Biofuel Innovators with Alternatives to Oil
By John Addison (5/14/08). Oil soars to $125 per barrel and economies around the world sputter or fall into recession. Enough is enough. Many biofuels can be blended with gasoline and diesel refined from oil, then pumped into our existing vehicles. Even making our fuels with ten percent biofuel and ninety percent refined oil is enough to drop demand for oil and send the price south.
At the moment, this approach has major drawbacks. Food prices are soaring as more ethanol is made from corn, and biodiesel from soy and palm oil. Rain forests are being slashed and burned to increase production of soy and palm oil. Next generation biofuels, however, promise to minimize these downsides while ending our dependency on oil.
“Once viewed as an environmentally-friendly, silver bullet alternative to fossil fuels, biofuels have recently become "public enemy number one” in regard to rising food prices. But what role does the growing biofuels market really play in the current food crisis?” Asks James Greenwood, President and CEO, Biotechnology Industry Organization, who goes on to answer the question.
“There are a number of factors contributing to rising food costs. Poor harvests over the past year in Australia, Canada, South America and Eastern Europe. Protectionist tariff policies affecting the rice-producing nations of South Asia. A weak dollar is driving up the demand for U.S. exports of grains, a dynamic exacerbated by hedge fund and pension fund managers who are pouring unprecedented levels of investment in grain commodities. Growing incomes and meat-eating preferences of an emerging middle class in countries like India and China are increasing global demand for animal feed and the fuel required for production and transport. But the most significant factors driving up food prices are ever-rising energy and transportation costs.
“In coming years, biotechnology will allow us to create biofuels from non-food crops, crops that yield more per acre, require less fertilizer and are more tolerant of drought and other adverse conditions. These scientific breakthroughs will only enhance the world's ability to feed and fuel itself in a responsible and sustainable way. As biofuels production transitions to these second and third generation biofuels, biotechnology will play an essential role in providing the world with cleaner fuel and more affordable food.”
The U.S. Agriculture Department projects that the combination of a shrinking corn crop and the swelling appetite for corn ethanol will keep the price of the nation's largest crop in record territory into 2009. USDA economists expect U.S. farmers to produce 12.1 billion bushels of corn, down 7.3% from the record 13.1 billion bushels they harvested in 2007, as farmers grow more soy.
In the U.S., ethanol is currently in far greater demand than biodiesel. By law, 36 billion gallons of ethanol must be in use by 2020 in the USA. This ethanol will primarily be blended with gasoline. E10, a blend of ten percent ethanol and ninety percent petroleum refined gasoline will be common. By contrast, in the U.S. most diesel fuel is consumed by heavy vehicles with expensive engines that must run for years. Warranties can be voided and maintenance cost increase unless the diesel fuel meets exacting standards.
Biofuel innovators were discussed and presented at the Platts Advanced Biofuels Conference, which I attended. With improved biofuels we will achieve increased energy security while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This article examines short-term and longer-term biofuel solutions.
In the heart of Silicon Valley, Khosla Ventures is funding innovative solutions for clean transportation and other major global problems. Brilliant innovators such as Vinod Khosla and Samir Kaul are involved in a number of companies creating cleaner fuels with cellulosic ethanol, biomass gasification, and synthetic biology.
Platt conference keynote speaker Vinod Khosla predicts that within five years fuel from food will no longer be competitive with cellulosic ethanol. He also predicts, “In five years, oil will be uncompetitive with biofuel, even at $50 per barrel, though oil will take longer to decline in price.”
Khosla Ventures identifies several sources of cellulosic ethanol. “There are four principal sources of biomass and biofuels we consider (1) energy crops on agricultural land and timberlands using crop rotation schemes that improve traditional row crop agriculture AND recover previously degraded lands (2) winter cover crops grown on current annual crop lands using the land during the winter season (or summer, in the case of winter wheat) when it is generally dormant (while improving land ecology) (3) excess non-merchantable forest material that is currently unused (about 226 million tons according to the US Department of Energy), and (4) organic municipal waste, industrial waste and municipal sewage.” Khosla Papers and Presentations
Sugarcane is the currently the most efficient feedstock for larger scale ethanol production. While corn ethanol delivers little more energy output than the total energy necessary to grow, process, and transport it; sugarcane ethanol delivers eight times the energy output as lifecycle energy input. Also, sugarcane typically produces twice as much fuel per acre as corn.
Brazil produces almost as much sugarcane ethanol as the United States produces corn ethanol, but at a fraction of the energy cost. Sugarcane is also grown in the southern U.S., from Florida to Louisiana to California.
Brazil is free from needing foreign oil. Flex-fuel vehicles there get much better mileage than in the U.S. If you drive into any of Brazil’s 31,000 fueling stations looking for gasoline, you will find that the gasoline has a blend of at least 20% ethanol, as required by law. 29,000 of the fueling stations also offer 100% ethanol. Ethanol in the U.S. is normally delivered on trucks, increasing its cost and lifecycle emissions. Brazil's largest sugar and ethanol group, Cosan SA announced the creation of a company to construct and operate an ethanol pipeline.
Most sugarcane is grown in the southern state of Sao Paulo. Economics do not favor its growth in rain forests, although those who favor blocking its import make that claim. It is cattle, soy, palm oil, logging, and climate change that most threaten the rain forests. Some environmentalists are concerned that a significant percentage of Brazil’s sugarcane is grown in the cerrado, which is one of the world’s most biodiverse areas. The cerrado is rich with birds, butterflies, and thousands of unique plant species. Others argue that without sugarcane ethanol, more oil will come from strip mining Canadian tar sands and from a new “gold rush” for oil in the melting artic.
“In addition, the residue of sugarcane ethanol, bagasse, can be used for further energy production. While this may likely be used for generating carbon-neutral electricity, it could also be used in cellulosic biofuel production, potentially generating an additional 400-700 gallons per acre.” (CA LCFS Technical Analysis p 87-88)
Sugarcane growers are planning the development of varieties that can produce a larger quantity of biomass per hectare per year. These varieties are being called “energy cane” and may produce 1,200 to 3,000 gallons of ethanol per acre, contrasting with 300 to potentially 500 gallons of ethanol from an acre of corn.
Although sugarcane ethanol is currently the low-cost winner, long-term economics are likely to favor cellulosic sources.
In his keynote speech, Vinod Khosla sited promising sources such as paper waste, wood waste, forest waste, miscanthus, sorghum, hybrid poplar trees, winter cover crops, and perennial crops have deep roots and sequester carbon. Cellulosic ethanol could potentially yield 2,500 gallons per acre.
