Environmental News, Articles & Information | Global Warming News | EcoWorld

While racing towards Los Angeles from Hawaii on his yacht, Charles Moore decided to stray from the typical route and take what he thought would be an easy shortcut through the North Pacific gyre. Expecting to see nothing by calm, shimmering water in one of the most secluded regions of the ocean, Moore was shocked to find himself surrounded by mounds of garbage instead. For almost a week, Moore would walk on deck just to stare at sun-bleached toys, ropes, cups, and eerie shadows of plastic bags floating underneath the waves.

The North Pacific Gyre, noted for calm stable waters, and circular undersea currents, is calculated to contain over 100 million tons of trash. After its discovery in 1997, the area was dubbed the Eastern Garbage Patch by oceanographer, Curtis Ebbesmeyer.

During the late 1980′s, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had speculated that huge quantities of debris were trapped by ocean currents. They explained that these masses of garbage would continue to accumulate where currents flowed around in circles, creating an effect similar to a vortex by trapping the garbage inside. The North Pacific gyre had been mentioned by NOAA, but didn’t receive much attention until Moore sailed through the area during the 1997 Transpac competition.
post resumes below image

The gyres of the world’s oceans. (Photo: Algalita Marine Research Foundation)

It was no surprise that Moore, having grown up by the ocean and raised by an avid sailor, founded the Algalita Marine Research Foundation in 1994. This organization, based in Long Beach, California, started out studying the ocean’s chemical and bacterial properties, but their focus changed after Moore discovered the seemingly endless plastic soup during his unforgettable race.

Algalita quotes Moore on the subject: “there were shampoo caps and soap bottles and plastic bags and fishing floats as far as I could see. Here I was in the middle of the ocean, and there was nowhere I could go to avoid the plastic.”

Scientists estimate the swirling mass of plastics and debris is two times the size of Texas. In fact, the Pacific gyre has now separated into two ever increasing patches known as the Western and Eastern Pacific Garbage Patches (combined, they are called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch). This oceanic dumping ground is now a major spot for studying the effects of plastics on marine life.

Eighty percent of the trash floating in the patch is plastic. These plastics are slowly broken down into little pieces by the streaming sunlight and corrosive saltwater. Over time, these plastic chips will degrade to the size of dust particles which can easily become ingested by zooplankton. The effects of this on the entire marine food chain could be catastrophic. Even now, part of the ‘sand’ we find on the popular shorelines is composed of eroded plastic pieces mixed in with the natural crumbled coral and volcanic rock.

Algalita is one of many foundations dedicated to protecting the world’s oceans. One can hope that the growth of these giant garbage patches may be slowed down with the foundations’ restoration projects and outreach programs. If not, at least, their constant research on the effects of plastics and contaminants on marine environments will be better understood. This is the first step for finding a solution.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where almost everything is disposable, and it will take some time for that to change.

While decentralized sources of power, such as harnessing solar and wind energy to generate electricity, are well understood opportunities, there are additional fundamental areas where we are moving inexorably towards an infrastructure where being on the grid is an option, not a necessity. A recently announced new waste-to-energy system that turns trash into clean energy from IST Energy is an exciting example of this trend.

There are several credible companies developing ways to convert municipal solid waste (MSW) into energy, such as Ze-Gen, Plasco Energy Group, Rentech, Bluefire Ethanol, Coskata, Enerkem, and many others. But unlike these companies, which are developing technologies for centralized plants to convert thousands or, even more likely, millions of tons of MSW feedstock into electricity or fuel each year, IST Energy has developed a system that operates at an onsite scale.

If IST Energy’s technology moves out of the pilot phase – they are currently demonstrating a prototype unit for potential customers – the implications are huge. Instead of paying for expensive trash pickup and removal services, so waste can end up in a landfill, campuses, military bases, hospitals, and other institutions or commercial complexes can install a waste-to-energy solution from IST Energy, available in modules so it can be scaled to whatever waste processing requirement may apply.

During an interview last week with Stu Haber, CEO of IST Energy, he said the unit they are developing is 30′ by 8.5′ by 8′ high, able to fit in a standard shipping container for intermodal delivery anywhere. Into this volume, the system IST Energy has designed includes space for 3 tons of MSW storage at the front end (so it only has to be fed once per day), with a shredder, dryer, pelletizer, zero-emission gasifier, and internal combustion engine electricity generator that runs on the syngas extracted from the MSW.

A cutaway view of IST Energy’s onsite waste-to-energy system. (Image: IST Energy)

How much energy comes out of this system? A typical waste stream has somewhere between 8,500 and 12,000 BTUs of embodied energy per pound. With a gasifier that can extract up to 90% of this energy and convert it into syngas, and an internal combustion engine generator that converts the mechanical energy of the engine into electricity at about 27% efficiency, about 25% of every pound of waste input comes out the other end as electricity. Put another way, somewhere between 1-2 pounds of waste equals one kilowatt-hour, depending on the specific composition of the waste input. Additional energy is extracted in the form of heat, improving overall efficiency, and making these units miniature combined heat and power plants.

