The real estate agent’s mantra is well known: location, location, location. But location is important, too, when considering where to site utility-scale solar projects, and most of California's projects or planned projects are in less-than-ideal spots, according to a new study. As a result, these projects may have negative impacts on the environment and will not be as cost-effective or as carbon neutral as they could be.
Researchers from Stanford University and the University of California’s Riverside and Berkeley campuses identified 161 planned or proposed large-scale utility solar and applied an algorithm to determine how compatible they are with their location.
Mushrooms have energized many a marinara sauce, not to mention a few vivid hallucinations, but soon the fungi may be powering your Prius or getting your Galaxy phone to run longer. Engineers at the University of California have shown that mushrooms can create long-lasting, environmentally friendly anodes for lithium-ion batteries.
The risk of a major cyberattack on the nuclear industry is rising, potentially leading to blackouts or even meltdowns, researchers say.
The 2010 Stuxnet worm's infiltration of Iran's nuclear program was the most dramatic cyberattack the nuclear sector has ever seen. But it was not the only one. In one case in 2003, the Slammer worm infected the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant in Ohio, leaving reactor core safety data unavailable for nearly five hours. In another example from 2014, hackers stole blueprints of at least two nuclear reactors and other sensitive data from Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Co., then demanded money from the company in exchange for not releasing potentially important files.
Arizona’s solar dispute is hot, but not unique. Across the United States utilities are fighting to contain or eliminate “net metering” policies that pay rooftop solar users retail prices for the surplus power that their panels export to the grid (thus offsetting retail charges for power they consume at night). Utilities argue that solar customers rely heavily on the grid but, under net metering, pay little or nothing to maintain it. Over the past year all of Arizona’s utilities levied or proposed new fees for customers installing rooftop solar systems. APS’s proposal worked out to about $21 per month.
Solar advocates argue that rooftop solar provides a variety of benefits to the grid—such as reducing consumption of fossil fuels and lessening reliance on distant power plants. They see fees from utilities such as APS, which owns fossil-fueled and nuclear power plants, as unfair competition.
In August, ACC staff sided with solar advocates’ call to defer consideration of proposed fees so they could be reviewed in the broader context of the utility’s overall business. When the ACC commissioners voted to overrule, calling for immediate hearings on solar fees, San Francisco-based solar installer Sunrun and two former commissioners filed challenges with the ACC, alleging bias.
The bias filings allege that the two commissioners elected in 2014 allegedly benefited from $3.2 million in secret campaign donations to independent groups by APS. The filings also cite a third commissioner elected in 2012 for inappropriate public comments about rooftop solar users. (Earlier challenges accuse the remaining two commissioners of bias based on lobbying activities prior to their election in 2012.)
APS presents these attacks as a bid by solar advocates to avoid debating the proposed utility fees on the merits. APS writes:
They have retreated to procedural tactics and character attacks designed to discredit elected officials and undermine the integrity of the Arizona Corporation Commission.The obvious goal is to paralyze the Commission.
However, allegations of improper campaign contributions by APS have been swirling in the Arizona media for over a year. APS acknowledges that it is politically active, and has refused to confirm or deny the allegations.
According to the Republic the commissioners elected in 2012 benefited from contributions from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, including money from Arizona Public Service. And it writes that the two commissioners elected last year benefited from "independent political campaigns widely believed to be financed with so-called dark-money from APS.”
In March 2015 an organization tracking campaign finance contributions revealed that a foundation led by a former APS chairman and CEO that is normally dedicated to supporting Arizona State University had inexplicably given $100,000 to a "shadowy" nonprofit called Save Our Future Now. That group spent $2.4 million on TV ads attacking pro-solar ACC candidates in 2014.
Flow batteries are an interesting alternative to conventional batteries because they can store charges in the form of a liquid electrolyte that can be kept in tanks. Only the size of the tanks limits the amount of energy that can be stored. Utility companies and energy engineering firms have been eying these devices because they might replace storage batteries, devices that: have a limited lifetime; are known to be fire hazards; require metals such as lithium, that are limited in supply; and can only store energy in the electrode material, which has a fixed volume. What stands in the way of the wide implementation of flow batteries, in spite of the fact that they are commercially available, is that the compounds they use are expensive, toxic, and corrosive. Additionally, the energy storage capacity per unit volume of the electrolyte is low, typically just squeaking past 20 watt-hours per liter.
