A recent study found that the clean energy industry is the fastest-growing sector in Massachusetts, easily beating out behemoths like financial services, healthcare, and communications.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Census was published by the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, a quasi-public agency that runs a renewable energy trust fund of green power projects. The study found that clean energy industry had a 26 percent increase in jobs and now accounts for more than 14,000 jobs in the state. Those jobs are expected to grow three times faster than any other major industry, adding about 3,000 jobs in 2007. The next biggest increase was in the scientific, technical, and management services sector with an increase of 5.4 percent.

Three hundred and two companies, government agencies, and university research centers responded to the survey. Those in the renewable energy category said they will increase staff by an average of 30 percent in the next 12 months, while the energy efficiency sector will add an average of 25 percent more employees.

High fossil fuels costs and venture capital funding are contributing to the strong clean energy performance, as well as politicians and a public wanting action on global warming emissions.

However, the report also points out that the industry is still very young: of the 255 companies surveyed, 103 had annual revenues of less than $1 million. Most companies focus on selling their products to other companies within New England to speed up sales cycles. But this may result in limited growth if companies are passing up opportunities in faster growing and larger markets.

Governor Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray, and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi agreed last month that by 2010, Massachusetts should offset all of its growth in electricity demand with increased efficiency.

The survey defined “renewable energy” as including solar power, biofuels, wind power, wave systems, solar-assisted fuel cells, and all fuel cell companies, although the study recognizes that fuel cell production may be powered by fossil fuels.

Business Journals
Climate Ark
Massachusetts Clean Energy Census

Today the U.S. House is likely to vote on the Udall-Platts Amendment to the energy bill. This legislation would require 15 percent of our nation’s electricity to come from renewable sources by the year 2020. It’s high time the federal government catch up to so many states that already have implemented 21st century policies like this one.

But in addition to broad state and federal programs, consumers can also do some renewable energy good for themselves, even if they don’t own a wind turbine or live in a sunny area. They can buy green power.

“Green power” is a term for clean, renewable energy. More than 600 utilities in 36 states give their customers the option to buy their power from renewable energy sources (depending on the state, they normally include solar power, wind, biomass, hydropower, or geothermal) rather than traditional ones (likely to be coal). Although the transmission system can’t guarantee that particular energy from a wind farm makes it to your refrigerator, the total amount of green electricity that travels over the entire system is increased because (ideally) the utility is taking all of the extra revenue and investing in more renewable energy sources.

My fellow blogger Philip Proefrock just covered a green power program he is considering in his homestate of Michigan. Green power programs do vary, whether it’s the location from which the renewable energy is coming (in state or out of state) or the source (I know of one municipal provider that promotes destructive Canadian hydropower as an eco-friendly option, so make sure you know where the energy is coming from).

Here in Minnesota, I purchase wind power through Xcel Energy’s Windsource program. The initial cost is a little more than $3.50 per 100 kWh block, but I also get a credit on my bill for the avoided fuel costs of conventional (i.e. coal) power. The credit varies each month, but my cost last month was less than $11. Windsource was also audited by the Green-e program to ensure that ratepayers’ money is going to build new renewable energy sources, and it passed with flying colors: Windsource funds the costs associated with Xcel purchasing wind power from private owners of wind turbines and new wind generation facilities across the state, so I feel good about my investment.

Find out whether you can buy green power in your state at the U.S. Department of Energy. If you can’t buy green power locally, consider investing in renewable energy credits (RECs) to offset your emissions.

Sierra Club, North Star Chapter
Union of Concerned Scientists
Xcel Energy

Global warming concerns, government policies, and money-saving efficiency benefits have spurred clean energy systems to spring up all over the world. But a giant wind farm in the middle-of-nowhere North Dakota doesn’t do much good if there aren’t transmission lines to connect the power with the more populated areas that need it.

Europeans are facing similar distribution and reliability issues with their burgeoning renewable energy growth, and some see a continent-wide grid as the solution. Dr. Jurgen Schimd of ISET, a renewable-energy institute at the University of Kassel in Germany, says a transmission system that stretches across Europe is the answer. It could, for example, move electricity generated from a Spanish wind farm to the Netherlands where the wind is not blowing.

Norway is key to Dr. Schmid’s plans, as the Scandinavian nation is well-supplied with hydroelectric plants that can store energy from sources like the wind. For instance, the wind power is used to pump water up into the reservoirs that feed the hydroelectric turbines, so the power is “on tap” when needed. According to Dr. Schmid, even if the wind died and wind farms shut down all across Europe, Norway’s hydropower would leap to action and fill in the gap for up to four weeks.

This continent-wide transmission system for renewable energy has also sparked a renewed interest in direct current (DC). Over 100 years ago, when power grids covered shorter distances, alternating current (AC) transmission was favored because it loses less electricity than DC. However, as transmission lines have grown longer, high-voltage DC lines now suffer lower loses than AC. So using a DC transmission system would allow electric grids to be restructured more efficiently, losing less energy while transmitting it from Point A to Point B.

