By SUNIL RAGHU
NEW DELHI -- India aims to install 20 million square meters of solar thermal panels and 20 million solar-powered lights as part of a plan to add 20 gigawatt of solar-based power generation capacity by 2022, the country's renewable energy minister said Monday.
"We propose to provide up to 90% support for setting up solar power plants," Farooq Abdullah said at the launch of the National Solar Mission.
"In many other solar applications, where the initial cost is still very high, we're considering proposals for providing up to a 30% grant in aid," he said.
Currently, about 10% of India's total installed generation capacity of 155.859 gigawatt is renewable-sources based. India plans to increase its renewable energy generation capacity in order to reduce its heavy dependence on coal and cut emissions.
Mr. Abdullah later told reporters that within next three years India plans to add 1,300 MW solar power, out of which 1,100 MW will be grid-connected and 200 MW will be off-grid.
"This is our first benchmark," he said. "If we achieve this, achieving the remaining target would not be impossible."
State-run power producer NTPC Ltd.'s power trading arm, NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Ltd., will purchase solar power at the rate fixed by power tariff regulator Central Electricity Regulatory Commission for the first three years, Abdullah said. He didn't say how much of the solar power generated will be purchased by NTPC unit.
NTPC's unit will bundle four units of thermal power with each unit of solar power to bring down the cost of power to around 5 rupees per unit or 5.5 rupees per unit. One unit is equal to one kilowatt hour.
The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission in September said power produced by solar photovoltaic plants could have a tariff of 18.80 rupees ($0.4) per kilowatt hour. The power produced by coal-fired plants located at the pit head site costs around 1.70 rupees per kilowatt hour while imported coal-based power costs up to 2.60 rupees per kilowatt hour.
Earlier Monday, in his speech on the launch of the National Solar Mission, India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that the solar mission was "no doubt ambitious, but doable."
"In the mean time we may need to explore hybrid solutions combining solar power generation with gas, biomass or even coal-based power," he said.
Write to Sunil Raghu at Sunil.Raghu@dowjones.com
Tuesday, 12 January 2010
Fusion breakthrough a magic bullet for energy crisis?
By Pat Pilcher
Monday, 11 January 2010
Sceptics and environmentalists may be locked into endless arguments around global warming, but there's little debate that an energy crisis looms large.
A Florida based research team, however, may have found a solution to the world's energy woes that could provide a clean and near limitless supply of energy in as little as a decade.
The Energy Crisis
Global energy production and consumption is a complex beast and many nations remain heavily reliant on a lethal mix of oil and coal, both of which are finite, and have huge impacts on the environment.
While there is much conjecture on just how long oil and coal reserves will last, the stark reality is that they will both eventually run out.
In the 1950s, many thought atomic energy would allow humanity to dodge the energy crisis, with newly nuclear fission reactors providing an affordable and near limitless supply of energy.
More recently however, incidents such as the Chernobyl meltdown, the growing pile of incredibly toxic nuclear waste and the spectre of rogue nations manufacturing weapons- grade plutonium have taken the shine off nuclear fission.
With the energy requirements of developed nations continuing to grow, and developing nations gaining a serious appetite for energy consumption, demand will soon outstrip supply, and many predict that massive economic and social impacts are probable.
The fusion magic bullet?
Thankfully, a new type of nuclear fusion energy generation technology holds the potential to provide a cheap and clean source of energy without toxic radioactive waste or the environmental impacts of oil or coal.
Unlike nuclear fission, where the nucleus of an atom is split to release energy, nuclear fusion uses the same process as our sun and works by fusing atoms together to release of large amounts of energy.
Nuclear fusion generates energy leaving little to nothing in the way of by-products, and uses fuels that are plentiful but far less dangerous than the uranium used with conventional nuclear fission reactors.
Whilst physicists have generated nuclear fusion reactions, doing has involved creating the earthbound equivalent of a small star, which in turn has required ultra-strong magnetic fields to contain superheated gases many times hotter than the surface of the sun.
Unfortunately, doing so has tended to consume almost as much energy as was being generated by the fusion reaction. Creating a nuclear fusion reactor that is commercially viable and able to output surplus energy beyond sustaining its own reaction was thought to be at least 20-30 years away.
Thanks to work being done by a group of physicists at the University of Florida, all things fusion related could however be set to change in as little as a decade.
Where conventional fission reactors use uranium which can be refined to make nuclear weapons, the University of Florida's concept uses hydrogen and an isotope of boron called Boron 11, both of which are abundant on earth and can't be used to make atomic weapons.
When fusion reactions occur in the heart of a star such as our sun, atoms are subject to intense heat and pressure which stops the atoms from repelling each other, allowing them to fuse.
To date, experimental fusion projects have largely been focused on generating intense heat so they can fuse, and containing the super hot gases from this reaction consumes most if not all of the energy being produced by the fusion reaction.
The University of Florida have taken a different tack, by putting hydrogen and boron fuel into an accelerator that fires them towards each other at incredibly high velocities. When the hydrogen and boron 11 atoms smash into each other, they fuse, producing fast moving helium nuclei whose motion is converted into electricity.
This new process is clean, highly efficient and most important of all, simple. The output of the new reactor is electricity with its by-product being the same helium gas used to make voices squeaky and party balloons float, so there's no toxic radioactive waste to dispose of.
Initial calculations also show that this new type of fusion generation could produce clean electricity at similar levels but far more cheaply than oil or coal.
Because the reactor also operates using relatively simple engineering principles (especially compared to the current crop of fusion reactors), commercialising it is likely to involve significantly shorter time-frames than other fusion technologies.
Although technology is still however very experimental and has yet to be fully proven, a feasibility study into this new fusion process has been kicked off, and if it is found to be viable, it could become commercially available in as little as a decade, here's hoping.
Source: NZ Herald
Monday, 11 January 2010
Sceptics and environmentalists may be locked into endless arguments around global warming, but there's little debate that an energy crisis looms large.
A Florida based research team, however, may have found a solution to the world's energy woes that could provide a clean and near limitless supply of energy in as little as a decade.
