Japan to fight global warming, oil prices by replacing gas cars with ethanol ones by 2030
AP) -- Japan plans to fight global warming and surging oil prices by requiring that all vehicles be able to run on an environment-friendly mix of ethanol and regular gasoline by 2030, an official said Thursday.
The new policy, adopted by the Environment Ministry this month, will require all new cars to be able to run on a blend of 10 percent ethanol, an alcohol fuel often made from corn or sugar, and 90 percent gasoline, starting in 2010, said Takeshi Sekiya, an official at the ministry's global warming division. Costs and implementation are still being studied. The switch to ethanol underlines the new urgency felt by industrialized countries trying to rein in the effects of greenhouse gases and reduce dependence on foreign oil. Ethanol blends are already widely used in Brazil, and on Wednesday, U.S. automakers announced plans to double production of vehicles using the so-called flexible-fuel technology by 2010. "The main goal is to counter global warming," Sekiya said. "Adopting the new technology is not that difficult." Japan currently allows ethanol mixtures of up to 3 percent at the nation's pumps, but in practice "almost no cars" run on the fuel, Sekiya said. To encourage the market, the ministry will ramp up production of ethanol fuel on the southern island of Miyako, where a plentiful supply of sugar cane will be converted into fuel for the island's estimated 20,000 cars in the next three years. The goal is to have all cars on the nation's roads capable of running on the new fuel by 2030. By mixing in the plant-based fuel, scientists can reduce the harmful greenhouse gases churned out in vehicle exhaust _ a top priority for Japan, which is the world's second-large economy and a top air pollution offender, despite being a key driver behind to the Kyoto Protocol _ an international agreement to cut global output of carbon dioxide by 2012.
Japan also imports nearly all its oil and is keen to find alternative energy sources. Yet many obstacles remain to a smooth switch over, starting with the fact that ethanol fuel is more expensive than gasoline and contains about two-thirds of the fuel value. Japan's goal of a 10-percent ethanol blend also falls short of the standards being met by U.S. automakers, which are already producing cars that can run on 85-percent ethanol blends. General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group have produced 5 million flexible fuel vehicles that can run on 85 percent ethanol. They are expected to produce an additional 1 million of the vehicles this year, and Wednesday's new commitment would lead to 2 million annually by 2010. While only a handful of cars in Japan are actually running on ethanol blends, all vehicles produced by Toyota Motor Co., the world's No. 2 automaker, already meet the new 10-percent standard, Sekiya said. The trial run on Miyako will help bring down production costs so the technology can be spread nationwide, he added. By HANS GREIMEL, Associated Press Writer Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Friday, June 30, 2006
House votes to allow more offshore drilling - Yahoo! News
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday voted to scrap a 25-year-old federal ban on most offshore oil and natural gas drilling, allowing energy exploration 100 miles from the coastline, and possibly within 50 miles unless states say no.
The Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, which passed 232-187, could open up waters off the east and west coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico off Florida, collectively known as the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
"Our OCS is loaded" with oil and natural gas, said Rep. John Peterson (news, bio, voting record), Pennsylvania Republican, one of the bill's co-sponsors. "It could supply us for decades."
"I find it strange that people who live so far from the action have all the answers," said Rep. Alcee Hastings (news, bio, voting record), Florida Democrat, criticizing lawmakers from inland states who called for more drilling off his state's coast.
Currently, federal offshore drilling is allowed only in Alaska, Alabama, Louisiana and Texas.
The bill still must be reconciled with a narrower plan yet to pass the Senate which would allow drilling in nearly 3 million acres of federal acres in federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico known as Lease Sale 181. The House bill is unlikely to emerge from any bargaining session with the Senate in its current form.
The House bill would require energy companies with existing leases to drill in federal waters to renegotiate their deals or face a "conservation fee" that would tack $9 a barrel of oil or $1.25 per thousand cubic feet of natural gas onto what they produce.
The White House said it strongly opposes the renegotiation provision even though the current deal struck with energy firms could lose the federal government up to $10 billion over the next 25 years.
The House bill distributes billions of royalty dollars to coastal states that allow drilling, which also drew a rebuke from the White House.
Revenue-sharing provisions in the bill could reduce federal receipts by "several hundred billion dollars" over 60 years, the White House said.
The White House wants more OCS drilling, but "strongly opposes" provisions that would share up to 64 percent of revenues from drilling in federal waters within 12 miles of shore with adjacent states, its Office of Management and Budget said.
According to the
Congressional Budget Office' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Congressional Budget Office, Congress' nonpartisan watchdog, the bill would produce $900 million in federal funds from 2007 to 2016. Most of the bill's cost are pushed out beyond the CBO's 10-year window of analysis, Democrats said.
The House bill would permanently ban drilling within 50 miles of a state's coastline.
Natural gas drilling would be allowed between 50 and 100 miles offshore, unless a state called for a ban within one year after the bill is signed into law.
States would have much longer, until June 30, 2009, to enact bans on oil drilling from 50 miles to 100 miles offshore.
Exploration for oil and gas would be allowed anywhere beyond 100 miles.
Some 40 Republicans pressed for an amendment raising automobile fuel efficiency standards to 33 miles per gallon by 2016 from 27.5 mpg currently, but party leaders refused to allow a vote.
"It's astonishing that this House would debate opening the entire coast of the United States to oil drilling when we haven't voted on a single significant bill this year to increase conservation," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (news, bio, voting record), New York Republican.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday voted to scrap a 25-year-old federal ban on most offshore oil and natural gas drilling, allowing energy exploration 100 miles from the coastline, and possibly within 50 miles unless states say no.
The Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, which passed 232-187, could open up waters off the east and west coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico off Florida, collectively known as the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
"Our OCS is loaded" with oil and natural gas, said Rep. John Peterson (news, bio, voting record), Pennsylvania Republican, one of the bill's co-sponsors. "It could supply us for decades."
"I find it strange that people who live so far from the action have all the answers," said Rep. Alcee Hastings (news, bio, voting record), Florida Democrat, criticizing lawmakers from inland states who called for more drilling off his state's coast.
Currently, federal offshore drilling is allowed only in Alaska, Alabama, Louisiana and Texas.
The bill still must be reconciled with a narrower plan yet to pass the Senate which would allow drilling in nearly 3 million acres of federal acres in federal waters in the eastern Gulf of Mexico known as Lease Sale 181. The House bill is unlikely to emerge from any bargaining session with the Senate in its current form.
The House bill would require energy companies with existing leases to drill in federal waters to renegotiate their deals or face a "conservation fee" that would tack $9 a barrel of oil or $1.25 per thousand cubic feet of natural gas onto what they produce.
The White House said it strongly opposes the renegotiation provision even though the current deal struck with energy firms could lose the federal government up to $10 billion over the next 25 years.
The House bill distributes billions of royalty dollars to coastal states that allow drilling, which also drew a rebuke from the White House.
Revenue-sharing provisions in the bill could reduce federal receipts by "several hundred billion dollars" over 60 years, the White House said.
The White House wants more OCS drilling, but "strongly opposes" provisions that would share up to 64 percent of revenues from drilling in federal waters within 12 miles of shore with adjacent states, its Office of Management and Budget said.
According to the
Congressional Budget Office' name=c1> SEARCHNews News Photos Images Web' name=c3> Congressional Budget Office, Congress' nonpartisan watchdog, the bill would produce $900 million in federal funds from 2007 to 2016. Most of the bill's cost are pushed out beyond the CBO's 10-year window of analysis, Democrats said.
The House bill would permanently ban drilling within 50 miles of a state's coastline.
Natural gas drilling would be allowed between 50 and 100 miles offshore, unless a state called for a ban within one year after the bill is signed into law.
States would have much longer, until June 30, 2009, to enact bans on oil drilling from 50 miles to 100 miles offshore.
Exploration for oil and gas would be allowed anywhere beyond 100 miles.
Some 40 Republicans pressed for an amendment raising automobile fuel efficiency standards to 33 miles per gallon by 2016 from 27.5 mpg currently, but party leaders refused to allow a vote.
"It's astonishing that this House would debate opening the entire coast of the United States to oil drilling when we haven't voted on a single significant bill this year to increase conservation," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (news, bio, voting record), New York Republican.
New Scientist Breaking News - 'Sugar plastic' could reduce reliance on petroleum
A new way to make plastics out of sugar could help reduce the world’s reliance on petroleum. The technique could ultimately allow industry to make plastics from high-fructose corn syrups or other plant materials.
Companies and research organisations around the world are experimenting with plant-based plastics in a bid to lower carbon dioxide emissions and reduce the use of petroleum as oil stocks decline.
Now researchers led by chemical engineer James A. Dumesic at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, have developed an efficient way to convert fructose into a polymer precursor.
The researchers were interested in a chemical called 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), which can easily be converted into furandicarboxylic acid (FDCA). This is similar in structure to a petroleum-based precursor for the type of plastic commonly used in plastic bottles.
Unusable waste
But HMF has previously been difficult and expensive to make in quantity. This is because as HMF is produced, it reacts with any fructose remaining in the solution to produce an unusable waste material.
To change fructose to HMF, the researchers "dehydrated" it by adding an acid to strip off water molecules. Then, to prevent the newly formed HMF from reacting with the remaining fructose, they added a solvent.
This bound to the HMF and floated above the water, preventing further contact with any remaining fructose. Further chemicals were added to prevent troublesome side reactions.
The result was a reaction that converted 90% of the fructose in a solution to HMF. Once the reaction was complete, the solvent was boiled away, leaving the HMF to be turned into plastic.
Biodegradable plastic
Bio-based polymers are not new. One of the oldest plastics is celluloid, made out of the naturally occurring polymer cellulose. More recently, bacteria have been used to convert sugar into PHA, a biodegradable plastic.
But the researchers hope that because of its different chemical structure, HMF will allow engineers to design plastics with a range of different properties.
"There are many types of petroleum-based polymers with different properties and it will be necessary to develop many types of bio-based polymers with different properties as alternatives," says Timothy D. Leathers, a research geneticist at the US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service in Peoria, Illinois.
Herbert Vogel, a chemical engineer at Darmstadt University of Technology in Germany, says that the next step will be for someone to build a pilot plant to make large amounts of HMF that can be turned into plastics. But he warned that industry has little incentive to do so while petrochemicals remain relatively cheap.
Journal reference: Science (vol 312, p 1933)
A new way to make plastics out of sugar could help reduce the world’s reliance on petroleum. The technique could ultimately allow industry to make plastics from high-fructose corn syrups or other plant materials.
Companies and research organisations around the world are experimenting with plant-based plastics in a bid to lower carbon dioxide emissions and reduce the use of petroleum as oil stocks decline.
Now researchers led by chemical engineer James A. Dumesic at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, have developed an efficient way to convert fructose into a polymer precursor.
The researchers were interested in a chemical called 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), which can easily be converted into furandicarboxylic acid (FDCA). This is similar in structure to a petroleum-based precursor for the type of plastic commonly used in plastic bottles.
Unusable waste
But HMF has previously been difficult and expensive to make in quantity. This is because as HMF is produced, it reacts with any fructose remaining in the solution to produce an unusable waste material.
To change fructose to HMF, the researchers "dehydrated" it by adding an acid to strip off water molecules. Then, to prevent the newly formed HMF from reacting with the remaining fructose, they added a solvent.
This bound to the HMF and floated above the water, preventing further contact with any remaining fructose. Further chemicals were added to prevent troublesome side reactions.
The result was a reaction that converted 90% of the fructose in a solution to HMF. Once the reaction was complete, the solvent was boiled away, leaving the HMF to be turned into plastic.
Biodegradable plastic
Bio-based polymers are not new. One of the oldest plastics is celluloid, made out of the naturally occurring polymer cellulose. More recently, bacteria have been used to convert sugar into PHA, a biodegradable plastic.
But the researchers hope that because of its different chemical structure, HMF will allow engineers to design plastics with a range of different properties.
"There are many types of petroleum-based polymers with different properties and it will be necessary to develop many types of bio-based polymers with different properties as alternatives," says Timothy D. Leathers, a research geneticist at the US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service in Peoria, Illinois.
Herbert Vogel, a chemical engineer at Darmstadt University of Technology in Germany, says that the next step will be for someone to build a pilot plant to make large amounts of HMF that can be turned into plastics. But he warned that industry has little incentive to do so while petrochemicals remain relatively cheap.
Journal reference: Science (vol 312, p 1933)
U.S. looks to hydrogen fuel cells
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Energy`s setting up of a Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee is a step toward making fuel cells a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
'Research, development and deployment of hydrogen is central to President Bush`s Advanced Energy Initiative,' Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said last week. 'Receiving candid advice from this committee is one of the many ways we are working to meet the president`s goal of moving toward a hydrogen economy.'
The move comes amid estimates by the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department`s data arm, that energy consumption to grow by 71 percent between 2003 and 2030.
HTAC comprises 25 members from industry, academia, professional societies, government agencies and hydrogen safety experts who meet approximately twice a year to discuss issues pivotal to the development of hydrogen fuel cells. A chair will be elected at the first meeting, expected to be in the fall.
Significant funding is at stake. According to Energy Department statistics, President Bush`s fiscal year 2007 budget requests $215 million for hydrogen research and development, a 55 percent increase from FY 2006. The appropriation of this funding is the biggest challenge facing the development of hydrogen fuel cells.
The Energy Department has made progress with its hydrogen program. The storage material capacity of fuel cells has improved by 50 percent since 2004, but more work is needed to meet technical targets.
'The DOE will work with experts from academia, nonprofits and industry within the framework of HTAC,' DOE spokesman Craig Stevens told United Press International. 'The Committee will review and make recommendations to the Secretary on the implementation of programs and activities under the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act.'
The act is named for the late senator from Hawaii who was a proponent of the use of renewable energy sources. The act provides funding for research into alternative energy sources.
Other key topics of discussion should include the development of viable hydrogen production, storage and fuel cell technologies. The talks should also detail institutional challenges such as safety, codes and standards, education, and infrastructure investment, Stevens said.
Roger Saillant, chief executive officer of Plug Power, a firm that focuses on stationary fuel cells, is one of the 25 members of HTAC. He said he believes the HTAC`s membership will prove beneficial in realizing a hydrogen economy.
He said people resist changing to fuel cells because they are perceived to be dangerous. Studies have shown traditional gasoline and natural gas to be more dangerous than hydrogen. The inclusion of the director of the Florida State Fire Marshals, Rand Napoli, should go a long way in reassuring the public about hydrogen`s safety.
'Fire marshals bring legitimacy to the table which speeds up the storage, generation and consuming devices necessary with hydrogen,' he said.
Saillant said he believes current U.S. energy policies are more to protect the source of fossil fuels than reducing the consumption levels.
'HTAC is an excellent opportunity to educate about ways to reduce consumption and come up with alternatives to protecting the source,' he said.
Stevens believes the hydrogen community is on track to meet President Bush`s goal of making hydrogen fuel cells practical and cost-competitive by the year 2020. Discussion of the hydrogen transition strategy and the appropriations of funding should remain high on HTAC`s agenda.
For example, Bodman`s announcement of a $52.5 million solicitation in April will reach its pre-application deadline July 6 with applications coming due this December. This funding would be for research in fuel cell membranes, nanoscale catalysts and novel materials for hydrogen storage and will most likely be discussed at HTAC meetings.
'HTAC has the potential to have a positive effect on the Department of Energy`s hydrogen program,' David Friedman, research director for the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told UPI.
Friedman said he views hydrogen fuel cells more as a long-term project. The most important issue to resolve is the transportation of hydrogen along with other technical issues such as its storage and finding cheap, yet durable, fuel cells to install in cars.
