Can the tech community go green?

Following a trip to Geneva, Bill Thompson began wondering about how much electricity he uses.

Laptops could benefit from more energy efficiency

LIFT is one of the highlights of the technophile calendar, an opportunity to meet up with some of the most interesting people around and engage in debate about the future with those who are actually building it instead of waiting for it happen.

The nice people at the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) sent me there to talk about an online community they run called wattwatt (where I am a paid adviser), and a competition for schoolchildren around the world to come up with ideas for cutting electrical consumption called care4It (of which I'm an unpaid judge).

As I was doing my pitch for the technology community to take more of an interest in energy use - lauding the efforts to date of IBM, Google and Intel - I looked out from the stage to see hundreds of laptops ranged in front of me.

About half of the audience had their computers open, casting cold light onto their faces as they turned to listen or looked down to type some notes, answer e-mails or chat to their friends.

But just before my session I'd seen a couple of people trying to get their XO-1 laptops to talk to each other.

Uncomfortable reality

Many of my geeky friends seem either unaware of or unconcerned with the energy use of the myriad of devices they acquire and use, and it is about time we woke up

The XO-1 is the small green computing machine developed by the One Laptop Per Child project, and it has been built to be energy-efficient not because the designers wanted to save the planet but because electricity will be scarce and expensive in the countries it will end up in.

And it occurred to me that if the laptops in front of me had all been XO-1s, designed to use as little power as possible and even to shut down the central processor when nothing was happening, then the conference as a whole could have saved significant energy.

Of course we were in Switzerland so, as someone pointed out to me later, the power probably came from hydroelectricity with zero carbon load.

But that wasn't the point. The point is that many of my geeky friends seem either unaware of or unconcerned with the energy use of the myriad of devices they acquire and use, and it is about time we woke up, because we face an uncomfortable reality.

Human impact on the planet has been more significant than any other species since the first bacteria started photosynthesising and generated enough atmospheric oxygen to enable animal life to thrive.

Geologists have recently started saying that we need a new name for our geological era, that we have moved from the Holocene to the Anthropocene, a geological era that will be noted by future geologists - human or otherwise - for the preponderance of soot, cement and plastic in the sedimentary rocks laid down in our time.

Global warming

The XO is efficient because energy is scarce in the developing world

Our reliance on carbon-based fuels to supply most of our energy needs has added enough carbon dioxide to the atmosphere to affect the mechanisms that have given us a temperate and relatively stable climate system for the last 10,000 years, and we can anticipate significant changes as a result.

The distribution of human habitation will be directly affected; species diversity on the planet may diminish, at least temporarily; and the relatively temperate weather patterns we have been accustomed to for the 10,000 years or so it has taken our species to emerge from the plains and conquer the world may be replaced by far more severe patterns of meteorological activity.

Even if this is unlikely to be species-threatening it would be far better to reduce the impact of the coming changes by cutting the release of carbon into the atmosphere. Energy efficiency, especially when it comes to electricity, is a vital part of that process.

Being more efficient might buy us more time to reach a proper solution to the problem of global warming, but we have to be careful that we don't just end up giving politicians an excuse to do nothing because the science is as clear as it can be and significant action is vital.

It isn't certain but then nothing in science is certain, not even the existence of the very electrons that are driving your computer as you read this.

We have a well-grounded theory that incorporates the electron as a particle, but it could be wrong. So it is with climate change.

The evidence is compelling but no scientist would say that it is certain, because no good scientist can be certain about anything in the way that newspaper editors and politicians so often claim to be.

One way to encourage careful use is to provide more information about energy consumption.

Sitting here with my 17-inch flat screen monitor's screen saver going and my low-energy bulb in my desk lamp I wondered which was the best way to illuminate the desk.

A quick search indicates that my monitor is using 35W, a bulb around 15W, so I should turn off the monitor if I'm not actually typing. But what about my laptop screen? Should I use that instead?