Large-scale reliance on ethanol fuel will require new conversion technologies and new feedstock. Much attention has been focused on enzymes that convert plant cellulose into ethanol. Because cellulose derived ethanol is made from the non-food portions of plants, it greatly expands the potential fuel supply without cutting our precious food supplies.
Pilot plants are now convert wood waste into ethanol. Over the next few years, much larger plants are likely to come online and start becoming a meaningful part of the energy mix. In Japan, Osaka Project, Verenium utilizes demolition wood waste as a feedstock in producing up to 1.3 million liters of cellulosic ethanol annually. A second phase, planned for completion in 2008, will increase production to 4 million liters per year. Verenium Ethanol Projects
Norampac is the largest manufacturer of containerboard in Canada. Next generation ethanol producer TRI is not only producing fuel, its processes allow the plant to produce 20% more paper. Prior to installing the TRI spent-liquor gasification system the mill had no chemical and energy recovery process. With the TRI system, the plant is a zero effluent operation, and more profitable.
The spent-liquor gasifier is designed to processes 115 Metric tons per day of black liquor solids. The chemicals are recovered and sent to the mill for pulping; the energy is recovered as steam which offsets the production of steam using purchased natural gas. All thermal energy in the plant is now renewable.
Producing cellulosic ethanol over the next few years is unlikely to be cost competitive with oil refining, unless other benefits accrue such as Norampac’s improved plant efficiency, savings in energy, heat, steam, reduction of plant waste, and/or production of multiple products from the plant. In the longer term, 100 million gallon per year cellulosic plants may be profitable without byproduct benefits.
Another Khosla Ventures portfolio company is Range Fuels which sees fuel potential from timber harvesting residues, corn stover (stalks that remain after the corn has been harvested), sawdust, paper pulp, hog manure, and municipal garbage that can be converted into cellulosic ethanol. In the labs, Range Fuels has successfully converted almost 30 types of biomass into ethanol. While competitors are focused on developing new enzymes to convert cellulose to sugar, Range Fuels' technology eliminates enzymes which have been an expensive component of cellulosic ethanol production. Range Fuels' thermo-chemical conversion process uses a two step process to convert the biomass to synthesis gas, and then converts the gas to ethanol.
The U.S. Department of Energy is negotiating with Range Fuels research funding of up to $76 million.
Range Fuels was awarded a construction permit from the state of Georgia to build the first commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plant in the United States. Ground breaking will take place this summer for a 100-million-gallon-per-year cellulosic ethanol plant that will use wood waste from Georgia's forests as its feedstock. Phase 1 of the plant is scheduled to complete construction in 2009 with a production capacity of 20 million gallons a year.
Abengoa Bioenergy, also announced the finalization of a $38-million collaboration agreement signed with the DOE for the design and development of the Hugoton, Kansas cellulosic ethanol plant which will process over 11 million gallons of ethanol per year with renewable energy as a byproduct. The biomass plant will be situated next to a conventional grain-to-ethanol plant with combined capacity of 100 million gallons, using scale to make cellulosic ethanol more cost-competitive. Abengoa Bioenergy will invest more than $500 million in the next five years in their production of biomass into ethanol in the U.S., Brazil, and Europe.
Poet, the nation’s largest ethanol maker with 22 plants now turning out 1.2 billion gallons a year, plans to open a 25-million-gallon cellulosic facility in 2009 alongside its expanded grain ethanol plant in Emmetsburg, Iowa. Corn cobs from local fields will supply it. Ethanol 2.0
Ethanol is not the only bio-game in town. Many European cars and most U.S. heavy vehicles use diesel not gasoline. New generations of biodiesel, biobutanol, and synthetic fuels are being developed that could be blended with diesel or replace it. Some of these fuels could also be blended with gasoline and jet fuel. BP and DuPont have teamed to produce biobutanol which has a higher energy density than ethanol, can be delivered in existing pipelines, and can be blended with a wider range of fuels.
Amyris will use synthetic biology to develop microorganisms that produce biofuels. LS9 Inc. is in the early stage of using synthetic biology to engineer bacteria that can make hydrocarbons for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.
Algae have the potential to be an efficient producer of oil for biodiesel with byproducts of including hydrogen and carbohydrates which could be converted into ethanol. Biodiesel from algae can be done today. The challenge is to make production large scale and cost effective. Ideal forms of algae need to be developed. Oil must be “brewed” with the right solution, light, mixing and stirring. Cost-effective photobioreactors must be developed.
“If we were to replace all of the diesel that we use in the United States" with an algae derivative, says Solix CEO Douglas Henston, "we could do it on an area of land that’s about one-half of 1 percent of the current farm land that we use now."
Mike Janes, Sandia National Labs, is even more optimistic, "Recent studies using a species of algae show that only 0.3 percent of the land area of the U.S. could be utilized to produce enough biodiesel to replace all transportation fuel the country currently utilizes….In addition, barren desert land, which receives high solar radiation, could effectively grow the algae, and the algae could utilize farm waste….With an oil-per-acre production rate 250 times the amount of soybeans, algae offers the highest yield feedstock for biodiesel."
At the Platts Advanced Biofuels Conference, most algae experts, from scientists to CEOs of algael fuel companies, see challenging years ahead before cost-effective commercial scale production of biofuel from algae will be possible. As one expert quipped, “The greatest progress to scale is being done by Photoshop.”
A number of companies are actively exploring the potential for fuel from algae. "Algae have great potential as a sustainable feedstock for production of diesel-type fuels with a very small CO2 footprint," said Graeme Sweeney, Shell Executive Vice President Future Fuels and CO2. Shell is investing in using algae to produce fuel.
These innovators will only make a difference if they receive funding and distribution. Some of the energy giants are helping. Shell is recognized as the largest biofuel distributor among the “oil majors.” Shell has invested heavily in Choren biomass-to-liquids (BTL) in Europe. Shell has invested in Iogen, a maker of cellulosic ethanol catalysts and technology.
Biofuels have the potential to provide solutions for energy security and transportation with a much smaller carbon footprint. Other solutions include reduction in solo driving due to urban density and corporate programs, public transit, more fuel efficient vehicles, and the shift to electric vehicles that require no fossil fuel or biofuel. The new biofuels have the potential to encourage sustainable reforesting and soil enrichment. Biofuel 2.0 provides a path to fuel from wood and waste, not food and haste.
John Addison publishes the
Clean Fleet Report. He owns a modest number of shares of Abengoa.
