View Full Version : Obama's new energy & environment cabinet members
dpeilow
11-08-2008, 05:57 AM
Could the Terminator Arnold Schwarzenegger become Obama's new energy czar? | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1083831/Could-Terminator-Arnold-Schwarzenegger-Obamas-new-energy-czar.html)
Arnold Schwarzenegger has been tipped to become Barack Obama's new energy secretary.
The former movie star is coming to the end of his stint as California governor and could be asked to cross over from the Republican party to serve in Obama's new administration, according to several sources.
So just how much of a damascene conversion has the former Mr "10 Hummers" Schwarzenegger actually had?
graham
11-08-2008, 08:38 AM
Arnold could be interesting, I suppose.
This article: Obama’s Secretary of Energy: Who Will Get the Call? : Gas 2.0 (http://gas2.org/2008/11/08/obamas-secretary-of-energy-who-will-get-the-call/) mentions Arnold as a possibility, but also Steve Westley:
Westley is currently on the board of Tesla Motors and is a managing partner of the Westley Group, a clean technology company.
If Obama is looking at Schwarzenegger and considering conservatives for the position, I would prefer Anne Korin or James Woolsey.
If Obama is looking at Schwarzenegger and considering conservatives for the position, I would prefer Anne Korin or James Woolsey.I agree. Arnold would be an interesting public figure and advocate, but I'd prefer someone with a more quantitative understanding of the issues. The fact that he's still putting our tax money into hydrogen is a big minus for me.
I agree. Arnold would be an interesting public figure and advocate, but I'd prefer someone with a more quantitative understanding of the issues. The fact that he's still putting our tax money into hydrogen is a big minus for me.
Agreed. It would be a high profile choice for the (R) reason and the Celebrity choice.
I'm told Arnold is a good man and really wants to to the right green thing (with no explanation why with all those Hummers*) but that he is simply parroting the green people he has surrounded himself with.
*My take? He and his crowd is into super macho. Weight lifting macho, cigar smoking macho, Hummer driving Macho. The green? Maria? Trying to please the Hollywood elite? Spielberg and Cruise have made billions too but they all still want to be honored with a statue.
Chris H.
11-08-2008, 06:32 PM
Arnie talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. From what I've read, he still commutes (sometimes daily) between L.A. and Sacramento in a private jet. Not exactly green...
talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. From what I've read, he still commutes (sometimes daily) between L.A. and Sacramento in a private jet. Not exactly green...
Well, he isn't the only one we know who commutes up and down the state in a private jet.
dpeilow
11-09-2008, 03:53 AM
I'm told Arnold is a good man and really wants to to the right green thing (with no explanation why with all those Hummers*) but that he is simply parroting the green people he has surrounded himself with.
This is what concerns me. If he is prone to simply parroting those around him, what will happen if he ends up in Washington and swarms of lobbyists decend upon him. Business as usual?
Arnie...Not exactly green...
I don't care if he has a thousand lawnmowers running 24/7 in his backyard. As long as he changes policy for the better.
Arnold could be interesting, I suppose.
This article: Obama’s Secretary of Energy: Who Will Get the Call? : Gas 2.0 (http://gas2.org/2008/11/08/obamas-secretary-of-energy-who-will-get-the-call/) mentions Arnold as a possibility, but also Steve Westley:
If Obama is looking at Schwarzenegger and considering conservatives for the position, I would prefer Anne Korin or James Woolsey.
Woolsey would be fantastic IMO. Total speculation on my part, but it wouldn't shock me if it was Al Gore...
Chris H.
11-09-2008, 07:50 PM
Well, he isn't the only one we know who commutes up and down the state in a private jet.
True, very true... :rolleyes:
I don't care if he has a thousand lawnmowers running 24/7 in his backyard. As long as he changes policy for the better.
True, very true...
And, can get me a yearly check for the resources that my state gives up.
graham
11-13-2008, 02:21 PM
More on Steve Westly's consideration for Energy Secretary:
Westly 'honored to be considered' for Obama cabinet - Sacramento Business Journal: (http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2008/11/10/daily62.html)
“We’re not allowed to lobby, but I’d be honored just to be considered,” said Westly, when asked if he was lobbying for the position. Westly made the comments between sessions at the U.S. China Green Tech Summit in Shanghai this week.
Westly is the CEO of venture capital firm The Westly Group, a clean technology investor on Sand Hill Road whose portfolio includes electric car maker Tesla Motors and biofuels company Amyris Biotechnologies.
dpeilow
12-11-2008, 01:55 PM
AFP: Obama taps Nobel physicist for energy secretary: reports (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hG6qApOnk0LD2WSrbDdM0P_nCY_g)
CHICAGO (AFP) — President-elect Barack Obama has chosen Nobel prize-winning physicist Steven Chu, a strong advocate of alternative and renewable energy research, to be his energy secretary, US media reported Thursday.