Competitive about energy

In this case smart meter which monitors electricity consumption and displays it would be invaluable. If I want to know how much power my laptop is using then I can plug it in and watch the readout go up.

But we can do more.

One of the more interesting toys mentioned at LIFT was the "Wattson" meter.

It is a smart meter with a difference, because it stores data for the past four weeks and has a USB socket so you can download it to your computer and plot graphs, look at trends and even upload the information to their community site.

Getting people to be competitive about their low energy use is an excellent idea, and I can't wait to see Facebook apps and MySpace widgets that show energy use and your ranking against your friends and colleagues.

It might even persuade the geeks to think more seriously about leaving their chargers plugged in and computers turned on all the time.

Epilogue: I know that flying to Geneva isn't exactly a great way to show my commitment to the environment, even if I did offset the carbon load of my flight. But I don't believe that we need to stop flying, or give up our advanced industrial economies in order to limit climate change, and often being in the same room as a group of people is the only way to make a connection to them.

Source from: news.bbc.co.uk

Read More..

New solar systems

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Widespread anxiety about the damaging effects of burning fossil fuels, coupled with a genuine fear that oil and gas will become scarce before the century ends are fueling a renewed interest in renewable energy and, in particular, solar power solutions.

The PS10 solar tower plant sits at Sanlucar la Mayor outside Seville, Spain. The solar tower plant, the first commercial solar tower in the world, can provide electricity for up to 6,000 homes.

Not since the 1970's, when the energy crisis forced oil prices through the roof, have solar power solutions been so warmly received.

Most people associate solar power with shiny black panels of what are called photovoltaic cells (PV's) which nestle on rooftops trapping the heat from the sun and converting it into electricity.

But sightings of solar panels on suburban streets remain rare, not least because of the prohibitive cost of purchase and installation.

But there are other ways of capturing the power of the sun which may provide a considerable chunk of our energy needs in the years ahead. Research is increasingly focusing on 'concentrated solar power' systems -- CSP for short.

CSP systems focus direct solar radiation through optical devices onto an area where a receiver is located -- much like burning a hole in a piece of paper with a magnifying glass. This solar radiation is then converted into electricity.

In practice, the CPS system comprises of four elements - a solar field, solar collector elements, a solar receiver and a balance of plant (the remaining systems required to operate a power plant).

A range of concepts literally aimed capturing the sun's energy are currently in operation or being tested.

Parabolic troughs have been in operation since the mid-1980's. Some of the most notable are the nine power plants built in the Californian desert. Still in operation today, they create 354 MW of energy in total and remain the world's largest collection of concentrating solar power plants.

In Europe, a number of solar projects are being rolled out. Germany leads the way with over 10 solar power plants. Located in the Tabernas Desert in southern Spain, however, is the Platforma Solar de Almeria -- a solar power research facility where new solar technologies are being tested.

One of the concepts being trialed is the 'central tower' configuration which utilizes a collection of heliostats -- mirrors which automatically track sunlight -- which act as solar collectors. The heliostats then concentrate the solar radiation onto a central receiver located at the top of a tower.

Europe's first commercial concentrated solar power plant was officially opened in Seville, Spain in March 2007. The new Planta Solar 10 (PS10) is the first commercial solar thermoelectric power plant in the world.

624 large heliostats focus the sun's rays on to a single solar receiver 115 meters high. With temperatures reaching up to 250 degrees Celsius, the solar receiver then turns water into steam, which in turn powers a turbine.

It has a peak capacity of 11 MW which is enough to generate 23 million kWh of electricity per year. That's enough to power 6,000 homes and save 18,000 tons of carbon emissions every year.

A second tower, the PS20, is currently under construction and will produce around a peak of around 20 MW of electricity.

Using troughs, dishes and towers aren't always necessary when creating solar energy. Other more rudimentary methods, first conceived over a quarter of a century ago, are once more the subject of serious consideration.

Once such idea is the 'Energy Tower'. If the project ever becomes financially viable it will create some of the tallest structures on earth, dwarfing even the new 800 meter Burj Dubai tower in the United Arab Emirates.

