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

Earlier this month heralded the formal launch of “Carbon Information Management” (CIM) software from Planet Metrics, a Northern California based company that has been brewing this “web-based, multi-dimensional software that helps organizations to create and deploy innovative sustainability strategies” since early 2007.

Unlike Environmental Health and Sustainability (EH&S) software, such as the enterprise wide solutions offered by market leaders in that space such as ESS, CIM software focuses on helping enterprises assess the total carbon footprint of their products and processes. As such, CIM offers an important analytical tool to help companies move towards clean and sustainable operations that is very distinct from EH&S solutions. Like ESS, Planet Metrics appears to be the furthest along towards delivering a comprehensive solution in their space, although they do get competition from products offered by Carbon View and Clear Standards.

What differentiates Planet Metrics, according to CEO Andy Leventhal, is that the competition focuses on helping companies do carbon accounting and data collection, but they don’t have the ability to model carbon data, performing what-ifs, nor do they have the rich database of stored life cycle analysis (LCA) assessments. Also unique with Planet Metrics is how they have integrated over 4,500 LCA’s with an Economic Input/Output (EIO) model they licensed from Carnegie Mellon. With this continuously updated and expanded LCA/EIO engine, Planet Metrics has added a carbon assessment feature, allowing companies using their software to rapidly estimate the carbon impact of their operations.

As Leventhal emphasized, this tool allows companies to look at virtually every facet of their operation from a carbon impact perspective, from the supply chain and product design to the packaging, logistics and waste streams. “We want to help companies understand that carbon is an aspect of everything they do, letting them see ‘what’s inside what’s inside’ [from a carbon perspective]; how they can innovate with their suppliers to reduce their impact.”

Planet Metrics sees their customer base as the global Fortune 5000 companies. In addition to already working with several undisclosed major clients, they recently performed a carbon impact assessment for the massive Consumer Electronics show recently held in Las Vegas, where over 140,000 people attended from all over the world. “We would like to be recognized as the preeminent provider of software to help companies understand the emissions associated with what they’re making and what they’re moving,” said Leventhal, “we want to be used by sustainability teams, supply chain teams, designers; anyone doing deep investigations of where their carbon is being consumed in a carbon constrained environment.”
post resumes below image

PLANET METRICS RAPID CARBON MODELING APPROACH

The Planet Metrics modeling solution leverages a company’s data in combination with their CIM database, including life cycle inventories, Carnegie Mellon’s EIO-LCA data model, governmental statistics, and other studies to generate a customer-specific emissions profile. (Source: Planet Metrics)

The connection between carbon consumption and cost efficiency is not one-to-one, although as long as the cost of fossil fuel remains high the correlation is pretty strong. From that perspective, an analytical tool that can enable a company to identify areas where their carbon consumption efficiency can be improved will pay for itself in short order – regardless of the benefits of managing possible externalities relating to carbon emissions. As their website states: “Reduction of fuel or energy consumption will result in savings regardless of the regulatory status of carbon.”

Now that the price of fossil fuel has returned to earth, at least for a while, the correlation between carbon intensity and cost savings may not be as compelling. Imagine a company deciding whether or not to source a product with a high embodied electricity content (a photovotaic panel, for example). If this company is located somewhere in the intermountain region of the U.S., midway between a supplier in California and a supplier in Kentucky, and the price of the product is tied to the cost of electricity in each of those states, then they may find very little connection between carbon intensity and product cost. Electricity in California, worst case using natural gas, creates about 1.3 pounds of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, and costs on average about $0.115 per kilowatt-hour. Electricity if Kentucky, presumably using coal, creates about 2.0 pounds of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, but only costs $0.046 per kilowatt-hour; 50% more CO2 emissions, but less than 50% the cost. (Sources: For CO2/kWh, ref. this DOE page, table 1, “CO2 Emissions for Electricity in the U.S.,” for $/kWh, ref. the Electricity Costs table from CoalEducation.org.) Because of the recent, rather precipitous correction in the price of conventional fuels, the connection between economic factors and environmental sustainability factors is not as strong as when the price of fossil fuel was dramatically higher than it is today.

Nonetheless, adopting and mastering tools such as the CIM software available from Planet Metrics is in the interests of large companies, since increasing regulations regarding carbon intensity and carbon consumption appear to be inevitable. And inevitably the price for fossil fuels will rise again. Perhaps the biggest challenge to using Planet Metrics software is simply the vast and highly subjective nature of both the underlying data and the connecting logic. Accurately assessing the actual life-cycle carbon intensity of an entire supply chain can, ultimately, requires assessing and selectively connecting an infinite amount of often uncertain data. In this regard, CIM software might be compared to other models that attempt to grapple with infinite and uncertain data, from global climate simulations to hedge fund risk analysis tools to the Black-Scholes stock option pricing models. But in all these cases, the futility of achieving perfect accuracy should not deter the user from recognizing the utility of these models along with their limitations, and hopefully obtaining practical results.