Looking to the future, Saillant said he would also like to see HTAC communicate with stakeholders across the world. He believes bringing European, Asian and other counterparts to the table is vital to making hydrogen fuel cells viable.
'The United States is positioned with a unique opportunity to exercise our global leadership [with hydrogen fuel cells] and to address some serious long range problems affecting the world, such as global warming,' Saillant said.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Energy`s setting up of a Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee is a step toward making fuel cells a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
'Research, development and deployment of hydrogen is central to President Bush`s Advanced Energy Initiative,' Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said last week. 'Receiving candid advice from this committee is one of the many ways we are working to meet the president`s goal of moving toward a hydrogen economy.'
The move comes amid estimates by the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department`s data arm, that energy consumption to grow by 71 percent between 2003 and 2030.
HTAC comprises 25 members from industry, academia, professional societies, government agencies and hydrogen safety experts who meet approximately twice a year to discuss issues pivotal to the development of hydrogen fuel cells. A chair will be elected at the first meeting, expected to be in the fall.
Significant funding is at stake. According to Energy Department statistics, President Bush`s fiscal year 2007 budget requests $215 million for hydrogen research and development, a 55 percent increase from FY 2006. The appropriation of this funding is the biggest challenge facing the development of hydrogen fuel cells.
The Energy Department has made progress with its hydrogen program. The storage material capacity of fuel cells has improved by 50 percent since 2004, but more work is needed to meet technical targets.
'The DOE will work with experts from academia, nonprofits and industry within the framework of HTAC,' DOE spokesman Craig Stevens told United Press International. 'The Committee will review and make recommendations to the Secretary on the implementation of programs and activities under the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act.'
The act is named for the late senator from Hawaii who was a proponent of the use of renewable energy sources. The act provides funding for research into alternative energy sources.
Other key topics of discussion should include the development of viable hydrogen production, storage and fuel cell technologies. The talks should also detail institutional challenges such as safety, codes and standards, education, and infrastructure investment, Stevens said.
Roger Saillant, chief executive officer of Plug Power, a firm that focuses on stationary fuel cells, is one of the 25 members of HTAC. He said he believes the HTAC`s membership will prove beneficial in realizing a hydrogen economy.
He said people resist changing to fuel cells because they are perceived to be dangerous. Studies have shown traditional gasoline and natural gas to be more dangerous than hydrogen. The inclusion of the director of the Florida State Fire Marshals, Rand Napoli, should go a long way in reassuring the public about hydrogen`s safety.
'Fire marshals bring legitimacy to the table which speeds up the storage, generation and consuming devices necessary with hydrogen,' he said.
Saillant said he believes current U.S. energy policies are more to protect the source of fossil fuels than reducing the consumption levels.
'HTAC is an excellent opportunity to educate about ways to reduce consumption and come up with alternatives to protecting the source,' he said.
Stevens believes the hydrogen community is on track to meet President Bush`s goal of making hydrogen fuel cells practical and cost-competitive by the year 2020. Discussion of the hydrogen transition strategy and the appropriations of funding should remain high on HTAC`s agenda.
For example, Bodman`s announcement of a $52.5 million solicitation in April will reach its pre-application deadline July 6 with applications coming due this December. This funding would be for research in fuel cell membranes, nanoscale catalysts and novel materials for hydrogen storage and will most likely be discussed at HTAC meetings.
'HTAC has the potential to have a positive effect on the Department of Energy`s hydrogen program,' David Friedman, research director for the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told UPI.
Friedman said he views hydrogen fuel cells more as a long-term project. The most important issue to resolve is the transportation of hydrogen along with other technical issues such as its storage and finding cheap, yet durable, fuel cells to install in cars.
Looking to the future, Saillant said he would also like to see HTAC communicate with stakeholders across the world. He believes bringing European, Asian and other counterparts to the table is vital to making hydrogen fuel cells viable.
'The United States is positioned with a unique opportunity to exercise our global leadership [with hydrogen fuel cells] and to address some serious long range problems affecting the world, such as global warming,' Saillant said.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Energy`s setting up of a Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee is a step toward making fuel cells a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
'Research, development and deployment of hydrogen is central to President Bush`s Advanced Energy Initiative,' Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said last week. 'Receiving candid advice from this committee is one of the many ways we are working to meet the president`s goal of moving toward a hydrogen economy.'
The move comes amid estimates by the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department`s data arm, that energy consumption to grow by 71 percent between 2003 and 2030.
HTAC comprises 25 members from industry, academia, professional societies, government agencies and hydrogen safety experts who meet approximately twice a year to discuss issues pivotal to the development of hydrogen fuel cells. A chair will be elected at the first meeting, expected to be in the fall.
Significant funding is at stake. According to Energy Department statistics, President Bush`s fiscal year 2007 budget requests $215 million for hydrogen research and development, a 55 percent increase from FY 2006. The appropriation of this funding is the biggest challenge facing the development of hydrogen fuel cells.
The Energy Department has made progress with its hydrogen program. The storage material capacity of fuel cells has improved by 50 percent since 2004, but more work is needed to meet technical targets.
'The DOE will work with experts from academia, nonprofits and industry within the framework of HTAC,' DOE spokesman Craig Stevens told United Press International. 'The Committee will review and make recommendations to the Secretary on the implementation of programs and activities under the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act.'
The act is named for the late senator from Hawaii who was a proponent of the use of renewable energy sources. The act provides funding for research into alternative energy sources.
Other key topics of discussion should include the development of viable hydrogen production, storage and fuel cell technologies. The talks should also detail institutional challenges such as safety, codes and standards, education, and infrastructure investment, Stevens said.
Roger Saillant, chief executive officer of Plug Power, a firm that focuses on stationary fuel cells, is one of the 25 members of HTAC. He said he believes the HTAC`s membership will prove beneficial in realizing a hydrogen economy.
He said people resist changing to fuel cells because they are perceived to be dangerous. Studies have shown traditional gasoline and natural gas to be more dangerous than hydrogen. The inclusion of the director of the Florida State Fire Marshals, Rand Napoli, should go a long way in reassuring the public about hydrogen`s safety.
'Fire marshals bring legitimacy to the table which speeds up the storage, generation and consuming devices necessary with hydrogen,' he said.
Saillant said he believes current U.S. energy policies are more to protect the source of fossil fuels than reducing the consumption levels.
'HTAC is an excellent opportunity to educate about ways to reduce consumption and come up with alternatives to protecting the source,' he said.
Stevens believes the hydrogen community is on track to meet President Bush`s goal of making hydrogen fuel cells practical and cost-competitive by the year 2020. Discussion of the hydrogen transition strategy and the appropriations of funding should remain high on HTAC`s agenda.
For example, Bodman`s announcement of a $52.5 million solicitation in April will reach its pre-application deadline July 6 with applications coming due this December. This funding would be for research in fuel cell membranes, nanoscale catalysts and novel materials for hydrogen storage and will most likely be discussed at HTAC meetings.
'HTAC has the potential to have a positive effect on the Department of Energy`s hydrogen program,' David Friedman, research director for the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told UPI.
Friedman said he views hydrogen fuel cells more as a long-term project. The most important issue to resolve is the transportation of hydrogen along with other technical issues such as its storage and finding cheap, yet durable, fuel cells to install in cars.
Looking to the future, Saillant said he would also like to see HTAC communicate with stakeholders across the world. He believes bringing European, Asian and other counterparts to the table is vital to making hydrogen fuel cells viable.
'The United States is positioned with a unique opportunity to exercise our global leadership [with hydrogen fuel cells] and to address some serious long range problems affecting the world, such as global warming,' Saillant said.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Energy`s setting up of a Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee is a step toward making fuel cells a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
'Research, development and deployment of hydrogen is central to President Bush`s Advanced Energy Initiative,' Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said last week. 'Receiving candid advice from this committee is one of the many ways we are working to meet the president`s goal of moving toward a hydrogen economy.'
The move comes amid estimates by the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department`s data arm, that energy consumption to grow by 71 percent between 2003 and 2030.
HTAC comprises 25 members from industry, academia, professional societies, government agencies and hydrogen safety experts who meet approximately twice a year to discuss issues pivotal to the development of hydrogen fuel cells. A chair will be elected at the first meeting, expected to be in the fall.
Significant funding is at stake. According to Energy Department statistics, President Bush`s fiscal year 2007 budget requests $215 million for hydrogen research and development, a 55 percent increase from FY 2006. The appropriation of this funding is the biggest challenge facing the development of hydrogen fuel cells.
The Energy Department has made progress with its hydrogen program. The storage material capacity of fuel cells has improved by 50 percent since 2004, but more work is needed to meet technical targets.
'The DOE will work with experts from academia, nonprofits and industry within the framework of HTAC,' DOE spokesman Craig Stevens told United Press International. 'The Committee will review and make recommendations to the Secretary on the implementation of programs and activities under the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen Act.'
The act is named for the late senator from Hawaii who was a proponent of the use of renewable energy sources. The act provides funding for research into alternative energy sources.
Other key topics of discussion should include the development of viable hydrogen production, storage and fuel cell technologies. The talks should also detail institutional challenges such as safety, codes and standards, education, and infrastructure investment, Stevens said.
Roger Saillant, chief executive officer of Plug Power, a firm that focuses on stationary fuel cells, is one of the 25 members of HTAC. He said he believes the HTAC`s membership will prove beneficial in realizing a hydrogen economy.
He said people resist changing to fuel cells because they are perceived to be dangerous. Studies have shown traditional gasoline and natural gas to be more dangerous than hydrogen. The inclusion of the director of the Florida State Fire Marshals, Rand Napoli, should go a long way in reassuring the public about hydrogen`s safety.
'Fire marshals bring legitimacy to the table which speeds up the storage, generation and consuming devices necessary with hydrogen,' he said.
Saillant said he believes current U.S. energy policies are more to protect the source of fossil fuels than reducing the consumption levels.
'HTAC is an excellent opportunity to educate about ways to reduce consumption and come up with alternatives to protecting the source,' he said.
Stevens believes the hydrogen community is on track to meet President Bush`s goal of making hydrogen fuel cells practical and cost-competitive by the year 2020. Discussion of the hydrogen transition strategy and the appropriations of funding should remain high on HTAC`s agenda.
For example, Bodman`s announcement of a $52.5 million solicitation in April will reach its pre-application deadline July 6 with applications coming due this December. This funding would be for research in fuel cell membranes, nanoscale catalysts and novel materials for hydrogen storage and will most likely be discussed at HTAC meetings.
'HTAC has the potential to have a positive effect on the Department of Energy`s hydrogen program,' David Friedman, research director for the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told UPI.
Friedman said he views hydrogen fuel cells more as a long-term project. The most important issue to resolve is the transportation of hydrogen along with other technical issues such as its storage and finding cheap, yet durable, fuel cells to install in cars.
Looking to the future, Saillant said he would also like to see HTAC communicate with stakeholders across the world. He believes bringing European, Asian and other counterparts to the table is vital to making hydrogen fuel cells viable.
'The United States is positioned with a unique opportunity to exercise our global leadership [with hydrogen fuel cells] and to address some serious long range problems affecting the world, such as global warming,' Saillant said.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
Copyright 2006 by United Press International
BBC NEWS Science/Nature Lighting the key to energy saving
A global switch to efficient lighting systems would trim the world's electricity bill by nearly one-tenth.
That is the conclusion of a study from the International Energy Agency (IEA), which it says is the first global survey of lighting uses and costs.
The carbon dioxide emissions saved by such a switch would, it concludes, dwarf cuts so far achieved by adopting wind and solar power.
Better building regulations would boost uptake of efficient lighting, it says.
"Lighting is a major source of electricity consumption," said Paul Waide, a senior policy analyst with the IEA and one of the report's authors.
"19% of global electricity generation is taken for lighting - that's more than is produced by hydro or nuclear stations, and about the same that's produced from natural gas," he told the BBC News website.
The carbon dioxide produced by generating all of this electricity amounts to 70% of global emissions from passenger vehicles, and is three times more than emissions from aviation, the IEA says.
Lounge departure
Not many inventions last for more than 100 years without major modifications.
The incandescent light bulb, developed a century and a quarter ago by luminaries including Sir Joseph Swan and Thomas Edison, is one, and still produces almost half of the light used in homes around the world.
Time to ban the bulb? But incandescent bulbs are very inefficient, converting only about 5% of the energy they receive into light.
The biggest consumer is the fluorescent tube. Commercial and public sector buildings account for 43% of the electricity used for lighting; and here, fluorescents dominate.
The report notes that the efficiency of tubes can vary widely, between about 15% and 60%.
Regulations on their use vary widely too. Health and safety concerns dictate what light levels should be achieved in various buildings, but the IEA found the levels prescribed by regulatory authorities vary by a factor of 20 from one country to another.
The IEA reserves particular ire for that favourite of the western middle-class lounge, the halogen uplighter.
"This... is the least efficient of all commonly used electric lighting systems," it says. "They add a large amount of heat into the living space as a by-product... this heat might require additional air-conditioning energy for its removal."
It is concerned too that a significant proportion of the world's population has no access to electric lighting at all. Instead they rely on burning fuel, which is expensive, inefficient, produces poor light quality and contributes to respiratory disease.
Bright idea
Energy-efficient lighting can seem such an obviously good idea that it is hard to comprehend why it is not used everywhere.
EIGHT FOR THE SCRAPHEAP
Incandescent bulbs
Low-efficiency fluorescent tubes
High-loss "ballasts" for fluorescent tubes
Halogen uplighters
High-loss halogen transformers
Mercury discharge lamps (often used in street lighting)
Low-efficiency vehicle lighting
Fuel-based lighting in developing countries"There is no single panacea," said Dr Waide. "What we suggest is setting up a comprehensive set of policies.
"There is a strong case for introducing lighting measures into building codes. Currently codes have a lot of energy measures in them, but with few exceptions there aren't specific provisions for lighting."
Such codes could, for example, mandate the use of highly-efficient fluorescent tubes and ballasts, the devices which regulate input voltages for the lamps; at worst these can consume 40% of the energy going into the system.
China, the IEA reports, has recently developed such codes. If they are implemented in all new build, this would "...offset the need for a new Three Gorges Dam project every eight years".
For the individual, the most obvious switch to make is from incandescent bulbs to compact fluorescent systems (CFLs), marketed in many countries as "energy-saving bulbs".
The IEA calculated the total costs to the consumer associated with buying and then using the two types, and found a significant difference.
"The overall cost of 10,000 hours of light provision from incandescents is 85 euros," said Paul Waide, "but for CFLs it's 25 euros, because they use so much less energy, and because you might have to buy only one CFL for every 10 incandescents."
He acknowledged there were concerns about the quality of light coming from some CFLs, and that some consumers reported lower lifetimes than manufacturers claimed; the key here, he said, is better regulation of the product sector by governments.
"There is also a lot that governments could do to reduce the price differential between CFLs and incandescents; it's extremely efficient from a societal perspective."
The future may see even more efficient systems. LEDs hold out the most promise; currently four times as efficient as incandescents, manufacturers are aiming for 80% efficiency by the end of the decade, which would represent a 16-fold improvement on the traditional bulb.
But, the IEA concludes, there is no need to wait for LEDs. Policy measures and individual action to bring the switch would slash 38% from the global electricity bill for lighting by 2030.
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
A global switch to efficient lighting systems would trim the world's electricity bill by nearly one-tenth.
That is the conclusion of a study from the International Energy Agency (IEA), which it says is the first global survey of lighting uses and costs.