IST Energy intends to sell these units for about $850,000 each, meaning for that price you could process about 1,100 tons of waste each year, generating about 1.3 million kilowatt-hours, along with co-gen heat. At $.15 per kilowatt-hour, you would recover $200K per year just in electricity, plus you would harvest the heat, and presumably, save money on garbage collection fees (only about 5% of the volume of the waste material input remains as ash). If IST Energy can deliver this unit in large quantities according to these specifications, they have a very disruptive technology.

A few innovative people are motivated by ideas that will improve their communities, but the one thing that usually stands in their way is funding. Everything costs money.

Tomorrow’s sustainable future is REEEP’s challenge today (Photo: REEEP)

This is where Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP) comes in. This unique organization is backed by governments, banks, NGO’s and businesses that all have an interest in the sustainable energy market.

REEEP has distributed millions of dollars to fund various projects focusing on renewable energy and energy efficiency: In 2005, REEEP disbursed a modest 1.1 million euro throughout the world, but with their constant success and the addition of interested parties, available funding has continued to grow and in 2008 they had over 4 million Euro to hand out to worthy projects.

Some examples of recently funded projects include the following:

• Amazonia Energy Initiative to increase energy access for isolated communities
• Developing a vehicle for mass Implementation of solar water heating in South Africa
• Development of a business plan for rural electricity generation (DG) system based on biomass
• Financing Small Hydro Projects in the Sugar and Tea Industry in East and Southern Africa
• The Implementation of the Brazil grid-connected solar photovoltaic roofs program
• Compiling Renewable energy Legislation for Kazakhstan
• Promoting low energy building programs in China

These and other projects sponsored by REEEP display impressive variety, but a characteristic shared by all these projects is that they can be mirrored by interested countries and replicated on a larger scale.

Besides funding hundreds of unique projects, REEEP is proud to have initiated other activities as well: One of their major claims to fame is Reegle – “the information gateway for renewable energy and energy efficiency.” Launched in 2006, Reegle is a unique search engine that shows only the highest quality websites dedicated to green technology and energy efficiency. Reegle is definitely a better option than sifting through the thousands of sites that come up when using more general search engines.

Another core activity is the “Twinning Cities” idea. REEEP explains that “City Mayors have an important role to play in becoming leaders of sustainable energy systems at the local level. REEEP, in listening to its local partners, determined that cities in the Southern Hemisphere were requesting assistance and models for replication from OECD countries. For this reason, REEEP has established the City Twinning program as a mechanism to exchange experiences between cities.”

REEEP calls itself a catalyst for change. The organization has definitely proven its point by improving the global market for alternative energies while helping dozens of communities in the process.

Something we don’t hear often enough amidst this era’s turbulent convergence of cultures and challenging disruptions of technology is this: Humanity is destined within a tantalizingly few decades to achieve a level of prosperity that can scarcely be imagined today. The ongoing conflicts of nations, continued destruction of the environment, heartbreaking poverty, ruthless injustice – these all constitute a dark fog of tribulations that can appear inpenetrable. But this fog that can seem so thick and toxic is actually disappearing with breathtaking speed.

It is often easy to overlook the many positive forces of history, forces that can be identified with Euclidean precision, immutable forces that will deliver to humanity abundance in all forms, wealth to conquer poverty, cleanse the planet, and satiate the longings of peoples and nations. As the world urbanizes, voluntarily and en-masse, rural lands and wildernesses are relieved, and open space becomes abundant. As technological innovation advances at exponential rates, energy and water will also become abundant. The most important natural resource in the world is human creativity, and it is inexhaustible and will find a way to alleviate any scarcity.

The data to back up these audaciously optimistic claims is not terribly complex. It is based on two trends which taken together pretty much prove the point. The first is that the human population on Earth has nearly reached its maximum. Projections from the U.N. Office of Economic & Social Affairs indicate it is unlikely that the total human population will ever exceed 10.0 billion, and since there are already nearly 7.0 billion people in the world, most of the growth in human population has already occurred.

The second trend is the total economic output of the planet, measured in constant dollars, continues to increase. There is a fascinating 1998 study by J. Bradford DeLong, an economics professor at UC Berkeley, entitled “Estimating World GDP, One Million B.C. – Present.” that uses constant 1990 international dollars to estimate the per capita income of humans beginning over a thousand years ago and projecting through the year 2000. With this data, updated with more recent data through 2005 from the World Bank, and converting everything into 2005 international dollars, the table below provides estimates of per capita income as well as global GDP in fifty year increments from 1750 through the year 2000 and beyond. Assuming a modest annual rate of 3.0% for future global economic growth, on this table one can examine what happens when GDP continues to grow, but human population stablizes. The results are striking.
post resumes below image

ESTIMATED GLOBAL POPULATION, GDP, AND PER CAPITA INCOME FROM 1750 THROUGH 2150

When increasing global productivity no longer competes with population growth, per capita income improves dramatically.

