Renewable Energy Stock Trading Alert: Ram Power. (TSX:RPG) Gains over 36%

Renewable Energy Stock Trading Alert: Ram Power. (TSX:RPG) Gains over 36%

Category: Investment, Renewable Energy

News about Ram Power

New York, NY - October 11, 2012 (Investorideas.com renewable energy/green newswire) Investorideas.com, a leader in renewable energy stock research for independent investors, issues a trading alert for renewable energy stock Ram Power, Corp. (TSX:RPG.TO), trading up at $0.26. gaining 0.07 or 36.84% as of 2:08PM EDT on over 5 Million shares. The stock had a high of $0.275 in earlier trading.

The Company reported news yesterday that it has reached an agreement with the Nicaraguan Government to increase the power sales tariff for the San Jacinto-Tizate geothermal power project (the "Project").

The tariff increase request was thoroughly reviewed by the Nicaraguan Ministry of Energy and Mines ("MEM"), the Nicaraguan Energy Institute ("INE"), Disnorte-Dissur, a subsidiary of Gas Natural Fenosa (the power purchaser under the power purchase agreement for the Project), and the Nicaragua Energy Cabinet whose recommendation was subsequently acknowledged by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. The formal documentation implementing the increased tariff is now expected to be registered expeditiously by INE.

Investorideas.com Newswire

About Ram Power, Corp.

Ram Power is a renewable energy company based in Reno, Nevada, engaged in the business of acquiring, exploring, developing, and operating geothermal properties, and has interests in geothermal projects in the United States, Canada, and Latin America.

Research more cleantech stocks including electric car stocks - access 1400 green stocks at the Investorideas.com renewable energy stocks directory

Investorideas.com renewable energy stocks stock directory

About Investorideas.com - a leader in cleantech investor research

www.Investorideas.com was on the of the first investor sites covering investing in water and renewable energy stocks and has become a global go-to destination for investors researching the cleantech sector, with stock directories, company news, commentary from experts, research reports and industry resources and links. Investors can follow solar stocks commentary on our site with solar expert, J. Peter Lynch.

Follow Investorideas.com on Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/Investorideas

Follow Investorideas.com on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Investorideas

Follow Investorideas.com News on Linkedin.com/today at http://www.linkedin.com/today/investorideas.com

Sign up for the free investor news and stock alerts at Investorideas.com

http://www.investorideas.com/Resources/Newsletter.asp

Disclaimer/ Disclosure : Our sites do not make recommendations. Nothing on our sites should be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell products or securities. We attempt to research thoroughly, but we offer no guarantees as to the accuracy of information presented. All Information relating to featured companies is sourced from public documents and/ or the company and its management and is not the opinion of Investorideas.com. Learn more: www.InvestorIdeas.com/About/Disclaimer.asp Investorideas.com was not compensated for this report and does not hold a position in the stock

BC Residents and Investor Disclaimer : Effective September 15 2008 - all BC investors should review all OTC and Pink sheet listed companies for adherence in new disclosure filings and filing appropriate documents with Sedar. Read for more info: http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/release.aspx?id=6894

For more information about Investorideas.com

contact:

800.665.0411


Read More

GAO Study Highlights US Governance Challenges At The Water-Energy Nexus

 
Sustainable stocks and flows of water and energy are essential to societal health and well-being. Moreover, the two are inextricably linked and mutually dependent. Demand for both continue to rise in the US, with this year’s historic drought emphatically highlighting the economic, social and environmental costs, disruption and hardship dwindling water resources can cause.

US energy demand is forecast to increase 10% between 2010 and 2035, according to the Dept. of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA), and growing demand for energy means growing demand for water. In a 2010 report, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) found that the US energy industry has been the fastest growing consumer of water in recent years. CRS projects that water demand from the energy sector will account for 85% of growth in domestic water consumption between 2005 and 2030, the General Accounting Office (GAO) notes in a report released Nov. 8.

Meeting the challenges at the water-energy nexus is going to require substantive, coordinated policy action by the Obama administration, Congress and federal agencies, the GAO asserts in its report, “Energy-Water Nexus: Coordinated Federal Approach Needed to Better Manage Energy and Water Tradeoffs.”


 

 

Climate change, population growth and demographic shifts were identified by sources interviewed and reviewed by GAO analysts as factors that pose significant uncertainties and are “expected to exacerbate the challenges associated with managing both the supply and demand of water and energy.” Formulating national policies addressing water and energy resources, capacity, and needs requires taking account of the uncertainties related to both, according to the GAO report.

At a basic level, meeting these challenges requires more comprehensive data and research related to the water-energy nexus, the GAO says. This includes better understanding of hydrological processes, including aquifer recharge rates and groundwater movement. “In the absence of such data and research, developing and implementing effective policies could continue to be a challenge for Congress and federal agencies,” the report states.

Such policies need to focus in on the water-energy nexus at local levels, the report continues. How increased biofuel production affects water resources depends on the type of agricultural feedstock and whether or not irrigation is required, for example.

At the same time, adopting technologies and approaches to reduce water usage in energy production is “inhibited by barriers such as economic feasibility and regulating challenges.” Congress needs to be aware and factor these into policy-making when “deciding whether to promote the adoption of these technologies and approaches,” the report authors continue.

Finally, improved energy and water planning will require better coordination among federal agencies and other stakeholders. Water and energy resource planning and management have traditionally been distinct and separated, or “stove-piped,” according to the GAO.

Improved planning will require federal agencies to work with one another and other stakeholders, such as state and local agencies, academia, industry, and environmental groups. Congress and some agencies have taken steps to improve coordination, but these actions are incomplete or in their early stages. For example, in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to establish a federal program to address the energy-water nexus, but DOE has not done so.

Graphic courtesy “Energy-Water Nexus,” GAO, 2012

Read More

Puerto Rico Solar Power Plant Built to Withstand Hurricanes, Deliver Power Reliably in All Types of Weather

 
With the delivery of 26 megawatts (MW) of Canadian Solar’s CS6P-P high-performance PV panels, Spain’s TSK Solar is on track to bring online Uriel Renewables-Coqui Power LLC’s San Fermin solar power plant in the northeastern Puerto Rico town of Loiza. The Loiza solar power project is notable in several aspects of its design, engineering, and construction. It should be online by December of this year.