Planet Metrics is backed by angel investors as well as the premier venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson, and to-date has a total equity investment of $2.3 million.

PORTLAND, Maine, October 2008 — IntertechPira is pleased to announce that the 3^rd annual Organic Photovoltaics 2009 conferences scheduled for April 27 – 29, 2009^th at the Doubletree Hotel Philadelphia in Philadelphia, PA, US. Co-Chaired by Russell Gaudiana, of Konarka Technologies Inc. and Dr. Dana Olson of the NREL,this year’s program will provide a unique venue for industry experts, researchers, customers and investors to address the opportunities and most critical challenges for the commercialization of OPV technologies.Drawing in part on key examples from the OLED and printed-electronics industries, this forum will provide a multifaceted examination of what is required to transform today’s laboratory-based technologies into large-scale commercial products. Discussion of technological requirements and manufacturing considerations will be complemented by an analysis of market forces to identify not only when OPVs will be widely commercialized, but what role they will play in the context of a growing PV industry.

The conference will feature approximately 18 expert presentations assessing OPV market trends, technical development and application related advances through presentations, question-and-answer sessions and panel discussions. Keynote presentations will be allocated 35 minutes for the speaker followed by 10-15 minutes for questions and discussion. All other presentations will be allocated 25 minutes for the speaker with 5-10 minutes or questions and discussion. Throughout the conference, there will be a number of hosted luncheons, breaks and receptions, which will be held in and around the exhibit area located outside the main conference room.

Two pre-conference workshops will be held prior to the conference on Monday, April 27.

For more information on Organic Photovoltaics 2009 and related IntertechPira conferences, visit the IntertechPira or the Organic Photovoltaics 2009 websites.

Speaker recruitment is now underway.

To submit a topic for consideration, or to request more details, please contact Jessica Johnson at jessica.johnson@pira-international.com or +1 (207) 781-9626.

Members of the press interested in attending, to find out if you qualify for a complimentary press pass,please contact Sheri Bonnell at sheri.bonnell@pira-international.com or +1 (207) 781-9637

On March 17th the Tesla Roadster went into mass production – of sorts – on that day production model “#2″ was placed onto the assembly line at Tesla’s Lotus factory in Hethel England (Tesla press release). According to a report in AutoblogGreen by Sam Abuelsamid “Tesla Roadster starts production today,” the rate of production will be one car per week, meaning by now production unit #4 is starting to take shape.

If you want to know what’s really going on with the Tesla, unless you work there, AutoblogGreen is a pretty good source of information. And what they’ve had to say about the difficulties Tesla is encountering speaks to the challenges EV manufacturers in general have to confront. As Abuelsamid reported on 1-23 in “Tesla has a solution for their transmission woes,” “The primary issue that has been preventing Tesla Motors from getting their electric Roadster into full production for the last several months has been the unfortunate tendency for the transmission to self-destruct in only a fraction of a car’s normal lifespan.”

Apparently the awesome RPM range and torque delivered by a high-performance electric motor also requires transmissions with tolerances well beyond those behind conventional gasoline engines. Tesla’s interim solution on their first production cars is to get rid of the transmission entirely. Their permanent solution is no longer to use a two-speed transmission, but to develop a single speed drive-train using a reduction gear, while adding a more robust power electronics module combined with enhanced thermal management for the motor. Once all this is ready, Tesla believes they can ramp up to 15-20 cars per week, and retrofit the cars already sold.

There are a lot of challenges Tesla has had to overcome – a big question is how much time and money did Tesla put into battery technology that is changing rapidly? Does Tesla still have 6,000 laptop batteries in a 1,000 pound package, packing 50 kilowatt-hours of storage? According a white paper released by Tesla on 3-24-08, “Response to the CARB ZEV Expert Panel Position on Lithium-Ion Full-Performance Battery Electric Vehicles,” they state “Tesla’s ESS contains 6831 cells, arranged in 11 modules in series, with 9 “bricks” in series per module, and 69 parallel cells per brick.” Tesla has a lot invested in their battery pack – which according to their data has achieved 118 watt-hours per kilogram. But will a 100% battery powered car be the dominant car of the future?

It is clear 100% battery powered cars have potential for many common duty cycles. The average daily commute is under 40 miles, and at that rate, a Tesla roadster would only have to be charged 2x per week. But “quick recharge” or “hot swapping” for batteries is unlikely to become a practical, widespread solution for vehicles with duty cycles that require long range driving and frequent, quick and convenient remote refueling. This is why the series hybrid (using an all-electric drive train, a short range battery, and an onboard gasoline powered generator) which combines a shorter but still viable battery-only range with a fairly high mileage gasoline-only performance, has the potential to offer a more versatile, less expensive solution for ordinary families who don’t want to own a car that can’t make the long trip.