The carbon dioxide emissions saved by such a switch would, it concludes, dwarf cuts so far achieved by adopting wind and solar power.
Better building regulations would boost uptake of efficient lighting, it says.
"Lighting is a major source of electricity consumption," said Paul Waide, a senior policy analyst with the IEA and one of the report's authors.
"19% of global electricity generation is taken for lighting - that's more than is produced by hydro or nuclear stations, and about the same that's produced from natural gas," he told the BBC News website.
The carbon dioxide produced by generating all of this electricity amounts to 70% of global emissions from passenger vehicles, and is three times more than emissions from aviation, the IEA says.
Lounge departure
Not many inventions last for more than 100 years without major modifications.
The incandescent light bulb, developed a century and a quarter ago by luminaries including Sir Joseph Swan and Thomas Edison, is one, and still produces almost half of the light used in homes around the world.
Time to ban the bulb? But incandescent bulbs are very inefficient, converting only about 5% of the energy they receive into light.
The biggest consumer is the fluorescent tube. Commercial and public sector buildings account for 43% of the electricity used for lighting; and here, fluorescents dominate.
The report notes that the efficiency of tubes can vary widely, between about 15% and 60%.
Regulations on their use vary widely too. Health and safety concerns dictate what light levels should be achieved in various buildings, but the IEA found the levels prescribed by regulatory authorities vary by a factor of 20 from one country to another.
The IEA reserves particular ire for that favourite of the western middle-class lounge, the halogen uplighter.
"This... is the least efficient of all commonly used electric lighting systems," it says. "They add a large amount of heat into the living space as a by-product... this heat might require additional air-conditioning energy for its removal."
It is concerned too that a significant proportion of the world's population has no access to electric lighting at all. Instead they rely on burning fuel, which is expensive, inefficient, produces poor light quality and contributes to respiratory disease.
Bright idea
Energy-efficient lighting can seem such an obviously good idea that it is hard to comprehend why it is not used everywhere.
EIGHT FOR THE SCRAPHEAP
Incandescent bulbs
Low-efficiency fluorescent tubes
High-loss "ballasts" for fluorescent tubes
Halogen uplighters
High-loss halogen transformers
Mercury discharge lamps (often used in street lighting)
Low-efficiency vehicle lighting
Fuel-based lighting in developing countries"There is no single panacea," said Dr Waide. "What we suggest is setting up a comprehensive set of policies.
"There is a strong case for introducing lighting measures into building codes. Currently codes have a lot of energy measures in them, but with few exceptions there aren't specific provisions for lighting."
Such codes could, for example, mandate the use of highly-efficient fluorescent tubes and ballasts, the devices which regulate input voltages for the lamps; at worst these can consume 40% of the energy going into the system.
China, the IEA reports, has recently developed such codes. If they are implemented in all new build, this would "...offset the need for a new Three Gorges Dam project every eight years".
For the individual, the most obvious switch to make is from incandescent bulbs to compact fluorescent systems (CFLs), marketed in many countries as "energy-saving bulbs".
The IEA calculated the total costs to the consumer associated with buying and then using the two types, and found a significant difference.
"The overall cost of 10,000 hours of light provision from incandescents is 85 euros," said Paul Waide, "but for CFLs it's 25 euros, because they use so much less energy, and because you might have to buy only one CFL for every 10 incandescents."
He acknowledged there were concerns about the quality of light coming from some CFLs, and that some consumers reported lower lifetimes than manufacturers claimed; the key here, he said, is better regulation of the product sector by governments.
"There is also a lot that governments could do to reduce the price differential between CFLs and incandescents; it's extremely efficient from a societal perspective."
The future may see even more efficient systems. LEDs hold out the most promise; currently four times as efficient as incandescents, manufacturers are aiming for 80% efficiency by the end of the decade, which would represent a 16-fold improvement on the traditional bulb.
But, the IEA concludes, there is no need to wait for LEDs. Policy measures and individual action to bring the switch would slash 38% from the global electricity bill for lighting by 2030.
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Scoop: Trade deficit explodes, Government crosses fingers
Petroleum imports on fire, trade deficit explodes, Government crosses fingers
28 June 2006
The Government must take action now to reduce New Zealand’s dependence on imported fossil fuels to reduce the spiralling trade deficit, the Green Party says.
“The explosion in the cost of petroleum imports has pushed the monthly merchandise trade deficit to $104 million, the worst ever recorded for a May month,” says Russel Norman, Green Party Co-Leader.
The annual merchandise trade deficit for the year ended May 2006 is now nearly an incredible $7 billion and there has been an increase in the cost of petroleum and petroleum product imports of $1.2 billion over the May 2005 year.
“Oil imports now account for 13.3% of all imports, up from 11.2% in the year to May 2005. Oil by itself now accounts for 75% of the record merchandise deficit,” says Dr. Norman, the Green Party spokesperson on economics.
“The Government is very focussed on exports but it must also pay attention to the cost of imports if we are to bring our trade deficit and current account deficit under control.
“This is actually a major structural problem in the economy and the Government needs to more than cross its fingers and hope it will get better as a result of the falling dollar – we need a public transport plan.
“We need a plan to move freight off the roads and onto shipping and rail, and a plan to move passenger transport onto buses, trains and cycling in our urban centres.
“People are caught between inadequate public transport and rising petrol prices – they desperately need better public transport now.
“But, instead, the Government in the last budget went on a motorway building spending spree and projected declines in the spending on public transport infrastructure.
“Reducing our dependence on imported oil would be good for the economy, it would be good for the environment by reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, and it would be good for people caught between inadequate public transport and rising petrol prices.
“Let’s be honest with ourselves – we are facing the end of cheap oil, let’s prepare ourselves for it,” said Dr. Norman.
ENDS
Petroleum imports on fire, trade deficit explodes, Government crosses fingers
28 June 2006
The Government must take action now to reduce New Zealand’s dependence on imported fossil fuels to reduce the spiralling trade deficit, the Green Party says.
“The explosion in the cost of petroleum imports has pushed the monthly merchandise trade deficit to $104 million, the worst ever recorded for a May month,” says Russel Norman, Green Party Co-Leader.
The annual merchandise trade deficit for the year ended May 2006 is now nearly an incredible $7 billion and there has been an increase in the cost of petroleum and petroleum product imports of $1.2 billion over the May 2005 year.
“Oil imports now account for 13.3% of all imports, up from 11.2% in the year to May 2005. Oil by itself now accounts for 75% of the record merchandise deficit,” says Dr. Norman, the Green Party spokesperson on economics.
“The Government is very focussed on exports but it must also pay attention to the cost of imports if we are to bring our trade deficit and current account deficit under control.
“This is actually a major structural problem in the economy and the Government needs to more than cross its fingers and hope it will get better as a result of the falling dollar – we need a public transport plan.
“We need a plan to move freight off the roads and onto shipping and rail, and a plan to move passenger transport onto buses, trains and cycling in our urban centres.
“People are caught between inadequate public transport and rising petrol prices – they desperately need better public transport now.
“But, instead, the Government in the last budget went on a motorway building spending spree and projected declines in the spending on public transport infrastructure.
“Reducing our dependence on imported oil would be good for the economy, it would be good for the environment by reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, and it would be good for people caught between inadequate public transport and rising petrol prices.
“Let’s be honest with ourselves – we are facing the end of cheap oil, let’s prepare ourselves for it,” said Dr. Norman.
ENDS
Australian oil consortium to drill in NZ - Breaking News - Business - Breaking News
An Australian consortium of oil companies will begin drilling for oil in the Canterbury basin in August.
Beach Petroleum says seismic surveys suggest the Cutter 1 well could contain a reservoir of 80 million barrels of oil equivalent (boes).
The well is located 21km off the coast near Oamaru, about 100km north-northeast of Dunedin.
It will be drilled by Beach and two other investors, Tap Oil and Australia Worldwide Exploration.
Beach holds a 20 percent interest in the venture.
Results from the drilling should be known by the end of the year, a Beach spokesperson, Kevin Skinner, said.
"There hasn't been a lot [of drilling] in that area at all, so it's a bit of frontier country."
Mr Skinner said there were a handful of wells in the area, and one within the same boundaries had turned out to be a sub-commercial gas find.
Cutter 1 is Beach's first offshore target in New Zealand, and part of an $100m-plus expansion of the company's exploration program.
Beach aimed to increase annual production to above 5 million boes in 2007-2008 - compared to 1.4m this year.
The well will be drilled by the rig Ocean Patriot. It will take about a month to drill to a depth of around 3000m in 75m deep waters.
Other oil companies drilling in the Canterbury basin included Canadian company TAG and Green Gate, which believed it had a promising block in north Canterbury.
Origin Energy, Contact Energy's Australian major stakeholder, has permits in South Canterbury.
Green Gate director Stacey Radford said last year that oil rigs would dot North Canterbury in the next few years.
He said huge sums had been spent on oil exploration off the Taranaki coast, but little had been spent looking for oil off the South Island.
© 2006 AAP
An Australian consortium of oil companies will begin drilling for oil in the Canterbury basin in August.
Beach Petroleum says seismic surveys suggest the Cutter 1 well could contain a reservoir of 80 million barrels of oil equivalent (boes).
The well is located 21km off the coast near Oamaru, about 100km north-northeast of Dunedin.
It will be drilled by Beach and two other investors, Tap Oil and Australia Worldwide Exploration.
Beach holds a 20 percent interest in the venture.
Results from the drilling should be known by the end of the year, a Beach spokesperson, Kevin Skinner, said.
"There hasn't been a lot [of drilling] in that area at all, so it's a bit of frontier country."
Mr Skinner said there were a handful of wells in the area, and one within the same boundaries had turned out to be a sub-commercial gas find.
Cutter 1 is Beach's first offshore target in New Zealand, and part of an $100m-plus expansion of the company's exploration program.
Beach aimed to increase annual production to above 5 million boes in 2007-2008 - compared to 1.4m this year.
The well will be drilled by the rig Ocean Patriot. It will take about a month to drill to a depth of around 3000m in 75m deep waters.
Other oil companies drilling in the Canterbury basin included Canadian company TAG and Green Gate, which believed it had a promising block in north Canterbury.
Origin Energy, Contact Energy's Australian major stakeholder, has permits in South Canterbury.
Green Gate director Stacey Radford said last year that oil rigs would dot North Canterbury in the next few years.
He said huge sums had been spent on oil exploration off the Taranaki coast, but little had been spent looking for oil off the South Island.
© 2006 AAP
BBC NEWS South Asia Senate panel backs nuclear deal
A US Senate committee has backed a controversial plan to share civilian nuclear technology with India.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee took an hour to endorse the legislation by 16-2. It was cleared by a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday.
The deal offers US nuclear technology to India in exchange for inspectors' access to Indian civilian reactors.
The accord has been hailed as historic by some, but critics say it will damage non-proliferation efforts.
The BBC's Shahzeb Jillani in Washington says the bill is on target to be ratified by the full House and Senate in July.
Comfortable majority
The plans were described by Senator Richard Lugar, the Senate committee's Republican chairman, as "the most important strategic diplomatic initiative undertaken by President Bush".
The deal was signed during President Bush's visit to India
The proposed agreement reverses US policy to restrict nuclear co-operation with Delhi because it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and has twice tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998.
On Tuesday, the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives voted 37-5 in support of Mr Bush's initiative.
Mr Bush finalised the agreement during a landmark trip to India in March.
Under the deal, energy-hungry India will get access to US civil nuclear technology and fuel, in return for opening its civilian nuclear facilities to inspection.
But its nuclear weapons sites will remain off-limits.
NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA
India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction
Nuclear power supplies about 3% of India's electricity
By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's electricity
India has limited coal and uranium reserves
Its huge thorium reserves - about 25% of the world's total - are expected to fuel its nuclear power programme long-term
Source: Uranium Information Center
Global nuclear powers
Critics of the deal say it could boost India's nuclear arsenal and sends the wrong message to countries like Iran, whose nuclear ambitions Washington opposes.
India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has termed the deal as "unacceptable".
It said that it would make India "perpetually dependent" on the US for all initiatives in the application of nuclear energy.
Senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi told reporters on Thursday that the part of the deal allowing India's nuclear installations to be inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency was "very intrusive" and "immensely disruptive".
India has made clear that the final agreement must not bind it to supporting the US's Iran policy and does not prevent it from developing its own fissile material.
A US Senate committee has backed a controversial plan to share civilian nuclear technology with India.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee took an hour to endorse the legislation by 16-2. It was cleared by a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday.
The deal offers US nuclear technology to India in exchange for inspectors' access to Indian civilian reactors.
The accord has been hailed as historic by some, but critics say it will damage non-proliferation efforts.
The BBC's Shahzeb Jillani in Washington says the bill is on target to be ratified by the full House and Senate in July.
Comfortable majority
The plans were described by Senator Richard Lugar, the Senate committee's Republican chairman, as "the most important strategic diplomatic initiative undertaken by President Bush".
The deal was signed during President Bush's visit to India
The proposed agreement reverses US policy to restrict nuclear co-operation with Delhi because it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and has twice tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998.
On Tuesday, the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives voted 37-5 in support of Mr Bush's initiative.
Mr Bush finalised the agreement during a landmark trip to India in March.
Under the deal, energy-hungry India will get access to US civil nuclear technology and fuel, in return for opening its civilian nuclear facilities to inspection.
But its nuclear weapons sites will remain off-limits.
NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA
India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction
Nuclear power supplies about 3% of India's electricity
By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's electricity
India has limited coal and uranium reserves
Its huge thorium reserves - about 25% of the world's total - are expected to fuel its nuclear power programme long-term
Source: Uranium Information Center
Global nuclear powers
Critics of the deal say it could boost India's nuclear arsenal and sends the wrong message to countries like Iran, whose nuclear ambitions Washington opposes.
India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has termed the deal as "unacceptable".
It said that it would make India "perpetually dependent" on the US for all initiatives in the application of nuclear energy.
Senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi told reporters on Thursday that the part of the deal allowing India's nuclear installations to be inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency was "very intrusive" and "immensely disruptive".
India has made clear that the final agreement must not bind it to supporting the US's Iran policy and does not prevent it from developing its own fissile material.
BBC NEWS South Asia Senate panel backs nuclear deal
A US Senate committee has backed a controversial plan to share civilian nuclear technology with India.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee took an hour to endorse the legislation by 16-2. It was cleared by a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday.
The deal offers US nuclear technology to India in exchange for inspectors' access to Indian civilian reactors.
The accord has been hailed as historic by some, but critics say it will damage non-proliferation efforts.
The BBC's Shahzeb Jillani in Washington says the bill is on target to be ratified by the full House and Senate in July.
Comfortable majority
The plans were described by Senator Richard Lugar, the Senate committee's Republican chairman, as "the most important strategic diplomatic initiative undertaken by President Bush".
The deal was signed during President Bush's visit to India
The proposed agreement reverses US policy to restrict nuclear co-operation with Delhi because it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and has twice tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998.
On Tuesday, the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives voted 37-5 in support of Mr Bush's initiative.
Mr Bush finalised the agreement during a landmark trip to India in March.
Under the deal, energy-hungry India will get access to US civil nuclear technology and fuel, in return for opening its civilian nuclear facilities to inspection.
But its nuclear weapons sites will remain off-limits.
NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA
India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction
Nuclear power supplies about 3% of India's electricity
By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's electricity
India has limited coal and uranium reserves
Its huge thorium reserves - about 25% of the world's total - are expected to fuel its nuclear power programme long-term
Source: Uranium Information Center
Global nuclear powers
Critics of the deal say it could boost India's nuclear arsenal and sends the wrong message to countries like Iran, whose nuclear ambitions Washington opposes.