This is expected to be the first PV project on the Caribbean island to meet the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority’s (PREPA) technical requirements that grid-connected power systems enable both active and reactive power regulation. The frequency of electricity put out by the Loiza PV plant “will be adjustable and the voltage can be modulated at the grid connection point to accommodate any sudden fluctuations in solar intensity,” Canadian Solar explains in a press release.

The solar power plant is also noteworthy in that it’s equipped with its own predictive weather station. That enables the Loiza PV system to manage sudden increases or decreases in incident sunlight that would cause fluctuations in electricity output.
 

 

TSK Solar and project development partner Uriel Renewables also had to design and build a utility-scale PV system capable of withstanding a variety of extreme and adverse weather conditions, from hurricanes to flooding, as well as one whose foundations span a variety of soil types.

Addressing these issues, Loiza’s Canadian Solar PV panels are mounted on structures 2-4 meters above ground level capable of withstanding winds of up to 260 kilometers per hour (kph) (~162 mph). In addition to its voltage control mechanisms, the PV plant’s also being built with 40% overcurrent capacity and a back-up energy storage system, explained TSK general manager Roberto Montes.

“Given this highly demanding environment, the high-quality and durability of Canadian Solar’s modules was essential in meeting the strict requirements for us and our development partner, Uriel,” stated Roberto Montes, General Manager of TSK Solar. “Thanks to the robustness of our PV components, the new installation will help further stabilize Puerto Rico’s electrical grid.”

Added Canadian Solar CEO chairman Dr. Shawn Qu: “We continue to expand our global presence in markets that are attractive from a financial perspective and where we can work with strong local partners to ensure success. We are excited to be involved with innovative solar power plants, like the one in Loiza, as they showcase solar an option for a much wider range of markets with challenging energy needs.”

Strong and steady offshore winds also make eastern Puerto Rico a good wind power location. In late August, Spain’s Gestamp Wind announced that its 23-MW Punta de Lima wind farm at Naguabo near El Yunqe National Forest in eastern coastal Puerto Rico is nearing the half-way completion mark. It’s estimated that the Punta de Lima wind farm will provide enough clean, renewable power for 9,000 homes.

Interested in free solar estimates for your home?

Read More

Department of Defense Launches Attack on Climate Change

The U.S. Department of Defense has been among the most aggressive leaders on climate change action under the Obama Administration, and it has just stepped it up to the next level. Last week, DoD released the new Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, its blueprint for addressing the effects of climate change in a national security context. That includes global impacts such as geopolitical consequences, conflict acceleration and competition for food, water and other life-sustaining resources, as well as increasing demands on DoD resources for humanitarian relief.

Given that DoD does not exist in a vacuum, you can expect the agency’s plans to ripple out and affect other sectors, potentially including the global fossil fuel marketplace.

new DoD report outlines impact of climate change on national securityClimate Change and National Security

For a bit of background, in 2009 President Obama issued Executive Order 13514, which directed all federal agencies to evaluate their climate change risks and vulnerabilities. It also directed agencies to start developing plans for dealing with those impacts.

DoD incorporated those findings in its 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, which is a big deal because that document is the mechanism for translating strategy into action. In other words, the QDR results in real-life, potentially dramatic shifts in the way DoD forces and resources are allocated.

So, when the 2010 QDR asserted that climate change has become a significant national security threat, that wasn’t just DoD yelling into the wind, that was DoD putting the wheels of action in motion.

The Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap (CCAR)

Fast-forward to 2013, and now we have the next step, an actual blueprint for action in the form of CCAR.

The direct impacts that CCAR outlines include operational hardships and reduced training opportunities due to increased heat and extreme weather events, reduced access by ground vehicles (due to flooding or melting permafrost, for example), infrastructure degradation leading to increased costs for maintaining roads, runways and utilities, increased energy costs and risks to facilities from wildfires, coastal flooding and other exreme events.

CCAR inventories many more indirect impacts, too. All this is by way of hammering home the main point, which is to acknowledge the reality of the situation and deal with it.

The Department of Defense, in Defense of Science

CCAR basically describes how DoD decision-making will pivot around climate science and related fields, by fully integrating “climate change considerations into its extant policies, planning, practices and programs.”

The first step is to designate an advisory committee that will ensure a direct, nimble exchange of climate related information between DoD and other relevant agencies and authorities.

This reality-based approach is clearly stated in the advisory committee’s first set of goals, which include stressing “the importance of the science-policy interface.”

The emphasis on science continues throughout CCAR, particularly in regard to ensuring that the “best available science” is available to DoD decision-makers.

For the record, let’s also note that DoD hasn’t exactly standing still while working on its blueprint for action.

Since 2009, DoD has been transitioning to sustainable energy on practically innumerable fronts. The initiatives include solar power (both stationary and portable solar power), biofuels, alternative fuel vehicles, smart microgrids and EV-to-grid systems.

Many of these initiatives can easily apply to civilian use and some projects, like the new SPIDERS microgrid, are being developed specifically with widespread adoption by the civilian sector in mind.

DoD and the Keystone XL Pipeline

CCAR also outlines the need for international as well as domestic partnerships, so it has some interesting implications for the fossil fuel industry, including the export market.

In describing how DoD will continue to collaborate with the State Department (and foreign militaries) on climate assessment, CCAR also describes climate change as this:

“…a unique opportunity to work collaboratively in multilateral forums, promoting a balanced approach that will improve human and environmental security in the region.”

That appears to make the case that DoD’s climate-related concerns will interact with State Department policymaking in new and important ways.

In particular, CCAR seems to put another roadblock in front of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would bring tar sands oil from fields in Canada down through the U.S. midwest, to the Gulf Coast for export.


// ]]>

The pipeline requires State Department approval because it crosses the Canadian border, and it has been under a cloud of intense criticism because it would add a heavy dose of “dirty” fuel to the global energy mix.

The potential involvement of DoD is bad news for pipeline proponents, who already had a pretty bad time of it last week.

Among other things, some not-so-positive hints were dropped in a major speech last Wednesday by noted environmentalist John Kerry, who just so happens to be the new Secretary of State.