Development of the EV was hindered by environmentalists who believed the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle was the perfect green automotive solution. All electric, yet able to be refueled with hydrogen quickly and remotely. And we’ve all seen how far that’s come (and what is the battery charge-discharge efficiency vs. the efficiency to use electricity to electrolyse hydrogen then convert it back into electricity via a fuel cell? Hint – it’s 90% vs. 40%). Yet hindered even more than the EV by well-intentioned environmentalists was the series hybrid – because the onboard generator powered by a small gasoline engine was considered an unacceptable compromise even though that gasoline engine might only be activated a few times per year when the plug-in battery-only range was exceeded for longer trips. Technology is a river, politics are only rocks in the stream, and GM, Volvo, Fisker, and Aptera have all announced series hybrids.

Ultimately the next generation car that will dominate will be affordable and offer a no-compromise performance. The Tesla Roadster offers high performance at a price competitive with high-performance gasoline powered cars, and will find a niche. Manufacturers like Think may produce 100% battery powered cars that are affordable and can serve as commuter cars. But we are not likely to see quick charge facilities because even if the batteries are developed that can withstand a 50 kWh charge within minutes, we’re probably not going to see 10,000 volt extension cords hanging on the islands at self-serve filling stations, any more than we’re ever going to see 10,000 PSI hydrogen fill-ups on every interstate. For these reasons, our money is on the series hybrid as the next mainstream automotive innovation.

If you had 100 square feet of photovoltaic panels (PV), at 10 watts per square foot (full sun only), then you would be able to save one kilowatt-hour per hour. For that matter, if you only had 50 square feet of PV, but your panels yielded 20 watts per square foot in full sun, you would also be able to store one kilowatt-hour per hour.

The reason all this matters is because there isn’t a lot of room on the outside of automobiles for PV, but Fisker Automotive in Irvine, California, intends to put a silicon skin on their new plug in hybrid. During a follow up interview after our initial report “Fisker’s Luxury Electric Car,” Henrik Fisker also disclosed today that the car will be a series hybrid. But returning to silicon PV skin on electric vehicles, the real question is how many miles will you get per kilowatt-hour of stored electricity? Fisker wouldn’t say, although from his remarks it appears they intend to exceed expectations.

The Tesla Roadster, with 52 kilowatt-hours of storage and a 245 mile range, gets 4.7 miles per kilowatt-hour. The Chevy Volt, at 12 kilowatt-hours of storage, and a 40 mile range, gets 3.3 miles per kilowatt-hour. These are the yields you can expect from a silicon PV skinned vehicle. It is reasonable to expect Fisker’s “ecochic” line of electric cars to store at least a mile or two of range per hour parked in the sun if they can allocate 15+ square feet of car roof for PV, possibly much more, depending on the efficiency of the photovoltaics, the amount of PV skin, and the actual kWh/mile performance. Also, as Fisker explained, the owner would be able to select how to allocate PV power in order to ensure climate control in the vehicle’s interior, and overall thermal management in addition to charging the batteries.

Fisker’s new car has an elongated wheelbase, although the length of the vehicle is standard. This is because the wheels are moved further towards the front and rear of the vehicle than normal. Doing this makes extremely efficient use of the chassis, allowing the vehicle to weigh less. From front to rear, there is a gasoline engine, an electric generator (turned by the gasoline engine, which is completely disconnected from the drive train), a lithium ion battery (not using cobalt technology), and two electric motor-generators.

There is much about this car we do not know, in spite of the fact they have already been testing prototypes. With crash testing getting underway, Fisker is working with Quantum Technologies (QWTT), who have extensive experience crash testing battery systems for major automakers and the U.S. military, to provide the battery systems and power electronics. Considering Henrik Fisker’s experience doing automotive design (including the chassis), this company is a real contender. It is likely they have taken the intrinsic advantages of serial hybrid design, and taken them all further. The efficient placement of components on the chassis, twin motor-generators directly engaging the rear axles, non-cobalt lithium battery chemistry, are all logical innovations that exemplify the emergence of serial hybrid technology as the platform of choice for the next generation smart green car.

There are already a lot of credible entrants to these new automotive sweepstakes. There will be an efflorescence of auto manufacturers reminiscent of the first golden age of the car, when it was clear the horse was an obsolete transportation innovation, and where for a time there were dozens of major automakers. Fisker, Aptera, Tesla, Phoenix, Think, Zenn, Zap, and others claim their cars will join this next wave, the great inaugural generation of smart, clean, green cars. Series hybrid plug-in technology is a big part of this next automotive revolution.