Labels: ABG.MC, biobutanol, biodiesel, biofuels, BP, cellulosic ethanol, clean fleet, cleantech, DD, RDSA, SU, VRNM
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Blogroll Review: VW, Food, and $100 Billion
by Frank LingThe People's CarWith the price of gas exceeding $4 per gallon in the US, there is surging interest in vehicles with higher mileage. It may not be until we see $5 or $6 per gallon that we see mainstream transition to hybrids and plug-in electric vehicles.
Several efforts at high mileage have already made the news. Here is another one. This one coming from our friends in Germany.
Volkswagen plans to introduce a 230 mpg car by 2010. It is described as a cross between a VW Bug and a bobsled.
Hank Green at EcoGeek
writes:
The car's technology comes from it's unique shape and it's ultra-light body. The frame is actually made of magnesium, an extremely light metal, and the outer skin is reinforced with carbon fiber. The one cylinder engine is made of aluminum and sits on top of the rear axle. The car is only a bit more than three feet high and weighs less than 700 lbs.
Volkswagen says the design has been around since 2002 but because of it's design and perceptions over its safety, they have not marketed it. With such a low weight, it is thought that the car would lose out in a crash with a heavier vehicle. Finish Your DinnerIn the UK, a new report says that by reducing food wastage, the country could prevent 18 million ton equivalents of CO2 emissions each year or nearly the amount emitted by one in the five cars.
David Erhlich at the Cleantech Group
says:
According to the study, $2 billion worth of wasted food is still "in date." The group said it costs local authorities $2 billion to collect and dispose of all of the wasted food.
But there are answers, and WRAP said of the 6.7 million tonnes of food per year that's wasted, 4.1 million tonnes is avoidable.UN: Renewable Investment Hits $100 BillionIn what is a financial milestone, the UN reports that global investment in renewable energy has exceeded $100 billion for the first time last year.
From
Greentech Media:
"The finance community has been investing at levels that imply disruptive change is now inevitable in the energy sector," says Eric Usher, Head of the Energy Finance Unit at the UN. Usher said the UN's "report puts full stop to the idea of renewable energy being a fringe interest of environmentalists. It is now a mainstream commercial interest to investors and bankers alike."Frank Ling is a postdoctoral fellow at the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory (RAEL) at UC Berkeley. He is also a producer of the Berkeley Groks Science Show.
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
"A Special Report on the Future of Energy" by Mother Jones
by Richard T. Stuebi
I’ve never been a fan of the periodical Mother Jones – it's always seemed a bit too “alternative” for me. That said, I was recently given a copy of the May/June 2008 issue – a special report on the future of energy – and was surprised by the quality and balance of the articles.
I particularly found “The Seven Myths of Energy Independence” by Paul Roberts (author of The End of Oil) to be a compelling read. To him, the seven myths are:
1. Energy Independence Is Good
2. Ethanol Will Set Us Free
3. Conservation Is a “Personal Virtue”
4. We Can Go It Alone
5. Some Geek in Silicon Valley Will Fix the Problem
6. Cut Demand and the Rest Will Follow
7. Once Bush Is Gone, Change Will Come
I think many advocates are well-advised to really reflect on #7. Bush is unquestionably the bête-noire of all things environmental, but he’s only a part of the problem – and arguably not even the biggest part. Congress and the entrenched interests completely stymie good energy/environmental policy. A new President will help, but won’t be a simple cure-all, for what ails us in the energy and environmental arenas.
Which brings me to another article in the issue: “Congress' Top 10 Fossil Fools” by Chris Mooney, profiling the “foes and thwarters of renewable energy”. In his list, they are:
1. Senator Pete Dominici (R-NM)
2. The Southern Company (NYSE: SO)
3. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
4. Representative Joe Barton (R-TX)
5. Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY) and “Coal-State Dems”
6. Representative John Dingell (D-MI)
7. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
8. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA)
9. Senator John Thune (R-SD)
10. Senator John McCain (R-AZ)
Probably no surprise that there are more R's than D's on the list, but I was really surprised at the omission of Senator James Imhofe (R-OK), and by the inclusion of McCain. Apparently, the League of Conservation Voters gave the impending Republican Presidential nominee a rating of 0 (that's right, zero) last year “because McCain missed every single environmentally relevant vote”, including ones in which he could have been the tie-breaker to overcome a filibuster on the 2007 clean-energy bill. Alas, what could have been...
Other good articles in the issue include:
“The Greenback Effect” by Bill McKibben on why markets aren’t necessarily antithetical to the environment, but can be the driving force for environmental solutions.
“Breaking the Gridlock” by Jennifer Kahn on how the smart-grid could be the major enabler for energy efficiency.
“The Nuclear Option” by Judith Lewis – a reasonably fair and balanced view of the pros and cons of nuclear energy, without the expected hyperbole.
“Tar Wars” by Josh Harkinson, which paints a not-at-all pretty picture of what’s happening to the landscape in Northern Alberta as the tar sands are mined to make oil.
“Put a Tyrant in Your Tank” by Joshua Kurlantzick, profiling the bad guys leading many of the major oil producing nations – who are financed every time you fill up at the pump.
Lots of interesting nuggets to be found in the sidebar boxes too. For instance, did you know that 30% of the electricity supply at the infamous Guantanamo Bay Naval Base is provided by wind turbines?
Well worth spending $5.95 at the newsstand, pick up the May/June 2008 Mother Jones.
Richard T. Stuebi is the BP Fellow for Energy and Environmental Advancement at The Cleveland Foundation, and is also the Founder and President of NextWave Energy, Inc.
Labels: energy efficiency, energy policy, nuclear, oil, peak oil, smart grid, tar sands, wind energy
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Solar and Renewable Electricity Gain (Week Ending 5/9)
Author: Mark Henwood Broad market indices (Emerging Markets, EAFA, S&P500) all fell this week. Camino’s PurePlay™ indices were mixed, commodities (ticker DJP) rose strongly.
The PurePlay™ Solar index, comprised of 34 companies, reversed last week's 2.0% loss with a 0.9% gain. The index members were mixed with 13 stocks increasing and 21 stocks declining. In contrast to last week, two stocks (ENER and CSIQ) increased by over 20%. Energy Conversion Devices’ eye popping 45.2% gain for the week was largely responsible for lifting the index. The company stock rose sharply in very heavy trading after its 7 AM press release on the 8th, and then more after their earnings call concluded later in the morning. The company reported great results for its Q3 with solar product sales up 193% from the previous year. In contrast to prior periods the company showed a profit. More on ENER below.