The Energy Crisis
Global energy production and consumption is a complex beast and many nations remain heavily reliant on a lethal mix of oil and coal, both of which are finite, and have huge impacts on the environment.
While there is much conjecture on just how long oil and coal reserves will last, the stark reality is that they will both eventually run out.
In the 1950s, many thought atomic energy would allow humanity to dodge the energy crisis, with newly nuclear fission reactors providing an affordable and near limitless supply of energy.
More recently however, incidents such as the Chernobyl meltdown, the growing pile of incredibly toxic nuclear waste and the spectre of rogue nations manufacturing weapons- grade plutonium have taken the shine off nuclear fission.
With the energy requirements of developed nations continuing to grow, and developing nations gaining a serious appetite for energy consumption, demand will soon outstrip supply, and many predict that massive economic and social impacts are probable.
The fusion magic bullet?
Thankfully, a new type of nuclear fusion energy generation technology holds the potential to provide a cheap and clean source of energy without toxic radioactive waste or the environmental impacts of oil or coal.
Unlike nuclear fission, where the nucleus of an atom is split to release energy, nuclear fusion uses the same process as our sun and works by fusing atoms together to release of large amounts of energy.
Nuclear fusion generates energy leaving little to nothing in the way of by-products, and uses fuels that are plentiful but far less dangerous than the uranium used with conventional nuclear fission reactors.
Whilst physicists have generated nuclear fusion reactions, doing has involved creating the earthbound equivalent of a small star, which in turn has required ultra-strong magnetic fields to contain superheated gases many times hotter than the surface of the sun.
Unfortunately, doing so has tended to consume almost as much energy as was being generated by the fusion reaction. Creating a nuclear fusion reactor that is commercially viable and able to output surplus energy beyond sustaining its own reaction was thought to be at least 20-30 years away.
Thanks to work being done by a group of physicists at the University of Florida, all things fusion related could however be set to change in as little as a decade.
Where conventional fission reactors use uranium which can be refined to make nuclear weapons, the University of Florida's concept uses hydrogen and an isotope of boron called Boron 11, both of which are abundant on earth and can't be used to make atomic weapons.
When fusion reactions occur in the heart of a star such as our sun, atoms are subject to intense heat and pressure which stops the atoms from repelling each other, allowing them to fuse.
To date, experimental fusion projects have largely been focused on generating intense heat so they can fuse, and containing the super hot gases from this reaction consumes most if not all of the energy being produced by the fusion reaction.
The University of Florida have taken a different tack, by putting hydrogen and boron fuel into an accelerator that fires them towards each other at incredibly high velocities. When the hydrogen and boron 11 atoms smash into each other, they fuse, producing fast moving helium nuclei whose motion is converted into electricity.
This new process is clean, highly efficient and most important of all, simple. The output of the new reactor is electricity with its by-product being the same helium gas used to make voices squeaky and party balloons float, so there's no toxic radioactive waste to dispose of.
Initial calculations also show that this new type of fusion generation could produce clean electricity at similar levels but far more cheaply than oil or coal.
Because the reactor also operates using relatively simple engineering principles (especially compared to the current crop of fusion reactors), commercialising it is likely to involve significantly shorter time-frames than other fusion technologies.
Although technology is still however very experimental and has yet to be fully proven, a feasibility study into this new fusion process has been kicked off, and if it is found to be viable, it could become commercially available in as little as a decade, here's hoping.
Source: NZ Herald
Petrol engines will rule for at least another decade - top GM executive
The car industry may be all atwitter with talk of plug-in cars and hybrid engines. But there was a cold, hard assessment on the ongoing dominance of petrol today from Bob Lutz, the veteran vice-chairman for product design at General Motors.
Lutz, a top lieutenant to GM's chairman Ed Whitacre, predicted that more than 90% of the automotive industry's sales will continue to be petrol-driven vehicles for at least another decade - because the vast majority of motorists simply will not pay extra for the more expensive technology of eco-friendly cars.
"For the next ten years or so, we're going to be heavily dependant on the internal combustion engine," Lutz told a group of reporters, including The Guardian, at the Detroit motor show. "It's going to be years and years before [alternatively powered vehicles] even make up 10% of the US market."
Unless the cost of fuel at the pump rockets, Lutz said the cost of cars such as GM's own widely hyped Chevrolet Volt, which can generate its own electricity on the go, are simply going to be too high to snatch significant market share.
The problem, he argues, is straightforward economics - parts and components for electric vehicles are not being manufactured in sufficient volumes to make them competitive. If a manufacturer set out today to invent the internal combustion engine, Lutz said petrol-powered cars would initally cost "$200,000 each" because of a lack of large-scale factories to make, say, piston shafts.
"Other than the 5% of the public who will willingly make a sacrifice to buy green vehicles, the other 95% will ask 'what am I getting? What's the deal?'" said Lutz. "They're not going to spend an extra $5,000 to $6,000 on technology they don't need and don't particularly care about."
A 77-year-old industry authority who was a top figure at Chrysler during the 1990s, Lutz has never been one to hide his opinions - two years ago, he caused a raising of collective eyebrows by describing global warming as "a total crock of shit".
His views have since mellowed slightly - and curiously, he has some sympathy for a graduated tax on petrol to encourage the shift towards greener motoring. Although he stopped short of endorsing such a policy, he said a government commitment to increase fuel tax by, say, 25 cents per gallon annually, would create visibility both for consumers and carmakers.
"It would have the benefit of giving automobile companies a planning base and of giving families who own a vehicle a planning base," said Lutz, suggesting that carbuying couples might say "look, sweetheart, we'd better go one size down because we know what fuel prices are going to do".
That's a considerably more radical suggestion than the Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is willing to countenance. Visiting the Detroit show, Pelosi waxed lyrical about using "the soil, the wind and the sun" as fuel, adding that green technology was "a moral issue if you believe, as we do, that this planet is God's creation".
But when asked about the possibility of raising petrol taxes, she was blunt: "There certainly is an advocacy for such a position. But it certainly doesn't have a majority in the United States Congress at this time."