Some nations have already started work on a DC transmission system. A group of Norgwegian companies have begun building high-voltage DC lines between Scandinavia, the Netherlands, and Germany. An Irish wind power company called Airtricity proposes what it calls a Supergrid that would link offshore wind farms in the Atlantic Ocean with customers in northern Europe.

The electric grid in the U.S. is in sore need of an upgrade, and we should consider ideas that utilize the different forms of renewable energy abundant across the country (like hydroelectric in the Northeast, wind in the Midwest, solar in the Southwest). It’s a combination of these renewable sources – along with crucial upgrades in efficiency – that will provide a clean, reliable network of distribution in the 21st century.

Thanks to Working Dad at Housekept for the tip.

The Economist
Wikipedia

According to the American Wind Energy Association, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) recently told wind power supporters that a House vote on a national renewable portfolio standard (RPS) was likely to happen the week of July 30.

A renewable portfolio standard – also called a renewable energy standard – is a measure requiring utilities to get a certain amount of their power from renewable sources by a particular time.

Last month in the Senate, Senator Jeff Bingaman’s (D-NM) RPS amendment to the energy bill was killed before a vote could be held. Although the current House version of the energy bill does not have an RPS provision, Representatives Tom Udall (D-NM) and Todd Platts (R-PA) are expected to offer an amendment requiring utilities to get 20 percent of their energy from renewables by 2020. This amendment is based on H.R. 969, which calls for an RPS and is also authored by Udall and Platts. (Make sure your Representative is one of the 120 co-sponsors here).

In her meeting with wind power supporters, Pelosi underscored the critical role an RPS would play in moving the nation towards global warming solutions.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a 20 percent by 2020 RPS would save consumers nearly $11 billion on energy bills by 2030 and save nearly 2 billion short tons of coal from being burned up into the atmosphere. Similarly, the American Solar Energy Society found that an RPS could help create nearly 40 million new jobs in the U.S. by 2030 in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors.

It’s Getting Hot in Here
Union of Concerned Scientists
Wind Energy Weekly

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy recently released an energy efficiency scorecard for the states. In it, the ACEEE considered state-level policies, programs, and technologies and ranked the 50 states and the District of Columbia in eight categories:

1. Spending on Utility and Public Benefits Energy Efficiency Programs
2. Energy Efficiency Resource Standards
3. Combined Heat and Power
4. Building Energy Codes
5. Transportation Policies
6. Appliance and Equipment Efficiency Standards
7. Tax Incentives
8. State Lead by Example and Research & Development

The “State Energy Efficiency Scorecard for 2006” found that states are spending three times as much money on energy efficiency programs as the federal government. They’re also far ahead on appliance standards and building codes.

By documentng best practices and leadership across the county, a roadmap is created for states and other entities to learn from each other and work off of each other. Not to mention encouraging (perhaps) the federal government to catch up. The researchers at ACEEE found these states to have the best investment and policies on energy efficiency programs, codes, and standards in 2006:

1. Vermont, Connecticut, and California (tie)
2. Massachusetts
3. Oregon
4. Washington
5. New York
6. New Jersey
7. Rhode Island, Minnesota (tie)

ACEEE Acting Executive Director, Bill Prindle, described energy efficiency as a “first fuel” in the transition towards a clean energy economy. That is, the cheapest and cleanest energy is the energy we never have to use:

“Unless we accelerate the pace of efficiency investment, no clean energy strategy will work.”

Maybe Congress is taking some small steps: On Tuesday, the U.S. House voted 312-111 to increase programs that make cars and buildings more energy efficient, along with boosting research and development of clean energy. The vote count would in theory be large enough to overturn the promised veto by President Bush, who wants 4 percent less for the programs covered by the bill. The extra money in the bill would go towards research in wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower power, as well as ethanol and biodiesel. It doesn’t include anything about the new, sturdier nuclear warhead Bush wanted included.

ACEEE
Associated Press, via Yahoo! News

A new study shows that renewable energy could save the world $180 billion dollars each year in fuel costs and cut emissions in half by 2050.

The European Renewable Energy Council teamed up with Greenpeace International to examine how much the planet would save in terms of energy and money by investing heavily in renewable energy. And by heavily, I mean taking all of the $250 billion of subsidies currently given to the coal and gas industries and switching to investments and policies that focus on renewable sources. That also means an extra global investment of $22 billion in clean, renewable power plants. But by changing direction, the global clean energy market could be worth an annual $288 billion by 2030, up from $50 billion in 2006, and we would drastically cut our global warming emissions.

Businesses and governments would see the cost savings by investing in resources like wind, solar, and geothermal power, as well as biofuels.

The report is the financial argument for Greenpeace’s "Energy Revolution" plan for how to cut the world’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 50 percent by 2050, while maintaining global economic growth.

