 Stanford researchers have figured out a way to incorporate silicon nanowires into rechargeable lithium ion batteries and extend their life from 4 to 40 hours. The work, described in a paper in Nature Nanotechnology, could lead to iPods, laptops and camcorders that could be run nearly for an entire weekend without requiring a re-charge. Of course, this is still in the lab stage, and there are undoubtedly quite a few steps and hurdles between the campus and commercialization, but we're optimists. So, here's to the end of the ABC (Always Be Charging) Rule of electronics.—Gregory Mone
Via News.com
 A company called Environmental Power is building the country's largest facility for converting cow manure into natural gas. The company is constructing eight enormous tanks outside Stephensville, Texas, that will each be able to hold 916,000 gallons of manure. The plan: Add high-carb materials, cook to above 130 degrees Fahrenheit, and let the bacteria start converting all that refuse into methane. There's a great, detailed piece on the company's plans for turning poop into profit on Xconomy.—Gregory Mone
FutureGen picks Illinois for carbon-sequestering facility
Coal is almost the perfect fuel. It’s cheap and absurdly abundant—especially in the U.S., which has the world’s larges reserves. There’s just that tiny problem of massive climate-altering carbon dioxide emissions. Or is there?
The FutureGen Alliance—a coalition of private power companies and the U.S. Department of Energy—thinks it can make power cleanly by siphoning off the carbon dioxide and pumping it into underground reservoirs. The Alliance spent the past year evaluating four locations around the country that applied to host the first full-scale power plant using the technology; and today it chose Mattoon, Illinois as the winner.
Unlike a regular coal power plant, the FutureGen plant won’t actually burn coal but gasify it by exposing powdered coal to oxygen in a high-pressure heated chamber. The system yields several gases which are processed into hydrogen, which burns in a turbine to produce electricity, and carbon-dioxide, which is pumped into deep geologic formations that researchers expect to hold the gas indefinitely. Proponents say that gasification is easier than capturing CO2 from a regular power plant because it produces it produces a smaller volume of exhaust and it easily traps most other pollutants from coal, such as Mercury.
Pop Sci reported on the FutureGen project in February 2007, and we’re anxious to see if the Alliance can make good on its bold promise.—Sean Captain
(Image Credit: Kevin Hand)
Say this five times fast: Counter-Rotating-Ring Receiver/Reactor/Recuperator. OK, so it doesn't quite roll off the tongue, but this new device, which its designers wisely refer to as CR5, could help solve our planet's carbon dioxide problem.
The device, developed at Sandia National Labs as part of the Sunshine to Petrol project, uses sunlight and steam to neutralize carbon dioxide instead of spewing the stuff up into the atmosphere. The process would produce methanol, which could be used for fuel. The downer? The engineers say it could be a decade or more before the device is available.—Gregory Mone
Via Discovery News
 Oceanlinx, an Australian company that makes devices capable of converting the juice from ocean swells into electricity, has signed a deal with the state of Rhode Island to produce two separate offshore facilities that could end up powering more than 15,000 homes. One of the facilities will boast a bunch of the devices, each of which will be about 60 feet wide and 30 feet tall. Read more about how they work here. They're big, but they'd sit far enough offshore so they wouldn't be an eyesore.
We wrote about the technology at the beginning of last year—at that point the company was called Energetech—and back then everyone was a bit more optimistic in terms of the timetable. Now it will be at least two years before the devices start generating electricity. But at least things are moving along again.—Gregory Mone
(Image credit: John MacNeill)
Several companies are planning to build new nuclear reactors in the United States, and they'd like to speed up the approval process to get these plants online as soon as possible, but that might not be happening. All plant designs have to be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, so if a company wants to construct a new model, or import a proven one from France or Japan, it still has to get the NRC's OK, and this can take a while.