Incidentally, there are those who feel that America's leading carmakers were short-sighted in the run-up to the global economic crisis in concentrating too hard on gas-guzzling trucks and sports utility vehicles, rather than moving faster towards smaller vehicles. Lutz, who is the top four executives at America's biggest carmaker, isn't having anything of it, pointing out that nobody anticipated the volatility of fuel prices over the past two years - and that the gestation period of a new model of car is at least 36 months.
"People say 'those dumb Detroit companies just didn't get it - they just kept building trucks as oil prices rose'," said Lutz. "Some of your colleagues think designing and producing new cars is like putting the evening's edition together and then printing it the next day."
Lutz, a top lieutenant to GM's chairman Ed Whitacre, predicted that more than 90% of the automotive industry's sales will continue to be petrol-driven vehicles for at least another decade - because the vast majority of motorists simply will not pay extra for the more expensive technology of eco-friendly cars.
"For the next ten years or so, we're going to be heavily dependant on the internal combustion engine," Lutz told a group of reporters, including The Guardian, at the Detroit motor show. "It's going to be years and years before [alternatively powered vehicles] even make up 10% of the US market."
Unless the cost of fuel at the pump rockets, Lutz said the cost of cars such as GM's own widely hyped Chevrolet Volt, which can generate its own electricity on the go, are simply going to be too high to snatch significant market share.
The problem, he argues, is straightforward economics - parts and components for electric vehicles are not being manufactured in sufficient volumes to make them competitive. If a manufacturer set out today to invent the internal combustion engine, Lutz said petrol-powered cars would initally cost "$200,000 each" because of a lack of large-scale factories to make, say, piston shafts.
"Other than the 5% of the public who will willingly make a sacrifice to buy green vehicles, the other 95% will ask 'what am I getting? What's the deal?'" said Lutz. "They're not going to spend an extra $5,000 to $6,000 on technology they don't need and don't particularly care about."
A 77-year-old industry authority who was a top figure at Chrysler during the 1990s, Lutz has never been one to hide his opinions - two years ago, he caused a raising of collective eyebrows by describing global warming as "a total crock of shit".
His views have since mellowed slightly - and curiously, he has some sympathy for a graduated tax on petrol to encourage the shift towards greener motoring. Although he stopped short of endorsing such a policy, he said a government commitment to increase fuel tax by, say, 25 cents per gallon annually, would create visibility both for consumers and carmakers.
"It would have the benefit of giving automobile companies a planning base and of giving families who own a vehicle a planning base," said Lutz, suggesting that carbuying couples might say "look, sweetheart, we'd better go one size down because we know what fuel prices are going to do".
That's a considerably more radical suggestion than the Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is willing to countenance. Visiting the Detroit show, Pelosi waxed lyrical about using "the soil, the wind and the sun" as fuel, adding that green technology was "a moral issue if you believe, as we do, that this planet is God's creation".
But when asked about the possibility of raising petrol taxes, she was blunt: "There certainly is an advocacy for such a position. But it certainly doesn't have a majority in the United States Congress at this time."
Incidentally, there are those who feel that America's leading carmakers were short-sighted in the run-up to the global economic crisis in concentrating too hard on gas-guzzling trucks and sports utility vehicles, rather than moving faster towards smaller vehicles. Lutz, who is the top four executives at America's biggest carmaker, isn't having anything of it, pointing out that nobody anticipated the volatility of fuel prices over the past two years - and that the gestation period of a new model of car is at least 36 months.
"People say 'those dumb Detroit companies just didn't get it - they just kept building trucks as oil prices rose'," said Lutz. "Some of your colleagues think designing and producing new cars is like putting the evening's edition together and then printing it the next day."
Sweeep frustrated in efforts to get loans
An award winning recycling company that wants to recover valuable metals from old TV screens by investing in new processing technology has been frustrated by the reluctance of its bank to lend it any more money .
By Richard TylerPublished: 12:01AM GMT 12 Jan 2010
Sweeep, based in Sittingbourne, Kent, has recycled 20,000 tonnes of electronic and electrical waste that can no longer be sent to landfill and had planned to expand to take advantage of the piles of old TV sets piling up across the UK to extract valuable lead, copper, steel, aluminium and precious metals from circuits boards.
But attempts to secure the £1.5m it needs to buy the innovative British-made waste treatment equipment stalled when its bank, Barclays, baulked at extending further credit lines to the profitable company, which made sales of £5m last year and has £2m of outstanding borrowings.
Pam Watts, who founded the business with her husband Patrick, a former professional touring car driver, in 1997, said: “We buy very expensive, innovative and complicated machinery that’s at the forefront of the recycling sector. We employ it to create a profit and as soon as it’s established Patrick is on to the next project that will require more investment. For the recycling sector to move forward it needs support from banks that trust us to get on with the job.”
She added: “We are now relying on a 25 year old partnership with Barclays which has been pretty exemplary and we are hoping that will be taken into account.”
Sweeep have been finalists in Barclays’ own green business awards and have been endorsed by Tory leader David Cameron, who visited their recycling facility in 2008.
Mrs Watts said they began talking to their bank manager early last year but the application was only submitted in November. Barclays said it would be considered by its asset finance arm, but this may now switch to its team that considers Government-backed Enterprise Finance Guarantee loan applications.
Mrs Watts said: “[Lord] Mandelson is telling the public both the government and banks are supporting industry and small businesses financially and Britain is fully behind the green revolution and reducing carbon emission. Sweeep ticks almost every box in all of this.
“We are offering innovation and a new project to reduce landfill and recover lead from hazardous old style TV glass. We have a proven track record, years of experience, no hidden failures in the past, a profitable business, can demonstrate our ability to service debt comfortably, employ over 100 unskilled workers and have the confidence to offer our banks personal guarantees. Yet somehow getting hold of this financial support is like catching mist.”
Barclays said it was “exploring all possible options” to help finance the company. A spokesperson said: “Sweeep is a valued client and quality business, with a strong track record and excellent prospects for growth. However, the business has already borrowed very heavily, and has utilised virtually all of its available security for this borrowing.