Recently IEEE Spectrumreported on a flow battery that has a better performance and uses a basic electrolyte instead of an acidic one, keeping a zinc compound in solution. Now a team of researchers at Harvard University have reported in the 25 August issue of Science that they’ve created a version that uses two alkaline electrolytes that contain quinone and ferrocyanide—both widely available and non-toxic compounds—in solution. The researchers reported that after 100 charge-discharge cycles, the battery’s stored energy capacity had degraded less than 1 percent.
Michael Aziz, who led the research group, realized that if the negative points of today’s flow batteries—cost and toxicity—could be overcome, the flow battery could become a commercially viable alternative for the storage now badly needed for intermittent energy sources such as solar and wind.
“This looks like a compelling value proposition if you can find inexpensive chemicals that work well,” says Aziz. “We noticed that there is a molecule in plants that takes the electrons from chlorophyll, and it forms an electron shuttle in photosynthesis that ports electrons over and over, without any sign of degradation. That is exactly the functionality you want for the battery,” says Aziz.
However, the molecule did need some work; it was not soluble, and the reduction potential was not the right value. “All these things can be changed,” he noted. “We found ways to render the molecule soluble, and change the voltage, so we have something that works and that is highly soluble.”
The team made it clear that it was headed in this direction last year, when the researchers published a paper in Nature describing how they paired up this compound with bromine, which is a toxic substance. Aziz explains that, “We switched to alkaline chemistry because of the availability of a positive electrode material that is stable and soluble in base, but not in acid, and that is ferrocyanide.” Ferrocyanide is a widely available compound, used as a food additive and which, paradoxically, is not toxic because the cyanide groups are so strongly bonded to the iron atoms already present that they cannot attack the iron atoms in hemoglobin. “So now we have fulfilled our promise by coming through with non-toxic molecules on both sides [of the ion-selective membrane],” says Aziz. “We now have an entirely non-toxic chemistry.”
Flow cells need electrolytes that keep these compounds in solution with extreme pH values so that electrons and ions can flow easily. Most current flow batteries use acids, but the use of a base has other advantages. “Base is just less corrosive than acid, and this allows us to contain these electrolytes with much less expensive materials,” says Aziz.
At this point, about 95 percent of stored energy in the United States is in the form of water pumped up into a reservoir, which can be released to generate power by driving turbines when flowing back down. But in flat or arid areas, this storage option is not available, and it is here that flow batteries could play an important role, argues Aziz. “We are looking at a technology that can be used where pumped hydro cannot—in the middle of a city, on rooftops, near windfarms and solar farms,” he says. However, reaching this goal will require further work. “We need to prove that these molecules can last many thousands of cycles of oxidation and reduction, without doing anything else.”
Is industry interested? When they published their first paper in Nature last year, there was a lot of interest from companies. According to Aziz, “Most of them said, this is really interesting, call us as soon you get rid of the bromine.”
XPRIZE—the organization behind grand technology challenges such as the race to space won in 2004 by SpaceShipOne and current contests to land a Lunar rover and a Star Trek-style medical tricorder—unveiled a competition today that tackles a more mundane yet critical challenge: transforming carbon dioxide emissions from power plants into saleable products to help slow or reverse climate change. The competition's $20 million kitty has been raised from major carbon emitters: a coalition of oil and gas producers producing high-carbon oil from Alberta’s oilsands, and New Jersey-based electric utility NRG Energy.
Entrants will have until early 2020 to develop CO2 conversion technologies on two tracks: one targeting flue gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, and a second targeting the less concentrated emissions from natural gas-fired generators. The technologies that convert the most CO2 into products with the highest net value will win.
XPRIZE Chairman and CEO Peter Diamandis said in a statement that the Carbon XPRIZE confronts the fact that our "age of unprecedented technological progress and prosperity” is powered primarily by fossil fuels. According to the statement, competing technologies could incorporate CO2 into such products as chemicals, cement and other building products, and transportation fuels.
Of course, burning the extra oil produced via enhanced oil recovery releases more fossil CO2, clawing back some of the environmental benefit. And a supply of CO2 for such projects is hard to come by due to the high cost of equipping power plants for carbon capture and operating the equipment.
The Carbon XPRIZE seeks to catalyze carbon capture by turning CO2 molecules into products with higher added value. Scientists are exploring the possibilities already. Austrian researchers have, for example, demonstrated the use of enzymes and electricity to convert CO2 into alcohol-based fuels. And last year a demonstration plant in San Antonio began capturing CO2 from a cement plant and converting it into minerals and chemicals, including sodium carbonate, hydrochloric acid and bleach.