Along with photovoltaic skin, Fisker intends to sell an optional PV module that will go onto your property, presumably atop your house, sized to collect sufficent electricity to power your Fisker ecochic car through any prescribed duty cycle. You would drive off the grid. Your car would have no footprint (ref. Photovoltaic Cars). Eventually, Fisker Automotive hopes to offer cars in the more affordable $35,000 range, but even in these days of internet wonders, you can’t just create a major automaker out of thin air – it will take a few years if things go well. But it really appears the cat is out of the bag, the green car generation is upon us, and manufacturers are going to sell these cars as fast as they can make them for a long, long time.

This industrial-scale solar water heating array supplies 120,000 litres per day at Godavari Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. in Andhra Pradesh

The world’s largest solar steam cooking system at Tirupathi in Andhra Pradesh

Human civilization has been witnessing a gradual shift towards cleaner fuels-from wood to coal, from coal to oil, from oil to natural gas; renewables are the present demand…

With the fluctuating high cost of petroleum, minimizing dependence on importing conventional energy resources, stewardship to protect the Planet and providing affordable energy to all, countries including India have stepped up their energy path for harnessing indigenous renewable resources. To tap the infinite energy and transform as well as transmit it to each household, the Indian government has accelerated promotion of the use of universally available Solar Energy.

India due to its geo-physical location receives solar energy equivalent to nearly 5,000 trillion kWh/year, which is far more than the total energy consumption of the country today. But India produces a very negligible amount of solar energy – a mere 0.2 percent compared to other energy resources. Power generation from solar thermal energy is still in the experimental stages in India. Up till now, India’s energy base has been more on conventional energy like coal and oil. However, India has now attained 7th place worldwide in Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Cell production and 9th place in Solar Thermal Systems. Grid-interactive renewable power installed capacity as on 31.10.2006 aggregated 9,013 MW corresponding to around 7 percent of the total power installed capacity which equates to over 2 percent of total electricity.

Worldwide photovoltaic installations increased by 1,460 MW in 2005, up from 1,086 MW installed during the previous year. That was a 67 percent increase over the 750 MW produced in 2003. In 2002 the world solar market increased 40 percent. Solar Energy demand has grown at about 25 percent per annum over the past 15 years. In 1985, worldwide annual solar installation demand was only 21 MW. According to the IEA’s factsheet, “Renewables in Global Energy Supply,” the solar energy sector has grown by 32 per annum since 1971. Worldwide, grid-connected solar PV continued to be the fastest growing power generation technology, with a 55 percent increase in cumulative installed capacity to 3.1 GW, up from 2.0 GW in 2004, as per “Renewable Global Status Update Report 2006″ (http://www.ren21.net). Similarly, India witnessed an acceleration of solar hot water installations in 2005. Global production of solar PV increased from 1,150 MW in 2004 to over 1,700 MW in 2005. Japan was the leader in cell production (830 MW), followed by Europe (470 MW), China (200 MW), and the US (150 MW).

In the sun during the day, providing lighting at night, a photovoltaic/battery lantern illuminates the home

India: Status of Solar Energy:

The solar PV program was begun in the mid 70′s in India. While the world has progressed substantially in production of basic silicon mono-crystalline photovoltaic cells, India has fallen short to achieve the worldwide momentum. In early 2000, nine Indian companies were manufacturing solar cells. During 1997-98 it was estimated that about 8.2 MW capacity solar cells were produced in the country. The total installed manufacturing capacity was estimated to be 19 MW per year. The major players in Solar PV are Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) (http://www.bhel.com/bhel/home.php); Central Electrtonics Ltd., and Rajasthan Electricals & Instruments Ltd., as well as by several companies in the private sector. The latest, 100 million dollars investment from Tata BP Solar in India is the pointer towards the booming solar market in India. Of late, the market is growing for SPV applications based products with the active encouragement of the government.

The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (www.mnes.nic.in), earlier known as the Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources – have initiated innovative schemes to accelerate utilisation and exploitation of the solar energy. Number of incentives like subsidy, soft loan, 80 percent accelerated depreciation, confessional duty on import of raw materials and certain products, excise duty exemption on certain devices/systems etc. are being provided for the production and use of solar energy systems. The Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency (IREDA) – http://mnes.nic.in/annualreport/2004_2005_English/ch12_pg1.htm – a Public Limited Company established in 1987- provides revolving fund to financing and leasing companies offering affordable credit for the purchase of PV systems. As a result, the Renewable Energy Sector is increasingly assuming a greater role in providing grid power to the Nation as its total capacities reached about 9,013 MW. This apart, the Electricity Act 2003, National Electricity Policy 2005 and National Tariff Policy 2006 provide a common framework for the regulation of renewable power in all States/UTs through quotas, preferential tariffs, and guidelines for pricing ‘non-firm’ power.