India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has termed the deal as "unacceptable".
It said that it would make India "perpetually dependent" on the US for all initiatives in the application of nuclear energy.
Senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi told reporters on Thursday that the part of the deal allowing India's nuclear installations to be inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency was "very intrusive" and "immensely disruptive".
India has made clear that the final agreement must not bind it to supporting the US's Iran policy and does not prevent it from developing its own fissile material.
E-mail this to a friend
A US Senate committee has backed a controversial plan to share civilian nuclear technology with India.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee took an hour to endorse the legislation by 16-2. It was cleared by a House of Representatives panel on Tuesday.
The deal offers US nuclear technology to India in exchange for inspectors' access to Indian civilian reactors.
The accord has been hailed as historic by some, but critics say it will damage non-proliferation efforts.
The BBC's Shahzeb Jillani in Washington says the bill is on target to be ratified by the full House and Senate in July.
Comfortable majority
The plans were described by Senator Richard Lugar, the Senate committee's Republican chairman, as "the most important strategic diplomatic initiative undertaken by President Bush".
The deal was signed during President Bush's visit to India
The proposed agreement reverses US policy to restrict nuclear co-operation with Delhi because it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and has twice tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998.
On Tuesday, the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives voted 37-5 in support of Mr Bush's initiative.
Mr Bush finalised the agreement during a landmark trip to India in March.
Under the deal, energy-hungry India will get access to US civil nuclear technology and fuel, in return for opening its civilian nuclear facilities to inspection.
But its nuclear weapons sites will remain off-limits.
NUCLEAR POWER IN INDIA
India has 14 reactors in commercial operation and nine under construction
Nuclear power supplies about 3% of India's electricity
By 2050, nuclear power is expected to provide 25% of the country's electricity
India has limited coal and uranium reserves
Its huge thorium reserves - about 25% of the world's total - are expected to fuel its nuclear power programme long-term
Source: Uranium Information Center
Global nuclear powers
Critics of the deal say it could boost India's nuclear arsenal and sends the wrong message to countries like Iran, whose nuclear ambitions Washington opposes.
India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has termed the deal as "unacceptable".
It said that it would make India "perpetually dependent" on the US for all initiatives in the application of nuclear energy.
Senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi told reporters on Thursday that the part of the deal allowing India's nuclear installations to be inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency was "very intrusive" and "immensely disruptive".
India has made clear that the final agreement must not bind it to supporting the US's Iran policy and does not prevent it from developing its own fissile material.
E-mail this to a friend
BBC NEWS Science/Nature Government promises carbon cuts
The UK government has thrown down a challenge to its EU allies by promising to cut, by 2012, carbon emissions from big business by 12.5% on last year's levels.
That will mean the UK will achieve almost double its targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and bring it closer to its self-imposed target of a 20% cut in CO2 by 2010.
The surprise announcement comes the day after the French and German governments announced comparatively lax targets. Based on last year's figures, the Germans will cut emissions by just 0.6%.
The UK Environment Minister David Miliband said he had already spoken to the European Commission to make sure that EU neighbours imposed the strictest possible cuts.
Tony Blair has taken flack recently for failing to match his international rhetoric on climate change with tough emissions cuts in the UK.
He is also concerned that the Conservative leader David Cameron has taken a clear lead in the polls on green issues. Today's announcement is expected to regain some of the government's credibility on domestic climate policy.
Energy Review
The brunt of the emissions cuts will fall on electricity generators. They are shielded from international competition. Exporting industries will be allowed to emit as much carbon as they need.
The green group WWF called the policy a missed opportunity to put CO2 emissions back on track for the government's promised 20% cut. The new policy will bring CO2 down by 16.2% by 2010.
Ministers said more measures would be announced in the forthcoming Energy Review.
Today's announcement is expected by the government to increase electricity prices by 0.5% for domestic users (much less than the fluctuations following recent oil prices) and 1.0% for industry.
The business lobby group Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said it risked Britain's competitiveness.
But in this negotiation they appear to have been trumped by a group of business leaders brought together by Prince Charles.
They told the Prime Minister that tough carbon cuts would create jobs in a new low-carbon economy.
Greener than expected
A few months ago ministers said they would cut carbon at a level between three and eight million tonnes.
Today they announced that they have settled at the greenest end of that range - eight million tonnes.
It is not quite as big as it sounds because of recent changes in the sums. But it is still bigger than most observers expected.
The cut was welcomed by the chairman of Shell UK, James Smith, one of the business leaders who went to meet Mr Blair.
The Conservatives broadly welcomed the policy, but the Liberal Democrats said it did not go far enough.
The government also announced the formation of a new low carbon technology fund. Mr Miliband said it would include new money.
Under the new business-emissions cap, power firms will have to bid at auction for 7% of their emissions credits.
This could raise £150 million at current levels, but Mr Miliband would not promise it would swell the fund - this decision would be made by the Chancellor.
The UK's technology investment is very low compared with its European neighbours.
The UK government has thrown down a challenge to its EU allies by promising to cut, by 2012, carbon emissions from big business by 12.5% on last year's levels.
That will mean the UK will achieve almost double its targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and bring it closer to its self-imposed target of a 20% cut in CO2 by 2010.
The surprise announcement comes the day after the French and German governments announced comparatively lax targets. Based on last year's figures, the Germans will cut emissions by just 0.6%.
The UK Environment Minister David Miliband said he had already spoken to the European Commission to make sure that EU neighbours imposed the strictest possible cuts.
Tony Blair has taken flack recently for failing to match his international rhetoric on climate change with tough emissions cuts in the UK.
He is also concerned that the Conservative leader David Cameron has taken a clear lead in the polls on green issues. Today's announcement is expected to regain some of the government's credibility on domestic climate policy.
Energy Review
The brunt of the emissions cuts will fall on electricity generators. They are shielded from international competition. Exporting industries will be allowed to emit as much carbon as they need.
The green group WWF called the policy a missed opportunity to put CO2 emissions back on track for the government's promised 20% cut. The new policy will bring CO2 down by 16.2% by 2010.
Ministers said more measures would be announced in the forthcoming Energy Review.
Today's announcement is expected by the government to increase electricity prices by 0.5% for domestic users (much less than the fluctuations following recent oil prices) and 1.0% for industry.
The business lobby group Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said it risked Britain's competitiveness.
But in this negotiation they appear to have been trumped by a group of business leaders brought together by Prince Charles.
They told the Prime Minister that tough carbon cuts would create jobs in a new low-carbon economy.
Greener than expected
A few months ago ministers said they would cut carbon at a level between three and eight million tonnes.
Today they announced that they have settled at the greenest end of that range - eight million tonnes.
It is not quite as big as it sounds because of recent changes in the sums. But it is still bigger than most observers expected.
The cut was welcomed by the chairman of Shell UK, James Smith, one of the business leaders who went to meet Mr Blair.
The Conservatives broadly welcomed the policy, but the Liberal Democrats said it did not go far enough.
The government also announced the formation of a new low carbon technology fund. Mr Miliband said it would include new money.
Under the new business-emissions cap, power firms will have to bid at auction for 7% of their emissions credits.
This could raise £150 million at current levels, but Mr Miliband would not promise it would swell the fund - this decision would be made by the Chancellor.
The UK's technology investment is very low compared with its European neighbours.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Wind energy criticism 'betrays farm sector'. 29/06/2006. ABC News Online
Victoria's Energy Minister Theo Theophanous is demanding Federal Agriculture Minister Peter McGauran apologise for his criticism of wind energy.
Mr McGauran has told a gathering of dairy farmers that wind energy is only viable with government subsidies, and windfarms are a threat to rural communities.
He says wind farms are not a cleaner alternative to coal fired power stations and should only be allowed in places where the community wants them.
"Wind farms don't live up to the hype that they are an environmental saviour and a serious alternate energy source," he said.
"And the effect they can have on their neighbours are so serious it means they should not be allowed to get away with the exaggerated claims, their claims are fraudulent."
But Mr Theophanous says Mr McGauran's criticism is a betrayal of the agriculture sector.
"Does Peter McGauran care that we might have 30 per cent less water for agricultural purposes over the next 50 years as a result of global warming?" he said.
"What he said is a disgrace, he should come out and apologise and if he doesn't come out and apologise somebody else in the Howard Government should come out and say, well he's wrong."
Susan Jeanes from the Renewable Energy Generators' of Australia says Mr McGauran's comments are disappointing.
"I suspect that it's better that we let the Environment Minister comment on matters relating to renewable energy and climate change and let the Agriculture Minister comment on matters relating to agriculture," she said.
Ms Jeanes says the entire national electricity market was built with Government money.
"Scientists around the world have predicted that we need to reduce emissions by up to 60 per cent by 2050, emissions from Australia's electricity sector are predicted to be at 250 per cent above 1990 levels by 2050," she said.
"You can not do nothing and just sit back and just wait for a solution because it's not going to come without some form of assistance."
Six hundred wind farms have so far been built or been approved in Australia under the Coalition Government.
Print Email
Victoria's Energy Minister Theo Theophanous is demanding Federal Agriculture Minister Peter McGauran apologise for his criticism of wind energy.
Mr McGauran has told a gathering of dairy farmers that wind energy is only viable with government subsidies, and windfarms are a threat to rural communities.
He says wind farms are not a cleaner alternative to coal fired power stations and should only be allowed in places where the community wants them.
"Wind farms don't live up to the hype that they are an environmental saviour and a serious alternate energy source," he said.
"And the effect they can have on their neighbours are so serious it means they should not be allowed to get away with the exaggerated claims, their claims are fraudulent."
But Mr Theophanous says Mr McGauran's criticism is a betrayal of the agriculture sector.
"Does Peter McGauran care that we might have 30 per cent less water for agricultural purposes over the next 50 years as a result of global warming?" he said.
"What he said is a disgrace, he should come out and apologise and if he doesn't come out and apologise somebody else in the Howard Government should come out and say, well he's wrong."
Susan Jeanes from the Renewable Energy Generators' of Australia says Mr McGauran's comments are disappointing.
"I suspect that it's better that we let the Environment Minister comment on matters relating to renewable energy and climate change and let the Agriculture Minister comment on matters relating to agriculture," she said.
Ms Jeanes says the entire national electricity market was built with Government money.
"Scientists around the world have predicted that we need to reduce emissions by up to 60 per cent by 2050, emissions from Australia's electricity sector are predicted to be at 250 per cent above 1990 levels by 2050," she said.
"You can not do nothing and just sit back and just wait for a solution because it's not going to come without some form of assistance."
Six hundred wind farms have so far been built or been approved in Australia under the Coalition Government.
Print Email
Guardian Unlimited Special reports Half of global car exhaust produced by US vehicles
Hummers and SUVs blamed for high emissions · Average US car does less than 20mpg, says study Julian Borger in WashingtonThursday June 29, 2006The Guardian
Americans represent 5% of the world's population but drive almost a third of its cars, which in turn account for nearly half the carbon dioxide pumped out of exhaust pipes into the atmosphere each year, according to a report.
US cars play a disproportionate role in global warming because they are less fuel efficient than passenger vehicles used elsewhere in the world, emitting 15% more carbon dioxide, and because they are driven further across America's wide open spaces, said the report by the Environmental Defence watchdog group.
Americans drive 202m passenger vehicles out of 683m worldwide. The average US passenger vehicle, with a fuel economy of less than 20mpg, travels 11,000 miles a year, nearly a third more than cars elsewhere, according to Wednesday's report, Global Warming on the Road.
With suburban sprawl far outpacing the growth of public transport networks, Americans are commuting more each year, shopping more, and driving further to the shops each time. Between 1990 and 2001 the number of miles travelled on American shopping trips rose by 40%.
The boom in sports utility vehicles (SUVs) has peaked as a result of soaring fuel prices, but overall US fuel consumption will continue to rise in the next few years, the study found.
The huge Hummers, Chevrolet Suburbans and Ford Excursions bought in recent years will represent a bigger share of the cars on the road, as older, smaller cars end up on the scrapheap.
More SUVs are sold in the US than any other type of car, overtaking small cars in 2002. The report predicted that they "soon will be the main source of automotive CO2 emissions", emitting the equivalent of 55 large coal-fired power plants.
"The fuel economy of US vehicles has been declining since 1988, which means the CO2 emissions have been increasing, associated with a shift to large trucks," said John DeCicco, one of the report's authors.
While cars account for a tenth of greenhouse gas emissions around the world, American cars are responsible for 20% of US energy-related emissions. The Environmental Defence report found: "The amount of CO2 emitted from oil used for transportation in the United States is similar to the amount from coal used to generate electricity." General Motors, the biggest US car manufacturer, is responsible for nearly a third of those emissions, more than the biggest US power company, American Electric Power. GM and other car companies did not comment directly on the report, but noted that they were seeking to improve the energy efficiency and reduce the emissions of their fleets.
Mr DeCicco argues that far more stringent measures are needed, including a national cap on carbon emissions and a trading system that would allow companies that made more efficient cars to sell their carbon emissions rights to other firms. He also suggested that local authorities should be given financial credits for innovations that lead residents to drive less, providing better public transport or building shops closer to where people live.
The report also urges a rapid transition to fuels containing less carbon, like the ethanol President Bush has predicted will end his country's "addiction to oil".Special reportWaste and pollutionNet notes11.07.2002: Rubbish01.08.2002: RatsUseful linksWaste and recycling - Defra'Are you doing your bit?' recycling campaignCommunity Recycling and Economic Development programmeCommunity Recycling NetworkWaste and Resources Action ProgrammeUK Recycled Products Guide
Hummers and SUVs blamed for high emissions · Average US car does less than 20mpg, says study Julian Borger in WashingtonThursday June 29, 2006The Guardian
Americans represent 5% of the world's population but drive almost a third of its cars, which in turn account for nearly half the carbon dioxide pumped out of exhaust pipes into the atmosphere each year, according to a report.
US cars play a disproportionate role in global warming because they are less fuel efficient than passenger vehicles used elsewhere in the world, emitting 15% more carbon dioxide, and because they are driven further across America's wide open spaces, said the report by the Environmental Defence watchdog group.
Americans drive 202m passenger vehicles out of 683m worldwide. The average US passenger vehicle, with a fuel economy of less than 20mpg, travels 11,000 miles a year, nearly a third more than cars elsewhere, according to Wednesday's report, Global Warming on the Road.
With suburban sprawl far outpacing the growth of public transport networks, Americans are commuting more each year, shopping more, and driving further to the shops each time. Between 1990 and 2001 the number of miles travelled on American shopping trips rose by 40%.
The boom in sports utility vehicles (SUVs) has peaked as a result of soaring fuel prices, but overall US fuel consumption will continue to rise in the next few years, the study found.
The huge Hummers, Chevrolet Suburbans and Ford Excursions bought in recent years will represent a bigger share of the cars on the road, as older, smaller cars end up on the scrapheap.
More SUVs are sold in the US than any other type of car, overtaking small cars in 2002. The report predicted that they "soon will be the main source of automotive CO2 emissions", emitting the equivalent of 55 large coal-fired power plants.
"The fuel economy of US vehicles has been declining since 1988, which means the CO2 emissions have been increasing, associated with a shift to large trucks," said John DeCicco, one of the report's authors.