Image (cropped): Tank by D’oh Boy (Mark Holloway)

Follow me on Google+ and Twitter

Read More

Final Word On China Solar Duties Due (Sort Of)

The U.S. Commerce Department will announce a final decision today on duties in the China solar trade dispute that has split the U.S. industry and raised fears of a global trade war. Of course, for several months the government has already been collecting duties on certain Chinese solar imports. And, just to be clear, this won’t be the last word in the case.

Confused? Let’s try to sort things out.

u.s. china solar trade dispute

image via Shutterstock

First, Commerce will make a final determination today on the level of duties on crystalline silicon solar PV products from China.

You’ll recall that earlier this year, in two separate rulings, the department ordered preliminary antisubsidy duties ranging from 2.9 to 4.73 percent on imports from China and antidumping duties of around 31 percent on China’s largest solar companies, including Trina and Suntech, and up to nearly 250 percent on other manufacturers. Later, it boosted the antisubsidy duties to 3.44 percent on Wuxi Suntech and 5.81 percent on Trina.

Today, Commerce will nail down those levels. SolarWorld and its Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing cohorts, who started us down this long and winding road nearly a year ago, contend the duties should be heftier in order to fully offset the Chinese industry’s allegedly unfair advantages.

solarworld china duties

image via Wikimedia Commons

The aggrieved U.S. manufacturers and their supporters in Washington are also urging Commerce, in its decision due today, to expand the products subject to duties.

The argument here is that the Chinese companies are doing all the steps of the solar PV process in China except the manufacturing of the cells â€" adding “80 percent of the value of the final product” in China, according to a letter from several members of Congress to the Commerce Department [PDF] â€" and even shipping the product from China, and yet aren’t required to pay duties.

So all of this will be sorted out with the Commerce Department decision today.

But as we said, that won’t be the end of the case.

While the Commerce Department is responsible for determining the level of duties, it’s up to a second government entity, the U.S. International Trade Commission, to decide whether to enforce such duties, based on whether the U.S. crystalline silicon PV manufacturing sector as a whole is being injured by the Chinese practices.

In a preliminary ruling in December 2011, the ITC voted 6-0 that there was enough evidence to send the case forward. The commission is scheduled to decide on Nov. 7 whether to finalize the duties set by the Commerce Department, and whether to impose them retroactively, as has been the case on the preliminary duties. All it will take for the ITC to lock the duties in place will be a 3-3 vote â€" in this case, tie goes to the duties.

And that will finally wrap this thing up.

Read More

Suntech Launches Massive Saudi Arabian Solar System

Christmas Day for the rest of us was celebrated in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with the inauguration of the massive King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center’s (KAPSARC) 3.5 megawatt solar energy field in Riyadh by Saudi Aramco President and CEO Khalid A. Al-Falih.

The massive energy field stretches out over an area of 55,000 square metres and is currently the biggest ground-mounted solar installation connected to the grid in the whole Kingdom.

Suntech Powers Largest Solar System in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

The solar field is using 12,684 fixed-angle Polycrystalline PV panels provided by Suntech, one of the world’s largest producers of solar panels.

The field will provide 5,800 megawatt hours of renewable energy fed into the electric grid, and offset approximately 4,900 tonnes of carbon every year.

The initiation of KAPSARC’s solar field comes hot on the heels of a variety of other announcements made by the renewable industry in Saudi Arabia.

Taking a trip back almost a year and Saudi Arabia was already being billed as the next solar market hotspot. Wind the clock forward by ten months and one of the state’s main spokesmen, Prince Turki Al Faisal Al Saud, said that he was hoping that Saudi Arabia would be powered completely by low-carbon energy within his lifetime.

“Oil is more precious for us underground than as a fuel source,” he said. “If we can get to the point where we can replace fossil fuels and use oil to produce other products that are useful, that would be very good for the world. I wish that may be in my lifetime, but I don’t think it will be.”

Push forward yet another month and Saudi Arabia announced plans to invest $109 billion into solar energy and planned to generate at least a third of its electricity from solar by 2032.

The country has come a long way, considering their amazingly rich fuel reserves, and any push towards a renewable future is good news for a country so dependent upon fossil fuels.

Saudi Aramco President and CEO Khalid A. Al-Falih inaugurated the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center’s (KAPSARC) 3.5 megawatt solar energy field in Riyadh on Dec. 25, 2012.

The solar energy field was built over an area of 55,000 square meters and is currently recognized as the biggest ground-mounted solar installation connected to the electricity grid in the Kingdom.

The solar energy field will feed-in the center loads and electricity grid by about 5,800 megawatt hours of electrical energy annually. The field uses 12,684 fixed-angle Polycrystalline PV panels provided by Suntech with 14.4 percent efficiency and maximum power of 280 watts at standard test conditions. The DC power generated by the panels is collected and inverted to AC power through four inverters.

The 5,800 MWH amount of renewable energy will enable the KAPSARC facility to achieve the platinum LEED certificate. The field will offset carbon (CO2) emissions by about 4,900 tons every year.

The whole process of generating the solar energy field and connecting it to the grid is continuously monitored to analyze the data and measure the production efficiency.

The inauguration was attended by Fahad E. Al-Helal, Saudi Aramco Project Management executive director; Dr. Mohammed Al-Saggaf, president of KAPSARC; Moatz Al-Mashouk, Saudi Aramco Public Service Project general manager; and delegates from Saudi Aramco Power Systems in addition to the project team.

Read More

Polls Divided on Fracking

fracking protestGov. Andrew Cuomo has again put off the decision on whether to lift the moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, in New York. The famously cautious Cuomo has to weigh public opinion that is split down the middle. A Siena College poll found that  Forty-five percent support and 42 percent oppose fracking in the Southern Tier.

A continent away in Poland, there is no fractured opinion about fracking. The Polish people are energized that shale gas development could liberate them from dependence on Russia’s natural gas.

Dimiter Kenarov, a freelance journalist, reported:

Ever since the U.S. Department of Energy’s April 2011 announcement that Poland may hold enormous quantities of shale gas -- 5.3 trillion cubic meters, enough for 300 years of consumption -- hydrocarbon fever has swept the country. Even when the Polish Geological Institute and the U.S. Geological Survey reduced those figures by 90 percent in early 2012, the faith in shale remained unshaken. Nowhere else in Europe has shale gas generated so much enthusiasm among both politicians and the public. The government has already granted 111 exploration concessions on an area of 35,000 square miles, or about a third of the territory of Poland, while polls from last year suggest that 73 percent of the country’s nearly 40 million people back developing shale.