As the table indicates, global GDP grew at an annual rate of 1.0% or less until the industrial revolution, then picked up to around 2.0% per year until about 1950. During the period from 1950 to 2000, however, the rate of growth increased dramatically, to an annual rate of over 4.0%, as the momentum of the industrial revolution was catalysed by the information technology revolution, and rolled out from the Western Nations to begin to embrace all the world’s peoples.

Examining global population indicates similar trends, increasing growth rates as global wealth increases, with the the last half of the 20th century showing an unprecedented annual rate of population growth of 1.7% (ref. U.S. Census Bureau’s “Historical Estimates of World Population,” and Wikipedia’s “World Population.” Looking ahead, however, for the first time in history, the impact of wealth is so great that it is empowering individuals to shrink the size of their families instead of expanding them. The next fifty years through 2050 will see the average annual rate of global population growth reduced to 0.8%, less than half the rate of the preceding years, and after that, to virtually zero. The factors that cause humans to opt for smaller families – female literacy, access to contraception, and reduced infant mortality – are all the result of wealth, and as per capita wealth increases, everyone in the world becomes their beneficiary.

What is most encouraging is just how dramatic the increases to per capita income are going to be in the decades preceding 2050, and even more so in the 2nd half of the 21st century. As the table indicates, and these are constant units of currency, even at a realistic 3.0% rate of real annual growth in global economic output, which now easily and dramatically exceeds rates of population growth, by 2050 per capita income will be over $25K, which equates to an average household income of over $100K. By 2100 per capita income will be over $100K; an average household income of over $400K using 2005 dollars.

In many respects, just how so much wealth will benefit humanity is impossible to visualize. Just as cave dwellers couldn’t possibly imagine spending whatever might have passed for currency back then on a television, it is quite likely there are things we will do with our wealth in 100 years that we can’t imagine today. Things we can imagine are many, however, and fascinating: personal androids that will care for us when we’re old, life extension therapies that will delay getting old to begin with, treatment and prevention of currently incurable diseases, remediation programs to restore ecosystems, and exploration programs to colonize the solar system. With the kind of innovation and wealth creation that defines being human, ten billion people will not nearly exceed the carrying capacity of planet earth, and 100 years is not a very long time. It is helpful to remember this inspiring path we are on, and the bright destiny that awaits humanity, as we strive to make our way today through the fog.

Bishkek’s electricity generating plant can be seen in the background – frequently starved for fuel.

Every year when the winter knocks the door at former Soviet Republics particularly Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan…

Many political pledges, populist programs, negotiations, concessions, and decrees are made to facilitate the easy access to energy needs at least for survival. The political equations among the Central Asian countries oscillate awkwardly on the use of common rivers water that produces major requirement for electricity and irrigation. Claimed to having the largest hydropower potential in the region, the Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyzstan) is facing the challenge of an energy quagmire.

Power fluctuations have caused major discontent in Kyrgyzstan, which has been embroiled in political and economic instability in recent years. The citizens of the landlocked Kyrgyzstan are going through yet another difficult winter and electricity generation is so low that the government has been unable to honor a pledge to end power cuts. The politics over energy demand and supply inside the Kyrgyzstan is ticking to explode at anytime as civil unrest.

According to government sources the exceptionally cold winter of 2007 forced them to produce more electricity than planned from the major Toktogul reservoir. Toktogul Hydro Power Station has a concrete gravity dam with height of 215 meters and water reservoir with a total volume of 19.5 km3 (cubic kilometers – a cubic kilometer or km3 is equivalent to, and frequently also expressed as “bcm” or billion cubic meters). The water inflow in the reservoir made 7.44 km3 till October 2008, which is 1.8 km3 less as compared to the last year at the same time. The water outflow reached 4.3 km3, 1.5 km3 less than in 2007. Once the volume of water in the Toktogul reservoir decreased even further in May 2008 to 6.8 km3, which was difficult to produce electricity. By overexploitation, the depletion of the Toktogul reservoir, which on 01 April 2008 amounted to only 7.2 km3, some 5 km3 lower than average (2002-2007).The water in reservoir is already low since 2007. The water inflows into Toktogul in 2007 summer were 1.7 km3 less than the average of the previous 15 years. The 2008 winter forced the government to exploit more water to produce electricity. So in the mentioned figure, the government highlighted that so far the situation is not normal for the winter of December-2008 to March 2009. For this reason the Kyrgyz government wants to conserve water in the reservoir by scheduled cutting electricity. So it was not primarily the 0.3 km3 net drop which necessitated the flow reduction, but to manage the low level of water in the reservoir and to produce more electricity required for this ongoing winter.