However, in the Draft New and Renewable Energy Policy Statement 2005, which is yet be approved, the federal government is very cautious about the status of renewable energy in the future. It says, “despite the fact that the biomass-solar- hydrogen economy is some decades away, it should not make industry and the scientific & technical community of the country unduly complacent into believing that necessary steps for expected changes can wait.”

Present Scenario of Solar Power:

The MNES has been implementing installation of solar PV water pumping systems for irrigation and drinking water applications through subsidy since 1993-94. Typically, a 1,800 Wp PV array capacity solar PV water pumping system, which cost about Rs. 3.65 lakh, is being used for irrigation purposes. The Ministry is providing a subsidy of Rs.30 per watt of PV array capacity used, subject to a maximum of Rs. 50,000 per system. The majority of the pumps fitted with a 200 watt to 3,000 watt motor are powered with 1,800 Wp PV array which can deliver about 140,000 liters of water/day from a total head of 10 meters. By 30th September, 2006, a total of 7,068 solar PV water pumping systems have been installed.

A total of 32 grid interactive solar PV power plants have been installed in the country with financial assistance from the Federal Government. These plants, with aggregate capacity of 2.1 MW, are estimated to generate about 2.52 million units of electricity in a year. In 1995, an aggregate area of 4 lakh square meters of solar collectors were installed in the country for thermal applications such as water heating, drying cooking etc. The thermal energy generated from these devices was assessed at over 250 million kwh per year. In addition, solar PV systems with an aggregate capacity of 12 MW were installed for applications such as lighting, water pumping, communications, etc. These systems are capable of generating 18 million kwh of electricity per year. In 2003 alone, India added 2.5 MW of solar PVs. For rural electrification as well as employment and income generation, about 16,530 solar photovoltaic lighting systems were installed during 2004-05. Over 150,000 square meters of collector area has been installed in the country for solar water heating in domestic, industrial and commercial sectors making the cumulative installed collector area over one million square meters. State-wise details of cumulative achievements under various non-conventional energy programmes, as on 31.03.2006 are shown in the table below:

MINISTRY OF NON-CONVENTIONAL ENERGY FUNDED PHOTOVOLTAIC OUTPUT BY STATE

Government-funded solar energy in India only accounted for approximately 6.4 megawatt-years of power as of 2005

Similarly, India’s Integrated Rural Energy Program using renewable energy had served 300 districts and 2,200 villages by early 2006. More than 250 remote villages in seven states were electrified under the program during 2005, with additional projects under implementation in over 800 villages and 700 hamlets in 13 states and federal territories (see table below). Rural applications of solar PV had increased to 340,000 home lighting systems, 540,000 solar lanterns, and 600,000 solar cookers in use.

INDIA’S INTEGRATED RURAL ENERGY PROGRAM REMOTE VILLAGES SELECTED FOR SOLAR ELECTRIFICATION

By 2006 over 2,400 off-grid villages in India had received solar thermal and photovoltaic systems

Future Plans:

An Expert Committee constituted by the Planning Commission has prepared an Integrated Energy Policy that aims at achieving integrated development and deployment of different energy supply sources, including new & renewable energy. The grid-interactive renewable power installed capacity is expected to reach 10,000 MW as on corresponding to a share of over 2 per cent in the electricity-mix, by 31.3.2007. Further capacity addition of 14,000 MW is envisaged during the 11th Plan (2007-12) leading to a then share of around 5 per cent in the electricity-mix but mostly through hydro-power. A 10 million square meter solar collector area capable of conserving electricity equivalent to that generated from a 500 MW power plant is expected to be set up by 2022. India has recently proposed to augment cooking, lighting, and motive power with renewable in 600,000 villages by 2032, starting with 10,000 remote off-grid villages by 2012.

External Support:

A four-year $7.6 million effort was launched in April 2003 to help accelerate the market for financing solar home systems in southern India. The project is a partnership between UNEP Energy Branch, UNEP Risoe Centre (URC), (http://uneprisoe.org/) two of India’s major banking groups – Canara Bank and Syndicate Bank, and their sponsored Grameen Banks. As per the existing policy, Foreign Direct Investment up to 100 percent is permitted in non-conventional energy sector through the automatic route. The FDI received in non-conventional energy sector from January 2003 to September 2006 is estimated at around Rs.35 crore. The Multilateral Development Banks like World Bank and Asian Development Bank are also helping India to achieve its potential on renewable resources. But, the funding from MDBs on solar energy enhancement is negligible compare to other clean energy support in India.

A 200 litre per day solar water heating system installed in Karnataka by IREDA

Challenges and Constraints:

Solar energy is facing three fundamental challenges of cost, its manufacturing procedure as well as its waste products that have any impact on the environment and the land acquisition for erecting solar PVs.