“Therefore we need to be innovative in how we approach new lending; with high borrowing comes high risk, for us and for the business. We are currently working through options with Sweeep including asset based lending and an Enterprise Finance Guarantee loan to try and find a way forward.
“In cases such as this, where taking on more debt is becoming increasingly risky for the size of the business, many clients we work with will instead seek out new, long term investment, as it spreads the risk and takes the focus away from servicing loans.”
By Richard TylerPublished: 12:01AM GMT 12 Jan 2010
Sweeep, based in Sittingbourne, Kent, has recycled 20,000 tonnes of electronic and electrical waste that can no longer be sent to landfill and had planned to expand to take advantage of the piles of old TV sets piling up across the UK to extract valuable lead, copper, steel, aluminium and precious metals from circuits boards.
But attempts to secure the £1.5m it needs to buy the innovative British-made waste treatment equipment stalled when its bank, Barclays, baulked at extending further credit lines to the profitable company, which made sales of £5m last year and has £2m of outstanding borrowings.
Pam Watts, who founded the business with her husband Patrick, a former professional touring car driver, in 1997, said: “We buy very expensive, innovative and complicated machinery that’s at the forefront of the recycling sector. We employ it to create a profit and as soon as it’s established Patrick is on to the next project that will require more investment. For the recycling sector to move forward it needs support from banks that trust us to get on with the job.”
She added: “We are now relying on a 25 year old partnership with Barclays which has been pretty exemplary and we are hoping that will be taken into account.”
Sweeep have been finalists in Barclays’ own green business awards and have been endorsed by Tory leader David Cameron, who visited their recycling facility in 2008.
Mrs Watts said they began talking to their bank manager early last year but the application was only submitted in November. Barclays said it would be considered by its asset finance arm, but this may now switch to its team that considers Government-backed Enterprise Finance Guarantee loan applications.
Mrs Watts said: “[Lord] Mandelson is telling the public both the government and banks are supporting industry and small businesses financially and Britain is fully behind the green revolution and reducing carbon emission. Sweeep ticks almost every box in all of this.
“We are offering innovation and a new project to reduce landfill and recover lead from hazardous old style TV glass. We have a proven track record, years of experience, no hidden failures in the past, a profitable business, can demonstrate our ability to service debt comfortably, employ over 100 unskilled workers and have the confidence to offer our banks personal guarantees. Yet somehow getting hold of this financial support is like catching mist.”
Barclays said it was “exploring all possible options” to help finance the company. A spokesperson said: “Sweeep is a valued client and quality business, with a strong track record and excellent prospects for growth. However, the business has already borrowed very heavily, and has utilised virtually all of its available security for this borrowing.
“Therefore we need to be innovative in how we approach new lending; with high borrowing comes high risk, for us and for the business. We are currently working through options with Sweeep including asset based lending and an Enterprise Finance Guarantee loan to try and find a way forward.
“In cases such as this, where taking on more debt is becoming increasingly risky for the size of the business, many clients we work with will instead seek out new, long term investment, as it spreads the risk and takes the focus away from servicing loans.”
Electric Cars' Range Is Expected to Vary
Robert Lutz, General Motors Co.'s vice chairman, said Monday that the first buyers of electric vehicles may be unpleasantly surprised by how quickly the batteries run down during certain driving conditions.
GM plans to launch its battery-powered Chevrolet Volt in California later this year, and said Monday that Michigan would be the second launch state in 2010. The auto maker has promised the car will travel 40 miles on battery power alone, and then draw from a gasoline engine to keep the vehicle going once the charge has been spent.
Mr. Lutz said he drove one of the early vehicles for a weekend recently and found that, during a Michigan winter, the battery's range was only 28 miles.
Weather, driving conditions and drivers' behavior can cause the battery range to vary far more than mileage on a traditional vehicle.
GM is banking on the Volt to help create a green image similar to Toyota Motor Corp.'s success with its Prius hybrid. —Sharon Terlep
GM plans to launch its battery-powered Chevrolet Volt in California later this year, and said Monday that Michigan would be the second launch state in 2010. The auto maker has promised the car will travel 40 miles on battery power alone, and then draw from a gasoline engine to keep the vehicle going once the charge has been spent.
Mr. Lutz said he drove one of the early vehicles for a weekend recently and found that, during a Michigan winter, the battery's range was only 28 miles.
Weather, driving conditions and drivers' behavior can cause the battery range to vary far more than mileage on a traditional vehicle.
GM is banking on the Volt to help create a green image similar to Toyota Motor Corp.'s success with its Prius hybrid. —Sharon Terlep
PV Crystalox - Solar stock
Solar power stocks risk getting short shrift on grey, near-zero-degree days in January. So it proved with PV Crystalox Solar, the Oxfordshire-based maker of silicon wafers used to produce solar cells. Shares in the mid-cap company — one of the London stock market’s dozen worst performers in 2009 — failed to budge, despite a year-end trading update that showed shipments over the past four months modestly better than forecast.
Ironically, the improvement in sales — largely in Germany and Japan — can be credited to the phenomenon that has brought the company’s shares so low: the collapse in solar cell prices. With prices down 45 per cent last year (amid static demand and increased Chinese supply), the economics of solar generation have become much more favourable — closer to the point of “grid parity”, where the cost of consumers producing their own power from roof-top panels is the same as buying it in from the grid.
PV Crystalox’s immediate appeal is that, fuelled by government initiatives to meet long-term renewable energy targets, solar installations in Europe are forecast to rise strongly in 2010: to 10.8 GW from 6.8 GW in 2009 on usually reliable industry estimates. The concern is whether solar prices will get any worse.
However, PV Crystalox remained profitable even at last year’s depressed prices (a forecast £40 million at the pre-tax level), sits on £56 million of net cash, has a strong customer base and, through a new manufacturing plant in Germany, is less reliant on buying silicon from elsewhere. Those strengths suggest that the low rating of shares — about nine times 2010 earnings — owes more to the lack of a London-listed peer group than its medium-term prospects.
At 68¼p, buy.