AFP: Obama taps Nobel physicist for energy secretary: reports (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hG6qApOnk0LD2WSrbDdM0P_nCY_g)
Yeah, I heard it might be Steve. It's really refreshing to have a actual scientist in that position. While here, the word was that he was a slave driver to his graduate students and that he and Bob Laughlin were about the worst people to have on a Ph.D. committee. Just sayin'.
He would ask really hard questions and was never quite satisfied with your answer. These are probably good things in his new position.
graham
12-11-2008, 02:37 PM
Ha! I was just about to ask if you (doug) had run across Chu in your travels...
Aside from being harsh on his grad students, do you know enough to have an opinion on how he will be in this new role?
Well I went to a few of his lectures and knew a couple of his grad students, run into him at colloquia, stuff like that. I sorta lost track of him when he returned to Berkeley to become the director of LBL (Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory). Scientists don't necessarily make good managers (c.f. the SSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider)), but the fact that he still has his job at LBL is a good sign. He's a good communicator which is also a plus.
He seems pretty concerned about environmental issues and has directed a good deal of LBL resources (a DOE facility) on transportation energy. I am, however, a little concerned that he seems to have a focus on biofuels (since my preference is towards electricity). I think there was some controversy a while back since LBL was getting some money from BP to do biofuel research. But I am glad to have someone in that position that actually understands the law of conservation of energy (no pun intended) and should be able to make rational decisions based on facts.
.
A few of the purist eco sites are concerned about how much Chu adores Biofuels over Electric Transportation. When I think about his credentials compared to Ahnold's thin resume though, it actually does give hope.
dpeilow
12-21-2008, 03:13 AM
BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Climate experts get key US posts (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7793779.stm)
Maybe we should change the thread to Obama's new cabinet :smile:
What the New DOE Chief Steven Chu Means for Clean Technology Earth2Tech (http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/14/what-the-new-doe-chief-steven-chu-means-for-clean-technology/)
Doug wrote:
What the New DOE Chief Steven Chu Means for Clean Technology Earth2Tech (http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/14/what-the-new-doe-chief-steven-chu-means-for-clean-technology/)
from the article:
according to an interview with the Heritage Foundation (http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/14/what-the-new-doe-chief-steven-chu-means-for-clean-technology/%3Ca%20href=) published yesterday. He backpedaled
( The story Doug posted included a link in "according to an interview with the Heritage Foundation (http://earth2tech.com/2009/01/14/what-the-new-doe-chief-steven-chu-means-for-clean-technology/%3Ca%20href=)", which was actually a broken URL, but I found the supposed interview through Google. Apparently this isn't actually an interview with Chu, but rather a "conservative think tank" offering up suggestions of things they would like Chu to say if they could put words into his mouth. The earth2tech article acts as if he actually said those things. )
Heritage Foundation: Key Questions for Steven Chu, Nominee for Secretary of Energy (http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2203.cfm)
I suspect that the so-called "answers" they offer up are far from what he would actually say or think.
---
Morning Bell: Will Chu Let America Power Up? The Foundry (http://blog.heritage.org/2009/01/13/morning-bell-will-chu-let-america-power-up/)
DaveD
01-15-2009, 03:35 AM
Are those Chu's actual responses or just what Heritage Foundation is suggesting that they would like him to say in response to their suggested questions?
Therefore, when considering Chu for this post, the Senate should consider asking him the following questions.
"Yes" is the answer to your question. The HF's "Q&A" section, where your quotes came from, struck me immediately as the same tactic that Donald Rumsfeld used, asking himself questions and answering them in press briefings and interviews. So much tidier than answering other people's (more interesting and important) questions...
So the answer are not Chu's.
They are fabricated by the Heritage Foundation (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1425).
That seems despicable.
Other press then picks it up as if it were actual quotes, not fabrications.
----
http://www.heritage.org/about/
About Heritage
The Heritage Foundation is the nation’s most broadly supported public policy research institute, with more than 393,000 individual, foundation and corporate donors. Heritage, founded in February 1973, has a staff of 244 and an expense budget of $61 million.
Our Mission
To formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
So, like isn't trying to keep gas prices low encouraging excessive foreign oil consumption resulting in more national security issues? Are they really promoting their own goals? Oh wait, maybe they mean they want to promote more defense spending, and a bigger military...