The hunt for better, cheaper solar cells is due in India. Solar PV now cost one tenth of what they did in early 1980s. Despite the fact that the price of solar photovoltaic technology has been coming down over the years it still remains economically unviable for power generation purposes. During 1999, the cost of solar cells being manufactured in the country was estimated to be in the range of Rs. 1.35 to 1.50 lakhs per kW. The average cost of solar PV modules was around Rs. 2 lakhs per kW. At present the initial cost of both types of solar energy systems is higher compared to the cost of conventional energy systems and also the other non-conventional energy systems. However, the estimated unit cost of generation of electricity from solar photovoltaic and solar thermal route is in the range of Rs. 12 -20 per kWh and Rs. 10 – 15 per kWh respectively in India. With present level of technology, solar electricity produced through the photovoltaic conversion route is 4-5 times costlier than the electricity obtained from conventional fossil fuels.

There are number of R & D projects are going on solar PV Program in India. The Solar Energy Centre (http://mnes.nic.in/solarenergy1.htm) has been established by Government of India as a part of MNES to undertake activities related to design, development, testing, standardization, consultancy, training and information dissemination in the field of Solar Energy. Recently, development of polycrystalline silicon thin film solar cells and small area solar cells concluded at the Indian Association for Cultivation of Science at Jadavpur University. The National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi is working on development of materials and process to make dye sensitized nano-crystalline TiO2 thin films. The Centre for Materials for Electronics, Pune has been working on development of phosphorous paste for diffusion of impurities in solar cells. Under a joint R&D project of MNES and Department of Science & Technology (DST), the Indian Association for Cultivation of Science (IACS), Kolkata continued to work on optimization of process for fabrication of large area double junction amorphous silicon modules.

However, considering the fact that solar energy systems do not require any fuel, the running costs are lower. Therefore, the cost of some of the solar energy systems such as solar water heaters, solar cookers and solar lanterns can be lower than that of conventional energy products when calculated over the life of the systems. The other advantages of solar energy systems are modular nature, long-life, reliability, no recurring requirement of fuel, low maintenance and so on.

In the very near future, breakthroughs in nanotechnologies promise significant increase in solar cell efficiencies from current 15% values to over 50% levels. These would in turn reduce the cost of solar energy production. However, capital costs have substantially declined over the past two decades, with solar PV costs declining by a factor of two. PV is projected to continue its current rapid cost reductions for the next decades to compete with fossil fuel. However, the realisation of cost reductions is naturally closely linked to market development, government policies, and support for research and development.

Environmental Costs:

In India, of late there has been a debate regarding whether hydro-power and solar power are green or renewable? Since solar power systems generate no air pollution during operation, the primary environmental, health, and safety issues involve how they are manufactured, installed, and ultimately disposed of. Also, an important question is how much fossil energy input is required for solar systems compared to the fossil energy consumed by comparable conventional energy systems. Another concern area is installing solar cells on the land area. The large amount of land required for utility-scale solar power plants – approximately one square kilometer for every 20-60 megawatts (MW) generated – poses an additional problem in India. Instead, solar energy in particular requires unique, massive applications in the agricultural sector, where farmers need electricity exclusively in the daytime. This could be the primary demand driver for solar energy in India.

Conclusion:

Even though energy from renewable energy sources is growing rapidly, with markets such as solar cells, wind and biodiesel experiencing annual double digit growth, the overall share is only expected to increase marginally over the coming decades as the demand for energy also grows rapidly, particularly in many developing countries. In India, the scientific focus is deliberately moving towards transforming coal into clean energy as well as harnessing hydropower. The recent surge in nuclear energy is also diverting focus from the solar energy enhancement. In all probability, the Indian government will support off-grid solar energy production through a decentralized manner. In spite of this, India needs to focus research on solar energy and cheaper photovoltaics to provide affordable energy to all.

Additional State Info on Solar Energy:

Andhra Pradesh

The Solar Electric Light Fund (SELF) (http://www.self.org/) founded the Solar Electric Light Company (SELCO) Photovoltaic Electrification Pvt. Ltd. The SELCO was established in 1995 to market, install, and service Solar Home Systems (SHS) in south India. The SELCO has achieved international recognition as the first company to concentrate on marketing and servicing SHS in the rural Indian market. The Company uses TATA-BP solar modules and deep-cycle batteries purchased on the Indian market, while manufacturing its own lights and charge controllers. Currently, its primary products are 22 and 35 watt SHS, and it will be introducing a 50 Wp system to customers shortly.

The Ministry had sanctioned a project to Non-conventional Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., Hyderabad for installation of 50 solar dryers to individual users in rural areas with a view to promote the technology and show its potential in income generation and leading to development of entrepreneurship. The dryers were developed by Society for Energy, Environment and Development (SEED), Hyderabad.