The Renewable Electricity index increased 0.7% with 11 stocks climbing and 12 retreating. No stock increased or declined by over 20% and nothing caught our attention to report here other then to note that the index’s relatively low volatility continues.
Biofuels followed last week’s loss with an additional 3.4% loss. There were 5 advancing stocks to 10 stocks falling. Biofuels are now down 35.2% for the year, the worst showing of our four strategies.
Aventine (AVR) reversed last week’s gain with a 23.0% decline contributing significantly to the index’s decline. I previously noted Aventine’s large USD 26 million mark-down for its student loan ARS position and noted the company is engaged in other complex financial transactions to hedge operational risk. The company’s value decreased this week by USD 52 million, not because of operational risks, but due to an analyst’s concern about liquidity on the 5th and Moody’s concerns and negative outlook on the 8th. Is there more financial risk to come?
Fuel Cells posted another loss of 1.1% this week with 3 stocks advancing and 4 stocks declining. No stock increased or declined by over 20%.
Energy Conversion: After its big price move, annualizing the company’s Q3 earnings results in a current period PE ratio of 68.
The question is can the company continue the growth necessary to support this price? To grow at the PE ratio, the company will need to expand its Q3 2008 production of 21.6 MW to a Q3 2010 production 61 MW. With its announced plans to increase annual production capacity to 300MW by the end of FY2010 it looks like it may be possible to keep pace. But there isn’t much room for error. Any problems that impact this rapid growth with likely be rewarded with sharp price movements. In our view the stock may be fully priced after this week’s huge gains.
Mark is the founder of Camino Energy, an information provider specializing in globally traded sustainable energy stocks. He also is an investor in sustainable energy stocks.Labels: alternative energy, AVR, cleantech, CSIQ, DJP, green tech
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Give Me Your (Recycled) Heart
by Cristina Foung
My favorite green product of the week: pretty much anything from Fire & Light, but specifically the glass heart.
What is it?
This post is really in the spirit of Mother’s Day (if you’ve forgotten, it’s not too late – it’s this Sunday, May 11th). So if you’re looking for something beautiful and green to show your mom/grandmother/aunt/wife that you love her and you love the planet, Fire & Light makes beautiful stuff. The glass heart is a piece from their giftware collection (for the more practical moms, you can call it a paper weight or you could opt for something from their dinnerware collection).
Why is it better?
Fire & Light makes their hand-poured colored glassware in conjunction with a partnership with the Arcata Community Recycling Center (and just for those of you who have never heard of Arcata, it’s one of the greenest spots in the country). They take recycled glass, turn it into a raw material by crushing it, and re-make it into something absolutely beautiful. As their tag line says, they "have recycling down to an art."
Where can you find it?
You can have something shipped directly from Fire & Light or you can check out their retailer locator. The large heart retails for approximately $32.
And if glassware isn’t your mom’s thing, here’s a wiki about other green Mother’s Day gifts that might have something more fitting.
Besides her green products column on Cleantech Blog, Cristina is a passionate advocate for green living at the Green Home Huddle at Huddler.com, which focuses on electric cars, energy efficient appliances, and other green products.
Labels: cleantech, Fire and Light, gifts, green tech, recycled materials
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
The Status of Carbon Sequestration
by Richard T. StuebiAt a
recent symposium on climate change solutions at
Oberlin College, I heard a presentation by
David Ball, who leads the
Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) at
Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus.
His presentation was a fascinating collage of facts and observations about the status and prospects for in-situ sequestration of carbon emissions from coal powerplants and other large point sources. To wit:
CO2 must be sequestered deep underground to avoid cross-contamination with water aquifers, and also to find the low-density “spongy” strata underneath the impermeable “caprock” strata. This tends to be on the order of several thousand feet below the surface. In order to keep the CO2 underground at these depths, given the high hydrostatic pressures that pertain so far below the surface, the CO2 must be compressed to approximately 100 atmospheres before injection. No wonder the energy/capacity penalty associated with carbon capture/sequestration is so significant!
The average coal powerplant emits about 24,000 tons per day of CO2. Meanwhile, the largest pilot project attempted to date in the U.S. for carbon sequestration has only dealt with a volume of 10,000 tons per day. In the North Sea off of Norway, the carbon sequestration effort led by
StatoilHydro (NYSE: STO) at
Sleipner has been sequestering about 2800 tonnes per day since 1996. In other words, carbon sequestration has not yet been performed in anywhere near the volumes associated with powerplant emissions.
Notwithstanding the significant volumes of CO2 emitted in the upper Midwest from our fleet of coal generation and large industrial facilities, there is enough regional underground sequestration capacity to hold “hundreds of years’” worth of CO2 emissions. This was news to me: I had heard concerns that the carrying capacity of the deep underground reservoirs suitable for sequestration would be small relative to our current emissions.
As with many of the cleantech challenges, carbon sequestration is not a question of if something can be technically done. Rather, it’s a question if it can be done at an out-of-pocket cost that will be acceptable to politicians and their constituents.
Recent conversations I've had with a Norwegian company named
Sargas, which is developing a 95% carbon capture technology applicable to
pressurized fluidized bed boiler combined cycle power generation facilities, indicates all-in costs (including capital recovery and returns) of under 10 cents/kwh, perhaps to as low as 7-8 cents/kwh. This isn't too bad, but I suspect that the costs will have to proven at lower levels (or energy prices are otherwise going to have to rise much further) before many in the U.S. are assured that the potential economic impact of climate legislation won't be severe.
And, of course, sequestration doesn’t address any of the concerns associated with mining the coal to begin with. For some ardent environmentalists, that makes coal unacceptable, even with cost-effective carbon sequestration. That said, practically speaking for voters and officials alike, it’s hard to overlook such an inexpensive and domestically abundant fuel.
Richard T. Stuebi is the BP Fellow for Energy and Environmental Advancement at The Cleveland Foundation, and is also the Founder and President of NextWave Energy, Inc.Labels: carbon sequestration, clean coal, cleantech, fluidized bed, green tech
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Only Renewables Gain Again (Week Ending 5/2)
Author: Mark HenwoodBroad market indices (Emerging Markets, EAFA, S&P500) all rose this week. Camino’s PurePlay™ indices were mixed.