Apparently they are a credible enough and funded enough to get interviews with many experts on both sides of an issue. Then with subtle omissions of credit in the prose they essentially misquote the experts wholly.
They also mix expert disciplines in writing like asking an economist to speak on global warming.
They also give credit at the end of articles that implies that everyone agreed with it's premise.
Confirmation Hearings Begin for Steven Chu, Obama’s Choice for Energy Secretary - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/confirmation-hearings-begin-for-steven-chu-obamas-choice-for-energy-secretary/)
Chu Confirmation Update: Answering for Past Statements - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/chu-confirmation-update-answering-for-past-statements/)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/greeninc/chu2.jpeghttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/greeninc/chu.jpg
dpeilow
01-20-2009, 02:44 PM
In full: Barack Obama's inaugural speech - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5554819.ece)
We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.
That, at least, is promising :smile:
I've been watching live all day. I cheered internally when he said, "We will restore science to its rightful place." Thank you!
I came here to post exactly what dpeilow already posted.
Obama:
We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.Hopefully he put them in priority order.
Sun - check!
Wind - OK...
Soil - what exactly do we plan to grow to turn into fuel? Is it really the right approach?
There are a lot of farmers pressuring for "crops for fuel", but so far it seems to me that other alternatives are far preferable.
Joseph
01-20-2009, 05:44 PM
"We will restore science to its rightful place."
As far as I can tell, society already pretty much worships science/reason/etc. over emotion, intuition, blah blah blah. (not that there's anything wrong with that; reasoning pretty much always leads to the right course of action)
So if we already value reason over emotion/intuition, what is science's "rightful place"? Does he mean that we just don't pay enough attention to science? Or does he think science should be further elevated?
Does he mean that we just don't pay enough attention to science? Or does he think science should be further elevated?
No, he was responding to the fact that the last administration was very anti-science. From cutting NASA's science budget, to restricting stem cell research, to editing environmental reports... I'm sure the list goes on. Plus the Bush administration generally promoted a culture that was anti-intellectual. Intellectualism was something to be suspicious of... who knows what those eggheads are thinking about. You don't base your actions on reason (or evidence)... you act with your gut!
Anyhow, hopefully in this respect, Obama will be better.
Scientists Say Bush Stifles Science and Lets Global Leadership Slip | LiveScience (http://www.livescience.com/technology/080130-bush-legacy.html)
Scientists: Bush Distorts Science (http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2004/02/62339)
“The search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us” | Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team (http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/the_search_for_knowledge_truth_and_a_greater_understanding_of_the_world_aro/)
“The truth is that promoting science isn’t just about providing resources—it’s about protecting free and open inquiry,”
"today, more than ever before, science holds the key to our survival as a planet and our security and prosperity as a nation. It is time we once again put science at the top of our agenda and worked to restore America’s place as the world leader in science and technology."
Joseph
01-20-2009, 07:52 PM
Oh, ok. My political ignorance is showing. :redface:
Without knowing that the Bush administration is infamous for being anti-science, it seemed odd for someone to say people don't value science/reason enough. It's not like we're in the middle ages...
Kevin Harney
01-21-2009, 06:35 AM
TEG,
Soil can also be Geothermal ...
Oh yeah, right... But I still think he was probably talking about fuel crops.
I would say "from the earth" or "from the ground" if talking about geotherm, and save "soil" for things that grow. Geothermal steam comes from "beneath the soil", right?
Kevin Harney
01-21-2009, 08:53 AM
Actually I think he was referring to the bigger picture including ALL renewables and that was an easy way to include crops and geo and others for the simple common person. Also it gave the tone of very green saying soil. But I see your point and it is well taken.
TEG,
Soil can also be Geothermal ...
I read it this way too. Possibly beacuse of context. Sun, Wind, Soil as Space, Air, Earth.
I hope TEG is wrong about thinking biofuels but that said, any pragmatist will concede that a leader who wants to get a green initiative done will have to compromise and allow some new drilling, a coupl'a nukes, some phony clean coal and allow farmers to produce biofuels.
The worst part is, long after all these methods are proven useless we will be paying huge yearly subsidies to keep them alive.
Sigh,
It's politics after all.
Obama Under Pressure Over Role of Ethanol in Energy Policy - US News and World Report (http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/11/21/obama-under-pressure-over-role-of-ethanol-in-energy-policy.html)
Environmentalists agree with President-elect Barack Obama (http://www.usnews.com/features/news/politics/candidates-obama.html)on many points, but his policy on ethanol isn't one of them.Obama's Evolving Ethanol Rhetoric | 44 | washingtonpost.com (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/06/23/obamas_evolving_ethanol_rhetor.html)
Since entering the Senate in 2005, Obama has been a staunch supporter of ethanolTimes slams Obama on ethanol - War Room - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/06/23/obama_ethanol/)
Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/us/politics/23ethanol.html)
Like I said, I hope they pursue solar (and wind) first and foremost.