According to the New York Times, three companies have filed applications to build and operate five new reactors - but they've all either substantially modified approved designs or suggested models that haven't gotten NRC approval yet. Which means they're probably not going to be breaking ground as soon as they'd like. For many environmentalists, this is good news, considering the fact that we still haven't figured out what we're going to do with the waste yet. But others insist that we need nuclear, and we need to start planning new plants now, to meet our growing energy needs and assure that fossil fuels don't consume an increasing slice of that budget in the coming decades as today's nuclear power plants are retired. For more on that idea, settle down with this enormous study.-Gregory Mone
Starting in April, the China Lighting Conversion program plans to distribute 10 million compact fluorescent lightbulbs in China. Most Chinese people cannot afford the energy-efficient bulbs, but the Clinton Global Initiative's Joint U.S.-China Cooperation on Clean Energy is raising funds for the project. Partners already include China's Ministry of Construction, Tsinghua University and the media company Bertelsmann.
Replacing 10 million conventional lamps with compact fluorescent lamps will prevent the release of about 3.5 million tons of carbon dioxide over four years and
eliminate the need for ten 50-megawatt coal-fired power plants. Put another way, an investment of $20 million is expected to eliminate the need for a $500 million investment in new power plants.—Dawn Stover
Image: PiccoloNamek
 The zeroHouse, a concept home designed by the New York architecture firm Specht Harpman, would run on solar power and rain water, use gravity-fed plumbing instead of traditional energy-demanding pumps, and recycle its waste.
SF site Technovelgy.com likens it to the advanced abodes described in the Arthur C. Clarke novel Childhood's End, which could be anywhere on land, or even in the sea. The zeroHouse isn't quite there yet, but it certainly would make its occupants feel like the characters in an SF novel. Even the winged solar panel design is reminiscient of the International Space Station. Unfortunately, though, the couches don't look very comfortable.—Gregory Mone
This'll give you an idea of how much coal Americans are burning: Peabody Energy, the world's largest private-sector coal company, has a ticker showing its estimated 2007 coal sales. The ticker goes up by seven or eight tons every second.
Peabody says its coal products fuel approximately 10 percent of all U.S. electricity generation and more than 2 percent worldwide. Which means we're burning roughly 70 to 80 tons per second in this country alone. A large power plant operating in peak season may burn as many as 500 train cars' worth of coal in a single day.
Coal is relatively cheap, and we have lots of it. But despite constant references within the industry to "clean coal," nobody has yet come up with a cost-effective way to burn large amounts of coal without releasing heat-trapping carbon dioxide gas into the atmosphere.—Dawn Stover
Image: Peabody Energy
AquaBuOY is sunk. The $2 million buoy, deployed off the Oregon coast by the Canadian energy company Finavera Renewables, disappeared beneath the waves a day before its test run was to be completed. The 74-foot-tall device, a floating buoy meant to convert wave motion into electricity, had been in place for less than a month.
Finavera plans to retrieve the buoy from its resting place 150 feet below the ocean surface, but that will have to wait until calmer weather next spring. Despite the sinking, a company spokesman said the test was successful because data collected from the system's computer will be used to build a better buoy next time around.—Dawn Stover
Image: Finavera Renewables
 Nuclear power isn't disappearing anytime soon, according to a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency. By the end of last year, nuclear accounted for about 15 percent of electricity production worldwide, and its overall capacity will continue to rise through 2030.
France gets 78 percent of its power from nuclear, and a number of Asian countries are betting on it to meet their electricity needs. China has four reactors under construction now, and intends to launch a five-fold expansion by 2020.
In the US, 103 reactors provide nearly 20 percent of our electricity, but building a new plant involves an uphill PR battle, due in part to the fact that we still haven't figured out what we're going to do with the waste.—Gregory Mone
We've been anticipating fuel-cell powered gadgets for a while now, and today a small but significant step was taken to bring them one step closer: the U.S. Department of Transportation moved to amend aviation regulations to allow for passengers to carry on methanol-based fuel cells when they fly. The proposed amendment would allow for one fuel cell unit and two methanol fuel cartridges to be brought on board per passenger. Although methanol is a flammable fuel, the electricity-generating reaction inside of a fuel cell does not require combustion—with carbon dioxide and water vapor being the only byproducts of the reaction. Similar rules amendments have already been made to the transportation regulations of several other countries, including Canada, Japan, the U.K. and China.
