climate change."

Some of the cities' intiatives include:

• New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s controversial proposal for a congestion charge for Manhattan as part of the city's multi-billion dollar Green Plan.
• Toronto Mayo David Miller explained “Zerofootprint Toronto,” which helps residents understand how every aspect of their lives impacts the environment, and creates a network for people to join with friends, neighbors, and coworkers to create a virtual eco-community to create initiatives and measure results.
• Curitiba, Brazil’s Mayor Carlos Alberto Richa described a bus rapid transit system for his city to cut down on pollution from cars.
• Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced GREEN LA, an action plan to reduce the city’s carbon footprint 35 percent below 1990 levels. Villaraigosa said it is the most ambitious goal set yet by a major American city.

Summit organizers also invited business leaders in an effort to involve the private sector. Both parties discused how to work together under the conviction that fighting global warming – through innovation, transportation, and energy efficiency – is profitable.

Peopleandplanet.net
Washington Post

A seemingly simple alteration a wind turbine blade’s traditional shape could result in huge improvements in efficiency.

WhalePower Corporation out of Toronto, Canada has designed a turbine blade with rounded, teeth-like bumps along the leading edge. The company’s name is a nod to the humpback whale, whose flipper was the inspiration for the design.

The agility of the humpback whale is astonishing, given that they can be over 50 feet long, weigh nearly 80,000 pounds, yet move quickly and tightly in the water. One of the animal's advantages, according to scientists, is the unique row of bumps or “tubercles” along the leading edge of their flippers that dramatically increase the whale’s aerodynamic efficiency. Specifically, researchers found a 32 percent lower drag and 8 percent improvement in lift from a flipper with a serrated edge compared to a smooth one.

Businessman Stephen Dewar heard about the humpback research and contacted one of the scientists involved, Professor Frank Fish of West Chester University in Pennsylvania. After a few meetings, they enlisted the help of some local engineers and formed WhalePower, taking a cue from Mother Nature and modeling their blade design after the whale’s flipper.

WhalePower claims that their turbine design can capture more wind energy at much lower speeds than traditional designs. The channels created by the teeth at the blade's edge cause separate wind streams to accelerate across the surface of the blade in rotating flows. These “energy-packed” vortexes increase the lift force on the blade. For example, Dewar told the Toronto Star that this design produces the same power at 11 miles per hour that one would expect at 18 miles per hour. Furthermore, he claimed these channels prevent airflow from moving along the span of the blade and past the tip, which can create noise, instability and a loss of energy. By keeping the air flow nicely channeled, more wind is captured and noise is reduced.

Dewar sees this “biomimicry” design – the fusion of biology and engineering – reaching beyond wind power.

“’This changes the game,’ says Dewar, adding that any system using a fan or turbine could also benefit from the new design. This includes everything from better turbines for hydroelectric generation to residential ceiling fans that use less electricity. ‘If we've got what we think we've got, then the range of applications is staggering.’”

The Ontario Centres of Excellence and the Ontario Power Authority have contributed over $60,000 USD for early research and to encourage collaboration with a wind engineering group at the University of Western Ontario. The next and arguably most crucial step to commercial production is independent, third party verification of the blade’s performance.

Toronto Star
Wikipedia

Cross posted at Maria Energia

There’s a lot of talk about China’s staggering amount of planned coal plants, and the narrowing gap between it and the U.S. for the title of Planet’s Biggest Carbon Dioxide Emitter. But China is examining at least one unique way to develop more sustainably.

Welcome to Dongtan, the world’s first CO2-free city. Developers are building this $1.3 billion eco-city just outside of Shanghai. Renewable energy will be used extensively, the layout of the city maximizes walking and biking rather than cars, and transport vehicles will run on batteries or hydrogen fuel cells. Other plans include recycling organic waste, green roofs, and rainwater capture.

Dongtan will cover an area about three-quarters the size of Manhattan on wetlands at the mouth of the Yangtze River. However, Peter Head of Arup, the London-based firm heading the planning, said the wetlands are not at risk from the development. From the Architectural Record:

“‘First of all, water usually discharged into the river will be collected, treated, and recycled within the city boundaries,” he says. ‘There will be a 2-mile buffer zone of eco-farm between city development and the wetlands.’ While farming is water intensive, relatively small amounts of water reach the plants themselves. Head says Dongtan ‘will capture and recycle water in the city and use recycled water to grow green vegetables hydroponically. This makes the whole water cycle much more efficient.’”