Kevin Harney
01-21-2009, 11:13 AM
Actually I hope that they presue ALL avenues with equal ferver. Diversify !!!!
Just remember Martin's old slides... Like from "Focus Green" (http://teslafounders.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/focus-green/).
For yearly energy output, PV takes a fraction of the space compared to Ethanol production:
http://teslafounders.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/slide27.gif
Also, you have a lot more environmental impact producing ethanol... Fuel burned to run the tractors... Fertilizers runoff, etc.
Kevin Harney
01-21-2009, 12:46 PM
I am not arguing that solar and wind are better alternatives. I am just saying we need to use them all to make the most difference. Especially, if we want to increase our use of renewable energy to 25% in a few years - as Obama's plan states.
Who wins federal dollars race? Ethanol does, by a long shot - AutoblogGreen (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/01/09/who-wins-federal-dollars-race-ethanol-does-by-a-long-shot/)
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autobloggreen.com/media/2009/01/09ethanol_chart1.jpg
dpeilow
01-26-2009, 08:51 AM
BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Obama aims for oil independence (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7851038.stm)
Obama Cabinet | Salon (http://www.salon.com/env/feature/2009/01/26/obama_cabinet/index.html)
http://images.salon.com/env/feature/2009/01/26/obama_cabinet/story.jpg
Obama's New Science Policy - Chris Mooney | January 26th | ColbertNation.com (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/216622/january-26-2009/obama-s-new-science-policy---chris-mooney)
Perhaps not a good sign:
Obama Bets Big on Biofuels | Autopia from Wired.com (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/02/obama-bets-big.html)
http://blog.wired.com/cars/images/2009/02/02/range_fuels.jpg
Plug-in hybrids and electric cars get all the love (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2009/01/automakers-agre.html) in Detroit these days, but Washington isn't giving up on biofuel. Uncle Sam is spending millions of dollars to find ways of turning everything from algae to lawn trimmings into fuel as President Obama promises to invest heavily in alternative fuels.
The departments of energy and agriculture will award $25 million to advance development of "technologies and processes" to produce so-called "next generation" biofuels that aren't refined from food crops like corn. The announcement follows an agriculture department promise to loan $80 million to Range Fuels, a Colorado company that produces ethanol from wood chips, so it can build a refinery in Georgia.
"A robust biofuels industry - focused on the next-generation of biofuels - is critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing our addiction to foreign oil and putting Americans back to work," Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement (http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/%21ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.retrievecontent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/.d/2/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2009%2F01%2F0034.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_parentnav=LATEST_RELEASES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=NEWS_RELEASE#7_2_5JM).
...
We need to teach land owners that they are better off with solar farms than with rotating "energy crops". With a field full of solar panels there is very little maintenance, and if you get paid per kWh generated, they should be happy to retire their tractors and fertilizer. I guess once you are used to growing stuff it is hard to go in another direction. We have the same problem with people used to putting liquid in their cars, not hooking up a wire.
http://www.soultek.com/blog/uploaded_images/solar_farm-769860.jpg
http://zedomax.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/solar-panels.jpg
http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2008/03/21/solar-farm-32432_69.jpg
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_PwTE-070hdU/Rs8d35sYcKI/AAAAAAAAANk/jS07It4DOS8/s912/SolarPowerPlantSerpa.jpg
graham
02-06-2009, 06:35 PM
I don't think it is an education thing as much as cost. Solar panels are still way too bloody expensive. Corn certainly gives a better return short term. Probably long term as well.
Yeah, well, if we do like Germany and offer government subsidies on generated electricity it will be easy to get a loan to buy the equipment with a guaranteed payoff.
Germany Launches Its Transition To All Renewables (http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.feature/id/1208)
The PV industry was effectively spurred by the "100,000 roofs program," which from 1999 to 2003 produced 65,324 PV systems totaling 342 MW of capacity. The aim was to stimulate a new building-integrated PV (BIPV) market. The government initially stimulated this program by offering interest-free 10-year loans, waiving the last installment payment and guaranteeing a "feed-in" incentive of 8.5 euro cents per kilowatt-hour. With the beginning of the EEG on April 1, 2000, the PV incentive price jumped to 50.62 euro cents (US 66 cents). By the end of 2004, Germany had become the world's No. 2 PV producer and the world's No. 1 PV installer.