Originally patented as the 'Water Spray Down Draft Energy Tower' by Dr Philip Carlson in 1975, the project has, since 1982, been researched and promoted by Professor Dan Zaslavsky from Technion, the Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa.

The 'Energy Tower' produces electricity by pumping water up to the top of a chimney and then spraying it inside. As a consequence the hot air at the top of the chimney makes the water evaporate, thus cooling the air and making it denser. This cooler air then falls down the chimney shaft causing a downdraft which is used to power turbines.

Dr Rami Guetta, Project Manager of Sharav Sluices Ltd -- the company founded by Professor Zaslavsky to promote the system -- told CNN that there has been a lot of interest from Australia and the United States, although no contracts have been signed yet.

"We need about 18 months to three years to do a feasibility study, to work out the financial costs and to assess the output of the tower in an accurate way," he told CNN.

Depending on the site -- which must be in a hot, dry climate and relatively near to water sources -- the tower's height would range from at a minimum of 600 meters to a sky-scraping 1200 meters.

"It is a project that would work in about 40 countries," Dr Guetta said. "But generally speaking, the project would work 15-20 degrees north or south of the equator. But you can supply other countries by long distance power lines."

A similar idea, the solar updraft tower, also borrows from a project of yesteryear. The Solar Tower -- proposed by both Australian based firm EnviroMission and a U.S. company SolarMission Technologies -- is a direct descendant of a 1982 Spanish prototype.

The construction of a 190 meter tower surrounded by collectors (clear plastic canopy which traps warm air) in Manzanares, Ciudad Real, Spain was the brainchild of German engineer Jorg Schlaich. The plant successfully operated for seven years until 1989 and generated 50 kW of power.

Like the 'Energy Tower', the Solar Tower, uses air to drive turbines and requires a hot climate to be feasible. But instead of creating descending cold air it uses hot air from the collectors and diverts that up the chimney.

In order for the plan to be viable the towers need to rise to around 1000 meters, which, according to EnviroMission, would generate up to 200 MW of power for 200,000 homes.

Critics of the solar tower project claim that the collectors take up too much land (up to 3 kilometers in circumference) and that it is too expensive to implement.

EnviroMission which was formed in 2001 are still hopeful that the project will get the green light in the future.

And with newly-elected Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd finally committing Australia to the Kyoto Protocol, their chances have received a boost.

Source from: edition.cnn.com

Read More..

LEDs will light up Rockefeller Christmas tree

NEW YORK (AP) -- The Rockefeller Center Christmas tree is going "greener" -- with energy-saving lights replacing old-fashioned bulbs on the towering evergreen this year.

The Rockefeller Center Christmas tree will be covered with 30,000 multicolored light-emitting diodes, or LEDs.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said he hoped the change to the midtown Manhattan display will inspire the tens of millions of New Yorkers and tourists who see the tree every year.

"Now they will see an example of green leadership which may inspire them to make greener choices in their own lives," Bloomberg said Tuesday.

The 84-foot-tall Norway spruce will be covered with 30,000 multicolored light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, strung on five miles of wire.

Using the energy-efficient LEDs to replace incandescent bulbs will reduce the display's electricity consumption from 3,510 to 1,297 kilowatt hours per day. The daily savings is equal to the amount of electricity consumed by a typical 2,000-square-foot house in a month.

The owners of Rockefeller Center, Tishman Speyer, also showed off a new 365-panel solar energy array that will generate electricity on the roof of one of the complex's buildings, the largest privately owned solar roof in Manhattan.

After the official tree lighting ceremony on Nov. 28, the Christmas tree will be illuminated from 5:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. most days through the first week of January.

The Rockefeller Center tradition was started in 1931, when construction workers building the first part of the office building complex erected a 20-foot Balsam fir amid the site's mud and rubble.

After the tree is taken down in January, it will be cut into lumber to be used in houses built by Habitat for Humanity.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Source from: edition.cnn.com

Read More..