Kenarov recently spoke at the University of Pennsylvania. The discussion was hosted by the Wharton Energy Club. He said the European Union is split on hydraulic fracturing. Poland is at the epicenter of the “polarized debate.” Poland may “make or break the case for Europe.” Indeed, “all eyes are on Poland as it develops its shale gas industry.”

Kenarov observed that shale gas is a game-changer. It is a “complicated topic with a lot of players.” There are far-reaching geological, economic, environmental and geopolitical implications.

Currently, Poland does not have any commercial production of shale gas. Instead, development is at the exploratory stage. Kenarov noted that in contrast to the U.S., landowners do not own mineral rights so they would not receive royalties. Still, the Polish people support diversity of energy supply and independence from Russia.

The United States shares their high hopes. The State Department’s Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program provides assistance to help Poland assess its shale gas resources. Our shared interest in natural gas and energy security was highlighted during President Obama’s visit to Warsaw in May 2011.

Fast forward to the 2013 State of the Union address. Obama made it clear that shale gas is also a game-changer for the U.S.:

Today, no area holds more promise than our investments in American energy. After years of talking about it, we’re finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar â€" with tens of thousands of good American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before â€" and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.

Meanwhile, the debate over fracking rages in New York. It remains an unanswered question whether the Empire State will get in the game.

Read More

German Solar PV In January — €1.52/Watt

Reposted from Solar Love:

German solar PV power prices continue to fall. According to the latest data, the price of solar power for solar power plants with up to 100 kW of capacity has dropped to €1.52 per watt (or $2.03 per watt). Here’s a chart on solar’s long price drop in Germany, via a German PV website:

PV-Preisindex - Photovoltaikumfrage.de - photovoltaik-guide.de - Januar 2013

And below’s a German PV price history from the site, followed by information on the source of the data:

Photovoltaic Price History:

Month PV Price
January 2009 € 4,110
February 2009 € 3,930
March 2009 € 3,820
April 2009 € 3,740
May 2009 € 3,500
June 2009 € 3,500
July 2009 € 3,390
August 2009 € 3,230
September 2009 € 3,110
October 2009 € 3,050
November 2009 € 2,950
December 2009 € 3,060
January 2010 € 3,040
February 2010 € 2,970
March 2010 € 3,030
April 2010 € 2,930
May 2010 € 2,890
June 2010 € 2,840
July 2010 € 2,580
August 2010 € 2,610
September 2010 € 2,540
October 2010 € 2,500
November 2010 € 2,510
December 2010 € 2,470
January 2011 € 2,480
February 2011 € 2,390
March 2011 € 2,350
April 2011 € 2,390
May 2011 € 2,370
June 2011 € 2,300
July 2011 € 2,210
August 2011 € 2,170
September 2011 € 2,120
October 2011 € 2,090
November 2011 € 1,960
December 2011 € 1,950
January 2012 € 1,990
February 2012 € 1,960
March 2012 € 1,990
April 2012 € 1,900
May 2012 € 1,870
June 2012 € 1,740
July 2012 € 1,720
August 2012 € 1,630
September 2012 € 1,610
October 2012 € 1,600
November 2012 € 1,570
December 2012 € 1,590
January 2013 € 1,520

Since 2009, we identified on the basis of our online survey the current prices of turnkey photovoltaic systems up to 100 kWp. Explore the development of asset prices over the last five years.

Up to 300 solar power system operators take part in our monthly poll. The prices are based solely on the information of our subjects / participants. When the prices are net prices (Euro / kWp) for turnkey solar systems up to 100 kWp. We take no responsibility for the accuracy of this data. Errors and omissions excepted.

Have your say in our online survey “Prices of solar power systems in Germany” part and assist you with your participation in the Photovoltaic Price Index.

Read More

Environmental Commissioner of Ontario to release 2011/12 Annual Report, Part II

Environmental Commissioner of Ontario to release 2011/12 Annual Report, Part II

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario , Gord Miller will release his 2011/12 Annual Report, (Part II), Losing Our Touch, at a media conference in the Queen's Park Media Studio at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 2, 2012.

Category: Investment, Solar, Renewable Energy

News about Environmental Commissioner of Ontario

September 27, 2012 (Investorideas.com renewable energy newswire) The report will be available online at www.eco.on.ca, coincident with the media conference.

Accredited media may obtain a print copy of Losing Our Touch at the media conference or at the Legislative Press Gallery, in Room 387A of the Ontario Legislature Building.

This is the major portion of the Annual Report, which follows last week's release of Part I, Losing Touch (available on www.eco.on.ca). Part II, Losing Our Touch, will include substantive reviews of ministry decisions, ministry responses to applications for review and investigation, and other environmental issues.

A live webcast of the conference will be broadcasted via www.eco.on.ca starting at 10:00 a.m. on September 19th. Please note that an up-to-date version Windows Media Player is required to view the webcast. The Environmental Commissioner will not take questions via webcast, but will be available for individual interviews after the media conference. Bilingual support will also be available at the event. For more details, please visit www.eco.on.ca

Media not currently accredited by the QP (Legislative Assembly) Media Gallery must register with the Press Gallery Coordinator Gerald Christopher - Room 387A or 416-325-7922.

The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario is appointed by the Legislative Assembly to be the province's independent environmental watchdog, and report publicly on the government's environmental decision-making.

Aussi disponible en franais.

For more information or to schedule interviews, contact:

Hayley Easto, Communications and Outreach Coordinator
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
416-325-3371 / 416-819-1673, Hayley.Easto@eco.on.ca

More Info:

This news is published on the Investorideas.com Newswire and its syndicated partner network

Publish Your News - Send a release
News now!

Get Investorideas.com investor news and stock alerts
Free Sign Up: http://www.investorideas.com/Resources/Newsletter.asp

Disclaimer: The following news is paid for and /or published as information only for our readers.

Investorideas.com is a third party publisher of news and research. Our sites do not make recommendations, but offer information portals to research news, articles, stock lists and recent research. Nothing on our sites should be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell products or securities. This site is currently compensated by featured companies, news submissions and online advertising. If you have any questions regarding information in this press release please contact the company listed in the press release.