While cars account for a tenth of greenhouse gas emissions around the world, American cars are responsible for 20% of US energy-related emissions. The Environmental Defence report found: "The amount of CO2 emitted from oil used for transportation in the United States is similar to the amount from coal used to generate electricity." General Motors, the biggest US car manufacturer, is responsible for nearly a third of those emissions, more than the biggest US power company, American Electric Power. GM and other car companies did not comment directly on the report, but noted that they were seeking to improve the energy efficiency and reduce the emissions of their fleets.
Mr DeCicco argues that far more stringent measures are needed, including a national cap on carbon emissions and a trading system that would allow companies that made more efficient cars to sell their carbon emissions rights to other firms. He also suggested that local authorities should be given financial credits for innovations that lead residents to drive less, providing better public transport or building shops closer to where people live.
The report also urges a rapid transition to fuels containing less carbon, like the ethanol President Bush has predicted will end his country's "addiction to oil".Special reportWaste and pollutionNet notes11.07.2002: Rubbish01.08.2002: RatsUseful linksWaste and recycling - Defra'Are you doing your bit?' recycling campaignCommunity Recycling and Economic Development programmeCommunity Recycling NetworkWaste and Resources Action ProgrammeUK Recycled Products Guide
Builders say 'green' no priority for home buyers
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The high cost of energy-efficient materials like solar panels is curbing consumer demand for features that would make a house more "green," home building executives said this week.
Faced with a choice, home buyers would rather improve the look of a kitchen than spring for less-conspicuous technology that cuts their utility bills, Beazer Homes USA Inc. (BZH.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Chief Executive Ian McCarthy said at the Reuters Real Estate Summit in New York.
"I think people still look at a granite countertop and say, 'Wow, I'd really like that,' as opposed to really having energy efficiency," McCarthy said. " ... I think it's going to take some education."
Materials like solar panels, which are sold as roof tiles, are too expensive for consumers, partly because so few companies make them. Beazer pays about $2,000 to $3,000 to fit a home with such panels.
When the consumer won't foot the bill, the company is looking to cover the cost in other ways.
In Sacramento, California, the company teamed up with a local utility to install panels to generate electricity during the day and send the power back to the grid, balancing out the energy that residents used in the evening and at night.
"What we're trying to do is produce zero-energy homes," McCarthy said.
In Jacksonville, Florida, the company uses a Masco Corp. (MAS.N: Quote, Profile, Research) system called Environments For Living, which seals a home to limit energy use to a guaranteed level. It hopes to expand the program to other markets.
But for now, consumers just don't care, said Robert Toll, who heads the leading U.S. maker of luxury homes, Toll Brothers Inc. (TOL.N: Quote, Profile, Research)
Asked to what extent energy efficiency is a consideration to his customers, Toll said, "Zilch. Never was."
Even during the peak of the energy crisis in the 1970s, customers would express interest in saving energy, only to change their mind at the last minute. Continued ...
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The high cost of energy-efficient materials like solar panels is curbing consumer demand for features that would make a house more "green," home building executives said this week.
Faced with a choice, home buyers would rather improve the look of a kitchen than spring for less-conspicuous technology that cuts their utility bills, Beazer Homes USA Inc. (BZH.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Chief Executive Ian McCarthy said at the Reuters Real Estate Summit in New York.
"I think people still look at a granite countertop and say, 'Wow, I'd really like that,' as opposed to really having energy efficiency," McCarthy said. " ... I think it's going to take some education."
Materials like solar panels, which are sold as roof tiles, are too expensive for consumers, partly because so few companies make them. Beazer pays about $2,000 to $3,000 to fit a home with such panels.
When the consumer won't foot the bill, the company is looking to cover the cost in other ways.
In Sacramento, California, the company teamed up with a local utility to install panels to generate electricity during the day and send the power back to the grid, balancing out the energy that residents used in the evening and at night.
"What we're trying to do is produce zero-energy homes," McCarthy said.
In Jacksonville, Florida, the company uses a Masco Corp. (MAS.N: Quote, Profile, Research) system called Environments For Living, which seals a home to limit energy use to a guaranteed level. It hopes to expand the program to other markets.
But for now, consumers just don't care, said Robert Toll, who heads the leading U.S. maker of luxury homes, Toll Brothers Inc. (TOL.N: Quote, Profile, Research)
Asked to what extent energy efficiency is a consideration to his customers, Toll said, "Zilch. Never was."
Even during the peak of the energy crisis in the 1970s, customers would express interest in saving energy, only to change their mind at the last minute. Continued ...
Uranium prices seen up with nuclear power demand��Reuters.com
NEW YORK, June 28 (Reuters) - As the demand for uranium for nuclear power reactors increases worldwide, the spot price of the ore should continue to rise, boosting the growth of small producers, Resource Capital Research, of Sydney, Australia, said in a report.
The spot price of uranium is US$45 per pound, up 27 percent year to date.
With 180 new power reactors proposed or planned worldwide, Resource Capital Research forecast the price would reach $54 in 2006 and $60 by May 2007.
There are 441 reactors currently in operation, according to the report.
Over the past year, the market valuation of small Australian and Canadian producers has jumped 84 percent and 97 percent, respectively, over the past year.
Australian uranium producers in particular will likely see more Chinese investments now that the countries in April agreed to clear the way for the sale of Australian uranium to China.
China National Nuclear Corp. agreed in April to form a strategic alliance with Australian miner Uranex NL (URX.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), which owns holdings in Australia and Tanzania.
China National Nuclear Corp. is the Chinese government owned company responsible for the production, marketing, import and export of uranium.
The research firm, which favored exploration companies with near term news flow and sufficient cast to fund programs, named a few small to midsized miners with current or near term production potential (next three years), including Paladin Resources Ltd (PDN.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), International Uranium Corp. (IUC.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) and SXR Uranium One (SXR.TO: Quote, Profile, Research).
It also named several juniors with projects under development, including Equinox Resources Ltd (EQR.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Berkeley Resources Ltd (BKY.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), OmegaCorp Ltd (OMC.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Redport Ltd (RPT.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Nova Energy Ltd (NEL.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Tournigan Gold Corp. (TVC.V: Quote, Profile, Research), US Energy Corp. (USEG.O: Quote, Profile, Research), PepinNini Minerals Ltd (PNN.AX: Quote, Profile, Research) and Summit Resources Ltd (SMM.NZ: Quote, Profile, Research).
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
NEW YORK, June 28 (Reuters) - As the demand for uranium for nuclear power reactors increases worldwide, the spot price of the ore should continue to rise, boosting the growth of small producers, Resource Capital Research, of Sydney, Australia, said in a report.
The spot price of uranium is US$45 per pound, up 27 percent year to date.
With 180 new power reactors proposed or planned worldwide, Resource Capital Research forecast the price would reach $54 in 2006 and $60 by May 2007.
There are 441 reactors currently in operation, according to the report.
Over the past year, the market valuation of small Australian and Canadian producers has jumped 84 percent and 97 percent, respectively, over the past year.
Australian uranium producers in particular will likely see more Chinese investments now that the countries in April agreed to clear the way for the sale of Australian uranium to China.
China National Nuclear Corp. agreed in April to form a strategic alliance with Australian miner Uranex NL (URX.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), which owns holdings in Australia and Tanzania.
China National Nuclear Corp. is the Chinese government owned company responsible for the production, marketing, import and export of uranium.
The research firm, which favored exploration companies with near term news flow and sufficient cast to fund programs, named a few small to midsized miners with current or near term production potential (next three years), including Paladin Resources Ltd (PDN.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), International Uranium Corp. (IUC.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) and SXR Uranium One (SXR.TO: Quote, Profile, Research).
It also named several juniors with projects under development, including Equinox Resources Ltd (EQR.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Berkeley Resources Ltd (BKY.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), OmegaCorp Ltd (OMC.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Redport Ltd (RPT.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Nova Energy Ltd (NEL.AX: Quote, Profile, Research), Tournigan Gold Corp. (TVC.V: Quote, Profile, Research), US Energy Corp. (USEG.O: Quote, Profile, Research), PepinNini Minerals Ltd (PNN.AX: Quote, Profile, Research) and Summit Resources Ltd (SMM.NZ: Quote, Profile, Research).
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
Call for tougher carbon targets - Yahoo! News UK
LONDON (Reuters) - The government wants tougher European Union caps on emissions of greenhouse gases but cannot yet detail its own plans or whether it will submit these in time for a June 30 EU deadline, said Climate Change and Environment Minister Ian Pearson on Monday.
Each EU country sets a cap on free pollution permits to industry under the bloc's fledgling carbon market, designed to combat climate change.
The quotas are supposed to be less than projected emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide (CO2), to drive businesses either to clean up or buy extra permits.
Most industry got too many permits in 2005, the first year of the first phase of the scheme, but countries have the chance to take tougher measures from 2008-12, as they propose their phase 2 plans, which the European Commission can reject.
"(It's necessary) we all tighten up the scheme under phase 2," Pearson told a climate change conference in London.
"We're urging the European Union to be robust when considering countries' plans. It's an important time for the EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme). We do need to get phase 2 right."
In the past the government has said it would not meet the June 30 deadline to submit its plans, but Pearson would not comment on this timing when asked by reporters.
Pearson stressed to reporters the government's continuing commitment to bringing aviation's CO2 emissions into the trading scheme, while he saw a 2008 timetable slipping.
"It's going to be difficult to get it included by 2008. I'm very keen to continue to push things. Aviation emissions are growing and we need to tackle this area."
Email Story
Send Story via IM
Blog via Y! 360°
Print
Related Climate & Global Warming
U.S. won't rule out joining Kyoto successor - Reuters
Call for tougher carbon targets - Reuters
PM renews pledge to fight poverty - PA
Scientist challenges U.S. on global warming - Reuters
Antarctic measures on hold - Reuters
LONDON (Reuters) - The government wants tougher European Union caps on emissions of greenhouse gases but cannot yet detail its own plans or whether it will submit these in time for a June 30 EU deadline, said Climate Change and Environment Minister Ian Pearson on Monday.
Each EU country sets a cap on free pollution permits to industry under the bloc's fledgling carbon market, designed to combat climate change.
The quotas are supposed to be less than projected emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide (CO2), to drive businesses either to clean up or buy extra permits.
Most industry got too many permits in 2005, the first year of the first phase of the scheme, but countries have the chance to take tougher measures from 2008-12, as they propose their phase 2 plans, which the European Commission can reject.
"(It's necessary) we all tighten up the scheme under phase 2," Pearson told a climate change conference in London.
"We're urging the European Union to be robust when considering countries' plans. It's an important time for the EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme). We do need to get phase 2 right."
In the past the government has said it would not meet the June 30 deadline to submit its plans, but Pearson would not comment on this timing when asked by reporters.
Pearson stressed to reporters the government's continuing commitment to bringing aviation's CO2 emissions into the trading scheme, while he saw a 2008 timetable slipping.
"It's going to be difficult to get it included by 2008. I'm very keen to continue to push things. Aviation emissions are growing and we need to tackle this area."
Email Story
Send Story via IM
Blog via Y! 360°
Related Climate & Global Warming
U.S. won't rule out joining Kyoto successor - Reuters
Call for tougher carbon targets - Reuters
PM renews pledge to fight poverty - PA
Scientist challenges U.S. on global warming - Reuters
Antarctic measures on hold - Reuters
PRESS RELEASE Talisman Announces Lynx Pipeline Startup
CALGARY, ALBERTA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- June 28, 2006 -- Talisman Energy Inc. (TSX: TLM) (NYSE: TLM) has announced the commissioning of the Lynx natural gas pipeline.
The completion of the Lynx pipeline opens up a large geographic area, approximately 20 townships, for gas exploration. Talisman has built an extensive land position along the pipeline corridor, identifying 50 prospects and leads in the vicinity and the new facilities provide a path to market. The total cost of the pipeline system was $97.5 million. Industry pressures and wet weather caused a delay from an earlier anticipated startup date of April.
"The Lynx pipeline opens up a very prospective natural gas exploration area for Talisman," said Dr. Jim Buckee, President and Chief Executive Officer. "Although the main purpose is to use Talisman's midstream operations to provide strategic support for our natural gas exploration and development activities, we have developed this business into a valuable asset in its own right. We have increased total volumes (Talisman and third party raw gas) through our facilities from 155 mmcf/d in 2002, to over 400 mmcf/d last year and expect to reach 600 mmcf/d by the end of this year."
The Lynx project consists of a 12 inch diameter, 72 kilometer sour gas pipeline and a four inch diameter, 72 kilometer fuel gas line from the existing Findley dehydration facility to the new Lynx dehydration facility. The Lynx pipeline (Talisman 45%) has a nominal capacity of 130 mmcf/d of raw gas, with throughput expected to be 40 mmcf/d by the end of June. Talisman is also currently installing additional pipeline facilities in the Palliser area, which are expected to be complete in September.
Across its North American operations the Company has approximately 100 mmcf/d of sales gas shut-in or awaiting completion of infrastructure. The Lynx pipeline and Palliser pipeline are expected to bring an additional 20 mmcf/d of shut-in gas to market by September. Talisman expects its North American natural gas production to average about 880 mmcf/d in the second quarter, increasing to over 930 mmcf/d in the third quarter and over 940 mmcf/d in the fourth quarter, despite the loss of approximately 20 mmcf/d in the second half of the year associated with non-core asset sales.
Talisman Energy Inc. is a large, independent upstream oil and gas company headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Talisman has operations in Canada and its subsidiaries operate in the North Sea, Southeast Asia, Australia, North Africa, the United States and Trinidad and Tobago. Talisman's subsidiaries are also active in a number of other international areas, including Colombia, Gabon, Peru, Romania and Qatar. Talisman is committed to conducting its business in an ethically, socially and environmentally responsible manner and is a participant in the United Nations Global Compact, a voluntary initiative that brings together companies, governments, civil society and other groups to advance human rights, labour and environmental principles. Talisman's shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange in Canada and the New York Stock Exchange in the United States under the symbol TLM.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements or forward-looking information (collectively "forward-looking statements") within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. These statements include, among others, statements regarding: expected production volumes that will be brought to market; anticipated increases to Talisman's midstream operations; the timing of completion of additional pipeline facilities; and estimates of future production. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements use words or phrases such as: "expects", "does not expect" or "is expected", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", "plans" or "planned", "estimates" or "estimated", "projects" or "projected", "forecasts" or "forecasted", "believes", "intends", "likely", "possible", "probable", "scheduled", "positioned", "goal", "objective" or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved.
Various assumptions were used in drawing the conclusions or making the forecasts and projections contained in the forward-looking statements throughout this press release. Statements which discuss business plans for drilling, exploration and development assume that the extraction of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids remains economic.
Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections that involve a number of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by Talisman and described in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include:
- the risks of the oil and gas industry, such as operational risks in exploring for, developing and producing crude oil and natural gas, and market demand;
- risks and uncertainties involving geology of oil and gas deposits;
- the uncertainty of reserves estimates and reserves life;
- the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to production, costs and expenses;
- potential delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures;
- the outcome and effects of any acquisitions and dispositions;
- health, safety and environmental risks;
- changes in general economic and business conditions;
- the possibility that government policies or laws may change or governmental approvals may be delayed or withheld; and
- the Company's ability to implement its business strategy.
We caution that the foregoing list of risks and uncertainties is not exhaustive. Additional information on these and other factors which could affect the Company's operations or financial results are included: (1) under the heading "Risk Factors" in the Company's Annual Information Form; and (2) under the headings "Management's Discussion and Analysis - Risks and Uncertainties" and "Outlook for 2006" and elsewhere in the Company's 2005 Annual Report Financial Review. Additional information may also be found in the Company's other reports on file with Canadian securities regulatory authorities and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
Forward-looking statements are based on the estimates and opinions of the Company's management at the time the statements are made. Unless material, the Company assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements should circumstances or management's estimates or opinions change.