The Ministry of Industry, Energy and Fuel Resources responsible for supplying electricity and heat informed the public that due to inadequate water supplies in the Toktogul Reservoir, there would be daily power cuts everywhere. School days are shortened or closed. A senior citizen of Bishkek, Rufat Aliev says,

“Even during World War-II, schools were never shortened or closed down.”

Although citizens reprieved from daily blackouts in the extreme cold for few days, the blackouts resume again on November 15 in rural areas and Bishkek countryside. Kyrgyz electricity company Severelectro has already restarted electricity blackouts in Bishkek in late 2008 and planning to continue in 2009. (See Table-1 of black out- schedule). Meanwhile, the President sacked the energy minister Saparbek Balkibekov when the minister apprehended the looming energy crisis in Feb, 2009!

Table #1: ELECTRICITY BLACKOUT SCHEDULE – BISHKEK (OCTOBER & NOVEMBER)

Electricity generation in 2008 totalled 8.8 billion kilowatt hours, when in 2007 it was 10.5 billion. Due to the shortage of electricity generation, the prices of the electricity have been increasing gradually. Kyrgyz Prime Minister Igor Chudinov announced the government’s plans to increase prices for electricity by 13 percent and water by 20 percent in April 2008.

According to the electricity, heating and hot water tariffs raising plan, the prices may increase by 25-30% starting from April – May 2009. But, right now the price is 62 Tyiyn per KW (1 Som= 100 Tyiyns, in mid-January 2008 the Kyrgyz Som would exchange for about .025 US dollars, ref. Kyrgyz/USD exchange rate) is much above the normal price. So far, the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade estimated that the electricity blackouts cost Kyrgyzstan about 60 billion Soms or 6 percent out of GDP growth.

The new Minister of Industry, Energy and Fuel Resources, Ilias Davydov, said to the Parliament in mid-December that

“heating and electricity tariffs are not expected to rise since January 1, 2009.”

However, many people who live in condominiums, have already constructed small stoves in their apartments and buying coal, and/or mazut (heavy, low quality fuel oil) in order to heat their homes, in case the central heating system fails to provide the required heat. Although people are receiving heat from the central heating system in Bishkek, people are expecting a high increase in tariff in anytime in end of January 2009. During the summer, the Bishkek residents were angry and frustrated by the fluctuation of power supply. Nicholas Lukyanovich Kravtsov, a former Soviet energy specialist now heads the public association on protection of the rights of consumers ‘Yustin’ in Bishkek says,

“The government has created this myth of load shedding on the decline of water level in the reservoir including other myths of non-profitability of the energy sector, high prices for electricity and privatisation.”

On another night without electricity, candlelight is seen dimly through the windows of this apartment building.

The Complex Water and Energy
Nexus in Central Asia

In this situation, it is necessary to delve into policies and mechanisms for management of key resources – water and energy resources. According to the President of the Kyrgyz Republic, the countries of the region day by day would be involved in tough negotiations for water and energy. However, one-sided utilization of water resources of rivers for power generation entails problems in water supplies for people living in lower reaches, primarily for the irrigation purposes.

Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan are located in the high mountains of Pamir and Tyan Shan, whose many glaciers supply the water which is the main energy resource in these countries. Hydropower provides over 90% of their energy supply. In the former Soviet region, after Russia, Tajikistan has the second highest water resource potential (530 billion kWh/year) followed by the Kyrgyzstan (142 billion kWh/year). However, most of the experts and government agencies are of the view that Kyrgyzstan exploits less than 9% of its hydroelectric potential. The annual hydropower potential of the smaller rivers is between 5 and 8 billion kWh, but only 3 percent has been utilised so far. Its rich water resources consist of 50 cubic kilometers of surface runoff a year, 13 km3 of potential ground water resources, 1,745 km3 of lake water, and 650 km3 of glaciers. The region’s largest rivers (the Naryn, 807 km; Chu, 380 km, Talas, 200 km, Saryjaz, Kara Darya, Chatkal, and others that belong to the Syr Darya and Amu Darya basins) find their headwaters in Kyrgyzstan.

There are 20 major power plants with a total installed capacity of 3,680 MW in the country. Although there is conflicting information about the total number of large hydropower and combined heat and power plants (CHP) in the Republic, it’s commonly accepted that 2,950 MW comes from 18 hydro power plants and approximately 725 MW comes from two heat and power plants.

Table #2: EXISTING POWER PLANTS IN KYRGYZSTAN

(Source: Ministry of Industry, Energy and Fuel Resources, Kyrgyz Republic)

Table #3: SMALL HYDROPOWER PLANTS ON THE NARYN RIVER

According to the National Energy Program (NEP) of the Kyrgyz Republic for 2006-2010 and the Strategy of the Fuel and Energy Complex until 2025 (NEP), there will be addition of 3,960 MW from several hydropower stations by 2025 (See Table-4). However, this ambitious program needs sufficient investment. The NEP also envisages to commission 1200 MW Kavak state district heating power station by 2015. During the same period, the NEP will add to the hydropower generation from small hydropower amounting 178 MW.