Investorideas.com Disclaimer: http://www.investorideas.com/About/Disclaimer.asp

Investorideas.com Disclosure: http://www.investorideas.com/About/News/Clientspecifics.asp

BC Residents and Investor Disclaimer: Effective September 15 2008 - all BC investors should review all OTC and Pink sheet listed companies for adherence in new disclosure filings and filing appropriate documents with Sedar. Read for more info: http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/release.aspx?id=6894


Read More

Riverside County’s Property Assessed Clean Energy Program Tops $100mm, Goes State-Wide

Homeowners are helping fuel the transition to a clean energy economy, conservation, and more efficient use of energy, water, and other natural resources. Home to the most successful Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program in the nation, California’s Riverside County has announced that its HERO (Home Energy Renovation Opportunity) Program financing is now available throughout the Golden State.

Launched in December 2011 by a partnership made up of 17 cities, Riverside County, Renovate America, SAMAS Capital, Public Financial Management, and David Tausig and Associates, nearly 6,000 homeowners have applied for HERO financing. More than $100 million has been provided for successful applicants to carry out home clean energy and energy efficiency projects, according to the HERO program partnership.

Photo Credit: GRID Alternatives

It was just back in late September that the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) announced that $40 million in home energy retrofits had been financed via the HERO program.

Now expanding state-wide, WRCOG’s HERO Program is based on the principles set out in California’s AB811, “which allows property owners to pay for permanently affixed energy and water efficient products and renewable energy systems over time through their property taxes.” Eligible projects include Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems, insulation, water heating, and solar PV systems, the partnership explains.

Municipal bonds are issued and loans made from banks participating in HERO and other PACE programs to finance residential clean energy, energy efficiency, and water conservation projects. To repay them, homeowners agree to pay more in property taxes over varying periods of time, from 5 to 20 years, with interest payments tax deductible. The payments can be transferred if the home is sold before all payments have been made.

“The rapid expansion of the HERO Financing Program shows us that this is the right program at the right time for our residents,” City of Calimesa Council Member Jim Hyatt commented. “Homeowners are ready to make these investments, and convenient access to affordable financing seems to be making a difference in encouraging homeowners to move forward with these types of projects.”

“Cities and counties that are looking to provide a residential and commercial PACE solution can now do so through HERO. The Program can co-exist with other PACE programs or serve as a stand-alone solution for cities and counties,” added Renovate America’s Mark Rodgers.

The PACE program has also been a boon to local contractors and economies. More than 530 Riverside County contractors have signed on as program participants to date.

“HERO Financing has been a huge part of the growth my business has seen over the past few months. After years of having customers make upgrades only when absolutely necessary, I have been pleasantly surprised to see homeowners coming out of the woodwork to make the changes they have long dreamed about,” Synergy Companies’ Glen Rusche elaborated.

Also adding to the momentum behind growing residential and small-scale solar deployment, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in January announced the state government will provide $150 million a year for the NY-Sun initiative, the goal of which is “to quadruple customer-sited solar capacity in New York State,” sister site Red, Green & Blue recently reported.

“Solar is the fastest-growing energy source in the US, up 500 percent” since President Obama took office, rising from 1,100 megawatts (MW) to more than 6,400 at the end of Q3 2012, Solar Energy Industry Association senior VP Carrie Cullen Hitt noted, adding that the US solar industry now employs more than 119,000 workers at 5,600 companies, mostly small businesses.

Read More

Texas Wind Power Transmission Set to Skyrocket as Energy Exec Hints at End of Nukes

A $7 billion project that will send wind power from remote areas in West Texas to Dallas, Houston and other big cities is on the verge of completion, and that could pound yet another nail into the coffin for U.S. nuclear power and, for that matter, coal. The new Texas wind power project was authorized by the state’s Public Utility Commission (PUC) in 2008. When completed some time this year it will include 3,500 miles of new line carrying up to 18,456 megawatts, and according to a trade news report, PUC is already looking to order more wind power transmission lines, apparently with connections to out of state markets.

The question is, does this really mean that nuclear and coal power are on the way out?

new transmission lines for texas wind power

Texas Wind Power Up, Nukes Down

Well yes, eventually, according to Christopher Crane, the CEO of energy giant Exelon. In an interview with the Chicago Tribune last week, Crane predicted that the influx of low cost wind power would lead the company to start shuttering its nuclear plants.

That’s no idle conjecture (or threat, as the case may be). Direct costs and risk management issues are already casting a shadow over the nuclear industry in Texas.

In 2011, rival utility giant NRG was set to build two new power plants in Texas but backed off as a wind power surplus combined with a stiffer regulatory environment for nuclear power, consequent on the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

The U.S. market isn’t the only place where nuclear energy is getting a chilly reception due to cost and safety concerns. The U.K.’s ambitious plan to build 10 new nuclear power plants just lost the backing of British utility Centrica, which is apparently going to concentrate its resources on renewable energy as well as natural gas.

Texas Wind Power Up, Coal Down

Coal is on even more shaky ground, partly because new wind farms and other clean energy facilities are beginning to offer more competitive alternatives, and also because existing coal power plants are being converted to other fuels, namely biomass and natural gas.

As with nuclear power, the regulatory framework is also becoming more hostile to coal. Just yesterday the Washington Post editorial board urged President Obama to lay out a forceful climate change action plan in his upcoming State-of-the-Union address, noting that the Environmental Protection Agency is already poised to issue new rules that don’t require Congress to consent:

“The EPA has already established or is in the process of establishing a range of new air pollution rules. These rules will ensure than no new conventional coal plants are built in the United States, and they will force the closure of some particularly awful, ancient coal-fired facilities.”

The Global Energy Whack-a-Mole

Though the U.S. utility landscape is transitioning to safer, renewable forms of energy, that’s not going to have much of an effect on global greenhouse gas emissions.

The domestic market for coal is drying up, but U.S. coal companies have simply begun exporting more coal abroad. For that matter, pressure is mounting on Congress to allow more natural gas exports due to the domestic gas boom, and the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would make the U.S. an export enabler of notoriously “dirty” tar sands oil from Canada.

As for nuclear energy, the nation’s stock of aging nuclear facilities is creating one giant headache for local emergency planners to say nothing of ratepayers and taxpayers.