The amended Renewable Energy Act of 2004 assures continued activity in the German PV market. The base incentive remains 45.7 euro cents. This incentive is increased to 54-57 euro cents (US 70-75 cents), depending on the size for PV systems mounted on building roofs (the upper size limit has been eliminated). The incentive is further increased to 59-62.4 euro cents (US 77-81 cents) for PV systems integrated into building surfaces other than roofs (eg., walls).
Because the upper size limit for PV systems has been eliminated, even large ground-mounted systems are assured a revenue stream of 45.7 euro cents (US 59 cents) for 20 years plus the year of commissioning. The law also requires grid operators to give preference to renewable energy generators, and to guarantee connection to the grid even if that means upgrading their transmission facilities. They can recover their costs in the fees they charge for use of their facilities.
GERMANY: Solar subsidies are victim of their own success (http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=2803)
(An anti-problem: The demand is too great!)
More here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/environment/1689-feed-tarrif-laws.html
shark2k
02-07-2009, 06:09 PM
I believe it was late last year that Germany and other European countries seriously cut back on the awesome government funding for solar panels which resulted in a large decrease of buyers. That decrease caused a lot of panel supply to suddenly become greater than demand. I think a lot of it has to do with this economy though.
The pictures of the solar farms TEG posted looked really cool though :biggrin:
-Shark2k
Excerpt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC_hFlpcPHI
Full interview here (starting at 20:45): Charlie Rose - Barton Biggs, Steven Chu (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8696557984325524065&ei=ib3ASf3WGZPCqAPK16TDAQ)
SteveF
03-19-2009, 12:16 AM
Dr. Chu is an impressive fellow, and gives one hope that our future will be much greener. I also was very encouraged that he believes we may be less than 5 years away from a battery for cars that would last the lifetime of the car, with much better energy density. After all, he's not just some guy in a lab or an entrepreneur looking for funding for a battery startup company - he's our Energy Secretary. I was worried from things I heard on this forum that Dr. Chu might be too focused on biofuels to the exclusion of batteries for car propulsion. After listening to this, I am much less worried about that.
Thanks for posting this, Doug.
Thanks Doug,
That made my day.
Obama appoints Jon Wellinghoff as new Energy Commission Chief. There are many changes in the works on who has how much decision power. It all favors Obama's and Jon's belief in a smart grid including V2G.
In Wellinghoff’s view, the U.S. electricity system will ultimately become more decentralized, with local solar projects generating power and automobiles serving as storage devices for utility companies. He said that in five to 10 years, if the cost of including the price of household solar installation in a mortgage is less than the money saved on utility bills, “everybody will put solar on their houses.”
And Wellington also understands that plug in hybrids, are a core climate solution. And electricity is the only alternative fuel that can lead to energy independence.
Ultimately, Wellington hopes to find ways to better manage electricity demand so renewable power sources can be integrated into the system. For instance, he is a proponent of using electric cars to send electricity back to the electrical grid as well as draw from it. Electric-car owners could sign up with a company that would amalgamate hundreds or thousands of car owners and, based on their average behavior, promise to either draw down or send back electricity to the grid. Car owners would be paid, which would help offset the cost of electric vehicles, currently priced at least $8,000 or as much as $12,000 more than non-electric versions.
That is a vision that I think makes a lot of sense.
President Obama just visited SCE (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/03/17/president-obama-will-visit-sce-electric-vehicle-center-thursday/) which does V2G (http://www.greencarcongress.com/v2g/) research.
I wonder how much utilities will control V2G as apposed to other entities like Better Place, AC propulsion, etc.?
WE STILL NEED CHEAPER BATTERIES WITH HIGHER CALENDAR AND CYCLE LIFE!
It would be great to see a smart grid with lots of solar and V2G storage come to be in my lifetime. It is exciting to see it start to happen, but I am sure that there will be many entities and naysayers try to slow it down or stop it.
ChargeIt!
03-22-2009, 09:07 AM
I have no problem with the technical aspects and benefits of V2G. My problem with V2G is the negative effect on the battery w.r.t. its long-term life. Why should I let the utility (/other customers) benefit from the energy stored in my battery unless I am properly compensated for the reduction in battery life ?
It would be great though to have that energy available during the occasional power outage around here (2.5 hours about a week ago at 2am).
I have no problem with the technical aspects and benefits of V2G. My problem with V2G is the negative effect on the battery w.r.t. its long-term life. Why should I let the utility (/other customers) benefit from the energy stored in my battery unless I am properly compensated for the reduction in battery life ?
The effects on battery life is a legitimate concern. However, most of the benefit of V2G technology could be realized by simply allowing the power company to control when your car is charging for the purpose of load balancing. Ideally the consumer would be able to choose different levels of service. E.g.,
I always want my car charged as fast as possible.