Table #4: HYDROPOWER PLANTS PROPOSED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Although power production is growing from 13.3 billion kWh in 1990 to 14.5 billion kWh in 2006, the citizens are deprived of electricity. The share of hydropower stations in power production increased from 67 to 94 percent, while the share of heat and power plants decreased drastically from 32 to 6 percent in 2006. In country’s fuel energy mix, hydropower takes 81 percent; heat and power plants 17 percent and small hydropower stations around 1.3 percent.

Most of the existing hydropower plants were constructed in Soviet times entirely along a single river – the Naryn River. Before 1991, Toktogul Reservoir was operated in ‘irrigation mode’, with large summer releases to satisfy irrigation demands in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, and low winter releases. Surplus hydropower in summer produced by the Naryn Cascade was transmitted to the downstream Republics. During the winter, the Kyrgyz Republic received sufficient fuel to operate its combined heat and power plants. After 1991, fuel deliveries have not fully satisfied Kyrgyzstan’s needs. Therefore, the Kyrgyz Republic increased releases from the Toktogul Reservoir during winter. As a result, the reservoir operation has shifted to ‘power mode’ with large winter releases and lower summer releases. However, to address growing problems in the first half of the 1990′s, the Basin States entered into annual agreements on water allocation energy exchanges in an attempt to re-establish the pre-1991 operating regime. The 1998 Framework Agreement on the joint use of water and energy resources in the Syr Darya Basin between the Kyrgyz Republic, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan places these agreements on a more formal footing. However, the implementation of the yearly basis negotiated outcome of the 1998 agreement is always questionable.

According to one of the senior Kyrgyz government representative,

“It was the balance system to make countries equal. But after collapse of the USSR, upper riparian countries had to buy fossil fuel from downstream countries in market price, while latter used water free of charge. Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan cannot understand that Kyrgyzstan needs money to maintain all these reservoirs to provide with irrigation water”.

Without successful barter for alternative fuel, hydropower in winter comes at the cost of downstream summer irrigation.

The Barter system: Water vs Natural Gas

In the latest negotiation with Uzbekistan in Tashkent, the Kyrgyz Minister of Industry, Energy and Fuel Resources Ilias Davydov concluded the imported natural gas price at $250 per 1000 cubic meters. Although the minister explained that the price is quite acceptable, when Uzbekistan sells gas to Russia at $326 per 1000 m3, last year the price was very low at $145. Earlier, both the government has an intergovernmental agreement, where it says that Uzbekistan promises to deliver Kyrgyzstan gas, while Kyrgyzstan give 600 cubic meters of water and 600 million kW/h of electricity. The Kyrgyz government agreed on these conditions, in order to keep the Bishkek heat and power plant operational. Kyrgyzstan intended to negotiate with Uzbek authorities into leaving the gas price unchanged – $145 per 1000m3. In 2007/2008 the Uzbek gas cost Kyrgyzstan $145 per 1,000m3.

The Uzbek government has been accusing Kyrgyzstan not to abide by the water-energy deal that has historically governed water allocations between the two nations. Even per the agreed arrangement, however, the Uzbeks complain about being unable to attain their goals for irrigation needs in summer as well as over unwanted flooding in winter. The Uzbek government’s intention, ideally, is to make beneficial use of the water of the Naryn River and the Toktogul reservoir not only for the Kyrgyz Republic, but for the national economies of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan as well. This is one of the most political and complicated issues between these neighbouring countries. There have been many instances of the downstream Uzbeks accusing the upstream Kyrgyz of not abiding the 1998 agreement which always renewed annually as per the parties request. For example, when Kyrgyz officials released more water for producing electricity during the Winter of 2008, most of the Uzbek’s arable land flooded. When the Uzbeks needed more water in the following summer for irrigation, the reservoir had less water. There were hardly any official remarks on this.

Similarly, the Kyrgyz government inked a deal with Kazakhstan to import of 250 million kilowatt-hours of electricity to Kyrgyzstan in September 2008. However, the head of the parliament committee on fuel-energy sector Yury Danilov suspected that the price of Kazakh electricity will make 3-4 soms per 1,000 kilowatt hours.

A shuttered and vacant school in Bishkek. Until heat and electricity becomes more reliable, students cannot learn.

The Role of Multilateral Development Banks

Major donor agencies like the World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB) consider the present energy situation in Bishkek is continue to be a concern. The ADB is believed to be agreed to allocate $20 million for black oil, coal and gas purchasing for the Bishkek heating plant in the first quarter of 2009. The World Bank immediately sanctioned an emergency assistant to rehabilitate the Bishkek Heating Plant.