The Solar index, comprised of 34 companies, followed last week's 0.2% loss with a 2.0% decline. 15 stocks increased and 19 stocks declined. In contrast to most weeks, no stock increased or declined by over 20% and nothing caught our attention to report here. The solar ETFs both declined, 3.5% in one case and 2.2% in the other. With a 74% overlap I suspect this much difference is more random than a sustained trend
The Renewable Electricity index managed a 0.4% increase with 8 stocks climbing and 15 retreating. Most notable on the increasing side was Energy Developments (ENE.AX) advancing 11.8%, continuing to recover from the 30% sell-off on April 14th. I discussed this sell-off in the Week Ending 4/18 summary and noted that some traders, myself included, saw the 30% move as a significant over-correction.
Biofuels followed last week’s loss with a 0.4% loss. There were 5 advancing stocks to 10 stocks falling. On the plus side Aventine (AVR) posted an impressive 22.0% increase for the week as a result of its first quarter results. In my view some of the key factors cited by Aventine for its improved operating performance included (1) wider spreads (fuel revenue – corn cost), (2) decreased conversion costs, and (3) benefits of the wet milling process on by-product production. On the negative side the company reported a significant USD 21.6 million mark-down for its student loan ARS position. Considering that the company engages in significant long and short derivative transactions to hedge its physical and contract positions, I trust management is focusing sufficient attention on crucial risk management controls. I hope there are no similarities between investing in ARS student loan notes and commodity derivatives.
In contrast, Pacific Ethanol (PEIX) had a rough week in the market declining 11.7% despite an appearance by the CEO on Fast Money on the 25th and the start-up of the 60 million gallon per year Burley, Idaho plant. In defense of corn based ethanol Mr. Koehler noted that ethanol is the only significant alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels. More on this below.
Fuel Cells posted a smaller 0.7% decline this week with 4 stocks advancing and 3 stocks declining. YTD the index is down 31.3% for the year. This technology continues to struggle with product, fuel source, and profitability issues. Another view of the fuel cell industry discusses the sector in more detail.
Ethanol’s significance: How significant are the ethanol companies? Let’s take a look at Aventine. In their 1st quarter release the company reported producing 47.7 million gallons of ethanol. That’s roughly equivalent to 12,000 barrels of oil per day. In 2006 that would have ranked Aventine as the 50th largest oil producer in the US (EIA 2006 Annual Report). Granted, while that’s only 2% of the production of the largest US crude oil producer, it’s still pretty significant.
Mark is the founder of Camino Energy, an information provider specializing in globally traded sustainable energy stocks. All index computations and constituent changes cited above are available at Camino. He also is an investor in sustainable energy stocks. Mark has a position in ENE.AX
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Cleantech Blog "Power 10" Ranking Vol. I
I spend most of my day meeting and talking to companies in the cleantech sector. And those of you who know me know I have opinions on who is doing it right, and who is doing it wrong. So I thought it was about time to initiate the Cleantech Blog Power 10 Ranking of cleantech companies doing it right. Eligibility for inclusion in the ranking requires meeting a 6 point test. Suggestions for inclusions in future volumes are welcome. The 6 point test:
1. The company is energy or environmental technology related
2. I like their products
3. The market needs them
4. The company is smart about building their business
5. I’d like to own the company if I could (for the right price, of course!)
6. It is not already one of mine (my apologies to my friends Zenergy Power)
I have included cleantech companies big and small. Volume I surprisingly ended up with a lot more solar companies than I would have guessed, and no biofuels. Perhaps I really am a closet solar fanatic.
- Sharp Electronics – In solar, still the biggest, and still growing. Enough said.
- Det Norske Veritas – DNV is a massive 150 year old risk management firm. Their auditors underpin roughly half of the carbon markets. In carbon, audit and verification is everything. I could not leave them off.
- IBM (NYSE:IBM) – What IBM is doing in smart grid is very exciting. They are part of a large proportion of the smart grid implementations that are in process, and a huge proponent of open standards. Smart grid is to electricity what fiber is to telecom. It underpins everything.
- Applied Materials (NYSE:AMAT) – The future of photovoltaics lies in scaling thin film manufacturing process. Who better to do this than the dean of semiconductor capital equipment. I broke the story of Applied’s entry to solar in the blogosphere in 2006, and if anything underestimated how hard they were pushing. The whisper mill has been whirring that the installations of their plants are not on track. Not only do I have faith they will get there, I think it is critical to the industry that they do.
- Fuel Tech (NASDAQ:FTEK) – I wrote about them in 2007. The CEO John Norris is a long time friend and an excellent operator. Cleaning up coal is a huge business that needs to be done, and they do it well.
- Fat Spaniel – Distributed power, solar included, is a ticking time bomb without independent monitoring. Fat Spaniel does it the best.
- Smart Fuel Cells (XETRA:F3C.DE) – I wrote about them recently. I helped create a fuel cell business in 2002. This is the first fuel cell company in 5 years that has intrigued me. They actually ship product with solid gross margins. That is a start.
- First Solar (NASDAQ:FSLR) – Lowest cost producer in the photovoltaic business. Guaranteed to make the list until dethroned.
- Global Solar – I have been following this company for a long time. CIGS is very hard and has broken (or is currently breaking) hundreds of millions or billions of dollars worth of wannabes. This management team, led by Mike Gering, respects how hard it is. And since they have actually been running a pilot plant shipping product for 3 years, so we need to take note when they say they have cracked the manufacturing scale nut.
- Schott – Long a major player in crystalline silicon photovoltaics, amorphous silicon photovoltaics and concentrated solar thermal, where they are one of the top manufacturers of solar thermal receivers. That balance is unique, and exciting.
Neal Dikeman is a founding partner at Jane Capital Partners LLC, a boutique merchant bank advising strategic investors and startups in cleantech. He is founding contributor of Cleantech Blog, a Contributing Editor to Alt Energy Stocks, Chairman of Cleantech.org, and a blogger for CNET's Greentech blog.Labels: Applied Materials, cleantech, DNV, Fat Spaniel, First Solar, Fuel Tech, Global Solar, greentech, IBM, Schott, Sharp, Smart Fuel Cell
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Liquid (Green) Goodness for the 21 and Over
by Cristina Foung
My favorite green product of the week: VeeV Açaí Spirit
What is it?
VeeV is a liqueur (yep, in the US you have to be 21+ to drink it) made from açaí berries – these berries come from the Amazon and are known as a superfood full of nutrients and antioxidents (far higher than levels found in pomegranates or blueberries, although those are delicious too).
Why is it better?
First of all, if you’re going to drink, you might as well drink right. VeeV is made from 100% all natural ingredients (besides açaí, it’s got prickly pear and acerola cherry in there). It’s quite tasty straight up or mixed with other liquid organic treats (I’m a fan of adding a little lime juice and a few mint leaves, myself).