But what will the habitants do in this eco-utopia? City officials and consultants expect jobs in education like at the planned Institute for Sustainable Cities, and they anticipate attracting companies pursuing clean technologies, food research and production, and health care. Dongtan is also expected to rely heavily on ecotourism.

Designers hope CO2-free city will serve as a model for the rest of the urbanized world. Its first phase includes a marina village of 20,000 habitants that will be unveiled at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai. Nearly 80,000 people are expected to live in the city by 2020, and eventually designers hope to see 500,000 citizens living the good, green life there.

Architectural Record
Jetson Green

I’m not one to think a hydrogen economy is right around the corner – let’s make sure our energy efficiency and current renewable technology are maxed out first – but this invention caught my eye.

The WindHunter is the concept of an offshore, floating system of wind turbines that make electricity, electrolyze sea water, and make hydrogen. The architects of the idea envision four two-megawatt wind turbines mounted on a moveable framework connected to the deck of a ship. The electricity produced from the turbines is sent to four electrolyzers in the hulls or inside the deck, and then the collected hydrogen is compressed and stored in tube tank trailers until transported to shore. From the website:

“This continuously manned, safe and stable system will be easily maintained on-board while relocating to the best wind conditions for the wind turbines…. These large ships or platforms will operate out of sight of land either moored or anchored while facing into the wind and the oncoming waves. Millions of them can operate on the world’s oceans with minimal environmental impact and human resistance.”

The WindHunter is an interesting concept and we’re going to need to consider all ideas to transition ourselves to a clean energy economy. But this system has quite a ways to go before it sees the light of day, let alone feels an ocean breeze. The WindHunter company is in Phase One of developing a feasibility study of a vessel and its wind turbines. Next come the design, build, and launch of the system and then finally producing the hydrogen. According to the company, the estimated total cost is $100 million of the research and design process, and could take at least six years.

Via Ecogeek
WindHunter

Cross section of nanotube tower: Photo credit: Georgia Tech Research InstituteThe Georgia Tech Research Institute has come up with a solar panel design that could revolutionize the solar industry.

The new design features many nano-towers - think of microscopic blades of grass - that capture more sunlight because they have a larger surface area than the traditional flat design of photovoltaic (PV) cells. These three-dimensional panels produce about 60 times more current that regular solar cells. Because of this leap in efficiency, the coatings on the PV cells can be made thinner, and the overall size, weight, and mechanical complexity of the systems are reduced. From the news release:

“The GTRI photovoltaic cells trap light between their tower structures, which are about 100 microns tall, 40 microns by 40 microns square, 10 microns apart — and built from arrays containing millions of vertically-aligned carbon nanotubes. Conventional flat solar cells reflect a significant portion of the light that strikes them, reducing the amount of energy they absorb.

Because the tower structures can trap and absorb light received from many different angles, the new cells remain efficient even when the sun is not directly overhead.”

But although the new design can produce a current much more efficiently, photovoltaic cells have to generate a voltage too. So far there’s too much resistance within the solar cell to produce the type of electricity that’s needed. Researchers say that hurdle will be the next phase of development.

The United States Air Force funded part of the research, seeking a smaller, more efficient solar panel that could eventually be used to power satellites and spacecraft. Researchers at Georgia Tech believe solar power would see a large jump in residential and commercial use as well if this lightweight and more efficient design is proven effective.

Georgia Tech Research News
International Business Times via the Green Report

Gary Reysa and his wife cut their energy use in half with their self-designed “Half Plan.” A retired airplane product development engineer from Boeing, Gary continues to satisfy his mechanical and creative curiosity with an array of efficiency and renewable energy projects at his home near Bozeman, MT.

I spoke with Gary by phone on April 5th.

Green Options: Why did you decide to cut your energy use in half?

Gary Reysa: I’m very concerned about global warming, and now that that I have a new grandchild, I see the impact it could have on future generations. It’s easy to get the feeling that there’s not much an individual can do, so my wife and I thought: What can we do? Could we make a significant cut in our energy use and global warming emissions? Could we cut it in half?

GO: How did you begin?