It’s also creating a conundrum for diversified energy companies like Exelon, which operates the nation’s largest fleet of nuclear facilities but is also rapidly embracing wind and other renewables in its portfolio.


// ]]>

Last year, Exelon’s nuclear interests put it in the awkward position of opposing extension of the wind power tax credit, for which offense the company was kicked out of the American Wind Energy Association.

However, Exelon is also starting to amass significant wind power interests. Though wind and other renewables only account for about three percent of the company’s capacity now, that could change pretty fast.

Exelon’s first commercial wind farm only started operating in January 2012, and the company already has 44 wind projects operating in 10 different states.

Image: Texas wind farm by katsrcool (Bob)

Follow me on Google+ and Twitter

Read More

Why Keystone XL is Not in the U.S. National Interest

Secretary of State John Kerry’s first major international meeting came with Canadian foreign minister John Baird. At the press conference, Secretary Kerry faced (and essentially shunted aside) questions about Keystone XL.  A Climate Hawk as U.S. Senator, Secretary Kerry faced a difficult situation: Canada is pushing hard to enrich itself with the world’s worst environmental disaster and the United States has to decide whether it will help worsen the situation as the Department of State in nearing the end of a process of review of the Keystone XL pipeline.

In short, the question the Department of State must answer:

Is Keystone XL in the U.S. national interest?

And, more briefly, the answer:

No.

With full explanations after the fold, here are reasons why Keystone XL is a reckless, dangerous, and counter-productive project that should not be allowed to proceed.

In short, Keystone XL would

  • Contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions;
  • Foster accelerated damage to one of the most important carbon sinks;
  • Create risks for water sources;
  • Facilitate expansion of the most destructive industrial project on earth;
  • Increase spill risks of extremely difficult to clean-up and damaging Dilbit in extremely sensitive ecosystems;
  • Divert resources from efforts to reduce American and global dependence on fossil fuels;
  • Threaten employment;
  • Damage economic performance;
  • Threaten American health;
  • Increase gas prices for much of the American Heartland;
  • Increase profitability of Canadian and other foreign oil interests by taking money out of Americans’ pockets; and,
  • Damage American leadership around the globe as we struggle to mitigate climate change.

If this seems a long list, it is.

Despite the $10s ($100s) of millions spent on partial truths, disinformation, and propaganda, the fundamental facts demonstrate that this project should not go forward, that it is counter to U.S. national interest.

Crippling drought. Devastating wildfires. Superstorm Sandy. Climate has come home â€" and the American people get it.

The first step to putting our country on the path to addressing the climate crisis is for President Obama to reject the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. His legacy as president will rest squarely on his response, resolve, and leadership in solving the climate crisis.

On 17 February 2013, President’s Day, 100,000s of American citizens will be in front of the White House calling for the Obama Administration to recognize â€" and declare â€" that the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the U.S. national interest.  Join them.

A simple question to consider:

If we don’t say no now, when will we say no?

Let us take a moment to ‘review’ the bidding as to why Keystone XL pipeline is not in the national interest.

Thus, a simple question as to Keystone XL:  Why not?

The Keystone XL pipeline would

  • Ease expansion of environmentally devastating tar sands oil exploitation.
  • Worsen prospects for mitigating climate change
  • Lead to increased fuel prices for significant numbers of Americans
    • Currently, tar sands imported into the United States are refined mainly in Upper Midwest refineries and oversupply of fuel products there have lead to a lowered crude fuel and consumer prices for much of the Upper Midwest when compared to global oil prices. Keystone XL would move this fuel into the international market and out of American fuel tanks.
    • In fact, tar sands exploiters would see their profits come up, money coming out of American citizens’ pockets.
  • Create increased risks of oil pipeline spills
    • The first Keystone pipeline, which is relatively new, has had a large number of leaks.
    • Keystone XL would go through sensitive areas where a pipeline leak could impact sensitive environmental areas and numerous Americans’ health.
    • The product, called Dilbit, is much more dangerous and difficult to clean up in the event of a spill. Even the most cursory look at the industry’s record leads to a simple conclusion: pipeline spills will occur.
  • Threaten employment
  • Hurt America’s prospects for achieving a clean energy future
    • The pipeline would divert attention and resources from other paths and opportunities.
    • The pipeline’s approval feeds into a ‘drill, baby, drill’ mentality that fundamentally fails that increased production is counter to achieving energy security.
  • Undermine America’s ability to lead internationally.
    • Addressing climate change will require difficult decisions by individuals, communities, businesses, and nations.  Due to the $100s of billions involved and the power of polluting industries, the correct decision that rejecting Keystone XL is the right thing to do for U.S. national interest has become a difficult decision to make. If the United States is to be a world leader in addressing climate change and if the United States is to have any credibility in asking others to make difficult choices, the United States must show that it can make the correct decision even when it is difficult. As Professor John Abraham put it, “If we don’t say no now, when will we say no?“

Very simply, oil industry lobbyist claims to the contrary, the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the U.S. national interest.

Read More

Lock-In Wedges to Address Climate Change

Nearly a decade ago then-CEO of BP, Lord John Browne, gave a landmark presentation on climate change mitigation in the City of London. He introduced to the broader interest group (the work had already circulated in the academic sector) the idea of stabilization wedges, which had been developed by Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow at Princeton within a research program supported by BP. Each wedge represented one of a number of quantifiable actions that together were necessary to move from a business as usual (BAU) global emissions trajectory to a given atmospheric stabilization of CO2. In the initial study that stabilization was 500 ppm.

Wedges

Wedges were on a very large scale (up to 1 GtC/annum) and consisted of actions such as:

  • Increase fuel economy for 2 billion cars from 30 to 60 mpg
  • Replace 1400 GW 50%-efficient coal plants with gas plants (four times the current production of gas-based power)
  • Introduce CCS at 800 GW coal or 1600 GW natural gas (compared with 1060 GW coal in 1999) power plants.
  • Add 700 GW (twice the current capacity) of nuclear fission capacity

This was the first real attempt to quantify the physical changes required in the energy system and turn that into an overriding story which people could actually understand. Many variations on the approach followed in subsequent years. More recently, researchers from universities in the USA and China looked again at the wedges and concluded that the scale of the issue had grown and that an even more ambitious set of wedges would be required to address the climate issue. The team behind this analysis introduced the concept of “phase-out” wedges, or wedges that represent the complete transition from energy infrastructure and land-use practices that emit CO2 (on a net basis) to the atmosphere to infrastructure and practices which do not. But this raises the major issue of stranded assets, or assets that have to be abandoned before their useful life has ended, typically because of economic impairment.