But more importantly, from berry to bottle, VeeV is green. The company ensures sustainable harvesting of the berries through the Sustainable Açaí Project (founded by the Sambazon, the makers of a delicious açaí smoothie). VeeV donates $1 from every bottle to the organization which goes to the farming communities, organic certification, and ensuring “wild harvesting” to preserve the surrounding rainforest biodiversity.
VeeV also offsets their carbon footprint with Climate Clean. VeeV’s distillery (which also distills Square One vodka) is the only one in the United States to be powered in part with renewable wind energy, not to mention VeeV’s distillation process uses 200% less energy than a traditional pot still. The company is also a member of a variety of social responsibility organizations, including Business for Social Responsibility and Co-op America, and they utilize a variety of recycled materials such as glass for their bottles and post-consumer waste for their shipping boxes.
Where can you find it?
Check out the VeeV website to find a retailer in Los Angeles, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Napa Valley. If you’re outside of California, you can order it online for $34.99 from Mel and Rose or for $68 from 1-877 Spirits.
And if beer or wine (or juice) is more your thing, check out “Organic, Local, Solar Powered Booze” over at the Green Home Huddle.
Besides her green products column on Cleantech Blog, Cristina is a passionate advocate for green living at the Green Home Huddle at Huddler.com, which focuses on electric cars, energy efficient appliances, and other green products.
Labels: cleantech, green tech, VeeV Acai Spirits, wind energy
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
The Secrets of Curitiba
By John Addison (4/30/08). Talking with the former Mayor of Curitiba and architect, Jamie Lerner, is like talking with Santiago Calatrava about designing buildings or having an imagined conversation with Frederick Olmsted about designing parks. Jamie Lerner designs cities. More accurately, he helps all create a strategic vision of cities for people, not cities for cars.
I talked with Jamie Lerner at the EcoCity World Summit after he delivered his keynote speech to political leaders and urban planners from over seventy countries.
As one of Brazil’s most popular mayors, Lerner was elected three times. He helped transform Curitiba from collection of shanty towns to a beautiful and sustainable city of about two million. At a time when many Latin Americans were disenchanted with their politicians, Jamie Lerner had a 92% approval rating. Following his success as mayor, he served as governor of the state of Parana for 8 years.
In the late sixties, Curitiba had a contest for the best urban design for their city’s future. In 1968, the city incorporated many of the ideas of young architect Lerner into the Curitiba Master Plan. In 1971, he was appointed mayor of Curitiba.
Facing a budget crisis, he had to search for big ideas that could be implemented with little money. He greened the city by involving citizens in planting 1.5 million trees. He solved the city’s flood problems by diverting water into lakes in newly created parks. He lifted some children from poverty by paying teenagers to keep the parks clean.
Educating and involving children are at the heart of solving most problems, from poverty to transportation, observes Governor Lerner.
Any leader will tell you that change is likely to be met with strong resistance. Thinking like an architect, Jamie Lerner wanted to beautify the city with pedestrian boulevards that were car-free. Shop owners were up in arms, fearing that the change would destroy them. Then Mayor Lerner convinced some to take part in a thirty day trial. Shoppers loved it. Before the trial ended, the merchants asked that the pedestrian zone be expanded to include more streets.
Like most cities, Mayor Lerner saw a city with clogged roads that divided where people lived from where they worked. Jamie’s wisdom sparkles with humor, “A car is like a mother-in-law, you must get along but not have her run your life.” He envisioned solidarity. Ecocity Videos
Lerner got the city moving. Curitiba could not afford the light-rail systems of Europe and the U.S. which often cost more than $20 million per mile. Curitiba invented rapid transit using buses.
Bus rapid transit is successful for many reasons. Payment is simple, fixed price regardless of distance traveled. For those without prepaid passes, payment is made when entering bus shelters not while boarding the bus. Curitiba’s shelters are inviting transparent tubes with LED lighting that allow all to wait in safety. Express buses travel on dedicated lanes on major streets. The buses are double articulated to carry up to 300 people per bus, and up to 50,000 per day. Buses arrive frequently. Inviting pedestrian walkways and bikeways bring people to the stations.
Since implementing bus rapid transit, Curitiba’s population of people has tripled, yet its population of cars has declined thirty percent. Governor Lerner explained that there were only 25,000 daily passenger rides on Curitiba buses in 1974. By 2008, there are more than 2.4 million passenger rides daily. In Curitiba, bus rapid transit is far more popular than cars. 85% of the systems use the rapid transit.
Jamie Lerner, the inspiring architect and governor, has been invited around the world to help with new urban design and transportation solutions.
Transit is getting more popular in the United States, with gasoline now at record prices in all fifty states. Increasingly the United States is adopting the secrets of Curitiba. In Los Angeles, when Richard Hunt, Executive Vice President of LAMTA, showed me the Orange Line, the lessons of Curitiba were everywhere. Stations were safe and inviting. Electronic signs displayed minutes until the arrival of the next bus. Fares were paid before boarding the bus, so that there would be no cue delays as people paid drivers. Articulated buses use dedicated bus pathways. During peak hours, buses arrive every three to seven minutes.
The Orange Line has been so popular that ridership not expected until 2020 was achieved in seven months. Soon LAMTA’s bus rapid transit system will cover 35 southern California cities and cover 420 miles.
Bus rapid transit invites millions in U.S. cities such as Las Vegas, Pittsburgh, Boston, Orlando, Miami, Oakland and Kansas City. As America falls into a recession while oil and gasoline prices soar, rapid transit and smart growth urban development provide solutions.
Jamie Lerner has an answer, “cidade não é problema; cidade é solucão.” The city is not a problem; the city is a solution. Cities like Curitiba are model solutions from driving less and enjoying life more.
Copyright (c) 2008 John Addison. Permission to reproduce this article is granted when this copyright notice is preserved. John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report.
Labels: bus rapid transit, clean fleet, cleantech, smart growth, urban development
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
The Other Solar Energy
by Richard T. StuebiTen days ago, I attended a
one-day symposium on climate change solutions at
Oberlin College. Speaking at the symposium was John O’Donnell of
Ausra.
Ausra is a leading player in the field of
concentrating solar power (CSP), which utilizes mirrors to focus sunlight on a heating element containing a fluid to produce a steam that drives a turbine to generate electricity. In other words,
solar thermal electricity – a field that was highly active in the 1980’s only to experience a 15+ year hiatus – is now coming back with a vengeance. Ausra claims that its CSP technology will soon be able to enable electricity production (in sunny desert climates, such as the southwestern U.S.) for about 8-10 cents/kwh.