West Bengal

Since 1995, with the help of the US Department of Energy (http://www.eren.doe.gov/international.html) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (http://www.nrel.gov/), the Ramakrishna Mission, a non-governmental organization in West Bengal (http://www.sriramakrishna.org/) has installed more than 500 PV domestic lighting system and has established ‘Aditya’ – a solar shop in the mission campus in Narendrapur, which sells PV systems up to nearly 10 in each day. The systems are manufactured in India and the US. The technical staff of the Mission has expected to establish six more Aditya solar shops and more than 2000 additional domestic lighting system and seven-community systems in the West Bengal. Through 2005, 73 Aditya Solar Shops were established in India.

About the Author: Avilash Roul has been writing, advocating, researching, and creating knowledge on Environment and Development in various English Daily media since 2000. He has worked with Down To Earth (fortnightly magazine published in New Delhi, India) for the last three years. He has also contributed a Sunday column in New India Express on the environment and development. Right now Mr. Roul is working as an Assistant Coordinator for the Bank Information Center (www.bicusa.org), an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organization that advocates for the protection of rights, participation, transparency, and public accountability in the governance and operations of the World Bank, regional development banks, and the International Monetary Fund.

View Readers Comments about Fuel Cells

There is nothing simple about fuel cells.

Oh, the concept is simple. A fuel cell is a battery that you can refuel. Period. End of story. They make electric current. They should have been called Fuel Batteries.

Fuel cells are batteries that can be fueled by gasoline, methane, ethanol, or hydrogen, to name some. Charge producing electrons are chemically extracted from the fuel by the elements inside the fuel cell, which from an electro-chemical standpoint are identical to the elements inside the common battery, a continuous electric current, with energy derived from this fuel input. They last anywhere from one to six years before they wear out or need an overhaul.

They come in all sizes, and will be used for everything from micro-appliances to tools and appliances, to home power units, to car power units, to building power units, to utility power plants. Fuel cells will power ships at sea and colonies in space.

Fuel cells today are expensive to manufacture and depend on ongoing technological innovations to ensure their eventual economic viability. For example, unless you want to run a fuel cell on hydrogen fuel, you will have to process your fuel through a “reformer.” This device reformulates non-hydrogen fuels such as gasoline, methane, etc., to turn them into hydrogen.

This problem is being overcome but progress is slow. Reformers are still very expensive. Some of the higher temperature fuel cells can actually directly process non-hydrogen fuels, methane, gasoline and ethanol, without using the reformer. This can degrade and destroy lower temperature fuel cells, as well as high-temperature fuel cells using earlier technologies. And high temperature fuel cells that can directly process non-hydrogen fuels are still expensive, too. Nothing simple here.

None-the-less, if technology stocks are overvalued, some fuel cell companies may be undervalued. Imagine when the next wave of consumer electronics hits. The next wave of portables will need something easier than batteries. Think of fuel cells vs. batteries the way you might think of digital stills vs. film stills. No reloading. No film container. Just add energy. The fuel cell subsystem lasts for the same lifetime as the whole unit. In the future, the fuel-cell powered VR headset or heads-up-display sunglasses will recharge by plugging a small fuel ampoule into a port on the unit. A pill of ethanol, for example. Standard size ampoules for all kinds. That’s pretty easy and pretty cheap electric power maintenance. Beats batteries. Gets my vote.

Cars using fuel cells still take a long time to start their engines, and since most car drivers take a quick start for granted, this is a problem. Energy density is also still a factor limiting automotive fuel cells, since a moderate size car on acceleration needs at least 100KW per kilogram. Fuel cells for cars that are economical to produce today are only getting about half that efficiency.

Nissan Fuel Cell Car

One of the biggest remaining questions with car fuel cells is what fuel will they use? The chief advantages of methanol is that it is for all practical purposes limitless in supply, insofar as methanol can be derived from natural gas, whose proven reserves worldwide are easily quintuple that of oil. Also advantageous is that methanol is distributed in liquid form, which means that methanol can use the existing distribution network in place for gasoline. Even underground tanks that held gasoline can be easily converted to hold methane.

Hindenburg Airship

Hydrogen as a fuel is championed because, theoretically, it can be derived from totally renewable sources, such as solar energy. Hydrogen, moreover, creates absolutely no air pollution when it burns. Finally, hydrogen fuel is the optimal fuel to use in a fuel cell since it will cause the slowest degradation of the elements of the fuel cell. The disadvantages of hydrogen are that it must be transported and stored under extreme pressure, up to 2,000 PSI. Two somewhat related consequences of this are an entire new distribution and storage infrastructure must be built, an undertaking of massive, nearly incalculable expense, and since hydrogen is highly flammable, an explosive hazard is created and an infrastructure must be created to counter and prepare against.