GR: The Half Plan seemed really ambitious to us at first. For one thing, we had no access to special technology. But I had begun some projects back around 2000 when we moved into our house and I started keeping track of our energy bills. When we officially began the Half Plan, we decided to do the projects that offered the most energy saving per dollar spent for our climate, house, skills, and habits.

GO: Wouldn’t it have been a lot easier to just buy carbon offsets?

GR: I have mixed feelings about carbon offsets. I wouldn’t criticize anyone for doing it, but it’s just not for me. I do believe there are a lot of places in the world where you can spend a few bucks and get carbon reductions. But I feel like some people use them to get out of doing real action.

I feel better about doing something directly that reduces my carbon footprint. But even with the Half Plan, we still have to buy green power from Northwest Energy to make up for what we use. We’re not completely independent of the power grid.

GO: You said you didn’t have access to any special technology for cutting your energy use. Did that affect the execution of your plan?

GR: Not at all – once we started researching it, we found out that almost all the equipment we needed was actually available locally.

We did a lot of different projects to cut our energy in half. We bought a Toyota Prius, installed a solar water heater, energy-efficient light bulbs, better insulation in our attic, sealed up the windows, put our computers on power strips (shutting off the power strips stops the computer from continuing to “sip” electricity, even when it’s supposedly off) and installed dryer venting. And those are just a few of the projects.

GO: Has the Half Plan been very expensive?

GR: So far we’ve spent $8800. The single biggest expense has been the Toyota Prius - but it’s also been the single biggest energy savings and biggest cut to our global warming emissions. It cut our transportation energy use by about 60 percent! We thought we’d be making a sacrifice by buying a smaller car, but it’s been great and we use it for 85 percent of our driving. We do live in the snowy mountains, so we need bigger car with 4-wheel drive part of the time.

I factored in a $4000 cost for the Prius into the overall $8800 cost of the Half Plan, because $4000 is the premium we paid for the hybrid features. We were due to replace our old Outback vehicle anyway (it had 205,000 miles on it), so the decision was whether to buy a conventional or a hybrid car.

Our other big expenses included the solar projects. In fact, I just finished another big solar project, but I haven’t factored that into the cost yet. It's a solar space heating project that uses solar water heating collectors to provide space heating for the house. The collectors are on the south wall of our new garden shed. They heat water in a 500 gallon tank behind the shed which gets pumped to the house.

Solar collectors for space heating

GO: Have the savings outweighed the initial investments?

GR: The savings has been phenomenal. We’ve invested $8800 and I’ve calculated that we’ll save $4600 in energy costs and 20 tons in global warming pollution each year. The cost savings will continue to go up as electricity and fuel prices go up.

One really neat project has been making our computer use more energy efficient. Our two computers and related equipment use about 270 watts of power when turned on. We put all of it on power strips. At night, we hibernate the computers and then turn everything off with the power strip switch. During the day we have the computers set to hibernate if they are inactive for 15 minutes.

This saves a total of 1624 kilowatt hours of electricity per year, 3200 lbs of global warming emissions, and $162 per year! This just knocked me out.

GO: What was the Half Plan’s biggest surprise?

GR: The biggest surprise was that there were no surprises. It was pretty painless except for the money invested into the projects, but we’ve already earned a big chunk of it back in our first year of savings.

It was relatively easy to do these projects, too. We live pretty normally – as in we waste a lot of energy! – but we started paying more attention to how we use our energy. To me, it would be fall-off-the-log-easy for people to do this without sacrificing or paying much. It’s just a lack of focus that keeps it from happening.

GO: Now that you’ve found the Half Plan so easy to do, have you thought about cutting your energy even further?

GR: We plan to cut it in half again. This time we will have to use solar PV panels for our electricity, which has a higher cost and a slower return than our other projects. But I’m not doing this next phase for the financial return; I’m doing it to cut my carbon dioxide pollution that causes global warming.

GO: So the next half may not be so easy?

GR: We did the Half Plan without changing our lifestyle at all. But to cut our energy further, we’re going to have to make changes like drive less or bike more. That’s not a downfall for us, it just requires more work. There will certainly be lifestyle changes this time.

For example, we just got back from Hawaii. I felt guilty for spending 2500 lbs of CO2 to go! But I think if we’re going to get serious about making another 50 percent drop, then we will need to start thinking harder about trips like that.