Mobion—the makers of one of the most promising methanol fuel cells for use in mobile technology (pictured above) and a Best of What's New Grand Award winner from 2004—are especially delighted by today's announcement. As am I—having just endured a lithium-ion-destroying 14-hour flight to Japan, an unlimited fuel supply for my laptop would have allowed for several more life-sustaining episodes of Freaks and Geeks in-flight.
With today's announcement, now might be a good time to check out our PPX proposition (FCELL) questioning whether or not a fuel-cell-powered laptop will make it to market by 2009. I'd say we're headed in the right direction. Buy! Buy! —John Mahoney
 Forbes just released a list of the least fuel-efficient hybrids, and though the fact that some of these supposedly green rides aren't exactly saving the planet shouldn't shock too many people, it's still nice to see the guilty called out. Just because your Lexus LS 600h has some batteries in it shouldn't make you feel all nice and environmental. The thing still burns up a gallon of gas every 21 miles. Even worse: A GMC Sierra model that gets only 16 mpg. Enough said. Here's the list.—Gregory Mone
 In what Russian officials are calling a race against the U.S. to stake a claim in an area believed to be rich in natural resources, two Russian ships are set to deploy a pair of submeriibles to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean tonight. The race aspect might be overblown, though; according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, which is conducting the U.S. mission in the area, its scientists intend to study hydrothermal vents and the biology of the deep ocean.
The Russians, on the other hand, clearly seem to be heading down for the riches. It's not clear yet whether the potential reserves are large enough to justify the cost of pumping them out. But the Russian explorers, who will pilot the two subs down to depths of 14,000 feet, hope to establish that the area is actually a natural extension of their country, and thus belongs to Russia. They're even planning to plant a flag.—Gregory Mone
Via PhysOrg
 Doesn't it seem like we're looking for energy everywhere these days? While scientists are still working hard at harvesting power from the sun, wind and waves, they're also turning to unexpected sources such as human locomotion. Two MIT architecture students recently unveiled what they're calling the "Crowd Farm," a setup that would derive energy from pounding feet in crowded subway stations or rock concerts.
In each case, there would be a sub-flooring system consisting of independent blocks. When people walk across this surface, the forces they impart will cause the blocks to slip slightly, and a dynamo would convert the energy in those movements into electric current.
To prove the idea would work, the students built a stool that's connected to a series of four LEDs. When someone sits on the stool, the action transfers energy to the LEDs, which light up. The students say that moving from this proof-of-concept device to a large-scale Crowd Farm would be expensive, but it certainly sounds fun. One possibility: Concert-goers could boost the volume at a show. The setup would capture the energy of their pounding feet and transfer it to the speaker system, cranking up the sound.—Gregory Mone
Two good stories this morning—one in the Washington Post, the other in the Economist—analyze the various energy proposals working their way through congress. You can measure the complexity of the problem simply by counting the number of proposed piecemeal solutions—ethanol funding, oil industry subsidies, nuclear power, cap and trade, "NOPEC"—but as the Economist notes, the simplest, most effective solution is not even being considered: a straight tax on carbon. That's the easiest market-based way to make green technologies like the ones we profiled in our June 2006 cover story a reality, but it's also thought to be political suicide.
How would you wean the U.S. off fossil fuels? —Michael Moyer
On page 13 of the introductory pamphlet “A Brief Guide to Alcoholics Anonymous,” the organization's famous 12 steps begin as such: “We admit we are powerless over alcohol—that our lives have become unmanageable.” Although President Bush maintains that he quit the sauce on his own, without the help of AA, he is evidently familiar with their directives, for on Tuesday night in his State of the Union address, Bush admitted that we have a problem: global warming.