In reality fuel cell powered cars will eventually be built using all fuels. Some will be hybrids using combustion engines. Some will use fuel cells that tolerate various fuels. Some will use hydrogen generated and stored by the personal home fuel cell power units of the car owners. What fuel will prevail for cars using fuel cells? Don’t bet against gasoline. Don’t be surprised if several fuels occupy niches in the car market, either.

For homes and buildings fuel cells are already here. Check out the General Electric “HomeGen 7000″ fuel cell home powerplant (www.gepower.com/microgen/homegen_prod_desc.html). About the size of a refrigerator, less expensive per month than your utility bill, runs on propane! For buildings and for utilities, fuel cell powerplants are beginning to make economic sense. The potential for home and commercial building power systems using fuel cells, particularly in the United States as utility deregulation rolls out through the states, is probably much higher in the short run than that for automobiles. The heat produced by fuel cells, which is a liability in an automobile, is used for thermal co-generation in home power systems and is an asset. In the automotive market fuel cells are in competition with smart new hybrid vehicles and combustion engines that are themselves undergoing massive increases in efficiencies. By contrast in the utilities market fuel cells are competing with an under powered energy infrastructure and imminent percentage energy price increases in the triple-digits.

Fuel cells have been around a long time, over 100 years, but the materials cost along with the complex manufacturing process has limited development. New concerns about air quality as well as the availability of petroleum-based fuels has spurred their recent development. Their adoption around the world is inevitable, because of the convenience and independence they will give power consumers, as well as their ecological benefits, and, at last, their technological and economic viability. But they will not proliferate overnight, and where they show up first will surprise a lot of people.

It would be ironic if the first place we see fuel cells
widely used is to power consumer electronic portables and micro-devices, where their convenience outweighs any cost considerations, and the global energy and ecological impact of their adoption is negligible.

The next place fuel cells are likely to be widely adopted will not be in cars, but in home power systems. The ongoing cost of fuel and maintenance for a home power unit that uses a fuel cell is about the same as the average utility bill. This is going to change dramatically in the wake of utility deregulation and home power units using fuel cells will become a compelling investment overnight. Don’t forget their purchase may be subsidized for the homeowner or commercial building owner in the form of tax incentives, to boot.

Further irony might be found in the likely fact that the last place we’ll see widespread adoption of fuel cells will be onboard automobiles, since it is regarding tomorrow’s cars that we’ve all heard about fuel cells. Or in the likely fact that when and if these fuel cell powered (and hybridized with an internal combustion engine) electric autos do hit the road, most of them will run on ordinary gasoline.

EMAIL TO THE EDITOR

—–Original Message—–

From: ALAN DIKA

Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 5:13 AM

To: ed@ecoworld.com

Subject: fuel cells

Emailer: How much energy does it take to make a fuel cell?

Editor: We don’t know, but what you refer to is embodied energy, i.e., the total BTU’s (or equivalents) necessary to manufacture a fuel cell. “Renewable” energy, or any type of energy, cannot be evaluated solely on the energy output vs. energy input ratio during its useful life. The ultimate positive relationship between energy input and energy output with an energy device must take into account not only net BTU’s produced during the device’s useful life, but also the quantity of BTU’s expended to make the device. Also remember that a fuel cell doesn’t “make” anything, it is a conversion device; in the case of a fuel cell, hydrogen is converted to electricity.

Emailer: How much energy does it take to reform products to become useable hydrogen?

Editor’s reply: Again you are talking about devices that have some amount of “embodied” energy, which must be included in the efficiency calculation of any energy conversion or energy generating device. Fuel cells depend on hydrogen, which either must be reformed (refined) from fossil fuels, or extracted from water using electricity.

Emailer: Do we really reduce pollution, or do we move the source from the tail pipe to the coal burning power plant and natural gas burning manufacturing facility?

Editor’s reply: In the case of electric motor vehicles that use hydrogen fuel cells (or batteries or hybrids that use fossil fuel driven electric generators, for that matter), they are only moving the source of the pollution, not necessarily reducing pollution. Even vehicles powered solely by on-board photovoltaic cells to produce electricity would only be moving the source of their pollution, since photovoltaics must themselves be manufactured, and hence have embodied energy that requires its own generation. The idea of totally pollution-free energy is a myth.

Emailer: I’m all for fuel cells if they ultimately do less harm to the environment than the alternatives. I just haven’t heard any arguments about the issue, so I’m hoping you can point me to a source.

Editor’s reply: It is our goal with EcoWorld is to post credible quantitative information as to the ultimate efficiency of energy alternatives. We are hopeful you might point us to a source.

Emailer: It really seems that reducing consumption is the best way to save our planet- unlikely as that might be.

Editor’s reply: EcoWorld would posit that improving efficiency, via whatever method of energy production, in a pollution-free process is enough. Improving efficiency is better than reducing consumption, and equally feasible, we would say.