Unfortunately the environmental benefits of synthesizing CO2 into something new remain dubious because capturing CO2 and chemically refashioning it requires considerable energy. In the case of the alcohol fuels, the energy requirements of the chemical processing completely negate the climate protection achieved by recycling CO2.
The ultimate irony of the Carbon XPRIZE is that it could turn out winners that still do not pencil out economically or environmentally. Meanwhile, the oil producers backing it via Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, a Calgary-based trade group, are sitting on advanced production technology that promises to profitably slash their emissions at the source.
Oilsands emissions are rising as the industry shifts from open-pit mines that scrape Alberta’s tarry bitumen off the surface to operations that attack deeper deposits by drilling wells and injecting steam underground to melt the bitumen and pump it to the surface. But options that could shrink that footprint exist.
Eliminating steam production from natural gas makes the overall process cheaper while cutting carbon emissions per barrel by as much as 80 percent. “We can be as clean or cleaner than conventional oil,” says John Nenniger, N-Solv’s founder and chief technology officer.
Oilsands operators have conducted their own experiments with solvent-based production over the past five years, but implementation is lagging. Nenniger says oilsands producers neglected the technology when oil prices were high because they could make a profit with the older and dirtier steam technology. Weak Canadian climate policies meant they were not obligated to take a risk on the cleaner approach. And now that oil prices are low and oilsands projects are losing money, capital for new operations is scarce.
”It’s so frustrating from my perspective because every other industry is so aggressively competing to get to the bottom of the supply cost curve,” says Nenniger. “The oilsands industry says stuff, but they don’t actually do anything. Investment has been 10 to 20 fold below what it should have been.”
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper pulled his country out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2011, arguing that complying with the treaty's prescribed greenhouse gas reductions would hurt Canada's energy-intensive economies. Change may be coming, however. Harper, who hails from Alberta and has strong support from the oil and gas sector, finds himself in a tight race for re-election in October.
Thomas Mulcair of the New Democratic Party, a former Quebec environment minister who is leading in nationwide polls, unveiled plans this weekend for a cap and trade program to cut carbon emissions 80 percent by 2050—the same goals established by climate policy leaders such as the European Union and California. As of 2013, Canada's emissions were 18 percent above 1990 levels.
The governments of Scotland, the Republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland plan to coordinate the development of offshore renewable energy projects in their shared ocean water. The goal is to build an interconnected network of offshore wind, tidal, and wave generation and transmission in the Irish Sea, the straits of Moyle, and the western coast of Scotland.
The countries launched a feasibility study five years ago. It culminated last week in a series of reports including: a business plan; recommendations for how to implement projects; three proposed projects to serve as initial proof of concepts; and a spatial plan that provides guidance to potential developers regarding the best places to install offshore wind, tidal, and wave energy projects.
The area between Ireland and Scotland has the potential to generate around 16.1 gigawatts of renewable energy, including 12.1 GW from offshore wind and 4.0 GW from wave and tidal energy. The ISLES project's initial goal is to connect 6.2 GW of that potential generation by 2020.
A team of researchers from Germany and the U.S. have announced a new record value of 14% for the efficiency of water splitting by solar energy in a single cell. The previous record, 12.4%, was achieved 17 years ago by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the value in subsequent experiments with a technology called artificial photosynthesis has hovered around that figure. The researchers published this result last week in Nature Communications.
These figures should not be confused with the light conversion percentages of photovoltaic cells, explains Thomas Hannappel of the Technical University Ilmenau in Germany, who was the academic advisor for the researchers. “The percentages refer to the hydrogen efficiency, that is you compare the light energy captured by the photovoltaic cell to the energy that can be supplied by burning the produced hydrogen,” says Hannappel.
Artificial photosynthesis can be achieved by two different approaches: The first approach is a photovoltaic cell that supplies the current to the electrodes in a separate cell that splits water molecules into their constituents, hydrogen and oxygen. In the second approach, the photovoltaic cell also acts as an electrode in contact with water, and the voltage it produces splits the water directly. Having these two functions, photoelectricity generation and electrolysis into one unit makes it more usable, says Hannappel. “We have a greater range for cost reduction with one unit than with two different units,” says Hannappel.
However, still a lot of research will be necessary to reach this stage. “One of the referees during the publication process asked us, ‘Is this just a matter of dunking a high-efficiency PV cell into a solution and then getting out hydrogen?’ ” remembers Matthias May of the Helmholz Zentrum Berlin, whose doctoral dissertation dealt with this research. Indeed, the fact that you have to deal with a liquid-solid interface, the electrolyte, and the photosensitive semiconductor and a its interface with the catalyst surface is not a trio that gets along easily with each other.
