WORLD RENEWABLE ENERGY FORUM: Day One

As would be expected, for I am creating this blog live while attending the sessions, the World Renewable Energy Forum provides free wireless anywhere in the Colorado Convention Center, which is energized by a 300 kW solar photovoltaic system supporting 14% of the electricity and 23% of the air-conditioning.  Nearly half of the waste is re-cycled and 75 of the landscaping comes from their reclaimed water.

I haven't been to this annual solar gathering in a decade, and maybe two, while the world went right pass me.  For example, you can Twit (@ASES_Solar, using #WREF12), download a WREF app (crwd.cc/wref12) and connect with facebook.com/AmericanSolarEnergySociety.  Not sure what these mean.

The opening plenary session featured their two U.S. Senators, Michael Bennet and Mark Udall.  Both are champions of solar.  National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Director Dan Arvizu (left) gave a lengthy state of solar speech.  His, and just about all the coming talks, will no doubt be the equivalent of "preaching to the choir."  Arvizu, though, did say that the technologies currently of priority for NREL only provide about 2% of world energy usage.  But the potential is many times current consumption.

A discouraging aspect of all these studies is a chart he showed of more than a hundred comprehensive studies on what percent renewables might supply in the Year 2050, and they ranged from 2% to 77%.  It will all depend on factors such as willpower, Peak Oil, Global Climate Warming, wars, ingenuity, international collaboration...whatever.  But there is absolutely no question that we should be spending more (his lab has doubled technical staffing from five years ago) for the sustainables, much more.  This comparative analysis is already outdated because the United Nations has a 26 page report saying 80% on 2050.  So, of course, Ecofys says 100% in 2050 (book to the right).  One thing about solar advocates:  their enthusiasm shows no limit.

While "Biomass and Liquid Fuels" sounded enticing, the papers were too esoteric:  "Sulfur speciation and partitioning during thermochemical conversion" and the like.  Similarly for "WREC International Forum on Ocean Energy":  where the technologies were limited to wave and tides, and there was nothing much of relevance.

Thus, I went on to the session, Running the World on Renewables, chaired by Bill Leighty (wleighty@earthlink.net), featuring solar luminaries such as, left, Denis Hayes (dhayes@bullitt.org), Stephen Crolius (scrolius@clintonfoundation.org--Clinton Climate Initiative) and Mark Jacobson (jacobson@stanford.edu).  Hayes, of course, founded Earth Day in 1970 and was an early NREL head.  To the right is how he looked then.  Curiously enough, all these four got their start at Stanford University.

Jacobson (left):  4 million 5MW wind energy conversion systems at 100 meters can provide 50% of the current energy used.  The ultimate production can be 15 times greater than current use.  No fundamental barriers for windpower  In all cases, windpower actually cools the atmosphere.

Hayes:  talked on the hydrogen potential from solar and wind, with ammonia being the fuel of choice.

The key information point was that a gallon of liquid ammonia had more accessible hydrogen than a gallon of liquid hydrogen, similar to methanol.  However, NH3 has no carbon, while CH3O does.  In addition, I asked about the efficiency of a direct ammonia fuel cell, and the response was that a solid oxide fuel cell effectively reforms the compound in the process, and tests are beginning to apply this concept to trucks.  I further learned things like hydrogen pipelines will cost about twice as conventional ones.

Otherwise, later in the day I asked a largely NREL panel on algal fuels what was the real cost today in view of the Navy purchasing 450,000 gallons for $27/gallon to be used at RimPac in Hawaii, and what might be expected in five to ten years.  The consensus was....nothing worth repeating.  There must be an NREL guideline to be safe through amorphous obscurity.  One of them in private after the session offered under $5/gallon ($210/barrel) in five years as possible.  So what about those $1/$2/$3/gallon announcements by pioneering algae firms?  The panel was circumspect.

Return Wednesday for U.S. Secretary of Energy and Nobel Laureate Steven Chu, who has never appeared before this Forum before.  He has been pro-solar, unlike his stance on hydrogen, so all should go well.  For the record, his position on hydrogen is similar to mine.

-