Oil and Gas Information
Throughout this news release, Talisman makes reference to production volumes. Where not otherwise indicated, such production volumes are stated on a gross basis, which means they are stated prior to the deduction of royalties and similar payments. In the U.S., net production volumes are reported after the deduction of these amounts.
Contacts:
Talisman Energy Inc.
David Mann
Senior Manager, Corporate and Investor Communications
(403) 237-1196
(403) 237-1210 (FAX)
Email: tlm@talisman-energy.com
Talisman Energy Inc.
Christopher J. LeGallais
Senior Manager, Investor Relations
(403) 237-1957
(403) 237-1210 (FAX)
Website: www.talisman-energy.com
SOURCE: Talisman Energy Inc.
CALGARY, ALBERTA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- June 28, 2006 -- Talisman Energy Inc. (TSX: TLM) (NYSE: TLM) has announced the commissioning of the Lynx natural gas pipeline.
The completion of the Lynx pipeline opens up a large geographic area, approximately 20 townships, for gas exploration. Talisman has built an extensive land position along the pipeline corridor, identifying 50 prospects and leads in the vicinity and the new facilities provide a path to market. The total cost of the pipeline system was $97.5 million. Industry pressures and wet weather caused a delay from an earlier anticipated startup date of April.
"The Lynx pipeline opens up a very prospective natural gas exploration area for Talisman," said Dr. Jim Buckee, President and Chief Executive Officer. "Although the main purpose is to use Talisman's midstream operations to provide strategic support for our natural gas exploration and development activities, we have developed this business into a valuable asset in its own right. We have increased total volumes (Talisman and third party raw gas) through our facilities from 155 mmcf/d in 2002, to over 400 mmcf/d last year and expect to reach 600 mmcf/d by the end of this year."
The Lynx project consists of a 12 inch diameter, 72 kilometer sour gas pipeline and a four inch diameter, 72 kilometer fuel gas line from the existing Findley dehydration facility to the new Lynx dehydration facility. The Lynx pipeline (Talisman 45%) has a nominal capacity of 130 mmcf/d of raw gas, with throughput expected to be 40 mmcf/d by the end of June. Talisman is also currently installing additional pipeline facilities in the Palliser area, which are expected to be complete in September.
Across its North American operations the Company has approximately 100 mmcf/d of sales gas shut-in or awaiting completion of infrastructure. The Lynx pipeline and Palliser pipeline are expected to bring an additional 20 mmcf/d of shut-in gas to market by September. Talisman expects its North American natural gas production to average about 880 mmcf/d in the second quarter, increasing to over 930 mmcf/d in the third quarter and over 940 mmcf/d in the fourth quarter, despite the loss of approximately 20 mmcf/d in the second half of the year associated with non-core asset sales.
Talisman Energy Inc. is a large, independent upstream oil and gas company headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Talisman has operations in Canada and its subsidiaries operate in the North Sea, Southeast Asia, Australia, North Africa, the United States and Trinidad and Tobago. Talisman's subsidiaries are also active in a number of other international areas, including Colombia, Gabon, Peru, Romania and Qatar. Talisman is committed to conducting its business in an ethically, socially and environmentally responsible manner and is a participant in the United Nations Global Compact, a voluntary initiative that brings together companies, governments, civil society and other groups to advance human rights, labour and environmental principles. Talisman's shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange in Canada and the New York Stock Exchange in the United States under the symbol TLM.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements or forward-looking information (collectively "forward-looking statements") within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. These statements include, among others, statements regarding: expected production volumes that will be brought to market; anticipated increases to Talisman's midstream operations; the timing of completion of additional pipeline facilities; and estimates of future production. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements use words or phrases such as: "expects", "does not expect" or "is expected", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", "plans" or "planned", "estimates" or "estimated", "projects" or "projected", "forecasts" or "forecasted", "believes", "intends", "likely", "possible", "probable", "scheduled", "positioned", "goal", "objective" or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved.
Various assumptions were used in drawing the conclusions or making the forecasts and projections contained in the forward-looking statements throughout this press release. Statements which discuss business plans for drilling, exploration and development assume that the extraction of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids remains economic.
Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections that involve a number of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by Talisman and described in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include:
- the risks of the oil and gas industry, such as operational risks in exploring for, developing and producing crude oil and natural gas, and market demand;
- risks and uncertainties involving geology of oil and gas deposits;
- the uncertainty of reserves estimates and reserves life;
- the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to production, costs and expenses;
- potential delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures;
- the outcome and effects of any acquisitions and dispositions;
- health, safety and environmental risks;
- changes in general economic and business conditions;
- the possibility that government policies or laws may change or governmental approvals may be delayed or withheld; and
- the Company's ability to implement its business strategy.
We caution that the foregoing list of risks and uncertainties is not exhaustive. Additional information on these and other factors which could affect the Company's operations or financial results are included: (1) under the heading "Risk Factors" in the Company's Annual Information Form; and (2) under the headings "Management's Discussion and Analysis - Risks and Uncertainties" and "Outlook for 2006" and elsewhere in the Company's 2005 Annual Report Financial Review. Additional information may also be found in the Company's other reports on file with Canadian securities regulatory authorities and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
Forward-looking statements are based on the estimates and opinions of the Company's management at the time the statements are made. Unless material, the Company assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements should circumstances or management's estimates or opinions change.
Oil and Gas Information
Throughout this news release, Talisman makes reference to production volumes. Where not otherwise indicated, such production volumes are stated on a gross basis, which means they are stated prior to the deduction of royalties and similar payments. In the U.S., net production volumes are reported after the deduction of these amounts.
Contacts:
Talisman Energy Inc.
David Mann
Senior Manager, Corporate and Investor Communications
(403) 237-1196
(403) 237-1210 (FAX)
Email: tlm@talisman-energy.com
Talisman Energy Inc.
Christopher J. LeGallais
Senior Manager, Investor Relations
(403) 237-1957
(403) 237-1210 (FAX)
Website: www.talisman-energy.com
SOURCE: Talisman Energy Inc.
WebWire� BP Celebrates China LNG Double
28 June 2006, BP today joined its partners at a ceremony to mark the start of operations at China’s first liquefied natural gas (LNG) import and regasification terminal at Shengzhen, Guangdong province. An initial cargo of 57,000 tonnes of LNG was shipped to the partly BP-owned Guangdong Dapeng LNG import terminal at the end of May, one month ahead of schedule, from the North West Shelf Venture in Australia in which BP is also a partner. The second cargo, of 62,000 tonnes of LNG, arrived at the terminal prior to today’s ceremony.
Attending the ceremony at the terminal, Anne Quinn, BP’s group vice president gas and natural gas liquids, said: “The start of operations at China’s first LNG import project is an historic moment for China, Australia and all the partners involved in these two projects. As an active participant in China for more than 30 years, BP is delighted to have played its part and looks forward to pursuing other opportunities to bring low carbon energy to this important and rapidly growing market.”
Following an initial build-up period, the Dapeng terminal will receive 3.7 million tonnes of LNG each year under a 25 year contract agreed between Guangdong Dapeng LNG Company Limited and the North West Shelf Venture. Once re-gasified, the gas will be distributed by pipeline to customers in Guangdong province and Hong Kong.
Notes to editors:
* Guangdong Dapeng LNG Co., Ltd is a Sino-foreign joint venture with CNOOC Gas & Power Ltd. holding a 33 per cent equity share and wholly-owned subsidiaries of BP a 30 per cent share. Other shareholders include Shenzhen Gas Corporation, Guangdong Yudean Group, Guangzhou Gas Company, Shenzhen Energy Group, Dongguan Fuel Company, Foshan Gas Group, Hong Kong Electric (Natural Gas) Limited, and Hong Kong & China Gas Investment Limited.
* the engineering procurement and construction contract for the Guangdong LNG terminal was awarded to the STTS Group in April 2004. STTS is a consortium of Saipem, Technigaz, Tecnimont, and Sofregaz.
* the overall Guangdong LNG project is made up of 14 separate projects with total investment of over US$3.6 billion. These include four new build power plants, five local residential and commercial distribution networks in Shenzhen, Dongguan, Guangzhou, Foshan and Hong Kong, three LNG ships, one oil to gas power plant conversion and Guangdong Dapeng LNG Company’s terminal and trunkline projects.
* the North West Shelf Venture is owned equally by: Woodside Energy Ltd. (16.67 per cent and operator); BHP Billiton (North West Shelf) Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); BP Developments Australia Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); Chevron Australia Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); Japan Australia LNG (MIMI) Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); and Shell Development (Australia) Proprietary Limited (16.67 per cent).
* CNOOC NWS Private Limited is also a member of the North West Shelf Venture but does not have an interest in North West Shelf Venture infrastructure.
Related Links
BPwww.bp.cpm
28 June 2006, BP today joined its partners at a ceremony to mark the start of operations at China’s first liquefied natural gas (LNG) import and regasification terminal at Shengzhen, Guangdong province. An initial cargo of 57,000 tonnes of LNG was shipped to the partly BP-owned Guangdong Dapeng LNG import terminal at the end of May, one month ahead of schedule, from the North West Shelf Venture in Australia in which BP is also a partner. The second cargo, of 62,000 tonnes of LNG, arrived at the terminal prior to today’s ceremony.
Attending the ceremony at the terminal, Anne Quinn, BP’s group vice president gas and natural gas liquids, said: “The start of operations at China’s first LNG import project is an historic moment for China, Australia and all the partners involved in these two projects. As an active participant in China for more than 30 years, BP is delighted to have played its part and looks forward to pursuing other opportunities to bring low carbon energy to this important and rapidly growing market.”
Following an initial build-up period, the Dapeng terminal will receive 3.7 million tonnes of LNG each year under a 25 year contract agreed between Guangdong Dapeng LNG Company Limited and the North West Shelf Venture. Once re-gasified, the gas will be distributed by pipeline to customers in Guangdong province and Hong Kong.
Notes to editors:
* Guangdong Dapeng LNG Co., Ltd is a Sino-foreign joint venture with CNOOC Gas & Power Ltd. holding a 33 per cent equity share and wholly-owned subsidiaries of BP a 30 per cent share. Other shareholders include Shenzhen Gas Corporation, Guangdong Yudean Group, Guangzhou Gas Company, Shenzhen Energy Group, Dongguan Fuel Company, Foshan Gas Group, Hong Kong Electric (Natural Gas) Limited, and Hong Kong & China Gas Investment Limited.
* the engineering procurement and construction contract for the Guangdong LNG terminal was awarded to the STTS Group in April 2004. STTS is a consortium of Saipem, Technigaz, Tecnimont, and Sofregaz.
* the overall Guangdong LNG project is made up of 14 separate projects with total investment of over US$3.6 billion. These include four new build power plants, five local residential and commercial distribution networks in Shenzhen, Dongguan, Guangzhou, Foshan and Hong Kong, three LNG ships, one oil to gas power plant conversion and Guangdong Dapeng LNG Company’s terminal and trunkline projects.
* the North West Shelf Venture is owned equally by: Woodside Energy Ltd. (16.67 per cent and operator); BHP Billiton (North West Shelf) Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); BP Developments Australia Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); Chevron Australia Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); Japan Australia LNG (MIMI) Pty Ltd (16.67 per cent); and Shell Development (Australia) Proprietary Limited (16.67 per cent).
* CNOOC NWS Private Limited is also a member of the North West Shelf Venture but does not have an interest in North West Shelf Venture infrastructure.
Related Links
BPwww.bp.cpm
Sue Neales discovers divide button on calculator. More proof that being numerate is not a pre-requisite to be ajournalist at THE MURKURY
The Mercury: Gas bill reaches $40m [28jun06]
SUE NEALES Chief Reporter28jun06
THE Lennon Government has spent $40 million on the construction of a piped natural gas network across Tasmania, but only 723 customers have so far connected to gas.At more than $55,000 a customer, it would seem an expensive exercise.
But Deputy Premier and Resources Minister Bryan Green said yesterday that while he understood the need for scrutiny, he thought thestate should be proud of the gas rollout.
During Estimates Committee hearings yesterday, Mr Green said gas was now available to 19,207 homes in Tasmania, as at the end of May.
Just 582 of those homes, or 3 per cent, have connected to gas and switched appliances over.
');
document.write('');
// End Hide -->
on error resume next
if (plugin
document.write('%3Cobject%20classid=%22clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000%22%20');document.write('codebase=%22http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=3,0,0,0%22%20');document.writeln('id=%22obj7355%22%20width=%22300%22%20height=%22250%22%3E');document.write('%3Cparam%20name=%22movie%22%20value=%22http://saturn.tiser.com.au/images/C1_Networker_circus_300x250.swf?clickTAG=http://mercury.tiser.com.au/ADCLICK/CID=00001cbb13e3261e00000000/acc_random=98604450/SITE=TMRC/AREA=NEWS.STATE/AAMSZ=300X250/pageid=99963537%22%3E%20%3Cparam%20name=%22quality%22%20value=%22autohigh%22%3E');document.write('%3Cembed%20src=%22http://saturn.tiser.com.au/images/C1_Networker_circus_300x250.swf?clickTAG=http://mercury.tiser.com.au/ADCLICK/CID=00001cbb13e3261e00000000/acc_random=98604450/SITE=TMRC/AREA=NEWS.STATE/AAMSZ=300X250/pageid=99963537%22%20quality=%22autohigh%22');document.write('swLiveConnect=%22false%22%20width=%22300%22%20height=%22250%22%20');document.writeln('type=%22application/x-shockwave-flash%22%20pluginspace=%22http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash%22%3E');document.writeln('%3C/embed%3E');document.writeln('%3C/object%3E');
Another 141 businesses have also swapped to gas. Some of the largest ones, such as zinc processor Zinifex, claim the switch to natural gas from electricity to run plant is saving them $500,000 a year.
Mr Green told the parliamentary committee on economic development that the Government would have paid $56 million by the end of June 2007 towards the gas rollout, but ended up with infrastructure worth more than $500 million.
By April next year, Stage 2A of the gas project will have been competed by the Powerco group, with 38,500 homes able to access natural gas.
Mr Green said it would be up to Powerco to decide next year if it wanted to continue extending the gas pipeline to more homes, or if the State 2B expansion of the pipeline would be put up for commercial tender.
Mr Green, who confided he had just switched to a gas hot water system and was loving the long hot showers, said it had always been known that converting customers to gas would be a long-term project.
With the high cost of specialist gas appliances, Mr Green said the changeover from electricity to gas would be gradual, as consumers renovated their homes or chose to replace broken down electricity-based heating, cooking and hot water appliances.
But Greens energy spokesman Nick McKim said the uptake of gas by consumers was too slow and he called on the Government to offer more incentives to eligible customers to make the switch to gas.
The Mercury: Gas bill reaches $40m [28jun06]
SUE NEALES Chief Reporter28jun06
THE Lennon Government has spent $40 million on the construction of a piped natural gas network across Tasmania, but only 723 customers have so far connected to gas.At more than $55,000 a customer, it would seem an expensive exercise.
But Deputy Premier and Resources Minister Bryan Green said yesterday that while he understood the need for scrutiny, he thought thestate should be proud of the gas rollout.
During Estimates Committee hearings yesterday, Mr Green said gas was now available to 19,207 homes in Tasmania, as at the end of May.
Just 582 of those homes, or 3 per cent, have connected to gas and switched appliances over.