Ironically, the improvement in sales — largely in Germany and Japan — can be credited to the phenomenon that has brought the company’s shares so low: the collapse in solar cell prices. With prices down 45 per cent last year (amid static demand and increased Chinese supply), the economics of solar generation have become much more favourable — closer to the point of “grid parity”, where the cost of consumers producing their own power from roof-top panels is the same as buying it in from the grid.
PV Crystalox’s immediate appeal is that, fuelled by government initiatives to meet long-term renewable energy targets, solar installations in Europe are forecast to rise strongly in 2010: to 10.8 GW from 6.8 GW in 2009 on usually reliable industry estimates. The concern is whether solar prices will get any worse.
However, PV Crystalox remained profitable even at last year’s depressed prices (a forecast £40 million at the pre-tax level), sits on £56 million of net cash, has a strong customer base and, through a new manufacturing plant in Germany, is less reliant on buying silicon from elsewhere. Those strengths suggest that the low rating of shares — about nine times 2010 earnings — owes more to the lack of a London-listed peer group than its medium-term prospects.
At 68¼p, buy.
White House climate adviser offers hope after Copenhagen
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 22.11 GMT
More considered verdicts of what was -- and what was not - achieved at the Copenhagen climate change summit are beginning to come out. In this the first assessment of the new year from the Obama administration, Carol Browner, the White House environment and climate change adviser, admits that the summit did not live up to expectations. Those who went to Copenhagen hoping for a binding legal treaty, or even an operational agreement, did not get what they wanted.
"But what is important is that you now have China and India among the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gas emissions agreeing that it is time to do something," she said today.
Browner's silver lining-in-the-cloud assessment came in a 30-minute White House video chat, which cut out a little early because of a coughing fit. It was the first of four web chats on foreign policy, the economy and other matters.
Some US commentators have argued that the last-minute deal Obama put together between the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa would be just as effective as a treaty because it includes the world's greatest emitters.
Browner did not go that far. She said the focus still had to be on reaching a deal with the full force of international law. The Obama deal -- which left out Europe and more than 180 other countries that were represented at Copenhagen -- was just a step in that direction, Browner said.
"It's an important step and with time the world will find its way to a binding international treaty."
She went on to say that America still needed to do its share by putting laws in place for energy reform.
The reminder is important. The Senate has yet to take up a climate change bill -- in part because Democratic leaders are reluctant to take on a huge battle with Republicans immediately after the bruising confrontations over healthcare. They also have an eye on the mid-term elections next November. It might be smarter politics to come out with a jobs plan for the Democrats to campaign on next autumn.
The Democratic leadership could get even more skittish next week. The Alaska Republican, Lisa Murkowski, is pushing for a vote on 20 January to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. A spokesman for the senator -- who was on her way back from Afghanistan today -- said she was determined to go ahead. A vote against EPA regulation could cast the whole issue of regulating emissions in a negative light.
Some environmental organisations fear it would make it all but impossible to get to climate change legislation this year.
Browner did not get into a timetable for legislation, or the specifics of Murkowski's efforts to block the EPA. But it's interesting to note that the White House is not entirely letting up the pressure on the Senate to act.
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 22.11 GMT
More considered verdicts of what was -- and what was not - achieved at the Copenhagen climate change summit are beginning to come out. In this the first assessment of the new year from the Obama administration, Carol Browner, the White House environment and climate change adviser, admits that the summit did not live up to expectations. Those who went to Copenhagen hoping for a binding legal treaty, or even an operational agreement, did not get what they wanted.
"But what is important is that you now have China and India among the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gas emissions agreeing that it is time to do something," she said today.
Browner's silver lining-in-the-cloud assessment came in a 30-minute White House video chat, which cut out a little early because of a coughing fit. It was the first of four web chats on foreign policy, the economy and other matters.
Some US commentators have argued that the last-minute deal Obama put together between the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa would be just as effective as a treaty because it includes the world's greatest emitters.
Browner did not go that far. She said the focus still had to be on reaching a deal with the full force of international law. The Obama deal -- which left out Europe and more than 180 other countries that were represented at Copenhagen -- was just a step in that direction, Browner said.
"It's an important step and with time the world will find its way to a binding international treaty."
She went on to say that America still needed to do its share by putting laws in place for energy reform.
The reminder is important. The Senate has yet to take up a climate change bill -- in part because Democratic leaders are reluctant to take on a huge battle with Republicans immediately after the bruising confrontations over healthcare. They also have an eye on the mid-term elections next November. It might be smarter politics to come out with a jobs plan for the Democrats to campaign on next autumn.
The Democratic leadership could get even more skittish next week. The Alaska Republican, Lisa Murkowski, is pushing for a vote on 20 January to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. A spokesman for the senator -- who was on her way back from Afghanistan today -- said she was determined to go ahead. A vote against EPA regulation could cast the whole issue of regulating emissions in a negative light.
Some environmental organisations fear it would make it all but impossible to get to climate change legislation this year.
Browner did not get into a timetable for legislation, or the specifics of Murkowski's efforts to block the EPA. But it's interesting to note that the White House is not entirely letting up the pressure on the Senate to act.
Leading climate scientist challenges Mail on Sunday's use of his research
Mojib Latif denies his research supports theory that current cold weather undermines scientific consensus on global warming
David Adam, environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 16.47 GMT
A leading scientist has hit out at misleading newspaper reports that linked his research to claims that the current cold weather undermines the scientific case for manmade global warming.
Mojib Latif, a climate expert at the Leibniz Institute at Kiel University in Germany, said he "cannot understand" reports that used his research to question the scientific consensus on climate change.
He told the Guardian: "It comes as a surprise to me that people would try to use my statements to try to dispute the nature of global warming. I believe in manmade global warming. I have said that if my name was not Mojib Latif it would be global warming."
He added: "There is no doubt within the scientific community that we are affecting the climate, that the climate is changing and responding to our emissions of greenhouse gases."
A report in the Mail on Sunday said that Latif's results "challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy's most deeply cherished beliefs" and "undermine the standard climate computer models". Monday's Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph repeated the claims.