Moreover, Mr. O'Donnell discussed how Ausra was working on integrating its CSP generation technology with thermal energy storage approaches, so that Ausra's powerplants would be able to produce electricity not just when the sun is high in the sky -- from 7 am to 6 pm -- but over a time window more closely aligned to utility peak loads, which stretch from about 10 am to 8 pm. He made the interesting observation that thermal energy storage, using oils and molten salts, is many times more efficient and cost-effective than large-scale energy storage with batteries.
With all of the hype (much of which deserved) for solar photovoltaics (PV), it's easy to forget about solar thermal approaches, and CSP particularly. Although not as universally applicable as PV, CSP can make a big dent in national energy supply, exploiting only a relatively small fraction of otherwise unusable desert land. In many cases, the gating factor for CSP deployment -- just as has been the case for wind energy -- will be the availability (or lack thereof) of transmission capacity to electricity load centers.
Mr. O'Donnell made the point that building roads in the U.S. was a local phenomenon subject to a patchwork of regulations and constraints -- until President Eisenhower broke down the barriers with the creation of the Interstate Highway System in the 1950's. He further noted that
high-voltage DC technologies now readily available -- such as those offered by
ABB (NYSE: ABB) -- could transmit large blocks of power across the whole continent with losses of only about 11% (excluding the conversion facilities at each terminal).
We in the cleantech community haven't talked much about it, instead focusing on the sexy/cool generation/storage/consumption technologies, but maybe it's time to ratchet the discussion about the so-called "smart grid" up to another level.
Richard T. Stuebi is the BP Fellow for Energy and Environmental Advancement at The Cleveland Foundation, and is also the Founder and President of NextWave Energy, Inc.Labels: cleantech, concentrated solar power, green tech, smart grid, solar energy, transmission
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
Only Renewables Gain (Week Ending 4/25) + Solar ETFs
Author: Mark Henwood Broad market indices were mixed this week and so were Camino’s PurePlay™ indices.
The Solar index followed last week's 7.0% gain with a small 0.2% decline. The index members were also mixed with 15 stocks increasing and 19 stocks declining. Most notable in the group was Centrosolar (C3O.DE) which gained 26.2% for the week. The stock jumped on the 23rd after the company announced provisional results that were above expectations. Sales for the quarter were up 86% over the previous year and EBITDA almost tripled. One analyst suggested the stock was undervalued.
Camino’s Renewable Electricity index managed a small 0.1% increase with 8 stocks climbing and 15 retreating.
Biofuels reversed last week’s 1.5% gain with a 1.9% loss. There were 7 advancing stocks to 8 stocks falling. Several of the ethanol stocks (AVR, PEIX, VSE) seemed to benefit from coverage by Oppenheimer whose analyst believes that overcapacity in the sector will resolve itself in the next 12 to 18 months.
Fuel Cells slumped 5.1% on 1 stock advancing and 6 stocks declining. FuelCell Energy (FCEL) reported a sale to Posco which was well received by the market resulting in a 11% price increase for the week. The sale involved delivering 25.6 MW at a contact value of USD 70 million, or over USD 2,700 / kW. Analysts believe this number is below cost but will help the company reduce its cost. After years of losses FuelCell needs to get it right and get its costs down so it can compete in a very competitive natural gas fired electric generation market.
Solar ETFs It came as no surprise that solar ETFs have been launched by Claymore (TAN) and VanEck (KWT). These two providers worked hard to differentiate their products by using slightly different company selections and weighting schemes. Unfortunately they didn’t decide to compete on cost coming out at an identical 65 basis points.
The result is indices that have a 74% overlap in their 27 constituents. Between the two indices the only company not included in Camino’s Solar index (34 constituents) is MEMC Electronics (WFR). By our computation in 2007 at most MEMC has a 25% exposure to solar so we’re not sure why Claymore included them. We don’t think they currently belong in our PurePlay™ index.
Going forward we expect these ETFs will have comparable performance and very high volatility. We routinely calculate Sharp ratios for our indices in an effort to assess the risk/reward profile of the sector. Over the last 365 days our solar index’s Sharpe ratio was 0.8 and over the last two years the ratio was 0.48, both periods measured against the 13wk T-Bill. Traditional fund managers would probably not find these values attractive particularly considering their high beta. That said, we think there are plenty of opportunities in the sustainable energy sector.
Mark is the founder of Camino Energy, an information provider specializing in globally traded sustainable energy stocks. He also is an investor in sustainable energy stocks. Mark has no positions in solar.Labels: AVR, biofuels, C3O.DE, cleantech, FCEL, fuel cell, green tech, KWT, PEIX, renewable electricity, solar, TAN, VSE
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
The Answer May Be Blowing in the Wind
by Cristina Foung
My favorite green product of the week: Southwest Windpower Skystream 3.7 Wind Turbine
What is it?
The Skystream 3.7 is a residential wind generator that hooks into grid-tied homes. It has an estimated energy production of 400 kWh per month (at 12 MPH or 5.4 m/s). Its rotor measures 12 feet and towers are available ranging from 34 to 70 feet.
Why is it better?
The wind industry, ranging from offshore wind projects to residential turbines, has been steadily growing. Southwest Windpower manufactures the Skystream 3.7 which is the first all-inclusive wind generator with controls and an inverter built right in.
For the average single family home, it can produce about half of all electricity needs (or course that depends both on how much electricity you use and the average wind speeds in your area). But that’s not too shabby in terms of reducing your carbon footprint.
I also hear Skystreams are quiet, easy to install (or easy to work with dealers to get them installed), run in very low winds, and are easy to maintain. All good things, for sure. I can’t wait to stop by Robin Wilson’s house in San Francisco to see hers in action.
Where can you find it?
Southwest Windpower has a network of dealers worldwide that retail the Skystream 3.7. See the website for information on where to buy. A complete ready-to-install package with a 34 foot tower costs $8,725.00.
Besides her green products column on Cleantech Blog, Cristina is a passionate advocate for green living at the Green Home Huddle at Huddler.com, which focuses on electric cars, energy efficient appliances, and other green products.
Labels: cleantech, green power, green tech, Southwest Windpower, wind energy, wind turbine
Read more!
Stumble It!
Save to del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
Check it Out on Cleantech.org
California High-Speed Rail
By John Addison (Earth Day 2008). Fiona Ma was nervous about getting on a train that was about to set a world speed record. Just before Easter 2007 in the countryside outside Paris, she saw the people lining the green and flowered route. The French were flying flags, waving, and cheering. Less reassuring were those of faith who crossed themselves as the new train accelerated past 200 miles per hour. The people blurred into a collage of spring time colors. The train vibrated much as when a jet plane roars down the runway and starts to ascend. Fiona hoped that this train would not leave the tracks.