GO: So how do you entertain yourself out in Big Sky country?

GR: I love the TV show Living with Ed. It's a reality show with Ed Begley Jr and it's about how he lives his green lifestyle with his wife in Studio City, CA. It makes technical sense, it’s very entertaining, and he really cares about the issue and lives his life accordingly.

For a good read, I’d recommend The Carbon Buster's Home Energy Handbook by Godo Stoyke. It gives a long list of projects that people can do to cut their CO2 emissions and save money. It details the equipment needed, cost, return, energy saving, and carbon saving. I like the book so much I bought a second copy for our local library.

GO: Your website is a fantastic resource; very easy-to-understand information, graphs, and calculations. Any specific tips on how folks can get started on the Half Plan?

GR: At my website, Build It Solar, I have a Half Plan for People Who Like Plans and a Half Plan for People Who Don’t Like Plans, so folks can choose what works best for them.

I’m an engineer, and I know that simplicity is everything. When you have trouble with a design, it’s almost always because it’s too complex. For example, I found that the solar thermal designs are really simple and that anyone should be able to build it.

The other thing folks have to realize is that we are the problem. When you get mad about global warming, you have to look at yourself in the mirror. I read stuff on the Internet and I get the feeling that people are pointing fingers but aren’t identifying the problem as themselves. Instead, they want a quick fix or someone else to come along with the technology that will allow us to not have to do anything. And they feel comfortable about the fact that they’re not doing anything.

We’re the ones generating this problem, but that also makes it easy for us to do something about it. We’re in the driver’s seat to make drastic reductions. It’s easy to do. For example, efficiency is something you can implement quickly, and we can get a significant drop in emissions right away and painlessly. If enough people do that, we’ll have really made a difference.

GO: Do you think this can all really make an impact?

GR: My actual CO2 reduction is about 20 tons each year. If 100 million families did the same thing, the energy we would save we be about 25 percent of all of the U.S. CO2 emissions. That's huge! And the best part is that we know this can be done – with no help from new technology or George Bush. We can do this ourselves, right away.

Mike Strizki’s utility bill is zero, thanks to some creative thinking using renewable energy technologies. By using solar panels, a hydrogen fuel cell, storage tanks and an electrolyzer, he has enough electricity even on the cloudiest days. And Strizki isn’t a hermit living in the dark off of snails and rainwater, either. His 3,500 square foot house is located in central New Jersey on 12 acres, with amenities you’d see in any 21st century home, like a hot tub and big screen TV. His renewable energy system even creates hydrogen he uses to power his fuel-cell car.

So how does he produce zero emissions?

On a sunny day, Strizki can get more than enough of his electricity from the solar panels. The excess goes to an electrolyzer that then breaks down a tank of water into oxygen and hydrogen. The oxygen is released into the atmosphere, but the hydrogen is stored in 10 1,000-gallon propane tanks. So when the solar panels aren’t producing enough energy, the hydrogen is piped to an air-conditioner-sized fuel cell that makes electricity.
The fuel-cell car in the garage is called “The New Jersey Genesis” and Strizki – a civil engineer – helped design the car and maintains it for the NJ Department of Transportation. He fills it up with the hydrogen made from his electrolyzer.

This sort of system isn’t going to be available commercially for the rest of us anytime soon. Strizki’s project is extremely expensive - $500,000, paid for in part with a $250,000 grant from the NJ Board of Public Utilities.

Strizki acknowledges that the enormous cost is a huge hurdle, but believes that, with mass production, the price of the system (not including solar panels) would be about $50,000 and the new solar system would be around $80,000 (some states like NJ offer rebates that cover up to 70 percent of the solar’s cost).

Then there’s the question of efficiency. Critics point out that electrolyzers are only 50 percent efficient. By the time the process is complete, the hydrogen that is converted back into electricity is only half of the energy with which the process started. Sending that power back to the grid, some say, would be more effective because it would displace other dirty energy sources.

Strizki has created a company called Renewable Energy International that engineers, installs, and supports renewable energy systems like his. Despite its costs and efficiency questions, he still believes that hydrogen is the best solution to our clean energy problems. “No one has said what I’m doing doesn’t work…Nothing is as wildly expensive as destroying the whole planet.”

Christian Science monitor, Via the Modesto Bee
Renewable Energy International