The reports attempted to link the Arctic weather that has enveloped the UK with research published by Latif's team in the journal Nature in 2008. The research said that natural fluctuations in ocean temperature could have a bigger impact on global temperature than expected. In particular, the study concluded that cooling in the oceans could offset global warming, with the average temperature over the decades 2000-2010 and 2005-2015 predicted to be no higher than the average for 1994-2004. Despite clarifications from the scientists at the time, who stressed that the research did not challenge the predicted long-term warming trend, the study was widely misreported as signalling a switch from global warming to global cooling.
The Mail on Sunday article said that Latif's research showed that the current cold weather heralds such "a global trend towards cooler weather".
It said: "The BBC assured viewers that the big chill was was merely short-term 'weather' that had nothing to do with 'climate', which was still warming. The work of Prof Latif and the other scientists refutes that view."
Not according to Latif. "They are not related at all," he said. "What we are experiencing now is a weather phenomenon, while we talked about the mean temperature over the next 10 years. You can't compare the two."
He said the ocean temperature effect was similar to other natural influences on global temperature, such as volcanos, which cool the planet temporarily as ash spewed into the atmosphere reflects sunlight.
"The natural variation occurs side by side with the manmade warming. Sometimes it has a cooling effect and can offset this warming and other times it can accelerate it." Other scientists have questioned the strength of the ocean effect on overall temperature and disagree that global warming will show the predicted pause.
Latif said his research suggested that up to half the warming seen over the 20th century was down to this natural ocean effect, but said that was consistent with the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "No climate specialist would ever say that 100% of the warming we have seen is down to greenhouse gas emissions."
The recent articles are not the first to misrepresent his research, Latif said. "There are numerous newspapers, radio stations and television channels all trying to get our attention. Some overstate and some want to downplay the problem as a way to get that attention," he said. "We are trying to discuss in the media a highly complex issue. Nobody would discuss the problem of [Einstein's theory of] relativity in the media. But because we all experience the weather, we all believe that we can assess the global warming problem."
David Adam, environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 16.47 GMT
A leading scientist has hit out at misleading newspaper reports that linked his research to claims that the current cold weather undermines the scientific case for manmade global warming.
Mojib Latif, a climate expert at the Leibniz Institute at Kiel University in Germany, said he "cannot understand" reports that used his research to question the scientific consensus on climate change.
He told the Guardian: "It comes as a surprise to me that people would try to use my statements to try to dispute the nature of global warming. I believe in manmade global warming. I have said that if my name was not Mojib Latif it would be global warming."
He added: "There is no doubt within the scientific community that we are affecting the climate, that the climate is changing and responding to our emissions of greenhouse gases."
A report in the Mail on Sunday said that Latif's results "challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy's most deeply cherished beliefs" and "undermine the standard climate computer models". Monday's Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph repeated the claims.
The reports attempted to link the Arctic weather that has enveloped the UK with research published by Latif's team in the journal Nature in 2008. The research said that natural fluctuations in ocean temperature could have a bigger impact on global temperature than expected. In particular, the study concluded that cooling in the oceans could offset global warming, with the average temperature over the decades 2000-2010 and 2005-2015 predicted to be no higher than the average for 1994-2004. Despite clarifications from the scientists at the time, who stressed that the research did not challenge the predicted long-term warming trend, the study was widely misreported as signalling a switch from global warming to global cooling.
The Mail on Sunday article said that Latif's research showed that the current cold weather heralds such "a global trend towards cooler weather".
It said: "The BBC assured viewers that the big chill was was merely short-term 'weather' that had nothing to do with 'climate', which was still warming. The work of Prof Latif and the other scientists refutes that view."
Not according to Latif. "They are not related at all," he said. "What we are experiencing now is a weather phenomenon, while we talked about the mean temperature over the next 10 years. You can't compare the two."
He said the ocean temperature effect was similar to other natural influences on global temperature, such as volcanos, which cool the planet temporarily as ash spewed into the atmosphere reflects sunlight.
"The natural variation occurs side by side with the manmade warming. Sometimes it has a cooling effect and can offset this warming and other times it can accelerate it." Other scientists have questioned the strength of the ocean effect on overall temperature and disagree that global warming will show the predicted pause.
Latif said his research suggested that up to half the warming seen over the 20th century was down to this natural ocean effect, but said that was consistent with the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "No climate specialist would ever say that 100% of the warming we have seen is down to greenhouse gas emissions."
The recent articles are not the first to misrepresent his research, Latif said. "There are numerous newspapers, radio stations and television channels all trying to get our attention. Some overstate and some want to downplay the problem as a way to get that attention," he said. "We are trying to discuss in the media a highly complex issue. Nobody would discuss the problem of [Einstein's theory of] relativity in the media. But because we all experience the weather, we all believe that we can assess the global warming problem."
Pope Benedict XVI denounces failure of world leaders at Copenhagen summit
In a speech to ambassadors, the pontiff criticises the 'economic and political resistance' to fighting environmental degradation
Associated Press
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 16.14 GMT
Pope Benedict XVI denounced the failure of world leaders to agree to a new climate change treaty in Copenhagen last month, saying that world peace depends on safeguarding God's creation.
He issued the admonition in a speech to ambassadors accredited to the Vatican, an annual appointment during which the pontiff reflects on issues the Vatican wants to highlight to the diplomatic corps.
Benedict has been called the "green pope" for his increasingly vocal concern about the need to protect the environment. Under his watch, the Vatican has installed solar photovoltaic cells on its main auditorium to convert sunlight into electricity and has joined a reforestation project aimed at offsetting its CO2 emissions.
In his speech, the pontiff criticised the "economic and political resistance" to fighting environmental degradation and creating a new climate treaty at last month's negotiations in Copenhagen.
The weak agreement known as the Copenhagen accord that emerged from the summit urged deeper cuts in emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming, it did nothing to demand them.
"I trust that in the course of this year ... it will be possible to reach an agreement for effectively dealing with this question," Benedict said.
He said the issue was particularly critical for island nations and in places like Africa, where the battle for resources, increased desertification and over-exploitation of land has resulted in wars.
"To cultivate peace, one must protect creation." Benedict told the ambassadors, many of whom wore their national dress or were medal-draped formal attire for the audience in the frescoed Sala Regia of the Vatican's apostolic palace.