I only need my car to be charged to x level by y point in time.
I'm willing to allow my car battery to supply power back to the grid.
If some customers are willing to allow the charging of their cars to be paused (particularly if going to be parked for a long time, or the car doesn't need much juice to make it to the next destination), taking that load off the grid can have the same net effect of getting power from the batteries of other cars.
The pricing structure should be constructed in a way that encourages customers to get the service that gives the utility the most flexibility.
Computers should be pretty good at determining the rate at which each individual car should be charging based on a given set of rules, including the consumer preferences and the status of the grid.
WarpedOne
03-22-2009, 02:19 PM
- I always want my car charged as fast as possible.
- I only need my car to be charged to x level by y point in time.
Yes, those two features should be merged together into smart charging.
Supplying energy back to grid isn't really necessary nor helpful when there are thousands of cars capable of momentarily pausing their charging.
April '09 WIRED cover:
http://www.wired.com/images/article/magazine/1704/1704cover_press.jpg
http://www.atomicmall.com/cpic/10/10426-1237682310.jpg
dpeilow
05-29-2009, 12:08 AM
BBC iPlayer - One Planet: 28/05/2009 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0034fw5/One_Planet_28_05_2009/)
On this week's show, Mike's wish finally comes true - we send him fly fishing for work. But before we let him loose with his fly and rod, he has the small matter of interviewing Steven Chu, America's newest Energy Secretary.
The Nobel Prize winning physicist talks climate change, the world's energy crisis and US hopes for the upcoming Copenhagen summit. And although Secretary Chu doesn't offer any promises on whether America will sign up to legally binding emission targets, he's unequivocal in his desire for action. "Business as usual could be catastrophic. We have to change our way of thinking of consumption," he states.
dpeilow
06-24-2009, 02:22 PM
BBC - Newsnight: From the web team: Wednesday 24 June 2009 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2009/06/wednesday_24_june_2009.html)
Tonight we ask how the US is tackling the challenge of climate change and whether Mr Obama is delivering as was hoped. We will be discussing with - among others - the former White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, The Secretary of State for the environment Ed Miliband and, of course, the Ethical Man himself.
See reports here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/
The studio debate afterwards was interesting, if you can watch it. Essentially they are saying that big coal has successfully watered down the climate change bill, with Greenpeace claiming it now only leads to a 4% drop in CO2 emissions in 2020 over 1990 levels.
BBHighway
06-25-2009, 06:52 AM
Over at climateprogress, they seem to think highly of the WM bill. It's difficult to understand what the results will really be. There are so many differing claims, that the bill will do almost nothing, to massive reduction, and the cost estimates vary from increasing electric charges by $3100 to decreasing charges.
A tax on carbon would have been much more simple to understand and implement.
Over at climateprogress, they seem to think highly of the WM bill. It's difficult to understand what the results will really be. There are so many differing claims, that the bill will do almost nothing, to massive reduction, and the cost estimates vary from increasing electric charges by $3100 to decreasing charges.
A tax on carbon would have been much more simple to understand and implement.
Amazing the gyrations they will go though to avoid the "T" word.
Chu in the Greenroom of the Daily Show.
No interactions, but the last 30 sec is cute.
YouTube - Backstage at the Daily Show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7IqfH71hcU&feature=player_embedded)
(from his Facebook page) (http://www.facebook.com/stevenchu?v=photos&viewas=1258115531&ref=search#/stevenchu?v=wall&viewas=708607961&ref=search)
A fake Chu Grist Facebook page (http://www2.grist.org/stories/facebook-chu.html)
Serge
11-04-2009, 03:51 PM
One year after his election, Obama on verge of audaciously fulfilling his promise as the green FDR « Climate Progress (http://climateprogress.org/2009/11/03/one-year-after-election-obama-clean-energy-climate-green-fdr/)
Future historians will inevitably judge all 21st-century presidents on just two issues: global warming and the clean energy transition. If the world doesn’t stop catastrophic climate change — Hell and High Water — then all Presidents, indeed, all of us, will be seen as failures and rightfully so.