');
document.write('');
// End Hide -->
on error resume next
if (plugin
document.write('%3Cobject%20classid=%22clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000%22%20');document.write('codebase=%22http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=3,0,0,0%22%20');document.writeln('id=%22obj7355%22%20width=%22300%22%20height=%22250%22%3E');document.write('%3Cparam%20name=%22movie%22%20value=%22http://saturn.tiser.com.au/images/C1_Networker_circus_300x250.swf?clickTAG=http://mercury.tiser.com.au/ADCLICK/CID=00001cbb13e3261e00000000/acc_random=98604450/SITE=TMRC/AREA=NEWS.STATE/AAMSZ=300X250/pageid=99963537%22%3E%20%3Cparam%20name=%22quality%22%20value=%22autohigh%22%3E');document.write('%3Cembed%20src=%22http://saturn.tiser.com.au/images/C1_Networker_circus_300x250.swf?clickTAG=http://mercury.tiser.com.au/ADCLICK/CID=00001cbb13e3261e00000000/acc_random=98604450/SITE=TMRC/AREA=NEWS.STATE/AAMSZ=300X250/pageid=99963537%22%20quality=%22autohigh%22');document.write('swLiveConnect=%22false%22%20width=%22300%22%20height=%22250%22%20');document.writeln('type=%22application/x-shockwave-flash%22%20pluginspace=%22http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash%22%3E');document.writeln('%3C/embed%3E');document.writeln('%3C/object%3E');
Another 141 businesses have also swapped to gas. Some of the largest ones, such as zinc processor Zinifex, claim the switch to natural gas from electricity to run plant is saving them $500,000 a year.
Mr Green told the parliamentary committee on economic development that the Government would have paid $56 million by the end of June 2007 towards the gas rollout, but ended up with infrastructure worth more than $500 million.
By April next year, Stage 2A of the gas project will have been competed by the Powerco group, with 38,500 homes able to access natural gas.
Mr Green said it would be up to Powerco to decide next year if it wanted to continue extending the gas pipeline to more homes, or if the State 2B expansion of the pipeline would be put up for commercial tender.
Mr Green, who confided he had just switched to a gas hot water system and was loving the long hot showers, said it had always been known that converting customers to gas would be a long-term project.
With the high cost of specialist gas appliances, Mr Green said the changeover from electricity to gas would be gradual, as consumers renovated their homes or chose to replace broken down electricity-based heating, cooking and hot water appliances.
But Greens energy spokesman Nick McKim said the uptake of gas by consumers was too slow and he called on the Government to offer more incentives to eligible customers to make the switch to gas.
Wave Energy Wave Power Clean Renewable Electricity Generation - Wavegen
:: The Limpet unit on Islay has an inclined oscillating water column (OWC) that couples with the surge-dominated wave field adjacent to the shore. The water depth at the entrance to the OWC is typically seven metres.The design of the air chamber is important to maximise the capture of wave energy and conversion to pneumatic power.The turbines are carefully matched to the air chamber to maximise power output.The performance has been optimised for annual average wave intensities of between 15 and 25kW/m. The water column feeds a pair of counter-rotating turbines, each of which drives a 250kW generator, giving a nameplate rating of 500kW.
:: The Limpet unit on Islay has an inclined oscillating water column (OWC) that couples with the surge-dominated wave field adjacent to the shore. The water depth at the entrance to the OWC is typically seven metres.The design of the air chamber is important to maximise the capture of wave energy and conversion to pneumatic power.The turbines are carefully matched to the air chamber to maximise power output.The performance has been optimised for annual average wave intensities of between 15 and 25kW/m. The water column feeds a pair of counter-rotating turbines, each of which drives a 250kW generator, giving a nameplate rating of 500kW.
RenewableEnergyAccess.com UK Continues Energy Efforts into the Ocean: "UK Continues Energy Efforts into the Ocean
27 June 2006
This cross-section shows how a device installed by Wavegen on the Scottish island of Islay works. The Siadar scheme would use the same principle of using wave motion to move air through a turbine.
Photo: npower renewables
Berkshire, UK [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] A new chapter in the UK's search for a sustainable future has opened with the announcement of two new proposals for ocean energy research projects. One is an on-site wave energy project tapping the ocean's powerful swells as they make landfall, and the other, when completed, is a research center dedicated to energy research.
'So much has been said about using wave power to generate electricity, and those words are now beginning to be turned into actions.'
-- Bill Langley, npower renewables, Marine Development Engineer The wave power project would be located at Siadar on Lewis in the Outer Hebrides. The plan is a joint project between npower renewables1, one of the UK's largest renewable energy companies, and Wavegen2, a wave power company based in Inverness, owned entirely by the hydro equipment supplier Voith Siemens Hydro since 2005.
The development would consist of building a new breakwater similar in appearance to those frequently used around the UK coastline for the provision of harbor facilities. Where this breakwater differs is that, if developed, it would have a wave energy project built into it.
The companies involved say the location has fantastic potential if obstacles can be overcome -- the most significant of which is the availability of a connection to the electricity grid. Once operational, the project would harness power from the Atlantic's waves to generate up to 3 mega"
27 June 2006
This cross-section shows how a device installed by Wavegen on the Scottish island of Islay works. The Siadar scheme would use the same principle of using wave motion to move air through a turbine.
Photo: npower renewables
Berkshire, UK [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] A new chapter in the UK's search for a sustainable future has opened with the announcement of two new proposals for ocean energy research projects. One is an on-site wave energy project tapping the ocean's powerful swells as they make landfall, and the other, when completed, is a research center dedicated to energy research.
'So much has been said about using wave power to generate electricity, and those words are now beginning to be turned into actions.'
-- Bill Langley, npower renewables, Marine Development Engineer The wave power project would be located at Siadar on Lewis in the Outer Hebrides. The plan is a joint project between npower renewables1, one of the UK's largest renewable energy companies, and Wavegen2, a wave power company based in Inverness, owned entirely by the hydro equipment supplier Voith Siemens Hydro since 2005.
The development would consist of building a new breakwater similar in appearance to those frequently used around the UK coastline for the provision of harbor facilities. Where this breakwater differs is that, if developed, it would have a wave energy project built into it.
The companies involved say the location has fantastic potential if obstacles can be overcome -- the most significant of which is the availability of a connection to the electricity grid. Once operational, the project would harness power from the Atlantic's waves to generate up to 3 mega"
RenewableEnergyAccess.com The Ethanol Investment Craze
Advocates of renewable energy must be happy to see Wall Street firmly embracing the rise of ethanol, specifically American corn-based ethanol. There has been a surge of ethanol popularity in the media, including stories on "60 Minutes" and CNN and "Live Green Go Yellow" ads by GM, and there is a corresponding ethanol craze among investors. The investment interest in ethanol is borderline frenzy. This is dangerous, because investors seem to be pouring in money just on the basis of seeing the word "ethanol," without any detailed understanding of the corn ethanol industry and factors affecting the ethanol market.
"If the ethanol boom goes the way of the dotcom bubble, then various factors will cause the majority of ethanol startups to go bust in five to ten years, having been nothing more than fool's gold."-- Russell Hasen, RE Insider
I am an advocate of alternative energy and I have no bias against ethanol or in favor of oil. In fact, politically I am pro-ethanol, both for environmental protection and for energy independence. However, there are economic data to consider when making financial investments. American corn ethanol is being promoted by many of the investment banks that brought on the dotcom boom and bust of 2000, and there might well be a similar bubble growing in ethanol investment that may pop with devastating consequences for American ethanol. While writing a research report on the corn ethanol industry for altenews.com, I came upon an extensive assortment of statistics that will put a damper on corn ethanol in the next five to ten years. After a consideration of market data, there are some interesting and disturbing factors for investors to consider before investing in ethanol in America. There are also some aspects of corn ethanol that will bother environmentalists. I will offer analysis of some of these factors below.There are simple dynamics of supply and demand that will cause the price of corn ethanol to drop within the next ten years. Ethanol demand has been created by federal and state government mandates requiring ethanol use, including the switch from MTBE and the Energy Policy Act. However, fueled by the ethanol investment boom, so many new plants are being built that ethanol capacity will outgrow mandated usage in the near future. When that happens, supply will be greater than demand and the price of ethanol will drop.The profit margin for ethanol producers is dependent upon enormous government tax incentives and tariffs. If government support for ethanol, which is currently propped up by farm state Senators and industry lobbying, were to fade away, then profit margins would suffer fatal blows. Much of the political interest in ethanol is as a way to counter high gas prices which anger voters, and if crude oil and gasoline prices drop, it may sap political support for ethanol. Ethanol gets less mileage per gallon than gasoline, and wholesale ethanol costs more than wholesale gasoline, so if oil prices drop and bring down gas prices it will produce brutal competition from gasoline. Ethanol has not yet achieved mainstream status among drivers, so it must be able to compete with gasoline. Thus, the success of ethanol depends upon the price of oil. There is also a lot of data concerning tight corn supply that may bring the price of ethanol up and lead to competition between corn for fuel and corn for food.Ethanol has been championed by environmentalists and advocates of clean energy. However, there are factors in regards to which it may not be best for renewable energy activists to like the corn ethanol produced in America as opposed to two other kinds of ethanol, the sugarcane ethanol made in South America and the cellulosic ethanol that is being developed in research laboratories. Brazilian sugarcane ethanol is cheaper to produce and more energy efficient than American corn ethanol, and the only thing protecting corn ethanol is the prohibitive import tariff. However, Brazilian ethanol may reach America duty-free through a loophole in CAFTA and the Caribbean Basin Initiative. Brazil's ethanol has led Brazil to the position of having forty percent of its fuel needs filled by ethanol, marking it as far advanced over America in ethanol usage, in part because of the qualities of sugarcane ethanol. Cellulosic ethanol, which is already being produced in Canada and whose large-scale production is in the development stage, may be six times more energy efficient than corn ethanol and produce no pollution, which would be significantly cleaner than corn ethanol. The American corn ethanol lobby, funded by the ethanol investment craze, may exert political power to suppress sugarcane ethanol and cellulosic ethanol, in which case it may actually act against the anti-pollution agenda of clean energy in the long run. Competition from Brazil and cellulose will also have a harsh impact on corn ethanol profits.There are other arguments that can be made against the environmental benefits of American corn ethanol. The nation's largest manufacturer of ethanol, ADM, is reported to be burning coal to power its ethanol production plants. Research suggests that ethanol made from coal-burning plants has no net benefit in terms of reducing air pollution. It has also been reported that ethanol plants have enormous water needs, demanding as much as two million gallons per day, which may upset some water conservationists.Another factor to consider is the impact of celebrity endorsements of ethanol, which are distracting investors from the hard data of the ethanol market. Richard Branson and Ted Turner are often cited, but they are reported to have interest in cellulosic ethanol as well as corn ethanol. Bill Gates is perhaps the most well-known endorsement of corn ethanol with his $84 million investment in Pacific Ethanol. What is little talked about is the fact that Bill Gates received extremely generous terms for his investment that the average investor will never come close to. Based on the one-to-two conversion ratio of his preferred stock to common stock, it can be said that Gates paid one fourth of the price that the average investor paid for Pacific Ethanol stock on the same day of the transaction. Also, the terms of his investment give Gates substantial control over the company. Big name endorsements and media coverage are causing an ethanol investment craze that is overwhelming the tendency of investors to invest based on actual data.The full text of my analysis of the ethanol industry and the statistics to support my conclusions can be found in the research report called "Ethanol Investment: Golden Opportunity or Fool's Gold?" in the research report section of Alternative Energy News Source, www.altenews.com/researchreports.htm. To summarize my conclusions, ethanol deserves political support for environmental and energy independence purposes, but investors interested solely in profits should be cautious. If the ethanol boom goes the way of the dotcom bubble, then various factors will cause the majority of ethanol startups to go bust in five to ten years, having been nothing more than fool's gold, but the better ethanol companies will survive and prosper, creating golden opportunities for investors who study things such as supply of raw materials, manufacturing costs, and other market data. Anyone who likes ethanol should also be on the lookout for the development of cellulosic ethanol, which will one day revolutionize the biofuels industry. Investors and environmentalists who are troubled by this information are invited to read "Ethanol Investment: Golden Opportunity or Fool's Gold?" which is available free to the public on altenews.com.About the author...Russell Hasan is a graduate of Vassar College. He is the founder of Alternative Energy News Source (altenews.com). He cares passionately about environmentalism, and his reports and editorials focus primarily on the investment opportunities of clean energy.
The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyAccess.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.
For further Information
Research Reports at Altenews.com
Please Note: RenewableEnergyAccess.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Total Comments (12) reader comments on this story
post a new comment
-- dursun sakarya, 26 June 2006
Nothing happens in America until some faction is bought off. Who do you want your money to go to: Halliburton or ADM. I vote for ADM, they're less likely to lead us into foreign wars.
-- Brian Ballek, 27 June 2006
(part 1)
Advocates of renewable energy must be happy to see Wall Street firmly embracing the rise of ethanol, specifically American corn-based ethanol. There has been a surge of ethanol popularity in the media, including stories on "60 Minutes" and CNN and "Live Green Go Yellow" ads by GM, and there is a corresponding ethanol craze among investors. The investment interest in ethanol is borderline frenzy. This is dangerous, because investors seem to be pouring in money just on the basis of seeing the word "ethanol," without any detailed understanding of the corn ethanol industry and factors affecting the ethanol market.