The pontiff said the same "self-centred and materialistic" way of thinking that sparked the worldwide financial meltdown was also endangering creation. To combat it will require a new way of thinking and a new lifestyle and an acknowledgment that the question is a moral one, he said.
"The protection of creation is not principally a response to an aesthetic need, but much more to a moral need, inasmuch as nature expresses a plan of love and truth which is prior to us and which comes from God," he said.
To illustrate his point, the German-born pope pointed to the experiences of eastern Europe under the "materialistic and atheistic regimes" of the former Soviet bloc.
"Was it not easy to see the great harm which an economic system lacking any reference to the truth about man had done not only to the dignity and freedom of individuals and peoples, but to nature itself, by polluting soil, water and air?" he asked.
"The denial of God distorts the freedom of the human person, yet it also devastates creation."
Associated Press
guardian.co.uk, Monday 11 January 2010 16.14 GMT
Pope Benedict XVI denounced the failure of world leaders to agree to a new climate change treaty in Copenhagen last month, saying that world peace depends on safeguarding God's creation.
He issued the admonition in a speech to ambassadors accredited to the Vatican, an annual appointment during which the pontiff reflects on issues the Vatican wants to highlight to the diplomatic corps.
Benedict has been called the "green pope" for his increasingly vocal concern about the need to protect the environment. Under his watch, the Vatican has installed solar photovoltaic cells on its main auditorium to convert sunlight into electricity and has joined a reforestation project aimed at offsetting its CO2 emissions.
In his speech, the pontiff criticised the "economic and political resistance" to fighting environmental degradation and creating a new climate treaty at last month's negotiations in Copenhagen.
The weak agreement known as the Copenhagen accord that emerged from the summit urged deeper cuts in emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming, it did nothing to demand them.
"I trust that in the course of this year ... it will be possible to reach an agreement for effectively dealing with this question," Benedict said.
He said the issue was particularly critical for island nations and in places like Africa, where the battle for resources, increased desertification and over-exploitation of land has resulted in wars.
"To cultivate peace, one must protect creation." Benedict told the ambassadors, many of whom wore their national dress or were medal-draped formal attire for the audience in the frescoed Sala Regia of the Vatican's apostolic palace.
The pontiff said the same "self-centred and materialistic" way of thinking that sparked the worldwide financial meltdown was also endangering creation. To combat it will require a new way of thinking and a new lifestyle and an acknowledgment that the question is a moral one, he said.
"The protection of creation is not principally a response to an aesthetic need, but much more to a moral need, inasmuch as nature expresses a plan of love and truth which is prior to us and which comes from God," he said.
To illustrate his point, the German-born pope pointed to the experiences of eastern Europe under the "materialistic and atheistic regimes" of the former Soviet bloc.
"Was it not easy to see the great harm which an economic system lacking any reference to the truth about man had done not only to the dignity and freedom of individuals and peoples, but to nature itself, by polluting soil, water and air?" he asked.
"The denial of God distorts the freedom of the human person, yet it also devastates creation."
'Green' Products to Get a Push
Seventh Generation, Method Mount Campaigns for Their Household Staples
By ELLEN BYRON And SUZANNE VRANICA
Encouraged by resilient sales, some leading makers of environmentally friendly household products are boosting their marketing firepower, mounting a broader challenge to manufacturers of mainstream consumer goods.
Seventh Generation and Method Products, which both tout their cleaning and personal-care lines as safer for people and the environment, plan to launch their first major marketing campaigns this week. Both companies are hoping to capitalize on the momentum behind "green" products, which have posted surprisingly strong sales despite the weak economy.
tktkt
In a TV spot debuting Monday, a man replaces his household cleaners with Seventh Generation products.
The campaigns come as the two companies take other steps designed at least in part to prepare them to compete more directly with their mainstream counterparts. Seventh Generation is introducing a line of disinfecting wipes and sprays, while Method is expanding its lineup to include a new laundry detergent. They are also polishing their management credentials: The founders of both companies recently brought in consumer-product industry veterans to take over chief-executive duties.
While many shoppers switched to cheaper products during the recession, sales of products promoted as environmentally friendly have held up relatively well, despite their premium prices. Over the past five years, U.S. sales of "ethical" household products—what the industry calls items marketed on the basis of meeting an ethical standard—have nearly tripled, reaching an estimated $1.6 billion in 2009, according to market-research firm Packaged Facts.
"People may be trading from steak to poultry, but the people who buy these green products believe the health and safety of one's family is more important," says Burt Flickinger III, managing director of consulting firm Strategic Resource Group.
Indeed, a spokeswoman for Seventh Generation says sales at mass-market retailers rose 20% last year from the year before. The company says its 2009 totaled sales about $150 million, but declined to disclose profits.
Seventh Generation plans to launch its first TV ad on Monday. In the past, the Burlington, Vt., company has relied on small, mostly online, campaigns to promote its products, which include diapers, trash bags and laundry detergent it touts for attributes like biodegradability or natural ingredients.
The new ads, based on the slogan, "Protecting Planet Home," describe a household that uses Seventh Generation products as a place where "no one holds their breath while they're cleaning." Seventh Generation declines to disclose how much it is spending on the ads, which coincide with its introduction of wipes and spray that use a thyme-based disinfectant technology.
Method has depended on offbeat marketing tactics, including a Web site that lets people wash away their sins virtually with its hand soap. Now it is rolling out its largest ad campaign ever to plug a new superconcentrated laundry detergent. The product, scheduled to hit U.S. stores this month, comes in a slim bottle with a pump dispenser.
San Francisco-based Method is spending $10 million on the campaign, which includes a new detergent Web site that launches this week and print and online ads that begin next month. The pitch takes aim at the company's bigger laundry-aisle competitors with the tagline "Jug-Free America," suggesting that consumers don't need to lug around heavy detergent bottles.
One ad compares a Method detergent bottle with a large orange one, a not-so-subtle swipe at market leader Procter & Gamble's Tide.