The president first officially acknowledged the dangers of global climate change in the summer of 2002. Hindsight has rendered silly the breathless reporting of Bush's eureka moment nearly five years ago. But unfortunately, the solutions offered by his administration to solve this catastrophic problem have hardly evolved since that “historic” day of admission.
“Come to believe that a power greater than ourselves can restore us to sanity” is AA's step number two, and it's clear that our President has checked this one off his list as well. From the beginning, the administration has repeatedly assured us that it's only a matter of time before the high powers of technology swoop in to solve all the problems associated with global warming. “It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply. The way forward is through technology,” Bush repeated on Tuesday night. “We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. [applause]”
This rhetorical strategy is no accident. It is exactly the approach highlighted by Frank Luntz, the Republican strategist and spinmaster whose frighteningly Orwellian memo [PDF] detailing how to dance around the issue of global warming has become the basis for the GOP's talking points on the matter—even after Luntz acknowledged the errors of his ways last year. It's a good strategy—the president will be hard-pressed to find anyone on either side of the climate-change debate to disagree that technology can be part of the solution, but the truth of the matter remains: To truly make a difference, alternative energy technologies must be supported by smart federal regulations. And to say that this administration has been hesitant to impose such regulations would be a sizable understatement.
Without regulatory measures such as stronger “gas-guzzler” taxes for inefficient vehicles (the average fuel economy of American cars is less than half the average of the European Union and Japan), support for the organizations developing and improving alternative fuels and more stringent industrial emissions standards, technology will continue to fight this battle with one hand tied behind its back. Even applications of current alternative energy technologies could use some help: The greenhouse gases generated by the production and processing of the
35 billion gallons of green fuels Bush called for in his speech—a
perhaps overly optimistic seven-fold increase over 10 years—would be
roughly the same as those released by the burning of an equivalent
amount of regular gasoline.
As the AA mantra goes, we hope the president will “keep coming” and follow through on the promise of technology, providing ample federal support for alternative energy to thrive. For more information, see popsci.com/energy to find out what our most innovative scientists can do to help with our addiction. —John Mahoney
|
No more standby modes for this man
|
It seems like it’s becoming increasingly difficult to buy an electronic device that doesn’t come with a standby mode—the “always on” function that draws a reduced amount of power to allow for quick startups. TVs, videogame consoles, DVD players, cable boxes—basically your whole living-room A/V setup, not to mention your coffee machine—now come stocked with little standby lights that continue to glow well after the devices have been turned “off.”
This week, in its annual energy review, the British Government announced intentions to put a stop to this trend, proposing a ban on any device with a standby mode that draws more than one watt of power. With more efficient standby modes—especially from notoriously power-greedy televisions—Britain hopes to reclaim a large chunk of the 8% of annual British energy consumption drawn by devices in standby.
And while we’re talking about phantom energy wasters around the house, what about that tangle of A/C adapters beside your desk, used for charging the laptops, cellphones, digital cameras and portable game systems that no gadget fiend can leave the house without? As long they’re plugged in, power bricks continue to draw energy—even when not charging anything.
What can you do to eliminate this waste? Put your gadget chargers on one power strip that you can switch off when not in use. While you may not notice a huge difference on your individual power bill, when applied to the estimated 2.5 billion devices in the U.S. running on power supplies, the difference is pretty significant: The Natural Resources Defense Council, a U.S. environmental nonprofit, estimates that increased power-supply efficiency could result in savings of 32 billion kilowatt-hours per year—the equivalent of six coal-fired power plants and 24 million tons of carbon emissions. —John Mahoney
|
 |
|
Stanford researchers have figured out a way to incorporate silicon nanowires into rechargeable lithium ion batteries and extend their life from 4 to 40 hours. The work, described in a paper in Nature Nanotechnology, could lead to iPods, laptops and camcorders that could be run nearly for an entire weekend without requiring a re-charge. Of course, this is still in the lab stage, and there are undoubtedly quite a few steps and hurdles between the campus and commercialization, but we're optimists. So, here's to the end of the ABC (Always Be Charging) Rule of electronics.—Gregory Mone