"If the ethanol boom goes the way of the dotcom bubble, then various factors will cause the majority of ethanol startups to go bust in five to ten years, having been nothing more than fool's gold."-- Russell Hasen, RE Insider
I am an advocate of alternative energy and I have no bias against ethanol or in favor of oil. In fact, politically I am pro-ethanol, both for environmental protection and for energy independence. However, there are economic data to consider when making financial investments. American corn ethanol is being promoted by many of the investment banks that brought on the dotcom boom and bust of 2000, and there might well be a similar bubble growing in ethanol investment that may pop with devastating consequences for American ethanol. While writing a research report on the corn ethanol industry for altenews.com, I came upon an extensive assortment of statistics that will put a damper on corn ethanol in the next five to ten years. After a consideration of market data, there are some interesting and disturbing factors for investors to consider before investing in ethanol in America. There are also some aspects of corn ethanol that will bother environmentalists. I will offer analysis of some of these factors below.There are simple dynamics of supply and demand that will cause the price of corn ethanol to drop within the next ten years. Ethanol demand has been created by federal and state government mandates requiring ethanol use, including the switch from MTBE and the Energy Policy Act. However, fueled by the ethanol investment boom, so many new plants are being built that ethanol capacity will outgrow mandated usage in the near future. When that happens, supply will be greater than demand and the price of ethanol will drop.The profit margin for ethanol producers is dependent upon enormous government tax incentives and tariffs. If government support for ethanol, which is currently propped up by farm state Senators and industry lobbying, were to fade away, then profit margins would suffer fatal blows. Much of the political interest in ethanol is as a way to counter high gas prices which anger voters, and if crude oil and gasoline prices drop, it may sap political support for ethanol. Ethanol gets less mileage per gallon than gasoline, and wholesale ethanol costs more than wholesale gasoline, so if oil prices drop and bring down gas prices it will produce brutal competition from gasoline. Ethanol has not yet achieved mainstream status among drivers, so it must be able to compete with gasoline. Thus, the success of ethanol depends upon the price of oil. There is also a lot of data concerning tight corn supply that may bring the price of ethanol up and lead to competition between corn for fuel and corn for food.Ethanol has been championed by environmentalists and advocates of clean energy. However, there are factors in regards to which it may not be best for renewable energy activists to like the corn ethanol produced in America as opposed to two other kinds of ethanol, the sugarcane ethanol made in South America and the cellulosic ethanol that is being developed in research laboratories. Brazilian sugarcane ethanol is cheaper to produce and more energy efficient than American corn ethanol, and the only thing protecting corn ethanol is the prohibitive import tariff. However, Brazilian ethanol may reach America duty-free through a loophole in CAFTA and the Caribbean Basin Initiative. Brazil's ethanol has led Brazil to the position of having forty percent of its fuel needs filled by ethanol, marking it as far advanced over America in ethanol usage, in part because of the qualities of sugarcane ethanol. Cellulosic ethanol, which is already being produced in Canada and whose large-scale production is in the development stage, may be six times more energy efficient than corn ethanol and produce no pollution, which would be significantly cleaner than corn ethanol. The American corn ethanol lobby, funded by the ethanol investment craze, may exert political power to suppress sugarcane ethanol and cellulosic ethanol, in which case it may actually act against the anti-pollution agenda of clean energy in the long run. Competition from Brazil and cellulose will also have a harsh impact on corn ethanol profits.There are other arguments that can be made against the environmental benefits of American corn ethanol. The nation's largest manufacturer of ethanol, ADM, is reported to be burning coal to power its ethanol production plants. Research suggests that ethanol made from coal-burning plants has no net benefit in terms of reducing air pollution. It has also been reported that ethanol plants have enormous water needs, demanding as much as two million gallons per day, which may upset some water conservationists.Another factor to consider is the impact of celebrity endorsements of ethanol, which are distracting investors from the hard data of the ethanol market. Richard Branson and Ted Turner are often cited, but they are reported to have interest in cellulosic ethanol as well as corn ethanol. Bill Gates is perhaps the most well-known endorsement of corn ethanol with his $84 million investment in Pacific Ethanol. What is little talked about is the fact that Bill Gates received extremely generous terms for his investment that the average investor will never come close to. Based on the one-to-two conversion ratio of his preferred stock to common stock, it can be said that Gates paid one fourth of the price that the average investor paid for Pacific Ethanol stock on the same day of the transaction. Also, the terms of his investment give Gates substantial control over the company. Big name endorsements and media coverage are causing an ethanol investment craze that is overwhelming the tendency of investors to invest based on actual data.The full text of my analysis of the ethanol industry and the statistics to support my conclusions can be found in the research report called "Ethanol Investment: Golden Opportunity or Fool's Gold?" in the research report section of Alternative Energy News Source, www.altenews.com/researchreports.htm. To summarize my conclusions, ethanol deserves political support for environmental and energy independence purposes, but investors interested solely in profits should be cautious. If the ethanol boom goes the way of the dotcom bubble, then various factors will cause the majority of ethanol startups to go bust in five to ten years, having been nothing more than fool's gold, but the better ethanol companies will survive and prosper, creating golden opportunities for investors who study things such as supply of raw materials, manufacturing costs, and other market data. Anyone who likes ethanol should also be on the lookout for the development of cellulosic ethanol, which will one day revolutionize the biofuels industry. Investors and environmentalists who are troubled by this information are invited to read "Ethanol Investment: Golden Opportunity or Fool's Gold?" which is available free to the public on altenews.com.About the author...Russell Hasan is a graduate of Vassar College. He is the founder of Alternative Energy News Source (altenews.com). He cares passionately about environmentalism, and his reports and editorials focus primarily on the investment opportunities of clean energy.
The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyAccess.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.
For further Information
Research Reports at Altenews.com
Please Note: RenewableEnergyAccess.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Total Comments (12) reader comments on this story
post a new comment
-- dursun sakarya, 26 June 2006
Nothing happens in America until some faction is bought off. Who do you want your money to go to: Halliburton or ADM. I vote for ADM, they're less likely to lead us into foreign wars.
-- Brian Ballek, 27 June 2006
(part 1)
Planet Ark : Asia Shows Solar Power is Not Just for the Rich
FREIBURG IM BREISGAU, Germany - Solar power does not require steep subsidies to be able to push aside environment-polluting fossil fuels, says proponents of large sun-powered projects in Laos and Bangladesh.
In developed countries, solar-generated electricity is four times more expensive than so-called brown electricity made with coal and gas, and can only be made attractive to consumers when subsidised heavily, they told an energy conference.
But in large parts of emerging markets, solar power does not compete with mains electricity, because there is no grid.
In Bangladesh, where more than two out of three households cannot get electricity out of a socket, some 80,000 homes now own a basic solar panel that generates about 50 watts of power.
The energy is stored in a small battery and can light up three bright, energy-saving lamps for four hours, Sazzad Hossain, manager of Rahimafrooz told a solar industry conference in this southern German town at the end of last week.
"When we started in the early 1990s the villagers didn't believe the module would produce light from the sun. We connected it to a light and when the light went on, people believed, so that's the way we did promotion," he said.
A YEAR'S INCOME FOR A SOLAR PANEL?
A major obstacle to the popularity of solar power was that Bangladesh, with a population of 146 million, has a per capita income of US$440, according to Unicef, while the solar systems offered by Rahimafrooz cost US$300, including a US$30 subsidy.
Only through microcredits backed by the World Bank are citizens able to afford this huge upfront investment.
The loan repayment of US$9 per month is close to the cost of kerosene consumption and is often shared with neighbours who buy some of the electricity. After several years, if the loan is repaid, the panel with a 20-30 year lifespan is their own.
In Laos, for-profit company Sunlabob rents out basic solar modules for households and more advanced systems for village halls, schools and health posts where staff can now cool the vaccines and work through the dark. They also power water pumps.
"The majority of rural households can afford solar lighting. They have no idea how much they spend on candles and kerosene," said Andy Schroeter, managing director of Sunlabob.
Researchers from the German Fraunhofer's Institute for Solar Energy's (ISE) rural electrification South East Asia programme agree that even in the world's poorest regions citizens can afford to pay for basic energy needs.
"There is an energy demand in rural areas and there is a willingness to pay for it," said researcher Sebastian Goelz.
Story by Georgina Prodhan
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
FREIBURG IM BREISGAU, Germany - Solar power does not require steep subsidies to be able to push aside environment-polluting fossil fuels, says proponents of large sun-powered projects in Laos and Bangladesh.
In developed countries, solar-generated electricity is four times more expensive than so-called brown electricity made with coal and gas, and can only be made attractive to consumers when subsidised heavily, they told an energy conference.
But in large parts of emerging markets, solar power does not compete with mains electricity, because there is no grid.
In Bangladesh, where more than two out of three households cannot get electricity out of a socket, some 80,000 homes now own a basic solar panel that generates about 50 watts of power.
The energy is stored in a small battery and can light up three bright, energy-saving lamps for four hours, Sazzad Hossain, manager of Rahimafrooz told a solar industry conference in this southern German town at the end of last week.
"When we started in the early 1990s the villagers didn't believe the module would produce light from the sun. We connected it to a light and when the light went on, people believed, so that's the way we did promotion," he said.
A YEAR'S INCOME FOR A SOLAR PANEL?
A major obstacle to the popularity of solar power was that Bangladesh, with a population of 146 million, has a per capita income of US$440, according to Unicef, while the solar systems offered by Rahimafrooz cost US$300, including a US$30 subsidy.
Only through microcredits backed by the World Bank are citizens able to afford this huge upfront investment.
The loan repayment of US$9 per month is close to the cost of kerosene consumption and is often shared with neighbours who buy some of the electricity. After several years, if the loan is repaid, the panel with a 20-30 year lifespan is their own.
In Laos, for-profit company Sunlabob rents out basic solar modules for households and more advanced systems for village halls, schools and health posts where staff can now cool the vaccines and work through the dark. They also power water pumps.
"The majority of rural households can afford solar lighting. They have no idea how much they spend on candles and kerosene," said Andy Schroeter, managing director of Sunlabob.
Researchers from the German Fraunhofer's Institute for Solar Energy's (ISE) rural electrification South East Asia programme agree that even in the world's poorest regions citizens can afford to pay for basic energy needs.
"There is an energy demand in rural areas and there is a willingness to pay for it," said researcher Sebastian Goelz.
Story by Georgina Prodhan
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
Invigorated Kerry outlines updated energy plan - Boston.com
BOSTON --Sen. John Kerry, appearing invigorated himself, outlined an energy plan for the country on Monday that called for reducing oil imports, increasing the number of cars powered by renewable fuels and focusing on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
Some of the themes reprised those the Massachusetts Democrat outlined during his failed 2004 presidential campaign, but the fresh ideas and pointed rhetoric highlighted how Kerry both believes they have come of age, and that he plans to pursue them as he considers another White House campaign in 2008.
He labeled the energy bill he will file this week as "the most far-reaching proposal in our history." In 43-minute speech before a cheering hometown crowd at historic Faneuil Hall, he added: "Nothing else will protect our security and our world, if you believe the science."
Kerry proposed three ideas, including a hard target of reducing U.S. oil consumption by 2.5 million barrels per day as of 2015. That amount equals the daily volume of Middle Eastern oil currently used in the country.
He also suggested achieving that goal by requiring oil companies to provide at least one ethanol pump at their stations by 2010. In addition he called for a series of tax credits so consumers and carmakers will ensure 20 percent of all passenger cars and trucks as hybrids as of 2020.
"Twenty-twenty: That's not just a vision, that's a real program to jump-start energy independence," said Kerry, reprising almost verbatim a line from the energy plan he outlined during his failed campaign to unseat President Bush.
Both in 2000 and 2004, Republican mocked Democratic energy ideas, in particular painting former Vice President Al Gore and Kerry's wife, philanthropist Teresa Heinz Kerry, as out-of-touch environmentalists. With Heinz sitting on stage, Kerry responded for both of them amid an address that hewed closely to the prepared text and was devoid of the usual lengthy introductions and acknowledgments.
"Real crises stare us in the face, screaming for solution," the senator declared. "But nonexistent, contrived ones replace the real ones on the agenda of a Congress that wants to change the political climate instead of changing the climate. They remain bent on dividing the country with flag-burning and gay-bashing amendments to the Constitution, when we should be strengthening the country by living by our Constitution with a determined attack on global climate change."
Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, had a succinct reply.
"Let's hope that John Kerry's energy plan garners as much support from Democrats as his recent Iraq legislation."
It managed to garner only 13 votes in the 100-member chamber.
In the 18 months since Bush began his second term, Kerry and his staff have argued gasoline price spikes, unchecked increases in oil costs and ongoing terrorism and anti-American sentiment in the Middle East have broadened the audience for the senator's proposals.
Gore recently unveiled "Inconvenient Truth," a movie about global warming, while a panel of experts at the National Academy of Science said last week global warming is now an undeniable scientific phenomenon.
Bush unveiled an energy plan this year that calls for increased use of renewable energy sources. In his State of the Union speech, the president accused Americans of being "addicted to oil."
On Monday, he told reporters at the White House: "I have said consistently that global warming is a serious problem. There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused; we ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary to enable us to achieve a couple of big objectives: One, be good stewards of the environment; two, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil for economic reasons and for national security reasons."
Prospects for any individual bill remain uncertain, though members of Congress expect some broad action in response to record gasoline prices.
In addition to reducing oil use through expanded availability of ethanol and hybrid vehicles, as well as increasing automobile fuel-economy standards, Kerry pledged to lead an unprecedented focus on global warming.
The third element of Kerry's plan calls for an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reverse greenhouse emissions growth by 2010, as well as a program aimed at lowering emissions by 2050 to 65 percent below what they were in the year 2000.
Two months ago, the senator used another speech at Faneuil Hall to outline a military withdrawal timetable from Iraq. A Kerry plan to have the troops withdraw by July 2007 died last week in the Senate on a 86-13 vote.
------
On the Net:
Sen. John Kerry: http://kerry.senate.gov/
Kerry for Senate: http://www.johnkerry.com/
© Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
BOSTON --Sen. John Kerry, appearing invigorated himself, outlined an energy plan for the country on Monday that called for reducing oil imports, increasing the number of cars powered by renewable fuels and focusing on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
Some of the themes reprised those the Massachusetts Democrat outlined during his failed 2004 presidential campaign, but the fresh ideas and pointed rhetoric highlighted how Kerry both believes they have come of age, and that he plans to pursue them as he considers another White House campaign in 2008.
He labeled the energy bill he will file this week as "the most far-reaching proposal in our history." In 43-minute speech before a cheering hometown crowd at historic Faneuil Hall, he added: "Nothing else will protect our security and our world, if you believe the science."
Kerry proposed three ideas, including a hard target of reducing U.S. oil consumption by 2.5 million barrels per day as of 2015. That amount equals the daily volume of Middle Eastern oil currently used in the country.
He also suggested achieving that goal by requiring oil companies to provide at least one ethanol pump at their stations by 2010. In addition he called for a series of tax credits so consumers and carmakers will ensure 20 percent of all passenger cars and trucks as hybrids as of 2020.
"Twenty-twenty: That's not just a vision, that's a real program to jump-start energy independence," said Kerry, reprising almost verbatim a line from the energy plan he outlined during his failed campaign to unseat President Bush.
Both in 2000 and 2004, Republican mocked Democratic energy ideas, in particular painting former Vice President Al Gore and Kerry's wife, philanthropist Teresa Heinz Kerry, as out-of-touch environmentalists. With Heinz sitting on stage, Kerry responded for both of them amid an address that hewed closely to the prepared text and was devoid of the usual lengthy introductions and acknowledgments.
"Real crises stare us in the face, screaming for solution," the senator declared. "But nonexistent, contrived ones replace the real ones on the agenda of a Congress that wants to change the political climate instead of changing the climate. They remain bent on dividing the country with flag-burning and gay-bashing amendments to the Constitution, when we should be strengthening the country by living by our Constitution with a determined attack on global climate change."
Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, had a succinct reply.
"Let's hope that John Kerry's energy plan garners as much support from Democrats as his recent Iraq legislation."
It managed to garner only 13 votes in the 100-member chamber.
In the 18 months since Bush began his second term, Kerry and his staff have argued gasoline price spikes, unchecked increases in oil costs and ongoing terrorism and anti-American sentiment in the Middle East have broadened the audience for the senator's proposals.
Gore recently unveiled "Inconvenient Truth," a movie about global warming, while a panel of experts at the National Academy of Science said last week global warming is now an undeniable scientific phenomenon.
Bush unveiled an energy plan this year that calls for increased use of renewable energy sources. In his State of the Union speech, the president accused Americans of being "addicted to oil."
On Monday, he told reporters at the White House: "I have said consistently that global warming is a serious problem. There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused; we ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary to enable us to achieve a couple of big objectives: One, be good stewards of the environment; two, become less dependent on foreign sources of oil for economic reasons and for national security reasons."
Prospects for any individual bill remain uncertain, though members of Congress expect some broad action in response to record gasoline prices.
In addition to reducing oil use through expanded availability of ethanol and hybrid vehicles, as well as increasing automobile fuel-economy standards, Kerry pledged to lead an unprecedented focus on global warming.
The third element of Kerry's plan calls for an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reverse greenhouse emissions growth by 2010, as well as a program aimed at lowering emissions by 2050 to 65 percent below what they were in the year 2000.
Two months ago, the senator used another speech at Faneuil Hall to outline a military withdrawal timetable from Iraq. A Kerry plan to have the troops withdraw by July 2007 died last week in the Senate on a 86-13 vote.
------
On the Net:
Sen. John Kerry: http://kerry.senate.gov/
Kerry for Senate: http://www.johnkerry.com/
© Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