The ADB has a strategy called Central Asia Economic Cooperation under which a project named CASAREM (Central Asia/South Asia Regional Electricity Market) has been implemented for allowing energy export to Afghanistan and Pakistan as a market for the Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan’s energy. Maya Eralieva, Central Asia and Caucasus Coordinator of NGO Forum on ADB, says,

“The MDBs [Multilateral Development Banks] especially the ADB has been cajoling the Kyrgyz government to export energy to far Afghanistan and Pakistan. While the situation at home is very grim, why the ADB is suggesting to exporting energy to outside the national border.”

Like the ADB, the World Bank is also planning for an export market for the Kyrgyz hydro power with emphasising privatisation of the energy sector in Bishkek. The privatisation of Kyrgyzenergo (the State electric agency) has been stalled at the parliamentary level since 1997, when sell-offs of large monopolies were suspended following allegations of price rigging and corruption. However, during this present emergency situation many international agencies like USAID have been re-opening the public debate on privatization. According to the senior human rights activist, Natalia Ablova of the Bureau on Human Rights and Rule of Law, privatization would be a very dangerous experiment at least for the Kyrgyzstan as there is non-transparency, no legal system to protect consumer rights, and no judicial control over private companies.

The Elusive Yet Abundant Hydropower in the Kyrgyz Republic

It’s interesting to note that the national Flag of Kyrgyz Republic carries the glowing sun, but the country is pressed with increasing energy shortages. In the flag there is the tunduk positioned in the center of the glowing sun. This image of the tunduk, which translates as rooftop, refers to the top of the boz-youi – the traditional house of nomadic Kyrgyz people. So far, this scenic and beautiful landlocked country is looking for ways and means to harness the full potential of its hydropower. To pacify the anger of citizens of Bishkek, the Minister of Industry, Energy and Fuel Resources Ilias Davydov said that the government will consider writing off of citizens’ debts in early 2009. However, Mr. Guljan Ibraeva, citizen of Bishkek says,

“Joint effort can resolve all the energy crisis, lack of water resources, food crisis in this region. We have to put all our efforts together and back to Soviet time designed system which is suitable and more sustainable.”

This winter may decide the future of Kyrgyzstan’s energy sector and its bilateral relation with the neighbouring countries on water and energy. The Country must pay attention to hydro-energy diplomacy seriously.

THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

About the author: Avilash Roul, who recently completed his doctoral research on international environmental negotiations, particularly in the area of water security, has been writing, advocating, researching, and publishing on issues of the Environment and Development in various English Daily media since 2000. Earlier, he worked with Down To Earth (fortnightly magazine published in New Delhi, India). He also contributed regularly on Sundays for a column in New India Express on environment and development. More recently, Mr. Roul worked as an Assistant South Asia Regional Coordinator for the Bank Information Center (www.bicusa.org), that advocates for the protection of rights, participation, transparency, and public accountability in the governance and operations of the World Bank and regional development banks. He has served on advisory boards for many research institutions and community based organizations. He is core advisor on energy and environment for the Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict (www.sspconline.org), a New Delhi based think tank. Presently, he strategically supports many community groups and CSOs across Asia to build their capacity for research and analysis, project investigation, and strengthening community participation in Asian Development Bank (ADB) projects, programs and policies while working with the Manila based NGO Forum on ADB (www.forum-adb.org). He contributes his free time on researching and empowering and building capacity of various communities on environmental risk management, climate change, forest, mining, water and wildlife issues.

A question of more than passing interest to vehicle owners is at what point the price of gasoline becomes so high that owning an electric vehicle becomes a compelling investment. How that question is answered has implications not only for the emerging EV industry, but cleantech in general. To what extent will low energy prices combined with a slow economy result in entire sectors of cleantech slipping into dormancy, if not oblivion? Here are three factors worth considering:

Hybrids never made sense economically, and probably never will unless they cost virtually the same as conventional automobiles. Even when gasoline cost nearly $5.00 per gallon, a high mileage hybrid vehicle was not an investment that could be justified for economic reasons. Suppose a hybrid vehicle averages 50 miles per gallon and costs $10,000 more than a conventional vehicle that gets 25 miles per gallon. This means the hybrid incurs fuel costs of $.10 per mile, and the conventional vehicle incurs fuel costs of $.20 per mile. In turn, this means at a savings of $.10 per mile in fuel costs through driving the hybrid instead of the conventional vehicle, one would have to drive 100,000 miles before they would break even. At $2.00 per gallon, or even $3.00 per gallon, even moderately higher costs for a hybrid vehicle can never be recovered. In general, cleantech products that require a premium over conventional products are not going to survive in this economy. Now that Americans have belatedly realized that accumulating debt is the same thing as spending money, they are only going to be buying things they really need, at a price or payback they can afford.