Droga5, a boutique ad firm in New York, created the campaign. Method, which posted about $100 million in sales in 2008, declined to disclose its profit or more recent sales figures.
The two brands, which hold a niche market, still have a long way to go to reach a more-mainstream audience. Seventh Generation says that 9 out of 10 Americans haven't heard of its brand, while Method estimates that just 15% of consumers know about its products.
Even with stepped-up spending, the two companies can't hope to match the promotional budgets of industry giants like P&G and Reckitt Benckiser Group. P&G of the U.S. and Reckitt of Britain each spend more than $100 million a year in the U.S. on their respective Tide and Lysol brands alone, according to WPP's TNS Media Intelligence.
Big household-product makers, meanwhile, are trying to tap Seventh Generation and Method's niche. In recent years, Clorox has launched a line of earth-friendly household cleaners dubbed Green Works, and SC Johnson has introduced one called Nature's Source.
"Clearly we need to make every dollar work," says Eric Ryan, Method's co-founder and chief brand architect.
Branding experts say all companies in the green-product market need to tread lightly. People's guard is going up with the surge of green products, says Jonathan Asher, a branding expert at marketing-research firm Perception Research, and with the Internet they can easily check out claims.
To help ease their growing pains, Seventh Generation and Method recently hired consumer-product veterans. In June, Chuck Maniscalco became Seventh Generation's CEO, after serving as president and chief of PepsiCo's Quaker Tropicana Gatorade business. Drew Fraser took the helm at Method, after posts at Whirlpool, Clorox and P&G.
Write to Ellen Byron at ellen.byron@wsj.com and Suzanne Vranica at suzanne.vranica@wsj.com
By ELLEN BYRON And SUZANNE VRANICA
Encouraged by resilient sales, some leading makers of environmentally friendly household products are boosting their marketing firepower, mounting a broader challenge to manufacturers of mainstream consumer goods.
Seventh Generation and Method Products, which both tout their cleaning and personal-care lines as safer for people and the environment, plan to launch their first major marketing campaigns this week. Both companies are hoping to capitalize on the momentum behind "green" products, which have posted surprisingly strong sales despite the weak economy.
tktkt
In a TV spot debuting Monday, a man replaces his household cleaners with Seventh Generation products.
The campaigns come as the two companies take other steps designed at least in part to prepare them to compete more directly with their mainstream counterparts. Seventh Generation is introducing a line of disinfecting wipes and sprays, while Method is expanding its lineup to include a new laundry detergent. They are also polishing their management credentials: The founders of both companies recently brought in consumer-product industry veterans to take over chief-executive duties.
While many shoppers switched to cheaper products during the recession, sales of products promoted as environmentally friendly have held up relatively well, despite their premium prices. Over the past five years, U.S. sales of "ethical" household products—what the industry calls items marketed on the basis of meeting an ethical standard—have nearly tripled, reaching an estimated $1.6 billion in 2009, according to market-research firm Packaged Facts.
"People may be trading from steak to poultry, but the people who buy these green products believe the health and safety of one's family is more important," says Burt Flickinger III, managing director of consulting firm Strategic Resource Group.
Indeed, a spokeswoman for Seventh Generation says sales at mass-market retailers rose 20% last year from the year before. The company says its 2009 totaled sales about $150 million, but declined to disclose profits.
Seventh Generation plans to launch its first TV ad on Monday. In the past, the Burlington, Vt., company has relied on small, mostly online, campaigns to promote its products, which include diapers, trash bags and laundry detergent it touts for attributes like biodegradability or natural ingredients.
The new ads, based on the slogan, "Protecting Planet Home," describe a household that uses Seventh Generation products as a place where "no one holds their breath while they're cleaning." Seventh Generation declines to disclose how much it is spending on the ads, which coincide with its introduction of wipes and spray that use a thyme-based disinfectant technology.
Method has depended on offbeat marketing tactics, including a Web site that lets people wash away their sins virtually with its hand soap. Now it is rolling out its largest ad campaign ever to plug a new superconcentrated laundry detergent. The product, scheduled to hit U.S. stores this month, comes in a slim bottle with a pump dispenser.
San Francisco-based Method is spending $10 million on the campaign, which includes a new detergent Web site that launches this week and print and online ads that begin next month. The pitch takes aim at the company's bigger laundry-aisle competitors with the tagline "Jug-Free America," suggesting that consumers don't need to lug around heavy detergent bottles.
One ad compares a Method detergent bottle with a large orange one, a not-so-subtle swipe at market leader Procter & Gamble's Tide.
Droga5, a boutique ad firm in New York, created the campaign. Method, which posted about $100 million in sales in 2008, declined to disclose its profit or more recent sales figures.
The two brands, which hold a niche market, still have a long way to go to reach a more-mainstream audience. Seventh Generation says that 9 out of 10 Americans haven't heard of its brand, while Method estimates that just 15% of consumers know about its products.
Even with stepped-up spending, the two companies can't hope to match the promotional budgets of industry giants like P&G and Reckitt Benckiser Group. P&G of the U.S. and Reckitt of Britain each spend more than $100 million a year in the U.S. on their respective Tide and Lysol brands alone, according to WPP's TNS Media Intelligence.
Big household-product makers, meanwhile, are trying to tap Seventh Generation and Method's niche. In recent years, Clorox has launched a line of earth-friendly household cleaners dubbed Green Works, and SC Johnson has introduced one called Nature's Source.
"Clearly we need to make every dollar work," says Eric Ryan, Method's co-founder and chief brand architect.
Branding experts say all companies in the green-product market need to tread lightly. People's guard is going up with the surge of green products, says Jonathan Asher, a branding expert at marketing-research firm Perception Research, and with the Internet they can easily check out claims.
To help ease their growing pains, Seventh Generation and Method recently hired consumer-product veterans. In June, Chuck Maniscalco became Seventh Generation's CEO, after serving as president and chief of PepsiCo's Quaker Tropicana Gatorade business. Drew Fraser took the helm at Method, after posts at Whirlpool, Clorox and P&G.
Write to Ellen Byron at ellen.byron@wsj.com and Suzanne Vranica at suzanne.vranica@wsj.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
