Australian farmers have teamed up with environmentalists to create the Agricultural Alliance on Climate Change, a group that wants to cut emissions up to 60 percent by 2050.

Although they may not agree on all environmental issues, climate change is problem that they know requires immediate action and can be slowed. Farming groups like the South Australian Farmers Federation and Agforce are on the front lines of having to adapt quickly to a changing climate and risking their livelihood in the process. Some farmers also feel that they haven’t received the recognition they deserve for fighting global warming. The Alliance acknowledged as much in a statement:

Australia is tracking close to its Kyoto target due largely to the efforts of Australian farmers reducing emissions, particularly from practices such as minimum tillage and ceasing broad-scale land-clearing, while emissions from most other sectors have continued to increase.

The group seems to be rather light on specific policy initiatives or technology recommendations, while their ultimate aims include creating “effective and sustainable economic drives” from harvesting renewable energy, providing social and physical infrastructure and services to rural Australia, and providing information and tools to rural Australians to help them prepare for some of the unavoidable impacts of climate change.

Here in the U.S., farmers have joined with clean energy organizations and traditional environmentalists to push a common agenda as well. While they may not agree when it comes to party politics, issues like clean, efficient, and homegrown energy have clearly crossed party lines in many areas.

Organizations like the 25x’25 initiative were started by farmers with a vision of 25 percent renewable energy by 2025, and farmers unions are working at all levels of government to push for policies that support local, renewable power. Wind energy and biofuels are common grounds for collaboration, as so much farm land is also in some of the most wind-rich areas of the country, and as the potential for biofuels that go (and grow) beyond corn continue to hold great promise as a clean, reliable source of fuel.

Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Australian Conservation Foundation

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

Photo credit: NREL

A new study by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) found that U.S. manufacturers dominate the world’s market share of small wind turbine sales. Comparatively, global sales of larger, utility-scale turbines are led by companies like Denmark’s Vestas, Spain’s Gamesa and India’s Suzlon, who are also hungrily eying the U.S. market.

The 2007 Small Wind Turbine Global Market Study reports that about half of U.S. manufacturers’ sales are made overseas, and the other half satisfies about 98 percent of the small wind demand here at home. Small wind systems are defined as those with 100 kilowatts (kW) of capacity or less, and in 2006 nearly 7,000 Americans purchased them for their homes, farms, or businesses.

The key to building up the market for small wind, according to AWEA and other wind power advocates, is to provide stable federal tax credits and incentives. Ron Stimmel, AWEA’s small-wind advocate, pointed out that “small wind is the only renewable energy technology without a federal-level tax credit.” At $10,000 - $55,000 each, small wind turbines aren’t cheap.

It’s good news that, for once, the U.S. is leading the way in something small, clean, and local. Whether it’s for a community school, a farm, or a home, small wind allows people to reduce their reliance on dirty energy and create their own clean source. American wind power of any size, however, suffers from unreliable federal policies, like the production tax credit (PTC) for large wind that has to be renewed every few years. Wind farm construction increases quickly when the PTC is renewed and dies off as it nears expiration. This boom-and-bust cycle is bad for the wind power economy and our energy system. We need consistent incentives for a versitile energy source that can power a utility or a farm down the road.

Alternative Energy Retailer
AWEA Small Wind Turbine Global Market Study
State Energy Conservation Office
Union of Concerned Scientists

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

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

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

I cover the renewable energy beat here at Green Options, and I particularly enjoy writing about the states, communities, and businesses that are showing great leadership on advancing a clean, efficient, and innovative energy system for the 21st century. Although I agree that global warming and the related energy problems do require a federal goals, it is heartening to see citizens around the country taking action in spite of Washington.

This week brings a lot of renewable energy news from the states. So instead of covering just one, here’s a run down on the big legislative action that’s been going down. Do you know what’s going on in your state?

• Hawaii became the 2nd state in the nation, after California, to pass a statewide cap on global warming emissions. On July 1 the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2007 took effect, which aims to bring emissions down to 1990 levels by 2020. A 10-member Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Task Force will develop a plan by the end of 2009 for “maximum practicality and technically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions” by 2009.

• Florida is set to enact tough new emissions standards for air pollution that will attempt to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050. New limits would go into effect for automobiles and trucks, toughen energy efficiency goals and require that state-owned vehicles use cleaner fuels like ethanol and biodiesel. Electric utilities would also be required to cut emissions 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and generate at least 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources.

• Missouri Governor Matt Blunt signed legislation to increase the use of renewable energy from sources such as wind, hydroelectricity, solar power, hydrogen, and biomass. Specifically, utilities must get 11 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. Not as aggressive of an objective as other states, but it’s a start. Also, at least 70 percent of the state’s fleet of new vehicles must be flex fuel.

• New Jersey passed a global warming law this week that requires the state to cut global warming emission to 1990 levels by 2020.

CBN News
CNNMoney.com
Environment News Service
Renewable Energy Access

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

An 80 megawatt (MW) solar power plant – the world’s largest and big enough to power nearly 21,000 homes – will be built near Fresno, California.

A California-based startup company called Cleantech America LLC plans to build the solar farm. The company develops utility-scale solar plants and wants to commercialize photovoltaic (PV) solar technology in order to slow global warming and increase America’s energy independence.

The San Joaquin Valley Customer Choice Solar Farm (hopefully they’ll think of an acronym or something) is expected to be completed in 2011 and will cover 640 acres. That’s far larger than North America’s largest planned solar power plant in Nevada and double the size of the world’s largest solar project planned for Germany.

Cleantech’s CEO Bill Barnes told CNN that this project will make California the world’s clear leader in solar power, catapulting it ahead the current powerhouse, Germany:

“We’re pretty confident that solar farms on this scale are going to have an industry-changing impact. We think it’s the wave of the future. This scale of project, I think, creates a tipping point for renewable energy…the impact for it will be similar to the impact of the computer chip.”

The San Joaquin Valley is well-suited for a large solar project, according to Cleantech. Its good sun resources allow for power to be generated close to where it is needed and reduce the poor air quality that plagues the area. Producing power locally will also save on transmission costs that can drive up the price on out-of-state electricity.

According to the EPA, an 80 MW solar power plant would avoid up to 450 pounds of toxic mercury emissions and 100 million pounds of carbon dioxide emissions each year – a major contributor to global warming. That’s the equivalent of keeping 20,000 vehicles off the road. The University of California at Berkeley found that the San Joaquin Valley could see considerable job creation if the growth of solar projects in the area continues; up to 1,040 installation and maintenance jobs and 1,600 solar manufacturing jobs may be created, mostly in the local vicinity.

Some significant hurdles remain. Namely, choosing one of five sites under consideration to locate the solar power project, connecting it to the transmission system, and contracting with a manufacturer to supply the PV panels. The California Energy Commission must certify the solar plant as a renewable energy source that doesn’t create pollution, and a number of local permits must be obtained.

Cleantech will partner with the California Construction Authority to build the plant and sell the energy to the Kings River Conservation District, a public agency that is the water management arm of the San Joaquin Valley Power Authority. The Power Authority was created in late 2006 to reduce the power now bought from investor-owned utilities like PG&E and Southern California Edison.

Cleantech America
CNN
Fresno Bee