The recession is just beginning. For example, a typical Californian household can now expect to pay $250/month for electricity and natural gas, at least $250/month for water & garbage service, $250/month for internet, cable, and telephones, and at least $500/month for health insurance. If they own two cars, they can still expect costs of about $250 per month just for car insurance and registration fees. If they “only” owe $250K on their home, they can expect mortgage, insurance and property taxes to add at least another $2,000 per month to their cost of living. This means with no children, no car payments, and no credit card debt, a household has to gross, before taxes, about $60,000 per year. Add decent instead of minimal health insurance coverage, an overpriced home, dependent children, a car payment, and food, clothing, and other basic necessities, and the average middle-class California household now requires an annual income of at least $120,000 per year to stay even. All of the costs cited here are double what they were 10 years ago (despite private sector worker’s incomes remaining flat by comparison), and the reason they were allowed to get so high is because Americans were encouraged in every manner possible to go deep into debt and spend, spend, spend – and this drove the cost of living so high that even ordinary Americans who didn’t accumulate irresponsible levels of debt can barely survive, let alone those tens of millions who are in debt up to their eyeballs.

Will climate change legislation still happen? Don’t count on it. The elites – big government, big labor, and big business, in that order – who enriched themselves, or empowered themselves, or briefly postponed their accountability, or all of the above, by building an economy on unsustainable debt, now wish to further consolidate their power by imposing “carbon taxes.” Based on what is perhaps the biggest and most regressive fraud in the history of the world, the notion that anthropogenic CO2 is going to cause catastrophic climate change, America is supposedly on the brink of transferring additional wealth out of the hands of the crippled masses of ordinary Americans, so it can trickle upwards into the hands of attorneys, CPAs, corrupt or naive scientists, the public sector, select big businesses, bankers, insurance companies, environmental nonprofits, and the “international community.” Despite relentless propaganda, scare tactics, and demonization of any voice of sanity or moderation, it is quite likely Americans will finally realize who the bad guys and liars and opportunists really are, and rise up to stop this giant scam in its tracks. What will that mean for cleantech? What will it mean for environmentalism?

Bob Lutz, Vice Chairman, General Motors A man who calls it as he sees it.

Bob Lutz, the outspoken and brilliant Vice Chairman of General Motors, who once quite correctly referred to global warming panic as a “crock of shit,” commented recently on the futility of trying to impose fuel efficiency when the price of gasoline is down to $1.50 per gallon: “If you want to fight national obesity,” he said, “you have to increase the price of fatty foods. But the US won’t do that so they force the clothing manufacturers to produce only small sizes.” Along with Mr. Lutz’s insightful comment we might add the following well worn cliche, namely, “you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip.” If a cleantech product or service can’t offer the consumer tangible benefits despite cheap conventional energy and a depressed economy, it is probably going to go away.

Cleantech is indeed challenged as never before, and perhaps what is most regrettable is that for every cleantech business model dependent on unsustainable debt and unfounded fearmongering, there are cleantech businesses that promise undeniably good things; energy independence, elimination of toxic materials and toxic waste, abundant water and healthier food, cleaner air, and in rare and inspiring cases, actual cost savings and viable paybacks. Hopefully as the cleantech bubble deflates, all of these genuinely innovative enhancements to our way of life and our planet will live on, and acquire sustainable momentum when the global economy inevitably recovers.

14.11.2008: Project Apollon cooperates with SolarTec AG

SolarTec AG assumes responsible position in technical project coordination:

German photovoltaics company SolarTec AG was elected as industrial partner of the European Photovoltaics Project APOLLON (Multi-APrOach for high Efficiency integrated and inteLLigent cONcentrating PV modules/systems). APOLLON, a cooperation of European photovoltaic research institutions, aims at the development of high efficiency concentrator technology, focussing on innovative photovoltaic systems in the field of “PF -Point Focus” and “High Density-Mirror Based Spectra Splitting.”

SolarTec AG won recognition against strong competition of more than 400 project applicants, including worldwide renowned research institutes and universities. The total budget of the project amounts to approx. 11.7 Mio. €, of which 8.2 Mio. € will be funded by the EU.

Together with subsidiary company ENE, SolarTec AG is in funds of a 2.1 Mio. € budget (1.6 Mio. € funded by the EU) until 2012. Under the lead of CESI RICERCA (I), and in cooperation with 13 further
renowned companies and institutes from 10 countries, SolarTec AG will develop an innovative concentrator system for competitive, high-efficient photovoltaic electricity generation.

Solar Tec’s most important project partners are:
– CESI RICERCA, Milan, Italy
– AIXTRON, Aachen, Germany
– JRC, Ispra, Italy
– ECN, Petten, Netherlands
– ROBOTIKER ENERGÍA, Zamudia-Bizkaia, Spain
– ENEL, Italy

At the Kick-Off on July 10, 2008 in Milan, Italy, work contents and responsibilities of the project partners were fixed. Amongst others, project focus on in the development of a new, non-imaging
lens (Fresnel and Prismatic lens), combining high concentration and optical performance with wide
acceptance angles.