Bloomberg, via the Financial Express
Environment News Service
The Sietch Blog

What do you do when you’ve got a problem like communicating the need for renewable, efficient energy to hundreds of millions of people? Harness the web, of course.

SmartPower, a nonprofit marketing organization that promotes clean energy, used YouTube to form the Clean Energy Challenge. The aim was to create an ad for SmartPower around the belief that “clean energy is real. It’s here. And it’s working.”

After reviewing 150 submissions (not a ton, but not bad for such a wonky topic whose actors have virtually no chance of finding a mate on national TV), the $10,000 winner has been chosen. But in the true style of any reality show, the final results are drawn out over several days. The top 10 ads were posted on June 10th and for every day until the 18th one ad will be removed, finally leaving the “last ad standing” on Monday.

The winner will be announced via webcast at 5:00PM on June 18th and all finalists voted off are highlighted on the SmartPower Blog.

I was impressed with the quality of most of the finalists – these weren’t all made in someone’s basement. I’m a big fan of “Reading Light” and “Time Machine” because they made me laugh. And the kid in “It’s Your Choice” is really quite good. What's your favorite?

SmartPower

Canada’s province of British Columbia could be energy independent within 18 years and do it without relying on any domestic fossil fuels use.

A report from the GLOBE Foundation examined the feasibility of making Canada’s most western province completely energy self-sufficient. Dubbed “The Endless Energy Project,” it determined that not only can British Columbia (BC) be energy independent, but that it could be done "without undo social or economic hardship" and bring0 global warming emissions down to below the levels they were at in the year 2000. From the Executive Summary:

“The Endless Energy project has evaluated the rising price of conventional energy, energy security concerns, the threat of climate change and many other trends and combined them to show that moving from 40 percent renewable supply in year 2000 to 100 percent renewable supply in 2025 is not only possible, but entirely reasonable and desirable.

Importantly, the scenario described implies little disruption in way people live and the way businesses operate. However, it does imply a major expansion in economic growth as a result of: increased energy and technology exports, major investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy, and replacement of petroleum imports with indigenous bio-fuels and electricity.”

BC would need to develop its renewable energy sources on a massive scale, with hydropower being the backbone of the energy supply. Wind, solar, geothermal, and other sources would also be ramped up. Small scale renewable energy – such as solar systems on individual buildings – could provide up to 14 percent of the total energy needs of homes and businesses. The report also recommended that BC’s urban and rural areas explore district energy systems, in which a group of buildings or a small community gets is electricity and heat from a central source.

This could provide a helpful model for other provines in Canada who want to follow suit and to the States. However, hydropower has had its share of environmental justice problems in Canada, notably in Manitoba and Quebec. If BC does expand its hydropower, I hope it does so in respectful collaboration with the First Nations there.

The Endless Energy Project full report
Renewable Energy Access

Residents in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, largely live in slums with no access to basic facilities and services. (Photo source: CNN)Ethiopia plans to make electricity available to about half of the country’s population in the next eight years. This is an ambitious project for a nation that is expected to add 25 million people by 2015, and which currently only produces about 800 MW of electricity per year (mostly from hydropower) that reaches only about one-fifth of the population. In order to reach half of its citizens, Ethiopa will need to generate 4,000 MW of power and upgrade and install new distribution systems and transmission lines.

It won’t be coal or oil lighting up the nation, though: A combination of wind and geothermal power will help Ethiopia achieve this goal. Five new hydropower dams will also be constructed and completed by 2010. This multi-billion effort is being funded by the government, the World Bank, and loans from international financial institutions.

It should be inspiring and motivating to those of us in industrialized, wealthy countries that our friends on the other side of the planet are blazing forward with such an aggressive agenda.

CNN

Many of us have heard of geothermal power, when electricity is made from the earth’s heat using the steam from deep underground to drive a turbine and make electricity. In this country, most geothermal energy is made in the western states, but a new technology could make it more widely available.

Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) is defined by the Department of Energy (DOE) as engineered reservoirs that can produce energy from geothermal resources that don’t have enough water or permeability in the rocks to make them economical otherwise. In essence, the technology drills deep underground – 10,000 to 30,000 feet - and “stimulates” the earth to get more energy from it.

A new report by scientists and engineers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) looked at the feasibility and economics of moving EGS onto the market and establishing it as a major source of power by 2050.

Major conclusions of the report include:

• EGS has the potential to supply the U.S. with all of its electricity needs.

• The environmental impact is limited because most of the work happens underground, the surface equipment is compact, and transportation costs and associated pollution are limited because of the resource's wide availability. However, the report does note that EGS runs a “manageable” risk of contaminating the groundwater and impacting seismic activity with its drilling.

• With “reasonable” investment in research and development, EGS could supply the country with 100,000 MW of electricity by 2050, at competitive rates.

Because of the time needed to get a commercial-scale prototype up and running, the MIT panel recommended that the U.S. start funding enhanced geothermal systems in the immediate future.

Daily Kos
U.S. Department of Energy
MIT: The Future of Geothermal Energy