In that sense, what team Obama has accomplished in the year since he was elected is nothing less than an unprecedented reversal of decades of unsustainable national policy forced down the throat of the American public by conservatives.
dpeilow
11-24-2009, 03:00 PM
The BBC had a pretty interesting interview with Chu on Newsnight this evening. This should be available soon: BBC - Newsnight: From the web team: Tuesday 24 November 2009 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2009/11/tuesday_24_november_2009.html)
A full interview will be part of this programme tomorrow evening: BBC News - Can Obama Save the Planet? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/this_world/8367104.stm)
dpeilow
11-26-2009, 03:06 PM
The interview: BBC News - Newsnight - US Energy Sec optimistic about tackling climate change (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8378729.stm)
http://www.detnews.com/article/20110126/AUTO01/101260405/Biden-rolls-out-plan-to-put-1M-plug-in-vehicles-on-the-road
Nuclear Energy Advocates Insist U.S. Reactors Completely Safe Unless Something Bad Happens | (http://www.theonion.com/articles/nuclear-energy-advocates-insist-us-reactors-comple,19740/)
Nuclear Energy Advocates Insist U.S. Reactors Completely Safe Unless Something Bad Happens | (http://www.theonion.com/articles/nuclear-energy-advocates-insist-us-reactors-comple,19740/)
I didn't read the link, the title was enough. LOL
The energy plan is back (http://www.elp.com/index/display/article-display/0049897744/articles/electric-light-power/policy-and_regulation/2011/03/Obama_touts_electric_cars__clean_energy_standard.h tml):
... Obama said electric vehicles would be the best fix. Obama set a goal of deploying one million electric vehicles by 2015. During his presidency, the Department of Energy has created incentives for American companies to develop the vehicles as well as for Americans who buy them.
"There are few breakthroughs as promising for increasing fuel efficiency and reducing our dependence on oil as electric vehicles," Obama said.
Furthermore, the president called for the federal government to "lead by example," adding that he has directed the every vehicle used by the government to be upgraded to alternative fuel, hybrid or electric systems by 2015.
The factor keeping electric vehicles from truly taking off, he said, is the size, weight and efficiency of the batteries themselves. Obama said his administration has invested about $2 billion in grants for companies to develop better batteries and kick-start the American electric vehicle industry.
"Soon, America will be home to 40 percent of global manufacturing capacity for these batteries. And that means jobs. But to make sure we stay on the road to this goal, we need to do more — by offering more powerful incentives to consumers, and by rewarding the communities that pave the way for adoption of these vehicles," he said.
Obama said it doesn't take a Nobel Prize winner like Energy Secretary Steven Chu to tell you that electric vehicles run on electricity. So, he said, electricity should be generated in a safer, cleaner way.
"Even if we reduce our oil dependency, a smart, comprehensive energy policy requires that we change the way we generate electricity in America," he said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/business/energy-environment/31POLICY.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
The below is 50 minutes long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfeKFulcPSM&feature=player_embedded
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/blueprint_secure_energy_future.pdf
The energy plan is back
Thanks for posting. Batteries and generating electricity using clean energy appear to be the objectives. Am certain the critics (both EV & political) will be out in full force on this one.
Obama’s Energy Speech: What He Said, and What He Didn’t| BNET (http://www.bnet.com/blog/electric-cars/obama-8217s-energy-speech-what-he-said-and-what-he-didn-8217t/3729?tag=content;drawer-container)
Report: Obama administration buying 101 Chevy Volts, 10 Nissan Leafs Autoblog Green (http://green.autoblog.com/2011/05/24/report-obama-administration-buying-101-chevy-volts-10-nissan-l/)
Obama issues Presidential Memorandum for federal fleet performance Autoblog Green (http://green.autoblog.com/2011/05/25/obama-issues-presidential-memorandum-federal-fleet-performance/)
Presidential Memorandum--Federal Fleet Performance
The Federal Government operates the largest fleet of light duty vehicles in America. We owe a responsibility to American citizens to lead by example and contribute to meeting our national goals of reducing oil imports by one-third by 2025 and putting one million advanced vehicles on the road by 2015.
Living up to that responsibility means the Federal fleet should operate only as many vehicles as needed to work efficiently, leveraging Federal purchasing dollars to build manufacturing capacity for more alternative fueled vehicles, and reducing petroleum consumption through efficiency and alternative fuels.
In Executive Order 13514 of October 5, 2009, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, my Administration set a goal of reducing petroleum use in the Federal fleet. In order to provide guidance to executive departments and agencies (agencies) to help achieve my Administration's Federal fleet performance goals, and to ensure that agencies are in compliance with Executive Order 13514, I hereby direct the following:
Section 1. Vehicle Technologies. (a) By December 31, 2015, all new light duty vehicles leased or purchased by agencies must be alternative fueled vehicles, such as hybrid or electric, compressed natural gas, or biofuel. Moreover, agency alternative fueled vehicles must, as soon as practicable, be located in proximity to fueling stations with available alternative fuels, and be operated on the alternative fuel for which the vehicle is designed. Where practicable, agencies should encourage development of commercial infrastructure for alternative fuel or provide flex fuel and alternative fuel pumps and charging stations at Federal fueling sites.