An alternative way of looking at this issue is to consider “lock-in” wedges. Each represents a chunk of infrastructure in use today that is very likely to continue operating until the end of its normal life, emitting CO2 while doing so and therefore adding to the growing accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. According to the Oxford University Department of Physics, cumulative carbon emissions today stand at some 567 billion tonnes (since 1750). Limiting the global temperature rise to 2°C requires limiting cumulative carbon emissions to one trillion tonnes. Each wedge adds towards a total committed block of emissions, which in turn would lock us into a 2°C or greater outcome should that commitment block be greater than 433 billion tonnes (1 trillion less 567 billion). Major wedges are described below:

  1. The largest existing commitment is coal fired power stations. While the next generation of facilities may well be fitted with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) or at least be “CCS ready”, existing power stations may never be retrofitted. Today there is some 2000 GW of coal fired capacity, with each GW emitting about 6 million tonnes of CO2 per annum. More than half of this has been built in this century, so we might assume an average age of 16 years for the existing facilities. That leaves about 30 more years of operation. Even assuming that no more are built, that means cumulative CO2 emissions of 300 billion tonnes, or 80 billion tonnes of carbon. But we could well build another 1000 GW without CCS, so that alone adds another 225 billion tonnes of CO2, or 60 billion tonnes of carbon.
  2. There are about 1 billion passenger cars in the world today and production is now over 60 million per annum. Assuming the average age of a current world car is 7-8 years and the average lifetime of a car is 15 years, this population could emit a further 10 billion tonnes of carbon. We will almost certainly build another billion internal combustion engine cars, which in turn will add a further 16 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere.
  3. Natural gas use in power generation is growing rapidly, with some 1600 GW in use today, growing to 2000 GW over this decade. By the early 2020s, only a tiny fraction  of this capacity will have CCS. Given that a gas fired power station emits less than half the amount  CO2 compared to a similar sized coal plant, this fleet could see a further 140-150 billion tones of CO2, or about 40 billion tonnes of carbon emitted prior to retirement.
  4. According to the IEA, residential use of gas results in 1 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions per annum. This is somewhat hard wired into cities, so difficult to dislodge any time soon (although having replaced our gas boiler at home with an electric one because of new UK flue regulations, it’s clearly not that difficult). Nevertheless, this could well continue for 30-40 years, so perhaps another 10 billion tonnes of carbon.
  5. Aviation and shipping have both an existing fleet and show almost no sign of finding viable large scale routes to zero emissions (but biofuels may be the solution for both). Expect another thirty years of emissions at a minimum, which is another 10 billion tonnes of carbon.
  6. Finally, there is manufacturing industry which emits 6 billion tonnes of CO2 per annum globally. This includes refineries, ferrous and nonferrous metal producers, cement plants, chemical plants, the pulp and paper industry and various other sectors. Capacity is renewing rapidly both because of growth and development but also because of the gradual decline of developed country capacity in favour of much larger and more efficient production in regions such as the Middle East. New capacity will operate for thirty years at least, so this sector could be responsible for another 120 billion tonnes or more of CO2 or about 32 billion tonnes of carbon.

The sum of these “climate lock-in wedges” now looks something like this:

Climate Lock In Wedges 

This picture includes the major sources of emissions (e.g. oil fired power stations not included) and probably represents the best case in terms of retirement of existing assets. Staying within the trillion tonne limit therefore leaves little room for complacency with regards the next generation of assets and particularly the use of CCS in power generation. An alternate view of this would be to just look at the current proven reserves of oil, gas and coal which amount to about 1.3 trillion tonnes (BP Statistical review of World Energy). If totally consumed without the application of CCS, they would result in over 1 trillion tonnes of carbon emissions, bringing the total accumulation since 1750 to 1.7 trillion tonnes.

Read More

10 Huge Lessons We’ve Learned From Solar Power Success In Germany

Fox & Friends last week had the apparent bravery (or ill-conceived agenda) to mention Germany’s huge solar power success. We’ve written three articles in response to the Fox & Friends clip:

Another article that might help those who have been confused by Fox & Friends is this one (which I’ve been planning to write since September 2012). The fact of the matter is, Germany has had insane success in the solar industry arena. And there’s a lot that we can learn from the country (many other countries have already done so).

1. Feed-in tariffs (aka CLEAN Contracts in the US) can drive solar power growth like nothing else.

Well, maybe there are other things that could drive even stronger growth, but nothing else has done so to date. Germany leads the world in solar in many respects. As of the end of 2011, it had more solar power per capita than any other country, it has more solar power relative to electricity production than any country other than Italy (which has also used FiTs), and it has more solar power per GDP than any country other than the Czech Republic (which also followed Germany’s lead and implemented FiTs). Clearly, Germany and those who have followed with their own FiTs have seen more solar power growth than others. As John Farrell noted back in 2011 (still true today), FiTs have been used for the installation most solar (and wind) power in the world:

And, as noted in the first Fox News article listed at the top, Germany crushes the US (which has not implemented FiTs) in solar power capacity:

2. A more mature solar power market sells solar power for a much lower price.

Solar panels are a global commodity. Their price is essentially the same all around the world. However, the “soft costs” of a solar power system can vary tremendously. As noted back in June 2012, German solar installations cost a little more than half what US solar installations cost. At that time, German systems were being installed for an average of $2.24 per watt, while US systems were being installed for an average of $4.44 per watt. Now, US systems are probably down to about $4.00 per watt, but German systems are down to about $2.00 per watt.

The good news is, people have studied this, and we have a pretty clear indication of where the costs differ.

As you can see in the charts above, big differences exist in installation labor, customer acquisition, overhead, and supply chain costs. As a market matures and becomes more competitive, those costs come down. (Note: notable solar energy champions in the US have also speculated that US solar tax credits have kept solar power systems artificially high in the US â€" the argument seems quite logical and comes from someone I greatly trust in this arena.)