At three hundred miles per hour, the train was still on the tracks, accelerating. Out the window, only one image was distinct. A plane that was filming the historic event flew along side the train. Surrealistically, Fiona and the eleven other dignitaries could see what was filmed from the plane on a screen inside the train. Another LCD displayed their world record - 357 miles per hour on a train. Everyone cheered. The train slowed over the next few miles. Fiona took a deep breath, exhaled, and smiled; she took part in history.
These days, Fiona Ma, needs to find new courage every day. As California Majority Whip, she takes on the tough issues and is a force in making things better. For every important issue, there are vested interests on all sides whether it is better health care, better transportation, stopping global warming, or keeping California’s $1.7 trillion economy moving forward. Among her many responsibilities, Assemblywoman Ma chairs the Legislative High Speed Rail Caucus.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) believe they just may have the answer — an 800 mile statewide high-speed rail system that would serve more than 32 million passengers per year by 2020. Because the rail will be powered by electricity, and because of the efficiency of moving up to 1,200 people per train, CO2 emissions may be reduced by 12 billion pounds per year by 2020, and 18 billion pounds by 2030.
If you have ever been stuck in gridlock trying to get to work between Orange County and LA, or between San Jose and San Francisco, you will appreciate that the high-speed rail would add the equivalent of a 12-lane superhighway. Express high-speed trains will take one hour and fifteen minutes between San Diego and Los Angeles, and a little over two and one-half hours from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
CHSRA is upgrading their 2020 forecast to 68 million, from 32 million, and 94 to 117 million passengers by 2030. As Hall of Fame baseball great Yogi Berra observed, "It is difficult to forecast, especially about the future." 2020 annual passengers will depend on California voters approving the November bond, matching funding, and regulatory approval. CHSRA forecasts are achievable. By comparison, Europe already provides 250 million annual rides, and Japan over 300 million.
High-speed rail systems, using the new grade-separated high speed lines planned for California have not had one fatality in 41 years. Neither automobiles nor airplanes can match the safety of high speed rail.
California high-speed rail addresses a number of goals. Our current highways cannot support the planned growth to 50 million people. Only the USA and China use more oil than California. If there are more price hikes, or if supply is disrupted by war or terrorism, where will California get its needed billions of gallons of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel? Draughts, likely caused by climate change, are already hurting California agriculture and industry. California is unlikely to meet its targeted reduction of greenhouse gases without high-speed rail. Especially damaging are the greenhouse gas emissions from short-haul air travel. The per passenger greenhouse gas emissions of flying from LA to SF are equivalent of each person driving solo in a large SUV. Carbon Calculator
Although California faces rush-hour gridlock without high-speed rail, a project with a starting price north of $33 billion is certain to face some opposition.
With HSR, it’s about money. Proposed is that Californians approve a bond of $10 billion for one-third of the cost. One-third would be matched by federal funds and one-third by private investment. Although some anticipate cost overruns, more are worried that the price of not acting will be much higher. Because California is implementing AB32, the high-speed rail may be able to sell carbon credits to help finance the project and operations.
Since high-speed rail will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 18 billion pounds per year, you would think that all environment groups would support the measure. While there has been some support, the Sierra Club opposed disrupting environmentally sensitive areas and areas of wildlife migration, specifically in the Los Banos area. Beyond some local opposition, however, the national Sierra Club strongly supports high-speed rail.
Southwest Airlines successfully sued and stopped high-speed rail in Texas in the 1990s. Texas is now staring at a $183 billion price for the Trans Texas Corridor as a 4,000-mile-long stretch of 10 auto lanes and six railroad tracks for high-speed freight and commuter trains. This is over twenty times higher than if they had not been stopped from implementing high-speed rail years ago. Opponents of high-speed rail carefully follow Mark Twain’s advice, “Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.”
Airlines may not oppose high-speed rail. Today, Southwest cannot get the expanded gates and routes in California due to lack of airport expansion everywhere from San Diego to Los Angeles to San Francisco. Some airlines may support high-speed rail as it will more easily bring people to SFO and be part of bringing passengers to other airports more quickly.
Most are optimistic that voters will approve a bond issue for high-speed rail. Voters are faced with record gasoline prices and concern about California’s economic future. More people are commuting longer distances as they are unable to sell their homes in today’s difficult real estate market.
The major concerns are addressed in new legislation proposed by Assemblywomen Cathleen Galgiani and Fiona Ma - AB 3034 “Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century.” The governor wanted more private funding of the rail. The new bill allows for private rail funding provided by law. The Sierra Club does not want a Los Banos station. The new bill provides: “Preserving wildlife corridors and mitigating impacts to wildlife movement, where feasible as determined by the authority…” Also the bill, “Prohibits a high-speed train station between Gilroy and Merced.”
On April 14, the legislative committee approved the bill with 10 voting yes and no one opposing. It is expected to get the approval of the full Assembly and Senate and the Governor. Read the Bill and Post your Comment
Even if voters approve the bond, high-speed rail will not move forward unless there are matching federal funds. Congressman Jim Costa believes that will happen. As he states in his op-ed: “Congress has begun to take action to help make the idea of high-speed rail in California a reality. Two bills I introduced, HR 4122 the American Investment in Safe, Reliable High Speed Rail Act and HR 4123, the High-Speed Rail Authority Development and Formation Act, will help bring federal dollars to California to invest in the proposed high-speed rail system. The Senate also passed S. 294, which will help high-speed rail development in America…. Overall, for every dollar invested in this system, we will see two dollars in return.” Capitol Weekly Article
Will Californians park their cars and ride the rails? Last year, LAMTA carried 64 million riders. In the Bay Area, BART carried 47 million riders. With gasoline prices rocketing, Amtrak ridership on the Capitol Corridor is up 16% this March over a year ago; on the San Joaquins it has jumped 27%. Although Californians will not exclusively ride rails and rapid transit, but they will ride more and drive less. In fact, high speed rail will integrate with public transportation. All 25 HSR stations will be multi-modal. For example, to get to Sacramento I currently take BART to Richmond, then get on Amtrak in the same station.
As a manager covering several states, I used to travel weekly on airplanes. Point-to-point always required at least four hours to get to the airport, get thru security, taxi in the runway, fly, taxi in the runway, then rent a car. In