(b) Pursuant to motor vehicle management regulations, set forth at 41 C.F.R. 102-34.50, executive fleets are required to achieve maximum fuel efficiency; be limited in motor vehicle body size, engine size, and optional equipment to what is essential to meet agency mission; and be midsize or smaller sedans, except where larger sedans are essential to the agency mission. Within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, any executive fleet vehicles that are larger than a midsize sedan or do not comply with alternative fueled vehicle requirements must be disclosed on agency websites.
(c) The Department of Energy shall assist the United States Postal Service (USPS) in evaluating the best alternative fuel technologies for the USPS fleet.
Sec. 2. Optimum Fleet Size. Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, the General Services Administration (GSA) shall develop and distribute to agencies a Vehicle Allocation Methodology (VAM) for determining the optimum inventory with emphasis placed on eliminating unnecessary or non-essential vehicles from an agency's fleet inventory and ensuring lifecycle cost-effectiveness of maintaining such inventory. In addition, the VAM shall address composition for agencies' light duty fleets based on their missions. In doing so, the GSA shall consider existing Federal VAMs as appropriate. The VAM shall assist agencies in selecting vehicle options based on lifecycle cost analysis, including projected fuel costs, warranty, operations, mileage, maintenance, and disposal.
Sec. 3. Fleet Management. (a) Within 180 days of the GSA's dissemination of the VAM referenced in section 2 of this memorandum, agencies shall determine their optimal fleet inventory using the VAM, and shall post their optimal fleet inventory targets on agency websites. At the same time, agencies shall submit to the Administrator of General Services (Administrator) fleet management plans to achieve these targets no later than December 31, 2015.
(b) Within 30 days of receiving agency fleet management plans, the Administrator shall submit a summary of the plans to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and to the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.
(c) Within 90 days of receiving agency fleet management plans, the Administrator shall provide each agency and military service with recommendations for the acquisition of alternative fueled vehicles to implement fleet optimization plans, including shared fleet-on-demand services where applicable.
(d) Agencies shall incorporate new fleet management plans into their Annual Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans prepared in furtherance of Executive Order 13514, beginning with their June 2012 plan submission.
Sec. 4. Applicability. (a) With respect to law enforcement and emergency vehicles, the GSA shall, within 180 days of the date of this memorandum, and in coordination with the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, and the Treasury, and other appropriate agencies, issue guidance to agencies on the applicability and implementation of alternative fueled vehicle requirements.
(b) Consistent with the guidance developed in section 4(a) of this memorandum, the head of an agency may exempt vehicles used for law enforcement, protective, emergency response, or military tactical operations of that agency from the provisions of this memorandum.
(c) This memorandum shall apply to the activities, personnel, resources, and facilities of each agency that are located within the United States. The head of an agency may apply this memorandum to activities, personnel, resources, and facilities
of the agency that are not located within the United States, to the extent the head of the agency determines that doing so is in the interest of the United States.
Sec. 5. Definitions. (a) "Alternative fueled vehicle" means an alternative fuel vehicle as defined by Executive Order 13514 and an alternative fueled vehicle as defined by 42 U.S.C. 13211(3), including a "new qualified fuel cell motor vehicle" as defined in 26 U.S.C. 30B(b)(3) and a "new qualified hybrid motor vehicle" as defined in 26 U.S.C. 30B(d)(3).
(b) "Agency" means an agency as defined in Executive Order 13514.
(c) "United States" means the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands, and associated territorial waters and airspace.
Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law, including international trade obligations, and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(b) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(1) authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
Somewhat random:
GE lands $5.9M from DoE - The Business Review (http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/news/2011/08/10/ge-global-research-lands-59m-from-doe.html?ana=yfcpc)
GE lands $5.9M from DoE
The Business Review
Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011, 3:11pm EDT
[/URL]
The U.S. Department of Energy awarded [URL="http://www.bizjournals.com/profiles/company/us/ct/fairfield/general_electric_company/1177020/"]General Electric (http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/industry-news/logistics-and-transportation/) in Niskayuna more than $5.9 million for research in advanced vehicle technology.
The funding is part of $175 million the Department of Energy is for advanced vehicle research over the next three to five years. The funding will support 40 projects in 15 states and will help improve the fuel efficiency of future vehicles.
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said projects will target new innovations throughout the vehicle, including better fuels and lubricants, lighter weight materials, longer-lasting and cheaper electric vehicle batteries and components, and more efficient engine technologies.
The project at GE in Niskayuna will develop high performance motors with non-rare earth materials...