First, the researchers opted for using III-V semiconductors for the photovoltaic material. Not the cheapest and experimentally easiest choice, but these materials, made from elements residing in the third and fifth column of the periodic table, are more efficient in converting light into electricity than silicon. To achieve the required voltage, the researchers used tandem cells in which two layers with different band gaps convert photons from the entire solar spectrum into electricity.
Now, to make the two percent improvement required some experimental ingenuity. “We tuned the surface of our III-V solar cell on a subnanometer scale, transforming aluminum-indium phosphide into phosphate species and then depositing the catalyst on top,” says May. “What was important here was that the photochemical transformation process was all done in situ. This means that this interface never saw ambient air before the catalyst was deposited. That was very important because otherwise you will get charge-carrier recombination centers at the interface and this will reduce your overall device efficiency.”
Also the stability of these devices, complicated by chemical interactions between the electrolyte and the photovoltaic surface is still a far cry from current voltaics, although their prototypes ran for 40 hours. “One year ago we had stabilities of a couple of seconds, and we have improved that by three-four orders of magnitude, so we are optimistic that we can improve that by another three or four orders of magnitude.”
Ultimately, higher efficiencies, starting with 18–20% will allow the conversion of solar energy into hydrogen to become part of the burgeoning hydrogen economy. “In Germany we have a company that uses windmills connected to electrolyzers and they inject the hydrogen directly into the methane gas grid; you can do that up to five volume percent without changing the grid. This also forms some storage capacity if you have an overcapacity of electricity in the grid,” says May.
Last December, researchers at Stanford University developed a passive radiator that uses outer space as a universe-size heat sink. It absorbs ambient heat and then emits it at a very specific infrared band (between 8 and 13 micrometers), for which the Earth’s atmosphere is completely transparent. So the radiator can transfer the heat entirely off-world.
Stanford's radiator is cheap to produce (or so they say), but it would be fighting for rooftop space with all the solar panels that we (should) have up there. In work published today in PNAS, the Stanford researchers describe the performance of a prototype photonic crystal cooling system that can sit on top of a solar cell and cool it by up to 13 degrees Celsius—boosting the amount of electricity that it generates.
A prototype of a wearable device can sense what appliance you’re using. Engineers at the University of Washington developed MagnifiSense, a wrist-worn magnetic sensing system that tracks your interaction with specific devices, such as a microwave or hair dryer. Based on which device is detected, the system infers what activity you’re performing: Turning on a stove implies that you’re cooking, for example.
MagnifiSense works because each appliance generates a distinct electromagnetic radiation pattern. MagnifiSense uses off-the-shelf magneto-inductive sensors to capture a wide spectrum of frequencies near the user. This allows the wearable device to identify the radiation of the particular components—motors, rectifiers, and various modulators—that make up the pattern. Using signal processing and machine learning techniques, the system can use the combination of components to distinguish one device from another.
Edward Wang, lead researcher and a PhD student in electrical engineering at the University of Washington gave a hairdryer as an example:
The frequency component of a hairdryer is that there’s a motor that spins, so there’s going to be some changing frequency that has to do with the motor’s speed… There’s also the power that it draws, which is 60 Hz in America. The 60 Hz component can be seen in our signal. So, if it doesn’t have a 60 Hz component signal, then it’s not plugged into the wall.
These type of characteristics, also known as domain knowledge, are gathered into a feature set, which is similar to a template, says Wang. After hundreds of different hairdryer templates are fed into the system, it learns to identify the behavior of a hairdryer. Then, when the template of an unknown device is fed into the system, it compares it against existing templates to determine a match.
The team studied MagnifiSense’s performance in 16 homes and on 12 commonly used appliances in the kitchen, living room, and bathroom. It also studied the user’s interaction with various devices. In a 24-hour period, MagnifiSense successfully identified 25 of the 29 interactions.
Although this technology seems promising, researchers still need to work out a few kinks. People tend to interact with multiple electronics simultaneously. But, the current prototype can’t detect when multiple electronics are used concurrently.
“Due to the nature of the signal, they add linearly,” Wang says. “The sensor sees A plus B plus C.” This means that if you turn on the stove and also use the blender, the system detects the appliance closest to you- not both. He also says they’re trying to miniaturize the wearable device.