Map shows top CO2 producers in the world

WASHINGTON (AP) -- There's growing worry about global warming, but how much of it is the work of that power plant just outside town? And if Congress limits heat-trapping greenhouse gases, will it affect utility and electric bills? And who's the biggest corporate culprit when it comes to climate change?

Australians produce 11 tons of CO2 for each of its people from their power plants.

Answers to these questions may be only a couple of computer clicks away.

A new interactive online database unveiled Wednesday provides maps, color-coded categories and detailed information about who is putting 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually from power plants around the world -- about a fourth of it from the United States.

The Web site, which includes information from 4,000 utilities and 50,000 plants, shows not only the biggest CO2 emitters, but also the facilities and companies that are most green, releasing little if any carbon.

"We're trying to provide complete, balanced information. It's an open site," said David Wheeler, a senior researcher at the Center for Global Development, where he directed the creation of the massive database.

Using an array of information filters, a user can find out how much CO2 comes from electricity plants in a particular city or county, in a congressional district, from a specific company, or an individual plant.

Dubbed the Carbon Monitoring for Action database, or CARMA (www.carma.org), it proclaims itself as "the world's best place for power-plant voyeurism."

And there is a bundle of interesting information.

Australians produce 11 tons of CO2 for each of its people from their power plants -- the highest anywhere -- compared to 9 tons per person in the United States and 2 tons per person in China.

But the United States has the most CO2 emissions (2.79 billion tons), followed by China (2.66 billion tons). China, which soon is expected to pass the United States, is home to three of the world's five most CO2-polluting utilities.

China's Huaneng Power International leads all of the world's power companies, releasing nearly 292 million tons of CO2 annually. That's far more than Southern Co. and American Electric Power, the two biggest U.S. carbon emitters that each account for about 170 million tons a year, ranking sixth and seventh in the world.

Such information provides a "a vivid illustration that rich countries and developing countries must work together to overcome the challenge of climate change," said Wheeler, an expert on environmental economics.

Wheeler said in an interview that the interactive database should be of interest not only to individual citizens, but also to investors, insurers and corporate executives as Congress moves closer to imposing limits on carbon emissions to address global warming.

"Never before has this kind of detailed information been made available on a global scale," said Nancy Birdsall, president of the Center for Global Development, a think tank that examines how rich nations interact with developing countries.

While the federal government keeps annual statistics on U.S. CO2 emissions, CARMA seeks to provide its Web site visitors more complete, worldwide data by expanding on the government's numbers through independent research and extrapolations based on fuel use and electricity production.

The database also strives to be consumer friendly.

With a click of the computer mouse, one can see a map showing the top CO2 producers in the world and then move in closer to find information about the individual utility bringing electricity into your home.

Each emitter has a color code from green (the cleanest) to blue, yellow, orange and finally red (most polluting). The icons become larger the more CO2 a plant or company produces. A large red icon shows a plant producing a lot of electricity and a lot of carbon. A green one shows little if any carbon, often a nuclear power plant.

Click on American Electric Power, the Ohio-based utility that owns 25 coal-burning power plants, and one sees a large red icon. It is the country's second largest emitter of CO2 at 169,000 tons a year. Southern Co., based in Atlanta, releases a little more CO2, but its code is a mix of red and orange because of its use of nuclear energy along with CO2-producing coal. Duke Energy, 12th on the list of worldwide CO2 emitters, nevertheless gets an orange icon, also reflecting its ownership of nuclear power plants.

But of most interest to consumers may be the "digging deeper" option that displays CO2 emissions by plants or companies in a region, state, congressional district, town or by ZIP code. The Ohio Valley, the Southeast and Texas rank high in CO2 emissions, reflecting heavy fossil fuel use, while the West Coast, where nuclear and hydroelectric power are in heavy use, has comparatively little CO2 pollution from power plants.

Texas power plants account for the most CO2 (290 million tons) of any state, and Vermont the least (437,000 tons).

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Source from: edition.cnn.com

Read More..