Another aspect in the research project is the enhancement of micro-solar-cells (multi-junction solarcells) on the basis of III-V semiconductor materials deriving from space technology. Thus the APOLLON project credits with a somehow historic role, aiming at photovoltaic efficiencies beyond 40%. In order to reach that, new materials for MJ (Multi Junction) solar cells will be tested and produced in Solar Tec’s laboratory. During extensive “indoor” and “outdoor” tests, the concentrator-modules are checked on performance, quality and long life durability by reference measurements.

The tracking system is crucial for the efficient use of concentrator technology. SolarTec will develop a novel, intelligent and cost effective system that enables optimal performance of the complete
system.

SolarTec AG commits itself to a responsible position in the technical coordination of the project, as well as in implementing operational results into industrial production and commercialization of concentrator PV-Technology.

Main tasks of SolarTec AG are:
Optimisation of primary lenses
Optimisation of the complete module production process
Long term stability of the modules (with JRC)
Optimisation of cost-effective, highly-precise tracking systems of SolarTec (jointly with ROBOTIKER
ENERGÍA)
Development of secondary lenses
IEC-Certification (with JRC)
Construction of a test installation in Sicily (with ENEL)

ENE’s main tasks will be the development of “multi-layer-cells” with a concentration factor of 1,000 and an effectiveness of more than 35%, as well as the production of Ge-Wafers for the whole consortium.

Further information on the internet relating to the project can be found here:

http://www.apollon-eu.

org/project.htm.

A complete list of all partner companies can be found here:

http://www.apollon-eu.org/partners.htm

Solar*Tec AG is a photovoltaics industry company which develops and markets highly efficient solar energy systems. The Solar*Tec Group is active in all three generations of Photovoltaics: crystalline
silicon, thin film technology and concentrator PV (CPV).

One of the core-competences is the Sol*Con concentrator technology, which provides efficiency rates over 35 percent and generates solar energy up to 50 percent cheaper than conventional solar modules.

The services of the Solar*Tec Group include important steps of the value-creation-chain, amongst others wafer manufacturing for concentrator cells, TCO-Glass (under construction), production of
crystalline modules as well as turnkey construction of solar parks. Sol*Con™ is a registered trademark of Solar*Tec AG.

Contact:
Dr. Evangelos Zoidis, CTO, zoidis@solartecag.de
Dipl.-Ing. Matthias Sturm, Head of R&D, sturm@solartecag.de
Solar*Tec AG
Administration, R&D, Production
Uhlandstr. 13
85609 Aschheim near Munich
Tel. : +49 (89) 90 77 49 97-0
Fax: +49 (89) 90 77 49 97-69
Mail: info@SolarTecAG.de
Web: www.SolarTecAG.de

We aren’t alone when it comes to enjoying the occasional fruit or vegetable: thousands of insect species scuttle, buzz and dig their way onto farmland to make their homes in a delicious apple or ripening grape. Unfortunately, produce isn’t as appealing with these pests nestled inside of it, even if the occasional fruit fly is just another harmless source of protein.

After growing in the sun for a few weeks, fruits-and the insects that come with them-are plucked from trees and piled high into trucks. While rifling through the colorful produce section, it doesn’t occur to most people that there are a few more steps involved before the year’s harvest rolls into the grocery store:

A common way to destroy any stowaways is to place harvested fruits and vegetables in a chamber that is filled with methyl bromide (aka Bromomethane) gas for eight hours. This poison kills any bugs it comes into contact with. Bromomethane was widely used as a pesticide on open crops and in soils until a few years ago, when agriculturalists came to realize how harmful the substance actually was.

Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens)

To put things into perspective; Bromine is 60 times more harmful to the ozone than chlorine, and like many pesticides, exposure to the gas causes a variety of ailments in people-from dizziness and nausea to kidney failure, convulsions and death.

Nobody wants a dose of pesticides with their salad. Unfortunately, many pesticides are still used to gas harvested produce before it reaches the grocery store. The solution comes in the form of a cost-effective, non-toxic pressurizing method called the metabolic stress disinfection and disinfection (MSDD) system. The name is a mouthful, but the concept is quite simple:

Developed by UCDavis Physical Chemist, Manuel Lagunas-Solar, the MSDD device exposes pests to cycles of vacuum and pressurized carbon dioxide. First, air pressure is reduced by 90%. Then, after a few minutes, carbon dioxide fills the chamber. Ethanol vapor seeps into the chamber once in a while as well. (Ethanol, also known as pure alcohol, is harmless to humans in these small quantities. There is more ethanol in a shot glass of beer than there would be on the exposed fruits). Any bugs, eggs and microbes trapped inside these chambers with the food can’t survive the pressure changes coupled with the ethanol mist.

Making a chamber big enough for the large-scale farmer is not out of the question either. It is nice to see yet another innovative idea to cut back on our pesticide use.