// ]]>

3. More streamlined permitting works.

Because solar panels produce electricity, many jurisdictions across the US have all sorts of absurd permitting requirements that treat rooftop solar systems as if they are large-scale power plants or alien monsters that could destroy society. Permitting in the US is expensive (see the ILSR chart above) and takes forever and a day (or, more accurately, an average of two months). As one of our Australian writers noted recently, he was shocked to see the level of bureaucracy applied to simple solar power systems in the US.

Germany has rules about solar panel installations. They work really well. You can get a system installed almost immediately, and without paying for a bunch of paperwork. More or less, US jurisdictions regulating this matter should just look at what Germany’s got on the books and copy it.

4. Feed-in tariffs democratize the electric grid.

This is perhaps one of the most exciting lessons from Germany. As John Farrell noted in the title of one of the articles listed at the top of this page, “Germany has more solar power because everyone wins.” While US solar subsidies (tax credits) favor the rich and Wall Street, German solar subsidies favor the common man. Well, actually, they just favor everyone equally.

Guess what the result is. Yep, a lot more common people install solar in Germany than in the US. US solar power is primarily from large-scale solar power plants, while German solar power is primarily from rooftop solar power on residents’ homes. The “power company” in Germany is increasingly the citizenry.

5. Democratizing the grid gets residents informed and motivated about energy.

Guess what happens when you democratize the electric grid. People become more interested in energy, more informed, more motivated to save energy and get involved in the politics of energy. As someone once noted (sorry that I can’t recall the source), Germany may be the only country in the world where the taxi drivers can talk to you at length about energy policy. The same goes for energy use, the cost of energy, etc.

Democracy is built on information â€" on people having access to information, and people actually consuming and spreading that information. Democracies that do that less are weaker. Democracies that do that more are stronger. With energy being a critical component of life, as well as the richest industry in the world, having a citizenry that is highly informed about the intricacies of energy is a very valuable commodity.

If only there were a way to get people motivated about energy…. Oh yeah â€" solar policies that benefit the masses will do that!

6. The grid will not fall apart at 5% solar penetration… or 10%… or 15%… or 20%.

Early in Germany’s solar power days, critics of a solar revolution, and even many supporters, were convinced that solar penetration of the grid would be unmanageable, that solar would have to be limited to a certain percentage of the electricity supply. Initially, the idea was that 5% penetration was the max. As that approached and everyone could see that there wasn’t anything to worry about, the bar was raised to 10%, and then 15%, and then 20%.

Solar PV capacity in Germany is now equal to 50% of peak summer electricity demand:

In May 2012, solar power provided electricity for a record 30% of electricity demand:

Furthermore, studies continue to up the degree to which renewables can penetrate the grid without adding storage or creating problems. A German engineering study last year found that, “There isn’t much of a need for power storage in Germany even if it increases the share of its electricity that is generated by renewable sources by around 50%,” we reported in October. A comprehensive study released in December 2012 found that solar, wind, and storage could power the electricity grid 99.9% by 2030 cheaper than any other option.

Furthermore, decentralized solar power actually provides many benefits for the grid and society!

Of course, it decreases deadly pollution and cuts water use. However, beyond that, it also guards against fuel price volatility, decreases the risk of power outages, adds grid stability, increases grid security, and cuts the price of electricity. Let’s get into that last one in a bit more detail.

7. Solar power brings down the price of wholesale electricity.

This is a topic we’ve covered extensively before. But it’s not quick to explain, so bear with me.

Electricity suppliers get their electricity on the grid through a bidding process. The suppliers that can sell their electricity to the grid for cheapest win. Because the costs of solar and wind power plants are essentially just in the process of building them (the fuel costs are $0 and the maintenance costs are negligible), they can outbid pretty much every other source of power. As a result, 1) they win the bids when they produce electricity; 2) they drive down the price of wholesale electricity.

Because solar power is often produced when electricity demand is the greatest (and electricity is, thus, the least available and most expensive), it brings down the price of electricity even more than wind.

For more reading along these lines, see:

8. Even very grey places can generate a lot of solar power.

Despite what Fox solar experts might say, Germany has more grey days than you’d care to see. In fact, it has less in the way of solar resources than Alaska! And far less than most of the United States. But don’t take my word for it. Simply take a look at these solar resources maps from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory:

solar resources map NREL

9. Even once solar power capacity is equal to 50% of electricity demand, utility execs, fossil fuel execs, their buddies in government, and their buddies in the media won’t stop fighting it.

Fossil fuel companies lose revenue and profit when solar power increases. Utility companies are in a similar boat. These are some of the richest industries in the world. They aren’t going to relinquish their profit streams easily. They’re also among those spending the most money to buy friends in high government positions. And they certainly wouldn’t be spending hundreds of millions of dollars on that if it didn’t pay off. Us poor folk in the media are even easier to smooch, buy off, or simply confuse with easy-to-accept facts from those with the “facts.”

Germany may be in a better boat (democratically) than the US, but it still has rich people working to influence politicians and the media. It still has politicians working to change the laws to limit solar power’s growth. It still has reporters in major media getting the story horribly wrong, confusing millions of people along the way.

In other words, Big Coal, Fox, Senator Boehner and gang, and even reporters in outlets like the NYTimes and Washington Post won’t change their overall opinion about solar even as it grows and grows and grows, even as it becomes cheaper for homeowners in more and more places.

10. People love the sun â€" they love clean, solar energy â€" and they always will.

In poll after poll after poll, we can see that solar energy is the most popular type of energy amongst US citizens. Often, 90% or more of respondents are supportive of solar and policies to support solar. Naturally, at such a high percentage, this crosses political boundaries.

No matter how much fossil fuel fat cats, or their friends in politics and media, try to confuse the populace, most people will favor solar energy. Perhaps it’s linked to people’s natural love for the sun. Perhaps it’s linked to their understanding that solar power is better for our air, our water, and our climate. Perhaps it’s because they understand (maybe even just subconsciously) that solar power inclines itself toward more decentralized, democratic ownership. Perhaps it’s because they realize that energy from the sun is cheap, abundant, stable, and widespread. Perhaps it’s a combination of all those things.

And, no matter what anyone tells you, this support for solar doesn’t go away as solar power installations increase. Just take a tour through Germany and talk to people about it!

thomas edison clean energy

Read More
Powered By Blogger · Designed By Alternative Energy